/comp/ - Composition General

maj7 can't be a dominant.

You're playing a Cmaj7 with an altered 5 (altered 13 would imply a natural 5 somewhere else in the chord), which is a different chord than C7, since one of the essetial notes is different.

>alter
right.

But.. I tried playing a maj7#5 in lieu of a V in the ii-V-I cadence and it sounds good to my ear.. Or is my ear just shit?

You sure you didn't do a V7#5?

Using a maj7 on what should be the V7 results in some sort of Lydian Cadence. It's dormant feeling is much weaker.

Here I played it on the piano, excuse the shitty quality. Does it sound off to you?

I played 2-5-1 twice, each time replacing the 5 with a maj7#5. The second time, I kind of played a E/C, which is kind of the same thing.

>dormant
Dominant. Sorry, auto correct.

Anyways, compare your maj7#5 with a 7#11 or 7b9 of the same chord and see for yourself which one has a stronger dominant feel.

Sorry forgot the link.

clyp.it/kxbsk241

I'm going to start playing piano in 3 weeks.

My main goal is to compose my own music, the second big goal I've got is to play the Art of Fugue flawlessly.

How many years of study will it take me to be barely acceptable on those fugues? How many years will it take to be able to play the slower ones, like Contrapuctus I and XI?

>starting in three weeks
>not today
>three
>weeks
>how long until I'm good?

Crawl before you walk, nigga

I'll have my piano in three weeks. Until then I have nothing to practice on.
Also I'm planning to play piano at least 3 hours everyday. I've done so with guitar for 14 years, so I'm pretty sure I can do it in the long run.

Well, you've hidden the maj7 between lots and lots of passing notes and figurations.

If broken down to Tetrads, it will sound less dominant.

clyp.it/2sqbqula
First:
G-7 Cmaj7#5 Fmaj7

Then:
G-7 C7b9 F6/9

Sorry for the sound of the organ.

Fuges are tough dude. I've played for about seven years and Bach gives me a run for my money.
Even still, there isn't one right answer to your question. I mean, how often are you going to practice? Once a week or once a day? How many hours a day. If you sit at your piano for four hours a day I imagine you'll improve quickly. But if you're just jamming for thirty minutes your progress will obviously be slower.
You get out of instruments what you put in. Once I REALLY studied my guitar, I improved dramatically.
I guess my answer is it depends, buddy. But a Fugue is some tough shit to start with. Might I recommend some of S. Skaf's simpler stuff to begin?

Yeah you are write the 7b9 sounds more dominant, but I kinda feel that the maj7#5 gives a more 'tense' feel, i'm just wondering if i could use it in certain context to invoke that 'tense' feeling.

Of course. It will give you the Lydian Cadence kind of vibe. I for my part like the tension created through altered extensions (b9 #11 b13) while maintaining the tritone between the 3 and 7
Fugues. Look at Mendelssohn and Reger Fugues. Uuugh.

BTW, I already had a hard time transitioning from piano to pipe organ, but persistence will bring you somewhere.

Now, my only experience with Fugues is Well Tempered. Do you find others are as challenging to play?

Yeah. Bach chromatic fugue, reger Bach fugue, Mendelssohn organ sonata fugue movements...

What's your favorite Prelude and Fugue from WTP? Mine is a tie between 6 in D Minor - Book 1 and 14 in F Sharp Minor - Book 2.

Haven't played them in ages. I like the very first pair played on a harpsichord in moderate tempo.

My personal rec is Bach passacaglia and fugue.

youtube.com/watch?v=7HQXH_32mIw
Behold

I'm planning to practice 3 hours everyday. I know I have the discipline and time to do so.

Considering I'm 21 do you think I'll be able to play most of Art of Fugue by the time I'm 30?

What's the best (preferably cheap) program for composition?

3 hours a day over nine years, you may be able to. What is your guitar work? Classical or complex stuff or just power chords?
I guess what I'm trying to stress here is Fugues are really fucking hard comrade. I know they're beautiful but I would recommend starting with something simpler. That's just my two cents.

I use famitracker to compose for guitar and piano. If you don't mind your symphony being bleeps, sweeps, and creeps then I recommend it.

lilypond and musescore are both free

Dunno, I do prefer listening to these on an actual well-tempered harpsichord above all.

Anyways, here you go, the prototype of all passacaglia and Fugues.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=7S2pm1g70DI

2nded

Holy shit I've never heard this before this is great.
Man, Bach really was legendary.

Agreed, and freaking hard to play. I've learned the passacaglia by now, but even the first 3 lines of the fugue just fuck me over big time.
Check out the fugue in the development part of the 1st movement of Mendelssohns organ sonata op 65 and no 3. A 4 part fugue in both hands over a church song played on the pedal.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=JDvjE1ge-iA

3 to 4 mvts. in a classical sonata
I Allegro (sonata form)
II Largo
III scherzo or menuett
IV Presto (rondo form)

4 mvts in a baroque sonata (which is not what you're doing)
I Largo
II allegretto
III grave
IV allegro

As a piano based guy, I can't quite tell the difference between the intonations if I were to hear them during a recital, despite perfect pitch. I assume professionally trained string players might be able.

>muh common practice

good composers listen to Babbitt and Xenakis

Good composers listen to music from all periods.

Agreed.

Also what the fuck. You can reply to other threads? I didn't know that was possible.

that's fine to get a taste of what's out there but you have to agree that modern music is the best
serialism brought us into the future

>As a piano based guy, I can't quite tell the difference between the intonations if I were to hear them during a recital, despite perfect pitch. I assume professionally trained string players might be able.
Ah, believe me, perfect pitch doesn't help me either. I can tell you that something's out of tune if it's, you know, closer to a quarter tone away than to the note, or if in context it sounds dissonant like in that video, but my perfect pitch only tells me something's in the general range of A, or C or etc. The Bb that was played in that video to demonstrate incompatibility between 5-limit and scales sounded very sharp to me, but to be honest it sounded very sharp in the double-stop as well.

(Bb on the A string never ever sounds in tune, though, at least on the cello. At best it sounds good enough. Bb on the A string, C# on the G string and F# on the C string are the bane of high school conductors everywhere)

Mozart is absolute dogshit

seriously fuck off if you like his music

maybe there's pedagogic value there but that's it

Do you guys analysis pieces of music that you like? For example do you go through the scores, and go through the chord changes and stuff, and try to understand why it works?

Analysing each and every tone row of the piece is also recommended. Although a worthless and soul-destroying exercise, it will help you better "understand" and "appreciate" the piece. By this stage the urge to kill will probably be spiralling out of control so you may well want to have a sitter to watch over you and tie you down if necessary.

