# Where did the art of writing structured pieces gone?



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

I don't mean to sound like I'm preaching about this, but I personally would appreciate more structured piece on this forum. I can understand and appreciate the cinematic approached, and very often well rendered, however, as long as there is no video accompanying the music on the cue, I think it would be nice to see more often complete structured pieces. Mike Verta mentioned recently it should be a pre-requisite to show the score, I think equally important, or to me, even more important, is to have some form in your music, I feel too often it's bits of pieces, excerpts, phrases to show samples, and again I can understand this and the reasons why, and it's not to put down anything, but sometimes I feel it's getting dangerously unhealthy, similar to the thread not too long ago: Where did the melody go in film music? Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Mike Marino (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy,

Should the score be a prerequisite on orchestral genre music? Or any and all?

- Mike


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jun 13, 2011)

Some of us only write to image, so we are slaves to the inherent form of the scene. Furthermore, well-structured pieces can sometimes call too much attention to themselves, away from the dialogue/story (you need to sneak the music in and out, so no clear intros and endings). The key word in that last sentence is 'sometimes', of course.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jun 13, 2011)

Also, I know you have the best intentions, but you are coming off a bit preachy, and so is Mike with this pre-requisite stuff. Who cares about showing a score? The focus here is writing music with a virtual palette, 95% of which will never be played by real musicians.

PS: you wrote, "... not a put-down...", followed by, "... dangerously unhealthy..." - which is it?


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## chimuelo (Jun 13, 2011)

Well if there are folks shopping here 4 complete Orchestrations, having a thread titled " Complete Orchestrations " is a valid point.
But having a pre requisite should only apply to that thread.
Otherwise that could be considered a form censorship and end up having a detrimental effect.
I look forward to the day where I can sit down with my recently acquirred instruments and contribute, but right now rehersal mock ups for my Brothas' that can't read but play and look the part takes up any down time I have.
I often listen to various works done here and envy everyone as they have time to record and create.
I on the other hand, I immatate and emulate more now than ever.
Even on a day off I wake up and a dance groove is still in my head..........but then again so are the Reverend Franklins I require to buy said gear with..

I'd love a seperate thread as it is extremely frustrating sometimes listening to sa many snippets, etc.
Reminds me of Attention Disorder Syndrome....

I suffer from THird Parrty Developers Syndrome so I can relate.
3PDS can overtake me on my days off causing me to buy plugs I don't need.
Kind of like Mel Gibson in the Movie Conspiracy Theory with the book Catcher In The Rye...


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Mike Marino (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy, I understand what you're saying. It might be one of the reasons why there is such a lack of comment on the music posted in the member Compositions area. It seems like many listen; more have no comment.

I've noticed a recent trend of people posting quick 10-30 seconds clips from a new library they just got. I'm pretty new so i don't know if that's been happening for a while.

- The other Mike


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Can we rewind this thread? IT IS NOT ABOUT POSTING YOUR SCORE.
> 
> Mike V added that at the end of one of his comments a while back and more or less jokingly, but still with a message, and I just brought it up.
> 
> My point and thread is about pieces with structures rather than snippets.



I agree with you, Guy.


----------



## midphase (Jun 13, 2011)

Although I couldn't care less about structure or seeing a PDF of the score...I wish more people would post quicktime movies of their music to see how well it's functioning within the intended visual context that it was intended to function in.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 13, 2011)

Good film cues, if they are of an extended length, have an internal if not formal structure. They have a beginning, a middle, and an end, which is why trained composers tend to do them well.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## germancomponist (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> We're back to film cues. :(
> 
> 
> I think a film cue has the structure the film dictates, that's why I didn't want to generalize this. Pieces posted here have rarely any connection with a specific scene, so why not make it more in piece form? More interesting and fun, in my opinion.



A good thought, Guy! 

As you know, I love melodies (the reason, I started a same thread here some time ago...) and I think there *is* place for melodies in film music also.


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

When I suggested score posting as being a requisite, I was being facetious; but facetious in the same way as if I suggested most people use proper punctuation, grammar, and spelling in their posts - it really shouldn't be laughably unlikely. But it is.

And Ned, I'll tell you when "sometimes" structure can be distracting under picture: When you suck. If you can't write a melody under picture without it being distracting, you suck. If you can't write a piece with structure and cohesion under a picture without it being distracting, you suck. You suck and you have no craft. But don't sweat it, you can have a great career. In fact, you should thank your lucky stars you weren't trying to work before about 1990, when most of the people who now call themselves composers would barely have been considered _musicians_, let alone had a remote chance in hell of finding a job when they had next to zero skills.

Try walking onto the Paramount lot in 1970 unable to read or write music, being unable to write counterpoint or melodies, unable to orchestrate, unable to conduct, with no knowledge of the repertoire, no theoretical training, no experience playing in an orchestra, and unable to play an instrument with any proficiency. You wouldn't make it past the gift shop. And yet this is the profile of no shortage of "composers" in the industry today, and that's an undeniable fact. And some people have the delusional audacity to suggest the quality of work hasn't plummeted; as though none of that stuff is relevant. No, it's relevant, it just has nothing to do with working or having a career these days, which is the problem. 

We're not seeing "changes," we're not seeing "evolution," we're not seeing "differing tastes," we're seeing a deluge of work by people with next to no skills. And when that happens, any absolute sense of quality gets lost in the tide and everything becomes relative; "good" becomes the best of the "suck." And young directors who've never heard a decent well-crafted score in their lives think melody is destructive; shape their aesthetic based on the non-music they've grown up with in the disposable films they've seen all their lives. Craft, for the most part, has been washed out to sea. And who gives a fuck? Basically nobody. 'Cause why? For the craft? For the principle of it? Fuck no. "I wants me an Audi 8 and to retire in a big house asap. If I gaves two shits about writing lasting, contributory music, I would know how to maybe write counterpoint worth a crap which I don't." Fuggedaboutit. 

There are handful of guys on this forum - and young ones, too - busting their ass to learn craft. They send me their scores, they probe me incessantly for advice and help on orchestration, counterpoint, melody, and yes, template stuff and mixing, too. They're working it. And almost without exception, their music is way better than the standard offering.

And yet they don't post. Don't post their work, mostly. And they always say why: basically not welcome. Don't want to do drums+loops+choirs+ostinatos. Probably, they have no future in film music. And that may be a compliment.

I promise this is the last time I'm standing on this soapbox.  After awhile, just pissing into a fan isn't so much noble as it is stupid.  


_Mike


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> We're back to film cues. :(
> 
> 
> I think a film cue has the structure the film dictates, that's why I didn't want to generalize this. Pieces posted here have rarely any connection with a specific scene, so why not make it more in piece form? More interesting and fun, in my opinion.



