Jump to content

Markus Boyd

Members
  • Content Count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Markus Boyd last won the day on November 24 2019

Markus Boyd had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

17 Good

3 Followers

About Markus Boyd

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Isle of Man
  • Occupation
    Finance
  • Interests
    18th century music pedagogy
  • Favorite Composers
    Johann Christian Bach; JS Bach; Mozart; Vanhal; Zalenka; Handel; Hasse
  • My Compositional Styles
    Classical, Baroque
  • Notation Software/Sequencers
    Notion 6
  • Instruments Played
    Classical Guitar; Piano' Violin

Recent Profile Visitors

264 profile views
  1. I agree entirely. I do compose for an audience and so, to an extent, compose in a manner that is pleasing to the ear. I do draw on ideas from the CP as they work, and still work - its why we still listen to music from this period. I am not familiar with the work of Kitson... did he write, or try to write in a CP manner?
  2. Apologies, perhaps I misunderstood the thread nature. What I was really building to in my comment was that I think we should not shy away from applying concepts from the common period. It should certainly not be considered as a limiting endevour, particularly if as an amateur composer one have absolute autonomy as to how one chooses to apply them. Many of the concepts really do help with producing music with form and ideas that are coherent and relatable.
  3. I think it is true that when we subscribe to a particular school (i.e. romanticism), we naturally narrow our perspective. Despite this, we will still form conceptions about other schools, as well as the philosophies that underpinned them. Such conceptions can be misconstrued, often affected by cognitive bias. As a result, taste is entirely subjective; one must also appreciate that people from different eras had different ideas as to what constituted a "great" work, or composer. In fact, a great number of "great" composers (assessed by one's relative success) of the 18th century are now utterly neglected. Why? I think it is has something to do with modern concepts of artistry and individualism. The limitation that composers were subject to during this period was not so much to do with "rules". Rather, it had more to do with the employment model they had to operate in. Most successful composers either worked under the patronage of the church or an aristocrat. Either way, the composer was an employer, and good employees go what is asked of them. There is not a great deal of autonomy within this environment, although there were exceptions such as in the case of Haydn. Rules were often broken by competent composers, which was encouraged under reasonable justification. The sheer amount of music composed during the common practice period at least demonstrates the flexibility of the concepts and training that underpinned it.
  4. Over the next week or so, I am going to be conducting an analysis on Carl Friedrich Abel's Symphony No. 6 in E-Flat Major, Op. 7, WKO 18. Those familiar with some of my posts will be somewhat familiar with some of the terminology which I will be using. This type of analysis has been introduced by musicologist Robert Gjerdigen, who offers an accessible means to understand music that one may otherwise gawk at in puzzlement. Put simply, this approach understands music not by codes and formulas, but patterns. I listen extensively to music from this period, and I can attest that once you are familiar with the more common patterns, they will be instantly recognizable to the ear. I will post one movement at a time. If there is the interest and engagement in this sort of thing, I will look to do more. I suppose my somewhat ambitious direction with this is to develop a thriving educational hub, for there is not really any internet community dedicated to this form of musical analysis. Here is the work for those who would like to have a listen before I go into the detail (a little history: this work was attributed to the young Mozart by Modern Musicologists when they discovered his name on the manuscript). He had in fact copied it note for note, most likely as a learning exercise).
  5. I see. Well I have now also learned something. I asked because it is not uncommon for people to make use of other languages to describe their music... for example minuetto opposes to minuet. I think some people do so because minuetto might sound more interesting, or if they are inspired by a piece written by, say, an Italian. Same would of course apply for sonatina, rather than sonata. Id like to think I’m talking sense but this tangent is probably not worthwhile. It would be interesting to consider posting this in the collaboration topic to encourage others to try realize that bar which you have struggled with. It is a good exercise to have others put their mind to something like this - perhaps as a mini challenge
  6. This is excellent. Much enjoyed your adaptation... keep posting friend
