Leaderboard

[INFO DUMP] I am not sure if I would go with the term "a lot" when it comes to the midi-playback discrepancy. It can be wonderous to hear our music realized in the notation engine; and at the same time, two things can be true at once. Hearing it in the computer is not the same as hearing it live. Just because the computer can do it, does not mean it will have the same effect with an orchestra or if it will be played correctly by an ensemble as the computer has shown. (People have done comparison videos showing Musescore Audio engine vs. a real orchestra. You can hear the results and form your opinions.) It's why we inform ourselves on the properties of instruments and why we study instrument pairings so we have the best tools at our disposal for effective writing. _______________ Ironically, to ask "How do I write better?" is a subjective question and the only answer will be what is great/ good to you. In the literal sense, if you feel you are inefficient or that your music is not accomplishing the standards you want, then there in itself is some knowledge dissonance and it may be your writing process that hinders you. There are a few ways to do this, and asking these questions is more than okay (especially here!). Igor Stravinsky was quoted saying the following: "Good composers borrow, Great ones steal" It is a variation of a phrase both Picasso and T.S. Eliot used when describing their work. One way to learn is to look at the greats, or your composer ancestors. Look at their music and copy it by hand, or by mouse. See where they put the notes and see what instruments... then look at the results. Since you have some music theory training, analyze the harmony and see how they voiced a chord, etc! Try re-orchestrating something if you want; or come up with your own exercises. In the collegiate sphere, at an early point, we were given Bach harmonic progressions and had to write a melody on top in my undergrad. That was a few years ago. Speaking of, do understand that you won't become Wagner overnight. This will take time and that is okay. _______________ If you haven't already learned, most big composers did not compose for a large ensemble first. They composed for a reduced score, as in a simple grand staff for a piano, and wrote out the entire piece first BEFORE orchestrating it. Did you know Gustav Holst wrote The Planets for Two Pianos in 1914, FOUR years before the premiere? He wrote it for keyboard first and then orchestrated the famous work we know today. Starting small and being able to see all the pieces over 2-3 staves is a lot easier than trying to control 17+ staves at your first go. Thus, if you haven't, give this a try!

