GMG Classical Music Forum

Poem for Piano


Best,

Saul


http://www.youtube.com/v/TZY2VavnzlU

Performing Bach's Prelude In C major No.1
http://www.youtube.com/v/gPqJ6gDEgqU

The Swan
By
Camille Saint-Saëns

http://www.youtube.com/v/mOC9p7oDJW4

This is my arrangement of the music Evenstar by Howard Shore from the movie The Lord of the Rings.
http://www.youtube.com/v/YI1isF_9ThM

Here's a new recording of me performing my improvisation called 'Romance'.

Cheers,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/P1I7Ide74zM

This is my arrangement for piano of the music 'The Secret Wedding' composed by James Horner.
The music is a soundtrack for the movie 'Braveheart'.

Hope you enjoy it.

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/KmVGy4DmIJM

Mazurka In A minor for Piano

http://www.youtube.com/v/O2fyAS4nv5o

Frodo's Song.

I composed this a few days ago.

Cheers,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/kZPCjpR45N4

Performing Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata First Movement In C sharp Minor.

Regards,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/D9LrOVfMXNY

The Woods - Original composition for Solo Piano performed by myself...

http://www.youtube.com/v/8abWOG8_9BA

The Western Sea
http://www.youtube.com/v/nHt-xRrQfSo

J.S. Bach - Air on the G String - Piano Version

http://www.youtube.com/v/oxPIZVRmeGw

Latest Work,

Mazurka In E minor.

Regards,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/eOY-sSgpaqM

Performing my Mazurka In B flat major

http://www.youtube.com/v/At_HygbjpDk

Etude
http://www.youtube.com/v/8U2dUDX7EpE

Performing Chopin Valse Op. 64, No.2 In C sharp Minor Regards,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/UsjgbkESdCA

Performing Mendelssohn's Song without Words Op.19, No. 1

http://www.youtube.com/v/hG8zmJg4fOc

So, looks like I've decided to drop by.  ;)

I listened to: Mazurka in Em, Mazurka in Bb, and the Etude. (not really interested in the performances of film scores or works of other composers)

Mazurka in Em- fine piece, though not earth-shattering
Mazurka in Bb- I really liked this one. Excellent theme! The only thing I had trouble with was 2:41-ish... i was liking how it was progressing, but it goes into some goofy rhythm when I was thinking it'd sound nice to slow it down for a short while and let it sing
Etude- cool piece. Did you use really complex rhythms for this one, or is it just one of those things that sounds more rhythmically complex than it really is? (cuz it does sound quite complex!)


You don't use opus numbers, do you? It would probably help keep things in order a bit better, at least for me...

Quote from: Greg on June 08, 2010, 05:20:00 PM
So, looks like I've decided to drop by.  ;)

I listened to: Mazurka in Em, Mazurka in Bb, and the Etude. (not really interested in the performances of film scores or works of other composers)

Mazurka in Em- fine piece, though not earth-shattering
Mazurka in Bb- I really liked this one. Excellent theme! The only thing I had trouble with was 2:41-ish... i was liking how it was progressing, but it goes into some goofy rhythm when I was thinking it'd sound nice to slow it down for a short while and let it sing
Etude- cool piece. Did you use really complex rhythms for this one, or is it just one of those things that sounds more rhythmically complex than it really is? (cuz it does sound quite complex!)


You don't use opus numbers, do you? It would probably help keep things in order a bit better, at least for me...

Wow thank for responding and commenting!

This is great.

These particular pieces that you have listened are some well-thought out musical ideas that I put together and recorded myself playing, though I didn't write them on a piece of paper. I have written over 60 works on paper, but I do have a good number of these random recordings where I just record some music that I was inspired with and thought it would be a good Idea to record them and share them.

That's why I believe that you're right for saying about the Mazurka in B flat major that it has some 'goofy  rhythm' well that can happen when you have a theme and then you try to improvise as you go on with the piece, very natural. But then I sometimes get lucky with these pieces, where I am able to basically more or less pull it off and create a whole composition that has one line from beginning to end, and doesn't sound like an improvisation.

A good example would be the Mazurka In A minor - In this piece I had some very solid ideas and well thought of themes, and then I decided to record myself playing this, and as I played it, I was able to create a harmonious feeling from beginning to end, without going into those 'goofy rhythms' , I'm sure that you will agree.



http://www.youtube.com/v/O2fyAS4nv5o

And the Second example would be 'In the Woods', I basically composed this in one sitting, as I recorded myself playing it, and I wouldn't change a thing in it even if I put it on paper.

http://www.youtube.com/v/8abWOG8_9BA

But then I have what you call real completed compositions written on paper.

An example will be:

http://www.youtube.com/v/Sd4qrOecPew

The Etude was also one of those improvisations, though I had the theme, the main driving figure worked out before.

Thanks for listening and your comments!

Out of those 3, I thought In the Woods was pretty nice. (interesting title for someone from New York- a title like is very stereotypical for Swedish melodic death metal)  :D

(and pretty impressive that you improvised that.)  :o

Now, for the Scherzo- was that a MIDI piano? Are those repeated notes even possible to play?

Quote from: Greg on June 08, 2010, 06:44:27 PM
Out of those 3, I thought In the Woods was pretty nice. (interesting title for someone from New York- a title like is very stereotypical for Swedish melodic death metal)  :D

(and pretty impressive that you improvised that.)  :o

Now, for the Scherzo- was that a MIDI piano? Are those repeated notes even possible to play?

LOL thank you, glad you like 'The Woods' composition!

The Scherzo is a midi of course, its pretty difficult to play I'm sure you noticed that hehe.  You know that no one was able to play Beethoven's hammerklavier until  Liszt came along. Some said that Beethoven composed the music, and 'how to play it' was your own 'problem'.

Anyways, this is sort of what I did with this Scherzo, I knew that it would be almost impossible to pull of that measure with the 16th notes repeated but that's the only way I could have expressed and wanted to express myself in this music. Though now that I think about it, there is a way to edit that section so that it would be 'playable' but it for sure will take off an important charm from the piece, it will never be the same.

I have written 3 other Scherzos, in A major, E major and C sharp minor. I actually used to play the C sharp minor one some years back when I composed it, very enjoyable to play, perhaps I will do a recording in the near future and post it here. The other two in E  and A major are very pianistic and virtuosic, and that will need some time and lots of practicing before reaching a performance level.

Greg, where can I hear some of your music?

Interesting, man. Well, I haven't written anything complete in a long time, so my stuff is pretty old. In fact, I've trashed a few works, cutting my opus list to 6. Right now, I'm just trying to learn all I can so I can write the orchestral work I'll be working on, which will take a while.

Well, Saul, I'll put up my revised opus list in a minute.  :D

Quote from: Greg on June 09, 2010, 01:12:43 PM
Interesting, man. Well, I haven't written anything complete in a long time, so my stuff is pretty old. In fact, I've trashed a few works, cutting my opus list to 6. Right now, I'm just trying to learn all I can so I can write the orchestral work I'll be working on, which will take a while.

Well, Saul, I'll put up my revised opus list in a minute.  :D

This should be interesting.
If you ask me, this is the most important part of the entire site, discussing the works of resident composers of this website.
Would be great to hear some of your work.

Alright! Got them all up:
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,3174.msg418525.html#msg418525

(they're all MIDI, though  ::) )
8)

Hey Greg, what do you think about my Orchestral work In C minor?

Score included in the vid...

Cheers,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/XmYRukSj9sA

I didn't think that was one of your better ones, Saul...

I don't know where to start on this one.  ???

If I could sum it up, it needs interesting lines, more complexity, and more movement in the harmony (some sort of modulation, for example).

Think how interesting a Bach fugue subject can sound alone. Make your lines that interesting. Just compare what you have here to that, and try to emulate that aspect next time you write a new work.

(And don't ever write repeated cello/bass chords like that ever again, please!  :-X )

Quote from: Greg on June 10, 2010, 04:46:27 PM
I didn't think that was one of your better ones, Saul...

I don't know where to start on this one.  ???

If I could sum it up, it needs interesting lines, more complexity, and more movement in the harmony (some sort of modulation, for example).

Think how interesting a Bach fugue subject can sound alone. Make your lines that interesting. Just compare what you have here to that, and try to emulate that aspect next time you write a new work.

(And don't ever write repeated cello/bass chords like that ever again, please!  :-X )

If I may interject here, I agree with all of the above. I felt it needed some more rhythmic variety (certainly more than the triplets on that crescendo) and richer modulation. I couldn't help but feel that the descending motif was leading my ear to think of Chopin's Funeral March.

Quote from: Greg on June 10, 2010, 04:46:27 PM
I didn't think that was one of your better ones, Saul...

I don't know where to start on this one.  ???

If I could sum it up, it needs interesting lines, more complexity, and more movement in the harmony (some sort of modulation, for example).

Think how interesting a Bach fugue subject can sound alone. Make your lines that interesting. Just compare what you have here to that, and try to emulate that aspect next time you write a new work.

(And don't ever write repeated cello/bass chords like that ever again, please!  :-X )

Greg and Petrack

You are both right on everything, that it needs more complexity and more modulation, but I purposely wanted to keep this like that, bleak, slow march like feel to the piece.

Some background.

This was originally one of my piano works, and I decided to orchestrate it, the orchestration was more of ornamentation, then an aspect of complexity.

Interesting how people can relate differently to a specific piece, some people who had heard it liked it very much and some didn't, well I guess not everyone is going to like it.

But I agree that of course this piece can be made better, there is always room for improvement and I deeply appreciate your comments and the fact that you listen to it.

I will post more works later on...

Prelude In E flat Major for Piano

Comments comments comments!!! Looking forward to hear them...

http://www.youtube.com/v/idbAo9OGNJc

Okay, for that one, it sounded nice and interesting harmonically... but, the same thing here- you just have this repeated 16th note line that gets tedious, and the uninteresting melody doesn't really help.

I'd like to hear you write something that has very tasty harmonies like that, but with interesting (non-tedious) lines, and many of them (which interact with each other in an interesting way).  8)

Quote from: Saul on June 10, 2010, 05:14:23 PM
Prelude In E flat Major for Piano

Comments comments comments!!! Looking forward to hear them...

This one is slightly better, but it sounds more like an Etude than a Prelude. I wish the melody was repeated across more than one voice and that the left hand was more ornate (those heavy chords give the whole a sense of not going anywhere).

The harmonic progressions sound a bit weird and off-balance to me (for instance what goes on in the 2nd and 3rd bars), although the "consistency" there could be a factor of interest if there wasn't a constant stream of notes on the right hand.

Greg and Petrarch,

I would call this Prelude a Bachian Minimalistic and to use Greg's wording somewhat 'tedious' in a sense that's right. The melody might not be interesting when its alone, but the combination with the 16th notes and the rich modulation creates an interest imho.

Petrarch,

I do believe that this is a Prelude, I wouldn't call it very difficult to perform, and I didn't envision this to be a study for technique but just a musical work for the sake of music alone, but if anyone can get some technical benefits from performing it, then the more better.

The Harmonic progression  very much reflects the right hand notes, they work interestingly in an oblique mode, and they compliment each other.

Now if you want to hear an Etude, this is the one.

Etude in F sharp Minor 'The Wild River Etude'

Cheers!

http://www.youtube.com/v/R08Mxg4K97k

Quote from: Saul on June 10, 2010, 06:08:43 PM
I do believe that this is a Prelude, I wouldn't call it very difficult to perform, and I didn't envision this to be a study for technique

I didn't mean an Etude because it was difficult, it just sounded like the piece wanted to be one.

Quote from: Saul on June 10, 2010, 06:08:43 PM
The Harmonic progression  very much reflects the right hand notes, they work interestingly in an oblique mode, and they compliment each other.

The thing I was talking about re progression is just the tonal references that sound accidental and undesirable and skew the ear in a direction different than what the music is going (e.g. the dominant sevenths or equivalents that don't go anywhere or the passing tritones).

I would like to see your analysis of the harmonic progression of the piece. Maybe I'm missing something, especially since you say it is minimalistic in the Bach sense.

Quote from: petrArch on June 11, 2010, 05:54:48 AM
I didn't mean an Etude because it was difficult, it just sounded like the piece wanted to be one.

The thing I was talking about re progression is just the tonal references that sound accidental and undesirable and skew the ear in a direction different than what the music is going (e.g. the dominant sevenths or equivalents that don't go anywhere or the passing tritones).

I would like to see your analysis of the harmonic progression of the piece. Maybe I'm missing something, especially since you say it is minimalistic in the Bach sense.

There was no formal harmonic progression here, but whatever sounded good to my ear and the next logical modulation, though perhaps not necessarily the correct one.

Etude In C major No.2 - Presto Brillante - Score Included. Written on 2004.

Regards,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/JtB0d6A1Ppk

Caprice In A minor - Allegro Apassionato

http://www.youtube.com/v/CU1c7Bb0DP0

I'm not going to comment on the Etude...    :-X
however, the Caprice does have some interesting material- but mainly just in the right hand. What you need to do is make the left hand have more interesting material, instead of mainly just banging away at chords throughout.

I think Brahms' advice at trying to make every voice interesting applies here. When you have, for example,  the right hand ending a phrase and holding it as a whole note, and then you just have the left hand banging away at the same chord, that measure is going to be very dull. You have to make every measure interesting, even if it is hard.

If you took some of the good ideas (such as the sixteenth notes at 1:43 and the connection back to the main theme at 2:40) and just wrote with more of a focus on voices/creating interesting sounding lines (and their interactions) rather than repeating patterns, it would be much better.  8)

Quote from: Greg on June 13, 2010, 06:49:02 PM
I'm not going to comment on the Etude...    :-X
however, the Caprice does have some interesting material- but mainly just in the right hand. What you need to do is make the left hand have more interesting material, instead of mainly just banging away at chords throughout.

I think Brahms' advice at trying to make every voice interesting applies here. When you have, for example,  the right hand ending a phrase and holding it as a whole note, and then you just have the left hand banging away at the same chord, that measure is going to be very dull. You have to make every measure interesting, even if it is hard.

If you took some of the good ideas (such as the sixteenth notes at 1:43 and the connection back to the main theme at 2:40) and just wrote with more of a focus on voices/creating interesting sounding lines (and their interactions) rather than repeating patterns, it would be much better.  8)

I accept everything you said about the Caprice, in fact I expected you to point out those things, I was aware of them myself. This was like a study, and I intend to make it better. But I must say that it would be a very difficult task, cause I want to keep the piece classical, you got any ideas of how to keep the harmony very classical and strict and not wonder into a romantic Schuman or Chopin type of composition?

The harmony in here is somewhat similar to the first movement of Mendelssohn's first concerto for piano in  G.

Why don't you want to say anything about the Etude?

Quote from: Saul on June 13, 2010, 07:10:16 PM
I accept everything you said about the Caprice, in fact I expected you to point out those things, I was aware of them myself. This was like a study, and I intend to make it better. But I must say that it would be a very difficult task, cause I want to keep the piece classical, you got any ideas of how to keep the harmony very classical and strict and not wonder into a romantic Schuman or Chopin type of composition?

The harmony in here is somewhat similar to the first movement of Mendelssohn's first concerto for piano in  G.

You really shouldn't worry too much about trying to keep the piece a certain style- just let it be what it wants to be. If it ends up sounding classical, fine. If it ends up sounding romantic, fine. What matters most is that it sounds good.

I'm glad you understand what I'm talking about! I'd love to hear this piece reworked- not thematically, but as I said, more detailed and all. It's a pretty cool piece, but it just needs that extra interest in the details.

Quote from: Saul on June 13, 2010, 07:10:16 PM
Why don't you want to say anything about the Etude?

Almost the whole thing is just one measure copied and pasted, just with different pitches...  ???

Though I should add that if you are really, really, determined to make the piece more "classical"- sounding, you should just revisit and study in depth as much stuff from the classical time period as you can. Even if you've already done that, it might help to refresh your memory of the style before writing (even "classical" harmony can be pretty rich).  :D

Greg, I'm surprised you didn't hear the melody in the etude.

The Caprice has some sections that has good harmony, very classical, but then there is the left hand chords in some sections, and that could be altered. I really don't want to create this extravagance harmony, because I want to keep the music very direct and not wandering to different places.

Scherzo In E major No.1 - Prestissimo for Solo Piano.

http://www.youtube.com/v/3K6DQfKgCrw

This is for Luke,

One of my early Piano Preludes, written in the Baroque Style, hope this is a better example then the F sharp minor.
I would rather compose classical sounding works that are short then long ones that are banal.

http://www.youtube.com/v/Um5caTLNyxI

Quote from: Bulldog on June 24, 2010, 05:18:09 PM
Saul's on a roll now.  In just this one thread, he gets to praise what he likes, reject what he doesn't and give us examples of his compositional skills and performance characteristics.  I'm outta here....

Did anyone stop you from doing the same exact thing?

I don't get the logic, praise, rant and show us what you got... who's stopping you?

Let's hear you!

If you can't enjoy the occasional good argument, False_Dmitry, then aren't you the one who is missing out? ;)

Quote from: Lethe on June 24, 2010, 05:35:56 PM
If you can't enjoy the occasional good argument, False_Dmitry, then aren't you the one who is missing out? ;)

THANK YOU!

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 04:48:19 PM
This is for Luke,

One of my early Piano Preludes, written in the Baroque Style, hope this is a better example then the F sharp minor.
I would rather compose classical sounding works that are short then long ones that are banal.

http://www.youtube.com/v/Um5caTLNyxI

Do you write orchestral music? You're solo piano works are quite boring and lifeless. Oh and they're quite banal as well. You're living in the past and your music and opinions are further proof of this notion.

Here's another example of my 'classical style' composition that I really value. There is no need to break the rules of music in order to create a Romantic work.

This is a chamber work called 'At the Ocean' written for Harp, Flute & Violin.

http://www.youtube.com/v/1zah59tF4GM

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 05:42:06 PM
Here's another example of my 'classical style' composition that I really value. There is no need to break the rules of music in order to create a Romantic work.

This is a chamber work called 'At the Ocean' written for Harp, Flute & Violin.

http://www.youtube.com/v/1zah59tF4GM

There's nothing original or interesting about this composition. It sounds like a rehash of the past. The harmonies are uninteresting and there's not enough variation in the melodies. The rhythmic aspect is almost non-existent. I want to hear your orchestral music. If you haven't composed any, then get to work.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 05:42:06 PM
Here's another example of my 'classical style' composition that I really value. There is no need to break the rules of music in order to create a Romantic work.

This is a chamber work called 'At the Ocean' written for Harp, Flute & Violin.

http://www.youtube.com/v/1zah59tF4GM

This would sound like mud if played by the actual instruments, especially the flute in that range. And how do you intend the violinist to articulate those 32nd note arpeggios since no articulations are indicated? Sounds more like relaxing New Age music to me.

Quote from: Szykniej on June 24, 2010, 06:14:19 PM
This would sound like mud if played by the actual instruments, especially the flute in that range. And how do you intend the violinist to articulate those 32nd note arpeggios since no articulations are indicated? Sounds more like relaxing New Age music to me.

It appears that he has no knowledge of music theory whatsoever and if does he had a poor teacher. Yes, it does sound like New Age "music" to me. Heck, Yanni's better than Saul!!!!  Better yet, I would listen to Yanni before I listen to Saul's music.  :P  In both cases, I would have to be really disperate.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 05:58:47 PM
There's nothing original or interesting about this composition. It sounds like a rehash of the past. The harmonies are uninteresting and there's not enough variation in the melodies. The rhythmic aspect is almost non-existent. I want to hear your orchestral music. If you haven't composed any, then get to work.

There is absolutely nothing?

Are you been open-minded here?

It got over 30.000 views on youtube and all I was getting was praises for this music... but that's ok, you don't have to like it.
I created this with the score today for this website, but I posted this work some time ago without the score, so it got over 30,000 views.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 06:22:30 PM

I created this with the score today for this website, but I posted this work some time ago without the score, so it got over 30,000 views.

So did "Speedo Fail".

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 06:22:30 PM
There is absolutely nothing?

Are you been open-minded here?

It got over 30.000 views on youtube and all I was getting was praises for this music... but that's ok, you don't have to like it.
I created this with the score today for this website, but I posted this work some time ago without the score, so it got over 30,000 views.

And somehow 30,000 views translates to a great composition? Music IS NOT a popularity contest. You don't compose meaningful music and it shows.

I would be very interested in knowing who you studied composition with, because whoever it was obviously didn't teach you anything, but then again, you can't teach somebody to come up with a great piece of music. It has to come from their imagination and heart. Both of which you severely lack.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 06:34:39 PM
Personal opinion, that's what youre all about. Many people disagree with you, and this is a fact.
But anyways, I will post an Orchestral work for you...

Personal opinions are what everybody is about. I'm glad people disagree with me and I know it's a fact. It's also a fact that you live in a dream world where you believe all the birds sing your name and all the people praise you endlessly.

You still fail to answer my question: who did you study composition with?

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 06:39:16 PM
You still fail to answer my question: who did you study composition with?

Too bad Schoenberg isn't alive. If he were, I would find Saul and carry him over to Schoenberg's class by myself and force him to teach Saul.
(though it probably wouldn't help  ::) )

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 06:39:16 PM

Personal opinions are what everybody is about. I'm glad people disagree with me and I know it's a fact. It's also a fact that you live in a dream world where you believe all the birds sing your name and all the people praise you endlessly.

You still fail to answer my question: who did you study composition with?

And we are going back at the very beginning...

'Who did you study composition with'?

Like if I studied with a famous composer would that make my music worthy of your praise?
Would you be afraid to 'like' my music for what it is without knowing with whom I studied with?

Quote from: Greg on June 24, 2010, 06:42:35 PM
Too bad Schoenberg isn't alive. If he were, I would find Saul and carry him over to Schoenberg's class by myself and force him to teach Saul.
(though it probably wouldn't help  ::) )

No, that wouldn't work. You actually have to have a willingness to learn in order to study anything with anybody. If you're not willing to learn, then you're not going to learn anything. Don't you remember that Saul knows it all? :D

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 06:48:15 PM
All I asked you is a simple question, Saul. Do you have any musical training? If yes, who did you study with and where did you study?

If you don't want to answer my question that is your right, but I'm just curious where you received your musical training. That's all I'm asking.

I got some theory lessons from my piano teacher and the rest is all self taught.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 06:50:26 PM
I got some theory lessons from my piano teacher and the rest is all self taught.

May I suggest you take some composition classes? This is really something that you might want to consider. Have you considered going to college and studying classical composition?

Ok Mirrors, here is one of my Orchestral works.

Orchestral Fantasy In D minor
http://www.youtube.com/v/0m-iED0tXtQ

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 06:58:28 PM
I don't think its really necessary, I'm always learning, and there are many possibilities to learn, composition, I have books that I study, and I have taken some good composition lessons from my piano teacher which is a wondrous music scholar and a first rate Bach performer.

Appartently your "scholar" teacher hasn't taught you anything, because your mind is closed off to music of the Romantic and the 20th Century. If you want to be a good composer, then you're going to have to be more open-mind about music. I'm still waiting to hear one of your orchestral works by the way.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 07:07:53 PM
Appartently your "scholar" teacher hasn't taught you anything, because your mind is closed off to music of the Romantic and the 20th Century. If you want to be a good composer, then you're going to have to be more open-mind about music. I'm still waiting to hear one of your orchestral works by the way.

I posted it allready..go back a page......

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 24, 2010, 07:02:02 PM
Prokofiev is the best!

Yes, and listening to him and Saul side by side just makes him sound even greater!

I listened to that Orchestral Fantasy. That one as well sounds like you had a bit too much fun with the copy and paste. Some of the harmonic progressions were nice-sounding to me, but that was about it. That string theme sounds like a techno theme. Copy, paste, alter pitch content, copy, paste, alter pitch content...

Quote from: Greg on June 24, 2010, 07:11:56 PM
Yes, and listening to him and Saul side by side just makes him sound even greater!

I listened to that Orchestral Fantasy. That one as well sounds like you had a bit too much fun with the copy and paste. Some of the harmonic progressions were nice-sounding to me, but that was about it. That string theme sounds like a techno theme. Copy, paste, alter pitch content, copy, paste, alter pitch content...

Funny you say that, many others who have heard it gave me a very positive feedback. But if you want to get nasty, that's your choice.
Just remember that when I  commented on your music I was trying to be nice... you have no idea what kind of desserts I could have made from them. But that's fine, you guys know it all, and know what's good music and what's bad, who's a great composer and who is not, yet you blame me for doing the same thing that you're doing...

Heard of hypocrisy?

Saul,

Your "Orchestral Fantasy" is of significant improvement over your solo piano works. I particularly liked the part from 3:20 - 4:00. To me you were really getting more rhythmically interesting and even dramatic. I did not like the oboe, or what sounded like an oboe, melody, but maybe somebody else did. I still found that there wasn't enough variation in the work to keep me truly interested. It just sounds like, again, a rehash of an older style of music. It seems that you're letting the refinement of the older classical styles keep you from being more dramatic and emotional. I would also work on your counterpoint as it is totally uninvolving and, again, not varied enough. In time, you will learn how to write better for each section of the orchestra. As I said, this work fared a lot better than the piano works, which just seem like exercises and not actual meaningful music.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 07:17:12 PM
Funny you say that, many others who have heard it gave me a very positive feedback. But if you want to get nasty, that's your choice.
Just remember that when I  commented on your music I was trying to be nice... you have no idea what kind of desserts I could have made from them. But that's fine, you guys know it all, and know what's good music and what's bad, who's a great composer and who is not, yet you blame me for doing the same thing that you're doing...

Heard of hypocrisy?

I was being as nice as I could commenting your music. That's why I only commented on some of the stuff you put up- the aspects I thought were decent, and ignored the other stuff.

After awhile, though, it's a bit hard when nearly everything score you put up looks like a giant copy and paste. I'm going to have to point out the negative stuff more if you keep on posting your music (assuming you want an opinion instead of just self-promotion).

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 07:33:35 PM
Saul,

Your "Orchestral Fantasy" is of significant improvement over your solo piano works. I particularly liked the part from 3:20 - 4:00. To me you were really getting more rhythmically interesting and even dramatic. I did not like the oboe, or what sounded like an oboe, melody, but maybe somebody else did. I still found that there wasn't enough variation in the work to keep me truly interested. It just sounds like, again, a rehash of an older style of music. It seems that you're letting the refinement of the older classical styles keep you from being more dramatic and emotional. I would also work on your counterpoint as it is totally uninvolving and, again, not varied enough. In time, you will learn how to write better for each section of the orchestra. As I said, this work fared a lot better than the piano works, which just seem like exercises and not actual meaningful music.

Mirror,

This is a fine small little critic on my Orchestral Fantasy, I agree that this could be done better, I revised it a number of times, I beg to differ with you on the Oboe choice, but everyone has their own taste when it comes to Tone color, I feel it adds Drama. I disagree with your opinion that the piano works are 'studies'. They are not, not these particular ones, but there are a good number of them that I wrote which I'm not happy with at all.

I will soon post my First Symphony, perhaps one of my earliest works. 

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 07:41:34 PM

Mirror,

This is a fine small little critic on my Orchestral Fantasy, I agree that this could be done better, I revised it a number of times, I beg to differ with you on the Oboe choice, but everyone has their own taste when it comes to Tone color, I feel it adds Drama. I disagree with your opinion that the piano works are 'studies'. They are not, not these particular ones, but there are a good number of them that I wrote which I'm not happy with at all.

Perhaps I should have said the oboe part sounded too cliche for me. I love the oboe and the woodwind section in general. When I think of interesting woodwind parts I immediately think of Ravel, because he used these instruments very heavily throughout his compositions. Like, for example, the famous oboe solo in the second movement to his "Piano Concerto in G major." That melody you created had no substance to it, regardless if you think it did or not. I'm the one who is listening to your music and you want an honest opinion, so I gave it to you.

Have you heard much of Rodrigo's music? He wasn't an innovative composer by any stretch of the imagination, but he composed beautiful, creative music. He was a 20th Century composer, but he loved older forms of music and his admiration for Mozart is apparent in many of his works. Anyway, what made his music so interesting is that he incorporated Spanish folk melodies into his music sometimes those folk-like melodies were of his own creation. Anyway, the interesting thing about Rodrigo is that he was also influenced by Impressionism, which would account for his sometimes lush harmonies. I think interesting harmonies is another thing that is missing from your music, Saul.

Anyway, there are plenty of great composers in the 20th Century that took older forms of music and transformed them into something very modern. Just look at Poulenc. He may not be to your liking, but he composed some very backwards looking music that was very inventive. He, too, admired Mozart and you can hear this very elegant perfectionism in his music, but all of the ideas are clearly his own. Poulenc obviously admired traditional classical forms, but even he had to find a way to reinvent them, which meant breaking the rules.

My Symphony In F sharp minor - Allegro con Fuoco - A single movement Symphony, one of my very earliest works.

http://www.youtube.com/v/8Jn1qrXJ_cA

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 08:16:55 PM
My Symphony In F sharp minor - Allegro con Fuoco - A single movement Symphony, one of my very earliest works.

http://www.youtube.com/v/8Jn1qrXJ_cA

Oh boy, where do I start with this work? I'm not going to go into much detail because I'm way too tired, but there wasn't anything memorable to me in this symphony. I realize this is your first symphony. One thing I noticed about your music is you don't leave room for it to breathe. There are no pauses for one to catch their breath. I still found the harmony not interesting. I think some courses in harmony would do some good.

I did enjoy the counterpoint better in this work and there was much more variation, which your other orchestral work didn't have. I still think your piano works sound like exercises. Maybe you should stick to orchestral music. I would also work on your orchestration. A Ravel, Berlioz, Villa-Lobos, Rimsky-Korsakov, or Richard Strauss you are not!

Mirror,

I think you will like my 'Night' orchestral work that I composed some years back. Though this work stands contrary to my current opinion. This work is more 'modern' and I think that that's what you like.. After all....

http://www.youtube.com/v/jh51MB7iqUU

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 08:38:01 PMI think that that's what you like.. After all....

I'm just curious how do you know what I like? I never told you what I liked. I've certainly told you what I don't like. Now, it seems you want me to forget the way you treated me in this thread by wanting me to comment on your music.

I'm listening to your music as a favor to you and so that I can offer you some unbiased criticism, but don't think for a minute that I have forgotten the way you trashed a lot of composers I enjoy. By the way, if you don't like my tastes in music, which you still don't really know anything about, then why continue wanting me to listen and offer criticism of your music?

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 08:45:18 PM
I'm just curious how do you know what I like? I never told you what I liked. I've certainly told you what I don't like. Now, it seems you want me to forget the way you treated me in this thread by wanting me to comment on your music.

I'm listening to your music as a favor to you and so that I can offer you some unbiased criticism, but don't think for a minute that I have forgotten the way you trashed a lot of composers I enjoy. By the way, if you don't like my tastes in music, which you still don't really know anything about, then why continue wanting me to listen and offer criticism of your music?

The trash goes both ways. And I also believe that you startet it, so do you want to move on or to go back to the trash? your call...

And I recall you asked me to post my music here so that you could listen.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 08:52:04 PM
The trash goes both ways. And I also believe that you startet it, so do you want to move on or to go back to the trash? your call...

And I recall you asked me to post my music here so that you could listen.

I didn't start anything, Saul. The honest truth is I would never listen to the kind of music you compose. It's not my cup of tea. It's not harmonically or rhythmically adventurous enough for me.

Until you receive some proper training in composition, you will continue to compose work after work of uninspired drivel in my opinion.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 09:04:18 PM
I didn't start anything, Saul. The honest truth is I would never listen to the kind of music you compose. It's not my cup of tea. It's not harmonically or rhythmically adventurous enough for me.

Until you receive some proper training in composition, you will continue to compose work after work of uninspired drivel in my opinion.

Such a tragedy that you consider Schoenberg's and Prokofiev's utter nonsensical music, as art. I really don't know what drove you there, but that's your choice. The fact that you don't like my music is a good sign that I have not fallen into these composers' twisted ways of composition.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 09:15:55 PMSuch a tragedy that you consider Schoenberg's and Prokofiev's utter nonsensical music, as art. I really don't know what drove you there, but that's your choice. The fact that you don't like my music is a good sign that I have not fallen into these composers' twisted ways of composition.

Actually, if you spent any real time talking with instead of trashing the composers I enjoy, then you would realize that I only like a few select works from Schoenberg and I find Prokofiev's orchestral output more appealing than his chamber and solo instrumental works.

I'm an orchestral man. I enjoy symphonies, ballets, concerti, symphonic poems, etc. This is what I get the most enjoyment out of. There aren't many chamber works that I enjoy. I spend my time listening to music I enjoy, not what somebody else deems acceptable.

What drives me to any composer's music is the music's emotional content and my own intellectual curiosity.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 09:21:42 PM

Actually, if you spent any real time talking with instead of trashing the composers I enjoy, then you would realize that I only like a few select works from Schoenberg and I find Prokofiev's orchestral output more appealing than his chamber and solo instrumental works.

I'm an orchestral man. I enjoy symphonies, ballets, concerti, symphonic poems, etc. This is what I get the most enjoyment out of. There aren't many chamber works that I enjoy. I spend my time listening to music I enjoy, not what somebody else deems acceptable.

Yes you know everything on anything, youre the MUSIC MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE.


Sorry to have crossed your path...

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 09:23:33 PM
Yes you know everything on anything, youre the MUSIC MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE.


Sorry to have crossed your path...

::)  Okay, now you're just being ridiculous.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 09:25:32 PM
::)  Okay, now you're just being ridiculous.

Why, am I not stating reality, that You just know it better and I don't know a thing about anything, not on music , or piano or any other intellectual pursuit...?

So enjoy your triumph , you are the Master KNOW IT ALL Classical Genius that knows everything there is to know about music.
Why are we even talking? what's the point? what ever I will see you will say that I need to be 'schooled'...

Why don't you tell us what you Really think...

Good lord...

I've just woken up here in the UK, and what a gorgeous sunny morning it is. Not the sort of day that makes me want to sit and trudge through this any more. This thread seems to have become another little self-promotional shop for Saul and his youtube clips, so there really is little point continuing here; I"m going to get up and away after I've posted this. Saul, number of views means nothing - if you shout about your stuff loud enough, which is what you have been doing for years, people will come and look, regardless of quality. It's a bit like watching a car crash, in that way. And, yes, some people, passing through, will say nice things, because you have MIDI files of pretty sounds and some simple little chord progressions that move up and down in a new-agey manner (as Greg says, very cut-and-paste), and so on, and a lot of people don't ask for more than that - but they are not pieces that could ever be played in the real world, because they don't work for real instruments, and they certanly have nothing at all to do with 'the rules' that you were talking about yesterday.

But to celebrate the beautiful sunny morning here, and to remind ourselves that youtube does have actual real functioning wonderful music on it....

http://www.youtube.com/v/SoGyKYWlbQc

(not Sfz's favourite piece, this, but I think even he will find it something of a refreshing improvement on what has been posted here overnight. We are asked to believe that the composer of this was as nothing compared to Saul....)

Luke,

Yes, the in the real world pianists don't have fingers to perform my works, and violinists just forgot how to read music.

You're making lots of sense Luke...


But keep on toying around with that drivel of Schoenberg, maybe that's the only thing that makes you feel 'intellectual'.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 09:29:56 PM
Why, am I not stating reality, that You just know it better and I don't know a thing about anything, not on music , or piano or any other intellectual pursuit...?

So enjoy your triumph , you are the Master KNOW IT ALL Classical Genius that knows everything there is to know about music.
Why are we even talking? what's the point? what ever I will see you will say that I need to be 'schooled'...

Why don't you tell us what you Really think...

You do need training in composition there's no question about it. Even a complete classical novice who only knows Mozart or Haydn will tell you that. Maybe you should try to apply to a college that has a real music department? I'm sure there's somewhere you can go, but judging from the compositions you have provided you will not get in based on these works alone nor will you be accepted based on merit. You have to work hard. You have to do some soul-searching. Find out who Saul (whatever your last name is) really is. Get a piece of sheet paper and nice, sharp pencil with a good eraser and get to work. That's the only way you're going to achieve greatness. Some composers are born with their gifts others have to work at and try to better themselves for their entire lives.

I don't think I know everything, but I know an amateur composer when I hear one. My suggestion is dump this "scholar" you have for a teacher and take some composition courses with real, legitimate composers that you can learn from.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 09:44:22 PM
As I stated before, any composer today that can write classical music that follows the rules and traditions of classical music and doesn't compose atonal BS 12 pain headache music such as Schoenberg and his gang, is way superior then any of them beginning with Prokofiev until the latest atonal gatherer of banal sounds.