Are you going to post this every thread? At least give an example of what you don't like.

All the time. It's rarely a thorough measure-by-measure harmonic analysis though, more an analysis of compositional decisions, like what voices the composer has doing what at which times, or how one texture transitions to another.

I have done at least partial harmonic analyses of some things, though, like this
youtube.com/watch?v=_b_rwtDlUXA
I think it was two threads ago when I spent hours gushing about some minute but lovely details of the second movement.

Partially. I do skip through the score whenever I cannot disclose what it is that makes a particular thing work in a piece.

I bought the op score after a live concert where I just couldn't figure out what the strings were playing despite my absolute pitch, directly from the composer, too. Turned out it was full chromatic clusters.

Are you planning on getting a teacher?

I was listening to a few of Satie's piano works and I must say, it's really really great harmonically speaking. I NEED to know how they all work.

>each and every tone row of the piece
That's really not much. Compare looking through all of the harmonies in a piece and their Schenkerian structure and etc. to looking at a single tone row which gives you information about the entire piece that it's used to construct.

Like this which is used for the first movement of Berg's Lyric Suite. Even a cursory glance at it tells you why it sounds so agreeable to the ears.

>not listening to HIP exclusively

explain yourself

Why did Mahler put harps in the score when you can't even hear them?

Oh, I know that it's a late game goal.

Yeah, I'll study with a friend of my parents. She's a famous concertist here in Europe and she's currently teaching at my hometown Conservatory (wich is one of the best in my country), so I'm pretty confident I won't have to worry on that aspect

I would seriously recommend checking out S. Skaf though. His piano work is influenced by Bach.

Some of it is. Not all. A lot of it is also Chopin inspired.

Not really. I'll look through and see the key signatures, rhythms, common chords, and intervals that are used but I've been writing music for so long that there's really no need to go terribly in depth with analyzing. Honestly, I feel like a lot of the techniques I see people analyze and ascribe terms and patterns too are merely products of the composer asking himself if this shit is gonna sound cool. That's the bottom line.

They look cool as fuck and you don't want your harpist to sit there doing nothing but waiting to play another piece where they're more important.

I've seen live both the 5th and 9th melody.

You couldn't really hear what harps were playing most of the time, but you could easily hear the sound of picking notes. It was melodically useless but rithmically relevant.

Now I'm picturing Bach leaning back on his piano bench.
"Ay yo Karl, does this shit sound cool or what? Ain't this lick sick as fuck. Watch now I'm gonna play it an octave lower a second later at the same time, holy shit this is awesome."

Wrong. Debussy does it in prelude to the afternoon of a faun. He harmonizes the C# that is so prominent in the melody with a Dmaj chord and resolves it to a G chord. totally has a dominant feel to it. basically the take home lesson here is that mu is silly for talking roman numerals and traditional function according to the principles of tonal harmony in 2k16. Debussy and many others (ravel, schoenberg, bartok and even Wagner to an extent, to name a sad few) proved that questions like are pedantic and foolishly/falsely objective. If you think your Cmaj7 with its "incorrect" B natural has a pull to F then dude have fun with it. your C chord has a sharp 5? guess that means its a C augmented 7, so be careful with your voice leading, it could get tricky to pull off but aug chords are gorgeous and have even more of a dominant feeling. you're hearing harmony as color and just like Debussy said, "pleasure is law" and its the only unchangable one. fuck function, music is music

>Aw shit man, ya liked that one, didn't ya?
>Yeah I improvised it, ain't no big thang

Well now I don't know what to think.

any examples of jazz inadvertantly getting into serialism? I imagine if you took chromaitcism in jazz far enough you'd create a strange new style of serialism

I posted several times that a major chord has a weaker dominant pull. Didn't say it has no pull. You have 2 leading tones that resolve up to the 1 and 5 of the tonic, which is the same as in a Lydian Cadence. With a regular 7 chord, you have leading tones that move up to the tonic and down to the third. A Vmaj7#5 creates 3 leading tones that resolve upwards towards 1 3 5 of the I, creating a parallel motion, a repeating structure, and therefore a pleasant effect. I for my part happen to like leading tones that move into different directions more as for now.

Tldr

Vmaj7#5 works, but has a kinda unusual, maybe archaic sound. Use it sparingly to maximize its effect.

McCoy Tyner sounds pretty serial in certain passages of A Love Supreme.
Resolution is the most obvious example, especially in this live (solo starts at 1.30 circa)
youtube.com/watch?v=YvTuD7Ddhdk

it can get closer to general free atonality rather than serialist. jazz is a lil too free flowing to adhere to the rules you establish with a serialist row

(same poster as above) it does exist though

>2.15
>3.01
>3.25 to 3.52

Fuck, McCoy was a bad motherfucker with the piano. Definetely my favorite member in the Coltrane's quartet

why did Fricsay die so early? he would have been the

you're still talking with that hardcore marriage to those roman numerals. i get everything you're saying, I have a degree from UC davis in composition (sry im an asshole). you're correct except the unflattened 7th of the chord doesn't actually have a tendency to the 3rd, it would if it were a B flat and not a B natural in Cmaj7#5 for example. my point is that occasionally there are harmonies that you simply cannot explain why they work together from a functional standpoint. there is a way of talking about music in an incredibly in depth way without ever using the words tonic or V7 or lydian cadence (also think you might mean phrygian half cadence?) the prelude of Wagner's Tristan und Isolde does exactly what you're talking about for those leading tones moving in different directions than you'd expect. its such a crazy ass piece. the intro is like a french augmented 6 chord moving to the dominant but the sharp 4 moves down instead of up like its "supposed to" but it sounds so dope. its like damn wagner its 1862, youre breaking the rules before it was cool

Know the rules, so you know how to break them in a shell fashion, I understand that transcending the traditional models will create interesting and surprising new sounds. It's still interesting to see at which point these things deviate from the eversame old principles.

And I didn't say the maj7 would resolve down, but instead up as shown with the F sharp in the pic

>"You know what we need?"
>"A couple of grenades? Possible a rescue pelican?"
>"No, nametags."
I'm the first one you responded to here. Not the other guy. I agree with what your message is though without understand the technical aspect of it. If it sounds good it is good. I've got a riff on my guitar with an A ringing out behind a melody with frequent A#s, but it sounds sick as fuck. Don't know why it isn't more dissonant though...

>shell
Swell fashion. Freaking auto correct.

youtu.be/pb8BiQR9RTI

Thank you for clarifying. It looked like you combined three different figures of speech and I thought maybe I had a stroke.

