There's no forum for composing, so I'll ask here....

[IBBIAZ]

First off, seriously, anything you might be able to tell me would really help - this is pretty important to me.

 

Well, I'm applying to all my potential schools around Thanksgiving time. I want to get into the composition programs they offer, and if you know anything about that, you'll know that basically every school requires at least 3 original scores with your application, and those scores make up most of their decision. That's coming up pretty fast, so I figure I better get started on them.

 

The one thing I know is that they should all be somewhat different styles with different orchestration, and most of these schools are pretty traditional in their curriculum, so I know about what kind of styles they would appreciate more than others (no metal, folks).

 

For a little background information on my experience, almost all that I've done is either orchestral or small ensemble. I tend to be somewhat minimalistic in my composing, but I know that I should go a different way for at least one of my compositions. I have basically no experience writing piano scores, but really need to start, so anything you could tell me that would help me write piano pieces would be helpful.

 

If you want any more information about my background composing or anything, feel free to ask. You guys have helped me a lot before, and I'm hoping that you can offer the same guidance as you have previously. Just remember that ANYTHING you could say, even if you think it may be small, could prove to be a huge help. You guys rule.

[Poparad]

Try writting for two small ensembles (there's no need to write for a full orchestra or band unless you're applying to a really prestigeous school or a graduate school). Most schools prefer a string quartet (it seems to be the ensemble of choice) or a brass quintet. However, don't fee limited; you can make your own mixed and matched group, so long as the music is good.

 

Another option is to write for an unaccompanied solo instrument. Writting for your own instrument would be easiest, as you know what works and what doesn't.

 

The difficulty in writting for piano, or any other instrument you aren't familiar with, is knowing the idiomatic things about the instrument. Try to simply sit down at a piano/keyboard and try some things out. Another thing I find inspiring is to simply look at sheet music for piano pieces and see how things are visually layed out on the page. Your local public library should have plenty to choose from.

 

Also, if you're looking to pursue composition, and you don't already play piano, start! It's never to soon to get a head start on the instrument, and it really does greatly aid the composition process. You're going to have to learn it eventually because all composition programs in America require 2 years/levels of piano lessons as part of your education.

 

 

You're also right about trying to vary styles. A minimalist piece would be ok, but definately not more than one. Contrary to popular belief, many schools are becoming more open minded about styles, so you can be free to experiment in various styles, and not just the traditional serialism/cellular, chance/avant garde, or polytonal/quartal/bartok-ish/etc.

[IBBIAZ]

Yeah, I know what you mean about piano - I started playing it about 5 months ago. I can use it for compositional purposes, but am hardly a concert pianist.

 

What you said about mixing and matching groups - would it work even if hardly traditional at all or would that be frowned upon? I mean something kind of odd like maybe 3 cellists, 2 violins, a flute, and a trumpet, maybe.

 

Like I said, I can tend to be somewhat minimalistic, and I know that not all of my music should be - do you have any tips or tricks of breaking out of a mold like this?

[Poparad]

 

Originally posted by IBBIAZ What you said about mixing and matching groups - would it work even if hardly traditional at all or would that be frowned upon? I mean something kind of odd like maybe 3 cellists, 2 violins, a flute, and a trumpet, maybe.

 

 

So long as at least one of your pieces is in traditional instrumentation, you're fine.

 

 

Like I said, I can tend to be somewhat minimalistic, and I know that not all of my music should be - do you have any tips or tricks of breaking out of a mold like this?

 

 

Study pieces in other styles. Read up on a 20th century theory book that covers the various styles. "Materials and Techniques of 20th Century Music" by Stephen Kostka is a good one.

[IBBIAZ]

Originally posted by Poparad Study pieces in other styles. Read up on a 20th century theory book that covers the various styles. "Materials and Techniques of 20th Century Music" by Stephen Kostka is a good one.

 

 

I looked into that book, and I'll definately look into that later on, but I don't think that before I do these scores, I'll have near enough time to go through a 300-page text book.

 

Are there any general tips that you could give me or websites that may have some information?

