Composing Tips?

[greg]

I'm still trying to figure this out on my own, but if anyone has any helpful input, I'd be glad to hear.

I'm sure, as everyone can tell, I haven't been able to write music for the last (nearly) 3 years. It's not like I haven't tried, though- I try almost every day. But I'm either not satisfied with what I wrote, or I get burnt out on it (all 20 seconds worth of it) and lack the desire to proceed from there.

Usually, it goes like this- I may come up with some good ideas and feel some sort of unexplainable divine spark of creativity, write down some music as the start of a piece, and then after 30 minutes or so, I'll stop since I'm overwhelmed and need a break. However, once I do take a break, the piece literally dies in me. I'll look at it the next day and either like it, but can't come up with anything good to follow it- or I'll just think that it sucks. 

There are two causes that I can think of for this: 1) very high expectations of what I'll write  and
2) the whole constant fatigue problem. Especially now that I'm out of school, life feels like one thing: a solid, gray line extending into eternity. Everything has lost its color, and I'm not sure how one is supposed to be able to be creative when one feels like that almost all the time. When I'm not at work, all I feel like doing is lying down and either sleeping or staring into my computer screen, mind off. Just talking to people is painful half the time... getting up out of my bed to walk 3 feet away to sit down at my keyboard is nearly painful. The only time I play music now is when I grab my guitar (which is right by my bed) and lay down and play through scales or patterns (usually requiring no thought).


I think the only time I even wrote music that I could continue over the course of more than one day was when I was in school years ago and had summer break. Something about having all the time in the world, with nothing to do, inspired creativity. I would sit at my computer in the morning and just mess around with writing stuff, and didn't judge what I wrote.

I don't know... I'll figure it out. Any ideas, though?

[Scarpia]

Have you had any technical training in music composition and/or music theory?

[greg]

Not as in having had a teacher teach me directly. I definitely know enough to write something for orchestra (which is what I'm trying to do now), but it's just a matter of writing something that would satisfy my own tastes- the perfect combination of using certain harmonic, rhythmic, contrapuntal, thematic, etc. ideas that are completely unique to me and at the same time be the most amazing thing I've ever heard.

Have you ever had a chance to hear anything I've written or hear me playing guitar? Just wondering. 

[Scarpia]

Not as in having had a teacher teach me directly. I definitely know enough to write something for orchestra (which is what I'm trying to do now), but it's just a matter of writing something that would satisfy my own tastes- the perfect combination of using certain harmonic, rhythmic, contrapuntal, thematic, etc. ideas that are completely unique to me and at the same time be the most amazing thing I've ever heard.

Have you ever had a chance to hear anything I've written or hear me playing guitar? Just wondering. 

It strikes me that there is a contradiction here.  You say you know everything you need to know to write orchestral music, but you also say you are not satisfied with anything you write.  Greater technical mastery of the art of composition may be what you need.

[greg]

I wouldn't mind having a teacher, but that's just realistically impossible...

Not everything I don't finish writing I'm unsatisfied with. I thought that this project I started for clarinet + flute was pretty good, but it went the same way I described. I just started writing the first few bars, and it sounds great. But then, continuing the next day where I left off, I'm not inspired by it any more because it feels old, and the only thought that enters my mind is "I have to think of something at this point where I left off." So, I play through it repeatedly, again and again, each time trying to come up with something good at that point, and can't- it's like I'm forcing myself to. Eventually, several weeks later, one day, I somehow manage to come up with a few more bars that sound good- I think because I'm actually relaxed at that time. Then the same problem continues... I give myself an hour in the day to write, and once that hour is up, I have to do something, like go to work. But knowing that, it feels like every second I'm running out of time, and can't concentrate. The only time I can concentrate is when I just mess around on an instrument, with no feeling of time limit, and no commitment to writing it down, but there's always going to be a time limit, especially since I'll never have summer vacations again.

Eventually, I just dropped it because I need to focus on writing an orchestral work instead.

[jowcol]

The only time I can concentrate is when I just mess around on an instrument, with no feeling of time limit, and no commitment to writing it down, but there's always going to be a time limit, especially since I'll never have summer vacations again.

I'm of the belief that one should adapt one's creative approach to what one is feeling and the limits one faces.   Between the overtime job and kids (and a horrible music and literature  addiction),  I mostly improvise on my instrument (hammered dulcimer)-- not only is it more of a release, but the last few times I tried to write something, I'd lose the spark as well.  A lot of it would sound forced.   Although I dearly love orchestral music and admire composed music, I think that I produce better music by improvising.  (That's not so say improvised music is better-- just acknowledging my limitations in theory and composition).  One composer (I wish I remember who) said that it's fatiguing to listen to a work by a composer who is always working  at the limits of their technique.  Although everyone needs to step out of their comfort zone and challenge their assumptions, it's equally important to be honest with yourself.  And enjoy whatever the hell you are doing.

