The collaborative process - Why do I need a recording?

The eminent Christopher E. Wilson has sent me this as my first question(s) for our coblogeration:

The following questions are often asked by student performers... Why are composers always asking for recordings of their works? Finale exists, so why can't you send a midi recording of your works? Is it really that important when applying for schools/competitions that you have not only a live performance, but program notes?

Also, let's say a composer gets you a score last minute asking for a recording. If you are not going to be able to record it perfectly, what's the best approach? Should the piece be slowed down, should notes be taken out, certain passages simplified? Why?

I'll tackle the first paragraph today, and leave the second paragraph for the near future, where we'll all be too concerned with bears with wielding machetes enslaving us to care about such frivolity as music or procedural crime dramas.

The reason why we want a recording comes down to basic composer/performer etiquette if nothing else. Did you know that it takes time, effort, and sometimes alcohol expenses to successfully write a decent piece of music? Much in the same way a performer would be in the right to be pissed off by a venue cancelling a show at the last minute, a composer can get a bit miffed if a commissioned piece fails to receive a performance after sinking many, many hours that could be spent looking at lolcats in to writing a piece. And as long as you are performing it you may as well get a decent recording, right? The performer generally wants a decent recording of any pieces they are performing, which is their musical skill, so it stands to reason that the composer would want audio documentation of their skill as well. This is even more important with premiers, since it can help document any progress the piece makes over time. Unfortunately, we do not live in a musical climate where new works are played in overabundance either, so the recording of the performance of a new work may be the only for a long time (or ever), or may be the determining factor in convincing other performers to take on the piece. Or more importantly to the composer, that recording may help them get a job or residency or admittance in to a school/festival that could help further their career. Then you as a performer can say you knew them before they got big, and who doesn't want that.

That last point bridges in to why Finale and midi recordings are not good enough. Take a look at a Finale box sometime: does it say music notation software, or music performance software. Finale is a great tool for getting a general idea of a piece but it does not capture the essence of a piece. Midi sounds, especially those shipped with notation software, are a pale comparison to real instruments. If you don't believe me, I'll post an audio track of the most Chris Wilson playing the last movement of /dances and then I'll post an audio track of it being played by my computer using the best sampled marimba sound I've got. Unless you spend countless hours teaching yourself make midi imitate a classical setting and many dollars on the best samples available (and yes the best orchestral sound libraries can cost in the $1000's) then what you'll get will sound like a robot playing a Walmart clarinet. Sure, all the notes are there, but there is no nuance or energy to the performance. Some people do excel at making computers sound stunning, but they are generally working for Multimedia, where that is the skill that they are hired for as much as their writing (usually more than their writing.) Many composers also shy away from the use of notation software, so this isn't even an option for them. Finally, many extended techniques are not performable by even the best notation software and samplers out there.

Summary of above: when you tell the composer to use a midi recording for something, you are telling them that you can't play it better than their computer, which is hopefully selling yourself short. While my computer may play something more accurately than you, if I wanted to listen to pure accuracy I'd turn on my metronome and rock out all day.

Also, I get off on knowing that I've made Chris spend long hours of suffering learning whatever bear of a piece (and believe me, as I'm not a marimbist, even when I think something seems reasonable it turns out to be a bear, although I'm getting better) and if I don't get a recording, I have no evidence that I caused him to fight through intense frustration and, hopefully, many delicious salty tears. But that is a Chris exclusive reason, I assure you.

As for sending recordings out to competitions and schools. I'll keep this brief, because I should actually get some important work done today. I've had composition profs at various schools tell to NOT send in midi recordings of works, cause it never does the piece justice and adjudicators will generally give the piece a better mental performance without the midi polluting their view of the piece. So there you go, no recording in many instances is a better recording than a midi recording.

As for program notes, that seems like Chris tossed that in at the last minute as a big "F You Brian." Chris knows that I personally dread writing program notes, especially on programmatic and non-programmatic pieces. I usually do end up biting the bullet and writing something, and usually I hate it every time I read it afterwards. I think that actual program notes are of secondary importance when submitting to a composition, as often these are blinded and I have my serious doubts as to whether anything other than the music will have any effect on the outcome. Hell, the title itself is probably of secondary importance, although I still wouldn't suggest calling your piece Girls Gone Wild Sonata Number 2: The Teabag. What is important is to include any performance notes that are vital and the list of any parts that double on various instruments / list of percussion instruments needed by part on any submission in advance of the piece. These are generally to express any unusual requests or advanced techniques for which there is no standard notation. Unusual notation should also get a footnote in the score to explain it.

So that should do it for today. Feel free to express your opinion below or suggest topics that you would like Chris or myself to tackle. And don't forget to check out his post over here.