Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

OK so here goes....   Here's a one minute's slow section of an 11 minute piece I just wrote, orchestrated and recorded in Nov. The world premiere is supposed to happen later

Here's my latest composition:     The first few seconds have been floating around inside my head for the best part of a year, so I finally decided to make something out of it!

My piano concerto album is finally out on youtube/itunes.  Recorded at Abbey Road - hope you enjoy.     

I have, over the past half a year, written a piece in three connected movements:

Sinfonietta for Wind Instruments (lovingly named with subtle reference to Williams that nobody would actually understand).

I - Prelude & Ballad Hymn (4:13)

II - Fool's Dance (2:50)

III - Neo Musica & Finale (3:23)

I have a Sibelius/VSL recording of it here, if anybody would like to listen. See if you can pick out the multitude of Williams influences that I didn't even realise until after writing it. I'll hand out program notes too if requested.

File courtesy of Megaupload.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Well I finally got a recording of my "Rhapsody for Alto Saxophone and Piano" from my composition professor. It was premiered recently at our New Music concert.

Let me warn you, the saxophonist didn't do too well, expecially on the cadenza.... So use your imagination and think of what it could sound like, lol.... But I still like this piece:

Click Here

~Tyler :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey, that was good.

ok the basic scales seemed to be the feature of the saxaphone, but i've been known to use that trick myself from time to time. I loved the piano part, write a piano concerto, you'd easily give gershwin a run for his money.

i did feel that on the whole, a stronger pulse might have helped to move the listener along with the piece more, however towards the end this became much more established.

yes, very nice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^Thanks! haha, that's the fifth Gershwin-related comment I've received! :| You might be able to tell that I'm a pianist; I knew what I was doing when I was writing those parts, while this was my first experience with the sax. Thanks for the comment!

Link to post
Share on other sites

^Thanks! I'm sure you like Williams' sax work in CMIFC. Dan Higgins (I believe that's the guy) sounds amazing!

I'm a Freshman (sophomore in Fall) at Palm Beach Atlantic University, in West Palm Beach, FL. I plan on going to some music school for grad studies, maybe out of state. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Well nobody seemed to comment on the VSL-generated MIDI version of my Sinfonietta for Wind Instruments.

So, after much stress, here is the live recorded version. We had two rehearsals for this 11½ minute piece, so I think the end result was pretty amazing, for a university wind ensemble half-comprised of "Arts" students not actually studying music persé. The melody was a tiny bit concealed half of the time, due to a multitude of performance/recording issues, which was annoying cos it's leitmotivic in a Williamsesque way. And there's only a couple of stuff-ups, mostly in the first movement, where players got a few beats ahead of the conductor, and nobody seemed capable of "feeling" triplets properly!

In three connected movements, here is Daniel Bouwmeester's Sinfonietta for Wind Instruments

Bowie

Link to post
Share on other sites

^Wow! Sorry I missed this when you posted it earlier.

I like the melodies and motifs. I like how you use repetition just enough to get a melody stuck in our minds, but it's not overdone or tiresome. Nice percussion/timpani as well!

By the way, what exactly is a "Sinfonietta?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much Tyler

A Sinfonietta is sort of a miniature Symphony, generally one that has a number of movements. This one is all based around the main theme heard on the horns at about 1:45. Unfortunately the horn section was the weakest of all players, so the main thematic material carried and the subsequent development gets lost a bit. The high notes at 2:08ish are meant to be forte, this glorious arrival point in the melody, but as you can hear, it's a bit unconfident.

By the way, I listened to your piece too, and was gobsmacked at how fun it was and professional it sounded! You truly have potential and I hope you realise it. Maybe we will compete one day for an Academy Award, hehe (although we should both lose to preserve the "terrible Score winner" history pioneered by Williams).

Link to post
Share on other sites

^Wow, thanks! That's really reassuring to hear. You heard my saxophonist, at times I was feeling just as frustrated as you were with the horns, lol.

