How To Go About Composing Music....

[musicluvr49]

So I've been taking advanced theory classes for about 3 years now, and I am fascinated by composers, and how they shape their music and their harmonies. 

I'd really like to start, but I have no idea where to begin.

If anyone has any advice on this, please share.

Thanks.

[Bob]

Just start.  Figure it out as you go along.  You make your own style.

Learn as much as you can about everything about music, if you want, as long as it doesn't "pollute" your own style.

I haven't seen any manuals on how to compose like certain composers. 

[retrouvailles]

If you want to become a serious classical composer, the best thing to do is to just start to develop a portfolio of your compositions. Just put down whatever comes into your head, using whatever skills you have, and drawing from whatever influences you like. Then, when you are confident enough with what you have, find a local university and ask to make an appointment with a composition professor there (and perhaps do some research into said composer). Ask for their input on your music, and listen to what they have to say. It would also greatly help to find someone who teaches composition privately (it might be difficult to get composition lessons from a university professor steadily, for they have enough university students). Then, if you are still serious about it, apply at a local university for a composition degree. Even if you aren't serious, the best thing for you is to be exposed to many different composers and movements in music. It's always a great thing to be curious, also.

[musicluvr49]

If you want to become a serious classical composer, the best thing to do is to just start to develop a portfolio of your compositions. Just put down whatever comes into your head, using whatever skills you have, and drawing from whatever influences you like. Then, when you are confident enough with what you have, find a local university and ask to make an appointment with a composition professor there (and perhaps do some research into said composer). Ask for their input on your music, and listen to what they have to say. It would also greatly help to find someone who teaches composition privately (it might be difficult to get composition lessons from a university professor steadily, for they have enough university students). Then, if you are still serious about it, apply at a local university for a composition degree. Even if you aren't serious, the best thing for you is to be exposed to many different composers and movements in music. It's always a great thing to be curious, also.

Thanks so much !
 I can't really say I'm serious about it yet, as I've only been dabbling in it out for about a month now, but it's definetely something I wanna get more experience in. I wish I could get a composition teacher, but my parents are already paying for my piano lessons. so I doubt that they'll pay for an extra class.
Thanks for the advice though, I'll keep it in mind.

[aintgotnorhythm]

Get some software like Sibelius or Finale that you can use to put down your compositions and play back your score with simulated instruments. Also I would have a look at the actual scores of your favourite orchestral music to see how certain effects were achieved.

[john11inc]

Writing music requires two things:

1- Knowing what you want the piece to be, and
2- Knowing how to implement your ideas typographically.

Helpful hint: #1 is the hard one, and nobody can help you.  Try various ways of organizing your ideas to see which one is the most indicative of getting an actual piece on actual manuscript.

[Derek]

You may also consider improvisation as a way to help you create compositions. Improvisation became such a large focus for me that I haven't yet bothered to write much of my music down. I'm not sure that I will, either, since it is so easy to record. My goal is to have music be one of the most enjoyable things in my life, and improvisation definitely does that for me. If my goal was to promote myself and sell scores and have lots of people play my music, I might start notating. So far, such a goal doesn't seem desirable to me. So, think carefully about what you want to do with it some day.

Another nice aspect of improvisation is you can more directly apply your skills as a pianist. It is fun to relate what you learn through improvisation to observations you make in scores by your favorite composers, etc.

Consider also it was the method of choice for generating new musical material for Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin, Liszt, Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Debussy, etc. etc. etc.

The biggest challenge I guess for most for composing or improvising or both is simply where to start. With improvisation, I find that recording myself helped a lot in the early years. When you first start you won't have much of a short term memory for the melodies you just played and may not be able to create much melodic or formal structure out of what you're playing. But if you record yourself you might hear some cool melodic fragment you may have otherwise forgotten, and you can use it again. Either way it helps build confidence.

[Bob]

Get some software like Sibelius or Finale that you can use to put down your compositions and play back your score with simulated instruments. Also I would have a look at the actual scores of your favourite orchestral music to see how certain effects were achieved.

I know a few profs who would flip out about having something "feed you the answers" by playing back what you wrote.  Some go for the "pure" philosophy where you hear everything you write in your head.

[musicluvr49]

Thank you everyone for your advice !


Bob: Don't most composers use the piano when they compose? Or that's what I thought. What's the difference between that, and putting them into the computer?

[Derek]

I think the difference is efficiency and immediacy. No matter how fancy software gets, No mouse can click notes in as fast as a hand can play a melodic fragment and produce an immediate tactile and aural response to the quality of your music. It produces the tightest possible feedback loop for learning how to create music. Plus, it has the added bonus that if we experience some sort of digital apocalypse some day, only composers who use pianos (or other instrument) or just paper will be able to continue. All those software guys would be SCREWED.    Oh, and I wouldn't be able to record. So, I guess I'd be screwed, too. At least til I started writing more things down =D

Talking from my own personal experience of piano vs. software, I just can't get past the robotic sound of MIDI. I have heard a few people write truly fine compositions using only software, but wow...they must mark up their scores like crazy and use some really really fancy sound samples. I admire when people can pull that off but it seems like if you're just using software out of the box, it's going to sound pretty robotic. It really FEELS so much more satisfying to create music at a real instrument.