What I am saying Guy is that _apart_ from what the film imposes, well written film cuses have a sense of structure internally because guys who are trained that way, just write that way.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 13, 2011)

mverta @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> When I suggested score posting as being a requisite, I was being facetious; but facetious in the same way as if I suggested most people use proper punctuation, grammar, and spelling in their posts - it really shouldn't be laughably unlikely. But it is.
> 
> And Ned, I'll tell you when "sometimes" structure can be distracting under picture: When you suck. If you can't write a melody under picture without it being distracting, you suck. If you can't write a piece with structure and cohesion under a picture without it being distracting, you suck. You suck and you have no craft. But don't sweat it, you can have a great career. In fact, you should thank your lucky stars you weren't trying to work before about 1990, when most of the people who now call themselves composers would barely have been considered _musicians_, let alone had a remote chance in hell of finding a job when they had next to zero skills.
> 
> ...



Well, if a bit stridently, stated IMHO. :lol:


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

Ashermusic @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Well, if a bit stridently, stated IMHO. :lol:



Yeah, probably. Truth hurts and I don't give a crap, mostly.  I'm on solid argumentative ground, so if it becomes about what a pompous, pretentious douchebag I am, then you're attacking the messenger because you can't attack the message. I didn't event this stuff, and it doesn't take a genius to see the 800-pound gorilla in the room. It just takes the guy with enough whatever to say something and be willing to take the hit. 

As a guy who's been told his music sounds like a Williams knock-off half his life, I'm obviously comfortable taking the hit.  And, even though I'm accused of otherwise, I've never just sat back and taken potshots at people - I'm always encouraging them to grow and increase their power. I'm always willing to help. I've told the guys on this forum who've been absolute shits to me at times that I'd help them any way I could, anytime they want, if they just ask. Some, interestingly, have! I want us all to be better; I want the craft to be better. Sometimes you gotta get real first, to do that.


_Mike


----------



## Mike Marino (Jun 13, 2011)

@ Mike V:

Soooo.....then why not just call a spade a spade when listening to music in the Members Compositions section of the forum? If you think a piece of posted music sucks, say "I don't like it; it sucks."

- The other Mike


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

Mike - 'cause the point isn't just to hand out "it sucks" badges every three minutes. That's not my aim or goal. But there came a point where I had to choose between spending my online critique time on the guys who were really working it, sending me scores and pieces privately, or the myriad of people online simply posting works. I don't have time for both, and I'm much more useful to people who feel the same way that I do about this stuff. I can help them more, and more directly. When someone posts a piece and score online, you will notice I almost always comment right away.


_Mike


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Ned, and many more. What you are doing now, I'm sure you see the artistic value of it, this is your craft. Think of it for a moment, the same thing is going to happen to you in a few years, some young punk is going to get the gigs using a fraction of your craft and knowledge. Not saying composers today (including myself) are idiots compared to the previous generations, but if there is no wake up call soon, this is what is going to happen the next generation.



You realize that now you are going to get responses like: 
"Who is to say it is worse or better?" 
"It's just different." 
"It doesn't matter as long as people like it."
"Guys like you are locked into old fashioned paradigms"
etc.

It is a losing battle, Guy.


----------



## TheUnfinished (Jun 13, 2011)

Hey Mike,

Just checking something from your longer post. Are you saying that composers are approaching you saying that their more classical stuff would not be welcome if posted on here? Or am I misunderstanding that bit?

Because, if I have understood you, I'm surprised. This place may at the moment be skewed towards more media-styled compositions, but I doubt anyone would feel that a more traditional, concert-oriented piece would be unwelcome. 

I'd welcome them anyway!

Cheers,
Matt


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

I rarely will work on printing a score, but it's only because my composition production with VSL doesn't allow me the time, but I'm glad there are some people reminding others the importance of it, it tells me, Guy, get off your ass, and get some scores on paper!


----------



## midphase (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> midphase, are you saying you don't appreciate a well structured composition? Once again, I'm not talking about film cues. For those I can understand, and I don't care less either.



No...I'm saying that I'm not interested in them appearing on this forum since that's not the reason why I personally come here....but if others want to post structured non-programmatic music on VI Control they're more than welcome to it.


----------



## Tino Danielzik (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> I rarely will work on printing a score, but it's only because my composition production with VSL doesn't allow me the time, but I'm glad there are some people reminding others the importance of it, it tells me, Guy, get off your ass, and get some scores on paper!



Well, it's just me, but I just print out music if it's gonna be played by some real musicians, otherwise it's not necessary for me. (hope the grammar here is right  )


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

TheUnfinished @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Hey Mike,
> 
> Just checking something from your longer post. Are you saying that composers are approaching you saying that their more classical stuff would not be welcome if posted on here? Or am I misunderstanding that bit?
> Matt



Not more "classical" work, but more let's say, "vintage" work. Film stuff mostly, actually, but with those quaint little antiquated qualities like counterpoint. And there are lots of these guys, by the way. I mean, of my 35,000+ thread views, the vast majority comes from "Guest" accounts (the counter stops at 255, but...), who then contact me privately. You have to take a bird's-eye view of the forum and try to see what the work profile really looks like from outside. It's mostly people desperately trying to sound like Hans Zimmer, telling guys like me I should find my own sound.  There are a handful of guys who consistently post work rooted in solid craft, who are working their craft, but they're totally outnumbered. This is, after all, a VI forum, not a composer's forum. You want to watch a thread explode, check out the release of a library like CineBrass versus a piece with amazing counterpoint. Those are essentially opposite profiles in terms of excitement and interest. 

And that's the reason so many guys who care about that stuff don't join, and don't post.



Tino Danielzik @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> I just print out music if it's gonna be played by some real musicians, otherwise it's not necessary for me.



Necessary? No. You learn a shit-ton, though. Try it for 6 months, come back, and tell me you didn't learn a whole new universe of things, found new inspirations, improved your work measurably, and felt more confident in your composing. I challenge you!


_Mike


----------



## Tino Danielzik (Jun 13, 2011)

mverta @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Tino Danielzik @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> 
> 
> > I just print out music if it's gonna be played by some real musicians, otherwise it's not necessary for me.
> ...



I'm sure you're right with that. The thing with me is, my orchestral V.I. template is built like an orchestral conductor score. And I always write my music like I would write for real musicians and not for samples. Like this cue here: http://www.tinodanielzik.com/Invasion.mp3 There is no layering or something, it's ready to be played. 
I mean, what do I learn from MY score sheets? It's like I would control my own homework from school, isn't it?  Unfortunately I don't have an orchestra to hear how my composition sounds, if I wrote / orchestrated everything right. I have to stay with my V.I.'s.


