Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/16/2018 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    Hi everyone, I've been composing music for 3,5 years, but it was not until recently I decided to start uploading my music to the internet. I've never received any musical education, I had to educate myself. The first piece I decided to upload is the "Sonata for Viola and Orchestra". Please note, that even though it says sonata in the title, I wasn't sticking to any particular composition form. I would appreciate any feedback you can give me on both my orchestration and composition and your thoughts in general. For the story behind the piece, you can check the description of the video attached here. My idea behind this composition was as follows: The motif that represents life gets introduced in the first part of the composition in a major key (0:00-0:56). Then the piece switches to a minor key and a "loss" motif start playing by a solo viola, representing the losses during the war. After the second repetition of the motif (1:00-2:24), the life motif comes back now in a minor key representing that life has changed for the worse (2:24-3:15). The loss motif is then repeated again and the piece concludes on an unstable minor add9 chord to show the uncertainty of the situation (3:15-4:30). The piece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4jGyzvWlmY&lc=z221wrhqgxznjvopt04t1aokgbir4xpajzdb5agsljhlrk0h00410 The score is attached here Edit: Uploaded the piece here as well. For the history behind it, you should still check the link Edit 2: Replaced the previous pdf file with the new one, since I found some mistakes (had incorrect crescendo markings around bars 10-11)
  2. 2 points
    Sinfonia Concertante in C for Oboe, Bassoon, Fortepiano, Violin, Violoncello, and Orchestra. One movement in three parts: Allegro spiritoso – Andantino grazioso – Tempo primo Scoring: Flute, Principal Oboe, Oboe II, Principal Bassoon, Bassoon II, 2 Horns in C, 2 Trumpets in C, Timpani, Fortepiano, Principal Violin, Principal Violoncello, Strings Composed: January 10 - March 10, 2017 Commissioned by Billy Traylor, Director, Austin Baroque Orchestra. The Sinfonia Concertante is a form that had its heyday of popularity in the second half of the 18th Century. It is essentially a concerto for two or more solo instruments (five in this case) with orchestral accompaniment. It is considered to have emerged from the concerto grosso of the Baroque period, and is a cross-over form incorporating elements of the concerto and the symphony. Ordinarily, as with the concerto and symphony of the same period, it is in multiple movements, usually three or more. However, the present work was conceived as a single-movement work in three contiguous parts, contrasting in key and tempo (similar to an early opera overture) at the request of the commissioner, who also requested that the entire piece be less than 10 minutes long. As is often the case, all the principal players play ripieno with the orchestra when not performing a solo part, and likewise the fortepiano plays figured continuo when not soloing. The instrumentation is nearly identical to that of the Sinfonia Concertante in B-flat (1792) by Joseph Haydn (1732-1809), the addition of the concertatofortepiano being the only difference - again at the request of the commissioner - and I studied that work extensively before and during the writing of this piece. Perhaps the most famous example of this form is the Sinfonia Concertante in E-flat for Violin, Viola, and Orchestra (1779) by W.A. Mozart (1756-1791). There is a lot going on in this piece. Not only is the form condensed, but much of the time the texture is such that there is a very active quintet layered on top of an orchestra, as if it were a chamber work and an orchestral work all at once. I found the feedback I got from the soloists during rehearsals very interesting indeed. The oboist complained that I called for E and E-flat above high-C from him, which for a skillful player should be doable even on a period Classical oboe; and in fact he cracked both of them in performance. The bassoonist was thrilled with her part, saying that what I had written was not only reasonably playable, but very idiomatic for the instrument and a lot of fun to play. The fortepianist (who played my own Peter Fisk fortepiano for the performance) had nothing to say at all, but I got a sense that perhaps his part wasn’t demanding enough, because he was often tempted to rush the tempo. The violinist and ‘cellist both got after me for taking them too high without adequate preparation, which I found very strange; being a string player myself, I know for certain that any player worth his salt should be able to jump to a high position and begin playing without having to be led up there through a series of position shifts, even in 18th Century music. At any rate, I was not persuaded by anything I heard from the players to make even the slightest change to the music, and with a knowing smile I nodded and expressed condolences where necessary, but did nothing to assuage their discomfort where there was any. It is a concerted work after all, and meant to be challenging – and if Mozart had written it, there wouldn’t have been a peep out of anyone. This work was premiered on May 26, 2018 by the Austin Baroque Orchestra – on period instruments! It was my first performance of one of my pieces to have been performed by such an ensemble, and it was most gratifying. I have been trying to get a live recording of the piece ever since, but the Director is hesitant to give it to me because there were a few mistakes made here and there. It was an excellent performance, nonetheless, but he’s a perfectionist. I’ll keep after him! In the meantime, I hope the present electronic rendering will serve. Enjoy, and by all means let me know what you think. EDIT - I managed to obtain an amateur recording of the Austin Baroque Orchestra performing this piece, so I am replacing the electronic rendering I had attached here with it. It's not the greatest quality recording, and there are more problems with the performance than I remember there being (not the least being that in this, the second performance in San Antonio, the timpani were missing), but it has electronic rendering beat, and it gives a good idea of how the piece should sound with live instruments - and instruments of the period to boot. There is a bit of silence and tuning at the beginning - just wait it out!