 

 

I also realized that I didn't really give you any material to look at to see what I mean. I'll link something that I sequenced here:

 

http://comaxworld.com/mus/Kidd_Cabbage/Above _The_Fire.mp3

 

I talked to my music teacher at school and showed him that song, and he gave me some advice on getting out of a leading-nowhere, minimalistic state. I'll post some of his more general remarks here, so you can add your own or elaborate on what he said:

 

-try returning to old themes in the song, sometimes with different instrumentation or variation to give the song unity

 

-Instead of thinking just of the melody in the song and backing it up, try creating different melodies in different instruments that create harmonies of their own

 

-think harder about why you're doing certain things: like if you're repeating, why are you repeating, etc.

 

 

 

Thanks for your help so far. These compositions mean my future in college, and hopefully my future in what I do in life, so it means a lot to me, bud.

[Poparad]

 

Originally posted by IBBIAZ I talked to my music teacher at school and showed him that song, and he gave me some advice on getting out of a leading-nowhere, minimalistic state. I'll post some of his more general remarks here, so you can add your own or elaborate on what he said: -try returning to old themes in the song, sometimes with different instrumentation or variation to give the song unity -Instead of thinking just of the melody in the song and backing it up, try creating different melodies in different instruments that create harmonies of their own -think harder about why you're doing certain things: like if you're repeating, why are you repeating, etc.

 

 

 

Those are all very excellent comments; I probably couldn't say anything better.

 

Keep in mind that when you are trying out for a college composition program, they are looking at you for your potential to learn and try new things; not whether or not you have already mastered the numerous styles of modern classical composition.

[MorePaul]

IBBIAZ

 

It might be helpful if you tell us a little more about your background

 

like are you familiar with some of the trad texts (or the view/techniques distilled from them) like Fux, A. Mann, stuff like that?

 

when you say your pieces tend to be 'minimal', how do you see them as minimal?

 

 

For one, try to frame the evaluation you are about to face not in terms of "success" or "failure", but in terms of being placed in an area where you can learn what you need to and remeber your musical education will most likely extend beyond a bacheloreat

 

as for things that may help you show some diversity (and these are just some thoughts to break you out of your current mode -- so sicking to these specifically isn't needed, but it'll give you some diversity checkpoints)

 

-on one piece seperate the composition from the orchestration [i suspect that you typically 'write for the intruments'? as opposed to write the music then orchestrate?...try thinking in purely structural terms as a diversity exercise], and on another piece integrate them (ie write to the instruments)

 

-put the CF in something besides the upper voice on one piece (at least during the initial structuring on the composition. Another thing that can help here is write to more strict contrapunctual rules, it can put you into some difficult resolutions, but engineering those resolutions can really add to the interest whereas a looser interpretation can rob a lot of harmonic motionm esp in the "inner voies"...I'd say do this during the 'design phase', if something comes off a little stilted, play that particular part loose, but do that after you've pushed yourself to stay rich on the overall structure)

 

-write one piece homophonically, but for another piece do something with melodic/harmonic integration like a fugue or canon (that's help clear up the 'repetition'' problem and the 'melodic statement in innrer voices' in one swipe) if that's part of your sphere

 

to echo Pop (I think a lot of the above really already does, just in a less concise manner), I think sticking to trad 3-5 part pieces could showcase a lot in terms of strong fundamentals and I tend to think that focusing too much on orchestration may be detracting from the composition for these sorts of example pieces

(these guys understand the structure, tricks can be nice 'style points', but you aren't going to be able to fool them by plugging techincal holes with 'flash')

 

Most importantly -- accept who you are and where you are in your journey, both in terms of what you can do and the results of the examination.

 

[IBBIAZ]

 

Originally posted by MorePaul IBBIAZ It might be helpful if you tell us a little more about your background like are you familiar with some of the trad texts (or the view/techniques distilled from them) like Fux, A. Mann, stuff like that? when you say your pieces tend to be 'minimal', how do you see them as minimal?

 

 

 

Backgroundwise, I've only started getting much into classical composition in the past year or so, but I've taken three years of theory, so I have an idea of what I'm doing.

 

I... don't really have any familiarity with any of those texts that you're talking about... sorry.

