Wrongplanet Musicians' Showcase

Post Reply New Topic

what you have composed is thoroughly proficient and well played. i am surprised that you did not explore and develop your talent at a much earlier age. i like to listen to your self composed songs because they are valid

Oh, thank you very much, my friend! Well, I've played recorder in kindergarten but after a year it began to bore me and I never again had anything to do with music, I didn't even listen to it, until today I own no CD... But with 15 I became out of a matter of fortune singer in a band of my school and when we broke up because my friends changed school I wanted to continue, secretely took the guitar of my sister when nobody was at home and began to experiment (I was 16, going on 17^^ back then, now I'm 18 ). this summer I begged my father to buy me a piano and luckily he did, though he had never heard me playing music since I always wanted to keep it a secret to my family, I don't know why, that's just the way it is^^ But until now I've already read some articles about the theory and so I do mostly know what I do when I write music today (well, if I would take a closer look at my pieces I'd be able to analyze them, but I mostly don't do it...^^)

This piece is much more rhythmically interesting than anything you've posted here so far. Great job!

Some suggestions: As you might expect me to say, I still think you are harmonically stuck in the 19th Century. Rhythmically you're on the right track, but you need to free your mind in terms of harmonies.

Another thing that sticks out is how busy you are rhythmically. I already like what you're doing, but after a couple of phrases it becomes too static. We keep expecting some kind of contrast, but it never happens. To make that 19th century romantic style really pop, you need some better contrasting moods. Exaggerate EVERYTHING--rhythmic contrast, parallel major/minor keys, thematic development. I'd have started this piece much more aggressively and relaxed the almost motor rhythm idea into something a bit more chorale-like. Your dynamics are pretty flat I think, and that's a great opportunity to really draw your audience in.

And that works really well for Romantic style. And I'll be honest, one of my pet peeves is postmodern revivalism. Billy Joel did that experiment once, and I'm convinced he only got rave reviews just because he's freakin' Billy Joel. Like, what he DID he did very well, but the rest of the world has moved on. Personally, if I wanted to emulate anyone, I'd pick Claude Debussy and/or George Crumb. Or even one of Crumb's students, like Schwantner. One of the hottest guys out there is Eric Ewazen. I'm not that crazy about him, but he was all the rage back when I was I was still in school. I could have gone to a masterclass with Ewazen, but I'd just gotten too bored with the more "traditional" guys that they were bringing in and the fact that he teaches at Juilliard just simply isn't enough to impress me. I dunno...some people get off on that kind of thing. I might have gone if it had been Brian Ferneyhough, or someone like that. So, take that with a grain of salt, but I hear in you the potential for greater things. Every chance you get broaden your horizons.

You mentioned theory and analyzing... I think a solid foundation in theory is a wonderful thing to have. The "rules" exist to help us understand the context of various style periods--and I think this is something you do extremely well. You might have a tendency to being TOO structured, though, and I wonder if this is an aspie thing because I used to be the same way. It's difficult avoiding the temptation to structure and organize EVERYTHING, but over time I've forced myself to let it all go and just compose. Yes, there's still a "pre-compositional" design to what I write now. I just make sure I spend more actually composing rather than mapping out the entire process. Everything changed the day I turned off the click track! The less you're overly concerned with "proper" dissonance resolutions and the more you look for your own creative voice, the better a composer you'll be.

Keep working and keep posting. This is seriously getting good!

I posted this link about this time last year, there's some new stuff up but none of it is ready to be released yet.

http://soundcloud.com/chris-axelrod

Thanks for your feedback! Somehow you are my teacher substitution, that's great, otherwise I would have absolutely no orientation
I hope the liberal thinking for my kind of composing will come on it's own the further I get. But I would of course conscious try to move in this direction now that I know it.
I also think that some parts of this piece are not that well worked out and rather segues, especially the part after the first part, that's an error.
I think one of my biggest problems is that I hardly ever listen to music. I've got the waltz of the flowers from Tschaikovski on my music player, 4 pieces from Mozart, 2 from Debussy, 1 from Chopin and 1 from Beethoven and all the albums of the beatles such as some single songs^^ I should probably just listen to many other pieces but it's so boring to look for good music when so much of it is bad. I hate listening to bad and boring music but I have to if I want to find the good pieces... And it's even harder with modern music since it's not that well known. Another composer I really enjoy is Henry Mancini, he's rather modern. How are the styles called that you would suggest to me?
and one more time, thank you very much!

