Leaderboard

Greetings all! Hot off the presses, here is my latest piece, my Oboe Quartet in D, for Oboe, Violin, Viola, and 'Cello. It's in four movements and lasts about 17 minutes. I don't have any accounting for why I decided to write this piece. I was just sitting there one day after I finished a Divertimento for woodwinds and had let some space come between - several weeks without writing - and the idea for the opening movement came to me out of the blue. I started writing, and it came pretty easily. The whole thing took about a month intermittently. I'm a violist, not an oboist. A couple of weeks ago I made a post asking for some guidance as to the limitations of the oboe, and got some good answers. After doing some research on my own additionally, and checking with a friend of mine who plays Classical Oboe, I've made some calculated demands in the upper register of the instrument that I'm hoping won't be too taxing on a Classical instrument. It certainly should present no problems to a player on a modern instrument. I did my best to provide reasonable opportunities for breath - the last movement being the most demanding in this way, but circular breathing may be a good option - as well as quite a number of rests to allow the player to rest his/her embouchure. I've done my best without selling myself short, and I hope it shows. I hope you enjoy this. I look forward to your comments. Thanks! - Composed: November 13 - December 6, 2025 at Austin. - Instrumentation: Oboe, Violin, Viola, Violoncello. - Style: Classical, ca. 1790-1800 - Duration: 17:15 - Electronic Rendering by Finale 27 music notation software’s "Human Playback" with NotePerformer 4 artificial intelligence assisted interpretation.

Hi my dear readers, it's me again. I don't understand many things here, but first things first. Imagine that I say this piece is evidently made by AI. It would be very easy to prove me wrong, @Vonias. Instead of submitting .mid files, a better, more detailed description of the process you followed would have clarified all posters here of what you did and what you have not done with it. Personally I don't care a single bit about that but we'll get to that point later. Please, consider that you are in a place filled by trained & experienced musicians and some of us have passed hundreds of hours listening to pieces just to give feedback out of either a brief or a more in-depth analysis. For some, not specifying that you were helped by an AI to make a better recording of your work and ambiguously describe it or talk about it with phrases like: may very well lead to confusion and even anger among others who consciously decided against using this tools in order to participate in an event in which ultimately your compositional ability is what we want people to show off, review and comment. Various AI tools exist to "help" with that recognition, but they are still in beta (mostly) and their own creators advise against using them as reliable methods. I took the liberty to pass the audio to some, despite you confirmed that the recording is AI: It basically says "Pure AI" 90% and provides a model. Tell me —if you want— if it hit it, this will make this developer's work better. But the thing is that you say everything else is not AI-generated. And this is where we get into trouble here. There are two different pieces here. A pdf submitted along the creation of the post that has little to do with the final mp3 you provided and the score that apparently resembles the mp3, according to you, 1:1? What's exactly the relation between the first and second scores? I can see some, let's say "adventurous" chords in the first score but not that many in the second. First score is half the size, begins with a different voicing. Rhythms don't really coincide, lyrics rest at different places "angel____ vs. an-gel cries___" . Midis are all over the place but you can clearly see the difference. Just pointed out some. What @AngelCityOutlaw is pointing out is mostly in the right direction but: That would not work. You need a seed too. If you do that yourself twice with the same material (and without fixing the seed) you'll get different things if you don't specify the same seed to the model, whatever it be. It happens with music, but also with LLMs and Image & video generators. And there are various tools to treat, import and export midis. Generating high-quality products using it is a whole 'nother story yes, but we ain't talking about one here, this is a <1 minute composition. Finally let me tell you that I don't mind if you just made the whole thing via AI, a part, or whatever. I would prefer you and anybody else in that situation to be honest and clarify things from the beginning to the rest of us who most likely are prone to and will have a listen to your piece, perhaps even giving some also honest feedback in exchange. Regarding that, the audio doesn't seem quite fitting. The strange autotune sound that the AI apparently gives to the singers sometimes and the strange cuts in vibrato feel off. The piece lacks development but it's a short "poem" more or less, right? For more info on this topic of using AI to make/export/import music on many formats, an AI that I have enslaved using a rectangular plastic card that spits money, may show you the way. Or maybe not, who knows: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/can-suno-or-similar-programs-e-2dN_8OipSNCC93.FtFGJoA?sm=d#0 Perhaps I'm late to the party, but these are my two cents. Sorry for my possible typos in advance... I am too sleepy. Regards!

Also something else I need to say about this: So I, and others, can put in hours of work writing the music, orchestration, making detailed mockups, etc. but a guy who writes a Suno prompt and has a "piece" in 5 minutes is treated as equally-valid in this event? It isn't actually even his music. Where is the "fun" in that, exactly? Why even bother? You guys say you want more people to do reviews. What your reviews are going to become if this kind of thing is permitted is a bunch of people being like "Nice prompt bro, but I would've said 'romantic soaring strings' instead of 'cinematic'".

I'm sorry Mike, but you guys folded like a cheap suit in a matter of minutes. You give these AI bros an inch and they'll take 3 miles. What is to say you won't fold the same when it's not "just for fun?" Aren't all of these "just for fun" in some way? And people will bring up that "Well you accepted AI that time!" Is this a place for composers, or a place for grifters passing off AI music?

