I voted "yes".

There were obviously a lot more active composers during say Bach's time but today, I doubt there are as many (who are not just locked up in teaching jobs). But "where" are they all? Why is it that we hardly know them? Bach (and numerous others then) were clearly visible - every Sunday for example at the local church.

 

I voted "yes".

There were obviously a lot more active composers during say Bach's time but today, I doubt there are as many (who are not just locked up in teaching jobs). But "where" are they all? Why is it that we hardly know them? Bach (and numerous others then) were clearly visible - every Sunday for example at the local church.

It hasn't occurred to you the slightly less egocentric idea that, maybe, it's *you* the one who does not know them?.

 

I'm just beginning to enter the music industry as a composer (collecting royalties and stuff included) and so far since I'm not making a living out of it yet, writing music for ensembles and having them performed isn't something I find especially hard. I always have a collection of ideas so that at any given time when I have to write some music I can just pick whichever recent idea I think would be most suitable and off I go. It's certainly a challenge, just like any other job as a creator of any other art, writer of books etc. but it's a fun challenge.

As for popularity and success, that's just a by-product of creating things I like to create and not really important to me at all!

 

All the very best! It's nice to have a real composer here at TC.

 

You can safely change challenging into almost impossible

 

Yes it is challenging, though I suppose that depends on the expectations of someone as well.

I also think it's challenging to be a contemporary listener as there is a lot of choice and variety.

 

It is challenging to make a living in any industry where you have to sell things you create to get paid, whether it be music, food, furniture, sculpture, painting, novels, etc..

I remember reading some artist who said the the easiest way to make a living as an artist is to have a healthy trust fund.

 

If you've made or can make money out of your artistry & talent, well done!
I used to have a little Pottery business but because I couldn't reach that happy compromise of quality with effort/time spent upon its artistic creation & production, I couldn't make enough money to continue with it.
But...I got it all out of my system sufficiently, that the desire to create... for selling to others, left me undisturbed!
(I still am Disturbed of course...but for other reasons!)

 

Making a living as an entrepreneur is never easy, especially if your trade is in art. That said, I think that the reason Beethoven and Liszt were larger-then-life figures in their day is because life moved much more slowly back then, modern scientific study/knowledge was still in its infancy, the concept of public school to promote well-roundedness was not yet pervasive, and the mind of a human being had greater capacity to absorb complex artistic ideas. It was not uncommon for middle class children to be home-schooled and practice a musical instrument 1-2 hours per day, study the works of the ancient Greeks and deeply familiarize themselves with great painters/sculptors. I've must heard Mozart's 20th piano concerto at least a hundred times by now. But, I can only wonder if a reasonably learned person of that time who heard the work only once would have a much deeper experience with this work than I.

Today, a successful composer's music (and by successful, I don't necessarily mean critical acclaim, I'm referring more to financial success such that this artist is enabled to compose full-time) is more likely to be experienced with visual stimilu (e.g., film, tv, video games) than stand-alone. It's just the way our society absorbs art, now.

 

Today, a successful composer's music (and by successful, I don't necessarily mean critical acclaim, I'm referring more to financial success such that this artist is enabled to compose full-time) is more likely to be experienced with visual stimilu (e.g., film, tv, video games) than stand-alone. It's just the way our society absorbs art, now.

No it isn't. This is what you can do to dumb down your music so people will get it. Jazz music is doing okay and it is more complicated then ever, so why should classical music be made more accessible

 

I voted yes. Personally, though I think I'm as open-minded as the next guy, if there's a world premier of a contemporary piece locally, I generally avoid it. Our symphony had a series of second performances of former world premier pieces, and the ones I heard didn't grab me enough into wanting to hear them again.

The challenge is to create something that gets people's attention without dumbing it down but is complex/structured/whatevered enough that it will have enough artistic merit to warrant further consideration.

Sometimes I think it's easier just to pick up a guitar and play the standard rock licks, pick up your check, and go home.

 

"There were obviously a lot more active composers during say Bach's time but today, I doubt there are as many"

Is it obvious? I would have guessed there were a lot more composers today than in Bach's time what with the general increase in population, spreading of classical music throughout the world, the broader variety a composer has nowadays as far as career choice and the paradigm shift in parenting style where they encourage rather than discourage their kid's artistic endeavors.

