New music should be innovative!

Dang, 6 pages in 2 days....my threads are so much better and never get that much attention....maybe I'll title my next number "Classical Music is Worthless" or something....

~Kal

Don't worry. I'm kind of frustrated too. I don't get any comments on my pieces, but I get tons on the threads.

Thanks, Corbin. We definitely needed you to alert us :rolleyes:...

:P

Well, I'm trying to be on the same spelling correcting level as everyone else on this forum.

I think "level of authority" would've been a better word choice ;)

I'd say, after seeing a whole lot of pieces here on the forum, that from young people there's a lot of good potential and I'm surprised at the lot of good ideas that just need time to properly bloom into all they really can be.

Thanks for your words, on behalf of unexperienced composers lot, if I might.

Anyway, I'd just add a little note. Has it been common, or is it just part of our postmodern foolishness to expend more time discussing our aesthetics than actually, let's say... writing music?

I have to apologize for not reading the entire thread before posting but I'm afraid I have to agree with the "lame" sentiment. It's not lame to ask composers to try and be more innovative but it's lame to make assertions that certain chord progressions and such are bad to use. Have you ever heard John Adam's Grand Pianola Music? The last movement is just I-V-I and it's great. Maybe the issue is really just that you're still young and possibly prone to the idea that the more complex the music is the better it is. I used to feel that way as well and while I still like complexity I think it should always take a backseat to effectiveness.

Honestly though, if you think that most composers are dull or uninspired then you can take that as a huge advantage for yourself. If everyone else is focused on things that you consider dated and boring then you can focus on your own progressive ideas and hopefully be in a class all by yourself. Nothing could make someone stand out more and as a result get more attention. I'm not being sarcastic when I say I'm curious to hear some of your work.

Thanks for your words, on behalf of unexperienced composers lot, if I might.

Anyway, I'd just add a little note. Has it been common, or is it just part of our postmodern foolishness to expend more time discussing our aesthetics than actually, let's say... writing music?

First of all, I have spent a lot more time composing than contributing to this forum. Also, talking and arguing civilly does achieve things. People realize where the problems are in their viewpoints, as I have through this discussion. Plus, if we can't discuss our aesthetic attitudes, how are we supposed to practice them?

I have to apologize for not reading the entire thread before posting but I'm afraid I have to agree with the "lame" sentiment. It's not lame to ask composers to try and be more innovative but it's lame to make assertions that certain chord progressions and such are bad to use. Have you ever heard John Adam's Grand Pianola Music? The last movement is just I-V-I and it's great. Maybe the issue is really just that you're still young and possibly prone to the idea that the more complex the music is the better it is. I used to feel that way as well and while I still like complexity I think it should always take a backseat to effectiveness.

Honestly though, if you think that most composers are dull or uninspired then you can take that as a huge advantage for yourself. If everyone else is focused on things that you consider dated and boring then you can focus on your own progressive ideas and hopefully be in a class all by yourself. Nothing could make someone stand out more and as a result get more attention. I'm not being sarcastic when I say I'm curious to hear some of your work.

If you would have read it, I pointed out in one of my first posts that I credit the minimalist movement as being innovative. (that may have come off as being rude, no harsh feelings- I never read through entire threads either).:)

If you would have read it, I pointed out in one of my first posts that I credit the minimalist movement as being innovative. (that may have come off as being rude, no harsh feelings- I never read through entire threads either).:)

You also pointed out your disdain for diatonic compositions and simple cadences. It seems you're a bit at odds with yourself in this thread. At one point you criticize the things I just mentioned but at other points you say that you have no problem with tonality or using simple chord progressions in creative ways. It's really hard to understand exactly what your point is or where your problem lies with other's compositions and it leads me to believe that you haven't really figured it out yourself. You seem to be unhappy with the lack of innovation going on and at the same time have no idea what makes a piece innovative.

To solve this problem, I hereby declare:

From now on, a piece will only be innovative if it includes a LIVE HORSE in its performance and execution.

That is all.

Haha... live horses...

Ok. I am making a stand that composers MUST write bland, repetitive, unoriginal music.

If everyone wrote innovation, innovation would become the standard, and a regression to basic chordal progressions would become the vogue, avant-garde, cutting-edge innovative music.

Also, without composers writing boring music, you wouldn't be able to appreciate your non-boring music. (However you categorize that.)

That being said, I still agree with ELS that a lot of music on this site is not innovative.

No, SSC, only the first piece to include a live horse will be innovative. Then you have to come up with something different. ;)

I'm off to write a piece with a live horse in it...

I once had to play "Musik Im Bauch" by Stockhausen, which involved whipping a giant 9ft man-bird named "Myron". I didn't get the piece when I did it, and therefore it didn't sound very good.

No, SSC, only the first piece to include a live horse will be innovative. Then you have to come up with something different. ;)

I'm off to write a piece with a live horse in it...

SUCCESS!

What if a piece contains one's own orgasm sounds?

Interesting idea.

I can see it now:

Sonatine KY for Viola and Orgasm Tape

What if a piece contains one's own orgasm sounds?

There's that pianist that always makes those sounds when playing what's his name...

Glenn Gould.

Keith Jarret?

...but the majority of these pieces are so tonal and so rhythmically boring, I want to rip my hair out of my head...

... or simply are ok with being boring...

Give "Godzilla Eats Las Vegas" a listen..

is that what you mean by "boring"???

New poll.

I took the poll and saw an alarming result, that everyone who took the poll had the same opinion...

...then realized I was the 2nd person to take the poll. :-\

Thank you to whoever added the last option. Good idea!

I would like to say though that while we may not be pushing boundries, alot of us here that you are criticizing here are buy beginners learning the trade. We are really learning the box and creating a box to later think outside as I like to say. We are then expressign our knowledge in creation.

However, as time goes on and as we mature as composers we will come into our own. Dont worry about it, every one was once diatonic... I think some times we forget that even the best of the best started out being like every one else at some point. We just dont get to see those scores...

"Pleasant to hear" is not my real goal in music.

Just to note: writing music that is enjoyable (pleasant) for humans is one of my goals, but perhaps not the main one.

I think some times we forget that even the best of the best started out being like every one else at some point. We just dont get to see those scores...

Quite right, well said. My favorite composer is Mahler... His command and control of the orchestra is amazing, but he also had MANY years of experience conducting one all year to learn from.

In college he entered his school's composition contest twice and lost both times. So, I would love to see his college scores, or even HS and compare them to the genius he grew into. :)

Quite right, well said. My favorite composer is Mahler... His command and control of the orchestra is amazing, but he also had MANY years of experience conducting one all year to learn from.

In college he entered his school's composition contest twice and lost both times. So, I would love to see his college scores, or even HS and compare them to the genius he grew into. :)

Nice stravinsky quote in your sig.

One more thing, each persons body of music should be almsot indipendantly evaluated, somethign impossible to do...