Stravinsky spoke the motivation to compose  a few times-- I don't have access to the quotes at the moment, but the gist of it was that one should compose to solve a very specific problem, and not just be a composer for a sake of composing.  When I have written things that I can still stand to listen to later, it was usually the case that I really limited the scope of the work, and focused on one or two major ideas, and kept coming back to them whenever I got lost.   You might as well start with simplicity, as complexity will always introduce itself.

Some of this may be existential- why do you NEED to write an orchestral work?  What is it about the content you have in mind  that requires it?


Oh yeah-- one of the downsides of improvisation is that you may not push yourself hard enough, and be happy with the same level without pushing it further.  For therapy, that's not a problem, but if you are trying to grow, you need to gather that sense of urgency you have mentioned when you try to compose.

Another idea-- and that is to record some of your improvised work (or a lot of it) and search that for musical ideas to base compositions on.  If you are not writing for a specific performance, but are using software to generate the sounds (through midi, etc), some software allows you to compose alongside digital tracks. 

I'll contradict myself a third or forth time, and point out what Shostakovitch said.  He said it was vital to write every day-- and if you didn't have significant ideas, write trifles or orchestrate some other work.  Then again, he was vehement about the evils of improvisation. 

A last idea-- this is something that writers do.  Don't stop where your inspiration ends.  Instead, force yourself to stop in mid-phrase, where the path ahead still seems clear.  It will make it easier to start next time.

[Franco]

Nice post, jowcol - but this in particular hit home with me:

one should compose to solve a very specific problem, and not just be a composer for a sake of composing

This perfectly summarizes my approach - not to place myself anywhere in the league of Stravinsky - but I've always thought of composing like he describes.   

OTOH I am a big believer in sitting at the desk and attempting to do something every day, even if it is copying over what I've written previously (assuming you use pencil and paper).  Oddly, some of my best creative ideas have occurred while doing something uncreative such as recopying-reassembling some music I've scratched out and edited for a few days.  (I don't like using a computer for the actual writing, but only to create a finished document. )

There is something about the physical use of pencil and paper that is integral to my process - if I am stuck, doing something like writing out transpositions of a theme in various keys, or turning it upside down or backwards, or shifting a note from one octave to another - all done long hand will at some point cause a click in my brain which offers up a new idea, or direction.  I also like using all kinds of drafting tools, rulers, templates, different colored pencils, cutting and pasting parts of one page to another - it all contributes to a process - and the last score before I key it into Finale is can be somewhat of a construction/collage.

The creative process is a mystery - you need to find what works for you and just have at it - in a disciplined manner.

[jowcol]

The creative process is a mystery - you need to find what works for you and just have at it - in a disciplined manner.

Another Stravinsky quote I like is that he saw composing as an act of selective perception-- not creation.  It is like when a sculptor tells you that he just looked at the marble, and cut away everything that did not belong.

[greg]

EXCELLENT posts. Thanks, I'll keep these thoughts in mind. 

[mikkeljs]

For me desire always develope the longer time I spent on the piece and the more material I have written. Thats probably why all my pieces gets so long and complex. I feel that the time and work span is counting up the content, and that the extented focus on the same things is generating the desire emotionally. Two people can watch the same sunset, while one loves it so much and the other don´t care. I think the difference is because the one is open and the other can only see what has a direct function to himself and is limitted to focus only one meter around himself. It could be helpful to write something you find really borring, somehow then you dont feel its neccesary to follow an already existing desire, since you never know if you actually have one recently. But simply search for it by being open and patient. I would suggest to write as complex as you can, though still conscious, trying not to repeat youself but rather to add new objects, again and again through months. Inspiration for me comes from searching out of myself, not inside. What makes me satisfied is whenever I come up with something different than my previous feelings or thoughts, when I feel my brain is generating new experiences by itself (not by entirely copying impulses from outside, but from using them in a syntese with each other in a random way), thats when I feel most alive.

[greg]

But simply search for it by being open and patient. I would suggest to write as complex as you can, though still conscious, trying not to repeat youself but rather to add new objects, again and again through months.

Yes, yes.

[Ten thumbs]

I feel that perhaps your efforts at composition are lacking an aim. Look at your material and think about how your piece should end. Once you have a goal you may find it easier to persevere in directing your music towards it. To this end, consider structure: even if it is innovative, there should be structure.

