# How critical is improvisation in your composition process? how do you deal when it fails?



## impressions (Jan 12, 2014)

A question that been roaming my mind lately-
since most of the stuff I make are rarely "composed" in my head.
and from what I've heard in here, Alot of people in this forum use improvisation to compose their way to finish the gig.

I'm talking about opening a template without exactly knowing what should be the theme/groove/orchestration, and experimentation begins.

but there is a serious problem there, because composition is something, for lack of better words, "long termed music". while improvisation is great-but only true for the moment. at rare times, maybe more moments.

I've had good experiences with it, but sometime it can get you into serious mud.
because we compose for samples we have to experiment to know what will sound good. its a good excuse.
but the better composers, I think-correct me if not, Hear that in their minds first. they know what the piece should be like, how the orchestration would work-what parts will work well to each other. and then fit the mock up to that vision, if needed.

So what are you/we, improviser or composer?
and how do you deal when improvisation fails-or worse, gets you in the mud.


----------



## FatPablo (Jan 12, 2014)

To me, the ability to compose in your head has a lot to do with your own internal pitch. I think we all hear melodies in our heads but if you can't translate it immediately to actual note names, it often gets distorted and doesn't seem to be as great as you thought.

I don't know if better composers can do this or not, but I think the perception perhaps comes from "better" composers usually means more experienced. More experienced composers might have better internal pitch, and more importantly have practiced composing in their heads.


----------



## impressions (Jan 12, 2014)

FatPablo @ Sun Jan 12 said:


> have practiced composing in their heads.



nice. now if i could just shut my thoughts up for 2 seconds...  
not saying its not the way to go-but it is extremely difficult to me.


----------



## FatPablo (Jan 12, 2014)

I agree, it's very difficult to turn your mind off. Occasionally, I hear music in my head as I'm going to sleep. I'm sure a lot of people have the same. I started placing a small recorder by my bed in hopes of at least catching these melodies. If only I could actually sing.


----------



## impressions (Jan 12, 2014)

I manage to do that while i drive & record my horrid singing, but don't tell anyone.
but that's just short ideas, later on, coming to the desktop you face with writing different parts, development of motives, maintaining the same vibe, which makes your "finally i got inspired idea" to "damn that's not it".


----------



## markwind (Jan 12, 2014)

I am not by any means experienced, havent finished many a piece  but I'll share my take on it anyway and I invite everyone to openly disagree if you do! 

For me, improvisation always adheres to the feeling, the story i'm trying to tell. Sometimes, when composing a piece, I mess that up because I lost track of that overarching storyline within the piece. But as long as I am centered around that feeling, the composition should bring it all the way home. So basically, improvisation is the centre point of my flow right now, but always staying centered. 

But I do plan on changing that at some point. Not because I don't think it doesn't work or works badly, I actually quite like working like that, but simply because I want to push myself further along and because I suspect I can push myself in that direction, of composing a piece mentally before the mockup. Though I really dont think it's a better skill perse, I do believe that working in that way is more true to the piece one starts to write in the first place. Which is not the same as saying that the piece will turn out better, or more coherent. Only that it was written out of a uninterrupted creative flow which I would love to utilize at some point. - So I think I see it as just another source to draw from. What is better or worse, are not really topics I am fond of in this subjective process. 

Also, I think the answer to your question heavily depends what sounds you are working with. Are you exploring (to you) new soundscapes, or composing within familiar frameworks such as orchestras? Perhaps I am wrong here, but I can imagine that in the process of exploring new soundscapes one experiments alot more, to finally find that one thing that fits what you've been hearing in your mind all this while.
If experimentation/exploring is part of your process, then improvisation is probably too.

So really, I think that question needs some clarification on what you define as composing, because I believe the answer varies wildly depending on how you do. To the final question, improviser or composer, I would say that these are categories interesting for academic debate. As I think the reality is often overlapping.


----------



## Jetzer (Jan 12, 2014)

Interesting topic. 

I think there a basically two ways of composing. 

1. The types who improvise there way to writing a song.
2. Composers who write in there head before even hitting a note (especially trained composers) 

Or obviously a mix of these options. 

Both methods are valid, I guess. For me it totally depends on what I am writing as well. I try to train myself to hear the orchestra in my head, but sometimes it is good to have the samples and play with them a little. When I'm using synthesizers, I make the sounds specifically for the piece, so I sort of hear them in my head first. BUT, while synthesizing lot's of unforeseen magic can happen. You adjust based on what you hear as well. 

Since I compose in/with the computer, I always adjust my writing based on what I hear. Sometimes what I hear in my head are just some vague colors/chord changes, not always fully orchestrated. Or the instrument you thought was right for the part wasn't really it. 

