<\/p>\n
By Manuel Gutierrez Rojas<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
[M]odern technology has [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] shifted the metaphor from exceptional accomplishment on paper by \u201ccomposers\u201d to exceptional accomplishment on hard disk by \u201cproducers.\u201d Moreover, the producer and his machines are on stage, just as the composer was once a performer. At the top of the current charts, one increasingly finds cases in which the producer is the artist is the composer is the producer; and technology is what has driven the change.<\/p>\n
\u2014 Virgil Moorefield[1]<\/a><\/p>\n Personal computers revolutionized every aspect of music making from composition (including nonelectronic composition) to performance to distribution to consumption. And at every level their effects has been to simplify and democratize the art. But in the process they may have dealt the literate tradition a slow-acting death blow.<\/p>\n \u2014 Richard Taruskin[2]<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Composing music in a digital environment makes for an \u201cimmediate process\u201d of composition: writing music and being able to listen to how it sounds at the same time or real-time composing.[3]<\/a> It is different from the \u201cabstract process\u201d that traditional options offer such as writing down the music on paper, and finally being able to listen to how it sounds after it is performed by the assigned musicians.[4]<\/a> Indeed, the Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) initiated a more accessible platform to compose music with\u2014not only for composers, songwriters, and musicians in general, but for people who are not necessarily formally musically trained. The instantaneousness of these digital tools seems to have popularised and maybe even standardised the craft of musical composition and it may have closely connected or even unified the composer with the producer and\/or the performer.<\/p>\n With my paper I want to examine how much this democratisation of music composition has affected the artistic values of its profession and whether this development can be regarded as an extension of the craft, or that the traditional composer will die out. For instance, how much is Samuel Adler\u2019s well-respected Study of Orchestration <\/em>of use for these new composers?[5]<\/a> Many basic principles that traditional composers had to master are automated with music software (e.g. the necessary knowledge of a musical instrument\u2019s capabilities and limitation) or pre-performed (performance samples from sound libraries such as EastWest\u2019s). How then will these technological developments affect the compositional process?<\/p>\n I will use several books, articles, a private interview with video game composer Chris H\u00fclsbeck, Adler\u2019s aforementioned book, music software, and possibly other media for supporting my paper.<\/p>\n It does not matter much in what language and in which terminology composers happen to think their thoughts: their concepts of what is to be music next are always related to some technological considerations, and this relationship ranges from extreme subtlety to gross obviousness. There ought to be no need at this point to elaborate on the rather commonplace notion that technological considerations show the way from a musical idea to its realization, first in some code and then in a performance, and that technological considerations lead to the availability of the acoustical phenomena needed by composers for an audible representation of their musical ideas. It may be appropriate, however, to remember that musical ideas are thinking models in more or less deliberately stipulated linguistic systems; that [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] the complexity of such systems is increasing in many a sense and dimension; and that, therefore, composers now have to turn to technology with the additional request for assistance in handling the systems they stipulate.