# [no longer] Attempting a Quartet piece...



## synkrotron (Oct 15, 2019)

Bloomin' scary if you ask me! I mean, four stringed instruments, and possibly one of those (#1 Violin) for the melody line.

Oh, I should explain, I do not have the foggiest what I am doing here.

Anyway, I've got something mapped out, just a simple 32 bar exercise for Cello, Viola and a Violin. These three instruments are going to provide a "bed" over which the lead Violin will play some a melody.

And I'm working in C Major, so all white notes. Very, very simple... Childlike, I would have to admit.

The Cello part has each of its notes spread over two bars for the 32 bars.

Viola part pretty much follows the Cello part, sometimes an octave higher, sometimes an octave plus or minus a step or two and there are a couple of places where there is a quarter note "step" at the start of a couple of bars.

The #2 Violin then follows the Cello and Viola, again, sometimes providing a 3rd of a triad, sometimes a 5th.


Actually, as I am working out what to say I think I might be going into too much detail here, and I should get to the point.


I have an instrument each playing a note of a chord, but a lot of the time there are only two different notes, sometimes the 3rd or the 5th along with the root and therefore the "character" of the triad is essentially lost. What makes it more difficult for me to work out what I have actually played, in terms of a "progression," is that I am possibly playing inversions of a chord.

So, for instance, I thought I was playing a D minor, but with the flatted third missing for 1-3/4 of a bar, that leaves an F and an A, and because the F is being played by the Cello, that is very much saying, "you are really playing an F here" albeit with the fifth missing.


I always thought that the lowest note being played generally set the root of the chord, which is why I am saying F.

Is that the case? Could I use an inversion of a the D minor chord, which would put the 3rd as the lower note, and still call it a D minor?


Apologies if I've put this in the wrong place. I know it is a "noob" question but I felt that it would be better placed here as it is a composing related quandary.

Cheers, and thanks to anyone that got this far 

andy


----------



## Rowy (Oct 16, 2019)

String Quartets are very hard to write. It's easier to write an orchestral composition.

Writing string quartets can be a nice hobby though, if you have at least some idea of what you're doing. Did you have a look at Haydn's early string quartets? You can download the scores for free: IMSLP.

Haydn also wrote in C major. But there is a difference. Haydn didn't write in C major because he needed to keep the score simple. Still, there's no shame in writing in C major. As an experiment, I wrote 12 pieces for piano in C major once (and a couple of church modes), and I enjoyed myself very much.

I'm afraid I have to tell you something that will make some members of this forum very nervous. And that is, _study harmony_. Set your homework (4 voices) for string instruments. Because what you are making now equals simple homework.

You mentioned a D minor chord. Sorry, but it is not. Harmony will help you determine what that chord really is.

If you write a string quartet, you don't build a layer of three instruments and then add a fourth, like the violin. You're supposed to write all four voices simultaneously. The voices interact, you'll want to use some imitations and it is not easy to make this work when the other three instruments occupy the best spots.

An answer to your question about the inversion of a D minor chord will not help you right now. If the key really is C major, a minor chord on the note D can sound nicer as a first inversion, but remember, you're going in blind.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 16, 2019)

Also study idiomatic writing for best results and write appropriate parts. Remember the 4 strings are individuals that can be called upon for any role within a piece- be that soloistic, virtuosic, accompaniment etc. Do not just hold long notes for any length of time. Counterpoint is also needed as is clear musical intent for each player.
You are much better of learning the rudiments or more advanced study if you can read tbh. Even some great masters have delayed 4tet writing given its nature. But if you want to do it, study scores first as Rowy says.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 16, 2019)

Hi, Rowy 



Rowy said:


> String Quartets are very hard to write.



Yes, I believe so. Not from my own most recent experiences but from what I have found written about that on the internet.



Rowy said:


> It's easier to write an orchestral composition



That surprises me, I must admit. I find the idea of writing something "orchestral" quite daunting, but that may be down to my lack of understanding of what is meant by that.

Thank you for the link to Haydn's scores, I will have a look at that.



Rowy said:


> I'm afraid I have to tell you something that will make some members of this forum very nervous. And that is, _study harmony_. Set your homework (4 voices) for string instruments. Because what you are making now equals simple homework.



Excellent, thanks for that.

I generally use wikipedia for research on that kind of stuff.

I also have the two little AB guides to Music Theory that I refer to from time to time. I really should be better than this than I am, considering how long I have been making "music" (loosely speaking) but I tend to get interested for a bit, learn some new things, then go onto something else and end up forgetting what I have learned because I am not applying them from day to day.



Rowy said:


> If you write a string quartet, you don't build a layer of three instruments and then add a fourth, like the violin. You're supposed to write all four voices simultaneously. The voices interact, you'll want to use some imitations and it is not easy to make this work when the other three instruments occupy the best spots.



Yes, I guess I am trying to buck the system here by not sticking to the rules of quartet writing.

I watched Beethoven's String Quartet Op.59 No.1 "Razumovsky" on YouTube yesterday and realised straight away that I'm going about this all wrong. In fact, in the end I may decide that I will never do the format justice and give it up as a bad job.

Not just yet, though... I need to take what I have done so far and see if I can learn from the process. I doubt it will reach a point where I am happy to share.


Anyway, bottom line is, more research and hard work is needed!

Cheers, and thank you very much for your help 


andy


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 16, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> Also study idiomatic writing for best results and write appropriate parts.



Yes, I appreciate the importance of that. That aspect is probably going to be tougher than the music theory. I am never going to play a real violin. I am too old to pick up a new instrument as difficult as that. Fretless instruments have always scared the hell out of me...



mikeh-375 said:


> Remember the 4 strings are individuals that can be called upon for any role within a piece- be that soloistic, virtuosic, accompaniment etc.



Yes, indeed. Watching Beethoven's String Quartet Op.59 No.1 "Razumovsky" again and each instrument has its own time "in the spotlight," so to speak.



mikeh-375 said:


> Do not just hold long notes for any length of time. Counterpoint is also needed as is clear musical intent for each player. You are much better of learning the rudiments or more advanced study if you can read tbh. Even some great masters have delayed 4tet writing given its nature. But if you want to do it, study scores first as Rowy says.



Yes, I agree and thanks for that. Like you say, I need to do much study first.

Thank you for taking time to reply 

cheers

andy


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 16, 2019)

good luck Andy. All the advice given is the best way to maximise your creativity, but remember many a great piece of music has been written on feel alone, so don't let my post deter you from going for it anyway....you never know right?


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 16, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> good luck Andy. All the advice given is the best way to maximise your creativity, but remember many a great piece of music has been written on feel alone, so don't let my post deter you from going for it anyway....you never know right?



Thanks again, Mike 

I will share here how I get on with my endeavours


----------



## Rowy (Oct 17, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> but remember many a great piece of music has been written on feel alone



Not a string quartet. Perhaps a song, but not a string quartet.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 17, 2019)

Rowy said:


> Not a string quartet. Perhaps a song, but not a string quartet.



Yes, I am now really beginning to appreciate that having two violinists, a violist (?) and a cellist playing together doesn't instantly make it a String Quartet. There are quite specific "expectations."









String quartet - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org







BUT! Are rules not there to be broken?


----------



## Rowy (Oct 17, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> I also have the two little AB guides to Music Theory that I refer to from time to time.



Sorry, I don't know what these guides are, but just to make sure:

THIS is not classical harmony, THAT is classical harmony (well, part of it). Although I find the notation of some degrees a bit silly. Not so long ago the original European classical notation was being used all over the world. In major I II III IV and so on, not I ii iii IV. Thanks to the influence of American pop music and the notation of chords in popular music (that describes the build of a chord), the notation has been dumbed down.

I prefer the original notation. You're supposed to know that II in major is a minor chord. Sometimes Americans don't believe me that they too were used to the original notation, but I have copies of old American theory books that prove it. Like Schönberg's book about harmony.

This paper I wrote explains the differences between the popular and the original classical notation. It's free, so you're welcome to download it.

By the way, the Android app _Assistant Harmony Analysis_ that is mentioned in the paper is at the moment not available. It needs an update and I didn't have time yet. Besides I'm not such a great fan of Android any more and I'll probably have to learn Python first.


----------



## Rowy (Oct 17, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> Yes, I am now really beginning to appreciate that having two violinists, a violist (?) and a cellist playing together doesn't instantly make it a String Quartet. There are quite specific "expectations."
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If you don't study the rules first, how are you going to know that you're breaking them?


