Leaderboard

I really enjoyed this, especially the trio section! There are a few things I would change though. For starters, saxophones are a must in a march! The tenor could reinforce the baritone parts (which should, as ben mentioned, be identical parts) and the baritone sax, the bass end. The alto could take on different roles including the frilly bits, the melody, or the off beats depending on what is needed where. Although I thought your melodies and harmonies were tremendous, I found your counter-melodies in the baritone to be seriously lacking. For the most part it was an uninteresting held note with a few notes in the middle - make it more exiting! Also, in the section where you have baritone and trumpet on the melody, take away the trumpet and add trombone to make a bass end melody instead. Trumpets needs to rest, and the bass end needs to get exited. Great job!

I have a rock next to my bed, and it's music. I don't know anything about "tunes" but I know a lot about geology.

I can't stop to listening this.

mapping, gentlemen, don't forget mapping! genes are scientific term, music is not. to explain music in scientific terms one must complete mapping of these two different terms. as transcribed in Godel's famous theorem - science is mathematics, or it's model is arhithemtical and formal, music is not - to explain music in aritmetico-formal (calculus) system means to map every X and Y of it to values like 1,2,3,4 and so on. and it would be all fine if not, well, incompleteness theorem - there's no proof of complete formal system being consistent derived inside that system, i.e. no scientific operation (if it strictly formal, and we know other type of science) would ever complete the mapping of 'music' onto scientific terms and derive its complete outfit, there will always remain a term that is not provable, nor true nor false, inside the formal system. so we always need meta-mathematical things like sociology, philosophy or analytic psychology to account for things that fall out of formalisation. and the truth of that acount cannot be scientifically proved or disproved. so, to say that music is somehow obviously totalised by science of genetic formalism, is to completely ignore the godel's theorem and invalidate logics, that is to say that some phenomena can be totalised by formalising it, is to say that formalism in question admits some inconsistent term and fall into intellectual bad consience. the same goes for environmentalist approach, if it wants to become formalised. so, be happy, no matter how far we go in scientific research (unless logic changes), there will be always some new real to marvel us with it's infinity. for science to be consistent it has to pay the price of being incomplete. and that is to be cherished. so, no! to all you totalisers and ideologists.