jononotbono
Luke Johnson
Ok maybe I shouldn't jump the gun yet. I'll keep learning my intervals as they are always the same on any stage/staff and vital. Then it's to learn chords. Then...
Mike Verta say’s, “Transcribe, Transcribe, Transcribe” … “Rey’s Theme”
- Thread starter wbacer
- Start date
mverta
Probably Dead from Corona Virus
Absolutely 10000% disagree. Totally unnecessary. Jump in on the Galaxy Quest challenge asap.
Trust me.
_Mike
AlexanderSchiborr
Senior Member
It is a challenge to transcribe the Galaxy Quest Maintheme. You can do it, send Mr. Verta your rendition and you get access to the Galaxy Quest Transcribing Class.
I did transribe today a few bars from this. Probably some wrong notes and still no shakers, I don´t care. Makes fun and strengen your musical muscles
Last edited:
All of the above is correct but actually all you need is the V or V7 chord. The ii minor extends the chord sequence but it's not really necessary.
Last edited:
Go for it, the Galaxy Quest Challenge is great. I submitted a transcription and attended the live broadcast. Learned a lot. It definitely jump started my transcription quest.
jononotbono
Luke Johnson
Ok. I shall report back.
SillyMidOn
Active Member
True, but it helps "cement it", and if you can do a II- V into a new key, you know how to do a V into a new key as well
.AlexanderSchiborr
Senior Member
Sure nomenclatur can help to know, sort and put things into the closet, but still beware of going by a too much "head controlled writing". In my opinion the best things happen when you leave the theory mostly out of the game and start using your instincts, which is only possible to lead to great results in case you work hard and merciless over many many many years. And a big part of gaining control in that is to transcribe music you like because it cements that process in your head because you are "doing" it by trial and error and over the time you get an understanding why things work and others not. And that´s for me at least the bottom line.
Last edited:
Yup, both work.True, but it helps "cement it", and if you can do a II- V into a new key, you know how to do a V into a new key as well
spaunsam7
Non Senior Member
I'm a jazz drummer who crossed over to composing a few years back and during my drumming career I learned more from transcribing Vinnie Colaiuta, Dave Weckl, Jack Dejohnette etc. in a few months than years and years of private lessons and college. Don't get me wrong, learning how to read books and charts helped me understand everything that was going on better as oppose to not knowing how to read but nothing beats transcribing what you actually like than some exercise out of a book that you are gonna forget 5 mins after you play it.
NoamL
Winter <3
Gonna toot my own horn a bit... I had a dream a couple nights ago about a composer education tool, and this thread is as good a place as any to ask if there would be a market for it. Since you are all interested in learning through transcription!
I do agree with Mike that the best way to learn is to teach yourself. This idea would ONLY be a supplement to that. It comes from my own frustration at doing score study, where even after reading through lots of scores I still find myself with questions like "What would X + Y sound like?" and don't have an example at my fingertips that I can listen to.
So this idea solves that problem.
Basically the idea is a Cinematic Orchestration Lookup Online Resource (COLOR) that takes some grunt work out of learning orchestral color, by using modern technology (databases, websites & streaming video).
basically: imagine Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov's Principles Of Orchestration, but on meth.
The database would consist of comprehensively datamined examples of orchestral colors in traditional filmscores. The front end of COLOR would be a website where you can check and uncheck a bunch of dialogs to sift through the database and return musical examples that exactly fit a specified query. Like asking a librarian to get you a book. COLOR would eventually have hundreds or even thousands of specifically tagged examples at your fingertips.
That's a little hard to grasp so let me walk you through an example.
You have a melody and you are wondering how to orchestrate it:
Maybe cellos? How exactly would adding bassoons to the cellos change the tone? How about just winds, maybe bassoons in unison with horns? Would that sound muddy?
So you go to the website, which has three sets of dialog boxes.
The first dialog box is Instruments. You tick the boxes for "Horn" and "Bassoon."
The second dialog box is Center Of Gravity. This is just a way of systematizing the idea of ranges. It would look like this:
Your melody has a Tenor center of gravity so you'd check that box.
The last dialog box is Material, for this one you check "Melody."
You click GO and the COLOR does its thing and returns a bunch of citations.
One of them looks like this:
Instruments: 2 bassoons (unison) 2 horns.
COG: Tenor.
Material: Melody.
Dynamic: Mezzo-piano.
That looks promising so you click it.
