David Dean Mendoza

Why Radio & Music Industry Sucks Nowadays

Wed, 17 Nov 2010 06:28:00 +0000

New Music Politics

Wed, 17 Nov 2010 05:19:00 +0000

A nasty situation occurred recently between myself, my roommate, and my landlord over the refund of our apartment deposit. My roommate has a feeling that our landlord was upset over the fact that his renters of five years have the education to look for a deal right next door, buy the property, and move forward and upwards with their lives. We figured our landlord must be feeling disappointed that he will have to fix the place up, and find new tenants, but never did we expect him to be so nasty to us. It reminds me of some of my composition professors. Pure haters, at least my experience.

On several occasions I have experienced a feeling hard to describe from composition professors. It could take the form of a look, or a lack of verbal response. These non-verbals occur when: (1.) I write something that is beyond criticism where they cannot criticize. (2.) I get accepted into a festival, or conference that they did or could not. (3.) Receive an award that they did or could not receive. Suddenly, the font I use offends them, or suddenly “oh that conference doesn't really mean anything.” They don’t say much. If they do, it’s very quickly, something like, “Congratulations.” Nothing more. Forget about any sign of encouragement. Pure jealousy. After graduation, forget about it. They could not care less about what has become of you.

The basic point is that, some individuals feel that it might be ok for SOMEONE ELSE to get ahead, but not YOU. How dare YOU get ahead, yet alone exceed your professor at something. Who knows what they are thinking. Race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, even generational differences might play a role here as well. When they are not canceling your lesson, they are talking on the phone, or doing lessons over email. Ultimately, university composition professors really don't give a damn. A student will never really be accepted as an equal, which is why every young composer needs to be a DIY composer. They need to do all of the marketing, web design, promotion, legal, financial, business, long term planning, networking, travel, and even performing. All the more reason to follow your inner voice, and be yourself when it comes to artistic endeavors. It’s so hard to find positive encouragement these days when it comes to education. So I encourage young composers to think hard when criticism comes their way. Is this criticism coming from a good place, or is it coming from a place of jealousy.

This jealousy comes from the culture of new music. Tom Service has written about this situation perfectly in his article So long, and thanks for all the noise: 2010 and the end of musical history

...Contemporary classical music is often – a culture – sub-culture is really more accurate – that consists mostly of people who want to criticise more than celebrate, and in which assessments of value and importance are made in exactly the opposite way to that which they are made in the (most of) the rest of the musical world. It's a topsy-turvy never-never land in which the ugly is the beautiful – and not in a good way - in which musical communication, conceived as the active transmission of sonic-semantic phenomena to as great a number of people as possible, is frowned upon (you can only 'get' this music if you're clever enough, if you're part of the club), and in which if you enjoy yourself, you ain't doing it right. As I suggest in my title today – it's over. The situation of new music is systemically shot through with contradictions, in terms of its institutions, its communities, and possibly its composers.

Commercial Vs. Artistic Music Making

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 17:12:00 +0000

Composers always get asked by the average person, “Why don’t you write for the movies? Then you can make money.” I keep trying to explain to these people that would be like asking a poet like Maya Angelou to write a restaurant menu, or an artist like Picasso to design a company logo. Not only is it not what they want to do, it is a complete waste of time and energy. Great artists like these did not get into their fields with the motivation of money; they got into it because they wanted to either (1.) Express the inexpressible by discovering new ideas in themselves, (2.) contribute to their fields of art, (3.) or become famous by being great artists. (sort of and ego trip) It is the most frustrating idea to explain in our super capitalistic society that for the most part does not appreciate or support art of any kind, especially in the realm of education.

On the other hand, I would say that most composers are open to the idea of writing for movies, commercials, or, what have you. Some may view it as a means of quick money so that they can concentrate on whatever project they are working on. Others may take the approach that composition of any kind will help them grow as an artist, no matter how clichéd or banal an exercise it is.

