# Is it worth finding a private tutor for addressing more complex music theory question like these?



## rmak (Feb 27, 2021)

So I came across this really cool string quartet composition on YouTube using Berlin first chair in staffpad (you'll have to click on the link to go to YouTube to view) - 

I was curious about what was going on with the harmony in this piece. I posted a comment in the YouTube video to inquire about it, but I thought I would just make a thread here to see if anyone has any input on the matter. Im trying to move away from staying within one key to make things more interesting while writing and utilizing accidentals for simple mixtures, modulations, augmented chords, and other topics mentioned in the recent scoreclub subscription I had.

I have some understanding of what's going on in some parts of the composition, like in the beginning, the harmony goes E min to B min and then switches to D min and A min with the naturals (about 30 seconds in). I was guessing that this is an example of a modulation. Throughout the piece, there are quite a lot of accidentals, and it is hard for me to figure out the harmony and what the thinking is behind the composer.

Does anyone think it is worth it for me to find a private tutor to sit down with to go over stuff like this and to facilitate me writing some pieces utilizing more complex harmonies. I would very much want to write this way more naturally, and maybe this doesn't necessarily mean I need to understand all the music theory. Maybe a lot of it is just voice leading? In this particular piece, it is a lot like SATB, and maybe the composer is just leading with each line?

If anyone is thinks a private tutor may be a good idea, what are some good resources for that? I was just going to maybe put a post on craigslist or ask the staff at guitar center haha.


Thanks,
Ricky


----------



## d.healey (Feb 27, 2021)

You can't reverse engineer the composer's thinking by looking at the end result, unless you have an intimate knowledge of that composer's workflow and thought process.


----------



## rmak (Feb 27, 2021)

d.healey said:


> You can't reverse engineer the composer's thinking by looking at the end result, unless you have an intimate knowledge of that composer's workflow and thought process.


I'm not necessarily trying to reverse engineer, but that is a good point. I am just trying to find a way to best learn more complex harmonies. I want to take away some of the guessing or trial and error whenever I move away from the key signature.


----------



## rmak (Feb 27, 2021)

Gene Pool said:


> I like the piece.
> 
> Some would contend that the key sig shouldn't be there while others would contend otherwise. First world problems. I don't get into the middle of such debates.
> 
> To your question, I don't know what teachers you may be able to find, but for this type of piece the go-to approach is to use pitch class set theory. Just about any book on 20th Century harmonic practice other than the Persichetti will (or should) cover this. I introduced myself to it by way of a book by Allen Forte called _The Harmonic Organization of The Rite of Spring_, then moved on from there. I'll recommend more and say why if you want more.


Thanks for sharing. I actually have the Persichetti book haha. That's too bad. That's the first I heard of pitch class set theory. I'll look into that book by Allen Forte. I hope it's not a very heavy book. I'm trying to apply/practice instead of studying and getting buried in too much music theory. I had a subscription to scoreclub, and I am hoping some of the notes I took down from the advanced tonal harmony module will help me. I plan to review them more, but it is a hard thing to connect concept to its application in the YouTube composition above.


----------



## YuyaoSG (Feb 27, 2021)

That is worth finding a good teacher. If you want to write a piece, the composer teacher is more about inspiring you. If you go to youtube and find a composer youtube you like and contact him/her to see if he/she can provide you lessons.


----------



## synergy543 (Feb 27, 2021)

You could check out MITA's free course "Composition from Scratch".
https://musicintervaltheory.academy/composition-from-scratch/?fbclid=IwAR3lycfAPTaUDUr0_Lk8e7JbqbAKI50wZt18h7cfFx0sWnMrb7DzKC-0hA0
There is another course called "Portals" that I found very interesting that's available which you could check out with just a monthly membership trial. I just recently joined but have found MITA to be a very refreshing and valuable resource of ideas and a community of interesting composers.


----------



## rmak (Feb 27, 2021)

Gene Pool said:


> I just found this. Looks really good:
> 
> The Forte is thin, but a bit of a slow reader since you have to stop on every page and study the Stravinsky excerpt against what he's saying about it.
> 
> ...


Thanks for sharing about this. It is interesting. I am reading about it, and it sounds like its a system that categorizes pitches into numbers that then are categorized into prime forms whose interval vectors define its sound. I just watched this YT video of someone using pitch class set to composer - 

It's interesting. Maybe it will be worth while for me to look into it. I imagine it may take some time to familiarize or become proficient with this system. Was that the case for you? Do you find yourself caught up or slowed down in some of the math involved when transposing or when you are rearranging numbers around?

Thanks again.


----------



## rmak (Feb 27, 2021)

synergy543 said:


> You could check out MITA's free course "Composition from Scratch".
> https://musicintervaltheory.academy/composition-from-scratch/?fbclid=IwAR3lycfAPTaUDUr0_Lk8e7JbqbAKI50wZt18h7cfFx0sWnMrb7DzKC-0hA0
> There is another course called "Portals" that I found very interesting that's available which you could check out with just a monthly membership trial. I just recently joined but have found MITA to be a very refreshing and valuable resource of ideas and a community of interesting composers.


I just signed up for MITA free course! Thanks for suggesting!


----------



## rmak (Mar 7, 2021)

I've been going through the MITA free course (Thanks @synergy543), and this is my progress so far in staffpad. There's a lot of new content that I learned through the free course like utilizing the pentatonic scales embedded within the lydian mode for harmony, chromatic motors in harmony, and utilizing interval pattern to guide writing the melodic line (e.g.: 1, 4, 1, 4 etc...). The track below is about a minute. I plan to do day 5 next which covers orchestration. 

I find writing the harmony a bit challenging. I am trying to write more in staffpad and not rely on piano so much. I find myself going to the keyboard to figure out what chords work by trial and error, or sometimes, I might go 3 or 4 semitones down from the melodic line as a starting point. I thought I would share in case there are any beginner considering this course. I am also open to any constructive criticism from forum members. For this piece, I am just trying to write without judging myself too much, otherwise I would never get any writing done at all! It's a work in progress; I am still figuring out the harmony for bar 15 to 25.


----------



## synergy543 (Mar 7, 2021)

Sounds great! That is a good plan to just keep writing and not be too judgemental to facilitate the learning process. It clearly working so far. It's good to learn to hear what your writing in your mind's ear and occasionally if you need, go back and get your bearings from the keyboard. JW, in one of his interviews, suddenly sings out a line in solfege (so that's how he does it). So solfege is one way to learn although I always have difficulty with non-tonal music and solfege although there are various solutions to this problem you can learn. I look forward to hearing the rest of your piece, particularly your orchestration. It's a fun little exercise that got me moving along as well (my ex. is posted in the bonus material).

Be sure to listen to Marc Bercovitz's tutorial video examples in the bonus section. This is an absolute gem! Marc shows so many different orchestration possibilities of contrast and color with just his two examples. Marc is a master orchestrator and it's an honor that he is sharing his techniques and vision with us. Have fun!


----------



## Farkle (Mar 7, 2021)

Try Hindemith's books on composition and theory; they are interval-driven, which the piece you referenced has a lot of those ideas in them. EIS does this, too, and MITA, but they're an actual "course" with instructors and weekly assignments (and rates). It might be a nice "toe dip" to start with Hindemith, investing only 40 to 50 dollars for the books, and using that as your jumping off point.

Having said that, many composers have had great success and enjoyment learning MITA and/or EIS for this type of music, so that's something to look into as well.

Mike


----------



## rmak (Mar 7, 2021)

Farkle said:


> Try Hindemith's books on composition and theory; they are interval-driven, which the piece you referenced has a lot of those ideas in them. EIS does this, too, and MITA, but they're an actual "course" with instructors and weekly assignments (and rates). It might be a nice "toe dip" to start with Hindemith, investing only 40 to 50 dollars for the books, and using that as your jumping off point.
> 
> Having said that, many composers have had great success and enjoyment learning MITA and/or EIS for this type of music, so that's something to look into as well.
> 
> Mike



I was asking someone about EIS before. I didn’t know that it was comparable to MITA. I know with EIS, you have to do it via private instruction to cover a series of books, and it is a long term commitment that is more heavily focused on composition than orchestration. The person I messaged has been taking lessons with EIS for 3 years, and he claims it has changed the way he writes dramatically. The cost also does seem higher for EIS than MITA since they charge private instruction by the hour I think. Have you done both EIS and MITA? Do you have any thoughts on how they compare? Thanks

I was also curious what kind of music you have in mind when you say “this kind of music.” Do you mean music that does not have a “pop” feel to it since things are not always diatonic with this sort of writing. Are these interval subject courses useful for all genres of music?


----------



## Farkle (Mar 8, 2021)

rmak said:


> I was asking someone about EIS before. I didn’t know that it was comparable to MITA. I know with EIS, you have to do it via private instruction to cover a series of books, and it is a long term commitment that is more heavily focused on composition than orchestration. The person I messaged has been taking lessons with EIS for 3 years, and he claims it has changed the way he writes dramatically. The cost also does seem higher for EIS than MITA since they charge private instruction by the hour I think. Have you done both EIS and MITA? Do you have any thoughts on how they compare? Thanks
> 
> I was also curious what kind of music you have in mind when you say “this kind of music.” Do you mean music that does not have a “pop” feel to it since things are not always diatonic with this sort of writing. Are these interval subject courses useful for all genres of music?


I have not done MITA, but I'm a graduate of EIS and an instructor, so i can talk about EIS. There is a thread long ago, where one of the founders of MITA discusses how MITA is different than EIS, I encourage you to check it out. Both courses do use the ideas of Intervals in their compositional format (Equal Interval System, Musical Interval Theory Academy), so there is that similarity.

Regarding "This kind of music"; I'm speaking of the piece you originally referenced in your post. (The Green Turban). The motion from an E root center to a D root center, for examples, as an intervallic, rather than tonal modulation; the opening gestures in the violin, which are derived from the intervallic contour, rather than from a scale, etc. Any music that generates its' content from intervallic strategies, rather than a modal or diatonic scalar point. 

Absolutely, these interval subject courses are useful for all types of music. I use it to write multiple different genres. Again, I was responding to your original post, where you asked "what options would I have, if I wanted to learn to write in this style?". In my opinion, Hindemith, MITA, and EIS should all be good choices, for that kind of exploration.

Mike


----------



## marco berco (Mar 9, 2021)

Farkle said:


> I have not done MITA, but I'm a graduate of EIS and an instructor, so i can talk about EIS. There is a thread long ago, where one of the founders of MITA discusses how MITA is different than EIS, I encourage you to check it out. Both courses do use the ideas of Intervals in their compositional format (Equal Interval System, Musical Interval Theory Academy), so there is that similarity.
> 
> Regarding "This kind of music"; I'm speaking of the piece you originally referenced in your post. (The Green Turban). The motion from an E root center to a D root center, for examples, as an intervallic, rather than tonal modulation; the opening gestures in the violin, which are derived from the intervallic contour, rather than from a scale, etc. Any music that generates its' content from intervallic strategies, rather than a modal or diatonic scalar point.
> 
> ...


I completely agree with Farkle. I have done both, I am a MITA Graduate and instructor and I studied EIS with the regretted David Blumberg before he passed away. Both focus on the intervals as their main program. If I remember EIS has 226 lessons or so as MITA has 56 lessons but they can't compare. 

You need more time to study on each MITA Lesson as starting from Lesson 9 you have each time to make tons of exercices and finish the work by gathering, sketching your composition and orchestrating, many times for full orchestra. 

EIS has shorter Lessons wich mostly ask you to write small little pieces for treble and bass keys, excepted for some Lessons towards the end but it was a great time studying the concept of Intervals. 

MITA is more turned about to teach you tools for mostly writing TV Shows, Cartoons, Animation Shows and Featured Movies, it is why they push hard on orchestral writing. For my graduation I was asked to write a 20 minutes Piano Concerto with a full Orchestra, but it could be another important piece. 

MITA is less expensive especially for you have far less lessons but that doesn't mean it is not as good as EIS, it is simply different and you can submit for video lessons or pay coins for one to one lessons or correction of your works. 

To conclude, as wisely said Farkle, Hindemith, MITA and EIS should all be good choices, you just need to see what are your goals, motivations and how much work you want to put in your learning in order to succeed. Try to visit the websites, ask questions here and there, and follow your intuitions.


