poppajol - i think your post is incredibly insightful. i'm not sure i agree verbatim, specifically in prioritization of orchestration and harmony, but that would be so inconsequential in what you've said it almost doesn’t bear mentioning except in just adding very little bit of dimension.

our experiences seem similar and what has brought me out of classical music is ironically what brought me into it. that is the blending of contemporary sound palettes with traditional instruments. for me the musical challenge is not identifying traditional structures, but new ones where the definition of music might be simply, "the ordering of audible events in time." everything seems a continuum to me with stockhausen and mozart contributing equal parts; heresy, I know. music no longer seems dissonant or consonant - just shaded in a way that transcends twelve notes yet still recognizing the need for tension and release.

to my knowledge nobody has done anything beyond scratching the surface when it comes to organizing what is sonically possible with synths and samplers and that translates to my mind as well because i don't (and don't want to) hear in just traditionally-orchestral structures. so being the product of what might be the deconstructionist era of music, i constantly find myself wondering how to put humpty dumpty back together again. i know i'm not alone and it would be interesting to hear how others wrestle with realizing the unquantifiable.

Martin:

I think you bring up some fascinating points. I know this thread is about the composition competition but I will take the position that we are discussing composition until a moderator tells us differently.

Regarding the ordering of Harmony vs Orchestration, in most cases it would be more appropriate in the opposite order from what I suggested. For wellsdeckers, my thought, which is entirely open to discussion, was that for his specific issue, it is most important that he really internalize all the sounds of the instruments, their various combinations and individual capabilities. I feel that this is something he should start on right away so that he can learn to understand what he is hearing in his head.

Regarding the rest of your post: I think you have identified the most challenging aspect of life for the modern composer. We have access to a virtually unlimited sonic pallete and the exploration of using that in a musical way is just beginning. Consonance, dissonance, scale, pitch, formal structure, etc. are all fluid concepts at present and nothing is sacred or heretical.

I love your definition of music as "the ordering of audible events in time." That is wonderful and, with your permission, I will certainly steal it and use it in the future.

Clearly, these ideas have been under intense scrutiny for many years now. I doubt that there are any clear "answers" nor should there be. That is the reason I use Mr. Persichetti's quote as my musical motto.

Thanks for you comments.

Be well,

Poppa

@PoppaJOL said:

For wellsdeckers, my thought, which is entirely open to discussion, was that for his specific issue, it is most important that he really internalize all the sounds of the instruments, their various combinations and individual capabilities. I feel that this is something he should start on right away so that he can learn to understand what he is hearing in his head.

uh hello, duh, i get it. this is very good advice. thanks. you can lift my music definition if i can lift your nothing sacred/heretical bit. very liberating. deal?

Martin:

Deal! [:D] Thanks.

Be Well,

Poppa

@PoppaJOL said:

[...] I know this thread is about the composition competition but I will take the position that we are discussing composition until a moderator tells us differently. [...]

This is an interesting topic and a fruitfull discussion - go on as long as the starter of this thread doesn't feel hitch-hiked [;)]

@Another User said:

... timpani, percussion, keyboard, harp and string

Does this mean ONE keyboard (i.e., orchestral piano or celesta -- or doubling on both, for example) and how MANY percussionists? The usual max 3 or so? How about marimba and/or xylophone? Is it acceptable to specify a mix of percussion elements that (say) 3 players could handle while switching around between gongs, cymbals, blocks, marimba, xylophone, Mahler hammer, etc.?

Looks like a very well-run competition -- especially the "blind" judging.

[:)] KevinKauai

Wes,

Martin and Poppa have given some great info, and worth much to anyone wanting to go forward.

I only add the importance of learning about each instrument. Range, sweet spots (Which string and finger position gives a more resonant tone etc.), limitations (Which register in the clarinets sounds best for which style), and tonal qualities, solo and mixed. (Clarinet solo, and clarinet with violas or 2nd violins etc.)

A broader point is mixing sections.

In a very general sense, W/W and strings mix better than Brass and Strings.

French horns and bassoons do well together, and these instruments often provide a 'blending' ability for a mix of W/W and Brass.