I personally look at it both ways. Writing a few minutes of commercial music will not hurt me artistically because my influences, tendencies, and motivation has always remained the same since I was sixteen years old. In my opinion, most classically trained composers feel theurge to explore, and this tendency alone does not make their art suitable for commercial purposes. It makes it suitable for the composer, like-minded musicians, and perhaps an enlightened audience. Sure expressive sonic exploration can happen in commercial music, and surely there are opportunities to be creative. For this reason I feel that composers should be introduced to the craft of commercial music, if anything to be more well rounded.

Most importantly, we cannot forget why composers got into composing in the first place. They get into the field by having listened to the great works of the past, and loving that feeling of being transported into another dimension both sonically,emotionally, and mentally. So if they never got hooked on this addictive drug of art music in the first place,then they should probably go into writing the disposable music our consumer driven society and become financially stable.

But as I said before, writing utilitarian, practical music can be an exercise in writing directly,succinctly, accessibly, and yes creatively. Keep in mind; a great composer will probably never fully grow as an artist by writing this kind of music. On the contrary, if a composer is on hard times, like Shostakovich was, then it will provide good money. Just remember that like Shostakovich, composers should always return back to their art.

The problem with the general public when it comes to this misunderstanding of the commercial vs. the artistic is that they do not see any value in classical art music, whereas, they see lots of value in commercia lmusic. This is especially the case in the United States, although it must be said that there are a great number of opportunities for composers in the United States that do not exist elsewhere,and regional difference can be vast. For example the difference in opportunities can be great for a given composer living in Florida versus New York verses Minnesota. Recently though, music education programs have been cut in many parts of the United States contributing to this ignorant misunderstanding. But this is another connecting issue to be discussed later. The composer is often misunderstood because his/her art is created often using notation that the general public cannot read, and existis in a temporal space. Because of this mysterisous art, that is non-visual, it's hard to appreaciate without having expericened it. As our general population through lack of music education become ignorant to this art, how will the sound artist be viewed the years ahead? Will it be a citizin of value?

Dear Listener, Dear Composer: Don't Be Fooled

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 02:25:00 +0000

Dear Listener,

Dear Composer,

Don’t be fooled

Please be careful when listening to New Music. You may read that the composer’s music being presented attended Ivy League schools with advanced degrees, and have had many performances from around the world. They may also have studied with the greatest of living, or dead composers, and had their music played in the most famous of venues. They may speak very well about their style, opinions, and creative processes. They may use the most advanced technology to date and create the newest of sounds.

Sadly, you must realize that this does not mean their musicis of any quality. Prepare yourself. The sounds you may hear may: have no logical connection, no meaning with respect to the title, no direction, lack contrast, lack cohesion, be boring, be stupid, be more concerned with how pretty the notes look on the page, be more about the surface and less about the structure, be more about what technology is being used, be about how many microphones are being used, be about concepts instead of sound,be about how people are setup on stage, be about what instruments they made up or are using, be about what their professor though was cool at the time, be about whatever school or style they come from or follow, and lastly be about how they look on camera.

I always thought music was like cooking. There seem to be endless possibilities,but only a trained professional can make these combinations work well for the eater. Ah, but what about this role of the eater, or in this case, the listener. I agree, the composer should be free to cook, to create whatever he/she wants to, and in the words of Milton Babbit, “who cares if you listen.” The only issue here is that, Milton Babbit’s music is more interesting than what I am presently hearing today from some composers. In short, it takes a composer to know a composer, and these guys are no Milton Babbit. Following my analogy, a dish created by Milton Babbit may taste sophisticated, complex flavors, a mixture of different proteins perhaps with exotic spices and sauces. In the end, it has to taste good. The music, or the sounds in some cases, has to work. You can’t keep mixing dog food with baby food, and keep expecting people to come to eat at your restaurant. Not to say anything about paying for a ticket.

So I say to you listener, don’t be fooled. Just because they may have the appearance of being professional or talented, they just may not. I don’t mean to lump all new young composers with my words, but many do need to hear them. Although I defend their right to explore and create whatever sounds cross their minds, I am disappointed that after all their work in school, that they hardly have a handful of decent sounding music. I expected more from mid level composers, and sound artists of our time.

