I see a lot of people here posting about "where do I start" or "I have writer's block" or "I've started but don't know where to take this" and so on.

Each of those situations can have different solutions and even multiple solutions, but I thought I'd make a post that I hope many - whatever level - but especially beginners - may find helpful.

You can consider this a "prompt" or a "challenge" or just something to try.

I call this my "Composition Technique Etude Approach" for lack of a better term :-)

An "etude" is a "study" written for an instrument that is more than just an exercise - instead it's often a musical piece, but it focuses on one or a limited number of techniques.

For example, many Piano Etudes are pieces that are written to help students practice Arpeggios in a more musical context (and thus more interesting) than you might get them in just a "back of the book exercise".

Etudes to help Guitarists play more competently in 8ves are common.

Etudes for Violin that focus on Trills are something you see.

So the vast majority of Etudes out there tend to focus on a particular technique issue related to executing those techniques and are "practiced" through playing a piece that contains them in a musical way.

What I propose, if you readers are game, is to Compose a piece of music that uses a "Compositional Technique".

We don't get to "play pieces that help us increase our music notation skills" or our "penmanship skills" if using pen/ink and so on.

But what we CAN do is pick a particular compositional technique and challenge ourselves to "get better at it" just like a Cellist who is having trouble crossing strings might pick an Etude written for Cellists specifically to address that technical issue.

Now, we do have Counterpoint Exercises, and we could consider a Canon or Fugue etc. to be an example of this kind of thing we're already familiar with.

But this kind of thing is a little too broad - like the Trumpet etude might focus on high notes if that's a problem area - so maybe since we're always writing around middle C, a good compositional etude might be writing all high, or all low, or at extreme ends of the piano for example (note, if some of these come out to be a good technical etude for a player, bonus points :-)

So I would pick something that's more specific.

And the reason I'm suggesting this is a lot of us have the "blank page syndrome" - we're looking at this "empty canvas" trying to decide what colors to put on it.

And now, with the art world the way it is, you can paint all kinds of styles - and you can write all kinds of music - so we get overwhelmed - option paralysis of the worst order.

So my suggestion here is to give you a way to write something where you pick something ahead of time to focus on, and that way you don't have to worry about all kinds of other stuff - like how counterpoint rules can restrict what you do, focusing on one element helps you, well, focus on that.

It really could be anything, but here are some suggestions:

Write a piece that focuses on 2nds, or just m2s (or their inversions and/or compounds) as the sole way to write harmony and melody.

Write a piece that uses only quartal chords.

Write a piece that only uses notes from the Pentatonic Scale - for everything - chords and melody - and you decide how you want to build chords - every other note of the scale, or some other way.

Write a piece with melody in parallel 7ths (harmony can be whatever you want).

Write a piece that uses "opposite" modes - E phrygian alternating with C Ionian, or

Write a piece that uses the Symmetry of Dorian (or any other symmetrical scale/mode)

Write a piece that only uses planing (all parallel chords of the same type, or diatonic type, whichever).

Write a piece using just a drone and melody.

Write a piece with just melody only - no harmony - maybe not even implied.

Write a piece with a "home" and "not home" chord, like Tonic and Dominant, but not Tonic and Dominant, but a similar principle, just using those two chords in alternation.

Write a piece using an accompaniment that shifts from below the melody to above the melody back and forth.

Write a piece using some of the more traditional ideas of Inversion, Retrograde, etc. as building blocks for the melody and harmony.

Write a "rhythmic canon" for struck instruments.

Write something with a fixed series of notes and a fixed rhythm that don't line up.

You can really just pick any kind of idea like this and try it - you don't have to finish it, and it doesn't have to be long, complex, or a masterpiece - just a "study" - you're studying a compositional tool so writing the piece is like a pianist playing an etude to work on their pinky - you're writing a piece to work on getting ideas together in parallel 7ths or whatever.

I think you'll actually find you get some more short completed pieces out of stuff like this, and of course you can combine ideas to make longer pieces or compositional etudes that focus on 2 or more tools/techniques.

But don't worry yourself with correct voice-leading, or avoiding parallel 5ths, or good harmonic progression - in fact, write to intentionally avoid those if you want - can you make parallel 5ths sound great? (sure you can, that one's too easy ;-) but let the piece be "about" the technique, not all the other crap - if it's "about 7ths" and it's pretty clear from the music that that's what it's about, no one is going to fault it for not being in Sonata Allegro Form OK?

As title said. I composed music for an indie game project and it got used in a demo/alpha version, but one of the lead devs randomly said that he "made" some music from an AI generator, and then shared a new version of the game with it, consequentially removing mine. Not much to say, I just wanted to share. I'm very pissed off.

I recently read a post which got under my skin. Basically, a user who has two full-time non music jobs composed the music to a documentary, free of charge. He says all his music will always be free for anyone to use, and he wants other composers to join him in flooding the world with free music.

My position is that this devalues music. It places mediocre music into projects where a composer should have been paid, or library music should have otherwise been used which would at least pay royalties to a composer. If anyone on a project is paid- the composer deserves to be paid.

We as composers need to fight to maintain this as the status quo. Media music is one of the last bastions of musical composition that still has the potential to actually pay the bills (thanks in large part to a huge array of great music in the public domain, and the advent of piracy on more modern compositions).