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

My template set-up is identical. Write it down, print it out, and see what happens. You will notice that simply changing the way you interact with the material, physically, changes what you see and how you see it. I have a big monitor in portrait mode to view my Sibelius scores, but still, it's night and day between that and printing out a Tabloid score and sitting down at the kitchen table. Don't think; try it 


_Mike


----------



## JohnG (Jun 13, 2011)

Well; methinks this sounds like a book-learning-elitist yearning. Which I understand but don't agree with for the forum.

Of course people are welcome to post concert pieces. Scores too, naturally.

However, it's unrealistic to be _required_ to show the score, even irrelevant for some kinds of music. If people want to, of course that's great. I'm writing an electronic piece right now whose score would be useless, for the most part.

But of all music produced for money these days, what percentage is put out as full score? Precious little, measured "by the pound," I'd hazard.

That said, I do support posting longer cues, because they reveal much more of the compositional level of the person posting and thus expose more areas for constructive comment. 

Almost anyone, however much a beginner, can get away with 30 seconds using good-sounding samples and synthetic instruments; it's once you hit maybe 2-3 minutes (maybe 5?) that you have to show something extra besides good taste in sound (and / or a lot of drum libraries). At that point, you do need some structure, some devices (counterpoint maybe, different material, variations that are meaningful, etc.) or the piece can become repetitious and boring.

Sure, if you have studied music much at all, printing it out and looking at it can reveal interesting information, if only simple orchestration observations "hey, here I have a lot of brass -- how come I don't there?" Or maybe even, "this section is boring -- maybe all those straight chords are the problem?"

If the concern is that there's a general loss of craft -- the ability to perform at a professional level, knowledge of what has come before, knowledge of theme and variations -- yes, there is a loss of craft and I feel nostalgic about it too.

But for those pursuing the current aesthetic -- whether one likes it or not aside -- dredging through music of the Olden Days could reasonably be regarded as a complete waste of time.


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

[quote="JohnG @ Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:04 pm]"But for those pursuing the current aesthetic -- whether one likes it or not aside -- dredging through music of the Olden Days could reasonably be regarded as a complete waste of time.[/quote]

That is almost the most ignorant thing I've ever read about music. It's so indefensible on so many fronts, I can't in good conscience spend the picojoule of energy it'd take to obliterate it. When you think you have nothing to learn from a master, you have failed to learn the first lesson.

_Mike


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Tino Danielzik (Jun 13, 2011)

@ Guy

I'm sorry, but what was the point of this thread again? Would like to see more scores or would you like to hear more structured pieces instead always filmmusic kind of stuff?


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 13, 2011)

Tino Danielzik @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> @ Guy
> 
> I'm sorry, but what was the point of this thread again? Would like to see more scores or would you like to hear more structured pieces instead always filmmusic kind of stuff?



If you read his first post, I think it is pretty clear he is asking for longer, more structured pieces. 

It is amazing to me btw that anyone who maintains that there are certain standards gets labeled as an "elitist.

I guess every contractor who maintains that a house should be structurally sound is an elitist. Every chef who maintains that food should not be using too much salt to cover up poor quality ingredients is an elitist. Every non-fiction author who thinks other non-fiction authors should employ good grammar and syntax is an elitist.

The term is becoming meaningless through mis/overuse. Welcome to the Age of Lack of Craft is a Virtue.


----------



## Tino Danielzik (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Tino Danielzik @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> 
> 
> > @ Guy
> ...



 Ok, but I guess everyone has another perspective of how a structured piece look / sound like. Could be a problem.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Tino Danielzik (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Tino Danielzik @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> 
> 
> > Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> ...



Hm, ok, I have no problem with that. I always try to write longer and more structured pieces. Can't be that hard. Let's go to work guys! :D


----------



## JohnG (Jun 13, 2011)

mverta @ 13th June 2011 said:


> JohnG @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> 
> 
> > But for those pursuing the current aesthetic -- whether one likes it or not aside -- dredging through music of the Olden Days could reasonably be regarded as a complete waste of time.
> ...



Ahh, snotty condescension, Mike; what a surprise. I stand by what I wrote. Some scores' notation is worth studying, some have more to do with sound sculpting. Of course it's great to study Bach and R. Strauss and -- really all of them. But it depends on what you're trying to do and how much time you have to study.

Those in a position to decide what's in demand right now in many commercial arenas are oblivious to a good bit of the craft some of us have laboured strenuously to ingest. I am not advocating it but it's true.


----------



## sbkp (Jun 13, 2011)

mverta @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> still, it's night and day between that and printing out a Tabloid score and sitting down at the kitchen table. Don't think; try it
> 
> 
> _Mike



It's fully true. In my recent gig arranging songs for Jefferson Starship and real (gasp!) orchestra/choir, I was writing directly into Sibelius. Then I would print out sections of my work just to be able to look at it while sitting on the couch or, yes, at the kitchen table. It definitely showed me things I could improve in a way I would have probably missed on screen - if for no other reason than it's just _faster_ reading paper (and somewhat more visceral).


----------



## rgames (Jun 13, 2011)

While I understand and, in my heart, agree with the sentiments about "loss of craft" I do think it's shortsighted to make it a focus because what one person calls "loss of craft" might really be "change of craft".

You either like the music or you don't.

Let's do a thought experiment: If you heard a piece of music you really like then found out the composer didn't know how to read music and dictated it to an orchestrator, would you like it less?

It's kind of like the Wright brothers: sure, neither one had the "craft" of a formal engineer, but they did build and fly the first powered aircraft. Is their achievement any less worthy because of their lack of formal craft?

My point is this: measure the achievement on its own merits, not on the credentials of its creator.

Some music you like, some you don't. OK. Move on.

rgames


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 13, 2011)

Wrong. You must study the masters and gain knowledge in the correct ways and have a solid footing in the correct ways and write scores with pencil and score paper and blahdiblahdiblah.

Otherwise, you're not correct, your music sucks and you're going to hell.
So saith the sages.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## rgames (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy - part of the problem is that I still don't know how you (or Mike or anyone) define "craft". Those questions and examples have long since disappeared in the countless pages of discussion on this topic, but I've never seen any type of response.

I get the feeling we like the same type of music - I much prefer the music of the (generally accepted) classical masters over the production music that we usually hear in the media. I've said before that I think the quality of music demanded by the production world is woefully low by my standards.

However, "by my standards" is the key qualifier there. Where I can't join you guys is in extrapolating that preference to some type of quantifiable difference in skill of the composer. Sure, I can analyze the music and understand it in terms of its fundamental elements. And yes, I have a shelf full of scores with my notes in them. So I can use that information to understand the structures that make the music that I like. Are those structures what you're referring to as craft?

If so, who cares? All it is is an attempt to formally describe what I like. Much simpler just to say "I like it."

