Leaderboard

I don't know what kind of "Universities" you guys are talking about, but certainly the forum here does NOT have nearly 1% of the info you can get out of a proper course for either musicology OR composition. Likewise, even on the internet at large, you'd be hard pressed to find literature like books on in-depth analysis of Schubert's lieder or maybe stuff on Luis Couperin's influence on the french baroque canon, stuff that you can usually find at an actual university that doesn't completely blow. Hell nevermind that if you have actual professors that you can ask things to, they can point you to tons and tons of literature (and since you're studying there, you can ACCESS IT, imagine that!) Wanna know all the different interpretations of Beethoven's late string quartets and their relevance to 20th century perception of the middle romantic period? No problem! You can go look it up. If you're really studying -music-, composition or not, there's no replacement for having professionals help you pick out stuff and guide you into finding all the points of view on a particular issue. And even then, this varies greatly from country to country, here in Germany for example there is just SO MUCH literature on just about every single musical topic that honestly I still ask around when I need to dig up some particular bit of info for a research. Because, yeah, let's not equal wikipedia's entries on sonata form and what's here on YC to stuff like Erwin Ratz's "Einführung in die Musikalische Formenlehre," since that'd be a disservice. But of course how do you know if this book is any good if you can't find it or you have to buy it yourself? How about other books, then? Are you going to build your own library? Sorry but a lot of these things are not in PDF yet on the interwebs, like 98% of the literature on specific topics like these. Point is, if you study someplace where you have real access to all these resources and people to help you, you can only gain from that... But of course if you only want to write music, then you don't need to study anywhere or read any books, isn't that right?

Over the months and years I have been browsing around various composition forums I have noticed various observations and misconceptions made about composers and how they have learned their skills, either self taught or through formal training. So I ask you these questions; What are some of the misconception you have heard or have been told about the method of learning you went through on your compositional journey? Where do you think these misconceptions come from? What are a few of the truths that contradict these notions? And if you have an opinion; What method of learning you do feel is more beneficial? Or Do you feel the both methods are equally effective? Why are Why not? I ask these question mainly to help clear misconceptions about how people learn composition, to help younger and newer composers make a better informed choice in there compositional journey, and mostly, out of curiosity of my fellow composers and musician’s opinions.

DJ Fatuus - The decision on how we pass the time here as pliorius points in the Beckett quote is a question we all face and must answer. I just felt the topic had derailed from Plutokats original post which intended to share our observations of our own pursuit of becoming a better composer - not debate the value of university versus independent study. Anyway, sorry if the quote comes off irresponsibly cynical or this derails the topic further. Pliorius - Glad you liked my post.

A tango/fantasy, inspired by Gershwin, Poulenc, Messiaen,and others. MP3

I think an-whatever has a very crappy view of what University is. Now, I understand that there are certain state schools that offer no real challenge to a student then repeat the book. If that is the university you are going too, then I suggest you partake in more rigorous one o one with the professors in your department. However, there exist real university that encourage independent study and test that require students to take the information they learned and expand upon it during the test. An-whatever is completely correct about everything he says if your only goal for going to college is to have a job. However, I believe that if that is your end goal, then you probably should major in accounting or computer information systems, you know something where you know you'll get a return. A university is about expanding who you are as a person by forcefully putting you into a vast myriad of different people while forcing you to listen to older and more experienced people. I often see this in young math students. They can read Hungerford abstract algebra, and then complain that the questions have nothing to do with the chapter. Then they come to me and I point them to a chapter and show them how the word domain implies it's already a group -_-. Point being is that 99% of the people I come across CANNOT understand a text completely without reference. Even I, as a professional mathematician find new details in an intro text that I missed as student, a grad student, and using the text as a teacher. It takes experience, interaction with more skilled people, and most importantly a complete openness to new ideas to really succeed in whatever you do in life. You see, university is NOT there to teach you a skill or get you a job. It is there to EDUCATE you. I know people go there for a job, but that doesn't change the purpose. I find the people who are worse at their job were the same people who went to college for the job, not because they were interested in that field at a fundamental level. When you go to the university, you are paying for the privilege of the advice of people who have much more experience in your field than you can ever hope to find anywhere else. You are paying for an experience. You are paying for a challenge. You are paying for a new outlook and a refinement of skills and insight. You are paying for the opportunity to make connections. You are paying to find out what you really enjoy in life that isn't manual labor. Bottom line. If you value more over education, then yeah that money is a waste. Otherwise, then you cannot never replace a professor with the knowledge and experience to guide you where you want to go. (Side note, there are people who can make it on their own, but they are rare. They tend to have a key eye for self-criticism and pay attention to details every step of the way. Most kids are not that way.)

