home | recordings | compositions | press | services | instruction | articles | studio | biography | credits | links
Composer Focus Interview with Jerry Gerber
Can you tell us a bit about your background and how
you got started writing music?
I began studying music at the age of nine years old. I studied accordion and
then guitar. I wrote my first piece at the age of 10. By the time I was 13, I
was playing in a band, but my interest in popular music was beginning to wane by
the time I turned 20, a year or so after taking up keyboard. From then on, about
the only music I listened to, and certainly the only music I studied, was music
from the renaissance, baroque, romantic, and 20th century classical periods and
also music from Bali and India, occasionally. I also studied jazz theory. I
received my Bachelor of Music degree in composition and classical music theory
and then began scoring soundtracks. I wrote music for industrial films and
documentaries, and then I was asked to score 33 TV episodes of “The Adventures
of Gumby”, a popular animated TV series for children. After that I wrote the
music for the Gumby feature film and then began scoring for computer games. I
enjoy doing soundtracks, particularly if I think the story is a good one. I also
passionately love writing music for its own sake. Over the past 20 years or so I
have produced 11 CDs, 7 symphonies, 3 concertos and a lot of short works. I
decided sometime in the 1990s that I would pursue electronic production as the
means to hear and record my works, and forego the traditional route of trying to
get works performed by ensembles. I really love working in the studio,
experimenting, trying things out, testing out orchestrations, etc. Several of my
composer friends work with live musicians and ensembles and probably think I am
a bit odd for creating and producing all of my compositions using music
technology.
Workspace and setup
My studio (www.jerrygerber.com/studio.htm) consists of the Yamaha
DM2000 mixing board, Adam 3A speakers, and I use Sonar as my DAW. My main sound
library is Vienna Instruments Symphonic Cube. I run the library on a fast
Windows 7 machine with 24 GB of RAM. The DAW is a separate machine. I also have
numerous software synthesizers that I both program and use in my pieces. I also
use EMU samplers for choirs and Roland hardware synths.
Describe your creative process
A MIDI sequence is only as effective as it is detailed. The more details in
terms of tempo changes, phrase dynamics, sample switching and other parameters
that are in the sequence, the better and the more musical will be the results. I
often begin writing a piece after spending quite a while improvising at the
piano. Free improvisation is the most direct, intuitive, and physical aspect of
musicality that I know of, a lot of learning takes place there. When starting to
compose a piece, I work in the staff view and the event list in Sonar and begin
composing and sequencing. For me, MIDI sequencing and composition/orchestration
have merged into one seamless process. I insert notes onto the staff view and
build up phrases, sections, movements and entire compositions and albums this
way, re-tracing my steps many times along the way making changes and editing and
refining what I am hearing. Even though I have an advanced orchestral library,
MIDI sequencing is a time-intensive process. Phrasing, gesture and expression is
achieved through defining strong and weak beats, note lengths, velocities,
attack and release times and articulation—these parameters must be constantly
considered, and also be constantly in flux. After I am done with the composition
and orchestration and the sequence is finished, I render it to a stereo wave
file (and stems if there are audio tracks) and from there proceed to fine tune
dynamics using Sonar’s volume envelopes. This adds another layer of dynamic
variation that some pieces require more than others. I do my own mastering and
use small amounts of EQ to help bring out the best in the mix. I rarely use any
compression, and I use peak limiting only on some pieces. I take my time
mastering; I might listen to a piece over several sound systems over a period of
months before I finally settle on final mastering decisions. Monitoring a mix
too soft or too loud will produce a distorted concept of how the mix sounds due
to the way in which the low and high end is thrown out of balance when mixing
too loudly or too softly. 83 dB is a good level that avoids these imbalances. I
usually strive for transparency and a sound that is clear and open.
What's the most interesting project you've been
involved with?
I think every project I am working on at the time is the most interesting to me.
If it were not such, I doubt I’d be a good composer. When I am scoring
soundtrack music, that is most interesting to me. When I’m composing for CDs,
that holds my interest equally. My soundtrack music is simpler music (in terms
of length, style and complexity) than my compositions for my CDs because the
purposes of music as an adjunct to story-telling, dialogue, plot, setting,
character, and sound effects are different than music as a purely independent
language. That would make an interesting discussion of itself, the way in which
scoring to story and picture affects form, style, content and texture, really
the whole meaning of music is altered, including its more literary function.
You describe your medium of choice as "virtual
orchestration", you could tell us what you mean by this?
