Hello! I uploaded some new music (kinda - I wrote it a few years ago), and I was hoping some of you could take a listen! It's a Sonatina, and I've been calling it the "Procrastination Sonatina" in my head, since I wrote it to avoid practicing a piano piece I wasn't too fond of. (Here's hoping my teacher isn't on here.)
This my take, and what I do when I write music, and how I judge others' music. Your mileage may vary. Comments welcome.
“I don’t want to sound like Bach or Mozart — rules are for fools and drones with no imagination! I’m a rebel, like Joyce, Stravinsky, and Picasso!”
Who likes or needs “rules”? Who wants to be told where they can or can’t talk, use their cell phone, eat, or park for free? What is this nonsense about books full of “rules” for music, saying you “can’t” use two successive fifths, or sevenths not followed by the note below? Or that fugues “have to have” “expositions” and “episodes” and follow “rules’ preached by other books about what their notes are “allowed” to do? Are music lovers so arrogant and condescending that they listen to music trying to play “gotcha” when notes don’t do what some damned music professor said they ought to, and laugh and reject that music? Or is this a scam to ensure salaries for “music teachers” who are paid for putting red “X”s on people’s scores?
And didn’t tremendous artists like Schoenberg, Jackson Pollock and Allen Ginsberg become famous by “breaking rules” (as did Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart)? I never saw a music-police wagon pull up and arrest somebody for “breaking the rules”….
I see scores here every day, usually attempted complex contrapuntal forms such as fugues and canons, with “I know, I didn’t follow the rules! Sorry!” as a (lame) excuse for why they (almost invariably) sound amateurish, dissonant, and disjoint.
In the past, before the internet and easy-to-use, free score editors, musically sensitive people who went to concerts or church or listened to the vanished thing called “classical radio” would there hear great music of the past. The industrious among us might try to learn more about it by buying “phonograph records” (which, once invested in, had to be listened to many times to justify the acquisition), and scores, ditto, and perhaps trying to play the music they heard on a piano or simpler keyboard,. And maybe we might even buy some music paper, and pencils with erasers, and try to write some new music, and eventually arrive at the conclusion that this stuff was pretty complicated: as with stage magicians, the fact that serious music looks “simple" when done correctly is the very fruit of the art — if you do not learn how to be a magician-musician, the result on stage will be sad and transparent failure.
If you were lucky, you might have been near a good library (mine was almost an hour away) with a good section on music-theory books, or perhaps knew a professional musician, student, or teacher, who could explain how to write music that sounds, to whatever degree, like the music you heard and wanted to emulate. And you would learn that there are indeed methods, abstractions, technologies, and yes, “rules” (many of which differed from century to century and place to place) which causes the music of historical composers to sound the way it does, not like “old music”, but like well-written prose or a well-painted picture, where the parts contribute to the whole, each sentence expresses a logical idea, questions that are raised are answered, and there is no spattered paint or typos all over the piece. That, not genius or matchless inspiration, is why their music sounds like classical music instead of the uninformed tinkering of beginners. But it is utterly possible to inform yourself, and, with care and diligence, move beyond being a beginner.
If you are a native English (for example, it’s true in any language) speaker, you don’t say “I write my sanata yesterday with C major”, because it’s not English. Any native English speaker knows that, and although we understand it, we use and prefer (reasonably) proper spelling and grammar. Grammar is not a scam to pay teachers; people who speak English (or French, Russian, Arabic, or Japanese) competently not only speak in credible grammar, but best understand and appreciate correct utterances in their respective languages. The same is true of classical music — if you want your creations to be understood with ears accustomed to the form, texture, gestural vocabulary, and overall idiom of that extremely broad genre, you must “do the same thing”, “speak in that language”, i.e., follow the same rules. Failure to do so will prevent your work from sounding like competent classical music.
These “rules” were devised by musician-composers skilled in teaching, in order to codify and transmit, to their pupils, and to us, what they knew about writing music, so that they and we could do it, too, and express our own creativity. The rules of tonal music are not a strait-jacket, but a power tool.
As with every other art, those who “broke the rules”, such as Picasso, Joyce, and Stravinsky, were fully competent in the traditions of their arts before creating iconoclastic work.
"Your mileage may vary."
Any Feedback on this song???
This song is free to all, but any changes to the melody should be intimated.
If you like this music and the song, you can go ahead and use it in your worship time to glorify our Lord Jesus. You can add more Verse(s) to this song and share it with me so that I can also use it.
Praise The Lord
God Bless You
I have written full canons before and I have attempted writing fugues. But every attempt at writing fugues, at least 4 voice fugues leads to parallel octaves because I'm like:
Okay, I have reached an octave, now what? Going down to a 7th won't work because that will lead me back to the same octave. Going to a 9th also won't work unless it is between the tenor and the alto because I can't play a 10th interval with a single hand so if the 9th is between the tenor and the bass or between the alto and the soprano, my only choices are either to go back down to an octave or to leap. Going back to an octave seems like the better option because I conserve leaps, but it just delays the resolution of the octave. Contrary motion to a 6th might work, but what if that doesn't fit with the harmony? Only other solution I can think of that doesn't break the parallel octaves rule is a leap in 1 or both voices involved in the octave. And in general I want to use as few leaps as possible outside of maybe a subject entry, and if I have to use a leap, I would prefer a third over a sixth.
