Schillinger's Ststem of musical Composition
N0rman Stewart
Stuart (X-700) <hes...@sybercom.net> wrote in message
news:7toqsn$7ud$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Do any of you musical genius's have any idea how his system works? I
> know it has it's basis in mathematics, and that's all I know. Would
> one or more of you enlighten me as to what it is all about, and how it
> works?
>
> --
> Music and Laughter - two of life's greatest pleasures.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Stuart
Clay Moore
>
> Do any of you musical genius's have any idea how his system works? I
> know it has it's basis in mathematics, and that's all I know. Would
> one or more of you enlighten me as to what it is all about, and how it
> works?
I checked the books out of a University music library many years ago and
tried to study them. Yes, his methods are heavily based in mathematics -
based on formulas which supposedly makes it easy to crank out music
quickly. It was rumored that some Hollywood film composers studied with
him or used his method, which enabled them to meet the deadlines for
scores. I wasn't able to get interested, and I don't think the books are
still in print. I'm leery of ANYTHING that promises musical results
based on a formula. Sorry I can't give any more details into the system,
but it's been too long and it wasn't that compelling.
--
Clay Moore --
jazz guitarist web developer
cl...@claymoore.com clay...@music2u.com
http://www.claymoore.com/ http://www.music2u.com
To find out where I'm performing each week, sign up on my mailing list.
Go to
http://www.listbot.com/cgi-bin/subscriber?Act=subscribe_list&list_id=claymoore
Bruce Clawson/Doris Sabelka
are "The Schillenger System of Musical Composition" vol. I and II, "The
Mathmatical Basis of the Arts", and "The Sensations of Tone as a Physiological
Basis for the Thoery of Music" by Helmholtz, apparently a compainion book.
I remember nothing about Schillenger from college theory, other than he was
mentioned, but if you would like some other info on these books let me know.
But I will NOT read them for you! They are just too nasty.
Another satisfied X-700 player,
Bruce
> > Do any of you musical genius's have any idea how his system works? I
> > know it has it's basis in mathematics, and that's all I know. Would
> > one or more of you enlighten me as to what it is all about, and how it
> > works?r
Michael Fitzgerald
>I checked the books out of a University music library many years ago and
>tried to study them. Yes, his methods are heavily based in mathematics -
>based on formulas which supposedly makes it easy to crank out music
>quickly. It was rumored that some Hollywood film composers studied with
>him or used his method, which enabled them to meet the deadlines for
>scores. I wasn't able to get interested, and I don't think the books are
>still in print. I'm leery of ANYTHING that promises musical results
>based on a formula. Sorry I can't give any more details into the system,
>but it's been too long and it wasn't that compelling.
Well, George Gershwin was a student of Schillinger's. So were Benny
Goodman and Glenn Miller.
The original name of the Berklee School of Music was The Schillinger
House.
Others such as trumpeter/composer Hobart Dotson used the system to
great effect. Gigi Gryce was also familiar with it. I'm NOT leery of
anything that those guys considered worthwhile. It would not surprise
me at all if Coltrane had studied Schillinger's works, considering his
interest in the Slonimsky (which Gryce also studied, independently of
Coltrane).
Charles Colin may still publish one of the smaller books -
Kaleidophone. That's the one I own. The other books are available by
special order from amazon ($115 each for vol. 1 & 2). The first URL
below has details.
Check these WWW sites:
http://www.geodyne.com/schillinger/index.htm
http://www.zyworld.com/sahmyook/Page2.htm
http://www.peabody.jhu.edu/current/js/js.htm
There's an email list too.
Mike
Stuart
knowledge of it is facinating to me. Keep it up. I always get the best
responses from all of you. I would like to thank all of you for always
making my time spent wiht this group worthwhile.
Stuart
I checked out the sites you recommended. They were very enlightening.
How much, and what type, of math does one need to decipher the
Schillinger system?
Michael Fitzgerald
wrote:
>Mike, What is this book all about(Charles Colin / Kaleidophone)?
>Schillinger system?
Charles Colin is the publisher of this Schillinger book. The copyright
is 1940, but it was reprinted not so long ago. The address is still:
Charles Colin
315 W. 53rd St.
New York, NY 10019
The math involved is rudimentary - addition. This book sets up a
number system of semitones (perfect fourth = "5" because it's 5
semitones). Then Schillinger lists the permutations of combining these
intervals to create chords and "pitch scales" (synthetic scales that
might have 2 different kinds of F's or whatever so they aren't normal
scales or modes).
This is the MOST basic book of the Schillinger system. I don't own the
huge expensive books, but studying the system is on my list of things
to do in this life or the next. I feel it opens up a new realm of
possibilities.
I forgot to mention in my earlier post that Muhal Richard Abrams is
another student of the Schillinger system. He won a classical
composition contest fairly recently with a work written using the
system.
Mike
Bob Valentine
math at all. I think it is basically metaphysics wearing numerical
pajamas. Unless there is some page I didn't get, then as a science
or a system, it just isn't there.
This isn't to criticise his efforts. If his efforts have ANYTHING
to do with the production of good music (either his or his students),
then it was at least as worthwhile as any other verbal representation
of what goes on in music (like chord-scales, etc...)
A related story from the book "Art and Fear", which I haven't plugged
for too long. Leonardo Da Vinci invented a system of specially
calibrated spoons for mixing paints. One of his students, trying to learn
the system was frustrated, getting no useful results and asked another
student how Da Vinci really used the spoons. The reply : "Oh, the master
never uses them."
A story I heard recently was that Slonimsky studied with Schillinger
and wrote the Thesaurus as an assignment for him to "determine every
possible scale".
Bob Valentine
Wesley Clark Dick
>Stuart (X-700) wrote:
>>
>> Do any of you musical genius's have any idea how his system works? I
>> know it has it's basis in mathematics, and that's all I know. Would
>> one or more of you enlighten me as to what it is all about, and how it
>> works?
>
>I checked the books out of a University music library many years ago and
>tried to study them. Yes, his methods are heavily based in mathematics -
>based on formulas which supposedly makes it easy to crank out music
>quickly. It was rumored that some Hollywood film composers studied with
>him or used his method, which enabled them to meet the deadlines for
>scores. I wasn't able to get interested, and I don't think the books are
>still in print. I'm leery of ANYTHING that promises musical results
>based on a formula. Sorry I can't give any more details into the system,
>but it's been too long and it wasn't that compelling.
Some of the cats I was in the USMC with back in the very early 50's
were Schillinger students and I remember this piano man showing me how
to 'logically and mathmetically' modulate from one key to another
based on a formula which took into consideration the present key, the
number of bars desired for the transition, the duration (quarter
notes, half notes, etc.) of each note/chord and the new key in which
I was to end up. It was a cute little thing but this was before
the days of hand held calculators and I couldn't see bring a pad and
pencil to a gig. Seriously, it was nice and he did some cool things
with it in arranging for the big dance band.
Wes
Clay Moore
>
> On 10 Oct 1999 12:50:28 PDT, Clay Moore <cl...@claymoore.com> wrote:
> >I checked the books out of a University music library many years ago and
> >tried to study them. Yes, his methods are heavily based in mathematics -
> >based on formulas which supposedly makes it easy to crank out music
> >quickly. It was rumored that some Hollywood film composers studied with
> >him or used his method, which enabled them to meet the deadlines for
> >scores. I wasn't able to get interested, and I don't think the books are
> >still in print. I'm leery of ANYTHING that promises musical results
> >based on a formula. Sorry I can't give any more details into the system,
> >but it's been too long and it wasn't that compelling.
>
> Goodman and Glenn Miller.
>
> The original name of the Berklee School of Music was The Schillinger
> House.
>
> Others such as trumpeter/composer Hobart Dotson used the system to
> great effect. Gigi Gryce was also familiar with it. I'm NOT leery of
> anything that those guys considered worthwhile. It would not surprise
> me at all if Coltrane had studied Schillinger's works, considering his
> interest in the Slonimsky (which Gryce also studied, independently of
> Coltrane).
>
> Charles Colin may still publish one of the smaller books -
> Kaleidophone. That's the one I own. The other books are available by
> special order from amazon ($115 each for vol. 1 & 2). The first URL
> below has details.
>
> Check these WWW sites:
>
> http://www.geodyne.com/schillinger/index.htm
>
> http://www.zyworld.com/sahmyook/Page2.htm
>
> http://www.peabody.jhu.edu/current/js/js.htm
>
> There's an email list too.
Mike,
Interesting points, and links. Here is a quote from one of the links you
pointed to, a biographer of Schillenger's named August Champlain.
"The first book to be released, a two-volume work entitled "The
Schillinger System of Musical Composition," was a critical failure. This
seemed to confirm the skepticism of the musical establishment that the
rumors concerning Schillinger were baseless. The second book to be
released, "The Mathematical Basis of the Arts," did not fare much
better. Opinion remained sharply divided over the merits of
Schillinger's "System," as it came to be called. Critics panned it,
while former students praised it.