The politics and economics of getting large numbers of musicians together is
complicated and expensive, and the larger the ensemble the harder it is to get
performed. Composers belong to one of the few groups of people who are competing
(when it comes to hearing their works) with dead people! Last time I checked,
about 15% of music performed in the United States by symphonic orchestras is
written by living, American composers. As computer and audio technology advances
rapidly, a new musical medium is maturing, and composers and orchestrators can
now be responsible for interpreting their own works. Since interpreting music
has different challenges than composing music, the computer-based ensemble
offers the musician the opportunity to evolve both the creation and the
interpretation of their work, which contributes to a well-rounded musician.
There are advantages and disadvantages to every medium, no medium is perfect.
One cannot compare the sound of a live orchestra to a MIDI recording, it’s a
pointless comparison. But comparing a recording of a live orchestra to a
MIDI-realized recording, now that is fair game and I think the differences are
growing smaller every decade. Using high quality synthesizers and sample
libraries and bringing to that technology knowledge of composition and
orchestration, etc., can definitely produce highly musical and expressive
results. I once gave a talk to an electronic music class and a student of
conducting remarked that he thought what I was doing was “anti-social”. I
believe he might have felt a bit threatened that his dream career might not be
available to him if too many composers turn away from live performances. But his
fear, if that is what prompted the remark, is unfounded, that will not happen,
electronic music and the virtual orchestra are not replacements for traditional
means of music-making, they are additions, they’re options. This experience
reminds me of when Bob Dylan came on stage with an electric guitar in the 60s
and the folk musicians at the time were appalled and resentful, as though Dylan
had betrayed them. Likewise, I am sure that when photographers were beginning to
photograph people and nature in the 19th century, painters were aghast and
fearful that photography would encroach upon, or even ruin, painting as an art.
Such thinking is all too commonplace perhaps because as a species we’re so
paranoid.
You've been around for the early days of
sampled/virtual instruments. How have the developments in this area affected
your compositional workflow?
My first sampler, the Roland S-50, had the capability of loading one floppy
disc’s (1.44 MB) worth of data into its memory. That’s only one or two samples!
Consider the Vienna Symphonic Library Vienna Instruments Symphonic Cube—which
consists of over 760,000 samples, about 550 GB of data. When a solo violin
consists of over 22,000 samples, and with every note sampled in up to 4
velocities in every conceivable playing style, it becomes possible to phrase
shape in a way that early samplers simply did not allow. With 24 bit
well-recorded samples, the sounds are smoother than in earlier libraries, but
that’s also because of better converters and better clocking. In terms of MIDI
sequencing, this means that the musician can now realize musical ideas with a
level of detail comparable to what fine players can achieve. This does not make
sequencing any less labor intensive, in fact it does the opposite: With so many
samples to choose from, it becomes even more important that the best sample for
the phrase is used and that note velocities, envelopes and note lengths are set
at the best values for that particular sample and phrase. Having access to a
large and well-recorded library no more guarantees a good composition anymore
than having the best word processor determines the value of the story and the
skill by which is it written. When using earlier libraries, I had to simulate
crescendos and decrescendos using MIDI controllers, usually control 7 or 11, or
with an audio fade after rendering. This worked OK, but the new libraries
contain dynamics recorded into the sample itself, so this means less MIDI
programming in regard to certain passages, and it’s musically much more flexible
to have the dynamics already existing in the sample when needed.
For the all the up and coming composers out there,
if you could share one tip, what would it be?
Write your own music and write your best music and keep your passion for your
work alive. Have fun, enjoy the opportunities you’re given and when
opportunities are sparse, create your own. Your faith in your music and yourself
will be tested over and over, it won’t stop till you die. Music is a sublime
art, many musicians understand the healing potential of music, and its capacity
to help awaken in people a sense of beauty, order, balance, proportion and
mystery; of music’s capacity to help us remember our common humanity and to
inspire a sense of interconnectedness with all of life. But like all things we
humans do, it can be trivialized and reduced to a commodity in the minds of the
more materialistic among us or it can fail because it is bad music. Every
composer thinks that their music is different from other music, and potentially
this is true because each one of us is unique in some small but significant way.
Yet attaining a craft that brings an expressive reality and authenticity to this
uniqueness only comes from many years of thought, effort and work. Is
composition what you really want to do, or would you prefer to score films and
express yourself that way? Are both important to you? The more ambitious the
work, the more craft it requires. A successful career in music is based on
numerous things: talent, imagination, knowledge, luck, hard work, confidence,
attitude and patience. But even with all these things, a career is always based
just as much on who you know as what you know. A composer has to have strong
networking skills, must be able to work well with others, and must be creative
in solitude. If you have these qualities, and you have musical talent, become a
composer. If there’s really nothing you want to do more than write music, become
a composer. Perhaps the real joy and satisfaction comes because composition is
difficult and only those who really want it, and do not give up, get to write
music and develop their craft.
home
|
recordings
|
compositions
|
press |
services
|
instruction
|
articles
|
studio
|
biography
|
credits
|
links