| There are basically two ways you can compose | | | | because it isn't good but because I don't |
| a piece of music. The first and most | | | | feel like playing that way anymore. Currently |
| traditional way is to write out the melody | | | | I'm leaning towards a softer sound that comes |
| and then harmonize it. Some call this working | | | | from leading with the melody first. What I do |
| from the top (as opposed to the chords on the | | | | is get the first 2-bars down and then |
| bottom.) The second approach is where you | | | | improvise the rest till I fill up 8 measures. |
| create some kind of rhythmic harmonic pattern | | | | This way I can vary the chords and patterns |
| and improvise (or compose) the melody on top. | | | | without it sounding very repetitive |
| Now, which one is best for New Age music? | | | | (minimalism). It's actually another style. |
| | | | You can call it melodic while the other one |
| The answer is neither approach. Each has its | | | | (Harmony approach) is more textural. IT ALL |
| own merits and own special benefits. For | | | | DEPENDS ON YOUR MOOD! |
| example, if you start with a pattern in your | | | | |
| left hand and improvise a melody with your | | | | Don't let one style freeze you into something |
| right, you are doing what most new age | | | | where you can't maneuver artistically! |
| composers/improvisers do. This is what George | | | | Remember that your feeling must come first. |
| Winston does most of the time. He has chords | | | | Everything else is secondary. Let your |
| he sets to a certain rhythm and does his | | | | feeling lead you and your creation will be |
| thing with that amazing right hand of his. | | | | truly inspired, however, if you try to mold |
| | | | what you have to say into a specific style, |
| This is the style that I have been playing, | | | | the result may be less than satisfactory. |
| but I've recently lost interest in it. Not | | | | |