----------



## rmak (Mar 9, 2021)

marco berco said:


> I completely agree with Farkle. I have done both, I am a MITA Graduate and instructor and I studied EIS with the regretted David Blumberg before he passed away. Both focus on the intervals as their main program. If I remember EIS has 226 lessons or so as MITA has 56 lessons but they can't compare.
> 
> You need more time to study on each MITA Lesson as starting from Lesson 9 you have each time to make tons of exercices and finish the work by gathering, sketching your composition and orchestrating, many times for full orchestra.
> 
> ...


I will probably go with MITA because it is more affordable. I enjoyed the free lesson and have read nothing negative about it on here. I am hoping the lessons included in the academy will include application of concepts similar to the free lesson; that you practice/apply as you go. I like that. There isn't too much detail as to how orchestration is covered in the outline on the website, but I imagine it'll be covered.


----------



## Markrs (Mar 9, 2021)

MITA is something I am also considering in the future. First I need to keep learning the basics, plus I have already bought loads of courses, so I need to give them a go first.


----------



## rmak (Mar 10, 2021)

Markrs said:


> MITA is something I am also considering in the future. First I need to keep learning the basics, plus I have already bought loads of courses, so I need to give them a go first.


Do it. It'll be nice to see what you get out of the course. It's nice to share progress with one another as we learn. I sometimes hate doing all this by myself.


----------



## Markrs (Mar 10, 2021)

rmak said:


> Do it. It'll be nice to see what you get out of the course. It's nice to share progress with one another as we learn. I sometimes hate doing all this by myself.


@Blackster has mentioned that they have a good community there which would be important to me. The only thing I don't like about this hobby is that it is a solo thing (obviously during a pandemic this has been a useful thing). I am use to bouncing ideas off others as a way of being creative.


----------



## Farkle (Mar 10, 2021)

rmak said:


> I will probably go with MITA because it is more affordable. I enjoyed the free lesson and have read nothing negative about it on here. I am hoping the lessons included in the academy will include application of concepts similar to the free lesson; that you practice/apply as you go. I like that. There Iisn't too much detail as to how orchestration is covered in the outline on the website, but I imagine it'll be covered.


I think MITA will be a great choice for you; from the free resources I've seen, the course seems to be laid out very well, with a lot of practical advice and strategies to compose quickly, and professionally. I've been impressed with the final products that students and graduates have presented. I think also, it being a bit "shorter" means you can run with it more quickly. But, as Marco said above, shorter doesn't mean "worse". The pieces that I've heard from MITA students are well crafted, full of emotional content, and very cool to listen to.

Honestly, the most important thing is... Write! Whatever you are studying, put it into practice!


----------



## Farkle (Mar 10, 2021)

marco berco said:


> I completely agree with Farkle. I have done both, I am a MITA Graduate and instructor and I studied EIS with the regretted David Blumberg before he passed away. Both focus on the intervals as their main program. If I remember EIS has 226 lessons or so as MITA has 56 lessons but they can't compare.
> 
> You need more time to study on each MITA Lesson as starting from Lesson 9 you have each time to make tons of exercices and finish the work by gathering, sketching your composition and orchestrating, many times for full orchestra.
> 
> ...


Ahh, I wish I had met Blumberg, he was a great composer, and apparently, a really nice guy.

Marco, that's great to hear that MITA has that targeted approach towards cinematic, orchestral composing. I think EIS is more tuned towards arrangers, although you can certainly use it to score film and television (I use it all the time). 

I like how Frank starts with triads in the free, public lessons, as I think that gives more orchestral freedom from sketch to orchestra. Also, I think he does a good job of talking about the story and emotions that a composer should be thinking of before he starts. It's clearly a well thought out program, and effective.

Long and short is, They're both great, and whichever one inspires you to compose, and gives you the tools to compose; that's the one to go with. As Spud said, "Write like Mad"!

Best,

Mike


----------



## marco berco (Mar 10, 2021)

Farkle said:


> Ahh, I wish I had met Blumberg, he was a great composer, and apparently, a really nice guy.
> 
> Marco, that's great to hear that MITA has that targeted approach towards cinematic, orchestral composing. I think EIS is more tuned towards arrangers, although you can certainly use it to score film and television (I use it all the time).
> 
> ...


Thanks Mike for your kind reply. David Blumberg was indeed a great teacher and I learnt a lot with him. 

You are right saying that EIS is more turned towards arrangers and MITA towards the film industry. 

Nevertheless there is a kind of crossfade between them and they both permit you to realize your musical goals. 

Sure you can use EIS also to write for film scoring or anything you want to write, there is no limitations, so as you can use MITA to write arrangements. They both are mostly specialized in different musical fields.

Best,

Marc


----------



## marco berco (Mar 10, 2021)

rmak said:


> I will probably go with MITA because it is more affordable. I enjoyed the free lesson and have read nothing negative about it on here. I am hoping the lessons included in the academy will include application of concepts similar to the free lesson; that you practice/apply as you go. I like that. There isn't too much detail as to how orchestration is covered in the outline on the website, but I imagine it'll be covered.


Hi rmak,

With Frank Herrlinger we actually work at the orchestration course in order to complement the composition course. We hope the course will start to be released within a month or two, perhaps sooner, but we don't want to rush and we are willing to make if efficient for our members. 

The orchestration course will be free for the members of the Academy and will cover aeras not often explained in the books. There will be many examples and also the course will provide assignments.

One good thing is the Members Community where you will be able to exchange with other members and instructors, no one is let alone and we have a nice forum managed by Ivan too. We have a Zoom meeting each first wednesday of each month. There you will be able to directly ask for questions.

From time to time we write a sketch for the members who are willing to participate in writing a little composition/orchestration they share then during another meeting and discuss about technics and tools used.

I hope you will find inside MITA what you are searching for. In case you have more questions, don't hesitate to ask, it will me our pleasure to respond to your queries;

Best,

Marc


----------



## marco berco (Mar 10, 2021)

Farkle said:


> I think MITA will be a great choice for you; from the free resources I've seen, the course seems to be laid out very well, with a lot of practical advice and strategies to compose quickly, and professionally. I've been impressed with the final products that students and graduates have presented. I think also, it being a bit "shorter" means you can run with it more quickly. But, as Marco said above, shorter doesn't mean "worse". The pieces that I've heard from MITA students are well crafted, full of emotional content, and very cool to listen to.
> 
> Honestly, the most important thing is... Write! Whatever you are studying, put it into practice!


Hi Mike,

I really like your conclusion "the most important thing is.. Write ! Whatever you are studying, put into practice !". To me, it is the only way to make it. Tom Chase Jones (TC for the friends...!) always said you have to jump in the australian swimming pool, he meant even if a baby doesn't know how to swimm, put him in the swimming pool and he will arrive to swimm in order to not to sink...

Best is starting writing even if you are not skilled at the beginning as you will get more and more experience and skills by the time. Analyzing is great but far not sufficient, no one will become a John Williams just by analysing and speaking about scores. And also exchange with other composers, this is a great way to improvements.


----------



## marco berco (Mar 10, 2021)

rmak said:


> So I came across this really cool string quartet composition on YouTube using Berlin first chair in staffpad (you'll have to click on the link to go to YouTube to view) -
> 
> I was curious about what was going on with the harmony in this piece. I posted a comment in the YouTube video to inquire about it, but I thought I would just make a thread here to see if anyone has any input on the matter. Im trying to move away from staying within one key to make things more interesting while writing and utilizing accidentals for simple mixtures, modulations, augmented chords, and other topics mentioned in the recent scoreclub subscription I had.
> 
> ...



Ricky,

It is not really easy to analyse and understand pieces written by XXth century composers as we are generally trained to react with the diatonic system of analysis. 

Their pieces (Rachmaninov, Prokofiev, Stravinsky, Holst) cannot be analysed with traditional analysis as they use the interval system instead of the diatonic one, in my humble opinion it is the reason why you are in trouble understanding their writing and I had the same issues years before.

Their works are not atonal neither, but in between I will say. The advantage is you can freely go in and out of the diatonic system with the interval Theory.

Two educational system are specialised in this concept are EIS (Equal Interval System), which is more turned toward the arranging skills and MITA (Music Interval Theory Academy), which is especially turned towards writing compositions/orchestrations for movies, animations shows, documentary, video games and cartoons.

Hoping that helps.

Best,

Marc


----------



## Markrs (Mar 10, 2021)

marco berco said:


> Ricky,
> 
> It is not really easy to analyse and understand pieces written by XXth century composers as we are generally trained to react with the diatonic system of analysis.
> 
> ...


You have been very helpful Marc, it is really appreciated. Once I get a few more basics done (I really am very much a beginner) in theory I will look at giving MITA a go as I have been impressed with the videos @Blackster has done as well as both you and Frank's very articulate and considered responses to questions.


----------



## ed buller (Mar 10, 2021)

marco berco said:


> Their pieces (Rachmaninov, Prokofiev, Stravinsky, Holst) cannot be analysed with traditional analysis as they use the interval system instead of the diatonic one, in my humble opinion it is the reason why you are in trouble understanding their writing and I had the same issues years before.


I must admit I have issue with this statement. For one it seems to suggest that the above Composers were students of this system...They were not. All of the above studied music in the traditional way. Their earliest compositions quite clearly reflect that. But they quickly attempted new techniques to their own unique voice and in the heady days of the early twentieth century started using a variety of approaches to expand their oeuvre .

Perhaps I am being unfair, but I can't help feel that the OP is being slightly led astray by the promise of a quick fix to his compositional frustration in the form of a course that will demonstrate a discipline that none of his Heroes ever used!. Indeed even now scholars argue ( sometimes at swordpoint ) over the possible approaches Igor took in the attic of his Hotel in Clarens ( whilst nursing a toothache) to dust off the Rite.

Might he not be better served by following their example and learning Traditional Harmony and Musical Composition up to the late 19th Century, then studying the various techniques found in the books already mentioned for an overview of what choices he has to pick from in the Twentieth ?

At least then he will be well grounded and like those composers would be better equipped to make the choices that separate the Great from the merely adequate ?

Just Sayin !


Best

ed


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 10, 2021)

ed buller said:


> .........Indeed even now scholars argue ( sometimes at swordpoint ) over the possible approaches Igor took in the attic of his Hotel in Clarens ( whilst nursing a toothache) to dust off the Rite.


...Whiskey ed. He kept his vessel well lubricated...


----------



## marco berco (Mar 10, 2021)

ed buller said:


> I must admit I have issue with this statement. For one it seems to suggest that the above Composers were students of this system...They were not. All of the above studied music in the traditional way. Their earliest compositions quite clearly reflect that. But they quickly attempted new techniques to their own unique voice and in the heady days of the early twentieth century started using a variety of approaches to expand their oeuvre .
> 
> Perhaps I am being unfair, but I can't help feel that the OP is being slightly led astray by the promise of a quick fix to his compositional frustration in the form of a course that will demonstrate a discipline that none of his Heroes ever used!. Indeed even now scholars argue ( sometimes at swordpoint ) over the possible approaches Igor took in the attic of his Hotel in Clarens ( whilst nursing a toothache) to dust off the Rite.
> 
> ...


Ed,

I understand your point of view but if you read my post, I never said that those great XXth Century composers studied the interval Theory.

They started their study with traditional harmony, fugue and counterpoint and their genius made them going far beyond the diatonic system; Possibly the interval theory came from them by analysing their works, who knows.

Studying Interval Theory doesn't mean you have to throw away the traditional theory, it just adds to what you know.

I know that working on the interval theory (EIS then MITA) completely changed my life after years of traditional writing (Harmony, Fugue and Counterpoint, reharmonizing Bach Choral, then Berklee for Jazz composition and arranging) but it was up to me as it is up to you to choose another path, i think one has to study or work on what he find best for him, there is no rules.

One day, a stdudent asked Igor Stravinsky how he wrote such a piece and igor responded by "I don't know".

When you have written a lot of music you don't even think about theory and tools, writing becomes a second nature.

Best,

Marc


----------



## synergy543 (Mar 10, 2021)

ed buller said:


> Perhaps I am being unfair, but I can't help feel that the OP is being slightly led astray by the promise of a quick fix to his compositional frustration in the form of a course that will demonstrate a discipline that none of his Heroes ever used!. Indeed even now scholars argue ( sometimes at swordpoint ) over the possible approaches Igor took in the attic of his Hotel in Clarens ( whilst nursing a toothache) to dust off the Rite.