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 17, 2019)

Hi, Rowy 



Rowy said:


> THIS is not classical harmony



Yes, as far as I can see that article is about triads and extended chords.



Rowy said:


> THAT is classical harmony



I am familiar with the Roman Numeral system of representing chords.

Not totally familiar, though, and I often have to refer back to text books and the internet. Things don't stick in my head that well, especially as I am getting older.

A couple of years ago I made to circle (cycle) of fifth wheels out of laminated paper, one for major and one for minor. When I fancy creating something other than a drone or soundscape I often refer to those, to at least remind me of related chords in a key.

I also have the names of the chords on those wheels, tonic, supertonic, mediant etc. Which kind of helps.


I guess it is difficult for me to explain what my music theory level is. Which then makes it difficult for me to ask for help and then equally difficult for others to help me.



Rowy said:


> I prefer the original notation. You're supposed to know that II in major is a minor chord.



That is most interesting. Thanks. I started off writing Roman Numerals down all upper case, which is exactly how they are supposed to be written anyway. But then saw that lower case letters were being used for minor chords. So perhaps I should revert to the "proper" way. I must admit, however, that I don't remember by heart the relationship between the chord degree and character so I perhaps need to work on that. It is mainly just a memory thing and I'm sure that there is some way of getting that to stick.



Rowy said:


> It's free, so you're welcome to download it.



Excellent, and thanks. I have now downloaded 



Rowy said:


> If you don't study the rules first, how are you going to know that you're breaking them?




LOL! Yes, so true!


Thanks again for all your help here, Rowy, it is much appreciated  


andy


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 17, 2019)

Rowy said:


> Not a string quartet. Perhaps a song, but not a string quartet.



just being encouraging....


----------



## sIR dORT (Oct 17, 2019)

Interesting reading this post because I literally had to face the same issue. I'd just gotten into notating for strings and had very little orchestration experience. Writing for 4 stringed instruments is freaking hard. One thing that helped me was that I wrote the piece on piano first, and then transferred it to strings. This helped a bit. But I tried to make every different voice interesting, which made things more difficult but also more rewarding. So in my super rookie opinion, the more you work towards making the parts interesting (maybe using counterpoint, although I haven't studied that yet really) the harder and more rewarding it will be, and vice versa.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 17, 2019)

You can always wing it with samples of course, but to write without creative restriction appropriate for the medium requires many years of study and practice. @sIR dORT the worst thing you can do is write exclusively via the piano, find your notes there by all means but it is far better to study the instrument itself and begin to think like a string player (as indeed it is for all instruments of the orchestra) - what techniques are available? how can I exploit them in my music? what is the best way to bow such and such and can I exploit a bowing technique? Can I use multiple stops in a passage? Otherwise you are in danger of not writing idiomatically for the instruments and losing out in your composing and expression.
Then there is the question of timbre, as you probably know, there are so many different colours and effects available to be utilised if you know how and where to exploit them. Counterpoint is an essential technique as is harmony and sometimes, imaginative vertical spacing.
Like I say, many years of study and practice, but you can still have fun without the hard work of course..


----------



## sIR dORT (Oct 17, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> @sIR dORT the worst thing you can do is write exclusively via the piano, find your notes there by all means but it is far better to study the instrument itself and begin to think like a string player (as indeed it is for all instruments of the orchestra) - what techniques are available? how can I exploit them in my music? what is the best way to bow such and such and can I exploit a bowing technique? Can I use multiple stops in a passage? Otherwise you are in danger of not writing idiomatically for the instruments and losing out in your composing and expression.


I should have clarified that finding the notes on the piano was what I meant, not composing _for_ piano. I wrote the piece for a class and so I had an instructor who was able to help me understand the limitations and nuances of the instruments. Honestly, it's been super beneficial for my compositions with samples, as I'm starting to consider what's playable, how difficult is it, etc. But yes, I agree with you - writing for piano is a different story compared to a string quartet.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 18, 2019)

sIR dORT said:


> I should have clarified that finding the notes on the piano was what I meant, not composing _for_ piano. I wrote the piece for a class and so I had an instructor who was able to help me understand the limitations and nuances of the instruments. Honestly, it's been super beneficial for my compositions with samples, as I'm starting to consider what's playable, how difficult is it, etc. But yes, I agree with you - writing for piano is a different story compared to a string quartet.



Glad to hear that @sIRdORT. When I write, I often allow idiomatic traits of instruments to influence the notes and their execution, along with the overall technical approach to passages. I believe It's a good way to think whilst actually composing.

Another thing I did years back was to buy the cheapest second-hand fiddle, viola and cello I could find. As an ex-jazz guitar player I could then finger notes on them and work out what multiple stops where feasible....did the trick every time.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 18, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> Another thing I did years back was to buy the cheapest second-hand fiddle, viola and cello I could find.



Cheap or even free, I am sure my missus would kill me if I went out and got hold of anymore instruments  

Not that I have a lot in my studio right now... Just a couple of guitars, some synths and a modular system. But it really winds her up, and understandably so I suppose, that I can't play any of them to any real degree of proficiency.

I can certainly see the benefits of doing that, however.


So, knowing that, my question would be, how could someone learn the idiomatic traits of any instrument that they cannot play?

Plus, let's say that I could get my hands on a particular instrument, would it not be necessary to learn that instrument to a reasonable level in order to learn those traits?


cheers

andy


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 18, 2019)

Hi Andy, (@synkrotron )

The strings where a particular case for me as I had the guitar background as an advantage and could work things out. My wife approved... 

Knowing about all the other orchestral instruments is gleaned from scores and textbooks study along with listening and practical experience if available. For example, listening intently can often determine where a breath is taken on a wind solo, which may or may not correspond to the phrasing written in the score, consequently one can extract and use that sort of information when composing a wind (or brass!) line - factoring in limitations and exploiting them at the same time. Knowing the relative strength and efficacy of articulations in a given musical situation, knowing about dynamic contours and so on - all of this information and much more should ideally imv, inform the writing _at the point of creation_ for a total synergy of practicality, imagination and performance maximum.

The same principle aplies to orchestral combinations too - having a clear intent in what you want to achieve, making timbral decisions, vertical spacing decisions, dynamic considerations and so on - all of which will feed into the compositional choices from the outset, makes perfect sense to me. Rather than these basic issues being an afterthought ( arranging for example, could be considered post composition), they are an essential component.

What I'm suggesting (although it's obviously not the only way to work and wont suit everyone) is that utilising this approach where it's deemed appropriate benefits a composer of orchestral music, and is one that culls all knowledge and coheres it into a complete and cogent work from the off....and...it can be learnt without resorting to learning any instrument....


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 18, 2019)

Hi @mikeh-375 

Apologies for not coming back sooner.

Big thanks for all the help and advice you are providing here, I really appreciate it.

Quite a lot to take in and the more I read the more questions I have. And I feel really guilty pestering you and others here. Especially considering that I could drop the ball at any time. 

I am telling myself that I want to learn and achieve more along this classical line but I have been so "creative" over the last three years and suddenly a halt has been called.

I have always felt that jumping back on music theory and going further this time can only improve my creations, even if I keep within my ambient "comfort zone."

Regarding the string quartet thing. I chose a Haydn piece at random, Opus 50 #6 "The Frog" and found the score as well as a YouTube performance. I spent some time today attempting to input it into REAPER. At first I tried using the piano roll as that is my normal way of working but I found I was having to think too hard about that. 

So, for the first time in REAPER and certainly for a very long time before getting that DAW, I switched to notation editor view. Still some head scratching but much easier than piano roll. 

It is slow going but I am going to persist...

MIDI performance wise, each time I check and play a bar, it sounds terrible, so I am guessing that this is where mastering the MIDI comes in, tweaking everything so that it plays as it should.

Score wise, I am encountering some issues and at some point I will post images of certain parts of the score thou don't understand and cannot find an explanation on the internet.

cheers for now and thanks again,

andy


----------



## col (Oct 19, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> MIDI performance wise, each time I check and play a bar, it sounds terrible, so I am guessing that this is where mastering the MIDI comes in, tweaking everything so that it plays as it should.


And this is one of the distractions working with samples. You can get bogged down in getting them to sound half ok and less time writing the music. I try and ignore the rough sound until a piece is 90% written and then go over it and do the midi tweaking or maybe tweak a few bars here and there as it develops. 
Which strings are you using ?


