# Avoiding / Countering mock-up fatigue.....



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

Avoiding / Countering mock-up fatigue.....

Let's talk about this, doing convincing, ambitious mock-ups is gruelling work, and not for the faint at heart. The one thing I've learned the hard way, is to scetch out the entire cue quick and sloppy while inspiration runs strong......That is to say DO NOT start the meticulous mock-up process of that cool first 15 seconds of your cue, prior to scetching the rest of the cue........you know what happens .....after listening / mocking up that cool 15 seconds in loop mode for the next 5 hours or more, it will be virtually impossible for you to hear anything that should come next.....

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

Another problem for which I still have not found a solution is that it is difficult to stay in love and trust that it is good work once you have spent so much time hearing the same part.......All you can do is say to yourself: "I loved it 12 hours ago so it's good".....and resist the temptation of tearing it down due to having heard it enough to qualify as torture.....


----------



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

One more.......

Further phenomena I encounter is related to harmony......When writing/voicing/mocking chords, especially dense material with lotsa cool tensions, when listening to them for hours and hours on end, they become more and more wrong / off sounding.....and you start "correcting" all the coolness out of them......

Like I say let's discuss mock-up fatigue pittfalls and solutions.....


----------



## nikolas (Jul 8, 2009)

A few things that've helped me in the past (with the luxury of time though):

1. Not be based on inspiration, but hard work. I don't do sloppy work and then try to fix it. I often used to create scores and input the midi information (when I didn't have a midi keyboard).
2. Try to edit things quickly. I certainly don't spend 12 hours or a single phrase, or even a minute of music I think... 
3. I always try to keep in mind the first impression, for mine or other peooples' work (when giving feedback for example).

Of course I hope this doesn't come off as patronising, cause that's the last thing I want to do. Just like numbering a lot! :D


----------



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

10 hours per minute of Mock-Up isn't extreme for me.....


----------



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

Nikolas, 

I respect your work. I loved your compositions for strings that you submitted for your PHD in music.......but If your doing ultra-realism faked orchestra, and are not spending 8 to 10 hours on a minute of mock-up......it ain't gonna sound that good......

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

Keyswitches, alternations, swell curves, tempo maps, mixing, dynamics, etc etc etc......


----------



## artsoundz (Jul 8, 2009)

Steven, what you describe is dead on for anything-not just mocking up orchestra cues. I have the very same problems over and over with my music for hire and often, my own music. Sketching is always something I regret not doing initially and I think the craft of the sketch is deep.

I spent 4 days creating a minute and 15 second gypsy jazz piece a couple years ago. It was crucial to be realistic but my thought at the end of the process was one of hoping top find a better way. Of course if the budget was there I could have hired Pearl Django- a world class gypsy jazz group and they would have done it in an hour. But a low budget forced me into a deeply meticulous process that I wont soon forget.AND as a sidenote I couldnt have done it without EWQL Gypsy.

and your comment of editing out all the coolness- it's _so_ happens all the time for me but less so if it's my own music.. I'm always second guessing the client which generally fails miserably. I'v learned to just leave things in and let the first viewing come befor I make major decisions. Took me years to figure that out.

One thing that I've learned to do over the years is give up my baby much sooner than I used to. It's a lot easier for me to throw away stuff and start anew. That, very often ,saves the day.

My next musical goal is to learn the art of orchestral mockup. It frightens me.


----------



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

"One thing that I've learned to do over the years is give up my baby much sooner than I used to. It's a lot easier for me to throw away stuff and start anew. That, very often ,saves the day."

soooo true!

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

Artsoundz....I know about the qoute button, but it doesn't work on my iPhone 

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 8, 2009)

One thing I do now is mockup 1 line of the first part of the cue, and then mockup a line from the end part of te cue, followed by mocking up a line from the middle part of the cue......only then do I return to the first part and mockup it's second line......This way I don't get sick of the various parts nearly as quickly, because I'm jumping around as I mock-up.....

SvK


----------



## nikolas (Jul 9, 2009)

SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> Nikolas,
> 
> I respect your work. I loved your compositions for strings that you submitted for your PHD in music.......


Composed in less than a weeks time! :D heh... 

But I do agree. My mock-ups are usually not uber super realistic, mostly because they are aimed to pieces which will get performed live, so there's no need, or there's huge lack of time or concetration...

EDIT: You know what would be interesting? For a few people of us (not right now, please) to get the same midi files, or score, or whatever and work on their library of choice to get as closer to the real thing as possible. For a piece already recorded live. And then compaire and also compair methods and libraries and time spent. Limit 12 hours lets say, for a short less than 1 minute work. . . (But NOT now! Too busy right now. In a couple of weeks should be fine)


----------



## Simon Ravn (Jul 9, 2009)

SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> Nikolas,
> 
> I respect your work. I loved your compositions for strings that you submitted for your PHD in music.......but If your doing ultra-realism faked orchestra, and are not spending 8 to 10 hours on a minute of mock-up......it ain't gonna sound that good......
> 
> SvK



Aaarh... just because this is true for you doesn't mean it has to be true for everybody else 8) I rarely spend that much time on a minute of music. Only if it is really complicated battle music with tons of different orchestral and non-orchestral percussion etc. And in that case the final mixing takes up quite some time as well.

Also, I don't agree on your original "theory" either. I usually more or less perfect the whole thing as I go along, a few bars at a time. Sometimes I do work through - not the entire cue, but maybe a minute of music, especially if it is thematic stuff - just sketching it out with maybe piano + horn chords, to return and fully orchestrate it afterwards.


----------



## Angel (Jul 9, 2009)

I encountered nearly every problem you talk about as well, Steven.

I - speaking for myself only - often run into the following problem:
I have a piece in mind, working it out in mind (while walking with my dogs), do most of the arrangement in mind, have the final sound in mind.

Then I sit down in front of my daw, search for the startnote (that perhaps was a f# in my mind), press the "a"-key and BOOM. The entire idea explodes. 

Left is only a vague idea of the cue with a VERY simplified version of harmonies and arrangement. 
When I compose at the keyboard, my fingers do the composing. They play what they got USED TO, not what I had in mind before.

