# Orchestration question?



## LML88 (Nov 10, 2016)

Hi,

I'm looking for some info on orchestration; mainly, which parts can co-exist and which can not.
I only have a strings library currently (cinestrings) so for now that's the part of the orchestra I'm referring to with my question.

I've been looking into how an orchestra is set up; how many instruments, positions etc which I understand.
What I'm unsure of is how the different articulations are played. How are Long, legato strings blended with short staccato strings and which instruments play which?

Basically I'm trying to avoid having parts playing together that wouldn't translate with a real life orchestra.
I feel I don't have the basics down of what can be played and what can't, so I might be playing too much with one section.

does anyone have any info on this they could point me to?

Thanks a lot


----------



## Lassi Tani (Nov 10, 2016)

Listen to some music and get scores. I bought Star Wars the Force Awakens and Holst Planets scores and have been studying those, and I've been learning a lot.

Also, try this tutorial: http://evenant.com/articles/a-practical-approach-to-orchestration


----------



## JohnG (Nov 10, 2016)

strings can divide quite a bit, so don't be timid about it. Nevertheless, sekkosiki's suggestion is good.


----------



## AllanH (Nov 10, 2016)

The classic "Principles of Orchestration" by Rimsky-Korsakov has many examples of how to combine instruments and what works well together in his opinion. The book also exists as a free kindle or PDF.

https://amzn.com/0486212661


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Nov 10, 2016)

The art of orchestration is a huge topic. Your desire to focus first on one section of the orchestra, the strings, is a wise choice. Reading one of the books on orchestration is good, but perhaps a better way to begin is to look closely at a piece of music. You can then see how the concepts you mention work in context. I suggest you start with a classical piece of music, because you can download a free score, listen to the music free on YouTube, then try to mockup a section with your Cinestrings and get a feel for how close you can get to real strings sound.

I suggest you begin with the Mozart "Eine Kleine Nachtmusic" because it has wonderful melodies which will make your investigations fun. You will find plenty of examples of legato (slurred), sustained (notes without markings) and staccato (the little dots above the notes). Sorry if you already knew that. Here is a link to a free score

http://www.davideverotta.com/A_folders/Teaching/CW3/4.Mozart_EineKleineNachtmusik.pdf

Here is a link to a YouTube recording with video, so you can watch the strings play the different articulations:



Here is a link to a MIDI file. You can load this into your DAW which will save you a lot of work recording parts, you will find it listed under "serenades":

http://www.kunstderfuge.com/mozart.htm#Divertimenti

You will find that assigning articulations to the midi notes does not yield a very convincing performance, but you will start to get a feel for the comparison to the real thing. You probably already know about recording your own "playing" of each line into your DAW to improve the result. However, especially with strings, you will need to do a substantial amount of painting in CC data to begin to get a pleasing result.

Using samples can be a lot of fun, exciting, and challenging. It can also be very frustrating and sometimes seem impossibly difficult. Despite years of off and on effort, I still consider myself to have very weak midi mockup skills. But there are people on this site who are brilliant with using samples so well that it becomes difficult to distinguish the mockup from reality. Have fun!


----------



## ghandizilla (Nov 10, 2016)

I think Anze Rosman's "MeHaRyTe" approach is clearer than the Samuel Adler's foreground/background approach, and it can be as much versatile since it lets room for accents, doublings, heterophony, and more. It reminds me of Walter Piston's approach, so if you want to go deeper, it's the recommended reading. See also his gem http://evenant.com/articles/3-beginner-orchestration-mistakes (3 Common Mistakes) article. I also learned a lot by reading Ryan Leach's articles here and there.

Nevertheless, the best way to make significant progress is to transcribe (create mock-up) of the great masters. And even toy with it, invent your own continuations! I recommend Nobuo Uematsu and Danny Elfman to begin with, and then Prokofiev, Ravel, Stravinski to go further. I would not recommend to mock-up John Williams right away without having strong basic skills.

If you can spend some money on education, Mike Verta's stuff is really practical (Composition 1, Orchestration 1 & 2, and Secret Weapons are in my opinion the most useful masterclasses for beginners). I also heard great things about Scoreclub.net's Orchestrating the line course.


----------



## mducharme (Nov 10, 2016)

I would recommend purchasing Kennan's "The Technique of Orchestration". It has the best organization for a beginner, bringing you through the topics in a logical order. The Adler and the Piston have good information but are not organized as well. It is very difficult for someone without a teacher to learn from the Adler.

Some of the other examples like the Rimsky-Korsakov are fine but are kindof old and do not include instrumentation information. The Rimsky-Korsakov focuses mostly on various doubling choices, which is probably a little advanced if you are just starting out. It is more useful of a book after you have already done orchestration study with another book like the Kennan

One good book that just entered public domain is Joseph Wagner's 1959 "Orchestration: A Practical Handbook", which has lots of examples of piano music scored for orchestra. It is available on archive.org. It is probably the best relatively modern free orchestration book.


