Leaderboard

Hey, this is pretty good.

Personally, I think the whole "artistic freedom" thing is a bunch of baloney invented by composers to justify their music when its not received well by audiences. If you can't have the sense to make your music accessible to an audience, then why bother? Without them listening (as opposed to just hearing) and understanding the music, there whole performance is valueless. The composer only has so much control over the music. It is not our job to shove our idea down the audiences throat, but rather to give them an avenue to experience something through music so that they can come up with their own ideas about it. This is the beauty of music, imo, because a work that is crafted well and sounds good can lead to multiple interpretations of its meaning. Despite the fact that, say, two audience members heard the work at the same concert or two conductors performed it slightly differently, the music will still be new and fresh and giving new meaning every time it is played. Those are the true masterworks. They may be intellectually over the head of the audience, which isn't necessarily a problem, but what is most important is that they identify with the aesthetic content to a point where they can latch onto it and say "Yes, this," whatever that this is, "is what I'm experencing now. But wait! There it is again slightly differently!" (As the development section starts, for example.) AntiA is spot on when he talks about the human memory. Music that is not memorable will become irrelevant immediately after the applause is done. We need to strive as composers to make our music relevant to the audiences that listen, not just ourselves. If we only write what we want, then our music will fall into oblivion and the art form will truly die.

Sorry long weird rant. No art has ever had a "common tongue," in reality. It's just an illusion through tradition and reinforcement of culture. People were outraged at Stravinsky when his musical language was -EXTREMELY- conservative by our standards. I mean, people being outraged at something different is nothing new it happens everywhere. The problem is I think that tons of people even if they enjoy modern music don't believe in it enough to stand behind it. It's always with some bullshit shield of it being "too complex for normal people," or "unreachable aesthetic for regular audiences" or what have you. Well this is bullshit. I like modern music because I like how it sounds, it's really dumb like that. And I got into it because someone pitched it to me so that I was curious and began to listen. Why is this bad? It's like sharing someone's favourite dish, or movie. You pitch it somehow, always. Where's the problem? If your best friend told you "Hey man listen to this" and you hated it, you'd still give it a lot more thought than if you heard it against your will as part of some stupid mix concert where you were going to see mozart, not whatever was new. In a sense, pitching the music to the audience is friendly and I think it's a nice thing to do for ANY kind of music. I would appreciate it even if it was a style copy. But then again, I want to support my fellow composers above all else, I want to hear what they think. It interests me. And honestly I used to think that music had to "stand on its own," and that much can be true for the final opinion you have on something. At the end of the day, I still go back and listen to some of my favourite stuff not because they were recommended (and many times nobody told me either,) but because I think they're great. That's, I think, art standing on its own. But I changed my mind about the concert situation, where I used to think that no explanation was necessary, that people should naturally hear music and judge it based on just hearing it... But nothing can "stand on its own" if the only chance it has is trying to do some kind of magic trick where people magically fall in love with it with only hearing it ONCE. Specially using very different aesthetic, ideas, whatever. I realized this is impossible. The only way anyone (even me) would get to start listening and enjoying things is by diving into the aesthetic, the ideas, and so on. You can't pretend just by hearing a piece once you can do this, or even by hearing ten pieces, or whatever the number. If the person isn't curious, if it's not sparking interest, then it's just pointless. People also never just "listen" to music, they bring all sorts of scraggy into their perception. They make all sorts of judgments. I'm guilty of that as everyone else, and to be honest I only got into modern music when a friend suggested I should look for something modern that I liked. And that little sentence turned my world upside down. Look for something I liked? What? But I can't POSSIBLY like all that noisy scraggy! But what if there IS something I like? Maybe I'm missing out? No that's weird. I told him I wasn't sure at the time, but the question tore me up inside since I honestly didn't know. So I researched, I studied, and I began listening. For months all I did was listen to all sorts of 20th century music, listening to everything I could get my hands on, if it was from the 20th century I would listen. I remember the first thing I did was go out and buy myself a Hindemith CD, because I remember having liked something from him but because it wasn't Bach I told myself it was garbage. I felt somehow that I was kind of "making up" for all my stupid prejudice. And I found his music so amazing, that it inspired me to keep looking and that my friend was right after all. What was even more retarded about the Hindemith example is that my girl was at the time singing in a choir that did only modern repertoire, and she gave me a tape saying "here's a song I like, it's from a composer called hindemith" and I asked if it was modern music and she said yes. Just by her SAYING that I thought I was certain I wouldn't like it. Fortunately my ears are less of a dumbass than I was. I actually told her I didn't like it just kind of to keep up with my opinion that modern music was trash, even if deep down I was lying to myself but I wasn't sure. I also remember saying stuff I didn't like Stravinsky, when I hadn't even heard a thing he wrote at the time I said that! Oh, yeah, and the friend I mentioned? He ended up being my first composition teacher in Germany. But I digress, what I'm saying is, I like to say I don't give a scraggy about my audience when I write my music. This is true. But this doesn't mean that my audience is irrelevant, far from it. They're so relevant, in fact, that I'm willing to do anything outside of changing my musical vision to help them! If explaining the piece will do it, perfect. If they need me to play a couple of chords, crack some jokes, whatever, then fine too. Point is, leaving people in the rain pretending that they're supposed to be cognitive magicians is stupid and we should stop.

