Wrongplanet Musicians' Showcase

Post Reply New Topic

i have only a cheap casio keyboard at the moment, and the quality of it's instrumental library is very
limited.

i can not attenuate the amplitude of notes. either the note is "on" or "off", and there is no gradation at all. i can not play with any reference to the loudness of notes.

i used to have a lot more interest in crafting my music in a professional way when i had an expensive keyboard (which was stolen), and i used to spend maybe 2 weeks in replaying over and over again, the tracks until i was happy with them.

i was a perfectionist in a way, and i kept replaying tracks until i was happy with them.

now, i just play the whole thing once and record it on the first playing so as i will not forget what the melody is, and i do not bother to perfect the sound, and there is a world of difference between stuff i spend 2 weeks on crafting and stuff i just musically "jot down" for later redressing.

"8 bits" is a compliment to me. i have an 8 bit mind, and although i could interlace my music previously into a rather complex and correct transposition, i no longer can be bothered.

the fractals you speak of are from when i was enthusiastic, and i had a much better synthesizer.

i have lost almost all interest in performing music for now.

i hope you flourish because you have much talent.

You have to buy a new and high quality e-piano or keyboard,
I would be pissed off too if I would have to play on a garbage keyboard, that's demotivating and totally uninspiring.
Something that trivial should never be a reason for stop developing.

Well, I don't compose for "elitist" or "ivory tower" audiences. I lead a musically diverse life doing anything from playing in a classic rock band to solo jazz/New Age piano gigs at private parties and fundraisers to weddings playing strictly classical. I have a church gig where I go from accompanying strictly traditional choir anthems to CCM to outright "making stuff up" at different points in the worship service. I have a preference for serialism and electronic sounds, but I've also written for brass quintet, string quartet, piano, vocal choir, clarinet choir, and solo clarinet (which was for a long time my principal instrument). I'd love to get work writing for percussion, which I have done in my work for handbells and orchestra, but I've just never had a good percussionist or ensemble to write for. I've also played percussion at different times, but I'd rather have a pro percussionist who can help me not be dumb when it comes to writing multi-percussion parts. My handbell music has me occupied at the moment and is thus far the most difficult instrument I've ever written for. Harp is another difficult instrument to compose for, and I'm kicking myself for not writing for harp while I was acquainted with a world-class student harpist. I still have other contacts, so it's not like it's exactly out of the question. But I'm not limited to writing in a strict modernist style, either. I have to stay busy, and it's a rare thing that I actually get to write the kind of music I'm really passionate about. The stuff I've posted recently isn't really it, either, but it was music LIKE that which turned me on to electronic music in the first place. I've got a good chance to go somewhere with it now, and when I get that out of my system I'll move on to something else.

I have no problem with anyone who just wants to rewrite Brahms and Mahler. I could write Wagner and C.M. von Weber if I wanted to. I just lack the desire for it, and that kind of music just isn't ME. If that's YOU, then fine. There's probably still a lot of good music left to write in the key of C major. But I can also tell you if that's the direction you want to go and you really want repeat performances, you're going to have to be exceptionally good at it. The risk you take trying to get there is driving yourself nuts trying to reinvent the wheel. There are much easier and more musical ways to make music. I'm not saying take the easy path for the sake of taking the easy path. Composing is hard work no matter which direction you go. I'm just saying it shouldn't be needlessly difficult. If consonant harmonies and "proper" resolution of dissonance is your main concern, you might also consider minimalism in which you're dealing with static harmonies and relying on subtle rhythmic changes to hold a listener's interest. It's not MY preference, but I've written the occasional minimalist piece. The only drawback that I see with minimalism is it's taxing physically and mentally on the performer, but immensely satisfying if they can get through it. At worst you might make a listener fall asleep. But then again, you do have interesting works like Adams' Nixon in China and Glass' character trilogy. Listening to your (awes) music, I highly recommended Debussy. I still recommend Debussy, and maybe even Faure or Satie. I'm a HUGE fan of Camille Saent-Saëns. And I say that because they are traditional-sounding composers who still managed to push the creative envelope and are still influential. I like my share of Haydn and Mozart, but their work in our day and time isn't exactly groundbreaking stuff.

