# Need Help Trying to Determine if this Track is Morally Appropriate



## Rodney Money (Apr 12, 2016)

*Thank you all for your sincere comments, suggestions and even support. After a week of consideration I decided NOT to use it in the concerto. Thank you again for all of your help.*


----------



## Smikes77 (Apr 12, 2016)

Hi Rodney

My first thought was 'victims of Hiroshima', but then I listened to your track. Those screams are truly horrifying. I guess there are 2 sides to it, meaning 'we will never forget' and the 'I can't take this' side. Maybe there's a musical way of doing it like Penderecki. Those screams bother me though man, really.


----------



## Oouzha (Apr 12, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> As several of you know, I've been working on a trumpet concerto since November. Last week for reasons unknown to me, I thought of a way to open the work, based on September 11, 2001, but now I am unsure if the soundtrack for this 1st movement is morally appropriate. Basically, I am having a moral dilemma within myself. The piece starts with the sounds of New York, then a tension riser (the trumpet will be playing over top of this part even though I did not include it here,) and then lastly, "All hell basically breaks loose." So help me out, is this track morally acceptable or not? Then after that, I guess we can talk about the sound of the track that will accompany the trumpet. Thank you, my friends as always.
> 
> WAV File: https://app.box.com/s/mbtkww753nudw3b4ml0ps1sg5mz2m6v6




Using art to represent human trauma is probably as old as human trauma. 

I thought your work here was visceral. Obviously to say "I liked it" sounds strange, because it's not that sort of piece—but it was effective at achieving your aim, I assume, which is probably more towards immersion and evocation than to produce pleasure or even catharsis.

I don't see how this is possibly immoral. It's okay to make work that intentionally disturbs, in my view. If this were a cheap trick used for self-promotion or somehow denigrating to the victims, maybe. I don't think it is.

I'm curious how it will sound when you've put it all together.


----------



## bbunker (Apr 12, 2016)

Personally I'd say no - I wouldn't do this.

I don't mind being disturbed in the name of art - I've seen heads being chopped off, severed heads being made out with...being disturbed is part of the game. 

Where I think there's an issue is that it feels like sentiment theft. It's great to write a piece that imagines the experience, it's fine to write emotional reactions to traumatic events, imagined or directly felt. It's fine to use personal materials to create a pastiche of the pain in response to trauma. But the issue I have is that your source recordings don't have agency - they don't have the ability to accept or reject being drafted into a work, so no matter what taste the piece is in, it's something that's taken. It's snapshots of those involved, conscripted into having your name on top of it. There's something fundamentally off about that - kind of like if I recorded you surreptitiously in coitus and then put my name as 'author' and the title "Love" on it. It's different, sure...partly because you could theoretically identify the individual (i.e., YOU!) if you knew him. But, it seems to me that capturing sound from a number of people's emotional experiences doesn't change the fundamental problem.

I'm definitely not saying this is the final word on it, of course - I'm just a bit troubled using social experiences in Musique Concrete, especially things which aren't in the 'public' record like speeches or other public events. I'm sure plenty would disagree with me completely on this...I'm just recommending that you might be thoughtful of the issue, that's all!

To be fair, I dislike Penderecki's use of Hiroshima in his Threnody...the title came after the fact as a way of fitting his work into the political climate. It feels Arriviste, knowing this. 

As an aside - I'd probably use the phrase "Electroacoustic component" or "Tape portion" rather than soundtrack, since 'Soundtrack' seems to imply visual media which it acts as the audio portion of. And I've seen plenty of new Electroacoustic works which are for instrument and "tape" however anachronistic that reference is!


----------



## Oouzha (Apr 12, 2016)

bbunker said:


> Personally I'd say no - I wouldn't do this.
> 
> I don't mind being disturbed in the name of art - I've seen heads being chopped off, severed heads being made out with...being disturbed is part of the game.
> 
> ...



If you're right, then all photojournalism is also "off"...


----------



## bbunker (Apr 12, 2016)

Oouzha said:


> If you're right, then all photojournalism is also "off"...



I think the difference is in our idea of composition - photojournalism is in 'capturing' events in a way that musical composition usually is not. Not without some kind of caveat in the compositional mindset.

Photojournalism feels to me more like Rudy Van Gelder's 'authorship' in making jazz records: he doesn't create anything, he polishes what's happening by other authors, by others' experiences, and then presents what has been captured. The same thing is an issue in Ethnomusicology - how do you present a work that captures actual experiences of actual people, but makes clear who is the author of what experiences?


----------



## Smikes77 (Apr 12, 2016)

I must say its brought up an interesting discussion. Both points have validity.


----------



## Oouzha (Apr 12, 2016)

bbunker said:


> I think the difference is in our idea of composition - photojournalism is in 'capturing' events in a way that musical composition usually is not. Not without some kind of caveat in the compositional mindset.
> 
> Photojournalism feels to me more like Rudy Van Gelder's 'authorship' in making jazz records: he doesn't create anything, he polishes what's happening by other authors, by others' experiences, and then presents what has been captured. The same thing is an issue in Ethnomusicology - how do you present a work that captures actual experiences of actual people, but makes clear who is the author of what experiences?


I pay my bills with photography, particularly photojournalistic photography. It's far more than polishing, I assure you, and far more than taking what's already created. This is a convenient perspective perhaps for one who's not tried expressing himself through the medium, I suspect, but perhaps there are other ideological considerations I'm not seeing. 
If this is the standard, then all music is only "polishing", since the 12-tone scale already exists.
All art rearranges pre-existing components in some fashion. While this piece certainly isn't standard compositional practice—using street sounds and captured, candid audio as an integral part—it's certainly art. 
And more to the point of the OP, it's not immoral or "off" in any way, in my opinion.


