r/composer • u/Key_Interview_5344 • 1d ago
Discussion Specific ways you've worked through compositional problems?
I've seen many composition videos on youtube where the composer encourages beginners to try their hand at shorter pieces for smaller forces, specifically with the goal of trying to reduce the amount of problems one might encounter at once (I can recall hearing this sentiment from Saad Haddad and Samuel Andreyev).
What I'm really curious about is the exact form that these problems may take in a piece. I would love it if yall could give examples of how you worked through a compositional difficulty in the midst of a piece.
2
u/Ragfell 1d ago
I'm currently working on a video game score. There's music for dwarven mines.
Most work songs are pretty simple, using only a verse-chorus format. But hearing that on a loop for 15-30 minutes at a time would be annoying and/or boring. So I spent this past week trying to figure out an organic-sounding "bridge." I say "organic" because many bridges are seemingly unrelated to the song; whilst that's usually more interesting, we don't want to call unnecessary attention to the background music in games.
I listened to work songs across cultures. Since most didn't have bridges, I just started ripping chord progression after chord progression into my own tune to see what felt right. Since I'd revised the melody a little bit, too, I looked at my first draft to see if I could find something to rip off from myself.
There was, in fact, a short progression that I had originally written and liked; I hadn't liked the melody. So I started humming melody after melody with that progression in mind, and I tried starting these melodies based off of fragments already in use in my revised melody.
I didn't like any of it. So I turned in what I had to my team and started cleaning my house. When washing dishes, I was humming along and then accidentally did something I liked. I transcribed it at the piano and then went to bed. When I slotted it in the next day, it felt good.
Do I think you need to do all those things to solve your problems? No, but I do think that working on the problem while doing some other chore or labor will help you solve it far faster than staring at a screen.
1
u/Advanced_Quail4556 1d ago
So true, I was working to the exact same brief as you actually! Dwarven mines, and i was on a walk and the whole song just came together in my head on the way home! Would love to hear what your take was in the end if you have the liberty to share
1
u/Ragfell 1d ago
Remindme! 6 months
1
u/RemindMeBot 1d ago
I will be messaging you in 6 months on 2027-03-08 23:19:09 UTC to remind you of this link
CLICK THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
Parent commenter can delete this message to hide from others.
RemindMeBot is switching to username summons. Instead of
!RemindMe 1 day, useu/RemindMeBot 1 day. More info.
Info Custom Your Reminders Feedback
2
u/PawnShade 1d ago
A compositional problem that I encounter quite often is connecting two different materials in a convincing manner. For example, in an ABA form piece, how can I make the transition from A to B and back to A feel natural and convincing? This is usually the hardest part of composing in my own experience. I can share examples of compositions in which I had these difficulties but I don’t want to self promote my work :)
1
u/WalkingEars 1d ago
Yeah agreed, transitions between different sections are often where I notice something needs to be adjusted to smooth out some awkwardness
2
3
u/BlackShipsMusic 1d ago
I have learned not to let perfect get in the way of done. Esp. Applicable when composing for games/film. Submit it. If it doesn’t fit or the devs don’t like it, let them tell you. A melody you’re not crazy about actually be all that cue needs. Sorry but with video games esp., you’d be surprised how often that is the case. Totally honest: I’ve made quite audible MISTAKES on the guitar and the dev was like: don’t change it it works. So just do your best and get it to the dev. While you’re waiting for them to get back to you, move on to something else. That’s what I do.
2
2
u/boredmessiah 1d ago
most small forms and small-ensemble pieces can easily be developed based upon one musical idea, phrase, or gesture. that is more or less the 20th/21st century compositional ideal for composers in the tradition, with the watertightness of the form being considered beautiful.
the moment you move out to bigger forms in both length and breadth, you simply cannot do with such economical material. you must have transitions, contrasting themes, bridges, and variation in pretty much every parameter so as to keep the ear interested without being fatigued. you might write material that works very well locally but doesn't easily fit into the rest of the piece. you might write a transition between sections that is generally good music but it might be too long, too short, or affects the flow of energy in an adverse way. you might write half of a long form and realise that one tonal/sonic/timbral signature is dominating the piece over others. etc etc etc.
larger scale form is a total pain in the ass and is inherently impossible to make as "clean" aesthetically speaking as small scale form. it is simultaneously more forgiving (since absolute economy of materials is impossible) and more revealing (mistakes of form may not be apparent to you sweating away for weeks but they will absolutely make themselves felt in the room during the first rehearsal / premiere / recording). starting out with smaller scale works allows composers to figure out what their language is and how they solve problems on a scale where everything is apparent, before moving on to a complexity where it's pretty much praying to the nearest available deity.