@AngelCityOutlaw, this is a just for fun event which is why we are ok with the submission. Also, Vonias is being very clear about his submission being AI generated or assisted. We'd love for you to be a part of this event, but of course its up to you. You can change your mind any time, we just want to keep things festive and fun on YC!

@Kvothe Very cool! Loved the exposition. Especially got a kick out of the col legno in the lower parts, and the Dies Irae quote gave me a chuckle. You did leave me wanting a more definitive ending, but that's okay. Awesome!

Greetings Henry. Indeed I had expected the similarities between the primary subject of BWV 1080 and the ones used here would end up seeming far too glaring. Perhaps it may serve as a testament to the versatile simplicity of this kind of subjects, whence far greater complexity may be properly built upon. In any case, another fair reminder of Bach's genius and the omnipresent influence of his fugal developments. With that out of the way, I must apologize for not replying sooner with regards to the recent calamity. I wholeheartedly hope none of your acquaintances were directly affected by the fire. I initially hesitated to properly dedicate it to the victims due to its magnitude and devastation, and especially because of the gruesome suffering, mourning, affliction and grief so many families and friends of the deceased must be going through, for which this humble composition of mine could never properly stand up to provide nearly enough consolation. However, I should have realized sooner that not acknowledging it at all would be far more insensitive and disrespectful towards the victims and their loved ones. As such, albeit rather late, the dedication has been included in the score document. My utmost condolences. 節哀順變。

What I said is that there is no way AI generated "just a recording" of his piece. When I googled, even when I asked ChatGPT, there is no AI presently that can generate an accurate — "1:1" as OP says — mockup recording. If there was, Spitfire would be closing their doors right now. He also says he prompted it. Okay well, do you actually believe he sat there and typed out an entire note-for-note description and it rendered it? If you believe that, then prompt the AI (he doesn't say which he used) and if you don't get the exact same result, then you know he's lying. I can't get Suno to generate a solo drone, never mind a precise multi-voice harmony for choir that is 1:1 what I'd write. What has most likely happened here, is he is passing off an AI generated track as "his" work because it fit the "vision" he had or something and is providing you with a transcription. Until someone provides evidence and can replicate this piece with the same prompts or software, there is no reason to believe otherwise.

I'm withdrawing my participation. Competition or not, if you're putting on essentially a display of music created by members and also giving out site badges for them, then I feel that music should actually be created and produced by the members of the forum. I want my music alongside other human-created works.

Bump 😅

I What AI? I am unaware of any AI currently on the market that is capable of rendering sheet music as high-quality, "1:1" audio. If there was already such a thing, the sample library market would have imploded. But you said you "Prompted" it. Well, I'm similarly unaware of any of the major music AIs being able to deliver anything 1:1 based on a description. If such a thing existed, Suno and whatever the other big one is would already have been trounced. I tried to get these things to generate just a drone all by itself and it couldn't even do that, so I don't believe that, based on a prompt, you got an AI to deliver these complex harmonies and such "1:1" Absolutely no way.

Hello @TheGreatEscaper and welcome to the forum! I love this Mazurka-like prelude you've written! It has so much individuality and character! It reminds me at different points of both Chopin and Prokofiev. The chromaticism is very dark and ominous. The fact that you play your own works is great as well (and apparently you've already played @ComposaBoi's sonata as well! Great job and it's great to see this kind of interaction! You're an asset to the forum!) Formally the piece is a perfect little miniature. The melody sounds like something out of another world when it comes in on the 7th and 11th of the tonality - it's very subversive and surprising harmonically and anything but ordinary. And the accompaniment is like its own melody too that sets the stage for a very ghastly piece that would've been appropriate as a Halloween-themed piece. Thank you for joining us and for sharing this prelude and I look forward to listening to the others! P.S.: Thank you for posting just one piece into the forum to let the reviewers get just a taste of perhaps one of your better pieces instead of suddenly bombarding the forum with a bunch of music indiscriminately! You don't know how many composers do this and it really annoys the people who commonly review others' works here because we don't know which piece to listen to and it turns the forum into a dumping ground for works.

I think the initial motif, consisting of one measure, is repeated too often (16 times). It then gives way to another motif in eighth notes that is also repeated many times. I don't think it's just a matter of repetition, but rather that limiting the motif to one measure results in a lack of musicality overall (there is no unity in the overall phrase). The cadenza suffers from something similar. On the other hand, there are some parts or moments where the writing is less suited to a real pianist than to MIDI-type sound. I think that if it were treated differently, in terms of accents and dynamics, it could be closer to a contemporary sound. Although the cadenza moves between a very classical style and a more naive one. In measure 85 there is a change, but the idea of the rhythmic ostinato remains throughout. The scherzo, in my opinion, is too fast. The trio promised a change, but the accompaniment is just as fast. At those speeds, which I don't know if they would cause fatigue in the performer, the musicality is lost (for me). I quite like the Lento, it has a predominantly quartal harmony that makes it very clear sonically. Some mega-chords in the left hand need to be rewritten using both hands. The change (transition) at bar 33 needs to be worked on, as it is simply an abrupt turn. The Allegro ma non troppo is also very good; it sounds very Mozartian. I think there are many different ideas, and a sonata is not just about taking different structures and placing them one after the other. Perhaps the complicated thing is to make it sound like a single thing.

honestly I just took the fur elise midi file from musecore and It came with that 😭 I just didn't bother changing it thank you1