I am not fast in writing a score by hand without an instrument at hand, though I am able to.
But I should FORCE myself to work that way and get practice. I am sure I could better compose what I have in mind, than what I have in my fingers.

Anyone else knows this problem? =o 

Cheers, Angel


----------



## bluejay (Jul 9, 2009)

One thing I find really difficult is just the sheer amount of tracks I end up using. For a 20 second interlude piece I wrote recently I used 6 tracks of violins EQd them quite severely just to get a convincing string run. Outside of that run, those tracks were pretty much useless. If I'm working to that level of realism in a bigger track then everything gets way too expansive and I end up using far too many tracks.

My workaround at the moment is to generally aim for a high level of realism and only go to this kind of lengths when absolutely necessary.

Great thread btw!


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

SvK @ Wed Jul 08 said:


> One thing I do now is mockup 1 line of the first part of the cue, and then mockup a line from the end part of te cue, followed by mocking up a line from the middle part of the cue......only then do I return to the first part and mockup it's second line......This way I don't get sick of the various parts nearly as quickly, because I'm jumping around as I mock-up.....
> 
> SvK



I take it you are not writing music to picture, correct?


----------



## nikolas (Jul 9, 2009)

Just spent more than 2 hours on a single bloody page on a PhD commentary! Damnit!

Which brings me to the simple point: Bordom made me last that long, and the fact that I wasn't concetrating that hard. Maybe it's a matter of shere concetration? I mean, honestly, for a minute of music (largely orchestrated), you would have to input... 20 lines let's say and correct them. 20 minutes. 1/3rd of an hour! So each hour you could have listened to ALL the lines, soloed 3 times. In 12 hours one could have listened to ALL the lines a huge amount of 36 times! And as far as I understand (and act accordingly) we don't concetrate on the whole minute, but on phrases. I mean, ok, I undestand that people work in different paces, with different methods and all that, but it does remain that there must be some waste of time in the process, somehow! (my time waste is the fact that I'm posting here, instead of finishing that bloody page! :D)


----------



## Przemek K. (Jul 9, 2009)

The same goes for me. Maybe it's the fascination of a melody or a whole part you are writing and than you just get stuck listening to it over and over.

When I have enough time I definitely spend this so called " free time" to make the part as real as possible. But I too think that concentration is very important and of course some disciplin. Lazyness is..well :twisted:


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

Ashermusic,

I am scoring to picture....usually just piano under the whole cue. Then I start mocking-up the notes of the piano with the instruments that will really play those lines.....now more and more of the piano parts get muted....once the day is over the piano is gone and the mock-up is complete...

SvK


----------



## nikolas (Jul 9, 2009)

Not done with the page yet, but just HAD to check Vi!


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> Ashermusic,
> 
> I am scoring to picture....usually just piano under the whole cue. Then I start mocking-up the notes of the piano with the instruments that will really play those lines.....now more and more of the piano parts get muted....once the day is over the piano is gone and the mock-up is complete...
> 
> SvK



Steven, you know how much I respect you.

That said, if you are spending 8-10 hours in pursuit of the illusion of "realism" with samples as you compose to picture, I simply do not see how you can stay focused enough on the primary and difficult to achieve goals of film music, which are:

1. To play the picture.
2. Sound good, emotional, evocative, scary, funny, etc. (perhaps more real, but not necessarily more real.)
3. To play the picture.
4. To play the picture.
5. To play the picture.
6. To play the picture.
7. To play the picture.
8. To play the picture.
9. To play the picture.
10. To play the picture.

Just my opinion.


----------



## nikolas (Jul 9, 2009)

...and this concludes the Top 10 points by Jay on what is important in film music! :lol: 

(Incidently I do agree with that, and this is why I don't do film music: I would never be able to make it. I do music, and usually lack the emotional, etc, and have difficulty playing the picture...)


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

nikolas @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> ...and this concludes the Top 10 points by Jay on what is important in film music! :lol:
> 
> (Incidently I do agree with that, and this is why I don't do film music: I would never be able to make it. I do music, and usually lack the emotional, etc, and have difficulty playing the picture...)



You're in good company: Stavinsky decided he couldn't do it also, could not deal with the time constraints.


----------



## nikolas (Jul 9, 2009)

Thing is that it's not exactly a comfort and luxury choice (I don't do it because I don't like it). It seems that I haven't practices really emotions in music. Ok I can deal with it, but not usually with the traditional sense which also means that I get a huge "NO" from potential clients (or established ones)... Scoring on picture is not just composing, or rendering, or sequencing, or whatever linked to music strictly: it's much more and that part is missing from me (I think anyways). 

But I'd like Igor for company really! :D


----------



## JohnG (Jul 9, 2009)

I spend a lot of hours on my mockups too, especially if I'm only going to be able to replace, say, strings. Increasingly, I find that directors and producers expect an extremely high standard when reviewing mocked-up cues and I find trying to dislodge those expectations awkward at best.

I don't really know how many hours I devote per minute -- a lot, especially for main titles or other very significant cues. Naturally, one worries that one spends more time on picking samples than picking chords and melodies. But I think that's part of the devil's bargain that improved technology has wrought. 

Furthermore, in cases where many of the samples or synth sounds will end up in the final mix, sometimes it's only after having spent those many hours fooling with sounds that one can really begin to hear and evaluate a passage as a piece of music, rather than a meat-axed succession of sounds. This is especially true if one is trying something one hasn't done before or working on a passage that depends for success on many small contributions from many different sounds (by contrast with a theme-and-accompaniment cue). 

It's possible to imagine something that would sound great live, but be thwarted by the inability to thrash the electronics into what had been imagined. In those cases, sometimes I will write a separate cue and let the players have it to see if it can work after all for the director.

