montpellier

Sincerely doubt you'll find film scores available except through studio libraries and the like, and except for a few famous films scores as from John Williams, as stated. I think West Side Story is available as a score. I'd love to get the score for Green Mansions but the chances are very slim indeed.

I suppose it depends on how interesting your sexual life is. If you don't gently caress often it could be short or boring but if those occasions are tempestious then it might get like VW's 6th. What about "My life of loving..." .

Sheet Music Hound is quite good with obscure stuff if it's available at all. They don't have everything, though. Sheet Music Hound - Your On-Line Sheet Music Store I suspect some prices are high because of limited print runs. Berg's Lulu (Orchestral score) will set you back c

Schoenberg was just the start of a splurge of musical activity through serialism that did incur maths and statistics that ended up too often as undifferentiated sound across a span of time, unless very careful consideration was given to how the root material would pan out to determine the structure. Some composers achieved limited success but mostly it has fallen into disuse these days. Some critics of the 50s/60s declared that Schoenberg "missed the trick" by only considering a pitch row, where Webern began to consider time and other parameters of "the note". M

It depends on what happens next; what the Fnat is doing (is it on a weak beat); what harmony underlies, and the way you look on melodic line. Another way would be E#->F(#) not needing the # with the latter if f# is in the key signature. If the theme moves onto G# next, that would be a more elegant way. M

I beg your pardon? Where did I do that? I HATE being misquoted/misrepresented. Not me! So that's not in dispute I'll erase my posts and drop from the discussion. There are none as blind as those who will not see. :D

If you really have learned all this theory - using all these in practical progressions, then... I hate to say it but you should be answering these questions yourself. If you can't, you really need the help of a good teacher just to get started. Perhaps people here will give you lessons though it might take a little time. It's difficult to imagine someone so versed in theory who has not been impelled to try to compose something. Orchestration is an art and the only way to learn it is i) to study scores against passages of music, "just following the score" isn't enough - you need to study the scores, and ii) apply what you've learned by getting simple things performed by local soloists, groups/ensembles/orchestras - or even software like Finale (far from ideal when you're first starting but better than nothing) - and develop a critical ear. To find out how orchestral sounds are made you need to develop a good inner ear (ultimately to be able to hear something and know (or be able to work out) how it's done. Again, studying scores, even for solo instruments is really the only way. You can get good books on orchestration that give examples that you should listen to. Some I believe also come with a CD. The Northern Sounds "Rimsky Korsakov" site is a very good start. Study all the examples to find out what's going on. Unfortunately, musical composition isn't something you can slap a credit card on a counter for and get instantly. It'll take time, work and a lot of frustrations but if you're cut out for it, you'll make progress. So - how to proceed? Just compose something. Doesn't matter if it's simple. Write for a solo melody instrument like a clarinet or violin. Take off from there. Good luck! .

Creating a good accompaniment is part of composition. Have a look for pieces where the accompaniment approaches your requirements then see how it's done. Theory will give you the means to harmonise but doesn't resolve in accompaniments except in the most generic (and usually simple) ways. Alternatively, experiment with different styles. Much depends on the medium you're compsoing for. Is is a vocal with piano; orchestra; pop; classical?

Right on....

huh, I picked up a few phrases that deal with the more carnal aspects...best way to learn to speak a new language. You need to know how to ask what's important. :D If your phrase book translates: qa se g*m*ss* s’ena lepto, as “Please show me the way to the Post Office', buy a different phrase book. Ela mazimou, agapimou

Sounds like any IT project - over budget, late.... ;)

I won't waste time arguing. I mentioned one composer/teacher who does not go along with your viewpoint or QCs. I could name more. I also indicated as a simple example, a group of musicians who certainly made their fortune without an academic knowledge of theory. I finally said that various viewpoints are viable. Yours is fine, as long as you realise it isn't the only one. "modern theory says nothing about rules" I'd put that in my signature but people might think I believe it!

I don't recall saying anything about common practice. I think I said they got where they did with no theoretical knowledge at all. I was mistaken because they obviously had a few guitar chords - apologies about that oversight. .They couldn't even read music. But they did have an excellent musical sense - intuition if you like. Yes, their stuff was limited (though I notice they could use the melodic minor correctly!) but it was arrived at with almost no technical knowledge of music. Particularly for class-styled tuition - as long as we're also saying it does not teach creativity. ."Teaching theory" is, by its nature, teaching rules. And in the area of creativity, rules are sometimes constricting. Certainly in the composition of electroacoustic music, they are likely to thwart rather than assist creativity. Though I do admit a good sense of form is needed. Various viewpoints are viable. cheers.

Not at all. The original statement is a perfectly valid viewpoint. It's one purveyed by Ferneyhough and those teaching composition for today. Traditional theory will undoubtedly help those who want to write tonal music with key signatures and so on. That in turn might help those who want to compose music commercially but it may distract the contemporary composer. After some years of composing I've come to realise that developing a good aural imagination and the ability to document ideas is paramount. That subsumes a certain familiarity with theory put behind me now but I hardly refer to the theory I learned in preparation for the Royal Academy. It teaches you a mindset - which may not matter if you have the creative drive to override it. Otherwise it will limit you to tonality and by extension, form associated with tonality. Already answered above. The classic non-classical example is of course the Beatles who wrote highly successful and very good music with no knowledge of theory whatever. Not bad for singer/songwriters who couldn't even read music... I will concede that "theory" is a good discipline that will help composers control what they're doing. M

If you haven't got time you have two choices: make time (prioritise your day differently) or give up.