# Flute and String runs



## Wibben (Jun 24, 2012)

I've been trying to write nice string and flute runs in my more actiony tracks, but am having a lot of trouble figuring out how actual players do it. Are there any tips or common ways to go about it? 
Right now, when I want a nice run in the music, I usually just write in a bunch of 16th notes and hope for the best. Are there any, like, common practices with runs? patterns, so to speak?

How do you usually go about it?


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 24, 2012)

Wibben @ Sun Jun 24 said:


> I've been trying to write nice string and flute runs in my more actiony tracks, but am having a lot of trouble figuring out how actual players do it. Are there any tips or common ways to go about it?
> Right now, when I want a nice run in the music, I usually just write in a bunch of 16th notes and hope for the best. Are there any, like, common practices with runs? patterns, so to speak?
> 
> How do you usually go about it?



It all depends on the scale or lack of scale that you want. What I suggest you do is start studying orchestral scores so you can begin to learn these idioms. 

To get you started though, a pretty basic one is to just use an 8 note run in a diatonic fashion from root to root. You can use any basic 7 note scale/mode for this one. So you'll have a septuplet of 16th notes running the first 7 notes then on the next beat you'll have something like an eighth note with a staccato mark or no mark, depending on the effect and/or tempo. 

There are also tonal and atonal rips. Atonal/aleatoric rips can either be notated or briefly explained in the score. A note-head with a triangle one it, depending on its location means to either play the lowest possible note or the highest possible note. If you do this in a brisk enough tempo then you'll end up with a very nice chiffy rip in the winds. 

Just look up the Infernal Dance from the Firebird by Stravinsky to see a ton of tonal rips. Then like I said, please do yourself the favor of just studying as many scores and composers as you can. It will save you a lot of time and increase your knowledge immensely.


----------



## Wibben (Jun 24, 2012)

Thanks! Will give it a try, and try to find some scores to study, do you know any good resources on the web for this purpose?


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 24, 2012)

IMSLP.org. Good luck!


----------



## Wibben (Jun 24, 2012)

Thanks! :D


----------



## Goran (Jun 24, 2012)

For the technical side of the matter you can also consult many of the John Williams' scores - he uses string and wood runs relatively often. However, this "effect" is used ad nauseam today, and you would probably be well advised not to overdo it.


----------



## bryla (Jun 25, 2012)

It's a good thing to find a section of music that uses different kinds of runs and study sonically what happens in the different situations.

Pini di Roma is also a good piece to study for this


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 25, 2012)

bryla @ Mon Jun 25 said:


> It's a good thing to find a section of music that uses different kinds of runs and study sonically what happens in the different situations.
> 
> Pini di Roma is also a good piece to study for this



Respighi is a god of orchestration. He's definitely in my top 5 of all time. The entire Roman trilogy is a treat. Also his Birds and Window pieces are FANTASTIC! 

I'd say study all of Stravinsky's ballet's if you can. They are covered with jewels at practically every measure. Shostakovich has some very cinematic moments in his music. His Symphony No. 5 is a staple in the orchestral literature. Ravel's orchestral and chamber music is spot on. His String Quartet in G Major has an iconic second mvt. that will have you smiling for sure. Smetena's Vlatava: "The Moldau" (The River) is another great one to study. The list just goes on and on and on... 

Studying isn't just for orchestration tips, but it's also for composition study. Learning how to pace, fragment, extend, use form to your advantage, etc. Immerse yourself in the literature and you'll come out better for it in the end. And as someone else said, study some JW too. He borrows just like all of us from the greats.


----------



## sbkp (Jun 25, 2012)

Casey Edwards @ Mon Jun 25 said:


> bryla @ Mon Jun 25 said:
> 
> 
> > Pini di Roma is also a good piece to study for this
> ...



I'm so glad to find other people who agree with me on this


----------



## windshore (Jun 25, 2012)

As a flute / picc player the first thing I do when I see a run like this on a session (with strings or with other instruments) is to decide whether it's: 

A: A specific line - Is it really meant to be say, a septuplet in a specific tonality?
B: Is it an effect - Is it really more of a smear that mirrors the action of a cartoon character etc.