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 20, 2019)

Hi @col 

Yes... Very distracting indeed.

In fact, yesterday evening, after reaching bar 40 out of 164 of just the first violin part, I have given up programming in just the MIDI notes. I find that I am struggling with some of the finer points of music notation. Some great resource on the internet but there are still some elements that I cannot get my head around.

And I love to be creative, so I am going to take a bit of a break from this little project and see what I can come up with using my strings library that is nothing to do with classical music.



col said:


> Which strings are you using?



I am using Spitfire Audio Solo Strings. My first ever string library. I like it, though I have only just scratched the surface of this library stuff. The only other library I have is Noire. And Battery, of course... Been using that for my beat oriented stuff since V1.


cheers

andy


----------



## Dave Connor (Oct 21, 2019)

Although one should of course know what type of ensemble you are writing for, the fundamental issue or question here has to do with _Composition_. Without at least a fundamental understanding of it, the problems and barriers stack up very quickly. These fundamental principles must be understood _before _such an undertaking. It’s not that you won’t learn from tackling a string quartet outright or that there’s a law against doing so: it’s that the energy and effort involved in going that route would be far better spent in studying composition from the ground up. That includes the fundamentals mentioned here such as Harmony, Part-Writing and so on. A solid understanding of those things must be present regardless of the instrumentation of what will ultimately display the writing ability of the composer.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 22, 2019)

Thank you for your input @Dave Connor 



Dave Connor said:


> it’s that the energy and effort involved in going that route would be far better spent in studying composition from the ground up



I hate to say this, and I am sure I will be shot down for saying it. And young peeps should look away now.

I am 59. I feel that I no longer have the time or the patience to study composition from the ground up. So I will have to pick and mix what ever I feel is required for what ever it is I am working on. And by "time," I don't mean hours in any given day. I mean, I ain't got much time left. A difficult concept for younger people to grasp, but older people here will know what I mean when I say that, the older you get, the faster time flies by.

My current diversion into the use of what may be considered as classical instruments may be a total folly and waste of time. That said, I am enjoying my experimentations at this moment in time and I still hope to be able to use my newly acquired string library in my ambient creations.

About the "string quartet" thing. At the time of writing the OP I had no idea that a string quartet had such a strict set of expectations. I have since come to the conclusion that I will never, ever write what could be considered to be a string quartet.

I apologise if this sounds somewhat negative but after spending the last week or so reading articles and watching tutorials I am feeling a little bit overwhelmed and burned out. I am not working for a living at the moment and I spend at least five hours on average trying to learn new stuff.

I also find that I have lost some of my ability to learn new stuff and to have it stick. This is quite depressing. I have learned so much stuff over the years, work related, as a CAD designer and programmer. I am not the person I used to be and this reflects very much on my hobbies too. I was a keen photographer and I can't remember the last time I picked up my DSLR.

Music wise, I am a creator and I miss creating.

Some may say that I should have put the time in back when I was 19. I did put some effort in, in those early days, but it was mainly all guitar related and it was cool to start/join a band and just do stuff that sounded okay.



Okay... not sure where all that came from... I will stop typing, say "cheers" and hit the Post Reply button!


andy


----------



## Mornats (Oct 22, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> About the "string quartet" thing. At the time of writing the OP I had no idea that a string quartet had such a strict set of expectations. I have since come to the conclusion that I will never, ever write what could be considered to be a string quartet.



I think there's been a bit of an expectation here that this is what you were aiming for, that you were aiming to write string quartet music like a classical composer would. However, I think the beauty of virtual instruments is that you can take a string quartet and create whatever the hell you like with it. You have four voices to play with and they can fit into the SATB (soprano, alto, tenor and bass if you're not familiar - and I'm only recently familiar with the acronym!) model if that helps or you can use them however you wish.

I had a listen to your music when you first joined VI Control so can say that you will probably enjoy the solo strings more if you used them as you would any other sound in your music. I think you can dip into the more classic(al) side of the instruments as and when desired.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 22, 2019)

Hiya Paul 



Mornats said:


> I think there's been a bit of an expectation here that this is what you were aiming for, that you were aiming to write string quartet music like a classical composer would.



Yes, I really should change the topic title to reflect my current status, especially as some are more than likely to respond to that instead of reading the various bits and pieces of my meanderings.



Mornats said:


> However, I think the beauty of virtual instruments is that you can take a string quartet and create whatever the hell you like with it.



Absolutely  


My current project (having ditched the String Quartet and MIDI-fying the Haydn piece) consists of two Bass, one Cello, one Viola. I also have a Bass providing the A part by using the harmonic articulation, though I have yet to see if that would be better played by a Violin.


Interesting time ahead  



cheers

andy


----------



## Dave Connor (Oct 22, 2019)

In the end, you should do what you want : ) You happened to pick the Ferrari of ensembles which is essentially a virtuoso platform. The reverse of that is that you have four voices in four instruments that cover the nominal range of music and you could treat it as such. So, if you like that sound - why not? It just seems that you had very basic questions about the composition process itself rather than about writing for the string idiom. Generally when a composer is going to tackle such a well established medium he will study the acknowledged quality works such as Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven. In the case of those three, they really stretched their legs with several masterpieces between them. All that is to say that the string quartet has long been considered to be one of the ultimate challenges in music - hence my advice.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Hello again David 



Dave Connor said:


> Generally when a composer is going to tackle such a well established medium he will study the acknowledged quality works such as Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven.



Yes, I certainly went about this a bit half cocked.



Dave Connor said:


> hence my advice



And it was much appreciated.

cheers

andy


----------



## rudi (Oct 23, 2019)

@synkrotron Hi Andy, I had a few thoughts reading yours and others posts on here. First of all I think it's a fantastic idea of learning something new... it really is a lifelong process. It's also hard to acquire any new skill and takes time and effort. Maybe a different perspective might help here.

I still think learning by doing is key.

In this case a string quartet by one of the greatest classical musician of all times is a good way to gain many insights.... but instead of the long, time-consuming and frankly exhausting / tedious / soul consuming task of entering one part at a time from start to finish, you may find the following approach more constructive / productive.

But here are a few suggestions, in no particular order 

- only enter something like four bars (starting with bar one would be a great beginning)

- but enter ALL the parts

And here is the important thing:

- as you enter the first part, look at it and listen to it in isolation

- think about what it does... how the voice goes up or down; how much it leaps or remains static; what it does in terms of rhythm; what range it plays in; what shape the melody takes; note lengths

- do the same for the next part, but this time also look at how it fits in and dovetails with the previous part; is it pitched lower or higher; does it change as much or is it more static; does it follow the same rhythm or melody or is it different and so how?

- repeat for the other parts, and each time think what function they fulfill; e.g provide a melody... support one.... create or fill in harmonies... or dissonances... how they lead to the next note... how does the lower part behave: long notes, short ones, stick to root notes, use passing notes, play arpeggios... etc.

finally,

- listen to the result and how all those parts work together as a short piece of music

- make a nice cuppa of tea with a digestive biscuit or a chocolate hobnob

- pat yourself on the back 

- and leave it at that for the time being and let your brain absorb what you have learnt.


The next day you can decide whether you want to continue. At some stage you might want to refine the music you have entered by adjusting the velocity of each note or use CCs to do so, but once again, just a bit at a time, and listening to the results. In the case of REAPER you can save each stage really easily by "saving as a new version" so you can always go back to a previous good version (do you hear the voice of experience here 

Above all don't get burnt out and destroy your love of music!


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Hi Rudi  



rudi said:


> I still think learning by doing is key



Yes, I agree very much with that  



rudi said:


> only enter something like four bars (starting with bar one would be a great beginning)



Indeed, and I did consider that, but I thought I was "on a roll" with the 1st violin and kept going... I can be a bit obsessive at time. Well, my mates would tell me, "all the time."



rudi said:


> And here is the important thing:
> 
> - as you enter the first part, look at it and listen to it in isolation
> 
> ...



Yes, much close studying required.

When inputting just that first section I noticed how the use of accidentals took the soprano part slightly off-key but still fitted. That is one thing I need to look at more closely and how I can incorporate it into my own stuff.



rudi said:


> make a nice cuppa of tea with a digestive biscuit or a chocolate hobnob



Ha! Have you been talking to my missus?!



rudi said:


> The next day you can decide whether you want to continue.



