# My Piano Compositions



## Captainnumber36

1. *Goliath*


----------



## Captainnumber36

Any thoughts ?


----------



## Phil loves classical

i think there are quite a few nice parts. My preference to hear them closer together, and cut out the repetitions, which are like moments you are just thinking of what to do next. I think the harmony is more tight than ever before. My suggestion is to condense, regardless of what genre it is, which sounds like a cross between pop and classical to me. I thought the changes were well done. If you can add more it would be even better. It seems to contain folkish tunes which is nice


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> i think there are quite a few nice parts. My preference to hear them closer together, and cut out the repetitions, which are like moments you are just thinking of what to do next. I think the harmony is more tight than ever before. My suggestion is to condense, regardless of what genre it is, which sounds like a cross between pop and classical to me. I thought the changes were well done. If you can add more it would be even better. It seems to contain folkish tunes which is nice


Thanks Phil!

I think it's Pop, Classical and New Age.

I suppose I could cut out that second "verse" section...


----------



## Captainnumber36

I think a sweet acoustic guitar rendition of this piece would be great. You mentioning the folk aspect made me think that!


----------



## Captainnumber36

2. Cosmic Uncle


----------



## Phil loves classical

Try it on some different patches on your electric keyboard. It may work better as ambient music, which generally has less changes.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Try it on some different patches on your electric keyboard. It may work better as ambient music, which generally has less changes.


That's a good idea, though most of the patches on my keyboard aren't very good. It does have a pretty rockin' harpsichord though!

haha, :lol:


----------



## Captainnumber36

*3. Tunnel*


----------



## Phil loves classical

The harmony has been pretty tight in your last pieces. Try some less obvious chord changes, and stuff, to make it more interesting for the full length.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> The harmony has been pretty tight in your last pieces. Try some less obvious chord changes, and stuff, to make it more interesting for the full length.


Can you explain in more detail what you mean by the harmony being tight? My vague knowledge of the term doesn't leave me with much to take away from that sentiment. What I know of harmony is that it is the way two notes or more notes played simultaneously sound together. I'd appreciate your explanation!

Thanks


----------



## Captainnumber36

Also, I've been posting my earlier pieces that I wrote in high school which I feel are much stronger works. The only one which was a newer one in this thread was the "Cosmic Uncle" one, but I took it down thinking it wasn't such an interesting piece.


----------



## Capeditiea

as stated on another post or two... i shall (i am not sure if i posted it on Phil's post or not... but i shall watch at somepoint. :3 then grant my critical review.  but i am not as mean... so no worries.  i will tell you how it is.) (although i have listened to one of Phil's works. and after his explainations of what i didn't realize made a new focus.) 

it may be tomorrow... (well today. when i get to a youtube marathon of composers on this site... sheesh... why is it always youtube? sigh...) or friday.
*nods, i shall embark on this quest to see how ye all fare in my eyes... err... ears. 
I might even get to some of Billy's symphonies. among others.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Can you explain in more detail what you mean by the harmony being tight? My vague knowledge of the term doesn't leave me with much to take away from that sentiment. What I know of harmony is that it is the way two notes or more notes played simultaneously sound together. I'd appreciate your explanation!
> 
> Thanks


I meant your harmony has been very good, very clear. That's all. I also suggested you try changing things up more, since you're already there.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Capeditiea said:


> as stated on another post or two... i shall (i am not sure if i posted it on Phil's post or not... but i shall watch at somepoint. :3 then grant my critical review.  but i am not as mean... so no worries.  i will tell you how it is.) (although i have listened to one of Phil's works. and after his explainations of what i didn't realize made a new focus.)
> 
> it may be tomorrow... (well today. when i get to a youtube marathon of composers on this site... sheesh... why is it always youtube? sigh...) or friday.
> *nods, i shall embark on this quest to see how ye all fare in my eyes... err... ears.
> I might even get to some of *Billy's symphonies*. among others.


I wouldn't recommend doing that...


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

How do you come up with your names? They're very interesting to say the least, although in some occasions, I'm not entirely sure if they fit the mood of the piece.


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> How do you come up with your names? They're very interesting to say the least, although in some occasions, I'm not entirely sure if they fit the mood of the piece.


I just do what _feels_ right. I'm all about feeling and emotion!  Which of the ones above do you feel don't fit the mood?


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Captainnumber36 said:


> I just do what _feels_ right. I'm all about feeling and emotion!  Which of the ones above do you feel don't fit the mood?


Probably Goliath. I was expecting something dark and moody, but it wasn't really all that dark. It fits in nicely with your other pieces though.

Have you considered trying to broaden the musical colours in your palette? I think it would benefit you greatly.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

On the topic of what feels right... I used to do only that as well, but found great difficulty in obtaining the results I desired. I've found that music theory can help supplant the feeling you wish to convey.


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> Probably Goliath. I was expecting something dark and moody, but it wasn't really all that dark. It fits in nicely with your other pieces though.
> 
> Have you considered trying to broaden the musical colours in your palette? I think it would benefit you greatly.


I kind of see Goliath as showing a tender side to the mammoth of a beast in question; I represent his size with the length of the song and the number of changes it goes through and through playing it delicately, I show his tenderness.

How do you recommend I broaden my musical palette?


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Captainnumber36 said:


> I kind of see Goliath as showing a tender side to the mammoth of a beast in question; I represent his size with the length of the song and the number of changes it goes through and through playing it delicately, I show his tenderness.
> 
> How do you recommend I broaden my musical palette?


Maybe try finding a composer who uses different ideas and sounds than you. Listen to some of their music and try and analyze the different techniques they use that you like. Then you try and apply that to your music while changing it to still be your own style. That's how I expand my composing horizons. I'm sure some others on here have different strategies to diversify their styles.


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> Maybe try finding a composer who uses different ideas and sounds than you. Listen to some of their music and try and analyze the different techniques they use that you like. Then you try and apply that to your music while changing it to still be your own style. That's how I expand my composing horizons. I'm sure some others on here have different strategies to diversify their styles.


I've kind of been doing that with Beethoven's Piano Sonatas; studying his left hand patterns b/c I want to make my left hand sections more interesting!


----------



## Captainnumber36

*4. Ripples*


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

I see a lot of improvement from your earlier compositions, more complex.

I do think though, that you need to have more variation in key. After the initial theme changes, it kinda gets old. Still though, big improvement from when I last listened to your pieces.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Capt'n, I hear a lot more changes in this work, while the harmony is still clear, etc. I think you are heading in the right path in the Classical vein, while it sounds poppish too, but there is nothing wrong with that. I think this is definitely your best piece by far.


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> I see a lot of improvement from your earlier compositions, more complex.
> 
> I do think though, that you need to have more variation in key. After the initial theme changes, it kinda gets old. Still though, big improvement from when I last listened to your pieces.


I've been posting works I wrote earlier in my life, which are much better. College killed my complexity with the musicians I met which are the pieces I was posting when you were around last time.

Thanks for the advice, I'll try to change it up more.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Capt'n, I hear a lot more changes in this work, while the harmony is still clear, etc. I think you are heading in the right path in the Classical vein, while it sounds poppish too, but there is nothing wrong with that. I think this is definitely your best piece by far.


Thank you.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I need to put more time into figuring out the exact pedaling I want to use in the few pieces I've kept from all of the ones I've written. That will take these works to the next level, and if I ever go to score the music, I will know what I want.


----------



## Captainnumber36

*5. Pulse*


----------



## Capeditiea

Captainnumber36 said:


> *5. Pulse*


i have one question... Why are there scizzers on the floor behind you?"

is there a way to download your compositions?


----------



## hpowders

Capeditiea said:


> i have one question... Why are there scizzers on the floor behind you?"
> 
> is there a way to download your compositions?


That way he can cut his posts short.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Clever Powders, clever indeed!

I was using them for something in the basement and they just ended up there and I haven't picked them up yet.

Cap:

There are sites that can convert youtube videos into mp3s to be downloaded to your computer. It's a little work, but that is one way I know of.

https://ytmp3.cc/


----------



## Capeditiea

Captainnumber36 said:


> Clever Powders, clever indeed!
> 
> I was using them for something in the basement and they just ended up there and I haven't picked them up yet.
> 
> Cap:
> 
> There are sites that can convert youtube videos into mp3s to be downloaded to your computer. It's a little work, but that is one way I know of.
> 
> https://ytmp3.cc/


:O this will make listening to youtube things a lot more easier for me.  i shall fetch all your works... (no worries i will only use for personal use. if i like them enough i will also listen to them more than once.) :3


----------



## Captainnumber36

Capeditiea said:


> :O this will make listening to youtube things a lot more easier for me.  i shall fetch all your works... (no worries i will only use for personal use. if i like them enough i will also listen to them more than once.) :3


I hope you enjoy them! . The sound quality isn't spectacular, but it gets the point across.


----------



## Capeditiea

So i am awaiting for them to download... but the only one that failed... was Cosmic Uncle... 
I will listen when i wake up. :3 gonna sleep now.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Capeditiea said:


> So i am awaiting for them to download... but the only one that failed... was Cosmic Uncle...
> I will listen when i wake up. :3 gonna sleep now.


I took Cosmic Uncle down, that is why it didn't work. Awesome, let me know what you think!


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> *5. Pulse*


Sounds very Moody and nice to me. Probably the single most moving to me. I think some more variation would make it better, but it works well like minimalistic music.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Sounds very Moody and nice to me. Probably the single most moving to me. I think some more variation would make it better, but it works well like minimalistic music.


Thanks !


----------



## Captainnumber36

So I have one more piece to post of all the old songs of mine I'm keeping, then the mission to compose on the level of the pieces above again begins.

One of the main reasons I'm recording them is so I can remember how they go once I have a whole lot of compositions since I don't write out a score.


----------



## Capeditiea

On Goliath, it's name doesn't match what is going on... it has more of a feel of a Bright Juggernaut... or a Train even... (unless we can call the train, Goliath.) 
Which oddly seems to be a great prelude to Tunnel... (where the train ends up going through a long tunnel.) 
Though with tunnel, i feel there should be more emphasis on the notes and slightly slower in tempo. (particularly in the first half)
I really love Ripples. 

(pulse didn't download correctly so i gotta try again after i my laptop updates, since it is taking most of the data...) 


From listening to those three, i have a constant feeling of going back into the Old American West when trains were first becoming popular... 

It is really visual to me, and would love to play it, (if i had a piano.) it seems easy enough to play upon the values of many age groups. 

the only change i suggest is making more emotive. It just felt a little off. (which probably was more understanding when Uncle Cosmos was around...) 

I will listen to the three again before i listen to Pulse, since it feels like an interesting story is occuring in my ears and mind. Which may end up with a different outcome or opinion.


----------



## Sekhar

Captainnumber36 said:


> *5. Pulse*


This is an interesting piece of music. Reminds of Philip Glass (from the couple of times I heard him), Bluegrass (again, from what little I know of that style), oriental, and even Indian (east): e.g., the phrase at 1:17 that you repeat many times is very distinctly Indian - in fact, I'm pretty sure I heard that exact phrase earlier in an Indian music context. Overall, like I said, interesting.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Capeditiea said:


> On Goliath, it's name doesn't match what is going on... it has more of a feel of a Bright Juggernaut... or a Train even... (unless we can call the train, Goliath.)
> Which oddly seems to be a great prelude to Tunnel... (where the train ends up going through a long tunnel.)
> Though with tunnel, i feel there should be more emphasis on the notes and slightly slower in tempo. (particularly in the first half)
> I really love Ripples.
> 
> (pulse didn't download correctly so i gotta try again after i my laptop updates, since it is taking most of the data...)
> 
> From listening to those three, i have a constant feeling of going back into the Old American West when trains were first becoming popular...
> 
> It is really visual to me, and would love to play it, (if i had a piano.) it seems easy enough to play upon the values of many age groups.
> 
> the only change i suggest is making more emotive. It just felt a little off. (which probably was more understanding when Uncle Cosmos was around...)
> 
> I will listen to the three again before i listen to Pulse, since it feels like an interesting story is occuring in my ears and mind. Which may end up with a different outcome or opinion.


Thanks for the feedback. I will try to play them more emotively in future! The title Goliath could probably use an adjective with it b/c it's supposed to be showing a tender side to the mammoth beast who lost the battle to a tiny man, David.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Sekhar said:


> This is an interesting piece of music. Reminds of Philip Glass (from the couple of times I heard him), Bluegrass (again, from what little I know of that style), oriental, and even Indian (east): e.g., the phrase at 1:17 that you repeat many times is very distinctly Indian - in fact, I'm pretty sure I heard that exact phrase earlier in an Indian music context. Overall, like I said, interesting.


Thanks for your thoughts Sekhar! It does have a lot of different influences in it.


----------



## Captainnumber36

*6. Good Night*


----------



## Captainnumber36

No thoughts on _*Good Night*_?


----------



## Sekhar

Captainnumber36 said:


> No thoughts on _*Good Night*_?


Pleasing music, but seems to me rather too simple and what I suppose you could call minimalist, which I don't particularly like. I guess it could work for "easy listening" ambient type of situations, but doesn't sound like something that can stand on its own...which may not have been your intent anyway.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Sekhar said:


> Pleasing music, but seems to me rather too simple and what I suppose you could call minimalist, which I don't particularly like. I guess it could work for "easy listening" ambient type of situations, but doesn't sound like something that can stand on its own...which may not have been your intent anyway.


All of my music is minimalistic so you probably won't enjoy it much.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I consider my music to be a hybrid of Pop, Classical & New Age fwiw. Did you pick up that the first section is in 7/4 and then shifts betweeen 4/4 and 7/4 throughout the rest of the piece?

How about the Moonlight quotations/influence?

It upsets me that you think this is easy listening, but it is what it is. I would hope my music is a deep enriching experience for the listener.


----------



## Sekhar

Captainnumber36 said:


> All of my music is minimalistic...so, you probably won't enjoy my music much.


Actually, no - I did like your "Pulse" because it combined different styles in an interesting way. For me, minimalism is fine if it can add complexity in other ways, like say counterpoint or mixing styles like you did. The "Good Night" piece is IMO way too simple, almost like doodling where you play around on the piano extempore.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Sekhar said:


> Actually, no - I did like your "Pulse" because it combined different styles in an interesting way. For me, minimalism is fine if it can add complexity in other ways, like say counterpoint or mixing styles like you did. The "Good Night" piece is IMO way too simple, almost like doodling where you play around on the piano extempore.


Well, I'm happy you enjoyed Pulse at least!

What about the subtle time signature shifts between 7/4 and 4/4? LOL, I'm not trying to force you to like it, I just consider it one of my best, an early masterpiece.

Sometimes simplicity is best!


