/lit/ - Literature

Thanks, anon.

>>10191393
should've posted this on /mu/
then again maybe wannabe composers should gather here with the wannabe writers

>>10193069
>then again maybe wannabe composers should gather here with the wannabe writers

this

Please, mods, dont delete thread.

So, OP, what are your top ten symphony list? Do you agree with this one:

1. Beethoven Symphony No 3 (1803)
2. Beethoven Symphony No 9 (1824)
3. Mozart Symphony No 41 (1788)
4. Mahler Symphony No 9 (1909)
5. Mahler Symphony No 2 (1894 rev 1903)
6. Brahms Symphony No 4 (1885)
7. Berlioz Symphonie Fantastique (1830)
8. Brahms Symphony No 1 (1876)
9. Tchaikovsky Symphony No 6 (1893)
10. Mahler Symphony No 3 (1896)

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/aug/04/beethoven-eroica-greatest-symphony-vote-bbc-mozart-mahler

>>10193132
>Please, mods, dont delete thread.
this. there's sometimes too little understanding for cross-topic threads

1. beethoven 5 (inb4 pleb)
2. " 8
3. " 3
4. " 9
5. " 6
6. " 7
7. Mozart 41
8. Mozart 40
9. Mozart 38
10. Mendelssohn 5

order changes with life

r8 my sonatina

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FTC4dEsxBU

>>10193069

For being the music board of this site, they have some of the most plebian, base-level taste and understanding of music I have seen anywhere online. Truly the worst place to seriously discuss music. Would love me some higher-level music/composition discussion here.

>>10193187

Do you know Mozart's 39? I love the opening: one of the most beautiful I know.

>>10193132
>three fucking Mahler entries
>Tchaikovsky
>Brahms(????????)
>no Sibelius
>no Nielsen
>no Mendelssohn
0/10

>>10193201

I am at work now, but when I got home I will listen to it.

>>10193213
you're retarded

>>10193213
I hope you're trolling

>>10193207
are you sure that you're not confusing it with 38 (prague)? I know all of the later Mozart symphonies

>>10193205
that's why there's /classical/. it's really the only good thing on /mu/ (except maybe for /prod/)

>>10193222
>>10193220
This is one of the weaker choruses of philistines that have risen up against me

>>10193213
>>Brahms(????????)

I think Brahms 4th symphony second movement is one of the most beautiful works of art of all time.

I also have a hard time holding my tears whenever I listen to this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BL4bbKPJy8

>>10193214
if the thread still lives then

>>10193228

No, it's the 39. The slow building up, the slow arising of the music.

>>10193234
>Sibelius
>Nielsen

against Brahms, Mahler and Tchaikovsky?
I don't know, man...

>>10193241
I like it too, but the Prague symphony is better imo. It was some time my absolute favorite symphony.
But as my taste evolved I learned that our entire understanding of music and art (especially tying the art to the artist) would not have come about if there weren't Beethoven's symphonies

stuff like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgHxmAsINDk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5favl2Qtx0

(the last one has nice visuals)

>>10193249
>two greatest symphonists of the middle-to-late romantic
>not deserving a spot on the list of greatest symphonies
>two firetrucks and a great CHAMBER composer deserve it instead
hmm...

>>10193201
It's shit

>>10193272
it's not about the 'best' symphonies but about a personal best. there's nothing wrong with not having Nielsen and Sibelius in such a list

>>10193201

>>10193282
The list I was commenting on was quite literally a poll to determine the top 10 greatest symphonies of all time, of course all the list proves is that the readership of "The Guardian" are musically illiterate philistines, which considering the quality of English art music isn't really that surprising.

>>10193297
when you see it that way the list should be 7 Beethoven symphonies + 3 Mozart symphnies and that's it

>>10193305
I don't necessarily disagree with that.

>>10193205
Name (1) better site.