Unless you're into circuit bending!

One of the great things about the synth I use the most is it uses a variable sampling rate. In the past, producers used that to maximize their sampling while cutting back on how much RAM was required. With circuit-bending and chiptunes being in vogue these days, it's also a way to make it sound like it's eating itself without actually causing any physical damage to the synth itself.

@b9: If it's any comfort, the first electronic keyboard I ever played on was a Casiotone MT-205. I LOVED that keyboard, and it belonged to my aunt. And by "loved," I mean to the point of obsession. I have no hope of getting it now that she's passed away and my cousin isn't really letting anything go (I'm willing to offer top dollar for my grandmother's antique Singer sewing machine, but I've given up on that, too). So not too many years later I looked it up on eBay and bought one for myself. For what it is, it's got great trumpet, violin, flute, clavi, and drum sounds. Oh, and a freakin' HUGE pipe organ sound. Not that crazy about the accompaniment section, but it's got a gem or two in there. It also has a massive built-in chorus effect built in and the loudest speakers I've ever heard on something that tiny.

My point is that with a lot of those junk keyboards, you do tend to get mostly cheese. But don't take them for granted, either. There is a small niche for vintage "toy" keyboard enthusiasts, and every now and then you'll hear something on mainstream radio where a "toy" keyboard played a major role.

If you want something a little more professional without breaking the bank, I'd recommend something like the Korg X50. It's basically a poor-man's Triton and lacks a sequencer. But it does have USB and can run off a DAW plugin editor. Put it in Multi mode, load some programs, and jam away. One redeeming quality is it has a programmable arpeggiator, which means you can make drum and keyboard loops and play splits at the same time. It's more for playing live than recording, but as long as you have sequencing on your computer you can still do that, of course. There are also some Yamaha arranger keyboards comparable or cheaper in price that you'd probably really enjoy.

Thank you. I've only listened to this space sound thing and would love to listen to other compositions of you too.
In fact I'm not strictly against anything, it's just, every piece I write is an experiment to me that includes some new things. I don't restrict myself to any kind of style, it's just the thought in me that says the more I write and experiment the more it would be shaped to what my "soul" wants to express and the more aspects it would get. I actually don't want to "sound like" whoever. Therefore I am and was always very thankful for your tips considering the aspects that could be changed which I haven't even realized to be existing before.
I still believe that I would anyway shape my own sound the more I'd write.
Maybe my musical knowledge or my undeveloped style is going through the stage of the 19th century at the moment but it won't stop here. I of course don't mean this literally.
There are still so many aspects left that could still be explored by me or taught by people like you, that I could not imagine that the style itself wouldn't change enormously. It would be totally different. it has been different 2 months ago when I had half the experience and will become different in 4 months when I'll have twice as much experience. As I said, I would never stop developing, once I would find that I can't develop anymore I would kill myself for having no further reason to live. I don't believe that it would ever lead me to expressionism but I'm so totally likely to be bored by doing the same again and again so that once the regular theory offers no creative opportunities anymore I'd find a way to create new opportunities
But, no matter how different it may sound someday, it would always conform with my picture of beauty.

I hope you would keep on supporting me!

If this were an appropriate time/place, and if awes were further along than he is, I'd totally take some of his music to task and I wouldn't hold back on what I had to say. But I also know that it takes time to develop musical maturity and that some things I might say might be more destructive than encouraging. I know how it feels to have work I poured blood, sweat, and tears into ripped apart like there was no significance to it whatsoever, and that was by one of my first composition teachers! Although I think in my case I might have had a bit of an ego and the wrong expectation of what my graduate studies were supposed to be about. This was the same guy most feared by undergrad theory students... He was like the Darth Vader of comp/theory profs and I know he single-handedly ended the careers of many a music major. What I came to realize is he held his students to high standards and if you failed to at least try to understand this guy then you probably didn't deserve to be there in the first place. When it finally clicked with me what he was trying to do, I came to have an admiration of him. It was that kind of motivation that I really needed at the time to work hard at being a competent composer. So even though I didn't take his seminar again after that semester, I did request that he be a part of my thesis defense committee. People thought I was crazy for doing that and asked me if I ever intended to actually graduate. The fact that I survived my defense made me feel my degree was actually worth something.

