Composing

PART 1 — The First Structural Choice: Are You Composing a Moment or Designing a System?

Most composers begin with melody, harmony, or emotion.

Upstream, the real beginning is a structural choice:

“Is this piece serving a single moment… or supporting an entire system?”

A moment‑based composition is built to heighten a specific beat, emotion, or scene.

A system‑based composition is built to generate multiple cues, variations, motifs, and expansions.

These two identities behave differently in:

- thematic development

- orchestration

- motif design

- stem strategy

- collaboration with directors

- long‑term catalog value

When a composer doesn’t name the identity upstream, the music drifts — too small for a system, too broad for a moment.

Upstream clarity begins with naming the scale of the composition before writing a single note.

⭐ PART 2 — The Functional Role: What Job Is the Music Actually Doing in the Project?

Music doesn’t just “support the story.”

Upstream, every piece of music has a functional role inside the project’s architecture:

- Emotional Anchor — defines the project’s emotional vocabulary

- Rhythmic Engine — drives pacing and momentum

- Atmospheric Frame — shapes tone and world identity

- Character Signature — marks presence, intention, or transformation

- Structural Glue — binds scenes, sequences, or acts together

If the composer doesn’t declare the function upstream, collaborators will assign their own — and the notes will reflect their assumptions, not the composer’s intention.

Upstream clarity is simply this:

Define the job of the music before you compose it.

Once the function is clear, the creative decisions downstream — motif, instrumentation, dynamics, texture — finally have a stable foundation.

A Fun Composing Exercise

I posted a "sister" exercise in the screenwriting lounge, and it was so much fun I'm posting here too.

Ok, In my day job, have access to new names every single day. Sometimes, when I need to blow out the creative cobwebs (especailly after SIX WEEKS of non-stop holiday madness) I give myself a creative writing exercise. I thought I'd share it with you. BTW I only ever grab first or last names, never both so no privacy issues ever. I'll even do this as I watch film credits sometimes. I grab a first name, and a last name and then I create a song for them. Ready for the NAME BANK?

FIRST NAMES

Justus

Kynzi

Kenrick

Armetrius

Laiken

Brendalen

Roy

Wyatt

LAST NAMES

Possa

Morehouse

Dupuey

Razer

Stanberry

Latour

Wiley

So, the idea is something like this. Write one of two:

1. Describe a theme based on a charater name like this one: Kynzi & Kenrick Razer who's parents started the scooter empire in the early 2000s are over their parents' invention. They just want to try roller skates- their parents refuse (bad brand optics) until zombies appear in their town and all ride Razer scooters. The brave 12 year old twins must roller skate to saftey along with their Great Pyrenese Dupuey.

2. Write lyrics based on a name:

Roy Possa loved Laiken with alll of his heart

She never knew he existed, right at the start

He'd gaze at her longingly through windows at night

Wondering if ever she'd put up a fight

For love

For the sake of their hearts

Could they risk

For love

Laiken was moving to Richmond the next afternoon

Roy was broken his love going way too soon

Cause he'd never told her the depth of his heart

And soon she'd just leave him alone in the dark

Let's see what we can come up with :) Yep- the lyrics are pretty bad AND I only give myself 5-10 minutes to try to come up with something and get the creative juices flowing! So no judgment- let's try something new!

Most conversations in composing focus on the sound:

- melody

- harmony

- orchestration

- plugins

- stems

- workflow

- delivery formats

All important. All necessary. All downstream.

But upstream, there’s a question almost no composer asks — and it quietly determines whether their music becomes a project, a catalog, or just a file on a hard drive.

“What is the actual identity of the thing I’m creating?”

Because here’s the clarity:

A cue is not automatically an asset.

A track is not automatically a deliverable.

A composition is not automatically a project.

Most music collapses downstream because the upstream identity was never defined.

⭐ THE REAL DISTINCTION: MUSIC VS. MUSICAL ASSET

When you write music, you’re creating sound.

When you build an asset, you’re creating something that:

- has a clear owner

- has defined rights

- has predictable behavior

- can be licensed, reused, or scaled

- can survive collaboration, revision, and production

The difference isn’t creative — it’s structural.

A cue that behaves like an asset moves differently in the real world than a cue that behaves like a file.