I have heard that it is not nice to criticize my fellow composers because it reflects badly upon myself as a supporter, friend, and fellow colleague. I have grown tired on keeping my opinions to myself. I realize that every composer has his/her bad works and good works, and sometimes we may present a work that comes off as terrible from time to time. That’s not what I am criticizing. We all are students in a sense, and it takes many years to fully mature as a composer, and I realize this. I am criticizing how laissez faire and indifferent these composers are about presenting their work. This of course after lecturing to their students about how much care and attention must be paid to details.

I am frankly sick of the whole thing. Not sick of new music, of course, because I know what I like, and what I don’t like, which is more than I can say for some of my fellow composers who sometimes don’t have any opinion either way. I may not be the most talented musician, or the most talented composer. In fact, I know I have several uninteresting pieces, but I am determined to keep going. I am determined to improve as the years go by. I am determined to make my mark and contribution to my filed of study no matter how little and insignificant it may be. I have an incredible amount of perseverance that shall not be stopped. Any artist of any kind should have an unlimited amount of perseverance. If not, then the high priests of New Music will crush you. And antoher thing, don’t let the politics, egos,and unprofessional behavior of academia get in your way. Your professor’s music is not as great as you think it is, and you can be just as great as they are. So young composer, to you I say, don’t be fooled and don’t stop. Keep learning from the scores of the masters, keep reading, keep practicing, keep writing no matter what comes out, and keep your love of music alive because it’s your love, and that of no one else.

The Faliure of Academia

Tue, 01 Jun 2010 04:50:00 +0000

Recently I have seen a disturbing trend in academia. There have been and continue to be composers of little talent or skill getting accepted into PhD and DMA programs. Not only do they get in, but some have gotten full funding. What is the criteria of calling these composers talent-less or unqualified?

First, they do nothave many works. By many, I mean,some only have three. Anything fewer than ten is worrisome in my opinion. Through the bachelors and masters degree program, only to have three or four works hardly qualifies anyone as being a composer worthy of advancement. Also, many do not belong to any sort of composer organization. Some do not even perform their own music in any way to say nothing of their teaching ability. What will happen to these composers? Do they really get jobs? Will they have access to resources that more talented composers wish they had? Probably yes, but will they know what to do with them? They probably will not. It shocks me to think how talent-less even Ivy League composers are.

The only reason I can think of explaining these unjust actions is politics. Yes, sad but true. I call them unjust because many well-qualified composers apply to Ivy League schools, and don’t get in. It’s not a matter of not being qualified,but rather a matter of not impressing the right people, or writing the “right kind of music” Still, I am confident, and optimistic that good composers will raise to the top no matter how difficult the road may be. Good music is good music no matter what the circumstances. With technology the playing field is level to some degree, and no matter what academia does,you can’t put lipstick on a pig.

Tom Service explains perfectly in his article So long, and thanks for all the noise: 2010 and the end of musical history. But, while I agree with Milton Babbit's idea presented in Who Cares if You Listen, I also agree with Service's opionins as well.

Poor composers. They're damned to prestigious but virtually assured anonymity if they succeed within the rules of the club – whichever particular compositional club they belong to – and they're damned to exclusion from the game if they try and do anything genuinely different and shocking for their respective style-police.

Every composer is indebted, somewhere along the line, to the establishment, to systems of organised cultural power. And accepting their money as your lifeblood somewhat pollutes any notions of idealistic purity.

Universities have their part to play too, in giving jobs that allow composers to compose for themselves – and if their students and their communities are lucky, for them too. Things aren't as bad here as they are in America, where contemporary music is a ghettoised competition for tenure, and where there's no pretence to even try to make 'new music' appeal to a wider cross-section of the population than a coterie of students and professors – that's Milton Babbitt's dream come true, for those of you who have read his notorious article, 'who cares if you listen?' (even if the title wasn't his!) – which basically says that only an elite can understand this stuff, so only an elite will ever be able to access it, so it doesn't matter if nobody else hears it apart from your doctoral students and fellow professors.