Ed, I think Marc would be the last one to suggest a quick fix! One of his mottos that I've heard over and over is that "there are no shortcuts" and "you have to do the work". He himself is a graduate of the Paris Conservatoire and has spent a lifetime of study and will be the first to remind everyone of this. Although I'm studying MITA, Marc as also shared with me other extremely valuable sources of information including the Koechlin Harmony and Orchestration books from which he studied. Most MITA students are already well-versed in traditional harmony and are seeking to learn techniques that step beyond traditional theory, not unlike much of the theory material you have shared here with the forum. I think we all agree that there are no shortcut solutions with instant formulas and this is not what MITA is selling. It requires a lot of work and study and preferably some basic music skills and knowledge at least.

I'm just a MITA student so I hope this is a fair representation. If anyone who officially represents MITA disagrees, please feel free to correct me as I'm very new to this all but find it extremely interesting and the community is very supportive and enthusiastic. There is an immense amount of free materials too so anyone is free to explore that waters before diving in.


----------



## marco berco (Mar 10, 2021)

Gene Pool said:


> Who is "we"?


Gene,

When I used the word "we", it was generic as when starting to learn how to write music, one starts by traditional harmony, traditional cadences and so on.

You learn a letter, then you learn how to make a word with letters, then how to make a phrase with words and then a chater with phrases and the a book with chapters.

It is very seldom you start your musical studies with intervals as it is best to manage the traditional background first to be comfortable afterwards, but why not, everything is possible.

Best,

Marc


----------



## marco berco (Mar 10, 2021)

Markrs said:


> You have been very helpful Marc, it is really appreciated. Once I get a few more basics done (I really am very much a beginner) in theory I will look at giving MITA a go as I have been impressed with the videos @Blackster has done as well as both you and Frank's very articulate and considered responses to questions.


Thanks for your kind words Markrs. You will always find help with any of us at MITA when needed. Our goal is to push composers to improve their skills and share their works, from beginners to graduates, and providing help and support between the Academy Members.


----------



## ed buller (Mar 10, 2021)

marco berco said:


> I understand your point of view but if you read my post, I never said that those great XXth Century composers studied the interval Theory.


you said "interval system not diatonic". It supposes that it's a system that you have knowledge of and how THEY used it. THAT I dispute.

Respectfully I find it a little disingenuous to suggest that these composers where using a method that you know about and can teach. You might well have a method that you can teach, and you may well think it will make your students write music that sounds like them !....but that is just your opinion. 

best
ed


----------



## marco berco (Mar 10, 2021)

ed buller said:


> you said "interval system not diatonic". It supposes that it's a system that you have knowledge of and how THEY used it. THAT I dispute.
> 
> Respectfully I find it a little disingenuous to suggest that these composers where using a method that you know about and can teach. You might well have a method that you can teach, and you may well think it will make your students write music that sounds like them !....but that is just your opinion.
> 
> ...


Ed,

I think it is some misanderstanding here and I am sorry not being able to explain myself better. English being not my mother language I admit not being able to express as all of you guys.

I do not claim to have a truth in matter of music education or so and I will never pretend to compare with those great composers. Also I never said that these composers where using a method that I know and teach.

The purpose of MITA is to teach Interval theory directed towards film scoring, TV Shows and Animation, in complement to the diatonic system, not to be the genius of the century, so most of the work is to compose and orchestrate tons of pieces, from simple triadic pieces to complex ones, the most important is to write, write and write, no matter if you take lessons or not, there is no shortcuts than hard work anyways, being musically educated or not.

By the way I am more asked to write music than teaching, teaching is a way to transmit what you know to people who are willing to learn what you teach but nobody is perfect and will please everybody.

The best way to do IMHO, as said Gene Pool, is to let people choose what they want (or if they want) to learn or not, which whom they want to learn and find their own path. 

I just simply try to help composers who are interested by learning Interval Theory and completely understand that some are not interested in this theory they don't believe in, and without learning or using the interval Theory some composers write really great music. A friend of mine is a real genius composing nice melodies with few diatonic chords and i am pleased with what he composes.

Best,

Marc


----------



## rmak (Mar 10, 2021)

As someone in his thirties and working full time, I probably will not become a master composer, but I like to believe that with hard work, no shortcut, I ll develop the ability to write beautiful music. With the internet and forums like this, I am grateful that information is accessible. I see MITA as a potential tool to enable me to write better. I feel that some of the concepts from the free course brought new dynamics and helped drive some of the writing in the short 1 min piece I shared. I never experienced that before. I think the biggest challenge for me is to embrace the mundane and just write a lot, not expecting anything great, and in the process learn and grow. I am by no means an expert the traditional model, but I was going through the harmony modules on scoreclub. I took some notes and plan to refer back to them.

I do have some fear that all my compositions will sound atonal. Haha but I know that is not the intention or focus of MITA. One of the MITA members reached out to me to schedule a zoom meeting, so I guess that is something I can ask and talk more about. 

Thank you everyone for your feedback.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 10, 2021)

marco berco said:


> ..........
> You learn a letter, then you learn how to make a word with letters, then how to make a phrase with words and then a chater with phrases and the a book with chapters.
> 
> It is very seldom you start your musical studies with intervals as it is best to manage the traditional background first to be comfortable afterwards, but why not, everything is possible.


Marco, don't forget species counterpoint. For a complete beginner, it's as good a starting point as one can get and also happens to be intervallic in nature. So good in fact that one can consider species pedagogy as the musical equivalent to your analogy as it provides a sure footing with which to develop further.


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

It is with some heartbreak that I read through threads like this, and I find myself siding somewhat with Ed and Gene Pool in that whenever someone asks for help starting out composing (or perhaps getting out of a rut), these interval-based theories swoop to the rescue. I have listened to the example pieces of graduates of these systems, and even taught some of them -- finding that there is a great deal to repair unfortunately in those graduates, and the sound of the music has an intellectual insincerity to it -- you can hear that many of the note choices are the output of a system of thought, rather than the output of a heart.

And when I say this, which will of course cause annoyance, I say this on the following basis:

*Surely the only valid "system" for composing music is a system that results in the music sounding and feeling exactly the way the composer intended. That is: that what is deep inside your heart ends up on the page (or in the DAW). *

What the world wants and needs to hear is that which your heart is burning to hear and feel in your own music.

If even a single note is written according to some "idea", instead of because it sounds good to you in that moment of the piece, it is a wrong note.

Debussy put it brilliantly when asked by what system he composed: "mon plaisir" he replied. He writes the notes that give him pleasure when he hears them.

Any system proposed for composing music must therefore aid the composer in two ways:

1) Re-connecting with what is in their heart, if, like most composers, they are lost in thought and it has been a long time since they paid attention to what they actually want to hear and feel in the orchestra.

2) To learn exactly how to achieve those sounds and feelings in the orchestra.

Intervals are an aspect of beauty, yes. But intervals are one of many (nine aspects, in my opinion).


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> Marco, don't forget species counterpoint. For a complete beginner, it's as good a starting point as one can get and also happens to be intervallic in nature. So good in fact that one can consider species pedagogy as the musical equivalent to your analogy as it provides a sure footing with which to develop further.


mikeh,

Thanks for having mentioning this point. The MITA first 5 lessons are dealing with the line writing, which is a kind of modern counterpoint. Nevertheless there is a difference between the two even if both can be called "counterpoint", the "point" being the melody and the "counter" the counter-melody...

When working on traditional counterpoint you work in a tonality with a key and you join diatonic chords by the mean of lines and counterlines following strict guidelines. With MITA you write lines independantly of a tonality or chord progressions, you work with full modes and it is those created notes with encounters which draw the musical spots you want to highlight by melodies and countermelodies.

But you had a wise idea to point out this "counterpoint"-"line writing" as it is as an important part of the music and better is to know it if possible.

Best,

Marc


----------



## ed buller (Mar 11, 2021)

You mention Guitar Center so I'm assuming you are based in the US. I'd recommend finding a tutor. They are so many of them and it's perfectly ok for you to spend time picking the right person. That person should be familiar with Bach to Bartok and love both. Deal Breaker !. They should also be someone that really makes a positive impression on you. Trust your gut. Litmus test is , Do i want to be as aware of my musical choices as this person is of theirs and do I like them enough to a give them my money and spend a lot of time with them. Carefully chosen, this person WILL change your life. I got my version of this person at a late age 36, In San Francisco. He was teacher of a friend of mine the , the tech at the studio I made records at in Sausalito . His name was David Conte and he literally changed my life. Does he know all I need to know ?...Nope. Have since branched out and picked up new tutors, One if which posted above. Leon Willett. Taught me heaps !!!...Highly recommended. But I will go out on a limb , and truly no disrespect to the fine people of MITA, suggest passionately that you find a local tutor.

best

ed


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> It is with some heartbreak that I read through threads like this, and I find myself siding somewhat with Ed and Gene Pool in that whenever someone asks for help starting out composing (or perhaps getting out of a rut), these interval-based theories swoop to the rescue. I have listened to the example pieces of graduates of these systems, and even taught some of them -- finding that there is a great deal to repair unfortunately in those graduates, and the sound of the music has an intellectual insincerity to it -- you can hear that many of the note choices are the output of a system of thought, rather than the output of a heart.
> 
> And when I say this, which will of course cause annoyance, I say this on the following basis:
> 
> ...


Leon,

You pointed out interesting things about composition to discuss about.

To determine the border between a music composed with the heart rather than with an output system is a really big subject and i am afraid never finding an end to it.

For example, when using a simple "AABA" form is already an output from the system. The ear liking the repetition of a musical fragment, (but not with exageration), the human being will have a tendancy to naturallu use this system.

But in any system taught since the beginning (diatonic theory, interval theory, atonal theory, including the 12 rows which is an output system too and so on), there will always be individuals working more with their heads and some with their heart.

That being said, one cannot said at 100% that a guy as no heart, as generally a composition is a mix of your personnal feelings (and heart) and the use of the tools you learnt and practiced and it is seldom you can make the right ratio heart/output system. Tools and musical education is only the mean to deliver you from being stuck by the technic, in a word, to bring you freedom in your writing.

It is normal at the beginning of your studies that you feel prisoneer of the technics and tools you learn, but by working hard writing pieces and as the time goes by you are starting feeling more and more freedom.

By the way, I agree with you saying interval are a beauty, but only one among manies and i am happy with that. The interval theory gives you the tools to go in and out from this system and in a same piece you can go from diatonic, triads, atonal, in between and so on. In my particular case and after 60 years of hard professional work on music (excepted at 5 years old naturally...) I found my musical freedom from this "system output" as you call it. But your case and the case of others can be different.

To put everybody in a same room is a bit insane, that would mean that everybody who studied at Berklee is the son of an output system, same for the traditional studies, EIS and MITA and some others.

There is wonderful music written in every system and also with no system at all and I think it is not wise to oppose music written with your heart and written with no heart, for me it is a non-sense and means nothing, the most important is the result, are you happy with it or no. Let us composer choosing their own path, that's the most important. Only you know what you think is the best for you.

I am sure you are writing great music, so as Farkle here who is an EIS graduate.

Best,

Marc


----------



## GNP (Mar 11, 2021)

Learn the rules of counterpoint, particularly during the Bach era. It's really useful. Then as you familiarize yourself with those rules, you can break them according to your tastes.


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

GNP said:


> Learn the rules of counterpoint, particularly during the Bach era. It's really useful. Then as you familiarize yourself with those rules, you can break them according to your tastes.


I agree with you GNP, counterpoint and line writing are the foundations for who intends to master the composition (It doesn’t matter whether it’s with the help of a professor or not, the most important is to make it). 

I will add: learn harmony, Jazz, and everything you can learn in your whole life and be curious to learn from other composers too, at any level. To be an eternal student seems to be the key of impoving our skills; Charlie Chaplin once said: "Whe are all amateurs, it can't be otherwise as the life is too short to fully master our art".

Best,

Marc


----------



## sinkd (Mar 11, 2021)

rmak said:


> So I came across this really cool string quartet composition on YouTube using Berlin first chair in staffpad (you'll have to click on the link to go to YouTube to view) -
> 
> I was curious about what was going on with the harmony in this piece. I posted a comment in the YouTube video to inquire about it, but I thought I would just make a thread here to see if anyone has any input on the matter. Im trying to move away from staying within one key to make things more interesting while writing and utilizing accidentals for simple mixtures, modulations, augmented chords, and other topics mentioned in the recent scoreclub subscription I had.
> 
> ...



I'm a little surprised that so much of the music theoretical advice in response has been geared towards interval theory. The harmonic and melodic language of this piece seems to me to be more about alternating modalities (like the E minor/D minor relationship you mention) and extensions of tertian (triads/seventh chord) harmonies. Lots of it feels like it is in a key and could be analyzed with respect to extended functional harmony.


