Becoming a composer: a good idea or not?

[karlhenning]

Yes. And knowing why, is the key.

[Tapio Dimitriyevich Shostakovich]

And there are the Experiential Matters, which essentially weigh clichés like Oboe for beauty (what, the only instrument for beauty?) and Timpani for drama

OK, I mean the other way around: You can very well use a flute for describing innocence. This does not imply you couldn't use another instrument for this. Cliché. Hmm well, I'd not say cliché, but expectations of a specific  listening society in a specific era and socialization.

[karlhenning]

Having just finished a piece that included harp and consulting with a harpist throughout, I now know why and am very exciting about writing even more for harp.  I love the instrument!

(* pounds the table *)

[Luke]

Yes. And knowing why, is the key.

Knowing the keys is why.



This is all getting rather Zen.... 

[Luke]

Leon, have you posted any of your music on GMG? Fancy starting your own composer's thread? It's been a very rewarding experience for me, having had a long-standing, on-going, stop-start thread here and on the previous board. Sympathetic, interested listeners, a chance to air your music, log its progress, discuss your musical thoughts.

[Luke]

Oh yes, I like it! I'm still glad that I don't cringe at the name of my thread, after all these years. It very precisely describes what it is and what it does....and quotes a piece by Nicolas Slnimsky into the bargain! 

[karlhenning]

Knowing the keys is why.

The pedals are the key? . . .

[karlhenning]

Thanks for the suggestion.  I have thought about it and will probably do it, but the hard part is finding the right name for it.  Leon's Den? 

I like it, too; bring it on!

[Scarpia]

You mentioned you play the guitar.  Have you ever composed music for the guitar?

Having composed music on a limited basis in the rather distant past, I think writing music that can be performed is very valuable.  I don't understand the motivation of people who decide, out of the blue, that they must write a piece for 100 piece orchestra, double choir and 6 vocal soloists.   

[karlhenning]

. . . I don't understand the motivation of people who decide, out of the blue, that they must write a piece for 100 piece orchestra, double choir and 6 vocal soloists.   

On the other hand, if they've got a great piece in them for such forces . . . .

[Scarpia]

On the other hand, if they've got a great piece in them for such forces . . . .

Well, I don't mean to derail the thread, but there are lots of pieces that Bach wrote for keyboard that I can hear as chamber music.  It is my "dream" to make such transcriptions.   (Something along the lines of the well known transcription of the Goldberg Variations for string trio.)  But the idea it is unlikely to find good musicians interested in playing them puts a damper on it.

[Luke]

The key/key signature of the music is the key. Or - works this way too - the lever-keys with which one alters the notes on e.g. a knee harp. Bah. Hate explaining jokes!   

Having composed music on a limited basis in the rather distant past, I think writing music that can be performed is very valuable.  I don't understand the motivation of people who decide, out of the blue, that they must write a piece for 100 piece orchestra, double choir and 6 vocal soloists.   

I've done almost precisely that, once! No double choir, but a solo piano, and only 5 vocal soloists! That was the last time I did something so unlikely to be performed, but I don't regret doing it. I had a deep wish to create that piece (and the similar one which preceded it), and I had to prove to myself that I had the stamina and orchestral imagination to do it, too. A foolish, extravagant gesture, perhaps, from the outside, but it certainly felt a valuable, worthwhile thing to do on my part.

[Scarpia]

I've done almost precisely that, once! No double choir, but a solo piano, and only 5 vocal soloists! That was the last time I did something so unlikely to be performed, but I don't regret doing it. I had a deep wish to create that piece (and the similar one which preceded it), and I had to prove to myself that I had the stamina and orchestral imagination to do it, too. A foolish, extravagant gesture, perhaps, from the outside, but it certainly felt a valuable, worthwhile thing to do on my part.

But that wasn't your first substantial work, I assume. 

[Luke]

Depends what you mean by substantial. They were, and remain, the biggest pieces I had written in terms of forces required, by a long way. I was writing them with no real hope of performance, but the fact remains that once written, performance is at least possible, however unlikely. And that counted and counts for a lot for me personally. I realise that it is an illogical position, in some respects. But there - I have written two very large orchestral pieces, that probably won't ever get played, but that could potentially be done. That's something, anyway. More important, to me, is that I know the pieces have some quality in them, somewhere (though I like them a lot less now than I did at the time)

I should also say that as a much younger proto-composer - a 14 or 15 year old - I wrote orchestral pieces (or attempts at such) farily often. I loved toying with writing scores, and it was a great discipline for me, even though none of them (thankfully) ever saw the light of day. As far as orchestration goes they got better and better and eventually, when I did have orchestral pieces that could be and were played, I found that my orchestration was good, in the sense that the sounds I wanted were the sounds that emerged. It was all those dry-runs that got me to that place and meant that I didn't have to spend time tinkering with the orchestration of the performed works once their orchestras got their hands on them.

[Scarpia]

I see.  I guess nowadays you can also feed your orchestral score into a midi synthesizer and hear some approximation of how it would sound.

[karlhenning]

That can be less gratifying than in may seem ; )

[Florestan]

Thank you, but I've to find a teacher first.

The reason I asked you that question is that I am myself in your position --- not as a composer, but as a pianist. It is my dearest & wildest dream since I was a teenager to learn playing the piano; of course, not as a pro. I am now almost 40 and still dreaming... But I am determined not to die before being able to playing "Twinkle, twinkle, little star" on the keyboard!

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

The reason I asked you that question is that I am myself in your position --- not as a composer, but as a pianist. It is my dearest & wildest dream since I was a teenager to learn playing the piano; of course, not as a pro. I am now almost 40 and still dreaming... But I am determined not to die before being able to playing "Twinkle, twinkle, little star" on the keyboard!

Well if it gives you any hope...I started learning the piano 4 years ago, at the age of 42. It was due to a stroke of luck: I rented an apartment which had a piano in it, and I decided to take advantage of the situation. I got myself a teacher and applied myself. I'll never be a good pianist, but practicing almost every day for 4 years does have an effect.

By the way, I'm always puzzled by people who play music but can't read it. Learning to read music isn't difficult: you can learn the basics in a day or so. I don't understand why anyone who wants to play music, not just listen to it, would feel daunted by the task.

[Luke]

No, learning to read music is easy. Or it ought to be. And it certainly always seemed easy to me. But in my real job as music teacher I have to face the fact every day that for some pepole it simply isn't easy. Brains are wired differently, and what seems simple and obvious to one is not for another. It's harder, too, for older students. What happens, sometimes, is that the pupil, struggling with reading the music, ends up memorising the piece by default - they've had to repeat it so often just to get the notes up to some kind of speed that it fixes itself in their memories. Which is all very well for that one particular piece, but no help if you're looking to be able to play (or play through) anything and everything. Which is why I ask my pupils to sightread lots, to keep confronting themselves with music they haven't seen before, play through it and move on to the next piece. It's the best way of becoming familiar with a variety of musical 'situations' and at the same time quickly leads to greater fluency with music reading in all its aspects.

[Cato]

No, learning to read music is easy. Or it ought to be. And it certainly always seemed easy to me. But in my real job as music teacher I have to face the fact every day that for some people it simply isn't easy.

Not to sound like a prodigy, but I had deduced how to read music on my own by looking at my grandmother's piano music for about 15 minutes, when I was in early grade school.

I believe there might be a sort of snobbishness in being a musician who deliberately cannot read music: Paul McCartney comes to mind: the idea that despite this "huge gap," look what I can still do!

Yes, people are often mystified by abilities that others have, who view their talents as quite natural and no mystery at all!