# WHITE PAPER: How Much Orchestration Can You Really Teach in One Semester?



## sbkp (Nov 2, 2006)

Hey, Jon! Welcome (back) to VI. What brings you here?


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Nov 2, 2006)

"In teaching today, and with the group of students arriving tomorrow, I fear we have a serious problem on our hands with low attention spans and high rates of ADD. With
music demanding focus and attention, some students may need help in developing
this skill. If not already, this will become a major challenge for collegiate music
departments."

How true and relevant!

And this applies to everything you are sharing with us Peter, thanks!
What an insighful read! (and what a journey! :wink: )


----------



## JonFairhurst (Nov 3, 2006)

sbkp @ Thu Nov 02 said:


> Hey, Jon! Welcome (back) to VI. What brings you here?


I registered a while ago. I was just thinkin' about many of the people who were active on NSS and vanished. I figured I'd stop by.

Good to see you here!


----------



## synthetic (Nov 3, 2006)

Peter, what is the difference between "Writing for Strings" and "Orchestration Vol 2a?"


----------



## mathis (Nov 3, 2006)

synthetic @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> Peter, what is the difference between "Writing for Strings" and "Orchestration Vol 2a?"



Yes, good question.


----------



## PaulR (Nov 3, 2006)

JonFairhurst @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> I registered a while ago. I was just thinkin' about many of the people who were active on NSS and vanished. I figured I'd stop by.



Good.


----------



## sbkp (Nov 3, 2006)

PaulR @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> JonFairhurst @ Fri Nov 03 said:
> 
> 
> > I registered a while ago. I was just thinkin' about many of the people who were active on NSS and vanished. I figured I'd stop by.
> ...



Yes, I agree. Good. Don't be a stranger, Jon!

(Okay, I'm done hijacking...)

On a somewhat related note, I got a message that "How Ravel Orchestrated" had shipped. I can't wait!!!!


----------



## rJames (Nov 3, 2006)

*Re: WHITE PAPER: How Much MARKETING Can You Really DISGUISE in One POST?*

Peter, there is great value in what you present here at VI. There is no doubt.

I've read a few of the papers that you link us to. 

I don't think you need to market your material so blatantly though.

And I think you ought to (maybe you already do) pay Frederick for the vertical market that he provides.

I suppose your white papers are prepared for another market (or maybe its supposed to be transparent there as well) and maybe these references to your materials is justified.

But just by sharing the insights, you will be marketing your materials.

I realize that I need to take the Smalley seminar. So, you'll have some of my business soon.

Contrary to another post, your references to Hank etc do smack of name dropping.

I think Mancini wanted to be known in the public as Henry, or else he would have labeled hiw works with "composed by Hank Mancini." Of course, I really have no idea. Just a guess. (actually, for all I know he did label his works as Hank Mancini)

Usually using Hank would be reserved for a group of people who know him as Hank.

I don't know why that bothers me so much. ??

You can see that I do read your posts and respect your knowledge. I'd love to read your column here at VI that starts to detail the 1000 devices.

You wouldn't lose potential customers, you would attract them.

I, for one, just get turned off when every (exaggeration) post you make in any thread says, "I think the answer is to buy some of my courses."

I would be grateful, as would many others, if you were to respond to a post using your knowledge base and commenting on the orchestration. (use of instrumentation)

The "Member's Composition" area is full of people who want and need your critique.

I am one of them.

You will not lose customers by taking some time to critique, you will gain some.

This is a community of sharing, not marketing. I have learned many a great lesson here at VI and not just on midi mockup.

Sorry for the off topic.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Nov 3, 2006)

To paraphrase a line in one of the whitepapers, Peter's not in the music business, his company IS a music business.

Personally, I like this style of marketing. It gives rich information, and tells me that the author has really thought through the topic of how best to (and how not to) educate. The papers share a philosophy and make a direct connection to the materials that are crafted aroud this philisophy.

To me name dropping is "last weekend I was at this party and my good friend Tom Cruise told me..." - especially since the namedropper probably only caught a glipse of Mr. Cruise across the room. On the other hand, if you really worked with the guy and gained insight about acting and the movie business, share it by all means!"

Here's my namedropping story: When I was in high school my guitar (Ovation Deacon) was stolen. The police were no help, but through the local teenage network, I learned that the guitar had been pawned in Azusa - just north of my home town, Covina. I told the Azusa police, and they said that the police report had been filed in Covina - talk to them. I told the Covina police, and they told me that Azusa was outside of their jurisdiction.

So... I went to the Covina police station with my mom. She told them that she was friends with LA District Attorney Vincent Bugliosi (Helter Skelter), and if they didn't get us that guitar, they would be hearing from him. Five minutes after we got home the police called and politely asked us to come get the guitar.

Truth be told, my mom shook hands with Bugliosi at a writers party a couple of years before. "Hello. Nice to meet you." It was namedropping and bluffing at its very best!


----------



## sbkp (Nov 3, 2006)

Moms rule!


----------



## rJames (Nov 3, 2006)

JonFairhurst @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> To paraphrase a line in one of the whitepapers, Peter's not in the music business, his company IS a music business.
> 
> Personally, I like this style of marketing.
> 
> To me name dropping is "last weekend I was at this party and my good friend Tom Cruise told me..." -



At least we agree, Jon, that this is blatant marketing.

Part of my point is that even though Frederick allows "thread marketing", I think it sets a bad precedent. Its not my place to do anything about it. So, I'm just pointing it out.

I know Peter has a lot to say. And that is why I'm inviting him to be "THE" official "instrumentation/orchestration" critic on this board. I'm not being facetious.

He has a lot to share, but I haven't seen him chiming in on orchestration.

And there is a big void there. I don't think I've ever (exaggeration again) seen comments on orchestration. Maybe so, but mostly how real something sounds or how synthy. Nothing like, "you might want to try to pair up your French horns with your flutes for that transition to the brass section," or??? "Why are your first violins going it alone on that phrase?"

And on the "Hank" thing. If you have to explain that "Hank" refers to Henry Mancini then you have probablly used it in an incorrect setting.

Regarding Tom Cruise; in the same fashion, if someone were to say, I had dinner with Tommy last night and then went on to tell you that they mean that movie star Tom, you know, wink wink, Mission Impossible Tom, they have gone out of their way to name drop. "I am in a different class than you," don't you see that now?
"Can't believe I had to tell em who Tommy was."

