Minuetto per orchestra in Re maggiore op. 136

Well, to be honest, I've been holding my tongue for a while. It just seems to me as though all of your stuff sounds exactly the same. Your work seems to be solely pastiche after pastiche, none of them saying anything new.

It's obvious you have talent and knowledge, but in my opinion you seem to have chosen to stop being an artist and become merely a craftsman; churning out pastiche after soulless pastiche endlessly, like a Carpenter making a new set of bookshelves each week. This one done in pine, this one in oak, this one in teak, but basically all minor variations on the same tired design.

You show no seeming interest in learning new or varying your existing techniques. Honestly, to me it just seems that you want comments on your myriad variations on the same basic set piece to boost your ego.

Your direction in music is your choice and I am just another composer with a different opinion; I can do nothing about your personal choices, except to voice my own opinion.

I'll save you the trouble of a response simply by putting you on ignore and leaving you alone from this point on.

Flaming, then putting the person on ignore so they can't respond to you.

Way to go, Flint.

if a CD containing your and Flint's atonal 20th century pastiches was being sold next to a CD containing Punkitititi's classical/baroque revivalist pieces

Here is one of many clues that Requiem Aeternam has not actually listened (or at least, understood) any of QC's or flint's music.

In this debate, everything I have seen from Requiem has been at least as harsh as what flint said... so if Requiem thinks he's in the right, then he needs to go look up 'hypocrisy' or 'double standards'.

I'm fine with revivalist music... but I also understand the viewpoint that that music is largely outmoded as a form of personal expression.

Can we tone done the vitriol a bit, please?

Ummm.....

....

What the hell are you on about, RequiemAeternam? Please stop raving mindless nonsense. If that's not flaming, I don't know what is.

First of all, let me go out there and say that I too share the opinion of Flint and QcCowboy in that most of the pieces that Guglielmo puts up .. *are* similar in character and purpose. This comes from a different perspective, I'll give you that, but that should be no reason for you to go on a mindless tirade against this 1850 philosophy. If you want to write court music that is played in the background of proceedings of the court of the empire, that's fine. I don't have any problem with that, but it will not interest me, nor does it interest Qc or Flint.

Next, it is very important for you to realize that:

Flint and Qc write tonal works as well

Get out of your bubble. Music written in the style of 1750 is not all that tonality has to offer. If the musician wants to use other styles in order to further the art that they are creating, you have NO RIGHT to condemn them. They are keeping their musical palette open. Now, after going through years of schooling in order to understand all these techniques, if you STILL hold this childish view about music, then where is there room to debate?

Nobody says that Guglielmo is a bad composer, nor that he writes bad music. They are simply informing him that as an artist, thought is encouraged.

I would put you on ignore too, because you just show yourself to not only be ignorant, but unwilling to learn. And ignorance without the desire to learn is unforgivable.

Piano Trio - II.mid

Ummm.....

I don't have any problem with that, but it will not interest me, nor does it interest Qc or Flint.

If it doesn't interest any of you, then may I ask what ALL 3 of you are doing in this thread?

...ouch. Owned much?

:laugh:

Here is one of many clues that Requiem Aeternam has not actually listened (or at least, understood) any of QC's or flint's music.

And there's a huge clue in this thread that QC has not listened to nor understood ANY of Punkititi's music considering the fact that QC continues to erroneously refer to Punkititi's music as 'baroque' even though most of it is classical yet I don't see you telling him to go listen to more of his music and understand it better. The hypocrisy and skewed partiality in this thread is comical.

If it doesn't interest any of you, then may I ask what ALL 3 of you are doing in this thread?

...ouch. Owned much?

:laugh:

I really wouldn't be talking considering you seriously called Flint and Qc's work "atonal". This only serves to strengthen the general position that people who say they feel "nothing" from works past 1890 are ones who really don't understand it.

Anyway, this discussion is stupid. Admittedly, it was all Flint's fault but going into full out character assassination mode is no kind of response and kind of robs you of the high horse that you so desperately seem to like shouting from. I really don't see why this has to dissolve into a "NO U!" discussion.

Just to get back on topic, I'll edit this post with my critiques of Punkititi's piece later.

hey guys, here there are too many people fighting on one another and the reasons why one goes against the other are losing the focal point.

As I said before, THIS IS NOT THE ULTIMATE MINUET.

