# Best software for an aspiring composer



## theaviv

I'm an aspiring composer. I love classical music. I've been using MuseScore on Ubuntu. Here's a piece I composed:




Good playback is important to me, and I am considering getting

(1) a Mac (I refuse to use Windows, which is why I use Ubuntu)
(2) Sibelius subscription (which cannot run on Ubuntu)
(3) NotePerformer (which cannot run on MuseScore)

I know Sibelius in combination with NotePerformer will give me very good playback, but are there any other options you would recommend?

I am also wondering how I could go about creating a better mockup than the Sibelius and NotePerformer combo? Is it possible to create a mockup that is comparable to or even better than what a live orchestra can record?

I understand I have 3 options when it comes to mockups:

(1) NotePerformer (with Sibelius or another compatible scorewriter)
(2) learn how to do the painstaking work on a DAW
(3) hire a pro to do the painstaking work of creating the best possible mockup

Is it possible to export a MIDI (from Sibelius or another compatible scorewriter) with NotePerformer's interpretation? I figure it would then be possible to import the MIDI into a DAW and use a better sound library to create a better mockup.

Would I have any use for EastWest's ComposerCloud, Vienna Symphonic Library, or Overture 5?

What would you advise an aspiring composer who is currently using MuseScore on Ubuntu and is concerned with very good playback and sharing very good mockups?


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> I know Sibelius in combination with NotePerformer will give me very good playback, but are there any other options you would recommend?


I use neither Sibelius nor NotePerformer, so I can't give any advice on this, however I've heard Sibelius' documentation is lacking, at least compared to Finale, which may be a bit of a hindrance for a beginner. That information may be quite outdated, however, seeing as it was a decade ago I heard that.



theaviv said:


> Is it possible to create a mockup that is comparable to or even better than what a live orchestra can record?


Depends on what you mean by _better_. If you're using sample libraries, you can compose things that you may prefer to how it would sound if played by an orchestra. A lot of composers are disappointed when they discovery their lush, loud legato strings sound much quieter and a lot thinner as performed by live musicians.

Likewise, plenty of composers are disappointed when they find that their very fast, loud and aggressive spiccato part is barely audible over the woodwinds and brass.

However, no mockup will compare to a live recording in terms of sounding like an orchestra. Because it's not a live orchestra, it's recorded snapshots of a performance, pieced together to create music.

They can sound pretty darn close these days, though, (compared to 20 years ago) but it does depend on the music you're making as well as the resources you have available.



theaviv said:


> Is it possible to export a MIDI (from Sibelius or another compatible scorewriter) with NotePerformer's interpretation?


I don't use NotePerformer, but _as far as I know_, this is not possible. Or, I've never heard of such a function at least, nor seen anyone use it.



theaviv said:


> Would I have any use for EastWest's ComposerCloud, Vienna Symphonic Library, or Overture 5?


Most certainly, if you want to create more realistic mockups. I'd strongly recommended trying ComposerCloud if you're just starting out. It'll give you an idea of what working with sample libraries is like.

Remember, it's easy to get into buying a lot of sample libraries you never end up using. I myself spend frequently spend hundreds of dollar a month on sample libraries and it's really not something I encourage, so getting into ComposerCloud may help you ease into the world of sample libraries, so to speak.

I've never heard of anyone creating realistic mockups using Overture 5, and as far as I know it's not something the software specialises in.



theaviv said:


> What would you advise an aspiring composer who is currently using MuseScore on Ubuntu and is concerned with very good playback and sharing very good mockups?


Not knowing your budget, I'd recommend picking up a DAW with a workflow you like (demo them!), and subscribing to ComposerCloud. Then, spend money wisely on sample libraries you need to fill in the gaps.

This is what I wish I could've done when I started out. Of course, back then, ComposerCloud wasn't an option, and sample libraries were far more expensive than they are now.


If you have any more questions feel free to ask or send a DM. I'll reply once I get the chance.


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> Good playback is important to me, and I am considering getting
> (1) a Mac (I refuse to use Windows, which is why I use Ubuntu)


Yes, you will as a practical matter need a Mac or Windows to get the level of playback you want.



> (2) Sibelius subscription (which cannot run on Ubuntu)
> (3) NotePerformer (which cannot run on MuseScore)
> 
> I know Sibelius in combination with NotePerformer will give me very good playback, but are there any other options you would recommend?



This playback is not "very good" but is instead "good enough to get an idea of the piece and the balance". NotePerformer output is not going to be suitable for generating an MP3 from notation software as the finished product. If every piece you write is going to be performed, and you just need to get a sense of how things sound before the performance, NotePerformer shines there. But if you want to get, say, film scoring work, or you want someone to use your piece in something (say as background music for a YouTube video or just for listening pleasure) notation software with NotePerformer won't cut it.



> Is it possible to create a mockup that is comparable to or even better than what a live orchestra can record?



No. But most listeners who are not musicians are so used to the sound of sampled orchestras (and have heard so few live ones) that they are fooled by newer more advanced libraries, and fooling them is often good enough.



> I understand I have 3 options when it comes to mockups:
> 
> (1) NotePerformer (with Sibelius or another compatible scorewriter)



Not really an option if people besides you are going to be listening to the "mockup." You can't send a director NotePerformer output if working on a short film.



> (2) learn how to do the painstaking work on a DAW



This is the only viable option, and this is what everybody does. It is part and parcel of being a commercial composer in the modern day.



> (3) hire a pro to the painstaking work of creating the best possible mockup



Not viable - if you keep having to pay someone to do mockups of every single piece you aren't going to get enough money from the composition work that you do to make it worthwhile.



> Is it possible to export a MIDI (from Sibelius or another compatible scorewriter) with NotePerformer's interpretation? I figure it would then be possible to import the MIDI into a DAW and use a better sound library to create a better mockup.



Yes, but in many cases it is faster to play it in via your DAW. You get lots of extra CC garbage exported from notation MIDI output that you have to delete. The cleanup work can take a while. IMO there is very little point in starting with notation if that piece is never going to be performed by an actual ensemble.

The only negative aspect of composing into the DAW is that you can more easily lose the vertical aspects of the arrangement (since playing things in line-by-line tends to lead to more horizontal thinking) but this can be remedied with proper workflow.



> Would I have any use for EastWest's ComposerCloud, Vienna Symphonic Library, or Overture 5?



The first two, yes. Overture? I would avoid notation programs made by a one-man operation. If they decide they don't want to make it anymore, or are unable to make it anymore, then the software likely receives no updates and after a few OS upgrades you can't run the program anymore. Sibelius or Dorico are your best bets if you need notation, but you only need notation if real live performers are going to be playing your pieces.



> What would you advise an aspiring composer who is currently using MuseScore on Ubuntu and is concerned with very good playback and sharing very good mockups?



Notation programs are never going to give you good enough mockups. There is also no point in working in notation if it will never be performed by actual human musicians. Go to Mac or Windows, get a DAW, learn how to mock up in there and how to mix.


----------



## d.healey

Kontakt will run on Ubuntu, as will Reaper. With those two things you can make your mockups sound as good as anyone else's - but keep in mind that a large part of getting a realistic mockup is not software, it's skills and experience.

If you want a good mockup then you have to put in the work and time or hire someone to do it for you. You won't get something realistic from any notation software. Notation and performance are two different skills and the software that is great for one is not so great for the other. My approach is to use notation (Musescore) for composing and Ardour (or another DAW) for performing mock-ups.


----------



## mducharme

Kontakt is not officially supported on Linux according to NI webpage:









Specifications







www.native-instruments.com





Google searches show that it can run on WINE. I've used WINE before on Linux for a few small odds-and-ends apps but I don't think I would want to depend on WINE for such critical software, and would be concerned about performance. If you run into issues you are unlikely to get assistance.

Besides, there are some great Kontakt libs out there, and most of the libs I use are Kontakt based, but do you really want to limit yourself to only Kontakt libs?


----------



## Dewdman42

I think for music a Mac is a good idea for you and shares a lot of Unix stuff you are used from Ubuntu. I’m a huge fan amp f note performer, not a huge fan of Sibelius. I’d look at dorico first combined with note performer.

getting into kontakt and more sophisticated sample libraries may be where you end up eventually but it’s a long journey and I like your idea of starting out with a notational program and note performer


----------



## theaviv

Dewdman42 said:


> I think for music a Mac is a good idea for you and shares a lot of Unix stuff you are used from Ubuntu. I’m a huge fan amp f note performer, not a huge fan of Sibelius. I’d look at dorico first combined with note performer.
> 
> getting into kontakt and more sophisticated sample libraries may be where you end up eventually but it’s a long journey and I like your idea of starting out with a notational program and note performer



Thank you.

Dorico looks good but NotePerformer only has beta support for it. Also, more known issues are listed for Dorico (6 issues) in comparison to Sibelius (2 issues).

Sibelius seems to be the most popular choice. Why do you prefer Dorico?


----------



## theaviv

theaviv said:


> Is it possible to export a MIDI (from Sibelius or another compatible scorewriter) with NotePerformer's interpretation? I figure it would then be possible to import the MIDI into a DAW and use a better sound library to create a better mockup.



I received this answer from Wallander Instruments, the company behind NotePerformer:



> Hi Aviv!
> 
> I'm afraid the changes we make are internally in our software. And the operations we do on a note-by-not basis are a lot more advanced than MIDI events. We control the envelope of each note individually, also down to the attack/release.
> 
> If you export MIDI from the notation software, the MIDI you get will be the MIDI that -inputted- into NotePerformer, by e.g. Sibelius. So it will contain our articulation switches, but nothing else unfortunately.
> 
> Best regards,
> Arne
> Wallander Instruments



I now understand the best way to create a mockup in a DAW is to play all the parts by hand using a MIDI (keyboard) instrument. That way, the interpretation is exactly the way you want it. Do you all agree?

Would Logic Pro X be a good choice?



Willowtree said:


> Not knowing your budget, I'd recommend picking up a DAW with a workflow you like (demo them!), and subscribing to ComposerCloud. Then, spend money wisely on sample libraries you need to fill in the gaps.
> 
> This is what I wish I could've done when I started out. Of course, back then, ComposerCloud wasn't an option, and sample libraries were far more expensive than they are now.



I am thinking of getting a Mac with Logic Pro X and subscribing to ComposerCloud.

How long do you think it would probably take me before I am able to create industry-grade mockups/orchestral tracks?



Dewdman42 said:


> getting into kontakt and more sophisticated sample libraries may be where you end up eventually but it’s a long journey and I like your idea of starting out with a notational program and note performer



Would I need Kontakt if I have ComposerCloud? How do the two compare?


----------



## Living Fossil

theaviv said:


> How long do you think it would probably take me before I am able to create industry-grade mockups/orchestral tracks?



If you're working hard, i'd say 5-10 years.
It takes several years for the ear to learn hearing one's own stuff in a somehow "objective" way in regards to production technique (and of course also compositional aspects).
Of course, there are exceptions, people who learn extremely fast and get in 3-4 years to a impressive level. Usually, those learned to play an instrument at a very early age and are very young when they start producing music.
However, to keep things realistic: most people don't reach "industry-grade", for several reasons. One question is always if the voice of an aspiring musician/composer is industry compatible at all. 
Then again, in the industry you can sometimes find music that is definitely substandard.


----------



## theaviv

Living Fossil said:


> If you're working hard, i'd say 5-10 years.
> It takes several years for the ear to learn hearing one's own stuff in a somehow "objective" way in regards to production technique (and of course also compositional aspects).
> Of course, there are exceptions, people who learn extremely fast and get in 3-4 years to a impressive level. Usually, those learned to play an instrument at a very early age and are very young when they start producing music.
> However, to keep things realistic: most people don't reach "industry-grade", for several reasons. One question is always if the voice of an aspiring musician/composer is industry compatible at all.
> Then again, in the industry you can sometimes find music that is definitely substandard.



Let's say I'm working with Logic Pro X and ComposerCloud.

Let's say I take an existing composition - like Karl Jenkins' Palladio (my favourite classical piece) or one of the movements from Vivaldi's Four Seasons (which is in the public domain like so many other great classical pieces) - and I try to create a really good mockup, like a track that could be used in film or a videogame.

I don't see why it should be so difficult? I would use a MIDI keyboard instrument to record all the parts, choose the right virtual instruments from ComposerCloud, and make whatever other sound adjustments necessary to produce a finished product. Am I missing something?

I think I should be able to learn how to do that within a couple of months give or take, no?


----------



## Living Fossil

theaviv said:


> I don't see why it should be so difficult? I would use a MIDI keyboard instrument to record all the parts, choose the right virtual instruments from ComposerCloud, and make whatever other sound adjustments necessary to produce a finished product. Am I missing something?



That's what i meant. It takes several years for one to see (or: to hear) why it is so difficult.
The more you improve, the more you hear what's missing.
(The Dunning-Krueger effect, while not being exactly the same, deals with similar phenomena)

p.s. i don't think you will believe me now, it would be untypical. But maybe you think back at this post in 5 or 10 years...


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> I now understand the best way to create a mockup in a DAW is to play all the parts by hand using a MIDI (keyboard) instrument. That way, the interpretation is exactly the way you want it. Do you all agree?


I agree that it's one way to do it, and perhaps the most intuitive. Generally, I'll either play them in with one hand, entering CC data with the other, or I'll draw both the MIDI and CC data in the piano roll, depending on what I'm doing. Often, I'll do both.

I'd also recommend a breath controller and pedal (to control CC data). For some libraries, they're essential.



theaviv said:


> Would Logic Pro X be a good choice?
> 
> I am thinking of getting a Mac with Logic Pro X and subscribing to ComposerCloud.


I'm not on Mac, so I can't comment on Logic Pro X, but a DAW and subscribing to ComposerCloud sounds like a very solid start.



theaviv said:


> How long do you think it would probably take me before I am able to create industry-grade mockups/orchestral tracks?


Years, for sure.



theaviv said:


> Would I need Kontakt if I have ComposerCloud? How do the two compare?


*ComposerCloud*
ComposerCloud is a subscription service and depending on which subscription you choose you can get all of EastWest's libraries for commercial use. If you end the subscription, anything you've made with the libraries are yours to keep, but you can no longer keep using the libraries. They use the PLAY Engine, which is EastWest's own sampler.

*Kontakt*
While Kontakt comes with a lot of samples, they're fairly outdated. So, why'd you want to get Kontakt? So that you can use third-party Kontakt libraries (such as those by 8dio, Embertone, Light and Sound, Waverunner Audio etc). This can be confusing for beginners.

There's two forms of Kontakt libraries: Kontakt Player libraries, and regular Kontakt libraries. The former doesn't requite Kontakt, only the free Kontakt Player. The latter require the full version of Kontakt.

Essentially, if you get Kontakt, it opens up a world of excellent third party libraries you would otherwise only be able to use in demo mode, _even if you've purchased them_.

*Would you need Kontakt?*
Eventually, perhaps. ost of us use Kontakt regularly. Almost all (as in at least 90%) of the sample libraries I own are Kontakt libraries. Though, the content in ComposerCloud should keep you busy for a long, long time, though. 



theaviv said:


> I don't see why it should be so difficult? I would use a MIDI keyboard instrument to record all the parts, choose the right virtual instruments from ComposerCloud, and make whatever other sound adjustments necessary to produce a finished product. Am I missing something?
> 
> I think I should be able to learn how to do that within a couple of months give or take, no?


Because you're going to have to learn how to use MIDI CC Data to enter realistic dynamics, expression, release times, legato etc (depending on the library you're using). You'll also need to learn to make use of keyswitches, and essentially you're going to have to learn to phrase each instrument like a musician playing that instrument would phrase it.

It takes a _long time_ to learn that for _each _instrument. Years, easily. However, don't let that discourage you. It's part of the journey, and it's honestly great fun.


----------



## theaviv

First, I want to say thank you to everyone for all the detailed answers. It is greatly appreciated. This is helping me make an informed decision - and also learn more generally about how professional composers work.



Willowtree said:


> It takes a _long time_ to learn that for _each _instrument. Years, easily. However, don't let that discourage you. It's part of the journey, and it's honestly great fun.



I'm sure it would be a fun and worthwhile journey. I imagine it would help me train my ears and become quite knowledgable about all the instruments and the nature of sound in general.



mducharme said:


> This is the only viable option, and this is what everybody does. It is part and parcel of being a commercial composer in the modern day.



But I'm just wondering if composers like Karl Jenkins, John Williams and Howard Shore bother to play with DAWs and create mockups?



Willowtree said:


> *Would you need Kontakt?*
> Eventually, perhaps. ost of us use Kontakt regularly. Almost all (as in at least 90%) of the sample libraries I own are Kontakt libraries. Though, the content in ComposerCloud should keep you busy for a long, long time, though.



So you're saying Kontakt offers better sounds than ComposerCloud and is more of the industry standard?


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> But I'm just wondering if composers like Karl Jenkins, John Williams and Howard Shore bother to play with DAWs and create mockups?



John Williams certainly doesn't, Karl Jenkins most likely doesn't, Howard Shore I'm not sure. Williams and possibly Shore might have an assistant create mockups for them. Jenkins is for the most part not a film composer so why would he have to do mockups?

Back in the 1980's and before it was the case that directors would just hear the composer and an assistant play the cue for them on two pianos so they could get an idea of the sound, and so there was no such thing as a mockup, but those days are long past. It's been the norm for at least 20 years now that directors would get to hear synthesized renditions of cues before they are recorded, or at least of the main theme. And many are unable to look beyond the sounds you are using, if they don't sound very good to them then they worry the final product might be like that.


----------



## mducharme

Another thing related to that - the "polish" (production) of what you send a director (even as a mockup) is really important. Perhaps you can write music 10x better than composer Y. However, suppose composer Y is excellent at production/mixing/mastering and has really great sounding libraries, making his/her music sound more "polished", and it works well to picture. If you don't have very good libraries and your production/mixing/etc skills are not up to snuff, in most cases composer Y will get the work instead of you. Writing "better music" means very little when the polish on the finished product isn't there.


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> But I'm just wondering if composers like Karl Jenkins, John Williams and Howard Shore bother to play with DAWs and create mockups?


@mducharme covered this pretty well. 

I'd like to add that most younger composers use mock-ups extensively. Some (including many successful composers) use mock-ups almost exclusively, though most will include some amount of live recorded instruments (particularly vocals or solo instruments).

However, composers like Shore or Williams often (or typically) orchestrate their scores themselves, so a mock-up may not be as useful. If you're working under pressure and you prefer to notate and it's going to be performed anyway, and you're orchestrating it, a mock-up may actually prove a waste of time.



theaviv said:


> So you're saying Kontakt offers better sounds than ComposerCloud and is more of the industry standard?


Kontakt on its own certainly doesn't sound better than ComposerCloud, though there are a couple gems in the library it comes with (I've never used them, however). You'd rather get Kontakt so that you can get third party libraries to use in it, and there's a very diverse market for that.

It's very much the industry standard sampler. However, ComposerCloud gives you access specifically to EastWest's sample libraries. You don't need to purchase any third party material. You subscribe, and you can access their libraries for as long as you're subscribed.

Essentially, if you get Kontakt, you're going to have to go out of your way and purchase third party libraries to use in it, and it can be very costly when you're starting out. Do they sound better than EastWest's instruments? Well, that's a matter of opinion, and it depends on the developer.

*Here's a non-exhaustive list of some developers that make third party Kontakt libraries*:
8dio, Embertone, Waverunner Audio, Light and Sound, Soundiron, Impact Soundworks, Orange Tree Samples, Chris Hein and many, many others.

(I'm not affiliated with any of these companies).


----------



## Blackster

The more time I've spent as a composer, the more I realized that the tools are not that important! Tools are just tools, nobody who is going to pay you will ask you if you've used Cubase or Logic, Spitfire Libraries or Berlin Libraries ... pick whatever sounds good to your ears and learn how to get the most out of that!  ... 

I'd spend way more time and energy in investing in yourself so you find some great unique selling points that you can use to your advantage over the competition. Because if you are not different, you have to be cheaper.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Blackster said:


> nobody who is going to pay you will ask you if you've used Cubase or Logic,



True, but it does happen. I almost lost a gig once because a director came into my studio and was baffled that I didn't compose with Pro Tools (yes, believe it or not!). It also helps to be somewhat fluent with Pro Tools, as most editors request session files in that format.


----------



## Willowtree

Wolfie2112 said:


> True, but it does happen. I almost lost a gig once because a director came into my studio and was baffled that I didn't compose with Pro Tools (yes, believe it or not!). It also helps to be somewhat fluent with Pro Tools, as most editors request session files in that format.


I once had a student I was tutoring lose respect for me because I didn't have "brand loyalty" and used three different DAWs. Then again, he also was uncomfortable with the fact I was a Windows user.

@theaviv, as @Blackster stated, despite how often many of us talk about the tools, focus on getting more tools, spend way too much mone on them (I'm guilty of all three of these) it's really you, the composer, who matters in the long run.

Yes, fancier tools will have more advanced features and yes, it's a huge part of your sound. However, the absolutely most important thing (when it comes to the quality of your music) is _you_. Your skills as a composer, arranger, orchestrator, produce etc.

A skilled composer can make a lackluster library sound good. And an unskilled composer won't get much use out of that New Fancy 2000 Gb 10 mic 50x RR 100 dynamic layers string library with divisi and 40 different legatos and .... okay, okay, someone please make this, I will ignore my own advice and spend all my money on it!

Jokes aside (_hint: it's only half a joke; I would buy it_), it's easy to get caught up in what tools to use, but seriously, if you get a DAW and ComposerCloud, you'll be absolutely fine for _years _to come. If you decide to go the Kontakt route, you'll be fine too (though expect to shell out quite a bit more money at first).

If you decide to pursue this, I really look forward to seeing your progress here on the forums over the years. 

EDIT: New Fancy String Library wasn't exaggerated enough, there we go!


----------



## rudi

theaviv said:


> But I'm just wondering if composers like Karl Jenkins, John Williams and Howard Shore bother to play with DAWs and create mockups?



People like John Williams et al have got such a great catalogue of outstanding music, proven track record, huge talent, deep experience, and the odd Oscar or two (or more) . They have worked with some of the greatest directors and orchestras. They are in a different league 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Williams


----------



## Blackster

Wolfie2112 said:


> True, but it does happen. I almost lost a gig once because a director came into my studio and was baffled that I didn't compose with Pro Tools (yes, believe it or not!). It also helps to be somewhat fluent with Pro Tools, as most editors request session files in that format.


 
Ok then  ... well, whatever the client wants, right? As we are all service providers, we have to take the demand into account, of course. But still, YOU are the professional in that area, NOT HIM! So, talk him out of his belief :D


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Blackster said:


> Ok then  ... well, whatever the client wants, right? As we are all service providers, we have to take the demand into account, of course. But still, YOU are the professional in that area, NOT HIM! So, talk him out of his belief :D



Yeah, it's really goofy how there's this stereotype that you're not pro unless you're using certain tools.


----------



## Chorny Serge

theaviv said:


> I'm an aspiring composer. I love classical music. I've been using MuseScore on Ubuntu. Here's a piece I composed



Hey, Aviv! You wrote me a question about my piece and so I remembered this site, I will now upload stuff here.
As for your composition, I was interested in how it would sound like recorded with sample libraries so here's the sketch on that theme I made. Don't wanna show off, I was just hoping it'll answer some of your questions. And it was fun) I'm just practicing every time I can.


----------



## theaviv

Chorny Serge said:


> Hey, Aviv! You wrote me a question about my piece and so I remembered this site, I will now upload stuff here.
> As for your composition, I was interested in how it would sound like recorded with sample libraries so here's the sketch on that theme I made. Don't wanna show off, I was just hoping it'll answer some of your questions. And it was fun) I'm just practicing every time I can.



Wow! I love it. It's wonderful when you hear a piece you composed produced in high-quality. I wouldn't mind if you continue! I attached the midi and score if that's of any use.


----------



## theaviv

Chorny Serge said:


> Hey, Aviv! You wrote me a question about my piece and so I remembered this site, I will now upload stuff here.



Yes, I think your mockup of Palladio is excellent.




I like it a lot better than the other mockups I found:










Yours is closer to the real thing:




You have a good ear!


----------



## theaviv

theaviv said:


> What would you advise an aspiring composer who is currently using MuseScore on Ubuntu and is concerned with ... sharing very good mockups?





Willowtree said:


> Not knowing your budget, I'd recommend picking up a DAW with a workflow you like (demo them!), and subscribing to ComposerCloud. Then, spend money wisely on sample libraries you need to fill in the gaps.





mducharme said:


> Notation programs are never going to give you good enough mockups. There is also no point in working in notation if it will never be performed by actual human musicians. Go to Mac or Windows, get a DAW, learn how to mock up in there and how to mix.





theaviv said:


> I am thinking of getting a Mac with Logic Pro X and subscribing to ComposerCloud.
> 
> How long do you think it would probably take me before I am able to create industry-grade mockups/orchestral tracks?





Living Fossil said:


> If you're working hard, i'd say 5-10 years.





Willowtree said:


> Years, for sure.





mducharme said:


> This is the only viable option, and this is what everybody does. It is part and parcel of being a commercial composer in the modern day.





theaviv said:


> But I'm just wondering if composers like Karl Jenkins, John Williams and Howard Shore bother to play with DAWs and create mockups?





mducharme said:


> John Williams certainly doesn't, Karl Jenkins most likely doesn't, Howard Shore I'm not sure.





mducharme said:


> Another thing related to that - the "polish" (production) of what you send a director (even as a mockup) is really important. Perhaps you can write music 10x better than composer Y. However, suppose composer Y is excellent at production/mixing/mastering and has really great sounding libraries, making his/her music sound more "polished", and it works well to picture. If you don't have very good libraries and your production/mixing/etc skills are not up to snuff, in most cases composer Y will get the work instead of you. Writing "better music" means very little when the polish on the finished product isn't there.



Of course, you could outsource the polish, but you're saying:


mducharme said:


> Not viable - if you keep having to pay someone to do mockups of every single piece you aren't going to get enough money from the composition work that you do to make it worthwhile.



But then again, some composers seem to do just that:


mducharme said:


> Williams and possibly Shore might have an assistant create mockups for them.





rudi said:


> People like John Williams et al have got such a great catalogue of outstanding music, proven track record, huge talent, deep experience, and the odd Oscar or two (or more) . They have worked with some of the greatest directors and orchestras. They are in a different league



(1) a great catalogue of outstanding music
(2) proven track record
(3) huge talent
(4) deep experience
(5) the odd Oscar or two (or more)

I believe if I put my focus on building a great catalogue of outstanding music, the rest will follow.


Blackster said:


> I'd spend way more ... investing in yourself so you find some great unique selling points that you can use to your advantage over the competition. Because if you are not different, you have to be cheaper.



Rather than investing in a Mac, I believe I should invest in working with a producer and building a great catalogue of outstanding music.


d.healey said:


> If you want a good mockup then you have to put in the work and time or hire someone to do it for you.



