→ Music Composition Weblog ←

Don't Fear Failure

2012-01-29T14:23:00.002-03:30

I recently watched a PBS documentary on Bob Ross (no relation), who gained fame as the creator and host of The Joy of Painting, a television program that ran for 12 years on PBS stations in the United States. On the show, Ross would teach viewers how to create an oil painting from start to finish in just half an hour by following seemingly easy, step-by-step instructions. The blank canvas with which he started would be gradually transformed into a completed, impressive landscape painting by the end, rather like a cooking show that starts with some ingredients and a stove and ends with a fully-prepared dish or meal. According to the documentary, Ross believed anyone can paint; by following his simple steps, viewers came to believe that they too could create art!

I like the sound of that. Too often, the creative process is shrouded in mystery or explanations that seem designed to obfuscate. Here are examples of both:

Shrouded in Mystery: This composition came to me fully-formed in a dream, and all I did was write it down when I woke up!

Explanation Designed to Obfuscate: The prime form of [0 2 3] is, as any idiot knows, [0 1 3], which aptly illustrates that, on a Babbittion plane, "major" and "minor" (I herewith mimic dormant terminology with both prudence and a dash of "pince-nez" impudence) trichords are indistinguishable from one another, at least aurally (visually, the difference is notoriously striking!). I manipulated both of these sets employing a cunning derivation of neo-Riemannian theory that I authored while researching North-Indian proto-tablational reductions of integer-centric, sub-sonic impulses in the steppes of central Asia on prestigious Fulbright, Guggenheim, and Getty Grants, employing retrogrades, inversions, and, of course, post-modernist regression, with the following results: [0130230203010333333333327(!)7], and so on (I refrain from revealing too many of my secrets here in the interests of protecting my intellectual property; all too often in the past others have marauded my ideas and created works that generated untold millions for their music. I speak here of Michael Jackson, Madonna, and Justin Bieber, among others). It was thus that I engineered my latest chef-d'œuvre, "Mary Had a Little Lamb." It is contradistinctive from "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star," Baa Baa Black Sheep," and "A B C D" in non-trivial ways that defy explanation (I refer readers capable of understanding über-high-level theoretical constructs to Edward Cone's seminal publication, "Beyond Analysis," which MUST be followed immediately by a close reading of David Lewin's "Beyond the Beyond," although it is unlikely that people who love music are capable of understanding either article).

I made up both examples above, but if the second amused you, I highly recommend a visit to The Contemporary Classical Composer's Bullshit Generator, a clever Perl Script by composer Dominic Irving, that, as its name suggests, generates reams of random rubbish masquerading as composer's program notes.

But I digress… Bob Ross empowered ordinary people to create art by demystifying the process of artistic creation, and explaining his process in a way that made ordinary people feel that they too could paint. And I think that was a tremendous accomplishment.

But can anyone compose music?

I believe the answer to this is yes, at least for anyone that is physically capable of doing so. GarageBand, an Apple software application for Mac OS X and iOS, allows users with no musical background to to create music or podcasts. You don't need much musical knowledge to use music sequencing and notation software either; all you need is a computer, the knowledge of how to use these programs, and the ability to distinguish the musical bits you like from those you don't. Naturally, as with painting, the more you do it, the more your skills improve.

This is great news for people who love music but did not have instruction in musical instruments as they grew up. It's also great news for people who did have musical instruction in an instrument, but not in composition. A lot of classical musicians are trained with little or no instruction in composition, but, should they (or anyone else) ever wish to try their hand at composing, there are ways to do this in privacy, in a risk-free environment.

A recurring theme of Bob Ross's television shows, according to the documentary, was don't fear failure, and this seems good advice for anything else in life as well, but particularly so for music.

Fear of failure can hold us back from achieving our goals. Some awareness of the potential pitfalls associated with any endeavour seems wise — we all know what can happen if you cross a road without looking — but what can go wrong if you compose music?

This calls for a list!

Things that can go wrong if you write music:

It might not be good.
It might cause a riot when it is premiered.
The audience might boo lustily, or shout, "For SHAME!" during the premiere.
It might result in your becoming the biggest laughing stock in the history of the human race.
It might get bad reviews.
The musicians might tell you that the music is unplayable.
The musicians might not play the right notes. Or they might play the right notes, but at the wrong times.
The musicians, accustomed as they are to playing music by dead people, might resent having to perform music of composers with the unmitigated gall of being alive.
The musicians might say, "You didn't really want that F sharp in bar 41, did you?" Or worse.
Your parents/friends/pets might not like it.
You may be branded a formalist, and be called before the Union of Soviet Composers to explain yourself.
You might get run over by a bus on the way to the premiere.

Yes; all of the unfortunate events in the above list could happen to composers, but some are not very likely (numbers 2, 3, 4, 5 [because concerts don't get reviewed much these days, and many reviews don't express particularly strong approval or disapproval], 11, and 12), and others are just things you deal with as they arise.

Perhaps the most likely of the above possibilities is the first: It might not be as good as you'd like it to be, at least in the early stages of your development as a composer.

But so what? If our composition isn't as good as we would wish it to be, then we try again, and keep trying again until we can eventually write music we feel good about. Sure, the premiere of Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring caused a riot, but (a) music premieres generally don't, and (b) if your premiere causes a riot, count your blessings (while taking cover), because, as the old show business saying goes, there's no such thing as bad publicity.

All great composers have had bad reviews, been harshly received by members of the public and/or their family, and many have been told been told their music is unplayable. In spite of this, they went on to greatness. If their are technical issues in your music that are causing stress for the musicians, you look closely at them to see if there is a compromise that serves your goals as the composer, and makes it more "user-friendly" for the performers. It's all "stuff" that you can deal with, and, to quote a book I have never read, "Don't sweat the small stuff."

Sure, it can sting when people don't respond to your music as you had hoped, but, generally, if you work at developing your craft for long enough, you will write music you can feel proud of, and that is the only factor within your control. And if you believe in your music, others are likely to believe in it as well.

Compare the things in the above list that actually have some likelihood of going wrong to the things that can go wrong for air traffic controllers, surgeons, or police officers; if they have a bad day, terrible things can result!

"Failure" is all relative. If a composer goofs and writes notes that are out of range for a particular instrument, we fix it, and, in the great scheme of things, nothing particularly bad has happened. If a composer tries some crazy new thing that does not end up working very well, the composer may feel disappointed or even embarrassed at the premiere, but there's an excellent chance that someone will come up to the composer afterwards and say something like, "Dude, that was my favourite part of the whole piece! I really loved that section!"

A composer can (and, I believe must) take chances and try new things, and if they don't work out satisfactorily, we either attempt a fix (go back and keep trying things until we arrive at a solution that satisfies us), or chalk it up to experience and move on to the next piece somewhat wiser, assuming we have understood why it didn't work.

Fear of failure can be paralyzing for an artist; I believe, having experienced it, that it is the primary cause of "writer's block." Embrace the risks inherent in writing every new composition, with the knowledge that:

Risks are an essential part of the process;
If risks "fail" — if something you try does not succeed — the consequences are usually minimal;
There is a solution for every compositional problem;
The more you solve compositional problems, the more you learn;
The solutions to compositional problems can end up being among the strongest sections of a composition; and
There is a saying that you learn more from failure than you do from success. I don't know how true this is — I think there is much to be learned from both, frankly, and here's a link to a Scientific American article that challenges this saying — but I do believe that challenges (a nicer word than "failures," don't you think?) provide opportunities to both (i) learn and grow as artists, and (ii) strengthen our compositions, so, looking at it this way, they are not to be feared, but embraced!

I'm not sure I would go so far as to suggest we embrace failure, though, just challenges!

On the perception of progress

2011-08-01T15:45:00.010-02:30

How do you measure progress when composing? I sometimes set durational goals for myself, like thirty seconds of new music every day. The value of this approach is that it can provide an incentive to create some quantity of new music every day, even if it sometimes feels like you're "churning it out."

But wait! Is "churning out" some quantity of new music every day a desirable goal?

There are plusses and minuses to this approach, but, for the most part, I would suggest that it can be a useful goal.

• Here are some arguments for and against this approach:

Pro

Writing music every day (or at least most days), is, like practicing your instrument or singing daily, extremely helpful (possibly essential!) if you are to become a skilled composer. Giving yourself daily duration goals can help motivate you to achieve this.
Working on your current project daily also keeps it fresh in your mind. You will likely find that your piece stays with you, "in your head," when you are not actively engaged in composing. One value of this is that it allows your subconscious to get involved in your creative process; you may be reading, exercising, or falling asleep, and suddenly get a good idea for your composition because your subconscious is keeping your piece on the "back burner," as it were. Another value is that when you begin work on your composition every day you will avoid the bewilderment I sometimes feel when I have been too long away from a project, which causes me to wonder why I wrote what I did, where I thought I was going with a particular musical idea, or, sometimes, why I ever thought it would be okay to become a composer... Writing a composition sporadically is possible, but not much fun.
There is value in being able to compose quickly. Surprisingly (to me, at least), it doesn't necessarily result in lower-quality writing. I think we sometimes get too obsessive about small details in our compositions, at the expense of the big picture; this can be fixed by working at a steady (and fairly brisk!) pace. As a general rule, I think it is much more valuable to try to "churn out" music for a period, and then, perhaps when you get stuck, you can go back and work on some finer details such as links, general improvements, and score details. This isn't quite the same as saying, "don't sweat the small stuff," because details are very important in a composition. Instead, I am suggesting that there is a time to concern yourself with details, and there is a time to concern yourself with the big picture; if you spend too much time on the former, the latter may suffer. And vice-versa.
If you make a habit of challenging yourself to write music every day, you will find it easier to do so; it can help ease the existential pain that sometimes accompanies composition (see my previous blog entry for more on this topic). You are also likely to find that you are writing music with which you are satisfied, for the reasons given above.
If you go on to a career as a composer, there will almost certainly be times when you have to compose quickly, such as an impending completion deadline. If you write music for film, television, or commercials, writing good music quickly is a basic requirement; an inability to deliver quality work on time will quickly close the door on future opportunities. The only way to develop this proficiency this is to spend years challenging yourself to "churn it out" on a fairly regular basis.

Con

A daily duration goal can be useful, but it can also be counterproductive if you are meeting your goals but writing music with which you are not satisfied.
A daily duration goal is not always practical; some sections of a composition require more work than others. I often find the beginning of a work very slow-going, but once that is out of the way, and I am happy with it, things often proceed more quickly, albeit with subsequent decreases in my rate of progress when new challenges present themselves. A particularly thick or complex texture can also slow you down.
Other aspects of the composition process are as important as writing new sections. At the top of the list, perhaps, is revision of earlier sections. Each new day brings fresh perspective to one's music; what seemed like a brilliant idea the night before might seem pretty weak the next day, and if this is the case, revisions are necessary. For what it's worth, my own approach is to generally start my composition time by revising earlier sections, followed by working on new material. For me, everything is subject to revision until the piece is done, which means I might still be tweaking aspects of the first few pages as I work on the final pages.
Likewise, an essential aspect of the composition process is editing your music, which includes adding dynamics, articulations, written instructions, slurs, bowings, etc., and this too takes time, if it is to be done intelligently. In general, I recommend editing your music as you go, more or less, but the way I actually do it is that I will try to generate new music until I get stuck, at which point I go back and edit/revise/improve earlier sections. I have discovered that sometimes the reason I feel stuck is that something in an earlier section is not sitting well with me, and if I can fix that, then the feeling of being stuck often lessens.

→ It is important to feel you are making regular progress on your compositions, and one way of doing this is to set achievable goals for yourself every day. These goals can be durational, but they can also relate to other aspects of the composition process as well, such as revisions and editing. You could aim to put in dynamics, phrasing slurs, articulations, bowings, etc., for x many pages, for example.

→ You can even extend this to other tasks that are important for a composer, such as copying (and editing) parts, inviting people to an upcoming concert where your music will be played (using social media and other methods, such as E-mail), making and distributing posters for that concert, and communicating with your performer(s) to ensure (a) they are prepared to perform your music, (b) they don't have any concerns with what you have written thus far, and (c) they know that you welcome their input.

→ One final thing: Goals are useful when they help motivate you to achieve something, but counterproductive when they make you feel you have failed if you do not achieve them. Set modest, achievable goals, and then see how they work out. If they are easily achieved, then slightly increase the difficulty, and vice-versa if they are not. Be flexible; modify short-term goals if necessary in order to better reach a long-term goal. We are all capable of achieving wonderful things, and setting a series of smaller goals can help us get there.

Oh, the pain of it all!

2011-07-29T15:22:00.007-02:30

Is composition sometimes painful for you?

A former composer-colleague of mine once told me that you have be a masochist to be a composer. That might be overstating things, but perhaps not... It got me thinking, anyway.

Many things in life are painful, yet we do them anyway. Perhaps the most extreme example of this is giving birth, which, as I understand it (for alas, I have thus far failed to accomplish this, despite years of trying...), can be profoundly painful.

And yet, despite this, many women knowingly and deliberately give birth, often more than once.

Are they masochists?

I don't think so. I suspect that the motivation is simple: Their desire to have children is so strong that they are willing to endure the pain that comes with giving birth, and the further frustrations, stress, and challenges that come with raising children.

I think it is similar with composition. Sure, you have your good days where you feel you are making progress on the piece, and you like what you have written, but you also have periods where you struggle, perhaps to the point of wanting to give up, and if you struggle a lot with a composition, you might well find yourself wondering why you ever thought it would be a good idea to write music in the first place. Wouldn't lying on a nice beach in the tropics be preferable? Or playing video games?

Every composer must discover and own their motivation for writing music, but I suspect for most of us the motivation is similar to the desire to have kids: At the end of an often painful process, you will have in your hands something that came from some mysterious place inside you, about which you can hopefully feel good for the rest of your life.

And, speaking only for myself, there are few experiences in life that can compare to the satisfaction of a completed composition that I like (as opposed to a completed composition that I don't care for very much!), which is why I keep at it.

But still, the pain of it all can be daunting at times. If you find yourself feeling discouraged, it might be comforting to know that most, and probably all, composers have experienced what you are feeling on a pretty regular basis. It seems to go with the territory.

I think overcoming discouragement can be particularly challenging during the first few years of composing, since after going through all the labour pains involved in creating a composition, the completed work often does not turn out to be as good as we had hoped.

You almost need to be delusional to persevere beyond these disappointments! Or, if "delusional" is an attribute not held dear to your heart, perhaps "really optimistic" is a better descriptor... The point is, when you begin developing your skills at anything, you tend not to be as good at it as you will become if you persevere doggedly for several years, and it helps if during this early period you can find positive aspects to ensure you are sufficiently motivated to continue.

So, rather than dismissing the results of your compositional efforts ("OMG, my piece sucks!" Or, "how embarrassing! Won't somebody PLEASE drop an anvil on my head?"), it is useful, even essential, to identify the positives ("I really like the tone colour (or harmony, or texture, etc.) of that section!" Or, "The first thirty bars turned out better than I expected!"), while at the same time recognizing that some aspects of your composition(s) need work.

A positive attitude and a good work ethic may be two of the most essential qualities in becoming a good composer, but, unfortunately, the former can be the greater challenge. And it is probably something that all composers struggle with.

I love it when a plan comes together...

2011-04-06T16:12:00.062-02:30

The title of today's blog was the weekly catch-phrase of John "Hannibal" Smith, a character on "The A-Team," a popular television series that ran from 1983 to 1986 on NBC, and a 2010 film of the same name. You don't need to have been a fan of "The A-Team" (I was, mainly because I'm a foreign television buff), however, to agree that it can indeed be wonderful when a plan comes together.

This, friends, is what John "Hannibal" Smith looked like:

Notice the "thumbs up" sign, as well as the well-chomped cigar, and generally-roguish demeanor. This is part of what made the show popular. The other big reason was Mr. T, but this blog is not about him. Sorry.

What got me thinking along these lines is that I work at the Memorial University School of Music, and, as with any music school, when you walk down the hallways you get to hear random musical fragments of whatever students and faculty are working on. Some might find it disconcerting to be exposed to brief excerpts of completely different repertoire in quick succession, but not me; I have always enjoyed this aspect of my work environment.

In fact, I don't even have to leave my office to experience this, albeit on a smaller scale. I am surrounded by performance faculty offices, with piano studios on either side of mine, and trumpet and low brass studios across the corridor. Don't get me wrong; the soundproofing in our building is surprisingly effective, and when I am in my office I cannot hear sounds from my colleagues' studios particularly well, but, especially when my door is open, I do get to hear some of what my fellow musicians are working on.

Mostly, I never hear complete pieces; I suspect most teachers do just as I did when I taught classical guitar: You stop the student at various times during their lesson, and say, "let's work on that." Sometimes you spend a whole lesson working on a few notes, trying to find a strategy that will result in a better performance of those notes; small snippets of music are often played many times, and the student is often told to continue this small-scale repetition during practice sessions in advance of their next lesson.

→ That's they way we learn music. We break it down into smaller sections, practice them repeatedly until mastered, then gradually start reassembling these fragments into longer sections, which we practice numerous times, and repeat the process in ever-increasing sections until we can play the entire piece cleanly, with musical understanding, and hopefully with something personal in our performance as well.

For the past couple of weeks, I have been hearing complete composition performances in the studios around me. This stands to reason, because we are at the end of our school year (today is the last day of classes), which means that students will soon be playing end-of-year recitals and performance exams. This is the time of year when their performance levels should be peaking; this is the time of year when, hopefully, every student can feel as though months of planning and hard work are coming together, and, like John "Hannibal" Smith, feel pretty darn good about it. I love it when their plans come together!

Well, this being a blog about composition, you might already have some idea of where I'm going with the preceding tale... There are at least two parallels with the composition process:

1. The repetitive aspect. You can spend hours trying to get a few notes "just right," tweaking minute details such as dynamics, articulations, pitch, texture, rhythm, and register, perhaps feeling that you're not making much progress along the way. Someone not familiar with the amount of drudgery involved in the creative process might be profoundly unimpressed by all this. Yikes! That sounds very much like a dog's breakfast! they might think to themselves (although, like most of us, they probably have little idea of what a dog's breakfast actually sounds like).

In short, hearing a small section of music played over and over might well leave the casual observer nonplussed.

But, hopefully, any musician would get it. I suspect that any good musician (or, for that matter, anyone who has reached a high level in any endeavour) knows that the creative process involves an extraordinary amount of drudgery. If your goal is to become a good or even great composer, I believe it is essential to accept and understand this. Your initial ideas may be fine, or not, but they very often go through hundreds of transformations until they reach the final product, which is the completed composition. You need to have the patience and tenacity to see the process through to the end.

2. Just as having a plan was vital to the success of The A-Team (every week, the bad guys would get blown up in spectacular fashion, and those lovable rogues on The A-Team would triumph! How awesome is that?), having a plan for your composition can be a very useful thing.

Now just hold on a sec! you might say in your folksy way (if you speak in a folksy way, that is). Since when do YOU [meaning me] have a plan, let alone follow it?

Here's the thing: Plans comes in many varieties. Some are very specific, and some are less so. Mine, admittedly, tend to be less so, but some aspects that are useful to consider before starting a composition include:

Instrumentation (kind of a no-brainer, but it helps to establish this before you start!)
Duration (again, fairly obvious, but the length of your composition has tremendous bearing on the kind of piece you can write);
Performance difficulty level;
Context (will people dance to it? Will it be "background" music? Is it for a recital?);
Mood(s) or atmosphere you wish to evoke;
Genres you want to draw from, if any (e.g., blues, tango, minimalism, etc.);
Specific techniques, materials, or processes you want to use (polymeter, mixed meter, compound meter, polytonality, exotic modes/scales, free atonality, a sequence of non-tonal chords of your own invention, stochastic music, etc.);
Compositional attitude (is this "serious" music, or playful? Or both? Is it "functional" (e.g., music for marching band, or music for a specific occasion like a wedding or funeral), or "art" music? Or both? Do you care what people think of your music, and if so, how will that affect the kind of music you write? Who will the audience be?).

Perhaps strangely, I don't spend much time thinking of form before I begin, even though I believe that the structure of a composition is integral to its success. I think this might be related to three things:

I like the sonata principle. I virtually never set out to write a sonata-form piece, however. Instead, I find myself borrowing some of the concepts of sonata form in the music I write, such as:
• A mix between sections of greater and lesser stability, where stability can refer to thematic identity, pitch centricity, mood, or anything else you can think of. This is at the core of classical sonata form, and the concept can be applied to modern music too;
• Some degree of the unexpected — one of the things I like about sonata form is its flexibility, and particularly the number of times composers introduces unexpected elements, such as a new theme in the development, no bridge, an unusually long bridge, unexpected modulations, etc.;
• A return to some aspect of the opening material towards the end; and
• Codas that may be lengthy and contain further surprises.
I like the Fibonacci sequence, and the Golden Ratio, and these are often somewhere in my thoughts as I compose (and they can be applied to form, as well as many other parameters, such as rhythm and intervals).
I tend to start thinking about the kind of form that would best suit a particular piece only after the composition is underway. I do not argue that this is a good (or bad) strategy; I do it because it happens to work for me. Some might say this is a bit like beginning to construct a building with no architectural plans, and only drawing up plans once the first couple of stories have been finished. To that, I say this: A composition is not a building. It is, I think, very important to develop a plan for the form of your composition, but sometimes you don't exactly know what the possibilities are until you have worked with your musical ideas for a while. Remember: One of the many things a composition is not, is a building. But you probably already knew that...

Some composers like to represent musical form on graph paper. I have tried this, and it is certainly useful. Some prefer to describe the structure they wish to use with words. Many use letters or numbers to designate sections within a form (e.g., A B C B D A B). There are many approaches to planning that work, and the key is to try different ones until you discover ones that work for you.

I don't tend to have very specific pre-compositional plans about scalar and harmonic resources, but, within any section, I generally aim to be consistent. There is no rule saying you have to be consistent in this or any other aspect of a musical composition, of course; I just happen to like what I write more when it is consistent. If you didn't start out with a plan for scalar, harmonic, and motivic resources, it can be useful to look at however much of the composition you have already written, and then try to deduce what sort of harmonic language you have been using. Subsequent sections can then be consistent with the pitch collections of earlier sections, if you wish, or you may choose to use contrasting language.

I suspect that most composers devote a significant amount of time to pre-compositional planning, and I can understand why: It can make the difficult process of composing somewhat easier, and can result in a better composition. There have been numerous times when I have been stuck at some point in a composition, and wished I had a plan, because I believe it would alleviate at least some of the stress (and even helplessness) that comes when you feel as though you have absolutely no idea where your composition should go from a point of impasse.

My main caution on this topic is this: While it can be is useful to have a plan before you start composing, the plan needs to be flexible. If something is going according to plan, but not working, then it stands to reason that the plan must be changed. You could even build this flexibility into your plan; if option x doesn't work, then try y; if y doesn't work, then try z, etc. I think this is what the adage, plans were meant to be broken, is getting at.

I recommend giving it a try, and, like anything, you may need to try it several times before you feel you are starting to get the hang of it. Then, if you have planned well, you may experience something of the smug sense of accomplishment conveyed weekly by A-Team's John "Hannibal" Smith... or if that is perhaps aiming too high, then perhaps at least some sense of satisfaction that your plan came together!

[This blog was only very loosely planned.]

You might be a composer if …

2011-03-04T14:45:00.019-03:30

How many of the following statements apply to you?

You are curious as to how compositions work, and when you make personal discoveries in this direction you are more likely to think, "cool! I'd like to give that a try!" than "cool! I'd like to publish a paper about this one day!" (Not that there's anything wrong with this second impulse, and some composers do both successfully.)