----------



## Captainnumber36

*7. Nocturne*


----------



## Captainnumber36

^^

You may prefer this one Sekhar, it has more complexity to it!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil, I'd love to get your thoughts on the latest two I've posted!


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Phil, I'd love to get your thoughts on the latest two I've posted!


I think the Good Night is a step backward from a couple of the ones before it  The Nocturne is a challenging melody to harmonize well with the left hand. Some of your notes don't harmonize with others, creating disonnance that doesn't fit the piece. I harmonized the first part. Each note in the melody immediately before and after should harmonize with a note in the chord, which could create complex chords, if you don't go by the standard I, IV, V progressions, those standard progressions could make the song sound dumb.






fixed a couple of notes after I relistened.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Thanks, I'll work on it.


----------



## nikola

Nocturne really has beautiful melody.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> I think the Good Night is a step backward from a couple of the ones before it  The Nocturne is a challenging melody to harmonize well with the left hand. Some of your notes don't harmonize with others, creating disonnance that doesn't fit the piece. I harmonized the first part. Each note in the melody immediately before and after should harmonize with a note in the chord, which could create complex chords, if you don't go by the standard I, IV, V progressions, those standard progressions could make the song sound dumb.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fixed a couple of notes after I relistened.


What have you done in this video? It sounds terrible. Did you just made a dissonant version of his piece while trying to show him that his tonal music is dissonant?


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> What have you done in this video? It sounds terrible. Did you just made a dissonant version of his piece while trying to show him that his tonal music is dissonant?


Not surprised fo hear that from you. It is not disonant, but using harmony in different functions according to the melody which itself contains dissonance, used for suspense. Why don't you try harmonizing the same melody?  Prove your worth as a composer and listener. It can't be done with the 2 chords: I and V that is in your compositions.

Here I updated one chord which was giving me trouble before. It is using software program which won't sound as good as a real piano. But an experienced listener would be able to get past it


----------



## nikola

You said:



> Some of your notes don't harmonize with others, creating disonnance that doesn't fit the piece.


His notes harmonize with others and his piece is not dissonant. On the other hand what you did IS disonnant.

You also said:



> "those standard progressions could make the song sound dumb."


What you did actually sound dumb and I don't know was that actual intention.

And then you said:



> Prove your worth as a composer and listener. It can't be done with the 2 chords: I and V that is in your compositions.


I don't want to play with his music because there's nothing wrong with his music, but it seems that you hear things that are not there. Dissonance? Maybe your brain misinterprets what dissonant in reality is.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> You said:
> 
> His notes harmonize with others and his piece is not dissonant. On the other hand what you did IS disonnant.
> 
> You also said:
> 
> What you did actually sound dumb and I don't know was that actual intention.
> 
> And then you said:
> 
> I don't want to play with his music because there's nothing wrong with his music, but it seems that you hear things that are not there. Dissonance? Maybe your brain misinterprets what dissonant in reality is.


Give it a rest, yeah?

Phil ALWAYS tries to be constructive in his feedback towards others, whereas you seem to go out of your way to try and make others feel inferior. You could stand to learn a thing or two from him.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> Give it a rest, yeah?
> 
> Phil ALWAYS tries to be constructive in his feedback towards others, whereas you seem to go out of your way to try and make others feel inferior. You could stand to learn a thing or two from him.


So, just because your music is not that good means that you have to answer to every post I post here!? Oh well...


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> So, just because your music is not that good means that you have to answer to every post I post here!? Oh well...


I live for talkclassical drama tbh. I often share anecdotes with my friends and family for a good laugh.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> I live for talkclassical drama tbh. I often share anecdotes with my friends and family for a good laugh.


Yeah... and I mastur**** on your posts with my whole family. You are making us happy. Thank you! :kiss:


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> You said:
> 
> His notes harmonize with others and his piece is not dissonant. On the other hand what you did IS disonnant.
> 
> You also said:
> 
> What you did actually sound dumb and I don't know was that actual intention.
> 
> And then you said:
> 
> I don't want to play with his music because there's nothing wrong with his music, but it seems that you hear things that are not there. Dissonance? Maybe your brain misinterprets what dissonant in reality is.


the notes did not harmonize. The Captn's melody was sophisticated, but the harmony in the left hand had some conflicting notes. You also have some in your own music. when you put stresses outside of the conflicting chords it may not be heard as clearly, but is still actually there. The ledt and right hands have to go together, and the left hand has to cover the melody. Plus I didn't say his sounds dumb, I said if you use only tonic chords or dominants then it cluld sound dumb 

Capt'n here is a piano version which illustrates better what I'm saying. Here the tones sound a lot better than on midi I think you are almost there. it is in Chopin's style and is more complex as you said. Just work on the left hand a bit more.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> the notes did not harmonize. The Captn's melody was sophisticated, but the harmony in the left hand had some conflicting notes. You also have some in your own music. when you put stresses outside of the conflicting chords it may not be heard as clearly, but is still actually there. The ledt and right hands have to go together, and the left hand has to cover the melody. Plus I didn't say his sounds dumb, I said if you use only tonic chords or dominants then it cluld sound dumb
> 
> Capt'n here is a piano version which illustrates better what I'm saying. Here the tones sound a lot better than on midi I think you are almost there. it is in Chopin's style and is more complex as you said. Just work on the left hand a bit more.


You are like a blind man teaching someone who can see how to mix colors.

It is sad that you're so sure that you think that you know what you're talking about. There are no conflicting notes, but when I listen to your raping of his music, I can certainly hear many conflicting notes. Buy new ears.
What you did now in this video sounds more tolerable, but previous version was disaster of disturbed mind. You should leave other people's music alone.


----------



## nikola

Captainnumber36 said:


> No thoughts on _*Good Night*_?


Haven't you already played "Good Night"? I remember it was based on "Moolight Sonata"?


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> You are like a blind man teaching someone who can see how to mix colors.
> 
> It is sad that you're so sure that you think that you know what you're talking about. There are no conflicting notes, but when I listen to your raping of his music, I can certainly hear many conflicting notes. Buy new ears.
> What you did now in this video sounds more tolerable, but previous version was disaster of disturbed mind. You should leave other people's music alone.


well it's not just me obviously.  keep ranting if it makes you feel better, somewhere else. In the end the Captain did ask for my opinion, and this is not the place for TRYING to knock others down. I ask that you refrain from further retaliation in respect of the Captain's thread.

BTW the real piano version has the same notes as the computer generated.


----------



## Captainnumber36

It did sound a bit dissonant to me when I heard the midi version, tbh. The piano version helps illustrate to me how you envision it and hear it much clearer.

I do appreciate hearing Phil's opinions and Nikola's support of my music. Phil always has something interesting to say, and I feel he is genuine with whatever he offers. I don't think he's arrogant like some others on here, and it makes me happy that someone of his level would 1. take the time of day to keep listening to my music and 2. take the time to construct thoughtful and insightful comments on the pieces. It makes me happy when I have pleased his ears, b/c I think his are stronger than mine at this stage.

I love Nikola's compositions and think they are fantastic. Yes they are simple, but there is nothing wrong with simple in my book. They are melodious and stand strong on their own.

I think I need to master this harmony thing b/c I don't think I can create masterpieces without an understanding of it.

Thanks to both of you!

And yes Nikola, I have posted Good Night before. This is a different recording of it though.

I also like TC drama!


----------



## Captainnumber36

One thing I don't like about your version Phil is how much space you leave in-between the phrases; it does't feel fluid.


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> Nocturne really has beautiful melody.


Thanks Nikola! Your continuous support helps me more than you know.


----------



## Captainnumber36

But again, if I'm being honest, I can't hear how my version doesn't harmonize. To me it sounds perfectly fine! I feel, Phil, the chords you substituted in place of the ones I used in the original piece are flashier for lack of a better term. They are more aggressive in their color and attack the ears with more vigor than the original piece.

But, I still am unable to hear how my version doesn't harmonize, and wonder if that's even an issue.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> One thing I don't like about your version Phil is how much space you leave in-between the phrases; it does't feel fluid.


I agree on the spacing. It was to make the harmony more clear. E Christobel also mentioned about the harmonization before to this piece or similar. As I said in the other pieces the harmony was airtight and perfect, but with this more sophisticated melody with what they call suspensions, the way to harmonize is to adapt differently for just certain chords. When I learned Beethoven and Chopin in lessons there were also a few chords in transition that seemed to jump out and surprise me, which didn't sound smooth, or something. But over time my ears got trained to hear it. It is aggressive since it changes the direction, but is what Classical composers used to keep things moving, and to anticipate what comes next.

When I relistened to your version it is the bass note in some places that sounds off, and makes the harmony sound muddy in a way. You'll notice I never changed the right hand melody notes which are perfect. What I'll do is try to recreate your version on piano, emphasising the notes I feel wrong, which will draw more attention to it, which may not have been noticeable before. There isn't only one way to harmonize, BTW.

I think this piece has great potential. As I said earlier it is challenging to harmonize adequately.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I agree on the spacing. It was to make the harmony more clear. E Christobel also mentioned about the harmonization before to this piece or similar. As I said in the other pieces the harmony was airtight and perfect, but with this more sophisticated melody with what they call suspensions, the way to harmonize is to adapt differently for just certain chords. When I learned Beethoven and Chopin in lessons there were also a few chords in transition that seemed to jump out and surprise me, which didn't sound smooth, or something. But over time my ears got trained to hear it. It is aggressive since it changes the direction, but is what Classical composers used to keep things moving, and to anticipate what comes next.
> 
> When I relistened to your version it is the bass note in some places that sounds off, and makes the harmony sound muddy in a way. You'll notice I never changed the right hand melody notes which are perfect. What I'll do is try to recreate your version on piano, emphasising the notes I feel wrong, which will draw more attention to it, which may not have been noticeable before. There isn't only one way to harmonize, BTW.
> 
> I think this piece has great potential. As I said earlier it is challenging to harmonize adequately.


Theoretically, couldn't you change the right hand to match the left hand chords too? (not that I"d want to, just wondering).


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Theoretically, couldn't you change the right hand to match the left hand chords too? (not that I"d want to, just wondering).


Yes you could. But with the melody you already have something good. You're implying a certain harmony to go with it. Here it is on computer mdi, I marked up certain spots where there could be some problems in red. Basically you want to avoid 7th intervals with the right hand note and bottom base note on the left hand in this type of piece (it is Romantic, not atonal). You instinctively implied a dominant but used a different note instead. The challenge is to avoid the 7ths while not affecting anything else, since a change could interact with something else creating dissonance. You instinctively wanted to use the same chord twice with left hand which works most of the time.


----------



## Captainnumber36

So, I need help at learning how to hear the inaccuracies in the harmony so I can go about correcting it on my own. Any tips?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Yes you could. But with the melody you already have something good. You're implying a certain harmony to go with it. Here it is on computer mdi, I marked up certain spots where there could be some problems in red. Basically you want to avoid 7th intervals with the right hand note and bottom base note on the left hand in this type of piece (it is Romantic, not atonal). You instinctively implied a dominant but used a different note instead. The challenge is to avoid the 7ths while not affecting anything else, since a change could interact with something else creating dissonance. You instinctively wanted to use the same chord twice with left hand which works most of the time.


Is this video trying to show me my mistakes? The last chord doesn't sound right.


----------



## nikola

Captainnumber36 said:


> Is this video trying to show me my mistakes? The last chord doesn't sound right.


Once again he proved that he can't hear a thing. Your notes are all fine. Stop asking blind man to teach you how to mix colors.


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> Once again he proved that he can't hear a thing. Your notes are all fine. Stop asking blind man to teach you how to mix colors.


I'm a little insecure. On one hand, I have always believed in following my ear and my heart when it comes to composition on the other hand I think that if I want to impress this high brow community I have to do something that is theoretically correct.


----------



## nikola

Captainnumber36 said:


> I'm a little insecure. On one hand, I have always believed in following my ear and my heart when it comes to composition on the other hand I think that if I want to impress this high brow community I have to do something that is theoretically correct.


There's nothing theoretically correct in his disonnant interepretations of your music.


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> There's nothing theoretically correct in his disonnant interepretations of your music.


He does love his atonality in his own work! lol.


----------



## Captainnumber36

There is such a thing as being theoretically correct, but I've never cared about it, but at the same time, I want to impress folks. But I should just focus on doing what's right by me as a composer and let the listeners find me rather than the other way around. I post it and let ppl decide for themselves.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> So, I need help at learning how to hear the inaccuracies in the harmony so I can go about correcting it on my own. Any tips?


Just keep listening to music. harmonies will form in your mind naturally. Keep in mind the most disonant intervals are 2nds and 7ths which are the keys closest to each other like B and C C#, and tritone like C and F# together. You don't need to read much theory. You already picked up some instinctively. Just keep trying different combinations. And see what Beethoven and Chopin does. They are great for a reason, picking the best combinations and avoiding bad ones. I think the more and closer you listen to others, the more aware you become. Paul McCartney listened to a lot of Classical, so he also instinctively picked up a lot. You already have certain song types down. This one is tough to harmonize. I wish others here would try and post some harmonizations on the same melody.

BTW, I like both consonant and dissonant music, which different conventions. I've passed harmony hearing tests in my piano exam.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Is this video trying to show me my mistakes? The last chord doesn't sound right.


Yes these are the chords you used. When everything is unstressed and unpedalled as on the midi, then the warts will show. Follow in your original video where the red markings are. Contrary to what Nikola says, these 7th intervals are accepted as disonant by everyone, and is bigger than you, me and Nikola. So it's like arguing against grammar teachers. The more he tries to put me down, the more off the mark against everything he becomes, I've just been more polite * I would challenge him to recreate what you did to prove his hearing ability.* Not holding mh breath on that one (what excuse will he make up this time?) In pop standards they wouldn't allow 7th intervals on record, either. They have professionals proofreading everything.

Just keep at it little by little. I know you have higher ambitions. You've already been down the other path.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> Yes these are the chords you used. When everything is unstressed and unpedalled as on the midi, then the warts will show. Follow in your original video where the red markings are. Contrary to what Nikola says, these 7th intervals are accepted as disonant by everyone, and is bigger than you, me and Nikola. So it's like arguing against grammar teachers. The more he tries to put me down, the more off the mark against everything he becomes, I've just been more polite * I would challenge him to recreate what you did to prove his hearing ability.* Not holding mh breath on that one (what excuse will he make up this time?) In pop standards they wouldn't allow 7th intervals on record, either. They have professionals proofreading everything.
> 
> Just keep at it little by little. I know you have higher ambitions. You've already been down the other path.


I already heard your "versions", so I rest my case.


----------



## Czech composer

nice, nikola is back. popcorn time!


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> I already heard your "versions", so I rest my case.


Ah, that's what I thought.  BTW, I was a piano teacher for a while, and my job was to hear when the harmony was off, even when my stepkids couldn't. Also I arranged pop songs before similarly only given a melody, and this was a tough one, though I wasn't at the piano the first couple times and just did it by software. I showed them juzt for fun both versions without saying by whom. Maybe it's a war with words that you want to win?

Hey, Captn, I'll try to record a pop song I arranged on piano without given any chords, for my wife. I had wanted to record it years ago. I'll have to relearn from memory


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> Ah, that's what I thought.  BTW, I was a piano teacher for a while, and my job was to hear when the harmony was off, even when my stepkids couldn't. Also I arranged pop songs before similarly only given a melody, and this was a tough one, though I wasn't at the piano the first couple times and just did it by software. I showed them juzt for fun both versions without saying by whom. Maybe it's a war with words that you want to win?
> 
> Hey, Captn, I'll try to record a pop song I arranged on piano without given any chords, for my wife. I had wanted to record it years ago. I'll have to relearn from memory


I heard your versions of "correct" harmonies, so it's obvious to anyone who is not tone deaf that you don't know what you're talking about. Someone must tell you that. Sorry.


----------



## Sekhar

Captainnumber36 said:


> There is such a thing as being theoretically correct, but I've never cared about it, but at the same time, I want to impress folks. But I should just focus on doing what's right by me as a composer and let the listeners find me rather than the other way around. I post it and let ppl decide for themselves.


Captain, my sincere suggestion is that you do spend some time on studying theory (lots of free online sites) to get a grasp of the basic concepts. It has nothing to with impressing folks (nor should it ever be IMO) but to understand the fundamental ideas, like how harmony functions as in this particular case. I believe in functional harmony, so I don't feel we should ever harmonize a piece so it "sounds nice," but should use harmony with purpose: e.g., to establish a key, create progressions/cadences to build structure, vary the mood as you develop the piece, etc. It'd be impossible to do that without understanding how the chords function, as there are many, many combinations. And it's not that hard, though it can take a year or two to get comfortable. Still, theory is much, much easier to master than musicianship, which you seem to be good at (and it's a gift), so I'd strongly suggest you go for it.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Here is an Asian pop song I harmonized years ago, given just the melody, and still have no idea how it sounds by others, haven't listened to any except mine. I think what people have to do is master basic progressions before going into more complex ones. Some people tend to shun more accessible, consonant music and try to dive right into being "original", when they haven't quite grasped harmony, which leads to problems.






Excuse the playing.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> Here is an Asian pop song I harmonized years ago, given just the melody, and still have no idea how it sounds by others, haven't listened to any except mine. I think what people have to do is master basic progressions before going into more complex ones. Some people tend to shun more accessible, consonant music and try to dive right into being "original", when they haven't quite grasped harmony, which leads to problems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excuse the playing.


There are some harmonies that sounds kinda 'off', but it's mostly decent. 
I know you can do much worse than this. Show us


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> There are some harmonies that sounds kinda 'off', but it's mostly decent.
> I know you can do much worse than this. Show us


lol! The two of you are fun to read going back and forth.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Sekhar said:


> Captain, my sincere suggestion is that you do spend some time on studying theory (lots of free online sites) to get a grasp of the basic concepts. It has nothing to with impressing folks (nor should it ever be IMO) but to understand the fundamental ideas, like how harmony functions as in this particular case. I believe in functional harmony, so I don't feel we should ever harmonize a piece so it "sounds nice," but should use harmony with purpose: e.g., to establish a key, create progressions/cadences to build structure, vary the mood as you develop the piece, etc. It'd be impossible to do that without understanding how the chords function, as there are many, many combinations. And it's not that hard, though it can take a year or two to get comfortable. Still, theory is much, much easier to master than musicianship, which you seem to be good at (and it's a gift), so I'd strongly suggest you go for it.


Do you have any sites to suggest or what specific theory I should focus on learning about? I do know some! But my ear is definitely stronger than my knowledge of theory since I learned Suzuki piano that emphasizes ear development.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Here is an Asian pop song I harmonized years ago, given just the melody, and still have no idea how it sounds by others, haven't listened to any except mine. I think what people have to do is master basic progressions before going into more complex ones. Some people tend to shun more accessible, consonant music and try to dive right into being "original", when they haven't quite grasped harmony, which leads to problems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excuse the playing.


That was really good!


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> I heard your versions of "correct" harmonies, so it's obvious to anyone who is not tone deaf that you don't know what you're talking about. Someone must tell you that. Sorry.


To be fair, his acoustic piano version sounded good except for the spaces between the phrases. I need to sharpen my ears to get on Phil's level.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil, what in your opinion makes Good Night less clever than the others?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Also, Phil, it looks like what you did in the midi version that points out my "mistakes" is add the note I'm hitting in my right hand to the left hand chord. Doesn't it make a difference where the note is hit on the piano in terms of how it comes off to the listener? It's really bothering me that I can't hear what's wrong with my piece.

I think Nikola isn't messing with my composition b/c he doesn't see anything wrong with it to begin with, that's his argument.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Also, Phil, it looks like what you did in the midi version that points out my "mistakes" is add the note I'm hitting in my right hand to the left hand chord. Doesn't it make a difference where the note is hit on the piano in terms of how it comes off to the listener? It's really bothering me that I can't hear what's wrong with my piece.
> 
> I think Nikola isn't messing with my composition b/c he doesn't see anything wrong with it to begin with, that's his argument.


Huh? I didn't quite understand your post. What is considered good harmony is when generally the melody notes are in the chord except for quick off-beat notes; or at least in the same scale, there are some exceptions. Where I circled the notes with a line connecting is where you have a note conflicting with the other. The harmony in Good Night was kind of static, and there were times the right hand melody clashed with the chord  Those 2 pieces before I recall had every note harmonizing well (I tired of using that word ) and had progression. I was telling Nikola to just recreate exactly as you did to prove his hearing ability, which he declined 

I did have wrong notes in that pop song, didn't play it in years. The progression was simple. It was the same chords over and over except for a middle part with the arpeggios.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> Huh? I didn't quite understand your post. What is considered good harmony is when generally the melody notes are in the chord except for quick off-beat notes; or at least in the same scale, there are some exceptions. Where I circled the notes with a line connecting is where you have a note conflicting with the other. The harmony in Good Night was kind of static, and there were times the right hand melody clashed with the chord  Those 2 pieces before I recall had every note harmonizing well (I tired of using that word ) and had progression. I was telling Nikola to just recreate exactly as you did to prove his hearing ability, which he declined
> 
> I did have wrong notes in that pop song, didn't play it in years. The progression was simple. It was the same chords over and over except for a middle part with the arpeggios.


You are simply jealous that I can say so much without doing anything at all while you are doing so much and you still can't say anything


----------



## Captainnumber36

_Michael's Medicated_


----------



## Captainnumber36

_Mellow D_






You guys get two today!


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> You are simply jealous that I can say so much without doing anything at all while you are doing so much and you still can't say anything


I do agree you are saying lots by not doing anything


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> _Mellow D_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys get two today!


I was hoping for progress from the 3 pieces around Good Night, to be honest. Nothing wrong with these 2, just seems you are reverting to only doing your thing.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I was hoping for progress from the 3 pieces around Good Night, to be honest. Nothing wrong with these 2, just seems you are reverting to only doing your thing.


You mean editing of Nocturne and such or moving forward in terms of composition?


----------



## Captainnumber36

I wouldn't mind learning theory if someone could send me to a good free site online and inform me of what to focus on. That way I can better understand what my ears are hearing when I compose!


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> You mean editing of Nocturne and such or moving forward in terms of composition?


ya, both. There are some videos that are pretty well made I see. This is a nice intro into intervals






for chord progressions the most important thing is the Circle of Fifths. When people say they use distant chords, they are referring to the position in the circle. It doesn't matter if someone knows theory or not, when they use chords they are still within the circle of fiffhs, which is why it is better to study it.


----------



## Sekhar

Captainnumber36 said:


> I wouldn't mind learning theory if someone could send me to a good free site online and inform me of what to focus on. That way I can better understand what my ears are hearing when I compose!


There are many you'll find with Google, depends on what kind of instruction you're looking for. But I'd suggest musictheory.net and teoria.com for starters.


----------



## Captainnumber36

So circle of fifths, which I'm somewhat familiar with. I know it's big in Jazz, right? Intervals, will do! What else would be useful? I'll be a bit lost on those sites without some direction on what will help me understand music better.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> So circle of fifths, which I'm somewhat familiar with. I know it's big in Jazz, right? Intervals, will do! What else would be useful? I'll be a bit lost on those sites without some direction on what will help me understand music better.


Circle of 5ths is for everything with chords.


----------



## nikola

I composed the first part of this and Phil's demon that entered into my soul composed the last part. As you can hear, he must destroy everyting decent with wrong notes:


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> I composed the first part of this and Phil's demon that entered into my soul composed the last part. As you can hear, he must destroy everyting decent with wrong notes:


I think you are limited to basic major and minor chords in all pieces I heard from you. The last part didn't need to be done that way. I'll do a version of it when I find some time


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> I think you are limited to basic major and minor chords in all pieces I heard from you. The last part didn't need to be done that way. I'll do a version of it when I find some time


You did it, so it was obvious done your way. I actually composed this piece for fun and didn't intend to develop it.
I'm also not THAT limited, but you can't hear things properly. You probably think that composing dissonant stuff makes you unlimited, but it's problem that you compose music with notes/chords that sound off and dissonant even when you think they're not. I'm not the only one who told you that. Remember?


----------



## nikola

I gave it more time to listen to your music today, so I'll try to rate your pieces from 0 to 5 based on how I feel about them. 

1. Goliath - 3.5
I like it. It has many interesting parts especially during the first part, but it seems that somewhere from the middle, motifs became slightly less inspired and piece started to sound more repetitive. I also think that near the end I hear melody similar to "Can't Take My Eyes of You". 

2. Tunnel - 2.5
I like melancholy of the piece, but it seems too repetitive for my taste and without any stronger or more interesting ideas. Also way too long. It shouldn't be longer than 3 minutes considering what it has to offer. 

3. Ripples - 2
Even though there are some interesting developments during the middle part of the piece, I still somehow can't connect emotionally to it. 

4. Pulse - 4
A lot of interesting stuff is going on here. Pretty much ambitious piece. It's minimalist without being too repetitive and I like all those rythm changes and I also like very much the main idea that opens and close the piece. 

5. Good Night - 4
What I really like about this piece is the atmosphere. It's really unique and even though it's based on "Moonlight Sonata" it sounds even more atmospheric and gloomy. I really believe if other instruments, effects and rythms would be put over this piece that it would be truly great. Even though it sounds simple and motif goes somehow in circle, I'm still giving it high rating because I really like it. 

6. Nocturne - 4.5
This one is a real classic to me. Part from 0:50 to 1:30 has really breathtakingly beautiful melody and also when it repeats itself. It's great climax. The only problem is maybe too slow and static piano playing and there are some kinda strange seconds at the 2nd part of the piece, but it's overally really moving and great piece. 

7. Michael's Medicated - 1.5
Unfortunately I really can't enjoy this one too much. Way too repetitive and without much of interesting ideas. 2nd part is completely different, yet still somehow derivative. It's more like a sketch of something undeveloped.

8. Mellow D - 2
Pretty much inoffensive piece without much need to prove anything, right? 


Those ratings are simply based on my subjective feelings that could even slightly change next time, but they are the best way for me to express how I feel about every piece. Some ratings are probably too high while others too low, but I think it's good to come with slightly exaggerated ratings to simply show which pieces I like more or less and how I feel about those.

I remember that you posted some really interesting stuff from your EP's or something like that. It would be great if you could play or post those again here.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> I composed the first part of this and Phil's demon that entered into my soul composed the last part. As you can hear, he must destroy everyting decent with wrong notes:


Sounds like something out of a grade 1 piano lesson book. 
The second part is much better, you should compose more music in that style, it's a lot more expressive and interesting to listen to.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> That's an exaggeration and a half.


I like to exeggerate when I hear critics from people who are clearly not competent to give any. 
Don't get me wrong. Your music is not pure disaster, but it not listenable... it's dissonant even where you don't want it to be dissonant (something similar to Phil's music)... its motifs are based on repetitions and developments of those repetitions, so everything sounds like one big neverending grand finale.... it's drastic, uneven, annoying to listen to, it doesn't breathe. I'm sure that not being performed by real instruments or better software doesn't help, but still...


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> I like to exeggerate when I hear critics from people who are clearly not competent to give any.
> Don't get me wrong. Your music is not pure disaster, but it not listenable... it's dissonant even where you don't want it to be dissonant (something similar to Phil's music)... its motifs are based on repetitions and developments of those repetitions, so everything sounds like one big neverending grand finale.... it's drastic, uneven, annoying to listen to, it doesn't breathe. I'm sure that not being performed by real instruments or better software doesn't help, but still...


You haven't listened to anything beyond the first movement of my symphony, that much is evident. You also don't know what dissonance is either, nor do you understand that repetition and development is one of the core essences of a symphony. In short you do not have even the slightest grasp of any single aspect of music, and it unfortunately shows throughout your existence.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> You haven't listened to anything beyond the first movement of my symphony, that much is evident. You also don't know what dissonance is either, nor do you understand that repetition and development is one of the core essences of a symphony. In short you do not have even the slightest grasp of any single aspect of music, and it unfortunately shows throughout your existence.


So much words... and my arguments are still correct 
Yes, I did listen right now your 3rd mvt. Go to your post.


