Tom Lovering

I've only listened to the MIDI (and that, yesterday), and am not sure which parts are being referred to, but would it not be more interesting and productive for you to investigate a solution to this practical problem (e.g. bass flute), thus expanding your orchestration armoury and making your piece playable in the process? That said, I'm currently guilty of unplayable harp parts (although I am about to adapt it for classical guitar, where I can attain the desired arpeggio speed, and actually a closer timbre to my ideal).

I'm liking it so far, although my MIDI card insists on playing everything really badly apart from the timpani and horns, which sound absolutely awesome. I'm finding the timpani a bit loud though overall (might want to tweak the MIDI settings). I love the horns and piano section. I might have to steal that instrument combination. (Having listened to the whole thing) A general comment, some stuff (notable example directly after the horn/piano bit) comes out of the blue a bit. If you have woven that bits of that theme - maybe the low strings rhythm - in earlier (maybe you did, but I didn't notice), it might make more sense. It also jumps around random styles a bit too much for my taste. Maybe if you did it as more of a rondo type thing rather than largely through-composing lots of different bits without as much continuity, it would be more effective. That said, I feel the overall balance of tempo, texture and dynamics is very good. I also disagree with ending on the major, especially if this is the first movement of a larger work. Then again, I can hear you are a better composer than me. :D What is the random squelchy thing by the way? Is it a real instrument or some crazy sped-up looped frog sound or something? Also, I would change the title before a concert. "Lost Temple" sounds quite overtly cheesy. Maybe just put it in Italian or something :D

At the moment I'm stuck between composing intuitively (and rather simply) and composing systematically, with more careful planning and analysis, with the result that many of my compositions seem to be lacking in cohesion and continuity as I am becoming more critical of myself. I'll post a 4 minute beginning to a current orchestral attempt, which on the one hand contains a lot of quite good stuff imo, but on the other hand doesn't really gel together at all. If anybody could, by listening, or generally, identify some specific points or perhaps give me some useful device to help me nurture my muse to maturity that would be helpful. Thanks. (Incidentally, I know the harp part is ridiculously unplayable - with this composition I was more interested in getting down exactly what I want ideally rather than worrying about technical concerns, important though they are). StringsIntro.mid StringsIntro.sib

I don't suppose anyone has any MIDI files of Georgian (not Georgia in America, I mean the ex-Soviet nation) folk music of indeterminate origin? I would quite like to integrate some folk melodies from that part of the world into a new composition. Thanks. Edit: Sorry, this is in the wrong forum. If somebody could knock it up into the one above that would be lovely. Moderation: done.

Incidentally, are you from Montpelier, Bristol or is the name of other relevance? I live in Fishponds, so I'm curious.

True... but if you're a professional composer why are you taking advice from me? That said, I have deadlines to meet, but it makes sense for me to enjoy producing about 5 semi compositions I've enjoyed doing and developing one than labouring over a composition to try to make it original or fulfil some expectation, with the result that my heart isn't in the music so it's crap anyway.

Interesting to hear you say that Nico - I recently read a very similar comment made by Pat Metheny (the absolutely stonking jazz guitarist - www.patmethenygroup.com ), who became an honourary professor of music at 18 years old. It's obviously worth it (after all, if you can make a living out of composing, who needs school?).

A very useful tip I picked up from a wonderful composer last weekend was to enjoy the compositional process above all else. It is easy to get distracted and start thinking about corollary concerns like perfomances and other people's responses to your music, but the most important thing is you. Since realising and accepting that composition is a purely selfish activity in itself (although other people can enjoy the fruits of it) I have found my mind a lot freer to do whatever it does. If nothing else, it's made me say to myself "Why should I care if people complain my music sounds like Tchaikovsky! I wrote it purely for my own pleasure." It's a philosophy I'm adopting now anyway - you might find it useful.

There are so many moments during this where I could easily be listening to Tchaikovsky. Wonderful. I think the MIDI does it little justice though. I would love to hear this performed.

The Piston book is definitely worth it if you are serious about orchestration, giving (for the majority of the book) details on individual sections and instruments and then (my favourite bit) some analysis of how the orchestra as a whole can be (and has been, by composers) manipulated in terms of texture and counterpoint. Very useful.

Although classical music (including baroque, romantic, 20th century) is less popular as a percentage, I would not be surprised if more or a comparable number of people prefer classical music now as in the past. Of people in the past, only the upper and upper-middle classes would habitually have gone to classical concerts, most working class people used mainly to folk music, unable to afford to patronise classical music. Nowadays, I get the feeling that largely classical music is still largely appreciated by the more academic upper-middle and upper classes, as well as now some proportions of lower classes, while perhaps a majority of people who would have been classified 'working class' or lower-middle a century ago now listen predominantly to 'popular' music. Tbh, as a guitarist who has played in rock bands, jazz music, and classical, as well as a composer and (very much infant) conductor, I do not see popular music as completely distinct and alien from 'classical', and certainly reject the 'image' hypothesis as a generalisation of all popular music, although some, and indeed much undoubtedely is.

Hi, I'm just wondering why there isn't a solo instrument subforum, or whether 'piano' could be broadened to accomodate all solo instrument stuff. As a (primarily) classical guitarist, I compose a fair bit for solo guitar, and that has no obvious section on these fora.

I have, along with others in this thread, set out rational arguments as to why mathematics and music have a tangible connection. From Canzano's other posts on this forum I would imagine he knows a great deal about music, and to propagate a shouting war by insulting him is itself, I feel, immature and (more importantly) unnecessary and irrelevant. The issue is, can you put forward any rebuttal to the rational arguments put forward by myself and (better) by Derek? If so, let them be posted so this interesting thread can continue in a constructive manner. On the subject of proof, I had certainly been informed that studies into the apparent lack of structure in some of Debussy's work (specifically Prelude a l'Apres-midi d'un Faune) found that the reason his music was so beautiful despite a lack of conventional structure was on account of the presence of the golden ratio. I read this in programme notes, though, so I don't have much more information unfortunately.

I think of an oboe's sound in terms of an equilibrium between clarinet-like and flute-like, and I think the d'amour is generally more flute-like (when played well). That isn't probably very helpful if you don't think in the odd ways I do though....

Thanks - that sounds really useful I guess actually, because then you can take the music you've developed and try it out in loads of different metres and rhythms before settling on a final idea. Cool! :w00t: I'll try it for a week.