How I Should Be Composing

This is really fascinating! According to an article in the Wall Street Journal today, this is how actual professional cultural creators work: The Data-Driven Tech Engine at the Heart of Hollywood’s Content Factories.

America’s studios, creators and marketers are relying, more than ever, on digital platforms that allow them to gauge what audiences like—and would like to see more of. They’re not just looking for test screenings, either. They’re looking to check in with potential audiences at every stage of production, from before a script is written until the moment their new TV show, film or music video debuts.

Netflix is projected to spend more on new and acquired content in 2020—$17 billion—than Apple Inc. spent on research and development in 2019.

With stakes that high, minimizing risk when creating new content “at scale” means treating it like any other mass-market product. Executives, producers, writers, directors and marketers need to be able to consistently craft programs that are more likely than not to find their target audiences. Critical approval and industry awards—even box-office blowouts—while nice, aren’t the endgame for most.

I've totally been doing it wrong. But of course, there is a lot less at stake in a new composition by Bryan Townsend as compared to a new film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe or a new tv series on Netflix. Actually, I'm not sure if anything is at stake if you mean income. I used to just throw my royalty checks from my books on guitar technique and transcriptions in a drawer as it was hardly worth cashing them. And the royalties from my compositions were so paltry that I told my publisher to let them accumulate until it was worth the trouble. As far as outlays go, I have been thinking about buying the Sibelius music software (which is a pricey $599) as it apparently handles quarter-tones much better than Finale which I have been using for twenty years or so. Yes, I am thinking about writing something for prepared quarter-tone guitar.

But taking to heart the kind of procedure outlined above, obviously what I should be doing is preparing a sketch or two and submitting them to the critical views of my readers so I will know what they will like. Then I will know how to proceed. Right? I just started sketching out some ideas for my String Quartet No. 3, so why don't you have a look and tell me what you think?

Click to enlarge

Let me just walk you through that. At the top is a projected title for the possible piece. A very long time ago I used the title "Unbounded Vision in Blue and Purple" for a weird little piece for flute and guitar and sketched out a couple of others with similar titles. The reference is to visual art. This one, abbreviated to "UV in Grey & White" might be a subtitle for the piece. Below that is a collection of pitches that consist in a central pitch of D extending upward in semi-tone, tone, semi-tone, tone, semi-tone steps which is a segment from the octatonic scale. Then the same series of intervals are used to extend down from the D. I whimsically call this a "hypo-octatonic" scale after the terminology for Medieval and Renaissance modes. Below that I have the two octatonic scales on D, one beginning with the semitone and the other with the tone. Below that again, I have the two endpoints of the original scale but this time used as the central point in hypo versions. To the right is a sketch of a possible overall structure: one movement in five sections of roughly three minutes each with some ideas as to the content. At the extreme bottom left is a condensation of the material used in a new version of my old piece, "Unbounded Vision in Blue and Purple," this time rewritten for violin and guitar. The guitar largely arpeggiates the chord (fingering shown) while the violin is largely restricted to the C and B flat pitches. In the original version I was experimenting with the elimination of the idea of pitch-class, the notion used in nearly all Western music, that all multiples of a given frequency are the "same."  That is, all As whether 110, 220, 440, 880 or whatever, are the "same" note. If you eliminate that concept, then every note is itself.

So whaddayathink? Scrap it? Go forward? If you are my "target audience" you must have some thoughts?

Ok, yes, this is a bit satirical, but actually when a piece nears completion, I often find the reactions of some close musical friends to be quite useful.

There is a little caveat at the end of the article that gives me hope:

One obvious pitfall of reducing art to surveys and data is that it gives producers and executives too much leverage over the creatives they rely on to generate hits. And the biggest hits often gain popularity because they head off in a new and unexpected direction, representing the vision of a single person or small creative team. They might not benefit from these modern-day focus groups.