Furthermore, just because I can quantify what makes music that I like, I am reticent to say that music that lacks those characteristics lacks the same commitment on the part of the compser (is that what you mean by craft?). How can I possibly know how a composer arrived at a particular melodic, harmonic, rhythmic, structural, or whatever choice?

Is it revision and prolonged thought that indicates craft? Can't be - a number of masterpieces were written quickly. And a lot of awful music was pored over for years before being premiered.

So, again, I don't know how to define the elusive "craft". I only know what I like and don't like 

rgames


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## poseur (Jun 13, 2011)

what a shitty, shitty thread, redolent of so many shitty attitudes.
it's no wonder that so few passionate, creative composers join this forum,
and/or enjoin in any real conversations.
dayum.
it's just like high school, only bitterer & more rigidified!

dt


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 13, 2011)

I've got torn feelings towards this whole new vs old thing, but my inner guts and excitement always lend me to the old. I still have a special place in my heart for people like Hans Zimmer, because I don't think it's all crap and some of it does get me really excited, but nothing can replace my own personal happiness of sitting down with pencil and paper. There is something about writing out orchestra music on huge 26 stave staff paper that really just ingrains this shit in your brain and is much more exciting to me doing it that way. I'm currently practicing orchestration by orchestrating out Rachmaninov's Prelude in Gminor (Op. 23 No. 5) by just listening to the piano performance (Emil Gilels really rocks this piece!!!) and looking at the piano music and orchestrating out the different counter lines, and voicing the melody, etc, etc. It's really fun and every time I see hand written scores I get all giddy like a little school girl because to me it's like looking at a piece of visual art. Really well orchestrated music just looks good on paper. I feel as if I can just tell I fucked up if the overall blur of my ideas look like shit.


----------



## poseur (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> poseur @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> 
> 
> > what a shitty, shitty thread, redolent of so many shitty attitudes.
> ...



that's what you think this is?
a discussion?
really?
have you read some of these posts, here?

is this not, more likely, a bunch of folks stepping up on self-described pedestals, 
in order to loudly condescend 
--- full brass section, here, please ---
to lowly, working composer-peons?
dude,
apparently, you live in a very, very different world than do i.
for sure.

dt


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## JohnG (Jun 13, 2011)

Maybe the air of superiority in your first post, Guy?


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## poseur (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Does anybody know what the hell Poseur is talking about?



please re-read not only some of the key posts, herein, guy,
but also look directly at the attitudes that seem to inspire them.

presenting scores, as some folks' ideas of a test (or, bellwether) of applied compositional rigors?
extremely broad (& seemingly snooty, imo) pre-judgments of the validity
of the constitution of (waaaaaaaay generalised others') compositional structure?
dude.
puh-leez.
those are some lofty-assed perches, up there.

dt


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## poseur (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> JohnG @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe the air of superiority in your first post, Guy?
> ...



i dunno.
i should probably be banned, but.....
it seems to me that there's some real bullshitting going on, here.

my reaction, here, has little-to-nothing to do with the bases of traditional music(s).....
did i say anything about elitism?
certainly not in direct regards to any style of education, at all;
that would be (at very least, somewhat) hypocritical of me.

unless, of course, you're only discussing, there,
one form and/or style of traditional music that you like & respect & you have studied,
in which case, then?
yeah:
music is much too beautiful, promising & expressive
to ever become enslaved to any one tradition.
even film music.

proof of structure?
judging a composer's output by dint of the comparison between your education and their's?
that's just incredibly presumptuous, and misplaced amongst "creative" composers
in a public forum, imo,
w/o going into precise details.

it also appears remarkably ungenerous, to me,
as goes any _sincere_ sense of civility,
much less any desire to foster a "community" atmos.

dt


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## poseur (Jun 13, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Why do you think Mike Verta has given up on this thread? Because this sort of this was coming up.



so, ummm, wait:
it's ok for mike to "let everyone know" precisely why & how they might SUCK @ film-composition,
yet l can't call bullshit on what seems to be your desire, here:
to build a (very small) creative judge-and-jury, re:
what constitutes valid compositional structure in film-scoring?
damn, dude!

dt


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 13, 2011)

I think I made myself clear a while back, and I think Poseur agrees:

Gentlemen. Those among us who think there is only one path to enlightenment (or writing good music) are unlikely to be agreed with by the thousands who picked up a guitar and started bashing away, eventually finding their own sound and changing the world in some small way.

I'm sorry! I missed the sign on the door that said:

"Only traditional Western European based and trained composers may enter-please present your score on the way in for consideration".

It's a shame you think the conversation has devolved to the point that a mod must step in-perhaps it was based on a flawed premise to begin with.


----------



## poseur (Jun 13, 2011)

thank you, john graham, for seeing something of where-i'm-coming-from.
.
please do NOT hesitate to suspend or ban me,
if it seems to the mods that i've gone too far, or am being contextually unreasonable.

this place probably needs some heat, anyways.....
and, not from the friction created by such rank & wimpy,
unwarranted & unsuitable condescensions, imo.

dt


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

JohnG @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Ahh, snotty condescension, Mike; what a surprise



Yeah, we tend to get real uppity with all our book learnin' and everything.

Here's the gospel, kids: everybody from Williams to Zimmer knows the work of the masters. Go learn it. Study it. Increase your power. That's about as sage advice as I can give you. If and when you've mastered those skills and _then_ decide it was a waste of time, I'll listen, and not before, because you're just talking out your ass. You can't shortcut experience, and minimizing/badmouthing skills you ain't got is weak. 

And, hey, Casey: You keep at it, grasshopper. We're counting on you.



_Mike


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 13, 2011)

:!:


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 13, 2011)

mverta @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> You can't shortcut experience, and minimizing/badmouthing skills you ain't got is weak.
> 
> _Mike



So is codifying all musical experience by whether it does or does not reflect one particular discipline.


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 13, 2011)

mverta @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> JohnG @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> 
> 
> > And, hey, Casey: You keep at it, grasshopper. We're counting on you.
> ...



HA! I appreciate the encouragement, and trust me, I'm trying REALLY hard to not be a waiter at a SteakHouse anymore, but don't hold your breath! It might take a while...


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> So is codifying all musical experience by whether it does or does not reflect one particular discipline.



You assume too much. I equally advocate picking up your axe and learning to groove, but, one thing at a time, I figure. In any case, I'm not suggesting other input isn't valid just because what I'm talking about IS. There exists no such mutual exclusivity. But the truth is, absolutely nobody has anything to lose by increasing their exposure to and absorption of the masters. Hans has decided to take that input and do entirely different things with it than, say, Williams has. Yet both went there. There is a reason, and the return-on-investment is astounding. I have seen few critics of that process who've actually GONE through that process. I see a lot of armchair quarterbacks badmouthing something on principle - what that principle is, I can't imagine. Laziness? - instead of giving it a whirl. Too bad.

