gandhi

This piece should definitely be getting more attention on this forum. The only critique I could make is that the form is slightly homogeneous, but as a backdrop score (which is what I see this being used as) that doesn't really matter. Great use of orchestration and fantastic rendering - maybe the best synthetic performance I've heard to date on YC. I do think VSL overdoes the vibrato a bit. No one seems to be able to produce a vaguely realistic string synth without doing that, unfortunately.

Beethoven, hands down, for the following reasons: - Nine of the greatest symphonies ever written, so much so that composers for the next 50+ years struggled to stretch beyond his shadow. These symphonies displayed not just the compositional brilliance possessed by many other composers, but also the importance of the revision process, by which he honed his art to the point of completely overhauling the symphony and defying "correct forms" which are taught in today's college composition classes. While many composers were embarrassed to ever let others see anything other than their best work, whether intentionally or not he left his work process open to his successors. For this, he also deserves the title of best composition teacher of all time. - His string quartets underscore the previous title. Unlike his symphonies, they are used extensively as instructional material in studying compositional form & analysis. - The greatest pianist of his time until Liszt, he wrote revolutionary works for piano which even Chopin struggled to surpass. - In contrast to utter nonsense that someone here (no direct quotes) wrote, despite not having the same genius for melodic compositional as Mozart who preceded him, some of the greatest melodies ever written are present in his symphonies (#5 mvt 2, #6 mvt 1 & 5, #7 & #8 mvts 1), sonatas (Pathetique mvt 2, Tempest mvt 2 and others), string works (various), etc. It is certainly true that Beethoven incorporated the arpeggio in many of his melodies, but they are in no way reducible to that. However it is possible to understand how someone could arrive at this conclusion, seeing how Beethoven was possibly the best orchestrator of all time, and used this skill heavily to supplement his melodies by not leaving the melody with any one voice for long. - At least three choral works (Mass in C, Missa Solemnis, 9th Symphony) that each captured the human spirit in ways never before seen. - The most inspirational composer of all time, having overcome a harsh childhood, social awkwardness, financial trouble, and deafness itself.

Probably wrote small, poorly conceived compositions from age 6-8 or so. Although I studied theory and counterpoint in college, I didn't have any formal composition studies until age 23.

Never received any constructive critique on this work. Please leave any specific comments about harmony, form, scoring etc. Although I haven't written in this imitative style for some time now, comments (positive & negative) are still helpful.

Thanks, Qc. Yeah it's pretty short of being an entire movement right now; I ran out of time to develop the structure properly, and I spent only two days on the scoring. My composition and orchestration teachers may be able to help me with this. Thanks for the critique on the transitions - I will work on those.

Sound textures are well picked. Quite impressive for a first full orchestration attempt!

This was written to fulfil an orchestration assignment for one of my classes. I'm not sure that I even consider this a complete 1st draft, but it contains enough motivic material that I figured it was worth posting for review. MP3 Please post constructive critique. Orchestration Final_2006_12_08_0900.MUS

Of course, Mozart was dealing with diversity of pitch cambers in his particular memorizational feat, whereas Glazunov was listening to a piano transcription. I'm not sure which of the two feats would be easier. Correct pitching would be a major faciltator; it's probably also easiest for one to memorize a work for instrument or ensemble type that one most frequently works/listens to. I've often found that my ability to memorize something has little to do with whether I'm actively seeking to memorize it. My anecdotal experience and heresay suggests that advanced retention techniques are best facilitated through looking at a work wholistically, rather than being consciously obsessed with the details. So Mozart may not have had a particular advantage. I am encouraged by hearing of others repeating a similar feat. (And Robinjessome, I have a written source confirming the Mozart story - I'll see if I can find the book at home).

Montpellier, you're right - my comment wasn't appropriate. I've deleted it in case Saul is still reading this forum.

Mozart transcribed an entire Oratorio perfectly, note-for-note, after listening to the piece once. I believe he was 12 at the time. Did Mozart just have great genetics and a great memory, or did he train? I would suggest that the latter was more important. He didn't just train more than everyone else; he trained differently. Pitch recognition and structure recognition are the only skills you need for listening transcription, but there are some related skills that serious musicians would do well to master. Some tips: 1) Mozart had an outstanding sense of absolute (or "perfect") pitch, which added a third dimension to his ability to recognize and retain musical information. You can learn this from tutorials such as the one at PerfectPitch.com. I taught it to myself in middle school. 2) Mozart could read a score and hear the entire thing in his head. This makes use of three skills: a. Study of advanced reading techniques (not just speed reading; more like photo reading). I don't know how this skill might carry over into music reading, but I plan to find out in the next couple months. b. Study of advanced memory retention techniques (see here for an example). Another development skill I plan to work on. c. Relative pitch (college ear training courses offer this, and most piano players are pretty good at it. Train yourself in front of a piano.) d. Thorough understanding of counterpoint and chordal structures (much of which is memorized). When [classical] music is well-formed and you can recognize its structures, you only need to memorize the sequence types and their orders, rather than memorize notes. See writings of Fux, Palestrina, Schoenberg's "Theory of Harmony", and any books on musical form. e. Excellent sightreading ability - formed by practice as well as all the above skills. I'm convinced that devoting onself to studying these skills properly would give most composers better skills than they could get by going to school for a music degree, as I did.

I can't tell which of the instruments are supposed to represent the human voice. But having sung many years in vocal ensembles, I think it would be difficult to sing and probably impossible to sing on pitch. The composer is not making good use of counterpoint. Recommend remedial training in counterpoint. Even if the piece isn't intended to be classical, voice leading is still very important to any choral music. Fux would be a good source for traditional voice leading.

[censored by self]

I like it, but my analysis ability is limited by the lack of information - the piece ends abruptly for an absolute piece, but this is clearly intended to accompany media. Do you have a score, or some copy of the media that is being accompanied?

This piece is of an entirely different caliber from anything else I've heard on this site yet. At the very least, it's the best recording I've heard yet on this site. Is there a score available?

I liked the percussion, but it makes it sound more like a band piece than a symphony. Maybe you should file it is that? Impressive voice synthesis.