Good vs. Bad - Orchestration

Ok. So at the other place, I saw a question about common mistakes novice orchestrators make.

Since I don't participate there anymore, I thought I could copy in an answer here.
The following I wrote for a blog post and asked a very similar question: What is good vs. bad orchestration.

Hope one or two things spark your imagination

With best wishes

Doug
_____________________________________________________________________________________________



There are levels or layers to this answer. bad to good.

1. Writing notes for an instrument that extends beyond its range. Example: F below middle C for a violin, or D (middle line bass stave) for Vibraphone. etc.
2. Writing music that is not idiomatic. This really still has nothing to do with ensemble playing. Every instrument has its own character, dynamic curve, patterns that fit will etc. For example: once I was playing in a new music ensemble at Interlochen as a guitarist. A composer saw that the guitar and flute roughly had the same range in an orchestration book. Since he had a piece he was re-working he took the flute part from his previous piece (which was pretty complex) and simply pasted it onto the guitar part via notation program. It was like getting served blue bananas. The whole thing felt awkward, and difficult to play. This is why many classical musicians can get PTSD after playing with living composers.
3. Tough to balance: Another way to put it is by composers shooting themselves in the foot. It could be a really high trumpet or vocal part with a (pp) dynamic marking. It can also be trying to divide a triad between 2 trumpets and a flute with music above the stave and a very soft dynamic. Good orchestration would be more like running downhill. Say a harp and flute instead and there is no problem to play soft.
4. The orchestrator/composer generally speaking has their head up their ass. Another way to say this, is they are not thinking very musically or creatively. Often it means they have no sense of “the whole”. They think orchestration is assigning notes to instruments, and lose sight of what else ads life to music. Phrases are divided between instruments oddly, everything is tutti all the time, no articulations or dynamics (or its opposite going 100% micromanage everything and never trust your musicians are musicians). Expect it to sound like it did on their computer….. the very first time, not thinking about people needing to breathe etc. etc.etc.

What makes good orchestration is a little harder to answer without a specific task. Good orchestrators are like fine tailors. We can make things to suit, and what works fantastically for one setting, might not for another. Basically good orchestrators “bake in” ways to make the musicians sound great, and make rehearsal efficient. Another thing would be that the sum is greater than the individual parts. Of course great orchestration feature soloists or solo passages, and highlight individuals, but a lot of “great” orchestrations are simply great moments of music. Hopefully, you are emotionally transported, and then you can deduce the magic.

My last paragraph was "general" for a specific reason. Debussy (for example) was a great orchestrator. However if you give one of his delicate orchestrations to “Thomas Jefferson middle school orchestra” it's going to fall apart 9 out of 10 times. The Chicago Symphony……. WOW ! They make it sound like magic. Conversely, a composer like Dvořák is great sounding and less difficult from an orchestration point of view. Dvořák sounds amazing with the Chicago Symphony and survives the middle school.

In the Preface to RK, he says there are 3 kinds of orchestration:

- that which sounds OK at first try

- that which sounds OK after much rehearsal

- that which never works

If you want to attain the FIRST category - a VERY good goal for a beginner - write things which "just work". Getting 2 horns to play quietly enough to accompany a low solo flute, by writing separate dynamics, is between categories 2 and 3. Using divided strings, without too much movement, or harp is category 1.

This is an important distinction, especially for beginners. Do NOT depend on writing separate dynamics to make your orchestrations work; choose instruments, registers, and idioms, so that they will work "automatically".

Orchestration is one of those fields where there is always something to learn, but I thought it would be useful for beginners here to have some concrete goals to start with. As a first goal, aim to orchestrate what I call "CLEANLY".

These are the most basic questions to ask yourself:

1) Is everything I have written reasonably *easily* playable? For your first orchestrations, your musicians will not be members of the world's best ensembles. It is ALWAYS better to make things as simple to play as you can. Even with pro orchestras, it saves rehearsal time (time = $$$).

2) Have I used my ensemble fully? Unlike in a virtual orchestra, adding 4 extra tuba parts is not free in the real world. Adding 4 extra tubas to play 3 notes each means lots of $$$. Is it worth it? Wherever possible, write for STANDARD ensembles, for the same reason.

3) Is the orchestration CLEAR? Is the mainline properly emphasized and does it stand out enough in relation to accompanying material? Make the orchestration balance on its own wherever possible.

4) Does the orchestration respect and enhance the form? Making major changes in orchestration in mid-phrase usually will simply distort the music.

