# As the track & arrangement gets busier, do you lose perspective?



## nickhmusic (Feb 12, 2012)

I have been interested in talking about this for a while - and I bring it up tonight because I've just spent 2 days on a 2-3 minute cue which challenges everything I've done musically. 

I wrote a piece for the entire orchestra, using the full woodwind, brass, percussion and string sections. Tough job, particularly as the track gets busier.

My attempt is always to write and produce something that betters what I did last time.

Personally I find that at the beginning stages of the piece, I am driven entirely by inspiration, instinct and habit. The writing stage.

Then - as it starts to take shape - or I run out of ideas, I start to lose the ability to work with the whole - and become quite finickity about the details. 

The two mindsets are not related. The creative part at the start is pure inspiration (I guess you could call it the muse). 

The other mindset is all about attention to detail, going in and tweaking EQs, reverbs, CC curves, balance - ARRRGH - etc. Reworking the arrangement, re- playing in melody/accompaniment lines.

Sometimes I lose the wood for the trees. Fresh perspective on a new day helps, but it can be hard to get that back when the track and arrangement is so busy.

Just wondered if anyone else felt this way or had any thoughts on this.

Cheers folks! o-[][]-o 

Nick


----------



## lee (Feb 12, 2012)

Sometimes a different workflow than "doing everything in my daw" helps. Some people like to use pen and paper developing ideas (not necessarily sheet paper, could be plain text, drawings, whatever, describing and planning your project) before they "perform" them in the sequencer. Then you have your work from another perspective, the paper. Or if you're a keyboard player (like me) then having a piano next to your daw or even in another room, helps me focus on the creative "inventio" part without being distracted by all the ccs, eq etc. And just switch between the sequencer/paper/piano.

Not sure this makes any sense to you, but this is my experience.


----------



## nickhmusic (Feb 12, 2012)

Thanks for the idea Lee - like a good way of getting out of the DAW world for a while - and like you say it could help to see the arrangement and creation from a different point of view.

I've always found the keyboard a great sketching tool


----------



## lee (Feb 12, 2012)

Making music can be so emotional and mind-blowing. Sometimes we just need to plan ahead. Im not against "go with flow" but sometimes the flow can get helped by masterplan that youre controlling making sure your goals with the music are fulfilled. Or at least tested


----------



## nickhmusic (Feb 12, 2012)

that sounds like a very good thought process. I'm with you on the mindblowing part - and I can only imagine that with a proper plan, you can have the best of the experience, along with the organisation of knowing that you are going in the right direction.


----------



## RiffWraith (Feb 12, 2012)

nickhmusic @ Mon Feb 13 said:


> My attempt is always to write and produce something that betters what I did last time.



Thats good!



nickhmusic @ Mon Feb 13 said:


> Personally I find that at the beginning stages of the piece, I am driven entirely by inspiration, instinct and habit. The writing stage.



That's good too!



nickhmusic @ Mon Feb 13 said:


> Then - as it starts to take shape - or I run out of ideas, I start to lose the ability to work with the whole - and become quite finickity about the details.



That's not so good. It could be several things:

1) You are not there yet with your workflow, and are still feeling your way around your sequencer, learning how to do certain things from a technical standpoint.

2) Lack of knowledge regarding orchestration. I am not saying you lack knowledge, but what you have said exhibits just that. Some good books, such as Samuel Adler's _The Study Of Orchestration_ will help. As will getting hold of some full orchestral scores, like the John William's signature series from Hal Leonard. Sit down, and make a MIDI mock-up of the score in front of you. Incredible learning experience - even for the experienced composer/orchestrator.

3) It's psychological. You do have the knowledge, and you do have the talent, but at a certaain point, you tense up, and say to yourself, "OMG - what do I do with this...am I good enough to finish it?!?!" Or something similiar. That fix is not so simple; you have to wade through it and overcome your 'fear'.

Cheers.


----------



## Arbee (Feb 12, 2012)

Interesting topic, looking back on some of my earlier work I have certainly been guilty of "under composing" and then "over arranging and over producing".

With many of us who have to fulfil the roles of composer, arranger, sound designer, performer and sound engineer, it is easy to get lost. Engineering when you should be composing, arranging when you should be engineering etc.

It's vital to my sanity to understand what my role is at any given stage in the process and not try to be everything at once. It's tough!


----------



## nickhmusic (Feb 12, 2012)

Hey Riff, thanks for the words.

Regarding orchestration - I have always thought it is possible to learn this by ear (up to a certain point) - through listening and paying attention - and then applying what you've learned.

A lot of what I have learned is from listening to film scores over the years - and picking up techniques that way. I have also bought Samuel Adler's book on orchestration and find it very helpful indeed. 

