Posting new music without scores

Music is temporal, that is, it exists as a process in time. It is therefore very difficult to identify tangible parts of it when it is being performed. A score is simply a visual representation of the sounds in this performance process and therefore allows us to identify a precise point in it. It's infinitely easier in reviewing to say 'your voice-leading in the horns is poor on the second and third beats of bar 45 in the second movement' than 'your voice-leading in the horns is poor in that bit where it goes into 5/4 after the loud bit with the drum and high flutes but before the start of the fugue in the strings about ten minutes from the beginning'. Which is more practical?

Okay, I disagree with a good number of posts in this thread, but I won't bother elaborating too much since it's not going to get anything changed either way at this point. What I couldn't resist pointing out though is this particularly amusing and nonsensical argument. With no offense meant to you, siwi, I find that it's "infinitely easier" in reviewing to say 'your voice-leading in the horns is poor at 2:14'. No need for beats of a bar, no need to describe the music. You're quite right — music IS temporal. That's why the player has a time counter, so that you can pinpoint what portion you're talking about precisely, to the second. :facepalm:

As for the rest, the system is great as it is. If people want you to dissect their orchestration and find neat little tricks they've done, they'll post a score. If they want you to remember that music is made for listening and they're only looking for your reaction to the SOUND, then they don't post a score. And guess what? If you can't interpret a piece of music without its score, then you're more than welcome not to review their work — if they were only after comments about the sound anyway, then they're not missing anything. And if they do want comments about orchestration and technical details that are hard to pick out by ear alone, and they don't post a score because they think someone will trawl YC and snatch their magnum opus.....then they probably shouldn't be on the internet. But more importantly you can ask them to send it to you privately if they trust you and value your commentary. This is not rocket science.

If we add in a read-only player, which is very doable, it will clog up the site's functionality and shoot up our bandwidth, among other things. And for what? Get with the times, people, and let composers have their choice of whether or not they have/need/want to post a score of their work...let's not remove yet another freedom. And — again — no one is forcing you to review something that you feel you can't adequately review without a score. If you need it and don't get it, move on or ask for it personally. There's a reason the system allows people to choose.

I would like to know the good/bad aspects of these possible actions taken to the score posting behavior, not just personal opinions but about true, practical and funtionality matters, if it's easy, difficult, would make everything slower, won't work on many browsers, .... real thing.

If we add in a read-only player, which is very doable, it will clog up the site's functionality and shoot up our bandwidth, among other things.

Ok, so..... we can say it was a bad idea.

By the way,

I'm going to investigate the copyright online registration process, I knew it was on beta testing but I'll see if it's funtional already.

It looks is fully funtional now, check it here

I wouldn't call it a bad idea as such, it's just that it's not particularly practical or necessary.

my position here is very easy, and I'll make it short and clear:

I'm for the posting of the score, all I would like to see is a minimum protection for it, that's it.

If I would be against the posting of scores I wouldn't be asking those measurements, they would be useless if we are not going to post, actually I want to post all my scores, small, large, important, all of them.

Putting it like this I can understand and am even for rather than against the idea which DMA has put up before. A 'minimum kind of protection is always good, but in this does not mean, you select those who can see your score. What would be an idea is that the score is limited to those who have in one way or another, contributed to this site, so that score viewing cannot be done by non-registered members.

BG

... What would be an idea is that the score is limited to those who have in one way or another, contributed to this site, so that score viewing cannot be done by non-registered members.

I like this....

I like this....

Ditto.

What would be an idea is that the score is limited to those who have in one way or another, contributed to this site, so that score viewing cannot be done by non-registered members.

ammm... can you explain a little better this, .... who would choose those members ? or how would it work ? sorry

I know promoting similar forums is against the rules (if someone recall those) but I'd like to ask you (I'll do it too) to browse in possible sites that may have similar issues, like virtual libraries (once I saw one with a read-only pdf, but remember the solution must not affect the overall YC functionality) perhaps, forums about poetry or lyrics, I don't know, just to see if we find something could really work in here, ... Like I said, if we don't find something satisfy us all, we leave it the way it is, and this is not an urgent matter of course...

ammm... can you explain a little better this, .... who would choose those members ? or how would it work ? sorry

I think he's suggesting that only registered users (who are logged in, of course) should be able to view scores.

ooo pretty much like I said, "Public" "Logged in" and "Private" like the other text fields already existing, yeah it could be.

