Looking for fellow composer for Electronica/Soundtrack

[Orpheus]

hi. i live in Arcadia (near Pasadena, CA.) anyone nearby that wants to do some music together?

i have a good sized studio, with some nice equipment (Mackie 32x8, Korg Z1, Emu Morpheus, a bunch of Roland sound modules, and an Akai S6000 sampler.) have lots of sampling CDs.

total of more than $50,000 of equipment... (not counting about $15,000-$30,000 worth of sampling disks)

anyway.... i like electronica and soundtrack. personally, i think i am a good composer, but with one serious weakness...............

i can't do drum tracks!

so.... if you rock at drums, i would love to do some stuff with you.

you can check out some music at www.fallingtodreams.com

or i can send you a CD upon request.

orpheus

 

[scrypt]

Orpheus: I live far away but wanted to say I support you in your love of composing.

Something you can do to understand "drum" tracks (though one of the fun things about electronic music is that *any* sound can function like a drum): transcribe and take apart your favorite sequences. I guarantee you'll learn [to] acquire more patterns and tricks even if you feel like a copymongrel. (Copying out other people's scores was how Bach learned to compose.)

A while ago, I liked figuring out tracks by Squarepusher, Total Science, Dillinjah and Amon Tobin. I thought that learning the busy stuff first would prepare me for adding space.

Also: It helps if you think of the percussion as fragments of a pointillistic contrapuntal line -- think of it as the dance version of Webern. I've always liked Arovane and Michael Zorn because they understand so well that percussion, like any part, should change in relation to the others. My personal preference is for percussion that sounds through-composed.

Here's a book I recommend: Twentieth Century Harmonic and Contrapuntal Techniques, by Dennis Esselstrom. His thesis: Every linear aspect of music composition (harmony, melody, consonance, dissonance, rhythmic density, meter, countrapuntal complexity, tonal progressions, orchestration, registration, dynamics) involves a contour of tension and release.

[Also: Since you've spent so much money on pro gear, I have to assume you've been doing this for some time and are probably trained. Please don't think of my comments as condescending even if they seem obvious. My parents were teachers and I've taught composition as well. I feel it is an obligation for us to share our knowledge with one another rather than watch each other grope in the dark for the light switch.]

[BTW: I just looked at your profile. I have a friend (but not a girlfriend) named Eurydice, too. She's Greek.]

 

[LobsterSan]

question to you two...

i am interested in electronic composition as well. though i am a music minor and have learned a good amount about classic harmonic progressions, i still feel quite lacking in terms of counterpoint and other compositional topics. when i talk to my music major friends i am overcome with feelings of being a fraud. i have a bit of a self-confidence problem, if you will, when it comes to talking to other musicians and composers about my music. i always feel as if i am not as qualified or do not deserve the respect of other musicians, because i feel as if i do not have the same amount of knowledge as them. i feel this failure to communicate is severely hampering my growth as a composer and musician.

my question to you is this: will increasing my knowledge through self-learning books and such help? or does everyone feel kind of dumb about knowing what they don't know, and it really just takes courage to get out there and talk about your music? in regards to composition, is doing the best way to learn? do you believe great composers can be self-taught or do they need rigorous structure and study? i may consider graduate school studies in music, but i am unsure whether this is really going to quell my fears.

 

[skippy]

i believe a lot of electronic music composers don't have much knowledge of theory. if you think about it, much of the rules and theory came about because it sounded good to the ears of the composer. though i suppose knowing theory can't hurt.

 

[scrypt]

Theory is an approach, not a pedigree. Counterpoint is learned (at first) as a series of rules to be followed, but that's not what it's about. The rules are there to allow you to think of parts independently and together at the same time, and to help you learn to give life to each individual part. Once you learn to think on that level, the rules can feel arbitrary and may be dropped -- even Bach didn't always follow them. If you can get to that point by practical experience, then fine. In my view, it's best to have both kinds of technique working for you. Whenever anyone hands me an unfamiliar kind of music, I can dive in because I know how to analyze and organize what I hear. But I also know how to apply what I've learned practically.

Think of theory and music training as a way to get you to think more fully and in greater detail. That's really what it is. Apart from that, it's just a changing collection [of] mannerisms that allow other composers to think of your music as legitimate. [The mannerisms don't] matter unless you're looking for a grant.