  3. 2 points
    You still use repeat signs, but either add text above the affected passage that says, "4X," or "repeat until directed," or something like that, or you can use a first ending bracket at the repeat sign, but instead of being marked, "1." to indicate 1st ending, it will be marked, "1., 2., 3., 4.," to indicate 4 repeats before moving on to the next section. You can also indicate different treatments for each of the repeats in text above the affected passage. For example: 1. p, 2. ff, 3. mf.... Hope that makes sense without pictures.
  4. 2 points
    The way I've usually seen it in scores and parts is a repeat sign with 3X above it for 3 repetitions, 4X for 4 repetitions, etc. I'm not familiar with Reich's scores so I can't tell you how he does it, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if it were all written out.
  5. 2 points
    Before this degenerated into rancor, there were many good points made on a subject that is difficult to unravel, especially in cyber space. But there was already agreement in some areas, the finer points a which got lost in cross talk. Thanks for your efforts!
  6. 2 points
    I'm of the controversial opinion — and I'll die on this hill — that the arts, western music included, have long since reached their highest possible standards. I will argue that paintings by the likes of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, sculptures such as David or The Rape of Persephone, western classical, baroque, romantic, folk, etc. music, and so on were and remain the best examples of their respective mediums. They exemplify the mastery over their respective crafts that one ought to aspire to. And this is obvious in the fact that these works continue to stand the test of time as being considered the all-time greats. They still have this appeal to people, hundreds of years later. Here's the thing about reaching a high standard: The only way to truly be "original" from there is to do something that defies this standard, and the inevitable result of abandoning that paradigm is a lower standard. In the contemporary sense regarding film music, John Williams, Goldsmith, Silvestri, Korngold, etc. are still seen as the gold standard. Their music for Star Wars, Back To The Future, whatever...they're the most popular orchestral pieces of the 20th and so far 21st centuries. Why? Because they are reminiscent of, and in many cases directly lift from the standards established in the romantic era and before. "Batman Begins" or the scores to most of the Marvel movies, are absolutely NOT of that standard. They work for what they are, but what they are is vapid, empty pieces of music to accompany vapid, empty films. The only piece most people can recall any melody from in the entire franchise, is the "Avenger's Theme"...composed by Alan Silvestri. These kinds of works, will — and I'll argue already have — fallen by the wayside if not be forgotten entirely in time. The MCU, much like the band KISS, will be remembered more for their record-breaking sales and furthering of unabashed consumerism of the day than any actual artistic or cultural worth. So what to do about originality? Concern yourself with living up the high standards of yore rather than being unique. The obsession with being "unique" is actually a lie anyway, one which is symptomatic of society's post-enlightenment shift away from seeking to cultivate virtue and wisdom by understanding what we ought to love. It's fine to love trailer music, but you ought to love the works of Mozart or John Williams more. Otherwise, what you wind up doing is trying to convince everyone else to conform to the idea that your music of a lower standard, is actually just as good as any of the greats because you feel there is no inherent meaning in anything other than that which we choose to impart on it. So I agree with Coleridge about the waterfall: The waterfall is, and has to be sublime — not just "pretty".
