# Among all the great composers, which would have been the best and worst programmers?



## Guy Bacos (Jan 24, 2013)

A fictional question here. Among all the great composers, pre-synth era, or to make it easier, pre-1950, Bach to 1950, which great composer would you think would have had the most skills in programming samples, and which the worst?


----------



## autopilot (Jan 24, 2013)

Bach would have rocked a DAW - I reckon anyone who worked as an organist you could argue was kind of using a DAW anyway.

I suspect Mozart would have done well at programming, and been an early adopter of the VSL stuff. 

Wagner would have been all PC with a massive slave setup, but have frustrating tech issues all the time, mostly caused by the PLAY engine.

Beethoven would have had his deafness brought on earlier through use of headphones, but until then would have been a strong Mac advocate.

Sibelius would have been a Finale user.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 24, 2013)

Sean, I think my gin and tonic is helping, but you're a funny man tonight! o=?


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jan 24, 2013)

I know it' stretching the imagination a bit, but it's fun to think about it, well, maybe just for me? I would imagine Ravel would be an excellent programmer. I think Chopin would be the worst.


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 24, 2013)

*Godowsky* would have won hands down in the technical arena. Even out sequencing Bach and Chopin. Doubling their track output.

*Mozart* would've gotten endlessly lost in the Daw's ostinato and cut and paste features maybe even inventing the Zimmer ostinatos before their time.

*Frantisek Kotzwara* would have really screwed things to death in a way that I can't even begin to explain. I advise you NOT read about it... *HERE if you must..Death.*
(I told you not to read it)


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jan 24, 2013)

As for Mozart, he would quickly end up being broke, not managing well the cost of all his gear and software.


----------



## dannthr (Jan 24, 2013)

Organs are essentially additive synths.


----------



## park bench (Jan 24, 2013)

Fun idea. :D 

Wagner would have loved the fact he could have a soprano sing at insane ranges and not destroy her vocal chords...


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 24, 2013)

Paganinni, in frustration, would have never written the variations as his Garritan Stradivarius software was no longer being supported and updated. And the copy-protection prevented him from booting it up. It just... *wooden* work no longer.

Another composer though, who dealt exclusively with open-source software and Linux would have excelled tremendously as he had a real (um....) *Handel* on the technology.


----------



## Rob (Jan 24, 2013)

autopilot @ 25th January 2013 said:


> Sibelius would have been a Finale user.



=o


----------



## Tatu (Jan 24, 2013)

Ravel and Debussy would've been awesome at it, but would've either failed to finish anything, because samples just can't get you quite there, or degrade as composers.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jan 24, 2013)

Looking at their approach and mentalities, I think Wagner, but not so much as a programmer but as a developer since the Wagner horns were specifically created for his operas.


----------



## IvanP (Jan 25, 2013)

autopilot @ Fri Jan 25 said:


> Sibelius would have been a Finale user.



:mrgreen:


----------



## Stiltzkin (Jan 25, 2013)

Liszt would have struggled to adapt to a system with any form of latency input - he'd likely have broken many computers with the speed of his playing alone.

Rachmaninoff would have flooded his setup too with his man tears.

I think Scriabin would have been an excellent user though, given his improv + adaptation style of composing.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jan 25, 2013)

Scoenberg, Berg, and Webern, or as my composition teacher used to call them, the Father, the Son, and The Holy Ghost 

I somehow feel Tchaikovsky would have been terrible at it but I cannot explain why.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 25, 2013)

Webern would have only needed an iPhone, Mahler a 5-PC farm. J. Strauss, of course, would have used VSL. Varèse would be on a Moog modular, Satie would be a Spitfire man. Of course, all would be on Omnisphere as well...


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jan 25, 2013)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri Jan 25 said:


> Webern would have only needed an iPhone, Mahler a 5-PC farm. J. Strauss, of course, would have used VSL. Varèse would be on a Moog modular, Satie would be a Spitfire man. Of course, all would be on Omnisphere as well...



For some reason, this all rings true.


----------



## twnd (Jan 25, 2013)

Stravinsky maybe would have sounded artificial.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jan 25, 2013)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri Jan 25 said:


> Webern would have only needed an iPhone, Mahler a 5-PC farm. J. Strauss, of course, would have used VSL. Varèse would be on a Moog modular, Satie would be a Spitfire man. Of course, all would be on Omnisphere as well...


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jan 25, 2013)

Stiltzkin @ Fri Jan 25 said:


> Liszt would have struggled to adapt to a system with any form of latency input - he'd likely have broken many computers with the speed of his playing alone.
> 
> Rachmaninoff would have flooded his setup too with his man tears.
> 
> I think Scriabin would have been an excellent user though, given his improv + adaptation style of composing.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jan 25, 2013)

Peter Alexander @ Fri Jan 25 said:


> Looking at their approach and mentalities, I think Wagner, but not so much as a programmer but as a developer since the Wagner horns were specifically created for his operas.