Then again, a lot of people criticize Christians, or Moslems, having never read the Bible or the Koran cover-to-cover. There really is a whole lot of talking-out-one's-ass out there. Try something different, I say. When you don't go to church, at least really know WHY.



Casey Edwards @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> HA! I appreciate the encouragement, and trust me, I'm trying REALLY hard to not be a waiter at a SteakHouse anymore, but don't hold your breath! It might take a while...



I still have my Kinko's and Guitar Center badges. Keep the faith.


_Mike


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 13, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> I think I made myself clear a while back, and I think Poseur agrees:
> 
> Gentlemen. Those among us who think there is only one path to enlightenment (or writing good music) are unlikely to be agreed with by the thousands who picked up a guitar and started bashing away, eventually finding their own sound and changing the world in some small way.



That is an over-simplification, IMHO. The Beatles were fabulous songwriters partly because they worked like dogs to develop that craft. Paul McCartney tried a film score and it did not work very well with the picture or as music because he lacked the craft. His oratorio only works even to the degree one thinks it does because Paul's great talent for melody was able to be crafted into a large form by Carl Davis.

I don't advocate condescending to composers who are not well trained but who work hard to develop craft. I do advocate condescending to composers who are not well trained and who do not work hard to develop craft because they think, "Well with the great libraries I buy I can make it sound good without it and I am not well paid and my delivery schedules are tight and the client does not know the difference anyway."

I don't think there are that many here who take that cavalier a view but some have said things that sound dangerously close to it.


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

Ashermusic @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> I don't advocate condescending to composers who are not well trained but who work hard to develop craft.



And fortunately, this is one thing I have never seen on this forum. 


_Mike


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Jun 13, 2011)

i received a complaint about this thread.

Quite simply this is a forum where all are welcome to post music no matter what it is and hopefully without fear of attack from others. 

If you don't like the music many people post here create your own forum.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 13, 2011)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> NYC Composer @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> 
> 
> > I think I made myself clear a while back, and I think Poseur agrees:
> ...



I don't advocate condescending to anyone about anything....and all this hard work/craft/who exactly is a "master". Jeez. I spent too much time in the company of various elitists: i.e. jazz elitists, classical elitists, metal elitists, hip hop elitists, to give any credence to anyone who think they can set the rules. There ARE no rules-agreed, there's talent and hard work, but even these things are subjective to a degree.

I skipped music school and formal education not because I was lazy, but because at heart, I was and am an iconoclast and an auto-didact. I found a different way to approach 'craft'- learning by doing. I don't in any way deny the value of a formal education and the studying of whatever appeals to one, but this notion that there are prerequisites-baloney. That said, I've seen this argument time and time again, and I think I'll leave it here. Cheers all.


----------



## lux (Jun 13, 2011)

I have to say though that Guy Bacos' original question was pretty reasonable. Not new, but yes reasonable. I recall many composers in the past wondered that same thing. 

Is a complex matter, and it has to do with the fact we dont identify success anymore with orcehstral music, at least not in considerable amount. Unless its film muisc. Film music represents a link between the ancient art of orchestra and modern techniques and emotions (like the screen provides). Composers always look around for successful scenarios, no matter what they say.

As usual a reasonable conversation has been taken to shit by Mike and his unstoppable anger.

My idea is that Mike Verta tries desperately to build (here expecially) a different world from scratch where everyone finally will be able to recognize his so underrated crafts. Thats the main flavour i've smelled in his posts from his early appearances here. He names John Williams every post and basically carries that same concept over and over. That wouldnt be an issue but he seems unable to hide his own frustration so half threads he partecipates in go bananas due to his angry human fashion.

So we have two chances, one is to respond to the original question. The other is to derail this thread with another Williams vs Zimmer diarrhea.


----------



## mverta (Jun 13, 2011)

Craig Sharmat @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> If you don't like the music many people post here create your own forum.



I don't know about laying into Guy for criticising work, Craig. We have an entire section of the forum dedicated to criticisms. I think if one finds they don't like anything on the forum, they'll leave on their own, yes? But it sounds dangerously ambiguous to suggest some criticism is criticism, and other is "hate." I don't recall ever seeing somebody say they thought a member's piece of music was shit, but I have seen an awful lot of constructive criticism. Is not liking a piece hateful? 

Ah, the perils of opening a public forum. All those pesky varying opinions.


Lux: you're adorable, sometimes  Not the strongest reader, but cute nonetheless.


_Mike


----------



## lux (Jun 13, 2011)

yes, i am adorable. I know. what about you.

and youre right, not the stronger reader as well. It has also to do with the fact you could learn the craft of being concise on forums.


----------



## mverta (Jun 14, 2011)

I am an angry, hateful, spiteful failure of a musician who's jealous of everyone else, frustrated at my career, and who has a John Williams fetish. Or something. Oh yeah, and wordy.

_Mike


----------



## lux (Jun 14, 2011)

Concise enough i would say. The failure part is your own addition, not mine. Despite the fact i'm adorable i'm never used to offer such type of judgements.


----------



## mverta (Jun 14, 2011)

Indeed, you seem very restrained with your judgements. Especially when it comes to me. I'm keeping it brief here, on account of your problem with paragraphs. (I do so aim to please...)


_Mike


----------



## lux (Jun 14, 2011)

mverta @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> Indeed, you seem very restrained with your judgements. Especially when it comes to me.



coming from you...maybe a thick skin is something only the others are obliged to have, not you


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 14, 2011)

You know, maybe for once I'll go out on a limb and be a little more out spoken as to what I believe. I usually like to just stay neutral and watch the fights (like the nosy neighbors down the street who spectate on domestic violence before they call it in), but what the hell, I'll give it my 0.02 cents.

My spark of interest was NOT Respighi, De Falla, Vaughn Williams, or Stravinsky, Hell I didn't even know who these guys were until College, but my firsts were John Williams and Danny Elfman. How cliche is that? But this was my first love for orchestral music and I remember both very clearly. So I started writing orchestral music in a program called Guitar Pro 4 since I was only a guitarist with a very limited knowledge of how to accomplish scales/arps/etc without a guitar pattern to do it with. I was literally always fishing for sounds because I didn't know what I was doing. Fast Forward to today and I'm lightyears ahead of where I was (Still far behind though)! However, I can say that All of my BIG epiphanies have been either at the piano with pencil and paper or at the piano reading scores and trying to figure out the WHY of everything I was hearing. According to me 6 years ago this is very shocking since I feared these things immensely! I don't think this is elitist, I think this is just a rite of passage for knowledge in something that is very important to me. I always thought computers and samples were helping me learn quicker because I got instant gratification of sound and an idea of what I was writing, when in reality I was just making it harder on myself and building a library of ideas in my head that were way off. NOTHING will every replace studying with score and going to live concerts, whether you want to weave soaring melodies with beautiful counter-melodies or learn how to use motivic and ostinato patterns to their fullest extent.