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

marco berco said:


> when using a simple "AABA" form is already an output from the system. The ear liking the repetition of a musical fragment, (but not with exaggeration), the human being will have a tendency to naturally use this system.


I would suggest that sincerely wanting to reprise a musical idea... is the only "system" you need. No AABA notion is necessary if you are following your heart. The danger here is to autopilot an AABA form and to release music into the world that does not reflect your heart. 



marco berco said:


> But in any system taught since the beginning (diatonic theory, interval theory, atonal theory, including the 12 rows which is an output system too and so on), there will always be individuals working more with their heads and some with their heart.


Yes! And I would suggest that all of the head-based music is bad music. 

I would define good music as: "a sincere reflection of what the composer had inside them". A window into that person. 

I would define bad music as: everything else.



marco berco said:


> There is wonderful music written in every system and also with no system at all and I think it is not wise to oppose music written with your heart and written with no heart, for me it is a non-sense and means nothing, the most important is the result, are you happy with it or no.


I would suggest that a system has never generated wonderful music, except perhaps by accident  

Or, perhaps more accurately, I would suggest that the only valid system is that which enables the intact translation of the composer's heart onto the page (or the DAW).


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 11, 2021)

I venture that a good, mutually beneficial synergy between heart and mind is actually a desirable compositional state and one that retains control whilst allowing for fantasy. The "sincere reflection within a composer" needs a vehicle, an outlet for comprehension and that ideally imv, should include formal/technical procedures and set-ups with which to play and rub up against. OK I'm not talking about film music so much.


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

As long as not a single note is put on the page for any other reason than how it sounds or feels. 

If we find ourselves looking for (or worse: believing in) a reason to write a note that is outside of our desires, we are in deep trouble.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 11, 2021)

I believe an important part of composing is inevitability and that is induced and managed by more than the heart alone imv.
I would add that technique and music are not mutually exclusive, they need each other especially at a foundational level. Even more so at the fantastical, imaginative level. Technique is a major part of the compositional process that brings about a successful realisation of inner fantasy and should be manipulated with flair and especially invention, to eke out the best potential in a piece.


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> I would suggest that sincerely wanting to reprise a musical idea... is the only "system" you need. No AABA notion is necessary if you are following your heart. The danger here is to autopilot an AABA form and to release music into the world that does not reflect your heart.
> 
> 
> Yes! And I would suggest that all of the head-based music is bad music.
> ...


Leon,

It is nice and fine to debate with you about what is a good music or not, but I don't agree with you concerning the fact as the good music is written with the heart and bad music is written with the head.

First of all, no one can be judge of what is written with the heart and what is written with the head as often the border between those considerations is really thin and I admire you if you are able to say that a composer used 37% of his head and 63% of his heart to write a piece and vice versa and at any percentage. 

If we follow your point of view, then only composers who never studied how to write music are writing with their heart and produce good music, the others being disqualified because they studied the music which open you to writing kind of systems (nevertheless I agree with you concerning the AABA form which is a form among so many... but would you say that Miles Davis (and many great others) did not compose with his heart, knowing he used a lot of AABA forms which were the most used at a time. His genius was in his great ability to turn the form at his advantage with genius melodic and rhythmic ideas applied to this form.

I think that "good" music is the only one that sounds good and "bad" music is simply one which sounds bad, whatever tools, technics, inspiration or perspiration you used to obtain your goals. The only judge is the result, not a meeting of self-satisfied composers which will judge how the music was written as the Graal. As long as the music sounds good and please part of an audience, who cares about how you composed it ?

Also, don't forget that a music which sounds "good" or "bad" is not really objective as some music will sound good for the ears of some and bad for others, no one can please everybody.

I think we should be more open minded and avoiding to judge others from our own considerations.

Best,

Marc


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> I believe an important part of composing is inevitability and that is induced and managed by more than the heart alone imv.
> I would add that technique and music are not mutually exclusive, they need each other especially at a foundational level. Even more so at the fantastical, imaginative level. Technique is a major part of the compositional process that brings about a successful realisation of inner fantasy and should be manipulated with flair and especially invention, to eke out the best potential in a piece.


If “technique” is that knowledge which enables you to make the music sound the way your heart desires, then we agree! But most use technique in order to write notes on the page without consulting with the heart at all.

Also, I believe that “inevitability” is a ghost concept that you can just replace with “what the heart desires to hear”.

I am assuming you mean “inevitability” as in music flowing forward naturally.

But when you really look at it, the heart wants surprises sometimes, and inevitable flow other times. So in the end, inevitability is under the umbrella “heart”.

It may seem like a semantic argument, but it’s not. Any claim that the brain (or a system) can know better than the heart needs examination — and I’m claiming that there can never be a case where this is true.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> If “technique” is that knowledge which enables you to make the music sound the way your heart desires, then we agree! But most use technique in order to write notes on the page without consulting with the heart at all.
> 
> Also, I believe that “inevitability” is a ghost concept that you can just replace with “what the heart desires to hear”.
> 
> ...


Remember technique is also a search tool to eke out implications in material. Of course you go hunting with inventive approaches to technical procedures but will only settle on the finds that resonate with your aesthetics. When material is found, it will suggest more directions and so on.

Using technique as I implied above, does not exclude inspiration nor surprises neither, it actually encourages them when used with the correct mindset and openness. Technical issues are there to support the music.
The trick as we know is to make sure the music speaks/sings first of all, the rest is under the hood so to speak for most of the time so far as the listener is concerned, but that inner working is of vital importance and its contribution should be understood, mastered and exploited in order to write well....


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> I believe an important part of composing is inevitability and that is induced and managed by more than the heart alone imv.
> I would add that technique and music are not mutually exclusive, they need each other especially at a foundational level. Even more so at the fantastical, imaginative level. Technique is a major part of the compositional process that brings about a successful realisation of inner fantasy and should be manipulated with flair and especially invention, to eke out the best potential in a piece.


I completely agree with you mikeh. Technique and inspiration cannot be separated to my humble opinion; Tchnique and tools are just means turned toward helping you to improve your writing skills and doesn't destroy your inspiration. The struggle between composing with the heart or with the head is an endless debate and for me is too much esoteric and not enough practical.

Best,

Marc


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> If “technique” is that knowledge which enables you to make the music sound the way your heart desires, then we agree! But most use technique in order to write notes on the page without consulting with the heart at all.
> 
> Also, I believe that “inevitability” is a ghost concept that you can just replace with “what the heart desires to hear”.
> 
> ...


Leon,

I agree with you on the fact that some use technique only in order to fill pages, but I saw that mostly when people are studying and do their homeworks, especially when at a lever level of studies, but at the end, and with experience those writers seems to rely more and more to what their heart dictates, as you said.

Best,

Marc


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

marco berco said:


> It is nice and fine to debate with you about what is a good music or not, but I don't agree with you concerning the fact as the good music is written with the heart and bad music is written with the head.


OK, but to be clear, I really am claiming this! 


marco berco said:


> First of all, no one can be judge of what is written with the heart and what is written with the head as often the border between those considerations is really thin and I admire you if you are able to say that a composer used 37% of his head and 63% of his heart to write a piece and vice versa and at any percentage.


I believe people can tell when music is sincere, and also when it was "telephoned" in using some system, in an absence of consultation with the heart.


marco berco said:


> If we follow your point of view, then only composers who never studied how to write music are writing with their heart and produce good music, the others being disqualified because they studied the music which open you to writing kind of systems (nevertheless I agree with you concerning the AABA form which is a form among so many... but would you say that Miles Davis (and many great others) did not compose with his heart, knowing he used a lot of AABA forms which were the most used at a time. His genius was in his great ability to turn the form at his advantage with genius melodic and rhythmic ideas applied to this form.


No, no! This is a total misunderstanding of what I said. 

I believe almost everyone should study music because without studies, it is usually very difficult for a person to get their heart onto the page accurately.

I also believe Miles meant every note he played (from the heart). At least on a good day.

But I am criticising any composing system who's sole goal is not an accurate putting of the heart onto the page. Which I believe is extremely hard to argue against reasonably.

If a composing system helps a composer be sensitive about how it feels to reprise a musical idea, great! But if a composing system claims that AABA is somehow intrinsically valuable (even if, perhaps, in this case the composer does not truly desire to repeat the A...), I am claiming that this system does damage to the poor composer. Such a system would be a sort of appeal to authority.




marco berco said:


> I think that "good" music is the only one that sounds good and "bad" music is simply one which sounds bad, whatever tools, technics, inspiration or perspiration you used to obtain your goals. The only judge is the result, not a meeting of self-satisfied composers which will judge how the music was written as the Graal. As long as the music sounds good and please part of an audience, who cares about how you composed it ?


I am suggesting that the only ultimate judge of the music can be the composer themselves, since indeed you can't aspire to please anyone else. Your music is a window into your heart -- and some will like it, some will not.

But to compose something you didn't even mean in the first place. This is what I am proposing is wrong. And if a system pushes someone in that direction, in my opinion: run.



marco berco said:


> Also, don't forget that a music which sounds "good" or "bad" is not really objective as some music will sound good for the ears of some and bad for others, no one can please everybody.


We agree -- we can only in the end, write that which reflects our own heart. Some will like it, some will not.


marco berco said:


> I think we should be more open minded and avoiding to judge others from our own considerations.


Agreed. But who is closed minded here? I am suggesting that a system that pressures a composer in any direction is necessarily bad, and that only "how it sounds" is the ultimate goal. I am arguing against any intrinsic value being attributed to academic thinking, and reminding the world: we want to hear what is in your heart, please.


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

marco berco said:


> As long as the music sounds good and please part of an audience


Imagine 100% of humans hated Beethoven 5. 

But Beethoven himself was satisfied. He put down what he meant. 

I would suggest this is all that matters.


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> Imagine 100% of humans hated Beethoven 5.
> 
> But Beethoven himself was satisfied. He put down what he meant.
> 
> I would suggest this is all that matters.


Totally agree, excepted when working for a client... he has to like your work otherwise you get fired, but that’s another story, far beyond the head and hearth debate.


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

Yes yes, agreed


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 11, 2021)

.....the most fruitful and potent works, certainly in concert/art music rely on some forms of restraint. Restraint induces invention out of necessity, resulting more often than not in great music. It is sometimes with the parameters of the restraint that we can glimpse the personality of a composer.

I am unconvinced that people can tell the difference between heart and system in the general scheme of things. It is more likely that people will either like something or not and there is no reason to doubt that because a piece has technical merit or was generated as such, the composer was impervious to its emotional effect or the music is any less effective for being written in such a way.


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> I am unconvinced that people can tell the difference between heart and system in the general scheme of things. It is more likely that people will either like something or not.


OK I am open to be wrong about this. But if I had to bet, at the moment at least, I would still bet on musical insincerity being detectable by everyone. 



mikeh-375 said:


> .....the most fruitful and potent works, certainly in concert/art music rely on some forms of restraint. Restraint induces invention resulting in great music. It is sometimes with the parameters of the restraint that we can glimpse the personality of a composer.


But wouldn't that restraint be pleasurable to the heart? Restraint sounds great! Would it not still fall under "heart" then? Can we really find something that outputs notes onto the page which sound good, and which is not ultimately the heart?


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> OK I am open to be wrong about this. But if I had to bet, at the moment at least, I would still bet on musical insincerity being detectable by everyone.
> 
> 
> But wouldn't that restraint be pleasurable to the heart? Restraint sounds great! Would it not still fall under "heart" then? Can we really find something that outputs notes onto the page which sound good, and which is not ultimately the heart?


I think we just disagree about the 'Heart' as a descriptor here Leon. I understand the sentiment of course but would prefer to use the term aesthetics especially given the subjectivity we apply to preferences in music.
I imagine you in a silk dressing gown in a scented parlour... 

Out of interest, how do you assess someone like Schoenberg, Webern or Boulez when it comes to insincerity or heart?


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> I think we just disagree about the 'Heart' as a descriptor here Leon.


I think you are right!



mikeh-375 said:


> How do you assess someone like Schoenberg, Webern or Boulez when it comes to insincerity?


I don't know Boulez's works well, but I experience both Schoenberg and Webern as 100% sincere. Like I am listening directly to their soul.

But I believe it was a silly mistake of Schoenberg to feel the need to invent serialism and tiptoe around that system, since he already had those sounds and feelings inside him, as we can see in his free atonal period. In my opinion, he simply caved in to an OCD "need" for order and academic justification.

So, in my opinion Schoenberg and Webern sound sincere and amazing DESPITE the silly system they ended up inventing.

