Leaderboard

The members have voted in this poll; Spring 2026 Competition Poll and have decided about the form and details of the next Young Composer's Composition Competition! As per the previous trend, this competition has no monetary rewards - only kudos and badges. Also in accordance with the results of the 2025 Halloween Satisfaction Survey, we are inviting the members/competitors to participate in the creation of the badge awards that will be dispersed at the end of the competition! So if you have any ideas for particular badges that would accord with the kind of music that will be submitted for this competition and the theme of this competition, let us know in the List of Manually-Awardable Badges thread and we will take your ideas into consideration! Please reply to this topic to declare your intent to participate in this competition! The winners will be determined by popular voting polls! Reviewing and Judging: The reviewing of the competition submissions will once again be spearheaded by our volunteer staff and those who wish to contribute their time and effort to reviewing the entries out of the goodness of their own hearts (and/or sense of fun!). You may use the Official Competition Reviewing Template, or jettison the template and review the submissions just like you would any other piece of music on the website! You could even make your own template! You will be rewarded for your efforts with "Ardent Reviewer" badges in three tiers: Featherweight Reviewer - for reviewing 33% of the entries Welterweight Reviewer - for reviewing 66% of the entries Heavyweight Reviewer - for reviewing 100% of the entries Thank you for whatever time and effort you're willing to give! Instrumentation: as per the poll, the members are free to compose for any kind of trio/quartet/quintet from a Pierrot ensemble to a kazoo trio to a quartet of Tibetan throat singers! Write for the serpent! You may use any combination of 3 - 5 monophonic or polyphonic instruments/voices. Pictures, Photos, Paintings: You may submit a picture, photo or a painting of the landscape you based your composition on. This is totally optional, but if you submit one, please do not use AI to generate your image. However, you may use a screenshot from a game. Or you can use a completely imaginary landscape. Duration: 3 - 7 minutes with a sweet spot of 5 minutes. Deadline: Tuesday, June 2nd, 2026 Entrants thus far: @Fruit hunter @MK_Piano @UncleRed99 @MrBelegro @Luis Hernández @Musicman_3254 @TristanTheTristan @Wieland Handke @L.S Barros @Some Guy That writes Music @therealAJGS Here is the submissions thread for the competition where participants are encouraged to post links to their composition (rather than posting their piece directly into the pre-existing topic - make your own dedicated topic so the members at large can review your music there): We are instituting a policy of not allowing any AI generated works in the competition. Because of this you will be required to detail how you created your piece and submit a PDF score or midi file for the perusal of the staff and members at large. Original compositions only.

Here is my A level composition. I'm doing it roughly in the style of Chopin, but the overall style is just trying to be romantic. The structure is ABA, and the B theme is highly similar to the A theme. Things the exam board focus on are: 'Motivic development, form and structure, harmony, and texture. The time limit is 2 minutes 30, so I'll probably just play some parts quicker next time. Any feedback would be appreciated!Elegy in G#m.pdfWhatsApp Audio 2026-03-31 at 16.37.38.mp3

Yes - thank you for pointing that out!

I will do the thing that is writing something or other for the thing mentioned above, and things. (I am declaring my intent to participate. for those who have to think a little bit too hard to figure that out) ☠️

Let this comment mark my intent of joining this competition. Good luck to anyone who may join and I am excited to see whom may take up arms in this fun little game of music creation!