----------



## LML88 (Nov 17, 2016)

sekkosiki said:


> Listen to some music and get scores. I bought Star Wars the Force Awakens and Holst Planets scores and have been studying those, and I've been learning a lot.
> 
> Also, try this tutorial: http://evenant.com/articles/a-practical-approach-to-orchestration




Good idea. I particularly like Holst so that should be fun.
Thanks for the link!


----------



## LML88 (Nov 17, 2016)

JohnG said:


> strings can divide quite a bit, so don't be timid about it. Nevertheless, sekkosiki's suggestion is good.



Good point, thank you.


----------



## LML88 (Nov 17, 2016)

AllanH said:


> The classic "Principles of Orchestration" by Rimsky-Korsakov has many examples of how to combine instruments and what works well together in his opinion. The book also exists as a free kindle or PDF.
> 
> https://amzn.com/0486212661



Thanks for the link, I'll check that out


----------



## LML88 (Nov 17, 2016)

Paul T McGraw said:


> The art of orchestration is a huge topic. Your desire to focus first on one section of the orchestra, the strings, is a wise choice. Reading one of the books on orchestration is good, but perhaps a better way to begin is to look closely at a piece of music. You can then see how the concepts you mention work in context. I suggest you start with a classical piece of music, because you can download a free score, listen to the music free on YouTube, then try to mockup a section with your Cinestrings and get a feel for how close you can get to real strings sound.
> 
> I suggest you begin with the Mozart "Eine Kleine Nachtmusic" because it has wonderful melodies which will make your investigations fun. You will find plenty of examples of legato (slurred), sustained (notes without markings) and staccato (the little dots above the notes). Sorry if you already knew that. Here is a link to a free score
> 
> ...




Thanks a lot such a detailed response.
Great advice, I'll be sure to check all of that out!


----------



## LML88 (Nov 17, 2016)

ghandizilla said:


> I think Anze Rosman's "MeHaRyTe" approach is clearer than the Samuel Adler's foreground/background approach, and it can be as much versatile since it lets room for accents, doublings, heterophony, and more. It reminds me of Walter Piston's approach, so if you want to go deeper, it's the recommended reading. See also his gem http://evenant.com/articles/3-beginner-orchestration-mistakes (3 Common Mistakes) article. I also learned a lot by reading Ryan Leach's articles here and there.
> 
> Nevertheless, the best way to make significant progress is to transcribe (create mock-up) of the great masters. And even toy with it, invent your own continuations! I recommend Nobuo Uematsu and Danny Elfman to begin with, and then Prokofiev, Ravel, Stravinski to go further. I would not recommend to mock-up John Williams right away without having strong basic skills.
> 
> If you can spend some money on education, Mike Verta's stuff is really practical (Composition 1, Orchestration 1 & 2, and Secret Weapons are in my opinion the most useful masterclasses for beginners). I also heard great things about Scoreclub.net's Orchestrating the line course.



Great advice, thanks very much for he info and for the links!


----------



## LML88 (Nov 17, 2016)

mducharme said:


> I would recommend purchasing Kennan's "The Technique of Orchestration". It has the best organization for a beginner, bringing you through the topics in a logical order. The Adler and the Piston have good information but are not organized as well. It is very difficult for someone without a teacher to learn from the Adler.
> 
> Some of the other examples like the Rimsky-Korsakov are fine but are kindof old and do not include instrumentation information. The Rimsky-Korsakov focuses mostly on various doubling choices, which is probably a little advanced if you are just starting out. It is more useful of a book after you have already done orchestration study with another book like the Kennan
> 
> One good book that just entered public domain is Joseph Wagner's 1959 "Orchestration: A Practical Handbook", which has lots of examples of piano music scored for orchestra. It is available on archive.org. It is probably the best relatively modern free orchestration book.



Those sound interesting, thanks for the post. I'll check it out


----------



## JohnG (Nov 17, 2016)

ghandizilla said:


> I would not recommend to mock-up John Williams right away without having strong basic skills.



Why? I think that is not very good advice. Williams is probably the best orchestrator of the modern era, if you're talking about the "regular" orchestra.* Apart from his composing, he conducted for decades, all different ensembles, and he knows what makes an audience sit up and pay attention. In addition to his famous work with orchestra, he's arranged band music, written and arranged a lot of jazz, and was also a studio piano player.

I would not hesitate to recommend his scores to a student. They are a gold mine.

*Although James Newton Howard can do everything perfectly.




mducharme said:


> Kennan's "The Technique of Orchestration"



Kennan's book, by the way, is not for professionals. It is way too timid on ranges and other advice. If you are writing for a university orchestra or a good but not top-notch municipal orchestra or something, ok, but not if you are writing for the best players.