>>10193187
>Not beethoven 10

>>10193329
>beethoven 10
that wasn't even finished by him

Mendelssohn is GOAT

So is this just for classical music?

>>10193329
talkclassical Tbh

>>10193337
actually so far this is only about symphonies

this is pure beauty

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eqDzMxQjx0

Beethoven showed that the form is a field for creativity just as melody and harmony and can become beautiful just as them

anyone /classicalguitar/ here?

>>10193329
I'l be that guy

Reddit.com/r/letstalkmusic

>>10193360
Can i use this to learn theory while playing classical guitar?

>>10193423
Hi

>>10193445
listening to symphonies? sure why not

>>10193337
If you are asking about all the stuff in the OP
It analyzes classical form but technically you can apply it to any tonal music. Including modern and Jazz.

Why is it that I always get such a craving for Wagner only when I am drinking?

>>10193132
>All that Mahler
Gross. Beethoven's fifth and Schubert's ninth should definitely be in there too.

>>10193329
>Name (1) better site.
Random facebook groups are better. Literally anywhere that discusses music is better.

What book do I read if I just want to "understand" classical music?

>Tchaikovsky

>>10195780
analisations of pieces you like

0. dont underestimate your dunning-kruger, op

>>10191393
What to do if I'm a complete beginner though, there is no introductory theory and I really want to dedicate most of my time on it.

>>10195411

The aural equivalent of beer-goggles: beer-buds

>>10196687

Learn an instrument, preferably the piano, and sing.

>>10196753
Yeah but how can I learn the piano?
>sing
What if I can't sing at all is there any hope and again what are some good starting sources.

>>10196772

Take lessons and practice everyday. You don't have any other options.

As for singing, you really just need to be able to internalize music. You don't need a great voice or anything. Sing along to melodies and push yourself to not hit wrong notes. It's a part of ear training. Playing an instrument is going to help you with this too.

>>10196799
>Take lessons
What if I can't, what are some online sources, there are thousand books and I'm going to start it by myself anyway. I'm simply asking so I can spend less time doing worthless stuff and get straight on the point, usually people with experience can help with that.
>As for singing, you really just need to be able to internalize music. You don't need a great voice or anything. Sing along to melodies and push yourself to not hit wrong notes. It's a part of ear training. Playing an instrument is going to help you with this too.
Thanks for that

>>10196804

Well, you can start with something simple like Piano for Dummies or whatever; you just won't develop technique, which is fine if you only want to compose, but you have to be able to *think* music.

So immerse yourself in playing/singing/listening, obsessively, for the next five to ten years. Then, see where you're at. If you can play Bach on the piano and sight sing, move onto learning counterpoint and harmony. All throughout this, write music. Even now, go, make a melody. Make a melody everyday. Seriously, art is hard as fuck and it hurts and you need to be crazy to pursue it.

>>10196804

Responding to you but referencing >>10196904
>you just won't develop technique
If you really can't take lessons then watch a lot of early piano lessons on youtube. Books can't teach technique. Videos, while not ideal do a much better job at showing you how to play well. But make sure you do learn technique. You can permanently fuck up your body by playing the piano wrong.

>>10197084
>>10196904
Thank you guys, I appreciate it
>permanently fuck up your body by playing the piano wrong
What do you mean?

>>10197104
Playing the piano is a really unnatural thing to do. Our bodies were not designed for it. The sorts of stretches, fast finger movements etc are not something the human body is meant to do very much, let alone thousands of hours of.
You can develop RSI, you can pull tendons and hurt muscles (though the last isn't serious). The first two can lead to permanent damage. Correct technique is not just someone that makes you play better, it's something that helps to minimize the risk of injury. So long as you have reasonable technique, you don't over practise, and you stop playing and rest when you feel any sort of weird pains you will be fine.