HOWEVER... I don't think picking apart every little thing that doesn't work in awes music would be helpful. I'm not writing the music--he is. I can offer suggestions, say simply what I think works well and some general things to avoid, maybe even offer alternative creative options. Awes has to find his own way, and far be it from me to take that experience away from him. If he's REALLY interested in that, he can PM me any time.


Well, that's just it. Music is simply a language of sound. I have a few definitions of music, one of them being "music speaks where words fail." I think of music as being sculptures of sound, and that can range from the beauty of some concrete image to utter revolting abstraction. It can be anything in between, and it can be any/all of that at any time. It can be pure emotion, it can be pure emptiness. It can contradict itself, it can make perfect sense, it can be wholly irrational. If you think what I wrote is absolutely beautiful, then GREAT. If it makes you want to vomit, GREAT. I was in a contemplative frame of mine when I wrote it, but that doesn't have to mean anything when you listen to it. It's music. It just IS. The fact that you complain somewhat about it demonstrates that I was moderately successful in achieving my goal!

But at the same time, it's a stepping stone for more music I want to write in a similar direction. The fact is I'm out of practice, and that probably does come through in the music. I'm going to post another one in here probably tomorrow evening. The process of composing hasn't changed, nor the musical language. I just think I did a better job of creating the atmosphere I was going for. What's weird is I have some people telling me they like the last one better. I've got one more planned, but I have to get through this handbell gig tomorrow afternoon before I start thinking about it. After the 4th one, I'll probably shoot for something a little more "mainstream," the reason being I have friends who are actually interested and if I get enough people into it I may bite the bullet and do a CD release. I don't do this for the money...but it sure would be nice!


Because in music like that I downplay the role of any single melody and go more for effect. There IS a unifying melody, but I also use a lot of developing variation that the melody becomes obscured. And for what I'm going for, a dominant melody would actually be antithetical.

You mentioned elsewhere someone saying your music is mechanical or some such... I don't have a problem with mechanical music. You ever listen to Kraftwerk? Nearly everything they do is mechanical and robotic sounding, and people LOVE it.

As far as "understanding it" goes, here's the wikipedia page for a brief rundown of how I'm currently writing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve-tone_technique

The rest of this post is just a technical description of the particular process I use. It won't hurt my feelings if you don't want to read it, but it's there if you think you'll find it helpful. But what's most important is not the process, since you don't hear the process but rather the end result of a long line of spontaneous decisions I made on how to treat pre-determined material. I find that this helps me. If you want to compose music, just do it. How you do it is your own business.

At one point several years ago I was obsessed with derived tone rows. I found out, though, that there are only so many derived rows, that invariance cuts your options in half, and that an invariant tone row directly integrated with a time-point scale gives you a chromatic scale. I'm a strong proponent of integrally serial music, btw, but I think rather than linking musical parameters directly it's more effective to link different parameters to their own independent rows and link those parameters geometrically. I haven't attempted this in years and likely won't for a long time--but one never knows...

So I don't bother with mathematical trivialities that I don't understand nor do I waste time trying to force it to work. My approach is this: Come up with a tone row, which I'll either do by messing around at the piano until I play something that catches my ear, or if I'm totally uninspired I'll draw notes at random from a deck of cards (which is how my most recent stuff got started). From there I'll write the pitch classes (notes) down on a spreadsheet and make a 12-tone matrix that shows all 4 transformations of the tone row. I'll pick one or more row forms, decide how I want to combine them, and I'm ready to start composing. The easiest and most interesting way to do this is by keeping in mind that all row forms and their retrograde are hexachordally combinatorial. By using this little trick, you can express row forms in longer sequences of non-repeating notes, changing the order of the actual notes played in sequence, and still stay true to the original row forms so expressed. Something that used to give me fits was analyzing Webern's Opus 21 when I noticed he was dropping notes from rows--what I found out was that the "dropped" notes were actually places within simultaneous rows in which they crossed over with common tones. The result is you get odd numbers of notes instead of the expected even numbers. There are tricks like this that you can use to alter or vary your musical ideas while still maintaining the organic unity of the composite work.

