Posted by Guy Shahar on January 16, 2025 at 3:19pm
What is your experience of receiving criticism as a composer and how has it changed over time.I’m still near the start of my journey, and have had some amazingly valuable pointers and advice from posting my music on forums and asking for feedback. But I’ve also had a load of abuse from a few people, who feel that if you post something you’ve created, you’re fair game for vitriol. This can have a very negative effect.How have you managed to get the feedback you need while avoiding the abuse? Or do you just choose to either keep your music to yourself or to put up with the abuse?It would be really interesting to hear your experiences for my own benefit, but also, I want to make a video about dealing with criticism as a composer soon, and this conversation could help with that too.
Views: 53
You need to be a member of composersforum to add comments!
In some works, by some people, I have received useful criticism and certainly in the case of what was practically performable, I had the odd bit of advice (in one case octave leaps in the clarinet were too hard as it involved a change of register). But equally in some cases the theorists have completely failed to understand the music because they had certain expectations according to how they thought the music should develop, not what I was actually trying to write. Overall, though, my main problem is getting enough people with some vague sympathy and understanding of my idiom to listen in the first place, though i do have a few fans to whom I am grateful. Actual abuse I have only really had when I dared to express reservations about the work of another composer which simply resulted in ad hominem attacks. I'm not really a critic by nature and these days rarely bother to comment on works unless they speak to me in some way.
Well done for at least having a few fans. That's already a great achievement. I don't think I have any (someone approached me on Soundcloud saying she was my greatestt fan, but it turned out she wanted to sell some promotion service to me....). You're also lucky to have posted and not received abuse that simply says how terrible the music is with nothing to build on.
I'm sure you will get some fans as you start increasingly to find your own personal style and voice. Something like that rarely comes right at the beginning!
Could you quote some of the abuse you've had, or criticism you felt was abusive?
Guy Shahar > Dave DexterJanuary 18, 2025 at 10:01am
Hi Dave. I'd rather not go through the conversations again (and bring myself down...), but it has ranged from decent feedback delivered in a condecending way (which is very unfortunate, but livable with), to comments that state that the music is terrible in a certain area (like register) but without saying how or what can be done, to comments that simply criticise how amateurish the piece is but give no more detail, to occasionally short simple abusive comments like that I have no business making music, or that another critical response has been too kind to me....
Dave Dexter > Guy ShaharJanuary 21, 2025 at 1:46am
My point would be that even genuine critique is often insulting, especially to new composers. You've got to a point where you can achieve a little, but not to the point where you can *really* hear and understand what you've done, so you take it personally when an outsider brusquely breaks it apart.
Reading between the lines on this forum, you ask a lot of questions that you seem already to have decided your answers to. My intuition tells me that since - for example - you don't think music theory is necessary for your music, you may also think you fall outside the purview of critique that derives from that place, and are perhaps above it, because your music comes from within and so is not bound by conventional knowledge. You've inferred, indeed practically stated, that intuitive composing opens avenues that theory does not, to the extent that theory-trained composers might look with worry at intuitive ones. I used to think in exactly that way, and recall that *any* critique was difficult to deal with.
Guy Shahar > Dave DexterJanuary 21, 2025 at 5:40am
Thanks for sharing this Dave. It's a good insight. I have found - especially when I was at the very start - that even genuine critiques were painful - and I think probably for the reasons you mention - that i wasn't really in a place to do anything with the feedback, due to my being brand new to it all, so it felt like "you are bad" without empowering me to improve.
There's some truth in your second paragraph, but also a lot that doesn't ring true. I haven't decided the answers to any questions - though I may sometimes phrase things as if I have. I don't think humans often state anything, either as an assertion or a question, if they truly feel they know the answer - they would just quietly live by their truth without any need to express it. For me, it's all a big exploration - especially as I'm at such an early stage of my musical journey. It's not correct to infer that I don't think music theory is necessary for my music. Quite the opposite, I have stated very clearly that it's crucial. My intuition, or anyone else's, is not going to compensate for hundreds of years of musical analysis by great minds. It's about the balance. Both theory and intuition open avenues that the other doesn't, and each individual composer will have their ideal optimal balance between the 2. Nobody can totally ignore one of them and still create credible music. I call myself an intuitive composer because my personality works better by learning and expressing things without great conscious awareness of what I'm doing, and it woud be counter-productive in my case to put too much of my attention on breaking everything down and trying to analyse it - though it's critical that I do some of that, ideally at the optimal point where a shortcoming comes to the fore and I need to make headway on it. For someone else, it might be the other way round and they're best able to optimise and unlock their musical potential through conscious understanding and mastery of the theoretical aspect. It's not that one is better or worse, and the diversity of having both is enriching. Perhaps I tend to bang on about being an "intuitive composer" because I sense that this perspective and this approach is generally looked down on and disrespected so widely....