I think he's suggesting that only registered users (who are logged in, of course) should be able to view scores.

He is indeed suggesting what you so adequatly illustrated above, because he is very much against the original idea - at least that is how he understood it - of DMA that the score could only be seen by those members which were selected by the author (cf the list of members posted by DMA who would be entitled to view his scores), in his opinion this is not how sites like this should function. NEvertheless, he understands the need of certain composers for a kind of protection, hence he could settle - even thinks its logical to some extent - that a score should only be visible to registered logged in members, not to visitors or by people who are randomly passing-by.

BG

Well I got the idea of "Public" "Logged in" and "Private" from the current system (the network), when you fill your profile info you can chooce who can see you Zip Code or your E-mail etc, so I thought that same option could be used to the score, if you think the "Private" wouldn't work for scores could be "Public"(all) or "logged in"(Members) only.

EDIT:

and you know what, I can offer myself to review the orchestral works posted without score, the review won't be the same, but there is always much can be said just by listening, because many members when see there is no score don't comment, don't comment at all, and somebody must post something to those fellows, ... (including me, my last thread is the greatest but with no score, I have 2 comments only .

hey I said I can review just by listening but NOT .midi ok ?

While it can be a bit of a hassle to figure out how to convert your music into a PDF(my dad had to help me with this), it's well worth the trouble. Usually, mp3s or MIDIs do not give the listener an accurate perception of the piece. Posting the score can help to alleviate some of the misconception arising from a crude synthetic rendering and provide the basis for more constructive criticisms.

Alright, so...I'm relatively new to this site, but I figured I would chip in my two cents since I'm currently being asked to upload scores of my compositions as well.

First of all, I probably won't end up doing it. Sorry. Everyone keeps saying that they would like to see the score so they can "further analyze the work." What exactly are you looking to analyze? I post the MP3 because I want feed back on the general feel and overall sound of the piece. The last thing I want is another composer, whose opinion I did not ask for, tell me that I missed a mezzo forte marking in the second oboe part. I am the composer: let me handle the specifics.

(All right, all of that sounded incredibly rude, and I didn't mean it that way, honestly, I just feel kinda strongly about it.)

Furthermore, I'm not posting due to copyright issues. It scares the living daylights out of me just throwing my scores out on the Internet willy-nilly. I want to believe the best in everyone, but realistically speaking, you can really never tell.

All of this being said, I 100% believe that you do not need a score in order to assess and analyze a piece to the extent that another musician should. Any other suggestions as far as writing goes is moot to me, because I believe it can eventually lead to questioning your own artistic ideas and lead to unoriginality.

Alright, so...I'm relatively new to this site, but I figured I would chip in my two cents since I'm currently being asked to upload scores of my compositions as well.

All of this being said, I 100% believe that you do not need a score in order to assess and analyze a piece to the extent that another musician should. Any other suggestions as far as writing goes is moot to me, because I believe it can eventually lead to questioning your own artistic ideas and lead to unoriginality.

I disagree and let me tell you why:

As a reviewer on this website, I review a good 10 - 20 pieces a day (usually, I've been lax lately do to a very busy schedule). In all, I would say about 1 out of every 15 works is correctly rendered/performed to the score. The rest of the 15 works it is rather hard to tell various important compositional things: orchestration, thematic development, articulations, writing idiomatically to an instrument, etc. Those things I have realized while being a reviewer are very hard to tell based on just a recording. So, that is why I personally will not give an in depth review to threads that do not have a score - I don't want to make a statement, based off recording, that can not be backed up by score analysis. Now, in regards to the copyright issue... I recently checked with the Library of Congress. Any work that is created utilizing electronic/computerized means is considered to be copyrighted! That means when you input your material into Finale/Sibelius... it is considered to be copyrighted. The reasoning for this, according to the Library of Congress, is that your computer validates via time stamp that you created the work on said date. Myself, I have posted a lot of works on the forum and have no qualms posting the score. I have the time stamps on my computer and have submitted works to be copyrighted - so it's fully up to you.

Way to understand technology. Anyone can just set the clock back and get timestamps from before yours, how can you certify against that without doing the old fashioned stuff?

