|Musical composition is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.|
||This article is supported by Compositions task force.
See discussion at Category talk:Musical compositions.
modes in music of the Middle East
The article states that "music of the Middle East employs compositions that are rigidly based on a specific mode (such as the dorian, phrygian, mixolydian, and locrian scales)". The statement is rather confusing and should have a citation. While much Levantine music is modal, much is not. Further, as understood and used today the modes mentioned are derived from the Western European major scale (aka the Ionian mode) and to my knowledge are not known as such to the Middle Eastern music cultures.
Generally, this article is not very good. The topic is broad and needs a specialist's attention.
220.127.116.11 (talk) 11:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
John Cage complaint
-Anybody else find that statement about Cage generally not being considered a composer completely ridiculous? The pursuit of 'true beauty via music' This seems like a weak definition of the goal of composing. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk o contribs) .
- Yes it is ridiculous. I'm definitely not a fan of Cage's music, but I still think this article is too unnecessarily hard on his techniques. In particular, the whole article seems to be slanted to more Western "traditional" values, such as the mentioned "craft of musical composition" that Cage is purported not to follow. What exactly is this craft? Does it not include experimental and aleatoric music? I'm removing those statements about Cage that follow unstable slants. I understand if some believe that stuff about Cage, but c'mon folks, this doesn't need to be in an encyclopedia. (And note that just because only a "few" of his works contain this "craft of musical composition" doesn't mean Cage is not a composer...) Horncomposer 19:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- It has been removed. Good work. Hyacinth 20:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't get a chance to read the original comments regarding John Cage, but the fact remains that the word composition means to "sit with" or to put together. In several of his works, the musical content is not defined. A piece that can theoretically be performed as Beethoven's 5th Symphony, or a Lutaslowski piece, or just scraping sounds, can not be said to be 'composed'. While Cage's point that all music differs from one performance to another is certainly true, the amount of deviation must be taken into account. This has nothing to do with experimental, or even introducing aleatorical elements into a work. You can throw dice to determine the notes, but if every performance reqires the procedure to be redone, there never was a composition. And why not include this discussion in an encyclopedia? Where else will the general public get exposed to the fundamental concepts of contemporary music? Part of the reason audiences are estranged is due to the the complexity, and diverse methods of generating music. Clarifying the "composers" intentions will allow the public to come to a better understanding and appreciation of contemporary music.
- I'm aware this sounds to many as heresy, but who cares about just "contemporary music", anyway? There are not enough chances in a lifetime to enjoy real music, that is, the whole of Classical music. --SciCorrector (talk) 22:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- John Cage's early works were "composed" in the traditional sense, so there's that...
Also, speaking to SciCorrector's point: I bet you also don't like all that talking, color and other newfangled things in your movies either.
Nenndul (talk) 20:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
This page is redirected from compositional techniques, but has just a small section about it. Maybe we can make a new article for Compositional tecniques since it is a substantially broad subject, or at least expand the existing section. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by E-sub-n (talk o contribs) 00:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
New article title
For the sake of consistency, we should name this article Composition (music), because we already have Composition (visual arts), and Composition (language), and because this is the commonly adopted style in popflock.com resource (even in articles about music). For instance,
As you probably know, if we change the title, the current title Musical composition will be turned into a page which will redirect here, and double redirects will be fixed by whoever does the move, or automatically by BOTs.
Paolo.dL (talk) 12:02, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Aside from the work involved, why not change the other article titles? Hyacinth (talk) 21:18, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Copyright info expanded
I've added several paragraphs of introductory material to the section on copyright and legal concerns. I tried to keep the focus on copyright as it applies to compositions in particular. I also chose my words carefully in an effort to be precise and accurate. For example, I tried to make it clear that copyright does not grant, as was previously implied, total control over a composition...rather, it only grants a certain, limited set of rights, which composers often assign to publishers. This will become more important if the section is expanded to cover topics like fair use and de minimis, especially in regard to musical quotation and sampling.
The new content is all uncited, but all of it should be fairly easy to verify in the many how-to guides out there for aspiring musicians; I would start with This Business of Music. Anyway, if you see anything blatantly wrong, please just fix it. Thanks. --mjb (talk) 08:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)