I'm sure Peter is a great guy, I'd absolutely love to have a long chat with him about orchestration, but I suppose I'm not making friends today.

My post is just a response that has been building in me over Peter's marketing.

He always gives valuable information, so I will go back to lurk mode now.

OH, and one more thing...(he said going into full confession mode)

I bought his, "Principles of Orchstration, Volume 1" book. I realized after I had it that it was not what I wanted to study. 

I was so naive about the whole orchestral music world that I though it would help me with writing. 

I called and he and hiw wife said, in so many words, you bought it, you're stuck with it...no return.

I'm not saying its not a good book. I was not ready for it. I glossed through articulations and ranges of instruments and was done for the time being.

From my perspective, it did not help me one iota (at the stage I was at). Because the libraries are defacto limited to the instruments range. You don't really need to know it because a violin just won't play if your fingers move out of its range on the keyboard. The notes are not mapped where they do not belong.

True of the whole orchestra. 

Same with articulations. Who needs to know what an articulation that you cannot play is? If you can play it (meaning, it is in your library) then you can only play it by loading the articulation. And then you know what articulation is.

It is also a good idea to try all of the articulations so you hear what they are.

So, I bought something I didn't need at the time and couldn't return it for who knows what reason. Seems a little money grubbing to me.

At the time money was an issue (maybe it always will be to me).

On the positive, now that I am beginning to write for real players, it will become more and more useful.

It left a bad taste in my mouth.

He'd probably have a lot more of my money right now, if he had played it a little more humanely in the beginning.

And, he'd have more of my respect (who cares about my respect; true) if he were to show some of his expertise instead of always wearing his marketing hat.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Nov 3, 2006)

Hi rjames,

I don't own Peter's Principles of Orchestration, Vol 1, so I can't comment on the text, but your comments about ranges and articulations tell me that part was about instrumentation, rather than orchestration - a point Peter makes in one of the whitepapers. I've had similar frustrations with orchestration books. 

Unfortunately, instrumentation is the foundation of orchestration, so all the books seem to rehash the same stuff. I would guess that Vol 2 moves to the next (and more interesitng) level.

I recommend the small pocketbook - Orchestration Dictionary (or something like that - is it D of O?). I keep it on my desk for the occasional quick reference.

A year and a half ago my wife bought me Adler's book and CDs. Now THIS gets into orchestration. Having the CDs is wonderful, as I'm not a great sight reader. It's not cheap, but I learned a few of the 1,000 devices from it, and have been able to internalize them.

Anyway, I can relate to buying a music study book and being disappointed. First, we tend to have a narrow range of what we want to learn next. Also, if it's too rudimentary, it's a bore, and if it's too advanced, we can't make heads nor tails of the thing. Finding the perfect book is tough.

Which brings me to mentors. Too bad they aren't more available! They can see when our eyes gloss over, and they can distill the important points.

If Peter is able to share some of his knowledge on the site, as you recommend, that would be fantastic.


----------



## synthetic (Nov 3, 2006)

Um, isn't this the commercial announcements forum? Marketing is allowed, if not expected here. I won't say that some members don't pitch their products at the drop of a hat, but it must be tempting when the electric bill arrives. 

Now go upgrade to GVI already, and would you like an FW-1884 to go with that? 

Stil curious about the Orchestration book comparison. I should find someone to re-bind my old Alexander "Principals of Orchestration" with the awful plastic ring binder that I've abused for 10 years.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 3, 2006)

*Re: WHITE PAPER: How Much MARKETING Can You Really DISGUISE in One POST?*



rJames @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> Peter, there is great value in what you present here at VI. There is no doubt.
> 
> I've read a few of the papers that you link us to.
> 
> ...



Ron, thanks for your comments. To quote Ronald Reagan, "I paid for this mic." I'm a paid advertiser, and my ads appear in this forum, and my notices in the commercial section. Recently I paid for three months of advertising in advance. 



> I suppose your white papers are prepared for another market (or maybe its supposed to be transparent there as well) and maybe these references to your materials is justified.



Alexander Publishing has the world's largest curriculum on orchestration. The majority of textbook publishers, of which I'm one, only have one, maybe two titles at most. We have eclipsed that. Our objective, as written in the current White Paper linked here, is to provide sufficient amount of material for schools to offer a minor in orchestration. The materials published so far enable a school, beginning in the winter semester, to begin offering three semesters of orchestration training. This will grow across 2006-2007.

I post the White Papers here because composers reside here, some of whom went to college, took orchestration, and have definite opinions and comments about their experience. I'm interested in hearing what they have to say, pro or con.



> But just by sharing the insights, you will be marketing your materials.



I have shared my insights both here and on Northern Sounds, and continue to do so.



> I realize that I need to take the Smalley seminar. So, you'll have some of my business soon.


Our seminar is called the Two-Day Film Scoring School with Jack Smalley. Orchestration is with his son, Scott.



> Contrary to another post, your references to Hank etc do smack of name dropping.



I respect your view, but I politely disagree. This was the world I worked until I fell ill. These are legitimate experiences to share. And I think talking about what I learned is valid. Additionally, I consider myself to be the most blessed of the blessed to having come from a small town in Virginia and being given the opportunity to spend a combined six years with two great film composers. 

That's the experience I had and I reserve the right to share as part of the background and rationale by which I prepare these texts.



> I think Mancini wanted to be known in the public as Henry, or else he would have labeled hiw works with "composed by Hank Mancini." Of course, I really have no idea. Just a guess. (actually, for all I know he did label his works as Hank Mancini)



For legal and copyright purposes, Hank's work was labeled with his legal name. In private, in the studio, in his general walk in life, he preferred to be called Hank.



> Usually using Hank would be reserved for a group of people who know him as Hank.
> 
> I don't know why that bothers me so much. ??



I knew him as Hank and was instructed in the beginning to call him that.



> You can see that I do read your posts and respect your knowledge. I'd love to read your column here at VI that starts to detail the 1000 devices.
> 
> You wouldn't lose potential customers, you would attract them.