Recording of op piece. Chromatic clusters hurt, but they are meant to hurt.

I loved the fughetto/Canon thing in the middle part.

clyp.it/0cgqvhui

In my amateur opinion, that sounds incredibly obnoxious and cheap. Cheap in the sense that you're not making music that sounds sad, you're just making music that is painful to listen to, and not in the painful soul kind of sense, like the I want to kill myself sense, and not in the this music is so sad I want to kill myself sense, if that makes sense.
I really like whats going on with the cello though. I'd like to hear just that without the orchestra murdering each other in the background.

>Try writing SATB because some dude's tutorials say they are good for beginners
>Took a whole day to write 4 bars
>Still have no idea what I'm doing
>2 voices don't really do anything
>It sounds bland as fuck
I-it gets better, right? Also, am I doing anything terribly wrong for a beginner?

How did you record it?

kinda agreed. The recording is not that balanced.

When I heard it live, the clusters came in quite equal in volume, creating a very thick coherent layer, which mitigate this "mudering each other" thing. The composer even came on stage for this premiere performance of that piece in europe and did some explaining. Funny old man.

there was a CD with the score.

yeah man I get you. thats exactly why I study classical music. however that progression isn't doing what I think you think it's doing though. thats a vi chord going to a vii6 (minor when you'd expect diminished). what you're calling a IV chord doesnt even have the root so its just gonna sound like a vi. maybe move that E up to the F# and then that left hand A down to the E, that way you get all your chord tones and more contrary motion, a little voice exchange and you avoid parallel sixths 3 times in a row (which is like thew max you can do without it getting tiresome). it's gonna be extra crunchy cuz of those dimished intervals. lydian is one of my favorite modes. its so damn special but so damn hard to pull off
hell ya dude

>vi chord going to a vii6
ah, freaking typo. Of course it's vi vii I, I switched the i and v. The iv in lydian has to be avoided or altered to stay clear from diminuished chords.

Voice leading is so-so, I know. Just wanted to demonstate a lydian cadence.

do the bass line first, then fill in alto and tenor to get chords that make sense.
I'd rather go for 2 systems a 2 voices each, makes it easier to read

The Schoenberg text is handy to learn composition as well as music theory, but it's very specific to the common practice era style. Are there good texts on composition in any style, tonal, serial, minimalist, neotonal?

Do you know what I was quoting or do you agree with everything else I said?

What about the Kostka in the op?

>do the bass line first, then fill in alto and tenor to get chords that make sense.
Like, just throw a bass line in and then try to figure a progression that works with it, if any, and fill the other lines according to it? Or do I set on a progression first?

>I'd rather go for 2 systems a 2 voices each, makes it easier to read
I was really afraid I'd lose track of each voice and/or make them cross each other if I went directly for 2 staves.

What site should I use to share music sheets and music here on /comp/?

That's a great text, but purely music theory.

I heard William Russo's book goes into modern technique. How deep and how well I have no idea, because I never read it and just now remembered I wanted to ask /comp/'s opinion about that book.

clyp.it/ejzxm31m

of course not a random bassline

For exercises sake, take any simple song line, and try to harmonize it by (triads only)
a) only using I, IV and V, root position as much as possible unless there's forbidden parallels
b) interchange IV and II6, as well as V and VII6 where applicable or necessary due to forbidden parallels.
c) expand IV (or II) - V (or VII) - I progressions by making them a [III] - VI - IV (or II) - V (or VII) - I progression, otherwise known as descending fifth sequence.
d) try modulation and secondary dominants where applicable
e) use suspensions / passing notes resulting in 7th chords etc.

see pic, one example for each point.

I've trascripted the first part of a string quartet I'm writing. Since it was transcrited on muse score there is no control over dynamics.

Any opinion?

clyp.it/mzbowdnz

Will give it a try, thanks user.

neotonal? If so, I don't really have much to say about the chords, due to lack of proficiency. There are some dissonances that I don't quite get, like in bar 4 when all strings play Eb and the viola plays f.

I understand you want a unisono feel at the beginning of that piece, thus I won't comment on the parallel 5ths in bar 7.

I can play the whole Art of Fugue with mistakes and I'm 20. Here's what I have to say to you.

>I'm planning to practice 3 hours everyday. I know I have the discipline and time to do so.
Simply put, it is impossible to measure how much discipline you will have 9 years from now, 1 year from now, or even 1 day from now. Don't overestimate your confidence. You will go through several existential crises even if you have already gone through one. Your life course will change drastically for no reason.

Second of all, the Art of Fugue is highly complicated and is not standard piano repertoire that you can just learn easily. Nobody really knows if it was even composed for the keyboard, and it is in certain parts physically impossible to play. Most pianists will not know how to help you with the fingering or complicated passages, simply because they are not often performed pieces.

Third, why the Art of Fugue in the first place? It is not exactly the most impressive piece. If you are looking to impress people with little effort stick to standard repertoire like Liszt and work your way up to the most pathos-invoking and impressive pieces of Chopin.

Bach, having composed during the baroque period, was highly technical, and during his life all his keyboard works were composed for only the instruments available back then. The organ and the harpsichord were both instruments of literally 0 dynamics (no matter how hard or soft you play a note it comes out the same volume), meaning that he had to express emotion in a completely different manner than that of later composers, say Mozart, Beethoven, or Chopin. This will naturally make you a lot less impressive because as a society we've grown towards sentimentalism over technicality.

Reconsider your life choices.

>Don't overestimate your confidence.
I was saying that cause I've managed to play guitar at least 3 hours everyday for 13 years now.

>why the Art of Fugue in the first place?
It's not really aout impressing others.
It's simply my favourite music. I love listening to it and I'd love to play it and interpret it as I prefer to.
Also as I said earlier I'm not playing to jump on it as soon as possible. I know how an instrument should be learned and I know that AoF is some seriously advanced shit. I was just curious about what should I expect.

I'd rather master Goldberg before Art of Fugue (which I'd rather play on an organ desu), if you're into baroque music. There's definately a lot to explore and love.

youtube.com/watch?v=iSXj48lkFew

>It's simply my favourite music
Well in the case that's usually what will motivate you to make it all the way there. Sorry if I sounded like I was putting you down a bit.

Bach has been my favorite composer since a child and that has helped me learn his pieces. Having been a huge "math geek" since a child, the style of the fugue, which is highly mathematical, has always fascinated me.

For a while (recently ago) I was "into" modern classical music and tried playing some pieces on piano to no avail. I find that eventually you lose motivation if you don't love a piece. Unless you're one of those kids who had strict parents and can force yourself to do anything of course, but I have never had much motivation in anything (especially school).