5) Are the score and part professionally presented? Nothing gives away an amateur faster than parts badly copied or a score with a weird ordering of instruments. Standards exist here for a reason: The musician does not have to learn new conventions for each piece. N.B. Having a computer make your parts does NOT guarantee they are OK. Computer-generated page turns are sometimes ridiculous, the parts may not be big enough to be read at a distance (remember, the trombone has to be able to see his part at quite a ways off!), etc. etc. ...

There is much, much more, of course, and some points (like #4 above) could be discussed at great length, but I'd say if you can't answer an unequivocal yes to all of the above, you don't DESERVE a real orchestra yet!

 

Part 2

STRINGS - general comments

The string section is the main section in a symphony. It is not just because of it being the biggest section in an orchestra, but namely, because of its sound versatility. I would say, strings play a similar role in the orchestra like a piano in the composer's study room - a must.

It is fairly easy to resound the strings: there are only a few things which, if kept, may let practically anything sound well. Below, please, find some notes and suggestions from my experience:

Violins: while there is no difference between the 1st and 2nd violins sound (except the pan effect), there is no reason to cross the staffs and write 1st violin lower the 2nd and vice versa. Think about the 2nd violins rather as about the lower violins, less expressive in the performance and less technically skilled than the 1st violins.

Violas: thanks to the middle registry tone range, a bit covered sound, less extensive group in the orchestra and usually with worse technical abilities, many composer considered violas as orchestral pads - playing just the harmony. However, if doubled with e.g. french horns, they can play nice expressive melodies, as well.

Cello is probably the most all-round instrument in the orchestra. Its sound can be both soft and sharp, and usable in all registries. Cellos should be considered "the 1st violins" on low registries.

Double bass: there are many jokes about the double bass play technique and sound. Its namely because of they usually produce very muddle sound with heavy-handed technique. If writing for a double bass, think of the sound of subwoofer. To get sharper sound, use it doubled namely with percussion (timpani), low piano (great colour) and/or low brass.

Notation: I would strongly suggest to everybody to spend some time on "debugging" the score and parts in accordance with the "Principles" as well as the general notation rules (see my earlier post, "general conductors comment"). The more time you'll spend on reviewing the parts, the more time you'll earn on rehearsals and/or recording. As far as for the strings notation specifics: please, don't use the 8va--- lines, as most players did always complain of that. The 1st violins are used to read even the highest positions quite comfortable, and for violas, celli and double basses, switch rather for an upper (treble) clef. Although these octave transpositions may - in general - look easier to read, string players rather rate it confusing.

Divisi: in orchestral parts, double stops are usually supposed to be divisi. Therefore, I would suggest to note rather "non divisi" technique instead of "divisi".

Bowings: unless you are an experienced string player, don't spend much time trying to write correct bowings. String players will most probably change it, anyway. Good bowing is a challenge even for string players. Moreover, it is also a bit internal question at every orchestra (have a look into the parts, how many changes were made on bowings over the years in every orchestra....)

Legato, staccato, etc.: it is easier to write general expression notes than work out every single note in the score (usually, this is the case of computer notation - play loopback). Moreover, it is also much easier to read for both the conductor and players.

Pizzicato: this technique has a few limitations - it can't be too fast, and changes between arco and pizzicato will require a little preparation time (similar to a "breath")

Skips and jumps: most common problem in orchestral scores today. Although on sample libraries, all jumps and skips are allowed, in real life, they aren't. Jumps over 1 (1 and 1/2) octave are practically impossible to play in a section, all together and in tune.

Fast arpeggios: although this technique works well on piano, it is one of the most difficult and totally far-fetched technique for strings. If possible, try to use alternate techniques (e.g. tremollo) instead of this. If you still need to go with arpeggios, try to not exceed, say, one octave (one way) or use the arpeggios continuously, in countermovement (e.g. up and down, up and down etc.).

The exception to the "general" advice of arpeggios is when open strings are involved. Orchestration books contain many examples of idiomatic fingers and shapes.

Sound effects: if you feel there is the need of string effects, think about those with sharper sound, suitable for sectional play. These are e.g. pizzicato, "Bartok" pizzicato, sul ponticello, col legno, etc.

Softer effects, like con sordino, sul tasto, harmonics, etc. would sound well rather in solo parts.

Virtuoso techniques: e.g. left hand (Paganini) pizzicatos, fast double/tripple stops passages (non divisi), special bowings, etc. is probably best to omit all of them. These effects are mostly unsuitable for an orchestral section: partly because of the orchestral players aren't necessary that soloists, partly, because of these effects sound at best in solo parts or chamber music. Note, that composing mastery is usually not in the writing of complicated parts (the less for an orchestra), but on "cleverly written parts', they will "sound well" already at the first rehearsal.

