Leaderboard

long time ago song time ago

This is my third orchestral composition. I used Cubase 10 Pro and Miroslav Philarmonik 2. I hope you enjoy it! Let me know what you think! Υoutube Link:

I've been in a pretty sunny musical mood lately (listening to a lot of Mozart) and came up with this prelude. It's a basic A-B-A with the B section being a minor mode variation from the A theme. Hope you enjoy!

day one - Flow 1.mp3 Hello. Hope everyone is doing well. As the title says i composed this in 20 minuts as I am experimenting between quantity vs quiality since there are some studies that mention that you should focus on quiantity so i thought i would give it a try since i am really slow at quality. Would be happy to get feedback on it Thank you very much.

I extended the submission date of the callenge to the 19th of May of 2023. I hope some people will participate because thus far only 2 people. 😕

This piece is part of a longer piece of orchestration, which with my current estimations it will reach around 45:00 - 50 minutes of orchestral work. The main theme of the entire composition is based on the myth of the Holy Grail and knights of the Round Table. There are many dark themes in the whole music piece, as well as moments of epicness and grandiose. This particular piece that I present here (and which i finished recently in my DAW) is more emotional, sad in a way but with moments of epicness bursting through it and giving an urge that moves the composition forward. There are melodies towards the middle to end which give a resolution to the build up tension, yet leaving us with a feeling of anticipation (regarding the plot) as the knights are lost in between the worlds of the myth and search for the Grail. The quest goes on... I would be thankful to receive your reviews and opinions of this musical piece. I attach also a score transcription of the orchestration.

I present the first five Symphonic Sonatas - beginning in reverse chronologic order. Symphonic Sonata No. 5 in Bb

Hi Daniel–Ømicrón, You write, and expressive yourself very well. I do not yet have a score of this work. Scoring and publication is the next major project. Yes, your phrase 'develop and branch off' is exactly what I am trying to do. That you will not forget the motive is pleasing to me! Then, it is no longer 'my motive' or the motive of the music, but rather, our motive. I have read your feedback a few times to really absorb exactly what you mean. I appreciate your balanced feedback. To solve the tension by the end of the work is indeed the ultimate goal. The greater the tension, the greater the challenge. You are right - I ought to view and engage with the other composer posts on this forum. Kind regards, F. Adebiyi

Hi @Left Unexplained, Very enchanting music here! (I use the word enchanting the third time but I have to use it here!) I do agree with @Rich that the passages are a bit episodic, but the orchestration obviously cover it, or rather because of the episodic quality so it's so varied here! I don't mind being Penelope to wait for your posts for long since everytime you come up with amazing music! Henry

Nobody has to push the boundary by any means. In the nature of competition, how would you determine which piece to choose? What other way can we find distinction to choose the “Number 1” composer in a pool? My question: how would this piece compete with two full orchestral scores in a competition setting (one of them being a 13 minute exploration of dozens of timbres, rhythms, and musical moments)? Perhaps it was a flaw in the competition to leave things so open, but we were asked to write what inspired us from the provided tracks. This guy did that, and that is what is important. He also is proud of his music and enjoyed writing it! Nobody is criticizing this aspect! What is also important the tantrum I have read in this whole thread because he was not a winner. I explained many reasons why his piece may have not been chosen *in a competition*. I also explained the way he handled the outcome was negative. He is no better than other composers and should find happiness in himself and his writing. He does not need to be a winner to write music that satisfies him. He is the one who submitted to competition where his piece was going to be ranked. His piece was ranked. He did not like the results and criticized the process. He came to vent, chalk his music up as a masterpiece, and get mad at the judges. I explained his piece did nothing in it to compete or bring out his unique voice. Nobody has commented on this being a “bad” composition because that would be unproductive. There is some real feedback in this thread and generally there is support from the peers saying things like “I actually did enjoy your piece.” He just didn’t write music that could compete, and you can’t flaw me for recognizing this when the piece was submitted to a competition meant to decide a “winner.” (Keep in mind, I say all of this while also having lost the same competition. There is also some conversation of the comments from judges being too harsh; a competition can be a learning experience for personal growth. You do not have to listen anything anyone says if it goes against how you feel and doesn’t meld with you to grow. If you would like to become a composer that wins competitions, some of the harsh criticisms probably stand some merit. The comments are all pick and choose in how you want to move forward. But yes, some probably could be more productive and supportive.) P.S. I am always offended when people come to reply to me and only choose parts of what I have said to reply to. There were 3 more paragraphs in the message you replied to and some of them had addressed exactly what you said. I would love to have a conversation, but please do not respond again unless you can respect the entire message I wrote explaining my thoughts.