I highly suggest just working through Bach's other common works if the Art of Fugue is your endgame. If fugues are your favorite music you should be able to work through things like the Well-Tempered clavichord in under 3 years, then maybe the Goldberg variations if you feel so inclined. Getting it done before 27 would be very possible in my opinion at 3 hours a day. As for playing without flaw I can't really say, but if it is mostly for your own enjoyment then perfection should be mostly insignificant for you.

not him but
How is the fugue mathematical? It strikes me as one of those things, like Debussy's La Mer and the supposed connection to the golden ratio, that I've never really been persuaded by.

If you have a legitimate reason for that though, as a fellow "math geek" (I'm the one who's been spazzing out over just intonation) I'd love to hear it.

Unrelated question, but I find I have a lot of trouble envisioning more than two independent parts while I'm trying to compose. I think this is just because of how LH-RH-dependent my composing is, where I have one hand do some basic accompanimental figure or some sort of ostinato, and the other hand plays the melody. If I were to learn to play a fugue, would that help in some way?

organ/piano guy here.

A multi-part piece played on two hands always means that you have to do some work arounds for middle parts (like sharing a middle voice between the thumbs of both hands). But I'd say yeah, practicing polyphonal (not necessarily fugal) pieces gives you a better understanding.

There's always a mathematical background in fugue, though the system is open enough to justify the claim for creativity.

Whenever I hear people saying that Bach is too technical I always think about things like this from 2.20.
I mean, yeah he's playing through conventions, but who cares when the result can have this depth?

Forgo the link
youtube.com/watch?v=-I1TFlKaVtA

>How is the fugue mathematical?
I could spend an hour or 2 explaining this, but it mostly depends on what you define as "mathematical". I'm not talking about supposed golden ratios in Debussy's La Mer or the supposed use of Fibonacci sequence in Bartok's music for strings, but rather just the art of transposing (similar to matrices) and making the parts of the whole fit together in harmony. Harmony in general is a highly mathematical subject. Some people think what we think of as "harmonic" is just based on other music we've heard in our lives and therefore think of as "good" sound, but when it comes to Bach and baroque music, it's more about the fundamental theory of resonance.

They didn't even know about resonance or sine waves back in the day but it was very apparent in the development of tuning theory (Read up on the genius named Andreas Werckmeister) that certain frequencies sound good with other frequencies. The development of the Fifth and the Third, and the proper way of tuning a keyboard was a huge development and a highly mathematical one. One big reason I think baroque music isn't as popular now is simply because we've switched to a predominantly equal-temperament world where there is no such thing as true "harmony" any more. There are tons of theories on Bach's Well-Tempered clavichord's intended tuning, as well as many interpretations of the "ornament" he drew on the cover. But in general I think this all relates back to math.

LH-RH composing is a style that's hard to get rid of. I would highly suggest just learning to write a fugue in 4 voices or even 2 voices and just seeing how sounds interact independently and dependently on each other. Also try listening and playing some of William Byrd's rounds. They are contrapuntal in theory but not in the fugal sense. Try writing some rounds as well.

bump

halp please.

Torrent sibelius 5, haven't looked back

Honestly the bass doesn't need to move or do as much counterpoint unless you want it to. If you really want to, try using already established subjects in one of the voices altering as you please, reversing em, reflecting, etc.

Even andras Schiff, a professional pianist of 30+ years can't play art of fugue flawlessly. Despite the age they are some of the most difficult keyboard music around. 4 part polyphony at high speed, with each voice independant is extremely difficult to master

Both of Martinu's string trios are godly.
youtube.com/watch?v=hMj1OJqpsPw

>neotonal?

Yep. All the dissonances and perfect fifths are completely deliberate.

Any other opinion on this? How does this sound to you guys?

Mozart is a great composer, you just haven't realized it yet.

you can hear them though.

of course. Thats how you learn as a composer.

scribd.com

>The organ and the harpsichord were both instruments of literally 0 dynamics
Organs have volume pedals ya dunce

volume pedal.

Not all. Well, modern american organs maybe all do, but the century old instruments in europe don't all have a swell manual (and none of Bach's organ pieces require it).

Anyways, you can still influence volume by the number of notes you play at the same time on both, the harpsichord and the organ.

You can use registration to have different volumes and timbres for different parts of a piece. For phrasing, you rely on articulation and agogic.

Organs also have stops and multiple keyboards. you have plenty of dynamic control, even without a volume pedal.

Why on Earth is it in Eb minor instead of D minor? (or rather, Eb dorian it seems.) D minor is one of the keys that come most naturally to a string player. Eb minor is completely alien.

The double stop in measure 13 in the cello part is extremely awkward to play. Actually, all of the double stops are relatively difficult due to the key, but that one's equally awkward in D minor as well.

>clyp.it/mzbowdnz
Rythmically it's fairly boring. I'm not really sure what the theme is either. There's a lot of movement between voices and the viola seems to have a ton of prominence despite not playing a strong melodic line.

I like the textures and layering but I feel like it needs more ornaments. Increase the tempo some to a more clipper pace and I feel like what you have as the melody will flow better. Try giving it more chromatic notes too rather than simply staying inside the key.

forgot to mention, compositionally, I think it sounds pretty sweet. Some of these textures seem more fleeting than they need to be, unless that's the intended effect of course.

>I want to learn to play art of fugue flawlessly
good luck
youtube.com/watch?v=UeOMM9wJlvc

>Writing a Fugue based on your national anthem
works surprisingly well, probably depends on your specific anthem as to how well it would work though.

There goes my absolute pitch. Baroque tuning, you confuse the shit out of my brain

Wait until you listen to pic related. the temperament is fucking whack. Great album though. underplayed fugue master

Tomorrow I'll take my first piano lesson. I'm 19, but I still feel that through sheer discipline I can become as good as it gets.

Am I wrong about that? Has the ship already sailed for me? Can I still become a great comcertist before I get into my 40s?

*30s

Useless typo

I mean, if you work really hard you can become president. It depends on how much work you put into it, though.

The earlier you start the better though, and you've long since passed the point of cementing the movements into your muscle memory permanently at an early age, so you'll have to work hard.

>The earlier you start the better though, and you've long since passed the point of cementing the movements into your muscle memory permanently at an early age, so you'll have to work hard.

Does this mean that taking pauses from the piano will compeltely fuck up my technique?

I'll start learning how to read sheet music tomorrow (I've always used guitar tabs).

What's the best way to learn how to read music? Should I look at the note and call its name or should I call the interval between a note and the next one?

