Composers Best Enemies
In the ever-evolving world of film composition, technological advancements and established traditions offer an abundance of tools and methodologies that promise to ease the creative process. Yet, even as composers embrace a wide range of digital audio workstations, virtual instruments, and AI-driven music generators, they often also adopt certain habits and workflows. While these aids may appear to make life simpler, it’s crucial to consider their potential downsides. Over-reliance on certain tools or ingrained habits can be an artistic stumbling block, hindering both creativity and career progress. This article aims to shed light on these composers best enemies, exploring how something seemingly advantageous can turn into an enemy if not carefully managed.
Quantization
The Allure and Downfall of Over-Quantization
Quantization, an integral part of digital music composition, has been nothing short of a technological marvel. By automatically aligning notes to a predefined temporal grid, it cleans up any “human error” in timing, offering a neat and polished output. But this polish comes at a price. Over-quantizing can remove the very soul of a composition. The natural fluctuations in tempo that define live performances—those slight hesitations or anticipations that lend music its emotive power—are eradicated.
Beyond Emotion: The Problem with Precision
Such sterilization does more than simply strip music of its emotional resonance. It fundamentally alters how listeners engage with and respond to a composition. In a world overwhelmed by digitalization, people yearn for authenticity; the organic flow of sound that speaks to the human condition. Over-quantization risks silencing this unspoken but universally understood language.
The Fallacy of “Smart” Quantization
While basic quantization is already complex, “intelligent” or “smart” quantization ups the ante. These advanced algorithms attempt to intuit a composer’s rhythmic intent, automatically making adjustments. The trouble here isn’t just that they can make mistakes—although they do. The larger issue is that these tools can subtly erode a composer’s unique style and voice. In an age where originality is at a premium, this loss is costly, both artistically and professionally.
Doubt and Instinct: The Psychological Dimensions
These supposedly smart tools may misinterpret the composer’s rhythmic instincts, creating a subtle dissonance that’s hard to identify but easy to feel. The risk here is twofold. First, it can instill a sense of doubt about one’s own musical intuition. Second, it can lead to a final output that, while technically clean, lacks the elusive “spark” that distinguishes compelling compositions from merely competent ones.
Constant Tempo
Simplification and Sterilization
Adhering to a constant tempo, often set by metronomes or in-DAW tempo tracks, simplifies the composition and production process. The constant BPM (Beats Per Minute) is easy to follow, straightforward to mix, and convenient for rapid iterations. However, this efficiency sacrifices the musical ebbs and flows that imbue compositions with depth and character.
Industry Pressures and Artistic Trade-offs
Constant tempo is a symptom of an industry increasingly driven by deadlines and efficiency. A high-paced environment leaves little room for nuanced tempo variations and encourages “safe” compositions. Unfortunately, these often lack the dynamism and emotional engagement that set great film scores apart from merely functional ones.
On the flip side, composing with a variable tempo—filled with accelerandos, ritardandos, and other such nuances—can make a piece feel alive, more in sync with the on-screen action or drama. However, this flexibility can be a double-edged sword. While it brings life to a composition, it also presents significant challenges for orchestras and ensembles during live performances. This complexity demands skillful execution, making it a daunting but worthwhile challenge for composers.
Writing for Virtual Instruments
Shaped by Software: The Risk of Passive Composition
Virtual Studio Technology (VST) instruments have revolutionized film composition, offering unprecedented access to an enormous palette of sounds. But there’s a catch. These digital marvels come with their limitations—fixed tonal ranges, set dynamic scopes, and predefined articulations—that can subtly dictate the compositional process.
Active Composition: A Cognitive Imperative
The antidote to this passive influence is an active approach to composition, grounded in a deep understanding of musical theory and orchestration. A nuanced knowledge of these aspects can help a composer liberate themselves from technological limitations, expanding their creative horizons exponentially.
What clients need
The Needs-Wants Dichotomy
Navigating client relationships involves a subtle balance between understanding what a client wants and what the project actually needs. It’s easy to fall into the trap of prioritizing one over the other, often skewing towards the latter due to the composer’s own artistic convictions. This can result in a work that, while musically excellent, fails to meet the client’s vision, leading to dissatisfaction, project stalls, or even termination of contracts.
A Fluid Communication Channel: The Secret Ingredient
Successful client interactions rely on a two-way communication channel. This enables a flexible adaptation to feedback, encourages mutual respect, and fosters a collaborative atmosphere. Stubbornness and lack of adaptability are not just project risks but career risks. Thus, keeping an open dialogue is not a recommendation but a requirement for professional survival.
Hyper-Focus on Details
The Early Stage Pitfall: Detail-Orientation
There’s a time and place for focusing on minute details. While this meticulousness can be an asset during the later stages of a project, it can be a liability during the initial phases. The early stages demand a broader focus, one geared towards aligning the composer’s vision with that of the client. Over-emphasizing details too early can prevent this alignment, bottlenecking the project and leading to missed deadlines or even project cancellation.
Prioritization Through the Lens of Project Stages
A composer’s focus should shift depending on the stage of the project. The early stages are best served by broader strokes—defining themes, establishing moods, and setting musical direction. Once these big-picture elements are in place, attention can safely turn to the finer aspects—orchestration nuances, harmonic complexities, and detailed instrumentation, among others.
Composing is a thrilling journey, full of choices. Some tools and habits seem great. They promise to make life easier. But watch out! They can trap you. They can make your music less human, less unique.
We’ve covered several pitfalls today. Over-reliance on quantization can suck the life out of your work. Constant tempo can make your pieces feel robotic. Trusting your VSTs too much can limit your creativity. Focusing too much on what a project needs over what the client wants can lead to frustration. And obsessing over details can waste valuable time.
But it’s not all doom and gloom. Knowing the pitfalls can help you avoid them. Stay flexible. Keep learning. And always, always listen—to your clients, to your audience, and most importantly, to your own creative voice.
Remember, the best composers aren’t just skilled; they’re smart. They know when to use tools, and when to trust their instincts. By avoiding these common traps, you’re not just making better music; you’re becoming a better composer.
Author
Contents
