# Composing - what does your process look like?



## ein fisch (Mar 7, 2019)

In terms of the composition - chords, arrangement, melody, percussion, sound choice - what do you do first? Do you have a fixed routine or is it different on every project you're working on?

I personally found out that its way easier (and faster) for me to sketch everything out with my piano and record it with my phone before i even touch my DAW and think about instrumentation. However it can be a frustrating process, sitting on the piano for like 10 days (like right now ) and not coming up with something where i could say "thats it!"

Any routines, tools which help you in the composition process are more than welcome


----------



## Alex Fraser (Mar 7, 2019)

Procrastinate.
Procrastinate some more.
Hit YouTube/iTunes/Anything for an idea.
Go nuts making a very rough version of the track.
Tidy it up.
Mix it.
Doubt everything I did between steps 4-6.
Go "shopping" on the internet for new libraries/tools to fix self loathing.
Create a "better" mix from scratch, only to find out it sounds exactly the same as the first one.
Repeat steps 7 - 9.
Eventually break of out loop as deadline or patience limit is reached.


----------



## ein fisch (Mar 7, 2019)

im wondering why we musicians are so incredibly nerdy about tweaking knobs that don't even affect something - your point 9 prooved me that im not the only one with that problem


----------



## Gerbil (Mar 7, 2019)

For sample based music I usually start improvising with an instrument in the template and start to shape something that leads to other ideas. Then I'll go for a walk and plot out the structure etc and chisel away when I get back back.

For concert music I don't go near a DAW or even Sibelius. Paper and pencils and sometimes the piano.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 7, 2019)

The usual stuff...booze, fumblin around, booze, etc.
Seriously though, exploration of ideas first via techniques, improvising within created structures, booze, anything to reach the "Lucky find". Once something stirs my loins, I then explore the implications of it, be it a motif or a chord by generating material from it to see what lies hidden.


----------



## studiostuff (Mar 7, 2019)

I thought this was a thread about Composting...


----------



## KallumS (Mar 7, 2019)

Literally just hit keys until something happens. I don't know how to start a song


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 7, 2019)

I used to apply the Angus Young method of composition: "just hit yer guitar real hard 'till yer get a good sound and yer all set, lad!".

Love 'im, mates.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 7, 2019)

studiostuff said:


> I thought this was a thread about Composting...



Exactly.


----------



## Farkle (Mar 7, 2019)

Here's me doing a speed composing for a couple of hours. Someone asked how I compose, this is pretty much how I do it.




Mike


----------



## Michel Simons (Mar 7, 2019)

Basically a process of trial and error with lots of errors.


----------



## Studio E (Mar 7, 2019)

michelsimons said:


> Basically a process of trial and error with lots of errors.


Truth.


----------



## JohnG (Mar 7, 2019)

This is an actual portrait of me composing:


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 7, 2019)

I just sit at the piano, close my eyes and hit some random keys, sometimes I throw a cat on the keys and see what happens.


----------



## jmauz (Mar 7, 2019)

Different for each project. Time, genre, instrumentation, time, existence of dialog, usage of a reference track, time, oh and time are some of the variables that determine my process.


----------



## Studio E (Mar 7, 2019)

In all seriousness, I'm a keyboard player so I start with whatever sound I think might work, and then start tinkering. Often times, although I might not totally rewrite a cue (Though that happens too), I often change little bits of it so many times that it becomes something quite different. I'm not an orchestrator, and whether it's orchestral or otherwise, I think a good analogy is that of building a statue out of clay. I might start with a vague shape of what I want. I'll add more clay, make it more detailed, maybe very detailed, but then rip half of it back off....but then add on more clay, of maybe a different color. I will go through these stages countless times as I proceed. It seem wasteful but I've decided it's just the way I function. Eventually I end up with a detailed, colurful shape of something I don't hate (hopefully).


----------



## ein fisch (Mar 9, 2019)

Interesting approaches. Thanks to you all for sharing your workflow!


----------



## ein fisch (Mar 9, 2019)

michelsimons said:


> Basically a process of trial and error with lots of errors.


Those errors bother me so much when im under pressure / working with someone


----------



## MatFluor (Mar 9, 2019)

ein fisch said:


> Those errors bother me so much when im under pressure / working with someone



That's how you can refine your workflow. Theoretical optimizations are a rabbit hole - and can lead to some bag habit you dug yourself into out of misinformation (for example preparing stem groups that you think everybody needs, but in reality the people you work with want something completely different - ergo redo your routing).

My approach to composition is similar to Farkles approach. Usually I try to assemble as much info as I can before I write a single note - therefore having a laser-focus on what I set out to do with minimal distractions. I still am shaping some aspects - like at what point do I go into the DAW, what music genres are better to precompose on paper, what info do I really need etcetc.

