Leaderboard

Concerto Grosso in g major: Concerto grosso in g major written in the early italian school after Corelli for two solo violins, solo cello, strings and basso continuo. Written to my son Jonas. Key signature i used for this piece is G major (Everything rustic, idyllic and lyrical, every calm and satisfied passion, every tender gratitude for true friendship and faithful love,--in a word every gentle and peaceful emotion of the heart is correctly expressed by this key.) I. Grave - allegro. II. Adagio III. Vivace IV. Largo V. Presto Please tell me what you think. SimenN

It’s very nice. Joe hisaishi inspired? I’m not so fond of the modulation in the middle but overall the mood is nice. And it sounds a little too similar to Windows Startup Sound at the beginning, so be careful with that.

it's something incredible, you gave me a sense of celebration, brought Christmas closer. Although this is a kind of European I would say Christmas, a bit modern, but so warm. Thanks

A piece I composed a while ago, but thought to share. I wrote this in response to a Reddit challenge to write a piece in a mode other than major/minor, and I chose to try Phrygian, but in practice it more or less turned into regular minor with the occasional lowered second. Nonetheless I'm proud of how the piece turned out.

Markus, what an thought trough statement. In all my years and disscusions on this subject nobody has ever said something like this. What you say is true. And as you say, most composers on this forum write post-romantic music. When they are attacking what i am doing, they forget that they are doing the same as me to an extent. No one on this forum do not write within a style, nor did anyone here invent their own style. Every composer are influenced and expressing themself within a practice or style. Some styles are more free, some styles are more restricted. Ask yourself this: When somone hear your "ture voice" works, what do they say? Do they mistake it for beeing baroque music? - no they dont. Do they mistanke it for beeing Classical or romantic music? - no they dont. Do they hear its post-romantic or modern? Yes they do. How is that? - Is it because the score is dated 2020? - Or is it because the music in buildt on practice and principles from modern music? - The lack of tonalcenter, the figures for modern music, the use of the instruments, the use of long notes and more rests then notes, the harmony, the structure and the form. This is your style and tratis, but you did not invent them, as i did not invent the traits of my style. If what you Maartin say is true, then we all are just copyists. How amazing is that. To actually say that a piece of music or art is just a copy its a bit mean 😄 Even as the practice is long gone, its fully possible to learn the craft and the language of the practice and write expressive music in it with one own crativitiy and voice. To be creative in the style is not to do something extreme that never have been done before, but a individual will allways have hes own traits (as explained over).

The opposition to pastiche composition has a common theme, one which I experienced at my school when I first developed an interest in it. It harbors the idea that music is the creation of an artist, and all art should contain artistic expression. Imitation of a style or composer from a bygone era, therefore, should not be encouraged for it will limit one's means to distinguish themselves within a school or tradition that countless others have already exhausted through their output. Whilst this argument has some merit, it is based on a number of misconceptions and assumptions that cannot be ignored if one is to think about it. As Simen points out in his quote by JS Bach, composers of the 18th century were more craftsmen than artists, whose craft centered around pleasing and relatable patterns. Many highly successful composers from this period were educated in institutions that from an early age drilled their students in such patterns by rote, to the extent that it became a second language. I think it is fair to say that the underlying practice of composers from the 17th and 18th centuries conflicts with our understanding of artistry (that is, if you associate artistry as something beautiful or profound that pushes boundaries and which may challenges people intellectually). It is no coincidence that popular music from this era is predominantly by figures whose mastery enabled them to set themselves apart from their contemporaries. But how can one begin to understand their art without looking at the context in which their craft was cultivated? The truth is, the practices of the 18th century musical world have long ceased to exist. There is much we do not understand and may never do. The attempted revival of their practices in my view, is more a scholarly exercise and Simen seems to do this better than others. I have observed that most who use this forum subscribe post-romantic models, and many have become quite specialized in their respective disciplines. An inevitable outcome of this is that people will project different things on other people's works. That is an important thing to consider when you are offering criticism.

Thank you for your reviews Sojar and Maarten Bauer. We have had that discussion many times before, and I wil try to explan again. I do write in a style/idom yes, and the goal is to sound as it would have been written in the 17th century. I write in the school of Corelli (wich is something is called now, back in the baroque Corelli harmonic and meldoic langauge was typical for the style, though he did countinue to develop the concerto grosso form, as Stradella had started). Corellis iitalian comtemporarys sound very much alike him, i doubt anyone how does not know hes music well could hear if it was Corelli, Torelli, Locatelli, Stradella, etc. But if you really know the composer, you would hear the "voice of the composer". My music is influenced by later styles of italian baroque, as well as german, and north german (buxtenhude). That influence is allways present in my music, so that means that i have some things that is not typical for the italian style. First of all, the music i compose it flows as natural from my head is it does for you when you write your music. This piece is not a copy of Corelli, but i use the same main traits as him and all the other contemporarys did. If your logic is right, then everybody is just copying, that is not right is it? Take Handel for an example. Every heard the hallelujah corus? - The main melody here something Corelli and hes contemporarys have written 100 times before. This the most common traits of a melody from this period, both melodic, rytmic and harmonic. Its phrase. This is actually used in a fugual theme by Corelli. I could have been going on with examples like this. The point here is when one compose in a style there are meldodic, harmonic and rytmic simularities, often its allomost the same, but its not a copy. These things are the tools one use to make the music, nowbody owns them. As JS Bach once said, im am not an artist, im a craftsman. Its not just all about what you write, its as music as how its written. This things goes for all styles, even the one you write, that you belive is so full of your own voice, but you are bound by the same things as me. I think that is a really strange thing to say. Its not a song, its a style. So if you like punk rock, with bother listening to SUM41 when you have heard Green Day. Why would you listen to Zelenka when you have Bach? Why listen to Kraus when you have Mozart?. Maybe people who like Corelli and hes contemporarys enjoy my music. If they do, im very happy. I express my music, if it gives anyone pleasuere is great, if not its more then ok. If you rather would listen to Corelli, please do that 🙂 I tire of this debate, I have been a part of it for 15 years now..!

Hi Noah: This is great.. It could start as a great Jazz tune, but with Xmas feel, you give it double duty which is perfect. Possibly the kick a bit busy. In two places at 45 seconds and 1:13 the chord makes my left eyebrow go up. It's really a small detail. The melody and chords really give it a very valid 'sentimental' quality, which I love. I should learn this piece, to see if I can get some insight into emotion you invoke so skillfully.

Fuga la ciaconna in g minor: The fugue subject is a countersubject to the commonly ciaconna passage (in the key of gminor: G F EB D). This passage is not written in the fugue, but is "hidden" in the hamony. The little experiment here is to have a hidden 4th voice to sing with the words kyrie. The theme will be inn all of the four voice ranges. The idea is to give the freedom to the performer of how to arrange and where to place the voices. That is the experimental part of the piece. As for the fugue it self its for 3 voices. Plase tell me what you think