# What process do you use when composing ?



## SymphonicSamples (Jun 24, 2016)

I was discussing this with a friend recently and was interested in hearing some thoughts from fellow composers about your composition process. What approach from the following has been more often than not the catalyst in which your best works are born ?


----------



## Dean (Jun 25, 2016)

as this brilliant link on creativity {by John Cleese]suggests,I think its the ability 'play' and never 'work' the idea,then recognise those 'moments', hone in on them,play some more,.then switch to work mode and structure those 'moments'

D


----------



## JohnG (Jun 25, 2016)

I only have one process. Suffering and misery. Sometimes agony. So that's three, counting.


----------



## chibear (Jun 25, 2016)

Best catalyst for me is when my wife goes to visit her sister for a week.


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Jun 25, 2016)

The question assumes that one can tell which of one's work is the best work. Or that any of it is any good at all.


----------



## AllanH (Jun 25, 2016)

The basic idea/theme often comes relatively easy as long as I'm tired (i.e. late at night). The detailed work is done when I'm focused and awake over the next several weeks. Often the "basic theme" needs some structural amendment, and sometimes it gets reworked extensively. I often have to let a piece rest for while before going back and making progress.


----------



## patrick76 (Jun 25, 2016)

JohnG said:


> I only have one process. Suffering and misery. Sometimes agony. So that's three, counting.


"I've heard some say the music just writes itself, but I'm skeptical. My guess is, creative people are reluctant to admit they suffer in the process of creation. But I see suffering as an inescapable part of the experience." - Jerry Goldsmith


----------



## SymphonicSamples (Jun 25, 2016)

Admittedly it's a very watered down simplified set of answer to choose from and inspiration that leads to the initial ideas is different every time, but interesting to hear composers individual thoughts. 



chibear said:


> Best catalyst for me is when my wife goes to visit her sister for a week.



I can totally relate to that. The trickling stream opens out to a vast ocean 



AllanH said:


> The basic idea/theme often comes relatively easy as long as I'm tired (i.e. late at night).


Yeah so true , sometimes early morning when the brains fatigued I can be more open to allowing idea's to form and slip through the gates that otherwise I may have blocked many hours before with the waking brain in all it's arrogance filtering ideas through an overthought process saying , "Nah too simple, get rid of it, total rubbish, sounds like something else", and the you delete the idea. Almost feels like a Seinfeld moment


----------



## InLight-Tone (Jun 25, 2016)

Do the hard part of coming up with new ideas for a composition AFTER working out preferably outside. Fleshing out a piece and doing the detailed edits and development can be done when partially brain dead as it's more grunt work, but I find pumping in oxygen and vigorous physical movement does wonders for generating the elusive FRESH inspiration. It seems that many of the classical greats (which I do not aspire too) were avid walkers in nature...


----------



## dgburns (Jun 25, 2016)

Paul T McGraw said:


> The question assumes that one can tell which of one's work is the best work. Or that any of it is any good at all.



very true,but one can at least get a sense of how well developed a work is.For example if scoring,you can tell how well the music fits the scene,as well as how well it flows through the nuances etc.
One can also get a sense of the thematic or melodic development as well as the success of the arrangement based on how well the selection and choice of voicing suits the melodic elements.
I find myself,especially on orchestrally bent music,often playing around with very simple initial lines,but find that the more time I have to further develop those lines into outwardly radiating music phrases that come from or respect the initial melody,or leit motif,they can add interest in a way that can surprise and yet invite further investigation.As with any creative of cerebral task,one can only concentrate for so long before you fatigue thinking about how to further improve what's in front of you so far.When do you allow yourself to be content?how far must you develop until the music is as well concieved as is possible? well if we judge by our own unique metric,then it's just a matter of pleasing oneself.But that rarely wins over everyone else,unless you have a sense of where the bar is as far as the rest of the world is concerned.Tricky this business of trying to gauge the way others value the effort you put forward as a musical idea or work.
But one thing that strikes me most of all these days is the notion that people like listening to music that has structure,especially if they can pick up on that structure early on.Even better if you can create some movement that comes as a bit unexpected,as that can add interest.Better yet if you can re-state the initial idea assertively and yet make it seem like you are moving to another place overall.Music should move,it wants to move,people want it to have it's own logic,it's own set of mathematics so to speak.It could come from rythmn or whatever else moves you.

These are things that cross my mind everyday as I score.I also admit that it's a real chore to get away from muscle memory,but it pays off to try as hard as can be.That safe place is a dangerous place to languish in,just because it's familiar doesn't mean it makes for the best music for others.

Hard to be objective with this business of writing,tough and easy to fool yourself into thinking you got good stuff on the page when a few hours away can tell otherwise.Sometimes it's ok to not be so hard on oneself though,as that can lead to the opposite extreme which can strangle any creative impulse before it gets a chance to come into fruition.

