Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: June 04 2010
Location: Terria
Status: Offline
Points: 13298
Posted: September 10 2012 at 16:37
My one piece of constructive criticism is learn music theory. Know all your scaled and chords and progressions and whatnot. Not that I think you should apply them to your music because obviously that's not what your trying to accomplish, but I believe it was Picasso who said first you have to learn the rules before you can break them.
Joined: April 15 2012
Location: My Bedroom
Status: Offline
Points: 14169
Posted: September 10 2012 at 16:40
Well, that's what I aim to do. I know a lot about theory and am learning more and more every week. But in the mean time, I'll keep on doin' what I does
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: September 10 2012 at 17:44
Andy Webb wrote:
My one piece of constructive criticism is learn music theory. Know all your scaled and chords and progressions and whatnot. Not that I think you should apply them to your music because obviously that's not what your trying to accomplish, but I believe it was Picasso who said first you have to learn the rules before you can break them.
There is a lot more to that quote than mere literal meaning of the words. It's not just learning the rules but knowing how to apply them, in Picasso's case this was not just knowing the rules of pigment, composition, perspective, light and shade and all the technical theory of painting, but knowing how to use them, break them and then use those new rules within existing rules:
...painted by Picasso when he was 12 - he can paint, but there is still a juevenile quality to the composition and you don't get the sense that the girl is actually sat on the chair, or that the chair itself has any dimension or substance - we can see the back, but there is no indication that the rest of it even exists from the girl's posture or positioning.
Four years later, we get this:
Eventhough we cannot see the chair the doctor is sitting on very clearly we know it is there, the painting conveys the substance and dimension of the chair by the composition of the painting and the positioning of the doctor in relation to the chair.
...and from that (if you follow his painting chronologically) is a progression of applying the rules and breaking them that leads to cubism, neoclassicalism and surrealism in his work:
Woman in an Armchair - painted when he was 29 - heavily abstracted and superficially nothing like the previous two paintings, except that it is a similar subject to the first and shows all the compositional merits that the second possess. It is abstract but there is nothing random or improvised about it, it is avant garde but it is still following the rules of composition in the use of light and shade, balance, focal points and all those other techniques that depict the substance and dimension of the chair without showing it realistically.
For me this is what separates good avant garde music from random notes - the use composition and the use of music theory "rules", breaking those rules knowingly and resolving them effectively (or at least satisfactorily)
Joined: October 10 2010
Location: Lancaster, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1321
Posted: September 10 2012 at 17:59
smartpatrol wrote:
Well, that's what I aim to do. I know a lot about theory and am learning more and more every week. But in the mean time, I'll keep on doin' what I does
I'm afraid it shows. It sounds like someone just improvising with whatever comes to them. I can hear some great ideas in there and some real promise but it just seems like a record of extended ideas, both good and bad, at the moment.
Andrew, I want to ask you this: What emotions did you intend for the listener to have while hearing your material? Also, what reaction did you expect this audience (i.e., members of PA) to have when hearing your material?
Joined: April 15 2012
Location: My Bedroom
Status: Offline
Points: 14169
Posted: September 10 2012 at 19:04
Epignosis wrote:
Andrew, I want to ask you this: What emotions did you intend for the listener to have while hearing your material?
Well, I didn't really have emotion(s) in mind. Each song was made under a different emotion, so maybe a few. But I honestly didn't think about it prevoking an emotion.
Epignosis wrote:
Also, what reaction did you expect this audience (i.e., members of PA) to have when hearing your material?
Well, the best I hoped for is that people would recognise some promise. That's what I really want. because as I get better at playing, I'll be able to expand on that promise and make some genuinely good stuff.
Joined: June 04 2010
Location: Terria
Status: Offline
Points: 13298
Posted: September 10 2012 at 19:24
Dean wrote:
Andy Webb wrote:
My one piece of constructive criticism is learn music theory. Know all your scaled and chords and progressions and whatnot. Not that I think you should apply them to your music because obviously that's not what your trying to accomplish, but I believe it was Picasso who said first you have to learn the rules before you can break them.
