Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

183,173 users have contributed to 42,281 threads and 255,002 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 6 new thread(s), 19 new post(s) and 63 new user(s).

  • This is an almost existential philosophical discussion about the sheer heart of music. I don't have any opinion on well or not writing of a traditional notated score, but I wanted to express my point of view concerning the conservation of music itself and its reason of being.
    Why do people sing? Why do they imitate birds? Why do they enchant in rituals? Why do they dance and therefore produce rhythms...?
    Birds can sing lovely (romantic) tunes, but are they in fact? Actually not. Most birds sing a fairly agressive song to let opponents know where their territory is and not to amuse human ears. All the-like forms of 'music' have a reasonable explanation. The question is: is that music as we tend to understand it? So many good composers have tried to imitate these chants and put every detail down in written scores. Why? It would have been a lot easier to improvise on appropriate instruments the calls of animals... But somehow, they wanted us to kow how it is done, to have us remember, to show their mastery or skill, or simply to create a repeatable and identical sound for many generations (almost scientifically).

    Is it absolutely necessary to make a written score? Of course not, but it is some kind of certainty that the creative work will survive (be it in dusty archives). Digital versions are always tied to digital means of performance and storage known today. For how long will that be the case? Look at the CD (disappearing). The MD long time ago forgotten... The sampling techniques we all praise today will eventually vanish and be replaced by entirely new ways of playing back on 'computers'. Even that magical instrument will finally be dusted under by history and evolution.

    My point is, that there is no real urge or necessity to write scores, but it seems (for now) the most reliable way to preserve your creations. It is indeed a rather slow and tedious job, but it remains the universal storage of music for later performance or study. I'm an old school musician, I even couldn't create a simple song within a DAW. Somehow I need the physical visualisation of staffs and notes to see (and hear) music. The dots and squares in a piano roll don't speak to me at all. And since I'm not a piano player, I can hardly use my limited skills to play directly in a track in order to have a lively performance... I just need my pencil and paper (computer keyboard and screen) to enter my ideas and emotions. Old fashioned or outdated? Maybe, but who cares. It's my way...

    Max


  • To me music does not exist unless it is written down on paper, preferably by candlelight while wearing a powdered wig.  Though jazz can't be and needs recording media.  The best  thing for that purpose is 78 rpm ceramic discs. 


  • last edited
    last edited

    @William said:

    To me music does not exist unless it is written down on paper, preferably by candlelight while wearing a powdered wig.  Though jazz can't be and needs recording media.  The best  thing for that purpose is 78 rpm ceramic discs. 

    :)))


  • Yes... by candlelight in the middle of the night... I've given up on wigs though--my hair is getting good in the back... More to the discussion at hand, my recent music is notated clearly and exactly, with nothing left to chance, unless there is a stochastic process in play, in which case the the defining handles on that process clearly define its behaviour and constrain the limits of that behaviour. The majority of it however is defined as a set of clear rules for acting on musical symbols. For example, meter and rhythm are specified by means of a grammar that produces a temporal hierarchy--meter--in which temporal proportions--rhythm--is represented as ratios--1:1 whole note, 1:2 half note, 1:3 whole note triplet, 1:4 quarter note, 3:8 dotted quarter note, 1:5 fifth note, 1:7 seventh note, this being an answer to suggestions made by Henry Cowell in his New Musical Resources of a few years back. Melodies are defined as figures--melodic shapes--mapped to scales or modes with rules for combining one or more figures under classical rules of transformation into longer phrases, periods, sentences. Orchestration--grouping, following, leading, tacit, tutti, etc. are guided by the same metric hierarchy, so, in a sense the main score might be thought of as that structure which can be represented in a variety of readable forms, machine or human. An example of one of these in human readable form is in the two attached images. The linear one shows the basic temporal hierarcy. The circular ones show the thirty-two possible unique combinations of compositional structure in such a five-level temporal hierarchy. So these are some aspects of my compositional notation practice. Once a MIDI performance is composed, that can, of course, be turned into conventional common music notation if there are musicians that would like to perform it. All of the dynamic and performace articulation details can be easily infered from that.

    Image

    Image


  • These are very interesting insights and quite fascinating thoughts! Well, I'm going to add mine, too.

    I'm making music with synthesizers and with samples for more than 25 years, and I've never fleshed out a single score. I've occasionally jotted down some ideas (like Schubert did in taverns), but my composing is too much "sound-bound", meaning: My aim while composing is to make something sound good, and especially with samples it's a lot about finding the right articulations and getting the whole mix to sound appealing.

    I consider myself to be composer, mixer and producer in one person, and as such I'm constantly switching between those roles. If an instrument blurs or deters my mix, I substitute it or let it play a different phrase - even if a real orchestra could do the trick. Whileas composers for real orchestra finish their score and rely on the score to contain all the musical information needed for the orchestra to play it according to their musical vision. I think this purpose is absent in midi composing and - at least for me - it's too much of an iterative process for score writing to be involved.

    To be honest, I'd love to have a full score of my works in my hands - just for the feeling of it :), but it's so much work and it would only pay if I had a real orchestra ready to play it. Or could there be another reason?


  • last edited
    last edited

    @William said:

    To me music does not exist unless it is written down on paper, preferably by candlelight while wearing a powdered wig.  Though jazz can't be and needs recording media.  The best  thing for that purpose is 78 rpm ceramic discs. 

