วีดีโอ

I have long admired the work of Sibelius. We share a similar idea about taking little bits of things and using them developmentally. The romance is my favorite movement. G# minor is one of my favorite keys but one mustn’t overdo it especially not in an orchestral context. Another example of sad G# minor that comes to mind is the old castle from pictures at an exhibition. I really do thank you so much for taking the time to listen and really hear the music for what it has to say. It is so hard to find people willing to do that in today’s musical environment.

Thank you so much for your comments! It’s a gift to a composer to have someone who actually listens to and digests their music in a meaningful way. I really appreciate your taking the time. The “shoot outs” and “existential dread” come mostly in part from my admiration of the music of Allan Pettersson. The wedding march quote is not so important as the fact that it is almost immediatly obliterated.

There is actually another layer to the tam-tam symmetry. The 1st movement coda has 3 loud strikes. The 3rd opens with a loud strike. And the romanza has 2 around its midpoint. I only realized this after the fact. I am glad that you approved of the revision. Despite the speed at which I wrote the first ending, I never really was all that fond of it. I think part of me was just glad to have it “over” Thanks so much for your comment!

Thanks Jack!

In that build up I was trying to evoke sounds of nature. Bird calls, stuff like that. Thank you for your kind words!

Thank you. This had always been my favorite movement from 1. Also the most experimental. If I do go back and revise, it will be left mostly unchanged. And yes, it is a bear of a piccolo part.

Thank you, John.

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for your comment.

I mentioned that I wanted to change the form in this movement. The “first and second subjects” are both based on the horn fanfare opening. Then there is the quasi tonal outburst which I saw as a first development that eventually gives way to a new 3rd theme and then we get the development proper. T1 and 2 are recapitulated with T3 present in both of their recapitulations. I am not sure if it worked but it was my idea. The take me out to the ballgame is representation of something extramusical. That is why I choose it as opposed to some other sweet theme. (Tangential, but I had forgotten how much the playback butchered my written tremoli). I appreciate all your comments. You’re very thoughtful and kind but more importantly you are honest. Thank you.

TMOTTBG reference reminds of a college friend's poetry...he wrote these poems that were fine, but they sort of were encoded with private meanings that he alone understood...it might be the same with this...nobody will guess its private meaning and everybody will misunderstand your point, some may think you are making an ironic political statement, some will find it as out of place as that weird bit of rock n' roll that happens in Schnittke's Requiem. It's perfectly fine as it is, it doesn't effect the overall quality of the piece...I just find it so interesting to talk and think about whether what we intend and meant is really all that important in the long run. Once (if we are lucky) to have it listened to by others they will undoubtedly make up their own story. But we can do our part not to confuse them or muddy the waters...I guess my message is to think universally rather than always privately and you may find your music communicates better. Also, I hope you didn't take offense at my comment, hey you were only 13, because really you compose music with the sophistication of a far more experienced composer and come with a very wide and adventurous listening experience for someone your age. I don't mean to patronize and if I am a bit critical of certain things it's because I don't think you need to use 'I'm so young and inexperienced as an excuse'. You set a high bar for yourself and in my comments I take a cue from that rather than looking at your age. I didn't even touch Shostakovich until I was in my 20s. Heck, I never composed a thing until I was 57.@@aclassicaldisaster

@@johnpcomposer I am aware that my musical output is somewhat selfish. I had kept it somewhat as a personal diary and I won’t lie and say I don’t enjoy the “secret garden” effect that little encryptions allow me. I do acknowledge that music rarely becomes popular if it bewilders its listeners (The Rite? Maybe?). I like to think that the message the music gets across is rather clear. I was confused by what TMOTTBG represents in my life. It was out of place. If we were in private forum I could tell you the story. I feel a bit guilty having the compulsion to include it. It’s rather a trite story and the music makes it seem more existential than it is (I think). Maybe that is the condition of the music that I am most partial too. You can’t do it halfway. I do appreciate your criticism and of course taking nothing even approximating offense. I apologize if I came across as defensive. It’s hard to differentiate my legitimate want to try and explain my choices with stubborn defensiveness. I look for criticism because, frankly, there are too many people willing to kiss your ass for a few kind words in return. A pro with a con comes off as more genuine. I engage with your music because you engaged with mine. Engage, not strictly complement. I complement because I think it’s excellent music, not because I feel I have some obligation. This is the way I believe it ought to be. Perhaps I was inarticulate when I mentioned my age. I did not mean it as an “I’m only a child! Don’t shoot!”. I meant it only to call out that symphony 1 is (and I was aware that it was) an immature, or at least less mature work and that I like to think that my work quality has improved. I appreciate that you take my cue that I’d prefer age not be a factor in my music. I should’ve just said I was “younger, more inexperienced”, instead of what I did say. I’d rather be compared to my models and called “not entirely successful” than be called “excellent for his age”. I am thankful that you aren’t someone who would write me off because of my age (I’ve lost performance opportunities because of it). I can’t help but think of Shostakovich’s 1st symphony. When people talk about it they generally mention he was only 19 when he wrote it, or that it was essentially his final project for music school. They mention these things before they mention the wonderfully sarcastic first movement, a delightfully energetic scherzo, an affectingly tragic slow movement, or a finale that ends with one of my favorite “crash bang boom” endings in the repertoire!