HOWEVER, this is not to be confused with the importance that samples have played in my life. I love having all this stuff and being able to test run my ideas or just dick off and improvise with a virtual orchestra. It's fun! I just really hope people don't under-estimate the really adventurous and fun task of seeking knowledge through a more inward approach. It made my passion much more personal and weaved the idea of exploring music a lot tighter to my existence. 

Maybe we should just listen to Odysseus - "Balance is best in all things." But I guess in the end, to each their own, and I can respect that whether I like it or not. I'm only 23 and my ideas and viewpoints are nothing like they were 4 years ago and are ever evolving.


----------



## mverta (Jun 14, 2011)

lux @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> coming from you..



Ah, but _I_ have never pretended to be otherwise. Perhaps you see the distinction there. Actually, perhaps not. Nevermind. 

...for some reason, I'm recalling the practice of leading sheep across minefields... a cruel display. Apologies.


And Casey, you have wisdom beyond your years. I'm leaving you in charge after I'm gone.  I'm going to go Like your Facebook page, now*.

_Mike





*Get one, if you haven't!


----------



## midphase (Jun 14, 2011)

All I can say is that this video seems appropriate for this thread:

http://youtu.be/UcTLJ692F70


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 14, 2011)

Here ya go!!! haha :D http://www.facebook.com/pages/Casey-Edwards/155449011192068?sk=wall

I'm embarrassed to admit how long that took for me to create and it still looks like shit...oh well. It was a good reminder to do something that I'd wanted to do for a while. Now I just need to learn about Websites and how to create that!


----------



## lux (Jun 14, 2011)

mverta @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> lux @ Tue Jun 14 said:
> 
> 
> > coming from you..
> ...



so what are you complaining about with my judgements? Here, you are what you write.


----------



## lux (Jun 14, 2011)

midphase @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> All I can say is that this video seems appropriate for this thread:
> 
> http://youtu.be/UcTLJ692F70



definitely!


----------



## TheUnfinished (Jun 14, 2011)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> I don't advocate condescending to composers who are not well trained but who work hard to develop craft. I do advocate condescending to composers who are not well trained and who do not work hard to develop craft because they think, "Well with the great libraries I buy I can make it sound good without it and I am not well paid and my delivery schedules are tight and the client does not know the difference anyway."



Hope you don't think I'm picking on you Jay, but your quote just resonated with what I wanted to say on the subject.

There's this tendency (and it can happen on both sides) of reducing the dialogue to the extremities and creating _strawman_ arguments of the ilk of "Well, if you think Mozart isn't better than some kid with one finger held down on Omnisphere and the other on Evolve, then you're crazy" or vice versa, when nobody has said anything of the sort. This is what causes frustration and then, as we've seen again, anger.

Film music, like any other form of music, is constantly evolving and this means that the craft necessary changes. Sometimes it happens in peaks and troughs, sometimes it's a gentle curve. Like the evolution of classical music, some things get lost along the way, others just sit it out waiting for a revival. Music for media relies less on classical motifs and forms because it has steadily absorbed other forms of music that now play an important role. This is not a 'good thing' or a 'bad thing', it is just 'a thing'.

I don't think it's elitist to suggest that learning traditional classical music craft is the best way to become a film composer, I just think it's wrong. It's ignoring reality and demeaning all other forms of musical expression.

Is it a bad idea to learn these classical crafts? Hell no. All learning is great. If it's what moves you most, like Casey, you go for it. Make sure that these great lessons are still there to be learned and appreciated.

But is it the only path to enlightenment? Also, hell no. Musical developments in the 20th and 21st centuries have moved at a pace not seen before, there are new ways to express oneself musically, new forms, new instruments, new ways to experience music. All of this is wonderful and we should embrace it. And we should recognise how much of this evolution of music is served by what has gone before - those who have brought us here: be they Palestrina, Stockhausen, Eno or Dr Dre.

The second you start imposing any antideluvian constraints on any form of art you spoil it, you take away its spark. All art is a personal journey, every step is learning, and it's a journey that never ends.

I listen to music every day, as much as I can, of all different genres: some of it is breath-taking, some of it annoying, some of it inspires me, some of it baffles me. Wouldn't have it any other way. 

Okay, I've rambled on enough. Work to do!

Matt


----------



## poseur (Jun 14, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> There you go again. You feel so threatened by what others think, that you distort completely what is being said and you accuse people like Mike V and myself of trying to show superiority. Look at what you just stated, that is not at all what was said. Could you be drunk by any chance?



i don't feel threatened by what you (or, anyone else) thinks;
why would i?
i'm an educated, lifelong composer & musician, whose education continues.

and, fwiw:
i was not drunk, though i'm definitely a little bit "crazy".



Guy Bacos @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> "where did the art of writing structured pieces gone"?



well.
1) please define the acceptable limits of "structured pieces", precisely,
in the context of a real world filled w/beautiful, moving & effective music(s).....
..... of so many valuable kinds & varieties.
2) the craft of creating "structured pieces" is not, in & of itself, the single beating-heart of much music-of-value, and
3) if the question has any interpretable meaning worthy of a response, at all, then:
it's not gone,
even when it's not always apparent to you, personally,
here in the teensy-eenie-weenie-world-of-VI control.

fwiw, and imo:
the study of form & function
--- whether ongoing, or once-upon-a-time ---
guarantees effective, expressive music in no way, whatsoever,
no matter which "Master" one has labored under (or, hopefully "towards"),
no matter how virulent one's personal arguments for some kind of consensual need 
for baldly obvious connections to (what one individually sees as) "musical tradition" may be.

do i think that learning traditional craft is important?
i absolutely do.
do i think that the adherence-to & perfection-of classicised & often idiomatically-focussed craft
is the summum ultimum of a (¿film-?) composer's working life,
that it warrants pseudo-_artistic_, intellectualised condescension from those who seem to believe & live as if it is so?
absolutely not.

and, i think it may, indeed, be misleading for other composers, both young & old.....
no matter how folks might imagine & style themselves
as leaders of some kind of imagined "elite" pack/herd/etc.

and:
i might _almost_ agree w/some portions of the truisms presented within some of your posts,
certainly in mike verta's, even in jay's, but.....
let's call a fork "a fork", here:
_truims_ are not exactly _*truth*_.

dt


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 14, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Mike Marino (Jun 14, 2011)

@ Casey:

Great post! I just liked your Facebook page as well. :D 

- The other Mike


----------



## poseur (Jun 14, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> I can answer these questions but it seems whatever I will say the word i_ntellectualized condescension _will come back from you or Ned, John G, or others. Do you honestly think I have time to waste on replies like that? Some of you have a serious problem with this elitist attitude you constantly refer too. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the suggestion I made of posting pieces with a more defined structure rather then just a snippet. If you need to play 20,000 questions about what is a structure, you may want to look at musical structures 101, but here i go again with my condescension intellectualized, right? So as I said I have better things to do.



i have nothing better to do.
???
hell, dude..... i didn't post this thread.

condescending?
well.
i've looked at "musical structures 101", thankew verra much,
as well as "idiosyncratic musical structures 101".
thanks for the further "kindly" advice from on-high, anyways.


dt


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 14, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jun 14, 2011)

I bet you a guy playing a bucket with mad skills could write some dynamite soundtrack for the right film. Who cares about where someone got their voice? Who give a toot if they know melody, structure, have even heard of Bach?