Just writing something is not guarantee for tons of reasons like those, anything digital can be manipulated.

Likewise, no score = no review IMO unless it's a piece nobody is actually meant to play live, in which case is fine. Otherwise, it's just encouraging lazy behavior and saying it's OK to do it.

Alright, so...I'm relatively new to this site, but I figured I would chip in my two cents since I'm currently being asked to upload scores of my compositions as well.

First of all, I probably won't end up doing it. Sorry. Everyone keeps saying that they would like to see the score so they can "further analyze the work." What exactly are you looking to analyze? I post the MP3 because I want feed back on the general feel and overall sound of the piece. The last thing I want is another composer, whose opinion I did not ask for, tell me that I missed a mezzo forte marking in the second oboe part. I am the composer: let me handle the specifics.

(All right, all of that sounded incredibly rude, and I didn't mean it that way, honestly, I just feel kinda strongly about it.)

Furthermore, I'm not posting due to copyright issues. It scares the living daylights out of me just throwing my scores out on the Internet willy-nilly. I want to believe the best in everyone, but realistically speaking, you can really never tell.

All of this being said, I 100% believe that you do not need a score in order to assess and analyze a piece to the extent that another musician should. Any other suggestions as far as writing goes is moot to me, because I believe it can eventually lead to questioning your own artistic ideas and lead to unoriginality.

Waw! I stand in awe for you and humbly bow my head. Reading your posting you cannot but belong to the three most well-known composers of the world.

What we are looking to analyze, is what is not heared or clearly heared when listening to your music file. Personally, I have been standing in front of the orchestra long time enough to know from experience that not everything your hear in a computergenerated melody sounds the same in real life, nor is it heard as such when performed by a live orchestra. I am not a computer genious but I guess it also has to do with the sound library and generating program you use.

Furthermore, I am a bit puzzled by your posting. This is what you write: "The last thing I want is another composer, whose opinion I did not ask for, tell me that I missed a mezzo forte marking in the second oboe part. I am the composer: let me handle the specifics.". If you do not like other composers to point out where you are wrong or what you did right, why then are you on this forum. We are here to learn from eachother as I pointed out before and as others pointed out as well. Mutually we fertilize eachother.

As for the posting of scores: the above thread clearly illustrates that there are as many pro's as contra's to posting scores; personally I belong to the pro side as there is no music without scores except for the music intendedly conceived as such; A painter paints paintings, a writer writes books. We are no Michelangelo's who are content with resolving a preset difficulty after which we can leave the sculpture alone; a painter without paintings is no painter, never mind how vividly he can talk about his supposed painting, a writer without books is not a writer never mind how detailed the analyse is he makes.

With regard to the score posting issue: it is not because in the US of A copyright is automatically insured when posting a score here on the computer, that this rule is valid in other parts of the world. I have pointed out that this is not the case in larger parts of Europe, for that matter (see previous posts). Furthermore, copyright protected or not, one has never the certainty that a work is not to be copied by somebody else who lives in a completely different part of the world. And guess what? Chances of being caught for that matter are very slim, because a) you are not that well known so that people all over the world would immediately recognize your style hence your music; b)the chance that the composition of the one who actually stole your music is perfomed numerous times in his own country as well as abroad on a world tour is verly slim as well; c) as pointed out previously by someone else: even when copying can clearly be established, few judges are concerned with copyright issues all depending on how famous you are; d) as for all these people who always say that they do not post score but only sound files: perhaps it would take a bit more time - I admmit - but when you really want to "copy" a tune, you sit down, play the fragment and write it out yourself. So, where is your copyright protection then? There is absolutely no way of securing your work; the only way to do so is to leave it in an ivory tower and only talk about it, not posting neither a sound file nor a score.