That was the entire reason of this thread, not to showcase my work, though it somehow happened, that was not the original intention.
I have nothing else to add to this thread, because it was hijacked by those who can't stand a different position in things, and therefore resort to personal attacks. Lots of maturity is still needed in order to discuss things here in a normal manner.

Said the closed-minded, amateur composer.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 09:46:12 PM
Said the closed-minded, amateur composer.

Don't you think you had enough Mr. Musical Master of the Universe?

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 09:47:53 PM
Don't you think you had enough Mr. Musical Master of the Universe?

Just to let everybody know, Saul's original response to me was "Oh, shut up already!" This kind of child-like behavior is exactly what I expect from the world's foremost amateur composer.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 09:35:14 PM
Luke,

Yes, the in the real world pianists don't have fingers to perform my works, and violinists just forgot how to read music.

You're making lots of sense Luke...

Thanks. At last you are taking it on board (it isn't only me, though, Saul, you are having sense thrown at you from all angles, and you refuse to listen. It's rather a sad little spectacle really).

Saul, as has been pointed out to you already, some of what you have written and posted is literally impossible or unrealistic to play, that arpeggiated violin part being the most obvious - something that sounds and looks easy and idiomatic to you, because you've seen that sort of thing done before. But in reality you've missed the point of the figuration, you're not handling it in a way that will work, and the computer can't tell you that the actual notes you are writing won't lie under the fingers. Your piano pieces are playable, I guess, should anyone really want to. But they too are hindered by your notation, which frequently makes no sense or rides clumsily over the shape of the music. I remember one piece of yours, years ago, with horror; it was written in 4/4, I think - the computer default, I guess, you didn't bother to change it - but was clearly supposed to be in 3/8. I'm sure you'll tell us that this was a deliberate compositional choice, as you tried to with that F sharp minor-C major fiasco, but if that is the case it makes as little sense in this case as in that.

Quote from: Saul on June 24, 2010, 09:35:14 PM
But keep on toying around with that drivel of Schoenberg, maybe that's the only thing that makes you feel 'intellectual'.

Doesn't make me feel intellectual, that piece I just posted. No, it just excites me, it feels radiant and beautiful and spine-tingling, it has power, grace, depth of sound.

I love that you are trying to turn this into 'intellectuals' vs poor old you....the thread only went that way, Saul, because you were trying to tell us all about how you follow 'the rules' and, finally, after many years of being tactfully quiet, some of us felt it was time to demonstrate to you how little you understand those rules yourself, as demonstrated in your music. (PAnd the sight of you trying to convince us that you understand 'the rules' better than a composer like Schoenberg who lived and breathed them more than almost any other composer ever has...it's just the funniest, saddest thing I"ve seen online). There's nothing wrong with a little MIDI new-age soundscape if that is your bag, no one would be slating it as they have been here if you hadn't been trying to present it to us as in the spirit of Mozart or Mendelssohn.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 09:55:19 PM

Quote from: SaulDon't you think you had enough Mr. Musical Master of the Universe?

Just to let everybody know, Saul's original response to me was "Oh, shut up already!" This kind of child-like behavior is exactly what I expect from the world's foremost amateur composer.

Well, he has no substance to argue, so he takes childish refuge in name-calling.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 24, 2010, 09:21:42 PM
Actually, if you spent any real time talking with instead of trashing the composers I enjoy, then you would realize that I only like a few select works from Schoenberg and I find Prokofiev's orchestral output more appealing than his chamber and solo instrumental works.

But I find the violin sonatas rank with the very best of Prokofiev's work.

Quote from: Luke on June 24, 2010, 10:06:57 PM
Thanks. At last you are taking it on board (it isn't only me, though, Saul, you are having sense thrown at you from all angles, and you refuse to listen. It's rather a sad little spectacle really).

Saul, as has been pointed out to you already, some of what you have written and posted is literally impossible or unrealistic to play, that arpeggiated violin part being the most obvious - something that sounds and looks easy and idiomatic to you, because you've seen that sort of thing done before. But in reality you've missed the point of the figuration, you're not handling it in a way that will work, and the computer can't tell you that the actual notes you are writing won't lie under the fingers. Your piano pieces are playable, I guess, should anyone really want to. But they too are hindered by your notation, which frequently makes no sense or rides clumsily over the shape of the music. I remember one piece of yours, years ago, with horror; it was written in 4/4, I think - the computer default, I guess, you didn't bother to change it - but was clearly supposed to be in 3/8. I'm sure you'll tell us that this was a deliberate compositional choice, as you tried to with that F sharp minor-C major fiasco, but if that is the case it makes as little sense in this case as in that.

Doesn't make me feel intellectual, that piece I just posted. No, it just excites me, it feels radiant and beautiful and spine-tingling, it has power, grace, depth of sound.

I love that you are trying to turn this into 'intellectuals' vs poor old you....the thread only went that way, Saul, because you were trying to tell us all about how you follow 'the rules' and, finally, after many years of being tactfully quiet, some of us felt it was time to demonstrate to you how little you understand those rules yourself, as demonstrated in your music. (PAnd the sight of you trying to convince us that you understand 'the rules' better than a composer like Schoenberg who lived and breathed them more than almost any other composer ever has...it's just the funniest, saddest thing I"ve seen online). There's nothing wrong with a little MIDI new-age soundscape if that is your bag, no one would be slating it as they have been here if you hadn't been trying to present it to us as in the spirit of Mozart or Mendelssohn.

You still didn't explain to me and others what in the world Schoenberg's music has beside his name? You know there's a saying :"Its all in the name".

The man doodled clumsy sounds together that sound horrible, I wonder who he wrote his music for?

The elite, that means you?

Quote from: Saul on June 25, 2010, 04:25:29 AM
You still didn't explain to me and others what in the world Schoenberg's music has beside his name? You know there's a saying :"Its all in the name".

The man doodled clumsy sounds together that sound horrible, I wonder who he wrote his music for?

The elite, that means you?

You still don't get the point?...

Maybe people like his music just because the like it. Maybe you feel distressed about that, but it's the truth. If people really secretly hated it and only listened because they wanted to seem "elite" or "intellectual," that just wouldn't work for long. They would get tired of it eventually.

Quote from: Greg on June 25, 2010, 04:34:24 AM
You still don't get the point?...

Maybe people like his music just because the like it. Maybe you feel distressed about that, but it's the truth. If people really secretly hated it and only listened because they wanted to seem "elite" or "intellectual," that just wouldn't work for long. They would get tired of it eventually.

I once heard a famous statement by a liberal leader of a western country which I will not name, that 'if we had true culture, we wouldnt have been so afraid to say that we hate classical music'...

Some people hide behind banality in order to say that they understand it, and then put down those who can't stand it. That makes them feel smart.

Hmm . . . "doodled clumsy sounds together that sound horrible" reminds me of something . . . definitely not Schoenberg, of course ; )

Not sure which of your threads this belongs on now - sort of a shame that they had to be split up like that, really. Keep all the craziness in one place, that's what I think....

But anyway, just to offset your 'my 13 year old nephew hated Schoenberg' thing from yesterday, I thought you should know that played a group of 12/13 year olds at my school one of Schoenberg's fabulous op 16 orchestral pieces last week (I remembered that now because I just gave one of them a piano lesson and she was talking about it). I expected them not to like it, I though we might get the groans from the back that a bit of classical can sometimes bring out of them, but no, they just loved it, they loved the vigour and excitement and boldness of it all. Proves nothing, that, and isn't trying to, beyond perhaps suggesting that your nephew's gut reaction doesn't tell us anything of value.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 25, 2010, 05:03:37 AM
Hmm . . . "doodled clumsy sounds together that sound horrible" reminds me of something . . . definitely not Schoenberg, of course ; )

http://www.youtube.com/v/JSMJ0lg9i3s&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/v/xrjg3jzP2uI

thanks, Saul, I've had to listen to a lot of banal pap at work today, it's nice to listen to some real music with a bit of guts and spirit, integrity, skill and beauty to it.  :)

Quote from: Luke on June 25, 2010, 05:07:58 AM
Not sure which of your threads this belongs on now - sort of a shame that they had to be split up like that, really. Keep all the craziness in one place, that's what I think....

But anyway, just to offset your 'my 13 year old nephew hated Schoenberg' thing from yesterday, I thought you should know that played a group of 12/13 year olds at my school one of Schoenberg's fabulous op 16 orchestral pieces last week (I remembered that now because I just gave one of them a piano lesson and she was talking about it). I expected them not to like it, I though we might get the groans from the back that a bit of classical can sometimes bring out of them, but no, they just loved it, they loved the vigour and excitement and boldness of it all. Proves nothing, that, and isn't trying to, beyond perhaps suggesting that your nephew's gut reaction doesn't tell us anything of value.

The idea that one must write music to please a 13-year-old is a bit daft, too ; )

Quote from: Luke on June 25, 2010, 05:11:03 AM
thanks, Saul, I've had to listen to a lot of banal pap at work today, it's nice to listen to some real music with a bit of guts and spirit, integrity, skill and beauty to it.  :)

QFT

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 25, 2010, 05:12:37 AM
QFT

Here's something I composed this morning its called

Atonal Gibberish, hope you enjoy it Karl....

http://www.youtube.com/v/qK7hGEZTbxM

Hm... thanks for that. Just listened to that piece, and going back to the Schoenberg's 3 Piano Pieces that you just posted makes it sound even sweeter.

There is a ton of atonal music out there which sucks and a ton which is great. That piece you wrote is one of the ones that suck (i guess you made it that way intentionally, though). Not sure what your point is in posting that was.

Quote from: Saul on June 25, 2010, 07:00:04 AM
Here's something I composed this morning its called

Atonal Gibberish, hope you enjoy it Karl....

So now you are dividing your music into two catagories, atonal gibberish and tonal gibberish?
;D

Quote from: Greg on June 25, 2010, 08:22:31 AM
Hm... thanks for that. Just listened to that piece, and going back to the Schoenberg's 3 Piano Pieces that you just posted makes it sound even sweeter.

There is a ton of atonal music out there which sucks and a ton which is great. That piece you wrote is one of the ones that suck (i guess you made it that way intentionally, though).

Or, he may not be able to help it ; )

Quote from: Scarpia on June 25, 2010, 08:25:09 AM
So now you are dividing your music into two catagories, atonal gibberish and tonal gibberish?
;D

: )

Quote from: Greg on June 25, 2010, 08:22:31 AM
Hm... thanks for that. Just listened to that piece, and going back to the Schoenberg's 3 Piano Pieces that you just posted makes it sound even sweeter.

There is a ton of atonal music out there which sucks and a ton which is great. That piece you wrote is one of the ones that suck (i guess you made it that way intentionally, though). Not sure what your point is in posting that was.

I guess the reasoning was something like, "I don't like lobster; let me show everyone how lobsters taste bad by cooking one and letting them try it to prove that no one should eat them". From a logical standpoint, the reasoning is wrong in many levels.

Here's some of my favourite piano music ever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVPlE6yHcoE

http://www.youtube.com/v/MVPlE6yHcoE

Quote from: petrArch on June 25, 2010, 08:33:24 AM
. . . From a logical standpoint, the reasoning is wrong in many levels.

Ah! I see you've met Saul.

Hey Greg and Karl, since you guys enjoyed it so much here's another short little Atonal Gibberish I pulled off this afternoon.

Atonal Gibberish No.2 - Poking fun at atonal music

http://www.youtube.com/v/HR51_oQUQGs

Quote from: Saul on June 25, 2010, 01:23:27 PM
Symphony No.2  In G major- Allegro.

This is an early work, and very modern sounding, I was experemnting with everything back then. I didn't get the chance to come back to it and complete it...but maybe sometime in the future I guess.

Cheers,

Saul

Clearly an early work that does not scale the heights of "Atonal Gibberish #2."

Quote from: Scarpia on June 25, 2010, 01:24:54 PM
Clearly an early work that does not scale the heights of "Atonal Gibberish #2."

I know that you really like the Gibberish, for you always listen to this kind of music... Schoenberg and his buddies...

Quote from: Saul on June 25, 2010, 12:16:29 PM
Hey Greg and Karl, since you guys enjoyed it so much here's another short little Atonal Gibberish I pulled off this afternoon.

Don't you have a job?

I think we are encountering him in his vocation......being annoying.

Mike

Saul... you do realize that Atonal Gibberish was in C Major, right?
Are you just too lazy to write in enough accidentals, or do you just fail at everything?

Quote from: Greg on June 26, 2010, 08:09:13 AM
Saul... you do realize that Atonal Gibberish was in C Major, right?
Are you just too lazy to write in enough accidentals, or do you just fail at everything?

I have a feeling he doesn't actually write anything, most of the time; he just plugs a keyboard into his computer, lets his fingers walk over the keys and assumes the results must be meaningful, literate notation. That's why, I'm guessing, most if not all of his pieces (all the ones I've looked at anyway) are 'written' in computer-default 4/4 even if the notes themselves suggest other time signatures entirely; it's why, I'm guessing, his scores are full of nonsense accidentals such as computers generate, with the expecation that the composer will go over them and rewrite them (though I admit that the ignorance of enharmony could just as easily be all Saul); it's why, I'm guessing, the rhythms of his pieces so often seem to sideslip their place in the bar by a semiquaver or so, as if he paused whilst playing and the computer interpreted it as a deliberate rest; why, indeed, the rhythmic notation is so often simply odd and misleading (like the left hand in that last thing)...

Of course, I could be wrong, he could mean all this stuff and spend time typing it in by hand. Which is just as bad, in a different way, maybe worse in fact.

And yeah, I saw that last bar of pure C major with interest (Saul will tell us it was a deliberate mockery of....something).

Quote from: Luke on June 26, 2010, 09:17:02 AM

And yeah, I saw that last bar of pure C major with interest (Saul will tell us it was a deliberate mockery of....something).

I quite like Atonal Gibberish no.1. Neither of the works in this series is very atonal however.

That's because Saul is so imbued with the spirit of pure classicism...

Quote from: Luke on June 26, 2010, 09:17:02 AM

I have a feeling he doesn't actually write anything, most of the time; he just plugs a keyboard into his computer, lets his fingers walk over the keys and assumes the results must be meaningful, literate notation. That's why, I'm guessing, most if not all of his pieces (all the ones I've looked at anyway) are 'written' in computer-default 4/4 even if the notes themselves suggest other time signatures entirely; it's why, I'm guessing, his scores are full of nonsense accidentals such as computers generate, with the expecation that the composer will go over them and rewrite them (though I admit that the ignorance of enharmony could just as easily be all Saul); it's why, I'm guessing, the rhythms of his pieces so often seem to sideslip their place in the bar by a semiquaver or so, as if he paused whilst playing and the computer interpreted it as a deliberate rest; why, indeed, the rhythmic notation is so often simply odd and misleading (like the left hand in that last thing)...

Of course, I could be wrong, he could mean all this stuff and spend time typing it in by hand. Which is just as bad, in a different way, maybe worse in fact.

And yeah, I saw that last bar of pure C major with interest (Saul will tell us it was a deliberate mockery of....something).

Everything you said is pure lie, no wonder you come to the wrong conclusions about me and my works.

I never use any keyboard to write my works. I enter each and every note slowly and thoughtfully.
But why you care for this truth, you're only here to make fun and ridicule.
And I should be the one asking whether you have a job or not.

But I will still continue posting some Atonal Gibberish for everyone to listen. Perhaps one day you will come to the conclusion that appreciating atonal music, has nothing to do with the actual music, but with the person himself. I am fully confident that if you thought that these 2 works were written by Webern, you would have enjoyed them, and even called them 'Great Works', but hitting on 'Saul's music' because its 'Saul's is a really easy target, and somewhat cowardly.

Think about it objectively, why does it takes me an half an hour or an hour to compose such Gibberish pieces, while my classical compositions for piano take some days for me to complete.

I want everyone to think about this question seriously.

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 06:01:14 PM
Think about it objectively, why does it takes me an half an hour or an hour to compose such Gibberish pieces, while my classical compositions for piano take some days for me to complete.

I want everyone to think about this question seriously.

Masochism.

Quote from: Joe_Campbell on June 26, 2010, 06:22:52 PM
Masochism.

I said think about it seriously, if you can...

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 06:31:13 PM
I said think about it seriously, if you can...

I did, and that's the only answer I could come up with. All the music is no good, but inexplicably, your "atonal" (C major) gibberish 2 managed to sustain interest with its frenetic pace, which is more than can be said for any of your other works.

Quote from: Joe_Campbell on June 26, 2010, 06:36:12 PM
I did, and that's the only answer I could come up with. All the music is no good, but inexplicably, your "atonal" (C major) gibberish 2 managed to sustain interest with its frenetic pace, which is more than can be said for any of your other works.

I see,

You like modern atonal music.

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 06:01:14 PM
But I will still continue posting some Atonal Gibberish for everyone to listen.

Cool. Please actually make #3 atonal this time.

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 06:01:14 PM
Think about it objectively, why does it takes me an half an hour or an hour to compose such Gibberish pieces, while my classical compositions for piano take some days for me to complete.

I want everyone to think about this question seriously.

Did your "Etude In C major No.2" take days?

Why don't you think about this question seriously?

The answer to the question is that you just threw in random stuff, thinking that just because it is "atonal," that it is just as good as the atonal music written by Schoenberg (who often spent a little bit more time than "some days" working on his music).

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 06:01:14 PM
I am fully confident that if you thought that these 2 works were written by Webern, you would have enjoyed them, and even called them 'Great Works', but hitting on 'Saul's music' because its 'Saul's is a really easy target, and somewhat cowardly.

No, they don't even sound like Webern, for one. Actually, much of Webern I don't even care for...


oh, wait. Was I supposed to say that out loud? But I want to be accepted by these obscure intellectual circles, and to appear cool, I have to pretend that I like Webern. Oh, gee... now no one will accept me.  :(

Quote from: Greg on June 26, 2010, 07:00:51 PM
Cool. Please actually make #3 atonal this time.

Did your "Etude In C major No.2" take days?

Why don't you think about this question seriously?

The answer to the question is that you just threw in random stuff, thinking that just because it is "atonal," that it is just as good as the atonal music written by Schoenberg (who often spent a little bit more time than "some days" working on his music).


No, they don't even sound like Webern, for one. Actually, much of Webern I don't even care for...


oh, wait. Was I supposed to say that out loud? But I want to be accepted by these obscure intellectual circles, and to appear cool, I have to pretend that I like Webern. Oh, gee... now no one will accept me.  :(

What wasn't atonal about it?

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 07:13:26 PM
What wasn't atonal about it?

The first bar and the last two bars are obviously in C Major.

Even during a couple of bars along the way, only white keys are being used, so it retains a feel close to C Major. The whole thing is just 30" long, and nearly half of it feels C Major.

Just because it goes off into some "strange" accidentals for awhile doesn't make it atonal. If you listen to a typical Prokofiev melody, you'll notice that it might start C Major, go off into something else, and then end up connecting to C Major at the end of the melody.

Peter and the Wolf, for example:

http://www.youtube.com/v/pFF1q6l33Fs&feature=PlayList&p=FE4DD082885DFB25&playnext_from=PL&index=6&playnext=2

Greg, that was probably the worst permutation of that theme to try and demonstrate tonality...was it played before a football game?? :)

Quote from: Joe_Campbell on June 26, 2010, 08:12:57 PM
Greg, that was probably the worst permutation of that theme to try and demonstrate tonality...was it played before a football game?? :)

I couldn't find a good video- I meant to find one that would just show off the string theme, and that's it. I don't think there is one on youtube, though. You'd have to find a complete performance and know when to start it up.

Greg,

Yes, you made some good points about Gibberish No.2, it does sound more classical then atonal at least in some sections...but by the second measure its not C major any more.

Here's Gibberish No.3


http://www.youtube.com/v/2dKNeGKA3GA

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 07:13:26 PM
What wasn't atonal about it?

It didn't lack a key center.

But just remember:
Schoenberg: There's plenty of good music yet to be written in C major.
Charles Rosen: The only problem is that nobody has written any of it yet.

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 06:01:14 PM
Everything you said is pure lie, no wonder you come to the wrong conclusions about me and my works.

I never use any keyboard to write my works. I enter each and every note slowly and thoughtfully.

Really? Truly? Then that is a very sad state of affairs. Tell me why, then, just to take the first thing I look at, your third 'atonal' piece, you 'slow and thoughtfully' entered that recurrent rhythm as four 32nd notes with the last two tied, rather than as two 32nds and a 16th? It looks stupid and it makes the thing harder to read; it's simply the wrong notational choice. I could kind of understand if the computer was making the choices for you - you know I was actually being charitable to you in suggesting that that was how you compose. But, no, you carefully made that notational choice, apparently? Why?

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 06:01:14 PM
But why you care for this truth, you're only here to make fun and ridicule.

If that is true, please tell me why for many years I have seen you write music like this and said nothing at all? I'm only commenting because of your bizzare claims, the other day, to be a better composer than Schoenberg etc., with your own music posted as 'proof' of this. It needed rebutting, that ridiculous claim, Saul.

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 06:01:14 PM
And I should be the one asking whether you have a job or not.

Ask away (though it wasn't me who asked you that in the first place). I teach music, Saul - piano, theory, composition, music history, cello.


BTW, that new one isn't atonal either. I know, you sat there and played some 'funny' black notes into it, but that doesn't make it atonal. Look at those long stretches of pure white note figurations, or those simple triad arpeggiations in the left hand - purely tonal they are, though not functionally tonal (but then your usual tonal music isn't functionally tonal either, very often). Your 'atonal' black notes on top of the latter are no such thing at all, they are just a random approximation of the spicy 'wrong-note' technique sometimes used, in a very calculated way, by Prokofiev, in whom they are not atonal either.

Quote from: Luke on June 26, 2010, 10:07:55 PM
Really? Truly? Then that is a very sad state of affairs. Tell me why, then, just to take the first thing I look at, your third 'atonal' piece, you 'slow and thoughtfully' entered that recurrent rhythm as four 32nd notes with the last two tied, rather than as two 32nds and a 16th? It looks stupid and it makes the thing harder to read; it's simply the wrong notational choice. I could kind of understand if the computer was making the choices for you - you know I was actually being charitable to you in suggesting that that was how you compose. But, no, you carefully made that notational choice, apparently? Why?

If that is true, please tell me why for many years I have seen you write music like this and said nothing at all? I'm only commenting because of your bizzare claims, the other day, to be a better composer than Schoenberg etc., with your own music posted as 'proof' of this. It needed rebutting, that ridiculous claim, Saul.

Ask away (though it wasn't me who asked you that in the first place). I teach music, Saul - piano, theory, composition, music history, cello.


BTW, that new one isn't atonal either. I know, you sat there and played some 'funny' black notes into it, but that doesn't make it atonal. Look at those long stretches of pure white note figurations, or those simple triad arpeggiations in the left hand - purely tonal they are, though not functionally tonal (but then your usual tonal music isn't functionally tonal either, very often). Your 'atonal' black notes on top of the latter are no such thing at all, they are just a random approximation of the spicy 'wrong-note' technique sometimes used, in a very calculated way, by Prokofiev, in whom they are not atonal either.

When I compose I also like the score to look interesting and appealing.
That is why I chose to tie the 32 notes.

I would hardly call it stupid. There is absolutely nothing stupid about it, and it makes no problem to read.
But yes, you're entitled to your opinion, Luke.

This is great that you teach music, good for you.

I work as a sales rep in my father's small business, it's a family owned business for the past 20 years.

Cheers,

Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 10:15:27 PM
When I compose I also like the score to look interesting and appealing.
That is why I chose to tie the 32 notes.

I would hardly call it stupid. There is absolutely nothing stupid about it, and it makes no problem to read.
But yes, you're entitled to your opinion, Luke.

I want to say, first, that everything I'm going to write here I mean completely genuinely, as well-meant compositional advice, and it would be great if you took it on board, because if your music was more legibly written, I promise you that more musicians would take it seriously when they first laid eyes on it. First impressions count, and notation is important, Saul, it tells us a great deal about a composer and how seriously we should take his or her music, just as good or bad spelling tells us about the competence of a writer.

Also, of course, well-notated music is easier to read. I'm good at reading music, Saul, and I know how you mean this music to be played, but because that notation is not really the right one, and because the right one is so obvious, I had to have a second glance at it to check that it was what you really meant. In fact, I've had three or four 'second glances' whilst writing this and the previous post, just to check that, yes, you really did write that rhythm that way - it just seems so odd to me, you see, that someone would choose to do that. As much as possible, it should be a rule of thumb that you don't ask your performers to look twice at your scores as I've had to do - if the rhythm is simple, it needs a simple notation (and if it's complex, it may well need a complex one, and they may have to look at it multiple times before they understand it - that's OK too). The interestingness or appealingness of the score should always come second to legibility, and the sound of the music should always be reflected in the appearance of the score.

In this specific case: of course everyone knows that a tied 32nd is the same as a 16th, but in the context you used it, the 16th is that bit clearer, so you should have chosen to write it that way. There are rules about rhythmic notation, and they are there for a reason - every composer from Bach to Boulez would write that rhythm  32-32-16, not 32-32-32_32, unless there was a specific reason not to.

I've got two examples for you. The first is my own mock-up of the C major scale, in quarter notes, played twice. I hope you agree  that the second notation, in the second bar, is easier to read. The first notation would sound identical, but looks ridiculous, yes? Nevertheless, the deliberate mistakes I made in notating the first one - tying notes that didn't need to be tied, and using wrongly chosen enharmonic accidentals that make the line of the music look different to what it actually is, zig-zagging here where the actual pitch just rises - these are mistakes I've seen over and over in your scores. Not to this extent, obviously, I'm trying to show you why it is a mistake by taking it to an extreme, that's all.

Second example - Beethoven, piano sonata op 110. Here is one of the rare examples where we do see, in the second and third bars, 32 notes tied in the way you did. Notice how in the first bar, the melodic line combines 8ths, 16ths and 32nds in exactly the way I said you ought to - no ties except to clarify the metric structure of the bar (the first quarter-tied-to-dotted-8th could have been written as a double dotted quarter; the 8th tied to a 16th could have been written as a dotted 8th, but the ties here are the right choice because they make clear where the beats lie. This is the correct and normal use of ties). In the next bar, we have the example I really wanted to show you, of what is, essentially, the incorrect use of ties. This notation is bizarre, technically it is wrong, it's confused people for centuries - but that's precisely why it is so wonderful. In a piece of yours, Saul, because this kind of wrong notation is common, we would look at that and just go 'typical Saul, he means straight 16ths I guess'. In a piece of Beethoven, because we know, from all the other perfectly notated bars, that he must have a specific reason for the odd notation, we delve deeper, we discern that the odd notation here must be something to do with the oddness of the music, with this peculiar pulsing repeated note that speeds up and slows down in an organic, natural way, not in the 2-4-8-16 proportions of, well, almost everything else in the classical canon. The 'incorrect' notation here makes us look deeper and understand the very special nature of this passage better, realise that we need to play it in a very special way and with special attention - that's the power of notation, correctly used. If you are going to use ties to tie your 32nds together when they don't actually need to be tied, you lose this potential, as well as just making your music look wrong and uninviting, as explained above.

Quote from: Saul on June 26, 2010, 08:38:54 PM
Greg,

Yes, you made some good points about Gibberish No.2, it does sound more classical then atonal at least in some sections...but by the second measure its not C major any more.

Here's Gibberish No.3


http://www.youtube.com/v/2dKNeGKA3GA

This isn't atonal. Tonal music is allowed to have augmented fourths in it too you know! Much of it just sounds like standard romantic harmony - after bar 5 no one could describe it as atonal, it's very clearly in a key*. Bar 24-27 are pure C major! Again, I quite like this one actually.

*Luke - did you hear the clear references to Janacek's Piano Sonata?

Quote from: Luke on June 26, 2010, 11:03:10 PM
Second example - Beethoven, piano sonata op 110. Here is one of the rare examples where we do see, in the second and third bars, 32 notes tied in the way you did. Notice how in the first bar, the melodic line combines 8ths, 16ths and 32nds in exactly the way I said you ought to - no ties except to clarify the metric structure of the bar (the first quarter-tied-to-dotted-8th could have been written as a double dotted quarter; the 8th tied to a 16th could have been written as a dotted 8th, but the ties here are the right choice because they make clear where the beats lie. This is the correct and normal use of ties). In the next bar, we have the example I really wanted to show you, of what is, essentially, the incorrect use of ties. This notation is bizarre, technically it is wrong, it's confused people for centuries - but that's precisely why it is so wonderful. In a piece of yours, Saul, because this kind of wrong notation is common, we would look at that and just go 'typical Saul, he means straight 16ths I guess'. In a piece of Beethoven, because we know, from all the other perfectly notated bars, that he must have a specific reason for the odd notation, we delve deeper, we discern that the odd notation here must be something to do with the oddness of the music, with this peculiar pulsing repeated note that speeds up and slows down in an organic, natural way, not in the 2-4-8-16 proportions of, well, almost everything else in the classical canon. The 'incorrect' notation here makes us look deeper and understand the very special nature of this passage better, realise that we need to play it in a very special way and with special attention - that's the power of notation, correctly used. If you are going to use ties to tie your 32nds together when they don't actually need to be tied, you lose this potential, as well as just making your music look wrong and uninviting, as explained above.

The famous tied 8th notes (quavers, for them as likes that sort of talk) in the Grosse Fuge are another excellent Beethoven example.

Yeah, but that's a bit too modern and dissonant, dontcha think?

Quote from: Guido on June 27, 2010, 01:31:06 AM
This isn't atonal.

No, but it's been well established that Saul is capable of writing gibberish ; )

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 27, 2010, 06:34:55 AM
No, but it's been well established that Saul is capable of writing gibberish ; )

One out of two ain't bad.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 27, 2010, 06:34:55 AM
No, but it's been well established that Saul is capable of writing gibberish ; )

'Well Established'...?

Don't you know that Atonal is another word for Gibberish?

http://www.youtube.com/v/XJqQk3mgpYY&feature=related

Oh God...I love Roslavets! Have you heard his 3 etudes as well? Bring on the gibberish!!

I will soon record myself and play for you some Atonal Gibberish stuff, Karl...hang tight...

Why did you edit that post after I said I liked Roslavets? Was he not atonal enough for you? Maybe it was because someone actually professing love for the music you condemn as incompetent would completely shatter your argument that the pursuit of modern "gibberish" is a purely intellectual one.

edit - apparently, the adjustment to his post was made before I even commented, which makes no sense

Quote from: Joe_Campbell on June 27, 2010, 07:04:38 AM
Why did you edit that post after I said I liked Roslavets? Was he not atonal enough for you? Maybe it was because someone actually professing love for the music you condemn as incompetent would completely shatter your argument that the pursuit of modern "gibberish" is a purely intellectual one.

edit - apparently, the adjustment to his post was made before I even commented, which makes no sense

No it wasnt that atonal, that's right. but this thing is a flip...

Hey Karl,

Here's something I instantly composed on the piano this morning and recorded myself performing it.

Its called Gibberish Fantastique an Atonal Fantasy...

http://www.youtube.com/v/I7gADAx17Mg

Not quite sure what you are trying to do with these little things, Saul...but anyway, I listened to this one (I see you've abandoned the notation this time, that's probably wise). Well, I listened to some of it anyway, it got a little tedious. But it's not atonal, again, Saul! Not sure what it is, exactly, but it's not atonal. You can't get your fingers out of those often-repeated tonal patterns, it seems.

That's the funniest thing about these pieces of yours - the joke isn't what you think it is (that atonal music is rubbish and easy to write/fake), but that none of the pieces you've presented to us are actually atonal. You've failed to deliver the punchline. And the next level of the joke is that, actually, in a way you are right, it ought to be the easiest thing on earth to knock up a piece of 'atonal gibberish', if you are not bothered about the artistic result. A few clusters and so on would do the job quickly. Even the cat that jumped on the piano whilst I was accompanying a choir on Friday managed it. And yet still you come up with tonal stuff! In internet parlance, I believe this is called a Fail. But it is, in a completely different way to that which you intend, very funny, so thank you for cheering me up post England's dismal exit from the World Cup. That, plus the two Chopin Nocturnes I played whilst the last minutes dragged on, seem to have pulled me through....

I find it interesting, btw, that you claim to have improvised this piece, and therefore give us no score this time. Previously you claimed to have carefully composed the previous two, for which you gave scores, and to have gone over their notation in detail, not let the computer handle it as I was surmising from all the typical horrible computer-style mistakes I pointed out. I wonder, in the light of this new improvised no-score approach, if I really believe that.   

Lucky Luke,

I had to so something innovative what you will call to grab you guys to comment on my music. I had the most fun, and I didn't mean much of what I said. I love all good music, and I have nothing against Rachmaninov or anyone else. In fact I adore some of Rach's preludes.
I wanted to push the limits and see what you will guys will say about these things, and you guys held on tight, kudos for you all, Aside the personal insults and the uncalled for baggage, well its all understandable, no hard feelings.

As to my real feelings about modern music, I don't have anything against it, I just don't like it very much. I really love the Classics, Bach Mozart Mendelssohn, Beethoven, and Chopin, and somewhat disappointed from the fact that many talented composers spend their time creating atonal modern stuff, when they could be writing monumental works, and the fact that we don't have any real genius modern classical composer on the level of the greats. This is somewhat annoying.

What I want to do next, is to create some kind of a composer' challenge where we ask all the composers here to compose a work in Baroque, Classical and Modern, and we then all vote for the best composition.

Cheers,

Saul

Quote from: Luke on June 27, 2010, 08:06:26 AM
I find it interesting, btw, that you claim to have improvised this piece, and therefore give us no score this time. Previously you claimed to have carefully composed the previous two, for which you gave scores, and to have gone over their notation in detail, not let the computer handle it as I was surmising from all the typical horrible computer-style mistakes I pointed out. I wonder, in the light of this new improvised no-score approach, if I really believe that.

I just wanted to create something spontaneous. I never said I wrote this particular piece, it was all fun.
I even said 'Instant composition' another words improvisation.

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:11:07 AM
Lucky Luke,

I had to so something innovative what you will call 'Atonal Thinking' to grab your asses to comment on my music. I had the most fun, and I didn't mean much of what I said. I love all good music, and I have nothing against Rachmaninov or anyone else. In fact I adore some of Rach's preludes.
I wanted to push the limits and see what you will guys will say about these things, and you guys held on tight, kudos for you all, Aside the personal insults and the uncalled for baggage, well its all understandable, no hard feelings.

.....riiiiiiiiiight. I see.... So it was all a big joke, to try to push us....yeah. BTW you shouldn't be surprised we 'held on tight', Saul, you're talking about music we love, passionately. We need no kudos. But, you see, I'm afraid I find it hard to believe that all of this, the last few days, has been a joke. Seems to me like you are altering your position because you're bored of it, or because you've realised that we actually know what we are talking about, or because you've realised that there are in fact flaws in your music, or whatever....

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:11:07 AM
As to my real feelings about modern music, I don't have anything against it, I just don't like it very much. I really love the Classics, Bach Mozart Mendelssohn, Beethoven, and Chopin, and somewhat disappointed from the fact that many talented composers spend their time creating atonal modern stuff, when they could be writing monumental works, and the fact that we don't have any real genius modern classical composer on the level of the greats. This is somewhat annoying.

see, the thing is, as I just said, you have made it impossible to believe anything you say any more. If only this were true, it would be the most sensible statement you've made for many days. But sadly I can't believe that you really think this. You protested too much.

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:11:07 AM
What I want to do next, is to create some kind of a composer' challenge where we ask all the composers here to compose a work in Baroque, Classical and Modern, and we then all vote for the best composition.

I wonder if you'll have takers.

Quote from: Luke on June 27, 2010, 08:01:21 AM
Not quite sure what you are trying to do with these little things, Saul...but anyway, I listened to this one (I see you've abandoned the notation this time, that's probably wise). Well, I listened to some of it anyway, it got a little tedious. But it's not atonal, again, Saul! Not sure what it is, exactly, but it's not atonal. You can't get your fingers out of those often-repeated tonal patterns, it seems.

That's the funniest thing about these pieces of yours - the joke isn't what you think it is (that atonal music is rubbish and easy to write/fake), but that none of the pieces you've presented to us are actually atonal. You've failed to deliver the punchline. And the next level of the joke is that, actually, in a way you are right, it ought to be the easiest thing on earth to knock up a piece of 'atonal gibberish', if you are not bothered about the artistic result. A few clusters and so on would do the job quickly. Even the cat that jumped on the piano whilst I was accompanying a choir on Friday managed it. And yet still you come up with tonal stuff! In internet parlance, I believe this is called a Fail. But it is, in a completely different way to that which you intend, very funny, so thank you for cheering me up post England's dismal exit from the World Cup. That, plus the two Chopin Nocturnes I played whilst the last minutes dragged on, seem to have pulled me through....