Thanks for the tip on the JW signature scores. Currently ploughing my way through "Obliviate" - which is a cue from Alexandre Desplat's score for Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part I.

N


----------



## nickhmusic (Feb 12, 2012)

Arbee @ Mon Feb 13 said:


> It's vital to my sanity to understand what my role is at any given stage in the process and not try to be everything at once. It's tough!



Thanks Arbee, glad to have raised a couple of points. And I completely agree with what you've said - I always ignore it - but it is clearly so important to separate the mix from the arrangement - even though with what we do, we are essentially mixing and balancing as we go along


----------



## JimmyPoppa (Feb 16, 2012)

N,

Don't know if the following would work for you but, for myself, I completely separate the 'composing' process, from the recording & sequencing. Certainly, this is because of my background (age mid 50s, trained as pencil/paper composer, work as arranger/orchestrator 30+ yrs, learned tech later - e.g. MIDI, Sibelius, Sequencing, etc.). 

The value of this approach for me is that, by the time I hit the recording/sequencing, the piece is already completely done and I'm entering a different mind set, that of the performer/engineer/editor, etc. There can be some tweaking to the piece, of course, I don't have a rule about it. 

The main thing I'm saying, which others have hinted at, is I don't lose perspective on the piece because I'm totally focused on the writing rather than anything else. It also facilitates the recording because I know before I even start what the piece is. I can set up the orchestra (if I don't have a template), make library choices, and a hundred other things go more crisply because I actually know what I'm trying to achieve right from the start of the sequencing process. Of course, this approach also helps avoid the problems of keyboard habits determining my ideas and 'keyboardistic' writing rather than instrumentally idiomatic writing. 

I have a composer friend who does this even though he writes at his keyboard, using sample sounds (rather than a notation program the way I do it). He combines his keyboard and sample work with the sequencer notation and Sibelius, to finish the piece, then focuses on the sequencing. Maybe some combination of this could work for you, just as a change. 



nickhmusic @ Sun Feb 12 said:


> Regarding orchestration - I have always thought it is possible to learn this by ear (up to a certain point) - through listening and paying attention - and then applying what you've learned.
> 
> A lot of what I have learned is from listening to film scores over the years - and picking up techniques that way. I have also bought Samuel Adler's book on orchestration and find it very helpful indeed.
> N



Unless your ear training is at an outrageous level (and I mean academic, musical ear training) as well as your analytical skills, it is extremely difficult to really learn all the nuances of orchestration just by listening. Particularly if you are using recordings as your primary source since, because of mixing, etc. choices, you can easily miss a significant percentage of what's going on.

To a HUGE extent, it's as if you're trying to reinvent the wheel. Working out things that have already been known for years, even centuries, and that you could absorb in hours instead of weeks. If you don't like studying via books and courses (a lot of people don't), then, at the very least you could acquire the scores to whatever you're listening to and read as you listen. You will definitely see things in the score that you might not notice by just listening.

There are tons of free orchestra scores available online. You could do short segments of things you like and combine the listening with the score. Even if it's not a specific film, you can still learn a lot about technique. Maybe your Adler would then serve as a backup reference. IMPO, none of this compares with organized study of orchestration but, not knowing you and your situation, I can't say what's realistic for you.

However, based on what you wrote, that you find yourself losing perspective as the pieces get 'bigger.' I'm inferring that you are seeking a better overall command of the orchestral forces. A great deal of this is simply, hard-core, technical study. Instead of spending weeks, months, and even years trying to dig out all the material contained in recordings of film scores, you could use that time much more efficiently getting a solid foundation in orchestration, arranging and ear training. Then when you listen, you will have a much deeper understanding of what you're hearing. And when you write, you won't find yourself overwhelmed by what you're trying to achieve.

Anyway, sorry to go on so long. Hope some of this helps.

Be Well,

Jimmy


----------



## Aaron Sapp (Feb 16, 2012)

I was in the same boat years ago. Would write/sequence/orchestrate several bars at a time. Would want to commit seppuku by the end of a track. One thing that completely changed my writing speed was simply writing an entire track with strictly a piano patch. Sequence/write the whole track with a piano patch so that you capture the musical impulse right away. Once youre done, go back and start copy/pasting sections of your piano sketch and make the necessary orchestration decisions/adjustments. 

Though most of the time I do tend to pound out an idea on my upright first. Nothing like a real piano to effectively coax/develop an idea.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 16, 2012)

Aaron Sapp @ Thu Feb 16 said:


> I was in the same boat years ago. Would write/sequence/orchestrate several bars at a time. Would want to commit seppuku by the end of a track. One thing that completely changed my writing speed was simply writing an entire track with strictly a piano patch. Sequence/write the whole track with a piano patch so that you capture the musical impulse right away. Once youre done, go back and start copy/pasting sections of your piano sketch and make the necessary orchestration decisions/adjustments.
> 
> Though most of the time I do tend to pound out an idea on my upright first. Nothing like a real piano to effectively coax/develop an idea.