So I guess give both a shot and see which one you like best!

[lostinidlewonder]

Counterpoint.

[musicluvr49]

I think the difference is efficiency and immediacy. No matter how fancy software gets, No mouse can click notes in as fast as a hand can play a melodic fragment and produce an immediate tactile and aural response to the quality of your music. It produces the tightest possible feedback loop for learning how to create music. Plus, it has the added bonus that if we experience some sort of digital apocalypse some day, only composers who use pianos (or other instrument) or just paper will be able to continue. All those software guys would be SCREWED.    Oh, and I wouldn't be able to record. So, I guess I'd be screwed, too. At least til I started writing more things down =D

Talking from my own personal experience of piano vs. software, I just can't get past the robotic sound of MIDI. I have heard a few people write truly fine compositions using only software, but wow...they must mark up their scores like crazy and use some really really fancy sound samples. I admire when people can pull that off but it seems like if you're just using software out of the box, it's going to sound pretty robotic. It really FEELS so much more satisfying to create music at a real instrument.

So I guess give both a shot and see which one you like best!

Good point Well I've never used piano software before, but it would probably sound,a nd feel more natural using a piano. Thanks for the advice.

Counterpoint.

I already know that,   thanks though.

[retrouvailles]

I would really look into getting a music notation software, as someone mentioned earlier. Most composers these days use them, just for the ease and because it makes performers happy to see nice looking scores. Of course all sketches and prep work are done by hand. Also, most composers do compose at the piano. I can only think of one composer today who doesn't compose at the piano (that I know of), and that is Christopher Rouse. Music notation software is not necessarily for rendering the music for playback, but if you want something for that, there are programs out there for that, such as Garritan Personal Orchestra, but that is very high end. The computer can only help you out.

[lostinidlewonder]

I already know that,   thanks though.

What the hell you know all there is to know about counterpoint? You might know the tip of the iceberg but if you know ALL there is to know about counterpoint in merely a few years you are very talented and should NOT have problems with composition.

I tend to compose at the keyboard itself and write onto paper, I find using a computer and clicking too slow in that domain.

[musicluvr49]

What the hell you know all there is to know about counterpoint? You might know the tip of the iceberg but if you know ALL there is to know about counterpoint in merely a few years you are very talented and should NOT have problems with composition.

I tend to composer at the keyboard itself and write onto paper, I find using a computer and clicking too slow in that domain.

Woah... I never said I know ALL There is to know about counterpoint, Lol. Of course I don't I'm only 16, I have a ways to go.  I'm just saying I already know to use it in my composing.

And I've been taking theory classes for about 6 years, but I've only taken advanced classes for 3 years.

[Bob]

I think the point of not using the piano was to learn to hear what you want in your head and to not just blindly accept whatever the piano (or software) spits out as what you really meant. 

If it's piano, you're limited to ten fingers and that's not necessarily the limits or capabilities of what you're composing for. 

If it's piano or software, it might spit out a certain sound and then you might just accept that as what you meant, as opposed to thinking about it more yourself.  With live performers or software or piano you'll still have to have the music performed sometime.

It's really helpful to have some live players to read through your material too.  Then you know if you're getting things across the way you meant and what the players at that level can do.

[Derek]

The "what you really meant" topic is an interesting one to me. I find when improvising that I often anticipate where I want the music to go. Sometimes for whatever reason my fingers or the geography of the keyboard betray me. Sometimes this works, and doesn't sound quite like I anticipated, but sounds good, other times it sounds bad. I think for me I enjoy trying to find a balance between anticipating what I will play and allowing the keyboard and its geography to cause me to do something I didn't anticipate at all, possibly teaching me something new. I wouldn't call that blindness at all if I'm aware of what is going on.  

Bob is right that improvisation will limit you to the physical span and capabilities of your fingers. Being an amateur whose only goal is to have fun, I accept this limitation. But for someone who wants to go beyond improvisation and create scores and all that, you may want to use both an instrument and other methods.

[djealnla]

Deleted

[Derek]

That's another interesting topic. While composition using one's fingers may limit you in some ways, it seems that all of the most loved composers did use their fingers and a piano to help them learn how to make music. Personally I believe this is no coincidence, because their creation of music was intimately tied up with what they enjoyed in the moment. Composers that abstract composition so far as to partially or wholly ignore whether they are enjoying it tend to fail to win their audiences. The result is they please only themselves with an artificial feeling of intellectualism or superiority. I've tried many times to appreciate music such as this, and do enjoy improvising atonal music at times, but I find it enjoyable almost exclusively on the "it is fun to move my fingers" level. Aurally, I continue to fail to enjoy it as much as melodic music.

[ahinton]

That's another interesting topic. While composition using one's fingers may limit you in some ways, it seems that all of the most loved composers did use their fingers and a piano to help them learn how to make music. Personally I believe this is no coincidence, because their creation of music was intimately tied up with what they enjoyed in the moment.