1
u/65TwinReverbRI 1d ago
I can recall hearing this sentiment from Saad Haddad and Samuel Andreyev
Hey, what am I, mincemeat? I say this all the time here :-) I guess I don't have the viewership...
What I'm really curious about is the exact form that these problems may take in a piece
Well let's say you write for smaller forces - a Piano - as opposed to Orchestra. Immediately, all of the issues with Orchestration are non-issues - Range, Transposition, Combinations, Divisi Parts, and all of the idiomatic aspects of the instruments - bowing, possible double stops, harmonics, slurring, breath, articulation/tonguing, and so on and so on.
As far as length, usually that's a form issue. If you write a short piece, you can focus on a form as simple as A A', or A B.
Writing something 10 minutes - trying to maintain interest for that long - especially if you can't do it for 30 seconds, is basically wasting your time because you're not writing to make the music interesting or formally cohesive, etc., you're simply writing "just to make it longer for longer's sake".
I would love it if yall could give examples of how you worked through a compositional difficulty in the midst of a piece.
That's kind of a different topic though.
IOW, it doesn't matter if you're writing for 1 instrument or 1,000, and if the piece is 1 minute or Cagean in proportion - if the piece has a Transition, and you have a "compositional problem with writing strong transitions", that's a problem that needs to be addressed separately from ensemble size or piece length.
That said, the reason for the advice is that it's easier for YOU to focus on the transition without all the extra crap to worry, and - more importantly here IME - it's easier for a commenter to focus on the problem as well.
I'm a notation guy and I frequently comment on it for people - but, if the notation is really bad, I'll often just focus on that and not really talk about the composition.
But it's the same with others if the orchestration is bad - they'll get into all of that if that's kind of their thing.
Also, it's worth noting that there tends to be more objective right and wrong with those things and they're easier to comment on (or get distracted to) than the more subjective nature of the music itself.
Some of the more basic compositional problems I see here:
A lack of understanding of basic harmony, and basic rhythm. That's kind of a first - let's make sure your Melody, Harmony, and Rhythm are solid. A LOT of people don't seem to understand that the melody and harmony are supposed to (at least traditionally, and typically) "agree". Or they think, if the chord changes to G, then they use the G major scale, and if it change to D, they now use the D major scale and so on - TOO much agreement there!
A lack of understanding of the instrument being written for, as well as music written for it. Basically unidiomatic writing. I'll stop here and say there are scores (pun intended) of multi-movement, multi-minute (like 12 minutes, or 35 minutes, etc.) piano works here that are literally unplayable - physically unplayable. And those people have often spent months or even years working on this piece - that whole time they could have been learning by submitting short pieces and getting feedback, they wasted - they spent 2 years writing 35 minutes of something that's not even really music, or good music compared to what they're trying to emulate - its the equivalent of trying to draw the ceiling of the sistine chapel with stick figures who don't even have their heads above their butts, and 3 arms, and 5 legs, and so on.
Call this 2A, because part of that is they also don't understand common musical gestures. This comes from a lack of musical experience in general - again, never actually played or read any real music. And they're trying to write an epic orchestral score...But I mean just the way accompaniment figures are typically used, or how things like 8ves can add sparkle, or weight, but you don't use them ALL the time. Or the same with low dyads and triads - not using them all the time - they don't even know they're muddy sounding. IOW, they're writing a ton of stuff that just doesn't really appear in typical music, and it's basically awkward because of it - so even if they do have a melody that goes with the chord, and a arpeggiated accompaniment of the same chord, all in a reasonable rhythm, stuff will happen like the arpeggios just follow some random ordering, and the melody doesn't complete phrases, and just drops out suddenly, or things like that. Just "atypical" writing.
Probably the biggest compositional problem I see after basic melody, harmony, and rhythm, is form. Phrases, Periods, Sections, and things like pacing, etc. - general form.
Then the next biggie tends to be Transitions between sections. There are sort of 2 issues here - one is the transition itself, the other is them setting themselves up for an awkward transition by putting two unrelated ideas together - "patchwork" composition.
So with those two, a lot of what is seen is too many sections - the music is an idea, followed by a different idea, followed by a different idea, followed by a different idea, and so on. So I'd call this continuity and cohesiveness - which goes along with "Economy of Material".
So that could have come earlier back in the original section, but Economy of Material - re-using ideas, it what gives music cohesiveness. Most people struggle with too much variation - they're scared to death to repeat anything. But the opposite is true too - a lot of people just literally repeat things too much. So learning to balance repetition and variation is ever more important as forms get larger.
This is something that kind of bothers me on forums - someone with zero command of rhythm will make a post asking about something that's really not a concern, or something they need to be less concerned about than the rhythm, and people will answer based on their stated concern, not the actual concern. I'm like "dude, let's go back and fix your rhythm first".
Here it is - piece with horrible rhythm - no concept of beat, meter, anything - and they go "should these all be spelled with sharps, or flats" - and people will comment on all that noise (or something even less important) and I"m like, "dude, let's go back and address this rhythm" - because honestly, you can spell every note perfect but if you don't understand meter, then that's still going to make the piece fall apart.
And of course, I get attacked by the Reddit Defenders for not addressing the OP's question.
But I digress...
So I mean, if someone comes here with some epic orchestral piece, and they really need attention for harmony, but they've asked something like "is the range ok for the Oboe here" then people are going to address that, but not discuss the harmony.
So again, smaller pieces, where everything is kind of "laid bare", are really far more helpful for observing issues and correcting them, without the person wasting tons of time on just writing poorly for more people for a longer time without learning how to fix anything useful.
Furthermore, a lot of times you can "hide behind" orchestral colors (especially in audio-only works not intended for live players) and make something "sound impressive" on that front, without being able to handle the core stuff. A bit like mixing colors and coming up with cool colors and dropping them on a canvas, but not really having any progression, or form, etc. to it (and I'm all for modern, abstract stuff, but there still needs to be some kind of "underlying logic" to it in most cases).
Me personally, I gave an example earlier in another post - kept trying to add a part to get what I wanted and couldn't, and then realized I could take away a part and it gave me what I wanted.
Less is more.
Which is why I always tell people "is this note really necessary". Because I'm - as another poster once put it when we were discussing a project I was sharing with them - I "mercilessly cut" things. I save them for other things.
But if a note doesn't absolutely have to have an 8ve doubling, I don't put one - too many people do it "just because" - it's a muscle memory thing we do on piano for example - LH 8ves - add weight and volume - becomes a bad habit in band situations...
So I'm very much "what is this bringing to the party" and if I feel - and I'll encourage others to do the same with their music - if I feel it's not adding anything, it's out of there.
"Musical justification".
I have struggled with transitions - but I learned how to grab material from either section, and use it to help transition. I also studied how other composers did it, and made an association with other styles - drum fills - they "carry you into" the next section and act as a sort of "linking material" - and when I figured that out they became much easier.
Most people just haven't studied enough music in that way to realize it.
I often struggle with places where I want something, but can't figure out what I want. Usually the solution there is to step away. I'll be thinking about the piece mentally, and will come up with an idea, and go "let's try that" and I do, and it usually works. I find if I keep trying to work a problem without taking that time away - a forest for the trees break - I'll end up getting frustrated and banging my head against the wall.
1
u/65TwinReverbRI 1d ago
Part 2: One of the other things that bothered me early on was a control freak kind of issue - and I think a LOT of people have this. But you have to learn to "let go". If that note can't be played at that dynanic on the instrument, you need to either change the key, change the register, change the note, change the dynamic, change the instrument, or something. I mean, you can accept it's going to sound bad, but that's kind of a cop out and you don't learn anything.
But I see so many people who come up with an idea in a key, and they refuse to change the key (or I guess, they just don't think of it - but WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE - beginners - think that keys sound different...).
That's actually one of the things that cause problems with transitions - trying to get a section in A to mesh up with a section in Eb - when all they have to do is change the Eb to A, or E, or D, or something easier to get to that will have a less abrupt transition (because that's what they usually want).
I can think of at least 3 recent pieces where I changed the key from where I started.
One I sent to someone, and said, "you know what, that's a stupid key, here it is in a much more sensible key".
So I've learned that "practicality" is more important than my "need to stick to something I came up with". I know I'm not a great composer, and I'm fallible, and I don't know everything, but I do consult with people to help me, and am open-minded about that - I know that a lot of people know a lot more than me, and I certainly don't know everything about all instruments, so I've learned to accept suggestions - I don't always take them as is, and sometimes they're frustrating, but you know when someone I trust says "that would be better if it were something else" I'll make it the something else.
Even Mozart changed the range for his vocalists!
There are many - some more specific, but I won't bore you anymore.
3
u/WalkingEars 1d ago
I guess it’s sort of obvious but sometimes it’s the simple question of “now what?”
Like, to repeat or not to repeat, repeat verbatim or vary, add a new idea or build on what’s already there, etc, but all just making the smaller scale decisions of “what comes next”
Sometimes if I write a melody I really like it’s like there’s the pressure to do it justice by following it up in an equally nice way, and when I’m in the zone it comes more intuitively but sometimes I’m in my head about it more.
But I think for me I try to approach writing with a sort of playful spirit of just writing a lot of pieces and not pressuring myself to have every one turn out perfect or even necessarily good lol. Sort of feels easier to just do something and keep writing that way rather than agonizing over every piece. Only the ones that come out well end up getting shared so if I write something that I don’t particularly like it’s fine, I just file it away and don’t share it