Composing without Notation

Well, im bringing this up since i myself don't know any notation. Don't know how to read it nor how to write it.

Although, the biggest problem i have when i create my music is that sometimes its really hard to get my ideas down.

Is it the same for you people who do notation? Or do you find it easier with notation?

Sometimes i come up with awesome tunes in my head that, to me, sounds great. I just want to put it down but the only way i could do it would be to record it in a microphone with my mouth. But i could hardly mimic all of those intstruments at once using only my mouth, now could i?

Now, some people may use a piano or keyboard or some other instrument to record their song with. My problem is that i can barely play the keyboard. I wander around with my fingers back and forth until it sounds good. Well, more than that. I use several fingers sometimes. However, i can't force myself to play anything i want.

I have realised that my biggest problem is to translate the tempo that i have in my head, to the sequencer on my computer. Since i have to put a tempo, 120 for example, where is this number within my head? Cant find it! Doh..

Anyways, whats your views on this whole subject?

Is it unbearable to Compose without notation?

Whats the pro's/con's with knowing notation?

How long would it take for someone like me to learn?

Is it possible to learn it on your own? As in self-taught? The way i am.

Feel free to add to the discussion :laugh:

Anyways, keep hikin' :(

Cheers

This issue has actually been kind of brought up recently what with recent talk on Vangelis. Now, Vangelis is clearly a competent composer, but as far as I know, his knowledge on notation is minimal. That is, if he has any knowledge. He is very much an improvisatory keyboard musician like yourself.

To me, there are two key advantages to being able to notate. The first is, as you say, so you can put down on paper ideas swimming around in your head. The second is to allow your music to be performed by other musicians. If you can't notate, you may creatively stunt yourself. I say "may" because it is by no means a certainty - Vangelis' music is very creative and he is fairly successful even though he doesn't provide huge detailed scores. Apologies for not being able to think of any examples off the top of my head aside from Vangelis, I am sure there are plenty.

I would say learn how to notate if you can. It's certainly an advantage.

Is it unbearable to Compose without notation?

You can do step editing, and not know a single note. So it is bearable. However, this is only useful for planned music. If you improvise, make sure you remember what you improvised, then step edit (enter the key, and the note will appear on your notation program).

Whats the pro's/con's with knowing notation?

I don't think there are any disadvantages to knowing notation, other than creating limitations. But any good composer will not let that happen. The pros? As Mike said, you can communicate your ideas to others, and you can have a higher chance of getting your music known to the world. Without the notation, what are your chances really?

How long would it take for someone like me to learn?

It won't take long. Notation is the easy part, composition is the hard part. Pick up a piano book, or any sheet music you like, and listen to the music as you follow. Thats how I learned. If you use a notation program, you can easily figure it out just by playing around. There are only a few occasions where I actually get confused and need a calculator to calculate note durations to predict how the notes will fit in the measure (when I write arpeggios) but the notation program you use should take care of all the dirty work for you. You can even get away with trial and error to figure things out. Knowing your durations is the most important part, I would say.

Is it possible to learn it on your own? As in self-taught? The way i am.

Yes, without a doubt.

There's this fellow named Justin R. Durban that does cinematic compositions and he doesn't do a note of notation. check it out:

Edgen

I've heard of people who memorize their compositions to avoid the troubles of notation, but they play solo instruments, so it wouldn't be as difficult, although personally I wouldn't want to rely completely on my own memory.

However, it depends on what you mean by "notation". Many electric guitarists can't read sheet music, but use tab instead. If you find it impossibly difficult to read standard notation, why not devise your own system? For example, sometimes when I want to write down ideas for piano before they escape, I take the easy way out and just write down the note names. I also write the counting down underneath the notes so that I don't forgot the rhythm, and for me, that method is far faster than notating on paper and has all of the important information, although it can become quite disorganized. Wait, what instrument do you play?

Of course, it's highly recommended that you do learn to notate, or at least learn to use a program or MIDI keybaord that will notate for you. It's like entering a fist fight with your hands tied behind your back. Undo the knots - don't hinder yourself! I use improper notation as a shortcut, but I can still input notes if required. Come to think of it, I don't actually input as notes. However, the program I use employs guitar tab and rhythms, but it also notates techniques, e.g., tremolo picking.

As long as you find a system that works and doesn't exclude relevant information, e.g., note rhythms, it should be fine. However, reading sheet music will help you with almost every aspect of music. If not for the sake of notating, learn it to aid your performance and theory.

There is somebody in my GCSE music set who was protesting "I don't believe in this culture's obsession with writing everything down - notation is the enemy of music", to which I quickly replied, "I'm writing for orchestra, and rehearsals are tight enough without me teaching every musician his/her part individually!" (not to mention that by the time you've 'taught' everyone 30 mins of symphony, most will probably have been forgotten) Q.E.D.:D

Does anyone have any good systems for writing down music (in rough) quickly? It takes me hours to write out 16 bars of music I might have improvised on guitar in 30 seconds, only to discard it the next day as out of keeping with the current project.

Whenever i'm outlining a piece. I just right the key. Underlying harmonic chords as the roman numeral. I then right the first note and then just write in the intervals I want. with an arrow going up or down. Beat durations I never write down because I like to change thoses based on my moods, although if I Do write them down then I simply right the count.

Thanks - that sounds really useful I guess actually, because then you can take the music you've developed and try it out in loads of different metres and rhythms before settling on a final idea. Cool! :w00t: I'll try it for a week.

My "musical shorthand" is similar to Duck's. A numeral represents the degree of the scale, arrow up or down means change octave.

I devised my system before I learnt notation. I was 5 or 6.

I rarely think out (musical) ideas beforehand in creating a piece, but when I do do it, I usually jot it down some bars though they tend to be abstract enough that I don't make any rhymthical distinctions (or the other way around too, I guess).

And while I do use notation 90% of the time when I make music, it's more due to things looking neat than efficiency. I know a lot of people that rely exclusively on the "piano roll" to sequencing their MIDIs, and they turn out just as well if not better than those written with traditional notation. But I still find most piano roll sequencers to be kinda rigid and avoid them (though there was this really nice, fluidly flowing one I found for a sampler/sequencer program - unfortunately not MIDI compatible).

When I have a melody, but no manuscript paper, I draw a series of dots and dashes and write words like "GRRR" orr "LOVEY DOVEY" or "HAPPY". I do like the number idea. If I have a specific key in mind, I write the letters, but numbers would be more helpful to me if i would write the intervals.... yeah.... now I'm going to do that.

Anyway, the dots are quarter notes or anything less, the value of the note is told by spacing of the notes... The dots are up or down realtive to how big a jump the note value is. The dashes are for sustained notes...

Hope that helps.

-Jon

Notation is all about communication. If you want to communicate your music to other musicians it has proved to be an efficient tool. It has nothing to do with the act of composing itself. So if you just want to create music and perform it yourself you can do without notation. But if you want to communicate with people you better learn their language. It's pretty unreasonable expecting them to learn yours. Besides it is indeed pretty easy to learn.

Marcel

Notation is all about communication. If you want to communicate your music to other musicians it has proved to be an efficient tool. It has nothing to do with the act of composing itself. So if you just want to create music and perform it yourself you can do without notation. But if you want to communicate with people you better learn their language. It's pretty unreasonable expecting them to learn yours. Besides it is indeed pretty easy to learn.

Marcel

It's more than that. Everyone can talk. But not everyone can read the written word. Certainly, you can be functional and illiterate, but consider what you stand to gain by learning to read and write: Access to the successes and mistakes of many before you. Ideas to be expanded on. Inspiration. In order to become a master, you need to learn from the masters.

The fact is, "professional" musicians read music. Unless you are disgustingly rich, you cannot afford to hire an orchestra and teach them their parts by ear. For starters, most musicians don't learn music well this way. Most of them will try and transcribe, or at least sketch out what you want them to play anyways. Most likely, they will only do this because they are being paid. They would be very unlikely to do something like this out of respect for your musicianship. Of course there are exceptions. I'm pretty sure Paul McCartney had to dictate his symphony to someone that transcribed the score - and a not very good one at that (my personal opinion). Finally, working with musicians that read can be an intimitating experience if you don't read yourself.

Don't get me wrong, I've worked with many talented musicians who couldn't read (and therefore notate) thier way out of a paper bag: Most notably guitarists. But they didn't have to to play Rock and Roll.

Jazz musicians rarely read "thru-composed" music. They deal with a scetch of a melody and "changes", a standardized system of harmonic understanding. Do you think the best of them read??

Answer: You bet they do. The better ones read everything they can get thier hands on including "classical music" - to expand their "vocabulary". Jazz musicians transcribe the great solo's off of CDs to learn from the masters of their genre. Most jazz musicians are excellent readers.

Bottom Line: There are too many reasons that as a musician and especially composer, you should learn to read and transcribe. For starters, it's a great way to learn an instrument. It's a virtual prerequisite in many areas of the profession, even at an amatuer level. Consider the number of critics on these forums that won't bother to review a work without a look at the score. Way too many subtleties are lost listening to a MIDI file.

Having said all this, I would point out that you shouldn't confuse reading with musicality. Reading is ONLY a SKILL. Like reading and writing words, it is a highly acurate representation of the real thing. Music is of course so much more than dots on the page.

To write a novel, one should know how to write. One should understand grammar, form, development, the use of dialogue, the use of linguistic colour.

Why should it be any different for writing music?

Anyone can "compose" a simple piece of music without ever notating it. Especially if they are writing music that is in a style that does not require experimentation or research on the part of the composer.

If you want to push yourself further, if you want to find your own musical identity, then yes, you need to understand music intimately - technique, theory, analysis, history. You need to get beyond what you "hear" and get to a point where you both "think and hear" your music. You have to be able to distinguish between imitating what you've heard before and creating something truly unique that is yours. I don't mean "avant garde". I mean something that has your unique imprint on it.

It's all very nice to write music that sounds like Mozart, or Beethoven, or Brahms, but why "sound like" someone else? Isn't the goal to sound like yourself? Isn't the goal to stop imitating others and find your own true voice? What made each of those composers unique was what made Mozart different from Salieri, what made Beethoven different from Hummel, Chopin from David! Pastiche is a wonderful way to learn, but at a certain point, the true composer must move beyond imitation and search out his personal voice.

Whenever i'm outlining a piece. I just right the key. Underlying harmonic chords as the roman numeral. I then right the first note and then just write in the intervals I want. with an arrow going up or down. Beat durations I never write down because I like to change thoses based on my moods, although if I Do write them down then I simply right the count.

I still have problems with notation, but learning music theory is very helpful to me. I began playing by ear, so I do best by ear training. For example, while it may be good to learn a certain triad, I have to both learn the triad, then hear it. It helps me distinguish between different chords, so that I can write down what I come up with. As my knowledge of music thory gets better, I'm better able to write down what I come up with, because I have a rough idea of the chords (for example, I could identify a certain passage as a major seventh, and identify the root note). Notation is becoming easier with practice. The theory's taking quite a while, but I feel that it's worth it.

I actually have a personal sketch notation system which I sometimes use when I have no access to a computer to write things down. I will draw up an example and then post a picture and an explanation so you all can see. Who knows, some may find it useful.

I'll usually write any melodic idea on one staff and the harmonic sonority below it on another. Writing down

just the melody or even just the melody and roman numerals seems to dangerous to me. I could imagine

coming back later to the piece wondering just what the gently caress chord I had written that made that melody sound

good.

Also, for the melody I notate the rhythm but for the harmony I just use dots seeing as if I'm somewhat neat

and methodical I can use the melody to determine where the chords fall. I find it also helps to notate without

barlines. Instead of worrying about filling up 4 beats every measure, let the chips fall where they may. You

can worry about meter later.