Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Composer's Lounge Is there anyone out there who still uses manuscript????

Same here. The respect is mutual... and I'm still a bit puzzled why you should listen to me, to be honest! :P

And to be further honest, I'm still waiting to know why someone would be bothered by the tools someone uses, instead be concerned (if so) to the final output... ???

Try doing high school english class! :P

My guess is that froglegs is wanting to know what others think of manuscript vs.computer input software. However, that's my view. (I also use manuscript for composing).
I'll let froglegs answer for himself, but in doing so, I have added my view

I definetely use manuscript. Once I'm done, I just engrave it to my comp in finale format.

I've experimented with both. I find I'm more creative at a piano, next choice would be my music DAW, last choice is my Finale machine. When I'm at the piano I'm imagining and hearing the music in my head. Typically at my DAW I'm working off scribbled notes and playing on a digital piano in the same room. My Finale machine is far from any instrument and I personally need the feedback from an instrument.

Like the others I don't care what vehicle someone uses to compose music. In the past those of us who compose at the piano have been denigrated as needing a crutch. I frankly don't get it. I'd much rather hear the result of efforts and decide if I like what I hear, after all that's how I compose.

The problem I have with this approach is that I tend to get carried away playing, and don't get anything written down. Sometimes I'll figure out how I want a few bars to sound, and then I'll think about what comes next, and then what comes next... before I know it, I've forgotten what I started with. It can be fun but, for me, it doesn't work out very productive.

The advantage of working on computer _or_ on paper is that you've got a permanent record from the start. I suppose I could use a MIDI keyboard and record all my 'doodles'. That way, if I forget what I started with, I could still go back and find it. I guess I could do the same at the piano with an audio recorder, but then I've still got to transcibe from the audio.

FWIW I think we all ought to try all the different ways there are of writing music, and see what works best. The problem is that giving each method a fair crack of the whip takes months. It took me months -- many, many months -- to get to where I could enter music into Sibelius faster than writing it out on paper. But now I have, I can't imagine going back to paper.

For me it's not about a 'crutch', but rather the fact that my hands (as a pianist) and my outer ears (as a listener) are accustomed to certain types of music and aesthetics! And I want out!

Not quite sure what you mean by that Nikolas, but I do recall you liking Radiohead. Thom Yorke is one of my favorites in contemporary/alternative genre of music. Amazing artist.

i thought this piece (and title) appropriate with your comment above. Great version of this piece.

Dara: I meant that I want to break out of my own habbits (as a pianist and as a listener). Of course on closer inspection such an effort usually leads to a more 'intellectual' type of music... :-/ And thanks for the video. I agree it's a great live version of this work! Are they not wonderful? (PS. It's so nice to see them working with scores! It's not something you usually see in a live rock concert, but then again it's quite difficult to pin down Radiohead as "rock").

As a not necessarily good pianist that's why I like writing at the piano. Every mistake leads in a new direction. Nikolas you just have to start listening to your mistakes. To be serious for a moment you've already realized the problem, the solution comes in exploring with your inner ear. Of course if that's too ingrained in your habits then perhaps listening to mistakes is a good idea.

Steve: Yes, I know! I hope that I'm going in the right direction balancing 'intellectual' and 'commercial' music. This is why I keep a dual personality in my composing efforts (concert hall AND computer games music! ).

Honestly it's quite helpful, and for a 3 year period I didn't have a midi keyboard in my studio, so I was working with the mouse alone! (And manuscript and pencil of course).

Manuscript and pencils are very reliable tools.

I think when people talk about piano being a crutch, there are two things to consider. First of all, the aesthetic of the instrument will subconsciously dictate your composition process. Also, the ability to internalize the entire process, that is to say the ability to hear something in your head and not need a piano to verify the notes, your workflow will be extremely fasts.

That is how beethoven was able to compose deaf. There is a certain point where you know how things will sound. Piano also does not quite translate in terms of orchestration. That is only learned thru trial and error and also listening to orchestras live with your sccre. That is the one thing you can notice with beethoven as he got deaf. Some of the orchestration was not quite there. Lots of conductors will amend the scores.

I think the piano is a great tool. I definitely like to play and improvise when coming up with themes. But when I have my themes and i'm sort of constructing the work, a piano isn't really needed. Nor do I use the sounds on sibelius as they just are not realistic and probably more missleading that anything. You use your internal compass because you know. You know how many horns you need to match a certain wind configuration without having to get an orchestra to play it.

There is the unfortunate standard of having a mockup for producers and directors ( film biz ) so eventually, you are forced to resort to samples to give an indication but again , your mock up isn't necessarily your actual score for orchestra. Mockups don't need to be accurate. For example , homophonic horns can just be played as chords with a program like Symphobia and you don't really have to voice each instrument because the director won't notice and the producer , well the producer , well lets not talk about producers.

The trend in the film industry is sort of sad in that most of the composers will give you a midi export of them playing piano and then notes. It is rare to even get the theme notated. I have worked as an orchestrator for a few blockbuster films with very well known composers and your don't get that much information. You have a team to work with but the composer in many instances wears the hat of the producer more often that the composer. I understand why and it isn't really a weakness of composers but rather a time issue.

You get a piano with the theme and it is rather obvious what the theme is as this is hollywood. Then you have some notes, you know the overall vibe the composer is going for and the type of instruments that will be playing but there is alot that an orchestrator will have to do. I mean often, you get the theme , instructions are , make this theme last 3 minutes. and then energetic underlined.

I was an assistant so i still had someone that would oversee the work I did so I had some sort of help but i've been on my own for a few projects and you need to understand the composer's aesthetic and you just go for it. You have backup solutions.

sort of off topic but it is a fascinating industry. Not quite as fascinating as the days of Steiner. Now that was interesting.

True, but not when you have to deliver several finished music track and the deadline is running... :-/ Too slow in that case. And what MadforBrad says...

I agree with most of what you've said, except this. If you've read Thayer's Life of Beethoven you know his neighbors complained about loud banging on the piano at all hours as well as singing. Beethoven kept a ruler by his piano by clenching the ruler in his teeth and touching the body of his piano it would transmit the sound into his skull bypassing the parts of his ears that were the problem. So even late in life Beethoven composed at the piano.

As for the importance of knowing from experience how things will sound I agree with you there. I have no problem hearing melodies in my head and notating them, it's when determining complex harmony and counterpoint that the piano becomes important for me.

That's where Sibelius becomes important for me

I can follow a melody, or a sequence of chords, without needing to hear it played. But I'm notwhere near being able to do that with counterpoint.

And although, as MadForBrad says, Sibelius is not particularly accurate for orchestration, it's a heck of a lot more accurate than blind chance. Since I rarely write for anything bigger than a trio, orchestration tends to be a matter of blind chance for me on the rare occasions I have had to attempt it.

Yes. For notes when I'm playing and get an idea. Then I use Sibelius.

yes but was it really part of his workflow or desperate attempts to hear. I doubt it was how he spent all of his time when composing.

I think I read somewhere (in PW perhaps) that Beethoven was never fully deaf... Not sure though...

I never have problems with tearing counterpoint in my head and notating it down.