I can go into further detail later if needed xD


----------



## Michel Simons (Mar 9, 2019)

ein fisch said:


> Those errors bother me so much when im under pressure / working with someone



I am never under pressure because for me it's "just a hobby". And when I am working with somebody else I am still working on my contributions on my own. And since he is as much a slacker as I am...absolutely no pressure at all.


----------



## Rodney Money (Mar 9, 2019)

I compose in a way that I believe little to no one else does, or I couldn’t teach someone how to write this way. But I literally compose everything in my head first from start to finish then go to staff paper to write out the basic themes and structures, then straight into Finale for live players or into a DAW for electronic fixed media simply trying to capture the sound in which I hear within my head. For extremely virtuosic music written for live professionals with complicated runs I will often write down the rhythms first then “find” the notes. Lastly, I will take an “acoustic” instrument to figure out correct flow and ornamentation. For pieces with 3 or 4 part harmony I don’t even need to hear it simply writing the melody first, then the bass, and lastly writing in the inner lines which are my favorite. Mozart wrote in this way also (EDIT for those reading: concerning his homophony writing.)

If I am writing just for DAW then it’s not uncommon for me to have most of the composition written out. Then I will try to play in everything live keeping the natural human aspect. Next I will improvise lines using expressive sampled instruments or live instruments playing whatever feels right often discovering countermelodies and if it fits it stays even if “the math” doesn’t make any sense. Lastly I will add percussion if needed for accents, drive, and ambience. Also if I am writing solely for DAW without the intent of live performances, I will add noises just for texture and feel even if the ear doesn’t notice it. I will also commission other sound designers, musicians, or even actors if I need a certain sound, ambience, or even spoken text to enhance the composition to match the audible sound with what I’m hearing on the inside.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 9, 2019)

Try not to smoke pot during any of the actual composition process...

or you could be maestro Brian Wilson and write a set of masterpieces completely under the influence:


----------



## gregh (Mar 9, 2019)

I never really noodle around or muck about til something comes up. I always have an idea for what I want and a way (or ways) to get that. I spent years playing improv from rock jams as a kid to free jazz to noise and so on. I never felt the urge to record any of that once past about 18 - in fact I was against recording improv - and I think that attitude stays with me so noodling about is not really on the cards. 
I don't make the orchestral and commercial music a lot of people do here, but if I were to do so I would probably work from a fairly complete idea in my head (like Rodney Money but without the skill). That just seems a lot quicker to me


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 9, 2019)

Sometimes things come out of accidents, noodling, seeing a great movie or hearing something amazing.

The thing is, I get up every morning at 4 am (cd player and headphones on while I eat  )and begin work at 4:45 until around 10 am on an average day. If there's a commission I each lunch at 10 and then go back to work until 3 pm, getting a couple of hours after supper as well.

Now that's _*every morning*_, so when I get up I'm writing and/or editing. I take a day off maybe three times a year.

This morning is a good example: I didn't have a commission or anything in mind, so I listened to *Goldsmith's Legend *while I ate my Lucky Charms and really liked a combination he made with high flute and lower-range EH, so that was what started my day; just thinking up a melody to use that combination on. From there I went back and did extensive editing and reorchestration of my fourth (crappy) Symphony, which ended up taking most of the morning and day (I was very motivated today and worked longer).

I'm just a journeyman composer, but it's my firm belief that writing every day makes you better in at least some way every day.

Or maybe I should lower my Prozac dosage.


----------



## TheKRock (Mar 9, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Procrastinate.
> Procrastinate some more.
> Hit YouTube/iTunes/Anything for an idea.
> Go nuts making a very rough version of the track.
> ...


Bahahahahaha!!! I could have written that!


----------



## jbuhler (Mar 9, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> my fourth (crappy) Symphony


You've just now endowed it with its subtitle: Symphony No. 4, "The Crappy." 

I agree with the compose every day routine, which is also how I write prose, though for parts of the year I can't stick to it due to other obligations. But I usually try to steal an hour or two at the end of days I can't otherwise compose to at least noodle about and work out a short piece even if I don't write it down or commit it to the DAW.


----------



## studiostuff (Mar 9, 2019)

No disrespect to the process of those who compose every day. But until a contract is signed, I'm hiking, skiing, trying to be available to my family and friends... and definitely not worrying about process, or deadlines, or my competition. 

When my clients want me to get serious about a project, they let me know, and then I start...

I'm motivated by a serious deadline, and the inspiring work of the folks I work with.

I really believe we can take ourselves and our work a little too seriously. I bank on the theory that living this way makes me a better composter. So far, so good.


----------



## dpasdernick (Mar 9, 2019)

Forgive the vulgarity but my composing process looks and sounds like Sid Vicious f*cked a 1990's Rompler and then threw it down a flight of stairs.