Still, I don't think Stockhausen or Arne Nordheim would agree that theory doesn't matter at all in electronic music. There's a hilarious interview with Stockhausen in which he's asked to listen to Aphex Twin and Richie Hawtin. He really hates them both, and when he's asked to articulate why, he reacts most strongly to the repetition. That's one of the key differences between Stock, who spent his life avoiding repetition, and Hawt, who spent his life embracing it like any other crossover minimalist.

Also: Despite the retro-futurism of his blips and clicks, Stockhausen still wants the musical events to "live" in the conventional sense -- it's as if he were trying to create a golem in sound. Whereas techno musicians are comfortable with letting a machine sound like a machine and using repetition "like a drug" (Stockhausen's words).

My preference for hearing parts interact in a contrapuntal way is one reason I prefer Arovane (and IDM) to Hawtin (and minimal techno). That being said, I still like to hear Hawtin pulsing in the room sometimes like static sonic furniture.

It never hurts to have more theory and technique. But if you're feeling inadequte next to people who have more already, you might be [overlooking] the valuable musical instincts you probably have already.

 

[LobsterSan]

skippy: this is very true. i forget about the tenets of how music theory came about -- and that is simply through experimentation. there is no absolute truth as to how music is to sound (unless a specific goal is sought), and it is important ot remember that theory is a tool.

thank you for the thoughtful response, scrypt. interesting to see what stockhausen's reaction to richard james was like... they are both so well regarded but in vastly different contexts/circles. i really like your first statement, that theory is "an approach, not a pedigree". i think i have been hampering myself by using my lack of theoretical training as a crutch. when things get difficult and i can not accomplish what i want, or when someone says something negative about what i have created, i use my 'lack of knowledge' as a way to keep myself from experimenting and as an excuse for the reasons why my music doesn't sound 'good'.

actually, i have been fairly absent from creating anything new in about 2 years. this stems largely from some comments (or lack of comments) from people when i have made my music semi-public and available. my sensitivity to the possibility of failure has kept me from the most important thing -- simply trying things and gathering experience from these trials. i see now that i have been like dostoevsky's self-tortured step-father character in his attempted novel, netochka nezvanova. granted, i do not think of myself as a genius (far from it), but my fear of failure is keeping me from even trying.

 

[Orpheus]

heh he... welp, scrypt, i don't feel you've condenscended at all. in fact, i don't really know any of the names you've mentioned.

but thank you... maybe when i have some time i will try to take apart the rhythms of my favorite tracks.

the only formal education i have had was the harmony series and counterpoint..... but i find that when i compose, i really don't follow the rules strictly... maybe they kinda define a starting point, but i really just write down what sounds good to me. but of course, i'm sure if you listen to my music, you can find many "mistakes."

but despite improper progressions (my professor would have killed me if she found out how sloppy i am)... i think the music still sounds acceptable to the laymen people.

right now though, i just want to have some fun.... hence finding a partner to work with. i think i would be best if i could concentrate on what i do best, and let my partner do the rhythms.

but thank you scrypt... i will definately follow your advice in the future.

.........as for lobster man: today's technology makes anyone a composer. you don't really have to have ANY talent.... just patience. it's not like hundreds of years ago you gotta actually play to know what your music will sound like. these days, i got my Sonar software and loads of synths. ....i don't play any notes personally. all inputed by mouse. you can check out my music @ www.fallingtodreams.com

i think you'll find many parts very authentic, and hard to tell from a real acoustic recording. of course, some parts sound kinda fake too....... but the point is, if you want to start, now's the time. the technology is there.

 

[scrypt]

I thought I'd give you a few examples of people who had a little/no training and people who had a lot. I might be wrong about a few of the details because I'm doing this from memory. Feel free to correct me.

Classical Composers:

Arnold Schoenberg, author of "Theory of Harmony," creator of the twelve-tone method, immortal twentieth century composer and composition teacher of Berg and Webern, was himself *untrained*. He was taught roughly a year's worth of theory and that was it. In a moment of characteristic idiocy, Pierre Boulez wrote a contemptuous article called "Schoenberg Is Dead," in which he dismissed this indispensable German Jewish composer as an "autodidact."

Khachaturian, composer of the Sabre Dance and several other famous works, never had a piano lesson until he was twenty-one.

Roy Harris, composer of what Aaron Copland called "a musical best-seller," the Third Symphony, never studied composition until he came home from serving in the army. I believe he was twenty-six.

