JonSlaughter

Ian: It would be awesome(for me ;) if you could record something I've written. Anyone of these would be awesome: http://sites.google.com/site/jonslaughter/home Obviously if you happen to like any one of them then choose that one. The one most people seem to like is the canon in C. The score isn't always notated for the performer(for example the "invention" in Eb and "imitato" in C are notated more for analytics) and some pieces/parts are not completely playable by only two hands. Most pieces are rather short. I personally like the Abstract Dissonance piece the most but I don't think your going to be able to play it unless you have 3 arms ;) Feel free to make any artistic changes if you decide to record anything... Thanks, Jon

Very nice! You are well on your way to making some very good stuff! Keep it up. My only issues is the sound quality. Some instruments are a bit thin and obviously computerized(digital or whatever you wanna call it). It's not necessarily a problem as you are limited by your equipment but just make sure you milk everything you can to get full sound(double stuff, add delay/reverb/chorus, etc...). I'm basically talking about improving it a few percent. Also I noticed that you don't seem to have a huge dynamic range. I tend to listen to a lot of classical music and this seems to be a modern and classical style mixed. By having more dynamical range you can help create that ebb and flow a bit better and make your climaxes stronger. Again, this is only a few percent. (if your aiming for a certain format it might need to be compress or if you want a more pop feel) Arrangement wise I think it is nice. I like all the contrasting instruments as it adds a lot of interest. The intro is killer IMO. But dynamics will make it really kick. Up to about 32s. The problem is that you build this textural and harmonic tension but the dynamics somewhat counter act it. The intro piano doesn't fade in and dynamically lead into the next part. At 17s you have a climatic point. You build up to this point rhythmically and texturally yet dynamically nothing changes. After 17s you have some very nice textures but there is no dynamic drive. At 1:36 you have another lead into the next section but dynamically there is no crescendo. Texturally and rhythmically this is what you are doing but dynamically you are not. I think you have got the musical ideas in your head and how to arrange them. That is 95% of the work of making good music. Just remember that since you are manually playing these and don't have an orchestra you have to make sure you play it like real people would and remember to add dynamics and play them properly(it can be hell at times but that's part of the challenge). Basically it's like your telling a very good story and using very good diction and vocabulary to make it interesting but you are not speaking it with very much emotion. http://sbinfocanada.about.com/od/speakforsuccesscourse/a/speechlesson3.htm (I'm not saying it's really bad but that if you make the dynamics fit the mood and get the climaxes to have dynamic crescendo's it should help and give the music a bit more "life") Of course at this level it's more of personal opinion and other factors(physiological, equipment, etc...). If your completely satisfied with the sound then ignore what I'm saying.

I like the mood it sets. The short notes swell's are an issue because the note doesn't fully develop and feels a bit awkward. That is a sampling/orchestration issue. Your base idea is good but you just need to perfect it. Try to get a better sample library and sequencer(sounds like you just recorded directly from a keyboard). Once you get all that down you then work on a more complex arrangement if you wanted or keep it as is.

I like it too. The ending needs to be fixed. Sounds like the woods and high strings cut out instead of fade out. I would like to see a little more tension being built up but this might not be what your going for. One emotion is great and all but when you bring in the more than one then it feels like your going somewhere. You can do it in subtle ways that don't distract from the main emotion you are trying to achieve. Also, usually sadness followed by joy, exuberance, etc makes the piece more meaningful since most people want a "happy story". Even though you might want to express a single emotion you had you also too want a happy outcome(although you might not be experiencing that or thinking about it). For example, suppose someone else is going through a similar emotional issue as yours. If you want the song to "touch" them then don't you think that by making them feel as if "everything is going to be ok" at the end would make them feel good? If it's just sad through the whole piece then it becomes harder to make a connection. The piece to me, does not sound that sad but contemplative. (sort of sad and introspective) Towards the end you seem to start moving in a more joyful(but not joyful, just towards that direction) but do not go much further. Again, you may not feel the way I'm describing but you know you would like to, right? (not to many people like being sad) It might be hard to write something you don't feel but maybe think about the way you want to feel. If you can communicate that too(like you did with the sad part) then the piece will be more moving for people. I would mess around with the intro a little, I really like the first section(excluding the intro). The pulsating effect is pretty cool. But before that it is a bit bland. Maybe add some very soft slow strings underneath. This way it will tie in with the instrumentation in the first section and make a more unified introduction. These are only suggestions and are just personal opinions on what I might do. I feel that it has a lot of potential but for it to really take some one's breath away you'll have to work on it a lot to milk every ounce you can(not because it's bad but because it is always difficult to do with these types of pieces). If this was a background piece then it would definitely work well(since you don't wanna interfere with what is going on with the foreground). If it is meant to be a standalone piece that is suppose to take the listener on an emotional journey(not roller coaster like but from point A to <img src="http://network.youngcomposers.com/elgg/ipb/public/style_emoticons/default/cool.gif" alt="B)" /> then adding more joyful(not necessarily happy but like a feeling of overcoming the sadness).

