# Orchestra Strings



## novaburst (Feb 4, 2016)

Hi I just could not find what I wanted to here in any of the post, so needed to do a new thread.

Let me be quick, ok 

8 basses, 10 cellos, 16 violins, 14 violas.

The question is playing a chord. lets just say C major: is it correct to have all the instruments to play a single note, say basses the C note, cello on the E note and violins and violas on the G note, to make the chord all together this is the way I am currently doing it.

Or is it correct to have all instruments play the same chord all at once say all 10 violins playing C major chord, all cellos playing C major chord and so on.

Or is there any rules to this at all and play as you feel.


----------



## afterlight82 (Feb 4, 2016)

that's a very low-orientated section, will be violin-light (not that that is bad, necessarily!). Ordinarily you'd be looking at 16 first violins, 14 seconds, 12 violas, 10 celli, 8 bass, which is a popular 60 player lineup that balances pretty well.

I've pushed away from 8 basses, but that's just me on sessions. I think 6 usually sounds better, 8 is no louder and doesn't give you any extra bottom end that can't be achieved with less loss of clarity, but sometimes you need the extra bodies against the brass section...just depends. Also, divisi double basses is rarely a good idea, especially in 8ves.

As to the rest of the question, the answer is pretty much the _entirety_ of the subject of string orchestration, could write a book on that subject. I'd suggest you think about less in terms of bodies on which note, and more about the voice spacing...what's the function of each line? What's the voice leading requirements, is one part the melody, in which case, do you maybe want a few extra bodies on that line? There's myriad ways to do it.

Generally, you want to have wider intervals the lower down you go, the harmonic series is a good place to start to see the "basic" spacings as you go up in the chord, if you're looking for a very homogenous sound, but it's not a rule. There aren't any rules. Only guidelines and what you want it to actually sound like in context. Vln 1 divisi a 6 (senza vib. very high up) is a fantastic sound, and so, conversely, is everybody tutti in unison octaves. It just depends. Most of what sounds good in terms of spacing on the piano can be translated to strings in some way (but again, not all...)


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Feb 4, 2016)

Having played cello for many years in orchestra (long ago and far far away) I can tell you that just about anything you can imagine has been done in terms of arranging a chord or a note among the strings.

The most traditional sound would be to avoid crossing one section over another (Violins should be unison or higher than violas) and to get a uniform sound have each section in the same relative range. For example if in the high range for violin, use high range for both violas and cellos to help achieve a unified string sound.

However, lot of composers will "cross over" to make a section stand out. For example, cellos high in their register, everyone else low in their registers, and the result will be that the cellos will stand out.

There are no rules, but there are typical arrangements to get a certain sound. Want a rich, lush, full sound? Use divisi in each section, excpet the basses. Rarely see divisi in the basses. That sort of thing.


----------



## airflamesred (Feb 4, 2016)

I think the former is nearer the mark but you can invert the chord and the instrumentation - many, many ways to do it.


----------



## Morodiene (Feb 4, 2016)

If you think about each section being a different "voice", you can spell out chords differently. Remember you want to have the root of the chord be doubled, but you don't want to double the 3rd or the 5th. Also, what you put in the basses will be the inversion of the chord, so you can make some nice effects with inversions (3rd or 5th in the bass). For a full sound, have the violins go pretty high, and basses go pretty low and fill everything else in the middle. For less full, work more in the middle ranges.

Take a look a full scores of music that you'd like to emulate. Try to find something relatively simple to start with, and see what things the composer did to write for these instruments and how they work together.


----------



## novaburst (Feb 4, 2016)

Thanks all some great advice and tips *4real* really helped out.


----------



## JohnG (Feb 4, 2016)

you need an orchestration book


----------



## muk (Feb 5, 2016)

You have gotten some great answers already. The thing is, your question is incredibly basic. As John writes, you have much learning before you. Try to learn the basics of harmony and orchestration. In addition, open as many scores as you can get your hands on, and listen to the music with the score in front of you. Then study the score thoroughly to see how the music is written, how the piece is orchestrated. If you hear anything that you like and don't know how it was achieved: try to get a score and find out how it was done.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 5, 2016)

One thing that has helped to open up the string arrangements is use inversions of the chord and widen them, so f .e:
1) C minor:
C-Es-G can be:
( from low to high)
C-G-Es
Es-C-G
G-Es-C
So these chords already get strechted over a 2 octave range.

