Joseph Sowa: Recent Episodes
None
I'm proud to say I'm exhibiting with the CodaChrome Collective at the 2023 Midwest Clinic! Come visit me at booth no. 1814 and learn more about the pieces below. Whether you're a band director, orchestra conductor, or performer, I have music that’ll interest everyone — and at all grade levels.
Concert BandAfter Further Review2021-22. Concert band. Grade 2
A theme and variations inspired by football instant replays. Kids love it and multiple middle school bands won “1st place” when performing it at the Festival In The Parks, Cedar Point 2022.
The Beating Heart of Dawn2020-21. Concert band. Grade 4-5
A lyrical concert opener with rich harmonies and a dark undercurrent, The Beating Heart of Dawn is a piece about hope.
Full OrchestraSummer Has Ten Thousand Stars2010. Full orchestra
Featured in the Midwest 2022 Orchestra New Music Reading Session, the orchestra piece a perfect concert opener.
String OrchestraSpace Invaders!2018. String orchestra. Grade 2.5
A zany piece for young players that introduces them to some of the sound effects their instruments can make.
Nana's Waltz2022. String orchestra. Grade 3
Shades of Dvorak and Satie inspire this grade 3 waltz suitable for high school players.
Aspen Song2019. String orchestra and harp. Grade 3.5
Aspen song has a rustic American feel that captures the beauty of mountain forests.
Woodwind Chamber MusicMotion Lines
2016. Saxophone quartet
As recorded by the PRISM quartet on their album Surfaces and Essences.
Monet’s Gardens
2009. Saxophone quartet
Woodwind Solos and Duets6 Inventions
2022. Flute and saxophone
Panegyric
2020. Alto saxophone
Sixty Seconds of Saxophone Stuff
2020. Alto saxophone duet
3,000 Miles
2019–2020. Flute and harp
Granite and Sage 2017. English horn and piano
Coruxa en Carbayu 2016. Flute and guitar
Daydreams and Postlude2014–2015. Oboe
Clarinet Sonata
2008–2009. Clarinet and piano
The post Works for Midwest 2023 appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
I'm proud to say I'm exhibiting at the 2022 Midwest Clinic! Come visit me at booth no. 2008 and learn more about the pieces below. Whether you're a band director, orchestra conductor, or performer, I have music that’ll interest everyone — and at all grade levels.
Concert BandAfter Further Review2021-22. Concert band. Grade 2
A theme and variations inspired by football instant replays. Kids love it and multiple middle school bands won “1st place” at the Festival In The Parks, Cedar Point 2022 performing it.
The Beating Heart of Dawn2020-21. Concert band. Grade 4-5
A lyrical concert opener with rich harmonies and a dark undercurrent, The Beating Heart of Dawn is a piece about hope.
Full OrchestraSummer Has Ten Thousand Stars2010. Full orchestra
Featured in the Midwest 2022 Orchestra New Music Reading Session, the orchestra piece a perfect concert opener.
String OrchestraSpace Invaders!2018. String orchestra. Grade 2.5
A zany piece for young players that introduces them to some of the sound effects their instruments can make.
Nana's Waltz2022. String orchestra. Grade 3
Shades of Dvorak and Satie inspire this grade 3 waltz suitable for high school players.
Aspen Song2019. String orchestra and harp. Grade 3.5
Aspen song has a rustic American feel that captures the beauty of mountain forests.
Woodwind Chamber MusicMotion Lines
2016. Saxophone quartet
As recorded by the PRISM quartet on their album Surfaces and Essences.