 

"There were obviously a lot more active composers during say Bach's time but today, I doubt there are as many"

Is it obvious? I would have guessed there were a lot more composers today than in Bach's time what with the general increase in population, spreading of classical music throughout the world, the broader variety a composer has nowadays as far as career choice and the paradigm shift in parenting style where they encourage rather than discourage their kid's artistic endeavors.

And also incomparably more wealth, meaning more leisure time.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/06/quantifying-history

That is perspective! (It's down just now. Check back in a few hours....)

 

In The Mainstream of Music, D.F. Tovey tried to correct perceptions of the tragic neglect of Schubert in his lifetime:

From such portents it is easy to infer a tragic picture of neglected and hopeless genius. But these are accidents, thrown into undue prominence by the crowning accident of early death from typhus fever in poor circumstances. Modern sanitation, to say nothing of modern medicine, has made typhus fever a rare cause of death. But we are unduly optimistic if we imagine that a musical genius of Schubert's calibre has a better chance of success before thirty-one at the present day. When we are invited to show indignation at the barbarity of an age which made Schubert consent to part with a dozen of his finest songs at a krone apiece, and with his great E flat Trio for about seventeen shillings and sixpence, we may as well begin by asking the Carnegie Trustees what their experience shows them as to the modern composer's opportunities for getting his works published at all. Schubert's early death during a struggle with poverty is too sad for us to waste our emotion on details which indicate, if they indicate anything, that he lived at a period of exceptional opportunities for young and obscure men of musical genius.

Composers today (unlike the rest of us) have it a lot harder--thanks for your efforts!

 

I think it would be more difficult to be a non-contemporary composer today. That would be quite a trick!

 

I suppose if "every Sunday at the local church" is the criterion, Bill Gaither is the greatest composer of our time.

 

No, it is not the criteria. And in case if you didn't get that analogy, Bach was an active composer in the lives of regular folks - the Leipzig locals coud say "we have a local composer named Bach, who writes new music for the church weekly". Where is that near equivalent today?

You could name a few film score composers.

 

I think it is challenging for contemporary composers to make a comfortable living, since most of them are piecing it together from numerous individual small contracts (i.e. one piece at a time). As far as notoriety goes, doubly difficult, due to the sheer number of composers and our increasingly wide listening choices thanks to the internet.

That being said, this recent USA Today article says music director and composer jobs are on the rise at an extremely high rate.

3. Music Directors and Composers
> 10-year job growth: 178%
> 10-year job growth: 15,960
> Total employed: 24,940
> Median annual pay: $47,350

It seems that Americans' thirst for music is on the rise. This should drive job growth of music directors and composers. Another factor driving job growth for this occupation is the expected greater need for original music scores or transcriptions used in commercials and movies. In addition to musical talent and mastery of a variety of instruments, those in this occupation, especially the ones writing and conducting classical music, usually have a bachelor's degree. About 10% of music directors and composers earned less than $21,450 annually, while the top 10% made more than $86,110, a high annual income compared with the same top 10% of other occupations on this list.

I think those who are talented and well-connected will do even better in the near future, and there will be a greater disparity between them and their competitors.

 

I think it is challenging for contemporary composers to make a comfortable living, since most of them are piecing it together from numerous individual small contracts (i.e. one piece at a time). As far as notoriety goes, doubly difficult, due to the sheer number of composers and our increasingly wide listening choices thanks to the internet.

That being said, this recent USA Today article says music director and composer jobs are on the rise at an extremely high rate.

I think those who are talented and well-connected will do even better in the near future, and there will be a greater disparity between them and their competitors.

Great Outstanding Post!!!

 

Welcome to TC, earlybard! Your first post was very interesting. Thanks!

 

I think it is harder to become a really famous composer now than it was, but perhaps a bit easier to make a living at it. Back in the day, composers found work in composing for the day-to-day, like church (as mentioned before), but also at other events. Court composers wrote for just about every occasion, and even later composers (like Johann Strauss) wrote for special occasions. Those occasions are just different now. We have film, video games, and television. One could potentially make a bit of money as a church composer, but I wouldn't expect that to be the primary source of income. Also, regarding traditional concert pieces: I don't believe that the concert setting was quite the same back when Beethoven and friends were composing. From what I've read, these could sometimes be rather rowdy events, with lots of talking and drinking. Actually, it would be interesting to open up a classical bar/club, with a casual concert setting, open mic nights, and all that.