Hi! Long time for not posting anything! I'm revising my old Clarinet Quintet and learning orchestration in the process. Here's something I'm working on. Clarinet Quintet in C minor is a work I finished 4 years ago in 2022 which I accidentally began my revision of it in April 2026. It's a work in four movements and in it I want to share my feeling towards despair, dream and hope. The piece is dedicated to my friend Ms. Merina Fung. Speical Thanks to @Thatguy v2.0 for making the audio for me. Here is the youtube video of the movement: Here is the structure of the 1st movement: 00:00 1st subject, Exposition. Introduce the "despair" motive (0134), in some sort of sad waltz in C minor. The passage in 01:26 is directly copied from an old piece of mine named "Boredom" 01:48 Transition. Follow the tonal plan of the first movement of Tchaikovsky's Fourth Symphony and modulate to tritone major Gb major (which is the tonic key of my next major work, String Sextet in G flat major). 04:09 2nd subject, Exposition. Introduce the "dream motive" (0247) and subsidary chromatic motive of (0123). Conflicts of the despair and dream motives continue, the dream seems to win at 06:53 with its own climax but easily defeated with a bold C minor half cadence right before the close of the exposition with a forceful perfect cadence in Gb. 08:42 Development, part 1. The dream breaks expectedly I really like the counterpoint in 08:59. Modulates to E minor for the transition theme, then build to a really beautiful climax in E major in 11:10 which I really love. Makes this movement sounds a bit less tragic. 11:36 Development, part 2. Another false serenity after the beautiful climax by a disappointed passage in G# minor in 12:38. The serene texture returns in B major in 13:17 but falls short to a dominant preparation of C minor in 13:50. I really love the retransition as it sounds really passionate to me (Actually I love all parts of the remianing parts in this movement after this point). A review of the keys visited in 14:27 with an octatonic falling scale, ending with two sorrowful monologue of clarinet and cello, just like the beginning. 14:53 Transition. I skip the 1st subject reappearence in the recap as it's completely meaningless to do so, given how the motive is developed in the entire movement. I really love the tragedy here, as I even have this passage reappears in the coda of 4th movement, after 40 minutes or so lol. Another false serenity in tonic major in 15:24, and I really love the nostalgic sounding passage in Ab major in 16:01, still base on the dream motive. The German sixth chord in 16:36 must be stolen from Schubert"s Quartettsatz. A fugato in 16:42 trying to fight despair and reclaim dream once more and "sucessfully" modulates to Gb major once again. 17:31 2nd subject, Recap. But when you want more you hurt more, as despair harms you more when you have hope. This time a hard C minor half cadence comes. The dream theme now becomes a nightmare in 18:07 and continues to sigh. 19:20 Coda. Previous themes keep reappearing as I myself used to ruminate my sadness all the time. Finally it ends with what begins the piece, the realization of despair in its original form. Structurally I am not really satisfied with how I expand the themes in the 2nd subject of exposition (Dream part) and how I treat the materials in development, as I am afraid I overextend too much. However I just retain most of the things originally as I wanna keep true to my old self. It's an absolute low when I composed this piece, as I really questioned myself whether I could really compose something good back then. Luckily I did finish the entire work and gave me some confidence, plus meeting some really good friends here. The whole 4 movement piece is composed with three motives mentioned above, as I wanted to keep the piece coherent. The inspiration of the work comes from Brahms’s Clarinet Quintet as I wanted to write a more tragic piece than his (of course this goal fails), but I am happy with what I’ve done. Strangely only now do I find how Brahmsian this piece is. One interesting thing is that despite the movement is in C minor, in the first 14 minutes (two-thirds) of the movement, only 2 minutes are in the tonic. In this revision I mainly modify spots I find unreasonble, some voicings and slurs, and breathing spots for Clarinet. Hope you listen through the music and read through the description, and my wish that enjoy the work! Feel free criticize the work as I know it's far from perfect. P.S. the old version of this same Quintet is posted before: It's my biggest mistake to post an hour long piece here as my first post. So I will chop up the 4 movements and post it one by one now! Henry Clarinet Quintet in C minor 1st mov V3.mp3 (For YT)Clarinet Quintet in C minor 1st mov final 20260501.pdf

I see, that helps a lot! In the orchestration example you provide, there is something lacking in terms of the ensemble tessitura. Tessitura is a complex word, but in simple terms describes the characters/ properties of an instruments range. (I.e Flutes sounds airy/ whispery when played low, Tubas sound rich when played high, etc.) In this context, I am worried about where the notes are placed in the instruments and then comparing that to the harmonic series. If you wanted a full sound from the orchestra, you need to fill out the harmonic series so we hear all the resonances. The computer (MuseScore in this case) is deceiving you because you are hearing a lot of instruments, but if this were played live, it would sound loud, but not as rich/ warm as you want it to. FEEDBACK: Brass - The horns doubling the same pitch will not sound "full" but the same brassy sound louder. Ensemble Tutti - There can be different variants of an ensemble tutti. The most basic being every instrument is playing the exact same line in their registers. However, another implication is that every instrument is playing, albeit, different material. This is more reminiscent to your example and I think it fitting if you have the bass instruments (Contrabasses, Contrabassoons) sustain the pedal/ tonic fundamental. If every line is moving, then it is hard to hear the melodic content you want. Pulsing the harmony and grounding the bass while the melodic line moves will be an effective tool to clearly hear the feature. Timpani - BEWARREEEEE the timpani. While written in bass clef, it is NOT a bass instrument. Remind yourself that the timpani has anywhere between 1-5 drums (5 for professional ensembles and 4 for universal standard) It has a hard time moving stepwise and if you can write leaps or intervals bigger than a 3rd, it will be very easy on the player. They can tune the drum heads live and if you are not too sure if it is playable, ask a timpanist for insight. Also, for a point of the score, make sure your language is standard. You mixed english names and italian names for the instruments. Make it easy on the brain and keep it one or the other lol Attached is a sample orchestration of what I have done with these comments. I changed the harmony a little to make it simpler for example purposes only: (I just realized I missed the Divisi for the Celli.. whoops) Orch.Sample_Audio.mp3 Orchestration Sample.pdf

I see! Feel free, yeah. Trying to maintain a certain balance between number of posts & number of replies is a wise choice. In my experience, uploading too much and replying too little leads to being ignored because others fairly see you as someone that only wants a bit of attention and that doesn't really care about anything else. It's a valid stance, but it leads to rejection. That said, I encourage you to keep posting & interacting here. I'll make sure to check your No. 8 whenever I find a bit of free time! Regarding this: do you use a software to make these pieces that doesn't provide a solid PDF output overall? Regards!

Sometimes it's not about your skills, it's more about whether the judges' taste is similar with yours and your work's skill level can still be very high even if they think it's not good enough to advance to the next round. I think of winning any prizes more like a chance event, just like having job interviews haha. Keep going and you will for sure pursue what you want! Henry

Melodies Themes Motives Harmony Chords Textures Form Development Structure Time Originality Creativity Score Presentation Instrumentation Orchestration Playability Execution of Given Challenge Taste 4 8 2 10 3 8 2 9 Average Score: 5.75 I'm not one to enjoy being critical, too harshly of anyone's original music, as most of the time, music is subjective and taken in based on individual opinion and preference, but from a professional stand point, this score is quite difficult to follow. I'd also note that the terms of the competition stated; "3 - 5 monophonic or polyphonic instruments/voices." {most of the Instrumentation choices here are neither mono / polyphonic in nature, and there are far too many of them.. lol} While I understand your intent, in your use of braces (which you used grand staff brackets rather than part brackets, but I understand, nonetheless lol), for a section representing 1 performer, it's simply not within the constraints of the rules of the competition. I went ahead and graded it as I would any other score, however, to provide you with some level of feedback on the writing done here. I did not want to neglect it, artistically. As you can see, I highly favor the Originality, the Textures, and your taste within the given score, however, the piece itself is very "through-composed" without much rhyme or reason that's easily discernible... Meaning, I don't hear a motif that catches my attention; a home for me to reference back to again, to keep my ear on-track with the music. For that reason, I felt a 2 was appropriate for the form/development section, as well as the 4 in the Melodies, Themes, and Motives. (Slightly higher because of the intricacies in melodic components with the few polyphonic instruments you do have in use for this score.) Ultimately, I feel that this score should not be considered as a valid entry, simply based on the number of staves you've used here, despite the constraints, but I will always have respect for anything that anyone has taken their time and effort to work on, and this piece, in and of itself, has the potential to be much greater than it is, currently, I think. - Uncle Red

Hi Sera, welcome to the forums! Just as an advice, many of us like to read the sheet music in case there's any. Maybe it's not the case here? Did you use a DAW to make this directly in MIDI + VSTs? Hmmm. Still in the first mp3 you attached. I guess I should read these criticisms more in depth in order to see how much I would agree or disagree with them. Often, the definitions of what X or Y are depend widely on the person using them. I would be inclined to think that when somebody told you that there's "no melody" they tried to convey something a bit deeper than "there's absence of a melodic line". Maybe they themselves don't even know how any better way to tell you their thoughts, but again I am not sure since I did not read these comments myself. There's obviously a melody in the sense there's an horizontal line in the piano (and later, on the strings) that's intentionally put on top of the rest of the sound mix, and there is some motive repeating here and there but it is shadowed by the —I would say, evident— vertical design of the piece in one hand, and also by the repetitive nature of the piece itself, a repetition that does not rely on the melody but that is commanded by that vertical design. The block-ish simple 4-chord progression/wheel harmony (Em G Bm D, with ocassional variations G-> Am, Bm-> Eb), to me and in this very case, competes against the melody here, and successfully (to some of your critics disgrace) robs a good chunk of its prominence. Adding variations and ostinatos on top of or next to said melodic line does not help. On top of that, the dynamics that are not built by layering instruments/voices are in my opinion either very subtle or inexistent. All in all, I can get people saying: "there's no melody" as an oversimplification of "this piece lacks a strong melodic line leading it". In fact, the harmony itself leads (or restricts) the melody. As much as there's rhytmic movement in the upper voice in the piano, it always stays inside of each bar. The piece barely moves from that so what the brain ultimately gets is "| Things | Things | Things | Things |". The melody is not on top of that, but constrained to that rigid sub-structure. Your alternative three "melodies" suffer from that. You build vertically, vertical sub-structure commands over horizontal movements, and thus the melody you build doesn't escape and get the prominence it needs to be righteously called a "melody". This does not mean that any piece with these characteristics will have no distinguishable melody, but that this happens in this particular case. Let's stop a bit at the "it's just tinkling", I would not say that but I kind of get where this may come from too. Keeping in mind what I discussed in last paragraph, if you combine "melodic line not leading", "ostinatos & small variations" and we consider that the piano resorts to it's high register in order to make that melodic line more prominent, we get something that we could indeed call "piano tinkle". I would say it can be cantabile, but it can also feel easily forgettable because it again gets diluted by the things I have been pointing out in this message. But wait a minute: do you intend this piece to have a prominent melodic line to begin with? After 3-4 listenings, it strikes me as a piece with (strong?) influence of the style of L. Einaudi (and the likes) . I'm not a fan, but it's yet another way to build music and it doesn't neccesarily rely on a melodic line to move things forward. For certain purposes, you don't even want things to "move forward". You may want to create an "atmosphere", or simply something whose main source of movement &/or development is not concentrated in the melody. You do you. Finally: it doesn't strike me as a Ballade but I'm not sure if there's a clear defintion of that so no big deal. Did you yourself think: "I want to make a piece with a clear, distinguishable melody."? Just curious. Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Kia Ora Henry, I will admit that when I first heard the original version of your Clarinet Quintet I did not like it very much. Blasphemous, I know. Everyone else on YC seemed to love the piece, and I just... didn't. I found all too much, which I suppose was your intent; despair is overwhelming or whatever it was. After listening to this revision, my opinion has changed. Or at least my opinion on the first movement, which was one of the two of the original I listened to. I don't dislike it anymore, but I don't love it now either. I think it's a decently good piece, but far from your best work. My favourite part of this piece is by far the second subject which if I recall correctly, is based on the dream motif. It definitely has this dreamy, hopeful, idealistic Romantic, feel to it which I really really like. I mentioned something similar to this to you on discord, and I'll rehash it here, I think it could work really well readapted as a waltz theme in an orchestral arrangement or something. I think it really contrasts well with the first subject (despair) and is a nice break from all the despairing going on before it. My least favourite aspect of this piece is... I don't actually know. I've relistened to this version and skimmed through it a couple of times trying to find something I dislike but... I can't find I hate. I think I will have to listen to this a few more times and get back to you. Perhaps it was the awful playback in the original post that made everything sound worse to me, I don't know. Again, I'll have to get back to you on this In summary, I think this piece has really grown on me. Or at least the first movement has. That second subject is absolutely my favourite part of the piece but I don't really care for... something, I just can't quite tell to be honest. I think I find this piece less over bearing now than I did on my first listen years ago. Progress has been made! look forward to hearing the rest of your revision of this piece. Maybe the latter movements will convert me, a filthy heathen who cares not for the Clarinet Quintet in C Minor, into a believer. Ngā mihi, Archie

Hi! I'm trying to write Romantic-inspired pieces, but I struggle with a lot of things. I cannot figure out what it is. I've taken a look at some tuttis in scores (like Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1), but I didn't do well. To get a more "classical" vibe, should I reduce the harmony and leave just two voices (melody and bass)? Or should I double more voices in octaves more carefully? I should add that I didn't apply myself too much; maybe I should think harder and not just place random notes on the paper. For simpler reading, I can provide an excerpt of the score (it's very short anyway). playback with musesounds.mp3 score.pdf

Hi ................Try a little Rythem first......then progress to LAYERS. an example below: 1: Timpani Rythem 2: Low-Brass & Bass 3: Staccato string & Horn 4: Top-Line String TIMPANI BUILDUP.mp3

@BlackkBeethoven please don't quit writing your piece! Young Composer's Forum should always strive to be a great place for you to receive feedback, guidance and support on any of your musical projects. "Go write a piano piece because you're not ready and need to learn the basics" is not really constructive feedback. Members on YCF should strive to support the composer with whatever project they choose to write, not tell them what to do. We're here to support you in whatever YOU choose to do not what WE think you should do.

