I often think of my music as an “equal opportunity offender.” I try to defy standard conventions of style. Since common labels like “contemporary” and “traditional” just don’t seem to apply, some people have difficulty classifying my music. Evangelicals think that I am composing traditional, academic music while academics think I am composing warm-fuzzy evangelical music.

So much music, in both popular and academic circles, goes wrong when an agenda is attached to it. By this, I mean that the artistic and communicative quality of the music becomes a secondary consideration behind an ideological goal. In my opinion, evangelicals and academics both often fail in this regard. They are like two sides of the same coin: Academics sometimes produce music that is inaccessible to performers and listeners because their agenda is to impress others with their intellectual prowess. Evangelicals sometimes produce music that seems watered down and heavy handed because their agenda is to ineffectively overstate their message while attempting to imitate the popular music of secular entertainment culture.

My goal is to create beautiful and honest music. I spoke previously about how music should contain three important elements: truth, goodness and beauty. I hope that my music will encourage and convict others because it is artistic and innovative while remaining accessible. This is a delicate balance of competing elements, but when achieved, ensures that one’s music will be an effective way to profoundly communicate and connect with both listeners and performers.