It still sounds a bit like you are writing for a machine rather than a pair of hands. There's some cool stuff at the beginning, but overall I don't get much real sense of drama or mastery of form.
If you want people to play your works, you need to have a certain gift for dramatic structure. Dramatic structure is what separates a real, cohesive piece of music from a mere jumble of notes. These days, with notation software readily available, anyone can write virtually unplayable 'pieces' with thousands upon thousands of notes all over the keyboard. Very few people can compose a well-structured, melodically and harmonically interesting three minute piece that folks actually WANT to play.
Again, I urge you to get away from midi playback, and write something that YOU can play with YOUR own hands.
I'd love to hear your Berceuse(s)! I didn't wish to give you the impression that this creation holds no merit whatsoever. There were some nice ideas, particularly at the beginning. Its form seemed a bit unformed, and I was disappointed by the expressive capabilities of the midi playback. Again, I urge you to get away from midi playback, and write something that YOU can play with YOUR own hands. Don't worry about not being a virtuoso! Virtuoso players are a dime a dozen. Original composers are in short supply! It shows more self-respect when a composer takes the time to play his or her own works, rather than rely on midi. Remember, midi playback absolutely RUINS even the finest compositions, rendering them without any sense of feeling whatsoever.
The problem I tend to have is that I can usually either have a recording made OR I can actually make a score so it can be played more than once.
I don't understand what you mean by this.Why can't you simply write something out neatly by hand, stick it on your music desk, and play it?
The reason why is because I can improvise a piece that I don't have the compositional knowledge to write, and I compose works more often than not that require more skill of organized playing than I have.
Anybody can improvise a 'piece' that they don't have the composition chops to notate. That's one of the main reasons why improvisations and finished compositions are not the same thing. Don't write beyond your skill level! That's like a 'chef' who is attempting to publish a cookbook, having not even once prepared the recipes contained therein, on the basis that they require too much cooking skill, that he doesn't have! Would you, or anyone in their right mind, buy such a cookbook?
I sincerely try my best to help people rather than to hurt them. I've been putting the finishing touches on another small piece, and it should be ready for the public very soon indeed. Oh, and kake, comparing oneself to Beethoven, no matter HOW prominently one mentions the disclaimer "I'm no Beethoven" is EXTREMELY inadvisable.
Those smiley faces can hurt.
I'm going to hunt down and beat the **** out of the next person to use this: I'm not saying this is the case in the current situation, but one can obtain a lot of knowledge about pianistic language and technique by observation and studying. It's not like trying to write a fugue without having the tiniest bit of knowledge of counterpoint.
The only reason I stated Beethoven's name was because I couldn't think of any other composer with a significant handicap that affected composition. I realized after I posted that it was not the best idea to state it as I did.
No worries, kake. I understand that was the purpose of the comparison. My point was simply that nobody actually cares about handicaps in this business. As distasteful as that may be for some people, no publishing company will say "oh... he has birth defects that left him with terrible coordination.... poor guy.... let's publish his music and help him out... he hasn't had an easy time in life!".
I don't bother with publishing companies. If people want the files for my works, I'm more than happy to give the bloody things out for free. No reason taking people's money when I don't really have a use for it.
I don't bother with publishing companies either.... but publishing companies don't bother with me and hopefully that will change when I develop a higher profile through concertizing. BS you don't have a use for money... you don't eat, or sleep under a roof, or wear clothes? Because last time I checked, those things are all pretty darn pricey!
What do you do when your compositions are beyond your technique?
But don't compose something that you cannot even hear in your head without playback! You should be able to write out your piece on paper by hand without touching the instrument. Otherwise, you don't really KNOW what you're writing... you're sort of just... guessing as you go, so to speak, leaning heavily on the notation software to provide you with ideas that you didn't have in the first place! There is no need for there to be an arms race! If you have worthy musical ideas, compose with them! If the musical ideas are truly worthy, it shouldn't matter whether or not you have the crystalline touch and lightning-fast reflexes of a master-pianist!
Actually, most of the time, I have the ideas for a composition and they naturally come to me BEFORE I actually notate them. I just use the notation software to make it both neater and to ensure I am correctly transcribing what I am envisioning in my head.All that being said, I do use notation software with caution.
Further more, concerning the composition of a novel, numerous times I've read that novelists feel that their works almost write themselves once the characters are well enough developed: they seem to feel that the characters are shaping the work, not the author. Whatever this tells us about the creative process, it would be an extraordinary writer who could envision every word in his novel in his mind before writing. No doubt those with the literary equivalent of perfect pitch combined with a photographic memory might be able to do so, but other mortals shouldn't be deprived of the pleasures of creativity.
Composition, in my opinion, is not an either/or proposition. In other words, I decry the idea that one "must" be able to hear everything in one's head before notating the ideas. First of all, not everyone is born a Mozart, whose music evolved and presented itself to his inner mind automatically and completely, no doubt due to the uncanny talents of his unconscious. Secondly, such a dogmatic view ignores the element of improvisation, which can be a help to a composer as his music develops. In addition, it ignores the element of serendipity, where a previously unsuspected idea may come to mind, even through "noodling." When Stravinsky used a piano to help him, did it prove he was less of a composer? Perhaps he could envisage his compositions completely in his inner ear and used the piano merely to confirm his choices but I don't know, I just raise the question for what it is...I don't believe that awesom's analogy to a novelist not being able to read his own work is valid. Reading a score or a manuscript after the fact is not the same thing as the effort involved in creating it. Further more, concerning the composition of a novel, numerous times I've read that novelists feel that their works almost write themselves once the characters are well enough developed: they seem to feel that the characters are shaping the work, not the author. Whatever this tells us about the creative process, it would be an extraordinary writer who could envision every word in his novel in his mind before writing. No doubt those with the literary equivalent of perfect pitch combined with a photographic memory might be able to do so, but other mortals shouldn't be deprived of the pleasures of creativity.To awesom's credit, he does concede that his personal views shouldn't prevent anyone one from writing however they see fit, whether with the aid of composition software or not.
By and large, however, I consider improvisation and composition to be different realms, both of which interest me seriously.
However, I do not believe composition can be 'taught'.
Topic: Original Composition - "Fantasy" Glissandi Etude 