Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


KJthesleepdeprived last won the day on July 31

KJthesleepdeprived had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

152 Excellent


About KJthesleepdeprived

  • Rank
    Advanced Composer
  • Birthday 05/05/1995

Profile Information

  • Biography
    Just an amateur pianist that happens to compose music quite painstakingly. Negligible music education/formal training, but I'm tryin' real hard not to suck.
  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Board games, card games. Any game that isn't a first person shooter basically.
  • Favorite Composers
    Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, Edward MacDowell, Judd Greenstein, Missy Mazzoli, Jeremy Zuckerman, and um oh yeah a lot of folks actually on this site
  • My Compositional Styles
    I don't know, man.
  • Notation Software/Sequencers
    Finale, although paper's been lookin' fine lately
  • Instruments Played
    Piano and some other things that I'm bad at

Recent Profile Visitors

6,483 profile views
  1. So many details, so many loopholes. The nitty is so gritty with this competition. I'm completely unfamiliar with this 'poor form' we're using and I think maybe I don't quite understand what is expected in terms of 'development' for the shared material. Or of development in general. I get it vaguely but I've never taken any kind of composition class so an exact definition of motivic development eludes me. I've tended to stay away from a lot of these seasonal competitions when the rules/expectations exceeded my abilities so it's never really come up for me. I know we're not supposed to 'reprise' said material (except at the beginning of each movement), which I understand to mean we shouldn't just quote the exact same melody/pattern with the same orchestration/voicing/rhythm midway through the movement unless it's at the final movement. Also, the new material should sound different but be a natural progression from the shared material. So what exactly does that mean? Is that rule just there to keep us from quoting and re-quoting the same theme with meager adjustments or is there a standard for how much the 'development' should change the shared material? Everyone else has such technical questions and I'm over here trying to figure out something that I'm sure most music majors already know. Still optimistic about my entry, but a little guidance on this one thing would go a long way!
  2. Your piano writing is very appealing to me and it's frankly above my modest skill level as a pianist. Which is perfect because I can knock out two birds with one stone: Practice to improve sightreading and learn some fun music by a composer who isn't six feet under! I'm going to just binge through your playlist on YouTube and nab all your pdfs, ok? Ok. Nice work, keep it up!
  3. I lack the higher level of music education that a lot of y'all have, so my thoughts aren't based on knowing a ton of music history or advanced theory. I do have an opinion, though. It's already been said, but if we define 'originality' as some metric of how 'brand spanking new' something is, then nothing is truly original. We're always drawing influence from ideas and sounds we've already observed or experienced, musical or otherwise. That's why I don't like that way of thinking. There's definitely some merit in being able to accomplish your goals by doing something bizarre or unusual with your music, but no one should be surprised that most listeners aren't flocking to hear that stuff. Using your musical abilities and adding your own ideas to pre-existing styles and forms (like what @Monarcheon was talking about) can be a good way to find originality too. Not to say modernism is a bad thing, but over-asserting its importance as a way of advancing music seems silly to me. Personally, I'm finding it very fulfilling to reharmonize and re-arrange music for my church, giving it more color and energy. I don't do it as a way to be original. I just do it because I like it and I think worship music these days is really lackluster. Originality is a worthy goal, but it's not one that I'm interested in chasing. Instead of seeking it out, I'm hoping that honest effort and an open mind will bring me there naturally. Also sorry, but cojones means balls.
  4. I love this! Not only for the music (which is very nice) but because its encouraging to see someone complete older, unfinished work after so long. I guess writer's block can't last forever! Pretty cool, and the final result is very enjoyable.
  5. Another lovely piece! This was beautiful and delicate. Although, I was thrown off a bit at measures 24-29. I'm not sure I'd have been able to correctly interpret the dramatic changes in tempo on my own if I were reading it without having heard it. Not sure if thats just my inexperience with sight reading/interpretation or if there is a clearer way to communicate that on the page. In any case, it's really delightful and I think I'll try to learn it!
  6. @bkho Thanks for your comment! For measure 27, I wanted those three notes to be included because they're in the orchestral version. I put them as octaves so they'd be heard clearly but you're right the two hands do run into eachother, and I hadn't noticed until you pointed it out. I'll have to reevaluate that bit. As far as measure 29, I'm not concerned about the right hand. I have no issues playing that line. It's a leap for sure but since everything in the right hand is in octaves, it isn't too bad. Being able to keep ones hand in the same shape helps with things like that. If anything, I thought you'd tell me you were skeptical of the left hand arpeggios in that section. I'm still unsure about them to be honest. I suppose I should also get advice from the other pianists I know. Thanks for the feedback though!
  7. I was thinking more along the lines of "light and delicious like a cucumber sandwich" for my description. But yes, this is a very graceful. It's energetic and relaxing at the same time. Excellent work, thanks for posting!
  8. Well, it's been a while since I was on this site. I haven't written music in a couple years, but I've been playing piano in church so I'm not totally out of practice. Decided to hop back into the wonderful world of composition with something easy, so I did an arrangement of something instead of trying for an original work. I had two different versions of this theme in mind when I adapted it for piano. I'm including them both below in case anyone wants to hear what material I was working with. I'm looking forward to posting more on this site and hearing/reviewing as well. I'd forgotten how much I enjoyed listening to the music that gets posted here! (EDIT: Check the bottom of the post for the score if you're so inclined!) My Piano Arrangement: Original Version: Symphonic Version:
  9. It's not too short at all. The melody is pretty creative and I totally got the impression of snowy surroundings from listening to it. You delivered just the right tone and atmosphere. I really enjoyed this! Good job!
  10. This is awesome! Looking forward to checking out more of your stuff!
  11. It's been so long since I've listened to one of your choral pieces and it was such a lovely one to come back to! I like the way you write because the care you put into it is evident. So good to hear your music again. Wish I could hear it sung!
  12. Hi there! I like the overall tone of this piece. I think I'd enjoy playing it since it's quite Octobappropriate for the season. I saw in another post that you said you only work with MIDI and don't have scores for your music? Because of this, I may have to learn this by ear because I'm really fond of it. Keep it up, I've heard your other music and it's very enjoyable!
  13. What an atmosphere! I'm not hugely into guitar but I'm a real sucker for novelty. Bowed guitar checks that box for me, this was nice!
  14. Oh Luis, your video starts at 36 seconds instead of at the beginning. Not a big deal, just letting you know. Anyway, I really enjoyed this. I know it's to be expected at this point but your writing is lovely and your dogs are adorable!
  • Create New...