A magnificent win by Germany I think you mean.  :) btw I infinitely prefer this improvisation to anything I have ever heard Saul compose before - some of it's actually quite pretty! Again though not atonal as you say.

Quote from: Luke on June 27, 2010, 08:18:54 AM
.....riiiiiiiiiight. I see.... So it was all a big joke, to try to push us....yeah. BTW you shouldn't be surprised we 'held on tight', Saul, you're talking about music we love, passionately. We need no kudos. But, you see, I'm afraid I find it hard to believe that all of this, the last few days, has been a joke. Seems to me like you are altering your position because you're bored of it, or because you've realised that we actually know what we are talking about, or because you've realised that there are in fact flaws in your music, or whatever....

see, the thing is, as I just said, you have made it impossible to believe anything you say any more. If only this were true, it would be the most sensible statement you've made for many days. But sadly I can't believe that you really think this. You protested too much.

I wonder if you'll have takers.

Cheers,

Saul

In order to play a bluff you must  make it real, I'm an artist after all lol.

Anyways, some of the more modern stuff are some my favorite compositions.

Such as Rimsky's flight of the bumble bee, and Moszkowski Etincelles and  Bax The Happy Forest, so there is no way that I totally reject everything within Modern music. I dislike the radical atonal Schonberg and Webern this is absolutely true. I can never connect with it, because their music is the most radical atonal music ever written, but I have not heat against those who like them, if that's their cup of tea.

To all the composers in this site. I wanted to create a composition challenge for anyone that is interested to contribute.
The first challenge :

Compose a short piano piece not more then 2 minutes at any tempi in the Baroque style.
After the presentation here of all the compositions, there will be a poll and everyone will be able to vote for their favorite composition.

Cheers,

Off to work!

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:32:49 AM
In order to play a bluff you must  make it real, I'm an artist after all lol.

lol indeed

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:32:49 AM
Anyways, some of the more modern stuff are some my favorite compositions.

Such as Rimsky's flight of the bumble bee, and Moszkowski Etincelles and  Bax The Happy Forest, so there is no way that I totally reject everything within Modern music.

I find it hard to slot any of these into the category 'modern', I have to say....

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:32:49 AM
I dislike the radical atonal Schonberg and Webern this is absolutely true. I can never connect with it, because their music is the most radical atonal music ever written, but I have not heat against those who like them, if that's their cup of tea.

which, as I said, if it is true, is the most sensible thing you've written for days. Except not tea, please, I don't like tea, that's where Karl and I do not see eye to eye. That could easily become a much more heated issue than anything discussed in recent days here, I imagine...  8)

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:37:32 AM
To all the composers in this site. I wanted to create a composition challenge for anyone that is interested to contribute.
The first challenge :

Compose a short piano piece not more then 2 minutes at any tempi in the Baroque style.
After the presentation here of all the compositions, there will be a poll and everyone will be able to vote for their favorite composition.

Cheers,

Off to work!

Shouldn't you put this on the Composing/performing board, Saul?

I'll be interested to see if anyone takes up this challenge. Call me a spoilsport but I won't - I have enough to do trying to fit in the pieces I am actually desperate to write as it stands!

Please make it a "blind" poll, if this idea takes off.

Music is NOT a competition, Saul. To quote Bartok: "Competitions are for horses, not artists."

If you don't understand this, then you're not a composer of any merit.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 27, 2010, 08:52:59 AM
Music is NOT a competition, Saul. To quote Bartok: "Competitions are for horses, not artists."

If you don't understand this, then you're not a composer of any merit.

Concerto = A concerto (from the Italian: concerto, plural concerti or, often, the anglicised form concertos) as a musical work is a composition usually in three parts or movements, in which (usually) one solo instrument (for instance, a piano or violin) is accompanied by an orchestra. The etymology is uncertain, but the word seems to have origin from the conjunction of the two Latin words conserere (meaning to tie, to join, to weave) and certamen (Competition, fight): the idea is that the two parts in a concert, the soloist and the orchestra, alternate episodes of opposition and cooperation in the creation of the music flow.

Quote from: Luke on June 27, 2010, 08:41:04 AM
Shouldn't you put this on the Composing/performing board, Saul?

I'll be interested to see if anyone takes up this challenge. Call me a spoilsport but I won't - I have enough to do trying to fit in the pieces I am actually desperate to write as it stands!

Why?

We are going to discuss the composers and their music afterwards.

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:58:29 AM
Why?

Earning money, looking after my children, that sort of thing. I have a long, long list of pieces I actively want to write (and about 5 pieces on the go at the moment, in fact) and I have trouble finding the time to do them! And I tend only to write pieces that I want really want to write, anyway - it's the way I like to compose. If I get the urge to write a Baroque style piece, you can be sure I'll post it here...

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:57:29 AM
Concerto = A concerto (from the Italian: concerto, plural concerti or, often, the anglicised form concertos) as a musical work is a composition usually in three parts or movements, in which (usually) one solo instrument (for instance, a piano or violin) is accompanied by an orchestra. The etymology is uncertain, but the word seems to have origin from the conjunction of the two Latin words conserere (meaning to tie, to join, to weave) and certamen (Competition, fight): the idea is that the two parts in a concert, the soloist and the orchestra, alternate episodes of opposition and cooperation in the creation of the music flow.

Again, you're totally ignoring what I'm telling you and you continue time and time again to act like a complete jerk. But what else is new right?

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 27, 2010, 09:15:31 AM
Again, you're totally ignoring what I'm telling you and you continue time and time again to act like a complete jerk. But what else is new right?

Apparently, you have never heard in your entire life the concept of composition competitions.

The winner gets a pack of Marlboro.

Quote from: springrite on June 27, 2010, 10:55:45 AM
The winner gets a pack of Marlboro.

How about a vacation to the Bahamas?

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 10:36:21 AM
Apparently, you have never heard in your entire life the concept of composition competitions.

Apparently, you never, in your entire life, have heard the concept that music IS NOT a competition. When you learn this concept, you will have a new appreciation for music.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 27, 2010, 11:16:37 AM
Apparently, you never, in your entire life, have heard the concept that music IS NOT a competition. When you learn this concept, you will have a new appreciation for music.

Everyone knows that the greatest composers entered and won the Prix di Rome. For many of them, it is the only place where you can find their names.

Quote from: springrite on June 27, 2010, 11:19:29 AM
Everyone knows that the greatest composers entered and won the Prix di Rome. For many of them, it is the only place where you can find their names.

Absolutely, but everybody also knows that music isn't about competition, it's about expression.

The internet has all kinds of crazy offerings.  I was just looking over a site named "Million $ Competition" where you can buy an eighth note for $2.14.

Quote from: springrite on June 27, 2010, 10:55:45 AM
The winner gets a pack of Marlboro.

How about the winner gets to prance and preen about the site and claim to be a better composer than Schoenberg?  Oh wait, you don't have to win any competition to do that.   ::)

Quote from: Bulldog on June 27, 2010, 11:25:43 AM
The internet has all kinds of crazy offerings.  I was just looking over a site named "Million $ Competition" where you can buy an eighth note for $2.14.

With the buy-7-get-one-free coupon, you can get a whole note at only $14.98!

Quote from: springrite on June 27, 2010, 11:28:54 AM

With the buy-7-get-one-free coupon, you can get a whole note at only $14.98!

This is a measure above the octave...

I asked this in another thread with no response but how does one go about writing music on the computer.  I write the old fashion way with pencil and music manuscript paper. 

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_NOEVqitG1Gg/TCQaP8KNEqI/AAAAAAAAATI/Sa5A9TzyE0g/S220/DCP_5882.JPG)

Is writing music on the computer easier or harder than writing it free hand?  Do I need to buy a program or are there free ones.  I have a Mac Mini with OS X 10.5.8 Leopard.

Thanks in advance.

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 07:45:10 AM
Its called Gibberish Fantastique an Atonal Fantasy...

I actually thought that one sounded quite nice... and not completely atonal, either- more like halfway. Possibly one of your best.  8)

I would, but I'm not really interested in writing in the Baroque style. I have a couple of opening bars of a Fugue that I was writing that I think sounds awesome, but it's more Romantic-sounding.
Only if at least 4 other people agreed for sure to do this competition AND the rule were to be changed to any style would I do this.

Whether if people are planning to participate or not, I'm writing this Baroque piece.
I really hope that people will join and contribute.

Cheers,

Saul

Quote from: Greg on June 27, 2010, 04:09:42 PM
I actually thought that one sounded quite nice... and not completely atonal, either- more like halfway. Possibly one of your best.  8)

Thank you Greg and Luke, here's my latest Gibberish, this I like myself.
I just completed recording this afternoon.

Who would have thought that just simple feelings spontaneously created on the piano without a set key center can sound so pleasant.

Cheers,

Saul
http://www.youtube.com/v/QqHuTfUzi_I

Lol at the signature, Saul.  :D

So, I like that one, too. The Harmony sounded beautiful, but it sounded like it needed to breathe a little.

Seriously, I'd LOVE for you to keep on writing stuff like this, but take more time to write. Improvisations are nice, but they can't usually be great like a master work. If you can find a way to seriously compose in this direction with the same spontaneity, but with an added impact of seriously critical writing, you have potential with this stuff. This is WAY better than your copy and paste stuff. Please write more stuff like this SERIOUSLY and TAKING YOUR TIME. I'm always happy to discover new music I can enjoy, after all.  8)

Quote from: Greg on June 27, 2010, 05:02:32 PM
Lol at the signature, Saul.  :D

So, I like that one, too. The Harmony sounded beautiful, but it sounded like it needed to breathe a little.

Seriously, I'd LOVE for you to keep on writing stuff like this, but take more time to write. Improvisations are nice, but they can't usually be great like a master work. If you can find a way to seriously compose in this direction with the same spontaneity, but with an added impact of seriously critical writing, you have potential with this stuff. This is WAY better than your copy and paste stuff. Please write more stuff like this SERIOUSLY and TAKING YOUR TIME. I'm always happy to discover new music I can enjoy, after all.  8)

Thank you Greg,

LOL, now I have fans for my atonal music!
Cello Guy liked Gibberish No.1 - look at the comment  :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qK7hGEZTbxM&feature=email

I actually saw that comment yesterday.
So... can you say that you'll compose like I mentioned from now on?

Quote from: Greg on June 27, 2010, 05:14:46 PM
I actually saw that comment yesterday.
So... can you say that you'll compose like I mentioned from now on?

I will concentrate on classical music and experiment with atonal for a while.

Ok,

Here's my submission.

Baroque Prelude In B minor -Allegro Con Fuoco.
Others are more then welcomed to join this challenge.

http://www.youtube.com/v/OeqDPVfM5VE

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 05:20:14 PM
Ok,

Here's my submission.

Baroque Prelude In B minor -Allegro Con Fuoco.
Others are more then welcomed to join this challenge.

http://www.youtube.com/v/OeqDPVfM5VE

Since you think music is a competition, I can go ahead and tell you that you won't be winning anything with that amateur composition.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 27, 2010, 05:35:05 PM

Since you think music is a competition, I can go ahead and tell you that you won't be winning anything with that amateur composition.

You're one mean oldfella...

If you can't enjoy this thread, please leave!

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 05:17:30 PM
I will concentrate on classical music and experiment with atonal for a while.

Alright...

Wait...are you going to write atonal music because you like it or because there are others who like it? Surely you know what an artist's honest response should be....

Didn't you just spend a good week denouncing atonal and modern music and everything to do with them?

Saul,

It seems you have been born into the wrong time. That piece is totally derivative. The world moves on and exploring art means innovation. We can't keep stepping into the footsteps of the past.

We no longer build in the Gothic style.
People do not paint to emulate Raphael.
Artists do not sculpt as Canova did.
No one writes in the style of Dickens.

....No serious living composer treks closely along the soundworld of Bach

There are of course often references to and influences from the past in present works of art. We may feel that artists presently have lost their way. But unless they are working to make their art relevent to the world around them, they merely create the kind of material you are writing; pastiche. Frankly, that is hack work. Art is a mirror or a lamp to society, anything else is irrelevant chocolate box material and lacks integrity or rigor of thought.

That does not take away from Bach, Canova etc, we love their work, it still speaks to us, but we are in the present and creating a future, not dreaming of the past.

Mike 

Quote from: knight on June 28, 2010, 12:01:01 AM
The world moves on and exploring art means innovation. We can't keep stepping into the footsteps of the past.

We no longer build in the Gothic style.
People do not paint to emulate Raphael.
Artists do not sculpt as Canova did.
No one writes in the style of Dickens.

....No serious living composer treks closely along the soundworld of Bach

There are of course often references to and influences from the past in present works of art. We may feel that artists presently have lost their way. But unless they are working to make their art relevent to the world around them, they merely create ... pastiche.... Art is a mirror or a lamp to society, anything else is irrelevant chocolate box material and lacks integrity or rigor of thought.

That does not take away from Bach, Canova etc, we love their work, it still speaks to us, but we are in the present and creating a future, not dreaming of the past.

Mike

This brings to mind the Borges essay "Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote.".  The idea was that an imaginary 20th Century author (Menard), would rewrite Cervante's Don Quixote exactly word for word- -but that the entire meaning of the novel would differ based on the time it was written.   A side by side analysis was particularly interesting:

Quote
It is a revelation to compare Menard's Don Quixote with Cervantes'. The latter, for example, wrote (part one, chapter nine):
. . . truth, whose mother is history, rival of time, depository of deeds, witness of the past, exemplar and adviser to the present, and the future's counselor. Written in the seventeenth century, written by the "lay genius" Cervantes, this enumeration is a mere rhetorical praise of history.

Menard, on the other hand, writes:
. . . truth, whose mother is history, rival of time, depository of deeds, witness of the past, exemplar and adviser to the present, and the future's counselor.

History, the mother of truth: the idea is astounding. Menard, a contemporary of William James, does not define history as an inquiry into reality but as its origin. Historical truth, for him, is not what has happened; it is what we judge to have happened. The final phrases—exemplar and adviser to the present, and the future's counselor —are brazenly pragmatic.

The contrast in style is also vivid. The archaic style of Menard—quite foreign, after all—suffers from a certain affectation. Not so that of his forerunner, who handles with ease the current Spanish of his time.

[\quote]

Of course, Borges' idea was not encourage more Menards, and when 20th century composers did adopt neo-classical forms, (Pulcinella, anyone?) the looked at the classical tradition as more of a tool box than a cook book.

My own particular opinion is that anyone who wants to create something should be empowered to create whatever they want, but if they are really trying to communicate to a specific audience, they need to work with the needs and expectations of that audience.   If an work of art is created "out of spite", or to prove some external point, how can the work ever be a genuine statement that will be received by that audience?  If an the work is an expression of some inner angst-- how can it be done using an existing form without personalization?


Finally, if it is so necessary to have a competition (I'm seeing an American Idol thang here), perhaps we can borrow WC Field's approach where the winner gets One Night in Philadelphia, and the runner up gets Two Nights in Philadelphia...

I would echo the sentiments of these last two posts if it wasn't for the fact that Saul's piece has nothing of the baroque in it beyond a kind of constant semiquaver motion. I can see what he is aiming at - but really, bar by bar, note by note, the piece is so chock full of things that would make a baroque composer turn in his grave that I can't even begin to list them. Big things and little things, un-baroque rhythms (those odd cross-the-bar syncopations that don't really work as syncopations, un-baroque figurations, lines that go nowhere, chords lacking thirds, that infernal constant notational thing (B minor has A#s, not Bbs, F# minor has E#s, not F naturals....those passages are such a pain to read, because they don't look like they sound; this is what that lengthy post I made on your thread yesterday was about....), the initial expectation of a fugue or at least some attempt at imitation in the opening bars frustrated instantly, lack of melodic purpose in any line slower than a 16th... It's a bit painful, which isn't fun to say.  :(

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 03:27:35 AM
I would echo the sentiments of these last two posts if it wasn't for the fact that Saul's piece has nothing of the baroque in it beyond a kind of constant semiquaver motion. I can see what he is aiming at - but really, bar by bar, note by note, the piece is so chock full of things that would make a baroque composer turn in his grave that I can't even begin to list them. Big things and little things, un-baroque rhythms (those odd cross-the-bar syncopations that don't really work as syncopations, un-baroque figurations, lines that go nowhere, chords lacking thirds, that infernal constant notational thing (B minor has A#s, not Bbs, F# minor has E#s, not F naturals....those passages are such a pain to read, because they don't look like they sound; this is what that lengthy post I made on your thread yesterday was about....), the initial expectation of a fugue or at least some attempt at imitation in the opening bars frustrated instantly, lack of melodic purpose in any line slower than a 16th... It's a bit painful, which isn't fun to say.  :(

If you really expected me to take a Bach work and copy it note by note , then you would have missed my music. I used the Baroque style as an influence, but this work is a completely new and refreshing piece.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 04:25:05 AM
If you really expected me to take a Bach work and copy it note by note , then you would have missed my music. I used the Baroque style as an influence, but this work is a completely new and refreshing piece.

Saul, you clearly haven't read a word of what either Mike or Luke just said.

Quote from: Joe_Campbell on June 27, 2010, 08:09:06 PM
Wait...are you going to write atonal music because you like it or because there are others who like it? Surely you know what an artist's honest response should be....

Didn't you just spend a good week denouncing atonal and modern music and everything to do with them?

There is nothing wrong with experimentation. In fact before I began digital work I used to paint, then I experimented with the photo manipulation techniques, and I enjoyed it very much and decided to create this kind of art. There is no contradiction.
Also, this whole talk about atonal music was about generating a discussion, pushing the limits and making people speak what they feel about it.
Also, I really like some of the Atonal music that I composed and Improvised this past week, I believe that I like it because I understand it, I get my own music, but Schoenberg and Webern are too obscure for me, and since I don't understand their music, I don't enjoy it.
Its too, how should I say it...disorganized lacking direction and unity. In my pieces I believe I was able to create a flowing line from beginning to end, which is very important in music.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2010, 04:30:26 AM
Saul, you clearly haven't read a word of what either Mike or Luke just said.

I read them, Mike suggests that i should put this kind of style and music away and begin exploring new avenues of expression within modern music.
I got it, that's his opinion, and he has every right to state it.

But I don't agree with :

'We no longer build in the Gothic style.
People do not paint to emulate Raphael.
Artists do not sculpt as Canova did.
No one writes in the style of Dickens.

....No serious living composer treks closely along the soundworld of Bach'

The attached is an excerpt from an old piece; I wrote it some 16 years ago, though it was only performed for the first time a week ago today.  At the bottom of the first page begins the last in a series of variations on the folksong "Barbara Allan";  it was written in an echo of Baroque style.

Now, the funny thing (as I see it) is that, on the day of the concert, the pianist — who had not seen my program notes, nor had we discussed the piece in detail . . . he essentially agreed to perform the piece on my sending it to him as a PDF file — the pianist suddenly said to me, "I have to ask you: were you thinking of the second movement of Bach's Italian Concerto when you composed this?"

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2010, 04:41:39 AM
The attached is an excerpt from an old piece; I wrote it some 16 years ago, though it was only performed for the first time a week ago today.  At the bottom of the first page begins the last in a series of variations on the folksong "Barbara Allan";  it was written in an echo of Baroque style.

Now, the funny thing (as I see it) is that, on the say of the concert, the pianist — who had not seen my program notes, nor had we discussed the piece in detail . . . he essentially agreed to perform the piece on my sending it to him as a PDF file — the pianist suddenly said to me, "I have to ask you: were you thinking of the second movement of Bach's Italian Concerto when you composed this?"

I want to hear a midi or something if you can, please...

I don't have that available at the moment.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 04:25:05 AM
If you really expected me to take a Bach work and copy it note by note , then you would have missed my music. I used the Baroque style as an influence, but this work is a completely new and refreshing piece.

Well, what you said initially was:

Quote from: Saul on June 27, 2010, 08:37:32 AM
To all the composers in this site. I wanted to create a composition challenge for anyone that is interested to contribute.
The first challenge :

Compose a short piano piece not more then 2 minutes at any tempi in the Baroque style.

...not in a style influenced by the baroque. But actually, my point remains, it isn't that your piece doesn't really bear the imprint of Baroque style; the faults I pointed out would be essentially the same if this was a classical pastiche. That's what I was meaning, the other day, about competence - some things are just not right, such as the notation things, or the way the melodic lines flow (or don't)...

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 04:51:51 AM
Well, what you said initially was:

...not in a style influenced by the baroque. But actually, my point remains, it isn't that your piece doesn't really bear the imprint of Baroque style; the faults I pointed out would be essentially the same if this was a classical pastiche. That's what I was meaning, the other day, about competence - some things are just not right, such as the notation things, or the way the melodic lines flow (or don't)...

What's wrong with the notation and the meolodic lines?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2010, 04:48:01 AM
I don't have that available at the moment.

In the interests of illumination I printed your sample out and sightread it into a microphone. Sightread it, you understand....all starts out nice and easy, Karl, and then I turned the page to see all these arabesques I wasn't expecting, and just had to grit my teeth and plough through them! It's also at a very low bitrate so that it fits within the 500kb attachment limit. So this is scarcely even an approximation of your piece, and I apologise fully. I will delete it if you'd prefer! But perhaps it might serve a purpose just for this thread.

Most kind of you, thanks, Luke!

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 04:43:28 AM
I want to hear a midi or something if you can, please...

Can't you play the piano?

And nicely done, Luke!  Thanks again.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 05:07:26 AM
What's wrong with the notation and the meolodic lines?

I've written you quite lengthy posts about the notation before - for instance, the use of enharmonic notation is awkward and nasty to read (to be honest, sometimes Baroque composers, early Baroque composers, did this too, though they knew they were doing it, and it isn't part of standard practice, for a good reason). There are also those odd bits where single voices seem to split into two - just before trills, the last page or so being particularly full of this. This makes no sense, especially as the piece looks to be a two part invention the rest of the time.

As far as the melodic writing goes...well, your running semiquavers sometimes have a nice dirve about them, but around them you are fitting slower lines which don't really seem to go anywhere. In a Baroque piece, especially in a two part invention which this essentially is, each line should be interesting in its own right and for my money, FWIW, some of those lines, especially the quarter notes on the first two pages, didn't have much of a melodic purpose to them.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 28, 2010, 05:19:03 AM
Can't you play the piano?

Ha!

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2010, 05:19:50 AM
And nicely done, Luke!  Thanks again.

You're too kind - I'm squirming a bit, listening again! But, with a little practice... anyway, it provides an illustration, which was all I intended.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 28, 2010, 05:19:03 AM
Can't you play the piano?

I don't have a printer.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 05:23:54 AM
You're too kind - I'm squirming a bit, listening again! But, with a little practice... anyway, it provides an illustration, which was all I intended.

All that filigree is so apparently pattern-resistant, that (like much of my music, really) it seems almost designed particularly to resist sight-reading.  No needto squirm!  You've done very well, and it serves as a most helpful illustration, thanks!

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2010, 05:28:46 AM
All that filigree is so apparently pattern-resistant, that (like much of my music, really) it seems almost designed particularly to resist sight-reading.  No needto squirm!  You've done very well, and it serves as a most helpful illustration, thanks!

It's those darned repeated notes that I wasn't expecting!

Saul,

I'm sure that your compositions might have a sentimental value to you and your dear nephews and I respect your creative effort. But when it comes to Baroque keyboard music, I prefer Bach and Scarlatti anytime over them. I always value the original more than the pastiche.

Face it manly: "classical music" (in the absurdly narrow sense you understand it) is dead, in the sense that no effort to revive it compositionally would ever achieve the level of the great masters you so dearly revere. One cannot live in AD 2010, compose like in AD 1710 and pretend to be taken seriously as a professional composer.

Be it said without any enmity towards you.

Yes, in the same vein, and as Karl did earlier, I ought to say that there is a baroque influence on my own compositions, at times, certainly, but it's not there as pastiche, it's been absorbed and used to my own ends. As, for instance, in this piece for clavichord from 2004 - the instrument itself is baroque, of course, but it's more the material of the piece, the ornaments, vastly slowed down or at 'proper' speed, fully written out and otherwise, and the way they determine the melodic structure of the piece. (The audio file, once again, is at a very low bitrate so that I can attach it; more to the point, it is EXTREMELY quiet, but then that's what clavichords are like, and the intimacy is partly why I love them so much - the microphone was hanging an inch above the strings and I've amplified it 250%, and it is still scarcely audible!)

....on the other hand, there are pieces I have written in a more literally Baroque style, I suppose, such as the fugues with subjects drawn from silly 1980's pop songs that I've been talking about recently on my own thread. Now, they aren't actually strictly Baroque in style - in fact, stylistically, they vary considerably - but it wasn't my intention to write baroque pastiche. However, one thing they certainly aren't is me composing in my own voice - they started out as a little joke, and I enjoyed doing them, so in a light-hearted way I carried on.

Here, for instance, is a fugue whose subject is taken from a stupid party-time song called Agadoo (did you escape it in the US?). It's the lightest, frothiest nonsense imaginable, so as a joke I set it in the key of C sharp major and in 5 parts, wildly slowed-down - as a cheeky but vague reference to the profound 5 part C sharp minor fugue in book one of the 48. It's not Bach in style, it modulates in places a baroque composer wouldn't go, and it uses harmonies they wouldn't use. And - oh yeah - it's rubbish.

The point is, though - these pieces mean little to me, even though I spent some time on them, (much more than on the clavichord piece I just posted which was written in 10 minutes at most, but which I prefer vastly) because they aren't in my own style. They were fun, no more, they are probably chock full of errors, they are silly - and they don't make it onto my official 'worklist', such as it is. Notice the other piece has a proper recording, quiet though it is. This one is just a MIDI - it doesn't deserve more.

I think the comparison between these two pieces is the way I would illustrate what I think of as the irrelevance of composing in an archaic style in 2010 - it can be done, but to me, anyway, only as an exercise or a joke. Not as a serious part of one's output. IMO. The past is with us in the present, we use it all the time, with love and respect...but I don't think we should just try to recreate it.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 04:30:49 AM
Its too, how should I say it...disorganized lacking direction and unity.

It isn't as straightforward as other music, but a lot of Schoenberg and Webern is organized, just in a way that may not be as easily perceptible (you just have to listen closely- and if you can't do that, you probably shouldn't be listening to classical music anyways).

For example, Schoenberg's Piano Suite has large sections that are repeated, and his Variations for Orchestra are very straightforward- you have the "BACH" theme (notes B-A-C-Bb) and variations on it. Typical variations form.

Oooh, spotted a parallel in that fugue too, just as I did with another one earlier. Fixed now, simply by exchanging parts for a few notes. These rules are such a swizz  :D

You understand  and enjoy your own self-professed "gibberish" which isn't actually atonal in the first place? I still don't believe for a second that all of your previous hatred was just an "act" to elicit passionate responses. You've been on this board far too long for that kind of about-face to hold any weight.

Quote from: Greg on June 28, 2010, 07:45:01 AM
It isn't as straightforward as other music, but a lot of Schoenberg and Webern is organized, just in a way that may not be as easily perceptible (you just have to listen closely- and if you can't do that, you probably shouldn't be listening to classical music anyways).

Greg, you're not making any sense, there is no reason not to listen to classical music, especially if you dislike certain composers or can't really get them.

Quote from: Joe_Campbell on June 28, 2010, 01:08:29 PM
You understand  and enjoy your own self-professed "gibberish" which isn't actually atonal in the first place? I still don't believe for a second that all of your previous hatred was just an "act" to elicit passionate responses. You've been on this board far too long for that kind of about-face to hold any weight.

It just proves what a great act it was , you still believe it.

I said that Rachmaninov and other famous composers wrote 'worthless music', if you really believe that I meant that, then you just naive.
It was all to generate a discussion, that's all.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 01:43:17 PMI said that Rachmaninov and other famous composers wrote 'worthless music', if you really believe that I meant that, then you just naive.
It was all to generate a discussion, that's all.

So you are essentially admitting that you are a Troll.  Big surprise. 

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 01:43:17 PM
It just proves what a great act it was , you still believe it.

I said that Rachmaninov and other famous composers wrote 'worthless music', if you really believe that I meant that, then you just naive.
It was all to generate a discussion, that's all.

You appear to be the proud manipulator.  Perhaps all your past religious pronouncements are also pure garbage.  At any rate, your words just blow in the wind, and there's no reason to believe anything you say.

Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2010, 05:50:49 AM
Saul,

I'm sure that your compositions might have a sentimental value to you and your dear nephews and I respect your creative effort. But when it comes to Baroque keyboard music, I prefer Bach and Scarlatti anytime over them. I always value the original more than the pastiche.

Face it manly: "classical music" (in the absurdly narrow sense you understand it) is dead, in the sense that no effort to revive it compositionally would ever achieve the level of the great masters you so dearly revere. One cannot live in AD 2010, compose like in AD 1710 and pretend to be taken seriously as a professional composer.

Be it said without any enmity towards you.

This is a reply to Florestan, Luke, Karl and Greg

I have heard all your comments but please understand that whatever you say here is an opinion, and I do respect it, but others have told me differently and hold a different opinion, more positive that is about my music.

For example a few years ago I have met with the wonderful and amazing Pianist Eliran Avni in The Juilliard school of music. He used to teach piano there.  We met in Juilliard, and he took me to one of the Piano rooms there. He criticized a number of my compositions and played some of my works on the piano for me.

He said that I have some good ideas about classical music, and that further study is necessary in order to polish and advance my technique of composition. He then told me that if I want to compose classical music, I should be very strict with the rules therefore he recommended to me Walter Piston's 'Harmony'.

He then performed in front of me an atonal modern piece by one of his friends in Juilliard.
All throughout the performance, I was thinking to myself 'what in the world is he playing' but I pretended to like it so not to embarrass him. To my surprise when he finished playing the work, he told me :"You see Saul? This is my friend's music, he studied all the rules and all the theories of music and he doesn't break the laws, but what is this?" he said it with a clear face that translates to :"This music is really bad, and pointless".

He therefore encouraged me to peruse classical theory study on a professional level, he didn't encourage me to go down the 'Atonal Avenue' of composition, probably because he is an insider from within the classical music world, he knows the value of true classical music, and on the other hand the value of the tons of almost pointless modern music that is composed today.

From the selected works that I showed him for review, two works caught his attention, and after he played them he told me that he wants to take these two works of mine, and show them to his Professor, he really enjoyed them. The first one is the F major Prelude No.1 and the Second one is the Rondo In D major. The F major Prelude is written more in the Baroque style, while the D major Rondo is more attuned to the Classical Era.

This is the Prelude In F major that he Liked:

I will also post the Score if Luke or any other pianist here would like to play it here and upload it here, this would be nice, I will also upload my performance of it on a later date.

http://www.youtube.com/v/yyxmz4pRK_g


Best Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 02:07:12 PM
This is a reply to Florestan, Luke, Karl and Greg

I have heard all your comments but please understand that whatever you say here is an opinion, and I do respect it, but others have told me differently and hold a different opinion, more positive that is about my music.

For example a few years ago I have met with the wonderful and amazing Pianist Eliran Avni in The Juilliard school of music. He used to teach piano there.  We met in Juilliard, and he took me to one of the Piano rooms there. He criticized a number of my compositions and played some of my works on the piano for me.

He said that I have some good ideas about classical music, and that further study is necessary in order to polish and advance my technique of composition. He then told me that if I want to compose classical music, I should be very strict with the rules therefore he recommended to me Walter Piston's 'Harmony'.

He then performed in front of me an atonal modern piece by one of his friends in Juilliard.
All throughout the performance, I was thinking to myself 'what in the world is he playing' but I pretended to like so not to embarrass him. To my surprise when he finished playing the work, he told me :"You see Saul? This is my friend's music, he studied all the rules and all the theories of music and he doesn't break the laws, but what is this?" he said it with a clear face that translates to :"This music is really bad, and pointless".

He therefore encouraged me to peruse classical theory study on a professional level, he didn't encourage me to go down the 'Atonal Avenue' of composition, probably because he is an insider from within the classical music world, he knows the value of true classical music, and on the other hand the value of the tons of almost pointless modern music that is composed today.

From the selected works that I showed him for review, two works caught his attention, and after he played them he told me that he wants to take these two works of mine, and show it to his Professor, he really enjoyed them. The first one if the F major Prelude No.1 and the Second one is the Rondo In D major. The F major Prelude is written more in the Baroque style, while the D major Rondo is more attuned to the Classical Era.

This is the Prelude In F major that he Liked:

I will also post the Score if Luke or any other pianist here would like to play it here and upload it here, this would be nice, I will also upload my performance of it on a later date.

http://www.youtube.com/v/yyxmz4pRK_g


Best Saul

Are all these statement lies also?

Quote from: Scarpia on June 28, 2010, 02:08:42 PM
Are all these statement lies also?

An Absolute truth. This is in all seriousness, and I'm saying this with honesty.

You did shoot yourself in the foot by setting up a situation, sticking to it, then telling everyone you had only done it for effect. It is difficult now to know where you are coming from.

Mike

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 02:11:55 PM
An Absolute truth. This is in all seriousness, and I'm saying this with honesty.

And is that a lie?  What credibility do you think you have when you tell us you will post any trash just to wind us up? 

Quote from: knight on June 28, 2010, 02:13:45 PM
You did shoot yourself in the foot by setting up a situation, sticking to it, then telling everyone you had only done it for effect. It is difficult now to know where you are coming from.

Mike

Ok, but I still enjoyed the entire discussion and the composing of these pieces, I had a great time.  :)

Saul, this is not a sandpit set up mainly for your amusement. People here clearly feel manipulated and it will be difficult for you to retrieve the ground you have now lost. The fact of your enjoying winding people only makes the hole you dug a bit deeper.

Mike

Quote from: Scarpia on June 28, 2010, 02:14:35 PM
And is that a lie?  What credibility do you think you have when you tell us you will post any trash just to wind us up?

There is no reason for me to wind you up here.
If you like you can send Eliran Avni the Pianist an Email and ask him about me, I hope he still remembers me.
If he contradicts anything that I say, then you don't have to believe me anything in the future. This is a true story that Happened with me a number of years ago, perhaps 6 years ago. I have said this in pure honesty and in good faith.


http://www.eliranavni.com/

Saul,

I apologise for making the assumption in other posts that all your music is notated in 4/4 simply because that's what your computer automatically does, even if the sense of the music is something else.

Because that F major piece you just posted is notated in 3/4. Great!

Trouble is, this time it actually is in 4/4, and very clearly.

Listen along to it counting 3, then 4. Or just look at the music, in fact, the way the left hand quarter/half notes are grouped in 2 and 4 beat patterns (forcibly tied across barlines in order to be fitted into your 3/4 metre)

It's rankly awful, obvious mistakes like that which make me take with a huge pinch of salt these positive critiques you describe from elsewhere. They are either

1) your embellishments of the truth
2) the result of someone wanting to spare your feelings (well, I can understand that)
or
3) the result of the person whose judgement you've sought not being as good a musician as you think or as you describe.

Because, honestly, for a  pianst (student? teacher?) at Juilliard not to comment on this basic problem in your notation speaks very, very badly for Juilliard, if it is really true.

The sound of the piece, btw, as far as I listened (a page and a bit) is much nicer than the B minor piece, I think. It's not like you don't have some nice ideas in there...

Hmm, didn't get what happens in bar 16 though...

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 02:24:06 PM
Saul,

I apologise for making the assumption in other posts that all your music is notated in 4/4 simply because that's what your computer automatically does, even if the sense of the music is something else.

Because that F major piece you just posted is notated in 3/4. Great!

Trouble is, this time it actually is in 4/4, and very clearly.

Listen along to it counting 3, then 4. Or just look at the music, in fact, the way the left hand quarter/half notes are grouped in 2 and 4 beat patterns (forcibly tied across barlines in order to be fitted into your 3/4 metre)

It's rankly awful, obvious mistakes like that which make me take with a huge pinch of salt these positive critiques you describe from elsewhere. They are either

1) your embellishments of the truth
2) the result of someone wanting to spare your feelings (well, I can understand that)
or
3) the result of the person whose judgement you've sought not being as good a musician as you think or as you describe.

Because, honestly, for a  pianst (student? teacher?) at Juilliard not to comment on this basic problem in your notation speaks very, very badly for Juilliard, if it is really true.

The sound of the piece, btw, as far as I listened (a page and a bit) is much nicer than the B minor piece, I think. It's not like you don't have some nice ideas in there...