[INFO DUMP - WARNING ] You play this very wonderfully. Without the score, it is very pleasing to just close your eyes and listen. Easily very romantic, and as you said, very Chopinistic sounding. As an observation, Chopin's Op.48 no.1 Nocturne in C-minor feels like the source for your compositional style in this work; especially with the triplet recapitulation. Now to my raw comments, I have a range of things from literal score engraving and my own interpretation of the score from the eyes of another pianist: First thing from the score is the meter changes. I personally do not think you need to change the meter at all. Since you are imitating romantic style, I think it best to truly adhere to those compositional trends before breaking them. More specifically, the 2/4 bar at measure 5. It turns your 4-bar phrase into a 4 1/2-bar phrase and it only happens once? It is very atypical for that style. To add, you do not restate your opening melodic idea except the very beginning and the A' recap. Seeing the score, it does not imply a strong sense of A-B-A', but instead, a through-composed improvisation session that was transcribed. Even with 2 minutes & 30 seconds for this, I think you can bring the opening theme back to end the first A section, however, by modulating to the Dominant (As you did originally). With the B section, it seems more often than not, the left hand is the only hand doing 12/8. The right hand is still in 4/4 (or 2/2) as evident by all your duples. Just keep the same meter, and add triplets in the left hand, keep the right hand in a simple meter, and just re-add your 6-tuplets or other spots as you originally have. It will make the whole piece look and feel more cohesive to an outside view. Nearing the end, your "Recap" is not as strong or decisive as you think. We hear the opening material/ motif come back, but what about the harmony? Your piece is in G#-minor, so doesn't it make sense to end either in G#-minor or Ab-major? Instead, you never resolved the work by ending on an Eb-major chord, which is the enharmonic dominant of G#-minor. For musical clarity, please find a way to get us back to G#-minor. It is very common to use the END of the B-section as a transition into the opening key. Reference the Op.48 Nocturne I mentioned for this point. Lastly, the meter: You mark Alle Breve with Largo. If your reference Chopin Op.28, no.4 Prelude in E-minor, we see the same technique. If you play this, you need to keep the half-note intact; thus, it should be played faster. Your triplets in the B-section were too slow for the meter you picked. Alright, time to end! A nice work and very refreshing to hear. May these comments serve you well and if you would like to see these comments annotated for visual aid, let me know! Good luck in your exam and keep up the good work!

I'll join

me me me. I intend!

Yo, Since some people have asked about what I'm up to for film scoring I figured now would be a good time to make a thread. Firstly, I am scoring a very cool action/horror film that begins shooting next month, but they are looking to raise some additional funds. Check out this spoiler-free (mostly), behind-the-scenes video (which I also scored). The film stars stuntwoman and actress Alleya Bourne, whose work you may have seen on "The Last of Us" and the film's effects, including the animatronic creature itself are all practical and provided by an Emmy-winning team who have also lent their talents in prosthetics, makeup and puppeteering to Hollywood films like "Sonic The Hedgehog" and "Child's Play". The entire cast and crew would greatly appreciate any support you might able to offer, which you can do so at this link: The Customer - Film and Storytelling | Seed&Spark Oh and you can check out the teaser trailer (which features a heavily-reverbed version of a vocal track I wrote for it) for another film I composed for, a dark supernatural drama called "Crossroads" starring Dave Greason (MGM+'s Billy The Kid) Both will be doing the festival tours in North America later this year so you can catch them in a number of major cities! Thank you for checking it out and all the support the Young Composers community has given me over the years!

