zbbcczbccbz

It's a piece for piano, and I guess it's called Bounce. It's slightly waltzish, but not quite. Comments are appreciated! :lol:

BOUNCE.MID

W00t! New stuff by Jeff Ball :lol:!

Anyways, this is a neat piece - it's kind of reminisant of your "Dance of the Maniac Child(ren?)", rhythmically and harmonically, but this piece takes it a lot further - and feels a lot more "complete". There seems to be some neat development stuff going on, but I can't really tell since I don't have a sequencer in front of me, and everything goes by so quickly :P. Some of the stuff I picked up sounded like motifs of your older pieces, though I don't know if that was intentional. Jeff, man, you really should get some people to play your piano stuff - they are simply too cool to exist solely as midi/sampled audio. Great stuff!

Originally posted by Jeff Ball@Aug 10 2005, 03:15 PM

It's a piece for piano, and I guess it's called Bounce. It's slightly waltzish, but not quite. Comments are appreciated! :lol:

Ooooh, Barber-esque arpeggios around 0:35, I like! (That's Samuel Barber by the way).

I like the upbeat tempo and the rather helter-skelter motion of the piano. The almost after thought ending there was cute too. :-)

This piece is too atonal for my tastes. I did not enjoy it and found that it led nowhere. I apologise... I do however think you have potential to be a good atonal composer. Best of luck with your composition ventures.

The music of Jeff Ball... ATONAL? I've got to listen to this! *giggles* (I know Jeff will take this in the good humour in which it was meant. If not, I will cry.)

I shall try to listen tomorrow, when I have the inclination to turn on a computer with a sound card. It's 3:00am (reminds me of another piece of music... or was that Mr. Inglis or Mr. Whalen?... actually, I wrote one called 3:30 am. Must dig that out, as it was quite a nice miniature.)

I really like the harmony/melody between 2'46' and 3'50". :blush:

But I like it more when played an octave lower, but that's just a personal thing (I can't stand it being constantly in the "higher" register) and...

... with more pedal! :mellow:

Overall an A++

Cool.

Somehow, even Jeff Ball's less tonally centred pieces make total sense to me - including this one.

Even so this is anything but atonal.

Nice. Bouncy.

Was there a small pardy on 'Daisy, Daisy' at about 3,15? Maybe my ears deceived me.

Well, it's funny. I agree with Jonathan though, too atonal for my tastes.

:O) (==== Look! It's a clown!

Like most things on this forum it sounds very video gameish. So I guess it doesn't have to really go anywhere and do anything. If it wasn't meant to sound video gameish then I might suggest making it do something.

I really enjoyed your piece - it did sound very bouncy and had a quirky side to it.

However to address some of these posts - this piece is most certainly not atonal, in any way shape or form. There are moments of polytonality, lots of quartal harmony, and also quick modulations that can throw your sense of key off - however it never loses a sense of "tonic". The harmonies in this piece are no more daring than something you would find in the Debussy preludes. Honestly, I don't see how saying "its too atonal, I didn't like it" is constructive criticism of any kind - if you can't say anything useful, just don't post. It can be extremely frustrating to work hard on a piece, only to have it casually dismissed with subjective comments.

I also don't think it sounds video-gamish - ironically because the harmonies are a bit bold for video game music. But I do think it sounds fun, playful, and a little joyous. Your use of quartal harmonies and unexpected key shifts adds to the pieces quirkiness and overall playfullness. The ending also fit well with the piece. Good job!

I loved this tune. It was fun and mentally stimulating. great work, keep it up!!! :D

Honestly, I don't see how saying "its too atonal, I didn't like it" is constructive criticism of any kind - if you can't say anything useful, just don't post.

In that case, just rename the forum to "Get Your Compositions Postively Critiqued - Warning, don't be honest unless you have happy thoughts". If you can't deal with criticism than don't ask for it. Everybody's tastes aren't the same and it is quite clear that nightscape's post was referring to my earlier post. I still hold that I did not like this piece of music for the reasons previously given, but that doesn't imply that Jeff is a bad composer. In fact I even stated that he is a good composer. If you want me to stop posting, then I will, that's not a problem, but I won't only post when I enjoyed a piece and I'll explain why I didn't like it.

And just so that there isn't a double standard, stating that "its too atonal, I didn't like it" is the same as stating "I really enjoyed your piece". Both are completely subjective, so don't criticise someone for their post and then do the exact same thing.

Well thanks for all the feedback!

You know, without negative criticism, nobody would have gotten anywhere. There's only so much you can do by being nice about things. What Nightscape was referring to was usefulness, which is something completely different.

Having beethoven1986 say "I loved this tune. It was fun and mentally stimulating. great work, keep it up!!!" is just as nearly useless to me as saying "I thought it was atonal and lead nowhere."

This is basically (I just read) what cavatina said.

Now, I have a question, since this is criticism I'm entitled to ask why people have certain opinions. cavatina, why did you think it was too atonal, and lead nowhere?

Yay, I really liked it. Constantly surprising. * grins *

Originally posted by Jeff Ball@Aug 12 2005, 12:00 AM

Now, I have a question, since this is criticism I'm entitled to ask why people have certain opinions. cavatina, why did you think it was too atonal, and lead nowhere?

