Guri Harari

Funny how the Mods here have no trouble "putting rude kids" in their place (often by being rude themselves), yet when somebody comes with a real argument against what they are doing, they become mysteriously silent. I don't feel safe here, and it doesn't have anything to do with the rude behavior of some 11 year-old. As much as I find rude speech annoying, I find that what the Mods are doing now is far worse. And if that is the price we are required to pay for a clean forum, I say the price is too high. Yes, I know that nothing I'll say is going to change anything. Nevertheless, it is important for me to state how I feel about the whole thing.

You know, when I hear this kind of "defense" from a moderator, it runs chills in my spine. I may be the new guy on the block, but I can sense unfairness when I see it. I've also seen, on more than one occasion, that a Mod spoke very rudely to other members, and then excusing their behavior by saying "the other guy started it". Well maybe he did, but replying to rude post with another rude post is only making the problem worse, isn't it? I'm not saying this to be judgemental. I'm simply saying that it's rediculous to try and enforce a rule which you do not obey yourself. And this goes not only for the Mods, but for all of us. I've never written an offensive post on YC, and I'll never will, because this issue is important to me. I'll never flame someone or belittle someone on YC, even if "he did it first". Not because I'm such a saint (I'm not - as anyone who met me in person can testify), but because this place means too much to me. And if you care for YC too, I respectfully ask that you do the same.

Yes, I agree. So back to the discussion on "odd time" and whether it is too much for "normal people" to handle :D Phantom, do you know the Jazz Piece called "Take Five"? Written in 5/4, and most people have no trouble swallowing it (except those who hate jazz, and for them the odd meter is the least of their problems with that piece) And how about the theme of the film "Mission Impossible"? Also written in 5/4(at least part of it is. I think there is a transition to 4/4 somewhere in there, but part of it is definitely written in 5/4) There are even examples in 19th century music of odd time. The most famous, no doubt, is the second movement of Tchykovsy's (sp?) "Pathetique" Symphony, which was described by one of the critics as "a waltz for the legged people" ( see? that's why we need critics! for these priceless poetic descriptions! :D ) An even earlier example, though less known, occurs in Chopin's 1st Sonata, Opus 4. I admit I've never heard it performed, but the Larghetto is written in 5/4. And here we are speaking of piece written in the 1820's! So I don't think odd time, by itself, is that hard to swallow. People hear it all the time, in the concert hall, in the movies, and on TV, without even noticing it.

I'm not talking about musicians vs. non-musicians. To be honest, I prefer feedback from musicians, because they can express there opinions in precise technical terms. And I'm sure critics can be very fine people and very astute musicians. But when they wear the critic hat, they are obliged to forget all about being human and listening to music for pleasure and all that rubbish. They must be profesional. And you know what? I'm not even complaining about it. The world needs professonal critics. I'm just saying that as a composer, I should be thinking of the people who'll want to enjoy my music, and not for those who get payed to review it. True. But you see, this isn't about me wanting to get praise at all costs. If the critics love my music and the general audience hates it, then my music failed to communicate the message I tried to convey.

Point well taken. Of-course I was exaggarating a bit to make my point. But a single week, taken on it's own, won't even make a small difference, unless you're going for a goal more specific than "becoming a better composer". You won't become a better pianist in a single week, but you can substantially improve your performance of a specific piece by cramming tons of practice into 7 days. That's what I mean by "a specific goal". And the same is true for composing. If your looking to improve your counterpoint writing, for example, you can make noticable progress in 7 days. And even then, you'll have to be very focused in what you do. Same here. In fact, I haven't composed anything really new in over a year now. It's the kind of "time off" I've been talking about earlier. I find it necessary to my development as a composer - to stop, every now and then, and reflect over what I've written and where I want to go.

Okay, here is what I don't get... If your problem is with flaming and religious wars, what's stopping you from specifically prohibiting these things? I see no point in artificially forcing people to stay "on topic". As long as things don't get nasty, why should we even care if the discussion goes off topic?

I'm afraid you misunderstood me. Cramming tons of "practice" into a single week won't do you any good, no matter what you do afterwards. You simply can't rush your development as a composer in this manner. You can't remove time from the equation, because time (and especially - time off) is a necessary ingridient in the recipe for becoming better. And the same is true to the performing arts, as well as any other serious undertaking you'll ever want to do. You won't become a chess grandmaster or a jiu jitsu black belt in a week, either. That being said, there is one benifit of following your plan. A week of unfocused experimenting will inject a refreshing new wind into the way you view music. Don't call it "practice" though, because it isn't practice. And bear in mind that it may still take months or years for you to actually reap the benifits of this exercise.

