Adrian Ellis' The Music Creative

Classy Chassis Car Show – Photo by Jay Lee (baldheretic)

Recently, I had a meeting with a composer friend who had recently set up a drum kit in his studio.  We wanted to make a casual night of experimenting with mic placement, to see what kind of sounds we could get with his set up.  For non-studio geeks this all sounds pretty academic and dry, so while I was explaining to another friend what I was up to that night, I realized I could use an analogy based on her interest in photography: “It’s like lighting a scene”, I said, “the drum kit is our subject, and we are experimenting with different mic positions, just as you would have different lighting setups in a photo shoot.”  It then struck me that you can actually draw pretty compelling analogies across the board between Film and Music.

Lighting = Microphones: moving microphones around changes the ’scene’ and how it’s perceived in a similar fashion to lighting in film.

Camera = Microphones + Mixing board/Recording device: the mic’s act as the lens of the camera, and the film stock/digital capture is like the recording device that captures the performance, be it analog tape or digital.

Set/Location = Studio/Reverb: the set is the environment which is captured, in which the performances live, and so it is with the recording studio.  Alternately, ’spaces’ can be created using reverbs after the performance is captured.

Actors = Musicians: Actors interpret the screenplay, musicians the musical score.  Actors use their bodies and voices to create the performance, musicians use their bodies and their instruments.  Similarly, Voice/Dialogue = Instruments/Music.

Script = Musical Score, and Screenwriter = Composer

Director = Composer/Conductor: the analog of the director’s job may get split on the scoring stage, where the conductor may not be the composer.  However, the conductor is working to realize the composer’s vision, and thus might be seen as an Assistant Director.

D.O.P. = Scoring Engineer: the D.O.P. controls how the scene will be captured and how it will look – the Scoring Engineer provides the same service using microphones, a mixing board, and recording medium.

CGI = Samples/Synthesis: both are simulations of reality, but are intended to elicit the same emotion from the audience as would an ‘organic’ source.

And here we come to an interesting point.

There is a problem with my last analog.

In order to understand this, we have to understand how a sample works.  Sampling is primarily used in the world of film/media scoring to re-produce the sounds of instruments which a production may not have the time or money to afford.  The most common are used in place of the symphonic orchestra, and lately to replace performances of rare/unusual or so-called ‘ethnic’ instruments – such as the Duduk, which has become very popular, but for which competent players are both hard to find and expensive to hire.  Instead, a sample library is created by a company, which hires a player and/or ensemble to be recorded playing individual notes through all dynamic ranges, with as many effects and nuances as possible.  These are then programmed for one or more commercially available ’samplers’ – devices (hardware or software) used to trigger these sounds using a keyboard or other MIDI device.  There are often layers to each note,  so if I load a brass section sample, and hit the key softly, it will trigger the sample of the section playing that note softely.  If I hit it harder, the corresponding louder, fuller, brassier sounding sample is triggered.  You can see the implications – with a professional rig and sample libraries I can create, for a much smaller cost, a score consisting of a full orchestra, 100 person choir, and a Taiko drum ensemble, which will sound very much like the real thing.  Almost.

So whazza problem?

Since we are looking at analogs, imagine this.  A filmmaker is creating a CGI set for her film, so she accesses her ’sample library’ of set pieces.  She looks at an apartment block, a rural scene (with an option ‘gently flowing river’ plug-in), and from a more exotic location package, the ‘Downtown Tokyo’ sample.  Drag and drop, bam – there’s her scene.   Then, it’s to the ‘Actors’ folder, where she finds ‘Hollywood Hunks’ and chooses number 6  of the set a 8.  This one is a brilliantly recorded sample of Brad Pitt, and has 168 facial expression layers and 97 ‘physical actions’, and a full range of syllables and consonants, allowing for the construction of any dialogue, in a range of emotional states (Brad-mad, Brad-sad, and Brad-glad).  She continues this way until she is ready to start ’sequencing’ her film, adding in her script with it’s dialogue and actions.

If every film was made this way, we would eventually be looking at the same ’samples’ of everything.  There would be no nuance, no dynamics, no edge, no life.  It would be a pre-packaged, slickly packaged and homogeneous mass – the same Pitt-sample with the same Tokyo-background sample saying it’s dialogue with the same pre-determined range of inflections.   Sure, many films use the standard stock footage of the New York fly-over to establish location, but we are talking about what amounts to an entire film made only of stock footage and stock acting.

