20. Albireo - Michael Dixon

[Aaron] Welcome to the Theorist Composer Collaboration, a podcast interview series highlighting modern composers and their compositions. My name is Aaron D'Zurrilla. I am the host of this podcast and also a graduate music theory student at Florida State University. Today I will be talking with the composer Michael Dixon, who, alongside his piece, Albireo, is the featured guest for this episode. We discuss their background, writing for Carillon, the compositional process behind Albireo, modern issues in music academia, and much more. So, without further ado, this is an excerpt from Albireo, and welcome to the TCC. Again, the music that you were just listening to is an excerpt from the piece titled Albireo by the composer Michael Dixon, who, alongside their music, is the featured guest for this episode. That leads me to welcome Michael Dixon themselves to the program. How are you?

[Michael] I am doing great. I am about to start my fourth year at the University of Florida. I am doing my Bachelor's of Music in Music Composition. I just moved into my new apartment. I am just getting settled in. How are you?

[Aaron] I am good. I am good. You know, it sounds like you have some small weekend things to work on. I am also moving apartments, and listeners cannot see this, but Michael, you might notice the wonderfully professional setup I have in my hometown childhood bedroom in between moving apartments. But you know, that is what it is this time of year, and I thank you for coming onto the program and recording it this time of year, because there is always a lot of movement going on for people, transitions and so on, and the start of the semester. Well, you just gave us a little bit right there, but how about you go ahead and introduce yourself a bit more personally, professionally, academically, whatever you choose.

[Michael] Oh, yeah. I guess there's a lot of things I could say. I have been playing piano since I was very young. My mom taught me since I was like two or three, and I started seriously considering music as a career in middle school. I was just a band kid playing the French horn. It wasn't until I was actually considering college options that I began to think about composition and I didn't really write any pieces until I entered the University of Florida. But I kind of just very quickly fell into it. I was originally considering like a double major in psychology, but then the composition just kind of took up my entire life and I fell in love with it. So I just kind of I dove headfirst into it. And then I guess kind of the main topic of today is my carillon music, and I'm sure we'll talk about the instrument more. But for those of you who don't know, a carillon is essentially a set of tuned bells in a bell tower that is played by an instrumentalist. And I started playing the carillon two years ago at the beginning of my second year at the University of Florida playing on the Century Tower carillon. So that's another thing that was just it was supposed to be just kind of a hobby or an elective class. And as I do with many things, I got way too absorbed into it. It's kind of become another part of my career.

[Aaron] I just want to say only on this program, you know, on a podcast talking about, oh yeah, hobby, just, you know, learning how to play a bell tower, you know, just weekend things, you know, after class. Well, during class now, actually, but go on.

[Michael] Yeah, yeah. So I performed on the carillon before I started composing for it. But I mean, it was kind of a no brainer as a composition major to start exploring the instrument. And yet there's some really unique limitations with it, but also some unique capabilities. And that's something I'd love to spend some more time talking about. But people describe the carillon as kind of a democratic instrument, for better or for worse, because you have to design your programs around what kind of non-academic audiences are going to hear. Because I mean, unlike most of the proceedings at the university, carillon concerts are heard by everybody, regardless of whether or not they want to hear it. So it's kind of a different setting and more, it's more of a focus on broader appeal. And I would say that's kind of influenced my style since I started writing for it, since I have all these considerations of how do I want to balance my personal voice with creating music that will be truly impactful to those outside the classical training of the School of Music. So...

[Aaron] Let's put a pin in that because I really like how you framed that with a democratic music or a democratic instrument, you said. I really, I've heard similar talking about sort of things, but that's a really interesting thing. Let's put a pin in that for right now. Let's back up. Let's back, let's back up a little bit. You know, one thing that's unique about you, Michael, at least in relation to myself is you said you really had not started fully composing until you started at University of Florida. And it just so happens that, you know, we took comp skills one, two, and three together. And not that, not that I'm some grand observer of compositional progress, but I did see you, you know, I would say progress, obviously progressively, but you flourished very quickly within that setting. I remember.

[Michael] Oh, thank you.

[Aaron] Oh, your skills developed, you know, not to speak any poorly of anyone else or myself, you know, Sydney was along the ride with us. Shout out to Sydney if she's listening. But you know, I would say out of all of us, you know, your skills just far exhumed past a lot of us. It seemed like a very natural fit, in my opinion, even in comp skills one and certainly in the subsequent classes.

[Michael] Yeah, I mean, I would say I, it just kind of felt like it was right for me. Just something that was natural. Of course, like everybody has certain talents that just come easily. And when you start pursuing something and it just feels right and you don't have to put quite as much effort in to get the same amount out of it. That's that's kind of what it felt for me taking those those classes. And I just I had an interest in kind of building up my understanding of the music that came before me, but also just truly understanding myself and my own unique voice. And I know some people, but there's a lot of disagreement on like, how important is it to study the composers that came before us? Whether that be 20th century composers or the common practice period or Renaissance counterpoint or whatever. I find something of myself in each of those practices. And I think that kind of this setting has been instrumental, I guess, not pun intended, but sort of pun intended, in informing my voice. So I would not consider myself an experimentalist by any means. And that's not like any anything I hold against the avant-garde. I love listening to more experimental music. But just in terms of my personal voice, I feel comfortable just observing all sorts of styles from what came before me and synthesizing that. And I think that the comp skills classes that we took were just like my first glimpse of just truly like what what all has happened in the world of classical composition.

[Aaron] Unburdened by what came before, indeed.

[Michael] But it was really eye opening. And I knew from those first couple of classes that I just I wanted to dive into it and make it my primary focus. So yeah, I'm pretty new as a composer, but learning more each day, learning more about myself becoming more comfortable with the craft.

[Aaron] Yeah, all very genuine. And I'm going to brag on you a bit more. But you know, even at the time that I was there, which you've done so much more even after I left after I graduated University of Florida, you even while I was there, your name was on like every single concert that was available, basically, for the most part, you were pumping out music faster than a lot of grad students, you know, getting grants and submitted. I remember it was it would have been the beginning of your second year when we were in comp skills three, you got, one of your French horn pieces got accepted to a competition or a festival or something of that sort for new horn music. And I remember just being like, hot damn this guy is making this guy making moves out here. Oh, and also speaking of French horn. So you said you play piano from a young age. And I remember there was a moment when I remember you telling us in class that you were really trying to hone in on some piano skills. I remember you performed some of your pieces and did your own accompaniment and stuff. It was very good. Actually, I remember it was it was for a class, but you played one of my pieces too. I remember it was just it was just for a class. But French horn, weren't you previously or still are in the French horn studio with Dr. Basler?

[Michael] I am. Yes. And I perform I performed in the symphonic band of the wind symphony and the symphony orchestra and I've got auditions in a week from tomorrow. So wish me luck on that.

[Aaron] Oh, yes. Good luck.

[Michael] As an undergrad student, I mean, performance is still very much an integral part of my studies. And I would hope to keep it that way when I continue into graduate school, maybe not quite in the same capacity. Obviously, as we go into graduate studies, we tend to specialize more. I mean, I undergraduate composition studies just kind of like a holistic study of music. But I I would say I perform about as much as I compose right now, and I'm grateful for that because I am constantly exploring just staples in the repertoire and also new pieces. I perform in the new music ensemble at the university as well. I think that's really important, especially for composers who are just starting out like myself to get that perspective of what performers truly appreciating in the music and understanding what comes idiomatically. And I mean, ultimately, it's a collaborative process if every composition is collaborative. And I because I perform so much, I kind of I understand what will make people angry if I put it on the page in front of them. So I would say that that's saved me a lot of headache, just understanding, I guess, how to get my point across and communicate my voice, but also make things as easy for my performers as possible.

[Aaron] Yes, yes, of course. You know, I think that's a virtue that I'm not badmouthing anyone in particular, but I think that's a virtue that needs to be reminded to some especially younger composers, maybe not just starting out, but like the middle phase, you know, somewhere around there. Oh, man, what I wouldn't give to to play under under the baton of Dr. Lu again. I love Dr. Tiffany Lu, the orchestral director at University of Florida.