----------



## Smikes77 (Apr 12, 2016)

Do you think that something like this is similar to a stand up comic using controversial events to make a joke? Comedy can come from a good place or bad place after afterall.


----------



## bbunker (Apr 12, 2016)

Oouzha said:


> I pay my bills with photography, particularly photojournalistic photography. It's far more than polishing, I assure you, and far more than taking what's already created. This is a convenient perspective perhaps for one who's not tried expressing himself through the medium, I suspect, but perhaps there are other ideological considerations I'm not seeing.
> If this is the standard, then all music is only "polishing", since the 12-tone scale already exists.
> All art rearranges pre-existing components in some fashion. While this piece certainly isn't standard compositional practice—using street sounds and captured, candid audio as an integral part—it's certainly art.
> And more to the point of the OP, it's not immoral or "off" in any way, in my opinion.



I think the mistake I made is in the line that Van Gelder doesn't "Create" anything - this is the wrong choice of words. Clearly there's a lot created - in terms of the document itself. There's a lot of "value added" at that stage in the process. It is indeed far more than polishing. I agree with everything on the first paragraph you wrote - but I still disagree with your point in this regard. I would imagine that in viewing your works I wouldn't feel that you've appropriated anything. In a piece where source audio is combined with other media like this; well, it depends on a number of factors, doesn't it? I wouldn't say that it's necessarily 'immoral' or 'off.' Just that one should give a lot of thought to issues of authorship, of identity, of authenticity, and of agency. Whose 'voice' is being heard as whose, and in what ways do the interactions of those voices combine to create a greater collective voice (as is the case in your works, I presume!) to create a work in which the positive benefits outweigh the reservations.

I do think the '12-tone scale' reference is a bit of a straw man, though - the notes of a scale don't have physical existence, don't have their own experiences, simply 'exist' as they do as ideas about pitch, about frequency, about fingerings, and about how these pitches combine.


----------



## bbunker (Apr 12, 2016)

Smikes77 said:


> Do you think that something like this is similar to a stand up comic using controversial events to make a joke? Comedy can come from a good place or bad place after afterall.



I probably wouldn't have any problem with a post-traumatic comedian...because he or she would be sharing their own experiences, or some filtering of their own experience. Doesn't feel off at all to me. Unless it isn't funny.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 12, 2016)

Is it the people screaming that is disturbing? Would it help if I told you that that recording of the people was made for public domain purposely and simply as a sound effect? I am assuming that they knew and probably had to sign somthing originally? Could the people screaming effect simply be seen then as an instrument instead of real individual people with a say so, or do we have to now worry about Tina Guo's thoughts, for example, if I take her CineSample's electric cello to represent a villain who murders parents in front of their children's eyes slapping my name on it? Thank you for you thoughts.


----------



## Smikes77 (Apr 13, 2016)

You know, if you had told me it was from a horror film I probably would think 'that's some scary sounding stuff'. But because I know what the subject matter is, it makes it real. I really don't know, I think the other posters have great points to make, whereas I'm on the fence. There are of course lots of films about the holocaust, so as a precedent I think it would be OK. Perhaps it's because it just sounds horrific combined with the subject matter. Why do you want it to be about 9/11? Let's see if other people chime in.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

Smikes77 said:


> Why do you want it to be about 9/11?


Why do people do movies about World War 2, Pearl Harbor,The Holocaust, Titanic, and even 911?


----------



## mducharme (Apr 13, 2016)

I love Penderecki's Threnody, and electroacoustic music/musique concrete, but this is very disturbing. What you wrote is closer to acousmatic music, or foley. Rather than perceiving the qualities of the sounds themselves as sound objects, it leads me to picture a realistic scene of something happening, more programmatic. A city going about its normal business, then an explosion, people screaming and sirens.

At best, it will sound like you have the sound and music to score some film that isn't there, as if you wanted to score a film, rather than write a standalone piece, but couldn't find one so you made up some sounds. At worst, it will be seen as cashing in on Brussels or any other modern day disaster or bombing like that, no matter what your stated intention was.


----------



## mducharme (Apr 13, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> Why do people do movies about World War 2, Pearl Harbor,The Holocaust, Titanic, and even 911?


The movies are ultimately about the people more so than the disasters themselves. Getting invested in the characters, what happens to them, hoping they make it, the human drama. This is different because there is no 'story' to contextualize this, no characters to relate to, other than a general explosion and something terrible happening and people dying. I'm not sure that making up a story would help, because then it would seem again like a film score without the film, just with some audio and music..


----------



## Smikes77 (Apr 13, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> Why do people do movies about World War 2, Pearl Harbor,The Holocaust, Titanic, and even 911?



Mostly? For money. The question I think is, what motivates people to watch these movies? And I think mducharme is probably right.


----------



## markleake (Apr 13, 2016)

Regardless of the morality, my opinion is you should give fair warning of the content before you play this, including a trigger warning. I think the same should also be the case for posting it here on this forum (I don't think you've adequately flagged it currently). I played the track a little before I realised what it actually was - and thankfully I was able to stop it only a few seconds in as I read some of the posts. Even if it is simulated, for me, I really don't want to listen to your track, and I suspect many in your audience would be pretty disturbed by it also. Also, are you absolutely sure you will only have adults in your audience? Just my 2 cents.


----------



## mverta (Apr 13, 2016)

Are you writing this for today, or for tomorrow? Therein lies your answer.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

mducharme said:


> this is very disturbing.