No filmmaker I know of would accept this, and yet, more and more, music made of  ’samples’ is accepted as fulfilling its important role as an emotional alchemical substance in film and media.

The Challenge

There are, of course,  reasons why this situation exists, primarily having to do with time and money.  But is this good enough?  I think that we all need to begin to think more creatively about how we work, and what we produce.  We need to begin imagining situations where it is both financially and within the constraints of time, possible to make supporting musical products which fulfill and exceed their requirements, and which have a real, tangible, unique, and effective signature.  Everyone is copying everyone elses copy of something – we need to do better.  Not every film needs a gigantic orchestral score that it may not be able to afford – can the same emotional goals be achieved using a different method?  I strongly believe they can – and it will be to everyone’s advantage.  There are ways of working quickly and cost-effectively to deliver music which will add tremendous value to the production – a unique proposition to the filmmaker who receives a score that works, and sounds unlike any other.

Late July Session at Q Music

Producing. One of the least understood gigs in the music world.  Just what is a producer, and what is their role in the making of music?

Definitely, maybe…

First, let’s get some definitions out of the way.  Although they share the same title, a Film Producer has very little in common with a Music Producer.  A Film Producer “is someone who creates the scenes and conditions for making movies.. [he/she]  initiates, co-ordinates, supervises and controls matters such as fund-raising, hiring key personnel and arranging for distributors.”  Film producers rarely have a whole lot of creative control – this is the realm of the Film Director.

A Music Producer has a lot more creative influence on a project, but the amount that a producer can affect the end result of a musical product can vary a lot.  Simply put, a producers job is to take the raw materials rendered by the artist to the point before recording begins, and help guide the shape of how those are turned into a final, coherent, artistic form.  Their role is generally collaborative, working alongside the artist (and sometimes the label) to best represent their vision.  A producer might also serve as an intermediary/advocate between the artist and the label, attempting to move a project to a point where both parties are happy with the results.  Producers should see the project from both perspectives – the artists vision, and the requirements of producing something that will be accessible and ultimately critically and fiscally successful.  The producer aims for balance.

So, what exactly does a producer DO?

Here is a shortlist of some of the hands-on work a producer might engage in.  I’ve kept this to the confines of a producer working with an artist on a record, but it can be more or less applied to other situations as well.

Mentor/coach the artist – help them maintain a healthy and productive mental state, improve on weaknesses while maintaining their confidence and the morale of the team.  Push for more when needed, know when to back off.  See the threshold of an artist or situation – what is the best that can be achieved?  How much is too much, when does pressure becomes detrimental?

Help select the best material from the artists long-list of work, suggest collaborators and/or other material to fill in any holes.  Artists may bring a massive collection of songs and sketches to the table, and that needs to be mined for those rough diamonds.  Sometimes, there might be a shortfall, and they need to be encouraged to write more, or find alternatives such as covers.  In some cases, the artist may benefit from working with an additional collaborator – another songwriter or lyricist.  This is a very delicate situation, where the artists confidence is in jeopardy.   A producer is like a doctor – what is their bedside manner?

Help develop the material/artist, improve arrangements, define a direction.  Some songs might still be sketches, need a chorus, a bridge, a hook, or some other X factor – a sound effect, or production style.  The material may be in a very simple sketch form, and the producer will help arrange it for band, and suggest instrumental parts that enhance and define – a brass section or string quartet for instance, or even decide it should be for voice and guitar only.

Help determine (and then maintain the consistency of) the sound of a project – what instruments, styles, materials and methods are going to be used to achieve a specific result?  A Death Metal band will require vastly different production styles and materials than a Bluegrass band.  The producer has to have a big-picture, overarching view of the project as a whole.  A producer’s mind is an encyclopedia of techniques and technical knowledge, as well as an idea factory that can problem solve quickly and effectively under pressure.

Guide performances – create a situation that brings out the best in an artist.  This involves more coaching – knowing the psychology of your artist – knowing what they’ll need and providing it before they ask.  This might involve creative problem solving to make them feel more comfortable in the sterile studio environment, or finding an amazing instrument that helps their playing.  It also means saying “don’t worry – it’s all taken care of”, and putting out fires, handling problems, and generally making it seem smooth, seamless, and fun.