It is just a stupid work, not even a serious one, it has got a nice melody, I wanted to write a minuet and so I did. PERIOD!

And so far on here I have posted just music that is similar in character, but not my big works, I posted just 2 symphonies and those are my early ones, I was 16 when I wrote them.

I have not posted yet all of them, and there are other 24 waiting to be posted.

I have 6 piano concertos I didn't post

I have 1 trumpet and 1 cello concerto I didn't post

I have 4 Cassations and 3 Serenades for orchestra that I didn't post

the list can go on for other 200 works I didn't post on here...

You guys don't even know what I can do, what I did and what I will do (to QcCowboy, Flint et all...)

again at Qc, you can't say this

I said baroque because that's what you usually post.

when then you say this right after

I never bothered listening to your piece, because it holds no interest what so ever for me.

and do notice that until this point, I have refrained from commenting on any of your pieces, musically. I see no point in it.

and more to say.. if you said

it holds no interest what so ever for me.

why you come in here and say things to me??

I am not talking about what happened after flint said his opinion, because as a moderator you have to calm down and control the things said.

I am saying why you asked me questions about the way of writing for horns? You don't care about my work/s, why this interest? :huh: :blink:

and more on, since you say

however, I can't help but feel a sting when someone posts about your pastiche and calls it brilliant and says you're the best composer on this forum.

If you talk like that means that you feel me as threat to your works, so you go out and tell that, to make people angry??

Is it that nobody, or not many people prised your compositions as much as they did with this particular one, being it just a simple minuet, and not even a great "major work" like the ones you have in that part of the forum??

and at the end I don't care if you like or not my work/s, we are SIX BILLIONS (6.000.000.000) on earth!!

you're entitled to say this

I'll be joining flint in ignoring your posts from now on. not for any anger or ill-will, but purely from lack of interest in what you have to offer.

You don't like my style because you don't interface in it, it doesn't tell you what your music tells you, this is the way I feel too, this kind of contemporary music doesn't tell me as much as classical music does.

the problem is just this:

Why all this mean words, anger and harsh comments to just tell people, I don't like this kind of music so I won't spend much time on it commenting. (If you, and others like you, wanted to be civil and polite...)

but, still, for coherence and unity of mind and reasoning, coming of the preceding thinking:

why and for what purpose to go to a place where you're not comfortable and you know you don't fit in because of all the differences that exist?

You Ignore me because you have no topic on where attack me??

And why you would want to attack me?? Am I a thread for you? What have I done to you??

Why you have all these problems?

Are you insecure, so you need to make others feel bad, and humiliate and demotivate them so you can feel good and redeem your mind and feel superior so your soul feels better?

(I might go on and add other things later...)

let me get one thing clear,

I mentioned "baroque" because of the following earlier in this thread:

WHAT?!?!?!?!?! I thought many of your pieces were baroque, I guess I was wrong. :sadtears:

I don't understand why you say it is 'quite hard for [you]' as you are one of the most talented composers in this site, you should be able to do it. :nod:

And by the way, RequiemAeternam, I guess that answers your smarmy comments about my referring to it as baroque.

When I asked why you were writing with horns in D, I wanted to know why you use an instrument that is no longer in use. And you answered it.

I've been to your website (soundclick page).

Remember, this isn't the first piece you've posted here, and you've submitted works for Major Works before. So I've seen your hundreds of "opus numbers" (including the same piece in different instrumentation, yet with a new opus number... you don't do that. same music = same opus number. even if the instrumentation is completely different. it gets a new opus number when you significantly alter the music)

Why don't you post something you wrote this year?

Why are you posting things from so many years ago?

Punkitititi, I looked at the score, very quickly.

I saw horns in D. I wondered "why on earth write for an instrument no one uses anymore, why not just write for modern horns". And I asked.

Then you answered.

Period.

I had no further interest in your music.

I think Flint's comments were far too harsh, I don't agree with saying them.

I DO agree with what he said, however.

And to be quite frank, he does have a right to his opinion, whether he's a moderator or not.