To add, maybe in measure 8, let Clarinet one finish the 16th note gesture with the oboe. Why? Mainly due to the instance a performer may be late when entering and to not break the long gesture of the scale. Have the clarinet finish the gesture into the next downbeat. I am unsure why the horn figure is broken up in measure 9. It makes sense for Horn 1 to go the A natural and jump to C# as an escape tone. (Same in mm.10) Also, make sure the Horn 2 beaming is the same in measure 7. Measure 11 - Lower the bassoon 2 scale down an octave or raise the Low B on measure 12 up. Bassoon fingerings are tough and that jump is agony for a player because of how many fingers they put down and the change in embouchure. So lower it down an octave or make them both land on the same B-natural in mm.12.

Very much a night and day difference! Just be careful of a low flute or low oboe for too long as their tessituras change very distinctly. Flutes playing low = Whispery or "airy" sound and does not project well Oboes playing low = 'Goose' Honk. They sound a little comical. The only spot I saw this was measure 12, so it's not an issue unless you prolong that registration for too long. Good work!!

Hello, Little fugue i wrote today in the north german baroque style. First musical output in years. Simple in harmony, joyful and melodic in theme and counterpoint. Scored for four voices, work well enough with organ or strings. Fuga in g.mp3 Fuga in G.pdf

Hi! Actually I just completed my piano toccata piece inspired from living near the motor city (Detroit, MI) in my childhood... I decided to make this toccata piece since I thought the mechanistic characteristics of the genre match well with general images of the motor city... In this piece I tried to express free style of lots of jazz and popular music heard when I was growing up near Detroit, while keeping this piece modern classical music... Hope you enjoy this piece, and please feel free to leave any comments and suggestions :) Motorcity Toccata.mp3 Motorcity Toccata.pdf

For the first time in my life, after watching a few harmony videos, I wrote this waltz. I'm curious to hear your opinion. https://voca.ro/1juGRRVoFhLh Walzer in G-dur.pdf

Hello Tristan: I have these glaring errors in there because I don't play the piano—and when I do, I only use virtual instruments. You are right about that octave; I hadn't considered that it might not be playable. As for those notes that appear to be marked as triplets, they are actually three eighth notes, though they do look like a triplet here. I didn't intend to have triplets there—nor could I have them—because I would otherwise be short an eighth note. Thanks again for your helpful tips.

Hi Tristan! Nice composition! I would say, you have a nice thematic idea. You could have progressed it, though, into d dur or perhaps c dur. As we can see here:. your writing is very messy, although using a notation software. You should know that in composition, you could always use marks such as simile. You also didn't have to keep emphasizing that it is piano and not something else like... Idk... fortississississississississississimo. As you can see, you have decided to make a triplet here at the start. Very creative, but, the problem is the notation. You need to have a 3 on the top of the triplet... Right? Adding on to my point, it doesn't even sound like a triplet, so why did you do like such? I am confused. Also, you shouldn't write ♩=120. Instead, write Italian. More fancy, you know. Write moderato. Write poco allegretto ma non troppo. (etc.). Moreover, some stuff are proving a second Rachmaninov, which is you, because of these.: yep. That is your left hand span... I am surprised. Nice one, welcome to YC, enjoy your time, see you later! -TristanTheTristan Composer

Lithl - Swarm of Sound I would appreciate any kind of feedback, whether it’s a critique or just your overall impressions of the work. Thank you.

Just had a listen to it. I'm not sure if it's stimulating but I found it funny (in the good way) at times. I can get why it's called "noise": the piece ended, and youtube directly put "Studie 1" from Stockhausen next. I couldn't have told that it was a diferent piece if they were both presented in the same mp3. I would say this is a matter of finding your public. Value is relative, and subjective. There's always a non-zero chance that some may find your work (the one you submitted) interesting or even beautiful. In fact, you can prove this yourself by making something you may find most terrible and sharing it. Sooner or later, someone may appear and praise it. Keep following the path you like. Kind regards!

