Thank you for that piece on bar by bar. I've been doing that sometimes and now I see the damage it can do to my piece. Not that I'll never do it again, but I'll try to learn to do it only when it's right for the moment.
Thank you very much for this eye opening ideas! I'm new to VSTs and such and I was just looking for some advice on all this before spending a lot of money and NOT getting what's in my head. Really, thank you for this series!!!
When I was younger I played in a couple of rock bands. Most of the time the drummers would say "Reading music stifles my creativity". I could not show them charts, so I had to play the drums to teach them the drum part. Oh well.
Yeah - I've worked with many drummers over the years, and the best ones aren't always the ones that read music. I've found myself just singing 'boom boom pah etc..' and letting them get on with it! EO
Thanks Michael - I don't know Staff Pad. Just had a look at their site - it seems like a great product, thanks for alerting us to it. I find orchestral sounds are usually better than solo instruments in most apps - a point I briefly touch on in the Part 2 episode. Personally I don't use any of the included stock sounds of any notation app (!) - I use third party instruments like VSL and Spitfire Or I just use a piano sound (see Pros and Cons Part One ). But everyone works differently - I'm using notation software to write music that will eventually be played live - I just want it to sound pleasant when I'm generating the parts, rather than aiming for something that sounds 'like real'. If you use it to make 'recordings' that sounds like a real orchestra, that's a whole different mindset - I'd recommend mixing and matching different third party instruments. Personally I'd do this on a DAW, but notation apps are improving all the time. Even the solo instruments are getting better. EO
That's a very strange composing process you mention - just fucosing on one tiny idea to start with. I always have a large scale form idea when I start to compose something - that's a natural part of it. For instance, if I know how to begin a piece I almost always know how to finish it too - I just know. I never start to work with such details before the piece as a whole is finished. What I feel or hear in terms of texture might be vague sometimes, but I never start to work with that in detail before the entirety is done (which usually is spontaniously and fast for me). But being finished until a cetain bar sounds strange, because composing is not a straight line - very few composers write things in cronological order. However, when almost everything is settled as a whole, I often struggle to connect the dots, as to speak. And at the end their is always a lot of technical work left. (How to accompan that cello line and create enough space between the instruments, for instance, even if I know what harmonies and rythms I want.)
Very interesting. I agree that not so many experienced composers write this way - bar-by-bar. It almost never works, and is indeed strange. But I have worked with hundreds of younger composers and it is the second most common problem I find (the first is having too many ideas). In contrast, it sounds like you have a good process - the annoying, detailed technical work is left to the end of the process, when you are confident that the big architectural basis for your piece is secure. Thanks for your thoughts, and good luck with your music, EO
@@EarOpener Thank you! As you try to explain in your video, the big issue here is using the computer playback for this purpose instead of listening to your inner voice/ear. If you want to sit at your piano and work out the very first bars in detail becuase they set the mood for the enitre piece that is absolutely fine and normal, I think. ... or if you prefer to just use paper and pen. (This is not to say that the playback function is never useful later in the process.) I have only acted as the teacher one time. It was a piece a person wrote when he was very young and first started out. His sense of proportions was great. I judged there were three main issues: 1. bad voice leading 2. Too limited/strict in his musical ideas/ too few thematical contrasts. He mainly used just one motive and the texture was barely varied at all. 3. lack of good technique resulting in his large scale musical idea not coming thru clearly enough. (Here I also include things like modulating to a certain tonal region way too early in the piece.) When I first started out the main criticism I got was bad voice leading and too limited in my large scale planing of harmonies (like using the same chord too many times in the piece as a whole, for instance.)
very interesting. Yes contrast in texture is a massive rookie error. And structures that have no tension and release. SO many things to address! I sometimes wonder whether the best advice is simply "write loads of things". Eventually you will start to recognise your rookie errors and move on . . .
@@EarOpener Yes, I can see what you say. It's ironic, because apparently (even if I personally haven't been giving people feedback) many people have the opposite problem of hvaing too many conflicting ideas. You can of course have lots of different material in your piece - the problem is when you don't find a way to connect the different sections in a way that feel coherent. I assume this is what many qualified mucisians mean. Too much material can be an issue - especially if you don't feel that the musical ideas really belongs inthe same piece. That being said I think as a gerneral guide, you should have at least two contrasting material ideas. Even in very short pieces from the classical composers there are usualy at least two different ideas in this respect. How much and in what way they are connected varies signifcantly. I think a good way of teaching would be for you to give the student masterful examples from different composers. Look here how this composer uses the same material, but varies the texture and also the articulation of his main motives. Look here how another composer has a main A theme, but has a contrasting B theme . Etc.
I see where you are coming from, but I respectfully disagree with your second point out needing contrasting material. Take the first C major and C minor preludes in Bach's Well Tempered Clavier for example. They have one idea - absolutely zero contrasting material! I think it depends what you can do with the idea - and Bach knew what he was doing. I agree with your last point - we have really tried to do this in our videos - use lots and lots of very contrasting pieces of music to see the different strategies you can take. (eg see our video on Balancing complexity and simplicity) EO
I just discovered these videos, amazing work, you made all these approaches so simple, loving it! Please keep doing them, they are just invaluable.
Thank you! Enjoy exposing the channel. EO
Really enjoyed watching this and the thoughts presented. Thank you Paul🙂
Thank you Steve - really glad you enjoyed it.