That's all very well - and it is, of course, true in the case of quite a few composers - the fact remains that those composers who do not develop sufficient prowess at the keyboard will inevitably have limited resources at their disposal to "use" the piano to help them compose - and I should know! There's no way that trying to work at the piano would have helped me compose my fifth piano sonata, for example; this is not only because I find the piano a distraction to the act of composition (which I accept that many do not), my ability to play it would not get me far beyond its first couple of bars!

Composers that abstract composition so far as to partially or wholly ignore whether they are enjoying it tend to fail to win their audiences. The result is they please only themselves with an artificial feeling of intellectualism or superiority.

Would you care to cite examples of this, accompanied by viable and credible proof? What makes you assume that composers might write things that they would not enjoy hearing? What makes you assume that composers can assume that, if they enjoy their own music, audiences will do the same? And what makes you assume tht composers have a hope in hell's chance of predicting what the reactions of their audiences-to-be might be? You can't "win" audiences in any case; it's not a battle! You write what you want to write, you hope to get it played well and then you hope that at least some people who listen will get something out of it; that's the best that anyone can realistically expect to do. Beethoven, Carter, Birtwistle and Sorabji have all in their different ways made reference to not considering their potential audiences when writing; that's not arrogance at all, but a practical admission that it cannot be done any meaningful way and, in any case, one should be concentrating on writing the piece, not on what some people might think about it when it's been performed!

I've tried many times to appreciate music such as this, and do enjoy improvising atonal music at times, but I find it enjoyable almost exclusively on the "it is fun to move my fingers" level. Aurally, I continue to fail to enjoy it as much as melodic music.

As someone who writes tonal music, I feel impelled to ask you what it might be that appears to give you the idea that "melodic" and "atonal" are somehow antonyms?

Best,

Alistair

[Derek]

@ahinton: I think I muddied two ideas in part of my post. I can also think of lots of cases of tonal composers who have also taken abstraction too far and fail to make interesting music (to me). I humbly submit that what I have stated are all my own opinions and reactions to music. The only composer I can think of who did not use a keyboard to compose music that I really love is Antonio Vivaldi, but he was a violinist so he may have used his experience playing and enjoying his violin to inform his composition.

Atonal vs. melodic is an oversimplification of course. I think all I meant to say was music that is purely intellectually contrived on paper with the goal of confounding tonality usually fails to please my ears. But as I said in the above paragraph I've also heard tonal music that was also written in partial or total abstraction from enjoyment of its creation that fails to please me.

I don't mean to say that what I've said applies to everyone, though I am tempted to believe it for the simple fact that modern classical music has failed for many many years now to win back audiences. I think the only thing that will save it will be a return to simplicity and melody. But again that's just my opinion.

[musicluvr49]

Thanks everyone for your opinions.

I think I'll stick with composing at the piano for now, as my ear is defintetly not fully trained yet.

[john11inc]

Counterpoint.

Vital in 1811, but not 2011, depending on the type of music the poser of this question intends to write.  Always useful, though!

[ahinton]

@ahinton: I think I muddied two ideas in part of my post. I can also think of lots of cases of tonal composers who have also taken abstraction too far and fail to make interesting music (to me). I humbly submit that what I have stated are all my own opinions and reactions to music. The only composer I can think of who did not use a keyboard to compose music that I really love is Antonio Vivaldi, but he was a violinist so he may have used his experience playing and enjoying his violin to inform his composition.

OK, fair enough - but Vivaldi was by no means the only composer from a former era to major on string playing - and, after all, Bach and Mozart were string players...

Atonal vs. melodic is an oversimplification of course.

If you'll pardon my so saying, it's less an over-simplification than a complete misunderstanding or reality.

I think all I meant to say was music that is purely intellectually contrived on paper with the goal of confounding tonality usually fails to please my ears. But as I said in the above paragraph I've also heard tonal music that was also written in partial or total abstraction from enjoyment of its creation that fails to please me.

I don't mean to say that what I've said applies to everyone, though I am tempted to believe it for the simple fact that modern classical music has failed for many many years now to win back audiences. I think the only thing that will save it will be a return to simplicity and melody. But again that's just my opinion.

OK - what may or may not please your ears is what it is, except that this should change daily according to your latest listening experiences. I don't get what this "abstraction" is meant to be in the terms in which you cite it without giving examples. Music "winning back" audiences is a nonsense. As I said, it's not a battle - and remember how the audiences of Boston in the late 1920s and 1930s loved lots of modern music! Why "simplicity" as some kind of virtue above complexity? - how can we live without either and both? And what's so "simple" about fine melody? Absolutely nothing, to me...

Best,

Alistair

[Derek]

@ahinton, you've reminded me why I've avoided such discussions for so long. I am a simple minded amateur, and have no valid opinions of my own. I forgot.

[ahinton]

@ahinton, you've reminded me why I've avoided such discussions for so long. I am a simple minded amateur, and have no valid opinions of my own. I forgot.

We're all "amateurs" if we love what we do! I did not state that you have no opinions of your own, valid or otherwise; indeed, I questioned some of the opinions that you put forward as I do not understand them, so perhaps it's me that's the simple-minded one. What I wrote was not for the purpose of causing offence but to draw you out on the issues concerned and ascertain how and why you appear to have arrived at some of the conclusion that you wrote about.