Now you can play with this in lower ranges and higher ranges, and if you would use your question literally, a choice can be to use the lower note with Celli, then Violas, and then Violins.
But as many said before, now you head into what kind of sound you are after, so it means experiment with it.
Use only celli, only violas, or lower 2 notes Celli and upper violas or violins.
And all the combinations of it in the whole playing ranges.

And as is obvious, the basic chords used can be varied, minor, major, diminished, augmented, etc will all ask for their own way of arranging it, and there is no rule......
but you need something to start with.

Important: enjoy the discovery process, as many composers will say that( if you really compose) it will be a learning process for the rest of your life.
Unless you want to repeat yourself ( no, not the forum member)


----------



## novaburst (Feb 5, 2016)

Orchestra is a new field for me, I got converted excuse the expression but I fell in love with orchestra in July in 2015, so not even a year still a babe, but soon realized the approach to it is not like conventional music or the popular music.

So for instance I remember scratching my head wondering why the violins would not play below G 2 note on my 88 keys key board

Which is why the information, advice given hear may seem simplistic to many but gold nuggets to me

Thanks again.


----------



## dreamnight92 (Feb 6, 2016)

If I understand your question: you used to write for synth and keys and balance each instrument by itself...orchestral world is different! Each instrument has its own range and also the timbre is not constant throughout the dynamic and extension range. 

Your question is: should I treat a single section as a synth/pad and balance it for itself? The answer is NO! 
As other said you'll need to study a little orchestration tecniques...but I can give you a quick advice for strings: if are writing JUST chords for accompaniment you should write a 5 voice chord (double octave bass note) using normal rules you know as strings were an unique sections, then you can distribuite the voices for each section from bottom to top...but keep in mind that strings usually sounds best with open voices spacing


----------



## dreamnight92 (Feb 6, 2016)

Here an example


----------



## novaburst (Feb 6, 2016)

I am working on a small simple piece of music not sure if I have the right to call it orchestral.
But here is a little part of the intro,

Well this may sound funny but I want you to tear it apart with constructive criticize m .

So what are the does and what are the donts, what to do before I carry on with it.

Thanks in advance Edit


----------



## novaburst (Feb 11, 2016)

Hi music people please can you give me some intake on this piece I really don't mind you all telling whats wrong, I don't want to invest time and go the wrong way. 

I uploaded it to a friend of mine and she said the piano riff is to long and is a bit out, tell me what you think, I did agree with her


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Feb 11, 2016)

commenting on another music I am very careful with, and I take it you are a beginner at this kind of music.

There is so much to learn (for me too still) that you can start anywhere:
Have you done something with what is given in this thread so far and applied it to this piece? Have you tried "widening" the chords as I suggested in an earlier post?
Did you listen to some more (simple) pieces and tried to listen what the various string sections are doing?
Do you know a little bit about counter point writing? have you tried doing it?
Have you tried working with more melodies at the same time? And that some melodies have a longer time whilst others (below or above it) are more quicker or short termed? Have you tried rhythmical structures?

All of this and many, many more things, needs to be learned before I can give you anything on this piece of music. And I think by the time you have learned some of the above, you will have moved on from the current piece you ask advice about.

I give you one thing you could try: make the strings moving and not static. Let them flow in melodic lines. Experiment with it.

Addition: music is not about the knowledge that you need. As you may know, f.e. Vangelis did not have any formal training. He is very intuitive and plays for long hours in a day. Some of that gives fruition into music that we as "audience" eventually receive. So you don't need to know anything other then a good musical ear for creating music.
Then if you want you can gather the knowledge on your way.


----------



## Rob (Feb 11, 2016)

novaburst said:


> I am working on a small simple piece of music not sure if I have the right to call it orchestral.
> But here is a little part of the intro,
> 
> Well this may sound funny but I want you to tear it apart with constructive criticize m .
> ...




very nice start for a piece... I really like it. What I hear, before talking strings writing, is that the strings should come in and out in a much gentler way, swelling from piano to mf very flexibly, you could use a controller for that, making every phrase start from almost nothing to full sound, and concluding going back down to pp... then you could start thinking in terms of voices moving, of contrapuntal lines and maybe adding some appoggiaturas here and there to give more interest to harmony. But as it is already to me sounds like a promising start.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Feb 11, 2016)

Hi novaburst, I listened to your little piece which is nice but can be even nicer if you work on the programming and the mix. 
The reverb you're using sounds really artificial so you definitely should find a better one and avoid drowning your instruments with it so they still have space to breathe.
Regarding the string programming, I don't which library you're using but it sounded synthy. It may be because of the reverb or the samples themselves. And as other forum members have pointed out, your strings section is really low oriented and you can hear it in your piece. The chord played by the strings is too full and this creates a bit of a mess in the low part. I think you should make your violins/violas more stand out of the rest by removing some contra basses and cellos.
Keep practicing and working, your track is really nice to listen to and this is quite encouraging!


