Leaderboard

Hello guys, long time no see. I have been quite busy and I struggled a lot with this composition, but it is finally over and I came here to share it with all you. ^^ I hope you don't mind me copying the video descrition, I'm to tired to do a custom descrition here. This piece took so long to compose, around 45 hours. The main reason for that was that I got a mental block with it and I couldn't tie two sections of the work. I'm thankful to Carlos Barbé for enlightening me and making realize a couple of key things that I needed to sort out in order to do some progress. This is the last composition I will do for my "Dream Fantasies" set. After some consideration I decided to let the performer decide in what order to play the 3 pieces. I wanted to offer some freedom and let different musicians decide how they understood the whole thing. The piece is filled with lots of references to Nostalgia and A Sleepy Apology, so it can work as a nexus or a summary. This piece in particular is quite abstract, but its main theme is time. What it really means... Unfortunately I couldn't get a better performance because I finished this piece yesterday (31/01/2022-08/04/2022) and the most technically challenging fragment was the last thing I did. So I had vitually no time to properly practice the thing and also the piano where I played is super unbalanced (sometimes you play a key and it doesn't make a sound and in other instances it sounds too loud). But I think at least I got the right mood I had in mind (even though I calculated the piece should have a duriation of around 5' 40", so I played the slow section way too slow, sorry about that haha). Hopefully I will be able to record in my own piano in the near future. Oh, and I played this while having some kind of injury in my feft hand index finger, so yeah haha. And my hand hurted a bit after the loud section with 4ths, I don't know what I'm doing wrong to get injuries so easily. Thank you to everyone who supported me and showed interest. See you soon. 🙂 Also if anyone wants the score send me an email to ivanmusic1886@gmail.com . Although I'm still doing some modifications and even this recording has a detail that I changed in the score (not a big deal tho). Link:

Greetings everybody here! The following is another piece of work in the same set as the previous work: Miroirs et Fleur et de Lune. This work is entitled as Jeux, trying to picture a game of light and dark, switching from dissonance to finally a pentatonic scale, a joy atmosphere at D major. This work is finished in a rush, so... there might be a lot of flaws lol, so please comment on my work to help it become better 😀 Imago_III_V_Jeux.mp3

I disagree, there isn't that much contemporary music during classical music performances today, or most often not anything at all, and todays masses of people still don't go to classical music performances. The fact things could have started that way isn't the reason things are still this way. If people would like the music of Bach or Mozart or Beethoven, for instance through the use of advertisement on television, they would start to listen to it and go to concert etcetera. Your view is highly one-sided. If we would throw out all modern music in classical music scene, have only the music until the 1900 and maybe the music in late Romantic style from the 20th century, do you really think people would come back? I don't think they would. It is far more complex. And why would be people not get Mozart because they don't get Schönberg? You make some huge leaps in your argumentation...

Random garbage is a bit of a hyperbole, there's nothing wrong with watching random garbage on youtube. However, my point was that it is much easier to do that than to read. Active listening can apply to anything really, which was John Cage's argument when it comes to what music really is. Either way, I think it's probably the case that you can make a good argument that classical music has more depth in general, if anything because it's much longer than almost every other genre. You have a lot more time to do things, rather than canning it to 3'30'' so it can fit on a radio program. So potentially, this is can be the case. On the other hand, I guess we have to decide what "depth" means, since I think you can make something very short and still have a lot of depth to it (Schubert's Winterreise is a good example, as are many character pieces from the late 19th century. Something like Schumann's der dichter spricht from Kinderszenen has quite a bit of depth to it, I could argue, and it's only a single page long.) Another reason why classical music has more potential depth is because the composer is a lot freer in a classical composition, than in almost any other genre. You can select from any number of instrument combinations, you can select from a whole lot of forms, or make your own. Never mind the musical language itself. There's a whole lot of available options, in fact, almost too many, which leads to a lot of younger composers having option paralysis.