A bit like winning a war where someone decides that everyone has to do it standing only on their left foot. We won the war, but did we really to hop our way there? Could we just walk?


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> .....the most fruitful and potent works, certainly in concert/art music rely on some forms of restraint. Restraint induces invention out of necessity, resulting more often than not in great music. It is sometimes with the parameters of the restraint that we can glimpse the personality of a composer.
> 
> I am unconvinced that people can tell the difference between heart and system in the general scheme of things. It is more likely that people will either like something or not and there is no reason to doubt that because a piece has technical merit or was generated as such, the composer was impervious to its emotional effect or the music is any less effective for being written in such a way.


Mike,

You completely reflected my thoughts but you expressed them in a more elegant way. Indeed, technique and heart are intimately intermingled and connected and it is hard to detect any percentage for one or the other in a composition. Sometimes technique is coming to the rescue of a failing inspiration at some spots during the writing of a piece and put you again on the right way to a new inspiration.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> I think you are right!
> 
> 
> I don't know Boulez's works well, but I experience both Schoenberg and Webern as 100% sincere. Like I am listening directly to their soul.
> ...


Schoenberg did indeed feel atonality prior to formalising it but there is an interesting point here that relates to technique and its purpose. I worry that you think it was a need for academic justification that led him to devise his system. Atonality needs control.
I have tried to counter, far to many times in this forum and probably with little success, the mistaken belief that technique somehow harms ones expression, or makes one write like Bach or Bartok, or is somehow detrimental to the resulting music. This is honestly not the case. Technique ironically frees the mind and allows it to soar, knowing that a firm foundation of experience and knowledge gained with practice underpins and supports even the wildest moments - it can enable them because you know how to do it, or you can see a way to make things intelligible.
Schoenberg knew this as do all good composers and his formalising the system at the fundamental level he did, was to ensure he could carry on writing as before. Why, because technique is fundamental and vital to the work in hand and cross-fertilises and informs the creative impulse....well that and the fact that he wanted the great German musical hegemony to continue....


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> I think you are right!
> 
> 
> I don't know Boulez's works well, but I experience both Schoenberg and Webern as 100% sincere. Like I am listening directly to their soul.
> ...


I have seldom seen insincere composers during my life, each one of them trying to write the music he liked or was skilled to compose to the best he could. Nevertheless you will find insincere composers, but I mostly found them inside those who did not know much about music but wanted to appear as great composers and used ghost writers to satisfy their ego or their wallet... or both !


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 11, 2021)

marco berco said:


> Mike,
> 
> You completely reflected my thoughts but you expressed them in a more elegant way. Indeed, technique and heart are intimately intermingled and connected and it is hard to detect any percentage for one or the other in a composition. Sometimes technique is coming to the rescue of a failing inspiration at some spots during the writing of a piece and put you again on the right way to a new inspiration.


indeed. some composers have admitted to "workman like" passages in well known works. And let's face it, a work can never be 100% inspiration. At some point in a piece, I also like to hear development of ideas too that lead on to newer fields and more inspired moments.


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> Schoenberg did indeed feel atonality prior to formalising it but there is an interesting point here that relates to technique and its purpose. I worry that you think it was a need for academic justification that led him to devise his system.
> I have tried to counter, far to many times in this forum and probably with little success, the mistaken belief that technique somehow harms ones expression, or makes one write like Bach or Bartok, or is somehow detrimental to the resulting music. This is honestly not the case. Technique ironically frees the mind and allows it to soar, knowing that a firm foundation of experience and knowledge gained with practice underpins and supports even the wildest moments - it can enable them because you know how to do it, or you can see a way to make things intelligible.
> Schoenberg knew this as do all great composers and his formalising the system at the fundamental level he did, was to ensure he could carry on writing as before. Why, because technique is fundamental and vital to the work in hand and cross-fertilises and informs the creative impulse.


Mike, it is really and exactly what I tried to expain but you did well carefully and completely with a few phrases explaining this mistaken belief and stupid struggle concerning the technique which destroy inspiration, perhaps is it an excuse for some not having seriously studying and providing hard work, who knows...


----------



## Leon Willett (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> his formalising the system at the fundamental level he did, was to ensure he could carry on writing as before.


My suggestion is that there is some deeply wrong thinking going on here. He invented a system so that he could keep on going as before? If he wanted to keep going, then why a need for the system? 

We composers (Schoenberg included) suffer from a tendency to offload the responsibility for courageously and vulnerably choosing our own notes onto a system of one kind or another. And this tendency must be fought against. 

I can agree with both of you on one point: some systems can cause you to discover something you like, and then keep it. But that's really as far as I can go attributing value to one of these systems. And this is fairly easily replaced by just trying stuff at the piano until you like what you hear. 

For example, if a system suggests that equal intervals are in some way better than un-equal ones, we have a problem. What if someone enjoys the sound of an interval that is unequal to another? 

If a system (serialism, for example) suggests that once a row is started you have to emit all the remaining pitches in that row (whether or not the poor composer feels it sounds or feels good), we have another problem. What if the composer would rather the poor oboe stop here, and skip the remaining six pitches? 

When you really look under the microscope, all systems that prescribe a particular note over another, in a particular order, appear ridiculous. 

I'm not arguing against music education. I am a teacher! What I am claiming is that music education needs reforming, with this in mind: "the only thing that matters is that the music sounds and feels the way the composer intends". I support this particular teaching system, and in fact... I teach it! All prescriptive systems necessarily must be off the table, perhaps with the exception of being viewed as exploration tools -- but I have my worries there. 

I'm very happy to just agree to disagree!  Just please mean every note. The world needs the beauty that you carry inside.


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

mikeh-375 said:


> Schoenberg did indeed feel atonality prior to formalising it but there is an interesting point here that relates to technique and its purpose. I worry that you think it was a need for academic justification that led him to devise his system. Atonality needs control.
> I have tried to counter, far to many times in this forum and probably with little success, the mistaken belief that technique somehow harms ones expression, or makes one write like Bach or Bartok, or is somehow detrimental to the resulting music. This is honestly not the case. Technique ironically frees the mind and allows it to soar, knowing that a firm foundation of experience and knowledge gained with practice underpins and supports even the wildest moments - it can enable them because you know how to do it, or you can see a way to make things intelligible.
> Schoenberg knew this as do all good composers and his formalising the system at the fundamental level he did, was to ensure he could carry on writing as before. Why, because technique is fundamental and vital to the work in hand and cross-fertilises and informs the creative impulse....well that and the fact that he wanted the great German musical hegemony to continue....


Mike, I completely agree with you, to counter ideas which are often false is a difficult task. By the way, I think if I was being able to write music like Bach or Bartok it would feel greatly honoured...


----------



## GNP (Mar 11, 2021)

Leon Willett said:


> If “technique” is that knowledge which enables you to make the music sound the way your heart desires, then we agree! But most use technique in order to write notes on the page without consulting with the heart at all.
> 
> Also, I believe that “inevitability” is a ghost concept that you can just replace with “what the heart desires to hear”.
> 
> ...


Totally agree.

Techniques are there to simply assist, *not to just fill pages*. They are not the bane of the composer's being. I never understood those who write music only by decoding techniques - it's too left-brained for me to bear.

Yes, I have been inspired by crazy nuts like Ornette Coleman. But a simple heartfelt tune can also make me cry. And that's why I do what I do. To make people scream in fear, fly like nobody's watching, fall in love like no other, sacrifice like no other. Now, suddenly somebody comes up and says, "hey check it out, circle of 5ths! the overtone series!"........it's like kind of a buzzkill, as much as interested as I am to master those things. lol.

Also, there seems to be a "quantity" obsession to prove how "hardworking" one is as a composer (or any other field, for that matter). Well, hard work is useless without the heart and a sense of efficiency.

I tend to believe those who are reducing their workload more, because *it shows that they're actually really into it*. Those who are just blindly "working" are like........uhhhhh.........


----------



## rmak (Mar 11, 2021)

ed buller said:


> You mention Guitar Center so I'm assuming you are based in the US. I'd recommend finding a tutor. They are so many of them and it's perfectly ok for you to spend time picking the right person. That person should be familiar with Bach to Bartok and love both. Deal Breaker !. They should also be someone that really makes a positive impression on you. Trust your gut. Litmus test is , Do i want to be as aware of my musical choices as this person is of theirs and do I like them enough to a give them my money and spend a lot of time with them. Carefully chosen, this person WILL change your life. I got my version of this person at a late age 36, In San Francisco. He was teacher of a friend of mine the , the tech at the studio I made records at in Sausalito . His name was David Conte and he literally changed my life. Does he know all I need to know ?...Nope. Have since branched out and picked up new tutors, One if which posted above. Leon Willett. Taught me heaps !!!...Highly recommended. But I will go out on a limb , and truly no disrespect to the fine people of MITA, suggest passionately that you find a local tutor.
> 
> best
> 
> ed



I m currently living in Sacramento area. I grew up in San Francisco! I haven’t had much luck finding a tutor locally maybe I am looking in the wrong places.


----------



## ed buller (Mar 11, 2021)

Well it’s a schlep but I can’t recommend the good -expletive at the San Francisco Conservatory of music enough. There maybe an ex alumni from Sacramento who could teach you locally. I’d suggest you contact them ASAP .
best

ed


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 11, 2021)

Serialism is not as proscriptive as you seem to think it is Leon. Systems and/or technique do not hinder expression, they are there to assist, enable and clarify it. They are also there to be broken and many a piece will have started off one way and ended another. Surely music always sounds as the composer meant it irrespective of technical systems and techniques, why wouldn't it, unless you think that there is a disconnect between aesthetics, expression and the means of achieving them. No note goes on the score that isn't meant to be there with great composers and anyone who is sincere.

There is of course nothing wrong with the way you are teaching and it will be enough for many but if a student wants to write concert/art music, (like perhaps John Williams), they must have a different attitude to how they learn, assimilate and especially use technical procedures because refinement in that genre does not come from simply playing stuff at the piano. William's music for example, is informed by his superb technique in almost every bar and it is that know-how that gives him a wide ranging freedom of expression.

No need for arguments here though Leon, so we'll just disagree about some of this...keep writing.


----------



## BaSsDuDe (Mar 11, 2021)

I have read most of what people have posted.

Being properly educated in harmony, counterpoint, orchestration and arranging is never a lost cause in music. The only limitations are those we place upon ourselves.

Some people will say you can dissect a piece and work out in entirety what the composer/arranger intended and others may not. Harmonically, rhythmically and in scale association, you certainly can.
After forty years of doing this as a professional, I do not believe there is one way to do anything.
A seasoned composer, writer, arranger/orchestrator and performer will most often write or play what they hear regularly intermingled with how they feel at that point in time.
Sure, they can write theoretically and sometimes it can sound great, especially if it is a paid and expedient job but more often, if they care about it artistically, they won't do it only that way.

That said, you cannot beat a great tutor or person willing to share their knowledge whether in paid lessons or otherwise. In order to break any rules we must first understand what we are breaking.
When someone speaks only diatonically, sorry, that's extremely limiting in advanced composition. That is like putting everything into a square box. There are so many scales, composition methods, techniques, polyrhythmic and atonal methods and more these days, all with countless harmonic/chordal/rhythymic equivalents. Using diatonic is the foundation only and being clear, a good and solid foundation as only a starting point for perhaps the first decade. some people never get out of that limitation whether through refusal or inability sadly. Stretching past that is removing the boundaries and there are no boundaries to art. Charlie Parker is reputed to have said something like that.

So get it from a teacher or the Internet, either way it is certainly feasible for anyone. Just make sure you get it from someone who has done the hard yards.
Cheers


----------



## GNP (Mar 11, 2021)

BaSsDuDe said:


> I have read most of what people have posted.
> 
> Being properly educated in harmony, counterpoint, orchestration and arranging is never a lost cause in music. The only limitations are those we place upon ourselves.
> 
> ...


I do believe in breaking the boundaries in art. However, I also believe art is not just solely about that objective, otherwise, might as well do rocket science, why music? Quite the conundrum....


----------



## b_elliott (Mar 11, 2021)

rmak said:


> I was curious about what was going on with the harmony in this piece. I posted a comment in the YouTube video to inquire about it, but I thought I would just make a thread here to see if anyone has any input on the matter. Im trying to move away from staying within one key to make things more interesting while writing and utilizing accidentals for simple mixtures, modulations, augmented chords, and other topics mentioned in the recent scoreclub subscription I had.


A lot of great advice from all above. 

