Here's one of my short piano compositions

I was inspired by Ferkungamabooboo's "Wouldn't It Be Nice" to post one of my own pieces, which I slipped into a reply to his post. But apparently no one has heard it? So I'm starting a thread of my own. This one is among my first batch of piano compositions I consider complete, composed between May and July of this year. I've composed another ninety-seven since then, all of them short, but in the aggregate they total nearly four hours' worth.

Some facts about me: I'm 54, no doubt older than most here. I never composed anything before this year--this eruption of a melodic gift is rather inexplicable to me, but I gladly accept it. I can barely play--I can plink out "For He's a Jolly Good Fellow," badly, but that's as far as I got in my beginning piano class that ended in May, and, being five songs behind by the time of the final recital, had to take an Incomplete. The pieces I'm composing are created mainly with the Piano Roll mode of Anvil--I also look at Staff mode, but my sight reading is still so poor that using Piano Roll is far easier for me. Partly because these pieces were created without playing them, except for a few exploratory phrases on my 49-key Casio keyboard, I created them without any particular regard for how difficult they would be to play. My fondness for unisons and chords spread across octaves probably make some of these impossible to be played by one person, and some might actually require two keyboards in a dual effort.

Since I can't actually come close to playing these pieces myself, I haven't given their technical difficulty much thought. My goal was to create MIDI files that satisfied my musical sensibility, within the limitations of the medium. I still haven't figured out how to achieve dynamics or legato, so everything, with a few exceptions, sounds staccato and moderately forceful, never extremely soft or extremely loud, and not very connected. So apparently by taking the easiest avenue offered by the Piano Roll mode, I've taken away the piano's original reason for being--it's capability to be variable between soft and loud. I need to master the capabilities of my program, but studying that sort of thing is not very interesting to me, I must admit--I'd much rather compose another new piece. So they all suffer from certain limitations, but that also imposes a unity of style, and that can be a good thing.

Anyway, here's the one I posted in response to "Wouldn't It Be Nice."

"He Wished They All Could Be California Girls, But His Soul Was Weighed Down Heavily By The Awareness of Tragedy."
He_Wished.mid

I'll post the notational text version soon, but I warn you, some of these things are a mess when you look at them!
Be honest, but be kind. I'm new at this. Thanks.

Walter Rhoads
Sacramento, California

I've been waiting for a score to be posted, but there still isn't one, although I can assume what the score would look like.

First, the "young" in "young composers music forum" means "young" as in "new to composing" rather than "young in age." I don't think that you, at 54, are as old as you think you are on this site.

You said your goal was to write music that satisfies your musical sensibility. If you have done that, then you have accomplished your goal.

Based on what you said and what I hear in this piece, it seems to be a bunch of random notes hammered out. There is nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't leave any room for comment, which is probably why no one has responded yet until my post. If you wanted to write music based on plunking down random notes, you seemed to have already mastered the technique, so there isn't much else to say.

If you want to be more musical, as you say you do, you need to either learn the techniques of composition, or learn how to use your program. Music isn't limited to writing notes on paper, and people have very sucessful compositions using musical programs and don't know a thing about notation. But, to be harsh here, it sounds like you don't understand either.

You said you have written 97 more of these things? And that instead of polishing one piece, you get bored with it and start another? Certainly this isn't out of the ordinary for a young composer (heck, I had a catalogue of 157 pieces before I hunkered down and got serious with composition, but those pieces are in a vault somewhere and no one will ever know about them), but when are you going to start putting quality before quantity and share those compositions, too?

There is something to be said about aleatoric music ("random" or "chance" music) but even within that genre, there is still technique and sophistication behind the music.

I am sure this piece actually is playable by a human, as I have heard music played that sounded like the performer had 5 hands and was much more chaotic sounding than your piece.

Not sure what else to say...

Hmm...you're entitled to your opinion, but I assure you it wasn't random. I thought the ears around here would pick up on that, and that the criticism would be more along the lines of "...it sounds like (-------; fill in some composer from historical record), but it's not developed, more like a fragment," etc. I didn't think anyone would think this was random. It has intention and to me there is a melodic structure. Some of my others are more accessible on first hearing, but now I'm hesitant about submitting them. Since it just sounds like noise to you, yet is not as chaotic as some you know of that are playable, I don't know what to say. Not as chaotic must mean there is some order, eh?

I gather you didn't perceive a derivation from the line "I wish they all could be California girls..." (the Beach Boys, "California Girls.") That was the point of departure.

I detect a note of hostility. But I'm going to thank you for posting, since getting some kind of response was my goal. But your feedback isn't very meaningful or helpful to me.