But what is one to do? If James Newton Howard has to mock up cues for Peter Jackson, I can't feel that I have a basis to complain. It's the market.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

JohnG @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> I spend a lot of hours on my mockups too, especially if I'm only going to be able to replace, say, strings. Increasingly, I find that directors and producers expect an extremely high standard when reviewing mocked-up cues and I find trying to dislodge those expectations awkward at best.
> 
> I don't really know how many hours I devote per minute -- a lot, especially for main titles or other very significant cues. Naturally, one worries that one spends more time on picking samples than picking chords and melodies. But I think that's part of the devil's bargain that improved technology has wrought.
> 
> ...



We see this a little differently. I can tell whether the cue will work emotionally with the film with a piano sketch. After that, it is all about orchestration choices, and finally mix. I am old school I guess in that I still think in terms of first composition, then orchestration, then mix.

If the director/producer is demanding THAT level of mockup, then I am not going to get/accept the job anyway, unless there is good money involved. JNH and guys like him have a team of guys to help him whip their mockups to that level, and I am not going to work for $2 an hour, which is what it will come down to on the budgets I am getting if I were to spend that amount of time. Plus I am not convinced for a nanosecond that it leads to the music working better with the picture.

I fear WE are actually conditioning the directors/producers to expect this by our excessive focus on it.


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

Asher.....please, I work to picture, I pride myself on it....I love film....It's all about "to picture"......

To be clear I am speaking of mock-ups that are the final product and will NOT be performed by a real orchestra.......

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

Asher....

there is truth in what you say......."when you're at the point where another 5 hours will only make it 10% better, stop."

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

choco......haha

SvK


----------



## Stevie (Jul 9, 2009)

You just reached 1111 posts SvK, I guess you can make a wish now! :D


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> Asher....
> 
> there is truth in what you say......."when you're at the point where another 5 hours will only make it 10% better, stop."
> 
> SvK



You mean 10% better in your subjective musical assessment, not 10% better in how it works to picture, correct?

If so, we are now on the same page


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

yes


----------



## madbulk (Jul 9, 2009)

Simon Ravn @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Nikolas,
> ...



I agree with both of you. It simply depends. Depends on your tools, depends on your facility for inputting the line the first time, depends on your clarity of purpose, depends on the purpose itself. Depends, I suspect Steven, on whether you're trying to make it sound like another famous composer's work. It just depends.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

JohnG @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> jay, you may have misread my post to some extent.
> 
> I was trying to talk about situations in which samples will constitute a large portion of the final recording, particularly experimental music that isn't susceptible to a piano sketch -- real or synthetic.
> 
> I can imagine a lot of stuff; sometimes I can't wrestle the electronics into submission.



Understood, and while I can envision scores where that would be true, like "Straw Dogs", I do not hear many of them in the marketplace and I have never personally been hired to do one, although I would welcome it.

And in more traditional scores, even when the samples are "a large portion of the final recording" I am still unconvinced that spending exorbitant amounts of time trying to make them "real" (God, I hate even using that term in this context!) leads to a better result with the picture. And once again if the client is hyper-focused on that, I am the wrong composer.


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

I can make a wish?

ok:

"Dear powers of the heavens.........Grant me to score one (or more) beatitiful neo-noir pictures in my life, with decent budgets and critical acclaim..allow me to find my own voice, and let music flow through me, grant me the ability to speak to the viewer through my cues, and let it be through these cues that I successfully convey to the viewer that which is not said on screen."

there!

fingers crossed.

SvK


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

Stevie @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> Very interesting thread!
> Well, I'm often in the situation that I get stuck with my mockup and can't judge the quality of it anymore. I have just listened to it, too often.
> I have no clue how to get out of that situation to be honest...
> Meanwhile I am looking for the reset button.



We are still talking about music to picture, correct?

Here is what I do:

I take a half hour off and then sit down and forget I am a composer and try to become just a movie/TV show fan watching the scene. If as I am doing so, I feel the proper emotions and nothing is musically taking me "out of the picture", then I know I am getting it right.

Sometimes I ask my wife for her reaction. She is not a musician but is very tuned in to movies/TV with the ability to almost totally suspend disbelief and think of the characters as real.

if the music is working for her, it usually works for the client.

So bottom line, marry well


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> I can make a wish?
> 
> ok:
> 
> ...



Beautiful. This should be the film composer's morning/evening prayer.


----------



## JohnG (Jul 9, 2009)

Ashermusic @ 9th July 2009 said:


> while I can envision scores where that [samples and electronics form a significant portion of the final] would be true, like "Straw Dogs", I do not hear many of them in the marketplace ....



What marketplace are you referring to? A good portion of TV and many films are done this way, and not only student or micro-budget films either. 

Plus advertising, trailers (another form of advertising) -- all these use samples and electronics, often primarily samples and electronics.

I confess I find it slightly grating for you to imply, Jay, that some of those posting, myself included, are missing the point of what is important in scoring to picture, or to insinuate that we are unable to imagine what a scene needs by using only piano. We are not talking about that, but a sub-category, making mockups, that is part of many peoples' experience as professionals.

Moreover, stating that James Newton Howard employs people who can do his mockups for him misses out the fact that he does a lot of them himself, according to people who work with him.

Finally, John Williams frequently revises his film music, often very substantially in relation to picture, after hearing it played by an orchestra.


----------



## careyford (Jul 9, 2009)

+1 on marrying well.


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

Asher......

I must tread very carefully here........I just went to your site, and listened to Orchestral underscores section.....yes that sort of work would not take 10 hours a minute........But doing one minute of "Dark Knight", or one minute of "Vertigo" or "Michael Clayton", or "Star trek"......is a whole other ball game man......

respectfully.

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

The sound scapes of such pictures are 3 dimensional........Modern scores are becoming ever-more sophisticated in terms of texture...in this day and age it is what the listener expects..in ADDITION to Orchestral treatments.......

If you listen to say "SpyGame" by Gregson-Williams.....there is a lot going on....everytime you listen you hear something you didn't notice before......not to mention the knowledge neccesary to tweak electronic presets, know how to use / abuse envelopes, lfo's, granular, convo. Having an understanding of all modulation sources...and in addition to all that...Orchestra as well......(Spygame "Berlin" cue...full Orchestra, at least 6 to 8 really cool synth patches, doing really cool stuff, orchestral percussion, electronic percussion, voices + ethnic zither stuff, countless different multi-taps, a whole truck load of different reverbs...all of those fx musically automated yadaydaydayda)

I'm also not talking about, simply banging on the loudest bassiest drums for a minute....That can sound great and will also not take 10 hours, since drums like that take up the entire sonic spectrum, so you'll be done fairly quickly......