That is one reason I did not number my string symphony. I thought perhaps because it was a string symphony it didn't deserve to be considered a fully symphonic work...but in terms of quality...I would not feel it unworthy to be numbered. One thinks of Bruckner's symphony 0. I have not gotten much beyond the 1st movement of No. 1 so my thoughts were strictly related to that movement but I probably was not clear about that. Hope you have a great New Year's weekend and get some composing done if the spirit moves you. I'm at the climax of the adagio of the symphony, and just over the 12 minute mark. It may be a sort of double climax and then with a quiet coda. @@aclassicaldisaster

@@johnpcomposer I figured you hadn’t listened past first movement (that’s fine). I do think that with revision it will be worthy of symphony 1 position. I’ve done it in my mind already, just have to move it to paper. I’ve also thought about Bruckner’s negative symphonies, but I do not think myself that type (although, I have a 20 minute symphony 1 and a half which I scrapped because it was too derivative of Sibelius 7, so perhaps one day…) Happy New Year to you as well. Come to think of it as I’m typing this it’s New Year’s Eve for me (very early morning, but the day). Slow movements are often my favorite. I am insecure about my own double climax here. It takes careful consideration to pull it off, but I’m sure you know that and you will pull it off. All of the music I’ve heard from you has been very well proportioned and deliberately paced. I’m in the development of symphony 3.1. I’ve withheld brass and percussion, eventually they will enter and overtake. They’ll wrestle the music into the minor and the 2 major key themes will be recapitulated in minor. It’s all written in my head, but I need to transfer to paper. Thinking a lot about Honegger’s 3rd symphony. It has one of the most sublime endings in the repertoire.

I understand how you may feel about this movement. As I had envisioned it, there wasn’t meant to be any more dramatic continuation. The 4th movement is the end of the world, and the music cannot raise itself again to anything else dramatic or impressive. So it sort of just wanders around aimlessly trying to figure out what to do now. The point of this movement was that it had been so shattered by the others that it couldn’t do anything but look back (this is why brass and percussion are largely omitted past the opening outburst). It may not have been entirely convincing, and you may not have been convinced by it as a structural concept but perhaps my explanation puts it in better perspective. I have thought about cutting the second largo for time because as you say, it drags. It’s half an hour long and nothing much happens other then reminiscences of music we’ve already heard. It is superfluous but that is perhaps why it is my favorite movement? To me it feels the most honest. To batter the listener for 80 minutes and then ask they sit and listen to nothing for 30 more? Perhaps it is a similar effect to the 4th movement of RVW 6, but he was significantly more compact. The ending is somewhat deliberately unsatisfying. The unresolved B and the mirrored major 7th leap that opened the whole thing. Nothing was resolved. I would urge you to perhaps take pause before listening to symphony 1. It is the work of a 13 year old who had not really gotten himself acquainted with the form (although that didn’t stop him from trying to alter it). There are many things I would have done differently and I view it as far inferior to the other works of mine that you’ve seen. Symphonies 1, 2, and 3 are written as a trilogy. There are reused themes and ideas.

And how old are you now, if I may be so impertinent to ask? If you prefer I will stick to your more recent work. You are tremendously talented young teen and very advanced in the matter of style for your age, which I assume is still teenaged. Some parts of that 2nd scherzo are astonishing in the complexity and density of the sound, the sheer inventive weirdness that shows young genius. I do understand that your point is that nothing can happen...but then we might want less of nothing. We can maybe have that effect in 20 minutes rather than 30. But my thoughts on structure are my opinion only for my tastes and intended to give my perspective on symphonic form to perhaps figure out how you might shorten it without compromising your concept...in this case cutting length would not mean cutting content@@aclassicaldisaster

