Why I compose music on paper

I guess there are advantages and disadvantages to anyone's composing work ethic.  But in this topic I will be talking about why I compose on paper and why it has proven so advantageous to me.

There is perhaps a certain legend about composing on paper that it results in music that sounds more inspired.  For me it's more that when composing on paper, my musical imagination has more free reign and can't be fooled by the sound of the composition.  And I do think that "fooled" is the right word here because it can be very easy to have one's musical decision making disadvantageously swayed by the immediate feedback of sound while one is in the process of composing.

Silence also allows me to compose music from a more dispassionate angle without feeling anything that the music might make me feel.  And I think that helps me have a more objective relationship to the musical material and use better creative judgment.  Sometimes I might whistle or hum the melodies to myself.  I rarely need the help of any instrument as even vertical sonorities can be whistled/hummed or imagined (exception: writing music for instruments I'm not familiar enough with like guitar).

But if I let myself feel the emotions of the music while I'm composing they interfere with the process and I start to build up too much expectation and pressure to put out the finished final product.  While if I write the whole piece out on paper without listening I feel like I have all the time in the world to organize things the way I want before calling it "finished" and there's no pressure (which sometimes can also be a drawback as it can be easy to lose motivation).

But I have resorted to going back and forth between computer and paper where I had listened to part of a composition before finishing it on paper.  Usually I have done that (even very recently) because I was losing interest in a composition and hearing it provided a certain infusion of excitement and motivation to finish it.

Usually in my style of composing (which has to a degree become accustomed to composing on paper) the melodic and contrapuntal lines take precedence and justify the harmonies.  Even very unusual or dissonant sonorities can in this way be confidently (I hope) and deliberately written since the logic of the melodic line leads the ear and justifies the harmonies.

Of course, the assumption behind composing only on paper is that the result will be simpler and to that effect, better conceived.  Although as I have already mentioned, hearing an unfinished composition can also be advantageous as long as one has the self discipline to tear oneself away from the computer and return to the notepad (that's at least very important for me).

The reason why I find it also inconvenient to start the whole process of composing on the computer is because it's not as easy to sketch things out on the computer.  I have a small 8 in. by 3 in. notepad in which I jot my ideas down everywhere I go that I can keep in my pocket.  It's really convenient for brainstorming.  Later I set those ideas harmonically or for various instrumentations and variations.  It's a longer process but it's easier than having fragments in a midi or other file form on the computer (for me).

Back in the day I used to compose exclusively into the sequencer but circumstances in which I did not have access to a computer for extended periods of time forced me to write only on paper and I came to prefer it.  Don't get me wrong though - I have tried to return to composing on the computer.  I found it to be a very aimless and fruitless experience.  The things that I "composed" in this way were more like improvisations that lacked any kind of musical direction or logic.  Maybe I have just gotten old or something, but I much prefer my new way of composing on paper.

Please share if any of this is relatable to you - or share your own composing work ethic and why it works (or doesn't work) for you!  Thanks for reading if you've gotten this far!

Peter

Oh this quite a specific and though-provoking.  Thanks for sharing. Always wanted to put thoughts into this. I rly wanna write abt this in a longer form and post it elsewhere when I have the time to. But for now, these just my few cents.

It is quite like the hard copy vs soft copy of any other form, eg movies ( which engages, but also kinda dictates your sense ) vs reading ( where the remaining spaces are left to filled in by your own ).

Personally, mines more or less based on pragmatism, the skills and the comfort level I have. A short hist:

I used to be very tech-adverse and detested the many complications, risks and connotations that comes with tech. I preferred to keep it simple and antiquated ( the beauty of it ). So I had neither the skills nor confidence and desire to do things up in com in general, even for prose, let alone score notation. Most of my present pieces in software had their first drafts in manuscripts in those years ( 2015-2018 ) - all of which I still preserve for memory and reference.

Now that I got increasingly comfortable with, and even embrace, tech ( due to work ) and social media more these two years, I ended up also utilizing them for my personal endeavors ( a main one being music ). I started to re-work most of my pieces fr the past from late 2022 ( I stopped learning music officially since 2018 ) .

----------------------------------------------------------------

So yea, as much as I use software way more than paper now, I won't put a judgement as to which is better, but respect what suits one person at a particular pt on his/her life and what exactly ( or wht exact piece ) they are doing - this is also becos of my composing exp:

Back then, I only write a piece on paper when I have played it on piano many, many times and really liked it. So that idea better be sustain in me long enough. However, this approach also means that ideas that are somewhat good or are fleeting do not get written down and most of which are forgotten. Another issue being I tend to edit and change a lot, which means there are so many erase marks and cancellations ( for spaces which were erased too much and the paper is damaged ). Also, it can feel very guilty to completely abandon an idea which was written but cannot be erased becos it will damage the book. its like composing until you give up on that piece and it stay as an eyesore in that manuscript, and looks back in regret and guilt.

But at the same, the I'm not limited by the sounds and visuals the software gives, but by my playing and imagination. Writing on pencil on paper has that beauty which I like, esp when you keep it for years - when you look back the feeling can be amazing ( but as elaborated need not be always so ). There's that touch and element of honesty I feel - after all, its a real tangible thing you can touch with your hands. Also, as most notation requires internet ( if i'm correct), then as long as you manage your surroundings, there are much fewer, or at least not too many, distractions. Final plus t being this approach saves eye power in this day and age.

Now, on using software. I'd say its a personally pragmatic choice. Everything from writing to publishing it. I have gotten over all that saving and organization and the know-hows of tech and social media. Music has so many permutations and combinations, some of those that we like more aren't even explored by ourselves. Software allow us to explore those patterns we think we may want more quickly and sift out those we don't rly want as much, to be left with fewer options and eventually come to a decision. Danger being one gets too into the music on paper, and not the actual playability of pieces, which can be easily compensated, As for inspiration, if I hv an inspiration that I wanna keep ( say a catchy theme )

-while online, I'll write them on a " miscellaneous score " file where I keep ideas which are temporarily not decided to be pieces.

-But if late at night ( where I dont wanna on my laptop again ) / not with my personal laptop, I'll write in in whatever scraps of paper I have, bf I transfer them. Ofc there are many times I lost, or forgotten abt, my ideas - but this has less with the form and the topic.

On 1/13/2024 at 12:32 PM, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

I find it also inconvenient to start the whole process of composing on the computer is because it's not as easy to sketch things out on the computer

I very much relate to this. I don't compose on both computer and paper on scratch almost entirely. Just doesn't work for me. Nothing comes out, unless there's alr something. Doesn't matter where, when I put in notation, there's usually a piece or at least a theme. If not, for me its just a waste of time. If I compose anything on scratch, it is only in front of the piano. Though, I must say once I have a main theme, I just experimenting and thinking in front of the software, while also taking time to ponder things without the visual and audio influence of the software, walks etc...

-----------------------------------------------

So yea, now I use software generally to save time and capture and develop ideas. Paper is a past/ once off thing. But I still love both ways : ). Beyond computer and paper though, is the third ingredient in this composing machinery ( prior tp publish ), which is none other than ourselves. And ofc others ( like y'all ) , in the post-publish stage.

Idk... these are just some not very well-organized thoughts. Hope there's some relatability and I'll eventually be able to put more prose and organize them into some actual piece of writing.

Well, PeterthePapercomPoser, I’ve already mentioned that I don’t use notation software for composing and rely on paper and other things.

Perhaps I suffer ADHD but musical ideas lighting my mind are sometimes ephemeral. If I don’t capture them somehow I can lose them. I'll jot them somehow on any piece of paper available if necessary. Notation software is too slow. Perhaps if I practiced it like a secretarial touch-typist I could be a lot faster – but then why, when I can jot on a piece of paper? Across time I’ve developed a shorthand. It also doesn’t restrict me to time signatures and preset barlines which can seem a block to freedom. (It’s why all my engraved scores are in 4/4. I really should do something about that!) I can include a rough time line if I want, useful when I can’t be sure of how long I want something to sustain. Likewise, a silence between phrases sometimes necessary in music.

But it’s also admin. I sometimes compose at the piano, sometimes not, but at one point or another I may change my mind or want to try something else. So I just pop down to the next available staves and jot the alternative. With software I’d have to save the original and the alternative, probably have to print one off for comparison. Fine for one alternative but if more ideas spawn from that it could become a headache on a computer. Eventually I’d have to consolidate for putting in the DAW. Trying to combine bits from multiple files is probably another headache and time consuming – whereas at worst I can literally cut and paste on the table. I can have as many sheets on display as I like.

The other bit is a tendency to think orchestrally. I find orchestral instruments all the resource I need with some exceptions. So I add text notes for instruments that seem appropriate as I go. I can’t think of notation software that allows this.

I’m also aware of the tendency toward thickness if trying to write straight into full score so I work in short score but sometimes open out to 4 staves if things are getting elaborate.

So the basic process is: paper, on completion get it into the DAW, make any final adjustments; produce a score (if I think I’m likely to submit it or even have the rendering played at any form of public event).

But I have to admit, the DAW has made me lazy, experimenting with instrumentation when I can’t arrive at a decision through my imagination. But I never cheat – rather than mess around with the faders I set them to a mezzoforte for each instrument with the velocities set to around 64 then make all adjustments louder or quieter through the velocities.

It’s seemed to work so far.

Yo Peter,

That's an interesting topic I have forgotten to reply LoL!

(please ignore all those tenses LoL. We don't have any tenses in Chinese since it's an analytic language haha)

When I begin to compose I use solely sketchbooks, as I write everything on it. I am however not as crazy as you the PaperthePetercomPoser who writes your own staff!!!!! The reason for this is that I don't even have a notation program for it then. Only when I have to submit my ( ) and a bullshit chamber piece (which I fantasitically think would be suitable as an introduction to my trash String Quartet no.1) to the education bureau for my portfolio of the public music exam that I start to use Sibelius 6 for the first time. Composing on sketchbooks is still the main means for me, and I will use the time when I type my score to Sibelius to modify details. However my scoring is so bad that time and I miss so many details. Only when I started to write my Clarinet Quintet in C minor around 2016 I started to use Sibelius comprehensively since that work requires 5 staff for each line and it will cost much paper LoL. And up to now I mainly use Sibelius and sketchbooks becomes a means to catch my sudden inspiration or working out of ideas, before the real composing sessions. I still have a sketchbook around me to catch every inspiration possible, whether it happens in my workplace or in traffic. I don't use paper now is only becoz it's too time consuming to use my pen instead of computer program!

On 1/13/2024 at 12:32 PM, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

And I do think that "fooled" is the right word here because it can be very easy to have one's musical decision making disadvantageously swayed by the immediate feedback of sound while one is in the process of composing.

For me I am different, I need those sound to tell me whether what I write is right or not, even if the sound is so crappy just like the Sibelius Ultimate on iPad. Like that six voice fugue I never imagine the real sound of it by hearing that crappy rendition haha, but I need that to help me determine what should be written and what shouldn't. Maybe for me I always don't like mere freedom, since that will be a false freedom which in terms limit my composition. I love to set limits to myself and limit my freedom and hence make it more productive!

Henry

On 1/12/2024 at 8:32 PM, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

For me it's more that when composing on paper, my musical imagination has more free reign and can't be fooled by the sound of the composition.  And I do think that "fooled" is the right word here because it can be very easy to have one's musical decision making disadvantageously swayed by the immediate feedback of sound while one is in the process of composing.

I wanted to add that I have recently experienced this phenomenon where I wanted to reject a piece of music that I had already finished on paper while I was entering it into the computer.  Because it was sounding so horrible and bad I thought that my composition was just a dud and that sometimes things just don't work out the way I intend them, musically speaking.  I was ready to trash the composition but instead decided to just finish entering it into the computer to see what it would sound like in its entirety.  It turned out much better than I thought and now I enjoy it immensely!  I think I just had to get used to the weirdness of the piece.  It was good that I didn't write the piece in the sequencer/notation program/DAW because the immediate feedback of the process of writing it would have severely discouraged me from continuing it.  I am glad that I was able to delay judging it until it was finished and not being able to hear it helped me in this process.  (In case someone is interested the piece I am talking about is my Arpeggio Etude for Piano).  I thought I would share this anecdote in case it might help someone who is suffering from writer's block or finds themselves prematurely rejecting everything they come up with as I have sometimes done.  Thanks for reading!