You hear or read that "X is a dead-end," where "X" can be minimalism, serialism, or any musical movement or technique, and, even though you may never have written a piece using this technique, you give it a try to see if there are aspects yet to be explored.

If music theory books say you "can't" do something (e.g., write parallel fifths, follow a dominant chord with a subdominant, leave chord sevenths unresolved, etc.), you feel you must do it.

You are told there is no future in composing, and think, "That's probably true. But it doesn't apply to me."

You hear music by great composers, and think, "Nice. But I wonder what would it sound like if [some particular musical idea] had gone in a different direction?"

You hear unrealized potential in otherwise unremarkable compositions.

You catalog (mentally, or in a notebook) cool ideas for possible use in future compositions.

You think, "I wonder if anyone has ever tried this (some musical idea) before, and go ahead and try it even if you discover that others thought of the idea long before you did.

You are able to make snap decisions regarding the value of your musical ideas.

Your snap decisions regarding the value of musical ideas prove to be good, at least some of the time.

You are not deterred when you realize that some (or even a lot) of your musical decisions were bad. You try to identify the problems, and begin the work of fixing them. Or you trash the piece and start over.

You are deterred when you realize that the composition on which you have worked for a month or more is crap, but it doesn't stop you from either trying to fix the problems or starting over.

You see potential in musical ideas that others might dismiss.

Your head is in the clouds.

Your feet are planted squarely on the ground.

You have rocks in your head.

You are an iconoclast.

You have a healthy respect for tradition, but don't feel confined by it.

You have trouble with authority figures.

You feel the need to express yourself, and music is the best way you know how to do that.

You don't mind working for long periods on your own. You probably prefer working this way.

You have the courage of your convictions, but are open to honest criticism from others.

You don't mind trying something and failing, because it means you learned something along the way.

You are not afraid to try new things.

You are not deterred by the fact that, in the early stages, your composition might be embarrassingly bad, because you know that you will figure out a way to improve it. You understand that even great art can be pretty terrible in the initial stepts of the creative process.

Your musical ideas startle you sometimes, and you wonder where they came from.

You are honest about the flaws in your creations.

You are delusional.

You hear something amazing, and think, "I could do that."

You believe in the value of having a plan before beginning a composition.

You believe plans are for suckers, and prefer instead to make it up as you go.

You don't buy into the "genius" paradigm, preferring to believe that "masterpieces" are the result of (a) an extraordinary amount of hard work, (b) a long period of learning one's craft, (c) a certain amount of cleverness, and possibly even (d) a good (or just relentless) marketing campaign.

You are prepared to put as much work as it takes to become the best composer you can be.

You aspire to greatness, but would settle for goodness, or even competence, at least in the short-term.

You are moved by music in ways that words cannot fully express, and aspire to write music that can touch others in this way.

This is just a silly exercise in trying to identify some of the characteristics of composers. A couple of disclaimers: (i) This list is not exhaustive; I'm sure there are other qualities that could be added (and I welcome any suggestions you may have!); (ii) You may have many of these attributes but not be interested in composing, or, theoretically, you may feel that none of these statements apply to you, in spite of the fact that you are a composer. I'd especially like to hear from anyone who feels this way... I am of the general belief that most composers share at least a few attributes (beyond universal ones that all humans share, such as needing to eat, sleep, and drink, and a desire to avoid being kicked by a donkey any more than is absolutely necessary, etc.), but I could be wrong about this.

The Ross (née Heisenberg) Uncertainty Principle, and Other Musical Dichotomies

2010-11-11T11:48:00.032-03:30

Most readers of this blog are, I am sure, well acquainted with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, the gist of which is that there are certain pairs of physical properties in quantum mechanics (e.g., position and momentum) where the more precisely one is measured, the less precisely the other can be measured, represented as follows:

As every musician knows, the uncertainty principle can be applied to Fourier transforms of complex waveforms:

Now, you may be saying, "Not so fast, cowboy! I am not at all acquainted with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle (nor, I suspect, are most most readers of this blog!), and all of these mathematical formulae are making my head spin! Besides, what does any of this have to do with musical composition?"

I will respond by admitting that (i) I am not actually a cowboy, and (ii) my opening statements are mischievous attempts to be provocative (or vice versa; I'm not really sure). I realize that Heisenberg and complex mathematical equations are not common areas of study for most musicians, but, whether you understand them or not, those equations certainly catch the eye, do they not? ;) In any event, please do not worry; there will only be one further mathematical equation in this blog, but I will explain it with disturbing clarity, or concise obfuscation, depending on my mood at the time. Or not…

One of the most important dichotomies to be found in most classical music is certainty versus uncertainty; today's blog is about the value of uncertainty, in a very general sense, within musical compositions.

Here are some examples of how this can work:

Certainty	Uncertainty
Theme; a recognizable melodic idea.	Development; use of familiar motives in unfamiliar contexts; transformation of motives in order to create new material. Some aspects of the material may be recognizable, but the listener may be unsure as to where it is going. Transition; the beginning of a transition often sounds like a continuation or repetition of previous thematic material, but it soon becomes apparent that something different is going on, as modulation takes place, and the material is taken in a different direction, creating uncertainty.
Key/Modality/Pitch Center; a section is in a particular key, or modality, or, if non-tonal, it may be centered on a particular pitch class.	What key are we in? Development sections, transitions and retransitions, cadenzas, and even some coda sections (notably Beethoven's) all move between key areas, creating harmonic instability. Even tonicizations within more stable key areas can create some harmonic uncertainty.
Form; I recognize this form! I therefore have a pretty good sense of what is likely to happen next. If the form includes a recapitulation (and most do), then I have a very good sense of what to expect for the last section of the piece.	Form? Um... What's going on here? I don't recognize the form. Or, I thought I recognized the form, but the composer has thrown in unexpected elements (such as a coda that is longer than the development, or an unusually long transition, or a cadenza thrown into a piano sonata (as in Mozart's K.333, III), or a new theme in the development section). Is it sonata form, or rondo, or sonata rondo, or sui generis, etc.?

My musical "uncertainty principle" is this: It is at least as important to have sections that give rise to a sense of uncertainty in a composition as it is to have sections of certainty.

Fortunately, this can be represented by the following equation, which makes composing extraordinarily easy (if you're a physicist); x = quantity of uncertainty (measured in photon energy), p = mass of uncertainty (e.g., any Mass movement, such as kyrie, gloria, credo, etc.), and the h-bar is, of course, Planck's constant (I'm guessing this is a reference to Planck's faithful canine companion, Helmut):

Why? The excitement of a roller-coaster ride — not an emotional one, an actual one! — is probably related to both the ascents and descents; going up the big hill that tends to be right at the start creates a sense of Heisenbergian uncertainty (some might call it "dread"), as you wonder what lies in store for you once you reach the top (Is this thing safe? Why did I think this would be fun? Do I have a legal will?), and going down creates a sense of certainty (I am going to die! I know it for sure! Whee!), mixed with uncertainty (how much longer? Why is it so dark in here? Will I toss my cookies?). People who love these rides, I would guess, love both the uncertainty and the certainty of the experience, but especially the former. At least I do...

But a musical composition isn't a roller-coaster ride, is it?

Well, perhaps not, but I was making a rather loose analogy. A musical composition can be compared to a journey, and, if this analogy makes sense to you, then it is a wonderful example of the old saying that what matters most in life is the journey, not the destination. How much fun would life be if you knew exactly what was going to happen at every stage? How enjoyable would a musical composition be if you knew beforehand exactly what would happen at every stage?

→ Uncertainty; don't leave home without it!

What about compositions that are memorized? They are enjoyable, even when I know exactly what will happen next! Good point! But I think what may be taking place here is that even when you know exactly what notes are going to be played before they are actually played, I am not sure that you know exactly what your emotional response to those notes will be, so here again, I suspect that part of the attraction to the composition may be based on uncertainty. This too is analogous to a roller-coaster ride; even if you've been on it numerous times, you might respond slightly differently to it each ride.

I encourage you to look for opportunities within your compositions to try this idea out.

This topic is an offshoot of the predictability/unpredictability dichotomy that I have mentioned in class and written about in past blogs. Predictability within a musical composition, like routines in life, can be comforting and reassuring at times, but too much can quickly bore the listener; a great composition seems to have a perfect balance of the two.

Below are links to two blog entries relating to this one, FYI:

• Two musical dichotomies: Familiar vs. Unfamiliar, and Expected vs. Unexpected
• More musical dichotomies

Questions:

1. Besides those already discussed, to what other musical parameters can this certainty/uncertainty dichotomy be applied?

2. What are some of the ways in which it can be applied to the composition on which you are currently working?

3. Is this a useful way to think about music?

4. What are some other dichotomies to be found in music?

5. Can the certainty/uncertainty dichotomy be applied to other genres of music, such as popular, jazz, folk, or world?

Blog Index — Organized by Topic (® 2010-May)

2010-05-10T10:38:00.002-02:30

Below is an index of most blogs posted thus far. I omitted entries that I didn't think would be very interesting or relevant, such as reminders of deadlines, concert congratulations, order of class presentation, etc.

Feel free to browse these — clicking on any blog title will take you to that page. You may find some that give you ideas about composition techniques, or that contain useful things to think about when composing, including suggestions for what to do when you are stuck. They are loosely organized by topic.

→ Course and Blog Information ←
Class Blog and Student Blogs Explained
Group Composition Lessons; Pros and Cons
Concert Protocol
Welcome Message (January, 2010)
Welcome Message (September, 2009)
Welcome Message (January, 2009)
Class Business — Odds and Ends (January, 2009)

→ Originality and Art ←
Originality and Quality of Initial Musical Ideas
How Important is Originality in Art?
Is Originality a Detriment in Art?
Originality — Does it have Any Role in Art?

→ Kandinsky's Theories on Art ←
Kandinsky's Theories (1)
Kandinsky's Theories (2)
Kandinsky's Theories (3)

→ Argh! I'm Stuck! ←
Stuck?
Strategies for Becoming Unstuck
Creative Angst... Welcome to the Club!

→ Audience Response to Contemporary Classical Music ←
"Audiences Hate Modern Classical Music Because Their Brains Cannot Cope"
On the "Hatred" of Modern Classical Music Due to the Brain's Inability to Cope
Marketing Contemporary Classical Music (1)
Marketing Contemporary Classical Music (2)

→ Atonality – What's in a Name? ←
Why Atonal Music?
Atonal — Even the Word Sounds Unpleasant!
Atonality = Noise?

→ On Composition (Miscellaneous Topics) ←
How to Become a More-Skilled Composer
Talent? Skill? What's the Difference?
Inspiration, Perspiration, and Perspicacity
Express Yourself? Really???
Writing a Play; an Analogy to Composition
Keep? Discard?
Notation Software Woes
Musicworks Magazine

→ Opportunities ←
Kim's "Composer's Kitchen" Blogs

→ Musical Influences ←
Musical Influences (1)
Musical Influences (2)

→ Thematic Growth, and other Technical Considerations ←
Thematic Growth (1)
Thematic Growth (2; Simon's Guest Blog)
Thematic Growth (3)
A Sampling of Post-1900 Materials of Music; See Anything You Like?
Things to Consider when Composing for Piano

→ Nuts and Bolts; Score Details, etc. ←
On Musical Detail (1)
On Musical Detail (2)
On Musical Detail (3)
What is a "Fair Copy?"
Jessica's Tips on Writing for Youth Band
Adding Multiple Ossia Bars in Finale

→ Composition Projects ←
Project 1 - Atonal Theme and Variations
Project 1 - More Details
Project 2: Using Musical Clichés in Creating Art Music
Project 2: Using a musical style or gesture as a point of departure
Project 2: Recontextualizing and atonality
Project 3: Fun With Scales and Modes
Project 4: Composition for Wind Band
Project 5: Write Three Character Pieces for Solo Piano
Project 6: Choice of Text Setting, or Genre Recontextualization

→ Newfound Music Festivals (and Other Concerts) ←
2010 — Student Reflections
2010 — Evening Concert Programmes
2010 — Thursday Daytime Events
2009 — CMC 50th Anniversary Concert
2009 — Thursday Daytime Events
2009 — Festival Feedback

→ Composition Issues (10-part series) ←

1. Originality and Quality of Initial Musical Ideas
1.1. The quality of ideas may not matter very much in determining the quality of the complete composition that emerges from them; and
1.2. The degree to which these ideas are original may not matter very much.

2. How do you Develop Compositional Craft?
2.1. Study the music of others.

2.2. Compose as much as you can.

2.3. Invite criticism from others.

3. Understanding your Musical Idea

3.1. Live with it for a while.

3.2. What's it about?

3.3. Does it change character?

3.4. What is its function within the context of the piece?

3.5. Structural Analysis.

3.6. Harmonic (or Pitch, Scale, etc.) Analysis.

4. The Pros and Cons of Development

5. How to Extend or Develop Musical Materials; Specific Suggestions

6. Balancing the Old with the New, the Expected with the Unexpected

7. More Dichotomies to Ponder…

7.1. Less is more, vs. More is more.

7.2. Always leave them wanting more, vs. Give them what they want.

7.3. Don't treat the listener like an idiot, vs. There's a sucker born every minute.

7.4. There can be 'too much of a good thing,' vs. If you have a good idea, then stick with it!

7.5. The George Costanza approach.

8. I think my idea has run its course. Now what?

8.1. The three models for composers' roles.

8.2. Mastery or Mystery?

8.3. The value of a plan.

8.4. Getting stuck, and possible workarounds.

8.5. Don't obsess!

8.6. Challenges = Opportunities for inspired solutions!

9. Taking your inspiration from wherever you find it

10. Inspiration, Perspiration, and Perspicacity

→ My Music ←
Domenico 1° (Scarlet Daybreak) & Domenico 2° (Scarlet Nightfall)
Funky Flute Groove Experience

Kim's Composer's Kitchen Blogs

2010-04-29T11:54:00.007-02:30

Kim Codner, who just finished her fourth year here at the School of Music and is heading off to McGill to do a Master's in Composition next year, is participating in a programme in Montreal right now called "Composer's Kitchen," with the Quattor Bozzini and composers Linda Smith and Michael Oesterle. Click on the link if you wish to find out more about this programme, but briefly, their website describes it as follows:

This unique event revolving around the string quartet is a combination workshop, laboratory, playground, and master class. Over the course of a week, the Quatuor Bozzini and two experienced composers will observe the work of six up-and-coming composers. Their compositions will be read, played, assessed, analyzed, worked on, played again, and performed in the closing concert. This gives young composers a unique opportunity to perfect their craft with professional musicians.

Kim has been posting blogs on her experiences there, and they are a great read! They also have a lot of useful information on notation issues, and the kind of feedback she's been getting from both the quartet and the "mentor" composers.

Here are the links to her Composer's Kitchen blogs:

Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010 (recordings!)

Check 'em out, and say "hi" to her via the comments area if you do!

Talent? Skill? What's the difference?

2010-04-22T12:25:00.094-02:30

In my previous blog entry, I posed the question:

What about talent? Where does that fit in the makeup of a good composer?

Here is a definition for "talent," from the online Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary:

A natural ability to be good at something, especially without being taught.

Other definitions often use the word "innate," meaning "something you are born with," which means the same thing in this context as "natural." Some of the many areas in which people are sometimes said to have talent include:

public speaking
dance
mathematics
writing
sports
being funny
chairing meetings
music

But how could anyone possibly be born with a talent for chairing meetings? you might ask, indignantly. After all, babies seemingly never actually chair meetings, at least when grownups are around (when grownups aren't around, who knows what they are up to?).

Since we tend not to see babies chairing meetings, writing fiction or non-fiction, composing concertos, etc., how do we know if they are born with these talents?

It would seem very difficult to establish proof of talent in many of these areas in an infant; I would suggest that they generally become evident at later stages of development (e.g., Erickson's stages of psychosocial development), after an individual has had the opportunity to develop skills relating to these areas (talent in composition generally follows the development of skills as a musician, for example).

This leads me to propose the following:

Talent must be developed in order to be manifested.

However, something that has to be developed in order to be manifested sounds very much like a skill; how is talent different from skill?

Here is a definition of Skill in The American Heritage Dictionary:

Proficiency, facility, or dexterity that is acquired or developed through training or experience.

The essential difference, it would seem, is that talent is something we are are born with, while skill may in fact be related to an innate talent, but it must be developed.

But even this does not fully clarify the difference between talent and skill, because if talent is only manifested after at least some development, then how is it any different from skill, which is also manifested after development?

Some might argue that the difference is that a person with a particular talent would require less training to develop proficiency in that area than someone without that talent.

Perhaps this is true, but the speed with which one develops proficiency in an area is also highly dependent on other factors as well, such as motivation, environment, opportunity, and instruction. Someone of average talent might develop skill more quickly than an individual with greater talent, if the first person were more motivated, and/or had better teaching.

All of this leads me to wonder if it is possible to measure innate ability, and, if it cannot be measured, is it possible to prove that it even exists?

Let's explore that.

When we describe an individual as "talented," we often mean that they learn or develop particular skills very quickly, or do them very well, with seemingly less effort than someone else with seemingly less talent.

However, these things do not necessarily mean that an individual is talented; perhaps the so-called "talented" person learns particular things quickly or does them well because they have had more practice doing so.

Or perhaps some of the skills a person has developed in one area (e.g., bicycle racing) can be transferred to another (e.g., speed skating), and it is this that allows them to develop so quickly in the second area.

(Canadian Clara Hughes, who has won multiple medals in both the summer and winter Olympic games, is a great example of this kind of skill transference. Another example is Pierre Boulez, who quickly (while still in his twenties) established an international reputation as one of the leading composers of the Modernist era, but he has subsequently also become known as one of the leading conductors in the world. Most of the "great" composers of classical music were also regarded as among the great performers of their time.)

As a teacher, it can be tempting to conclude that one student is more talented than another because of a difference in their rates of progress. However, because teachers have limited knowledge of their students prior to meeting them in the classroom or private studio, we do not actually know how much time students have spent developing skills in the areas in which we teach, or in cognate areas. Not only that, but we don't really know how hard students work outside of the classroom on the skills we teach, or how efficiently they are working.

While teachers often get a sense that some students seems to learn more easily or develop skills more quickly than others, the lack of information we have about their background, practice habits, and other impediments to learning (there are many circumstances in a student's personal life than can inhibit learning) gives us no basis on which to conclude that one student is any more talented than another.

A potential danger in drawing conclusions on the relative talent levels of our students when we don't really have a basis for doing so is that we might give in to the temptation of tailoring our teaching in some way to the "talented" students, perhaps because they respond better to our teaching, thereby ensuring that those who struggle continue to do so. Or, more generally, we might encourage the "talented" more than the "untalented."

Are you suggesting that there is no such thing as talent?

I am suggesting that we need to reexamine our assumptions of what talent is, whether there is any way of measuring it, and yes, even of whether there really is such a thing as talent (as opposed to skill, which is something that very clearly exists and that can be both developed and measured).

One way to prove the existence of talent would be to establish a control group of kids who all received identical upbringing, including parenting style and values, education, and training in the arts and sports, and then measure their achievement in the various areas in which they had been trained at regular intervals to see if some were to demonstrate a significant and lasting superiority to their peers in particular areas.

I'm not actually sure this would prove anything (other than being an impossible study to conduct from a practical standpoint, not to mention the ethical/legal impediments to establishing such a control group!), because you would have to factor motivation in there as well; people learn more easily when they are motivated to do so, and there it would seem unlikely that everyone from this hypothetical control group would have a similar level of motivation in all areas.

Another way — and this has the advantages of being both feasible and legal(!) — would be to study identical twins adopted into different families to see if one twin's significant strength in a particular area is matched by the other twin. I would guess studies like this have been done, and if I find any, I will report back on a later blog.

But what about Mozart? He must have been HUGELY talented to compose symphonies when he was only four years old!

Indeed, he would have been, but he wrote no symphonies (or any other type of music) when he was four. After Mozart's death, his sister, Nannerl, wrote: At the age of five he was already composing little pieces, which he played to his father who wrote them down. (Deutsch 1965, p. 455)

There are several points to note from this statement:

Nannerl was writing years after the fact, at a point when her late brother was widely acknowledged as a great composer — according to Wikipedia, Mozart's sparse funeral did not reflect his standing with the public as a composer: memorial services and concerts in Vienna and Prague were well attended. Indeed, in the period immediately after his death Mozart's reputation rose substantially: Solomon describes an "unprecedented wave of enthusiasm" (Solomon 1995, p. 499) for his work; biographies were written (first by Schlichtegroll, Niemetschek, and Nissen); and publishers vied to produce complete editions of his works.

Nannerl also wrote that, upon meeting her brother and becoming familiar with his music in 1781, Joseph Haydn said to Mozart's father: I tell you before God, and as an honest man, your son is the greatest composer known to me by person and repute; he has taste, and what is more, the greatest skill in composition (Deutsch 1965, pp. 461–462). It seems likely that Nannerl's goal in writing these statements was to document (and perhaps even add to) her brother's greatness, and, as such, it is difficult to know how historically accurate they are.

In any event, that Mozart became a great composer as an adult after having been a precociously-skilled child is not in question (at least by most people familiar with his music; Glenn Gould famously felt otherwise, arguing that Mozart died too late rather than too early (Ostwald 1997, p. 249)). What is less certain is the degree to which his youthful compositional efforts were aided by his father.
Nannerl mentions her brother composing "little pieces." Not symphonies. Now, admittedly, composing little minuets at the age of five (or six, some historians maintain) is pretty darn special, but did these little pieces contain the seeds of greatness he would later achieve as a composer? Or, put another way, there have been (and continue to be) many highly-precocious young kids in the world whose impressive early achievements might have been comparable in some way to Mozart's, but very few of them have come anywhere close to achieving what Mozart did as an adult. Mozart's place in music history was achieved on the basis of his compositional work as an adult, not as a child.
"... which he played to his father, who wrote them down." His father, Leopold (1719–1787), was a highly-accomplished musician himself — he was deputy Kapellmeister to the court orchestra of the Archbishop of Salzburg, as well as a composer and an experienced teacher. If young Wolfgang played mistakes (parallel fifths, doubled leading tones, etc.) in his childhood compositions, might Leopold have corrected them in the process of transcribing them to music manuscript? Given that he was an experienced teacher (and his son's greatest advocate, AKA a "stage parent"), it seems likely that Leopold would have pointed out mistakes and ways of improving these little pieces.

It is presumably for these reasons that the symphonies listed as #2 and #3 by Mozart are now listed as "spurious," with #2 thought to have been composed by Leopold.

In any event, the point here is that it is hard to know the degree to which Mozart's early compositional efforts were aided by his father, and it is therefore at least possible that some of what we attribute to "pure genius" or "natural talent" on the part of Mozart can be attributed to the help received from his father.
And finally, although you and I were probably not composing little pieces for the piano at the age of five, we also did not have Leopold Mozart as our dad. Leopold published a treatise on violin playing the year that Wolfgang was born, and taught both of his children how to play violin and piano at remarkably early ages. He also assembled books of compositions from which to learn piano (and perhaps composition as well) for both of his children (Blom, p.11). Mozart was home-schooled by his father, and this home-schooling included much musical training. Leopold's desire to show off the skills of his children (did I mention he was a stage-dad?) is obvious from the frequent tours to perform for European royalty that began when Wolfgang was six. Given his skills as both a musician and teacher of music, and his evident desire for his children to excel at music and be recognized for it, it seems at least possible that other children growing up in that environment might also have been "composing little pieces" at remarkably early ages.

