How do you transition from improvising to composing?

[ranjit]

I don't know whether this is the correct sub-forum to post this on, but here goes:

I am a self-taught piano player. I mostly play by ear and improvise. I am also interested in music theory -- I have done an online course on it, and follow quite a few music theory channels on Youtube. I can pick up songs on the fly pretty fast, and I improvise a LOT (hours a day). What would be the best route to get into composing?

When I try composing something, I end up thinking "I could improvise better than that" and start doodling on the piano again.

[adodd81802]

Not saying you HAVE to conform.

But music does have rules. Sometimes it's restraining, sometimes it's an aid.

You can have a type of composition in mind when you are composing, and use that to steer the direction of your improvisation.

For example (classically speaking) Are you looking to compose a waltz, or a ballad, or a sonata.

OR

does your improvisation fall into that category without you even realising, and while improvising you feel it will be good suited to be a Nocturne, Prelude, Fugue e.t.c.

One thing it isn't wrong to do, is simply create an improvisation. I can only think of Brahms right now, but plenty of composers wrote pieces that had no strict structure and was therefore considered an improvisation.

Lastly you mentioned about theory, this is probably the key. The more you understand about music, the more you can compose with some structure, so it doesn't end up just being doodles. You will understand how to use your improvisations to fit into a piece, and then essentially what is required of you to complete the rest of the composition.

There's plenty of theory composition books, some paid for and some free - see IMSLP website.

If you have a particular interest in both genre and style, maybe dive into that area first, and expand as you get better at composing. Hope that helps

[mjames]

uhh...

you write it down, in paper or in your brain..whatever works.

look over it

change what you want to change

come back the next day

rinse and repeat

The moment you start fixating on stuff you want to change and improve in an improvisation, it's no longer improvising it's composition; whether you write it down or not.

[pianoplunker]

I don't know whether this is the correct sub-forum to post this on, but here goes:

I am a self-taught piano player. I mostly play by ear and improvise. I am also interested in music theory -- I have done an online course on it, and follow quite a few music theory channels on Youtube. I can pick up songs on the fly pretty fast, and I improvise a LOT (hours a day). What would be the best route to get into composing?

When I try composing something, I end up thinking "I could improvise better than that" and start doodling on the piano again.

There is not really a big difference between composing and improvising. If you simply jot down on paper what you improvised or record it - you just composed. More important, if other musicians can understand what you improvised , then you composed. 

[ronde_des_sylphes]

The difference between composition and improvisation is often a matter of organisation. Playing around whilst improvising can be a good way of generating material, but much of the time (and following on from mjames's post) editing and ensuring coherence and structure from the initial improvised material is a way to transition it into a composition.

Also, sometimes composition can be significantly analytical in its basis (you take motifs and think about how you want to expand and develop them). This may become quite an intellectual process, whereas improvisation is more immediate, spontaneous and visceral.

[ted]

I went the other way, transitioning from composition to improvisation as my primary artistic medium. While the meaning of the two words may seem reasonably clear, I suggest that their manifestation in any individual creative psyche is extremely convoluted and deep. Neither is there any need for them to be mutually exclusive, no choice need exist at all, let alone be mandatory. Structure and form are arbitrary musical properties, just as this or that chord, this or that rhythm are creative options. If a priori, architectural structure is important to you, if you enjoy it, find it beautiful, then obviously you will lean toward composition and use improvisation mostly to generate ideas. If, on the other hand, you find yourself wanting to change things all the time, find it hard to settle on anything final, then you will lean toward spontaneity.

Until the last couple of decades and advances in recording technology, spontaneous creation could not produce an artistic end product of lasting quality. This obstacle no longer exists but, at least in my limited experience, very few musicians realise just how radically different things have become and how far creative choice has expanded.

The technical difficulty of notating improvised material in compositions has been discussed elsewhere and at length, by Andrew, me and several others. It is a separate issue, mostly concerns rhythm and need not be repeated. The only advice I have to offer is not to be hasty, do both, and keep all options open. The question will resolve for you in time. I was fifty-five before it did with me !

[lostinidlewonder]

Recording improvisation via midi can put all the notes down in a rough way for you in a program so you can edit, cut and paste ect. I liked doing it this way because it was easy to order ideas explored in an improv and focus on small parts to correct, improve and develop them.

[doug123]

I make my living via composition and orchestration.

In addition to the fine answers here already, I would add daily practice of music dictation (transcribing by ear).

Just like in literature great writers read a lot. Consider dictation like reading. Write down music you like by ear. You can get the scores and check your work often too.

Of course formal lessons help too.  It's a broad topic, but that one distinction alone cuts thru a lot.