----------



## TomislavEP (Mar 10, 2019)

1) Long period of procrastination and escapism
2) A moment of happiness and diversion
3) Quickly capturing an idea or a motif
4) If a whole piece forms all of the sudden, record a solo piano track in a DAW
5) MIDI editing of a performance to a detail
6) Bashing my head on what other sounds and instruments to add if not doing only a solo piano piece
7) Always returning to certain favorite sounds and Kontakt libraries, but hoping to finally take the advantage of those I haven't yet touched
8) Coming up with the arrangement, additional orchestration or other elements
9) MIDI editing of every additional track
10) Drawing / cleaning of the automation data
11) Listening and adding FX here and there
12) Mixing and "mastering", according to my abilities

Actually, I'm trying to delude myself a bit by doing this list, as this process is unfortunately often much more chaotic. But I always strive toward the steps I've described. I should also mention that for the time being, I compose primarily for my own purposes and rarely work on projects that include a strict deadline.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 10, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> You've just now endowed it with its subtitle: Symphony No. 4, "The Crappy."
> 
> I agree with the compose every day routine, which is also how I write prose, though for parts of the year I can't stick to it due to other obligations. But I usually try to steal an hour or two at the end of days I can't otherwise compose to at least noodle about and work out a short piece even if I don't write it down or commit it to the DAW.




   

Your method is what I call the "staggered" approach, getting in quality time when you can and really being "there" when it_ is_ time.


----------



## muk (Mar 10, 2019)

Rodney Money said:


> Mozart wrote in this way also.



Tangent on Mozart:
****************

No he didn't. Mozart wrote at the piano, with paper and pencil. He laboured extensively over every detail, and his sketches are littered with discarded attempts and corrections. The myth that Mozart invented everything in his head first, and then simply wrote everything down perfectly, is nonsense. It goes hand in hand with the stylization of the person Mozart as the rebell genius in the movie 'Amadeus'. (A brilliant movie, by the way. But as factually incorrect on almost everything it depicts as it could be. That doesn't diminish its cinematic value one bit. It just makes it a completely untrustworthy source on the life and work of Mozart.) It could not be further from the truth. Mozart was a hard labourer, an extensive sketcher.

You think Mozart wrote his 'Jupiter' symphony sitting in a room, looking out the window for a few days? Then picking up a pencil and just writing the whole thing down start to finish? It's a touching fairy tale. It's also completely ridiculous. The only thing he ever wrote completely in his head were very short and simple piano pieces. And his fabulous improvisations. They must have been impressive to experience. Yet an improvisation is not a finished piece. Not for Mozart, not for anybody. Whenever writing a piece, Mozart took to paper and pencil, and extensive sketching. Just like every other composer in history before the invention of the computer.

The theory that Mozart composed exclusively in his head arose from the fact that none of his sketches had been known at that time. But that fact does not justify the conclusion. (Similarly, Beethoven's reputation as a hard working composer was derived from the fact that several thousand of pages with his sketches survive. And here, the conclusion is apt).

For Brahms, almost no sketches are known. Does that mean that he composed in his head? No. It means that he meticulously burned all his sketches, because he didn't want anybody to see them. Luckily for us, he handed some of the sketches to his housekeeper with the instruction to burn them. His housekeeper was clever and insubordinate enough to keep them in a safe place, because she must have guessed the cultural significance of these sketches.

For Mozart, some of his sketches have emerged over the last few decades. And they paint a completely different picture of his composition process. Not a sign of having worked out everything in detail in his head. Quite the opposite. Namely they show the labourious, strenuous, arduous, process and the often misdirected attempts that stood behind his creations.

***********
Tangent end

What does that mean in the context of this thread?

Ultimately your writing process doesn't matter one bit for anybody but yourself. Experiment, try to find out what works best for you. You will find techniques that help you to write fast. Most likely the quality of the end product will suffer from writing fast. You'll find other techniques that will help you write the best music you are capable of. Most likely this will be a slow, arduous process. After a while you will know what works for you in any specific situation, and choose your writing process according to what you are trying to achieve, and the amount of time you can/want invest into a piece. In the end, it's the written music that counts. If that is great, no one is going to care if it was written on an ocarina, whistled into your ear by a dove while you were asleep, using a computer or whatever tool you deem helpful. It's the end result that counts.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 10, 2019)

Rodney Money said:


> I compose in a way that I believe no one else does, or I couldn’t teach someone how to write this way. But I literally compose everything in my head first from start to finish then go to staff paper to write out the basic themes and structures, then straight into Finale for live players or into a DAW for electronic fixed media simply trying to capture the sound in which I hear within my head. For extremely virtuosic music written for live professionals with complicated runs I will often write down the rhythms first then “find” the notes.



Do you have perfect pitch?
Your method isn't that unique Rodney, I too can hear inside although I do need the physical sound at times and I suspect there are more around who have the same facility (I knew several at my Alma mater). I too have also on occasion created a rhythmic map and I'd recommend that to help focus on longer stretches of linear time and form. A typical map over many bars can help establish good symmetry without writing a single note and one can then also plot dynamics, tempo change etc. In media I sometimes found it useful too, mapping sync points to tempo/rubato before writing.