To what degree were Wolfgang Mozart's childhood accomplishments the result of the intensive musical training he received, and to what degree were they a product of his musical gift or innate talent?

Postscript: After writing the above, I was reading Outliers — The Story of Success, by Malcolm Gladwell (mainly because I wanted to find out about the so-called "10,000 hour rule" discussed in my Inspiration, Perspiration, and Perspicacity blog of about a month ago), and found this quote from Genius Explained, by the late British cognitive psychologist Michael Howe:

... by the standards of mature composers, Mozart's early works are not outstanding. The earliest pieces were all probably written down by his father, and perhaps improved in the process. Many of Wolfgang's childhood compositions, such as the first seven of his concertos piano and orchestra, are largely arrangements of works by other composers. Of those concertos that only contain music original to Mozart, the earliest that is now regarded as a masterwork (No. 9, K. 271) was not composed until he was twenty-one: by that time Mozart had already been composing concertos for ten years (Howe, p. 3).

The music critic Harold Schonberg goes even further:

It is strange to say of a composer who started writing at six, and lived only thirty-six years, that he developed late, but that is the truth. Few of Mozart's early works, elegant as they are, have the personality , concentration, and richness that entered his music after 1781" [the year he turned 25]. (Lives of the Great Composers, Part 2, p. 103)

We can become so caught up in the mystification of genius that we overlook the fact that any person of significant accomplishment, even those we call geniuses, achieved what they did through protracted hard work.

To conclude by answering the question posed at the outset: Where does talent fit in the makeup of a good composer?

It's hard to say. I'm not sure I'm prepared to say there is no such thing as talent, but what is clear is:

If there is such a thing as talent, it needs to be developed in order to be manifested;
Skill clearly exists, and is developed through training;
Skill is measurable, but if someone has come up with a way of measuring talent as an independent quality from skill, I don't know of it;
I see no benefit in concerning yourself with the issue of how talented you are, or whether you possess enough "raw" talent to achieve greatness. If you focus on developing your skills, and, if you work hard enough over a sufficiently long period, you will become highly skilled. And, if you become highly skilled, AND continue to work hard it seems likely to me that you will distinguish yourself in some way in your field.
I would guess that the main reason everyone who sets out to become highly skilled does not succeed in doing so is that many loose their motivation somewhere along the way.

How to become a more-skilled composer

2010-04-15T11:52:00.045-02:30

I ended my March 25 blog with a statement that I hoped would provoke (inspire?) some responses, saying:

Good composers are good by virtue of the fact that they work hard; mediocre composers are not as good because they do not work as hard. If a composition is not considered to be very good, it probably indicates more about the composer's laziness than it does about talent or inspiration.

Do I believe this? Not exactly... Here is what I do believe (stated in what I hope is a less belligerent way!):

In order to become a good composer, you need to work very hard at it for an extended period, and you have to constantly challenge yourself to find ways to improve. Hard work may not be the only factor that leads to becoming a good composer, but I believe it is the most essential ingredient.

There is something attractively democratic about this, because it suggests that any musically-skilled person is capable of becoming a good composer if they work hard enough.

If this is true, then the argument could be made that one reason that some composers do not write better music is that they have not put sufficient work into becoming better composers, which is essentially the point that my "provocative statement" attempted to make (but if you state things too reasonably, people tend not to feel provoked into responding!).

Is Bill a lazy composer? If Sarah has invested significantly more hours in compositional training than Bill, and, by virtue of that fact, Sarah is the more skilled composer, this in no way suggests that Bill is lazier than Sarah. However, if Bill wishes to become a better composer but is not interested in committing the time necessary to achieve this improvement, then perhaps Bill can be said to be lazy... or just naive.

But let us stop all this talk of laziness and move on to ask what specific things can one work on in order to become a more skilled composer? Below is a list of some of them; as always, feel free to disagree, agree, or add to the list!

Write more music (or, the 10,000 hour rule) . Try to write every day, if you can, or try to devote at least a couple of hours a day, four to five days a week, to composition. In order to become better performers, all musicians understand that you need to practice on a regular basis — daily, preferably. Well, the same is true for improvement in any skill, such as writing, sports, surgery, acting, etc., and, of course, composition.

You may have heard of the "10,000 hour rule," a concept mentioned numerous times in "Outliers: The Story of Success" by Malcolm Gladwell, who suggests that the key to success in any field is, to a large extent, a matter of practicing a specific task for a total of around 10,000 hours. Using this "rule," you would have to practice composition for four hours a day, five days a week, 50 weeks a year, for ten years in order to become an expert composer!

Before you throw up your hands in despair (what? You don't have four hours a day for the next ten years to spend on composition???), I will suggest that a lot of the time you have already spent training to be a musician should count in the calculation of the number of hours required to become an expert composer. Your training on an instrument, in aural skills, in music theory, your time spent jamming with friends, your time spent listening actively to music — I would suggest that they all help make you a better composer, so you may be closer to that 10,000 hour goal than you think!

Benefits:
   • The basic principle here is practice makes perfect. Or, if not perfect (is there any such thing in art?), then at least better.

Challenges:
   • Finding the time on a daily basis for anything beyond what we are currently doing is a challenge.
   • Doing something on a daily basis can lead to ruts; it may be necessary to vary one's routine occasionally, and/or to take breaks from the routine.
Find ways to gain perspective on your music. I wrote about this in my 2009-02-05 blog, "Running into a brick wall" (in which I quoted Richard Bach: "Perspective; use it or lose it"), but the basic idea is that we can easily get so wrapped up in our creations that we lose perspective on them, and the numerous ways to gain perspective include taking a break (and possibly engaging in something else for a while, including exercise), which allows us to return to our work with a refreshed mindset, and asking for honest feedback from others (including performers).

I suspect most composers have had the experience of going to bed feeling quite pleased with the musical idea on which they had been working, only to awaken the next day to discover that they really don't like that idea very much at all! Clearly, when this happens to us, our perspective has changed, but which is right? Is it a great idea, a terrible idea, or somewhere in between? The only way to make a good judgement on the merits of a musical idea is to examine it from different perspectives, and ways of doing this are listed in my above-mentioned blog.

Benefits:
   • Getting different perspectives on your work during the composition process will make it more likely that you will be satisfied with the finished product, no matter what your perspective or frame of mind.
   • Inviting honest feedback from others can lead to improvements you might otherwise not have considered.
   • Feedback from performers can help you to write more idiomatically, and notate your musical ideas more clearly.

Challenges:
   • If one is in a highly-stressed or depressed frame of mind, finding ways to alter our perspective can be extremely challenging. Also, this frame of mind can cloud one's judgement to the point where one is unable to make good decisions about the merit of our musical ideas.
   • Soliciting honest feedback from others can result in suggestions that do not actually help your music in any way (and they may even make it worse); you have to be able to sort out the good suggestions from the less good ones.
Develop good musical judgment (i.e., good musical instincts). This relates to the previous point, the basic idea being that while all composers probably experience times when their judgement about their own music is clouded, good composers find ways to work through these periods and end up making decisions that lead to good compositions. Or, put another way, even great composers can have terrible musical ideas (e.g., Late at night: This is GREAT! — Next day: Oof! What was I thinking???), but they somehow manage to sort out the bad ideas from the good ones, which helps lead to good music.

Benefits:
• Good judgement leads to good music.

Challenges:
• It's easy to say, "develop good judgement" (yeah, thanks Yoda!), but how do you do this? And what does this word, "good" mean in this context, anyway? Keep reading to find out...
Analyze music. It would be good if at least some of this were in a formal sense, involving comprehensive structural analyses of compositions, but it could also occur in a less-structured way, involving active listening to music while taking note of anything at all that interests you, such as the structure, process, colours, orchestration, the way the composer writes for particular instruments, mood, and how it is achieved, etc. What aspects of the music would you like to try in your own compositions?

Benefits:
• Analysis helps us to find out how music works, and the knowledge we have on that subject, the better able we are to create the kind of music we would like to hear.

Challenges:
• Finding time to engage in analysis can be a challenge, but beyond that, the only potential pitfall might be that a person enjoys analysis so much that they become less interested in composing music than they are in analyzing it. As pitfalls go, that's not such a bad one, however...
Be curious. This is basically an extension or reinforcement of the previous point; when you play music, or hear it, or look at scores, ask yourself questions: What makes this work, or not work? How does it work? What makes audiences respond (positively or negatively) to this music? How do you respond to the music, and what is it about the music that elicits that response? How is a particular sonic colour created? How detailed is the score? What notation conventions are used, and are there any there that you could use, or even be inspired by?

Benefits:
   • Perhaps the most famous adage about curiosity, sadly, is that it "killed the cat," but nothing could be farther from the truth, at least for composers (and I'm pretty sure for cats too). The benefits are, I think, self-evident, so rather than pedantically listing them all, I thought I would provide a few quotes on the topic that you might find interesting:

   • It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. (Albert Einstein)
   • The whole art of teaching is only the art of awakening the natural curiosity of young minds for the purpose of satisfying it afterwards. (Anatole France)
   • It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. (Aristotle)
   • The cure for boredom is curiosity. There is no cure for curiosity. (Ellen Parr, also attributed to Dorothy Parker)
   • Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly. (Arnold Edinborough)
   • Seize the moment of excited curiosity on any subject to solve your doubts; for if you let it pass, the desire may never return, and you may remain in ignorance. (William Wirt)
   • Loyalty to a petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul. (Mark Twain)

Challenges:
   • It's easy to fall into ruts where we don't question things very much, so the challenge is to avoid doing so.
   • I suppose that the reason the adage about curiosity and the cat came about is that there can be such a thing as too much curiosity (although perhaps it is more a case of too much foolishness), and this may lead a person or beloved house pet (for I am a cat lover) to do nutty things, such as, Hmm... What would happen if I put my finger in that electrical socket? or They say it is not wise to stroll in a leisurely fashion across eight lanes of the Trans-Canada Highway during rush hour close to a major urban center, but is it really true? I am going to find out for myself, thank you very much! But for the most part, curiosity, combined with a dash of common sense, is a good thing.
Be open. This is related to curiosity, but being open isn't quite the same as being curious. Being willing to try new approaches to writing music, even when you're pretty sure you're not going to like them, is a bit like trying on new clothes that you're pretty sure you won't like; sometimes you will be surprised to discover that you do like them! Ditto for food, which is the basis for "Green Eggs and Ham," by Dr. Seuss, Sam-I-Am.

Benefits:
• Some times, when we try something (food, clothes, a musical technique) that we do not expect to like, we surprise ourselves by discovering that we do like it! If we remain closed to these possibilities, we never make these new and often rewarding discoveries.

Challenges:
• Again, as with the unfortunate cat who met his/her untimely demise, some judgement must be shown. There are many more things to try than there is time in one's lifetime to try them, so at a certain point you have to move forward with the task at hand, which in our case, is composing.
Be decisive. Being curious and open are great attributes, but when it comes to actually composing your piece, you need to be able to make decisions. Is this too short, or too long? Does this idea need more development? Should I have an introduction? Should the music have a climax? etc. Clearly, some decisions are better than others, but just as clearly, the inability to make decisions will lead to an inability to complete the composition; sometimes, even a bad decision is better than no decision at all, if it helps complete the the work. Besides, you can always go back later and change it. It's not like being a surgeon or an air traffic controller, where bad decisions can lead to loss of life!

Benefits:
• Being decisive helps the composition process go more smoothly.

Challenges:
• Being decisive doesn't necessarily mean you make good decisions, but even here hard work helps; the more experienced you are as a composer, the more likely you are to make better decisions.
Have the courage of your convictions. Again related to the previous point: Remember that nothing catastrophic can happen if you try something new as a composer and it proves to be unsuccessful. Schoenberg was reviled and ridiculed by many for coming up with his "Method of Composing with Twelve Tones Which are Related Only with One Another," but if he had lost his confidence in the method and decided to scrap it before it was published, or decided against writing any music using this method, it seems unlikely that he would have achieved his position in history as arguably the most influential composer of the twentieth century.

Benefits:
   • Having the courage of your convictions can lead to greatness.

Challenges:
   • Having the courage of your convictions can also lead to being ostracized, if your convictions are radically out of step with prevailing norms.
   • Belief in one's own convictions may actually be a case of hubris, and I'm not sure hubris actually helps make you a better composer...
Strive to improve. The opposite to a desire to improve is complacency, and complacency is never to be a good thing for an artist.

Benefits:
• Striving to improve generally leads to improvement (another statement of Yoda-like profundity, I know), and while we must reach a point of satisfaction with whatever piece we are working on in order to feel it is finished, in order for it to be good we must constantly seek ways to make it better.

Challenges:
• Constantly striving to improve can become an unhealthy obsession. As mentioned above, you can only finish a composition if you reach a point of relative satisfaction with it, but no art is ever perfect, so you could theoretically spend your entire life trying to perfect a single composition because you know it could always be better. That's a pretty extreme example, but a more common example is one kind of writer's block, where a person recognizes (or at least believes) that their work needs to be better, but experiences creative paralysis when they cannot find a way to make it so.
Develop your people/networking skills. Composers mostly depend on others to perform and programme their music. Some composers perform their own music, and some composers compose electronic music that is not dependent on performers for its realization, but even in both these cases, composers often depend on others to programme their works. Good people skills can help create performance opportunities for your music, and the more opportunities you have, the more you improve as a composer

Benefits:
• You mean, besides untold wealth? The better your people/networking skills, the easier it is for people who can help your career (performers, music programmers) to think of you when they make decisions about the music they want to programme. I believe that all successful composers are good composers, but not all good composers are successful, where "success" is measured by the number and kinds of commissions, performances, and public exposure a composer has. I suspect that the main reason for this difference is the disparity in people/networking skills among good composers.

Challenges:
• Well, I don't know about you, but one of the things that attracted me to composition was that you could practice it in private, without anyone knowing what you are up to until you actually finish a piece and then try to get it performed. As a shy person by nature, I found the privacy and solitary nature of composition to be comforting. So how the heck do people who are naturally shy develop better social skills? The answer is more involved than I have energy to write about right now, but, briefly, suffice it to say that it is possible, but you have to work at it.

But even so, I still hate having to pick up the phone to call someone I don't know; it makes me so profoundly uncomfortable that, for the most part, I avoid it altogether.

E-mail is a bit safer, though. Every now and then I will E-mail someone about the possibility of performing my music, and, while I don't enjoy doing this at all, it pains me considerably less than making phone calls, and it actually leads to positive results at times. Sometimes it doesn't result in a performance, but the person is nice enough to respond with complementary comments about my music, and, since we composers often do not receive very much positive feedback about our music (but this is why having the courage of your convictions is important; you have to believe in what you do, and not rely on others to validate our music for us), occasional encouragement is a good thing.

What about talent? Where does that fit in the makeup of a good composer?

"Talent" is an interesting and difficult-to-pinpoint concept, and, since this is already very likely my longest blog entry ever, I will answer that question in a separate blog entry.

But briefly, I never speculate as to whether some of my students are more talented than others or not; I think every student I have ever had has sufficient talent to become a very good composer if they are willing to work at it, hence my emphasis on the value of the work ethic.

Finally, in their comments to my Inspiration, Perspiration, and Perspicacity blog, Kim and Kate both suggested that the subjectivity of the term "good" in connection to a composition makes it problematic to label a composer as lazy. After all, there are plenty of compositions that some people find good and others don't, and given this subjectivity, it is (probably) unfair and harsh to classify composers of works you do not think are good as lazy (as was done in the "provocative statement" from two blogs ago).

But, that said, it strikes me that the best student composers I have taught — and by "best," I mean those that composed works that I thought best demonstrated the values I stress when I teach (cohesiveness, development, imagination, finding the right balance between the expected and unexpected, and many, many more!), AND whose work seemed most highly regarded by classmates (something that one can deduce from the comments class members make when critiquing each other's work every week), tend, almost without exception, to be the students who are the least complacent about their compositions. Simply put, some students seem to be more easily satisfied with their music than others, but students who strive the most diligently to improve their music generally succeed in doing so.

So, while I agree that it is a rather harsh to classify anyone as lazy, I will say that complacency stands in the way of improving as an artist (point 9 above).

Also — on the point of subjectivity when it comes to evaluating art — I don't believe the evaluation process for art is completely subjective. The degree to which there is consensus on what constitutes "greatness" in works of art over many centuries would suggest that there is something objective about it too, although it is very likely culture-specific as well (another interesting topic, but for a different blog!).

I would argue that the evaluation process for art is more objective than it is subjective, at least within cultures, which explains the degree to which there is agreement on what these "great" artworks of the past have been, and why, when students perform their compositions-in-progress for one another in our classes, it is common for several people to pick up on the same thing in critiquing each other's work.

Odds and Ends

2010-04-15T07:21:00.001-02:30

Wrapping things up...

1. All blog comments and student journal entries must be made by Monday, April 19, in order to be credited for them.

2. Final scores and recordings were due yesterday, although I have told some people that they could get me their recordings today. If you have not submitted your score/recording yet, let me know asap.

3. Most of you have picked up your scores/comments from the first project, although I still have a few. I also still have a few from last term that were never picked up (!). Please drop by to pick yours up asap.

4. Tuesday evening's composition seminar went well — we had a great listening session and discussion, and Andrew Staniland and I were joined by composer Rob Teehan, in town this week for the Junos (check out his website: http://www.robteehan.com/) and Shawn Bostick, Regional Director of the CMC Atlantic Region. Some of you have expressed interest in continuing these meetings in the summer; if you think you'd like to do this, please leave a comment to that effect below, and I will follow up on this in a later blog.

Inspiration, Perspiration, and Perspicacity

2010-03-25T08:47:00.012-02:30

Joshua White, who in his most recent blog says he has written more music in this past week than he did in the previous four, asks:

Does it take inspiration to make music that I will be personally satisfied with?
If so, is there any way to seek this inspiration or come up with an inspiring idea?
Would it be better to steer clear of inspiring ideas and become better at working with ok ideas to make them good technically?

These are great questions, and bring to mind Thomas Edison's famous adage about inspiration versus perspiration:

"Genius is one per cent inspiration and ninety-nine per cent perspiration."

What exactly is inspiration? Here is part of what the current Wikipedia article has to say about it:

Inspiration refers to an unconscious burst of creativity in a literary, musical, or other artistic endeavour. Literally, the word means "breathed upon," and it has its origins in both Hellenism and Hebraism. Homer and Hesiod believed that inspiration derived from Gods such as the oracle of Delphi. Similarly, in the Ancient Norse religions, inspiration derives from the Gods. Inspiration is also a divine matter in Hebrew poetics. In the Book of Amos the prophet speaks of being overwhelmed by God's voice and compelled to speak. In Christianity, inspiration is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

It seems that inspiration is often seen as something of a mystery. How do we get great ideas? Where do they come from? How do we create the circumstances under which inspiration can arise?

My take on this is that the feeling of being inspired is a wonderful thing, but it is fruitless to wait for 'inspired moments' in order to create something good. In essence, I agree with Edison on the relationship between inspiration and perspiration in the creative process.

Here's another question:

What does it mean if something comes easily to you?
(a) You are inspired; or
(b) You are working within your comfort zone, not really trying anything you haven't done before.

I can only answer for myself, and say that lots of times for me that answer is (b).

Something I have said in class is that it helps to think of composition like a job. If you were a film music composer, and a director said, "we need x minutes of music for a chase scene, y minutes for a love scene, and z minutes for a scene where the protagonist is verging on madness... Oh, and we need all that in 24 hours!", you would probably get busy and write all that music as quickly as possible, knowing that if you failed to do so, or if the music wasn't very good, the director would find someone else to do the job.

In other words, you would work extremely hard (perspiration), and not sit around waiting/hoping for inspiration to magically appear. Deadlines often provide all the inspiration you need.

I find it helps to think of ALL composition projects that way. Some will end up being more personal than others — they will have more of you in them — but it is often easier to finish a composition if you think of it as a job that needs to be done, as opposed to, say, thinking of it as an opportunity to reveal your inner psyche through music.

And, by the way, all things you create will have at least some of your DNA in them, whether you are aiming to do this or not.

Perspicacity — defined by the Compact Oxford Dictionary as "having a ready insight into and understanding of things" — is part of the equation in this way: If you understand the potential of the musical materials with you are dealing, you are far more likely to compose something good than if such were not the case.

Understanding the potential of musical materials that you create, and knowing what to do with these ideas, are all part of the craft of musical composition. It is safe to say that no matter how inspired you are, you are not likely to compose something really good until you have a mastery of this craft. And again, the only way to gain such mastery is to work very hard at it.

I have written about ways in which this can be done in other blogs, most notably the entire nine-part series on Composition Issues that were the very first posts to this blog. I will paste the links to this series at the bottom of today's entry.

I will leave you for today with a provocative statement:

Good composers are good by virtue of the fact that they work hard; mediocre composers are not as good because they do not work as hard. If a composition is not considered to be very good, it probably indicates more about the composer's laziness than it does about talent or inspiration.

Okay, have at it! What do you think?

→ Composition Issues (9-part series) ←

1. Originality and Quality of Initial Musical Ideas
1.1. The quality of ideas may not matter very much in determining the quality of the complete composition that emerges from them; and
1.2. The degree to which these ideas are original may not matter very much.

2. How do you Develop Compositional Craft?
2.1. Study the music of others.
2.2. Compose as much as you can.
2.3. Invite (and be open to) criticism from others.

3. Understanding your Musical Idea
3.1. Live with it for a while.
3.2. What's it about?
3.3. Does it change character?
3.4. What is its function within the context of the piece?
3.5. Structural Analysis.
3.6. Harmonic (or Pitch, Scale, etc.) Analysis.

4. The Pros and Cons of Development

5. How to Extend or Develop Musical Materials; Specific Suggestions

6. Balancing the Old with the New, the Expected with the Unexpected

7. More Dichotomies to Ponder…
7.1. Less is more, vs. More is more.
7.2. Always leave them wanting more, vs. Give them what they want.
7.3. Don't treat the listener like an idiot, vs. There's a sucker born every minute.
7.4. There can be 'too much of a good thing,' vs. If you have a good idea, then stick with it!
7.5. The George Costanza approach.

8. I think my idea has run its course. Now what?
8.1. The three models for composers' roles.
8.2. Mastery or Mystery?
8.3. The value of a plan.
8.4. Getting stuck, and possible workarounds.
8.5. Don't obsess!
8.6. Challenges = Opportunities for inspired solutions!

9. Taking your inspiration from wherever you find it

Jessica's Tips for Writing for Youth Band

2010-03-23T09:46:00.005-02:30

Guest blog by Jessica Blenis, who was one of the prize-winners in the Gower Community Band composer's competition last year:

Having had the experience of writing for the Gower Community Band last year I figured it'd be helpful for all those writing this year to give a bit of insight into techniques which might make it easier for the composer, conductor and the musicians.

1. EDIT EDIT EDIT. Then edit again. Sometimes you'll swear you've put an accidental in and when your program plays it back it sounds right but there's no accidental marked in. Mine did this oodles- there were wrong notes all over the place. Of course I'm working with Finale 2005. Even pro-Finale people, I imagine, would recoil at the mention of using a program which dates back five years.