[Michael] She's fantastic, we're actually going to be playing. I forget which Mahler Symphony it is, but there will be like eight to ten horns in it. So I'm going to be brought in for that endeavor. I am so excited.

[Aaron] The fact you guys are playing a Mahler Symphony, that's that's a lot. That's a lot.

[Michael] Yeah, she's done so much with the program in such a short amount of time. And she's just really just, I've never seen somebody so driven.

[Aaron] She's a fantastic person, professional and conductor. She's great. Let's get more into the piece today and to get back to what you were talking about with how do you the carillon how you pronounce it correctly, right?

[Michael] Yes, yes.

[Aaron] The carillon. So it's a bell tower if you want to be really blunt and not very accurate, but you play the bell tower. But in you know, if anyone from University of Florida or Gainesville or anyone familiar with UF is listening, you will understand how big of a thing it is that Michael here has composed for and played the carillon in the Turlington Square at University of Florida because Century Tower is one of the most iconic iconic things of University of Florida. If you've ever visited the campus, certainly gone there, walked through it or seen any promotion from UF. Century Tower is a center point of the campus, if not the giant bus station right next to it. Every single student at University of Florida, unless if you are an agricultural student off campus, has heard music from Century Tower. So like that's a really big deal. And it's really freaking cool if you ask me. So you know, just to give a little little insight to some people, the notation for the carillon at least just on the face of it looks like a piano score almost. You know, if you had a couple extra appendages, you could probably play it on piano. But but but Michael, I you know, I don't know very much about the instrument. And if I was a betting person, I would bet all of it down on that most people don't know much about how it works either. So can you talk a bit just like mechanically how the instrument works? I see in the performance video you sent me, it has like two tiers of keys, like between an organ and a piano, it's closer to an organ. But I know it's probably not that simple. So can you talk about how the instrument actually works?

[Michael] Yeah, so I'd like to actually start with the notation, as you mentioned, it is notated with a regular grand staff as a piano would be. But it's actually very similar to an organ and that the lowest staff is for the pedals. But because we don't play as many notes as an organ, there isn't a need to have three separate states, you just have the two. So yeah, I mean, as you mentioned, it is kind of more well, it's so different that I don't know, I don't know if it can really be compared to a piano or an organ, but it does have a a manual and pedal and the manual rather than being a set of keys is a gigantic set of batons that you play with your fists. And you mentioned that there's an upper and lower row of the batons, the upper row is what would be the black keys on the piano organ and the lower row will be the white key. So it's really just a gigantic oversized piano keyboard with batons instead of keys. And then the pedals are kind of that they're a little bit more spread out than organ pedals would be, but it's just the same basic principle, just like two tiers upper and lower. But yeah, so we can play up to six notes at once unless you are playing clusters, which are, again, if we're talking about the instrument being democratic and considering that everybody has to listen to it, clusters may not be the best idea. Although I have heard some pieces that successfully employ them, but generally, we can play up to six notes at one time. But because of the physical limitations and also because of the rich timbre of the bells, there are typically far fewer notes and lines and elements happening at once and the texture still sounds just as full. So are there any other questions you have about? Yeah, so what do I guess I got a little sidetracked?

[Aaron] No, not sidetracked. You're quite on track. So like, the pedals, what do they look like? Do they look like organ pedals?

[Michael] So organ pedals are very elongated because you're meant to kind of like switch between the heel and the toe and they're meant for that kind of functionality. Whereas with carillon pedals, you're only, there's not that distinction. You're just using your foot and because we need to get much more leverage on it, they are kind of wider and I guess shorter or squatter. So I'd say the pedals are about the size of my foot, a little bit narrower, but they're big enough that you will not accidentally hit two pedals at once unless you've got enormously large feet. But I guess that brings me to another point to mention, which is that in a traditional carillon, everything is purely mechanical. It's not like there's an electronic system translating these inputs into mechanisms that ring the bells. Of course, most carillons do also have an automated mechanism that will play the bell toll on the hour, but everything besides that is purely mechanical and there's usually metal tables that hook up to the clappers of the bells inside the tower. So when we strike the baton or press the pedal, it is physically moving the clapper ring the bell.

[Aaron] So is the Century Tower one completely mechanical?

[Michael] Yes. I mean, but besides the automated clock strike, yes. And yeah, one very difficult element of the instrument from the standpoint of a performer is that because it is all purely mechanical and because all these bells are different sizes, the lower bells require much more force to sound at the same dynamic as the higher bells and that makes control an enormously difficult aspect of playing. And just like separating melodic lines and making sure the accompaniment, which is often in the pedals, doesn't overshadow melodic lines can be exceedingly difficult. That's been one of the most challenging aspects as I continue to grow is just understanding that there's kind of a nonlinear progression of how much force I need to apply to each baton to get the desired sound. And it complicates it that each carillon is different and some instruments are terribly heavy to play on and some like a Century Tower are on the much lighter side.

[Aaron] So have you played on other carillons?

[Michael] Yes, I have. I'd love to talk about that more too.

[Aaron] So I play, because I know people like church performers and they always say like not all pianos are not created equal. Certainly no organs are created equal. I bet that's even compounded upon for carillons.

[Michael] Right. Yeah, absolutely. Because I mean, I would say even the keyboard or not keyboard, but like the console that the manual is mostly standardized, but the size of like the gap in between batons I've noticed will be slightly different from instrument to instrument. So yeah, so much of being a carillon performer is adapting just on the fly. And a lot of people don't really get the chance to acquaint themselves with the instrument before playing your recital on it. So that truly is one of the skills we have to learn performing on the instrument. Yeah, I every instrument is so radically different. And I think as a composer, it's been important for me to learn about the different types of bells as well, because there's like seven or eight different bell foundries that produce bells and each bell has a different sound. And for example, I will be playing a series of recitals at Bach Tower, Bach Tower Gardens in Lake Wales, Florida over Labor Day weekend, which I'm very excited about. But those bells have a, they're much more bottom heavy and kind of, I would say they have a brighter timbre, but the low bells are just booming. And then the high bells are kind of just very tinny and don't project quite as well. So that's something that I have to adjust to as a performer, but also something I have to consider as a composer that people will be playing this piece on all sorts of different bells and certain things that I've tested, certain things that I play tested on the Century Tower may sound completely different and may not be quite as effective on an instrument with different bells. It's, yeah, it's a beast to write for. I would say it's a very tight knit and welcoming community. And I would also say similarly to the organ world, most people who write for carillon are carillonneurs, carillon performers first and composers second. I mean, don't take that with a grain of salt. I'm not entirely sure that that's true in the modern age, but

[Aaron] I think it makes sense. But at least in my experience in grad school and seeing a wider world of music, it seems like communities of niche instrumental performers typically also are composers for such things.

[Michael] Yeah, right. Yeah. I would say every pretty much every staple piece of my repertoire that I've learned has been an original composition by a carillonneur and there's so many initiatives to get the composers outside of this tiny little world to write for the instrument. And I mean, I guess that that was part of part of the the initiative that the grant that I received was kind of designed to get student composers interested. It just so happened that I also played the carillon.

[Aaron] Yeah. Well, before you go on, let's let's intro that because that's important. So Albireo is the product of a grant that you received, I'm assuming applied for, but it's from the what's the group called?

[Michael] The Guild of Carillonneurs in North America or the GCNA for short. And that is the predominant carillon organization in North America.

[Aaron] Yes. But so yeah, talk about that because you you got what seems like a cash prize and recognition from the organization, which I will put the page of the grant recipients in the description where at the top you will see Michael's piece and there's also the performance video too that you can see it being performed by Rayyan Merchant. Yeah, Rayyan Merchant. So yeah, talk about that grant a little bit. How did you come across it? What was that process like?