Best,

Alistair

[Derek]

We're all "amateurs" if we love what we do! I did not state that you have no opinions of your own, valid or otherwise; indeed, I questioned some of the opinions that you put forward as I do not understand them, so perhaps it's me that's the simple-minded one. What I wrote was not for the purpose of causing offence but to draw you out on the issues concerned and ascertain how and why you appear to have arrived at some of the conclusion that you wrote about.

Best,

Alistair

The truth is I know very little about the classical world, so my opinions probably are in fact invalid. I know a very small set of facts that have influenced my present opinions. Most of my favorite composers loved playing an instrument, so much so that I think this probably informed their composition. I wasn't aware of this for much of my youth when all I was doing was listening to and enjoying some classical music. Later on, I tried to appreciate some modern stuff, and for a while deceived myself into thinking I liked it. Even later, I realized this was all self deception and most of that music is rubbish. I find no matter how much I read or know about it, it does not alleviate my distaste for this music. As for tonal music, most of the tonal music I've heard that I've disliked has been music written by little known composers using software. Most of them do not play or choose not to play an instrument very much. A FEW of them have pulled of writing music that I like with only software. But even that isn't nearly as good as music by also-instrumentalists, to me. My opinion is that this must be no coincidence, otherwise I would have been listening to several composers during my youth that were not also instrumentalists. It just makes a hell of a lot of sense to me that those that enjoy sound will create enjoyable sound. To have barriers to enjoying sound, such as a long period of time between writing down notes and actually hearing them, is to impede creating enjoyable music. This is all me, my own impressions, my own opinions and my own experience. The only examples I CAN give are that every composer I listened to in my youth, long before I became a musician myself, I later learned were obsessive instrumentalists of various kinds. Not one was a "pen only" composer. Maybe it is just pure coincidence though, and there are actually dozens of Bachs, Beethovens, etc. that wrote amazing music having never became an obsessive instrumentalist of some kind. Perhaps my opinion will change if I encounter such music. Didn't Berlioz compose mainly pen only? I can't stand his music.

I forgot to mention there is a lot of non classical music, such as melodic power metal/death metal, which is also consistent with "instrumentalists seem to produce music that I like." Again, I stress this is my opinion and my taste, and I don't expect anyone to agree with me.

[ahinton]

The truth is I know very little about the classical world, so my opinions probably are in fact invalid.

Thgat's fair enough as far as it goes, then; I had not appreciated that fact. However, this does not of itself make your opinions necessarily "invalid" per se; it's just that those opinions will have a bearing on a rather different world of musical experience to that which most posters would expect to discuss here.

I know a very small set of facts that have influenced my present opinions. Most of my favorite composers loved playing an instrument, so much so that I think this probably informed their composition.

Many composers up to the 20th century did indeed play and instrument and a few of them also sang; Berlioz was probably the first major figure who was not proficient at the piano, the organ, the violin or another orchestral instrument. There have been less such figures in the 20th century for a variety of reasons and more composers have tended to turn to conducting than performing as an instrumentalist. It's hard to say how and to what extent each composer's performing activities influenced their respective developments as composers; that would require an extensive case-by-case survey.

Later on, I tried to appreciate some modern stuff, and for a while deceived myself into thinking I liked it. Even later, I realized this was all self deception and most of that music is rubbish. I find no matter how much I read or know about it, it does not alleviate my distaste for this music.

It isn't, but if some of it just doesn't register with you after repeated listenings, then so be it (which, however, is a different matter to whether or not it's "rubbish"!); you don't, however, specify whether your jaundiced and negative view of certain music applies to all atonal music by reason of its being atonal or only some of it (and, in any case, what's "atonal" to one pair of ears may not be quite the same to another).

As for tonal music, most of the tonal music I've heard that I've disliked has been music written by little known composers using software. Most of them do not play or choose not to play an instrument very much. A FEW of them have pulled of writing music that I like with only software. But even that isn't nearly as good as music by also-instrumentalists, to me. My opinion is that this must be no coincidence, otherwise I would have been listening to several composers during my youth that were not also instrumentalists.

I do agree that you have a point here; even those who are not especially proficient at an acoustic musical instrument can still derive information about what it is to play it, just by virtue of trying to play it. Personally (and I know that this is just the wrong thing to say on this forum especially), I do not enjoy playing the piano (although I wish that it did - I've never managed to overcome an inherent fear of it), but I spent enough time working at it to understand the kind of enjoyment that those who can play it can get from it - and, furthermore, I can understand the need for and the value in getting to grips with the sheer physical businesss of creating sound at an instrument, so I have never regretted a single moment spent at the piano, an instrument that has long fascinated me as an expressive force to be reckoned with.

It just makes a hell of a lot of sense to me that those that enjoy sound will create enjoyable sound. To have barriers to enjoying sound, such as a long period of time between writing down notes and actually hearing them, is to impede creating enjoyable music. This is all me, my own impressions, my own opinions and my own experience.