Solfege the shit out of life. Choose between movable or fixed do.

Pretty much. Well, it completely fucks mine up and I started when I was 5, but I imagine it'd be even worse for you.

Work out ways to practice the concepts even without a keyboard at hand. Learn the physics behind why some technique and posture rules work.

Also whatever you do, don't work yourself so hard you burn yourself out and/or injure yourself. If you git good enough you may come to associate playing intensely with pain (I know I did). If at any point something starts to hurt, though, stop. It's not supposed to hurt, and you're doing something inefficient in your technique.

bump

...

so sometimes when I'm listening to harpsichord it'll abruptly change its timbre and sound really "plucky" like a lute

what's that about

That's the lute stop .

>just found this
youtu.be/6h6AabkLvEE

Ooo fml

So you guys know, there's Bandcamp and SoundCloud for recorded music, but where do you go around sharing your scores?

Have you ever thought of perhaps buying a few mics and recording yourself? It's always been a small dream of myself to write for the piano and record myself, but I don't know if my technical abilities are good enough, and I don't exactly have a grand piano.

...

I've done it many times. In fact it's good for you to record yourself playing in some way. When you're practicing it's good to hear what you mess up on. In addition it simulates the pressure of a live performance very well.

Yeah I have recorded myself hundreds of times, I do some recording for the guitar but I have never mic'ed an actual piano, the only times I have recorded myself on the piano was through my Note 4 and obviously the sound quality is shit. I was looking for a better solution like maybe buying two condensers and recording them, I wonder if that would give a more professional result? It still sucks though because I don't have an actual grand piano, just a Yamaha U1. Would an upright give a passable sound?

A full size upright sounds just fine for recording. As long as you aren't using a console or other smaller size upright you should be fine. Full size uprights sound much better than baby grands even, at least imo.

its called "publishing your scores"
thankfully only people who know what they're doing can do it.

Scribd.com is one way for PDFs

Is a U1 a full sized upright?

I'm obviously quite new to this so pardon my ignorance. I thought musescore had a platform for people to share scores but from what I can deduce they are mostly sketches instead of actual works

...

MAH BOY GLENNY G!

good night comp.

I'd like to record my own playing as well. I have a Roland workstation at home with some good piano samples and weighted wooden keys, and I'd really like to record that through line in. I do have a Scarlett 2i4 interface, but I'm really unsure how to wire everything.

As for recording a real piano, maybe invest in an entry level tascam or xoom

I was thinking of buying 2 condensers, and then plugging it into my 2i2, into a DAW. Sounds simple enough?

yeah, for recording an upright, that's okay. Even a portable recorder like tascam would do (and be more versatile if you wanna steal other people's playing)

Now this is how my stuff is currently set up.

I got my PC, some amp and bookshelf speakers, and I got the Roland workstation with its own speakers. Both systems were seperate.

Later-on, I got the scarlett.

My questions now are:
A) should the amp now be connected to the line output instead of the PC's 3,5mm audio jack?
B) If I wanted to record the Roland's own sound, would I need two cables connecting the L and R outputs of the synth to both instrument line ins of the scarlett, as the Roland outputs are mono?

nap time bump.

Why can't you just connect the outputs of the Roland to the 2i4, then connect that to your PC?

I tried that (connected a L mono out to the 2nd line in of the scarlett).

I could record the sound of the roland, but I couldn't hear what I was playing during recording unless through headphones that go into the Roland's headphone port.

That doesn't make sense, your DAW should have a monitoring function that allows you to monitor live what you are recording, the signal gets output into your interface's output.

I suppose it might be because audacity has no monitor function or something. Gotta retry in cubase some time, once I figure out how to make cubase take the inputs from the scarlett.

Download REAPER or something. The 2i4 came with ableton live right? That works as well.

aight, I'll look into these.

clyp.it/dn1pe4y5

I've been working on something for the past week, it is still not finished yet, since I'm planning to compose a new intro and make a lot of changes to instrumentation and arrangement, but I'm asking you for some feedback. It's my first big project that I'm going to finish for sure this time. I'm especially interested if /comp/ enjoys the actual piece, since /prod/ is focused on the other aspect. Also, tell me if it gets too repetitive for you, even though (at least this part) is practically a popular piece so it has a lot of loops, even though I don't think I will keep the main motif the same almost all the time.

It may be me but I hate both that guitar sound and that motif.
Also are you seriously repeating it for 3 mimutes with what, 4 variations every once in a while.

It's really boring and I can't read anything into it.

What kind of compositions do students take to their interviews in COnservatories and music schools?

I suppose this reply was meant for my post above.

I'm not sure what to say. Honestly, telling someone you hate something without any explanation does not exactly help in any way. I will have to ask you if you have listened to a whole piece before writing that comment.

About the motif, It's a main idea that is playing through a most of the piece, but you actually hear it in the introduction, then at one part in the middle as a mere background and as a restatement at the end. I can't make you like something, but I have been listening to it for 20 hours and I still personally enjoy it. The guitar is a high quality VST, but I can easily change that sound to something similar if more people don't like it, as I have lost objectivity on that due to a constant listening.

I don't actually think it is that repetitive with a few variations (where did you hear that?), since melodic ideas change through time.

I am by no means being defensive, I would just like to get a constructive criticism for a change because this doesn't get me anywhere. Last few times here I got a similar reply and it is as disheartening as it can be, but I will not let it stop me improving.

But being told realistically if I have a potential in composition would be desireable, since I'm focusing all my powers to that at the moment, and as it seems, the fact I'm good at piano doesn't necessarily mean I should be good at composition and producing as well. I'll admit this is not the most "musical" piece I have done, but that is not important in this case.

Who here /hateselectricguitarvirtuosism/?

I think I've never heard in my life an excellent guitar playr playing some solo and thought ''wow, this sounds as good as my favourite piano/flute/cello solos'', though I love the insturment when it's played badly.

In some sense it feels more closer to electronic music than classic music. I always value sound and texture more than melody.

Jazz guitarists like Pat Martino and Joe Pass really pull off the whole 'shredding' thing really well though.

Jason Becker is cool. Thats about it

I kinda like the guitar motif, the way it flows along with the bass counterpoint gives it a slight BoC feel.

Overall sounds like it could belong in some sort of hollywood film. I liked it.

Pat Metheny

talented

不母铺

>Not mother shop
What did he mean by this?

...

I suddenly have the urge to combine ambient guitar effects with the piano to form some sort of composition.

Woah.