Maybe this is just another step in the direction where Stravinsky, Schoenberg, and Cage paved?


mducharme said:


> A city going about its normal business, then an explosion, people screaming and sirens.


Yes, that's what happed. If I decide to use it, the trumpet will come in at the riser.


mducharme said:


> At best, it will sound like you have the sound and music to score some film that isn't there, as if you wanted to score a film, rather than write a standalone piece, but couldn't find one so you made up some sounds.


I wanted to write a concert piece that speaks to the listeners. If I decide to use this as an opening, it will only be the first 4 minutes of a 5-7 movement, ~30-40 minute work.


mducharme said:


> At worst, it will be seen as cashing in on Brussels or any other modern day disaster or bombing like that, no matter what your stated intention was.


Every year I play taps at memorial services and soldier's funerals, played at the funerals of newborn infants as their parents wept, and played "Amazing Grace" by the graveside of all four of grandparents' and mother's final resting spots and never felt as though I was "cashing in." Thank you for taking the time to both listen and comment! It means a lot.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

mducharme said:


> This is different because there is no 'story' to contextualize this, no characters to relate to, other than a general explosion and something terrible happening and people dying.


I will tell you a little more about the full concerto. If there was a "story" or "character," it would probably be an "every day person," a musician, the American people, or American Spirit describing the stages we went through. If I decide to use this first 4 minutes, it will be the 1st movement showing what tragedy happened. The 2nd movement based on Bush's words describing an unyielding "Quiet Anger" features a solo flugelhorn expressing their anger from within their soul (the lights fade to black at the end of this movement,) the 3rd movement is a moment of silence lasting around a minute, the 4th is a hymn-like tonal composition remembering the fallen (the accompanied track is a rain storm featuring other elements such as church bells, fireplace, and singing bowls,) the 5th movement called "Innocence Lost" features the trumpet playing backstage as the lights come back on, and the (maybe) finale is based on Bernstein's words "Our Reply to Violence." 



mducharme said:


> I'm not sure that making up a story would help, because then it would seem again like a film score without the film, just with some audio and music..


I personally believe that a composer tells their story through music. My music tends to be autobiographic. For example, I write a piece based on my grandmother, it gets performed, published, and next thing I know it's on NPR, being performed across America, to Europe, to Asia, but I've never seen my music as a film score, but me simply sharing my life's experiences using sound.


----------



## jacobthestupendous (Apr 13, 2016)

This discussion reminded me of this:


Seriously, though, I think the biggest danger is that you will trigger some very visceral reactions, which for many people will be more than they can handle. Sounds and music have the power to put people in an emotional space, and this puts people in a very scary--and for a lot of people a painfully recent--one. I would just caution you to not be flippant about it (maybe don't include the circus movement, for example); insofar as composers do have a duty of care for the listener, I'm sure you will not abuse it. Your question here clearly demonstrates that you take this very seriously.

If you do decide to use this source of still abundant pain, make sure that you do not use it cheaply. The more powerful a thing is, the greater our need is to wield it responsibility. Your contribution to funerals is a perfect example of this.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

markleake said:


> Regardless of the morality, my opinion is you should give fair warning of the content before you play this, including a trigger warning.


"I am unsure if the soundtrack for this 1st movement is morally appropriate. Basically, I am having a moral dilemma within myself. The piece starts with the sounds of New York, then a tension riser (the trumpet will be playing over top of this part even though I did not include it here,) and then lastly, 'All hell basically breaks loose.'"


markleake said:


> Also, are you absolutely sure you will only have adults in your audience?


The adults would be the ones having the issues, in my humble opinion.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

jacobthestupendous said:


> Your question here clearly demonstrates that you take this very seriously.


That's exactly why I posted it here and will be asking others in the field as well. I am honestly on the fence also. Thank you for your words and the video.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

jacobthestupendous said:


> The more powerful a thing is, the greater our need is to wield it responsibility. Your contribution to funerals is a perfect example of this.


Thank you for that.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Apr 13, 2016)

I am sorry Rodney if my assesment of your question is not a happy one..... but I don't understand why you ask others about something that apperently you are not clear about yourself?

And....if you don't know yourself why you should or shouldn't do it, don't!

Have you asked yourself why you want to put a concerto in the context of 9-11?
-Do you want to raise a certain awareness? If so, of what?
- do you want to shock people? Why, and with what goal?
- do you want to bring attention to you as a composer by using other peoples suffering and demise? If so..... Disgusting.
- do you want to warn people of terrorists and general human stupidity how crazy it is to destroy each other in the name of one or another 'religion'? If so, is a concerto the means to do that?

All other questions come up that make me seriously ask why you would do this if it aint clear to yourself?

And in general, don't do this. Make it a good concerto that stands on its own. You obviously have the capacity to create good music, so why use suffering and destruction to create music. Whilst most people could do much more with uplift, well being and awe.

I hope you sincerly make the right decision and throw away this idea of 9-11.

All the best to you


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> I am sorry Rodney if my assesment of your question is not a happy one..... but I don't understand why you ask others about something that apperently you are not clear about yourself?
> 
> And....if you don't know yourself why you should or shouldn't do it, don't!
> 
> ...


I'm very clear of the movements 2nd-Finale. In 2001, I was asked to write music for a special American Composer's Concert in remembrance of the victims where Dr. William Jones performed on trumpet accompanied by me on the piano. It was a composition around 8 minutes long that was received by a standing ovation and curtain call. Then just last year, a trumpet player remembered the piece and a melody that I wrote back in 2000 and asked me if I would expand the work into a full concerto accompanied by "track," also adding the melody that he liked. I am just wondering if what I posted on this thread is appropriate. I am not worried about the other movements in the same sense that I am not worried about playing certain pieces at a funereal. Thank you, my friend, for you concerns and comments!