I accept that this is your view alone, but I do not accept some of it myself. Long periods of time between writing music down and hearing it performed can be (and usually are!) quite frustrating, to say the least, but they do not - and, indeed, cannot of themselves - impeded the creative processes. I would not care to think that my string quintet was adversely affected by the fact that I completed it almost 8 years after beginning work on it and its recording was made around 30 years from its start date; likewise, my piano quintet was begun in 1980 and only completed last year after a very long hiatus in its composition but I have no reason to believe that the work is the worse for that.

The only examples I CAN give are that every composer I listened to in my youth, long before I became a musician myself, I later learned were obsessive instrumentalists of various kinds. Not one was a "pen only" composer. Maybe it is just pure coincidence though, and there are actually dozens of Bachs, Beethovens, etc. that wrote amazing music having never became an obsessive instrumentalist of some kind. Perhaps my opinion will change if I encounter such music. Didn't Berlioz compose mainly pen only? I can't stand his music.

I see you got to Berlioz before I did! Yes, he was apparently a rather bad guitarist and that was about it - but he developed a great understanding of the finer points of all the orchestral instruments and I have never heard an orchestral musician complain about his writing. You may  be unable to stand his work but, to me, the best of it is unquestionably up there with the major works of the first half of the 19th century.

Where I would agree with you is that eschewing instrumental study is bad news for a would-be composer, but that doesn't mean that the inability to develop into a virtuoso performer signifies a similar inability in the field of composition.

Best,

Alistair

[invictious]

Honestly, the worst part of composing is putting it on sheet music. Just imagine how Stravinsky would have a ridiculously difficult time composing the Rite of Spring? He probably spent more time writing down the parts than actually coming up with the notes!

(joke)

[richbatsford]

hi folks

as a pianist/composer, I write exclusively at the keyboard.  i think Derek articulated my reasons why quite brilliant in referring to the "tightest possible feedback loop"

composing at the piano is literally immediate - the music comes out and exists right there and then in the moment and for me, that trumps by a million miles anything i could come up with by trying to work it out with a pen and paper or a PC.

thats just the way my mind works tho - I would think that the best thing is to find out (good old trial and error) which way works the best way for you

cheers

Rich

[m1469]

 

So I've been taking advanced theory classes for about 3 years now, and I am fascinated by composers, and how they shape their music and their harmonies. 

I'd really like to start, but I have no idea where to begin.

If anyone has any advice on this, please share.

Thanks.

I am currently going through a huge re-definition period in my life on all things music and piano.  Composition is something that has always been a part of my life, as far as I can remember.  In that sense, I beleive composing is, at its origin, something very personal to us that is always going on within us in terms of how we think and view life and organize our perceptions.  A little example in my world would be that I have for quite a number of years (I'm not sure how many) been listening intently to the sounds of the world around me, and I am coming to understand that I form ideas of what the world is or who people and mankind are, based on these sounds.  I believe the ideas that are formed are the type of organization itself, and then if you want to carry that over specifically to the piano or to instruments and singers, you could say that a composer is organizing his/her ideas on those sounds, so-to-speak.  But, okay, that is all very abstract, perhaps.  The main idea here is that you already have specific-to-you organizational tendencies, I believe, and the real trick here is in defining those to yourself and then developing those in a fundamental way (I'm sorry, I just CAN NOT escape this term for now).

Practically speaking, I will tell you what I am currently doing and though it may not be the thing you decide to do yourself, perhaps it will at least give you some ideas to work with.

For the sake of saving time, I won't go through my current belief system about my perception of music and so on, but instead I will cut right to the chase and tell you that, as a pianist, I spend time each day practicing what I consider to be the fundamentals of music and piano playing.  One of my aims during this time is to practice thinking like a composer, and in that process be open to discovering my own sort of thought-patterns, etc..  Exactly to my main point, I currently believe there are certain characteristics to sound-organization that help to make music be something of an actual craft and help to make it be an actual composition.

The main textual characteristics I am aiming at defining to myself are:

Preparatory
Exclamatory
Conditional/linking
Arrival

I currently believe these characteristics are involved in telling a story clearly, and “style” depends mostly on how we achieve each of these (arpeggiated, tempo, etc.).  For me personally, I want to start thinking in a way that includes arpeggios and chords and scales, and so while I am practicing those on the piano, I am organizing in my thoughts now what characteristic whatever I am playing fits into.  So, part of an argeggio pattern, for an example, might be preparing the listener (me, in this case, and my imaginary audience) for the next part of the pattern, which I might decide is the exclamatory section of my pattern, and then I decide what my point(s) of arrival is/are, and perhaps what I section I will use to link it.  This Is my general process, right now, and part of that process is being patient with myself while I am exploring this in the way that I am.

