Dirk Gently Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 er, so are we gonna get a thread for planning the April Composing Competition? I propose a Scherzo competition, as a kind of homage to April Fool's Day (I dunno :P)...
Guest CreationArtist Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 I propose an April Piano Concerto Competition, as a kind of homage to (I dunno). :P
Mike Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Since we've just reached the Symphonic Competiton's deadline, I'm inclined to put monthly competitions on hold until that's sorted out. Otherwise there will be too much happening at once. Any ideas for the next monthly competition (be it April or May) are probably best aired in this thread: http://www.youngcomposers.com/forum/competition-planning-suggestions-thread-1076-27.html
Spectrums Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 I agree with you. There was not enough planning done and with the Symphonic competition going at the same time, there wasn't a lot of entries.
Mark Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 I agree with Mike, with the judging for the symphonic competition I doubt I'd have time for an April comp. I disagree with Matt, on the grounds that a piano concerto is a fairly massive project, and your sig tells us you've already started :P
Guest CreationArtist Posted April 20, 2007 Posted April 20, 2007 I like the idea of a sonata competition, .. too bad we just had one. How about a flute concerto movement? By the way, the text in my signature is old and I have no current project... but I'm sort of always "working" on concerto ideas and themes, but I've never begun writing.
violinfiddler Posted April 21, 2007 Posted April 21, 2007 Ewww, Mozart.Whatcha gonna do about it? Ooohhh. You are playing with fire there.
Guest CreationArtist Posted April 21, 2007 Posted April 21, 2007 Nothing, because I know you're kidding or lying to yourself. Probably a little bit of both.
Mark Posted April 21, 2007 Posted April 21, 2007 I just fail to see what's so great about Mozart and why he is compared to Beethoven and Bach in terms of 'genius'. He didn't really do anything groudbreaking apart from write way too many symphonies that sound way too alike. This is my opinion. You are entitled to your own opinion and to disagree with mine.
Daniel Posted April 21, 2007 Posted April 21, 2007 "He didn't really do anything ground-breaking". Sure Mozart didn't do anything ground-breaking. He certainly didn't do to the concerto what Beethoven did to the sonata... or to the string quintet what Haydn did for the symphony. He didn't have the soloist enter in the first few bars, for the first time ever; a tradition to be followed, and taken to heart by the Romantics. He also didn't write the first operas ever to be continuously performed from their first performance up to the modern day, operas which are considered to be among the very finest of all written opera, and which were far ahead of their time. He didn't invent the piano quartet, and then have them rejected for publication because they were too difficult, musically, and otherwise. He also didn't write what is considered by musicologists as being the only trio music written after Bach, that equals it. He didn't do much, did he? :w00t:
Mitchell Posted April 21, 2007 Posted April 21, 2007 Brass is good. I am happy with a brass competition.
M_is_D Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 "He didn't really do anything ground-breaking".Sure Mozart didn't do anything ground-breaking. He certainly didn't do to the concerto what Beethoven did to the sonata... or to the string quintet what Haydn did for the symphony. He didn't have the soloist enter in the first few bars, for the first time ever; a tradition to be followed, and taken to heart by the Romantics. He also didn't write the first operas ever to be continuously performed from their first performance up to the modern day, operas which are considered to be among the very finest of all written opera, and which were far ahead of their time. He didn't invent the piano quartet, and then have them rejected for publication because they were too difficult, musically, and otherwise. He also didn't write what is considered by musicologists as being the only trio music written after Bach, that equals it. He didn't do much, did he? :) And still in the end, it's all due to your own personal taste.
Zetetic Posted May 22, 2007 Posted May 22, 2007 I agree that Mozart was revolutionary, probably mostly through influence rather than directly, but just to play devil's advocate: If the piano had actually existed earlier, I'm sure plenty of composers would have seized upon it and invented the piano quartet before he just happened to write one. Also, Gluck's Operas are still performed and enjoyed. Also, he couldn't write fugues, by his own admission (The less said about that organ piece, the better). Then again though, no-one's really been able to do that since Bach, nor have they really wanted to unless as a gimmick, exercise or 'showy-off' thing. :P
oboeducky Posted July 1, 2007 Posted July 1, 2007 So there's not going to be any more of these little ones?
Recommended Posts