Thanks for your compliment. First, below you wrote to the effect that you didn't get much out of Volume 1. Well, in the back of the book is a list of the most common combinations to help you get to the next step. There are instructions there on how to do score reduction. The tools are there. 



> I, for one, just get turned off when every (exaggeration) post you make in any thread says, "I think the answer is to buy some of my courses."



I agree, it's an exaggeration, because I don't do that at all. 



> I would be grateful, as would many others, if you were to respond to a post using your knowledge base and commenting on the orchestration. (use of instrumentation)
> 
> The "Member's Composition" area is full of people who want and need your critique.
> 
> ...



Ron, thanks for taking the time to write this. I respect your opinion. I'll try to spend more time in that area in the future.


----------



## Dr.Quest (Nov 3, 2006)

Ron, 
Sorry man, but I think you are way over analyzing this post. 
Just my opinion of course. 
Cheers, 
J


----------



## rJames (Nov 3, 2006)

Dr.Quest @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> Ron,
> Sorry but I think you are way over analying this post.
> Just my opinion of course.
> Cheers,
> J



Yeah, probably. I over analyze everything.

For me it was an opportunity to say something that I've been thinking upon reading many of Peter's posts.

Save for a couple of virtual instruments, AIR and one other, you don't see a lot of this "thread marketing" at VI.

So, its not this post that I am analyzing but a general feeling that has been accumulating within.

If Hank wanted everyone to call him, "Hank" then I'm all for it.

Of course, if you want to communicate to a bunch of composers you don't know, use the common tags; Mancini, Goldsmith, Herrmann, Mozart, Haydn, Shostokovich (I'll bet I'm butchering these spellings). That's the way we talk about them. (er, well, the way you guys talk about them)

Can anyone direct me to a post where Peter gave constructive feedback on orchestration or didn't mention his coursework or a product that he reps or his website?

I guess I just don't know how to say it. Maybe a PM would have been more correct. Since the marketing was in the various threads, I decided to post my thoughts there too.

I thought that I laced my comments with enough sincere compliments that the criticism would be well taken. 

And Peter's response is fair and courteous.

Its good to hear Peter is an advertiser. I didn't know that.

I'd rather see an advertisment as what it is.

I did put the little embarrased icon on my post cause I knew I was going out on a limb.

Maybe I have just missed most of Peter's posts and just read the few that happen to be advertisements. I only read the few that seem interesting to me.

Jamie, did you see he called me Rick James? Is that an insult?

(kidding; but its Ron for future reference)

I might also have some misguided contempt (too strong a word) for a very few others that tend to name drop on the forum.

I say, show me what you got. I don't care that you met somebody.


----------



## Frederick Russ (Nov 3, 2006)

Not that it really matters, but Peter has been a banner advertiser at VI for over a year. Instead of having a banner running promoting Alexander Publishing, he's chosen to market his wares here, in Commercial Announcements, which we here at VI created some time ago so that advertisers had a way to discuss their products yet keep commercially-related topics separate from the rest of the forum. 

In other words, if you don't want to read forum advertisements, just avoid Commercial Announcements altogether. We felt that even if someone is trying to "sell" something, its still pertinent to getting information to our members - but visiting the forum slated for that is a personal choice. Just to clarify.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 3, 2006)

rJames @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> JonFairhurst @ Fri Nov 03 said:
> 
> 
> > To paraphrase a line in one of the whitepapers, Peter's not in the music business, his company IS a music business.
> ...



Ron, that's quite a compliment. I appreciate it, but that's not a role I feel is appropriate for me to even attempt to fill. There was someone who set himself up in that exact role on another forum, and his comments were totally obnoxious and insensitive to others. 

Additionally, it's difficult to discuss orchestration per se when all of the pieces presented here are MIDI mock-ups and any, and I repeat, ANY comment on orchestration change is completely subject to what libraries the composer has. 



> And there is a big void there. I don't think I've ever (exaggeration again) seen comments on orchestration. Maybe so, but mostly how real something sounds or how synthy. Nothing like, "you might want to try to pair up your French horns with your flutes for that transition to the brass section," or??? "Why are your first violins going it alone on that phrase?"



Orchestration/composition comments are voids on all the forums. The majority of the conversations on demos is about recording technique, reverb, and EQ, if even that. I've just reviewed 7 pages of comments on the new Muse demos on another forum, and not one, not ONE, discussed the composition, the arranging of the composition, or anything else. 



> And on the "Hank" thing. If you have to explain that "Hank" refers to Henry Mancini then you have probablly used it in an incorrect setting.



Thanks for the thought.



> I'm sure Peter is a great guy, I'd absolutely love to have a long chat with him about orchestration, but I suppose I'm not making friends today.
> 
> My post is just a response that has been building in me over Peter's marketing.
> 
> He always gives valuable information, so I will go back to lurk mode now.



You're sharing what you feel. If relationship is of concern to you, then perhaps next time you'd consider criticizing me privately instead of publicly in an international forum.



> OH, and one more thing...(he said going into full confession mode)
> 
> I bought his, "Principles of Orchstration, Volume 1" book. I realized after I had it that it was not what I wanted to study.
> 
> ...



With all due respect, I think you're being a bit over the top here including your comments about my wife.

Every publisher, including us, has the same return policy. If you're not happy with it, then return it within 30 days in salable condition for a full refund less shipping and handling charges. If it's a PDF, there's no return because it's software, and once you have it, you have it. 

Regarding your other comments, I can only comment in summary. An orchestration book is about the orchestra. Electronic orchestration is about replicating the orchestra. To do electronic orchestration effectively, as I wrote in my White Paper, you have to know what instruments sound like and what they don't sound. I methodically broke them down for you by low, medium, high and very high ranges so you could fix the sound in your mind. When you know that, you can then evaluate your sounds to know what works where. That takes time, effort, and work. But that's what every other professional does and why some composers templates run 200 and 300 tracks. It's also why professionals get every library they can afford because you are your sounds. Some sounds and some libraries work better in some situations than others. If you only have one library, you're stuck. 

With the speed these libraries are coming out at, it's impossible to write an "orchestration" method that describes how to use that specific library. 

Orchestration (instrumentation) texts, as a genre, tell you what instruments can do. 

Your job with your libraries is to determine, hopefully before you buy them, whether or not the library will do what it claims. You have in my orchestration book tempos for single, double and triple tonguing. Well, can your brass samples do that or not? And up to what tempo? 