----------



## mducharme (Apr 13, 2016)

Rodney, I never said you *were* cashing in, I'm just telling you what I expect people will think. You asked for feedback, I was not trying to be mean, but honest. I could have not said anything, but I expect that if you use this as it is you will have lots of people walking out on your performance, no matter how good your actual music is. If you that to happen, then go ahead.

In my books, there is a huge difference between musical depictions of tragedy using instruments and actually depicting tragedy using screaming human voices. Penderecki's threnody was affecting, but not in the same way. The string instruments maybe resemble screams, but we can tell they are not human beings screaming. However you can take a human voice screaming and do all kinds of different effects and processing to it and people will still identify it as being a voice screaming. Human beings are somewhat programmed for this, to respond to things like a baby in distress, etc. That makes this ten times more disturbing than threnody.

Playing a trumpet elegy at a funeral has a very different effect on people, it is an instrument and music to represent their mourning. Consider this - what if, instead of a trumpet elegy, you had played the last bit of that acousmatic track at a funeral? Mourners would hear people screaming and in pain, when they are already in pain.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

mducharme said:


> Rodney, I never said you *were* cashing in, I'm just telling you what I expect people will think. You asked for feedback, I was not trying to be mean, but honest. I could have not said anything, but I expect that if you use this as it is you will have lots of people walking out on your performance, no matter how good your actual music is.


It's all good, my friend, I sincerely appreciate your help!


----------



## Mike Greene (Apr 13, 2016)

Personally, I think it's morally fine, since your intentions are sincere, and the piece sounds well done to me. To me, it's art, and this could turn out to be a very powerful piece that people would really appreciate.

If this were some cheap gimmick, or if it were done without respect for the subject matter, then that would be another matter, but since you're an honorable guy with honorable intentions, I don't think you need to censor yourself.

I would include in the program a mention about you playing taps at funerals, by the way. The audience's mindset is is important, so if they go in believing you're sincere, they'll connect better to the piece.

With that said, there are very valid points made in this thread on both sides. In particular, I would definitely let the audience know ahead of time what the subject matter is and that it could be disturbing.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

Oouzha said:


> I'm curious how it will sound when you've put it all together.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Apr 13, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> I was asked to write music for a special American Composer's Concert in remembrance of the victims where Dr. William Jones performed on trumpet accompanied by me on the piano. It was a composition around 8 minutes long that was received by a standing ovation and curtain call. Then just last year, a trumpet player remembered the piece and a melody that I wrote back in 2000 and asked me if I would expand the work into a full concerto accompanied by "track," also adding the melody that he liked.


Sorry again, really.......... I am not out on having a go at you, so please don't take it as a personal issue against you, but it is that the general human notions that seem to go around without anyone asking themselves first whether they are valid to begin with.

If you see here your reasons for writing this music:......... write a piece for a composers concert, in remembrance of the victims, .......received with a standing ovation...(why? because they liked the music? or because some people there lost dear ones themselves in that horrible event?) ............. a trumpet player liked your melody............
if those are your reasons for making music I personally cannot subscribe to that at all.

How much suffering is there already in this world, daily, hourly, minutely.... how many men, women and children get abused by violent people,...or raped, killed, tortured, used and abused.....and for what reason...money....religions(or at least what generally is understood as a religion), power, sex........ you name it.
And in the glory of those human qualities we (as an so called artist group) are then to create music for listeners who will then do what with it? have a nice evening in the concert hall ? enjoy a good glass of wine afterwards with some snacks and oh yeah...contemplate a little on those stupid other humans who do horrible things? 
is that our contribution as music creators? because we get paid for a job to make that music it now is valid?

Again..... I don't mean any offence to you at all, but since you posted this question to this particular group of musicians in the world in a way that you yourself doubt whether it fits the purpose, I doubt that anyone else will get its (diffuse) purpose.
That's why I propose to do the opposite: do it for the human greatness: the Einsteins, Beethovens, Leonardo da Vinci's, and all other great people who left something in this world that others could benefit from. Do it towards that! ... instead of locating everyone towards the worst of humanity and indulge in it as if that will get us further in life...... I don't get that. And I am not saying to go through life with "pink"glasses but to do something uplifting> We all need it far more then darkness.

And once again, all the best to you and your choices.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> Sorry again, really.......... I am not out on having a go at you, so please don't take it as a personal issue against you, but it is that the general human notions that seem to go around without anyone asking themselves first whether they are valid to begin with.
> 
> If you see here your reasons for writing this music:......... write a piece for a composers concert, in remembrance of the victims, .......received with a standing ovation...(why? because they liked the music? or because some people there lost dear ones themselves in that horrible event?) ............. a trumpet player liked your melody............
> if those are your reasons for making music I personally cannot subscribe to that at all.
> ...


Trust me, it's all good, my friend. I love hearing your thoughts. I know it's hard to tell, because the only thing I've posted sound wise is this thread, but the concerto midway becomes uplifting and finishes this way. In a nutshell, the piece is all about this:


----------



## mducharme (Apr 13, 2016)

I don't mean to sideline this, but I was actually faced with this very dilemma lately. I did a 4 channel electroacoustic track, finished it and had it performed a few days ago, based on Sagan's "Pale blue dot" speech and photo (the stereo downmix is on my soundcloud), and wanted to make it uplifting but also make people think. Sagan's words mention all of the suffering in the world and how much different things would be if people realized that all of this fighting done with fellow man is over a tiny dot in a corner of the universe, how that puts things in perspective. I was considering having references to wars by incorporating more such sounds, and even tried it, but it gave me a sick feeling just listening to it, so I took it out save for one quote from FDR's "day of infamy" speech, which I figured was old enough to not cause problems. Although there might be a few references to modern events, they are more oblique than explicit. Sure, it might have been more effective in some regards if I had tackled certain issues head on, but I just felt queasy every time I started going into that zone. It's the same unease I feel surrounding the music above.