Why don't you just send him a note and ask him about his meeting with Saul Dzorelashvili and about this two particular works.

He liked them alote and took both scores from me to show to his Professor in Juilliard.
He is powerful virtuoso pianist and a first rate music reader, and he used to teach in Juilliard.

That jest about modern atonal music was about music that I didn't like, therefore I created something that will generate a powerful discussion about music.

But I never joke about my music, I take my art very seriously, otherwise I wont be spending so much time, and energy for something that I didn't feel so passionate about.

Quote from: Bulldog on June 28, 2010, 02:03:56 PM
You appear to be the proud manipulator.  Perhaps all your past religious pronouncements are also pure garbage.  At any rate, your words just blow in the wind, and there's no reason to believe anything you say.

There is no reason to be nasty, I didn't mean it to come out this way, and people actually feeling bad about this. I did it in good faith, and even Luke thanked me for having such a great time with this thread. You know 'fun' is a great thing sometimes.

That jest about modern atonal music was about music that I didn't like, therefore I created something that will generate a powerful discussion about music.

But I never joke about my music, I take my art very seriously, otherwise I wont be spending so much time, and energy for something that I didn't feel so passionate about.

Then, please, please, Saul, do yourself a favour, stop being so pig-headed with honestly given criticism of your pieces. It doesn't matter to me what your pianist friend said, if he didn't mention to you that you had written a piece that should have been in 4/4 in 3/4 then the comments he made have utterly no credibility in my mind - it's such a basic error, and it isn't a matter of opinion, it's pure simple musical fact.

But you see, I know it seems as if I am being very harsh, but I honestly wish you would take this stuff on board. Learn to notate better. It isn't really hard. Learn to think about the shape of your tunes - that F major piece has a nice basic line3 spoilt by some awkward jumps which you really didn't need to make, and which, again, go against basic classical rules of melody construction. Again, easy to solve. With a few tweaks you could have quite a nice piece there, but details are important, Saul, and in a very friendly spirit I recommend that you take constructive critical advice when it is offered instead of only paying attention to people who, for whatever reason, don't see fit to point out the errors.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 02:33:59 PM
There is no reason to be nasty, I didn't mean it to come out this way, and people actually feeling bad about this. I did it in good faith, and even Luke thanked me for having such a great time with this thread....

not quite - I thanked you for making me laugh, but not in the way you intended; the joke itself was painfully unfunny. I thanked you because your mockingly atonal pieces weren't actually atonal, which I did find funny.

Your purpose in doing what you are doing, though, elludes and annoys me as much as it does everyone else, and, given your record for backtracking when in a corner, I am not inclined to believe that you didn't mean every word of what you said and are merely making an effort to wriggle free, I'm sorry to say.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 02:36:36 PM
Then, please, please, Saul, do yourself a favour, stop being so pig-headed with honestly given criticism of your pieces. It doesn't matter to me what your pianist friend said, if he didn't mention to you that you had written a piece that should have been in 4/4 in 3/4 then the comments he made have utterly no credibility in my mind - it's such a basic error, and it isn't a matter of opinion, it's pure simple musical fact.

But you see, I know it seems as if I am being very harsh, but I honestly wish you would take this stuff on board. Learn to notate better. It isn't really hard. Learn to think about the shape of your tunes - that F major piece has a nice basic line3 spoilt by some awkward jumps which you really didn't need to make, and which, again, go against basic classical rules of melody construction. Again, easy to solve. With a few tweaks you could have quite a nice piece there, but details are important, Saul, and in a very friendly spirit I recommend that you take constructive critical advice when it is offered instead of only paying attention to people who, for whatever reason, don't see fit to point out the errors.

I accept what you say, that this piece can be made better, you didn't say anything awful.
But you need to also accept that you are not the only person in the world that understands music and notation.  Other educated and accomplished musicians did find something good about my music, especially this pianist, who never was my friend, I just met him through the web and decided to meet in Juilliard.  We are both Israeli, so we had something in common, but he wasn't my 'friend' per say. And when he had to say his criticism, he didn't dress it in beauty and in manners, he said it very openly, and actually I was pretty upset after the meeting, cause before back then I was younger and had higher expectations, and he put me on my place. He told me that I need to study more harmony and to polish my skills in compositions. This is not such a 'nice' or 'welcoming' feeling when someone tells you this but he did. But on the other hand this wonderful musician was impressed by some of my piano works and took a few to show to his Professor. Also he didn't say that I should go down the 'Atonal Road', and encouraged me to continue with the 'Classical Style', and if you were listening to how people here have completely crushed this notion, like if anyone will compose in this classical style there will be nothing for him in music, you might of thought that they know what they were talking about. That's their opinion, there's nothing wrong with stating an opinion, but you and others should know that there are other opinions in this world, which hold no less value then yours.

Now if you want to trash this pianist because he disagrees with you on a number of points, that's your choice, but remember be careful from sounding strange...

It really doesn't look good when others are trashed if they don't agree with your version of how things are or how they should be.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 02:40:29 PM
not quite - I thanked you for making me laugh, but not in the way you intended; the joke itself was painfully unfunny. I thanked you because your mockingly atonal pieces weren't actually atonal, which I did find funny.

Your purpose in doing what you are doing, though, elludes and annoys me as much as it does everyone else, and, given your record for backtracking when in a corner, I am not inclined to believe that you didn't mean every word of what you said and are merely making an effort to wriggle free, I'm sorry to say.

You really believed me  when I said that all composers after Grieg wrote 'worthless music'?

Am I that influential and good in making people believe stuff?

Maybe I'm in the wrong business, perhaps politics will suit me better.

As I say, I have no idea about this man, nothing other than what you tell us. If he is as good a musician as you say, then he will certainly have spotted the error I pointed out. It is very obvious, and it's the kind of thing that isn't a matter of opinion - if I say, simply, 'I am right' about this, it isn't arrogance, it's because it's a 2+2=4 matter: the piece simply should not be written in 3/4 and that's the end of it.

So, given that fact, there are really only two options - he spotted it and didn't tell you (which ought to make you think, why? was he trying to spare your feelings? what else didn't he say?). Or, he didn't spot it - in which case, there is nothing you can say that will convince me that he is as good a musician as you claim.

OTOH, you say he told you to study harmony and composing skills more - maybe he meant things like this too, under that heading, and just didn't comment specifically on this one error, glaring though it is. I wholeheartedly agree with him, in that case. The 'atonal road' isn't for you,  that is clear, because you seem to dislike it so much. So take his advice, and my advice, and Sforzando's (he used to be a composer too, back in the day...) and Karl's (I assume) and improve those basic skills. It shouldn't take you long, not if you are as committed and passionate about this as you say you are - and that's the one thing I do believe, 100%. Things like the time signatures, the enharmonic nonsense, the voice writing, the rhythmic side-slips which you surely don't mean....they could all be sorted out in a few hours work, and your music would be improved vastly. The melodic problems....they might take a little longer, I think, that's a harder thing to learn, but it's not impossible at all.

I'm saying this in order to help, Saul, I promise you.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 02:59:23 PM
As I say, I have no idea about this man, nothing other than what you tell us. If he is as good a musician as you say, then he will certainly have spotted the error I pointed out. It is very obvious, and it's the kind of thing that isn't a matter of opinion - if I say, simply, 'I am right' about this, it isn't arrogance, it's because it's a 2+2=4 matter: the piece simply should not be written in 3/4 and that's the end of it.

So, given that fact, there are really only two options - he spotted it and didn't tell you (which ought to make you think, why? was he trying to spare your feelings? what else didn't he say?). Or, he didn't spot it - in which case, there is nothing you can say that will convince me that he is as good a musician as you claim.

OTOH, you say he told you to study harmony and composing skills more - maybe he meant things like this too, under that heading, and just didn't comment specifically on this one error, glaring though it is. I wholeheartedly agree with him, in that case. The 'atonal road' isn't for you,  that is clear, because you seem to dislike it so much. So take his advice, and my advice, and Sforzando's (he used to be a composer too, back in the day...) and Karl's (I assume) and improve those basic skills. It shouldn't take you long, not if you are as committed and passionate about this as you say you are - and that's the one thing I do believe, 100%. Things like the time signatures, the enharmonic nonsense, the voice writing, the rhythmic side-slips which you surely don't mean....they could all be sorted out in a few hours work, and your music would be improved vastly. The melodic problems....they might take a little longer, I think, that's a harder thing to learn, but it's not impossible at all.

I'm saying this in order to help, Saul, I promise you.

Read his site and look up his page on the Juilliard school of music. He took this work to show to his professor that's how impressed he was.

http://www.eliranavni.com/

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 02:55:29 PM
You really believed me  when I said that all composers after Grieg wrote 'worthless music'?

Am I that influential and good in making people believe stuff?

I think it's more that, after years of seeing you post the most bizarre stuff here, nothing you say surprises us any more. Saying 'that all composers after Grieg wrote 'worthless music'' is indeed an utterly stupid thing to say - but you have proved in the past that the stupidity of a statment is no barrier to you making it.  :D So we believed you. And some of us still do, perhaps.

I know of Eliran Avni, he is an Israeli pianist and a very good musician.  But, I doubt he would have said anything that would have embarrassed an aspiring composer showing him a composition, although I am sure he was aware of the fact that the piece is clearly in 4/4 but notated in 3/4.

Saul, if you are serious about composing, find a good teacher  - as it says in Pirkei Avot, although there they are taking about a rabbi, but the same applies concerning learning composition.  That is, if you are serious.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 03:04:01 PM
I think it's more that, after years of seeing you post the most bizarre stuff here, nothing you say surprises us any more. Saying 'that all composers after Grieg wrote 'worthless music'' is indeed an utterly stupid thing to say - but you have proved in the past that the stupidity of a statment is no barrier to you making it.  :D So we believed you. And some of us still do, perhaps.

LOL!

I'M RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT!

CHANGE WE COME TO BELIEVE IN! :)

Quote from: Franco on June 28, 2010, 03:06:14 PM
I know of Eliran Avni, he is an Israeli pianist and a very good musician.  But, I doubt he would have said anything that would have embarrassed an aspiring composer showing him a composition, although I am sure he was aware of the fact that the piece is clearly in 4/4 but notated in 3/4.

Saul, if you are serious about composing, find a good teacher  - as it says in Pirkei Avot, although there they are taking about a rabbi, but the same applies concerning learning composition.  That is, if you are serious.

Actually he did say a number of things that embarrassed me very much, like his insistence on talking to me about the cycle of fifths on the harmony of my Prelude In G minor. He said that certain things in the harmony need to be revised. Yes I was embarrassed and had to take the criticism.
Yes I'm learning theory by myself, and perhaps will find a good harmony teacher down the road in the future.

Are you still not going to take it on board, Saul? You really do have your head in the sand, don't you - you are being offered good advice that will improve your compositions (by this pianist too, it seems), and you don't want to take it. I won't bother anymore, I think. I've spent a lot of effort trying to give you good, detailed advice the last couple of days, without the slightest sign that you've even read it. You would clearly rather stumble on writing music that is, I'm sorry to say, written in the most totally illiterate manner I have ever seen outside my beginner level theory students. That's not opinion, that - just fact, according to the 'rules' of classical music theory you claim to hold dear.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 03:11:44 PM
Are you still not going to take it on board, Saul? You really do have your head in the sand, don't you - you are being offered good advice that will improve your compositions (by this pianist too, it seems), and you don't want to take it. I won't bother anymore, I think. I've spent a lot of effort trying to give you good, detailed advice the last couple of days, without the slightest sign that you've even read it. You would clearly rather stumble on writing music that is, I'm sorry to say, written in the most totally illiterate manner I have ever seen outside my beginner level theory students. That's not opinion, that - just fact, according to the 'rules' of classical music theory you claim to hold dear.

I don't know why you said that, when I clearly said that I take your criticism about this work. Look on top on the thread above, I have said it. So please  don't be mean. There is no need to be mean and aggressive. The point I was making is that you guys made it as if my music has nothing good in it, written in the worst style and skill. This is not the case, as suggested by this Pianist who took a number of my works to show his professor in Juilliard.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 05:14:16 AM
In the interests of illumination I printed your sample out and sightread it into a microphone. Sightread it, you understand....all starts out nice and easy, Karl, and then I turned the page to see all these arabesques I wasn't expecting, and just had to grit my teeth and plough through them! It's also at a very low bitrate so that it fits within the 500kb attachment limit. So this is scarcely even an approximation of your piece, and I apologise fully. I will delete it if you'd prefer! But perhaps it might serve a purpose just for this thread.

Hey Luke,

I would like you to explain what's your position about Karl's piece.
What did you find baroque in it if you did?

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 03:16:13 PM
I don't know why you said that, when I clearly said that I take your criticism about this work. Look on top on the thread above, I have said it. So please  don't be mean. There is no need to be mean and aggressive. The point I was making s that you guys made it as if my music has nothing good in it, written in the worst style and skill. This is not the case, as suggested by this Pianist who took a number of my works to show his professor in Juilliard.

No, Saul, I'm not being mean - look at my posts just above, where I say I am offering you constructive criticism in a friendly way; and look at the time I have spent trying to write things that will help you, including making little image files in one post, recording a piece of Karl's in another, and so on. Far too long actually - I am hours behind with the work I should be doing tonight! So I'd say I've been very generous, and the 'meanness', if any, has come from you not even appearing to have read any of these posts, and appearing to dismiss honestly offered criticism and refuse well-meant advice.

I did in fact say, repeatedly, in the last few posts, that there is good stuff hiding in your pieces, and that what you need is better technique in order to make that stuff reveal itself and to write music which has a more logical flow. So much for skill - you need more of it, but you can acquire it of you are prepared to work at it and not just talk about it.

As far as style goes - I don't, personally, think that writing in that style nowadays really works. You are, it seems to me, a textbook case of why it doesn't, because you have absorbed some of the surface features of music-as-it-was-200-years-ago but of course you haven't been brought up with the principles of tonal composition, sonata dialectic etc in your blood (because you weren't born 200 years ago), hence the disjunction between the style you are aiming at and what you are actually writing. But in principle I have no problem with you doing it if you wish to, and nor would I have a right to. 

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 03:26:09 PM
No, Saul, I'm not being mean - look at my posts just above, where I say I am offering you constructive criticism in a friendly way; and look at the time I have spent trying to write things that will help you, including making little image files in one post, recording a piece of Karl's in another, and so on. Far too long actually - I am hours behind with the work I should be doing tonight! So I'd say I've been very generous, and the 'meanness', if any, has come from you not even appearing to have read any of these posts, and appearing to dismiss honestly offered criticism and refuse well-meant advice.

I did in fact say, repeatedly, in the last few posts, that there is good stuff hiding in your pieces, and that what you need is better technique in order to make that stuff reveal itself and to write music which has a more logical flow. So much for skill - you need more of it, but you can acquire it of you are prepared to work at it and not just talk about it.

As far as style goes - I don't, personally, think that writing in that style nowadays really works. You are, it seems to me, a textbook case of why it doesn't, because you have absorbed some of the surface features of music-as-it-was-200-years-ago but of course you haven't been brought up with the principles of tonal composition, sonata dialectic etc in your blood (because you weren't born 200 years ago), hence the disjunction between the style you are aiming at and what you are actually writing. But in principle I have no problem with you doing it if you wish to, and nor would I have a right to.

Actually I'm open to look into more modern avenues of expressions in music. This site and yours and other people's comments have influenced me and I did read what you posted and I do appreciate them.

What I was upset about was the statement of almost an irrefutable fact by some posters here that writing today in the classical style of the past is a lost case, and shouldn't be produced in order to be taken seriously.

I therefore brought an example of a noted musician, an accomplished pianist that believes that there is nothing wrong in continuing writing in the old style, and he didn't discourage me to go down the traditional path of writing music. Therefore clearly there is not a unison of thought and opinion about this matter, this is controversial  by every standard. I just  wanted to make this clear.

Also the amount of information that I have learned from posting here about different topics in music, is totally amazing and I really appreciate this.

Looking forward discussing more music with everyone here...

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 03:23:49 PM
Hey Luke,

I would like you to explain what's your position about Karl's piece.
What did you find baroque in it if you did?

Plenty.

As Karl said, it's not baroque pastiche, of course not, just as the piece of mine that I posted isn't pastiche. It is - they are - both informed by the baroque, but they don't intend stopping there. In a very real sense, the way in which baroque features are viewed through a modern prism in Karl's piece makes it a much more vital, alive piece than your B minor one, I think, even though yours is generally faster, louder etc. I love the way Karl has run with the idea of a baroque walking bass, just tilting it onto its side (metaphorically speaking) so that it becomes something else entirely, something alive and speaking, whilst at the same time still remaining recognisable rooted to that ancestral basso continuo line (cello pizz.?). Similarly, I love the way Karl takes that little incipit, with its fairly straightforward baroque ornamentation, and lets it fly (I didn't like it when I was sightreading it, mind!). The complexities mount, the tuplets become more complex, the figurations more tricky; from the baroque the line takes on shades of (say) Eastern European folk singing, complete with glottal stops and ululations. Karl is always very good at riding that tightrope, I think, where his lines seem to be poised between two or more things, stylistically, historically, geographically - Bach, Hindemith, folk song, Finnissy (yes, there's lots here in Karl's way with ornamenting a melody that reminds me of Finnissy's incomparable skill at that job)..... are these all here, for starters. It makes for a very allusive and rich listening (and playing) experience.

You see - that's what happens when a composer is not simply aiming at pastiche, but is able to draw on a range of repertoires, baroque being only the most obvious one here, is able to 'speak' fluently and personally in them, and is able skillfully to bring them into meaningful relationship to each other. It can only come with openness to a variety of musics, though.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 03:35:07 PM

What I was upset about was the statement of almost an irrefutable fact by some posters here that writing today in the classical style of the past is a lost case, and shouldn't be produced in order to be taken seriously.

I just think it is more complex than that, you see. It is fine to love Mozart, Mendelssohn etc. more than any other composers, but you live in 2010, and you've heard all this other 'stuff' (atonal stuff, pop stuff, jazz, whatever) even if you don't like it. It's in your head, you can't wipe your mind clean of it.

So, in your B minor piece, there are little syncopations which sound vaguely funky - you liked them, so you put them in, and there's nothing wrong with that....but their source isn't the baroque, it is jazz, or pop, or something. You see, that's all that I/we mean - what you have experienced in your life is part of you, and it will seep into your music whether you want it to or not. Funky syncopations are part of Saul's experience of life; he writes them because he feels them. Great, that is good - but it means the music isn't pure baroque

Well, that's fine, you've actually said you don't want to just write pastiche, you want to do more with it than that. That was very good to read. But the important step to take, I think, even before any of the technical stuff, maybe, is finding out what you, Saul, really are like as a musician. I don't mean your tastes, I mean the way sounds come out of you naturally. And then, take that as a gift, run with it, beaver away at it - it is the key to really becoming yourself as a composer.

In my case, I have my own favourite composers, but I've never tried to compose like them. They did it already, and they did it perfectly, because they were them. I'm me, so I needed to find what worked for me. And I think I did, to the extent that I think my music sounds like me, anyway, though that doesn't mean I'm not still looking to refine all of that, and I might decide tomorrow that I've been doing it all wrong.

In your case, it might be that you need to drop some of the preconceptions you have made about yourself and how your music tastes ought to be reflected in your composing. Just compose without thinking about other people's styles, and observe what happens. And when you see trends develop, seize on them, work at them, they are the real music you ought to be writing.

Well, that's my view of things, anyway!

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 03:53:34 PM
I just think it is more complex than that, you see. It is fine to love Mozart, Mendelssohn etc. more than any other composers, but you live in 2010, and you've heard all this other 'stuff' (atonal stuff, pop stuff, jazz, whatever) even if you don't like it. It's in your head, you can't wipe your mind clean of it.

So, in your B minor piece, there are little syncopations which sound vaguely funky - you liked them, so you put them in, and there's nothing wrong with that....but their source isn't the baroque, it is jazz, or pop, or something. You see, that's all that I/we mean - what you have experienced in your life is part of you, and it will seep into your music whether you want it to or not. Funky syncopations are part of Saul's experience of life; he writes them because he feels them. Great, that is good - but it means the music isn't pure baroque

Well, that's fine, you've actually said you don't want to just write pastiche, you want to do more with it than that. That was very good to read. But the important step to take, I think, even before any of the technical stuff, maybe, is finding out what you, Saul, really are like as a musician. I don't mean your tastes, I mean the way sounds come out of you naturally. And then, take that as a gift, run with it, beaver away at it - it is the key to really becoming yourself as a composer.

In my case, I have my own favourite composers, but I've never tried to compose like them. They did it already, and they did it perfectly, because they were them. I'm me, so I needed to find what worked for me. And I think I did, to the extent that I think my music sounds like me, anyway, though that doesn't mean I'm not still looking to refine all of that, and I might decide tomorrow that I've been doing it all wrong.

In your case, it might be that you need to drop some of the preconceptions you have made about yourself and how your music tastes ought to be reflected in your composing. Just compose without thinking about other people's styles, and observe what happens. And when you see trends develop, seize on them, work at them, they are the real music you ought to be writing.

Well, that's my view of things, anyway!

Great read, but on the other hand what do you do when someone writes that your symphony moved them so much?

I mean this classical feeling and style found in my first symphony moved a good number of people. I have sold over 400 Cd of my works and got a good number of them praising my music. One person upon purchasing one of my Cd's was so impressed that he sent me a check in the mail for an additional 7 Cds, which included this Symphony. Another woman purchased 7 Cds to give to her family and friends. An Israeli women had sent me $50 for the score of my Ancient Dance In G minor. I receive a nice amount of emails and comments on my you tube page by people who just love music and by those who are professional musicians praising my work and some even asking to purchase a number of my scores so they could perform them.

My question essentially is what does a composer do when he really feels that his music has moved a good number of people with the style and manner that he writes?

Two days ago I received the following comment on my Symphony In F sharp minor after I posted it on Youtube:

"Heavenly...music sounds deeply in my spirit.
feels like deep prayer goes from everywhere".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Jn1qrXJ_cA


You musicians more then anyone else must know what this means to a composer...

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 03:53:34 PM
But the important step to take, I think, even before any of the technical stuff, maybe, is finding out what you, Saul, really are like as a musician. I don't mean your tastes, I mean the way sounds come out of you naturally.

Further to that, I'd add that what you were doing with your third atonal gibberish piece, though you meant it as a joke, is actually preciesley what I meant. I don't think Guido - or was it Greg? - or both? - was/were joking when he/they said they liked this better than anything else of yours they'd heard. I think I did too - and the reason was, it was flowing, spontaneous, it was new, and it sounded like something different.

Now, maybe it 'only' sounded different because when you let your hands loose on the keyboard, untramelled by stylistic worries, they reach for particular shapes that are essentially unique to you. My hands do that, and I let them, and (with refinements) I often use these shapes that my hands reach for in my pieces. It's part of what makes my pieces sound like me - that my hands play the piano differently to everyone else's (and so do yours, and so do Karl's etc. etc.). It's also why, although my music looks hard to play, I find it very easy - it fits my hands like a glove, but probably wouldn't fit everyone's so well.

The point to this - exactly what I was saying before, about finding out what YOU do, not what those stylistic worries tell you to do. What your hands do when given free rein on a piano is just one, physical part of it. You need to explore that, and all sorts of other things, perhaps, to discover what really works for YOU and makes your music individual.

Luke,

All these three gibberish pieces I composed off the piano. I just used Finale to enter the notes using my imagination, glad you were somewhat impressed by it.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 04:07:17 PM
Great read, but on the other hand what do you do when someone writes that your symphony moved them so much?

I mean this classical feeling and style found in my first symphony moved a good number of people. I have sold over 400 Cd of my works and got a good number of them praising my music. One person upon purchasing one of my Cd's was so impressed that he sent me a check in the mail for an additional 7 Cds, which included this Symphony. Another woman purchased 7 Cds to give to her family and friends. An Israeli women had sent me $50 for the score of my Ancient Dance In G minor. I receive a nice amount of emails and comments on my you tube page by people who just love music and by those who are professional musicians parsing my work and some even asking to purchase a number of my scores so they could perform them.

My question essentially is what does a composer do when he really fells that his music has moved a good number of people with the style and manner that he writes?

Two days ago I received the following comment on my Symphony In F sharp minor after I posted it on Youtube:

"Heavenly...music sounds deeply in my spirit.
feels like deep prayer goes from everywhere".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Jn1qrXJ_cA


You musicians more then anyone lese must know what this means to a composer...

I understand. But to me, composing is a basic need for myself. I'm happy when my music pleases people, and I would be unhappy if it didn't, but more important than anything, to me, is that it flows naturally from me, without the hindrance of worrying too much about reception*. There is nothing more personal, to me, than the act of writing down music, and so, ultimately, I have to do it in the way that is right for me. And if I don't, I start to feel clogged up, mentally!

*that's not an anti-audience who-cares-if-you-listen arrogance, it's just priorities - if I am not pleased with my music, how can I happily show it to anyone else?

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 04:12:55 PM
Luke,

All these three gibberish pieces I composed off the piano. I just used Finale to enter the notes using my imagination, glad you were somewhat impressed by it.

It was the last one which worked best, I think. What I see there, more than anything, is the vague potential for stuff you could work on in the future. With a piece like that, once written, I would examine it carefully and see which bits work best and are most personal. And then I would refine these ideas, work on them until they become Saul fingerprints.

Why can't everyone just accept the fact that Saul is the greatest living composer who has just finished composing the perfect piece of music and stop all your jeaous comments? He is the New Bach.

Quote from: springrite on June 28, 2010, 04:19:55 PM
Why can't everyone just accept the fact that Saul is the greatest living composer who has just finished composing the perfect piece of music and stop all your jeaous comments? He is the New Bach.

Because no one has ever suggested this, but you.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 04:16:14 PM
There is nothing more personal, to me, than the act of writing down music, and so, ultimately, I have to do it in the way that is right for me.

That, btw, is why those fugues I wrote will never get on to my 'worklist', will never really be 'my' music (even though I composed every note). Because they didn't really flow from me, that isn't the way I naturally compose. They were fun, people like them, as far as I know - but I feel no really personal connection with them as I do with most of the other music I've written in the last 6 or 7 years. They don't feel like they come from me.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 03:40:57 PM
Plenty.

As Karl said, it's not baroque pastiche, of course not, just as the piece of mine that I posted isn't pastiche. It is - they are - both informed by the baroque, but they don't intend stopping there. In a very real sense, the way in which baroque features are viewed through a modern prism in Karl's piece makes it a much more vital, alive piece than your B minor one, I think, even though yours is generally faster, louder etc. I love the way Karl has run with the idea of a baroque walking bass, just tilting it onto its side (metaphorically speaking) so that it becomes something else entirely, something alive and speaking, whilst at the same time still remaining recognisable rooted to that ancestral basso continuo line (cello pizz.?). Similarly, I love the way Karl takes that little incipit, with its fairly straightforward baroque ornamentation, and lets it fly (I didn't like it when I was sightreading it, mind!). The complexities mount, the tuplets become more complex, the figurations more tricky; from the baroque the line takes on shades of (say) Eastern European folk singing, complete with glottal stops and ululations. Karl is always very good at riding that tightrope, I think, where his lines seem to be poised between two or more things, stylistically, historically, geographically - Bach, Hindemith, folk song, Finnissy (yes, there's lots here in Karl's way with ornamenting a melody that reminds me of Finnissy's incomparable skill at that job)..... are these all here, for starters. It makes for a very allusive and rich listening (and playing) experience.

You see - that's what happens when a composer is not simply aiming at pastiche, but is able to draw on a range of repertoires, baroque being only the most obvious one here, is able to 'speak' fluently and personally in them, and is able skillfully to bring them into meaningful relationship to each other. It can only come with openness to a variety of musics, though.

Interesting analysis of the piece, but to me the piece sounded either very baroque at times, and very modern almost atonal at times. I wish I had heard more infusion of both styles more clearly. Perhaps that's what Karl was aiming at, but its very difficult to infuse such opposing elements and styles into a single composition that will sound natural and flowing, I almost sensed some sort of hesitation within the music, I'm not sure why, but its like he didn't want to give too much of either one, not the Baroque and not the modern been concerned that one will overpower the other.

Nice performance by you anyways, and a good decent work by Karl, after all said and done it I had pleasure listening to it.

Cheers,

Saul

Quote from: Teresa on June 27, 2010, 04:01:56 PM
I asked this in another thread with no response but how does one go about writing music on the computer.  I write the old fashion way with pencil and music manuscript paper. 

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_NOEVqitG1Gg/TCQaP8KNEqI/AAAAAAAAATI/Sa5A9TzyE0g/S220/DCP_5882.JPG)

Is writing music on the computer easier or harder than writing it free hand?  Do I need to buy a program or are there free ones.  I have a Mac Mini with OS X 10.5.8 Leopard.

Thanks in advance.

Teresa,

There is no shame in writing music using a notation program. There are a number of notation programs available out there. The two famous ones are Finale and Sibelius, each costs around 600 to 700 dollars.
I strongly suggest that you purchase one, for it will ignite your imagination in ways you have never thought possible.

Many composers use the keyboard to enter their notes on the virtual music page. I personally don't do that. I enter each and every note manually as if I was composing with a pen and a paper. The great advantage of composing like this, that every time you enter your note, the computer plays the note for you and you can hear it and things become more easier and faster this way, especially when you wrote a musical idea and you want to hear it played right away, the computer can do that for you.

Hope this helped,

Regards,

Saul

Just for clarity, you might want to edit your post 81, because the post of mine you've quoted isn't the one you are replying to underneath  :)

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 04:44:27 PM
Just for clarity, you might want to edit your post 81, because the post of mine you've quoted isn't the one you are replying to underneath  :)

Done!  :)

Cool

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 02:59:23 PM
As I say, I have no idea about this man, nothing other than what you tell us. If he is as good a musician as you say, then he will certainly have spotted the error I pointed out.

Quote from: Franco on June 28, 2010, 03:06:14 PM
I know of Eliran Avni, he is an Israeli pianist and a very good musician.  But, I doubt he would have said anything that would have embarrassed an aspiring composer showing him a composition, although I am sure he was aware of the fact that the piece is clearly in 4/4 but notated in 3/4.

I tend to side with Franco - Mr Avni likely did not mention the error out of politeness, or out of an unwillingness to have to begin the constructive criticism at such a basic, disheartening level. Of course, this judgment is just based on the fact that I've heard Mr Avni play on CDs and find him a very talented artist. For what it's worth, his constant championship of the music of Avner Dorman suggests that Mr Avni is a proponent of tonal, "classical" styles seen through a 21st century prism, music that combines the "neo-baroque," romantic melodicism, and high energy while being very distinctively modern. Dorman does not write music that imitates Bach; he writes music that reminds you that he likes Bach.

Quote from: Brian on June 28, 2010, 05:00:08 PM
I tend to side with Franco - Mr Avni likely did not mention the error out of politeness, or out of an unwillingness to have to begin the constructive criticism at such a basic, disheartening level.

Not a mater of sides - that was one of the three possibilities I initially posited myself  here (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,16709.msg424116.html#msg424116) - that either Saul was exagerating, or Mr Avni was not as great a musician as Saul said, or that Mr Avni was being polite. Although it sounds as if he did in fact tell Saul he needed to improve his skills, even if he didn't single out the glaring error that I would have expected him to mention.

Quote from: Brian on June 28, 2010, 05:00:08 PM
I tend to side with Franco - Mr Avni likely did not mention the error out of politeness, or out of an unwillingness to have to begin the constructive criticism at such a basic, disheartening level. Of course, this judgment is just based on the fact that I've heard Mr Avni play on CDs and find him a very talented artist. For what it's worth, his constant championship of the music of Avner Dorman suggests that Mr Avni is a proponent of tonal, "classical" styles seen through a 21st century prism, music that combines the "neo-baroque," romantic melodicism, and high energy while being very distinctively modern. Dorman does not write music that imitates Bach; he writes music that reminds you that he likes Bach.

When I heard Avni play this music on Youtube I couldnt believe it. Such poor music in my opinion, I don't really get what he found in this music, perhaps he did it because he knew Dorman from Israel, I don't know. This particular work of Dorman is an example of a very poor music written in classical style. I really didnt like it when I heard it about two years ago on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/v/7l6GFcFE9cc

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 04:38:33 PM
Teresa,

There is no shame in writing music using a notation program. There are a number of notation programs available out there. The two famous ones are Finale and Sibelius, each costs around 600 to 700 dollars.
I strongly suggest that you purchase one, for it will ignite your imagination in ways you have never thought possible.

Many composers use the keyboard to enter their notes on the virtual music page. I personally don't do that. I enter each and every note manually as if I was composing with a pen and a paper. The great advantage of composing like this, that every time you enter your note, the computer plays the note for you and you can hear it and things become more easier and faster this way, especially when you wrote a musical idea and you want to hear it played right away, the computer can do that for you.

Hope this helped,

Regards,

Saul

Saul thanks for the suggestions.  Are there any free programs for Mac?  Money is a problem now, especially big-time money like $600-$700. 

I quite like it, on it's own terms - pretty good stuff. Not really my taste, but it is doing exactly the sort of thing Brian is saying -

Quote from: Brian"classical" styles seen through a 21st century prism, music that combines the "neo-baroque," romantic melodicism, and high energy while being very distinctively modern

The modern touches are lightly and charmingly applied, discret bits of modality, simple motoric rhythms with a touch of syncopation, playful dynamic contrasts. And it works on its own terms, it doesn't ask to be heard as an attempt to recreate a style, it simply inhabits its own. I hesitate to say that this is the sort of thing I would have imagined that you might want to write, Saul.....but, actually, it is!

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 05:14:48 PM
I quite like it, on it's own terms - pretty good stuff. Not really my taste, but it is doing exactly the sort of thing Brian is saying -

The modern touches are lightly and charmingly applied, discret bits of modality, simple motoric rhythms with a touch of syncopation, playful dynamic contrasts. And it works on its own terms, it doesn't ask to be heard as an attempt to recreate a style, it simply inhabits its own. I hesitate to say that this is the sort of thing I would have imagined that you might want to write, Saul.....but, actually, it is!

No, I don't want to write this kind of music. It lacks many things in my opinion. Drama, depth, and meaning. Listen to it carefully again, try to understand what the composers is saying, I just don't get what he wants to say with this piece.

Quote from: Teresa on June 28, 2010, 05:14:30 PM
Saul thanks for the suggestions.  Are there any free programs for Mac?  Money is a problem now, especially big-time money like $600-$700.

Yes, this is a free version for mac, with limited capabilities, its a good thing to start with. Downlaod it to to your computer and beging using this software. Eventually you will want to get the full version, and I must tell you, if you want to save for something, this is it!

http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/14808/finale-notepad

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 05:18:05 PM
No, I don't want to write this kind of music. It lacks many things in my opinion. Drama, depth, and meaning. Listen to it carefully again, try to understand what the composers is saying, I just don't get what he wants to say with this piece.

It does lack some of the things that often go with 'drama, depth and meaning' I suppose. But I certainly think that not all music has to be capital letter Deep and Meaningful. In its own small way this piece had its own dramas - little ones, rhythmical ones, dynamic ones, registral ones, the sort of dramas Mozart filled his music with, though obviously applied with a more modern sensibility here. And on a larger level, it did have a 'meaning' to me - can't put it into words, but it was something to do with the happiness that comes with a sense of balance and proportion, old and new together in healthy equilibrium. Nothing shattering, but I liked the flavour.

Now you see that isn't something I get from your pieces, not yet. Where this piece seemed light, easy, and balanced, yours seem laboured and lost, and frustrated, to me...they give off a kind of negative energy, somehow, maybe because there is this tension between what they are trying to do and what they are actually doing. So I'm not really getting any over-arching 'meaning' from your music, and I think it is because of the technical problems and the stylistic confusions holding things back.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 05:26:28 PM
It does lack some of the things that often go with 'drama, depth and meaning' I suppose. But I certainly think that not all music has to be capital letter Deep and Meaningful. In its own small way this piece had its own dramas - little ones, rhythmical ones, dynamic ones, registral ones, the sort of dramas Mozart filled his music with, though obviously applied with a more modern sensibility here. And on a larger level, it did have a 'meaning' to me - can't put it into words, but it was something to do with the happiness that comes with a sense of balance and proportion, old and new together in healthy equilibrium. Nothing shattering, but I liked the flavour.