I'm talking Clayton, Dark Knight, Crimson Tide, North By NorthWest.....big stuff. The art of not sounding busy, but being super intricate and three dimensional nonetheless........

So 10 hours a minute...........not a stretch by a mile.......

best,
SvK


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> Asher......
> 
> I must tread very carefully here........I just went to your site, and listened to Orchestral underscores section.....yes that sort of work would not take 10 hours a minute........But doing one minute of "Dark Knight", or one minute of "Vertigo" or "Michael Clayton", or "Star trek"......is a whole other ball game man......
> 
> ...



Not at all, understood.But I am confident I can do so in less than 10 hours a minute, because I did a mockup of orchestral reproduction for an orchestral piece for a guy that came out quite well and while I spent a lot of tine on it, I didn't spend 10 hours a minute. (BTW, I HATED doing it.)

With a typical turnaround of 6 weeks for 45-60 minutes of music, I don't know how one could do that anyway.

But trying to do an orchestral score like "Dark Knight" and expecting it to sound really close to that with samples is IMHO, folly, whether you spend 5 hours, 10 hours, or 40 hours per minute.

I have listened to some excellent work by good mockup guys. and none come closer to that sound than I guy I know who does orchestral mockups relatively really quickly for several composers here in L.A.

I went to his studio to see how he achieves it:

1. He is a really good keyboard player and well trained orchestrator.

2. He does most of his cc automation in real time with an Expression pedal, and he has serious Expression pedal chops.

3. He uses a small number of libraries with keyswitches, which he plays in real time from a small keyboard dedicated to that task. He knows the libraries' strengths and weaknesses and keyswitches without even having to think about it.

He believes that to some extent it is like baking bread, you do not want to overwork the dough. Chris Stone used to do the same thing. He once improvised a cue while I watched in 20 minutes that I would have been proud ti have written in 6 hours.


----------



## nikolas (Jul 9, 2009)

About 15 years ago I got an EMU 4600 (or something close to that anyways). My first sampler (which I sold a few months ago, because I never used it! :D). Keyboard based with 2 MB of RAM (!!!) and plenty of hopes!

Hooked up already with contemporary classical music I wanted to create a "concerto for sampler". A normal score, with normal notes, where each note would coincide with different effects/sounds/notes/pitches/timbres! Not extremely original, but I was about 17-18 at the time, so I'm forgiven.

I do think, though, that samples are also an instrument, a tool, and other people use it wisely, other buy the heck of a tool and never get to use it as they should, while others use it according to the guidelines, etc. There are a few who master the instrument/tool and these people shine! TJ is one of them, for example (along with being a great composer as well, imho). JBacal is another one. There is a skill connected to rendering, there is a skill connected to playing live. (for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKorq7dE4gM . She could render a full Ballet by Prokofiev real time and end it... Not extremely well rendered, but fuck she's doing it real time! so...)


----------



## Adamich (Jul 9, 2009)

SvK @ Wed Jul 08 said:


> Avoiding / Countering mock-up fatigue.....
> 
> Let's talk about this, doing convincing, ambitious mock-ups is gruelling work, and not for the faint at heart. The one thing I've learned the hard way, is to scetch out the entire cue quick and sloppy while inspiration runs strong......That is to say DO NOT start the meticulous mock-up process of that cool first 15 seconds of your cue, prior to scetching the rest of the cue........you know what happens .....after listening / mocking up that cool 15 seconds in loop mode for the next 5 hours or more, it will be virtually impossible for you to hear anything that should come next.....
> 
> SvK


You have just described my day so far. I'm glad I'm not alone


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

OK, I have re-thought this.

You know what, guys, if you have clients that demand "ultra-realism" from your mockups, or your own sense of craftsmanship demands it, and you have the time, patience, and desire to do it, and you and your clients are convinced that the end result produces a score that is better sounding music that works better for the picture, then I should not be telling you not to do so, even though personally I am not convinced.

In the end, we all must do what we believe serves our muse, our clients and their projects best, and if that means pursuing "realism" with samples by investing in ever more "real" sounding libraries and putting in copious amounts of time to work towards those goals, then you have my respect and best wishes. 

It is just not my path.


----------



## nikolas (Jul 9, 2009)

There is a slight misunderstanding, Jay. In the sense that what you say could also apply elsewhere (other media, for example), but you are talking about film music specifically.

I was getting ready to counter argue that some budgets do not allow for live orchestras, but allow for a very good composer/performer/producer/mockupartist. But I've no idea about budgets in films!

My guess is that samples and very realistic renderings also help the director BEFORE the money is spent to real recordings, to decide whether something is good or bad. And it makes sense.


----------



## Aaron Sapp (Jul 9, 2009)

I can empathize with your plight, Svk. I was very much the same; 10 hours a minute was not insane for me at all either...

Years ago I used to compose, orchestrate and polish a couple bars at a time. It worked for me just fine -- when I was living with my parents.  Problem with this method is that after you've spent four hours perfecting that five-second trombone marcato line, the spark that inspired the track in the first place is long gone and the rest of the track is more laborious than fun. 

When you're doing this full-time, you develop new methods out of necessity, really. I had thought about sketching tracks n' all that for a long time, but didn't actually give it a whirl until a few years ago. I'm glad I did. The main benefit is capturing your musical impulse without the distraction of production. Get the composition down, polish up the sketch with the counterpoint lines, harmonies, octave doublings, etc. This sped things up for me at least a hundred-fold, because orchestration is more technique than anything. A lot of the orchestration is already dictated by the sketch; mid-range parts for horns/violas, lows for contrabass/cellos with accompanying staccatos for trombones, etc. The same tracks that would've taken me weeks of work years ago I can do now in a fraction of the time and not want to smack a baby by the end of the day. 