<\/p>\n \u2014 Herbert Br\u00fcn [6]<\/a><\/p>\n Herbert Br\u00fcn carefully describes the thought process of a composer\u2019s mind and how the type of medium that forms the building blocks for the mind\u2019s ideas to be realised can make the process more efficient or more comfortable. Throughout the centuries, the medium to write the music with changed. Before digital technology was sophisticated enough to write music in a digital environment using software, making one\u2019s musical idea a tangible medium for others to perceive, could be done by writing it down in a standard that is music notation, by performing it, or by recording the performance of the idea\u2014either directly or using the notation of it. Depending on these options, there are differences in the way the musical idea is documented. Musical notation gives instruction for how the idea should be performed while the recording of a performance documents an interpretation of the idea. In his \u201cRationalization and Democratization in the New Technologies of Popular Music,\u201d Andrew Goodwin argues that music notation is a way to structure or \u201cbring order\u00a0<\/em>to the creation\u201d of music and that \u201ca universal notational system and the precise measurement of tonal and rhythmic differences comes to define what music is<\/em>.\u201d[7]<\/a> Adam Basanta further elaborates that the score is not the composition; it is a part\u00a0<\/em>of it, \u201ca piece of the puzzle,\u201d and that the listening of the piece is the other necessary part.[8]<\/a> There can be a benefit for performing the idea, rather than writing it down. Some musical ideas are very hard or even impossible to write down in standard notation. Then there is the skill of being able to perform the idea that might make music notation more beneficial, for it can instruct another musician who has the skill to perform the idea, to perform it.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Many prominent tools for digital music production are for correcting imperfections of recorded performances. Especially recorded MIDI input (MIDI is a standard to connect computer devices with other electronic musical devices such as a digital piano) can be edited to such a degree that there will not be any audible traces of digital artifacts, such as is\u00a0<\/em>the case with live recordings (i.e. the side effect of auto-tuning vocals). However, a flawless performance does not necessarily make for a good performance. For instance, a slightly offset beat by the player could be intentional, as part of the player\u2019s \u201cfeel.\u201d Andrew Goodwin argues that \u201cit is essential to note that arithmetical accuracy is rarely the goal in popular music. Instead, the sometimes elusive quality of \u2018feel\u2019 is what most musicians and producers seek, and this usually involves some displacement of the notes away from their mathematically \u2018correct\u2019 position.\u201d[9]<\/a> This human element that is \u201cfeel\u201d and that can be part of a performer\u2019s style will be lost more and more if a standard of perfectionism has become the norm.<\/p>\n If the digital composer is not careful, his digital compositions can easily sound artificial\u2014even if he uses high-quality pre-recorded samples, either because of a lack of knowledge to how a certain musical instrument should be performed or because of too much cleaning up of human imperfections. Indeed, a lack of digital artifacts does not hide inhumanly flawless performance. During the \u201cDemocratization of Performance\u201d panel discussion, Pierre-Luc Sen\u00e9cal notes that the DAW options of using preperformed music segments\u2014most notably music loops, but also guitar riffs, or even detailed instrumental articulations\u2014can make it difficult for the user to secure his own musical identity, but that they can be beneficial because they \u201chelp save time: it is useless to reinvent the wheel every time.\u201d[10]<\/a> Indeed, using programmed instruments for composing can make for a less obstructive writing process\u2014especially for artists that write their music by performing and recording them, than by writing it down traditionally. Progressive math-metal band Meshuggah wrote their album Catch Thirtythree<\/em>(2005) using programmed drums, not because drummer Tomas Haake could not perform the parts, but because of the comfortable production process as Haake points out: \u201cIt would have taken away from the initial idea, which is just spur of the moment and lets everything flow freely.\u201d[11]<\/a> Haake, however, felt it necessary to acknowledge that the drums were programmed, saying:<\/p>\n We know a ton of bands where the drums are programmed, but they will never admit to it. It\u2019s so important to them that people think, \u201cYeah, you\u2019re playing live.\u201d That was another thing, for me at least, that felt like a release of sorts, just to say, \u201cYeah, this is programmed,\u201d and just have that out in the open, and then let people decide on whether they think it\u2019s good or not.[12]<\/a><\/p>\n This, as Moorefield would describe, \u201cfreeing [oneself] of the notion of performance,\u201d[13]<\/a> goes back to the musique concr\u00e8te<\/em>, wherein \u201cnotating musical ideas\u201d were seen as a limitation to composition.