+1. I started writing things out with a piano with paper and pencil. Took me years to get back to doing that, but I wasn't having much fun just sequencing. As soon as you start sequencing you start tweaking patches, adding fx, mixing, ect, ect.... Something to be said about just spending the time to get an idea out without all that stuff. Then I take my complete sketch and then I start dealing with the technology, finalizing the orchestration, changing things that could be better. But, there's something to be said about taking the time to just get the music out. Also, its faster for me. By the time I start sequencing the music is already pretty much done. Then I can deal with the performance, programming, mixing, finding the right sounds, ect....


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Feb 16, 2012)

josejherring @ Thu Feb 16 said:


> Aaron Sapp @ Thu Feb 16 said:
> 
> 
> > I was in the same boat years ago. Would write/sequence/orchestrate several bars at a time. Would want to commit seppuku by the end of a track. One thing that completely changed my writing speed was simply writing an entire track with strictly a piano patch. Sequence/write the whole track with a piano patch so that you capture the musical impulse right away. Once youre done, go back and start copy/pasting sections of your piano sketch and make the necessary orchestration decisions/adjustments.
> ...



i tried going back to that for a while but I kept writing for real players instead of to the samples, and they are just not the same thing. IMHO you have to write to what the samples do well and avoid what they do not. So now I only do it for contrapuntal passages sometimes.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 16, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Thu Feb 16 said:


> josejherring @ Thu Feb 16 said:
> 
> 
> > Aaron Sapp @ Thu Feb 16 said:
> ...



Yeah. I had that thought. Then I decided that if the samples can't do what I want they're worthless. But, I still do keep in mind that I'm writing for samples, if I'm writing for samples. But, you'd be surprised at how creative you can get with samples when you have a clear idea of what you're after. Then you start bending the samples to suite your ideas rather than the other way around. Start reediting your sounds, resampling stuff, time stretching articulations. Sampling your own stuff, ect.... I REFUSE TO BE TIED DOWN BY SAMPLES ANY LONGER!!!!! :lol:


----------



## nickhmusic (Feb 16, 2012)

Thank you very much for your thorough thoughts guys - I really do appreciate it.

A couple of common points have come up a few times in this thread, one of them being the extremely important study of orchestration - and the other is the thought that writing the piece beforehand would allow me to focus on all the technical aspects (mixing, editing. etc) after the music has been written.

I do often write on the piano first, the idea created using a piano patch. The piece then starts to take shape and it is then that I will start playing in lines for brass/strings/percussion etc.

This thread has helped give me some things to think about - really positive stuff actually as I really enjoy the learning process but have to come to terms with the fact that however good my ear might be - I need the full knowledge - and this is why I'm at this crossroads. Time to get my head into the score and parts.

Better get reading then - might even try Berklee's orchestration course online? 


Thanks again -awesome of you all.
Nick


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Feb 16, 2012)

josejherring @ Thu Feb 16 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Thu Feb 16 said:
> 
> 
> > josejherring @ Thu Feb 16 said:
> ...



Clearly, you care about creativity more than I do. If my client is happy, I'm happy. What can I say, I'm a total whore


----------



## Farkle (Feb 16, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Thu Feb 16 said:


> josejherring @ Thu Feb 16 said:
> 
> 
> > EastWest Lurker @ Thu Feb 16 said:
> ...



But an honest, whore, Jay.... :twisted: 

In all seriousness, I see both sides. When I was really active in TV, trying to break in, I was all about writing as FAST as possible (a good quality for TV, right)? Stylus RMX, Loops, sound design, whatever could get the cue done faster.

Then, about a year ago, I made the decision to "write slower", do it the way I wanted to, and to actually make the music written. Went back to pen and paper, and haven't looked back.

Is it slower? You betcha. Can I keep up with TV... mayybe, maybe not. Am I having a blast at Play Eternal writing music? Uh-huh. And, my team loves the music I'm doing. As always, though, I am writing for my medium. Video game music is a much slower beast than TV.

Now, not to derail this thread, back to the "how do I control my template and clutter". Here's my opinion. Get more "senses" involved. Don't just rely upon your ear. Write it out. Get your vision, your spatial sense, your music theory involved. I stand by what Mike V said in his video cast. He can look at a score, and a certain sound "looks" a certain way in a score. I've been transcribing and score reducing scores this year, and I think he's really right with that. Sooo, one can reverse engineer a sound because it "looks" a certain way.

