# Four-part harmony?



## jsnleo (Aug 25, 2020)

Hi guys please forgive my ignorance. Could someone please tell me if four-part harmony is a must for writing strings? Do I still need to follow those rules if it's a pop song or a film score? Thanks in advance.


----------



## doctoremmet (Aug 25, 2020)

There are no rules.


----------



## Bluemount Score (Aug 25, 2020)

jsnleo said:


> Hi guys please forgive my ignorance. Could someone please tell me if four-part harmony is a must for writing strings? Do I still need to follow those rules if it's a pop song or a film score? Thanks in advance.


Only if the idea you have in mind or what your client wants requires it. Of course knowledge is (almost) always useful, but as the Dr. said, there are no strict rules otherwise - confidence in this comes with experience and trying different things out.


----------



## JohnG (Aug 25, 2020)

plenty of pop songs have only one line for strings, usually violins only; in fact, some of those are the most memorable.

Whether or not you relish those memories...


----------



## Rtomproductions (Aug 25, 2020)

Rules are helpful, but a good ear (and some decent marketing skills) is really the only thing you need to be a successful composer these days.

So sure, learn the rules. Certainly won't hurt you.


----------



## Rob (Aug 25, 2020)

agree with everything above... of course if the pop song is something like this knowing the rules helps


----------



## SupremeFist (Aug 25, 2020)

Four-part harmony is useful for writing in pretty much any genre, except maybe minimalist Belgian techno.


----------



## doctoremmet (Aug 25, 2020)

SupremeFist said:


> except maybe minimalist Belgian techno.


AKA 45 RPM techno records played on 33 RPM AKA “New Beat”


----------



## SupremeFist (Aug 25, 2020)

doctoremmet said:


> AKA 45 RPM techno records played on 33 RPM AKA “New Beat”



Sweet! 🤘🏻


----------



## Al Maurice (Aug 25, 2020)

Whenever I see a string ensemble in a pop piece, I sometimes feel are these actually doing anything other than providing pads. Might be worth considering if the players are adding value to your piece, rather than just looking the part -- excuse the pun.


----------



## doctoremmet (Aug 25, 2020)

Al Maurice said:


> Whenever I see a string ensemble in a pop piece, I sometimes feel are these actually doing anything other than providing pads. Might be worth considering if the players are adding value to your piece, rather than just looking the part -- excuse the pun.


Here’s an example of strings in a pop piece driving it ryhthmically rather than being mere pads:


----------



## muk (Aug 26, 2020)

When writing for strings, there are countless other options to use apart from four-part harmony. There are unlimited things you can write. However, there also a million things that you can't write if you don't know four-part harmony. 

Is it mandatory? No. There is a lot you can write without it. But there is also a lot that you can't write. So learning it is definitely worth it, as it will broaden and enrich your style.

Here is a pop song with beautiful four part harmony in the solo strings:


----------



## Traz (Aug 26, 2020)

This is one of my favorite songs ever. I'm not completely sure what techniques were used to write the strings but it sounds like a lot of voice leading is going on.

I'm not sure if voice leading necessarily always means four part harmony, I'm still learning about all this stuff. 

Maybe I should use my ear training and try to work out this song sometime.


----------



## ansthenia (Aug 31, 2020)

Learning 4-part harmony is very valuable so I recommend learning it, but you only have to apply it when it helps you achieve the texture you're aiming for:

You follow the rules of 4-part harmony when your goal is to have 4 consistently separate parts that sound good by themselves and create nice sounding harmony together. You break the rules of 4-part harmony when this isn't your goal. Say at one point you want two of those lines to join together and play the melody simultaneously while the other two join together to play a background line, doing this is breaking basic rules of 4-part harmony (parallel unisons), but because your goal isn't to have 4 separate parts at this point then these rules don't apply anyway. In this new texture of two lines (being played by 4 instruments) some knowledge of counterpoint would perhaps be valuable.

The better your knowledge of counterpoint and harmony, the better you will be at achieving your desired texture and maintaining it/breaking it as desired. It is very valuable for any composer, even if some are still very good without it, it can only help.


----------



## Dave Connor (Aug 31, 2020)

The short answer is yes. Strings are essentially a 4-part group of instruments. Understanding how to make use of the parts in relation to each other while always maintaining resonance is worth studying. That is, those who make it a point to thoroughly study 4-part writing generally excel beyond those who don’t - to where the musical results reflect it - and obviously so.


----------



## MaxOctane (Sep 3, 2020)

jsnleo said:


> Hi guys please forgive my ignorance. Could someone please tell me if four-part harmony is a must for writing strings? Do I still need to follow those rules if it's a pop song or a film score? Thanks in advance.



Hi @jsnleo. It would help us answer your question if you posted some examples of the music you're trying to write. Are there composers you want to emulate, or specific pieces/songs you like the strings on, or youtube clip of some film/TV score that you want to have a go at?

"Writing strings" can mean a million things, from Haydn harmonically-perfect quartets to experimental 20-minute atonal works.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 3, 2020)

jsnleo said:


> Hi guys please forgive my ignorance. Could someone please tell me if four-part harmony is a must for writing strings? Do I still need to follow those rules if it's a pop song or a film score? Thanks in advance.


Having done a lot of string arrangements in my day all I can say is that strings pretty much compete in the same range as synths, guitars, basses, pianos, vocals, ect. 