[14]<\/a> Selecting and compiling sounds to create music was the way forward.[15]<\/a> Moorefield furthermore examines that Pierre Schaeffer, who coined the term musique concr\u00e8te, \u201ccomposed music in which the studio was the performer. More precisely, they created music which was meant to exist exclusively in recorded form, as tape music.\u201d[16]<\/a> While musique concr\u00e8te aims at a certain musical style, the production of such music is very similar to digital music production. Indeed, the term connects neatly to digital composition. After all, the immediacy of contemporary music production incites composers to create compositions that are based on sound rather than on tonality and harmony. Mathieu Lacroix argues that \u201cMusic is now not an axis of notes\/harmony into time, but of sound into time.\u201d[17]<\/a><\/p>\n In his Producer as Composer<\/em>, Sam Logan observes that \u201cthe DAW might become a crutch for the composer who will become reliant on it in order to compose, and who will gain an unrealistic expectation of orchestration and instrumentation.\u201d When a composer only uses real-time composing as a draft, as a mock-up for an eventual live recording with a real orchestra, it could lead to frustration if it turns out that the composition cannot be performed as cleanly and with the same dynamics by real instrumentalists.[18]<\/a> He demonstrates this problem with two woodwinds:<\/p>\n [W]hen working with two virtual instruments of flute, playing in its lower register and a bassoon, also in its lower register, by default they will sound at the same volume in the DAW when played back together. A live performance would see the flute being entirely drowned out. On top of this, the budding composer inexperienced in orchestration and instrumentation can easily fall victim to writing outside instrumental range, as well as never coming to grips with the idiomatic eccentricities of the instruments the VST instrument is modelling.[19]<\/a><\/p>\n Furthermore, he remarks that DAW users often \u201cuse a keyboard as a physical and graphical means of operating the instrument.\u201d[20]<\/a> This could lead into non-keyboard instruments being performed in a keyboard manner.[21]<\/a><\/p>\n Studying the capabilities for each instrument before real-time composing was available, was necessary for the composer to know how to transfer his musical ideas into a performance by a palette of sounds of the musical instruments, as Samuel Adler points out in his Study of Orchestration<\/em>.[22]<\/a> In the book\u2019s chapter \u201cThe Woodwind Choir (Reed Aerophones)\u201d he mentions the limitations of volume and dynamics for woodwinds such as flutes: \u201cIntensity and volume vary with each woodwind instrument, depending on the range and particular register in which the passage appears. [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] For example, the flute and piccolo are very weak in volume in their lowest octave [.\u00a0.\u00a0.].\u201d[23]<\/a><\/p>\n The immediacy of composing in a digital environment has given the composer many options for both the performance of the composition as well as the production of it. In his \u201cDemocratization of Performance,\u201d Pierre-Luc argues that \u201c[w]hereas every step of the musical creation was once realized separately by a professional and in a specialized venue, now it can all be done by the same person in one place and sometimes at incredibly low costs.\u201d[24]<\/a> Although such a digital composer can be more affordable than separately hiring people for specific professions, because of this composer\u2013performer\u2013producer unification, he has a lot more responsibility.<\/p>\n Besides, it could still be less expensive in the long run to hire a dedicated orchestra, conductor, recording studio, and recording engineers for a composition to be recorded, than to use virtual instruments and months of tweaking to make them sound convincing, according to video game composer Chris H\u00fclsbeck.[25]<\/a> In a private interview, he elaborately discusses the benefits and problems of composing digitally. About hiring real musicians versus sequencing music digitally, he argues that even if a composer has the latest high-quality virtual instruments at his disposal, it is impossible to make his composition match a real orchestra, at least for now. He compares it to creating an art piece out of different photographs collaged together and that the original sources will always be visible:<\/p>\n [I]t still will look a little [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] bit plasticy, if you will. It does not have that soul. [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] I always say: when you have sixty\/seventy people in an orchestra play your music, everyone of those musicians is interpreting in a way. Even [notated music] with good [detailed] instructions, [the musicians] are interpreting with their own soul, [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] how they learned their instrument, what they\u2019re bringing to it. And the combination of all [of that], if you put those seventy people together, that creates something [so] that, that soul is expressed in the music.