# Studying Voice Leading (very basic question)



## all ears (Jul 21, 2016)

I have spent the past few months trying to learn as much as possible about orchestration. And while analyzing scores it is becoming very clear to me that much of the great writing I see, and the great musical effect it achieves, must be due to very good voice leading.
Could anybody please give me some advice on how to approach a systematic study of this subject (in the context of orchestral writing, especially film music)?
Of course I know about Fux's book, and I have also worked through a chapter on voice leading in the Kostka text. But it seems that this very strict approach is applied more to choral music, and I am not sure if I should be studying something different for orchestral writing.
Thanks!!


----------



## artmuz (Jul 21, 2016)

The voice leading is the same regardless of instrumentation I mean that in relation to harmony functionality. To what concerns counterpoint it just induces polyphony but still regardless of instruments.
You made the good decision to study scores, one link in that regard is: http://www.musicnewapproach.com/#!film-music-book/c94z
There are analyzed film scores and underlines of basic orchestration tricks (doubling, dovetailing etc..)


----------



## all ears (Jul 21, 2016)

Thank you very much for the reply. The site you link to is really very interesting.
I guess my main problem is to understand which of the guidelines of voice leading one really needs to follow when writing for strings (as opposed to chorus), for example. And the "why".
In the meantime I have found a site (http://www.music-cog.ohio-state.edu/Huron/Publications/huron.voice.leading.html) that seems to be concerned with the second part of my question.
But still, if anyone has an idea as to more good reading material (for someone with some working knowledge of harmony but no expert knowledge), I'd be very grateful.


----------



## artmuz (Jul 21, 2016)

Schoenberg has written many books and of these I could recommend at least two: Harmony and composition. Not the theory of harmony but: structural functions of Harmony and the other is Fundamentals of musical composition.


----------



## Farkle (Jul 21, 2016)

Not to promote EIS, but I will. Book 1 of EIS does scales and nomenclature, and is about 4 lessons. Book 2 is 22 Lessons, and is literally all about voice leading through all keys, progressions, and extensions (9ths, 11ths, etc.). And, it's designed for you to compose with immediately, so it's described practically.

If you're willing to devote 6 months with EIS, you will literally have all the voiceleading knowledge you need, in my opinion.

Mike


----------



## ed buller (Jul 21, 2016)

Hi

i'm afraid this is a massive question and lies at the heart of good writing. Traditionally, good voice leading limited your chord choices enormously. Almost all of the discipline came from techniques used in choral pieces , then applied to instruments. Many of the rules worked well but to be honest I think that since the late romantic period a lot of the more strict rules have fallen by the wayside.

In film music there tend's to be a lot more freedom. The best way to think of it is to try for smoothness where ever possible. The top Line and The bottom are usually the most audible, so pay attention to those. When it comes to orchestration be mindful of how much weight you give to the leading tone. Chord progressions in film music tend to be outside of what you'd find in fux. So be careful of how the chords are connected. Common tones and where they are place etc. A massive amount of the sound comes from just that. Listen to "the cloud" from Star Trek TMP....notice how you get this gradual climb through the Cue. Who handles it and why it raises the tension is the key .





A big influence for this Soundtrack came from this:




Very similar approach to the voice leading . What sounds like a chromatic line in the soprano is re-enforced with simple triads.

If you don't have these: http://www.brianmorrell.co.uk/filmbooks.html very good.

e


----------



## wpc982 (Jul 21, 2016)

Good grief. That ohio state reference, please do not take that as your simple basis for learning. Wow. What nonsense is put forth as 'theory'!!


A6b. _Effective stream segregation is especially thwarted when tones move in precisely positively correlated pitch direction._

[D17.] *Parallel Motion Rule.* _Avoid parallel motion more than similar motion._


----------



## JohnG (Jul 21, 2016)

Seems like you're getting a lot of pretty detailed advice and I personally would be afraid of losing one's intuition (and the fun of composing) in too much analysis.

It's sometimes worth writing a good tune or motif and an accompaniment and then working little by little to make the accompanying lines better / more complex and with, yes, better voice leading. But sometimes you just want homogenous glue in the accompaniment. Or simple, repeated eighth notes (quavers) on a succession of chords so the bass and melody are more easily heard.