[Michael] Yeah. So the Franco committee is the committee within the guild that focuses on the commissioning of new carillon compositions, and this was an initiative that they had for student composers and performers. So yeah, my collaborator, a co recipient, Rayyan, he had been playing for a couple of years before I did. He was also a member of the carillon studio at the University of Florida. He has since graduated. But this was an initiative for one student composer and one student performer to team up and write a new piece for the instrument. And this is very helpful for me as a performer to collaborate with somebody who has more experience, especially in certain techniques that I'll get into in a little bit. But yeah, I was, we were very grateful to receive this opportunity and I would also, I would recommend it to any student composers who are listening. I believe they are doing it every year now. You don't have to play the carillon to receive this grant as a composer. You don't even have to attend a university that has a carillon. You just have to collaborate with somebody who does perform on the instrument and can premiere your piece. But yeah, we applied for that. I just submitted some examples of my composition work. Rayyan sent in some demonstrations of his playing and we kind of put together a proposal for approximately what my piece would contain and what I would focus on and how we would collaborate to achieve it. And then once we got approved, it was kind of a month long process of just staying in touch and I showed him my drafts and he would provide feedback on what would be more or less idiomatic based on his experience. And then that culminated in a premiere in February of this past year at a carillon festival at our university.

[Aaron] Wait, there was a carillon festival at University of Florida?

[Michael] Yes. Yeah. I mean, it wasn't like a widespread thing. It was kind of a celebration of the university carillon tradition. So we had a couple of guest performers and alumni come to perform recitals and it was kind of just a really nice weekend event. Yeah. And I was grateful to be a part of that.

[Aaron] So let's talk about before we get into the piece itself, let's talk about one more little subtopic when it comes to the carillon. In our preliminary meeting that we had, you posed an interesting question. It's honestly a question that a composition professor would probably ask their students. It's one of those like biting questions, you know. The carillon, as you've said, a democratized instrument and the music is too, because there is not a single place where it's an authentic carillon and it's not out in the public, essentially. I mean, you could probably find an exception, but that's essentially the premise. And also I want to say, obviously people are going to have heard a good chunk of the piece already at the very beginning of this episode, but it's not just like angels we have heard on high. Like, you know, when going to and from on the buses, you know, you can hear full fugues being played on the carillon just on a Wednesday. You know, it's just so there's a lot of different things that can be done. And this is coming from someone who's so far removed from it. It's surprising, at least for me. I'm sure, you know, you being involved in the community and so on, it's not. But okay. I sidetracked myself, but the thing that you brought up in the preliminary is we were discussing like what piece to do and you brought up to feature in the episode and you brought up, oh, you know, it'd be really cool to feature a carillon piece. I'm not sure how great the recording may or may not be. There's going to be some background noise. It's not going to be purely just the carillon because, you know, to get an authentic sound, it needs to be performed and therefore recorded in out in the open. There might be some buses, there might be some people talking. And although the performance video that's on the website that will be linked, it's really clear. Like there's honestly not that much in the background. There still is a little bit, especially near the end when it gets quiet. You were asking in the preliminary, is that background really background? Because it is a public instrument. Is the ambiance of the public setting part of the performance zeitgeist of the carillon of the piece itself Almost like not quite, but it's like a sound walk how like any and all elements that are in the recording are what the purpose of the recording is. You know, you can't control the background noise necessarily. What are your thoughts on that? I know you like pose that as a hypothetical, but what's your thoughts about that?

[Michael] I mean, I think from a pragmatic standpoint, that noise is going to be there, regardless of whether we intend for it to be. So I think that the music is kind of inherently designed to be either an accompaniment to everyday activities as people walk down the street, or to be accompanied by those activities. It will never be just a standalone performance. So I would say, I mean, regardless of whether or not we consider the kind of ambient noise as an extra musical factor or part of the music, I don't know if that's kind of a cop out, but

[Aaron] I know. I mean, I mean, it's okay. It is an easy answer. But that's also it's just true. Like you like whether or not you like it or not, or you think that it like it's just that's what it is, you know, that it's so it's going to be there. But what what to you, if anything, does it add to a recording of a performance? Does it, is it just is it the background? Or is it part of the ambience for you?

[Michael] I definitely think it's part of the ambiance. It makes it feel more authentic in a way that I mean, this is not necessarily a negative aspect. But when we have these professionally recorded in studio recordings of classical music, it is just so spotless and perfected that we tend to forget the real life performance setting that these pieces are typically performed in. And I think with an outdoor instrument that just really gets amplified. So I always like to kind of lean into it and let that background noise kind of indelibly as I listen. It's not something that I try to tune out by any means. Even when I'm performing, I can hear sometimes like when I'm hundreds of feet up in the tower, I can still hear the buses driving by. Or if people are shouting or talking loudly enough, sometimes I can hear voices. That's just that's just part of it. It's music in a, I would say, kind of collaboration with the outside world. And I really like that. I think that's something that is hard to find elsewhere.

[Aaron] I agree. I agree.

[Michael] Does that answer your question.

[Aaron] Oh, yes, certainly. As you can probably tell, I'm a fan of collaboration. But no, that's I agree. It adds to the uniqueness of it. I mean, this is because I come from University of Florida, at least for two years, and the music building is right next to the carillon and the music building has like an open outdoor structure. So when you're just sitting outside of class and chilling, you hear the carillon all day. If you're just, you know, going through and in and out classes, it's a part of your day. It's part of the sound. And so, you know, I've been at Florida State for a year and listening to the piece and hearing a bus or two and hearing faint noise. Again, the recording is very professional. But I know it brought me back to like standing at the Charleston bus stop, you know, or like passing by. It was nice. I agree with what you're saying, essentially. So okay, been teasing it, been talking about here and there. Let's talk about the specific piece of today, which is Albireo. I keep saying Albireo. Albireo?

[Michael] Albireo.

[Aaron] Albireo. I keep getting the, I'm sorry, Michael. There's no, yes, Albireo. So we're talking about Albireo. Let's talk about that name. Can you give us some insight on that?

[Michael] Yes. So Albireo is a star system in the constellation Cygnus, which is the swan. I got the inspiration because my brother is an astronomer. So anytime I'm looking for ideas for a piece, I'll reach out to him and be like, hey, you know some cool space stuff and everybody likes space stuff. Yeah.

[Aaron] When I Googled it and it said that it was an interstellar body, I thought, oh, there's some influence from your brother, from John. Yeah.

[Michael] Yeah. I mean, maybe there's a debate on whether that's overused in classical music, but I feel like I kind of have a pass at having a brother who is an astronomer. Yeah, if that's the typical, it's better than Sonata No. 32. So I go with it. But anyways. Yeah. But yeah, so I was kind of toying with this idea of a swan in the stars. And this is in my program notes as well. So sorry if I inadvertently directly quote from that. But I was going for kind of a piece that was an equal measure comforting and creepy and just something that kind of felt like expansive in points, but also just very intimate and drawn in close to the listener. That's the mood that is kind of conjured in my mind when I look up at the constellations. So I really enjoy kind of extra musical inspirations. And that's something that I've really struggled with. I mean, because you've heard so many pieces of mine that are just, I mean, I have brass quintet, I have two movements for horn and piano. I have all these sorts of things that are just, there's no kind of inspiration. It's just the, this is a piece, this is raw music. Not that I see anything wrong with that. And I think I will continue to have pieces that are kind of in that vein. But I do really enjoy toying with extra musical ideas and figuring out how to convey them. And yes, something that I've kind of very newly learned, and I was actually at a summer festival with Mary Epstein, who's at the New England Conservatory. She was a guest speaker at that festival. And she gave a talk on writing music based on visual art. And something that really struck me is that, like I, all this time I had been trying to find these one-to-one correlations with the musical ideas and the ideas, whether it be in the makeup of art or the qualities of the stars or whatever. But she pointed out that it can really be as simple as really internalizing the way that the art makes you feel and then doing your best to create a piece that evokes that same emotion by whatever device is necessary. So I think I was kind of approaching things from such an academic, just kind of objective standpoint, like, oh, this needs to have a concrete way that it correlates to this idea. But it was very freeing to realize that this can be a purely emotional process in figuring out the material and what that material is inspired by. So yes, sorry, but I went up on a little tangent, but that was how I approached that.