And - whabam! - you're listening to a piece of music:
Just by listening to an example you learn a lot:
At this range the horn predominates and absorbs the bassoon sound.
The sound combo is dark & slightly ominous. If you give the horns accent marks even at mp there will be some nice edge on the sound.
It's now easier to go back to your melody at the piano and imagine how it will sound with horns+bassoons. You could learn all this from a book but now you're listening to it. Also, each of the examples can give you inspiration for what kinds of orchestration to use to accompany & contrast your melodic colors.
If I did this project it would probably start in the New Year and it would be on Patreon since I'd be doing it in my free time. Basically the more monthly subscriptions I got the more examples I'd be able to transcribe, data-tag and enter into the database each week.
I do agree with Mike that the best way to learn is to teach yourself. This idea would ONLY be a supplement to that. It comes from my own frustration at doing score study, where even after reading through lots of scores I still find myself with questions like "What would X + Y sound like?" and don't have an example at my fingertips that I can listen to.
So this idea solves that problem.
Basically the idea is a Cinematic Orchestration Lookup Online Resource (COLOR) that takes some grunt work out of learning orchestral color, by using modern technology (databases, websites & streaming video).
basically: imagine Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov's Principles Of Orchestration, but on meth.
The database would consist of comprehensively datamined examples of orchestral colors in traditional filmscores. The front end of COLOR would be a website where you can check and uncheck a bunch of dialogs to sift through the database and return musical examples that exactly fit a specified query. Like asking a librarian to get you a book. COLOR would eventually have hundreds or even thousands of specifically tagged examples at your fingertips.
That's a little hard to grasp so let me walk you through an example.
You have a melody and you are wondering how to orchestrate it:
Maybe cellos? How exactly would adding bassoons to the cellos change the tone? How about just winds, maybe bassoons in unison with horns? Would that sound muddy?
So you go to the website, which has three sets of dialog boxes.
The first dialog box is Instruments. You tick the boxes for "Horn" and "Bassoon."
The second dialog box is Center Of Gravity. This is just a way of systematizing the idea of ranges. It would look like this:
Your melody has a Tenor center of gravity so you'd check that box.
The last dialog box is Material, for this one you check "Melody."
You click GO and the COLOR does its thing and returns a bunch of citations.
One of them looks like this:
Instruments: 2 bassoons (unison) 2 horns.
COG: Tenor.
Material: Melody.
Dynamic: Mezzo-piano.
That looks promising so you click it.
And - whabam! - you're listening to a piece of music:
Just by listening to an example you learn a lot:
At this range the horn predominates and absorbs the bassoon sound.
The sound combo is dark & slightly ominous. If you give the horns accent marks even at mp there will be some nice edge on the sound.
It's now easier to go back to your melody at the piano and imagine how it will sound with horns+bassoons. You could learn all this from a book but now you're listening to it. Also, each of the examples can give you inspiration for what kinds of orchestration to use to accompany & contrast your melodic colors.
If I did this project it would probably start in the New Year and it would be on Patreon since I'd be doing it in my free time. Basically the more monthly subscriptions I got the more examples I'd be able to transcribe, data-tag and enter into the database each week.
Last edited:
Gonna toot my own horn a bit... I had a dream a couple nights ago about a composer education tool, and this thread is as good a place as any to ask if there would be a market for it. Since you are all interested in learning through transcription!
I do agree with Mike that the best way to learn is to teach yourself. This idea would ONLY be a supplement to that. It comes from my own frustration at doing score study, where even after reading through lots of scores I still find myself with questions like "What would X + Y sound like?" and don't have an example at my fingertips that I can listen to.
So this idea solves that problem.
Basically the idea is a Cinematic Orchestration Lookup Online Resource (COLOR) that takes some grunt work out of learning orchestral color, by using modern technology (databases, websites & streaming video).
basically: imagine Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov's Principles Of Orchestration, but on meth.
The database would consist of comprehensively datamined examples of orchestral colors in traditional filmscores. The front end of COLOR would be a website where you can check and uncheck a bunch of dialogs to sift through the database and return musical examples that exactly fit a specified query. Like asking a librarian to get you a book. COLOR would eventually have hundreds or even thousands of specifically tagged examples at your fingertips.
That's a little hard to grasp so let me walk you through an example.
You have a melody and you are wondering how to orchestrate it:
Maybe cellos? How exactly would adding bassoons to the cellos change the tone? How about just winds, maybe bassoons in unison with horns? Would that sound muddy?
