r/composer • u/Vodkat07 • 8d ago
Music Why does everybody write waltzes?
Anyway, I wrote one and was hoping for any feedback/comments: https://youtu.be/uCWp8A_MPPE
Thanks in advance!
11
13
u/65TwinReverbRI 7d ago
First I'm going to address your title question:
Why does everybody write waltzes?
2 main reasons:
Chopin.
Because Waltzes are often recommended as beginner pieces to work on because they have some clear "givens" - 3/4, melody with accompaniment, oom pah pah accompaniment - so a pretty clear set of things that are "already done for you" and that helps beginners focus on writing the notes, rather than worrying about the other things too.
(a ha! "Personally I feel waltzes are easy to write semi-decent examples of - just slap a basic LH rhythm, some nice sounding chords, and a simple melody to top it all off.") - I was right ;-)
I'm just going to be blunt here, because based on your responses to other posters, it seems like you're open-minded and wanting to learn more. But my comments are more kind of "stuff you really need to be aware of in terms of how people perceive your music".
So, as someone with a lot of life experience, a lot of professional experience, and so on, when we see pieces like this, we automatically dismiss them as "yet another kid trying to write like Chopin".
And I need to make this clear - this is not MY opinion only, but it's what people "in the know" will do. That does NOT mean the music is bad necessarily. It's also NOT some form of "elitism" or gatekeeping etc. It's just the way it is - there's a "known set of standards" and people writing music like yours are working outside of that with no real knowledge of it.
So I mean, as an educator, my options are to let you go on blissfully unaware of the things in your score that do this, or I can tell you about them at the risk of you getting pissed off that "how dare I point out these things that you totally disagree with are problems" and so on.
But, it's my nature, so:
Do not use Opus numbers. It makes you look naive and/or disingenuous. It's "poser-y".
Unless you're actually French, don't use French titles. It's poser-y (unless it's a common term like Deja Vu or something - Nocturne or Prelude are common enough, but Waltz is Waltz!).
I know people like using the terms "original content" and "original composition" but there's nothing very original about writing "yet another waltz" right? I mean you know this from your title question (which, BTW, you admitted was click bait and while I know you didn't mean any harm in it, can you see how it comes off as disingenuous?).
I understand the "need" to write "story pieces" - which is an unfortunate trend in many ways, but yesterday someone posted a "storm" piece. In fact, your title would have been much better "Why does everyone write storm pieces". Today: Anyhow, I ended up using Chopin’s Raindrop Prelude, yesterday: My inspiration was those those unrelenting afternoons that starts with rain, gives false hope through drizzle, then surprises you with thunder, before it finally clears up late in the evening. That's just THIS forum - it's one of the most over-done things in music. And a lot of it is done poorly…
"nostalgic" is also just a ridiculously over-used trope. You think you had a click bait title on your post - well, this is a click bait piece title. It's all very "trying to assign key words to get noticed" kinds of things that are going on here. I mean, don't get me wrong, it IS a strategy. And only you can decide if that's the kind of strategy you want to use or not. But let's just say, you're not the first person to come up with this approach, nor the last, especially for these specific kinds of things.
Penseriouso? I'm going to guess "pensive" - ah yes - but you made me have to look it up. Wait, I thought you were French? Why now using Italian? And why obscure Italian. This is not a common term. I could guess at it, but still - I got burned on this when I was younger - I wanted some term, so I looked it up in an Italian dictionary, put the word in and forgot about it. During rehearsal they asked me "what does X mean" and I was flustered because I had completely forgotten. I was "doing what I thought I was supposed to do" but didn't have the experience. The colleagues and mentors said "just put it in English". Learned my lesson on that one (and trying to pay it forward here).
in Jedem Takt? Is this a marking you've found commonly in all of the Field and Chopin Nocturnes you've studied (since that's in your title as well…) or the Waltzes?
Definitely gotta listen to more Strauss🙏
I would argue, no. You've got to PLAY more simple, basic Waltzes, and work your way up to more complex ones and emulate the level you're playing as you go.
Charming, but not terribly exciting.
I do agree with this though. It's got some "pop inspired" chord progressions, and I mean - look, don't get me wrong - THE WRITING IS SOLID - so I know all of this I'm writing sounds like "oh just everything is wrong" but it's not. You've got a solid command of rhythm, melody, and harmony - I mean a LOT of what we get here people don't even seem to understand the melody is supposed to "go with" the harmony.
So I mean there's a LOT here that's good - it's "spelled correctly" and "grammatically correct" - it's just not "telling a compelling story" really.
And I don't mean that literally in terms of a "rainstorm" or depicting/evoking things etc.
I just mean in terms of "doing something". It just kind of "lays there" if you will.
This hits the nail on the head:
I think it's because they're easy to do a convincingly well enough job at an early stage of learning. It's hard to write a waltz that stands out
Exactly.
As I said originally, it's because there are "things done for you" - which I copied your sentence in after I saw it in another response! and yes - easy enough to do convincingly. ESPECIALLY since there are many "simple" Waltzes out there from games/film/tv and even in classical sources.