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> I gave it more time to listen to your music today, so I'll try to rate your pieces from 0 to 5 based on how I feel about them.
> 
> 1. Goliath - 3.5
> I like it. It has many interesting parts especially during the first part, but it seems that somewhere from the middle, motifs became slightly less inspired and piece started to sound more repetitive. I also think that near the end I hear melody similar to "Can't Take My Eyes of You".
> 
> 2. Tunnel - 2.5
> I like melancholy of the piece, but it seems too repetitive for my taste and without any stronger or more interesting ideas. Also way too long. It shouldn't be longer than 3 minutes considering what it has to offer.
> 
> 3. Ripples - 2
> Even though there are some interesting developments during the middle part of the piece, I still somehow can't connect emotionally to it.
> 
> 4. Pulse - 4
> A lot of interesting stuff is going on here. Pretty much ambitious piece. It's minimalist without being too repetitive and I like all those rythm changes and I also like very much the main idea that opens and close the piece.
> 
> 5. Good Night - 4
> What I really like about this piece is the atmosphere. It's really unique and even though it's based on "Moonlight Sonata" it sounds even more atmospheric and gloomy. I really believe if other instruments, effects and rythms would be put over this piece that it would be truly great. Even though it sounds simple and motif goes somehow in circle, I'm still giving it high rating because I really like it.
> 
> 6. Nocturne - 4.5
> This one is a real classic to me. Part from 0:50 to 1:30 has really breathtakingly beautiful melody and also when it repeats itself. It's great climax. The only problem is maybe too slow and static piano playing and there are some kinda strange seconds at the 2nd part of the piece, but it's overally really moving and great piece.
> 
> 7. Michael's Medicated - 1.5
> Unfortunately I really can't enjoy this one too much. Way too repetitive and without much of interesting ideas. 2nd part is completely different, yet still somehow derivative. It's more like a sketch of something undeveloped.
> 
> 8. Mellow D - 2
> Pretty much inoffensive piece without much need to prove anything, right?
> 
> Those ratings are simply based on my subjective feelings that could even slightly change next time, but they are the best way for me to express how I feel about every piece. Some ratings are probably too high while others too low, but I think it's good to come with slightly exaggerated ratings to simply show which pieces I like more or less and how I feel about those.
> 
> I remember that you posted some really interesting stuff from your EP's or something like that. It would be great if you could play or post those again here.


Thanks for the thoughtful response Nikola! It was nice to hear a breakdown of everything.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I'll see about recording some of my tunes from the EPs. Tunnel, Nocturne, Mellow D and Michael's Medicated were all on them.


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> You did it, so it was obvious done your way. I actually composed this piece for fun and didn't intend to develop it.
> I'm also not THAT limited, but you can't hear things properly. You probably think that composing dissonant stuff makes you unlimited, but it's problem that you compose music with notes/chords that sound off and dissonant even when you think they're not. I'm not the only one who told you that. Remember?


It wasn't quite the way you described, more complex harmonies need a bit more work before getting right, like the Captn's Nocturne, and someone else chimed in on my defense in that piece, Remember?  On other hand, someone else does agree with me with what I said above. Also the second part is not something I would write. Disonnant music is not all the same, even if it is to you. But it is not needed in this case anyway.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> It wasn't quite the way you described, more complex harmonies need a bit more work before getting right, like the Captn's Nocturne, and someone else chimed in on my defense in that piece, Remember?  On other hand, someone else does agree with me with what I said above. Also the second part is not something I would write. Disonnant music is not all the same, even if it is to you. But it is not needed in this case anyway.


I have no idea what you just did here and why. My ending was there to describe failure. Your ending is only failure 
Also I'm not sure if you caught LH chords correctly. What chords did you use in the first part? Write in letters.


----------



## nikola

Also, when I compose my music, it's not because I want to make something terribly complex. I want to make something that I will like. I decided not to abandon this little musical sketch because it has catchy and meaningful melody that you can remember and whistle. It is something that music is many times to many people "all about". 
People who are not able to compose such meaningful little tunes that can stand on their own should not compose music at all. 
From Verdi's 'Prissoner Choir' and Brahms 'Lullaby" to Wagner's "Bridal Choir" melodies are what counts. 
"Success on Demand" is probably one of the most simple pieces I composed and it should stay that way.

Recreate first 30 seconds of this one:


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> Also, when I compose my music, it's not because I want to make something terribly complex. I want to make something that I will like. I decided not to abandon this little musical sketch because it has catchy and meaningful melody that you can remember and whistle. It is something that music is many times to many people "all about".
> People who are not able to compose such meaningful little tunes that can stand on their own should not compose music at all.
> From Verdi's 'Prissoner Choir' and Brahms 'Lullaby" to Wagner's "Bridal Choir" melodies are what counts.
> "Success on Demand" is probably one of the most simple pieces I composed and it should stay that way.
> 
> Recreate first 30 seconds of this one:


I don't recreate on demand  Just when I see a different direction like your last piece. The last part had arbitrary disonant notes which makes my skin crawl, you may say that was the whole point, but the first part being naive, the music takes a distastful turn. It just doesn't transition well. My ending was an attempt to make it flow, and have a sarcastic ending, even though I'm not really that satisfied with it.

This piece has certain parts that are somewhat interesting, but the piece doesn't hold together. It is like you patched certain fragments together. There is no development, from its more moody intro. But I think it is one of your better pieces.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> I don't recreate on demand  Just when I see a different direction like your last piece. The last part had arbitrary disonant notes which makes my skin crawl, you may say that was the whole point, but the first part being naive, the music takes a distastful turn. It just doesn't transition well. My ending was an attempt to make it flow, and have a sarcastic ending, even though I'm not really that satisfied with it.
> 
> This piece has certain parts that are somewhat interesting, but the piece doesn't hold together. It is like you patched certain fragments together. There is no development, from its more moody intro. But I think it is one of your better pieces.


Quite contrary... it was my intention to makes skin crawl. It's not the same to use dissonance only because you want to show-off (what you're doing) and when you use it for the reason. I used it for the reason and that is what you probably can't understand. Also, your LH chords doesn't seem right plus there is a chord that shouldn't be there.

For the 2nd piece, it holds brilliantly well and you're not able to reproduce the beginning. There are changes in some motifs, that's for sure, but they also criticized Gershwin that he "only" glued many different parts for his "Rhapsody in Blue", just like what Dvorak did for Symphony of the New World or what Mussorgsky did for Night on Bald Mountain.

But then, they're Gershwin, Dvorak and Mussorgsky while you are only you.
On the other hand, my piece certainly didn't intend to glue many different pieces together. The intention was to follow the same idea and develop it with 3 melodically slightly different, yet related motifs. It's actually how you tell the story in music - change things and don't always stay within the same repetitive pattern, but to understand that you should be able to properly hear and feel the music.

So, your critics are once again, completely and utterly meaningless, even more because you don't understand that my intention wasn't to compose what you think that I should compose. I composed what I WANTED to compose


----------



## Phil loves classical

^^ I figured you would say that about your dissonance, which is why I said it first  I use disonance only to show off and not to write as i feel? And there is nothing you could do to make your piece better? Ok.

I could recreate your piece as I did for the other and the Captain's at the beginning, before my changes, but I don't see a point if that wasn't already enough. Besides anyone here with musical training could do it.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> ^^ I figured you would say that about your dissonance, which is why I said it first  I use disonance only to show off and not to write as i feel? And there is nothing you could do to make your piece better? Ok.


Is this your argument or what? 
My ending shows the decline of success. Your ending doesn't say anything like that. It doesn't properly show what I wanted to show with that ending. It sounds like you did some errors by mistake. Capishe?
If you want to improve it, then improve it. No need to destroy the piece and then claiming that is "improvement".

You still didn't recreate first 30 sec of other piece? Of course. You can't.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

There can be no decline in success if there was none to begin with :tiphat:


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

https://www.musical-u.com/learn/dont-get-stuck-writing-four-chord-songs/

This comes to mind when listening.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> https://www.musical-u.com/learn/dont-get-stuck-writing-four-chord-songs/
> 
> This comes to mind when listening.


If you comment captain's music, did you ever hear about minimalist music?


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> If you comment captain's music, did you ever hear about minimalist music?


No, not captain's music.

He, for the most part, uses fairly original progressions, though structurally it can be a bit repetitive.

While listening to one of your pieces, I noticed you have a tendency to gravitate towards the typical chord progressions seen in commercial music... but you also seem to be aware of the "cliche" and end up throwing in a change to the progression to try and differentiate it, which ends up sounding... off. I think if you were to either go fully down one route of either accessible easy listening or originality w/artistic expression, it would make your music sound more mature and probably improve the quality greatly.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> No, not captain's music.
> 
> He, for the most part, uses fairly original progressions, though structurally it can be a bit repetitive.
> 
> While listening to one of your pieces, I noticed you have a tendency to gravitate towards the typical chord progressions seen in commercial music... but you also seem to be aware of the "cliche" and end up throwing in a change to the progression to try and differentiate it, which ends up sounding... off. I think if you were to either go fully down one route of either accessible easy listening or originality w/artistic expression, it would make your music sound more mature and probably improve the quality greatly.


You obviously hear things completely wrong because you, obviously, don't know what you're talking about. 
In "Surreal Thoughts" there are 8 different LH chords. 6 of those only during first 30 seconds. 
What you think that is off is simply natural development of the piece. 
It's always nice to hear negative critic from someone who is not even able to count the number of chords (even though he think he is) while his music sounds nothing more than childish, dissonant and repetitive annoyance. 
Once again, I would be worried if someone like you thinks that my music is good on any level. 
Since I know about common 4 chords used lately in pop music, I must admit that I'm surprised that you're not able NOT to recognize them in my piece. Actually, I'm not. 
While we talk about those 4 chords, do you know that Beatles used those 4 chords in their "Let It Be" song? And trust me, that song is better and more inspired than anything you will write in your life.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> You obviously hear things completely wrong because you, obviously, don't know what you're talking about.
> In "Surreal Thoughts" there are 8 different LH chords. 6 of those only during first 30 seconds.
> What you think that is off is simply natural development of the piece.
> It's always nice to hear negative critic from someone who is not even able to count the number of chords (even though he think he is) while his music sounds nothing more than childish, dissonant and repetitive annoyance.
> Once again, I would be worried if someone like you thinks that my music is good on any level.
> Since I know about common 4 chords used lately in pop music, I must admit that I'm surprised that you're not able NOT to recognize them in my piece. Actually, I'm not.
> While we talk about those 4 chords, do you know that Beatles used those 4 chords in their "Let It Be" song? And trust me, that song is better and more inspired than anything you will wrote in your life.


I don't really care that much for the beatles, I'm more of a glam-rock type of guy. I think you may have misread my post. I was saying that it seems like you would naturally end up using a lot of those chord progressions, but you seem to throw in a non-conventional chord into the progression to try and avoid the cliche, which makes the music sound strange.

Natural Development would follow the chord progression neatly, but that is not present here. I would say you are using a slightly more creative form of development not inherently based in a pattern, but of whim, which is admirable. That's how I compose too, sometimes.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Also, your pieces don't really have a melody, either. Just chord progressions. It's interesting. I really wish I heard what you do in the music. I must be a talentless hack.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> I don't really care that much for the beatles, I'm more of a glam-rock type of guy. I think you may have misread my post. I was saying that it seems like you would naturally end up using a lot of those chord progressions, but you seem to throw in a non-conventional chord into the progression to try and avoid the cliche, which makes the music sound strange.
> 
> Natural Development would follow the chord progression neatly, but that is not present here. I would say you are using a slightly more creative form of development not inherently based in a pattern, but of whim, which is admirable. That's how I compose too, sometimes.


No, I didn't use extra chords to avoid cliches, because my music isn't cliche. To compose cliches I should probably know some theory and common chords of pop and classical music. I don't know any of that because I'm composing by ears. Yes, my music is simple, but it is good. Musicians and other people, who are not tone deaf, told me that. Even without them, I can hear my music quite properly. I did compose it primarily for myself. 
I don't count number of chords because I simply go by feeling and ears. You probably count chords because you want to complicate things in your music. I don't do that because I don't care. I only wanted to compose something that will sound good to me. That's how I always compose. 
It's actually funny that you are using my argument "OFF" against my music. Unfortunately, I'm not enough deaf not to be able to be aware of good and bad sides in my musical sketches 
It's also interesting to see that you think that I composed something simply because to avoid something typical. I'm not that vain. If I thought that some chord is OFF I would certainly not use it. The hardest part was composing first 30 seconds... not because I forced many chords, but because I wanted to achieve sound that you can actually hear now. I have to look at my amateurish sheets now to see how many chords actually are there. To compose the rest of the piece came somehow more naturally.

As you can hear in this next piece, everything is based mostly on only 1 LH note and piece is going forward only by RH chords. Only during 2nd part of the piece I added 2 new LH notes, not because I wanted more chords, but because I wanted to make change in the piece. I don't know is it typical or not what I did, but I liked it what I come up with and that's why I composed it. There isn't any other reason.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> Also, your pieces don't really have a melody, either. Just chord progressions. It's interesting. I really wish I heard what you do in the music. I must be a talentless hack.


Yes, there are probably more chords in my music than simply some melodies. I guess "Success on Demand" is one of the rare pieces I made that everyone could whistle under the shower.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> No, I didn't use extra chords to avoid cliches, because my music isn't cliche. To compose cliches I should probably know some theory and common chords of pop and classical music. I don't know any of that because I'm composing by ears. Yes, my music is simple, but it is good. Musicians and other people, who are not tone deaf, told me that. Even without them, I can hear my music quite properly. I did compose it primarily for myself.
> I don't count number of chords because I simply go by feeling and ears. You probably count chords because you want to complicate things in your music. I don't do that because I don't care. I only wanted to compose something that will sound good to me. That's how I always compose.
> It's actually funny that you are using my argument "OFF" against my music. Unfortunately, I'm not enough deaf not to be able to be aware of good and bad sides in my musical sketches
> It's also interesting to see that you think that I composed something simply because to avoid something typical. I'm not that vain. If I thought that some chord is OFF I would certainly not use it. The hardest part was composing first 30 seconds... not because I forced many chords, but because I wanted to achieve sound that you can actually hear now. I have to look at my amateurish sheets now to see how many chords actually are there. To compose the rest of the piece came somehow more naturally.
> 
> As you can hear in this next piece, everything is based mostly on only 1 LH note and piece is going forward only by RH chords. Only during 2nd part of the piece I added 2 new LH notes, not because I wanted more chords, but because I wanted to make change in the piece. I don't know is it typical or not what I did, but I liked it what I come up with and that's why I composed it. There isn't any other reason.


That's not at all how I compose... I don't know why you think that.

I hum pretty much all the time. Anyone who knows me knows this, and probably hates it because It's probably annoying. Every now and then I'll hum something interesting, and jot it down. Once I have that melody/motif/idea written, I figure out how to build a coherent piece around it. For the most part, it works, and I've had a fair amount of success locally. I started learning more theory a few years ago though, and started trying to write more structured pieces. I've found that being able to put emotion into a structure takes a lot more work than just improvising an entire piece. I don't know why you think not having knowledge of music is a good thing.