  7. 2 points
    This is an interesting scenario. I've done both things (written for specific people, and written stuff without anyone in mind,) and I think that the most important thing is that if you're writing for specific people, they should know and you should tell them what you're doing to some degree. You should be very familiar with what repertoire they can play well and what's their overall technical level. I've had mostly good experiences with this as people I've written things for trust me enough to let me do whatever I want, and it's worked out pretty well. However, you can't count on that being the case and it could as well be that they can put restrictions on what they want you to write, etc etc. If it's an outright paid commission, then sure it doesn't matter that much that you cater to their wishes since a job's a job, but in my experience I've always done things in a way where I have the freedom I need to do my thing first and foremost. However, I understand that may not be always possible or reasonable. The best way to go about it, in my opinion, is to write for no specific person and write what you actually just want to hear. Then, after you've written the piece, see if there are any comments on possible changes or interpretations that you may be willing to compromise on. I think this gives off the best impression of you as composer since you are sure of your work but at the same time you are open for suggestions, just remember that you are the boss in the end, with all the responsibility that entails.
  8. 2 points
    I love Mieczysław Karłowicz (1876 - 1909), he was a Polish composer and he died so young because of an avalanche when he was in mountains. I praise his Violin Concerto in A major and symphonic poem "Odwieczne pieśni". I am very glad you've put Vasily Kalinnikov on your list, if only he had lived longer... but what he already composed is amazing
  9. 1 point
    So, I decided to finally get around to fully orchestrating my piece for concert band, "Baron von Munchausen" -- string section and all. I was surprised that it took only a few hours of my day today. Most of the work was simply rephrasing the saxophone section as a string section, and adding some new string parts as well. The wind instruments definitely still take center stage, though. I also made some minor tweaks to the harp part and other instruments. It's a fun, adventuresome piece -- hopefully in the spirit of the Baron himself -- and I hope you'll enjoy it. I'd certainly appreciate hearing whatever thoughts pop into your head as you listen. I've attached the original program notes from 2017 along with the updated score. Thanks as always, YC.
  10. 1 point
    Here I have one of my composition assignments. The task was to use a famous musical quotation; here, I use it rather transparently, but if unfamiliar it is Erik Satie. Moreover, it had to be about two minutes long. I plan on writing multiple miniatures: this, the first. Much of the inspiration for the name -- sculpture -- is in my own paradigm toward composition; I think of it as like the act of sculpting and in very visual fashion, associating music with color. Enjoy! (I left it in concert pitch for ease of reading)
  11. 1 point
    Hello everyone, I wrote this piece in late 2017 and back then I didn't know much about harmony, but I think this piece kinda shows one of the styles of composition that I'd like to continue in the near future. Hope you like it. Please let me know what you think about this piece.
  12. 1 point
    @Bill Jones Thanks very much! Very glad you enjoyed it. And regarding a live performance: from your mouth to God's ears!
  13. 1 point
    I came to this site from tantalizing little bits of information about J. Lee Graham and the first post I find knocks my socks off. Sir, this demands to be played live and with a audience in attendance. Well done sir. Weill done!
  14. 1 point
    Hey! The Kansas City Symphony (the symphony orchestra of the town I am from) just performed this symphony a few weeks ago. The last movement is very cool.
  15. 1 point
    Love it, and the ending was quite fitting. The pieces has nice fluidity and the textures seem to really work. Good job!
  16. 1 point
    Yes, I think it worked pretty good as a single-movement work. I agree, even Beethoven quoted Mozart in a number of his works. I personally believe that Mozart quoted other composers too, perhaps unconsciously. For example, there is a harmonic progression in the 2nd theme of the 1st movement of his 12th Piano Sonata that reminds me of the 3rd movement of Vivaldi's Summer.
  17. 1 point
    This is a really great piece, congratulations. I think it's really hard to compose in the style of the classical period without quoting Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven.
  18. 1 point
    I find it Eerie music and Adventurus too! Good work artist Olivér Kovács !
  19. 1 point
    This is my latest track.
  20. 1 point
    This is great stuff! As a huge fan of classic Hollywood scores, I'd love to hear this and other works of yours played by live ensembles.
  21. 1 point
    Mind traveling music! I like that. Thanks for the kind words.