[26]<\/a><\/p>\n H\u00fclsbeck\u2019s analogy connects to Sen\u00e9cal\u2019s composer as a painter\u00a0<\/em>idea \u201cYou\u2019re working directly with sound, and there\u2019s no transmission loss between you and the sound\u2014you handle it. It puts the composer in the identical position of the painter\u2014he\u2019s working directly with a material, working directly onto a substance, and he always retains the options to chop and change, to paint a bit out, add a piece, etc.\u201d[27]<\/a> This availability of \u201cchop and chang[ing]\u201d at will could lead to a composition that keeps getting edited.[28]<\/a> Especially in film music, film producers micromanage the composition process of the composer, because of the real-time composing aspect as demonstrated in the short documentary \u201cThe Marvel Symphonic Universe.\u201d[29]<\/a> A film director could hear directly how one part of the piece can affect the film and vice versa\u2014so much that the creativity of the composer is reduced to the producers\u2019 wishes.[30]<\/a> In his History of Music Production<\/em>, Richard James Burgess argues that this idea that digital music technology cannot be made responsible for the \u201cdeclining standards of musicianship, bad music on the radio, excessive mediation by producers, and so forth,\u201d only its users can.[31]<\/a>He remarks that \u201c[t]he producer and the needs of the production dictate the use of the equipment not the other way round. This is conceptually no different than driving a Ferrari in a thirty mph zone.\u201d[32]<\/a><\/p>\n One way to prevent digitally programmed compositions from sounding unconvincing performance-wise, is to avoid delicate musical elements\u2014ornamental phrasing, gentle vibrato effects, etc.\u2014but this, in turn, limits the compositional freedom of the composer. The idea is similar to how CGI artists[33]<\/a> can easily fool the viewer with computer generated background elements of a film to look real, such as those in Brokeback Mountain<\/em>(dir. Ang Lee, 2005),[34]<\/a> but will have a harder time to computer-generate a convincing human being, such as a young Arnold Schwarzenegger as The Terminator in Terminator Genisys<\/em>(dir. Alan Taylor, 2015).[35]<\/a> This unusable range of digital manipulation for digital composers is an \u201cuncanny valley\u201d (a term coined by Masahiro Mori).[36]<\/a> Accessing this valley\u2014no matter how careful or prepared\u2014can easily turn a convincing, yet \u201csafe\u201d composition into a very unconvincing mess, if I may. The more realistic these virtual instruments sound, the more difficult it becomes for them to sound convincing.<\/p>\n EastWest\u2019s Hollywood Orchestra is a sound library consisting of a complete modern classical orchestra. Every section has many different articulations. For instance, the user can select for the violins:<\/p>\n I experimented with the Slur Runs patch for the violins using Rimsky-Korsakov\u2019s famous \u201cFlight of the Bumblebee\u201d (1899\u20131900).[38]<\/a> While the fast runs sound very real (so much that YouTube flagged the video as being a copyrighted upload of a real <\/em>recording of the piece), every note is perfectly divided within every measure, because they were inputted using music notation software (Sibelius) and then transferred to a DAW (Studio One 2), which makes the performance sound too mechanical. I would have to perform the piece on my digital piano for human elements to appear, but this would still be a translation from one instrument (a piano) to other ones (violins) which still results in performative problems. Having discussed these problems with H\u00fclsbeck he comments high-quality samples with many articulations make it harder to sound real. He mentions:<\/p>\n There are some sample libraries [that] are trying to capture the soul of the performance, but then they\u2019re limited [to] what they can do. If you make them more flexible, then you have to make them kind of like more robotic sounding, because you want a clean <\/em>string sound for example, for that\u00a0<\/em>note. It\u2019s always going to be that clean string sound. Each time you hit that note, it\u2019s going to sound the same. There are some libraries that try to do several different recordings when you press the note in succession and stuff like that [such as the round-robin sampling technique].