[Luke]

Hi Greg

Haven't posted here for weeks, but thought maybe I could contribute something here...hope so. I recognise what you are describing, the way a piece flows one day and the next everything seems disconnected. That used to happen to me quite a bit, and it made me change the way I composed for a while (it's all on my thread, buried deep somewhere, you'll have read it at the time). It seemed to me that if this was happening, then the music must be coming from a fairly deep place within me, and, as I'm not the same person the next day, no wonder the music won't connect with the music of the previous day. So for a while I allowed this state of affairs to happen and didn't try to force the issue. I wrote only small pieces, in one sitting, and if the music didn't flow as soon as I sat down with piano, pen and paper, then I didn't force it. I honestly think this worked - the pieces came (above all, I"m talking about those Improvisation I wrote in 2003, links on my thread if you want to see what I'm on about), and then after a few months they stopped coming, and there was nothing I could do to make them come again, nor did I really want to. And somehow from that point on I became much better at preserving my mental approach to a piece over however many days it took. Writing in that way, letting it flow when it would and then stopping when it stopped, also taught me a lot about myself and the things I tend to do as a composer, and I was able to encourage these things 'artificially', as it were, choosing to do them rather than discovering them anew each time; this helped my style become much more personal, much more 'me', and also helped me with that ability to sustain the compositional mood over a much longer time span. That's how those tiny, intense Improvisations led on to longer, more ambitious things like the various sonatas I've written which are, if anything, more intense, and more personal, even though they are longer and more complex - because the Improvisations let me find things out about myself without even knowing it.

So, what I'm saying, I suppose, is - don't fight it: even if you want to be writing Mahlerian epics, for now write short pieces, lots of them, and love it! Short pieces aren't lesser pieces, as you know of course - think of Webern and Kurtag, but also of Schumann, Scriabin, Mompou, whoever. Just the sheer variety and productivity might well ignite things for you again.

[rappy]

Hi,

great post, Luke. I have made exactly the same experience.
Last week I had a discussion with my theory teacher. I told him that when I start writing a piece, it flows out of my head until there comes a point when it stops flowing and I feel the need to begin "constructing".
He told me that there is no real possibility for me to "legitimate" the ideas I wrote down by the ideas that follow, because I have no system as a reference. He said that I'm thinking too much in tonal categories. With death of tonality, the possibility of logical connection also died. The effect was that people invented new systems because they felt the need for legitimation (serialism).
By denying such a system, people then began composing associatively (e.g. Rihm).
So I shall continue composing associatively when I began so. If the whole composition is written that way, it will have more flow, will sound more authentic and more "myself".
An extreme example is Feldman, who just didn't care about what he had written before when he continued writing the next day.

Maybe you should try it that way? Maybe you have the same problem - the music flows and flows and then there comes a point at which you think: "Ok, now I gotta do something with the things I wrote down" (such as Haydn might have thought after having written the exposition)
Maybe you must also recognize that this way of thinking does not fit to your style. Keep on being creative until you've written the last bar.

[greg]

Thanks for the tips, everyone. 

I think I really might try that- writing a bunch of miniatures at whim for a while. It would also be the only way I could use exercises in overall form, in a hands-on way- not to mention real experience actually writing stuff, and directing/making routine a personal style.

[Saul]

I'm still trying to figure this out on my own, but if anyone has any helpful input, I'd be glad to hear.

I'm sure, as everyone can tell, I haven't been able to write music for the last (nearly) 3 years. It's not like I haven't tried, though- I try almost every day. But I'm either not satisfied with what I wrote, or I get burnt out on it (all 20 seconds worth of it) and lack the desire to proceed from there.

Usually, it goes like this- I may come up with some good ideas and feel some sort of unexplainable divine spark of creativity, write down some music as the start of a piece, and then after 30 minutes or so, I'll stop since I'm overwhelmed and need a break. However, once I do take a break, the piece literally dies in me. I'll look at it the next day and either like it, but can't come up with anything good to follow it- or I'll just think that it sucks. 

There are two causes that I can think of for this: 1) very high expectations of what I'll write  and
2) the whole constant fatigue problem. Especially now that I'm out of school, life feels like one thing: a solid, gray line extending into eternity. Everything has lost its color, and I'm not sure how one is supposed to be able to be creative when one feels like that almost all the time. When I'm not at work, all I feel like doing is lying down and either sleeping or staring into my computer screen, mind off. Just talking to people is painful half the time... getting up out of my bed to walk 3 feet away to sit down at my keyboard is nearly painful. The only time I play music now is when I grab my guitar (which is right by my bed) and lay down and play through scales or patterns (usually requiring no thought).