Danny Elfman, indefatigable composer of endless oom-pah-oom-pah soundtracks and TV show themes, can't read or write a note of music. He works it all out on his sequencing software and has people orchestrate it for him. I still remember the outraged letters in Keyboard Magazine after he explained this in an interview.

-----------------

Matthew Herbert, world-class engineer/producer and house DJ, can compose music for orchestra and was trained in music thoroughly. His father was an engineer for the BBC Orchestra.

Kid Koala can read music fluently and has scratched turntable parts that were written by another composer. He did this with an orchestra, BTW.

Ryuichi Sakamoto, Ryoji Ikeda and many other so-called popular electronic artists from Japan have been trained thoroughly in classical music. Ikeda recently put out an album of string music called op. (short for opus).

Techno composer Cristian Vogel studied with Stockhausen himself (though I doubt he invites K.S. to his shows!).

Scandanavian Chain Reaction veteran Vladislav Delay was trained as a jazz percussionist, which is one reason why many of his albums (such as Multila, his best) haven't a steady beat. He also claims to hate most techno.

I hope that everyone here who feels insecure or inadequate about their training will continue to compose and to study whenever they need to. Lack of training can be an excuse for mediocrity, but so can training.

Another thrilling thing about composing/practicing instrumental music: You can work out your problems without ever talking about them. In my experience, composition is far more satisfying than therapy.

 

[Orpheus]

oh my god.... you have an incredible memory.

but i think the most inspirational to me is danny elfman..... gotta love his soundtracks. ...and he seems to work just like me... everything's done in a sequencer. though, i can read/write music, computers make life so much easier. .....hmm.... deannie elfman.... heh he.

hey, do you happen to have stuff that you personally composed on the internet?--i'd like to hear.

what do you think of my music?

 

[Czilla9000]

I live near Arcadia and want to compose...but I can't drive.


By the way, if I want to compose, is the first step to get a synth? There is a Yamaha S80 synth at school which his fun to play with. Is that a good synth for "Elfman" like soundtracks?

 

[scrypt]

Quote:

Originally posted by Orpheus hey, do you happen to have stuff that you personally composed on the internet?--i'd like to hear. what do you think of my music?

Actually, the only things I have on the net are very old: There's a simple piano improvisation on my matterland site and possibly a few wav. files from the days before mp3. I haven't updated the site because new books and CDs authored by your lonesome are less than imminent. (However, I will be doing a signing at a book fair coming up in NYC at my publisher's request.) And I hadn't been putting up my best work because I'm saving it for an album of instrumental music: part electronic and part acoustic.

I don't want to talk about your music (which I haven't heard yet) in public because I think such things should be spoken of in private (at first, at least). If you'd like to know what I think, please contact me off the board.

Don't PM me because my box gets full easily. E-mail me instead at the address I offer in my profile.

Czilla9000: Make sure the keyb you pick up is multi-timbral and has at least 64-note polyphony. You won't believe how fast you'll run out of voices. If you like Elfman soundtracks, you'll probably want it to do sample playback (unless you'll be doing that from your computer). In other words, it should have natural sounds like pianos and strings.

My favorite electronic program is still Reaktor.

 

[jessica00]

i dont compose or mix techno, but i listen to it alot. just do whatever gets yer blood rushin or gives you a chill.

 

[Orpheus]

czilla... 15 years old huh? ...heh he, welp, if you think you are good with rhythm, or have potential, i can pick you up. let me know.

or... you can just play around. get your feet wet. perhaps you'll be the next hans zimmer. i'll show you the equipment you'll need for a simple setup.

orpheus

 

[Orpheus]

so, no one wants to make any music together!?

you'd get access to some awesome equipment... some really great ones too. and a VERY LARGE sample library (maybe $15,000-30,000 worth. something like that...) got every type of sound you could imagine here. ...the only thing i don't really have is a virtual analog synth (i'd love to get a Nord someday)... though the Korg Z1 can make some very analog type sounds too... but besides that, i got pretty much everything you could want. well, no drum machine either.... i do all that type of stuff in a sequencer, but i'm sure if you're good with drums, you already have one anyway...

you're welcome to bring over your own equipment too....

well?

 

[skippy]

i'm downloading reason as i type right now. i've used frooty loops, rebirth, jeskola buzz, etc... i hooked up a midi keyboard to my computer, but i found out that it's just faster for me to pop notes into the sequencer with the mouse (i also found out that i couldn't play a keyboard if my testicles depended on it). i love software synths, it lets musical retards like me fiddle with music without having to invest too much cash into real synths.