⭐ THE UPSTREAM CLARITY

Before you compose, ask:

“Is this a piece of music…

or is this a component of a larger system?”

Because the answer changes:

- how you structure your rights

- how you deliver your stems

- how you collaborate with directors

- how you negotiate your usage

- how your catalog grows

- how your work survives beyond the project

Composers who think upstream don’t just write cues —

they build containers that their music can live in.

Most conversations in composing focus on:

- melody

- harmony

- orchestration

- sound design

- workflow

- plugins

- DAWs

All important.

All necessary.

All downstream.

But there’s an upstream question almost no composer asks — and it quietly determines whether their music becomes a project, whether that project becomes a deal, and whether that deal survives the real world.

Here it is:

“What exactly am I creating — a piece of music, or a usable asset?”

Because if the answer is unclear:

- cues get reused without clarity

- rights drift across collaborators

- producers misunderstand what they’re licensing

- composers lose leverage

- backend evaporates

- the music becomes harder to protect, monetize, or scale

Most composers never see this upstream layer because the industry trains them to focus on the notes, not the identity of the thing the notes create.

So here’s the clarity:

A composition isn’t just sound — it’s an asset container.

If the container is unstable, everything downstream becomes unstable.

The composers who understand this move differently:

- they negotiate differently

- they deliver differently

- they protect their work differently

- they collaborate differently

- they build catalogs instead of isolated tracks

So I’ll leave the room with this:

When you compose, are you creating music…

or are you building an asset?

The answer changes everything.

PART 1 — The Downstream Trap (Why Composers Keep Fixing the Wrong Layer)

Most composers respond to musical problems by going straight to:

- rewriting motifs

- adjusting harmony

- changing instrumentation

- tweaking rhythms

- rebalancing the mix

These are downstream corrections — they adjust the expression of the idea, not the identity.

Upstream clarity begins with recognizing that most musical problems are not technical.

They’re structural signals from an idea that wasn’t defined clearly enough to survive downstream execution.

This is the first shift.

PART 2 — The Upstream Collapse (Where Most Musical Ideas Actually Die)

Musical ideas rarely collapse because of:

- weak orchestration

- poor mixing

- thin harmony

- unrefined motifs

Those are symptoms.

Ideas collapse upstream when:

- the emotional engine isn’t defined

- the musical world has no identity

- the thematic logic is unstable

- the idea doesn’t know what it wants to be

- the composer is “searching” instead of “executing”

This is why drafts drift, cues wobble, and themes lose coherence.

Upstream collapse is invisible until you name it — and once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

PART 3 — The Musical Center (The Upstream Anchor That Stabilizes Everything)

Every stable musical idea has a center — the upstream anchor that governs:

- emotional intention

- thematic behavior

- harmonic gravity

- rhythmic identity

- textural logic

When the center is locked, the music becomes:

- coherent

- emotionally consistent

- resistant to drift

- easier to orchestrate

- easier to revise

- easier to expand into a full score

When the center is missing, every downstream decision creates new problems.

Upstream clarity is the discipline of locking the center before touching the DAW.

PART 4 — The Upstream Framework (Where Composers Gain Real Leverage)

Downstream work is execution.

Upstream work is governance.

This is where composers gain leverage:

- defining the emotional identity of the idea

- stabilizing the thematic engine

- clarifying the musical world

- mapping the idea’s internal logic

- establishing the rules the music must obey

Once the upstream layer is clear, downstream work becomes:

- faster

- cleaner

- more intentional

- more expressive

- more structurally stable

Downstream is where you write notes.

Upstream is where you define the world those notes belong to.

This is the leverage point.

This is where upstream clarity becomes a composer’s advantage.

When the upstream layer is structured, the composer gains:

- a defined sonic identity

- a stable thematic logic

- a coherent emotional architecture

- a predictable palette

- motifs that behave consistently

- a musical ecosystem that can scale across scenes, episodes, or formats

This is the layer where IPBSE, as a framework, operates — not as a tool for finance, but as a structure for ecosystem clarity.

For composers, that means:

- your world has rules

- your palette has logic

- your themes have continuity

- your motifs have identity

- your score behaves like a unified system

⭐ Downstream is where you write music.

⭐ Upstream is where you build the world the music belongs to.

⭐ Worlds survive. Isolated cues rarely do.

When composers understand the upstream layer, they stop creating disconnected pieces and start building musical ecosystems — the thing directors, producers, and audiences actually respond to.

Most musical ideas don’t fail because of:

- lack of talent

- weak orchestration

- poor mixing

- insufficient tools

They fail upstream, long before craft even becomes relevant.

Upstream collapse happens when:

- the sonic identity of the world is unclear

- the emotional logic of the story isn’t defined

- the thematic engine isn’t stable

- motifs don’t have continuity

- the palette isn’t coherent

- the musical ecosystem doesn’t behave predictably

These are not technical problems.

They are structural problems.

And because they occur upstream, they’re invisible to most composers.

⭐ The idea never becomes a cue because the cue never becomes part of a coherent musical ecosystem.

Downstream can’t fix this.

Downstream only works with what survives.

The Upstream Layer Most Composers Skip — And Why Their Scores Suffer for It

Most composers begin their process far too late.

They start with:

- a theme

- a tempo

- a palette

- a cue

- a scene

- a feeling

All of these are downstream decisions.

They matter — but they are not the foundation.

The real foundation of a score is built upstream, long before a note is written.

And when that upstream layer is missing, the composer ends up:

- rewriting cues

- chasing tone

- adjusting themes endlessly

- reacting to director notes instead of leading

- losing continuity across the project

- feeling like the score is “almost there” but never locking

Downstream problems almost always come from upstream gaps.

Let’s walk through the upstream layer most composers never define — and why it changes everything.

⭐ 1. Identity: What Must Remain True Across the Entire Score

Every project has a musical identity, whether the composer defines it or not.

Identity is not:

- genre

- instrumentation

- tempo

- mood

Identity is the non‑negotiable truth of the score.

It answers questions like:

- What emotional world does this story live in?

- What is the score protecting?

- What is the score refusing to become?

- What must remain true even when the music shifts?

When identity is unclear, the score drifts.

When identity is defined, the score becomes inevitable.

⭐ 2. Boundaries: What the Score Is Not Allowed to Do

Most composers never define boundaries.

They focus on what the score should do, not what it must avoid.

But boundaries are what protect:

- tone

- emotional logic

- world consistency

- character truth

- narrative cohesion

A score breaks not when it’s “bad,” but when it violates the world.

Examples of boundary questions:

- What musical choices break the story’s reality?

- What instrumentation contradicts the world?

- What emotional colors are off‑limits?

- What clichés must be avoided?

Boundaries are not restrictions.

They are guardrails that keep the score from collapsing.

⭐ 3. Continuity Logic: The Rules That Make the Score Feel Like One Voice

Continuity is the layer that separates amateur scores from professional ones.

It includes:

- motif behavior

- harmonic logic

- rhythmic identity

- instrumentation consistency

- emotional cause‑and‑effect

- how themes evolve

- how tension is built and released

Continuity is not about repetition.

It’s about governance.

It’s the difference between:

- a collection of cues

and

- a unified musical language

When continuity is defined upstream, the score feels intentional.

When it’s not, the score feels improvised.

⭐ 4. Expansion: Can the Score Grow Without Breaking?

Most composers write for the project in front of them.

Upstream composers write for:

- sequels

- series

- spin‑offs

- adaptations

- expanded worlds

Expansion reveals whether the upstream structure was real or improvised.

If the score collapses when the world grows, the upstream wasn’t strong enough.

If the score expands effortlessly, the upstream was solid.

⭐ The Real‑Real Truth

Composers don’t struggle because they lack talent.

They struggle because they start too far downstream.

Upstream clarity gives the composer:

- a stable identity

- clear boundaries

- a unified musical language

- an expandable structure

- fewer rewrites

- stronger collaboration with directors

- faster cue writing

- more emotional consistency

- more trust from producers

When the upstream is clear, the downstream becomes inevitable.

Not because it was wrong…

just because it was too much, or didn’t belong anymore. Less is more, most of the time.

I’m always surprised how often the fix is removing the thing I liked most.

PART 1 — Why Most Scores Collapse: The Missing Upstream Layer

Most composers think their challenges show up in the writing — the cue that won’t land, the theme that won’t lock, the instrumentation that feels off.