Remember, if you want to compete for Academy Awards, you'll have to compose the political movies! I, for one, plan on scoring a movie about a lesbian couple that died in 9/11 because they were signing adoption papers in a 88th floor office. Genius! LOL

Question: what is the person saying in 4:05-4:15?? And who is saying that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That section (as with many others) was recorded in the rehearsal moments before the final "performance" recording (not much of which I used in the final edit). It was the best bit, musically, unfortunately the conductor is yelling over it saying "THANKYOU!" for going to mp before a crescendo! Most people were struggling to get the notes right rather than pay attention to dynamics, phrasing, musicality etc. It was just a rehearsal though. We may schedule a performance in the second semester of the year, so then I may have a better recording for you.

"Thank you!!! Thank you for going to mezzo piano!!!!" is the full quote. Quite amusing I guess.

Bowie

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi, i know i've mentioned this piece before. but now its recorded live and so i would like some comments on it. two notes. first it's recorded by an amateur group. secondly, the conductor did not follow all of my tempos so its too fast at the beginning and too slow in some other parts. but anyways, here it is, live with a string orchestra.

http://www.acidplanet.com/artist.asp?PID=785845&t=2714

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's lovely if it is played properly.....and terrible if it's played like that!

It's going to be a really great piece, seriously, one of the greats, deffinately.

But you've got to get it played properly, the orchestra really throws it off and completely ruins one of the nicest pieces i've ever heard. Get some good samples, or get a good orchestra and go and make a great composer of yourself, that you've shown us all, you can be.

I look foreward to battling with you for the oscars in 5 years tony.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, Tony, maybe it's because I'm listening to it through crappy laptop speakers, but I don't hear anything too upsetting. Sounds pretty good to me. Oh wait, I've arrived at 2:10. Well, that's ok, it's still fine. This makes me nervous, as I'm writing a bass quintet...hopefully I can get a good group. I'll beg....

Anyways, we all know how to listen to crappy recordings/performances and use our imagination, lol.

Whoa, I'm at 4:00! This is a cool section!

-Tyler ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

haha thanks for the compliment. i dont think its that good, tho my craft is getting better. i dont think i will be getting better samples cuz i detest samples. they lack resonance and musicality. though musicality can be programmed, do i want to spend 60 hrs programming sequencers instead of composing? on the other hand, i will be getting better groups. i am graduating to semi-professional groups this year, AND possibly a famous, professional one. we'll see if that works out.

oscars in 5 years? haha... we'll see lol. doubt i'd get there. plus i'm more concentrating on being a concert composer rather than a film composer. it gives me more freedom on my project choices, though i do want to do a film score sometime in the future. maybe pull an aaron copland and win an oscar haha.

Link to post
Share on other sites
hi, i know i've mentioned this piece before. but now its recorded live and so i would like some comments on it. two notes. first it's recorded by an amateur group. secondly, the conductor did not follow all of my tempos so its too fast at the beginning and too slow in some other parts. but anyways, here it is, live with a string orchestra.

http://www.acidplanet.com/artist.asp?PID=785845&t=2714

I've just listened to this, good piece :thumbup: it has diverse sections with enough varying material to keep the interest going over the course of the 9 minutes. And I don't thinks it sounds bad, sure you can hear it's not professionally performed, but most of the time the performance is not so bad as to distract from the music itself :wave:

-Chris, again feeling the urge to write/complete something that one of the orhestras here would perhaps perform, for which 1min40sec cues for a game score obviously won't qualify ;)

P.S.: Nice violin solo at the end ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony, Composer_Fan, and Bowie

These pieces are all amazing! .. Composer_Fan, your piano writing is brilliant and the saxophone part was pretty brilliant too! And might I say, I hear a little Williams influence in places (CMIYC in particular). Maybe that's just me though :P

Tony, your string piece is just beautiful, beautiful harmonies, and harmony progressions. Really REALLY well written and very satisfying and warming to listen to.

