Leaderboard

It has recently come to my attention how some composers approach their music-making very technically - labeling chords, roman numerals, showing modulations etc. But this kind of approach is very much the opposite of how I write music. I studied all those technical aspects of music as well of course. But how I make music now is very much based on my gut feelings and intuition rather than technical rules. I am still tangentially aware of all those technical aspects of my compositions of course. But inspiration, for me, comes first and the technical understanding, after. How do you approach composition? Which approach do you value more? Technique or Intuition? Which comes first and which is secondary?

Great topic! I would personally argue the two are inseparable. Sure some may choose to emphasise one over the other as more important although that creates a false binary, and probably reflects their experience and training. Music is a form of human expression that is built upon a language that has been continuously shaped according to technical innovations, fashion and the political, economic and social conditions of the time. I'd argue that the syntax of that language, with enough training and application, becomes second nature - much like how we speak our native language. That is the intuitive aspect of producing music and which has greatest utility when producing an outline. The obsession with Mozart's compositional process, given his mythologized status, has helped us understand he produced his music by completing the outer parts first and I expect that has been the common practice across the board. Obviously, this still requires technical knowledge and proficiency in a plethora of domains not limited to form, structure, voice leading, and manipulating tonality; but is nonetheless a relatively free part of the overall process where 'inspiration' is most relevant. Much of what follows, in my opinion, is the process of adding complexity to that foundation. And this is where one's technical competencies really tend to shine: through orchestration decisions; enriching the voice leading and counterpoint between the various parts; the manipulation of ideas; and ultimately shaping of your ideas into a compelling construct capable of engaging your audience successfully. For me, the latter is often the most technically demanding, with increasing difficulty in accordance with structural complexity (compare the task of writing a conventional minuet with an opening movement to a suite in sonata-allegro form). Artistic inspiration without technical competency will have a tendency to lead to art that has 'potential' - at best - for the need of further refinement. And technically competent expression that lacks 'humanity' - so to speak - will may result in mechanical and uninspired art. AI music can sound a bit like the latter. There is a useful analogy that likens the depth of knowledge in music theory to that of an iceberg. The deeper one gets, the more abstract the concepts. But mastery of those deeper realms will provide the composer with a wider variety of tools to apply. One cannot simply be inspired to write a 4 part fugue; they would not get very far if they tried...

Hello @PeterthePapercomPoser! Let's see, by "technical composition," do you mean things like deciding beforehand to resolve to a major chord here or using a diminished chord there to create a darker mood? Or perhaps composing using mathematical formulas? In any case, I personally feel that it’s best to use whichever approach fits the moment. For instance, even when inspiration strikes, I often fail to give it shape because I lack the necessary skills. At times like that, or when I have no inspiration at all, I’ll compose based on technical principles instead. Sometimes that process sparks a new idea, and the reverse happens too. Of course, if you consider a technical breakthrough to be a form of inspiration itself, then we’d really need to clarify our definitions, though perhaps this isn't the place for that. Sadly, I’m not a gifted composer, I just do it for fun, but I enjoy both methods because each is important and has its own unique appeal. Personally, I find it satisfying when I start with technique and end up creating something that matches what I envisioned. (And sometimes, creating something unexpected too!) Best, Lithl.

I really liked the replies and I couldn’t agree more. The ultimate purpose of music, as has been pointed out, is, I believe, to evoke emotions, whatever they may be. And taking it to extremes, whether one relies solely on inspiration or bases everything on theoretical and technical considerations, the result will be ineffective. I don’t think there’s a single composer, including in pop music, who has achieved any real success by relying predominantly on one or the other. Many pop musicians don’t have much technical training, but they have teams behind them who make up for all that. Relying solely on inspiration and intuition is like a surgeon who operates with great talent but knows nothing of anatomy. Conversely, an anatomist cannot operate on the basis of theoretical knowledge alone. These are inseparable aspects for any composer of even the most basic calibre. And as has also been said, ultimately it becomes a naturally interwoven process. The idea, the inspiration, can come from a great many sources, but technical knowledge allows you to greatly improve the result in every respect. I also believe that, nowadays, many composers are eclectic and draw on elements from various musical languages, depending on what they think will work best for what they wish to express. I don’t know – the broader the range of resources, the more varied and better the results can be. It’s like being a chef with 10 ingredients or with 100.

