MMKA I really enjoyed listening to this. Wonderful composition and midi-performance. You should be very proud of this.

This is indeed a very fine piece in classical style. Well done! Very enjoyable and well performed.

Thanks for sharing it with us.

Jos

Dont take me wrong if I am trying to be not just friendly but honest in a concrete and constructive sense.

Yes the overall appearances  of your stringqartet is friendly and even charmiing and inspired in some harmonic colors you gave your thematic development.

Here are a few things which I nevertheless think might be considered perhaps in a honest reflection on your composition:

- What you wrote is obviosly not a classical sonataform, but resembles more a rondo what means a theme alternating with a couple of digressions. It is a problem of this form that it makes an overall development of the movement as a whole quite difficult since it tends to return always back to the same beginning. (That is obviously the reason why you nearly never will find a rondo in a first movement of a classical sonata) ) To avoid the thematic monotony which might be the consequence the classic music has developped concepts like the sonata-rondo, combining characters of the sonataforrm (with exposition, development and reprise) and the repetions and digressions of the rondo. This Idea seem to me useful also if you think about the Form you chose here.

- in some parts of the theme but also in some digressions (for instace very nice beg9inning from ca. 2'30) you use with some charm harmonic means which goes beyond  the basic I, IV, V, harmony which are often thought being "classical" (which is defenitly even not for Haydn true in any way) If classical composers stay for notably more than one or two bars in this narrow harmonic structure it often has another extraordinary reason which might be something like a more or less dramatic increasing or decreasing dynamic or situations at the begining or the end of a certain part of the form or the movement as a whole supported by a kind of harmonic stasis. When I listen to your Quartet between 1'28 to 2'11 I think there is a very long concertration on the basic harmonic positions but at least in my ears not enough reason to convince me of the nececitty of 40 seconds harmonic motionlessness..

- again another perhaps simila problem which might have also its reason in the rondoform. The classical musc (as far as I understand it becomes rich from its speaking sequence of different muscal characters. Yes of course is that also the reason why the rondo has been so popular in that period. I would suggest if you again remind a bit more how it is usually done in the classical sonataform you always have a basic contrast of to clearly sometimes even extremly different characters beside one more rhythmic accenuated you always find a more lyrical, singing character. Yes, your theme is a well imaginated melody, but you still might contrast it with something more lyrical to get a more obvious contrast on which you might build up your form.

again dont take me wrong I do not want to deny the serene neoclassical charming attitude we all can listen in your music. I just try to be honest since my personal believe is that this might help you more than just being polite and there for not mentioning what perhaps might help to improve it.

@fahl5 said:

Dont take me wrong if I am trying to be not just friendly but honest.

Yes the overall apearances  of your stringqartet is friendly and even a bit charmiing and inspired in some harmonic colors you gave you thematic development.

Here are a few things which I think might be considered perhaps in a honest reflection on ou composition:

- What you wrote is obviosly not a classical sonataform, but resembles more a rondo what means a theme alternating with a cople of digressions. It is a problem of this form that it makes an overall development of the movementz as a whole quite difficult since it tends to return always back to the same beginning. To avoid monotony which might be the consequence the classic music has developped concepts like the sonata-rondo, combining characters of the sonataforrm (with exposition, development and reprise) and the repetieions andd digressions of the rondo. This Idea seem to be useful also if you think about the Form you chose here.

- in some parts of the theme but also in some digressions you use with some charm harmonic means which goes beyond  the basic I, IV, V, harmony which are often thought being "classical" (which is defenitly even not for Haydn true in any way) If classical composers stay for notably more than one or two bars in this narrow harmonic structure it often has any other extraordinary reason might be something like more or less dramatic increasing or decreasing dynamic or situations at the beginning or the end of a certain pat of the form or the movement as a whole supported by a kind of harmonic stasis. When I listen to your Quartet between 1'28 to 2'11 I think there is a very long concertration on the basic harmonic positions but at least in my ears not enough reason to convince me of the nececitty of 40 seconds harmonic motionlessness..