Or next week... Next month even 


cheers, and thanks

andy


----------



## ism (Oct 23, 2019)

In fairness, string quartets are such amazing things that even very bad ones, or at least very basic ones, can still be entirely worth while.

Here's my stupid little noodle, which isn't really a composition, its just me trying to understand the expressive dimensions of what's possible with the library:






Even though I'm just fumbling around on the keyboard, the way the strings start to work together, however briefly, starting at ~0:50, for that fleeting moment I do think you can feel that "string quartet effect", which suggests that there's something very interesting possible here - even within the limitations of sample libraries, even within the (even more severe) limitations of my compositional skills.

There's also a sense that, while it's always worthwhile studying Beethoven and Hayden, that maybe not the best model to set yourself.




For one thing, trying to mock up a Beethoven quartet on any existing sample library is setting yourself up for not just disappointment, but despondency and despair.


For another, in that one can write Beethoven string quartets like Beethoven, setting out with Beethoven as your gold standard is setting yourself up for not just disappointment, but despondency and despair.


Instead, how about taking as a model maybe something more minimalist? Jane Antonia Cornish, or maybe Olafur Arnalds recent EP where he arranges some tracks off his latest album.





It's definitely not beethoven. But it does have that "string quartet effect" - which is fundamentally about how the different voiced both blend into harmonies, and then separate into separate lines.


In this sense, "the string quartet effect" is very fundamentally about counterpoint.


But you can buy a basic course on counterpoint/voice-leading for $10 of Udemy. Or bettter yet, check out Alain's scoreclub courses on counterpoint. They're not going to get you to Beethoven levels, but there's a wonderful simplicity in some of these more minimalist string quartets. 

I also found David Huron's "Voice Leading: The Science Behind a Musical Art" very helpful in understanding just what the "string quartet effect" is. Huron isn't going to teach you voice leading or counterpoint, but it provides a really solid basis for what is, at a basic level, the effect in human perception that makes string quartets so amazing. (And why string quartets work so differently from, say, Jazz quartets).






And it's a perceptual effect that I feel starts to kick in even at those few seconds around 0:50 - ~0:55 in that above fumbling noodle.

Of course Beethoven wouldn't be too impressed by either my noodles or by Olafurs quartets.


But - continuing some of my theorizing from yesterday on this thread -






I made a track that sparked a debate about Neo-Classical music


Yeah, but what does Neo-Classical mean I’m assuming that’s a joke, and that you you’re not actually inviting me to write another essay on the subject ... because otherwise we really could be all day :)




vi-control.net






I think that the sense of returning-to-something of the 'neo-' in the 'neo-classicism' of composers like Olafur and Cornish are indeed looking to find some kind of simpler essence that is somehow lost or obscured in the layers of complexity that accrete in various schools of composition.


One such essence - I conjecture - is precisely what I'm calling here the "string quartet effect". Not that it's easy to write. But even if I were to aspire to write with Beethoven-esque levels of complexity in string quartets, I think the first thing to learn is fundamentally how to distill the evocation of the "string quartet effect" in the simplest, most minimalist way first.


For there are truly beautiful string quartets, yet to be written, that don't even need to climb the Herculean mountain of the oeuvre of Beethoven of Hayden, or even attempt to deconstruct the anxiety of that influence.


----------



## styledelk (Oct 23, 2019)

ism said:


> Here's my stupid little noodle, which isn't really a composition, its just me trying to understand the expressive dimensions of what's possible with the library:



Your stupid little noodle still sounds better than 99% of my output. I'm fooled enough by this into thinking it was a composition, and that the sub-bass and grain synths were going to come in at the end with a light bit of analog drums.


----------



## ism (Oct 23, 2019)

styledelk said:


> Your stupid little noodle still sounds better than 99% of my output. I'm fooled enough by this into thinking it was a composition, and that the sub-bass and grain synths were going to come in at the end with a light bit of analog drums.



I'd argue that what's good about this doesn't lie in it's compositional strengths, it lies in


a) how great the samples are, in particular their range of textures

b) in particularly how the stereo image and multiple mics and whatever else lets them blend which sound an amazing field of depth

c) the way this clarity of sound, lets them - with even minimal, naively plonked in countrapunal texture - blend and kind of explode into the perceptual phenomenon of the "string quartet effect"


Its not that I didn't put a reasonably amount of work into this. But I gave little though to the melody, less to the harmony, and even less to the counterpoint.

My efforts here are almost entirely focused on understanding the textures and the dynamics and the vibrato and the arcs and the bending.


I don't even know what the chords are (except that I'm pretty sure it's all in C-Major), never mind what the problems in the voice leading might be. At this level, its a terrible, plonkingly naive composition, written with a terrible, plonkingly naive compositional technique.



But again, the performance of the musicians behind the samples are amazing. And I did spend considerable effort to understand what kind of phrases fall within the library's sweet spots - from which we can see wondering possibilities start to take shape.



For instance, I did spend quite a bit of time working to really bring out the raspiness of the p layer of the solo violin, and (closely related) working out the idiomatic phrasing of vibrato/non-vibrato. (Quite a lot of effort in fact - to the point that I wrote a Logic script to make it easier to capture this kind of idiomatic arcs).

And similarly, when the viola and cello enter (technical this is only a trio) it's the crafting of the arcs at least as much as the technicalities of the counter point here that work to give us this "string quartet effect" - Huron's book was actually quite helpful in, well maybe not understanding how to achieve the effect but in understanding why the "string quartet effect" hinges on the crafting the arcs in the way it does.


And ultimately, when I sit writing a string quartet - in the specific medium of a specific sample library - the sin quo non of writing a string quartet, is evoking the "string quartet effect".

Technique and harmony and counterpoint is of course very helpful in pressing farther into string quartet writing.

But ultimately the "string quartet effect" is quite basic to the perceptual qualities of the human mind. And this is what string quartets need to write to.

And its this makes string quartets string quartet, not the layer upon layer of breathtaking and unapproachable genius that the likes of Beethoven build on top of it.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Thanks @ism 

That is a lot of writing so I need to spend more time reading through that.

I have listened to your noodle half a dozen times while reading and writing and this sort of thing appeals to me.

One quick thing about the "string quartet..." Mention that and expectations are that you are to stick to the form of four pieces totalling to anything from 30 to 40 minutes (at least that is what the examples that I looked at where... some may be longer still). Creating a short "sketch" that incorporates four bowed instruments isn't a string quartet. I know that now.

So, in future, if I ever creative anything for 2x violin, viola and cello I will not be calling it a string quartet 

cheers

andy


----------



## ism (Oct 23, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> One quick thing about the "string quartet..." Mention that and expectations are that you are to stick to the form of four pieces totalling to anything from 30 to 40 minutes (at least that is what the examples that I looked at where... some may be longer still). Creating a short "sketch" that incorporates four bowed instruments isn't a string quartet. I know that now.
> 
> So, in future, if I ever creative anything for 2x violin, viola and cello I will not be calling it a string quartet




So there's a certain (19th century) formalism that designates the format of what counts as a "string quartet". Which is as much as anything the length and format in which customers and concert goes expected their "string quartets" to take in order to get their money's worth.

I just want to argue that the very specifically amazing things about string quartets (what I'm calling "the string quartet effect" is maybe the most obvious to me, but there's certainly many other things that are amazing about string quartets) are more fundamental that the 19th century conventions of form and commerce that designate a composition a "string quartet" or "not a string quartet".

Not that I'm against these conventions of form - I've recently bought a number of records of contemporary compositions for string quartets, that I'm perfectly happy to repost comply with the conventional, and still essentially 19th century, formal requirements of a "string quartet" quite rigorously.


But the specific brilliances in the kinds of music, of any form, that an actually quartet of string players makes possible is something I care more about that whether I ever write anything recognizable to a paying 19th century audience as a "string quartet".

I suppose I was a little sad to see you abandon you aspiration to write a "string quartet" so completely, and thought that maybe a more flexible notion of the possibility might be in order.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

ism said:


> I suppose I was a little sad to see you abandon you aspiration to write a "string quartet" so completely, and though that maybe a more flexible notion of the possibility might be in order.



Thanks, and, yes, that helps.

I just won't call anything I do, along those lines, a "String Quartet."

I would need to call it a "piece for two violins, a viola and a cello."

But I wouldn't mind betting that if I did say that latter, someone may chip in to say, "but that is a string quartet" just because of the instruments used.