@Henry Ng Tsz Kiu Thank you for all the insightful feedback! Definitely agree modulation could be cleaner especially and some small mistakes with voice leadings all around. Still am very new to writing long form , but am currently working on my second sonatina and I am kind proud of it so far haha Really looking forward to hear what you think of it! Especially since I felt a lot braver than my first work so i took more risks which I'm sure will also result in more things that can and will go wrong haha. Once again , appreciate your feedback! @Kvothe Appreciate the feedback! Definitely agree with overall comments. I think a lot of issues that are apparent here are being solved in my next work which i hope to finish in the upcoming weeks!

An interesting question. I think that, nowadays (or for the past few decades or so), even as a professional composer, it is almost impossible to develop a unique, new and personal style. I believe very few in history were like that. Bach, Wagner, Debussy, Schönberg… in the 20th century there are perhaps more: John Cage, Messiaen, Bartók… But there are other composers of equal or greater calibre who did not introduce ‘revolutionary’ new ideas, yet who took the music that was developing at the time and made it evolve and grow. These composers also have highly recognisable personal styles (Mozart, Beethoven, Verdi, Puccini, Brahms, Chopin, and many more). We currently face a ‘problem’: we are familiar with a vast number of musical languages and systems that emerged in the 20th century, and there are many of them. I believe that, nowadays, a composer must be eclectic and must be familiar with as many musical languages as possible, drawing from each the elements that suit them at any given moment. The ability to combine all of this is a sign of a composer’s maturity. Very often, we stick very closely to a particular style, or even a particular composer, and write pieces by imitating them as best we can. That’s fine, but I don’t think that amounts to developing one’s own style. I see it as absolutely necessary, especially for learning purposes. Regarding the second point you raise. It’s true, there are a great many widely used techniques and other things that software programmes cannot do. Although they are gradually incorporating them. Of course, I can’t see a DAW or an editor handling random elements. The notation for this has been sorted out, but the software-based performance cannot be random.

Hello I’m going to give my opinion on a few points, but without awarding a score. Firstly, the choice of the piccolo is a bit odd. Much of the part written for it could be played on a conventional flute. At certain points, however, this isn’t possible. One advantage of the piccolo is that, in the higher registers, it can be played less loudly than the flute. Although the dynamic markings are a bit sparse. One thing I don’t like is that the flute and viola play in octaves… two or three octaves apart. This creates a rather large and constant gap in between. Although at times it is ‘filled in’ with a note from the harp. The viola is also a bit odd because much of its part is in treble clef, which seems more appropriate for a violin. Writing for the harp isn’t easy either. Once the issue of whether pedal changes are feasible has been resolved (something I haven’t analysed), the problem is that it doesn’t seem very idiomatic for the left hand to be arpeggiating all the time. It’s an ostinato that already creates monotony. The range of the chords in each hand at that speed strikes me as far too wide; I’d limit it to an octave (for example, bar 23). I also find what happens in section B a bit complicated, where one whole hand is occupied and the other is too, doing different things. As for whether it captures the spirit of the piece, I won’t comment on that because it seems so subjective to me that I can’t really judge… I believe that a chamber piece of this style requires careful attention to dynamics, accents and balance. Best regards.

When it comes writing, I like to write from structural point of view. Think analyical as I write (melodic form, hamorny, musical form, counterpoint, etc). That way, I can try to a cohesive composition. The recent piece I wrote I went through and looked for motive i could use for ending section. :)

Alex 2 points: I assume your sore is in C. To transpose from English Horn in F to Oboe is a 5th up. If you review your English horn part that would put the Oboe in the mid-range. Secondly, you have the English horn play G above the staff ... not a low note. As per the Oboe and the problems with low notes ... which I would consider to be anything below a C#/Db you are correct. The amateurs and some semi-pro players might have difficulty attacking the notes with confidence and producing an initial soft attack and pleasant tone too. Personally, I practice daily producing soft attacks on the lower notes and I test my (handmade) reeds on such an attack. So much skill: air support, embouchure, coordination (tongue, breath, fingers) all impact on the low notes. So you I guess you have to know your players experience level. Now having said this .... I really don't like composers who do not appreciate and who write melodic lines etc. for Oboe without understanding the skill level needed and/or the context written for those low low low notes. Oboe is a challenging instrument ... one you both love and hate at times! And don't let me start on the reeds .............................. Mark