The only person who flamed in this thread, so far, was the person who jumped in to "defend" you. He chose to create a personal attack on other thread participants.

by the way, I really think you need to look at what I wrote more carefully: I mention the word "baroque" once in this entire thread (until now). So just to clear up some misinterpretations here, RequiemAeternam actually refers to your music as baroque more often than I did.

oh, and the lack of counterpoint IS an issue with your piece.

and your insistence on using natural horns (in this and other works of yours) is pushing you to write in a very stilted and unbalanced manner. I listened to a half-dozen of your pieces since this all started, and while you have the style down pat (the early classical thing), your use of natural horns is pushing you to make musical decisions that are out of character for the style. With brass entrances being ONLY on notes they can play, you are not being careful enough about choosing WHEN they come in, and it is creating a haphazard (patchwork) effect.

Why don't you simply use modern instruments? They would allow you to actually WRITE music instead of limiting yourself in this manner.

There's nothing particularly laudable about using period instruments for a work that was obviously not written in that era. You live in the 21st century. You choose to ignore 200 years of musical history. So be it. But at least, don't add extra, unnecessary, difficulty to your hobby.

By embracing the limitations of those instruments, you are adding musical limitations. Meaning that you are stopping yourself from advancing musically. I am not saying you MUST advance... but you MIGHT do so at some point, even if by accident, except the limits you self-impose won't allow that "accident" to happen.

And if you live under some sort of illusion that a natural horn is somehow "superior" sounding to a modern horn, you are wrong. Get over that.

Benjamin Britten (a modern composer) decided to impose the "natural" horn in one of his pieces (Serenade for tenor, horn and strings)... but used a modern instrument to do it. All he did was indicate which passage was to be played "as if it were a natural horn", thus forcing the horn player to use only natural lip position note changes and hand alterations.

From all the posts in this thread, whether or not for defending me, this one is one I liked.

I wish they had been all like this and not going again on the debate "old versus new" which is stupid, because it is music, everybody can access to it and do whatever they like with it.

I don't really care if you or others call it baroque, it is just a genre...

When I asked why you were writing with horns in D, I wanted to know why you use an instrument that is no longer in use. And you answered it.

Punkitititi, I looked at the score, very quickly.

I saw horns in D. I wondered "why on earth write for an instrument no one uses anymore, why not just write for modern horns". And I asked.

Then you answered.

Period.

I had no further interest in your music.

yes and that was it...

Flint did launch the flame out of nowhere... he quoted your question and said the sneaky comment to get people/me mad and make it like it was. A useless war, kind of troll-like.

I've been to your website (soundclick page).

Remember, this isn't the first piece you've posted here, and you've submitted works for Major Works before. So I've seen your hundreds of "opus numbers" (including the same piece in different instrumentation, yet with a new opus number... you don't do that. same music = same opus number. even if the instrumentation is completely different. it gets a new opus number when you significantly alter the music)

I thank you for giving it a look and yes, I know that thing, you've expressed it very well when I posted it originally, and I know that and what you mean.

But I tell you, there are some composers that have done that, and not just once, that's why.

Why don't you post something you wrote this year?

When I write music, I do write at the same time several works together and this happens to me because I lose interest or I have no more ideas for that particular work, but I might get new ideas for a new one, and I start writing, and that might happen again so I start a new piece, etc... so I let thefirst one rest a bit and then, when I get the ideas again for it, I finish it.

Why are you posting things from so many years ago?

While I am finishing the new ones, I have the old ones that I want people to listen to, that's why I am posting them.

I think Flint's comments were far too harsh, I don't agree with saying them.

I DO agree with what he said, however.

And to be quite frank, he does have a right to his opinion, whether he's a moderator or not.

You can agree or not with him, but there are several ways to tell things to people, and I don't think you would like to be offended gratuitously, and then pretend to be right and be the one that is there just to give tips to people.

He did that to try to offend me and what I do, and if you read my answer to his post, it is all written there, I don't need to further this.

The only person who flamed in this thread, so far, was the person who jumped in to "defend" you. He chose to create a personal attack on other thread participants.

Maybe he took his reply on a personal level and maybe he has been harsh sometimes, but the problem is that he answered right away, being mad at the kind of discussion the other one was trying to make, so he didn't meditate on it, but just answered, instead the other thought about it to have a particular effect, and this is totally different.

A think is when you kill somebody because you want to defend yourself, and a thing is you kill somebody, just to do it, lucidly.

by the way, I really think you need to look at what I wrote more carefully: I mention the word "baroque" once in this entire thread (until now). So just to clear up some misinterpretations here, RequiemAeternam actually refers to your music as baroque more often than I did.

