Leaderboard

This is my first attempt (excluding some best-forgotten teenage stuff) at writing a concerto. The style is my own blend of Classical and some early Romanticism and perhaps a dash of Baroque, but I wrote for the modern valve trumpet. Admittedly, the tessitura may be a bit high, frequently going up to the 8th and occasionally the 9th harmonic. Any comments or feedback would be most appreciated!

Wow then I would get several of them for my works! My Clarinet Quintet is 62 minutes long so it will get 2 of them!!

We staff have decided that it might be a good idea to open the awarding of badges up to the members, not just the staff. The staff aren't perfect and can sometimes miss some good opportunities to award badges to members for some of their excellent or distinctive content. So if you feel like you have been overlooked for an award you deserve - let us know! Tell us which piece you think deserves what kind of award/badge and why and we will consider granting it to you. You can also suggest awards for other fellow composers' works! Refer to the following list of manually awardable badges. If a badge doesn't exist for your particular achievement you can suggest new badges/awards in that thread:

This is my second piece from the Spring Trilogy, April. It is the most easy-going of the cycle. It begins as a gentle waltz but it gets more energetic and drammatic. After a short recapitulation the piece ends surprisingly in dark contrast between bright pizzicatos and low, murky tremolos of the cello.

Hell yeah brother

How about we just ban AI and trust that people are honest, and if people find out that it's AI, they get temporarily banned. This way, people will be afraid to post AI content and not post any.

I don't think we should be Draconian about policing this. I think the policy should be no posting music composed by AI, but I really think it would be a mistake to start policing and interrogating every post and assuming it's AI until proven otherwise. If there are indications that a piece might be AI (e.g. no score provided, telltale signs of Sonus, posted by someone with no prior history on the forum, etc.), then it makes sense to inquire further into it. But demanding proof of authorship from every composition would be a drastic overreaction to an issue that has, as far as I'm aware, only actually cropped up once here so far. I'm against AI compositions on the forum, but I'd rather waste my time once or twice giving useless feedback on an AI composition than chase real people who are posting real compositions off the site.

There gonna be this one guy who’s probably treating the badges like Pokémon

I present to you the new badge - The Colossus of Prora

Hallo @PeterthePapercomPoser, I have created a PNG which could be used as basis for a badge. Some considerations: The original photo can be found at Wikimedia Commons under https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20-07-06-Prora-RalfR-DJI_0120.jpg. Please check whether it can be used concerning the license conditions. I have nothing against a „Collossus of Prora“ badge, but I would remind that this building did not have the best reputation because of its „problematic“ history. Originally erected by the Nazis as a huge holiday resort for their „Kraft durch Freude“ (Strength Through Joy) project. After World War II it was used a long time as military barracks, first by the Soviet Army, than by the East German Volksarmee. Since the mid-1990s, it stood empty for a long time and was exposed to decay and vandalism. Now it is (at least partly) renovated and houses a hotel, apartments etc. A more detailed overview can be found at Wikipedia under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prora.

how about, "better than th..." oh nevermind

Upps, the "Colossus of Prora". Did you mean something like that?

Hello everyone, I recently updated a little draft of music for string quintet on the incomplete works forum and I just developed it into a full piece. After some thought, the section felt somehow like a developed theme, so I composed a main theme by using some of the musical features found in that draft I composed. The piece is an elegy and has the following sections: [m.1~m.9] Introduction -- The introduction was composed by making use of the most important harmonies of the piece: Cmaj, Cminor, Dbmaj and Gmaj. [m.10 ~ m.25] Main theme -- Main theme in C minor. This theme is in 2/2 (cut time). It works as a period but, in this case, both statements end in a half cadence (the second has a stronger modulation to G). [m.26 ~ m.40] Development section (original draft) -- Developmental section which starts with the main theme in Cmaj. This section is repeated once and it is in 4/4 (common time). [m.41 ~ m.51] Restatement of main theme -- second part of the main theme repeated once, this time ending in a perfect cadence (with picardy third in last chord). I am considering repeating also the first part of the theme in the restatement. Somehow I feel the development lasts for long enough as to justify a complete repeat of the initial theme, but I am still not sur. Any suggestion about the best thing to do is welcome! I think the atmosphere fits that title of "elegy", but it is also too hopeful at times so I am not sure if it is really an elegy. Please, let me know if you have any suggestion for the title! Also, I am not sure about the use of dotted notes for those moments in which they need to cut the phrase a little earlier. Would there be a better way for notating that? Thank you! As always any feedback is more than welcome and hope you enjoy it!