Now you see that isn't something I get from your pieces, not yet. Where this piece seemed light, easy, and balanced, yours seem laboured and lost, and frustrated, to me...they give off a kind of negative energy, somehow, maybe because there is this tension between what they are trying to do and what they are actually doing. So I'm not really getting any over-arching 'meaning' from your music, and I think it is because of the technical problems and the stylistic confusions holding things back.

Luke,

In all honesty what do you think about my Ancient Dance In G minor No.2, I want to know what you think ....

http://www.youtube.com/v/jO4ES7udj8s

So we're all naive, then, and you're the great trickster. Congratulations on ensuring you will never again have any credibility in anything.

Quote from: Joe_Campbell on June 28, 2010, 05:36:50 PM
So we're all naive, then, and you're the great trickster. Congratulations on ensuring you will never again have any credibility in anything.

As I explained before it was meant to generate a vibrant discussion, that's all.
Let's move on now, enough, you have stated what you wanted to say a number of times, its clear, there is no need to dwell on this forever.

I'm sure you'll agree.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 05:42:38 PM
As I explained before it was meant to generate a vibrant discussion, that's all.
Let's move on now, enough, you have stated what you wanted to say a number of times, its clear, there is no need to dwell on this forever.

I'm sure you'll agree.

We have moved on.

Quote from: Scarpia on June 28, 2010, 05:54:21 PM
We have moved on.

Merci beaucoup!

Well, again, not really my style, Saul, but I suppose it isn't a zillion miles from the kind of thing Saint-Saens or someone might have written mid 19th century, in the 'oriental' mode. Well, I think that's the kind of style you're aiming at, anyway.

MIDI sounds don't help - I'm not entirely sure what some of those instruments were meant to be! In general I'd say that, for the style I think you are aiming at, there is too much movement and busy-ness too soon after the start. The fairly static opening is quite nice, and if the piece had continued in that vein I think it would have been more successful, though that little four-note figure passsed from instrument to instrument pulls the ear away from the melody a little, I think, and again, it's a bit too busy, IMO. Anyway, you could sustain that mood much better with more restraint, letting the textures be a little less full, and letting repetition have it's full effect. It seemed like the music changed every bar or two, new ideas supplanting the old ones before they had registered in the mind, and in the end, to my ears, the piece lost focus because it didn't latch onto one main idea for long enough. I think maybe you were trying too hard to keep things interesting and to fill the texture out, I don't know. Sometimes less is more (a lesson I need to learn in my own posting habits, don't worry).

I can see why people like listening to this sort of thing Saul, don't get me wrong. Your music can sometimes sound quite pleasant and atmospheric, even when the notation is poor, but I feel that it needs much more careful shaping and a more trigger-happy delete finger getting rid of inessentials to function as well as it could. You churn out a lot of ideas, in this piece and others, but few of them really register because 1) they are not striking enough,  2) they don't stick around long enough and 3) they are often very similar to each other, so that the piece ends up sounding like a ramble through vaguely connected ideas rather than a structured journey.

That was a very badly structured post, a 'rambling through vaguely connected ideas' itself, mind you! Apologies. It is 3 a.m. here, I need sleep!

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 06:04:53 PM
Well, again, not really my style, Saul, but I suppose it isn't a zillion miles from the kind of thing Saint-Saens or someone might have written mid 19th century, in the 'oriental' mode. Well, I think that's the kind of style you're aiming at, anyway.

MIDI sounds don't help - I'm not entirely sure what some of those instruments were meant to be! In general I'd say that, for the style I think you are aiming at, there is too much movement and busy-ness too soon after the start. The fairly static opening is quite nice, and if the piece had continued in that vein I think it would have been more successful, though that little four-note figure passsed from instrument to instrument pulls the ear away from the melody a little, I think, and again, it's a bit too busy, IMO. Anyway, you could sustain that mood much better with more restraint, letting the textures be a little less full, and letting repetition have it's full effect. It seemed like the music changed every bar or two, new ideas supplanting the old ones before they had registered in the mind, and in the end, to my ears, the piece lost focus because it didn't latch onto one main idea for long enough. I think maybe you were trying too hard to keep things interesting and to fill the texture out, I don't know. Sometimes less is more (a lesson I need to learn in my own posting habits, don't worry).

I can see why people like listening to this sort of thing Saul, don't get me wrong. Your music can sometimes sound quite pleasant and atmospheric, even when the notation is poor, but I feel that it needs much more careful shaping and a more trigger-happy delete finger getting rid of inessentials to function as well as it could. You churn out a lot of ideas, in this piece and others, but few of them really register because 1) they are not striking enough,  2) they don't stick around long enough and 3) they are often very similar to each other, so that the piece ends up sounding like a ramble through vaguely connected ideas rather than a structured journey.

That was a very badly structured post, a 'rambling through vaguely connected ideas' itself, mind you! Apologies. It is 3 a.m. here, I need sleep!

Your right in the fact that I need to learn to use the power of silence better, many times I put too much stuff in the music, too many ideas and don't give silence any chance to contribute to the structure and overall feeling of the piece, I was thinking about this for few days now, and I believe that Greg had said something to this effect too.

Very nice critic, thank you.

Good night , Luke.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 05:19:53 PM
Yes, this is a free version for mac, with limited capabilities, its a good thing to start with. Downlaod it to to your computer and beging using this software. Eventually you will want to get the full version, and I must tell you, if you want to save for something, this is it!

http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/14808/finale-notepad

Thanks it's downloading as I type.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 05:33:14 PM
...what do you think about my Ancient Dance In G minor No.2...

http://www.youtube.com/v/jO4ES7udj8s

Hey, I like this one, it should sound excellent if it is ever played with real instruments.  I like the tone colors and use of percussion.  :)

Quote from: Teresa on June 28, 2010, 06:20:06 PM
Thanks it's downloading as I type.
Hey, I like this one, it should sound excellent if it is ever played with real instruments.  I like the tone colors and use of percussion.  :)

Teresa THANK YOU!

Here's another short Baroque piece I composed about 7 years ago.

Two Part Invention In F

http://www.youtube.com/v/ZKIrlSRRIaU

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 05:33:14 PMhttp://www.youtube.com/v/jO4ES7udj8s

The main problem aside from the lack of motivic development is that you never really get any ideas off the ground. It's as if the rhythmic aspect of your music is totally non-existent. So again, the lack of motivic development, ideas that never climax or reach any kind of resolution, and non-existent rhythmic structure.

I think one of the main things that keeps your music from growing or maturing is that you're living in the past. I'm not saying go and compose an atonal or super modern work, but I think you should definitely find ways to make the music you compose more interesting (i. e. odd time signatures, ambiguous chord voicings, strong rhythms and counterpoint, stronger melodies, etc.).

But it's your music, some people without any knowledge of classical music may enjoy you're music, but anyone who's been listening to classical should be able to detect the lack of genuine emotion and originality.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 28, 2010, 06:27:53 PM

The main problem aside from the lack of motivic development is that you never really get any ideas off the ground. It's as if the rhythmic aspect of your music is totally non-existent. So again, the lack of motivic development, ideas that never climax or reach any kind of resolution, and non-existent rhythmic structure.

I think one of the main things that keeps your music from growing or maturing is that you're living in the past. I'm not saying go and compose an atonal or super modern work, but I think you should definitely find ways to make the music you compose more interesting (i. e. odd time signatures, ambiguous chord voicings, strong rhythms and counterpoint, stronger melodies, etc.).

But it's your music, some people without any knowledge of classical music may enjoy you're music, but anyone who's been listening to classical should be able to detect the lack of genuine emotion and originality.

I know that many people enjoy my music, if you don't and you want to only criticize and say that there is no originality and emotion because you seem to know better, then that's your choice.

But I care that people actually enjoy my music, and that's the main purpose in my music.

Don't get me wrong, there is always room for improvement, but such drastic rejection by you is very extreme and just doesn't reflect the reality of what people tell me about my music.

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 05:14:48 PM
I quite like it, on it's own terms - pretty good stuff. Not really my taste, but it is doing exactly the sort of thing Brian is saying -

The modern touches are lightly and charmingly applied, discret bits of modality, simple motoric rhythms with a touch of syncopation, playful dynamic contrasts. And it works on its own terms, it doesn't ask to be heard as an attempt to recreate a style, it simply inhabits its own. I hesitate to say that this is the sort of thing I would have imagined that you might want to write, Saul.....but, actually, it is!

I should point out that Dorman wrote the piece at age 19 (in '95). The slow movement is evidently (ie I'm just guessing) a direct homage to the Ravel concerto: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I60tLD-SLk. The finale is listed in the related videos, and is fairly witty actually. But clearly Saul and I have different impressions of Mr Dorman  :(

Romance In E minor


http://www.youtube.com/v/oTVLrNrjHJA

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 06:32:48 PM

I know that many people enjoy my music, if you don't and you want to only criticize and say that there is no originality and emotion because you seem to know better, then that's your choice.

But I care that people actually enjoy my music, and that's the main purpose in my music.

Don't get me wrong, there is always room for improvement, but such drastic rejection by you is very extreme and just doesn't reflect the reality of what people tell me about my music.

The reality is you can't take criticism and you expect superlatives to be thrown in your direction when the fact remains you haven't done the work to be awarded such compliments.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 28, 2010, 09:13:17 PM

The reality is you can't take criticism and you expect superlatives to be thrown in your direction when the fact remains you haven't done the work to be awarded such compliments.

Actually if you read the threads, I clearly stated that I listen to criticism. You can't mess with facts, the facts are that plenty of people have listened and gave me compliments. If you can't handle it, that's pretty sad.

Please lighten up...

Quite an assumption, you are making, Saul, to put our names on that poll. I see you want to do this differently - for us to choose something from our existing pieces, rather than to compose something new. Well, I certainly wouldn't compose something new, for the same reason I wasn't going to compose a baroque pastiche. But I'm also not going to choose something from my existing pieces 'that best reflects the Classical Music Era' either, because I think that phrase means something different to you than it does to me.

As Karl and I pointed out in the first of these threads, what a composer living in the here-and-now does is to draw on aspects of the baroque, the classical, and so on, not imitate it. Karl gave an example of a piece of his which drew on a particular type of Baroque piece - walking, stalking bass, non-repeating ornamented melodic line - which also reflected a whole host of other musics in a very rich way. I gave an example of a piece of mine written for a baroque instrument which in some way communes with the past through a sort of intimate and much slowed-down magnification of baroque ornamentation. But neither of these were baroque pastiches.

In the same way, I could here choose from a number of pieces that draw on classical methods and ideas. But I won't, because they are not classical pastiches. To me, above al, the classical was the period of the sonata principle. There are figurations we might associate with the classical - Alberti figurations and so on - which you will hardly evert find in my music (the jost obvious exception is in my JOKE fugue on Aqua's 'I'm a Barbie Girl'  :D  :D - it's number 8 of my set of mucking-around fugues, you'll find score and MIDI on my thread a couple of pages back). But the sonata principle - yes, you will find that there, all over the place: it's very important to me. Look through my thread and you'll find scores and recordings of pieces callled

Psyche Sonata (that's an old one, though)
Nightingale Sonata (this one quotes an 18th century folksong with something slightly like an Alberti bass underneath)
Canticle Sonata - the biggest, and the only one in 3 movements
Sonata in absentia (x 2 - recent pieces, these two)
Flute Sonata (the new one)
and one movement simply called Sonata

Most of these pieces were written in the last 3 years, btw. None of them could exist without the sonata principle, in a deep way they are really quite Classical pieces (maybe the Canticle Sonata above all - it's a piece where I feel I learnt to 'classicize' certain aspects of my style) but I woudln't select any of them as a piece which 'best reflects the Classical Music Era'

Quote from: Luke on June 28, 2010, 07:15:04 AM
Yes, in the same vein, and as Karl did earlier, I ought to say that there is a baroque influence on my own compositions, at times, certainly, but it's not there as pastiche, it's been absorbed and used to my own ends. As, for instance, in this piece for clavichord from 2004 - the instrument itself is baroque, of course, but it's more the material of the piece, the ornaments, vastly slowed down or at 'proper' speed, fully written out and otherwise, and the way they determine the melodic structure of the piece. (The audio file, once again, is at a very low bitrate so that I can attach it; more to the point, it is EXTREMELY quiet, but then that's what clavichords are like, and the intimacy is partly why I love them so much - the microphone was hanging an inch above the strings and I've amplified it 250%, and it is still scarcely audible!)

I just don't know what you did here Luke. With all due respect, you can't really call this a serious work or even a composition.
It said abselutly nothing to me. Baroque? even Karl's piece sounded Baroque at times, but this.. i just don't know what to say...

That's OK, Saul, I didn't really expect you to. It's not meant to sound Baroque in any way, as I said; it just draws on some baroque techniques.

Saul,

You seem to not being able to get the essential point: although your music can certainly sound pleasant and I'm sure there are many people who enjoy it, what you do is an exercise in futility. Everything that can be expressed in the style you're aiming at HAS BEEN ALREADY EXPRESSED at such a level of complexity and craftsmanship that you, with all due respect, will never attain even if you lived a thousand years from now on. Honestly, what new and interesting music do you think you can write in the style of Bach or Mendelssohn? Once again, your music is pleasant to the ear and I can easily understand why some certainly uneducated listeners (in the sense of not being familiar with the great tradition of classical music) find it appealing --- but no serious classical music afficionado will ever mistake it for something original and emotionally touching.

Ask yourself this simple question: is someone familiar with The Well-Tempered Clavier or Songs Without Words going to enjoy the music you write at the same level of complexity, originality and emotion? More general, is someone familiar with the music of the 1700-1850 timeframe, which you favor, going to find any genuine value in your own compositions?

You might delight in the fact that you sell your CDs to people, or that you receive enthusiastic appraisals on Youtube and it's a legitimate reaction --- but here pops up another question: are you pleased with the status of a Youtube composer, or are you willing to find your own voice, one that by originality and emotional content could make its way to the hearts and minds of serious listeners and, why not, even to the concert halls?

Oddly enough, I happen to know a Romanian composer (http://www.mariusherea.com/) who has exactly the same ideas and the same reactions to criticism as you have. It's like you two are twins. Just search for Marius Herea on Youtube.

Quote from: Teresa on June 28, 2010, 05:14:30 PM
Saul thanks for the suggestions.  Are there any free programs for Mac?  Money is a problem now, especially big-time money like $600-$700.

There are other programs available that aren't free, but cost much less and might do what you need. I have Sibelius and took a few courses on it offered by the Boston Symphony, but I'm not a composer and I don't require all of the bells and whistles that came with it. I mostly need a notation program to transpose orchestral parts or write out short exercises, so I usually find myself using an old program that I originally bought for my IBM 486 instead!

Quote from: Szykniej on June 29, 2010, 02:53:23 AM
There are other programs available that aren't free, but cost much less and might do what you need. I have Sibelius and took a few courses on it offered by the Boston Symphony, but I'm not a composer and I don't require all of the bells and whistles that came with it. I mostly need a notation program to transpose orchestral parts or write out short exercises, so I usually find myself using an old program that I originally bought for my IBM 486 instead!

Thanks, WOW a program to transpose orchestral parts would really be cool.  I use the Music Theory Dictionary by William F. Lee to find the interval to transpose an instrument's notation up or down and for the practical performing range.  Transposing is a real pain and I am sure it has slowed down my writing considerable.  It would be a godsend to have a program automatically do this for me.  Once I learn the programs I think I just might like moving to the computer.  :) 

Quote from: Teresa on June 29, 2010, 03:32:55 AM
Thanks, WOW a program to transpose orchestral parts would really be cool. 

In my teaching, it's a real time-saver. For example, if I find an exercise for violin written in treble clef that I want to use with the full group, I just enter it into the computer and the program can then print it in viola clef for the violas and in bass clef for the cellos and basses. Or, if we're performing an orchestral piece that calls for a bassoon or French horn that I don't have, I can easily produce parts for a tenor or alto sax player to use instead.

Quote from: Teresa on June 29, 2010, 03:32:55 AM
Thanks, WOW a program to transpose orchestral parts would really be cool.  I use the Music Theory Dictionary by William F. Lee to find the interval to transpose an instrument's notation up or down and for the practical performing range.  Transposing is a real pain and I am sure it has slowed down my writing considerable.  It would be a godsend to have a program automatically do this for me.  Once I learn the programs I think I just might like moving to the computer.  :)

Better still; a computer program that actually composes the music. (http://www.miller-mccune.com/culture-society/triumph-of-the-cyborg-composer-8507/) 

Quote from: Franco on June 29, 2010, 04:35:02 AM
Better still; a computer program that actually composes the music. (http://www.miller-mccune.com/culture-society/triumph-of-the-cyborg-composer-8507/)

Excellent. Now all we have to do is to enter the "golden rules of classical music" and we'll get at the other side as much Mozarts and Beethovens as we want. Saul's dream came true!  ;D

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 12:54:25 AM
Saul,

You seem to not being able to get the essential point: although your music can certainly sound pleasant and I'm sure there are many people who enjoy it, what you do is an exercise in futility. Everything that can be expressed in the style you're aiming at HAS BEEN ALREADY EXPRESSED at such a level of complexity and craftsmanship that you, with all due respect, will never attain even if you lived a thousand years from now on. Honestly, what new and interesting music do you think you can write in the style of Bach or Mendelssohn? Once again, your music is pleasant to the ear and I can easily understand why some certainly uneducated listeners (in the sense of not being familiar with the great tradition of classical music) find it appealing --- but no serious classical music afficionado will ever mistake it for something original and emotionally touching.

Ask yourself this simple question: is someone familiar with The Well-Tempered Clavier or Songs Without Words going to enjoy the music you write at the same level of complexity, originality and emotion? More general, is someone familiar with the music of the 1700-1850 timeframe, which you favor, going to find any genuine value in your own compositions?

You might delight in the fact that you sell your CDs to people, or that you receive enthusiastic appraisals on Youtube and it's a legitimate reaction --- but here pops up another question: are you pleased with the status of a Youtube composer, or are you willing to find your own voice, one that by originality and emotional content could make its way to the hearts and minds of serious listeners and, why not, even to the concert halls?

Oddly enough, I happen to know a Romanian composer (http://www.mariusherea.com/) who has exactly the same ideas and the same reactions to criticism as you have. It's like you two are twins. Just search for Marius Herea on Youtube.

Maybe you didn't hear a word that I said but here it is again ...




I had a decent number of people who actually understand classical music, and are knowledgeable listeners, purchase my music. Here's an email  exchange between me and  a Canadian couple a few months ago...

This is just one example, please pay attention:

:"Hello,
I would like to purchase one of Saul's C.D.s. How can I do that ?
Thanks,
S. B
"

"Hello, Saul,

I'm the other half of the team, the one with the PayPal account! Sharon and I quite enjoyed listening to your music on line, and we would very much like to purchase one of your CDs. I'll submit payment via PayPal in the amount of USD$29.99 as soon as possible. I think that you should thereby receive our mailing address, but it is the same as the one on Sharon's email.
Best Wishes for a Happy New Year, and continued success!

G.B"


'Hello Again, Saul,
A short note to say that the required funds have been sent to you via PayPal.
Cheers!
G. B"


'Hello, Saul,

As newcomers, we're much looking forward to receiving your CD and to visiting your well-designed website more and more often. Best Wishes for continued success!'


'Hello  G.!
Thank you for your purchase!
I just finished packing your order and on my way to send it.
I will keep you posted on the status of the shipping.
I would like to ask you, how did you hear about me, my music?
I'm so pleased that my music has touched you and Sharon.
Kind Regards, and Best of Wishes to Both of You.

Cheers,

Saul '


'Hello, Saul,

We're glad to hear that our order is on the way. Thanks very much for your efforts on our behalf!
Now, regarding how we came to hear of your music. Sharon is not terribly thrilled with some of the music available these days, and she had the idea of searching the internet for music that she liked. Her idea was to find the music, download and pay for it, and make a CD of songs that she really wanted to hear. However, neither she nor I are terribly au fait with modern computer technology. Accordingly, it was a bit of a "hit and miss" effort on both our parts. Fortunately, she made a good hit: accessing YouTube, she came across one of your tunes and, by extension, your website. She then took the opportunity to listen to a number of pieces of music on your site. Enjoying what she heard (and bringing me to the computer to listen as well) she sent you the initial email asking about purchasing your CD. And the rest, as they say, is history!
We have also visited the iTunes website to see if we could buy any of your individual works, but we are unable to find you via their search engine. Perhaps you can advise us if you are indeed on that site. If so, we will continue our search. Alternatively, perhaps there is another site from which we can purchase some of your work. Again, if so, would you please advise us Thanks!

Best Regards!

S. and G. B.'

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 04:39:45 AM
Maybe you didn't hear a word that I said

Actually it's you who haven't read or haven't understood my post you quote.

Let me state it frankly: anyone who, like your Mr. Barling there, speaks about classical music in terms of "songs" and "tunes" knows nothing about it (except maybe compilations like Mozart for Babies or The Greatest Hits of Classical Music) and is hardly in a position to judge the quality of a composition.

But in the end, I'm glad you found a niche for your style. If it makes you happy (and, why not, rich) then it's just a decent job as anything else. Good luck!

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 04:39:45 AM
Maybe you didn't hear a word that I said but here it is again ...[snipped]

I don't want to intrude on the discussion, but unless you have persmission to use those people's names, I would suggest hiding them or changing them. I know I would be very upset to find my name used in that way without permission (even if I was 110% in agreement with the poster). Anyway, it is more of an etiquette thing, and would suggest changing the names (unless they have given permission).

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 04:48:28 AM
Actually it's you who haven't read or haven't understood my post you quote.

Let me state it frankly: anyone who, like your Mr. Barling there, speaks about classical music in terms of "songs" and "tunes" knows nothing about it (except maybe compilations like Mozart for Babies or The Best Classical Hits) and is hardly in a position to judge the quality of a composition.

But in the end, I'm glad you found a niche for your style. If it makes you happy (anmd, why not, rich) then it's just a decent job as anything else. Good luck!

You're so quick in making assumptions about people, and besides these two fine people I had many others who are also professional classical music lovers and listeners who purchased my music. I know this to be true and this is the reality I am exposed to.

Quote from: ukrneal on June 29, 2010, 04:50:50 AM
I don't want to intrude on the discussion, but unless you have persmission to use those people's names, I would suggest hiding them or changing them. I know I would be very upset to find my name used in that way without permission (even if I was 110% in agreement with the poster). Anyway, it is more of an etiquette thing, and would suggest changing the names (unless they have given permission).

I don't think there anything negative here but I have changed their names to their initials only.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 04:51:25 AM
You're so quick in making assumptions about people, and besides these two fine people I had many others who are also professional classical music lovers and listenrs who purchased my music. I know this to be true and this is the reality I am exposed to.

Fine. But don't forget that Brahms, a true classicist and an honest man, destroyed perhaps as much music as he published. And I'm sure that the compositions he committed to the flames were far superior to your own ones (because firstly they belonged to a genius and secondly they were of their own times) and more worth the money of Mr. Barling.

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 04:59:56 AM
Fine. But don't forget that Brahms, a true classicist and an honest man, destroyed perhaps as much music as he published. And I'm sure that the compositions he committed to the flames were far superior to your own ones (because firstly they belonged to a genius and secondly they were of their own times) and more worth the money of Mr. Barling.

So youre saying that I should burn all my music and stop people from enjoying it?

Thank God youre not my mentor.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 05:01:32 AM
So youre saying that I should burn all my music and stop people from enjoying it?

I'm saying that you should stop being a self-absorbed narcissist.

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 05:06:03 AM
I'm saying that you should stop being a self-absorbed narcissist.

Self Absorbed Narcissit? Why because I pointed to you that some real music lovers enjoy my music?

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 05:08:03 AM
Self Absorbed Narcissit? Why because I pointed to you that some real musc lovers enjoy my music?

No, because you take the smallest criticism of your music and musical philosophy as a personal offense.

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 05:16:31 AM
No, because you take the smallest criticism of your music and musical philosophy as a personal offense.

There was nothing 'small' in your 'criticism'.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 05:23:49 AM
There was nothing 'small' in your 'criticism'.

Even if it was the harshest slaying of your works, which was not --- you can't expect people praising you to no end, can you? Not everyone has the good taste of Mr. Barling.

Besides, if you can't stand criticism then you have no business composing for the public.

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 05:29:12 AM
Even if it was the harshest slaying of your works, which was not --- you can't expect people praising you to no end, can you? Not everyone has the good taste of Mr. Barling.

Besides, if you can't stand criticism then you have no business composing for the public.

Criticism that makes sense and is legitimate and true, I accept. If you note, I have accepted a nice amount of remarks pointed out by Luke and some others. But you suggest that anyone that likes my music can't know anything about music, and I pointed out to you that this is not the case.

I have no problem accepting critic from you, as long as it makes sense, I will accept it, but flat out over hyped assumptions on my music will be rejected by me.

Regards,

Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 05:32:58 AM
you suggest that anyone that likes my music can't know anything about music,

Not at all. I said that anyone who spoke of classical music in terms of "songs" and "tunes" was manifestly unfamiliar with what classical music is about. Quite different of what you inferred.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 05:08:03 AM
Self Absorbed Narcissit? Why because I pointed to you that some real musc lovers enjoy my music?

Has it ever registered on you that hardly anyone on these boards has had a good word to say about any of your music? And do you think that's because we're all a bunch of meanies, jealous and spiteful over your phenomenal talent, and all conspiring to gang up on you because we want to see your immortal genius squelched and defeated?

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 05:49:59 AM
Has it ever registered on you that hardly anyone on these boards has had a good word to say about any of your music? And do you think that's because we're all a bunch of meanies, jealous and spiteful over your phenomenal talent, and all conspiring to gang up on you because we want to see your immortal genius squelched and defeated?

Actually, Luke and Greg  those who I was speaking with about this topic, and even Teresa had said some postive things about my music.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 05:52:37 AM
Actually, Luke and Greg  those who I was speaking with about this topic, and even Teresa had said some postive things about my music.

Your music pleases the ear at a very basic aural level, I grant you that. But so does the music of hundreds of composers who died before 1900. You are living in 2010. How do you distinguish yourself from them?

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 05:52:37 AM
Actually, Luke and Greg  those who I was speaking with about this topic, and even Teresa had said some postive things about my music.

Luke and Greg have expressed considerable reservations about your music. That is simply a matter of fact.

You've got to start understanding something, Saul. Fawning praise is not the only valid reaction to the works of art you keeping dumping here on a regular basis.

Quote from: SaulSelf Absorbed Narcissit? Why because I pointed to you that some real musc lovers enjoy my music?

There is some self-absorption and narcissism operating even in the way you post this, Saul.  You've pointed out that some real people enjoy your music, which none of us gainsays.  But in order to inflate the artistic importance of your work, these are not mere mortals, no — they are real music lovers.

Remember what a classical sage said about the unexamined life, Saul.  Both Luke and Florestan have made perfectly even-tempered comments, in neighborly charity.  That you refuse to consider that their comments may have some artistic application to you, but you insist that you already know it all, and that criticism of your work or viewpoint is, of necessity, hostility towards you, reflect poorly on you.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 06:28:58 AM
Luke and Greg have expressed considerable reservations about your music. That is simply a matter of fact.

You've got to start understanding something, Saul. Fawning praise is not the only valid reaction to the works of art you keeping dumping here on a regular basis.

They have expressed 'considerable reservations' but pointed out the good aspects within my music, and Teresa praised one of my works.
I'm not looking for praise, but for discussion and to learn and to expose my music. Every composer wants these things...
And by the way, as I'm typing this I'm listening to the Grilling of Dean Kagan on the Senate floor, and I somewhat feel that's what I'm getting here.. grilling for just talking about music in a very nice manner. Florestan had made his points in a variation of ways, Luke had said some things, even Greg... I have listened and accepted those points that I felt made sense and Rejected those I differ with. There is no such a thing of completely agreeing with everything is been said to you about music, or your music in particular.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 06:35:38 AM
They have expressed 'considerable reservations' but pointed out the good aspects within my music, and Teresa praised one of my works.

Teresa also detests Mozart.  So how do you balance that with her praise (as compared to balance of response from Luke and Greg)?

Wait, wait, don't tell me: only praise for your work is a response worthy of your embracing.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 06:35:38 AM
I'm not looking for praise...

No, I think that is exactly what you're looking for. And your remark about Kagan proves it. Your unwillingness to accept criticism has been made quite obvious here. The comments you're so quick to "reject" have usually been the most valid ones.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 06:35:38 AM
. . . And by the way, as I'm typing this I'm listening to the Grilling of Dean Kagan on the Senate floor, and I somewhat feel that's what I'm getting here.. grilling for just talking about music in a very nice manner.

Oh, but that is richly funny on more than one level. First, there is your game of Playing Martyr, here.  Second, your playacting and blah-blah about "atonal gibberish," and your egoistic evaluation of yourself as a composer "superior to Schoenberg," that's all talking about music in a very nice manner, is it?

Karl,


I responded to a musician here that is not a layman when it comes to music, enjoying one particular work. Her reservations about Mozart, is her own business and she is entitled for her opinions and even though I didn't agree with her opinion of Mozart I have never ever attacked her in such a brutal manner as some prominent members have, and that is not what I call 'charitable neighborly' behavior as you suggested.

Teresa has every right to trash Mozart, just as I have every right to attack Schoenberg's music.

The fact is that Teresa enjoyed Ancient Dance In G minor and she was brave enough to tell me this here publicly knowing the sometimes harsh sentiment and atmosphere that is created here against my work.

She did a simple thing , she enjoyed my music and told me that.
There is no need to create an 'intellectual ring' against my music saying that anyone that enjoys my music doesn't know a thing about music...
Does that include Teresa too?

She also doesn't know a thing.. And only you and your friends here understand music?

Clearly this is not constructive criticism that any composer will accept from anyone.

And that's the point I made to Florestan and to a degree to Luke too.

Best,

Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 06:47:12 AM
I responded to a musician here that is not a layman when it comes to music, enjoying one particular work. Her reservations about Mozart, is her own business and she is entitled for her opinions and even though I didn't agree with her opinion of Mozart I have never ever attacked her in such a brutal manner as some prominent members have, and that is not what I call 'charitable neighborly' behavior as you suggested.

Saul, you've twisted my remark.  I leave it to you to read what I wrote, and learn what I actually suggested viz. charitably neighborly.

It's not the first time you've twisted remarks so as to ratchet up your customary boilerplate, Saul. And that is simply tiresome. I shan't reply any further.

Good luck. With skills on the order of yours, luck may be all you have.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 29, 2010, 06:53:31 AM
Saul, you've twisted my remark.  I leave it to you to read what I wrote, and learn what I actually suggested viz. charitably neighborly.

It's not the first time you've twisted remarks so as to ratchet up your customary boilerplate, Saul. And that is simply tiresome. I shan't reply any further.

Good luck. With skills on the order of yours, luck may be all you have.

Dear Karl,

I accepted some of the criticism of Luke and Greg about my music, things like notation and also looking for new avenues of expression that are more modern then what I'm used to.

This is nice and acceptable.

But I reject the notion that if anyone actually' dares' to like my music therefore must be a layman.

I reject this twisted  description of my work, and I demonstrated very clearly why.

Best Wishes,

Saul

You still don't get it, Saul...

After hearing one of Beethoven's late quartets --- I don't remember OTOH which one --- Schubert commented something like "What are we left to compose now?".

If you can, please give me a straight and honest answer to this simple question: compared to the piano music of Mendelssohn, what's new and different in your own?

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 07:01:25 AM
You still don't get it, Saul...

After hearing one of Beethoven's late quartets --- I don't remember OTOH which one --- Schubert commented something like "What are we left to compose now?".

If you can, please give me a straight and honest answer to this simple question: compared to the piano music of Mendelssohn, what's new and different in your own?

I don't stand a chance with you, you just don't like my music and said it a number of times.
I accept it that you don't like my music.

Now if you would post some of your music and talk about Baroque music in general I would be delighted to exchange ideas with you. But about my music, this is a closed deal.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 07:05:13 AM
I don't stand a chance with you, you just don't like my music and said it a number of times.
I accept it that you don't like my music.

I never said I didn't like your music. In fact I said specifically that it was ear-pleasing. But I ask you again: what's the difference between Mendelssohn's music and your music?

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 07:09:04 AM
I never said I didn't like your music. In fact I said specifically that it was ear-pleasing. But I ask you again: what's the difference between Mendelssohn's music and your music?

Oh thank you! that you are saying that my music is " ear-pleasing " THANK YOU!

Now there are many differences between me and every other composer in the world, not just Mendelssohn. When I write a piece of music, I try to the best of my abilities to translate my feelings into sounds. I do this in a very genuine and heartfelt and passionate way. I also want very much that people will be moved and touched by my music, I never say that I want to be like one particular composer, but to have my own distinctive voice within music. I draw many good points from a number of composers that I like, but I never try to sound like them, I mean what would be the purpose of writing music if you sound like just someone else, right?

Best Wishes,

Saul

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 12:54:25 AM
Everything that can be expressed in the style you're aiming at HAS BEEN ALREADY EXPRESSED...is someone familiar with The Well-Tempered Clavier or Songs Without Words going to enjoy the music you write at the same level of complexity, originality and emotion?

I'd just like to point out that I don't think "everything that can be expressed has already been expressed" in every musical style. It is certainly possible for a deeply intelligent contemporary composer to revisit styles, or ideas, or forms of older eras and write music that is highly complex, original, and emotionally engaging but at the same time fundamentally backward-looking in the academic sense. In other words, reseeding a prior century's fields does not always preclude greatness - it is just that you need to add the greatness. Or more radically, being "backward-looking" can often be a way of being "forward-looking."

For example.

(http://www.selections.com/images/products/picture1zoom/BX050.JPG)

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 04:51:25 AM
... I had many others who are also professional classical music lovers...

I just wanted to record this phrase for posterity. I want that job.  8)   What do they do, precisely, these professional classical music lovers?

Saul, you seem to have taken some of what I had to say to heart - but oddly enough, the slant you want to take on my commentary, after all that, is:

Quote from: SaulLuke and Greg....had said some postive things about my music.

and I don't really want to be painted as an all-things-considered 'lover of Saul's music'. I did say that there are, now and then, some pretty sounds going on in there somewhere - that's not hard to do, mind you, it's not much of a compliment. My criticisms are extensive ones (I only scratched the surface of the things I have problems with in your music) - and these criticisms remain.

I want you to note, btw, that though I've mentioned the style you write in, and that IMO it's not really an advisable way to write in 2010, I've never really criticised the music itself on that basis. My problems with your music aren't the style it is in, they are the slapdash and error-strewn technique with which it is written, the lack of understanding of form/content, and the paucity of invention.

OTOH, I know that you didn't like my piece - a devastating blow that I will have to weather - but that's not a problem to me, I really have no concern if someone doesn't like the sound of my music, because I know that it is well put together and internally consistent, and that sort of thing, my sense of the piece's strength in and of itself, not opinions of dubious origin garnered on the internet, are what make me satisfied with my music.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 07:14:12 AM
Oh thank you! that you are saying that my music is " ear-pleasing " THANK YOU!

You're welcome.

Quote
Now there are many differences between me and every other composer in the world, not just Mendelssohn. When I write a piece of music, I try to the best of my abilities to translate my feelings into sounds. I do this in a very genuine and heartfelt and passionate way. I also want very much that people will be moved and touched by my music,

Oh my God! In all this you are similar, nay, identical, to each and every composer who ever lived on Earth. I ask you once again: show me one single major difference between Mendelssohn's piano music and your own.

Quote
I never say that I want to be like one particular composer, but to have my own distinctive voice within music. I draw many good points from a number of composers that I like, but I never try to sound like them, I mean what would be the purpose of writing music if you sound like just someone else, right?

Then how come that none of us here is able to distinguish your personal voice? Are we all deaf?

Quote from: Brian on June 29, 2010, 07:17:27 AM
I'd just like to point out that I don't think "everything that can be expressed has already been expressed" in every musical style. It is certainly possible for a deeply intelligent contemporary composer to revisit styles, or ideas, or forms of older eras and write music that is highly complex, original, and emotionally engaging but at the same time fundamentally backward-looking in the academic sense. In other words, reseeding a prior century's fields does not always preclude greatness - it is just that you need to add the greatness. Or more radically, being "backward-looking" can often be a way of being "forward-looking."

For example.

(http://www.selections.com/images/products/picture1zoom/BX050.JPG)

Oh I certainly do agree with that. Schoenberg himself said that there was much music left to be composed in C major. But Shostakovich never uttered such contempt for contemporary developments as Saul did, neither do his preludes and fugues sound like they could have been composed a hundred years back.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 01:40:45 PM
Greg, you're not making any sense, there is no reason not to listen to classical music, especially if you dislike certain composers or can't really get them.