You have some great ideas. I personally am a fan of the type of mood that you create which reminds me of Yanni. My biggest complains in listening to your works has to do with orchestration and more importantly repetitiveness/lack of a unifying climax. It seems you try to make the piece longer by continuing an idea but sometimes short is better. I'll try to give some hints on things you can work on but it's just my perspective. Orchestration - In your other multi-instrumental pieces there was some balance issues. For example, with Journey across the stars there are some problems with the bass overpowering the piano. Also the digital piano tends to sound slightly thin. This isn't necessarily bad but seems to lack some expression. In some of your orchestration and arrangement you do a very nice job but it seems sometimes you lose some focus. It stands out more than it should because it sounds really nice in some spots then ok in others(and hence sticks out more than if it was just ok all over). Also you seem to be using a keyboard for all the orchestration. This is fine and one can't expect perfect results and it is generally pretty difficult to perfect anyways. If you agree with me that there is some issues then the best thing you can do is try to find out how they came about. I feel that you are trying to make more music than is needed to extend the time and that is why it evolves that way. I could be wrong. If this is true or if you tend to "wander" when you are composing this then you need to work on perfecting your pieces(which involves only keeping the best of it). Repetitiveness - In this case it sounds as if your wandering on some themes and ideas. This isn't necessarily bad depending on the context and does give a melancholy mood. This could be more preference than anything else but I personally like to feel the tension build up and then be released and if it's not done for long stretches it can feel boring. Again, if you feel that your wandering or writing for "time" then this is most likely the reason. If that is the case then it's ok to do while composing but you then need to remove all the unnecessary repetitive stuff when you are perfecting the piece. (you can actually insert stuff to counterbalance it but this requires more composing). In any case you definitely have a great talent but you just need to perfect it to become a true master. No doubt you will get better with time. Here are some other suggestions: 1. Venture out in other styles... even styles you don't necessarily like. This can help you become more creative by getting your musical "juices" flowing. I used to not like country music but after hanging around some country musicians I started to like it and it opened up new musical doors for me. You also learn more about the structure of music as your brain subconsciously analyzes the music you hear(by trying to figure it out). This helps you in understanding what music really is which ultimately will help you with your own music. I guess an analogy is like if all you every saw were various shades of red... when you see other colors such as shades of green your mind will evolve and understand better what "color" is. Even if you don't like the shades of green you will then appreciate the red more. 2. Try to write short pieces(1m or less) that express one idea you have completely without any extra sections or repetitive musical information. This does not mean repetition is to be removed but that you shouldn't' repeat things just to repeat them. When someone talks they can repeat themselves to reinforce an idea but if they just repeat themselves just to repeat themselves then it doesn't work(hopefully you get what I just said <img src="http://network.youngcomposers.com/elgg/ipb/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif" alt=";)" />. In fact, you could give yourself a fixed time limit... say 30s. Attempt to cram as much new information, in your musical style, as you can. This is the complete opposite and bad if you do this when composing but this may balance out for you. e.g., if you can do both ways intentionally(too much information and too little then you probably can find a happy medium). Work on song structure very intently. The formal song structures(part forms, etc...) are not necessarily what you want in your style(as it is more free) BUT again, by learning them and having a good understanding you'll subconsciously integrate them in your style and with enough practice you'll do it to good effect. This alone may give your songs more form and make them less repetitive. Of course you'll never please everyone with your music and it's ultimately you that needs to be happy with it. If you are going to try to reach a wider audience though you have to compose "for them" and of course they decide what is good or not. I'd say your pretty close to being a "true" composer(people that actually have a "gift" for it and not just make music). The only thing I have notice is that your style is very specific(from the music you have posted) and hence limits your audience but all composers have this issue more or less. What I mean is that you seem to know what you want to say and just need to work a little more to go from good to great. It's totally up to you though if you want to go down that path though as you may not want too. Some people are totally satisfied composing ok music and we'll never be perfect anyways. I'm just the type of person that wants to be the best I can be at whatever I do and tend to want other's to do the best they can too(at least I say that ;/) but life is different for everyone. This is the reason why I'm trying to point out a few things that I feel are weak in your music and some suggestions to improve them. It's up to you to decide if I'm right or not(Because I could be wrong) or if you care about it or whatever it may be. Believe me, I wouldn't go through the trouble of writing such a long post if I didn't think you had some gift to do great music. Basically when I hear your music I can hear it as being heard just as good as any other similar great music(such as yanni which it reminds me of). This means that if you can reduce your weakness your music will be stronger and be more enjoyable and possibly become great(this is of course true for everyone but I don't think your weaknesses are as much as most people). What I think is great about your music is your ideas and mood. This is preference as many people hate those moods(too mellow or whatever). The only issue is that your expressing the ideas slightly weak in some parts of your pieces which result. Again, this is all relative and is ultimately what you feel. (there are some people that complain about Beethoven, Mozart, etc... ). Jon