----------



## mac (Apr 13, 2016)

It seems to cause an emotional response in people, so you're probably doing something right? I see it as art, and not particularly offensive. Has a feeling of Godspeed You Black Emperor, which I'm going to play right now, as it happens.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 13, 2016)

mac said:


> It seems to cause an emotional response in people


That is defiantly true, lol. Thank you for your comments!


----------



## markleake (Apr 13, 2016)

mac said:


> It seems to cause an emotional response in people, so you're probably doing something right?


Just because something produces a reaction doesn't make it right - it can in fact mean quite the opposite. That goes for many things in life, not just for music or other art forms.
Rodney: I guess fundamentally I dissagree with your willingness to play something like this, especially when you say: "The adults would be the ones having the issues, in my humble opinion." in response to my asking about if childeren will be pressent.... that doesn't reassure me at all that you are treating the topic as you should. This kind of content is quite scary and traumatic for children, and even some adults. I may appreciate your obvious musical ability, and I'm not saying you shouldn't perform this, but I'm not a fan of your approach to this at all.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

markleake said:


> but I'm not a fan of your approach to this at all.


You can not judge me yet, my friend, because I have not made it part of the entire concerto. I have not made the conscious decision on inclusion, so you can not technically say this, "I'm not a fan of your approach to this at all." You think just because you hear it here that it is "written in stone." No, I am still at the "thinking process" while trusting y'all to help me. If I said, "Here is my piece, completed and done," then you could judge me.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Apr 14, 2016)

mducharme said:


> In my books, there is a huge difference between musical depictions of tragedy using instruments and actually depicting tragedy using screaming human voices.



This.
I feel that using canned SFX to do the heavy lifting of your piece doesn't qualify as concerto music.
Using instruments to depict what you have in mind would be much more deserving and challenging, and would give those that are direct or indirect victims of acts of terror a chance to sit through the piece without having the horror of it be graphically thrown at their faces again.
In a way, I feel you chose the easy way out in tackling the challenge that you set for yourself.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Apr 14, 2016)

I'm in the "no" camp.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Apr 14, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> As several of you know, I've been working on a trumpet concerto since November. Last week for reasons unknown to me, I thought of a way to open the work, based on September 11, 2001, but now I am unsure if the soundtrack for this 1st movement is morally appropriate. Basically, I am having a moral dilemma within myself. The piece starts with the sounds of New York, then a tension riser (the trumpet will be playing over top of this part even though I did not include it here,) and then lastly, "All hell basically breaks loose." So help me out, is this track morally acceptable or not? Then after that, I guess we can talk about the sound of the track that will accompany the trumpet. Thank you, my friends as always.
> With the trumpet part now:



Hi Rodney,

Without reading every single comment after your initial post here is my opinion thus far:
I don´t know what you imply here with that piece of work, but I just gave a listen to that track and it is (apart from the moral aspect you mentioned) a very apocalyptic sound enviroment. I don´t even know if your trumpet fanfarish intro contributes in any kind or complements in any kind to that "sound". Apart from any moral aspect just technically if you ask me: I would say no. You know what I would do: Concentrate on writing compelling fanfares and overall high quality music because I think that should be more of a focus? I mention that because I don´t get anything out of your trumpet solo there, really nothing! It is just (at least for me) a random sequence of notes which you can feed a computerprogram with who does a similiar job. (ok..12 tone, serial music..I saw your post the other day) Still! So if you need any help or advice, here is mine: Go and work on your fanfare and keep focused on the things who do matter when it comes writing music! I hope you don´t get offended here but I felt to be really saying now what I feel.

Best Greetings,
Alex


----------



## Suganthan (Apr 14, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


>



I've got layman's feedback. I recognize the screaming gives uneasiness to some. How about dramatizing the screaming sounds with music along with it? (Strings would work, would strings be there in trumpet concertos?) or even the brass in low dynamics?


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> Sorry again, really.......... I am not out on having a go at you, so please don't take it as a personal issue against you, but it is that the general human notions that seem to go around without anyone asking themselves first whether they are valid to begin with.
> 
> If you see here your reasons for writing this music:......... write a piece for a composers concert, in remembrance of the victims, .......received with a standing ovation...(why? because they liked the music? or because some people there lost dear ones themselves in that horrible event?) ............. a trumpet player liked your melody............
> if those are your reasons for making music I personally cannot subscribe to that at all.
> ...