Improvising is a huge part of my compositional process. I play the drums and the piano reasonably well, so when I get stuck I can always bang away and make some new rithms or colors. Often I also hear the music in my head, but mostly when I am actually playing. So I hit a chord, in my head I hear the next one so I play and move on and on. But like Markwind, I like to push beyond that and become better at uninterrupted writing. 

I like the magic of improvising, as well as the magic of making mistakes. Reasonably I quantized my little bass drum groove, it went totally wrong but was actually a lot better. Fun  

I always forget the music I hear when I go to sleep, sadly. It's like some subconscious thing as well just before we go in sleep-mode, just like improvising...


----------



## Blackster (Jan 12, 2014)

To me it depends on the style. Since I'm a guitar player I would never image a rock song in my head  ... it's more of noodling around and get to the goal real quick. 

But when it comes to more complex structures, the only thing I have in my head is melodies. Mainly main motives. I write that down and work on harmonies and counterparts after that. 

So, in short I guess it really comes down to experience and training. When you know the beginning and the ending of your cue, the middle part often is self-eplanatory. And most of the times I struggle with the ending and therefore with the middle as well :D


----------



## impressions (Jan 12, 2014)

Ok I will give you an example why impro and experiments gets in the way of composing.

You're commissioned to make music that encorporates certain emotions, while keeping a distinct style. So you go the sketching part, throw ideas. No Wait 
you can't do that because there isn't enough time. You need something that works with those parameters today. So what now? start improvising because it's very fast composing, and you don't have time. 
Only you haven't figured out what happens after that starter impro you just made. So you continue improvising, until the whole thing is all air. A baloon of avoidance. 
The ideas also don't connect necessarily. If the starting isn't good enough it won't hold the whole piece. It's too weak. 

And that's just the motif finding. Theres also finding the right lines,harmony, instruments. And if you're loading stuff and trying them out you get burned out pretty quickly and left with nothing or maybe something weak. 

A lot of very precious time gone wasted because of choosing the impro path.


----------



## Dan Mott (Jan 12, 2014)

I never get sound ideas in my head, but I have recently got some ideas. I am going to go record them before I even start composing. I am trying to not write a single note until I have an idea about where I want to go and what source material I want to use for the piece.


----------



## markwind (Jan 12, 2014)

I see what you mean, yeah that would be a tough one, depending on what was asked. 

In what way do you mean that precious time was waster because of choosing the impro path? Is that in the sense of one's development as a composer, or on that hypothetical commission?


----------



## rgames (Jan 12, 2014)

I really can't play piano so almost all my ideas start in my head. My ability to imagine music far exceeds my ability to play it on the piano.

I guess I'm not really sure how to define improvisation. A lot of improv is just noodling within some harmonic framework - kind of a muscle memory of sorts. If that's what improvising is then technically I can't do it on piano. However, I am a proficient clarinetist but I don't compose on clarinet. I compose mostly in my head and pick it out at the piano.

But as I work through ideas in my head, isn't that just another form of improv? If so, I guess all composition is improv.

I don't know. It's a mystery to me. I like it that way - I always feel like it's a miracle when a coherent piece of music emerges from all the chaos.

rgames


----------



## chibear (Jan 12, 2014)

For me it's hard to say. My DAW is always on so whenever something pops into my head I pound it out on the Keyboard and save it in what I guess can be called my Box-O-Themes. It could be a couple of bars on piano, an orchestrated fragment or whatever. It's on my hard drive and cloud. I review those quite often and every so often one comes alive and develops. Many are waiting for a proper instrument to continue. Needless to say my work flow is very sporadic. I'm glad I don't have to do this for a living.

In the 70's and 80's I was a session player in a particular studio and was often hired by a composer who usually only had the first tune completed when he walked in. While we were recording that tune he was in another studio writing the next tune at the piano, orchestrating it and writing out the parts. Some days we put down 15-20 tracks. Obviously he had an exceptionally fertile mind, but got the job done as well.


----------



## ryans (Jan 12, 2014)

rgames @ Sun Jan 12 said:


> But as I work through ideas in my head, isn't that just another form of improv? If so, I guess all composition is improv.



Yeah... Whether you're making it up in your head, or at the keyboard, or with a pencil and paper, with a cello etc... I don't see a difference?

Ryan


----------



## impressions (Jan 13, 2014)

ryans @ Sun Jan 12 said:


> rgames @ Sun Jan 12 said:
> 
> 
> > But as I work through ideas in my head, isn't that just another form of improv? If so, I guess all composition is improv.
> ...



not exactly. since if improvisation is-



> just noodling within some harmonic framework - kind of a muscle memory of sorts.