Oh reeeeeally... I can't wait to come up with some nonsense

Hello @Fugax Contrapunctus ! I’m a bit surprised and even disappointed that your fugue hasn’t received a single review over the last two weeks, and so I’ll try to be the first one. Perhaps the reason is that most of the members hesitate to write a „I-have-very-enjoyed-your-playful-piece-Thanks-for-sharing“ reply because of your reputation. I’m thinking of your razor-sharp introductions, packed with background knowledge and specialist terms as well as that counterpoint – fugues and even perpetual canons – is considered to be very hard and not everybody is experienced enough to give profound comments. The choice of the subject for your fugue – I think I’ve already watched the video a year or so ago – from the G sharp minor fugue of the WTC1 has captivated me since that particular fugue is for me a distinctive one and one of my favorites (while there are many). The original key of G sharp minor has such a characteristic mystical and gloomy mood reminding me somewhat at Halloween – and interestingly your „Halloween-fugue“ which I have seen on YouTube, too, is consequently also in that key! And even your A minor version retains that pitch nearly exactly in the tuning (A=415) you’ve chosen! Even if you use the subject from Bach’s fugue, your fugue is a completely different one – showing which incredible possibilities counterpuntal composition offers – always having material with which to compose. While Bach’s one has a more walking character, your one has a continuous flow due to the complementary rhythm created by the semiquavers in the counterpoint and the episodes. That made it not as easy for me to discover the subject entries, so that I took the time to look in the score thoroughly and annotate them; I think I’ve detected the following ones: • Exposition: Bar 1 (bass, a minor), bar 3 (alto, e phrygian), bar 5 (soprano, a minor) • as sole subject entry in the 1st episode: Bar 13 (tenor, b minor) • 2nd Development: Bar 23 (alto, a minor), bar 27b (tenor, g minor), bar 29b (soprano, c minor) • 3rd Development: Bar 35 (bass, d minor), bar 39 (tenor, a minor), bar 41 (alto, e minor) • 4th Development: Bar 47 (bass, a minor), bar 49 (alto, e phrygian), bar 53 (soprano, a minor) Now I feel comfortable enough voicing a few points of criticism, which—intended as suggestions— could bring the experience of the listener and the reader of your score to another level: What prompted my “analysis” above was the fact that the subject entries are relatively difficult for the listener to perceive. You have – for example – omitted the staccatos on the last four notes of the subject in all recurring entries. Or to be more clearer, there are no articulation, phrasing, dynamics, pedaling and tempo marks (except the ritardando in the coda) at all. This might be completely intentional, since such annotations were unusual in the Baroque era, but - in my opinion – a human player would always apply that to express its interpretation, and I’m sure that was also the case during Bach’s time. And for a recording from a „software“ it is essential to apply these things to achieve a – more or less – realistic impression and to avoid that the recording sounds too mechanical as it is inherently the case due to the „exactness“ of the midi output generated from the „pure“ score. I have made the experience, that investing effort to articulation, phrasing, dynamics, pedaling and micro tempo changes brings a huge improvement of the realism of the recording and made a piece I nearly was going to throw away since I felt it boring worth to listen to. Since then, I always maintain two scores. One as the „printing“ score to be used for playing from, and one solely for the purpose of recording in the software. I do so with all of my pieces, and the „recording“ score is full of exaggerated articulations, dynamic marks and even micro tempo changes to achieve a satisfying, more realistic recording result wherein I can express my ideas about the interpretation. I must admit, that I have the temptation to take your fugue – if you don’t have anything against -, type it into my software (I use „lilypond“) and add the articulation, dynamics etc. according to my interpretation. I would be excited how it would sound like. (I can’t promise to do so, perhaps soon or in a year or never, regarding the time I find.) A last comment on your score: When I’m looking at it at the first glance, there are some intervals that seem to be unplayable or uncomfortable to be played. I’m sure, that all of them are playable, but you have (while done otherwise) omitted to take over the note in the other hand. This might be better for reading the score for analysis purposes (only). But when coming to playing and especially sight-reading and a note of an interval is written in the “wrong” staff, the recognition pattern that a sight-reader normally uses to identify that interval is inherently lost, forcing the player to identify a single note and add it to the chord/interval being played, which slows down the process. Consequently, such situations require practice and/or memorization, which contradicts the approach of sight-reading and playing the piece “without practice.” Therefore, I very appreciate scores where the chords/intervals are notated as a complete pattern in that staff where it is to be played by the respective hand. I must admit, that such a score looks sometimes a bit „cluttered“ because of the „kneed beams“ and sometimes cross-staff note stems (producing sometimes problems for the collision resolving with dynamics, slurs etc), but if the player finally makes the respective annotations by hand in its score, the readability is reduced, too.

I hope you don't mean that you're composing a solo piano type of thing for this competition... Since we're only doing trios, quartets, and quintets. Also.. are you intending to enter this competition or not? You haven't made that clear from your previous posts..

Hello, I'm looking forward to the new contest and would therefore like to announce that I will be participating. Unfortunately, my favorite among the topics – „Mock-ups, Mash-ups and Medleys“ – did not win the poll, but „Landscapes – Soundscapes“ also sounds very interesting – while also very challenging. The duration of two month seems appropriate to me – not too short and not too long. I think depicting a landscape musically with no more than five instruments might not be easy (though still better than using a solo piano)—usually, painting “landscapes” requires the use of a full orchestra. But let’s see what happens ...