If you're going to be effective at this, grasp now it's not about memorizing, it's about listening, internalizing, testing with samples, then applying compositionally. It's about investing in yourself to listen, listen, listen. To score read. To attend live concerts. To talk with musicians and ask questions. 

A while back Caroline and I attended an orchestra concert and I had an opportunity to meet one of the bassists. We began talking about bass parts and he commented on two scores he thought every composer should study to write effective bass parts. Not only did I ask him what they were, I ordered them the next day, and downloaded the MP3s from iTunes as soon as I got home. 

The pieces: Holberg Suite by Grieg and Enigma Variations by Elgar.

To learn, you have to put the time in to learn the literature. That's why we packaged the Naxos Music Library with the book instead of a CD, so that instead of having snippets, you have over 10,000 recorded compositions representing 165,000 tracks of streaming audio to listen to, 24/7. 

Not everyone wants to put in that effort. For those who do, we have the training materials available. 

Of all the orchestration book publishers, Alexander Publishing is the only one with a forum for their book. 

http://www.alexanderpublishing.com/forum/login.asp?target=default.asp (http://www.alexanderpublishing.com/foru ... efault.asp)

If you're on our email list, I've emailed EVERY owner of Professional Orchestration (aka Revised Rimsky-Korsakov's Principles of Orchestration) about the forum. Have you registered to take advantage of this? If not, it's open for you to do so.

Thanks again for writing. 

Blessings.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 3, 2006)

synthetic @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> Peter, what is the difference between "Writing for Strings" and "Orchestration Vol 2a?"



Writing for Strings is an indepth course the equivalent of two semesters of work. 
http://www.professionalorchestration.co ... trings.php

Paul Thomson reviewed on this forum.

Professional Orchestration Volume 2A covers the Second Key to Learning Professional Orchestration, orchestrating the melody within each orchestral section. Because of its size, 500 pages, 2A focuses on the strings while 2B focuses on Winds and Brass.

See:
http://www.professionalorchestration.co ... lume2a.php


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 3, 2006)

> Jamie, did you see he called me Rick James? Is that an insult?



Reread.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 3, 2006)

THREAD MARKETING -

FYI, Thread marketing is done all the time on Northern Sounds and here. Thread marketing is an effective tool for developers (or publishers) to present materials and be able to discuss them with potential customers. On this forum, that takes place in Sample Talk and in the Commercial section, where we pay to advertise.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 3, 2006)

Patrick de Caumette @ Thu Nov 02 said:


> "In teaching today, and with the group of students arriving tomorrow, I fear we have a serious problem on our hands with low attention spans and high rates of ADD. With
> music demanding focus and attention, some students may need help in developing
> this skill. If not already, this will become a major challenge for collegiate music
> departments."
> ...



Thanks, Pat!


----------



## rJames (Nov 3, 2006)

Well, I started with an embarrased icon attached to my reply, now I will have to get a tattoo.

I didn't even realize this was the "Commercial Announcements" forum.

I didn't even know there was one.

I was kidding about the "Rick James" bit.

I meant "unofficial" orchestration guru.

Try making comments about orchestration in a manner that is not obnoxious. Maybe it was just the particular self-appointed guru at NS.

Peter, we agree that there are not many comments about writing, instrumentation, orchestration...most of the things that will help take many of us to the next level, even mentioned in the threads on Member Compositions.

Too bad for this forum.

Its not my right to ask you to help in that regard, but I'm asking.

Maybe we need a model.

Again, I may be remembering Jamie's post about what to study next. Peter's response was something to the effect that the next step (totally paraphrasing and remembering something from a while back) was to get some of the materials that he had for sale.

Sorry, but it is just a cumulative feeling that I have about Peter.

And admittedly, a bad experience with his company.

I did not mean to denigrate your wife by any means, but only to denigrate the fashion that your company treated me when I called to try to return your materials.

I was given no option to return the materials in a saleable fashion.

I'm not saying your wife acted on her own, nor am I criticizing her.

I think this is the second thread where I've read your "white papers".

The reason that I didn't even know that this was the commercial announcements forum is that there was no commercial announcement in the thread.

It was a link to "articles" that had embedded within it, the question "How much orchestration can you really teach in one semester" but that really wasn't the article's contents.

The answer was simple and took a paragraph, "almost none". The White paper was really, "Where can you find quality orchestration studies if you want more than you get in a semester of school?" Honesty in a simple statement.

Maybe I was reacting to the fact that I got drawn in again to another commercial disguised as a "White Paper"

It is merely my opinion that you do too much marketing at VI.

That is just my opinion. I was freely expressing it.

That is why I keep saying that I'll bet you have plenty of knowledge to share. But I don't "know" that because what I've read of your posts, ends with "Alexander Publishing."

Heck maybe I'm just glossing again.

*Ponder this* I don't respond to many threads.

If Jamie wasn't right before, he certainly is now. This is way over the top.

OK, now that I have your attention, how about lunch?

(my first on-line interactions with Scott Rogers were more intense than this and we became friends, I think) BTW...where is Scott Rogers?

I think my basic problem is that I didn't look to see that this was a commercial forum.

I will now go sit in the corner with a dunce cap on and write, "look before you leap." 100 times.

Anyone in the market for a couple of old Macs? A Fender Rhodes with serial number under 100?


----------



## Dr.Quest (Nov 3, 2006)

> Jamie, did you see he called me Rick James? Is that an insult?



Hey Daddio, it just means you are *Superfreaky*! :smile: 

Cheers,
J


----------



## ComposerDude (Nov 4, 2006)




----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 4, 2006)

rJames @ Fri Nov 03 said:


> Well, I started with an embarrased icon attached to my reply, now I will have to get a tattoo.
> 
> I didn't even realize this was the "Commercial Announcements" forum.
> 
> ...



Ron, you ordered from us on June 24, 2004. All of our customer service is handled by e-mail so that we have written records to protect both customer and company. 

Neither of us have any recollection or record of you wanting to return the book. I'm not saying you didn't attempt to, I'm saying we have no record or recall of such a request from over two years ago. 

Our return policy for books is openly published:
http://www.truespec.com/shipping.php

This has always been our return policy and will continue to be so. I apologize, but neither of us remember your call. If you called during August, my dad died then and I was going back and forth between Virginia and California handling estate issues.