Classical is no different than any other genre of music. If you want to make it big, really big, you gotta focus on being the artist - not the artist and producer combined. The biggest artists in the music industry do not try to be both producers and artists.

Michael Jackson did not produce his own music, he worked with Quincy Jones. He outsourced the polish. Classical is no different - it's just another genre in the industry. If you want to be the King of Classical, you gotta think like the King of Classical.

I never wanted to be a videogame or film composer. When I was 20 and started composing for the very first time - more than a decade ago - I envisioned myself as a "classical artist" - I wanted to release singles and albums just like any other music artist of more mainstream genres - pop, country, etc. I wanted to hear my music played on Classical 96.3 FM. I wanted to make classical popular again - and I believed I could do it, but life got in the way and I didn't compose much since. I'd like to think it's time for me to believe again.



Blackster said:


> Because if you are not different, you have to be cheaper.


----------



## mducharme

If you choose to go that route, and you haven't really composed much in the past 10 years, be prepared to spend at least 5 years just composing and getting those skills up to speed before you are writing well enough to warrant hiring a producer. And even if you hire one then, there is a big risk of spending the money on that and then not really making it back.


----------



## Willowtree

I'm going to be very blunt in my reply here, and it's not intended to crush your hopes, but just to give you some perspective.



theaviv said:


> But then again, some composers seem to do just that:


Right, but you're not John Williams or Howard Shore. By his 20s, John Williams was already a succesful composer, and he was in the right place at the right time as well, and an excellent session musicians. Also, raised by a musician. He started out when a DAW or realistic mock-ups were even an option, let alone something the industry thought ever possible.

Saying that _some composers seem to do just that_ is a bit like saying some humans are millionaires. It's true, but they're the very rare exception.

You are not John Williams. Even the most brilliant composers of our day need to start out working with DAWs and mock-ups. Hiring an assistant is not an option unless you have a lot of funds and a catalogue.

Can you conceivably afford to pay several hundreds of dollars per minute of music? If so, then go for it. But it doesn't look like a promising career option, and if you're going to invest that amount of money into it, you either ought to be rich, or you might as well try to make a living out of it.



theaviv said:


> Rather than investing in a Mac, I believe I should invest in working with a producer and building a great catalogue of outstanding music.
> 
> 
> Classical is no different than any other genre of music. If you want to make it big, really big, you gotta focus on being the artist - not the artist and producer combined. The biggest artists in the music industry do not try to be both producers and artists.
> 
> Michael Jackson did not produce his own music, he worked with Quincy Jones. He outsourced the polish. Classical is no different - it's just another genre in the industry. If you want to be the King of Classical, you gotta think like the King of Classical.
> 
> I never wanted to be a videogame or film composer. When I was 20 and started composing for the very first time - more than a decade ago - I envisioned myself as a "classical artist" - I wanted to release singles and albums just like any other music artist of more mainstream genres - pop, country, etc. I wanted to hear my music played on Classical 96.3 FM. I wanted to make classical popular again - and I believed I could do it, but life got in the way and I didn't compose much since. I'd like to think it's time for me to believe again.


You're underestimating just how difficult it is to make it in this industry. I've been doing this for almost my entire life. I started composing music when I was 4 years old, was given lessons to play the recorder and piano around the same age (as well as the harmonica, for some odd reason. ask my parents).

While my personal projects are predominantly orchestral (that's what I prefer to be doing), I've learned to compose all manner of music, from jazz, to rock, to modern hybrid, to electronic and so on.

I've worked with MIDI since I was 10, and I've composed thousands of pieces. I'm not one of the big-shot composers, and half the time I don't make a living as a composer. I mostly get uncredited work, often serving as an arranger or occasionally consultant to other composers (because of my teaching skills).

Again, I am not trying to crush your dreams or tell you that what you're aiming for isn't within the realm of possibilities. You will need a DAW and you will need to make your own mock-ups if you don't have money to spend.

And if you decide to find a producer with a very low rate, remember that in this industry, more often than not, you get what you pay for.

Just some friendly piece of advice but very bluntly.


----------



## mducharme

Agree completely with the above - I wanted to say that too but didn't have the patience because the post would have been long.


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> Right, but you're not John Williams or Howard Shore.



I am The Aviv.

I will share mockups of my compositions here soon enough.

But I'm already liking what @Chorny Serge did with my piece Serenade. Can't you hear its potential? Imagine how amazing it would sound with a real string orchestra! This is something that would be played on the radio for sure. This could be a hit classical piece!


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> I am The Aviv.
> 
> I will share mockups of my compositions here soon enough.
> 
> But I'm already liking what @Chorny Serge did with my piece Serenade. Can't you hear its potential? Imagine how amazing it would sound with a real string orchestra! This is something that would be played on the radio for sure. This could be a hit classical piece!


Again, I am going to be blunt.

The mock-up doesn't sound like a string section or a string orchestra and is not phrased like one. The short notes are far too loud, for starters, and the slurred passage wouldn't be phrased the way it is.

This is absolutely fine if you're doing some media composing, so @Chorny Serge by no means did a bad job. This is in many cases what a client or director might want. But if _classical _is what you're going for, this is not what real recorded string music would sound like.

Setting the mock-up aside, I hate to break it to you, but this sounds like a fairly average media composition. This is something I see most composers making in a couple minutes when bored or in a hurry with a deadline coming up. For a piece like this, the orchestration and performance needs to be what stands out, since the harmony, rhythm or melody will not stand out from the crowd.

There's nothing new here. Standard harmony. Standard rhythm. Standard melody. This is stock music. And if that's what you're going for, that's okay, but people won't look at this and think "Oh, it' the Aviv's music!" They'll listen to this and think "ah, another one".

The above is when compared to non-classical orchestral music (such as trailer music, film music, game music and music inspired by it etc).

Compared to actual, proper, contemporary classical music? This is nothing of note whatsoever, and would maybe get a scoff or two from a classical musician*

If you want some more pointers in-detail, feel free to send me a DM and when I have the time I'll jump into a chat with you and we can go over your composition. I'd normally charge for that, but as long as you're patient and bear in mind I might not always be this fast at replying (I'm a very busy person at times), don't worry about that. Consider it a favour.

_* Edit: for context, contemporary classical music is far more experimental and avant-garde. It tends to lean either in the direction of being quite atonal, with complex mathematical polyrhythms, microtuned instruments and with very intense dynamic changes throughout. Or, it tends to lean in the direction of using additive rhythm with non-functional tonal harmony, little change in dynamics throughout, and being generally quite subdued._


----------



## brenneisen

theaviv said:


> I believe if I put my focus on building a great catalogue of outstanding music, the rest will follow.



not today


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> If you want some more pointers in-detail, feel free to send me a DM and when I have the time I'll jump into a chat with you and we can go over your composition. I'd normally charge for that, but as long as you're patient and bear in mind I might not always be this fast at replying (I'm a very busy person at times), don't worry about that. Consider it a favour.



Thank you @Willowtree. I really appreciate your offer and your detailed well-written responses throughout this thread. I'll definitely keep it in mind.

Do you have a SoundCloud or YouTube channel?

The piece is not in its final form. I'm hesitant to agree with you on how you think it would be perceived by the public. I've listened to classical music all my life. I know when something is good.

I'm not really familiar with what you call contemporary classical music, but I don't believe Classical 96.3 FM plays such music.

An example of what I consider to be a great classical piece (by a living composer) is Karl Jenkins' Palladio. I also love anything by Vivaldi.

If you're right, I'll just have to learn the hard way. I'm quite set on the direction I want to take now and you've been very helpful in my process of figuring it out.


----------



## mducharme

Jenkins' Palladio is OK, but cliche. Vivaldi is good but overplayed, especially The Four Seasons.

I think your Serenade is not bad (and I've heard a lot of very bad stuff), but it is not anywhere near as strong as you think it is. Even if it was played by a string orchestra and well produced (even by a top producer), I don't think you would get anywhere with it, certainly not a big audience. It would require a lot of rewrites in which case it would become a very different piece before it would get anywhere near that stage.

This "I know my stuff is fantastic and would be a hit" kind of thinking is the trap that you can easily fall into if you have had nothing but people telling you how wonderful your stuff is (as almost every reasonably good composer has experienced). Especially those who don't compose - they are so amazed by anything written by someone who does, especially by someone they know personally, that you can't count on them for honest and blunt feedback. They'll just tell you it is wonderful and this leads to an inflated sense of your own abilities.


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> Thank you @Willowtree. I really appreciate your offer and your detailed well-written responses throughout this thread. I'll definitely keep it in mind.
> 
> Do you have a SoundCloud or YouTube channel?
> 
> The piece is not in its final form. I'm hesitant to agree with you on how you think it would be perceived by the public. I've listened to classical music all my life. I know when something is good.
> 
> I'm not really familiar with what you call contemporary classical music, but I don't believe Classical 96.3 FM plays such music.
> 
> An example of what I consider to be a great classical piece (by a living composer) is Karl Jenkins' Palladio. I also love anything by Vivaldi.
> 
> If you're right, I'll just have to learn the hard way. I'm quite set on the direction I want to take now and you've been very helpful in my process of figuring it out.


I stopped using soundcloud some time ago and have been meaning to put my music on some other service, including YouTube, but life got in the way, due to having another person in my care for a year, as well as some health issues that are finally getting resolved.

The plan is to get both my website music back up by December, but if I'm in the talks of scoring a project I can't yet talk about, and if I get it ... May take a bit longer, perhaps January.

Send me a DM with your e-mail and I'll e-mail you some pieces I've made in different styles.

And of course, I've only listened to 42 seconds of what I assume is just an arrangement of a larger and longer piece. And, well, you know when _you _think something is good.

And often, we're not that great at judging our own works. For example, I frequently see composers devalue themselves by stating "but I'm not [insert famous composer]". But, I also see the opposite: a lot of people assume their music is a lot more special than it is.

Ultimately, there's a lot of music out there. Chances are any melody or chord progression you come up with will already be used in a lot of other things. So, to stand out, you need to develop your own style. What I heard when I listened to the above piece was stock music. Music intended to be replaced, or music intended to stand out as little as possible.

Is that a bad thing? No. And the part writing itself wasn't bad by any means. That I want to be clear about. What I heard did not sound bad by any means. It sounded quite good, as you yourself say. However, it doesn't stand out, and comes off as very average.

I just threw together quick little short tune and arranged it for strings. I'm attaching it to the this post. This uses a very cliché Hollywood structure and chord progression (except for the cadence) just to illustrate what I mean.

It's an immediately familiar sound and that can be a good thing, but also means it's very generic. The piece I'm posting is, in my opinion, far more generic than yours (hence the title, I wanted it to be as cliche as possible), but I hope it illustrates my point.

I didn't do any real mixing or mastering, aside from adding a tail to blend the sound a bit and correcting some of the midi CC., so expect the sound to be a bit harsh in places.


----------



## Willowtree

mducharme said:


> Jenkins' Palladio is OK, but cliche. Vivaldi is good but overplayed, especially The Four Seasons.
> 
> I think your Serenade is not bad (and I've heard a lot of very bad stuff), but it is not anywhere near as strong as you think it is. Even if it was played by a string orchestra and well produced (even by a top producer), I don't think you would get anywhere with it, certainly not a big audience. It would require a lot of rewrites in which case it would become a very different piece before it would get anywhere near that stage.
> 
> This "I know my stuff is fantastic and would be a hit" kind of thinking is the trap that you can easily fall into if you have had nothing but people telling you how wonderful your stuff is (as almost every reasonably good composer has experienced). Especially those who don't compose - they are so amazed by anything written by someone who does, especially by someone they know personally, that you can't count on them for honest and blunt feedback. They'll just tell you it is wonderful and this leads to an inflated sense of your own abilities.


I grew up on a lot of Bach and Vivaldi (my father regularly performed their music), and I've been told it shows in music, which is a shame since I'd rather be compared to Ravel or Fauré than Bach (slight sarcasm, but there's truth to this statement). 

Anyhow, this is very much true. All of it, but especially the last piece of advice. My youngest sister did not opt for a music career and rarely makes music anymore, but is a natural and a musical genius who could play better as a child than I can as an adult, and who has ears for music well beyond my own.

You'd think her advice would be useful but it's not, because anything I make will impress her because I'm her little sister.

This is why I actually very rarely share my music with my family or friends. Though, amusingly, one time I was visiting my boyfriend's parents, and his mother pulls me aside and gives me this in-depth criticism of my music. I was speechless.


----------



## Eric G

theaviv said:


> Thank you @Willowtree. I really appreciate your offer and your detailed well-written responses throughout this thread. I'll definitely keep it in mind.
> 
> Do you have a SoundCloud or YouTube channel?
> 
> The piece is not in its final form. I'm hesitant to agree with you on how you think it would be perceived by the public. I've listened to classical music all my life. I know when something is good.
> 
> I'm not really familiar with what you call contemporary classical music, but I don't believe Classical 96.3 FM plays such music.
> 
> An example of what I consider to be a great classical piece (by a living composer) is Karl Jenkins' Palladio. I also love anything by Vivaldi.
> 
> If you're right, I'll just have to learn the hard way. I'm quite set on the direction I want to take now and you've been very helpful in my process of figuring it out.



My advise is simple. Your journey is YOUR JOURNEY. Along the way you are going to have OPINIONS from everyone you ask. Although their advise is well meaning, it based on their JOURNEY. Don't let that dampen your enthusiasm (doesn't look like it will) because you are going to need it to help you along the way when you start learning your HARD LESSONS. An they will be HARD. 

So best of luck, plenty of good folks here to give you ADVISE and thier OPINION. Take what you need and get on with it.


----------



## Willowtree

Eric G said:


> My advise is simple. Your journey is YOUR JOURNEY. Along the way you are going to have OPINIONS from everyone you ask. Although their advise is well meaning, it based on their JOURNEY. Don't let that dampen your enthusiasm (doesn't look like it will) because you are going to need it to help you along the way when you start learning your HARD LESSONS. An they will be HARD.
> 
> So best of luck, plenty of good folks here to give you ADVISE and thier OPINION. Take what you need and get on with it.


Thank you for posting this, Eric. It's so easy to get caught up in our own experiences at time, we forget that they're neither objective nor true for everyone.


----------



## Bollen

theaviv said:


> I'm an aspiring composer. I love classical music. I've been using MuseScore on Ubuntu. Here's a piece I composed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good playback is important to me, and I am considering getting
> 
> (1) a Mac (I refuse to use Windows, which is why I use Ubuntu)
> (2) Sibelius subscription (which cannot run on Ubuntu)
> (3) NotePerformer (which cannot run on MuseScore)
> 
> I know Sibelius in combination with NotePerformer will give me very good playback, but are there any other options you would recommend?
> 
> I am also wondering how I could go about creating a better mockup than the Sibelius and NotePerformer combo? Is it possible to create a mockup that is comparable to or even better than what a live orchestra can record?
> 
> I understand I have 3 options when it comes to mockups:
> 
> (1) NotePerformer (with Sibelius or another compatible scorewriter)
> (2) learn how to do the painstaking work on a DAW
> (3) hire a pro to the painstaking work of creating the best possible mockup
> 
> Is it possible to export a MIDI (from Sibelius or another compatible scorewriter) with NotePerformer's interpretation? I figure it would then be possible to import the MIDI into a DAW and use a better sound library to create a better mockup.
> 
> Would I have any use for EastWest's ComposerCloud, Vienna Symphonic Library, or Overture 5?
> 
> What would you advise an aspiring composer who is currently using MuseScore on Ubuntu and is concerned with very good playback and sharing very good mockups?




Speaking as someone (also on Ubuntu!) who started quite, quite late and "made" it in several fields of composition: arranging/orchestrating (nice gig, but not thoroughly creative), media (hated it), film (hated it) and now just writing "classical" (loving every single second of my life!) I suggest, unless you are very rich, to start with these three things:

- Dorico
- Kontakt
- And a Windows machine, because you're going to need the money!

For over a year now I've been using Dorico for all my mockups and I've stopped using my DAW, except for the occasional mixing/mastering. It provides all the tools you need for creating expressive music and leaves you with a great professional looking score! It also has plenty of humanising setting which help a lot!

Kontakt is a good place to start because it comes with a half-decent library of instruments already and if you can make those sound realistic, then the top libraries will be a breeze. EW sucks!

A Windows machine (no matter how objectionable you find them) will cost you a fraction of the money better spent in other areas such as higher end libraries and useful software like Vienna Ensemble Pro.

As a classical composer you won't need Hollywood level mockups (not that Hollywood uses mockups anyway), but you will need to show your work/demos to musicians, conductors and producers. So even though the production quality won't need to be so high, the demos will need to reflect _your _vision i.e. a good musical performance where the instruments phrase, where the tempo varies, etc.

Finally, enthusiasm is the key! If you don't believe in yourself then it's unlikely anyone else (barring your family and friends) will! I, for one, wonder how many people actually quit just before their opportunity came along...? And as my Dad used to say: it's better to die trying than to never have tried at all...


----------



## theaviv

mducharme said:


> Jenkins' Palladio is OK, but cliche.



It's my favourite classical piece - and trust me, I've listened to all of them. I love it even more than anything Beethoven or Mozart composed. It's passion, it's obsession, it's perfection.

I did a search for Palladio on YouTube and clicked on the top video.

Here are some of the comments I found:

"I need more classical music like this. It has a sense of calmness yet is still energetic and dramatic. Magnificent."

"I turned the radio on in the car and came across this piece of music it was so awesome I got to my destination but parked up and waited to find out who it is. Thank you for sharing this  Love your video too absolutely perfect for the music "

"Thanks a lot for your comment Lynne, it was almost the same story for me. I came across this piece when I was in a museum in Germany and this fantastic piece suddenly came on the museum's playlist. I was immediately hooked."

"Same for me today. I was listening to classic fm and the sound system in my car is fantastic so I turned it up...wow. I know it has been over played on tv add`s etc but I think it is my new favourite classical tune."

"Ah I love this song so much!! There's just something about it, what a wonderful piece. This is definitely one of those songs I could listen to over an over."

"Just listened to it in music class today for the first time...I love it!!!"

"started listening to this because my class is playing it in orchestra but then i grew to really like it"

"The end gives me goosebumps every time"

"I just love this song so much that I HAD to ask my ballet teacher for this. I first couldn't find it but I'm soooo happy that I have found it!!!! Now I can use this music for warming up home too ))))"

"Wow,,,,What a niece piece ,,,Wow,,,,Superb"

"I agree, it's one of those pieces that when one listens to doesn't easily stop "

"I know better than to read comments, yet some say this is not classical music, it is alchemy, same 12 notes many octaves, yet music by definition has an ease to the ear. I defy anyone to not admit this. How about imagine writing this yourself, sillies, then appreciate the genius this is. Pure spirit."

This is the video I pulled the comments from:


----------



## Bollen

theaviv said:


> It's my favourite classical piece - and trust me, I've listened to all of them. I love it even more than anything Beethoven or Mozart composed. It's passion, it's obsession, it's perfection.
> 
> I did a search for Palladio on YouTube and clicked on the top video.
> 
> Here are some of the comments I found:
> 
> "I need more classical music like this. It has a sense of calmness yet is still energetic and dramatic. Magnificent."
> 
> "I turned the radio on in the car and came across this piece of music it was so awesome I got to my destination but parked up and waited to find out who it is. Thank you for sharing this  Love your video too absolutely perfect for the music "
> 
> "Thanks a lot for your comment Lynne, it was almost the same story for me. I came across this piece when I was in a museum in Germany and this fantastic piece suddenly came on the museum's playlist. I was immediately hooked."
> 
> "Same for me today. I was listening to classic fm and the sound system in my car is fantastic so I turned it up...wow. I know it has been over played on tv add`s etc but I think it is my new favourite classical tune."
> 
> "Ah I love this song so much!! There's just something about it, what a wonderful piece. This is definitely one of those songs I could listen to over an over."
> 
> "Just listened to it in music class today for the first time...I love it!!!"
> 
> "started listening to this because my class is playing it in orchestra but then i grew to really like it"
> 
> "The end gives me goosebumps every time"
> 
> "I just love this song so much that I HAD to ask my ballet teacher for this. I first couldn't find it but I'm soooo happy that I have found it!!!! Now I can use this music for warming up home too ))))"
> 
> "Wow,,,,What a niece piece ,,,Wow,,,,Superb"
> 
> "I agree, it's one of those pieces that when one listens to doesn't easily stop "
> 
> "I know better than to read comments, yet some say this is not classical music, it is alchemy, same 12 notes many octaves, yet music by definition has an ease to the ear. I defy anyone to not admit this. How about imagine writing this yourself, sillies, then appreciate the genius this is. Pure spirit."
> 
> This is the video I pulled the comments from:



However, just to give you another perspective:

_"Not sure I'm liking it that much. Some repetitions (along with the performance like in the harp piece) seem almost like film music. Very smooth but I'm not sure how deep. 

I'm going to sing the Armed Man this spring. And this music is to me unoriginal and boring. Nothing exciting about it! This guy should stick to film score or pop music. 

Err... I'm not sure that this should be classed as 'classical' or 'art music'. It might use orchestral instruments, but the rest of it kind of disqualifies the music :/ To me, it just sounds like an orchestrator's arrangement of some tunes that an aspiring 15-year-old musician weaved on a piano in 10 minutes. In all honesty, listening to the Dies Irae from his 'Requiem' (not provided in the OP), I both cringed and laughed. 

I also think it's quite indicative of this man's style that his Palladio was used in a performance by an electronic string quartet for Britain's Got Talent... 

The music struck me as amateurish in many ways... a pop musician taking a stab at the classical genre... far too "new age" in sound. I am open to music that bridges the gap between genre such as Osvaldo Golijov, William Bolcom, John Zorn, Anouar Brahem, and others... but Jenkins just didn't hit the mark in my book. 

I agree. It's all pretty dreadful as far as I am concerned. It's not classical music as I understand it. "_


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> It's my favourite classical piece - and trust me, I've listened to all of them. I love it even more than anything Beethoven or Mozart composed. It's passion, it's obsession, it's perfection.



I don't agree - that doesn't invalidate your opinion of course, but I just don't agree. Showing a bunch of comments from people who like it isn't going to make me change my mind. You may like it better than anything Beethoven or Mozart composed, and that's also fine, but it is certainly not in the same league as their works.


----------



## theaviv

Bollen said:


> However, just to give you another perspective:
> 
> _"Not sure I'm liking it that much. Some repetitions (along with the performance like in the harp piece) seem almost like film music. Very smooth but I'm not sure how deep.
> 
> I'm going to sing the Armed Man this spring. And this music is to me unoriginal and boring. Nothing exciting about it! This guy should stick to film score or pop music.
> 
> Err... I'm not sure that this should be classed as 'classical' or 'art music'. It might use orchestral instruments, but the rest of it kind of disqualifies the music :/ To me, it just sounds like an orchestrator's arrangement of some tunes that an aspiring 15-year-old musician weaved on a piano in 10 minutes. In all honesty, listening to the Dies Irae from his 'Requiem' (not provided in the OP), I both cringed and laughed.
> 
> I also think it's quite indicative of this man's style that his Palladio was used in a performance by an electronic string quartet for Britain's Got Talent...
> 
> The music struck me as amateurish in many ways... a pop musician taking a stab at the classical genre... far too "new age" in sound. I am open to music that bridges the gap between genre such as Osvaldo Golijov, William Bolcom, John Zorn, Anouar Brahem, and others... but Jenkins just didn't hit the mark in my book.
> 
> I agree. It's all pretty dreadful as far as I am concerned. It's not classical music as I understand it. "_



Gotta find your audience, I guess.

Not everybody likes Taylor Swift either, but you can't deny she's one of the most successful music artists in history.

Likewise, "Karl Jenkins is one of the most performed living composers in the world" - and something tells me it's mostly because of Palladio.


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> It's my favourite classical piece - and trust me, I've listened to all of them. I love it even more than anything Beethoven or Mozart composed. It's passion, it's obsession, it's perfection.


Those are fancy buzz words oozing with affect. Jenkins is a fine composer and makes catchy pieces, not surprising since he's a former jingle writer. But I would hardly call Jenkins' 
music representative of contemporary classical music. It has far more in common with new age if anything.

It's catchy music with its roots in rock, jazz, pop and jingles. Does that somehow mean it has less merit? No, of course not. But to compare Palladio to Beethoven and Mozart is a bit silly. It has far more in common with pop and advertisement music (in fact, that was the piece's original purpose: advertisement) than it does with classical music.

And there's nothing wrong with liking that, but let's not get the two confused. @mducharme also made very valid points above.



theaviv said:


> Gotta find your audience, I guess.
> 
> Not everybody likes Taylor Swift either, but you can't deny she's one of the most successful music artists in history.
> 
> Likewise, "Karl Jenkins is one of the most performed living composers in the world" - and something tells me it's mostly because of Palladio.


Actually, he was an active musician all the way back in the 70s, as a rock musician, rising to prominence as a jingle writer in the 80s. Outside of advertisement, he didn't become all that big until a decade and a half ago, with his new age project Adiemus.

I don't think Palladio has much to do with his success at all. Adiemus is his big work. He was successful by current standards as early as the 80s, though.


----------



## Willowtree

I do want to add that with the statement "to compare Palladio to Beethoven and Mozart is a bit silly" I'm not talking about some sort of "merit" or saying "it can't compare to the greatness of those ol' composers!"

What I'm saying is, Palladio was borne from advertisement in the 90s, draws from a very different style than anything Beethoven or Mozart made.

Then again, based on that statement one could argue it has at least a little in common with Mozart.

My point is, they're so far apart and should be applauded for their own merits, not compared to each other like ... Apples and oranges, if you forgive the expression.


----------



## mducharme

Mozart and Beethoven's music is undoubtedly in a different league than film composers I love, such as Jerry Goldsmith, James Horner, and John Williams. However, I find that I listen to more Goldsmith/Horner/Williams than I do Mozart/Beethoven. Often I just like to listen to pieces that I enjoy, even though they aren't really "masterworks" in comparison. I think that's the case with a lot of people.


----------



## Bollen

theaviv said:


> Gotta find your audience, I guess.
> 
> Not everybody likes Taylor Swift either, but you can't deny she's one of the most successful music artists in history.
> 
> Likewise, "Karl Jenkins is one of the most performed living composers in the world" - and something tells me it's mostly because of Palladio.


Depends what you mean by success...


----------



## Willowtree

Bollen said:


> Depends what you mean by success...


Success is found within and is personal. Moat other definitions, particularly material ones or those related to popularity, will only lead to emptiness.

And that concludes philosophy 101.

Though indeed, if you define success by material gain or popularity, you will likely be left empty.


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> But I would hardly call Jenkins' music representative of contemporary classical music. It has far more in common with new age if anything.



What music would you say is representative of contemporary classical music?