Yes I guess you are right, I guess my advantage is that I do know how I made the piece while someone listening for the first time comes with different expectations, especially compared to the other pieces. Anyway thanks for your advice! I think about it.

Oh, I did not mean to offend you, but I think your other works worked better because you had less going on in parallel: Rather homophonic, but with more emphasis on the melody and (really delicate) harmonies. In this work I have trouble keeping up with the individual voices and feel quite lost, hence I suggested you to make it more comprehensible by removing some of the irregularites. Or, to answer your question: No, I did not notice the constant repetition in the pedal. Visually, I could spot it in the score, but not aurally. You may have introduced ideas which are hard to spot by ear.

First, and last warning. Do not do this, I am not insulting you nor your music and I'm tired you always doing the same thing. Instead of using arguments, you just go for personal attacks. They're different things for different people. There's plenty of people out there who think Rach's concerto is dreadfully boring and they'd rather do something else. In fact, I'd say this is the state of classical music in the west in general, it's on the decline. And the video does address this pretty well, specially with the example concerning the sex pistols. The idea that anyone should just accept, without question, that X or Y are just "masterpieces" and Z composer is just a "genius" really rubs me the wrong way. I say let things fall where they may, if these things are so genius and those masterpieces are so great, then why are people like you so afraid of letting people make up their own mind on them? None of it has anything to do with Marx, at all. In fact I'd say it's quite the opposite, since the video talks about the importance of people's individual circumstances and their choices, very much something communism doesn't like (the bit about China is about the disaster of Mao's cultural revolution and how it destroyed the western classical music being made, caused people to kill themselves or get tortured, etc.) But since you're so afraid of watching it, I guess you'll never know huh? I'm 100% for people's freedom to do what they want to do, including criticizing supposed musical "masterpieces," or having different tastes or ideas. I'm both on Johnny Rotten's side AND on Babbitt's side, in that the "mainstream" opinion isn't automatically rule of law, no matter what anyone says. I'm a skeptic, I need to see and judge things for myself and I don't just buy anyone's ideas at first glance, no matter what kind of "authority" says them. I know you're an authoritarian, so obviously you don't like this, but one of the fundamental pillars of our modern western world is the idea of freedom, both of action and of thought. And, for all the disdain for Marx you both have, you still love using Ricardo's "Labor theory of Value" (LTV) that's so central to his economic analysis, when it comes to music. However, we know that this is false since effort does not equal value. You can spend all your life writing a piece, or practicing Rach's 3rd concerto, but that doesn't automatically mean it has any value. You guys are all about value, specially cultural value, but in reality it depends on what people actually do, what they like and what actually gets any attention. And it turns out that any given pop star or rock band (in other words, the cultural mainstream) is -VASTLY- more successful and popular than any mainstay in the classical repertoire. A songwriter can outclass Mozart, Beethoven AND Rachmaninov in sales and popularity, many many many times over, and we see it all the time. We've seen it for decades now. So they're more valuable to people, despite the music being "less effort" to make. You can then say that the classical warhorses are "timeless," but are they really? I mean as the institutions that prop them up slowly die due to people not engaging with classical music due to many of the points the video makes (one of which being classical music being hard to access with people of low income, as well as the idea that classical music is only for the rich or "the elite."), we may find that just like thousands upon thousands of composers have been lost to time, so will eventually these "geniuses", if people ultimately don't find what they did valuable and rather engage with other things. Classical music is a tiny niche, that's slowly getting smaller and smaller. That's also one major point of the video, and the point is discussing what can be done so that more people can get into classical music. Saying that their tastes are garbage because they don't appreciate Mozart does NOT motivate people to listen to Mozart, it only causes disdain and apathy.

Yet it is is almost insulting to suggest to the trained musician that anyone can do just as well. Rachmaninov's 3rd ist a masterpiece of craftmanship and very nice to listen to. Yes, there is a difference in value between minutiously crafted composition, be it classical or jazz, on the one hand and a (pop) song I just made up on the other hand. Orchestration is an entirely separate challenge, something you do not have to care about if it is just you and a guitar. A well-written sonata requires training no songwriter knows about. Nobody in their right mind would call this distinction elitist.

