So I Wrote A symphony

Share your music, collaborate, and partake in monthly music contests.
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

wagtunes wrote: if you actually think this symphony is "samey" then you don't listen to a lot of symphonies. Most are borderline monotonous as they basically play thee same theme for that movement over and over. Somebody into classical music would know that. That's all I'm saying. You clearly are not.
So if someone doesn't like your symphony it's because they don't understand classical music? Unbelievable arrogance.

Post

Yawny McYawnovitch @ the argument. And kudos for being able to create such complex compositions. :tu: Not my musical taste either, but i wouldn't think of criticizing it, or hating on it, especially if i wasn't able to do something remotely similar, like the people hating on it here.

Post

thecontrolcentre wrote:
wagtunes wrote: if you actually think this symphony is "samey" then you don't listen to a lot of symphonies. Most are borderline monotonous as they basically play thee same theme for that movement over and over. Somebody into classical music would know that. That's all I'm saying. You clearly are not.
So if someone doesn't like your symphony it's because they don't understand classical music? Unbelievable arrogance.
No, that's not what I said. He called it "samey." He didn't say he didn't like it. Of course I guess you could infer that but that's not what I got from the comment. Had he said he didn't like the music or thought it was poorly written or boring then yes, it would be clear he didn't like it.

My confusion is at the word "samey". If one actually DOES understand classical music they would clearly hear that this is anything BUT samey. But in case anybody doesn't hear it, I will point out all the things that make this piece anything BUT samey.

1) Instrumentation - If you listen carefully, you will hear that each movement alternates between woodwinds, brass, strings and full orchestra. The instrumentation changes constantly. For traditional classical music, written in the 18th and 19th centuries, my changing of instrumentation so often would be considered excessive.

2) Melody - The main theme in each movement is repeated no more than 2 or 3 times within a 10 to 11 minute period of time. I would estimate that there are no fewer than 20 different themes in each movement, thus a rhapsody in style. Again, compared to 18th and 19th century symphonies, this would be considered excessive.

3) Rhythm - If you listen carefully, the rhythm changes often in each movement. This is especially hard to do in the 3rd movement which is minuet style. This is almost unheard of in traditional symphonic music.

So how on God's green Earth is this at all "samey?"

If you're going to criticize something, at least make a criticism that makes some kind of sense. Again, if this person was versed in 18th and 19th century symphonic music, they'd clearly hear that this piece is in no way "samey" if you're comparing it to traditional pieces of the time.

This has nothing to do with whether he liked it or not. In fact, I don't expect anybody here to like this piece. KVR is not exactly a hangout for this type of music. I just posted it for the hell of it and no other reason. I was fully expecting everybody to hate it.

But samey? It simply makes no sense if one understands classical music, which clearly he doesn't.

If that makes me arrogant, well, so be it. But at least make your criticism make some kind of sense, which is why I will NEVER criticize something I don't understand, like dub step. I don't like it, but I won't criticize a piece trying to point out its flaws simply because I don't understand the genre to begin with. I wouldn't know good dub step from bad dub step if it bit me on the rear.

Hopefully, this explains clearly why the "criticism" of my piece makes no sense to me.

Post

chk071 wrote:Yawny McYawnovitch @ the argument. And kudos for being able to create such complex compositions. :tu: Not my musical taste either, but i wouldn't think of criticizing it, or hating on it, especially if i wasn't able to do something remotely similar, like the people hating on it here.
Thanks, but I wasn't expecting anything less.

Post

chk071 wrote: i wouldn't think of criticizing it, or hating on it, especially if i wasn't able to do something remotely similar
You must struggle with art, dance, sports, politics etc. or any activity you don't excel at. :hihi:

Post

And you must struggle with anything in your life, homeboy.

Post

chk071 wrote:And you must struggle with anything in your life, homeboy.
Blow your dog whistle, wonk.

Post

Why, you come back to me then?