Monet’s Gardens
2009. Saxophone quartet
Woodwind Solos and Duets6 Inventions
2022. Flute and saxophone
Panegyric
2020. Alto saxophone
Sixty Seconds of Saxophone Stuff
2020. Alto saxophone duet
3,000 Miles
2019–2020. Flute and harp
Granite and Sage 2017. English horn and piano
Coruxa en Carbayu 2016. Flute and guitar
Daydreams and Postlude2014–2015. Oboe
Clarinet Sonata
2008–2009. Clarinet and piano
The post New Works for Midwest 2022 appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
Whether you’re just starting out at composing or have been writing music for decades, improving your composing skills can help you find greater technical mastery, artistic fulfillment, and career success. Deliberately developing your composing skills is especially important if you’re not yet as good of a composer as you hope to be (which describes most […]
The post Top 5 Tips to Get Better at Composing appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
From Kindergarten onward, we’ve been programmed to picked: To be chosen for the playground kickball team. To get the SAT scores that’ll lead to a good college. To receive the grades that will get us into our major. To win the interview that’ll land a job. For almost the first three decades of our lives, […]
The post Why Kindergarten Ruined Your Career appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
I know you WANT to get your music commissioned and performed. But, just like with the audience bell curve, it’s crucial to understand WHY if you’re going to make your maximal impact. “Because that’s just what composers do” is NOT a good enough reason to seek commissions and performances. Here are the three big reasons […]
The post Top 3 Reasons Composers Should Focus on Commissions appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
Because SOMEBODY had to. Someone had to demystify the magic of how to give audiences goosebumps — without the usual handwringing about “style” and “voice” and “am I good enough?” and “great music is only for geniuses.” Someone had to cut through the cynicism, jadedness, and ignorance that too many musicians use as a way […]
The post Why I Founded a “Wizarding School for Composers” appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
Let’s talk about that feeling of “I’m not good enough.” Or of “My music is too ____ or not enough ____ to be successful.” Or, most of all, of “I don’t deserve my successes. When others find me out, they’ll mock and shun me.” As you know, these feelings are often called “Imposter Syndrome.” You […]
The post Why Imposter Syndrome Actually Inhibits Your Career appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
Recently, in the New Year Composition Jumpstart and on Facebook, I made the assertion that “J.S. Bach is a supreme composer but a terrible model for other (esp. young) composers.” Specifically, I called him “the worst model for developing ideas.” The comments have still been pouring in, though my favorite was the one that began […]
The post When Bach Can Be a Dangerous Model for Young Composers appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
Looking for a book the start the new year? Look no further. Read Child Composers in Old Conservatories by Robert Gjerdingen. The tl;dr summary: Classical composers were able to write the intricate music at the speed they did because they were not trained the same way musicians are in modern universities. Rather than teaching them […]
The post My #1 Book Recommendation for 2022 appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
As both a lyricist and and composer, Sondheim was one of those rare artists whose craft and intellectual rigor were just as profound as his psychological insight and humanity. My favorite song of his is probably “Send in the Clowns” (Barbra Streisand’s version is fantastic), but “Being Alive” is a close second. Another connection I feel […]
The post A Composition Lesson from Stephen Sondheim appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
Today I wanted to share with you one of my favorite articles: “The importance of stupidity in scientific research” by Martin Schwartz from the Journal of Cell Science. Don't let its title or source put you off. It has EVERYTHING to do with the creative process. As composers, we reach a point when our teachers, […]
The post The Importance of Stupidity in Music Composition appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
Last week, I wrote about the two fluencies that professional composers must have: technique and process. Professional composers generally all achieve a baseline of technical fluency. Many, especially those in media music, also develop a reliable process fluency. Without both fluencies, you can’t be like Michael Giacchino, for instance, and take on a project like Rogue […]
The post Flow like Water: Developing a Professional Creative Process appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
All composers began as amateurs. You wrote music, with no or minimal training, because you loved it. Sure, being an amateur had its frustrations. It often took you a forever of fumbling to find the figures you imagined. But that earnest stumbling was part of the fun. In the end, simply hearing your music and […]
The post The Two Fluencies Professional Composers Must Have appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
Anyone who has studied music history knows that musicians have been theorizing about music for millennia. However, that theory has not always served as the basis for musical training.
In particular, many classical composers did not learn “music theory” as contemporary musicians typically understand it. Reconstructing how composers used to be taught has been a major facet of Robert Gjerdingen’s life’s work.
Gjerdingen is an emeritus professor of music theory, cognition, and history at Northwestern University. In interviews, articles, presentations, and two main books, Music in the Galant Style and Child Composers in Old Conservatories, he paints a detailed picture of how different composers’ training was.
The Origins of the Modern Music Theory Core Most pointedly, he shows how our modern university music theory core is a 19th-century invention. In an interview with Nikhil Hogan (see also this interview and Child Composers pp. 311–324), Gjerdingen explains:
“Chord grammar” models what chord progressions are stylistic to Common Practice music. It also categorizes chords by their cadential function: Predominant, Dominant, or Tonic. “Chord grammar was developed for middle- and upper-class dilettantes who were taking college classes. They were in a higher social status than musicians. Musicians were artisans. They worked with their hands. They went to trade school. They worked for the people who got to go into college.
“The artisans spent a lifetime learning all the details of this stuff, and in college, [the dilettantes] just learned about it. [For instance,] you could take a class on space travel: You don’t how to go to space, you just read about it. In the same way, in a harmony class, you read about harmony.
“The sleight of hand that was developed in the 19th century was to imagine that everything is a cadence. Whole pieces are cadences. Everything’s a cadence, so you only have to learn the grammar of cadences, and now you know harmony.”