----------



## Morodiene (Feb 11, 2016)

While reverb and mix may be a problem, the main focus right now should be on the part writing, IMO. You seem to have a lot of parallel motion in the chords. An example of this would be at 0:29 where you have a chord progression of (I think) Dm, Em, F, G. There's nothing wrong with doing this, except that the chords seem to be spelled the same way, either they're all in root position or in the same inversion on all 4. This creates something called parallel motion between the outside voices if in root position. 

So in this case, that means you have in the first chord a perfect 5th created by D and A, and then the 2nd chord, another perfect 5th from E and B, another 5th from F to C, and then finally from G to D. Sometimes you can get away with this if you are writing something that is distinctly 5th, like Debussy did to invoke a more oriental/eastern sound. However, your sound is pretty 'western', so you are going to want to change the inversions to avoid this parallel motion. The intervals to avoid between voices are parallel 4ths, 5ths, and octaves. You can have parallel 3rds and 6ths all day long (and 2nds and 7ths too, but that can create a lot of dissonance).

With the above chords, if you want to maintain in the violins the A B C D melody, then you'll need to change the notes below them to avoid that parallel motion. One thing that really helps is to do contrary motion. You could in the cellos start on D, then go down to G (I thought about B here, but then you'd have B in the violins as well, which would be doubling the 3rd of the chord, and you only want to double the root), then A, then G. Have the basses do the same an octave lower. Then you have Dm in too position, Em in 1st inv., F in 1st inv., and then G in root. Then fill in with violas the missing note of each chord.

I haven't spent much time to double-check this, but it hopefully gives you an idea. Also note that the chords are more spread out. Don't be afraid to have violins up the octave, too, if it needs more space. The piano is in the middle of the keyboard, and then your strings are also, but strings can easily go up the octave so it's not interfering with what the piano is doing.


----------



## novaburst (Feb 11, 2016)

Yes thanks all, I do have books but what is posted bear is so much more value, really sorry to have to bug you for this .

Really helps so much thanks for imparting that knowledge now I feel armed.

And thanks for taking the time to listen to the piece to give the Intel


----------



## Morodiene (Feb 11, 2016)

novaburst said:


> Yes thanks all, I do have books but what is posted bear is so much more value, really sorry to have to bug you for this .
> 
> Really helps so much thanks for imparting that knowledge now I feel armed.
> 
> And thanks for taking the time to listen to the piece to give the Intel


Something that I encountered as a pianist trying to write for orchestra is that there are things that you do for piano writing that you can't really do for part writing. I can name you many examples of great pieces of piano literature where there are parallel 5th and chords all in the same inversion for measures at a time, but do that just once in a 4-part string harmony and it just doesn't work. But you have to start somewhere and get your hands dirty with it. That's the best way to learn.

One other comment about part writing: the best way to avoid parallel motion is oblique motion. This means that if you have a C chord and then a G chord, they share the note G in common, so it would be best to have one voice play G-G and that really helps avoid parallel motion. In your instance above, there weren't any notes in common from one chord to the next. That happens too, but it's good to keep an eye out for wherever you can use oblique motion in your writing.

Do you write out your scores, or just play it in by ear? For me, actually seeing the notes really helps to quickly identify mistakes and ways to correct, since sometimes it can be hard to hear them at first. If you're not good at reading/writing music, then this will be great practice or you to get better.


----------



## novaburst (Feb 11, 2016)

@Morodiene I forgot to mention You were correct on the progression of chords in your earlier post they are the chords I am using,

Your knowledge and in tell on notes and chords is very deep it has helped out a lot I am copying this page.

I play my chords and play notes by ear first and then write it out I think I just want to here the progress or being lazy 

I have been been to school for some music theory on a very low level, as what I am hearing from you guys is a leap ahead of time, 

I have never heard of the word counter point never heard it mentioned until this forum

but thanks again for imparting your skills and knowledge.