A Satie ripoff Satire

Hehe, I can imagine some fat drunken dwarfs just jigging away

My of first large form piece. I haven't worked on it since I then but I figured I would go ahead and upload something. You'll have to understand the title to understand the music ;) Prosaic

Look at my music and if you like it then I can advise you the approach I took in learning "counterpoint". It might be enough to get you started in making "independent" melodies. Basically there are some tricks along the way that can help out but the main thing is that when most people start, IMO, they go down a dead end because most contrapuntal methods suck such as Fux's method(which is based in the Palestrina style and more of a vocal method but can be useful but generally more difficult to master because of subtle but very real stylistic issues). In any case several pieces have pdf's with annotations of what I did. Anyways, check it out and if your interested I'll go into more detail.

It must be extremely time consuming to do so? I assume you mean you use one midi track per articulation and have several tracks per instrument? This is what I'm trying to avoid because I like to write the music using proper notation(makes it easier to visualize what is going on). You really figured out how to get the proper sound out of the library.

Nice. You obviously have EWQL setup correctly! Mind if I ask whats your setup using? I've been trying to get sibelius setup to use Platinum pro so I don't have to use keyswitches for the articulations(downloaded the soundset for it) but no luck ;/

The "crackling" is due to the latency which you already have figured out. I have had that problem in xp and win7x64. It has to do withe cpu not being able to keep up and dropping samples. I had to switch from 2ms to 10ms in cubase recently for some reason(was using 2ms and it was working fine before then but wasn't using EWQL). In fact win7 let me get down to 2ms when I could only get down to about 10ms before crackling in xp(same audio hardware). x64 should be faster since registers are used to pass parameters instead of the stack(but of course has to be designed properly to use with it). First make sure it is no an EWQL issue by using something that is inherently low latency(a simple synth) and see how far you can get down. Try different audio qualities such as 16-bit/44khz(with my emu-1212 I can't use anything without running into issues) and see if it helps. Progressively add more complexity and see if you can figure out what may be causing it. Note that everything in the chain adds latency(delay) and it could be a number of things(e.g., plugins). It goes without saying that you gotta be using aiso to get the most performance. All cards are not created equal so check and see if others are complaining about the card your using. If you just have too much stuff going on then your own option is to get a better system, get another system and split the load, or accept the latency. I imagine though, if your just doing something simple then you should be able to get at least 10ms so all I can really say is to try and troubleshoot the problem. Start from the most simple setup and see how far you can get it down and if it is significant then go from there. If not then either your system can't handle it or it is not optimized for audio. Things you can do are disable services that are not needed... especially anti-viruses, defrag hard drive(for samples as this can help a lot), and tweak some of Win7's registry settings. All this stuff can be easily found by googling. One thing though. If you've got a large sample library and a large HD you should keep in mind that when you format it you want to use the largest cluster size. This reduces fragmentation and allows loading up the samples faster. It wastes more room for small files(so if they are wav's then it is a bad idea usually) but is more optimal for large files.