2. Amount of instruments: I'm not exaggerating when I say that there was a really strange though not surprisingly out-of-balance instrumentation found in the Gower band- for popular instruments like flute and clarinet especially, there were 8-10 people where we'd usually expect 2-3. There was a fair amount of trumpet players, I think 3 trombones maybe 4, Several sax players, but very few bass clarinets (Katie Noseworthy played it) I don't think any bassoons, one maybe two oboes, a few horns, one maybe two tuba players, and I think three or four percussionists. This being said, here are some tips:

if you want a solo flute line, definitely write it in. Otherwise you'll have 10 flautists playing it and making 10 people play the same thing at the same time isn't very wise when it's an exposed part.
exposed parts- definitely write 'solo.'
Don't go crazy with percussion- I almost had to step in and play with the band but due to time constriction, I couldn't. So I'd say three to four percussion parts would be enough unless you've got one person playing two parts which needs to be indicated on the score in order for it to be seen easily.

3. Range- keep in mind that the age range goes from I think 11-70 and not all of these people are professional or able to play wide ranges. Here's a basic outline that I was told to stick to for instruments where range is often a problem:

trumpet: Don't go too high above the clef, or stay there for prolonged periods of time.
french horn: I wouldn't write anything above written G5 (sounds C5) and nothing too noodley.
trombone/tuba: noodley writing is discouraged- these guys really a simple but groovy bassline, same as the tuba. Nothing too high above the bass clef, and tricky slurs were a bit of a no-no too.

4. Dynamics: Generally, the sound is loud- I was warned by Jill Abbot about this, but didn't find it was a huge problem. However, with a big group like this, a certain range of dynamics is expected, and some dynamics- aka pppp- are out of the question due to the sheer number of people playing. If you want something to be soft but with a full concert band range of sounds, try using 'soli,' where one person from that section plays by themself, though it's not necessarily a solo seeing as in each other section someone else is playing by themself. So cut back on numbers and indicate a dynamic, and when you want a big sound, have a tutti but definitely make sure that you write dynamics appropriate o balance out the sound- a trombone playing FF could quite possibly cover up the sound of a clarinet playing FF unless you've taken register into consideration and put the trombone in a lower register and the clarinet in a higher one.

5. Rehearsal numbers- make sure they're very clear and put them in places which make sense- in other words, at the beginnings of phrases so if the conductor decides to start at H, the poor clarinetist isn't in the middle of a wicked run.

6. Idiomatic stuff is best. Leave runs and whatnot to instruments where dexterity is more expected and long notes to insturments which would normally be given such things.

7. Consider the level of your piece- high schoolish. In other words, certainly don't write stuff you'd be intimidated to play. Something that looks nice on the page can sound absolutely wonderful and intricate without being lip-busting. It looks great when you glance at a score which is black with notes but you have to be realistic and merciful! Some of the people in the band are very capable of playing tricky stuff while others are still on their way to getting there.

8. Appeal. I don't kno how many people in the Gower band came up to me and said that at first they really disliked the piece- which is my fault, seeing as I wrote something with a great amount of dissonance which isn't what they were used to playing. I'm not saying screw dissonance and atonality and write something tonal and predictable, but people will enjoy playing something they like much more than playing something which looks good on the page, and the audience will also like the piece more if it has appeal. The Gower people were very stuck on finding the melody- so make it findable. I didn't- my melodies were hidden and that was something I wish I'd changed before I submitted it. If you want your piece to stick with them, I'd say give them something that attracts people- but with your own personal seal on it. Not the animal, though. Seals bite. What I mean is make the work yours, but when you're writing for an ensemble it is wise to take into consideration what they habitually play, what they're capable of playing, and what they'd probably like to play/hear.

Hope this helps! If you're writing for the band and have any other questions please feel free to ask!

Clark here — I just wanted to thank Jess for taking the time to share these tips with others. They are very helpful! I also wanted to add a few comments of my own:

#1. "Edit edit edit..." Absolutely! In fact, I would suggest that when an ensemble plays music that has mistakes in it, it can be PAINFULLY embarrassing for the composer! I think any composer who has had this experience can attest to that. It also can make the ensemble and conductor lose faith in the composer and the composition; this is not only embarrassing, it's a lousy way to start a working relationship. Here are links to my "Musical Detail" blogs, in case you missed them:

On Musical Detail (1)
On Musical Detail (2)
On Musical Detail (3)
What is a "Fair Copy?"

#2. The number of players of the different instruments is definitely imbalanced, but that is pretty typical of community bands (and probably school bands as well), hence the need to double lines of hard-to-find instruments (e.g., oboes, bassoons) in other instruments.

#3. Range limitations — definitely bear this in mind; orchestration texts often have a list of instrument ranges for professional performers AND for amateurs; keep the latter close-at-hand when composing.

#4. Dynamics; good points all.

#5. A good idea for rehearsal letters is to place them at structural division points. As Jess says, never put them in the middle of a phrase.

#6. Idiomatic writing is obviously welcomed by performers (this is true for professionals as well, but especially true for amateurs), but since most students do not have a well-honed sense of what constitutes idiomatic writing for every instrument, go with your instincts on this and check periodically with performers of those instruments to see if your instincts are right.

#7. Again, unless you have a fair amount of experience, it is hard to know what exactly constitutes a "high-schoolish" level of writing for wind band, so go with your instincts and check with people who have more experience periodically (your teacher, the band director, other people with experience conducting bands, etc.).

#8. "Appeal." This is tricky... We all tend to want people to like our music, but I have been harping away at my students to venture beyond traditional tonality ever since I began teaching composition; how to reconcile the two?

I guess the most important thing to keep in mind is that it IS possible to have both; to write music that appeals AND doesn't resort to tired old clichés of tonal music. For the purposes of this course, you already know that you MUST venture beyond tonality, and I have explained my pedagogical rationale for this on numerous occasions, including several blogs (Why Atonal Music?, Atonal — Even the Word Sounds Unpleasant!, Atonality = Noise?).

If someone comes up to you and says, "at first, I didn't like your music!" this probably means they DO like it now, so that's a good thing! They don't have to love it at first sight/performance. In fact, new pieces often sound like crap the first few times they are rehearsed, especially if the performers aren't professionals, and if the composer isn't professional. It's a learning curve for everyone. The more experience the composer has, the more we know how to write idiomatically, to score effectively for large ensembles, to take the performance level of the ensemble into account, to include TONS of detail in the score so the the rehearsals don't have to stop every fifteen seconds to fix a problem or ask a question.

I am suggesting that a person saying "at first I didn't like the piece" may be an indicator of their response to a lot of things, including the chaotic way it sounded the first few times it was rehearsed. So, stick to your guns and write the best music you can, making sure your final score is as clear as it possibly can be, and don't feel pressured to write overly-simplistic music to make it appealing!

Blog Index — Organized by Topic (® 2010-Mar)

2010-03-20T19:16:00.026-02:30

→ Kandinsky's Theories on Art ←
Kandinsky's Theories (1)
Kandinsky's Theories (2)
Kandinsky's Theories (3)

→ Argh! I'm Stuck! ←
Stuck?
Strategies for Becoming Unstuck
Creative Angst... Welcome to the Club!

→ Atonality – What's in a Name? ←
Why Atonal Music?
Atonal — Even the Word Sounds Unpleasant!
Atonality = Noise?

→ On Composition (Miscellaneous Topics) ←
Express Yourself? Really???
Writing a Play; an Analogy to Composition
Keep? Discard?
Notation Software Woes
Musicworks Magazine

→ Musical Influences ←
Musical Influences (1)
Musical Influences (2)

2.2. Compose as much as you can.

2.3. Invite criticism from others.

3. Understanding your Musical Idea

3.1. Live with it for a while.

3.2. What's it about?

3.3. Does it change character?

3.4. What is its function within the context of the piece?

3.5. Structural Analysis.

3.6. Harmonic (or Pitch, Scale, etc.) Analysis.

4. The Pros and Cons of Development

5. How to Extend or Develop Musical Materials; Specific Suggestions

6. Balancing the Old with the New, the Expected with the Unexpected

7. More Dichotomies to Ponder…

7.1. Less is more, vs. More is more.

7.2. Always leave them wanting more, vs. Give them what they want.

7.3. Don't treat the listener like an idiot, vs. There's a sucker born every minute.

7.4. There can be 'too much of a good thing,' vs. If you have a good idea, then stick with it!

7.5. The George Costanza approach.

8. I think my idea has run its course. Now what?

8.1. The three models for composers' roles.

8.2. Mastery or Mystery?

8.3. The value of a plan.

8.4. Getting stuck, and possible workarounds.

8.5. Don't obsess!

8.6. Challenges = Opportunities for inspired solutions!

9. Taking your inspiration from wherever you find it

→ My Music ←
Domenico 1° (Scarlet Daybreak) & Domenico 2° (Scarlet Nightfall)
Funky Flute Groove Experience

Marketing Modern Music (2)

2010-03-05T18:51:00.080-03:30

The second article I linked to last week was "Looking for Listeners Who Love New Music" (New York Times, February 28, 1999), by Greg Sandow, who composes, has taught "Music Criticism," and "Classical Music in an Age of Pop" at the Juilliard School. and has written on classical music for The Wall Street Journal and other publications.

The subheading of Mr. Sandow's article is, "There really is an alternative new music audience, one that's hardly connected to classical music at all."

Sandow suggests that part of the challenge in getting mainstream classical music fans to embrace new classical music is that the product (new classical music) is being marketed to an audience whose stylistic preferences lie elsewhere (18th- and 19th-century music). The problem isn't with the product; the problem is in the way it is marketed.

As an analogy, consider what would happen if someone decided to market "adult contemporary" pop ballad singers (e.g., Céline Dion, Lionel Richie) to fans of death metal, gangsta rap, or screamo, or vice-versa, using the logic that fans of one sub-genre of pop music (e.g., death metal) are bound to like all other pop sub-genres (e.g., adult contemporary). It would seem a strategy unlikely to succeed; just because you like one sub-genre of pop music doesn't mean you necessarily also like all the others. The marketing principle, in a nutshell, is that it makes more sense to target your product to people who would be interested in it than to those who would not.

Sandow: Let's say you're in business, and you've got a product that your customers love (in the Philharmonic's case, Beethoven and the other classical masters). Now you've produced something much less comforting, and more esoteric. Would you try to sell it to the same people?

Or think of the pop-music world, where it's taken for granted that audiences come in many flavors. There's a mainstream audience, which loves Top 40 ballads, and there's an alternative audience, which prefers darker, edgier, more difficult music, by artists like PJ Harvey and R.E.M. Is there a lesson here for classical music? Is there an alternative classical audience that can be reached in some new way?

The answer, according to Sandow, is a resounding yes. As an example of such an audience, Sandow cites "Bang on a Can," which draws 1,000 people to its annual new-music marathons, and these, said its director of development, Christine Williams, are in their 20's and 30's, attracted in part by aggressive marketing aimed at lovers of downtown dance, jazz, visual art and performance art.

Another example mentioned is Milwaukee's "Present Music:" "You can look down from the stage, and see the earrings and nose rings and different- colored hair," said its director, Kevin Stalheim. "If I were going for mailing lists, I'd go to the art museum and modern dance companies, not the Milwaukee Symphony."

If you want proof that is closer to home of an alternative new-music audience, you need go no further than the biennial Newfoundland Sound Symposium, known around the world as a kind of sonic Mecca for new-music enthusiasts. There is some overlap between its audiences and, say, Newfoundland Symphony Orchestra subscribers, but my hunch, having attended both numerous times, is that the overlap is probably not very large; both have their own devoted followers, and just because you like one doesn't mean you will like the other.

So, does this mean it is impossible to get people who love Beethoven and Brahms to open their hearts to new classical music?

I don't believe so, nor is the article's author suggesting as much. Some mainstream concert presenters seem to have succeeded in doing so, such as the Los Angeles Philharmonic, the Lyric Opera of Chicago, and the San Francisco Symphony, according to Sandow. A lot of new classical music is very much rooted in old classical music, and it isn't unreasonable to think that there can be audiences that enjoy both.

On the other hand, there is also a lot of new classical music that seems to fall outside the comfort zone of many Beethoven/Brahms/et al. lovers, and perhaps it is unreasonable to expect otherwise.

The "elephant in the room" that hasn't been mentioned in this discussion is that a great many orchestras find themselves in crisis: Most are losing money, and are not attracting enough new, younger, patrons to counteract their steadily aging and shrinking audiences. As a result, some have gone bankrupt — in this country, this has happened to the orchestras in Halifax, Hamilton, and Vancouver, although all were subsequently resuscitated — and others teeter on the edge of bankruptcy. The CBC cited financial reasons for shutting down its radio orchestra, although some see it as part of their overall shift away from supporting classical music (which, in the case of CBC Radio 2 has resulted in a drastic reduction of their audience share, as I understand it). Fortunately, the National Broadcast Orchestra of Canada has arisen in its staid without any financial support from the CBC, and as I understand it, part of the NBOC's mandate is to programme contemporary works by Canadian composers. I hope they will thrive as an orchestra.

In an effort to grow their audiences, many orchestras offer "pops" programmes, film music programmes, and programming hybrids wherein rock bands and rap artists perform with a symphony. I would guess that some of these initiatives are financially successful, but I don't know the degree to which they create a new or larger audience for either more mainstream or contemporary classical music. Hopefully they do.

The solution seems quite simple to me: Programme more of my music! Audiences of all ages, hair colours, and body-piercing preferences love the stuff.

No? Well, that statement was made half in jest, but only half, because I would like to think that the solution lies at least in part in reaching out to audiences that are attracted to newer, often more experimental art by offering programmes targeting these audiences. But I recognize that it's a kind of logical paradox (A.K.A. Catch 22) wherein many who are attracted to the work of living artists think of symphony orchestras as musical art museums exhibiting the work of dead artists, and so programmes aimed at fans of contemporary art might not actually attract them, and may in fact alienate some of the orchestra patrons who prefer their art to be by composers who are mostly European and entirely dead.

One thing I have discovered is that you don't have to be a fan of classical music to enjoy contemporary classical music. A few years ago, I started posting my music at MacJams.com, an on-line community of thousands of music-makers of all kinds, probably mostly falling within the various sub-genres of pop/rock, but also including other genres such as jazz and classical. I have read many favorable comments about contemporary classical pieces by people who admit that they don't know or even like much about classical music, which I thought was pretty cool and reinforced my hunch that more people would like this music if they were exposed to it. If you are curious to read some of these comments, have a look at my Dream Dance page, or just go to the site's "classical" category and see what you get.

And so, in agreement with the Sandow article, it has also been my experience that there is an alternative new-music audience, but the challenge for contemporary composers is to find a way to reach them.

On the "hatred" of modern classical music due to the brain's inability to cope...

2010-03-02T10:25:00.036-03:30

Last week I posted a link to an article in The Telegraph (UK) entitled, "audiences hate modern classical music because their brains cannot cope."
The subheading of the article states: "Modern classical music is so widely disliked by audiences because the human brain struggles to find patterns it needs to understand the compositions as music."
Note that somewhere between the headline and the sub-heading, modern classical music has gone from being "hated" to "widely disliked." At least things are looking up!
My thoughts on the article:

What is meant by "modern classical music?" Schoenberg (who died in 1951) is cited seven times, and Webern (who died in 1945) once; no other twentieth-century or present-day composers are mentioned. This suggests no awareness whatsoever of the "modern" classical music scene. If this article had been written in 1930, it would make sense to cite Schoenberg and Webern as representatives of (only) one stream of modern classical music, but even then it would have been a very narrow cross-section of the composers active at that time, which also included Vaugh Williams, Rachmaninoff, Ives, Holst, Ravel, De Falla, Bartok, Prokofiev, Gershwin, Copland, Khachaturian, and Shostakovich. Equating "modern classical music" with "the music of Schoenberg and Webern" in 2010 is beyond perplexing; it is bizarre.
Where is the evidence for audience "hatred" or "wide dislike" of modern classical music? None is given.
Don't get me wrong; I am not living in some alternate universe in which people never express antipathy towards contemporary classical music. Quite the opposite, in fact! I am suggesting that the article in question takes this view as a given, without any attempt to substantiate it. I have certainly heard people say they don't like contemporary classical music, but I have also heard the same said about medieval music, classical music in general, rap, jazz, rock & roll... In fact, I think I have at some point heard just about every musical genre maligned, but none of this constitutes evidence for widespread hatred of these genres.
On the other hand, each musical genre has its own and often substantial following, and contemporary classical music is no different. Consider this:
- Compact disc recordings of Henryk Górecki's Symphony No. 3 ("Symphony of Sorrowful Songs") have, according to Wikipedia, sold more than a million copies.
- According to an article in the New York Times (to which I posted a link in another blog last week), Nonesuch Records cultivates its own version of [an] alternative audience, and has done wonderfully, sometimes selling more than 100,000 copies of CD's by Steve Reich, Philip Glass, Astor Piazzola and the Kronos Quartet, and only slightly less of John Adams.
- I have witnessed packed houses whooping and hollering their enthusiasm for new classical music numerous times at the Winnipeg New Music Festival.

Bang on a Can

The wonderful guitarist, Mark Stewart, who is a member of the Bang on a Can All-Stars, but who also plays in Paul Simon’s band and on the film scores of Elliot Goldenthal, says “I play three kinds of music: popular, semi-popular, and unpopular.” Mark calls my music and the music of Bang on a Can “semi-popular.”

New York Times, 5 March 2007

We often speak of audiences as if they were single, monolithic entities, but they are groups of individuals that typically share some traits, but are distinct from one another in other ways. It is problematic to generalize about what audiences like or dislike; if it were simple, every television show, movie, and pop song would be a hit.
I was a church music director for several years, and I remember once being told that "the congregation finds the music too fast" (or perhaps it was "too loud;" I don't actually remember). How did we learn what the congregation thought, I wondered; was there an exit poll? Of course not! In the subsequent conversation I learned that one individual had complained about the music to one of the priests, and the priest, perhaps sharing the same concerns, had reported it to me.
I don't mean to pick on this priest; I suspect we all have overstated a case on occasion. I have had similar conversations with radio producers, concert producers, etc., who have suggested they know what audiences like and dislike, but upon further discussion it often turns out that they are stating personal preferences, often reinforced by a few others telling them they feel the same way.
Conducting a poll is theoretically a more objective method of finding out what people really think, but interpreting the data gathered through a poll can be a tricky business, potentially flawed by the biasses of the polling organization or individual conducting/interpreting the poll.
In any event, when a person states that audiences "hate modern classical music," they are not usually conveying the results of a poll; they are often expressing their own personal feelings about modern classical music, possibly based on part on what a few others have told them. This does not constitute evidence in support of their statement.
The implication that modern classical music is complex, and the music of Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven isn't, shows a lack of understanding of both older and newer classical music. There are works of deep complexity by the great composers of centuries past (e.g., late Beethoven quartets, Thomas Tallis' 40-part motet, "Spem in alium," Bach's "Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue" and "The Musical Offering," Chopin's "Prelude in A Minor"(the tonic is not clear until the last chord of the piece), etc.), and there are works of great simplicity by contemporary composers (e.g., Terry Riley's "In C," The New Simplicity movement, much of the music of Arvo Pärt, etc. ).
"Mr. Ball believes that many traditional composers such as Mozart, Bach and Beethoven subconsciously followed strict musical formula to produce music that was easy on the ear by ensuring it contained patterns that could be picked out by the brain." I am curious to know to which "strict musical formula" (sic) Mr. Ball is referring. This tantalizing statement is not explained, although perhaps it is in Mr. Ball's book.

But enough criticism on my part! Here are some quotes from the article that make good sense to me:

Phillip Ball: "The brain is a pattern seeking organ, so it looks for patterns in music to make sense of what we hear."
David Huron (Ohio State University): "Much of what the brain does is to anticipate the future. Predicting what happens next has obvious survival value, and brains are remarkably adept at anticipating events."
Timothy Jones (Royal Academy of Music): "Mozart and Bach have similar levels of complexity as Schoenberg, but those complexities are in different musical domains. Their music is very information dense. I would question how much of the familiarity with the music of Mozart and Bach has to do with culturalisation rather than an innate cognitive inability to understand the music of composers like Schoenberg. Certain people can learn to appreciate it."

"Culturalization," a term from anthropology meaning "to be exposed or subjected to the influence of culture," is, I believe, a highly-relevant point. Bach and Beethoven are an acquired taste for many; not everyone loves their music the first time they hear it. Similarly, music of unfamiliar cultures or genres can be confusing or perplexing at first, but, through a process of culturalization, we can grow to appreciate and understand it better. Might not the same be said about Schoenberg's music?
The degree to which this article focusses on Schoenberg's music is both strange and troubling. Strange, because, as mentioned above, his music is not exactly "modern," in the sense of "being of our time," any more, and troubling, because Schoenberg's music was denounced (and, I believe, banned) by the Nazis for being "degenerate" (as was jazz), and this article seems to be suggesting that it is okay, or at least understandable, to hate Schoenberg's music because its purported complexity makes it impossible for most human brains to comprehend.
I don't buy it. But you probably figured that out by now!

Marketing Contemporary Music (1)

2010-02-22T23:06:00.005-03:30

More food for thought: Marketing Contemporary Music (article by Greg Sandow in the New York TImes; click link to view entire article).

The article's final paragraph seems to summarize the author's thesis:

Should we be trying to educate the classical music audience...? Why talk as if there's something wrong with it [contemporary classical music], as if it has a disease that needs curing? Instead, let's arouse it, excite it and draw new people to new kinds of artistic musical events. That way, even large institutions might renew themselves and heal the split between contemporary classical music and the rest of the arts.

What do you think?

_____________________

If you like Mr. Sandow's writing, please check out some of the many links to his other articles on his home page.

"Audiences Hate Modern Classical Music Because Their Brains Cannot Cope"

2010-02-22T22:25:00.005-03:30

According to an article in The Telegraph (UK), "audiences hate modern classical music because their brains cannot cope."

It's a provocative headline and an interesting point of view. Have a look at the article, and, if you feel so moved, please share your thoughts about it in the "comments" area below. I will post a blog with my views next week.

Do you agree or disagree with points of view expressed in the article?
Do audiences "hate" modern classical music?
Who exactly are these "audiences" to which the article refers?
Is it generally true that modern classical music is complex (and is therefore hard or even impossible to process for the brain)?
If it is true that the brain cannot process highly-complex music, does that mean that we should aim to keep things simple when composing?

Re-Post: "Funky Flute Groove Experience"

2010-02-16T06:27:00.010-03:30

[N.B. This blog entry is about 1.5 years old, from THURSDAY, AUGUST 07, 2008. The reason for re-posting it here is that I recently learned that the site that hosted an older, inactive composition blog of mine was going to be shut down, and this was the only entry from that blog that had not already been transferred over to this one.]

This morning [AUGUST 07, 2008] I finished editing the guitar track to my most recent composition, Funky Flute Groove Experience.

The above link will take you to the programme note and recording of this piece, but a brief background is that I wrote it for Christine Gangelhoff (flutist) and electronics, to be performed at the most recent Newfoundland Sound Symposium (July, 2008). Christine and I had asked a local DJ/turntablist (DJ Russtafari) to be involved in this too, but we learned a few weeks before the performance that he had moved to Korea, and, incredibly, was not planning to commute back to St. John's for the performance! What was up with that?

Another part of the original plan was to have me play guitar on the piece, but, as the performance date got nearer, I started getting cold feet because (a) I don't perform much, (b) My confidence in my abilities as a guitarist is (deservedly) low, and (c) I was spending all my time composing the piece and had no time to learn a guitar part.

Christine, who had been expecting to perform FFGE as part of a trio (with DJ Russ and myself) called "Urban Sound Collective," was now facing the prospect of playing solely with the electronic accompaniment, and was a tad disappointed. Kind of hard to call yourself a collective when there's only one performer, I guess...

