I made this II

Finale or Sibelius?

Not bad. It needs a bit more variation. I think if the pizzicato ostinato was played by woodwinds (perhaps a combination of clarinet and flute), you'd have a richer sound. Of course that's just my personal opinion, as I don't like to use pizzicato for anything other than setting tempo.

Also, check your range on the glockenspiel. I'm not sure it can go that low. Unless it's meant to be celesta.

I would recommend more harmonic variation and greater variation in instrumentation. The harmonies seem to favour parallel 4ths/5ths, minor triads and unison, which without much variation and without alternative voicings can become tedious and repetitive.

Melodically, not all the lines work well in the harmonic climate you place them in, creating dissonances where it sounds like you didn't mean to put any - I get the impression that in terms of compositional theory, you are a novice, so I recommend that you read around on traditional structuring of tonal music (I read a book by Walter Piston, but it bored me to fucking pieces, so maybe you ought to look for a more inspiring piece of literature).

Let me say again, more variation in instrumentation or if you insist on using strings and trumpets only, more varied use of the instruments.

It's commendable that you've made an effort, and I think that with a bit of pushing in the right direction, you could become a competent composer.

Better than Nepsotic's stuff

I should probably have mentioned that I know almost nothing of musical theory or terminology.

I probably should take up some reading on the subject, and the bits I can understand of your critique seem sensible, and I can see what you mean.

There was one thing I did think about when I went into creating this. And it was something along the lines of making it simple, but making it work overall. Mostly because I'm not a really good or well-learned composer, so I opted for what I knew I could complete. Not that it excuses your much more informed critique, but it does offer a certain explanation to some of them.

I kind of feared there might be a comparison between me and Nep.

You have all the makings of a good piece here, but its mostly just chord after chord of horns. Write a key musical phrase and assign an instrument (probably a mid-to-high woodwind or strings) that prevails over the chords you've already penned.

Do you write all this out on the staff from the get-go, or do you work it out on a keyboard first? Doing the latter will help you create a more interesting melody, and you can experiment more freely. Writing strictly on the staff is very limiting, and you're actually using the wrong part of your brain when you do it that way, because you're working things out visually as opposed to with sound.

I made the mistake of doing that when I first started composing. The brain programs itself to see certain patterns of notes that you will subconsciously write over and over, so its better to do it by ear.

Be bold. Hit notes you think you shouldn't or that initially sound 'wrong' Strain yourself. You might just come up with something really unique.

I can't really play any instruments as such, so I am more or less forced to do the staff only. Still, I might take that advice, as my sister does have an electric keyboard she hardly uses. It seems like very logical to think playing it out is a better way to do it than writing it all out at once.

And I think I did try to come up with one general phrase at first, but then found it extraordinarily hard to write tracks to accompany it.

If you're interested, I use a MIDI writing program called Anvil Studio, then usually either just record directly from there, or convert it to something higher quality using a soundfont of some kind. This is a case of the latter.

Damn straight. I mean, it's a completely different type of music, but yeah.
After reading that I just started hitting random keys on my MIDI track and I actually came up with something pretty good.

There's not right or wrong way to make music, as long as the final product is cohesive. I've come up with melodies by just turning on the metronome and hitting random notes like an epileptic rag doll.

The most fun I've had creating melodies was with tone rows earlier in the year. It sounded awful, but that's the point.

I wouldn't use Anvil Studio for note input. MuseScore is a much better free alternative, but it can be buggy.

It's hard to get an idea of what it really sounds like from that and without actually seeing the music on a stave I'd be hard pressed to say too much that hasn't already been said. The low instrument at 2:48 felt like it dragged the chord askew.

Other than that, it almost feels like it has too many peaks and falls without going anywhere. It's hard to find the balance between repetition and introducing new material/not being boring. I really felt here that after some of the quiet sections it could have built up with something else. Personally I would avoid that many clear loud - > soft - > loud bits within the shape of an entire piece. Working form that my first step would be cutting some of the bits out to have a clearer progression of when it was big and when it was small. Also, the ending could have been more final, but that comes into cadences. I think you finished going Dm - C - Dm, which is the kind of thing you avoid unless you're going for a "fade out". If you were going for that kind of thing keep repeating those chords while you fade.

Composition is very personal and you're completely entitled to ignore everything everyone has said here. I've been composing myself the last few days, so my comments may be odd or overly personal preference.

Not heard from you in a while, how are things?