Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

This is a very rough work-in-progress.  Score is not in presentable form yet, but below is a midi mockup of the current draft. I'm interested in any general thoughts you may have; my main concern right now is that even though the work is basically a monothematic arch form, the primary motive is not always clearly audible, and the development section ventures so far away from the tonal language of the opening that I have some concerns about whether it sounds cohesive.  

MP3 mock-up:  https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9HY2GoDR54AajltUFhNUjM5OEE

Views: 577

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Finally, a word of wisdom from the Dave. ;-)

NAH, OO understands the 'sport' of it..... I don't think that you do.

Remember Dave, this is just one thread. It is not headlined to everyone.

You can ignore it if you chose to.

A light hearted banter of words and ideas is not the same as a

vicious Gestapo like accosting and, what's the word you like to use...

oh yeah,' prejorative' accusations.

You like to look back through past posts and threads in your search for

proof to foil others, and don't tell me that you try to avoid 'squabbles'.

My point is, that there is a positive and a negative side to all this.

but yeah, ignoring someones post is a good way to end it.     RS

Perhaps move it to a place where it won't drown someone's music submitted for feedback. I'm dreadfully old-fashioned, I know.

And jesus god, if you're going to pastiche me at least spell the word right. Pejorative. PEJORATIVE.

(I wanted to prove that you weren't a good arbiter on the subject of homophobic slurs. Took about five minutes.)



roger stancill said:

NAH, OO understands the 'sport' of it..... I don't think that you do.

Remember Dave, this is just one thread. It is not headlined to everyone.

You can ignore it if you chose to.

A light hearted banter of words and ideas is not the same as a

vicious Gestapo like accosting and, what's the word you like to use...

oh yeah,' prejorative' accusations.

You like to look back through past posts and threads in your search for

proof to foil others, and don't tell me that you try to avoid 'squabbles'.

My point is, that there is a positive and a negative side to all this.

but yeah, ignoring someones post is a good way to end it.     RS

Dave, I kinda like 'prejorative' better. It implies an elitistist mentality

bias or prejudice towards another. Regardless, my poor spelling still

seemed to transmit the meaning , so thanks for proving my other point.

The gist of any communication is something greater than the sum of it's parts.

Word Nazi's are stupider than dummies who caint spel.

See there, it's a win- win. Good job.

Hello RS, and Dave,

Thanks for your recent posts.

"perhaps the implied meaning was actually 'in the name of religion'."

Perhaps it was.  Anything is possible.  One might have said so.

"That is how I interpreted it. A title is not supposed to be a paragraph of explanation."

I don't know. I'm not sure there are any rules stating whether a title can be a paragraph.  Is there a rulebook where I can find the precise regulation? Perhaps you've seen a  fairly well known play (with a lot of music) called,

The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as Performed by the Inmates of the Asylum of Charenton under the Direction of the Marquis De Sade

The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as Performed b...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJc4I6pivqg

Is that too long?  We have so many films, novels, plays and pieces of music now with just one or two word titles. Different works with the same title.  So perhaps long titles are a good thing.  I read that, 'Leif Segerstam has written a silly amount of Symphonies (over 280), many of them with [very long and] ridiculous names. Here is a favourite of mine:

'Symphony No 228: Cooling my beard too (2) on "Sval"bard, "Spit"sbergen farewelling (on the "seal"ed waters) the blinding "spittingly" ice- (&eyes) cracking Sun (setstart on 22.8 …!) with my son (JS) remembering nostalgically "lace"- (spets-) coverings of (eg) Venusmountains as well as all those got … (lays …) – It is very windy on the tops, "the picked peaks for peeking into the ∞s …", "spets"-listening too … 2 … 8!" '

Is that too long?  It seems like a whole paragraph.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v7Ht2W8Z6E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAydCG0KTdQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1CPFf1luOg

"Knowing... is not the sum of the parts. It is a quality greater than the sum of its parts."

We can talk about epistemology here, though that may be bit beyond the scope of the thread, or our ability to explore the issue in a short space.  It also might take more than a paragraph. 

"The 'gist' of heaven can't be reached by building a tower to the 'heavens' and climbing ..."

So I take it you don't like the Tower of Babel?  Is it the architectural style you don't like, or do you think it was just too tall?  Maybe the gist of heaven can be reached through music more easily.  So you do have a good point.

"But, I suspect you know that,   so why all the 'literal' wordplay?"

Well, what do we have here in addition to "words?"  We can attempt to send thoughts, mental vibrations or telepathic messages across the internet, or across invisible spiritual circuits and conduits.  I am not against that.  Shall we try that instead of words, and see the result?  It might be very positive.  We could also send "music" instead of words as well.   I'm slowly coming along with one or two in progress.  ...   I think you are right about "squabbles."  Sometimes conversation that appears to challenge a specific assertion is looked at as part of a "squabble."  It need not be apprehended in that fashion.  "Wouldn't it be nice if we all stopped engaging for a month or so?"  Dave asked.  I am not sure what "engaging" means in this context.  I thought it might be a good idea to start a thread about why all the high school bands in the Washington D.C. area had refused to participate in the upcoming inauguration ceremonies.  Would that be an "engaging" topic?  It could also have to do with "violence in the name of religion," or the exhortation to violence, in the name of politics, racial bigotry or religion.  All that could be worked out.  [On the question of pro-jorative versus anti-jorative, I remain neutral].

 

 

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2017   Created by Chris Merritt.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service