----------



## NoamL (Nov 17, 2016)

LML88 said:


> What I'm unsure of is how the different articulations are played. How are Long, legato strings blended with short staccato strings and which instruments play which?



This is the wrong way to conceptualize it - although it's understandable considering how sample libraries are set up.

The string orchestra has 5 sections

Violin I
Violin II
Violas
Cellos
Basses

So you can have 5 musical voices at a time. Each voice can play any articulation, or a musical phrase that combines articulations (such as a legato passage ending with a staccato note, etc).

What you can't do is have the cellos play, for instance, legato and pizzicato at the same time. 

There is an exception to this rule though. If you REALLY want one section to play two pieces of material, or you need more voices (to fill out all the notes in a chord, etc), you can divide a section. In real life this means that half of a section would play one piece of material and the other half would simultaneously play something different. It is more common to divide the Violas & Vln II than to divide the Cellos or Vln I. The Basses are very rarely divided.


----------



## NoamL (Nov 17, 2016)

A quick example:







There are 5 musical parts. The violins would play detache (in samples, probably best represented by staccato or short marcato) for the first two measures, then legato for the last three. The cellos and basses play their first two notes staccato, then play legato lines for three measures, then their last three notes would probably best be mocked up as staccato, long marcato, short marcato.

Think in terms of voices and what articulation each voice needs at a particular moment.


----------



## JohnG (Nov 17, 2016)

Noam that is _mostly_ true. In film music it is not uncommon to divide everything, even the basses, to get a particular effect. You certainly are correct, though in suggesting it's not typical.

It's amazing how effective strings divided can sound, even if there are very few on an individual part.


----------



## ghandizilla (Nov 17, 2016)

JohnG said:


> Why? I think that is not very good advice. Williams is probably the best orchestrator of the modern era.



I could not agree more, but in my own personal experience, I tried to mock-up Williams too soon, and did not manage to learn as much from it as I would have if I had tried for example Jerry Goldsmith in the first place. So I suggest to get to Williams in a second time.


----------



## Reaktor (Nov 18, 2016)

Just my 5 cents (still being novice myself). I'v been studying and listening for cinematic classical for about three years now and the more I have learned the less I let "how it should be done" to bother me.

I have asked just the same questions by myself here at VI and from both professionals and hobbyists. Answers have always been vague. I really thought there are "classic rules" which should be known by everyone writing orchestral music. Lately I have trusted more on my instincts, which have developed simply by listening existing music.

One thing I was overdoing for about half the time was using too much long notes, as this usually fails to create continual movement. Having both short and long notes makes songs go forward, while using only short ones may lead to 30 seconds feel like two minutes.

As for studying scores, someone posted excellent "generic orchestral adventure game music" sheets (just my genre description by lack of better terms) to facebook group. You should check 'em out, as you will find original songs there as well. Lots of content on these few songs, which are well crafted.

http://bocomposer.weebly.com/score-sheets.html


----------



## Ashermusic (Nov 18, 2016)

JohnG said:


> Kennan's book, by the way, is not for professionals. It is way too timid on ranges and other advice. If you are writing for a university orchestra or a good but not top-notch municipal orchestra or something, ok, but not if you are writing for the best players.




Agreed, We used it at Boston Conservatory of Music in the late '60's and I learned more in one year of private study with the late Dr. Albert Harris than I ever learned from it.


----------



## JohnG (Nov 18, 2016)

Reaktor said:


> I really thought there are "classic rules" which should be known by everyone writing orchestral music.



Well, actually, there are rules everyone should know. Many times, as an orchestrator or arranger or producer I've re-arranged someone else's work and the composer says, "yes! _That's_ what I wanted!" Basic knowledge about successful doublings, or writing for brass or winds is good to know, even if you choose not to follow it all the time.

Nobody is going to pay the kind of money to hire you an orchestra unless you or someone on your team knows how to achieve the effects you're aiming for. It doesn't mean you rigidly follow all of them all the time, but if you don't even know them, you may flounder around, wasting time trying for something that is well known. When the orchestra costs $10,000 for 30-40 minutes, people will frown on that.


----------



## Reaktor (Nov 19, 2016)

JohnG said:


> Well, actually, there are rules everyone should know. Many times, as an orchestrator or arranger or producer I've re-arranged someone else's work and the composer says, "yes! _That's_ what I wanted!" Basic knowledge about successful doublings, or writing for brass or winds is good to know, even if you choose not to follow it all the time.



Actually I put this in a wrong way and you are of course right on this.

I would still state those more like an golden guidelines than rules, because rules usually put beginners to position where they start following those rules without giving a minute thinking he could try something out of box. One problem with orchestral composing is they way it appears to many beginners, as very elitistic rocket science. 

I would of course encourage to study doublings as well as studying how orchestral motion comes from rhytmic structures of short notes rather than just banging drums, but I just want to encourage to experiment. 