My current experimentation, with the Solo Strings library, consists of one violin, one viola, one cello and two bass......

cheers

andy


----------



## ism (Oct 23, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> I just won't call anything I do, along those lines, a "String Quartet."



Well a rose by any other name ... 


Actually as argued earlier on this thread, I do believe there is a clear distinction to be drawn between a "string quartet" and a "song arranged for two violins, a viola and a cello".

The latter might, for instance, just take the notes of some strummed guitar chords and divide them between the soloists. Which might sound perfectly lovely. But it lives in its own country, a long way away from where string quartets live.


But to sit down to write something that really looks to:

a) bring out how intimately the solo strings blend harmonically (in precisely the way that, say a jazz quartet of flute, sax, bass and whatever else goes into a jazz quartet simply can't), and

b) evoke a contrapuntal "separation" of the voices into distinct perceptual streams


is to at least venture out in the direction of "string quartet country"

The distinction with a jazz quartet is helpful, I think. That jazz quartets can be improvised, whereas "string quartets" generally can't, comes from the fact that the timbre of the flute and the Bass etc handle the separation of the soloists into independent lines (/perceptual streams) largely by merit of having such instantly recognizably different timbres.

To take 4 instruments of extremely similar timbre, by contrast, you have to actively prevent them from blend into a single homogenous harmonic progression (like the effortless blending of 6 distinct notes on a strummed guitar). And to achieve this, you really need to work for it by careful crafting your voice leading, and/or your phrasing (for instance) to keep your voices distinct, and resist the "strummed guitar effect" of harmonic blurring.

I'm not saying this is the only possible way to mark the boundary of "string quartet country". But it's how I like understand the underlying reasons that it's so hard to move from "song arranged for solo strings" into genuinely "string quartet" territory.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Interesting stuff there, @ism 

You have obviously given this subject some serious thought.



ism said:


> evoke a contrapuntal "separation" of the voices into distinct perceptual streams



Yeah, Counterpoint is something that I have only ever done by accident. Having concentrated on drones and soundscapes for the last couple of years hasn't helped me to understand the finer points.

Thanks yet again for all of the above. I will endeavour to return and reference as often as I can. So, please, do not delete! 


cheers

andy


----------



## Rowy (Oct 23, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> I hate to say this, and I am sure I will be shot down for saying it. And young peeps should look away now.
> 
> I am 59. I feel that I no longer have the time or the patience to study composition from the ground up. So I will have to pick and mix what ever I feel is required for what ever it is I am working on. And by "time," I don't mean hours in any given day. I mean, I ain't got much time left. A difficult concept for younger people to grasp, but older people here will know what I mean when I say that, the older you get, the faster time flies by.



So you're 59. Big deal, I am 64. And I can tell you of my own experience that the fact that you are 59 is one of the reasons that you think that you're no longer capable of learning. A dear friend of mine became 60 this year and she told me that she was very worried, because she was forgetting things. That, she said, never happened before. You silly cow, I replied, wait till you're 64, then you'll be in trouble. Forgetting things means nothing. It's just the start of a lot of misery. 

Of course, I was pulling her leg. The fact is, that my writing even improved these last years, and that's just me. Many of the great masters wrote their best work when they were old. Well, old... My mother was old when she died. 96, and yet she was still complaining about a brother of her, who died young because he refused to live a healty life. He died when he was 86, the scoundrel.

Studying harmony is not such a big deal if you take lessons. Forget about the internet, videos, and books. Go talk to a music teacher. Or a church organist, they usually are great at harmony.

I guarantee you, if you take real lessons, you will be able to understand and apply harmony at a decent level within one year. Yes, one year. And then you'll be 60. So what?

If you become 80, you'll have 20 years of (semi-) professional music writing under your belt. How much time did Mozart have? Or Chopin? Or Schubert? Besides, it is not reaching the goal that should give you pleasure, but the path you have chosen. Enjoy music, enjoy writing music and don't worry too much.

About a string quartet. Yes, it is one of the most difficult forms. Writing for orchestra is easier. Why do you think young composers who hardly learned anything make those pompous "Zimmer"-like soundtracks? Because you can hide your lack of training behind a lot of noise. Bring in the drums and the public will be in awe. You only need 3 chords. Percussion will do the rest.

That's why a string quartet is so difficult. There's nowhere to hide, the audience will hear everything, every tone. It is easier to make noise, to pull handles behind a curtain, like the Wizard of Oz.

Should you then wait till you know enough? No. First of all, if you want to take a look at a string quartet by Haydn, don't take one of the higher numbers. Try his first ones. They seem very easy, and they are. You'll be surprised.

And if you want to have another go at a string quartet, try this. Keep it simple. Don't overdo it with independent melodic lines in all four voices. Write one nice melodic line. Give the violin a part of it and then the cello, or the viola. Chop it up, give all instruments a part of the melody every now and then. Meanwhile, let the rest play a rhythmic accompaniment.

A complete string quartet isn't necessary. Look at Haydn's minuets. Nice, but not that difficult. Really, just keep going and take lessons. You're only 59. It's not that you are old.


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 23, 2019)

Getting back to one of your earlier ideas of doing exercises to get familiar with string libraries, one thing I often do that you might consider - lay down a simple ostinato and then add a lead over it. For example, here's one I did a few days ago:




This one was Spitfire chamber strings, but you could do something similar with solo vln+vla. Sounds like:








StringOst.mp3


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





Then overdub another solo instrument - in this case I used the Fluffy cello (there's some sort of cello in the background too). Just duplicate the ostinato 100 times and let 'er rip. It's fun and you will get familiar.








StringOstLead.mp3


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Hi @Rowy 

Of course, we are all different.

Just because some Peeps come into their stride in their later years doesn't mean we all can.


Regarding proper old age. My dad popped his clogs at 60 (1998, so I am well over that crappy episode) and his dad died at 59 (never met my grand dad).

So I somehow doubt that I'll be reaching 80... It's in the blood, so to speak... But if were are both here in twenty years time we'll have a laugh and a chat about this  



Rowy said:


> First of all, if you want to take a look at a string quartet by Haydn, don't take one of the higher numbers. Try his first ones. They seem very easy, and they are. You'll be surprised.



Ah, good to know, thanks 



Rowy said:


> Look at Haydn's minuets.



Good idea 


cheers,

andy


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Hi @BlackDorito 

I'm trying to understand the difference between "ostinato" and "arpeggio."

Arpeggio is something that I (thought) I was familiar with. A selection of notes, often a chord, which repeats.

Ostinato seems to be very similar in that is a repetitive phrase or motif.


Anyway, had a listen to your examples... Yes, I do this sort of thing quite often but just not with "classical" sounds. Many of my creations build from this kind of thing, so I should be able to do the same with my new library.


cheers, and thanks for those tips 


andy


----------



## JPComposer (Oct 23, 2019)

I was in a similar position a while back.

Jonathan Peters' courses give you everything you need to know to get going. I took composition 1&2 over a few weeks condensing it all onto 8 sides of A4 by the end. All these questions you have will be cleared up. A very concise and well thought out course.

Before I started all my music was basically a drone with arpeggios over it because I couldn't think of anything else. After I finished it I was able to write a piano sonata.









Music Composition 1 Training Course


Learn how to compose well-written rhythms and melodies




www.udemy.com





Finding out about form and theme development especially was a breakthrough. The tutor is a bit dry, but I really can't recommend these courses enough going by what I personally got out of them.

Cheap too. Every time I've been to the page it's always been less than £20.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Hi @JPComposer 

Thank you for the heads up on that course, I will take a look.


cheers

andy


----------



## Mornats (Oct 23, 2019)

Thanks for the course recommendation. It's £13.19 for me at the moment so I grabbed that. I learned something just from one of the sample 4 minute videos so I think it'll definitely be worth it!


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

Mornats said:


> I learned something just from one of the sample 4 minute videos so I think it'll definitely be worth it!



I was thinking the very same thing... Pocket money compared to all those bloomin' libraries!


----------



## ism (Oct 23, 2019)

For about the same cost ($11 on kindle) you can get Belkin's "Musical Composition: Craft and Art"





I don't know this particular Udemy course, but I have a few. And while you can certainly learn things from them ... I guess I just pedagogically really do find them poor to terrible. They're almost always on sale for ~90% off. And they're probably worth the $10 or so you pay for them ... but there's generally much better resources available.