Hi @Cafebabe! This is a nice classical sonata! The thing that bothers me when listening to this at first is the really bad balance between the melodic right hand and the accompanying left hand. The left hand should be softer and the melody in the right brought out more to be in high relief. Before, the only way to make this happen is to use MS Basic Soundfonts and use velocity values for the right hand. But I don't know if you know about a recent trick I learned in writing piano music in Musescore Studio 4 using the Musesounds Piano. What I do now is I write the piece for two tracks of basically two separate pianos - one for each hand. I go to the layout options and have each piano displayed with only one clef in one staff rather than in a grand staff for both. Then I bracket them as if they're one grand staff but each retains its own individual identity. This way I can give each hand its own dedicated dynamics and volume, reverb and other settings giving me more control over what is the most prominent part of the composition at any given point. I also noticed that you don't have any dynamics in your piece at all. Maybe you didn't find it necessary, and it could be argued, it is more historically accurate if its meant to be played on a period instrument. Musically, I find the retransition back to F major at the end of the exposition a little abrupt and forced. Another thing is that I'd expect each theme in a sonata to have ample time to speak before going into transitional figures. This would usually be done by giving the themes a full period, double period or sentence form which you don't do and it makes the themes seem like they can't stand still and start to flit about try to run away from themselves before the listener has even had a chance to absorb them. Also, when the development section starts, it seems like it's just a chord progression without really any relation to the themes. It makes me question what, if anything, is being developed. Although I had a lot of critiques of this piece, I did find it an overall enjoyable easy listening experience. Thanks for sharing!

87053bd8f2cb48d184ee054407d37bb8.mp3 Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated. Please note that some of the grace notes are written like they are due to a better playback performance. Any advice on what the genre is? When it was just the first piece it was a Bagatelle, but now I’m not sure

I have already uploaded March and April from my Spring Trilogy, here is the finale, May. Since this month is traditionally rainy in Slovenia, the beginning has some features of rain with various aleatoric timbre playing on orchestra, while cello brings the initial melodic motif with its various transformations. Music becomes more "down to earth", more energetic and passionate. It continues to bounce between these two contrasting characters and ends with cellist playing improvised harmonics of a basic tone of c with unisono violins and violas while lower strings play some low ranged aleatoric pizzicatos.

As far as the 3rd part of this poll, If we decide to regulate, I think requiring / encouraging the composer to give some insight about how they composed the piece, and their motivations of the composition should be enough.

As someone involved in education, AI has been a hot topic. I have a pragmatic view that AI, for good or bad, is ubiquitous in our society so it is better to control how it is expressed in the forums where you can set explicit guidelines and consequences for abuse rather than ban it entirely and have it go underground. I would advocate creating a dedicated subforum for AI music and be clear that AI music must be declared as such can only be submitted/discussed there and a clear policy that violating these guidelines can lead to suspension or banning from the site. Also in the end, if someone wants to pass of AI music (or any other creative endeavor as their own), it's really hurting them more so than others. They are not improving their creative process so any praise/feedback is hollow and meaningless. At least it's not stealing someone else's work and passing it off as your own (which has happened to me). I am of the mind that AI generated art in all forms will always be inferior to human efforts so in the end who really cares?. If AI every got to the point there were really think it is on par or superior to human effort, well, then great since a masterpiece is a masterpiece (I am just doubtful that AI will ever be able to achieve this).

Coming back from the dead just to vote on this. The core of any artform is the creative process, and the use of genAI to generate music is anti-process. It focuses instead on the result, and advertises itself as a "facilitator", a "helper", or something to remove the "hassle" of the process. It misses the point that when passion is involved, the creative process is a hassle that one ultimately enjoys. There is no art without passion, and all genAI does is vomit results to the passionless. A creative process comes about through the passionate development of a skill, and it fosters further understanding of said skill. The result is one particular target of a process at a given point in time: it comes about as the inevitable conclusion of a process. This decades-long shift of focus to the result is what makes genAI seem legitimate, because it's the endpoint of a logic that defines art as the object instead of the craft. It's made of the same cloth as the commodification of art, and the reduction of everything to "content." It's a corporate point of view, which can't conceive of art in any other way, and only seeks to expedite what it wrongly perceives to be nothing but a very slow assembly line. I am a composer because I know how to make music, and I learned how to make music by making music. A prompt engineer did not learn how to make an illustration, they learned how to tell a particular machine to do so. One could argue that prompt engineering is a craft, because it isn't absent of human involvement. But where it fails is in never being directly responsible for the result. With genAI, nothing about how to directly reproduce the result is learned because there's no process involved, only instructions by proxy given to a glorified blender. What differentiates genAI from art is the absence of a skillful process directly related to the object. Therefore, the point, and what makes one anything from a hobbyist to an artist, is the process. It just so happens that one cannot go through the process without inevitably coming to a result, which informs more process, and so on and so forth. That's how an artist grows.

