This work has great possibilities as to thematic material and expressiveness, but forgive me to say so, it sounds a bit flat and this is mainly due to a couple of shortcomings:
The cello has little expression and power (I guess you've mostly used sustains, and they lack attack and velocity curve, bowing variation and the necessary detaches).
The overall power doesn't show because of the weak volume and dynamic changes. Have you used a normaliser in the master? You should.
The phrases could be more elaborate with tension bows and some relaxing counter themes.
The playing room (acoustics) seems so narrow and damped.
The piano is OK, the cello sounds very synthetic and unreal (partially due to the elements I've mentioned above).
You know I always appreciate your work and this one surely merits a better treatment. I know you're a man of detail and precision. I hope we'll hear a more complete version of part one and of course the other parts as well!
... I guess you've mostly used sustains, and they lack attack and velocity curve, bowing variation and the necessary detaches.
... Have you used a normaliser in the master? You should.
Hi Max, thanks for the comments, but I must admit, I don't know what you are talking about. I use an older Kontakt Player version, and I can't see a possiblity to edit sustains. I did normalise the cello wave file, but I couldn't find a difference apart from it just being louder.
Could you imagine that I send you the midi file, finale-File or Mp3-File and you try to work it out your way, so that I could get an idea of the difference ? This would be a big help for me.... Because I must say I just love it the way it is ...
Anyway, here now my second movement, which means very much to me:
I won't presume to comment on the technical elements of the software because, simply said, I have no idea what it all means. But the music itself, regardless of software elements, is delightful and would do extremely well in a live setting. This selection would be an interesting and satisfying addition to a recital repertoire.
Now I understand. You mentioned the cello of Kontakt. The contact strings some kind of Vienna strings, but the very reduced version without the possibility of precise articulating. That explains a lot. I guess you've made the best of it.
What I mean is the lack of attack and variation in bowing techniques (some samples come in pretty late due to the slow attack). But since all this isn't possible in Kontakt, you could only use what is provided.
The overall volume is another matter. You could try to enforce the whole piece (wave or mp3 file) with a free application such as Audacity. You simply copy your file in the app and edit the normalisation. That brings all the volumes up with respect for the dynamic differences, without altering the relative highs and lows. Normalising just one file is not such a good idea. Either you do both of them with the same relative boosts, or you do the master file in one move. You could try out various settings since Audacity doesn't alter your master file.
It would be useless to fiddle with your midi file, because of the limited possibilities of the Kontakt strings.
Furthermore, I agree with William that your work is wonderful. That's why I begged for some more and deeper elaboration.
I'm liking this piece very much. It has a nice neoclassical feel to it. At times it reminds me of Boughton (forget his first name, but he penned a wonderful string quartet, ca. 1900, based on Greek folk themes). At other times the style is more romantic, especially the ending. just when I thought the piano was dominating too much, the cello would come in to provide contrast. Nice work, well done!