Thank you for that piece on bar by bar. I've been doing that sometimes and now I see the damage it can do to my piece. Not that I'll never do it again, but I'll try to learn to do it only when it's right for the moment.
Thanks Chas. It's an incredibly common problem.- good luck with your music EO
Thank you very much for this eye opening ideas! I'm new to VSTs and such and I was just looking for some advice on all this before spending a lot of money and NOT getting what's in my head. Really, thank you for this series!!!
It is our pleasure Gustavo. Really glad it's useful. Good luck with your music. EO
When I was younger I played in a couple of rock bands. Most of the time the drummers would say "Reading music stifles my creativity". I could not show them charts, so I had to play the drums to teach them the drum part. Oh well.
Yeah - I've worked with many drummers over the years, and the best ones aren't always the ones that read music. I've found myself just singing 'boom boom pah etc..' and letting them get on with it! EO
for solo violin you are right, but for full orchestra I'm surprised you don't use Staffpad, the sound is quite decent.
Thanks Michael - I don't know Staff Pad. Just had a look at their site - it seems like a great product, thanks for alerting us to it. I find orchestral sounds are usually better than solo instruments in most apps - a point I briefly touch on in the Part 2 episode. Personally I don't use any of the included stock sounds of any notation app (!) - I use third party instruments like VSL and Spitfire Or I just use a piano sound (see Pros and Cons Part One ). But everyone works differently - I'm using notation software to write music that will eventually be played live - I just want it to sound pleasant when I'm generating the parts, rather than aiming for something that sounds 'like real'. If you use it to make 'recordings' that sounds like a real orchestra, that's a whole different mindset - I'd recommend mixing and matching different third party instruments. Personally I'd do this on a DAW, but notation apps are improving all the time. Even the solo instruments are getting better. EO
That's a very strange composing process you mention - just fucosing on one tiny idea to start with. I always have a large scale form idea when I start to compose something - that's a natural part of it. For instance, if I know how to begin a piece I almost always know how to finish it too - I just know. I never start to work with such details before the piece as a whole is finished. What I feel or hear in terms of texture might be vague sometimes, but I never start to work with that in detail before the entirety is done (which usually is spontaniously and fast for me). But being finished until a cetain bar sounds strange, because composing is not a straight line - very few composers write things in cronological order. However, when almost everything is settled as a whole, I often struggle to connect the dots, as to speak. And at the end their is always a lot of technical work left. (How to accompan that cello line and create enough space between the instruments, for instance, even if I know what harmonies and rythms I want.)
Very interesting. I agree that not so many experienced composers write this way - bar-by-bar. It almost never works, and is indeed strange. But I have worked with hundreds of younger composers and it is the second most common problem I find (the first is having too many ideas). In contrast, it sounds like you have a good process - the annoying, detailed technical work is left to the end of the process, when you are confident that the big architectural basis for your piece is secure. Thanks for your thoughts, and good luck with your music, EO
@@EarOpener Thank you! As you try to explain in your video, the big issue here is using the computer playback for this purpose instead of listening to your inner voice/ear. If you want to sit at your piano and work out the very first bars in detail becuase they set the mood for the enitre piece that is absolutely fine and normal, I think. ... or if you prefer to just use paper and pen. (This is not to say that the playback function is never useful later in the process.)
I have only acted as the teacher one time. It was a piece a person wrote when he was very young and first started out. His sense of proportions was great. I judged there were three main issues: 1. bad voice leading 2. Too limited/strict in his musical ideas/ too few thematical contrasts. He mainly used just one motive and the texture was barely varied at all. 3. lack of good technique resulting in his large scale musical idea not coming thru clearly enough. (Here I also include things like modulating to a certain tonal region way too early in the piece.)
When I first started out the main criticism I got was bad voice leading and too limited in my large scale planing of harmonies (like using the same chord too many times in the piece as a whole, for instance.)
very interesting. Yes contrast in texture is a massive rookie error. And structures that have no tension and release. SO many things to address! I sometimes wonder whether the best advice is simply "write loads of things". Eventually you will start to recognise your rookie errors and move on . . .
@@EarOpener Yes, I can see what you say. It's ironic, because apparently (even if I personally haven't been giving people feedback) many people have the opposite problem of hvaing too many conflicting ideas. You can of course have lots of different material in your piece - the problem is when you don't find a way to connect the different sections in a way that feel coherent. I assume this is what many qualified mucisians mean. Too much material can be an issue - especially if you don't feel that the musical ideas really belongs inthe same piece. That being said I think as a gerneral guide, you should have at least two contrasting material ideas. Even in very short pieces from the classical composers there are usualy at least two different ideas in this respect. How much and in what way they are connected varies signifcantly.
I think a good way of teaching would be for you to give the student masterful examples from different composers. Look here how this composer uses the same material, but varies the texture and also the articulation of his main motives. Look here how another composer has a main A theme, but has a contrasting B theme . Etc.
I see where you are coming from, but I respectfully disagree with your second point out needing contrasting material. Take the first C major and C minor preludes in Bach's Well Tempered Clavier for example. They have one idea - absolutely zero contrasting material! I think it depends what you can do with the idea - and Bach knew what he was doing. I agree with your last point - we have really tried to do this in our videos - use lots and lots of very contrasting pieces of music to see the different strategies you can take. (eg see our video on Balancing complexity and simplicity) EO