[Aaron] No, the balance between programmatic and absolute music is something I've found interesting over the months doing these episodes because what you're describing is this intangible programmatic writing. And what I mean by intangible, if you're saying is your music closer to absolute or programmatic, you're setting up a binary with a spectrum between the two. There's this offshoot of programmatic where it is highly programmatic, but it's not like Symphonie Fantastique or like this movement means this thing or this gesture means this thing. It's like an overall vibe even to put it very generally. Maybe there's like some signifiers that mean a specific something or like this section has more of this weight or that weight where it's not at all more absolute, but it's not the strictest of programmatic. There's like an offshoot. And so I understand what you're saying. And as a, I've said this before on other episodes, as a casual, not as an academic, not as like a music professional, but just as a casual music enjoyer or a concert goer, I also prefer those sorts of things as an audience member. Even if it's not a specific story, like you're saying, like an overall feeling, maybe there's different parts to the feeling and different parts of the piece, but just the general impression of the piece. I always love it when there is intentionality behind, you know, cool chords are cool chords, but it's even cooler when there's a reason why they're cool.

[Michael] Yeah, I would say like, I think that this piece could be totally fine if it didn't have this title, if it were just like, I mean, I can't come up with a generic music title off the top of my head, but if it, if it weren't programmatic, I don't think it would necessarily be less effective in conveying my ideas, but it's just fun to tie it to an extra musical idea. And I think that's something we need to remind ourselves.

[Aaron]  I mean, I feel like it makes it easier to work on too, if you're like in a slump a little bit. Yeah.

[Michael] And I do love like serious and profound compositions and pieces with deeper artistic messages. But for me, I've never found that inspiring in my personal craft and whenever I've tried to convey like a deeper kind of existential message, I never really get anywhere with it. So I just like to have fun. And I think that's an element that we need to bring back, make classical music fun. I would consider myself not like an unserious composer, but a playful composer. And I hope that comes across in my music.

[Aaron] So you know, in generally in your music it does, but I actually saw this piece as kind of serious. I'm not going to lie, not to disagree with your, you know, this is part of the fun of this podcast because I started as a, as the theorist or someone who at least tries to specialize in analyzing music, not making it. I, it's, it's a combination of a handful of things. And so, well, let's, let's start with the beginning, you know, the beginning of the piece, which was already heard before, but we'll hear again right now. You know, this ostinato that you have in the pedal, it is like a... There's so many different semiotic things throughout the history of music. And I would count this as one. There's probably a proper name for it, but I'm not into semiotics or topic theory. But with the timbre of the carillon, what we're used to hearing it in popular culture, maybe anytime we come past it, it feels so ominous just to have a repeated ostinato. And then it feels even more jarring to have very purposely, you could have had it on the beat, and you didn't many times, fragments in the top staff that are set theory adjacent. I don't know if you did that, but it seems built on fourths a lot of the time. And so the only thing really binding you to the musical development for the first portion of the piece is the ostinato and the pedals. It changes chromatically here and there, but it feels almost heavy. The timbre of the bells is not, but the texture is heavy and it feels solemn, in my opinion. It felt very... I want to say dredging, but that makes it sound like it's a bad sound. It's not, but dredging is actually a terrible word for that. But it has a very weighty tone. It's not something I would expect to hear coming out of class on the carillon, at least. Maybe it is, maybe it's not. So I know you were talking in a general sense, not necessarily just this. You do have a general vibe or story you want to tell, but it's not deadly serious. But without having much background of the piece, just absorbing it as it is without looking at the score at first, it felt very serious and ominous. You said that you wanted it to sound ominous. You certainly achieved that, even just by the ostinato itself. But then the loose tonality for the first portion of it really made it feel like that. So what were you thinking of when you created the ostinato idiom and this pace forward that you have in there?

[Michael] Yeah, yeah. Some really good points, thank you. I liked the term you use of loose tonality because that's how I would describe my tonal language. Maybe not all the time, but when I'm not in this loose, chordolinguental tonal world, I'm in a world of constantly shifting tonality. Just thoroughly tonal music, except the key or the mode changes every few seconds. So that's a world that I really like to live in. And in this instance in particular, I was kind of shifting fourths and fifths. I was basically taking different segments of the circle of fifths that all contain that central E flat, whether it be directly in the middle or on one of the ends of that subgroup. But yeah, I was looking for ways to just gradually expand that harmony. I mean, starting out with just a couple of perfect fifths that just sounded very simple and open. And then I gradually working my way up until I had what I would consider an augmented octave or a sharp 15 or whatever you would call it. So yeah, I wouldn't say I was necessarily thinking of it in terms of set theory, but more as just purely intervalic chordal and quintal harmony.

[Aaron] Yeah. And it's funny you bring up, well, it is chordal and quintal harmony, that the construction of it is less post tonal and more pre tonal even, which is, you know, that's the effect that chordal and quintal harmony has because so much pre tonal harmony is built off of the resonance of those, less so. So that's interesting. And of course, as you said, one of the beauties and the fun of chordal and quintal harmony is you have so much perfect consonants that once you wrap around, it can very quickly become harshly dissonant naturally, which is very fun.

[Michael] Yeah, I love one of my favorite things to do when I write music is to make kind of, I mean, intensely discordant or like even uncomfortable sounds fit naturally. If I can find a way to do it, I will and I love juxtaposing different elements and kind of I'd say something that's common to a lot of pieces in my practice is that I will compose to completely distinct musical ideas and then try to find the bridge between them and in that form the basis of my material. In terms of the pedal, that kind of, that was kind of out of necessity as it is not possible to sustain notes on the carillon. I think if I, my original intention was just to have a kind of like constant E flat kind of humming under that, but obviously that's not possible on this instrument. But I kind of, I leaned into it and yeah, as you mentioned, I, many of these bursts, I did not place on the beat because I kind of, I wanted to obscure the idea of the pulse, just kind of the pedal was just there because it had to be. But then I don't really know how to describe, I felt like you described the effect of the creative better than I did. It was just kind of like this ominous, solemn sound, almost like a sense of dread. Maybe I wouldn't go that far.

[Aaron] I would go that, you don't have to. Yeah, I'll go that far.

[Michael] Yeah. Okay. But yeah, I mean that rhythmic intensity, which is kind of a pleasant byproduct and I just decided to lean into it and stay with it.

[Aaron] And so, you know, it's, I'm sure when you got my questions and you were looking at them, you just said previously that you enjoy juxtaposition in your music and I'm sure you enjoyed what I wrote about the juxtaposition that you have. So let me go through a couple of, just two of those. One of them is at measure 11, where you come out with this absolute flurry of notes. Was that a non-tuplet? How do you pronounce that? When it's nine?

[Michael] I don't know.

[Aaron] Okay, whatever. Just a bunch of notes, yeah. Yeah, a whole bunch of notes. You even write in the score that it doesn't necessarily need to be in time, but it needs to be metrical, you know, or so on what you wrote. And that's a very different idiom or idea than has been at the piece so far. And that's only measure 11 after an establishment of that dreading tone. And then at measure 30, jumping forward, it's like a traditional three-part harmony counterpoint with like pretty normal melodic contour and development in the top voice.

[Aaron] And see, when I was first listening to it, when very first without the score, it did not jump out to me that those sections were so different. Those really fast notes did, just because, you know, that typically happens in a piece when you first hear the fastest denominations, that usually jumps out. But especially with that measure 30 idea, it did not jump out to me that it was so different than where we started in the piece. But then when I was going back, when I listened to it again with the score, and when I was just looking at the score, it was like, it was, it almost looked like you had accidentally put two different kinds of pieces together. And because then, you know, you had kind of left behind the quarter in quintal harmony, you had thirds, it wasn't necessarily one, four, five, but you had, you know, a little bit more traditional harmonic structure. And we talked, I talked about the melodic, but you, I couldn't quite put into words how you were able to smooth those ideas altogether in a relative to the piece short amount of time. I guess with the really fast note denominations, you ramped it up by adding, there were a lot of different triplets of different types. I don't quite get the measure 30 one why it works so well. But can you, can you talk about either, you know, the difficulty of or the practice of adding juxtaposition without harming the integrity of the music?

[Michael] Yeah, yeah. Well, first of all, thank you, because that's exactly what I was going for. I wanted to make it sound seamless despite being just so completely new. So yeah, I really appreciate that that came across. I, this is, yeah, this is a really difficult question because I'm not entirely sure myself.