 

And when I say that my pieces are very minimal, I mean it in the fact that they're nice to listen to, but tend to drag and lead nowhere. You listen and think "Well, it's a good listen, but there's nothing really memorable about it." I know what I'm doing harmonically and have that basically down, but there's no hook in my music.

[MorePaul]

Originally posted by IBBIAZ

 

 

Backgroundwise, I've only started getting much into classical composition in the past year or so, but I've taken three years of theory, so I have an idea of what I'm doing.

 

what kind of theory have you been studying? (it might give us a handle on where you are coming from -- often if someone enters composition from a certain genre or their interest in composition grew from playing a specific instrument, their approach can show the natural bias to that)

 

And when I say that my pieces are very minimal, I mean it in the fact that they're nice to listen to, but tend to drag and lead nowhere. You listen and think "Well, it's a good listen, but there's nothing really memorable about it."

 

hmm, it can be a confusing term b/c minimalism can be in reference to a certain approach, and historical movement in composition. Yes, some of the apsects you bring up can be a common criticism of some of that music (esp from those who don't particularly like it), but minimalism itself,doesn't have to be a victim of that.

 

 

 

I tend to find myself applying the term "trite" as a term of critique as it describes (critically, and hey I self-apply it a lot) a work (musical or otherwise) that's maybe stale or lacking a statement as the term doesn't attach itself to a particular idiom (so one wouldn't confuse "bad minimalism" with "minimalism" a style)

 

I find that, in the beginning - compositions will tend to be somewhat trite (as one is learnin their mechanics and one is actively trying to 'color within the lines') -- so it's kind of par for the course

 

I know what I'm doing harmonically and have that basically down, but there's no hook in my music.

 

when you mention "hook" are you thinking of "hook" as in a pop song where one may have a single flashy element to grab attention (the hook) or are you thinking more in terms of just "generally interesting" (but may lack a specific hook)

 

when you mention you feel comfortable with your harmonic understanding, are you used to working contrapunctually, or would you say you tend to work homophonically? (this kind of ties in to that background question)

 

 

just trying to get a handle on where you are coming from so that maybe we can offer some more "customized" thoughts

[IBBIAZ]

what kind of theory have you been studying? (it might give us a handle on where you are coming from -- often if someone enters composition from a certain genre or their interest in composition grew from playing a specific instrument, their approach can show the natural bias to that)

 

 

I studied general theory at my school. Really early classical, most of it, like lots of Bach. Basically the ones that show us the general rules and don't stray too much outside theory barriers so that we don't get skewed guidelines. I'm taking more advanced theory this year, though, so I'll learn more guidelines outside of the general 'rules'.

 

 

 

when you mention "hook" are you thinking of "hook" as in a pop song where one may have a single flashy element to grab attention (the hook) or are you thinking more in terms of just "generally interesting" (but may lack a specific hook)

 

when you mention you feel comfortable with your harmonic understanding, are you used to working contrapunctually, or would you say you tend to work homophonically? (this kind of ties in to that background question)

 

 

 

When I say hook, I just mean a general interest kind of thing. Mine seem dragging.

 

And mostly, I work homophonically, but I'm still doing well with contrapunctually....

[MorePaul]

Originally posted by IBBIAZ

 

I studied general theory at my school. Really early classical, most of it, like lots of Bach. Basically the ones that show us the general rules

 

So like general 4 part choral type harmonies and such

"Harmonize this CF" that kind of stuff

 

 

And mostly, I work homophonically, but I'm still doing well with contrapunctually....

 

That's kind of the sense I got listening to the one piece (that you are most comfortable with a homophonic way of approaching it - are you from a Jazz or popular music background? primarilly guitarist by any chance), but one piece, - I thought -might be a little small of a sample, so I'd rather have your self-eval there.

 

I fear that the comfort with contrapunctual stuff is mainly in the grammar (ie the mechanics you've learned so far) as opposed to a way of thinking (hey, we all have our 'native' approaches, so don't take it as a slight, just sort of a 'where you're comging from')

 

This can certainly tie into what pop and your primary instructor are talking about.

I suspect that you are most used to the "harmonize this CF" or it's compliment (solo over these changes)

 

that can kind of yield works that are a bit trite if one is trying to produce a contrapunctual work out of it

 

A couple of things that may help...as the guys above mentioned, I think you may be working the counterpoint "correctly" in that the voice leading is smooth -- but, not reaslly insteresting melodically..so they are just sort of tere being slaves to the CF.