Post

chk071 wrote:Why, you come back to me then?
You obviously miss my point...I don't have to be an actor to criticize a movie or an athlete to criticize a bad play. The ability to do something is not the prerequisite to judge or dislike something. Ya dig Homey? :roll:

Post

You should have a bit of competence though in the area you review, or you simply won't be able to do a review. For example, i couldn't review jazz music, because i have no idea about it, and it all sounds same-ish or weird to me. But, the way you appear to me, the point is not the music in this case anyway, it's rather to bash on the OP, because you dislike him. Or you're pissed off in general, and like to vent here as usual. The thing is just, it won't help, and noone here is to blame for your problem anyway.

Post

chk071 wrote:You should have a bit of competence though in the area you review, or you simply won't be able to do a review. For example, i couldn't review jazz music, because i have no idea about it, and it all sounds same-ish or weird to me. But, the way you appear to me, the point is not the music in this case anyway, it's rather to bash on the OP, because you dislike him. Or you're pissed off in general, and like to vent here as usual. The thing is just, it won't help, and noone here is to blame for your problem anyway.
I wasn't reviewing...an opinion is not necessarily a review. Not to mention you just did what you accuse me of ...you know no more about me than you do about Jazz...You have no right to assume that you know my reasons for doing anything. It's your opinion that I'm venting or that I don't like the OP or that I even have a problem. Get over yourself.

Post

Karma_tba wrote:
chk071 wrote:You should have a bit of competence though in the area you review, or you simply won't be able to do a review. For example, i couldn't review jazz music, because i have no idea about it, and it all sounds same-ish or weird to me. But, the way you appear to me, the point is not the music in this case anyway, it's rather to bash on the OP, because you dislike him. Or you're pissed off in general, and like to vent here as usual. The thing is just, it won't help, and noone here is to blame for your problem anyway.
I wasn't reviewing...an opinion is not necessarily a review. Not to mention you just did what you accuse me of ...you know no more about me than you do about Jazz...You have no right to assume that you know my reasons for doing anything. It's your opinion that I'm venting or that I don't like the OP or that I even have a problem. Get over yourself.
For the record, I have no problems with your comments. They were perfectly fine. Not everybody likes classical music and to a lot of people, it does all sound the same.

I do find it kind of ironic though that these same people listen to trance (which I love) and think it all sounds different.

You have to admit it is kind of amusing.

Post

When time permits I'd love to listen to your creation. I never took on anything remotely so ambitious; mostly pieces for classical guitar with a percussion ensemble and voice.

It is a tireless pursuit (even on a small scale) and I applaud the effort before I hear your music. I can see you hunched over the keyboard as you move the melody between voices and experiment with different inversions and chord substitutions. It is such a great feeling when it comes together and so frustrating when what you hear in your head remains elusive. So satisfying nonetheless.

I'll give it a listen tonight and I will pay attention to the changing voices and rhythms that you mentioned in a previous post. Looking forward to it. - Scotty

Post

wagtunes wrote:
If that makes me arrogant, well, so be it.
No. What makes you arrogant is your assumption that "critisism" of your work is due to a lack of understanding.

Post

thecontrolcentre wrote:
wagtunes wrote:
If that makes me arrogant, well, so be it.
No. What makes you arrogant is your assumption that "critisism" of your work is due to a lack of understanding.
In this particular case, I'm sorry, but it is. An understanding of the classical symphony form in the 18th and 19th centuries would leave a person to op ANYTHING but that the piece is samey. It is such a ludicrous comment, given everything I have outlined about the piece, that it almost warrants a complete disregard. It would be similar to my saying I don't like girls because they don't have a penis. It makes no sense.

Did you even listen to the piece? If not, how can you even comment on whether his opinion makes any sense or not? And if you did, do you agree? One whose ear is not used to listening to classical music (as mine used to be many years ago) probably will. When I first heard 18th and 19th century music it all sounded the same to me. That was 50 years ago.

I'm sorry, but in this particular case, this particular comment makes no sense. I'd have much preferred a simple "It bored me. I didn't like it."

At least in context, that comment would make sense or at the very least be defensible.

Post Reply

Return to “Music Cafe”