I find that studying composition has been the best thing for me. Bouncing my ideas off of Dr. Knight is so beneficial - eventually I'll get married to some chick, and she'll have to listen to me ramble on incessantly, but for now, he gets paid to do that :) Teaching and learning are both related - it's a two-way street. When you teach and guide someone else, you learn as well. I've seen it in percussion over the last several years - by having to teach a 7th grader how to buzz roll, I have to trial-and-error until we find the way that clicks for them. You can't tell me that isn't instructive for me....cause it is. Sure, one can say "This is how you do it - that's that" but that's not really 'teaching' as much as 'telling'. Dr. Knight has been vital in helping me develop my ability to create solutions on my own and discover for myself what to do - he has yet to tell me what to do, at all (this is my fourth year here.) There have been times he's said "I don't think this section works, it doesn't seem to fit" at the early stages of a composition, and of course I continue anyway because you can't just....NOT write something because of that. But 4 months later when I can't get any further on this piece, it turns out that by eliminating or replacing that section, the piece just works out, and I can assemble the puzzle I've been trying to assemble. And I'm noticing how I'm starting to develop that instinct of "Something's not right here" that I feel is vital to creating an organic work (and if you, for some reason, don't understand what I mean by 'organic', I mean a work that flows well, a work that feels like "everything is in the right place" a work that, even if to no one else, feels complete to me and feels correct, a work that feels like a living being as opposed to pitches and rhythms.) But then again, Dr. Knight is a superb teacher. But we're not talking about bad teachers are we? I don't think anyone is arguing that bad teachers are what we should seek out. Can anyone say there is no benefit to studying with a superb compositional instructor, or guide, if you will? About the finding performers thing - You may be so lucky to have an orchestra at your disposal, but I know that if I didn't have access to the University Symphony Orchestra, writing an orchestral work wouldn't even cross my mind - it's too impractical. Let's say that for one service (let's say three hours) you pay each musician 100 dollars to play for you (which is fairly low). Let's say you need a medium size chamber orchestra to rehearse and read and record your work, all in three hours. 2222,4221, 8,4,4,2, timpani, 3 percussion. That's 3800 dollars. I don't have that kind of cash. What I do have, though, is a university orchestra, and a scholarship. I like getting performances, and I may or may not pursue a career as *just* a composer, but it will certainly be part of my daily activities and my lifestyle - along with playing percussion and teaching. Going to college is the only way I can do that.

What do you mean? Here's yours. :whistling:

What do I look like a mathematician? I have no obligation to prove anything! (walks away slowly...). Anyways. I'll first address this little issue. I'm not going off talk it. Believe it or not, your experience with academic directly influence your view on what it means to go through the university. You have essentially been using that as a back up for the majority of arguments, so just as I would go after your source if it was flawed, I'm going after your experience. Secondly, I take you as a failed professional composer because of this statement: "I could actually be composing as a professional like so many others who never actually studied music composition, much less pursued a degree. " I took that to mean that you could be composing as a professional...as you you're not right now, but if you did the other thing you could. So even though you have performances coming up...you're not a professional. Hell I had performances and I'm not a professional. I take professional simply to mean, you make your living off writing music. I'm a professional mathematician, because...well, I get paid to do it. Yeah you're right having knowledge doesn't mean you do anything good with it, but when someone tries to give it out, might as well listen and take it for what it's worth. I think you undervalue their insight a bit to much, and so what if they are combative. If it's how they want to be so what. Often times, it's pretty fun. Their attitude really doesn't lessen the merit of what they say, even if it bugs you. Look, i'm sorry you got shunned for not being advance enough, but i'm willing to bet you got shunned more for just thinking you know it all or don't need their help. Nevertheless, it's their right. If you wanted to work on my research team, but had no idea how to reconstruct the relationship between algebraic structures and symmetric donuts, then we'll have a problem. Now, let me get my main idea across. In theory, you can learn everything there is to learn on your own. Can most people do this to a sufficient degree, I say not. Should you study independently? Of course. Should you shun university? No, learning from others is always a good thing. Should you pay 5 figures, no, get a scholarship. (Hell i got paid to go to school.) Is a University there to only train you in your job? No, that's stupid. If you don't value an well rounded education, should you go to university? No, you'll end up like an-whatever. Does going to university mean you are better than a self-taught person? No, not at all. If you are completely self-taught, do people look at you different? Yes, university gives people a common ground. If you are self-taught will people always look down at you? No, the more you get your name out, the less that chip will be on your shoulder. Overall, if you want to succeed in anything all you need is three things. Work, dedication, and connections.