No, not if you dislike certain composers- but if you just listen casually. Though this probably doesn't apply to you or anyone here, so never mind.

I'm listening to the live Kagan confirmation hearing, this is just too interesting, I promise to come back and reply to your comments and Luke's.

Best Wishes,

Saul

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 07:23:44 AM
Oh I certainly do agree with that. Schoenberg himself said that there was much music left to be composed in C major. But Shostakovich never uttered such contempt for contemporary developments as Saul did, neither do his preludes and fugues sound like they could have been composed a hundred years back.

Yep, we're in agreement after all. If you're going to write a new baroque piece, the goal is not to compose music as if trapped in amber in the year 1720, the goal is to compose music as if you're looking back at 1720 and taking in everything that's happened since and using it all in service of your own voice and your own artistic goals. :)

Quote from: Brian on June 29, 2010, 07:28:24 AM
Yep, we're in agreement after all. If you're going to write a new baroque piece, the goal is not to compose music as if trapped in amber in the year 1720, the goal is to compose music as if you're looking back at 1720 and taking in everything that's happened since and using it all in service of your own voice and your own artistic goals. :)

Precisely. But if you programmatically reject everything that came after 1900 and your idea of music is stuck in mid-19th century you're not going to make any positive  impression and that's my whole point.

After discussion with the other Mods, I have amalgamated all of Saul's composition threads and I have renamed the thread. If you feel inclined to discuss these topics with Saul, it needs to be done from this single topic.

I am mystified at the lengths some of you are going to in this dialogue with the deaf. It is up to you, but remember folks, the normal rules about the way we deal with one another pertain; so no hair pulling or eye gouging.

Knight

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 07:23:44 AM
Oh I certainly do agree with that. Schoenberg himself said that there was much music left to be composed in C major. But Shostakovich never uttered such contempt for contemporary developments as Saul did . . . .

True, in fact (apart from younger days, when he was agog over Petrushka, and prepared his own arrangement of the Symphony of Psalms for piano four hands) Shostakovich continued to expand his pallette in his last compositions.

The only perorations Shostakovich spoke against modernism in music, were arguably public political obligations.

Quote from: knight on June 29, 2010, 07:48:55 AM
I am mystified at the lengths some of you are going to in this dialogue with the deaf. It is up to you, but remember folks, the normal rules about the way we deal with one another pertain; so no hair pulling or eye gouging.

Understood, and my only answer to your mystification is the sheer sport of seeing how Saul manages invariably to miss the point, skirt the issues, and otherwise interpret every comment made here as proof of his unassailable genius. It is a rare talent. But I promise, no hair pulling or eye gouging; otherwise, we would be left not only with the deaf, but with the deaf, blind, and bald.

QuoteNow there are many differences between me [Saul] and every other composer in the world, not just Mendelssohn.

A true fact that is beyond dispute. 

I will put forward an analogy that will possibly clarify this fact even more: I'm assuming that Saul, as well as most of us at GMG can ride a bicycle, now there are many differences between Saul and every other bicycle rider in the world, not just Lance Armstrong.

Quote from: Franco on June 29, 2010, 08:06:15 AM
A true fact that is beyond dispute. 

I will put forward an analogy that will possibly clarify this fact even more: I'm assuming that Saul, as well as most of us at GMG can ride a bicycle, now there are many differences between Saul and every other bicycle rider in the world, not just Lance Armstrong.

This looks like it is going to be worked up into a syllogism; good luck.

SF, Yes, bald and deaf and blind....not good.

Mike

The Who didn't even do that to Tommy . . . .

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 29, 2010, 08:34:29 AM
The Who didn't even do that to Tommy . . . .

Even Helen Keller had hair. . . .

I saw The Miracle Worker when I was in grade school. It was one long Bad Hair Day before the term had been coined.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 29, 2010, 07:59:18 AM
True, in fact (apart from younger days, when he was agog over Petrushka, and prepared his own arrangement of the Symphony of Psalms for piano four hands) Shostakovich continued to expand his pallette in his last compositions.

The only perorations Shostakovich spoke against modernism in music, were arguably public political obligations.

I think what makes Shostakovich so great - for me he ranks alongside Bach, Mozart and Beethoven - is that he could write intensely personal, intensely Shostakovian music in a multitude of styles. The Tenth Symphony, in which he introduces DSCH, is arguably the culmination of the Russian Romantic symphonic tradition of Balakirev, Rimsky, and Rachmaninov; the Preludes and Fugues were written fueled on inspiration of Bach; throw in the Fourth and Fifteenth Symphonies and you've got four pieces right there that sound like they were written by people who maybe met each other at a party one time and exchanged polite words but secretly aren't too fond of each other's music.

To Florestan,

You said that my music sounds almost the same as Mendelssohn and you can't see the difference.

Please if you can explain  how this Prelude sounds like Mendelssohn...

Thanks,

Saul
http://www.youtube.com/v/RulebBhsJlw

Quote from: Brian on June 29, 2010, 08:47:18 AM
I think what makes Shostakovich so great - for me he ranks alongside Bach, Mozart and Beethoven - is that he could write intensely personal, intensely Shostakovian music in a multitude of styles. The Tenth Symphony, in which he introduces DSCH, is arguably the culmination of the Russian Romantic symphonic tradition of Balakirev, Rimsky, and Rachmaninov; the Preludes and Fugues were written fueled on inspiration of Bach; throw in the Fourth and Fifteenth Symphonies and you've got four pieces right there that sound like they were written by people who maybe met each other at a party one time and exchanged polite words but secretly aren't too fond of each other's music.

Nice post, Brian.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 09:46:14 AM
To Florestan,

You said that my music sounds almost the same as Mendelssohn and you can't see the difference.

Please if you can explain  how this Prelude sounds like Mendelssohn...

Thanks,

Saul
http://www.youtube.com/v/RulebBhsJlw

Actually, I think it does somewhat, a kind of recently discovered Song without Words. But I'll go out on a limb this time and say I think this is a pretty good piece, Saul. It has direction and resolution, and you do some nice things distributing the figurations between the hands and varying the bass line between dotted halves and dotted quarters.

Since this is evidently a computer performance, one thing I would strongly urge is converting the 16ths to triplets. At this tempo, I truly doubt a living pianist could handle all those repeated 16ths, and triplet figurations would make this much more playable while keeping the agitated effect you want.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 09:46:14 AM
You said that my music sounds almost the same as Mendelssohn and you can't see the difference.

Please if you can explain  how this Prelude sounds like Mendelssohn...

That's almost a copy-paste from Beethoven. You still don't get the idea, do you? I'll restate it: You, Saul Dzorelashvili, living in 2010, cannot pretend to be taken seriously as a composer if you compose in the style of infinitely superior composers who lived 200 to 100 years ago. Their music sounds genuine and heartfelt even on the thousandth listening. Your music, ear-pleasing at a very basic level as it is, sounds on a second listening contrived and false, because out of its time. It conveys the urgent feeling of "been there, done that".

Now with regard to the poll you added: I think neither Karl nor Luke nor Greg want to reflect the Classical Era. The Classical Era is gone and the only one here who dreams of reviving it is you Their music aims at reflecting their (and our) era and their own feelings and reflections about it. The poll is meaningless.

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 10:08:00 AM
That's almost a copy-paste from Beethoven. You still don't get the idea, do you? I'll restate it: You, Saul Dzorelashvili, living in 2010, cannot pretend to be taken seriously as a composer if you compose in the style of infinitely superior composers who lived 200 to 100 years ago. Their music sounds genuine and heartfelt even on the thousandth listening. Your music, ear-pleasing at a very basic level as it is, sounds on a second listening contrived and false, because out of its time. It conveys the urgent feeling of "been there, done that".

Now with regard to the poll you added: I think neither Karl nor Luke nor Greg want to reflect the Classical Era. The Classical Era is gone and the only one here who dreams of reviving it is you Their music aims at reflecting their (and our) era and their own feelings and reflections about it. The poll is meaningless.

The last composer in the whole world I was thinking about while writing this work was Beethoven.
Probably this Beethoven thing is a fragment of your imagination, which you are entitled to.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 10:06:54 AM
Actually, I think it does somewhat, a kind of recently discovered Song without Words. But I'll go out on a limb this time and say I think this is a pretty good piece, Saul. It has direction and resolution, and you do some nice things distributing the figurations between the hands and varying the bass line between dotted halves and dotted quarters.

Since this is evidently a computer performance, one thing I would strongly urge is converting the 16ths to triplets. At this tempo, I truly doubt a living pianist could handle all those repeated 16ths, and triplet figurations would make this much more playable while keeping the agitated effect you want.

Thank you very much.

About the playability of this piece, there is no problem playing this piece at this tempi.
Eliran Avni played this piece in front of me.

Best Wishes and Thanks again for your fine comments,

Cheers,

Saul

Quote from: jowcol on June 28, 2010, 02:16:21 AM
This brings to mind the Borges essay "Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote.".  The idea was that an imaginary 20th Century author (Menard), would rewrite Cervante's Don Quixote exactly word for word- -but that the entire meaning of the novel would differ based on the time it was written.   A side by side analysis was particularly interesting:

QuoteIt is a revelation to compare Menard's Don Quixote with Cervantes'. The latter, for example, wrote (part one, chapter nine):
. . . truth, whose mother is history, rival of time, depository of deeds, witness of the past, exemplar and adviser to the present, and the future's counselor. Written in the seventeenth century, written by the "lay genius" Cervantes, this enumeration is a mere rhetorical praise of history.

Menard, on the other hand, writes:
. . . truth, whose mother is history, rival of time, depository of deeds, witness of the past, exemplar and adviser to the present, and the future's counselor.

History, the mother of truth: the idea is astounding. Menard, a contemporary of William James, does not define history as an inquiry into reality but as its origin. Historical truth, for him, is not what has happened; it is what we judge to have happened. The final phrases—exemplar and adviser to the present, and the future's counselor —are brazenly pragmatic.

The contrast in style is also vivid. The archaic style of Menard—quite foreign, after all—suffers from a certain affectation. Not so that of his forerunner, who handles with ease the current Spanish of his time.

Of course, Borges' idea was not encourage more Menards, and when 20th century composers did adopt neo-classical forms, (Pulcinella, anyone?) the looked at the classical tradition as more of a tool box than a cook book.

All artists live in a context. Even if Saul succeeded in composing (say) the Mendelssohn Octet, it doesn't have the same artistic meaning, as a piece composed by Saul in 2010, that it has as a piece composed by an 16-year-old in 1825.

Additionally, no one in 2010 trying to write note-for-note music as Mendelssohn might conceivably have composed a piece . . . the effort to produce that speculative piece (merely compositionally) were great (and in some ways, anti-artistic).  Realistically, I don't see that it is even possible; a composer in our day is informed by a wealth of culture and history (including Mendelssohn, himself) to which Mendelssohn had no recourse.

The fine violinist Fritz Kreisler was a famous fraud in exactly this way, concertizing with pieces he himself had written, but attributing to 19^th-century composers.  In Saul's shoes, Kreisler would have pointed in pride to the audiences who, in good faith and without looking too closely, took them for "originals."

That quote I sought out in light of Andrei's remarks:

Quote from: Florestan on June 29, 2010, 10:08:00 AM
That's almost a copy-paste from Beethoven. You still don't get the idea, do you? I'll restate it: You, Saul Dzorelashvili, living in 2010, cannot pretend to be taken seriously as a composer if you compose in the style of infinitely superior composers who lived 200 to 100 years ago. Their music sounds genuine and heartfelt even on the thousandth listening. Your music, ear-pleasing at a very basic level as it is, sounds on a second listening contrived and false, because out of its time. It conveys the urgent feeling of "been there, done that".

Now with regard to the poll you added: I think neither Karl nor Luke nor Greg want to reflect the Classical Era. The Classical Era is gone and the only one here who dreams of reviving it is you Their music aims at reflecting their (and our) era and their own feelings and reflections about it. The poll is meaningless.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 10:16:03 AM
Thank you very much.

About the playability of this piece, there is no problem playing this piece at this tempi.
Eliran Avni played this piece in front of me.

Best Wishes and Thanks again for your fine comments,

Cheers,

Saul

I knew it! if he gets praise, it's only his due. If he gets criticism, it's to be dismissed or ignored. But I'd like to hear from the other pianists here about the playability of those semiquavers.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 11:34:43 AM
I knew it! if he gets praise, it's only his due. If he gets criticism, it's to be dismissed or ignored. But I'd like to hear from the other pianists here about the playability of those semiquavers.

Plus, 10 years from now he'll still be bragging on web sites that you praised his music to the high heavens.

karl,

Why does it matter when the music was composed, isn't music timeless and isn't good art timeless?
In my opinion enjoying music shouldn't be tackled with the question of time.
Good music that speak to people should be enjoyed and appreciated regardless when it was written.
Let's say Karl lived for 300 years since the time of Bach and he composed in the Baroque style  back then, and as time went by and he reached the imaginary age of 300, he still composed in the same style lacking any modernization that reflects the present age.

Should we then appreciate all the beauty of Karl's music that he composed back then, and reject his music today just because it doesn't reflect the present?

I think this is futile. Composers who compose today in the style of the past, shouldn't be 'rejected' and 'cornered' for music in a sense doesn't become better or worse if it doesn't reflect the present time.

If it would be then what's the whole point of listening to the great past composers?

They don't speak to us in our current mental environment. We have nothing in common with them culturally and philosophically, per say. They lived in a forgotten age, which will never return, what was then will never reappear.

So should be give up on classical music all together?


I sense a certain hypocrisy here.

Which is it?

If you don't believe that classical music written today has any beneficial quality for the listeners because it doesn't reflect our present era, then why not forget about classical music, and leave this music to the past from where is came from?

Best,

Saul

By the way this is the most Atonal piece I have composed as of yet...

http://www.youtube.com/v/a5qLSgj5IJM

Hmm, that actually sounds like what would happen if Scriabin were hired for a gig in a jazz club. Pretty cool!

Quote from: Teresa on June 28, 2010, 05:14:30 PM
Saul thanks for the suggestions.  Are there any free programs for Mac?  Money is a problem now, especially big-time money like $600-$700.

Melody Assistant (at www.myriad-online.com) is not free, but very feature rich, and supports Mac and Windows.  I haven't checked the pricing lately, but the basic program is 20$, and you may wish to spend another 50$ or so for "Gold Base" if you plan on generating listenable audio files.

Quote from: jowcol on June 29, 2010, 05:26:49 PM
Melody Assistant (at www.myriad-online.com) is not free, but very feature rich, and supports Mac and Windows.  I haven't checked the pricing lately, but the basic program is 20$, and you may wish to spend another 50$ or so for "Gold Base" if you plan on generating listenable audio files.

Thanks, I'll check it out.  :)

Quote from: Brian on June 29, 2010, 12:46:50 PM
Hmm, that actually sounds like what would happen if Scriabin were hired for a gig in a jazz club. Pretty cool!

Glad you enjoyed it, Brian.  :)

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 10:16:03 AM
Thank you very much.

About the playability of this piece, there is no problem playing this piece at this tempi.
Eliran Avni played this piece in front of me.

Best Wishes and Thanks again for your fine comments,

Cheers,

Saul

I could not play this full volume at work a few hours ago, but played at home it sure sounds like triplets throughout to me. Anyone else?

I dont know where you heard triplets there...the score is right there, there are no triplets.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 06:16:52 PM
I could not play this full volume at work a few hours ago, but played at home it sure sounds like triplets throughout to me. Anyone else?

Yeah, I noticed that before I even read any posts commenting about it.
It should be in 12/8 time.

Quote from: Greg on June 29, 2010, 07:02:20 PM
Yeah, I noticed that before I even read any posts commenting about it.
It should be in 12/8 time.

I see, I will check it out...thank you...

Quote from: Greg on June 29, 2010, 07:02:20 PM
Yeah, I noticed that before I even read any posts commenting about it.
It should be in 12/8 time.

Or 4/4 with triplets. Greg is exactly right. The notation threw me. The reason is that the highest note in the figuration is always the seventh note of the bar; therefore instead of it sounding like the "and" of 2, it sounds like the 3rd beat in a 4/4 measure. A live pianist might follow the beaming and play it in 3, but from the computer file it sounds absolutely like triplets. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, as the repeated notes are more secure for the player this way.

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 09:20:19 PM
Actually if you read the threads, I clearly stated that I listen to criticism. You can't mess with facts, the facts are that plenty of people have listened and gave me compliments. If you can't handle it, that's pretty sad.

Please lighten up...

...I've also read plenty of posts that give your music a lot of criticism. My own observation is anyone who likes what you currently composed aren't experienced listeners and/or are just trying to be nice to you and don't know how to give you a valid suggestion. I didn't sugarcoat my criticism of your music.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 07:18:11 PM
Or 4/4 with triplets. Greg is exactly right. The notation threw me. The reason is that the highest note in the figuration is always the seventh note of the bar; therefore instead of it sounding like the "and" of 2, it sounds like the 3rd beat in a 4/4 measure. A live pianist might follow the beaming and play it in 3, but from the computer file it sounds absolutely like triplets. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, as the repeated notes are more secure for the player this way.

Either way, your choice of notation would force me to change the speed from 140 to 250 to achieve what I want.
But I guess that its ok. I will change the notation to 4/4...

Cheers,

Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 28, 2010, 09:20:19 PM
Actually if you read the threads, I clearly stated that I listen to criticism. You can't mess with facts, the facts are that plenty of people have listened and gave me compliments. If you can't handle it, that's pretty sad.

Please lighten up...

No, Saul, this attitude will never get you anywhere, the fact that I thought you achieved a modest success with your G minor piece notwithstanding. You may say you listen to criticism, but in reality you absorb none of it and you only believe the compliments. You say some pianist six years ago told you to study with a teacher; you obviously never followed through. Since you dismiss all comments intended to help you see your weak points, and you only believe the fawning praise, I don't see how you will ever develop as a composer.

Sorry, can't waste my time on this further.

Quote from: Saul on June 29, 2010, 06:58:43 AMI accepted some of the criticism of Luke and Greg about my music, things like notation and also looking for new avenues of expression that are more modern then what I'm used to.

You have accepted criticism from nobody. When somebody gives you their honest opinion and that opinion happens to be a criticism, it simply goes in one ear and out the other. Nothing sticks with you. Is your ego really that large? Can you not see that people are giving you honest criiticism with the sole purpose of helping you compose more meaningful music?

I mean it's as if anyone that goes against your music is wrong and has no idea about what he/she is talking about. I have heard more classical music probably than you have your entire life. I have surveyed almost the full history of classical from Monteverdi to Handel to Haydn to Schubert to Brahms to Mahler to Schoenberg to Part and so on. I have a collection of more than 6,000 classical recordings at my disposal on a daily basis. For you to simply not take what I'm telling you seriously is ignoring what I have learned, heard, and researched, but, also, anybody else who comes to you with intent not to demonize your music, but offer you guidance on ways you could improve it.

I'm sorry, but I think if you can't keep an open-mind, then you will never mature as a composer and you will continue to compose one stagnant work after another, but if this is the direction you want to take with your music, then that's fine, but don't expect any serious classical listener to take you seriously.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 07:18:11 PM
Or 4/4 with triplets. Greg is exactly right. The notation threw me....

Exactly. The point I've been making all along - your notation throws people (the piece sounds very tripletty to me too, btw). You make it hard for a musician to put their trust in you as the composer when there are basic errors like this.

Like a 'writer' who claims to be superior to James Joyce, but whose grammar and spelling are abysmal.

(But he writes by feeling, you know . . . .)

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 01:37:51 AM
Like a 'writer' who claims to be superior to James Joyce, but whose grammar and spelling are abysmal.

Perhaps Joyce, with his own idiosyncratic 'notation', is not the best example....though of course, Joyce's peculiar spellings and neologisms etc are done with the full weight of western (and other) literature ever-present in Joyce's brain, deeply thought through and hugely allusive. Saul's notational difficulties are hardly of the same ilk, being nothing to do with his relationship with past music and everything to do with him not really understanding or thinking about how and why music is written the way it is.

Interestingly, though, anagramatically - Stephen Dedalus = Saul Needs Depth........ this surely means something.

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 02:39:49 AM
I am a writer, my spelling and grammar are atrocious.  The talent of any writer is the content of their thoughts as expressed through the written word and the delivery of those words in enjoyable flowing prose.  Editors can correct the grammar, that is their job.

Your ideas about literature are exactly as those about music: deeply flawed and utterly ridiculous. I wouldn't be surprised if you considered Flaubert or Faulkner the worst writers.

Quote
I have been an active audio writer

What on earth is an "audio writer"other than an oxymoron, I wonder...

Quote
since the early 1980's and a poet since the 6th grade.

You amaze me no end. A poet with atrocious grammar and spelling?

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 02:52:59 AM
Your ideas about literature are exactly as those about music: deeply flawed and utterly ridiculous...

That would be in your opinion.  I FIRMLY believe both music and the written word should be enjoyed by the listener and reader.  To assume anything else is to deny reality.

The content of a writer's thoughts as expressed through the written word and the delivery of those words in enjoyable flowing prose is considerably more important than mere spelling and grammar.  There are tools to help with the latter, the first requires human inspiration.

QuoteWhat on earth is an "audio writer"other than an oxymoron, I wonder...

Someone who writes about audio equipment, audio formats and the music that rests upon them.   

QuoteYou amaze me no end. A poet with atrocious grammar and spelling?

Thank God for spell check and editors.  Why would you deny an outlet for those who do not have a mastery of spelling and grammar?  The HUMAN MIND is so much deeper than the mere window dressing you attribute to it.  Expand your horizons. 

BTW about ten of the above words were misspelled but Spell check caught them all and I corrected them.  Tools are important.  :)

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:13:52 AM
That would be in your opinion.  I FIRMLY believe both music and the written word should be enjoyed by the listener and reader.

False dichotomy, Teresa.  Even your impassioned tag ("To assume anything else is to deny reality! So there!") does not make your remark a relevant 'rebuttal'.

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:13:52 AM
That would be in your opinion.  I FIRMLY believe both music and the written word should be enjoyed by the listener and reader.  To assume anything else is to deny reality.

The content of a writer's thoughts as expressed through the written word and the delivery of those words in enjoyable flowing prose is considerably more important than mere spelling and grammar.  There are tools to help with the latter, the first requires human inspiration.

So you're basically saying that a writer is not suppose to have a complete command of the language in which he writes. Very interesting.

Quote
Someone who writes about audio equipment, audio formats and the music that rests upon them.   

Not sure that "audio writer" is the right term for that but never mind.

Quote
Thank God for spell check and editors.  Why would you deny an outlet for those who do not have a mastery of spelling and grammar? 

Those who do not have a mastery of spelling and grammar can of course dabble in writing if they so please --- but they will never be writers or poets in the true sense of the word.

Quote
BTW about ten of the above words were misspelled but Spell check caught them all and I corrected them.  Tools are important. 

Poor Byron, Coleridge and Poe... I wonder how could they live without spell-checkers?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 03:26:19 AM
False dichotomy, Teresa.  Even your impassioned tag ("To assume anything else is to deny reality! So there!") does not make your remark a relevant 'rebuttal'.

It is not a rebuttal but the way things are from my perspective.  We disagree in opinions and I am living proof as I am a writer who DEPENDS on spell check and grammar tools such as live editors.  To deny this IS to deny reality.  OPEN YOUR EYES!   :o 

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:31:17 AM
It is not a rebuttal but the way things are from my perspective.  We disagree in opinions and I am living proof as I am a writer who DEPENDS on spell check and grammar tools such as live editors.  To deny this IS to deny reality.  OPEN YOUR EYES!   :o 

Nobody is denying reality, except perhaps you, in conjuring up this strawman that anyone else is denying reality.

The topic is at bottom Saul's composing. There ain't a spell-check for his notational ills, Teresa.

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:31:17 AM
It is not a rebuttal but the way things are from my perspective.  We disagree in opinions and I am living proof as I am a writer who DEPENDS on spell check and grammar tools such as live editors.  To deny this IS to deny reality.  OPEN YOUR EYES!   :o

You are not a writer, at least not in the sense in which Melville, Mark Twain or William Faulkner were. You depend on spell-checkers and editors precisely because no one expects you to write well.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 07:51:21 PM
. . . Since you dismiss all comments intended to help you see your weak points, and you only believe the fawning praise, I don't see how you will ever develop as a composer.

Admirably succinct.

QuoteThere ain't a spell-check for his notational ills, Teresa.

My usage was probably poor there. Should have written, There ain't no spell-check . . . .

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 03:29:48 AM
So you're basically saying that a writer is not suppose to have a complete command of the language in which he writes. Very interesting.

A writer is a writer, it comes from flashes of inspiration.  Spelling and grammar are skills that a very small percentage of the population is good at, thus tools were developed for EVERYONE to use, including writers.  It is more important that a writer write!

QuoteThose who do not have a mastery of spelling and grammar can of course dabble in writing if they so please --- but they will never be writers or poets in the true sense of the word

Not true! Writing is about content NOT window dressing, would you deny the contributions of proof-readers and editors?

QuotePoor Byron, Coleridge and Poe... I wonder how could they live without spell-checkers?

More work for their proof-readers, editors and publishers.

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:41:51 AM
Writing is about content NOT window dressing

Spelling and grammar aren't "window-dressing," for Pete's sake. They are core competencies.  Making the odd mistake is one thing.  Ill education is another.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 03:37:01 AM

The topic is at bottom Saul's composing. There ain't a spell-check for his notational ills, Teresa.

You are the one who CHANGED the topic with Reply #363: You said
"Like a 'writer' who claims to be superior to James Joyce, but whose grammar and spelling are abysmal."

I found this HIGHLY INSULTING to all writers with poor spelling and grammar skills.   :o

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:46:30 AM
You are the one who CHANGED the topic with Reply #363: You said
"Like a 'writer' who claims to be superior to James Joyce, but whose grammar and spelling are abysmal."

I found this HIGHLY INSULTING to all writers with poor spelling and grammar skills.   :o

The way you read gives no one any confidence in how you write, Teresa. (Interesting that you observe no distinction between poor spelling and abysmal spelling, BTW.) Giving a simile for Saul's notational shortcomings, is not changing the topic from Saul's notational shortcomings. The topic is still those notational shortcomings.

Someone who claims to be a writer, SHOUTING by overuse of all caps, is highly insulting ; )

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 03:37:37 AM
You are not a writer, at least not in the sense in which Melville, Mark Twain or William Faulkner were. You depend on spell-checkers and editors precisely because no one expects you to write well.

NEWS FLASH
"I AM A WRITER" Besides hundreds of published articles, tons of poetry, I also have an eBook.  You cannot take that away from me, why are you so mean spirited in everything you post?  Just curious.

I find OFFENSIVE that you equate grammar and spelling with real human inspiration, writing is in one's blood or it's not!  >:(

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:51:47 AM
Besides hundreds of published articles, tons of poetry, I also have . . .

. . . a freighter full laden with hyperbole?

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:51:47 AM
I find OFFENSIVE that you equate grammar and spelling with real human inspiration, writing is in one's blood or it's not!  >:(

Poor, Teresa. The world must be full of insult for you.

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:41:51 AM
A writer is a writer, it comes from flashes of inspiration. 

Nonsense. It comes from genius / talent and hard, even agonizing work over the blank paper. 

Quote
Spelling and grammar are skills that a very small percentage of the population is good at

Spelling and grammar are not skills, but rules. They are taught in the elementary school and everyone with a modicum of intelligence can master them. I grant you though that an etymological ortography such as the English one is more difficult than a phonetic one (as my own, Romanian) but a college-level educated person should have no hard times with it. FWIW, I never use the spell-checker yet I am confident that my writing is correct in 99% of my posts.

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:41:51 AM
, thus tools were developed for EVERYONE to use, including writers.

I think very poorly of a writer who depends on tools for writing correctly.

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:41:51 AM
It is more important that a writer write!

I don't remember right now what writer (one of the greats) said that the most important tool for a writer was not the pencil but the eraser.

Quote

Not true! Writing is about content NOT window dressing, would you deny the contributions of proof-readers and editors?

Not at all, but their job is to detect the occasional errors scattered here and there, not to re-write a whole manuscript according to the spelling and grammar rules.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 03:50:21 AM
The way you read gives no one any confidence in how you write, Teresa. (Interesting that you observe no distinction between poor spelling and abysmal spelling, BTW.) Giving a simile for Saul's notational shortcomings, is not changing the topic from Saul's notational shortcomings. The topic is still those notational shortcomings.

My objection was your simile for Saul's notational shortcomings was at the expense of writers with poor spelling and grammar stills.  As long as the inspirational content is there and the writing is compelling, spelling and grammar can be fixed.    :)

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:51:47 AM
NEWS FLASH
"I AM A WRITER" Besides hundreds of published articles, tons of poetry, I also have an eBook. 

Shouldn't you have said: together with my spell-checkers and editors I have co-authored hundreds of articles, tons of poetry and an e-book?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 03:52:54 AM
. . . a freighter full laden with hyperbole?

Karl you are very mean, why?  >:(

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 03:56:23 AM
Not at all, but their job is to detect the occasional errors scattered here and there, not to re-write a whole manuscript according to the spelling and grammar rules.

Well, now Teresa is going to find it HIGHLY INSULTING that you are reducing the workload of the world's proofreaders and editors! ; )

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 03:51:47 AM
NEWS FLASH
"I AM A WRITER." Besides hundreds of published articles and tons of poetry, I also have an eBook.  You cannot take that away from me! Why are you so mean spirited in everything you post?  Just curious.

I find OFFENSIVE that you equate grammar and spelling with real human inspiration. Writing is in one's blood or it's not!  >:(

Please point us to any of these "hundreds" of published articles. Half a ton of the poetry will suffice.

(Edited the quotation for errors in punctuation.)

Quote from: Sforzando on June 29, 2010, 07:51:21 PM
No, Saul, this attitude will never get you anywhere, the fact that I thought you achieved a modest success with your G minor piece notwithstanding. You may say you listen to criticism, but in reality you absorb none of it and you only believe the compliments. You say some pianist six years ago told you to study with a teacher; you obviously never followed through. Since you dismiss all comments intended to help you see your weak points, and you only believe the fawning praise, I don't see how you will ever develop as a composer.

Sorry, can't waste my time on this further.

Why did you have to go back to this, I have taken your critic about the notation, and even thanked you. But I guess you're too afraid to stay with the compliment that's why you had to say something negative just so people wouldn't think that you really liked my music that much?


The way you did this was incongruous.

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 03:56:23 AM
Nonsense. It comes from genius / talent and hard, even agonizing work over the blank paper. 

I know full well, just where do you think that comes  from: flashes of inspiration.  Before you can use your genius, talent and hard work you must first get inspiration.

Do you keep paper by your bed in case you wake-up with a river of ideas in your head?  You know you have to write them down as fast as possible or they are lost forever.   Have you ever went through a long dry spell where inspiration DOES NOT come.  All the talent and genius will not help without inspiration. 

QuoteSpelling and grammar are not skills, but rules. 

I agree they are a set of rules, however in English it does take a certain skill to master them.  I will give you an example in Grammar I made a "C", however in Composition I made an "A", was one of seven students chosen for the Journalism class and my writing won awards.  Being poor at both spelling and grammar, means I had to work harder!!!

QuoteFWIW, I never use the spell-checker yet I am confident that my writing is correct in 99% of my posts.
I think very poorly of a writer who depends on tools for writing correctly.

Good for you, not everyone is so talented at spelling, with spell check you would NEVER know which writers are poor spellers?  So your statement cannot be supported. 

QuoteI don't remember right now what writer (one of the greats) said that the most important tool for a writer was not the pencil but the eraser.

I agree with this 100%!

QuoteNot at all, but their job is to detect the occasional errors scattered here and there, not to re-write a whole manuscript according to the spelling and grammar rules.

Sorry perhaps I lead you to believe my grammatical errors are worse than they actually are?

Quote from: Sforzando on June 30, 2010, 04:12:33 AM
(Edited the quotation for errors in punctuation.)

Dude, you are so encroaching on Teresa's "freedom of thought"! ; )

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 03:59:01 AM
Shouldn't you have said: together with my spell-checkers and editors I have co-authored hundreds of articles, tons of poetry and an e-book?

All the content is MINE, all I needed was a few grammatical corrections here and there.   I use both spell check and a dictionary but I still do not catch everything.   

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 04:18:39 AM
I agree they are a set of rules, however in English it does take a certain skill to master them.

Skill? No. Just takes paying attention while one is attending grammar school. Curious fact, that we even call that level of education grammar school, is it not?

I just passed by a bookstore that is selling their overstocked books for $1 per kg. That makes it $1000 per ton. So I guess writings do come by the ton, literally.

Well, all jokes aside, writers don't have to be literary geniuses to be called a writer. There are lots of dancers who are not the lead at Boshoi, but they are still dancers.

Well, then again, what do I know.

I just find this whole area tricky to talk about because the obvious retort for the Sauls of this world (I'm talking about Saul but this applies to Teresa and her writing too...to Saul's writing as well, come to that) is - it doesn't matter if it reads badly and has notation/spelling/grammar errors, it only matters that it sounds nice and that people like it (never mind that many don't.....)

On the surface that seems hard to respond to. Aren't we being nit-picky pedants stifling the creative flow of intuitive genius by insisting on writing the stuff down correctly? Well, bluntly, no, we aren't, and no, it isn't enough that people who happen to hear the music in passing like the sounds. (If that were all that made great music, the world would be considerably more full of great music than it is, because making pretty sounds as Saul does on his computer is not really very difficult.)

No, if you are going to write music, and expect people to play it, and expect them to take you seriously in turn, you need to have respect for their musical intelligence, and respect for the art itself. Writing as Saul does shows no respect for the musicians who might play his work (and who have to go through it carefully to work out what he actually means rather than what he writes), no respect for the thousands of composers, including the ones he claims to venerate above all others, who have taken the time to master the craft, and who understood it fully, from the inside, as Saul and his youtube fans don't, I feel. And no respect for himself either, in the long run - because despite his claims to spend ages on each note (!) Saul's attitude towards his craft is complacent and lazy, self-satisfied and unwilling to listen to advice when he badly needs it: doesn't matter if my notation is shoddy - that's real lack of self-respect.

In fact, I would go so far as to say I find notation like Saul's actually insulting, to my intelligence, and to the complexities and subtleties and beauties that are hidden within the art form I love so much. It's vapid, it shows no understanding of music theory and history, it's insulting in its implicit claim to musicality when none is on show. Surely the audience you really want to engage with are not people who click on a youtube video whilst out looking for heaven-knows-what, but people who will take time with the music, examine it, treasure it, live with it - and that audience is going to be utterly alienated before even playing a note by the lack of care and craft implicit in poor notation.

Quote from: springrite on June 30, 2010, 04:26:02 AM
Well, all jokes aside, writers don't have to be literary geniuses to be called a writer.

Perfectly true. One corollary must be, that not all writers are necessarily geniuses.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 04:27:34 AM
Perfectly true. One corollary must be, that not all writers are necessarily geniuses.

Send me a few thousand bucks and I can buy you tons of poetry.  ;D

On Wall Street today, a sharp uptick in poetry futures . . . .

Quote from: Sforzando on June 30, 2010, 04:12:33 AM
Please point us to any of these "hundreds" of published articles. Half a ton of the poetry will suffice.

(Edited the quotation for errors in punctuation.)

I haven't finished my eBook of Poetry yet.  However here is the ordering information for the PDF of my eBook  An Analog Lovers Survival Guide (http://analog-lovers.blogspot.com/) and the Kindle edition  (http://www.amazon.com/An-Analog-Lovers-Survival-Guide/dp/B001PTGQ80/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1244682685&sr=8-2)

At my Blog SACD Lives? (http://sacdlives.blogspot.com/) you will find links to some of my Positive Feedback Online articles as well as links to my other three blogs.  Besides the 4 blogs I also have 2 forums and they have links as well. 

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 04:26:31 AM
I just find this whole area tricky to talk about because the obvious retort for the Sauls of this world (I'm talking about Saul but this applies to Teresa and her writing too...to Saul's writing as well, come to that) is - it doesn't matter if it reads badly and has notation/spelling/grammar errors, it only matters that it sounds nice and that people like it (never mind that many don't.....)

My own view, FWIW, as a composer, would be pretty much the opposite - it doesn't really matter if, on a person-by-person basis, some dislike my music whilst some like it (though it's nice when it gives pleasure, and thankfully mine seems to have done so pretty consistently over the years). What really matters is that I know that the work, on its own merits, is as good as I could make it from every angle, that it is coherent, consistent, and so on. That I can feel pride in it, and feel that I have written it with respect for other musicians who might play it, for other composers without whose music mine could not exist, and for myself in doing as good a job as I can.