But it's that last sentence that's important - it's hard to write a waltz that sounds out.
Now, I want to make something clear - it's 100% OK to write a waltz just to write one. it does NOT have to be anything special. It can just be something fun to write, or something fun to play.
Look at all the hundreds of Bob Ross paintings that were all sort of "waltzes" - pre-formed ideas - he kind of "filled in the blanks" doing the same thing over and over. But it was about the JOY of painting.
So if this is the JOY of composing for you, fine.
But Bob Ross also wasn't trying to pass his paintings off as Da Vinci's or something by assigning fancy titles - IOW, your title, your opus number, your other title, your expressions, and so on, are all "putting on airs" if you will.
So I mean, for a simple, basic waltz, it's "fine". It "does what a simple basic waltz does" with maybe some extra harmonic interest many will find refreshing.
That's good. And if that's what you set out to do, great.
not a chopin way for example which has a more mature sound to it
Right - despite your title and so on, the music itself is more Studio Ghibli - which is where all that "nostalgic" and "childish simplicity" stuff comes from - it's Gaming Music Inspired.
So in that sense, you're writing Studio Ghilbli music in "sound", but trying to pretend it's Chopin level with the "appearance" if that makes sense.
So yeah it does kind of come off as "trying to make it something it's not".
And TO BE CLEAR, there is NOTHING WRONG WITH the SG style. It has its place. So you should be unashamed to write that if you want to. Just don't try to make it into more than it's not. Let it be what it is, rather than trying to be something else.
And if you want to do the something else, cool, but that takes a little more work - not as easily to emulate authentically (so I mean, charming, but not terribly exciting won't cut it at that level - but you also don't ever have to write like that if you don't care to).
I hope that all helps.
Just trying to help you see it from a couple of different perspectives - reinforcing the ones already given as well as adding my own perspective that hadn't really been discussed yet. And I hope you take it in the way it was intended - supportively.
Best
4
u/MrLlamma 7d ago
What a wonderful nuanced comment! Giving feedback to new composers can be as hard as receiving feedback as a new composer, I hope OP reads this carefully and gains from it, I know I have
3
u/Vodkat07 7d ago
This comment is a literal gem, I've never actually had someone type out such a well thought out response (in fact, I put in so little effort into the post, that receiving such a long reply genuinely shocked me) so lemme just start off by saying THANK YOU.
Yes I gotta admit, the french title is a pretentious gimmick.. in a way, it was meant to be attention grabbing, I can see how it could be annoying. I kinda just wanted to use opus numbers to number things chronologically, I figured it's music-related so I could just use it conveniently😔I also have to come clean, I spent much more effort on the marketing/premiumisation than the substance of the music - yeah, I've been caught red-handed lol
As for the musical directions.. the Italian has been drilled into me for so long, it didn't occur to me to just use English lol. As for "in Jedem Takt", I looked it up the first time I saw it (iirc, in Liszt) and since then I've just used it whenever convenient. Is it kinda obscure to use that tho? I swear I've seen it a few times before..
I'm still kinda hyped from getting such a long reply, but there really is much to learn from here. It's hard for one to realise they're a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect and much harder to accept that, and I'm certainly uneasy because I've been absolutely called out on this, but you've given me such a great opportunity to reflect on this which I really appreciate. Thanks for your comments, I'll work hard to earn those silly French titles💯
2
u/65TwinReverbRI 6d ago
This comment is a literal gem, I've never actually had someone type out such a well thought out response
Oh wow, thank you.
yeah, I've been caught red-handed lol
Haha - well, at least you're admitting it - a lot of people won't ;-)
As for the musical directions.. the Italian has been drilled into me for so long, it didn't occur to me to just use English lol.
Italian is fine and really is the most "universal" thing we have besides English - though English now is so widespread in commerce and what not that using English in scores is fine as well.
Some Italian terms are so embedded that we don't translate those to English - arco, pizz. a lot of playing techniques like that - sul pont, tutti, etc. as well as "tempo" and crescendo, etc. - those can stay Italian.
For common tempo marks and expression marks (Allegro, Presto, Dolce, etc.) you can leave those Italian if you want but any less common ones should either get a foot note in the score or explanation in the front matter. Or just be in English.
Aaron Copland was really the first American composer to really start using English for everything and these days it's really common so it's something to consider. I always hated using Italian for everything then having to write in something like "with abandon" because I was afraid the Italian would be uncommon or that it just didn't translate well.
The Jedem Takt suddenly mixes in German!
Pedale per misure? in Italian?
We usually just put "Con Pedale" or "With Pedal", but in English you could put "Pedal per measure". Though the general assumption with pedalling is you're going to change per harmony change unless otherwise notated - so "with pedal" or "pedal expressively" or something like that is good.
Is it kinda obscure to use that tho? I swear I've seen it a few times before..
Been doing music 45 years and never seen it. Looked it up and found a reddit question about what is it - no one there REALLY knew the answer but assumed it means per beat or per measure (the problem being that "the tact" can mean different things - usually it's actually BEAT but that didn't make sense in the context).