Listening to work with score in hand is a great way to understand more about blending instruments and sections. Beethoven's symphonies are great studies and give a lot of info in a concentrated session of listening.

Regards,

Alex.

hermitage59:

Very good points! It is vital to learn these many aspects of the instruments in terms of sounds you hear in your head! You don't just want it to be theoretical knowledge but rather you want it where you can make different combinations mentally and accurately determine how they will sound. The only way to do this is the way you described - to work on an in depth understanding of each instruments capabilities and varieties of sound and expression and to listen, listen, listen to them in various combinations. Doing this over and over with scores in hand, as you mentioned, is an inexpensive yet productive way to go about it.

I also think it is absolutely vital to hear live instruments, not recordings, at every possible opportunity in every context. It doesn't matter whether it's a great symphony or the local pub's Brass Quintet. You must hear live instruments until those sounds are permantly burned into your brain. Even the best recording ever made doesn't sound the same as a live instrument. The recording may actually sound better, and often does, but it is not the same as live. This will have an enormous affect on your compositions.

Be Well,

Poppa

The submission deadline for the 2006 Fauxharmonic Orchestral Composition Contest has been extended to March 18, 2006.

You can find out more about the contest and the judges here:
http://www.fauxharmonic.com/composition-contest/

The submission deadline for the 2006 Fauxharmonic Orchestral Composition Contest has been extended to March 18, 2006.

You can find out more about the contest and the judges here:
http://www.fauxharmonic.com/composition-contest/

@Another User said:

I certainly cannot hear the music in my head

I have a 'reverse' problem: I hear lots of things in my head but can't get t out fast enough (making me loose most of it). And to my dissapointment, I can't exactly pinpoint what notes I'm hearing, so when I do remember phrases, pieces or whatever, I waiste time (and consequently loose idea's) trying to figure out what notes it all were.

I'm the same. I pretty much hear full scores playing in my head, complete with lots of different nuances and instruments flying about in the background. I can't notate/write properly - although I try and notate everything when it's finished in Sibelius afterwards just for the practice - and I'm not all that clued up on orchestration (though I've started hitting the books).

But VSL allows me to sit down with the extensive library and determine whether it was an Oboe or clarinet I was hearing, whether it was a horn or trombone swell, what percussive instrument that was etc etc. And then when I do find the sound, I look up the instrument in my "Sibelius Instruments" program or encyclopedia just to make sure that the instrument CAN actually do what was in my head!

If it weren't for programs like VSL, I'd have to stick with rock songs and electronics. But even if I was capable of writing a score with nothing but pen and paper, VSL is the only way to (1) play it back and hear it to see if it does actually work or (2) show other people what it sounds like who can't play things in their head by reading scores, or (3) score low-budget productions that can't afford an orchestra.

@paulhenrysmith said:

The submission deadline for the 2006 Fauxharmonic Orchestral Composition Contest has been extended to March 18, 2006.

You can find out more about the contest and the judges here:
http://www.fauxharmonic.com/composition-contest/

Hi Paul,

It might be worth contacting the British Academy of Composers and Songwriters if you want to advertise these sort of competitions as well. They always advertise/send out bulletins to their membership (all composers) of competitions and events, regardless of restrictions (unless it's not open to UK residents!) Their website is www.britishacademy.com.

Thanks for the tip ... I'll contact them.

I'm utterly amazed at the range and quality of the 70+ submissions we've gotten so far. Orchestral composition is definitely alive and well ... and not just in film/TV/games. It's going to be great fun to perform the winning piece. (And maybe we'll perform some of the honorable mentions, as well).

Cheers!

- Paul

@PoppaJOL said:

wellsdeckers:

1. Ear Training - This may be the most important thing of all for you. In my opinion you should make this the number 1 priority in your development. Not everyone is lucky enough to hear music in their heads. Because you can, you must train yourself to understand what you are hearing.

2. Orchestration/Arranging - Many people would put Harmony before this and they are probably correct but, for me, Orchestration and Ear Training are the true keys for people who really hear the music already.

3. Harmony and Advanced Harmony - The better you understand the components of music the easier it will be for you to remember and to translate what you are hearing.

4. Composition - This is the skill and technique of taking what you hear and crafting into a piece that realizes all the potential in your ideas.
Poppa

That's truly excellent advice. I get so frustrated hearing music in my head and not being able to get it down that I always end up with my "best creations" staying in my head - the amount of work I've had to abandon after I've gone over the "ruining it" mark or times I've had to simplify things because I'm ending up with just "noise" in my head when I try and concentrate on it. But I never really thought about it in the way you've put it forward.

But yeah, I see what you mean. I suppose it's no different to when you have thoughts in your head and then you either 'notate' them by writing it down, or you speak them out loud, only as it's the language you're brought up on you don't need to think about or break down this process because it's become instinctive. Just like typing here at the keyboard. I think of what I want to say and I just type it without needing to sit down and work out each letter of each word I've just thought.

If you learn music properly as a language in the way you've suggested, I imagine it would be the same process. Your sentences become passages, words become bars, letters become notes. The grammar is the expression or the articulation.

I've started reading books on orchestration, and even though I'm not even half-way through the book, I'm already listening to sounds in my head and determining what instrument it either is or would work best being.

As for the ear training, is that literally just sitting at keyboard and hitting notes over and over again until eveytime you hear one you can recall it being an Fb etc?

@Another User said:

As for the ear training, is that literally just sitting at keyboard and hitting notes over and over again until eveytime you hear one you can recall it being an Fb etc?

its the composition or the familiarity of the keyboard or the voicings as well as the fingering that gives you the hint of what note is being played. And thus it will guess for you by ear. for Example an Eb key is a well known sweet key because where it sits in the keyboard. If you continously practice or are familiar with all the keys and know how they sound, they will tell you the notes. Almost all violin concertoes are written in the key of D. Because of where the violin sits. therefore one has a head start of what notes are being played. I learned this from an englishman in LA his name is peter something, i forget his last name, but he scored The charlies angels series among others. Elderly Experience somtimes is the best way to learn. The sensuous of man is truly remarkable.

As of the topic about writing music down fast enough before the thought disappears.

This is truly why the great composers died very young, it was to write continuously with no disrupt untill the composition was complete. Write it down quickly, untill the body gives up and research shown at 35 its when the body gives up. Its true to athletes also. Makes sense to me.

I've spend most of my life understanding these issues. My studies have been documented and published. It is without a doubt that speed in writting comes from knowledge and knowledge is theory. When I first got starterd, theory in books meant the scales and chords. Very elementary. There are some books like ramau and a couple of others, good luck trying to make sense out of century old written texts for the most part, nevertheless they didn't sufficiently supply me with the great composers tools. I had to discover and document as I went along. And most of my discoveries were all by accidental sensuous ear comparison. It took years to unvail.

Orchestration books are of-course helpfull also. For orchestration.

if you are a piano player of-course also makes a difference. The other instrumentalist all play piano also.

Ear training, to me, involves hearing how the notes relate to each other, not the absolute pitch (E-flat).

I'm certain this is why wellsdeckers wrote that harmony usually comes after ear-training because the two go hand in hand.

Learning how to hear the difference between a major triad and a minor triad is infinitely more important than cultivating perfect pitch. By knowing how to identify interval and chord qualities you can hear in your head a melody and think "root note goes up a major sixth then down a minor third, up a major second then up again a perfect fifth." All this without specific notes. Just relationships.

Translated to G major this would be: G-E-C-D-A C major: C-A-F-G-D

This is exactly how some of my themes have started (on the back of a cocktail napkin, at that!). Then when I get home I can find a good register/key for the theme while I orchestrate.


The fastest way to get started is to decipher popular melodies in your head to train yourself to hear relationships. Examples:

The first 4 notes of Beethoven's Fifth outline a descending major third.

The first two notes of Also Sprach Zarathustra is an ascending perfect fifth.

The five notes of John William's Close Encounter theme is up a major second, down a major third, down an octave, up a perfect fifth.

Clark

Hi Clark
We have to stop meeting like this.

