Leaderboard

Hey, Guys!!! Just Started working on a new piece. looking to get some feedback (gently, please!!). Its an SATB setting of the famous poem "Go, Lovely Rose", which Im sure most of you are familiar with. This is just the first couple of bars. Its definitely a lot different than my last work, "There Will Be Rest". Once again, I just transcribe what comes through my head. For all of you music theory buffs, you may notice that I make use of the Prometheus Chord or so-called "Mystic chord". I decided that there is not enough usage of it in classical music today. I think, when arranged correctly, it can really add some real distinctive flavor to a piece. Anyways, tell me what you all think. I do have a little bit of writer's block on how to begin the next line, so suggestions are appreciated. thanks. Go Lovely Rose rough draft.pdf Go Lovely Rose.mp3

Seems like common sense to just "write what you want to write..." Seems like common sense that people might accept that you "write what you want to write..." Seems like common sense that people would be willing to hear "what you want to write..." ... Academics out there, please explain what's unacceptable about wanting to learn how to "write what you want to write..." or to expect to learn how to write what you want to write at a school, of all places, even if it happens to lean toward popular music or something else that isn't "modern." Why redirect anyone to write music they do not want to write? For everyone else, yes, we are all free to write whatever we want to write. It's no one's place to sit in judgment of others or to expect anyone to do something they don't want to do... which includes not wanting to listen to and/or write in a "modernist" epoch. So, comments about "challenging yourself" and so forth, well, I'm not the first to say I've listened to many modern works and NOT enjoyed them. How about NOT imposing your views on others if you don't want others to impose their views on you.

I am writing what I think sounds good/cool to me. I didn't think I needed to qualify that really - I thought that was pretty much known knowledge about me. I've thrown away, deleted, and rewrote so many works of mine.... just due to my own displeasure with the way they sound. Doesn't everyone?

Thanks for the advice, it's helpful sometimes just to have a bit of insight into others' processes. Yes, Jason, I'm doing the standard Baroque-style traditional counterpoint.

Music that is from your own culture that you're familiar with isn't hard for you to understand? Stop the swollenfooting presses.

Heh, call it my take on reality. I've said it before, I'll say it again. Our artistic freedom extends to the last listener. So, if you're composing with only yourself in mind, obviously your artistic freedom is whatever you make of it. When we then bring the issue of "who is listening" to modern music, I stand by my assessment... our artistic freedom extends to the last person who listens. If the issue is whether or not anyone is listening to modern works, clearly there are people listening. If the issue is why more people are not listening, this is my opinion on the matter. That's all I have to say about it. Are we taking our cues on the life of Beethoven from Immortal Beloved? Here's a tip. Don't. From what we understand about Beethoven, this period of "seclusion" in his life lasted up to about his Third Symphony! Beyond that, while there were emotional trials to face in life, I believe it is you that is over-generalizing the details to make a point that Beethoven was composing in a vacuum. Quite the opposite, actually. He was actually quite passionate and outspoken on matters, he was social in many respects, and he was not living a life of perpetual isolation as it was dramatized in the movie at some points of his life. While the issues with his nephew's suicide attempt weighed on his mind, he was quite literally engaged with the world around him... which happened to be one of his great fears when he wrote his letter to his brother before writing the Eroica, that he would be unable to be engaged with the world because of his condition. To say otherwise is to mitigate the circumstances that he lived with and overcame. To say Beethoven composed in a vacuum is, quite possibly, the most ridiculous thing I've read in this thread. As to your other points, Jason, I have to say that taking the aristocracy into account, there was a far greater consumption of music in that social class than among the peasantry as well. What I mean by this is that "minstrel" music was a far cry from what a "Rock Concert" is today. People arrive in the hundreds of thousands to see a Rock Star perform live, and if you're Michael Jackson, multiply that number by a hundred. Still, with communication being what it was in the 18th Century, there was a far greater demand by paying attendees for the art, and there were plenty among the commoners that would, if they could, attend a symphony orchestra concert. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. Today, the level of complexity and artistry in these "common", "middle-class" events where music is performed is just as viable as the complexity of a "modern music concert." There is no distinction to make now between "art" and "popular" the way the distinction could be made in the 18th Century (atrociously, of course, because the distinction is unnecessary anyway beyond the trivial discussion we're having here). Quite frankly, I'm blown away that this is being glossed over as though it's broadly the same now as it was then - another generalization that appears to ignore a great deal of differences in the WORK PRODUCT (not just the emergence of a middle class) and the consumption of it - it's not even close, not even in the ball park. Sadly, I think some of the academics out there approach it with this same, grossly over-generalized misconception. I might vomit if I continue hearing it construed in this manner.