I'd like to remind you that I started out literally the same as you; I learned piano solely by ear, learning piano songs by ear, and coming up with songs by ear. All I did was learn how to read music, and with that, the opportunities in music opened up in so many directions. There is a very wise saying by a very wise person: "I only know that I know nothing"


----------



## nikola

So, you're musically young then and there is still a hope 
No, I don't think that having knowledge of music is bad thing. I never said that. If I started earlier in life to compose I would certainly be glad to learn all possible theory. I'm also extremely bad at piano playing. I can't even play now my own stuff. I actually only knew how to play my own stuff while I was composing it. 
I only think that musical education is not always necessary. There are many musicians that can't even read notes and are very talented and famous. 
Composing isn't my career, but composing for my own enjoyment was even greater because of that. I knew I could create something from nothing, no matter how small it is.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> So, you're musically young then and there is still a hope
> No, I don't think that having knowledge of music is bad thing. I never said that. If I started earlier in life to compose I would certainly be glad to learn all possible theory. I'm also extremely bad at piano playing. I can't even play now my own stuff. I actually only knew how to play my own stuff while I was composing it.
> I only think that musical education is not always necessary. There are many musicians that can't even read notes and are very talented and famous.
> Composing isn't my career, but composing for my own enjoyment was even greater because of that. I knew I could create something from nothing, no matter how small it is.


What I do now is composing for fun/therapy. What I hope to do is become a professional composer, but I have a long way to go before that time. I haven't even finished high school yet.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I enjoy Nik's pieces, a lot in fact! I found the ending to Success on Demand clever.


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> What I do now is composing for fun/therapy. What I hope to do is become a professional composer, but I have a long way to go before that time. I haven't even finished high school yet.


Are you going to college for composition?


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> What I do now is composing for fun/therapy. What I hope to do is become a professional composer, but I have a long way to go before that time. I haven't even finished high school yet.


Damn... it's all very clear then. I didn't think you're so young. I'm probably more than twice older than you then.


----------



## nikola

Captainnumber36 said:


> Are you going to college for composition?


We're 2 best composers here, but nobody will agree with that :trp:


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> We're 2 best composers here, but nobody will agree with that :trp:


lol! Well thanks for the shout out! Neither of us really compose classical music though.


----------



## nikola

Classical music is dated :devil:
We are progressive musicians.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Captainnumber36 said:


> Are you going to college for composition?


Probably. I'll likely perform professionally as either a pianist or singer though, since I'd need some sort of stable income.


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> Probably. I'll likely perform professionally as either a pianist or singer though, since I'd need some sort of stable income.


That's awesome dude, what composer(s) do you feel you are particularly good at conveying on the piano? When you say singer, do you mean opera?


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Captainnumber36 said:


> That's awesome dude, what composer(s) do you feel you are particularly good at conveying on the piano? When you say singer, do you mean opera?


1. Rachmaninov and Tchaikovsky, since I liken my personal styles most closely to them.
2. Yeah, I sing opera. Every now and then I'll find a call for singers or whatever, but most of the time I sing in a choir.


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> 1. Rachmaninov and Tchaikovsky, since I liken my personal styles most closely to them.
> 2. Yeah, I sing opera. Every now and then I'll find a call for singers or whatever, but most of the time I sing in a choir.


Best of luck to you. I have a friend that went to the Cincinnati Conservatory of Music (CCM) at the University of Cincinnati for Jazz guitar.

He is now the guitarist for one of the top American indie rock bands called Walk the Moon. They had the single "Shut Up and Dance With Me" if you know it.

I don't like the music and think he sold out massively, but, at least he is making money on music for a living.


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> No, I didn't use extra chords to avoid cliches, because my music isn't cliche. To compose cliches I should probably know some theory and common chords of pop and classical music. I don't know any of that because I'm composing by ears. Yes, my music is simple, but it is good. Musicians and other people, who are not tone deaf, told me that. Even without them, I can hear my music quite properly. I did compose it primarily for myself.
> I don't count number of chords because I simply go by feeling and ears. You probably count chords because you want to complicate things in your music. I don't do that because I don't care. I only wanted to compose something that will sound good to me. That's how I always compose.
> It's actually funny that you are using my argument "OFF" against my music. Unfortunately, I'm not enough deaf not to be able to be aware of good and bad sides in my musical sketches
> It's also interesting to see that you think that I composed something simply because to avoid something typical. I'm not that vain. If I thought that some chord is OFF I would certainly not use it. The hardest part was composing first 30 seconds... not because I forced many chords, but because I wanted to achieve sound that you can actually hear now. I have to look at my amateurish sheets now to see how many chords actually are there. To compose the rest of the piece came somehow more naturally.
> 
> As you can hear in this next piece, everything is based mostly on only 1 LH note and piece is going forward only by RH chords. Only during 2nd part of the piece I added 2 new LH notes, not because I wanted more chords, but because I wanted to make change in the piece. I don't know is it typical or not what I did, but I liked it what I come up with and that's why I composed it. There isn't any other reason.


To know theory is to be able to recognize cliches better. Theory doesn't tell you what chords have to be used. It sounds you are limiting something you don't know to reinforce your own views.Theory tells which chords are possible.


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> We're 2 best composers here, but nobody will agree with that :trp:


Truth is you 2 have potential, and for being self taught is quite admirable. But to claim you're already there is just limiting yourself. I hope the Captn will keep progressing. Nothing wrong with writing more of the same if you accept the limitations, and not fool yourself into thinking it is more than it is.


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> I have no idea what you just did here and why. My ending was there to describe failure. Your ending is only failure
> Also I'm not sure if you caught LH chords correctly. What chords did you use in the first part? Write in letters.


The problem I see is the first part sounds like music for toddlers, while the second part changes the frame of reference. If it was meant to mean success for an adult, the theme should be more befitting. My version is sticking with the toddler frame of reference, maybe he made a new friend in daycare, and the last part is he lost the friend he made. That way the frame of reference is consistent rather than switching from a child's view to someone who commits suicide.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> To know theory is to be able to recognize cliches better. Theory doesn't tell you what chords have to be used. It sounds you are limiting something you don't know to reinforce your own views.Theory tells which chords are possible.


Nice try. I'm still waiting for you to reproduce first 30 seconds of ST piece.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> Truth is you 2 have potential, and for being self taught is quite admirable. But to claim you're already there is just limiting yourself. I hope the Captn will keep progressing. Nothing wrong with writing more of the same if you accept the limitations, and not fool yourself into thinking it is more than it is.


Come on.... we're the greatest ever. Beethoven is little kid for us in composing.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> The problem I see is the first part sounds like music for toddlers, while the second part changes the frame of reference. If it was meant to mean success for an adult, the theme should be more befitting. My version is sticking with the toddler frame of reference, maybe he made a new friend in daycare, and the last part is he lost the friend he made. That way the frame of reference is consistent rather than switching from a child's view to someone who commits suicide.


Everything that doesn't suck is "music for toddlers" to you. To be able to compose melodies that can stand on their own is actually the hardest thing to do. All the greatest arias are based on "music for toddlers" principles, but you can't hear that. I didn't say that is SERIOUS piece of music, but you're actually able to destroy even such innofensive piece with your verbal diarrhea.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Truth is you 2 have potential, and for being self taught is quite admirable. But to claim you're already there is just limiting yourself. I hope the Captn will keep progressing. Nothing wrong with writing more of the same if you accept the limitations, and not fool yourself into thinking it is more than it is.


I'll never use theory to create music, but I'll use it to understand what I've created. I don't mind becoming more knowledgeable about theory though!

But what is it that Nikola and I have created and what isn't it that we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking it is? I think I'm a little more all over the place in terms of genre bending, but what joins us together is strong melodic hooks that are harmless and inoffensive, friendly and catchy.

Your music is more offensive and jarring, unfriendly and un-catchy. It strives to be different and atonal. And that is all fine, but don't fool yourself into thinking it is otherwise.  Your music is more in line with what is taught in music composition schools today too, but it also has less appeal to a wider audience, which you probably don't care about.

The music Nikola and I create may not be what 21st century composers are doing, but we are being true to ourselves. It is more appealing to a wider audience, but that isn't my goal when I compose, it just happens to be that way.

But like I said, I'm open to learning about theory.


----------



## nikola

Captainnumber36 said:


> and what isn't it that we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking it is?


The only way he can justify his "music" is to put other people music down. Since he is not able to compose with his ears, he will always try to convince others that his knowledge of theory makes his music more "advanced, meaningful, complex" and such crap, while in reality his music isn't tolerable on any level, not even in theory. He can only criticize the music he would never be able to compose, no matter how much he tries to prove that it is "too simple, childish" and such nonsense. 
I also can't believe while reading his nonsense considering Vangelis or Yanni music for example. He says that they "didn't come up with anything new". WTF!? When I hear only two chords together from Vangelis I know it is him and nobody else sounds like that. That means "developing your own voice". Same with Yanni. They actually invented their own sounds. 
And our dear Phil invented what? Unlistenable atonal nonsense that is even atonal within atonal parameters? Well, Phil, trust me, you're not the only one who is composing truly bad music on this board and you certainly didn't invent anything new and you also certainly didn't develop your own voice. So, yes, Vangelis and Yanni even without musical knowledge developed their own unique styles. Every truly great musician will tell you that no matter how much you try to put inspired and great musicians down. 
What Phil is doing is hiding his bad music behind some so called theoretical nonsense. It's still nonsense and it will always be nonsense. You can't polish a turd.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> The only way he can justify his "music" is to put other people music down. Since he is not able to compose with his ears, he will always try to convince others that his knowledge of theory makes his music more "advanced, meaningful, complex" and such crap, while in reality his music isn't tolerable on any level, not even in theory. He can only criticize the music he would never be able to compose, no matter how much he tries to prove that it is "too simple, childish" and such nonsense.
> I also can't believe while reading his nonsense considering Vangelis or Yanni music for example. He says that they "didn't come up with anything new". WTF!? When I hear only two chords together from Vangelis I know it is him and nobody else sounds like that. That means "developing your own voice". Same with Yanni. They actually invented their own sounds.
> And our dear Phil invented what? Unlistenable atonal nonsense that is even atonal within atonal parameters? Well, Phil, trust me, you're not the only one who is composing truly bad music on this board and you certainly didn't invent anything new and you also certainly didn't develop your own voice. So, yes, Vangelis and Yanni even without musical knowledge developed their own unique styles. Every truly great musician will tell you that no matter how much you try to put inspired and great musicians down.
> What Phil is doing is hiding his bad music behind some so called theoretical nonsense. It's still nonsense and it will always be nonsense. You can't polish a turd.


You do the exact same thing. I could quote endless amounts of posts by you, but everyone has seen that you typically resort to ad hominems when others critique your work.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

nikola said:


> The only way he can justify his "music" is to put other people music down. Since he is not able to compose with his ears, he will always try to convince others that his knowledge of theory makes his music more "advanced, meaningful, complex" and such crap, while in reality his music isn't tolerable on any level, not even in theory. He can only criticize the music he would never be able to compose, no matter how much he tries to prove that it is "too simple, childish" and such nonsense.
> I also can't believe while reading his nonsense considering Vangelis or Yanni music for example. He says that they "didn't come up with anything new". WTF!? When I hear only two chords together from Vangelis I know it is him and nobody else sounds like that. That means "developing your own voice". Same with Yanni. They actually invented their own sounds.
> And our dear Phil invented what? Unlistenable atonal nonsense that is even atonal within atonal parameters? Well, Phil, trust me, you're not the only one who is composing truly bad music on this board and you certainly didn't invent anything new and you also certainly didn't develop your own voice. So, yes, Vangelis and Yanni even without musical knowledge developed their own unique styles. Every truly great musician will tell you that no matter how much you try to put inspired and great musicians down.
> What Phil is doing is hiding his bad music behind some so called theoretical nonsense. It's still nonsense and it will always be nonsense. You can't polish a turd.


You do the exact same thing. I could quote endless amounts of posts by you, but everyone has seen that you typically resort to ad hominems when others critique your work.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Captainnumber36 said:


> I'll never use theory to create music, but I'll use it to understand what I've created. I don't mind becoming more knowledgeable about theory though!
> 
> But what is it that Nikola and I have created and what isn't it that we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking it is? I think I'm a little more all over the place in terms of genre bending, but what joins us together is strong melodic hooks that are harmless and inoffensive, friendly and catchy.
> 
> Your music is more offensive and jarring, unfriendly and un-catchy. It strives to be different and atonal. And that is all fine, but don't fool yourself into thinking it is otherwise. Your music is more in line with what is taught in music composition schools today too, but it also has less appeal to a wider audience, which you probably don't care about.
> 
> The music Nikola and I create may not be what 21st century composers are doing, but we are being true to ourselves. It is more appealing to a wider audience, but that isn't my goal when I compose, it just happens to be that way.
> 
> But like I said, I'm open to learning about theory.


I think what Phil meant by that is becoming arrogant about your music, thinking it is the best it will ever be, insisting on your own genius, etc.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> You do the exact same thing. I could quote endless amounts of posts by you, but everyone has seen that you typically resort to ad hominems when others critique your work.


But I'm good composer, so I can.


----------



## nikola

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> I think what Phil meant by that is becoming arrogant about your music, thinking it is the best it will ever be, insisting on your own genius, etc.


Yes, I am all of that. Thank you for all the praise. I deserved it!


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> I think what Phil meant by that is becoming arrogant about your music, thinking it is the best it will ever be, insisting on your own genius, etc.


Ah, I always have the mindset to grow and improve my whole life, so that isn't an issue for me. But, I'm proud of what I've done so far and do hold it to a high standard!


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> I'll never use theory to create music, but I'll use it to understand what I've created. I don't mind becoming more knowledgeable about theory though!
> 
> But what is it that Nikola and I have created and what isn't it that we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking it is? I think I'm a little more all over the place in terms of genre bending, but what joins us together is strong melodic hooks that are harmless and inoffensive, friendly and catchy.
> 
> Your music is more offensive and jarring, unfriendly and un-catchy. It strives to be different and atonal. And that is all fine, but don't fool yourself into thinking it is otherwise. Your music is more in line with what is taught in music composition schools today too, but it also has less appeal to a wider audience, which you probably don't care about.
> 
> The music Nikola and I create may not be what 21st century composers are doing, but we are being true to ourselves. It is more appealing to a wider audience, but that isn't my goal when I compose, it just happens to be that way.
> 
> But like I said, I'm open to learning about theory.


I don't mean using theory to create music like a fugue or something, even though that's ok too. But to develop it further or harmonize "properly", like your Nocturne. It wasn't only me that said is wasn't harmonized quite right. Also the theory says it isn't, which I used just as a check. All you have to do is listen more to music out there and add something to it or go in a new direction, being aware of what it all there already and what yours all means in the scheme of things. I didn't compose until I listened to pretty much all that is out there, so that I can incorporate elements to form my own voice. Contrary to what Nikola says I usually conpose by where my ear is leading me for tonal and atonal. I do follow a few guidelines for each though. And use dissonance that is not arbitrary. I don't mind if it is offensive or jarring, because that is what my ear is trained to accept.

