Valse no. 1 - Original composition

[francoisfj]

Hello, this is a waltz I composed recently, please let me know what you think of it

It's played on a computer software, but when I will get the time, I'll play it myself

[faulty_damper]

There are some very awkward/incorrect harmonies, like two different harmonies in the RH and LH.  There are also a lot of strange skips.

[francoisfj]

I see.. If you have time, can you point out where? As for the transitions I have to work on that it's true

[faulty_damper]

The incorrect harmonies are very obvious.  It's prevalent throughout, like every measure.  The skips: listen by phrase to catch them, not in isolation.

[francoisfj]

Really? I can think of 2 or 3 places only. I'm certainly not an expert in composition but I can say almost with certainty that the harmonies are not that prevalent, certainly not every measure.
As for the skips I have to work on that

[j_menz]

The harmonies are fine. Faulty never quite made it out of the (early) common practice period. 

My comment is that is shos all the usual signs of having been composed at the computer. I'd suggest you do more actual composing at the piano - there are too many bits that are unjustifiably awkward to play (not enough bang for the buck). Have a go, and simplify some of it out a bit - it will be better for it, and a better piece to play as well.

[francoisfj]

Ok thank you
As for the composition on the computer, I never really understood why people tell me that, I do compose on the piano then only write it on the computer :/

[j_menz]

It looks like you give it some tweaks while you're at it, tbh.  It may just be the way the thing does the score, too. If that's the case, see if you can tweak it somehow.  Assuming you would like others to play it, even those of us always on the lookout for new pieces/composers are put off by those that look like they're written for midi machine rather than human, so it's worth invesdtigating.

[faulty_damper]

The issue is most perceptible with the RH melody, starting at m5.  It changes harmony midway through each measure, usually at the embellishments.  It get progressively worse throughout.  Then this issue moves over to the LH, then both hands.  It doesn't sound good.

The weird skips start at beginning of m6, m9, etc. It really sounds like it should be a step or something, not 5ths and 6ths.

[faulty_damper]

The harmonies are fine. Faulty never quite made it out of the (early) common practice period. 

Stop being a dick hurling insults.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

I have no problem with the harmonies. By 19th century standards, they are wrong or eccentric, but, looking with modern eyes, some are quite interesting. However, I would suggest that the pedalling isn't discerning enough, unless you genuinely want the cross-harmonic blurs. The score needs some editorial work, as j_menz in effect suggests. I don't mind the skips either, they give sections a quirky character. It's not a Chopin waltz!

[j_menz]

Stop being a dick hurling insults.

No insult intended, but your harmonic aesthetics are from 1850 or before. That's fine, and God knows there's a lot of it bout, but is hardly useful in critiquing something that is coming from a different perspective. It's a bit like complaining that traditional Chinese music (non equal temperament) is "out of tune", or that Schoenberg doesn't use proper cadences.

[francoisfj]

Thank you for the comments
I see what you mean, I'll rearrange the score in a more readable way

[faulty_damper]

No insult intended, but your harmonic aesthetics are from 1850 or before. That's fine, and God knows there's a lot of it bout, but is hardly useful in critiquing something that is coming from a different perspective. It's a bit like complaining that traditional Chinese music (non equal temperament) is "out of tune", or that Schoenberg doesn't use proper cadences.

You made a comment directed at me instead of the thread topic.  If you disagree, disagree with what I say, not disagree by insulting my knowledge and expertise.  This is a repeated pattern of behavior on your part that is repetitive and persistent. And also repeatedly making posts commenting on spelling or grammatical errors, etc. does nothing but dirty and derail threads. And the persistent subtle personal attacks that you continuously make.  Stop it.

[faulty_damper]

Francois,
Another thing to consider are the elaboration of ideas.  You have a single 4 bar idea that requires another 4 bars to complete.  Instead of completing it within the same idea, it jumps into another idea at m5 that sort of completes it, but changes the mood entirely.  The second idea starting at m5 is actually complete, but it doesn't relate at all to the opening four bars.

Also check the voice leading in the harmonies of the LH.  Then check to see if the RH melody actually corresponds to the LH harmony.  There are many, many places where it doesn't sound like it does.

[outin]

You made a comment directed at me instead of the thread topic.  If you disagree, disagree with what I say, not disagree by insulting my knowledge and expertise.  This is a repeated pattern of behavior on your part that is repetitive and persistent. And also repeatedly making posts commenting on spelling or grammatical errors, etc. does nothing but dirty and derail threads. And the persistent subtle personal attacks that you continuously make.  Stop it.

It has also been a repeated behavior pattern on your part to claim there are insults where it's clear to others that none exist and act like the wounded party even after provoking people first. I'd suggest you don't digress to your earlier behavior if you intend to stay here.

I think it has already been clearly shown that the powers to be on this forum have little problem with ironical, sarcastic or controversial answers to posts (even your posts in the audition room have been well tolerated), so it's better to learn to deal with those as well. 

And no, I am not insulting you or making any statement about you as a person, just reacting to what you have posted here.

[faulty_damper]

See Outo,
You're doing the exact same thing Jmenz and others are doing.  You, and others, muddy these threads by taking it off topic.  The very fact that you derail topics at a specific member is, in fact, an insult, both to me and the OP.  All you had to do was PM me to not derail this thread.

[j_menz]

incorrect harmonies

Perhaps you would care to explain what you mean by that then, not in terms of common practice theory, and not in terms of your own aesthetics.

[outin]

See Outo,
You're doing the exact same thing Jmenz and others are doing.  You, and others, muddy these threads by taking it off topic.  The very fact that you derail topics at a specific member is, in fact, an insult, both to me and the OP.  All you had to do was PM me to not derail this thread.

I admit I don't really care for the PM feature. Maybe that would have been better, but why did you not PM your complaints to j_menz then? I don't think J_menz was OT at all, but it was your post that took this off topic. As a psychologist you know that we all base our opinions on art on our individual thinking patterns and so cannot be really objective. So what's wrong with discussing these premises as well in these threads?

[stoat_king]