  7. I think this works quite well. There are times where I think he the top voice (is bar 9) could be doing something more interesting. Nonetheless you move through the different keys effortlessly and the thematic material is developed intuitively. I would also suggest is that it is lengthened. Perhaps by ternary form (with this material used as the A section) however you would need to modulate to the dominant. One thing I wish to ask is why you have opted for the name “fughetta”, which of course is Italian for fugue. Unless you are Italian, I struggle to understand your reason not to use the English translation... It depends ultimately on what you intend this piece to be
  8. I suppose you are right. Not all period baroque music is contrapuntal.As Tonskald points out it has a concerto grossi feel. Look forward to hearing your next project Gulliem:)
  9. I am a bit rushed but I hope you get the idea
  10. Well done again Guillem. You have evidently managed to capture your ideas in a coherent manner as well as exploring neighboring keys to spice things up a little. I much enjoyed your monte at bars 32-34. To take this a step further you should explore a little counterpoint, or in other words infuse some individual character in some of the parts, particularly the bassline. I see that after your phrases you have a tenancy to pause. Pauses are ok, however if used too often it suggests you are not entirely confident at connecting different phrases. This is not actually that difficult; consider utilizing the bass in such instances . For example In bar 3, I have attached a suggestion in how you could do this The second violin in this piece either supports the first violin, or the violas and bass. When I write for two violins, I like to add to a degree some communication. What I see here is the groundwork for something really quite impressive. You have succeeded at delivering a tonally varied piece of music (which is not always straightforward to do) produced some interesting ideas and above all the harmony works. You obviously learn quickly. The next step I think that you consider is to think about character.
  11. Whilst I agree with position that AI cannot create (at least for the near future) I Ann interested in what we mean by creation. Do we imply the creation of something, new, innovative and challenging? Or can creation extend to the production of a piece of music that is more or less confined to subset of rules like, for instance, the vast majority of music composed during the common practice period? I am particularly interested in the latter question, as I do think we have the technology to enable AI to produce music aligned with the common practice period. Essentially, AI would learn various types of patterns and how to realize them, and one would think that over time it will learn how to manipulate them with increasing complexity. To reject the view that such computerized activity does not equate to creation depends on your perspective, and I suppose on the level of musical sophistication of the work AI can produce. Even so, there is a serious possibility that the intensively manual process of composition will become redundant. How soon depends on how aggressive these things are pursued. i am doubtful that an engine which creates music from the common practice period will pop up on the scene anytime soon, for there is not much economic incentive to do so... unless one thought to I ncorporate a vast library of ideas and realizations into a music software which, like corrections to human errors, would be recommended to the user should their basso continuo, for instance, defy the practice they wish to emulate. Very interesting topic. Let’s hope others show interest.
  12. It suggests that you might be out of your depth with fugue writing. This takes an incredible amount of experience and skill to pull off properly. I myself have never written a fugue, as I do not consider myself ready for it.
  13. With respect, a suggestion one could make is that you focus on one post at a time, especially if other forum members take the time to provide time consuming feedback.
  14. I have written some variations on your theme, to help organize your ideas more coherently. It is very important to clearly define your bassline as much as your upper voice. The cadences should be the most straightforward part, especially if we are working with two parts. Any questions feel free to continue on this thread, or by private message. You can see that in the first and second variations, the music modulates towards the dominant just before where would be the end of the A section. This is in line with the direction of many, dare I say, thousands of minuets composed during the 18th century. The B Section would typically begin with a Fonte, or a Minor to Major 4 bar passage (to modulate to the Major one would simply lower the previous 2 bar phrase by a step). Followed would be a phrase leading to a cadential flourish towards the Tonic. There are of course endless possibilities within such apparatus', however the greater deviance from norms and the less definition, so to speak, in the overall direction, renders the minuet less fit for purpose as a dance. Composers such as Mozart and Haydn took the idea of a minuet and expanded its structure to the point where it was no longer intended to accompany a dance, so to speak. However, the underlying bass and its relationship with the upper voice was at least predictable to an extent thus retaining many of the characteristics and formula established long ago.
×
×
  • Create New...