You can add a bunch of extension, but think about why you would want to. Just cause you can doesn't mean you should. Try to make some justification in the music for using the ones you do.

calm down there. 3 hours for a beginner is not wise. You're more likely to over practice and build bad habits than you are to make solid improvement. Get a teacher and start with an hour a day.

I don't know man, I think that at least half of the time I'll just play for my enjoyment, like I always do with guitar.
I don't know how to explain it to you, I really love the act of playing an instrument and I usually love what I come up with (I really have the impression that I can't ever choose the wrong note since I know so well what do I like to listen to).

Also yeah, I'll study with a great teacher.

Some guy actually did this for my college's composition concert once. It was quite good.

PSA: Anyways doesn't have an "s."

It's just "anyway."

Not him but
>I think that at least half of the time I'll just play for my enjoyment
I know exactly what you mean. That probably takes up most of my practice.

Note that you can get several hours of fun from an instrument you know well, but you may get bored quickly with an instrument you're just starting to learn.

Also it's unproductive as Hell. My cello teacher actually had to tell me to practice as though I hated it and wanted to get it over with, because that would be more efficient.

grammarist.com/usage/anyways/

What about non electric guitar?
Flamenco from Pace de Lucia is very impressive on a technical level.
Or old Lute pieces transcribed for guitar.

Treble clef above, bass clef below.

I have this in c minor, 3/4, I have this as VII6. Is this right or would it just be a VII because the first pitch in the measure is the root?

My teacher told me to use vii*6 for the leading tone chord because VII implies a borrowed chord with a major tonality whose root is the b7 scale degree.

Adding more "space" to the overall piece. A piano cannot produce sustained sounds, it's dynamic is pretty much determined by the first touch of the key. An ambient landscape works best for this kind of things.

Also mainly because i can only play the guitar and the piano.

It partially depends on context. It probably wouldn't be a VII because the first pitch is the root, but with that set up it could be a VII for other reasons, like whether that LH figure happens in the measures before and after or is only for that measure.

Well, that is what it is (it's in c minor, so it's Bb in the treble)

Like the second to last one? And yeah, it has caused what I'm working on to switch to the major key. I just rolled with it to see what I get. I still haven't finished this but it may be worth an upload.

This is the excerpt. Maybe I need to study more before attempting the notation. I only got the basics to notate chords but the moment I see more complex things I'm never sure what to do.

bump

musescore.com/user/12540031/scores/2698631
Here it is. Be as harsh as you want, anything beyond "it's shit" is useful. I'll be redoing the first part once I finish the second one, so you may want to skip that. What I actually did work on is in measure 15 and onwards.

Also ignore the notation, as a lot of it is copy pasted in measures 26+, plus it gets fucked in the export process.

Phonetics

>bu mu pu

This first chord is iv.
Diminished chords must be notated with a degree symbol as such: vii°6
Considering 21-23 are all VII I don't think they need to be classified as separate chords at all. The Bb in the LH in measure 21 sort of "holds over" into the next two measures if that makes any sense.

(If you're hoping to analyze your own score it's helpful, but just so you know you're not obligated to write out the chords on the score.)

If you're trying to tease V/III before resolving to i instead, you might consider making measure 24 a V instead of vii°6, because as it is it hardly feels like a cadence at all.

actually now that I've listened to it I'm pretty sure we've long since modulated, in which case there's no sense writing it as if we're still in C minor.

what's the best chord to use

>(If you're hoping to analyze your own score it's helpful, but just so you know you're not obligated to write out the chords on the score.)
Yeah I know, just doing it for practice really.

This too. It's pretty much E major at that point which is partly why I didn't finish the notations, as I didn't know if I had to keep them as c minor or E Major.

So I can make the switch in notation just like that?

Yeah. You basically just write the new key and then the chords in the new key. If there's a pivot of some variety, there are many different ways to notate it, but it's basically something like this.

it's Eb Major and not E Major, though

Oh cool. Thanks user. I also got rid of the notations in extension on the VII like you suggested. Well, it'll be a fifth now anyway. Also added the º to the diminished.

to be safe, only do that if you're doing a full cadence in your new key (II-V-I, IV-V-I etc.), else the new key is not consolidated enough to make it a modulation.

So in this case it doesn't apply? I wasn't doing a cadence, since the key being played is Eb at that point.

And I don't really know about those progressions you mentioned. I've only studied about using ii-I or vii-I as closures, very basic stuff so far.

not ein native speaker, but I'll be more aware now, thanks.

well, do a x - y - I in Eb with x being II or IV, y being V or VII and you got yourself very clearly established in that key and can continue to use Eb as I of your modulation.

Gotcha.

Bach transcriptions by Segovia is one of my top 5 favourite vynils, so yeah, classical guitar sounds great to me.
Electrical guitar tho... I don't know, it just sounds cheap and vulgar. I love to hear distorted, reverbered raunchy guitars, but a jazz player playing his instrument impeccably? Boring and soulless.

What is the hardest thing you've learned in music theory and composition?

That I still don't know what the fuck I'm doing.

current progress, still struggling to do some better counterpoint at the marks. After the episode with the CF, I'll resume the fugue theme.

clyp.it/fypxhtq5

Anyway is the standard term, anyways is colloquial and can be substituted for anyway in most contexts.

strawpoll.me/11351129

磕碰

...

上

バンプ

ah, I was beaten
So what's the chinese pun this time?

is anyone going to answer my question

No pun, it's the simplest way I know of saying means "above" or "up".

I didn't even know that there is a "best" chord.

I thought it was a joke

youtube.com/watch?v=-yvy9lS5DC4
Always relevant

Glad you did, thanks.

Thanks if it is not a sarcasm, can't tell anymore on this place unfortunately.

How to percussion? Just fling shit until I figure it out?

pitch axis. Still can't quite remember how it works.

you chose a seemingly random note within your scale, then you start a mode somewhere in relation to that note, so you're playing what sounds real odd, but still works. I have forgotten the specifics but its technical and there is some trial and error to get it working.

Upper structures. Still trying to memorize them, there's so many.

How did he utilise the guitar? I was thinking of making the guitar play a lot of drone chords that sustain very long thanks to reverb and delay, and the piano play something on top of it. Easiest way is to have them play slow notes across a bunch of chord changes, but that gets boring fast.

Quick question. If I were to move from a C major chord to an Ab major chord as part of a progression, am I moving to a flattened six, or am I borrowing the sixth chord from the minor key? Essentially am I using a borrowed key or flattening the sixth? The overall piece is still in major key.

Well, actually, it was right after my piece, in which I performed, so I was only able to hear a bit of it. Also this was a year ago so I don't quite remember, but that sounds about right.