It all depends how you do it. If you have a good and natural reason to use odd time, most people won't even notice it. I can give you two examples from my own music. In one of my sonatas, the entire Scherzo is in 5/4 time. When playing it in front of my family, nobody went "hey... this is written in an odd time signature. That's blasphemy! So let's stone the guy with rotten tomatos". They didn't even notice. Why? because the music flowed naturally. The 5/4 meter wasn't thrown in to "make things interesting". It was the soul of the music itself. The second example I have for you is even more striking. The slow movement of the same sonata. It was written in 2/4 time, but one bar is in 3/4 time. In this case, the flow was so smooth that even I didn't notice the change of meter until I sat down and wrote the music on paper. So you see, it isn't true that people get lost in odd time. What is true, is that "making things interesting" tends to confuse people. Mind you, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Indeed, that's the whole point of making things interesting in the first place. :)

Very true. The last people you should write music for, are the critics. The critics are not your audience. In fact, these guys are the only people in the entire world who won't be able to experience your music as your audience does, because their job forces them to analyze and judge it.

Yeah, well... most professionals in any field tend to fall into that trap. Then again, "most" is not "all". And those guys who do have this sad attitude towards music, would never post on our forums anyway. It would be... ehm... "below their dignity" to hang out with guys like us. So really, I don't get the point of this "fight". We are all on the same side, are we not? As for the idea of "writing music everyone would like", good luck. I don't think it is possible, but hey - people also thought that landing on the moon is impossible, and the best dreams are "impossible" ones.

And occasionally, listen also to music that doesn't speak to you. You'll absolutely hate it 90% of the time, but the other 10% will provide you with gems that will help you develop your unique style.

You want to become a better composer in a week? Are you serious? Yes, the same logic that applies to the performing arts also applies to composing. Now imagine an amateur pianist coming to you and asking: "If I go out all spring break (which is this whole week) and play tons of stuff on the piano... Nothing focused, I'll just try a whole bunch of things I've never tried before... Would that make me a better pianist at the end of the week?" You'll send him straight to the looney bin, right? Everybody knows that in order to be a half-decent pianist, you must practice daily (or almost daily) for many years. So why would you think that composing is any different? There is one cavet to what I've said: if you continue to compose and practice your composing technique after the said week is over, than such a week of intense unfocused experiments can benifit you in the long run. But you won't see the imporvement immediately, no matter what you do.

Unfortunately, you can never be 100% sure. The best you can do, is play the theme to as many people as you can, and ask them "do you know this one?". And even then, there's always a possibility of screwing up. It happened to me once, and believe me - it's embarassing as hell. Imagine the horror of discovering that the entire scherzo movement of your latest sonata was subconsciously "borrowed" from an existing piece. Bah! I guess this is one of the professional (?) risks of being a composer, heh?

Four notes? You gotta be kidding... If that were true, composers would have been out of business long ago. Every four-note combination have already been used countless times. Also, classical composers regularly "stole" entire melodies from one another. It was actually a proud tradition of the classical era, to "steal" themes from composers you admired, and then treat those themes in a different way. For example, compare the following two themes: 1. Beethoven's Piano Sonata #1 in F minor, 1st movement - the main theme. 2. Mozart's Symphony #25 in G minor, 1st movement - the second part of the main theme. I'm not sure who "stole" from who in this case, but the two themes are practically identical. Here we are talking of not 4 or 5 notes, but a complete theme of 18 notes (36 notes in the Mozart, because it has each section repeated twice). So what are you going to say? That Beethoven and/or Mozart weren't good enough to write their own original music? It all boils down to whether the "borrowed" theme or fragment works in the new context of your own piece. If it does, then it is artisitically valid (though if the borrowed theme is copyrighted, you might still face trouble in court)

I don't think it is anymore of a cop-out than using a simple chromatic scale as a means of "modulation", which is something that classical composers have been doing for centuries. In any specific case, the question is this: Does it sound right, or does it sound like the composer put it there to get himself out of a sticky harmonical situation? If it sounds like a cop-out, it probably is. By the way, there is at least one composer on YC that used such a device in his otherwise classical sonata. Checkout Cygnusdei's 3rd Piano Sonata. In the Rondo movement, he has a wild stormy Ligeti-style interlude before the final return of the main theme. I'm not sure whether I want to give this guy a Nobel Prize for being so refreshingly original, or slap him in the face for his nerve... But one thing is certain: In Cygnusdei's Sonata, it doesn't sound like a "cop-out" at all.