Bowie, your piece shows some really great orchestration skills, In my opinion. And I can't get that quiry scherzo-ish passage out of my head! lol *hums* Really Diverse and well pulled off. :music:

i dont think i will be getting better samples cuz i detest samples. they lack resonance and musicality. though musicality can be programmed, do i want to spend 60 hrs programming sequencers instead of composing? on the other hand, i will be getting better groups. i am graduating to semi-professional groups this year, AND possibly a famous, professional one. we'll see if that works out.

It's nice that it's possible for you to not spend 60 hours programming sequencers :)

Here's a little something I've written recently:

http://www.acidplanet.com/artist.asp?PID=784999&t=4206

Link to post
Share on other sites
How do most of you guys record your work? Do you go to a studio or some other way?

I'm recording directly on the computer from midi playback, midi playback through EWQL library, midi keyboard through EWQL library, or live via (crappy) microphone (violin, horn and guitar stuff... what I'm able to do here...).

Link to post
Share on other sites
How do most of you guys record your work? Do you go to a studio or some other way?

I'm recording directly on the computer from midi playback, midi playback through EWQL library, midi keyboard through EWQL library, or live via (crappy) microphone (violin, horn and guitar stuff... what I'm able to do here...).

Um...yes...wait what?!?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best way to explain technical jargon is with more technical jargon, and then explain that jargon with more jargon and then you need even MORE jargon....*takes breath*....until your so utterly lost and confused that it dissuades you from learning or caring ;)

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

i hook up the sennheisers E835 for vox and MD421II and the ME64 for instrumental. I find they work the best for my purposes while remaining the least expensive microphones. i usually hook up 4 mikes for instrumental recordings.

For my recording, i had 4 tracks as always. The version you guys heard is the MD421II from far away so it gives it a more resonating,ambient but much more balanced sound (that song i sent you is not yet mixed properly; i can only do that after finals). Then i position the shotgun-mike ME64 to face the violins, the violas and the basses. i find the viola and bass ones pick up the cello so if i play with the two, it gets me a decent cello sound. After hooking it up, then i XLR it to the 16track Fostex VF160 and record onto there. I did 3 takes. Then after, i upload it to the comp and use protools to edit, remove sounds if they are excessively obvious, etc. though i hate the editing process because i dont have good enough software to remove a click without removing a few important upper frequencies, so often it sounds a bit off after you do edits. thats why on some professional recordings you'll find you can still hear the sounds of hitting stands, etc. its just not possible to remove the sound clean enough.

how about other people? how do you do it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
hi, i know i've mentioned this piece before. but now its recorded live and so i would like some comments on it. two notes. first it's recorded by an amateur group. secondly, the conductor did not follow all of my tempos so its too fast at the beginning and too slow in some other parts. but anyways, here it is, live with a string orchestra.

http://www.acidplanet.com/artist.asp?PID=785845&t=2714

I like it although the main theme sounds like the slow mvmt from Saint Saens' Organ Symphony. But it's well composed and the performance is pretty solid (except for the part where you give the celli the melody- I guess playing in their upper range kinda stumped them.

Nice work though!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i compose in cubase vst 4 and play through creative samples and then recorded internally using wave32. It's about a hundred quids worth of music equipment but it's got me into hollywood.

I look foreward to the day when i get ewql samples and write some really amazing music with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I look foreward to the day when i get ewql samples and write some really amazing music with them.

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that is exactly the same day that hell is scheduled to freeze over.

t's about a hundred quids worth of music equipment but it's got me into hollywood.

Hollywood is bursting at the seams with wannabes. What's your edge?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I look foreward to the day when i get ewql samples and write some really amazing music with them.

Good music doesn't come from samples :) They can only make good music sound better, or somewhat patch up bad music with sonic power (MV anyone? :P)

Link to post
Share on other sites
i compose in cubase vst 4 and play through creative samples and then recorded internally using wave32.  It's about a hundred quids worth of music equipment but it's got me into hollywood.