Both are correct. You can also call it a chromatic mediant.

Since an Ab major chord has both an Ab (flat 6) and Eb (flat 3) it's most likely a modulation considering you need to go to at least Eb major to get those two flats. If the melody also has those notes in it it only further cements it as a modulation. I'm not sure what the difference is between it being a flattened 6th versus a borrowed key in the context of your question. Modulation is pretty normal.

If you're gonna write in an archaic style, why are you afraid of resolutions? Not even talking about cadences, just harmonic resolutions.

youtube.com/watch?v=8ZQVuQLCk9o
This is pretty good as an example of neotonality.

It's also just great in general

He looks to be in a constant state of orgasm.

bump

...

should probably go to sleep bump

...

ぶむぷ

...

...

...

Do you mean that I'm spending too little time in the actual key if f# minor?

...

...

I'm studying this right now. It's almost a colouring book for music, not too concerned with theory but just fun to work through.
And I know nobody asked, but it sure beats bumping the thread with an empty message.

why not bump with books we're reading. I'm on this one and the piano book, they're 80% identical though.

Currently reading "Harmony" by W. Piston.

mixed up the theory book and the piano book.

Wow, it's alive bump

Which edition?

1959, the first I've found. Just picked it up randomly when I saw some recommendations. I need some good harmony book from the beginning, I also have Schoenberg's book but I think this will be easier to start with.

Alright, I've just been looking at the most recent edition and lots of people say it's a bloated monstrosity. Then again, there's some other people saying it's the most complete book on its subject. Oh well. Depends on the readers starting level I assume.

nah, we're zombies

braaaains

Challenge idea: write a piece where the melody is complete in the bass line and all other voices / accompaniment has to be above it.

The distinction between melody and bass line is pretty blurry though

then how about using the melody of an existing song/piece as baseline?

More referring to your constant substitutions, especially in the clyp you posted first. It starts to feel odd and forced that you won't resolve any of your applied chords.

I see.

The thing is, the main key of the piece is F# min, and the episode with the CF is in B dorian. I kinda find it hard to do harmonic resolutions over a dorian bass line (there's mostly plagal cadences and phrygian half-cadences in that section), but I'll try to reduce the number of substitutions there.

thanks for the input!

Does anyone have some pointers for composing with mainly dissonances, but not just atonality, to make horror-movie like sounds? I haven't been able to find good advice on this so I just threw some minor seconds and parallel fifths together and made a mess.

I guess that's the field of film composing, dunno about literature though.

Yeah here's some works by famous composers that have been in horror movie soundtracks:

youtube.com/watch?v=m129k5YcQnU
youtube.com/watch?v=HilGthRhwP8

Neither is tonal (to my knowledge), but the Bártok makes things creepy by his use of timbre (the celeste and timpani are particularly spooky-sounding) and meter changes so that on top of the dissonant music, you're kept on edge.

The Penderecki is a bit more avant-garde, but the main creepiness of the work is huge tone clusters that continue to freak me out when listening (especially right before and during the bomb drop).

If you're interested, Penderecki's "Luke's passion" also has some more interesting techniques like quarter-tones, the choir actually laughing and mocking Jesus, and music that is written to not be played rhythmically exact (so it sounds like everyone is startled and really sounds like hundreds of people instead of 1 orchestra and a few choirs).

I'll add my fav creepy piece, which is youtube.com/watch?v=G2E058Ep99Y
in particular the first etude

the unisono chromatics moving in min 9ths do all the work

At times I kinda wonder if Bartók really wanted his music to feel so eerie or if he'd get buttmad over how much his works are labelled as such nowadays.

well, not all his works are creepy, like his allegro Barbaro which is simply furious and powerful, or his violin concert, which is everything but creepy.

True, but it seems whenever someone asks for creepy classical tunes Bartók and Penderecki are the first names to pop up. Penderecki probably doesn't care, otherwise he wouldn't let his music appear in horror movies, but I keep wondering what Bartók would think of the association.

Well, in chosing his stylistic means for those creepy pieces, Bartok surely wasn't intending to create some gay and cheerful Mozart/Haydn Divertimento effect. The creepy direction is well intended I'd say.

Anyways, I do find it debatable whether it's "sacrilegious" to utilize certain classical pieces as background music for movies, like using a Bach Cantata in "Runaway Bride". Quoting operas is one thing, but repurposing sacred music for a comedy... debatable.

You're modulating down a third, kind of like Coltrane changes, try playing Eb7 before the Ab then go down a third again and cycle back to the first tonic.

give us the full progression, it depends on the context.

C-Eb7-Ab-B7-E-Dmin7-G7-C

>C-Eb7-Ab-B7-E-Dmin7-G7-C
>I-V/bVI-bVI-V/III-III-ii-V-I

Since the Ab doesn't lead into any other chords that are related to it, I'd put it as bVI

That will be just fine. As everyone else said, depends on the context. But from here it looks fine.

to elaborate on an challenge idea:

Take one of these melodies, put them into the bass voice and build a piece with the rest of the voices on top, similar to
youtube.com/watch?v=xkV7Wc7Ck0g

how's that?

follow me

twitter.com/TheHorbgorbler

Thanks, user, I'll study these. I guess I had a misconception about atonality.
I'm really, really enjoying Threnody.

Following the score sometimes adds a whole new depth to the piece.
youtube.com/watch?v=MWm5GRfK2Fk

youtube.com/watch?v=1DPqNHkm1bM
>tfw you realize the theme to the Moldau is the Israeli national anthem

Our anthem is made from a Slavic dance and a church song. Dunno what's worse.

Been working on this, posted it some days ago. A bit more progress but not even half of the piece yet.

Sigh. How the fuck did Bach make over 1k works? What did the fucker do with his life?

musescore.com/user/12518851/scores/2674751

not him, but here are some other things by Penderecki
youtube.com/watch?v=ApJU2QbbXpc
Quite a good cello concerto in my opinion
youtube.com/watch?v=bG7U0yI31VY
Note how completely different this is.

During the 3 years he worked in Leipzig, he wrote cantatas every Monday, copied sheets on Tuesday till Thursday, rehearsed Friday and Saturday and performed on Sunday during mass.

Dude was a genius but that sounds like a shitty life tbqh.

...

Dude also made like a dozen kids with 3 (successive) wives.