I want to join this competition

Hello, Since the duration of the pieces has been set at around 5 minutes—which I think is very manageable—and I think the evaluation template is great, I’d like to participate, to the best of my ability and based on my knowledge, as a reviewer... Please let me know if that’s okay. Best regards.

I would like to participate in this competition, please

I declare my intent to join into this competition

Hello again! After a few days of chaos in my life, I was sidetracked from getting these comments done. Attached on this reply is a pdf containing my annotations to your Score as well as two pages of comments at the end for simplicity. If you have any questions, I will do my best to answer! PDF: A. Karatzikis - Land of Gods (ANNOTATED).Pdf

Something better. Trio. I am.

Hello, About six years ago, I orchestrated Schönberg’s Six Little Pieces for Piano. I only uploaded one of them to the “Writer’s Block and Suggestions…” section, since I wasn’t quite sure what I was doing. Now I know a little more about orchestration and how to approach different styles. So I’d like to share the orchestrated version of all six pieces. Thank you. Best regards. Schoenberg.mp3 Schoenberg.pdf

Regarding the Criteria for the Contest I presume the rules include " ORIGINAL COMPOSITIONS ONLY" , Renditions & Covers Rejected ?

Unfortunately, I will be busy this time of year. I am hoping that everything becomes less busy for me during the summer. Good luck to everyone.

THIS IS OBVIOUSLY NOT AN ENTRY FOR THE SPRING COMPETION, LANDSCAPES. https://musescore.com/user/96214813/scores/33034298 This is my second nocturne, dedicated to a fellow student from Year 7. He is an extremely talented beginner thus able to play harder stuff. Moderato-Adagio, Db Major, 3 minutes 22 seconds, and 60 bars. Very short, for me. 5 pages of A4, March 23rd 2026-April 2nd 2026. It is in rondo form, with a cantabile theme. As always, my music is NOT AI Generated. The piece starts with the Submediant, a bombastic octave, here, going to un-resolve in to the V of the V. Then, it decides, to go on a weird cadence of that chord progression I have no idea how to describe because I was just chilling and I was like yes! That feel and what. So yeah. And then the dominant with the minor third thing. This rondo form is more like a ABACA type of thing, so yeah that is it bye.

Very proud of you my guy, keep us all updated!

I got "way-too-drunk ragtime" vibes haha, this is great! I think the constant accel and rit added to that flavor as well. Nice work there Peter

Hello I think this is a beautiful piece. The melodic phrases are truly lovely, and while it doesn’t aim for an overly virtuosic style, it does evoke the Romantic era. I agree with everything @MK_Piano says; I think he has a valuable mastery of the piano and this style. I’d highlight one thing he mentions, which is to really reinforce the overall structure of the piece. Give it a clearer ABA form. I think the modulations are fantastic, but I also think a return to the starting key would give it more impact. I also agree regarding that 2/4 time signature. Rather than finding it problematic—since I see it as justified by what’s happening there, the modulation and “precipitation” into another harmonic region—it’s the fact, as he also pointed out, that it isn’t repeated in the recapitulation. A wonderful piece of work.

Best imagery?

Thank you so much for your feedback! It is so greatly appreciated, and has brought to light so many obvious things that I just haven't paid attention to it seems! Everything you say makes complete sense, and will definitely help me a lot for the exam!!! Thank you so much, and I'll be working on all these points!

Reading the title of this thread I have a few seconds of terror that you're leaving the forum, thank God you don't! Congrats on your works being used in films! Henry

