Music composition for bitcoins

[ryepdx]

Hey, I have a college friend currently studying music who is interested in composing music in exchange for bitcoins. Reply here if you would like to commission a piece. 

[ksd5]

Can you please offer a sample of his work? Thank you. :-)

[ryepdx]

I just contacted her. She says she'll get a demo to me tomorrow to post up here.

[ryepdx]

Okay, so she had a busy day and didn't get back to me until tonight. She says she'll send me the demo at 9:30AM PST, so it should be up here shortly thereafter.

[ryepdx]

Alright, she finally got her demo to me:
http://ryepdx.com/sonata.mp3

Let me know if anyone's interested in hiring her and I'll pass the word along.

[ryepdx]

Bump.

[ryepdx]

Bump.

[xenon481]

Alright, she finally got her demo to me:
http://ryepdx.com/sonata.mp3

Let me know if anyone's interested in hiring her and I'll pass the word along.

This feels like a re-working/re-imagining of Brahms' Clarinet Concerto #2. Many of the chord progressions, harmonies, and stepwise movements are sometimes nearly identical in idea.

It works well, but it is plainly obvious where it came from.

If I was to commission a work, I'd want an original work, not an imitation of a classic.

[casascius]

Most definitly agreed, with that factor aside, i was also Very displeased at the audio quality, Running only at 160kb/s, Is terrible IMO, i listen to stuff thats running at either PCM 1411kb/s Or lossless 1xxx-12xx

The complexity of the audio is also lacking, So i'll pass.

If you reach a skill level to do music complexity simmilar to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZEM1bVR0NY
then i'd be intrested, but i doubt that will happen soon.

my #1 annoyance was that to listen to your sonata with six speakers i had to emluate it, érgo there was no 3d imersion in the audio, Making it very flat

With all due respect, don't be such a jerk.  My #1 annoyance was reading this reply.  People who pay for compositions like this often just need it as filler music for commercial purposes for some powerpoint slides or flash presentation.  Their work still has value even if it doesn't appeal to your arrogant eclectic taste.  If you don't like it, just don't buy it!

BTW, imitating public domain work has an appeal in a commercial context because it helps puts to rest any concern over licensing/rights.

[TheMasonX]

Most definitly agreed, with that factor aside, i was also Very displeased at the audio quality, Running only at 160kb/s, Is terrible IMO, i listen to stuff thats running at either PCM 1411kb/s Or lossless 1xxx-12xx

The complexity of the audio is also lacking, So i'll pass.

If you reach a skill level to do music complexity simmilar to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZEM1bVR0NY
then i'd be intrested, but i doubt that will happen soon.

my #1 annoyance was that to listen to your sonata with six speakers i had to emluate it, érgo there was no 3d imersion in the audio, Making it very flat

With all due respect, don't be such a jerk.  My #1 annoyance was reading this reply.  People who pay for compositions like this often just need it as filler music for commercial purposes for some powerpoint slides or flash presentation.  Their work still has value even if it doesn't appeal to your arrogant eclectic taste.  If you don't like it, just don't buy it!

BTW, imitating public domain work has an appeal in a commercial context because it helps puts to rest any concern over licensing/rights.

I fully agree with casascius, you have absolutely no right to be such an jerk. Your musical tastes aren't nearly as refined as you think they are, nor should you require such extravagance. I found your complaints unfounded, ostentatious and ignorant. I'd recommend that you keep your mouth shut next time you want to complain about somebody else's work, unless you've got some way to back up your argument.

[Mahkul]

If you reach a skill level to do music complexity simmilar to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZEM1bVR0NY
then i'd be intrested, but i doubt that will happen soon.

my #1 annoyance was that to listen to your sonata with six speakers i had to emluate it, érgo there was no 3d imersion in the audio, Making it very flat

I haven't checked the original song, but the song you quote on youtube is hardly complicated from the composing point of view.

[cdhowie]

Why the hell would music be created at 1411kb/s if Nobody can hear above 320?.

Comment from the peanut gallery: Kb/s measurements are specific to the codec in use.  For example, uncompressed PCM at 22.5kHz computes to a much higher Kb/s figure than lossy 320Kb/s MP3, but the latter will have better quality (assuming the input for both conversions is close to or higher than 44.1kHz).  Likewise, 96Kb/s Vorbis is usually considerably higher-quality than 96Kb/s MP3, when processing the same input.

So when talking about Kb/s you need to reference which codec you are comparing, otherwise the measurement means nothing.

[xenon481]

Now before you argue otherwise about my hearing capabilites and acuse me of lying, Take this into account, Why the hell would music be created at 1411kb/s if Nobody can hear above 320?.
Im not gonna argue weather or not i've been a douche, Because i have. Now stop talking about me, and talk about the music

It was a MIDI file using standard software samples recorded into an mp3 format. I don't care how high of a bitrate the mp3 could have been set to, the quality wasn't getting any better.

This post is about music composition (as in sheet music), not about recording options.

Arrogant Electric tastes?, Oh c'mon thats such a longshot that you'd miss, the link i provided is closer to classical than electronic, Arrogant sure, no arguments there, but the song features, Drum,Symbols,Chimes,Piano,Synthesizer,A bass guitar and a little snare drum.
Correct me if im wrong but thats closer to classical than some garbage from Akon

He said "eclectic", not "electric".

"hardly complicated from the composing point of view"
That was kinda my point, Whilest i did post something that 'I' say is more complex, I do not see how i could be wrong, Im not trying to post something like YYZ from rush, I was trying to put something simmilar to the sample Sonata, something basic but more complex and with Much more depth to it.
 as a way to state "when you reach here, money will reach over there"

You obviously don't understand musical composition complexity at all.  What you posted is one of the least complex things that can be created. It was merely some looping samples in a single key that had an internal groove beat.

The sample Sonata that the OP linked had many different keys, modes, inversions, structures and more all while having the two instruments interact with eachother. It wasn't brilliant by any means and very much an imitation work, but saying that some random groove sample loop mix is more complex is sheer lunacy.

[epii]

I can't claim to have any sophistication in my musical taste, but sonata.mp3 sounded like it'd make some pretty awesome background music for a Japanese-style RPG. 

[xenon481]

Now before you argue otherwise about my hearing capabilites and acuse me of lying, Take this into account, Why the hell would music be created at 1411kb/s if Nobody can hear above 320?.
Im not gonna argue weather or not i've been a douche, Because i have. Now stop talking about me, and talk about the music

It was a MIDI file using standard software samples recorded into an mp3 format. I don't care how high of a bitrate the mp3 could have been set to, the quality wasn't getting any better.

This post is about music composition (as in sheet music), not about recording options.

Well then, Go get a lossless audio file that plays at roughly 1000kb/s, Then convert it down to 160(what the sonata had) and tell me you dont think it sounds worse, Higher bitrate, means i can layer more data

Do you not understand that going from MIDI to MP3 is like going from Text to Computer Voice? The computer voice isn't going to sound any more human-like just because you are encoding it at a higher bitrate.

[Fiyasko]

I've deleted all my posts.
And one last thing before im gone for good and you people talk about HER music, and not Me.

Do you not understand that going from MIDI to MP3 is like going from Text to Computer Voice? The computer voice isn't going to sound any more human-like just because you are encoding it at a higher bitrate.

That would be going from Lower to Higher, Wich would do nothing. MIDI->Mp3=No difference
lossy 12xxKb/s converted into an mp3 160kbs= Big sound quality drop Mainly noticable with the amount of 3d depth
Mp3 160 converted to lossy 12xxKb/s =Nothing changes