To be honest, Palladio is the only piece I like by Jenkins. I can't find any other piece by him that I like.



Willowtree said:


> But to compare Palladio to Beethoven and Mozart is a bit silly. It has far more in common with pop and advertisement music (in fact, that was the piece's original purpose: advertisement) than it does with classical music.



Well, if you google "palladio genre", a big infobox appears with the word "Classical" in large font. Besides, to my ears, it sounds classical.

Again, here are some comments left by the general public on YouTube:

"So amazingly beautiful ! Reminds me a little bit Vivaldi. Paintings perfectly matching the music."

"For the longest time, I assumed this piece was Vivaldi. Only learned about Jenkins a few years ago. What a talent!"

"Amazing like "Vivaldi" ore "rondo veniziano".... Thanks for uploading."

"When I originally heard this piece I thought I was listening to something comoosed by a contemporary of Vivaldi (1678-1741) and Albinoni(1671-1750),not a composer born in 1944.."

"Vivaldi, Albinoni and Pachelbel would be honored!"

Agree or disagree, this is at least how some classical fans perceive it.


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> Though indeed, if you define success by material gain or popularity, you will likely be left empty.



To me, success is when your audience can feel what you feel.

Taylor Swift has millions of fans feel what she feels through her music.

You will be left empty if your audience never understands your work. You may not want to believe it, but art is a social thing by nature. If you only create art for yourself, you will never reach your full potential. Magic happens when you have an audience to create for, even if it's just one person. God created everyone because he wanted an audience.


----------



## Bollen

theaviv said:


> To me, success is when your audience can feel what you feel.
> 
> Taylor Swift has millions of fans feel what she feels through her music.
> 
> You will be left empty if your audience never understands your work. You may not want to believe it, but art is a social thing by nature. If you only create art for yourself, you will never reach your full potential. Magic happens when you have an audience to create for, even if it's just one person. God created everyone because he wanted an audience.


Ah! Well that's very commendable too! 

When I decided to become a "classical" composer I made an agreement with myself that I would only write for a future that might never be... And certainly one I would never see. Musicians commission all the time, I'm flattered that they want my music, but they do this every season. My music might never be played again, ever! I might disappear into history just like everyone or become immortal like the "greats"! To up my chances I haven't relied on just my " talent" nor my over-education (as some of my colleagues say), but also on listening to Boulez and Stockhausen (despite hating their music) to the point I had it memorised note by note. And also the minimalist and over-complexity types, so that I could make sure my ear and musical brain was up to date. So that even if I try to write like my heroes, my influence would be so much broader than them, I would be force to write like ME. A creature living in the 21st century that might love Debussy, but has heard everything that happened in the 20th century and beyond...

It's almost like being a monk...


----------



## Willowtree

This ended up a particularly lengthy post, so apologies for that.



theaviv said:


> What music would you say is representative of contemporary classical music?
> 
> To be honest, Palladio is the only piece I like by Jenkins. I can't find any other piece by him that I like.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, if you google "palladio genre", a big infobox appears with the word "Classical" in large font. Besides, to my ears, it sounds classical.


Before we get further into arguing semantics, I want to make it clear my statement that Palladio is less contemporary classical is my own viewpoint, and I'm sure some will disagree. A curious thing you'll see when you read the comments is several others make statements similar to mine, and several others make statements that directly contradict mine.

Anyhow, to me, much of the contemporary classical music I'm surrounded by is technically complex, not very catchy, and requires a very good understanding of music to be fully enjoyed. On the other hand, Palladio could be enjoyed by anyone regardless of musical knowledge.

In other words, contemporary classical music tends to be made for composers by composers, whereas music such as Palladio is made for the general population.

I suppose it's a matter of where the music comes from, to me. A lot of music today (Palladio is an example) draws a lot more from popular music and folk music than it does from classical music of the past.

We also have our backgrounds. I use the term the way it's been used by my mentors, teachers and people around me. I care little for what random people on the internet think about the term as long as we're able to communicate. That's the important part. So, when we say classical, you and I may mean different things. Just want to clear that up. We may be using the same term to talk about very different things. 

Again, it's easy to come off as a bit arrogant with an "I'm in the right!" attitude online, but that's not my intention at all, so apologies if it's come off that way. I have great respect for your generally pleasant behaviour in this thread, so thank you for that.

Anyhow, this is getting lengthy. Check these out:

_Oresteia _by Iannis Xenakis (1966)
_Kontra-punkte_ by Karlheinz Stockhausen (1953)
_I Fall_ by Eric Whitacre (2017)
I particularly recommend I Fall.



theaviv said:


> To me, success is when your audience can feel what you feel.
> 
> Taylor Swift has millions of fans feel what she feels through her music.
> 
> You will be left empty if your audience never understands your work. You may not want to believe it, but art is a social thing by nature. If you only create art for yourself, you will never reach your full potential. Magic happens when you have an audience to create for, even if it's just one person. God created everyone because he wanted an audience.


I don't share your definition of success, and I often make music that I know will make others feel very differently than me. If my music makes people feel the way I want it to make them feel, I've succeeded regardless of how I feel.

Additionally, we don't know how Taylor Swift feels. Chances are, she doesn't feel anything remotely resembling what her fans does. Or maybe she does. Who knows! 

I don't require my audience to understand my work, I require the client to be pleased and I require my music to augment my client's work. If I'm making music for my own projects, I require it to make me pleased, which in extent will likely make my audience pleased.

That's just my perspective though, and if your definition of success _works for you_, that's great and that's the important part. If mine doesn't work for you, discard it and stick to your own definition.  And thank you for sharing your definition even if I don't share that viewpoint.



Bollen said:


> It's almost like being a monk...


Speaking as someone who once considered becoming a Buddhist nun (it's a long story), I feel that this sentence was surprisingly accurate to what it's like working with music these days. :')


----------



## mducharme

I agree with the above, but also have a slightly different view. Contemporary classical music is most often meant to challenge the listener - it may cause them to ask fundamental questions like what is and what is not music. Composers often use program notes to help bring the listener to the halfway point, or giving a good explanation for what the audience should expect, but they should come the rest of the way. Some of it is more challenging than others - obviously the Whitacre is erring towards "universally accessible" in contemporary classical, but he is still part of the contemporary classical camp.

If you look at something like film music or pop music, it has very different requirements. It has to be immediately accessible to basically everybody. With pop music people will change the track if they don't like it early on, film music if you do stuff that is too weird the emotions can become jumbled in the cue. So in both cases you need a much more direct and accessible approach. And there is nothing wrong with that.

With contemporary classical music, there is a saying "writing down to the audience", meaning "I know I can write much better music than this, but I am writing much much simpler than usual so as to not challenge the listener in any regard and simply please them". Although there is nothing fundamentally wrong with wanting to please people, classical composers generally haven't been concerned with pleasing the audience as the first and foremost duty since Mozart's times. The other more crass way of saying this to an audience (nobody would actually say it this way) would be "You are too uncultured to understand my music, so I am going to write stupid simple stuff that I hate writing and is beneath me so that your brains can understand it without being challenged, even though I am capable of more." Since contemporary classical music generally implies that "challenge the listener" approach to some degree, the approach of "writing down to the audience" is fundamentally incompatible.

Many or most contemporary classical composers feel like they are wasting their abilities if they deliberately make their music worse (in their own view) to make it more palatable to the masses (by being unchallenging). Jenkins writes down to the audience and makes a lot of money from it.


----------



## mducharme

An analogy in fine arts - suppose artists never went in the direction of things like cubism, surrealism, impressionism etc. because they thought they thought they would be too weird for people who just wanted to look at realistic portrait paintings, and "painted down" to the masses who would view them. Imagine how much great art would have never existed.


----------



## Willowtree

mducharme said:


> I agree with the above, but also have a slightly different view. Contemporary classical music is most often meant to challenge the listener - it may cause them to ask fundamental questions like what is and what is not music.


This is true, my statement that contemporary classical music was by composers for composers was by far too generalised. And indeed, one doesn't need to be a composer to enjoy it (I had a brilliant mentor once who'd never consider himself a composer, merely an analyst, performer and occasional arranger).




mducharme said:


> obviously the Whitacre is erring towards "universally accessible" in contemporary classical, but he is still part of the contemporary classical camp.


Quite true. One can of course compare Xenakis' choirs to Whitacre and it's no contest. Whitacre may be more accessible, and he's a brilliant composer in his own right. But Xenakis was a musical genius and his music indeed challenged a younger me's understanding of music and caused me to reevaluate what music is.



mducharme said:


> film music if you do stuff that is too weird the emotions can become jumbled in the cue.


Everything you said is true, but I'd like to add that (for example) Lord of the Rings has a lot of elements most would consider unfamiliar, but it's executed so well it serves to enhance the otherworldliness of the films. Despite that, you can tell what stuck with audiences. You don't see the general audience talking about the use of the Piccolo as a signifier for the alluring power of the Ring. They talk about how "epic" the Moria sequence is, or how pleasant the Concerning Hobbits tune is.

But even then, it's highly unusual for a film score. The Moria sequence uses very unusual orchestration and instrumentation (8 Trumpets, for example), and despite the pleasant sound, Concerning Hobbits is quite dissonant.

Point is, @theaviv, you can do unusual things in music for media, but the more blockbuster something gets, the more "AAA" something gets, as a general rule, it gets more consonant, the chord progressions become simpler, and the orchestration more typical.

Not sure if mducharme agrees with this, but either way I'm interested to hear his further viewpoint, should he share it.



mducharme said:


> Jenkins writes down to the audience and makes a lot of money from it.


Often, I feel that writing down to the audience is a skill of its own.



mducharme said:


> An analogy in fine arts - suppose artists never went in the direction of things like cubism, surrealism, impressionism etc. because they thought they thought they would be too weird for people who just wanted to look at realistic portrait paintings, and "painted down" to the masses who would view them. Imagine how much great art would have never existed.


Quite true. More on that, there does seem to be almost two camps of composers: those of us who view it as an art worthy of study and analysis, and those who are simply using it as a tool, with an analysis or study being incidental and only practical.

An analogy to this would perhaps be that some of us are (in how we conceptualise ourselves) artists, and some of us are craftsmen. I suspect most of us participating in this thread belong to the former category, but I'm inclined to view it as a bit of an (imaginary) spectrum between art and craft.


----------



## mducharme

Willowtree said:


> Often, I feel that writing down to the audience is a skill of its own.



Oh absolutely. With film work I find the hardest thing is getting the theme right. It is such a tricky balance - if the theme is too simple it is not unique and identifiable enough, but if it is too complicated you get into the situation where now it is becoming unique but less catchy, too convoluted. Building the theme entirely on a good motif and having an identifiable head motif is so critical. There is a sweet spot in between where often it feels like 5 notes are too many, 4 notes are not enough etc. It really takes a lot of practice and work to finesse a theme to make it really stand out and be catchy.

I compose both contemporary classical and film music, and so I really have two styles that are quite different. I approach both in a fundamentally different way. Although music need not be designed to communicate emotion and may be more intellectual and abstract in that sense (which is also valid), contemporary classical music often (to me) excels at communicating dark emotions (anger, fear, etc) but rarely communicates more "happy" emotions. I start getting depressed if I listen to (or compose) nothing but dark sounding contemporary classical all the time. Listening to and writing film music gives me a bit of a break, being able to write something happy or beautiful for a change.


----------



## Willowtree

mducharme said:


> Oh absolutely. With film work I find the hardest thing is getting the theme right. It is such a tricky balance - if the theme is too simple it is not unique and identifiable enough, but if it is too complicated you get into the situation where now it is becoming unique but less catchy, too convoluted. Building the theme entirely on a good motif and having an identifiable head motif is so critical. There is a sweet spot in between where often it feels like 5 notes are too many, 4 notes are not enough etc. It really takes a lot of practice and work to finesse a theme to make it really stand out and be catchy.
> 
> I compose both contemporary classical and film music, and so I really have two styles that are quite different. I approach both in a fundamentally different way. Although music need not be designed to communicate emotion and may be more intellectual and abstract in that sense (which is also valid), contemporary classical music often (to me) excels at communicating dark emotions (anger, fear, etc) but rarely communicates more "happy" emotions. I start getting depressed if I listen to (or compose) nothing but dark sounding contemporary classical all the time. Listening to and writing film music gives me a bit of a break, being able to write something happy or beautiful for a change.


Outside of my personal projects, most of my paid composition work has been in creating themes for various characters or cues for board game groups (which pays about as well as you'd expect) and some cues for smaller video games. Otherwise, I've mostly worked as an arranger or consultant for composers.

My experience in composing for film is therefore not only limited, but thus far nonexistent, unless you count some student short films. I'm too young and haven't been in this industry professionally long enough for that (or, that is what I tell myself at the very least).

Thus, most of my perspectives on film music comes from mentors, teachers and friends (as well as intense study of film scores). This is very valuable insight, thank you. I've been in the talks of scoring an art film in France (I don't speak French, but I'm friends with the director), and while that's certainly a different audience, this is very useful, thank you.

I no longer compose contemporary classical unless I know that it's going to be performed. Sampling hasn't gotten to the degree of realism that I feel it's worth the effort.


----------



## CT

mducharme said:


> contemporary classical music often (to me) excels at communicating dark emotions (anger, fear, etc) but rarely communicates more "happy" emotions.



Sorry to push into this conversation, but that got me thinking.

Does contemporary classical music rarely communicate more happy emotions, or does it do that almost as often, only for those pieces to be frequently written off as conservative/accessible and thus not fit to be categorized with "serious" contemporary classical music in the first place? 

Even outside of media music, I think there are plenty of modern composers who quite successfully say things on the more positive end of the emotional spectrum. The thorny, anguished sound of many composers from the latter half of the 20th century is the product of their time and place. I always think of Steve Reich talking about how absurd it would feel to write like someone who was living in war-torn Europe while actually living in the world of a million burgers sold. 

Not to say that those of us here and now have nothing dark to communicate as well, but I think that's an important way to understand the "softening" of musical language in recent decades, and to accept its validity. It can still be done poorly, like anything else, but when done right, it's just as worthy of admiration as anything by whichever master from the distant past you wish to name.

...not sure what my point was. Over and out.


----------



## mducharme

miket said:


> Does contemporary classical music rarely communicate more happy emotions, or does it do that almost as often, only for those pieces to be frequently written off as conservative/accessible and thus not fit to be categorized with "serious" contemporary classical music in the first place?



In some cases I believe that happens to some extent, yes (being written off as conservative).

However, I think where the real problem comes in is, when you are writing in a more accessible style, there is this temptation or trap to fall into where you start writing in a 1900's or 1800's (or 1700's or 1600's) style, or some combination of those (as I believe Jenkins does in Palladio), seemingly completely ignoring everything that happened in the 20th and 21st centuries, almost pretending they did not exist. Copying an antiquated style wholesale is not really very innovative like contemporary classical is supposed to be - it is instead anachronistic, just writing a piece a few hundred years out of time. So if you are dealing with more tonal materials, you face the challenge of how to reflect modern times and accept the music of the 20th (and 21st) century and be innovative in some way while still being fundamentally tonal. Reich does that with his rhythms and evolving patterns (which were slightly influenced by much older Perotin and Leonin style Notre Dame organum from medieval times), Whitacre does it with his diatonic clusters. But it is more difficult to pull off successfully (vs simply writing "darker" stuff) because we have the baggage of common practice period music being dragged along with us that is subconsciously influencing us all the time, and tempting us to simply mimic it instead of creating something innovative. It is like you have this big trap in the ground, and some composers dance around it successfully without falling in, while others stay far away.


----------



## CT

Yes, I agree! I think that sums up the challenges facing any composer in 2019 very well.


----------



## Living Fossil

mducharme said:


> However, I think where the real problem comes in is, when you are writing in a more accessible style, there is this temptation or trap to fall into where you start writing in a 1900's or 1800's (or 1700's or 1600's) style, or some combination of those (as I believe Jenkins does in Palladio), seemingly completely ignoring everything that happened in the 20th and 21st centuries, almost pretending they did not exist.



Just to put things in place (while not disagreeing with you): 
There is an exact term for the category/genre that "Palladio" falls in:
It's called "Easy Listening"
The fact that it uses a traditional instrumentation and mimics some baroque stereotypes doesn't make it somehow "classical music".
Comparing it to Vivaldi (and similars) offers just blatant ignorance on the subject. But since i already mentioned the Dunning-Krueger effect, there is no more left to say in this thread. 
(i know, it wasn't you who made this stupid comparison)


----------



## Willowtree

mducharme said:


> In some cases I believe that happens to some extent, yes (being written off as conservative).
> 
> However, I think where the real problem comes in is, when you are writing in a more accessible style, there is this temptation or trap to fall into where you start writing in a 1900's or 1800's (or 1700's or 1600's) style, or some combination of those (as I believe Jenkins does in Palladio), seemingly completely ignoring everything that happened in the 20th and 21st centuries, almost pretending they did not exist. Copying an antiquated style wholesale is not really very innovative like contemporary classical is supposed to be - it is instead anachronistic, just writing a piece a few hundred years out of time. So if you are dealing with more tonal materials, you face the challenge of how to reflect modern times and accept the music of the 20th (and 21st) century and be innovative in some way while still being fundamentally tonal. Reich does that with his rhythms and evolving patterns (which were slightly influenced by much older Perotin and Leonin style Notre Dame organum from medieval times), Whitacre does it with his diatonic clusters. But it is more difficult to pull off successfully (vs simply writing "darker" stuff) because we have the baggage of common practice period music being dragged along with us that is subconsciously influencing us all the time, and tempting us to simply mimic it instead of creating something innovative. It is like you have this big trap in the ground, and some composers dance around it successfully without falling in, while others stay far away.


There's this irony when we see some using functional harmony in contemporary classical, perhaps a consequence of how music is sometimes taught, although I see it more in those claiming to be self-taught than in students.



miket said:


> Yes, I agree! I think that sums up the challenges facing any composer in 2019 very well.



I'm going to go a bit on a tangent here, but take a listen to a lot of the music in the first half of the 20th century. Schoenberg and his contemporaries did a lot to explore atonality, but even then a lot of composers were slow to embrace it (Schoenberg's "emancipation of the dissonance"). And let's not forget all the (often anti-Semitic) comments about how this signified the end of civilisation and beauty and all that.

Meanwhile, take a listen to a lot of the popular music of that era. It tends to be rather upbeat, happy, celebratory and very consonant.

I would argue that you could essentially split up music here into "post-modality" and post-tonality. Not necessarily distinct categories, but more of a spectrum. (yes, "post-modality" is a lousy and vague inaccurate term I just came up with, but let's set that aside)

"Post-modality" then deals with the modern development and exploration of modes, pentatonicism and non-tonal harmony. You could further group this into jazz and non-jazz. I'd argue film music, game music, trailer music, everything the general population is going to have presented to them ... It's heavily derived from this.

Post-tonality in this context I'm talking about the breakdown of functional harmony and tonality, and the eventual establishment of non-functional tonal harmony as well as the introductions of noise music and a lot of the abstract stuff we saw, for example, from Stockhausen with early electronics etc. This is where we get contemporary classical music from.

This isn't academic on any level and is just a personal observation. But there very well seems to be a clear distinction between these two, and they express emotions very differently. I would argue the emotions that can be evoked by "post-modality" are those we associate with cinema as well as popular music. Anger, grief, happiness, sadness. Things we can put into words.

The emotions then often evoked by post-tonality are far more complex, often difficult (if not impossible) to put into words, because we do not have words for them.


----------



## Willowtree

Living Fossil said:


> Just to put things in place (while not disagreeing with you):
> There is an exact term for the category/genre that "Palladio" falls in:
> It's called "Easy Listening"
> The fact that it uses a traditional instrumentation and mimics some baroque stereotypes doesn't make it somehow "classical music".
> Comparing it to Vivaldi (and similars) offers just blatant ignorance on the subject. But since i already mentioned the Dunning-Krueger effect, there is no more left to say in this thread.
> (i know, it wasn't you who made this stupid comparison)


Agreed. As I said previously, it's advertisement music. I think Jenkins on the whole is more of a new age composer than anything I'd call classical (nothing wrong with that), but Palladio ...

It's about as classical as pop songs using Pachelbel's Canon as a foundation.


----------



## CT

Willowtree said:


> I'm going to go a bit on a tangent here



That's fine, I enjoyed reading it! 

And again, I pretty much agree with what's been said, especially regarding the possibilities for greater emotional subtlety and shading that more complex harmony allows. That is certainly its appeal for me. 

Your way of classifying different strands of musical development seems as plausible as any other I've heard, as well.


----------



## AmbientMile

Wonderful thread! I wish more of this world could be this civil in their discussions.


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> Additionally, we don't know how Taylor Swift feels. Chances are, she doesn't feel anything remotely resembling what her fans does. Or maybe she does. Who knows!



We know what she feels. She makes a living out of making it public - through her music - and she does it so well, the whole world is entranced by her.

She writes from her life and experiences, which makes her a genuine artist - not a "craftswoman" like you might say:


Willowtree said:


> An analogy to this would perhaps be that some of us are (in how we conceptualise ourselves) artists, and some of us are craftsmen. I suspect most of us participating in this thread belong to the former category, but I'm inclined to view it as a bit of an (imaginary) spectrum between art and craft.




I don't think you even understood what I meant when I wrote:


theaviv said:


> To me, success is when your audience can feel what you feel.
> 
> Taylor Swift has millions of fans feel what she feels through her music.
> 
> You will be left empty if your audience never understands your work. You may not want to believe it, but art is a social thing by nature. If you only create art for yourself, you will never reach your full potential. Magic happens when you have an audience to create for, even if it's just one person. God created everyone because he wanted an audience.



Music (and art in general, but especially music) is all about expressing what you *feel* - and this is the fundamental point you all seem to be missing here.

Success as an artist means your audience was able to feel what you felt when you made your artwork (in this case, a piece of music).

When Beethoven wrote a piano sonata or a symphony, he was expressing what he was feeling (like *no* other composer before him) - for example, the exhilarating fury in his iconic 5th Symphony.

(Music forever changed after him. His death marks the beginning of a whole new era of classical music, the romantic one. There's a reason why Beethoven is the only composer who gets his own chapter in textbooks.)

When Beethoven presented his work - whether by publishing sheet music or putting a concert together - he hoped his audience would feel what he felt - and oh boy, did they ever!

And so, Beethoven's story is really a happy one (as expressed in his 9th and final symphony) - and to say he was successful is an understatement.

By the way, Beethoven loved catchy tunes. He was mad happy when he came up with his little tune, Ode to Joy. They say he was humming it all day and night for weeks.

Do you know why catchy music is catchy? Because it is true.

A catchy tune is a *true* abstraction of a particular feeling that is both personal and universal at the same time.

Catchy music catches people because they can't resist feeling what the composer is expressing. It's magic that's hardwired into us - our minds' innate ability to right away recognize an arrangement of sound as having meaning, a feeling, and to sync into that feeling.

It's a beautiful thing when it happens.

To me - and to just about everyone else in the world except you "cultural elites" - it's what makes music *good*.

It catches you effortlessly.



Living Fossil said:


> There is an exact term for the category/genre that "Palladio" falls in:
> It's called "Easy Listening"



No, it's called "Diamond Music" - because of its perfect abstraction of inhuman intensity and determination.

To hear such a perfect abstraction is like finding a diamond in the rough.

Like this lay YouTuber said:


theaviv said:


> "I know better than to read comments, yet some say this is not classical music, it is alchemy, same 12 notes many octaves, yet music by definition has an ease to the ear. I defy anyone to not admit this. How about imagine writing this yourself, sillies, then appreciate the genius this is. Pure spirit."






Willowtree said:


> I don't share your definition of success, and I often make music that I know will make others feel very differently than me. If my music makes people feel the way I want it to make them feel, I've succeeded regardless of how I feel.
> 
> Additionally, we don't know how Taylor Swift feels. Chances are, she doesn't feel anything remotely resembling what her fans does. Or maybe she does. Who knows!
> 
> I don't require my audience to understand my work, I require the client to be pleased and I require my music to augment my client's work. If I'm making music for my own projects, I require it to make me pleased, which in extent will likely make my audience pleased.
> 
> That's just my perspective though, and if your definition of success _works for you_, that's great and that's the important part. If mine doesn't work for you, discard it and stick to your own definition.  And thank you for sharing your definition even if I don't share that viewpoint.



Fair enough. In the end, success means you achieved your objective - and we all have different objectives.

P.S. As you can tell, Beethoven is my favourite composer.


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> Music (and art in general, but especially music) is all about expressing what you *feel* - and this is the fundamental point you all seem to be missing here.



Not all music is about expressing what you feel. Some music is more intellectually driven rather than emotionally, or more emotionally complex but not trying to communicate any particular singular emotion (as Willowtree has said in slightly different words). And before Beethoven there was no real concept of music expressing what the composer was feeling - music was just something separate from the feelings of the composer. And those are all valid approaches as well, and still result in music, and very often (I feel) it can be good music.



> Catchy music catches people because they can't resist feeling what the composer is expressing. It's magic that's hardwired into us - our minds' innate ability to right away recognize an arrangement of sound as having meaning, a feeling, and to sync into that feeling.
> 
> It's a beautiful thing when it happens.
> 
> To me - and to just about everyone else in the world except you "cultural elites" - it's what makes music *good*.
> 
> It catches you effortlessly.



Catchy music is not necessarily good, it is just easily digestible, and usually comprised of enough repeating motives that it gets stuck in your head (aka earworms). Some catchy music can be good, but not everything catchy is good. Sometimes really banal things can get stuck in peoples heads. A lot of music can be really really excellent but not catchy at all. So there is not really a strong correlation there.




> No, it's called "Diamond Music" - because of its perfect abstraction of inhuman intensity and determination.
> 
> To hear such a perfect abstraction is like finding a diamond in the rough.



No, he put it on an album called "Diamond Music" because he wrote it for a DeBeers diamond commercials that aired on TV for years, and they used that music that became the first movement of Palladio.


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> We know what she feels. She makes a living out of making it public - through her music - and she does it so well, the whole world is entranced by her.
> 
> She writes from her life and experiences, which makes her a genuine artist - not a "craftswoman" like you might say:


Now now, don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say she's a craftswoman, I merely said some seem to conceptualise themselves and their music as such (craft, rather than art). That's not a judgement call by me, but an observation of how some approach music.

I don't believe Taylor Swift's music makes me feel anything discernible, nor do I have a single clue what she feels based on her music.

That's just me, though. I'm not her audience.



theaviv said:


> I don't think you even understood what I meant when I wrote:


I believe I did, based on your elaboration. I merely don't share your viewpoint or philosophy.



theaviv said:


> Music (and art in general, but especially music) is all about expressing what you *feel* - and this is the fundamental point you all seem to be missing here.


I disagree with this. This is your belief. Your _opinion_. Not an objective fact. And we are all entitled to _opinions_. And I think it's great we are all arguing for ours, and of course you for yours.