----------



## WhiteNoiz (Feb 11, 2016)

For a sketch, it's OK-ish. Overall, it feels like you're playing a piano-strings synth patch. The huge block chords clash at the same frequencies/ranges and it creates a muddiness (on the strings themselves and on the strings in combination with piano), which is also helped by the flat dynamics. I get a brickwall feeling. I like the violins going up at the beginning. It was a nice short idea. And the cello "answer" later, although it feels a bit rushed. The rest seems like you copy-pasted the piano track. Huge sustained chords on strings seem to work better on pop, beats or arrangements of that type which aren't particularly busy and would appreciate the richness more. And often don't aim to be particularly realistic. For traditional orchestra, it feels a bit of out place [for me]. Not that it can't be used but I don't really recall an example with such blunt, consecutive blocky movement (don't be offended, I'm still developing too :D), so there's that*... Even then, I'd expect something more like "soft sustained bed with piano or solo melody on top". And I'd probably use it on p or mp dynamic and also vary it a bit. That's where the dynamics bit also comes in. The way you did it, you seem to oversaturate the spectrum without a very meaningful impact.

I also think you had some short 'runs' that went like E-Eb-D which don't really seem to fit. I'd change it to E-D-C or something.

But yeah, you have to start somewhere... Listen to some soundtracks or performances/recordings to get ideas for orchestration, instrument-specific typical lines (arpeggios, runs, fx, shorts...), articulations, combos... "Devices". Books are also helpful but I find that it's better to develop your inner ear first before jumping to specifics ("_Oh, so that thing was a Tuba after all._", "_Hm, hadn't thought about using tremolo this way_" or maybe even "_So, that's called tremolo... Hm. Note for later._" and stuff). Actively listen; analyse when listening. Enjoy but also try to understand what it is exactly you enjoy and what lies underneath that "sells" it in a specific way. The timbres, textures... Much like a "bland" piano chord that can sound great and take you places as a pad... Or the same melody at a different range or instrument.

Don't just pick up theoretical terms. Try to see how they really apply and try to discover some things yourself. Mix the feeling with the technicality.

I've been listening for years to the same pieces for hours a day before I internalised some stuff. Then developed it some more by transcribing (for the specifics and corrections as well as improving the guesswork). Once you get the feel it'd be quite helpful to take a track you've internalised and look up the score or transcribe it to see in-depth and turn it more easily to knowledge compared to just theory or looking at some 'soulless' charts and sheets with nothing to draw from. Then you can also move to instrument ranges and stuff. Mix it up. Still, I'd value internalisation of use of tremolo more than "there's measured and unmeasured tremolo". Although you'll probably climb up the specifics ladder according to what new obstacles or needs you face (mostly when you start to wonder "Is this playable?" :D). Of course, the more technical/practical stuff you know, the better. But don't be overwhelmed.

Even for piano-strings music you can have more complex lines, melodies on more sections etc. Making a string sustain bed with piano on top would also work. It's just this bit of "everything, everywhere at the same time following the same pattern/movement" that screams more "jamming" or "keyboards" instead of "orchestra" or "finished piece". (Which this I'm guessing wasn't supposed to be but anyway...)

I think you can do better. You have an ear for variation, just make it more specific, flowing and balanced. I say it both as a listener and a musician; apparently not at the level of many others in terms of theory, but I have come to a point where I think I can form a valid opinion.

* See at about 16:10 for an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9mGQU7rGGM (www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9mGQU7rGGM) (Orchestral; This is a very good example of string writing ideas/softer passages [and a lot of the typical stuff like flute fills and strings dubs, higher cellos with horns, woodwind sections, woodwind combos, xylo accents, piano with orchestra/strings, harps, solo leads...; beautiful] and the picture helps you follow what's going on)

But even there, it's very sparse and the strings lean toward *fp*. (Short to medium forte to piano bursts) At least, I'd use fp for bursts and tie lines a bit more and make them more dynamic for more flowing stuff)

Btw, I made an edit based on yours, albeit a bit different:
https://instaud.io/private/918895d1b849d99c8634d1f607d302f4e1ad249f

In the end, I'd make it more tied and dynamic. Dunno, it sounds more open to me. Overall, I wouldn't say that this is a very typical example of orchestral (string) writing... At least not according to my perception.

Didn't spend too much time on it. Just a slightly different take to spark some ideas.

Anyway, if you're also into piano-strings or generally softer pieces, I think these (and the one linked above) are some of the better references:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfz-XDWPt-M (www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfz-XDWPt-M) (Some Vivaldi vibes)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0wPoqrfrzM (www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0wPoqrfrzM) (More cinematic)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koM48s00ZFQ (www.youtube.com/watch?v=koM48s00ZFQ)

It's a quite DIY and personal approach but that's it for me. For what it's worth... Should've probably stopped at the E-C-B part but I was feeling creative. Not sure where this came from but there, you have it.  Pardon the seemingly teaching tone.