  22. 1 point
    I haven't seen the original work, so I'm just looking at this as a concert band piece. I think the opening develops too slowly - I think it would sound better if four bars were cut out and the vibraphone came in at bar 5. I found the glock/oboe rhythm at 96 quite interesting. If you were intending this to be played by a real band, I would kind of recommend just having the glock play it - the reason being it's a very hard rhythm to play, and even I would probably find myself very slightly fudging it. Which would be fine if I was the only player with it, but two players fudging the same unison rhythm can end badly. Another thought I have is that it doesn't seem like it changes enough. You've got plenty of tempo/rhythmic variation, and you change up the chords, but you don't have any dynamic variation and you often use the same combinations of instruments. These things will come more naturally to you as you get more experience in writing - an idea will come with a specific sound/dynamic/colour in mind. You're also generally using the full range of registers available within the concert band - more ideas for variation would be using only the high register or the low register.
  23. 1 point
    @edfgi234 You have many good ideas of rhythms and your harmony is interesting. However, piece is a bit too long for my opinion and there were some parts where it felt quite empty: It's a bit of a dramatic fall after our ear got used to more rhythmic patterns, more complex harmony and more voices. It feels to empty, at least for me. If you want this nothingness I guess it's fine but I think you should drop these elements one by one. I'd simply give the right hand chords too, so it sounds... fuller in a way. Also I like the way it ends.
  24. 1 point
    You have some very rich chords in the beginning! I feel that the rhythmic melody starting at m.27 fits a concert band setting better than orchestra. There were some really weird rhythmic things going on though. Using tuplets will make your life easier!
  25. 1 point
    I'd like to take a look at the score, but it definitely sounds nice, and sounds appropriate for the time period.
  26. 1 point
    I like this! It certainly has an interesting feel to it. As much as I enjoyed it, I was disappointed with how short it was. I felt like you had a really great idea here that could have been expanded on. Either way, it was a delight to listen to.
  27. 1 point
    This is a great work sculpted in this style, it's very pleasant to listen to and quite accessible; it's got all the great characteristics of enjoyable, serious, light, great music. Great job!
  28. 1 point
    I think the best thing you can do is think of WHY something has to be longer. Think in terms of Beethoven's economy of material, how his sonatas are mostly the same stuff repeated over and over in different ways, joined by a loose arc structure. In other words, you can make something as long as you want if you just keep repeating things in different ways. Think of how Fugues work, which is kind of a similar idea. The point is, "form" is a really complicated topic altogether and Schoenberg's entire point with his system and so on was to allow for the creation of new complex forms (like a new Sonata-type form?) using his different tonal material. It's not the form that gives something its length, it's how long you want to take with developing your own ideas. That's why even if there are many pieces that are "sonatas" and adhere to the form, that says nothing of the length itself. A good example is Symphonies, which really are "Sonatas for orchestra," they are often much longer than piano sonatas, but they have the same structural ideas. That's because the orchestra can be used to develop things as well as just the actual notes being played. Instrumentation plays a big role in structure there, hence usually longer works.
  29. 1 point
    Hi everyone! Just wanted to share a tune I've been working on the last weeks. Tried to make a light and easy theme with elements of something cold or frozen maybe. I know it's very short but I like making these short tunes as a learning tool for improving my orchestration and mixing skills. Any comments?:)
  30. 1 point
    Nice choice of harmonies/scales/modes! I'm not sure I follow where the melody is, though. I understand the repetition of tri-tones as an idea, but I never picked up on a clear intervallic or rhythmic motif otherwise. The closest I felt to hearing something like that was around 1:50. Keep working! 🙂 Gustav
  31. 1 point
    Thank you both for your comments! You're right Ken320 I'm stretching too much. Great idea about punctuation as fuel.