Additionally, another user made the great point that if you don’t monetize your music and offer it for anyone to freely use, then you run the risk of someone else monetizing it for you and literally stealing from what you intended to be a free stock music sample.

These are just a few of my thoughts- I’d love to hear your takes on the issue! Do composers deserve to be paid for their work?

Hey Everyone,

I hope you are doing well! A game developer hired me to create a music piece for his game trailer. He had generated a track by AI, but he wasn't satisfied. It was a kind of "placeholder" track, but he wanted something similar.

In my opinion, this is a very interesting situation because an AI was replaced by me, a composer. In trailer music, the composer should follow the events unfolding in the video material, and this is something, that AI cannot do.

My version became much more complex, and the instrumentation is different, but the scale and the key signature are the same. So, the AI-generated track inspired me a bit, but I thought it was too simplistic and basic, it only contained two chords.

What do you think about this method? The customer generates a track using AI, tells the composer they want something similar, and the composer rethinks the AI-generated track, supplementing it with their own approach and unique style.

Is this acceptable or unacceptable?

I wanted to share with this community because it’s something I never thought possible. I have 2 degrees in music composition and have been in just about every field of composing imaginable. Concert music, commercial music, instrumental, film, choral, studio, etc. I’ve spent nearly 20 years trying to find where my voice fits. Failed performances, commissions that don’t pay out, one-off performances, all of it always fizzled into nothing.

But recently, I’ve been fortunate enough to start having some of my choral music published. And with that, sales have actually started. 2 years ago, I made $70 in royalties. 1 year ago, $700. This year, its exploded into the 5 digits. This isn’t intended to be a show off, but more of something I’m extremely proud of accomplishing. Life changing? Maybe not financially. It helps a lot, yes, but trying for nearly 2 decades, I’m finally starting to support myself doing what I truly love.

For those of you in a similar boat in trying to “make it”, stick with it. I promise it’s possible. Keep searching for your voice and medium that makes you happy. Thanks for reading.

I used to do a lot of custom score work for a couple of local and regional creative production houses that mainly work with companies for highly directed brand videos and advertisements

Starting early last year I started getting contacted less and less for new work from them both, and slowly but surely the brands they got hired by insisted on just using AI for the music to save on the production budget

The production houses aren’t happy about it either, but they also have mouths to feed and staff to pay, and even their own work is slowly being taken over so they need to play ball

The entire library and commercial music space will cease to exist soon. Human music will always be valued but no one really cares if the ad for the new Honda has AI music so the backlash is minimal

https://academic.udayton.edu/PhillipMagnuson/soundpatterns/

I find that there are a shockingly high amount of composers who post scores with such rudimentary mistakes that it brings into question the ability to read music.

Now, I swear I am not a paid advertiser, but please consider using it for the following:

1. We are work with a creative medium. Having a mutual agreement and understanding of certain conventions makes discussions a whole lot more productive. I am talking basic organization and structural units. To me, going outside the conventions requires strong reasoning.

2. “How do I compose for an instrument I don’t play?”Lucky for you, there’s an added bonus in learning how to notate extended techniques as well as conventions, hundreds of pages on this.

3. It helps transitioning software by making you aware of the biggest limitations.

It seriously is a frustration of mine to see people react defensively to recommendations from this book. Please, just read it and consult often… Why waste time making up crazy justifications for stuff that has logical conventions, idk

MakeMusic is officially sunsetting Finale and recommending switching to Dorico. Owners of Finale can crossgrade to Dorico for an limited time exclusive offer of $149 via the MakeMusic website.

After August 2025 it will no longer be possible to activate Finale on any new hardware, but existing activations will continue to work as long as the program functions on the OS.

Read the full goodbye letter from the President of MakeMusic here:

https://www.finalemusic.com/blog/end-of-finale-new-journey-dorico-letter-from-president/

8/27 Update from MakeMusic:

Earlier this week, we announced the end of development on Finale. Based on your feedback, we have these important updates to our original announcement:

Finale authorization will remain available indefinitely

We've heard your concerns. They are valid. We originally announced that it would no longer be possible to reauthorize Finale after August 26th, 2025. But as a result of our community’s feedback, Finale authorization will remain active for the foreseeable future. Please note that future OS changes can still impact your ability to use Finale on new devices.

Yesterday I was informed that the director / producer of a web-series that I had pitched for was instead going to be using AI music because he had been "seduced by it".

This made me feel borderline physically sick but in reality, this will become the new norm.

My pitch was solid, and my contact who had put me forward praised my turnaround time, the level of production and, perhaps most importantly, how I nailed the feel of the show.

It's important to say that in no way did I expect to get this gig, it wasn't a given. But losing out to an algorithm or prompt is pretty frustrating.

I can understand financial implications, I can understand the ease of typing in what you want and the end product being 'passable'. I just cannot get over how a creative, a director, can champion using AI over the human.

I implore all of us, as creatives, to keep pushing, to keep creating and bring the magic to the moving image in a way only a human truly can.

(I'm struggling to believe I've even had to write the last part of that sentence).

I am fully open to discussion on this, from both sides.

Have a great day and don't let the fire die,

TG

I'm a professional filmcomposer, and I want to start a show on youtube about what it's like to be a composer, in terms of the musical side, but also the business side and what it's like to be an artist for a living. Would this be something you're interested in, and if so: What are topics you'd like to hear more about? What do you really want to know about this profession? What would you like to see explored?