I look foreward to the day when i get ewql samples and write some really amazing music with them.

interesting. i usually sit at the piano to work out what possible snippets i can use as motifs (i'm a very beethoven type composer in that regards). then i actually do the composing with a pencil, a table and manuscript. i find its better than using a computer. then i head on over to the piano to play it through, work out details. then back to the drawing board as i work out more stuff. easier for me to plan out form, potential modulations and 10 different expositioins on paper than on a comp. comp takes too long to notate.

its interesting that you said ewql and equating it to writing some really amazing music. good music comes from practice and talent, not the samples:p. i hope you meant decent sounding music instead of writing music.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^You know, Tony, I usually write at the piano/computer at the same time. But lately I've been having some composer's block, and I think it's the computer getting in the way. Time for a new method!

Sharpening his pencils,

~Tyler

Link to post
Share on other sites
i compose in cubase vst 4 and play through creative samples and then recorded internally using wave32.  It's about a hundred quids worth of music equipment but it's got me into hollywood.

I look foreward to the day when i get ewql samples and write some really amazing music with them.

interesting. i usually sit at the piano to work out what possible snippets i can use as motifs (i'm a very beethoven type composer in that regards). then i actually do the composing with a pencil, a table and manuscript. i find its better than using a computer. then i head on over to the piano to play it through, work out details. then back to the drawing board as i work out more stuff. easier for me to plan out form, potential modulations and 10 different expositioins on paper than on a comp. comp takes too long to notate.

its interesting that you said ewql and equating it to writing some really amazing music. good music comes from practice and talent, not the samples:p. i hope you meant decent sounding music instead of writing music.

I agree with tony that this is the only way for mere mortals like us, and like Beethoven, to compose decent music of the intricately woven melodic and contrapuntal variety: to sit with eraser, pencil and paper at a piano and collaborate with them. This is how I composed my wind band Sinfonietta (which has gone off with not much more than a whimper :cry: lol).

But, in matt's defense, a piano is not the best method for all types of music. I've certainly been able to come up with transparent themes and arrangements suitable for tv jingles and stuff on Sibelius, and I know it's probably an efficient way of crafting dense Gladiator-esque scores or other Zimmer or electronic-sounding soundscapes... it depends what Matt wants to achieve.

But as my composition teacher said, don't spend time working on stuff that you're good at. Try and expand your horizons and learn how to write in ways that seem hard to grasp and achieve to you, and listen to and analyse music of composers you don't necessarily like. This is how you will truly make it in Hollywood, if that's where you want to go.

Link to post
Share on other sites
comp takes too long to notate.

Pressing the enter key vs. dragging pencil accross for note head and stem.

At least it's easier to change on a computer. And you can hear it straight away.

i agree with that. much easier to hear, which could arguably pose a problem for newbies when orchestrating because now you expect the flutes to play forte below F which is impossible. or trumpets to play above F5 or horns above G4 without much difficulty, which when you do not have professionals, is quite difficult.

In terms of entering it on the computer, it takes soooooo long. I'm using finale, maybe Sibelius is faster. I have it hooked up to the midikeyboard etc when i enter. but then to change from quarter to whole notes, or create triplets, quintuplets, etc requires more time than i can afford. and usually, my final draft is so different from my initial conception, so then i have erase it all and re-enter it. Plus you do not get the luxury of making notes (on orchestration, or highlighting potential motifs) as you compose assuming you're composing on the computer. I am also oldschool since i like pencilling. Its like writing an essay or a novel; I prefer to handwrite it. It makes it more intimate. so thats just my shpeal. haha. i know some of you disagree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
i agree with that. much easier to hear, which could arguably pose a problem for newbies when orchestrating because now you expect the flutes to play forte below F which is impossible. or trumpets to play above F5 or horns above G4 without much difficulty, which when you do not have professionals, is quite difficult.

see this is why i use a computer. You're not limited in any way to what a grade 8 musician can play. I can write beautiful melodies in eirie ranges that no violinist would dare to try and play, but i get to hear them and use them in films to make great scores, so the world does not miss out simply because an average musician cannot play what is needed. And epic and touching moments do not have to be degraded because half the orchestra might have been blown up at the volume and timbre you wanted, or the choir would have passed out cause you needed them to hold a high f for 3 minutes.