But to claim I am missing a fundamental point because I disagree ... Perhaps, from your point of view, I do. But from my point of view, you are taking on an unnecessarily restrictive definition of art.




theaviv said:


> (Music forever changed after him. His death marks the beginning of a whole new era of classical music, the romantic one. There's a reason why Beethoven is the only composer who gets his own chapter in textbooks.)


Beethoven died about halfway through the romantic era, so this statement is rather erroneous.



theaviv said:


> By the way, Beethoven loved catchy tunes. He was mad happy when he came up with his little tune, Ode to Joy. They say he was humming it all day and night for weeks.


Did you spy on his chambers!? That's not very nice! 



theaviv said:


> Do you know why catchy music is catchy? Because it is true.
> 
> A catchy tune is a true abstraction of a particular feeling that is both personal and universal at the same time.
> 
> Catchy music catches people because they can't resist feeling what the composer is expressing. It's magic that's hardwired into us - our minds' innate ability to right away recognize an arrangement of sound as having meaning, a feeling, and to sync into that feeling.
> 
> It's a beautiful thing when it happens.


Absolute nonsense in my opinion, but thank you for sharing your perspective.



theaviv said:


> To me - and to just about everyone else in the world except you "cultural elites" - it's what makes music *good*.


Haha, I'm hardly a cultural elite, but thanks, I suppose? I spent last weekend listening to rap with my boyfriend and trying to get him to watch silly sitcoms. We then got drunk, and I listened to him rant about his farm and how he was worried about the solar panels something something.

I used to be one of those punk kids who ditched school and ranted about how capitalism sowes its seeds of its own destruction and that school was only there to socialise us into unquestioning slaves. (I was a very dramatic teenager).

With all due respect, I _don't_ think I'm a cultural elite. But, if I give the impression I am... Hey, I'll take it.



theaviv said:


> No, it's called "Diamond Music" - because of its perfect abstraction of inhuman intensity and determination.
> 
> To hear such a perfect abstraction like finding a diamond in the rough.


Sounds like a catchy title for a label.



theaviv said:


> Fair enough. In the end, success means you achieved your objective - and we all have different objectives.
> 
> P.S. As you can tell, Beethoven is my favourite composer.


I can tell! I don't share your enthusiasm, but I do fancy some of his later works. I'm much more keen on late 19th century and early 20th century music


----------



## David Cuny

theaviv said:


> Do you know why catchy music is catchy? Because it is true.
> 
> A catchy tune is a *true* abstraction of a particular feeling that is both personal and universal at the same time.
> 
> Catchy music catches people because they can't resist feeling what the composer is expressing. It's magic that's hardwired into us - our minds' innate ability to right away recognize an arrangement of sound as having meaning, a feeling, and to sync into that feeling.


That's a bit like saying that a hammer hitting someone's thumb is an abstraction of pain.

Music is more a _trigger_ for emotion than an abstraction of emotion.

Melodies are often arranged in forms that make them easy to remember - nested binary forms that combine the familiar with novel. They also often combine cadences of language - used in speech to mark meaning - that we'll respond to as if they were actually encoded with meaning.

But that doesn't mean that the music has any intrinsic meaning.

In fact, music can elicit strong emotional reaction and give the impression of meaning that are at odds with their lyrics. For example, a songs can sound happy - that is, be musically "encoded" to trigger positive emotions - yet have somber and depressing lyrics.

It's not clear why earwoms make us constantly hit the internal "replay" button, but it's probably keyed to the emotional response of the music along aligning with our memory encoding, with some sort of reward being triggered.

This article on why "Baby Shark" is so catchy is an interesting read.


----------



## Willowtree

David Cuny said:


> That's a bit like saying that a hammer hitting someone's thumb is an abstraction of pain.
> 
> Music is more a _trigger_ for emotion than an abstraction of emotion.
> 
> Melodies are often arranged in forms that make them easy to remember - nested binary forms that combine the familiar with novel. They also often combine cadences of language - used in speech to mark meaning - that we'll respond to as if they were actually encoded with meaning.
> 
> But that doesn't mean that the music has any intrinsic meaning.
> 
> In fact, music can elicit strong emotional reaction and give the impression of meaning that are at odds with their lyrics. For example, a songs can sound happy - that is, be musically "encoded" to trigger positive emotions - yet have somber and depressing lyrics.
> 
> It's not clear why earwoms make us constantly hit the internal "replay" button, but it's probably keyed to the emotional response of the music along aligning with our memory encoding, with some sort of reward being triggered.
> 
> This article on why "Baby Shark" is so catchy sugggests (among other things) is an interesting read.


To add to @David Cuny's already excellent commentary: While some elements of music do seem to have emotional responses independent of the listener's background, they're so dependent on other factors those elements can't predictably produce any one emotion. For example, music with high tempo is both associated with anger and joy. Slower tempo is associated with both sadness and peaceful calm.

And even then, the same music has been shown to produce emotions in listeners highly dependable on context. If you associate, say, steel pedal guitars with nostalgic memories of childhood, you will have a very different emotional experience listening to that instrument than someone who utterly hate the tone of it.


----------



## Willowtree

@theaviv And please, don't take any of my or anybody else's comments personal here. The music world (particularly when you come near anything orchestral) can be unrelenting, unfair and harsh. But no one here is trying to kill your enthusiasm, which you seem to have plenty of. And that's important.

Just bear in mind, none of us are as far as I can tell judging you or your tastes. We're just sharing our own viewpoints, offering guidance and advice as best we can (keep in mind I offered to go over your composition with you for free, something I would normally charge for).

We have good intentions.


----------



## rudi

Willowtree said:


> There's this irony when we see some using functional harmony in contemporary classical, perhaps a consequence of how music is sometimes taught, although I see it more in those claiming to be self-taught than in students.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to go a bit on a tangent here, but take a listen to a lot of the music in the first half of the 20th century. Schoenberg and his contemporaries did a lot to explore atonality, but even then a lot of composers were slow to embrace it (Schoenberg's "emancipation of the dissonance"). And let's not forget all the (often anti-Semitic) comments about how this signified the end of civilisation and beauty and all that.
> 
> Meanwhile, take a listen to a lot of the popular music of that era. It tends to be rather upbeat, happy, celebratory and very consonant.
> 
> I would argue that you could essentially split up music here into "post-modality" and post-tonality. Not necessarily distinct categories, but more of a spectrum. (yes, "post-modality" is a lousy and vague inaccurate term I just came up with, but let's set that aside)
> 
> "Post-modality" then deals with the modern development and exploration of modes, pentatonicism and non-tonal harmony. You could further group this into jazz and non-jazz. I'd argue film music, game music, trailer music, everything the general population is going to have presented to them ... It's heavily derived from this.
> 
> Post-tonality in this context I'm talking about the breakdown of functional harmony and tonality, and the eventual establishment of non-functional tonal harmony as well as the introductions of noise music and a lot of the abstract stuff we saw, for example, from Stockhausen with early electronics etc. This is where we get contemporary classical music from.
> 
> This isn't academic on any level and is just a personal observation. But there very well seems to be a clear distinction between these two, and they express emotions very differently. I would argue the emotions that can be evoked by "post-modality" are those we associate with cinema as well as popular music. Anger, grief, happiness, sadness. Things we can put into words.
> 
> The emotions then often evoked by post-tonality are far more complex, often difficult (if not impossible) to put into words, because we do not have words for them.


Great post!


----------



## rudi

mducharme said:


> No, he put it on an album called "Diamond Music" because he wrote it for a DeBeers diamond commercials that aired on TV for years, and they used that music that became the first movement of Palladio.



The first time I heard it was at the cinema for the said commercial... I remember thinking "that went by far too fast". It was years later that found out who wrote it


----------



## Bollen

I can't contribute to this thread as much as I'd like, due to time constraints, but I am carefully reading everyone's post!

I would just like to jump in on two things that bothered me: 

Contemporary music tends to be darker than happy... This is the very opposite of what contemporary music is! If anything contemporary music has a much broader pallette and far more sophisticated and nuanced depths than what I call wiggy music (music written in the era when people wore wigs). While it might be applicable to some post WWII European composers (and not all), Americans were certainly writing far more optimistic pieces. But even some of Xenakis' percussion pieces were very raw and many would say "happy" (awful term to describe something as sophisticated as music), they're like the epic drum solo at the end of a modern jazz gig. John Luther Adams Become Ocean is hardly "dark". I wouldn't want to try to define it, but it's certainly a shade of consciousness, a mood shall we say, that was never expressed in music from previous centuries. I could go on for hours, but just think of many themes in the Rite of Spring, Bartok's hilarious string quartets or his Concerto for orchestra or even Ligeti's Bagattelles!

The other thing was the idea that catchy is some sort of desirable trait... Oh dear! If you really think that, then advertisement is your only path. Not even pop music aims for that! Some of the worst music in history has been so-called "catchy": who like shorts, the monster dance, I scream, you scream, etc. My flatmate, who's a classical violinist, is always getting horrendous music stuck in her ear that she hates. I mostly get people's expressions stuck in my head, particularly colourful ones "dats bloody gut now innit?" GB, "I ain't got no lawd in my yard, y'all hear!" US, Etc. And others in other languages. Also, like many have said, it completely depends on your exposure, ears and ability to sing. I used to get be bop tunes stuck in my head, most atonal pieces I've composed and whenever I think of the Rite, there's two bits that always stick with me for a few days, the opening line being one.... People's brains get stuck on loops all the time, it's meaningless and certainly not worthy of being attributed to art.

I know I said only two, but to address @theaviv, making people feel what you feel with music is a pointless enterprise. People are more diverse and complex than all the music that has ever been written in history. You'd be lucky to find one person resonating with you on one moment of a piece, forget about a repertoire.


----------



## mducharme

As I already said, I feel music does not have to communicate emotion (and doesn't have to try) to be good music. However, since I compose film music as well I've thought a great deal about how music can communicate emotion (where that is the intent) and very specific emotions in some cases, and not come to any particularly solid conclusions (it is a complicated subject).

I think the best chance people have of making others feel (in a universal way) what they feel through music is through the voice. Certain vocal inflections are used for certain types of feelings or emotions that are pretty universal for all of humanity. I can think of a particularly potent example (the Karelian lament (or Finnish-Karelian lament)) in which the emotions expressed through the voice would be quite clear to basically any human being: 

Certain devices/progressions in film music (certain cliches, and in this case the word is not meant negatively) are associated with certain emotions, but it is a complicated question as to how much these associations are due to their use in other films for similar types of things, so that the brain begins to associate them, and how much these associations are for musical reasons. I think it is a bit of both in some or most cases, where wonderment can be expressed by having some kind of "pleasant surprise" chord that in the best of cases leads to ANS arousal (the tingling spine in listeners when that magical moment happens and the wonderous sight is revealed). But certainly these may not be universal for all humanity, for someone from a culture who has never heard any kind of tonal music probably would not be able to predict what would happen next in such a progression for the "surprise" to occur in the first place. So there is some assumption there of prior familiarity with the syntax of tonal progressions.


----------



## ism

David Cuny said:


> hammer hitting someone's thumb is an abstraction of pain.
> 
> Music is more a _trigger_ for e





Willowtree said:


> Now now, don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say she's a craftswoman, I merely said some seem to conceptualise themselves and their music as such (craft, rather than art). That's not a judgement call by me, but an observation of how some approach music.
> 
> I don't believe Taylor Swift's music makes me feel anything discernible, nor do I have a single clue what she feels based on her music.
> 
> That's just me, though. I'm not her audience.
> 
> 
> I believe I did, based on your elaboration. I merely don't share your viewpoint or philosophy.
> 
> 
> I disagree with this. This is your belief. Your _opinion_. Not an objective fact. And we are all entitled to _opinions_. And I think it's great we are all arguing for ours, and of course you for yours.
> 
> But to claim I am missing a fundamental point because I disagree ... Perhaps, from your point of view, I do. But from my point of view, you are taking on an unnecessarily restrictive definition of art.
> 
> 
> 
> Beethoven died about halfway through the romantic era, so this statement is rather erroneous.
> 
> 
> Did you spy on his chambers!? That's not very nice!
> 
> 
> Absolute nonsense in my opinion, but thank you for sharing your perspective.
> 
> 
> Haha, I'm hardly a cultural elite, but thanks, I suppose? I spent last weekend listening to rap with my boyfriend and trying to get him to watch silly sitcoms. We then got drunk, and I listened to him rant about his farm and how he was worried about the solar panels something something.
> 
> I used to be one of those punk kids who ditched school and ranted about how capitalism sowes its seeds of its own destruction and that school was only there to socialise us into unquestioning slaves. (I was a very dramatic teenager).
> 
> With all due respect, I _don't_ think I'm a cultural elite. But, if I give the impression I am... Hey, I'll take it.
> 
> 
> Sounds like a catchy title for a label.
> 
> 
> I can tell! I don't share your enthusiasm, but I do fancy some of his later works. I'm much more keen on late 19th century and early 20th century music




Eloquently argued.


----------



## Bollen

mducharme said:


> As I already said, I feel music does not have to communicate emotion (and doesn't have to try) to be good music. However, since I compose film music as well I've thought a great deal about how music can communicate emotion (where that is the intent) and very specific emotions in some cases, and not come to any particularly solid conclusions (it is a complicated subject).
> 
> I think the best chance people have of making others feel (in a universal way) what they feel through music is through the voice. Certain vocal inflections are used for certain types of feelings or emotions that are pretty universal for all of humanity. I can think of a particularly potent example (the Karelian lament (or Finnish-Karelian lament)) in which the emotions expressed through the voice would be quite clear to basically any human being:
> 
> Certain devices/progressions in film music (certain cliches, and in this case the word is not meant negatively) are associated with certain emotions, but it is a complicated question as to how much these associations are due to their use in other films for similar types of things, so that the brain begins to associate them, and how much these associations are for musical reasons. I think it is a bit of both in some or most cases, where wonderment can be expressed by having some kind of "pleasant surprise" chord that in the best of cases leads to ANS arousal (the tingling spine in listeners when that magical moment happens and the wonderous sight is revealed). But certainly these may not be universal for all humanity, for someone from a culture who has never heard any kind of tonal music probably would not be able to predict what would happen next in such a progression for the "surprise" to occur in the first place. So there is some assumption there of prior familiarity with the syntax of tonal progressions.



How fascinating! I had heard this type of singing many times in my life, but I had no idea it was actually a tradition!

Now, just be the devil's advocate, although I agree 100% that this particular case does have some general archetypes, the question remains: what is she lamenting? That she broke her favourite salt dispenser or a son to war? I confess I have in many occasions used the little downward pitch bend during the release of a note in order to emulate a type of weeping, but the response has been anything but universal... Some people find it funny, others cool, other tender... Empathy is a weird one and although film has tried its best to "Americanise" our sensibilities, there still remains a huge chasm even amongst westerner....


----------



## Geomir

Willowtree said:


> @theaviv And please, don't take any of my or anybody else's comments personal here. The music world (particularly when you come near anything orchestral) can be unrelenting, unfair and harsh. But no one here is trying to kill your enthusiasm, which you seem to have plenty of. And that's important.
> 
> Just bear in mind, none of us are as far as I can tell judging you or your tastes. We're just sharing our own viewpoints, offering guidance and advice as best we can (keep in mind I offered to go over your composition with you for free, something I would normally charge for).
> 
> We have good intentions.


I think the problem is to BALANCE between:
- Not being low confident, have low self-esteem, and be sure that you are going to fail and be eaten alive in this cruel world of music
- Not being overconfident, arrogant, and think that everyone is waiting to get ecstatic with your amazing compositions

This balance must be kept always. (Plus knowing the right people to help you and promote your music can always help)!


----------



## mducharme

Bollen said:


> Now, just be the devil's advocate, although I agree 100% that this particular case does have some general archetypes, the question remains: what is she lamenting? That she broke her favourite salt dispenser or a son to war? I confess I have in many occasions used the little downward pitch bend during the release of a note in order to emulate a type of weeping, but the response has been anything but universal... Some people find it funny, others cool, other tender... Empathy is a weird one and although film has tried its best to "Americanise" our sensibilities, there still remains a huge chasm even amongst westerner....



In this case I feel that it isn't so much the music itself that leads to the empathy. It is instead the iconic vocalization of crying, which I perceive as an authentic emotional response from another human being and it triggers an appropriate reaction in me. To me, it is completely different from music with a downward "sigh" that emulates that. The "sigh" as musical figure really is only partially iconic (a direct representation of that thing) -- it is certainly also partially symbolic (an abstract representation of that thing). Symbols bring in all sorts of cultural and personal baggage that lead to them being viewed differently than iconic or indexical references. When you abstract the "sigh" at least partially as a symbol by interpreting it musically, you may lose the intercultural meaning of pure icons or indexes. (Note that I am using terms from Pierce's semiotics theory, a good simple breakdown is shown at: https://vanseodesign.com/web-design/icon-index-symbol/)

Also please note that I don't necessarily view the Finnish-Karelian Lament as outstanding in a musical sense. I see it as a direct example of a musical form where the primary intent is to move the listener, and I feel that it accomplishes this in a cross cultural way. But, I would argue, it accomplishes this universal communication of emotion by means of tone-of-voice instead of specific musical techniques.


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> @theaviv And please, don't take any of my or anybody else's comments personal here. The music world (particularly when you come near anything orchestral) can be unrelenting, unfair and harsh. But no one here is trying to kill your enthusiasm, which you seem to have plenty of. And that's important.
> 
> Just bear in mind, none of us are as far as I can tell judging you or your tastes. We're just sharing our own viewpoints, offering guidance and advice as best we can (keep in mind I offered to go over your composition with you for free, something I would normally charge for).
> 
> We have good intentions.



No harsh feelings at all. I think we're having a very good discussion here and I appreciate it. I am learning from this.



David Cuny said:


> That's a bit like saying that a hammer hitting someone's thumb is an abstraction of pain.
> 
> Music is more a _trigger_ for emotion than an abstraction of emotion.
> 
> Melodies are often arranged in forms that make them easy to remember - nested binary forms that combine the familiar with novel. They also often combine cadences of language - used in speech to mark meaning - that we'll respond to as if they were actually encoded with meaning.
> 
> But that doesn't mean that the music has any intrinsic meaning.



David, that's a cold way to think about music.

Of course music is an abstraction. All art (or maybe almost all art) is an abstraction of something.


mducharme said:


> An analogy in fine arts - suppose artists never went in the direction of things like cubism, surrealism, impressionism etc. because they thought they thought they would be too weird for people who just wanted to look at realistic portrait paintings, and "painted down" to the masses who would view them. Imagine how much great art would have never existed.



Michael compared music to visual art.

A painting is almost always an abstraction - i.e. a representation - of something.

Mona Lisa
The Starry Night
The Kiss

The titles tell you what they represent - what they are an abstraction of.

Even so-called "abstract paintings" probably represent things that only the artists themselves can explain.

If you create something without meaning, is it really art or just a random arrangement of elements made by a sentient being?

Dennis Dutton attempted to answer the question of what constitutes art using anthropology. Before he died, he summarized his findings in a book titled _The Art Instinct_. He argued that the phenomenon of art can be found across all human cultures, past and present. He argued that the definition of art is not black and white but more like a scale. He determined there are a dozen criteria points, and the more points you have checked off, the closer it is to art.

What is Art? Denis Dutton's Criteria:

1. *Direct Pleasure*: The art object is valued as a source of immediate experiential pleasure in itself, often said to be "for its own sake."

2. *Skill and Virtuosity*: The making of the object requires and demonstrates the exercise of specialized skills. The demonstrations of skill is one of the most deeply moving and pleasurable aspects of art.

3. *Style*: Works of art are made in recognizable styles, rules that govern form, composition, or expression. Style provides a stable, predictable, "normal" background against which artists may create novelty and expressive surprise.

4. *Novelty and Creativity*: Art is valued for its novelty, creativity, originality, and capacity to surprise its audience. This includes both the attention-grabbing function of art and the artist's less jolting capacity to explore the deeper possibilities of a medium or theme.

5. *Criticism*: Wherever artistic forms are found, they exist alongside some kind of critical language of judgment and appreciation.

6. *Representation*: Art objects, including sculptures, paintings, and fictional narratives, represent or imitate real and imaginary experiences of the world.

7. *Special focus*: Works of art and artistic performances tend to be bracketed off from ordinary life, make a separate and dramatic focus of experience.

8. *Expressive individuality*: The potential to express individual personality is generally latent in art practices, whether or not it is fully achieved.

9. *Emotional saturation*: In varying degrees, the experience of works of art is shot through with emotion.

10. *Intellectual challenge*: Works of art tend to be designed to utilize a combined variety of human perceptual and intellectual capacities to a full extent; indeed the best works stretch them beyond ordinary limits.

11. *Art traditions and institutions*: Art objects and performances, as much in small-scale oral cultures as in literate civilizations, are created and to a degree given significance by their place in the history and traditions of their art.

12. *Imaginative experience*: Art objects essentially provide an imaginative experience for both producers and audiences. Art happens in a make-believe world, in the theater of the imagination.

https://sites.google.com/site/allen...second-quarter--aesthetics---form/what-is-art

He discovered this by immersing himself in the art practices of various cultures, past and present. He looked for universal traits. He argued that the phenomenon of art is innate to human nature, arises naturally in human societies much like language (hence the title of his book, modeled after Steven Pinker's _The Language Instinct_).

It would be best to just look at examples...

Here's a sketch I composed:



When I composed it, I imagined a prince setting off on a quest to rescue his princess. He mounts on his horse and then stares off at the vast field facing him before embarking on his mission, galloping bravely along the way.

I conducted a little experiment. I played the sketch to a coworker (nonmusician) without telling him anything about it, not the title, nothing. I asked him to tell me what he was imagining as he was listening to it.

I swear this! He said he was imagining a hero mounting on a horse and then galloping away!

Here's another one:



I asked the same coworker to tell me what he was imagining this time (of course, again, without telling him anything, not the title, nothing).

I swear! He said sunrise.

He couldn't believe it when I handed him over my phone and showed him the title!

When music is a true abstraction of something, it's like magic! Other people can see and feel what you see and feel.

I still believe what I said earlier is true:



theaviv said:


> Do you know why catchy music is catchy? Because it is true.
> 
> A catchy tune is a *true* abstraction of a particular feeling that is both personal and universal at the same time.
> 
> Catchy music catches people because they can't resist feeling what the composer is expressing. It's magic that's hardwired into us - our minds' innate ability to right away recognize an arrangement of sound as having meaning, a feeling, and to sync into that feeling.
> 
> It's a beautiful thing when it happens.
> 
> To me - and to just about everyone else in the world except you "cultural elites" - it's what makes music *good*.
> 
> It catches you effortlessly.



Let's look at examples of catchy music.

First of all, the two skeches above. They are catchy (writing catchy music is what I do best - I have a talent for it) and I believe it's in part because they are perfect abstractions of what I was imagining.

But here's some other examples:

Eine kleine Nachtmusik

Com'on, are you gonna argue against that? It's an abstraction of, well, "a little night music" - a little night of lightheartedness, socializing, and fun. Mozart probably wrote it for an aristocratic party.

In the Hall of the Mountain King

Grieg tells you what he was going for in the title. You can't argue the piece is not catchy! He did an awesome job in the abstraction.

Palladio

Jenkins named it after Andrea Palladio, a Renaissance architect. Whether he was imagining perfectly cut diamonds or the wonders of human architecture, the feeling he captured was that of outmost intensity and determination - because that's what it takes to perfectly cut a diamond or build a monument that is meant to last eternity.


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> 6. *Representation*: Art objects, including sculptures, paintings, and fictional narratives, represent or imitate real and imaginary experiences of the world.



You might be putting too much focus on #6, which in music presents certain challenges. If we adopt a Peircean taxonomy for different means of representation of a thing, then we find three terms, icon, index, and symbol, all of which refer to visual representations (types of signs). Icon being a literal depiction of something (like a drawing of an actual real place or event), index being something that correlates with an event (smoke indexes fire), symbol being an arbitrary object that doesn't really resemble the original thing in an iconic sense but represents it through indexical association (ex. a corporate logo glyph of some kind that appears next to the company name, for instance the circular Kontakt logo that looks like a no-smoking sign). While icons and indexes are considered to be universal, symbols require either a cultural or linguistic linkage in order for their meaning to be properly perceived.

So how do these things relate to music? Well, I would say we can have symbols in music, leitmotif being a good example. Those are associated with characters and ideas but are not necessarily strongly iconic. We learn to associate those with characters and ideas through indexical means (ex. the character appears and we hear the motif), but this association is normal with symbols.

What about pure indexical association? No natural event spontaneously produces music in the way that fire produces smoke, so it is difficult to point toward a universal linkage of this type. Bird song may be a natural reaction to something, but I would hesitate to consider bird song as "music", and therefore find it difficult to relate to the idea of a pure index. Since we learn the meaning of symbols through indexical means all the time, that doesn't really count as a Peircean index. As a result, I would say that in music we cannot have the strict Peircean meaning of indexes. However certain techniques or styles may be used frequently with certain types of scenes, and these cliches themselves do have a partial indexical association, even though it requires the cultural filtration (assumes familiarity with other films that had similar scenes that took a similar approach to music). So these indexes, while not strict Peircean indexes, can be applied to music if we are willing to bend the Peircean definitions slightly by making indexes not truely universal for all cultures and languages of human beings. Certain music may also remind us of a certain time in our own life (ex. memories of childhood) which again is an indexical association that is not necessarily universal.

What about icons? Can we represent things iconically in music? We can imitate certain sounds that naturally occur with musical means (ex. imitation of bird-song using flutes, or thunder using a bass drum), so I would say yes, and it is therefore universal in meaning for essentially everybody on our planet. There are also other iconic representations that can be accomplished through linguistic association. For instance, the idea of high pitch corresponding with visual height and low pitch corresponding with low visual height. So if we want to communicate the idea of flying for instance, we can use high pitched sounds an an absence of low pitch (the ground (bass) isn't there, and so we are floating/flying). But that association is not universally iconic because that requires linguistic associations of "high" and "low" pitch. Not all languages use this terminology, some refer to low as "thick" and high as "thin", or low as "big" and high as "small". Yet that is not a completely arbitrary choice but one rather based on language, and so it isn't a perfect example of a symbol either. For events like that, which are common in film music, I would classify them as iconic, but not universally so, and therefore not really following the strict Peircean definition of icon which was really based on visual (not auditory) signs.




> I swear this! He said he was imagining a hero mounting on a horse and then galloping away!
> 
> <snip>
> 
> I swear! He said sunrise.
> 
> He couldn't believe it when I handed him over my phone and showed him the title!



Why are you saying "I swear" for all these things? Of course he would imagine that! I would be very surprised if he didn't. You seem to expect that we would not believe that you can use music to depict something in this way. I think most people on this forum (if not all) would agree that it is possible to use music alone to communicate certain images like that like "hero getting on a horse and galloping away" or "a sunrise". But should look at why and how that happens (see below).