[39]<\/a> [.\u00a0.\u00a0.]Right now, the resolution is just not there. [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] When you want to try to make your MIDI sampling recording sound good, you have to spend a lot of time. You have to actually put in imperfections in a way. You have to mix different libraries. You have to experiment and do all these things that the musicians in an orchestra do just [from] their experience. And in the end, you\u2019re spending maybe months to make a piece sound, whereas an orchestra could record it in fifteen minutes and you could move on to the next piece.[40]<\/a><\/p>\n On the other hand, it is the question whether the listener cares that what he hears clearly sounds artificial. For example, all the guitars in Britney Spears\u2019s Oops!… I Did It Again<\/em>(2000) are artificial (as can be heard by her cover of \u201c(I Can\u2019t Get No) Satisfaction\u201d (2000).[41]<\/a> And the orchestra of the famous \u201cNovember Rain\u201d (1991) by Guns N\u2019 Roses is completely synthetic (even if the music video assumes otherwise).[42]<\/a> Nevertheless, Spears\u2019s album and Guns N\u2019 Roses\u2019 song did not seem to be negatively affected by these artificial sounding instruments.<\/p>\n In the 1940s, John Cage looked forward to a future wherein musical notation would become a thing of the past, a future wherein \u201ccomposers [could] make music directly, without the assistance of intermediary performers.\u201d[43]<\/a> This paper demonstrated that this essentially happened because of digital music technology. Though musical notation is still being used, many musical performers can rely on media which does not necessarily need traditional musical notation. Taruskin speaks of a postliterate age. He says:<\/p>\n In preliterate cultures compositions can be fixed in memory and reproduced orally or (with rehearsal) by ensembles of performers; in the postliterate future pieces will go right on being fixed and reproduced in those time-honored ways, but it will also be possible to fix them digitally and reproduce them via synthesizer or via MIDI. Indeed, it is already possible to do these things, even if only a minority of composers now work that way. When a majority of composers work that way, the postliterate age will have arrived. That will happen when\u2014or if\u2014reading music becomes a rare specialized skill, of practical value only for reproducing \u201cearly music\u201d (meaning all composed music performed live. [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] [T]he availability of technologies that can circumvent notation in the production of complex composed music may eventually render musical literacy, like knowledge of ancient scripts, superfluous to all but scholars.[44]<\/a><\/p>\n However, a postliterate age implies an age beyond musical literacy, while digital music production does rely on literacy, only digitally, either using piano rolls on DAWs, or sequencing the music in other digital ways. Thus electronically literate composition or e-literate composition would be the way forward.<\/p>\n As of now, while the mixture of human performances with digitally coded performances or even solely programmed performances can be very useful for preproduction of a compositional piece as an end product, it could make the work sound artificial. Unfortunately, because of a DAW\u2019s immediate process of composing, pre- and postproduction have either become the same or disappeared completely. Furthermore, the use of virtual orchestras creates compositional limitations, because some orchestral techniques and instruments cannot sound convincing beyond a certain level of realism. This artificiality of digital programmed composition\u2014resulting into an \u201cuncanny valley\u201d of sound\u2014is the one thing that makes real musicians, session artists, orchestras, etc. still relevant; they still do have a purpose. Furthermore, the strong manipulative capabilities with real-time composition ironically complicate\u00a0matters with the composing aspect itself. There is a big responsibility into efficiently streamlining the writing process rather than obstructing it. Especially film composers struggle with their superiors micromanaging them.