>>10196687
The instructions are right there, read the complete musician.
Theres a full introduction in the first 4 appendices of the book. Read that and then go back to the start

>>10193132
my top ten in no order:
-Mahler Symphony No. 6
-Bruckner Symphony No. 8
-Dvorak Symphony No. 9
-Sibelius Symphony No. 4
-Brahms Symphony No. 1
-Beethoven Symphony No. 6
-Rachmaninoff Symphony No. 2
-Shostakovich Symphony No. 10
-Tchaikovsky Symphony No. 6
-Schubert Symphony No. 8

>>10193213
>>10195464
What's up with the Mahler hostility?

>>10197769
It's a /mu/ meme

...can't i just watch a youtube tutorial?

>>10197712
why would anyone listen to all this obsolete grannycore bullshit

>>10197793
No youtube tutorial is ever going to cover everything in those books. You would have to pay people a shit ton of money to produce such a series. And nobody would care about it because its hard as fuck.

Pretty much all of the videos on youtube will be able to cover about 50 pages of music theory, which is just the normy shit everyone knows.
Scales, rhythm, timings, intervals, triads, and finally seventh chords.

Everything past that you will not find in youtube videos. And the thats 700 pages of stuff.

Its a labor of love. If you love it you will stick to it.

Is being a composer like a painter where if you didn't start from a young age you pretty much have no shot? Or rather like a mathematician where your best work is done as aa young person? Or can you be old like a writer and keep getting better?

>>10197925
You may keep getting better for your entire life since experience has a big part in the process of composition (and maybe not only for this reason), but being exposed to music early on your life is very important, yes.

Daily reminder to ignore CLT /classical/ memes, he wants attention because he can't get it in the orchestra

Is there anyone who writes about music better than he does?
>>10197942
Tallis is more at fault for /classical/ memes than CLT.

>>10197925
plenty of big shot composers started in their mid 20s

>>10197925
>a painter where if you didn't start from a young age you pretty much have no shot

Completely false. Art is a combination of knowledge and muscle memory.
If you know the anatomy, and you know how light works, and you practice using your pencil well, you will learn to draw at a high level.

What you're saying is really an excuse for you to not take up the challenge and learn to draw.

>>10197797
i demand answer you poseur twits

Mozart 25 is underrated much like the man himself.

>>10197797
>grannycore

Have you tried actually listening to the music bud? Here listen to some Bach. Look at the player and his passion for the music.
Every note Bach rights came from the heart and it is a reflection of a deep human emotion.

https://youtu.be/aEkXet4WX_c?t=7s

>>10198036
bach is exception, gould is not

il faut etre absolument moderne
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkT2dS1CYvo

>>10198052
Don't know why you don't like Gould but I'll give you another:

Dvorak took inspiration from Native American music and used it to create a symphony that symbolized the break of dawn and the discovery of the new world. You can hear and feel hope and cheer in the music. Like Bach, its a reflection of the human spirit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9opcAg3dJEc

>>10198069
his personality gets on my nerves, he also plays 1080 using piano, which says a lot about his grasp of the piece

I have music popping up in my head all the time. I've done some basic theory study, but I really just want to be able to reproduce or preserve those random compositions before they disappear from memory. Are there any books/methods that deal with that aspect specifically?

Does anyone have anything for people interested in violin? I've missed the chance of learning an instrument young and I am interested in violin. I am a complete illiterate when it comes to reading sheet music, I just need a starting point.

>>10198082
When something gets into your head get out your phone and sing it.
Then play what you sang on the piano and your done.
If you don't know how to play things by ear, practice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYP-3q22too

"If your happy happy happy clap your hands"
C F G G G G G G F G A

Took me 5 seconds to get that.

>>10198082

Ear training. Learn to sing solfege.

A good exercise: play a cadence (e.g. I-IV-V-I ), then play a random note. Guess what scale degree it is by ear. This is probably easier with another person.

>>10198085

Lessons. Learning violin is going to be a bitch to do alone. I just picked up a cello and I'm hesitant to get too serious until I find an instructor. I've already picked up a million bad habits from over a decade of self-taught guitar playing. It's easier to learn good habits than unlearn bad ones.

