# Anyone using composition systems?



## Herman Witkam (Oct 14, 2005)

I was just wondering, aside from EIS has anyone every used or is using compositional systems like dodecaphony, serialism, curve-based theory, schillinger system etc.. And if so, did or does it provide compositional gratification?


----------



## fictionmusic (Oct 14, 2005)

Hey Herman

For sure. I have done tons of serial stuff and 12-tone stuff (even though it is regarded as passe) and I studied with a guy who studied with George Russel (Lydian Chromatic Technique) so i was pretty immersed in that for awhile, as well as the theories of Hindemith, Tremblay and Bartok. I am a big fan of Gordon Delamont as well. 

I like theory and study it quite a bit but.... Stravinsky said it best when he said "its all intervals" in that, regardless of what system you use or analyse with, it ultimately boils down to one note going to another.


----------



## gugliel (Oct 16, 2005)

I use a kind of harmony-system based on tuning. Really. Hard for people here to tell, probably, because of the limits and failings of sample-based recordings and my own sample-recording technique (and time limitations), and because I haven't yet stretched it far away from what may sound like common-practice harmony. 

But having a system (imo) has brought my music to a new level, where my instinctive melodic, rhythmic, formal ideas can be checked against a number of rules, and where there is a clash indicated, the "system" requires that I take the time to figure out whether there is a rule problem (not often) or whether something in the music I've written is masking something else, and one or the other can be fixed.


----------



## Herman Witkam (Oct 17, 2005)

Thanks for the replies  

David - what do you think about the use of complete serialism, like Messiaen used in a short period. It was said to lead to average or random sounding music. 

I'm studying the compositional methods of 3 Dutch composers of the 20th century (Peter Schat, Ton de Leeuw and Theo Loevendie). It's interesting to see a second movement of primitivism, after Stravinsky. Composers using musical ideas and rhythms from ancient cultures etc.

Gugliel - Could you explain about your harmony-system based on tuning? Is your system a rigid system, or do you allow your ears/compositional judgement to correct notes/rhythms that do not work for the specific composition?


----------



## fictionmusic (Oct 17, 2005)

Herman Witkam said:


> Thanks for the replies
> 
> David - what do you think about the use of complete serialism, like Messiaen used in a short period. It was said to lead to average or random sounding music.




I like the idea Herman, but ultimately there comes a point when I want to break out of it to play something that just occurs to me and doesn't follow the self-imposed rules. At that point I usually abandon it. I guess I haven't done enough of the total serial music to be able to be comfortable enough with it to feel I was expressing myself.
But....I love the idea of being limited in writing things or using self-imposed systems. One of the reasons I was so happy writing TV music for years was that there were very strict parameters to work within. 

Nowaday I use whatever comes to mind (or hand) and don't really worry about the academic purity of it, but every now and then I sit down and follow some very strict rules just for the fun of it.








Herman Witkam said:


> I'm studying the compositional methods of 3 Dutch composers of the 20th century (Peter Schat, Ton de Leeuw and Theo Loevendie). It's interesting to see a second movement of primitivism, after Stravinsky. Composers using musical ideas and rhythms from ancient cultures etc.



I am not aware of the composers you listed, but I really like the primitivism style of composition. Stravinsky's hand is so ubiquitous in modern music.

I really like Louis Andriessen's music and I hear traces of Stravinsky in that, also in Karl Amadeus Hartmann's stuff (well more of Stravinsky's neo-classical period than his primitive period), but I doubt they count as part of the second movement of primitivism. I have an account at groves so I'm going to do some checking up on the composers you are studying.


----------



## Herman Witkam (Oct 18, 2005)

fictionmusic said:


> I really like Louis Andriessen's music and I hear traces of Stravinsky in that, also in Karl Amadeus Hartmann's stuff (well more of Stravinsky's neo-classical period than his primitive period), but I doubt they count as part of the second movement of primitivism. I have an account at groves so I'm going to do some checking up on the composers you are studying.



In the Netherlands Louis Andriessen counts as the best known Dutch composer in the US, but the other 3 I mentioned are more known because of their compositional methods.

This is a track I composed for a play, which was performed last saturday. It's inspired by the Dutch 70's avant-garde small ensemble style in which Andriessen composed, for the ensemble "De Volharding".

http://www.herman-witkam.com/wijk/aksie_voeren.mp3


----------



## FrozeN (Oct 18, 2005)

fictionmusic said:


> but ultimately there comes a point when I want to break out of it to play something that just occurs to me and doesn't follow the self-imposed rules.


I think I am kind of at this point (hopefully too :lol: ), coz I just don't bother how I actually write a piece nowadays, I just do anything that comes into my mind. I don't really use any systems or theory, but yet, you could say chances are I have already developed my own musical language that I am using it subconsciously.

Anyway, that's why I like Bruckner's music SOOOOOO much! His writing is completely illogical and incoherent, yet his music is so expressive and touches my heart so deeply. :wink:


----------



## gugliel (Oct 19, 2005)

Herman Witkam said:


> Could you explain about your harmony-system based on tuning? Is your system a rigid system, or do you allow your ears/compositional judgement to correct notes/rhythms that do not work for the specific composition?



it is somewhat rigid, in terms of what notes are allowed to follow what other notes. Has no influence on melodic or harmonic rhythm, however; and issues of non-harmonic notes are somewhat unfixed still. And each time my ears say one thing and the harmony-rules another, it gives me a chance to improve one or more of three things: my ears, my rules, and my music!

The principal rule may be to disallow movement by imperfect perfect intervals (fourth, fifth, octaves that could not be tuned perfectly): the classic case is I ii V I, where the root of ii conflicts with the fifth of V. A corollary of this is that a simple shift from tonic minor to tonic major is also disallowed (though an very similar shift from dominant major to dominant minor IS allowed, so if one likes that flavor, a small modulation provides it).


----------



## José Herring (Oct 19, 2005)

FrozeN said:


> Anyway, that's why I like Bruckner's music SOOOOOO much! His writing is completely illogical and incoherent, yet his music is so expressive and touches my heart so deeply. :wink:



I once heard a portion of Bruckner 4 "Romantic" Symphony I believe. I heard it when I was in highschool. I was so blown away that I had to get the whole symphony. Little did I know that the clip that I heard was the only really well organized portion of the whole symphony.

Man when that guy was on he was brilliant, but when he's not it's tough to listen to.

Cezar Franc to me is the opposite. He's organized to a fault. His symphonies textbook in there use of sonata-allegro.

My whole life I've been trying to find a balance between the two. Some composers have that balance, like Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Brahms, Stravinsky and others. I hope that someday I can get there too.

Jose


----------



## Evan Gamble (Oct 19, 2005)

Herman Witkam said:


> This is a track I composed for a play, which was performed last saturday. It's inspired by the Dutch 70's avant-garde small ensemble style in which Andriessen composed, for the ensemble "De Volharding".
> 
> http://www.herman-witkam.com/wijk/aksie_voeren.mp3



nice piece herman, whats live and whats samples?


----------



## fictionmusic (Oct 19, 2005)

Herman Witkam said:


> This is a track I composed for a play, which was performed last saturday. It's inspired by the Dutch 70's avant-garde small ensemble style in which Andriessen composed, for the ensemble "De Volharding".
> 
> http://www.herman-witkam.com/wijk/aksie_voeren.mp3



Cool piece Herman...how did it go? I really like the chamber sensibility it has, small and intimate but still propulsive. It reminds me a wee bit of Stravinsky with the bars of different length and the wickedly busy bassoon part (and the playful quality). Any more stuff like that?


----------



## FrozeN (Oct 19, 2005)

josejherring said:


> I once heard a portion of Bruckner 4 "Romantic" Symphony I believe. I heard it when I was in highschool. I was so blown away that I had to get the whole symphony. Little did I know that the clip that I heard was the only really well organized portion of the whole symphony.


I can imagine... I hated Bruckner's music so much when I started studying music. Only after a few years did I realize the beauty and innocence of his symphonies.

It's really hard to understand his music, like what you said, he is such a disorganized person! :lol: I guess he just didn't give a damn to theory and harmony at all. It's so ironic that his "Romantic" symphony doesn't sound romantic at all, and his Symphony No. 8 *in C minor* NEVER had a single phrase in C minor, except he did write a key signature with 3 flats and ended with a (picardie) C major chord.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 19, 2005)

Think I'll try it. Just letting go and writing whatever comes to mind. Just to see what I come up with.

Jose


----------



## fictionmusic (Oct 19, 2005)

josejherring said:


> Think I'll try it. Just letting go and writing whatever comes to mind. Just to see what I come up with.
> 
> Jose




Good idea Jose. 

One of the stories I loved about Charles Ives was when he would use some system (like fugues that maintained a parallel 5th interval in all subsequent parts) but then abandon it to suit the new stuff he was hearing in his head. 

I firmly believe that you need to follow your heart (or head) in this matter, but, in order to satisfy both client demands as well as your own artistic integrity, you sometimes need to limit your choices going into it.

I pretty well always listen to the music in my head and write that (if possible) but when working for a client, I immerse myself in "material" before I start (so I might write a ton of tone-rows and manipulate them a la Tremblay before I start hearing ideas...or if I am writing for a lifestyle show, I'll play tons of folky gtr parts until they start assembling themselves in my head in a usable and client-friendly manner).

I find that music that limits its direction by self-imposed systems to be exciting to do, but the moment you write something by the "book" (whichever book you happen to follow) and not the note you are hearing in your head, then you are being false to yourself as a composer. Not to say it doesn't occasionally happen (especially if the note you are hearing is only going to muddy the waters for a client-driven piece), but too rigid an application of systems is counter-productive I think.

I remember having Rob MaConnell (jazz lad in Canada) take a tune of mine and reharmonize it by the book (his book ie) and I watched as he systematically turned a fairly idiosyncratic and highly dissonant piece into a straight ahead II-V train-ride. All the rules of composition I was "breaking" I broke because I wanted to, whereas he figured I didn't know any better.

The truth was I love theory and study it constantly, I just don't use it to stop me from doing what I want. I think if you have enough various systems of analysis under your belt, you can justify almost any note choice with some theory anyway.

It all boils back down to having one note follow another, and my favorite music of my own is when that note is whatever I want it to be regardless of anything else. 

Whew, sorry to go so but it is a subject I think about a lot.


----------