  32. 1 point
    Thank you very much, @J. Lee Graham! I'm very happy that you enjoyed my piece and playing! I, too, am one of those who think that keys have personalities. I think that each key has its own emotions that are intertwined within its scale, even if all major and minor scales follow the same patterns. And I agree with your sentiments of E-flat minor: your description is apt for that key. At the time of writing this piece, I wanted to try writing in keys that aren't commonly written for, in this case, E-flat minor. Yes, indeed, Rachmaninoff was a major influence on this piece. Rachmaninoff is one of my heroes in music, and this was becoming apparent around the time of composing this piece. Again, thank you for your compliments and appreciation. It means a lot to me. All the best, Theo
  33. 1 point
    I am very intrigued by this piece; while not in a style with which I am very familiar, the piece flows very nicely from idea to idea, and there is a clear and logical progression of material. I think you managed well to exploring and developing a lot of the material you present; for instance, I can very transparently follow the initial figures created by the clarinet and glockenspiel (independently, of course). The flute then introduces one of its prime figures -- i.e. the sextuplet -- and I am able to follow how it passes between the lines and transforms, as in the piano later in the piece. Ultimately, I think you did a good job creating a consistent, coherent structure by exploring the material you rendered. Good job, and good luck with the performance!
  34. 1 point
    @Noah Brode Thanks for listening and commenting, Noah! I really appreciate it! I'm very glad to hear this. Holding attention with this kind of material is a challenge, and smooth modulations can be tricky, but I think I was able to pull some good ones off. My favourite is the one from C to E-flat near the beginning. I'm so glad you enjoyed all that fluff I threw in! I had fun with that, and learnt a lot. I had never written for glockenspiel before, and it was an interesting experience. I tried hard to make this piece sound as fun and festive as possible. I think you're right, I could have done more of this. Viennese-style waltzes do indeed tend to be somewhat violin-centric affairs; but the masters in this style do toss the tune around more than perhaps I did. I used the 'cello a lot in this, actually, but for some reason, no matter how high I put the volume on them, the 'cellos never really come through. Neither do the double basses, and they really should, because traditionally the bass line is in the double bass throughout, and it needs to be strong. Something I'll need to work on with my software. I believe those places are where Finale threw in an error and screwed me over...I mentioned it in my opening comments. I can't seem to delete these aberrant time signatures, so I'll probably have to redo the entire score (I probably should anyway). I'm sorry they were confusing. Yes, Finale has its challenges and it's not perfect, but a few of the things it does well, it does very well indeed, and "human playback" is one of those things I've been very happy with more often than not. The "Viennese Waltz" setting is particularly effective. Let's say that it's not without precedent. A very famous example of one with an extended introduction in duple metre (cut time) is Johann Strauss II's "Kaiser-Waltzer" (Emperor Waltz) Op. 437 (1889), which opens with a slow march. Similarly, Franz Lehár's "Gold und Silber" (Gold and Silver), Op. 79 (1902) begins with a short march section in common time. It was these examples that gave me to believe that I could get away with one myself. Not all Viennese waltzes begin with an introduction, but many do; I believe they served as time intervals during which dancers could catch their breath, check their dance cards to see who had the next dance with them, and so forth. Again, I really appreciate you listening and commenting to such extent. I had begun to make peace with the idea that nobody would, which makes your review an especially pleasant surprise. Thanks again!
  35. 1 point
    Hello everyone, Here is a little piece I wrote over the holidays. The theme is actually a mix of 2 themes by Rachmaninoff combined into one, from the 2nd movement of his Piano Sonata no. 2 in B-flat minor, and his Prelude in B minor. It is a short piece, only lasting 6 minutes. I might add another piece to the opus number later on, but in the mean time, it will remain as is. Here is my performance on Youtube: I hope you all enjoy. 🙂 Theo
  36. 1 point
    Wow, this was really well written and a pleasure to listen to. It kept my attention ths whole nine minutes with elegant orchestration and smooth modulations. I especially liked how your glockenspiel, harp and woodwinds worked together to create delightful flourishes and embellishments. If I had any suggestions, it might be to move the melodic line around a little more -- I wasn't really keeping track, but it felt like a lot of violin with some woodwind doubling; a few more sections featuring the cellos or horns could add some nice contrast in a lower register. There were a few places where the time signatures were doing weird things. On page 10, the rhythm switches to 3/4 with no change in notation at m. 42. The time signature finally changes on pg. 12, m. 57. The same situation happens on pgs. 40 and 41. It may be that I am misunderstanding something about the use of common time in waltzes -- those spots on pgs. 12 and 41 just threw me off. I'm also kind of astounded that your music program has the option to play back the waltz with the traditionally stilted Viennese rhythm. It added a really nice authentic vibe to the playback. One final question: is it usual to have such an extended section in 4/4 time to start off a Viennese waltz? Really great work; thanks for sharing!