There is a point of diminishing returns when it comes to mockups. Even though I'm guilty of micro-sequencing a tune every now and then, for the most part I've developed a sense of what sounds solid enough. Or what won't distract the listener if by the off-chance they happen to be listening. You eventually get to a point where you just have to let the piece go and move on. The novelty of suffering for your art diminishes very quickly when your landlord tacks on a 10% late fee because you spent all week perfecting a piece that ultimately disappointed your clients anyway.


----------



## kid-surf (Jul 9, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> SvK @ Wed Jul 08 said:
> 
> 
> > One thing I do now is mockup 1 line of the first part of the cue, and then mockup a line from the end part of te cue, followed by mocking up a line from the middle part of the cue......only then do I return to the first part and mockup it's second line......This way I don't get sick of the various parts nearly as quickly, because I'm jumping around as I mock-up.....
> ...




Ditto...That's what I'm thinking as I begin reading this thread.

I'm also thinking: "diminishing returns". If one wishes to be a mock-up king, ok, fine, it's your life. But for those aiming at being film composers, there's definitely a point of diminishing returns. 

At a certain point (realism) you're working to impress other composers in ways that the dudes who'll hire you will NEVER decipher. What a colossal waste of time. Particularly if one plans to use a real orchestra.

This topic is a perfect example of the way composers fail themselves. Props here for mock-ups don't play to the outside world of directors and producers. This praise is in a vacuum.

It's like the fledgling filmmaker who spends hour upon hour on everything but the script. THAT guy ain't going nowhere.


----------



## kid-surf (Jul 9, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Ashermusic,
> ...




+1


----------



## kid-surf (Jul 9, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Asher....
> ...




On the nose...


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

Aaron.....good advice....

In my first comment on this thread I state exactly that:

Do the scetch of the full cue FIRST...don't worry about production, then go back and mock-up....

SvK


----------



## kid-surf (Jul 9, 2009)

Aaron Sapp @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> There is a point of diminishing returns when it comes to mockups. Even though I'm guilty of micro-sequencing a tune every now and then, for the most part I've developed a sense of what sounds solid enough. Or what won't distract the listener if by the off-chance they happen to be listening. You eventually get to a point where you just have to let the piece go and move on. The novelty of suffering for your art diminishes very quickly when your landlord tacks on a 10% late fee because you spent all week perfecting a piece that ultimately disappointed your clients anyway.




Just made it to your post...ok good, I'm not the only one to mention it. Glad you're crack'n it out...

Point is: It can be FUCKING GREAT w/o being PERFECT.


----------



## José Herring (Jul 9, 2009)

I agree with Kid and Jay (Asher).

Personally I just don't see the point. I've tried to see the point but really don't. I've listen to tons of mockups by people working at all levels in the industry of film and TV and I've never except in two cases thought to myself "wow sounds like the real thing". One mock up by Craig Sharmat that I heard where he did replace the mock up with the real thing and I could hardly tell the difference between the two. And, one amazing mockup I heard TJ do a while back that really did sound like the real thing. But other than that those instances are really, really rare.

A mockup has two purposes imo. One is to give a filmmaker the impression of a real orchestra to be later replaced by the real thing. And, two to be used on a project where they need a real orchestra but can't afford one or won't pay for one. As things are going these days I'm probably never going to do the latter again. 

But there is tremendous potential which I'm just starting to explore of using samples along with other non traditional instruments such as sound design and percussives to create a valuable final product that stands on it's own. 

Back when Kid was composing more he was headed this way of using sound design and engineering to create a new type of sound by use of samples. I didn't see the value of it then but after scoring 4 or 5 films with samples trying to sound like orchestra I see the value of it now.

That's not to say that mockups of the real thing shouldn't be as good as possible. But, I'm just starting to think it's just a waste to spend all that time on something that really isn't going to be the same as an orchestra or wishing that it could be. I say use the tools to bend the samples towards a new style of music. Of course that means that you'll have to let go of the old ways which I'm finding difficult to do.


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

If time is afforded, and I have the potential and tools at my fingertips to make it sound great...I see no other alternative than to do just that.

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

10 hour per minute is 1 hour of finished music in 60 days...HOWEVER....after you have 30 minutes of music ...it becomes easier as you can adapt the next 30 minutes from all the previous midi sessions.....alter tempos, orchestrations, voicings, re-use material and so forth.......

Which brings you in at about 6 to 7 weeks.

SvK


----------



## José Herring (Jul 9, 2009)

I don't think anybody is doubting your ambition to create the best music you possibly can. My question is what is it that you're actually trying to achieve? 

I've heard a few of your pieces. All of it very fine stuff. But, it's hard for me to imagine that it's taking you 10 hours per minute to achieve it. So perhaps your goal of technical perfection in mock ups should be re-examined and perhaps the fatigue is coming from trying to tweak things beyond the point of achieving your intended results.


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

jose....

I'm not complaining. It is what it is. And thanx.
What do I wish to achieve? See prayer on page 2  

SvK


----------



## Dave Connor (Jul 9, 2009)

I do mockups for directors and producers to sign off on for a real orchestra to ultimately record as well as polished mixes of mockups that are intended as finalized versions for broadcast or CD etc. There is a world of difference between the two because in the latter case you want it to sound as real as possible. Ten hours for a minute for an orchestral arrangement of complexity is pretty dead on in my experience. Basically you have to polish and tighten several times until you just can't get it any better and then you're done. If you stop shy of that you are (in my case) not delivering your best work which is cardinal in my thinking.


----------



## David Story (Jul 9, 2009)

Jose, I recently interview several major composers in LA on this subject. They all agree with you. Hybrid scores are the thing, beyond mockups. I understand there are other views on this, I just like synth plus live.


----------



## SvK (Jul 9, 2009)

David ,

welcome.....I agree Hybrid Scores are where it's at right now.....Synth/Controlled Noise/Orchestra all of it......

Doing anything well is hard...and takes time!
Crack the RedBull 

SvK


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2009)

Hybrid scores are what interest me now.


----------



## mjc (Jul 9, 2009)

12 hours for one minute of music???? 