I want to ask  why did Bernstein attack Beethoven so hard saying that even though he was 'the greatest composer ever' he was a terrible orchestrator?

I guess by this standards, Beethoven didn't know how to compose a work of art without any flaws and without breaking the rules of orchestration, therefore he just didn't know what he was doing as a composer.

Following your logic, this is the only conclusion I reach.

Knowing this, Beethoven would have been shredded by some perfectionists here attacking his banalistic and disorganized way of orchestrating a piece of music.
http://www.youtube.com/v/wNi1_kGC9dg

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 04:33:52 AM
I guess by this standards, Beethoven didn't know how to compose a work of art without any flaws and without breaking the rules of orchestration, therefore he just didn't know what he was doing as a composer.

Following your logic, this is the only conclusion I reach.

Orchestration is not so much a 'right or wrong' skill as notation. Which is why we still have arguments about the quality of Beethoven/Chopin/Schumann/Rachmaninov's abilities in this area, but never, never, never about their abilities to actually write the stuff down. I can't think of any notational nonsense in the musc of thes or any other great composer*

Put it this way. In all my experience of reading scores by the great composers and the pretty-damned-amazing-even-if-not-great composers - and I have a library of several thousand of these scores on my walls, plus as many or more on my computer) I have never in my recollection had that nasty jolt one gets when one reads something clumsily written, with poor grammar. It's almost as if writing things down correctly is the lowest common denominator of good composition - IOW, one might never be a Beethoven, but one has to at least get that right even to be a Diabelli.

Now, OTOH, I have sometimes come across that nasty jolt when reading music which is not by the greats. In transcriptions of jazz and pop songs, for instance (I remember with a shudder a version of Stormy Weather in C major in which all the Es were written as F flats....). In the hugely popular but IMO cheaply written music of Ludovico Einaudi (there's one in F sharp minor which does the whole F natural instead of  E sharp thing). The fact that it is in this lesser music, or transcriptions made by lesser musicians, where one starts to find this lesser notation tells its own story, I think.

And finally, at the other extreme, when I am looking at music by children, students etc., it is rare not to find notational errors.

Surely this is evident to all, I shouldn't really need to point it out. But the line is remarkably consistent. Good composers, whose music is of the highest quality, always write things down well. Children and poor composers are the ones who also tend ot have bad notation. Tells its own story, I think....

*I do not mean, btw, that there is only one way to write a piece, nor even that weirdnesses and 'errors' aren't OK sometimes. There are many scores which contain 'errors' of all sorts, but the ones by the great composers tend to be justifable in some other way, e.g. that the 'faulty' notation has an expressive power that the correct one wouldn't (examples by the handful in e.g. Ives' Concord Sonata)

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 04:26:31 AM
I just find this whole area tricky to talk about because the obvious retort for the Sauls of this world (I'm talking about Saul but this applies to Teresa and her writing too...to Saul's writing as well, come to that) is - it doesn't matter if it reads badly and has notation/spelling/grammar errors, it only matters that it sounds nice and that people like it (never mind that many don't.....)

On the surface that seems hard to respond to. Aren't we being nit-picky pedants stifling the creative flow of intuitive genius by insisting on writing the stuff down correctly? Well, bluntly, no, we aren't, and no, it isn't enough that people who happen to hear the music in passing like the sounds. (If that were all that made great music, the world would be considerably more full of great music than it is, because making pretty sounds as Saul does on his computer is not really very difficult.)

No, if you are going to write music, and expect people to play it, and expect them to take you seriously in turn, you need to have respect for their musical intelligence, and respect for the art itself. Writing as Saul does shows no respect for the musicians who might play his work (and who have to go through it carefully to work out what he actually means rather than what he writes), no respect for the thousands of composers, including the ones he claims to venerate above all others, who have taken the time to master the craft, and who understood it fully, from the inside, as Saul and his youtube fans don't, I feel. And no respect for himself either, in the long run - because despite his claims to spend ages on each note (!) Saul's attitude towards his craft is complacent and lazy, self-satisfied and unwilling to listen to advice when he badly needs it: doesn't matter if my notation is shoddy - that's real lack of self-respect.

In fact, I would go so far as to say I find notation like Saul's actually insulting, to my intelligence, and to the complexities and subtleties and beauties that are hidden within the art form I love so much. It's vapid, it shows no understanding of music theory and history, it's insulting in its implicit claim to musicality when none is on show. Surely the audience you really want to engage with are not people who click on a youtube video whilst out looking for heaven-knows-what, but people who will take time with the music, examine it, treasure it, live with it - and that audience is going to be utterly alienated before even playing a note by the lack of care and craft implicit in poor notation.

I wonder how many people will 'treasure' your 'music'.

I HAVE HEARD YOUR 'WORKS' ON YOUR PAGE, A NUMBER OF THEM.. COULDN'T GO THROUGH A SINGLE ONE WITHOUT GETTING EXTREMELY BORED.

Ok.. Go on writing 'intelligent well crafted music' that will bore people to the extreme.

Everyone has their choices, and you clearly carved out yours ...

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 04:46:56 AM
Orchestration is not so much a 'right or wrong' skill as notation. Which is why we still have arguments about the quality of Beethoven/Chopin/Schumann/Rachmaninov's abilities in this area, but never, never, never about their abilities to actually write the stuff down. I can't think of any notational nonsense in the musc of thes or any other great composer*

Put it this way. In all my experience of reading scores by the great composers and the pretty-damned-amazing-even-if-not-great composers - and I have a library of several thousand of these scores on my walls, plus as many or more on my computer) I have never in my recollection had that nasty jolt one gets when one reads something clumsily written, with poor grammar. It's almost as if writing things down correctly is the lowest common denominator of good composition - IOW, one might never be a Beethoven, but one has to at least get that right even to be a Diabelli.

Now, OTOH, I have sometimes come across that nasty jolt when reading music which is not by the greats. In transcriptions of jazz and pop songs, for instance (I remember with a shudder a version of Stormy Weather in C major in which all the Es were written as F flats....). In the hugely popular but IMO cheaply written music of Ludovico Einaudi (there's one in F sharp minor which does the whole F natural instead of  E sharp thing). The fact that it is in this lesser music, or transcriptions made by lesser musicians, where one starts to find this lesser notation tells its own story, I think.

And finally, at the other extreme, when I am looking at music by children, students etc., it is rare not to find notational errors.

Surely this is evident to all, I shouldn't really need to point it out. But the line is remarkably consistent. Good composers, whose music is of the highest quality, always write things down well. Children and poor composers are the ones who also tend ot have bad notation. Tells its own story, I think....

*I do not mean, btw, that there is only one way to write a piece, nor even that weirdnesses and 'errors' aren't OK sometimes. There are many scores which contain 'errors' of all sorts, but the ones by the great composers tend to be justifable in some other way, e.g. that the 'faulty' notation has an expressive power that the correct one wouldn't (examples by the handful in e.g. Ives' Concord Sonata)

He attacked every aspect of Beethoven's skill taken a seperatly. In short he destroyed him.
Poor Beethoven would have been destroyed here, by the 'Know it all atonal lovers'.

Einaudi ought to be a case study on this thread, btw - hugely popular, in a youtubey, Classic FM-y kind of way; new agey, tonal, atmospheric, pretty, aware of classical textures and techniques....but not really interpretable by classical standards. I'm not going to be say that he is an awful composer, because I think he has found a way to make this technique of using classcial textures and shapes within a new age/minimalist context work rather well, and he has some very striking, memorable ideas, also. He ought to be a role model for Saul, in some ways, I think - this is the direction in which I can see Saul's music acheiving its potentially most completely.

But it's interesting and IMO not insignificant, as I hinted at up there, that Einaudi is the only serious composer (or to be harsh and maybe unfair, wannabe-serious composer) whose music features the kind of errors in notation I described, even though to a vastly lesser degree than in Saul's music - for the most part Einaudi writes perfectly well, on this level.

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 04:49:13 AM
I wonder how many people will 'treasure' your 'music'.

I HAVE HEARD YOUR 'WORKS' ON YOUR PAGE, A NUMBER OF THEM.. COULDN'T GO THROUGH A SINGLE ONE WITHOUT GETTING EXTREMELY BORED.

Very interesting remark, Saul. Luke is commenting strictly on the documents;  and as you have no answer, you descend to personal remark.

Not that Luke need worry. Heck, my music bores you ; )

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 04:33:52 AM
I want to ask  why did Bernstein attack Beethoven so hard saying that even though he was 'the greatest composer ever' he was a terrible orchestrator?

I guess by this standards, Beethoven didn't know how to compose a work of art without any flaws and without breaking the rules of orchestration, therefore he just didn't know what he was doing as a composer.

Following your logic, this is the only conclusion I reach.

Knowing this, Beethoven would have been shredded by some perfectionists here attacking his banalistic and disorganized way of orchestrating a piece of music.
http://www.youtube.com/v/wNi1_kGC9dg

I think you completely missed the point of what Bernstein is saying in this clip.

Quote from: Franco on June 30, 2010, 04:56:58 AM
I think you completely missed the point of what Bernstein is saying in this clip.

Yes; curious, the straws at which he grasps to rationalize his lack of basic competencies.

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 04:50:37 AM
He attacked every aspect of Beethoven's skill taken a seperatly. In short he destroyed him.
Poor Beethoven would have been destroyed here, by the 'Know it all atonal lovers'.

And yet he also called Beethoven the greatest composer of all, you said....

Beethoven has been mentioned here, as an example of 'how it should be done', though. You ignored that bit (unsurprisingly)...

As for your opinions on my music, they mean nothing to me, because I'm afraid I don't have any respect for your musical sensibilities. You don't like atonal or chromatic music, you don't like modern stuff, you don't like music with ambiguities, you hate Schoenberg and Webern, then you won't like much of mine, it's not a bother to me. Plenty of people do, and what is more, they include many people - such as composers Robin Holloway and Alexander Goehr - who I respect enormously as musicians, not people on youtube who think that a symphony is a song and that a MIDI recording is an orchestra  :D

Karl,

This is personal?

You got to be kidding, my music is from inside of me, from my soul, attacking it is personal by every standard. On the other hand, what did you or he composed that was so earth shuddering and great?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. All you say that you are 'educated musicians that get insulted by my music'...well excuse me to insult you...

And then you had the nerve to call me arrogant...?

I will do a test today and go in the street and stop random people asking them , excuse me have you heard of the world famous composer Karl Henning?

How many will say yes?

And I wouldn't even bother doing this with Luke...his music is just how should I say a waste of paper, ink and time.. yet he had the nerve to brutally attack my music in every way possible, knowing full well, that many have actually enjoyed my music, yes, my music is not an insult, yes its  beautiful that's right, something that Luke has a major problem creating in his music, beauty and meaning and no education or skill can make you put beauty on a piece of paper if you don't have this talent.

Karl, this is the way it is.

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 05:01:57 AM
. . . not people on youtube who think that a symphony is a song and that a MIDI recording is an orchestra  :D

Burn! : )

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 04:17:28 AM
Why did you have to go back to this, I have taken your critic about the notation, and even thanked you. But I guess you're too afraid to stay with the compliment that's why you had to say something negative just so people wouldn't think that you really liked my music that much?


The way you did this was incongruous.

Dude, you just don't get it. Out of any number of pieces you've regaled us with, I mentioned the one brief one I've seen thus far that worked. But this is so typical, Saul. You'll clutch at any straw to bolster your unassailable self-esteem.

Should I bring up your piece Chanukah, the score of which you were so indiscreet as to post some years back? There were a few amazing moments in that one too, such as your G minor chord on the bass staff scored for three tubas. (Trombones might have worked - see Berlioz Fantastique IV.) Or a whole note for harp tied over about 8 measures in slow tempo. That note would have died out in the middle of the first measure, let alone sounded for 8. Or writing for timpani as if they were fully melodic instruments. Good stuff, Saul. Keep it up. Bravo, bravo. Happy now?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 05:05:43 AM
Burn! : )

Putting other composers down because you cant stand someone composing better music then yours, that's why you have to deface it, and attack it, looking for the 'weak points'... if this is how you want to treat fellow musicians, yes you and Luke, continue this way...

Calling my music 'an Insult' by Luke, just demonstrates the viciousness and the dishonesty with everything he said so far. Trying to be helpful?

Well with help like this, who needs trouble...

Teresa, there's no need to be upset, I have exposed their double standard. Beethoven from that video above would have been kicked and attacked had he lived here today by some  members here, he too had flaws in every aspect as Bernstein suggested, yet, its not an INSULT TO LUKE...

Such drivels don't impress me at all.

Everyone should listen to that Bernstein video and let the TRUTH  WIN THE DAY!

CHEERS,

I've got my popcorn out!  :D

This thread truly has it all -- compositional and literary discussions; action and adventure; debates and posting duels; drama and, dare I say, a little romance?   8)

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 05:12:56 AM
Putting other composers down because you cant stand someone composing better music then yours, that's why you have to deface it, and attack it, looking for the 'weak points'... if this is how you want to treat fellow musicians, yes you and Luke, continue this way...

Calling my music to 'an Insult' by Luke, just demonstrates the viciousness and the dishonesty with everything he said so far. Trying to be helpful?

Just to be clear, I didn't call your music an insult to me. I said it feels insulting to a musician (including me) when they open a score and find that the music is written wrongly.  The genre sort of feeling, I suppose, to opening an expensive luxury item and finding that the instructions don't make sense and the goods itself aren't as well made as the y look on the packet - that's a kind of insult too, isn't it? I love the song Stormy Weather, I don't feel insulted by it in itself - but I did feel insulted, and inconvenienced, when some idiot transcriber prepared a version of it in C major in which all Es were written as F flats. I felt 'I shouldn't have to be deciphering this for you, you ought to know this stuff if you are going to be paid to transcribe music' - that's the feeling I am getting at. Opening the score and seeing that, immediately, also gave me no confidence in the quality of the transcription and made me loathe to play it. That's also what I am talking about.

As far as trying to be helpful - yes. For posts and posts and posts. They are there on the record, lengthy, detailed posts, including the score samples I made for you and the recoridng of Karl's piece I knocked up so that you could hear it as you requested. And in fact, today, all I've written is the above 3 or 4 posts which are entirely about notation, nothing else, and sprang from the talk Karl and Florestan were having with Teresa about spelling and grammar.

As for my music, well, all I can say is what I've said before - your opinion means nothing to me. The criticisms I have made of your music have been detailed and refered to the scores, in the hope that maybe you would decide to think about some of the issues. Your comments about mine are just designed to insult, and I won't sink to that level. I'm not surprised you don't like my music, it was never going to be your sort of thing (though I wonder what you have listened to, as there are some very straightforwardly pleasant little tonal pieces there too which I suppose didn't fit your characterisation of my music, such as The Dove - I think Guido called that one 'a distillation of loveliness' or something, so it can't be too hard on the ears - or my children's pieces  :D )

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 04:33:15 AM
I haven't finished my eBook of Poetry yet.  However here is the ordering information for the PDF of my eBook  An Analog Lovers Survival Guide (http://analog-lovers.blogspot.com/) and the Kindle edition  (http://www.amazon.com/An-Analog-Lovers-Survival-Guide/dp/B001PTGQ80/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1244682685&sr=8-2)

At my Blog SACD Lives? (http://sacdlives.blogspot.com/) you will find links to some of my Positive Feedback Online articles as well as links to my other three blogs.  Besides the 4 blogs I also have 2 forums and they have links as well.

So in other words, all this work is self-published and you have had nothing accepted by a legitimate publishing house.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 04:22:57 AM
Skill? No. Just takes paying attention while one is attending grammar school. Curious fact, that we even call that level of education grammar school, is it not?

Unfortunately, ours is an age when the very basic requirements for writing a coherent text are dismissed as "oppressive", "stiffling" and "high-brow". Anyone with a computer and internet access publishes his "prose" or "poetry" and becomes instantly a "writer".

Grammar rules? Spelling rules? Rules of logic or rhetoric? To hell with these relics from the past! We live in the era of "personal freedom", and this includes freedom from grammar and spelling.

Painstaking work over a blank paper? Erasing tens of written pages for the sake of a single one? Agonizing over one single right word for hours? To hell with these relics form the past! We live in the era of "self expression", when the most inchoate and rudimentary scribblings have the very same right to be called literature as Absalom, Absalom! or Moby Dick.

The whole poetical output of Baudelaire, Trakl or Esenin fits easily into a paperback? Poor lazy guys from a pitiful age! We live in the era of "tools", which enables anyone, regardless of his mastery of language, to write tons of poetry.

O tempora! O mores!

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 04:33:15 AM
I haven't finished my eBook of Poetry yet.  However here is the ordering information for the PDF of my eBook  An Analog Lovers Survival Guide (http://analog-lovers.blogspot.com/) and the Kindle edition  (http://www.amazon.com/An-Analog-Lovers-Survival-Guide/dp/B001PTGQ80/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1244682685&sr=8-2)

At my Blog SACD Lives? (http://sacdlives.blogspot.com/) you will find links to some of my Positive Feedback Online articles as well as links to my other three blogs.  Besides the 4 blogs I also have 2 forums and they have links as well. 

Teresa, please be so kind to answer this question: do you, in all earnest and hand on heart, consider yourself to be a writer in the same sense that F. Scott Fitzgerald was?

I'm done with hearing critic from Luke, Karl and the rest of the bunch. I don't want to 'insult' you guys with my music.
I will post my music for those who want to enjoy and have fun with it.

That's all. I have achieved with this discussion what I wanted to point out for everyone here for a long time now, the double standard that exists in the modern classical music world and the somewhat dishonesty that prevails in its circles.

Best Wishes,


Saul

Just demonstrates the viciousness and the dishonesty . . . Ah, the lengths to which Saul goes, the contortions into which he throws himself, to discount straightforward criticism as . . . Martyrdom!

Reverts to Sfz's point, that all he wanna hear is how purty the music is!

Quote from: Saulthe double standard that exists in the modern classical music world and the somewhat dishonesty that prevails in its circles.

Saul, the dishonesty here is your own.  Well, it is either dishonesty or delusion.  And it's not my contract to sort out which.

So, Saul 'has achieved with this discussion' what he wished:  an exercise in blindness, deafness and baldness by which he remains convinced that he is a Great Artist, and that any helpful advice from professional musicians is "shredding."

Poor, poor Saul. Yawn.

"I'm done with hearing [critique]" is funny, though.  As if you've heard any of it.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 05:46:45 AM
Just demonstrates the viciousness and the dishonesty . . . Ah, the lengths to which Saul goes, the contortions into which he throws himself, to discount straightforward criticism as . . . Martyrdom!

Reverts to Sfz's point, that all he wanna hear is how purty the music is!

Saul, the dishonesty here is your own.  Well, it is either dishonesty or delusion.  And it's not my contract to sort out which.

So, Saul 'has achieved with this discussion' what he wished:  an exercise in blindness, deafness and baldness by which he remains convinced that he is a Great Artist, and that any helpful advice from professional musicians is "shredding."

Poor, poor Saul. Yawn.

Any objective reader of this discussion would come to the conclusion as I did, that you guys have double standards, and a measure of dishonesty when it comes to music.

The Bernstein video clip exploded in your faces, there is no way you can run around it with 'excuses'. No way.

I have nothing else to say about this , its all pointless now, the Truth is exposed and your double standard even more so.

I will post my music as I said, only for those who want to enjoy it, yes ENJOY MUSIC, something that a number of people refuse to do here.

Cheers,

Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 05:03:02 AM
You got to be kidding, my music is from inside of me, from my soul, attacking it is personal by every standard. On the other hand, what did you or he composed that was so earth shuddering and great?

I think you mean "earth-shattering."

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 05:03:02 AM
And I wouldn't even bother doing this with Luke...his music is just how should I say a waste of paper, ink and time.. yet he had the nerve to brutally attack my music in every way possible.

So you justify treating Luke's music in the same way you complain he has treated you?

This reminds me of a apocryphal story attributed to Andre Previn who was asked to listen to a young lady play the piano and then asked for his opinion.  As the story goes he replied, "you know, I really don't like music, but I loved this."

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 05:51:06 AM
The Bernstein video clip exploded in your face, there is no way you can run around it with 'excuses'. No way.

Ok, let's try a little sylogism:

1. Beethoven is composer who, according to Bernstein, is great but made mistakes in writing down his music.
2. Saul makes mistakes in writing down his music.
Therefore
3. Saul, according to Bernstein, is a great composer.

Satisfied now?

Quote from: Sforzando on June 30, 2010, 05:54:45 AM
I think you mean "earth-shattering."

So you justify treating Luke's music in the same way you complain he has treated you?

The only difference is that I'm actually right, and I'm not saying this to help, or to insult or to do anything else, I'm stating a fact.
Go to his page and try to listen to one composition from beginning to end, its an agonizing ordeal.

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 05:56:34 AM
Ok, let's try a little sylogism:

1. Beethoven is composer who, according to Bernstein, is great but made mistakes in writing down his music.
2. Saul makes mistakes in writing down his music.
Therefore
3. Saul, according to Bernstein, is a great composer.

Satisfied now?

I never said that I was a great composer. But I have no doubt that Beethoven would have received the same treatment by these know it all perfectos, had he lived today. He also had flaws and mistakes after all, but Luke doesn't get INSULTED from it... I wonder why?

The answer is obvious.

Quote from: Saul. . . his music is just how should I say a waste of paper, ink and time.. yet he had the nerve to brutally attack my music in every way possible.

Saul, you don't read any better than you write. Nothing, absolutely nothing, that Luke has said to you, here or anywhere, is anywhere near a "brutal attack."

And any intelligent person reading here knows it.

On the other hand, you are here opining that his work is "a waste of paper, ink and time."  An opinion which is not worth the paper it's printed on, but whose nasty hostility is naked on view.

What would G-d say?

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 06:00:22 AM
I never said that I was a great composer.

More dishonesty, Saul. Who here told us that you are composer superior to Schoenberg?

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 05:12:56 AM
Putting other composers down because you cant stand someone composing better music then yours, that's why you have to deface it, and attack it, looking for the 'weak points'... if this is how you want to treat fellow musicians, yes you and Luke, continue this way...

Just wanted to reassure Saul that any criticisms of his music have not come from some disgruntled sense that he is a better composer than me.

Karl - now, Karl, there is someone who is a better composer than me, by all the ways I figure you can measure these things. Karl has a way with structure, with line, with invention, that I can only dream of. I have no problem saying this - an, clearly, no wish to 'deface' it.

but what Karl can't do as well as me is compose 'as Luke' (and nor should he want to!). IMO a composer ought to find the way of writing that comes most naturally from them (that's a piece of advice I gave you, friendly in tone and intent, a day or two ago, I don't think you really noticed it). I feel like I've found that way, for me, and so I am satisfied. Karl's found his. My feeling was always that until you managed to get past all the frustrating blockages in your music, you wouldn't find that way that was the real Saul for you. But I am coming to realise that perhaps the stopped up incoherence I hear in your music (nothing to do with style, this, just a general mood) is not just technical in origin - perhaps it is the way you truly are and would compose even if you had as flawless a technique as Schoenberg.  :)

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 05:57:32 AM
The only difference is that I'm actually right, and I'm not saying this to help, or to insult or to do anything else, I'm stating a fact.

Poor Saul, doesn't even know what a fact is.

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 06:00:22 AM
I never said that I was a great composer. But I have no doubt that Beethoven would have received the same treatment by these know it all perfectos, had he lived today. He also had flaws and mistakes after all, but Luje doesn't get INSULTED from it... I wonder why?

The answer is obvious.

Anyone has flaws and mistakes, but not anyone is willing to acknowledge and correct them.

About Beethoven having mistakes, there is a little story about Sibelius telling a student at an exam: "Hey, you're using parallel fifths, lad, be careful!" The student replies: "But you use them yourself, professor!". To which Sibelius replies: "Me and Mr. Beethoven use them willingly, you use them ignorantly!"

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 06:00:22 AM
I never said that I was a great composer. But I have no doubt that Beethoven would have received the same treatment by these know it all perfectos, had he lived today. He also had flaws and mistakes after all, but Luje doesn't get INSULTED from it... I wonder why?

The answer is obvious.

Saul, I understand that you have the ability to write these works very quickly, but wouldn't it be a wiser use of your time to be commiting more of your musical works to paper than wasting your time here bantering with your envious ciritics?  I imagine you could have increased your Youtube clips from 74 to over 100 by now, had you not taken time out to answer these lesser lights.

I am somewhat surprised that aside from one clip which had over 4,000 views (with 3 comments), most of your works have been viewed less than 50 times, with no comments.

Quote from: Franco on June 30, 2010, 06:07:12 AM
I am somewhat surprised that aside from one clip which had over 4,000 views (with 3 comments), most of your works have been viewed less than 50 times, with no comments.

Maybe 3,950 of them found that one clip enough ; )

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 06:04:53 AM
Poor Saul, doesn't even know what a fact is.

You see this is what I'm talking about...

How can I take anything you say seriously when you speak like that...

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 06:00:22 AM
I never said that I was a great composer. But I have no doubt that Beethoven would have received the same treatment by these know it all perfectos, had he lived today. He also had flaws and mistakes after all, but Luke doesn't get INSULTED from it... I wonder why?

The answer is obvious.

That word insult seems to have really riled you, Saul. You ought to try to understand the context in which it was meant. I was talking about the disjunction between the claims you make and imply for your music and the feeling I get when I actually look at it. It feels insulting, not just to the performer, but also to Mendelssohn (or whichever model you are taking in the given piece). I have to ask myself, each time, how would Mendelssohn - a supremely technical composer, deeply imbued with all of that stuff, highly sensitive to musical incoherence - feel reading this piece and knowing that he had been the inspiration for it?

I know this sounds nasty, there is no other way to make it sound. But I genuinely don't mean it to, and I"m not only talking about your music here, Saul, either. It's just a feeling I get each time I look at music of this type - not just by you, by anyone working in hommage to older styles and missing them. How would the composer being paid hommage to feel.......?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 06:02:43 AMMore dishonesty, Saul. Who here told us that you are composer superior to Schoenberg?

Well, but he characterized Schoenberg as incompetent so he's only superior to an incompetent, and wait, that was the part when he was posting nonsense for the sake of "discussion."  Why am I still reading this wretched thread?  Maybe it is time to stop posting and let it sink into the earth where it belongs?

Quote from: Franco on June 30, 2010, 06:07:12 AM
Saul, I understand that you have the ability to write these works very quickly, but wouldn't it be a wiser use of your time to be commiting more of your musical works to paper than wasting your time here bantering with your envious ciritics?  I imagine you could have increased your Youtube clips from 74 to over 100 by now, had you not taken time out to answer these lesser lights.

I am somewhat surprised that aside from one clip which had over 4,000 views (with 3 comments), most of your works have been viewed less than 50 times, with no comments.

Some of my vids had nearly 60.000 views with almost 200 favs and a rating that comes to 4.8 that's almost 5 stars.
Yes, according to the perfectos here, they are all dumb deaf and stupid for listening, enjoying my music.
Can't you see what their doing here?
Showing themselves as helpers, but creating trouble instead?

The Bernstein video exploded in their faces, you can't shrug this off with excuses.

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 06:06:27 AM
Anyone has flaws and mistakes, but not anyone is willing to acknowledge and correct them.

Simple typo, but I feel sure you meant but not everyone is willing to acknowledge and correct them.

Can someone explain to me why the Bernstein video exploded in our faces? I seem to have missed a meeting)

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 06:13:53 AM
Some of my vids had nearly 60.000 views with almost 200 favs and a rating that comes to 4.8 that's almost 5 stars.

Since when is Youtube a standard of quality in classical music?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 06:16:18 AM
Simple typo, but I feel sure you meant but not everyone is willing to acknowledge and correct them.

Well spotted. I should have used the spell-checker.  :)

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 05:43:11 AM
I will post my music for those who want to enjoy and have fun with it.

I assure you, some of us are indeed having fun with it.

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 06:18:32 AM
Well spotted. I should have used the spell-checker.  :)

Well, I knew you wouldn't be hugely insulted by my pointing it out, mon ami.

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 06:16:42 AM
Can someone explain to me why the Bernstein video exploded in our faces? I seem to have missed a meeting)

I think Saul, bless his heart, is using reasoning similar to Florestan's demented syllogism, post 424.

I think I understand the "double standard" now. There's youtube standard, and there's the professional musician standard ; )

Quote from: Scarpia on June 30, 2010, 06:21:17 AM
I think Saul, bless his heart, is using reasoning similar to Florestan's demented syllogism, post 424.

I trust you got the whole post right.  :)

For the record, I find all of Luke's music which I have had opportunity to read in score full worthy. Ink, paper, pixels, time . . . worth it all.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 06:21:09 AM
Well, I knew you wouldn't be hugely insulted by my pointing it out, mon ami.

Why would I? English is not my native language and I more than welcome any criticism and correction regarding my writing it.

Quote from: Scarpia on June 30, 2010, 06:21:17 AM
I think Saul, bless his heart, is using reasoning . . . .

Oh, he must be insulted that you say so. Use reasoning, rather than his fee - eeling?

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 06:24:15 AM
Why would I? English is not my native language and I more than welcome any criticism and correction regarding my writing it.

And one can always count on you for good sense, and taking things in good faith.

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 06:16:42 AM
Can someone explain to me why the Bernstein video exploded in our faces? I seem to have missed a meeting)

I had to be taken to the hospital to be treated for severe facial burns.

Quote from: Scarpia on June 30, 2010, 06:11:51 AM
Well, but he characterized Schoenberg as incompetent so he's only superior to an incompetent, and wait, that was the part when he was posting nonsense for the sake of "discussion."  Why am I still reading this wretched thread?  Maybe it is time to stop posting and let it sink into the earth where it belongs?

Great chapter on Schoenberg in Glenn Watkins's The Gesualdo Hex.

Just saying . . . .

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 06:13:53 AM
Some of my vids had nearly 60.000 views with almost 200 favs and a rating that comes to 4.8 that's almost 5 stars.
Yes, according to the perfectos here, they are all dumb deaf and stupid for listening, enjoying my music.
Can't you see what their doing here?
Showing themselves as helpers, but creating trouble instead?

The Bernstein video exploded in their faces, you can't shrug this off with excuses.

I did not see any with more than 4,000 views. 

Re the Bernstein video, nothing exploded in my face other than the fact that you completely misunderstood what he was saying.

I feel bad for you because you have a blind spot that is prohibiting you from benefitting from the constructive criticism you have gotten from several folks here and will make slow progress, if any at all, since you are satisfied with your compostions as they are. 

You have talent, but what the comments are addressing is your lack of craft.  Craft can be learned, but in order to learn it one must first be convinced that there is a deficiency.  So far, it seems you do not think you have any problems with the craft of musical composition and find the criticism is just a difference of taste. 

Not so. 

Craft is a form of literacy: either someone speaks/writes well or they make repeated mistakes in grammar and spelling and these are not a matter of taste, but reflect a fundamental ignorance of the language.

I hope you take my previous suggestion seriously to go find a teacher, since I think you will benefit from the experience and serious instruction and study is really what you need and will prove much more valuable to you than 60,000 views from Youtube.

Quote from: Franco on June 30, 2010, 06:48:58 AM
Craft is a form of literacy: either someone speaks/writes well or they make repeated mistakes in grammar and spelling and these are not a matter of taste, but reflect a fundamental ignorance of the language.

No problem with that. Spell-checkers and editors will make him an accomplished writer in no time. :D

On another thread the poster rappy put up one of his piano compositions and it was nicely realized.  Along with this thread and Karl's and Luke's postings of their work, it has gotten me energized to prepare some pieces to post.

I've been in somewhat of a funk lately about all this since all of my scores were destroyed in the flood we had on May 2d.  I'm sure there were no masterpieces lost, but I had planned on taking a fresh look at them to see if there was anything worth editing and trying to get performed.

Well, the flood saved me from that tedium.   :)    But it also left me bereft of any tangible evidence that I am a composer.  Starting over from scratch will free me from the past, but there is still a strange feeling of loss shadowing me. 

I hope to have something to post soon, and would greatly appreciate some of those who have shared their opinions with Saul to do the same regarding my meager offerings.

:)

Quote from: Franco on June 30, 2010, 07:21:20 AM
On another thread the poster rappy put up one of his piano compositions and it was nicely realized.  Along with this thread and Karl's and Luke's postings of their work, it has gotten me energized to prepare some pieces to post.

I've been in somewhat of a funk lately about all this since all of my scores were destroyed in the flood we had on May 2d.  I'm sure there were no masterpieces lost, but I had planned on taking a fresh look at them to see if there was anything worth editing and trying to get performed.

Well, the flood saved me from that tedium.   :)    But it also left me bereft of any tangible evidence that I am a composer.  Starting over from scratch will free me from the past, but there is still a strange feeling of loss shadowing me. 

I hope to have something to post soon, and would greatly appreciate some of those who have shared their opinions with Saul to do the same regarding my meager offerings.

:)

I look forward to doing so. Will be nice to have another composer set up stall here! Generally - this thread of Saul's isn't typical - comments are made and taken in the best of spirits, and I've found having my own thread here to provide a wonderful place to talk about my composing, to provide scores and recordings, and just as importantly, just to be a place to hang out, have mock flame wars, discuss musical esoterica, unveil private obsessions....

But what an absolutely horrific thing to happen though, that flood. That must have been totally devastating. I hope you managed to save what was most important to you, nevertheless. I often wonder what I would save if such a thing were to happen in my house. My favourite CDs and scores, obviously - but it goes without saying that it depends on whether the children were in the house too.






Because if they were, that would be two more pairs of hands to help carry even more armfuls of scores and CDs into the dry....

Quote from: Franco on June 30, 2010, 07:21:20 AM
On another thread the poster rappy put up one of his piano compositions and it was nicely realized.  Along with this thread and Karl's and Luke's postings of their work, it has gotten me energized to prepare some pieces to post.

I've been in somewhat of a funk lately about all this since all of my scores were destroyed in the flood we had on May 2d.  I'm sure there were no masterpieces lost, but I had planned on taking a fresh look at them to see if there was anything worth editing and trying to get performed.

Well, the flood saved me from that tedium.   :)    But it also left me bereft of any tangible evidence that I am a composer.  Starting over from scratch will free me from the past, but there is still a strange feeling of loss shadowing me. 

I hope to have something to post soon, and would greatly appreciate some of those who have shared their opinions with Saul to do the same regarding my meager offerings.

:)

Terribly sorry to hear of that.  Where do you live?

I deeply sympathize with Franco. A few years ago my computer was stolen from my car --- it contained a lot of poetry I wrote; nothing "earth-shattering" of course, but they did have a sentimental value to me. I was able to reconstruct some of them by memory, but others were lost forever.

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 07:42:28 AM
I deeply sympathize with Franco. A few years ago my computer was stolen from my car --- it contained a lot of poetry I wrote; nothing "earth-shuttering" of course, but they did have a sentimental value to me. I was able to reconstruct some of them by memory, but others were lost forever.

My laptop hard disk died suddenly and I lost a really good c-code.

Quote from: Scarpia on June 30, 2010, 07:46:51 AM
My laptop hard disk died suddenly and I lost a really good c-code.

The joys of modern technology...  :)

I live in Nashville, TN.

All in all, we were blessed that our damage was light compared to what some other suffered, e.g. totally losing their homes -

I've got a one thing in Finale for piano trio that I need to buff up, and something noodling around my head for flute and piano. 

Brutal about the flood, Franco!

Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2010, 06:16:50 AM
Since when is Youtube a standard of quality in classical music?

Since Wikipedia said so.

:)    ;)

Quote from: Franco on June 30, 2010, 07:47:54 AM
I live in Nashville, TN.

All in all, we were blessed that our damage was light compared to what some other suffered, e.g. totally losing their homes -

I've got a one thing in Finale for piano trio that I need to buff up, and something noodling around my head for flute and piano.

I saw reports on the news, very sorry that you were affected so severely.  But writing chamber music in Nashville?  Must be hard to channel the spirit of Mozart, Beethoven and Brahms in a town where the music gods are Elvis, Johnny Cash and Dolly Parton.   8)

Quote from: Scarpia on June 30, 2010, 08:21:05 AM
I saw reports on the news, very sorry that you were affected so severely.  But writing chamber music in Nashville?  Must be hard to channel the spirit of Mozart, Beethoven and Brahms in a town where the music gods are Elvis, Johnny Cash and Dolly Parton.   8)

Actually, I've worked as a songwriter here, and the respect for craft is quite inspiring, and intimidating, no matter in which genre of music you choose to work.  It has been a source of disappointment for me that so many classical music fans do not "get" country music. 