So it depends.

The idea being to think of the song as a whole and the strings as part of that whole. If for say it's a piano vocal more ballad type song then of course strings will play a bigger roll. If it's more of middle swing type rock tune, strings will mostly just get in the way and you have to chose your moments. Then strings become more rhythmic and the harmony less important than just the bite and laying down which can be done with chords or not, just depends. If it's a hip hop type tune or RandB then the instrumentals are so sparse that you can do a lot and it just has to have the right feel and be right.

The other thing to know is that not a lot of people study arranging like an art form these days. Not so in the past but these days hardly anybody takes the time to actually learn how strings for example fit into a pop song. So there's a lot of really painfully lame arrangements these days that wasn't so in the past when there were more professional arrangers, musicians and producers doing things. Then people wonder why records stopped selling and blame internet downloads and not really looking at the fact that the arrangements by and large are just ignorant. But I digress.

My suggestion is to find 10 songs like the one you're trying to arrange strings on (that have also string arrangements) and listen to them over and over and over and over again. Then sit down and do your arrangement, the next thing you know, you can bang out an excellent arrangement in about 1 hour provided that you have some idea of harmony ect..


----------



## JohnG (Sep 3, 2020)

José Herring said:


> So there's a lot of really painfully lame arrangements these days that wasn't so in the past when there were more professional arrangers, musicians and producers doing things. Then people wonder why records stopped selling and blame internet downloads and not really looking at the fact that the arrangements by and large are just ignorant.



laughing over here. very true


----------



## Romy Schmidt (Sep 8, 2020)

jsnleo said:


> Hi guys please forgive my ignorance. Could someone please tell me if four-part harmony is a must for writing strings? Do I still need to follow those rules if it's a pop song or a film score? Thanks in advance.



No, four-part harmony is not a must. I prefer five-part harmony. Real five-part harmony, not four-part harmony with a bass that doubles the cello.


----------



## Film Sounds (Sep 11, 2020)

I only ever write strings in 20 part harmony and fugue. Every other desk splits so each string section has 4 voices in it, all tuned to different complimentary systems. I've been told my music is so complex that it takes a lifetime to be able to comprehend what's really going on.

Rules can both restrain you into doing great things and restrain you from doing greater things. Up to you what to use and how to use it.


----------



## jsaras (Sep 11, 2020)

Just write minor pentatonic scale unisons with a 100-string patch. Works for a lot of people.


----------



## Dave Connor (Sep 11, 2020)

Romy Schmidt said:


> No, four-part harmony is not a must. I prefer five-part harmony. Real five-part harmony, not four-part harmony with a bass that doubles the cello.


However number of voices you get up to 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 etc., these are all variants of the 4 part texture historically. Which you probably know.


----------



## Heinigoldstein (Sep 11, 2020)

Al Maurice said:


> Whenever I see a string ensemble in a pop piece, I sometimes feel are these actually doing anything other than providing pads. Might be worth considering if the players are adding value to your piece, rather than just looking the part -- excuse the pun.




Mmh, here they definitely add a lot of value


----------



## Saxer (Sep 11, 2020)

I love the string writing of Claus Ogerman. Ok, he absolutely knew how to write for four (or five or fifteen) string parts. But he didn't need to!


----------



## Loïc D (Sep 11, 2020)

doctoremmet said:


> Here’s an example of strings in a pop piece driving it ryhthmically rather than being mere pads:




And pretty much anything by Neil Hannon / Divine Comedy.


----------



## Living Fossil (Sep 11, 2020)

Saxer said:


> I love the string writing of Claus Ogerman. Ok, he absolutely knew how to write for four (or five or fifteen) string parts. But he didn't need to!




Claus Ogerman is fantastic.

Do you know this link?:



The Work of Claus Ogerman



(i think i posted it some years ago)

There is a part with arrangements (lots of manuscripts), a real treasure trove:

Link to arrangements


p.s. i also absolutely love his use of flutes...


----------



## Romy Schmidt (Sep 12, 2020)

Dave Connor said:


> However number of voices you get up to 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 etc., these are all variants of the 4 part texture historically. Which you probably know.



Yes, I know  

5-Part sounds better on a piano and it's easier to orchestrate than 4-Part harmony.


----------



## GNP (Sep 12, 2020)

jsnleo said:


> Hi guys please forgive my ignorance. Could someone please tell me if four-part harmony is a must for writing strings? Do I still need to follow those rules if it's a pop song or a film score? Thanks in advance.



It's not a must, unless if you're trying to write a Fugue.


----------



## Rob (Sep 12, 2020)

Living Fossil said:


> Claus Ogerman is fantastic.
> 
> Do you know this link?:
> 
> ...



Long time Ogerman fan here... I was the one to post the link really, back in 2015:






Claus Ogerman scores


Many of you already know this, but I found it recently while looking for strings scores by one of my favorite arrangers... it's a site held by Mrs Barbara J., with handwritten and printed orchestral scores sent and approved for download and consulting by Ogerman himself. There's most of his work...




vi-control.net


----------



## Living Fossil (Sep 12, 2020)

Rob said:


> Long time Ogerman fan here... I was the one to post the link really, back in 2015:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, you're right, that's where i got it originally from! 
In the mean time, i've reposted it several times on several places...


----------

