Exercise in Minimalism

Hi all,

Haven't posted in this part of the forum in ages. Anyway, was really bored and really lazy today and while playing around with some sounds thought this particular random combination of them didn't sound too bad :) Let me know what you think. I don't even know if its minimalism. Tell me what you think please :D

Regards

Pravin

Exercise in Minimalism.mid

A great Painter by the name of Picasso painted in a very abstract style called Cubism, people often think that it's child's drawing, saying that even a kid can do it. But, how many people actually know that Picasso was also a master of Classical and impressionist paintings?

samething for you, don't go for the avant-garde, when you haven't mastered the basics, stick with tonal music, and study it well, when you are done with tonal music, and you are sure that you can write tonal music. then you can go off explore into stranger territories, like serialism, or minimalism, or whatever. The point is, everybody needs to have that solid classical training first, otherwise nobody is ever going to take your avant-garde pieces seriously.

N/10

Hey Schubert,

I don't dispute what you say at all. I am well aware that Picasso had the ability to paint and sculpt like Michelangelo at the age 14. I too wondered why his painting style does not in any way represent this amazing technical and classical skill - before realising it was as much a matter of form as it was of substance.

I don't consider this work serious. If you notice I referred to myself as 'lazy', I referred to the piece as 'a random combination', I titled the piece 'an Exercise' meaning it wasn't really anything laboured or complete, I posted it under the 'Experimental' section. If anything, all I was really trying to see was whether people thought there was any merit in it, even from the most trivial of perspectives. Perhaps it was a gratuitous post, and needn't have been made; either way, if you can spare the time to listen to the piece, you should at least comment on its features, even if you don't agree with (or in this case, have mistaken) its purpose.

Furthermore, I disagree with you about the necessity of classical training. While I of course advocate the same position, that those who are classically trained have the authority to veer from the track (as my signature can attest to) towards newer and more abstract types of music, I do not think you can label it as a necessity. Ingenuity (of which there is admittedly very little in this case) should be given as much free reign as much as one should be imposed to study the classics.

This was a trivial experiment, intended only to see what a different style of composing could amount to. I do not think it warranted your 'N/10' rating, and I think you could provide more constructive criticism in the future.

Pravin

i have no further comments to make, for i am not specialized in the minimalist style.

A great Painter by the name of Picasso painted in a very abstract style called Cubism, people often think that it's child's drawing, saying that even a kid can do it. But, how many people actually know that Picasso was also a master of Classical and impressionist paintings?

samething for you, don't go for the avant-garde, when you haven't mastered the basics, stick with tonal music, and study it well, when you are done with tonal music, and you are sure that you can write tonal music. then you can go off explore into stranger territories, like serialism, or minimalism, or whatever. The point is, everybody needs to have that solid classical training first, otherwise nobody is ever going to take your avant-garde pieces seriously.

N/10

That's BULLSHIT!!If you never let loose your imagination and creativity you will never be able to write any interesting music...It's like you don't allow your kid to draw his first experience with the crayol but you give him a pencil to draw his first study of the cube at the age of 4....you just kill the feeling...I say EXPERIMENTS COME FIRST then when you are able to realize your lacks and the simple act of creating isn't fulfilling anymore because you want to express genuinely not only randomly THEN COMES CRAFTMANSHIP!If you miss experiments you'll be stuck in mediocrity and will never be able to go over borders cause you lost the magic of inventing during the process of learning how to be regular...Believe me,I've seen examples...I think the only thing that is important is to invent...(not so impressed about this piece though...)

A great Painter by the name of Picasso painted in a very abstract style called Cubism, people often think that it's child's drawing, saying that even a kid can do it. But, how many people actually know that Picasso was also a master of Classical and impressionist paintings?

samething for you, don't go for the avant-garde, when you haven't mastered the basics, stick with tonal music, and study it well, when you are done with tonal music, and you are sure that you can write tonal music. then you can go off explore into stranger territories, like serialism, or minimalism, or whatever. The point is, everybody needs to have that solid classical training first, otherwise nobody is ever going to take your avant-garde pieces seriously.

N/10

Freeze for a second, do you know what you're saying?

your basically saying this "Do it my way, it's the right way. And it's the only way!"

that is one of the most arrogant statements I've ever heard on here. That wasn't even a review. If it's not in your style, then don't comment

Upstart, Minimalism isn't my forte at all. But I will say this, I think it's great that you're experimenting with other things :D . That's one of the best ways to find out different things.