I know for a fact that you can't learn to have a voice, something to say (even if it's abstract, as music comp is) - you either have it, or you don't. I used to teach, and saw proof of this in my students year after year. We've all heard brilliant students/teachers write total crap.

The little art we do in our commercial work can and must try to be free of bullshit preconceptions about structure, rules, limits. I believe that a piece that has no beginning, no end, no easy structure to follow can work just as well as a more typical work - it's only harder, 'cause it's new territory, and those gigs are very rare - but we can talk about it, do it on spare time, share pieces. Wake up fogeys, we're in the 21st Century. The king is dead (since oh, Russolo?), long live we all.

In fairness, I do use melody, structure, etc in my soundtrack work. But I'm a gun for hire, and if someone asks me to do something personal, original, you can bet your a$$ I'm more likely to do open-ended, non-melodic, non-traditional music (city bus as a bass) than anything else.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jun 14, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Mon Jun 13 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue Jun 14 said:
> 
> 
> > NYC Composer @ Mon Jun 13 said:
> ...



I only used the term "condescend" because someone else said that is what some of us are doing.

I do not want a litmus test as to who can make a living writing music but I do want to continue to hold up the guys who write technically well, understand harmony and counterpoint well, understand orchestration well enough to at least give orchestrators good sketches to work from, can develop motifs, and write good melodies, etc. as the ideal we teach young composers to strive for. And whether one gets to that point through traditional training or by being an auto-didact is irrelevant to me.

Not because it gets you more work or makes you more money but because it is a venerable craft worth preserving.

I don't know your music Larry but for every legitimately good so-called iconoclastic composer that comes along, (Mike Andrews comes to mind) there is a much larger number who are not good. And the wholesale replacing of underscore by "on the nose" pop songs is an embarrassment, or should be, to filmmakers.

The average film or TV show is less well-served by music today than 30 years ago, I am sorry folks, but that is what I believe and no amount of "It's not worse, it's just different" arguments is going to change my mind on this. If people want to stick labels on me for maintaining it, fine, I can live with it, since none of you are going to hire me anyway.

OK, I am out.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jun 14, 2011)

Me while reading the title of this thread: Hey, really, where did the structured music go?

Then while reading the thread itself: Huh?



Guy Bacos said:


> I think it would be nice to see more often complete structured pieces



What I hear sometimes seems to me sort of an intro. Just when the intro is over and a great theme could show up or something it stops. Just when it could become really interesting. 

Not that there is anything bad about this, this can serve greatly as a library test or so. However if this thread is meant to *en*courage composers to write a little longer cues and develop their themes a bit then I am all for it. At least that would be way better than to *dis*courage them in any way.

I see however that developing themes and structuring music is a 'music for its own sake' thing. Not everybody needs, likes or can afford this in his work (but I will always do).


----------



## JohnG (Jun 14, 2011)

Mike Marino @ 14th June 2011 said:


> @ Casey:
> 
> Great post!



Agreed


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 14, 2011)

:!:


----------



## dcoscina (Jun 14, 2011)

I like to get up on my high horse once in a while but to be honest, there are several people here who might not scream out how much knowledge they have about music or how much training they have, but rather they post their stuff and it kicks ass. Some of them have formal training and others have learned by practical application. As I get older, I see that it's good to appreciate skills from people regardless of how they attained them.

As for form in film composition, I think it's already been said that the composer doesn't have that much input into his/her music. I think it's a bit naive to say that it's technology and a lack of skill that has brought us to where we are in film scoring as far as structural integrity is concerned. As some have mentioned, even John Williams doesn't write music like he did for his '70s/'80s/90s scores. There's less long themes, and less attention to design compared to his seminal works because the dictate of directors and audiences has changed over 30 years. Yeah, he still writes at a level that is higher than most, granted, but comparing him to himself, you can see that the evidence is on the wall.

Also, and this bears mentioning- I go to concerts a lot and concert composers these days even lack structure and these guys are TRAINED composers. What's their excuse? What's more, they are often quite influenced by FILM SCORES. Mind you, they are film scores from 30 years ago, but still, it's film score influenced nonetheless. 

Believe me, I still value learning more about music and pushing one's abilities but it's real easy for me, a person who doesn't rely on the music I compose, to pay bills, eat, etc. These practical concerns must weigh on a career composer's mind. If you took a time machine back to the days of JS Bach or Mozart, I'm sure they also made compromises to please their patrons.

EDIT- just as a side note- I don't post larger works here because they are done in Sibelius or Notion and don't sound sonically terrific even though they are musically much more expansive and developed than my sample based compositions.


----------



## lux (Jun 14, 2011)

Good post Dave.


----------



## TheUnfinished (Jun 14, 2011)

Whether one agrees with Dave or not (and I will admit that I do) that was a well communicated post, that did not rely on a strawman argument, hyperbole or tried to dress opinion or taste as fact.

I hope the thread maintains that level of discourse.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 14, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jun 14, 2011)

Seems like the initial request isn't so much about wanting to hear more in terms of structure, but simply pieces that are LONGER.

And there's definitely a ton of straw man arguing going on, the initial question is about structure and there are rants about composers who can't read or write a note of music, can't conduct, can't orchestrate - how do you get there from lack of structure (whether that's due to lack of skill, knowledge of formal structure but choosing not to follow it, or simply because something posted here is too short to have much in the way of structure).

I think most here would agree that there's value in working hard to improve your skills and studying those who have come before and are more talented. But the black and white attitude that anyone who doesn't make Structure the highest priority must be a hack seems a bit silly.

Personally, formal structure has never got me all that excited. There's brilliant music and awful music that does a great job of following the traditional forms and there's brilliant music and awful music that completely ignores the traditional forms. I've heard enough of each to not feel like one approach is inherently better.