The song "Cell" doesn't sound that bad, if you have any clue how to insert vocals it might be pretty pretty.
But as naked as it is it rather sounds, just like the otherones, like playing around with a computer program.
I don't know... if you go on it might become good soon enough. I don't like to demolish your cloud castle but compare it to real music consciously, you might see the difference.

i am very tired and i must be careful with how i word what i am going to say.

you talk in a very arty farty way, and you speak of "postmodern revivalism". i calculate that that phrase means resurrecting styles that have become dated (hence "unfashionable").

i think music is eternal, and if a piece of music is good, then it is good forever. i do not care what the current tastes of people who wish to be fashionable are. a piece of excellent music would sound as good to me 10 billion years ago (if i lived then) as it would sound in ten billion years in the future (if i lived then).

you dismiss billy joel as a person who was applauded for his classical music simply because his name "carried weight". you say the "world has moved on", and i say only fashion has moved on. people who devalue music because it is not contemporary are people who do not see the fundamental essence of music.

i very much liked billy joels excursion into classical music, and i was saddened to see that it did not catch on in today's world due to shallowness of appreciation.

this is a beautiful piece and i hold him in high esteem
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FMzWFy25jk[/youtube]

you may dismiss me as a layman, but i dismiss you as a snob.

CATFIGHT!! ! xD

what does "xd" mean ?

i am not fighting. i am just saying what i think.
you probably have seen this before, and you may dismiss it as
amatuer rubbish, but this is a song i composed for the purpose of my video
clip of steering an ocean liner around the hymalayas.
the song is supposed to represent a transition from blind
acceptance (like after just having woken up) to panic as i freshen
up to the fact that i hope the captain knows what he is doing
(when i realize it is a very unusual and dangerous situation).

anyway, i was ridiculed by people like angel rio who told me to
stay with my day job.

the actual song goes for 7 minutes, but a slice of it is in this video.


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UhMczDdO8Q&feature=plcp&context=C3f4133dUDOEgsToPDskLyzR6JMjSlTuh_vHjveZQN[/youtube]
it needs to be listened to more than once to understand it.

i know you are smarter than me musically, but i think that you should not demean anyone who is below your level of talent.

I'm sorry for the "catfight" I just feel very uncomfortable if people are seriously in an argument and then I feel forced to say something stupid that leads the attention away from the anger, even if the anger is focused on me then. I know that you in fact spoke for me and not against me.
But I'm very impressed by your 3D modeling, you should use it for something that leads the attention of others on your works. Usually people wouldn't care about a ship on it's own but would care if something interesting would happen with it or on it. You could simulate crashes for example. I wonder why you don't use this qualification you definitely have. You invest days or weeks of time in building a ship and a landscape but then you don't use it. You should do! The two reasons for 3D modeling are video games and movies, and since you obviously are a skilled programmer if I consider the programm you wrote for fractals, why don't you use the enourmous amounts of time you invest in it anyway for creating a video game?

i posted what i posted simply to show that amateur musical compositions can be quite valid.
it must be listened to with an unprejudiced ear for a few times to see it is actually quite a complex and valid piece of music.

i play cover songs often, and they sound much more professional than my own compositions because i have a substrata with which to work, and so it may be bewildering to people who hear things i cover compared to things i compose.

whatever. just soldier on. i am going to bed.

goodnight, my friend!

For starters, I'm not interested in trolling or starting a bunch of contentious garbage with anyone. But I do see a lively discussion of musical criticism as a worthwhile endeavor. I don't insist nor expect that everyone see eye-to-eye with me.

I don't think it's "arty farty." I spent most of my significant life in some sort of music school, and music was the one thing I was ever good at. It practically saved my life. So...I've learned to be a critic and to have a professional attitude towards music. And one secret I've picked up along the way is that by fairly evaluating someone's work (what works, what needs work) you actually become more conscious of the process yourself and improve your own work. I like posting the kind of music I enjoy listening to and composing here, but at the same time I recognize that my kind of music is not for everyone. I mean, one of my favorite composers is Iannis Xenakis. I can't even start to comprehend how that guy got his ideas and worked them into musical compositions, but I find it no less appealing. Most people I went to school with find Xenakis difficult to listen to. And to a degree that's understandable. But at a certain point it ceases to be a matter of taste and more a matter of being closed-minded. I personally don't care what "style" someone chooses to write in. I don't even care if what someone writes is even fashionable. In fact, I'd rather listen to unfashionable music than fashionable because at least someone who composes unfashionably is rejecting what is current and hip in favor of asserting his own creative voice. And I think the best way someone can avoid sounding dated is by writing forward-looking music rather than settling for being a style composer. It's not about being current. It's about artistic integrity.