Are you disappointed you're not getting the kind of response you thought (hoped) you would by posting this? That you got another guy, before me this time, not buying into the Marxism and watching an hour-long video with irrelevant tangents about China? Sounds like it stings.

Anyone can also draw, paint or do brain surgery with any kind of budget or training as well, though. I've got a pizza cutter and YouTube tutorials. That doesn't mean everyone can do it well without the kind of training, dedication, materials and also — genetic predisposition requisite to excelling in these areas and that's where we run into the problem. One may not necessarily be wrong for enjoying things which don't really live up to these sorts of standards, but to suggest that ACTUALLY, they're totally just as valid because (insert political gibberish here) is where the issue comes up and you start to see that these people actually are just revolutionary ideologues seeking to destroy longstanding crafts/tradition that rose to prominence organically, precisely because they produced great results and actually came to represent entire cultures and ethnic groups of people and which said ideologues find humiliating in their inability to replicate it. Music may be more than Mozart. Music is also pornodeathgrindcore. People who like the latter aren't "wrong" but to suggest that anyone saying Mozart and not "Entombed" is what should be the cultural standard of craftsmanship, aesthetic and musical ability for aspiring composers to aim for and exceed is an "elitist" which really they mean "chauvinist" here, is totally unreasonable and is motivated by subversive, revolutionary worldviews. Pretty sure that video even has a "cultural revolution" segment...

Oh, I was just confused that you would expect others to be able to join in the discussion of this sixty-two minutes long video without mentioning what exactly you found compelling. As nobody seems to have the time to comment on a two-minute piece by a fellow user, this seemed rather expectant to me. But really, it was just meant as a snarky comment, nothing more. On topic, because I made it through the video: I think he is conflating many things. Why does he mention the social standing of musicians in Mozart's time while completely glossing over how in Liszt's time already, musicians were basically revered celebrities? How is commercialized pop music elitist? To the contrary, merely academically succesful music(have you heard "The Sandpiper") seems elitist to me(as he acknowledges in the case of Babbitt). Pop music is commercialized entertainment. He really conflates entertainment and art. How can you mock the West for being snobbish about Classical Music and fail to see that all this vain materialism and performance of the Rieus of this world is what drives China to investment into Classical Music? No, it has to be some Confucian tradition. What I think: Music has never been more accessible to youths all around the world. Open up Spotify, type in 'Debussy Préludes“ and you are there already. Just as every other craft, music requires (expensive) training and dedication. Go around and ask people: They do not care about music at all. Why would one dedicate so much time to music if it were not for thinking it to be higher art? Why listen to 62 minutes of Tentacrul if not for that? And this is true for many other things. People also like to flaunt their belongings. Has he ever heard people talk about expensive(not fine) food, sports or anything like that? He really conflates enthusiats(as on this forum) with people who just pretend for status. To top it off, he himself writes purely academic music and in this very video talks about ancient China for ten minutes which is not even tangentially related to anything else he talks about. It is almost comical how he has his gripes with the correlation of wealth and Classical music while uploading hour long video essays to his YouTube channel.

Probably a bit late, but as a guitarist myself I still want to comment on your piece. The guitar accompaniment is definitely playable and makes good use of the register available. Harmonically however, the piece is a bit bland and quite "barebones" to my taste. This is exacerbated by the simple form and accompaniment figures, although I suppose, this is more a matter of taste. Maybe you had something simple(like a folk tune) in mind or were cautious because of the lack of experience in writing for the guitar. On a related note: I am quite partial towards your other works in the vein of Mozart and Haydn(especially your Piano Chamberto). Maybe you should try your hands at a Neo-Viennese tune, perhaps a witty minuet, scored for guitar and clarinet.