Amateur Composer's F.A.Q.

Question to add:

- Obviously it is not a whole piece that I managed to compose, but a small motif because arrangements are quite difficult to do without a piano, for me..

Would you be able to?

Does Open Music and MaxMSP mean anything to you?

Aside from this, modern compositional methodology is very far from the approach to the instrument that one could have in the 1800s.

Read harmony in what sense? Harmony is the science that deals with the concatenation of chords; the 'how' is an object of aesthetics. Harmony is also the spectrum of a sound... so which laws?

pianothor wrote:

- Can you recommend a manual/website that illustrates the basics of composition in an extremely concise manner (I don't have a shred of free time at the moment)?

I don't think the pairing of music and synthesis is feasible; the study of composition is a path that the composer must travel... one does not become a composer with a text: 'composition for dummies' which, by the way, I have just discovered exists

http://www.amazon.it/Music-Composition-Dummies-Scott-Jarrett/dp/0470224215

I had opened this topic which perhaps can be useful in some way

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/760-si-puo-davvero-studiare-composizione-da-autodidatti/

pianothor wrote:

- Can you recommend a manual/website that illustrates the basics of composition in an extremely concise manner (I don't have a shred of free time at the moment)?

I don't know, but you can get an ironic and meaningful flash by taking a look at the video posted here

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/2399-corso-rapido-di-armonia/

Before approaching composition, one should have some theoretical basics; I mean that without knowing what an interval and a triad are, I doubt much progress can be made... whether you have time available or not.

There is a wide variety of literature on how harmony has evolved over time, and there is certainly no single manual that can contain everything. It depends heavily on which aesthetic you want to delve into.

pianothor wrote:

Is this thing about writing "openly" something possible for any musician?

It depends on too many factors; if we are talking about a tonal piece in 4 parts... obviously yes. But what level of complexity are we talking about?

pianothor wrote:

- Why do I often notice composers judging as wrong that which is intended by the author? Why should we respect the laws of harmony 100% according to many composers?

Which composers and in relation to which authors?

I didn't understand the second question.

The important thing is that you feel good; the "where" to write is entirely subjective, as are almost all the procedures to adopt for writing. In this forum, there are people who write directly on the computer and there are people (like me) who always write at a desk, regardless of the medium.

Allow me a joke: the infamous G. Allevi said in an interview that he conceived one of his best songs while sitting on the toilet... I would add "...and it shows"

The discussion regarding study is different: studying harmony, counterpoint, the fugue, compositional forms, etc., serves to have solid foundations to start from. As I have said several times, studying composition (more or less) simply means becoming a "composition technician"... being a composer is different, but the two things cannot exist alone, in the sense that you cannot have one without the other.

A "composition technician" without music in their head might perhaps write music, but it will always sound "professional/mechanical," and a composer without technique will encounter a myriad of errors that will make their composition unpleasant to listen to.

And yes... I agree with Marzapane: there are no shortcuts.

As I was saying in another post, all composers start from the same technical base and then each finds their own style or decides to embrace a certain style, even if this latter statement is rather presumptuous (I have heard it several times from my colleagues), since we do not decide what music to write, but we simply write what is in our heads and that's it.

Thanks to everyone for the answers!

@Frank in the second question I was trying to get an answer to what happens today, a while ago I read an article that recounted how academies snubbed Keith Emerson.. Surely it has happened to many other emerging composers but Emerson is the only one I know...

Why is it that today, as soon as someone composes something nice and well-made and becomes famous, there is always that good portion of composers (most of whom are Masters) who must turn against them because they didn't compose the way they wanted?

Obviously I am not referring to Einaudi and Allevi

pianothor wrote:

Thanks to everyone for the replies!

@Frank in the second question I was trying to get an answer to what happens today; a while ago I read an article that recounted how academies snubbed Keith Emerson... Surely it has happened to many other emerging composers as well, but Emerson is the only one I know...

Why is it that today, as soon as someone composes something nice and well-made and becomes famous, there is always that good portion of composers (most of whom are Masters) who must swim against them because they didn't compose the way they wanted?