Bring it together -  Select the appropriate studio(s), players, collaborators, equipment and instruments, engineers, which will help to contribute to that final sound.  Great producers are very well connected, and have a vast network of musicians, engineers, and resources to select from.  Once you have great material, and great people to perform and record it, very little can go wrong.  On the other hand, the wrong person for a gig can sap time, creative energy, morale, and money from a project.

Perform on the record – many producers are also excellent artists and musicians in their own right and can leave their mark on a record in a very tangible way by contributing musical material.

Oversee the entire record production process from tracking to mastering, and make hard decisions when something isn’t working to toss out, move on, re-invent, overhaul, start-over, salvage, etc., while maintaining high morale and creative effectiveness.  If something isn’t working or can’t be saved, the producer’s ‘bedside manner’ is incredibly important – the artist and the team must never feel that all is lost or that something horrible has happened – it has to feel like a positive part of the process, and that progress is being made.

Stay out of the way when necessary – sometimes, a producer’s job is to shut up and stand back – let the process happen on it’s own and only gently course correct as necessary.  To much messing around can destroy natural organic performances, and too much control can crush the creative process, and the ‘happy mistakes’ that you want to occur.  The producer must also be able to see those for what they are, and jump on little opportunities that others might miss.  They have to know what take has magic in it, and not overtax the artist with too many options or extra work that doesn’t need to be done.

That’s a take!

There are so many variables in the making of a musical recording.  What I’ve talked about here is based on some of my experiences, and many conversations with those much more experienced then I.  What do you think the role of the producer is/should be, and what are your experiences in producing or being produced?

by rosiehardy

Creativity. It’s all about, you know, like FREEDOM, Maaaaaan.

Have you ever sat there, ready to just dive in creatively, and you end up staring at your computer screen/writing pad, or with your instrument limp in your hands, and nothing happens?  You’ve got Tabula Rasa – the blank slate – you can do whatever you want.  What a terror!

To get the juices flowing, I might take a look at the gear – maybe I turn on my synth to get some ideas flowing. Holy crap, I’ve got 6 kazillion patches – too much to choose from! Scroll, audition, scroll, audition (…six hours later… still no music written).  I’m looking for a fence but all there is is horizon.

Oh, the oppressive quality of limitless options. In Space, there is no ‘up’.

Or maybe, you don’t get locked into the above, but you go and create and boy, it’s the same old song and dance – you are working from your comfort zone. You are boring yourself.

Maybe it’s time to build yourself a nice little sandbox!

If you prepare your for your creative work by setting some limitations, you will find that it can give you a sense of definition, direction.  You start to make consistent decisions from an anchored point, and you are then able to work more efficiently and with flow. Also, you are ‘free’ to color outside the lines, because you know where the lines are – and so, surprisingly, limitations help you create work that is fresher!

A studio is an absolute labyrinth of possibilities – this is why records take so long to make because there are millions of permutations of things you can do. The most useful thing you can do is to get rid of some of those options before you start.

Brian Eno said that, the super-genius that he is.  He also goes on to say:

One of my mottoes is that if you want to get unusual results, work fast and work cheap, because there’s more of a chance that you’ll get somewhere that nobody else did. Nearly always, the effect of spending a lot of money is to make things more normal.

Cut it out!

Before you start working, try and think of a bunch of things you are NOT going to use, and ways of working you will NOT fall back on. The further you move from your comfort zone, the more unusual result you will get, or, the more CREATIVE a result you’ll get. You are going to force yourself to think interesting.

Parameterize!

Think of some unusual restrictions to put on yourself. This is one of the most interesting aspects of creative collaborations, especially in film music; it presents it’s own set of limitations – you are creating work that supports already created work, within the framework of the story, and the directors vision. I also love working with directors who have no, or only a limited knowledge of music. They will suggest things you would never have thought of on your own, maybe even crazy ideas. Run with it! And if you are working alone, on your own project, try and think of some things you can box yourself in with. Get rid of some of your options. Don’t use stuff you know will result in the ’same old sound’.

Check your options at the door – you are going to use ONLY a woodwind section, one synth patch, accordion, and a delay. Now go make an awesome film score. Think that sounds crazy? Check out the work Giacchino did for ‘Lost’ – his palette: small string section, trombones, and a harp. Pretty unique, effective, and memorable score, right? Or how about the brilliant choice to have Neil Young score ‘Dead Man’ with just an electric guitar, improvised live while watching the film.