My fear of a book like the one from Ludwin Music (linked above in the first reply) is that there are 10 million astute observations amounting to -- not very much, from a composer's point of view. Yes, in the example on the splash page maybe the cellos start off doubling the melody and then move to an accompanying role (or something) but -- so what? I think the emotional drive of The Road to Perdition is remarkable, but that particular detail is meaningless.

Don't get me wrong -- it looks like a cool book and fun to have.

Back to your original question:



ed buller said:


> Almost all of the discipline [in voice leading] came from choral pieces then applied to instruments.



I agree with Ed. If you can sing the part and it sounds nice on its own, it's probably a part that "has good voice leading." It's great if your parts have contrary motion, it's great if you avoid parallel 5ths and octaves, and it's nice if each line has its own personality. But a few noted composers broke all those rules: Mozart, James Newton Howard, Hanz Z, Beethoven, Beatles, Hendrix, Goldsmith, Sex Pistols, Beyonce etc.

Also, what's "singable" is in the eye of the beholder. The demands Bach placed on singers in his Bm Mass far exceed those of most of his predecessors and are much more like instrumental parts. But certainly they "make sense" by themselves, by which I think one means that they sound like a reasonable piece of music when played or sung alone, and you can hear the implied harmonic progression.


----------



## NoamL (Jul 21, 2016)

Voice leading is not as important in film music as in classical music. One of the reasons is that the chord progressions we use are often based on a lot of parallel chords. You often have _no choice_ but to have parallel fifths. That's ok, it sounds fine and it's part of film music style.

voice leading for contemporary film music, I would boil down to three rules:

1. Keep voices on common tones where possible.

2. Move to the nearest available next note.

3. b7 resolves downwards.




The rules that are still relevant, by contrast, are the rules for what voices to double when you're constructing chords in different inversions. Those rules are based on overtone phenomena and will probably be relevant for as long as people write tonal music...


----------



## bryla (Jul 21, 2016)

NoamL said:


> Voice leading is not as important in film music as in classical music. One of the reasons is that the chord progressions we use are often based on a lot of parallel chords. You often have _no choice_ but to have parallel fifths.


I would like to politely disagree:
1. I can't really see why 'we' as film composers use a lot of parallel chords. To quote Richard Bellis: "Film music" is not a KIND of music. If we score a film with "film music" it is the equivalent of musical incest.
2. For what you call parallel chords, there will always be a way to avoid parallels.
3. To quote Jack Smalley: there are no rules in music, only expectations. 

The 'rules' everyone is talking about are a set way to write idiomatical music from the era of the common practice again based on observations from the vocal music from the Renaissance. 
Many composers not doing film scores has broken the 'rules' because it was part of their voice.
So why are parallels a big deal in harmony class? Because in 4-part harmony parallel fifths and octaves negates temporarily the sensation of 4 independent voices in to 3. 
So why score a scene with parallels? If it's right for the movie!

So why study it? Because knowledge and literacy leads to deeper understanding. 

I would recommend the Robert Gauldin text and workbook that I teach from. The learning curve is steeper though than Kostka but it is good. Then take a score - of film music if you like - and reduce the string section to a condensed score to see how it is applied. Then do the same to every section of the orchestra. Then try transcribing a section of string ensemble and try to hear all the voices.

This will keep you occupied for a couple of months


----------



## Arbee (Jul 22, 2016)

Without getting too deep academically, I tend to think of voice leading as ensuring everyone gets an interesting and musical melody to play. Writing with a voice leading mindset just seems to make an arrangement flow and sound comfortable and cohesive. Big band writing perhaps exemplifies voice leading pretty well, for example ensuring the third trumpet or fourth sax chairs enjoy their parts as much as the lead players. It essentially comes back to the "singable" comments already well made in this thread.


----------



## BigImpactSound (Jul 25, 2016)

Studying voice leading is traditionally learnt be studying baroque counterpoint and renaissance counterpoint. The principles learnt can be applied (and modified) for all existing styles of music.


