Xeno

This is ingenious. I believe that I want a score. I think number nine is more like a tango; is there anything that sounds like that in what Piazzola wrote (I'm not familiar with his works). Anyways, you should also look at this: YouTube - Victor Borge - Happy Birthday (2)

I think that classical music is "unpopular" because of a variety of factors: I. Classical music went out-of-favor when more musical styles/fads emerged. II. Misconceptions regarding classical music (such as that it's only for smart people or that all classical music is boring). III. The very style and structure of other styles of music being simpler and easier to follow without losing interest. IV. Classical music is harder to understand from an emotional standpoint because there aren't lyrics with which to understand what the music is saying. (Even if a piece isn't overwhelmingly emotional from a harmonic or melodic standpoint, the lyrics can make up for it with a sad storyline [what comes to my mind is Eleanor Rigby by the Beatles].) I find it kind of sad to see that a lot of people don't really get classical music. I'm glad that I do (to some extent :D).

Here goes: :sadtears::sadtears:Oh, th-thank you s-so much. I would l-like to th-thank A. M. V-Van Vliet for naming this p-piece after me. It's my n-namesake. I w-would like to thank m-my family for getting m-me this f-far and all ways b-believing in m-me. Thank you s-so much!:sadtears::sadtears:

I am soooooo honored that someone named a piece after me:sadtears: I feel like giving one of those melodramatic weepy speeches like at the Oscars ;)

I'll get us all back on track (or at least try) :D I don't worry about players being bored. One element of music is texture and how many players are playing at one time. Altering this to give everyone an 'interesting part' compromises the composition because it can severely affect the texture. Also, if the piece is interesting to listen to, then there won't be any problems with people being bored because they will be busy enjoying the music. [The first time the orchestra I play viola in was rehearsing the Waltz of the Flowers from Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker Suite, the entire viola and cello sections forgot to come in after the harp solo because they were so busy listening to our talented harpist play.] Seriously, why would you care about players being bored if it is necessary to create good music?

Your piece has no distinguishable melody. It almost sounds as if the melody was removed and only the underlying chord progression was left. As a matter of fact, it is only a chord progression. Sorry, but you need to write a piece with melody, harmony, rhythm, texture, timbre, form, and dynamics (those are, after all, the seven elements of music). You piece only seems to contain harmony, timbre, and dynamics.

Or you could just post the finished version... :D

Sorry to say this AA, but I've kinda given up on hearing anything coherent from you.

*chuckles* I have to agree with everyone here in that it doesn't make much sense. We had this problem before (*rubs temples in an annoyed and tired manner*). WHAT IS YOUR POINT? I'm unsure as to whether I'm too stupid or too intelligent to understand it.

It's nice to see something for viola (my main instrument is the viola and it's hard to find good show pieces sometimes). I feel that, overall, your piece is great for a first work, although it tended to lack melody in many parts (melody is something I'm a bit of a stickler about). Other than melody, your piece had no real major problems. The minor problems (in my opinion) are that the piece sometimes wandered away from Baroque style (which isn't altogether a bad thing) and that some of the chords are... awkward. For example, in measure 19 of the first movement, the two triple stops are a bit annoying to play and might not yield the same quality as having just the sixth (just the A and the higher F). Another example is the chord in measure 5 of the third movement, where it would be impossible to play without breaking the chord, which usually doesn't sound as good as it would if you were to change the low A to a D so that the chord was F, D, A, F (reading bottom-to-top). Weird chords, although being more technically difficult, aren't worth it because they tend to sound worse and much of the audience wouldn't notice the slight change in the chord it would require to make it easier to play. The last thing I noticed was that there seemed to be a bit too much jumping from the high register to the low register (and vice versa) for my taste. For example, in measures 13-14, the phrase ends an octave below where most of the phrase was situated. In this case, I would suggest moving the A up an octave. (Maybe it's just me, but it sounds odd.) Just for a few good reference pieces for viola, I would look at... Hoffmiester Viola Concerto in D (especially the 1st mvmt): YouTube - Beijing viola competition??hoffmeister 1rd mov Telemann Viola Concerto in G: Reger Viola Suite, 4th mvmt (maybe: it is far removed from Baroque...): Anyways... I think the piece is good and it is great to see something for viola. :D

I think (after reading about a third of the thread, mind you) that this thread is about why a majority of the GENERAL PUBLIC appears to not enjoy too much dissonance. It seems that most non-musical people don't listen to any music with a lot of dissonance in it. If you look at a non-musical person's iPod, they're going to have a lot of main-stream, consonant music (by Taylor Swift, Coldplay, Green Day, etc.) and not Shostakovich. I believe this thread is about why many people don't like dissonant music and why main-stream music doesn't employ dissonance often. In my opinion, many people today are passive listeners when they listen to their iPods (unless they are singing along with the music, in which case the odds are that they are listening to primarily consonant music); they just let the music wash over them. Dissonant music refuses to "wash over" the listener, insisting instead on attacking the listener. I think that musically-trained people think about the music while they listen to it (active listening) and are better able to cope with extreme dissonance.

Um... I think I already covered this... And I think SSC also covered this... Bottom line: things said like facts are expected to be facts. Things said like opinions are expected to be opinions.

*claps wildly and enthusiastically for SSC" SSC, that was the blunt, in-depth review I wanted to give, but was too lazy to. I decided to write a shorter, more eloquent review that ended up sacrificing most of my complete distaste for the essay and some of the more colorful sarcasm that I had thought-up when reading it. Thanks SSC for getting us all (but mostly AA) back on-topic. :D

Once upon a time, there was this person who decided to write an essay about different styles of music and other random stuff and then submitted it here for it to be evaluated. I evaluated it (quite thoroughly if I might add) and some other people commented and somewhere in it all AA began ranting, spewing irrelevant nonsense about open-mindedness. Then I questioned how AA's rant concerning open-mindedness pertained to the essay, and AA began ranting more about open-mindedness. My point is, AA, if your argument (which I am tempted to dub the "Open-Mindedness/Nonsensicality Argument") is relevant to the essay, please tell me how. How is your Open-Mindedness/Nonsensicality Argument relevant to the essay?

AA, I still don't see the relevancy in whatever argument you are trying to make. I don't understand how you are applying it to the essay and I think you should expound upon the link between your argument and the essay.