Rodney Money

It's all good, and Pate, I can share my business with anyone, especially the public, common knowledge of the price of education, if it's used to make my point.

Are you really this young and naïve? I took my blasted time and energy to show you how your music would look in a published score, gave you a sound example also for following along, told you why your score looked bad, and absolutely no appreciating. That's what's wrong with the youth of today. I made it perfectly readable for any string player, even showing you the bowing, and keeping your exact rhythms except how they should look and articulated. This is how it should look to be read by a real life player. The tempo and dynamics are optional and should be replaced with yours, but you did not offer them so I had to write some. When you write music, you must write the correct notes and how we should play them. I understand you were not trying to be rude, you just wanted clarification, but if someone takes this much time just to try to help you understand something that I paid $30,000+ to learn and you are getting it for free, it deserves more than just thanks for the tips. And to clarified, this is how it would look to get an actual player to play what you want. You would need to change the tempo and dynamics for your interpretation though.

I also said this though, and I wished Stravinsky did it also, it is great when they can tie the new technique they learned back into their own style. The only pieces that get recognize are works that are worth publication.

Robin, you are a lot of fun. Great to meet you. Concerning your "Bam!" statement, when composers such as Stravinsky start doing things that are uncharacteristic of them, those pieces are either forgotten or considered lesser than their other works. Take for example his 12 tone technique fanfare "Fanfare for a New Theatre." The only people who like that piece are trumpet players for the technical challenge, music theorists to find all the different rows and their variants, and people in the audience who think they should like it just because Stravinsky wrote it, but the piece sounds like total garbage to the ears and especially compared to his other works. I do, however, love it when composers do something uncharacteristic of themselves, but it is more impressive when they can tie that new technique back into their own style. Now when Beethoven in his 3rd symphony started doing things differently that was a very good thing, because he was still developing his style breaking away from the musical influences that surrounded him. Being fully committed, as in my wife, means I WILL ignore outside influences. Being fully committed to God means I WILL ignore the outside influences of this world. I will not be shaken from those. That's fully committed. I'm not fully committed into my "style of music." I love learning and expanding even writing pieces that didn't sound like me from one piece to the next. You said you are fully committed to your style, and when I hear that I hear unchanging or your words, "harden" no matter what a client tries to commission you to write. I don't understand your definition of being fully committed... but will change if needed. Sounds like a politician.

Nope, I was right the first time. :)

KJ, here's what I would do. I have attached both the score and sound. You have played victim in trying to turn your notation program into a DAW. I can tell because you noted everything so specifically concerning the sound of the "shortness" which on the flipside would be a nightmare to try to read. If you want good sound coming from a notation program like Finale you must create and save your project two ways: how it sounds and how it looks. Viola Score.pdf Viola MP3.mp3

Great job! But you said this can stay and that can stay... if you are committed to your style as I am with my family, you can't pick and choose. In the words of a wise Asian, "It's all or nothing." I can't say to my family concerning vacation, "Wife, you can go to the beach, but baby will stay." Or I will be the one who will stay at home. :) Maybe your definition of your style is too descriptive and needs to be condensed?

Honey in musical terms would be trumpets representing the bees with Harmon mutes, stems out playing fast chromatic and scaled runs while the thick, golden honey itself would be a tuba in its mellow mid to high register falling gracefully downwards to the plop of the double basses' low pizzicato, all the while hearing a lovely waltz in 3/4 and a major key playing in the background.

Happy to be here, my friend!

Great job! Now I want you to compose a tuba concerto with piano accompaniment for $5000, and make the finale in a Yiddish dance. How are you going to commit to your style and abide my wishes also. Go...

Doesn't matter, I won't remember those names anyways. BTW Robin, you haven't answered my question yet on the other topic of being "fully committed to your style."

This makes no since to me. It just sounds to me that you have not done anything musically since you graduated, and you are trying to run away from home to get away from it all. Life is a distraction to composers. Get over it, learn to deal with it, and get your butt writing music. If mommy and daddy are paying for your education, then go where ever you like, but if you are paying for more school understand this, more education should be an investment to your financial future and not just another reason to waste time and go in to debt because you are not ready to make a living in music in the real world. I never heard of any of those "artists" before. It cracks me up when musicians call themselves artists. I've never heard of any of those people so I dedicided to look them up and find out who they were. It would be easy to learn any of those people's style. For Monk, just play one chord over and over, singing nonsence rhythms and hyena noises tricking your audience into believing it's art, for Stanko learn to play classical guitar then play jazz standards, and for Towner learn to play smooth jazz on a trumpet. Not that hard. Heck, I will even teach you those chords, lol.

If you are fully committed to your style, in which you are now hinting that you are, what is it? To be committed at something, such as a relationship, you better know what it is.

Sorry, my pea-sized brain cannot fully grasp this deep concept of being fully committed to something but letting it evolve also subjecting it to change. How can I be fully committed to my faith, then let it evolve over the years to suit my needs showing that I never truly believed in my faith to start with? It is the decision of the composer also, he's the one writing his darn music, and style can and does abruptly change. I see it with my private students everyday and I've expeirenced it also. My style completely changed my first semester in music school, thank the Lord, as I learned new compositional techniques. If I was fully committed to the style of my youth my music would still sound like cheesy contempary Christian music, and my student's pieces would all sound like Katie Perry. These are all deliberate decision also. I am working on two large projects right now, and all my brain keeps telling me is, "Make it compositionally mature to be appreciated by academia but musical enough to be loved by the everyday listener."

The only thing in life I am fully committed to is God, my wife, and my child. Louderart, you haven't answered my question yet, I agree with Plutokat, and Robinjessome, for you to be fully committed to something you must know what it is. So let's say you had to write a marching band show, a ballet, and a piece for 3rd graders for boomwhackers to be performed in front of the governor's mansion, what is your personal composition style, and how would it reflect in all of those three examples?