Belkin's book, for instance, is genuinely informed by his decades of really deeply thinking about pedagogical issues in teaching composition. Even just getting the kindle preview to read the introduction might be enough to see what I mean. If he would make some videos to accompany it, it would be an instant hit, I predict.

Or Alain's scoreclub (although the pricing is deeply unfortunate, unless you have a lot of time to put into it in a short time) which has all the hands on practicality of videos, simply imbued with Alain's decades of pedagogical experience.

Or Mike Verta's Mastercalsses - more formal, and more filmic, but Composition I, I'd suggest is also a good starting point, followed but Counterpoint ... would be a nice augmentation to Belkin, and a great stepping stone to more formal counter point.

One possible exception might be the cheapo Udemy courses on Counterpoint. I've skimmed a couple of these, and while pedagogically they don't seem to be much more than videos that summarize the bullet points in the back of the chapters of any counterpoint text, if you already know something about actual music, that that's maybe enough to get you going.

In general, learning the formal *rules* of counterpoint is perfectly straightforward. It's figuring out what the *mean* in actual music that's hard.



But I suppose that's for another thread.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 23, 2019)

ism said:


> For about the same cost you can get Belkin's "Musical Composition: Craft and Art"



Thanks for the heads-up, ism, I will have a look at that too.

I was also considering something from here, having watched some of their YouTube videos recently:-









Online Music Lessons & Courses







www.mmcourses.co.uk






And I have also been watching some of this guy's videos, mentioned elsewhere on this forum:-









Christopher Brellochs


DR. B, aka Dr. Christopher Brellochs (educator & saxophonist) has taught collegiate music theory for 23 years! He teaches saxophone at Vassar College and is ...




www.youtube.com







all helpful stuff


----------



## ism (Oct 23, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> Thanks for the heads-up, ism, I will have a look at that too.
> 
> I was also considering something from here, having watched some of their YouTube videos recently:-
> 
> ...




Yep, lots of good stuff out there.

Also, Ludwin's books (which are really the powerpoint of his masterclasses):





__





Music New Approach | Ludwin Music | United States


Music Composition Lessons | Ludwin Music




www.musicnewapproach.com





which miss some of the basic pedagogical structure you get in Belkin, for instance, but have a wealth of useful and practical content in a form that I just don't think you can find elsewhere.

Also, I find this book illuminating:



But it requires a suprising amount of algebraic geometry - it frames music as shapes on orbinfolds (which are geometric manifolds, only with topological wonkiness. Which is fascinating because I've never seen an application for orbinfolds outside of quantum field theory before).

Yeah, maybe just ignore that last one.

But the larger point is - there's an explosion of resources, but its chaotic and unorganized. And its worth

a) paying for it . Because top tier pedagogy is incredibly hard to do, and immensely valuable to find. (I'm not saying you can't find good pedagogy on Udemy. Just that I never have, and that the nature of the platform, at least arguably, deters it). And

b) research the various resources to find out what's going to meet you where you're at.


I'll go so far to say that the Udemy model strikes me as being best suited to quickly and cheaply produced courses that just mine the easiest stuff to teach, ignoring anything that's difficult, even if its also important. So there are some easy wins in the information you do get, but I never seem to feel that the end result is a particular good pedagogical foundation.

And there's a similar risk with youtube. There's no pedagogical standard. Successful youtube videos hit the topics of low hanging fruit and instant gratification.

Top Tier pedagogy is something very different. And at least for certain types of things, the value to students of high quality vs low quality pedagogy is enormous.


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 23, 2019)

More thoughts:



synkrotron said:


> I am 59.


Common affliction .. no whining 

Ostinato, arpeggio, obbligato - yes, confusing terms. Ostinato implies repetition, but arpeggio does not (although commonly used that way). 

You could write a string quartet, which might imply some stylistic expectations, or you could write _for_ a string quartet (the four instruments), which should not. Thinking linearly, imagining what each individual performer will see in their part score, will help in either case (particularly if you want it performed). I've done it ineffectively in the past by creating motives and passages at the piano, which made me think too vertically. _The piano is a trap!_


----------



## Kevin Fortin (Oct 23, 2019)

ism said:


> For about the same cost ($11 on kindle) you can get Belkin's "Musical Composition: Craft and Art"
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I recently learned elsewhere on this forum that Alan Belkin does have his own YouTube channel:








Alan Belkin


Music of Alan Belkin; online courses by Alan Belkin.




www.youtube.com





(That links to his front page, which only shows a few videos. There are many more items under the Videos link.)

And even more material can be found on his website, e.g., under the Teacher link:




__





Alan Belkin Music







alanbelkinmusic.com


----------



## Rowy (Oct 24, 2019)

BlackDorito said:


> Getting back to one of your earlier ideas of doing exercises to get familiar with string libraries, one thing I often do that you might consider - lay down a simple ostinato and then add a lead over it.



That is an excellent idea. Like a Chaconne or a Passacaglia. Or the famous Canon by Pachelbel.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

Kevin Fortin said:


> I recently learned elsewhere on this forum that Alan Belkin does have his own YouTube channel






Kevin Fortin said:


> And even more material can be found on his website, e.g., under the Teacher link




Excellent, thanks Kevin


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

@Mornats 

Let me know how you get on with that JP course.

Lesson 01, assignment 5;

I have already fell foul of the 3/4 6/8 thing... Both work, but which is the right way to notate? I went for 3/4 but the answer was written in 6/8.

I need to get my head around that before moving on...


----------



## Mornats (Oct 24, 2019)

Will do  It may be slow going as my usual learning technique is as follows:

Learn a little bit of knowledge.
Listen to some examples of that knowledge in practice.
Write a piece or two exploring that little bit of knowledge.
Get it wrong, but learn the questions I now need to ask.
Ask the questions.
Get the answers (usually from the amazing people on here).
Improve the pieces I was working on.
Get bored with the pieces I was working on.
Start writing new pieces.
Realise I need Spitfire Studio Brass and Woodwinds to go with my strings.
Buy sample libraries.


----------



## rudi (Oct 24, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> @Mornats
> 
> I have already fell foul of the 3/4 6/8 thing... Both work, but which is the right way to notate? I went for 3/4 but the answer was written in 6/8.
> 
> I need to get my head around that before moving on...



The key difference is how each measure is sub-divided into beats. 

In 6/8 you have TWO groups of 8th notes (123 456)
IN 3/4 you have THREE groups of 1/4 notes (1 2 3)

In terms of emphasis 6/8 has a "*STRONG *weak" feel.
In 3/4 you'd have a "*STRONG *weak weak" feel.

It might help to count them as follows to know where the beats fall:
In 6/8 you could count it as "*ONE *trip-let TWO trip-let" (think We Are the Champions)
In 3/4 you'd count is as "*ONE *TWO THREE" (think waltz time).


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

Mornats said:


> Will do  It may be slow going as my usual learning technique is as follows:
> 
> Learn a little bit of knowledge.
> Listen to some examples of that knowledge in practice.
> ...



That sounds so familiar


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

Hi @rudi 

The first real lesson on this course I have bought into is regarding transcribing rhythms.

There are five audio file examples of simple rhythms over a small number of bars. Each one has the downbeat accented so that definitely helps the listener to work out the meter.

You listen to each example and try to work out the rhythm and put it down on paper or, as I am doing, using MuseScore.

I'll be honest... Pretty basic stuff, even for me, but I did struggle a little bit with assignment 5. I didn't even go straight into MuseScore with this one and got out some pencil and paper instead.

I worked out correctly that there were six 1/8th notes but, from the example provided, I failed to latch onto the 123 456 feel, so I opted for the 1 and 2 and 3 and feel (3/4) instead... Still six 1/8th notes.

But now that I know what to look (listen) for, it seems obvious as I listen to that example again.


Onto lesson 2!

cheers,

andy


----------



## rudi (Oct 24, 2019)

Hi Andy,

I am not very good at transcriptions... but I have been getting better at recognising pitches and rhythms.
I remember the first few times I came across 6/8, and much more rarely 3/4 as a drummer, and how confusing it was (plus 99.99% of drumming is in 4/4 ) Once I started to recognise the difference it became much easier.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 24, 2019)

rudi said:


> but I have been getting better at recognising pitches



Really? Excellent. I can't ever see myself being able to recognise pitch. Relative pitch, perhaps, but not a particular frequency.


