Uncomfortable calling myself a "composer".

[James Steele]

Yes... thanks for your honesty, because it's hard for us to talk about. I think most people go through this-- I know I have. We all have inner voices that say these things to us. A lot of times, at least for me, it happens when I'm away from the writing process and I'm not creating. Sometimes when we're in the midst of working and creating music we can say to ourselves "Damn... this is pretty great stuff." Then we get away from it for a while and we beat ourselves up about how we're not the best singer/guitarist/composer/whatever and that so-and-so is better than we are. There will always be that person with more raw talent, but I think an earlier poster made a damn good point. The person who is out there self-promoting and being visible and networking is going to be the one that does well. Also, we have to develop strategies for not expressing those doubts in front of a client, etc.

I had a similar experience at a trade show and I'm hanging out with certain "name" guitarists that are all endorsed artists with a certain major guitar company that will go unnamed but should be pretty obvious. These are musicians I have admired for years. The whole time I'm thinking "What am I doing here with these guys? I should be carrying their gear for them. I don't deserve to be here." It's very human, very normal, yet something we have to develop our own strategies for overcoming because in the extreme it can be debilitating. I've read a book where they talk about developing an "opposing voice" in your head and when the nagging, self-doubting voice speaks up, you shout it down with the other voice that says, you are indeed worthy, etc.

It works for the junior senator from Minnesota:

[James Steele]

.

Oh, and I would LOVE to have this thread moved to the Composition forum, if that's ok with you and James.

Seems like that's a good place for it. Done deal.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

It's a funny balance: insecurity v self-assuredness. You have to feel competent enough to seek the work but then you're not sure you're right for the gig - or if you should be doing this at all. James wrote: "... we have to develop strategies for not expressing those doubts in front of a client, etc."

I have never feared doing this, especially at the creative team initial meetings. It isn't a sign of weakness, IMO. It's a sign that you don't think you have all the answers and there isn't one right or wrong answer to every creative problem/project - at least not as far as creation of something as personal as music and sound, sets, costumes, lights, video, direction, interpretation, etc. There are many answers. All right. All wrong. There is no right or wrong: anyone who knows all the answers doesn't know the question (or something like that.) Where have I seen that before?

Composer and artist stories about destroying and conversely defending their works abound. We are an impulsive lot as well. Think about the day (assuming there was one) when you decided you wanted to "be" a composer. How impulsive is that! You think your good enough that people will pay you to essentially think? And not only that, but to think of something as useless and ephemeral as sound for the sole purpose of listening to it. Not an air raid siren, or a backup warning beeper, or a phone ringing, or something useful and with purpose, but to think of something truly useless that people either: sit motionless in a room listening to; or wildly dance, cheer, get high and drunk to (now we're talkin!) while 'groovin' or maybe screwing to?; or just to use as "background" while passing their lives away. What are you, some kind of god?!

Clearly, we are not gods, and often don't make as good a living as people suspect. Some do, others get by, and still others keep at it regardless of the rewards or not. The one thing in common with these is that none of them STOP making music (or art). They don't give up. That's a beautiful thing. Ultimately, we do give up and disappear - no matter how great. What's left is the music. Kind of like an echo of our lives.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

It works for the junior senator from Minnesota

Is that the Jr Senator from MN? It also worked briefly for Harding and clearly for Reagan and Schwarzenegger (although I wanted to vote for the porn star...) but it didn't work out so well for Pia Zadora. OMG! Did I just use Harding, Reagan and Pia Zadora in the same sentence?

Time to take a break from ObtuseNation.

Thanks for moving the thread Mr. S!

[James Steele]

It's a funny balance: insecurity v self-assuredness. You have to feel competent enough to seek the work but then you're not sure you're right for the gig - or if you should be doing this at all. James wrote: "... we have to develop strategies for not expressing those doubts in front of a client, etc."