- again another perhaps simila problem which might have also its reason in the rondoform. The classical musc (as far as I understand it becomes rich rom its speaking squence of different muscal characters. Yes of course is that also the reason why the rondo has been so popular in that period. I would suggest if you again think a bit more how it is usually done in the classical sonataform yoyu always have a basic contrast of to clearly sometimes even extremly different characters beside one more rhythmic accenuated you always find a more lyrical, singin character. Yes your theme is a well imaginated melody, but you still might contrast it with something more lyrical to get a more obvious contrast on which you might build up your form.

again dont take me wrong I do not want to deny the serene neoclassical charming attitude we all can listen in your music. I just try to be honest since my personal believe is that this might help you more than just being polite and there for not mentioning what might help to improve it.

fahl5, everybody knows it wasn't in strict form, but who cares? It's good music, people enjoy it, let it be at that. 

"fahl5, everybody knows it wasn't in strict form, but who cares? It's good music, people enjoy it, let it be at that. " - Guy Bacos

That is exactly right.  Why on earth should it be in strict form? Also the differences are an expression of the composer.  Merely making a copy of an old style is less original.

Anyway it sounds excellent  

It's funny, because I was just watching a documentary the other night, "Ugly Delicious" and the chef/host lamented those that are so steeped in "authenticity and tradition" that they forget about innovation, or simply about the natural evolution of things. On the episode dedicated to pizza, they show the head of the organization responsible for setting the standards for authentic Neopolitan pizza. I'm sure you can imagine how he was portrayed, and how many other modern, notable chefs respond to his views. Similar situation here. We can all appreciate the origins and brilliance of the masters that created the forms we borrow from. But, to suggest that music can not evolve, transform, differentiate itself from the traditions of the past is ridiculous. Again, congratulations, MMKA for sharing your original works. I personally find this a much better use of VSL samples than creating sampled renditions of masterworks, but each to their own.

Thank you Carl, Guy, Dave, Paul, Jos, Steffen and William, for your friendly words. I appreciate all of your words and of course it encourages a lot, when people see good things in ones work, no doubt about that, especially when somebody is an expert, and there are definitly on this forum😊.

Steffen, I appreciate the time you took to listen to the music and to give your reaction. And I understand very well your thoughts about the form. When I was finishing my piece I realized,

• that there was some development in, 
• development? sonata form?... no it wasn't that, because the 2 contrasting themes like in a sonata form were not there (complete with tonica and dominant) however
• there is some contrast in the first and the second (quiet) part, you could call it first and second theme, but
• no, for the second time, not a sonata form, the theme of the quiet part is in fact derived from the first theme (the three marcato notes at the end of the first motiv), no tonica and dominant contrast, and the reprise is not there. (Please, understand me, I just write here some thoughts I had, thinking of this piece, it is not a complete reasoning).
• The quiet piece is contrasting on many points: no repeating eighth notes, harmonic simplicity, just I, IV V, the viola has a big part of the melody, instead of the first violin and the cello. The lively comes from the strong sforzando's and some eighth triplets in the second half. A completely different motion as in the first measures, but in another way it expressed the same (see the last point). And after that, the motion of the beginning comes again (repeating eighths, harmonic) and stays till the end. 
• Then the question came to me: expand the music futher? No, because it had all in it to express what was in me, yes, together with the last chord. For some people it sounds a little over the top, I understand that, but that was what I feel in this piece at the end.
• For me an important thing was, that the joy that is in me (see the title of the piece) would be expressed. And many people feel that joy when they hear the music (I don't say that they all feel or believe the reason of my joy - some people do, other not - but most people feel the joy itself in the music). So in this form it expresses everything I wanted. And that's all I desire. (Concerning this piece, I mean...😊)

Kind regards!

@Acclarion said:

I personally find this a much better use of VSL samples than creating sampled renditions of masterworks, but each to their own. 

Hi Dave, indeed, each to their own. I personally like the efforts people do to create renditions of masterworks. It is a way (not the only one) to explore the possibilities of making music with samples. For people it can be also a way to play and work with the music that they love (and have the access to the sound of all the wonderful instruments of a whole orchestra for this). Perhaps we can compare it in a way with the quatre mains culture of the nineteenth century, where people were playing the symphonies of Mozart in their homes at the piano (just a thought that comes now in my mind). And for them that was most of the time the only way to hear them. Because: when could somebody hear a symphony of Mozart??.. But they played the music and had a lot of fun.
And the work that Steffen does is something I appreciate very much. Much of his renditions wouldn' t be heared in this time, when he didn't do that work.
And so we go on. (For me it is still always something very special, you living in the USA, I live in the Netherlands, and we see and hear something of each other on a regular basis...) Greetings!

OK, then my reaction deleted also.