I first added the strings which simply play the same harmonies. I just wanted a fuller spectrum to give it more ambiance so the exact harmonies a notes are not too important(I it could be improved). I then doubled the complete piano part on a harp(at first I was going to do something else but quickly realized that doubling it with the harp gave a nice new tonal sound(that had more of an asian flavor than the piano alone)). All that was done in sibelius with EWSO and Ivory running for the samples. I then spent the next hour or so trying to get asio setup because I couldn't record it using adobe audition. New computer and haven't really set everything up correctly so it needed to get done but still have issues. So to record it I had to go into cubase. In cubase I imported the mid file and had some problems for some reason but after that I was able to reproduce the sound I had in sibelius. Just for fun I doubled some of the instruments to get a slightly different tonal character. The harp/paino now was doubled with a synth harp from a vst called Sakura(and I simply used it because of the name ;) Most of the sounds didn't work(too electronic) but when I used the harp and mixed it properly it sounded much better(gives it the almost bell like quality). I also added an english horn and bassoon to the strings simply doubling them. So really I didn't do much but a lot of doublings of sound(that generally is the quickest way to a fuller sound without much real work). The strings are the only thing I really added but it is pretty simple. Of course I mastered it by adding some compression(wasn't really needed though), reverb, widener, etc.. (just the standard preset stuff) I think the piece could go a lot of ways. While in your piece you do not build up a tension much you could completely change it's direction if you wanted and I feel that if done right would sound awesome. The theme IMO is very nice(I personally like that kinda mood). So what I imagine is you building up to a climax then release it by playing the theme(maybe solo piano). Maybe an analogy is that first, everything is serene then a storm seems to be brewing. It starts raining and it feels like it might get really bad(hints of, say tornadoes, etc...) but very quickly the clouds dissipate and the sun comes out(Which is what is represented by the them). Basically what you have written can probably be used exactly with one exception of repeating the theme after a climax(say around 1:15). By adding some instruments, proper use of dynamics, and some drums, you could build excitement using exactly what you already have. Release the tension built using original theme(or slight variation) then continue doing what your doing with a reduced texture or go for another climax and release. Of course if you want that personal feel still then a solo instrument is the way to go. The only thing I would do is try to bring in the original theme somewhere in the middle as it is not heard again and this will help make it a bit more coherent. Basically you have a lot of ideas and what seems to be your main theme is never used after the intro(it is played twice early on but never after that). In fact you have several thematic ideas but they are not used as a release for tension. This is not necessarily bad but generally people need to be reminded of the theme... it actually excites them if it is not redundant because they feel good about hearing it again(for various purposes). Anyways, these are just some ideas. It's all up to you ;) But I think you have something very nice but just have to polish it.

Thanks. I would just find it easier to use the comments page to post then visiting the thread but I have been doing that lately and it is getting easier ;)

@Wendell: Everyone struggles. Practice makes perfect. Mainly it is a lot of tricks involved but you gotta listen to your ear(I struggle with this a lot too). If you hear something wrong then there is something wrong... simple as that. Then you have to think about what is wrong then figure out how to make it right(which is usually not hard once you know what exactly is wrong). Basically the main issue is the sounds are weak and not very realistic. You can have the greatest melodies and arrangements but if the sounds suck then the piece will suck. The sounds have to breath and have life or the piece will be dead. If the sound doesn't strike you as cool then it probably isn't and will hurt the overall sound. If you can't that the sounds feel/sound weak then either you have a bad ear, are not listening to the sounds/too involved with the composition process and need to take a step back, or they are fine. Now, it sounds like you are using synthesized sounds. They sound "fake" and lifeless. By fattening them up I mean making them sound more real and exciting. You can do this several ways. If it is an instrument then doubling, filtering/modulating/etc, harmonizing, adding counter melodies, etc... they all can fatten up the sound. http://forum.youngcomposers.com/t25255/sakura-sanctuary/page__pid__343008__st__0entry343008 Play the original then play the one I did(download it from media fire). All I did there was fix the sound(his piano sounded bad or strange) by using sampled instruments(closes thing I can get to the real thing) and doubling the melodies and adding some strings underneath. This gave it a more full sound(not necessarily something you want if you just want a piano version) and more things were involved. The theme, now instead of just the piano also includes a harp, a synth harp, a flute. The there are strings, and a horn and bassoon that double the strings(but slightly). It was relatively simple since I just created some strings underneath then doubled stuff. All I did was take what I considered a bad sounding recording and fixed it up by changing the sounds(but same notes) and I think it sounds better. He would also get a very good sound if he played on a piano alone but had a professional setup. Anyways, it's really up to you as you have to develop your own style and tricks. The main thing is that if you hear something bad, and you have the time, fix it. If your not sure what is wrong then listen and try to figure it out... if you still need help then ask people and see what they say. But if you are completely happy(for all practical purposes) with it then don't mess with it. For example, I'm not completely happy with my rendition of Sakura Sanctuary but for practical purposes(not my song, just for demonstration, other things to do, etc) it was good enough. If your not using samples then you might want to try to get some mix them in or replace the instruments with them. Anyways, Main thing is you are fully satisfied with your sound and if so then just ignore everything I have said ;)