Again, it is ok, I don't care :)

oh, and the lack of counterpoint IS an issue with your piece.

I am writing just a dance, you don't need to make it like a fugue... look at other menuets from other composers, the ones that lived in that time, they didn't write masterpieces in counterpoint for their menuets.

and your insistence on using natural horns (in this and other works of yours) is pushing you to write in a very stilted and unbalanced manner. I listened to a half-dozen of your pieces since this all started, and while you have the style down pat (the early classical thing), your use of natural horns is pushing you to make musical decisions that are out of character for the style. With brass entrances being ONLY on notes they can play, you are not being careful enough about choosing WHEN they come in, and it is creating a haphazard (patchwork) effect.

Maybe I have to refine my ability to write with natural horns... I am still young, and there's time to learn that too.

Why don't you simply use modern instruments? They would allow you to actually WRITE music instead of limiting yourself in this manner.

I know that would be easier to write for a modern horn, since it has all the notes I need and not just the harmonics and some other ones that could be played by adjusting the hand in the bell and the tonguing etc...

There's nothing particularly laudable about using period instruments for a work that was obviously not written in that era. You live in the 21st century. You choose to ignore 200 years of musical history. So be it. But at least, don't add extra, unnecessary, difficulty to your hobby.

By embracing the limitations of those instruments, you are adding musical limitations. Meaning that you are stopping yourself from advancing musically. I am not saying you MUST advance... but you MIGHT do so at some point, even if by accident, except the limits you self-impose won't allow that "accident" to happen.

I am not ignoring 200 years of musical history, I am just writing what I feel inside, I listen to the modern and contemporary music, and I am trying to implement more things of this time as well, but that will take time, but I never said I don't want to do that, but I don't feel doing it right now.

And if you live under some sort of illusion that a natural horn is somehow "superior" sounding to a modern horn, you are wrong. Get over that.

This is useless to mention as of I answered to this thing at the beginning when you asked me why I used natural horns...:whistling:

Benjamin Britten (a modern composer) decided to impose the "natural" horn in one of his pieces (Serenade for tenor, horn and strings)... but used a modern instrument to do it. All he did was indicate which passage was to be played "as if it were a natural horn", thus forcing the horn player to use only natural lip position note changes and hand alterations.

I know Britten and his serenade, and it is a fascinating composition, and if he needed the effect of natural horns, he could achieve that, because modern horns can do good what did natural horns.

I know that you meant to say that, Britten, being a modern composer and needing the nuance of a natural horn, he indicated the passages to be played as if, and you suggest me to do the same with my works instead to write for real natural horns.

I have to think about it... but thanks for all the suggestions :)

Was it that hard to avoid be mean and talk politely? (not referring you)

To add on to Qc's comment- there are modern pieces that utilize the natural horn, but often this is because of the difference in tuning. :x

Why don't you post something you wrote this year?

Why are you posting things from so many years ago?

Don't be a hypocrite, you've posted your share of old music.

Don't be a hypocrite, you've posted your share of old music.

honestly, that last part was not necessary.

this is off-topic to the OP.

however, yes, I've posted older works.

I've also posted my fair share of new works.

I said baroque because that's what you usually post..

He has never poested any baroque, mabye something like early classical/late late baroque, but never baroque. This is classical music.

He has never poested any baroque, mabye something like early classical/late late baroque, but never baroque. This is classical music.

hey, speaking of hypocrisy, why doesn't anyone say anything about Flint and I getting called "atonalists"? Flint and I are considerably FURTHER from "atonal" than Punkitititi is from baroque (by your own admission Simen... since you say "late baroque").

Ok, this is typical. Like i have said 100 times berfore, when a revivalist compoers gets some attention or compliments the modernist have a NEED to go in there an sabotage as well as he can. I did something very funny today regarding this post, my friend is a psychiatrist. I asked her over here to evaluate this post and look at why some ppl behave like this. Her evaluation was:

The modern composers exploded when the revival composers got more compliments, the modernist does not tolerate this, so he starts with a small comment to protest and show he is there, that will be both qcc horn comment and flints: "It's easier to just re-write the same piece over and over."

When the revival composer answers to this the explotion happens:

Flint : ell, to be honest, I've been holding my tongue for a while. It just seems to me as though all of your stuff sounds exactly the same. Your work seems to be solely pastiche after pastiche, none of them saying anything new.