..mm....as 'professionals' shouldn't we be aiming to write at least 3 mins of music a day (that's if we are talking about your usual 4 - 8 weeks time frame to score a film :wink: )

i dunno if i can squeeze at least 36 hours of work in a third of that time haha...then again, as we know, the 'big guys' have there entourage


----------



## Dave Connor (Jul 10, 2009)

ajcmuso @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> 12 hours for one minute of music????



No not at all. If you got a minute done in say three hours (mockup) and then wanted to make that sound like 75 individuals playing live (where all the natural behavior of the instruments is showcased) then you've got to do a ton of editing. You are essentially telling a computer to sound human: it ain't easy. What's easy is having it sounding like a computer and samples: that happens with very little effort.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Jul 10, 2009)

SvK @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> I'm talking Clayton, Dark Knight, Crimson Tide, North By NorthWest.....big stuff. The art of not sounding busy, but being super intricate and three dimensional nonetheless........
> 
> So 10 hours a minute...........not a stretch by a mile.......
> 
> ...



And that's what you are comparing your own stuff to? Can we hear some of that?

You do realise that when working of the above mentioned kind of scores theres a whole team of composers, producers etc. working on it, because it is such a complicated (and technical you could say) puzzle, creating synth sounds, mixing those with samples + real recordings etc.... Well... if that is how you work, 10 hours seems fine to me for a one man operation. 8)


----------



## Simon Ravn (Jul 10, 2009)

Disregard.


----------



## Angel (Jul 10, 2009)

woohoo


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 10, 2009)

Y'all ever had this experience?

Start in the morning, do mock-up til the wee hrs, but hey, you've finally got it right, you've written some great stuff, you've tweaked the sounds, you've played to the samples, it sounds like an orchestra goddamnit, you're Stravinsky, you're Hermann, yay yay yay go you!!

So you go home feeling tired but satisfied.

Wake up the next morning, listen to what you did...

"Wow ...what was I thinking to create that large Farfisa organ sound to play my brilliant piece???"


----------



## Angel (Jul 10, 2009)

yes, I have this experience every time


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 10, 2009)

Dave Connor @ Thu Jul 09 said:


> I do mockups for directors and producers to sign off on for a real orchestra to ultimately record as well as polished mixes of mockups that are intended as finalized versions for broadcast or CD etc. There is a world of difference between the two because in the latter case you want it to sound as real as possible. Ten hours for a minute for an orchestral arrangement of complexity is pretty dead on in my experience. Basically you have to polish and tighten several times until you just can't get it any better and then you're done. If you stop shy of that you are (in my case) not delivering your best work which is cardinal in my thinking.



Boy Dave, all I can say is I hope they pay you _really_ well.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 10, 2009)

And friends, don't forget what happens to all that detail in your work when they add any of the following to that wonderful cue you worked hours and hours on (spoken from experience):

Cars racing; a monster's roar/stomp/smash; industrial ambience; a river rushing by; plane taking off; customers inside a bar/restaurant; gunshots; city downtown ambience; construction site in background; kids running around in the backyard barbecue scene; multiple dialogues in background while main character talks; etc, etc, etc.

Of course, you'll always enjoy listening to and sharing the cues on their own afterwards. But at each final mix session/audition, your heart will break a little. Unless you don't give a sh*t... :shock: :lol:


----------



## Angel (Jul 10, 2009)

Isn't the amount of work you should do depending on the distribution? Will it be released standalone in addition to the film-release?


----------



## SvK (Jul 10, 2009)

NYComposer:

yes.....years ago, my setup suffered from "Organ Syndrome". Took a long time to rid it of that.

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 10, 2009)

Asher .... Maybe Dave also takes personal pride, from hearing his results as clear, and emotionally impactful as possible......

Money, money, money....Is that it for ya Jay? It's all about the money?

S v K


----------



## ChrisAxia (Jul 10, 2009)

Interesting thread guys. 

Funny how most of us will focus on really small details in our work that 99% of people will very likely never appreciate! I'm sure we all take pride in what we do, and want it to sound as good as possible (within the limitations of using samples), so we do what we do. 

With experience, as well as getting faster, I think most of us will also move on to the next cue when we know that to make significant improvements will take more time than we realistically have available.

I can understand spending 10 hours/minute, and I will probably do this for the main themes myself, but 4-5 hours/minute is my usual rate. Any slower than this and I'm sure I'd be fired!

As far as countering mock-up fatigue, let me know when you have the answer! I often cannot believe how different my perspective is after a two hour break. Sometimes I'm happier than I expect, but more often than not, it's "What the hell was I thinking!!?"

~Chris


----------



## SvK (Jul 10, 2009)

I promised myself 2 things this year. One to quit smoking, and two, to stop arguing about things where both sides will never reach common ground.....I've achieved the first goal, and am about to fail the 2nd.......



SvK


----------



## synthetic (Jul 10, 2009)

Amazing thread. I thought I was incredibly slow until I read this. I pictured everyone else out there effortlessly getting this stuff done in 1/4 the time I take. Now I feel the need to work a little harder.


----------



## Dave Connor (Jul 10, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Fri Jul 10 said:


> Boy Dave, all I can say is I hope they pay you _really_ well.



They have to Jay otherwise I don't do it. Truth be told it's really against nature to do that kind of thing. I don't like doing it and wish I didn't have to but sometimes there's no other way because the cost of a real orchestra is prohibitive. That said, I have been trying to figure out how I might be able to go with live players on this project I've been working on because it's just a better way in every respect.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 10, 2009)

SvK @ Fri Jul 10 said:


> Asher .... Maybe Dave also takes personal pride, from hearing his results as clear, and emotionally impactful as possible......
> 
> Money, money, money....Is that it for ya Jay? It's all about the money?
> 
> S v K



It is just SO tedious to me, Steven, that I would want to be very well paid.

We all have things we do professionally that we would do for very little money because it is a joy. Things we don't like want to be paid better for.

For instance, I had such fun composing, orchestrating and conducting real musicians for an NBC movie of the week I did called "Fugitive Nights" that although I was decently paid, it would have felt worthwhile for me had it paid far less. This last DVD I did the music for, all in the box, was not particularly well paid but I enjoyed it thoroughly because I liked the project, liked what I was composing, and while it required some tweaking, not so much that it felt tedious.

