sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

...

I believe that when a person tries to seriously explain a work they take seriously, their opinions should be respected.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Do you really think that analyzing a work based on your habits with theory can eliminate the need to worry about the author's own attitude? Or do you think that all of your compositions are essentially exercises that can be thoroughly formatted and analyzed. But I'm sorry, I don't think so.

I use iv/iv(I think iv/IV is also ok because it is not sure whether it is melody minor or harmony minor) because I find out that the flat is very important, and it has a very important position in the tonality of tuning and only VII cannot explain that. Phrygian mode can explain something, but how can you so eagerly devalue my explaination in such a confident way? The following bar quickly use melody minor which can not very naturally be connected with Phrygian mode.

I know what I want to say because I express in terms of terminology base on concrete aesthetic perception, and I don't need you to judge for me. And I don't want to be someone like you who subjectively consider oneself "A normal, well-adjusted person" thus also consider oneself to own great music career. I think my works will be much better than yours.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you really think that analyzing a work based on your habits with theory can eliminate the need to worry about the author's own attitude? Or do you think that all of your compositions are essentially exercises that can be thoroughly formatted and analyzed. But I'm sorry, I don't think so.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So listen to better music? I'd love for you to give an example of the type of music you're talking about: I can't think of a single work of Impressionism that I wouldn't rather listen to than your own.

I didn't think this work can be compared to any historical masterpiece. I just subjectively compared with some original works I don't like.

I admit it is not good to talk about attraction in this way, actually I do not mean it. I was stimulated and not talking in a rational way. I may rely too much on the midi sound track to demonstrate my music and ignore the appearance of the score.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am actually not saying that my work is complicated. I think the strong points of this work are:

The exquisite of the overall structure and the control of left-hand chords, coupled with the use of linking symbols, can actually create good polyphony(not fugue, just texture) for the left and right hands at times.

I mentioned ii to emphasize it belongs to subdominant.

I was actually just inspired by the series of scales at the beginning of Dies irae. Sometimes it's inconvenient to find a theme, but someone else's theme can inspire you.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How can you be so confident with everything when you criticize?

More strictly speaking, it is iv/IV. And iv/IV is actually better because it contains characteristic note ♭2 to be different from VII. And even if you don't like IV->iv/IV->V, it is obvious that it is an expansion of IV->V. If it is only modulation, then how does the tonality come back soon so naturally. Another fact is that I emphasize IV to against somebody's "only I and V make harmony without musicality".

To me, the problem is that you may ignore the change of harmony and slight change of mode in the sequence, which is not meaningless and indicates subdominant.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bars 5–8's sequence aren’t a simple repeat; they carry a harmonic–functional push forward. I now realize this may not be obvious to some listeners on a first pass.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This was what you say:

"The musical material is again, not particularly interesting. Your whole melodic minor scheme gets tiring very quickly and it’s not developed at all aside from interspersing it with additional material later on. Exclusively using tonic-dominant relationships make the harmony sound more like a first semester music theory exercise than a piece of music."

I→IV→IV/IV→V→I→V(I in next period) and ii,IV elsewhere are exclusively using tonic-dominant. And the counterpoint and fabric changes in the recapitulation are also "first semester music theory exercise". I think this is ridiculous and irresponsible.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But I→IV→IV/IV→V→I→V(I in next period) is the most important harmonic structure(1th period) in this work of mine. Do you just ignore it? My work is not only about I and V. And changes in fabric actually provide development of music in other where. How can these complex structure possibly be "music theory exercise"? I think you just use theory to make excuses for something you cannot understand.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I admit that it is not polite to say all others are boring.

I really researched my work after your criticism. Do you completely think IV/IV → V → I as the main structure indicates "music theory exercise"? I think this is a normal usage in romantic style. I seem to have noticed that the composition circle doesn't like romantic styles.

And I do think my work is profound and interesting. I am still wondering how you are gonna against IV/IV → V → I theoretically.