> When music is a true abstraction of something, it's like magic! Other people can see and feel what you see and feel.



So by "true abstraction" I would gather you are trying to refer to some kind of universality. However, this is not a real universality but instead one that requires cultural and linguistic references to aid in the interpretation.

Lets first look at your "hero galloping away" music. If we look at timbre, brass instruments have an association with the military, and therefore heroism. This is certainly an indexical association that goes back at least many centuries (where brass instruments due to their loudness have been used to create fear in the enemy or rally the troops). However, you would need to be from a culture that used brass instruments in that way, or at least have a knowledge of cultures that did this, in order for the brass instruments to have that heroic association. So it is not universal, but is through a cultural lens.

The other aspect of your "hero galloping away" melody is the outlining of triads with occasional repetition of notes. These are again aspects that have become musical cliches (that is not necessarily meant negatively) for something heroic, so we have this combination of elements that are really communicating "hero".

And lets look at harmony - so our system of harmony is certainly symbolic in that it is largely arbitrary, even if you try to point to natural things like the overtone series as the basis, those end up being imperfect representations. So harmony is symbolic and we develop a set of expectations from harmony. At this point we are certainly used to the major and minor scales from tonal music. Your use of dorian mode here gives the major IV which, compared to minor, gives us a sense of "uplift". The major IV that dorian provides is a mild surprise compared to the minor IV that we might instead expect after hearing the opening minor I chord, and so this surprise, which is uplifting, I believe helps also in communicating the heroism. The darkness of the minor I chord and the hope of the major IV, painting the odds the hero is against and the hope. But these are certainly not universal - I perceive these due to my own expectations of tonal syntax where when I hear a minor I chord I expect I am in minor and not dorian but the following chord can change my views on that. A listener without familiarity with western tonal music would have no such expectations of tonal syntax and could perceive this differently. Even two listeners with familiarity of Western tonal syntax might have different views on how it makes them feel.

Even more indexical associations are present. So this type of horn with string pad texture is a very common approach for painting heroism, evoking linkages with Lord of the Rings most clearly. And there are also indexical associations of dorian mode with heroism against odds, ex. the force theme from Star Wars. It is almost impossible to really separate clearly the impact of these indexical associations vs. actual musical structure in determining what it is that makes it evoke that visual. In other words, is it that that raised 6 degree of dorian mode breaks our minor-default expectation given our tonal understanding and provides a lift that we hear as heroic or hopeful? Or is it that simply that this mode is used in this way in so many other films and similar scenes that we make the indexical association and recognize it due to indexical similarity? I think for most people it is a bit of both.

So now lets look into your "sunrise" theme. You are leveraging the lingustic linkage of high notes with things that are physically/visually high (the sun in the sky). You don't have the bass, which suggests floating/flying. You are using very bright timbres, which again a linguistic idea and you are therefore associating brightness in timbre with the brightness of the sun. So all of those things are not really universal for all human beings, but only have the intended association where the terms in language high/low pitch, bright/dark timbre match the visual or physical ideas of height/depth, brightness/darkness, etc. For instance, if you played that music for someone from a culture where they don't say "high pitch" but "small pitch", then I would expect that person to give you an answer more along the lines of it reminds them of babies or children instead of a sunrise, since they would interpret your use of what we call "high notes" as referring to small things.

And again we have the indexical associations here, of the sunrise being depicted in similar ways in many other pieces of music. So even if we don't make the direct linguistic association with a sunrise, if we have heard enough music that depicts sunrises in a similar way, we may make the association entirely through indexical means.


----------



## mducharme

> First of all, the two skeches above. They are catchy (writing catchy music is what I do best - I have a talent for it) and I believe it's in part because they are perfect abstractions of what I was imagining.



To be honest, I would probably say the hero galloping is only somewhat catchy, and the sunrise one I didn't really find catchy at all, but this is just my opinion.

Your other examples of "catchy music" I would agree are catchy, and range from OK to very good, but again, something catchy isn't good by default. Don't cherry-pick things that are both catchy and good to suit your narrative that catchy music is good. And I think my very long response above regarding musical semiotics details the problems that I see with calling something a "perfect abstraction" in music, for there are very few things that we could argue are true cross-cultural (universal) aspects of music, and many, many things that rely on our cultural, linguistic, and musical knowledge and associations thereof.


----------



## WERNERBROS

mducharme said:


> Yes, you will as a practical matter need a Mac or Windows to get the level of playback you want.
> 
> 
> 
> This playback is not "very good" but is instead "good enough to get an idea of the piece and the balance". NotePerformer output is not going to be suitable for generating an MP3 from notation software as the finished product. If every piece you write is going to be performed, and you just need to get a sense of how things sound before the performance, NotePerformer shines there. But if you want to get, say, film scoring work, or you want someone to use your piece in something (say as *background music for a YouTube* video or just for listening pleasure) notation software with NotePerformer won't cut it.


NotePerformer sounds good enough for YouTube though.
LINK


----------



## theaviv

Thank you Michael for the detailed analysis of my two sketches. I enjoyed that!



mducharme said:


> So by "true abstraction" I would gather you are trying to refer to some kind of universality. However, this is not a real universality but instead one that requires cultural and linguistic references to aid in the interpretation.





mducharme said:


> And I think my very long response above regarding musical semiotics details the problems that I see with calling something a "perfect abstraction" in music, for there are very few things that we could argue are true cross-cultural (universal) aspects of music, and many, many things that rely on our cultural, linguistic, and musical knowledge and associations thereof.



By a true or perfect abstraction, I meant the essence of something was elegantly extracted.

Let's make a comparison to visual arts again. Say you want to draw the outline of a dog, but the outline you draw ends up looking more like the outline of a cat or a mouse - that would be an imperfect abstraction, i.e. not a true abstraction.

The same applies to music. Say you want to depict a sunrise, but your audience ends up perceiving something more like a bird on fire - I guess it wasn't a good abstraction.

Now, music is more similar to the literary arts (especially poetry) than to visual arts. This is because music is sequential - the elements are processed in a given order. Also, music may require familiarity with the genre to be truly appreciated (sort of like how literature requires familiarity with the language to be correctly interpreted).

So let's make a comparison to the literary arts. Say you write a poem about sunrise, but the audience can't figure out what you're talking about. Most likely, the abstraction was not very elegant.



mducharme said:


> Don't cherry-pick things that are both catchy and good to suit your narrative that catchy music is good.



Well, I listed examples to support my statement. I would be interested in examples supporting your statement, because I can't think of any.

What are some examples of classical pieces that are catchy but not good?

(It is always best to support or argue theoretical ideas with concrete examples.)


----------



## theaviv

WERNERBROS said:


> NotePerformer sounds good enough for YouTube though.
> LINK



This is interesting.

Here are some comments people made:

"Sample libraries don't even stand a chance anymore."

"This is incredible. I honestly thought this was the original recording at first."

"I think it's interesting that you say "Sample libraries don't even stand a chance anymore". I'm of the opinion that, technologies like NotePerformer, while still in their infancy, are indeed the way forward. The issue that still persists with sample libraries is that although they "sound" great on account of being actual recordings, you are limited to what was actually sampled and the technology is unwieldy. A real brass section can play those rhythms and articulations in the opening of this tune with little effort, but sequencing even that with a sample library is a nightmare. General MIDI and notation software can play something like that with ease, but are unlikely to fool anyone as sounding live, and most will not have the opportunity to record it live. I believe this is why the "String Pad + Legato Melody" style writing has become so prevalent. It's not particularly interesting musically, but it's what the samples can reliably do and possibly fool someone into thinking it's real."

"You nailed it. It's quite sad that a majority of the 'scene' has limited their writing based on what their samples can do. I mean, who can blame them, right? They sound great playing slow transitions and Adagio like passages. But before we could realize it I think a lot of composers fell into the trap and the samples dictated to us what we should write, not the other way around. The technology Noteperformer uses is likely the way forward imo. People are trying to use samples to replace the orchestra completely, for budgetary reasons. Let it just be a tool for mockups, and let human beings bring your piece to life. And because it should only be a tool during the composition phase, I think Noteperformer is a much better and more flexible tool. It's the perfect compromise between sound, dynamic, and fluidity."

"AI is truly the future of sample libraries..."


----------



## theaviv

Earlier, we had a bit of a discussion about the classical genre, particularly as it pertains to Karl Jenkins' Palladio and my Serenade:


Willowtree said:


> Setting the mock-up aside, I hate to break it to you, but this sounds like a fairly average media composition.
> 
> ...
> 
> There's nothing new here. Standard harmony. Standard rhythm. Standard melody. This is stock music. And if that's what you're going for, that's okay, but people won't look at this and think "Oh, it' the Aviv's music!" They'll listen to this and think "ah, another one".
> 
> The above is when compared to non-classical orchestral music (such as trailer music, film music, game music and music inspired by it etc).
> 
> Compared to actual, proper, contemporary classical music? This is nothing of note whatsoever, and would maybe get a scoff or two from a classical musician*
> 
> ...
> 
> _* Edit: for context, contemporary classical music is far more experimental and avant-garde. It tends to lean either in the direction of being quite atonal, with complex mathematical polyrhythms, microtuned instruments and with very intense dynamic changes throughout. Or, it tends to lean in the direction of using additive rhythm with non-functional tonal harmony, little change in dynamics throughout, and being generally quite subdued._





theaviv said:


> I'm not really familiar with what you call contemporary classical music, but I don't believe Classical 96.3 FM plays such music.
> 
> An example of what I consider to be a great classical piece (by a living composer) is Karl Jenkins' Palladio. I also love anything by Vivaldi.





mducharme said:


> Jenkins' Palladio is OK, but cliche. Vivaldi is good but overplayed, especially The Four Seasons.





Willowtree said:


> Jenkins is a fine composer and makes catchy pieces, not surprising since he's a former jingle writer. But I would hardly call Jenkins' music representative of contemporary classical music. It has far more in common with new age if anything.
> 
> It's catchy music with its roots in rock, jazz, pop and jingles. Does that somehow mean it has less merit? No, of course not. But to compare Palladio to Beethoven and Mozart is a bit silly. It has far more in common with pop and advertisement music (in fact, that was the piece's original purpose: advertisement) than it does with classical music.
> 
> And there's nothing wrong with liking that, but let's not get the two confused.





Willowtree said:


> What I'm saying is, Palladio was borne from advertisement in the 90s, draws from a very different style than anything Beethoven or Mozart made.
> 
> Then again, based on that statement one could argue it has at least a little in common with Mozart.
> 
> My point is, they're so far apart and should be applauded for their own merits, not compared to each other like ... Apples and oranges, if you forgive the expression.





mducharme said:


> Mozart and Beethoven's music is undoubtedly in a different league than film composers I love, such as Jerry Goldsmith, James Horner, and John Williams. However, I find that I listen to more Goldsmith/Horner/Williams than I do Mozart/Beethoven. Often I just like to listen to pieces that I enjoy, even though they aren't really "masterworks" in comparison. I think that's the case with a lot of people.


----------



## theaviv

Continued:


theaviv said:


> Well, if you google "palladio genre", a big infobox appears with the word "Classical" in large font. Besides, to my ears, it sounds classical.





Willowtree said:


> Before we get further into arguing semantics, I want to make it clear my statement that Palladio is less contemporary classical is my own viewpoint, and I'm sure some will disagree. A curious thing you'll see when you read the comments is several others make statements similar to mine, and several others make statements that directly contradict mine.
> 
> Anyhow, to me, much of the contemporary classical music I'm surrounded by is technically complex, not very catchy, and requires a very good understanding of music to be fully enjoyed. On the other hand, Palladio could be enjoyed by anyone regardless of musical knowledge.
> 
> In other words, contemporary classical music tends to be made for composers by composers, whereas music such as Palladio is made for the general population.
> 
> I suppose it's a matter of where the music comes from, to me. A lot of music today (Palladio is an example) draws a lot more from popular music and folk music than it does from classical music of the past.
> 
> We also have our backgrounds. I use the term the way it's been used by my mentors, teachers and people around me. I care little for what random people on the internet think about the term as long as we're able to communicate. That's the important part. So, when we say classical, you and I may mean different things. Just want to clear that up. We may be using the same term to talk about very different things.





mducharme said:


> I agree with the above, but also have a slightly different view. Contemporary classical music is most often meant to challenge the listener - it may cause them to ask fundamental questions like what is and what is not music.
> 
> ...
> 
> Some of it is more challenging than others - obviously the Whitacre is erring towards "universally accessible" in contemporary classical, but he is still part of the contemporary classical camp.
> 
> If you look at something like film music or pop music, it has very different requirements. It has to be immediately accessible to basically everybody. With pop music people will change the track if they don't like it early on, film music if you do stuff that is too weird the emotions can become jumbled in the cue. So in both cases you need a much more direct and accessible approach. And there is nothing wrong with that.
> 
> With contemporary classical music, there is a saying "writing down to the audience", meaning "I know I can write much better music than this, but I am writing much much simpler than usual so as to not challenge the listener in any regard and simply please them". Although there is nothing fundamentally wrong with wanting to please people, classical composers generally haven't been concerned with pleasing the audience as the first and foremost duty since Mozart's times. The other more crass way of saying this to an audience (nobody would actually say it this way) would be "You are too uncultured to understand my music, so I am going to write stupid simple stuff that I hate writing and is beneath me so that your brains can understand it without being challenged, even though I am capable of more." Since contemporary classical music generally implies that "challenge the listener" approach to some degree, the approach of "writing down to the audience" is fundamentally incompatible.
> 
> Many or most contemporary classical composers feel like they are wasting their abilities if they deliberately make their music worse (in their own view) to make it more palatable to the masses (by being unchallenging). Jenkins writes down to the audience and makes a lot of money from it.





mducharme said:


> An analogy in fine arts - suppose artists never went in the direction of things like cubism, surrealism, impressionism etc. because they thought they thought they would be too weird for people who just wanted to look at realistic portrait paintings, and "painted down" to the masses who would view them. Imagine how much great art would have never existed.





miket said:


> Even outside of media music, I think there are plenty of modern composers who quite successfully say things on the more positive end of the emotional spectrum. The thorny, anguished sound of many composers from the latter half of the 20th century is the product of their time and place. I always think of Steve Reich talking about how absurd it would feel to write like someone who was living in war-torn Europe while actually living in the world of a million burgers sold.





mducharme said:


> However, I think where the real problem comes in is, when you are writing in a more accessible style, there is this temptation or trap to fall into where you start writing in a 1900's or 1800's (or 1700's or 1600's) style, or some combination of those (as I believe Jenkins does in Palladio), seemingly completely ignoring everything that happened in the 20th and 21st centuries, almost pretending they did not exist. Copying an antiquated style wholesale is not really very innovative like contemporary classical is supposed to be - it is instead anachronistic, just writing a piece a few hundred years out of time. So if you are dealing with more tonal materials, you face the challenge of how to reflect modern times and accept the music of the 20th (and 21st) century and be innovative in some way while still being fundamentally tonal. Reich does that with his rhythms and evolving patterns (which were slightly influenced by much older Perotin and Leonin style Notre Dame organum from medieval times), Whitacre does it with his diatonic clusters. But it is more difficult to pull off successfully (vs simply writing "darker" stuff) because we have the baggage of common practice period music being dragged along with us that is subconsciously influencing us all the time, and tempting us to simply mimic it instead of creating something innovative. It is like you have this big trap in the ground, and some composers dance around it successfully without falling in, while others stay far away.





Living Fossil said:


> Just to put things in place (while not disagreeing with you):
> There is an exact term for the category/genre that "Palladio" falls in:
> It's called "Easy Listening"
> The fact that it uses a traditional instrumentation and mimics some baroque stereotypes doesn't make it somehow "classical music".
> Comparing it to Vivaldi (and similars) offers just blatant ignorance on the subject. But since i already mentioned the Dunning-Krueger effect, there is no more left to say in this thread.
> (i know, it wasn't you who made this stupid comparison)





Willowtree said:


> Agreed. As I said previously, it's advertisement music. I think Jenkins on the whole is more of a new age composer than anything I'd call classical (nothing wrong with that), but Palladio ...
> 
> It's about as classical as pop songs using Pachelbel's Canon as a foundation.





rudi said:


> The first time I heard it was at the cinema for the said commercial... I remember thinking "that went by far too fast". It was years later that found out who wrote it


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> Well, I listed examples to support my statement. I would be interested in examples supporting your statement, because I can't think of any.
> 
> What are some examples of classical pieces that are catchy but not good?
> 
> (It is always best to support or argue theoretical ideas with concrete examples.)



So here is an example of an amazing classical piece that is not catchy:



I love that work - I can't speak of how highly I regard it. But I can't see someone "singing the melody" from it, so it isn't catchy at all as far as "catchiness" goes.


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> This is interesting.
> 
> Here are some comments people made:
> 
> "Sample libraries don't even stand a chance anymore."
> 
> "This is incredible. I honestly thought this was the original recording at first."



Great. Now, factor in what they are going to say when they hear your piece in NotePerformer alongside the sampled version. I would be completely astonished if they actually thought your NotePerformer version matched at all what was capable of sample libraries done well of the same piece. NotePerformer sounds good if you don't have anything to compare to. But if you have anything to compare to, done by somebody of reasonable ability, it isn't comparable at all. Chances are that if you submit something for potential use in a film, you will be going up against somebody with great sample libraries with strong mixing abilities. Do not forget that.

Then the sampled version vs. live performance - again completely different. Some non musical people might be fooled by the sampled version vs live performance until they hear them in juxtaposition.


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> So let's make a comparison to the literary arts. Say you write a poem about sunrise, but the audience can't figure out what you're talking about. Most likely, the abstraction was not very elegant.



You're making assumptions that the immediate audience interpretation of something is the one that was intended. Sometimes works of art require deeper study before you can unravel the meaning - they do not present the intended meaning (if there was one) immediately to you. So it isn't necessarily "not very elegant", but instead simply requires a bit more thought to process. And I suppose you might say that something that is immediately understandable is somehow "more elegant". But in reply I would say that something being immediately digestible without presenting any mysteries whatsoever is simply not rewarding. You can find amazing things in an old and thoughtful artwork if you look closely enough and study it enough. If something makes itself entirely plain to you immediately with no mysteries, there is nothing to unravel about it, and that makes it uninteresting.


----------



## theaviv

Following up on our discussion about genre:

I would call music like Karl Jenkins' Palladio _mainstream classical_ - or more precisely, _contemporary mainstream classical_.

mainstream: (adjective) considered normal, and having or using ideas, beliefs, etc. that are accepted by most people

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/mainstream

contemporary: (adjective) existing or happening now

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/contemporary

It is important to recognize that contemporary classical (by common definition) should include music that (1) is by a living composer, and that (2) the public would call classical.

"*Contemporary classical music* is classical music relative to the present day."

Wikipedia lists a variety of "movements" and "developments by medium" for contemporary classical:

2Movements

2.1Modernism
2.2Electronic music
2.2.1Computer music

2.3Spectral music
2.4Post-modernism
2.5Polystylism (eclecticism)
2.5.1Historicism
2.5.2Neoromanticism
2.5.3Art rock influence

2.6New Simplicity
2.7New Complexity
2.8Minimalism and post-minimalism
3Developments by medium

3.1Opera
3.2Chamber
3.3Choral
3.4Concert bands (wind ensembles)
3.5Cinema
3.6Video and Computer Games
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music

The point is, it's important to recognize that there is a broad range of what could fall under the (contemporary) classical umbrella.



theaviv said:


> I never wanted to be a videogame or film composer. When I was 20 and started composing for the very first time - more than a decade ago - I envisioned myself as a "classical artist" - I wanted to release singles and albums just like any other music artist of more mainstream genres - pop, country, etc. I wanted to hear my music played on Classical 96.3 FM. I wanted to make classical popular again - and I believed I could do it, but life got in the way and I didn't compose much since. I'd like to think it's time for me to believe again.



I want to be a classical artist. I want to release singles and albums just like any other music artist of more mainstream genres - pop, country, etc. I want to hear my music played on classical radio. I want to make classical popular again.

So far, contemporary mainstream classical is mostly limited to media music - i.e. film, videogame, and advertisement music. For example, classical radio like Classical 96.3 FM will occasionally insert a little John Williams, video game themes performed by the London Philharmonic Orchestra, and Karl Jenkins' Palladio (which could be considered media music as well, since it was originally composed for advertisement). Most of mainstream classical is still by dead composers from centuries ago.

But I believe there is a silent yearning out there for a new flavour of classical, one that I believe I will capture with my music.


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> Most of mainstream classical is still by dead composers from centuries ago.
> 
> But I believe there is a silent yearning out there for a new flavour of classical, one that I believe I will capture with my music.



Best of luck to you with that - but even though mainstream classical is mostly by dead composers from centuries ago, and there may be a silent yearning for a new flavour of classical, the problem is not simply the ability of the writer.

Suppose you could bring Mozart or Beethoven ahead through a time machine and have them writing new works in the modern day simply continuing their old styles. They might be very skilled and get attention that way, but otherwise they would be writing in an old outmoded style. So probably people might think they were great imitators of Mozart and Beethoven but would not believe they were them brought through time, and would not be nearly as interested in their works as the original works of those composers.

So how do you write something new? Almost all the new "popular" tonal music has really become very simplified in terms of harmony that it is really uninteresting in that way, so if you write something simple and catchy it will be uninteresting because it doesn't really do anything new.

So it is a catch-22 situation. If you write something experimental, it will be too weird for most people. If you write something that is very traditional, it will sound like Mozart or Beethoven teleported into the future with no knowledge of future music. So how do you have an angle where it isn't "too weird" for the average listener, but it also doesn't sound like rehashed Mozart/Beethoven? Steve Reich did it somewhat successfully, Phillip Glass did it somewhat successfully, a few other composers have, but it is very rare, and there is no easy solution to that problem. If there was an easy solution to that problem, there would be a lot more rich composers out there.


----------



## SonsofRest

TheAviv, you remind me a bit of myself and where I was some years ago, which is why I'm going to post this.

When I was first starting out, way back when, I had written a couple of pieces which were very, very good. They were good enough that I knew if I could get the right people to listen to them, it would change everything for me. When someone with more experience listened to them and tore them apart, I didn't let it bother me, because I knew for an absolute fact that they were good, and his criticism was coming from a lack of understanding on his part, he was too "old school" and narrow-minded to see the art in it.

As it turns out, I was completely, utterly wrong. I'd been relying on the feedback I got from friends and family, believing that when I asked them to be "brutally honest" they would be, but of course they weren't. That's not their fault, it's mine for not understanding that of COURSE the people you live or work with can't possibly be unbiased. You will almost never get reliable feedback from friends, family, or coworkers (there are rare exceptions).

Someone above mentioned the Dunning-Kruger effect, which could be summed up as "not knowing enough to realize how much you don't know". I see it all the time in the Microsoft Excel classes that I teach. When I had students who stated that they were "experts", I challenged them to rate their abilities on a scale of 1 to 10 before the class, and again afterwards. Invariably, the students who gave themselves an 8 or 9 before the class gave themselves a 1 or 2 afterwards, once they understood how much they still had to learn.

This is what happened to me with writing music. I wasn't good enough and didn't know enough to understand that when I thought I was gifted and talented, I was actually a small step above "utterly incompetent". Fortunately, after a lot of personal reflection, I was able to understand this and come to terms with it and move forward, but it was a lesson in humility. Now I'm happy to say that my compositions are much better than they were back then, and they continue to improve with a lot of study and practice. I'm still a long, long way from anything I'd begin to call "great", though.

I suspect that you may be in the same place I was. Don't get me wrong, confidence is wonderful, but I would caution you to be mindful that it doesn't cross the line into something else. Hubris will prevent you from learning and growing. Please understand, I'm not saying that your compositions are terrible, in fact they're better than what I was doing at the time. But like me, I think you've got a very long way to go.

The good news is that you're in the right place - this forum and its members are a really incredible resource for learning and improving. You're in great company here. If you're willing to listen to what some of the working composers here tell you, and take their advice with humility and grace, I expect you will have great success, and that is my wish for you.

I'm sorry this has gotten so long, but as I stated before you remind me a bit of my younger self, and I want to help you get out of the same traps I fell into.

Wishing you the best!


----------



## Bollen

theaviv said:


> Following up on our discussion about genre:
> 
> I would call music like Karl Jenkins' Palladio _mainstream classical_ - or more precisely, _contemporary mainstream classical_.
> 
> mainstream: (adjective) considered normal, and having or using ideas, beliefs, etc. that are accepted by most people
> 
> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/mainstream
> 
> contemporary: (adjective) existing or happening now
> 
> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/contemporary
> 
> It is important to recognize that contemporary classical (by common definition) should include music that (1) is by a living composer, and that (2) the public would call classical.
> 
> "*Contemporary classical music* is classical music relative to the present day."
> 
> Wikipedia lists a variety of "movements" and "developments by medium" for contemporary classical:
> 
> 2Movements
> 
> 2.1Modernism
> 2.2Electronic music
> 2.2.1Computer music
> 
> 2.3Spectral music
> 2.4Post-modernism
> 2.5Polystylism (eclecticism)
> 2.5.1Historicism
> 2.5.2Neoromanticism
> 2.5.3Art rock influence
> 
> 2.6New Simplicity
> 2.7New Complexity
> 2.8Minimalism and post-minimalism
> 3Developments by medium
> 
> 3.1Opera
> 3.2Chamber
> 3.3Choral
> 3.4Concert bands (wind ensembles)
> 3.5Cinema
> 3.6Video and Computer Games
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music
> 
> The point is, it's important to recognize that there is a broad range of what could fall under the (contemporary) classical umbrella.
> 
> 
> 
> I want to be a classical artist. I want to release singles and albums just like any other music artist of more mainstream genres - pop, country, etc. I want to hear my music played on classical radio. I want to make classical popular again.
> 
> So far, contemporary mainstream classical is mostly limited to media music - i.e. film, videogame, and advertisement music. For example, classical radio like Classical 96.3 FM will occasionally insert a little John Williams, video game themes performed by the London Philharmonic Orchestra, and Karl Jenkins' Palladio (which could be considered media music as well, since it was originally composed for advertisement). Most of mainstream classical is still by dead composers from centuries ago.
> 
> But I believe there is a silent yearning out there for a new flavour of classical, one that I believe I will capture with my music.


If you look up most "successful" living classical composers you'll notice that, for the most part, they tend to gravitate towards the "weird" side of the spectrum. I think the reason is that classical, unlike pop, doesn't just depend on the audience for success. Musicians and especially conductors play a huge role in what gets performed! Musicians tend to prefer pieces that offer a challenge or are at least entertaining to play (never met a player that enjoys playing ostinatos ). Conductors are a whole different beast! They have many of the same requirements as players, but also have high ideals of art, history and also their own image as an artist and what kind of repertoire they like to be associated with...

