quantum

I'm copying out some Gregorian chant which has non symmetrical beats in every bar. After entering the the notes and re-beaming and adding ties as necessary, I need to copy and paste this section for multiple verses. When I paste, Finale 2006 re beams and re ties everything. I went into Mass Edit Items to Copy, and all are checked. How do I prevent Finale from doing this. I want the copied section to paste exactly how it is beamed.

Thanks for looking at it. I'll try to make a rec of it. No this isn't some satirical comment on contemporary music, just one of my styles. I like modern stuff. In the meanwhile if you want to listen to me play my stuff head over to pianostreet (same user name). Here's the Index of Improvisations, scroll down to find me. The more recent ones are on the second listing. Index of Improvisers and Improvisations

Just tried it. It's not impossible. That is presuming Choir is below the Great manual. Good legato may not be possible in both lines. If it were a French type organ with the G.O. on the bottom it gets tricky. With my hand span I can reach a Maj 9 over the keys, and Maj 10 on the side of the keys.

This piece alternates between contrasting sections, and tends to have a directionality towards always increasing complexity. I began the piece with the idea of a spinning or dizzy dancing like figure and went from there. spindle.pdf

How do I attach actual chords and capo chords on the same staff? Eg: Capo 3: Em, D, C, Am7, etc.... Actual: Gm, F, Eb, Cm7, etc.... So I want to have both sets of chords on the same staff, so the guitar player can use the same score as the keyboard. Using Finale 2006

Is there a reasoning behind you using the closely spaced block chords in the LH? Such chords are wonderful for a deep sonorous effect, or punchy percussive tones like Prokofiev or Messiaen does. It would probably be beneficial to open up the LH figurations a bit, spread the voicing of chords beyond 1 octave and possibly form arpeggio figures around them. Take a look at some Chopin Nocturnes and see how he creates interest in the LH by spreading out the chord and also giving it a suitable accompaniment pattern.

I've seen that before, but forgot what it was called. Is it plausible then to consider it a genre of composition?

I'm sorry that you don't like it very much, but in a way glad too that it doesn't appeal to everyone. You have expressed your opinions and I respect your views. The fact that you disagree with some of my ideas means at least you have taken time to think about the piece and react to it. Not including a tempo marking would encourage any free choice of tempo. I would like the performer to take a given marking and be daring enough to change it, even go against it as they see fit. A graphic score would do similar, encouraging a freer interpretation. The diversion from a specifically notated score is more controversial and risque. People still love to write neo-romantic piano music. Same argument can be made that it could be cliche, why just not play Rach. What if effect is the intended practicality?

For those of you that have read my "Jury piece" thread and wonder if all this guy does is make nonsensical scores. :o I do a lot of improvising. This one is a couple years old, but I do like it. The title resulted after listening back on the recording, rather than inspiring me to make music suited to it. In the moment stuff. Improv - August 27, 2005 "Images of Latin America"

I've gone through university training - mostly in performance not in composition. In a lot of classes you are dealt all of this theoretical stuff that implies something has to be a specific way. I've had a lot of ideas bubbling in my head to writing compositions for the purpose of breaking conventional rules and using music theory to contradict itself. A lot of this score also has to do with randomness, and taking cells of random occurrences and organizing the into some sort of musical idea. The tempo marking of "Allegro...ish" was intended as a stab to the seriousness that many musicologists have to the very narrow range of acceptable temi for many of the great classical compositions. You could play this piece largo if you wanted to and as a composer I would not complain. Even though the time is 57/64 that does not mean that 64 = 1 beat. Just the same as how 6/8 is in many traditional cases thought of as having 2 beats per bar. Another example: many quick waltzes are felt in 1 not 3. Given even a flute choir would not have the necessary ranges to perform this piece, the essence of the score is more important than note accuracy. A flute may not be able to play all notes as written but a good musician would definitely be able to project the general feel and shape of the composition. Again this is a poke against the sometimes obsessive score accuracy tenancies of trained classical musicians. Some people are so seriously into playing exactly as the notation says, that they forget to convey the essence of the music. I'm not really asking you to perform the score as is, rather bend the rules so you can make the music performable and still convey the feel of the score. The element of nonsensicality is very important in this composition, as is the use of randomness within constraints. Would the argument for an emotional response be plausible? For example: abc piece makes me cry, def piece is so majestic, etc. What about a piece that makes you go "Huh? What just happened here. That didn't make sense" (and it wasn't supposed to)

Most of my creative work currently comes out of improvisation, not written composition. I've done a lot of score copying and editing in Finale however, mostly of other people's works. I composed this piece away from the piano. I was in a very humorous mood and wanted to write something wacky. The initial inspiration of this piece came several years ago although I didn't think much of the event at the time. I was at a local university to visit their music library and walked passed the bulletin board for the wind band. On there was a score 1 page in length with a hand written note scribbled with a sharpie: "This is the only thing you have to play for the end of term score excerpts exam." What followed was the wackiest looking, unreasonably complex piece of notation I had ever seen. It made Stockhausen look like Mozart. A few days ago I had an urge to experiment with some of the weirder things you can do in Finale. This piece took about 2 days to put down. There are a lot of impossible looking situations, but within the scope of contemporary music are probably possible to perform with some imagination. I intended to include a lot of score elements you may see with contemporary compositions such as dynamic markings assigned to many individual notes (or rests in this case), complex layered polyrhythms and tuplets, multiple levels of nested dynamics, playing parts of the body other than the fingers, etc. Contrary to my own score indications, I've included here 3 different recordings with marked tempi. I composed the score listing at Quarter = 120, and never thought to play it back slower until after it was finished. I realized after that would make some things ridiculously fast (although it sounds cool). Quarter = 60 sort of seems to be physically playable. I've included Quarter = 40 if you wanted to hear more of the note interactions at a slower tempi. Note that many of the note clusters tremolos and glissandi didn't come out in the midi. Some of the composers who probably influenced look of this score were: Scriabin, Boulez, Stockhausen, Finnissy. The impossibility of many situations in this piece was humorously intended, although there is a part of me that wanted there to be some remote possibility of practical performance. jury_piece01_01.pdf jury_piece01_01(mm120).MID jury_piece01_01(mm60).MID jury_piece01_01(mm40).MID