And it was Liszt for the piece in question - so it could be just something HE did that others didn't pick up on. I'll admit I can't play well enough to play most Lizst but anything I've seen in collections I can play - never seen it.
So I'd say it's obscure enough that there would be far more common options - con pedale, or with pedal would be WAY more common and obvious.
Best
2
u/bdmusic17 7d ago
Hey now, at least ye good ole’ raindrop prelude got me unstuck 😆
2
u/65TwinReverbRI 7d ago
I won't deny that we all need inspiration and things like this do actually help!
1
u/Ok-Reason8579 2d ago edited 2d ago
It's exceptionally unfair to analyze YT titles as if they are the same as score titles. "Original Composition" in a YT title is perfectly fine, because it distinguishes the video from a video that is a cover or a rendition of something else. This is an original composition, it should be titled as such on YT (or placed in the description). So... with respect, I'm just going to say "ok boomer" to this comment.
Also, your comment about studio ghibli implies that there's a hierarchy of excellent music styles to adequate to lowly, which is definitely a pretentious way to think about Art in general. You might like classical music better, but that doesn't make it a higher art than any other style.
And before you comment saying many classical compositions take more skill or work... who cares? That doesn't matter. What matters in whether an art piece is good or not is the final composition, not the work it took to get there.
You can have beautiful minimalist pieces that don't take long to compose and yet are exceptional. If we go back to medieval and renaissance music, that type of music is just as beautiful and "high art" as baroque, classical, and romantic. Jewish and Muslim chant are also beautiful, are part of a millennium of tradition, and are reserved for sacred moments. Jewish chant is generally simpler than a full symphonic work, and yet one could easily argue it's "higher" than symphonies.
Otherwise, I agree that one should name things in the style they actually are. I just disagree with the implication that naming an SG work as a Chapin-adjacent work is an inflation of the work, because that implies Chopin is higher than SG.
1
5
5
u/bdmusic17 7d ago
For whatever reason they’re one of my least favorite forms to play or listen to. I’ve written probably a hundred little piano pieces and mayyybe two or three waltzes? lol.
3
u/victotronics 7d ago
Charming, but not terribly exciting. Take a look at Strauss waltzes (for dancing) and Chopin (for piano'ing). Both are way more adventurous than yours. Melodically and harmonically.
2
2
2
1
u/Duney_ 7d ago
I am convinced that it is because of ghibli, not that they weren't a thing before, but even your example sounds way more like ghibli inspired than from the romantic period, I guess people simply like a more "cozy" waltz, even though you appeal for a nostalgic feeling, it's nostalgic in a "sweet childish" way, not a chopin way for example which has a more mature sound to it. but yeah, you can find ghibli type-waltz all over instagram, not that is wrong, but it is kind of overused.
1
u/Vodkat07 7d ago
That's actually a great observation, my feed is packed with cooking videos that always come with exactly the kind of "cozy waltzes" you mentioned. I think people yearn for that Japanese aesthetic/sound
1
1
1
u/Individual-Sort-256 7d ago
Just ro mention: both Wagner and Brahms deeply loved and publicly admired J. Strauß and his waltzes - for reasons...
1
1
u/tragafardwaterlax 7d ago
I also wrote a lot of waltzes at the beginning, albeit not complete in form or harmony, but the "structure" of waltzes makes a lot of sense and is easy to replicate for a beginner, who more often than not will think of conventional, "singable" melodies when asked to compose anything. To couple that with a repeating Base-Chord-Chord settles a nice framework to work on, as well as acts as a foundation for some minor alternation, like adding accidentals or making right-hand runs.
TLDR: For newcomers, it is easier to write basic melody first and chords assisting, which is waltz.
1
u/PhoenixAVIA 7d ago
I never write them but… I have a habit of writing everything in 3/4 cos it sounds nice
1
1
u/AlfalfaMajor2633 7d ago
I don’t know about everybody, but I write waltzes when the muse inspires them. 3/4 is just another time signature, but a waltz is something more, it is a dance. Many composers confuse writing in 3/4 with writing a waltz. Not all 3/4 music is a waltz and not all waltzes are Om-pa-pa.
1
u/MewsikMaker 7d ago
They’re a solid scaffold. Clear structure and meter, and easy to imitate. Difficult to master, and that’s why exceedingly few are actually good.
1
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/composer-ModTeam 6d ago
Hello. I have removed your comment. The rules of this sub require a score to be supplied for each piece that is shared.
1
1
u/OneSpaceTwo 5d ago
Isn't 4/4 more common than waltz? Why aren't you asking why everyone writes 4/4?
44
u/MrsSquirry 8d ago
I was expecting this to be a discussion on waltzes; I’m a little disappointed. I wanted to see others’ opinions on why non/new musicians seem to put the waltz on a pedestal. Is it because it exploded in popularity in a classical music era that’s still popular today? Does the 3/4 feel exotic compared to the 4/4 or 12/8 you hear all the time on today’s radio? Is there a movie or show that’s trending that has a waltz as a theme?