On a different note (PTP) Nashville also has many great musicians: from the symphony, Vanderbilt's music department as well as a few other surrounding music schools - so hopefully, conjuring up a few readings may not be a huge obstacle.

Quote from: Franco on June 30, 2010, 08:25:44 AM
Actually, I've worked as a songwriter here, and the respect for craft is quite inspiring, and intimidating, no matter in which genre of music you choose to work.  It has been a source of disappointment for me that so many classical music fans do not "get" country music. 

On a different note (PTP) Nashville also has many great musicians: from the symphony, Vanderbilt's music department as well as a few other surrounding music schools - so hopefully, conjuring up a few readings may not be a huge obstacle.

I used to be a big Johnny Cash fan.

Quote from: Scarpia on June 30, 2010, 08:32:16 AM
I used to be a big Johnny Cash fan.

He probably gets a lot of YouTube hits too.

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 05:03:02 AM


You got to be kidding, my music is from inside of me, from my soul, attacking it is personal by every standard.

I will do a test today and go in the street and stop random people asking them , excuse me have you heard of the world famous composer Karl Henning?

How many will say yes?

And I wouldn't even bother doing this with Luke...his music is just how should I say a waste of paper, ink and time.. yet he had the nerve to brutally attack my music in every way possible, knowing full well, that many have actually enjoyed my music, yes, my music is not an insult, yes its  beautiful that's right, something that Luke has a major problem creating in his music, beauty and meaning and no education or skill can make you put beauty on a piece of paper if you don't have this talent.

You're such an ego-maniac. Do you actually read what you write?

As I said, there are people that may enjoy your music, but those people in most cases are not experienced classical listeners. Let me be really honest, you're not talented, you have no good ideas, you're living in the past, you can't take the slightest criticism, and you think having 60,000 hits on YouTube constitutes you being a great composer. You simply do not have the skills right now to compose meaningful music. I seriously doubt your music is from your heart, because 1. it's not a product of the world we live in and 2. it's too impersonal. Not only does your music suffer from poor ideas, but your ego is getting in the way of making a true emotional connection with the listener.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 30, 2010, 10:13:14 AM
He probably gets a lot of YouTube hits too.

And he deserves them!

Out of interest I did a little semi-scientific comparison earlier. I am very reticent about posting my music anywhere except GMG - and even here I hold back quite a lot. I'm the opposite of Saul in that respect. I do not court views - I prefer quality of feedback rather than quantity, in fact I'm uncomfortable with the idea that 1000s of people might be listening to my music and reading my scores, but because GMG has its 500kb limit on attachments, I have to host my files somewhere so that they can be viewed by GMG users, and so, in theory, I guess they can be viewed by anyone who uses GMG. So, expecting a pretty small number of views, I counted up the number of hits my files have had on esnips, the file-hosting site I use. Bear in mind that 1) esnips is a functional little file-hosting site with a miniscule traffic compared to a major phenomenon like youtube; 2) I have never found the idea of self-promotion attractive, as Saul clearly does, and so I have not sown the internet with links and promotions of my files taking them to esnips - in fact the only place I have put the links to these files is on GMG; and 3) because my files are basically for GMG users, comments on them are made here at GMG, and I've only had one (exceedingly positive but slightly misled!) comment on esnips from a non-GMGer (esnips not primarily being a comment-based site in any case).....and the file that he commented on has been viewed about 3x more than any other file bar one - I assume a causal link between the comment and the increase in views.

IOW, were my files hosted at a comment-centred file-hosting site, I would be expecting them to have been viewed about, at a conservative estimate, at least 2x more than they have been. And were I to spread around the links as Saul does, they'd rise still further. And were they hosted at a major video-viewing site like youtube, I'd expect that number to rise even more sharply. As it is, I have done about the minimum possible to make my files available just to GMG users and no one else....and yet I still seem to have had 44000 'hits'.....

No, hang on - I just remembered something...a year or two back, esnips' files were made available on Scribd too....I had nothing to do with that, all my post-whenever uploads were automatically uploaded to Scribd too and are just sitting there,I think, though I've never even looked at the site. Let me go and check it out now....OK, it seems that even without my having placed the files there, without me even really knowing about the site apart from its name, I've got another 2800 hits there also, for the 10 or so files that are there.

I am mentioning this merely to help put into some perspective Saul's idea that his 60000 hits really means anything at all. Clearly, as my own files show, even without any promotion at all, if you put a file on the internet, 10s of 1000s of people will look at it. The internet is a big place. A lot of people use it. 60000 is a pretty small number.

Quote from: Szykniej on June 30, 2010, 08:16:57 AM
Since Wikipedia said so.

:)    ;)

;D ;D ;D

Good one! :)

I know that this is really a thread about composing; but further back there was discussion of prose and poetry. Some interesting points were made. So, self indulgently, I though I would submit an extract from a rather longer piece I wrote last year about a visit to Venice.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

One highlight was our first visit to the Ghetto. This is the city where the word, the concept, was invented. Italian for 'a forge', two adjacent forges sat on a tiny island within the north of the city. Due to the danger of fire, the forges and armour makers were removed to the much more distant island of Murano, where the glass industry subsequently flourished. This tiny original forge area was then dedicated to the Jews; who were given a very qualified welcome back to the city in medieval times.

The island has three bridges as the only access and although the Jews could leave the Ghetto during daylight hours, they had to be back on the island by nightfall. Drawbridges were raised and the exits guarded by Christian soldiers. The Jews had the dubious privilege imposed upon them of paying the wages of their gaolers.

They were permitted to ply only three trades, two of which were Bankers, (for Christians were not allowed to lend money, but had a constant need of it), and Doctors. These latter were permitted accompanied egress at night when the Christians needed attention. If there might be an idea that you are merely visiting an historical site; banish it. The past and present collide. Issues around persecution and schism are very much alive here.

We took the official tour, the only way to visit the synagogues for a non-religious purpose. The guide of our 20 or so party was a stylish forty-something woman with a leonine mane of wavy hair. We got off to a difficult start. Climbing flights of stairs we were confronted by a locked door and the key was not doing its job. After quite some effort and no success, I quietly voiced the question: anyone know a prayer for locked doors....thin smiles from the men around me with their skull caps. After a spell in the museum we were recalled.

The door was open and we were ushered, men all with head coverings, into the synagogue. Our guide gave a sensible amount of information.

So crowded were the Jews that they had built tenements up to eight stories high. As the Synagogues have to have a roof looking onto heaven, they were built on top of houses. The interior walls were painted to look like marble, as the Roman church had forbidden the Jews to possess marble, too good for them seemingly. There had been several thousand Jews living cheek by jowl and very much on top of one another. Some floors have headroom of less then six feet.

In modern times the Jews were allowed to live wherever they wished, but the centre of Jewish life remains firmly in the Ghetto where The Community comes together on a regular basis. Early in the tour it was explained that before the Second World War the number in the city had dwindled to about 700. There were then three round-ups by the Fascists and Nazis, the last dragging ill Jews out of the hospital. Over 200 died in concentration camps, the rest became part of the Diaspora. Now there are about 300 in the city.

It was tentatively suggested that there might have been some who were saved by local Venetians. This was scoffed at, "No Madame! That was not likely the case. Venetians were in league with the Fascists." At this point tension was suddenly present and by the end of the tour, the air crackled with it. There was one idiotic Gentile female whose third asinine remark questioned one story that had been mentioned as being in the Torah. "Well, it is not in my Old Testament...Aaron, I do believe, he is in the OT, but that guy you mentioned; never heard of him." The guide was clearly angry, but did not reply. The screw of tension was again turned.

There was a pattern to this questioning. The guide would give information, ask whether there were any questions, extended silence, then one eventual question followed by a flood. But not the flood one might expect. It was a flood of salt water. Only the women spoke and almost all the questions were barbed. The Venice Community is strictly Orthodox. There is no Reform Community evident and all of the strictest rules are adhered to when joining community occasions.

"Are the women still segregated in this Synagogue?" "Can the women be seen or are the curtains drawn?" "Surely it must get very hot for the women up there?" "Does the Rabbi go to the Torah or is it brought to him?" "Where and how are the children educated?" "Why do you not have your own school?" "If you have no doctor here now, who acts as the Mohel?" "You said this building is used every week for Shabbat, look, this lamp in the sanctuary has been allowed to go out!" "Why are there name plates on these seats?" "Why cannot the seats be passed down the generations within the family?" Subtle meanings here that are only really clear to the initiated.

The men looked on grimly, or stared at their feet. Those of us who were not of The Community were raising eyebrows and catching one another's eyes. By this time the tension was palpable. Who would ask what, next?

All this may look on the page like a mere list of questions, but they were actually passive/aggressive challenges, some of which were up-front, outright aggressive. The body language added much. The divisions in the community were laid bare and our guide was being used as a punch-bag representative of the ultra orthodox by, I assume, reform Jews, or by some who felt that Venice was not nearly ultra orthodox enough.

Going through this ritual four times a day must become an endurance test. Our guide was a no nonsense feisty sort, restrained somewhat by the fact that these people insulting her were paying for the privilege. Her smile was tight as a thong, her remarks largely uttered through gritted teeth. I suspected she was envisioning piano wire. It was riveting theatre in a way and we learned a great deal; not all of it part of the official menu.

The final of the three Synagogues we entered was more elaborate with beautiful carvings. It had been used to film part of 'The Merchant of Venice' with Al Pacino. Our not so tame dolt Gentile asked....'The Merchants of Venice?' and pulled a puzzled expression. 'Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice' she was told. She remained puzzled. I assume there is no such merchant in her version of the Old Testament. 

Interestingly for the creation of this synagogue Venice had in this instance felt sufficiently sure of herself as to defy the pope's edict. But with an eye to its mercantile reputation it sold permission to the Jews to use real marble. They however had to employ Christian architects who imposed a modified version of the standard sacred Solomonic architecture, Christianising it to an extent. The 'pulpit' was raised higher than the place in which the Torah is stored, very much a solecism, an anomaly, a departure from the orthodox.

The things people do to one another never cease to amaze. No wonder that on occasion the locks refuse to allow the doors to open. On occasion wisdom should prevail and the door be left locked.

Mike

Very nice, Mike, thank you for sharing. A really interesting, thought-provoking account, and beautifully, evocatively written (great spelling too  :D )

And if I'm not wrong there is a little hidden moral in the last paragraph, which I want to try to take heed of if possible re this thread. Clearly the door is firmly locked, and maybe I was stupid to try to open it. Apologies to all if I've been either annoying or frustratingly but pointlessly persistent on this thread. 

:)

Wonderful travelogue/diary, Mike; most meaty.

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 12:42:48 PM
And if I'm not wrong there is a little hidden moral in the last paragraph, which I want to try to take heed of if possible re this thread. Clearly the door is firmly locked, and maybe I was stupid to try to open it. Apologies to all if I've been either annoying or frustratingly but pointlessly persistent on this thread. 

:)

I could be wrong, but I don't think the message was directed at the generous locksmith, but rather at the one who seems key-less.  ;D

--Bruce

Today I opened my Email and found the following comments about my Romance In E minor and My Prelude In G minor that I uploaded 2 days ago.

First one on my Romance:

Oh, another great song, good work you've done !!!!

Second comment :

Wow, this is amazing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTVLrNrjHJA



On my G minor prelude I was Delighted with :

Pretty intense! Good job, man!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RulebBhsJlw

My musical philosophy is the following:

I'll rather eat a cake that looks beautiful and tastes great but is presented on a plastic or glass plate, rather then eat a tasteless and ugly looking cake that is presented on a golden plate.

Those who are good with allegories, will understand this very well.

Best Regards, Friends.

Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 02:13:59 PM
Today I opened my Email and found the following comments about my Romance In E minor and My Prelude In G minor that I uploaded 2 days ago.

First one on my Romance:

Oh, another great song, good work you've done !!!!

Second comment :

Wow, this is amazing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTVLrNrjHJA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTVLrNrjHJA)



On my G minor prelude I was Delighted with :

Pretty intense! Good job, man!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RulebBhsJlw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RulebBhsJlw)

My musical philosophy is the following:

I'll rather eat a cake that looks beautiful and tastes great but is presented on a plastic or glass plate, rather then it a tasteless and ugly looking cake that is presented on a golden plate.

Those who are good with allegories, will understand this very well.

Best Regards, Friends.

Saul

...And the endless self-promotion never ends.

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 30, 2010, 02:23:47 PM

...And the endless self-promotion never ends.

You know pretty well that this has nothing to do with 'self promotion'.

Quote from: knight on June 30, 2010, 12:23:13 PM
I know that this is really a thread about composing; but further back there was discussion of prose and poetry. Some interesting points were made. So, self indulgently, I though I would submit an extract from a rather longer piece I wrote last year about a visit to Venice.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

One highlight was our first visit to the Ghetto. This is the city where the word, the concept, was invented. Italian for 'a forge', two adjacent forges sat on a tiny island within the north of the city. Due to the danger of fire, the forges and armour makers were removed to the much more distant island of Murano, where the glass industry subsequently flourished. This tiny original forge area was then dedicated to the Jews; who were given a very qualified welcome back to the city in medieval times.

The island has three bridges as the only access and although the Jews could leave the Ghetto during daylight hours, they had to be back on the island by nightfall. Drawbridges were raised and the exits guarded by Christian soldiers. The Jews had the dubious privilege imposed upon them of paying the wages of their gaolers.

They were permitted to ply only three trades, two of which were Bankers, (for Christians were not allowed to lend money, but had a constant need of it), and Doctors. These latter were permitted accompanied egress at night when the Christians needed attention. If there might be an idea that you are merely visiting an historical site; banish it. The past and present collide. Issues around persecution and schism are very much alive here.

We took the official tour, the only way to visit the synagogues for a non-religious purpose. The guide of our 20 or so party was a stylish forty-something woman with a leonine mane of wavy hair. We got off to a difficult start. Climbing flights of stairs we were confronted by a locked door and the key was not doing its job. After quite some effort and no success, I quietly voiced the question: anyone know a prayer for locked doors....thin smiles from the men around me with their skull caps. After a spell in the museum we were recalled.

The door was open and we were ushered, men all with head coverings, into the synagogue. Our guide gave a sensible amount of information.

So crowded were the Jews that they had built tenements up to eight stories high. As the Synagogues have to have a roof looking onto heaven, they were built on top of houses. The interior walls were painted to look like marble, as the Roman church had forbidden the Jews to possess marble, too good for them seemingly. There had been several thousand Jews living cheek by jowl and very much on top of one another. Some floors have headroom of less then six feet.

In modern times the Jews were allowed to live wherever they wished, but the centre of Jewish life remains firmly in the Ghetto where The Community comes together on a regular basis. Early in the tour it was explained that before the Second World War the number in the city had dwindled to about 700. There were then three round-ups by the Fascists and Nazis, the last dragging ill Jews out of the hospital. Over 200 died in concentration camps, the rest became part of the Diaspora. Now there are about 300 in the city.

It was tentatively suggested that there might have been some who were saved by local Venetians. This was scoffed at, "No Madame! That was not likely the case. Venetians were in league with the Fascists." At this point tension was suddenly present and by the end of the tour, the air crackled with it. There was one idiotic Gentile female whose third asinine remark questioned one story that had been mentioned as being in the Torah. "Well, it is not in my Old Testament...Aaron, I do believe, he is in the OT, but that guy you mentioned; never heard of him." The guide was clearly angry, but did not reply. The screw of tension was again turned.

There was a pattern to this questioning. The guide would give information, ask whether there were any questions, extended silence, then one eventual question followed by a flood. But not the flood one might expect. It was a flood of salt water. Only the women spoke and almost all the questions were barbed. The Venice Community is strictly Orthodox. There is no Reform Community evident and all of the strictest rules are adhered to when joining community occasions.

"Are the women still segregated in this Synagogue?" "Can the women be seen or are the curtains drawn?" "Surely it must get very hot for the women up there?" "Does the Rabbi go to the Torah or is it brought to him?" "Where and how are the children educated?" "Why do you not have your own school?" "If you have no doctor here now, who acts as the Mohel?" "You said this building is used every week for Shabbat, look, this lamp in the sanctuary has been allowed to go out!" "Why are there name plates on these seats?" "Why cannot the seats be passed down the generations within the family?" Subtle meanings here that are only really clear to the initiated.

The men looked on grimly, or stared at their feet. Those of us who were not of The Community were raising eyebrows and catching one another's eyes. By this time the tension was palpable. Who would ask what, next?

All this may look on the page like a mere list of questions, but they were actually passive/aggressive challenges, some of which were up-front, outright aggressive. The body language added much. The divisions in the community were laid bare and our guide was being used as a punch-bag representative of the ultra orthodox by, I assume, reform Jews, or by some who felt that Venice was not nearly ultra orthodox enough.

Going through this ritual four times a day must become an endurance test. Our guide was a no nonsense feisty sort, restrained somewhat by the fact that these people insulting her were paying for the privilege. Her smile was tight as a thong, her remarks largely uttered through gritted teeth. I suspected she was envisioning piano wire. It was riveting theatre in a way and we learned a great deal; not all of it part of the official menu.

The final of the three Synagogues we entered was more elaborate with beautiful carvings. It had been used to film part of 'The Merchant of Venice' with Al Pacino. Our not so tame dolt Gentile asked....'The Merchants of Venice?' and pulled a puzzled expression. 'Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice' she was told. She remained puzzled. I assume there is no such merchant in her version of the Old Testament. 

Interestingly for the creation of this synagogue Venice had in this instance felt sufficiently sure of herself as to defy the pope's edict. But with an eye to its mercantile reputation it sold permission to the Jews to use real marble. They however had to employ Christian architects who imposed a modified version of the standard sacred Solomonic architecture, Christianising it to an extent. The 'pulpit' was raised higher than the place in which the Torah is stored, very much a solecism, an anomaly, a departure from the orthodox.

The things people do to one another never cease to amaze. No wonder that on occasion the locks refuse to allow the doors to open. On occasion wisdom should prevail and the door be left locked.

Mike

I want to know what was the third job?
Any ideas, Knight?

Quote from: Mirror Image on June 30, 2010, 02:23:47 PM
...And the endless self-promotion never ends.

And a fan who calls a Romance (presumably a piano solo piece?) a song ; )

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 02:13:59 PM
Today I opened my Email and found the following comments about my Romance In E minor and My Prelude In G minor that I uploaded 2 days ago.

First one on my Romance:

Oh, another great song, good work you've done !!!!

Second comment :

Wow, this is amazing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTVLrNrjHJA



On my G minor prelude I was Delighted with :

Pretty intense! Good job, man!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RulebBhsJlw

My musical philosophy is the following:

I'll rather eat a cake that looks beautiful and tastes great but is presented on a plastic or glass plate, rather then it a tasteless and ugly looking cake that is presented on a golden plate.

Those who are good with allegories, will understand this very well.

Best Regards, Friends.

Saul

Saul, bless you heart, didn't anyone ever teach you any manners?   You mother never told you that boasting, tooting your own horn, flaunting any complementary word anyone ever offers you is crass, rude, and shows a lack of good taste?  Have you failed to notice that you are the only person on this entire web site who engages in such behavior?  Are you really that starved for attention, that you have to stoop this low?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 02:35:25 PM
And a fan who calls a Romance (presumably a piano solo piece?) a song ; )

I was ready you gonna point that out, but that's fine. A song is a also a word to describe music. Songs without Words, Songs written by Grieg for Solo piano, Songs written by Mahler for Orchestra, and many other examples where the word Song is used to describe a Work.

Face it Karl, my music is been enjoyed by many people, layman, and professional musicians, as I said I have been asked many times to provide the scores to some of my compositions. Remember that just casual listeners don't ask for scores, these are people who play instruments and are 'above average' music listeners.


As to Franco who said that he didn't find any of my youtube videos with over 4.000 views...

Walla:

58.237 views
234 ratings - 215 likes 19 dislikes 91 comments - Favorites: 159

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM2YUJzKqu8

Next:

32.546 views At the Ocean.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ga98fFu_qM

Best Wishes,

Saul

Quote from: Scarpia on June 30, 2010, 02:40:57 PM
Saul, bless you heart, didn't anyone ever teach you any manners?   You mother never told you that boasting, tooting your own horn, flaunting any complementary word anyone ever offers you is crass, rude, and shows a lack of good taste?  Have you failed to notice that you are the only person on this entire web site who engages in such behavior?  Are you really that starved for attention, that you have to stoop this low?

Its not about attention but discussion to find out the truth of the matter.
Apparently, some people here were 'insulted' by my music, therefore I offered a counter argument showing them clearly, that other people think otherwise and in fact enjoy my music very much.

Cheers,

Saul

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2010, 02:35:25 PM
And a fan who calls a Romance (presumably a piano solo piece?) a song ; )

Huh?  You won't have many sales requiring a litmus test of your fan base.  I believe in being more gracious to those who read or listen to my works.   

It is also possible that the music lover was influenced by the terminology of "iTunes" which calls are works regardless of genre "songs"?

Quote from: Teresa on June 30, 2010, 02:53:54 PM
Huh?  You won't have many sales requiring a litmus test of your fan base.  I believe in being more gracious to those who read or listen to my works.   

It is also possible that the music lover was influenced by the terminology of "iTunes" which calls are works regardless of genre "songs"?

Teresa, you're a genius, God bless you.

Best,

Saul

Saul - genuinely interested question, no agenda, and completely OT, apologies: why have you stopped writing 'God' with the - in the middle recently? I've noticed it a few times now.

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 02:57:32 PM
Saul - genuinely interested question, no agenda, and completely OT, apologies: why have you stopped writing 'God' with the - in the middle recently? I've noticed it a few times now.

You imply he doesn't know how to spell his own name?   ;D

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 02:57:32 PM
Saul - genuinely interested question, no agenda, and completely OT, apologies: why have you stopped writing 'God' with the - in the middle recently? I've noticed it a few times now.

Look here with the emphasis on Writing the Name of God http://www.jewfaq.org/name.htm

I don't mind how he chooses to spell this word, it's obviously of importance to him, so I was just interested. No agenda, as I said.

Though I have to say.....back on topic........if a composer chooses to call a piece a song, that is one thing, and indicative of thought on their part. For a listener to call any piece of music a song whether it is or isn't, does seem to indicate a basic lack of understanding of how music works, which in turn, to me, shows a general lack of meangingful engagement with the art form. Unless the composer indicates otherwise, a song is something that is sung! (BTW Songs without Words - the clue is the without words bit - he's saying, this is instrumental music aspiring to the condition of vocal music; Grieg's 'Songs for piano' - the only ones I am aware of are the arrangements he made of his voice+piano songs; Mahler's Songs for orchestra.....remind me, I can't think what they are)

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 03:03:16 PM
Look here with the emphasis on Writing the Name of God http://www.jewfaq.org/name.htm

Gotcha. Thank you. So - still OT, but still no agenda, just interested - is this something you have changed your mind about recently?

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 03:06:41 PM
Gotcha. Thank you. So - still OT, but still no agenda, just interested - is this something you have changed your mind about recently?

Yes, apparently people were getting annoyed with this and I didn't want to explain the reason over and over again therefore I researched and looked into it and found the recent rabbinical rulings about this matter that permits typing the name of God on the computer, for reason mentioned in the link.

Cheers,

Saul

I see, that's interesting, I appreciate you explaining it.

(Could try to wrench that back on topic by making the connection to the idea of changing one's habits of notations and spellings and so on, but I won't!)

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 03:05:20 PM
I don't mind how he chooses to spell this word, it's obviously of importance to him, so I was just interested. No agenda, as I said.

Though I have to say.....back on topic........if a composer chooses to call a piece a song, that is one thing, and indicative of thought on their part. For a listener to call any piece of music a song whether it is or isn't, does seem to indicate a basic lack of understanding of how music works, which in turn, to me, shows a general lack of meangingful engagement with the art form. Unless the composer indicates otherwise, a song is something that is sung! (BTW Songs without Words - the clue is the without words bit - he's saying, this is instrumental music aspiring to the condition of vocal music; Grieg's 'Songs for piano' - the only ones I am aware of are the arrangements he made of his voice+piano songs; Mahler's Songs for orchestra.....remind me, I can't think what they are)

That's like saying that a person can't enjoy a good piece of cake, until he finds out what were the ingredients and when was it baked, which bakery and who was the actual baker.

Usually when I go to my friends and family and they put in front of me a delicious looking blueberry cheese cake, no questions asked, I just take a fork and get some coffee or milk and begin to eat and enjoy it.

Many at times, and perhaps people will realize this sometime in the future that they enforce a blockade on themselves, totally afraid to enjoy something to the fullest until they found out all the details and until it passed all the checkpoints of their intelligence.

I say, forget the name, forget the baker, just listen to the music and enjoy, perhaps with a good cheese cake if possible..

Regards,

Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 03:20:26 PM
That's like saying that a person can't enjoy a good piece of cake, until he finds out what were the ingredients and when was it baked, which bakery and who was the actual baker.

No it's not - to take your analogy, it's more like saying, let the person enjoy the cake as much as they want, but if they call it a loaf of bread, then perhaps don't give too much credence to their opinions on cullinary quality.

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 03:32:34 PM
No it's not - to take your analogy, it's more like saying, let the person enjoy the cake as much as they want, but if they call it a loaf of bread, then perhaps don't give too much credence to their opinions on cullinary quality.

Its so amusing because Karl decided to make fun and not check who were these two people who Dared to write beautiful compliments about my Romance In E minor.

But if you click on their pages you will see that they are both musicians...

But of course for Karl and yourself, they are both dumb deaf and stupid for liking my music...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTVLrNrjHJA

Same goes for the G minor

http://www.youtube.com/user/rwicker05yes

I am not clear why you care what Luke or Karl think; you show no respect for their advice or liking for their music. Why bother going on and on?

Just post your pieces and let people make up their minds.

Mike

Quote from: knight on June 30, 2010, 03:41:16 PM
I am not clear why you care what Luke or Karl think; you show no respect for their advice or liking for their music. Why bother going on and on?

Just post your pieces and let people make up their minds.

Mike

Cause they are human beings that have an opinion, and believe it or not I want to listen to all opinions, those that make sense I listen.

How?


1. When Luke and some others pointed out some problems with notation, I thanked them and said that I will revise the work .

2. When they said that I should further study harmony , I agreed, and accepted what they said.

3. When they suggested that I should explore some modern elements with my music, I said I would look into it.

But when Luke and some others have said that they were 'insulted' by my music because it had flaws, I explained to them that this kind of approach is wrong, by firstly pointing out that even the Greats didn't compose their music without faults, as so brilliantly illustrated by Bernstein who totally destroyed Beethoven's capability as a composer if you separate each aspect of his music, the melody, the harmony, the orchestration, they are 'nothing' he said it not me. But people apparently didn't find any 'insults' with Beethoven's music even though  it was not free of flaws.

And secondly by providing a list of people and listeners, some of them musicians, who actually do enjoy my music and like it very much.

Best Wishes Knight,

Saul

Well, we are now at a point where all sides have explained their position very clearly and at length. People are now going round in circles. My advice to you all is to give it a rest, for the benefit of the Board. Move on and expend the energy elsewhere.

Mike

Quote from: knight on June 30, 2010, 03:54:44 PM
Well, we are now at a point where all sides have explained their position very clearly and at length. People are now going round in circles. My advice to you all is to give it a rest, for the benefit of the Board. Move on and expend the energy elsewhere.

Mike

I have no problem with that.

Regards,

Saul

Quote from: Saul on June 30, 2010, 03:49:27 PM
But when Luke and some others have said that they were 'insulted' by my music because it had flaws, I explained to them that this kind of approach is wrong, by firstly pointing out that even the Greats didn't compose their music without faults, as so brilliantly illustrated by Bernstein who totally destroyed Beethoven's capability as a composer if you separate each aspect of his music, the melody, the harmony, the orchestration, they are 'nothing' he said it not me. But people apparently didn't find any 'insults' with Beethoven's music even though  it was not free of flaws.

As I said earlier, Saul, you really seem to have been upset by my use of the word insulted earlier - you've mentioned it many times since then, and I can see it agrieves you, so I am sorry about that.

I did already try to explain to you what I meant by it, and it wasn't what you have repeatedly said, as you did just now - that I was insulted by your music. What I said was, my musical intelligence feels insulted when it is asked to read and decipher something that doesn't make sense notationally, with a view to playing the piece. I'm not talking about the sound of the music here, I'm talking from a performer's perspective about the feeling of frustration you get when you expect one thing and get another. There is, I think, something implied in posting one's music online, and it's this: 'here is my piece, I have worked hard on it for you, the listener and, in the case of the score, for you, the performer, I have made sure that all is legible, that the notation fits the sense of the music so that you won't have to do any unnecessary deciphering'. But when I see one of your scores, Saul, the impression I get is more 'here is my piece, I hope you like the sound of it, but because I like the sound it makes when I press play, I'm not that bothered by how it looks for you if you are going to try to play it yourself'. That feeling is a little unpleasant for the performer, it feels a little disrespectful, as if you are telling them that they don't really matter. And it would be so easily solved with the notational scrub-up I've advised.

Listening to your pieces I don't feel insulted, Saul, even if they aren't to my taste. It's only as a potential performer that your scores give off that feeling that you don't really care about me (  ;) )

Yep, just saw that, Mike. Only to happy to oblige.

Quote from: knight on June 30, 2010, 03:54:44 PM
Well, we are now at a point where all sides have explained their position very clearly and at length. People are now going round in circles. My advice to you all is to give it a rest, for the benefit of the Board. Move on and expend the energy elsewhere.

Mike

http://www.youtube.com/v/rSjK2Oqrgic

;D

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 04:02:33 PM
As I said earlier, Saul, you really seem to have been upset by my use of the word insulted earlier - you've mentioned it many times since then, and I can see it agrieves you, so I am sorry about that.

I did already try to explain to you what I meant by it, and it wasn't what you have repeatedly said, as you did just now - that I was insulted by your music. What I said was, my musical intelligence feels insulted when it is asked to read and decipher something that doesn't make sense notationally, with a view to playing the piece. I'm not talking about the sound of the music here, I'm talking from a performer's perspective about the feeling of frustration you get when you expect one thing and get another. There is, I think, something implied in posting one's music online, and it's this: 'here is my piece, I have worked hard on it for you, the listener and, in the case of the score, for you, the performer, I have made sure that all is legible, that the notation fits the sense of the music so that you won't have to do any unnecessary deciphering'. But when I see one of your scores, Saul, the impression I get is more 'here is my piece, I hope you like the sound of it, but because I like the sound it makes when I press play, I'm not that bothered by how it looks for you if you are going to try to play it yourself'. That feeling is a little unpleasant for the performer, it feels a little disrespectful, as if you are telling them that they don't really matter. And it would be so easily solved with the notational scrub-up I've advised.

Listening to your pieces I don't feel insulted, Saul, even if they aren't to my taste. It's only as a potential performer that your scores give off that feeling that you don't really care about me (  ;) )

Luke,

I will not respond to you now, even though I want to, because I want to respect Mike's request for giving this topic a break for now...

Let's talk about something else, there are other things on this site that should be also interesting besides my Music!


:) :D

Well, I don't see why Saul should have all the fun. Responding to the Competition for a Baroque piece, here's something I wrote around 1996, which is probably the last year I composed anything. A friend wanted to learn the piano but only had a 49-key Casio, so I thought of writing 10 Easy Pieces for a Casio Keyboard. Only problems were (a) I made the pieces much too hard; (b) I got frustrated with the range and stuck a high D in the piece I'm uploading here. This little Adagio, #5 in the suite, is a kind of 2-part invention in the Baroque spirit and obviously has the E major 2-part invention of Bach on its mind. It could also be played as a duet for 2 cellos. I have no way of recording this, but it shouldn't be beyond the average pianist, and the score shows you also the Bartokian #4 that leads into it.

Sfz, that looks like fun!  :) I'll print it out and try it at home later. I'm currently working my way thru the 2-Part Inventions, so this piece looks like a natural to try next.

Quote from: Sforzando on June 30, 2010, 05:45:56 PM
Well, I don't see why Saul should have all the fun. Responding to the Competition for a Baroque piece, here's something I wrote around 1996, which is probably the last year I composed anything. A friend wanted to learn the piano but only had a 49-key Casio, so I thought of writing 10 Easy Pieces for a Casio Keyboard. Only problems were (a) I made the pieces much too hard; (b) I got frustrated with the range and stuck a high D in the piece I'm uploading here. This little Adagio, #5 in the suite, is a kind of 2-part invention in the Baroque spirit and obviously has the E major 2-part invention of Bach on its mind. It could also be played as a duet for 2 cellos. I have no way of recording this, but it shouldn't be beyond the average pianist, and the score shows you also the Bartokian #4 that leads into it.

Fabulous to see some of your music!  :) :) :) I could try to record it later, as I did that piece of Karl's, if you trust me. For illustration only, of course.

The two-part nature of your piece reminded me of one of my own not-worth-the-paper-or-ink pieces, also written with older music at the back of my mind, though in this case it was medieval music, and particularly ars subtilis pieces by e.g. and esp. Matteo da Perugia. This one was written in about 20 minutes. I find it quite moving, in its brittleness and with those little recurrent 'fragile' trills that come again and again, each time played with pedal..but I think that is because I am aware that a few hours after writing this piece (summer 2005) I suffered a bit of a nervous breakdown...

This is it, anyway. Funnily enough, when I posted it on my own thread, Eugene listened to it and wrote what is I think the only somewhat negative review of a piece I've had, before Saul's. But I didn't mind, because Eugene is an exceptionally sensitive listener. What he actually said was (comparing this piece to another small one which he had enjoyed more):

Quote from: EugeneThe Unfinished Study had too many notes for my taste and frankly seemed the product of a less concentrated session? However, the ending was fabulous .... [and in another post]....You know Luke, I am transcribing some interviews with some tamil refugees these days using a very meticulous transcription convention which means it takes a full working day to transcribe 15 minutes of conversation. So whenever I've had too much (of traumatic stories), I put my work away and listen to your work, which makes me very tranquil. I think this is part of the reason why I happened to like X better than the Unfinished Study - possibly picking up on the tumultous undertones lurking in the shadows (the more sun the more shadows). The story behind the piece was intense but it made me want to go back and listen to the piece again. Call me morbid.

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 10:55:25 PM
Fabulous to see some of your music!  :) :) :) I could try to record it later, as I did that piece of Karl's, if you trust me. For illustration only, of course.

Thank you, Luke. Of course I trust you. I'll try yours later when I get a chance, too.

Looking at Sfz3.jpg, something doesn't look right at the start of the second system. I think that should have been A_ G# A G# F#. I'll check tonight when I get home, but I may have messed up something in the Finale file.

Fun stuff, Sfz! Thanks for posting this.

I composed this work for Piano & Orchestra about 5 years ago. I was inspired to write the music after I viewed Monet's Painting titled 'Magpie'.
I thought the painting to be magnificent, moving and thought provoking.

I provided the score for download.

Best,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/KS3-JiHHsKo

Quote from: Saul on July 01, 2010, 05:22:20 AM
I composed this work for Piano & Orchestra about 5 years ago. I was inspired to write the music after I viewed Monet's Painting titled 'Magpie'.
I thought the painting to be magnificent, moving and thought provoking.

I provided the score for download.

Best,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/KS3-JiHHsKo

Rossini has The Thieving Magpie; Saul has The Painting Magpie. (Typo corrected.)

Quote from: Luke on June 30, 2010, 12:42:48 PM
Apologies to all if I've been either annoying or frustratingly but pointlessly persistent on this thread. 

:)

No need for apologies as far as I'm concerned, Luke. I've been following this discussion and I've found your remarks to be informative and insightful. I've learned a few things along the way.

Quote from: Szykniej on July 01, 2010, 05:47:47 AM
No need for apologies as far as I'm concerned, Luke. I've been following this discussion and I've found your remarks to be informative and insightful. I've learned a few things along the way.

Hear, hear.

Quote from: Sforzando on July 01, 2010, 05:43:58 AM
Rossini has The Thieving Mapie; Saul has The Painting Magpie.

You mean to say the Thieving Magpie not Mapie...

Quote from: Saul on July 01, 2010, 05:55:39 AM
You mean to say the Thieving Magpie not Mapie...

It was a typo. And you meant to say "You meant to say," not "You mean to say."

Quote from: Sforzando on July 01, 2010, 06:28:19 AM
It was a typo. And you meant to say "You meant to say," not "You mean to say."

http://www.youtube.com/v/G1jLOWIxFIQ