    I wear my powdered wig every morning when I go to my studio.  Otherwise I don't get paid!   ;>😉


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Max Hamburg said:

    My point is, that there is no real urge or necessity to write scores, but it seems (for now) the most reliable way to preserve your creations. It is indeed a rather slow and tedious job, but it remains the universal storage of music for later performance or study. I'm an old school musician, I even couldn't create a simple song within a DAW. Somehow I need the physical visualisation of staffs and notes to see (and hear) music. The dots and squares in a piano roll don't speak to me at all. And since I'm not a piano player, I can hardly use my limited skills to play directly in a track in order to have a lively performance... I just need my pencil and paper (computer keyboard and screen) to enter my ideas and emotions. Old fashioned or outdated? Maybe, but who cares. It's my way...

    Max

    Max, you are aware I assume that DAWs do contain notation editors?   I've never used the PRV in the 26 years I've been using a DAW.  It's the dumbest thing ever invented, at least when compared to standard music notation.  If DAWs didn't have notation, I could hardly compose and produce the kind of music I do.   The following DAWS have notation editors:

    1.  Cubase

    2.  Sonar

    3.  Reaper

    4.  Pro Tools

    5.  Digital Performer

    6.  Logic


  • last edited
    last edited

    Hi Jerry,

    Of course you're right about most DAWs having a scoring unit. I started a couple of years ago with Logic Pro X. It was my first DAW experience and I found it hard to handle, very complicated, mainly in the automation section. Moreover I found the notation unit very messy and clumsy (probably due to my ignorance).
    Since I work with Notion (notation) and since Notion has been acquired by Presonus, it was obvious that I would work with Studio One Pro. It is a lot easier and they planned at Presonus to integrate it in Studio One. But so far, they haven't. The only cooperation between the two is rewiring from Studio One to Notion (which is not what I would want) and mainly for audio tracks. Importing midi data from Notion is quite tricky as well, but they are aware of this and will tackle it in an updated version.

    In my limited experience I noticed that most DAWs are actually designed to work with audio and are not so effecient and user friendly with midi.

    I'm still hoping (and I'm definitely not alone) that Presonus one day will fully integrate Notion in its DAW, so that both worlds can live in peace (audio and midi) and that classical composers can produce - if necessary - a decent score and parts.

    I remember a fellow composer in the States (Randy Bowser), who composed only with his DAW (I think it was Sonar) and hardly did any writing of parts and scores. Only when absolutely necessary he extracted a notated version of his creativity, but he hated this. (That is quite the opposite, but I can understand it. Without notation, I would be lost in dots and little blocks...)

    And I banned my powdered wig and all the candles some weeks ago. Much too hot over here. A cool summer wine is more efficient nowadays... 😉

    Max


  • last edited
    last edited

    @Max Hamburg said:

    Hi Jerry,

    Of course you're right about most DAWs having a scoring unit. I started a couple of years ago with Logic Pro X. It was my first DAW experience and I found it hard to handle, very complicated, mainly in the automation section. Moreover I found the notation unit very messy and clumsy (probably due to my ignorance).
    Since I work with Notion (notation) and since Notion has been acquired by Presonus, it was obvious that I would work with Studio One Pro. It is a lot easier and they planned at Presonus to integrate it in Studio One. But so far, they haven't. The only cooperation between the two is rewiring from Studio One to Notion (which is not what I would want) and mainly for audio tracks. Importing midi data from Notion is quite tricky as well, but they are aware of this and will tackle it in an updated version.

    In my limited experience I noticed that most DAWs are actually designed to work with audio and are not so effecient and user friendly with midi.

    I'm still hoping (and I'm definitely not alone) that Presonus one day will fully integrate Notion in its DAW, so that both worlds can live in peace (audio and midi) and that classical composers can produce - if necessary - a decent score and parts.

    I remember a fellow composer in the States (Randy Bowser), who composed only with his DAW (I think it was Sonar) and hardly did any writing of parts and scores. Only when absolutely necessary he extracted a notated version of his creativity, but he hated this. (That is quite the opposite, but I can understand it. Without notation, I would be lost in dots and little blocks...)

    And I banned my powdered wig and all the candles some weeks ago. Much too hot over here. A cool summer wine is more efficient nowadays... 😉

    Max

    I've used Sonar for some 25 years.  The notation editor in a DAW is designed for MIDI input and editing, and, if you accept it as such, it works great for sequencing and composition.  Some people expect a DAW's notation editor to be a publish-quality program, able to generate parts for rehearsals and otherwise be a finished "score".  I think that is too high a bar, Sibelius, Notion, Finale, these are dedicated score programs for those purposes.  All DAW's notation programs work OK, but you have to really dive into them and figure out how to use them efficiently.  Once you do that, they work.  I've produced, so far, 9 symphonies and 14 albums composing directly in Sonar and though I have some complaints, I am able to do what I need to do.


  • I can only speak for the score editor in Logic. While it is not meant for publishing, it can be used to quickly prepare readable parts for the musicians (including the musicians in an orchestra). A classical music performer will find it quite unprofessional, and most of what is needed in a contemporary/avantgarde score is missing. But it will get the work done, in particular in film music or less academic-inspired fields.

    Paolo


  • PaulP Paul moved this topic from Orchestration & Composition on