I can't put my finger on it yet, but from my experience it is a huge difference. when you know what you want, when you have the vision clear, the rest of the parts and arrangements comes much more naturally. 

I'm not saying don't improvise at all-but I'm convinced that the frequency of composing is different than the improvising one. just like rgames said improvising is a way of noodling, hoping that something will emerge from the memory, trying to evoke something by playing. the worse cases are when going astray because too many notes were already played-and probably alot of the wrong ones. that's impro(playing alot of wrong notes to find the right ones).

I think even hans said in one interview I've listened to, that when he was looking for a specific synthetic sound, and the interviewer asked him if he went experimenting to get it, he immediately stopped him, and said its nothing if you can't hear it in your mind first. like it doesn't have any worth of you start fiddling without knowing what you want.
or maybe he meant you can't really work under tight deadlines with this approach.



> In what way do you mean that precious time was waster because of choosing the impro path? Is that in the sense of one's development as a composer, or on that hypothetical commission?



that too, but even much more immediate than that-since you turn up with lots of fast ideas, none of them necessarily related when improvising. so you can't use them as a whole piece. also, you need to figure out parts for ideas you're not entirely sure are the ripe for developing. and if you find out that couldn't develop, you need to find a better idea, and all that time before-got wasted. which is very very crucial if you're doing multiple projects. I've had lots of bad experiences because of getting desperate, because of deadlines, where the music could have gotten much better if I would have approached it differently.
even in my current project, I can see a difference in the composition which had more improvisational approach than the more envisioned one.


----------



## kmlandre (Jan 13, 2014)

rgames @ Sun Jan 12 said:


> But as I work through ideas in my head, isn't that just another form of improv? If so, I guess all composition is improv.


One of my first composition teachers in college likened the musical process to the literary workflow, wherein one just simply writes and writes, then stops. That's improvisation. 

It's followed by editing, where bad grammar, poor punctuation, awkward sentences, irrelevant thoughts, disjointed ideas, and plagiarized passages are reworked into a unified whole. That's composition.

I've always found that analogy useful in that it allows me to simply play around with ideas without pressure. When the clock dings or I feel like I've completed that mysterious "something", I switch mental gears to the critic/editor mode and start tossing out the junk and sewing the patches together.

Of course, I notate my stuff from start to finish, so going back and analyzing what I've written is fairly easy when it comes time to "do" the composition part of it. It's a much more difficult process if the only data available is an audio track...

Kurt M. Landre'
http://www.SoundCloud.com/kmlandre


----------



## H.R. (Jan 13, 2014)

Hans Zimmer once said he wouldn't touch a key, unless he knows what he's going to do with that music. 

That's absolutely right. I mean improvisation is something essential but for the minimal parts. Since I heard that quote from Zimmer I tried to do the same and It helped me a lot to come up with more appropriate scores. 

It's not just notes, sounds and style. It's about knowing the soul of your music from start to finish.


----------



## Jetzer (Jan 13, 2014)

It also depends on what you call writing. Normally me improvizing means I write a couple of bars, or like one minute or so. 

Taking that minute and make it 5, that is the real work. It is not just improvizing, it is thinking about what you want to say, structure, colors etc.


----------



## KEnK (Jan 13, 2014)

My forte is jazz guitar

So improvisation (even other than jazz) is second nature to me.
But I also studied classical composition as school, 
so I have a more structural view of composition, even in a jazz context. 

I will often create a structural diagram of a piece first.
This is an outline of the over-all movement.
I usually have a schematic of a piece before I've written a single note.

The over-all structure is mapped out completely-
intro A B A1 C a subsection based on intro B2 A outro (for example)

If I'm writing a piece for a jazz group it may include 
chords or harmonic rhythm for each section,
various feels or meter,
Sub sections related to previous material,
Having different chord structures for various soloists,

All that is before a single note is "doodled"

I often look at vids that people post of their compositional process.
Often it's nothing more than layering parts over a drone.
There is zero thought given to the architecture of the piece.

That's something different than "composition" to me.
If you think about the architecture first, your entire process will be different.

k


----------



## Mahlon (Jan 13, 2014)

kmlandre @ Mon Jan 13 said:


> One of my first composition teachers in college likened the musical process to the literary workflow, wherein one just simply writes and writes, then stops. That's improvisation.
> 
> It's followed by editing, where bad grammar, poor punctuation, awkward sentences, irrelevant thoughts, disjointed ideas, and plagiarized passages are reworked into a unified whole. That's composition.
> 
> ...



This is more or less the way I see it, too. I think it's a wise approach whether you're improvising ideas from your head via concepts, or pencil and paper, or noodling it out on a keyboard to help what you think you hear in your head, or playing a flute to get it out -- whatever works.

THEN, enter the editing stage.

And finally the polishing.

But I come from a writing background, too, so this approach to creation seems natural to me.

As a visual artist friend of my father's said to him about painting, "Marshall, you've got to put _something_ down in order to fix it."

Mahlon


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 13, 2014)

I always compose in my head. 

After this, I try to realize it with my libs. Mostly I am not able to realize it with sample libraries. Then I'm looking/searching at the process of compromise... . Very often/mostly it is very depressing. The reason why so many compositions are in my drawer.


----------



## williambass5 (Jan 15, 2014)

Interesting topic.

To me its two heads of the same coin. Improv is more spontaneous and goes from conception to realization in real time. There are people who can create "finished" pieces amazingly well in real time with a remarkable sense of form and expression.

For the rest of us mortals, composition, to me, expands the conception to realization time frame to allow revision and fine tuning. 

I saw a Victor Wooten (bass player) clinic where, during Q&A, a person expressed concern that he "just couldn't improvise". Victor responded "You just did. Did anyone give you a cue card of what to say? Did you write your question before you arrived today? No. You spontaneously choose the words and inflection to express what you wanted to say. That's improvisation." 

To me, once a person takes the process out of real time then it becomes composition.


----------



## Will Blackburn (Nov 29, 2016)

Harry Gregson Williams talks about this briefly. He says improv help him 'find a way in to his movies'. 

3.30


----------



## JJP (Nov 29, 2016)

Like Kenk I'm a jazz musician, so improv was always a big part of my performing life. I have always thought of improv as composition in real time, so I'm always trying to form some sort of structure in my improv. I think that's more interesting for a listener than just noodling because you're trying to say something meaningful and convey an actual thought. The tricky part of that is that you have to be completely in the moment, but also aware of what you're doing and where it might lead... without over-thinking it. That's where having a good vocabulary comes in. It sounds difficult, but it's something you develop with practice just like speaking.

To keep with the speaking analogy, composing is more like writing. Since you have the time to reflect on what you are writing (it's not happening in the moment), it is expected to have more coherence and structure. Educated writers don't have to speak out loud to generate ideas when they write. Likewise, educated composers don't always have to play an instrument like a keyboard while composing.

I also find that I am a bit more "eloquent" when I generate ideas away from my instrument. When I write at the instrument, I tend to compose things that are based on licks or techniques that lie easily on the instrument. That's fine in some cases, but it becomes a bit of a crutch and limits my thought process. I find it more creative to come up with a musical idea and find a way to realize it with the instruments at my disposal than use the instrument as a starting point.

However it can be done the other way around!


----------



## J-M (Nov 30, 2016)

Interesting thread!

For me it's mostly 50/50, I hear melodies, sometimes even whole songs in my head (sometimes it can get very annoying!) and then I rush to Cubase trying to record it all. Sometimes/or if I forget what I was initially going for, I start improvising. I'm a guitar player so improvising is something I'm fairly used to do.


----------



## KEnK (Nov 30, 2016)

JJP said:


> I have always thought of improv as composition in real time, so I'm always trying to form some sort of structure in my improv. I think that's more interesting for a listener than just noodling because you're trying to say something meaningful and convey an actual thought.


And here we can change the thread title to "*How Critical is Composition in your Improvisation Process*".
Only joking a little- but that's a key thing in lifting improvisation out of the noodling zone.
As you said in your post, "That's where having a good vocabulary comes in"-
that's the ticket, the main course.
Personally, my improvisational skills improved drastically after I began playing/studying Bach.
The way he gradually mutates/develops ideas is ripe for improvisation in any genre.
Bach is a lot like jazz. Sonny Rollins or Ali Akbar Khan are a lot like Bach.
But that's probably a different discussion.

k


----------



## Tysmall (Nov 30, 2016)

My composing life is much like my academic and social life, I improvise everything and then figure out how to make it work later. 

I stopped judging my work in all aspects of my life and have become not only less insane and manic but better and more expressive at everything I do. You are your own worst critic.

I may have a 58% in Organic Chemistry right now .. but it's my 58%.