It's obvious you have talent and knowledge, but in my opinion you seem to have chosen to stop being an artist and become merely a craftsman; churning out pastiche after soulless pastiche endlessly, like a Carpenter making a new set of bookshelves each week. This one done in pine, this one in oak, this one in teak, but basically all minor variations on the same tired design.

You show no seeming interest in learning new or varying your existing techniques. Honestly, to me it just seems that you want comments on your myriad variations on the same basic set piece to boost your ego.

Your direction in music is your choice and I am just another composer with a different opinion; I can do nothing about your personal choices, except to voice my own opinion.

I'll save you the trouble of a response simply by putting you on ignore and leaving you alone from this point on.

By tho look of the comment its clearly that the modernist has a very negative thinking about the revivalist composer. But why? If this was a one time example of rude beahviour towards revivalists, this would not mean much. But when there is a pattern of episodes. The answer will be :

The modernist feels inferior to the revivalist, but will not admitt it. Knowing that he never will be able to achive what the revivalist does, he resorts to other metohods, this is often an attempt to humiliate or rude behavior in public, (as in this forum). If people follow up on hes saying/comments he will get a certain satisfaction of it, and build up hes own confidence. If not he will abandon the arguement and hide, working into hes mind "They dont understand, they are studpid, i do the right thing" This also helps to build up de confidence.

This type of behavior is often seen in people who is under alot of stress, like they allways got to prove themself, and try to be superior. When they fail or feel they fail they will instantly resort to rude and hard behavior.

She alalyzed qcc too:

You seem a bit more moderate, but have the same problem. What gave you away was your first comment and when you inmitted that you dont even bother to listen to the music, it has no interest for you what so ever. This shows that you have decided that the revivalist music is BAD, you dont want it to be good and for you it never will be.

So that is why you never comment on the music qcc? you never listen or what, you just try to find error in the score so you can say "hey, this is not professional music"?

I will tell you, my firend has been a psychiatrist for 10 year. and work with difficult behavior. She has no intereset in music, she does not know much modern and not much baroque. (she is musical deaf). So this has nothing to do with me or you. This just an analyzis of behavior in this thread and previous threads with the theme " modernist vs revival"

I would like to say to flint: I dont like you music much, i realy think it sucks, but comment like this is idiotic, there is no need to justify your music here.

SimenN

Regrettably, this debate has gotten an unpleasant flavor since post #19 by Flint – personal opinion-bashing instead of helpful feedback on composition matters.

Composing is basically musical craftsmanship of carving "tonally moving forms" (Hanslick 1854). Whether one does this in a more modern idiom (like Flint, among others) or in some historical style (like Punkitititi) is solely a question of personal choice. Nobody is entitled to challenge this choice, neither a moderator of this forum (at least three of them took part on here, namely QcCowboy, Flint, and Daniel) nor a plain member of this site. What can be questioned is the craftsmanship in handling the "tonally moving forms", in particular the balancing of consonance and dissonance as the fundamental ingredients of tonality.

After a close lookup of Punkitititi's compositions (in particular on his homepage at Soundclick.com) it is evident that he has mastered composition, in an age from 14 through 24, in different genres of classical style, primarily through learning by doing and less through instruction. His knowledge of musical form – in its inner workings as well as in its external features (e.g. instrumentation) – is substantial. However, as up to today he has not developed a distinctive personal style of originality in composing tonally. (As an extreme model one could study Arvo P

I thank you all for the support and the trust :)

Ok, this is typical. Like i have said 100 times berfore, when a revivalist compoers gets some attention or compliments the modernist have a NEED to go in there an sabotage as well as he can. I did something very funny today regarding this post, my friend is a psychiatrist. I asked her over here to evaluate this post and look at why some ppl behave like this. Her evaluation was:

The modern composers exploded when the revival composers got more compliments, the modernist does not tolerate this, so he starts with a small comment to protest and show he is there, that will be both qcc horn comment and flints: "It's easier to just re-write the same piece over and over."

When the revival composer answers to this the explotion happens:

Flint : ell, to be honest, I've been holding my tongue for a while. It just seems to me as though all of your stuff sounds exactly the same. Your work seems to be solely pastiche after pastiche, none of them saying anything new.

