All Activity

Funnily enough, it's very telling of commenters who don't have much of substance to say about the overall quality of my work when they start pointing out the most banale, trivial nitpicks. Not your case by any means, but it's a relatively common occourrence in the comment sections of some my videos. Things like "this is supposed to be 3/4, not 6/8 meter" or "the panning of the background choir doesn't match that of the Cantāmus one". I wouldn't say it's a matter of reputation. I also wouldn't write such replies unless I have any observations or criticsm of substance to offer, as I believe it's a waste both of my time and that of the composer whose work I'm reviewing. Besides, this composition is technically a revised version of and older work: a repost, if you will, so I wouldn't blame more seasoned members who frequently comment on my posts for merely withholding what has already been said before. I had never tried this double-scoring method before, and I must admit it sounds as effective in rendering more human-like expression as much as it seems to pose a whole lot of work. The closest thing to this I usually do is manually inputting the exact tempo gradation values for the ritardandi at the end of each piece, since before MuseScore 4 came out there was no way to insert working rallentandi automatically into the score, or at the very least, not that I knew of. So in order to cover my tracks while still keeping those tempo markings functional, I manually alter the text format to make them invisible, even inside the program itself. That alone often turns out to be an absurdly tedious process and I hate it. At the moment I doubt I could even imagine myself inputting all those rubatos and expression markings and then subjecting those to the same formatting process without cleaving my head open in half out of exasperation. Even if the improvements were marginally or even substantially noticeable, I have much more valuable things to do with my time than attempt to "humanize" the recording manually. The mere thought of engaging in such a tiresome toil for a result that could far more accurately and naturally be replicated through MIDI input or a simple performance recording sends me quite aback. I've heard of this software before. A Discord user by the name of @grpnr1345 applied the software's protocol's to one of my earlier fugues under the same guise, and the results were mixed for me, because the sampling and reverb values were just deplorable, turning the overall timbral quality of the piece essentially into a downgrade, but the altered recording itself, as well as the intricacies of its transformation, felt rather convincing. For context, the audio file in question has been attached to this post. Lastly, thank you kindly for your detailed review. As for the software you mentioned, you're free to apply the Lilypond protocol to my score whenever you feel like it or have time for it. It will most definitely be interesting to see how different users of the same software modify music in the same style, so you have my full permission and encouragement to "humanize" the recording as you see fit. Fugue in G-sharp minor No. 17 Pablo Marinero Cueto 2023 - Zell 1737.mp3 Fugue in G-sharp minor #17.pdf

Getting much better at this lately.

So, two movements done, and I'm at least thinking of the third. Maybe a Brahmsian A Minor melody with a quirky harmonization, rondo-sonata with a big fugue for a development? That sounds right up my alley!😀 Melody...🤔 Hazards of editing: in the second movement, I meant to repeat the whole A section, which is aba within itself, but forgot the ba!☹️Had to paste it in...nine minute movement with repeats, I think... I had the thought in the shower, that I can't have the last movement ending triumphantly in A Major, since the first movement did that. Too much harmonic symmetry! Will have to be a tragically austere A Minor final cadence.

Ah yes surely.LOB 64 Padovana et Gagliarda.pdf

I'll join

A divertimento for pairs of clarinets, oboes, horns, and bassoons, inspired by the wind divertimenti and serenades of Mozart. Any comments would be most appreciated! 1. Allegro.mp3 2. Minuetto allegretto.mp3 3. Andantino grazioso.mp3 4. Minuetto vivace.mp3 5. Presto.mp3 1. Allegro.pdf 2. Minuetto allegretto.pdf 3. Andantino grazioso.pdf 4. Minuetto vivace.pdf 5. Presto.pdf

I didn't know you were a cat!

Thanks a lot for your comment I made a few adjustments in a newer polished version @PeterthePapercomPoser Like clock work version 2.2 05-04-2026 - Flow 1.mp3version 2 refined.pdf

Now should you go crazy with drums again or make a catchy beat?...

that is right

100, 10 minutes.mp3 n100, 10 minutes.pdf

Hey @Bjarke ! Nice job on this one! It's full of vitality and forward-driving energy! I love it! I don't find any part of it boring and can easily listen to it over and over. To me it doesn't sound so much like clockwork but more like a Spring piece with it's liveliness and exuberance. It doesn't sound mechanical to me. For me, for it to be a piece about clockwork it would have to contain some sense of ticking mechanicality. It's also not the right tempo to sound like a clock. Doesn't matter though, as I think you've created a great piece of music here! Great job and thanks for sharing! P.S.: My only nitpick would perhaps be to have notated this in 6/8, 9/8 or 12/8 as it would become easier to read imo.

Like clock work version 2.mp3version 2.pdf Hey. Any chances of getting critique on this composition? Thanks in advance. Some personal things i noticed: Overused rhythm – Effective but repetitive; lacks contrast and becomes monotonous. Sections that don’t fit – Some passages sound good on their own but feel disconnected from the main idea. Ideas needing polishing – Certain motifs or sections need refinement so they integrate better into the overall structure and narrative of the piece. Too much tension There is too much tension in the piece. It needs more release here and there. The main lead could be stronger and more interesting The main idea is pretty good but it is repetitive from the first round to the second round. Awkward transitions There is a few places where there are awkward transitions that needs to be fixed. more modulation The piece stays too much within the same key.

I think I fixed my files

okay done. drums.mp3

go crazy with the drums and see what happens 😊

I think I'll put a piano part after the drop, but I have a problem. Recently I had to re- download windows 10 because my computer was as laggy as a potato, But it messed up my files, and that made It so my DAW doesn't load the right Instruments. I'm actively trying to fix it.

Good round, though!

Would you provide a score?

I don't know what you mean by "having voices 'backwards.'" My guess would be that you either mean that I derive harmonies through melody rather than the other way around or that I sometimes use chord regressions. Neither of these are, in my opinion, though, a problem, and I think much of the music I've uploaded to the net is reasonably solid aside from issues with me often using cheap synthesized instruments.

Basically, have your music more thought through and with a clear idea of the thing and not having voices 'backwards'.

Holy Splinter at Time's Center

Hi! I am a young composer, in 4th grade and I want to be more known across platforms using my orchestral pieces that I compose in and out of school. I have a piece titled Vasilisa's Veil and I want this to gain popularity. The link will be included 😊 Vasilisa's Veil The video linked is posted on YouTube by my orchestra teacher. If you watch it, I appreciate greatly ☺️

Seems about right.