Those classic rules usually come up while playing around and when you discover that certain doublings end up to certain mood or sound, you quickly realize that it was mentioned on dozens of articles you had already seen while trying to Google - the difference being that you most likely didn't like the doubled sound the first time when you were forcing the good sound to come out by following the articles / guides 

I believe there is the difference between real professional orchestrators and hobbyists (such as myself) and for the ones who haven't taken the long path it's more important to just start trusting own instincts and enjoy composing - all the theoretical stuff usually opens up by itself during the journey, when you are ready to comprehend it.

... or well, I'm more of "hit yourself with a hammer once, do it again, and you most likely won't do it third time" :D

Still, maybe I was originally answering to wrong question and talking my own thoughts out loud - LML88 specifically asked for tips on realistic doublings / tips on realistic arrangement, while I was simply stating I'm not overthinking it - probably poor answer 

btw. Personally I would hire help to re-arrange my compositions if I wasn't happy with 'em and would have an opportunity go big. It would be foolish to not take it up to the next level with help and learn at the same time.


----------



## JohnG (Nov 19, 2016)

@Reaktor well, I guess I understand the issue with "elitist" and I don't want to have a go at you personally because I accept you're expressing a feeling that many people have. In general, when it comes to music and people say "elitist" I think they really mean some combination of "boring," "heard it before," "we're supposed to worship it because it's in a book and because it's old and people with doctorates say so," and so on.

I accept the validity of that feeling and I even share it to some extent, or I'd be a professor I suppose, studying others' works that are no doubt much more learned than anything I'm likely to produce.

But I find the disdain for elitism, frankly, childish, and don't think it stands up to scrutiny even for a few minutes. I don't want the passengers on my transatlantic flight attempting to fly the plane -- that isn't elitist, but a recognition that the pilot knows how to do it and the rest of us don't. Similarly, if you don't know how to write for, say, the brass section, you aren't very likely to achieve what you want, whether that's warmth and glory, or power and excitement.

A lot of new composers think their pieces would sound a lot better if they could get real players instead of samples, but in fact that isn't always, or even often, the case. Many people post cues on v.i. hoping they will sound "epic" and buy more libraries that will have that "epic sound." But the reason stuff sounds epic is not just the coolest-ever drum hit or brass library, it's the arrangement.

Sure, most things we hear sound better with real players but part of the reason is that producers, before stumping up the money, required that the music pass through the hands of somebody who knows these arcane skills of arranging and orchestration. It isn't just the players, it's also the rules or, maybe put differently, a bag of tricks that succeed predictably.

To me this revulsion against elites is partly the result of the political rhetoric of the era, featuring an oft-repeated saw that "the elites have really messed everything up." In fact, the things that messed things up are endemic to humanity -- greed, suspicion of The Other, laziness, ignorance, the drive to power -- all our swell qualities. Meanwhile, you have universities pandering to students, companies pandering to customers, and politicians pandering to voters, telling everyone his opinion is "special" and "important." It is ridiculous to tell me that my opinion on international trade and tariffs is somehow just as valid and important as someone who's done it for 20 years, and yet as voters we hear it all the time. It's in the interest of the political parties seeking disruption to encourage voters to think that way. And I guess we'll see now how great that turns out.

Turning back to music, I see most people who have made it into bigger films turning right back to the guys and gals who know all those pesky, boring old rules when it comes to arranging, voicing chords, and orchestrating. And whether working in samples or with a live orchestra, those tricks of the trade continue to accomplish what they always have, and I encourage everyone interested in orchestral music to learn as many of them as possible.


----------



## Reaktor (Nov 19, 2016)

Thanks for sharing your point, well taken.

How I interpreter musical elitism is the way how different genres hold to their "secrets", or how people trying to study those genres feel they are dissapproved without encouragement to try to express themselves, rather than trying to inspire 'em to find their way to be inspired. I have found this issue with every genre, but orchestral music is the most complicated due to lots of content to study... so i don't see this as political elitism, even though that is usually the context when people complain about classical music elitism


----------



## JohnG (Nov 19, 2016)

Reaktor said:


> how people trying to study those genres feel they are dissapproved without encouragement to try to express themselves, rather than trying to inspire 'em to find their way to be inspired



I totally understand. People get snobby about the orchestra and adopt a lofty tone that can be offensive. It's a shame.


----------



## Morodiene (Nov 19, 2016)

I get where you're coming from, Reaktor. And really, there are those who put up stumbling blocks for newcomers to composing out of a sense of power, self-importance, etc. 

My first composition teacher was like that. He said we had to learn how to splice tape in our electronic music class, despite the fact that there were synths and DAWs available. We learned nothing about DAWs in the entire class, by the way. He once told me in counterpoint class that one note I had was wrong. I asked him why, and he didn't give me a good explanation except that another note sounded better. But I hadn't broken any of the "rules". I disagreed and left it there, but he was sure to take points off for that note when I handed it in.

