They say that musicians hear and compose music in their heads. Do they really hear all those quick transitions, complex chords, and sounds?
For example, the very fast melody in Rhapsody No. 2, or the sounds in Rhapsody No. 6 (it’s impossible to believe that a grand piano gives them off), or the beautiful ending of Rhapsody No. 12.
If you have a musical ear, and it is absolute, you can “hear” the music in your head by reading the notes. Looking at the score, you can imagine what it would sound like (with very high accuracy).
Now let’s talk about composing.
There are at least three basic ways to create music.
The intuitive or inspiration-based way
A whole piece of music is born in your head. First you hear it, and then you write it down. It just appears in your head out of nowhere. I wrote one piece this way, and it was a strange experience. While I was inspired, I had the feeling that I “borrowed” my hands and “something” played the composition with them and I wrote it down on paper.
In fact, this happened at the composition exam: I didn’t prepare myself, came in an hour before the exam, wrote a piece and passed it successfully (however, I recommend that you prepare yourself). The disadvantage of this method is that if you don’t have inspiration, the magic won’t happen – there will be no music.
The music is probably born in your subconscious or somewhere else. I think the idea gradually forms in the back of your mind and eventually turns into a result. Then you hear it and record it. Sometimes you have no choice because the idea “demands” to be written down. This feeling is not to be confused with anything else.
The methodological way or the knowledge-based approach
If you know music theory well (very, very well), you can create a composition the way computer programs create it: you choose a basic motif and then compose the music on paper according to the rules of harmony and other ideas you want to embody. With this approach, you create music from scratch, adjusting its sound at each step.
Music created this way can come across as boring, unemotional, or predictable. I heard one piece of music apparently created this way, and it was the most boring. You will need a lot of theoretical knowledge to write decent music.
A combination of the two methods.
It’s hard to get an entire melody from inspiration alone. It’s also hard to create an entire melody based on theoretical knowledge alone. So you can mix the two methods. You come up with a motif that you like (inspiration), and then, using knowledge, you turn it into a complete composition (harmony). As you play, the inspiration may come back to you and bring the rest of the tune with it.
Using a mixture of the two techniques is probably the best idea. The thing is, once the melody is “in your head,” you won’t be able to write it down completely – one minute at the most. That’s not enough for a complete piece.
For electronic music, there’s another way – the trial and error method. First, you run a music program with a blank template, then you start repeating some musical pattern and gradually add sound effects as you watch the changes. If you like what you hear, the project is saved and the process of adding effects continues.
Change the rhythm, listen – change the beat, add beats. Play it again. Overlay other patterns, and so on. This process is quite different from the methodological way and is more appropriate for electronic or non-standard music. An analogy might be a child playing dice. There needs to be an understanding of the changes that occur when one effect or another is added.
Typically, most compositions are created with musical instruments, more often with keyboards such as the piano. But sometimes composers prefer to work without them, using only their mind and paper.