I am an Indian acoustic guitarist. The complete musician doesn't really tickle my fancy. What other books do you recommend?

good book analyzing all 32 beethoven sonatas

http://www.24grammata.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/HARDING-24grammata.com_.pdf

>>10198079
>he also plays 1080 using piano
Pleb. Gould's real problem is his playing, see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9rL3aGWzAg

>The Complete Musician by Laitz

Can you read this as a complete beginner? If not, which resources, if any, would be useful for the would-be composer whose skills are completely lacking in this area?

>No Fauré, Schubert, Scarlatti, or Debussy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-j6LLkpQYY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXSWFlwX9a4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf53hQtkD78
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy6plkuF50o

Stick to literature philistines

>>10198346
Yes you can.
First go through everything on this website, should be no more than 1 hour. https://www.musictheory.net/

Then read the first 4 appendices at the end of the book.
Then go back to the start and go through the book normally.

>>10198651

I sure do love reading, thanks for the advice anon <3

ahem, ten indisputably best pcs in proper order

9 mozart
20 mozart
23 mozart
2 bartok
4 beethoven
2 brahms
schoenberg
21 mozart
22 mozart
24 mozart

>>10193329
r/musictheory

>>10193132
>New World Symphony (Dvorak) not on that list
>Beethoven No. 5 not on that list
>Mozart No. 40 not on that list
>Shostakovich not on that list
Dropped

>>10196739
What yesterday's scientific experiment has shown me is that it takes me approximately 1.25 70cl bottles of whiskey and 10 cigarettes to get through one complete performance of Parsifal

>>10198029
underrated post

just like Mozart

>>10198912
Unironically does not have enough Mozart Tbh

>>10191393
>Read Fux's Counterpoint.
>Every important composer in history has read this book.
No one Pre-Bach read it, and it wasn't translated into German until Bach was almost dead (so he likely didn't read it or didn't pay too much attention).
Bach tended to teach his students using figured bass examples rather than species counterpoint.

Not saying people shouldn't read Gradus ad Parnassum, but many many great composers didn't read it - and Fux himself wrote it with his own "ideal" of what Palestrina's work should have been, rather than Palestrina's actual work (Fux didn't have access to very much of Palestrina's music)

Props for making this thread though, we sometimes have /comp/ on /mu/ but it has been dead for months now.

Trained composer here, I'll drop by from time to time. I mostly write fugues these days so nothing too exciting. Have had my music recorded by symphony orchestras and performed / recorded by chamber groups, although I'm still firmly small-time

>>10193132
1. Martinu 1
2. Schnittke 2
3. Martinu 4
4. Schnittke 1
5. Mahler 5
6. Ritchie 1 (Anthony Ritchie)
7. Mahler 2
8. Turangalila (I say it counts)
9. Sibelius 7
10. Mahler 1

>>10198113
what makes you think his ideas are cantabile?
ever tried singing a chopin etude?
op is a charlatan

>>10199198
Whoops - forgot about Rautavaara symphonies - They are all very good and you should listen to them. Also his harp and piano concerti

>>10199204
>>10199198
Kill yourself poly

>>10199209
Will do, I'll get right on that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPYGRfzfBew

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTxYykhQZbI

>>10199148
oi, stay away from Liszt
the stuff he did after he shaved his head and become an exorcist was pretty good

>>10191393
I reject this idea that you need to read about music to write music. You might be able to learn HOW to write if you absolutely cannot write at all from nothing. But if you have the gift, you have the gift.

Edward Elgar, entire self taught:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2OhGH3rFi4

>Arnold Schoenberg called himself an "autodidact" in an interview.[13] Other largely self-taught composers include notably Hans Zimmer,[14] Danny Elfman, Havergal Brian, Nobuo Uematsu, Joachim Raff, Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji,[15] Bohuslav Martinů,[16] Georg Philipp Telemann, Heitor Villa-Lobos, Toru Takemitsu and Edward Elgar.[citation needed]

Music is abstract, and even infants can recognize scales. It is intrinsic to being human. Infants can't read and they can barely speak.

