# My 11th Composition



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Was tinkering around the piano and just writing down the sounds that came to mind and leading to others. Yes, I know the first part is whole notes and sounds like Debussy.






still a rough sketch, needs more filling in. will update once I have more


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Completed this piece. I think it could be my favourite of my own pieces.


----------



## nikola (Sep 7, 2012)

This is all so wrong.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

nikola said:


> This is all so wrong.


I don't think someone who shuns music theory could know it is wrong. 

Disliking is a different matter though.


----------



## nikola (Sep 7, 2012)

Phil loves classical said:


> I don't think someone who shuns music theory could know it is wrong.
> 
> Disliking is a different matter though.


Nice way to justify lack of hearing. This is just bunch of chords thrown together and they don't work. You could let cat running on piano keys and it would sound similar.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I should have gave a warning first like I usually do that this is not for listeners looking for safe music (or likely for fans of Yanni).

Yet I find it way less difficult than some early 20th Century composers’ music, which if posted here, would also reap a lot of criticism from you.


----------



## nikola (Sep 7, 2012)

Phil loves classical said:


> I should have gave a warning first like I usually do that this is not for listeners looking for safe music (or likely for fans of Yanni).
> 
> Yet I find it way less difficult than some early 20th Century composers' music, which if posted here, would also reap a lot of criticism from you.


Really? Going with argument "this is not safe music" pretending it's some sort of superior form of music that can't be understand really confirms that you're not in touch with reality.
This is not classical music what you posted. In terms of music overall, it's basically nothing. Few meaningless chords that are actually very easy to hear and to come with conclusion that they are meaningless and bad on all possible levels. There is no idea behind this. It is incoherent mess and time between hitting all those chords is same throughout. It's motionless nothing.
From musical viewpoint, it's meaningless. From experience viewpoint it's terrible. From technical viewpoint it's like 5 year old noodling on piano for the first time in life.

I'm only honest now. From all your sketches so far, there are some half interesting ideas that are undeveloped, but to sum everything, your music is actually to me some of the worst I heard so far on this board and if this piece is your 'peak' in your opinion, then you're really lost. I heard some meaningful and even great classical compositions here even if they were not 'my kind of music'. This is not even remotely close to meaningful or even decent. It's not even a sketch. To call anything music it must have at least something. This has nothing to do with music. You're delusional. If you don't want to improve, great. It's your decision.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

^^ maybe you just don’t get it, or agree with my approach? But to claim it is meaningless is beyond your entitlement. 

Motionless is the opposite of what I say it is. It is constantly in motion with the chord progressions. I am not going back and forth between melody notes over repetitive chords, which is how I would describe your music that I’ve heard (minimalistic I would call it). I’m not trying to attack you but to try to understand your background where you are coming from. 

I am welcome to comments by others who have something to say or suggest, but they first need to know what the goal was.

Plus I do have a few friends (some casual listeners, some with more musical background) I share my music with, and I sensed this was a good direction to head in keeping with my musical goal


----------



## nikola (Sep 7, 2012)

Phil loves classical said:


> ^^ maybe you just don't get it, or agree with my approach? But to claim it is meaningless is beyond your entitlement.
> 
> Motionless is the opposite of what I say it is. It is constantly in motion with the chord progressions. I am not going back and forth between melody notes over repetitive chords, which is how I would describe your music that I've heard (minimalistic I would call it). I'm not trying to attack you but to try to under your background where you are coming from.
> 
> ...


Whatever you say is nothing more than snobbish nonsense that is not backed up with talent, ability to hear music or any theory knowledge that you praise so much.
You think that so called 'theory knowledge' can compensate the fact that you actually don't have a talent for composing. You're actually way too old to compose such nonsensical musical sketches. 
You should composed something like this when you were 7 years old. Even then this would be to many ears obvious sign that you should stick to something else and not to music. 
This so called 'chord progression' is actually bunch of chords that don't work together put at one place with here and there some single tone probably pretending to be a melody. It's just all over the place, incoherent chords noodling - not music. 
This is probably what you want to achieve, but simply can't: 



It's not my style, but it actually deserves attention because it is something with clear idea and done well. So, before trying to sell crap like "you can't understand my piece because it's not safe music and it's too advanced for you' try to ask yourself first is that what you compose anything more than the statement of your own pretentiousness.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

^^ thanks for the link, but it is not anything close to what I wanted to achieve.

Your last question is interesting, and I think we’re going somewhere. I don’t consider music being created in a sense actually, but that music is just a product of pre-existing ideas being explored. So my “music” is just from ideas I’ve heard elsewhere that I’m digging at a slightly different location. Maybe what I dig up may not appeal to you and others. Which is why I don’t expect people to like what I compose. If I get paid to dig up stuff people would like, I would not be having as much fun. I’m glad we had this chat 

I actually agree with your criticism on the left hand chords played being at the same timing for most of the piece, and is something I havent worked out totally in my head. I’ll look into that.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Good to see nothings changed since I have been away from the boards! :lol:

I kind of like it, but it needs a bit more shaping and as always, it's too short.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Good to see nothings changed since I have been away from the boards! :lol:
> 
> I kind of like it, but it needs a bit more shaping and as always, it's too short.


You're right about the shaping. I nailed down the rhythm here, except one part I messed up a bit, and changed a few chords around.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

nikola said:


> This is just bunch of chords thrown together and they don't work.


I probably never agreed with nikola on anything, but on this one he's dead right.


----------



## neofite (Feb 19, 2017)

As my name implies, I'm no expert. However, I think nikola's criticism might be a bit harsh and that this piece could have some potential. Of course, it clearly could use some polishing, not only of the composition itself but also of its performance. With a little such polishing, it certainly would be no worse than a lot of the monotonous so-called "contemporary classical" music that is churned out these days, and perhaps more original and interesting than much of it.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

neofite said:


> As my name implies, I'm no expert. However, I think nikola's criticism might be a bit harsh and that this piece could have some potential. Of course, it clearly could use some polishing, not only of the composition itself but also of its performance. With a little such polishing, it certainly would be no worse than a lot of the monotonous so-called "contemporary classical" music that is churned out these days, and perhaps more original and interesting than much of it.


I love you :kiss::kiss: Here is an updated version with more expressive playing and a couple of fixed chords.






There is no theme, just colour and rhythms as Debussy puts it.


----------



## neofite (Feb 19, 2017)

This is a major improvement, at least in my humble opinion. 

If you are not already doing so, I suggest that you expand it to at least twice its existing length, not so much by adding new material but mainly by repeating and developing the existing themes. This can be tricky, but success in this regard is part of the joy of composing. By the way, I hope you are creating a written/printed score for this work.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

neofite said:


> This is a major improvement, at least in my humble opinion.
> 
> If you are not already doing so, I suggest that you expand it to at least twice its existing length, not so much by adding new material but mainly by repeating and developing the existing themes. This can be tricky, but success in this regard is part of the joy of composing. By the way, I hope you are creating a written/printed score for this work.


thanks. Yes, I always create a score for everything I write. It helps spot problems, and gives a good view of the whole thing.


----------