I'll take this as a sign of victory. My flawless record keeps trucking on. Anyway, i'm not slandering you because what I say is true, get over it. You failed at becoming what you wanted, oh well, i failed at trying to lay tyra banks it happens. Despite my method of speaking, I still make points. Don't ignore them because your feelings are hurt.

What? Are? You? Talking? About? I agree with you, Ferk. We're all self-taught. Whether we bounce ideas off of a Professor or off of a fellow composer on a website like this, though, I don't see the difference. This forum is a collective body of knowledge that offers more insight than possibly any single university in existence. Just having an existing userbase of roughly 50 active members is far more than participation numbers in 98% of composition programs worldwide, and with technology and local ensembles among us (as a collective group) we can find ways to get our works performed simply through our own efforts to organize and communicate with each other. If someone with a concert band piece seriously needed a reading of their work, I know of three potential groups in my area that I am connected with who could potentially read those works (and I could record, video and audio). Of course, I won't go out on a limb for anyone who won't go out on a limb for me, either, so it's a give and get kind of situation. Still, we have everything we need here on this forum to learn about 95% of what we could get from a university. Is that 5% really worth the $40,000 tuition and the degree if all you want to learn is composition? Really? I think it's a question of value. I don't see it.

For a minute there, I thought we were having a discussion until you threw out this little gem of pretentious malwisdom. By the way, define "professional composer" for the record, BD. :) All uni programs are not the same. I readily admit that. It doesn't mean my observations are at all unqualified. I should know. I've been to -many- uni's during my time in academia. Though I tire of the indoctrination going on in many of those universities that most consider to be the upper echelon of the academic ladder, I'm confident that my observations are just as relevant to those institutions as they might be to smaller, lesser attended/admired schools. So, please spare me the rhetoric. If you want to discuss, stay on topic. If not, if you insist on insulting me instead of engaging me on an intellectual level in this discussion, then I'll stop wasting my time on you.

I'll take this as a sign that you are delusional. True? Prove it! :) Failure is a matter of perspective. I'm looking at two performances in the next four months of large ensemble works (that I've written in the past six months), which I'm quite proud of myself for nearly securing both (still a question about the orchestral work, I'm confident it will see a live performance). I'm becoming what I want to be as a composer, something many of the university music composition programs, seminars, and festivals I attended shunned for not being "advanced" enough. Because I don't write like Ives, Penderecki, Stockhausen, Varese, Carter, or Cage, my music was not "advanced" enough for these supposed "professionals" you put on a pedestal of greatness. What a joke! Have you ever attended a music theory and musicology seminar? Have you seen the combative behavior of these intellectuals first-hand? I have, and what an insightful weekend it was, too! It's enough to make you wonder, "Where do universities 'get off' on charging me five figures in tuition for -this- kind of intellectual pandering?" I can cite from my experience detailed discussions about the absurdities I've encountered throughout my entire academic life, and for what? Does the intellect of an individual automatically command obedience? Of course not. Just because someone -has- knowledge doesn't mean they do anything positive, rational, or constructive with it. If you'll actually show me the respect to address my points, then maybe I'll address yours. Oh and by the way... My feelings aren't damaged in any way, actually. I'm honestly laughing at you (out loud at the Tyra Banks comment, :)) but on the inside as well because you're not actually making a point in targeting -my- experience in education. Furthermore, after repeatedly (and respectfully) reminding you to stay on point, you insist on slinging insults and insinuations about my academic experience. How am I supposed to take you seriously when you continue to ignore my points and behave like some teenage drama-queen with an attitude? At least you're good for a laugh, so this hasn't been an -entire- waste of my time. Pretty close, though.