----------



## novaburst (Feb 12, 2016)

@WhiteNoiz thanks for you addvice and thanks a million for those links, and most of all thanks for that nova sketch I don't think I can get the mark off my face from smiling when I listen to that , that was a very nice piece it came alive.

I think I have a treasure chest in these post I don't no why suddenly I fell in love with orhcestra, but I must say the people involved in this music are just as nice, I really appreciate what advice I have received from you all, with in just a few days I have become a new musician simply because there are so many people here that want others to do well , just these few days I have learned so much and would dare to say more so than I learn in uni back in the days.

You all are the best.


----------



## FredericBernard (Feb 25, 2016)

novaburst said:


> Hi I just could not find what I wanted to here in any of the post, so needed to do a new thread.
> 
> Let me be quick, ok
> 
> ...



Some other people already gave some good advice. But I'd like to add some points.

Generally speaking there are TONS of ways in how you could arrange chords for a string orchestra, even for something simple like a C-Major chord.

One very simple "rule" for arranging in general is starting low with big intervals, and the more higher you go, the more smaller the intervals get.
Let me explain this to you with a simple C-Major chord:

Bass: C
Cello: c
Violas: g
violins II: c'
Violins I: e'

So as you can see, Basses and Celli starting out by playing an octave, then the viola one fith above, Violins II a fourth above, and finally Violins I a third above..

Here's another example:

Bass: C
Cello: c+g (either as divisi or unisono, it's up to you**...)
Violas: c'
violins II: e'
Violins I: g'

BTW, Basses and Celli just doubling in octaves is very common, also in today's film scores..... and it gives you some nice fundament
FYI, actually they commonly played this way a few hundred years back, were Cello and Double Bass were never divided from each other. That's also why the double bass is called double bass....simply because its original function was to simply double other instruments like the Cello.
.....so as a simple bottom line: with Celli and Basses in octaves you could most likely never go wrong.

**unisono would mean ALL cellists would have to play both notes on their instruments, while divisi would mean that for instance 4 Cellists would play the c while 4 others would play the g. Unisono would sound stronger in nature, but would be generally harder to play. Also keep in mind that stronger reg. louder is not always better....
(....plus session string players just don't like unisono chords )



novaburst said:


> Or is it correct to have all instruments play the same chord all at once say all 10 violins playing C major chord, all cellos playing C major chord and so on.



Yes, this specific technic you are describing is actually most commonly done for very powerful opening or closing chords of a piece (John Williams also loves to do this).
Most commonly the players would play the big chords as unisono (or "divided unisono") especially in classical music.
Also keep in mind that Double Basses (compared to Violins, Violas and Celli) would most certainly never play any whole chords (most commonly only octaves or fiths at best, and these also as divisi...so divided on several double basses).

Take a look at the very last page from Tchaikovskys famous first Piano Concerto and you'll know how such a big string chord would look like in practice:

http://petrucci.mus.auth.gr/imglnks/usimg/9/95/IMSLP34851-PMLP02744-Tchaikovsky-Op23v1FSmuz.pdf

....anyway, there is MUCH more to know, and you would most certainly need a while till you got to know all the fundamentals of string writing.

Strings in general are something extremely versaitle. There are not only tons of ways of how you could arrange chords, but also a plethora of different playing technices they can use. Arco, pizzicato, tremolo, sul tasto, sul ponticelo, detache, stacatto, spicatto, riccochet, col legno, flagolet, glissando/portamento, con sordino, sul una corda, etc..... just to wildly throw in some names 

Anyway, hope this helps thought.

-Frederic


----------



## novaburst (Feb 26, 2016)

@FredericBernard Thanks for the knowledge esp on instrument section really helps, also nice to know John Williams has used similar technique


----------



## tav.one (Feb 26, 2016)

Very useful information, can anyone suggest books that have this type of knowledge for beginners...mainly writing for strings (and brass, woodwinds) & diving chords over different sections?


----------



## FredericBernard (Feb 26, 2016)

Yes, check out http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0240814134/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_1/186-5113364-0569707?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_r=0A98SHBW1TARKXGA4YYY&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_p=1944687742&pf_rd_i=0964670526 (this) one.....this was the one which I mainly used when I was starting out.
You could also try out http://www.amazon.com/Study-Orchestration-Third-Samuel-Adler/dp/039397572X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1456513409&sr=1-1&keywords=adler+orchestration (this) one, which is something like the standard orchestration bible everybody is using.

Another thing you could do (besides score study) is to make transcriptions by ear of already existing compositions.
It's a real great way to learn orchestration technices.


----------

