In graduate school there was a seminar for composers where we talked about our work and personal philosophy of music. One big questions was “are you an innovator or a more conservative composer?” Being as electronic/computer music was my focus I sided with innovator. My argument was that if one traced the history of computer music it was one of experimentation. If a composer wasn’t pushing forward with a new technique then there wasn’t much to hold one’s attention. I felt that it was a culture of “what have you done for me lately.” I still think that was a pretty accurate assessment based on my discussions with other composers and students. We listened for the technique and not for the music.
That should have been a pretty big red flag. After the dreams of my PhD faded and I retreated creatively to my mental cave, I found myself drawn back to the guitar; my gateway to music. And not the classical guitar that was the center of my musical training but the steel string acoustic guitar. Something visceral and very real settled in when I returned to it and I’ve been riding that feeling ever since.
Now, years later, I’m starting to wonder if there isn’t a need to combine the two. That deep passion for music and the deep research that comes with technology and its application. Thinking back to journal articles and more academic discussions makes me think that I really do need more. It’s a good time to take stock and experiment a little. The things I’m reading these days have put most of what I’m doing in a new light. Some of it good, some of it less good, but all of it indicates a need for adjustment if not wholesale change.
Musical development is a road that never ends. I think I’m being reminded that it’s OK to pull over for coffee from time to time but there’s a lot of ground to cover.
0 Comments.