I was thinking about the ice that's formed here on the ocean. How in foggy conditions it looks like it never ends. I'd like to go sit at the beach of my cottage with an omni mic and just stare into the fog and play this... This is also a slight experimentation on both microtonal tunings (aesthetic) and in player's freedom. You'll note that my recording sounds a bit different to this (and was actually played on steel string guitar), but that's the point :D. I often feel that the player is not given enough free reign to interpret what they are playing - not enough free reign to bring themself to the stage. So this is a slight complaint to that I suppose. All thoughts, feelings, colours, landscapes, gibberish, textur 21st of jan.mp3 es that come to mind please tell me.

I see them. They're the tiny little arrows attached to the accidentals (see image below).

Hi @PaavolaPyry! It does sound improvisatory with all the sudden chord progession but I like it. Nice playing as well! To me it sounds like a Lute Baroque prelude in more modern chords. I am sure @PeterthePapercomPoser would like the piece as well as he wrote a lot of microtonal pieces, and @Thatguy v2.0 wrote many great guitar pieces. I hear some of the microtones but don't see them on the score, will you add them on the score? Thx for sharing! Henry

Kia Ora Alex, Nice piece. A few suggestions: Although tabs are quite common for notating guitar parts in pop styles, classical guitar pieces are generally only notated using standard musical notation. While you can still include a staff of tab in your score, it might be more conventional to remove it. If you do choose to include tab, please, PLEASE get an actual guitarist to write it out for you. The tabs generated by notation software are almost always shite and the one that Musescore generated for you is no exception. It has suggested some ridiculous unplayable shite (like in bar two, who the hell has hands large enough to press both the second and seventeenth frets at the same time?!) which render it's inclusion in your score quite pointless. All in all, this is a good start. I'm excited to see where this piece goes next! Ngā mihi, Archie

Hi @Alex Weidmann! I am no expert in guitar writing so I can't tell whether it's playable or not, but I would say the whole music would sound like something written in Chinese instrument Zhongruan (my fav. Chinese instrument due to its cute look lol!). It's also a plucked string instrument like guitar: Thx for sharing! Henry

Hello! Here's a funeral march type piece. Form and harmony are very static and simple, in Fm with an A | A1 | A2 form. Hope you enjoy, and as always, any comments are welcome 🙂

The two staffs is a neat thought, but try out a single staff. There's a few moments where the higher or lower bits are on the staff that isn't higher/lower (Mostly thinking about measure 25 but it happens a few other times that aren't as easily solvable) and it just feels off. It would also solve a lot of issues of notes that are on both staves, which I would have no idea what to do with if I were to have to play it. As for if it's playable, I am no expert. But I can say that a lot of it looks suspiciously like you just threw in the 6 notes you needed and didn't think too much about fingering. Which, to be fair, is also how I would do a sketch. If you can, you really want to find someone who plays guitar and run it by them. Eveen having them just take a quick look is incredibly helpful (I know from experience). I've linked a pdf or two from when I was assigned to write a guitar piece so that you can also hopefully use them. (They are attached and are very helpful as someone who has never touched a guitar) As a piece itself, I like it! I am frankly not a great critic on pitch collection or form, but overall it sounds nice!

I think we are discussing more on the authorship when a composer is REALLY the one who composes the work themselves. As long as the AI doesn't interfere with the composing process it should be allowed, so AI programs like Cantai or Note Performer are no problem at all. Henry

Here's the thing, though: "AI", by itself, is pretty much meaningless. For decades, people have been using "AI" to refer to the programming controlling NPCs in video games, for instance. Sometimes, "AI" is used in a sense that covers any machine learning or neural network application. More recently, "AI" has caught on in the context of Large Language Models like ChatGPT that take a prompt as input and then use some minimization function over their corpus of training data to predict what the most likely response to that prompt would be. The broader class of software including LLMs and similar models that output images, sounds, etc., are called "generative AI". And because "AI" is such a hot topic now, anyone whose software product uses anything resembling a neural network is going to be sure to advertise it as "AI". In my opinion, it would be better to use more precise language and, when we mean LLMs, say "LLMs". But I suppose that ship has sailed. In any event, clearly what is under discussion here is whether music composed by a generative, LLM-like software should be permissible here - and as I've said, I don't think it should be, since this is a composition forum and there's no sense in posting a piece of music you didn't compose. But by the same token, if you composed the music, then of course you should be permitted to post it, regardless of whether you used tools that are advertised as "AI" to produce the audio mock-up of the music you composed.