...

use microtones. They are the most horror-movie ish thing there is, especially on strings, and when combined into very close harmonies (closer than a semitone)

Essentially you can just write in cluster blocks if you want a very dissonant sound. all the notes from C - F# as a chord, and then layer that with all the notes from A-D# as a second chord on top. With both of those clusters sounding it will be pretty dissonant. The dynamics become very important when writing like this, you can slowly fade in the chord, or start very loud, and quickly fade away, ect. You focus more on dynamics and extended techniques than harmony and melody. Also a big focus on Timbre.

Here's a great dissonant microtonal piece:
youtube.com/watch?v=sHI2xyyH-CU
I talked to John about this and he said it was an octatonic chord (with 8 different notes), with the microtonal melody over top, and then the chord moves up a quarter tone, and the melody continues. The chord continues to move up by quarter tones in each section.

>What did the fucker do with his life?
Literally write music all day every day.

What are you talking about? writing music and working with choirs and orchestras every day as a living is the dream of every composer. These days you dont even need to copy parts because we have computers and printers.

That challenge isn't much harder than writing a small concerto for a low brass instrument

...

>tfw I can't compose all day to improve because I have to learn to produce better and it takes a SHITTON of time. And I'm still not good at mixing.

My train of thought when I'm making some music:

>after some hours realize it's a simple pop song
>want to abandon it because ultimately it doesn't satisfy me as an artist enough
>but this is what people will listen to more likely

>compose something classical
>it's even in the old style
>I enjoy it so much
>realize nobody will care about this anymore, I'm not a second coming of Bach or something, nobody cares if it's more complicated than a 4-chorder
>even no point in notating it since not a music student so it will not be played on that one occasion either

>back to contemporary pop/rock/electronic
>and here we go again

I think I need a psychiatrist. I'm never satisfied. Le born in the wrong generation meme is starting to get me, I feel.

if you enjoy writing in the old style, keep writing in the old style. Fuck what pop fags "want" to hear. You gotta write for yourself. If you enjoy it, so will others.

Sounds like you need to find a middle ground of old style and contemporary. finding your own voice can take a lot of time, and sometimes takes a life-changing experiences too.

bamp

why obsess about getting classic compositions performed? what prevents you from going david borden mode?

youtube.com/watch?v=yxcwrj_YZjk

So, how do I make a money (or even better, a living) as a composer without a degree? Is that even possible?

And btw, yeah, I'm in this for the money. I mean, not really, since I would do it anyway, but I wouldn't spend so much time on it while ignoring everything else otherwise. Is it a time to stop and return to reality or not?

Depends on what you want to make. But you know, like they say.. it's almost impossible to make money off music unless you were in the right place at the right time

What are your plans as composition students, go into teaching?

Do film soundtracks, sell pop backing tracks to people, produce music for people, organize concerts.

You'll have a hard time getting the usual jobs composers get - lecturers, composers-in-residence, commissions and grants. All of those require some formal training.

Making a living purely as a composer is very difficult and you have to essentially start your own business, become self-employed and work your ass off trying to get clients. Of course you also need to be able to write great music in almost any style.

Imo if you can't work with scores and live performers, you're not really a composer, more of a "producer". Being able to write a score and give it to a real performer is kind of the prerequisite of being a composer. Not sure if you've picked that up yet or not, but having a degree gives you all the skill to do that, as well as much much more. If you're serious about becoming a composer full time, you should study the art form and get a degree. You will also meet a lot of performers and other composers in your time at college/university so its a great place to build up a group of people you can work with, and make connections. Like any job, its often WHO you know, not WHAT you know, although unless you're working completely on the computer with no live performers, you need to know the basics of score writing before even starting with contacts and looking for work.

Thanks. I was studying piano at a university but didn't finish. I have a lot of years of formal education, so I'm not that clueless.

But given that my current degree is not really satisfying for me (computing) and that I regret not having a way to express myself anymore, which I had with music, I'm seriously thinking about my future and what to do.

You'll make a lot more money with computing and actually be able to find work. You can always compose in your spare time.

tfw too intelligent to compose and only thinking in terms of post-tonal microtimbral clusters and silence-shaping.

So say for a regular altered C7b13 with a natural B on top of the chord, what would be the name of the chord?

Basically an E major stacked on top of a C7. Notes can be from lowest to highest, C E G Bb E G# B

stravinsky stack

i wasnt trolling btw
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polychord

Your problem is your dogmatic thinking about genres, IMHO.
Don't compose some pop/rock/classical song, just do your thing.

How jammed is the classical music market?

I've started studying composition when I was 17 (I'm 28). I've written string quartets for a decade now, and I think I'm on something.

Considering that I have at least 30 string quartets that are 10/10 to me, what is the best way to share them with the world while building some reputation?

I'm 100% clueless on how live music, distribution and marketing work.

I know about polychords but is there anyway I can like describe them in terms of extensions.. Maybe C7b13#7?

I'm not a composition student, I rejected music school. I don't like teaching at all, and knowing for a fact that trying to go into music as a living basically means doing composition/performance on the side and having your income mostly coming via teaching, is a big turn off for me.

Music can be learned yourself you know. It's not like math or some form of science whereby a lot of factual stuff needs to be drilled on.. Hell music theory is descriptive and if I have to spend half my life learning it along the way, then so be it. I treat it more like a personal journey somehow.

get them performed. get in touch with local quartets, or performers you went to school with. apply for funding to get published, performed, etc. enter them in composition workshops and competitions.

You should upload some PDFs on Scribd.com so we can check them out. I would be interested in seeing if they actually look or sound 10/10

That may be true, but I don't know anymore... It feels like literally having to sell a soul for money. Money is important but I will always regret it, getting a recognition by smaller or larger groups of people for doing something I love would be much more important to me, even though I admit I may be ignorant and don't know what I'm talking about since I don't have experience.

The thing about computing is, you can look at it as a tool that is extremely flexible and can be applied to almost every aspect of life.

Try and find ways to integrate computing into music. You could write an algorithm to generate chord progressions. Or you could go into chance music. Or you could approach composition from a mathematical, 'computing' approach. The possibilities are endless.

Remember that we need to further introduce new concepts to music, it's what make it so interesting.

>tfw 80% of people I have on facebook are music students and I have to watch their success stories while I'm shitposting on Cred Forums and wondering what am I doing with my life all day every day.

They are not successful, I haven't heard of them at all.

is Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization worth learning or was it just a meme so jazz musicians could pretend to have made autonomous theoretical discoveries?

clyp.it/zvifciia

I don't know much about real music theory beyond the basics, I just write with Finale Songwriter. Curious what you guys think of this piece. It's very basic especially at the start, but give it a chance until at least one minute in. Maybe you guys can educate me on how to make chords sound better or just stuff in general.

I'll have a look when I get home, care to post the score for now ?