Anyways, I think we have to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. This teacher was awful, but the rules of counterpoint weren't. These "rules" exist because they are a way of explaining why great music is great. So it is a way of defining and categorizing, but they certainly don't mean you don't ever step outside of them. However, knowing good voice leading helps you avoid odd sounds that get exponentially worse when you have that parallel 5th doubled in the brass, strings, and winds!

So know the rules, so you know when (and how) to break them


----------



## David Story (Nov 19, 2016)

Everyone learns how to orchestrate by writing out parts and having them played live. A community orchestra is fine. Everything else is theory.


----------



## Reaktor (Nov 19, 2016)

I actually wrote about my thoughts around year ago, when it was forcefully implied to me that just about the only good way to learn orchestration is by joining orchestra, even community one or marching band. Unfortunately in Finland there isnt marching band culture at all and community orchestras are at scarce, and those tend to be very genre snobbist communities (as far as my personal experiences go). For someone who has never played any orchestral instrument its unbearable idea to go through 3 year course instrument basics, just to reach the place where you might be able to pickup ideas of how things work, instead of actually studying composing. I'm well over 30, working 8-9 hours a day and I just got my second child, so its a matter of spare time... but that doesn't mean I would not be willing to spend all my free time studying by myself 

When I referred that musical elitism (or snobbism), I definetly wasn't giving critic to VI community - this is one of very few places where you can actually ask and get good answer without feeling fool asking stupid questions. Thank you all for that!


----------



## JohnG (Nov 20, 2016)

Reaktor said:


> its unbearable idea to go through 3 year course instrument basics, just to reach the place where you might be able to pickup ideas of how things work, instead of actually studying composing. I'm well over 30, working 8-9 hours a day and I just got my second child, so its a matter of spare time



I agree. You don't have time to start your life over. Maybe try Thinkspace courses?


----------



## Reaktor (Nov 20, 2016)

JohnG said:


> I agree. You don't have time to start your life over. Maybe try Thinkspace courses?



That's a good advice and I have given a though on that. We'll see 

Currently I'm advancing on getting out of my usual keys and scales. Exploring new scales has grown potential to write more interesting tracks. I'v always been player who learns by ear (for ~15 years now) and whenever I pickup some interesting motion I tend to practice reconstructing it, so that I start to understand how it was done... for instance, one of the first piano songs I picked up two years ago was Othello by Chilly Gonzales. Technically it was (and as a whole song still is) *way* out of my league, but I simply hammered my head for months and got good enough to play both intro part and chorus. I'm able to mimic by seeing and listening, a skill I picked up over the years on guitar. It was simply mechanical practicing without understanding why it's played the way it is (and why chords / voicings work). After I was satisfied with results I already got feeling of how playing those voicings feel under my fingers, and for a reason or another I'm able to quickly try out similar voicings on other chords as well - makes nice chord coloring and interesting progressions.

That's my method - pick up something you like, try to mimic it and apply ideas from it to own use... but still I'd love to really know theory behind it and have real playing skills to pick stuff up faster 

Edit: Well, it's such a great video I'll just have to put it over here ^^;


----------



## just2high (Nov 20, 2016)

LML88 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm looking for some info on orchestration; mainly, which parts can co-exist and which can not.
> I only have a strings library currently (cinestrings) so for now that's the part of the orchestra I'm referring to with my question.
> ...



@LML88 I'm wondering if you might clarify your question a little bit more, what do you mean by blending legato with staccato? Do you mean at the same time as in Violins play legato and Cellos and Basses play staccato or Violins switching from legato to staccato?

Also, when you say "how the articulations are played" do you mean physically or in practice how they are used in orchestration?

Another resource that I'd recommend are Peter Alexander's books, they are really well done:
http://www.alexanderpublishing.com/...ion/Professional-Orchestration-PDF-Books.aspx

His Visual Orchestration course is also really helpful.

Do you have Cinestrings CORE or the whole bundle? I would follow NoamL's suggestion and think of the string section as 5 voices or lines to start, since you only have Cinestrings and it doesn't have Divisi patches. If you really want to divisi you can but bear in mind that it won't sound like your samples because you'll be doubling up the number of players. So if you stick with one section can play one thing at a time you'll be at least in the right ballpark to start.

Since realism is your goal one other thing to keep in mind as you look for scores or music to listen to is that your Cinestrings is a fairly large ensemble, 55 players:
16 violins 1
12 violins 2
10 violas
10 cellos
7 basses

This is more typical of later romantic orchestras and not earlier classical orchestras. More Beethoven not Mozart. If you count the chairs in the youtube of the Eine Kleine Nachtmusik posted earlier there are 23 or 25, so less than half the size of your Cinestrings group. So if you use Cinestrings to mockup Mozart it won't quite line up with real recordings if they are using the classical ensemble.


