# Empfindsamkeit



## Ian Moore

Originally, 'Empfindsamkeit' was the name given to an eighteenth century style of music which prompted the beginning of the transition from classical period to the Romantic. The word can be translated as 'sensitivity' and the music of this period shows an extra 'sensitivity', especially to Romantic ideals.

My work is not connected to any Romantic ideas. The title merely indicates the understanding that the music is meant to be more 'sensitive' (in terms of evoking the senses) than some of my music before it. It is closely linked to 'Adieu' musically and emotionally.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

I seem to be unable to enjoy this kind of music, for some reason. I'm sure it's excellent, compared to similar pieces from the same... genre? I can tell that much.
What do you call this kind of music?


----------



## Ian Moore

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> I seem to be unable to enjoy this kind of music, for some reason. I'm sure it's excellent, compared to similar pieces from the same... genre? I can tell that much.
> What do you call this kind of music?


I just call it music but other people call it modern or modernist music. If you want to be more precise, you could call it complex contemporary music/avant garde music. Whatever label you give it, it is music for listening to so continue to listen to it and you may change your mind.


----------



## Vasks

Is this an excerpt? I didn't see a final double bar.

And curious. I noticed that the strings are kept relatively low (no high notes/clef changes for cello & viola).


----------



## Ian Moore

Vasks said:


> Is this an excerpt? I didn't see a final double bar.
> 
> And curious. I noticed that the strings are kept relatively low (no high notes/clef changes for cello & viola).


Yes this is an excerpt.

Lowish strings are to create a darker effect and to allow the oboe to stand out.


----------



## TheLastGreatComposer

Ian Moore said:


> I just call it music but other people call it modern or modernist music. If you want to be more precise, you could call it complex contemporary music/avant garde music. Whatever label you give it, it is music for listening to so continue to listen to it and you may change your mind.


This is great work! However I feel the same, a lot of modernist music can be quite harsh.. What prompted this style to develop?


----------



## Ian Moore

TheLastGreatComposer said:


> This is great work! However I feel the same, a lot of modernist music can be quite harsh.. What prompted this style to develop?


What prompted modernism to develop? A hard question to answer. I don't really think that music develops/progresses etc... Composers and audiences (eventually) become more accessible to certain trends. I wouldn't call it progress...it's more like admiration.


----------



## Ian Moore

I don't like resurrecting older post but I am interested to find out why people are less interested in this music. It has been a very slow burner compared to the rest. Please give your honest opinion and no abuse needed - genuine constructive criticism please.


----------



## Crudblud

A composer is generally lucky to get even two or three responses here. That's just how it is now, in previous years it was more active but still only a handful of pieces generated lasting discussion.


----------



## Aramis

Crudblud said:


> That's just how it is now, in previous years it was more active but still only a handful of pieces generated lasting discussion.


I beg to differ xDxXDxxxD the only things in this section that "generated lasting discussion" were Billy's and Saul's legendary threads and these "lasting discussions" amounted to 10+ pages of dirty flame. Having been here since 2009, I can confirm that this section never offered much feedback and, at best times, you could count on 3-4 people who actually dropped by every now and then. Can't blame anybody though, why would anybody want to listen synth/MIDI samples from amateur composers.

Ian, since you have real recordings, how about making it known in your thread's titles. There is a chance that many people would be curious to enter, knowing that it's "real thing" by serious composer.


----------



## Sloe

Aramis said:


> Can't blame anybody though, why would anybody want to listen synth/MIDI samples from amateur composers.


I can say I sometimes come here just to listen to MIDI samples. I think MIDI have a beauty of it´s own.


----------



## Ian Moore

Ararmis, thank you for your kind comments. I would be a bit weary of getting the 'backs up' of people who do not have 'real lfe' musicians though. I am lucky enough to my music played by professional musicians - some of the inexperienced composers would definitely benefit from the same kind of support.


----------



## Ian Moore

Sloe, Stockhausen uses 'midi' very effectively but it is something that he probably learnt from working with acoustic instruments. I really think it is important for up and coming composers to gain their skills from hearing their music being performed by the best musicians they can obtain.


----------



## Sloe

Ian Moore said:


> Sloe, Stockhausen uses 'midi' very effectively but it is something that he probably learnt from working with acoustic instruments. I really think it is important for up and coming composers to gain their skills from hearing their music being performed by the best musicians they can obtain.


I just say that just because a midi violin or guitar don´t sound like the real thing it is not the same as it sounds bad just different. Stockhausen´s or others skill or were they are coming from I will not comment.
Otherwise I really like your work.


----------



## Morimur

Crudblud said:


> A composer is generally lucky to get even two or three responses here. That's just how it is now, in previous years it was more active but still only a handful of pieces generated lasting discussion.


That's because there's generally nothing exceptional about what composers post on here. Real talent is uncommon.


----------



## Ian Moore

It depends what you class as real talent. In classical music, some people tend to stick to the things which are recognisably safe. The composers that everyone can agree are 'truly talented'. In my opinion, most composers,even the great ones, only write a handful of truly amazing pieces. Every composer is capable of writing a "one hit wonder". Great composers can do lots of times. A music forum isn't the best place to judge the quality of a piece of music or a composer - we're really judging the quality of the recording.


----------



## Crudblud

I notice my post, predictably, has spawned some snide comments about MIDI. I have defended MIDI a number of times here and elsewhere because I feel it is grossly misrepresented ─ generally by people who don't understand it, people who see it as a stepping stone rather than a possible destination in its own right ─ and that the stigma of illegitimacy placed upon it is ludicrous and should be challenged.

The only real problem with MIDI is that most people who might want to use it have no idea how to use it, they treat it as a stopover on the way to live performance and so the music itself is written as if for live performance. They don't put in the due time and effort to learn how to work with it, discover its complexity and potential, merely seeing it as a way to reach a facsimile of their "vision" on the cheap, yet they will always blame the tool, not themselves, for turning out less than stellar results. I can count on one hand the number of MIDI compositions posted here besides my own that have displayed on the part of the composer any sort of understanding of MIDI's capabilities. Indeed, I would not need many more hands to count the number of competent MIDI compositions I have encountered elsewhere.


----------



## Guest

Ian, do you consider the new complexity school a significant influence on your work? I listened to this again today, but paid a bit more attention to the rhythms...


----------



## Ian Moore

Crudblud said:


> I notice my post, predictably, has spawned some snide comments about MIDI. I have defended MIDI a number of times here and elsewhere because I feel it is grossly misrepresented ─ generally by people who don't understand it, people who see it as a stepping stone rather than a possible destination in its own right ─ and that the stigma of illegitimacy placed upon it is ludicrous and should be challenged.
> 
> The only real problem with MIDI is that most people who might want to use it have no idea how to use it, they treat it as a stopover on the way to live performance and so the music itself is written as if for live performance. They don't put in the due time and effort to learn how to work with it, discover its complexity and potential, merely seeing it as a way to reach a facsimile of their "vision" on the cheap, yet they will always blame the tool, not themselves, for turning out less than stellar results. I can count on one hand the number of MIDI compositions posted here besides my own that have displayed on the part of the composer any sort of understanding of MIDI's capabilities. Indeed, I would not need many more hands to count the number of competent MIDI compositions I have encountered elsewhere.


That is exactly what I was trying to say when I referred to Stockhausen. In experienced hands, it can be illuminating. But I think people need to gain the experience from real life acoustic music, probably first. There is a fundamental difference between acoustic and synthetic generated music. Lessons about both need to be learned.


----------



## Ian Moore

nathanb said:


> Ian, do you consider the new complexity school a significant influence on your work? I listened to this again today, but paid a bit more attention to the rhythms...


I consider the concepts of the so called "new complexity" to be essential to my music(It's a term that composers do not like because any music can be complex and simple or even both). Although, I was never a fully fledged follower.


----------



## Aramis

Crudblud said:


> The only real problem with MIDI is that most people who might want to use it have no idea how to use it, they treat it as a stopover on the way to live performance and so the music itself is written as if for live performance. They don't put in the due time and effort to learn how to work with it, discover its complexity and potential, merely seeing it as a way to reach a facsimile of their "vision" on the cheap, yet they will always blame the tool, not themselves, for turning out less than stellar results.


That's entirely dependent on what one is trying to do.

A power drill is certainly a very good invention and essential tool these days, but if I want to be a sculptor in marble and have no other tool available to me, it is only natural that I will complain about it's limitations. Similiarly, a composer aspiring to write music for acoustic instruments or voice can't be expected to settle with MIDI tool and adjust to what it offers, even if for composer like you, who excel in synthetically produced sound, it's a gold mine.


----------



## Crudblud

Aramis said:


> Similiarly, a composer aspiring to write music for acoustic instruments or voice can't be expected to settle with MIDI tool and adjust to what it offers


Of course not, but that has nothing to do with what I said.

A composer who knows nothing about the violin writes a solo violin sonata. It is unplayable. The composer defends themselves by saying "it isn't my fault, the violin failed to meet my requirements." Does this composer get a free pass from you, or should they have done the research?