I'm sorry for your bad experience. Please contact us directly and let me know what we can do.

As far as advertising is concerned, I pay to be here, I keep my ads in this section. I originally posted the White Paper in composition, but it was moved here. 

Unlike the vast majority of companies who advertise here, Alexander Publishing is the only educational publisher. We focus on materials that help composers get there faster. If I have suggestions based on texts we publish, that's the reason. 

Are we concluded, Ron, or is there something more you'd like to discuss?


----------



## rJames (Nov 4, 2006)

yes, that was exactly it. You were having a major crisis at the time.

We are concluded.

What can you do to make it right. Well, you don't have to do anything...but trying to forget this interchange would be great. 

Evidently, I didn't communicate clearly that I wanted to return the book. I have been known to be a bit oblique at times.... :¬)

And then entice me with some demonstrations of your knowledge.

I think your premise is well established. They don't teach much orchestration in school and many of us don't know nearly enough.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 4, 2006)

rJames @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> And then entice me with some demonstrations of your knowledge.
> 
> I think your premise is well established. They don't teach much orchestration in school and many of us don't know nearly enough.



I have a call into Frederick. I'm open to sponsoring one of two types classes on line.

1) going through one score by which I'll teach you how to apply the 8 Keys to Learning Professional Orchestration. I suggested to Frederick: Raiders of the Lost Ark, Nutcracker Suite, possibly Pavanne by Faure. These works are much more accessible. Raiders is built on a song form of AABB'A. Text requirements are the score. Any orchestration comments I make I option to source back to the book I wrote (with page numbers). 

2) A complete 13-week course using Professional Orchestration Volume 1, the Naxos Music Library, and the Professional Mentor. At the end of the 13 weeks, you'll have written and recorded individual solo pieces for each major instrument of the orchestra, plus woodwind ensemble, brass ensemble, string ensemble and full orchesta. Because of the electronic arranging emphasis, I'll create a separate package for the Thesaurus of Orchestral Devices from Writing For Strings which will include score, MP3, and MIDI files to be loaded into the sequencer. This will then give you ready references for how to MIDI edit each major orchestral instrument and various devices. You'll post your MP3s and comments WILL BE RESTRICTED to composition and instrumentation issues only.

I won't charge for either online class, but, the required text is Professional Orchestration Volume 1 which of course includes the Professional Mentor and the one year renewable subscription to the Naxos Music Library.

If anyone has the book, but not the NML, you can still order it for $15. Write Caroline.

If you decide you want to go for the one semester class, it's non-accredited value will be roughly 4 credit hours. I will teach you score analysis, score reduction. You'll test your libraries with the material. You'll learn to do the MIDI edits

Here's the caveat emptor: Like with E.I.S., I have a specific way of teaching. So you can use any other orchestration book as a supplement, but I can only do this out of Professional Orchestration. To do this, we literally have to be on the same page.

Recording will be handled as a separate workshop.

VALUE: At a state school with cost per credit hour of $125, the minimum class value is $500. I'll give my time, but you have to get the class materials.

MY EXPECTATIONS - My expectations as instructor is that you'll do the work and apply this material to your own writing. My attitude is this. I'm making an investment in each person choosing to do this. I expect nothing less than career success on your part.

That's the deal.

At the conclusion of this class, we'll take a short break, and then I'll launch a second class based on Professional Orchestration Volume 2A. Here, we will be absolutely RUTHLESS in regard to evaluating sample libraries and creating effective MIDI mock-ups.

Let me know what you want. To be worth my time, I need at least 5 people to sign up who'll stick with it. No quitters allowed.

Peter


----------



## rJames (Nov 4, 2006)

Well, now I feel guilty for bringing this up.

Starting over... 

I would go for this if you would allow me in after what I've said and done for the past day.

What I am enticed by is 1000 devices. 

I feel like I am reinventing the wheel every time I create a piece of music. I have to listen and relisten to see if; I like what I'm doing, where to go next and how to get there.

If we study one score, we would only analyze the set of devices used in that score. It is a less expensive way to go if I understand the course requirements correctly.

Speaking for myself only (obviously) I am not as interested in writing for each instrument (even though I can see how important that is) but how they work together. (I also understand how one should preceed the other)

In the full course, we would write for and record each of the instruments. How is that done?

Is there an extra financial requirement to hire musicians?

So, if we have no materials, how much is each class?


----------



## synthetic (Nov 4, 2006)

I'm interested in either class. I like the idea of Raiders from example 1, as I'm interested in film scoring and the AABA melody seems like a great orchestration workshop. Of course example 2 sounds even better to me.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 4, 2006)

rJames @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> Well, now I feel guilty for bringing this up.
> 
> Starting over...
> 
> ...



1) Part of learning those devices is knowing how to write for the instruments, that's why instrumentation is FIRST.

2) You write and record with whatever sample libraries you have TODAY.

3) The class is FREE except for the materials charge of the book (if you don't own it already), the NML (if you own an older edition of the book and not the NML), and the workshop package for MIDI editing.

If you follow my approach, you won't be reinventing the wheel. That's the whole purpose with the methodology.

PA


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 4, 2006)

synthetic @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> I'm interested in either class. I like the idea of Raiders from example 1, as I'm interested in film scoring and the AABA melody seems like a great orchestration workshop. Of course example 2 sounds even better to me.



Forget film scoring. By looking at this as an AABA form you'll have an approach for how to approach scoring any pop song in a concert setting. Don't limit orchestration or what you're learning to film scoring. Whatever I cover will have a broader application, and for your career, you need to keep that in mind.


----------



## synthetic (Nov 4, 2006)

By "film scoring" I meant a 20th-century romantic sound typically found in modern film scores. I understand that orchestration devices are universal, and that much is based on (or directly ripped from) 20th-century concert works. 

I think it's time to start a new thread with your class offer. I really want to see #2 happen.


----------



## rJames (Nov 4, 2006)

I miscommunicated again, how unlike me...

I realize the classes are free (and that is extremely generous). I meant how much for class A or class B.

But I've gone to the site and found the price of Professional Orchestration to be $79.

