Thank you for taking time and listen!
Really glad you enjoyed it. Work is still in progress, altough Im quite
happy whith what Ive got, but I want to make it longer.
Im working without any composition theory and have only very basic
knowledge of music theory and sheets
My technic is:
I set a beginning, maybe only one chord, listen to it over and over again with closed eyes, until my "inner" ear imagines a continuation I like.
Then I give my best to hold this inner sound image and orchestrate it
on the software.
Interesting method; you're composing based on sound rather than form. Many 20th Century composers have used this method also. The trick is, as Ned Rorem said, "Knowing when to stop."
"Knowing when to stop"; sounds interesting, can you explain a little bit further what he exactly meant with that quote?
And did you mean the beginning of the composition is good or it is good as the beginning? (Cause I said it isnt finished)
"Knowing when to stop"; sounds interesting, can you explain a little bit further what he exactly meant with that quote?
And did you mean the beginning of the composition is good or it is good as the beginning? (Cause I said it isnt finished)
That quote is the title of his memoirs, and he is referring to Erik Satie.
What Satie did was, in his early pieces, instead of using chord progressions to propel a piece to its conclusion (like the I-IV-V-I chord sequence), he used chords for their color, their individual sound. So really, his Gymnopedies and Sarabandes could go on forever, because they weren't working toward a goal or a final fulfilling ending cadence. Ned Rorem's admiration for Satie, then, was, though a piece of his could go on forever, his talent was that he knew when to stop.
As to your piece, I just meant I like how it sounds so far.
Thanks!
Well, I update the piece from time to time so clicking on the link in my first
post will always direct you to the newest version of it.
I can post it here when I think its finished.
Ah, ok I think I understand...its about finding the point where a chord progression or a melodic line should end when there is no formal structure that "tells" where to end it, right?
Interesting thought, but in fact I think its important for a piece to have at least one "goal" or climax or fulfilling moment or how you want to call it.
But the goal shouldnt be (inescapable) a conclusion of the formal structure or method but more a psychological or emotional conclusion.
Actually all of my favourite pieces have one or more of these moments, a psychological or / and emotional goal, which tells me the meaning or essence of the piece.
But that is for sure very subjective.
For example:
Maurice Ravel: La vallée des cloches
To my subjective perception the "goal" or "breaktrough" of the piece is from
2:50 to 3:10
Anyone knows what I mean or am I in my own world :lol:
Interesting thought, but in fact I think its important for a piece to have at least one "goal" or climax or fulfilling moment or how you want to call it.
But the goal shouldnt be (inescapable) a conclusion of the formal structure or method but more a psychological or emotional conclusion.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Classical Music Forum
2.6M posts
40.5K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to classical music for musicians and other enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about composers, compositions, arrangements, collections, recordings, techniques, instruments, styles, reviews, classifieds, and more!