# Studying... Studying... And...



## meaks (Nov 18, 2018)

Hello !

I want to share with you a problem i'm facing.
I'm a composer for media, movies, etc... for 15 Years, i've worked as an arranger on some renowned film, "The Artist" in mind.
For now i've studied classical harmony, i've studied jazz as well, i've also learned myself different harmony principles.

*So far i've learned :*

*Classical harmony
Schoenberg Theory
Modern Harmony Principles (Including all types of styles, intervallic, etc...)
Jazz Theory
Neo-Riemmanian Theory
Tintinabulli Theory
Modal Theory
I'm diving into atonal and serialism principles now.*

Note that i can't say i totally control those knowledges, that would be pretentious, i'm still working on them.
I'm in a Big Band composition class too, in an atonal/contemporary composition class, in a modern composition class for several years now, i'm also in a music for film composition class this year (orchestration, arranging) with a top arranger.

The problem i'm facing is that i'm felling tired with all those class works i must finish every week and i'm realizing that i have studied enough principles to be able to compose music for the rest of my life !
Beside, i know that, as part of our craft, it's important to keep on learning.
Also, now every professor i have are telling me that they have no more answers to my questionings, that it's all matter of writing notes on paper and let the ears do the job on what is right and what is wrong.

To resume, no more theory, instead of that, write, write, write with all those colors and materials and make choice on what material and style fits my sensibility.

Did you experience the same kind of questionings, did you feel the same way "at a certain point of your studies" and how did you handle those problematics ?

Sorry for my bad english !
And thanks for your answers,
Meaks.


----------



## Florian Le Meur (Nov 18, 2018)

HI !

At first, sorry for my English too...

"To resume, no more theory, instead of that, write, write, write with all those colors and materials and make choice on what material and style fits my sensibility"

I think it's not one OR another... It's more a circle. If you have study a lot, and listening a lot, may be it's time to write, and search your own vocabulary... and get back later.

I'm not "so advanced" but now it's time for me to try and listening to my own work... If it's not good enough, I'll go back to composers that inspire me, and analyse conductors for harmony and orchestration, in order to fix my choices and create my own library of phrase and colors... 

Bye.


----------



## Consona (Nov 18, 2018)

I'm far from a 15 years professional, so apologies for my audacity giving you some advice, but maybe this will help change your perspective. Mike Verta teaches the exact opposite of what you are experiencing, his approach is writing and transcribing first, theory lessons last, if ever.  Write, write, write is the best thing you can do, plus listen to the masters of the type of music your are writing and try to decipher their approach, by transcribing and checking out the score (which is not available very often, but that's the reality of it...). Hang out with people of similar interests and share your findings. Or visit Mike's Redbanned forum.


----------



## did (Nov 19, 2018)

As you seem having a good level, I think what I'm going to say is already known, but in case...
When mastering all those theories, the good point is that you have tools for analysing all existing scores, and then understanding why you like or dislike a music. So I think that the ultime point is to analyse a lot of composers (classical, modern...), again and again, and as Florian said, searching your own vocabulary ( not so easy I suppose !)


----------



## mikeh-375 (Nov 19, 2018)

_"To resume, no more theory, instead of that, write, write, write with all those colors and materials and make choice on what material and style fits my sensibility"
_

That is precisely it Meaks and also include a sense of adventure, i.e experiment and keep an open mind and open ears. Theory is there to support your flights of creativity not hinder them.


----------



## AdamAlake (Nov 19, 2018)

I would start with dropping the notion that theory is relevant to writing music.


----------



## Will Blackburn (Nov 19, 2018)

Consona said:


> I'm far from a 15 years professional, so apologies for my audacity giving you some advice, but maybe this will help change your perspective. Mike Verta teaches the exact opposite of what you are experiencing, his approach is writing and transcribing first, theory lessons last, if ever.  Write, write, write is the best thing you can do, plus listen to the masters of the type of music your are writing and try to decipher their approach, by transcribing and checking out the score (which is not available very often, but that's the reality of it...). Hang out with people of similar interests and share your findings. Or visit Mike's Redbanned forum.




What's the redbanned forum?


----------



## AdamAlake (Nov 19, 2018)

Will Blackburn said:


> What's the redbanned forum?