To what end does "Einführung in die Musikalische Formenlehre" inform the composer today? What prevents -anyone- from reading it themselves (other than translation issues, which would be just as much of an issue for any university course using this as a text)? The fact of the matter is that universities globally are still important for research, just like Libraries are important for research. If you want to be a music researcher, go to a university. You might actually have an abundance of positions available for you to apply when you complete your degree. If you go to university to learn what you need to become a composer (which is broadly subjective), you're not going to have some job position waiting on you when you graduate, plain and simple. It's about the return on someone's investment, speaking specifically about money. And if a composer has to learn on their own at a university anyway, how is that any different at a university than at home in your pajamas with a network of other professionals. You're giving a LOT of credence to the professor as professional in an academic environment that hardly "qualifies" that title. A music composition professor is more of a psychologist and mentor than a skilled researcher and trained librarian. So, what exactly -is- the value of academic study at a university for strictly the composer? $40,000? $80,000? When is enough really -enough- when the bottom line boils down to a career that is self-constructed, a knowledge base that is self-constructed, and a work study flow that is, as well, self-constructed? If I go to my professor and ask, "Where can I learn more about the music of John Hancock composer?" How will the professor's insight into this be any more or less valuable than any other professional insight outside of academia? What about a membership to a local university's music library, which is certainly NOT $40,000? If I ask the librarian on duty the same question, how is that any -less valuable- than the professor's insight? What's to say that the professor won't actually refer the student TO the music library for that information? You're kidding yourself if you think that a professor's insight is objectively any more valid or insightful than people who, as profession may have it, actually have to find said materials FAR MORE OFTEN than said professor. Yet, you're not going to pay $40,000 to that library for the librarian to point you in that direction now, are you? Why pay $40,000 to a university for the advice of that professor? Where's the monetary value? Economically, it makes no sense. A degree is a piece of paper, and certain jobs -require- that piece of paper in order to be considered for the position. No such position AS A COMPOSER whose only job duty is to compose requires said piece of paper. It makes no sense to pay so much money for insights you could receive through simple investigation on your own. The only thing you're really paying for, then, is convenience. You're paying for an answer that -might- save you time in your research pursuits if you're not resourceful enough to find the information in a more timely manner. But in the end, you're still teaching yourself. You're still becoming a composer independent of really anything a professor has to offer. The only other thing you might be paying for is -certainty- from a professional that your work is great and well-written. How do you even measure 1% of what a university has to offer in comparison to resourcefulness through internet communication and access to, GASP, frickin' Amazon.com?! You're again kidding yourself if you think that 1% is at all measureable. I might as well throw out any random percentage of what universities offer compared to independent study, because the bottom line is we're all studying independently. When going to a university, all we're paying for is convenience that is just as convenient on the interwebs as it is at a brick-and-mortar institution. If a library hired a music research assistant for $15 an hour to perform the same tasks as a composer at a university, would you pay $40,000 over four years for that person to help you find what you needed for your own independent study of music? Would you pay that much to have that person sit with you and critique your work?? Why would you? The library itself is supplying the information. Are you paying for someone else's interpretation of that information? Are you paying for a lecture on that information that further explains it? If you can honestly comprehend what you read, there is absolutely NO BASIS for paying five figures for any of these services. I suppose you'd rather pay someone $40,000-$80,000 to read and study those books for you and then regurgitate that information back to you? Really? Where are the majority of people who do pay that much ever going to earn the money to recoup that investment? Fortunately, there are statistics out there that might tell us roughly how many composers who pay for that education actually recoup that loss with their music sales, distribution, and current composer job openings. I'm sure that percentage is abhorrently low, too. Fiscally, it makes no sense to strictly study composition at a university. You're only doing so because you have the money to waste and don't mind wasting it. Either that, or you're a sucker like me :)