Yeah, the motive isn't too bad but I get to involved with the manipulation of it and forgot about trying to make it interesting ;/ It's not bad but I could have done a better job. I guess the term is "mechanical" which is how it sounds.

Ok, I went ahead and added some strings and doubling to make give a thicker texture and richer texture. I did not change any of the notes. It isn't as good as I would like it because my computer wasn't setup and I spent the last 2 hours trying to route asio and get cubase to work ;/ (kept crashing when I would try to import the midi and then would crap out when I would load the samples). (still not working the way I want it but at least I was able to get something done) This is just the first few measures. http://www.mediafire.com/?ijj3kmkdiqy While this sorta destroys the personal feeling you get from a solo piano my goal is to show you how much better a decent recording sounds(I'm not sure how your piano sounds live but the recording works against the emotion). I also did not mess to much with the dynamics of the main theme as I let sibelius take care of it(usually sibelius completely ruins it but it sounded good so I didn't worry about it). Basically I didn't tweak too that much to get the sounds balanced(the strings need a little work). Anyways, I hope you like it ;) I think it's a great melody and would like to see a really profession rendition of it as it would probably sound awesome(but you'll still need to work on the structure to make it perfect).

@Serge: I can't hear pirates in it but whatever floats your boat ;) But I did kinda try to create an aggressive and exciting piece that was suppose to sound very emotional. The melancholy stuff was added after I composed the main part(basically the middle section starting with the Allegro). I tend not to think thematically when I compose but more abstractly(I have a vague sense of what I want to accomplish but no clear visual imagery in mind). But if you hear pirates then it's pirates ;) @yifei: Well, the abstract stuff has to do with the emotions. The dissonances come from the contrasting emotions presented. They are not clearly defined, so they are "abstract" and their contrast produces a mild dissonance(not harmonic dissonance). The abstract dissonance is not meant to be interpreted musically. Now I did add the title after the fact so it might not be the best but I suck at naming things. Calling it "piece 3" is fine with me ;) But most people want some meaningful title because I guess it's easier to remember or gives more meaning to the piece.

This reminds me of Yanni. I like it as it has a very serene feel to it. My real problem with it is the sound of the piano as it sounds thin and bright and I feel that with the proper tonality it would sound really good(some more resonance and reverb with better low end). The ending is a little fishy though as it seems you kinda just run out of ideas and quit. Towards the end it seems your trying to coast to make it longer but forcing it. I think overall it is a great idea and expresses a great mood(I like moods like that). If I were you I would polish it up, remove all the weak parts and you'll probably have a really great piece. Or, actually another way you could go about it is add some strings. This might help fill the spectrum some, provide some variety, and mask the thin piano sound. There is really nothing wrong with the piece but I just feel you could take it to the next level if you want. If you like it the way it is you might try to write a variation using the beginning(which I think is the best part) and add some modulations and use a bit more tonal color in a development section just so you can get more out of it. Anyways, just some ideas

Well, I just label the main things so if I come back years later and want to modify it I have some clue whats going on without having to reanalyze it. It's better to do those things as you compose them rather than after the fact. I'm glad you found it enjoyable.