None of which makes it exactly an attractive proposition, being a young composer. One thing is for sure: the old model of getting a high-profile commission from a leading orchestra or ensemble, getting a few good reviews, maybe even a recording, and then a publisher to look after your interests in perpetuity – makes no sense at all any more. Publishers are struggling with the transition from being bearers of the printed score to owners and negotiators of composers' rights and intellectual property, and the idea of achieving notoriety or even fame through a well-placed commission is well-high impossible any more.

Things are chainging for sure.

Going Bankrupt as a Composer

Tue, 01 Jun 2010 04:44:00 +0000

We all agree that being a composer is very difficult. First, you have to have the talent and early training as a musician. Second, you have to hone and practice your craft while continuing on into a university or conservatory setting. Third, after schooling, whether that be a BM, MM, PhD, or DMA, a composer has to get known. The best way of doing this is by making recordings, CDs, DVDs, getting a website, joining composer societies, attending festivals and conferences, creating your own opportunities by networking, and/or whatever else it takes to get your name out there.

A serious problem arises when composers who are not affiliated with universities or conservatories have to find other paths towards employment. For example, if a composer gets accepted into various festivals per year, but cannot rely on funding from a university, then that composer will have to come up with whatever they can for expenses. These include hotels, rental cars, registration fees, and air travel. If the composer is very successful he/she will be burdened with even more expenses that could range in the thousands. It’s almost like being punished for being successful in a way. Thinking back to how things used to be in Europe gives me some measure of hope. I am sure there were many talented musicians and composers who never got to work in the royal courts, or for any well-to-do families. So in some ways, composers today are better off because we at least we have the freedom to go into debt following our passions.

The only hope is to make enough money doing something else (hopefully music related) that can pay the bills. Yes, no doubt, it’s a very difficult profession. I remember a professor who taught fine art who was asked about how he defines success (referring to his students) as an artist? He replied, “ If my students don’t commit suicide.” I think the same applies to composers.

The Composer Performer

Tue, 01 Jun 2010 04:38:00 +0000

Usually composers do not develop in the same way as performers. In fact all composers should in my opinion come from some sort of performance background. In my case, I started playing piano at age seven, and viola at the age of ten in my elementary school. Truthfully, I was quite horrible. I did not become a capable performer until after my studies at the university. Through perseverance and practice I have overcome many anxieties that have hindered my development, and have performed solo at many concerts with only manageable stage fright.

To be a composer performer means total freedom. The freedom of not being able to depend on having to ask performs to play new music. This is a tremendous advantage over those composers who don’t play their own music. Still,some composition professors in academia would have young composers believe thatit is easy to get performers to play new works. On the contrary, young composers do not have the easy access to performers as their professors do. Sometimes getting performers is rather easy, yes, but in many cases, a string quartet for example or any forces larger than two persons poses a very real problem for young composers. It takes good communication skills to get other people to do somethingthey might not want to do. Another problem arises when as an advanced undergraduate or masters student writes works for the orchestra. How do these talented young composers get played?

Going into the university environment one would think thatnetworking would make it simpler to advance the music of young composers, but in reality the composer is perhaps the most isolated of all musicians. Lets face it; most performers scoff at composers even though they may be acquaintances or friends with them. The truth is that most people including performers, music theorists, musicologists, music educators, and others in themusic fields do not see any value in new music.

Composers cannot be discouraged from these developments forthere is a path towards freedom of expression. In our times today we have access to two new developments that can improve our situation. There are: the internet and improved technology. The internet has brought us the ability to create our own website, the ability to network across the globe with other music makers, access to purchase western and non western instruments, access to buy sheet music directly from publishers, access to learn about all kinds of musical systems

Improved technology has given us the power to buy computers and other devices in which to create, record, and master electronic music, and laser printers in order to print our music, and the ability to create electronic instruments and sounds.