You don't compare it to anyone's production at all. It doesn't sound like anything you've ever heard before? Are you sure? Nothing in your experience is comparable?

Evidently I made the wrong wager when I submitted one of the edgier ones. I wish you all well.

Walter

Here's the pdf.

hewished.pdf




This is what I got when I made a pdf from the staff mode of Anvil. If the notation doesn't show what's heard, blame Anvil, not me. As for what's heard, it's not random. It would be unlikely to show what logical progression it has (and there is some) if it were random. It was the product of intention, following my melodic instinct. I've heard jazz improvisations on standards from that genre's repertoire that are MUCH more abstruse than this--you have to really listen for a while to discern that all that slogging is oh, "My Funny Valentine," let's say. Music--sound in an organized pattern, a sonic design, a non-meaningless succession of pitches, with some sort of rhythm--is a large capacious ballpark, a giant football stadium. By definition,it's not unlimited, but it is large. I am in that ball park. I am not outside in the parking lot. The area outside represent noise, if you're following my analogy. Mozart may be on the fifty-yard line, while I may in the cheap seats, but I'm still in the stadium.

Sounds random, but not even good enough to be classed with the category of music that's primarily random? Sounds like I'm in an untenable category. I shouldn't have been so honest, owning up to the fact that I still don't understand all the facets of the program I purchased. Next time I wade into a swimming pool with sharks, I'll make sure I'm not bleeding.

I supposed you don't want to hear a piece that's a digression from "Mona Lisa" into some Arabicism? The beginning of "Mona Lisa" can be heard in mine if the listener is familiar with the song.

I'm going to do something more pleasurable now, like hitting my head with a board.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.


Walt

It doesen't sound random at all to me! Actually the first I thought was ''metal'' or ''rock'', rather than any sort of ''aleatoric'' music. I like it a lot! Sounds sexy! Bouncy!

The length felt just right, too. I listened to it about 10 times anyway, so that made up for whatever.

Attached is the MIDI file imported into a real notation program.

Originally Posted by Justin Tokke

Attached is the MIDI file imported into a real notation program.

Thanks!

Walt

Originally Posted by Walter Rhoads

I thought the ears around here would pick up on that, and that the criticism would be more along the lines of "...it sounds like (-------; fill in some composer from historical record), but it's not developed, more like a fragment," etc. [snip]

You don't compare it to anyone's production at all. It doesn't sound like anything you've ever heard before? Are you sure? Nothing in your experience is comparable?

Why, more than once, do you ask to be compared to another [implied: famous] composer?

It's kind of bizarre, but in a good way, I suppose. I've never really heard much like it before, but I disagree with the assessment of it as random. I did hear definite patterns in it, which is a good sign. Still, I think it really needs to be polished (although I'm not sure how one would go about doing that with a piece like this). Also, get a real notation program.

Originally Posted by SonatainfSharp

Why, more than once, do you ask to be compared to another [implied: famous] composer?

Because famous composers have styles--their work has characteristics that tend to identify them to the listener. The great ones typically are models of a style or school. Everyone wants to be original, but comparisons are still useful. As a rule, artists can be loosely grouped, and that includes lesser creators such as ourselves. In trying to understand any work of art--visual, musical, etc.--it's helpful to identify points of similarity to what has gone before. Although this can lead to an excessive emphasis on categorization--pigeonholing--it is still a basic tool of appreciation. Hypothetical example:

"Artist X says he paints out of doors, he uses broken color and indistinct outlines, his colors are bright and saturated--in this painting, Artist X could be said to be an Impressionist. We don't know if he has studied historical Impressionism and has borrowed their innovations, which were original at the time, or if he actually is ignorant of them and has somehow re-invented the wheel. But he certainly has a kinship with Impressionism." (Referring to Impressionism in painting, not music)

Or, in music: First Listener: Composer Ys' music is not without passion, but that passion is under intellectual control to a high degree. In his precise and symmetrical structure, he is more reminiscent of Mozart than Beethoven. If I had to choose, I would have to say he's more Classical than Romantic."

You get the idea. I just made these up. Usually in the arts, no matter what you're doing, someone else has already done it, and usually done it better. Those are the names in the history books. And usually there have been enough points of similarity for innovative individuals to be grouped with others of (somewhat) like mind. Often this process is highly annoying to the artists, and simply serves to simplify lazy critics' homework. But it is still a fundamental tool that we all use.

I'm not suggesting I'm greater than anyone else, or belong with the immortals, just that finding characteristics in common helps us to understand something new.

W.R