I actually agree on this point. But the thing about being fashionable is that the world of classical music performance is still largely stuck on the same 300 works by the same 30 composers. I don't care how much training they've had or how professional they are--I have little respect for them. At least you have some people like the Verdehr Trio, Kronos Quartet, and Eighth Blackbird featuring new compositions. When I suggest good composers for a young beginning composer to pay attention to, I'm not merely suggesting people that I like (I'm NOT a big fan of Eric Ewazen, but he is a notable younger guy). I think young composers do well to listen to a cross-section of current composers so they don't feel limited by the 18th or 19th centuries (or event the 20th century in a lot of ways). It's a great way to gather new ideas and find a forward-looking direction to go artistically, and it's a lot better than limiting one's work to composing anachronistically. If awes were to be an actual university-level musician taking a composition course, much more would be expected. I think awes works hard at what he does and deserves to be taken as seriously as my professors took me while I was a composition student.


But it's true. Look, I'm not a big billy joel fan. But I AM a huge fan of Paul McCartney. And I know a lot of other Paul McCartney fans went nuts when Liverpool Oratorio came out. And, yeah, I was in my early teens back then and I loved it. But in retrospect it is hardly a great masterpiece. That doesn't mean it doesn't have value--I can still listen to it and enjoy it, just like people who have a less-than-academic appraisal of Billy Joel can love his pseudo-classical music. That's fine. I also like New Age music. And I'm just being honest when I say New Age and postmodern revivalist pieces are not the direction the future is taking. And I don't think I'd be very honest if I didn't tell young music creators to get out of box and walk the line a little.


Well, billy joel DOES have a lot of dedicated fans and needs not worry about how successful that album was/is. And that album doesn't show a lot of imagination or artistic integrity. My concern with awes' music is that in a similar way to Joel it comes off as a music theory assignment rather than a significant piece of creative work.


Laymen are the ones who have to listen to music. So, no, I don't dismiss anyone whether they are professional musicians or laymen. I'm sorry you think I'm a snob, but I actually do have a good bit of experience in making music that goes back to writing arrangements and original pieces early in high school and going on to earn two college degrees in music--one in music education and the other actually in composition (master's degree). I've had to listen to a LOT of music and critique my classmates. And I continue to compose music. I don't expect everyone to like it. It's not for everyone. And I don't expect anyone to make music the same way I do. But regardless, music composition is a craft that has to be carefully cultivated and nurtured. It's a LOT of work that doesn't always pay off. The least I think I should do is offer a beginner whatever wisdom I can based on the experiences I've gained over the years.

I'm not sure if there are any kinds of music that I consider INvalid. To me, music is music.

I like to think I generally listen with an unprejudiced ear, but the fact is we are all subject to personal likes/dislikes.

Note that in my original comments I highly regarded what awes did rhythmically. I also think that the piece really does work musically in a 19th century kind of way. But I do think there are a few musical elements missing that I think awes should work on for his next piece.

One final comment on postmodern revivalism: Something I hear postmodern composers get away often is using an eclectic approach to making music. I think awes' particular approach would be enhanced by going for more of a pastiche of styles rather than getting stuck in Victorian mode. You do have to be careful about that, too, though. One of my professors thoroughly ripped on of my pieces because it sounded to much like I'd written 4 or 5 pieces within the first major section. I chose to make the various sections I'd written a little more elaborate, but at the same time a rapid alternation between several themes all at once creates a unique musical effect itself. So that might be another creative approach you might take. To get an idea of what I mean by that, try rapidly switching an FM radio among different active frequencies. The Beatles' "Revolution #9" is a great musique concrete example of what I'm talking about. It's possible to capture those kinds of ideas in traditional musical notation to be played by a solo instrument or an ensemble. Just a thought...

i do not know what sounding "dated" means.
if someone dreams of a composition and wakes up and wants to play it, should they assess whether it is "modern" sounding, or should they assess any other factor which may prevent them from performing it?

should they think "even though it was what i dreamed of and wanted to play, i should not play it because it will be seen as outdated?".

maybe so according to you (who i now respect more considering i now understand that you are very musically educated).

i have no musical education, and therefor i am not capable of assessing music as accurately as you assess it.




that is disappointing. how can you dismiss mozart? how can you say that because the genre in which his music was situated is now outdated, that his music is worthy of little respect?. honestly, i have no musical education and i see mozart as like a jesus of music. his music kills my own creativity because it is so vastly superior to anything i could ever think of, but you have little respect even for that?

i am sorry but i do not understand your musical compositions, and i believe that it is because i have insufficient musical intelligence to understand them because you say you have university degrees in academic musical pursuits. i will not challenge you, but i will say that i can understand mozart to the pinnacle of my musical intelligence, and i can not understand your music at all. so maybe i am musically relatively stupid, and i am sorry about that.







but people want to play what their imaginations give them to play, and i am not in agreement with you that if that they dream of songs that are out of the current fashion, then they should be shelved and not played at all. maybe you are talking about how to make money from music, or maybe you are talking about how to get thousands of fans of your music. i care not for money or accolades. i just care to express what is in my mind to play.