It's tricky, but personally I find it to be a much fairer system than just depending on an audience. Players and conductors are far more appreciative and loyal and also understand the art behind it better. Audiences are fickle and influenced by many external factors...


----------



## Bollen

mducharme said:


> So here is an example of an amazing classical piece that is not catchy:
> 
> 
> 
> I love that work - I can't speak of how highly I regard it. But I can't see someone "singing the melody" from it, so it isn't catchy at all as far as "catchiness" goes.



My favourite discovery this year at the proms:


----------



## Willowtree

I don't have the time to give a proper reply to everything here since I'm very busy, but:

Ducharme's already given some detailed opinions on your sketches. However, to be blunt, I mostly found them quite clichéd. Catchy is not a term I'd use to describe them. I'd describe them as repetitive. The orchestration was a bit odd in places, and the voice leading had some issues. The harmonic development was lacking. There's some good ideas in there, but to shine the above needs some work.

(EDIT: "found them" here refers to the tracks, not Ducharme's opinions which were excellent)



theaviv said:


> What are some examples of classical pieces that are catchy but not good?
> 
> (It is always best to support or argue theoretical ideas with concrete examples.)


@mducharme is more qualified than either of us to discuss this, but appealing to authority isn't supporting your examples, nor is grabbing random comments or dictionary entries. If anything, it's making your arguments seem unreliable, unfounded. They lack a concrete ground to stand on. If you're going to give examples.

Catchy is subjective. I don't find most classical music is catchy whatsoever. Listen to Shoenberg's Piano Concerto Op. 42. Is that catchy? I don't think it is at all. Some might. I don't. Your view of "classical" seems limited to the music frequently played so it appears catchy to you because you're so used to it, perhaps?




SonsofRest said:


> TheAviv, you remind me a bit of myself and where I was some years ago, which is why I'm going to post this.
> 
> When I was first starting out, way back when, I had written a couple of pieces which were very, very good. They were good enough that I knew if I could get the right people to listen to them, it would change everything for me. When someone with more experience listened to them and tore them apart, I didn't let it bother me, because I knew for an absolute fact that they were good, and his criticism was coming from a lack of understanding on his part, he was too "old school" and narrow-minded to see the art in it.
> 
> As it turns out, I was completely, utterly wrong. I'd been relying on the feedback I got from friends and family, believing that when I asked them to be "brutally honest" they would be, but of course they weren't. That's not their fault, it's mine for not understanding that of COURSE the people you live or work with can't possibly be unbiased. You will almost never get reliable feedback from friends, family, or coworkers (there are rare exceptions).
> 
> Someone above mentioned the Dunning-Kruger effect, which could be summed up as "not knowing enough to realize how much you don't know". I see it all the time in the Microsoft Excel classes that I teach. When I had students who stated that they were "experts", I challenged them to rate their abilities on a scale of 1 to 10 before the class, and again afterwards. Invariably, the students who gave themselves an 8 or 9 before the class gave themselves a 1 or 2 afterwards, once they understood how much they still had to learn.
> 
> This is what happened to me with writing music. I wasn't good enough and didn't know enough to understand that when I thought I was gifted and talented, I was actually a small step above "utterly incompetent". Fortunately, after a lot of personal reflection, I was able to understand this and come to terms with it and move forward, but it was a lesson in humility. Now I'm happy to say that my compositions are much better than they were back then, and they continue to improve with a lot of study and practice. I'm still a long, long way from anything I'd begin to call "great", though.
> 
> I suspect that you may be in the same place I was. Don't get me wrong, confidence is wonderful, but I would caution you to be mindful that it doesn't cross the line into something else. Hubris will prevent you from learning and growing. Please understand, I'm not saying that your compositions are terrible, in fact they're better than what I was doing at the time. But like me, I think you've got a very long way to go.
> 
> The good news is that you're in the right place - this forum and its members are a really incredible resource for learning and improving. You're in great company here. If you're willing to listen to what some of the working composers here tell you, and take their advice with humility and grace, I expect you will have great success, and that is my wish for you.
> 
> I'm sorry this has gotten so long, but as I stated before you remind me a bit of my younger self, and I want to help you get out of the same traps I fell into.
> 
> Wishing you the best!



Excellent post. 

@theaviv, I'd like to ask you: What is your musical background? I'm not saying you need credentials or any specific education etc but you have to understand, many of the great composers have been doing it for many decades before they even consider the things you're talking about.

Come onto the VI Control discord and I'll gladly have a talk with you. Surround yourself with other composers, many who have classical backgrounds. Please do. It will humble you.

I have DMed you the link.


----------



## theaviv

SonsofRest said:


> I'd been relying on the feedback I got from friends and family, believing that when I asked them to be "brutally honest" they would be, but of course they weren't. That's not their fault, it's mine for not understanding that of COURSE the people you live or work with can't possibly be unbiased. You will almost never get reliable feedback from friends, family, or coworkers (there are rare exceptions).



*Nowadays, you can order reliable market research reports for your music:*

@Chorny Serge recently produced a mockup of my Serenade for me:




He used my draft:




I uploaded the mockup on ReverbNation (https://www.reverbnation.com/theaviv) and ordered a *ReverbNation Crowd Reviews* report (https://www.reverbnation.com/band-promotion/crowd_review):

"_Crowd Review_"

"_Improve Your Music With Unbiased Feedback_"

"_Get your song heard by a targeted sample of real music fans and measure their thoughts and feelings in a customizable research report._"

"_Earn a spot on the ReverbNation homepage: Score a 7.5 or better on your Track Rating score with Crowd Reviews, and you could earn a spot on the Crowd Picks section of the ReverbNation homepage._"

I ordered the report on Oct 26 and received an email from them on Nov 1:


*The Aviv,*

Congratulations! Your song, "Serenade", scored *7.9 *through Crowd Review and as a result has earned this featured spot.

A ReverbNation team member will contact you in *7-10 days *to confirm your feature date.

We're excited for you! Tell your fans to check it out too!​

This is known as "Wisdom of Crowds":

"_The Wisdom of Crowds is a powerful and proven methodology that states large groups of ordinary people organized under the right conditions (a "smart crowd") outperform small groups of experts in making decisions and predictions. The idea is not new. It’s the science behind Google and decision-making in some of the largest companies in the world. It has been proven time and again that collective wisdom consistently surpasses the experts. It also means that TuneCore Fan Reviews can guarantee 90% accuracy in track ratings. If you want to know more, we recommend you read "The Wisdom Of Crowds: Why Many Are Smarter Than The Few" by James Surowiecki._"

https://support.tunecore.com/hc/en-...neCore-Fan-Reviews-Frequently-Asked-Questions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds

I also ordered a *TuneCore Fan Reviews* report (https://ca.tunecore.com/artist-services/get-reviewed).

I will share both the *ReverbNation Crowd Reviews* report and the *TuneCore Fan Reviews* report.

Hold on...


----------



## theaviv

theaviv said:


> I uploaded the mockup on ReverbNation (https://www.reverbnation.com/theaviv) and ordered a *ReverbNation Crowd Reviews* report (https://www.reverbnation.com/band-promotion/crowd_review):



*ReverbNation Crowd Reviews*

Serenade • 104 Reviewers • Classical (instrumental) • November 1, 2019

_American audience_


_Reviewer Rating Distribution_

rating# of reviewers%cumulative %10/102220%20%9/101111%31%8/103130%61%7/102120%81%6/1066%87%5/1077%94%4/1011%95%3/1033%98%2/1011%99%1/1011%100%

_Summary using rounded figures:_


20% thought it was perfect
30% thought it was almost perfect
60% thought it was pretty good
80% thought it was good
90% thought it was not bad
10% thought it was bada rating of 10/10
a rating of 9/10 or more
a rating of 8/10 or more
a rating of 7/10 or more
a rating of 5/10 or more
a rating of 4/10 or less

_My personal conclusion_: For any given sample of listeners, results show most of them would like it - and _maybe_ about a quarter of the total listeners would become fans.

This is better than I expected.

If 100 000 people listen to Serenade, about 20 000 would think it's perfect. Another 10 000 would think it's almost perfect. Maybe some of them (like about 25 000) would seek me out and become fans. They could then perhaps support me using crowdfunding.

I attached the report.

I will make another post with some of the reviews...


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> *Nowadays, you can order reliable markt research reports for your music:*
> 
> @Chorny Serge recently produced a mockup of my Serenade for me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He used my draft:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I uploaded the mockup on ReverbNation (https://www.reverbnation.com/theaviv) and ordered a *ReverbNation Crowd Reviews* report (https://www.reverbnation.com/band-promotion/crowd_review):
> 
> "_Crowd Review_"
> 
> "_Improve Your Music With Unbiased Feedback_"
> 
> "_Get your song heard by a targeted sample of real music fans and measure their thoughts and feelings in a customizable research report._"
> 
> "_Earn a spot on the ReverbNation homepage: Score a 7.5 or better on your Track Rating score with Crowd Reviews, and you could earn a spot on the Crowd Picks section of the ReverbNation homepage._"
> 
> I ordered the report on Oct 26 and received an email from them on Nov 1:
> 
> 
> *The Aviv,*
> 
> Congratulations! Your song, "Serenade", scored *7.9 *through Crowd Review and as a result has earned this featured spot.
> 
> A ReverbNation team member will contact you in *7-10 days *to confirm your feature date.
> 
> We're excited for you! Tell your fans to check it out too!​
> 
> This is known as "Wisdom of Crowds":
> 
> "_The Wisdom of Crowds is a powerful and proven methodology that states large groups of ordinary people organized under the right conditions (a "smart crowd") outperform small groups of experts in making decisions and predictions. The idea is not new. It’s the science behind Google and decision-making in some of the largest companies in the world. It has been proven time and again that collective wisdom consistently surpasses the experts. It also means that TuneCore Fan Reviews can guarantee 90% accuracy in track ratings. If you want to know more, we recommend you read "The Wisdom Of Crowds: Why Many Are Smarter Than The Few" by James Surowiecki._"
> 
> https://support.tunecore.com/hc/en-...neCore-Fan-Reviews-Frequently-Asked-Questions
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds
> 
> I also ordered a *TuneCore Fan Reviews* report (https://ca.tunecore.com/artist-services/get-reviewed).
> 
> I will share both the *ReverbNation Crowd Reviews* report and the *TuneCore Fan Reviews* report.
> 
> Hold on...



@theaviv, bear in mind reverbnation has a relatively poor reputation and is considered to be quite unreliable and the stats assigned are reportedly fake, not real.








ReverbNation Reviews - 2.0 Stars


136 reviews for ReverbNation, 2.0 stars: 'They will keep charging your credit card 2-3 times a month, won't send you notices so you'll forget all about it. I signed up for their SONG PROMOTION service and after 40 weeks got very little results. 4,709 2,910 Ad clicks 1,796 Song plays 3 Other...




www.sitejabber.com


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> @theaviv, bear in mind reverbnation has a relatively poor reputation and is considered to be quite unreliable and the stats assigned are reportedly fake, not real.



Here are a couple of articles that praise their Crowd Reviews:

(1)

A Review Of ReverbNation’s Crowd Review Service [Brian Hazard]
Jul 10, 2017

https://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2017/07/a-review-of-reverbnations-new-crowd-review-brian-hazard.html

(2)

CD BABY, TUNECORE, DISTROKID, AWAL, DITTO...WHO IS THE BEST DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION COMPANY FOR MUSIC
12-19-2018

"_I don’t use ReverbNation for any of their services because they simply aren’t the best at anything (because they offer so much) *EXCEPT CrowdReview*._"

https://aristake.com/post/cd-baby-tunecore-ditto-mondotunes-zimbalam-or

---

Besides, I got very similar results from TuneCore (https://ca.tunecore.com/artist-services/get-reviewed). I used more than one market research service.

Also, real people wrote individual reviews. I will highlight some of them here if you give me the chance...


----------



## Willowtree

theaviv said:


> Here are a couple of articles that praise their Crowd Reviews:
> 
> (1)
> 
> A Review Of ReverbNation’s Crowd Review Service [Brian Hazard]
> Jul 10, 2017
> 
> https://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2017/07/a-review-of-reverbnations-new-crowd-review-brian-hazard.html
> 
> (2)
> 
> CD BABY, TUNECORE, DISTROKID, AWAL, DITTO...WHO IS THE BEST DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION COMPANY FOR MUSIC
> 12-19-2018
> 
> "_I don’t use ReverbNation for any of their services because they simply aren’t the best at anything (because they offer so much) *EXCEPT CrowdReview*._"
> 
> https://aristake.com/post/cd-baby-tunecore-ditto-mondotunes-zimbalam-or
> 
> ---
> 
> Besides, I got very similar results from TuneCore (https://ca.tunecore.com/artist-services/get-reviewed). I used more than one market research service.
> 
> Also, real people wrote individual reviews. I will highlight some of them here if you give me the chance...


You're hand picking positive reviews here. But even if it is accurate, this was a crowd review of @Chorny Serge's mock-up and arrangement of your work, which was significantly different.

I hope the results prove useful for you, nonetheless.

Might I just ask. You claim you want to make classical, not popular music. Yet you seem very much to desire your classical music to be popular.

A quarter of listeners will not become fans, I can assure you. Not even the most popular artists have a hundredth of listeners become fans.

But if you wish them to, why? Then you're making popular music? Nothing wrong with that. But classical per definition is not popular.


----------



## theaviv

theaviv said:


> I will make another post with some of the reviews...



"*I think that this artist can hang around with the best of them in this classical genre, so I hope they keep pushing their work forward.*" - male, 31, rated it 8/10

"*I really like the artist name. The track title is nice, simple, and understated. The music is so strong, awesome, movie quality. Great listening.*" - female, 29, rated it 10/10

"This song is quite the *masterpiece* that sounds like it needs to be part of a movie soundtrack! This has such intense emotion to it! A song of motivation!" - male, 31, rated it 8/10

"*I love the sound of this music!* It reminds me of Lord of the Rings. *I would definitely buy this album.* Great sound and very enjoyable." - female, 40, rated it 10/10

"*This song is simply beautiful! I love everything about it. It's lovely to listen to, exciting yet peaceful at the same time. Amazing!!!*" - female, 41, rated it 10/10

"*I enjoyed everything about this song. I could listen to it over and over. It is just what I needed to hear this morning.*" - female, 46, rated it 10/10

"A *beautiful classical piece*. I was taken in my mind to a large, Victorian entertainment hall with ladies dressed in Victorian dresses dancing with eloquent men. *The violin was heart piercing and I loved this piece of music.*" - female, 56, rated it 10/10

"*I could not find anything wrong with this song. I really enjoyed listening. Instrumentals are very good and I would love to hear more.*" - female, 63, rated it 10/10

"*I love the unique sound here and the way that the momentum keeps building. I think it would sound even better in person. Keep working on it, great job so far.*" - female, 44, rated it 8/10

"I have enjoyed listening to this *classical song*. It has *very strong hints of mystery notes* in it, that makes it *so interesting to listen to*." - female, 41, rated it 10/10

"I like the way this song starts and slowly builds throughout. The stringed instruments work wonderfully together. As I listen, the momentum continues to build, getting louder and louder. This is really enjoyable. *Great classical instrumental song*." - female, 59, rated it 10/10

"I love the sound of the strings! All the different sections blended well together. All the violins sounded as one. There was so much emotion in this piece. It became more and more intense! *Absolutely beautiful!*" - female, 53, rated it 10/10

"I loved the progression of the strings and the way they built up and swelled. *It made me want to keep listening to find out where the song would go next!* I could see this as the soundtrack to something deep and dramatic." - female, 31, rated it 10/10

"I very much enjoy the soft chill ominous vibes of this *classical song*. Love the droning violin sound. Great atmospheric sound. Cool mix." - male, 35, rated it 10/10

"I'm loving the beats, they are on key. The song structure is off the chain and the sound production is perfect. The instrumental is awesomely amazing. Keep up the great job and *I'll keep an ear out for more.*" - male, 37, rated it 10/10

"It sounded like something that could be an action movie. I enjoyed the song, and thought that it was worth listening to again. *The artist was someone that I haven't heard of, and I would seek them out again.*" - male, 23, rated it 10/10

"It's a *beautifully composed song* with instrumentals that merge together gracefully and *fulfill the purpose of the song's title* and purpose with *perfection*. Great job!" - female, 24, rated it 10/10

"Passionate song, the violin being the main component of the song creates an ambiance that is *exciting, passionate, and relaxing all at the same time!* I also like how the song begins soft and eventually gets louder and more intense with more violins joining in." - male, 35, rated it 10/10

"Song is done *perfect*. Existential feel, and instruments are amazing. *Song structure is on point.* Makes me feel like Christmas is near. *Beautiful song.*" - female, 32, rated it 10/10

"The instrumental are well thought out and played very well. The song has a *mystical* feel to it. I could see this in a movie." - male, 32, rated it 10/10

"The song is really driving and relaxing. It's *well written* and there is *no issues* with it that are noticeable. It's a *solid song all around*." - male, 29, rated it 10/10

"The strings adds a rising aura to the instrumentation. I really love the way the song intensifies and then start to ease back down gently." - male, 29, rated it 10/10

"The strings sound great as well as the woodwinds. *I could definitely sit through a concert listening to songs like this*, they make me feel happy which I guess the title Serenate would indicate." - female, 60, rated it 10/10

"This reminds me so much of James Horner's stuff, and *I love it!* The music sounds like *it's telling a story*, and *I feel involved in its development.*" - female, 24, rated it 10/10

"This song was *beautiful, powerful intense, moving, immersive, and engaging*. I was thoughtful, peaceful, happy, and nostalgic. The sound quality was high and clear." - female, 46, rated it 10/10

"*I am loving this song.* It sounds like it would be played during king henry the 8th grand entrances or during a dragon match in game of thrones.. *I simply love it.*" - male, 25, rated it 9/10

"I could see this working very well in a movie or TV show. The quality of it is good and it's got a nice long dramatic type sound to it. I would work well in an adventure movie horror or drama." - male, 36, rated it 9/10

"I enjoyed the swelling strings and how the melody built up over the song duration. *It reminds me of traveling or the passage of time.*" - male, 35, rated it 9/10

"I like how it's reminiscent of Hans Zimmer's scores, with the cellos providing the active background and rhythm. *The melody is smooth and makes me think of a ship sailing on waves that get stronger as time goes on. Very contemplative and beautiful piece.*" - female, 41, rated it 9/10

"*I love the intense beat of the song* as it begins and then how more mellow instruments are introduced giving it a more serene feel." - female, 33, rated it 9/10

"*I really love the melody of this song.* It is so soothing and perfect for a rainy Saturday morning. The instrumentation seemed perfect and fit well with the melody. *I felt the song title also fit the song perfectly.*" - female, 47, rated it 9/10

"*It's beautiful and powerful and inspiring. I really enjoy listening to it.* I would love this as a soundtrack - I can hear it as part of a movie score." - female, 41, rated it 9/10

"*The composition has a great rhythmical section and really plays well with the chord progressions in the song.* A great piece for a film! The mix is really well done." - male, 26, rated it 9/10

"This is very relaxing and peaceful to listen to. *Everything about it is beautiful.* You can feel the emotion the feeling that the song brings. I love how it gets louder and louder. I can see this being in a major motion picture. The only thing I didn't like is that in the background it is a bit heavy with one of the instruments sounds like a horn or something. This would do great in a time period film on a dance floor slow dancing in elegant gowns." - female, 48, rated it 9/10

"*This song has a sublte intensity, like something big is going down and we should prepare, then as it builds it gives you the sense of a cautious hope.*" - male, 31, rated it 9/10


----------



## theaviv

"*Beautiful song*, I could easily see this being in a movie soundtrack one day, or maybe even a video game soundtrack. *I loved it, no complaints here.*" - female, 25, rated it 8/10

"*For a classic song I think that it really does have a cool touch that make for a fun song even in this day and age.*" - male, 29, rated it 8/10

"*I enjoy the intro of the track.* The strings on the track are emotional and it has a tint of great play here. It sounds like something you hear in a Skyrim Soundtrack." - male, 24, rated it 8/10

"I enjoyed this *epic sounding song*. The backing melody adds a sense of depth and that works in harmony with the main violin melody. The main violins add a sense of emotion and personality to this song. I like the layers of contrast and harmony in this song." - male, 35, rated it 8/10

"I felt that the instruments being played sounded so serene together. *I am not familiar with this sort of music but it sounds well made.*" - male, 28, rated it 8/10

"*I like how it starts subtle but starts to draw you in as it plays on.* It's very relaxing also. It seems like it would be a great instrumental for a dramatic scene in some sort of drama." - female, 36, rated it 8/10

"*I like that it has a feel of a professional orchestra. They give the feeling of true emotions that are deep to the heart.*" - female, 45, rated it 8/10

"*I like the foreboding tone of the intro* - good use of string dynamics and tone. Seems like something that could be used for a movie soundtrack." - male, 40, rated it 8/10

"*I play for the music more than one time because in this song is very interesting to hear it always this is very very nice and humming song.*" - male, 22, rated it 8/10

"I really enjoy *classical music*, so I found this song to B *enjoyable overall*. It had a *very nice, elegant sound to it.* Fans of the genre will likely appreciate the song too." - male, 32, rated it 8/10

"*I really like the introduction section of the song - it adds a sense of mystery and magic to the song which is really fun and unique.*" - male, 31, rated it 8/10

"I think that this song is *really good*. I like that the music flows together really well and over all I think that it would be really good." - female, 27, rated it 8/10

"I think this song has some *great beats and a lot of energy*. I really *enjoy listening to it* and I think the *quality of the music is great*." - male, 37, rated it 8/10

"I thought the instrumental had an *interesting dramatic sound*. The tone and quality sounded good. I liked how the song built up in intensity, it became more interesting to listen to and the instruments were nicely layered." - male, 33, rated it 8/10

"*Lovely piece.* Has a cinematic feel. Can hear this in a movie definitely. *Beautiful melody.* And the accompaniment is bouncy. Production is clear and dynamic. *A winner.*" - male, 45, rated it 8/10

"*The beat was really easy to get into and feel the vibe with. The instruments were well played and real easy to follow.*" - male, 26, rated it 8/10

"*The opening cello was interesting and put me in a curious yet apprehensive mood. I enjoyed the violins quite a lot as well. Overall it was a great song.*" - male, 37, rated it 8/10

"*The production in this song was very epic sounding. I especially loved the sound progression in this song. It was very entertaining to listen to. This is a real good song.*" - male, 28, rated it 8/10

"The song seemed smooth and quiet. This was a relaxing tune that *I enjoyed very much*. Pleasant music is a good thing to hear. *This is happiness.*" - male, 64, rated it 8/10

"*This feels really intense and really quite epic*, just a very cool sound that would work really well in a movie sound track or on tv." - female, 39, rated it 8/10

"*This is a nice tune that quietly builds up. It starts with the violins as the music sways between our ears to leave quite a melodic tune.*" - female, 57, rated it 8/10

"This song has a nice sound. The volume was very quiet in the beginning. I like the way it builds. This is *a relaxing yet emotional sound*." - female, 46, rated it 8/10

"*This song has a very subtle opening. The violins are quite good from the beginning.* I can imagine this being on a movie soundtrack, during the credits." - female, 45, rated it 8/10

"This song sounds like it would be good as music for a video game like Warcraft I find it to be *pretty good to me*." - female, 34, rated it 8/10

"*Beautiful piece of music here. Everything is nicely laid out. I like how emotion evoking the song is. Everything is timed nicely. Nicely laid out piece of music.*" - male, 30, rated it 7/10

"*I actually liked it quite a bit. It reminded me of getting ready to leave the house on one of those important dates from a long time ago. Thank you for the memories!*" - male, 40, rated it 7/10

"*I really like how mellow and relaxing this song is. I love the instrumental music. It's a very beautiful sound.*" - female, 30, rated it 7/10

"*It reminds me of walking in the rain in a city in Europe. The violin solo is very pretty at the beginning of the song.*" - female, 35, rated it 7/10

"*The build up for this song is quite smooth and has a really good flow to it. The way it pulls you along is absolutely wonderful.*" - male, 38, rated it 7/10

"*The main string melody is beautiful, but I also enjoyed the backing string riff too. Simple yet effective. I also enjoyed it when the other strings join the main melody and the tempo slows. Nice, emotional piece overall.*" - male, 31, rated it 7/10

"*The song had a dramatic flair and a romantic quality. The orchestral effects gave the song a dignified sound. The composition was complex and intriguing.*" - female, 39, rated it 7/10

"The strings component on this song was really beautiful. It made me want to listen intently and this was a *very well-composed song*. It was calming and *easy to listen to*." - female, 24, rated it 7/10

"There was a low-key intensity to how the instrumentation sounded in this song that *hooked me* and *made me interested in listening to more of the song*." - male, 32, rated it 7/10

"*Well I do love a good serenade of classical music and I feel like that is exactly what was delivered here. Really great talent at work.*" - male, 34, rated it 7/10

"*Great sound and meaning the song portrays. All the instrumentals go together very well and makes you intrigued for what is next. Violins were very strong throughout.*" - male, 30, rated it 6/10


----------



## haus.media

This thread was an unbelievably enlightening way to kill an hour plus this evening....time that could have been spent furthering my musical efforts...which currently suck, and will most likely suck a bit less in ten years.

A deep bow at the waist to both @Willowtree and @mducharme and the supporting cast members for fighting the good fight of enlightenment. Never give up, never give in.


----------



## Willowtree

@theaviv, while you got these excellent paid reviews above, the sketches on your YouTube channel only have dislikes.

I don't intend any offence, but paid reviews of someone else's production of your song are not going to accurately reflect the reception your music gets.

Since you're right now seemingly more interested in attention and aren't responding to my questions towards you, I believe I'm done in this thread.

Thank you, everyone. It's been a pleasure.


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> *Nowadays, you can order reliable market research reports for your music:*
> 
> @Chorny Serge recently produced a mockup of my Serenade for me:



In all honesty, this was more than a mockup. He changed your arrangement, he changed the cello ostinato (the actual notes), he added harmony parts in thirds to the ostinato, he changed articulations quite a bit (legato to spiccato or pizzicato), he added a ton of shaping. Those are all improvements, but those are things that should have been in your original, not for him to add. Those were all compositional improvements, not improvements in the mockup. He has corrected some of the weaknesses of your original in terms of composition, but there are still many weaknesses.

Your moving back and forth between the C major and D minor harmonies, and nothing else, mean that the piece never really goes anywhere - I don't feel it ever really develops. The harmonic stasis makes it work somewhat on a minimalist level, as sort of a cross between Jenkins and Philip Glass, except weaker than both.

Jenkins' music has a trajectory because it actually has harmonic motion - yours is stasis. Philip Glass uses stasis in a similar way but his patterns and rhythms are more interesting and he changes them more often.