If you're going to use a tool, you need to put in the time and effort to learn how to use it, otherwise you'll be operating on the basis of ignorance. That's bad enough, but going on to complain that the tool you don't know how to use didn't produce the results you were expecting it to is even worse.


----------



## Aramis

In a way it's true, yet the experienced composers tend to warn the younger adepts: "don't write your music so that it sounds good in synth performance, it will criple your writing". Because if you learn to make an orchestral score and arrange it according to which instruments, dynamics, articulations etc. sound good in synth orchestra performance, you will basically learn a twisted craft of orchestration that will be your ball and chain when/if you finally get to write for the real thing. You will learn your craft according to the wrong rules. That is why for most, it will remain what it is, sad necessity when having no real musicians.


----------



## Ian Moore

Aramis said:


> In a way it's true, yet the experienced composers tend to warn the younger adepts: "don't write your music so that it sounds good in synth performance, it will criple your writing". Because if you learn to make an orchestral score and arrange it according to which instruments, dynamics, articulations etc. sound good in synth orchestra performance, you will basically learn a twisted craft of orchestration that will be your ball and chain when/if you finally get to write for the real thing. You will learn your craft according to the wrong rules. That is why for most, it will remain what it is, sad necessity when having no real musicians.


The strength and the weakness of midi writing is that midi sound doesn't sound as warm(human) as acoustic sound. The 'synthetic' sound of midi can be advantageous - used properly it can appeal to the imagination; be new and adventurous. this has to be weighed up against the disconnection from the 'human' qualities - the lack of an easily recognisable emotional response; e.g. a direct connection to the emotions. As everyone has said, midi is a tool which is available to all composers. It should be used for the right reasons. I am just as guilty as anyone else of mocking up my music in midi because I can't find the performers to play it. But in the long run, it does more harm than good. You really do need to get out there and with a "beg,steal and borrow" attitude and find musicians who can play your acoustic music. Don't settle on midi because it is easy, choose midi because it is what you want.


----------



## Stirling

Professional - though in some one else's style. I hope we will hear more from you.


----------



## Stirling

And the ability to hear it is also uncommon.


----------



## Ian Moore

Stirling said:


> in some one else's style


What do you mean?


----------



## Stirling

mid 50's American serialism


----------



## Ian Moore

Stirling said:


> mid 50's American serialism


It's not serialist. I am not American(although I wish I was because of the opportunities) nor is the music. Whose style do you think it is anyway?


----------



## Stirling

So? I said the style was of a type, not you. But, let me be blunt: you are a composer, amidst the dross. You must copy the the that inspire you, and there go farther. Think about Verklärte Nacht - it is in some else's style. But it has potential. A few years later Pierrot Lunaire is his own, but it has learn somethings from the past. Do you work, and eventually it will be your own. Remember you are already farther the most people, but that only means that you can glimpse a pure vision the no one else can see.


----------



## Mahlerian

Stirling said:


> So? I said the style was of a type, not you. But, let me be blunt: you are a composer, amidst the dross. You must copy the the that inspire you, and there go farther. Think about *Verklärte Nacht - it is in some else's style*. But it has potential. A few years later Pierrot Lunaire is his own, but it has learn somethings from the past. Do you work, and eventually it will be your own. Remember you are already farther the most people, but that only means that you can glimpse a pure vision the no one else can see.


Whose? It sounds like pure Schoenberg to me.


----------



## Stirling

Wagner - Schoenberg said as much.


----------



## Mahlerian

Stirling said:


> Wagner - Schoenberg said as much.


It is influenced by Wagner, to be sure; Brahms' music left its traces as well. Still, both the themes and the way they are developed bear Schoenberg's own personal stamp, although there is more frequent use of sequencing and literal repetition.


----------



## Vasks

Hey guys, we're hijacking Ian's thread and really should stop, but let me say my two cents: *Being influenced does not have to equate with sounding like. I don't hear Wagner when I listen to Verklarte Nacht.*


----------



## Ian Moore

I think what he is trying to say is that the style isn't individual enough yet. That Schonberg went onto create a completely unique utterance. I assume he is suggesting the same for this work. Some composers find it when they are young; some when they are old. However he should listen to the comments expressed here. With Schonberg's Verklarte Nacht his individuality was already there. It wasn't until Pierre Lunaire that people recognised it. I think this is true of most composers. There individuality is hidden in their early compositions.


----------



## Guest

Where he got "50s American Serialism" is a mystery to me, too. Don't worry.


----------



## Ian Moore

He may mean 1950s European serialism.


----------