@@johnpcomposer I am now 16, but the lionshare of this symphony was composed while I was 15. I do not mind you listen to symphony 1 if you are so inclined, I just ask you be aware that I think it needs revisions too. The recapitulation of first movement (even to me) goes nowhere for longer than I can even justify with a program note. I am somewhat fond of scherzo. About 20 vs 30 minutes: I got a bad habit from Shostakovich. I tend to mark my tempi exaggeratedly fast or slow to make a point to the conductor about how I’d want it played. However, in an age where it is very likely that the computer (the literalist) will be the only one realizing my work there is no interpretation. I figure a conductor would take the outer largi a bit faster than marked in some areas, a bit slower in others. Same with the scerzi and central adagio. Enough flexibility to expand out compressed moments (such as in Scherzo II) and somewhat gloss over the dead spots (as in the finale). If I find the time I’ll go through and “conduct” for the software how I would perform it, which would make it, perhaps, even more coherent.

I have to listen to that scherzo again on my good headphones at home. I really want to hear all the details. I am curious however about this end of the world idea...while you say it's autobiographical I have to wonder why it's the end of the world...the world is going on and you are still alive composing...your ending suggests death and futility, but obviously that is far from true. I find my music has nothing to do what is going on in my life, not in an overt way, all the emotions, fears, triumphs, sadness....these are all in me and any number of them can come out during the course of any given work...the fact is, I can't really compose well when I'm sad or depressed because I can't focus on music...however, music is so therapeutic and life giving that I find myself much less depressed because the act of creating staves off feelings of ennui or futility or despair...If there was one thing a symphony the length of yours could have used was more variety of expression...in the Mahlerian sense a work of that length should give us the world....as a pure musical act (for it is now a work apart from the circumstances under which it was composed) it will be judged by what it is rather than what you felt when you wrote it.@@aclassicaldisaster

It’s interesting that you hear Sibelius. He is, for me, a B list influence I think. This is to say that I love his work cyclically. It is autobiographical. I shy away from writing it out because I like the music remaining ambiguous to the listener. It ought to be what they make it. TMOTTBG is part of the thematic material throughout the symphony and it does represent someone. I think you hit the nail on the head which you called it an enormous tone poem. I am glad you are starting to see the whole in focus. I know writing movements without self contained structure was a bit of a risk. I’ve always valued criticism more highly than complements. Your thoughtful commentary is very much appreciated.

If I could sit and listen to it with you I would tell you what I mean about Sibelius the melodic line shapes the placement of timpani, the woodwind textures. But if not Sibelius who do you see as being influential on your work....I also hear some Shostakovich...perhaps Pettersson as I may have said, but only in his more tonal moments. And believe me I don't mean to detract from the fact that you have you own wonderful style emerging that I love... @@aclassicaldisaster

@@johnpcomposer Shostakovich is my favorite composer. I believe his 8th symphony is the greatest piece of music ever composed. A list influences I would probably say Shostakovich (I think I like him because I can identify with him as a person, we look somewhat similar and we have somewhat similar personalities), Mahler, Pettersson maybe Rachmaninoff. B list would be Sibelius, Tchaikovsky, Walton, Ravel, Williams (yes, that Williams), Bruckner, Hanson, Myaskovsky, Bax, Vaughan-Williams, Honegger, Popov etc. My influences are eclectic and sometimes I lean more into some than others. I do have the “Tchaikovsky complex”, wherein I hate everything I write which prevents me from judging it objectively. I hope that one day my style has crystallized, but I suppose it’s harder to hear it when you can see where you stole all the little things from. I do retain Shostakovich’s sense of quotation. This symphony is full of them. Quotations from my works (Symphony 1, Cello Sonata, Piano Sonata, etc.), the works of other composers (Shostakovich 5, The Planets, etc.), popular tunes (Take Me out, “My Favorite Things”). I use them to tie my music to the thoughts that it represents.

Thank you for your comment! I did always loved the way Sibelius developed his materials, even if I were somewhat indifferent to the materials themselves.

I'm planning to listen in entirety to the Scherzo II and the final Largo soon. More comments to follow. Sibelius 5 is my favorite of his...the way you come out of the slow part of the Scherzo II into the allegro reminds me a lot of Sibelius I would have thought you were a devotee! And he's actually an excellent model for writing a post-modern symphony. In any event, there is a great deal of beauty and even if chafe at the length and the pauses in development, I have to say that your music was always beautiful, tasteful and interesting and that's not easy to do in such a large scale work. @@aclassicaldisaster

I adore Pettersson! It’s funny you should say I do fast music well. I hate writing it. I’m more an adagio/largo sort of guy (but I’m sure you guessed that with how much slow music of mine you’ve listened to). Thanks so much for your comment!