With all of this and all that it implies one must ask, why attend university? While I agree that a great deal of music making can be learned from home, the disciple of the academic environment in combination with the facilities such as practice rooms,concert halls, electronic music studios, office spaces, and the general university experience is worth at least a bachelor’s degree. The rising cost of such degree is something for the composer to think about. As someone told me, “Don’t go into debt with a degree in the arts!”

And what about the future? Without a doubt the composer has to be prepared for what’s awaiting in the so-called “real world” The positions of the past are long gone,such as the copyist, but there is hope. To be a music teacher in the public sector takes a lot a patience and skill. Without a degree in music education it can be rather difficult to get into the school system, but the question is, would a composer want to? It’s a hard road to travel, but I am optimistic about the future. People need music, even our music.

The Masses and Contemporary Music

Tue, 01 Jun 2010 04:36:00 +0000

As contemporary classical composers we are faced with thequestion of how best to present our music to the masses. Usually this might happen after our bachelors or masters degree. This presentation might take the form of recording, designing, and releasing a CD,creating a website where one could listen our music, or perhaps buy and/or download recordings or sheet music. To me this is all well and good.

Then there are those brave souls who become their own artistic director or band leader, and manage an ensemble that tours around the country playing to anyone who might schedule them. For musical styles that intersect the classification of the classical and commercial worlds this might be a great option.

I had not considered this path until a colleague of mine suggested that I become my own artistic director and plan such a tour. He said to me, “ You know a lot of these bars have open mic nights where you can play and people will be so drunk that they will clap at anything.” At first, I thought it was an interesting idea. I actually know someone who does this sort of thing in New York City. He continued stating the fact that at composer conferences (we happen to be at an SCI regional one) we only get an audience of fellow composers, and that we should try to reach the masses. Again, I agreed and thought nothing of it.

Then the next day I realized how much I disagreed withhim. I thought to myself, why would I play for people who don’t appreciate or understand contemporary music. Not to mention the fact of people getting drunk and clapping at my music. Was I that desperate for an audience? The answer was no, of course.

So the question becomes, as contemporary composers, what kind of audience is best suited for our music. Is it the educated few who have the knowledge to at least appreciate our art form, or is it the average person who might not understand us or at worst hate our music?

Of course we open ourselves up to the average person who might walk into a music festival, or a university performance of something contemporary. If a young person does not get exposure to contemporary music they probably will not have an appreciation for it. Even when performers get exposure to contemporary music, many of them still do not preferit. We work with a very esoteric art form that not many people are going to understand. I have always accepted this fact, and I am surprised at how many of my colleagues setup their website expecting to sell lots of music, and suddenly realize that no one cares.

In closing, I am reminded of these excerpts from RichardMaxfield’s article Composers, Performance and Publication. I recommend every composer read this awesome article. It may be rather negative, but I agree with it, and enjoy ita lot.

….”The few pennies so patronizingly offered the composerfor his work amount to payment so meager as to be totally absurd; no saneperson would give his time for such a pittance. And this in return for all rights and control over the fate of the music! The publisher does not serve the composer by printing and disseminating his music: it becomes the property of the publisher, and its use governed by big business not artists. Serious art is hardly likely to thrive in such an impossible system……….”

“An audience is best served by presenting a challenging occasion suitable to the most sophisticated connoisseur. The more special and atypical the farethe more it offers by virtue of being extraordinary. Rather than popularizing such concerts, warn the audience away. Then only those who are receptive to the extraordinary will come and the atmosphere will be alert and open. The majority who mainly seek familiar entertainment will help by staying away until they become properly curious as to what the informed are talking about. There is more satisfaction in the calmer atmosphere of an audience come prepared to listen than in the cool reception of a very much larger audience who aren’t really interested. Never mind adverse press. It is predominantly the voice of conventionality and exerts,if anything, a negative effect on thinking people. And especially never mind how much applause. It is not so much correlated with the quality of the music as it is a conditioned response elicited by the bravura of a strong personality on stage or the clangor of a loud and vigorous finale.”