For me the acid test of a piece that is "too static" is if I can skip ahead one minute and it still sounds the same, and another minute and it still sounds the same, and the next minute, etc. What Chorny Serge did went beyond what would normally be done by someone doing a mockup. Calling it a mockup is, I think, not being quite generous enough in terms of what he did.



> I uploaded the mockup on ReverbNation (https://www.reverbnation.com/theaviv) and ordered a *ReverbNation Crowd Reviews* report (https://www.reverbnation.com/band-promotion/crowd_review):
> 
> 
> 
> *The Aviv,*
> 
> Congratulations! Your song, "Serenade", scored *7.9 *through Crowd Review and as a result has earned this featured spot.​



And that is supposed to mean something? I see you pasted a million reviews, spamming the messages with glowing reviews of your piece. Obviously, nothing I say is going to dissuade you of your seeming belief that you are an utter genius and that we are all pathetic talentless hacks in your shadow, jealous of your ability. So it will probably do absolutely no good to point out those crowd reviews are not geared for classical music, they are for popular. They are not going to mean anything outside of that. The fact that they are calling it a "song" demonstrates that. If you want to write popular music and see how people like it, sure, that makes sense. But for classical? Meaningless. People who listen to mostly popular music are going to be easily impressed, and so you'll get inflated reviews.

I can imagine a very different reviews site with people who are actually well versed in classical music. I expect you would get a quite different result.


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> But classical per definition is not popular.



What is this nonsense? Classical is a genre. No genre is defined by popularity.

Genre is defined by style:


theaviv said:


> 3. *Style*: Works of art are made in recognizable styles, rules that govern form, composition, or expression. Style provides a stable, predictable, "normal" background against which artists may create novelty and expressive surprise.




The reviewers in both the ReverbNation report and the TuneCore report (which I will post soon) identified the piece as classical:


theaviv said:


> "I think that this artist can hang around with the best of them in this *classical genre*, so I hope they keep pushing their work forward." - male, 31, rated it 8/10
> 
> ...
> 
> "A beautiful *classical piece*. I was taken in my mind to a large, Victorian entertainment hall with ladies dressed in Victorian dresses dancing with eloquent men. The violin was heart piercing and I loved this piece of music." - female, 56, rated it 10/10
> 
> ...
> 
> "I have enjoyed listening to this *classical song*. It has very strong hints of mystery notes in it, that makes it so interesting to listen to." - female, 41, rated it 10/10
> 
> "I like the way this song starts and slowly builds throughout. The stringed instruments work wonderfully together. As I listen, the momentum continues to build, getting louder and louder. This is really enjoyable. *Great classical instrumental song*." - female, 59, rated it 10/10
> 
> ...
> 
> "I very much enjoy the soft chill ominous vibes of this *classical song*. Love the droning violin sound. Great atmospheric sound. Cool mix." - male, 35, rated it 10/10
> 
> ...
> 
> "*For a classic song I think that it really does have a cool touch that make for a fun song even in this day and age.*" - male, 29, rated it 8/10
> 
> ...
> 
> "I really enjoy *classical music*, so I found this song to B enjoyable overall. It had a very nice, elegant sound to it. Fans of the genre will likely appreciate the song too." - male, 32, rated it 8/10
> 
> ...
> 
> "Well I do love a good serenade of *classical music* and I feel like that is exactly what was delivered here. Really great talent at work." - male, 34, rated it 7/10




I will also remind you of a very important concept. You should really read up on it:


theaviv said:


> This is known as "Wisdom of Crowds":
> 
> "_The Wisdom of Crowds is a powerful and proven methodology that states large groups of ordinary people organized under the right conditions (a "smart crowd") outperform small groups of experts in making decisions and predictions. The idea is not new. It’s the science behind Google and decision-making in some of the largest companies in the world. It has been proven time and again that collective wisdom consistently surpasses the experts. It also means that TuneCore Fan Reviews can guarantee 90% accuracy in track ratings. If you want to know more, we recommend you read "The Wisdom Of Crowds: Why Many Are Smarter Than The Few" by James Surowiecki._"
> 
> https://support.tunecore.com/hc/en-...neCore-Fan-Reviews-Frequently-Asked-Questions
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds




I have said many times before, I want to make classical popular. My genre is different from yours:


theaviv said:


> Following up on our discussion about genre:
> 
> I would call music like Karl Jenkins' Palladio _mainstream classical_ - or more precisely, _contemporary mainstream classical_.
> 
> mainstream: (adjective) considered normal, and having or using ideas, beliefs, etc. that are accepted by most people
> 
> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/mainstream
> 
> contemporary: (adjective) existing or happening now
> 
> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/contemporary
> 
> It is important to recognize that contemporary classical (by common definition) should include music that (1) is by a living composer, and that (2) the public would call classical.
> 
> "*Contemporary classical music* is classical music relative to the present day."
> 
> Wikipedia lists a variety of "movements" and "developments by medium" for contemporary classical:
> 
> 2Movements
> 
> 2.1Modernism
> 2.2Electronic music
> 2.2.1Computer music
> 
> 2.3Spectral music
> 2.4Post-modernism
> 2.5Polystylism (eclecticism)
> 2.5.1Historicism
> 2.5.2Neoromanticism
> 2.5.3Art rock influence
> 
> 2.6New Simplicity
> 2.7New Complexity
> 2.8Minimalism and post-minimalism
> 3Developments by medium
> 
> 3.1Opera
> 3.2Chamber
> 3.3Choral
> 3.4Concert bands (wind ensembles)
> 3.5Cinema
> 3.6Video and Computer Games
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music
> 
> The point is, it's important to recognize that there is a broad range of what could fall under the (contemporary) classical umbrella.
> 
> I want to be a classical artist. I want to release singles and albums just like any other music artist of more mainstream genres - pop, country, etc. I want to hear my music played on classical radio. I want to make classical popular again.
> 
> So far, contemporary mainstream classical is mostly limited to media music - i.e. film, videogame, and advertisement music. For example, classical radio like Classical 96.3 FM will occasionally insert a little John Williams, video game themes performed by the London Philharmonic Orchestra, and Karl Jenkins' Palladio (which could be considered media music as well, since it was originally composed for advertisement). Most of mainstream classical is still by dead composers from centuries ago.
> 
> But I believe there is a silent yearning out there for a new flavour of classical, one that I believe I will capture with my music.


----------



## theaviv

mducharme said:


> And that is supposed to mean something? I see you pasted a million reviews, spamming the messages with glowing reviews of your piece. Obviously, nothing I say is going to dissuade you of your seeming belief that you are an utter genius and that we are all pathetic talentless hacks in your shadow, jealous of your ability. So it will probably do absolutely no good to point out those crowd reviews are not geared for classical music, they are for popular. They are not going to mean anything outside of that. The fact that they are calling it a "song" demonstrates that. If you want to write popular music and see how people like it, sure, that makes sense. But for classical? Meaningless. People who listen to mostly popular music are going to be easily impressed, and so you'll get inflated reviews.
> 
> I can imagine a very different reviews site with people who are actually well versed in classical music. I expect you would get a quite different result.



Again, like I have said many times before: _I want to make classical popular._ My genre is different from yours. Please see the above post.

I don't think you're a "pathetic talentless hack in my shadow, jealous of my ability" - when did I say that? I admire your intelligence. I think your genre and taste in music is different from mine and the vast majority of the public. I think we write for different audiences.

Also, I've been listening to the contemporary examples you've shared here, and I will continue to listen to them. I hope to eventually be able to see what you see in them. I am very open to different kinds of music.


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> I don't think you're a "pathetic talentless hack in my shadow, jealous of my ability" - when did I say that?



You didn't say exactly that, but your tone (if one can use that word for online forum posts) demonstrates an overabundance of ego and a lack of humility. It is better to have both in balance. At some point you are going to get a particularly devastating rejection or critique from someone important who you expected to really impress and everything you have built up regarding your self image is going to come crashing down, which is not going to be healthy for you, and won't be positive for your composition aspirations. I would just hope that when that happens, it doesn't result in you throwing in the towel.



> I admire your intelligence. I think your genre and taste in music is different from mine and the vast majority of the public. I think we write for different audiences.



Thank you, but I do write two very different kinds of music. I write contemporary classical concert works and I also score films. When I am doing film music composition the goals are completely different, and I am writing to move an audience. That means that there are certain things that are done differently vs. contemporary classical concert works. Our musical tastes are certainly different, but when I am writing film music, I am trying to write for the same audience.

Also, I think most professional musicians are good at respecting music that they don't necessarily generally enjoy to perform or listen to, so I think you would find most who write contemporary classical still have valuable insights and feedback regarding music that you intend to have a more popular base. Certainly more valuable than members of the general public. It is nice to hear feedback from the general public that they really liked something, but they hand that feedback out too readily to too many people. They are too easily impressed.


----------



## theaviv

Willowtree said:


> But even if it is accurate, this was a crowd review of @Chorny Serge's mock-up and arrangement of your work, which was significantly different.





mducharme said:


> In all honesty, this was more than a mockup. He changed your arrangement, he changed the cello ostinato (the actual notes), he added harmony parts in thirds to the ostinato, he changed articulations quite a bit (legato to spiccato or pizzicato), he added a ton of shaping. Those are all improvements, but those are things that should have been in your original, not for him to add. Those were all compositional improvements, not improvements in the mockup. He has corrected some of the weaknesses of your original in terms of composition, but there are still many weaknesses.



@Chorny Serge is a talented producer, which is why I noticed him, contacted him, and worked with him on my first mockup. He did what any good producer does: He took my blueprint and in the process of constructing it, he made modifications that he thought would make it better - and I agreed with his decisions.

Serge is an architect by education and works as a 3D designer. He understands very well that an architect needs a builder. The architect makes the bulk of the design. The architect lays out the main foundation and ideas that identify and distinguish the work and make it unique. The builder has the task of taking the design and compiling it into the finished product. In the process, a good builder will suggest practical and even aesthetic modifications. A good architect considers input from his builder - but the architect makes all the final calls.

_The artist is the architect. The producer is the builder._

The artist is also like a chef. He writes the recipe. The cook has the task of preparing the dish. In the process, a good cook will suggest modifications to the recipe. The chef makes the final call. The chef is the artist of his menu and restaurant, and he employs cooks in the process of creating his art.

_The artist is the chef. The producer is the cook._

This is how music is done in the mainstream industry. I said this earlier when I wrote my decision regarding the original question of the thread:


theaviv said:


> Classical is no different than any other genre of music. If you want to make it big, really big, you gotta focus on being the artist - not the artist and producer combined. The biggest artists in the music industry do not try to be both producers and artists.
> 
> Michael Jackson did not produce his own music, he worked with Quincy Jones. He outsourced the polish. Classical is no different - it's just another genre in the industry. If you want to be the King of Classical, you gotta think like the King of Classical.
> 
> I never wanted to be a videogame or film composer. When I was 20 and started composing for the very first time - more than a decade ago - I envisioned myself as a "classical artist" - I wanted to release singles and albums just like any other music artist of more mainstream genres - pop, country, etc. I wanted to hear my music played on Classical 96.3 FM. I wanted to make classical popular again - and I believed I could do it, but life got in the way and I didn't compose much since. I'd like to think it's time for me to believe again.



All mainstream artists work like this - the late Michael Jackson (worked with Quincy Jones), Taylor Swift (on her recent album, worked with Louis Bell, Jack Antonoff, Joel Little, and others), and many others. The artist focuses on being the artist and works with producers to polish their work.

I want to be a mainstream artist. I want to make classical popular.

My genre is _mainstream classical_.

I focus on being the artist and work with producers to polish my work.

This is the 21st century.

The mainstream industry is a ballgame all of its own. I am familiar with it because I attempted in the past to make it in the pop genre. I encountered blocks in singing the songs I wrote:

















The Aviv


I compose classical music. I want to make classical popular again. My plan is to tour the world with a personal orchestra, conduct my music, and put on spectacular concerts!




soundcloud.com


----------



## mducharme

theaviv said:


> All mainstream artists work like this - the late Michael Jackson (worked with Quincy Jones), Taylor Swift (on her recent album, worked with Louis Bell, Jack Antonoff, Joel Little, and others), and many others. The artist focuses on being the artist, and works with producers to polish their work.
> 
> I want to be a mainstream artist. I want to make classical popular.
> 
> I focus on being the artist and work with producers to polish my work.



I have not met a composer or even heard of a composer who would call themselves a "classical" composer who was relying on the producer to such a degree.

Any composer will get feedback from people and can implement that feedback in their piece without "tainting" their work as being 100% theirs, but this is a bit different.

Although I'm not a fan of his music, I can guarantee that Jenkins knows what he is doing, and that when "producers" do recordings of his music that everything they record is what he had written, that they don't have to add those details.

In pop music as a genre, of course the producer does this sort of thing. George Martin composed the string parts for the Beatles' Eleanor Rigby inspired in turn by Bernard Herrmann's film score Psycho (1960). But pop music is not classical. In classical you are expected to have the skills yourself - not necessarily the audio recording and mixing aspects, but the writing. In film music it is sometimes different, where some film composers may not even be able to read music and get someone else to notate what they wrote (they are usually quite talented if they are able to get away with this). In classical music? I would probably say unheard of entirely.



> This is the 21st century.



If being in the 21st century means that it is normal to be a "classical" composer without knowing what you are doing, then bring back the 20th already.


----------



## theaviv

mducharme said:


> I have not met a composer or even heard of a composer who would call themselves a "classical" composer who was relying on the producer to such a degree.
> 
> Any composer will get feedback from people and can implement that feedback in their piece without "tainting" their work as being 100% theirs, but this is a bit different.
> 
> Although I'm not a fan of his music, I can guarantee that Jenkins knows what he is doing, and that when "producers" do recordings of his music that everything they record is what he had written, that they don't have to add those details.
> 
> In pop music as a genre, of course the producer does this sort of thing. George Martin composed the string parts for the Beatles' Eleanor Rigby inspired in turn by Bernard Herrmann's film score Psycho (1960). But pop music is not classical. In classical you are expected to have the skills yourself - not necessarily the audio recording and mixing aspects, but the writing. In film music it is sometimes different, where some film composers may not even be able to read music and get someone else to notate what they wrote (they are usually quite talented if they are able to get away with this). In classical music? I would probably say unheard of entirely.



I am a multidisciplinary innovator. What I am trying to do is unheard of entirely. I want to make classical popular - like, really popular.

Serenade is a product of my soul. It came from me. I am the mind behind the intense beat and the beautiful melody. I am the mind behind the dramatic flair and the romantic quality. @Chorny Serge absorbed the energy of my draft and amplified it in the mockup, like the talented producer he is.



theaviv said:


> "*I love the intense beat of the song* as it begins and then how more mellow instruments are introduced giving it a more serene feel." - female, 33, rated it 9/10
> 
> "*I really love the melody of this song.* It is so soothing and perfect for a rainy Saturday morning. The instrumentation seemed perfect and fit well with the melody. *I felt the song title also fit the song perfectly.*" - female, 47, rated it 9/10





theaviv said:


> "*The main string melody is beautiful, but I also enjoyed the backing string riff too. Simple yet effective. I also enjoyed it when the other strings join the main melody and the tempo slows. Nice, emotional piece overall.*" - male, 31, rated it 7/10
> 
> "*The song had a dramatic flair and a romantic quality. The orchestral effects gave the song a dignified sound. The composition was complex and intriguing.*" - female, 39, rated it 7/10




I am the mind behind the story.

(Read the story here: Story)



theaviv said:


> "This reminds me so much of James Horner's stuff, and *I love it!* The music sounds like *it's telling a story*, and *I feel involved in its development.*" - female, 24, rated it 10/10




I am the name and face of the music.



theaviv said:


> "*I think that this artist can hang around with the best of them in this classical genre, so I hope they keep pushing their work forward.*" - male, 31, rated it 8/10
> 
> "*I really like the artist name. The track title is nice, simple, and understated. The music is so strong, awesome, movie quality. Great listening.*" - female, 29, rated it 10/10




I am The Aviv.



theaviv said:


> "It sounded like something that could be an action movie. I enjoyed the song, and thought that it was worth listening to again. *The artist was someone that I haven't heard of, and I would seek them out again.*" - male, 23, rated it 10/10




I attached the midi of my draft and the midi of the mockup. You're making it seem like I did nothing. You're making it seem like I would be lost without @Chorny Serge.

Me and Serge have a very good artist-producer relationship, but make no mistake: There are many producers out there, only one The Aviv.


----------



## mducharme

Best of luck to you, but I don't think I can advise any further in a way that will be useful. So like @Willowtree smartly did before, I'm going to bow out now.


----------



## theaviv

mducharme said:


> It is nice to hear feedback from the general public that they really liked something, but they hand that feedback out too readily to too many people. They are too easily impressed.



Well then, if you think my Serenade is just "ah, another one" (like Willow said earlier) why don't you get a crowd review report for your best film piece, see if you get similar or better results than my Serenade, and post the report here. If you do, then maybe I'll shut up.

It's a mere $50 USD for 100 reviews. Not a bad deal at all.


Willowtree said:


> Setting the mock-up aside, I hate to break it to you, but this sounds like a fairly average media composition. This is something I see most composers making in a couple minutes when bored or in a hurry with a deadline coming up. For a piece like this, the orchestration and performance needs to be what stands out, since the harmony, rhythm or melody will not stand out from the crowd.
> 
> There's nothing new here. Standard harmony. Standard rhythm. Standard melody. This is stock music. And if that's what you're going for, that's okay, but people won't look at this and think "Oh, it' the Aviv's music!" They'll listen to this and think "ah, another one".



Any one of you is welcome to do this and demonstrate (with real evidence - i.e. crowd review report) just how full of myself I really am.



mducharme said:


> Thank you, but I do write two very different kinds of music. I write contemporary classical concert works and I also score films. When I am doing film music composition the goals are completely different, and I am writing to move an audience. That means that there are certain things that are done differently vs. contemporary classical concert works. Our musical tastes are certainly different, but when I am writing film music, I am trying to write for the same audience.
> 
> Also, I think most professional musicians are good at respecting music that they don't necessarily generally enjoy to perform or listen to, so I think you would find most who write contemporary classical still have valuable insights and feedback regarding music that you intend to have a more popular base. Certainly more valuable than members of the general public. It is nice to hear feedback from the general public that they really liked something, but they hand that feedback out too readily to too many people. They are too easily impressed.



If you write for the same audience and can move them better than me, prove it.


----------



## mducharme

Two final comments. First, I personally felt that your Serenade is OK but not amazing, but I think you have promise as a composer based on a few aspects of the Serenade that shone through, and I don't think you should give it up, but you have a lot of work to do. Second, I don't need to prove myself to you, and I'm certainly not going to blow $50 USD doing so when I get no other benefit from it.


----------



## Chorny Serge

mducharme said:


> He changed your arrangement, he changed the cello ostinato (the actual notes), he added harmony parts in thirds to the ostinato, he changed articulations quite a bit (legato to spiccato or pizzicato), he added a ton of shaping.


Yep, that's what I do) just can't stop mockup-ing everything I hear. This is probably another stage of learning music. 

This was a very interesting and informative conversation here, I've learned many clever thoughts. If anyone else interested in any kind of collaboration you're welcome to contact me or just say "hi" in my thread) 





New composer is here to show some mock-ups, talk about music and of course make some! Greetings!


Hi everyone! My name is Serge and I'm a self-thaught composer from Ukraine. I would like to share my work with you. I am only at the beginning of creating content for social networks, you can listen to some of my music by following the links: Here's my attempt to record the flute (with midi...




vi-control.net


----------



## Geomir

@theaviv
Don't you think that your Serenade is way too simple? The "left hand" (imagine it as a piano piece) is using the same chord progression (consisting of only 2 chords) for 5 minutes!

[Start of Song] d minor -> c major -> d minor -> c major -> ... -> d minor -> c major [End of Song]

The "right hand" has some nice catchy melodies, but it alone cannot save the fact that for 5 full minutes the whole song follows this simple pattern! Again and again and again and again! No change of tempo, no change of chord progression, only d minor -> c major, from start to finish! And this specific chord progression is one of the most "obvious" ones and the most "basic" ones, there is nothing unpredictable to make it original or offer some surprise!

Maybe if your serenade was made to be as an "intense passage" taken from a 20 minutes piece, then I think it would be much more interesting! Imagine a 20 minutes slow/medium tempo song, relatively peaceful, and suddenly the surprise: change of tempo, and your serenade enters (from _pp_ to _ff_), playing for 2-3 minutes! I think it could be more impressive if used in that fashion! Think of it!

But as a stand alone song, I think it's very simple, flat and monotonous: 5 minutes are too many for a chord progression with only 2 chords in a constant tempo!

I consider myself an inexperienced beginner composer, I consider my songs "not ready yet for the public", and all of them have many more different chords, some surprises in chord progressions, and I repeat I am new to this! I am just trying to keep my feet on the ground, and balance my confidence with humility, so I don't rush and publish something that is unfinished, or that it could be vastly improved if I was more patient and humble!

P.S. Check Schubert's Serenade. A beautiful, emotional, sad, melancholic piece of music. It's considered a simple song, everyone can play it in his piano (I mean, it's not something genius, complicated or advanced like some of Bach's or Mozart's pieces), and still in the first 10 seconds he already uses 4 different chords in his chord progression! And then more and more, so the song evolves and goes from "pure sadness" to "sweet melancholy", and back again!


----------



## Willowtree

@theaviv, this will be my last post in this thread and I am going to unfollow it because I don't think this discussion is fruitful whatsoever any longer.

If you want to prove yourself, come onto the VI Discord and post a track. Be judged by your peers.

Also, repeatedly stating in your story focused on women that there was no hidden sexual meaning intended made me, as a woman, uncomfortable.

I'd personally advice you rewrite it, but that's just me.

Good luck.


----------



## haus.media

I'm just going to leave this right here....









The Aviv


Artist based in Hamilton, ON




www.youtube.com





Particularly...



Either this thread has been a very protracted and laborious comedic "bit", chewing up the valuable time of individuals with actual hard earned talent or it's been a dark look inside an individual's somewhat frightening struggle with disillusionment. 

Oh, and third person proclamations never play well in the bigger picture of meaningful human discourse.


----------



## SonsofRest

haus.media said:


> I'm just going to leave this right here....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Aviv
> 
> 
> Artist based in Hamilton, ON
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.youtube.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Particularly...
> 
> 
> 
> Either this thread has been a very protracted and laborious comedic "bit", chewing up the valuable time of individuals with actual hard earned talent or it's been a dark look inside an individual's somewhat frightening struggle with disillusionment.
> 
> Oh, and third person proclamations never play well in the bigger picture of meaningful human discourse.




Wow...

Well, if this has been an elaborate troll, I certainly bought into it. It would also explain a lot of the bizarre behavior.

If it's not a troll, then there are issues at play here which I don't think any of us are qualified to help with, despite our best intentions.

I think Willowtree and mducharme had the right idea - I'm going excuse myself from this thread as well.


----------



## theaviv

Geomir said:


> @theaviv
> Don't you think that your Serenade is way too simple? The "left hand" (imagine it as a piano piece) is using the same chord progression (consisting of only 2 chords) for 5 minutes!
> 
> [Start of Song] d minor -> c major -> d minor -> c major -> ... -> d minor -> c major [End of Song]
> 
> The "right hand" has some nice catchy melodies, but it alone cannot save the fact that for 5 full minutes the whole song follows this simple pattern! Again and again and again and again! No change of tempo, no change of chord progression, only d minor -> c major, from start to finish! And this specific chord progression is one of the most "obvious" ones and the most "basic" ones, there is nothing unpredictable to make it original or offer some surprise!
> 
> Maybe if your serenade was made to be as an "intense passage" taken from a 20 minutes piece, then I think it would be much more interesting! Imagine a 20 minutes slow/medium tempo song, relatively peaceful, and suddenly the surprise: change of tempo, and your serenade enters (from _pp_ to _ff_), playing for 2-3 minutes! I think it could be more impressive if used in that fashion! Think of it!
> 
> But as a stand alone song, I think it's very simple, flat and monotonous: 5 minutes are too many for a chord progression with only 2 chords in a constant tempo!
> 
> I consider myself an inexperienced beginner composer, I consider my songs "not ready yet for the public", and all of them have many more different chords, some surprises in chord progressions, and I repeat I am new to this! I am just trying to keep my feet on the ground, and balance my confidence with humility, so I don't rush and publish something that is unfinished, or that it could be vastly improved if I was more patient and humble!
> 
> P.S. Check Schubert's Serenade. A beautiful, emotional, sad, melancholic piece of music. It's considered a simple song, everyone can play it in his piano (I mean, it's not something genius, complicated or advanced like some of Bach's or Mozart's pieces), and still in the first 10 seconds he already uses 4 different chords in his chord progression! And then more and more, so the song evolves and goes from "pure sadness" to "sweet melancholy", and back again!




Fair question. I appreciate your sincerity.

It would completely change the whole tone and intention of the piece if I were to add meaningless complexity. Music is not about how many chords you can string together or adding senseless surprises in chord progressions. Music (and art in general) is about meaning.


theaviv said:


> If you create something without meaning, is it really art or just a random arrangement of elements made by a sentient being?



The alternating two chords is what gives the piece its obsessive, passionate, and intense tone.

"This is deeply romantic music. In essence, it describes the growth of something beautiful - something magnificent and wonderful. It describes the most exciting part of a relationship, the beginning."

"The red rose symbolizes this something beautiful. It symbolizes this growing love as it slowly blooms in the dark."

"The red rose symbolizes this music."

I wrote about it here.

In a random sample of listeners, market research shows that 20% tap into the meaning of the piece and rate it 10/10:


theaviv said:


> *ReverbNation Crowd Reviews*
> 
> Serenade • 104 Reviewers • Classical (instrumental) • November 1, 2019
> 
> _American audience_
> 
> ...
> 
> 20% thought it was perfect
> 30% thought it was almost perfect
> 60% thought it was pretty good
> 80% thought it was good
> 90% thought it was not bad
> 10% thought it was bad




Here are some of the thoughts listeners shared...