Yes, of course you do gravitate to the slow music. Wagner would approve as by the time he got to Parsifal it was slow, slower and slowest. That is why for contrast;s sake I wished that you could sustain the energy of the fast music. I agree with you...I adore fast music, and I'm very good at writing it, and I love being done with it but it is excruciating to write....Because I find it hard to keep up with the speed of my thoughts...so much easier to hear and intuit the right changes at a nice slow tempo...I'@@aclassicaldisaster

@@johnpcomposer It is amazing the mental strain it takes to write 50 measures of fast tempo (~30 seconds of music) compared to what it takes to write 50 measures of slow tempo (~a week and a half of music)!

I acknowledge that it is almost ridiculously enormous and I, perhaps, included much music that is not of strict necessity. I know it is rather cliche and defensive to say “that was my intention” when a composer does something gauche or indirect, but this was my intention. This symphony really is a large symphonic poem. It is a condensation of the last 3 years of my life, really one situation therein. Perhaps it would feel more formally convincing if I explained the form of the whole? I used a formal idea I’m not quite sure I’ve ever seen deployed. All the movement are to be played attacca with one another. The first movement serves as introduction and exposition. Almost all the material is derived from the opening line in violas, the scalar movement that pervades comes from the descending chromatic line in basses. The “drama” in first movement is development of the 2 thematic groups separately. There is no recapitulation in that movement. The middle 3 movements serve as development of specific motives. The final movement has crisis, recapitulation, and coda. Theme guide I put together so that it is easier to see the connections musescore.com/user/29324804/scores/11169334/s/N1eR2m Again, I don’t disagree with you that it probably could be shortened. Symphony 3 is much much more compact. This symphony just turned out this was because of what I was trying to express in it. If there are moments wherein you feel like something ought to be happening, periods of waiting, disappointment, stubborn avoidance of closure, feeling trapped in the music, or anything else, then I communicated my point. I say this as non-defensively as I can: I wrote this symphony to the scale it is, not just because I could but because I legitimately believed it was the best way to realize my intent. Thank you so much for listening and your thoughtful comments!

I can see that more clearly with your explanation and of course having listened to movements ii and iii what you were after. This does have a unity I can see the return of various motivs, perhaps not as clearly as listening repeatedly would yield. I tend to be critical of excessively long symphonic works...it's a bias on my part (especially by young composers looking to past models), but I feel a much more cogent style in you, even when I can detect where it came from. You deserve great credit for that. I can see that you may well have created those holding periods where nothing happens with an intent. This works really well in the Adagio maestoso. I wasn't convinced it helped the structure of the 1st Largo. @@aclassicaldisaster

@@johnpcomposer I think you raise many good points. I am not averse to revision at some point and I probably will trim and rearrange (especially in outermost movements). Thanks for your kind words, I do try to make sure everything remains logical.

Thank you for your comment. I try to use my own voice. In honesty, I’ve been trying to top this ever since I wrote it. It has given me a sort of “I’ve said all I can” feeling.

Thanks Joe!

Thank you very much!

The empty stages are only visible for the first page of each movement. After that they are removed and only active parts are visible. Thanks for the comment.

Thank you.

I have other pieces, yes. A couple of a sonatas, a few preludes, and other odds and ends. They’re on my MuseScore account, not posted her because I couldn’t find the time. Thanks for your comment!

@@aclassicaldisaster also your 2ndsymphony technically second longest symphony in my playlist

Thanks so much for your comment!

This is actually a computer rendering from MuseScore 4 with MuseSounds. Thanks for your comment!

@@aclassicaldisaster Wow! Need to catch up with the technology. Bravo, wonderful music!

Interesting. Shostakovich is definitely a big influence for me. I look back at this work and I’m embarrassed. The orchestration is, in many places, poor and it’s quite derivative. The second symphony is definitely a Great Leap Forward for me in terms of ability a stylistic integrity. Many thanks for your kind words!

@@aclassicaldisaster One tends to be one’s own harshest critic! Things like that tend to happen I feel about a composers earlier works. I personally think this symphony is quite a fine work! And as you said about your second symphony being an improvement, I found that is also a trend as we continue writing! I’m personally very eager to start my second symphony to try to improve upon my shortcomings in my first!

It’s my favorite musical form for a reason! For as long as I’m able I’ll continue in this vein. Thanks for your comment.

@@aclassicaldisaster that’s very exciting to hear! I’m very eager to hear your subsequent works!

Thanks Jack.

Thank you so much for your comment. I’m glad it resonated with you. This was sort of my “offering to the universe”, so I’m glad it affected you!

Thanks Jack!

Thank you very much!

Thanks, Joe!