----------



## waveheavy (Dec 7, 2016)

My two cents:

IMO, the basics of learning to orchestrate is understanding how to use the overtone series, especially for tutti passages (tutti means all instruments play at same time); and knowing how to voice lead from chord to chord; this in addition to knowing the traditional structure and textures of the orchestral sections.

Traditional layout:
3 flutes (one is piccolo)
2 oboes
English Horn
2 Clarinets in Bb
Bass Clarinet
2 Bassoons
Contra Bassoon

4 Horns in F
3 Trumpets (Bb or C)
3 Trombones (3rd one can be a bass trombone)
Tuba

Timpani
Drums
Snare
Glockenspiel
Triangle
Cymbals
(Xylophone)
(Marimba)
(Tubular Bells)

Piano
Celesta
Harp

Violin I
Violin II
Violas
Violincellos
Double Bass

The woodwind, brass, and string sections each can form a full chord in tutti passages. So tutti passages are something to really pay attention to in score study (like The Planets). Notice how that often the notes from low to high pretty closely follow the R-R-5-R-3-5-7 format of the overtone series.


----------



## LML88 (Dec 7, 2016)

Thank you for all the replies. I've read through everything and taken notes. Now to put it into practice!


----------



## Alohabob (Dec 7, 2016)

waveheavy said:


> My two cents:
> 
> Traditional layout:
> 3 flutes (one is piccolo)
> ...



Quick question on this. Are you stating how many people are playing these instruments or how many different parts are played? for example, would it be 4 horn players all playing the same one note or would they be all playing different notes in a chord? 

I'm asking for a 'traditional' or 'normal' answer, not a 'you can break any rule and do whatever you want' one.


----------



## NoamL (Dec 7, 2016)

@Alohabob yes there are 4 horn players. But they are all over the place when it comes to how many players per note. They can play "a4" where all 4 musicians play the same note. Or they can play "a2" where a pair of horns plays one note, and the other pair plays a different note. Or they can play four different notes to make a chord. These are all "normal"/traditional ways to write for horn.

The question of how many horns you should use on each note has to do with balance. The horn has a round, mellow sound and points towards the back of the stage, which means it's kind of easy to drown out. The trumpets and trombones are naturally louder. If they're playing with the horns, the horns often play a2 while the other brass play individual notes (so the three trombones cover 3 notes, the four horns cover 2, and the three trumpets cover 3.) In softer situations it's ok to voice a triad with just 3 horns.

Likewise for melodies! The solo horn is nice but easily covered up, check out how Mahler was very careful to give this important horn solo a very light accompaniment (pizzicato strings & light woodwinds), and yet the musician still has to put a lot of effort to be heard:



So it's pretty common for horn solos with light/medium accompaniments to be a2, with a pair of players. This just gives the sound a bit more "support".

The horn also often plays melodies in unison with the woodwind instruments, like it's not uncommon to see a melody with 1 horn, 1 flute, 1 clarinet in unison. For these roles usually 1 horn is enough.

For big blasting horn melodies that carry over the entire rest of the orchestra, a4 is a great sound, or even a6 or a8 on many film scores. Like Star Wars, check out the 6-horn unison happening at 0:55...



Last thing you should know if you are writing for live orchestra is that horns 1 & 3 traditionally play high parts and 2 & 4 play low parts. So if you split them up a2 it would 1+3 playing one note, and 2+4 the other. Or if you had a 4-note chord you would give the notes to, from top to bottom, horn 1, 3, 2, 4.


----------



## tack (Dec 7, 2016)

Tangential question: if a2 is pronounced "a due" do we say a4 as "a quattro"? Honestly although I've often heard the former I've never heard the latter. But that could just be for lack of exposure.


----------



## Kent (Dec 7, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> My first composition teacher was like that. He said we had to learn how to splice tape in our electronic music class, despite the fact that there were synths and DAWs available. We learned nothing about DAWs in the entire class, by the way. He once told me in counterpoint class that one note I had was wrong. I asked him why, and he didn't give me a good explanation except that another note sounded better. But I hadn't broken any of the "rules". I disagreed and left it there, but he was sure to take points off for that note when I handed it in.


Out of curiosity, how was your electronic course set up? In my undergrad we had Electronic Music I and II, where I was analog and II was digital. Students could not take II without taking I (modular additive synthesis, tape manipulation, Musique concrète), and I think that was rightfully so. So much of the language of digital music playback and manipulation (transport, cut, rewind, et al.) comes straight from analog. Concepts are easier to learn using kinesthetics and tactile experiences than merely clicking on a screen. We aren't even a full generation removed from that era (or maybe just one), and certain analog synthesis elements are seeing a huge resurgence. 

I guess I'd just like to see where you're coming from on this. (I totally get the "uninspiring" professor angle, though.)