 

Try working with a CM (Cantus Mushus ) -- by this I mean, establish a melody=ic theme, but as you harmonize that, think about the melody that is getting constructed in another voice AND here's the deal, revise the "CM" to serve the secondary melody

 

One thing that can help with this is make a short theme that has variations as a melody throughout the piece (you can use this theme in the secondary melody to really call attention to the fact that it has melodic statement)

If you are comforta ble with Canon and fugue forms, you could really highlight this kind of thinking in a piece like that

 

another way you could approach it is cadentially, again, start with the basic "Harmonize the CF" idea for an opening statement , but then make that slave to cadential movement

(as an example one nifty trick to do is to "rotate" keys through extensions through the circle of fifths -- you can copy and alter the theme in these new keys for interest)

 

Something that can become kind of trite is if the supporting voices simply rhythmically "snap to a grid" underneath the CF maybe with some passing tones in there to try to give is some flavor -- so that, they sort of appear as "chords" as opposed to independent voices that harmonize

(you've probably heard peopl mis=phrase Bach fugues so that the fugue-y goodness isn't highlighted as the theme folding in on itself, but rather sounds like chords under the theme...sort of missing the whole point)

 

 

is any of this helping?

[IBBIAZ]

So like general 4 part choral type harmonies and such

"Harmonize this CF" that kind of stuff

 

Exactly

 

 

That's kind of the sense I got listening to the one piece (that you are most comfortable with a homophonic way of approaching it - are you from a Jazz or popular music background? primarilly guitarist by any chance), but one piece, - I thought -might be a little small of a sample, so I'd rather have your self-eval there.

 

 

Yup, good guess. I originally played guitar and most of what I play on guitar is progressive metal type music.

 

 

I fear that the comfort with contrapunctual stuff is mainly in the grammar (ie the mechanics you've learned so far) as opposed to a way of thinking (hey, we all have our 'native' approaches, so don't take it as a slight, just sort of a 'where you're comging from')

 

 

So you mean it's something that you can't really learn, or something that you have to learn just through practice?

 

 

 

A couple of things that may help...as the guys above mentioned, I think you may be working the counterpoint "correctly" in that the voice leading is smooth -- but, not reaslly insteresting melodically..so they are just sort of tere being slaves to the CF.

 

Try working with a CM (Cantus Mushus ) -- by this I mean, establish a melody=ic theme, but as you harmonize that, think about the melody that is getting constructed in another voice AND here's the deal, revise the "CM" to serve the secondary melody

 

One thing that can help with this is make a short theme that has variations as a melody throughout the piece (you can use this theme in the secondary melody to really call attention to the fact that it has melodic statement)

If you are comforta ble with Canon and fugue forms, you could really highlight this kind of thinking in a piece like that

 

 

Awesome, I'll try working with something like that right now.

 

another way you could approach it is cadentially, again, start with the basic "Harmonize the CF" idea for an opening statement , but then make that slave to cadential movement

(as an example one nifty trick to do is to "rotate" keys through extensions through the circle of fifths -- you can copy and alter the theme in these new keys for interest)

 

 

Yeah, I know what you mean. I've tried things like that and they usually end up sounding alright.

 

 

Something that can become kind of trite is if the supporting voices simply rhythmically "snap to a grid" underneath the CF maybe with some passing tones in there to try to give is some flavor -- so that, they sort of appear as "chords" as opposed to independent voices that harmonize

(you've probably heard peopl mis=phrase Bach fugues so that the fugue-y goodness isn't highlighted as the theme folding in on itself, but rather sounds like chords under the theme...sort of missing the whole point)

 

 

Yup... that's me again. haha

 

 

Yeah, things like this advice really does help. Thanks a lot, man. You gys are great.

[1001gear]

This is good. More.

What is 'CF' ?

[Poparad]

 

Originally posted by 1001gear This is good. More. What is 'CF' ?

 

 

Cantus Firmus (Fixed Song). Early church music in the middle ages was written around a fixed melody with the other voices added to that to create harmony and countermelodies.