Funnily enough, it's very telling of commenters who don't have much of substance to say about the overall quality of my work when they start pointing out the most banale, trivial nitpicks. Not your case by any means, but it's a relatively common occourrence in the comment sections of some my videos. Things like "this is supposed to be 3/4, not 6/8 meter" or "the panning of the background choir doesn't match that of the Cantāmus one". I wouldn't say it's a matter of reputation. I also wouldn't write such replies unless I have any observations or criticsm of substance to offer, as I believe it's a waste both of my time and that of the composer whose work I'm reviewing. Besides, this composition is technically a revised version of and older work: a repost, if you will, so I wouldn't blame more seasoned members who frequently comment on my posts for merely withholding what has already been said before. I had never tried this double-scoring method before, and I must admit it sounds as effective in rendering more human-like expression as much as it seems to pose a whole lot of work. The closest thing to this I usually do is manually inputting the exact tempo gradation values for the ritardandi at the end of each piece, since before MuseScore 4 came out there was no way to insert working rallentandi automatically into the score, or at the very least, not that I knew of. So in order to cover my tracks while still keeping those tempo markings functional, I manually alter the text format to make them invisible, even inside the program itself. That alone often turns out to be an absurdly tedious process and I hate it. At the moment I doubt I could even imagine myself inputting all those rubatos and expression markings and then subjecting those to the same formatting process without cleaving my head open in half out of exasperation. Even if the improvements were marginally or even substantially noticeable, I have much more valuable things to do with my time than attempt to "humanize" the recording manually. The mere thought of engaging in such a tiresome toil for a result that could far more accurately and naturally be replicated through MIDI input or a simple performance recording sends me quite aback. I've heard of this software before. A Discord user by the name of @grpnr1345 applied the software's protocol's to one of my earlier fugues under the same guise, and the results were mixed for me, because the sampling and reverb values were just deplorable, turning the overall timbral quality of the piece essentially into a downgrade, but the altered recording itself, as well as the intricacies of its transformation, felt rather convincing. For context, the audio file in question has been attached to this post. Lastly, thank you kindly for your detailed review. As for the software you mentioned, you're free to apply the Lilypond protocol to my score whenever you feel like it or have time for it. It will most definitely be interesting to see how different users of the same software modify music in the same style, so you have my full permission and encouragement to "humanize" the recording as you see fit. Fugue in G-sharp minor No. 17 Pablo Marinero Cueto 2023 - Zell 1737.mp3 Fugue in G-sharp minor #17.pdf

Hellloooo! This is my submission for the Landscapes competition. For my landscape i have chosen the Italian mountainous region of the Lombardy. The instrumentation is (supposed to be) 1 Cornetto and 3 Sackbuts, but there is also the possibility of other instruments like a consort of viols or a broken consort.LOB 64 Padovana et Gagliarda Detta la Lombarda.mp3 OBS: The original insturmentation is sadly not possible due to the fact that i dont have good enough virtual instruments that have a good sound, the only ones that i have are soundfonts that sound quite unrealistic and robotic...

Ah yes surely.LOB 64 Padovana et Gagliarda.pdf

A divertimento for pairs of clarinets, oboes, horns, and bassoons, inspired by the wind divertimenti and serenades of Mozart. Any comments would be most appreciated! 1. Allegro.mp3 2. Minuetto allegretto.mp3 3. Andantino grazioso.mp3 4. Minuetto vivace.mp3 5. Presto.mp3 1. Allegro.pdf 2. Minuetto allegretto.pdf 3. Andantino grazioso.pdf 4. Minuetto vivace.pdf 5. Presto.pdf

I didn't know you were a cat!

Like clock work version 2.mp3version 2.pdf Hey. Any chances of getting critique on this composition? Thanks in advance. Some personal things i noticed: Overused rhythm – Effective but repetitive; lacks contrast and becomes monotonous. Sections that don’t fit – Some passages sound good on their own but feel disconnected from the main idea. Ideas needing polishing – Certain motifs or sections need refinement so they integrate better into the overall structure and narrative of the piece. Too much tension There is too much tension in the piece. It needs more release here and there. The main lead could be stronger and more interesting The main idea is pretty good but it is repetitive from the first round to the second round. Awkward transitions There is a few places where there are awkward transitions that needs to be fixed. more modulation The piece stays too much within the same key.