Like I said, if you don't want to recoup the money you spend on a university education, then go get a degree in music composition. It will be convenient. It will offer all of the things you mention later on in your post. The university will take your money and you will get what you pay for in terms of knowledge. Now, whether you can use that knowledge is another question, but if you'll be happy working in customer service to pay off your debt for the experience in college, then more power to you. I went to school to be a composer. They took my money, sold me books, lectured on material I could read on my own and understand, and had I held the foresight I have now, I could have dedicated a significant amount of that money to the equipment I actually need to work as a professional in the industry. I could actually be composing as a professional like so many others who never actually studied music composition, much less pursued a degree. It's not some "crappy view of what University is" as you claim. It's just a simple observation. If anything, I'm trying to get people to check in with reality and gain another perspective on the matter. If you don't agree, that's fine, but implying my education was somehow deficient compared to yours when you obviously disagree with my opinion for reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the institution is absurd. Stay on topic. We're not talking about -MY- education, we're talking about the justifications for self-study and academic-study in music composition. My educational background has nothing to do with it. I'm pointing to general observations anyone with perspective on the matter could make. This isn't an exclusive description of university education. This is a description of -life- itself, just in case you didn't know.

Hey, this is a completely fair, valid viewpoint to make. I commend you for making it. :) But I'm about to disagree with you... Ugh, you're loading this whole discussion on the topic with presumptions of -my attitude- when I'm referring to very specific, very accurate, very telling -observations- of the university system. Please. Stop. Veering. Off. Topic. This, to me, is silly. It's actually a flaw on many fronts, but from a practical standpoint, everything you can garner from a University -can- be acquired through individual effort and thoughtful, resourceful research methods. This includes many of the same characteristics of music composition that you can learn -right here- on this website. What we do here is no different than what you do in a composition lesson with a professor. Except, here you get a variety of perspectives through community feedback as well as having it provided to you absolutely -free- of charge. You'll pay anywhere from $100 to $1000 per credit hour to a university to have one composition professor go through a similar reviewing process on a week-by-week basis. How does it make any sense that here, for free, we can get potentially -more- feedback on our work than a single professor we pay anywhere from $100 to $1000 per credit hour might provide? What is it, exactly, that qualifies the professor yet doesn't qualify the members of this forum? We're all composers with various backgrounds. If anything, I toss the suggestion right back to you... be realistic! :) -AA

When you say something is "true," you have an obligation to prove why it's true. First, my "experience" doesn't automatically prove any kind of assumptions you're making. I can say, "Composition professors do not offer anything one cannot learn on their own, through their own effort and resourcefulness," and this in no way reflects on the quality of the educator or institution. Gee, this sounds really familiar... Second, I was not clear in that statement. I'm referring to industry professionals who have the gear through years of intelligent investing in tangible tools that gives them access to paying projects. I should have been more specific. I don't "over"-value their insight. It's insight just like my wife's opinion is insightful, and she's no musician. It doesn't bug me that they were combative, either. What bugs me is that they were -certain- that they were right while others were wrong when music, a subjective matter entirely, is hardly an area where such certainties can be ascertained. Furthermore, such certainties flood other concentrations of music study like history, musicology, and yes, composition. Why not? Aside from maturation and attitudinal issues, what prevents ANYONE from learning ANYTHING? Who said I'm "shunning" university? I'm critical of universities, moreso than most people who would rather wade in the ebb and flow of life than think critically about social structures like university education. Criticizing universities has nothing to do with criticizing learning from others. We all learn from each other. Should you have to go to a university to get a well-rounded education? No. Should you have to pay 5 figures for that well-rounded education? Hell, no. EVERYONE should have abundant access to a well-rounded education. Right. I can see you thought that one through. "An-whatever?" That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read where it concerns music composition. Uhh... what? Funny, I know many composers with all three of these qualities who have yet to "succeed" (living full-time off of composition as a profession). :) --------------------------------- You're not a professional composer, but you're offering advice as a mathematician to individuals considering a potentially expensive(!) academic career in the study of composition with the hope of one day making it their full-time profession. How very convenient it is for you to make such generalizations about the profession without even the slightest consideration for the variables involved in making that hope a reality. But then you have the gumption to label my advice "bad" when I say that, in the specific pursuit of -music composition- as a career, the path a huge majority of industry professionals took did not include a degree in music composition. Not only am I specifically pointing out that university study -in music composition- is expensive and impractical, I'm pointing out that a high number of full-time composers making their living exclusively in the industries that pay professional composers for their work never even pursued a composition degree. THAT is the only point I really need to make. This doesn't speak for the rest of university programs or "shun" universities outright, as you seem to interpret my view. Sadly, your interpretation is entirely based on -your- assumptions of -me- and NOT about anything I've said in this thread.