Back to the OP and this piece. I just re-listened to The Green Turban (a reference to Khidr?) for a 2nd time and watched the score as it was performed. 

IMO the composer has digested Frank Zappa to a high level. Especially the funky rhythmic sequences @ 1:09. FZ could write this riff. He wrote a ton of stuff in 3/4, had a mastery of rhythm and harmony outside of I-IV-V. I like the intervals E - G with D# below. Different color. 

The amount of time changes shown on the score really lends to a lovely rubato feel but would take a Kronos level SQ to pull this off live. 

I don't need to tell you that FZ never saw the inside of any music academy let alone EIS, MITA, but dunno about reading books such as what @Gene Pool mentions. He certainly listened to the masters like Stravinsky, Varese; but, then he did his own take to the endearment of millions. 

My 2-cent approach (while you/me search for a teacher): work out 3 or more phrases that mimic this style. Draw from rhythmic sources that intrigue you. Match the form del Rosario(?) uses ABA expressive-funky-expressive. My guess: You might surprise yourself since you already resonate strongly. 

One last thing now that I think of it: in some wisdom systems it is suggested the teacher will show up when the student is ready. Meanwhile, keep on composing as @Farkle points out. Cheers,


----------



## youngpokie (Mar 11, 2021)

BaSsDuDe said:


> When someone speaks only diatonically, sorry, that's extremely limiting in advanced composition. That is like putting everything into a square box. There are so many scales, composition methods, techniques, polyrhythmic and atonal methods and more these days, all with countless harmonic/chordal/rhythymic equivalents. Using diatonic is the foundation only and being clear, a good and solid foundation as only a starting point for perhaps the first decade. some people never get out of that limitation whether through refusal or inability sadly.


I am wondering if it is possible to make this paragraph more arrogant, dismissive and patronizing, and I'm not sure...


----------



## rmak (Mar 11, 2021)

b_elliott said:


> A lot of great advice from all above.
> 
> Back to the OP and this piece. I just re-listened to The Green Turban (a reference to Khidr?) for a 2nd time and watched the score as it was performed.
> 
> ...


That's a good idea. I plan to join MITA today probably and see if I can do a bit more writing in conjunction to what's taught in the lesson. I can see from this thread that the discussions can get real deep! Sometimes it's hard to pick what resource to go to for learning. For me, I just want to jump in and if it doesn't work, try to move on to something else. And maybe it's not a matter of working or not working; maybe I haven't discovered or learned enough concepts and principles to pair with what I am currently learning or have learned.


----------



## synergy543 (Mar 11, 2021)

A whirlwind of great ideas and opinions in this thread. The OP expressed concern about his writing sounding atonal with MITA, but musical interval theory is just a toolset that one can use to compose and nothing more. It's not a cult or a devious method that turns you into a cookie-cutter composer, nor does it keep you from writing from the heart. Interval theory is just a method that gives you various tools to work with to allow you to write outside of the diatonic system if you wish, but of course, you can write diatonically if you want to. As people are learning new skills though, it does make sense to be imitative, and you see this even among masters such as James Horner or John Williams. In that sense, we are all still students learning from one another as well as from masters of the past.

For me though, MITA also offers something else of interest, and that is a supportive community that encourages each member to try new ideas and to experiment and learn. MITA is a very fertile ground for composers of all levels to learn new methods and share thoughts and ideas and get feedback and positive support from others. So while there are many different ways to learn and compose, MITA is also a very conducive environment in which to do so, which is helping me to get into gear writing and learning all sorts of new ideas on composing and orchestrating. However you choose to do so, learning and writing with new skills is an inspiring way to move forward as a composer.


----------



## b_elliott (Mar 11, 2021)

rmak said:


> That's a good idea. I plan to join MITA today probably and see if I can do a bit more writing in conjunction to what's taught in the lesson. I can see from this thread that the discussions can get real deep! Sometimes it's hard to pick what resource to go to for learning. For me, I just want to jump in and if it doesn't work, try to move on to something else. And maybe it's not a matter of working or not working; maybe I haven't discovered or learned enough concepts and principles to pair with what I am currently learning or have learned.


Sounds like a plan. Do me (& other vi members) a favor: post your stuff so we can hear your progress. It could inspire a hold-out like me! Best, B


----------



## BaSsDuDe (Mar 11, 2021)

youngpokie said:


> I am wondering if it is possible to make this paragraph more arrogant, dismissive and patronizing, and I'm not sure...


It's not arrogant or dismissive.
If a person has been doing harmony for Big Bands and Orchestras for decades and creating music in Art for Art's sake, diatonic is not a guiding force, the creativity is.
I was not intending to be arrogant, just truthful as most of the people I work with think the same.


----------



## BaSsDuDe (Mar 11, 2021)

GNP said:


> I do believe in breaking the boundaries in art. However, I also believe art is not just solely about that objective, otherwise, might as well do rocket science, why music? Quite the conundrum...


Look at music over centuries. The reference points people aspire to whether Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Basie, Ellington, Gil Evans, Stravinsky, Parker, Coltrane, Jaco, Hendrix and too many to list.... they all were unique.

Copying what exists is fabulous for any musician as an influence point. copying without trying to find anything new is not what enables music to move forward. Trying new things and breaking boundaries and combinations of styles or concepts does.


----------



## rmak (Mar 11, 2021)

Does anyone know how much the coins cost in MITA? It looks like it s a 100 coins per lesson in the composition module, and you accumulate 50 coins per month... I just noticed the coin system... haha

These are some of the modules included with the monthly membership

1-min. Music Theory | 19 Lessons | 19min.

19 Lessons | 19min.

Interval Theory Basic Course | 9 Lessons | 2h 40min.

The Application of Negative Harmony - Part 1 | 9 Lessons - 1h 12min.

Efficiency Booster - The 3-Step Process | 1h 20min.

MITA Counterpoint - Structured Line Writing | 1 hour

The OTS Modes I - Theory & The Application | 2h 7min.

The OTS Modes II - Polytonality & Pivot Points | 2h 6min.

String Theory I - Composing with Lines | 3 hours

String Theory II - Applied to the OTS Modes | 1h 8min.

The Portals Workshop | 5-Day Workshop | 3h 33min.

Interval Theory Blues Guitar | 127 Lessons | 2h 17min.

Interval Theory Pentatonic Live Composition | 8h 32min.
Maybe I'll wait until my zoom call with MITA is done tomorrow before joining =)


----------



## marco berco (Mar 11, 2021)

GNP said:


> Totally agree.
> 
> Techniques are there to simply assist, *not to just fill pages*. They are not the bane of the composer's being. I never understood those who write music only by decoding techniques - it's too left-brained for me to bear.
> 
> ...





rmak said:


> Does anyone know how much the coins cost in MITA? It looks like it s a 100 coins per lesson in the composition module, and you accumulate 50 coins per month... I just noticed the coin system... haha
> 
> These are some of the modules included with the monthly membership
> 
> ...





rmak said:


> Does anyone know how much the coins cost in MITA? It looks like it s a 100 coins per lesson in the composition module, and you accumulate 50 coins per month... I just noticed the coin system... haha
> 
> These are some of the modules included with the monthly membership
> 
> ...


rmak, if you become a MITA member, there is each first Wednesday of each month a Members meeting with the founders and instructors and there is many exchanges, point of views and also writing challenges. The Community is really willing to help each composer to improve his skills and everybody can participate if he wants to.


----------



## gyprock (Mar 11, 2021)

Gene Pool said:


> You're still speaking ignorantly, even after having been informed of same. How can people be so impervious to facts? Is this all just part of your marketing fluff, or do you really not understand this subject?


Maybe it's not just about facts. If we all went to the academic source of the facts there would be no need for different teaching approaches provided by the likes of MITA, Thinkspace, Evenant, Scoreclub etc etc. Maybe people like to pay for the delivery and personal experience of the tutors. It's the journey and the light bulb moments along the way that make the subject enjoyable.

I've read Pershichetti's 20th Century Harmony and Adler's Orchestration along with a bunch of other notable texts and the result was that I never wrote anything. It is only because I've paid and taken some of the aforementioned courses that I was able to create something that gave me some satisfaction.

I'd rather pay $100 to Elton John for a session on how to use the I, IV and V chords than to read an academic tome with a bibliography and cited references that tells me that doubling the leading tone is not a good idea. Let people decide if what they are being spruiked is worthy of assessment.


----------



## ed buller (Mar 12, 2021)

gyprock said:


> I've read Pershichetti's 20th Century Harmony and Adler's Orchestration along with a bunch of other notable texts and the result was that I never wrote anything.


Well in all honesty that is somewhat Tragic. Vincent would be mortified to hear that all that effort at showing you ( in great and thorough detail ) how to get to grips with some very gratifying and powerful techniques of modern composition was wasted. Perhaps you overestimate your actual interest ? Unless this was an assignment of course , a sort of pedagogical "Eat your greens !" moment.....

best

ed


----------



## mikeh-375 (Mar 12, 2021)

ed buller said:


> Well in all honesty that is somewhat Tragic. Vincent would be mortified to hear that all that effort at showing you ( in great and thorough detail ) how to get to grips with some very gratifying and powerful techniques of modern composition was wasted. Perhaps you overestimate your actual interest ? Unless this was an assignment of course , a sort of pedagogical "Eat your greens !" moment.....
> 
> best
> 
> ed


It is a shame. Reading alone is not enough though, it'd be like learning the fingering on paper for a scale, not bothering to practise it and yet still wanting to perform concertos on stage with the best.

As I see it, technique does not often seem to be taught in the right way and with the right attitude instilled into the student. Students should be urged to practise and assimilate and then most importantly _invent_ with it for themselves by applying or adapting it to their own ways of working. It's the last part, the invention, that is vital because it will develop the students individuality if there is any to be had.


----------



## rmak (Mar 26, 2021)

Hi, this is the OP. I though I would share my most recent progress with MITA and staffpad =) This took me 12 to 16 hours, including time spent on lessons and getting used to staffpad. I hope to write faster as I learn more.




Im trying to apply negative harmony, PC, scaling, chromatic motors etc... Im open to constructive feedback, or other content I should read and learn from. I'm still not super strong on voicing/orchestration. I just used the ukulele and some ambience from the piano to make things simple. I also feel like I don't have a lot of control over the emotional or story telling direction when I write with the MITA techniques, but that is okay. I try to go with the flow and not have strong expectations.


----------



## Markrs (Mar 26, 2021)

rmak said:


> Hi, this is the OP. I though I would share my most recent progress with MITA and staffpad =) This took me 12 to 16 hours, including time spent on lessons and getting used to staffpad. I hope to write faster as I learn more.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sounds great, sounds like you are coming along very will with MITA. I have the week off work and so plan to tackle the free MITA "Composing From Scratch" workshop. I will see how I go with that then look further into MITA.


----------



## rmak (Mar 26, 2021)

Markrs said:


> Sounds great, sounds like you are coming along very will with MITA. I have the week off work and so plan to tackle the free MITA "Composing From Scratch" workshop. I will see how I go with that then look further into MITA.



That’s nice. Look forward to what you come up with!


----------



## rmak (Apr 27, 2021)

Hi it's been a while. I thought I would share my most recent composition effort with MITA. I am trying to apply more concepts like negative harmony, poly chords, string theory. I am open to any constructive criticism or advice to improve. I tried not to add too many new melodic or harmonic ideas in the composition and tried to build from things preceding it. 

I wouldn't turn the volume up too much on this one as the forte on the staffpad piano is a bit sharp.


----------



## waveheavy (Feb 13, 2022)

rmak said:


> Hi, this is the OP. I though I would share my most recent progress with MITA and staffpad =) This took me 12 to 16 hours, including time spent on lessons and getting used to staffpad. I hope to write faster as I learn more.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Might sound really nice using traditional orchestra instruments.

One of the things MITA is very good at is teaching how to move the music with the emotion in the film or TV cue, and finding new material with their techniques. The film world isn't a lot about a traditional song form composition, unless you're writing a starting or ending theme.

About voice leading, all that's mostly about 'the rule of the nearest way' between two chords. I studied Peter Alexander's Professional Harmony 1 book years ago, and he made you do all these 2 chord and 3 chord movements, and apply smooth voice leading. I liked to never have gotten through them all. But it created a kind of matrix of chord movements that you learned, and could use like a library of sounds to pull from. It gave you a better understanding of chord relationships.