[1001gear]

Thanks.

[MorePaul]

IBBey

 

. I think it probably is just a matter of time and attention to it. About up to this time you were probably mainly concerned with the "grammar", which is appropriate at the time. Now you are looking to move more to "creative writing" now that you have your grammar down...just like with prose, "grammar" exercises without anything else will read a little stilted, so it is with musical constructions.

 

I'm not really worried for your ability to absorb/learn the material -- why?

well, you really self-identified "problems" (or areas you are unhappy with), so the mental "ear" is there noticing it, and you are secure enough to self-critique and welocme critique from the outside.

and FWIW - the problems you came in here with seem to fit what I would expect to see from where you are (this speaks to you accurately, honestly assessing what's going on)

 

as it may be 11th hour (or at least 9th hour), I realize the "brain dump" might not be the way to go...sure, stretch on a piece, but don't tilt at windmills by trying to pull something out of a hat (I categorically deny that particular piano jury ever happened to me )

 

One approach you may want to take is to submit (judgement call here), with your work (and you may already be asked to submit some sort of explanitory text), a self-critique of the pieces (or you may be able to explain this in interview...the written version helps asyou can frame your thoughts without getting nervous, it shows dilligence, and they can recall it more easily)

 

Explain where you are overall, parts of the pieces you thought worked out, where the pieces didn't satisfy, what you hope to learn...that kind of stuff

As pop mentioned, they expect you to be ready to learn the material, not know the material -- So I think you have some strong cards to play in your ability to self-critique

[IBBIAZ]

Just wanted to thank all of you guys for your help on this.

 

I'm bookmarking this thread to always look back on for helpful concepts and if I need more help, I'll just post it in this thread. Thanks you guys.

[IBBIAZ]

Just a quick nother question:

 

What are your views on planning out a song structure as opposed to writing the music in whatever order it comes?

[Poparad]

 

Originally posted by IBBIAZ Just a quick nother question: What are your views on planning out a song structure as opposed to writing the music in whatever order it comes?

 

 

I do a bit of both. I prefer songs with at least some sort of basic organization (total free-form is a bit random for my tastes), though songs that are too divided into even sections (like most rock/pop music) can get a bit too predicable.

 

I tend to write more loosely with form, though I do have sections to tunes for contrast (but I try to make the transitions between sections as smooth and seemless as possible).

[MorePaul]

 

Originally posted by IBBIAZ Just a quick nother question: What are your views on planning out a song structure as opposed to writing the music in whatever order it comes?

 

 

hi Ibb - I think it can vary piece by piece and needs to serve the artistic statement.

 

If there is a strong conceptual/structural statement, you may want to start with more planned structure.

 

If, however, you are "songwriting" you may want to let the "lyrical" (read figuratively) statement guide the structure.

 

* (you are writing a particular type of piece and want to follow that convention to call to the fact that the piece is of that family or the concept really needs that tight exacting expression or you are necessarily constrained by other factors such as a dance)

 

 

 

One thing that is kind of nifty is that using different workflows can help "shake things up" and give your (mine..."one's") work some different feel.

 

One approach to try is to be firm, but flexible -- tyou can start with a structure, then revise, or start freeform then tighten it up

 

The first will probably help if you are feeling the piece is mushy and doesn't make any statement. The second may be a good exercise if you feel the works are becoming stilted

[IBBIAZ]

Hey guys, I'm back. I just finished a string quartet to submit as part of the few compositions to send to schools, and wanted to know what you other music guys have to say about it and if you've any criticisms on it or comments in general. It's a string quartet (2 violins and 2 cellos) in A major in the style of early classical. Let me know what you think!

 

http://comaxworld.com/mus/Kidd_Cabbage/SQ1_Movement_1.mp3

 

I also uploaded a midi file of it so if you really want to go in-depth about something, you can have the sheet music.

 

http://comaxworld.com/mus/Kidd_Cabbage/SQ1_Movement_1.mid

 

Since I finished that, any ideas for what to do next? Maybe a piano piece?

 

If a piano piece would be a good choice to try, could you give me any tips for writing for piano? I've never tried piano before, but I guess you have to start sometime! Thanks for your help.