And I end up not finishing the fugue
Now I've been told that the distribution of 4 voices in a keyboard fugue is generally that the bass voice is alone in the left hand and that the other voices are generally in the right hand. But, it seems to me, that having 2 voices per hand just feels more balanced. I have also been told by a few people that fugues are easier to write than canons. Now this seems very counterintuitive to me. In a canon, you have the same melody, just delayed by a certain amount in each line. Sometimes this has a ground bass below it. I won't give an example from Pachelbel because you all know it. Instead, here is a 4 voice canon by Mozart played by a string quartet:
As you can see, every voice is playing the same exact melody until the cadential section is reached.
In contrast, fugues seem in all ways more complicated than canons. If I had to describe it as a cross between 2 forms, I would say that it is a cross between the canon and Sonata form. It has the main melody in multiple voices, just like a canon. And sometimes there are 1 or more countermelodies that also appear in multiple voices. There is also motivic development which is similar to what you find in Sonata form. 1 thing that differs the fugue from both canons and Sonata form is that the voices are like completely independent even if you don't take time into consideration. Time is what makes the lines of a canon independent. Fugues have lines that are independent through melodic shape alone. Sonatas rely on the relationship between melody and bass. No such relationship in fugues. In that sense, sonatas are closer to a ground bass canon.
And like I said before, I have never written a complete fugue, just a few complete canons. Even something like Fugue in C minor WTC I seems easy for a fugue but hard for counterpoint in general and especially compared to canons. Here is the fugue I'm mentioning and this video uses color to show the 3 independent voices:
So are fugues really easier to write than canons if they are almost like a cross between the canon and the sonata? If canons are hard, then wouldn't fugues be even harder?
Hi! I was wondering if you would like to view my compositions. To avoid rhythmic glitches, please print them off of piano shelf .
Hi! I was wondering if you would like to view my compositions. To avoid rhythmic glitches, please print them off of piano shelf
La robe est l’un des achats les plus importants et les plus importants de votre journée massive, ce qui signifie que vous voulez vous assurer que vous avez fait le plus grand choix et que vous êtes satisfait de ce que vous avez sélectionné. À la fin, c'est votre mariage et c'est vous qui portez cette robe de mariée. Quels que soient vos choix, vous saurez que vous portez la robe de mariée parfaite pour une grande mariée
site robe soiree
, comme si vous étiez.
Contactez les magasins pour vérifier cela. Le jour de votre rendez-vous, résistez à l'envie de mettre des vêtements confortables et d'aller au magasin. mariée colorées. Les couleurs communes sont rose-violet de toutes les couleurs.
Vous pouvez choisir de nombreuses substances, par exemple: B. dentelle, mousseline et ainsi de suite. Vous pouvez ajouter de la dentelle à votre robe de mariée pour qu'elle soit élégante et élégante. En outre, vous pouvez également ajouter des accessoires à votre mariage pour le rendre plus beau.
Same computer and browser that I have been using every time I report these issues(Windows 10 OS, Dell Inspiron 15 laptop, Mozilla Firefox browser).
This icon issue started several days back. But at first, it only affected me when I initially logged in and as soon as I went to another page, the icons would show up correctly(like the arrow for the upload icon, the bubble for the comment icon, and everything else).
Today, it is more permanent. No matter what page I'm on, the icons look like gibberish. Like the upload icon looks like F0RR in a little box instead of the upload icon. Only time on the site makes the icons look normal. What is causing this and when will the icons get back to normal without me having to wait to see the normal icons?
Just to clarify, the reply and like icons aren't affected and neither is the notification icon but pretty much every other icon is affected.
I had this idea last year of composing a suite that represents different types of weather. But it wasn't until yesterday that I started composing part of this suite. As you can probably tell from the post title, this part of the suite is supposed to represent a storm. That is why I chose the key to be a minor key. I went with C minor because it is the easiest of the minor keys for me to improvise in. I would have used 8va for the sixteenth note runs in the right hand. Problem is, the section that would be 8va goes by so fast that I'm not sure where to start the 8va. Similar thing goes for where I would typically use a clef change. So outside of the first few bars, I haven't put in any 8va markings or clef changes.
I have been doing these things to get across the feeling of a storm in the piece:
- Keep the 16th note momentum up except for places where I decide to use a harmonic progression
- Use scalar passages with leaps to represent the strong wind
- Stark dynamic contrast(Like it quickly goes from pianissimo to fortissimo in the beginning 5 bars)
- Staccato to represent the rain
- Fast octaves to give a sense of turbulence(which is very fitting for music that is supposed to sound like a storm)
- Use the Fate Motif underneath a long scalar passage to give the feeling of a lightning flash
- Use harmonic progressions to represent the thunder
- Use diminished 7ths more often than dominant 7ths
Here is the link to the piece if you want to give me feedback on what I have so far of it:
I finally finished working on this piano duet today. Any name suggestions welcomed, as well as any other feedback!
Finished arranging Dance With the Devil by Breaking Benjamin! I've got a few other scores finished that will be on their way shortly!
Hello! New member here. I have been doing some research on drum beats and been using Musescore for my transcribing. For analysis, I think it'd be very useful to have information on the onset of notes in drum beats. Musescore provides this in the information in the bottom left hand corner when a note is selected, i.e "Beat: 2.5" for an eighth note played on the "and" of 2, but for some reason this information doesn't make it to the xml files I've exported. Those files include the type of note and duration among other things, but for percussive notes it's much more useful to have information of when in a measure the note starts rather than just the duration of note, as, other than some cymbals, most percussive sounds are instantaneous. Is there any workaround to get this information in the exported .xml files? I've found this page: https://musescore.org/en/node/288539
which points to an external plug-in but I've had some trouble getting that to work, and I feel like it should be simpler.
Any help or pointers in the right direction would be helpful. Thank you!