So, generally speaking, that's the way I work. Sometimes I'll write out exactly how I intend to use the material before I record the first note; sometimes I just get to it when I get to it. Within a single piece I try to use all 4 transformations and all of their transpositions--48 different forms in all. The particular technique I use most often is called "partitioning," as I think it's the most effective way to use the most material to exploit a variety of timbres and textures within an electronic work. It works great for acoustic instruments, too. Once I prepare one or more row forms, I play a few notes of the sequence to figure out what sounds best to my ear. I hit the record button and play what I've practiced. If I want rapid notes, I slow the sequencer speed down for recording and then return it to normal for playback. Or if I want something to be slow and not take all day to do it, I'll record at a faster tempo and slow it down later. Once I know how I'm going to treat the material, it's all very improvisational. And that aspect of what I do is something that I think is probably out of the norm for most serial composers. I don't quantize anything. I work things out so that there are no errors. And I just keep going until the material runs out.

Well, like I said before, you're breaking out a little bit rhythmically. If you keep heading in that direction, I think you'll be right on track.

Change is good, but don't get TOO enamored with the idea... Everyone finds that "groove" that they compose best in. Early on in his studies, Aaron Copland gave in to academic pressures to write atonal music. Nadia Boulanger, on the other hand, taught him that rather than focusing on European trends he should consider writing music exemplary of his own nation and culture. "Rodeo," "Billy the Kid," and "Appalachian Spring" became the big hallmark pieces of the Copland sound and style. The negative thing about Aaron Copland is that as far as many American musicians are concerned, he's the only American composer. And that's so not true. My favorite American composer HAS to be John Corigliano, who I think fails as a postmodern composer but is still a marvelous eclectic. My favs: Symphony #1 and the Clarinet Concerto (written for Stanley Drucker and Leonard Bernstein). "Gazebo" is OK, but not his best work, and "Alternate Statements" is just pure beauty. I think you might like "Alternate Statements." You'll eventually find a sort of "sweet spot" in your work and you'll tend to stick with that. You just won't work any less hard at getting the results you want.

Read up on Stravinsky. I think he went through maybe three different artistic phases before getting his "mature" style. And every chance you get, listen to as much music as you can and learn as much about it as you can.

Anyway...

You asked about my other work. I posted this last year:

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt146178.html

Laugh if you like, but I've never encountered anything more difficult to write for! My partner is a temperamental person who doesn't take suggestions easily. On the other hand, I'm not good at memorizing choreography. I read music; she doesn't. We butt heads a lot, but we get stuff done. One of the best pieces of advice I have to give, no matter what your preferred style, is never compose in a vacuum. Work with a partner. Your piano playing skills are coming along a lot faster than what I usually expect from most piano students, and if I understand right you're really self-taught. So it's no problem for you to perform your own music. Find someone else to write for who plays a different instrument. Ask questions about different playing techniques, instrument range, etc., and let them see the progress you're making on a composition and hopefully get them to sightread it. You may find that the ideas you write sound great in your head but suck in reality. Or your performer may not interpret it the way you want and you find you need to (gently) correct them. My handbell partner doesn't have the musical training I've had, but she's just brilliant. And we've both only been doing this just over a year now. The video in that post was made only about 3 or 4 months after we started learning to play bells together, and there are still things we desperately need to learn--all in good time!

Wow, this seems to be an extremely challenging instrument. great work.
It would be wonderful to have other musicians playing for me, playing the music I wrote. Like they do for you in your handbell composition.
I was thinking about buying a Violin to be able to comprehend how to write for strings. And much more I love their sound. I probably will do so in the next months.
But I don't know if I would be able to find other musicians in a similar situation as mine. One more year of practising, then it might hopefully last to convince non-amateur musicians to work together with me.
I mean, I've got a rockband but I actually hate this amateurish trash and only keep it alive to at least not feel totally lost in the world of music.
I'm thinking about studying composition after my graduation, though I doubt that I could study both physics and composition at the same time...
but if I would I would certainly find many contacts there. Luckily I have two friends who have some contacts, maybe I would get a chance to be introduced to somebody.

