“Talking about music is like dancing about architecture” (source unknown).
Many directors and producers who work with me explain that they don’t really know music that well and that they struggle to discuss it. Some feel intimidated by it because they feel they don’t know musical terminology. Or worse, some know a little bit of music terminology, sometimes not really understanding the correct meaning of what they’re saying and misuse it.
I tell my directors and producers not to use music terminology at all. I ask them to speak to me about story, drama, emotion, colors, feelings, shapes – anything that helps them express what they’re after, forget music terminology. It is my job to translate what they are looking for into music. Just as when they discuss the framing of a shot, or the lighting of a scene, or coach an actor they talk about what they’re after, not how to achieve it, I ask them to do the same with me. My view is that we are all storytellers, the actor does it through acting, the cinematographer does it through his/her camera work, the set designer does it through his/her set design etc. My job is to support, enhance and advance the story through music.
I’ve found this works really well for several reasons. First it puts them at ease. They seem to appreciate that my approach is that of a storyteller whose medium happens to be music rather than as a composer or a music editor. It makes them feel comfortable discussing things in more abstract terms. Second it prevents unintended miscommunications. I’ve had people give me very specific music directions using musical terminology, which turned out to be completely wrong. By speaking about drama, story, emotion etc. I make it my job to interpret what that means musically instead of relying on them. I also find this very freeing because it allows me to bring more of my personality into the process.
When I was a student a teacher told me a story of a client he had that heard a cue he had written and asked for it to be more dissonant. My teacher thought that was an interesting and bold direction and set off to rewrite the cue. When he played the new version for the director, again the director wanted it to be more dissonant. When he presented the third rewrite to the director, the director’s frustration was palpable; he felt it still wasn’t dissonant enough. My teacher was perplexed because by now his cue was quite dissonant and unusual, so he asked the director “when you say more dissonant, what exactly do you mean?” The director replied “faster!”
Now imagine if my teacher had followed up in the first place and said something like “when you say you want it more dissonant, what exactly are you looking for? More tension? Something darker? Are we trying to make the audience more uncomfortable?” It would have become immediately clear that his director was misusing a musical term.
I once had a director tell me a temp cue I used sounded t0o plastic and he wanted something more metallic. I’ve had directors use colors, for example – something feels too dark and brown and they want it to be brighter and lighter and redder. I once had a director respond to a temp cue for a very tense and suspenseful scene saying the cue made him very uncomfortable, which was good, but it wasn’t scary enough, he wanted it to make him “shit his pants.” These are all wonderful descriptions that all make sense in context. I’ve watched directors grunt and pace across the room waving their hands as a scene played, almost as if conducting the shape of the music with barely a word being spoken.
So whenever working with directors and producers, I highly recommend always steering the conversation to the abstract rather than musical terms. Remind them we are all storytellers and that it is your job to translate what they want emotionally and dramatically into music.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.