Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/13/2018 in all areas

  1. Thanks for taking the time to listen, Willibald - I'm glad you enjoyed it. Regarding the composer competition, I certainly agree with you. I've seldom found much enjoyment in listening to mid to late 20th-century art music. The peculiar thing is that the general market is not actually especially interested in academic music. There's interest among performers and composers, but the vast majority of concert-goers would prefer listening to a Brahms, Bach, or Mozart over a Boulez, Babbitt, or Cage, for instance. Modern composers are often quite removed from this market, partly because it is incredibly difficult to gain a foothold against the established repertoire, and partly because there simply isn't enough demand for classical music to allow most composers to make a living of it. Thus, they pursue it as a hobby in the way that Ives did, while earning their living doing something else. I think what's really at play here is that most post-secondary composition instructors of the past couple of generations grew up in the academic climate of the 50s through 70s - an era that was marked by a striking intolerance for utilizing stylistic elements from past eras in an effort to advance music in the same way that all other fields were advancing - and they push their students to continue this tradition. Most composers are intelligent people, and they pride themselves on this intelligence. They do not want to be regarded as unoriginal, nor as individuals incapable of handling the complexities of highly advanced modern music. Those who did dare write more traditional music (Barber, for instance) often received scathing criticism from the proponents of the new style, and students who were not lucky enough to have an open-minded professor at school were likewise scolded for their lack of originality. This peer pressure can be extremely persuasive, and in my opinion is the primary reason that avant garde styles came to dominate the art music world. Unfortunately, this played a significant role in killing off demand for serious art music (which was seen as necessary by many of the chief proponents of the avant garde movement). The effects are still very much present to this day. A few years ago when I was checking in here more regularly, I remember seeing numerous examples of composers in this forum posting nicely written music in traditional styles who were admonished that they should be "finding a fresh, original voice" rather than imitating styles of the past. Invariably, these detractors were modernists, and ironically, their music was seldom any more creative or original than the composers they scorned - they were just imitating a somewhat more recent style of music. The idea they persisted in advancing - that one MUST employ the tools of the modern era in order for his or her music to be relevant to the modern era - always struck me as deeply flawed. If older musical styles are no longer relevant, why do we still listen to and adore them? Why are they still, to this day, more popular among the concert-going public than modern art music styles? The argument only makes sense if one feels that the primary purpose of music is to advance and evolve. All that said, it also makes no sense to me that anyone would claim the world would be better off had avant garde music never been explored. There are some musicians who genuinely believe that this is the most beautiful and expressive music in the world, and they should not be scorned for it. There are also many who find a real sense of fascination and intellectual fulfillment in the process of writing in serialist, aleatoric, and other avant garde styles. I actually think that for many of them, that is of much more importance and relevance than the resulting sound. And there can be no denying that such music is a greater communicator of certain emotions than the tonal system could be. I suppose, in a nutshell, that I wish people would stop trying to pressure each other into writing in their own preferred style. Write what you enjoy - not what you're told you should write. Unless, of course, you make a living writing music for other people, in which case what you write should probably be something they want to hear. :-)
    2 points
  2. I wrote this song to be meaningful, its a fancy song with meter changes and cool sax parts. Tell me what you think, follow me on SoundCloud and Instagram, I would love to follow people back who write and enjoy similar music as me and interact with them. My Instagram is wind_player1 and my SoundCloud is below. Thank You, Cj Rhen. Listen to Back Of My Mind by Cj Rhen #np on #SoundCloud
    1 point
  3. Thanks! I can indeed adjust the reverb, so maybe I'll try that... the thing with these virtual choir sounds is, they sound pretty choppy and robotic without lots of reverb, so it's a matter of finding the right balance. I also think these sound libraries tend to work better for more homophonic textures, so sometimes in more complex, polyphonic pieces like this one, they can be a little hard to follow. But I still stand by my "better-than-MIDI" comments!
    1 point
  4. The amount of reverb in the sound makes it a little hard to follow, for me. I know you were looking for a mysterious effect, but if there's a way to adjust it down a little that would make this more effective as a demo. As it is, sometimes it's hard to feel the beat. I like the idea of the chimes as accompaniment. It should help keep the pitch true, since this is a longish piece to hold the key a cappella. You got a good graveyard vibe to the text. Nice job.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...