There's a disconnect there.

>>10199939
And not even one (1) good composer was mentioned in that text.

>>10199944

>>10199939
Whatever way you plan to compose, you need some way to write what you are making down. The ideas of harmony, counterpoint, and most importantly form would take a long time to come up with on your own, and even then you would have no idea if you are taking them as far as it is possible.

There are no gifts, there is only hard work. If you reject resources which might help you from sheer narcissism, good fucking luck.

>>10199944
Telemann

>>10199959
No.

And also fucking lol at using this as an excuse as to not learn theory, I guarantee that all of these have a firm grounding in theory (Schönberg specifically have written some of the best beginner texts of theory for fucks sake!) and them being self-taught only refers to the fact that they had little to no FORMAL TRAINING.

>>10199965
>There are no gifts, there is only hard work.
Utter nonsense. Plenty of gifted individuals do jack-all with their talent. Plenty of hard-working individuals have zero talent.

Some software and maybe a keyboard is all the gifted individual needs to start composing.

>>10199968
I understand why you're being defensive, if you've invested time in formal study. But not everyone needs certification.

>>10199971
"Talent" is a term dilettantes made up to explain the seemingly magical way an artist can be a master of their craft.
There are certainly a lot of qualities great artists possess that make them great. However any natural affinity they might have had becomes insignificant at some point. These are extremely conscientious people, people who work every second they are able to, and better their craft every day.


>Some software and maybe a keyboard is all the gifted individual needs to start composing.

haha, are you talking about yourself?

>>10199987
>There are certainly a lot of qualities great artists possess that make them great. However any natural affinity they might have had becomes insignificant at some point.
Seems like your splitting hairs here. Are you rejecting the idea that certain humans are almost inhumanly talents "fresh-out-of-the-box", so to speak? As if it is impossible for a person given all the tools and no further prodding cannot make music of exceptional quality? I'm not saying a gifted individual cannot improve beyond base-level, but to deny innate talent just shows your colors. You're an elitist snob, probably not talented yourself, if you're discounting it entirely. Sorry if that seems harsh, but I can't see any other way about it.

I make no claims to be talented. I wrote some stuff for orchestra; I can't read music. You explain it.

>>10199997
Of course some people are able to understand some things better when just introduced to the topic, or they have a clear idea what that want to do, and a number of other things which makes them stand out, and which people label as "talent".

>if it is impossible for a person given all the tools and no further prodding cannot make music of exceptional quality?
However, we are not talking about exceptional quality here, we are talking about the giants of music, the greatest examples one can think of. Not some one hit wonders, or people who wrote some stuff for the orchestra, just to be forgotten next month, and continue with posting cartoon cats on a hebrew dreidel forum

The truth of the matter is that talent might make you stand out from the crowd of similarly insignificant people, but who is some Elgar compared to Beethoven, Chopin or any other composer who had teachers, studied, read, and on top of that learned on their own and composed?

>>10200012
>However, we are not talking about exceptional quality here, we are talking about the giants of music, the greatest examples one can think of

Actually the topic of the thread, from the OP

>So you want to compose music. Everything you need is in the mega.
What follows is various prescriptions on how to write music, including learning to play (!) piano, in order to compose.

I reject that notion. These things are refinements of a talent (natural, innate, untrained) that exists already. Some people simply lack the ability to write music. Some people are neurologically incapable of noticing fine discernment in pitch, it's called amusica.

Some people write music in their head of brilliant scope and quality; the barrier to writing is translating that to a performer(s). Software has closed the gap, so to speak. It's also allowed a lot of poor music to proliferate, which may cause some to cast aspersions on the idea. But one thing is clear: music is not just a discipline, like welding or carpentry or basket-weaving. It is innate (and perhaps unique) to the human brain. It comes from within.