This is awesome! Quite savage yet very well put together and with some tremendous climaxes. Trance Macabre is definitely the perfect name. I can sample it decently for you if you want, but it depends on what software you used to make the MIDI file. Any .mus or .xml files?

SSC, please stop being a pretentious hack. That's no way for a so-called "respectable" composer to act, k?

Just because I don't share your musical tastes doesn't mean I'm not challenging myself. I give things a chance, and if I don't like it I don't like it. Of course I'm going to label it all crap. It's based on my experience of modern music. It's impossible for me to sit down and listen to every single piece written in the last 100 years, so I listen to what I can and form an opinion based on that. Maybe my opinion will change in the future, but for now my opinion is that I don't like most modern music. And just because I don't like your music, doesn't mean music isn't important to me. You seem to have the idea in your head that if a person doesn't like every single thing ever created in the world of art, that makes them lazy or whatever. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but music is EXTREMELY important to me. I don't know how many ways I can say it; I give everything a chance, and if I don't like it, I don't like it. It doesn't mean I pretend it doesn't exist, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean I don't listen to other pieces. I'm not going to lie to you; I don't actively explore information on modern music. That's because it's not of interest to me. I'm not going to try and convince you that I'm right, because I know that would be useless. You have your opinion and I have mine. But don't try and say that music is unimportant to me. I don't give a damn what you think about my tastes or lack of, music is the greatest thing on this planet IMO. I don't care what the genre is, where it was made, when it was made. Yes, some styles interest and connect with me more than others, but reality check time; it's the same with EVERYONE. I doubt there's a person on this planet who can say they liked every single piece of music they've ever heard in their life. If everyone liked EVERYTHING in art, art would serve no purpose IMO. Opinions is what makes art, and if everyone thought exactly the same way, what would be the point of expression?

Good start! I think your view of the history of classical music, western speaking, is a little flawed. Classical music, from the time of the earliest periods up till today, has always been a 'reactionary' art. The contrapuntalists of the Renaissance reacted to the simplicity of the period preceding them. The early Baroque artists reacted with simplistic monophony to the rich counterpoint of the Contrapuntalists. The early classicists, with their focus on brevity and form, were a clear reaction to the perpetuo moto that is highly illustrative of the Baroque. Etc. The only thing that was built upon is the 'perceived' musical theory laid down in the process. This is no different than today, really. That said, the last thing to correct in the above is your view on form. Through each period of classical music, composers have created, disposed of, and completely abandoned forms left and right. I could make a list of forms that would stretch from New York to Los Angeles of just the ones that have been abandoned between the Renaissance and Romantic periods alone! This really shows a lack of understanding or knowledge of modern music... totally. Your not wrong, at all. And as far as I can see, no one here (or anywhere, as far as I know) is saying that music doesn't 'effect' one emotionally. However, that said, I think that your sort of displaying here the problem with classical music today. It's not so much the 'pretentiousness' but instead the vehement disregard for anything post 1920 common at all levels of music from musicians to composers. Instead of just passing off anything post 1920 as being something you hate, I would recommend actually taking the time and listening to the music. There's a LOT of modern music that is worth listening to AND taking in. I'm not talking about the stuff that regurgitates Beethoven or Brahms or Mahler either. Venture out of your box a little bit - it's not as bad as your making it out to be nor is it something to cower in fear OR lash out against in vehement anger as many in this thread (and elsewhere on the forum) have done.