Replies
In some works, by some people, I have received useful criticism and certainly in the case of what was practically performable, I had the odd bit of advice (in one case octave leaps in the clarinet were too hard as it involved a change of register). But equally in some cases the theorists have completely failed to understand the music because they had certain expectations according to how they thought the music should develop, not what I was actually trying to write. Overall, though, my main problem is getting enough people with some vague sympathy and understanding of my idiom to listen in the first place, though i do have a few fans to whom I am grateful. Actual abuse I have only really had when I dared to express reservations about the work of another composer which simply resulted in ad hominem attacks. I'm not really a critic by nature and these days rarely bother to comment on works unless they speak to me in some way.
Well done for at least having a few fans. That's already a great achievement. I don't think I have any (someone approached me on Soundcloud saying she was my greatestt fan, but it turned out she wanted to sell some promotion service to me....). You're also lucky to have posted and not received abuse that simply says how terrible the music is with nothing to build on.
I'm sure you will get some fans as you start increasingly to find your own personal style and voice. Something like that rarely comes right at the beginning!
Thank you. Hope so!!
Could you quote some of the abuse you've had, or criticism you felt was abusive?
Hi Dave. I'd rather not go through the conversations again (and bring myself down...), but it has ranged from decent feedback delivered in a condecending way (which is very unfortunate, but livable with), to comments that state that the music is terrible in a certain area (like register) but without saying how or what can be done, to comments that simply criticise how amateurish the piece is but give no more detail, to occasionally short simple abusive comments like that I have no business making music, or that another critical response has been too kind to me....
My point would be that even genuine critique is often insulting, especially to new composers. You've got to a point where you can achieve a little, but not to the point where you can *really* hear and understand what you've done, so you take it personally when an outsider brusquely breaks it apart.
Reading between the lines on this forum, you ask a lot of questions that you seem already to have decided your answers to. My intuition tells me that since - for example - you don't think music theory is necessary for your music, you may also think you fall outside the purview of critique that derives from that place, and are perhaps above it, because your music comes from within and so is not bound by conventional knowledge. You've inferred, indeed practically stated, that intuitive composing opens avenues that theory does not, to the extent that theory-trained composers might look with worry at intuitive ones. I used to think in exactly that way, and recall that *any* critique was difficult to deal with.
Thanks for sharing this Dave. It's a good insight. I have found - especially when I was at the very start - that even genuine critiques were painful - and I think probably for the reasons you mention - that i wasn't really in a place to do anything with the feedback, due to my being brand new to it all, so it felt like "you are bad" without empowering me to improve.
There's some truth in your second paragraph, but also a lot that doesn't ring true. I haven't decided the answers to any questions - though I may sometimes phrase things as if I have. I don't think humans often state anything, either as an assertion or a question, if they truly feel they know the answer - they would just quietly live by their truth without any need to express it. For me, it's all a big exploration - especially as I'm at such an early stage of my musical journey. It's not correct to infer that I don't think music theory is necessary for my music. Quite the opposite, I have stated very clearly that it's crucial. My intuition, or anyone else's, is not going to compensate for hundreds of years of musical analysis by great minds. It's about the balance. Both theory and intuition open avenues that the other doesn't, and each individual composer will have their ideal optimal balance between the 2. Nobody can totally ignore one of them and still create credible music. I call myself an intuitive composer because my personality works better by learning and expressing things without great conscious awareness of what I'm doing, and it woud be counter-productive in my case to put too much of my attention on breaking everything down and trying to analyse it - though it's critical that I do some of that, ideally at the optimal point where a shortcoming comes to the fore and I need to make headway on it. For someone else, it might be the other way round and they're best able to optimise and unlock their musical potential through conscious understanding and mastery of the theoretical aspect. It's not that one is better or worse, and the diversity of having both is enriching. Perhaps I tend to bang on about being an "intuitive composer" because I sense that this perspective and this approach is generally looked down on and disrespected so widely....