I’m kind of on the mix opinion here for me AI music seems very dishonest and rather very silly in its own part. It should have no place competing against real human work however, though I am completely foreign, even encouraging the use of some AI music software’s. (stuff like cantai.) that allows for the performance of a human work to be perfected. Thing number one: I definitely feel like that a performance using AI is not as bad again this is not regarding about the performance of music. This is a regarding about people’s compositions. Thing number two: it should be unfair to have AI as a wild thing in competitions. Sure they could be in an events. Events are perfect for AI as that nobody is competing against anybody, however, though I feel like top priority should be given to real people’s human works first AI could wait. Competition competitions and AI do not mix unless if you have a AI only competition My final thing to say though is, I am very mixed about having a AI only sub if we do have one sure I wouldn’t mind as much and it’s not a huge problem but again you’re not composing music at least there should be someplace for AI music here and to have at least a very strong filter that can be unable to get rid of it for those who do not want any part of it things to go against AI is definitely some anti-AI software to tell if someone is using it for ill intent. At least some knowledge of a piece of music can work as proof and even if it’s a short thing, then at most a score to accompany with it. Honestly for contests score in audio should be mandatory unless if stated otherwise. Thank you.

I got my piece to play for today 😁

Me and the computer "wrote" this using quaternions where a = duration , b = pitch , c = dynamic, d = articulation.

Hello Everyone, Thank you for your support in my recent compositions, I really appreciate the great feedback I always get from y'all. Today I have a piece that I really needed to write for myself. I've recently been under a lot of stress, with demands and expectations of other people really weighing me down. The struggle to meet those expectations has hurt my self-esteem. This piece is simply an expression of that feeling, and ends with the hope that I will conquer it all.

I've now moved on to Chapter 4 of Persichetti's "20th Century Harmony" which is about quartal chords. The prompt for this one was "10. Extend the following string-quartet opening. Feature pentatonic melodic and quartal harmonic writing." Thanks for listening and I'd appreciate any comments, suggestions, critiques or just observations!

Parking lot, parking lot, You are what all I've got Please give me a shot And don't act like an AI bot!

This sounds like an interesting and inventive subversion of a waltz. I'm curious why you describe it as two movements, though. I guess you're considering a new movement to start at m. 106, but it's in the same tempo and style. Also, you probably know this, but the stuff in the right hand at m. 158 and forward would normally be written as tremolos. I assume you wrote out the notes so that the notation software played it back correctly, but in such cases I'll usually prepare separate versions of the score for playback and for display.

skip to 3:30 if you get bored of the vibraphone intro lol

This piece is for a concert later this year. Just started on it tonight, and it's the first time I've written for guitar. So I'm sure it's probably unplayable! N.B. I decided to use two staffs to make it more readable. Think it would look very cluttered on a single staff.

Thank you for organizing this event. It has been wonderful to listen to such a variety of proposals.

Hello hello! I've technically known about this forum for a while, but it's time to finally post! I'm hopefully going to start being more active around here to keep myself accountable and continue working on my composition skills To start this out, I wanted to share a piece I've been working on! It's still a WIP, (Basically the only thing in this file that is actively unfinished is the ending and I want to rework the start), but other than that it's a pretty complete piece. I wrote it for a solo-violin assignment in my composition studio, and because I got really mad at a choral concert I went to because they sang a piece called "Shalom" that had nothing to do with the language of origin or culture of origin. Anyway that's a rant for another bit. Here's the little klezmer!

Hi @jejrekmek! I don't find the intro boring at all; on the other hand I find it very religious which reminds me of Buddhist or Hindu music. Your singing is like chanting which is religious as well, and the chords, like Peter said is other-worldly. After it it's more in the world but the accompaniment reminds me of Gamelan music in the interlocking repetitive structure. Nice use of some microtones as well. The section after 5:30 is so interesting to listen to, it's almost like a musical example in a World music class with those drums and percussions! The rhythm throughout the piece is fascinating, again reminds me of world music! The ending is really calm to listen to like many of the pop Japanese music! I really enjoy this one, thx for sharing! Henry

Until I switched to Dorico from Finale over a year ago, I had never heard of Elaine Gould or her book. I do have a PDF of it and it’s certainly interesting, but as with any manual that purports to provide rules, I’m not going to agree with all of it or even most of it. Notation is a very personal thing, and when you consider the scores notated by folks like Feldman or Shapey and many others, there are many “rules” that get broken all the time, yet the music does manage to get performed, and generally performed very well.