Plus, no matter how virtuoso one is (and I sure as hell am NOT), the pencil writes more elaborate lines than playing it in in real time. So, my thought is... separate the writing from the DAW sequencing. Sketch out on paper. Do what Jimmy said... write it out, so that putting it into the DAW is more like "mixing and recording", and not writing. 

Again, just my opinion, and I am in NO WAY denigrating how others work. I know too well the constraints of tight deadlines, you gotta do what you gotta do for the client. BUT, if you have the ability and time, I think it is worth your while to bring the pencil/paper writing phase into the equation.

As always, just my $.02. Take what works, discard the rest. 

Mike


----------



## bryla (Feb 17, 2012)

As the thread gets busier with unnecesseray quotes, do you lose perspective?


----------



## JimmyPoppa (Feb 17, 2012)

Farkle @ Thu Feb 16 said:


> josejherring @ Thu Feb 16 said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly, you care about creativity more than I do. If my client is happy, I'm happy. What can I say, I'm a total whore
> ...



LOL. Speaking of unnecessary quotes. The ones above reminded me of this, from the movie Harlem Nights:

*"I’m an honest ho. And all my hoes is honest."*

Be Well,

Jimmy


----------



## JimmyPoppa (Feb 18, 2012)

nickhmusic @ Thu Feb 16 said:


> This thread has helped give me some things to ...come to terms with the fact that however good my ear might be - I need the full knowledge _(of orchestration)._ Better get reading then - might even try Berklee's orchestration course online?
> 
> Nick



Nick,

Just noticed you were implying a question about the Berklee online course. Before you do that, you might take a look at these free online courses in Orchestration and Arranging.

http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/forumdisplay.php/76-Education (http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/for ... -Education)

Maybe you could work your way thoroughly through them and get a good overview of what you're getting into.

Then you might compare the Berklee course vs this one called Cinematic Orchestration: http://www.thinkspaceonline.com/co/

I get the impression that your orientation is toward film scoring. If you have a decent foundation from the free courses, you might get more of what you're really after from the CO course than the Berklee. They are similar in price range so, you can decide what you think best fits your needs. I haven't taken either so I can't say from personal experience. I did take the Music For the Media course from ThinkSpace (the developers of the CO course) and thought it was quite good. 

Anyway, hope this helps.

Be Well,

Jimmy


----------



## nickhmusic (Mar 17, 2012)

Hi Jimmy,

Thanks so much - it's very good of you to take the time to reply 

I found that I learnt a great deal recently by studying one of the Alfred Publishing scores (which are now available digitally online) - and playing in the parts individually. I approached this per section and have found this invaluable in studying the composer's choices in arrangement and orchestration.


----------



## JimmyPoppa (Mar 18, 2012)

nickhmusic @ Sat Mar 17 said:


> Hi Jimmy,
> 
> Thanks so much - it's very good of you to take the time to reply
> 
> I found that I learnt a great deal recently by studying one of the Alfred Publishing scores (which are now available digitally online) - and playing in the parts individually. I approached this per section and have found this invaluable in studying the composer's choices in arrangement and orchestration.



Nick,

Thanks for getting my morning off to a nice start. I'm genuinely happy to be of any help. 

The approach you just described is classic. Probably the majority of orchestrators in the history of the world have learned just about exactly that way.

This forum has a lot of folks with a HUGE amount of knowledge who seem generous about sharing when the person inquiring is sincere. That is one of the great values of the digital age, along with the instant availability of most of the music of recorded history, essentially for free!

Good luck and hope to hear more about how it's going.

Be Well,

Jimmy


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Mar 18, 2012)

I'm also a big fan of starting on the piano first, even though I'm a guitarist first (which may be a good thing, as I tend to write fairly simply on the piano). There's just such a thrill when the music goes from a simple two-hand thing to a combination of instruments.
Also, regarding complexity, there's not much that compares to the experience of having someone else, with fresh ears, say things like, "it's too busy", "I got lost after...", "huh... what melody? I couldn't hear it!". Collaborating with someone can help you to gain a little perspective that you may have lost from having worked so hard on the little details that most people don't hear. Most of the time, I take away lines/tracks after others have listened and given me feedback. If I had to simplify my approach to writing: sketch -> arrange -> strip away. That last part is probably the most important!


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 18, 2012)

Some years ago I bought the _Symphonic Ensemble Strings_ and the _Symphonic Ensemble Brass_ from SoniVox, tu use them on my notbook.

2 little toys with what I very often write my first ideas/ pre-arrangements. Especially good when longer notes are in the arrangement..... .

Both sound really good, and it is preparing fun to compose with them.


----------