Yes, Wagner would probably revolutionize the entire approach, develop a super computer made for heavy programming and come up with his own libraries: Wagner Strings. Wagner Brass etc


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jan 25, 2013)

Chopin would probably give it a try, 5 min later, blood on the keys, keys sticking, asks George Sand for money to buy "19th Romantic Strings", she says no because he's been defending her daughter rather than her, then Chopin kicks all his gears and gets lost.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jan 25, 2013)

Guy Bacos @ Fri Jan 25 said:


> Peter Alexander @ Fri Jan 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Looking at their approach and mentalities, I think Wagner, but not so much as a programmer but as a developer since the Wagner horns were specifically created for his operas.
> ...



Which Hans did.


----------



## schatzus (Jan 25, 2013)

I'll bite... If John Williams started 5 years ago on a DAW with EWQLSO Platinum:
Good or bad?


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jan 25, 2013)

schatzus @ Fri Jan 25 said:


> I'll bite... If John Williams started 5 years ago on a DAW with EWQLSO Platinum:
> Good or bad?



I think frustrated.


----------



## rgames (Jan 25, 2013)

I think samples and sample programming are the domain of the film music composer, so you need to distinguish between composers for film and those who work in other genres.

Would "Great" concert music composers of any era use samples to any significant extent? I'm not sure but I doubt it - I listen to a lot of contemporary concert music and I can't recall hearing any that used sample libraries. Electronics, sure, but nothing that we would consider a "sample library".

"Great" concert music composers don't need to program - they write the music and the musicians take care of the rest.

That's not to say that you can't write great music with samples - you can. However, I doubt any "Great" concert music composer would do so - the genre requires flexibility that just isn't present in the sample world. At least not with what is presently available.

rgames


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jan 25, 2013)

In general it's true what you're saying rgames, however, the intention of VSL from the start was to create these samples as much for the media composer as for concert music, Varèse mockups and such.

But in this thread, we can have fun thinking libraries were quite evolved.


----------



## David Story (Jan 25, 2013)

+1

Was at a meeting with Jim Cameron. Someone asked him if he would like to do a low budget film. "Why would I want to do that?" he replied. 

Stravinsky had a similar response to synths. He did use vibes, organ. He considered the rest "noise", primitive. Beethoven would probably have a similar view. Though he did compose for the panharmonicon. But he didn't program it.

Varèse did use all electronics in Poème électronique, a brilliant site specific work.

Bach and other Baroque composers would take to synths and samples, but would prefer to play in real time, since they had amazing chops. As Dan said, an organ is a kind of synth.

Mozart would play 'em, but would he program them? Maybe.

Easy to imagine Debussy and Ravel using samples and synths. They'd probably get into programing since they were consummate craftsmen.


----------



## fish_hoof (Jan 26, 2013)

Here's a twist. Would some of the old world composers (Bach, Mozart, etc) be as good of composers if they HAD all of this technology? They without a doubt spent more than 10,000 hours perfecting their craft. However, when half that time is spent learning DAW's, programming, etc, would they still have the writing chops?

Sorry if this doesn't make sense, I like the post by Guy but it's also 2:41 am where I am... :shock:


----------



## Christof (Feb 18, 2013)

> Mozart would've gotten endlessly lost in the Daw's ostinato and cut and paste features maybe even inventing the Zimmer ostinatos before their time.



Actually Mozart invented the Zimmer ostinatos in some way, just listen to the first bars of his symphony No.40 in g minor.


----------



## JPQ (Feb 18, 2013)

Beethoven gets middle ear implant and Vivaldi uses Mac.


----------



## sherief83 (Feb 20, 2013)

Christof @ Mon Feb 18 said:


> > Mozart would've gotten endlessly lost in the Daw's ostinato and cut and paste features maybe even inventing the Zimmer ostinatos before their time.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Mozart invented the Zimmer ostinatos in some way, just listen to the first bars of his symphony No.40 in g minor.



Good thought. I've always had the feeling that the modern ostinatos phenomena is likely owed to how Stravinsky used them in the Rite of spring. 




autopilot @ Thu Jan 24 said:


> Beethoven would have had his deafness brought on earlier through use of headphones, but until then would have been a strong Mac advocate.


Hmmm... I happen to frequently use headphones a lot and I happen to have a lot of ringing in my ears of late and I'm afraid of the whole deafness thing... and its not helping that I love macs and that I happen to share Beethoven's birthday the 16th of December... You didn't just predict my miserable future did you? :D

To participate in the thread. I think Stravinsky would be the most successful sample composer of all. His way of composition and cutting and pasting certainly reminds us of how we do it in midi.


----------



## Daryl (Feb 21, 2013)

I think that any composer who could play an instrument to a high standard would have been a great programmer. These guys learned the tools of their trade, all of them, to a really high standard, so there is no reason to assume that if "tools of the trade" involved dicking around on a computer, they wouldn't be equally as good.

D


----------

