Remember last year when I was all hot and bothered about the arts patronage opportunities afforded by the Kickstarter platform? Well, it happened. With help from my friend Tim Rosenberg, I put together a consortium to commission a work for solo alto saxophone. It’s totally done now, YAY!!!!!1!!!!1!!!! The piece is called alone together and will be premiered by Tim at the NASA biennial in a couple weeks.

alone together

first system of alone together

I just sent an email to my Kickstarter backers with a PDF of the score, and hard copies are going in the mail today. Right after I finished sending the PDF out, I checked my usual web comics and found this gem on Married to the Sea:

Married to the Sea

Married to the Sea, 5 March 2012

This was today’s comic! I swear I didn’t plan that.

 

About a week ago, I first read a story about a new Golijov piece that a couple of audience members believed had been plagiarized. My first thought was “No way. Golijov is a serious composer. He works with other people’s material in a kind of collage, but he wouldn’t be so silly as to blatantly rip off another composer.”

I’m beginning to sing a different tune. Especially now that I’ve heard the two pieces (which incidentally, do not sing different tunes). To demonstrate the similarities between these two compositions, I made a video with recordings I could find on the web. 1

Can this be a “-gate” now? Lots of smart people have weighed in on this already, notably Alex Ross, Anne Midgette, and Rob Deemer.

My thoughts:

The piece is most definitely a rip-off. Golijov claims he cleared it with the original composer, but the original composer didn’t get any credit in the program, and he ain’t gettin’ paid by ASCAP/BMI when the work gets performed. Also, this was a large commission. According to one report, 35 orchestras each paid between $1,500 and $4,500 to join the consortium. Even if they all paid the lower amount, Golijov would have received more to write that piece than I made teaching college courses last year. They paid for something original, not an arrangement. They got an arrangement.

I would be remiss if I did not add this one last thing: Sidereus is a piece of junk! My first reaction when I listened to the piece (before hearing the Ward-Bergeman) was to wonder if the music I was hearing was really distinctive enough to be considered a copy. It’s boring. It goes nowhere in the sub-4-minute original work, and it doesn’t go any further when Golijov spins it out (mostly through repetition) to 9 minutes.

 

I love streaming music services. Mog, Rdio, Spotify. They’re all great. They help solve one of the most vexing problems of being a musician, discovering new music (without going broke buying stuff). One issue that always comes up, though, is finding an exact recording. Each service has a pretty large catalog, and while there is some overlap, each service has many recordings that the others don’t. Enter: Music Smasher by Matt Montag. It searches Rdio, Spotify, Grooveshark, Soundcloud, Mog, and Bandcamp (whew!). What is really cool about the service is that it includes services like Soundcloud and Bandcamp, where files are uploaded directly by artists and catalogs often include independent artists and “unreleased” content. Go there now.

[http://www.mattmontag.com/smasher/]

Music Smasher

 

And now it’s time for another installment of our sporadic series “Sh*t My Texbook Says.” 1

Let me share with you the first paragraph of Dr. Wright’s excellent essay “Understanding Poetry” on melody:

A melody, simply put, is the tune. It’s the part we sing along with, the part we like and are willing to listen to again and again. TV pitchmen try to entice us to buy a CD set of “The Fifty All-Time Greatest Melodies,” but not a similar collection of rhythms or harmonies. Rhythm and harmony are merely supporting actors; melody is the star. The more the melody shines, the more beautiful is the music.

Had I not been sitting in a public place when I read this, I may have thrown the book across the room. First off, saying that the melody is the tune is completely useless. They are synonyms, and it’s important for students to know that the words are more-or-less interchangeable. However, if we’re trying to teach students to listen thoughtfully and make empirical observations about music, we’re going to need a better tool.

Second, rhythm cannot be separated from melody. We like to say that melody is a sequence of pitches. That’s a nifty saying, but it is most certainly not true. It isn’t just the order of the pitches that defines a melody, it’s also the rhythm in which those pitches occur. Rhythm is also more fundamental to the way we perceive sounds. You cannot hear a pitch without it occurring in time (rhythm), but you can definitely hear a rhythm without a definite pitch. (Take a moment here to clap a clave rhythm for yourself. You’ll feel better. I promise.)

Finally, Dr. Craig-M-Wright-PhD’s last sentence might as well end “…and therefore is better and more valuable than music that does not emphasize melody, but that stuff’s not really music anyway, right?”

Reading this book always reminds me of this:

Notes:

  1. The textbook in question is Listening to Music by Dr. Craig M. Wright, Ph.D.
 

First day of school here at Grand Valley State. In honor of that, I thought I’d share some more from this music appreciation text. I have a feeling that “Dave argues with a textbook” might become a running series here on the blog. We’ll see. Just a few grafs after the quote from my last post, I found this gem.