There is a lot more to that quote than mere literal meaning of the words. It's not just learning the rules but knowing how to apply them, in Picasso's case this was not just knowing the rules of pigment, composition, perspective, light and shade and all the technical theory of painting, but knowing how to use them, break them and then use those new rules within existing rules:
...painted by Picasso when he was 12 - he can paint, but there is still a juevenile quality to the composition and you don't get the sense that the girl is actually sat on the chair, or that the chair itself has any dimension or substance - we can see the back, but there is no indication that the rest of it even exists from the girl's posture or positioning.
Four years later, we get this:
Eventhough we cannot see the chair the doctor is sitting on very clearly we know it is there, the painting conveys the substance and dimension of the chair by the composition of the painting and the positioning of the doctor in relation to the chair.
...and from that (if you follow his painting chronologically) is a progression of applying the rules and breaking them that leads to cubism, neoclassicalism and surrealism in his work:
Woman in an Armchair - painted when he was 29 - heavily abstracted and superficially nothing like the previous two paintings, except that it is a similar subject to the first and shows all the compositional merits that the second possess. It is abstract but there is nothing random or improvised about it, it is avant garde but it is still following the rules of composition in the use of light and shade, balance, focal points and all those other techniques that depict the substance and dimension of the chair without showing it realistically.
For me this is what separates good avant garde music from random notes - the use composition and the use of music theory "rules", breaking those rules knowingly and resolving them effectively (or at least satisfactorily)
Oh god yes, that quote is far deeper than the textual meaning, but I was just making a point. Picasso was an undisputed genius of his craft and a master at the pure philosophy of artwork.
On avant-garde music, I completely agree. There's a big difference between "avant" music that is just to be avant (perhaps Metallica's Lulu), and then "avant" music that goes against the stream of music for a purpose (such as Henry Cow, Univers Zero, etc)
Andrew, I want to ask you this: What emotions did you intend for the listener to have while hearing your material?
Well, I didn't really have emotion(s) in mind. Each song was made under a different emotion, so maybe a few. But I honestly didn't think about it prevoking an emotion.
Epignosis wrote:
Also, what reaction did you expect this audience (i.e., members of PA) to have when hearing your material?
Well, the best I hoped for is that people would recognise some promise. That's what I really want. because as I get better at playing, I'll be able to expand on that promise and make some genuinely good stuff.
The problem with the first statement is that you consciously chose not to convey something. As much as you adore John Cage (and as much as I loathe him), he consciously tried to convey some kind of emotion. When music is always off the beat, always out of tune, always discordant, there is no contrast, and that makes the music bland.
Your second statement is what is really telling. What you've just told me is that this project you have on bandcamp is not "genuinely good stuff." I listened to several of your tracks. It sounds like you know the basics of a drum machine and that you can use a pick. That's unfortunate credentials for producing something.
I'm not knocking you- this means you are two years ahead of me (I could neither use a drum machine nor a pick at 12).
However, making "genuinely good stuff" involves, in my opinion, this:
1) Becoming proficient at an instrument. 2) Learning basic music theory. 3) Recognizing a good idea when it comes AND 4) Rejecting the ten bad ones that always do.
Don't be 12 and put your business out there on the Internet expecting love. Otherwise, you get this:
Someone made that (I assume) looking for honest criticism but no mean comments. Sorry, but on the Internet, you get lots of ridicule. If people hate what you do, they will say so. And they won't be sorry.
If you think you have promise, then study an instrument, practice every day, and don't give in to the notion that everything you do is gold. Hear me: Most of what you will do is awful. Don't publish it please.
Instead, figure out what the diamond is among the dust. Then develop it until it is exactly what you want. If you like the idea but cannot perfect it, then leave it until it matures in your mind. Don't give it to us until it does.
So Andrew, get out there and rock and ROLL THE BONES.