There are many instances where runs are essentially impossible to play correctly as written. Part of that I believe is the intention of the composer to create stress or "energy" in the performance. If you really want to hear each note speak exactly the way you have written, then be sure you know the instruments well enough to know what is technically reasonable.


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 25, 2012)

sbkp @ Mon Jun 25 said:


> Casey Edwards @ Mon Jun 25 said:
> 
> 
> > bryla @ Mon Jun 25 said:
> ...



Have you ever heard anyone disagree?!?! :shock: 

Oh, and to the thread starter, listen to The Planets by Holst. That's a pretty solid dictionary of film score licks from beginning to end.


----------



## sbkp (Jun 25, 2012)

Casey Edwards @ Mon Jun 25 said:


> I'm so glad to find other people who agree with me on this



Have you ever heard anyone disagree?!?! :shock: [/quote]

Heh, no. I've just run across many people who've never even heard of him.


----------



## Chriss Ons (Jun 26, 2012)

Casey Edwards @ Mon Jun 25 said:


> I'm so glad to find other people who agree with me on this





sbkp @ 26th June said:


> I've just run across many people who've never even heard of him.




I always felt that Respighi is in the "criminally underrated" -category of 20th century composers.
I'm really stoked, because I just got tickets for the Brussels Philharmonic performing his _Pini di Roma_, early next year... I can't wait.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jun 26, 2012)

Josquin @ Tue Jun 26 said:


> I always felt that Respighi is in the "criminally underrated" -category of 20th century composers.



+1
Respighi is wonderful.

To the original poster: It helps much if you can write with global accidentials.

To everybody: Pleeez use more global accidentials (and change them accordingly), pretty pleeez ...


----------



## JaredJn (Jun 26, 2012)

First off the Moldau by smetana is BEAUTIFUL! it is one of my favorite pieces ever. Second, I just listened to Shostakovich's Symphony #5 and wondered how in the hell I've never heard this before. It is truly amazing! 

Thanks for the extra studies!


----------



## Wibben (Jun 27, 2012)

Wow! So many good music tips :D I'm not at all familiar with classical music, really, except The Planets, which I really love.

Are there any performances/orchestras that I should check out, when it comes to Respighi? It's such a vast ocean of different recordings out there.

Hannes_F: What is a Global Accidental?


----------



## Hannes_F (Jun 27, 2012)

Wibben,

accidentals tell to use black key notes, they are those little # or b symbols.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidental_%28music%29

Global accidentals mean that you write the according number of them (according to the key in which the music is written) in front of the whole piece and on the start of every note system, and that way you spare writing them in front of every individual note.

That way often runs in standard scales look quite simple when notated, with only occasional accidentals. Easier to write, easier to read, easier to understand what is going on.

If we study scores of great composers we can see a certain simplicity and clearity. The proper use of global accidentals helps a lot here.

Another item that helps a lot is the use of the proper clef for each instrument. You will notice that once you use those clefs and stay within the note system extended by only one or two ledger lines up or down you will in most cases automatically stay in the comfort zone of that instrument where all sounds fortunate. Look into any score of the greats and you understand what I mean.

These are only small things that tend to come out of fashion because of composing in the piano roll but I find them still helpful.


----------



## windshore (Jun 27, 2012)

Hannes_F @ 6/26/2012 said:


> To the original poster: It helps much if you can write with global accidentials.
> 
> To everybody: Pleeez use more global accidentials (and change them accordingly), pretty pleeez ...



+1 Amen!

It has become more fashionable lately to not use key signatures on film scores. It makes sense in some situations where the tonality is not diatonic or if it changes constantly, but I have no idea why a copyist, composer would want to avoid key signatures for most music. It really is a PITA to read!


----------



## Daryl (Jun 27, 2012)

windshore @ Wed Jun 27 said:


> Hannes_F @ 6/26/2012 said:
> 
> 
> > To the original poster: It helps much if you can write with global accidentials.
> ...