Last thought: When looking on the internet, several composers who are actually well know - for this you only have to consult that database of Living modern composers - all have scores posted on their site. A mere reflection: how comes that people who are really active professionally in the field of music have no problems adding scores to their site open to everybody to see, consult, print, .... them whereas here, there is such an issue of posting scores on the site. Mikis Theodorakis, the world know Greek composer - has his entire musical archive on the net. You can print the original handwritten files and do with it whaterver you want. Is he afraid of copyright? Do not guess so, otherwise he would for sure protect his works. You can print and copy his works, and yes... among them are several unknown ones, especially youth compositions, even to those who had the pleasure of conducting several of them. Does he care or does he relinquish of putting them online? As said before, there is absolutely no way of a 100 % protecting your work, unless your lock it in a safebox and never let anyone look at it. Being copies is one of the risks of being active in arts, yet ... look at it this way: being copied also means that you are good and worthwhile copying; otherwise people would not do so. Generally I have started to believe that - as mentioned already previously - those who "finally managed" to put a tune down, are those who are the least willing to open up their cupboard for others to see and those who are really talented do not have any problems whatsoever have a look at what they are doing.

BG

Actually, looking back at this, when I posted way back when. I don't really care if they post a score or not. It's music, and to me, music is meant for the ears (I don't have synesthesia.) I admit, I enjoy looking at a score to follow along, I do that with pretty much all the audio files I can find matching sheet music for. But it's not like I can't hear certain things they do, like variations of a theme, or modulation, ect. This should be even more obvious to fellow composers. If I really don't understand something they do at one point, I would question them and wait for their reply. If they want to prep the music for performance, then yes, a score should definitely be provided. For most circumstances, I just enjoy the fact that they shared their music and if I like it well enough, I will tell them.

Actually, looking back at this, when I posted way back when. I don't really care if they post a score or not. It's music, and to me, music is meant for the ears (I don't have synesthesia.) I admit, I enjoy looking at a score to follow along, I do that with pretty much all the audio files I can find matching sheet music for. But it's not like I can't hear certain things they do, like variations of a theme, or modulation, ect. This should be even more obvious to fellow composers. If I really don't understand something they do at one point, I would question them and wait for their reply. If they want to prep the music for performance, then yes, a score should definitely be provided. For most circumstances, I just enjoy the fact that they shared their music and if I like it well enough, I will tell them.

It is indeed nice to have a score with a piece to follow along. "But it's not like I can't hear certain things they do": it is not as much the form as the sonority: I bet you that you would have trouble as well re-orchestrating a Mahler symphony or a Ravel orchestral work due to the harmonizations and the instruments used in Div; hence for all these things (view thread above) it is useful.

It is indeed nice to have a score with a piece to follow along. "But it's not like I can't hear certain things they do": it is not as much the form as the sonority: I bet you that you would have trouble as well re-orchestrating a Mahler symphony or a Ravel orchestral work due to the harmonizations and the instruments used in Div; hence for all these things (view thread above) it is useful.

Oh it CAN be the form too - the site is full of works that disguise the overall form with contrapuntal means etc.

And now I address this little bit of LOL, which I missed.

First of all, I probably won't end up doing it. Sorry. Everyone keeps saying that they would like to see the score so they can "further analyze the work." What exactly are you looking to analyze? I post the MP3 because I want feed back on the general feel and overall sound of the piece. The last thing I want is another composer, whose opinion I did not ask for, tell me that I missed a mezzo forte marking in the second oboe part. I am the composer: let me handle the specifics.

---

All of this being said, I 100% believe that you do not need a score in order to assess and analyze a piece to the extent that another musician should. Any other suggestions as far as writing goes is moot to me, because I believe it can eventually lead to questioning your own artistic ideas and lead to unoriginality.

Questioning your own artistic ideas is not such a bad thing, you could try it sometime. But of course where would my LOLs be without such great statements of grandeur?

If you're posting music without a score, whatever your reason is, then expect a "eh I like it" as the best you'll get. Insightful comments can only be made with access to the score, since WRITING is a big part of the thing and even if you have great live performances of all the things you're posting there are many other things that can be seen only in the score. I mean, sure, if you're amazing you can probably not need to see a score to more or less know how something was written, but it's in the interest of everyone to see how people approach different problems in different ways.

As for you handling the "specifics," other composers can help you proof read your scores in cases you miss things. Or simply put, they may as well have more experience than you (but that's IMPOSSIBLE, of course,) and can point out things you may miss due to the lack of experience. And in either case, even without a score a lot of those "specifics" can be deduced and etc etc.

But really now, why not post your scraggy on myspace? Or elsewhere? If you really don't want composer input, you shouldn't post in a forum mostly populated (or used to be at least) by composers. And likewise, if you're not asking for people's opinions, don't post things at all because you'll get opinions regardless.