----------



## rudi (Oct 26, 2019)

Better than I was certainly (although that's not setting the bar very high ). I have been doing less "hunt and peck" on my MIDI keyboard, and also getting better at inputting notes closer to the pitch I "hear" in my head. Still a long way from absolute pitch, but better at relative pitch 

BTW I have found it harder to follow the posts since BBCSO has been released... it seems to be taking over!!! I would have loved to order it, but I can't justify the cost!


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 26, 2019)

Hi Rudi 



rudi said:


> I have been doing less "hunt and peck" on my MIDI keyboard, and also getting better at inputting notes closer to the pitch I "hear" in my head.



So much hunting and pecking here, stumbling across "happy accidents."

And I think that my biggest failing of all is that, unlike many great composers/song writers, I have never been able to hear stuff in my head. I couldn't, for instance, grab a blank piece of music sheet and map out an idea. Vocally I just cannot hold a tone so I have to power up the keyboard and painstakingly plonk a series of notes, usually directly into my DAW and see what happens.

What I just done, however, is created some blank music sheets on my computer and printed a dozen off. My intention now is to work on some of that voice leading stuff but commit stuff to paper so that I can write notes (not music) and hopefully make some progress in that department.




rudi said:


> BTW I have found it harder to follow the posts since BBCSO has been released... it seems to be taking over!!! I would have loved to order it, but I can't justify the cost!



Haha! Yea, I know  

I am still in danger of falling for the BBC SO library... I have to remind myself that my skill level does not justify owning such a library, regardless of cost.

What I should do is carry on learning, using my Solo Strings library as a sound source, and see how things stand come Black Friday 2020. If I feel that I have progressed enough and that I my interest of creating something more "classical" then I will invest.



cheers

andy


----------



## ism (Oct 26, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> What I should do is carry on learning, using my Solo Strings library as a sound source, and see how things stand come Black Friday 2020. If I feel that I have progressed enough and that I my interest of creating something more "classical" then I will invest.



Solo strings are the hardest sampled instruments to write with. By a huge margin.

In fact, you could even argue (if you squint at the logic a little) that the lower one's skill level, the more important it is to buy BBCSO (or something).


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 26, 2019)

ism said:


> Solo strings are the hardest sampled instruments to write with. By a huge margin.
> 
> In fact, you could even argue (if you squint at the logic a little) that the lower one's skill level, the more important it is to buy BBCSO (or something).



I get what you are saying, ism, but seeing as I have already invested in the Solo Strings library I need to get the best out of that. If, at some point in the future, I decided that I am finding the whole music theory thing is beyond me I can still use that library for my ambient stuff.

I suppose I shouldn't have splashed out on Solo Strings, though, because anything that creates a tone would be enough for me to use to learn voice leading, for instance. I just fancied having some bowed instruments in my collection 


cheers

andy


----------



## ism (Oct 26, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> I get what you are saying, ism, but seeing as I have already invested in the Solo Strings library I need to get the best out of that. If, at some point in the future, I decided that I am finding the whole music theory thing is beyond me I can still use that library for my ambient stuff.
> 
> I suppose I shouldn't have splashed out on Solo Strings, though, because anything that creates a tone would be enough for me to use to learn voice leading, for instance. I just fancied having some bowed instruments in my collection
> 
> ...



Well the interesting thing is that for centuries, composers have learned to write for first soloists and then ensembles and only after years of experience and mastery does it become remotely feasible to write symphonies.


But because of quirks of sound and physics and sampling, the opposite is true with sample libraries.

The easiest thing to write - and get a satisfying sound from - with a sample library as your first compositing is a great big thonkingly loud epic trailer. Because you put in enough fff trombones and it doesn't really matter that the intonation of your viola section doesn't really capture the subtitles of a real viola section. Even the GPO (which for the most part I can't stand, sonically) can make convincing mock up of certain sufficiently loud epic pieces.


There was a thread here a while ago trying to mock up a ... I think it was a Debussy string quartet. Some noble attempts with various solo string libraries, but none of them were convincing in remotely achieving a level of sound quality that I would remotely actually want to sit down and listen to for pleasure. But then, someone mocked up exactly the same thin with I think is was the Spitfire chamber strings. And, while it of course lost the detail of solo strings, it really did sound great.

My point is that with sample libraries, much of the conventional wisdom on how you should learn composition needs to be challenged. And even the conventional wisdom of say 10 years ago (the era of the GPO and VSL SE), the conventional wisdom of learning to compose with sample libraries was at least implicitly "start with symphonies".

Happily, among recent sample libraries accessible to beginners, there now available instruments that can sound good for smaller compositions (ie without relying on a fff trombone section to cover up the deficiencies in the library). This this implicitly conventional wisdom (still present in, for instance the Albion One market of "Start writing Film Music Now") can reasonably be challenged.

That said, solo strings are by *far* the most difficult, frustrating, limited space in which to start composing music with samples.

I'd even argue that if you were to pick up, say, Light and Sound Chamber strings (frequently on sale for $120), you'll be able to see how much easier it is to write "string quartets" for chamber string ensemble, that would be a *much* easier (and *much* less frustrating) way to learn at least certain aspects of string quartet writing.

Just a thought.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 26, 2019)

ism said:


> My point is that with sample libraries, much of the conventional wisdom how you should learn composition needs to be challenged......



I can't agree with that @ism. What you say might be fine for media work, but if you are serious about composing to a high level of competence (as some media composers do for that matter), it's best imv not to conflate sample based production and writing techniques with actual composing skills that are essential and fundamental. Those skills and the learning and mastering thereof are timeless and can be adapted to individuals and any style of music and production.
Of course, it all depends on what you want to achieve.


----------



## ism (Oct 26, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> I can't agree with that @ism. What you say might be fine for media work, but if you are serious about composing to a high level of competence (as some media composers do for that matter), it's best imv not to conflate sample based production and writing techniques with actual composing skills that are essential. Those skills and the learning and mastering thereof are timeless and can be adapted to individuals and any style of music and production.



By "conventional wisdom" I was also referring to as much the recent "conventional wisdom" of start with an all-in-one and write loud symphonies as earlier forms. In fact a lot of the "conventional wisdom" that echoes implicitly around these pages, and is encoded in quite a lot of the marketing and design of sample libraries - and especially "entry point" all-in-one sample libraries is precisely conventional wisdom of what makes sense for media composers. 

So this implicitly beginning-media-composer-centric conventional wisdom needs to be challenged, pedagogically. And in doing so its worth looking back and reconsidering the conventional wisdom of previous eras. 

But of course the "conventional wisdom" of not even thinking about writing a symphony until you've published a couple of hundred chamber works is something that might reasonably challenged in the era of sample libraries.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 26, 2019)

Thanks, guys 

My own personal goals are not to create anything "large," (number of instruments). I want to stay very much "small" but, as I now realise, not a specific form like a "String Quartet."

Music theory is something I have been skirting around for many years. I could probably just as easily carry on with what I have been uploading to Bandcamp. I must be doing something right as I have somehow managed to sell over eighty items in the last couple of years. A lot more than I ever thought possible.

But I am giving it another go (music theory, or at least some of it) to see if that allows me to develop and increase my type of output.

Might come to nothing...


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 26, 2019)

Oh. My. Goodness!

I did a bit of research on Four Part Harmony. Must have been at it for a couple of hours now.

Mind Blow...

So many do's and don'ts

So much to remember regarding the different motions between chords.

When checking across all the parts, you have to check all the various voices;

Soprano – Alto
Soprano – Tenor
Soprano – Bass
Alto – Tenor
Alto- Bass
Tenor – Bass

So that's six checks.

Consecutive fifths! Consecutive octaves! Against the law... You WILL go to jail!

Will be going to bed in a bit and a lot of what I have tried to absorb tonight will be forgotten by morning.

I suppose it is a simple matter of keeping at it huh?!


----------



## CT (Oct 26, 2019)

Over the years I've found that most of the classic rules regarding four-part harmony and counterpoint are internalized pretty quickly, and in fact, the ear tends to guide you towards following them anyway. They boil down well, after a bit of study. And then you can decide to ignore them at any point, if it sounds right for what you're trying to do, because no one is grading you.

Incidentally, if you want some motivation for mastering four-part harmony, check out Bach's jaw-dropping take on this piece as heard in the final verse. This is what I'm going to write some brief variations on for my first BBCSO effort.




Ok, I have to post this one too because it's so fun.