Everyone always wants an answer, "Why?" when it comes to writing a piece based on such strong subject matters. So far, if you take out this first 4 minutes that I posted on this thread, and just looked at the 2nd movement to the finale, you are left with the answer. Those movements reflect how I, as both a musician and American, personally reacted and felt seeing terrorists try to destroy my home and kill my American brothers and sisters. And as both a performer and composer, this is the only means I know how to express myself. Here is the score so far without the finale, because it is not finished. https://app.box.com/s/8kq2tx1oqzrsow6eos55bxylbcb6dgzw

The 1st movement in the score called "A Quiet Anger," based on Bush's words "Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror, the sight of planes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness and a quiet, unyielding anger." That's exactly how I felt also. I simply placed my emotions in music. It's as though a musician wanted to express their feelings but being alone in the forest away from everyone. The moment of silence in the 2nd movement for about a minute is self explanatory, and the third movement "Fallen Heroes" expresses what I was feeling on the inside while playing trumpet at all of the services and memorials during that time. Instead of anger as in "A Quiet Anger," I was expressing pain and loss. The finale will be based on Bernstein's words, "This will be our reply to violence: to make music more intensely, more beautifully, more devotedly than ever before. I was studying music at the university during 2001. I was a sophomore, in fact. On that Tuesday we had marching band rehearsal. 300 college kids, all silent, we turned to the flag, played The Star Spangled Banner, and simply left for the day. Music History class was much of the same, we sat down, our professor said some words, played 5 minutes of Brahms's Requiem, and then we left for the day. So as a musician full of inward thoughts and overhyped emotions, I asked myself, "What can I do?" And then Bernstein's quote was inspiring. So I see this concerto, like most of my music, as autobiographic, what I was going through at this time. The finale is based on a true event later that month of September when I went home for the weekend. It was nighttime during a small thunderstorm, and I felt the need to go to my home church and just be alone. Ever since I was a teenager I had a key to go in anytime I needed to practice. As I sat in that dark church, while the thunder and rain echoed through the halls of the church, while inspired by Bernstein's words, I took out my trumpet and started to play a melody of rising hope, telling the terrorists that they had failed.

So in short, it's telling my story.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

Suganthan said:


> I've got layman's feedback. I recognize the screaming gives uneasiness to some. How about dramatizing the screaming sounds with music along with it? (Strings would work, would strings be there in trumpet concertos?) or even the brass in low dynamics?


The trumpet player who commissioned the work wanted the piece for just himself and no other accompaniment except for "tape." Right before I started the finale, I asked him do you want piano for accompaniment, a brass quintet, strings, or something cool like a percussion or trombone choir. He said, "No, I want to be by myself when I perform it with no other musicians." Because it is easier for me to compose for live musicians needing sheet music, it would've actually been a lot easier for me if he wanted accompaniment. Since it will be performed in concert, I cannot render a live orchestra for the track but only sounds such as synths, sound effects, or taking acoustic sampled instruments and editing them so no live musician could actually play the part.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Hi Rodney,
> 
> Without reading every single comment after your initial post here is my opinion thus far:
> I don´t know what you imply here with that piece of work, but I just gave a listen to that track and it is (apart from the moral aspect you mentioned) a very apocalyptic sound enviroment. I don´t even know if your trumpet fanfarish intro contributes in any kind or complements in any kind to that "sound". Apart from any moral aspect just technically if you ask me: I would say no. You know what I would do: Concentrate on writing compelling fanfares and overall high quality music because I think that should be more of a focus? I mention that because I don´t get anything out of your trumpet solo there, really nothing! It is just (at least for me) a random sequence of notes which you can feed a computerprogram with who does a similiar job. (ok..12 tone, serial music..I saw your post the other day) Still! So if you need any help or advice, here is mine: Go and work on your fanfare and keep focused on the things who do matter when it comes writing music! I hope you don´t get offended here but I felt to be really saying now what I feel.
> ...


Nope, I am not offended. I appreciate your comments. I am honestly not sure the 12 tone fanfare works in this particular context or not either. I posted it here so the people of this forum could help me through this process as I value their opinions like I value yours to help me decide, but I've been told by other musicians that the 12 tone fanfare works by itself and not just some random sequence of notes. There is an earlier, technically easier version without the sextuplets and 32nd notes, that has been performed multiple times in live concerts. I've never let it get published, although asked, because I didn't ever know what I wanted to "do" with it. Me just throwing it in the riser was an experiment with the hopes of causing more "rising, articulated, moving tension." Since I have only being rendering with quality samples and Cubase for less than a year now, I only have a version rendered with Garritan Samples and Finale. This was the version that was performed in public from around 2003-2013ish. I think the chords may give more sense to the overall structure of the fanfare. Sorry for the bad Garritan sounds that are way too wet, but here is the score and sound:
"Sound" https://app.box.com/s/pccdfz3t5vcpr7pgodio
Score: https://app.box.com/s/ydzx6krf0suwi7da4gj0


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Apr 14, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> Nope, I am not offended. I appreciate your comments. I am honestly not sure the 12 tone fanfare works in this particular context or not either. I posted it here so the people of this forum could help me through this process as I value their opinions like I value yours to help me decide, but I've been told by other musicians that the 12 tone fanfare works by itself and not just some random sequence of notes. There is an earlier, technically easier version without the sextuplets and 32nd notes, that has been performed multiple times in live concerts. I've never let it get published, although asked, because I didn't ever know what I wanted to "do" with it. Me just throwing it in the riser was an experiment with the hopes of causing more "rising, articulated, moving tension." Since I have only being rendering with quality samples and Cubase for less than a year now, I only have a version rendered with Garritan Samples and Finale. This was the version that was performed in public from around 2003-2013ish. I think the chords may give more sense to the overall structure of the fanfare. Sorry for the bad Garritan sounds that are way too wet, but here is the score and sound:
> "Sound" https://app.box.com/s/pccdfz3t5vcpr7pgodio
> Score: https://app.box.com/s/ydzx6krf0suwi7da4gj0



For me ecspecially in knowing what that background sound is all about I don´t find it in the music or I don´t know or think that the music complements that character in sound of the background. I really like your garritan thing as a standalone much better I have to say.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

Suganthan said:


> I've got layman's feedback. I recognize the screaming gives uneasiness to some. How about dramatizing the screaming sounds with music along with it? (Strings would work, would strings be there in trumpet concertos?) or even the brass in low dynamics?