I therefore decided, in a moment of compassion/rashness, to follow through with my original plan and create a guitar part for the piece (which was otherwise about 95% finished), and to (eek!) perform it too. I second-guessed that decision a few times (which I guess means I third-, fourth-, and fifth-guessed it), but the good news is that it worked out okay; I am reasonably happy with the part I came up, and I wasn't nervous at all while playing it (probably because it was largely improvised, and the rest was memorized). And, as it turned out, we were able to find another DJ/turntablist in Deb Sinha, who was here for a performance during the Newfoundland Sound Symposium, who very graciously agreed to step in at the last minute and did a fine job. And so Urban Sound Collective was a trio after all, and all went well! Or, if "well" is overstating matters, then at least nobody was injured during the performance, and it has been my experience that one cannot ask for much more than that in life.

I guess the fact that I took a risk and didn't have it blow up in my face emboldened me to try recording the guitar part myself. I had never edited digital audio before (hard to believe, I know, in this day and age!) and so was apprehensive about the process; the fact that I was using a 10-year-old Mac G4 that crashes about twice a day did not inspire confidence. It took a couple of hours to get everything set up — I was temporarily stymied because I don't have a microphone preamp (necessary to boost the signal strength from 'mic level' to 'line level'). The microphone (used to pick up the guitar amplifier) had been connected directly to the digital audio processor (MOTU 2408MkII) but I couldn't figure out how to boost the signal (as I said, I was a complete novice at this!), so I routed it through my mixer and applied gain to the signal there. It took a ridiculous amount of time (the more time it took, the less inspired I felt), but once things were set up properly the process of recording was very straightforward.

I ended up spending hours recording and editing the guitar track — you can move individual notes a few milliseconds (or a lot of milliseconds) forwards or backwards until they are exactly where you want them, but it's a painstaking (and simultaneously amazing) process. I took several runs at the guitar solo (in the last two choruses of the minor blues that occurs around the middle) and the rhythm, quite frankly, is still a bit loose, but I eventually left it as is because it didn't feel too out of character for the piece.

If you want to have a listen, click on this picture:

Postscript: I submitted this to MacJams.com, where it has received comments from members of that on-line community. Click here if you would like to read them.

Piano Project Deadline

2010-02-10T15:21:00.000-03:30

For those who missed yesterday's class, the deadline for submitting your three pieces for solo piano (bound copy) is this coming Tuesday (February 16) at the start of class.

Wind Band Readings: April 7

2010-02-10T15:02:00.001-03:30

Dr. Denise Grant has most generously offered us a reading session for your wind band compositions! This will take place from 4:00 to 5:15 PM, April 7.

She feels that there will be sufficient time to read five different works (fifteen minutes per work). This would consist of a reading with a few pauses as needed to fix problems, and a second reading straight through that would be recorded.

If more than five of you plan to write for band, we will need to figure out what to do about that!

Reflections on the Newfound Music Festival

2010-02-04T09:52:00.006-03:30

Warning: Gushing Ahead!*

The seventh Newfound Music Festival is over, and my sense from having attended 8 of the daytime events on Thursday and 5 concerts is that it all went wonderfully well. I loved the mix of experiences that was offered — talks about technology, the round-table discussion on the importance of nurturing creativity in the classroom and how to go about doing so, the captivating and moving performances and engaging presentation of Dawn Avery (so mesmerizing that I lost track of time and, for the first time ever, was late picking up my kids after school...), hearing our SOCAN Foundation guest composer Derek Charke speak about sound ecology, his experiences of living in the far north, and the remarkable sounds he recorded there, as well as hearing Derek talk about and perform his own music so beautifully, the wide variety of ethnomusicology presentations, the other presentations on fascinating topics, as well as all the great music given great performances on both the student and evening concerts.

In my dream universe, there would be something akin to Newfound Music Day (the Thursday) once every month, or even every week! It'll never happen, but it sure would be sweet if if it did.

Part of the reason I like the diversity of experiences is simply that I like variety — although (or perhaps because) my area of specialization is composition, I am fascinated by the myriad of ways in which different people interact with music — but another reason is that it allows me to learn more about some of the work in which our students and faculty are engaged, which is always fascinating.

A final special mention goes to the students who performed or presented in the festival; I am an educator because I believe strongly in the value of education in helping individuals fulfill at least some of their potential, and so I was profoundly moved by the enthusiasm, technique, and conviction in the many performances and presentations I witnessed.

I asked students in my composition class for their thoughts/reflections on this year's festival, and here is what they had to say:
_____________
* Apologies to Derek Charke for appropriating my heading from the title of his composition, "Warning: Gustnadoes Ahead!"
_____________
Student Reflections:

I always enjoy Newfound Music day and the concerts that accompany it. This year was particularly enjoyable! The two presentations that I chose to write about were "Inner Space/Outer Space", a presentation about the Sound Symposium, and Derek Charke's presentation on "Sound Ecology".

I am vaguely familiar with the Sound Symposium, and it was great to get an inside scoop of 2008's festival. I've attended several and even performed in some "Night Music" events at the Ship, which are sponsored by the Sound Symposium, so I knew that sound spontaneity, improv, and new approaches to music and art are the basic approaches involved. 2008 had a theme related to geographic locations, how they can affect sound, and the way we perceive it. Concepts such as a "sight-specific" piece (where the composition was intended to be executed at a certain place and certain time), and an individual's "sound biography" (referring to all the sounds one has heard in their lifetime, and the emotions and memories we then associate with such sounds) were new concepts to me. Watching several performers set up experiments of music in strange locations, or having pieces entirely dependant on the participation of the audience were interesting as well.

The idea of Sound Ecology was very intriguing to me as well. I've done a fair bit of processing and messing around with recorded guitars/percussion that I do at home, and in electronic music class last year, some other random noises I created... but capturing the wide array of sounds that occur in nature and using them as a basis for a composition was something I had never thought of. Taking the crunch of someone walking through hard snow and looping it to create a driving rhythm sounded amazing, and layering this all to a tape and then playing flute over it was something Derek did in some of the concerts.. GREAT STUFF!

POSTED BY: STEVE COWAN

The concert on Thursday evening was a great concert to go to, there was a variety of different instruments and there was a variety of musical styles played. The piece that struck me the most was Derek Charke's piece that he played himself. He played solo flute along with technology and a pre recorded track. This was not entirely a track though because he had something set up, so that when he played a certain pith it would trigger a pre determined set of notes to play at the same time. The technology has to do with a machine hearing a certain frequency from the instrument and then that frequency triggers something else to play the notes of the chord. There were also two other performers who played with a pre recorded track and I am starting to find out that when a good pre recorded track is created it can definitely not only support the solo player but it adds a whole new level to the composition. Some people think that it is not a big deal to play along with a track it's not the same musical experience playing with another person. I would agree with this statement but the art of the pre recorded track is in the countless of hours creating it and trying to create and accompaniment for the soloist.

Overall I have learned a lot from the concert on Thursday and Saturday the more ideas I am able to listen to, obviously my pallet of options for composing grows.

POSTED BY: A. RIDEOUT

The Newfound music festival has come and past for another year and for me, it has definitely been the best yet. I don't know if it is because I am older, or if it is because I am learning to appreciate these festivals more and more but for me this year was definitely the best year so far. Thursday morning was definitely a big eye opener for myself. I got to see first hand, techniques of modern composers and how they take their ideas and manipulate them. For example the first session with Dr. Staniland showed a very modern way for creating music, using a looper. I have never done any work with a looper or max/msp but after this session it is easy to see where music is heading and the possibilities it has for creating music in this evolving world of technology. The topic of technology was almost a theme for the morning because guest composer Derek Charke also displayed some of his work on Thursday morning and it was easy to see that most of his work also involved technology. A lot of the work he showed us at this session had a pre recorded track to go along with a solo preform er or group. For example in his piece "gustandos" for solo flute, there is obviously a solo flute part but it is preformed with a pre made track specifically for that piece. This was definitely a huge eye opener because I was able to see where modern composers are in regards to what kind of elements composers now use to write. Another aw some aspect of this workshop was when he played "cirque de nord 3" for string quartet and "trio, for percussion" both play around with very interesting sounds from each respected family. In "cirque de nord 3" he shows us how he was able to arrange and capture traditional throat singing in a string quartet. The new bowing systems he created and the sounds that were produced were aw some and very intriguing. The "trio" was also very intriguing due to his choice of instruments. The Instruments he chose and the sounds he wanted worked very well and created a very cool effect. My favourite instrument that is required of a preform er for this piece is to put a bass drum head in front of a resonating instrument; like a harp, guitar or piano and then proceed to hit the head.

Overall this festival was very influential on me and I have learned some big and great tips for composing, but I also have picked up some small tips along the way which will definitely make me a better composer.

POSTED BY: A. RIDEOUT

I thought this years Newfound music festival was great. Not only did I get several opportunities to perform new works, I was able to listen to a lot of contemporary music.

- The Friday night concert was great. This first half of the program was music from two of our composers at MUN, Clark Ross and Andrew Staniland. I really enjoyed both of these pieces. What stood out to me the most was the texture that Andrew was able to create through the use of sparse chords and "word painting" on the piano. The text was very clear and the piano was used a tool to emphasis what the character was feeling. Great!

- Saturday Night student composition concert was also a great success. Great crowd and everyone's music seemed to come across well in the concert hall. I was especially happy with the way that Tim interpreted my pieces. I thought he treated the colors very well.

- Late night Saturday concert featured music from the Americas. Great selection of pieces which contrasted very well with the rest of the festival.

POSTED BY: ADAM BATSTONE

So our first concert of the semester went over very well!!

It was really nice to hear everybody's two piano pieces in the PC Hall. I think that the show was a success because it didn't run to long, there were no awkward pauses in between performances, and the show was about 45 minutes long, which is perfect for a pre-show to an 8 o'clock concert! I think we had a good sized audience as well! I was half worried that we'd have trouble getting people to come, but with a facebook group, a poster (by yours truely), and word of mouth we were glad to see so many people! It's always better to have a bigger crowd than I small one.

I had a short meeting with Derek Charke on Friday, and that was very helpful! Just to get another professional opinion is always a great thing, and he offered many tips and suggestions that I think will really help shape my pieces better.

POSTED BY: AIDEN HARTERY

This years' Newfound Music Festival was very enjoyable, especially the final concert on Saturday night. I really loved Dawn Avery's performance, and after going to her workshop on Thursday it really helped me to better understand and appreciate what she does. Her talk on Thursday was very interesting, and I loved hearing how Native American music has influenced modern pieces. I found it really cool that she's using music of the past, present, and representations of the future in her music and presentations.

The Saturday night concert was awesome, and I was very impressed with all of the pieces. The 2nd set of percussion ones was my favourite, I think. I also liked the use of hand-clapping in the first piece. Dawn Avery's performance was also very enjoyable, and I loved her use of The Star-Spangled Banner. When she sang and played at the same time, that really impressed me because I find it really difficult to do and wish I could do it myself! I loved her use of pizzicato and singing at the same time, it made a really cool effect.

I thought that our own little recital was a big success! It was great to hear everyone's peices performed, and especially at such short notice. A big thank you to Justin for learning and performing mine!! I'm looking forward to the next one!

POSTED BY: KATE BEVAN-BAKER

I had the pleasure of seeing 4 out of the 5 concerts that went on during the course of the Newfound Music Festival. All of them were very interesting. I was fortunate enough to get to play Jess Blenis's piece in one of the student recital which I thought went extremely well and sounded great. My favorite concert of the weekend was Saturday nights concert which was the last of the concerts for the weekend. The concert focused on music from the America's including Latin America and was very interesting exciting and defiantly got me taping my foot. The first songs in the program were my favorite and the second last piece was fantastic as well. Another very awesome concert was Thursday night's concert which I was able to be apart of by playing "the computer" in Derek Charks piece for Flute and Computer. The piece was really interesting and the program on the computer that he uses was really cool in how it manipulated sounds and such. Also his other piece Warning! Gustanados Ahead was amazing I love all the extended techniques for the flute. Over all the concerts were great I really enjoyed them. I unfortunately did not make any of the lectures as I was working the student recitals. Maybe next year!

POSTED BY: MARY BETH WALDRAM

First of all, I think the composition prelude concert went really well! It was really great to hear how the pieces we've written have grown and matured even over just a few weeks. I think the entire program, all put together, sounded really nice. And ending it off with a snappy ragtime was definitely the way to go.

I adored every piece on the Saturday night program. I really like that style of music, and hearing an entire program of it was really gratifying.

The first three pieces were really nifty, and set a great theme for the rest of the evening. I've never really listened to any great amount of this music, but we all know vaguely what it sound like, and it's the type of music you can listen to both intuitively and mindlessly- putting it on a completely elevated level of listening. The percussion pieces were remarkable simply because they looked as though they were difficult (heck, it's like playing a huge piano with sticks- and with two sticks in one hand!!) they sounded completely relaxed and groovy. The changing rhythms were great fun too, and every time one happened I found myself enjoyinh it all the more.

Carousel was really nifty- at times I could see where it got its name as it seemed to kind of wind down, but then it would go forward again and continue on. There is a great amount of flow in all of these pieces, I find- not like most music which has a beginning, a middle section and an end seperated by definite sections. It almost seems more organic to play music in this South American style, more fluid. I did like the return to this kind of style with the Ortega piece, which began with the chant, moved on to a somewhat improvisatory section before it returned to the chant. That was pretty darn nifty and toe-tappin'.

I think my favourite part of the entire evening was when Dawn Avery played -and sang!- her pieces from the North American Indian Cello Project. The last thing I had expected was for her to sing whil she played cello and her voice was so captivating and the words very profound. I wish I had a copy of the poem she based the second movement- about the medicine man- on, and, of course, a recording of it as well. Involving the audience was pretty nifty too!

The Kalimba and Brazilian set were enjoyable as well, especially when Jeff Dyer and Paul Bendza played/sang together. That was a really neat effect, to sing along with the clarinet, which made me realize just how much like a human voice the clarinet can sound. OH- and I decided that I really like the soprano saxomophone. Such a pretty tone!

Anyway, it was yet another night of great music, and another great Newfound Music Festival.

POSTED BY: JESSICA BLENIS

I really enjoyed the Newfound Music Festival this year, though I didn't get to attend nearly as much as I wanted to. I had planned on attending more of the sessions, but between being sick, working for one of the student recitals, going to the 1:00 one and having chamber music rehearsal, I did not get to see a lot. You can only hear so much from backstage, so I did not get to hear some of the really groovin' music played in the 11:00 concert, and immediately after my piece was played in the 1:00 concert I had to leave the auditorium to say goodbye to my friend who moved to BC on Friday, who had stopped in at the last minute to hear my piece.

I did get to two of the concerts, and I'm really glad that I did. I did not get to the one on Thursday night because the weather was really bad and I was sick (the combination of the two would've been REALLY pretty...Not.) but I got to go to the one on Friday and Saturday night.

So this blog will be about the one on Friday night!

I was very impressed with the variety of different pieces which were played. Of course, it was really great to hear music by two of our own- Clark Ross and Andrew Staniland- and by the guest composer, Derek Charke. There were a lot of surprising things in this concert, and my ear felt very satisfied with what it had heard. You know that feeling? It's marvellous when your ear has that nice sigh, as though it's just had a full, three-course meal and has unlatched its belt a notch. Now it's time for some hardcore napping and digestion!

Well, save the nap for later, maybe.

I really think "Shooting the Moon" is a good title for Clark's piece. There were several ponts during the piece when I heard a rhythm which caught my attention, and the octave-notes in the left hand really reminded me of the disco piece that Megan Warren had composed last year. I could easily hear both the disco and the jazz influence, and it's very satisfying even when all you get is a tiny snippet of music from a style you're listening for.

This was the first time I'd heard something by Andrew Staniland all the way through (we listened to the first movement of one of his pieces in orchestration and arranging) and want to hear more, so I can see where this fits into context and know what his style is like. That's how I like listening to music- I like to listen to several pieces by the same composer and get a better feel for not only the individual pieces as I listen to them in context, but by the overall style with which they've been written. There was a moment in the beginning of the second movement which was absolutely beautiful, and I found the majority of his music to be intelligent, edgy and captivating. I also think he represented the text really well with the music.

I also found the title of Derek Charke's pice very fitting. I've always liked the sound of hearing a performer play something with music playing in the background, and the melee of sounds and textures in his piece were both very mesmerizing. I kind of found myself wondering how one would notate that- do you write in the score what to listen for in the recording? Of course, as the composer, he would obviously know what to listen for, but all the same, for someone reading through the part the first time, how would they know when to play? One more note- he is a great flautist! Kudos for being able to both write and play beautiful music!

The piece by Onishi was really a treat to listen to, though as a string player who values both their bow and violin strings, by the end my mind was screaming "Oh noo!! Please don't break your strings!" and "You're definitely going to need your bow rehaired!" Bartok pizzicato always makes me cringe. I don't think I could do it if someone paid me to, not even if I borrowed a cheap violin. And I take great pride when I break one bow hair, and find it absolutely amazing- enviable, even- when people break four or five, but as a student who is clutching every penny dearly, I still kind of shudder when I think about getting a bow rehaired after playing just one piece.

All that rubbish aside, it was a lot of fun to listen to! I found there was always something going on, and I didn't know where to look or listen next- especially since they were seated so far apart, but that was what I liked about it. I liked hearing the music coming from remote parts of the auditorium. I'm an easy giggler, though, and had to really try not to giggle when either Aaron or Michelle made funny noises into their instruments. I loved the advanced techniques very much!

The Wuorinen piece is one I think I'd have to warm up to. I love the sound of classical guitar (any type of guitar, really) and was setting myself up to hear something tonal and classically pretty. I have to admit, whenever someone is introducing their piece and says '12 tone' my ear kind of pouts. I would love to see the music, go through it and analyze it, but that's because 12 tone music is beautiful on the page and somewhat...Strange to the ear. Like what Milton Babbit said in "Who cares if you listen." This isn't music to listen to, though that's what we do with it.

Good concert, though! Great variety of styles and instrumentations. :)

POSTED BY: JESSICA BLENIS

Newfound Music Festival was awesome as always this year!

The two I enjoyed most were:

1) The Saturday night concert- Dawn Avery (is that her name?) well, the cellist, was unreal! It was such a unique performance. I really loved the unique techniques she thought of and even using the anthem as an electric guitar-like sound was brilliant. Overall a really cool concert, groovy!

2) The Friday night concert- I highly enjoyed Andrew Staniland and Clark Ross's pieces.
Clark Ross's piece, I can remember last year in composition when the disco piece was written [by Meg Warren]. He took the best elements from that piece and wrote another piece (Shooting the moon?) that was incredible! I loved hearing the ascending disco line in the piano. I wasn't too sure about the saxophone imitation of that rising disco line, for about 2 bars, but thats just a matter of opinion! Overall it was incredible!!
Andrew Staniland's work in 4 movements really related to the type of writing that I tend to gravitate towards- Very sonorous and beautiful use of chords in his work! I really enjoyed listening to the change of character in each movement as well. I also really enjoyed the choice of text the piece was based on. It had some really interesting verses.

Thats my Newfound Music Blog!

POSTED BY: KIM CODNER

My favorite time of the year (or at least one of them)has come and passed, the Newfound Music Festival. I don't know why I love it so much, I guess because I am able to witness different innovations and new processes that different composers use in creating new music. It really is a shame that music students aren't exposed to more of this kind of thing.

The biggest highlight of the festival for me were the first two sessions in the P.C. Hall, Andrew Staniland with his presentation on loopin and Max MSP, and Derek Charke's presentation on his composition.
I am a huge fan of manipulating live sounds. I am always trying to make new sounds with the use of technology (electric guitar/keyboards & using different effect pedals) and the computer program that Staniland presented seemed to give him total control of the way that he was able to manipulate the sounds made in the microphone. This was my first real brush with electro-acoustic music.

I was also really blown away by Derek Charke's composition with the influence of inuit throat songs. The amount of energy created by the extended techniques he uses in the quartet is absolutley incredible. It was funny to see how his inspirations for some of his composition doesn't come from say Debussy or Stravinsky, rather he found something that has never been done before, (maybe bartok is more the inspiration for this kind of thing).
It was really fun to hear these innovations performed in the concert on the second night. Hearing Charke's disturbances of carcadian rhythm was really cool. The way he incorperated the electroacoutic element to establish a mood was totally effective.

It was also really nice to hear other modern composers, two of our own, and the way in which it is all music from the past ten years, yet the styles were vastly different. This year the new found music festival made me feel very appreciative that I live in the time that I do, with the freedom to be totally creative and so many different tools and ressources right at my fingertips.

POSTED BY JOSHUA WHITE

he Newfound music festival is one of the very few activities at mun more so intended for the composition faculty. Obviously it's something that everyone can all enjoy, but for us composers it really helps to see what new tactics are used for composition that can help us write on a different level. This year I managed to attend the thursday and saturday night concerts as well as the morning lectures in the PC hall.

The lectures that Derek Charke and Andrew Staniland presented on the topic of looping and recording were quite intriguing. I spend a lot of time fooling around with looping pedals and recording software to create pieces for 'pop' music, but have yet to attempt to write for anything like this. Using the looping device as an instrument certainly gives the composer a lot more options for composition. The art of real time looping and manipulating would definitely be an interesting concept to toy around with.

As for the concerts, I enjoyed Scott Godin's piece for electric guitar and recording (or two electric guitars) entitled 'Gwan' in particular from the thursday night's concert. Guitar is something that I play quite frequently (even more than my primary instrument to be quite honest) so I could take in the performance a lot easier. I also find myself stuck writing pieces that are more western pop oriented, so to see something that bridges this sort of genre with traditional elements was very enlightening.

The Saturday concert I found to be very enjoyable to watch all around. It was definitely a change of pace from a lot of the concerts that take place at the music and was very refreshing. Jeff Dyer is a personal friend of mine so it was really nice to see him performing again. Dawn Avery's pieces were also very relaxing to sit down and listen t after all the stress that the composition concert caused me.

Overall I really enjoyed this year's festival. In past years I never really took in as much as I did this year and now that I have I'm excited for next year's. Definitely something to look forward to.

POSTED BY ROBBIE B

Newfound Music Festival: 8 PM Concert Programmes (Thur/Fri/Sat)

2010-01-27T15:14:00.050-03:30

Newfound Music Festival VII

Crossing Boundaries

Thursday, 28 January, 8PM. Petro-Canada Hall

Maureen Volk: Toccatas, by Clifford Crawley

Michelle Cheramy: Gustnadoes, by Derek Charke

Jay Sorce (guitar): Another’s Fandango, by John Anthony Lennon

Jay Sorce: Shard, by Elliott Carter

Steve Cowan, Andrew Wicks: Gwan, by Scott Godin

INTERMISSION

Gina Ryan: Diastemas, by Alcides Lanza

Derek Charke: Lumière Immobile, by Derek Charke

Leibel, Bendzsa, Regehr, Volk: Palm Court Songs of the Buble Ring, by John Greer

Friday, 29 January, 8PM. Petro-Canada Hall

Paul Bendzsa, Andrea Lodge Shooting the Moon, by Clark Ross

Calvin Powell, Krista Vincent Peter Quince and the Clavier, by Andrew Staniland

INTERMISSION

Derek Charke: Disturbances of Circadian Rhythm, by Derek Charke

Hodgson, Cheramy, Cook Tu n’y trouveras que du vent, by Yoshiaki Onishi

Andrea Lodge, Jay Sorce Sonata for Guitar and Piano (1995) by Charles Wuorinen

Saturday, 30 January, 8PM. Petro-Canada Hall

Music of the Americas

Performers:

Dawn Avery, cello

Adam Batstone, Tim O’Brien, Slvie Proulx, guitars

Andrew McCarthy, Alex Peppard, Rob Power, Andrew Rideout, Whitney Rowe, percussion

Jeff Dyer, vocalist

Bill Brennan, piano and percussion

Chris Davis, bass

Aaron Hodgson, trumpet

Paul Bendzsa, woodwinds

Ritmo Jondo (Flamenco), by Carlos Surinach

El Quitapesarus, Comfort, & Pajarillo (Venezuelan traditional)

Carousel, by Andy Narrell

Selections from North American Indian Cello Project, by Dawn Avery

¡El Pueblo Unido Jamás Será Vencido! by Sergio Ortega (arr.)

Kalimba, by Inti-illimani

Brazilian set: (Balanga Beico, Capivara, and Quando Amanhece (by Celso Machado); O cantador, by DCaymi / N. Motta

Newfound Music Festival; THURSDAY DAYTIME SCHEDULE

2010-01-27T14:42:00.002-03:30

NEWFOUND MUSIC FESTIVAL

THURSDAY DAYTIME SCHEDULE
(January 28, 2010)

	Choral Room	PC Hall	DF Cook Recital Hall	Large Classroom
9:00	Martin Lussier: *Montreal Buzz;* *Celebrating "musiques émergentes*"	Andrew Staniland/Paul Bendzsa: *Looping Outside the Box; custom looping routines using max msp*
10:00	Education Round Table Discussion: *Is Creativity Killed in the Classroom?* (10:30 – 11:45)	Derek Charke: *Presentation on his Music*
11:00	Education Round Table on Creativity, (continued)		Student Recital 1	Maureen Volk: *Help! I Need a Canadian Piece: Playable (and Appealing) Works for Piano*
12:00	SMS LUNCH IN THE LOBBY	SMS LUNCH IN THE LOBBY	SMS LUNCH IN THE LOBBY	Sebastien Despres (12:30): *Faith in the Power of Music*
1:00	Melanie Redmond: *Pedagogical Piano Works of* *Anne Crasby*		Student Recital 2	Alison Corbet: *Inner Space/Outer Space*
2:00		Dawn Avery: *North American Indian Cello Project*	Derek Charke: *Flute Masterclass*
3:00	Carla Safrany: *Propaganda Music in Zimbabwe*	Derek Charke: *Sound Ecology*
4:00			Stacie Dunlop: *Schoenberg's Vocal Style*	NB: Video-Conferencing Room Rebecca Draisey-Collishaw: *Fusions and Confusions*

Saturday Composition Recital: 6:45 PM

2010-01-27T09:53:00.004-03:30

Hi all, please provide programme information in the comments area below (titles, performer's name, your name).

Thanks!
_________________________
Programme Order

Mary Beth Waldram: In A Dream
1. Rushing Colors
2. A Dance with You
Justin Guzzwell, piano

Kate Bevan-Baker : Three Pieces for Solo Piano
1. Twinkle
3. Ragged
Justin Guzzwell, piano

Megan Barnes: The Big Blue World
1. The Drop Off
2. Gravity
Megan Barnes, piano

Steve Cowan: Three Pieces for Solo Piano
I.
II.
pianist TBA?

Jessica Blenis : "Epiphany"
II. Elision
III. Efflorescence
Kim Codner, piano

Adam Batstone:
I. The Funeral
II. Recolletion
Tim Purdy, piano

Kim Codner: "Music Therapy"
I.
III.
Kim Codner, piano

Robbie Brett: TBA
Performer: TBA

Andrew Rideout: Three Pieces for Piano
I.
II.
Dylan Varner-Hartley, piano

Joshua White:
I: 2 vs. 3
II: 3 vs. 4
Robbie Brett, piano

Aiden Hartery: Suggestions for Piano
I - Breeze
II - Cascade
Andrew Coffin, piano

Justin Guzzwell: Three Pieces for solo piano
2.
3.
Justin Guzwell, piano

Lessons with Dr. Derek Charke?

2010-01-26T22:52:00.004-03:30

As discussed in class today, the visiting composer for the Newfound Music Festival, Dr. Derek Charke, is prepared to offer short lessons to Mu4100 composition students during his residency here. The only days we can do this are Wednesday and Friday, both of which I know are already pretty busy days for a lot of you. But let's try this anyway; please indicate a time in the "Comments" section below that you could meet with Dr. Charke on Wednesday or Friday afternoons between 2 and 4PM.

I will suggest a lesson time of 20 minutes; it is not very long, but it is a longer feedback period than we usually have time for in class, and I'm a concerned about not overloading Dr. Charke's schedule if possible.

I will let find out what room we can use and post that info asap. I can also put a notice about the room on my office door.

Available times:

Wednesday
2:00 Joshua White
2:20
2:40
3:00
3:20
3:40

Friday

2:00 Kim Codner

2:20 THIS SLOT IS FREE!!! (Adam cancelled)

2:40 Robbie Brett, esq.

3:00 Aiden Hartery

3:20 Andrew Rideout

3:40 Mary Beth Waldram

(If you need more times, let me know asap!)

A Sampling of Ideas and Techniques for Composing

2010-01-12T14:24:00.004-03:30

USING VARIOUS SCALES:
1. Octatonic scale (A.K.A. “diminished scale”)
2. Other “modes of limited transposition” (Messiaen’s term), incl. modes that repeat every 2 - 3 8ves
3. Pentatonic scales (i.e., anhemitonic (e.g., CDEGA), hemitonic (e.g., EFGBC), hirajoshi (e.g., ABCEF), etc.
4. Whole-Tone scale
5. Any other made-up scale

RHYTHMIC ASPECTS
1. Motor rhythms (continuous motion)
2. Eastern European (asymmetrical; 2+2+3, 2+2+2+3, 3+2+2+3, etc.), West African, and other world rhythms
3. Jazz (?)
4. Non-retrogradable
5. Additive Rhythm
6. Added-Value Rhythms
7. Isorhythms
8. Cross Rhythm
9. Nonretrogradable Rhythm
10. Free (“timeless”, no sense of pulse)
11. Rhythms or phrase lengths based on Fibonacci (or other) Numerical Series.
12. Polymeters
13. Mixed metres ( 3/4 | 5/8 | 2/4 | 7/16 |, etc.)
14. Tempo fluctuations (i.e., sudden/gradual tempo changes, metric modulation)
15. Polytempo

MUSICAL CHARACTER, IDIOMS/GENRES
1. Various programmatic moods, such as aggressive, pretty, wistful, playful, demented, nervous, sad (various kinds), numb (catatonic), angry, fearful, etc.
2. New jazz, third stream
3. Fusions; combining popular music genres (rock/electropop/trance/hippety-hop, etc.) with various 20th C. art music devices
4. Minimalism (repetitive (trance-inducing); sparse and static (trance-inducing))
5. New simplicity
6. Borrowing/adopting elements of music from other cultures: Japan, Eastern Europe, India, etc.
7. Expressive (romantic) versus Non-expressive (mechanistic)

TECHNIQUES
1. Pointillism
2. Motivic unity; set theory (post-tonal); using a limited number of specific intervals
3. 12-tone serialism
4. “Total” serialism (creating series of dynamics, articulations, registers, timbres)
5. Klangfarbenmelodie, texture-based organization
6. Saturation (Ligeti, industrial music)
7. Harmonic motion (atonal)
8. Polyrhythms
9. Polytonality, polymodality
10. Clusters
11. Microtones
12. Prepared piano, other extensions to instrumental practices (multiphonics, etc.)
13. Indeterminacy, controlled aleatorism
14. Modulation
15. Mixed media
16. Nihilism, Antimusic, Decatigorization, Biomusic, (what the heck do these terms mean?)
17. Quotation
18. Any combination of the above.

Writing for Piano

2010-01-12T10:18:00.029-03:30

Our first project of the term is to write three pieces for piano of about 1-2 pages in length. Aim to write one piece a week.

The objectives of this project are:

To learn how to write more idiomatically for piano. It can be a challenge for non-pianists to write well for the piano, and even experienced pianists don't always succeed in this.
To explore compositional approaches that are new to you. You may select these from the sheet handed out in our first class (reproduced above), or come up with your own. Try something different for each piece.
To write motivically-unified and organic music.
To write good music ;).

How do you write idiomatically for piano?

As you compose or arrange for piano, and especially when writing chords (solid or broken), take into account that (i) the gap between thumb and index finger on each hand is wider than the gap between the remaining fingers, and (ii) the left and right hands mirror each other (so the gap in the LH is on the right, and vice-versa in the RH). A chord with adjacent notes to be played by thumb and index fingers is difficult to play if there is also a wide gap between the index and little fingers. Not impossible, just more difficult. It may be that the sonority you want can only be achieved by writing an awkwardly-spaced chord like this; that is fine, but just be aware that if your writing contains lots of awkwardly spaced chords, pianists are likely to think of it as unidiomatic writing, and may therefore be less favorably disposed towards it.

There are 88 keys on the piano; don't limit yourself to just the notes found in the treble and bass clefs. Besides the standard, "LH in bass clef and RH in treble clef," try:

Both hands in the treble clef, perhaps with the RH using an "ottava" treble clef (treble clef with an "8" above it, sounding an octave higher), or even a "quintima" treble clef (sounding two octaves higher);
Both hands in the bass clef, possibly with similar clef adjustments to sound an octave or even fifteenth lower;
Hands spaced very widely apart, at the extremes of the keyboard;
Hands very close together, perhaps even on top of one another;
Crossed hands; LH playing higher notes, RH playing lower notes.

Decide on a texture, and try to keep it consistent for the entire piece, or, alternatively, consider a section with a contrasting texture (but consistent within that section).

The way in which you choose a texture is of course up to you (every choice you make in composition is up to you!) but one way would be to study textures used in a variety of piano scores. But don't get so caught up in studying scores that you get overwhelmed; if you wanted to buy a pen and went into a store with a thousand to choose from, it would be much more difficult to make a decision than it would be if you went into a store with only three pens. Confucius probably said something like this. If not him, then perhaps Yogi Berra... Or Groucho?

Studying the scores of the great composers is a time-honored way to learn composition, and a good portion of your training here at the School of Music is devoted to that. But it can be a little daunting, especially since virtually all the "great" (and even "pretty great") composers from Bach forward were also known as excellent keyboard performers; when they wrote for keyboard instruments, they really knew what they were doing! However, remember this: It is not necessary to be able to perform on an instrument in order to write well for it. Most of the great composers may have been keyboardists, but they also wrote well for other instruments, many of which they likely could not play well (or even at all). While the ability to play an instrument can be a great asset in learning to write idiomatically for that instrument, it is not essential.

Do not feel the need to outdo the great romantic composers in writing virtuoso works of the "war-horse" variety. There is much to be said for simplicity. "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." (Einstein, and possibly Yogi Berra too)

Consider the pedals. Or, more precisely, consider how they differ. There are three pedals on most grand pianos and many uprights. Yet most of us only ever require (or at least politely ask) the pianist to use one. This need not be the case, although it is fine if you only use the sustain (also called "damper," which seems counter-intuitive since it lifts the dampers from the strings, as opposed to dampening them) pedal, or no pedal at all. But no matter what pedals you use, make sure you indicate your intentions in the score. Here are the three pedals, and what they do:

Soft pedal (on the far left). Its function is self explanatory, but bear in mind that it also changes the tone colour slightly. A chord played using the soft pedal can sound just as loud as a chord played without it (if you play the second chord a little louder to compensate for the effect of the soft pedal), but the timbre will be slightly different.

Sostenuto pedal (the middle pedal on most grands). If you (a) depress any number of piano notes, (b) depress the sostenuto pedal, then (c) release those notes but keep the sostenuto pedal down, those notes will continue to ring, although subsequent notes will not. It sustains only the notes that are sounding at the point the pedal is depressed. It can be used to create interesting sound effects, such as silently depressing several notes that are harmonics of one or more pitches and depressing the sostenuto pedal; when you play the fundamentals of those pitches staccato (and fairly loud, to be effective), we hear the staccato note, which is dampened immediately, followed by ringing harmonics of that note. As with any sound effect, overuse can reduce its impact (e.g., the use of Auto Tune pitch-correction software in Cher's "Believe," subsequently used in countless other songs), but, if you like this idea, you could set yourself the challenge of finding interesting and novel ways to use it as the basis of one of your short pieces, perhaps like a study. Most uprights do not have this feature. Instead, many have an middle pedal that dampens the sound in a much more pronounced way than the regular soft pedal.

Sustain pedal. This is the standard pedal, the one that removes the dampers from all the notes on the piano.

Write something (a few bars), then go to the piano and see how it feels to play it. This is a kinesthetic exercise, the point of which is to develop some tactile connection between the music you write and how it feels to play it on the piano. If you are a non-pianist and are perhaps reacting to this suggestion with sudden-onset apoplexy, don't concern yourself too much if/when you play wrong notes (unless they are off by an octave or more... then you should worry); the goal is to find out how it feels to perform your music, not to find out how your music sounds. A good pianist is likely to play the right notes. Think of yourself as an actor in a movie playing the part of a pianist; the actor just has to pretend to play the piano and move his/her hands accordingly, while the actual sound would be overdubbed later, performed by a competent professional. Hopefully.

Or, do the opposite: Compose a few bars at the piano, then enter the music on your computer or write it down, evaluating your musical fragment as you do. How many motives are there? Are they related? How can this idea be expanded?

Either way, the point is to try out your music at the piano. Don't rely only on your notation programme's playback function as you compose, as it won't give you a feel for the music.

You can even do the above with very challenging music by the great composers (e.g., Bach, Beethoven, Chopin, Debussy, Bartok, etc.); simply attempting to perform a bar here, a bar there, in their music will give you a sense of what is possible in terms of idiomatic writing for piano.

Although it is possible to play bass lines in octaves, don't make that your default approach to writing for the left hand (or the right hand, for that matter). The ear can tire of constant octaves pretty quickly.

Patterns are a part of much piano music; examples include various foms of the Alberti bass, LH chordal patterns in waltzes (boom - chuck - chuck ...), various arpeggio figures such as the one used in the C major prelude in book 1 of the Well-Tempered Clavier, or the considerably more demanding one used in the C major Etude from Chopin's collection. By no means should you therefore conclude that patterns must be used in your music, but simply be aware that patterns can be relatively easy for muscle memory to understand and execute. Frequent pattern changes are more challenging to to perform than occasional ones, and while there is no rule against writing challenging music, composers/arrangers need to be aware that doing so can have negative consequences, such as flawed performances, or even a reluctance to perform the work at all.

On the other hand, be aware that too much of a repeated pattern can cause the listener's interest to wane. And then there's pattern-based minimalism, where repetitive patterns are the goal, although even here, subtle shifts tend to occur, which can sustain interest.

This last point (on the challenge of trying to balance too much repetition with too little) is something that I have written about in other blogs; here are some links, if you want to check them out:

New Semester, New Course!

2010-01-11T15:58:00.011-03:30

Here we go again! The composition course this semester is Music 4100, "Advanced Composition" (at Memorial University of Newfoundland's School of Music). Please visit this site regularly to read and comment on entries relating to music composition. This blog is open to anyone; most of the comments tend to be by students in my courses, but anyone who wishes to comment is free to do so.

Many of the people visiting this blog are not current or former students — when I checked the "Site meter" at the bottom of this page a few minutes ago, it showed recent visitors from Japan, Singapore, Germany, California, Ottawa, and New Brunswick — so be aware that any comments you make can be read by a fairly large and diverse audience.

A list of student blogs is on the right column of this page; if you are in the course and your blog isn't listed, please let me know your blog's URL and I will add it.

Typically, almost all comments are made by class members for one very simple reason: Class members are required to comment on a certain number per semester. That's right; I am an ogre! I compel students to comment on the class blog by means of marks incentives.

Is this fair? Is it right? Is it good pedagogy? Well, I think so (obviously), but (polite) comments from those who feel otherwise are always welcome. I would be happy to hear thoughts on the idea of enforced blog participation as a course requirement, whether you agree with it or not. I believe discussion can be a healthy and helpful thing, and my objective is to find ways of engendering it.

Enjoy, and may you always find the right notes!

CMC 50th Anniversary Concert — Friday

2009-12-03T03:06:00.007-03:30

This Friday there will be a concert that I hope you can all attend, as it will be the first time in the School of Music's history (of which I am aware) that we have an entire concert of music by composers who are from Newfoundland or who have lived here. The occasion is a celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Canadian Music Centre, an institution that has been at the crux of the development and dissemination of Canadian music, and, it is definitely an organization to join if you continue in composition on a professional level.

Below is the programme and programme information, FYI — Hope you can make it (and if you do, maybe let people know what you thought of it in a blog!):

CMC 50th Anniversary concert

Friday, December 5, 2009, 8 PM

D.F. Cook Recital Hall

Steppin’ Out (1996) by Clark Ross
A Suite for Flute and Piano (1980) by Clifford Crawley

Andante amabile
Allegretto espressivo con alcuna licenza
Allegro scherzando

Three (2009) by Jim O’Leary
Slipping into madness is good for the sake of comparison (2001) by Scott Godin
Ostinati and Hymn (2009; world premiere) by Jim Duff

Ora Ensemble
Krista Vincent – piano
Vernon Regehr – cello

with
Nancy Case-Oates – violin
Paul Bendza – clarinet
Stephen Hynes – flute

Commissioned by the CBC in 1996, Clark Winslow Ross’ Steppin’ Out is an eclectic single-movement trio for violin, cello and piano. It is essentially lighthearted but sometimes soulful, with stylistic references to the blues, minimalism, Bach and Jimi Hendrix. Steppin’ Out features extensive use of ostinato (recurring pattern) figures, such as the repetitive thirds played at the opening by the piano, which, together with sporadic interjections by the cello, create a kind of musical humour.

Clark Winslow Ross’ compositions have been performed worldwide and across Canada. He has won awards in national competitions and has received numerous commission grants from the Canada Council, the CBC, and the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council. Clark is Associate Professor of composition, theory, and electronic music at Memorial University of Newfoundland and is the founder and Artistic Director of the Newfound Music Festival. He has lived in St. John’s since 1992.

___________________

UK-born Clifford Crawley was educated at the University of Durham, the Royal College of Music and Trinity College, London. He also studied with Lennox Berkeley and Humphrey Searle. With a long career in all levels of music education, Crawley currently holds the title of Professor Emeritus at Queen's University, where he taught for 20 years. After ten years in Toronto, he now lives and enjoys an active musical life in St. John's, Newfoundland.

___________________

Jim O’Leary was born and raised in Windsor, Newfoundland and Labrador. A percussionist by training, he studied at the University of Prince Edward Island, and completed Masters degrees in composition at the School of Music in Piteå, Sweden and at the University of Cambridge, England. O’Leary notes that his composition Three was created as one intended to be fairly accessible, explicitly avoiding any over-complexities or density in the work; “the goal was to create intimate music enabling the audience to focus on the subtle changes in scoring and the timbre of the instruments, the use of quarter tones (both melodically and harmonically), and above all the form.”

O’Leary's music has been performed by, among others: the Umeå Symphony Orchestra, the Motion ensemble, the Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra, as well as New Music Concerts, l'Orchestre de la francophonie canadienne and the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra. He is presently a research student at Queens University Belfast, Northern Ireland.

___________________

Scott Edward Godin’s Slipping into Madness was commissioned by the East-West Quartet and was made possible with the assistance of the CBC. The title comes from the “Truisms” of New York artist Jenny Holzer, which is a series of paranoid slogans closely resembling ancient proverbs. They range from witty, to confusing, to raving mad. The piece deals with the juxtaposition of many different musical emotions, causing uneasiness of paranoia in the listener who searches for a logical progression of the musical material from beginning to end. Written immediately after the events of 9/11, the piece pays homage to Messiaen’s masterwork, Le quatuor pour le fin du temps.

Godin began his musical training on piano, completing a Bachelor of Music degree in 1993 with Helmut Brauss. Winning the Johann Strauss competition enabled Scott to study in Vienna with internationally renowned pianist Paul Badura-Skoda. He completed a Doctoral degree in musical composition with John Rea at McGill University. Scott’s music has been performed throughout Europe, Canada, Mexico, and the United States. He was a finalist for the 1999 Gaudeamus Competition in Amsterdam, finalist in the 1999 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Young Composers' Competition, and he was awarded five prizes in SOCAN Young Composers Competitions (Canada), including Serge Garant Awards for chamber music in 1996 and 1998.

___________________

Jim Duff’s Ostinati and Hymn features interplay of four ostinati between violin, cello and piano, in an overall ABA form. Duff holds a Diploma of Fine Arts from the University of Calgary, a Bachelor of Music from Berklee College of Music, Boston, and a Masters of Music from North Texas State University. Jim has acted as instructor at Memorial University of Newfoundland, and for the past fifteen years, he has worked closely with the Newfoundland Symphony Orchestra as composer, arranger, and conductor for their annual Gala and Pops concerts. Several of his concert band compositions and arrangements have been published and distributed worldwide by Alfred Publishing Company and Warner/Chappell Music, Inc.

___________________

Ora Ensemble is a world-class ensemble dedicated to the performance and promotion of contemporary music in Newfoundland and Labrador. The name Ora is Latin for coastline, border or boundary, encapsulating both the ensemble’s physical presence on the edge of the north Atlantic as well as the cutting edge of its artistic mandate.
___________________

Founded in 1959, the Canadian Music Centre is proud to celebrate its 50th Anniversary this year. In honour of this milestone, each region of Canada is holding concerts featuring the music of local composers who are affiliates of the CMC. Each composer on this evening’s programme has ties to Newfoundland.

The Canadian Music Centre is Canada’s only organization mandated to house, actively promote and disseminate the music of Canada’s composers within Canada and internationally. With over 700 established composer-affiliates to date, CMC makes these composers’ music accessible through an array of programs. At its core, the CMC houses a public lending library and archive totalling some 22,000+ music scores and recordings which continue to expand as composers deposit new works.

Another Raging Success!

2009-11-29T20:55:00.011-03:30

Tonight's concert went extremely well, and I congratulate everyone involved! As I said to Dave in a conversation after the concert, if you added up the number of person-hours that it took to make this concert happen, I suspect you would get an impressively-large number. Not only are there the hours each composer spent writing and editing their work, there are also the hours spent learning and rehearsing the music by the performers; a concert like this represents a tremendous commitment and is a remarkable achievement, and I think you all should feel proud.

As well as it went, though, the one unfortunate aspect was that we were unable to hear the works of two students, one because the performers' schedules were impossible to coordinate, the other due to a technical problem in getting the prepared piano sounds on CD to play in the hall. I'm sure this must have been a great disappointment to those students as well as to the rest of us, but these things do happen from time to time, and there will always be more performance opportunities in the future.

Speaking of performance opportunities in the future, this is the end of the road for this course, but I hope not the end of your development as composers. Some of you will continue on with Music 4100 next term, but even if you don't, you can always continue to write music and try to create opportunities to have it performed. I will talk about this a bit further in tomorrow's class, and I will also set the deadline for score submission, blogs, and class blog comments.

Well done, everyone!

P.S. Does the use of the word "raging" to modify "success" strike anyone else as odd? It is a very common word pairing, but I wonder where it comes from. I found this in the online Webster's dictionary definition of "raging": 3 : extraordinary, tremendous, e.g., "a raging success."

Tonight's Programme Order

2009-11-29T16:29:00.008-03:30

I accommodated the programme order requests received as best I could; some people wanted to go early, and others needed to go late, so in these cases I programmed the requests in the order received. The one request I was unable to accommodate was Megan's, who asked to go early, but she is performing one selection with Erin Milley, who had much earlier requested to go late. As it stands, I'm not sure that Erin's first piece (Sarah's) is late enough to accommodate her, but if it isn't, I guess we can delay Sarah's piece until Erin gets there, and proceed in the concert order to Lindsey's and Steve's compositions if necessary. This was more complicated than usual! Good luck tonight.

Student Composition Recital

Music 3100 (Introduction to Composition - Dr. Clark Ross)
7:00 PM
Petro-Canada Recital Hall

• Musical Text Settings, and Recontextualized Musical Clichés

Stephen Quinlan Hippo’s Hope (Sylverstein)

Stephen Quinlan (ten.), Jill Dawe (tpt.), Celina Barry (tba.), Jennifer Benson (pno.)

Adam Smith Three Japanese Poems

Susan Watkins (sop.), Andrew Coffin (pno.), and processed prepared piano

Mary Beth Waldram 3:43 (Waldram)

Susan Watkins (sop.), Mary Beth Waldram (cl.), Lindsey Wareham (pno.)

Dave Goudie A Musical Journey Through a Moment (Goudie)

Sarah Caines (m.sop.), Laura Jacyna (vc.), Lindsey Wareham (pno.)

Joshua White Fog

Patrick Edison (ten.), Joshua White (melodica), Laura Jacyna (vc.), Simon Mackie (pno.)

Adam Batstone Sonnet 100 (Shakespeare)

Bethany Saunders (sop.), Adam Batstone (gtr.), Andrew Rideout (perc.)

Aiden Hartery Constantly Risking Absurdity

Stephen Ivany (bar.), Jill Dawe (tpt.), Phillip Holloway (tbn.), Andrew Coffin (pno.)

Chris Rodgers Title TBA

Chris Rodgers (gtr.), Andrew McCarthy (perc.), Dylan Varner-Hartley (pno.), Josh White (db)

INTERMISSION

Alexander Pryor Une Pesce, Due Pesci (Seuss)

Megan Barnes (sop.), Sarah Clement (fl.), Mary Beth Waldram (cl.), Alexander Pryor (pno.)

Megan Barnes your little voice (Cummings)

Megan Barnes (m.sop.), Mitchell Hamilton (fl.), Katie Noseworthy (b.cl.), Simon Mackie (pno.)

Sarah Clement Snámh na Rónta (Clement)

Erin Milley (sop.), Megan Barnes (m.sop.), Melissa McDonald (euph.),

Catherine Trainor (bohdrán.), Alexander Pryor (pno.)

Lindsey Wareham I Wandered Lonley as a Cloud (Wordsworth)

Emily Cairns (sop.), Mary Beth Waldram (cl.), Lindsey Wareham (pno.)

Steve Cowan Clave

Brooke Stewart (vn.), Laura Jacyna (vc.), Andrew Rideout

Brooke Stewart Would you Look at That! (Nesbitt)

Erin Milley (sop.), Brooke Stewart (vn.), Laura Jacyna (vc.)

Andrew Rideout Fire and Ice

Erin Milley (sop.), Brooke Stewart (vn.), Andrew Rideout (perc.), Simon Mackie (pno.)

Music 3100 is an introduction to composition for music students in second year or higher, for which no previous composition experience is necessary. The students composed two 4-5 minute works this semester, the first of which was a set of variations for piano and one other instrument based on their own original chord progression, and these were performed on our first concert (October 25).

Students had a choice for the second project between (a) "recontextualizing" a musical cliché or genre for 3-4 performers (possibly including voice and/or electronics), or (b) composing a work for voice and 2-3 other instruments.

If you are interested in learning more about the students’ experiences with composition, feel free to visit the class blog, which has link to each student’s individual blog as well as about 80 composition-related blog entries, many of which have numerous comments by students:

http://clarkross.blogspot.com/

PC Hall Rehearsal Times - Sat/Sun

2009-11-27T15:31:00.003-03:30

As mentioned in class today, we have the PC Hall all day Saturday and Sunday. If you want to sign up for a 1/2 hour time slot (or more than one), please do so by leaving a comment below with the time you want. Mary Beth has a swipe card with access to the Hall.

Good luck Sunday!

Written any blogs lately?

2009-11-26T16:06:00.002-03:30

I notice that some have not written any blogs for a while (in one case, the last blog was written in September), and some have not left many comments on the class blog (which is what you are reading now). As we head into the final week of classes, it might be good to put these activities on your "to do" list if you have been an inconsistent blogger/commentator. You have until December 11 to get caught up; that's the day I will tally up everyone's totals in these two categories (your own blog entries, plus comments on class blogs).

Don't forget that you can post a review of a MusicWorks article in your blog, and it will count as two blogs. Likewise, a concert review of a contemporary music concert (or a contemporary composition on a concert of otherwise dead composers) will count as two blogs, assuming it is reasonably substantial (just 100-200 words would do the trick!).

If you have not been very good at class participation, I will even consider extra blogs (thoughtful ones, please!) as partial participation credit.

Final Concert! (Do I have your info?)

2009-11-26T15:32:00.006-03:30

Well friends, hard to believe it, but we are only days away from our final concert (Sunday, 7PM, Petro-Canada Hall). Have you submitted all necessary programme information? If not, please provide it in the comments section below, by 5PM Friday. I was still receiving programme information for our first concert up to about an hour before the show, and I would prefer to have the information much sooner than that this time.

Also, if you have a requirement to be early or late in the programme, now would be the time to let me know (and the reason, please).

In no particular order, below is the programme information I currently have; please check spellings for accuracy:

Mary Beth Waldram - 3:43 - Susan Watkins (sop.), Mary Beth Waldram (cl.), Lindsey Wareham (pno.)

Aiden Hartery - Constantly Risking Absurdity - Stephen Ivany (bar.), Jill Dawe (tpt.), Phillip Holloway (tbn.), Andrew Coffin (pno.)

Andrew Rideout - Fire and Ice - Erin Milley (sop.), Brooke Stewart (vn.), Andrew Rideout (perc.), Simon Mackie (pno.)

Adam Batstone - [NO TITLE] - Bethany Saunders (sop.), Adam Batstone (gtr.), Andrew Rideout (perc.)

Joshua White - Fog - Patrick Edison (ten.), Joshua White (Mel.), Laura Jacyna (vc.), Simon Mackie (pno.)

Dave Goudie - A Musical Journey Through a Moment - Sarah Caines (sop.), Laura Jacyna (vc.), Lindsey Wareham (pno.)

Alexander Pryor - Une Pesce, Due Pesci - Megan Barnes (sop.), Sarah Clement (fl.), Mary Beth Waldram (cl.), Alexander Pryor (pno.)

Lindsey Wareham - I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud - Emily Cairns (sop.), Mary Beth Waldram (cl.), Lindsey Wareham (pno.)

Chris Rodgers - [NO TITLE] - Chris Rodgers (gtr.), Andrew McCarthy (perc.), Dylan Varner-Hartley (pno.), Josh White (DB)

Steve Cowan - [NO TITLE] - Brooke Stewart (vn.), Laura Jacyna (vc.), Andrew Rideout (perc.), Dylan Varner-Hartley (pno)

Stephen Quinlan - Hippo's Hope - Stephen Quinlan (ten.), Jill Dawe (tpt.), Celina Barry (tba.), Jennifer Benson (pno.)

Brooke Stewart - Would You Look at That - Emily Stockley (sop.), Brooke Stewart (vn.), TBA (vc.)

Project 2 - Choice of (a) Musical Cliché or Genre Recontextualization, or (b) Text Setting

2009-11-14T08:48:00.032-03:30

I handed out project #2 descriptions on October 26 in class, but never posted them to our class blog, so here they are:

→ You have a choice in your second project between (a) "recontextualizing" a musical cliché or genre for 3-4 performers (possibly including voice and/or electronics), or (b) composing a work for voice and 2-3 other instruments,.

(a) Below are links explaining the cliché-based project:

(b) WRITE A SETTING OF WORDS AND MUSIC FOR VOICE AND 2-3 OTHER INSTRUMENTS
Duration: 3-5 minutes

Aim to set the words as expressively as possible. ALL musical decisions should be based on textual considerations.

The harmonic language should be original (i.e. not based on traditional harmonic sonorities), as was required for the first project. However, you need not begin by creating an original harmonic progression, as you did for the first project. The kinds of sonorities you choose should grow out of what is expressed by the text.

Selecting the text takes time; you need to live with it for a while before knowing whether it will work in a song setting. Look for a text that can be enhanced by adding music to it, respecting the fact that poems work just fine without music. Setting a poem to music does not necessarily create better art than the original poem without music, and it may produce worse art! Setting a poem to music results in a different kind of art than that of the poem alone; it may touch the listener in a different way. Find a text that draws a meaningful response from you. When you feel you understand it thoroughly, you are ready to begin the process of setting it to music. You may need more than one text if choosing short poems.

Recite the words many times, in many ways, in the same way that a trained actor practices reading the same line many different ways until they discover a delivery that most suits the line. Consider how and where emphasis, space (pauses), rhythm, and tempo can be manipulated most effectively for communicating meaning. Take notes!

Emphasis, when reciting poetry, occurs on at least three different levels:
a) Emphasis on the correct syllable within each word;
b) Emphasis on a particular word within each line;
c) Emphasis on a particular line within a verse; what is (are) the most important point(s) within a verse? How can you communicate this importance to the listener?

Write the text on blank paper, leaving considerable space between lines. Then, using notes made during the previous two steps, begin the process of applying rhythm, meter, tempo, and space (rests) to the text, using standard rhythmic notation below each line of text.

The more space (i.e. time) you leave between lines (or within them, if appropriate), the easier it will be to add instrumental parts to the voice part. Well-written instrumental parts complement the text and can create a dialogue with the singer.

Explore alternatives to the natural tendency to place accented syllables on strong beats, or even strong parts of beats. Challenge yourself to discover other means of communicating emphasis (see #7 below)! Avoiding the obvious makes things less predictable.

Free your rhythm; mix simple and compound rhythmic values; use ties; consider other tuplet values.

Don’t forget to include rests; singers need places to breathe, and the text will have stronger impact if you give the listener sufficient time to absorb the meaning of each line; too many lines too quickly can result in information overload.

Textual emphasis can be achieved in a variety of ways, such as:
a) Metric (rhythmic) placement — expected or unexpected;
b) Delaying the expected arrival of a word (i.e. “and … …cried!”);
c) Lengthening the note value(s) for a word. Sometimes, shortening note values can have a similar effect;
d) Using significantly higher (or lower) pitches for a word than were used for the rest of the line;
e) Textural contrast; a word sung on its own, without accompaniment, can be quite effective;
f) Text repetition; repeating a word, or even a line, is possible, and gives added emphasis;
g) Orchestration; similar to (e), but this time the instruments can be used for reinforcement of particular words;
h) Dynamics (e.g., suddenly louder or suddenly softer); perhaps the most obvious method, so avoid over-reliance on it, although when used in combination with any of the above techniques it is fine.

Challenge yourself to find appropriate places to use extended vocal techniques.

Challenge yourself to find appropriate places to use extended instrumental techniques.

Score carefully; don’t make the singer fight to be heard! Become familiar with the voice you are writing for (where is it louder, where is it most comfortable, etc.), and become similarly familiar with each of the instruments you are using. The most common technical challenge we face when writing for voice is making the text intelligible to the listener; all your careful planning will not matter if the audience cannot understand the words (although even here there are exceptions; if setting Latin Mass movements (e.g., Agnus Dei) for an audience familiar with these texts, the lack of clarity in your text setting may not impede the audience's ability to understand it. Also, some composers, beginning around the mid-20th century, would deliberately set vowels or consonants in isolation from the words from which they originated. This, as you might imagine, can make it extremely difficult to understand the words, although the composer's goal was often expressive nevertheless.

Another consideration in intelligibility is that it tends to be physiologically more difficult for singers have good diction in higher registers.

•Week 1: set text rhythmically, according to 4, 5, 6, & 7 above.
•Week 2: set it melodically. You will have to sing it in class!
•Weeks 3 and 4: finish the project, adding instrumental parts, and modifying the melody as needed. In-progress versions of your work must be workshopped (performed) in class every week.

Since some questions have arisen on the ever-popular topic of tonality/atonality, below are some blog links on the topic and a definition that may be helpful:

→ Tonality (Wikipedia): "The system of musical organization of the common practice period, and of Western-influenced popular music throughout much of the world today"

"Fair Copy" Due Friday, 1 P.M.!

2009-10-26T22:37:00.003-02:30

Just a reminder, in case you missed today's class or last week's blogs, that the final, bound, "fair copy" (i.e., best quality copy) of the score for your first project is due this Friday at 1 P.M.

You can get your scores bound at most photocopy shops, including the one in the student centre, as far as I know. It costs about $2 for this service.

The score should have a front and back cover (cover stock, or clear acetate front cover).

The front cover (or cover page, if you are using clear acetate) should have your composition title, the titles of each movement if they have titles (but don't list "I, II, & III" if they don't have titles; use those numbers at the top of the first page of each of the pieces instead) and your name.

Inside the front cover (on the left-facing page) you should have the total duration of the composition, as well as your programme note (and optional brief bio).

The score should be printed double-sided.

I recommend slightly heavier-weight paper for the double-sided pages, so that the notes on the back of pages don't "bleed" through.

There are three blog entries on the topic of musical detail; please read them before handing in your scores:

On musical detail (1)
On musical detail (2)
On musical detail (3)

Successful Concert!

2009-10-25T15:34:00.020-02:30

Congratulations to all composers involved in today's concert! I thought it went very well indeed, although, at 2.5 hours in length, it was a bit of a marathon, was it not? :-)

Although we had all heard in-progress versions of your compositions over the course of the past six weeks, these really only gave us a glimpse of the finished products. In most cases, a tremendous amount of revision occurred subsequent to in-class readings, and in all cases the recital provided our first opportunity to hear everyone's finished compositions. Plus, what we hear in class is almost always a read-through, whereas what we heard in today's recital were polished performances, and this makes a huge difference in how an audience hears the music, as we all know.

These class recitals are always a real treat for me, and I hope you feel the same way. There is something very special about witnessing the process that leads from the amorphous, murky beginnings of a work to it's completed state. The creative process is often difficult, perhaps even painful at times, but it sure is rewarding to see it come to fruition.

And many thanks as well to all of today's performers! If I counted correctly, there were 20 performers involved, so an impressive number of people put a lot of work into making this recital a success.

Thanks to Mary Beth Waldram for recording the show, and to Jessie Blennis for her help backstage!

And finally, thanks to all who remained to hear the end of the concert! Only one class member was unable to do this due to having to go to work, but everyone else hung in there 'till the very end, which is a great way to show your support and respect for each other's music.

→ All went well, but, given that we will be doing this again at the end of the semester, it would be useful to think about what could be improved for our next concert.

Did you wish there had been a larger audience, and if so, what do might be done to achieve this? Any ideas as to how we could have better publicized the concert?

Would you have liked to have had a post-concert reception of some kind in the lobby?

Is there anything we could have done to speed up the concert a bit?

Any other ideas, or comments?

Upcoming Concert – Information, and Protocol

2009-10-22T13:13:00.007-02:30

Information:

Our first concert of the course is imminent… This Sunday at 1 PM at the D. F. Cook recital hall. I am REALLY looking forward to it, and I hope you are too! Make sure you invite all friends, family, and basically any other people you have ever met.

Please let me know (via the "comments" section below) the following:

Title of your composition, and the titles of the three pieces if they also have titles. You may give it a generic title, such as "Three Pieces for Violin [or whatever instrument you're writing for] and Piano," if you wish, but I encourage you to come up with a more descriptive title if you can. But don't stress over it… If you can't come up with a good descriptive title, a generic one is fine.

Your name, as you would like it to appear in the programme.

The names of your performers.

Any requests you may have regarding where you would like your composition to be in the programme (early, late). Please only make such a request if you or your performers have a valid reason for doing so (like having to be at work, etc.). All class members are expected to support one another by being present for the entire concert; if your piece is on the first half, please don't leave at the intermission

If you or your performers are playing two or more compositions, do you prefer them to be back to back, or separated by at least one other composition? If it doesn't matter, just say so, because it makes programming a bit easier.

Concert Protocol:

Dress: All black, or black pants/skirt and coloured top… Or some other combination that you like that looks dressy, but isn't as formal as a penguin suit.

Introductions: Each composer will give a brief introduction to their work; please try to keep it short and snappy; no more than 1 minute, maximum! Remember to thank the performer(s) by name. Your spoken introduction may be off the cuff or written down, but in my experience, audiences seem to relate better to the former than the latter, probably because we tend to speak more naturally when we make it up as we go. If an extemporized introduction is what you choose, consider making a few notes beforehand to help guide you.

Programme Notes: Not necessary for this concert, but necessary for the final version of your score. Programme notes by the composer are generally thought to be a good thing in concert settings, but (a) It has been my impression that many concert-goers do not read the programme notes, or read just a small portion of them, perhaps because the lighting conditions during a concert to not lend themselves to reading, and (b) Many of you are already stressed enough by trying to finish your compositions and rehearse them in time for Sunday's concert without having to stress further about writing programme notes at the last minute.

Hurry on and off the stage!The concert is likely to be quite long as it is (17 students times 5-6 minute compositions = 85-102 minutes, plus 17 times 1-2 minutes for introductions and getting on and off the stage, = 102-136 minutes; this is absurdly long! By way of comparison, most classical music recitals are planned with something like 60-70 minutes of music…), so it is essential that the switchovers between performances be as brief as possible. Towards that end, each duo should walk on the stage AS the previous duo is walking off, and take very little time between each of your three pieces.

I think that's all for now!

And good luck to all in your preparations!

musicworks

2009-10-07T13:58:00.024-02:30

Last summer, Micheline Roi, editor of musicworks magazine, contacted me to ask if I thought our composition students might like to receive free issues of the magazine. An anonymous (I think) and very generous donor had apparently provided the funds to make this happen, and I was thrilled to be able to pass this opportunity onto our students. Composition students should each have received one issue (Winter, 2007) by now, and you will be receiving two more in the coming weeks.

musicworks has a couple of descriptive catch phrases on the cover above its name, which give you a sense of its purpose and orientation:

For curious ears, and…
Explorations in sound.

Further information is provided on the magazine's website:

We stand committed to new and challenging forms of music and to the excitement of creative engagement in sound exploration. We feature composers of new music for concert presentation as well as those who work with recorded sound; we feature improvisers, instrument designers, and artists who work in radio, sound installation and sound sculpture.

We offer an inclusive context in which ideas can be discussed, and unfamiliar forms of sound art introduced to adventurous listeners.

So, now that you know a bit about the magazine, I would like each Mu3100 composition student to read one article, and then write a blog entry on your reactions to that article. You could make your entry short and sweet (but at least a paragraph), or you could write at greater length; if you do the latter, and you are short of the required number of blog entries at the end of the semester, I will count it as two entries.

The magazine has a wide variety of items, so I hope you will take this opportunity to learn about some of things that are going on in the huge world of contemporary music. Do not feel you have to agree with everything a writer or interview subject says! Disagreements, like skepticism, can be healthy, and can make for a good discussion.

Musical Influences - 2

2009-10-06T12:51:00.026-02:30

In my "Musical Influences - 1" blog a few days ago, I promised to "spill the beans" and reveal some of my musical influences. Alas, I fear I have spilled a ridiculous quantity of beans; my response is awfully long... In any event, here is a slightly-edited version of the answer I gave to the music teacher who asked me about this last week:

Some of the composers whose music I most admire include Palestrina, J.S. Bach, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Bartok, Ravel, Messiaen, and Lutoslawski, but I'm not sure how much any of them actually influenced my music in any fundamental way. But they, and many other musical creators in many genres, have all inspired me, without a doubt. I am inspired by the fact that so many people have written magnificent works of sound art whose appeal has transcended time and some cultural differences; it gives me something to aspire to. I am inspired by the raw emotional power of great music.

Great musical creators have an uncompromising refusal to be satisfied with anything less than the absolute best work they are capable of creating. I am both inspired and influenced by this.

Something I hadn't realized until I began thinking about the answer to this question is that the influence of various composers can be found in many of my compositions, although usually for just a few bars here and there. For example, I wrote a few pieces with Bach-like moments, for no good reason other than it seemed like a good idea at the time, such as:

There are about 15 seconds of Bach-like music at 7:11 of Dream Dance for solo piano;
There is a longer, Bach-like toccatta section at 3:58 of Steppin'Out, for piano, violin, and cello;
The piano figure that forms the entire basis of Julia's Prelude is taken from Bach's prelude to the Bb fugue in WTC, book 1, although I gave it a Schumann-like harmonic treatment;
Variation 9 of McGillicuddy's Rant is also based on that figure.

In none of these cases was I trying to fool listeners into thinking I was Bach; I was just drawing upon some aspects of his music as a source of stylistic inspiration, in much the same way that I draw upon jazz, the blues, funk, tango, etc., in other pieces; it's all stuff I like, so it finds its way into my music sometimes.

Before I became a classical musician, my aspiration was to become a professional jazz musician, so it is perhaps no surprise that jazz, and related forms like funk and blues, has been a major influence on me, and there are great jazz musicians I admire tremendously, such as Charlie Parker, Miles Davis, and Oscar Peterson. Here are some of my jazz-influenced pieces:

Funky Flute Groove Experience (2008; flute, electric guitar, electronics on CD)
Jennifer's Tune (2005; piano, bass, optional drum kit)
Urban Dance Music (#1 & 2: 2000, #3: 2003; alto saxophone, electronics on CD)
Andrew Jacob's Ragtime Blues (2001; solo guitar)
Night Music 2 (1993; no recording)
Late-Night Music (1990; trumpet, bass, drum kit, piano)

Besides the above, I have written a few other works that show varying degrees of jazz influences, such as:

Three Pieces for Violin and Piano (1997, ®2004). The main theme in the first piece has a subtle reference (at least for me) to a blues-based pitch collection, even though this is a 12-tone composition, and the theme returns towards the end accompanied by a walking bass-line in the piano, which makes the bluesy feel more obvious. The third of these pieces, is more overtly-influenced by jazz, and really goes to town with a walking-bass idea, maintaining it for almost the entire piece. My apologies to all for this.
The 4th variation of McGillicuddy's Rant (1980-2003) for solo guitar is titled "Bluesy." A weird aspect of this piece is that the second section isn't particularly bluesy; for some reason, it reminds me of music by "The Allan Parsons Project," even though I was never a particularly big fan of the theirs. That's pretty weird, if you ask me.
Duck Soup (1994), for bass trombone and piano, makes use of some jazz-like material, but it is less overt than in most of the other compositions mentioned.
Passage 3 for Orchestra (1992), also borrows from the jazz world in sections. For a while in the late 1980's and early 1990's it seemed that almost everything I was writing had a walking bass-line at some point, and when I realized this I was able to attend a 12-step, walking-bass recovery group that gave me the courage to put a stop to this insidious practice, at least for a few years. Alas, several relapses have occurred since then, but I'm working on this, taking it a day at a time.

Another specific influence on one piece in particular (Steppin'Out) was an ensemble called the Penguin Cafe Orchestra. Steppin'Out also gets kind of crazy towards the end, in a Jimi Hendrix, shredding-type way, so there's another inspiration.

Cartoons (and a video game called Toontown.com) have also been a source of inspiration... I wrote a piece called Toontown Follies a couple of years ago that was supposed to be a little bit like cartoon music, and my band piece, The Misty Mall of Avalon, has cartoonish moments, and a kind of TV-show feel to the main theme.