 

Yeah good points, kelseythepterodactyl I agree. Too much competition from non-musical alternatives (and distractions)!

 

On the Bach example, apparently there are no surviving records of what any of the regular church goers thought of Bach's Cantatas. Clearly there was a desire on his part to engage the community but whether they responded in kind is anyone's guess.

Also there are contemporary composers who are active in composing music for the Church - Arvo Part and James MacMillan for example, and Peter Maxwell Davies is ostensibly active in his local community.

The biggest problem that I see for contemporary composers is people's perceptions of them/us. There still seems to be people out there who believe that all or most contemporary composers are dodecaphonists or serialists. The past also has the advantage that all or most of the dross has been gradually filtered out, going to see new works is a hit and miss affair. In the past there also wasn't so much of a concern with the past. If memory serves, the longest continuously performed works in the Operatic repertoire, for example, are late Mozart fare, before that it was generally the case that a work had it's day and then eventually petered out, but during the 19th century concern began to arise about preserving the past, and early music societies formed and began the work of preserving works from the pre ~1750 period. Mozart and Haydn had for the most part to compete only with the music of their contemporaries.

 

On the Bach example, apparently there are no surviving records of what any of the regular church goers thought of Bach's Cantatas. Clearly there was a desire on his part to engage the community but whether they responded in kind is anyone's guess.

There are surviving documents complaining about Bach's chorales. I don't have the reference handy, but the gripe seemed to be that he elaborated those favorite old tunes to the extent that the congregation got confused and couldn't sing along properly.

 

Unfortunately, there are no more prince Eszterhazys around today to employ composers of the stature of
Haydn , and who can support their own orchestras and opera companies . None the less there re still plenty
of composers today , although few of them hve gotten rich on their compositions alone .
Many teach at universities or music schools , and some are able to get commissions from orchestras to write
muisc . But being a composer has never been an easy thing .

 

Frank Ticheli-Interview

In another thread I posted a great interview of Frank Ticheli that covers some of issues raised: http://www.talkclassical.com/23933-surviving-composer.html#post420694

 

John Williams seems to do alright. Better than Bach I'd guess (excluding the number of children).

 

Children-wise, Bach outscores John Williams by a factor of 6.666 (give or take). But Williams has bigger paydays.

 

From what I hear of some contemporary music the challenge is more for the listeners!

 

:lol: I hear this comment too every now and again.

 

Yes without doubt. It seems that if you want to write orchestral or any large scale works then if you are really lucky you may get 10 mins at the start of a concert. Sadly it seems that gone are the days where major new symphonies appear in the second half of a concert; or at least that is how it seems in London!

The ray of hope is the recording studio, fortunately new large scale works are still making it to CD. It is sad however that a lot of works have been available on recording for some time but are still to receive a world premier (CD recordings don't count, it has to be a live performance with an audience).

I have a friend that is a composer, he studied with Lutoslowski and Ligeti and briefly with Henze, he has written and had performed & recorded a violin concerto and various other pieces at the Salzberg Festival. He now composes for film because it is just too hard to work as a "contemporary composer."

 

.

 

Composition just like Art needs connections to be on the 'inside' as they say. So in today's market economy where publishing companies and agents and concert managers and orchestras are looking to make money out of you, you need to have one of these three things:

1. Be so talented and capable that even if you don't have the connections necessary, these folks will glue on to you like bees on honey.

2. Have medium talent, but have a privileged access to the rite people who will know how to market your abilities

3. Have no talent whatsoever, but have the best inside access to all the agents, publishers, agents, et..., many times parents who have been in show business have kids that have no talent, and they enjoy the benefits of having an inside to all the rite people to pursue their artistic aims even though they have way less talent then others...

 

Wrt 3 Not as far as composition goes, I would say.
You have to have a certain talent or to be able to plug into a taste of the public. You also have to be dedicated and determined. My son was talking to a top writer in the pop world who had written about 20 hits. But he said he had actually written over 1000 songs! Ie 980 also-rans!

 

Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin and LIszt all had pupils, and they were often at least partially dependent upon the income from giving those lessons. Many a composer has made some of their income by working for their publisher also as an editor, preparing a newer edition of older music not their own.

You barely have a complete picture of "how it was then." Gloss articles in Wikipedia, etc are not going to give you that fuller picture, either.