As always, I should have been more descriptive. What I mean is the sorts of expressions of doubt that can be self-damning. Not necessarily saying things "I'm not really sure if I can meet that deadline" or "that's really not my forte." I'm talking about perhaps saying things like "I'm no good at that type of music" or "I can do that, but you probably won't like what I come up with." Do you know what I mean? I'm not saying pretend you know everything. Not at all. I'm just saying one should stop and analyze every time one is considering making a self-depricating remark, consider the audience, and perhaps filter it out.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Got it, James, and I certainly agree with that! I've seen too many folks who come into a project knowing what it will look like when it's done - which is, of course, impossible. I meant no offense.

[Mr. Quimper]

Thanks to everyone for their insightful and thoughtful replies; you've truly helped me out quite a bit. I suppose my insecurities stem from the fact that I haven't been pursuing music my entire life; art in one form or another, yes, but this obsession with music/sound developed fairly late (well, compared to many other composers, anyway).

I also feel like I have somewhat of an apprehension towards certain terms, like "music" and "composer", which seem to carry more weight than say, "sound art" or "producer". The former seem loftier, more weighed down by history and expectation. That's part of the reason why I chose "sound design" over "scoring" as a field of study; audiences seem far more forgiving and have fewer expectations for how diegetic sound effects or soundscapes should sound in comparison to the realization of the underscore. This fear even manifests in my work, as my scoring tends towards the conventional and is roughly in line with what is heard in most films despite my personal musical tastes which tend toward the esoteric and avant-garde.

I think the fact that I haven't written music for live musicians also factors into this. Perhaps somewhere in my mind I still reserve the mantle of "composer" for those who have actually written and orchestrated music on paper to be read and interpreted by living breathing musicians.

[Frodo]

Perhaps somewhere in my mind I still reserve the mantle of "composer" for those who have actually written and orchestrated music on paper to be read and interpreted by living breathing musicians.

A rose by any other name....

[Mr. Quimper]

Perhaps somewhere in my mind I still reserve the mantle of "composer" for those who have actually written and orchestrated music on paper to be read and interpreted by living breathing musicians.

A rose by any other name....

...well, I'm not sure if real musicians smell as good as VIs, but they do tend to sound better!

[bongo_x]

Don't call yourself a composer if you're not comfortable with it, just say "I score films" or "I write music" or something like that. I say "I record rock bands" because engineers should know a lot more than I do. I know several people who have their credits listed as "recorded by" instead of "engineered by" for this very reason. You may or may not have seen that before, now you know why.

I think one idea is to stop judging yourself at all as much as you can. You don't really need to decide whether you're any good or not, that's up to the guy paying the bills (or the audience). They'll let you know.

bb

[FMiguelez]

.

Some of James' posts got me thinking about my own internal insecurities, especially when dealing with styles of music that I either, don't like, or have no experience writing. I would LOVE to hear your stance in the following, my composer friends:

We all are much better at certain styles than others.
If you get a gig where you are required to write outside of your comfortable zone, what do you do? And I don't mean JUST outside this comfort zone. I'm talking about outside what you like, outside of what you feel comfortable with, music that you know very little about (stylistically speaking).

Back at College, I took a class precisely about this. It was called "stylistic adaptation and research", or something like that. It was very nice, and it let me see for myself that you can always learn and understand unfamiliar styles. My final project for it was to do a Turkish-style music adaptation for a fictitious score. I read a lot about it, bought a bunch of CDs, studied them, and even summoned the dormitory manager, who was Turkish, to talk to me about that music.

BUT WHAT if you just HATE the style you are required to write? I almost never ever turn down gigs on that basis, but if someone hired me right now to write a Mariachi piece, or a Salsa piece... I REALLY REALLY don't like that music. I can even say I truly HATE it with all my soul (for MANY personal reasons. I especially despise Mariachis, but that's a whole new topic).

What would you do?

Would you hire someone else to write it for you? If so, how does that fit with the producers who are hiring YOU to do it?

Is it ethical to sub-contract someone with more skills for that particular style, and "team-up" with that person? (perhaps he does the writing and you the production part). Is this common in the USA? If so, how do you deal with the Director or producer who hired YOU to do this? How do you break it to them, so you don't look like an idiot? How do you explain them that this might be better for the project, but making sure they still call you next time?

