TO ALL COMPOSERS!

THIS is probably the most useful thing I've ever read on composition. Thank you StumbleUpon. I think these rules should be learned by anyone wanting to learn music composition.

Thoughts?

hehe.... we had it hanging on the wall in the percussion room for when we practiced. We actually got to play it once... though without penguins

OH GOD WRONG LINK!!! HAHAHAH no THIS is what I meant to post. Sorry for the mixup.

:facepalm: x10

Wow

1st link: :blink: :o that is terrifying!!! is it an actual piece? if it is I want to hear a recording or better yet see a video!

2nd link:Very informative, thanks!! its just the thing I need right about now too!

I love that first link (Faerie's Aire is hanging in the percussion dept. at my school). INFLATE THE CIRCUS CLOWNS! Brilliant engraving.

Here's more info on John Stump:

http://lostinthecloudblog.com/2010/03/13/john-stump-composer-of-faeries-aire-and-death-waltz/

I know this thread's more about the second link, but this is fascinating stuff.

I like both links :lol: The first is unspeakable. As for the second, good advice! The only thing I might disagree with a bit is that overall planning is always in the picture -- there's certainly nothing wrong with it, but sometimes it's good to be more spontaneous as well, in my opinion :) I especially like the Fifth and Sixth rules.

Thanks for sharing both! :D

The first link is a goodie :D I've seen it like 3 years ago and it still never gets old :)

The second was fun to read though :o In fact, most of the rules on there were stuff that I was already following subconciously ;)

Ok, the second link. Nice stuff. I like the 5th rule the most.it has changed my view on and method of composing.

Awesome, both links! :D

I've often composed by the 5th rule, but I usually felt a little bad about it, like I might be breaking some high rule up there I had never discovered in my 4 semester's worth of non-music major music theory 1 and 2 classes!

As for the first link, I have a music video related to that, though it may be misnamed. I'll put in another topic though to stay on topic. :)

I've often composed by the 5th rule, but I usually felt a little bad about it, like I might be breaking some high rule up there I had never discovered in my 4 semester's worth of non-music major music theory 1 and 2 classes!

Haha. Dude you porbably learned more about music in your comp sci classes than most people do in 4 years of undergrad music :P.

I dunno, I'm not really down with these "rules."

Something like: "If you want to move, don't stay in one place." is so tautological that it renders itself meaningless. And the short comment on Minimalism is at best misguided and only one way to look at it.

Alternatively, "A composition is the sum of everything you know and feel about music -- and life." is so broad that it's meaningless. So an etude isn't a composition, because it's not everything you know and feel? What if you hide things?

I just feel like these are empty aphorisms than actual advice.

Haha. Dude you porbably learned more about music in your comp sci classes than most people do in 4 years of undergrad music :P.

I dunno, I'm not really down with these "rules."

Something like: "If you want to move, don't stay in one place." is so tautological that it renders itself meaningless. And the short comment on Minimalism is at best misguided and only one way to look at it.

Alternatively, "A composition is the sum of everything you know and feel about music -- and life." is so broad that it's meaningless. So an etude isn't a composition, because it's not everything you know and feel? What if you hide things?

I just feel like these are empty aphorisms than actual advice.

I fail to see why you think the minimalism comment is misguided. Would you be so kind to enlighten me?

Could you argue that everything you "know and feel" does not affect the results of what you produce if you write an etude? If you hide things (be it IN the composition or FROM the composition) then that could likely be a side effect of some kind of experience of yours - something you know and feel.

I think these rules are simple but they are understandable and a good start for beginning composers. Deeper aesthetic and philosophical thoughts might be too heavy for someone just starting out (depending on the maturity of that person of course). I don't think the one who wrote this had this in mind for someone studying composition at an university.

I fail to see why you think the minimalism comment is misguided. Would you be so kind to enlighten me?

Sure, but don't expect enlightenment haha.

The page says "Minimalism although based on repetition is not static if processes of change are present (as in good examples of this genre)." The first half of the sentence again brings out the tautology - if there is change, there is change. But the parenthetical half really irked me a bit. I'm fascinated by staticness, and I'd argue that there are plenty of examples where the piece changes very little. Sure, phasing's all about the change, but on the other hand it's all about the staticness and the fact that this change comes from a stable system. Furthermore, you'll have something like Lucier's Piece on a Wire or Glass's Piece in the Shape of a Square where very little changes, and what does isn't substantial -- to me it's really about the staticness. I mean, I'm probably reading too much into a short sentence, but I see (small m) minimalism as a major part of composition -- and I feel this diminishes that influence by focusing on change.

And then you have stuff like Glenn Branca and that whole scene, which is also its own kind of Minimalism.

Could you argue that everything you "know and feel" does not affect the results of what you produce if you write an etude? If you hide things (be it IN the composition or FROM the composition) then that could likely be a side effect of some kind of experience of yours - something you know and feel.

Right, but I mean insofar as "You don't need to put a) everything you know and b) any emotion into a piece." When I'm working on a puredata project, I'm not worrying about voice leading (necessarily), or say harmony, even though it's part of the toolset I have. And sure, that's because i'm focusing on other things, like melodic creation or timbre, and that's a conscious choice. But I worry that this advice might lead someone to go "but the voice leading's awful!" instead of looking at what the piece actually means.

I think these rules are simple but they are understandable and a good start for beginning composers. Deeper aesthetic and philosophical thoughts might be too heavy for someone just starting out (depending on the maturity of that person of course). I don't think the one who wrote this had this in mind for someone studying composition at an university.

Yeah for sure.

On the other hand though, I'd rather have a neophyte realize that stuff's complicated and not straightforward instead of going "well, the rules of engagement are..."

Also, welcome to the site :)

thank you - i am about to be able to use a desk to do work for the first time in a while, and this might be something useful to place above it :)

The first link was a funny segue into the link actual. And I agree; I'm book marking that page right now.