# What do you think of this composer I found on YouTube?



## John Williams (Jun 12, 2010)

It´s just awesome, and it was found by mistake.
His symphony has so many emotions, and his musical voice is unique.
I believe modern music hasn´t seen anything like this in a long long while.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

I cant help but not agree...

sorry!


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

John Williams said:


> It´s just awesome, and it was found by mistake.
> His symphony has so many emotions, and his musical voice is unique.
> I believe modern music hasn´t seen anything like this in a long long while.


Welcome. Your first post.

I suspect you might be that composer.


----------



## Boccherini (Mar 29, 2010)

John Williams said:


> It´s just awesome, and it was found by mistake.
> His symphony has so many emotions, and his musical voice is unique.
> I believe modern music hasn´t seen anything like this in a long long while.


Some of us _might_ have thought after reading your post, what a sick person would try to promote his desperate reputation by poorly posting his music here and say he has "just found it by mistake" and "modern music hasn't seen anything like this in a long long while".
But we're kind, your music is perfect... ehhhh that music is perfect.


----------



## Boccherini (Mar 29, 2010)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Welcome. Your first post.
> 
> I suspect you might be that composer.


Whoops!
I started writing my post before I saw yours.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

Boccherini said:


> But we're kind, your music is perfect... ehhhh that music is perfect.


Sorry? Seriously?


----------



## John Williams (Jun 12, 2010)

Look Boccherini and HarpsichordConcerto I do not know the composer anyway.
I just probabily saw a really unique voice, I mean musically, and I don´t see that very often.
And by the way, the first post, I mean that is completely being skeptical, I just could be writing about 
Jay Greenberg, or Alexander Prior and I think they have their unique voice.
And I think that is what you will never understand...


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

He may have a unique voice but i still think its rubbish.


----------



## John Williams (Jun 12, 2010)

And excuse me, to say that the composer is probabily even not happy, that I sent this post, he is probabily just trying to put his career out there, without any defamation, so help with that by supporting or not.


----------



## gmubandgeek (Jun 8, 2010)

Boccherini said:


> Some of us _might_ have thought after reading your post, what a sick person would try to promote his desperate reputation by poorly posting his music here and say he has "just found it by mistake" and "modern music hasn't seen anything like this in a long long while".
> But we're kind, your music is perfect... ehhhh that music is perfect.





HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Welcome. Your first post.
> 
> I suspect you might be that composer.


Amen! Nothing else need be said.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

John Williams said:


> And excuse me, to say that the composer is probabily even not happy, that I sent this post, he is probabily just trying to put his career out there, without any defamation, so help with that by supporting or not.


You see, it is possible that you may be promoting the work of a random composer. I am merely offering my opinion on the piece you have called awesome and full of emotions.


----------



## Km7 (Jun 12, 2010)

Personally, I find the work boring and dry. It doesn't seem carefully and thoughtfully written to me, but written just for the sake of writing it. I would say the orchestration is insensitive, if not even cheesy. Part of the not very good impression is perhaps due to the stiff performance, which I suspect is computer-generated, but it could be done much, much, much better. However, since this isn't the case, it reinforces what I said in my second sentence.

P.S.: Is this thread a joke we failed to get?


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Sounded like it was made with an artificial/electronic orchestra, not real players.


----------



## David58117 (Nov 5, 2009)

Whoever it is needs to invest in some better equipment, as the midi sounds horrible.


----------



## Nix (Feb 20, 2010)

David58117 said:


> Whoever it is needs to invest in some better equipment, as the midi sounds horrible.


The video says he used Sibelius 6. Honestly though, computer playback shouldn't be what a composer invests in. If he or she really knows their stuff they won't need the computer to tell them how it should sound. That said, the composer (whoever it is) really shouldn't be displaying their work with a midi, as it isn't an accurate representation of their work, nor should they be writing work with the playback in mind- which is what the average listener is going to interpret as their intentions. In fact the composer really shouldn't be writing an orchestral piece unless there's some chance it's going to get played, or if they are REALLY creatively inspired and orchestra is the only possible outlet for it, which I don't think is the case here.

Write for what's available, and please, don't post midi's expecting a favorable response and don't do it trying to manipulate others behind a screen name. This forum is a perfectly acceptable place to share your music in the open.


----------



## Km7 (Jun 12, 2010)

*Nix*, I don't completely agree. I am not sure if you are familiar with the abilities and quality of today big orchestral libraries and music production software. They use them in film music, media, etc. and the music sounds quite authentic, because composers who do that actually should and do invest in producing fine computer playback. This is a skill, too. And yes, it takes lots of time. Sibelius libraries are cheesy.



> In fact the composer really shouldn't be writing an orchestral piece unless there's some chance it's going to get played


No offense, but this is ridiculous.


----------



## David58117 (Nov 5, 2009)

Nix, I don't believe Sibelius is a softsynth or a sampler. There are some really amazing programs out there, many of which are meticulously recorded samples from world class orchestras, which is what you hear in many movies and on disks now a days. 

The "it has to be live players or nothing at all" is an outdated way of thinking.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> No offense, but this is ridiculous.