And with chords, I find many think it's a lot more complex than it really is. There's only 4 different triads in traditional harmony (major, minor, augmented, diminished). All chords are built off of one of those 4 triads. (Suspended and Quartal harmony is a different beast)


----------



## waveheavy (Feb 13, 2022)

On the general thesis of this thread, and as a MITA member, and having studied traditional harmony (though self-taught through Peter Alexander's harmony and counterpoint books), I can attest that interval theory is a completely different theory concept than traditional harmony. My brain kind of hurt when I first got into it, because it was so different than traditional theory. But that's exactly what I wanted, because I was tired of trying to come up with new sounds using traditional techniques and still wind up sounding like everybody else.

After a while, I began to see how interval theory is a whole lot like simple math, because the basis is not diatonic harmony (unless that's mostly what you want in a composition, with some interval theory magic thrown in). My son grasped some of the concepts of interval theory quickly, because he likes math. And I remember a Jazz musician a long time ago saying something about all 12 notes are good at some point. 

The Difference I See:
1. traditional diatonic harmony = concentrating on the harmonized scale for chord movement, using accidentals to slightly alter or extend harmony from that basis, and relying more on modulation and tonal center changes to create complexity. A system based on the western diatonic scale of 7 notes, and thus 7 chords harmonized off that scale, and its 7 modes.

2. harmony based on interval theory = having the option to add to the diatonic system, harmony based on intervallic combinations and patterns as the basis. This is why it's practically impossible to do traditional diatonic analysis with interval theory composition, because its basis is not diatonic harmony. It is a system based more on 12 chords, and 12 notes, instead of 7 chords and 7 notes. In this respect, I see the diatonic system as a planetary limitation, whereas the interval system as covering the whole universe.


----------



## waveheavy (Apr 14, 2022)

Leon Willett said:


> I would suggest that sincerely wanting to reprise a musical idea... is the only "system" you need. No AABA notion is necessary if you are following your heart. The danger here is to autopilot an AABA form and to release music into the world that does not reflect your heart.
> 
> 
> Yes! And I would suggest that all of the head-based music is bad music.
> ...


That way of thinking kind of reminds me of my college art history class. It taught that 'art' doesn't have to be beautiful to the eye to be 'art'. They defined 'art' being about 'functionality', not always about beauty.

So techniques used by Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, and Miles Davis means they were not composing from the 'heart'????


----------



## waveheavy (Apr 14, 2022)

BaSsDuDe said:


> Look at music over centuries. The reference points people aspire to whether Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Basie, Ellington, Gil Evans, Stravinsky, Parker, Coltrane, Jaco, Hendrix and too many to list.... they all were unique.
> 
> Copying what exists is fabulous for any musician as an influence point. copying without trying to find anything new is not what enables music to move forward. Trying new things and breaking boundaries and combinations of styles or concepts does.


Debussy broke diatonic tradition, and most of the academics in his day rejected it.

Beethoven in his latter years experimented with diminished harmony, and the public rejected it.

Even in the days of Bach it was taboo to include dissonance like a tritone, which was considered the devil's interval. Yet the tritone (#4th or b5th) is an essential element used in Jazz composition.

All... of those differences are about using new techniques or methods of composition. So academics against that are simply being unrealistic about music as an art form.


----------



## Leon Willett (Apr 19, 2022)

waveheavy said:


> That way of thinking kind of reminds me of my college art history class. It taught that 'art' doesn't have to be beautiful to the eye to be 'art'. They defined 'art' being about 'functionality', not always about beauty.
> 
> So techniques used by Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, and Miles Davis means they were not composing from the 'heart'????


No: Bird, 'Trane and Miles obvious all were playing from the heart. What you are hearing coming out of their instruments are the sounds that they WANT to express. The sounds in their imagination are coming out of their instrument. 

What I am claiming is a problem is when you play a particular scale because someone said it "fits" over a particular chord, and are literally surprised by the sound coming out of your own instrument. In this case, what is coming out of your instrument has nothing to do with what you imagined. In fact, in such a situation the improviser (or composer) has not even looked inside themselves to find out what sounds are actually in their imagination, and are instead composing or improvising based on an intellectual idea (a scale's appropriateness for a particular chord, for example). 

When the sounds coming out have nothing to do with one´s inner, imagined soundscape or desires, I am claiming that this is bad. I want to hear what you have inside you.


----------



## Dave Connor (Apr 19, 2022)

Leon Willett said:


> No: Bird, 'Trane and Miles obvious all were playing from the heart. What you are hearing coming out of their instruments are the sounds that they WANT to express. The sounds in their imagination are coming out of their instrument.


Hopefully _all _musicians play from the heart. I don’t think there would be much appeal if they didn’t. In the case of the giants you mentioned, it seems to me they are particularly distinguished by their intellectualism. These were tremendous musical thinkers. Certainly three of the most studied players in Jazz history.

Anyway, you probably don’t disagree with that I imagine.


----------



## pinki (Apr 19, 2022)

Leon Willett said:


> When the sounds coming out have nothing to do with one´s inner, imagined soundscape or desires, I am claiming that this is bad. I want to hear what you have inside you.


Leon I have read the whole thread and I really applaud your stance. What you have never really addressed however is the notion of "one's inner imagined soundscapes or desires".

See, thing is, I'm not sure a lot of people know what the heck that means! I think you might find that it often has to be taught and well, there you go, a paradox. 
Inner hearing in my experience is a remarkably absent skill in a lot of highly cultured people, but it absolutely is the way forward for composers.

So:
If one is taught to meditate in order to access these inner landscapes, does that negate it? 
And per-leeese...free jazz improvisation...all about "heart" n'est ce pas? Lord spare me!

I'm only joshing.. I do basically agree with a lot of what you say, but I am not anti-technique if done right.

BTW MITA..I dabbled for a while, and the things that struck me were:
1. too arcane...I tend not to trust systems, but systems whereby the basics cannot be put succinctly in to a course (or book) of less than a year or two- definitely not.
2. the graduate compositions were quite traditional sounding, ironically, nothing struck me as innovative or truly original sounding.
3. a big emphasis on orchestra
4. a lovely bunch of people


----------



## Leon Willett (Apr 20, 2022)

pinki said:


> Leon I have read the whole thread and I really applaud your stance. What you have never really addressed however is the notion of "one's inner imagined soundscapes or desires".
> 
> See, thing is, I'm not sure a lot of people know what the heck that means! I think you might find that it often has to be taught and well, there you go, a paradox.
> Inner hearing in my experience is a remarkably absent skill in a lot of highly cultured people, but it absolutely is the way forward for composers.
> ...


I think that you are likely right that I over-estimate people's ability to imagine sound clearly, and perhaps have forgotten how my own ability improved, and was not always as sharp as it is now.

Nevertheless, try this:

Think of a piece of music that you love. A pop song that you know really well, or the opening of beethoven's fifth... whatever. Something you know really well.

Now sit quietly and imagine it. Like an mp3 playing inside your head.

Is it really true you are unable to imagine vivid sound? Pitches, rhythms, instruments...

Yes, your inner ear can be sharpened further with training. But we all already have an inner ear, even with no training at all.

In any case, ultimately, surely, what composing should be is as follows:

Step 1 - you imagine some sound
Step 2 - you realise this sound in your music as best you can

Or at least this should be the core of what you are doing, and we should minimize decisions that are not to do with how things sound.

If, however, one's process looks more like this:

Step 1 - do some maths
Step 2 - write down some notes according to these maths

...my suggestion is that one is, in this case, not composing at all -- even if what comes out sounds vaguely as if it were music -- and, I further suggest that nothing of much value can come of this 

Composing music is a sharing of one's inner sound world, not one's maths or concepts.

It is interesting to bear in mind that the vast majority of composing methods -- including some with famous names that invite a sense of authority -- completely ignore the inner imagination of the composer, and are lost in a sea of what is essentially prescriptive mathematics regarding what one should compose.

My suggestion is that you should realise the joyous sounds which you imagine. This is what I mean when I say "from the heart", as opposed to "from the intellect" or "from the maths".

Finally, it's worth mentioning some intellectual endeavours actually help you realise the sounds which you carry in your imagination -- in which case I am in favour of them! For example, to know that a certain sound you are imagining is a major sixth, or that a certain rhythm you are imagining is a triplet. But only in so much as it helps you get your imagination on to the page, or into your sequencer.


----------



## Leon Willett (Apr 20, 2022)

It just occurred to me that there is a really simply "nutshell" way of putting this: 

A happy composer is a composer whose music matches what they had imagined. Everything else is unhappiness or dissatisfaction.


----------



## youngpokie (Apr 20, 2022)

Leon Willett said:


> In any case, ultimately, surely, what composing should be is as follows:
> 
> Step 1 - you imagine some sound
> Step 2 - you realise this sound in your music as best you can


I'm really enjoying this thread. For the sake of clarification, you're not talking about planning and conceptualizing in the sense in which it is used in classical music, correct?



Leon Willett said:


> I would suggest that sincerely wanting to reprise a musical idea... is the only "system" you need. No AABA notion is necessary if you are following your heart.


In classical music, choosing form is a very important step in the compositional process. Even Mozart, widely considered the most spontaneous of the masters, used logic and careful planning to construct the form - it was never picked randomly. We don't really understand the inner logic of form anymore and/or how it works in the larger context of the piece. But Beethoven and Brahms constructed and actually planned how their sonata forms would unfold - upfront. Tchaikovsky had to precisely plan the content of all the ballets - meaning tempo, duration, mood of _each piece_ - often before a single note was written or imagined. All of the great composers had filtered and rejected multiple themes that came "from the heart" - because they didn't fit with the "constructed" concept of the piece. Virtually every enduring masterpiece was created like this: a planned and constructed whole, for which small individual elements were imagined.

Anyway, if you build your form from the heart as you go along, without deliberation and clear thinking - all it means is you're unconsciously replaying the form you're most familiar with. It's not more or less genuine - it's just habit. Often this means neglecting a component that can contribute to elevating the whole.

I think the same applies to the tonal planning - using modulation, for example, as a form-building tool, depending on the chosen form and intended dramaturgy of the piece. Orchestration, which is another point in the process where logic and cold calculation is inevitable (and frequently necessary), especially in music where themes repeat, modulate and evolve from simple to climatic. Rimsky Korsakov famously said that orchestration is composing too, even if it often feels like problem solving.

Form, tonal plan, orchestration - it's all not that different from writing fiction or a movie script. All these seemingly calculating steps are a vital part of compositional process, just as critical as imagining a melody. Neither has as much value individually as they do when taken together.

The most telling element, in my opinion, is that virtually all of the great composers always used these two approaches in parallel. Every one of them had a notebook to write down themes they imagined, often with the elements of orchestration as it appeared to them. These themes were used and re-used, re-orchestrated - based on the larger logic of the future composition.


----------



## gamma-ut (Apr 20, 2022)

You can regard (and maybe should) regard form and the other kinds mathematical approaches mentioned above simply as constraints – then the art is to find something that satisfies the composer's intentions subject to those constraints. And the composer might choose to relax the constraints if they don't work in the context of the piece.

In the case of the constraints seemingly imposed by MITA's or similar interval-based schemes from what I've seen, there is no need to keep them. They just provide a way of winnowing down the number of options when beginning a piece or of breaking out of habitual practices.

Form OTOH is probably the firmest constraint, whether it's writing to a sequence of images or sticking to sonata form.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Apr 20, 2022)

....form can also spring from the music itself.


----------



## JohnG (Apr 20, 2022)

It isn’t “all or nothing.” At either extreme (brains on one end and “heart” on the other), you risk bad outcomes, either baffling sterility or mawkish sentimentality.

“Good” music comes (usually) somewhere in the middle, whether it’s Bach inventions, show tunes, a symphony, or a game score.

I don’t want to write just for myself, but on the other hand that internal voice including, in some cases, intellectual intentions, has to anchor what we do. Everyone faces pressures as an artist, whether as a performer or composer, and it’s extraordinarily unlikely that any one of us is going to make enough money to work full time in music. Given all the question marks and inherent uncertainty of life in general, and life for a musician in particular, those exterior sirens can be tremendously unsettling, leading us to grope around and (sometimes) risk over-embrace of some source that sounds super confident.

*Stick With It*

Moreover, since we all face those external pressures and lures, it’s tempting as a composer to ape other music that succeeded in another project, to pander, or to become distracted by other opinions (including those on this thread) and start to write in response to others’ voices. But following someone else’s path, I fear, leads to Mediocrity in the Land Of Blah.

*We have to stick to what we really believe in if we’re ever going to rise above short, uninspired imitations. * Even if _nobody_ else likes what we’re doing, at least it’s ours. Put another way, if we work sincerely, using heart and head together, at least the output might have some kind of integrity, integrity that I believe an audience can detect quite palpably.