It's obvious you have talent and knowledge, but in my opinion you seem to have chosen to stop being an artist and become merely a craftsman; churning out pastiche after soulless pastiche endlessly, like a Carpenter making a new set of bookshelves each week. This one done in pine, this one in oak, this one in teak, but basically all minor variations on the same tired design.

You show no seeming interest in learning new or varying your existing techniques. Honestly, to me it just seems that you want comments on your myriad variations on the same basic set piece to boost your ego.

Your direction in music is your choice and I am just another composer with a different opinion; I can do nothing about your personal choices, except to voice my own opinion.

I'll save you the trouble of a response simply by putting you on ignore and leaving you alone from this point on.

By tho look of the comment its clearly that the modernist has a very negative thinking about the revivalist composer. But why? If this was a one time example of rude beahviour towards revivalists, this would not mean much. But when there is a pattern of episodes. The answer will be :

The modernist feels inferior to the revivalist, but will not admitt it. Knowing that he never will be able to achive what the revivalist does, he resorts to other metohods, this is often an attempt to humiliate or rude behavior in public, (as in this forum). If people follow up on hes saying/comments he will get a certain satisfaction of it, and build up hes own confidence. If not he will abandon the arguement and hide, working into hes mind "They dont understand, they are studpid, i do the right thing" This also helps to build up de confidence.

This type of behavior is often seen in people who is under alot of stress, like they allways got to prove themself, and try to be superior. When they fail or feel they fail they will instantly resort to rude and hard behavior.

She alalyzed qcc too:

You seem a bit more moderate, but have the same problem. What gave you away was your first comment and when you inmitted that you dont even bother to listen to the music, it has no interest for you what so ever. This shows that you have decided that the revivalist music is BAD, you dont want it to be good and for you it never will be.

So that is why you never comment on the music qcc? you never listen or what, you just try to find error in the score so you can say "hey, this is not professional music"?

I will tell you, my firend has been a psychiatrist for 10 year. and work with difficult behavior. She has no intereset in music, she does not know much modern and not much baroque. (she is musical deaf). So this has nothing to do with me or you. This just an analyzis of behavior in this thread and previous threads with the theme " modernist vs revival"

I would like to say to flint: I dont like you music much, i realy think it sucks, but comment like this is idiotic, there is no need to justify your music here.

SimenN

Hi. Actually i am not too bothered about the position of your friend, as far as I am concerned these findings cannot be proved with ANY degree of certainty. It screams "confirmation bias" through the angle of negative motive. But even if part of what has been postulated there was motive, i doubt it was the only motive and it is highly unlikely that there would be ONLY ONE motive.

Your post tries to come across as clever, with views from an expert - backed up, trustworthy - but the information given is so black and white that I felt the need to respond. After all, it is in my nature to question things, and to paint this thread as so apparently obviously black and white would seem to me to be foolish.

As one example, the notion that "modernists" or namely the aforementioned "modernists" would feel inferior is arrogance par excellence, due to your friend not having a deep enough background knowledge of the subjects in question.

Is the subject a young aspiring composer who came through a current UK system where standard learning core compositional technique isn't always formally learnt (and all their rules) i.e 16th or 18th century counterpoint. Or is the subject say for example an experienced composer who has come through a more traditionally grounded American school, where they have 'been there, done that and bought the t-shirt' of replicating older styles and have changed their style for the sake of their own personal expression, rather than not being able to produce for example what Punkitititi has produced.

It doesn't really matter actually, I mean even if armed with such information you still wouldn't be able to come up with clear and arguably definitive answers. My first thought on Flint's miraculously ridiculous post was that he was just completely annoyed that an 'artist' was only going to choose to be a 'craftsman' and that he is doing music some sort of disservice because he is not trying to say anything new in his pieces (arguably). I read most possibly to my mind that Flint was annoyed through travesty or perceived lack of vision from punkitititi rather than feeling inferior or as if he lacks punkitititi's technique. But how could I EVER possibly say that this is definitely the reason, I am just guessing. I couldn't possibly present this as some king of black and white fact.

Ya... I would say all in all I just found your post almost ridiculously preposterous as it assumed only one thread of thoughts based on no detailed knowledge of the subjects.