I use a computer because it's easier for me to use, just as a pencil and paper composer uses what they use because they find it easiest.

And i did mean the better the samples, the better the music i can write with them,cause the more timbre my imagination has access to, the better the music my imagination can construct.

PnP composers can hear all the timbres in their mind, PC composers don't have that luxury, so we need to hear what we write as we write, in order to write, so the better the stuff we use to write, the better it is written...well that's me anyway.

As i always say, every composer is different. Each person will use what they are happiest to use.

And lets face facts, we do not do this to expand our educational horizons, we do it cause we love it more than anything else. We are least depressed when we sit or indeed stand to write, so we do what we do because we love it, and because that is who and what we are.

IMO

Link to post
Share on other sites
see this is why i use a computer.  You're not limited in any way to what a grade 8 musician can play.  

Instead you're limited to a fake, tinny sound and balatantly unrealistic noises. There is such thing as meshing orchestra with synthesiser, if you want particular sounds (like the violin you mentioned) instead of blanketing your entire orchestra with artifice.

And epic and touching moments do not have to be degraded because half the orchestra might have been blown up at the volume and timbre you wanted, or the choir would have passed out cause you needed them to hold a high f for 3 minutes.  

And you absolutely needed them to play a high f? Just because you said so? You really do degrade music in general by putting down live players so. The ability to sing or play an instrument is a life skill, a career, a hobby and a point fo jealousy all rolled in one, and you'd still rather use a computer. That also begs the question of interpretation; no-one will ever hear anyone else's interpretation of your music because you've effectively blocked it from the access of any conductor or live performer. Inerpretation is the other half of music (the first half being what's written).

And i did mean the better the samples, the better the music i can write with them,cause the more timbre my imagination has access to, the better the music my imagination can construct.

Why not the better the orchestra? If you can spend money on samples, why can't you on an orchestra? Clearly all of the problems you mentioned would be far less trouble for a mosr expensive orchestra, just as it would sound better for more expensive samples.

IMO

Clearly. Otherwise this argument would not exist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not the better the orchestra? If you can spend money on samples, why can't you on an orchestra? Clearly all of the problems you mentioned would be far less trouble for a mosr expensive orchestra, just as it would sound better for more expensive samples.  

sorry for the confusion.

In order to use an orchestra you have to be comfortable with not having the faintest idea of what the final result will be or you have to possess a complete instinctive understanding of it in order to think of something and write it, then perform it.

The problem is that i don't posess this ability. so rather than not bother ever writing music like some of you would like, i write solely for the computer. If someone else would like to take the score and perform it exactly as i wish, then they are welcome to do so, i have no quarrel with that. I just can't write straight to standard notation like a pencil and paper composer can.

I know, it's pretty difficult for someone who finds one system easier to understand someone who doesn't, and even more so if they posess a knack at what they do, but that is the way these things have to be. Some people find one way easier and some find the other way superior.

Having your score open to interpretation is known as "the composer's bane"

the thing that surprises me most about some of the people on this board, is the fact that they continually push the old methods as the only true methods, yet they pratically worship film composers who, although posessing full knowledge of how to do things that way, abandoned them for the computer and digitised samples as soon as they came along. Now there's an interesting fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites
the thing that surprises me most about some of the people on this board, is the fact that they continually push the old methods as the only true methods, yet they pratically worship film composers who, although posessing full knowledge of how to do things that way, abandoned them for the computer and digitised samples as soon as they came along.  Now there's an interesting fact.

Firstly, we worship John Williams here, whose use of synthesisers 0.3% of the time is about as close as he comes to computers.

Secondly, these "computer" composers of whom you speak (except for Vangelis or, questionably, Zimmer) DO possess the full knowledge of how to do things that way (as you said yourself)! It's like the old adage, you learn the rules properly so you can break them: can you tell me what other way there is to separate a random kerfuffle of notes by a ten-year-old who gets his hands on "Noteworthy Composer" or some basic program, and a composer writing 20th century chance or strange weird music? While you may despise listening to one as much as the other, you can't argue that there isn't probably something clever and mature being said in the latter composition.

