# Please rate this from 1 to 10



## behnampmdg3 (Jun 8, 2010)

Hello;

I am curious how this piece sound to you guys who are familiar with classical music.

Here is the link, thank you guys

http://webdesignshop.net.au/9.mp3


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

Synthesisers? 


Apart from sounding confused between a fugue and a cadenza, I'm not sure. It feels like it might fit in well to the commercial t.v. sector as a snippet somewhere, but not perhaps in the classical tradition. 

As I said - I don't know, but 'classical' isn't the kind of idiom it seems to express?


----------



## behnampmdg3 (Jun 8, 2010)

Head_case said:


> Synthesisers?
> Apart from sounding confused between a fugue and a cadenza, I'm not sure. It feels like it might fit in well to the commercial t.v. sector as a snippet somewhere, but not perhaps in the classical tradition.
> As I said - I don't know, but 'classical' isn't the kind of idiom it seems to express?


I dont know what is a fugue or a cadenza. I believe there are those who listen to the music cause of the excietments and unpredictablities, not to hear the same thing over and over again.

I also believe that not everything has to follow the same rules that everyone has been doing for hundreds of years! Maybe if Bach was alive he would mix fuge and cadenza.

Thanks for the reply.


----------



## Major Minor (May 30, 2010)

My critique would be this sounds very much sequenced and quantisized.... the quantisizing being the problem. It's too tightly wound up. Does your sequencer offer Iterive quantisizing? If so I would use that... (...it doesn't make every note rigidly, exactly on the beat.) 

If it's a question of not being able to play that fast I'd recommend turning the tempo down to where you can play it, then turning it back to where you want it and -not- quantisizing it. The ear doesn't mind slight imperfections... in fact what most people really hate about electronic music isn't nearly the electronic side , but the tightly quantisized side of things.

I don't have a problem with the music, but the recording side of things needs a bit of work. Sampled sounds need a bit of massaging to make them sound organic.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

*in my opinion...*

this is bachsh...

awful.

Martin


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

I think it is crap. Sorry, but you did ask for a rating.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

It's such a short piece it's hard to rate. The bit from 12 to 20 sounds like it's from Bach's toccata and fugue in D minor, and alot of the ideas in this I suppose are staple ideas from baroque music. They work ok in that music so it works here too I suppose.


----------



## Jacob Singer (Jan 7, 2011)

behnampmdg3,

I don't think you should worry about the "cadenza-this, fugue-that" stuff. Those kinds of categories are only important if you want them to be. Personally, I've never felt the need to strictly classify something in order to find value in it. In fact, much of my favorite music doesn't easily fit into one strict category or another. It simply stands on its own merits.

Obviously this piece is electronic, and there is nothing wrong with that, but if the violin is the focus then I'd go for a more natural sound (i.e. lose the reverb-y, over-the-top effect). That is, if you even _want_ it to sound natural. Maybe "over-the-top" is what you are going for, in which case my advice would be the complete opposite: switch it to a wild synth sound or something. 

If it were me, I'd definitely throw some strong rhythmic chords underneath that last bit, to help emphasize the movement, and then later you could break it all down again with just the solo violin.

I dunno... those are just my first impressions.


----------