----------



## ism (Oct 26, 2019)

Parallel 5ths and 8th don’t harm your harmony, they harm you voice leading. 

Start with a melody plus a counter melody . This is usually not too hard, and you typically won’t need many of the ‘rules’ to keep them from blurring into the ‘strummed guitar effect’. You can have your other voices just filling out chords, which are a pleasant background harmonic mush, and so the ‘rules’ don’t matter at all to the non melodic voices.

And actually with only two independent lines (melody and counter melody), you probably don’t need to work very hard to keep them independent. So you can break lots of rules and it’s probably ok. In fact, you can probably just wing it, 

Research suggests that the human mind can cope with three separate lines fairly easily. So if you have 3 separate lines, you can probably still break a reasonable number of ‘rules’ without everything blurring into harmonic mush. But here’s where knowing the ‘rules’ starts to really help. Here’s where parallel 5th start to hurt you voice leading, causing the voices moving in parallel 5ths to collapse into harmonic mush (ie. the 1 and 5 of a single chord). 

If you want 4 independent string melodies, It starts to get seriously hard. This is when your need to seriously use ever trick you can (ie the ‘rules’) to keep the 4 lines from blurring into a ‘Harmonic mush’, ie ‘chords’. 

If you’re, say, Bach, and you enjoy writing in 5 or 6 separate melodies at a time just for fun in your spare time, then you need to ever bit of insight into avoiding harmonic mush that you can possibly squeeze out of these rules, augmented by an immoderate amount of your own genius. Seriously, break a single rule in your 6 part voice leading and you’re totally screwed. 

In general, I would recommend avoiding even attempting writing in 6 part voice leading unless you’re at least as good as Bach.


----------



## rudi (Oct 26, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> Hi Rudi
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, happy accident do happen  Music like everything else is a series of processes, a set of tools, a language... the more you become familiar with it the more fluent you become. There are also different paths to different types of music. Using blank music sheets is a really good idea, because it helps to understand / visualise the horizontal (time/rhythm) and vertical (pitch/harmony) dimensions of music. Of course that's only one part of it -- but it's a great start. I've jotted down so many ideas and fragments of ideas over the last year or so to develop my writing that I've got a nice stack of sheet music. 

However about 90% plus of it is quite rubbish or mundane, but from time to time there's something that makes me think..... aah, this could work! 

Re libraries, I went through a phase of thinking (and still now to a degree) if only I had so and so I could make better music... and to a degree it's true... but at the same time I started to realise that I already had access to probably more then enough "good" sounds, and I needed to concentrate on writing, experimenting and improving.

With that said I love the sound and comprehensiveness of BBCSO (those legato strings, woodwinds, percussion, multi-tongued trumpets....)


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 26, 2019)

Hi Mike 



miket said:


> And then you can decide to ignore them at any point, if it sounds right for what you're trying to do, because no one is grading you.



A good point, of course. So I should still learn what I can and then use what I have learned if it works for what ever I am doing at the time.



miket said:


> check out Bach's jaw-dropping take on this piece as heard in the final verse



Thanks for posting that.



miket said:


> Ok, I have to post this one too because it's so fun.



And that one too  

As it happens, I was listening to the Mike Oldfield version the other night on The Complete CD. But it never occurred to me to listen to it in this context.


cheers

andy


----------



## Kevin Fortin (Oct 26, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> Consecutive fifths! Consecutive octaves! Against the law... You WILL go to jail!



"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 26, 2019)

ism said:


> In general, I would recommend avoiding even attempting writing in 6 part voice leading unless you’re at least as good as Bach.



Ha! Good advice right there  

Thanks again, ism, I am reading all your stuff and doing my best to digest 

cheers

andy


----------



## BlackDorito (Oct 26, 2019)

I love In dulci jubilo. [I think the Chanticleer has too much reverb - must've been a cathedral. They can sound quite intimate in a smaller space]

@synkrotron - in this solo string odyssey you are embarking on, are you comfortable reading music and have you considered working in notation, such as Dorico or Sibelius? IMO, notation has some advantages wrt. seeing the parts, cutting and pasting, and immediately playing back the fragments you are working on. The one string quartet I did was constructed - indeed, composed - in Sibelius. I don't think I could've done it just entering notes into a DAW app.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Oct 27, 2019)

i


ism said:


> ...............*So this implicitly beginning-media-composer-centric conventional wisdom needs to be challenged, pedagogically. And in doing so its worth looking back and reconsidering the conventional wisdom of previous eras.*
> 
> But of course the "conventional wisdom" of not even thinking about writing a symphony until you've published a couple of hundred chamber works is something that might reasonably challenged in the era of sample libraries.



Amen to that @ism. The less you know about orchestral composing, the more you are in the hands of the samples themselves and in this regard, the companies have way too much influence on technique and compositional outlook imv.
One can obviously attempt a symphony of course, but as you will know, whether it's any good or not depends on a lot more than manipulation of a faux orchestra in a box.


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 27, 2019)

Hi @BlackDorito 



BlackDorito said:


> in this solo string odyssey you are embarking on, are you comfortable reading music and have you considered working in notation, such as Dorico or Sibelius?



Solo String Odyssey! I like the idea of that haha!

Erm, no. not comfortable reading music at all. I have deliberately take my time deciphering what is in front of me, if you know what I mean.

I know the clefs and therefore the notes/rests, and lengths on the stave but I am too slow for it to be useful.

That's reading... Writing is much the same and I am slow.

Regarding notation software, it was advised to install MuseScore for an online course I am trying out, so I installed that. Is it any good? I find it to be a little bit of a pain to use but I believe that that is because I haven't been using it long enough.

For the first time ever, just the other day, I decided to have a go at notation view within REAPER. It's not that bad, actually.

So I am undecided as to whether I should use REAPER or MuseScore.

cheers

andy


----------



## rudi (Oct 29, 2019)

synkrotron said:


> Regarding notation software, it was advised to install MuseScore for an online course I am trying out, so I installed that. Is it any good? I find it to be a little bit of a pain to use but I believe that that is because I haven't been using it long enough.
> 
> For the first time ever, just the other day, I decided to have a go at notation view within REAPER. It's not that bad, actually.
> 
> ...


Hi Andy,

I've used at various times Sibelius, Dorico, Notion, Musescore, Overture, Cubase score editor, and the REAPER score editor. Each one has its own quirks and strengths, and all have their own learning curve!

Musescore is actually a surprisingly good notation package and I wouldn't have any problem in recommending it. 

In terms of finished results (ie for printed work) REAPER isn't in the same league as the other packages, but for writing and visualising a score it's fine... it also has the advantage of having a piano roll view, so you can switch between the two modes.

Thanks to music XML you could also export / import your composition across notation software. Although there are some differences in what will / will not import / export, for basic notation you should be ok. 

The important thing is to find the software that suits you 

And well done on embarking on the notation ship!!!


----------



## synkrotron (Oct 29, 2019)

rudi said:


> And well done on embarking on the notation ship!!!




Thanks


----------



## eph221 (Nov 8, 2019)

Rowy said:


> That is an excellent idea. Like a Chaconne or a Passacaglia. Or the famous Canon by Pachelbel.


Fun fact, pachelbel''s brother emigrated to colonial South Carolina and lived there until he died? I'd love to hear more about him if anyone knows anything. BTW Andy write the damn quartet.


----------



## synkrotron (Nov 9, 2019)

eph221 said:


> BTW Andy write the damn quartet.



Ha!

Hiya mate 

I've pretty much given up on this for now.

I have been getting my head around the theory of it but it is taking too long. As it should, I suppose.

But I love creating, as you know, so I jumped on to something else.

And then yesterday afternoon I was told by my "agent" that I've been accepted for a job, which was great news, because I have been actively looking for over three months now.

Downside of that is, of course, creativity has now fallen off a cliff while I re-familiarise myself with some software I need to use.


Oh well! Such is life


----------



## rudi (Nov 9, 2019)

Good luck with the job mate!


----------



## synkrotron (Nov 9, 2019)

rudi said:


> Good luck with the job mate!



Thanks


----------



## Pier (Dec 2, 2019)

Thanks all for the advice and links to resources.

After 20 years of making electronic music and playing a bit of piano I want to learn more about actually writing music instead of fiddling with synths and plugins. A couple of days ago I started trying to write something for string quartet intuitively and it was a strenuous mental exercise so I guess I'm heading in the right direction.

I'll post something in a couple of days for you to bash.


----------