Would you gracefully decline the project?

Would you swallow your disdain for the style and force yourself to do it, even if you know you will be not be enjoying it at all?

Where do you draw the line with your artistic integrity and work you don't enjoy doing?

If there is time to do the necessary research and go through the "familiarization" process, would you go ahead and do it?

I'm really curious about your views on these matters.

Also, there are other issues to consider. Not all styles are as "easy" to assimilate as others. For instance, if a Hip Hop beat maker lands a gig to write for a full orchestra, he will pretty much be f***** (pardon my french). Unless he can learn in a few days what takes others a lifetime to learn, of course.
Now, I know all styles take people a lifetime to be great at, but some are more "fakeable", or easier to grasp the main attributes, so one can do a decent job of emulating the style (even if it would make an expert-of-that-style cringe), but for practical purposes, it would probably be close enough.

Thoughts?

[MIDI Life Crisis]

FMig: I have only contracted a composer once for a gig. He was a student at the time but very gifted and wrote beautiful orchestral music (still scoring lots of movies presently as well). ANYWAY... I hired him to score a short section of a theater piece (with credit) and paid him very well to do it. The piece was unusable - I won't go into details except to say that the style I asked for (which I was perfectly capable of doing myself) was not even close to his rendition and I ended up re-scoring the section myself and not using his piece.

I've been in the situation of having to replicate a particular style many, many times and have always done well. Basically, if it's a hip hop or rap thing I can call on a wave sequenced synth or VI such as the Wavestation to come up with the basic backing track. Since I was a guitarist in a past life (as well as a drummer and singer) the rest is not too hard to snag. Country is a little harder and not my cup of tea, but again I can fake it as well as some of the guys I hear with hits.

More esoteric music like Klezmer, middle eastern, asian, and other ethnic styles do require research. In the old days, I'd search out and buy an LP, or CD, or go to a music library and listen until I 'got it.' Now I can Google or do an iTunes search and find the styles instantly. Often I will only listen to very brief passages unless there are structural concerns (as with belly dancing, etc).

Ultimately, I always "impose my sound" on the score so that even though you are hearing a score that might be for a play by an ancient Greek like Sophocles, it would still be recognizable as being from Mortilla. What does that mean? Well, if I told you I'd have to kill you. But that's a much bigger topic for me:

How does a composer create and retain their unique voice over a series of varied pieces? Can you tell a piece by Mozart v a piece by Beethoven or Bach on first hearing? I usually can and many others can as well. Same goes for a work by Badfinger v The Beatles or Led Zeppelin v Ten Years After. It's not just the vocals, it's "the sound" and that to me is far more important than arriving at a "good imitation."

In fact, it is what bothers me the most about so many film scores of late. So many composers are try to do soundalikes that they are loosing (or worse, never achieving) their own, unique voice. Some of that comes from near-sighted directors and producers who require you to do this. I would never agree. My music is my life and "the project" is only a part of that for a few months. If the project doesn't "fit" me I walk away and thank them for their time. OTOH, the challenge of creating something that has the duality of being something "required" and/or "familiar" while also being stamped with a unique, recognizable voice of the composer is really the "trick" isn't it? And getting a producer/director to buy into that can be difficult. But if you don't stick to your guns there, you're just a music machine IMO,and not really a composer. You regurgitate and process extant music without ever expressing your take on the world. And art is, after all, all about expression and storytelling.

There are so many soundalikes now it is really getting boring. Even composers who try to sound like themselves! I love the music of certain film composers, but when they try to recreate previous successes or simply re-use an effective passage in two widely different settings (or worse, a perfume commercial!) then they start to loose my respect just a little. It's about moving forward, not running in place - at least according to my esthetic. Of course, they are the ones with the Oscars, not me. And frankly, that's OK. Awards are temporary. Time is the true test and longevity the best reward a composer can get.

Sorry for the diatribe - but you asked.