Elgar is admired by many great composers and has been described "a genius" by critics and musicians. He lacks the output of a Beethoven, but that doesn't make him less a composer. He clearly understood theory. He was lucky to be exceptionally bright and a skilled reader, as he obviously lacked access to software that makes it much, much easier for naturally talented (there's that word again) individuals to get started composing with zero assistance. But his formal training is limited to playing violin and piano, and includes zero instruction in theory. This he learned on his own. If that's not talent (genius-level), I don't know what is.

Admire Beethoven and Chopin and all the classical trained composers for THEIR genius and THEIR hard work. Do not discredit Elgar because he lacks formal training. Feel free to discredit me; I will not share my music with you, and I'm sure you're glad of that.

I leave you with The Dream of Gerontius, considered by many his masterpiece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K55d9a8j8WE

>>10193132
just off the top of my head and in no particular order
Bruckner 9th
Brahms 1
Brahms 2
Brahms 3
Brahms 4
Wagner Symphony in C
Mozart 41 (not gonna put more than one wolfie on here but 39 too)
Bruckner 4
Mahler 2/9
Shostakovich 5th

>>10200048
>Elgar is admired by many great composers and has been described "a genius" by critics and musicians
Literally only delusional english believe this.

I'm not even joking, you will NEVER hear the name Elgar in musical academia nor will you ever see his music performed anywhere else in Europe.

who else composes here?

>>10200063
>I'm not even joking, you will NEVER hear the name Elgar in musical academia
That's not surprising at all. They fear and hate him for being a genius outside their safe space.

>>10191393
>command+f
>no saint saens, no scriabin

u guys r shit

>>10200069
why would you compose an a computer and not use a DAW
either notes on paper, or multicolored bars on a project track, make up your mind

>>10200075
alright, you stay on the uneducated side of the musical spectrum with Edgar and the rest of delusional narcissists who reject the academia because it "can't see their talent"

but actual real composers who value tradition and the craft will continue to dominate artistically, okay? okay

>>10200089
Not a problem.

>>10200112

>>10200082
nowadays in music schools they require you to compose in a notation software

the medium is arbitrary but I did use a daw to help with this one

>>10200082
>why would you compose an a computer and not use a DAW
So you can send performers and people who need / want to see the score a PDF.

And so you can quickly and easily make corrections, extract parts, import / export MIDI files.

All professional classical music ends up in a type-set score so your music is going to end up in a notation program eventually. Its fine to do sketches on paper or sometimes even large sections. Having an entire piece on paper is pretty old fashioned though, its not the 70s (or 1770s) any more.

>>10198383
why is this so much better than everything else posted in this thread?

>>10200462
Because you have bad taste. He didn't even manage to post the correct Scarlatti.

>>10196772
There's tons of books, youtube videos and apps to help out with this stuff. Just get a piano and start learning music theory. Once you know how to play a few chords and scales you can sound ok and improvise and write music. Getting started is easy on the piano.

Getting any good takes many years, and I'd say you should work on ear training as much as possible. Get an app to practice it every day, do it at the piano, sing everything you play. Get a sight singing book. Take singing lessons. Singing is the best way to train the ear, and a good ear is the only way to play and write well.

>>10200467
>why is this so much better than everything else itt?

Comprehension.

>>10191393
I'm a composer and I also make arrangements. Anyone care to look at my work ?

https://soundcloud.com/sean-orourke-377966223/the-kid-on-the-mountain-piano-flute-bodhran

>>10200747
>program music
No thanks!

>>10200792
I'm irish so I make irish sounding music. What about that makes it program music?

>>10200816
The title indicates that it is a programmatic piece, therefore I refuse to listen to it.

>>10200828
Vivaldi and bach both wrote great program pieces. Stop being such an autist.