[Aaron] Well I guess your intuition just worked. It worked with it.

[Michael] Yeah. I, I, people often describe me as like an intuitive composer, which I, I appreciate, but it also frustrates me because I wish I understood myself better. I, that makes sense. I wish I, I think I would be more effective and also be more comfortable exploring. If I understood my own process better.

[Aaron] To be fair, wouldn't we all, wouldn't we all at this age, you know?

[Michael] Yeah, yeah. I, yeah, I, I think a lot of the time I stick within my comfort zone just because it just feels so effortless and I can just turn it out. But I, I'm at that point three years into my career where I, I kind of am not as satisfied with that anymore. But yeah. I mean, I, I think I was able to do it because from the beginning this has been a core part of my process. I think almost all of my pieces start with writing just like a very short section, whether it just be like a few notes or a few measures of just something that is stuck in my head that I think would be brilliant as either like a tender moment or a climactic point. And then everything else is figuring out how to connect and synthesize those distinct sections into like a series of bridges that connect them. And I, yeah, I've gotten very comfortable doing that. I would say, I mean, I think that's very common to a lot of the, I guess like more traditional composition practices of just like figuring out how many different ways can I play with a small idea and combine it with another small idea. So I think most of what I do is kind of like figuring out these different permutations of a melody. I think I would consider most of my work kind of like in some capacity, like a theme and variations kind of splice stuff. And I don't know. Does that make sense?

[Aaron] Yeah, no, no, no, no. It makes sense. I'm sure if I, you know, I hope you don't find this offense, but I did not go through with a fine tooth comb. I'm pretty darn sure because the piece is so cohesive, I can find concrete ideas from the beginning found within like that measure 30 section that keep referencing at least in textural development for sure. So no, I understand. Yeah. I think that's in my experience in dabbling in composition, which you saw a bit of, I think a lot of people, younger composers, people trying out different things can get trapped in trying out different things, not developing different things, you know, big difference there. And so very, you're very successful in that fact. So let's move to later in the piece. I know we talked about programmatic absolute differences in that and how you see when you're writing. As you write in the score, it dies away at the end. Or it comes to a rest, a gradual rest in terms of narrative. What are you thinking about here with this softer ending? I mean, part of it is a more, you know, like that's you've started low, you go up high and then you start low at the end of the piece, you know, like that's pretty normal song or piece structure. But what were you thinking about it in terms of narrative?

[Michael] I would say in terms of form, my music tends to be very simple and intuitive. And that is kind of been one of my insecurities early on. That I think as I continue to learn, I'll become more comfortable experimenting with different types of form. But I it was just kind of a very basic arc of starting and ending from this very small kernel. And I think that that's particularly effective on the carillon because of the ambient noise behind it. It just kind of starts to emerge and then kind of shrink into the background noise. And yeah, like as I had mentioned, it's really I find it really captivating in other carillon pieces. I hear that do that when like you almost can't tell if the pieces started or ended. So yeah, that was kind of the motivation. I wanted the texture to kind of be almost symmetrical or like the form and texture to be like generally symmetrical and kind of ending as it started. But with a new kind of understanding and that there was a very different harmonic language at the end. It was kind of like two chords mashed together instead of this like very broad pre tonal quartal quintal thing at the beginning. So yeah, I think just on a very basic level, I'm thinking about I'm balancing new material with comfort and repetition, which of course is not novel. That's what we all do as composers. But I think it was as simple as that for me, just figuring out what I can change and what can kind of return back to its original.

[Aaron] Yeah, I mean, good answers and good reasons don't always need to be complicated ones. So that makes sense. So before we move on to the final section of this podcast, is there anything else specifically that you want to talk about with Albireo?

[Michael] Sure. Yeah, I think that there is actually one other thing I want to mention, or maybe even two. I don't know. One thing about Albireo and then one thing about the carillon in general that I forgot to discuss earlier. So with this piece, I was excited to work with Rayon because he had done some studying in Europe. And I guess most people probably don't know this carillon culture originated in Belgium and the Netherlands, like just this the Flemish carillon world.

[Aaron] I didn't really have an expectation, but I guess I wouldn't never have guessed that.

[Michael] Yeah. So a lot of Americans will actually go over to the, there's like a preeminent carillon school in Belgium. And yeah, that's a place where a lot of American carillonneurs kind of like take a pilgrimage to and will study for a year and get their certificate and then return.

[Aaron] Are you going to do that?

[Michael] So the only thing that's keeping me from doing that is like, I don't know if I can live away from home for a year. I think eventually I could be comfortable doing it and I would love to because I visited Belgium before and it's just a fantastic country and I love everything about it, but it's a little intimidating.

[Aaron] The Jedi temple awaits you, Michael. Anyways, sorry to throw you off track. Continue.

[Michael] So one thing that's very unique to the kind of European carillon school is tremolo as a way to sustain melodic lines. For whatever reason, that's not something that happens as much in American carillon music. And part of it is that some of the dominant voices in American carillon music just didn't like the sound of the tremolo. It was just kind of an internal bias and as these people were also composing for the instrument and forming staples of literature, they just didn't write as much of it. So I kind of I wanted to explore and kind of reconcile that difference between these two schools by working with Rayan who absolutely loves playing pieces with tremolo and like heavily studied this technique in Europe and like every single recital he played in Century Tower there was like at least one or two pieces that just kind of like a raucous tremolo line and I really enjoyed it.

[Aaron] It has a very ascended sound. It's very powerful sounding, which I'll play a clip of the piece. It looks hard. It looks so hard.

[Michael] Yeah, so it is it's a very difficult technique. And like, I mean, very versatile, too. I'm like, as I mentioned, it can be completely like rockets and in your face, or it could be very like intimate and gentle. But it is Yeah, I mean, I'm still learning myself, because I'd love to eventually be able to perform my own piece. But it's not it's not easy. They I mean, as with any other instrument doing a tremolo, you have to ensure that it's even and not too like rushed. But that's especially difficult on the carillon when each baton has a different weight to it. So yeah, there's I mean, techniques that I don't necessarily need to get into because I don't know how applicable or interesting they are. But generally, like, like I have to stay very low, kind of like in the lower part of the batons range and just keep it very close and very measured. So it's a joy to write for maybe not quite as much to play. But I have actually been having I've been having a lot of fun learning how to play tremolo. And I, I am kind of annoyed that that isn't as prevalent in American music. So yeah, I was very, very grateful to use this piece as a learning experience, because that's what it was supposed to be supposed to be a collaboration between a student composer and a student performer to mutually learn from each other. And I think we definitely achieved that. But that that's why there are a couple of sections of the piece that that have a just kind of like broad sweeping tremolo melody with with pedal accompaniment. So yeah, that's one thing I wanted to discuss. And the other thing about the carillon in general, as a performer, I always love to talk about this, because like, as we mentioned, everybody in the area is listening. And you would think that that would be really nerve wracking as a performer. But it's kind of a paradoxical thing, because I can't see anybody. I when I'm up there, I just kind of I feel isolated. And that's kind of comforting, because it's just much easier to tune out the audience, because I have no idea how large the audience is, then it doesn't make any difference to me. But I've never been in a situation quite like that, where there's kind of a terrifying reach that my my performance, but also, nobody is listening to it. I mean, generally, people are not listening to it nearly as closely as you would be listening in a in a concert, because most people are going about their day. I mean, there are exceptions, of course, we have carillon recitals, sometimes where we set up chairs outside the tower, and people come specifically to listen. But in general, it's a much larger and also much less attentive audience than in a typical concert setting.

[Aaron] That is except when they play some pop songs every once in a while. Like, I remember like playing Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah a little bit. Anyway, aside, I remember walking out of the library one day, they're playing Hallelujah and a big group of people outside the library were like singing it together while the carillon was playing. But that's more of an exception.