----------



## Norman (May 12, 2017)

JohnG said:


> Seems like you're getting a lot of pretty detailed advice and I personally would be afraid of losing one's intuition (and the fun of composing) in too much analysis.
> 
> It's sometimes worth writing a good tune or motif and an accompaniment and then working little by little to make the accompanying lines better / more complex and with, yes, better voice leading. But sometimes you just want homogenous glue in the accompaniment. Or simple, repeated eighth notes (quavers) on a succession of chords so the bass and melody are more easily heard.
> 
> ...


----------



## jononotbono (May 13, 2017)

bryla said:


> To quote Richard Bellis: "Film music" is not a KIND of music. If we score a film with "film music" it is the equivalent of musical incest.



It is a "kind" of music. It's called Film music. And the fact it breaks every single rule is what makes it so exciting.


----------



## Leon Willett (May 14, 2017)

Hello! 

When we say "good voice leading" we are actually, when you really look at it, referring to two completely separate things that we want our music to have: 

- we want each line to have melodic beauty 
- we want the journey of intervals between the lines (the moment-to-moment interval flavours) to be emotionally satisfying 

So traditional teachings can be a little confusing... until you actually separate it out. 

"Voice leading" really is two completely separate issues. Check it out: you could have two great melodic lines, but then they suck, interval-journey-wise, when played together. Or, you can have two lines that make a beautiful interval journey between them, but suck as individual melodies. 

So, it's more helpful to think of it as two separate things. Your music has an "interval journey" between the lines and also "beauty of each line" individually. 

When the theory says, for instance, that the seventh of a chord should resolve downwards, this is really because a seventh is "rubbing against" the root of the chord, making a "bitter" interval of a second. And, we love it when it then proceeds to fall away to a "sweet" third. It makes a satisfying *interval journey*. Bitter tension --> sweet release. (like, say, a B and a C played together, followed by the B falling to A while the C remains). 

A moment of bitterness followed by a moment of sweetness, all the while carried by beautiful lines... this is an example of what people really mean when they say the rather abstract and confusing term "voice leading". 

This is how I teach it, and it really has given amazing results  

Good luck!


----------



## Flaneurette (May 15, 2017)

Many good tips.

There is so much information these days. Many resources can be found, even complete free books on composition.

The Internet is amazing. In my youth there was no way to study music other than to enroll into a conservatory, private study with a notable composer or trying to figure it out by ear. I took the DIY approach because I grew up in a poor family, and there was no money for music lessons, let alone a conservatory which carefully shrouded their _secrets_ behind enormous fees. Which is a real shame...

But then came the Internet, the great equalizer.


----------



## Rowy (May 20, 2017)

artmuz said:


> Schoenberg has written many books and of these I could recommend at least two: Harmony and composition. Not the theory of harmony but: structural functions of Harmony and the other is Fundamentals of musical composition.



If I'm not mistaken Schoenberg wrote only one book about harmony. The rest was written by a student of Schoenberg.


----------



## Rowy (May 20, 2017)

Flaneurette said:


> Many good tips.
> 
> There is so much information these days. Many resources can be found, even complete free books on composition.
> 
> ...



Erm... It is my experience that even to get a good understanding of harmony, let alone composition, you need real lessons, face to face, from a qualified teacher.

Internet might be a great equalizer for some people, but it's also a destroyer of talent. Because in the old days you had to go to a conservatory or take lessons from a qualified teacher, there was no risk that you'd fall in the wrong hands. I've seen too much websites about music theory made by amateurs who spread a lot of nonsense.

So, be careful out there 

About being poor and not being able to study, that was not a problem in my country, a social democracy. Although I wasn't poor, the government paid the tuition. Not that it made much difference. A study by a sociologist showed that students of a conservatory mostly came from middle class families, while students at university came from either rich families or poor families (again, the government paid for it).

I guess it's logical. Although you didn't have to pay your tuition you still needed an instrument and if you were poor, you couldn't afford a piano or a violin. Besides, making music yourself was important to middle class families (and some of the rich), while poor families had other things on their mind.


----------