@William said:

"fahl5, everybody knows it wasn't in strict form, but who cares? It's good music, people enjoy it, let it be at that. " - Guy Bacos

That is exactly right.  Why on earth should it be in strict form? Also the differences are an expression of the composer.  Merely making a copy of an old style is less original.

Anyway it sounds excellent  

No one pretended anyone should write "in a strict form" or "making a copy of an old style"; no one disputed in any way that the overall appearance sounds charming at all.

Are you really that superficial Guy and william, to ignore so badly what the real point of my comment was and argue instead like a musical don quichote against a selfinvented windmill of conservative formalism which you just arbitrarily insinuate my very concrete comment? If so I can not help you.

Just read carefully and consider seriously why I proposed to "think about" the form might help to improve the composition as it seem to me that the music itself wants to be. it is not about formalism it is about to unfold the richest and most convincing musical thinking. And yes there are moments which i realy like (the theme is well invented, some diggressions are harmonicly very nice (for instance near 2'30) other seem to me compared to that less exciting as I mentioned the harmonicly motionless passage from 1'28-2'11 or the tendency to a kind of thematic monotony.

If MMKA wants it to be like this, than he wants it like this, it is his music no matter with that att all. I just honestly gave my spontaneous impression about what in my ears appears less convincing and what in my ears appears well done in this composition, since as far as I understood this is what threads like this are all about.

(allow me not to answer any discussion about what I do in this thred, If you feel need for, create your own thread for and I will answer what ever anyone likes to discuss, But in this thread here, imho one should better be concentrated on MMKA interesting Stringquartet.)

@fahl5 said:

Are you really that superficial Guy and william

fahl5, I thought you would know by now, especially with our previous discussions, we are non thinking superficial musicians, I think you are wasting your time with zombies like us. 

Unwanted or unsolicited comments can be felt threatening or intrusive, even if they are meant as constructive contributions. One should be able to appreciate a submission as it is, without lecturing (unless the sender asks for constructive comments in order to improve his/her performance), especially when it is really good. Keep in mind that for a number of members this is the only way to get at an (limited) audience.

Jos

@Jos Wylin said:

Unwanted or unsollicitated comments can be felt threatening or intrusive, even if they are meant as constructive contributions. One should be able to appreciate a submission as it is, without lecturing (unless the sender asks for constructive comments in order to improve his/her performance), especially when it is really good.

Jos

Are you kidding ?????? "Unwanted or unsollicitated comments" this is a forum for public discussions. Did you think anyone is posting here who do not "want" a "comment" on what he is posting???

No one is forced to post here anything if he is not ready to discuss it.

There is nothing "threatening or intrusive" in answering honestly what I like and what I suppose could be worth to think about.

@fahl5 said:

Are you really that superficial Guy and william

fahl5, I thought you would know by now, especially with our previous discussions, we are non thinking superficial musicians, I think you are wasting your time with zombies like us. 

Yes as your completly offtopic answer indicates it, you obviously really put it exactly the way it is.😛.

and now please come back to the much delightfuller Stringquartet....

@fahl5 said:

Are you really that superficial Guy and william

It upsets me that people get so angry with each other about our music. We have different opinions, OK. We can sometimes benefit from considering other peoples views, especially when they are from a person who shares our basic values.

In this case we all share a love for quality (classical) music and although some focus more on one genre or era than another, we can usually find several eras or sub-genre areas in common. 

This community is too small to be able to loose any knowledgable members. So while I may have strong opinions about the music discussed, I hope I never fall prey to the temptation of conflating my musical opinions into negative opinions about the people on this forum.

If we all thought in exactly the same way, and had identical opinions, what would be the point of even having a forum to discuss music or any other topic? Therefor we should join together in a brotherly comradery and enjoy the different perspectives we each bring to a discussion.

@Paul McGraw said:

It upsets me that people get so angry with each other about our music. We have different opinions, OK. We can sometimes benefit from considering other peoples views, especially when they are from a person who shares our basic values.

In this case we all share a love for quality (classical) music and although some focus more on one genre or era than another, we can usually find several eras or sub-genre areas in common. 

This community is too small to be able to loose any knowledgable members. So while I may have strong opinions about the music discussed, I hope I never fall prey to the temptation of conflating my musical opinions into negative opinions about the people on this forum.

If we all thought in exactly the same way, and had identical opinions, what would be the point of even having a forum to discuss music or any other topic? Therefor we should join together in a botherly comradery and enjoy the different perspectives we each bring to a discussion.

Thank you Paul!