By contrast, if we unmoor from who we are, intellectually and emotionally, in some effort to get popular, or please someone else (teacher, audience, producer, whatever), we risk detaching our work from our core as a composer and a human being, with disappointing results. Audiences, I believe, can detect the absence of integrity with great accuracy.


----------



## waveheavy (Apr 20, 2022)

Leon Willett said:


> No: Bird, 'Trane and Miles obvious all were playing from the heart. What you are hearing coming out of their instruments are the sounds that they WANT to express. The sounds in their imagination are coming out of their instrument.
> 
> What I am claiming is a problem is when you play a particular scale because someone said it "fits" over a particular chord, and are literally surprised by the sound coming out of your own instrument. In this case, what is coming out of your instrument has nothing to do with what you imagined. In fact, in such a situation the improviser (or composer) has not even looked inside themselves to find out what sounds are actually in their imagination, and are instead composing or improvising based on an intellectual idea (a scale's appropriateness for a particular chord, for example).
> 
> When the sounds coming out have nothing to do with one´s inner, imagined soundscape or desires, I am claiming that this is bad. I want to hear what you have inside you.


Yet Parker's chord progressions and Coltrane's chord progressions were devised by a 'methodology', and not through improvisation. The melodies they played were improvised on the spot, but not the chord progressions. Parker applied multiple ii-Vs and dominant 7ths in a way no one had done before (see the song Confirmation). Yet Parker could play improvised melodies over that which fit well, and without having written those melodies beforehand. Likewise Coltrane came up with a chord progression system of chromatic 3rd root movement, and improvising over that, and those chord progressions became known as the "Coltrane changes". So that's what I mean by methods. They both came up with individual methods that had not yet been done in Jazz. It's said that Coltrane got his idea from Classical theory and just applied it to the field of Jazz, which may have very well been.

Any music composition style, whether it be traditional diatonic or EIS or interval theory based, is still about methodology. So 'playing from the heart' is actually a vague term that doesn't explain method, even by the greats in music.


----------



## youngpokie (Apr 20, 2022)

gamma-ut said:


> In the case of the constraints seemingly imposed by MITA's or similar interval-based schemes from what I've seen, there is no need to keep them.


I wonder sometimes if MITA is a bit like a new language: we're not fluent in it yet and so of course it feels clumsy and unnatural; we don't have a full frame of reference for it and so we can only judge it using the familiar diatonic paradigm that simply doesn't fit.

The traditional form is closely associated with the diatonic swing from S to D to T, which then gives rise to a nuclear structure that's endlessly repeatable and highly memorable. This in turn leads to a particular set of tools created to manipulate, transform, extend this basic structure into works of art. 

Showing my total ignorance, I have no idea how MITA deals with form and wonder if a MITA specific form even exists yet.


----------



## waveheavy (Apr 20, 2022)

gamma-ut said:


> You can regard (and maybe should) regard form and the other kinds mathematical approaches mentioned above simply as constraints – then the art is to find something that satisfies the composer's intentions subject to those constraints. And the composer might choose to relax the constraints if they don't work in the context of the piece.
> 
> In the case of the constraints seemingly imposed by MITA's or similar interval-based schemes from what I've seen, there is no need to keep them. They just provide a way of winnowing down the number of options when beginning a piece or of breaking out of habitual practices.
> 
> Form OTOH is probably the firmest constraint, whether it's writing to a sequence of images or sticking to sonata form.


That thinking is vague also. How can we call ideas one chooses not to use, as constraints, because when sticking to a certain music style one must refrain from composition outside that style? that is, if one wants to produce a certain style of music.

Even in the Classical era, they used the figured bass notation system to define note intervals in a chord. (still taught today).

M.I.T.A. does a similar thing with interval theory. They are not changing the naturally occurring intervals of a music scale, just using numbers instead of names (instead of min2nd, Maj2nd, min3rd, Maj3rd, and so on). So their numbering system is a valid system, because it keeps to the nature of the scale intervals. 

And likewise their interval numbering system for chords is still based on the actual intervals between the notes in the chord. A 4-3 chord is still a Major triad, and a 3-4 chord is still a minor triad, it's just written using an interval number system, similar to what the Figured Bass system does.

The 'magic' of the interval system is how it helps coming up with compositions that one might never come to using the traditional diatonic way of thinking. Doesn't mean all those interval compositions will sound weird, because a certain amount of them are... diatonic, just read and understood from an interval numbering method.


----------



## gamma-ut (Apr 20, 2022)

youngpokie said:


> I wonder sometimes if MITA is a bit like a new language: we're not fluent in it yet and so of course it feels clumsy and unnatural; we don't have a full frame of reference for it and so we can only judge it using the familiar diatonic paradigm that simply doesn't fit.
> 
> The traditional form is closely associated with the diatonic swing from S to D to T, which then gives rise to a nuclear structure that's endlessly repeatable and highly memorable. This in turn leads to a particular set of tools created to manipulate, transform, extend this basic structure into works of art.


I think one problem people are having with MITA (and I would imagine EIS but I have close to zero experience with that one other than the few bits of Spud's commentary that have made it online) is that it's not a system of analysis like Neo-Riemannian theory, that was developed to explain how existing music works. These interval systems are systems designed to help compose music. There might be some analysis that you can then apply to the results but as far as I'm aware, that's outside MITA's scope. 

And as MITA assumes (as far as I've seen) conventional voice leading, counterpoint and modal techniques, I don't think it's in any way incompatible with neo-Riemannian theory (or anything that comes along that deals with 12TET non-tonal or not-strictly-tonal music). 

It pretty much gives you a bundle of tools that will give workable results reasonably quickly. Getting great results is up to the artist.

From what I've seen, MITA doesn't really deal with form as such as it's largely geared to writing for picture, games etc where the form is going to be dictated by scene length and content. So, it's going to be tone poem for the most part. I imagine there is nothing stopping anyone from impressing something more sonata like on it.


----------



## waveheavy (Apr 20, 2022)

youngpokie said:


> ....
> 
> Showing my total ignorance, I have no idea how MITA deals with form and wonder if a MITA specific form even exists yet.


M.I.T.A. recommends sticking to an AABA or ABAB 'song' form at first. They don't have their own music song form, if that's what you're thinking. Interval theory purpose is to enhance... diatonic composition, not replace it.


----------



## waveheavy (Apr 20, 2022)

gamma-ut said:


> I think one problem people are having with MITA (and I would imagine EIS but I have close to zero experience with that one other than the few bits of Spud's commentary that have made it online) is that it's not a system of analysis like Neo-Riemannian theory, that was developed to explain how existing music works. These interval systems are systems designed to help compose music. There might be some analysis that you can then apply to the results but as far as I'm aware, that's outside MITA's scope.
> 
> And as MITA assumes (as far as I've seen) conventional voice leading, counterpoint and modal techniques, I don't think it's in any way incompatible with neo-Riemannian theory (or anything that comes along that deals with 12TET non-tonal or not-strictly-tonal music).
> 
> ...


In reality though, M.I.T.A.'s interval system can... reveal many naturally occurring musical events simply by number relationships, and that can be very profound. That may seem new, but those relationships are not new, they were part of the musical 'grand design' from the beginning, whenever that was, like the interval nature of the Overtone Series, who first created it? 

As for song form, or different music styles, it can be used for any style. It's important to remember that it is 'interval theory', and that applies to the naturally occurring intervals within a chosen scale. So any composition that one can devise is still going to be based on those scale intervals, just like what diatonic theory relies upon using different terminology and analysis tools.


----------



## youngpokie (Apr 20, 2022)

gamma-ut said:


> is that it's not a system of analysis like Neo-Riemannian theory, that was developed to explain how existing music works. These interval systems are systems designed to help compose music. There might be some analysis that you can then apply to the results but as far as I'm aware, that's outside MITA's scope.


Thanks! Maybe that's exactly what I find so confusing.

One of the methods of traditional composition is to take a chord or two and build a rhythmic structure on the chord tones themselves, and then to manipulate this structure into a melody by repetition, ornamentation, multiplication. A leap of X interval followed by sequential steps (usually of 2nd) in another direction, and so on and so forth. In other words, it's all interval based too and it is so simple and easy it quickly becomes a highly intuitive and personal method that feels like it comes "from the heart".

What's different in MITA? My impression at some point was that MITA focuses exclusively on the interval approach and discards the diatonic framework underneath in order to fully unlock this new potential.



waveheavy said:


> They don't have their own music song form, if that's what you're thinking. Interval theory purpose is to enhance... diatonic composition, not replace it.


Everything I heard written using MITA (admittedly not a lot) felt like it was endlessly meandering and loopable and totally unfinished. A 7 course dinner consisting of only appetizers. That was EXTREMELY annoying especially because there were some real gems in terms of unusual harmony and rhythm. I assumed this is the consequence of the abandonment of traditional harmony (especially the sense of cadence or closure, however vague) and that's why I'm wondering if MITA needs its own form-building tools.


----------



## gamma-ut (Apr 20, 2022)

waveheavy said:


> That thinking is vague also. How can we call ideas one chooses not to use, as constraints, because when sticking to a certain music style one must refrain from composition outside that style? that is, if one wants to produce a certain style of music.


You've already cited an example: Giant Steps.

The core of concept or constraint is a series of major-third shifts upward but the form is relaxed after the first two groups of those moves to come up with something that actually works in the context of a song.


----------



## gamma-ut (Apr 20, 2022)

youngpokie said:


> One of the methods of traditional composition is to take a chord or two and build a rhythmic structure on the chord tones themselves, and then to manipulate this structure into a melody by repetition, ornamentation, multiplication. A leap of X interval followed by sequential steps (usually of 2nd) in another direction, and so on and so forth. In other words, it's all interval based too and it is so simple and easy it quickly becomes a highly intuitive and personal method that feels like it comes "from the heart".


Root cycles in MITA are really no different conceptually. What is different is that the cycles move outside the normal diatonic system, which is how you get a lot of the harmonic richness you've perceived. It has a lot in common with things like Coltrane changes, which waveheavy already mentioned, and it's no secret that EIS, for example, was built on a jazz background. I think a bunch of people have semi-independently discovered or applied the same things. Zappa seems to do a lot of the same things in his music, where he's shifting a mode derived from a blues scale up and down chromatically. And I guess a lot of it can be traced back to the impressionist composers and their use of chord planing.

MITA doesn't necessarily discard diatonic frameworks: there is a lot of attention to modes (as in Dorian, Lydian etc) early on. They just happen to change over quickly, much like the tonal centres in Giant Steps.

I think a natural consequence is that if you're not careful, things can get aimless real fast, and that's probably what you've heard in some of the examples. However, in the context of writing to picture, that lack of direction can be an advantage as the music can be more of a support to the imagery instead of trying to compete with it. 

Also, if a piece is advertising itself as being based on a specific method, the chances are it won't be a classic because to some extent it may simply be existing as an exercise rather than a piece with a distinct aim. And then you have the consideration that the diatonic tradition has a lot more examples one can cite.


----------



## oofjelly (Apr 21, 2022)

Hi all, been lurking this thread for quite some time. I was wondering where one go read (books, vids, etc) more about this "interval theory" that EIS/MITA seem to advertise/teach? Thanks!


----------



## gamma-ut (Apr 23, 2022)

oofjelly said:


> Hi all, been lurking this thread for quite some time. I was wondering where one go read (books, vids, etc) more about this "interval theory" that EIS/MITA seem to advertise/teach? Thanks!


The short answer is no, especially for EIS. I believe there are some old books by Spud Murphy floating around the US interlibrary loan system but the only one that's viewable online via the New York Public Library is largely on more conventional material: sort of a cross between The Beato Book and Sammy Nestico's Complete Arranger.

From what I can gather, there isn't really a book on the EIS method itself. Those used on the course are more workbooks that are meant to go with live instruction.

MITA has some free articles and videos at their site: things like fitting tritone subs into their system. However, I don't think there is something that really provides a detailed overview of the techniques that is outside the paywall. Thomas Chase Jones did some seminars/workshops a few years ago in Hollywood back before the site launched IIRC, but the videos for those might only be available to members.


----------



## waveheavy (Apr 23, 2022)

oofjelly said:


> Hi all, been lurking this thread for quite some time. I was wondering where one go read (books, vids, etc) more about this "interval theory" that EIS/MITA seem to advertise/teach? Thanks!


The following link to MITA's YouTube site has a few lessons by Frank Herrlinger that is a good example of what MITA members get in their composition course.


----------