When it comes to personal style, as a composer, it is hard to describe what that style would be. Yes, I compose ensemble pieces (rather solo or chamber) or full orchestra, too. However, period style is not going to be same. The term best fits me is "polystylist". This means I could possibly write in different styles. For instance, my Halloween piece was written for string quartet but the style 20th century. (note; I could have written a serialism written for that competition...). Currently, I working piece that sounds neo classical for the next competition. Joe Hirashi was the inspiration for the piece. My personal taste is open book. Heck. George Leigti works are always fun to listen to. And who does not want to listen a post tonal composition that has clusters and other modern jazz. :) The problem is...midi can not play back alerotical boxes and clusters. Only live musicians can. Thus, that is what trying figure out, next. How to have play back in score. (maybe use a daw?)

My pleasure! Glad to help out. :)

Please submit links to your "From Nothing, to Something" competition pieces here! (Please don't submit your music directly into this thread - rather, create your own dedicated thread where members will be able to review your music there - Upload Your Composition for Analysis and Feedback and then copy and paste the URL of your topic into a reply that you make in this thread). Thank you for your participation! To read the requirements/specifications of the competition and declare your intent to participate go here:

Thanks Mark. I still have a lot to learn about the oboe. (Not to mention all the other orchestral instruments!) Hopefully I'll improve over time.

I see you've encountered the annoying bug, where MuseScore duplicates the tempo directions, and propagates them down through the score for no obvious reason. You can get rid of these by selecting each tempo element in the Layout side-pane, and hitting delete. (You'll find them sandwiched between the instruments.) As to the music, it's a lovely piece, and I enjoyed listening; but I think your rendition could be improved. At Bar 50 (for example), you have crotchets in the strings interspersed with quaver rests. These sound very unnatural, because the sound cuts out too abruptly. I'd be inclined to make these dotted crotchets, and add diminuendo hairpins below each one to taper off the note. Then reset the dynamics on the next note. Your staccato tenutos on the strings around Bar 38 have a similar problematic effect: so I would lose those. Hope that helps, Alex.

Hi there @MinGry I agree with @MK_Piano about articulations. As I glance over the first movement, there are moments where you can mark slur for phrasing. You are missing dynamics marks where those hairpins are. The player needs to know what is the starting dynamic is and the ending dynamic is. you start with P then cres p? As a pianist, I would need more information than that. This applies for the second movement and the third, as well. I also agree with @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu on tonal planning of the piece. When it comes to modulation, in the style you are writing in the composers either choose a common chord or common tone. That way, there was smooth transition between each tonal area. Structure: It fits the form of early classical sonata. One with a devolvement. I hope mine, @MK_Piano, and @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu feedback will help you grow as composer. Please continue to write and share your works on this forum. Do not be scared to branch out to different ensembles, too. :) Kvothe.

Even Film composers draw from influences different styles. John Willams drew from Shoenberg's use the tonal when he wrote the night bus scene in Harry potter. Aliev vs Predator extensively used Aleortical writing. However, it has seems new composers want less orchestral and synth base music. I can see how this works (sort of). But it would not work in every film. Nor will the audience like it. Audiences who attend operas, ballets, and musicals desire the traditional sound: a rich orchestral score. Synths will only work to those who never listen to that.

What prelude is it?

I doubt you'll get much of response to your post, primarily because of the INDOCTRINATION taught by schools and possible University's too. However,once you've had enough of that DOGMA , you start to "FORM YOUR OWN IDENTITY" which of course will be Obliterated by the masses . "You must Conform". Music that can create EMOTIONS | Urgency - Terror - Fear | & | Euphoria - Joy - Charisma | will stand a much better chance of being remembered and Respected. This is just my opinion you don't have to agree with it, and i doubt if the majority will. An example of a "SOUND" that caught my attention as a Child.

Thank you very much for your thoughtful feedback. It was incredibly helpful.

