andrew17

Yeah but he asserted that you can't HAVE music without music history. He didn't say you couldn't MAKE music without music history.

That's like saying I can't take a sip of water if I don't know the molecular structure of H2O.

If you don't do conventional harmony or theory, and you don't play an instrument, maybe you should ask yourself what a conventional university has to offer you.

Yeah I would say my own story sort of disproves this theory. I grew up in a very musical environment. Both my brother and mother being prodigous talents on piano and violin respectively I heard a lot of music in my youth. But I like my father displayed absolutely NO musical interest or ability until I got to highschool. When I was 14 something turned on and I began to play piano. I also discovered I had a sort of photographic memory for music that I had either never had or noticed before. Perhaps I did have this type of talent before 9 but whenever my parents tried to get me to play instruments (and they did often) it did not show itself. I don't know what that means for this theory.

One must also consider tempo. The cliche is of course is that 'sad' pieces are slow and 'happy' pieces are faster. As for specific notes, in my own piano compositions I often find myself writing 'sad' melodies with more stepwise movement as well using a lot of passing tones and chromatic ornamention. If you analyzed my 'happy' melodies you would find they contain more leaps than steps and play around a lot with arpeggios and rolls up and down the keyboard. I also find I'm more inclined to use dotted rhythms when I'm writing cheerful pieces. The emphasis can also be put on dynamics to set the tone of the piece. Just some of my thoughts.

Thanks for all the responses guys they've been a really big help. I have at least six months still before I really have to buckle down and decide what I'm doing for university. So I think until then I'm just going to compose and see how my style develops.

I have a question about pursuing a composition major. It seems that a lot of conservatories / universities now a days are looking for modern styles of composition in their students. They also seem to be looking for those who compose for large ensembles and orchestras. As a person who composes almost entirely for piano in the late classical / early romantic (beethoven, schubert, chopin) idiom, would I have trouble getting accepted to the average composition program.

I think that perhaps it's a bit strange but I find myself influenced a lot less by other composers and a lot more by soloists. I compose entirely for piano solo by the way. If I am composing a Polonaise or a Rondo I often find myself thinking not of an individual work, say Chopin's Polonaise op. 53, for it's own compositional merit. I think about the percussive sound that Vladimir Horowitz brought out of the piano when he played that particular piece and many others. And I think I'm much more influenced by that. I am not really sure if it's a good thing. Melodies and harmonies come very naturally to me and I do need a lot of external influence or inspiration to get them out of my head. It's the nuances of a piece, and the dynamics and the style that different interpreters have brought to different pieces that I often find myself trying to emulate.

I have OCD and it shows up mostly in the way I harmonize my music. I have the compulsion to order things go straight and look right and perfect. If you have OCD you'll know what I mean. I do the same thing when adding harmonies to my pieces. I have a lot of trouble breaking away from simple triadic structures not because I lack a knowledge of harmony but because certain types of harmonies sound really 'off' to me and I can bare to play them. I'm getting better at introducing new harmonies into my composition but I still often find myself play my pieces with different harmonies than I wrote out on the sheet music. Cheating if you will. This also transfers over into my repetoire. I have trouble concentrating on extremley dissonant pieces or pieces with what I think are peculiar sounding harmonies (I am a piano player by the way). I have found myself gravitating mostly to the music Chopin because it combines the romanticism I am a fan of as well as some interesting harmonies. However for some reason I can't really explain his harmonies, even when dissonant or just off, sound very appealing to me. This problem is also the reason I can't deal with a tonal music to me. To me listening to a tonal music is nearly toture (no offense intended to people who love a tonal music, I am not questioning it's validity I just mean that for me personally it is hard to listen to). Hope this was some help. Andrew

Chopin Valse Op. 64 no. 2

Although it is a very famous melody I do think the openning theme of Dvorak's Humoresuqe no. 7 is my most favourite melody.

My perfect pitch abilities are not nearly that which some people have. However I can recognize and hear different pitches. However 2 years ago I had no abilities to do this whatsoever. So I say you can learn it, because I am :P

This is not a rag. The biggest reason why is that there is no syncopation. All the notes are hit on the beat. There's no harmony which is an important part of all rags. This sounds more like some kind of exercise in counterpoint rather than a piece of ragtime. Also it's way too fast. Ragtime is supposed to be slow. I would be weary of calling this piece "The Definitive American Rag"

I have Audiation in way I suppose. I also have math calculating skills. I think about math and music is the same way and I see them both the exact same. I have never really analyzed it that much because it's of no use to anyone around me (until now really). I sort of see the harmonies in my head. I can't play the piano at the moment but I'll try and make some concise notes of how it works next time I'm at the instrument tomorrow.

A few other examples of different types of jazz music.