Forum focusing on composition, rather than sample libraries.

https://redbanned.com


----------



## mikeh-375 (Nov 19, 2018)

AdamAlake said:


> I would start with dropping the notion that theory is relevant to writing music.



Hi Adam,

We couldn't disagree more.... A big misunderstanding about theory is that it is somehow not related to the creative act when it actually underpins it and informs it I mean, how can it not? - One finds oneself in the learning.
You can write great music without theory of course, but you can (and this is surely too obvious to state), write great music with it too.
No argument here, just a major difference in approach to (orchestral/concert/classical) composition.


----------



## agarner32 (Nov 19, 2018)

mikeh-375 said:


> We couldn't disagree more.... A big misunderstanding about theory is that it is somehow not related to the creative act when it actually underpins it and informs it I mean, how can it not? - One finds oneself in the learning.
> You can write great music without theory of course, but you can (and this is surely too obvious to state), write great music with it too.
> No argument here, just a major difference in approach to (orchestral/concert/classical) composition.


I couldn't agree more and well stated. To state that theory is not relevant to writing music is just not true - plain and simple. Whether you understand what you're doing or not doesn't negate that fact. Adam, I don't know what your skill level is or anything about your music, but I'm going to guess if you're writing music for a living, you probably adhere to most (or many at least) "theory" rules and concepts. There certainly are composers who write great music without formal theory training and vice versa. There is never just one path. Although this argument is super old, it's still an interesting one and a bit entertaining.


----------



## meaks (Nov 19, 2018)

Thanks for your answers !

Personally, i took the path of learning theory with professors, schools and conservatory, as well as myself. I don't want to bother everyone with that old "Is it important to learn theory to write music ? ". I'm just asking if some of you had the same type of questionings at a certain point in your learning journey.

Concerning my background, for the good part i think i could not be possible to arrange music for "The Artist" as well as other movies, or even compose (notation) some personal piano, quatuor or more orchestral piano pieces that fits my sensibility without those years learning jazz, classical, modern and more recent theories, as well as some orchestration.
For the not so good part i think sometimes that i have too much choice of materials to write music, so much that sometimes i'm a bit confused  on what to write ! Modal, tonal, Atonal, Poly-tonal, Modern, Classical, Baroque, Contemporary, Minimalist, Serialism, Jazz, and so on... 
I realize with all those years in harmony and composition classes that every style needs time and self-study to control them and that finally, theories sculpt your ear, which is finally the best "validation" you can have on what "sound" good for you.
I was just asking myself if some of you felt the same way, and what choices you made to finally have your own "type" of writing.

Maybe you finally made the choice of improving your skill in two or more (but not all) of those materials because it fits your sensibility, so you can have more deep control on them ?
Maybe you decided to choose a "current" (Minimalism, Serialism, Neo-tonal or other) to have a recognizable "style" ?
Maybe you mix them together and kept what you thought was interesting for your music vocabulary ?
Maybe you know some of those theories and just pick up some of their principles to feet the needs of your composition ?
Or maybe you accept as a fact that you will study all kind of new music concepts and that its a part of a composer's job?
Sorry if this post is a bit bothering you...
I'm in a position where i'm really thinking that maybe i don't need to go more deeply into theory, i'm just seeking for other experiences to help me in my decision.

Thanks,
Meaks.


----------



## Florian Le Meur (Nov 19, 2018)

Good evening... Its a bit late and I'll be short for this time... But in fact it's a main question asked by Meaks : (I re-form it... may be I'm wrong...but I try...) 
- How can we be "fresh" and "new" to compose with a huge culture of music (listened, analysed, played, learned...) and a knowledge which is more a judge than a help, or a tool ? 

I think it was the life of Picasso who tried to forget all his life how to paint like a master (very young he has the technic to copy masters !!!) for be able to paint like a child he was... Raw Art, free of knowledge.

Meaks, I think you've got a part or the answer with you serie of questions at the en of your post...
But it depends if you want to write for yourself or for a command... It can be different.

I think, with your technical level, you rich the point where you have to find a method of work instead of thinking of style or current... maybe.

- Michel Legrand used to compose 20, 30 different samples for a song and a couple a days later, he re-listened all of it in order to choose by comparison... it's his method.

- Steve Reich got the idea of "time gap" (sorry) when he saw in a cab, the windscreen wipers which didn't work as the same tempo... He tried to put that in music...and invented loops (large part of his language).

- Ligeti tried to translate with strings, summer sunlight over a field of wheat which change orientation due to the wind... May be translate natural events in music could be a method for a piece or source for inspiration...

just ideas after midnight...tomorrow is another day...

have a nice day, 

Bye !


----------



## Consona (Nov 19, 2018)

AdamAlake said:


> Forum focusing on composition, rather than sample libraries.
> 
> https://redbanned.com


Well said.


----------



## MatFluor (Nov 20, 2018)

Redbanned is Mike Vertas place which he founded after some disputes on here.

On that whole theory thing - just as small note:
Theory and technique are the two main ingredients - and that varies a lot what you want to do. You need Theory in one way or another - if you don't know the ranges and strong points of an instrument, you won't be that effective composing for orchestra, if you can only play power chords on a guitar, you can't really make some jazz.

The way I've seen from e.g. Mike Verta (who constantly pushes for "forget about theory when composing") is too internalize theory to a level where you can compose without actively thinking about it. Similar to the Picasso example above. Without his theory and technique, he would not have been able to create what he created.

So - you can learn all the theory you want, in all variations - but think of it as ammo for your musical gun, tools in your musical toolbox. And what good are tools if they are not used? It's not about actively thinking about "Ok, that is a 9 screw, so I need a 9 screwdriver, it's in the second box, the second shelf......", it's about having in internalized to be able to instinctively grab the fitting screwdriver, without thinking of sizes, positions, and whatnot. Only by applying your knowledge you can internalize it, and only then also you can steer away from the expected, and create interesting music.

And all that, of course, falls apart when you go "full artist" channeling your inner lifeforce into the instrument you're holding - you know what I mean. Different philosophies there.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Nov 20, 2018)

Matflour says it all really. The sad thing is, if you do not know much theory/technique or don't subscribe to it with much conviction, you might never know how strong and potent a voice you have. I will qualify that by saying that a lot of folk don't need it at all and fair enough, talent is talent and raw talent has the potential to be smothered by theory if it is not understood how it all applies to creativity. But I also believe that it will do no-one any harm to learn the skills of their craft to as far as they wish to go until they feel they have enough....really it is that obvious....learning your craft to be as good as you can be, just like any other profession.
Back on topic with Meaks though.
Regarding your bullet points above, I think you have the right attitude as all of them could apply. In my case, I found all technique useful in my media work and as a result was less stressed about deadlines or writing because I always had ideas to draw on and could write very quickly - technique opened many paths to explore. With my attempts these days at serious art music, I have a schizoid personality in that sometimes I am atonal and other times, more tonal(ish). Learning to write in both camps has enabled me to wander sonic fields with confidence and fuse newer ways of doing things that may have just on odd occasions, yielded some original touches...(delusional or what...we can all dream eh?)


----------



## scottbuckley (Nov 20, 2018)

MatFluor said:


> The way I've seen from e.g. Mike Verta (who constantly pushes for "forget about theory when composing") is too internalize theory to a level where you can compose without actively thinking about it.



100% agree. I also think that composition is in many ways an empirical process - something which is actively learnt through experimentation and observation; but being exposed to different ideas (through theory) may mean your experiments may create something unique and amazing. Be proud that you've studied more breadth that most composers might, and see where it takes you .

Also, have fun .


----------



## meaks (Nov 20, 2018)

A great thank to all of you for your precious answers and for sharing those questionings with me, i understand now that i was a little confused with all that material i learned and i realize that it will be too difficult to control all of those languages at the same time, even if i know a good part of some of them. I should go back on writing projects using different type of writing and explore them. As Scott Buckley said, have fun !
As i said, many thanks to all of you, you unblock my thoughts .


----------



## ed buller (Nov 20, 2018)

Theory I think is best learned after you have found something you like, have used it and want to know why you like it , and how to use it in different ways. It should always be in tandem to actually composing and be augmenting and enhancing skills you are already familiar with . The best approach for me was. 1, Fall in love with a piece of music. 2, learn how to play it . 3, pull it apart to find the bits I really liked. 4, Learn the "theory" and devices behind those bits so that I could reproduce them in different settings.

best

ed


----------