In this post and my previous one, when I say “music theory,” it is to these simplifications I am referring. Most university and online courses, plus AP Music Theory, assume this chord grammar as their starting point. It is the “core” of the theory core.
Now, in a university setting, these simplifications have many advantages:
- They’re easy to teach and grade, as compressed into four semesters
- They aren’t composition-specific and can be easily applied by performance and education students to their specialities
- They make it easy to segment composition-focused training into different courses and semesters
- They’re interesting in their own right as theory and useful as a gateway to the current, rich and vibrant academic theory discourse
- They’re flexible enough to encompass contemporary vernacular styles
- They’re easily contextualized with other theoretical traditions from around the world
- They’re concepts that professional musicians are expected to know
- Most of all, they’re sufficient for amateurs while also being serviceable in training professional musicians
So, if musicians and institutions want to focus on teaching and learning this theory, I can see and respect why.
That said, the theory core and its assumptions is neither the only or best way of training composers.
How Composers Learned Music — With Minimal Theory For composers and musicians who want to learn “all the details” of counterpoint, for those who really want to understand how classical composers thought about music based on how they learned it, for those who want to learn music from a compositional perspective from the outset — Gjerdingen describes an alternate path in Child Composers in Old Conservatories.
This alternate pedagogical tradition began in 18th-century Italy and spread to France and Russia, where it continued into the 20th century.
Essentially, rather than centering theory, it focused on vocabulary and usage.
Students learned dozens of short contrapuntal patterns, or “schemas.” These schemas included cadence formulas but encompassed many more patterns besides.
Through hundreds of solfeggi, partimenti, dispositions, and counterpoint exercises, students learned how to
- Spot these contrapuntal patterns given only single-line fragments
- Recognize the patterns’ implications and affordances
- Identify which fragments fit together and how they could be recombined
- Order the fragments to create a convincing musical rhetoric
- Embellish and disguise these fundamental structures
As Gjerdingen explains, students spent “hundreds and thousands of hours . . . working on patterns . . . and variations of things. . . . At the Paris Conservatory, they had entire pages where you’d have 20 harmonizations of the same melody or 20 harmonizations of the same bass. Those were skills that really helped developed a rich understanding of what the underlying pattern was.”
And this was the dominant pedagogical tradition that trained composers from the 18th to the early-20th centuries, including Rossini, Verdi, Rachmaninov, Debussy, Ravel — and even Berio. It’s also the tradition that the legendary Nadia Boulanger taught to her students. It further shares many common elements with the training Bach, Haydn, and Mozart received (e.g., see Nicholas Baragwanath, The Solfeggio Tradition, 22-30).
Through this training, even these composers’ second- and third-rate peers achieved a fluency in composition and counterpoint that most contemporary college graduates cannot begin to match (see Child Composers 322–23).
“But Didn’t They Know Theory?” Now, did these musicians know and discuss theory? Generally, yes — but it was peripheral to their training in much the same way that composition is peripheral to contemporary theory instruction.
For instance, Gjerdingen explains that, at the Paris Conservatory, Rameau’s theories “never had any influence.”
“That may be a slight overstatement,” he concedes. “But [Charles] Catel, who was one of the early authors of a widely used harmony book at the Paris Conservatory, basically said, ‘Yes, there is Rameau, but we don’t deal with that.’”
Likewise, they often didn’t conceive of theory the same way we do. For example, Gjerdingen, citing C.P.E. Bach, relates that J.S. Bach “did not really buy ‘this inversion business.’”
“If you’re writing in the style of Bach,” Gjerdingen explains, “you can’t throw in any inversion of a chord in a particular instance. It’s usually a very particular version of the chord, so, from Bach’s point of view, those were different things because they were used differently.”
Gjerdingen collected many of his sources into the website partimenti.org, where interested readers can find the aforementioned “entire pages where you’d have 20 harmonizations . . . of the same bass,” among dozens of other historical documents.
What Does All This Mean in the 21st-Century Like Gjerdingen, I would argue that these historical methods of learning composition — and their modern revivals — are NOT for everybody. Still, knowing about them provides composers an eye-opening contrast to the common, 21st-century university curriculum.
In the English-speaking world, only over the past decade or so have these pedagogical materials and strategies begun to be revived. In addition to Gjerdingen, scholars such as Nicholas Baragwanath, Job IJzerman, Giorgio Sanguinetti, Peter van Tour, and others, have been working to develop not only a clearer picture of the historical pedagogy but also its potential applications in the modern day.
Besides Gjerdingen’s website, partimenti.org, the Learn Partimento podcast is a great source for learning more about them and the scholars and musicians pursuing these threads today. (There are dozens of other good sources to which I’m happy to point interested readers.)