I have Principles of Orchestration and it seems to have been renamed since Principles is also the expanded Rimsky-Korsakov book.

the "Raider's March" seems to be $41 (rounding up).

Can I order the NML for only $15?

Course A: analyzing one score approximately $50
Course B: Study the entire Professional Orchestration Vol 1 approximately $80

Seems like we will get to more devices by analyzing the score.

But Volume 1 leads to Volume 2.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 4, 2006)

synthetic @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> By "film scoring" I meant a 20th-century romantic sound typically found in modern film scores. I understand that orchestration devices are universal, and that much is based on (or directly ripped from) 20th-century concert works.
> 
> I think it's time to start a new thread with your class offer. I really want to see #2 happen.



Cool. I just wanted to clarify I wasn't offering the Hans Zimmer Sound-A-Like scoring class! Some guys are so obsessed on film scoring they don't look beyond to see the broader technique needed.

As for starting anothò“   IDí“   IDî“   IDï“   IDð“   IDñ“   IDò“   IDó“   IDô“   IDõ“   IDö“   ID÷“   IDø“   IDù“   IDú“   IDû“   IDü“   IDý“   IDþ“   IDÿ“   IE “   IE“   IE“   IE“   IE“   IE“   IE“   IE“   IE“   IE	“   IE
“   I


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 4, 2006)

sbkp @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> Peter, you are extremely generous. I would like in on this (option B, if we're voting). I already subscribe to Naxos.com. Is your subscription different somehow?
> 
> And I have Revised Principles of Orchestration, as well.
> 
> ...



If you have the NML from us, you get near CD quality and you can play an album all the way through. If you have the $19.95 version, you can only play one track at a time. Also, I have play lists already set up on the Naxos Music Library for you to listen to.


----------



## synthetic (Nov 4, 2006)

rJames @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> Seems like we will get to more devices by analyzing the score.



As an owner of Principals of Orchestration Vol 1 (the precursor to this book), I can assure you that's NOT the case. 875 pages, and if it's at all like POO then well over 1/2 the book is highlighted score examples. Maybe more like 75%, and it sounds like ProOrch Vol 1 has even more examples. Compared to one 5 minute suite, you'll get much more from the full book. 

C'mon rJames, say option 2, and we're halfway there.


----------



## synthetic (Nov 4, 2006)

Now we know the real reason Peter changed the title: he was tired of lazy typists referring to it as "POO" :D


----------



## rJames (Nov 4, 2006)

Option 2 is fine.

(either way will do for me)

I'll pay closer attention to your emails from now on.

As I may have mentioned before, there was not a reason for me to get into the book's details until recently.

I think I am ready for it.

With an instructor, it is a no brainer to do it now.

I don't listen to much music. That is why I haven't looked into the Naxos thing yet.

That is what I like so much about EIS. 

It is not a study of previously created structures. It is a study of musical structure. You gotta try it to see what I mean but SPud tried to keep style OUT of the course. (which is almost impossible)

I know this will be different and I am quite ready for that. My working experience in music is all about analyzing style and recreating it. So, I know how important it is in the real world. 

To communicate in music we need to use the conventions that have become the norm.

Honestly, I'd like to study the 1000 devices void from a piece of music. Because then you actually see the device and you are not confused by the ancillary writing.


----------



## synthetic (Nov 4, 2006)

rJames @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> That is what I like so much about EIS. It is not a study of previously created structures. It is a study of musical structure. You gotta try it to see what I mean but SPud tried to keep style OUT of the course. (which is almost impossible) ...Honestly, I'd like to study the 1000 devices void from a piece of music. Because then you actually see the device and you are not confused by the ancillary writing.



I don't understand this logic. We're studying music, not math. You have nothing to learn from Ravel and Wagner? You're starting to sound like a 20th-century serialist. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I think a balanced education receives information from all points of view.


----------



## rJames (Nov 4, 2006)

synthetic @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> I don't understand this logic. We're studying music, not math. You have nothing to learn from Ravel and Wagner? You're starting to sound like a 20th-century serialist. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I think a balanced education receives information from all points of view.



I don't know about you, but I'm studying math...a very, very elegant math.

Hopefully, the differences will be apparent in our music.

I am ready to study the masters. But, I just don't listen to music that much. I don't want to be overly influenced.

Now who's name dropping...

I had an experience with a copyist for a feature composer (I think he is a well respected copyist for many composers but you wouldn't know his name nor the composer most likely). He liked my stuff but said that is was very derivitive of Ravel, Debussy and Stravinsky. He was trying to insult me. I am told by a reputable source that he is considered an expert in these things. And has thousands of recordings.

I have barely heard of these guys. (I did, however see "10") I took it as a compliment.

I'm sure I've heard these guys' music many times over my lifetime. 

Obviously Spud and EIS is taking me down a pathway that these guys strolled, once upon a time.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 4, 2006)

Ron, there's not a publishable list of 1000 devices. That's what I'm working on now. If you want to see a starting list, look in the back of my orchestration book.


----------



## Leandro Gardini (Nov 5, 2006)

Peter, as you must remember, I´ve been very interested in your orchestration classes for a long time...you can count with me and I´m sure this time it´l work!!!
A can see you are more focused on orchestration, but, is there any chance for harmony or counterpoint???I´ve already studyed and still studing the 3 ones, but I´m always seeking new good courses like what is you publishings offer!!!


----------



## Rodney Glenn (Nov 5, 2006)

Hi Peter

Sorry if this perhaps is a bit off topic.

I'm wondering if there is any difference in content between your older "Revised Rimsky-Korsakov's Principles of Orchestration" and the new "Professional Orchestraion Volume 1" and if so, what?

I'm also wondering when (roughly) you expect to release Volume 2?

Thank's in advance

R


----------



## rJames (Nov 5, 2006)

Peter, I don't think I've been receiveing emails from you until very recently. I have noticed a few in the past few weeks.

I went to your link <http://alexuniv.com/proaudio/> and it says the offer was one-time and is over in June.

We can get this worked out when and if you do this class. (I understand that if I call Caroline that she can work it out)

After all the trouble I gave you on this thread, I too think you ought to post your offer of guiding a class on-line in a new thread. (unless you want to keep your class size down) 

Free for those who have the materials and only $79 for those that don't.

That is a weekly fee for most (private) courses.

