Improvisation IS Composition but reallyfast.
Composition IS Improvisation but rrrreally slow.
These days, the question is not “What you can do,” it’s “What can you do in two hours?”
Lots of times I’m working really really fast, just winging in parts, so naturally the orchestration and part writing is not as “Classically Legit.”
It’s NOT a fault of the process, it’s just that my mental toolset (and my computer setup) doesn’t work that fast. Composers that DO have super fast arranging and orchestration chops tend to use paper for a lot of stuff, because:
1. They were trained that way so that is their comfort zone,
2. They are typically in demand so they can get a budget and a live ensemble so why sequence?
A friend of mine is just this kind of person. When composing a big band chart, for instance, he goes straight to a transposed score. When composing a jingle, he’ll do all the rough tracks in his sequencer to get client approval then replace parts or all of it (depending on budget) with live musicians later.
SO, my point is:
All my stuff stays in virtual form. No live musicians. So there is no need to write stuff down. Therefore, all intricate part writing is sequenced as well.
So, Dave, I must respectfully disagree with you. "Real hard writing" is unique to the process, not a result of something like pencil and paper.
Multi-voice fugues are easily manipulated in the matrix window and I can copy, drag and transpose themes and do all the things that paper does but better and faster. Plus, I get instant feedback on how it all sounds. I can make orchestration/arrangement decisions while this is happening as well, avoiding wasted time away from the “canvas.”
The Boulez quote and the "interacting with the materials" idea is right on the money. If the composition is meant to remain a virtual orchestration, then I would strongly urge the composer to train themselves away from paper.
The ONLY reason I would use paper is if I had a really slow computer system (or if I was writing for live ensemble).
Clark