----------



## theaviv

theaviv said:


> Here are some of the thoughts listeners shared...





theaviv said:


> "*This song is simply beautiful! I love everything about it. It's lovely to listen to, exciting yet peaceful at the same time. Amazing!!!*" - female, 41, rated it 10/10
> 
> "*I enjoyed everything about this song. I could listen to it over and over. It is just what I needed to hear this morning.*" - female, 46, rated it 10/10
> 
> "A *beautiful classical piece*. I was taken in my mind to a large, Victorian entertainment hall with ladies dressed in Victorian dresses dancing with eloquent men. *The violin was heart piercing and I loved this piece of music.*" - female, 56, rated it 10/10
> 
> "*I could not find anything wrong with this song. I really enjoyed listening. Instrumentals are very good and I would love to hear more.*" - female, 63, rated it 10/10
> 
> "*I love the unique sound here and the way that the momentum keeps building. I think it would sound even better in person. Keep working on it, great job so far.*" - female, 44, rated it 8/10
> 
> "I have enjoyed listening to this *classical song*. It has *very strong hints of mystery notes* in it, that makes it *so interesting to listen to*." - female, 41, rated it 10/10
> 
> "I like the way this song starts and slowly builds throughout. The stringed instruments work wonderfully together. As I listen, the momentum continues to build, getting louder and louder. This is really enjoyable. *Great classical instrumental song*." - female, 59, rated it 10/10
> 
> "I love the sound of the strings! All the different sections blended well together. All the violins sounded as one. There was so much emotion in this piece. It became more and more intense! *Absolutely beautiful!*" - female, 53, rated it 10/10
> 
> "I loved the progression of the strings and the way they built up and swelled. *It made me want to keep listening to find out where the song would go next!* I could see this as the soundtrack to something deep and dramatic." - female, 31, rated it 10/10
> 
> "I very much enjoy the soft chill ominous vibes of this *classical song*. Love the droning violin sound. Great atmospheric sound. Cool mix." - male, 35, rated it 10/10
> 
> "I'm loving the beats, they are on key. The song structure is off the chain and the sound production is perfect. The instrumental is awesomely amazing. Keep up the great job and *I'll keep an ear out for more.*" - male, 37, rated it 10/10
> 
> "It sounded like something that could be an action movie. *I enjoyed the song, and thought that it was worth listening to again.* The artist was someone that I haven't heard of, and I would seek them out again." - male, 23, rated it 10/10
> 
> "It's a *beautifully composed song* with instrumentals that merge together gracefully and *fulfill the purpose of the song's title* and purpose with *perfection*. Great job!" - female, 24, rated it 10/10
> 
> "Passionate song, the violin being the main component of the song creates an ambiance that is *exciting, passionate, and relaxing all at the same time!* I also like how the song begins soft and eventually gets louder and more intense with more violins joining in." - male, 35, rated it 10/10
> 
> "Song is done *perfect*. Existential feel, and instruments are amazing. *Song structure is on point.* Makes me feel like Christmas is near. *Beautiful song.*" - female, 32, rated it 10/10
> 
> "The instrumental are well thought out and played very well. The song has a *mystical* feel to it. I could see this in a movie." - male, 32, rated it 10/10
> 
> "The song is really driving and relaxing. It's *well written* and there is *no issues* with it that are noticeable. It's a *solid song all around*." - male, 29, rated it 10/10
> 
> "The strings adds a rising aura to the instrumentation. I really love the way the song intensifies and then start to ease back down gently." - male, 29, rated it 10/10
> 
> "The strings sound great as well as the woodwinds. *I could definitely sit through a concert listening to songs like this*, they make me feel happy which I guess the title Serenate would indicate." - female, 60, rated it 10/10
> 
> "This reminds me so much of James Horner's stuff, and *I love it!* The music sounds like *it's telling a story*, and *I feel involved in its development.*" - female, 24, rated it 10/10
> 
> "This song was *beautiful, powerful intense, moving, immersive, and engaging*. I was thoughtful, peaceful, happy, and nostalgic. The sound quality was high and clear." - female, 46, rated it 10/10
> 
> "*I am loving this song.* It sounds like it would be played during king henry the 8th grand entrances or during a dragon match in game of thrones.. *I simply love it.*" - male, 25, rated it 9/10
> 
> ...
> 
> "I enjoyed the swelling strings and how the melody built up over the song duration. *It reminds me of traveling or the passage of time.*" - male, 35, rated it 9/10
> 
> "I like how it's reminiscent of Hans Zimmer's scores, with the cellos providing the active background and rhythm. *The melody is smooth and makes me think of a ship sailing on waves that get stronger as time goes on. Very contemplative and beautiful piece.*" - female, 41, rated it 9/10
> 
> "*I love the intense beat of the song* as it begins and then how more mellow instruments are introduced giving it a more serene feel." - female, 33, rated it 9/10
> 
> "*I really love the melody of this song.* It is so soothing and perfect for a rainy Saturday morning. The instrumentation seemed perfect and fit well with the melody. *I felt the song title also fit the song perfectly.*" - female, 47, rated it 9/10
> 
> "*It's beautiful and powerful and inspiring. I really enjoy listening to it.* I would love this as a soundtrack - I can hear it as part of a movie score." - female, 41, rated it 9/10
> 
> "*The composition has a great rhythmical section and really plays well with the chord progressions in the song.* A great piece for a film! The mix is really well done." - male, 26, rated it 9/10
> 
> ...
> 
> "*This song has a sublte intensity, like something big is going down and we should prepare, then as it builds it gives you the sense of a cautious hope.*" - male, 31, rated it 9/10





theaviv said:


> This is known as "Wisdom of Crowds":
> 
> "_The Wisdom of Crowds is a powerful and proven methodology that states large groups of ordinary people organized under the right conditions (a "smart crowd") outperform small groups of experts in making decisions and predictions. The idea is not new. It’s the science behind Google and decision-making in some of the largest companies in the world. It has been proven time and again that collective wisdom consistently surpasses the experts. It also means that TuneCore Fan Reviews can guarantee 90% accuracy in track ratings. If you want to know more, we recommend you read "The Wisdom Of Crowds: Why Many Are Smarter Than The Few" by James Surowiecki._"
> 
> https://support.tunecore.com/hc/en-...neCore-Fan-Reviews-Frequently-Asked-Questions
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds


----------



## theaviv

It's been half a year since I last posted here. I thought I'd share what I've been up to.


Given the favourable results from the *crowd review reports*, I am considering releasing _Serenade_ as my *debut single* - sometime in 2020. I am looking at distributing it with either Symphonic Distribution or CD Baby.


I've been working on finalizing the *album cover*:






I've also been working on a *draft video*:






The *draft video* is part of the *source package* I sent to my video producer, who will be using it to make the finished *music video*.


You can take a look at the rest of my *source package* here:

The Aviv - Serenade - Music Video Source Package


The *source package* includes a *treatment*, *script*, as well as a *libretto* I have written:


The Aviv - Serenade - Libretto

_A seawave splashes down the shore. The mood is right. The moon is bright. Stars are singing with delight. I wonder what's in store.

I feel it in the air. Every moment is with flair. Palmtrees dancing on repeat, seawaves washing down the beat. I wonder if there's more?

Well… she walks in, dressed in red. All eyes on her, enough is said. I guess my destiny's complete - and I am on the floor!

Sparks fly out. A rose unlike any other, only a bud, ready to blossom. Lightning strikes. Something stirs inside of me. Who would have thought? That smoke would be evaporating just in time for dawn.

There she is again! Embers are shooting out of me as I race across the vast ocean. The moonlight marks my destination. I become a lightning storm ready for romance.

She alights in fire and together we burn. Our flames, side by side, spin across the sky, leaving behind a trail of glowing ashes wherever we go.

The sun begins to rise as our love begins to bloom. The higher it goes, the stronger we grow. The beauty and the bliss… we go round and around till we drown. The whirlpool we create becomes inescapable. The vortex is all we can think of - and we would have it no other way!

It draws us deeper and deeper. Mesmerizing. Hypnotizing. The sun is climbing closer and closer to eternal light. Magnificent is the only word.

We soar above the clouds. Daylight invites adventure. The ocean begs for diving. The petals we shed blow in the wind. Life seems to just float by…

Until the clouds begin to roar and the thunder begins to speak - saying it is time for us to go.

Closer and closer, it looms in the horizon. We jump straight into it! Nothing can hold us back. Nothing. No wave is powerful enough to separate us.

We fall but we bounce up. The storm is strong but our love is stronger. We bleed, we cry, but we never give up. Boom. Splash. Her hand is still in mine. Roar after roar. Shake after shake. Rain pours down our cheeks but we embrace - we go along and face - the brutal cold and dark!

But alas…

All things must come to a stop. All things must reach an end. The sun will eventually set. The rose will ultimately wilt. Nothing can live forever - as they all like to remind.

But it was a good night!

So why do I feel so blue?

I guess because we must say our goodbyes…

'Tis time for the last lullaby…

…before we make way for the next night to begin anew…_


----------



## THW

Went down a rabbit hole reading through this thread. That’s enough VI control for tonight!


----------



## Pincel

THW said:


> Went down a rabbit hole reading through this thread. That’s enough VI control for tonight!



Same here... I was transported to another dimension reading through this stuff. 
Welcome to the Dark Side of VI Control? xD


----------



## theaviv

*How would you classify the

Primary Genre
Primary Subgenre

Secondary Genre
Secondary Subgenre

Mood/Style

of this piece of music?

Which famous artists (#1, #2, and #3) would you associate with it?

(This info is being asked by CD Baby for distribution.)*












Music Genres | AllMusic


Explore Music Genres on AllMusic




www.allmusic.com









Music Genre List - A complete list of music styles, types and genres


Genres of Music | The Most Definitive Music Genre List on the Web. Contribute, share and discover almost every music type, genre or style on the Internet!



www.musicgenreslist.com





*Here is a copy and paste from CD Baby:

Genres*

Choose 2 genres and subgenres, plus a mood that describes your music

_Genre #1:_

Main Category: _Please choose a genre_
Sub Category:

_Genre #2:_

Main Category: _Please choose a genre_
Sub Category:

_Album Mood/Style:_

Main Category: _Please choose a mood_

*Artists you sound like*

Tell us which famous artists you sound like! Please enter up to three artists people say reminds them of your music.

Famous Artist #1:
Famous Artist #2:
Famous Artist #3:

*Here is what I am thinking:

Genres*

_Genre #1:_

Main Category: _Classical_
Sub Category: _Orchestral_

or

Main Category: _Classical_
Sub Category: _Virtual Orchestra_

These are the only two sub categories (of Classical) CD Baby offers that I think are relevant to the piece.

_Genre #2:_

Main Category: _Easy Listening_
Sub Category: _Classical Pop_

or

Main Category: _Easy Listening_
Sub Category: _Orchestral_

or

Main Category: _Electronic_
Sub Category: _Virtual Orchestra_

or

Main Category: _New Age_
Sub Category: _Neo-Classical

Album Mood/Style:_

Main Category: _Instrumental_

*Artists you sound like*

Famous Artist #1: _James Horner_

"This reminds me so much of James Horner's stuff, and I love it! The music sounds like it's telling a story, and I feel involved in its development." - female, 24, rated it 10/10, ReverbNation Crowd Review






The Aviv


Reviews of my Serenade: "I think that this artist can hang around with the best of them in this classical genre, so I hope they keep pu...




theaviv.blogspot.com





_market research reports:_
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h94ym3mxgd8cjqo/AAAb8WH_C9mOqOPRfQTnto-9a

Famous Artist #2: _Hans Zimmer_

"I like how it's reminiscent of Hans Zimmer's scores, with the cellos providing the active background and rhythm. The melody is smooth and makes me think of a ship sailing on waves that get stronger as time goes on. Very contemplative and beautiful piece." - female, 41, rated it 9/10, ReverbNation Crowd Review

Famous Artist #3: _Howard Shore_

"I love the sound of this music! It reminds me of Lord of the Rings. I would definitely buy this album. Great sound and very enjoyable." - female, 40, rated it 10/10, ReverbNation Crowd Review

*I am thinking of just doing this:*

Genre #1:

Main Category: _Classical_
Sub Category: _Orchestral_

Genre #2:

Main Category: _Classical_
Sub Category: _Virtual Orchestra_

Album Mood/Style:

Main Category: _Instrumental_

Famous Artist #1: _James Horner_
Famous Artist #2: _Hans Zimmer_
Famous Artist #3: _Howard Shore_


----------



## theaviv

theaviv said:


> These are the only two sub categories (of Classical) CD Baby offers that I think are relevant to the piece.



I was wrong about my initial assumption. Taking a closer look at all the _sub categories_ under _Classical_, there are several options relevant to my track:

_Contemporary_
Minimalism
New Age
_Orchestral_
Sinfonietta
Tone Poem
Virtual Orchestra

I think it is important to first identify the _era_, especially since most classical music being recorded is still from the past:

*Genre #1:* (_era_)

Main Category: _Classical_
Sub Category: _Contemporary_

I think it is then important to identify the type of ensemble (or _form_ as I like to call it):

*Genre #2:* (_form_)

Main Category: _Classical_
Sub Category: _Orchestral_

I ordered another crowd review report from ReverbNation (attached) - this time with all the advanced insights they offer. I was curious to see what _genres_ and _similar artists_ reviewers would list:

*Regardless of how this song was classified, select the genre(s) you find most appropriate for this song.*


Classical83Instrumental40Other5Ambient4Alternative3Indie3Holiday2Dubstep2

(There were only 104 reviewers, but they were allowed to select more than one genre.)

*Which well-known artist does this song remind you of most?*

_Hans Zimmer_
Beethoven
Mozart
Bach
John Williams

*Number of Reviewers who Selected Each Artist*


Hans Zimmer8Beethoven6Mozart5Bach5John Williams4Enya3philip glass3Howard Shore3Yo Yo Ma3Yanni2

(Almost everybody listed someone different, ranging from Joseph Haydn to Max Richter to Sia. Most listed a well-known composer, like Tchaikovsky. A good deal of them listed a film composer, like James Newton Howard. Just about as many of them were not able to pick one. They either said "none", "no one", "n/a", "N/A", "?????", "unsure", "Not sure", "Original", "The Aviv", "I don't know", "No one comes to mind", or "Not any off the top of my head" - which is a good sign, because it means my style probably comes across as unique.)


----------



## theaviv

Here is a little Christmas gift for everyone! I finished writing my first string quartet. I think you would enjoy it! The title is Bliss. It suits the holiday season:




NotePerformer 3.3.2
Sibelius 2020.12


----------



## theaviv

My plan for 2021 is to keep composing and uploading score videos of my work.

This year has been a little slow for me.

My main accomplishment in 2020 was the release of my debut single, Serenade:









The Aviv | Classical Music Composer


The Aviv is a classical music composer based in Canada.




theaviv.ca












The Aviv on Apple Music


Listen to music by The Aviv on Apple Music. Find top songs and albums by The Aviv including Serenade.




itunes.apple.com











I spent a lot of time on the source package for the music video:




See https://www.dropbox.com/.../5d4.../AACNtX4jmM1WtaG31-KKzCn5a

I learned how to use my new iMac and Sibelius:


----------



## theaviv

As an exercise, I had typeset my favourite classical piece, Palladio by Karl Jenkins:




I am proud to have finished my first string quartet, Bliss, just in time for Christmas:




I intend to work intensely in 2021, composing every day and condensing ten years worth of progress into one!



https://youtube.com/theavivca


----------



## theaviv

To answer the original question of the thread - best software for an aspiring composer...

For my purposes, as a classical artist, it is:

Sibelius + NotePerformer
(music notation software + full orchestral sound library)
(twelve-tone equal temperament + large-scale modern symphonic orchestra)

This is all I need to compose the greatest music imaginable - and I have it!

I can then work with a producer to create a mockup fit for release, or better yet, a recording.

Also, an iMac is well worth the investment. I do all my work on my desktop, so it made sense to buy a premium computer. I was able to upgrade my 2019 Retina 5K iMac from 8GB to 40GB of RAM. There is a slot at the back you can easily open to do it.

The reason I chose Sibelius (instead of Dorico or Finale) is because (at the beginning of 2020) it was the only notation software fully compatible with the best playback system available, NotePerformer, which was the most important factor for me. NotePerformer was primarily designed for Sibelius. Also, it is the only notation software (out of the three compatible with NotePerformer) with no big upfront investment (just an affordable monthly subscription rate). Plus, there seem to be more resources available for Sibelius than any other notation software.

NotePerformer is definitely a game changer.

Here is a NotePerformer playback of Palladio by Karl Jenkins:




NotePerformer 3.3.1
Sibelius 2020.6

Compare it to a recording:

https://youtu.be/32Ag0dBGbvc

Compare it to a 2019 mockup:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVYayz9KBpU (https://youtu.be/kVYayz9KBpU)

Conclusion: NotePerformer does a great job representing the sound of a live performance!

For my purposes, as an artist, any money spent on sample libraries and virtual instruments would be better spent outsourcing the production with a professional. Likewise, any time spent learning and tinkering with a DAW would be better spent composing and performing. My ultimate aim is to make commercial recordings, not mockups. I see mockups as just an intermediate step. My ultimate aim is to conduct my music and tour with a personal orchestra.


----------



## theaviv

Happy New Year!

My first piano concerto - Takeoff:




NotePerformer 3.3.2
Sibelius 2020.12


----------



## justmjulie

I heard from those who compose on notation software (Sibelius and Dorico) They both LOVE NotePerformer. (It can provide good quality(not the best but good), go check demo on youtube see you like it or not)

If you are going to DAW (music library) there will be a lot of tech issue will pump out, you have to learn to manipulate the tech or have someone help you work on midi. But in DAW there is a lot of new sound you can smash on. 

Some people will export midi from notation software and give midi programmer to do the realistic mockup.

Ps. I remember Dorico can do mix inside the software, not sure this function work on Sibelius or not. 

Hope this help!


----------



## theaviv

Bollen said:


> If you look up most "successful" living classical composers you'll notice that, for the most part, they tend to gravitate towards the "weird" side of the spectrum. I think the reason is that classical, unlike pop, doesn't just depend on the audience for success. Musicians and especially conductors play a huge role in what gets performed! Musicians tend to prefer pieces that offer a challenge or are at least entertaining to play (never met a player that enjoys playing ostinatos ). Conductors are a whole different beast! They have many of the same requirements as players, but also have high ideals of art, history and also their own image as an artist and what kind of repertoire they like to be associated with...
> 
> It's tricky, but personally I find it to be a much fairer system than just depending on an audience. Players and conductors are far more appreciative and loyal and also understand the art behind it better. Audiences are fickle and influenced by many external factors...






I contacted a local music school at the beginning of the year, and the director was really interested in both _Serenade_ and my string quartet, _Bliss_. They are hoping to record both next week.


----------



## Stringtree

In the end, that which was sought by the OP was achieved. The Serenade is closer to Karl Jenkins than ever. I think many overlooked the composer's intentions and provided a solid hour of reading that...

revealed the depth and breadth of expertise here
showed the generosity and patience of our member family
rocked the women who really know what they're talking about
introduced us to maybe some new music that was beautiful
explored philosophy of music, history, and trajectory

Well worth it. Reading. In these times, it's terrifying to wonder to myself that I just know some highfalutin argot and am a crappy composer wannabe. I don't know. It's self doubt and dread. Just speaking for myself.

So the collecting of accolades is not something that your typical USA or British person would do, but the world is populated by cultures that hold different values. This is an unknown dimension.

Internet tone. It often doesn't come across. But I'm proud of all of the help given. 

@theaviv is well on his way toward what he wanted to do in the first place, we all might have learned something, and I know for sure I'm too old to do acid again. Lol. It's all good.


----------



## theaviv

You may find this interesting:

I composed a piano concerto last year (see my post from Dec 31, 2020) and I recently submitted

(1) the *NotePerformer playback*, as well as
(2) a *mockup* by @Chorny Serge

for ReverbNation crowd reviews:









Takeoff (NotePerformer) | The Aviv


Takeoff (NotePerformer) by The Aviv, Classical music from Hamilton, ON, CA on ReverbNation




www.reverbnation.com












Takeoff (Mockup) | The Aviv


Takeoff (Mockup) by The Aviv, Classical music from Hamilton, ON, CA on ReverbNation




www.reverbnation.com





Surprisingly, they both scored exactly the same:









2021-04-12 Takeoff (Mockup) market research

2021-03-17 Takeoff (NotePerformer) market research

(Serenade market research)









Serenade | The Aviv


Serenade by The Aviv, Classical music from Hamilton, ON, CA on ReverbNation




www.reverbnation.com


----------



## theaviv

If you think you can produce a better mockup, email me at [email protected] with a quote for the job and a link to your work.

Here is the original production source package (used for the mockup above):

2021-01-05 Takeoff production source package

It includes the

_MIDI file (General MIDI, Type 1, 1920 PPQN)
PDF of the full score
Audio (MP3) of the NotePerformer playback
Video (MOV) of the full score with NotePerformer playback_

exported from Sibelius.

Here is an updated production source package:

2021-04-30 Takeoff production source package

It includes a _volume reference track_ in addition to an _updated_ _MIDI_, _PDF_, _MP3_, and _MOV_.

I tweaked the dynamics a little and made the strings tremolo in bars 165 and 166.

The piano part has some sections where the left and right hands intersect. I wrote it that way because it was the simplest and most basic way to represent the sound I wanted. As it stands, the player has discretion on how to work out any conflict between the hands.

Also, in the score, I used ledger lines instead of octave lines, because playback for octave lines in Sibelius is not always reliable.


----------



## theaviv

*It is halfway into 2021. I thought I would share my progress...*

I am working now with Daniel J. Stimac on producing my piano concerto:









Takeoff (Bella Notte Productions) [1] | The Aviv


Takeoff (Bella Notte Productions) [1] by The Aviv, Classical music from Hamilton, ON, CA on ReverbNation




www.reverbnation.com













2021 Takeoff market research


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





We are looking to improve the track by mixing in some recorded parts - the contrabass, the woodwinds, and possibly the violins:









2021-06-09 Takeoff digital package


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




(latest digital package, not final)

I am also getting ready to print _Serenade_ and _Bliss_ with Chernay Printing. I am working with Robert Puff on finalizing the sheet music for publication:









2021-06-14 Serenade and Bliss PDFs


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




(latest drafts, not final)

My plan is to send free packages to interested musicians and music schools (as part of a marketing strategy to get my music out there).

A professional violist, Elizabeth Reid, has expressed interest in _Serenade_: "It’s a really wonderful piece. I hope you can publish the sheet music!"

A local music school, Bel Canto Strings Academy, sent me videos of their students performing my music:







The director said they really enjoyed it. We also talked about recording _Bliss_ with her professional colleagues:






We are waiting until later in the summer, when the pandemic will hopefully ease a little in Ontario.

Also, my debut single, the mockup of _Serenade_...




...has made it on a few Spotify playlists, like this one:




*#9*

I believe, given enough exposure, there will be demand for my music. Therefore, I will be making the sheet music available for order on my website - and I am in the process of talking with fulfilment warehouses about the possibility of shipping orders on my behalf.


----------



## bill5

Dude. Get out more.


----------



## theaviv

A little Christmas sketch... Merry Christmas!




This year has been all about getting my sheet music out on the market, which turned out to be more work than expected:



I have been busy preparing my website for processing orders:

https://www.theaviv.ca/serenade
https://www.theaviv.ca/bliss

I will soon be operating as a sheet music publisher for my compositions. Modern technology makes it possible for me to compete with sheet music publishers without too much upfront investment. I will be partnering with a logistics company, ShipBob, who will be warehousing my inventory and fulfilling orders from my website. I am looking forward to having my business up and running within a few weeks. I will then be targeting the US market with social media ads.

I feel like 2021 could have been more productive... I could have achieved more... but I am learning from my mistakes and becoming more efficient each year.

I did not compose much this year, but I did revisit a sketch I wrote back when I was 22. I was living in a youth shelter at the time, in downtown Toronto. I had to go to a job fair. I was walking all around the mall, looking for it, but I could not find it. I got frustrated and decided to leave. The music came to me while I was on the subway. This is the piano version, closely based on the sketch I originally wrote. My next step is to orchestrate the music:




I wrote a little blog article earlier this year about my influences:









My Personality in 3 GIFs


I was recently inspired to describe my personality with three GIFs: The first one represents my creativity, imagination, curiosity, and how my mind never stops running. The second one represents my ambition, how I am always up to something, always trying to get somewhere, and how it never ends...




www.theaviv.ca





Disney has been an immense influence on me. As a child, there was no greater magic than Disney - and I was all about magic. I see myself as Disney’s apprentice...

I am an artist. I manufacture cultural products. I see myself as an art entrepreneur like Walt Disney, who started his career as an illustrator. I am starting my career as a composer. Later on in my career, I will be revolutionizing the film industry with my fiction and comedy. I believe a great filmmaker must first become a great composer, because music is the at the heart of storytelling. I have always been aiming for the greatest magic possible, and there is no greater magic than art - a specialized work of information designed to transform an information processing system like the human mind.

I know I have a lot more skills to develop, but there are always more skills to develop when you are an artist. I have developed enough skills to be able to put high quality products out on market, stamped with my unique brand of perfection. In other words, I believe I have developed enough skills over the years to be able to run a successful business as an artist, a professional who creates products of culture. Nonetheless, I might not attain success until my mid-40s or even 50s. I must be prepared for that, and be in it for the long term.

In my last year of high school, when I was 17, I came up with my signature and artist name, The Aviv. In 2007, when I was 20, I finalized my signature and formulated my career plans. In 2009, when I was 22, I got my first apartment, where I still live. I then took a decade, the 2010s, to further develop and prepare myself for launching my career in the 2020s.

In 2020, I released my debut single. In 2021, I have been occupied with getting my sheet music out on the market. I am aiming to have my sheet music business in full operation within a few weeks. By the spring or summer of 2022, I anticipate earning fulltime income from my sheet music. By 2023, I am aiming to have a great catalogue of outstanding music, available as singles to stream on digital platforms and as sheet music for sell on my website. I will be earning income from sheet music sales as well as from my singles. By 2025, I want to be ready to tour the world with a personal orchestra:

2020 - 33 - released my debut single
2021 - 34 - occupied with getting my sheet music out on the market
2022 - 35 - anticipate earning fulltime income from my sheet music
2023 - 36 - aiming to have a great catalogue of outstanding music
2025 - 38 - ready to tour the world with a personal orchestra

I believe delaying the launch of my career by a decade was a good turn of events. The 2010s would have been too early. The technology would have still been at a 20th century level. It was better for me to spend the 2010s further developing my entrepreneurial mindset, as well as my powers of abstraction and imagination, and further immersing myself in art and the three main branches of art - music, fiction, and comedy. I believe I have developed enough skills over the years to be able to run a profitable art business. (Also, had I not taken the 2010s to develop myself, I may never have had my creative breakthrough in 2012, when I was 25. I began working on an epic titled https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qaskkb6ik1m74f9/AAAdUHCVBnvmVcyK4F9vq59pa (Devil Hunter), which I believe will be my magnum opus.)

Every morning when I wake up, I see my framed signature and am reminded of my ideal, the greatest magic possible. My single size bed demonstrates my utter devotion to it. In the end, what will matter most to me is not whether I attained my ideal, but that I strived to attain it with all my heart, all my soul, and all my mind.


----------



## Tekkera

Maybe I shouldn't read vi-c so late at night anymore. I think I am seeing things


----------



## d4vec4rter

Just browsed through this thread. Not sure what to say really. On a mission or what? And a pretty intense one at that. Good luck to you though.


----------



## mikrokosmiko

This thread is art. Thank you


----------

