Can you give one detailed example of "simply amazing" results you achieved with this system? I mean this sincerely - it would help.
Here are my concerns:
- It's an entirely different system to learn
- I've looked over it - it looks ambiguous and ad-hoc to me
- An once person's "take" on redefining the last 400 years of music as proliferated by the grand masters from Bach to Coltrane had better have a convincing argument - and I don't see it.
so a detailed musical example as to what this is all about - and in particular how it enables: composition, theme building arrangement and development, and orchestration - all relevant to current (media) composers - would be helpful (given that it's been promoted on a very "current composing paradigm" web site.
knolan, I understand the hesitation with "jumping into" a whole new musical system, I felt the same way when I first learned about EIS. As a disclaimer, I am a current student (just reached book 10 out of 12) and I can tell you I can't be more pleased.
A bit of background: I first heard about EIS when I discovered this forum sometime in 2007, but I had just been accepted to a Masters program in composition and while I was really intrigued, I felt like I really didn't need it. But a year and a half after I finished my degree I found that my writing was stagnating and being just out of school I didn't have many projects to keep up my game. So I decided to give EIS a shot, if nothing else I knew I would be paired with a teacher who was actively working and I would be forced to write every week to keep in shape. 2.5 years later I can safely say that EIS has helped to improve my compositional understanding, imagination, and speed. I also get a fair amount of work writing music for live theater in my city.
With that said, I think it is important to clarify what EIS is and is NOT. It is easier to say what it is NOT.
EIS is not a redefining of the classical tradition of Western music. EIS is not an exclusive system. EIS is not just a set of rules or guidelines.
EIS is a comprehensive approach to Music Theory and Composition. It gives one perspective of understanding the relationship of tonal pitches to one another and how to organize them.
If that description seems nebulous then let me ask you this: Can you describe Schenkerian Analysis to me like I am 5? Or can you describe Atonal Theory and Composition to me like I am 5? Or can you even just describe Roman Numeral Analysis to a non-musician? I'm not trying to be combative, just trying to point out that it is very difficult to describe systems succinctly without good foundational knowledge in the subject. And as each system has its own nomenclature, it makes it challenging to translate sometimes.
I also think it is important to keep in mind that ALL music theory is THEORY. A practice devised in order to try and understand why specific combinations of pitches creates pleasing melodies and harmony. You can analyze a piece of music using Roman Numeral Analysis, Tone Matrices, or Schenkerian Analysis. You can also analyze a piece of music using EIS.
So, in my opinion EIS is a comprehensive approach to Music Theory and Composition. That being said, I do not think that I would have progressed well through the course or have been able to take the most advantage of it without all of my formal training. While not a requirement, having good foundation in Tradition Music Theory and Harmony makes it extremely easier to understand what is going on. It has also been illuminating comparing the different approaches to explaining Harmonic Movement, Counterpoint, and Chord Structure.
In some ways calling EIS a system is a misnomer, because there are two aspects to it. There is the Music Theory approach and then there is the Pedagological core. The "name" EIS refers to the both combined, because they are really hard to separate. EIS teaches the music theory approach systematically through the course. It begins with note relations and chord structures, and continues to progress through counterpoint and harmonization, and also arranging and orchestration.
There is no other teaching method that does this, which is where the strength of the system lies. It is designed for composers; it assumes you are going to write music. Any other music theory course you are taking along with performers and educators. All it does is present the theory, the application leaves you hanging. In the EIS system you are paired with a teacher who walks you through all the steps in the system. However, like all educational endeavors, you get what you put into it. There is an assignment for each lesson and how you use the material in your own music is up to you. What I have gained from EIS is confidence, freedom, and speed, the music is still my own.
So take what you will. The biggest benefit from EIS comes from being in it for the long haul. The later lessons are really exciting, but I understand now that without the foundational ones you just keep making the same mistakes. Great music can be written without EIS and great music can be written with it. I've found that EIS really fits the way I think and hear music in my head, which I always struggled with trying to justify my choices to my composition teachers in school (why did you choose this chord? it's not functional!). I am also always on the lookout for ways to improve my knowledge so I don't just study EIS exclusively.
I also don't believe that anyone who has benefitted from EIS is trying to belittle any other system, they are just so excited from having discovered a method that works for them.
As for examples, the "weird" pieces are usually etudes, written to practice a specific concept from a single lesson. There's a great post in this forum called Boss Battle Music which has the PDF markup and a mockup which shows a great example of application. I'm in a cafe right now so don't have access to my stuff but can give you some examples later. And of course, go and listen to anything on Craig Sharmat's website.