The two music creators (arrangers / composers / orchestrators) that I hold in the highest esteem have never met each other, but I was reflecting today that they have something in common when they talk about music. I’ll call it the high / low split.
When they talk about big M “Music”, it’s clear that they have a deep reverence, and highly personal resonance with music, that it touches and moves them in a way that seems altogether different than how you and I hear chords, melody, timbre, and rhythm. They dive so deep into it, and come up with new insights every time. Music for them is always unfolding, never unfolded, eternally discoverable and mysterious. Let’s call that the high side.
The low side happens when they talk about any particular piece of small m “music” that they are working on. Then, things get very, very pragmatic. This works. This doesn’t. I like this, but the producer didn’t, so we did this instead. Yes, they can sing this, but it doesn’t feel good when they do, so write something they will like and it will sound better. Why did you skip the chorus after the bridge? It’s called a formula because it works!
I love that. I think that high / low split is a really good way to thing about a lot of things, especially things we create.
june 2:17 pm on 2 February 2010 Permalink
I do too. Love that, I mean.
Brian Steckler 5:15 pm on 2 February 2010 Permalink
Well said. And very true.
Part of my currently formulating desired career path includes working a little more in the high and a little less in the extreme and ugly low. Granted we always need the low, but I’m talking about the extreme and ugly low.
michael 11:55 pm on 2 February 2010 Permalink
Stick, I’m heading the same direction. I’d like to be writing more things that might actually make a positive impact on music and the world.
Brian Steckler 9:47 am on 3 February 2010 Permalink
Oh, that’s very high and lofty. I was thinking more like “I don’t need to Auto-tune every note and slide every drum hit to the grid.”