  37. 1 point
    @Theodore Servin Thanks so much! Yes, that opening movement is very vigourous - the last movement too, actually, though maybe a little lighter touch. I'm honoured that you compare me to Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven in any sense, so thanks again, and I'm really glad you thought the ensemble worked well. I may indeed post some of the others in the set.
  38. 1 point
    It seems you misunderstood me. Never talked about progress for progress sake, but progress for art's sake ( meaning art as description of beauty, if you want ). I would never treat my audience as idiots. But if I compose something, better keep in mind the way people today " receive" music...2/3 minutes tracks, lyrics and singing, very high volume. If I want to be sincerely appreciated I must keep in mind this thing are lowering the "listener's quality...so I have to deal with them. I agree with yoy about the desperate ways to create originality and new standards, and I also agree with the uphold prior standards solution...but this is a theoretical idea...now we have to find the correct way to applicate it. Alma Deutscher fills the concert halls because she is a child prodigy...not because her style. There are tons of composers that use her language but no one has the enormous success she has...the difference obviously is in the age of composers. If maybe we would come back to those times were new music was composed with the aim of being played, we could have better times. Think about it...before romanticism music was composed because people needed something to play. Maybe playing ( mainly )dead people is what keeps us back. Just throwing there some ideas for the sake of discussion...no thesis here.
  39. 1 point
    The tonality you've chosen is fine. It has value and can be developed. But you're stretching the limit of that ostinato. So with that in mind there are many things you can do to add interest (if you don't mind a little back seat driving). First I would begin to alter it much earlier in the piece and introduce some sort of punctuation from other instruments here and there so that it can continue. Think of the punctuation as fuel. You can then invert and/or transpose the ostinato along the way. And you can pass it off to other instrumnets. Just some suggestions off the top of my head. Keep working on it. It's good.
  40. 1 point
    I don't really know what to say. This is a spectacular work. The instruments are interesting and blended perfectly. Certainly, your decades as a composer have been worth it.
  41. 1 point
    Why don't you stop presuming that other people don't do research? Are you the only one educated here? Well, I can't remind myself that Bach held a professor title. Yes, he was a master pedagogue, but above all he was a genius artist. And no, he wasn't a professor. Yes, the helped each other, because they knew how to do that, not because they had a degree or held a professor title. They weren't educated executors of rules. They were artists. Again: Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Haendel and Vivaldi didn't have a degree in composition. In anything actually. This discussion is now off-topic Yes, and I have a submarine in my room. Do you have a scientific research for that claim? Why don't we know those people? If now there are millions of such people, so there had to be thousands of such people in times of Mozart. Why do we know only Mozart and Haydn and not them? As I said before, technical ability isn't enough to create good art. I think old composers deserve more respect from you. If you think that your technical skills are as good as Mozart's, then think about it: you've learnt it, they created it. Your attitude towards old masters is like attitude of a geologist towards a rock.
  42. 1 point
    @sshn I see what you’re talking about. In the “Sicut locutus est” example you cite, Bach has chosen to force a kind of tonal answer (where a degree of the scale is altered) because it works well for what he was trying to do, I believe. As I understand it, tonal answers are only mandatory (if that’s even the right word to use) when the fifth degree of the scale is present near the beginning of a subject; for example, if the subject (in C major) is C G E C, then the answer would be G C B G, rather than G D B G. Does that make sense? Otherwise, I believe tonal answers are discretionary. Tonal answers and the rules governing them are the source of a lot of confusion. In the Fugue Crash Course I wrote and posted here many years ago (on the unlikely but very familiar subject Ah! vous dirai-je, maman, or “Twinkle, twinkle Little Star”), ideally, I should have done a tonal answer since there is blatantly a fifth degree of the scale near the beginning of the subject; but my purpose was to illustrate the basics of fugue writing, so I left the subject alone so as not to cause a lot of confusion. I may rewrite the exposition with a tonal answer someday though, just to be correct. In the case of your subject, I don’t immediately see that you have any choice but to write a codetta to modulate back to the tonic in the answer. I’m almost certain you don’t have to write a tonal answer, and It seems to me that a forced tonal answer would adversely affect the integrity of the subject in this case. Just my opinion, but that’s how it looks to me. Let me know if you have any questions, and by all means, if anybody else has a different understanding on the practice of tonal answers, let it be known!