Just yesterday, as a matter of fact, these characteristics of a composition came clearly to me while I was listening to Glenn Gould play Bach, in a longish drive.  I realized that repeated material or changes of harmony often serve as a kind of preparatory material for whatever is the next exclamation.  I’m currently quite infatuated with Glenn Gould, by the way .  What I discovered is that even entire sections of repeated material can be performed and perhaps even meant by the composer, as preparations for the next section (which is not necessarily in the order I listed above).  So, in a Classic style sonata, for example, the exposition is often repeated.  You could say that the first play-through serves as a statement, and the repeat serves as a preparation for the development, and that in a sense, the development is in some way a kind of link to the recapitulation, and the recapitulation may alternate between being exclamatory and then at some point serve as a kind of conditional material which leads to the final arrival point at the close.  Well, suddenly I can type forever on this subject, but I have to say that you can hear quite distinctly when Glenn Gould shifts gears from one to another.

Well, I wish you the best in your endeavor .

[musicluvr49]

I am currently going through a huge re-definition period in my life on all things music and piano.  Composition is something that has always been a part of my life, as far as I can remember.  In that sense, I beleive composing is, at its origin, something very personal to us that is always going on within us in terms of how we think and view life and organize our perceptions.  A little example in my world would be that I have for quite a number of years (I'm not sure how many) been listening intently to the sounds of the world around me, and I am coming to understand that I form ideas of what the world is or who people and mankind are, based on these sounds.  I believe the ideas that are formed are the type of organization itself, and then if you want to carry that over specifically to the piano or to instruments and singers, you could say that a composer is organizing his/her ideas on those sounds, so-to-speak.  But, okay, that is all very abstract, perhaps.  The main idea here is that you already have specific-to-you organizational tendencies, I believe, and the real trick here is in defining those to yourself and then developing those in a fundamental way (I'm sorry, I just CAN NOT escape this term for now).

Practically speaking, I will tell you what I am currently doing and though it may not be the thing you decide to do yourself, perhaps it will at least give you some ideas to work with.

For the sake of saving time, I won't go through my current belief system about my perception of music and so on, but instead I will cut right to the chase and tell you that, as a pianist, I spend time each day practicing what I consider to be the fundamentals of music and piano playing.  One of my aims during this time is to practice thinking like a composer, and in that process be open to discovering my own sort of thought-patterns, etc..  Exactly to my main point, I currently believe there are certain characteristics to sound-organization that help to make music be something of an actual craft and help to make it be an actual composition.

The main textual characteristics I am aiming at defining to myself are:

Preparatory
Exclamatory
Conditional/linking
Arrival

I currently believe these characteristics are involved in telling a story clearly, and “style” depends mostly on how we achieve each of these (arpeggiated, tempo, etc.).  For me personally, I want to start thinking in a way that includes arpeggios and chords and scales, and so while I am practicing those on the piano, I am organizing in my thoughts now what characteristic whatever I am playing fits into.  So, part of an argeggio pattern, for an example, might be preparing the listener (me, in this case, and my imaginary audience) for the next part of the pattern, which I might decide is the exclamatory section of my pattern, and then I decide what my point(s) of arrival is/are, and perhaps what I section I will use to link it.  This Is my general process, right now, and part of that process is being patient with myself while I am exploring this in the way that I am.

Just yesterday, as a matter of fact, these characteristics of a composition came clearly to me while I was listening to Glenn Gould play Bach, in a longish drive.  I realized that repeated material or changes of harmony often serve as a kind of preparatory material for whatever is the next exclamation.  I’m currently quite infatuated with Glenn Gould, by the way .  What I discovered is that even entire sections of repeated material can be performed and perhaps even meant by the composer, as preparations for the next section (which is not necessarily in the order I listed above).  So, in a Classic style sonata, for example, the exposition is often repeated.  You could say that the first play-through serves as a statement, and the repeat serves as a preparation for the development, and that in a sense, the development is in some way a kind of link to the recapitulation, and the recapitulation may alternate between being exclamatory and then at some point serve as a kind of conditional material which leads to the final arrival point at the close.  Well, suddenly I can type forever on this subject, but I have to say that you can hear quite distinctly when Glenn Gould shifts gears from one to another.

Well, I wish you the best in your endeavor .

Oh wow. This is a lot of information, but very very helpful. Thank you!

[m1469]

Oh wow. This is a lot of information, but very very helpful. Thank you!

You're welcome, but keep in mind it can be applied to one or several notes, or even thousands .

[musicluvr49]

Yeah. I'm still trying to process all that

You're welcome, but keep in mind it can be applied to one or several notes, or even thousands .

Thanks. I'm still trying to process all that you said, but I think I get it. Lol.

[ahinton]

You go about it by going about it - solvitur ambulando, as the Latin phrase has it - and it's not an easy path to choose and a much less easier one to pursue, but if you find yourself with the feeling that you have no choice but to pursue it, then so be it and that will usually be its own help (at least as far as it may be capable of being so)...

I write from personal experience...

Best,

Alistair

[m1469]

Yeah. I'm still trying to process all that
Thanks. I'm still trying to process all that you said, but I think I get it. Lol.

The main nugget, I think, is to give your ideas a beginning, a middle, and an end.  Even if you feel inside of you something profound, it doesn't hurt to practice giving structure to a musical thought in a very basic way.  In my composition class, our first assignment was to write just three notes ... I've probably been pondering a bit ever since ... hee hee.

[richbatsford]

yes, I think structure and purpose are really important.