> The "it has to be live players or nothing at all" is an outdated way of thinking


Why? The composer has to have experience in writing for orchestra before he will write serious symphonic work so yes, he should write for orchestra without hoping that it will be performed, but he should write *exercises*, sort of composition-etudes written to shape his abilities. But anything else, pieces that are ment to have artistic value should be performed by real orchestra, otherwise they are worthless. Nobody is going to listen Sibelius playback and enjoy it like real music, it is useful only for purpose of searching for weakness in the score so the composer may correct couple of mistakes before the work will be performed.


----------



## 151 (Jun 14, 2010)

Aramis said:


> But anything else, pieces that are ment to have artistic value should be performed by real orchestra, otherwise they are worthless.


I'm not sure how good your English is, but that turns out to be an absurd statement, unless you were wondering.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> I'm not sure how good your English is, but that turns out to be an absurd statement, unless you were wondering.


I think I said what I wanted to say.

There are two states of musical work: dead - only written; alive - performed. Dead masterpiece has little value until it's brought to life by being performed.


----------



## 151 (Jun 14, 2010)

Aramis said:


> I think I said what I wanted to say.
> 
> There are two states of musical work: dead - only written; alive - performed. Dead masterpiece has little value until it's brought to life by being performed.


I see.

I think a masterpiece exists beyond performance. 

With the way we can synthesise and absorb music in with minds, the piece is never dead.


----------



## Nix (Feb 20, 2010)

David58117 said:


> Nix, I don't believe Sibelius is a softsynth or a sampler. There are some really amazing programs out there, many of which are meticulously recorded samples from world class orchestras, which is what you hear in many movies and on disks now a days.
> 
> The "it has to be live players or nothing at all" is an outdated way of thinking.


Yes, but this piece isn't intended for a movie- which is music that often times isn't actually meant to be heard by the audience, just to create a sort of emotional ambience. If you are writing for films or some sort of media, then yes, a good playback software is necessary, but it was made pretty clear the piece we're discussing in particular was written to be listened to without the distraction of images and dialogue. No serious composer would write a concert piece for orchestra and then present it on a midi to an audience. Hell, even film composers hate using midi's when directors request to see what they've done so far. And for the simple reason that it's not an accurate portrayal of what the music really would sound like.

As a student composer I can tell you right now writing for orchestra without the chance of it getting played is a massive waste of time.

1) because you don't learn anything from it. You may think your getting in good practice for writing for clarinet, but without actually hearing the clarinet you don't know what you're writing all- you need the players to actually learn from what you've written. I've been told so many times- and learned firsthand- that you learn more in the first 5 minutes of rehearsal then you do taking a year of composition lessons. If you want to learn how to write for specific instruments then write for that instrument. Much easier to find a clarinetist then a whole orchestra.

2) You waste time taking on large scale projects (with again, no learned outcome), which hinder in developing your compositional skill. All the things a young composer might want to use to develop their technique- structure, counterpoint, harmonic language etc, can be done with small ensembles. Writing chamber music generally takes less time (if only because there's less instruments to write for), and it is in these small settings, which are much easier to get performances, that you learn the most.

And remember, it doesn't have to be a performance, orchestras (especially youth orchestras) will do readings of a composers work just so they can get an idea of what they've done. Writing an orchestra piece just for a reading is not a waste of time. Writing for nothing, is.

_I think a masterpiece exists beyond performance._

As do I, which is why I hold true to my original statement: if you are really creatively inspired and it must be for orchestra and if you feel you have something inside you thats so good that it has to come out, then write away. But even still, I'd advice first transcribing it for a small ensemble.

Sorry for the tangent- I just don't want people making the same mistakes I did!


----------



## Km7 (Jun 12, 2010)

Well, not all film composers hate MIDI. And I know serious composers who render their orchestral compositions with software samples such as GPO (which -isn't- a bare .mid file).


----------



## 151 (Jun 14, 2010)

I can concur with you Nix but this is correct...



Km7 said:


> not all film composers hate MIDI. And I know serious composers who render their orchestral compositions with software samples such as GPO (which -isn't- a bare .mid file).


MIDI is not a sound, it just sends and receives musical information. You may be surprised at the complexity of some MIDI controllers today (See Brian Eno's recent BBC showcase for example) which use ever-complicated levels of human input, including wind.

I think the definition of a composer should be a much more open and accepted term. There are occasions apt for all forms of musical expression and capture.


----------



## Nix (Feb 20, 2010)

Km7 said:


> Well, not all film composers hate MIDI. And I know serious composers who render their orchestral compositions with software samples such as GPO (which -isn't- a bare .mid file).


Do they use the software because they have no orchestra to play it, or because they're writing FOR the computer (to be played without visuals)? If it's the latter, then thats an entirely different discussion.


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

Nix said:


> As a student composer, I can tell you right now, writing for orchestra without the chance of it getting played is a massive waste of time.


Whoah, man, like, everything's a waste of time when you really, like, think about it.


----------



## Nix (Feb 20, 2010)

Argus said:


> Whoah, man, like, everything's a waste of time when you really, like, think about it.


Heh... sorry- commas removed! And I don't think about it. THAT would be a waste.


----------