OTOH, when I did a MIDI mockup for a composer's 30 minute symphonic piece and I had to do all those hours and hours and hours of tweaking, which probably still was not as much as a guy like you would have done, at times I wanted to throw my Mac out the window.

Dave just posted that he also finds it tedious and must be well paid to do it.

But maybe you enjoy all that tweaking and I am wrong in assuming you find it as tedious as Dave and I do?


----------



## Dave Connor (Jul 10, 2009)

SvK @ Fri Jul 10 said:


> Asher .... Maybe Dave also takes personal pride, from hearing his results as clear, and emotionally impactful as possible......



The results are in fact satisfying and it would be very unsatisfying to put in a lot of time and still not get there (hence the extra hours involved to make it really sound and work well.) But bring on the real orchestra please!

To clarify: All my film work ends up being played by a real orchestra so I just get things sounding decent which is not the long process I described earlier.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 10, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Fri Jul 10 said:


> SvK @ Fri Jul 10 said:
> 
> 
> > Asher .... Maybe Dave also takes personal pride, from hearing his results as clear, and emotionally impactful as possible......
> ...



I composed music for five modern dance pieces, average length 22 minutes, all of which were performed ( danced to my music on CD) at big venues in NYC, one of which was performed by the Alvin Ailey company, reviewed in the NY Times, blah blah blah. I was very poorly paid. I found it tedious. My forays in the 'art' world have always been tediously underpaid. Choreographer was 'difficult'. Call me nuts...I like getting paid.

Jay...re/ the orchestral mockup-would it have been just as tedious if it had been your compositional work?


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 10, 2009)

NYC Composer @ Fri Jul 10 said:


> Y'all ever had this experience?
> 
> Start in the morning, do mock-up til the wee hrs, but hey, you've finally got it right, you've written some great stuff, you've tweaked the sounds, you've played to the samples, it sounds like an orchestra goddamnit, you're Stravinsky, you're Hermann, yay yay yay go you!!
> 
> ...



( for all y'all who didn't respond in the affirmative to this post, you're either practicing the art of self deception, or yer lying weasels :wink: )


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 10, 2009)

NYC Composer @ Fri Jul 10 said:


> Jay...re/ the orchestral mockup-would it have been just as tedious if it had been your compositional work?



Probably a little less so, but still tedious.


----------



## stevenson-again (Jul 10, 2009)

this is a very interesting thread - stick with it SvK!



> Cars racing; a monster's roar/stomp/smash; industrial ambience; a river rushing by; plane taking off; customers inside a bar/restaurant; gunshots; city downtown ambience; construction site in background; kids running around in the backyard barbecue scene; multiple dialogues in background while main character talks; etc, etc, etc.



oh but isn't that the truth? very often the most interesting music that fits a scene is going to covered with sound effects and the most exposed is much harder to write for.

the thing is with orchestral vs mock-up, is that orchestras can be both easier and harder to make sound 'right'. very precise expression to picture is harder to hit, sometimes the musos just don't 'get it' - well it depends who and where you record, but don't think that it is necessarily shorter process. just because you tell the orchestra 'play it like this' and they do right away might be easier than massaging samples, but don't forget the effort it took to get the music onto the stands! and then once you have recorded there is all the editing and mixing. that's ok if you have a team but certainly i am not their yet where i can have armies of trusted assistants.

i have to say i do both ways and they have their relative merits. i don't always have the budget to record a full band but i often sweeten with live players here and there and that can make all the difference.

ned pointed out a really important element in the process - there is no point killing yourself over detail in an area you know is going to be covered in monsters shrieking, villagers screaming, and men in armour camply staring at a point just a few degrees left of where the monster is, you know the only thing that stands a chance of cuitting through it is high staccato trumpet. so you might as well play a yard of symphobia noodle some trumpet on top and then head to the pub.

but at other times slaving over nuances can have 2 effects; firstly it bears fruit in the classiness of the finished cue, and secondly it serves as inspiration. if you are inspired by how satisfying the mock-up is it gets all those nice juices flowing. and that effort tends to reward you later on with well programmed material you can re-use and reshape. 

sometimes the classiness of the well mocked-up cue comes through in that it just feels more sophisticated, elevates the pictures and impresses the client.

playing the picture....vital - but in my view there is a subtle additional thing to worry about...

at some point when i feel i have the right concept behind the cue, the priority is to make as cohesive a piece of music as possible that so happens to fit the picture. it's the hardest thing to do and i don't often achieve it, but when i do...man THAT is when a cue really makes it's mark and transports the story to a new level. it's also when i get my biggest hard-ons as well.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 10, 2009)

stevenson-again @ 10/7/2009 said:


> ... it's also when i get my biggest hard-ons as well.



OK now THAT's too much information!


----------



## SvK (Jul 10, 2009)

[quote="stevenson-again @ Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:56 pm"

at some point when i feel i have the right concept behind the cue, the priority is to make as cohesive a piece of music as possible that so happens to fit the picture. it's the hardest thing to do and i don't often achieve it, but when i do...man THAT is when a cue really makes it's mark and transports the story to a new level. it's also when i get my biggest hard-ons as well.[/quote]

I agree.....

SvK


----------



## Seb (Jul 10, 2009)

> Another problem for which I still have not found a solution is that it is difficult to stay in love and trust that it is good work once you have spent so much time hearing the same part.......



I know this pretty well due to my experiences as a metal guitarist, songwriter and audioengineer. All the stuff my band Downtime released was mainly written by me + I performed one of the two guitars + I did the recording, mixing and mastering together with another band-member. 
Which actually means that I write a song and then listen to it thousands of times. 
1. When I write it and record the first sketches of it. 
2. When we rehearse the new stuff. 
3. We´ll then play it on our shows
4. After it worked out good in front of the audience we´ll record the latest version of it
5. I do the recording of every instrument including vocals
6. Play my guitar-parts
7. Mix and master it
8. Finally play it on stage for another x times... argh...