Commit!

Be courageous! Print that effect! Lay down that track and stick to it! See if you can go with an open “It works – use it” mentality. Having pre-determined strategy for what you are ‘allowed’ to do will help your decision making tremendously. Does it fit within the framework you created? Good – do it!

Do not collect weapons or practice with weapons beyond what is useful.

- Miyamoto Musashi, the Dokkodo

Make it about your creativity and intellect, not about the gear. Avoid getting too many samplers, sequencers, plugins, synths, toys, gizmos and gadgets. Avoid the short-lived drug addicted high of buying new gear for it’s own sake, and using that as an excuse to keep you from being creative. Don’t get stuck in software learning curves instead of being creative. Too much gear can muck up your sound and serve only to make you sound like the latest thing – ‘hollywoodizing’ your sound.

These examples are mostly related in terms of music, but they apply to ALL creative fields, esp. filmmaking which is particularly subject to Option Overload (though usually constrained by budget). See how your options, techno-lust and safe-working-methods might be holding you back from being your creative best.

Cut a vital connection!

Do you have any cool ways of working? Let’s hear about them!

Read the full article on Film Music Magazine here:

Teamsters Say They’re Ready To Help Film & TV Composers Unionize at LA Meeting

450 composers, including many ‘A-listers’, met in Burbank, CA on Monday, Nov. 16th.

In the US, composers are one of the few professional groups working in film/tv that have no representation, in the way that actors have SAG and writers the WGA.  There is a really important and interesting (and HEATED!) discussion going on about composers unionizing and using their collective power to stop the devaluation of music, and “increasingly unrealistic delivery deadlines, punitive working conditions, lack of benefits enjoyed by most workers in the industry, plus the amalgamation of skill-sets”.

Check out these stats from the same article:

“…a staggering drop in composer fees from the 1980s to the present time—as much as an 86% pay-cut on an average movie adjusted for 2009 dollars. Further statistics purport a 240% increase in actual minutes of music used in today’s movies in contrast to those produced in 1980.”

It will be very interesting to see where this leads – it’s a divisive and emotional topic, there are as many questions as there are answers, and a lot is at stake.

UPDATE: Here is a very interesting article from the LA Times that adds some more dimension to the debate.  Consider this – David Carbonara is the composer for the incredibly successful ABC Show, Mad Men.  You’d think, of all working composers, he’d be doing pretty well, but “even after he labors on 13 episodes for a full year, he says he won’t earn enough to support his family.”

There’s something very wrong with this picture!

Red Pill or Blue Pill? by Gary Martin

Back in April, I did a guest post on StudioManifesto.ca called Voodoo Your Creative Flow, which dealt with using rituals to help maximize your creative effectiveness.  Wired magazine recently published a very interesting article that talks about the mysterious Placebo Effect, and it got me thinking about how this might be applied in a similar fashion.

The Placebo Effect is an absolutely fascinating phenomenon, and interesting on it’s own even outside any possible applications to creative work.  It was originally discovered after a WWII nurse injected a wounded soldier with saline instead of morphine, basically out of desperation in the face of shortages.  She reported to the anesthetist she was assisting that despite the fact that he did not receive an actual does of morphine, the soldier nonetheless experienced all the effects had one been administered (his pain was relieved, and the effects of shock were offset).  Since then, standard practice requires all pharmaceuticals must undergo rigorous testing in order to show that they considerably surpass the placebo in effectiveness, before they can put them on the market.  Another point of interest:  I have heard (though I have no specific citation of this) that a person taking Valium must know that they are taking Valium for it to be effective – if they are unaware that it is being administered, it has no effect. Recent studies show that the placebo is becoming more and more effective, and it’s becoming more and more difficult for new pharmaceuticals to beat them.   Crazy, huh?

At any rate, the Placebo Effect is another pretty amazing indicator of the power and potential of the human mind, and I think as creative people, this warrants some consideration.  I don’t have any specific suggestions on how you might apply this – a sugar pill that makes you awesome? – and I would love to see some dialogue and discussions.  If it’s possible that simply believing in the efficacy of something can yield measurable physical results, I think we are currently vastly underestimating how much creative problem solving is actually possible.

Check out the full article here, and then come back here and post your thoughts!