My composition - I hope

Composition and inspiration. Share your compositions and have them critiqued!

Have you heard this somewhere before?

Yes
0
No votes
No
4
100%
 
Total votes : 4

My composition - I hope

Postby TheRach » 31 Aug 2004, 11:52

Yeah, I wrote this a really long time ago, and this is just a few bars I extracted from it. I showed it to Comme and he said that he thinks that he's heard it somewhere before. I was like oh ****.
I'm wondering, is this original, or did I hear it somewhere and write it and thought that I wrote it?
BEWARE
NO HARMONY...AT ALL.

http://therach.chopinmusic.net/composition2.mid

Yo, I just want to see if this is really composed by me or did I hear this somewhere and write it down and thought it was mine!
Last edited by TheRach on 02 Sep 2004, 20:02, edited 2 times in total.
TheRach
i hate rovolCz
 
Posts: 582
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 14:22
Location: Virginia

Re: My composition - I hope

Postby Philip Daniel » 31 Aug 2004, 12:56

TheRach wrote:Yeah, I wrote this a really long time ago, and this is just a few bars I extracted from it. I showed it to Comme and he said that he thinks that he's heard it somewhere before. I was like oh ****.
I'm wondering, is this original, or did I hear it somewhere and write it and thought that I wrote it?

BEWARE
NO HARMONY...AT ALL.

http://therach.chopinmusic.net/composition2.mid

I don't think that I've ever heard this before :wink:. To me, it sounds like a wandering and listless figure. Many introductions to paraphrases, transcriptions, variations, and other 19th century virtuoso pieces begin in this way, in double octaves :D. So, to me, it gives the impression of being an introduction or prelude to a much larger and more complex piece. Since it sounds like only a beginning, and not a complete piece, I cannot rate it :). The ending is much better harmonized, however, although it is quite monotonous in lack of change of harmonic root and the voice-leading isn't perfect.
Best Wishes,
Philip Daniel
Philip Daniel
Moderato(r)
Moderato(r)
 
Posts: 796
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 15:46

Postby TheRach » 31 Aug 2004, 13:05

Lol I only put it in double octaves because I couldn't think of any other way to harmonize it. And the ending...Well it's just major and minor chords, I mean, if you saw the score, you'd see how unbelievably bad harmony it is. Actually I'll upload it here. It's a pdf. I'd save it as a Sibelius Scorch file, but I'd just be making it more complicated for some people who may not have downloaded the plug-in.
Edit: yeah i removed da link
And by the way, this isn't the complete composition I wrote. This is just a bit taken out of the middle and I just quickly thought up some way to end it. If I can find the original file, I'll post it.
TheRach
i hate rovolCz
 
Posts: 582
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 14:22
Location: Virginia

Postby citrine_peridot » 02 Sep 2004, 17:47

kindergardenish~~~~~~~~~~
User avatar
citrine_peridot
The "Pedal-Eater"
 
Posts: 645
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 17:12

Postby TheRach » 02 Sep 2004, 17:52

citrine_peridot wrote:kindergardenish~~~~~~~~~~


Because of the melody itself or because of the fact that a bad composer wrote it without any real harmony?

Edit: Or both? 8)
TheRach
i hate rovolCz
 
Posts: 582
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 14:22
Location: Virginia

Postby Chozart » 02 Sep 2004, 18:10

both lol :P :roll:
User avatar
Chozart
"Brendel-like" Mozart & Bach fanatic
 
Posts: 943
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 18:04

Postby TheRach » 02 Sep 2004, 18:15

I thought it was kindergardenish since a 5 year old wrote it. 8)
Anyways, I just wanted to know if this theme was original or not.
It seems that it it is not. 8)
TheRach
i hate rovolCz
 
Posts: 582
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 14:22
Location: Virginia

Postby Debussy » 02 Sep 2004, 19:47

There are quite a few parallel octaves in this piece, and you need to avoid that as much as possible. At all times, avoid parallel octaves and parallel fifths.

You need to have more of a melody in your piece, as well. I do like the ending with the rest and then your four chords.

Eighty-one.
User avatar
Debussy
Chopin Music's Casanova
 
Posts: 314
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 14:45
Location: Miramichi, New Brunswick, Canada

Postby TheRach » 02 Sep 2004, 19:49

It seems that everyone except for Philip Daniel is understanding what I am trying to do here!
Respec to Philip Daniel for that 8)

Time to edit my first post. 8)

Edit: By the way, Debussy, thanks for the advice.
TheRach
i hate rovolCz
 
Posts: 582
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 14:22
Location: Virginia

Postby Comme_le_Vent » 03 Sep 2004, 08:21

Debussy wrote:There are quite a few parallel octaves in this piece, and you need to avoid that as much as possible. At all times, avoid parallel octaves and parallel fifths.

You need to have more of a melody in your piece, as well. I do like the ending with the rest and then your four chords.

Eighty-one.


it hilarious that you like guns'n'roses, and other rock bands - because you do realsie that their whole music is based upon parallel 5ths and octaves...


rach, u misunderstood me, i thought this was by someone else cos it seemed too good for a 5 yr old!!

ive never heard it before!


and by the way - ignore THIS debussy's advice - and take the real debussy's advice and use parallel 5ths etc as much as you like(exactly what claude did 8) )

the rule of composition is - there are no rules 8)
Comme_le_Vent
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 596
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 21:36
Location: Northumberland

Postby Philip Daniel » 03 Sep 2004, 11:44

Comme_le_Vent wrote:
Debussy wrote:There are quite a few parallel octaves in this piece, and you need to avoid that as much as possible. At all times, avoid parallel octaves and parallel fifths.

You need to have more of a melody in your piece, as well. I do like the ending with the rest and then your four chords.

Eighty-one.


it hilarious that you like guns'n'roses, and other rock bands - because you do realsie that their whole music is based upon parallel 5ths and octaves...


rach, u misunderstood me, i thought this was by someone else cos it seemed too good for a 5 yr old!!

ive never heard it before!


and by the way - ignore THIS debussy's advice - and take the real debussy's advice and use parallel 5ths etc as much as you like(exactly what claude did 8) )

the rule of composition is - there are no rules 8)


Comme, the "rules" aren't so much rules as they are theoretical guidelines that can be used freely and broken freely within reason. A composer builds upon the common practice of past composers (i.e. music theory) and creates his own rules from this sturdy foundation :wink:.
Philip Daniel
Moderato(r)
Moderato(r)
 
Posts: 796
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 15:46

Postby TheRach » 03 Sep 2004, 11:46

Yes, once again. What Philip Daniel said.
By the way, I'm looking at that music theory website you gave me a while ago. It's really helpful, especially the exercises.
Respec to Philip Daniel 8)
TheRach
i hate rovolCz
 
Posts: 582
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 14:22
Location: Virginia

Postby Philip Daniel » 03 Sep 2004, 11:48

TheRach wrote:Yes, once again. What Philip Daniel said.
By the way, I'm looking at that music theory website you gave me a while ago. It's really helpful, especially the exercises.
Respec to Philip Daniel 8)

You should still follow the rules as much as humanly possible while only breaking them when necessary :wink:. Anyhow, ambiguities in voice-leading are common in more virtuosic pieces, for expressive purpose :wink:.
Philip Daniel
Moderato(r)
Moderato(r)
 
Posts: 796
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 15:46

Postby Comme_le_Vent » 03 Sep 2004, 12:43

NO PHILDAN!

you are wrong this time!

you CAN follow the rules!, but noone SHOULD follow the rules unless they want be be a derivative retard


im afraid your lack of wisdom is inevident
Comme_le_Vent
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 596
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 21:36
Location: Northumberland

Postby Philip Daniel » 03 Sep 2004, 14:31

Comme_le_Vent wrote:NO PHILDAN!

you are wrong this time!

you CAN follow the rules!, but noone SHOULD follow the rules unless they want be be a derivative retard


im afraid your lack of wisdom is inevident

My lack of wisdom? All I meant was that true musical geniuses follow the most fundamental theoretical rules in harmony and voice-leading while building upon them to achieve new effects. Music theory is a continually changing science, you see, and the so-called rules of the past are compiled from a study of the compositions of the time; while some "theories" in musical composition stay in use, others are replaced by more feasible ones as time proceeds. Music theory is not rigid; in fact, it is very flexible and composers such as Bach, Haydn, and Berlioz have stayed within its boundaries while achieving freedom, and that is the test of real genius.
Philip Daniel
Moderato(r)
Moderato(r)
 
Posts: 796
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 15:46

Next

Return to Pen and Paper

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron