How do we arrive at our final decisions?

[Shiva]

I'm really interested in any aspect of how a composer makes the decisions he/she makes concerning composition. One way I've thought of music is realizing what I'm listening to is the result of untold decisions made by the composer along the way. For example, why was one form chosen over another, why was an ascending interval over a descending interval chosen, and on and on. Decisions on a micro and micro level.

I'm not so much interested in workflow type decisions (e.g. "I use finale then export to Sonar, etc.")

So to put some parameters around what I'm asking. I'm looking for a description of some of the interesting problems you face and how you solve those problems.

[Acciacatura]

My work process goes something like this:

1. Either (a) or (b) can go first.
   • a) Come up with some motives and figure out some things to do with them. Write some fragments in my notebook.
   • b) Write a portion of the piece straight through, without censoring myself. Often I do this by ear with pencil and paper, only checking with the piano later, but it depends on the piece.
2. Develop a concept for the piece. Write a non-pitched sketch of the entire piece. Understand structurally what the initially written section does and how it does it.
3. Write drafts of sections.
4. Incorporate sections into the piece, doing some revisions to tie the sections together.
5. Repeat 3-4 until an entire rough draft is complete. Live with the draft to gain an understanding of large scale structural issues.
6. Decide what I want the piece to do and what I need to change to do it. Revise sections that need to go somewhere different.
7. Go through the piece rewriting and cleaning up mechanics (harmony, counterpoint, orchestration, etc.).
8. Publish (dynamics, blatant notation stuff) and print out the draft.
9. Go through the printed draft proofreading, editing for orchestration and clarity, and analyzing.
10. Attempt to justify every single note vertically and horizontally. Those notes that I cannot justify, I circle, and attempt to change so they contribute to deep structure and clarity in the piece.
11. Repeat 8-10 ad nauseam.
12. Submission or performance.

Maybe I should put a copy of this list up next to my computer. If I followed it better I could be 10 times as productive

[stevel]

[b) Write a portion of the piece straight through, without censoring myself. Often I do this by ear with pencil and paper, only checking with the piano later, but it depends on the piece.

I just heard an interview on NPR yesterday with an Author, and she had the exact same suggestion. It was amazing how many parallels she drew with composition. She said, for those who get stuck after their first chapter, to just simply "finish" the book. Get to the end. She would look no more than a pragraph back before she began writing each day. She said at the end, she found that characters names would change over this process, but that's an easy fix. I will say however, obviously she's got some sort of mental idea of what's happening in the work though.

Develop a concept for the piece. Write a non-pitched sketch of the entire piece. Understand structurally what the initially written section does and how it does it.

This is usually my first inclination, although I will sometime just toy with a motive, melody, rhythm, or sound and "build" something out of it. Usually the results then are more experimental though than when I work by concept as above.

Incorporate sections into the piece, doing some revisions to tie the sections together.

I find this to be a bit dangerous (or asking for trouble:-). A lot of peopl do this and their music ends up sounding "patched together" rather than having any unity or flow. If you can work like this I don't see a problem with it, but for beginning composers who are having trouble developing longer pieces, they should avoid the temptation of just cramming stuff together just to make it longer.

Attempt to justify every single note vertically and horizontally. Those notes that I cannot justify, I circle, and attempt to change so they contribute to deep structure and clarity in the piece.

I do this too. I'll say though, what I do is just make sure that they are "what I want" in a broader sense.

Submission or performance

I think this is an important step. I don't consider my pieces "finished" until they are: in fixed form "ready for publication" (even if they never get published or performed); performed; if not performed, then recorded if perfromable, or the fixed form may be an audio recording for electronic works.

Maybe I should put a copy of this list up next to my computer. If I followed it better I could be 10 times as productive

I want to say, I follow the same basic order as most of your list (the parts I cut out) except that I'm more likely to start with a conceptual sketch or outline than with snippets of music now - though I still will start with snippets when the mood strikes me.

My composition professor kept a list of all the pieces (concepts) he wanted to write beside his desk (he's older so he had one of those architectural drawing desks like many composers - I'm glad we have computers now :-) and I think I too would be more productive if I had those as a constant reminder!

Great info Acc. - I think we should make your original response a sticky somewhere!

Steve

[stevel]

Originally Posted by Shiva

I'm really interested in any aspect of how a composer makes the decisions he/she makes concerning composition. One way I've thought of music is realizing what I'm listening to is the result of untold decisions made by the composer along the way. For example, why was one form chosen over another, why was an ascending interval over a descending interval chosen, and on and on. Decisions on a micro and micro level.

Acc.'s response was so good Shiva, but I think there may be some more of the "decision" type things that weren't addressed.

I hate to say this, but many decisions I make are based on "what I feel". I know that's not very helpful, but, to make it clearer, I'll use a cooking analogy:

When one is cooking (and I'm a fairly good cook), you might say to yourself "it needs more pepper". Or simply "it needs more zip". Now, subconciously, you're basing that assessment on something YOU want - what you think it needs. Now, how you arrived at those decisions has to do with "prejudice". What you do to solve the problems is based on "experience", and your "skills".

For instance, sometimes, I might say something needs a little "sweetness". Experience tells me I can add Sugar, Brown Sugar, Shredded or diced Carrots, Pineapple Juice, etc. Skill is knowing how much of which ingredient I want to add to achieve the desired result (that is, Sugar will make it sweet, and dissolve, but pineapple juice will also add an acidic content). The prejudice that it needs sugar in the first place also comes from experiences - I'm making Cake and Cakes are sweet, or I just personally have a sweet tooth and I'm going to add Sugar to my Spaghetti. We can argue about the Nature versus Nurture aspects but those things are hard to avoid, and sometimes it's best to go with them or you end up with a horrible tasting meal.

Most of the time, we chalk up al of these things to "instinct". In music, it's often chalked up to this mysterious thing called "talent". Now, I won't say "talent" doesn't exist, but really it's more of a talent for understanding and absorbing and implementing experiences, rather than just raw musical talent.

So, for composing: I see many people trying to compose "classical" music, and yet they've listened to virtually nothing. That's like trying to back a cake if you've only had pie. It's not very instructive.

So at first, the decisions you make are based on "what would Beethoven do in this situation". When Beethoven wanted to build tension, which is what I want to do in my piece, what did he do, and if I do it, will it work for me too.

Now, I think too many people try to follow a recipe! That's what the people who read theory books and try to write music are doing. Following a recipe. One of the things I've found, is I want to know HOW things work. I can't just follow a recipe, I need to know WHY salt is in my Dessert recipe! (I like the show Good Eats on Food Network if you guys get that because it shows you why things work the way they do). Obviously, you can follow the recipe exactly, but the result will be different if you use veal stock instead of chicken stock, butter instead of bacon fat, real imported Parmesan instread of Kraft Parmesan, etc. How you stir some recipes and in what type of bowl you mix can have significant impact on the outcome.

So my advice to composers is to eat as many different types of food as possible, and to experiment with recipes and develop your own. If you only eat Italian food, you'll never understand how to make Jambalaya. If you only listen to Beethoven, you won't get Stravinsky. You can always decide to make or not make Jambalaya, and you can always decide to write like Stravinsky or not. The point is, without the experience you gain from listening, and the skills you gain from study, coursework, and experimentation, you won't be able to solve your problems. Not only will you not know how to solve a problem, but you won't even be able to decide on what you want to make for dinner!

Like Acc. said - sometimes you just grab an idea and build it. That's like opening the refrigerator and seeing what's in there, and making something from it. Working with a concept, or sketch, is like saying, I'm going to make Lasagna tonight. If you find out you're out of flat noodles, you improvise.

Now, cooking is more like performing, so the parallels are not exact here. But the original recipe creation is like composing. If you want to compose a Fugue, it's got a fairly specific recipe. If you want to make Salsa, it's got a plethora of recipes with only some general common chracteristics - like "a Waltz".

So you need to go into it knowing what you need to know. If you don't research it. I've researched things for a lot of my pieces - and I learn something all the time. And unfortunately, I look at earlier pieces and realize that with the skills I have know, I could have realized that concept much more effectively. But I don't like leftovers so I concentrate on tonight's dinner rather than living in the past. Learn from your mistakes (man, that was TOOOO Sweet!) and correct it next time. That experience is invaluable.

So sorry I can't give you anything more definitive than that, but it's largely a philosophical approach based on my own feelings of what "needs" to happen, and how I accomplish that based on the skills I have.

Best,
Steve

[Boneman]

I feel hungry after that Steve, all that talk of food etc.

I see what you mean, I tend to draw on years of performing and listening. I think that finding your own voice is really important and not using too much(conciously at least)of other peoples ideas.

[Elmer]

ACCIACATURA's answer was very complete & I wish I were that organized!!


I usually start with No.2: Develop a concept. Most of my compositions have been choral works, and I try to find a poem that contains something, a sort of conflict or contrast, that I can bring out in the music, and make that my focus for the entire piece. I should add that I use diatonic harmony, but with added 7th's, 9th's or (my favorite in the soprano) an 11th-- that is, replacing the leading tone in the dominant chord with the tonic.This is all done with very few, if any, chromatic notes or modulations; however my harmonic progressions are rather modal and unorthodox. I call it a mixture of Palestrina and Hindemith. The notes in my themes usually give me the basic progressions I use.

For example, if my theme starts G-A-B, then my bass, in opposite motion, would go G-F-E, and the chords I could use would include (1) G or ( by inversion) Emin or C or Amin7th, to (2) F, Dmin, or Bdim7th, etc. It becomes complicated fast, and I just decide sometimes by singing every possibility in each line many times! This goes along with ACC.'s Step No. 10-- attempt to justify EVERY note.

However, just in the last few nights, I had to make a very hard decision that I am not real happy about. I wrote a piece in memory of one of my music teachers and my choir is going to perform it on May 30. I wrote it in Eb and it is scored for choir, organ and trumpet. I wanted the trumpet to hold a high concert eb (above the treble staff) for a couple of measures (at Qtr. note =60!) and dim. to ppp. The trumpet player, who is a professional player, acted like I was crazy! I thought to myself, "Now I know how Beethoven felt like when they told him his music was impossible to perform!" I wrote a few notes of that phrase down, so that he only had to play a Bb, but still the last phrase of the piece had a climatic high C concert. I finally decided to transpose the entire piece down to Db. (Thank goodness for the easy transposition on FINALE!) I don't know if I will be happy with it when I hear it yet or not! I knew when I was writing it I was pushing the limits, and not just any old trumpet player could have performed it, but I sort expected a pro from the orchestra to say, "Well I can do it, but--",meaning that it would be very difficult. I mean I used to play hi eb-f-g and occasionally hit ab on the trombone (on top of the treble staff) and I was never a pro player! Any trumpeters want to comment?
Elmer

[stevel]

I call it a mixture of Palestrina and Hindemith.

Sweeeet!

I wrote it in Eb and it is scored for choir, organ and trumpet. I wanted the trumpet to hold a high concert eb (above the treble staff) for a couple of measures (at Qtr. note =60!) and dim. to ppp. The trumpet player, who is a professional player, acted like I was crazy!

Well, just because a note is in the range of an instrument, doesn't mean it's playable in every situation! Since you've got until May 30, can you get him to play it and see what it sounds like? It may be that you think you want that, but when you hear it performed the result may not be satisfactory.

Even transposed, what happens with the Db in place of the Eb? Does that solve the problem? You talk about Beethoven, but even Mozart was constantly accomodating his singers in operas. Since it sounds like you're comfortable with the choral parts, maybe you should leave them in Eb as you originally intended. Organ? Screw the trupet player! Give the organ a trumpet-like registration to play the high Eb and have the trumpet either not do it, or harmonize that line with a lower, more accessible line. I think if you're happy with the piece overall, it would be better to accomodate the trumpet (or solve it another way, or with the organ/trupet harmonized idea) to prevent a nasty part by rewriting it. I've run into the same problem before and it's frustrating as hell - you want this, but you can't do it. If you transpose, you rin the risk of making the bottom too low (or too muddy). It's a no-win situation unless you either change your mind, or succumb to the shortcomings of the instruments.

Best,
Steve

[reith]

Not sure if it is a final decision or whittling down, sort-of, then deciding to keep it or bin it.

The process goes like this for me:
i) I get an inspiration - can happen several ways.
ii) Part of the inspiration or brief will come to mind as a tune or harmony, wadges of sound, one or more effect. Usually comes with ideas about instrumentation.
iii) I note down what I can, sometimes on music paper, sometimes on plain paper, sometimes in other forms.
iv) If it's going to be feasible it goes forward sooner or later.
v) Bits/chords/fragments are tried out at a piano so I can check I've transcribed what I imagined - which I often haven't. If I can't think out the next bit I'll have left a blank. I might noodle around with something. And if I suddenly hit a super sound I write it down and it might change the whole piece.
vi) write it out a bit more neatly. go back to step v) until....
vii) it seems the whole piece works.
viii) get the fine detail sorted out; the harmony, flow, etc. Make decisions about how to present things in a final score, like should I use bar lines? What will make it easier to read and play.
ix) write in the bar lines - this often makes things look more awkward than they are so if it's for a soloist or duo I may forget bar lines and phrase things off some other way.
x) prepare a semi-full score then put it aside to ferment for a while (if time allows - with paid work it often doesn't).

So decisions happen all the way along. I'm not one to labour things too hard - if it doesn't work I file the ideas away. Sorry to say I can't get more technical than that.

reith

[Forte]

I find that it's difficult to think of music as a formulated series of choices, with only a limited number of correct outcomes for each choice. There are so many choices to be made that I wouldn't even call it choosing. I feel it's more like writing what you hear, and what you hear is the correct choice. Maybe that's just a musically uneducated opinion on the matter, since I certainly don't know enough about music theory to elimate a majority of my "choices." So to put it simply, I sort of go with the flow and then revisit what I've just written to see if it fits or see how it can be improved. Then I may rewrite again and again until it all comes out to my satisfaction.