When I started to orchestrate for film I was quite shocked that scores were not written as transposing, and I was told by a very well known orchestrator (who shall remain nameless) that it was mainly because many composers were too musically illiterate to be able to read a score well in the first place, so a transposing score was mostly out of the question. :lol: 

D


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jun 27, 2012)

Daryl @ Wed Jun 27 said:


> windshore @ Wed Jun 27 said:
> 
> 
> > Hannes_F @ 6/26/2012 said:
> ...



I was quite shocked when I found this out too! I think octave transposing instruments stay transposed (like celeste, double bass, and contrabassoon to name a few) but everything else gets transposed. I'm okay with certain instruments like Bb Trumpet and Clarinet being written as sounding, but I can't stand seeing Horns written in sounding pitch. 

Also, global key signatures don't really bother me either way. Film music has A LOT of phrase modulation so that really isn't a good idea for every piece anyways. Besides, traditionally french horns don't read key signatures at all. I usually try to just be clear with double bar lines and use key signatures if needed.


----------



## Daryl (Jun 27, 2012)

Casey Edwards @ Wed Jun 27 said:


> Daryl @ Wed Jun 27 said:
> 
> 
> > windshore @ Wed Jun 27 said:
> ...


----------



## MichaelL (Jun 27, 2012)

[quote="Daryl @ Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:45 am"
When I started to orchestrate for film I was quite shocked that scores were not written as transposing, and I was told by a very well known orchestrator (who shall remain nameless) that it was mainly because many composers were too musically illiterate to be able to read a score well in the first place, so a transposing score was mostly out of the question. :lol: 

D[/quote]


>8o Holy crap. I've been transposing since I was a kid (decades ago). It's really that bad out there?


----------



## Daryl (Jun 27, 2012)

MichaelL @ Wed Jun 27 said:


> Daryl @ Wed Jun 27 said:
> 
> 
> > When I started to orchestrate for film I was quite shocked that scores were not written as transposing, and I was told by a very well known orchestrator (who shall remain nameless) that it was mainly because many composers were too musically illiterate to be able to read a score well in the first place, so a transposing score was mostly out of the question. :lol:
> ...


Some composers are very good, but there are quite a few to whom, how shall I say it, manuscript paper has always been an optional extra. :wink: 

D


----------



## Wibben (Jun 28, 2012)

Isn't it a good thing, though, that you can write great music without knowing the accepted standars of music theory, so orchestration continues to be a job for specialists? hehe 

Thank you Hannes_F for the explination of global accidentals!


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Jun 28, 2012)

Let me chime in with my theory(s) here. Some may agree some may not....

The runs you are refering to and the runs JW uses allow the composer to start the "melody" before beat 1 (which adds more intensity or aggresiveness). The septupet works great 'cause of what Casey Edwards refered to earlier, you can play all the notes of the scale leading up to the beat. I also like the septuplet because of the rhythmic irregularity of having 7 notes to one beat. A cool trick I like is to have the upper strgs say, playing a septuplet and the other instruments playing 5 notes to the beat and still others (perhaps lower instruments) playing 3 notes to the beat. Sometimes it ends up just sounding like a big in-tune Whoosh...

Anyway, like others have said, the effect can be over done. But it sure sounds great when you want to get the Orch up and running! 


As far as global accidentals, I have found that String players benifit greatly from them but brass and wind players play better with every accidental marked.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jun 28, 2012)

Wibben @ Thu Jun 28 said:


> Isn't it a good thing, though, that you can write great music without knowing the accepted standars of music theory



OF COURSE that is good!

However you were asking for 


> Are there any, like, common practices with runs? patterns, so to speak?



if you remember. :D 

And studying scales would be common practice. Not necessarily with notation, but it helps.

As for the question of global vs. individual accidentals ... here is an example of why I prefer global accidentals. A short glimpse at the first picture shows where to take care beyond the standard Eb scale ... at the spots where it gets black. The first thing to care is the minor third, the second is the chromatic end. The rest is standard.

To say it in one sentence: *When using global accidentals only the exeptions are highlighted by extra accidentals.* Automatically, no matter what you do, can't go wrong - as long as you use the right global root key. Want to go to a different root key? OK, change the global accidentals (not that I ever heard many cases of that in this forum ....)

