Why am I a Composer?: Is Amateur Music Crushing your Film?

AFX Industrial (film scores)

For most people music is a very personal thing and it's often difficult for film makers to be objective when dealing with their score. So how do you tell the difference between amateur and professional music?

'Doing' it yourself.

I haven't touched a musical instrument in two months. If you look at my home office, apart from a few old manuscripts that I'm currently working from you will see no indication that I 'do' music at all. Most of my work is actually conducted in complete silence … Of course this is not the general image people have of a composer. If we take the 'doing' element away from music (playing drums, guitars and keyboards etc.) then music's universal appeal quickly disappears. It's the very act of 'doing' music, the instant gratification of strumming a chord that people find so magical. But for me that was always the most unsatisfying element of music - that it could easily become random chaos simply because it had to be 'done'.

I was always much more interested in how composers appeared to have total control over music, they could prevent it from becoming random - unless they desired it to be! I then realised when you distance yourself from the physical aspect of playing or doing, you slowly start to become more analytical about music and composition in general …

Incredibly, freeing ourselves from the limited and often repetitive nature of physicality (especially where musical instruments are concerned) can be liberating … By taking away these physical constraints and allowing music to be manipulated in the virtual world of your imagination (and manuscript paper) you can achieve the impossible. Contrary to popular belief, traditional music notation presents you with a seemingly infinite array of possibilities. If I picked up a guitar and started strumming I would lose interest after a while but sit me in front of a sixty piece orchestral score that I'm currently writing and the possibilities (and the hours) just whizz by.

How can you tell what amateur music is?

As a film maker this is the question you need to be asking on a regular basis. Music can win awards, it can make a movie and as my title suggests it can also crush the film that your dedicated movie making team have worked so hard to produce.

But how can you tell? What if the music on your film right now is perceived as amateur by everyone who watches the film except you? Now that's a scary thought! What if the music you thought was dramatic simply turns your film into a comedy or a parody and you hadn't noticed? Sickening thought eh? You have now successfully crushed your film into an unrecognisable genre and the audience have no clue whether to laugh or cry!

I want to help you to understand what amateur music is so you can avoid it.

We all understand that the definition of an amateur is someone who doesn't get paid for the work they produce … But what if the composer in question does get paid and by that definition is now a 'professional' composer, yet the music they produce is still amateur? That would be terribly confusing. For instance, if you paid your tone deaf sister in law to write the music for your new film then it would make her a professional composer right? Even if the music was painfully amateur it would still be professional music … Wouldn't it? Well, if we agree that the definition of a professional is one who gets paid then damn right - her music appears professional! But ... still sounds amateur.

So, now you have amateur music crushing your film that was created by someone who you just defined as a professional by paying them. This is an easy mistake to make - yet it sounds ludicrous when you write it down like this doesn't it?

I think from a distance there is also a tendency to homogenise music, most see it as an instantly accessible hobby. For many, music is, after all, just music … However this is a little like believing that chemistry is just chemistry and banking is just banking. But just like chemistry and banking, music is a multi faceted subject containing a microcosm of different areas in which people specialise. Imagine the myriad of subheadings you could place under the word chemistry, similarly music has a myriad of subheadings, divisions and specialisms.

If we look at the subheading of 'popular' music, an anomaly that film makers are constantly surprised by is our deep rooted belief that musical fame and musical ability go hand in hand when they so often don't. Think back to our earlier scenario where you paid your tone deaf sister in law to write an (unintentionally) amateur score for your film. Now lets take the same scenario template and replace it with a mega-star like Michael Jackson (may he rest in peace).

Of course Michael 'did' music, but if you could have isolated Michael with a copy of your film and asked him to score it totally alone, I guarantee the results would have been embarrassing and amateurish. I'd imagine no one would ever dare tell him that! And again, as a director you would have ruined your film - because rightly so it's hard to believe that someone of such status and perceived musical ability, simply couldn't score your film to a professional level.

As you can see it's hard to define the nature of amateur music, especially when amateur music has been created by a professional artist. However, if we're looking for the definition of a professional (in any field) then they could be defined by an acute understanding of their own limits. If we understand our limits and exploit only our strengths, then the risk that our output will appear amateurish is greatly diminished.

The Band Are 'Doing' the Music.

This is a very common scoring mistake. The director kind of likes the music created by a band with a line up consisting of (say) three banjos and a penny whistle. Then the director mistakenly employs the band to write his film score. And the serious nature of a film, that has taken years to produce, is instantly turned into a parody like this:

Love scene = banjo cue

Fight scene = banjo cue

Panoramic tracking shot = banjo cue

Horror moment = you get the idea!

But it's all 'music' isn't it? Please don't fall into this way of thinking, when it comes to scoring films there are a multitude of different disciplines required and a vast and seemingly baffling array of options available to you. Directors' always like to keep tight control over their productions and I often think by employing a band to 'do' the music, they're subconciously ensuring things don't step too far away from a musical idiom they feel comfortable with. Once you start employing professional scoring teams and orchestras you are forced to step outside of that comfort zone, and for many directors this can be daunting.

I know that many of the disciplines to do with film making can be picked up by a director over the course of their career, but I think as scoring exists on the periphery of film making, it can be one of the hardest elements to get a handle on. I imagine (unless the band's music is integral to the story) this is why lower level film makers tend to use a band to score their film.

But, if we think about how expensive and time consuming making a movie is, and how many people are involved in the process. Then it's scary to think that ultimately, the music alone indicates to an audience whether your film is to be received as a professional or amateur work. There's a lot more hanging on the music than you may have initially realised ...

For an audience, your score needs to appear as aspirational as the vision you had for your film. Audiences are very fickle and many go to the movies just for the music. If an audience feels cheated by an amateur score then it could put them off seeing any of your future work. And, for so many film fans the score is unquestionably part of the total experience, don't disappoint them with a badly recorded indie band instead of a score - they can hear that anywhere!

Until next time - peace to you all. David.