Hi @MinGry ! I will continue with my comment. In the 2nd mov, there's the same issue with modulation as in 1st mov, which is you don't have the dominant preparation for the new C major before getting into the key in b.15, as mere repetition of a key doesn't signify the modulation. The harmonic progression for b.16-23 is I-V-IV and then back to I, which is not in the style with the V followed by IV. The IV will be better substitued by a ii-V. For the 3rd mov, the rhythmic drive is nice. B.12-15's bassline and b.68-69 RH have too many parallel fifths which will be out of style. The contrasting G major passage can end in perfect cadence before going back to tonic C major. Thx for sharing! Henry

My reason for using the English horn, is that oboes can sound quite harsh and intrusive in their low range. A bit like a duck! So I thought an English horn would have a more pleasant timbre in that range. Alex this really is a misunderstanding of how an Oboe works! Let's throw out the meme about DUCKS! The lower range/register can be as beautiful as the upper range. (just ask Dvorak). The English horn in this orchestration will not add too much. It does not have the penetration ... it is better used a solo instrument or in a small ensemble. Please no more duck jokes! Mark

Hi @MinGry ! It's a really good attempt on a Classical sonatina style and I think you capture the style. I think for the 1st movement you can pay more attention on voice leading and harmony. In b.12 the G major melody is played on top of a C major chord which would be out of style. I think the modulation to G major in b.13 is not successful because you don't introduce V/V before modulating, you are only repeating the G major chord and suddenly have the music enters G major. Usually the music either have V/V chord before getting to V, or have an imperfect cadence ends with a medial ceasura before going to the dominant key. Forb.30, 32, 34 and 35 I will have F# instead of F natural of the semiquaver figure. Thx for sharing and I will check the remaning movements. Henry

The members have voted in the poll and decided upon a theme for the next competition - "From Nothing, to Something"! This competition has no monetary awards - only kudos and badges. We are inviting the members/competitors to review and to participate in the creation of the badge awards that will be dispersed at the end of the competition! So if you have any ideas for particular badges that would accord with the kind of music that will be submitted for this competition and the theme of this competition, let us know in the List of Manually-Awardable Badges thread and we will take your ideas into consideration! Please reply to this thread to declare your intent to participate in this competition! The winners will be determined by popular voting polls! The duration of each piece should once again be between 3 - 7 minutes. Reviewing the entries will once again be spearheaded by the members/competitors at large. You are free to use the Official Competition Reviewing Template or you can review the entries in any way you see fit or create a template of your own making! Thank you for whatever time and effort you are able or willing to give towards reviewing the competition entries! There will be tiered "Ardent Reviewer" badges given out for this event: Featherweight Reviewer - for reviewing 33% of the entries Welterweight Reviewer - for reviewing 66% of the entries Heavyweight Reviewer - for reviewing 100% of the entries We are instituting a policy of not allowing any AI generated works in the competition. Because of this you will be required to detail how you created your piece and submit a PDF score or midi file for the perusal of the staff and members at large. The musical entries to the competition are final once submitted. This is for the sake of consistency of reviewing (so that each reviewer reviews the same piece of music without any changes). Instrumentation: As per the poll, the competitors will be tasked with writing a piece for a mixed trio/quartet/quintet of individual instruments/players/singers. Deadline: As per the poll, this competition will take 2 months, so the deadline to participate will be Thursday, September 24th, 2026. @MK_Piano's theme for the competition can be found below: What greater challenge of a composer than to take nothing and turn it into something! Your goal is to take the text from Paul Verlaine’s summer poem “Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été,” (So, on a bright summer day it shall be) and turn it into a piece! This poem is short, but filled with evoking images of the season of summer. It is read as a love poem, and Verlaine felt the winds and sun of summer amplified the affection he felt for his admirer. When you write, we ask that you focus on what summer brings to you as it did for Verlaine. Using this text, you must create a musical work that best captures the sensation of summer. What was nothing but words on a page, will be turned into a beautiful work of music by your hand! Attached is the poem in English: So, on a bright summer day it shall be: The great sun, my partner in joy, Shall make, amid the satin and the silk, Your dear beauty lovelier still; The sky, all blue, like a tall canopy, Shall quiver sumptuously in the long folds Above our two happy brows, grown pale With pleasure and expectancy; And when evening comes, the breeze shall be soft And play caressingly about your veils, And the peaceful stars looking down Shall smile benevolently on man and wife. The poem in French and English Entrants to the competition thus far: @MrBelegro @Fruit hunter @Ninja Nolan @Kvothe @TristanTheTristan @MK_Piano @Matthew M @GMoneywroteasong @therealAJGS @Musicman_3254 @Some Guy That writes Music Here is the submissions thread for the competition where participants are encouraged to post links to their composition (rather than posting their piece directly into the pre-existing topic - make your own dedicated topic so the members at large can review your music there):