Most people on this forum could gain insight. 

It needs the correct thread title or many people who might want to take advantage won't get the opportunity.

"Would you join a "free" online orchestration course?"


----------



## synergy543 (Nov 5, 2006)

I'd be verying interested in joining in this if I could find the time. Any objection if I get the materials and sort of "audit" the class?


----------



## spoon (Nov 5, 2006)

man, 
you guys really have something in common.
Emotions.
Good, that´s really good. There are really "real human" people behind the vast space of VI...something I sometimes miss in software samples 


Online class....very good idea, really.


----------



## mathis (Nov 5, 2006)

Peter Alexander @ Sat Nov 04 said:


> To be worth my time, I need at least 5 people to sign up who'll stick with it. No quitters allowed.
> 
> Peter



Man, that sounds like a really great idea. I'd really love to participate in your 13 week workshop and I definitely wouldn't quit.
What I don't really understand: is this an offer only for EIS students?

Bests,
- Mathis


----------



## sbkp (Nov 5, 2006)

No, it has nothing to do with EIS. Ron's just kind of a loud-mouth about EIS (haha! kidding, Ron! I'm one of David's students, too! )


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 5, 2006)

rJames @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> I went to your link <http://alexuniv.com/proaudio/> and it says the offer was one-time and is over in June.



RON! It does't matter about the date. I sent you to the link to answer your questions and to show what was available. If you want NML for $14.95, then please contact Caroline.




> After all the trouble I gave you on this thread, I too think you ought to post your offer of guiding a class on-line in a new thread. (unless you want to keep your class size down)



Ron, this is not my web site. It's owned by Frederick Russ. And before any announcements are made, out of respect for his leadership here, I need an OK from him, and to see how he would prefer for it to be promoted.



> Free for those who have the materials and only $79 for those that don't.


It's free for the cost of materials which would be the book, the Naxos Music Library, and Professional Mentor. If we go into electronic scoring and MIDI editing issues, then I would have to add a separate workbook to adequately cover that which would be $25.

This class is a FREE 13-week class for those who have either my original Revised Rimsky-Korsakov's Principles of Orchestration, or it's renamed title, Professional Orchestration. 

If you have the older book, you need to order for $14.95 the Naxos Music Library one year renewable subscription for all the required listening involved.

A new workbook has replaced the older one that came with the Revised Principles of Orchestration called the Professional Mentor and this should be available around Thanksgiving. 

We can start the first week of December.

CAVEAT EMPTOR!
Since I'm teaching this class for free, I may require one Dover score. If I do, it will be The Planets by Holst. If I do, you can either order it from Amazon or from Truespec. I'll post it tomorrow at Truespec.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 5, 2006)

mathis @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> Peter Alexander @ Sat Nov 04 said:
> 
> 
> > To be worth my time, I need at least 5 people to sign up who'll stick with it. No quitters allowed.
> ...



It's for anyone who has my book, Professional Orchestration Volume 1. I may add the requirement of having The Planets by Holst (Dover edition), too.

See www.professionalorchestration.com


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 5, 2006)

synergy543 @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> I'd be verying interested in joining in this if I could find the time. Any objection if I get the materials and sort of "audit" the class?



One of my gifts is teaching, and so I will be vigorously teaching this class. Part of the experience is doing the work, recording your assignments, and then in a secure environment, learning how to qualitatively listen and positively critique your work and that of others. 

Following the Professional Mentor (see www.professionalorchestration.com) you're going to do the reading, the analysis, scan answers and fax them to me for review, and most importantly, write and record a two-minute piece of music per week for one specific solo instrument. At the end of our virtual semester, using whatever libraries you have, you're going to have a demo CD of at least 10 pieces, and depending on your skill with notation software, at least 10 works ready for you to publish and sell. 

Bottom line - at the end of the course, you'll have sufficient materials to start your own music publishing company.

So to audit, to me, means watching without participating because it wouldn't be fair to the others doing the work.

No college orchestration teacher teaches a class based on the cost of the materials. Their pay is covered in the cost per credit hour fee. Since I'm doing this for free, my "pay" is for each person to finish, and to have something in their hands that will propel their career forward. 

Since I'm doing this for free, my expectation is that whoever starts, finishes. If we need to extend the classes a few weeks to cover everything, I'm OK with that. 

But bottom line - I expect positive life results from those I'm investing my time in.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 5, 2006)

leogardini @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> Peter, as you must remember, I´ve been very interested in your orchestration classes for a long time...you can count with me and I´m sure this time it´l work!!!
> A can see you are more focused on orchestration, but, is there any chance for harmony or counterpoint???I´ve already studyed and still studing the 3 ones, but I´m always seeking new good courses like what is you publishings offer!!!



Counterpoint, The Instant Composer, releases First Quarter 2007, starting with 2-voice writing.

See you in class!


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 5, 2006)

Rodney Glenn @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> Hi Peter
> 
> Sorry if this perhaps is a bit off topic.
> 
> ...



Hi Rodney!

For copyright purposes, I made a few changes, but you don't need to re-order. Volume 2A ships December, January at the latest.

See: http://www.truespec.com/professional-orchestration-volume-p-409.html (http://www.truespec.com/professional-or ... p-409.html)


----------



## synergy543 (Nov 5, 2006)

Peter Alexander @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> So to audit, to me, means watching without participating because it wouldn't be fair to the others doing the work.


I understand Peter. What you're offering is most intruiging. However, as much as I would like to join, I think I have too many commitments at this time to devote the time required. I sure wish I could join though. I guess I'll have to study on my own at my own pace.

Cheers,

Greg


----------



## sbkp (Nov 5, 2006)

Peter Alexander @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> But bottom line - I expect positive life results from those I'm investing my time in.



Hard to argue with that, Peter. I'll reiterate myself: you're very generous.

Okay, I've got Revised Principles, I've emailed Caroline about NML, I'm not sure I ever got a workbook with RPoO, but I already own Dover's edition of The Planets, so, I'm almost ready, waiting at the desk in the front with my sharpened pencils and a highlighter. 

- Stefan


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Nov 5, 2006)

I too am too busy to jump in but would have certainly enjoyed doing this...

Ron, as much as I have to admit that your posts have led to this opportunity for many here, I also feel that Peter's generosity deserves some sort of apology on your part for some very agressive and, with retrospect, unjustified attacks ...


