»No one thrives on fear« – Time for Experiments

Ensemble Modern as a mentor for emerging composers: Since 2004, the International Ensemble Modern Academy (IEMA) has run mentoring programmes for composers at the start of their professional careers, giving them the chance to explore and refine their musical ideas in close collaboration with Ensemble Modern’s highly specialised instrumentalists. These seminars for composers have existed in various forms since 2004 and, since 2023, have been known as ›young_professionals‹. For this magazine issue, Stefan Fricke spoke with cellist Eva Böcker and violinist Giorgos Panagiotidis about the training format and what working with young composers personally means to them.

Stefan Fricke: How would you define a composer?

Eva Böcker: A person who manages to shape their imagination and ideas, through craftsmanship, into a self-contained work.

Giorgos Panagiotidis: Composing must also be unique and innovative, which is very difficult given everything that is already out there.

SF: Ensemble Modern has been running seminars for composers since 2004. All of the applicants have studied or are currently studying music at a university, so they are all highly skilled. What things do the participants learn from you that they don’t learn at their own schools?

EB: Without wanting to overstate our role – quite a lot, I think. Normally, composers receive a commission for a piece. If they’re lucky, they’re invited to the first or second rehearsal, where they can hear their work, and perhaps make a few small changes. Then comes the concert – a tough situation for inexperienced and young composers, because at that point they can no longer intervene substantially. Our format gives them the chance to discard their ideas very early in the process if they realise they’re not working. That’s hard to organise in an academic framework.

GP: Music schools also vary – they have different strengths in different areas. In France, for example, people work differently than in Germany, Argentina, or Greece. What matters to us is real practical experience, sometimes very simple things – like the fact that a player needs time to turn a page. At universities, composers often have to proactively seek out fellow students who are willing and have time to play their pieces just so they can hear them. With Ensemble Modern, they have much more time to test their ideas – and they can do this with professional musicians who have extensive experience in new music and in turning ideas into reality.

SF: So in a way, you’re both service providers and mentors?

GP: For some, yes; for others, maybe not. We’ve discovered many very good composers through this project, which is why we value the format so much.

EB: …for example, Arnulf Herrmann, Márton Illés, Vito Žuraj, Alex Paxton, Anna Meredith, Johannes Motschmann, Diego Ramos Rodríguez, Simon Steen-Andersen, and Katherine Balch.

SF: By now, you receive more than 200 international applications per edition. Applicants submit scores or recordings anonymously, and a jury selects the participants. Are the jurors always members of Ensemble Modern?

GP: Yes. A composer is also involved in the project as a coach, because sometimes participants are unable to develop their ideas the way they initially intended. In such cases, support from experienced composers is essential. This year, Michael Jarrell is taking on that role.

EB: Brigitta Muntendorf, Lucia Ronchetti, Helmut Lachenmann, George Benjamin, Johannes Kalitzke, and Enno Poppe have also served as coaches. For a time, the project was open to young conductors as well, but we moved away from that – we found that the question »Who decides what?« often overwhelmed them. We want to focus primarily on discovering new composers, and since 2025 we’ve expanded the project to include four working phases.

GP: The first phase – around eight months before the concert – begins with a Zoom meeting involving the selected composers, Ensemble Modern members, the respective composition coach, and the conductor. Participants present their ideas and perhaps a few sketches, and we discuss them. From the start, it’s about turning ideas into practical reality.

EB: The following phases include so-called try-outs, in which the compositional sketches are tested with us. Participants can gather insights through direct exchange and use them to finalise their works. A new feature is that rehearsals with the completed material begin five weeks before the concert! We call this phase the ›Feedback-Session‹. The big advantage – for both composers and musicians – is that there’s still time for improvements. The process concludes with the concert, where the works are premiered.

SF: With all your IEMA projects, you foster and fuel both the inventors and the interpreters of music. Do you prefer composers to performers?

EB: I don’t really make a distinction between the two. But of course, creating something yourself and performing it are entirely different things.

GP: For me, it’s simple: if it’s done well, it’s done well. But what does »done well« even mean? In art, you can like something or not. I do find the inventors a bit more exciting – they create something new, which I deeply value in our times.

SF: All right, let’s stick with the young composers. What do you give them – and what do you take from them?

EB: We try to understand what the composers want – for example, in terms of tone colours or playing techniques that go beyond what’s written in the score. It often takes detective work: lots of questions and careful listening. Sometimes techniques that look good on paper sound very different in practice, which can surprise or even unsettle them. Our job is to show alternative possibilities. There’s rarely time or opportunity for that level of detail in composition classes.

GP: It’s also important to note that we musicians have our own ideas about sound and how to achieve it. Sometimes a young composer comes in and you think, »Actually, this person isn’t quite sure what they want«. But – and this is one of Ensemble Modern’s strengths – we give them the freedom to find their own voice. Making suggestions is good if something doesn’t work yet, but we shouldn’t insist on our own approach. When someone has a clear vision, we need to consciously step back and give them space.

SF: You take them just as seriously as established composers?

EB: Absolutely. I was trained to always start by doing exactly what’s written in the score – even when it goes against my instincts. Sometimes I only understand later what was meant. The goal is always to bring out what the composer envisioned. If you put up a wall too soon and say »That won’t work«, you might miss something.

GP: In a way, we’re also psychologists. What would be the point of confronting young composers with harsh criticism? None. We need to support them so they can flourish. No one thrives on fear. So for us it’s not just about playing and making suggestions – it’s also about being psychologically supportive, creating time and the right atmosphere for their development.

EB: I think it’s really difficult to be a composer. It’s incredibly personal to hand over your score. Many feel very exposed when that first rehearsal takes place.

GP: And yet sometimes we also have to be firm – after all, time is limited. Occasionally, we have to say: »You need to move on; don’t get stuck on this or that detail.« We try to do that considerately, of course.

EB: There are two areas where I can be quite strict: first, with notation that’s sloppy or unclear – as in, »They’ll know what I mean«. That just makes our job harder. And second, with balance and dynamics. An ensemble functions differently from an orchestra. If you write the same dynamic for all instruments, you won’t get a balanced sound, because some are simply louder than others.

SF: What have you learned yourselves from all these years of working on composer projects?

EB: I’ve learned not to judge too quickly – and I keep learning that anew. Composers have different strengths and weaknesses. Some aren’t great at notating what they imagine, but you soon realise there’s a lot behind it. They need time to develop – and we have to bring goodwill to the process.

GP: I feel the same. And you can’t lose hope. Sometimes you think you’ve heard it all, that everything seems similar. And suddenly a new idea appears – genuinely new music, at a high level, that you didn’t expect. That’s happened several times in this project – and that’s why I’m so glad we’ve done and continue to do these seminars.

SF: What are your hopes for the current project?

EB: I hope the final concert at the cresc... festival presents a very diverse programme that reflects a broad range of aesthetics. Above all, I hope the composers are happy with what they’ve learned – that they take something new with them for their future works. And for the future, I hope we continue to meet people whose artistic growth we as an ensemble can follow and support. That’s already happened several times in previous years.

GP: My wish is that our society offers more space for different »flowers«, directions, and tastes. It’s so important that we don’t say, »This is good, that isn’t«. We live in a time where, metaphorically speaking, there should and must be gardens full of many different flowers. I also hope we can keep improving our training tools – which, of course, always requires funding.

EB: I have one more wish: that composers don’t forget we’re also human – the ones who play their music. Lately we’ve often heard: »Play it like a machine« or »It should sound like a machine«. But we’re not machines – our strength is that we’re alive and creative!