For me personally as a composer and a composition teacher, these historical methods and strategies are a significant inspiration, but, as I’ll describe in future posts, they are not my only influence.
The post How Composers Used To — and Could — Be Trained appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
[Ed. — After publishing this post, I discovered that many readers were misreading my intent and were unfamiliar with the background of my critique. Accordingly, I added and tweaked several paragraphs below and wrote an additional post. New readers may want to start by reading that subsequent post, “How Composers Used To — and Could — Be Trained.”]
You may think as I did — when you took AP music theory, or completed the standard college theory core, or watched a theory video on YouTube — that you were learning how music works.
As an aspiring composer, you may have even hoped, “If I learn music theory, I’ll know how to write music.”
Unfortunately, that’s not true.
What Music Theory Actually Teaches Unless you were unusually well-informed as a young composer and happened to win at “theory-instructor roulette” (or got deep into weeds of the grad-level theory discourse), it would be easy to infer — incorrectly — a certain set of assumptions about what theory offers.
Because learning theory involves writing and analyzing music, it is natural to assume you were learning composition on some level. Unfortunately, such assumptions often reflect more your own musical goals than they grasp the pedagogical objectives of most textbooks, university curricula, and online sources.
The music theory core, as it is commonly taught, does three things. It —
- Explains staff notation and music fundamentals (e.g., meter, rhythm, intervals, scales, chords)
- Describes what is normative to a specific repertoire, with an emphasis on harmony
- Gives dumbed-down recipes for how to recreate those norms
For the vast majority of university and online courses, that’s about it.
Now, a few courses (typically those focused on a film music, jazz, or songwriting) do go one step further: showing you how to recreate several different musical styles.
But even when it involves some composing, learning theory is fundamentally a descriptive enterprise.
Theory mostly teaches you how to talk about music, not how to make it. This is, of course, useful, but there can be a yawning gap between understanding music conceptually versus being able to create it practically.
As Robert Gjerdingen put it, the modern university theory core is like taking a course in space exploration. You end up able to discuss the subject and perform some rudimentary tasks — but that doesn’t make you an astronaut.
The Glaring Holes in Standard Music Theory For those hoping to learn how to write music, the common theory curriculum has some glaring holes:
- Despite melody being central to much music written today, few universities or online courses rigorously teach how to write a melody. True, they often teach general melodic forms and features (e.g., sentence form and high points), but only occasionally how to create the things that go into the formal boxes and how to control their features.
- Likewise, melody and accompaniment has been hands down the most common musical texture of the past 300 years, yet many theory courses never teach that skill — instead, focusing on how to write approximations of chorales.
- Regarding harmony, most universities and online courses teach far less than it seems because they teach a grammar of harmony, but not a vocabulary of specific harmonic gestures and their usage. As with melody, students are then taught formal boxes that can string together these grammatical utterances. The result is like teaching someone how to make grammatically correct English words, sentences, and paragraphs — while having only the haziest understanding of what the words actually mean.
- And then there’s the big elephant in the room: How does music take listeners on a journey that gives them goosebumps or takes their breath away? The common curriculum avoids the question entirely, even though solid scholarship exists on the topic.
In essence, music theory gives composers a rabbit and a hat . . .
And then expects them to figure out how to create the magic on their own (or “in a different course”).
Why Theory Training Can Leave You Frustrated Is this theory’s fault? Of course not.
But if you don’t understand what the theory core is trying to do, it is easy to become confused and frustrated.
As a result of these misunderstandings,
- You end up writing vanilla, run-of-the-mill music . . . and you don’t know how to spice things up.
Why? Because, by design, theory teaches you how to create what’s common and general, not unique and specific.
- You come to believe that excellence is a result of “geniuses breaking rules.”
Why? Because when you try to break the rules you were taught, your music just sounds worse.
- You feel like you’re reinventing the wheel every time you compose.
Why? Because the rules you were taught work were the equivalent of short-order recipes for specific styles. You were never taught how to make bespoke pieces in different or original styles.
- You feel like your music has to sound a certain way to count as “original.”
Why? Because most composition programs replicate the same issues from the theory core of focusing on norms and recipes rather than mastering possibilities and principles. The only difference is that, instead of passing tones and augmented-sixth chords, now those recipes include pitch-class sets, multiphonics, and bowed crotales.
So if you feel frustrated as a composer . . .
If you feel like something has been missing in your musical education . . .
You are 100% correct.
