Majestic Fanfare

[mjf1947]

Hi all,

Well, my mentor is still in the midst of a move and most probably won't review my work for at least 2 weeks more.  Now I have done lots of enhancements since my last meeting with him; so I am going to post here.  I feel I am close to the end ... with this in mind I will appreciate any comments in any regard.  Please point out the strengths as well as areas of need for review.  Please note ... I real have been trying to improve my brass orchestration - introducing counter melodies/motifs and harmonic support.

Not to jinx the work .... I am relatively pleased with it.   It feels Majestic~!

Mark

[whitebark]

Hi Mark,
Your piece is majestic indeed!  I like its energy, soaring main theme, and rich orchestral sound.  The piece dives right in at the beginning - perhaps you can add some introductory material, just a few bars at least.

The main theme does get buried in the general thick texture of the piece. Perhaps add a strong unison statement somewhere in the piece?

At any rate, great work!  I may comment further after giving the piece a listen again.

Jay

[Jerry Engelbach]

Mark,
 
Congratulations. It's an ambitious piece with tremendous power.
 
I realize that at this stage it's not subject to major revision, but I would have liked a contrasting singing middle section. I'm thinking of, for example, Walton's Crown Imperial.
 
I also realize that this is your working file. Combining instrument groups into common staves would make analysis easier.
 
I'd like to be more specific with a later listening. Question: Is it possible for you to upload a musicxml file of your original?
 
Cheers,
Jer

[mjf1947]

Hi Mark,
Your piece is majestic indeed!  I like its energy, soaring main theme, and rich orchestral sound.  The piece dives right in at the beginning - perhaps you can add some introductory material, just a few bars at least.

The main theme does get buried in the general thick texture of the piece. Perhaps add a strong unison statement somewhere in the piece?

At any rate, great work!  I may comment further after giving the piece a listen again.

Jay

I will definitely discuss your suggestions with my mentor.

Thanks!

Mark

[mjf1947]

Mark,
 
Congratulations. It's an ambitious piece with tremendous power.
 
I realize that at this stage it's not subject to major revision, but I would have liked a contrasting singing middle section. I'm thinking of, for example, Walton's Crown Imperial.
 
I also realize that this is your working file. Combining instrument groups into common staves would make analysis easier.
 
I'd like to be more specific with a later listening. Question: Is it possible for you to upload a musicxml file of your original?
 
Cheers,
Jer

Jer,

Thanks for the review.

Send me an email and I'll send you the file.  Is there a way for Finale to combine the staves?  I'm going to give a listen to the Crown Imperial.

Mark

PS: Lots of good ideas in the development of the Crown Imperial for sure!    Especially the stepwise introduction and development.  I not sure however if I want to include a contrasting midsection.  I envision the march punching through on all cylinders. As Jay said a strong reiteration of the main theme might enhance the work in the middle.  I will discuss all this with my mentor in a few weeks.

One more thought, I spoke with my other conductor who gave a listen to the work. He commented on all the fullness of the orchestra texture/sound; however, he cautioned me that real live players have other characteristics that are not controlled by a computer program and produce a different "breath".  I smiled a bit because - of cause the point is correct, yet I know from experience composing on Finale ... if the orchestration is poor ... it doesn't sound too good period.  So it's just not the software doing its thing.

I wonder how more experienced composers who had their work finished on Finale and then had a performance can comment on the differences between the computer playback and the actual performance.   Am I wrong in assuming good orchestration is what you hear regardless of the playback ... computer simulation or live?

[sandalwood]

Mark, I think this is a very nice work! I agree with Jay about a few bars intro to the piece. I'm curious to hear what the experienced will say about the correlation between Finale playbacks and live performances (provided one has not used unrealistic extreme register or out of range instrument sounds etc in the playback).

[mjf1947]

Hi all,

I still have not met with my mentor; however, I did an introduction to the work as was suggested by the forum.  Nothing too grand ... just an idea.  So I have attached the beginning measures with the new intro.

What do you think?



Mark

[whitebark]

I'd love to hear a recording of your new introductory measures.

Jay

[mjf1947]

Okay ... here's an audio file of the work.  Please look at the PDF.  I changed the chord structure of the first 2 measures.

Same idea though ...

Mark

[Jerry Engelbach]

Mark,
 
I like the new introduction. I think the start of the main melody on the Ab chord could be more clearly set off. It feels like a continuation of what's come before rather than the definitive beginning of the piece.
 
Thank you for sending me the MXL file. I used it to make a piano reduction so I could more clearly see the harmonies. The modulations are well thought out and are pretty striking.
 
One of the high points in the melody is that E natural in the Eb section. It's highly original and has a real bite of the sort that I would like to have heard as a recurring jolt in the piece.
 
I'm not so sure anymore about my previous suggestion about a contrasting calmer middle section. The buildup to the end is effective. What I think now is probably not practical as the piece is pretty well set. There is a long section of fragments in which the melody itself is not apparent. Perhaps those fragments might have come back together at the end in a cleaner statement of the main melody.
 
Cheers,
Jer

[mjf1947]

Jer, ...

Thanks for the insightful review of the work.  I am very rewarded to know my endeavors create such interest.  As per the modulations in the piece, they were done by "ear" ... they sounded good to me as well as from theory.  I did put lots of time into the transitions.

I definitely will review the work with your suggestions in mind.

Once I meet with my mentor I will post again.  He's still out of town.

In the interim I began a new violin ... piano work with some interesting harmonies.  It's a lament.

Mark

[whitebark]

I like your new introduction, which adds to the majesty of the piece.  As Jer said, the entrance of the main theme does not quite sound distinctive enough. This could be a trick of Noteperformer playback, as your orchestration certainly changes.

Jay

[mjf1947]

Jay ... I expanded the intro ... it now begins with a timpani solo.



Mark

PS: I am very grateful for the reviews from certain members.  However, I am at a loss as to why more forum members do NOT participate in these discussions.  I always aim to be courteous and if possible helpful or at least share my opinion of other member's work.  So what's up here  ... after all this is a working forum. 

[RJB54]

Very good work. Good handling of the ensemble.

I particularly liked the rhythmic/metric things you did. It kept the piece moving along with good energy throughout. So many pieces in this vein become plodding and tiresome due to the constant four square rhythm. 

[mjf1947]

Very good work. Good handling of the ensemble.

I particularly liked the rhythmic/metric things you did. It kept the piece moving along with good energy throughout. So many pieces in this vein become plodding and tiresome due to the constant four square rhythm.

Thanks so much for listening~!  I do seem to have a knack for this ... shifting the rhythms.

Mark