PianoManGidley

I would say meaning...at least, if by "meaning," you mean "soul." I think some composers (*coughJohnWilliamscough*) too often write music that they know will sell because of its beauty, but lacks any sort of true passion or soul behind it. It's like feeding someone nothing but chocolate icing...yeah, it tastes great, but there's nothing solid to support it, and you're just doing it to be popular and/or make money.

Well, one of the WIPs I submitted to my composition professor in my portfolio was the piece that turned out to be orchestrated for my first composition recital. Hopes of Snow That's honestly the only piece I remember for sure that was in that portfolio. Everything else was really old crap, too.

Totally...I HATE it when people do that! :P

Glad to know I'm not the only one who read it wrong at first...though I didn't think of the wrestler "The Rock," but more just personifying the genre Rock, turning it into a composer. "Oh, yes--I think Rock makes a wonderful composer!"

Listen and analyze composers that use unconventional progressions (that still sound good), such as perhaps Alban Berg or Lisa Gerrard.

Why not just rework the piano stuff to something you can play on the violin?

"Good" and "bad" are subjective. If you just don't like rock, then pretty much ALL of it will be "the bad kind" to you. I know for me, I can't STAND that bubble-headed 50s rock (a la "Little Shop of Horrors"). It makes me want to strangle kittens.

I love Joni Mitchell! I heard she cut an album with Chuck Mingus--I SO wanna hear that!! I'm a rock fan myself. I love a lot of various artists (overall, but also within rock), such as: Duran Duran My Chemical Romance Bowling for Soup Mindless Self Indulgence 2 Gryphon Blackfield Queen Richard Marx Ludo Savage Garden Sixpence None The Richer Chicago

1. Lisa Gerrard 2. Danny Elfman 3. Alban Berg 4. John Adams 5. Aram Khatchaturian

I really enjoy John Adams. His "Phrygian Gates" was what heavily inspired my "Of Dreams and Memories."

I don't know of anyone in band or choir who HASN'T heard of Whitacre. He's got a good sound and good style...my only complaint is that sometimes it feels like he's writing music that he knows will sell and be popular. Of course, that's just my totally subjective feeling.

What does "IDK" mean?

What's your opinion of Milton Babbitt? For me, I can't stand his music--it's far too stoic, which IMO defeats one of (if not THE) main point of music.

Depends...if I'm sketching out a tune that's popped into my head impromptu and I don't have access to an instrument to check pitch, I'll pick an arbitrary key and write it like that. Otherwise, yes, I'll write in the pitch I hear it in first, and transpose only if the instrumentation I decide to use would be better suited for something else (like initial concert pitch of B for wind ensemble--moves so easily to Bb)...unless, of course, I'm LOOKING to get a muddier/emptier sound from the instruments in question.

Again I point out Eastern music...is this just not music in your eyes? Are you really going to be that prejudice?

There was some famous composer--I want to say it was Charles Ives--that couldn't read or write music, and could only play piano while someone else took dictation to transcribe his music. So it's not an absolute necessity, though I think it's safe to say that it does REALLY help in the process.

Are you saying, then, that the music from other half of the planet was never really "composed"? That sounds rather insulting, IMO, because it sounds like you're saying that only cultures of the Western world can truly "compose," and that anything from the Eastern hemisphere is somehow "less."

Because I couldn't live my life without composing.

I'm another jazz fan...though I listen to plenty of other stuff, too: Rock, Folk, New Age, Minimalism...hell, I'm listening to some really good barbershop right now.

Hurm...hard to make a call on the single most important trait for a composer to have...but I'd harbor a guess at it being your ability to take criticism well--find out what's legitimately helpful that someone has to offer for improving your craft, and learn to just brush off the rest with either a "thank you" or a "whatever, screw you," depending on the tone and context of the criticism dealt. The way I see it, every artist worth their weight not only can stand to improve, but actively seeks to improve their craft without end. Ask the most talented musicians alive today after a performance what they thought of their performance, and they'll usually list at least one thing they could have done better...and it's because they know that there's always room for improvement.

You're totally forgetting John Corigliano's Oscar-winning score for "The Red Violin." But still, I don't think he would take in a student who had his/her heart set SOLELY on film scoring. That's a really tough gig to do well in as it is, and a lot of it is how well you can sell yourself and position yourself in the industry--not just how well you write, or even less, who taught you/where you studied. Danny Elfman went to college for one year, dropped out because he said it was "bogus," then went backpacking in Africa for three years before coming back to America to form his band, The Mystic Knights of the Oingo Boingo (more commonly known as simply "Oingo Boingo"). Tim Burton happened to be a fan of that band and contacted Elfman to score a movie he was set to shoot, "Pee-Wee's Big Adventure." And Elfman's career took off from there. (Of course, this isn't at all taking into account Elfman's FIRST film to score--"The Forbidden Zone," written and directed by his older brother, Richard Elfman.) So you can see that going to a prestigious school won't guarantee you a job in the film scoring industry. Better to simply read up on ways to promote yourself and your music for that, methinkst. The University of Southern California has a music school noted for its emphasis in film scoring, however, if you want to check that out. Besides, if we're talking about the "best" school for music in general, I've always heard greater things about Eastman than anywhere else...but that might be just because of who I was around at my own college (Lamar University).

Huh...the theory lessons I had were rather well explained to me. Obviously, a lot depends on the teachers and institution at which you study. I always learned that theory, while you had to view it as "rules" for your exams, was overall meant to be more like "guidelines." And understanding things like the harmonic overtone series and such helped explain just WHY certain things sounded better in the Western ear than other things...as well as, of course, convention and practice of the time, as montpellier stated. My only major complaint in theory lessons was having to sightsing using solfege syllables--they are meant to be a crutch for people who aren't as good at internalizing intervals, but when you can sing the intervals just fine but have to strain yourself to remember the proper syllable in time for each new note, then the help becomes a hinderance. It just ties into one of (if not THE) major flaws in American education: It assumes that everyone learns in the exact same way, when we really don't.

I think that the general trend with new and developing musical genres is that the first wave will be nearly entirely experimental, with the second wave starting to incorporate the findings of these experiments with our already rich and complex musical language. For example, Sch

I think his score for War of the Worlds was a bit different--it seemed more along the lines of a Jerry Goldsmith score, IMO.

Nope. Never considered it. I used to smoke occassionally, and I even tried pot once--though it didn't do anything for me. I still like to have a drink or two on occassion, though I do NOT like to drink to get drunk. But I've never composed anything while under the influence of any substance. However, I HAVE found that I do nearly all my best composing in my sleep, or in that weird state between consciousness and subconsciousness, so in a sense, that IS composing in an altered state of mind.