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 8, 2016)

kmaster said:


> Out of curiosity, how was your electronic course set up? In my undergrad we had Electronic Music I and II, where I was analog and II was digital. Students could not take II without taking I (modular additive synthesis, tape manipulation, Musique concrète), and I think that was rightfully so. So much of the language of digital music playback and manipulation (transport, cut, rewind, et al.) comes straight from analog. Concepts are easier to learn using kinesthetics and tactile experiences than merely clicking on a screen. We aren't even a full generation removed from that era (or maybe just one), and certain analog synthesis elements are seeing a huge resurgence.
> 
> I guess I'd just like to see where you're coming from on this. (I totally get the "uninspiring" professor angle, though.)


It was just one class. And sure, have half the class on it even, but nothing modern was covered and that was a big disappointment. We did not work on any synthesis. But anyways, it's ancient history at this point, and I sought out what I wanted to learn anyways.


----------



## Smikes77 (Dec 8, 2016)

tack said:


> Tangential question: if a2 is pronounced "a due" do we say a4 as "a quattro"? Honestly although I've often heard the former I've never heard the latter. But that could just be for lack of exposure.



I would assume so... or "a quatre"...?


----------



## JohnG (Dec 8, 2016)

As may be apparent, I am a fan of learning as much as you can, all the time. That said, at least in film / game world, a lot of the formality at scoring sessions has gradually evaporated over the past 20 years. Players once were pretty sniffy and even rude about computer-printed parts, having grown accustomed to reading beautifully hand-written pages. Now they are so glad to have a proper job they are positively grinning, almost no matter how little formal education the composers have.

Up to a point.

*Avoiding Disaster*

I'm not saying it doesn't matter if you don't know what you are doing -- it does, because it costs precious time. Also, you earn crucial authority with the orchestra by using terminology in the way it's used in the traditional way. This not only makes communication efficient and reassures musicians (who are anxious too -- they are sight-reading after all), but can spare you repeated questions like "do you really want a g-sharp there?" An occasional question like that is no big deal, but if players think you don't know what you are doing and your music is also unorthodox, they can bombard a composer with session-clogging questions that really hurt the results. I have witnessed a session in which things threatened to go off the tracks without the intervention of someone the players perceived as a "grownup in the room," whether it is you, the conductor, the orchestrator, etc. Plus you may have a producer or director or even the engineer standing there thinking you are not really in control of the situation. When you are spending $7,000-12,000 an hour, sometimes more, that is not a good vibe. There is a reason John Williams' recordings sound so awesome -- he is an awesome conductor and musician, not just composer / arranger / orchestrator.

*What's The Best Model?*

So it's better to know more if you can, and it's preferable to use traditional terminology for many reasons. All that said, as long as you are crystal clear on what you want, and not a pretentious git, you will survive. Gustavo Dudamel, LA's conductor (who is no doubt a musical genius), has a precious few clips on the internet of him conducting rehearsals of orchestras. While he does use musical terms accurately -- no surprise there -- the main thing is his total sincerity and lack of pretense. He is 100% there with the musicians, aiming to bring some emotional quality out in the music that has a musical aspect. His goal in directing is to accomplish something musical _with the players_, not to lord it over them. To me, that is the relationship we all should strive for when working with players and others we work with, especially if their traditional skills may exceed our own: we are collaborating, we are partners, we are all there to bring the magic. If we convey that belief we have a fighting chance to avoid "us _versus _them."


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 8, 2016)

JohnG said:


> As may be apparent, I am a fan of learning as much as you can, all the time. That said, at least in film / game world, a lot of the formality at scoring sessions has gradually evaporated over the past 20 years. Players once were pretty sniffy and even rude about computer-printed parts, having grown accustomed to reading beautifully hand-written pages. Now they are so glad to have a proper job they are positively grinning, almost no matter how little formal education the composers have.
> 
> Up to a point.
> 
> ...


Your first paragraph especially I think is very important if you have to work with real musicians. I've heard stories about music that went to a reading session without being properly proofread, and the parts were returned to the composer with some very not-so-nice comments written in them. I'm guessing the session did not go well due to errors in the score/lack of clarity. I think percussionists suffer the most of all the musicians in reading scores because so many have no idea how to write them. It's my understanding that the vast majority of percussionists have to re-write their scores to make them playable/intelligible.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 8, 2016)

@Morodiene I suppose percussionists suffer. There are conventions for their parts too; one can learn them just like any others, but they are not as easy to get hold of.


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 8, 2016)

JohnG said:


> @Morodiene I suppose percussionists suffer. There are conventions for their parts too; one can learn them just like any others, but they are not as easy to get hold of.