George Harrison died while I was composing I sleep and my soul awakens… for guitar and string quartet, and, coincidentally, around the same time I noticed that the my four-note opening motive was identical to the first four notes of George Harrison's “Within You, Without You,” the Indian-inspired composition on the Beatles' “Seargent Pepper’s … ” album. I have been a huge fan of the Beatles ever since I became aware of popular music — I went to Paul McCartney's concert in Halifax this past summer, and it ranks at the pinnacle of my life's musical experiences — and I had tremendous admiration for George as guitarist/composer and, perhaps even more, as a human being, so I decided to write a section of I sleep… that expanded on that four-note motive so as to make it a more evident connection to Within You… I think the connection is subtle enough that if you didn't know about it, you might miss it, but if you know the Harrison composition and are listening for it, the connection is obvious.

But this is not what I would call an example of influence; it was more a matter of inspiration, so much so that I ended up calling the longish, meditative final section of that work "Kirtan for George."

The influences of a wide variety of composers can be found briefly at various points in different compositions of mine, but I have also been influenced in a more general sense by genres of music, such as jazz, rock, funk, cartoons, TV game shows, new age, minimalism, renaissance, modernism, and probably a whole lot more. I like many different kinds of music, and I guess that is reflected in the music I write.

Stuck?

2009-10-05T09:04:00.013-02:30

I understand from reading student blogs that at least some of you have felt "stuck" at some point(s) during the composition process for this project. If this sounds familiar to you, here are some things that may help, beginning with a slightly modified version of the answer I gave Mary Beth:

Be aware that the feeling of being stuck is a very normal part of the creative process. A common reason for being stuck is that we are putting too much pressure on ourselves, and this awareness can help you react in with at least some degree of equanimity, which in turn can help you become unstuck.

Try different things; there are many ways to become unstuck, none of which work for everyone. (More specific suggestions are listed in one of the links below.)

In this project you were asked to write three character pieces, so consider the mood/atmosphere that your first two pieces have, then think about what kind of mood/atmosphere would go well with them, either as a contrast or as a complement.

Think about textures; what textures do you use in your first two pieces, and what texture(s) might make a nice contrast to them for your third piece?

Feel free to drop by my office with your compositional sketches if you'd like suggestions that are more specific to your particular situation.

Want even more suggestions? Consider reading a couple of earlier and more detailed blogs I wrote on the subject:

Musical Influences - 1

2009-10-02T17:04:00.006-02:30

If you were asked to name the composers who have had the most influence on your music, what would you say?

I am sometimes asked this question, and I never quite know what to say... It is relatively easy to list many musical creators in a wide variety of genres whose music I love (although there are so many that it would be a challenge to make an exhaustive list), but I have never taken the time to figure out how much of an influence any of them have had on my music.

Until now. I recently received an E-mail asking me this question from a music teacher who had heard my music in the Northwest Territories, of all places(!), and while I was thinking about my response, it began to dawn on me that yes, a quite a few composers have influenced me to varying degrees in a number of my compositions.

I will spill the beans and reveal my answer later, but in the mean-time, what are your musical influences?

Instrument List

2009-09-14T14:00:00.004-02:30

A list of instruments played by students in this class:

Piano (Lindsey, Joel, Alexander, Simon, Adam S.)
Flute (Sarah)
Clarinet (Mary Beth)
Trombone (Aiden)
Violin (Brooke)
Double Bass (Josh)
Percussion (Andrew)
Guitar (Steve, Dave, Adam B., Chris)

• Have I missed anybody? If so, kindly let me know, and I will add your name to this list.

• Voice (Megan and Stephen) not listed above for this project, but you will be able to write for voice for the next project.

• You can write for an instrument other than those listed above, as long as you arrange for a performer to be able to come to our class to play your music. The guest performer does not have to stay for the whole class, just long enough to perform your composition.

• You can write for yourself as a performer, but you do not have to do so. Note that one of the ways to earn class participation marks is through performing, so if you are not performing someone's work then you should make sure to contribute to the class in other ways, most notably by being an active commentator on others' music.

• What next? If you haven't already done so, have a look at the blog that explains this assignment. It is mostly a replica of the handout I gave you, but there may be some additional information there that is helpful.

→ Read "Project 1; More Details" when you have completed your chord progression.

→ Curious about what is required in order to create a "well-prepared score"? Read the following to find out:

Welcome (Fall, 2009)!

2009-09-11T12:44:00.003-02:30

Welcome to all new music composition students in this semester's "Introduction to Music Composition" course (Mu3100)!

As mentioned in our first class, in addition to writing and presenting your music every week, you will be expected to keep your own on-line journal in the form of a blog, in which you will write your thoughts about the music you compose, and your reactions to the feedback received.

As if that were not enough, you also need to check in with the class blog, which is what you are reading right now (i.e., http://clarkross.blogspot.com/), at least once a week, and make a comment on items that interest you. If nothing interests you, then I guess you should make a comment about that! The objective is to engender a dialogue about ideas relating to composition between all of us (i.e., you, your classmates, and me). Unfortunately, there is rarely enough time in our classes to have these kind of discussions, which is why we're doing it on-line.

If you have not already done so, please sign-up for a blog at Blogger.com (which is the same as blogspot.com), then send me the link. You should have done so by Monday's class (Sept. 14).

2009-08-04T14:39:00.001-02:30

Domenico 1° & 2°

2009-07-30T14:13:00.071-02:30

I spent the first weeks of spring/summer finishing a chapter for an upcoming book (edited by John Beckwith and Brian Cherney) on the music of John Weinzweig. I had spent parts of the previous two years working on that project, but I was very glad to learn more about the music of one of the truly great icons of Canadian music. I will probably elaborate on this in future blogs.

Having finished the chapter meant I could focus my energies on composing music once again, and the first project I gleefully tackled was writing a solo piano piece inspired by Domenico Scarlatti for my friend and colleague, Kristina Szutor.

In early 2010, Dr. Szutor will be recording a CD of contemporary piano works inspired by the Italian Baroque composer, Domenico Scarlatti (1685-1757), and she had asked me to compose something for that purpose. I think the planned name for the CD is Aprés Scarlatti, but I could be wrong, and/or that could change. I don't know all the other composers whose works are being recorded for this CD, but I believe two of them are Clifford Crawley and Dennis Farell.

I wasn't quite sure of how to go about writing a contemporary piece based on Scarlatti's music at first, but, as with so many initially-perplexing ideas in life, once I began to delve more deeply into it I discovered there was much to work with. I soon became quite excited by the project and ended up enjoying the experience very much.

So much so, in fact, that when I was finished I decided to write another, hence the cunning numerical scheme in title of these pieces: Domenico 1° & 2°. Part of the rationale behind my composing a second work was a familiarity with musicologist/harpsichordist Ralph Kirkpatrick's claim that the great majority (almost 400) of Scarlatti's 555 sonatas were written in pairs¹ (and they are often performed this way), so it seemed somewhat anomalous to be composing an azygous Scarlatti-influenced sonata. ;)

As I subsequently learned, however, more recent scholarship (notably W. Dean Sutcliffe, in The Keyboard Sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti and Eighteenth-Century Musical Style, Cambridge University Press, 2003) has challenged Kirkpatrick's claim,² so it really came down to my feeling that having completed one, it would be fun to write another. It also occurred to me that it would be less lonely for my first Scarlatti piece if it had a companion.

My introduction to Scarlatti's music came through learning guitar transcriptions of his sonatas, and one of the most popular of these amongst guitarists is K. 208 (L. 238) in A major. Two of the most pervasive characteristics of that sonata are the steady, often repeated, quarter notes in the left hand, and the flowing melody in the right hand with frequent syncopations; these ideas formed the basis of Domenico 1°. The working title for this piece was originally "Domenico Daybreak," and perhaps you can hear why if you have a listen (click the "play" arrow in the audio player below; if it doesn't work, click here instead).

^{Domenico 1° (5:52):}

The great majority of Scarlatti's professional life was spent on the Iberian peninsula, most of it in Spain, where he had five children, composed the majority of his single-movement harpsichord sonatas, and became familiar with flamenco music, the influence of which can be heard in some of his sonatas.

I had therefore planned Domenico 2° as a kind of fantasy based on flamenco-like scales (for example, phrygian mode with the possibility of raised third and seventh degrees), but I decided to make it an even-more overt homage to Scarlatti by quoting four bars of his Sonata in B minor (K. 27, which I transposed to A minor) that use a chord progression known as a "fandango," much associated with the music of Spain: Am - G - F - E, in 3/4 time. This quoted passage is also remarkable for the use of hand-crossings (left hand crossing above the right), an uncommon technique for the time it was written, and I based several other sections of my composition on Scarlatti's fandango material as well. If the audio player below doesn't work for you (it apparently does not work in Internet Explorer), click here instead.

^{Domenico 2° (7:48):³}

¹ Ralph Kirkpatrick, Domenico Scarlatti, (Princeton University Press, 1983), 143: "385 sonatas [were] indubitably arranged in pairs… not intended to be performed separately… The real meaning of many a Scarlatti sonata becomes much clearer once it is reassociated with its mate.… The relationship between the sonatas of a pair is either one of contrast or of complement. The sonatas that bear a complementary relationship to each other may share a certain overall unity of style or of instrumental character or they may be composed in the same harmonic color. In the contrasting pairs, a slow movement may be followed by a fast; a simple movement, generally slow, may serve as an introduction to a more elaborate; or an elaborate and concentrated movement may be followed by a simpler and lighter movement, for example a Minuet, which serves as a kind of Nachtanz."

² "Not a single detailed commentary exists in support of any particular pair. Instead we find gestures towards opening thematic connections or an outlining of the sort of broad relationships defined by Kirkpatrick." (p. 368)

³ Sectional repeats are observed in this recording of Domenico 2° (but not in Domenico 1°).

Blog Index — Organized by Topic (® 2009-Jul)

2009-07-27T14:09:00.008-02:30

Below is an index of most of the 2008-09 blogs posted (and is an update to an earlier blog index). I omitted entries that I didn't think would be very interesting or relevant, mostly because they contained composition class business, such as reminders of deadlines, concert congratulations, order of class presentation, etc.

Feel free to browse these — you may find some that give you ideas about composition techniques, or that contain useful things to think about when composing. They are loosely organized by topic.

→ Originality and Art ←
Is Originality a Detriment in Art?
How Important is Originality in Art?
Originality — Does it have Any Role in Art?

→ Kandinsky's Theories on Art ←
Kandinsky's Theories (1)
Kandinsky's Theories (2)
Kandinsky's Theories (3)

→ Random Musings on Composition ←
Express yourself?
Creative Angst... Welcome to the club!
Running into a Brick Wall
Why Atonal Music?
Atonal — Even the Word Sounds Unpleasant!
Atonality = Noise?
Writing a Play; an Analogy to Composition
Keep? Discard?
Notation Software Woes

→ Thematic Growth ←
Thematic Growth (1)
Thematic Growth (2; Simon's Guest Blog)
Thematic Growth (3)

→ Nuts and Bolts; Musical Details, etc. ←
On musical detail (1)
On musical detail (2)
On musical detail (3)
Group Composition Lessons; Pros and Cons
Class Blog and Student Blogs Explained
New Year, New Blogs!
Adding Multiple Ossia Bars in Finale

→ Newfound Music Festivals ←
Newfound Music Festival 2009 - Thursday Daytime Events
Festival Feedback, Please

2.2. Compose as much as you can.

2.3. Invite criticism from others.

3. Understanding your Musical Idea

3.1. Live with it for a while.

3.2. What's it about?

3.3. Does it change character?

3.4. What is its function within the context of the piece?

3.5. Structural Analysis.

3.6. Harmonic (or Pitch, Scale, etc.) Analysis.

4. The Pros and Cons of Development

5. How to Extend or Develop Musical Materials; Specific Suggestions

6. Balancing the Old with the New, the Expected with the Unexpected

7. More Dichotomies to Ponder…

7.1. Less is more, vs. More is more.

7.2. Always leave them wanting more, vs. Give them what they want.

7.3. Don't treat the listener like an idiot, vs. There's a sucker born every minute.

7.4. There can be 'too much of a good thing,' vs. If you have a good idea, then stick with it!

7.5. The George Costanza approach.

8. I think my idea has run its course. Now what?

8.1. The three models for composers' roles.

8.2. Mastery or Mystery?

8.3. The value of a plan.

8.4. Getting stuck, and possible workarounds.

8.5. Don't obsess!

8.6. Challenges = Opportunities for inspired solutions!

9. Taking your inspiration from wherever you find it

Fun With Scales and Modes

2009-07-24T11:42:00.083-02:30

If you have been following my blog entries on tonality (Why Atonal?, Atonality — Even the Word Sounds Unpleasant!, Atonality = Noise?), you will know that I encourage (i.e., require) student composers to explore harmonic/melodic systems that move beyond conventional tonality, where tonality is defined as " the system of musical organization of the common practice period, and of Western-influenced popular music throughout much of the world today" (from Wikipedia). One way to do this would be to experiment with any of the thousands of scales and modes that either already exist or that you can create yourself, hence the title of today's entry.

→ Here is an "octatonic" scale, also known as a "diminished" scale because a diminished seventh chord is formed from every second note. The intervalic pattern consists of alternating half- and whole-steps (or vice-versa):

Here is a short waltz based on this octatonic scale (click on it to enlarge):

^{Octatonic Scale Waltz:}

→ Here is a Hirajoshi scale:

Here is the first phrase of the waltz, this time based on the Hirajoshi scale:

^{Hirajoshi Scale Waltz:}

→ Here is one form of a blues scale:

… and here is the first phrase of the waltz based on that blues scale:

^{Blues Scale Waltz:}

Discussion:

We tend to limit ourselves to the use major and minor scales if composing tonal music, but there are thousands of other scale possibilities that have unique nuances and harmonic implications. If you have fun (i.e., experiment) with even a few of them, you may discover that every different scale gives your compositions a slightly (or even radically) different feel.
Of these, there are a number of commonly-used alternatives to major and minor scales, such as anhemitonic (which just means "no semitones") pentatonic scales (5-note scales whose pattern can be found by playing only the black notes on a piano, any of which can be the tonic), the blues scale (there are different permutations, but all are derived from the form of the black-note pentatonic scale beginning on Eb, or La-Do-Re-Me-So-La), the Hirajoshi scale (another pentatonic scale, from Japan, but unlike the previous penatonic scale this one has two semitones (which means it is hemitonic): La-Ti-Do-Mi-Fa-La), or the octatonic scale (used in some Russian folk melodies and by some Russian composers such as Stravinsky and Scriabin, as well as by Bartok, and also used in jazz).
You can make up your own scales and modes; Messiaen created scales with repeated patterns that he called "Modes of Limited Transposition," such as:

Tone-Semitone-Semitone-Tone-Semitone-Semitone-Tone-Semitone-Semitone (which he called his third mode):
or Semitone-Semitone-Minor Third-Semitone-Semitone-Semitone-Minor Third-Semitone (which he called his fourth mode):
Messiaen's Modes of Limited Transposition are all based on repeating patterns within equal subdivisions of the octave, but in making up your own modes or scales, you do not need to be limited in this way. You could, for example, create a scale with a repeating pattern that spans a major sixth. After four such pattern repetitions, you would have spanned three octaves and the overall, three-octave, pattern would then repeat. But the pitch patterns in each of the three octaves would be slightly different. Such as this, for example:

The following scale is a mirror around the pitch F#, but you could also create a scale with few or no pattern repetitions in it:

Another approach, suggested by my friend and former colleague Dr. Scott Godin, is to construct a few (2-3) atonal chords that you wish to use as the basis for a composition, then construct a scale containing all or most of those note. You can then use that scale to create additional harmonies if you wish.
Once you choose or create some scales with which you want to work (play), you could make charts of the triads and "seventh" chords formed on each scale degree. However, you need not build these chords in the same way as is done with major and minor scales (in thirds); you could form chords based on unusual patterns, such as chord I comprising the 1^st, 2^nd, ⁴th, and 5^th scale degrees; chord II comprising the 2^nd, 3^rd, ⁵th, and 6^th scale degrees, etc. Remember that there are no rules here, so you can form chords in whatever way you like.
All of these approaches create a harmonic and melodic sound world that is distinct from that of tonality, but which can yield some fresh and attractive results.
Consider this: "Tonality" refers to far more than mere scales and the chords formed from those scales; it mostly refers to the relationships between the notes and chords in the scales. When using alternative scales and modes, you may notice some relationships between notes and chords that seem "natural" to you, and you are of course free to use them, but bear in mind that often what seems "natural" in these scales and modes are the aspects that are most closely tied to tonality, such as dominant-tonic relationships or leading tones. It can be fruitful to explore note and chord relationships that are not similar to the more familiar aspects of tonality.
Incidentally, the objective, when using something like a blues or Hirajoshi scale, is not necessarily to create blues music or Japanese music (although it obviously can be if you wish); it is to write compositions that may sound to the listener as though they are related the kinds of music from which the scales originated, but with your own unique spin on them. For example, my blues-scale waltz fragment above does not sound particularly bluesy, because the F#-F-F#-G in the 3^rd bar is not characteristic of blues music. More bluesy in that bar would have been F-Eb-F-G, or even Gb-F-Eb-G, because the F#/Gb in that scale is usually treated as an inflection of F or G.
And finally, don't forget that the concepts of "non-harmonic tones" and "modulation" can be borrowed from tonality and applied to any music you compose using these alternative scales.
Have fun!

Mu3100 Project 1 (Atonal Theme + Variations)

2009-07-21T14:30:00.032-02:30

Project Description: WRITE THREE VARIATIONS ON AN ATONAL CHORD PROGRESSION FOR PIANO AND ONE OTHER PERFORMER (solo instrument or percussion).

Begin by creating an original harmonic structure on which the variations will be based. Follow the guidelines below. Be able to play this in class.

Write a progression of 12 to 16 chords of your own invention for piano, using only whole notes and solid (non-broken) chords.

No octave doublings.

None of the chords should sound like an obvious sonority in functional harmony. Read these blogs to understand why:

Any chord that sounds like it might have some distant relationship to tonal music (like Vb9 with an added 13th in an unusual inversion) should not function as it would in tonal music (i.e. the chord above should not “resolve” to anything resembling a I or vi chord).

The chords should sound connected in some sense; avoid giving the impression of a random series of unrelated sonorities. On the other hand, the sense of connection need not be obvious.

There should be a gradual increase in harmonic tension to a specific point, roughly 61.8% of the way through the progression(!), followed by a corresponding decrease in tension to the end. This proportion (61.8 : 31.2, which is the same as 1.618 : 1.0 or 1.0 : 0.618) is called the golden mean, or golden ratio, or phi, and is related to the Fibonaci Series (click links to read more about these).

No chords can be re-used, although they may be re-voiced. Note that the same collection of notes can have greater or lesser tension depending on the voicing.

Vary the number of notes in each chord to suit the desired tension level; avoid using four-voice chorale-style texture exclusively.

Explore the possibility of using different registers on the piano, either simultaneously in the same chord (hands widely spaced apart), or as a means of contrast from one sonority to the next, or as a means of contrast for subsequent variations.

Use a very slow tempo, in order to allow the listener’s ears to take in the uniqueness of each sonority before moving on to the next one.

Do not introduce dynamics yet; the increase in tension should be principally effected through harmonic means, not through dynamic control. Perform your chord progression without dynamic inflections.

Your primary composition tools should be your ears and instincts; when comparing chords x and y, which one feels like it has greater tension? However, if you study each chord you write to determine its intervallic content (do a Best Normal Order analysis and a Vector analysis, if you like), this information may be used when constructing new chords, or when altering existing chords for future variations. Each chord should sound “right” to your ears. Atonal music does not have to sound unpleasant, but almost all music is based on principles of tension and resolution, and your challenge is to do this within an atonal idiom.

→ When you play your chord progression for the class, we will each assign a "perceived tension level" score to each chord, notated on a sheet of paper, where 0 = no tension, and 10 = highest possible tension. This will be followed by a short discussion in which class members will be asked to identify the chords of greatest and least tension, and discuss any general trends with regards to tension in the chord progression (for example, you may find that the tension level increased substantially from chords 1 to 4, then took a dip for chord 5, then stayed the same for chord 6, then spiked (increased substantially) in chord 7, etc.).

Week 1 will be spent creating the chord progression.
Week 2 will be spent fine tuning it (based on feedback received in class), introducing rhythmic values to each chord (not all whole notes; try to create a sense of “timelessness” or unpredictability through notated rubato), considering the possibility of repeating a chord for rhythmic purposes or of re-using a chord, adding dynamics and articulations, marking in phrasing, and creating a melody.
Weeks 3, and 4, will be spent creating a new variation each week.
Week 5 will be spent creating the final copy of the score to be handed in, as well as a recording. The recording is normally made during the class recital, date TBA.
Note that the work you do each week does not have to be handed in (until the composition is complete), but it does have to be played in class.

→ Read "Project 1; More Details" when you have completed your chord progression.

→ Curious about what is required in order to create a "well-prepared score"? Read the following to find out:

Is Originality a Detriment in Art?

2009-07-15T22:35:00.002-02:30

I think originality is an essential element in art, but in my previous entry I suggested that there are many examples of great art where the degree of originality is arguably not very high, but this does not seem to detract from the art’s value or its impact on us.

Today I will go a step further and suggest that originality, and the power of art to move us, may exist in a kind of inverse relationship; that is, a groundbreaking, highly original work of art is less likely to move us than a work that uses techniques and conventions with which we are familiar, albeit in an original way. Or, put another way, if someone makes up a beautiful poem in Klingon language, most of us are unlikely to be moved by it unless we know Klingon. Which, alas, I do not.

But first an explanation of why this topic interests me.

I post my music at MacJams.com, a site where anyone can upload their music for the purposes of getting feedback from others. I like it a lot; it is very welcoming to people who make the effort to be involved, which I suspect is true of all on-line communities.

In addition to written comments, you can also vote on others’ music (although some artists choose to disable this option for their submissions, preferring to receive comments only). The voting system goes from 1 to 10 in four categories, one of which is “originality/creativity,” which is explained as follows: “Has this artist created something unique or pushed the musical boundaries?”

The answer to this question is clearly “no” for every piece I have ever heard there, including my own music, if one understands “unique” to mean "highly unusual or rare," "the single one of its kind," or "radically distinctive and without equal" (definitions I found at OneLook.com). Fear not, gentle reader; I do not therefore go around MacJams giving scores of “1” in this category. I do what I suspect most voters do; I give high scores to music that doesn’t sound too much like a blatant rip-off of something else, and medium scores to music that does. Being Canadian, my genetics prevent me from giving low scores.

In any event, the existence of this voting category at MacJams got me thinking about the meaning of “originality/creativity” (which I see as two separate categories, by the way, but that is a discussion for another day) and the importance of originality in the evaluation or creation of art.

The other reasons that this topic interests me are that (a) I am a composer, and it’s an issue that is on my mind whenever I write music, and (b) I am a composition teacher, and an idea that I try to communicate to students is that being overly concerned with the originality of one's creations may be dangerous, because it can lead to extreme self-censorship, i.e., not continuing any musical ideas because, upon reflection, they are not original enough.

On the other hand, it seems to me that at least some originality is essential if one does not wish to write music that sounds like somebody else's. As with so many other things in life, it comes down to a question of balance.

And so, to answer the question posed in today's blog entry, originality (by which I mean the quality of uniqueness, being significantly unlike anything else that exists) can indeed be a detriment in art if one of the goals of the artist is to express something that others can understand. In spite of this, it is an essential aspect of art. Perhaps it can be said that a little goes a long way, but too little goes nowhere at all!