How good are you at timing...

I think what the OP means is, "How good are you at waiting until just the right moment to create a change or effect in your music?"

I think so too.. I just really wanted him to actually say that instead of all these silly, poorly worded rhetorical questions.

As an answer... I would say that I am good at it. I do not make changes or use effects arbitrarily. In my music these things almost always have some amount of form or rationale about them. Therefore, the timing is just right for my purposes. Whether or not it might have been more effective placed somewhere else is not a question that I often ask myself because things have been placed where they are for a reason.

My timing comes from my internal music player.

What sounds "right" to me is what I've been trained to have sound right. Listening to endless hours of music has trained me to recognize points where changes need to occur. A loss of a measure can't happen because measures are constructed within this player of mine.

Now, this only works on the micro-musical level. At the structural level, the timing has come through practice and theory..

I always understood the OP..

I don't see the reason for ASKING it in the first place.

So are you also saying that you see the piece as a whole, that you can't rid a measure, because it has already been composed?

When I go back and edit my pieces, yes the concept of the "measure" is a concrete concept. I can only delete phrases, not measures. And if I do delete phrases, there is a certain imbalanced feeling to pieces.

So yes, when I go back and edit pieces, there is very rarely deletion.. just modification. If I delete one measure, I usually have to end up deleting/destroying the whole piece.

This is an interesting topic you bring up, actually. I never thought of it that way. Of course, I write very old-fashionedly and this really doesn't apply to some of the more experienced composers, I'd think. Nor even to the beginner composers :P

I'm just unique then. lol.

When I go back and edit my pieces, yes the concept of the "measure" is a concrete concept. I can only delete phrases, not measures. And if I do delete phrases, there is a certain imbalanced feeling to pieces.

So yes, when I go back and edit pieces, there is very rarely deletion.. just modification. If I delete one measure, I usually have to end up deleting/destroying the whole piece.

This is an interesting topic you bring up, actually. I never thought of it that way. Of course, I write very old-fashionedly and this really doesn't apply to some of the more experienced composers, I'd think. Nor even to the beginner composers :P

I'm just unique then. lol.

Thank you. I don't seem to have a problem with your unique :)

Morely I find it interesting your concept of writing and how the internal player runs. It reminds me of the genius of Mozart's caliber.

You speak of the more experienced composers and more beginning composers, so you do you believe these continuing pieces are improving? Do you think editing ever accesses in the mind, editing previous phrases? Is it simply just a preference to not edit specifics (like measures) in reality?

Haha, I am certainly not of Mozart's calibre, though.

Inspiration yields the best results, I find...

But I can work purely theoretically and purely by inspiration. Working with both yields the best results. Especially in sonata form, I really only need inspiration for the exposition and the development/recapitulation/coda can be done purely technically. But still, if a section needs to be edited by a deletion, I CANNOT continue work on the piece. It never sounds the same.

Interestingly enough, I've taken the time to analyze my own timing instincts and try to break them. For example, the rule of 3 ( a psychological marking point in our brains as to patterns).. I try to pick out when and where I'm thinking the music up in this way and I can simply sequence twice and come up with new material for the remaining two bars in a phrase.

Again, in the exposition, I have to fight my mental tendencies to sequence and repeat, as this is what provides tension and excitement to pieces.

Haha, I am certainly not of Mozart's calibre, though.

Inspiration yields the best results, I find...

But I can work purely theoretically and purely by inspiration. Working with both yields the best results. Especially in sonata form, I really only need inspiration for the exposition and the development/recapitulation/coda can be done purely technically. But still, if a section needs to be edited by a deletion, I CANNOT continue work on the piece. It never sounds the same.

Interestingly enough, I've taken the time to analyze my own timing instincts and try to break them. For example, the rule of 3 ( a psychological marking point in our brains as to patterns).. I try to pick out when and where I'm thinking the music up in this way and I can simply sequence twice and come up with new material for the remaining two bars in a phrase.

Again, in the exposition, I have to fight my mental tendencies to sequence and repeat, as this is what provides tension and excitement to pieces.