[Michael] Yeah, I would say I mean, I think one of my biggest shortcomings as a performer is that I haven't learned more popular tunes, because that's what people really enjoy. And I mean, I like as much as I would love to say people are dying to hear my music and these staples of literature, most people just really don't care. And I have to be honest with myself, we all have to be honest with ourselves about that. The things that really reach out to the crowd are like movie scores and just popular tunes that they recognize. So I think in my coming year, which this will be my third year studying the instrument, I'm going to really focus on arrangements. And yeah, I would encourage other people. I mean, I think there's always merit to learning arrangements and performing and writing arrangements. And it's a way, as we talked about with a democratic instrument, making sure that like people are like broad audiences of all sorts are interested and engaged with this instrument. So I think if we don't have this connection, it can become very elitist very quick. I mean, it's quite literally an ivory tower. So I am very interested in making arrangements and even like creative arrangements, like there can be like jazz improvisations. It doesn't just have to be like strictly orchestrating something as safely as you can and like translating it to the carillon. But yeah, I think there's real merit to arrangements with broader popular appeal. So 

[Aaron] I'm sure. And when you get to writing or performing some free modal jazz on the carillon, just, you know, let me know. We can go have a picnic outside of it in the Century Tower. So thank you for the insight with that. Of course, you know, there are I actually I mean, there's other carillon players out there, but like, just like statistically, you might be the only person I have on this show for a long time who has any familiarity with it. So this is really special. 

[Michael] Yeah, I mean, it's a very small community. I will say I went to the conference of the GCNA this past year, and there were exactly 100 people there. And that was like in the entirety of North America. So it's very, very small community.

[Aaron] Well, if it makes you feel better, there were less than 100 at Music Theory Southeast, and that was in combination with South Central. But, you know, typically in smaller communities like that, there's a little bit more passion per individual than maybe a larger community. But anyway, anyhow, and we're going to get to topics of elitism or possible elitism. But before that, I always like to give a guest an opportunity to just speak about broadly. You can answer this however you want. What does music mean to you as a professional person? It's a place in your life?

[Michael] Oh, man. 

[Aaron] Yeah, easy question, right? Yeah, I mean, multiple choice, really, just ABC or all of the above. 

[Michael] Yeah, it's funny because like as I've gotten so enveloped in music as my career and my field of study, I feel like I've kind of lost sight of what music is. And I feel kind of lost sight of this question more so than people who just enjoy listening to music, which is the vast majority of the population. I could give the generic definition that music is organized sound. I don't think you're necessarily looking for a definition of what music is. Yeah, yeah. I mean, for me, I wouldn't necessarily call it an escape. I know that that's a popular term that a lot of music lovers like to use as somebody who is doing this as a career. I'm not really escaping from anything. It has to be something that I'm really passionate about to study it and go into it as a workforce. And I think that I feel like a lot of people in artistic fields would probably share the same sentiment. If you don't truly have a passion for it, creative burnout can set in very quickly. And I've certainly felt that with some, I mean, even some pieces that I write when I'm trying to imitate other people. So I think for me, music is an expression of authenticity and an opportunity for me to engage with other people who are also being their authentic selves. I mean, I would say that's been reinforced by talking with other composers. I've had in my first couple of years, I've had this mindset that I need to be pushing the envelope more or being a little bit more experimental. But then, I mean, this past summer I went to a festival with probably some of the most avant-garde musical composers and thinkers I've ever met. And they all told me that if it doesn't bring me joy, I shouldn't try to do it. So I think music is a deeply individual thing. As a listener, it's a glimpse into other people's lives and processes. And as a composer, it's kind of an opportunity to let loose and just make something that I feel deeply satisfied with and that I feel is an extension of my own existence. 

[Aaron] There's a lot of good things in there. I'm going to add my own perspective on that and then I want to loop back to something that you said there. So being your authentic self is, that's like, just saying it plainly like I just did right there. Almost sounds trite. It sounds like elementary. Like, oh, really? I thought I could be fake. That one's like, I thought I could just pretend to be someone. Well, some people do think that. But be yourself is a very common advice, but man, it is so important. And in my perspective as a music theorist, so I've said this other times on the show before, but if I were to say I specialize in anything in music theory, it would be pop music with a big capital P. I've been just like millions of other people, tens of millions of other people right now have been very seriously looking at Chappell Roan's music. I'd love to do some work on, oh man, they're awesome. I love Chappell Rhoan. Lady Gaga is one of my favorite artists. Simon and Garfunkel has a special place in my heart. So does John Denver. And you know, you make fun of me as you will. I just love Pitbull. Pitbull's awesome. He's a cool guy. That's to illustrate, you know, capital P pop music. It's what a lot of people would think of is the sort of music that I like to study and I like to listen to. That's who I am. I love that kind of music. I grew up on Barry Manilow, The Eagles, Gloria Estefan. I did not grow up with classical music around me, even as a classical violinist. I just love that music. And in my development at University of Florida, and then a bit at Florida State, for a while I really did not understand that there was a genuine avenue of pop music analysis. And there was a good period of time at university, no one pressured me. It was just like the general vibe. It's not like there was a teacher, an evil teacher or something, but just like the general atmosphere was I would sit down at my computer and all day, you know, at different points throughout the day, I would just be playing on my computer and listening to as much of the classical canon as possible. And even things that are outside of what's considered the canon, maybe something from the 80s, the 90s, maybe a little bit more recent. But point is, it was all small C classical music. I found some great composers doing that. That's actually a lot of fun, especially more recent composers, just to play a Wikipedia game. Like find a really famous composer, see who they taught, and then see who that person taught, and then see who that person taught. Like go down a rabbit hole, you can find some really cool music you would literally never hear of. But point being, I was like trying to force myself into being like super knowledgeable and into like symphonies, into string quartets. Love a good string quartet. Can't, I mean, Death and the Maiden, you know, Schubert, you can't fight that. That's awesome. But point being is I was like, because of the general atmosphere of that sort of stuff, I felt like I needed to be a lot more into it than I really was. No one was talking about pop music really that seriously. If they were, it was like a joke or a punchline. And I kind of broke out of that when I did my research with Dr. Paul Richards. Love, love that guy so much about modal music in and its applications or its theoretical applications in modern popular music. That was so much fun. I mean, there were days where, you know, I'm sitting down trying to transcribe Watch Me by Silento, you know, the Whip Nay Nay song, where I'm thinking, what am I doing with my life? But, you know, we all have moments like that. But, you know, that was really cool. And, you know, it was, not to sound so melodramatic, oh, I had to listen to such beautiful music, but it, you know, for quite a while and even a bit at Florida State with the way things are talked about, have to be careful with how I say that, there's like a conformity that no one necessarily tells you, you should do this, you should do that. But there's a general sense. Even at Florida State, you know, there is a pop music class. And I took it and there's a professor that specializes in popular music. She's great. Professor Clendinning took the pop music class. It was great. It was a lot of fun. But pop music is still treated as like its own little, oh, what a cool little thing you do over there. Anyways, let's look at serious music now, or something like that, which I think it's funny that you called yourself a not serious composer. I think that kind of stuff is bullshit. I know what you were trying to say by that. It's like the perceptions that people have. But that sort of stuff needs to go. If we want to survive and live and have more than just people writing music for people who write music, if we want to get out of that, we need to get out of that attitude. And so that's my personal perspective on that. And so I want to loop around back to something you said about how I know I should be pushing the envelope more. I know that's like a thing in composition, as you said, avant-garde, and you went to a festival. I really appreciate the education that I got, especially having to do with composition at University of Florida. But I always wondered why about the pushing the envelope, because it's there? Well, if it's not genuine and you're just doing it to push the envelope, then I don't know, I feel like you lose something with it. So it's like, what's your perspective on that about this incessant... There's a similar issue in music theory, although the context is a bit different. This incessant urge for it to be brand new, first of its kind, inventive, in your face, or maybe completely out of your face. I don't know. There's a de-emphasization of personal expression and an emphasization of getting at the end chapters of a history book. 

[Michael] Yeah, yeah. I think that's a great point. I think there's a lot of different reasons that people may feel this route. Some, I think, are much more valid than others. I have nothing but respect for people who are just genuinely pursuing their inner voice and making the music that they want to hear. And it just so happens to be nothing that anyone's ever heard before. And I think that many of the most successful composers alive today are in that camp. And I think those are people that when I show them my music, they tell me that I don't need to change if I don't want to. 

[Aaron] Good for them. Good for you too.

[Michael] Yeah. But yeah, I mean, I think people see all these figures throughout history who were kind of famous and earned their place in the history books because they were radical or avant-garde. And they think that that is the way to achieve success. But I think that even those people weren't necessarily trying to be crazy experimental. I mean, my favorite example is Xenakis, who arguably, he was kind of the first of his camp, just creating these kind of, I mean, people describe the sound as just alien and just completely cutting edge. He was just using his mathematical and architectural training and applying it to music and creating these stochastic processes. And in stark contrast to the serialist camp at the time, it was genuinely something that had never been heard before. Yeah. I think there needs to be a stronger focus on the pursuit of authenticity than innovation. And as a caveat to that, I will say that I don't think it's possible, or I don't think it's fruitful, I should say, to completely shun experimentation. And I don't think that's what you're saying either. But I think that it's kind of necessary to explore the music that's come before us and also that is currently happening and synthesize all of these ideas and kind of reconcile them with my preconceived notions of what my music is. I think that none of us exists in an island and we're all influenced in some degree every single day by the stimuli around us from other people. So I think that authenticity should be an exploration of unfamiliar music. And I do think it's important to pursue these experiments. And one, I'm working on a string quartet right now that is just completely unlike anything I've ever done before. And it's a very process oriented and I wrote kind of like source material and then I'm chopping it up into extremely small pieces and kind of algorithmically inserting it into the final product. And I really enjoy doing things like that. I think my goal is to kind of pinpoint the two or three elements of that experiment that I just genuinely enjoy as a standalone musical element and then bring that back into my overall style. So yeah, I've kind of covered a lot of bases here and I don't know how much of that was just rambling but I think in general I would say like I see the value in experimentation and I think most of the avant-garde composers have gone down that route of experimentation and just discovered their love for certain elements of it and pursued it further. And I think that the composers who maybe aren't as successful are those who feel like they need to pursue that route if they are just genuinely not interested in it. 

[Aaron] Well, who is the designator of success? I mean, you know, that gets into structures of power, market thinking, the incentivization of market things, capitalism essentially, which that's that let's put that off to the side for now because that's an easy rabbit hole to fall down really fast. But you know, I don't disagree with you. I will the like fetishization of innovation almost in music and I never liked the idea. We talked about this during the preliminary and an Aaron D'zurilla drinking game, I suppose at Florida State is how many times do I bring up Milton Babbitt? But the idea of like innovation and and like progress in music, I that always saw on the face of it, that doesn't sound bad. And that sounds normal. It's like progress in the sciences or progress in mathematics. We all want to hopefully, hopefully want to be moving forward in our lives and moving forward in history. But in the history of music, progress in music, innovation in music, has usually had undertones of among many other things, elitism, sexism, racism, lots of different things. And especially in the case of my boy, Milton Babbitt, one of the most famous music theorists in history. Hope I don't get canceled from that. But because I'm going to leave that in. But it's really what I feel. I am only 23. So don't crucify me if anyone hears that. But so, you know, it's good to push boundary in understanding, in my opinion, and understanding what other tools are available. But just like with the sort of theorists and theorist-composers of the 50s and 60s and so on, of writing it for the sake of writing it and literally no other reason. You know, if it's like, how do I say? I don't know. I'm starting to ramble too. That's what I do. To recenter where I was going with that, just the overemphasis on historicizing what you do can sometimes be very dangerous. Of course, it's good to know what came before, you know, as you've talked about. We're trying to be educated. We need to learn about history, the good, the bad, the interesting. Well, maybe not the boring all the time. But, you know, like, we only have so much time in college. But it's important for our development to understand the tent poles of history. Hopefully, it's not all European white men, but that is typically what it is. And so I just get an icky feeling sometimes when I hear about progress and all that, because that means there is a destination or a goal or an ideal. And then you question who's making that ideal? Who's making that goal? And it's usually people in places of power. Who are those people in places of power? What are their backgrounds? I think we can all probably assume what the majority of it is. So some people would criticize that point of view. And I've gotten the criticism before that I'm taking a very simple idea of just trying new things and expounding it into like, a centuries long power struggle. But I don't know, that's just where my academic brain goes. You can comment on that or not. That's a, that can be touchy.

[Michael] Sure. No, I mean, I think, yeah, I mean, I certainly agree with a lot of what you're saying. I think that it's important to ask ourselves why we do the things we do as composers. And yeah, I agree that like, I've had these thoughts as well. Am I experimenting because I have been told by those at the top of my field that that is the ideal to strive for. But I think that was
certainly the prevailing attitude maybe 50 years ago, when composers at the university level were being told that like they had to write serialist music. Yeah. But yeah, I mean, my horn professor, Dr. Basler, who's incredible, and also is a composer who studied composition in graduate school. I believe he has, he got kicked out of multiple studios, because they did not like his compositional style, which I don't think that's something we would ever see.

[Aaron] That would be in like newspaper headlines. Those schools would get like, protested.

[Michael] So I'm very grateful to be a student at the time that I am, because I feel like there's genuinely a space for me in a way there may not have been a few decades ago. And I do think, I mean, just from personal experience and interaction with a lot of these composers, they understand that critique. And their motivation is not to kind of like appease or appeal to the ivory tower elites, but rather to genuinely explore a side of themselves that they are personally interested and invested in. So, but I mean, regardless, I think that there are a lot of unconscious or involuntary inclinations toward experimentation, because that attitude still kind of lingers. And I mean, in the kind of giants that we studied in our fields, they were all avant-garde. And so that's kind of the model that we adapt. But now more than ever, I mean, people have always felt that we've kind of reached the end of what you can do with music. And I don't think that will ever truly be the case. But I think we're kind of reaching a point of revival where the interests, like there's only so much more interest that can be generated by experimentation. And I think some people are reacting by kind of returning to tradition or whatever. Some people are reacting by just not pushing the envelope further. But there's, I think there's this fragmentation of styles among composers that is motivated by the end goal of authenticity, which is a, what I would say, like a more recent development and a very welcome one. 

[Aaron] Yes, I would agree with welcome. Speaking of ivory towers, lonely islands, and possible elitism, you know, what a very subtle way to ask the question of music theory. Not to like completely trash on my own field. I do love it. That's why I'm doing what I'm doing. But what, you know, when I ask a question about music theory, what it means to you, I'm sure I would hope. And from what I can tell from everything you said, it's a useful tool for what you do. But what do you think about the field of music theory?

[Michael] This is something that personally, I mean, I definitely do not have as much experience with as you. I have, I mean, I'm still in my upper level undergraduate theory courses where I'm not necessarily exploring the music of today. Although on the topic of Dr. Richards, he made an effort last semester to incorporate contemporary music into counterpoint. We had like research projects and presentations involved with that. So I am grateful, but I think I'm still at the point in music theory where I'm studying just the very established traditions. So take what I say with a grain of salt. I, of course, this is another easy answer and something that I think almost every theorist will agree with, but music theory is descriptive and kind of comes as a reaction to music that already exists rather than a set of rules for writing new music. Would you say you agree with that? I don't know. It seems to me that throughout history.

[Aaron] Well, real quick to respond to that dichotomy, I don't necessarily disagree, but I don't think the framing is the best because I don't think many people would be okay with a bunch of academics writing rules for new music. Anyways, go on, go on.

[Michael] Yeah. I mean, I think as in the modern era, there's been just kind of an explosion in a divergence of style from one composer to another. Music theory has kind of become an individual thing, like kind of a set of case studies. I think every composer has their own set of rules that they consciously and or unconsciously abide by. And music theorists, I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that music theorists studying contemporary music are kind of seeking to explore these like individual frameworks that composers use to drive their exploration as well as the kind of overarching trends from composer to composer. But as we've kind of grown and diverged, or maybe grown is not necessarily the right word, as we've changed and diverged, there is no one like common practice period. There's no one set of rules. I think that's something that a lot of popular musicians are like, will leverage with is the idea that academic musicians believe that music theory is like the be all end all. 

[Aaron] But I think there's a movement away from that a little bit. 

[Michael] Yeah, I don't think I generally I don't think anybody on our end is actually claiming that. 

[Aaron] That's not well, I'll say some do. 

[Michael] Okay. Nobody that I've interacted with, but maybe I haven't interacted with enough people.

[Aaron] It's probably better not to interact with that kind of. Well, okay, not to cut you off, but let me let me react to some of that. So, you know, you point out something you're very right about the study of contemporary art music, contemporary classical, however you want to label it, is that it's almost impossible to generally say like, if I were to list what some of my research interests right now are, it's pop music and contemporary classical. But that second one means almost nothing. If I study your piece, or someone from four or five episodes ago, the two very different methods, probably styles of composition, I'm not even thinking of a particular person, is that contemporary classical, contemporary music is so varied in so many different elements that you can't just say, oh, I study this. And that can be kind of difficult as a personal marketing, personal brand, or like overall expertise. But for artistic reasons, it's a beautiful thing. You know, it also, in my opinion, makes analysis a lot more fun. It just by because it's like each thing is its own little treat, its own little puzzle or box to explore. And in for some pieces, you kind of have to create your own diagrams, your own ways of analyzing it, which there's a lot of fun and creativity that comes out of that. To answer or to go to something else that you said, with popular, the dichotomy of commercial or popular music versus, you know, the perception of music theory out there versus the perception of music theory, quote unquote, in here, there's an overdue hate of, or not overdue, there's an overdone hate of music theory outside of institutions, in my opinion. It's hated on way too much. It's like a meme basically, but some of that is earned. Actually, I'm going to say a good deal of it is earned over time. So the elitism, the boxing out, some people take it way too far. I think contextualize, we need, people need to stop contextualizing music theory as a strictly academic thing. I said, Chappell Roan before. I don't know her background super well or her artistic process. I know there's videos of her in the studio or whatever. She uses music theory. Usher does. To Snoop Dogg, Dr. Dre, Kendrick Llamar. I just went down a rap line right there, but you know, all musicians do. You may not be thinking about it in the way that a music theory one preparatory class does at a university, but all musicians do use it in very different ways, depending on how you're talking about it, depending on the culture, the background, the genre, the style. So that's my perspective on that, is breaking down what it means to use music theory, because almost any time that I talk to a commercial or contemporary music artist, they almost always say, I don't really think about music theory. Well, then they were talking about how they write their music. Oh, no, they are. They're not, you know, making four part voice leading. Good for them. But they are using it. So that's, that's my perspective on that.

[Michael] Yeah, there seems to be a misconception of what music theory is. I think that that's what this all boils down to. If you can explain why you designed your music the way you did, that is music theory. So yeah, there you go. It's as simple as that.

[Aaron] Yeah, I think that's a good capstone to that. Well, Michael, we've gone a bit over our time. I apologize for that. I appreciate you being here. So we're going to wrap up. First off, what's next for you? You're going into your final year or your fourth year at University of Florida. You're working on the carillon, continuing that. Maybe you're going to make your pilgrimage to the home of the carillon in Eastern Europe, who knows. But what's next for you?

[Michael] That is the question, isn't it? So I'm not entirely sure. I know I want to continue in graduate study. I don't know if that's the immediate next step for me or if I want to first explore the carillon a bit more. There's a couple of opportunities both in the United States and abroad that I could potentially look at. But regardless, I will need to start applying to various opportunities. I mean, so right now I'm working on a string quartet. I am working on a piece for the Black Box Ensemble, which I'm super excited to work with.

[Aaron] You are like the fourth or fifth composer to bring, not just from UF. The Black Box Ensemble is making some moves. 

[Michael] Yeah, yeah. They're very, very active. And they're just great people too. I love them. But yeah, so I'm starting to journey into the world of writing for professional ensembles, which is really thrilling. And yeah, around this time is when I need to, if I'm going to start applying to graduate schools, I need to start making lists and consolidating my portfolio all that jazz. So yeah, I'm just continuing to write, continuing to explore, continuing to get quality recordings of my pieces. And whether or not I jump immediately into graduate study, it's something that I think is in my near future.

[Aaron] So fair enough, fair enough. And what would be the best way for the audience to contact you with any questions, inquiries, anything of that sort? 

[Michael] Yeah. So at the time of this airing, I was at the time of this airing, I currently don't have a personal website, but that's something that I am working on. I would say in the meantime, my university email is great because I get notifications for that and check it every day. And that would be michael.dixon@ufl.edu. And then as soon as I have a personal website and a business email, I guess we can get that updated.

[Aaron] I'll update the episode in your personal profile on the website.

[Michael] Sure. Yeah. Yeah. So yeah, in the meantime, university email is great. I would love to talk about any questions you have about carillon or otherwise. If you're interested in writing for the instrument and you want me to take a look at it and read it or even like just rehearse it and report it for you, like reach out. I'd love to talk about it. 

[Aaron] So I just want to say to everyone, I mean, composers who are listening would know this, but that offer right there, that's how you build an amazing portfolio. You literally have a carillon composer and writer offering to take that opportunity. That's, you know, that sort of anyway. So Michael, this has been great. And I'm going to give you the last word. If you were to say something to the audience about music, life, composition, music theory, academia, anything that we've talked about today or something else you want to add, what would that be?

[Michael] Ultimately, it's not that serious. 

[Aaron] All right. 

[Michael] Yeah. I think that's all I have to say. Everything is, I mean, we, I love academic study and just exploring existential themes, but at the end of the day, we've only got so long on this earth. And if you're not enjoying what you're doing, I know this is just like the most trite thing ever, but like they don't lose sight of why you're doing what you're doing and make sure that is truly bringing you joy and that you're having fun exploring it. 

[Aaron] Like I said before, sometimes the best answers are not always the most complicated ones, but all right. Thank you all for listening to this episode of the theorist composer collaboration with Michael Dixon and his piece, Albireo. It has been a phenomenal conversation. We went down a whole bunch of beautiful rabbit holes and I had a great time talking to you, Michael. Thank you for coming on to the theorist composer collaboration. 

[Michael] Yeah. Thank you, Aaron. Thank you so much. This is a fantastic conversation.

[Aaron] Hello, this is Aaron again, and I want to thank you for listening to this episode of the Theorist Composer Collaboration. I also want to give another big thank you to Michael Dixon for coming onto the podcast and for sharing their piece Albireo. Michael's contact info is listed in the description of this episode and I would appreciate it if he could show them some support. My conversation with Michael was quite large spanning and it was great to reconnect with him. As I said earlier on in the podcast, you know, I had most of my undergraduate composition classes alongside Michael, so I got to see him develop quite a lot and we learned quite many of the same things. Now, of course, he went further than I did, clearly, into composition, but it's great to reconnect with him and see the work that he's doing. I also made mention of the episode, I just wanted to reiterate, you know, just statistically, it's very unlikely that, you know, even if there's another hundred episodes of the Theorist Composer Collaboration, crossing my fingers, you know, statistically, it's quite rare that I would have another carillon player onto the podcast. Before talking with Michael, quite frankly, I didn't really know very much about it at all, so I'm very glad to have such a unique practitioner of such a unique instrument and subsection of performance and composition, of course, onto the show and I'm very grateful for that and I want to give, again, a very, very special thank you to the composer, Michael Dixon, for coming onto the podcast and for sharing their piece Albireo. For further updates and notifications on the Theorist Composer Collaboration, make sure to follow our Instagram and Facebook pages. You can listen to future episodes through our host websites, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, iHeartRadio, and YouTube, so make sure you subscribe to the platform of your choosing. If you want to monetarily support the work of the TCC, you can click the link to our Buy Me a Coffee page. All donations are highly appreciated. All the relevant links to follow, listen to, and support the show are in the description of this episode. TCC episodes are posted weekly on Mondays and don't miss our weekly blog posts, which go live a few days after a new episode is added. I'm also very excited to promote that our next featured guest is a very special one. It is Professor Douglas Boyce and his piece, Ars Poetica. There will be more information on this in the upcoming blog post and, of course, in the next full episode. Make sure to follow our social media accounts and relevant streaming platforms because you won't want to miss it. But, until then, this is Aaron, and thank you for joining the TCC.