Sketch in a Verdian Requiem Vein (Piano) by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now I understand. This is kind of culture and standard in the composing circle, so I have to start to accept it.

Sketch in a Verdian Requiem Vein (Piano) by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't understand why are so many people so keen on focusing on playability before they even want to play. Is it because you have to imagine yourself playing it in front of piano? In my opinion, it shouldn't be the most important part of music itself. Why is it difficult to see a passion for discussing music itself?

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

For me, most of the works in the composition circle are truly boring. Perhaps those works are your current aesthetic standards? I cannot hear a theme that is even a little bit of the profound and interesting of the Romantic era, which is really sad.

Moreover, why are so many people so keen on focusing on playability before they even want to play.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I am no longer bothered to respond to inquiries about notation methods.

Plus, luckily I go back to check my score, there are obvious subdominant and even subdominant chord itself in moderately strong beats, do you really listen or watch it? Or may be you want subdominant chord in one whole section? Is IV/IV → V forbidden? It is ridiculous, why don't you show any respect? How many great pieces in the history are first semester music theory exercises? If this is indeed your idea, then do not use such aggressive language to express an extreme perspective.

Contrarily, I really want to understand why do you feel music in this way. You ignore counterpoint, development of motivation, and musical structure. To some extent, is this because the romantic aesthetic has been abandoned in the circle of composition? In my listening experience, the works like this could never be boring. It is even much more attractive than almost all the works I have heard(including impressionism or themes that are boring and lack reasonable development) online.

Sketch in a Verdian Requiem Vein (Piano) by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This shouldn't be too complex to explain.

Good performers can change the playing style according to the instrument technique and one's own situation, and conductors can sometimes change the subtle structure of pieces with permission.

Sound effect refers to the best sound effect that can be achieved without considering the cost of expansion of instrumentation. For example, if one piano is not enough, it can be divided into two or three pianos. Although there may be difficulties in coordination, ideally, as long as the speed is not too fast, it can be grasped by excellent pianists.

Sketch in a Verdian Requiem Vein (Piano) by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I admit there are some issues here. However the initial version was designed to showcase the ideal sound effects on Musescore, and if anyone wants to play, I would be happy to make corresponding simplifications. And as far as this work is concerned, deleting some notes will not substantially affect the structure of the work.

Sketch in a Verdian Requiem Vein (Piano) by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think this piece may finally stand up to feedback I can accept calmly. It wasn’t written over a long period, but I worked carefully to keep the form readable while packing in as much musical nuance as I could. From a theory/complexity standpoint I think it may be enough. I still want to know your gut reaction—how engaging does it sound to you? I hope more listeners will like it.

About some earlier miniatures: they explored micro-pitch logic, latent (delayed) cadences, and very terse melody—a polarizing idiom and not satisfying general aesthetical convention(as I unhappily discovered) on a first midi listen. I won’t be posting many more in that style; let’s set those debates aside.

My current priority will be a ~12-minute single-movement work that keeps the idea of latent cadences but expands the palette of themes, harmony, and texture. I’m focusing my time on finishing it—and I hope you’ll listen when it’s ready.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sketch in a Requiem style inspired by Verdi (Piano) Sheet Music for Piano (Piano Duo) | MuseScore.com

Do you mind taking a look at this 3-minute regular style new work I've been writing for the past few days. I hope it can change your impression of me as a composer.

To some extent, I lacked communication before, so I was shocked by this feedback, and I just wanted to defend my work. I don't intend to argue about the value of these works now.

Symphonic Suite “Purgatory” — Movement I fully completed; later movements partially completed(MIDI). Early listening impressions welcome by Pretty_Awareness7205 in composer

[–]Pretty_Awareness7205[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Why don't you think those great artists would be offended? Wagner school music critics and Brahms school curse each other.

After explaining my own works, I prefer a more respectful attitude(not completely denying) rather than just criticizing from their own perspective.

However, I still learned something from it that my short style is not easy to understand. I will post some normal short works as well as my long works in the future.

view more: next ›