----------



## Rodney Money (Mar 10, 2019)

muk said:


> Tangent on Mozart:
> ****************
> 
> No he didn't. Mozart wrote at the piano, with paper and pencil. He laboured extensively over every detail, and his sketches are littered with discarded attempts and corrections. The myth that Mozart invented everything in his head first, and then simply wrote everything down perfectly, is nonsense. It goes hand in hand with the stylization of the person Mozart as the rebell genius in the movie 'Amadeus'. (A brilliant movie, by the way. But as factually incorrect on almost everything it depicts as it could be. That doesn't diminish its cinematic value one bit. It just makes it a completely untrustworthy source on the life and work of Mozart.) It could not be further from the truth. Mozart was a hard labourer, an extensive sketcher.
> ...


I was talking about how he would write the melody, then the bass, then the inner lines, not just writing down music without any work whatsoever. Studies about the changes of his ink confirmed this.


----------



## Rodney Money (Mar 10, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> Do you have perfect pitch?
> Your method isn't that unique Rodney, I too can hear inside although I do need the physical sound at times and I suspect there are more around who have the same facility (I knew several at my Alma mater). I too have also on occasion created a rhythmic map and I'd recommend that to help focus on longer stretches of linear time and form. A typical map over many bars can help establish good symmetry without writing a single note and one can then also plot dynamics, tempo change etc. In media I sometimes found it useful too, mapping sync points to tempo/rubato before writing.


So your saying without me writing a single note in Finale or a DAW me composing the entire piece in my head from start to finish isn’t unique? I’m not talking about hearing music in my head is unique.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 10, 2019)

Oh I missed the subtlety there. So is it perfect pitch _and_ a great memory? (he asks in a jealous way).
How long a piece are we talking about? Britten could rattle off about 12 pages of score a day and rarely touch the piano according to Holst's daughter. 
I don't think it is unique as such though, there was a guy (composer) at RAM who could do just about everything from hearing and writing in his head to sight reading massive scores on the piano....jealous again :-(


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Mar 10, 2019)

When writing to image: low-volume pad/drone to anchor the key, set a little mood. Choose a few characterful instruments. Move on to writing a melodic line, or a set of chord changes, or a beat. Work on it until I get stuck. Take a break. Move to another piece, and do the same steps. Next day, I reopen the unfinished pieces, with a fresh perspective, finding them to be less of a puzzle than I remembered. Finalize and bounce.

When writing my personal stuff: get in the right ‘mood’, turn on the modular goodies, other synths and/or drum machine. Get lost in the best way possible. Forget to record. Turn everything off.


----------



## BezO (Mar 14, 2019)

I believe my method is called Groove Up writing. I almost never have an idea when I go to write. No matter the genre, I almost always...

Lay down some drums/percussion
Start writing with a bass instrument

The resulting groove gets ideas flowing. I then...

Flesh out the progression with a chordal instrument
Tweak/write the melody
Revisit bass, progression & melody
Flesh out the arrangement/instrumentation and sound design
Listen, adjust, listen, adjust... Finished!


----------



## Wally Garten (Mar 14, 2019)

I usually start out by figuring out, in a general sense, what the piece will be:

- Identify thematic, emotional, and sonic points I'm trying to hit. 
- (Usually) Set out a palette of instruments to limit choices.
- (More rarely) Set out musical challenge/limitation, like writing in a less familiar time signature, or using chromatic mediants or quartal harmony.​
Once I've put these basic intellectual constraints around the project, it's all pretty spontaneous. Because I mostly write and record simultaneously, I tend to think of my process as sculptural, rather than "writing," per se. I make a big batch of clay (recorded takes of various parts), then modify it and cut away what I don't need, until it starts to take a shape that I like. The process is more physical more than mental, for me. 

I have a couple ways of getting started. Either:

- Start with the groove, like @BezO said. That works well for groove- or rhythm-oriented music. I work a lot with drum machines and synth sequencers.
- Playing short melodic lines or (more rarely) chord progressions until I bang into something I like.​
So either that groove or that melodic part will be the driver. Usually it happens pretty fast -- maybe 20-30 minutes. (That's the point of the first three steps -- narrowing the scope enough that I don't have to think much.) Then I build everything else around that key idea. That's "the rest of the fucking owl," of course -- roughly in this order: 

- Writing everything else to go with the key part.
- Recording live stuff like vocals. (My vocals are not very sophisticated, and so are usually also improvised. More rarely, I write the part beforehand in the DAW, usually with a piano, maybe letting that line play as a reference track while I sing.)
- Refining the melody once I hear it in context
- Putting sections together neatly.
- Obsessively editing MIDI/audio.
- Adding ornamentation and effects.​


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 14, 2019)

Awright, you busted me! Every man's gotta eat!