The post What I Wish Someone Told Me about Music Theory appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
A few days ago, composer Dan Forrest asked a great question in the American Choral Composers Forum:
These are two great questions:
- How do you know you’ve found “a really beautiful and worthwhile musical idea”
- How do balance the “courage to commit to an idea that might be good” vs. “enough awareness” to abandon an idea that “just isn’t great”?
I’d separate out the two parts.
“Beautiful ideas” consist of (1) beautiful (or compelling) sounds (2) made into meaningful ideas.
Compelling Sounds . . . Finding beautiful or compelling sounds isn’t that hard.
They often come as the result of free play or instinct.
Besides the conventionally beautiful (e.g., major seventh chords, well-placed suspensions, etc.), beautiful sounds elicit an obvious, gut-level reaction.
When you find yourself suddenly enticed by a sound — and when that captivation holds for more than a few days — it’s probably beautiful.
Find Compelling Sounds—Today When have you noticed this in your own composing? That sudden sense of “Wow! That’s cool!” or “Oh, my goodness! That was stunning!”? That feeling is a major clue that you’re onto something good.
Sometimes composers wait to take action until they feel that feeling.
This is a big mistake.
The fastest way to find compelling new musical sounds is by making lots of new musical sounds.
So start today by deciding what kind of sound you want (a melody? a harmony? a texture?). Then, make a dozen simple prototypes.
As you do so, pay attention to your gut: where is it being drawn? This is your hint that you've found an idea worth pursuing.
. . . Made into Meaningful Ideas Though finding beautiful sounds may be easy, developing beautiful sounds into meaningful ideas IS often hard.
By “hard,” I mean “takes a deliberate, sustained, and thoughtful effort.”
Long-term (i.e., years and decades), composers develop a sense for what is meaningful generally through curiosity about life and people and specifically through years of analyzing and performing lots of other music. There is no shortcut for this never-ending work.
Short-term (i.e., weeks and months), composers develop self-compassion for their half-baked ideas through two simple maxims:
- The full meaning of an idea is never clear in the first draft.
- Inspiration is an ongoing revelation, not a one-and-done event.
Composers who believe and trust these facts experience far less self-doubt.
Instead, they just revise. A lot.
In this revision process, they trust that their long-term understanding will reward their short-term persistence with insight about how to hone the meaningfulness of their beautiful sounds.
Make Your Meaningful Ideas—Today They key to “finding” meaningful ideas is developing the meaning of your current ideas through revision.
These blog posts will help you better understand the revision process and what concrete steps you can take for it:
- Why, No, I Cannot Write Today! I have no time, no motivation, . . .
- Well, Maybe, I Can Write Today . . .
- Why, Yes, Even Today I Can Write!
The post The Courage to Commit appeared first on Joseph Sowa.
https://josephsowa.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Hymn-Arr-Analysis-2.mp4 Here are the highlights from the above replay:
- Part 1 — Simple Harmonization
- 0:00: Essentials of chords — Blocked, Broken/Arpeggiated, Inverted, Embellished Arpeggiations, and Embellished Blocks
- 6:55: How (nearly) all tonal melodies embellish the tonic chord, with “If I Listen With My Heart” as a specific example (audio on YouTube)
- 10:50: The “quick and dirty” method for harmonizing melodies — “Which chords tend to harmonize which scale degrees?”
- Part 2 — Richer Harmonization
- 25:30: How counterpoint gives a richer understanding of harmony than “chord progressions”
- 25:30: . . . from a theoretical point of view
- 29:45: . . . from a music history point of view
- 36:26: Contrapuntal gestures in Sally DeFord’s original version (PDF) of “If I Listen With My Heart”
- 47:45: Contrapuntal gestures in Ryan Murphy’s arrangement (PDF)
- 25:30: How counterpoint gives a richer understanding of harmony than “chord progressions”
- 56:50: A special invitation to get feedback on your own arrangements and compositions (see below)
- Part 3 — Q+A
- 58:15: How conscious are composers/arrangers of contrapuntal gestures?
- 1:05:15: What are parallel fifths?
- 1:07:40: What resources exist for learning contrapuntal gestures?
- 1:10:29: What is a half cadence?
- 1:17:10: D-sharp vs. E-flat in bar 15 of DeFord’s original vs. the corresponding instances in Murphy’s arrangement
Make Your Arrangements Magical Musical magic isn’t just for Sally DeFord or Ryan Murphy. You can make it, too!
Schedule a free, 60-minute “Sorting Hat” call today. We’ll discuss your music, identify ways to make it more vivid and moving, and explore what the Wizarding School for Composers can empower you to achieve.
Schedule a Call
The post Hymn Arrangement Study Party, Part 2: Workshop Replay (10/05/21) appeared first on Joseph Sowa.