Yes I agree on what you say about those tendencies and what they yield, tension and excitement. That's is a good point. Do you find the fact that it does not sound the same when you edit it distracting? It diminishes your ability to compose of the same quality, or ruins mood? I find this to be true of me, but I am not sure why.

nintendo.

nintendo.

NO. SEGA.

>:(

...

At least Sega circa-90s.

nintendo

I think we all know, playstation.

Screw it. Mac. :mellow:

Suddenly I feel my english is completely useless .... I don't understand a thing on this thread, but there are quite qualified people in here I think somebody will follow Schumann "timing" matter.

Suddenly I feel my english is completely useless .... I don't understand a thing on this thread, but there are quite qualified people in here I think somebody will follow Schumann "timing" matter.

Well, everyone gave it a try. ... and failed.

Let's argue about videogames instead >:D

Yes, the discrepancy in timing is exactly what causes me to want to throw pieces away. However, this concept of "timing" is really only during the compositional process. Once I have finished a piece, I really don't even think about the aspects of timing.

Stop pretending you understand anything, Mael. :P

By saying "Nintendo", jujimufu cleverly referred to "no intiendo", which means "I don't understand" in Spanish.

By the way, Schumann, the first post raised two questions in my mind:

WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING AND WHERE CAN I GET SOME?

Also: *bashes n00b just 'cause he can*

^Isn't it "no entiendo"?

Probably. I'm not a good speaker of inferior languages.

Am I seriously the one and only person who understood exactly what Schumann was getting at. I find so many responses to threads in this forum completely outrageous. But instead all I am learning is that I am just weird.

My timing comes from my internal music player.

What sounds "right" to me is what I've been trained to have sound right. Listening to endless hours of music has trained me to recognize points where changes need to occur. A loss of a measure can't happen because measures are constructed within this player of mine.

Now, this only works on the micro-musical level. At the structural level, the timing has come through practice and theory..

I always understood the OP..

I don't see the reason for ASKING it in the first place.

Bold - Ahh thank goodness!

Underlined - Wrong.

^Isn't it "no entiendo"?

Yes, is "No Entiendo" "No Comprendo" "No se ni que onda con esto"

I'm still trying to decode the first post and I have several suspects:

- BMP Speed, How fast or slow is the piece

- Length of the work, Total Timing in minutes

- The time took you to write the piece (i.e. since 1950-2009:D)

In BMP speed I can say that good works and bad works can be made at any speed

The Length of the work, well, Development ability is a very important matter in composition, you may be able to write a 1 hour symphony with a 2 bars theme, or suffer trying to finish a 3 minutes interlude.

The Time takes you to write a piece depends of many aspects, but I think it must be something reasonable, like, 5-20 days for a 2-10 minutes piece or 3-20 months for a 1 hour Symphony...something like that.

if what I post has nothing to do with the thread issue. don't blame me for that.

Bold - Ahh thank goodness!

Underlined - Wrong.

No, it's the same thing with ALL the random pointless threads on this forum.

"Is Atonality dead?"

WHY ARE YOU ASKING THAT QUESTION?

"Is tonality a force of nature"

SERIOUSLY, NOBODY NEEDS YOU TO ASK THAT QUESTION

"Who's the BEST COMPOZAR EVAR?!?11?"

OPINIONS ARE OPINIONS, NO NEED TO SPARK DEBATES ABOUT THEM.

etc. etc.

you get my drift?

Yes, is "No Entiendo" "No Comprendo" "No se ni que onda con esto"

Or, as in Chile one would say: "Que wea?"

Or, as in Chile one would say: "Que wea?"

Yes, :laugh: well, at least we're having a little fun in here, while some Maestrotell us what's going on...

I think I got it, it's about "Theory of Relativity" in music and "Methaphisical" activities...

...No ?... ups! (I was already celebrating)

DON'T DOUBLE-POST!!

*bashes n00b*

I've heard it said that wise men speak in riddles...

Speaking of time, though, I think more composers should incorporate unusual time related aspects into their music... whether those views of 'time' are traditional or not.

Also, Schumann's words make for good quotes.

WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING AND WHERE CAN I GET SOME?

Your name is Beriloz and you're asking me?