>>10200838
>replying to a frog posting bait

>>10200747
First building looks better

>>10199939
>I reject this idea that you need to read about music to write music
>let me list a number of people, all of whom can read music and know a lot of music theory
Self taught =/= know nothing about music theory or being unable to read. You cite Schoenberg as a proponent for you cause, a composer who studied endlessly the music of his predecessors, who taught music theory, who was dissatisfied by late-romanticism because of theoretical points. Schoenberg, regardless of how you view his music is one of the giants of musical pedagogy of the 20th century, it's absurd that you are trying to use him to champion an anti-theory position.
Asides from the ridiculousness of using Schoenberg you cite Danny Elfman as an example. Danny fucking Elfman. Asides from the fact he can read and write music and knows music theory why on earth would anyone use him to make a positive point about anything? He's beyond shit.

If your position is that you don't need formal education to be a classical composer then sure, there are a number of notable composers who had relativity little instruction and did most of it on their own. In fact I don't know why you don't mention them and instead name two bad film composers, Elgar, and some no names. If that is your position you could have said Brahms, Verdi, or Wagner.
If your position is that reading is not necessary then that is just wrong. Every single classical composer can read and write and knows theory. I defy you to name one ever who isn't some snotty 16 year old autist composing on a computer.

>>10199987
Goethe met both Mozart and Mendelssohn as children. He said that Mozart was amazing, but Mendelssohn sounded like an adult version of Mozart. Mendelssohn had a sort of prodigious musical ability that only comes once a century at least. If it were all just hard work and good teachers Mendelssohn wouldn't be so impressive because there would be many others like him, but their aren't because he had something beyond a musical family and young instruction.

>>10201029
>Goethe met both Mozart and Mendelssohn as children
Goethe was only seven (7) years older than Mozart, I think you might be misremembering something.

>>10200048
Just saying anon, the point playing Piano while going through the reading is because Piano has the clearest and most direct link to everything you are reading. All of the points will come to life because you are playing everything they are talking about.

The OP never claimed that you needed to do all of that stuff to compose music. The point of doing all that stuff is to educate you on how good music works.

>>10199939
>Other largely self-taught composers include notably Hans Zimmer
That explains a lot.

>>10201029
>Martinu and Takemitsu
>No names
Tallis i understand you might be on the sauce right now but try to be less of a retard.

>>10201118
please kill yourself poly

I hope you wagnerposters know that he is literally the progenitor of kitsch

>>10201146
I'm not poly, you failure

>>10201097
Are there even any properly educated film composers besides Silvestri?

>>10199939
The idea of the primitive autodidact forging their path & creating exceptional works based on their "gifts" is mostly a myth, touted by naive, ahistorical individualists. The "individualist" part is not the issue here; in fact, to an intelligent individual, it seems wholly senseless to prohibit oneself from studying the wealth of musical history, or at least some general musical theory. If said musical theory seems arbitrary or pointless to them, at least reading it can help them to articulate why. There are brilliant autodidacts, for sure, but they all come out of & are thus influenced by a society. The primitives, guided by their supposed "gifts", are always influenced by the outside without knowing it

>>10201044
No I'm not. He heard both a child Mozart when Goethe was twelve and later on heard Mendelssohn play. What's so unbelievable about it. Mozart traveled a lot in his youth to perform. Look it up, a quick google search will give you lots of attestations.

>>10201118
>Martinu
An obscure composer who is only known by Czechs and very well listened classical enthusiasts
>Takemitsu
I guess he isn't that obscure though hardly well known.
No matter it makes no difference to the points I was making. Everything I said outside of that still stands exactly as it did.

>>10201165
John Williams was.

>>10201165
Literally all the composers up until the 70s. Then the percentage goes down. Still plenty of formally trained composers working in film music today. You do generally have to know how to score for an orchestra to get the job after all.

New Mega link with better organization and instructions.

https://mega.nz/#F!QWhx1KYY!mVS50gOr6g05MHTZr88v8g