By common I mean relatively common in cpp music ignoring outliers. Chromatic mediant modulation is extremely uncommon as is a ton of other modulations. But out of the common modulations the dominant is the most common. Because it is so common it it dwarfs almost all other modulations. If you choose a cpp piece of music randomly it will almost surely modulate to the dominant in a major piece(and most pieces are major). Next would be the relative major if minor. In fact in cpp music almost everything else is uncommon. Now, I am not simply comparing a piece that has a modulation to a subdominant and making it equal to that of the dominant but considering the lengths of the modulations. It wouldn't be fair, IMO, if you made very short modulations comparable to long ones. Also I do not consider tonicizations as modulations. If you ignore the lengths of modulations then one might start to think that even relatively rare modulations are used fairly often(specially if you include tonicizations). Also most cpp music(such as all the minuets, trio's, etc...), being rather simple and short do not modulate to anything but the dominant/mediant for major/minor. Since there is a huge collection of these types of pieces they skew the numbers. If, for example, you only consider the masters then the distribution changes since they tended to be more adventuresome. But overall they represent less than 1millionth of a percent of the total music out there. Of course I have not look at all the music but it's obvious that there are probably billions of pieces of cpp music and probably 99.9% were created by amateurs and semi-professionals. It is not too hard to guesstimate that the most of them probably were not harmonically varied. Now maybe I'm considering way to much music and probably should use those from the masters only since this is mainly what we hear. But even the masters have a large collection of simple music. Now, I could be wrong, but, I would be willing to bet that if you looked at all the pieces in the WTC that the modulation's to the dominant, simply by counting with disregard to length(except no tonicizations), would far outnumber any others. Second would be to the relative major for minor pieces(and in this case it is skewed since half the pieces are minor by design). All others would occupy probably less than 5%. Now, remember, a modulation that occurs in the dominant to it's dominant is a dominant modulation rather than that of the supertonic. Hence there are very few supertonic modulations since it doesn't occur in minor and is generally a dominant modulation(in the dominant rather than tonic). While I haven't analyzed every piece in the WTC I can't recall any seeing modulation to the minor subdominant in major. Of course there are many tonicizations of the minor subdominant(although still not that common as others such as the major subdominant). I'm not really into "modern" music that attempts to banish tonality. The only modern music I listen to is rock/pop/country. I'm more into cpp music and generally discuss theory in those terms(since it is the most well-founded and the theories we use today were all derived from it). I assume if the discussion isn't clearly geared towards a specific genre that it defaults to cpp. It depends. It is close and far. Which means context matters. If the I-iv is hear as a simple modal interchange of I-IV then it will work... but this is harder to do because it is a modulation unless the modulation somehow sets this up. And generally if it sets it up then it is not a I-iv modulation but a I-IV-iv modulation which is really a modulation to the major subdominant then to the parallel minor(this being completely different than a I-iv modulation)). Now we can setup the I-iv to work as a modulation to the iv through context but it is not easy(which is why it is not common). Suppose you take a simple piece of music that modulates from I to V. Now you transpose the V part to IV. When you listen to this you'll hear a I-IV modulation. But suppose you now change the mode to minor so you get I-iv. Now you'll year it not as a mode mixture but a distant modulation(but it actually isn't far as some as you have pointed out). Unless, of course, the context somehow makes it work. The more abrupt the modulation the more it will sound distant. If you emphasize the subdominant region in the first section and setup a modulation to the subdominant but present the minor subdominant then your ear may except it as a modulation to the minor subdominant. If you don't set it up properly then your ear will hear it as a distant modulation. With the dominant, there is no confusion(well, I suppose it is possible but much much unlikely). Well, of course. We really need to define what we mean by common. If we include all music then who really knows(I will still bet that the dominant is the leader by far). We also have to define how to include the modulations(do we take into account the length?). etc... etc... No, I said tonic to subdominant in minor... i.e., i-iv. This is different than I-iv.

The sounds are a bit too flaky to me. They sound very digital and processed. The intro rhythm is to chaotic for me. I like the bass that comes in though and it's melody and rhythm are nice. For some reason though the whole piece sounds very processed and it's spectrum seems to be relatively dry. Maybe adding some filler might help(at least for people like me). For example, before the bass comes in you have the swoosh like sound. But it has a very anti-climatic sound. The same happens with the chimes that come in a little later. When you normally hear these things they have a much larger and full sound and do not cut out so abruptly. The chimes should continue to chime and shouldn't sound like they are being cut off. I'm not sure if you intentionally did that or if you used some preset or what. I'm not saying they should continue for a long time but they shouldn't sound like someone basically muted them. I imagine that if you got the fatter sounds it would sound better. The first bass that comes in is the only thing that has a fat sound then it gets thing then gets fat(when you take off the LP filter). Try using several instruments on the same melody to get a really huge sound(but not too much so you don't destroy the balance). Have counter melodies and arpeggios going on(your doing that to some degree but I would add more). And for heavens sake master thing damn thing! <img src="http://network.youngcomposers.com/elgg/ipb/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif" alt=";)" /> If you want it spacey and full get more reverb, delay, stereo expander, and multi-band compressor(not too much but just enough to balance the spectrum). So, What I suggestion is that you simply continue to work on it. Right now you have a dirty rock(or dull gem) that may be a diamond if you polish it enough. Of course it's totally up to you. I'm just saying what I would like to hear in it that I think would make it more interesting(at least to me). It just doesn't hold my interest with the sparse orchestration Overall it is decent though but needs to work make it cool(there is nothing that draws me in and makes me want to keep listening). There are a few moments where things seem like they might get better but they don't. In a sense you simply do not build up enough tension. You almost start doing this about 3:00m but far too late and doesn't go far enough. There are moments where it seems like something different might happen but it doesn't or a new section appears but doesn't release any tension since none was created.