Coming up with an initial idea is something of a mysterious process (with me, its very simply just messing around on the piano and letting my mind and fingers roam freely).

then its a case of "what have I got" and perhaps more impotantly "where is it going?"

Rich

[thalbergmad]

solvitur ambulando

Been watching Harry Potter films have we??

Thal

[ahinton]

Been watching Harry Potter films have we??

I haven't personally; I cannot vouch for your viewing habits, of course...

Best,

Alistair

[m1469]

yes, I think structure and purpose are really important.

Coming up with an initial idea is something of a mysterious process (with me, its very simply just messing around on the piano and letting my mind and fingers roam freely).

then its a case of "what have I got" and perhaps more impotantly "where is it going?"

Rich

Just in reflection on your comment, and hopefully in some accordance with the thread topic, I am finding that where I am at with it currently is that I want and need to practice having ideas at all to work with.  As in, I need most to practice the process of what I consider a kind of basic principle, and for me right now, I am not going to try to qualify it as beautiful or ugly or profound or whatever it seems it's supposed to mean, exactly.  My personal main aim is to better define in a very clear way, what certain aspects of the sound-spectrum are, how to play them, and how to give them a kind of compositional structure in my thought-process.  I am becoming aware that I am learning to "improvise" my compositional thinking.  There are (at least I suspect) entire compositions in me that I don't know yet how to express because of several (fixable) factors. 

In my case, I am teaching a very young person within myself, how to develop in a very fundamental way.  I'm not sure at what age a certain mindset became stunted, but I believe it was around age five or so (not that there is not more after that age), and while I'm not positive the reasons, either, I have some pretty good guesses.  I'm not sure just how long this will take, but I'm guessing that if I practice thinking clearly, patiently, lovingly, it's only a matter of a few months.  I think that's worth it, no matter how small the baby steps seem to be (especially at first).     

[m1469]

Okay, I'm back ... haha.  I just got up from the piano, after having been practicing in the way that I have been talking about in the thread here.  I ended with a little improvisation in locrian mode (as my theme of today's fundamental routine was 'diminished') and something I am finding is that, fundamentally (so sorry), my creative process is happening nearly on its own, as I am working with the sound-spectrum in a fundamental way.  It's very much as though I am studying ingredients and getting to know certain ingredients individually, and as I get clear ideas on these ingredients, my thought-process is trying to see what happens when I blend them together.  Similarly to knowing the flavor of something like basil, and other ingrdients, and then mixing them together to form pesto (ultimately an idea in itself).  I am expecting that as I continue this process, I will be able to blend ingredients together to form complete musical ideas/compositions.  As a matter of fact, I may start a thread in the improv. audition room .  

[richbatsford]

this is very interesting stuff m1469.  I dont yet much experience of discussing composing technique with others, tho its something that I think its well worth trying to articulate and better understand.

it seems to me that to a large extent what we are discussing is not only methods of music composition itself, but also different methods of experience and developing our very minds and thought processes.

for my part, altho I know that there are specific and analyzable methods at work in my compositions, I like to maintain a fairly loose grip on them as they are unfolding.  Part of the reason for this is that I believe my conscious mind represents only a small fraction of my total brain processing - I might go so far to say that it can be pretty stupid at times!   But if I let these things happen on a fairly instinctual level, I feel I can sometimes harness these processes in a very natural and organic way leading to a result that is far more subtle and well, musical, than anything I could ever come up with if I really, consciously *thought* it into existence.

That said, Im increasingly trying to develop an awareness of the process in the hope that I can further develop and direct it in the future.

I think im pretty much agreeing with what you were saying actually, but to get my head around it, had to express it in my own words - hope that makes sense!

I like your analogy of comparing different compositional techniques (if Ive understood you correctly) to the ingredients in a dish - I'll try and keep that one in mind.

best wishes

Rich

[m1469]

this is very interesting stuff m1469.  I dont yet much experience of discussing composing technique with others, tho its something that I think its well worth trying to articulate and better understand.

Yes, I don't have any experience in actually discussing composing techniques with individuals, other than this thread so far.  Not that I haven't talked about composition itself in some ways with others, but as far as "techniques" ... not much.  Well, okay, I did have an class that discussed some of it ... hmmm ... that was a long time ago .  I do find that trying to articulate concepts in words can be very helpful to one's own understanding.  Often when I'm teaching, as I'm trying to help somebody understand something, it will trigger a deeper understanding for me (and if I'm not careful I'll sail off into some distant mental land ... haha).

it seems to me that to a large extent what we are discussing is not only methods of music composition itself, but also different methods of experience and developing our very minds and thought processes.

Yes, well, I think it's a matter of clarifiying elements that are already there.  As a matter of fact, I believe that's ultimately what we experience as "development" as human beings.  It appears that something is evolving, but in some sense it's always been there and it's as though we're grabbing it out of some kind of darkness and looking at it up close.  I think that composing is something similar to that and most of the ways in which I currently think about music is very much along those lines.

for my part, altho I know that there are specific and analyzable methods at work in my compositions, I like to maintain a fairly loose grip on them as they are unfolding.  Part of the reason for this is that I believe my conscious mind represents only a small fraction of my total brain processing - I might go so far to say that it can be pretty stupid at times!   But if I let these things happen on a fairly instinctual level, I feel I can sometimes harness these processes in a very natural and organic way leading to a result that is far more subtle and well, musical, than anything I could ever come up with if I really, consciously *thought* it into existence.