But the real issue happens before any note is written.

Downstream problems almost always come from upstream gaps:

- no defined identity for the score

- unclear emotional boundaries

- inconsistent musical language

- reactive writing instead of governed writing

- no continuity logic across cues

When upstream structure is missing, the composer ends up:

- rewriting cues

- chasing tone

- adjusting themes endlessly

- reacting to notes instead of leading the process

Upstream clarity isn’t about limiting creativity.

It’s about protecting it.

PART 2 — The Four Upstream Layers That Stabilize Any Score

Before opening a DAW or touching an instrument, a composer can stabilize the entire project by defining four upstream layers.

1. Identity Layer

What is the core identity of this score?

Not genre — identity.

What must remain true across every cue?

2. Boundary Layer

What is the score not allowed to do?

What musical choices break the world, tone, or emotional logic?

3. Continuity Layer

What rules govern the musical language?

This includes:

- motif behavior

- harmonic logic

- rhythmic identity

- instrumentation consistency

- emotional cause‑and‑effect

Continuity is what makes a score feel like a unified voice rather than a collection of cues.

4. Expansion Layer

If the project grows — sequels, series, spin‑offs — what musical elements must remain intact?

These four layers form the upstream structure that protects the downstream writing.

PART 3 — How Upstream Structure Reduces Rewrites and Builds Trust

Most rewrites in scoring don’t happen because the composer “missed the emotion.”

They happen because the composer and director were not aligned upstream.

When a composer presents a score built on upstream clarity, three things happen:

1. Directors feel understood

Because the composer isn’t guessing — they’re working from a defined identity and boundary set.

2. Producers feel protected

Because the score behaves consistently across the project.

No tonal drift.

No emotional contradictions.

3. Rewrites drop dramatically

Because the composer isn’t reinventing the score cue by cue.

They’re executing a stable upstream structure.

Upstream clarity turns the composer from a reactive problem‑solver into a structural partner in the storytelling process.

When the upstream is clear, the downstream becomes inevitable.

Once you identify the center of your score, the next step is to lock it.

Locking the center means:

- every cue

- every motif

- every harmonic choice

- every orchestration decision

- every texture

- every transition

…must serve the same structural identity.

Here’s the upstream discipline composers rarely practice:

⭐ The Center Test

Before writing a note, ask:

“Does this cue express the center — or distract from it?”

If the answer is unclear, the cue isn’t ready.

When the center is locked:

- the score stops drifting

- the palette becomes obvious

- the motifs reveal themselves

- the harmony becomes inevitable

- the composer stops guessing

- the revisions decrease

- the emotional through‑line strengthens

This is why upstream clarity matters:

Identity creates Function.

Function creates Execution.

Execution creates the score.

Most composers start at Execution.

That’s why they get stuck.

Upstream clarity flips the process:

- Identity — what the score is

- Function — what the score does

- Execution — how the score sounds

When the center is locked, the score writes itself.

This is how composers move from emotional chaos to structural confidence..

PART 1 — “The Composer’s Drift: Why Your Score Loses Its Center”

Most composing problems don’t start in the DAW.

They start upstream, long before a single note is written.

Every composer knows the feeling:

- the cue starts strong

- the idea feels right

- the palette is promising

- the first 20 seconds work

…and then something happens.

The score begins to drift.

Not because you lost inspiration — but because the center of the score was never structurally defined.

Here’s the upstream truth:

A score without a center will always drift.

A score with a center becomes inevitable.

The center is not:

- a theme

- a motif

- a chord progression

- a tempo

- a sound

Those are expressions.

The center is the structural identity of the score — the thing every musical decision must orbit.

Examples:

- “This score is about fracture.”

- “This score is about inevitability.”

- “This score is about a world losing its center.”

- “This score is about a character who can’t outrun their past.”

When the center is unclear, the composer compensates with:

- more layers

- more ideas

- more revisions

- more plugins

- more second‑guessing

But the problem isn’t musical.

It’s structural.

Upstream clarity begins with one question:

“What is the center of this score?”

If you can’t answer that, the drift is guaranteed.

Part 2 explains how to lock the center so the score stops wandering and starts behaving.