This process took its time and it was even enough time for me to develop my skills, as well as a musician and a "producer" (mixer, engineer and so on) within it. You can imagine how I thought about the tracks I wrote myself when all the work was done ( I now could do this better, and this more accurarte, and there´s the new fx-stuff I found...). 
But I learned to build up a certain disctance between myself and my music when it´s already done, see the fun of it (during shows) and that it IS in fact well done (metal) music. But most of the time it´s hard not to change every little occuring detail, even after finishing it up. 

Cheers, 
Seb


----------



## synthetic (Jul 10, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri Jul 10 said:


> Cars racing; a monster's roar/stomp/smash; industrial ambience; a river rushing by; plane taking off; customers inside a bar/restaurant; gunshots; city downtown ambience; construction site in background; kids running around in the backyard barbecue scene; multiple dialogues in background while main character talks; etc, etc, etc.



I spoke to a composer once who couldn't stand foley. "I write this beautiful sweeping music, but they feel the need to hear her dress rustling, who wants to hear the dress rustling?"


----------



## Seb (Jul 10, 2009)

> I spoke to a composer once who couldn't stand foley. "I write this beautiful sweeping music, but they feel the need to hear her dress rustling, who wants to hear the dress rustling?"



If you ever visit Germany and have some time to turn on the TV, just listen carefully. Yes, there is indeed music in the background! Well, sometimes. But most of the time, in my opinion, it´s her damn dress rustling, with of course the parquet she´s walking on creaking like there´s no tomorrow. Just wanted to say that you´re kind of blessed with a lot of music in (American) television. 

Cheers, 
Seb


----------



## SvK (Jul 10, 2009)

I love foley....really I do......

SvK


----------



## stevenson-again (Jul 11, 2009)

@ Ned: wait to REALLY get to know me....hehe


@ synthetic:



> I spoke to a composer once who couldn't stand foley. "I write this beautiful sweeping music, but they feel the need to hear her dress rustling, who wants to hear the dress rustling?


"

i get this a lot too, but i don't we should start getting to anal about our music. hear is the thing: music = emotion. if you ladle on the emotional intensity too much either by over-writing, having too much, or having it too high in the mix, it loses impact when you really need it. that's why i am not massively keen on the wall to wall approach that i am sorry to say, is a feature of too many american productions. silence can have a big impact as well.

the best example i can think of film makers knowing what they are doing with music is the scene in 'finding nemo' when the pelican is telling nemo of his fathers adventures trying to find him. we already know the story, so the dialogue dropped right down so we can barely make it out, we slowly zoom in on nemos expression of amazement, and thomas newman does his thang.

lesser film makers (especially in UK) tend to be paranoid about being able to hear every word, but the key story point in the scene i outlined is the emotional impact of the dialogue - not the dialogue itself.

sometimes the rustling of a dress or the clatter of bedpans does create a better overall effect than just music alone. but what gets me is that allowing room for that in your score, the directors who have not come to the SFX yet feels it needs filling, and despite your protestations that anything you do will be covered by said sound effect and possibly make the sound mix too busy, you are directed to do it and what happens? it is dropped right down or even cut right out at the mix. gah.


----------



## Lunatique (Jul 11, 2009)

I'm not so sure about the idea of just banging out a composition without trying to refine each section, as often your ears get used to the problems and you lose objectivity later. But I also agree that trying to polish just a few measures at a time often leads to not knowing how the hell you want to continue the rest of the composition. I run into both problems, and sometimes I wonder if I should just bang out the whole thing with just one instrument (piano or ensemble strings only), so the entire foundation is set, and then orchestrate/arrange later. The problem with that approach is if you are dealing with hybrid score, many non-orchestral or instrument elements would need to be polished right away because you can't exactly put a bare-bone place holder in there for a noise efx treated with glitch stutters, or a synth arp bleeping away with edgy filter automation.


----------



## billval3 (Jul 11, 2009)

Great thread, guys. I think I understand what you're saying Lunatique, but I AM wondering if the solution to some of the fatigue problems is to get something down first...maybe not bare-bones, but something that isn't totally refined. Step #2 would be to walk away from it for a little while. Maybe work on refining another cue. Step #3 is to come back to the first cue with a little more objectivity. What stands out as needing to be fixed right away? What needs to be re-recorded before tweaking?

Not that I have been able to do any of that...it's all hypothetical, of course! :lol: 

I HAVE found that walking away from something helps with fatigue, though. In fact, to use another example...I have been learning to play the flute for about a year and a half now. I have noticed that sometimes I'll be working on a passage that I just can't seem to get. I get up, walk around the room for a moment and come back. All of a sudden, the passage flows more effortlessly.

Now here's my big question...and maybe this deserves a separate thread. I don't want to hijack this one. How do you guys who are able to sketch something ahead of time go about it? I would really like to learn to do that.


----------



## stevenson-again (Jul 11, 2009)

> I HAVE found that walking away from something helps with fatigue, though. In fact, to use another example...I have been learning to play the flute for about a year and a half now. I have noticed that sometimes I'll be working on a passage that I just can't seem to get. I get up, walk around the room for a moment and come back. All of a sudden, the passage flows more effortlessly



what i like to do is move onto another cue when i feel i am becoming stale. but as much as possible i do try to get down as much as possible in a hurry as possible. i like to think of it as achieving base camp before tackling the summit. at least some bare bones. but sometimes the entire cue hinges on one tiny little detail that is to be extrapolated. get one short but important hooky thing done and the roll it out for a few bars. so both ways have their merits.

with learning an instrument - i think that is interesting to bring up in this context. what is happening is that you have little man that lives in your head and when you practice you send him lots of information which he has to sort out and stick into the right holes. that's why practice has to be patient and deliberate to be effective.

but composing for me seems to be spasmodic and anarchic. i compose somewhat in the manner of an epileptic with tyrrets. 45 minutes of an hour picking my nose, scratching my balls, surfing the internet, and 15 minutes of frantic activity that may produce the only usable music for the whole day. speaking of which - i think that song has finally loaded. back to work....


----------