So you go to the website, which has three sets of dialog boxes.
The first dialog box is Instruments. You tick the boxes for "Horn" and "Bassoon."
The second dialog box is Center Of Gravity. This is just a way of systematizing the idea of ranges. It would look like this:
Your melody has a Tenor center of gravity so you'd check that box.
The last dialog box is Material, for this one you check "Melody."
You click GO and the COLOR does its thing and returns a bunch of citations.
One of them looks like this:
Instruments: 2 bassoons (unison) 2 horns.
COG: Tenor.
Material: Melody.
Dynamic: Mezzo-piano.
That looks promising so you click it.
And - whabam! - you're listening to a piece of music:
Just by listening to an example you learn a lot:
At this range the horn predominates and absorbs the bassoon sound.
The sound combo is dark & slightly ominous. If you give the horns accent marks even at mp there will be some nice edge on the sound.
It's now easier to go back to your melody at the piano and imagine how it will sound with horns+bassoons. You could learn all this from a book but now you're listening to it. Also, each of the examples can give you inspiration for what kinds of orchestration to use to accompany & contrast your melodic colors.
If I did this project it would probably start in the New Year and it would be on Patreon since I'd be doing it in my free time. Basically the more monthly subscriptions I got the more examples I'd be able to transcribe, data-tag and enter into the database each week.
I like the idea. Sounds like a lot of work but worth pursuing. I think that as technology and AI become more sophisticated, resources similar to this are going to become part of the composers toolbox.
douggibson
New Member
@NoamL
While I think the spirit of the idea is nice, and could see it being something you make money from (a good thing !)
I do not see any advantages for learning. If the entrepreneur passion is there for you, then by all means go for it !
I simply have a philosophical bias against things like this. A few reasons.
1) There are already so many orchestration resources out there that are similar.
Off the top of my head: Gardner Read Thesaurus of Orchestral Devices, lists dozens of scores for any combination in the orchestra. Sam Adler's book, and others, include CD's DVD's. The spectrotone chart shows all the ranges and gravity in a single picture.
2)It's actually better for learning to do the lifting yourself. Every composer/orchestrator should have a catalogue like you mentioned, completed by them alone.
To give an analogy: In weight lifting, free weights are the best as they give the most resistance. The machines help with the lifting and thus produce less effective results. If you ever read (not that this is a literary masterpiece) Arnold Schwarzenegger's book he talks about his practice. One of the routines he did was: take an axe, cut down a tree and then alternate lifting the tree with lifting rocks. Pure caveman. Look at his results vs. the people I see in NYC all the time who have a latte, magazine, flipping channels on the tv, looking at their phone etc.
We have more "ear-training" apps then ever before. We have more people with full access to orchestral libraries to try out any combination with a few clicks. Are we seeing a new heights in pitch recognition and orchestration brilliance ? Debatable most likely.
3) Your "mistakes" can have valuable learnings. Particularly with transcribing if you are searching for a chord or texture and you play something on the piano that is "wrong" but sounds totally cool.....use it ! If you are professionally doing a take down, then of course you have to get it right. But if it is just for you and learning, your "mistakes" are just a shitty branding of the word variation.
For my own students I give them a film cue from Vertigo. I give them only piano score, and mp3.
The first week all they are to do is mark what they think could be a good choice. Next I give them an mp3 of the orchestral score, in which they mark up what instruments they are hearing. Finally the real score.
No one ever gets it "right" because its Bernard hermann, and they don't think about bass flute. Totally fine. I wouldn't even care if they nailed it 100%. The whole point is that orchestration is as much an art as a science.
Not simply "what was that" but "What could have been".
One last point, and I now have to apologize on why I am even writing this. I certainly did not mean to be negative and I do think it could make you $.
The last point, is in partnership with transcribing the practice of singing and memorizing what you transcribe will really seal it in. I have done numerous professional transcriptions for people, and honestly I can barely recall half of them. I completed the gig, client was happy, and never thought about the shitty thing I had to notate.
However, those passages that I really liked, used solfegge, did an analysis of, and played on the piano (when not a really complex orchestral texture that does not translate) and additionally transposed to at least 3 different keys and improvised on. Those stick. They also come back into my memory much faster.
Ok..... no more Vi-control posting at 1 am. Rambling............ ahhh!
While I think the spirit of the idea is nice, and could see it being something you make money from (a good thing !)
I do not see any advantages for learning. If the entrepreneur passion is there for you, then by all means go for it !