Briefly defined, music [emphasis in original] is the rational organization of sounds and silences passing through time. Tones must be arranged in some consistent, logical, and (usually) pleasing way before we can call these sounds “music” instead of just noise.

Seriously? We’re still using a value judgement in the definition of an art form? Rational, logical, and pleasing are a matter of cultural inheritance and personal taste. Also, “just” noise? Dr. Wright, what the heck is wrong with noise? Some people like it so much they make music out of it! Definitions like this remind me of early DSM definitions of homosexuality as a psychological disorder. Over 40 years after Stonewall, the Psychology world has since corrected their initial mistake. Almost 60 years after Cage’s 4’33″, at least some musicologists like Dr. Wright are still working things out.

[Dr. Craig M. Wright] is the author of numerous scholarly books and articles on composers ranging from Leoninus to Bach. [hyperlinks added]

Whoa! All the way to Bach? That’s a little edgy for me. Can we pull it back to Lully?

 

I’m teaching a new (to me) class this semester, Introduction to Music Literature, AKA Music Appreciation. The textbook we’re using (not my pick) is Craig Wright’s Listening to Music. Let me share a brief quote with you from the first page of Chapter 1:

Want proof of the allure of music? Next time you’re riding on a bus, a train, or the subway, look around and you’ll find that about twice as many people are listening to music as are reading. This is true pretty much everywhere around the developed world. But why does music have such universal appeal? Simply said, music has power.

First of all, if this were Wikipedia, I’d log in and put a [citation needed] after that glaring statistic. “4 out of 5 dentists” works great in a toothpaste ad, but I think it’s ok to expect more out of academic writing than a 15-second spot on local television.

More importantly, can we ditch this “music is magic” stuff? Yes, music is great. I like it. I’ve spent a lot of time studying it, and I plan to spend a lot more. However, making it into this ethereal, supernatural entity makes it almost impossible to having a meaningful discussion about. The people on the subway aren’t listening to music; they’re just letting music fill in the space around them because it’s preferable to whatever other sounds (or lack thereof) are naturally there. As I see it, my job as a music appreciation teacher is to demonstrate to my students that actual listening requires something more akin to the attention and engagement of reading a book or newspaper. That, dear reader, is music appreciation.

 

WE DID IT!

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks to each person that’s pledged. Thanks to each person that read about this project and thought about pledging. Thanks to each person who passed this project along to friends and colleagues. Who knew all you had to do to get a commission was to ask for one?

Earlier this morning, with a pledge from Alex Sellers, the commissioning consortium on Kickstarter reached its goal. It has since surpassed that goal (thanks to a generous pledge from Tim Rosenberg). If you read my blog, you should definitely read Tim’s as well. He doesn’t post as much as he used to, but there’s a lot of both thoughtful insights and humor. Well, I think it’s humorous anyway.

Talking about money like this is awkward for me. I’m asking people to pay me for something that, in all honesty, I’d probably do for free. I think most performers have this experience much younger than composers. I know I did as a performer. (Thankfully, one outgrows this feeling through playing showtunes and wedding music.)

Having said all that, I picked a goal of $500 because I thought it was achievable. I wanted to pick $1000, but I would have been in a crappy mood for a while if we’d only gotten to $800 and gotten nothing. Here’s the thing: yes, I’m a greedy jerk and I want your money, but that’s not the point (mostly). Now that we’ve reached the goal, the thing I’m more concerned about in this project is building a large network of people to play the piece. I know projects have been done in the past with new music to have lots of simultaneous “premieres” of works, but I want to have a big group of performers that are invested in this piece and feel some ownership of it. ”Investment” and “ownership” are, literally speaking, words about money. However, I think it’s telling that we also use those words to describe intellectual, emotional, cultural, and (in this case) artistic connections as well. That’s what I want.

So my point is this: we’ve reached our goal on Kickstarter, but this project ain’t over until the fat lady’s digital watch alarm goes off on Friday, April 22, 2011 at 11:36pm EDT. Please, continue to pass the word along.

Also, I don’t know if I’ve fully convinced Tim that we need to do this, but I really want to write a paper that uses our Kickstarter experience as the basis for discussing Web 2.0 things and the future of music patronage. My working title is “Patronage 2.0.” I know, it doesn’t have a colon in it, so it’s not a real academic document title yet. Like I said, it’s the working title. I’d also really like to title the section on social networking “Tweet the Composer.” Whaddaya think?

Thankyou
 

J.S. Bach had the Lutheran Church.

Haydn had the Esterhazy family.

Beethoven had Archduke Rudolph.