[Mr. Quimper]

Don't call yourself a composer if you're not comfortable with it, just say "I score films" or "I write music" or something like that.

Well, that's easier done in conversation; less so in promotional materials, websites, etc: "Mr. Quimper": Sound Designer and Person Who Scores Films doesn't really have much of a ring to it.

[FMiguelez]

.

Thank you for your post, Mike. It's always a PLEASURE reading about what successful composers, such as yourself, have to say about these matters.

Now, you emphasized the originality and the individuality of each composer a LOT. And no wonder. I agree with you on all that. Also, that is not always easy to achieve, especially when dealing with Directors and producers, for the reasons you know.

But it's INSPIRING to see how strongly you feel about that, and that you ALWAYS make sure you have it your way one way or the other. It's sort of like a quest and requirement for you. I just want you to know that I am (and have been ) stealing those things from you and trying to incorporate them into my own dealings with stubborn clients who want sound-alike music.
I can't say I always convince them... but I'm starting to get good at it The more stubborn ones just tell me it's their way or the high way, so I just have to deal with that

But what I am still not very clear, and that was the original intended meaning of my post, is if you would hire someone else before declining a project. Suppose there's a style you just can't stand. Suppose you are not willing to suffer through the familiarity process with this style. Suppose you know someone you trust who could do the project instead.
Would you sub-contract him? If so, how would you deal and explain the director this? Is this common practice? Are there ethical issues here?
Or would you rather just decline it?

[MIDI Life Crisis]

I ham rarely challenged where I walk away from a paying gig. An exception was one of the largest private commissions offered to me in the 1990's. $30k to write an opera score - and it was something of a reversal of what we are talking about.

A "librettist" rewrote Shakespeare's story of Anthony and Cleopatra as Will's version was "all wrong." Red flag #1. The libretto was about 250 tightly spaced pages with the opening line (I'll NEVER forget that!) repeated several times over and over:

"We are the Roman soldiers, marching off to victory!
We are the Roman soldiers, marching off to victory!
We are the Roman soldiers, marching off to victory!
Watch as we do battle!"

Red flag #2. But $30k in 1994 dollars was a lot of money. He offered me $5k to start but I insisted on $30k and no less and he was convinced I was the guy to write it. So about a month passed and he called and said he raised $20 and would get the rest. So we met again. This time I started to talk music (which he actually knew something about). I mentioned that Samuel Barber had written a beautiful score for an opera with a libretto by Franco Zeffirelli that was performed at the Met in 1966. I knew the score thru my work with Martha Graham as she had choreographed a few arias sung by Leontyne Price

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0LywmN5DaE

These are no small players by any means and my comment was that while I could write a score for his libretto, the "competition" was pretty stiff and that I doubt I could do anything even close to what Barber did. Certainly not any better. His response?

"Oh that! I know the Barber score; it's a disaster!"

End of discussion. "Then I'm the wrong guy. See ya!"

So to answer your question a little more directly, I tend to NOT delineate music into styles. Certainly they exist, but it's only notes, sounds and rhythms and that is what we do. There is certainly a "feel" to different types of music, but it gets down to technique. Some people spend their lives in one genre and stay there. In fact, most do. But my training such as it is, is in theater, and that means you're writing for a 60's musical one week, a 1890's mellodrama the next and for Chinese Opera the following. Add to that a dance background where your writing for toy guns one day, prepared piano the next (maybe later that afternoon) and a 35 piece ensemble the next - followed by a work for piano 4 hands.

It's all about versatility as far as I am concerned, and Hollywood HATES that. They want to pigeon hole you into a style. "You're the guy who does silent films" I hear so often. Clearly that's not the case in my mind. Sure, I write for silents, but I also write for theater, dance, animation, film, TV, mime, radio and concert music and still write love songs on my guitar every so often. If they can't get over it, then I'd certainly look for other collaborators. Then again, if they need a score for a hula movie, then I'm your man.



ps- I apologize in advance if this is coming off as an egotistical rant. I don't know any impersonal way to talk about my views of music creation. I suspect that's why many don't broach the subject at all. What the heck?