Obviously, I am not referring to Einaudi and Allevi

Yes, but I didn't understand who towards whom? Sorry, but you are speaking in general with a good dose of populism. You mention Keith Emerson, but among my contacts I have at least a hundred composers (of various educational backgrounds)... I read their comments daily and I don't find any connection to the content of this presumed article that you cite (is it traceable?)

Sorry for insisting, but "as soon as someone (who?) composes something nice (for example?) and well-made (for example?), becomes famous (always who?) there is always that good portion (meaning almost everyone) of composers (most of whom are Masters) (always who?) who must swim against them because they didn't compose the way they wanted? (... I fear that the world of composers reasons quite differently)

Sorry, I take the liberty of saying that I am a master... against which composer should I swim against and through which piece? Either concrete examples are given or the most obvious answer is to ignore the question as it makes no sense; to me, it appears to be a "non-question". In reality, all the questions appear to be full of a "distortion". Just to be clear: the teacher's only task is to show the student the constructs of various stylistic elements; once the student has understood what a style can be made of and how to govern it, their job is done. The fact is that it seems like a short thing, but it is a road that can be more or less long... it depends mostly on the student's abilities."},

I should preface that what I am about to say is a purely personal opinion; I am a conservatory student and not a teacher, so take what I say as advice from a friend

Personally, I dare say that there is no real "F.A.Q." for the composer, since every composer, amateur or otherwise, has their own way of writing. What concerns the study of Harmony and Composition mostly involves a series of "rules," or rather more like "tools," experimented with by great composers over the centuries which, as of today, simplify our lives because we don't have to experiment with everything ourselves, but instead have a solid foundation behind us.

That being said, if you find yourself comfortable in the open air, it means you have a certain affinity with this environment, and consequently, you feel more in the mood to compose. Personally, I haven't composed an actual piece yet, but rather many ideas that I intend to develop very soon, and I personally feel more at ease when it is raining and cold

As far as criticism is concerned, most of the time it happens either because the composer lacks great compositional knowledge or has not followed a course of study, consequently their choices will result in being somewhat "caustic," or because the critic does not share the composer's choices. Remember, however, that criticism, when it is constructive, is a pearl that must absolutely be respected; it could even prove useful to you

Regarding a manual, composition is a subject too vast to be approached in a synthetic manner; obviously, it depends on what you want to do. If you want to compose light music, you could research harmonic progressions and proceed as a self-taught person for the rest.

I hope I have been of help in my own small way

Thanks for your opinion Lowseling, look, I am preparing for the entrance exam for the 1st year of the Conservatory Bachelor's degree, so we are more or less in the same boat; you are already in, and I hope to join you.

I don't understand this thing:

As far as criticism is concerned, most of the time it happens either because the composer does not have great compositional knowledge or has not followed a course of study; consequently, their choices will result in being somewhat "caustic"

Who am I (a critic) to say that a composer's composition (amateur or not) is not beautiful? Obviously, it must be a Composition with a capital C; I am not talking about light music, but Music..

It's a bit like what I was asking in the second question...

pianothor wrote:

Thanks for your opinion Lowseling, look, I am preparing for the admission exam for the 1st year of the Conservatory undergraduate program, so we are more or less in the same boat; you are already in, and I hope to join you.

I don't understand this thing:

Who am I (a critic) to say that a composer's composition (amateur or not) is not beautiful? Obviously, it must be a Composition with a capital C; I am not talking about light music, but Music..

It's a bit like what I was asking in the second question...

The critic has every right to express their own opinion since the right to freedom of opinion exists. Often comments are given due to a disagreement with the composer's choices. One must then distinguish between a priori criticism and well-founded criticism; if I were to criticize you because you make a genre of music that I don't like or because you are young, it would be incorrect, but if I disagree with your choices, I have every right to point it out to you. Often criticisms are not made with bad intentions anyway, so I find nothing wrong with criticizing, or rather, commenting on others' compositions. In my view as a listener, commenting is the most appropriate form of expression.

pianothor wrote:

isn't it beautiful?

Beautiful or solid? Beauty is a subjective datum, solidity is an objective datum. In fact, the tastes of a critic interest no one, probably ...as Lowseling says, it is precisely that less subjective part that is interesting. I understand it can be annoying, but if someone puts themselves out there, they must also take the criticism ...in case it is deserved. Otherwise, one can stay closed in their ivory tower