I simply have a philosophical bias against things like this. A few reasons.
1) There are already so many orchestration resources out there that are similar.
Off the top of my head: Gardner Read Thesaurus of Orchestral Devices, lists dozens of scores for any combination in the orchestra. Sam Adler's book, and others, include CD's DVD's. The spectrotone chart shows all the ranges and gravity in a single picture.
2)It's actually better for learning to do the lifting yourself. Every composer/orchestrator should have a catalogue like you mentioned, completed by them alone.
To give an analogy: In weight lifting, free weights are the best as they give the most resistance. The machines help with the lifting and thus produce less effective results. If you ever read (not that this is a literary masterpiece) Arnold Schwarzenegger's book he talks about his practice. One of the routines he did was: take an axe, cut down a tree and then alternate lifting the tree with lifting rocks. Pure caveman. Look at his results vs. the people I see in NYC all the time who have a latte, magazine, flipping channels on the tv, looking at their phone etc.
We have more "ear-training" apps then ever before. We have more people with full access to orchestral libraries to try out any combination with a few clicks. Are we seeing a new heights in pitch recognition and orchestration brilliance ? Debatable most likely.
3) Your "mistakes" can have valuable learnings. Particularly with transcribing if you are searching for a chord or texture and you play something on the piano that is "wrong" but sounds totally cool.....use it ! If you are professionally doing a take down, then of course you have to get it right. But if it is just for you and learning, your "mistakes" are just a shitty branding of the word variation.
For my own students I give them a film cue from Vertigo. I give them only piano score, and mp3.
The first week all they are to do is mark what they think could be a good choice. Next I give them an mp3 of the orchestral score, in which they mark up what instruments they are hearing. Finally the real score.
No one ever gets it "right" because its Bernard hermann, and they don't think about bass flute. Totally fine. I wouldn't even care if they nailed it 100%. The whole point is that orchestration is as much an art as a science.
Not simply "what was that" but "What could have been".
One last point, and I now have to apologize on why I am even writing this. I certainly did not mean to be negative and I do think it could make you $.
The last point, is in partnership with transcribing the practice of singing and memorizing what you transcribe will really seal it in. I have done numerous professional transcriptions for people, and honestly I can barely recall half of them. I completed the gig, client was happy, and never thought about the shitty thing I had to notate.
However, those passages that I really liked, used solfegge, did an analysis of, and played on the piano (when not a really complex orchestral texture that does not translate) and additionally transposed to at least 3 different keys and improvised on. Those stick. They also come back into my memory much faster.
Ok..... no more Vi-control posting at 1 am. Rambling............ ahhh!
Interesting thread with many good comments. I'd like to add a question to the more experienced people here:
How would you rate the value of transcribing pieces (for which no score is available), right into Sibelius? The overall goal being to learn about orchestration.
The reason why I ask is: I have started doing this a while ago, and it's among the most satisfying things I've done in ages because I get to work at great detail with some of the scores I most admire and have a chance to listen back to the transcription (using Noteperformer). I'm talking about orchestral pieces which I try to reconstruct in full detail. Of course, those scores are locked away and will never become public, or are lost. This means I cannot compare the written notes the original. But comparing the audio that comes out of Sibelius with the original recording goes a long way, I feel.
I just wonder whether this is somehow inferior in a pedagogical sense. It's so much fun, there's got to be a downside...
How would you rate the value of transcribing pieces (for which no score is available), right into Sibelius? The overall goal being to learn about orchestration.
The reason why I ask is: I have started doing this a while ago, and it's among the most satisfying things I've done in ages because I get to work at great detail with some of the scores I most admire and have a chance to listen back to the transcription (using Noteperformer). I'm talking about orchestral pieces which I try to reconstruct in full detail. Of course, those scores are locked away and will never become public, or are lost. This means I cannot compare the written notes the original. But comparing the audio that comes out of Sibelius with the original recording goes a long way, I feel.
I just wonder whether this is somehow inferior in a pedagogical sense. It's so much fun, there's got to be a downside...
SillyMidOn
Active Member
That's us jazz musicians - we *have* to transcribe as jazz is kept for posterity in recorded form (audio) being an art form of the 20 century, so in order to find out what's going on, you have to transcribe it, whereas classical music was originally of course kept for posterity in written (score) form, so you go to the score to study it.
It is a real shame that all those many, many film music scores are neatly indexed just sitting in all those rooms in California, and no-one has access to them. I say make them available to the public!