If I was going to use live instruments, I would start off the finale, not this piece on the thread, similar to this with the rain and thunder echoing throughout the halls of the church and the instruments (used strings here for experimentation) would come in one at a time introducing the chord that supports the trumpet when it comes in.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> For me ecspecially in knowing what that background sound is all about I don´t find it in the music or I don´t know or think that the music complements that character in sound of the background. I really like your garritan thing as a standalone much better I have to say.


I like the "orchestration" of the Garritan version also, and you are right, the trumpet line probably doesn't fit the sound of the background. Thank you for commenting again and your invaluable and honest feedback.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Apr 14, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> I like the "orchestration" of the Garritan version also, and you are right, the trumpet line probably doesn't fit the sound of the background. Thank you for commenting again and your invaluable and honest feedback.


No Problem, thats what you asked for and what we are here. Hope you find a way what is good for you to live with and for everybody else. Good luck with that work.


----------



## airflamesred (Apr 14, 2016)

Patrick de Caumette said:


> This.
> I feel that using canned SFX to do the heavy lifting of your piece doesn't qualify as concerto music.
> Using instruments to depict what you have in mind would be much more deserving and challenging, and would give those that are direct or indirect victims of acts of terror a chance to sit through the piece without having the horror of it be graphically thrown at their faces again.
> In a way, I feel you chose the easy way out in tackling the challenge that you set for yourself.


100%


----------



## prodigalson (Apr 14, 2016)

Patrick de Caumette said:


> This.
> I feel that using canned SFX to do the heavy lifting of your piece doesn't qualify as concerto music.
> Using instruments to depict what you have in mind would be much more deserving and challenging, and would give those that are direct or indirect victims of acts of terror a chance to sit through the piece without having the horror of it be graphically thrown at their faces again.
> In a way, I feel you chose the easy way out in tackling the challenge that you set for yourself.



+1. What you're doing isn't morally wrong. However, taste is another question. John Adams approach to this subject in "On the Transmigration of Souls" comes to mind here. 



> The trumpet player who commissioned the work wanted the piece for just himself and no other accompaniment except for "tape."


. 

Why not have him do the screaming then?


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

Patrick de Caumette said:


> I feel you chose the easy way out in tackling the challenge that you set for yourself.


In terms of my personal abilities, writing for live musicians is 1000 times easier than rendering. The reason the track sounds so natural is because I viewed each sound as an instrument and placed each one exactly where I wanted it like I would a live instrument. I take the fact that it sounded easy as a compliment. Nothing is random. The track mirrors the "Fallen Heroes" thunderstorm track. The sounds of the trains, subways, and cars mirror the thunder, people's voices turn into the ambient sound of rain, and the bells of the bicycles and churches mirror the tubular bells and singing bowls. The first part depicting "pre-disaster" New York shows music everywhere such as the street musician playing buckets, women singing, the percussive sounds of a horse, and church and bicycle bells, etc. where each sound was cut, edited, and placed like a flute in an orchestra. Sound is sound. Music is organized sound. This tract was organized and not just random placement of city ambience. The riser itself was not "bought" and placed, but comprised around 20 different samples including a live guitar manipulated through Kontakt, reverb, and Cubase, and then the explosion was a mix of three different explosions including Cinesamples's percussion, the police and ambulances came from 3 different sources planned, panned, and placed accordingly, and the fire and debris even consisted of a peaceful fireplace how someone would place a tuba to add warmth and bass to the sound of the brass section. I wanted to do something different, and not just the solo instrument with accompaniment such as strings or piano that we've heard a 1000 times.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

prodigalson said:


> Why not have him do the screaming then?


He had no say in that. I posted it here for opinions, not for ridicule. He doesn't even know about this track.


----------



## storyteller (Apr 14, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> As several of you know, I've been working on a trumpet concerto since November. Last week for reasons unknown to me, I thought of a way to open the work, based on September 11, 2001, but now I am unsure if the soundtrack for this 1st movement is morally appropriate. Basically, I am having a moral dilemma within myself. The piece starts with the sounds of New York, then a tension riser (the trumpet will be playing over top of this part even though I did not include it here,) and then lastly, "All hell basically breaks loose." So help me out, is this track morally acceptable or not? Then after that, I guess we can talk about the sound of the track that will accompany the trumpet. Thank you, my friends as always.
> With the trumpet part now:




Rodney I love your music. It is easy to notice that in all you do, you want to evoke feelings of beauty and love. As artists, that which we bring into this world becomes of this world, and makes an impression on others. It is the impact left upon the observer of your art that matters. If the intention is understood to be an effort to share hope, Love, light, and inspire - then that can also be navigated through dark motifs if there is a triumphant resolve. I suspect that you may find an inner struggle with it because the resolve may not yet fit your mission as an artist - though that's just a hunch since the next movement is not part of the uploaded piece. I'd say if you have an inner question strong enough to ask for advice, then the resolve may not yet agree with your artistic values. It doesn't mean the part that caused the question shouldn't be used. It is kinda the opposite since you felt called to use it. Just figure out how to use it in a way that completes the dialogue your heart is trying to have with the world.


----------



## JJP (Apr 14, 2016)

Please forgive me for being a bit blunt, but I'd like to cut directly to where I think the problems are. I was in New York that day and saw the second plane hit. And this, while visceral, didn't resonate with me.