-edit-

to answer the post question-it seems to me that I get the best results when I put in the most effort.If an idea is not yet right,I only seem to get there by working hard and not giving up.I find the longer I work on something,the more unhappy I can get with it,but inevitably,the ideas I work on the hardest tend to come out the best.Especially these days when it just doesn't seem like anything of any interest comes to me by just farting around with stock sounds and midi.I gotta get in there with the real thing to get to a happy place.Wish I could get happy with less effort and less production value,but it seems I can't.even though everyone around me thinks I'm certifiable (nuts) for putting in the extra time.


----------



## BigImpactSound (Jul 7, 2016)

JohnG said:


> I only have one process. Suffering and misery. Sometimes agony. So that's three, counting.


----------



## Daryl (Jul 7, 2016)

Deadline.


----------



## mc_deli (Jul 7, 2016)

Deadlines
+
€€€
=
creative genius moving mountains making dreams come to life saving lives


No deadline +/- no cash = keyboard warrior


----------



## Studio E (Jul 7, 2016)

Paul T McGraw said:


> The question assumes that one can tell which of one's work is the best work. Or that any of it is any good at all.


This is exactly what I was thinking.


----------



## SymphonicSamples (Jul 7, 2016)

It was one way to place it in a framework. I guess the same logical thought process that leads someone to know what music they do and don't like written by other composers could be allied to their own music. Alternatively.. What compositional process do you most often find yourself drawn to.


----------



## Vik (Jul 7, 2016)

Daryl said:


> Deadline.


"To achieve great things, two things are needed; a plan, and not quite enough time." - LeonardBernstein


----------



## d.healey (Jul 7, 2016)

Well I posted this yesterday in another thread but it seems relevant here. How an 11 year old girl writes - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36722290


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jul 7, 2016)

mc_deli said:


> Deadlines
> +
> €€€
> =
> ...



Ultimate truth!


----------



## wst3 (Jul 7, 2016)

I've achieved the results I'm most proud of when I've started work away from the computer, noodling around on guitar or piano and then working with paper and pencil to rough out the ideas. Then I bring in the computer<G>!

That said, I have had pieces that started in the sequencer that worked out pretty well too.

Don't discount serendipity either - one of my all time favorite themes was the result of a problem in my studio where MIDI data was getting corrupted. I played the idea into a sequencer from the keyboard, and it came out something else entirely - different notes, different rhythms... at first I was upset, but when I listened I really liked it.

Deadlines can be a help or a hindrance, but usually they do help me stay focused.


----------



## zacnelson (Jul 7, 2016)

Bill I like your point about the midi data corruption.... some of my favourite ideas have come from errors, for example I copied some audio in my DAW and accidentally placed it in the wrong bar, and the interplay between the various misaligned tracks inspired me with a tonality or rhythm I wouldn't have tried otherwise. However I suppose that happy result is only possible because part of being musically creative is about being able to HEAR what makes something good. There are some people who come up with all sorts of great melodies but do not have the ability to know which ones are good and which are lame, and they often end up choosing the lame stuff and not noticing the great stuff they created THEMSELVES. (I've experienced this first hand with singers).


----------



## Vik (Jul 7, 2016)

The best process seems associated with many things, like:

- having an upcoming audience (working on something you actually know will be heard by others)
- a non-cluttered, "effortless" mind, which requires not having to spend much time on working out articulations or CC stuff
- not expecting something great to be created (and no, it doesn't help to try ro not expect something)
- a good sounding piano or other brilliant sounds
- not thinking much
- having enough undisturbed time both to get into the flow and to remain there long enough to produce something
- willingness to work on details (but usually not in the beginning of the process)
- "inspiration", which could come in many ways - like for instance to recently have listened to some great music or seen a really good movie, or from plain... emptiness.


----------



## NoamL (Jul 7, 2016)

I do not have a "best way" of working, but I challenge anyone else to come up with a more *RIDICULOUS* way of working than the following, which I honestly have done a few times:



1. Write a melody

2. Get stuck at what chord should come next

3. Get frustrated

4. Set up 24 unlabeled piano tracks in Logic and play all possible major and minor chords

5. Mix them all up

6. Go for a brisk walk

7. Come home

8. Listen to piece 24 times, soloing one "next chord track" at a time, and write down grades



I guess I do my best composing when I'm in the audience?


----------



## AlexRuger (Jul 8, 2016)

Noam, your stuff is awesome. If you've ever gotten stuck somewhere, I haven't been able to hear it in the final product.

I'm 100% in the third camp. My absolute best work is when the initial idea comes fast ("inspiration"), and then when I have the luxury of time to really dig in and develop it, orchestrate it, edit it, mix it, etc, all while hopefully exploring small side street ideas that pop up here and there the whole time.

Though, I'm usually in the second camp: getting going and narrowing down the palette and thematic ideas usually takes quite a bit of time, but once that's all figured out, it's usually smooth sailing.