Hi Lithl, welcome to the forums! As an experiment, I'm sure it's been entertaining and enriching for you. For me, the result is just a noise crescendo, I don't find it interesting at all. The processes that lead to it may be, though. I don't think that what you did proves or disproves that you lack talent. From this alone it's impossible to tell. Talent for what exactly, though? What are you pursuing? Are the other contestants' works similar to yours? How important is it to you to provide value to the listener? Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Really? That sounds like a very harsh critique. To be truthful, I think your work is good; it simply reflects your good style. Your melodies have a certain melancholic quality, yet they still feel energetic and full of hope—Specifically, in version 80, the first 27 seconds have a bit of a lonely, melancholic atmosphere. But starting with the note at 0:28, it feels as if the music begins to take a step forward with a sense of hope. It’s hard to put into words, but that’s the impression I get. Whether that was intentional or not, your music is capable of telling a story, and I think that’s great. I’m also interested to hear how others feel about it, not just me.

Could you tell me, for example, what kind of criticisms you received? Personally, I think it’s good overall!! If I had to point something out, I’d say the melodic phrasing feels a bit similar throughout, which makes the development feel a little thin. Among the new melodies, I really like measure 90. Personally, I thought it might be interesting to try swapping the left-hand accompaniment of 90 with something like what's in measure 96! By the way, if you don't mind, could you tell me the name of that forum? I’d love to take a look myself.

idk opus 4 - 1.mp3 opus 4 - 2.mp3 opus 4 - 3.mp3

Thanks for the words :) It is not a soul crusher, however it has made me upset. I am proud of this work and saddened to not be given the chance to hear it live. It may be another year before I have the same chance. Yet... we push forward and strive for the next opportunity. In the end, it won't keep me down, and I will still work and increase my skills to win the next one(s).

Iv been kicked in the teeth , and rejected several times in life but when you drive your car into a Dead-End....................The Sat-Nav "RE-ROUTES" And its the same with the Human Brain..................... https://www.classicfm.com/discover-music/second-time-lucky/

Could also think of that as a 13th chord without the seventh... so, maybe something jazzy as well? Ravel-ish? Makes me think of a music teacher I had, wrote all kinds of big band type stuff.

Hey there! I am new to this forum and would like to present my piano ballad (version 86). It was critized strongly in another forum, mainly because of the piano melody. The piece isn't completed in full. From 1:53 on the dynamics of the topline strings aren't edited yet. Because of the many critics I composed 3 new piano melodys (version 90,96,101). What is your hearing impression? How do you find the 3 melodys? Piano Ballade_86.mp3 Piano Ballade_90.mp3 Piano Ballade_96.mp3 Piano Ballade_101.mp3

Study in G# Min.mp3

Yes ...He certainly knew how to " MILK A BUCK " When interviewed and questioned, how he felt about people belittling him and mocking him, He said : " I cried all the way to the Bank ... And then i Bought it " ---

Oh, I already heard about the guy, "Mr. Showmanship". He was a clever one, good performer, better charmer. Regards!

Hi Nd, welcome to the forums! Do you happen to have a score of this? Interesting choice of piano, by the way. I'm not particularly fond of the way it attacks the notes that are outside of the high register but that's a more a matter of taste than anything else I will likely say in this message. I found some nice moments of calm in your piece, such as the section starting at ~1:10, or the section that preludes the end. Some others, such as the accelerando + pedal and the passage preceding it (1:35 and on, more or less) were not really my thing, they seem forced and for me, not in a good way. Question: did you publish the No.3, No.2 or No.1 here? Just out of curiosity. Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

I am unaware of this. Do you have a guy for... Wait, what's a sync agent in this context? 😆 A melody atop of the video &/or your piece can indeed sound better. But one must take certain things (some I did point out in the other reply, some not, some others I may not even know) into account when writing one. As a suggestion for experimenting yourself, perhaps you could try writing a melody with a distinguishable instrument (such as a flute, a clarinet, a music box, or whatever you want) on top of what you already have (minus what you think that could interfere) and see what happens, if it works, or it gets so cluttered. Kind regards!