I generally agree and enjoy a similar process (well, it's not as though I'm formally composing in my life right now), but my main aims in my life right now are to really clarify elements, so my instincts have more to work with.  I find that as I continue to clarify elements to myself, my instincts seem to automatically start including those in my instinctual paths, and in that sense, I don't imagine there is a limit to what the instincts can do ... but, I feel anyway, I must feed it with my intellect (though they can feed each other).  Since I've grown up mainly improvising (and composing) from my instincts (and whatever else my intellect sent their way), I know what it's like to reach points within my life where I am quite unsatisfied with what I can do.  It's like I just need more material to work with.  But, this is coming from somebody who didn't even know what Classical music was, really, until I was an adult.  I think it's different for individuals who have grown up with a broad spectrum of music around them.

I think im pretty much agreeing with what you were saying actually, but to get my head around it, had to express it in my own words - hope that makes sense!

Yes .

I like your analogy of comparing different compositional techniques (if Ive understood you correctly) to the ingredients in a dish - I'll try and keep that one in mind.

My analogy was actually especially relating to the fundamentals of music.  But, if it works for you in other ways, that's great, too! .  Now, to go listen to your first recorded improv .

[becky8898]

Hi: Lot of great things said here buy alot of smart people.  So ill give you a different piece of advice.  Carry blank manuscript paper with you, all the time, or at least whenever you can. Thats what I do.  Anytime I think of something cool in my brain, I write it down on the spot.  It takes practice but its worth it. I have a whole portfolio of all kinds of melodies scratched out.  Next step try and harmonize one of your melodies.  Keep it simple , real simple.  When you can do that, start thinking bigger. but do that first.  Also piano is not the greatest instrument to compose for  , if your a beginner.  Way to many things going on.  A Piano can play what like 10 notes at once.  Choose a different instrument.  KNow Guitar use that.  Familiar with Violin use that.  Trumpet use that.  Get the basics down first.  Hope that helps.

Cheers, Becky

[musicluvr49]

Hi: Lot of great things said here buy alot of smart people.  So ill give you a different piece of advice.  Carry blank manuscript paper with you, all the time, or at least whenever you can. Thats what I do.  Anytime I think of something cool in my brain, I write it down on the spot.  It takes practice but its worth it. I have a whole portfolio of all kinds of melodies scratched out.  Next step try and harmonize one of your melodies.  Keep it simple , real simple.  When you can do that, start thinking bigger. but do that first.  Also piano is not the greatest instrument to compose for  , if your a beginner.  Way to many things going on.  A Piano can play what like 10 notes at once.  Choose a different instrument.  KNow Guitar use that.  Familiar with Violin use that.  Trumpet use that.  Get the basics down first.  Hope that helps.

Cheers, Becky

Thanks for the advice. 

I'm not sure about composing for instruments other than the piano.... I can play the guitar, but I'm not very good at it yet, so I can't say I'm familiar with it. I think I could still compose for the piano, and keep it simple though.

[richbatsford]

Yes, well, I think it's a matter of clarifiying elements that are already there.  As a matter of fact, I believe that's ultimately what we experience as "development" as human beings.

Yes, this chimes nicely with something I was reading recently about whether we are in state of "being" or "doing" - and suggesting that "becoming" is a word that better expresses that constant state of change and evolution that gives rise from what we are from one moment to the next.

my main aims in my life right now are to really clarify elements, so my instincts have more to work with.  

hmm yeah, this and other comments over on the Improvisations thread make me think I could be a lot more proactive about how I deveop as a composer (and improviser)

But, this is coming from somebody who didn't even know what Classical music was, really, until I was an adult.  I think it's different for individuals who have grown up with a broad spectrum of music around them.

Ive gone rather the other way around - listening to classical in my teens and getting into contemporary music later on.   I think its very easy in a "grass is always greener" sort of way, to be jealous of other people's musical training, but actually the fact that we all have different backgrounds is part of what makes this all so interesting and in order to maximise our own potential we are probably best happily working with our own unique and particular blend of experience.

cheers

Rich

[m1469]

Ive gone rather the other way around - listening to classical in my teens and getting into contemporary music later on.   I think its very easy in a "grass is always greener" sort of way, to be jealous of other people's musical training, but actually the fact that we all have different backgrounds is part of what makes this all so interesting and in order to maximise our own potential we are probably best happily working with our own unique and particular blend of experience.

cheers

Rich

I meant that mainly as clarifying that I believe there is a difference, and not necessarily as a "grass is greener" remark, though I do believe that having the right training at the right time is not only critical, but something of great --even immortal-- value.  That's obviously a huge subject though.

What I can say right now is that I wish most of all that my musical activity properly punctuates my existence (and there is a lot to those words).  In a sense, that's all I want, but it may include much and perhaps more than I can even imagine.

[djealnla]

Deleted