My reason for not posting stuff is because 100% of my pieces end up going to contests these days and it means that usually I can't post them anywhere since that's a condition for most of them contests (no publish, no distribution, rights to first performance, etc etc.) And I don't really care about copyright in particular, I'm not that great.

If you want people to review your score, great, post your score. If you want people to review your music, you don't have to post your score. Why do you have to, if all you want is a composer's opinion on your 'sound?'

Personally I haven't gotten around to posting the score, not because I don't want others to see it, but because I've been busy as hell.

Note, to anyone who thinks their music is going to get stolen... all I can do is laugh. You see, when your music gets to a level where it's GOOD enough to get stolen, THEN, you should think about not posting your scores. And I don't think any self-respecting composer out there would steal another composer's music. There are definitely much more marketable things to steal. You can't even sell a piece of music these days, unless you have some kind of epic sheet music that everyone wants to play (which I highly doubt you do. Trust me. If you did, you wouldn't be on this website. *no offense to the others on this site, but we are all students)

To OP, if you're the type of person who doesn't like it when others don't post their scores, then just don't listen to their music. In the end, it's their loss.

If you want people to review your score, great, post your score. If you want people to review your music, you don't have to post your score. Why do you have to, if all you want is a composer's opinion on your 'sound?'

This is a false dillema. As siwi tried to point out there is a link between the composition, the sound, and the score. Scores are to be studied, to be analyzed, to get a better understanding of the piece so the review can go more in-depth.

The issue is not if people want their music OR their scores reviewed, but people (read DMA) want a better protection.

As for that. I am not afraid of copyist as I don't value my music that much or think that I am that genius ;) I think it is fine to want some protection, but let's stay reasonable.

To disable PDF-downloads for non-members seems fair to me. Users that want a first glance can get that by listening. Joining is for the ones who want to go more in depth.

A embedded PDF viewer is also a option, but people are allready complaining about the sites speed. The bandwidth would increase even more by loading the viewer over and over... So I feel the most for the first option.

A discussion like this should not discourage people to attach PDF's. Quite the opposite. Don't hide behind fancy mp3s!

BTW, Daniel, thanks for the vote of confidence that you would trust me to see your scores (your post on page 4?). But I don't considder myself to be a member of your elite group :)

This is a false dillema. As siwi tried to point out there is a link between the composition, the sound, and the score. Scores are to be studied, to be analyzed, to get a better understanding of the piece so the review can go more in-depth.

The issue is not if people want their music OR their scores reviewed, but people (read DMA) want a better protection.

As for that. I am not afraid of copyist as I don't value my music that much or think that I am that genius ;) I think it is fine to want some protection, but let's stay reasonable.

To disable PDF-downloads for non-members seems fair to me. Users that want a first glance can get that by listening. Joining is for the ones who want to go more in depth.

A embedded PDF viewer is also a option, but people are allready complaining about the sites speed. The bandwidth would increase even more by loading the viewer over and over... So I feel the most for the first option.

A discussion like this should not discourage people to attach PDF's. Quite the opposite. Don't hide behind fancy mp3s!

BTW, Daniel, thanks for the vote of confidence that you would trust me to see your scores (your post on page 4?). But I don't considder myself to be a member of your elite group :)

I am glad that finally people start to realize that scores are as important as sound files, if not more important. For all those who want to be a review of their "sound", well ... I have higlighted why sound files alone are dangerous to judge a "sound"; I remember vividly the first time I read a score of the 10th symphony by shostakovitch; the recording revealed things I would not have been able to recreate not knowing how it was done. So all those who say that scores are not necesarrily and are only after sound ... sorry but it's bullshit.

better protection: I agree, but how it is done seems tobe difficult.

ah, shos' 10th :D

My opinion:

Short:

I believe in scores. The end.

Semi-short:

If people want comments on piece that are intended to be played by real people, then the score is more relevant to the mp3 rendering IMO. The real people will read the score, not the mp3. Its like reciting a play by an audio reading of Shakespeare's Hamlet. It doesn't work. Period. Don't be lazy, post a score. No one is going to steal your work: your not good enough to steal from. The only composers people are stealing from are the ones long gone and dead. (Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Tchaikovsky, Holst, Mahler, etc. etc. etc.)