@Snarf, the orchestration I'm specifically talking about is the version I first heard linked to by the OP in the first post, the concert version, not the mockup that includes the weird notated score.
So, setting the inauthentic score aside, do you have the first few pages of the actual concert version you could post where I could just do a quick markup?
Anyway, the concert version is mostly fine for a pops music setting, and it was probably done in a mad rush, so when I say "not terrifically orchestrated" I literally mean nothing other than that. It's not a terrific model for study, especially compared to the Verdi.
The first thing I noticed when I heard the piece was right off in the timpani part in the opening four bars. It's a pretty common mistake that composers now and in the past have done historically, and timpanists who are so inclined and have the time will fix and markup their parts to minimize the issue.
The initial impression of the whole effect in the first two bars is obviously unified and determined, aggressive, and march-like. A steady rhythm, rather dry and detached, as in the strings and the other instruments. But the timpani resonance is blurring that effect because it's not being treated as an instrument with any control, as in one that can achieve better separation of the notes, which prevents it from being integrated. It's not that this sounds
bad—that's not the point—it's that the result is not the singular effect intended. The problem is even more pronounced in the studio version you posted, but it's still prevalent in the concert version.
There are a few things combined the timpanist could do to either mitigate the issue or eliminate it almost entirely. I'm guessing that the concert version, unlike the mockup score, does
not notate quarters for the timpani for that figure. I would be very surprised if it weren't notated as 8ths. Beyond that, I won't assume anything. But if I were in a hurry, the minimum I'd do is mark:
• 8ths with staccatissimo wedges: with this, ideally the timpanist will apply the sharpest staccato stroke (s)he is capable of. A sharp staccato stroke increases the point of attack, and lessens the amplitude of the ring-out for better separation. (The timpanist in the video is already doing this to some extent.)
• Specify "very hard mallets": this intensifies the effectiveness of the above. The timpanist in the video is already using some type of hard mallet, and that may have been marked in the part, but emphasizing the point by specifying "very hard mallets" drives the point home. Typical mallets for this would be what are often referred to as "ultra-staccato" mallets.
• Indicate an expression of
dark and dry (without "dark" you could say secco, it's anglicized.): "dry" emphasizes all of the above over again, and "dark" should affect the stroke, prolly the grip, and the timpanist may strike a little bit nearer the center by a couple inches. It might also have the timpanist choose ultra-staccato mallets that are a little heavy, or front-heavy, and/or with larger heads.
• Mark the timpani one or two dynamic levels lower than the strings (depending on the rest of the orchestration in those bars). The timpani resonance should not dominate the texture, but only just add some rhythmic point and punch to it.
And that's the minimum. It would help some, but it could be more separated still, and in my view, should be, for total integration. So I'd ask for a mute to be placed dead center of the timpani head, which would soak up some of the ring-out but still keep the overall timpani character. It's not drastic muting, it just tightens up the sound. And on top of that again, you could ask for a contact strike anywhere from one third to one half of the way between the rim and the center, which will make for a darker, more rhythmic and more percussive tone.
There are two alternate solutions to these combinations, but I'm outta time.
____________________
