Can I get your opinion on some music that I'm working on?

Question

I simply don't know how to develop these songs. My knowledge of theory/composition is very limited, so obviously that's something I need to work on, but any suggestions would be appreciated. I know for some people, my songs will probably sound very predictable for your seasoned ears :p

people iv shown this to have said that the first song sounds like Copland and the second one sounds like a Grieg piano concerto... I'm not very familiar with any of those composers, but I thought that was interesting...

all of this was recorded using a yamaha keyboard and a cheap mic, so forgive me if the sound is terrible...

anyway, here's the link... myspace.com/montorguel1988

thanks in advance for any and all suggestions :)

Answer 1

Your link's got a bit mangled so I'm repeating it here for folk to be able to get to your stuff:

http://www.myspace.com/montorguel1988

Meanwhile, I'll have a few more hearings and then I'll edit this shortly for a proper reply.

Edit:

Glinzek has meanwhile given you a swathe of good points to consider, so I'll just dip in and out where I can add, or view from another angle instead.

I was impressed by your instinctive inclination 'to set up a canvas', to demand attention, which in both pieces you do very well. You have a clear 'nose' for the theatre of performance in what you write: hold on to that! (And develop it whenever and in whatever way you can.) Many find that aspect of conceiving a piece very hard indeed, and you seem to gauge what's needed quite naturally.

The 'not knowing what to do next' you mention, is at times very audible, particularly in the first piece. It's strength is its rather more acerbic harmonic language -- there was a lot to like there -- but the 'sourness', i.e. the chromaticism is pretty much consistent from moment to moment, throughout. This can be fatiguing to the ear: raising and lowering the 'bite' of your individual harmonies will give you and your piece a sense of direction above and beyond the motivic techniques Glinzek mentioned. Both deployed in conjunction with each other will really get you moving. Don't worry too much about whom you might sound like. All our early compositions tend to sound like just about everything we've heard up to the point of writing them, often all at the same time! Enjoy the ride rather than worry about 'originality'. You'll find your own voice in due course as you go along: looking for one before its time won't make that happen any sooner... ;-)

The second could be an interesting outline sketch of an idea for (a movement of) a larger piece. Your sense of theatre shows well here. (I think it's this that provoked the 'Grieg' comment you had: its gesture is very reminiscent of the 2nd movement of his concerto, including the high treble register of the 'solo' entry.) Ironically, so well prepared, once the 'soloist' had entered, you promptly ran out of steam. :-/

Maybe harmonically more conservative, but you've set a stage in the second piece it would be a pity to waste. Set yourself a, let's say, 12 minute canvas size (of which you've now got a 2 minute intro already) and try to sketch out three, 3 minute each sections: the first, with two contrasting ideas sets the scene, the second screws the ideas around (perhaps including a tempo change), the third puts them back together again and, with just one minute left, why not close with some restatement of the intro to come full circle. At first you'll be mighty pleased to fill three sections of barely a minute each , but keep kicking it around in your mind. Improvise it out without noting it down: you'll get ideas of how to get from A to B to C 'in real time' from that, which otherwise can seem intimdatingly daunting with just a blank sheet of paper in front of you. Meanwhile you will also become mighty familiar with the material you do have, and that is where fresh ideas come from!!

You've got a talent, and only you, by kicking it about, licking it into shape, can find out how durable it actually might be. Study, certainly -- lots and lots of it -- but get your hands dirty, daily, and listen, listen, listen, to what others have done in the past and are doing now, and *how* they do it. You could surprise yourself!

Just one more thing: your comment that these two would sound predictable is grossly unfair on yourself: you have a way of engaging the listener's attention and holding on to it. That's one thing for sure that 'predictable' cannot do... :-)

Answer 2

Well, I don't hear Copland, and I sure don't hear Grieg.

I hear a very good start. You have a great color sense, and your motives are simple and direct, giving you lots of developmental options.

I like the first one the best. Sounds more like Debussy than Copland. (use of half-diminished 7th chords) The first motive sounds a little like "3 blind mice" but I like the slightly ascerbic harmony. The second motive, a gently rocking motion up a step and then down, has possiblilites.

The second is nice -- some voice-leading and melodic issues need to be addressed -- and I would like to see the piano entrance be a little more imitative of the material you presented before. Your harmonic language in this is more conservative than in the 1st example -- are you sure that's where you want to go? Sounds like the slow mvt of a piano concerto.

My advice is to continue your study in theory, but continue composing in your intuituve manner. Don't let theory rule your creative though. And theory will not help you develop these ideas. Just try to make what follows look back to the germs of the original ideas.

My composition professor made us memorize a list of things to do with a motive once you have stated it. You can:

1. State it again
2. State it again at a different pitch level
3. State it backwards (retrograde)
4. Invert it (upside down)
5. Do both (retrograde inversion)
6. State it with longer durations
7. State it with shorter durations
8. Change the intervals
9. any combination of the above

Have fun.

Answer 3

That was a lot better than I expected! The first piece has some neat harmonics in it, but it lacks melody and progression. The second piece was actually extremely well put. If possible, continue it and create a long, full piece of music! The chord progression of your "piano concerto" almost reminds me of Mozart, and that is astounding! Continue with your compositions. Perhaps some day you'll become famous for it! Keep us posted with any new pieces you compose.

Answer 4

Sounds like soundtrack music, not bad, but if pure music is what you're looking for you'll have to define your stile.