Very nice piece, with the cross relations between E and E flat. And very nice performance by Henry, as usual. Well done to both of you!

LoL I am not familiar with idioms at all and thought you guys are talking about Fifty Shades of Grey! Henry

Updated the mp3 with Henry's performance. If anyone's interested, he didn't listen to the mp3 render first 😄 Henry = 🔥

Since this is a composition form, it is difficult to have to have live performances, I will ask this: What are your thoughts regarding Note Performer? @PeterthePapercomPoser @Aiwendil Here are mine: NP has it owns instruments that are used in playback in notation play back. Thus, this is similar to how VST library operates: each library is. They have they own instruments. It cannot replace DAW and those VST. When it comes to mock-ups, composers usually work with in daw. But they could use NP, too. The studio string orchestra that performed my piece was sent a midi mock up with score and parts. I.e. I am fine with a midi mock-up with score and parts (either from daw or using NP). But I am not fine with something like Suno. That is not mock up! I hope this helps

Right because by that reasoning .. if I were to use a VST plugin with AI assisted vibrato modeling or some such thing, it wouldn't be permissible to post.

(Verse 1) Welcome to the playground, where the rules are all a lie You say you want a show, but you can’t look me in the eye Fists behind your lipstick, whispers in the hall You want me to be quiet, but I’m breaking down the wall (Pre-Chorus) You dress me up in sugar, but I’m made of something rough You want a perfect puppet, but I’m calling out your bluff (Chorus) I don’t wanna play in your fight club, Don’t wanna bruise for your fake love You want a winner you can pick and choose But I’m not here for you to use I don’t wanna bleed in your fight club, Don’t wanna break for your fake hug You want a trophy you can push around But you’ll never knock me down (Verse 2) Broken crown and knuckles, you love a bloody scene Cheering for the chaos while you’re hiding in between You want a pretty fighter, but I bite back twice as hard I’m not your little secret, I’m your battle-scarred (Pre-Chorus) You paint me with your rumors, but I’m coloring outside You want me by your side, but only if I hide (Chorus) I don’t wanna play in your fight club, Don’t wanna bruise for your fake love You want a winner you can pick and choose But I’m not here for you to use I don’t wanna bleed in your fight club, Don’t wanna break for your fake hug You want a trophy you can push around But you’ll never knock me down (Bridge) You want a show, you want a scream But I’m the fire in your dream Not your game, not your pawn I’m the war you can’t move on (Chorus) I don’t wanna play in your fight club, Don’t wanna bruise for your fake love You want a winner you can pick and choose But I’m not here for you to use I don’t wanna bleed in your fight club, Don’t wanna break for your fake hug You want a trophy you can push around But you’ll never knock me down (Outro) So ring the bell, let the punches fly I’ll still be standing, don’t need to try I don’t wanna play in your fight club But I’ll survive your fight club.

😁

This looks quite useful and interesting! I have to admit, I don't pay special emphasis on musical engraving at all because I never consider an essential part of composing at all. Henry

I also must admit that I’ve never read or heard about those two books. However, score engraving is an interesting topic for me and I take a lot of care to produce satisfying scores for my compositions. Therefore, that „debate“ should be something for me, too. The only „literature“ I’ve actually read about the art of music score engraving is the „Lilypond Essay“ which I’ve linked here. Even if I run the risk of @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu is thinking that I am a Lilypond lobbyist or salesman (😆, I must think on the „rodeo“ between Henry and @SeekJohn14v6 ...), I am just a Lilypond user, and I’m glad with this notation software for two reasons. First, the approach of writing „source code“ and „compiling“ it into a score and a MIDI-file is the right one for me, since in my everyday work I'm familiar with writing tons of lines of source code rather than using a WYSIWYG-interface. The other, and possibly more important fact is, that the resulting engravings are much more satisfying and similar to old-fashioned hand engravings than the most of the other notation software solutions are currently able to produce. So I had a small look again at the above cited „Lilypond Essay“ and, interestingly, the two books you mentioned can be found prominently in the „(Short) Literature List“. I looked around, if I could find some PDFs, excerpts etc. on the internet – and indeed I found some, so that I can take a view on that books to be able to participate in the „debate“ soon. Thanks for the suggestion!