Now more than fifty years after his death, Schillinger's books have
become cult classics. A small, but dedicated group of enthusiasts study
and attempt to master the difficult Schillinger "System," while the rest
of the academic musical establishment is either completely ignorant or
highly dismissive of Schillinger and his work."
Here is another quote from Schillinger scholar Bruno DeGazio.
"Unfortunately, the System as it exists today is more a collection of
lists and summaries than a clear explanation of the procedures
involved."
You might see how I as a 19 year old, mostly self-taught musician of
three years might have had some trouble relating to Schillinger's System
at the time I read his books. Before dismissing this as perhaps the
immaturity of youth, keep in mind that one of the driving forces in
Schillinger's day was the scientific communinity's attempts to reduce
things to formula and mathematics. I don't think I would find his system
appealing now any more than I did then - probably less so.
Michael Fitzgerald
>Now more than fifty years after his death, Schillinger's books have
>become cult classics. A small, but dedicated group of enthusiasts study
>and attempt to master the difficult Schillinger "System," while the rest
>of the academic musical establishment is either completely ignorant or
>highly dismissive of Schillinger and his work."
The only thing I might change about that statement is to make the last
"either/or" into a "both/and".....
Mike
Robert Irwin
to create melodies and solos. I would bet that Band-in-a-Box is using
these concepts in generating melodies and solos.
Bob Irwin
Check out Bob's Juke Box:
http://pages.prodigy.net/bobirwin/jukebox.htm
Stephen G. Carl
> You might see how I as a 19 year old, mostly self-taught musician of
> three years might have had some trouble relating to Schillinger's System
> at the time I read his books. Before dismissing this as perhaps the
> immaturity of youth, keep in mind that one of the driving forces in
> Schillinger's day was the scientific communinity's attempts to reduce
> things to formula and mathematics. I don't think I would find his system
> appealing now any more than I did then - probably less so.
>
Interesting. I remember Howard Roberts recommending Schillinger in
one of his seminars. I know you also attended at least one of Roberts'
seminars, Clay. Do remember him mentioning this?
PicLands
Comp. and had a studio that turned into Berk-Lee school. I studied with Larry
and have the books. It is a scientific,mathmatical approach to music,
I didn't follow thru ending in studying comp. and arranging. The system is more
for the working composer who needs more ideas and material to work with
.Arnie L.
Clay Moore
Yeah, I attended a Howard Roberts seminar. I was buzzin' for weeks after
that. He was an incredible teacher and player. I said in an earlier post
that I heard of Schillinger from Roberts. Also a book called "The
Shaping Forces in Music" by Ernest Toch.
Stuart
them? If so - for how much? I must say this whole thread is
facinating to me. I am more curious now than ever. Thanks for the
response. Thanks to all of you who have responded.
--
Music and Laughter - two of life's greatest pleasures.
Peter Kienle
> ......
> You might see how I as a 19 year old, mostly self-taught musician of
> three years might have had some trouble relating to Schillinger's System
> at the time I read his books. Before dismissing this as perhaps the
> immaturity of youth, keep in mind that one of the driving forces in
> Schillinger's day was the scientific communinity's attempts to reduce
> things to formula and mathematics. I don't think I would find his system
> appealing now any more than I did then - probably less so.
>
> --
> Clay Moore --
> jazz guitarist web developer
> cl...@claymoore.com clay...@music2u.com
> http://www.claymoore.com/ http://www.music2u.com
>
Sorry to quote this snippet out of context. I didn't know about the books
mentioned here and find it very interesting. A few years ago I went
through the Slonimsky. Over the past few years I have gone through a
process which took me away from the 'scientific' approach to music. At the
same time 'systems' (such as the one talked about here, or the Lydian
Chromatic Concept) can break habits and enlarge your musical horizon. At
the same time if taken too literally they can do exactly the opposite.
Science tends to look at 'things' and while the media (like CDs, records,
books, etc) are things - the message they carry is a process. Jazz seems
to be more like that than other styles which don't rely on improvisation
so heavily. Lately I am getting the feeling that the world needs more of
the 'unfinished-ness', 'out-of-the-moment-ness', irrationality that can be
present in Jazz.
If it sounds good it usually is good. We just so conditioned towards a
certain way of sounding good...