<\/p>\n When the time comes that artificiality is eliminated or that humanisation options have improved so much that a composition not performed by real people sounds like it is, then\u00a0<\/em>it is important to find out how the traditional performer\/artist can still be part of this musical culture. However, the music listener might not care about the presence of audible synthetic instruments such as the artificial orchestra in \u201cNovember Rain.\u201d<\/p>\n The traditional skills for a composer to be able to work professionally have become less of a requirement because many compositional elements are automated with computer software, such as the range for each musical instrument (but in virtual form). The lack of understanding each instrument\u2019s capabilities and limitations\u00a0can make for digital compositions that cannot be performed in real life, but that makes the DAW an electronic instrument of itself. It connects digital composers that use a virtual instrument beyond what a real performer is capable of performing to musique concr\u00e8te composition, in which the composition is freed from human performance, in which the sound is central.<\/p>\n Taruskin\u2019s idea that \u201c[p]ersonal computers [.\u00a0.\u00a0.] might have dealt the literate tradition a slow-acting death blow\u201d is not entirely true.[45]<\/a> A postliterate age, wherein musical notation will be obsolete, does not seem like an age we are nearing, but a transition to an e-literate age\u2014using electronic devices for notating and composing music\u2014that\u00a0<\/em>has happened. This new technology definitely has affected the process of composition, the \u201cway from a musical idea to its realization.\u201d[46]<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Adler, Samuel. \u201cThe Orchestra\u2014Yesterday and Today.\u201dThe Study of Orchestration <\/em>3rd ed., 3\u20136. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2016.<\/p>\n \u2014\u2014\u2014. \u201cThe Woodwind Choir (Reed Aerophones).\u201dThe Study of Orchestration <\/em>3rd ed., 164\u2013179. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2016.<\/p>\n Br\u00fcn, Herbert. \u201cTechnology and the Composer.\u201d Interpersonal Relational Networks<\/em>(1971): 1\u20139.<\/p>\n Burgess, Richard James. \u201cRandom Access Recording Technology.\u201d The History of Music Production<\/em>, 134\u2013146. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.<\/p>\n Eno, Brian. \u201cThe Studio as Compositional Tool.\u201d Audio Culture: Readings in Modern Music<\/em>, 127\u2013130. Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 2004.<\/p>\n Fuller, David. \u201cThe Performer as Composer.\u201d Performance Practice Volume II: Music After 1600<\/em>, 117\u2013146. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1990.<\/p>\n Goodwin, Andrew. \u201cRationalization and Democratization in the New Technologies of Popular Music.\u201d Popular Music: The Rock Era, Volume 2<\/em>, 147\u2013168. Edited by Simon Frith. London: Routledge, 2004.<\/p>\n Gutierrez Rojas, Manuel. \u201cContemporary Film Music Production that Changed the Hollywood Score.\u201d Music and the Moving Image<\/em>, 1\u20138. Utrecht: Utrecht University, 2017.<\/p>\n Haake, Tomas. \u201cGuest Spots: Meshuggah on the Drumkit from Hell.\u201d Alarm Magazine: A Passion in Discovering Exceptional Music<\/em>. Accessed April 27, 2017,<\/p>\n alarm-magazine.com\/2011\/guest-spots-meshuggah-on-the-drumkit-from-hell.<\/p>\n H\u00fclsbeck, Chris. Interview by the author, March 7, 2017. Transcribed by the author.<\/p>\n Lacroix, Mathieu. \u201cThe Producer\/Composer: The Hybridization of Roles and how it Affects Production and Composition of Contemporary Music.\u201d Master\u2019s thesis, NTNU, 2016.<\/p>\n Logan, Sam. \u201cModern Composition & Production Tools.\u201d Illusions of Liveness: Producer as Composer<\/em>, 27\u201334. Master of Musical Arts in Composition exegesis, Massey University and Victoria University of Wellington, 2013.<\/p>\n Moorefield, Virgil. \u201cThe Contemporary Situation: Is the Producer Obsolete?\u201d The Producer as Composer: Shaping the Sounds of Popular Music<\/em>, no page numbers. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2005. Kindle E-book.<\/p>\n Mori, Masahiro, Marl F. MacDorman, and Norri Kageki. \u201cThe Uncanny Valley.\u201d IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine<\/em>19, no. 2, June 2012.<\/p>\n Satterwhite, Brian, Taylor Ramos, and Tony Zhou. \u201cThe Marvel Symphonic Universe.\u201d YouTube<\/em>. Accessed April 30, 2017, youtu.be\/7vfqkvwW2fs.<\/p>\n Sen\u00e9cal, Pierre-Luc. \u201cDemocratization of Performance.\u201d Panel discussion with Adam Basanta, Nicolas Bernier, Myriam Bleau, Gabriel Dharmoo, and Erin Gee. Moderated by Patrick Saint-Denis. Held at the Canadian Music Centre, Qu\u00e9bec Region, April 6, 2015. Canadian League of Composers<\/em>. Accessed April 7, 2017, www.composition\/org\/events\/<\/p>\n democratization-of-performance-2.<\/p>\n Taruskin, Richard. \u201cMillennium\u2019s End.\u201d The Oxford History of Western Music: Music in the Late Twentieth Century<\/em>, 473\u2013528. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.<\/p>\n \u2014\u2014\u2014. \u201cThe Third Revolution.\u201d The Oxford History of Western Music: Music in the Late Twentieth Century<\/em>, 175\u2013220. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.<\/p>\n \u201cTerminator Genisys: Creating a Fully Digital Schwarzenegger.\u201d YouTube<\/em>. Posted by Wired. Accessed April 30, 2017, youtu.be\/DKlbaU_uWpI.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Visual FX of Brokeback Mountain<\/em>.\u201d YouTube<\/em>. Retitled as \u201cSpecial Effects of Brokeback Mountain.\u201d Posted by Fricky007. Accessed April 30, 2017, youtu.be\/kPw5plmkd6Q.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Motion Pictures<\/strong><\/p>\n Brokeback Mountain<\/em>. Directed by Ang Lee. Produced by Diana Ossana and James Schamus. Starring Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway, and Michelle Williams. Music by Gustavo Santaolalla. Universal City, California: Focus Features, 2005.<\/p>\n Terminator Genisys<\/em>. Directed by Alan Taylor. Produced by David Ellison and Dana Goldberg. Starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jason Clarke, Emilia Clarke, and Jai Courtney. Music by Lorne Balfe. Hollywood, California: Paramount Pictures, 2015.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Music<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cFlight of the Bumblebee.\u201d Written by Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov. Performed by the author using a DAW. From The Tale of Tsar Saltan<\/em>. Composed in 1899\u20131900. Retitled to \u201cFlight of the Bumblebee using Virtual Instruments.\u201d YouTube<\/em>. Posted by ManolitoMystiq. Accessed April 30, 2017, https:\/\/youtu.be\/eXIqpphaVrM?t=25s.<\/p>\n \u201c(I Can\u2019t Get No) Satisfaction.\u201d Written by Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. Performed by Britney Spears. From Oops!… I Did It Again<\/em>. Produced by Max Martin et al. New York: Jive Records, 2000.<\/p>\n \u201cNovember Rain.\u201d Written by Axl Rose. From Use Your Illusion I<\/em>. Produced by Mike Clink and Guns N\u2019 Roses. New York: Geffen, 1991.<\/p>\n Oops!… I Did It Again<\/em>. Produced by Max Martin et al. New York: Jive Records, 2000.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a>Virgil Moorefield, \u201cThe Contemporary Situation: Is the Producer Obsolete?,\u201d The Producer as Composer: Shaping the Sounds of Popular Music<\/em>(Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2005), no page numbers, Kindle E-book.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a>Richard Taruskin, \u201cMillennium\u2019s End,\u201d The Oxford History of Western Music: Music in the Late Twentieth Century<\/em>(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 495.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a>Manuel Gutierrez Rojas, \u201cContemporary Film Music Production that Changed the Hollywood Score,\u201d Music and the Moving Image<\/em>(Utrecht: Utrecht University, 2017), 6.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a>Ibid.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a>Samuel Adler, The Study of Orchestration<\/em>3rd ed. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2002).<\/p>\n [6]<\/a>Herbert Br\u00fcn, \u201cTechnology and the Composer,\u201d Interpersonal Relational Networks <\/em>(1971): 2\u20133.<\/p>\n [7]<\/a>Andrew Goodwin, \u201cRationalization and Democratization in the New Technologies of Popular Music,\u201d Popular Music: Critical Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies <\/em>2, The Rock Era, <\/em>147\u2013148, edited by Simon Frith (London: Routledge, 2004).<\/p>\n [8]<\/a>Pierre-Luc Sen\u00e9cal, \u201cDemocratization of Performance,\u201d panel discussion with Adam Basanta, Nicolas Bernier, Myriam Bleau, Gabriel Dharmoo, and Erin Gee. Moderated by Patrick Saint-Denis. Held at the Canadian Music Centre, Qu\u00e9bec Region, April 6, 2015, Canadian League of Composers<\/em>, accessed April 7, 2017, www.composition\/org\/events\/democratization-of-performance-2.<\/p>\n [9]<\/a>Andrew Goodwin, \u201cRationalization and Democratization in the New Technologies of Popular Music,\u201d Popular Music: The Rock Era, Volume 2<\/em>, 149\u2013150, edited by Simon Frith (London: Routledge, 2004).