Most people believe composing music is sitting at the piano and begin, guided by one's inspiration, to strike keys and meticulously write them down on the staff. It's very difficult to explain them that writing music is, in principle, independent of instruments. As a matter of fact, this is quite true. I'm not speaking about the very abundant musical literature where the instruments are not specified (think of the Art of the Fugue). We could play Beethoven's Fifth with no (musical) instruments at all.
Instruments have timbre. Now, it is possible to produce sound with no timbre at all. This would just be a sinusoidal wave generator. These waves are at the basis of any sound produced by musical instruments and correspond to the fundamental frequency of that sound. Instruments add other frequencies (waves) above the fundamental, making their tone much richer. But the important thing is that these added waves give color (timbre) to the sound produced by any musical instrument.
Now, what the sinusoidal wave generator does, is to remove all the upper frequencies (not really but the effect is the same) and leave only the fundamental. In this way, we have here a sound which is musical, but has no timbre at all. So, playing a tune with an audio oscillator --another name for the device, is equivalent to playing with no instruments. Of course, there is an instrument: the audio oscillator itself.
Very well. In this way, we have that music is independent from instruments in a very essential way. Getting back to the composer, there is no need for him, he does not depend, on the availability of an instrument. He can get to the piano, to see how a novel chord sounds, but the essential process it developed inside his mind. A composer deserving that name will not use the piano in general. But there are exceptions, of course. If he is an accomplished pianist, as Beethoven was, he can get carried away by an improvisation and then translate the result on paper. See how he said once that he could remember every note of his improvisations. I'm no authority to speak on B's compositional methods, but see how he worked and reworked his ideas --his sketches are a proof, before committing them to a more definitive form. And was he at the piano at these moments. Maybe, but he used to walk a lot while taking notes.
The cinema, in the same way that it does not know how to show a true chess game --one of the characters says "Check mate" and the other looks surprised, has taught the public the wrong way in what touches musical composition. Everything happens in the composer's head, and from his head goes straight to the paper, the musical instrument being no more than an auxiliary tool in the best case. Again, there are composers and composers. Ravel used to write for the piano and then transcribe for full orchestra (if somebody know better please get me out of my error). And it is probable that some of his compositions were born out of his dealing with the instrument. On the other hand Charles Ives only played the guitar, and in spite of the poliphonic nature of this instrument, I do not think it played a great role in writing the sonata Concord.
And then the orchestration phase comes, where, of course, the piano, guitar or whatever has no function at all. However, when Gershwin was writing the Concerto in F, he hired an orchestra and checked fragment by fragment if the realization corresponded to his wishes. There are always exceptions. And, of course, music is a mental process not only in the composer's head, but in the listener, when he tries to remember or just evokes some music.
Instruments have timbre. Now, it is possible to produce sound with no timbre at all. This would just be a sinusoidal wave generator. These waves are at the basis of any sound produced by musical instruments and correspond to the fundamental frequency of that sound. Instruments add other frequencies (waves) above the fundamental, making their tone much richer. But the important thing is that these added waves give color (timbre) to the sound produced by any musical instrument.
Now, what the sinusoidal wave generator does, is to remove all the upper frequencies (not really but the effect is the same) and leave only the fundamental. In this way, we have here a sound which is musical, but has no timbre at all. So, playing a tune with an audio oscillator --another name for the device, is equivalent to playing with no instruments. Of course, there is an instrument: the audio oscillator itself.
Very well. In this way, we have that music is independent from instruments in a very essential way. Getting back to the composer, there is no need for him, he does not depend, on the availability of an instrument. He can get to the piano, to see how a novel chord sounds, but the essential process it developed inside his mind. A composer deserving that name will not use the piano in general. But there are exceptions, of course. If he is an accomplished pianist, as Beethoven was, he can get carried away by an improvisation and then translate the result on paper. See how he said once that he could remember every note of his improvisations. I'm no authority to speak on B's compositional methods, but see how he worked and reworked his ideas --his sketches are a proof, before committing them to a more definitive form. And was he at the piano at these moments. Maybe, but he used to walk a lot while taking notes.
The cinema, in the same way that it does not know how to show a true chess game --one of the characters says "Check mate" and the other looks surprised, has taught the public the wrong way in what touches musical composition. Everything happens in the composer's head, and from his head goes straight to the paper, the musical instrument being no more than an auxiliary tool in the best case. Again, there are composers and composers. Ravel used to write for the piano and then transcribe for full orchestra (if somebody know better please get me out of my error). And it is probable that some of his compositions were born out of his dealing with the instrument. On the other hand Charles Ives only played the guitar, and in spite of the poliphonic nature of this instrument, I do not think it played a great role in writing the sonata Concord.
And then the orchestration phase comes, where, of course, the piano, guitar or whatever has no function at all. However, when Gershwin was writing the Concerto in F, he hired an orchestra and checked fragment by fragment if the realization corresponded to his wishes. There are always exceptions. And, of course, music is a mental process not only in the composer's head, but in the listener, when he tries to remember or just evokes some music.
Comment