Also, the pretty thing for you, Wibben, is: The notation shows you exactly what I thought when constructing the scale. I took a diatonic standard scale, and then the first decision was to make the third minor, not major, and the second was to insert an extra note at the end in order to make it eight notes, not seven. The writing mirrors the thinking even physically to an extent. As you might notice, there is a certain simplicity in this, and composing, notation and reading all fall in place, automatically and natural.

The second example shows what happens with individual accidentals: It often happens that the trivial notes (means: the reading-wise trivial, not musically trivial) are highlighted and bind the attention where it is not really needed.

The third example shows what can happen with individual accidentals if the composer has no clue - sharps and flats all mixed up, and it will take some time for the players to decipher this. BTW this is not an extra maleficent example but automatically produced by the notation program when inserting midi.

Again, it is all your decision, your time and your money. However learning notation as a composer is easy and can save a lot of time and money on the long term.


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Jun 29, 2012)

I would argue that a string player would look at the Globel Accidetals.Gif and go "Ohh yea that's a scale w/minor 3rd and b7th and major 7th thingy" and play it with no problem, just like rolling out of bed in the morning. A trumpet player (although this is not idyimatic of a trumpet part) would most of the time do the same thing, but has a greater chance of missing one of the accidentals. The Individual Accidental.gif has a better chance of being played correctly by the trumpet at a sight reading, Although I will concede it does not look as good.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jun 29, 2012)

Jimbo 88 @ Fri Jun 29 said:


> I would argue that a string player would look at the Globel Accidetals.Gif and go "Ohh yea that's a scale w/minor 3rd and b7th and major 7th thingy" and play it with no problem, just like rolling out of bed in the morning.



I would and a lot of other string players would, too. That is all I can say.

The reason is that standard scales lie 'in the hand' for violin and viola. Might be really different for winds and brass at that point. The second reason is that we need to eat a wholla lotta of notes and get used to read runs rather as groups, like words in contrast to letters.


----------



## Chriss Ons (Jun 29, 2012)

Wibben @ 27th June said:


> Are there any performances/orchestras that I should check out, when it comes to Respighi? It's such a vast ocean of different recordings out there.



When it comes to performance, clarity and detail, my favourite version of that work is the one on Exton records with the Radio Filharmonisch Orkest Holland under Vladimir Ashkenazy. It sounds absolutely... gorgeous, and it's the whole Roman Trilogy: Pines of Rome / Fountains of Rome / Roman Festivals. The downside is that it's an import SACD and a bit expensive.

As a great sounding introduction to Respighi's orchestral works and in terms of value for money, this 2CD-set from EMI classics is hard to beat. Can be had for like 10 euros. The included version of Pines of Rome is by the London Symphony Orchestra under the baton of Lamberto Gardelli. It also has the Ancient Airs and Dances on it, another Respighi favourite of mine.

On a final note, a good way to check for reference/recommended recordings is to see if your local library has copies of books like the grammophone/penguin classical music guides. I don't always agree with the reviews in them but over the years such books have given me invaluable pointers in putting together my classical CD collection.

Hope this helps.


----------



## bryla (Jun 30, 2012)

I'm very satisfied with a recording of the Roman Trilogi by St. Martin-in-the-fields. They are always great!


----------



## Chriss Ons (May 5, 2013)

...as mentioned before...

Brussels Philharmonic Orchestra, Julien Libeer (piano) - dir. Enrico Mazzola:

Giacomo Puccini - Preludio Sinfonico (1882)
Nino Rota - Concerto Soiree (1962)
Franz Schubert / Luciano Berio - Rendering for Orchestra (1989)
Ottorino Respighi - Pini di Roma (1924)

from the programme notes:



> (...)Another speciality where the Brussels Philharmonic profiles itself internationally is film music. The orchestra records and performs film music of stars such as Howard Shore, John Williams, or Alberto Iglesias in partnership with the Ghent Film Festival. The orchestra obtained international recognition for the Golden Globe winning film music for Martin Scorsese's 'The Aviator' (2005) and, more recently, thanks to the Oscar winning music for 'The artist' (music by Ludovic Bource). The orchestra plans to continue to extend its expertise in recording soundtracks.
> 
> _Impressions from Italy: a peaceful piazza on the edge of a hilltop, far from the stress and sweltering heat of the city. In the light of the setting sun, pine trees stand agains the rolling landscape. From a window, an aria from a Puccini opera can be heard. Summer is here..._
> 
> When the young Giacomo Puccini wrote his Preludio Sinfonico, he was already dreaming of a great career as an opera composer. His first orchestral work gives a hint of the romantic temperament which would cause furore in his later operas. We know Nino Rota from his unparalleled music for the films of Fellini or the renowned Love Theme from Coppola's 'The Godfather'- melodies that recur in his concert pieces as well. The virtuoso Concerto Soiree is bathed in poetry, but is also one of the most demanding works of the piano repertoire. Berio's restoration of Schubert's tenth, unfinished symphony recalls the frescoes of Giotto in Assisi, and gives an image of Schubert as he would sound in the modern era. Just as picturesque is the music of Ottorino Respighi. In his symphonic poem Pini di Roma, he takes the listener along on a musical tour of the pine trees of the city of Rome. From playing children and heavy traffic in the city, along mysterious catacombs and the full moon over the hills, to a triumphal procession along the Via Appia.









Indeed. the venue was half empty - I guess most people have better things to do on a Saturday evening. We (the audience) outnumbered them (the Artists) by only 4 to 1 or so. Maestro Mazzola was gracious about it - when it all was over, he kept grinning and waving at the empty balconies on levels 2/3. We got the joke, laughed, and started shouting _bravo_. And applauded for about six or seven minutes straight. My hands are still sore.

Because it was pretty brilliant. I found it hard to strike a balance between enjoying the music, and continuously watching bow movements, finger positions, listening to the sound of the orchestra - how it projected... breathed. How it contained every possible dynamic, color, with everything making perfect sense. (And how it's probably not very realistic to think you can get anywhere near this type of expression with VI's - but that doesn't mean you can't have fun trying, of course.)

It wasn't just a wonderful concert - I learned a lot. I'm not saying I _understood_ everything I observed, but listening to and watching the _real deal_ is the perfect compliment to study, I believe.

They're playing _Le Sacre_ later this month - I really should go.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 5, 2013)

Hard to beat Ravel and Debussy for this. But then, it is hard to beat them for anything musical


----------



## KEnK (May 5, 2013)

Hannes_F @ Thu Jun 28 said:


> As for the question of global vs. individual accidentals ... here is an example of why I prefer global accidentals...


Personally I prefer reading and writing w/ key signatures.
(I confess to never having heard the term "global accidentals" before this thread.
Didn't know what you meant at first.)

But I thought I'd share this unique situation.
I used to be involved w/ a ten piece fusion band that did somewhat complex material.
Everyone involved had great reading skills and it was a pleasure to write for this band.

I did subsequent bands w/ the guy who was in fact and still is the best reader I've ever encountered. 
He plays the entire sax family and flute as well.
His specialty is modern classical. Feldman, Babbit etc.

He told me he actually prefers accidentals to key sigs,
and would rather read a "C" chart than a transposed one.

A unique case indeed! But the guy is amazing.

k


----------



## Synesthesia (May 5, 2013)

Hey K,

Not necessarily that unique, a few session players in the UK have also told me they prefer reading accidentals when sight reading.

I think maybe it could come down to individual instrument families, and maybe players' backgrounds, as to whether they prefer to sight read with or without key sigs. 

One thing is that if you are doing quick pickups, the players may be swapping in and out of different keys for each pickup, maybe it adds another layer of confusion and thus possible mistakes for some players?

Also, way back, someone at JoAnn Kane told me quite a few US players prefer to read accidentals.

Its in interesting one. If I'm reading something complex (Debussy, Ravel) at the piano, key sigs make it easier, sometimes though with simpler works or works that change keys a lot within them, it would be easier to read just the accidentals.

No right or wrong answer I guess! All about context..

Cheers,

Paul


----------



## germancomponist (May 5, 2013)

Synesthesia @ Sun May 05 said:


> No right or wrong answer I guess! All about context..
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Paul



+1


----------