Presenting themes and then developing and contrasting them? Sure, but I'd argue that isn't necessarily the same as structure. Counterpoint? Sure, in the sense of having independent lines instead of all single melody over chugga-chugga all the time (and hey, if you're up for writing a fugue or canon and it works for the assignment, more power to you). Proper voice leading where it's appropriate, absolutely. And any of the other traditional "rules" when they make a piece sound better and add interest and variety. Honestly, the way the current trends in orchestral writing are I think stuff that is more old school and dare i say "traditional" would tend to stand out and seem more fresh and original in the sea of material that's all ostinato riffs and taiko. If nothing else, if you create music that requires skill and technique, you're less replaceable by a teenager with a few nice libraries and a collection of beefy loops.

Back to the original question, if people are bummed there aren't longer, more structured pieces posted, why not lead by example and post something that fills that gap?


----------



## TheUnfinished (Jun 14, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> TheUnfinished @ Tue Jun 14 said:
> 
> 
> > Whether one agrees with Dave or not (and I will admit that I do) that was a well communicated post, that did not rely on a strawman argument, hyperbole or tried to dress opinion or taste as fact.
> ...


Hey Guy, I can sympathise that you're probably not happy that the thread has wandered away from your original idea.

Unfortunately, previous threads on similar (or maybe even not similar) topics have informed this thread. People may have seen this thread as an extension of those other threads' themes... and so, here we are, whether we like it or not.

I was just saying that Dave hadn't deliberately misconstrued anything anyone else had said to make his point, he made his own argument. He also didn't make any broad, hackneyed statements.

That is all. I liked the way he communicated his thoughts and felt it was a more helpful tone to keep the thread lively and free of personal attacks. It may even get back round to your original posit.

And on that subject, it would be interesting to see some longer pieces on here. In fact, there seems to have been exactly that in the last day or so, so perhaps your call has worked, Guy!

@Mike C. Guy has indeed posted a longer piece using VSL glass instruments. Take a listen, it's very good.

Cheers,
Matt


----------



## dcoscina (Jun 14, 2011)

Mike C, okay, yeah, I totally would like that too. My normal work process might not have long pieces but even when I'm presenting a theme in a A-A-B-A form, I always try to use a variation of the A theme. For kicks, I wanted to compose my own Super 8 theme just based on the trailers and sort of being inspired by the story. I do a once through with the theme and repeat it with a different harmonic bed. The first pass is in Lydian mode but has a flattened 7th for a more whole tone concept. 

If I get some time, I will post a piano version of it (seeing that I still haven't finished it). but my ears always want to hear variation, even slight variation whether it's harmonically, rhythmically, or melodically. It's that contrast that I think most people's ears want to hear. Variety is the spice of life!


----------



## dcoscina (Jun 14, 2011)

lux @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> Good post Dave.



Thanks Lux. Once in a while I come down off my high horse and try to see things with greater objectivity. I think it's hard for me and perhaps others who feel so passionately towards music. But I should remember not to think with such tunnel vision that it blinds me from appreciating other stuff.

I just bought an ipod shuffle for exercising and such and put Zimmer's A Dark Knight on it. I honestly really like that cue. To me, it does have structure, it has shape and conveys a certain dramatic weight. It's long too! Perhaps it functions more like a suite but it still has a sense of linear development nonetheless. To me, it is much more relevant than John Adams' City Noir which has some beautiful sections but still feels a bit disjointed. It certainly pales in comparison to his '80s works like Harmonielehre, Harmonium, Short Ride in a Fast Machine, etc. Even Nixon in China was great. Obviously this is one of opinion or how the piece impacted me but I heard it live performed by the TSO in a John Adams festival and it really struck me as far as the disparity in construction was concerned.

However, all this talk is still not going to preclude me from studying Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra or Stravinsky's orchestration in Le Sacre to get a better handle on my own compositions. You can have both


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 14, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 14, 2011)

Guy Bacos @ Tue Jun 14 said:


> Well, anyway, whoever is interested in what I'm saying, I'd like to give an example.
> 
> This is a very basic piece: 1:30, but with ABA form although there are repeat bars within sections. But I think this is a good example of an ABA form. The Schumann style here has nothing to do with it, it could be any style. Shostakovitch, JW, whatever. and it could be so many other forms. This is just to show an example of a structured piece.
> 
> Scenes from Childhood



I just learned selections of that suite this last semesterl. Some of it is really fun and is a great study exercise in short form.


----------



## Dave Connor (Jun 14, 2011)

This piece displays a formal {discrepancy} which would not have been found in the Classical era: the lack of the tonic tone as the upper most voice at the end of the full cadence (last bar of A.) The third is at the top here. Of course these were the types of considerations that were in fact jettisoned in the Romantic era to which Schumann belonged.

All that is to say (a point of this thread) that form in music was given the same weight that it is in literature though-out history. If there's a complaint by those acquainted with these structural considerations to those who may not know or care about them you might consider the effect upon the listener: that of tortured grammar that borders on unintelligible. The other side of the coin might be a Beastie Boys track compared to a Burt Bacharach song. The idea is the destruction of what came before.

My silly 2 cents.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Jun 14, 2011)

:!:


----------



## Dave Connor (Jun 14, 2011)

No, I missed something Guy. It is from the collection that Traumerei is but not the not piece with that name and not the piece I was thinking of. I will edit my post.


----------



## doubleattack (Jun 14, 2011)

"Von fremden Ländern und Menschen" No. 1 from "Kinderszenen".
Have had to play it in my childhood. Easy and hard at the same time... :lol: 
btw beautiful interpretation.


----------



## doubleattack (Jun 14, 2011)

Sorry, I don't feel able to add some substantially here; I can understand the most (not all) but would cost me half a day to deliver some acceptable connected words. In this time the thread has going on from start to page 16 - or even is deleted at all by mods... :shock: 

But this discussion is very interesting, so I hope all participants will always find the right words!

Best

Frank


----------



## Dan Mott (Jun 15, 2011)

I wish I could post more than 30 seconds. Sadly I'm still working on that.


----------



## nikolas (Jun 15, 2011)

Purely as a member and not as a mod, I find deleting ones posts a bit silly a best! I'm sorry but I hardly understand what just happened here and if it wasn't for the quotes of some people I wouldn't have understood a thing!

On the subject: 

I'd also like that, but guess what; I'm not really looking for such works here, exactly because of the nature of the forum. Let's face it music tech is linked to film and media music, period!

If you also keep in mind that longer works, with more strict form, take more 'effort' (with " to avoid any complications) than just improvising and much more time, it's pretty reasonable why there are so few of such works. 

Guy you are one of the few people that post 'semi-classical' (since you are still alive, so they can't be Classical... oh perhaps classical) works and I appreciate the work you are doing, the form you're always offering and the depth of your works. I also happen to post some longer works with stricter form from time to time, but as it happens I'm quite confinded right now and can't post anything. Perhaps later in the year I might offer some surprise, but for now it's silence for me.


----------