i spoke to a musician about awes last night, and he listened to the music awes played, and he said that awes was capable of expressing emotion in his pieces (and he also told me that i was not able to express emotions, and that my music was mechanical and rigid), and that is why i look at awes with a virgin mind. i agree he could become very dynamic.


well with my uneducated mind, i think that the creative genius of billy joel far exceeds that of paul mccartney, but it is just my taste.


i am not concerned whether billy joel kept making money, i was concerned that his new direction was thwarted by lack of interest, and i wanted to hear a whole new range of classical compositions by him which will not be written due to public disinterest.




again i say that nothing i have heard from you inspires me in the least, but i am aware that it is because i am too musically stupid to understand your work.


no need to be sorry. sorriness is a commodity that i never deal with.

that is correct. everyone minus me is not everyone.



but what have you attained with your experience? as far as i can see your music is a hotchpotch of cacophonic sounds, and i can not make heads or tails of it.
ok i can believe that what you compose is far above my head, and my mind resolves it to nonsence due to my musical inability, but the end result is that you fail to capture my attention. i know that you are not performing to avarage or below average people (in a musical sense) and you will not be affected by my failure to understand, but i just say that i do not understand your music and i do understand mozart.


here is a small 1 minute minuet i composed and played that i am sure is very basal and not in the realm of your music, but i place much value on fundamental melody. melody to me is the most important aspect of a song, and i do not care for anything else rather than melody.

i never heard any melody in what you play.

but again i disclaim what i say because you have degrees in music and i do not , so i am like a housefly fighting with an eagle in this sense.

this is a one minute song which is a melody that i intend to incorporate into a longer song that i have in mind.

http://soundcloud.com/iamxb70/minuet-20-12-11-320

yes it is uneducated and not well played, but i can refine it to sound good. the melody is mine and i can do what i want with it.

b9, I like this piece, but somehow all of your songs remind me a bit of the soundtracks to old 8-bit Video games, especially the Pokemon games for the GBC. Don't worry, I absolutely enjoy the music of this games, it was the main reason I played them^^

You know, you both are talking about totally different things since your boths intentions are totally different.
At least I thought so, I thought AngelRho would speak for success and b9 would speak for self realization. but then I suddenly understood that
AngelRho just seems to make propaganda for experimental music, expressionism and musique concrete.
Somehow there are many guys considering those kinds of music as the highest musical and intellectual point one can reach.
I've hardly ever read something about musical theory and the kind of music that flows from my mind is the expression of what my brain considers as aesthetical and the expression of my emotions.
I'm going to write a 10 page article about how music works in our brains for my graduation this year in music. So soon I will know why the musical theory exists, is the same for every human being without ever having learned it and if musique concrete is valid or not. To me, expressionism and musique concrete appears to find it's only relation to music in the fact that it is a construct built of accoustic signals.
My intention is to become better all of the time, create aesthetical music and share it to as many human beings as possible. I definitely want to create something that others would love to listen to, so I would certainly stay up to date, but I'm sure, even if I stay in the "safety zone" of beauty I would reach others. I'm a hopeless aesthete and my ideal is pure beauty. That might be irrational but my soul longs for it.

I think there's something stupid on this world. Squares can't get themselves into modern music since they associate classics with "elite" and modern music with "plebs", plebs can't get themselves into classical music since they associate modern music with "hip" and classical music with "squares", many professional learned musicians can't get themselves into any other kind of music than expressionism since they associate it with the highest spot and everything below is no real music but playing around, jazz musicians consider anything but jazz as no real music since they consider improvisation as the highest spot and everything below is no real music but playing around.
So in fact everybody is just a vain bastard who thinks he is too good for the things he isn't able to get himself into.

haha, I feel so totally superior to them, I can hardly express it, just because I'm open minded. I thought this would relate to my AS. but probably it's just the fact that I'm better than them xDDD
(I'm sorry, this shouldn't sound arrogant)

Oh, and I think that Paul McCartney must be an awesome musician, the only thing that makes me doubt it is, that he did develop by 0% since he left the Beatles.
That often is the case. you might expect that successful musicians would someday begin to write more complex works, maybe even operas. but they seem to be asocial idiots who just want to live relaxed and lay back on their anyway flowing money shower. If I would maybe break through someday I would never stop developing myself. I want to become better, I don't care about money.

@AngelRho: I'd love to listen to one of your arrangements that's all written in a musical language I'm able to understand intuitively and not only if I learn a totally new system that somebody has invented once. You know, it's like talking in a language nobody knows but you, people would read your gestures, would hypocritical nod with an ashamed smile to hide that they don't understand anything and you would unknowingly isolate yourself believing that you are Superiokrates because nobody could ever contradict against your words. That wouldn't make me happy. I prefer being one of the best under a billion (I'm certainly not, just theoretically) to being the best of one.