Composing techniques and Ideas.

I am curious on how everyone else writes pieces here so we can compare and all learn from it.

I personally have to have something to write about before I start or else it feels not worth my time. For instance, the piece I am writing now uses the phrase "All in the Mind of a Child" The opening movement is the story of how a child feels and what he/she feels during the night. I then think of how to embody this in creative ways. Always knowing my objective though at the end of the piece, I often know the order exept for only a couple of slight changes throughout the music to make it flow better. I then start painting my picture starting with a series of chords, then the rythm, then the chords turn into phrases, then I apply melody.

I hope no one is too afraid to post their techniques because, they are afraid of people stealing them as I want this to be about learning so we can all grow and become more mature composers.

Ill posted this composition in its current stage. The txt is the chords I use.

My techniques and approach vary from piece to piece.

I'll always start with a period of what I call cerebral contextualization

Basically, a lot of time is spent in a pre-compositional state where I uncover and define the main elements of a piece. Starting often with a single idea: a chord/scale, rhythm, bass line, melody, texture.

In my head, I build and shape the piece, until I feel comfortable with the overall structure. Then, hit the piano - with paper and pencil. Sketch out the bare bones, adding more detail and definition as it progresses. Things like orchestration, voicings, backgrounds etc. come out in this stage...though the majority of the "composing" is complete, I just polish and refine.

Then, pencil score gets plugged into Finale, solely as a notational tool.

BAM.....chart done.

Read this post for more detail on my concepts, and whatever.

...

I often think of how I want a piece to feel, and then sketch the ideas out very roughly, while thinking of the actual notes in my head....I use lines and dots and symbols and stuff (as well as wordings and some expressions) to convey what I want. It might not make sense to others, but I can understand them :closedeyes:. I then go to my computer, and start notating what's on the sketch and in my head. I may change some of it, but it's a great way to get started, IMHO :w00t:.

I see how it sounds as I imput it.

Yeah, I suck. But I'm learning.

If I was super good like you all, I'd define chords and melody and then imput.

heres the midi

I see how it sounds as I imput it.

Yeah, I suck. But I'm learning.

If I was super good like you all, I'd define chords and melody and then imput.

Keep going don't ever get up and get theory books on anything and everything under the sun. It only increases your knowledge. I use more Jazz theory in alot of stuff than classical theory. Yet I play jazz in the Jazz band at my school and that's it.

First is that its a work in progress. I would agree that this is a piece of crap if somone said it was done but its not. I'm looking hard at what you wrote and taking in somethings and tossing others out. I have something after the long oboe hold, which I am working on right now. I intentionally kept the two opening transitions short and abrupt. Holding for the long dissonance later, then the majestic warmth.

I assume that the midi is a soundfile? A shell of the regular song? Assuming this I'd like to say that with the midi you cant hear some of the parts making them way more mushy than I would like.

About the voice leading, I intentionally stay away from it as I dislike the feeling it projects in most cases. There is only a smidgit of counter-point in this part of the piece mainly the flute and picc. part.

Lmao, about the reading. Knowing something and applying it is something completly different. I did put it to good use, and that is my opinion.

Thanks I do appreciate the comments,Anything more specific?

you say you don't like the sound of good voice leading, so you're saying you don't like any music written by any successful composer?

The majority of composers learnt voice leading properly and from then they could take liberties because they knew what sound they wanted and how to achieve it, it's like saying you want to compose classical music and only studying Yngwie Malmsteen.

A composition can start in any number of ways. Sometimes it's a mood in nature, maybe a storm about to start or the scent in the night air in the Mediterranean or something. Sometimes I decide on an exercise with a particular aim that expands into a 'work'; sometimes, if a work has been particularly intense and/or troublesome, it's easy to fall into something dead simple to relax. But it usually starts in my head where I let it grow a while before I try writing anything.

Sometimes it's just there and I write it at once so I always carry a notebook.

I think my first-ever composition started as a result of hearing Berg's early songs in their ensemble setting. All the nice classical harmony I learned was suddenly the wrong way.

I am curious on how everyone else writes pieces here so we can compare and all learn from it.

I personally have to have something to write about before I start or else it feels not worth my time. For instance, the piece I am writing now uses the phrase "All in the Mind of a Child" The opening movement is the story of how a child feels and what he/she feels during the night. I then think of how to embody this in creative ways....

It's a good start - not the harmony I'd write but sooner or later you'll know whether it's what you want. The software hasn't helped you. Like the opening could be played 'live' with more expression than finale allows. Then bar 37, accompaniment to the oboe: you need to look at the orchestration. There's no way you can get a pp on the bottom few notes on the contra-bassoon and the scoring will sound muddy in real life. You're also taking a chance on a bass clarinet with the extension to play that low. This is where finale and sampled sounds can be so deceptive. As you've applied pp to all those lower winds, give a thought to thinning them out. You'll lose nothing and the solo won't be shadowed by the 'novel' scoring. Mind, you might get away with it - Janacek did similar things in his Sinfonietta.

good luck.

... You stated that you 'don't like the sound' of a fundamental compositional technique. That's not opinion, thats just stupidity.

Nope, that's opinion and there are millions of chart songs out there to show it's a perfectly workable opinion, earming millions of

may I point out that there is a notated low A flat in the contrabassoon in this score?

As far as I know, that is outside the C-bsn's range.

And any extension to get that extra major 2nd down would make the low C and B natural difficult to play in tune (or even sound), as well as render unplayable the low Bb.

generally, bassoonists even remove the last segment of their contrabassoon to make the instrument lighter if the extreme low notes won't be required during a piece. in other words, not that many composers require those extreme low notes.

you say you don't like the sound of good voice leading, so you're saying you don't like any music written by any successful composer?

The majority of composers learnt voice leading properly and from then they could take liberties because they knew what sound they wanted and how to achieve it, it's like saying you want to compose classical music and only studying Yngwie Malmsteen.

Firstly, Yngwie is not all hes cracked up to be and Steve Vai would murder him in any form of creative songwriting.

Secondly,You need to go back and read what I wrote. No where did I state that I don't like any music with voice leading. I do not want to compose classical music, has it occured to people that voice leading is not always required in a piece. It sounds different when you don't which is what I was trying to do. If I brake stupid classical rules written a long time ago, I simply don't give a hoot:P .

Lastly, I also want to say Thank You to everyone who has tried to help me and that I take all your critisism seriously and am very thankful for it. The woodwind bass crit. especially.

Would you guys suggest a specific instrumentation book?

I think that you are confusing voice-leading with common style practice music.

What N.S. Canzano wants you to look at is how you are leading from chord to chord. Its a little haphazard at times. He's not suggesting that you change your style and use all of the rules of common practice style voice-leading.

I also do agree that learning common practice voice-leading can be a wonderful way to jump-start going into more complex things.

There's a lot of different orchestration books, each with a slightly different take on different instruments. I suggest that you take a look through as many as you can find. Samuel Adler's section on strings is rather good.

Of course, another way to study orchestration is just to study as many scores as you can find, and find out why the idea is/isn't coming out clear and what has been done. Seeing orchestration in action tends to really solidify any reading that can be done.

Firstly, Yngwie is not all hes cracked up to be and Steve Vai would murder him in any form of creative songwriting.

Yngwie was foremost a performer for whom there was nothing published that catered to his demands so he composed some which, considering he can barely read music, is meritable. Try his trilogy Op 5.

He was obsessed with the baroque, as are indeed a few members here who continue those traditions and they like to think of themselves as creative.

If I break stupid classical rules written a long time ago, I simply don't give a hoot:P

Basically agree, except they aren't stupid - they were once guidelines to help the musically untrained develop good musical taste in their writing. The best they can do for composers today is help them control what they're doing, make composition faster (because you know in advance how to write down what you're thinking). People like Debussy/Ravel/Stravinsky said exactly what you said and wrote some brilliant music.

Let these guidlines illuminate you, rather than use them as crutches like a few people here do.

Would you guys suggest a specific instrumentation book?

You could save yourself a fair bit of money going here. It has everything you need at this point and gives audio examples so you can hear what it's about.

Principles of Orchestration On-line - Northern Sound Source

:laugh:

No where did I state that I don't like any music with voice leading.

About the voice leading, I intentionally stay away from it as I dislike the feeling it projects in most cases.

Mark

The only way you can get away without using voice leading is in atonal or serial music, and I don't think thats the sound you're going for...

Voice leading doesn't automatically make it sound classical, theres plenty of other factors involved. Almost all diatonic music uses voice leading. From Classical to modern jazz. Voice leading is only about how you connect chords, not what chords you use, or the overall sound your work creates.

Did, it occur to you that I have said I wasn't trying to use it in this piece because I do not want it to sound classical?

Thank you for giving your advice.

I do not expect you to give me any positive remarks about the piece.

I DO NOT NEED YOU TO MASSAGE MY EGO.I WOULD RATHER HAVE YOU GIVE ME CRITISISM.

Has it occured to you that I don't change because of critisism always, though I do alot?

Has it occured to you that if you change to what everyone else thinks is good you start to LOSE your identity as a composer?

Please explain how you think it will help me?

I did not resist all critisism, only the kind I think would be counter productive to what I am trying to achieve. Lastly, I'm not resisting your critisism I already accepted what you think and have thought about it. Acting on it is something else entirely.

Also this is getting away from the point of this post. Which is to discuss techniques of writing. Not critique my piece though I thank everyone who has. I was using it as an example of a creative process that I use.

Even most modern and atonal and serial, and especially minimalist composers, and even pop bands, and rock bands, and the like...they all utilize voice-leading. They all utilize counterpoint, harmony, and orchestration. 4 main points in ANY COMPOSITIONAL style. You fail to realize that these are TECHNIQUES, NOT CLASSICAL RULES. It will most certainly not sound classical, it will only prove beneficial.

Because if you do not learn these things, chances are, your composition will be in a much worse state than it could be. All composition books, and college textbooks will discuss these things in great detail, and most of those who read these books compose music TODAY, and MUCH DIFFERENT STYLE. You are grandly, GRANDLY misjudging the effects of these infinitely important techniques. You also fail to realize your creative process is not the be and and end all of compositional processes. You seem to think that the music you write is fine and needs no revision...wrong. Even Beethoven's music needed revision. You are constantly CONSTANTLY spewing out opinions that reflect false information, and quite frankly, its making you sound unintelligent. So I suggest you heed my and others' advice and get to work. :mellow:

Firstly, you are accusing me of things I haven't said. I did not in any way shape or form say my piece didn't need revision. These techniques are not infinitley important. YOU ARE THE ONE CONSTANTLY SPEWING OUT FALSE THINGS. I have no doubt that voice-leading sounds good in some cases and that it might pove benificial but if I choose not to use it I won't.

Your first comment is fallacious look at it. I understand that voice-leading is used by alot of people it makes for a flowing piece. I went for more detachment. As I have stated about 3 or 4 times haven't I?

Please state where I am wrong and appear stupid to somone else besides you.

I know basic voice leading thank you. My guitar teacher drilled me with it as when we couldn't think of anything to do we would come back to it so he could wast my time.

I do not preach to be a master in theory, I know the rudiments of it.

Firstly, you are accusing me of things I haven't said. I did not in any way shape or form say my piece didn't need revision. These techniques are not infinitley important. YOU ARE THE ONE CONSTANTLY SPEWING OUT FALSE THINGS. I have no doubt that voice-leading sounds good in some cases and that it might pove benificial but if I choose not to use it I won't.

Your first comment is fallacious look at it. I understand that voice-leading is used by alot of people it makes for a flowing piece. I went for more detachment. As I have stated about 3 or 4 times haven't I?

Please state where I am wrong and appear stupid to somone else besides you.

I know basic voice leading thank you. My guitar teacher drilled me with it as when we couldn't think of anything to do we would come back to it so he could wast my time.

I do not preach to be a master in theory, I know the rudiments of it.

It does look like you said it, considering the way you rejected every criticism made upon your music.

Look... not using voice leading won't make up for detachment, it'll make up for crap. Voice leading isn't just about a flowing piece, it's about a piece that sounds good and correct to the ear.

Don't worry, bud, you should appear wrong and stupid to most knowleadgeble people, and considering I'm not even one of those, what does it say about you? You don't want your music to sound according to peoples' advice 'cause you think you'll lose originality. You're striving for a crappy originality right there.

It does look like you said it, considering the way you rejected every criticism made upon your music.

Look... not using voice leading won't make up for detachment, it'll make up for crap. Voice leading isn't just about a flowing piece, it's about a piece that sounds good and correct to the ear.

Don't worry, bud, you should appear wrong and stupid to most knowleadgeble people, and considering I'm not even one of those, what does it say about you? You don't want your music to sound according to peoples' advice 'cause you think you'll lose originality. You're striving for a crappy originality right there.

Hmmm, sounds good and *correct* to the ear. Hence disjointed, out of place, out of the norm.

I also ask you to please read all the posts as I am using most of the critisism supplied but I am not using voice leading and denied that I wanted to use it in that context.

Hehe, I said I wasn't going to use everyones advice all the time. Please read the things you quote.

Sorry, you sound stupid because you haven't read all the posts.

We are arguing the point whether voice-leading should be used in all pieces and I will move this to a different forum. We are losing the point of the thread.

voice-leading can be applicable in the most disjointed of sections, if you use it properly. You're misjudging the effect of it, and THAT is the basis of this argument. You claim to have not chose to use voiceleading for the following reasons:

It is too "classical"

It makes the music "flow" too much.

On the first point, for the 4th time which I have addressed: it is not a classical rule, it is a compositional technique utilized frequently throughout all compositional techniques. On the 2nd point, Voice-leading is not simply for flowing. I'm not saying this has to be in EVERY MEASURE of the piece, but it will make your piece sound empty if it is completely void of it, not disjointed. Disjointedness, even, becomes more effective with some form of voiceleading. You can still jump quite a bit using this technique (e.g. jumping a 7th while retaining the augmented 6th, etc.). Listen, I don't want to argue with you much more. I was just trying to help you, you resisted, made (extremely false) arguments, and now we're done. It's driving me insane and giving me stress I don't need. I apologize for wasting your time, but I assure you its not as much as you've wasted mine. Thank you. :mellow:

I agree we are wasting eachothers time. As neither of us are willing to back down.

I appologize for using the term too "classical". I used that word because the technique,rule,guidline etc. Was used in almost all classical pieces. Hence it sounds classical. This is the only false term I use throughout as I understand that other pieces and genres use it too and that I am stereotyping the word.

Please point out my false arguments.

There are tons of pieces that don't use voiceleading most of the time though. As stated by montipellar.

-Mark- That combination doesn't make sense take a closer look at it. One is listening to it, and the other is using it in composition. Very clever though trying to make me contradict myself.

-Retron- The chords in this piece are definitly not diatonicly correct. It is definitly different if you use voice-leading in a piece or not or else arguing the point would be mute for me everything you do in a piece effects it.

-Montpelliar-Thanks for sticking up for me. Thanks for the info on the instrumentaion it will prove invaluble. I love Op. 5 by the way, I just get sick of everyone in my school saying hes the best guitar player ever.

I appologize for calling classical rules stupid to everyone on this website.

.........-Montpelliar-Thanks for sticking up for me. Thanks for the info on the instrumentaion it will prove invaluble. I love Op. 5 by the way, I just get sick of everyone in my school saying hes the best guitar player ever....

No problem because it's what I believe. "Voice leading" and formal harmony have their place - they do teach would-be composers something - control, flow and musical tidiness (which at least one of your critics here isn't hot on) as long as they don't get hung up on theory. It can be as constricting as it is beneficial.

Good luck with it. And don't worry about the bads here. Almost everyone freaks at naive dismissal or distructive criticsm. Beethoven and Brahms did. Chopin was quite nastly about Liszt. Many were destroyed by changes of fashion and being told they were 'past it', like Elgar, Bantock and many pastiche composers who've been and will be.

Just carry on composing!

That got a little off topic.

none of us are saying voice leading is essential, we are saying voice leading is an important part of being a well rounded composer. What if some time you get a job composing and someone wants something written in a classical style? You wouldn't be able to do it because good voice leading is an integral part of that style. You are limiting yourself way too much.

That got a little off topic.

I don't think so - the topic is about "composing techniques and ideas", which are under discussion - there's disagreement about the weight that should be given to certain formal aspects of composition, that's all.

none of us are saying voice leading is essential, we are saying voice leading is an important part of being a well rounded composer. What if some time you get a job composing and someone wants something written in a classical style? You wouldn't be able to do it because good voice leading is an integral part of that style. You are limiting yourself way too much.

This is of course, true, if a composer wants to broaden his 'commercial' horizons. But it's equally important to develop an aural imagination. Like I said, the greatest works of Debussy, Ravel, Stravinsky etc were composed on the basis of good musical sense that turned its back on earlier guidelines.