----------



## Jorgakis (Dec 5, 2016)

I think the use of samples is a problem while composing. Because you're convinced very fast, due to the fast feedback, that one part is nice. In my case the result was rather like part after part adhs(as some on the forum said right). That was/is a huge problem for me as an untrained musician. But I use improvisation to fight that. First jazz improv on the piano (or occasionally in the daw ) , go with the flow as some will say and it sounds better. Then you can do some organising and cutting, but an idea should have the time to breath and go wherever it wants. So basically this is a more planned composing because you improvise for a longer time period and the brain understands when a musical part is long/dramatic enough or whatever, and this is no matter how random and crazy your improv is. I feel recently like this changed my composing drastically, the pieces sound less random than before although I used to try to be very prepared and structured. Ofc I would like to know how pen and paper composers do this in their minds without touching an instrument.


----------



## jonnybutter (Dec 5, 2016)

KEnK said:


> Personally, my improvisational skills improved drastically after I began playing/studying Bach.



That is awesome! I know just what you mean about the way Bach develops some pieces. Some of his fugues especially have a very mercurial, but also totally organic structure. Bach did actually improvise fugues, btw!


----------



## ZeroZero (Dec 9, 2016)

OP: "How critical is improvisation in your composition process? how do you deal when it fails?"

Here is my take on this. If I feel lack lustre on ideas, I simply turn to technical excercises.

The way I see these exercises is that they start off like a rusty bicycle chain - solid and immovable. You start playing them by simply taking them on 'as is' but as soon as you can you start to mobilise them, articulate them, begin the process of ownership. Maybe add a note, take one away, add an accent, use a new rhythm, invert, but do something _simple_ (simplicity is key) and _manageable_ to make slight changes. After really imbibing this into your practice sessions over months, there comes a time when the doors open and the difference between scalic exercises and tunes/harmonies/real music simply fades away and it all becomes real music.
For this to be effective you must be thinking in 'relative terms' by which I mean terms like roots thirds and fourths, not 'absolute' terms, like C, F#, Bb.
Working like this, when lack of creativity strikes, it's easy to get out the excercises and always find more.

One further point from me (FWIW). I only play notes I understand harmonically, no widdling. Beginners often think widdling is inspiration - it is perhaps but only like scribbling is art. 

I also have found that since I resolved to try to imagine in my head any note _before_ I played it, my aural abilities have lept forward. Of course this slows you down to begin with, but as speed picks up it's not a problem. If no one is around, even the cat, (who take _great_ exception being the connoisseur she is) I will try to sing the notes too.
Prehearing your lines is a simple thing, but much overlooked. Mostly the untrained play first, then (_possibly!_ - _thinking of a few ex students here!)_ listen to what they _have_ played. This makes the ear lazy.


Z


----------



## Vik (Dec 9, 2016)

To me, composition improvisation as well - only that it happens in slow motion. And while slow motion certianli comes with some clear benefits, there's actually a main benefit with improvising in real time as well: some times ideas come up which probably wouldn't have come up if you should compose consciously instead of improvise. Not sure why this happens, but if you do things in real time, "something else" (your subconsciousness, for instance) comes up with ideas which I find surprisingly interesting. 
So, as a way to use have access to the best of both worlds, I sometimes (MIDI) record harmonic/melodic improvisations - and if I do that, I may come up with maybe a handful of bars which can de developed into something more and very useful. That doesn't always happen when I just compose.


----------



## kitekrazy (Dec 9, 2016)

MrLinssi said:


> Interesting thread!
> 
> For me it's mostly 50/50, I hear melodies, sometimes even whole songs in my head (sometimes it can get very annoying!) and then* I rush to Cubase trying to record it all.* Sometimes/or if I forget what I was initially going for, I start improvising. I'm a guitar player so improvising is something I'm fairly used to do.



For me soon as record goes on then it went from record to suck. Idea almost gets lost. Most of my improv is with chord progressions since I work with electronic genres. I put those on Notepad.


----------



## benatural (Dec 9, 2016)

Not just critical but essential. It's like what Ben Burtt calls "happy accidents"... I've also heard it referred to as "panning for gold" However you refer to it, I enjoy the idea that not everything is under my control all the time, and that it isn't necessary for all ideas to manifest through the sheer force of my will. If you let it, improv can be a very generous gift giver!


----------



## ZeroZero (Dec 9, 2016)

benatural said:


> Not just critical but essential. It's like what Ben Burtt calls "happy accidents"... I've also heard it referred to as "panning for gold" However you refer to it, I enjoy the idea that not everything is under my control all the time, and that it isn't necessary for all ideas to manifest through the sheer force of my will. If you let it, improv can be a very generous gift giver!


There is a concept from Visual Arts called "found Art" basically its going to the dump and welding stuff together  . I think we have to do this in music to, ferretting around in the hard drive is like going to the scrap yard!
Edward De Bono has a concept called "Po" which get's you out of the rut of reasoned thinking. His book Beyond Yes and No is a good source for this.

Z


----------