I agree with you of-course. And alway's very interesting. But whats wrong with guessing what note is being played ? Have you any Idea what the music store sales people reaction is when you guess what key and what note is being played and what harmonizes with it. This is of my wonderful experience. And very flattering when people think you have some sort of magical powers and perfect pitch. When all along its nothing but sheer experience. Lets take for example the new Perkovia violin concerto that jay recorded for the present demo. I immediately noticed it in Eb, because of the voicings of the composition. It lies in the melodious key of Eb. So right away I knew that the aron copland's clarinet concerto is also in Eb because they use similar voicings and thrive on the same theme. So know you take the eartraining in harmony you were talking about and, you can name any note being played if needed. Perkovia went up and down a key here and there which could be of some hardship but if you recognize the voicings of those key's, one can also guess those notes. I make it sound very easy, but its Age and experience and the players like you clark that have the advantage. I bet you can name every tune written in the key of F, Clark. Because you use F more subconciously than any other key. Am I correct ? Please say yes , or I won't love you any more. And We have to stop meeting like this.

There's nothing wrong with having perfect pitch. It's actually a great thing. However, not everybody is blessed with perfect pitch. It takes a long time to cultivate, but the steps I described above will actually facilitate better pitch recognition. You yourself described this very thing, citing that you knew E-flat from something else you have heard.

It is also the same with tempo recognition. Using some other music to memorize pitch levels, intervals, and tempos is all part of the same process. In my experience, relative pitch recognition usually comes first when trying to cultivate all three of these things.

My point is that relative pitch is just as useful as perfect pitch, if not more so. It means that regardless of actual pitch level one can determine relationships between notes and I believe that ultimately is more important.

Sure I use F a lot. In jazz it is very common since easy horn keys tend to be flat keys for concert instruments (also Bb, Eb, etc.). But by liberating one's ear from thinking of pure notes, it is much easier to transpose and develop melodies and harmonies.

And one last thing: Having perfect pitch can drive you crazy. Hearing the creak of a door and being distracted by its pitch or the hum of your refrigerator, hearing a recording that is in the key of F but going crazy because the playback is fast so everything is a quarter step sharp--AARGH!!

Clark

@clarkcontrol said:

And one last thing: Having perfect pitch can drive you crazy. Hearing the creak of a door and being distracted by its pitch or the hum of your refrigerator, hearing a recording that is in the key of F but going crazy because the playback is fast so everything is a quarter step sharp--AARGH!!

Clark

I agree. I have had to learn to "turn off" my so called perfect pitch. If I was not able to do so, just looking at a French Horn part would cause some sort of "In Organum" to be going on in my head [:D]

DG

I can kind of (from a musically illiterate point of view) understand what you're both saying regarding pitch recognition. I think I can appreciate the principle behind identifying interval etc and major triads and the like above individual notes.

I've always had a difficulty in establishing individual notes. If I take a guess and say, "that's an E" it's probably a C#! And I still need a guitar tuner even after about 10 years of playing. But I tend to recognise sounds and their relationship with other sounds, without ever needing to give it a name. Ok, let me try and paraphrase that a bit better...

When I was younger, I didn’t have music theory books or piano books, so sounds didn't have 'names' to me - with no books telling me what a 'C' was, or where a 'C' was on the keyboard or a stave, how could they? So they were simply just sounds.

I'd try and replicate my favourite themes on the keyboard in the one-note-at-a-time fashion. Now I wouldn't know by listening that the notes for example were "C, E, G." etc, but I'd recognise the sound/tone the notes produced and almost instinctively knew where that sound appeared on a keyboard through a sort of "this key on this part of the keyboard makes this sound" rather than "this note is C6 on the piano" etc. I would also recognise when a note would rise by what we’d refer as a semi-tone or a tone or two tones etc. Again at that time I didn't know they were referred as such, but I recognised the 'gap' in the sounds.

So basically, once I'd identified a rough starting point, I knew by what degree a note may rise or fall. So even if technically I wasn't playing in the right key (maybe I started on a B when it should have been a C), the sequence of notes that followed sounded right.

It's weird because now I know some basics, I went back and looked at the music from these songs, and actually realised I played every single one in the wrong key - however the note progressions (when transposed to what I had actually been playing when I was younger) were all, incredibly, bang on.

Maybe that's why I have such a problem understanding theory. I listen and write by an aural instinct, and the moment I have to attach names or rules/principles to that, I forget it all or get very confused! [8-)]

Jonny