Bartók, Stravinsky, and Copland had Koussevitzky, Diaghilev, and the National Endowment for the Arts.

People with lots of money, we’re talkin’ Esterhazy money, are not, by and large, spending it on the patronage of classical music the way they might have 250 years ago. There are certainly some who are, and while the NEA is funded less and less each year, there are still a handful of composers (mostly already well-established) that are receiving commissions from individuals and government/non-profit grants. They are, however, the exceptions.

In addition to people like Rich Uncle Pennybags and non-profits, one of the biggest support groups for composers has historically been performers, particularly over the last hundred years or so. Conductor Serge Koussevitzky commissioned Bartók’s Concerto for Orchestra; clarinetist Benny Goodman commissioned Copland’s Clarinet Concerto.

The internet has lowered the entry cost of so many industries and other ventures. Why not patronage? In Spring 2010, Facebook ruffled feathers with some new policies about privacy (and a leak of some personal info). Many informed users were worried that Facebook had too much control over the internet and users, and up popped a little startup called Diaspora. Diaspora was working on a new kind of social network to compete with Facebook, and to raise money, they turned to Kickstarter. Kickstarter allows users to pledge support to creative products. It brings together people who are creating niche products with the niches they want to access and influence. Diaspora was able to raise over $200,000 mostly with donations of $5 to $25.

Kickstarter has an interesting all-or-nothing approach to fundraising. When starting a project, you set a goal and a deadline. People pledge various amounts. Different amounts get different rewards. If you reach your goal, backers’ credit cards are charged for their pledges and you get the money. If not, no money changes hands. This makes sense. The Diaspora folks couldn’t have done much with $200, and it would suck to be one of the people who gave part of the $200 just to see nothing come of it.

That got me thinking about my own niche, contemporary concert music. How could this model work for us that are creating music which unfortunately (yet honestly) has a very small audience? Kickstarter could be perfect for arts patronage in the internet age. Commissioning consortia have been around for quite a while, but when was the last time you heard of a commission that you could participate in for twenty-five bucks? (crickets)

So, I’m going to try it. I’m going to use Kickstarter to put together a commissioning consortium for a solo saxophone piece I’ll start working on this summer with Tim Rosenberg. I’ll keep updates on the blog, and on the Kickstarter project page. I’ll have a link to that here when I launch the project. My goal is to raise at least $500 in 90 days. Wish me luck!

 

It’s impossible for us as listeners to be aware of every development in new music. There are some great sites, like NewMusicBox, that do an admirable job of covering new music, but it’s just too large a subject. We have to make some decisions about how much time and energy we spend on it. I always like to look into the winner of the Pulitzer each year. Unlike journalists and authors, there’s only one Pulitzer for composers. This (over)simplifies things greatly. But each year when the winner is announced, I try to track down some recordings of music by the winner. I don’t think I need to like it all, but I do think that anybody who self-identifies as a composer should know at least a little bit about the people being recognized as the best in our field.

In 2008, the Pulitzer went to David Lang for The Little Match Girl Passion. When read that, I was embarrassed that I had never heard of him before, so I immediately went to find a recording of the piece. Unfortunately, it didn’t exist yet. 1 But it does now!

Lang uses the chamber singers as a kind of hybrid between vocalists and instrumentalists. He creates textures the same way he might in a chamber orchestra. Sometimes the texture is complex with dense counterpoint, and at other times, the whole ensemble is like a Greek chorus, all sounding together as one. Also, how about singers that sound like people and not whatever traditional “bel canto” opera singers sound like? Check out this fantastic recording from Amazon: David Lang: Little Match Girl Passion.

Notes:

  1. The Pulitzer goes to a work that was either performed or recorded for the first time in the last year.
 

I just got home from a really impressive performance by some MSU student musicians at East Lansing’s SCENE Metrospace gallery. I don’t know what the name of their group is, but if you ever get the chance to hear Alex Kreger, Kevin Bene, Susanna Mendlow, and Ryan Ptasnik, you should do it. They play a compelling blend of avant-garde jazz and folk music. I don’t have a recording of these guys, but listening to them tonight reminded me a lot of a group called Gutbucket, that I heard several years at Mizzou.

It is music that includes a lot of extremes. Sometimes it is very tightly controlled and intricate. At other times it seems simply out-of-control in a very appealing way. Often, these two sounds are jammed against one another to create some great textural counterpoint. Check out some of their albums on Amazon: Dry Humping The American Dream and Sludge Test, the latter of which includes a truly incredible transcription (do we still call it that?) of Olivier Messiaen’s “Dance of the Furies” from the Quartet for the End of Time.

© 2012 David MacDonald, composer Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha