Thanks a lot Adam, yes, although my solutions have helped make the rhythms at least playable I have to admit the actual micro-quality of the groove is an aspect which is almost impossible to discuss meaningfully in most classical ensembles both because it's not something they're familiar with thinking about, and also because it's virtually impossible to negotiate amongst more than say 4 musicians. One day I plan to have my own ensemble who work at it for months on end before they finally get the micro-groove I'm after (-:

A wild Adam Neely appears!

I think the habitat suits him around here (-:

look at that, my two favorite music boiz in one comment section, how grand

fangasm!!!!

buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-(bubbles)-buzz, giggle, buzz

Triangles can be things of beauty, or things or terror. I was a percussion tutor for a prominent high school concert band, and found the triangle they were using was just a $5 'toy' from a music shop, yet they had 4 hammered copper timpani, a selection of quality maple, birch, ans steel snare drums, quality mallet percussion... you get the idea. But their auxillary was completely overlooked. Luckily, the director was open to buying a nice Alan Abel triangle and set of different sized beaters, and a Grover brand tambourine with a head. It just took a single one hour tutorial with the percussion section on proper striking position and technique for both, and it had an amazing effect. The the quiet section with the triangle starting the bar, and the flutes to entering softly underneath it with a melody and the clarinets and horns swelling in long notes went from sounding abysmal to beautiful. The tambourine added a real punch without the force of a drum for some quieter rhythmic passages... The director thought I was a miracle worker when really it was just few people treat aux percussion seriously, and thus by horrible quality instruments and don't bother to learn even the basic playing technique. I remember one of the other bands were using a low quality triangle, and hitting with a drumstick (and we are talking bands made up of primarily 17 and 18 year olds)... in the adjudicator's notes he mentioned how the band whom I'd worked and another whom really respected the aux parts had done such a fantastic job with the aforementioned sections, and absolutely slammed the band that had the drumstick on triangle. TL;DR I agree the percussion section has so much to offer, but unfortunately it often gets a bad rep because the percussionists are unfamiliar with correct playing techniques, and have 'toy' quality instruments. If writing for a specific band, it's often worth seeing the quality of their gear and choosing accordingly... their is know point using the beautiful effect of a bowed cymbal if it's going to be played on a $10 cymbal, or by a player whom doesn't know how to bow a cymbal :-D

Very easy to over-use, though. I have to filter out a lot of glock and bells because their effect would be so lessened if I included them as much as I truly wanted to. It's true there's many effects available to percussion, but tbh almost none of them have any sustained application. Bowing any tuned metal, like crotales, is an exception. Triangle tremolo doubled with high woodwind trills, and perhaps glock trill as well, is a wonderful texture.

Personally, I'm a terrible percussionist. So, I write very little percussion.

In my orchestral pieces, there is never less than four precussion players. I confess: I love percussion.

The ending of "Richard Strauss's "Also Sprach Zarathustra" is a great example of the thundering timpani and the "cutting" triangle.

Sounds like your phone farted!

And that is how learning curve is achieved. And guarantee of advancement. I just subbed for that. These people are the teachers I want to learn from.

Sa-satire. Incredible

"A composer's guide" or something like that.

Try "Ein Musikal Spass" by Mozart. (I think that's how it's spelled)

rodgrego Musical Joke by Mozart, as MrInitialMan suggests (but in English)

"So you want to write a fugue", which Glenn Gould said he intended as a sort of recruitment ad for counterpoint in composing, has a lot of witty things going on in opposition to what his singers are singing at the moment. For instance, "Never be clever for the sake of being clever, for the sake of showing off", and the instruments and vocal parts are competing with each other at that moment to derail each other with complexity, resulting in what the composer called the annihilation of a fugue at the end.

Check musescore.org for the world's largest collection of such pieces.

Why would different octaves not sound equally "in tune" in equal temperament? Every note is related to itself in other octaves by either division or multiplication by 2. As far as I'm aware, the reason certain instruments sound sharp or flat in different registers is because of how they were made. For instance, I know that the altissimo range in saxophones has multiple occurences of the same note tuned differently, so players may choose one or the other and then proceed to lip it in tune. Another example is that most woodwinds sound sharp in the higher register and flat in the lower one because playing higher notes requires more air and mouth pressure, which in turns sharpens the note.

​@@karlpoppins That's a part of it, but there's also a matter of even temperament. It isn't exact. It's somewhat "squished" so that we can extend the range. (Many renaissance period instruments were only a couple of octaves). We can't really hear it in the middle register but it starts to become apparent in the extended range. That's why many piano tuners use "stretch" tuning. (Making the upper octave a tad sharp and the lower octave a tad flat).

​@@NelsonMontana1234 I don't understand. If I multiply A 440 Hz by a natural number I will keep getting octaves of A. Now, if I multiply A 440 Hz by 12√2 n amount of times, I will get the note which is exactly n half-steps above that A. Equal temperament was designed to be exact and symmetric, while sacrificing intervalic quality. It shouldn't sound flat or sharp in any octave. Are you talking about the process of tuning? Because, for instance, tuning all notes in a piano in relation to A 440 Hz, any error will accumulate the further away we are from the centre - and that's why pianos are tuned by octave, from the centre and outwards.

@@karlpoppins Theoretically, you are correct A440 should double to A880 and so forth as you go up by octaves. However, pianos are tuned sharper as you go up and flatter as you go down to account for something called inharmonicity (based on length, tension, and properties of the wire), which is characteristic of the piano. If one tunes pure octaves, the 5ths will end up too flat (Comma of Pythagoras). The bigger the piano and the better the quality of instrument the lower the inharmonicity will be. Some orchestras and other musicians are having their pianos tuned to A442. I'm a piano technician. Hope this helps!

@@karlpoppins Brent explained it perfectly. That applies to all instruments and it's especially apparent on midi instruments. It may SOUND like an English horn but it's still an electronic A 440. And the "inharmonicity" becomes apparent when going to the register above C7 (That's two octave above middle, not C dom)

It helps a lot if you can actually play the instrument in question, so you can try out what you've written. You don't have to be _good_ at it, because you can fumble and crawl as much as you want, but you should be able to figure out whether or not where will be physical difficulties in the part. Writing stuff that _sounds_ really difficult, but actually is easy on the instrument in question, makes both the musician and the audience happy. For example, properly constructed four-note arpeggios flying up and down over two octaves are easy on violins and violas, where they are exceptionally difficult if played on, say, a clarinet. Basically, if you have a grasp of the instrument sufficient to know what its characteristic idioms and tropes are, and you know _why_ its players gravitate toward those techniques, you'll be able to wield that instrument a lot more effectively than if you're just using a book or tutorial as a guide. Done right, you can end up with really complex compositions consisting entirely of parts that the individual musicians find relatively simple, or maybe that there are a handful of trouble spots that will require dedicated individual practice.

It's interesting to see what it is musician's have more or less difficulty with, especially when it's opposite what you expected. Sometimes, (probably more with less experienced musicians,) it's not even about the instrument per se, it's about what the musicians are familiar with, like his examples about funky rhythms.

Music that shows off technical ability does not require complexity. The most difficult music tends to be what's musically difficult rather than technically difficult. The things that sound difficult tend to actually be easy while the things that sound easy are likely more difficult.

E.B. White some players are incredibly skilled and will blow you mind. I’m always surprised by what many professional musicians can do.

I would never write a piece of music in terms of easy or complex. That's just doing something for the sake of it. To me, writing music is like expressing a story through sound and melody.

Which later oooozed over to George Clinton Pfunk. Bernie Worrell always incorporated classical music in the song.

thanks!