Naive amateur composition technique "guilt"

I have been interested in composition for a while now, though in spurts of "inspiration" (using that term in the humblest possible way).

I started off just noodling with musescore with absolutely no concept of what I wanted. I thought the solution would be to learn a lot of theory and use it. But while learning the grammar has been useful, I can't really compose with theory in mind (except for basic counterpoint guidelines). I mean, I can do it, but nothing really comes of it.

The only way I can enjoy the process and produce something that gives me some personal sense of accomplishment is if I just sort of improvise with the notation software. I do have a vague idea in my head when I'm composing, but a lot of it is more sculpting than realising a fixed and solid idea already in my mind's ear. In fact, my mind's ear is quite limited in comparison to what I imagine musicians generally have. That is, I could generate very little without the crutch of notation software and playback.

I do enjoy this process though and I'm not sure it's within my ability or even worth the colossal effort to develop a more traditional ear for composition. After all, I do it for enjoyment and have no pretentious about it whatsoever. HOWEVER, it has prevented me from seeking out composition lessons which I think I might enjoy as well. The thing is, while I'm personally at peace with my dilettante-ish ways, I'm afraid of how it would come off to a teacher. I almost feel like it would be in some way disrespectful. 

Honestly, this post is fizzling out. I'm not sure of the purpose, but I felt like writing this out. Did I just want a pat on the head? I don't know. Hopefully there's something here for discussion. Thank you for reading!

2 hours ago, UrKr said:

I started off just noodling with musescore with absolutely no concept of what I wanted.

I, as well as I am sure, many composers these days started composing in this way.

2 hours ago, UrKr said:

I thought the solution would be to learn a lot of theory and use it. But while learning the grammar has been useful, I can't really compose with theory in mind (except for basic counterpoint guidelines). I mean, I can do it, but nothing really comes of it.

Theory has been useful for me to understand how other composers in some famous works that I admire got their music to sound the way it sounded at specific, favorite, places that I then went in to analyze.  But I personally, don't use much theory (although I do use some) in the actual process of composing.  That kind of approach can easily lead to getting stuck in writing exercise-like music, which I detest and avoid.

2 hours ago, UrKr said:

I do enjoy this process though and I'm not sure it's within my ability or even worth the colossal effort to develop a more traditional ear for composition. After all, I do it for enjoyment and have no pretentious about it whatsoever.

I also didn't really develop a discipline in composition until I was forced to compose without a computer or software at hand.  It wasn't so much that I made some colossal effort to compose differently or to introduce discipline to my process - I just wanted to compose, had lots of free time, and had absolutely no access to a computer or any kind of software.  I am glad that I experienced this, as now I compose much differently and tend to finish more and longer works and have a different and better work ethic.  And I conceptualize the pieces I want to compose differently and better than before.  Most of the time, I have a good idea of what I want to compose before I begin composing it.  As compared to before, where I would just wander until I happened to strike gold so to speak (usually by starting a whole bunch of projects, most of which didn't pan out).  I still have a bunch of files on my old computer, which are the beginnings or just the germ of a potential idea, some of which I sometimes am able to go back and finish now that I compose on paper (by copying it into my notebook rather than finishing them in the sequencer).  I do have to say that I get much more enjoyment out of the process of composition now than I did before, even though back then I might actually have had more inspiration than I do now.

2 hours ago, UrKr said:

HOWEVER, it has prevented me from seeking out composition lessons which I think I might enjoy as well. The thing is, while I'm personally at peace with my dilettante-ish ways, I'm afraid of how it would come off to a teacher. I almost feel like it would be in some way disrespectful.

I think most students think like you do in the beginning and it's not unusual.  I personally didn't compose much while I was in the process of learning at school.  But I am glad that I did learn what I learned, as I was able to use that information later when I actually started composing more once school was over.  Sadly, my composition teachers were in my life at a time when I wasn't really able to make very good use of them nor progress much in my musical development.  But that doesn't mean that you won't find a teacher who will be very helpful for you.  You must judge for yourself whether that's what you really need.  I have heard the advice being given out that when looking to go to a music school, one should base one's choice on what composer or composition teacher one wants to study with and go to where they may find that person.

Anyway - I hope you find some of that helpful!  Thanks for your post.

I remember the first halfway-good piece of music I ever wrote when I was something like 13 years old.

At that time, while I knew how to play guitar and a bit of piano by reading sheet music and tab, I didn't really understand anything about composition.

So I'm working on this little rock song, and I stayed up until 4 am on a school night working on it, and for some reason, it just sounded BETTER and more cohesive than anything else I'd done up until then. The riff, the little excuse for a solo, etc. all just "worked". It bothered me that I didn't know why, because I wanted to be able to at least reproduce these results, but without writing the same piece. 

The next day, I don't remember exactly how, but I learned that the reason was because all of the notes in the little tune belonged to the E minor pentatonic scale. From that day I on, I became something of a music theory supremacist and have never looked back.

Fast forward some 20 years later, and I can compose anything I imagine or desire, precisely because I know how to make it sound that way. I know why something is working or not.

It also enables more originality within your own pieces. Maybe the next time I play the melody, I'll change the texture from melody + accompaniment to a chorale or polyphony. Or maybe the first four bars will be one texture and the last four another. You will learn how to seamlessly integrate all sorts of modulations, scales and combine them all into one, coherent melody or piece. In some of my pieces, the music will go up a half step,  be Dorian for two beats and diminished scale in the last half and the listener might not have even noticed what could've been a jarring modulation because the voice leading was handled correctly.

You have to be consciously aware of what you're doing and why you're making those decisions if you want to be able to do that, and that means composing with the theory in hand.

But it isn't just about being flashy.

Want to know how to get out of harmonizing your tunes with the same I IV V or making supporting parts more interesting without getting in the way? Music theory. Want to make a piece sound like ancient Egypt, underwater, or flying? You're going to have to know what scales, harmonies, textures etc. typically evoke those sensibilities. Want to write a string quartet? You'll find it's not as simple as writing for an acoustic guitar and singer or a piano with chords in the left hand if you want it to sound convincing. Music theory to the rescue. It just goes on.

The more that you master different concepts of composition, which is rather synonymous with music theory in all honesty, the less frustration and writer's block you will experience in trying to express your ideas.

Everybody starts with noodling around and finding things, but you aren't going to find anything that hasn't already been discovered as a concept.

Whether you're a hobbyist composer or an aspiring professional, at a certain point, if you really want to realize your potential as a composer, you will have to make a serious effort to not only learn, but master, music theory.

Personally, I've found the journey to be extremely fun, and the most rewarding intellectual and creative pursuit I suspect I'll ever undertake in my life.

 

Thank you for your responses!

Definitely food for thought, though these things tend to have to marinate for a while.

I do know the outlines of theory. How functional harmony is supposed to work and simple modulation in that paradigm. But if I try to apply that it just doesn't tend to work. The only thing that does is counterpoint rules. But I learned about that by actually doing some exercises on a Cantus Firmus. I would be interested in some applied music theory course because I tend to take away little from hearing about secondary dominants. When I write I tend to just focus on each voice and how it plays with the others. Harmony emerges from that. So I tend to think in quite simple terms of what a voice should be doing and how to transition smoothly from one idea to the next. That's up to now the only way I can write (to me) natural sounding music that isn't a study on a grammar rule. 

I imagine it is useful to be able to reach for something concrete when you're looking for a specific musical effect or sound. But reading about theory hasn't gotten me there thus far. 

9 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Want to know how to get out of harmonizing your tunes with the same I IV V or making supporting parts more interesting without getting in the way? Music theory. Want to make a piece sound like ancient Egypt, underwater, or flying? You're going to have to know what scales, harmonies, textures etc. typically evoke those sensibilities. Want to write a string quartet? You'll find it's not as simple as writing for an acoustic guitar and singer or a piano with chords in the left hand if you want it to sound convincing. Music theory to the rescue. It just goes on.

The more that you master different concepts of composition, which is rather synonymous with music theory in all honesty, the less frustration and writer's block you will experience in trying to express your ideas.

Everybody starts with noodling around and finding things, but you aren't going to find anything that hasn't already been discovered as a concept.

Whether you're a hobbyist composer or an aspiring professional, at a certain point, if you really want to realize your potential as a composer, you will have to make a serious effort to not only learn, but master, music theory.

I wonder if you happen to have any resources to recommend for this. Or a way of approaching it. Because the way I've been reading about it, it precisely leads to a tune harmonised by I IV V... knowing just enough rules to be boring.

11 hours ago, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

I also didn't really develop a discipline in composition until I was forced to compose without a computer or software at hand.  It wasn't so much that I made some colossal effort to compose differently or to introduce discipline to my process - I just wanted to compose, had lots of free time, and had absolutely no access to a computer or any kind of software.  I am glad that I experienced this, as now I compose much differently and tend to finish more and longer works and have a different and better work ethic.  And I conceptualize the pieces I want to compose differently and better than before.  Most of the time, I have a good idea of what I want to compose before I begin composing it.  As compared to before, where I would just wander until I happened to strike gold so to speak (usually by starting a whole bunch of projects, most of which didn't pan out).  I still have a bunch of files on my old computer, which are the beginnings or just the germ of a potential idea, some of which I sometimes am able to go back and finish now that I compose on paper (by copying it into my notebook rather than finishing them in the sequencer).  I do have to say that I get much more enjoyment out of the process of composition now than I did before, even though back then I might actually have had more inspiration than I do now.

That's very interesting. I've never really been in a situation where I was away from a computer for an extended period of time. If I could afford a month's vacation to nothing but cultivate my musical interests (violin/piano/composing) I'd love to do that sort of thing. I think being forced by circumstance to make such a drastic change has a very powerful effect on the brain. Something that I think is quite difficult to fake. If you don't mind, could you say more about how that went? What was the baseline from which you started? Did you find it difficult to know how it's going to sound? Did you feel limited by what you could come up with independently from an instrument (which modern notation software basically is)? Did you compose on the piano? I would be really interested to know about that transition. 

11 hours ago, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

Theory has been useful for me to understand how other composers in some famous works that I admire got their music to sound the way it sounded at specific, favorite, places that I then went in to analyze.  But I personally, don't use much theory (although I do use some) in the actual process of composing.  That kind of approach can easily lead to getting stuck in writing exercise-like music, which I detest and avoid.

I have never done REALLY this seriously. There's so much music I like, but I've never really gone to analyse it with theory in mind. I can listen and find things that sound interesting but I don't know how I'd apply theory to learning about it. I find harmonic analysis quite exhausting and in the end not very illuminating. 

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

And example of a piece I absolutely adore is this Janacek quartet. Even got to listen to it live a while ago. And it was an amazing performance. Engaging all the way through.  But I don't know how I'd analyse it with theory and mind.

7 hours ago, UrKr said:

That's very interesting. I've never really been in a situation where I was away from a computer for an extended period of time. If I could afford a month's vacation to nothing but cultivate my musical interests (violin/piano/composing) I'd love to do that sort of thing. I think being forced by circumstance to make such a drastic change has a very powerful effect on the brain. Something that I think is quite difficult to fake. If you don't mind, could you say more about how that went? What was the baseline from which you started? Did you find it difficult to know how it's going to sound? Did you feel limited by what you could come up with independently from an instrument (which modern notation software basically is)? Did you compose on the piano? I would be really interested to know about that transition.

I didn't have access to an instrument either - only college ruled paper and a pencil.  I decided to write music that I knew would work, with harmony that I could understand from past experience, which for me meant writing in a style using Japanese Anime/JRPG music as a model.  Because of that I was able to imagine how it would sound because I didn't do anything wild or outside of my knowledge.  I felt inspired so I kept coming up with different tracks to an imaginary anime/videogame.

7 hours ago, UrKr said:

And example of a piece I absolutely adore is this Janacek quartet. Even got to listen to it live a while ago. And it was an amazing performance. Engaging all the way through.  But I don't know how I'd analyse it with theory and mind.

I just listened to the beginning and right away I was already analyzing the harmony and understanding how he got that dissonant/tragic sound at the beginning which to me is just a certain voicing of an E minor add 9 chord with the root omitted but implied from the first two melody notes.  I love the crunchy sound he got from that chord.  Then, the cello melody plays around with a melody that borrows the #11 from Lydian but still staying minor.  There are some folk musics (especially in Poland) like the Mazurka, which like to sometimes use both the natural 4 and the #4 of the scale to give the music that folksy, mountainish feel.  Some weapon dances also make use of this.  Then, in measures 12, he uses an F# minor add 9 sonority instead, basically transposing the beginning up a step but voicing it an octave lower, the violin taking the folksy melody that the cello had before.  That's how I would try to understand just the introduction of this piece (which I haven't yet listened to in its entirety).  For me that would be helpful if I wanted to write something on the model of this piece in the future, or just to understand how those kind of chords/melodies sound the way they sound so I could get the same sound with different tonalities/melodies.  The understanding that there's a half-step dissonance between the added 9th and the minor 3rd of these chords is inherent to my understanding of these chords.

Thanks for your post and I hope that at least some of that is helpful!

Yes it does sound useful to build up that sort of vocabulary rather than just an intuitive subconscious absorption of influences. I imagine it gets more useful the more of this kind of things you have in your backpocket. Kind of like when you learn a language there comes a point where you reach a critical mass of acquired vocabulary to where you can convey and understand much more than you were able previously. 

Thank you for the example!