Joined: February 03 2007
Location: The Heartland
Status: Offline
Points: 16913
Posted: September 10 2012 at 21:28
Andrew, I listened a bit and enjoyed what I heard for the most part. Obviously most home recordings are not going to sound like experienced studio albums, and the advice from Rob and others is fair. But I don't need music to feel completely "professional" to enjoy, I like little basement projects and I like uninhibited creativity, even when not in my favorite musical styles. I hope you continue to work at it and have no doubt you will improve on all fronts.
So while I won't play this often I did enjoy listening and may listen again....and I like your cover image too.
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
Posted: September 10 2012 at 21:39
I will tell you that I don't enjoy this music. I'm not one to like atonal things very much anyway, and therefore most others probably won't either. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but you must be aware of this when putting music out there. You are directing your music to a specific, niche audience as it is, and 99% of the Internet and everyone will probably be at best indifferent to it. You need to be aware of this, as every musician does. Do what satisfies you, and don't rely on the approval of others.
Keep making music. Learn about music, write music, learn new instruments, listen to different artists always.
I will say that the one thing, above all else, that makes or breaks music is timing. Is is the easiest thing for a listener to pick out if it is wrong, and it is all over the place in your music. Only the most unlistenable of unlistenable avant-rock can find an audience if the timing isn't right. That is what I would advise you to work on at this stage.
Honestly, though, you're miles ahead of where I was at your age.
Also, if you're doing the home recording thing, you have to not only be a musician (hard enough), but you have to know at the very least proper recording techniques. If you want to pay $100 a track, you can send the multitracks to a studio for mixing, or you could learn mixing yourself. So there's another equally hard thing. So already you need to be:
-Musician
-Recording engineer
-Mixing engineer
And let me say you need to try to be as best as possible at all of those. Now I cannot really speak from a high horse since I know my limitations and I am still very much an amateur, even with a degree in the field. It is a process that takes a lot of time, ear training, and experience. But it is what you need to try to aim for if you want to sound professional, and earn other's respect.
I hope you'll take this as constructive criticism.
Joined: August 15 2011
Location: Stockholm
Status: Offline
Points: 147
Posted: September 11 2012 at 12:01
Listened through "Musi C", so can only comment on that song.
What you said earlier about not having any clear emotions in mind can mean lots of things. It could mean that you don't know what emotions you are putting into the music while there might be a blend of infinite emotions in the actual piece, which you add subcounsciously (spelling?) of course. Anyway, I'm afraid that to me, this song sounds like it's going nowhere. HOWEVER, it is clear that you strive to experiment with music, which I find most promising, especially since I learned that you're 12 years old. Practicing music theory and various (or just one) instrument(s) will allow you to experiment with better precision, which is something your music needs imo.
Keep on practicing, I remember my "songs" from when I was 12 (7 years ago), I hadn't discovered prog then so it's a bad comparison but still, they weren't better than this. If you actually practice hard (unlike me, I started to practice for real at about 15) you could create some very interesting stuff.
Leave the past to burn,
At least that's been his own
Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549
Posted: September 11 2012 at 18:04
I listened to a bit of it. That Quiet Marching is good; I enjoyed the mellotron and the syncopated drum beat. It could have benefited from a fuller mix, though, and maybe some other instruments to add texture and a little bit of melody (think "Dangerous Curves" by King Crimson). I'll tell you what I think of the rest when I get a chance to hear it.
Joined: October 10 2010
Location: Lancaster, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1321
Posted: September 12 2012 at 03:55
My biggest piece of advice would be to try and write a few conventional songs first. They give you the basis of how a song works and the musical theory. From there you can take these ideas and warp and twist them until you have avant music created from the basis of musical theory, rather than straight from nothing. It will make your songs hold up on so many levels.
Can I just say it is really inspiring that you start so young on trying new things and making your own music? I wish I'd had the same exposure to more outward reaching music at your age. I was lucky enough to be proficient at musical theory and an instrument, and it's taken me 7 years to become a better classical compsoer. God knows how good you're going to be in that time!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.323 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Ozark Soundscape (and my other musical projects)
Topic Options
Andy Webb wrote:
