3. Reed Quintet I - Will Davenport

[Aaron] Hello and welcome to the Theorist-Composer Collaboration, a podcast interview series highlighting modern composers and their compositions, hosted by music theorists. My name is Aaron D'Zurilla and I am a graduate music theory student at Florida State University and I will be your host for today. The music that you were just listening to is an excerpt from Reed Quintet I by the composer Will Davenport, who is the featured guest on this week's episode alongside his music. That leads me to welcome Will Davenport himself to the program. How are you?

[Will] I'm doing pretty good. How are you doing?

[Aaron] I'm doing great. I'm happy for you to be here. To get started, why don't you introduce yourself to the listeners, your background, personally, professionally, academically, whatever you choose.

[Will] Yeah, so let's see, I started music pretty young. My parents weren't really musical, but I was always just kind of obsessed with marching bands as a kid and so got into playing trumpets, eventually started writing music in high school and my band director at the time really helped me kind of push myself and start writing music. Then after high school, I went on to study at Ohio State University with Dr. Robert W. McClure and then now I'm at Florida State University.

[Aaron] Is it THE Ohio State University or is it the other Ohio State University?

[Will] I think it's the Ohio State University. I still get confused because I think both want to be THE Ohio State University, so they just say they are, but the green one in beautiful Athens, Ohio. Yeah.

[Aaron] Okay. Well, how would you describe yourself as a composer and then in extension of that, your music?

[Will] Yeah, so I think overall I have a pretty eclectic, random taste of music and I think that kind of shows up in my writing from time to time. My music kind of focuses on kind of older styles, mixing them in with newer techniques. Yeah.

[Aaron] Okay, fair enough. And, you know, if you were to, going off of that mixing in older styles, you know, what that means to me is that you have some compositional inspirations in the forms of different styles and perhaps composers. So if you were to compare your different inspirations to a composer or to a time period or style, what would that be?

[Will] It's kind of morphed over time. I think early on it was definitely very like late romantic Rachmaninoff inspired, but as I kind of learned about other styles and more modern styles through my undergrad, I became more influenced by Stravinsky, some, I suppose, Kate Soper.

[Aaron] You know, that's interesting. The guest last week, Ky Nam Nguyen, she also highlighted Kate Soper. So I want to ask, what is it about Stravinsky or Kate Soper too, that draws you to that sound? That through your development as a composer and as a student in your undergrad, what draw, drew you to those sounds?

[Will] I think with Stravinsky, it's more of an aesthetic draw. The way he orchestrates and uses instruments and thinks about instruments as almost kind of like separate characters at times is kind of similar to how I think. And I say Kate Soper more in that a lot of our pieces have either stories behind them or kind of philosophical ideas behind them. That kind of framing around a piece I find really interesting.

[Aaron] Your rationale of why you're drawn to those sounds makes a lot of sense in my mind from the qualities that are in Reed Quintet I. And we'll get to it specifically with the last movement, but there certainly is a different character for each instrument in many of these movements. And also that brings me to asking about the piece Reed Quintet I. So the title, alright, Reed Quintet I. For contemporary music, although there are plenty examples of this kind of nomenclature, one of the most famous recent examples I can think of is Jennifer Higdon naming her violin concerto, Violin Concerto. The plainness, no offense, of this title is a bit striking. Can you talk about why you named it with a sequential matter of fact title instead of as a character piece? And then can you talk about what the movement titles are? Because there's four movements and these certainly have character to them.

[Will] Right. So there's like a few reasons. One is that those ideas of like old styles, I think I still really enjoy the idea of like writing a quintet or like a concerto and like having that as the baseline is almost like a theme that you can do variations on. I find that really interesting. Obviously this piece is pretty all over the place. And I think also having such a plain title juxtaposed with everything else that's going on in the piece, I would find I just kind of find it funny. I also just like the idea of an audience member sitting waiting for the concert to start reading the program and reading, oh, Reed Quintet I and then going through the movement titles and being like, wait, what?

[Aaron] So can you share with the listeners what the titles of the movements are?

[Will] Yes. So the first title is called Well I, "Well I ....." Second movement is called Interlude. Third movement is called Interlude 2. And the fourth movement is called "What was I saying?"

[Aaron] Yeah. So there is that like, I'm not really sure if this is the right terminology, but like meta irony here, because like you're calling on tradition, essentially by naming the piece with a more clinical sequential nature. But as you said, the character of the music isn't plain in the slightest, which is what the title may lead you to think. And then on top of that, the movement titles certainly are not. And so that, you know, we're going to do a little, little breakaway here. But what are your thoughts on modern compositional naming practices, naming of pieces? Because in my perspective, it seems like at a certain point, sometimes the rationale behind titling a piece can be almost out of advertising or attention grabbing, which I'm not saying that's not a valid way of naming a piece. But it also seems in reaction to hundreds of years of naming pieces. But what are your thoughts on the modern compositional practices of nomenclature and all that when it comes to piece titles?

[Will] Yeah, it's interesting that you brought up advertising, because I think modern day, we don't have kind of kings and rulers like hiring top music masters to like run their state. And so we're like, composers are really just freelance contractors, basically, that is selling a product.

[Aaron] A general music contractor.

[Will] Yeah. It's a little grim, but it's, unless you have like kind of a steady commission, most composers aren't going to be having kind of a steady way of getting pieces out there. And so a lot of the way composers get pieces performed is submit to competitions and submit to places and stuff like that, and having a catchy title can at least get your foot in the door and make them pay a little more attention to it. But it's also a title is kind of the composer's only say on his piece. There are program notes sometimes in concerts, but often the audience only reads the title and then listens to the piece. And so that's kind of your only moment to set the tone. Yes, it's your only moment to set the tone. And so you have to kind of be either really succinct or really detailed with what you want. And if it's kind of a more complicated idea, you're going to end up with a more complicated title. So I guess that's kind of why we're seeing less of like, Reed Quintet I and more a short like little sentence or something as the title. Yeah.

[Aaron] Quick question. At new music festivals and different gatherings like that, are program notes not always published in the in the program or publicly for those events?

[Will] Most of the time, especially new music conventions, they they do a pretty good job of providing program notes because it's usually like run by composers and they understand. But if your piece is getting performed on, I guess, a concert with like a more mixed program of like old and new, sometimes you just get the title and your name in the program. Obviously, I've worked with like, I haven't worked with like the New York Phil or anything. So I mean, yeah, as as you like get to more professional orchestras and ensembles, they'll obviously have program notes and stuff like that. But some smaller venues just I it takes a lot of paper to print that many notes on each piece. So that is fair.

[Aaron] That is fair, especially, you know, whenever I would write program notes for pieces that I wrote in my undergrad, I would write paragraphs because I, it's interesting. You said about the program notes and the title, especially the title, are the composer's initial mode of control of how you're supposed to perceive the piece. And I would definitely take super special care because I was always very nervous that people would misinterpret whatever I was writing, even if it was mundane. I just wanted people to know exactly what I was trying to say. Moving on to talk about Reed Quintet I in more detail other than its interesting title. Now, this piece was already performed, yes?

[Will] Yeah, I had it performed on my senior undergraduate recital.

[Aaron] And that would have been spring of last year.

[Will] Yeah, it's coming up on a year now.

[Aaron] Yeah. Oh, my gosh, it really has been a while.

[Will] Yeah.

[Aaron] Okay. So about the instrumentation for this piece, it's a Reed Quintet, which is oboe, B flat clarinet, alto saxophone, bass clarinet and bassoon. What attracted you to this instrumentation?

[Will] Well, it's interesting. I try with most pieces to do something I haven't done before, and that takes many types of form, but I obviously hadn't written for Reed Quintet. And I hadn't written in depth for some of these instruments as well, like bassoon and saxophone. So I think that this ensemble kind of gave me an opportunity to get better at writing for woodwinds. It also has a lot of very interesting timbres with the kind of classic woodwind quintet. You have some more like round and sounds with the flute and the horn, but a lot with all these being read instruments, they can have very, very pointed articulation.

[Aaron] That makes sense. And when it comes to exploring different sounds and different modes of composition here, what I find interesting about your piece that you have in the program notes is that you were attempting to do different compositional techniques or styles for each movement. Can you walk through the listeners how you were thinking about each movement as a compositional practice, technique or exploration?

[Will] Yeah. So the first movement consists mainly of aleatory and to kind of explain what that is, for people who don't know, it's basically giving the performer more control than they would normally get. So in this specific instance, I'm giving them the notes, and I'm often giving them the order of the notes, but the tempo is kind of up to them, not only as an ensemble, but individually between parts. There can be different tempos happening at the same time. Hopefully. Yeah.

[Aaron] What is it like in the process of composition? You have to juggle between control and letting go of control depending on the style of composition that you're doing, and Aleatoric is purposely giving away control of the sound or the structure to a degree to the performers. What was it like composing in that space of limited control over what the sound is going to eventually produce? Because to me that would be very anxiety ridden to be writing something like that and not 100% knowing what's going to happen in a given rehearsal even.

[Will] Yeah, and that's interesting because we're rehearsing the piece right now with a different ensemble and the two rehearsal experiences are completely different. Right now there were way more questions on interpretation than there were in the first one. It's really interesting, in the first premiere they got exactly what I imagined, but with this current ensemble there were a lot of different interpretations. It's completely my fault for not being clear. At the time when you're writing it, you're more envisioning a blob of sound instead of the structured thing and it feels almost like cheating. You get to write a few notes per instrument and then just say 20 seconds or something and be like, oh wow, I just wrote 20 seconds of music.

[Aaron] Get that assignment done real quick before the comp lesson.

[Will] Yeah, but then in rehearsal that's kind of more where the work happens because you realize like, oh I really wasn't specific there. It's like, oh this can be interpreted this way. So through this most recent performance I've gone back and kind of put in some more details to make it more clear what I wanted. But it's definitely a lot of trial and error figuring out what will communicate to most people exactly what you want. Most people think like, aleatory is like the composer being like, ah just play whatever. But very often they have a very specific sound in mind that it would just be easier to give like free rhythm or something too.

[Aaron] So in the second rehearsal process, have you found yourself in your mind, whether purposely or not purposely, trying to shape this other ensemble to the sound of the first recording? Which is the one, the first recording is what listeners will be hearing throughout this episode but did you find yourself trying to shape it closer to that?

[Will] Yeah, almost. I felt a little guilty at times. There were points I would give feedback or think about giving feedback and be like, oh I just am a little upset. It doesn't sound exactly like the finished product of the first premiere. So there were times I had to be like, okay we're in the middle of the rehearsal. It's not going to be performance ready right now. But there were also times where like, I was kind of surprised that a lot of the aleatoric figures were interpreted in so many different ways. There's especially a couple spots near the end of the movement that were really, really unclear. And I think I was like there at the very beginning of the first performance to kind of shape how I wanted to go. For this most recent ensemble, I came in on the second or third rehearsal and so they already had some preconceived notions of what these figures probably sound like. And I had to be like, ah I meant this, I meant this here and there. 

[Aaron] I'm not gonna lie, that sounds really stressful.

[Will] Yes. And I thought this would be the easy movement.

[Aaron] And to the listeners, this interview is actually timed at a very unique moment because Will here is talking about another rehearsal for another performance. I'm actually going to attend that performance tonight. So I think it's really fun to interview you early in the day before the second premiere of your piece. So at the very end of this episode in the bumper that I put at the end, I'm going to record a mild review, or not really a review, I'm not going to critique anybody, how the second performance was different. So okay, I interjected to talk about aleatoric composition, but so that's the style or the mode of the first movement. Can you talk about what's up with the second movement, which is titled interlude?

[Will] Right. So the second movement uses a technique called tone rows, where you basically have a set of notes that need to appear in that order, and that is kind of used as the material, and that can be like reversed and like flipped upside down and done a whole bunch of stuff too. But the most common form, I mean, the really only form is 12 tone rows, basically. And there are 12 notes in the chromatic scale, and so they're often use all 12 notes in this technique. And I wanted to try this technique because I was so averted to it. I kind of hated it, and so the best way to learn how to like something is kind of force yourself to do it. But I was kind of being a little snide and so I did an 11 tone row.

[Aaron] Yeah, so the decision to leave one of the notes out was out of spite?

[Will] It was half out of spite. The way this movement is, it was a little spite. But the way this move kind of came around is, I guess kind of like the the genesis of this movement is where I wrote the first three measures of the movement just like by ear. I think at the time I was in band and we were playing Hindemith's B-flat symphony, and I was in an atonal course. And so all of that was kind of just in my ear. And so I wrote like the first three measures just kind of mimicking those styles. And so I wrote like the first three measures just kind of mimicking those styles. By doing that, I kind of found like, oh, it's like really close to being a 12 tone row. And so I ended up just kind of using that as an 11 tone row. One because I kind of liked what I had in the beginning. And second, it's kind of funny to just have an 11 tone row.

[Aaron] It is. I will tell you in analysis, it's frustrating. Because usually when theorists or just anyone really sitting down to analyze a piece that is explicitly 12 tone or in that ilk, part of the difficulty is locating all pieces of the row. And if a composer like yourself is like, oopsie, just I'm not going to use the 12th one. And that could really send a lot of theorists out the window. I'm not going to lie. It's part of the comedy of it too.

[Will] Right. Yeah. I don't think the audience isn't going to know the difference between an 11 and a 12 tone row piece.

[Aaron] I didn't when listening to it because I listened to it first. Then I read your notes.

[Will] I don't know. I threw out like throughout this piece, a lot of the compositional decisions. Well not all of them, but some of them were made because it was funny.

[Aaron] I appreciate that, I appreciate that.

[Will] Yeah. So 11 versus 12 tone, it's kind of arbitrary, but having it be funny was also a little inspiring because I wasn't trudging through 12 tone rows and doing all those calculations. I was doing funny 11 tone rows. I don't know. It kept me going a little.

[Aaron] So since we're talking about the second movement and we're talking about naming pieces and character pieces and how music can speak to whatever it's titled. The second movement has a title, a secondary title. It's not in the program notes of the score, but it's on the page when you start playing of the jester's privilege, which it's about a jester, so we have another comedic aspect, but can you speak to why you titled that and what the jester's privilege is? I actually did not know that this was a formal thing before reading your notes.

[Will] Right. So obviously at the beginning of a piece of music, normally there's a tempo marking and that sometimes has kind of an expression marking with it like Andante or like Vivo or something like that. And that was just something else I wanted to play with. But the basic idea is that jester's privilege was the jester was able to say anything he wanted and could mock the king and the queen and like make some lewd comments and stuff because it was understood that nothing he said mattered. Which I think is a really funny concept. Especially it was a little tongue in cheek putting that on the tone row movement. And I wanted to make it clear that like I enjoy serialism and stuff like that.

[Aaron] Yeah, but you labeled the 11 tone row movement as the joker movement.

[Will] I like it a lot now. When I was writing the piece, I was a little tired of it because it was I was playing it and I was learning about it in class and I was just an exhausted college student and I was like, I don't want to do math right now. I feel and then I ended up doing math.

[Aaron] Amen. I totally understand that feeling when it comes to atonal theory. When I was listening to it, the second movement that is jester's privilege, interlude, I was wondering, you know, I said before that I really did not detect it as a 12 tone or a tone composed or a row composed movement. And part of that is the missing 12th note. But also I was thinking it should have sounded more atonal than it did. I mean, it's it's out there in terms of harmony, but it's not as disjunct as maybe you would expect if you're doing a completely tone tone row composed movement. And I realized looking at how you treated intervals and where you placed different things, you still have intact melodic contour and different. When I say traditional, I mean more just conventional melodic writing. You know, you have leaps of fourths and fifths. Sometimes, they're a lot of times, 
they're diminished fifths. You still have a conventional phrasing and things of that sort. When you're writing in that style in a row composed area, how do you reign in the dissonance, especially when you have a lot of instruments going at the same time? That can be very difficult. How do you manage all of that?

[Will] Yeah, so I think part of why it sounds so melodic is that it just came from those first three measures that I wrote that just happened to be 11 tones. And so the row I got kind of was really, really cherry picked with having there's a lot of just like half steps in there and it sounds it ends up kind of sounding like there's just a bunch of like upper and lower chromatic neighbor notes because of all the half steps in there. And so you get this like sense of like, oh, it's like kind of like it's familiar, but it's really like weird and jagged and helping with kind of the like levity. So it's not so like, I guess so so dissonant the playing with the the kind of like jaunty rhythm as well as the shorter articulations. I think that kind of helps making it more making it easier to follow.

[Aaron] Certainly, it certainly does. And I also find it really fascinating that you compose the majority of the movement off of the material in the first three measures, because you may have seen in the notes that I sent you before this interview, I really detected some more traditional contrapuntal writing, I could pick out some subjects, counter subjects and definitely sequential ideas where you would have another instrument come in with that original subject or melody. And then you would have other instruments playing what you would expect in a Bach fugue, another instrument playing in an accompaniment figure while the other instrument is playing that melody for the first time. Was that intentional? Because it looked incredibly intentional to me.

[Will] Yeah, throughout this movement, I don't strictly stick to the tone row there. There's plenty of times where I'm like, I just kind of want this here. And so I just put that there. The tone row more acted as a kind of source for material. And whenever I was like, oh, I need like the bassoon to do something here, I was able to get the tone row and come up with some interesting rhythms to put on top of it. But it made this movement was probably one of the easiest to write because of the tone row. So much of the materials is literally just the tone row that I got to focus more on rhythm, focus more on form and like kind of timbral combinations, which kind of made it really just really nice to write.

[Aaron] Yeah, it's interesting. You wrote you wrote like a tonal composer using atonal tools, which is interesting. I like that. All right, so moving on to the third movement and viewers or listeners, prepare yourself because I'm about to play the entirety of interlude number two right now. Now, will I can't fathom the emotional impact that those two notes had on the listeners. Why did you make a five second movement that is the total of two measures and two notes? And I say all of that lovingly.

[Will] I know I totally understand. I originally, it's funny. It's just funny. I love I also the piece only had three movements, but the fourth movement was pretty long and it seemed I don't know for movements just seem right. And so I was like, I should probably add a third movement somewhere in there. And the idea of having such a short movement, I've never seen that done before. And I think I don't know, it's just funny. I also have I have notes in the score for the players who aren't playing to put their instrument up to their mouths. And in rehearsal, I kind of encourage the performers to really act like they're preparing for a larger movement. And so they have page turns, the conductor has to flip page on the score. They can do a little stretching or something and fiddle with their instrument and then everybody gets ready to play, and then two notes. And then everybody puts their instruments down and then does the same thing for the next movement. So I think there's kind of like a theatrical aspect to this movement and some other spots as well. And it's also the second movement and so hectic hectic and then with just a little tag at the end and I think kind of plays with expectations of like what's going to happen next, because the fourth movement then also starts with that little like half note thing, kind of leftover from the second movement, which kind of morphs into the clarinet cadenza that starts off the fourth movement.

[Aaron] Yeah, that's a really good segway into well, first off, I think the idea of doing that really short movement just out of comedic purposes is great. I think that's really funny. But so good segway into the fourth movement, which as you said is I'm not going to say it's the most detailed, but it certainly is the longest and has a whole bunch of different things going on. And the clarinet cadenza. All right, what were you referencing Gershwin with that B flat clarinet slide up to that up to that note, because when I started listening, I was like, Oh my gosh, that sounds like Rhapsody in blue. What was that on purpose?

[Will] It wasn't completely intentional while I was writing it. I mostly like, oh, it's half steps and then there's more half steps going on. But later on, I kind of realized like I did want the clarinets cadenza the purpose of that to be kind of a transition from the weird like uppity like rhythms and tone rows of the second movement and transition into this kind of older semi like bulky style that kind of gets played with a bunch. And so having I definitely had that sound in my ear and having that like, oh, it's like it's it's sort of Gershwin-y bits really throughout the cadenza kind of helped with that transition.

[Aaron] All right, fair enough. So I'm not saying you copied. It's just when I listened to that, you know, you're talking about the piece being like referential to other things and comedic in its own internal way. And another reference, I would say is like the piece title is "What was I saying?" And the joke being, of course, that you started saying a sentence in the first movement, you had two whole interludes. And then you ask, you know, well, what was I trying to say in the first place? There's a lot of interruptions going on musically. There's a lot of places where the instruments are interrupted by each other. But there is a moment in the first third of the piece where you end a phrase like it's a symphonic movement. It sounded like Beethoven or Tchaikovsky just for a second. Was that, like it reminded me of how sometimes Scriabin would self referentially make fun of other romantic or earlier romantic composers with how cheesy some things can be. Was that on purpose? Or why did why did you after so many different interruptions bring it to such a conclusive end in the first third?

[Will] You know, I had to I wanted to kind of go to the next section. And I was really trying to figure out like how to transition between the first like, I guess, a section and then the next B section that has like the bassoon trying to play something and everyone keeps cutting it off. I don't know, I because initially you hear it and it's like it's clearly just like V-I-V-I-V-I. It's like, oh, OK, maybe the movement is going to end soon. And then the it completely like soils and then speeds up and turns into a trill and becomes more of like a gesture and more of like ahhhhh. 

[Aaron] It was at that moment, especially after the Gershwin thing, the name of the piece, the name of the movements, the gestures thing, and then like and then the kind of the Gershwin as clarinet bit and then that little rush to a cadence and then moving on as like, OK, he's really messing with us right now.

{Will] Yeah, I'm glad it comes across at that moment.

[Aaron] I stopped thinking that it was like comedic subtext and realizing no, that that's why that's there is that it's it's funny. It's fun, not just funny.

[Will] Yeah, yeah. And the goal is not only to just make like funny music. I also want the performers to enjoy playing the music. And I think I think working with the previous ensemble of this ensemble, it's it's like they know like what's going on. And I think they have fun doing it. So that's that's also a part of it.

[Aaron] I'm sure they had fun with that. I'm sure they did. And speaking of self referential nature, again, I'm not accusing of copying or even in a John Williams style of copying, but you had to have known what you were doing by putting the bassoon in that register, holding a note in that way
It sounded so much like the bassoon at the beginning of the Rite of Spring, which I mean, for us, I'm sure for composers and you said Stravinsky is an inspiration in a handful of ways. I was listening to that. I was like, oh, that's the Stravinsky Bassoon, like not to give him complete ownership over the range of an entire instrument, but especially because the bassoon call also like shapes up the texture a bit of when the other instruments start to go a little bit crazy. It like is like yelling at them or like reminding them to like get in line and stop having such a disjunct texture. Was that reference on purpose?

[Will] Yeah, I definitely I wanted I mostly wanted that timbre. And obviously like Stravinsky is the one who was willing to do that to the first bassoonist that had to read that music and figure it out. But because of that, bassoonist can play up there. I mean, not with no problem. It's still like, hard. It's way more common and most bassoonists, like, learn that solo and are able to play up there. And it has such a funny squeaky timbre. I really wanted to have that in there.

[Aaron] Yeah, it shows how iconic that timbre is because you didn't decorate it like Stravinsky. You just held it on one note. But it's so iconic in our ears that range and that timbre that the ref to me the reference was immediately clear, even though you just held a note. It's not like you were playing the melody or anything. But yeah, that's really cool.

[Will] Yeah, and the idea behind the bassoon holding that note throughout the movement, this whole movement is each instrument trying to be in the limelight and be the focus of attention. And so they're kind of like wrestling each other throughout. And I do that because every time an instrument wants to take over, it plays a concert G sharp and it plays the notes like, okay, here. Here I go. I'm going to say something. It's my turn. And there I give it to the bassoon really high up, as if it's going to play this like kind of Right of Spring-esque ornamented melody. And then it just completely gets cut off and doesn't get to finish what it's saying. That was kind of the thinking throughout this piece as I was writing it of like, kind of the form of like people taking over and like wanting to play the melody.

[Aaron] What's interesting is that I saw it more in less of a thematic context, like you're saying I saw more as a imitative counterpoint almost, which in effect, that's kind of what it is. But I like, I like the rationalization of them stumbling over each other because that is what it what it equates to. It's like imitative counterpoint with a couple screws loose and placed a little bit jarringly because, like, each theme doesn't want to wait for the other one to finish or like have its spot. So that's really cool. So for time's sake, we're going to move on to our last little portion, which is..... Will, what does composition mean to you as an individual academic, if you view yourself as that, a lifelong composer? What does music composition mean to you?

[Will] To me, it's really just a form of language and expressing ideas that don't really work in others like English. I don't know. It's a mode of communication to me. I think to a lot of people that you're able to convey really, really interesting ideas that it's kind of clumsy to try and explain in speech. A lot of people also say that like composition is just theory in practice. I think that's really important to kind of think about.

[Aaron] I would I would agree with that. That can get a little hairy depending on the analysis that you're looking at. But I would say in general that that's true because for there to be analysis, there needs to be, the art needs to exist and therefore composers need to create it. So in a way that is true. Now on the subject of music theory and composition, how do you see the state of the intersection of music theory and composition? And I'm asking how do you see it now? How do you think it should be? Or are we doing okay?

[Will] I think overall, I mean, it's obviously gotten better as like those two fields have become like their own careers. So you can make a living off of being a music theorist and studying music. And I think that's really important for the art form as a whole. So we're doing pretty good. But I would in the future like to see kind of less of a split between music theory and composition because it's really like it's really two sides of the same coin. And I mean, I personally should be I should get better at kind of analyzing different pieces because it would make me a better composer. And I think that works the other way that theorists should start writing music as well to kind of put those theories into practice. And I mean, the second movement of my Reed Quintet is pretty a pretty good example of that because I did not understand 12 tone. I couldn't listen to it. But through writing it and through working with those ideas, I appreciated way, way more. And it's way easier to listen to now that you know like, oh, he's doing this here because I did that in a piece of my own. And so I don't know, these two things are really just like two sides of the same coin. And I think sometimes people can kind of forget that. Yeah, I don't know. This is good. We should like theorists and composers should talk more often because you and I have had like conversations about my music and about music of the past, the more modern music. And they I mean, it's influenced my composition, and I'm sure like it's influenced your thoughts on music theory and composition and all that.

[Aaron] Oh, it certainly has. And you know, I agree with you on what you said about two sides of the same coin and so on. That's why we're here. And also, yes, for the listeners, go back and look at the most recent blog post from the end of last week because I detail in there how a conversation I had with Will a couple months ago is actually what started sparking, or created, some of the thoughts that I had that led to the creation of the TCC. So I tell that story in that blog post. So go back and look at that if you want to see that. So Will, what would be the best way for people to contact you with any questions, inquiries and other things?

[Will] Yeah. So if you have any questions, if you are interested in my music, you just want to talk really. I mean, preferably about music, but I don't know.
I got time. You can email me at wdavenportcomposer at gmail.com. I'm also on Instagram and YouTube. I'm going to be trying to be a little more active on there as well as Facebook if you feel like that sort of thing. But yeah, I have a Instagram, YouTube channel and Facebook.

[Aaron] Yes, and we'll have all of your relevant information in the episode description as well as your contributor page on our website. Thank you, Will, very much for joining the Theorist Composer Collaboration for this interview and to share your music, which was again, read quintet number one. And I really look forward to seeing the second performance of it tonight. And I'm going to add a little bit at the end of this podcast describing what it was like, the performance of it. So thank you for joining. Thank you for being on here.

[Will] Yeah. Thank you for having me. It was great talking to you.

[Aaron] Likewise.

[Aaron] Hello, this is Aaron again, and I want to thank you for listening to this episode of the Theorist Composer Collaboration. Another big thank you to Will Davenport for joining the program alongside his composition, Reed Quintet I. In the description of this episode, regardless of the platform you are on, there will be links to Will's email and social media, and I would appreciate it if you could show him some support. His information will also be readily compiled on the corresponding contributor page on our host website as well. As I referenced in the episode later on the same day of recording the interview, I had the opportunity to see the second premiere and performance of read quintet number one. This performance experience was a bit different than listening to the recording and reading the score for a handful of reasons. For one, at the time of the original recording, Will was not able to find an oboe player, so the first recording, the one you heard throughout the episode, has a soprano saxophone playing the oboe part. So for the second performance they had an oboe player and the sound was, of course, different. There were sharper and snappier articulations, which is, of course, due to the different instrumental timbres. Another element integral to the piece, something that we discussed during the interview, is the comedic aspects, most especially with the third movement being five seconds long, and two measures with only two notes. Being part of a live audience, especially anticipating the theatrical elements of the piece, it was fun to hear the audience laugh, engage, and be receptive to the intended moments of levity, especially with the third movement. A handful of people also clearly got the slight Gershwin reference at the start of the fourth movement. Overall, it was a fantastic performance by the FSU Polymorphia New Music Ensemble. I want to again thank Will Davenport for coming onto the program and sharing with us his fantastic piece, Read Quintet I. For further updates and notifications on the Theorist Composer Collaboration, make sure to subscribe to our email listing on the homepage of our host website, and follow our Instagram and Facebook pages. Relevant links are in the description. You can also listen to future episodes through our host website, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, and YouTube, so make sure you subscribe to the platform you're choosing. Again all relevant links are in the description. TCC episodes are posted weekly on Mondays, don't miss our weekly blog posts, which go live a few days after a new episode is added. I am also very excited to promote that our next featured composer is Gabe Gekoski, with his composition, Modest Mutilation, being featured as well. You won't want to miss it, but until then, this is Aaron, and thank you for joining the TCC.