That said, all four of the different "modes" can produce at least decent work. It's always dictated by the timeline of the project. I think Louis CK said that your worst has to be better than everyone else's best, and that's something I do my best to live by. I try (and hope) that when I'm overworked and under-slept and don't have enough time to get out the initial idea, or the time to develop it, that my work is still good enough that the audience doesn't notice. Not always the end result, but that's the goal.


----------



## Arbee (Jul 8, 2016)

I remember asking a similar question on this forum some time ago and I still use HZ's advice from then to "embrace the chaos" . I find if I get traditional when an idea strikes (i.e. lock myself away with pencil and paper) I tend to get a traditional sounding result, so I try to mix it up between "traditional" and "suck it and see" experimentation directly in the DAW. Messy, but it's only way I can find to incorporate all the elements I want in the result.


----------



## karelpsota (Jul 8, 2016)

*Sleep Deprivation*

At a certain point in the night, I worry less about the little things and get stuff done.
The next morning, I clean up the mess with fresh ears. (Probably get rid of 50% of what I did)
A/B with a reference track to polish the mix (anything Shawn Murphy or Serban Ghenea works)
Finally, I master the piece by copying the EQ balance from the ref track onto my master.
Done!

PS: NoamL, this is most ridiculous thing I heard. I will definitely try it out.


----------



## KEnK (Jul 8, 2016)

I use various methods of composing-
Improvising, careful motivic development, simply tacking a melody onto a chord progression or groove, etc-

But what has always bugged me is the stuff people like the best is the crap I just throw at the wall.
My "throwaways" seem like the "best" (or at least the preferred).
Happens more than I like

k


----------



## muk (Jul 9, 2016)

KEnK said:


> But what has always bugged me is the stuff people like the best is the crap I just throw at the wall.



It's something I found too. I guess it is because generally these works are much easier to absorb, and don't need as much attention or effort to be understood. Usually people like some kitsch, if it is beautiful at the surface you can stop right there. Who cares what lies beneath anyway. Instant gratification seems to be more important than what you get out of it. Maybe that caters to a certain inherent laziness we all have. The well-known offers no surprises, you know what you get. New things on the other hand need some effort to be explored, at the risk that in the end - despite the effort put in - you might actually not like it. The well-known is a safer bet.



KEnK said:


> My "throwaways" seem like the "best" (or at least the preferred).



That's the question, isn't it? Does preferred equal best?


----------



## Vik (Jul 9, 2016)

muk said:


> I guess it is because generally these works are much easier to absorb, and don't need as much attention or effort to be understood.


Sure, but it's also interesting that such pieces often are a "success" (not as in most popular, but musically) even if they aren't necessarily easy to absorb. I guess we just have to accept that sometimes it can be quite easy to create some great... and speaking of that, human embryos are easy to create as well, and not really difficult or necessarily very time consuming either.


----------



## Sebastianmu (Jul 9, 2016)

"How do you get the idea? - I just try to think crea-tive-ly!"


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 9, 2016)

muk said:


> It's something I found too. I guess it is because generally these works are much easier to absorb, and don't need as much attention or effort to be understood. Usually people like some kitsch, if it is beautiful at the surface you can stop right there. Who cares what lies beneath anyway. Instant gratification seems to be more important than what you get out of it. Maybe that caters to a certain inherent laziness we all have. The well-known offers no surprises, you know what you get. New things on the other hand need some effort to be explored, at the risk that in the end - despite the effort put in - you might actually not like it. The well-known is a safer bet.
> 
> That's the question, isn't it? Does preferred equal best?



Muk, you have written my thoughts exactly.


----------



## Fer (Jul 9, 2016)

For me the most two enjoyable moments of composition are A: when i compose the first minute (always very fast) and B: when i press the export mixdown button. Everything else inbetween is pain and suffering : D


----------



## rgames (Jul 9, 2016)

I totally agree with the comments that I have no idea how to judge my "best" work. I can tell you what I like but it has no correlation to what others like or what makes money. All three of those group seem to be randomly related. It's a crapshoot.

So I think the better poll is "How do you compose?" because judging the "best" work, whether your own or someone else's, is meaningless as far as I have been able to discern. Of course there is no shortage of people who say they know how to meaningfully make that judgment but when you put it to the test it quickly becomes apparent that they don't.

rgames


----------



## wbacer (Jul 9, 2016)

Process wise, problem solving and creativity are linked and problem solving is what we do when we don't know what to do.


----------



## CT (Jul 9, 2016)

I guess I'm mostly the last option. Concepts (form, ensemble/colors, harmonic language, overall intent) tend to come to me very fast, but the initial ideas that are actually musical take time to iron out through improvising, humming, thinking, whatever. Then with thematic building blocks in place the process quickens, but I still tend to be anal about it and move slowly.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Jul 9, 2016)

I recommend Bach's process: Coffee. Lots and lots of coffee.


----------