  43. 1 point
    Cool then, show me, with scientific peer-reviewed literature, that "some works are really better than others." Make an actual argument based on scientific sources. That's what I expect from such a categorical claim, since it's a pretty big thing to claim as being "the truth." I think it's pretty cute you're trying to play me as a postmodern pushover, but no, on quite the contrary, I do value objective empirical evidence for things quite a lot. In fact, I value it so much that I try to keep up with the science literature on the things I want to know about. (I even posted some of it to the forum since I actually want people to read and inform themselves so they can properly argue things, it's more fun that way!) That being said, not everything can be entirely objective, which apparently is a problem to you for some mysterious reason. Argumentum ad populum. I mean, really now? That's almost highschool grade stuff. I think it's pretty hilarious you're trying to "get at me" by trash talking my music, you're going to have to do much worse than that. It's also really cute how you're like "Man I don't want to do this but you forced my hand!!!" oh please, that's really childish. You could've as well said I'm a talentless hack or an idiot or whatever other standard insults and it would've saved you the time and effort to actually listen to my music! That being said, thanks for listening and giving some feedback, I guess. In some unintentional way you actually did something nicer than you intended, which is also pretty funny. This is actually kind of amusing, if you want to keep going I'm all game. I'm also not from Germany and German is my 4th language, but hey that's neither here nor there. The glass houses quote is neat, specially since I don't live in a glass house, I live in a goddamn volcano lair for all you're concerned. Try harder, seriously. You gotta do much better than this.
  44. 1 point
    I pretty much agree with anything you said. But we still have to deal with the tabula-rasa that avant gardes made in pretty much all arts fields. They "destroyed" everything and left pretty much nothing, and This can be seen both as a luck or a catastrophe. (Exasperated subjectivism is a key that doesn't lock any door anymore. Modern audience knows that whatever kind of modern art is going to see/listen, is gonna be something ugly.) Now composers ( and artists in general have the power to create everything they want...but at the same time everything sounds so much dull...I can feel that what we really miss is our own language. Maybe everything we can do is to just pick up the pieces of language that still work, and try to put them together to create a new music "beginning" in human history
  45. 1 point
    I really like the harmony in this work. Great job!
  46. 1 point
    Wouldn't even call this my style but I still thoroughly enjoyed it, to my surprise.
  47. 1 point
    I would praise Moritz Moszkowski too Moritz (Maurice) Moszkows (1854 - 1925) was a German composer, pianist, and teacher of Polish-Jewish descent. I particularly like his Piano Concerto No.1, because of both the breathtaking melodies and well-balanced arrangement. Although I am not a pianist. but I can see his works are great for pianist to show off. Also: Ernest Chausson (1855-1899) was a French romantic composer. His wrote a few orchestral pieces, concerti as well as ensemble works. Personally, Poème for violin and orchestra is very nice.
  48. 1 point
    @Theodore Servin I personally think Stanford is amazing. Check out his symphonies and Irish Rhapsodies for the full English Romantic orchestral treatment. For a tidbit of one of his finest pieces of church music, here's a fine performance of his "Beati quorum via" for 6-part mixed chorus a cappella with scrolling score: The first time I sang that motet as a young chorister, I wept for joy - no lie. Agreed about Rheinberger - an apt description indeed. One of my favourites of his is the "Abendlied" (Evening Song), again with scrolling score: If you get a chance to listen to these, let me know what you think! --Joe
  49. 1 point
    @J. Lee Graham I'm very glad to hear that! Now, I'm also interested in checking out more of Stanford, because I must confess, I have not listened to much of his music. I do like Rheinberger's music very much; very sophisticated and well thought-out music. I enjoy this kind of romantic music. Best, Theo
  50. 1 point
    @Theodore Servin Wow...your introductions make me want to get to know these guys better!
×
×
  • Create New...