I think the same goes for bowings. You put a few in, but most likely, they'll re-write them anyways. But if you don't put any in, you're a rookie


----------



## Kent (Dec 8, 2016)

Building a rapport that way is huge. Anybody can write something in Sibelius (or worse, Finale), do little to no formatting, print on cheap 8.5 x 11 paper, and the musicians will probably be able to force their way through it. But taking the time to format correctly, use pleasing typefaces, and even printing on a larger, heavier paper are all consciously and subconsciously registered by the player as "this composer knows what he (she) wants; it's obvious a lot of thought and care went into the creation of something as relatively insignificant as my one-of-80 part." 

In other words, crudely, when you exude professionalism, people step up. When you exude incompetence, people step on you.

(Note I have nothing against Finale - I used it for a happy decade - but its auto-formatting ability is not known for being effective.)


----------



## SillyMidOn (Dec 9, 2016)

Ghee, there have been some excellent comments in this thread by all involved (well done, the "discussions" on vi-control can sometimes have a mind-numbingly lowest common denominator feel to it), and links to great resources. Just wanted to add one more:

http://www.timusic.net


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 9, 2016)

douggibson said:


> It's not always possible to do, but a few times when I have known before hand who is on a session, and if I already have a professional relationship with them, I have sent the parts to the concert master, and principals of each section to pencil in bowings before hand, which I would later typeset. This way the bowings are done by the exact specific players. They may change a few things still at the session but it does save time, and it is still being respectful to them. I of course paid on the side the principles for their time putting in the bowing. To me it was well worth it. Things run smoothly, a rapport is shown, and you can learn why they do one thing over another.
> 
> As an aside, I really don't think not putting in bowings (as in up/down markings specifically) means you are a rookie. No articulations... yes, of course. In my experience, what shows a rookie (and this just means notation that does not reflect intention: i.e. -anyone regardless of how long they have been at it) is notating things wrong, or redundantly.
> 
> ...


 That's why I said *some* bowings, and not all. Because even if you have certain intentions with them, there will be many that a particular player will choose differently for their own reasons. I like your idea of sending it ahead of time to have it notated for the first reading.


----------



## waveheavy (Dec 17, 2016)

Alohabob said:


> Quick question on this....
> 
> I'm asking for a 'traditional' or 'normal' answer, not a 'you can break any rule and do whatever you want' one.



NoamL pretty much covered the essentials. For volume balance purposes, 2 horns = 1 trumpet or 1 trombone. And the French Horn is traditionally often found in accompaniment with woodwinds too. 

Tutti means everything is playing at the same time, usually represents a climax point. So how do you write a tutti passage that has balance in full orchestra? You think of 'thickening' with the instruments you already have, and depending on what you want, you balance between the winds, brass, strings, and percussion. If you have a full traditional brass section (4 horns, 3 trpts., 3 bones, tuba) playing _ff _you're not going to hear much of the woodwinds nor a whole lot of the string section. Same thing if you have the timpani and drum bangin' along at _f_ you're not going to hear much of the rest of the orchestra. The only way to know those kind of balance differences is listen a lot to a real orchestra. And with percussion blaring throughout like a Hans Zimmer show, you won't hear that with a real orchestra. With orchestra percussion is used mostly to accent notes in other sections, not to provide beats like on a rap record.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 18, 2016)

AllanH said:


> The classic "Principles of Orchestration" by Rimsky-Korsakov has many examples of how to combine instruments and what works well together in his opinion. The book also exists as a free kindle or PDF.
> 
> https://amzn.com/0486212661



That one and the book by Samuel Adler are priceless. Although I've heard complaints from people who don't read music, why don't you do yet another thing that will up your game (in a big way) and learn how to read music (if you don't already)....and by the way YES many (super important) people in the music world still read music, don't let anyone dissuade you from it. Here's a good start: http://www.wikihow.com/Read-Music

Once you're able to read music, the Samuel Adler book will broaden your musical horizons and put you into an extremely powerful position; which, I'm presuming from your original post, is where you seem to want to be.



Ashermusic said:


> Agreed, We used it at Boston Conservatory of Music in the late '60's and I learned more in one year of private study with the late Dr. Albert Harris than I ever learned from it.



I read the Kennan after the Adler, and at first I thought my pique was simply because I didn't read Kennan first. I soon learned after that it was pretty much universally reviled as being grossly inferior.

As mentioned above, the Rimsky-Korsakov is a good companion to the Adler. I want to recommend the Berlioz as well, but I'm pretty sure the Rimsky-Korsakov was influenced by that one (despite Strauss' later additions).


----------



## Parsifal666 (Dec 18, 2016)

Actually, now that I think of it, if you read music you could just study Richard Strauss' scores to Salome and Elektra and learn a whole world of amazing things about orchestration. I have to put in a word for Dicky (pictured) as well, a beginner will learn TONS from his last four operas in particular. Mahler too.


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Dec 26, 2016)

@JohnG I truly enjoyed and appreciated your contributions to this thread. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts.


----------



## AVaudio (Dec 26, 2016)

I think this is my favourite resource on the topic: https://imslp.org/


----------