Keep composing!

Will K

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the affirmation! I'm glad that you share my sentiment. Thanks also sparing the time to listen to my piece and provide encouragment. I look forward to hearing more from you guys, and also reviewing some of your work when I can spare the time. Thanks,

Regards

Pravin

I actually quite liked the song. The whole point of minimalism (at least, from my point of view) is music that is repetitive without becoming boring or annoying. As the music keeps repeating, different things begin to stand out, and it becomes this trance-like experience of truly getting to the heart of the music. I'd say you've accomplished that here, for the most part. The parts weave in and out, coming in at different times, and have different textures, which helps keep things interesting. I found the piece as a whole very enjoyable.

There is some truth to what ShubertTrout said, however, though I'm not sure it applies to you, (especially judging by your signature) but rather to avant-garde composers in general. I feel it needs to be said. Remember that much of the reason for music (and art in general) is to communicate an emotion or story to the listener. So it's comparable to spoken language. Experimenting without knowing theory well is like speaking without knowing a language. When you're young, experimenting is all you can do--you go "goo goo ga ga" and cry and that's about it. You're still communicating, however no one would go to an auditorium to hear a baby speak about his/her inner desires. Once you learn a language, however, you have a much more remarkable ability to communicate EXACTLY what you are feeling without misunderstanding. The same is true with music. In the beginning, you are merely experimenting, however you are not as successful a communicator. Once you learn theory, then you can use it to your advantage to create music that has a better chance of saying exactly what you want it to say. So avant-garde is like when a person who is fluent in a language starts breaking some of the rules in order to better communicate his ideas. (Let's face it: rules can be restricting sometimes.) Avant-garde is comparable to a person making up a new word, or leaving out certain punctuation, or having run-on sentences to increase the flow of ideas; I say it is comparable to this because the person is USING the language and then ADJUSTING it to better communicate...he/she is NOT simply going "goo goo ga ga". I hope I'm making this difference clear. You have to know the rules to break them.

Hi Charlie,

Thanks for your comments, they are much appreciated. As to what you say I am in complete agreement. I strongly believe in the same principle, of music as a language, and theory as the rosetta stone to unravelling the language (or any other suitable metaphor). I agree with you as well about the limitations one can feel (frustrating, to say the least) of being musically inclined, at least aurally, but having no theoretical knowledge to back it up - so it is very much as you describe i.e. (without pejorative connotation) the babbling of a child. There are so many times when the melody is in my head, on the very tips of my fingers so to speak, and my inadequate knowledge of theory means my ability at conveying that sound is often over-wrought, or poorly harmonized. This is something I wish to rectify, and clarify, with time. What a wonderful feeling it would be, to compose something that you could truly say, without restraint, was entirely contrived, every last figure, note, dynamic, in your head before it was on paper. Or alternatively, an extension of your very self, no longer with the score as the medium, but purely yourself, and the sounds, as the expression of that emotion...your emotion...

Nevertheless I still think there is a point to the disagreement, which is despite all the wonders of the language, sometimes the most expressive feelings, and/or moments of rapture come to us completely inexplicably in the form of a phrase, or apt metaphor, or in the case of music, a particular melody, or unique chord progression etc. etc. That can often be due to a lifetime of labouring, an intuitive genius, but quite often as well - sheer accident. Experimenting has that virtue, for it allows moments like that to originate - without almost any prior experience, theoretical or the like. While at the moment, I believe that in the inital phases you are very much 'testing' the waters of sound, seeing what suits your style, appeals to your sense of what is 'pleasurably sounding' etc. I think experimenting in itself, rather than as a means to an end, has merit. For example, sometimes I often like to throw a random assortment of notes on the page not having any real idea what it will sound like. Then I will play it, or replay it, and it will spark an idea in my head which will be contrived, but its origin was through pure accident. I enjoy those moments - its a trick I think many composers here could attest to using.