Similarly, have you ever considered that the reason you struggle to know what music will sound like without a computer is because you have not only practiced that method thousands of times and it is what you are used to, but that you have not practiced the other way at all? The only way to be able to (confidently) hear music in your head is to (a) have a vast repertory of knowledge of what existing "live" music sounds like; and (B) practice forming connections in your mind between what you write to what comes out by a live performer (this is called "learning," albeit very abstract!). I think you'll find that, even if you want to continue writing computer-based music, it will be a thousand times better if you do as famed composers do and learn music the hard way, the well-rounded way, before dismissing it if you then continue to choose to.

Just my two cents.

Bowie - who is not saying he is the best composer in the world (just listen to my barely acknowledged "Sinfonietta" by this fan-board: http://www.acidplanet.com/artist.asp?PID=7...=793510&T=7417; please criticise it!), but is just preaching what I've come to realise is true after so long believing what you're believing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not the better the orchestra? If you can spend money on samples, why can't you on an orchestra? Clearly all of the problems you mentioned would be far less trouble for a mosr expensive orchestra, just as it would sound better for more expensive samples.  

sorry for the confusion.

In order to use an orchestra you have to be comfortable with not having the faintest idea of what the final result will be or you have to possess a complete instinctive understanding of it in order to think of something and write it, then perform it.

The problem is that i don't posess this ability. so rather than not bother ever writing music like some of you would like, i write solely for the computer. If someone else would like to take the score and perform it exactly as i wish, then they are welcome to do so, i have no quarrel with that. I just can't write straight to standard notation like a pencil and paper composer can.

I know, it's pretty difficult for someone who finds one system easier to understand someone who doesn't, and even more so if they posess a knack at what they do, but that is the way these things have to be. Some people find one way easier and some find the other way superior.

Having your score open to interpretation is known as "the composer's bane"

the thing that surprises me most about some of the people on this board, is the fact that they continually push the old methods as the only true methods, yet they pratically worship film composers who, although posessing full knowledge of how to do things that way, abandoned them for the computer and digitised samples as soon as they came along. Now there's an interesting fact.

wow. several things to say. first synthesized sounds can never be as good as it live. period. half of the beauty of live recordings is resonance between the instruments and resonance between the instruments and the concert hall. there is no possible way to dublicate the resonance between the instruments effect on a computer.

secondly, the main reason why many film composers use synthesized stuff is because the real thing is so damn expensive. period. you probably never thought about how much a jw score costs to record. but it is alot. for musicians, its 100 people x10 weeks x 500 (depends on thier skill). you also have to rent the hall which often costs 10000. then the stuff you have to rent for the recording. around 5000 (but could be more if its better stuff). orchestratorts, music copyists, librarians, conductors need to be paid. etc. so a film score can cost around 400k to record. synthesizing is so much more cheaper, so many composers use them. course some composers also use them for novelty effects, say to create new strange sounds, but they never use them to completely replace the orchestra. even hans zimmer uses a real orchestra coupled with his famous MV synths for his more recent recordings.

thirdly, if you dont possess the ability to hear each instrument, then learn. it's pretty simple. go to a library and borrow scores (or you can do what i did, and dover :mrgreen: ). so much things in the classical repertoire, on form, on motivic development on orchestration. there's a reason it lives beyond its time. also, many composers don't know what they're stuff will sound like in its final form. we do have inklings of it, but very few are gifted enough to know exactly how it will sound. so part of the novelty of composing is the hearing it performed live phenomenon.

lastly, the composer's bane is not interpretation. 75% of music is composition, 25% is interpretation (imo). for me, to have someone else interpret my piece is an honour, though i can get miffed when they ignore my dynamics. being a composer, we know that we cannot conduct every performance in history. so if we want our piece to live on, we have to accept that other people will interpret our stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.