Peter
--
Visit http://www.acmerecords.com
for Original Jazz that Rocks with BeebleBrox
jazz guitar trio 3rd Man
Odd Guitar Jazz
Original Tunes Online
john...@my-deja.com
picl...@aol.com (PicLands) wrote:
> The system is more
> for the working composer who needs more ideas and
> material to work with
> .Arnie L.
I have found Schillinger to be useful in this regard. I happened upon
a copy of "The Schillinger System Of Musical Composition" gathering
dust on a friend's bookshelf about a year ago, and I can't yet bring
myself to return it.
No, I haven't mastered his system. I'm not even halfway through the
book. But one of his ideas that has served me well is
interchangability of melodic and rhythmic intervals. For instance
taking a line and creating a contrapuntal line by playing the rhythm
backwards, and/or mirroring melodic ascension with descension, or using
the intervals (say 1 to b3) to create rhythmic spacing (dotted quarter
note). It has opened me up to the endless possibilities that can stem
from the smallest musical nugget.
If you're looking to unlock the mysteries of the universe, this a dead
end. But if you're looking to climb your way out of a musical rut, you
can "manufacture" ideas using Schillinger's methods, and then let your
good taste decide if it is worthy of flesh.
Rick Stone
>
> Stephen G. Carl wrote:
> >
> > Clay Moore wrote:
> >
> > > three years might have had some trouble relating to Schillinger's System
> > > at the time I read his books. Before dismissing this as perhaps the
> > > immaturity of youth, keep in mind that one of the driving forces in
> > > Schillinger's day was the scientific communinity's attempts to reduce
> > > things to formula and mathematics. I don't think I would find his system
> > > appealing now any more than I did then - probably less so.
> > >
> >
> > one of his seminars. I know you also attended at least one of Roberts'
> > seminars, Clay. Do remember him mentioning this?
>
> Yeah, I attended a Howard Roberts seminar. I was buzzin' for weeks after
> that. He was an incredible teacher and player. I said in an earlier post
> that I heard of Schillinger from Roberts. Also a book called "The
> Shaping Forces in Music" by Ernest Toch.
I don't have the Schillinger books, but was aware of them as a student
at Berklee in the 1970's. I learned some of the concepts though, while
studying composition with Jimmy Heath at Queens College while doing my
Masters Degree. Jimmy studied with Rudolph Schram, a Schillinger
deciple who developed his own system out of Schillinger's methods, so
this is the version that I learned. In particular, I found the
"permutation" theory to be extremely useful and after being aware of it,
see it in use by others every day (Bill Leavitt's "Melodic Rhythms for
Guitar" is totally based on classic permutation theory). Jimmy used to
point out that Lalo Schifrin had studied the Schillinger system and used
it to write all the background music for the series "Mission Impossible"
out of about three musical motifs. Apparently it was used by a lot of
other movie and tv soundtrack writers as well.
/=====================================================\
|RICK STONE guitarist/composer/teacher |
|email: jaz...@inch.com |
|Check out my CD the Rick Stone Quartet "Far East" |
|with Kenny Barron at: http://www.inch.com/~jazzand |
\=====================================================/
Rick Stone
> Sorry to quote this snippet out of context. I didn't know about the books
> mentioned here and find it very interesting. A few years ago I went
> through the Slonimsky. Over the past few years I have gone through a
> process which took me away from the 'scientific' approach to music. At the
> same time 'systems' (such as the one talked about here, or the Lydian
> Chromatic Concept) can break habits and enlarge your musical horizon. At
> the same time if taken too literally they can do exactly the opposite.
>
> Science tends to look at 'things' and while the media (like CDs, records,
> books, etc) are things - the message they carry is a process. Jazz seems
> to be more like that than other styles which don't rely on improvisation
> so heavily. Lately I am getting the feeling that the world needs more of
> the 'unfinished-ness', 'out-of-the-moment-ness', irrationality that can be
> present in Jazz.
>
> If it sounds good it usually is good. We just so conditioned towards a
> certain way of sounding good...
I don't think that the Schillinger method has much of anything to do
with "sounding" good. It's just a way of stretching your materials.
The composer/arranger still has to be the final arbiter of what "sounds"
good and/or appropriate, fits the mood, etc., in any given musical
context.
Jimmy Heath told me that when Schillenger was asked by some students to
hear his music, he told them he wasn't a composer but an engineer and
that THEY would have to figure out how to make MUSIC out of it.
Put in that context, the system is valid and can lead a composer/player
to some very musical options that one might not have come up with by
intuition alone.