First of all, this sounded like generic sounds which could be from various parts of NYC or anywhere which I found a bit disorienting. As an example, horses are not typically associated with lower Manhattan. They are more commonly found in other places like Central Park, and you couldn't even see or hear the Trade Center from there other than smoke unless you were on a hill deep in the park... even then maybe not. Since the sound design felt generic and random, it didn't create any feeling of place. That took me out of having emotional investment. (Sound design is a very subtle, complex in thing this way.)

I fear the part where the crash happens comes across as forced and crude. It gets a reaction, but more along the lines of something jumping out at you on one of those bad YouTube pranks where you stare at a screen for a long time before there is a moment of "BOO" accompanied by a scary closeup of something. The screams and flames sound very close, but being that close to a large fire sounds very different from the fire sounds you have here. Plus, that's not the way most people experienced 9/11. Most every person who was that close to flames in the WTC died.

Therein lies an important issue. To whom is this music supposed to speak and how? You're portraying something horrific from a very close position. If you're trying to create something to speak to an audience, you are using a technique that may not resonate with most, especially if they are mature or sophisticated listeners.

However, for those few who have experienced something like this, the way in which it is presented is more akin to forcing it into one's face and saying "Look at this! Look at it!" rather than describing it in a thoughtful or meaningful way or using it as a vehicle for reflection to seek some new meaning, closure, or transcendence. That may be off-putting to those who have experience with real violence like this. News reports throw things in our faces. If art does it, we usually expect it to do something more or for it to act in service of some new understanding or point of view. Otherwise is is just redundant and exploitative.

Most people who have experienced something like that from that close don't like to relive it in such a visceral way. (My father is a war veteran with close combat experience, and only very rarely talks about the smells and sounds of close flames, the screams of pain, and the horrific things done to the human body because it is so painful to relive.) Plus the way your sound design shows these elements hints at a lack of actual experience with such things. That undermines the credibility of the music's "narration" for lack of a better term. When we talk about literature, the credibility of the narrator is a very important issue in telling a story. The same is true for music when it is programmatic like this piece.

I think this is why you're having a bit of a moral dilemma about this piece. It's touching on a painful subject, but so far in this piece it's unclear why these painful memories are being drawn out and thrust upon us in this context. Plus, you're trying to create a soundscape that has very realistic elements which are shocking, but they may not come across as realistic. This means you're running the risk of exploitation and incredibility. I suspect those feelings are why you brought this question to the forum.

You would be greatly served by going back and reflecting again on your own experience with and feeling about this event and working from there as a starting point. Writing and composing are always more genuine when they spring from a place of personal experience. That doesn't have to be first-hand experience. It could be your own journey in learning about an event. That way all the elements are serving a clear purpose and you may be able to avoid this sounding "pasted together" which is always a risk in this type of work.

I know that creating a soundscape like this takes a lot of work. Creating soundscapes that evoke an emotional response is even more work and more difficult by an order of magnitude. Working that soundscape into a musical composition is yet one more challenge, and one which often fails more often than it succeeds in a concert setting for numerous reasons. You've set a great challenge for yourself by taking this approach, so be aware that sometimes challenges fail. However, whether the sound design approach is useful or not in the end, it can still be one part of the journey to finding what this piece truly is meant to be.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

JJP said:


> Please forgive me for being a bit blunt, but I'd like to cut directly to where I think the problems are. I was in New York that day and saw the second plane hit. And this, while visceral, didn't resonate with me.
> 
> First of all, this sounded like generic sounds which could be from various parts of NYC or anywhere which I found a bit disorienting. As an example, horses are not typically associated with lower Manhattan. They are more commonly found in other places like Central Park, and you couldn't even see or hear the Trade Center from there other than smoke unless you were on a hill deep in the park... even then maybe not. Since the sound design felt generic and random, it didn't create any feeling of place. That took me out of having emotional investment. (Sound design is a very subtle, complex in thing this way.)
> 
> ...


Thank you for your thoughts and comments. Means a lot!


----------



## prodigalson (Apr 14, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> He had no say in that. I posted it here for opinions, not for ridicule. He doesn't even know about this track.



Apologies. No ridicule was intended. It was simply a joke more at the expensive of the trombone player than anything else. 

And whether or not something is morally objectionable is a different discussion than whether or not it is in good taste. I think you're more in danger of violating the latter more than the former. That's my opinion and not intended as ridicule.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 14, 2016)

prodigalson said:


> Apologies. No ridicule was intended. It was simply a joke more at the expensive of the trombone player than anything else.
> 
> And whether or not something is morally objectionable is a different discussion than whether or not it is in good taste. I think you're more in danger of violating the latter more than the former. That's my opinion and not intended as ridicule.


It's all good, brother. My apologies for not seeing it as a joke. I blame it on my allergies, man I "love" spring.


----------



## Rodney Money (Apr 15, 2016)

*Thank you all for your sincere comments, suggestions and even support. After a week of consideration I decided NOT to use it in the concerto. Thank you again for all of your help.*


----------



## ag75 (Apr 15, 2016)

Rodney Money said:


> Is it the people screaming that is disturbing? Would it help if I told you that that recording of the people was made for public domain purposely and simply as a sound effect? I am assuming that they knew and probably had to sign somthing originally? Could the people screaming effect simply be seen then as an instrument instead of real individual people with a say so, or do we have to now worry about Tina Guo's thoughts, for example, if I take her CineSample's electric cello to represent a villain who murders parents in front of their children's eyes slapping my name on it? Thank you for you thoughts.



I don't think you need the screaming. It's too on the nose. If you orchestrated a sound or cluster that imitated screaming that would be another thing, but to me the screaming is just too on the nose. It fills in all the subtext and tells people exactly what/how to feel which limits your audience. Having said that I really liked the musical aspect of the piece.


----------