EDIT: I should probably edit this so that the post can be deemed to be on topic with the opening post. I listened to the music, I find it quite pleasant and fairly well written but lacking in flair. I also find it highly unoriginal, I wouldn't listen to this over Mozart or Handel, say. I would like to commend you on your obviously quite high degree of skill in handling your musical material. Happy composing, sir.

Punkitititi knows me from another forum, as well as this one. I've offered feedback to him and his piano pieces before and I did my best to help him (by offering feedback).

I can't listen or look at the score. Simply too busy. But I can certainly offer my opinion.

Indeed Flint went a bit harsh, ONLY AT THE VERY END with the ignoring comment. Otherwise he did offer constructive critisism, which actually is rare to find from such skilled composers! Same as with QcC! QcC is not a kid playing music and going "WOW you are teh b3st!" He is an excellent composer, very skilled teacher and professor, and a composer who's been having his works performed for many years!

So, yes there was flaming from Flints point, but the attack that went from Anthem was simply something else really. Same goes for Simen.

At some point the two groups will need to ignore each other and this will end. Simple enough.

… At some point the two groups will need to ignore each other and this will end. Simple enough.

It's a pathetic display to offer ignoring each other because the controversy between "traditionalists" and "modernists" in composing will simply not end. To the contrary, both sides should try to contrive ways and means of communication. Wherefore else is there a site like YC? At least we should try to be honest on speaking terms. As an example, let's take your compositions. As far as I have listened to them – here at YC or at your homepage – your music is not to my liking. And I could tell you in a rational way, why not.

Back on the topic of Punkitititi's composition, his music is possibly not to your liking. But could you tell, in compositional terms, why not? Or could QcCowboy do so?

I wonder what your answers would be.

It's a pathetic display to offer ignoring each other because the controversy between "traditionalists" and "modernists" in composing will simply not end. To the contrary, both sides should try to contrive ways and means of communication. Wherefore else is there a site like YC? At least we should try to be honest on speaking terms. As an example, let's take your compositions. As far as I have listened to them

It's a pathetic display to offer ignoring each other because the controversy between "traditionalists" and "modernists" in composing will simply not end. To the contrary, both sides should try to contrive ways and means of communication. Wherefore else is there a site like YC? At least we should try to be honest on speaking terms. As an example, let's take your compositions. As far as I have listened to them – here at YC or at your homepage – your music is not to my liking. And I could tell you in a rational way, why not.

It's a pathetic display??!?! Honestly, try to show a little more kindness in your talking to me please. And offering what? Proposing an idea is nothing more than some kind of weak advice and nothing else.

I don't really care about the controversy, I don't really see one.

By all means I don't really care about your take on my compositions in THIS thread. My compositions are posted in this forum, go have a take on them and see if you like them or not. See how I respond and see if I take kindly feedback or not, and if I mind bad reviews.

"Your music is not to my liking"?!?!?!? WTF?!?!? I never said anything about punkitititi's music in this thread. So what's the deal about my music, huh? You don't like my music? Big deal, I don't give a shite! Do rationalise it in the right threads and if you're right, believe me I'll have a listen and notice things. If not... And either way with so many degrees on my side, on QcC's side, etc, it's plain obvious that there is at least some level of subjectivity in the composer in us, or you dissagree with the educational system of UK, Greece and Canada then?

Back on the topic of Punkitititi's composition, his music is possibly not to your liking. But could you tell, in compositional terms, why not? Or could QcCowboy do so?

I wonder what your answers would be.

Just to stop you from wondering.

Did you notice the following sentence: "I can't listen or look at the score. Simply too busy. But I can certainly offer my opinion." And suddently his music is not to my liking? Where on earth did you get that idea, huh?

In other words: I can't have an opinion on something I've not heard or seen. I can have an opinion on a post made by Flint and a situation in YC (and elsewhere, btw. YC is not unique in this).

________________

On a final note. I hope that QcC and Flint has not left the forum (YC) for good... A real pity if they have...

BTW, to what end are you a moderator of this site?

Just thought of answering this one as well.

One thing in this post made me laugh, the tag under Qcc's name :

"grumpy old fart" that one was funny QCC.

You know... and here I was thinking that YC was a useful forum, with people who are offering advice and feedback other than flaming people back and fourth. Oh well... What do I really know, huh?

And why would he feel the need to tell us a random phrase in German? This whole thread is lame. There is no controversy. Real composers with real jobs and real knowledge... well... they don't need to argue.