I am currently on my way to bed and tomorrow and am flyingto Washington D.C. for a wedding reception later this morning (it's 3 AM!), however I promise that when I get back I'll I'll give you a more detailed explanation concerning what I was referring to in your piece.

Actually, if you read my post carefully, you'll notice that I never say anything about having to say nice or mean things. I was talking about usefulness - it really does no good to have useless comments. At least positive usefless comments can make you feel good - negative or confusing ones can just be frustrating.

This is what you have to say about the piece:

"This piece is too atonal for my tastes. I did not enjoy it and found that it led nowhere"

But there are a few things wrong with this. First, it isn't atonal, and it certainly does "go somewhere". It has a convincing ending, and flows well from section to section, right? Therefore it has to have gone somewhere. Saying that it goes nowhere is somewhat confusing to begin with because it means different things to different people. Mozart's definition of "going somewhere", Beethoven's definition, and Debussy's definition are all quite different yet equally valid.

I don't have anything against you, Cavatina, and I think that you should continue posting. However I just get the feeling that you don't like much beyond the period of the three Bs - normally this isn't a problem, but in a composer's forum letting this taint your judgement of other's works it can be.

I would love to play this song on piano that would be amazing if you could send me a copy of it

Yikes!

(that's a good yikes)

Can I say 'rambly'? That's all this piece is! But somehow I love it! I love the fact that it rambles, I love the sudden key changes left and right and inbetween, I love the incoherency of some parts, the difficulty of the left hand(or from what I can hear), and I love the wigginess it possesses. I don't like the ending, however. For as much rambling and wackiness this piece drags around for 4 minutes, a slow ending like what you have here seems not to do it justice. You're a better composer than I, for being so creative for so long(:D), but I would definitely have done something completely different for the ending. Maybe some rambling down BELOW middle C(haha), and then a crash or something down there to signify the piece has ended.

Have you considered setting this for organ? I think it would create a loverly concert piece. I can see it now, actually, and it verily well works for the instrument. (is that english?) I am an organist, or at least someone who plays the damn thing, and I could definitely see how easy it would be to create a great organ piece out of this. The piano seems to weak in the upper registers to really handle a piece like this that well. If not organ, than orchestra, with tons of flute-work and some great oboe lines. If you're willing maybe I could see the sheets?

Great stuff. Is there more of your work on the site? *goes and looks*

P.S. Not that I really care all that much, but people seem to care a lot about things that are waaay off-topic and that do not belong in someone's personal thread. There is a specific place for these discussions, and I urge that they be taken there as soon as they appear in individual's threads. *hands on hips, with stern face*

I think off topic posts is something this board currently lacks.

So. The blues. Streaking up the league.

Intense piece, by the way Jeff. I enjoyed it to listen to - the harmonies were interesting, however I think I started to get a little ear fatigue by the end. The slow ending I thought was a nice compliment to this, so that worked quite nicely... maybe things with too much energy scare me though. Much dependent on mood, must it be.

That's quite an interesting song. I really like the bouncy feel to it and your chord progressions... well, some more than others.

I think it's a very inspiring piece of music. I guess I wouldn't be able to compose anything that would even sound close to this kind of song.

Good job.

Jeff,

So I promised a more detailed explanation, hopefully this will be it. If it isn

Cavatina, that is an excellent, and certainly a useful post! You have inspired me to further explain my own comments about the piece.

The main problem I see with this is that there isn't enough contrast for a four and a half minute piece. This might sound untrue, since in actually there is an astonishing amount material in this piece. However, most of it is not contrasting material - it simply does not captivate the listener after about 2 minutes. You could insert a slower middle section, or perhaps change the mood halfway from bouncy and joyous to dark and gritty.

Anyways, as it currently stands, it sounds like a rather embellished improvisation. Cavatina may be on to something when he refers to a theme - only I don't suggest a theme, but an underlying motif might do the piece some justice. You do use a few motifs, because they don't occur often enough to hold the listeners ear. It might actually be too difficult to implement this in the piece now, so of course this could all be a moot point. The best thing I could suggest for you to learn from is to study the Debussy preludes (which you are probably already familiar with). Like I said before, his preludes are not in traditional forms, and often lack a theme but contain motivic composition. In this way they are similar to your piece.

And contrary to what others have said, I think the ending is the most inspired part of this piece. I think it is not too abrupt, the momentum slows down nicely, and its quite beautiful.

Bounce is a pretty nice piece, gosh its kinda hard to critique about it, hmm you've got a good ascending and descending melody kinda thing. But you kinda went to far with you seconds, but thats alright becuase you sometimes need em to add a special effect. Its pretty good, I like it. good work, my favourite parts are 2:00 and 3:00 there really good:D keep it up

wow, this was very helpful to me, both sides. Don't worry Cavatina, I'm greatful you took the time to be so thorough.

I guess a do a lot of experimenting, and I don't experiment with more than one thing at a time. I need to be doing more with my music than just one thing at a time. I tend to write in every style, and both comments made total sense, and I haven't really thought about it in such a way before. I appreciate it emmensely.

I've played debussy preludes before, and I'm listening to them now actually. I can hear motives everywhere. I can think of one piece which I wrote using basically one motive the entire time, and it turned out really well. Now I just need to start combining what I've learned by experimenting with everything separately.