----------



## synthetic (Nov 5, 2006)

I happen to already have The Planets Dover Edition, but have't gotten around to studying it yet. So I think that's an excellent idea.  (For everyone else, it's $10 on Amazon.)


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 5, 2006)

synergy543 @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> Peter Alexander @ Sun Nov 05 said:
> 
> 
> > So to audit, to me, means watching without participating because it wouldn't be fair to the others doing the work.
> ...



Greg, if at the end of 13 weeks no one has burned me in effigy, I'm sure there'll be a round 2.


----------



## synergy543 (Nov 5, 2006)

Peter Alexander @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> Greg, if at the end of 13 weeks no one has burned me in effigy, I'm sure there'll be a round 2.



Cool! Better than WWF! You mean after Rick, er.. I mean Ron, finishes with you you're willing to go for a second round? :roll: 

The second class is sure to be a knockout after you finish with Ron!

Thanks Peter,

Greg


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 5, 2006)

synergy543 @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> Peter Alexander @ Sun Nov 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Greg, if at the end of 13 weeks no one has burned me in effigy, I'm sure there'll be a round 2.
> ...



If everyone finishes, I'll look at doing the class again, semester 2 which would be book 2, Orchestrating the Melody Within Each Orchestral Section (if there's enough) or Semester 1 of Counterpoint by Fux, the Instant Composer.


----------



## rJames (Nov 5, 2006)

Patrick de Caumette @ Sun Nov 05 said:


> Ron, as much as I have to admit that your posts have led to this opportunity for many here, I also feel that Peter's generosity deserves some sort of apology on your part for some very agressive and, with retrospect, unjustified attacks ...



Patrick, you put me in an awkward position.

First, I'm sure that my posts had nothing to do with Peter's offer. Sounds like something he'd been planning.

I only asked that he take some time to give honest appraisal of the music presented here in the Member's Composition forum. But I realize that many people there don't really want honest appraisal.

Another member at VI and I have a critique club. Nothing but honest appraisal. We have a saying (because we said it to each other numerous times and have found it to be the typical mantra of composers responding to critique). The saying is, "I wanted it that way." Code words for, "I don't accept your critique."

Probably more important, I realize that Peter, most likely, has many more important things to do and doesn't frequent the Member Composition forum. I suppose thaò“T   IZ“T   IZ“T   IZ“T   IZ “T   IZ!“T   IZ"“T   IZ#“T   IZ$“T   IZ%“U   IZ&“U   IZ'“U   IZ(“U   IZ)“U   IZ*“U   IZ+“U   IZ,“U   IZ-“U   IZ.“U   IZ/“U   IZ0“U   IZ1“U   IZ2“U   IZ3“U   IZ4“U   IZ5“U   IZ6“U   IZ7“U   IZ8“U   IZ9“U   IZ:“U   IZ;“U   IZ<“U   IZ=“U   IZ>“U   IZ?“U   [email protected]“U   IZA“U   IZB“U   IZC“U   IZD“U   IZE“V   IZ~“V   IZ“V   IZ€“V   IZ“V   IZ‚“V   IZƒ“V   IZ„“V   IZ…“V   IZ†“V   IZ‡“V   IZˆ“V   IZ‰“V   IZŠ“V   IZ‹“V   IZŒ“V   IZ“V   IZŽ“V   IZ“V   IZ“V   IZ‘“V   IZ’“V   IZ““V   IZ”“V   IZ•


----------



## JonFairhurst (Nov 6, 2006)

Peter,

I'm horribly busy, but I'm going to sign up anyway. The opportunity to too good to pass up.

I've already got The Planets from Dover, and will order your materials shortly. I think I'll also get GVI, since I may need to do my "homework" while on the road. It will be cool to be able to play some nice Giga samples from the laptop - and even cooler to improve my ability to use them!

Thanks for your generous offer.

-JF


----------



## mathis (Nov 6, 2006)

Peter Alexander @ Mon Nov 06 said:


> mathis @ Sun Nov 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Peter Alexander @ Sat Nov 04 said:
> ...




Count me in! Thank you for doing this!
- Mathis


----------



## Rodney Glenn (Nov 6, 2006)

Peter Alexander @ Mon Nov 06 said:


> Rodney Glenn @ Sun Nov 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Rodney!
> ...



Hi Peter

Sounds Great. Thank you.

Cheers

R


----------



## Leandro Gardini (Nov 6, 2006)

Orchestration an than counterpoint...we are going against the original line but it´s really great Peter  !!!
I hope the film composers don´t undervalue the importance of counterpoint...I´m in for everything, with or without time...thanks you for that!!!


----------



## D.J. (Nov 7, 2006)

I'm interested as well.

I would like to know if you can give us an estimate of the time required per week to complete the assignments so I can plan for that properly.

Also, will the 'class time' be at a set time every week? Online?
I'd have to know I can be free at that time every week for 13 weeks 
(or a little more if it becomes necessary, as you mentioned)

Planning the time is the most important thing for me.


You also mentioned the materials required;
-Professional Orchestration Book 1(with Mentor and Naxos)
-Holst, The Planets (Dover full score)
-and some kind of a MIDI package made by you for this course. (around 25$)

Once I can confirm these details I can commit.

Thanks Peter for your time and generosity.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 7, 2006)

synthetic @ Tue Nov 07 said:


> But you're looking for both a printed score and a recording for each assignment, right? Not just a MIDI improv recording.



No, not an "improv" recording at all. In this course, what you write, you record. You have to record your compositionò“·   Im“·   Im“¸   Im“¸   Im“¸   Im“¸   Im“¸   Im“¸   Im“¸   Im “¸   Im!“¸   Im"“¸   Im#“¸   Im$“¸   Im%“¸   Im&“¸   Im'“¸   Im(“¸   Im)“¸   Im*“¸   Im+“¸   Im,“¸   Im-“¸   Im.“¸   Im/“¸   Im0“¸   Im1“¸   Im2“¸   Im3“¸   Im4“¸   Im5“¸   Im6“¸   Im7“¸   Im8“¸   Im9“¹   Im:“¹   Im;“¹   Im<“¹   Im=“¹   Im>“¹   Im?“¹   Im


----------