Most of the style you compose is similar to drone music. But drone music involves more interesting timbres than straight piano or keyboard. You can use electronics and change the sound ljke Eno. His music is not really profound, but he knows how to present. The pieces of uohrs I mentioned that have more changes or capture a mood better stood out, while others have their limitations stand out more, which isn't just me that noted it. While Nikola composes in a more genuine new age vibe, and same goes for him.

I don't fool myself about my music. Some, maybe a lot, are meant to be more just experimental and not fully realized like my last one.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"You can use electronics and change the sound ljke Eno. His music is not really profound, but he knows how to present."

I think this is a subjective assessment.


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> While Nikola composes in a more genuine new age vibe...


You don't know what you're talking about. From about 40 pieces that I composed there are maybe 5 to 10 pieces that could be considered "new age" only because of that vibe and mellowness (but they're still not new age), unless you think something like this is new age:


























Do you know what new age is? It's not the composing technique. It's music which main goal is to be relaxing and mellow. 
'New Age' is actually wrong term for many musicians that is used to describe the music that doesn't fit into any genre. Yanni and Vangelis are not new age and Yanni was especially clear about that. They may have relaxing pieces, but that wasn't the purpose why they composed their music. Most of Vangelis music is even more scary than relaxing. It's sometimes more progressive than new age. Same with Yanni who's albums are very different considering style and genres.
My music is even less new age. To say that my music has new age vibe means that you really don't have a clue what you're talking about. 
To say that music is new agey is only your way to minimize the value of someones music and that I can understand because that's the way your brain works.


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> You don't know what you're talking about. From about 40 pieces that I composed there are maybe 5 to 10 pieces that could be considered "new age" only because of that vibe and mellowness (but they're still not new age), unless you think something like this is new age:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know what new age is? It's not the composing technique. It's music which main goal is to be relaxing and mellow.
> 'New Age' is actually wrong term for many musicians that is used to describe the music that doesn't fit into any genre. Yanni and Vangelis are not new age and Yanni was especially clear about that. They may have relaxing pieces, but that wasn't the purpose why they composed their music. Most of Vangelis music is even more scary than relaxing. It's sometimes more progressive than new age. Same with Yanni who's albums are very different considering style and genres.
> My music is even less new age. To say that my music has new age vibe means that you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.
> To say that music is new agey is only your way to minimize the value of someones music and that I can understand because that's the way your brain works.


Ya, I agree. I think the best way to describe my music is progressive. It's not one particular genre in particular, but a culmination of everything I listen to (which is diverse) with a whole lot of my own voice.

Back to Phil on rating "profound" in music, that depends on how the music impacts each individual listener.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil's experiments are following a particular tradition of techniques and theories and don't have a very developed voice.


----------



## Captainnumber36

_Lazy River_


----------



## nikola

Nice idea and interesting chords. It seems that piece could be more developed, but it's still nice listening.


----------



## Captainnumber36

What do you think Nikola? It's different for me! I like to always continue to push myself and try to not repeat myself...I'm so used to doing that, it's almost second nature to me, which is incredible!


----------



## nikola

Yeah... I already gave opinion. I was few seconds faster


----------



## Captainnumber36

It's the first piece I've written with a definite dynamic I want to have in it. In the "bridge" I want to get louder and louder to build to that end, if you didn't pick up on it while listening.


----------



## Captainnumber36

How would you classify it? It's pretty unique isn't it? The two different four feels I switch between in the verse section to the chorus.


----------



## nikola

Yes, the last part is interesting. You pretty much established your style already. It's only not easy for me to use to too much repetitive parts, but your music still works almost as storytelling.


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> Yes, the last part is interesting. You pretty much established your style already. It's only not easy for me to use to too much repetitive parts, but your music still works almost as storytelling.


I can see that, that's a great way to put it!

I see your music like Mozart's, not in sound, but in that it's clear and to the point. There is no messing around!


----------



## nikola

Captainnumber36 said:


> I can see that, that's a great way to put it!
> 
> I see your music like Mozart's, not in sound, but in that it's clear and to the point. There is no messing around!


That's probably minus to my music... I can't fool around too much with the idea. Everything must have a purpose


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> _Lazy River_


I believe there are some clashes in harmonizing between left and right hands in some spots. The reason why it happens it sometimes one hand does the same pattern as before while the other shifts and works independently instead of both hands in harmony. It isn't only Classical that frowns upon that. That is reason why you need to write it out. When you are improvising you hear both hands independently, but not together. If you could find out how to make it fit together rather than just winging it, your skill and creativity could explode up to another level.


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> You don't know what you're talking about. From about 40 pieces that I composed there are maybe 5 to 10 pieces that could be considered "new age" only because of that vibe and mellowness (but they're still not new age), unless you think something like this is new age:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know what new age is? It's not the composing technique. It's music which main goal is to be relaxing and mellow.
> 'New Age' is actually wrong term for many musicians that is used to describe the music that doesn't fit into any genre. Yanni and Vangelis are not new age and Yanni was especially clear about that. They may have relaxing pieces, but that wasn't the purpose why they composed their music. Most of Vangelis music is even more scary than relaxing. It's sometimes more progressive than new age. Same with Yanni who's albums are very different considering style and genres.
> My music is even less new age. To say that my music has new age vibe means that you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.
> To say that music is new agey is only your way to minimize the value of someones music and that I can understand because that's the way your brain works.


That may be how you look at it, but the established music community would probably classify as New Age, which doesn't have an exact definition. Look it up


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> That may be how you look at it, but the established music community would probably classify as New Age, which doesn't have an exact definition. Look it up


So, here it is:


> New-age music is a genre of music intended to create artistic inspiration, relaxation, and optimism. It is used by listeners for yoga, massage, meditation,[1] reading as a method of stress management[2] to bring about a state of ecstasy rather than trance,[3][4] or to create a peaceful atmosphere in their home or other environments, and is associated with environmentalism and New Age spirituality.[5][1]


At least once in your life try to inform yourself before proudly saying utter nonsense. Stop being such a tool.


----------



## nikola

Further, exactly what I said:



> New-age music is defined more by the use and effect or feeling it produces rather than the instruments and genre used in its creation;[10]


----------



## Phil loves classical

nikola said:


> Further, exactly what I said:


I never said it was a composing technique. This statement you quoted supports my idea yours is new age as you are going for effect. Of course I've also looked it up  You forgot this part from Wikipedia

"There is no exact definition of new-age music."

So Yanni and others can't really object when others see their music as relaxing, simplistic, easy listening or "New Age".

Aiming for effect is the key. Satie could be considered New Age if he composed now. I don't consider something New Agey to minimize value in the way you and Captn might say I use math, technique and theory to compose. Although that is true for a few of my pieces.  Just to change this up, I consider a few of my ambient pieces to be New Age, minimalistic.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I believe there are some clashes in harmonizing between left and right hands in some spots. The reason why it happens it sometimes one hand does the same pattern as before while the other shifts and works independently instead of both hands in harmony. It isn't only Classical that frowns upon that. That is reason why you need to write it out. When you are improvising you hear both hands independently, but not together. If you could find out how to make it fit together rather than just winging it, your skill and creativity could explode up to another level.


When I listen back, I hear both hands together though...


----------



## nikola

Phil loves classical said:


> I never said it was a composing technique. This statement you quoted supports my idea yours is new age as you are going for effect. Of course I've also looked it up  You forgot this part from Wikipedia
> 
> "There is no exact definition of new-age music."
> 
> So Yanni and others can't really object when others see their music as relaxing, simplistic, easy listening or "New Age".


What's your problem?
I'm going for what effect? Can you read? Once again:
New-age music is a genre of music intended to create artistic inspiration, relaxation, and optimism. It is used by listeners for yoga, massage, meditation,[1] reading as a method of stress management[2] to bring about a state of ecstasy rather than trance,[3][4] or to create a peaceful atmosphere in their home or other environments, and is associated with environmentalism and New Age spirituality.[5][1]

So, those pieces I posted here can never be new age because they're not relaxing or meditative.

Go look on wikipedia and you'll see that Vangelis doesn't even have "new age" mentioned in genres, while Yanni has along with new age also mentioned many other genres.
Relaxing also doesn't mean simplistic. Your music is simplistic.

Considering your delusional mindset, I guess that you have some serious issues. 
You're not even able to recognize what new age is.

This isn't new age:





This is new age:





And yes, new age is still way better than your music that's neither good or complex.


----------



## Captainnumber36

nikola said:


> That's probably minus to my music... I can't fool around too much with the idea. Everything must have a purpose


It works for you, very well! I love your pieces.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Autumn:


----------



## Phil loves classical

I think that is a good step in a different direction. It is more in the Jazz vein. I think it could use some tightening on the length to make it more concentrated.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I think that is a good step in a different direction. It is more in the Jazz vein. I think it could use some tightening on the length to make it more concentrated.


Thanks man !


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

that's a pretty solid bluesy piece. i with phil though, it's a bit long. this would make a fantastic short and sweet piece. i like the new direction.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Although, Captain, you really need to get a grand! That upright sounds like its on its last legs, if you know what i mean.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Thanks E! I never stick to the same formula from piece to piece, so it's always a new direction in some ways. Yes, I need a new piano, or at least a tuning of this old upright that I've had since around 1987!


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Captainnumber36 said:


> Thanks E! I never stick to the same formula from piece to piece, so it's always a new direction in some ways. Yes, I need a new piano, or at least a tuning of this old upright that I've had since around 1987!


Good lord!

Also, if you're pressed for space/money, there are a few uprights out there with sound comparable to grands as well. I'm looking into getting one eventually.


----------



## Captainnumber36

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> Good lord!
> 
> Also, if you're pressed for space/money, there are a few uprights out there with sound comparable to grands as well. I'm looking into getting one eventually.


I'll be getting a grand in the near future.


----------



## Phil loves classical

A grand is really for more advanced pianists. I feel a grand is overkill for my piano technical level.

Main thing is if you play Classical, do not buy digital. I haven't played any that I felt were worth the money. But that was a while ago. Maybe they had advanced since.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> A grand is really for more advanced pianists. I feel a grand is overkill for my piano technical level.
> 
> Main thing is if you play Classical, do not buy digital. I haven't played any that I felt were worth the money. But that was a while ago. Maybe they had advanced since.


I want a baby grand for sound, and aesthetics in my house. I like the way they look! I want a piano with nice deep rich tones. I found a Steinway I really love, but I'll never have a Steinway, haha!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Me improvising on a Dave Matthews Band Song called #41:


----------



## Captainnumber36

I think this is one of my better compositions titled "Summertime":


----------



## Captainnumber36

Me improvising on the Phish song "Dirt":


----------



## Captainnumber36

Blue Birds Sing:





Snow White:


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Blue Birds Sing:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Snow White:


I thought Snow White was probably one of your best works. The harmony was pretty strong, and melody imaginative. In Blue Bird, I think you should change the left hand chord on the 4th right hand note.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I thought Snow White was probably one of your best works. The harmony was pretty strong, and melody imaginative. In Blue Bird, I think you should change the left hand chord on the 4th right hand note.


Thanks, not a bad idea about the chord change in BBS.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I have a question, what criteria separates composer from songwriter? I feel I am more of a pop/rock (ala Paul Simon) songwriter of instrumental piano music with a diversity of influence.

Where does that put me?


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> I have a question, what criteria separates composer from songwriter? I feel I am more of a pop/rock (ala Paul Simon) songwriter of instrumental piano music with a diversity of influence.
> 
> Where does that put me?


Songwriter is more specific to writing in the genre of songs, which are sung with accompaniment. Composers like Mozart and Schubert wrote songs, but were versatile to write other genres. When you were singing, you were a singer/songwriter, like Carole King, James Taylor, etc. You can say you are an instrumental composer when you're not singing.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Songwriter is a more specific to writing the genre of songs, which are sung with accompaniment. Composers like Mozart and Schubert wrote songs, but were versatile to write other genres. When you were singing, you were a singer/songwriter, like Carole King. You can say you are an instrumental composer when you're not singing.


Do I need to specify with "instrumental" composer?


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Do I need to specify with "instrumental" composer?


No, unless you want to be more specific. You can say your a piano instrumental composer.


----------



## Jacob Brooks

I think composition tends more towards planned, articulated, and written down forms. Songwriting (in its modern usage) means creating music in the tradition of folk music and rock/pop music, ie planned but not written down in the same way, with a lot of phrasal refrain to make it easier. One might call a string quartet playing chords (like viva la vida) a session of songwriting, one might call a progressive rock band making a long, complicated work a session of composition.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Jacob Brooks said:


> I think composition tends more towards planned, articulated, and written down forms. Songwriting (in its modern usage) means creating music in the tradition of folk music and rock/pop music, ie planned but not written down in the same way, with a lot of phrasal refrain to make it easier. One might call a string quartet playing chords (like viva la vida) a session of songwriting, one might call a progressive rock band making a long, complicated work a session of composition.


I'm somewhere in-between I think. I don't write out my music, and it has influences from mostly Pop and Classical.


----------



## Captainnumber36

_*Spun*_


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> _*Spun*_


I believe that is your most original piece. The harmony was constantly changing and getting away from repetition of regular major/minor chords, and you added chromatic notes.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I believe that is your most original piece. The harmony was constantly changing and getting away from repetition of regular major/minor chords, and you added chromatic notes.


Thanks, it's a personal favorite of mine.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Edited and deleted.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I started writing something new this morning, perhaps I'll have a new piece to showcase at some point today!  It's been a while.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I just scheduled a performance at a nearby Nursing Home for September 22nd, 2018 at 3:30 PM; not that you needed those details, .

I'm excited, I haven't performed in a while, I've been spending my time figuring out who I am as a person, and what I stand for. But now I'm ready to take over the world!

(I start Pre-Pharmacy School on Monday the 27th too)


----------



## Captainnumber36

New Music From Me:


----------



## Captainnumber36




----------



## Phil loves classical

I would say try checking out the concept of counterpoint. Both Classical and pop have tight counterpoint, also even in alternative rock music. The left and right hand are not integrated together, which is becomes glaring clear over a short time. With counterpoint, your music would gain a lot more sophistication.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I would say try checking out the concept of counterpoint. Both Classical and pop have tight counterpoint, also even in alternative rock music. The left and right hand are not integrated together, which is becomes glaring clear over a short time. With counterpoint, your music would gain a lot more sophistication.


Thanks, as always, for the constructive critique!


----------



## Captainnumber36

How derivative is my music?


----------



## Captainnumber36

It utilizes lots of pop song, song structures with Pop, Classical, Blues and Jazz theory and melody.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

The music is pretty derivative, I think, but you have gotten way better in songwriting in terms of structure and flow.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I just got done performing at a local nursing home and they loved it! One gentleman stated he heard lots of Paul McCartney influence in my music, "Lots of mean chords".

I always count my mistakes, I made three, you all would have picked up on them, but no one there did. I'm also very good at playing through my mistakes.

I had lots of fun though!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Check out my new one: "Rise"


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Check out my new one: "Rise"


Hey did you lose weight? The singing had some microtonal elements


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Hey did you lose weight? The singing had some microtonal elements


ya, my voice was straining after doing a few takes.


----------



## Captainnumber36

This new one is for you Phil, it's very Beatles inspired:


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> This new one is for you Phil, it's very Beatles inspired:


I thought it was pretty charming.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I thought it was pretty charming.


Thanks man!


----------



## Captainnumber36

A New Composition Titled "Mozart's Barbershop":


----------



## Alexanbar

not enough loud


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> not enough loud


Try this version:


----------



## Captainnumber36

Another Beatle-esq tune.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Lyrics: "On my knees, darling please, lovely girl, love me please. Come my way, shoot the breeze, talk a while, darling please. I love you girl"


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Another Beatle-esq tune.


Lyrics were quite funny.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Floydian


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Floydian


I think it's nice and moody. I think you can compose naturally in pop (there is nothing wrong with pop, but some people seem to take offense). Winging it is good to get ideas, which I think are quite strong here. But I still think you should work out the accompaniment and rhythms at a few parts. If could fix those, I really think you could go pro with those ideas. It's like you're 85% there. You don't even need to listen to classical. Just listen to how other bands make their bass lines. The right hand is there.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil especially, I re-worked my Nocturne piece. Really I just shortened it, but I think it makes it really nice.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Constrictor:


----------



## Captainnumber36

Not perfect versions, it never is, but they don't please me completely but they are pretty good. I just want feedback on the flow of the works!


----------



## Phil loves classical

^ I thought Dream Warrior was especially well done. I think you made good progress. Your sense of harmony greatly improved in all the pieces. By playing the pieces faster they flow better, and shows some technique I never knew you had.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> ^ I thought Dream Warrior was especially well done. I think you made good progress. Your sense of harmony greatly improved in all the pieces. By playing the pieces faster they flow better, and shows some technique I never knew you had.


Thanks! Always with good feedback.


----------



## Captainnumber36

My variation on the theme from Halloween: "Silent Night" - Michael is dead!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Me playing the actual Halloween Theme:


----------



## Captainnumber36

I need a new piano badly...this one is on it's last limb. I deserve a baby grand Steinway, I have been eyeing one at a local piano store nearby that is just suited for me!


----------



## Captainnumber36

I'm most concerned about the tempo, I like playing that fast, like early Phish. I'm practicing feeling out all my works right now, and getting them ready for a band.

My piece: 



The feel I'm going for (I want to add bass and drums to it):


----------



## Captainnumber36

How is my tempo on this one? Feels natural to me for the most part.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Fountain of Youth"


----------



## Captainnumber36

I speed up near the end a bit, I'm still getting comfortable with the piece, I just wrote it an hour a go.


----------



## Captainnumber36

My new EP:

https://pino2.bandcamp.com/releases


----------



## Captainnumber36

Please listen and see what your thoughts are on my current album:

https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com


----------



## Captainnumber36

What do you think of this jam I just layed down?


----------



## Alexanbar

Captainnumber36 said:


> What do you think of this jam I just layed down?


The video was deleted by user


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> The video was deleted by user


Yes, I took it down. I'm having frantic fluctuations in appraising my abilities!


----------



## Captainnumber36

I'm slowly finding my voice as a performer:


----------



## Captainnumber36

I put a few more up on my youtube page.


----------



## Captainnumber36

__
https://soundcloud.com/pino-398700642%2Fnocturne

I re-worked this one Phil, it's my Nocturne.


----------



## Alexanbar

Captainnumber36 said:


> __
> https://soundcloud.com/pino-398700642%2Fnocturne
> 
> I re-worked this one Phil, it's my Nocturne.


I think that using of 3*1/4 notes in right hand would be better decision. It may brings additional colors in the piece.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> I think that using of 3*1/4 notes in right hand would be better decision. It may brings additional colors in the piece.


I'm not sure I understand....?

Do you mean triple the melody?


----------



## Guest

All of the videos did not work for me, but sound cloud did.


----------



## Captainnumber36

poco a poco said:


> All of the videos did not work for me, but sound cloud did.


I took the videos down, and now that soundcloud as well. I did post a new one though, please do offer your insight if you would be so kind!


__
https://soundcloud.com/pino-398700642%2Fcosmic-uncle


----------



## Alexanbar

Captainnumber36 said:


> I'm not sure I understand....?
> 
> Do you mean triple the melody?


Because of often reorganization of your collection I can't add more comments


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> Because of often reorganization of your collection I can't add more comments


Hopefully I figure it out!


----------



## Captainnumber36

__
https://soundcloud.com/

Try this link Alex, and others!


----------



## Captainnumber36

I made a bandcamp site: I think I'm finally making myself happy again, musically!

https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com/releases


----------



## Captainnumber36

Captainnumber36 said:


> I made a bandcamp site: I think I'm finally making myself happy again, musically!
> 
> https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com/releases


This is still up!


----------



## Captainnumber36

deleted...........


----------



## Captainnumber36

https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com/album/dragon-tale

Just put up a new batch of works.


----------



## Alexanbar

Are you plane to reorganize your album for ensemle performancers?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> Are you plane to reorganize your album for ensemle performancers?


No, I just plan to release these little albums throughout my life and share them with folks on the internet, family & friends.


----------



## Alexanbar

Captainnumber36 said:


> No, I just plan to release these little albums throughout my life and share them with folks on the internet, family & friends.


Your music brings only simple sentiments and It will be better if you grow its difficulty - if you make more advanced dialogue between separate voices, add ornamentations and so on.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> Your music brings only simple sentiments and It will be better if you grow its difficulty - if you make more advanced dialogue between separate voices, add ornamentations and so on.


First of all, thank you for your thoughts and taking the time to listen.

The music is minimalistic, certainly, but simplicity of construction doesn't always equate to simplicity of reaction. That being said, perhaps your reaction was a simple one, and that's ok.

I can compose more difficult works, but I am trying to write music that I can perform well, if that chance arose, so it has to be within my comfort zone. I could push myself to expand my technique, but that isn't my focus right now.

I also don't plan to perform very often in my life, just at a request from a family member or friend, or a rare performance at a gathering of some sort.

I just enjoy my simple works that are soothing and pretty.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Another work I posted:

https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com/track/spun


----------



## Captainnumber36

Edit, deleted..................double post


----------



## Alexanbar

Captainnumber36 said:


> Another work I posted:
> 
> https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com/track/spun


I hear in my head additional voice in arabic style.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> I hear in my head additional voice in arabic style.


Maybe we should collaborate!


----------



## Captainnumber36

I put up more recordings today, the old ones are still there too. 

https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com/album/spun


----------



## Alexanbar

Captainnumber36 said:


> I put up more recordings today, the old ones are still there too.
> 
> https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com/album/spun


What is a picture in this page means?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> What is a picture in this page means?


It's an alien face I drew. I just match a drawing I have done to the title(mood) of the album the best I can.


----------



## Captainnumber36

On that website, you must have a cover art for every release you put out...


----------



## Captainnumber36

Alexanbar said:


> What is a picture in this page means?


What did you think of the music?


----------



## Captainnumber36




----------



## Captainnumber36

"Summertime"


----------



## Captainnumber36

This is short and fun, like me,  :

__
https://soundcloud.com/pino-398700642%2Fsafari


----------



## Flutter

"Dead & Lovely" is really good, gentle but harmonically and emotionally so tense, I like it! :tiphat:


----------



## Captainnumber36

Flutter said:


> "Dead & Lovely" is really good, gentle but harmonically and emotionally so tense, I like it! :tiphat:


Thank you! I think it's one of my best.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Here is a link to all my current compositions I intend to keep:

https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com


----------



## Captainnumber36

A New Piece: "Many Moons Ago"


__
https://soundcloud.com/


----------



## Captainnumber36

I just put together a new disc of tunes called "Chopsticks". Check it out if you want to! Please do feel free to listen to the other albums there if you feel like it.

https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> I just put together a new disc of tunes called "Chopsticks". Check it out if you want to! Please do feel free to listen to the other albums there if you feel like it.
> 
> https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com


I liked how Rain Dance started out, it was moody. But overall there were only 2 short motifs, the first one and the one at 0:30. I would have liked less repetition and small changes, and would like the right hand to have more melodies. When I think about it, it is not quite minimalism, more like ambient music. Minimalism like Steve Reich or Glass have more counterpoint and intricacy, and an elaborate set up or arrangement, even when it is repetitive and has basic and predictable variations.






I would say yours is more akin to this:






or this






On piano without effects, the Aphex Twin would sound more boring (some would say it already is), because the piano is too recognizable, and I suspect people would start comparing this and your music with Liszt or something, when they hear the piano. So my suggestion is to try different patches, timbres, electronic manipulation of your current music, where you don't change the content itself, or else move toward more intracacy and counterpoint like Glass and Reich, which I don't think is nearly as easy to do. A third option I think is to develop themes more, which also requires a lot of work. I just think you're in a bit of a no-man's land territory right now, stylistically. I wouldn't say it is an original style either because it is not altering something to achieve a greater result or showcasing in a different light. I'm sure Nikola would disagree, but that is my view.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> I liked how Rain Dance started out, it was moody. But overall there were only 2 short motifs, the first one and the one at 0:30. I would have liked less repetition and small changes, and would like the right hand to have more melodies. When I think about it, it is not quite minimalism, more like ambient music. Minimalism like Steve Reich or Glass have more counterpoint and intricacy, and an elaborate set up or arrangement, even when it is repetitive and has basic and predictable variations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say yours is more akin to this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On piano without effects, the Aphex Twin would sound more boring (some would say it already is), because the piano is too recognizable, and I suspect people would start comparing this and your music with Liszt or something, when they hear the piano. So my suggestion is to try different patches, timbres, electronic manipulation of your current music, where you don't change the content itself, or else move toward more intracacy and counterpoint like Glass and Reich, which I don't think is nearly as easy to do. A third option I think is to develop themes more, which also requires a lot of work. I just think you're in a bit of a no-man's land territory right now, stylistically. I wouldn't say it is an original style either because it is not altering something to achieve a greater result or showcasing in a different light. I'm sure Nikola would disagree, but that is my view.


Sorry for my delay in responding to this, I've been a bit busy the past few days. However, thanks for your always thought out feedback. I certainly see all the points you are making and where you stand in terms of your perspective on my music, but I think I like having my ambient style as you put it so well with the normal piano sound.

I understand this makes some want to hear "classical madness" as you might say, but I enjoy the delicate (for the most part) piano work I'm doing right now.

As always, thanks for listening, and giving your feedback.

I'm happy you found some enjoyment in "Rain Dance"!

Cheers,
:tiphat:


----------



## Captainnumber36

Captainnumber36 said:


> I just put together a new disc of tunes called "Chopsticks". Check it out if you want to! Please do feel free to listen to the other albums there if you feel like it.
> 
> https://nakulanbala.bandcamp.com


Any other thoughts on this?


----------



## Captainnumber36

edited and deleted.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I'm back to composition again. I don't think I've posted this one before, so I recorded it. Here is "Good Night":


----------



## Captainnumber36

Another titled "Solitude":


----------



## Phil loves classical

^ It's more pop, but there is nothing wrong with that. Keep improvising and trying out stuff.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> ^ It's more pop, but there is nothing wrong with that. Keep improvising and trying out stuff.


I'm definitely New Age/Classical. My technique and composing chops are far simpler than the greats in every way, but it's still enjoyable music. I think I'm more comfortable performing my compositions than my "jams" b/c I find it easier to consider the length of the performance that way.

Thanks for listening!

How is the harmony on these two?


----------



## Captainnumber36

I'm getting my piano tuned on Thursday too!


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> I'm definitely New Age/Classical. My technique and composing chops are far simpler than the greats in every way, but it's still enjoyable music. I think I'm more comfortable performing my compositions than my "jams" b/c I find it easier to consider the length of the performance that way.
> 
> Thanks for listening!
> 
> How is the harmony on these two?


All right. I thought Solitude had more variety. I think you made the harmony thing work by not using functional harmony, more similar to Debussy.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> All right. I thought Solitude had more variety. I think you made the harmony thing work by not using functional harmony, more similar to Debussy.


Nice, thank you. I will google "functional harmony".


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Spun"


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Tunnel"


----------



## Captainnumber36

I just posted a bunch of OG music to my youtube page, please listen and give feedback if you are interested in it at all, thanks!

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyUv3y1LKuZfwbOgBiV30dA/videos


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Starry Night"


----------



## Phil loves classical

That's a pretty good ambient tune to fit the timbre of the keyboard. Around 0:30 you added tidbits like in minimalism. In minimalism you would bring in each note one by one with each repetition while playing those notes you brought in already. After 1:30, I felt there was nothing added to the piece. I thought it took some away actually. I'm interested to hear you bringing in each note at a time to the basic riff with each rep.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> That's a pretty good ambient tune to fit the timbre of the keyboard. Around 0:30 you added tidbits like in minimalism. In minimalism you would bring in each note one by one with each repetition while playing those notes you brought in already. After 1:30, I felt there was nothing added to the piece. I thought it took some away actually. I'm interested to hear you bringing in each note at a time to the basic riff with each rep.


Thanks for the input.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> That's a pretty good ambient tune to fit the timbre of the keyboard. Around 0:30 you added tidbits like in minimalism. In minimalism you would bring in each note one by one with each repetition while playing those notes you brought in already. After 1:30, I felt there was nothing added to the piece. I thought it took some away actually. I'm interested to hear you bringing in each note at a time to the basic riff with each rep.


I really love that section at 1:30 however!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Try Pulse:


----------



## Phil loves classical

This style of music is usually not standalone music, but more like music to go with images. There is a local TV channel in Quebec I saw a few weeks ago that shows nature imagery with moody music in the background to fit a certain perspective. There used to be some here in Ontario as well in my hometown. Also in some of my nature scenery DVD's. Your music seems to fit that sort of purpose. I noticed you want to get published in the other thread. I only know the type of stuff my conservatory published is usually less drawn out, and very 'composed', no jamming, limited to 1 or 2 pages of written music with more concentrated ideas. So I think your style fits the first type more.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> This style of music is usually not standalone music, but more like music to go with images. There is a local TV channel in Quebec I saw a few weeks ago that shows nature imagery with moody music in the background to fit a certain perspective. There used to be some here in Ontario as well in my hometown. Also in some of my nature scenery DVD's. Your music seems to fit that sort of purpose. I noticed you want to get published in the other thread. I only know the type of stuff my conservatory published is usually less drawn out, and very 'composed', no jamming, limited to 1 or 2 pages of written music with more concentrated ideas. So I think your style fits the first type more.


I could see that. But I think there is an audience for my music as well in the performance setting! Or at least I hope there is, I love performing, even though I get tensed up about it. I'm learning to relax though! Those old folk love my music, it relaxes their tired bones.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Bluebirds Fly"


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Waves"


----------



## Captainnumber36

Waves does have a nice structure to it, doesn't it Phil.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> "Waves"


This one I thought has a lot of potential. I thought the left hand broken chord progression was too obvious as you played it, since you are reusing some key notes. The first chord Bb F Bb sounded great. But the next chord F C F sounded too obvious because you already used the F in the first chord. Then the chord after that, C G C, also sounded too obvious since you're reusing the C from the 2nd chord. I think it can be solved by just changing the 2nd chord, to like Ab Db Gb. The Gb will add a bit of tension that is resolved by the G in the last C G C chord.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> This one I thought has a lot of potential. I thought the left hand broken chord progression was too obvious as you played it, since you are reusing some key notes. The first chord Bb F Bb sounded great. But the next chord F C F sounded too obvious because you already used the F in the first chord. Then the chord after that, C G C, also sounded too obvious since you're reusing the C from the 2nd chord. I think it can be solved by just changing the 2nd chord, to like Ab Db Gb. The Gb will add a bit of tension that is resolved by the G in the last C G C chord.


Aren't I doing "Bb-F-C" "C-Eb-F-C" "Eb-F"? I believe those are all my left hand patterns in the piece, as is.


----------



## Phil loves classical

I was going note by note, not chord by chord. By using too many of the same notes, it sounds either more static or predictable. I believe it's all right to reuse some notes but not the for the lowest note. In the first 3 chords the first bass note of each chord appeared in the chord before. Try Bb-Ab-C for the first 3 chords I'm saying, or anything without repeating a note in the the bass note of each chord


----------



## SergeOfArniVillage

I just read and skimmed through this entire thread. Nikola’s posts crack me up :lol:

Gotta catch my breath .... ok, better.

I haven’t listened to anything yet, but I will. I think I’ll just listen to your most recent stuff, and comment on that.


----------



## SergeOfArniVillage

Pulse: Ok, I can see you have a semi-improvisational style, and I think you enjoy the meditativeness of repeated chords and broken chords. I think you do a good job, and while there’s a soothing familiarity to the piece, you do mix things up and take things in different directions throughout, and it keeps thing interesting. I do think that there’s room to grow, however. There’s all sorts of choices you can make, harmonically, that can add a little spice to your music, without it turning into something else entirely.

I think you have a sincere raw talent for music. Keep it up! I’ll listen to more later.


----------



## Captainnumber36

SergeOfArniVillage said:


> Pulse: Ok, I can see you have a semi-improvisational style, and I think you enjoy the meditativeness of repeated chords and broken chords. I think you do a good job, and while there's a soothing familiarity to the piece, you do mix things up and take things in different directions throughout, and it keeps thing interesting. I do think that there's room to grow, however. There's all sorts of choices you can make, harmonically, that can add a little spice to your music, without it turning into something else entirely.
> 
> I think you have a sincere raw talent for music. Keep it up! I'll listen to more later.


Thanks Serge! I appreciate the review.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Nocturne"





Phil, you've commented on this one before, but I did change it up a bit. Serge, feel free to comment on this one too, I think it's a stronger one of mine.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> "Nocturne"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phil, you've commented on this one before, but I did change it up a bit. Serge, feel free to comment on this one too, I think it's a stronger one of mine.


A lot better. There are still a few uneasy harmonizations, like at 0:51 to 0:54 you used the same chord on the left hand. The first is ok to set up tension but it kind of went awry the 2nd time when you changed the right hand but not the left hand to resolve or go somewhere. This piece puts a lot of stress on harmonizations on the beat, which can be thrilling when it works, but very noticeable when it doesn't.


----------



## Captainnumber36

A Waltz!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Captainnumber36 said:


> A Waltz!


I never got any feedback on this one, what did you all think?


----------



## Phil loves classical

It's good you're getting into more intricate melody lines. I suggest always trying out different harmonizations with the left hand. I feel you skimp over it sometimes.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> It's good you're getting into more intricate melody lines. I suggest always trying out different harmonizations with the left hand. I feel you skimp over it sometimes.


Thanks, I'll work on doing that in the future!


----------



## SergeOfArniVillage

Captainnumber36 said:


> I never got any feedback on this one, what did you all think?


Patience! :lol:


----------



## Captainnumber36

SergeOfArniVillage said:


> Patience! :lol:


Yessir!!!!!!!!!


----------



## SergeOfArniVillage

Waltz: Oh, right away I was pleasantly surprised. Crisp, staccato, no sustain pedal. (The sustain pedal is my favorite thing ever, but I respect it when a pianist divorces it every now and then.) Have you have ever written a piece like this before? If not, it's good you're trying new stuff.

At about 2:38 was my favorite section, I like how the R.H. went from a more scale-oriented melody to an arpeggiated figure. Nice development choice.

I agree 100% with Phil, broadening your harmonies is going to prove _vital_ to your growth as a musician. I'd encourage you to do one of the two following things.

1) _gradually_ start experimenting with harmonies that you think are a little strange, and see how you can make a piece you think is kind of pushing the envelope for you personally, but not so far removed that you feel like your writing isn't really true to who you are at heart,

or

2) just _go all in_ and make something you think is just really wild and completely nuts. You may even *hate* it at first. But you may be surprised at how something you initially thought was tripe, is actually just a real side of yourself or your own sensibilities you didn't know was there. It can be a very liberating experience. At worst, you'll just honestly hate it, and then know it's just not for you, and you can move on to whatever else, instead.

Thanks for sharing, this was nice to listen to


----------



## Captainnumber36

SergeOfArniVillage said:


> Waltz: Oh, right away I was pleasantly surprised. Crisp, staccato, no sustain pedal. (The sustain pedal is my favorite thing ever, but I respect it when a pianist divorces it every now and then.) Have you have ever written a piece like this before? If not, it's good you're trying new stuff.
> 
> At about 2:38 was my favorite section, I like how the R.H. went from a more scale-oriented melody to an arpeggiated figure. Nice development choice.
> 
> I agree 100% with Phil, broadening your harmonies is going to prove _vital_ to your growth as a musician. I'd encourage you to do one of the two following things.
> 
> 1) _gradually_ start experimenting with harmonies that you think are a little strange, and see how you can make a piece you think is kind of pushing the envelope for you personally, but not so far removed that you feel like your writing isn't really true to who you are at heart,
> 
> or
> 
> 2) just _go all in_ and make something you think is just really wild and completely nuts. You may even *hate* it at first. But you may be surprised at how something you initially thought was tripe, is actually just a real side of yourself or your own sensibilities you didn't know was there. It can be a very liberating experience. At worst, you'll just honestly hate it, and then know it's just not for you, and you can move on to whatever else, instead.
> 
> Thanks for sharing, this was nice to listen to


Yes, I must explore different harmonies. I have written staccato works before, but not on this level imo!


----------



## SergeOfArniVillage

“Yes, I must explore different harmonies.“

I know you’re tired of hearing that, but trust me. You will have an “a-ha” moment, and it will pay off.


----------



## Captainnumber36

SergeOfArniVillage said:


> "Yes, I must explore different harmonies."
> 
> I know you're tired of hearing that, but trust me. You will have an "a-ha" moment, and it will pay off.


Here is an attempt at something radically different for me: (I also think I decided I'm going to play all my pieces on the Harpsichord sound on my keyboard).


----------



## SergeOfArniVillage

Well, I hate it, I think it sounds _terrible_ :lol: But that's ok, because that's not the point.

The exact same thing happened to me. There was a time I was honestly really scared to use sharps and flats, and preferred to mainly just stay strictly in major or minor. But then I wrote a piece that used a lot of chromaticism for the first time, and felt super uncomfortable doing it the whole time. And guess what? It really sucked hard :lol: But the reason it was bad was just because it was my first time doing it, and didn't know what I was doing. But it was directly because of writing that piece I began to get more accustomed to viewing things at a different angle, and then a couple years later or so, I wrote the Jackhammer piece I posted on my thread, which was a huge improvement from my work previously.

Sometimes in order to succeed, you first have to fail. I think you really should be commended for having the guts to step outside your comfort zone.


----------



## Captainnumber36

SergeOfArniVillage said:


> Well, I hate it, I think it sounds _terrible_ :lol: But that's ok, because that's not the point.
> 
> The exact same thing happened to me. There was a time I was honestly really scared to use sharps and flats, and preferred to mainly just stay strictly in major or minor. But then I wrote a piece that used a lot of chromaticism for the first time, and felt super uncomfortable doing it the whole time. And guess what? It really sucked hard :lol: But the reason it was bad was just because it was my first time doing it, and didn't know what I was doing. But it was directly because of writing that piece I began to get more accustomed to viewing things at a different angle, and then a couple years later or so, I wrote the Jackhammer piece I posted on my thread, which was a huge improvement from my work previously.
> 
> Sometimes in order to succeed, you first have to fail. I think you really should be commended for having the guts to step outside your comfort zone.


Thanks for the honesty and words of encouragement. I think the work is really fun, actually!


----------



## Captainnumber36

edited and deleted.


----------



## Captainnumber36

My last post in this thread.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Here is an attempt at something radically different for me: (I also think I decided I'm going to play all my pieces on the Harpsichord sound on my keyboard).


Been gone a few days. Could you repost this one?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Been gone a few days. Could you repost this one?


I didn't save that one. It was pretty bad though.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Please look for all of my future works in the thread linked below:
I Am A New Age Piano Composer (A Revelation): Find My Future Works Here


----------



## Captainnumber36

I'm back to composing over the improvisation:

Here is a new one titled "Failing Optimistic":


----------



## Captainnumber36




----------



## Phil loves classical

They're still more improvisations than compositions. I don't think you can get around it. You have to write it out on a staff and look at it for more horizontal and vertical possibilities. You're kind of maxed out doing it this way.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> They're still more improvisations than compositions. I don't think you can get around it. You have to write it out on a staff and look at it for more horizontal and vertical possibilities. You're kind of maxed out doing it this way.


I don't see how they are more like improvisations. Can you elucidate? Do you mean to say, not fully thought out?


----------



## Phil loves classical

Take the last one, there isn't a true melody nor form. It is basically playing the same chords to different rhythms and repeating for the first 3 minutes. Around the 3:00 mark you start to improvise on the right hand to left hand broken chords, before repeating the process before.


----------



## Swosh

I liked those chords!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Swosh said:


> I liked those chords!


Thanks Swosh, . .


----------



## Minneapple

Captainnumber36 said:


> I'm back to composing over the improvisation:
> 
> Here is a new one titled "Failing Optimistic":


There is some nice stuff here. It would be more interesting if you used more of the keyboard's register and played some different voicings of the chords (and maybe a few different chords).


----------



## Captainnumber36

Minneapple said:


> There is some nice stuff here. It would be more interesting if you used more of the keyboard's register and played some different voicings of the chords (and maybe a few different chords).


Thanks for the input!


----------



## Captainnumber36

Here is one I wrote today: "Ecstasy"


----------



## Phil loves classical

That's good. It was definitely tighter and more composed.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> That's good. It was definitely tighter and more composed.


Thanks for the critique!


----------



## Captainnumber36




----------



## Captainnumber36

https://nakulan.bandcamp.com/album/the-alien-ep


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Scars"


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> "Scars"


Hey, that's quite moody sounding. Brings back some nostalgic memories. I don't quite like the progression to the more predictable chord at 0:50 or the right hand part from 1:30 to 2:00. But it seems you've pushed yourself well further than usual.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Hey, that's quite moody sounding. Brings back some nostalgic memories. I don't quite like the progression to the more predictable chord at 0:50 or the right hand part from 1:30 to 2:00. But it seems you've pushed yourself well further than usual.


Isn't most of my stuff quite moody?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Try this one too. It has some interesting changes in it!

"Alien Porridge"


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Isn't most of my stuff quite moody?


Maybe moodiness is a personal thing and I don't usually find it moody.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Maybe moodiness is a personal thing and I don't usually find it moody.


Fair enough.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> Try this one too. It has some interesting changes in it!
> 
> "Alien Porridge"


Can't say I find this one very interesting, haha, sorry . It just a 4 note melody over to a pretty predictable chord pattern, and then a shift to a couple of dissonant chords on the right hand with a more conventional chord on left and a few notes back and forth. I don't feel you've created something out of the individual elements, unlike Scars.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> Can't say I find this one very interesting, haha, sorry . It just a 4 note melody over to a pretty predictable chord pattern, and then a shift to a couple of dissonant chords on the right hand with a more conventional chord on left and a few notes back and forth. I don't feel you've created something out of the individual elements, unlike Scars.


I just really like when the blues progression goes to the B and the D chord section a whole lot. Rhythmically, it is all over the place too. Lots of changes in feels!


----------



## Captainnumber36

But no one will be intrigued by all.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Triangles"


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> "Triangles"


That's good. It has stronger form and melody, with minimal repetition. And definitely goes somewhere.


----------



## Captainnumber36

Phil loves classical said:


> That's good. It has stronger form and melody, with minimal repetition. And definitely goes somewhere.


Thanks sir Phil.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"At the Edge of Flames"


----------



## Captainnumber36

edited and deleted.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Captainnumber36 said:


> "At the Edge of Flames"


You've started to branch out into some dissonance. This one's moody too. I got kind of impatient with too much repetition of small bits. It would work better if you jump to the next part at 0:26 after 2 cycles, rather than putting in 2 more, which don't add but take away something to me. In that next part I would change it up the 2nd time at 0:46, to include a couple of lower notes on the RH melody. After that you can repeat and change something up once in a while, but you'd have a good block to work with. Repetition should have impact. The parts you're repeating are too short and incomplete to make impact.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Ashes of an Eagle"


----------



## Captainnumber36

"The Rise of Poseidon"


----------



## Captainnumber36

"We All Float Down Here"


----------



## hammeredklavier

Captainnumber36 said:


> "We All Float Down Here"


this reminds me of Satie


----------



## Captainnumber36

hammeredklavier said:


> this reminds me of Satie


Thank you very much.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"We All Float Down Here" (w/ added guitar by a friend from another forum)

__
https://soundcloud.com/c-ver-voort%2Fwe-all-float-down-here-collab-with-nakulan


----------



## Captainnumber36

edited and deleted.


----------



## Captainnumber36

"The Dark Tower"


----------



## Captainnumber36

"Twinkle"


----------

