OFF TOPIC: COMPOSING A SCORE

Could someone describe the steps (concept thru verification) a composer had to
go through to produce a score before MIDI existed?
I know this is an OFF TOPIC subject, but it seems many people here are
composers?
Lewis

Dear Lewis,
That's a tall order, explaining how to write music in an email. But I'll give it
a try since I once wrote about the subject.

Before I do though, I wanted to say that my computer crashed over the weekend and
I lost all of my email between Friday night and Sunday morning 72 in all. If
there were any relevant postings to my concerns and anybody still has them, could
you direct them my way. Thanks.

MUSIC COMPOSITION FOR THE COMPLETE IDIOT

Materials: You're going to need some basic materials. Since you've asked about
music composition on a tuning newsletter I would imagine you are going to be
working with alternate tunings. Hence, you might find it helpful to have a
tuneable keyboard(s) or other music instrument(s) available, if for no other
reason than to check out an interval or chord. In this vein, you might find a
tuner helpful in double checking the exact frequency of the musical pitches you
are using. In addition, you might find a calculator handy, because some
synthesizers require you to perform a formula for tuning the keyboard.

Something to compose the music to, will be the next important piece of hardware
you are going to need. If you plan to write it down you're going to need basic
writing implements. If you are going to record it, you are going to need
recording equipment or music sequencing software etc.

Some background with music is helpful. Training, education, books, music scores,
recordings, music lessons and other musicians are all resources for the composer.

Then you are going to need tranquility in spades. A quiet room, some vacation
time, an uninterrupted weekend, in other words a condition that is conducive
toward putting musical thoughts together. Since the act of composition
integrates everything you know, quiet and timelessness are very important
conditions for successfully carrying out this task. You might think of the
composer's one overriding leitmotif as "I have never heard this before."

In this condition of contemplation you might find it helpful to determine how
long of a composition you have in mind and how long you have to compose it.
Answer these two questions clearly and firmly and I think you will find them both
sources of inspiration. (e.g. Handel writes Messiah in a week. Bach turns out
reams of music for his church choir every Sunday, etc. etc. etc.)

Following along in this vein you might find it helpful to determine and compose
the ending now. It's not that you have to use this ending exactly as you now
contruct it, but I think you'll find that this ending (the last sound the
audience will go home with) will reverberate forward throughout the composition
as it takes shape. Obviously, it will have answered the basic questions of what
key your music will be in as well as influence instrumentation and form.

So in my view of music composition, priorities are a bit inverted. You might
have noticed I haven't mentioned harmony or melody yet. The next order of
business is dividing up this musical construction into manageable tasks. And so
at this point you might want to consider a general form and notational scheme.
The latter is well covered in this newsletter tuning@onelist.

Now I would consider writing a title. And though this may seem a trifle,
personally I think a title can be a source of inspiration. Sometimes, for
instance, a title can be stronger than the music. Or vice versa. Specifically
I'm thinking of The Firebird Suite which left me, as a kid, highly disappointed .
. . and made me want to write music even more.

At this point I start to consider scale. And there is a lot to choose from as
this newsletter amply addresses.

Rhythm might be your next consideration. And part of this phase of music
composition is to determine how fast the music is going to go (i.e., tempo) and
you might also consider settling on a time signature(s). This is crucial if for
no other reason than the fact that the faster the music goes, the more music you
are going to have to write.

And then now you might want to really look into orchestration. Because the music
you have in mind will be different depending on what instruments or vocals you
use. Instruments have specific ranges and abilities that can actual inspire your
music as it comes to fruition. I think you might begin to see the logic of
determining "scale" before "orchestration" because orchestration is a bit
dependent on scale, since not all instruments may be able to play your scale.
For instance a fixed keyboard instrument like a marimba may be too difficult to
retune depending on the scale you employ.

Finally harmonic and melodic considerations might be in order. At this point I
begin to doodle. And from these doodles you will find certain phrases that
become important. And from these phrases you might be able to determine possible
chord formations and chord progressions.

I hope this helps.

RT
Monday, March 8, 1999
Los Angeles

Lewis_Jimmy@hq.navsea.navy.mil wrote:

> From: Lewis_Jimmy@hq.navsea.navy.mil
>
> Could someone describe the steps (concept thru verification) a composer had to
> go through to produce a score before MIDI existed?
> I know this is an OFF TOPIC subject, but it seems many people here are
> composers?
> Lewis
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription
> to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at http://www.onelist.com and
> select the Member Center link from the menu bar on the left.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
> email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@onelist.com - subscribe to the tuning list.
> tuning-unsubscribe@onelist.com - unsubscribe from the tuning list.
> tuning-digest@onelist.com - switch your subscription to digest mode.
> tuning-normal@onelist.com - switch your subscription to normal mode.

> Could someone describe the steps (concept thru verification) a composer had to
> go through to produce a score before MIDI existed?

Well, it's not too terribly off-topic I'd say!

That's a difficult question to answer, because it depends a lot upon the
composer's individual way of thinking and hearing music, how friendly they are
with paper vs. computers, the style and mechanics of the music, the nature of the
orchestration, and other considerations.

First, some philosophy: I once mentioned to Ivor Darreg that I wanted to
become a microtonal composer, and he responded, "OK then, compose!". Along a
similar vein, later on, my (traditional) Theory instructor pointed out that
studying Theory does not help you out in composition: Before you take theory,
you'll get to a spot in a composition, and say, "I can't think what to do here".
After you take Theory you'll get to that spot and you'll say, "there must be a
hundred things I could do here"!

So, the object of that philosophy lesson is that there's a lot of "just do
it!" in composition. Inspiration, confidence, creativity, and practice is a lot
of what it takes to compose music.

But there certainly are lots of corollary skills too of course. Ear-training,
or "Musicianship" as some college-curricula writers call it, is probably the most
important. Generally speaking, that comes down to making a strong connection in
your mind between what you hear and what's happening in the music.

The proverbial "final exam" after a couple years of traditional ear-training
courses is to take four-part dictation, wherein the instructor plays for you a
short church-hymn style composition, and your job is to write it down. That is
perhaps a bit lodged in the more or less 17th-19th-century assumption that you
can't get music played without writing it down first (that is unless you play it
yourself at the keyboard of course). The skills it teaches you are exceptionally
powerful though: When you hear a certain melody in your head, you can write it
down, or the reverse. When you hear a harmonic movement in your head, you know
what chords will produce that effect, and so forth.

But more generally, having a firm connection between the sound in your head
and knowledge of the notes that produce them, is what lets you translate
theoretical ideas into actual music. That then, when I start in on a new tuning
system (for long-term investigation), is why about the first thing I do is come
up with a set of ear-training exercises on tape. They let me firm up that
connection in the new tuning's way of doing things.

So then what else is useful for composition? Well, ultimately for any style
of music that involves any significant degree of expressiveness, you're going to
have to have some skill in performing on some instrument. With MIDI, you can
"fake it" so to speak, but only up to a point and you it that point pretty darned
quick.

So then what do you do when you have all of the materials and skills (and do
we really ever)? Then the answer is Ivor Darreg's: "OK then, compose!" Go for
it! Try it. See what happens, try things out. See what works and what
doesn't. Take notes. Whenever a cool melody strikes you, write it down and file
it away for that time in the future when you realize that the reason why this
composition just isn't going anywhere is that the melody you've chosen isn't very
inspiring.

> Could someone describe the steps (concept thru verification) a composer had to
> go through to produce a score before MIDI existed?

It appears to vary between each individual. I understand that Hovhaness dreams al
his pieces and for that matter Erv Wilson has stated that many of his solutions have
been worked out in dreams. Wilson in my book is way ahead but even though I enjoy
Hovhaness I find him not the best, so I think there is hope for those of us less
blessed. This is the question I always wanted answered from other composers but
never could find any comment on it. For my self, I try a couple of different
methods. I recommend when you have any idea for a piece write down in any form
possible all your ideas first and later work on developments and orders. Sometimes I
have to figure out all the possibilities of answers to a problem and go through them
one by one. This is very time consuming but experience enables one to narrow down
the field allot quicker.
Lou Harrisons MUSIC PRIMER IS THE BEST BOOK BECAUSE OF IT ATTITUDE. Yes have some
fun for god sakes !
-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
www.anaphoria.com

> Following along in this vein you might find it helpful to determine and compose
> the ending now. It's not that you have to use this ending exactly as you now
> contruct it, but I think you'll find that this ending (the last sound the
> audience will go home with) will reverberate forward throughout the composition
> as it takes shape.

For similar reasons, when practicing to perform a composition, I often practice
the ending parts first. People remember the end the most, so I often practice it
the most. It seems odd at first.

But getting back to composition, I am often surprised by the variety of
motivations or inspirations I have for various compositions. In some cases, it's
some great melody that just hits me, and I want to do something with it. For me
at least, a harmony concept is rarely what lights the sparc. A formal concept
often does provide an impetus for me to compose. Sometimes a tuning system alone,
or more often a new approach to a tuning system (e.g., a new subset mode, or a
new way of using a tuning, like serialism) provides an impetus to compose. In
one case, and this particular composition is barely even begun, a spacial idea
inspires me to compose.

I agree with Gary Morrison's advice about not trying to make a masterpiece
but it's important to stress the caveat that not everything you compose is
ready for an audience. Most of the work I do in experimental tunings
remains on my desk, in studies documenting a path taken through new
environments, but not yet ready for wider exposure. I recently saw a video
clip of Morton Feldman holding forth in Darmstadt where he cited a painter
saying: "I don't want it to be interesting, I want it to be good." Of
course, any good music is bound to be interesting as well, but the reverse
is certainly not true.

Mr> Wolf
you hit it right on the head
Pat

Daniel Wolf wrote:

> From: Daniel Wolf <DJWOLF_MATERIAL@compuserve.com>
>
> "I don't want it to be interesting, I want it to be good." Of
> course, any good music is bound to be interesting as well, but the reverse
> is certainly not true.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start a new hobby. Meet a new friend.
> http://www.onelist.com
> Onelist: The leading provider of free email list services
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
> email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@onelist.com - subscribe to the tuning list.
> tuning-unsubscribe@onelist.com - unsubscribe from the tuning list.
> tuning-digest@onelist.com - switch your subscription to digest mode.
> tuning-normal@onelist.com - switch your subscription to normal mode.

> I agree with Gary Morrison's advice about not trying to make a masterpiece
> but it's important to stress the caveat that not everything you compose is
> ready for an audience.

Perhaps that makes sense even if only because - if you make a reputation
for yourself anyway - they'll all probably all get out one way or another!
Dvorak's first four symphonies, he apparently regarded as just practice, but
when people finally re/discovered them (in the '60s was it?), they started
becoming popular. There are plenty of other examples of music that composers
didn't really ever expect to make it out in the world that turned out very
popular. A lot of Fritz Kreisler's works fit in that category, or so I'm
told anyway.