<\/p>\n [10]<\/a>Sen\u00e9cal, \u201cDemocratization of Performance.\u201d<\/p>\n [11]<\/a>Tomas Haake, \u201cGuest Spots: Meshuggah on the Drumkit from Hell,\u201d Alarm Magazine: A Passion in Discovering Exceptional Music<\/em>, accessed April 27, 2017, alarm-magazine.com\/2011\/guest-spots-meshuggah-on-the-drumkit-from-hell.<\/p>\n [12]<\/a>Haake, \u201cMeshuggah on the Drumkit from Hell.\u201d<\/p>\n [13]<\/a>Moorefield, \u201cThe Discoth\u00e8que and Musique Concr\u00e8te<\/em>,\u201d The Producer as Composer<\/em>.<\/p>\n [14]<\/a>Jean de Reydellet, \u201cPierre Schaeffer, 1910\u20131995: The Founder of \u2018Musique Concrete,\u2019\u201d Computer Music Journal <\/em>20, no. 2 (summer 1996: 10).<\/p>\n [15]<\/a>Ibid.<\/p>\n [16]<\/a>Moorefield, \u201cThe Discoth\u00e8que and Musique Concr\u00e8te<\/em>,\u201d The Producer as Composer<\/em>.<\/p>\n [17]<\/a>Mathieu Lacroix, \u201cThe Producer\/Composer: The Hybridization of Roles and how it Affects Production and Composition of Contemporary Music,\u201d Master\u2019s thesis, NTNU, 2016.<\/p>\n [18]<\/a>Sam Logan, \u201cModern Composition & Production Tools,\u201d Illusions of Liveness: Producer as Composer<\/em>, 27\u201328 (Master of Musical Arts in Composition exegesis, Massey University and Victoria University of Wellington, 2013).<\/p>\n [19]<\/a>Logan, \u201cModern Composition & Production Tools,\u201d 27\u201328.<\/p>\n [20]<\/a>Ibid.<\/p>\n [21]<\/a>Ibid.<\/p>\n [22]<\/a>Adler, \u201cThe Orchestra\u2014Yesterday and Today,\u201d The Study of Orchestration<\/em>, 4.<\/p>\n [23]<\/a>Ibid., \u201cThe Woodwind Choir (Reed Aerophones), The Study of Orchestration<\/em>, 170.<\/p>\n [24]<\/a>Sen\u00e9cal, \u201cDemocratization of Performance.\u201d<\/p>\n [25]<\/a>Chris H\u00fclsbeck, interview by the author, March 7, 2017, transcribed by the author.<\/p>\n [26]<\/a>Ibid.<\/p>\n [27]<\/a>Brian Eno, \u201cThe Studio as Compositional Tool,\u201d Audio Culture: Readings in Modern Music<\/em>, 129 (Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 2004).<\/p>\n [28]<\/a>Ibid.<\/p>\n [29]<\/a>Brian Satterwhite, Taylor Ramos, and Tony Zhou, \u201cThe Marvel Symphonic Universe,\u201d YouTube<\/em>, accessed April 30, 2017, youtu.be\/7vfqkvwW2fs.<\/p>\n [30]<\/a>Ibid.<\/p>\n [31]<\/a>Richard James Burgess, \u201cRandom Access Recording Technology,\u201d The History of Music Production<\/em>(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 134.<\/p>\n [32]<\/a>Ibid.<\/p>\n [33]<\/a>CGI stands for computer-generated imagery.<\/p>\n [34]<\/a>\u201cThe Visual FX of Brokeback Mountain<\/em>,\u201d YouTube<\/em>, retitled as \u201cSpecial Effects of Brokeback Mountain,\u201d posted by Fricky007, accessed April 30, 2017, youtu.be\/kPw5plmkd6Q.<\/p>\n [35]<\/a>\u201cTerminator Genisys: Creating a Fully Digital Schwarzenegger,\u201d YouTube<\/em>, posted by Wired, accessed April 30, 2017, youtu.be\/DKlbaU_uWpI.<\/p>\n [36]<\/a>Masahiro Mori, Karl F. MacDorman, and Norri Kageki, \u201cThe Uncanny Valley,\u201d IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine <\/em>19, no. 2, June 2012.<\/p>\n [37]<\/a>See the following document for the complete list: www.soundsonline-forums.com\/docs\/<\/p>\n Hollywood-Strings_Articulations_Gold.pdf.<\/p>\n [38]<\/a>\u201cFlight of the Bumblebee,\u201d written by Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov, performed by the author using a DAW, from The Tale of Tsar Saltan<\/em>, composed in 1899\u20131900, retitled to \u201cFlight of the Bumblebee using Virtual Instruments,\u201d YouTube<\/em>, posted by ManolitoMystiq, accessed April 30, 2017, https:\/\/youtu.be\/eXIqpphaVrM?t=25s.<\/p>\n [39]<\/a>For more information, see the Taming The Robin\u2013section on this EastWEst\/Quantum Leap Hollywood Solo Instruments review: www.soundonsound.com\/reviews\/eastwestquantum-leap-hollywood-solo-instruments.<\/p>\n [40]<\/a>H\u00fclsbeck, interview by the author.<\/p>\n [41]<\/a>\u201c(I Can\u2019t Get No) Satisfaction,\u201d written by Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, performed by Britney Spears, from Oops!… I Did It Again<\/em>, produced by Max Martin et al. (New York: Jive Records, 2000).<\/p>\n [42]<\/a>\u201cNovember Rain,\u201d written by Axl Rose, from Use Your Illusion I<\/em>, produced by Mike Clink and Guns N\u2019 Roses (New York: Geffen, 1991).<\/p>\n [43]<\/a>Taruskin, \u201cThe Third Revolution,\u201d 176\u2013177.<\/p>\nHow Musical Ideas Become Reality<\/h1>\n
Human Artificiality<\/h1>\n
The Composer Becoming the Composer\u2013Performer\u2013Producer<\/h1>\n
\n
E-literate Composition: The <\/em>New Direction of Documenting Written Music<\/h1>\n
Conclusion<\/h1>\n
References<\/h1>\n