----------



## bill5 (Mar 14, 2019)

ein fisch said:


> In terms of the composition - chords, arrangement, melody, percussion, sound choice - what do you do first?


Lyrics.  Seriously, I have far more lyrics without music than the other way around. Lyrics are much easier for me. If you mean strictly the music, I have no set process. Tinker around on the keyboard sometimes and something will hit me, sometimes it will hit me elsewhere like driving my car, sometimes I'll be tinkering with some plugins and something will hit me. Sometimes when they hear it people want to hit me too lol

As to your choices above though, for me arrangement, percussion, and sound choice are all pretty much lumped into one process and that's almost always last. Melody is generally first ahead of chords.


----------



## Blackster (Mar 14, 2019)

That's a great topic! One of our Academy members (Nathanael Iversen) was so kind and shared his experience report about puts himself in creative mode. That's the first article of 3 ... the 2nd one will be released in a few hours, actually!  ...

https://musicintervaltheory.academy/inside-the-community-nathanael-iversen-my-process-of-gathering-material/ 

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

For me, it's really a very strict process nowadays: Gathering material, sketching, developing, getting paid!  ... 

All of these steps (except the last one) are pretty wide and there are a many ways how you can get them done but my main goal is to stay in creative mode for as long as possible. I want to make decisions based on emotions rather than pure technique because the client uses emotions to evaluate what you've done anyway.


----------



## ed buller (Mar 15, 2019)

One of the best things I got from Hans's MASTERCLASS ( get it if you haven't ) is just to start and keep going. Work linearly for a while. You can easily delete a bit of it doesn't work or move things about. In the lesson he does this with a session from The Second Sherlock film. It's very intuitive. He just works on bits...each after the other. He calls it a Diary and I found it very useful.. 

best

ed


----------



## Blackster (Mar 16, 2019)

Btw, here's the 2nd article from Nathanael Iversen in which he talks about his process! In particular, how to find a musical theme! 

https://musicintervaltheory.academy/inside-the-community-nathanael-iversen-how-to-find-a-musical-theme/ 

I hope this helps!


----------



## enyawg (Mar 16, 2019)

To be honest I’m more creative and even surprise myself at times if I don’t have a laser-focus. Ad-lib and jamming often creates my best work... to moving pictures at least. It helps me find the “tempo of a scene” and I don’t mean BPM.


----------



## cmillar (Mar 16, 2019)

I find there are now different scenarios:

1. If the music is to be recorded by a DAW and software instruments/electronic:
- I like to sketch some main ideas out first on paper
- then, I expect to be sorely disappointed once I start to record and play my ideas into the DAW...because every sample library will 'dictate' to you what will actually work and be playable and recordable. You'll always have to compose as to what you sample libraries can or can't do...my original concepts and ideas usually have to change and adapt to the softwares' strengths or weaknesses.

2. If the music will be for a live ensemble:
- paper and paper first for form, melodies, harmonies, etc. Don't even turn the computer on.
- then input the music into Sibelius. Taking advantage of the playback capabilities (NotePerformer or Sibelius Sounds) I can get a pretty good idea of form, length, etc. to see if I like what I've come up with.
- then, make a score and get parts ready for printing

For me, there's nothing worse than having to remember how to do things in a DAW or notation program when you can actually use the pencil and write down the music in a fraction of the time.

Plus, with real score/music paper, you can see what you're doing!...you can reference music you've already composed and get a sense of linear flow.

With the music 'in the monitor', I find I don't get into any sense of musical form or flow.

Old school? For sure...but if it was good enough for Mozart and the others, it's good enough for me.

Computers are nice, but with paper/pencil you can compose anywhere! Take an iPad with a piano program; take a small batter powered keyboard with you; sketch out ideas with no piano...just flow and rhythmic curves; sit in an art gallery; sit in a coffee shop; etc.


----------



## Rodney Money (Mar 17, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> Oh I missed the subtlety there. So is it perfect pitch _and_ a great memory? (he asks in a jealous way).
> How long a piece are we talking about? Britten could rattle off about 12 pages of score a day and rarely touch the piano according to Holst's daughter.
> I don't think it is unique as such though, there was a guy (composer) at RAM who could do just about everything from hearing and writing in his head to sight reading massive scores on the piano....jealous again :-(


Although my close friends think I do, I honestly don’t believe I have perfect pitch, but I do believe instead I have an overhyped relative pitch. Because I always tuned to concert F when playing brass instruments I hear that pitch clearly then can relate all the others to that note. In college the discussion came up twice where a theory instructor tested me if I could hear F or Bb because I was a trumpet player, and once even my own trumpet professor put me on the spot in front of the entire studio to see if I could sing F in tune “tuning it green” without looking at it. I was the only one who could at the time.

Even now all of my brass instruments’ tuning slides are pushed all the way in where normally they would be pushed half an inch out to be at 440. When I’m working with other musicians such as piano players I need to tell myself to be nice and say yes if they ask me if I need a tuning note even though I don’t need one. The only time I need one is when I play with organs, because they are “out of tune” from 443-442, and I need to tune to them.

If I am working on a composition or melody, let’s say in G, Bb, or even set theory, then the key or tonal center never wavers in my mind. Sometimes I will check the piano just to make sure because of my perfectionism and musical ocd. I can hear the different blended colors of the orchestra in my mind also like a clarinet with a marimba, tuba with a bassoon, or a cello and a euphonium. It’s very common for me to also quickly jot down a line for a soloist or section 15 minutes before rehearsal and not need to change a thing afterwards save an ornament here or there.

My mind only has enough space to only remember music and stories from the Bible. I am awful at math, horrible with directions driving to locations I should know, I don’t even know my own cellphone number, and I cannot remember names. The only way I can remember my social security number or address is to practice it like an instrument. But concerning music my mind never fells me remembering themes even over 20 years old, and right now I have a completed 45 minute symphony in my head that constantly plays.

What gives me trouble in music is trying to convey through sheet music and DAW what is in my head. My 40 minute trumpet concerto is being premiered this April, but sadly only 6 out of the 7 movements are complete with the finale remaining unfinished. The reasoning is because there is a constant struggle among what is in my head vs what is playable vs what is only playable naturally by me where others may greatly struggle. When I sent in 1-6 of the movements the 1st thing the soloist said was this looks hard, and in a fascinating curiosity I asked, “Which parts?” Because I truly could not tell! For me it felt almost sight readable with some polishing.

The problem with the finale is that it is running too long and is way too hard with what I hear inside my head. It might “kill” a performer being unplayable, so in my mind all weekend I have been trying to rework an entire section while having to do things like taxes, go to Best Buy, and to a Sweet 16 birthday. I think I have it almost worked out but I would still have to make sure it works, engrave the score, and finish the DAW electronic fixed media. That is my constant stress right now.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 17, 2019)

Rodney Money said:


> Although my close friends think I do, I honestly don’t believe I have perfect pitch, but I do believe instead I have an overhyped relative pitch. Because I always tuned to concert F when playing brass instruments I hear that pitch clearly then can relate all the others to that note. In college the discussion came up twice where a theory instructor tested me if I could hear F or Bb because I was a trumpet player, and once even my own trumpet professor put me on the spot in front of the entire studio to see if I could sing F in tune “tuning it green” without looking at it. I was the only one who could at the time.
> 
> Even now all of my brass instruments’ tuning slides are pushed all the way in where normally they would be pushed half an inch out to be at 440. When I’m working with other musicians such as piano players I need to tell myself to be nice and say yes if they ask me if I need a tuning note even though I don’t need one. The only time I need one is when I play with organs, because they are out of tune from 443-442, and I need to tune to them.
> 
> ...




You're a composer then Rodney.. (to paraphrase Messiaen, the realisation of which came when young whilst looking at a score and realising he could hear it).

I too have a lot of those traits, but my relative pitch is sometimes unreliable if music is overly chromatic. I've even had to be left alone in the control room at st1 Abbey rd to write revisions over lunch (damn clients - that was drinking time). It's moments like that when you really are grateful for the training.
Fortunately, most of these necessary (imv) traits can be acquired with practice and learning if one feels so inclined. Still, it sounds like you are fully equipped for a masterwork and I am feeling a little (only a little mind) jealous - but hah, my First Symphony is _47mins_ long...so there......


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 17, 2019)

Good thread! 

I have done a lot of research into this, over almost 20 years. For myself, and for others, here is the writing approach that I recommend, for orchestral music, wholeheartedly. 

Music is made out of elements that come in and out of the music. An element could be a single line played by an instrument or group (like, say a melody in horns), or it could be a group of lines that are blended timbrally and with roughly the same rhythm (like, say, a string pad… or even a melody half the players are playing a lower, "shadow" below the leader). I call this second kind of element, simply: a line with shadows. 

The approach is: 

You write one element at a time, all the way to each element’s natural ending spot, even if it turns out to be quite long. Resist the temptation to consider what other elements should also be there: you will add them later. When you’re done with an element, you add another, and then another, and then another… 

Each element you are adding should be added because it is fulfilling a desire you are having. A desire for a particular contour, a desire for a particular EQ range (deepness, for example), a desire for a particular poetic character (eg: heroism, mystery), a desire for a particular harmonic journey to be expressed, etc, etc. 

Every time you finish an element, you zoom out, look at your piece and consider what desire is not fulfilled yet. Once you notice a desire, you zoom in and add another element to help fulfil that desire. 

The order of the elements should be from left to write in your piece of music, so you should notice unmet desires as early as possible in your piece, and add elements right there, instead of forging ahead too quickly, leaving unmet desires behind. If you do forge ahead too quickly, you will run into problems where, when you go back to fulfil unmet desires earlier in the piece, elements bump into each other later. Hard to describe here in text, but take my word for it! 

When an element is falling on the empty page (because it is the first one in the whole piece, or because the element is opening up new bars of music where it happens to be the only one sounding), it is called a trail blazer. It is the one that decides the chords for all the other elements to follow. Even a single line element carries imagined chords with it. So, a trail blazer is a special kind of element, because it carries on its shoulders the responsibility of deciding the harmonic journey that the rest of the orchestra will follow, and this must be considered carefully, in the context of the piece as a whole! 

It’s actually a simple method. 

You add one thing, then another, then another… and you are mindful of what your trailblazers are doing to your piece. You are fully devoted to each element you add, and should not be finding yourself re-writing or fiddling with old elements. I should have mentioned earlier: no need for a sketch... just go straight in. Your trailblazer elements are your sketch.


----------



## GtrString (Mar 17, 2019)

I try to listen. The birds, the wind, the rhythm of the day, the news, the mood I'm in ect. And use those things to set a pace, a tone, rhythm, melody ect.

The hard thing is to shut down the inner dialogue, and direct it towards listening and being intuitive.

I try not to think of an order, but just go. Doing things in order (editing) is for later.

If working to a brief, the process preceeds a bit of research, coding the creativity. I do that more often.


----------



## thecomposer10 (Mar 17, 2019)

So I usually take different routes depending on whether I'm writing film or concert music. I used to write concert music straight into Sibelius, years ago, but was never happy with how "square" the result was. So, for concert music, what I do now – and have been doing for some time – is record a series of improvisations, either via phone voice memo or straight into Logic via my MIDI controller, and then synthesize those into a cohesive piece in Sibelius. I find that the result has an organicism that I am unable to accomplish without the improvisatory element. 

As for scores, usually (key word: *usually*) my scores have a lot simpler harmonic structure that doesn't require notation. So I'll figure out a melody (if applicable) on the piano and then get straight to orchestrating in Logic, moving things around if I don't think something is working. In the rare cases when cues are more extensive (like a complex action cue), I will usually do a short-score (four part, akin to two pianos) or, if absolutely necessary, a reduced orchestral score that doesn't have synths, percussion, or the stuff I know I can easily add in my DAW. 

To give you an idea of how these two methods sound in practice, here's a concert music-style thing for piano trio I composed a few months ago, as an accompaniment to a silent film: 

And here's an orchestral cue from a score:


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 17, 2019)

GtrString said:


> I try to listen. The birds, the wind, the rhythm of the day, the news, the mood I'm in ect. And use those things to set a pace, a tone, rhythm, melody ect.



The farting of my wife under the covers at night.....


----------



## toomanynotes (Mar 17, 2019)

I find most of my good compositions come while in the shower. Then I will write it down in a notation program or grab a guitar and record it to remind myself at a later date.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 17, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> The farting of my wife under the covers at night.....


Apparently my wife does not fart...it's always me who's to blame.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 17, 2019)

mikeh-375 said:


> Apparently my wife does not fart...it's always me who's to blame.



Girls don't poop!

P.S. I always blame it on the cat.


----------



## ein fisch (Mar 17, 2019)

I actually would be interested to see what kind of music comes out when a professional composers inspiration was a fart


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 17, 2019)

ein fisch said:


> I actually would be interested to see what kind of music comes out when a professional composers inspiration was a fart



Story of my entire career.


----------



## MartinH. (Mar 17, 2019)

ein fisch said:


> I actually would be interested to see what kind of music comes out when a professional composers inspiration was a fart



Something with 12 horns...


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 18, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> Something with 12 horns...



LOL!!!! Beyond Richard Strauss orchestration...Sir Seymour Butts presents THE FARTISSIMO CONCERTO! 


(nose plugs passed out at entrance)


----------



## Parsifal666 (Mar 18, 2019)

Sorry, I am a hopeless cornball.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 18, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> Something with 12 horns...



Fluttertongue obviously...
How did such a noble thread divebomb so quickly...oh..yeah...composers.


----------



## ryst (Mar 18, 2019)

Me after every attempt at writing music...


----------



## Mike Fox (Mar 18, 2019)

I randomly press keys on my keyboard until it sounds good. Seriously.


----------



## Mike Fox (Mar 18, 2019)

ryst said:


> Me after every attempt at writing music...


----------



## Markus Kohlprath (Mar 19, 2019)

ryst said:


> Me after every attempt at writing music...


This is the reason I advice my students to have a real cheap guitar always in reach during practicing.


----------



## Seasharp (Mar 20, 2019)

ein fisch said:


> In terms of the composition - chords, arrangement, melody, percussion, sound choice - what do you do first? Do you have a fixed routine or is it different on every project you're working on?
> 
> I personally found out that its way easier (and faster) for me to sketch everything out with my piano and record it with my phone before i even touch my DAW and think about instrumentation. However it can be a frustrating process, sitting on the piano for like 10 days (like right now ) and not coming up with something where i could say "thats it!"
> 
> Any routines, tools which help you in the composition process are more than welcome




I'm new to using a DAW but now that I do my process is:

Create the main melodic and harmonic content (melodies and chords) using my Synthogy American D Piano loaded on my iMAC and played via MIDI from my Montage.

Then breakdown the work into sections that will be played by different instruments.

Determine what those instruments will be. 

Record those tracks. 

Next determine what counter or harmony lines are to be played under each section and what instruments will play them. 

Record those tracks. 

I spend lots of time selecting the instruments adding effects etc.. and constantly listening and changing everything I noted above. Many times!

It's a lot of fun with so many choices. Sometimes too many.


----------



## Pantonal (Mar 22, 2019)

This is a fun thread! Thanks. For me the process of composing starts with why? Why pick up a pencil (always a mechanical one), why go sit at the piano, why find a quiet place to dream up music? For me composing is an arduous process so it takes a very good reason to commit to it. Sometimes, it's a request (yay!), sometimes it's musical inspiration, sometimes it's emotional inspiration. Whatever the reason it has to be a good one to sustain my efforts until the project attains critical mass. For me the very beginning is the hardest, the possibilities are unbounded, the paper is blank. Once I've written the first note the question becomes, what comes next? At some point there is a critical evaluation, is this good or crap? At a later point things seem to gain momentum and you're working within the ever decreasing confines of what you've already created to flesh out the map out the dramatic arc of the work. That doesn't mean the ending gets composed last, although the beginning is almost always composed first. What it means is that what was composed before will influence what gets composed through the process in order to create music that will (hopefully) sustain my interest (and hopefully that of others) throughout.

If it's vocal music the text (lyrics) come first. For whatever reason I can't hear a melody and then find words for it, but it's easy for me to hear words and come up with rhythm and melody. In fact most words have an inherent rhythm and while you don't have to stay with that, it's a good place to start.

One thing I've noticed is that the actual process is different for each piece and periodically I have to remind myself to exercise creativity. It's very easy to get a process ingrained and that limits your creativity to what you've already done. Sometimes it helps to get out of the comfort zone and seek the danger of doing something you've never done before or to make a significant effort to do something very different. I discovered this when first trying to compose a set of variations. The first five were obvious (walking bass, embellishment, dotted rhythm, etc). It's only when you challenge yourself to get past the easy and obvious that you become truly creative. Composing more than ten takes real effort, but is a very worthwhile exercise.


----------



## klawire (Jul 8, 2019)

Rodney Money said:


> Although my close friends think I do, I honestly don’t believe I have perfect pitch, but I do believe instead I have an overhyped relative pitch. Because I always tuned to concert F when playing brass instruments I hear that pitch clearly then can relate all the others to that note. In college the discussion came up twice where a theory instructor tested me if I could hear F or Bb because I was a trumpet player, and once even my own trumpet professor put me on the spot in front of the entire studio to see if I could sing F in tune “tuning it green” without looking at it. I was the only one who could at the time.
> 
> Even now all of my brass instruments’ tuning slides are pushed all the way in where normally they would be pushed half an inch out to be at 440. When I’m working with other musicians such as piano players I need to tell myself to be nice and say yes if they ask me if I need a tuning note even though I don’t need one. The only time I need one is when I play with organs, because they are “out of tune” from 443-442, and I need to tune to them.
> 
> ...



How long does it take you to go from having composed a piece in your head to writing it on paper? How detailed is the composition in your mind before it's written out?

I try to compose in such a way that I first imagine the music in my head and have a rough orchestration in mind before I start writing it out. However, it is impossible for me to figure out reliably how the sounds in my head translate to notes or intervals and need to use the piano to find the right notes. As soon as I start messing with the piano, I quickly start forgetting how the music sounded in my head and end up with something much worse sounding and lose track of how I was supposed to orchestrate it.

Any tips on how to go from hearing the music to writing it out? I'm trying to develop a better relative pitch and getting better at it, but I feel like that alone isn't enough.


----------



## Pantonal (Jul 12, 2019)

John Cleese doesn't write music but he has some interesting and valid thoughts on creativity.


----------



## dgburns (Jul 12, 2019)

my head hurts


----------



## TimCox (Jul 20, 2019)

Plunk some ideas out on my scratch piano track, orchestrate that. Plunk some more, orchestrate that, rinse and repeat as necessary


----------



## enyawg (Jul 20, 2019)

Move notes around till they sound good... seriously. And then try to see a potential light beyond what we can hear or imagine in the piece.


----------