Hey @Bjarke ! Nice job on this one! It's full of vitality and forward-driving energy! I love it! I don't find any part of it boring and can easily listen to it over and over. To me it doesn't sound so much like clockwork but more like a Spring piece with it's liveliness and exuberance. It doesn't sound mechanical to me. For me, for it to be a piece about clockwork it would have to contain some sense of ticking mechanicality. It's also not the right tempo to sound like a clock. Doesn't matter though, as I think you've created a great piece of music here! Great job and thanks for sharing! P.S.: My only nitpick would perhaps be to have notated this in 6/8, 9/8 or 12/8 as it would become easier to read imo.

okay done. drums.mp3

go crazy with the drums and see what happens 😊

For four equal voices, a cappella, this will work equally well for men's or women's voices, or could be used for a mixed choir. Three voices are in canon for all but the end of the piece, while the last provides a verse in an additional musical layer. It marches along at a good tempo for protest. The text explores three different approaches to working toward justice: boycotting the economy of those in power in favor of hands-on work in your community, peaceful self-sacrifice to earn respect and spread your message, and educating people about uncomfortable truths, so that they can base their future actions on an accurate picture of the situation. In 1891, the African Jubilee Chorus embarked on an extended concert tour of England to raise funds to start a college in Kimberley, South Africa. They sang to sold-out crowds, but were also met with constant racism. Choir member Katie Manye declined to participate in future tours, deciding hands-on work for her community was a better use of her time. She dedicated the rest of her life to a career in nursing. Speaking about her decision, she said, "I don't sing for people who do not see me." An anchoress nun, Julian of Norwich was chosen to be walled into a tiny cell of a church until her death as a living sacrifice. At a time when women in positions of power were actively suppressed, particularly by the church, Julian’s cheerful and calm acceptance of her fate earned the respect of her local community and gave her a voice that the authorities couldn't silence due to her ever-growing celebrity and popularity. Although she could not leave, a stream of important visitors came to her to seek her council, and her writings escaped and were published. Dating from the late 1300s, her books are the oldest known works by a female author in the English language and speak of comfort and hope in the face of adversity. One of her most famous quotes was the simple statement, "All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well." A prolific author, scientist, and activist, W. E. B. Du Bois believed speaking truth to power, especially when the truth was uncomfortable, was essential to achieving change. He felt that if we believe in a just society, we must speak up when society falls short, and teach both the good and the bad chapters of our history to have a clear picture from which to move forward. In addition to being one of the most important early voices for civil rights in America, Du Bois helped citizens in Africa and Asia organize for their rights against colonialist powers. The verse of this piece comes from his 'Black Reconstruction in America,' "Nations reel and stagger on their way; they make hideous mistakes; they commit frightful wrongs; they do great and beautiful things. And shall we not best guide humanity by telling the truth about all this…?"

Would you provide a score?

I don't know what you mean by "having voices 'backwards.'" My guess would be that you either mean that I derive harmonies through melody rather than the other way around or that I sometimes use chord regressions. Neither of these are, in my opinion, though, a problem, and I think much of the music I've uploaded to the net is reasonably solid aside from issues with me often using cheap synthesized instruments.

Thanks sir so you say tenor 1 should be kept at g4 for practicality

Of course, nothing compares to hearing orchestras perform live. Dvořák’s style is the complete opposite of Schoenberg’s, including their orchestral works. Dvořák embodies expansive, monumental Romanticism—even more so than Mahler, for example. But atonality deliberately avoids that and aims for conciseness, which is why it doesn’t use large orchestras.

Hey Tristian, very cool music! I always like to hear this! I think this is something that will always carry your curiosity with music, at least it does for me. You went with your gut and inner ear, and although you may not exactly know what you're doing, you hear it as correct and satisfying. Those are the moments where I would look at my own music and analyze it, always trying to figure out why I liked a particular thing I did when I didn't fully understand it.

This is a very small and simple Fugue i made in one sitting, im still pretty bad at making fugues and baroque music in general, so please have a bit of mercy on me! LOB 53 Fuga.mp3

Thanks, Mark! It's just a round with the W. E. B. Du Bois as a separate layer on top when you get right down to it, but that's certainly more organized than I usually am. Something I'm trying to be better about.

Hello! This piece is dedicated to a friend of mine, he gave me the text and i quickly got working on it, i finished it in 1 day and im pretty proud of it. I tried to mimic the style of Orlando di Lasso a bit but it didn't quite work out the way i wanted, so i just decided to stick with my own style. Enjoi! Text: Corpus omne perseverare in statu suo quiescendi vel movendi uniformiter in directum, nisi quatenus illud a viribus impressis cogitur statum suum mutare.

I am reviewing Vincent Persichetti's "20th Century Harmony" and just finished chapter 3! And so I decided to do the first exercise that looked good to me to try to make an actual piece of music out of (I don't like exercises for their own sake - I think I should always be trying to make living, breathing music). Here is the prompt for the exercise: "12. Harmonize the following melody in four string parts using dominant seventh chords exclusively. Much contrary and oblique motion and several inversions should be used." Like I said, I tried to make an actual piece of music out of it and not be too much of a stickler to the rules. I also tried to approach it not like a chorale exercise - let me know if I've succeeded on that front! Thanks for listening and I would appreciate any suggestions, critiques, comments or just observations!

First of all, I have to say that I really enjoyed this competition! It was an intense two weeks—on the one hand, to finish my own composition/arrangement, and on the other hand, to listen to such a diverse range of great musical works. I think all the participants invested a lot of time, effort, and passion to achieve such a result! I must admit that – puh – reviewing seems to be harder than composing! We have seen a lot of atonality and non-traditional musical structure (to mention some, but not to be exhaustive all "Dima’s National Dance" by @Dima, "From Above, Now Below" by @Thatguy v2.0, "Diptych for Piano Quartet" by @Cosmia, "Aos Si" by @HoYin Cheung, "American Cryptids" by @Micah, "Fumage" by @Justin Gruber, "Clowns" by @sebastian Pafundo, "Woodwind Quintet" by @Maxthemusicenthusiast, "The Mist" by @Kvothe, "A Hollow Theme for Halloween" by @therealAJGS) and – on the other hand – more „beautiful“ and „well-behaved“ pieces (for example, "Ghost Town Requiem" by @UncleRed99, "Bagatelle No. 6" by @Omicronrg9 and "Dance from the skeleton ball" by @MK_Piano), which I very enjoyed, too. As „balanced“ between this two poles I would consider "Daunting Steps" by @ferrum.wav, "Trio Variations" by @TristanTheTristan and – lol - my own piece. Therefore, the decision was very hard and due to the subject of the competition, Halloween, the more outlandish pieces were in the better position. The dedications of the badges „spookiest/scariest piece“, „strangest/weirdest/most outlandish piece“ and „biggest thriller“ were – in my opinion – not so easy to distinguish, so that we have one glorious winner in nearly all categories, "From Above, Now Below" by @Thatguy v2.0, my best congratulations. Special thanks to @PeterthePapercomPoser for organizing that funny contest! What did you think of the official competition reviewing template? For me, the competition reviewing template was very useful, giving the focus what to review a clear structure. Even if I did not give a textual review according to the eight categories but only a general one, scoring according to the definitions (i.e. between 0 and 10 points) and calculating an average was useful and helped to determine the winner(s) for the different badges. I could also imagine that in future competitions, the template and the numbers will be used in an official sheet to determine the overall winner. In such a case, however, it would be necessary to formulate more precisely how we should award the points in order to achieve a fair result that can be used for such a calculation. I noticed that some of the reviewers often awarded 10 points to pieces/categories they liked, while I was a bit stingy with this top score (apologies to all participants). I would like to say that such differences in the use of scores between different reviewers, although consistent in their own assessment, could lead to a kind of injustice. What would you like to see in future competitions? I think, the most revenue of the competition is getting a lot of review in a short period of time. Therefore, I would like to keep the competition „just for fun“ without monetary awards. An interesting variant could be to keep the competitors and judges anonymous. Such a rule could be combined with the mandatory use of the template and its usage for the calculation of the winner, as mentioned above. In such a case it would be necessary to require that all participants review all the other entries to achieve comparability and fairness. However, such a strict set of rules could imply that some members would hesitate to participate, thus we could try out that for one competition, but should not apply it to all future ones.