More importantly, as least for myself, experimental in that and similar ways encourages me to try to tame, capture, or recapture the sentiments and 'bottle' them, so to speak. Whether they be by accident, or my own, they all inevitably originate from me, and how I choose to bring them together. If it wasn't for such short cuts, I don't think I would ever have (at least in the beginning) the self-assurance to ever put pen to paper, or note to score. I would preoccupy myself with the idea that private study is the only means to becoming 'good' or being 'able' to compose; yet, one of the liberties of music is that it is (to a large extent) intuitive, and one needn't have rigorous training at all, or feel the need, to make music that is at least mediocre. Anyway, I think I digress from your original point....

In all respects though, I am in agreement with you. I have said plenty of self-deprecating comments already in previous posts in this thread to demonstrate that this was not entitled 'an exercise in minimalism' for pretentious reasons of appearing avant garde, but simply to see what others thought. It was slightly selfish, somewhat humorous, by no means serious, and entirely experimental. Yet I don't wish to belittle the enteprise to mere 'go go gaa gaa'. Hopefully these are all positive steps in the right direction.

I take your advice to heart though. I would have more readily accepted SchubertTrout's advice had he addressed me more directly. The fact that he began, quite dismissively, with general trivia about Picasso as an example of some artist 'principle' that he wished to generate by analogy I found to be particularly arrogant. Then again, I may have misunderstood his intention, as it is so easy to do with these short posts. I commend him, however, for having the decency to reply. Which, as many have experienced in this forum, is sometimes the hardest thing to recieve.

Anyway, that is all I have to say. Thank you for all the response, both positive and negative. It has been quite distracting, but nevertheless entertaning :) All the best,

Regards

Pravin

very nice Pravin!!! liked, be it minimalistic or whatever :P

Something bothers me about the posts made by SchubertTrout. He claims that exploring, "experimenting" with music, is a bad way. I don't agree with him, but; that is not the point. He still makes that comment when he later on says he knows very little about experimentalism, minimalism etc.

What is bothering you so much that you directly attack Upstart because of the pieces genre?

Do shut your Trout.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to the song. I've read that this piece was just written for fun, good :P

But! There is always space for improvement etc.

Even, if this song is meant to be minimalistic, I find it a bit too minimalistic, a bit as if you have looped it over and over and over again. Why not kepp that same theme, but "explore" a bit. Now the only thing that changes (in general) is the melody. I somehow feel that the piece is a bit to thin, put can't really put the finger on what.

Btw, nice rythem.

I haven't listened to the piece yet, but I also disagree with Shubert-Trout. My personal love is for experimentation, and I probably wouldn't get any joy out of composing otherwise. Just because a piece is experimental or different doesn't mean it isn't just as good as other pieces (A.K.A, Rite of Spring).

Unrelated: I personally love minimalism (Especially Steve Reich.)

Something bothers me about the posts made by SchubertTrout. He claims that exploring, "experimenting" with music, is a bad way. I don't agree with him, but; that is not the point. He still makes that comment when he later on says he knows very little about experimentalism, minimalism etc.

What is bothering you so much that you directly attack Upstart because of the pieces genre?

Do shut your Trout.

Trout is most likely a very confused person Sai. He thinks he's better than all of us. And as a result, he believes his word is final and that it cannot be wrong. This is blatant and arrogant thinking.

So Sai, I agere with you ;)

Trout is most likely a very confused person Sai. He thinks he's better than all of us. And as a result, he believes his word is final and that it cannot be wrong. This is blatant and arrogant thinking.

So Sai, I agere with you ;)

Uhm, just a small thing, SAI is HALF my name... it's as if i'd call you Wi :P

Anyway, nice that you concur ;)

Uhm, just a small thing, SAI is HALF my name... it's as if i'd call you Wi :P

Anyway, nice that you concur ;)

I know Sai, I just type Sai instead of Saiming, saves time that way. You can call me Wi if you want, I've always wanted to be named after a nintendo console ;)

Cheers!

I'll chime in on this discussion:

I found the basic idea interesting... but it was rather pointless.

I think a solid basis in classical training gives one craft - the ability to explore the material in many ways.

It would be interesting if you worked on this texture some more. It had promise. You could try by inserting notes here and there from an upcoming harmony, as a sort of preparation. I was sort of hoping your piano part would do just that since it was rather prominant in the texture.

I know Sai, I just type Sai instead of Saiming, saves time that way. You can call me Wi if you want, I've always wanted to be named after a nintendo console ;)

Cheers!

Well then I'll call you Ill :P

I like it.