I have enjoyed listening to all of the interestingly creative music everyone has been sharing on this thread. Music is very important to me, and when I was a child I was completely obsessed with playing classical piano pieces. As an adult, I gravitate towards synthesizers and other machines of the analog variety.

Here is a little song I recorded in "real time" on one audio track. If you are familiar with music making, you know that recording all parts on one track removes the ability to edit... so it does have some timing issues. I am also heavily influenced by old analog synth acts of the 70s and 80s, and I think it really comes through in this song. Last year I took the liberty of making a video with footage from one of my favorite directors, Georges Melies...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBykJbGai6g

This next link is a song with vocals. I really do not like singing on songs because it feels somewhat intrusive, and honestly, I would rather not listen to myself singing. If anyone ever wants to collaborate on vocals, let me know...

http://nouveauplastique.com/ModeleMecha ... Mix%29.mp3

Thanks for listening.

*For anyone curious about my setup, Cubase is my DAW of choice. I also use a large number of synths, including, but not limited to, Roland Juno 106, Juno 6, Juno 60, Roland V Synth, Roland JP8080, Roland TR66, Sequential Circuits Prophet 5, Sequential Circuits Pro One, Access Virus Snow, Access Virus TI, Dave Smith Mopho, Korg MS20, Korg MS2000, Microkorg, Yamaha CS2X, Yamaha AN1X, Nord Lead 2, and the coveted Minimoog... to name a few.

Wow, that's totally minducked
Your style is awesome, appears to be very much your own style.
It's normal for this kind of music that there is no real musical complexity, right? But that probably doesn't even matter.
It sounds successful. I mean it sounds as if it could be successful. especially the second one.
From what you sing in the second piece I couldn't even judge about if you sing good or not, it just matches to the rest of the song, it sounds professional anyway. There would certainly be enough people who would enjoy this stuff.

Thank you, it means a lot. I have played live shows in the past, but it was always so hard. The idea of being on stage with everyone staring at me is really not appealing. Over the years I have written hundreds of songs, but most of them will probably never see the light of day. I am sure many creative types in this forum can relate to that sort of thing.

Also, WOW. You are incredibly talented. I just watched a bunch of your videos on YouTube. Very nice.

Strangely I never had troubles with playing live with my old rockband, I felt rather comfortable with being the center of attention but that's probably just narcsissm. I and probably many other persons would certainly be thankful if you would share all your songs with us, if you perfectise them and record them they are surely worth to be listened to. Maybe you just need some more confidence, if so, just keep on posting here^^ but I doubt that it really is confidence. Somehow it's really easy for me to just keep all of my attention on my music instead of the people around me. They just don't exist for me when I play and sing. But that's of course easier said than done.
I'm looking forward to more stuff from you!

You and I should meet up sometime. Sounds like we have eerily similar tastes.

Your Melies track reminds me a lot of Frank Zappa during his "Jazz From Hell" period.

As a rule, I tend to avoid current Roland synths. I wouldn't complain about having a Juno 6, and I've been wanting a V-Synth for years. Do you have the keyboard or the desktop version?

Great stuff. Can't wait to hear more.

Thanks! And yes, I agree about current Rolands. The V Synth I have is a desktop version, which is more practical and economical.

I have so totally no clue what you both are talking about xD
It's some kind of keyboard, right? Wouldn't it today be much more economical and cheaper and wouldn't there be far more available sounds if you would use a normal midi keyboard with a laptop and vst instruments, for example kontakt : NI Kontakt? I've been using kontakt myself, it's the highest quality sampler I know.
I've not been using it with a midi keyboard but I've written the notes converted it to midi and then played it with kontakt in cubase. but it can of course be used as a standalone program too for live playing.
They have even got orchestral samples recorded by a philharmonic orchestra in really good quality. sounds extremely natural.
I don't want to make propaganda but I'm impressed myself^^

clementine, I love this! I'm on my third listen. I think your voice is perfect for this synthesized music sound. I wish I could sing like you.