Glissando: unless it is in slow tempi or in a contemporary "play-whatever-you-want" composition, I would rather suggest to use notated fast runs. Glissando within a full section runs the risk of sounding rather like a low-quality orchestra. (it can't play in tune and all together.)

 

No. Not at all. Was posted before you posted your composition (Which I have not listened to)

 

Sure. Sorry for my delay in this reply.

Well, to be clear double and triple stops are mostly divided in a string section. Quadruple stops are only going to be accents.
Long story --short: It's too difficult for good intonation to sustain triple and quadruple stops.

This would be about the safety limit I would say:

Debussy has some examples too.

Thomas, as always, gives really great advice. Being a guitarist myself....it was, and still is the bow that is the mystery. Not the left hand. I really can't
emphasize this enough.

Yes, and no. There is a division in the literature between Instrumentation vs Orchestration. Books on instrumentation will get you closer to what you are after. My personal bookshelf choice is by Alfred Blatter. More examples of solo playing vs. with the setting of an orchestra.

Then there are two other sources I would recommend. The first can be found at a music library. Every instrument would have an orchestra excerpt audition book. While it does not have aspiring composers in mind at all...it serves the same purpose. For example every Bassoon player will know the opening to "The Rite of Spring". Just like every Clarinet player will know Rhapsody in Blue and so on.

This way you will be look at orchestral literature and not solo work.

For film.......Psycho is a text book. The complete score is floating around the internet. I am sure you can find it. All string orchestra.

Personally, I would say don't over look composers whose orchestrations are not "flashy" but write very solid.

For example this work

It's really impossible to divide what is composition and what is orchestration. The counterpoint really holds it together and makes it idiomatic too.

I've never tried this, but as an exercise I bet most of Ravels 1st movement to quartet 1 would work for a string section. Maybe a few spots would need to finesse but it you don't know the work then I think you are in for a pleasant listening experience.

Lastly: The final resource I personally love, but it's kinda hardcore: Academia.edu I love reading PHD dissertations on such topics.
I mean.......the whole multiphonics on woodwinds to history of string quartet bowing.

It's impossible to cover it in any one book.

Also.....it is so hard to write in words a clear explanation. Looking over what I wrote I can see a possible misunderstanding.

When I said "Within one octave" I did not mean you can't move from that. More like this passage from Grieg. See what I mean ?
The left hand is within an octave, but you can move thru the various inversions of arpeggios. THis is very playable. Go thru rehearsal letter C

Lastly two of my own examples on this

 

Yeah, yeah. I knew what you meant. I just to re-re-re-state you would never give something as complex as the bach to a section.
You have to break that up.


Ok..... warnings aside:

This is what you want

https://ks.imslp.net/files/imglnks/...Widor_-_Technique_of_the_Modern_Orchestra.pdf


All the Peter Alexander stuff was a collection of public domain text which he picked from and then sold. The charts in "Professional Orchestration" are from this text by Charles Widor.

It's free. Some of the examples look like the following. The books goes thru a dozen more pages like these. Just download from the link I gave.
It's all perfectly legit.

 

The short answer is: "but that might be because I am a guitarist."

They are fine, of course, on the double bass as it is tuned in 4ths, not 5ths. The mid-low, to low range of the Cello 5ths, is fine.

Thomas Bryla alluded to the answer. The gist is violin technique differs from guitar, and 5ths mean having to squeeze two fingers into a very tight space. The result of which leads to either bad intonation, or simply less control over vibrato.

Now ....there are some pieces that explore 5th's on the violin. Perhaps most famous is the opening of the Berg Violin Concerto.
Another is by David Lang on Hillary Hahn's 27 encores.

 

Yeah, I understand perfectly what you meant. Perhaps someone on the forum is an accomplished violinist and able to explain why better.

Also, I might still have video footage from a workshop I did where the violinist demonstrated this very question for about 10 min.


I am a guitar player myself. For the song below, I wrote the bass part by picking up a bass and playing the bass line.
When I went in to record it, the session Bassist read thru the part and said "You're a guitar player....Bass players don't play like this"




Be well !!

 

Thanks for the nice words! Hope we get to hear the prog rock solo. A few members here are Prog-rock heads so I am sure you will get detailed feedback.

 

Thanks!

Best wishes
Doug

PS. Did we ever cover that epic track and the rhythms for you?