Motivation is like food for the brain. You cannot get enough in one sitting. It needs continual and regular refills.
Peter Jackson and Steven Spielberg are men at the top of their game, and Jackson especially is going to change the nature of film-making.
If you don't get feedback from your performers and your audience, you're going to be working in a vacuum.
You can't pander to your audience. You might in the short term, but ultimately you can't hoodwink them, either.
I recently did a piece for the Boston Pops and John Williams, and I hope that it's as well a composed piece as I've ever done for any other medium or occasion.
You don't underestimate either players or audience in any circumstances.
I don't see how they can with most of my pieces, but I think it's unfortunate that they can through familiarity with flashy performances of a great deal of other music.
I'm not actually teaching any more, but I am writing pieces for schools all the time, and for kids.
An audience shouldn't listen with complacency.
If you aim at anything lower that is expecting your audience to be really alert and aware, then you're going to be caught out sooner or later as a composer.
The demands are related to their questing of the best possible out of the people concerned. It's this going for the highest possible factor that I'm very concerned about.
What they can expect always is that they're going to be made to think.
If you're writing a piece for the Boston Pops, the balance is towards one end. If you're writing a piece for a chamber music society, then it's towards another point. I won't make a final answer on that. I think it changes with every piece.
But you can't really know your audiences so well.
I'm obviously very keen on the theater and I think it's inevitable that some of the orchestral and chamber pieces have got dramatic elements which might even suggest an unspecified dramatic plot of some kind or other, even though it's not in my mind at the time.
For un-subscribe please check the mail footer.