Soundishly, perfect orchestration, my friend. How well you know the piece and the instruments you used is obviously extraordinary. Continue working on this. This is great.

I thank you very much for your vast explanations. Now I can understand much better what the people meant with their critics. This initially should be an job from my sync agent. This youtube song was the example. Wanted was something in this style. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8AAacIL3LM The track in the video has almost no melody. While the devoplemt of my piece I created a melody and I thougt with a melody in my piece it would sound much better.

Thank you for your honest opinion. That is exactly what I wanted to hear. To me, if a piece is not found "interesting," it means it is no different from a mere mess—it is not a work that holds value for others. When I create a work, I don't necessarily have the conscious intent of making it for someone else; rather, I make it because it's fun, and I am satisfied with that aspect. However, I feel that can sometimes turn into a sort of self-indulgence. What I am clearly seeking is to create something that others find highly creative and stimulating. For example, Edgard Varèse’s Poème électronique is a work of so-called "noise," yet it is stimulating and incredibly imaginative to listen to. (Of course, I don't think for a moment that I belong in their lineage, but that is exactly what I am aiming for.) I believe I can only take pride in having created a "great" work—moving beyond simple self-satisfaction—when it possesses the kind of value that makes others feel it is worth listening to. In other words, I am talking about that specific talent. Even if I can create something I find interesting, if it holds no value for others, I feel I lack the talent—or perhaps the ability—to present that value. Of course, I don't think anyone's talent can be fully determined by a single work, but I simply wanted to ask as a point of reference. At least with this piece, I wasn't able to provide any value to the listener; therefore, I suppose it can be classified as a work of self-indulgence. Regardless, your perspective was extremely helpful! Thank you for your valuable input.

It's a German forum. They said things like:"There is no melody." "That's just tinkling." "I can't sing to this melody."

Hellooo, I made this waltz as an attempt to approach music for pedagogic uses. I also tried to give it a 'funny' sound so this waltz uses a lot of dramatic/parodic gestures. I think it turned out pretty good and funny. Hope u like it!!!!! <3<3 ·<{:D Vals I.pdfVals I.mp3

Hello Have you heard of this virtual instrument called CANTAI? Please note: I have no affiliation with these programmes, even though I use them. https://cantai.app/ It’s a virtual instrument for voices and choirs. It works with MuseScore (which is more advanced), Dorico (the official version was released a couple of days ago) and Sibelius. The novelty is that you write the score, add the parts (soprano, alto, tenor, bass, choir) and write the lyrics... And once everything is set up, the result is that it ‘sings’. I use it with Dorico. It still needs improving, because although it interprets dynamics and accents, and there are many voices available, there will be more. At the moment, in Dorico you can write in English and Latin. But Chinese and Spanish are already available in MuseScore (I think). I’ve written this little sample song to see how it works.

Here another example with text in Latin.

Thank you for your reply and honest thoughts. -Regarding your question Music is a work of sound. Therefore, as long as it is presented as a "work," it is created with some kind of purpose or intention, regardless of whether the sound itself is noise or not. In that sense, the difference between noise and music isn't about the sound itself; rather, it’s about whether that sound has been incorporated into the context of a “work.” If a sound has no intention behind it and is not presented in any form, it is simply noise. However, if it is presented by the creator—or even perceived as such by others—it has the potential to become music. Regarding SFX (Sound Effects), they are not the primary focus but rather a secondary element to the visuals. While they undoubtedly play a crucial role, whether SFX can stand alone as music depends on whether making them so is "meaningful." At the same time, I believe another essential factor is whether the work brings value to the creator or the audience—be it through being provocative, original, or inspiring. Even if you present a sound work with a specific intention, its true "greatness" is objectively evaluated by whether it is genuinely meaningful. That is exactly why I would like to hear your honest opinions on what you all think of this piece.

This is the best, Intellect! I cannot love it enough!

"Thanks for the honest feedback! I'm glad the music itself sounds good to you. I will try to improve the visual spacing in my next pieces."

Highly mesmerizing. Highly entertaining. Is this going to be a full fledged show?

Hi Tristan, This sounds very nice! I would suggest finding a different composition software to use, however. The spacing of the notes on the page is a bit all over the place, which makes this challenging to sight read. Musescore is a good free option that sorts that out for you automatically. I haven't used Vocaroo, but I understand it has some AI features for editing recordings?

Hello there! Here is the latest installment of preludes, no.16. This one deals with a lot of two voice counterpoint and a relentless ramble on one theme. As a personal side note, these have been a lot of fun to write, and it's been great simultaneously writing a bunch at once. I had a sporadic burst of ideas when I started this one, and it lead to a lot of spread out writing. I guess what I'm SAYIN' is... more to come! :D Thanks for listening and reading... any comments of any kind are welcome! P.S. some of those tempo markings are to mimic rubato, dunno I suck as an editor Edit: 🔥 @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu 🔥 Prelude No 16 - Score.pdf Henry Prelude no.16.mp3

So looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong! You should get upside collosus of prora badge, like extraordinarily existential and huge orchestra. This is funnily fun to listen to. Melodies Themes Motives Harmony Chords Textures Form Development Structure Time Originality Creativity Score Presentation Instrumentation Orchestration Playability Execution of Given Challenge Taste 8 10 8.5 10 9 (too messy because of size) idk... like... 7.5? 5 (great soundscape, but not trio quartet or quintet) 9.5 Average Score: 8. 4375

Hallo @luderart as you frequently present compositions in this style—short, aphoristic pieces for solo instruments—your compositional approach differs from that of most other members of the forum, who often attempt to write full-scale symphonic works for a large orchestra. Yet in an orchestra, an instrument is merely a gear in a large clockwork mechanism and is subject to the conductor’s interpretive intent. On the other hand, dedicated solo pieces for monodic instruments seem to be rare, so that I could imagine that they are appreciated by players of the clarinet, bassoon etc. However, when I listen to them and look at the score, I sense a kind of loneliness (which is not a criticism, but merely a statement of fact): The solo instrument „utters“ its sentence, yet no conversation emerges, as there is no accompanying or contrasting voice. And even the score pages look a bit „lonely“, since there is remaining whitespace due to the need of only one staff for notation ... Here is another, similar approach to a piece for a solo instrument, the bassoon. The composer, in that case, decided to put the „sentences“ in a more programmatic context, depicting „a garden“ over the course of a year. https://youtu.be/ok_R4cstdGs Now, some short thoughts to the individual sententiae: No. 1 It serves as an overture, trying to gain the attention of the listener. The meter change from 6/4 to 5/4 in bar two is somewhat surprising, and, together with the two trills, reminds me of the bells ringing in the lobby of a concert hall, urging the audience to take their seats before the playful quintuplet melody begins. No. 2 A short, playful piece - reminding me at children playing around. No. 3 To me, the third sentence has a melancholic and contemplative character, which is only seemingly lightened by the eighth-note runs. The final question remains unanswered. No.4 The fourth one has a quality that even exceeds the character of a „sentence only“. Because it consists of three clearly perceptible motifs, which are used in sequences, it has enough thematic material, so that it could be developed further or used as a sketch for a much larger piece, too. No. 5 Again, a sententia which is a short piece of its own, now in A-B-A form, yielding a small exposition, a development and a recapitulation. (Fun fact for me is bar 11. in 1/4 meter with the sole purpose to place a rest ...) No. 6 Number six for me expresses the idea behind the „sententiae“ as its best: Although it has a simple texture with only staccato semiquavers, the rests at the end of the phrases serve as the period at the end of a sentence, thus structuring the short utterance. No. 7 With number seven – which also bears thematic material which could be developed further -, we come back to a more melancholic mood, somewhat a recapitulation of sententia number 3.

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!

I have no idea why I did not post this here, but I am going to start up a string of tutorials on my Youtube channel. I talk about tuplets at the very basic level, and why you may want to use them in your writing. Give the video a thumbs up, comment if you wish, and don't forget to subscribe if you want to see more of this type of content from me. Video is really long, but I break all my content up into chapters. I'm open to suggestions on how to improve my videos. For example, if there's too much dead space I can try to make my videos progress a little faster. Or if the videos are just too long, I can break them up into smaller segments. I'm literally experimenting with video length.