I find this comment difficult to understand - for several reasons. One is, unless this was played live, one's tied to the sampled articulations available. As for monophony, the harmony is well implied in the melody as is often the case with a melody instrument. Why does one have to "push boundaries" or try to outdo the likes of Beethoven or Mozart or Adams? If that was an essential requirement of the competition it should have been stressed. On the strength of what you've said here, a goodly chunk of what's submitted here generally would be carp (typo) which in most cases it isn't, especially for the many beginners or those of limited experience. How many compositions presented here aren't in normal rhythms and diatonic? You won't find many. (I know all mine are 4/4 but that bears no relation to what happens in the score. I'd personally be happier if music wasn't turned into a combative sport but understandably some creators like a challenge. It depends on why we practice our art. It's why I rarely join in. I'm always open-minded to criticism good or bad but constructive, in regards to balance, development, scoring is always helpful because I'm open to revision. So one has to accept that judgement is only opinion - as when someone submits a piece here and asks for feedback. What's also confused me is [edit] I can't reconcile [/edit] "What I see...." with "I have not listened to the track." Try listening to it. Cheers.

Dear Peter, thank you very much for your detailed review! Yes, I guess there are several enharmonic spelling issues in my score. I'm not a musician and I compose in a piano roll in a DAW-software. When a piece is finished, then I transcribe it into a score in MuseScore. My almost sole source of knowledge about music theory are some short videos of Gareth Green from the YouTube channel "Music Matters". I'll try to learn more about enharmonic notation in future. K.R. Alex

nobody owes you respect aside from respecting your rights. If you feel like you deserve more respect, that's your problem and if you really cared about getting genuine respect you would try to adapt to the world around you rather than attempting to adapt the world to your needs and self image.

Very nice. At first I thought it was a bit too cinematic for me but I listened on anyway and found it excellent in every respect - orchestral balance, orchestration (very varied, held my interest easily) and its episodic nature was engaging. It might as well be a professional recording of a live performance, such are the production values. A most pleasant listen. Cheers.

Hi, sir. I would have thought that since the author's name here is "Symphonic" perhaps it was just referring to a work of his. Just read the comment made in regards of that though, haha. • Do you have a score of this? In my honest opinion, I am still in minute 7 but all I'm listening sounds pretty much CONVINCING. You have managed to make a simple small motive entertaining enough to last quite a while, and the way you develop and branch off from that is done quite decently in my opinion. I can tell that at least in my case I will not easily forget this motive. I kinda like this too. Minute 15. Sir, you must have a score of this. I really hope you do. I thought I just finished your second part. The third one starts powerfully, but ends in an abrupt pause that I'm not sure whether it convinced me or not. The section that continues with a different structural motif doesn't convince me that much. I would say it needs some polishing overall. By 21:30 it has returned tangentially to the backbone motive. By min 29, I'm completely absorbed, wondering why some passages still fit to me even while they consist basically on repetitions of the same chord. You walk dangerously but masterfully in that line between what I'd consider excessive repetition and abundant use of certain stuff. It's impressive how you managed to keep the tension all the way to the end and how you did solve everything. I'm confused, and amazed somehow. I do encourage you to post more here, seen that you have a quite good amount of music of your craft to show. I would gladly invite you to have a look at other users' posts too, since they probably want to comment their pieces or see others' points of. In any case, congratulations for this, and thanks, since it was really a pleasure to listen to this symphonic sonata. Kind regards, Daniel–Ømicrón.

here i hear no striving for effects or a desire to explore musical constructs merely for the excuse of exploring them nor a need to worry whether or not these tones deserve any particular appellation or title and no reason to do anything other than appreciate (enjoy) the logical and artistic flow of this work. Schubert's piano music, which has been described at times as 'boring' is brought to mind. Schubert, that great master, 'boring'? of course not! that was a tongue in cheek complement pointing the lack of flash or showiness in his music and so i apply it here in that sense. yes, 32 minutes is a long time but the impetus and raison d'être that i sense throughout seems all of a piece and holds thing together quite well. the final section beginning around 29 minutes is very effective and to the point. a symphony? nah...most of those do not conclude with wonderfully quiet and subtle tones such those presented here.

Hi @Symphonic, Thanks for your reply! What do you mean by a synthesis between symphony and piano sonata? The varied timbre of a symphony is not quite featured here for me as a symphonic one. There are different moods here but not symphonic. Symphony for me has different timbre featured as in an orchestra, and to be named sonata the whole music should have means to be linked as whole instead of bunches of different pieces. I don't think the naming works. I can name a piano quartet a "String Quartet" by only using the name's intension too. But not its extension when the name includes communicable meanings. There is indeed no "strict" definition, but not wholly without limitations on using the terms too. For me musical connection can include melodic, motivic, rhythmic, harmonic connections which make the music linked as a meaningful whole. What passages do you think there is a wealth of symphonic elements? I will listen more attentively there! The music to be "in the moment" is crucial. But to have a meaningful whole and cohesion isn't contradictory to the first goal. Mahler has many "moments" too, but he linked them by themes, motives, rhythm, harmony, timbre etc. I love this kind of discussion! Henry

I might try these...lmk what you think. I think I'll need to adjust my voicing on my C7 chord

Hi @GospelPiano12, Just brainstorming, e.g. the first bar can be a I-IV64-I progression, b.5 can be g minor, b.6 c minor! Henry