Daniel, some unorganized notes on your score: Your dark string writing at the beginning is ingenious and will come out very well. In the woodwinds and brass, I have seen Arab numerals (1. and 2.) more than Roman numerals (I and II) for marking where only 1 instrument plays. IF! you intend the timpani to do a "drag" pattern (like a snare) rather than measured sixteenths, it is better to notate like this: On page 6 you put TWO octaves between the violins. Writing them in 8ves is fine but putting an empty 8ve between will make it sound "thin." I would write the 2nds an 8ve higher as well, OR (my preference) bring the 1sts down an octave. Don't worry they will still "sound" very high as they are in fingerboard positions on their tense E strings. I am not a violinist but writing them as high as you do currently, looks excessive to me. BTW, I would also reinforce this melody with a flute or oboe, either would work fine. From page 6-9 the harmonies you use are wonderful. On page 9 those are high entrnaces (especially horn) for pp, and the horn goes even higher. The flutes will be more or less inaudible, playing in their low register, against brass. The return of the theme on p16 is very nice. However - again, the flutes will be inaudible here. In a tutti (strings+brass+winds) you can't score the flutes in their bottom octave, it usually won't sound. I also think that the solo trumpet, throughout, will not be anywhere near as quiet as he in this mix. Turn the trumpet sound way up and see if you still like the part. I really like the trumpet on p21 however. On page 25 you've got a nice setup but I really think the EH needs reinforcement. At the least, write the cue in the clarinets, and let's see, bassoons? And in rehearsal if it's too weak you can assign those instruments to help out. I have to say I did not like the "war" section AT ALL. It is much less imaginative in all ways - harmony, composition, and orchestration. Although, I did like the way you gradually orchestrated the decrescendo on page 76-80. However, I dislike the whole thing, to the point where I would split off the "Noche" section and have that played in concert by itself. It's truly wonderful, and self-contained, and has some really dreamy/jazzy moments. I am printing out that section of teh score to study your harmonies :)

hi I like the dark tone of the opening. Listening jst to the sound I can hear you didn't write the slurs yet. Its a bit artificial sometimes yet. I heard (very early in the piece) a kind of trumpet (muted?) witch sounded unnatural (maybe jazz or pop patches while i'd expect a more classical sound?) . Maybe because of the lots of reverb? I usualy like my MP3's dry. Makes it more easy to listen to the details. I imagine you are looking for a blurry effect, with those nice harmonies. It has a movieish tone. One orchestrational thing. At the end of the night there is a oboe+clarinet (?) melody emerging from the massive chords. I would make it a single instrument, preferably oboe... But this might be matter of taste. What I liked about the Night was its slowness; but when the Revelation started I was a bit bored. Because of the slow harmonic progression. I wanted to hear something new (like the faster string section thereafter) Ok, I'll stop commenting. I like your harmonic language, its a bit similar to mine :)

... or going to a website that has a track record of being skeptical about pseudo-science, which this clearly is. Honestly, Nazis? GTFO.