In the comments section on a persons music, when I reply there are several problems. 1. No spaces. Everything is compressed. When using the "visit thread" to take one to the forum part of it the same compression is there but if it is edited once it is fixed(the spacing shows up in the edit) if saved will show up correctly in the forum thread but not the commends section. 2. Urls, emoticons, images, etc... do not work on the comments section and when you use them they use a different syntax than what is used in the forums thread. <img> vs . Probably a simple bug to fix but quite annoying. (I'm on firefox btw) Otherwise I really like what has been done with the site. Much much more enjoyable to use and probably the best forums site I have seen because it takes the whole user experience into account. Suggestions: 1. In the "Find Posts" part of the profile one only see's their own replies and the last one they had. It would be nice if it also showed if there are new posts or the name of the last poster. Hence they can use it to see if there are is something to respond to. Right now I'm having trouble keeping track of the replies I have made and if someone has responded. I would like some kinda "alert" feature but something that is not intrusive(no emails or popup stuff). I don't mind clicking a link to see if "watched" topics have changed. 2. Allow one to add music without putting it on the "Recent Compositions" list. Possibly make the list longer(can scroll through them).

Well, I wasn't trying to be modern. The main goal with that piece was to derive all the music from the original subject. Looking back on it I could have done a bit more harmonically but I guess I got tunnel vision on the imitation side. I mean, I don't do anything less than what was done with most short baroque pieces(Although maybe a bit differently). I modulate to the relative major(since it is in minor) and then back but with a quick mode change(picardy third). I do stay in D a lot and could have done more there. I'm not sure what Handel piece your talking about as I haven't listened to him in a long time. Never really listened to him much except for the water suite stuff which I lost the music to.

I like it. I think for the style it needs better dynamics. It is suppose to be emotional but there are little dynamics to support it. If someone is emotional, sad or angry, they tend to be irrational. This piece has the those aspects. But people tend to be unpredictable. The dynamics don't support this. Sad maybe be someone quietly crying in a corner or on their bed but this isn't that kinda sad. At least that is the way I hear it. I think it is improvisatory like but after a while it gets rather boring because of the lack of development. The second section has it and sounds the best but the rest do not so I'm not sure what your trying to say with them. Nothing, IMO, is bad but it starts to sound too much like rambling on about some subject rather than telling a story. This is because of the lack of coherent development. Now, if you want to express confusion and such then that's fine but generally that is not good. 1. Dynamics. Imagine somebody playing this piece that maybe is hurt. Say his GF just left him. He would play it very emotional. One chord he might hit very hard and the next very soft. He would have have emotional outbursts where it would be very intense. etc... etc.. etc.. 2. For long pieces you must use get into different tonal areas and colors. Without this almost always a piece will become tiresome. 3. Learn some theory so you can have a wider musical vocabulary so others can discuss with you in a more technical way. You'll also learn some things to get more mileage out of things such as common modulation techniques, altered chords, mode mixture, etc... Overall, because I can imagine some of the improvements I think it has potential(which is why I like it). There are a few anti-climatic spots that could be removed to help increase it's tension but there are some good spots too. It sounds chaotic but that's what I like about it. But without the dynamics it sounds more confusing than emotional. To me, what it sounds like is that you sat down and just "improvised" something without a clear idea where you were going/what you wanted to say. This is fine... or at least I sorta like music like that(probably because I do it too). But it is very difficult to hold a listeners attention for any significant length of time without a clear goal. If you don't have a clear goal almost surely they won't hear it. Anyways.... just my thoughts.