I think the only time I even wrote music that I could continue over the course of more than one day was when I was in school years ago and had summer break. Something about having all the time in the world, with nothing to do, inspired creativity. I would sit at my computer in the morning and just mess around with writing stuff, and didn't judge what I wrote.

I don't know... I'll figure it out. Any ideas, though?

Like everything of value, one needs an audience.

The composers of  the past , had people who appreciated and loved their work, there was real interest.
So the composers found within them the strength to compose to satisfy the demand, and give back to the people.

But today, you will have one of two:

Either an ignorant audience who just doesn't understand classical music, and therefore wont be interested in your work.

Or an audience of Critics. Those who know something about classical music,  right away look for gaps, flaws and 'weak points' in your work, instead of actually enjoying the piece, they carefully examine it, that takes out the entire fun of the whole experience.

Case in point, look at my own thread of compositions and performances.

Does somebody care?

Absolutely nothing.

So if no one wants to hear, comment, say a few words about your creativity, why then should you be so eager to continue composing?

Do it for fun?

Well, you can just have musical ideas and play them for yourself and your close friends and family to enjoy, there is no need to spend months or perhaps years in composing complex works that no one would want to give his time to hear.

This is the truth of the matter, the greatest musical masterpieces have been composed and performed and recorded. You must be an extra ordinary individual with phenomenal talent, to match up with the greats.
And since most of the composers of today are not that, that's why they are vastly ignored by both layman and competent listeners and musicians,  I know its tough, but this is the reality.

[greg]

I see what you mean. 

But, my audience for this piece will be whatever judge is in charge of judging the piece (Sciarrino this year, Hosokawa next year) for the Toru Takemitsu competition:

http://www.operacity.jp/en/concert/award/index.php

and if I'm a finalist, then my audience will be a regular audience, with me there. 

If you're interested, you can try writing something for this competition, but they're probably more interested in works that are either avant-garde or "almost avant-garde" (which might categorize roughly how I would write). But, you never know!


As for this:

This is the truth of the matter, the greatest musical masterpieces have been composed and performed and recorded. You must be an extra ordinary individual with phenomenal talent, to match up with the greats.
And since most of the composers of today are not that, that's why they are vastly ignored by both layman and competent listeners and musicians,  I know its tough, but this is the reality.

I don't know if it's a matter of talent or a matter of what people generally like, but I haven't been nearly as impressed by contemporary composers as much as with "the greats"- and I have a taste for modern music. 

[Saul]

I see what you mean. 

But, my audience for this piece will be whatever judge is in charge of judging the piece (Sciarrino this year, Hosokawa next year) for the Toru Takemitsu competition:

http://www.operacity.jp/en/concert/award/index.php

and if I'm a finalist, then my audience will be a regular audience, with me there. 

If you're interested, you can try writing something for this competition, but they're probably more interested in works that are either avant-garde or "almost avant-garde" (which might categorize roughly how I would write). But, you never know!


As for this:I don't know if it's a matter of talent or a matter of what people generally like, but I haven't been nearly as impressed by contemporary composers as much as with "the greats"- and I have a taste for modern music. 

Thanks Greg, but the whole Idea of a competition when it comes to music, is a little strange for me.
I would like to separate between sports and music.

[greg]

It is strange, but at least for me, it would provide 3 things I desperately need all at the same time:

1) a trip to Tokyo
2) a huge cash prize
3) a performance of something I've written



It may be a bit "wrong" in the way to treat music as a sport, but it's also a way to promote contemporary composers- usually about 5 or so new works each year. If you have sooooo much new music that is being written and want to promote it but obviously can't get to every piece that is being written, one thing you can do is decide what is "the best" (what is worthy to be played). And, of course, to do that, you have to get the opinion of a professional composer. I have a feeling this is sort of what they're doing. It's just a fine way of promoting contemporary music.

[karlhenning]

But today, you will have one of two:

Either an ignorant audience who just doesn't understand classical music, and therefore wont be interested in your work.

Or an audience of Critics. Those who know something about classical music,  right away look for gaps, flaws and 'weak points' in your work, instead of actually enjoying the piece, they carefully examine it, that takes out the entire fun of the whole experience.

This does not hold true at all, in my experience.  I play/sing (or others play/sing my music) to audiences several times through the course of the year.  In the first place, the audience is a composite of people with greatly varying musical experience & sophistication.  In the second, a solid majority of the audience have always responded positively — even when (in many instances) the response includes the phrase "I'm not sure I understood all of your music."  In the third, the critical component of the response is, far more frequently than not, respectful and interactive — never dismissive.