|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 13, 2018 21:50:28 GMT
I suppose this is something reasonable people are going to disagree on, so I don't really want to press the argument. But just for the record, I have to say that I find wind ensembles consistently grating on my ears, especially wind-only chords. Wind + horns is not so bad, as the horn sound tends to smooth out the edge a little. I also can't stand the organ sound for long periods of time, though I do enjoy Saint-Saens' organ symphony where it is complemented by the rest of the orchestra. My ear is more tolerant of the brass timbres; but if I had to listen to a 30-minute brass symphony, I think I would be tempted to turn down the offer. That's not to say the strings are unquestionably pleasant to the ears; it highly depends on how the string parts are written. If they are poorly written, it can get tiring after a while. Now, of course, one can argue that the same goes for wind/brass ensembles; but the catch here is that the strings offer so many more varieties, both in style, in range, and in technique (e.g., pizzicato, snap pizz, a hundred varieties of ways of bowing), and generally don't suffer from registral issues (i.e., string articulations generally work across the entire range, doesn't have sharp timbral differences across different registers like, say, clarinets or oboes do, etc.). So there are so many more ways you can make interesting sounds with strings to keep the ear from getting tired, whereas when writing for winds or brass, you're constantly confined by the generally limited range, or range + timbre combinations, or changes in how the instrument responds in different registers (e.g., very hard to play pp in lower bassoon range, weak oboe sound in upper range, dramatic timbral changes in clarinet as you go from low to high), or the need of players to breathe, etc.. It's certainly possible to write interesting wind/brass parts, or entire pieces, even, but there are more constraints to work with. Strings offer a much more consistent sound / set of articulations across their entire range, which makes them much easier to adapt to a large variety of musical tasks. Perhaps the difference here is in the scale of the music we're dealing with: strings are generally more used in classical / art music settings, which also tend to feature longer pieces like symphonies or operas, whereas winds-only and brass-only works tend to be used more in band / pop / soundtrack / other settings, where long works are the exception rather than the norm. So the limitations of winds/brass/percussion in terms of tiringness to the ear don't really come into play in these shorter-scale genres, whereas for symphonic-style composers, we inevitably turn to the strings for long-term sustainability in terms of not being tiring to the ear. (Though I suspect there may also be some unconscious acclimatization to strings in classical / art music settings, just by tradition. So this analysis may be subject to some bias.) Anyway, as far as personal tastes go, I find percussion the most tiring to listen to. In fact, sounds like steel drums or celesta that are frequently used in modern works to highlight notes grate on my ears quite a bit, and if overused make me cringe. But then my ear is heavily biased towards classical/romantic era stuff, so perhaps this is all just subjective. But there may be some grain of truth to R-K's observation since I'm obviously not the only one who tires of percussion easily. Or maybe it's collective bias speaking? Who knows. I love you man, but this post is full of so many misconceptions and inaccuracies. I get personal taste. For example, I don't care for most piano music. I find the piano limited in many ways. But that's me. The organ is capable of many different sounds. Which one don't you like? Yes, how parts are written is of upmost importance. Range and inversion are critical for all instruments in all kinds of writing. Any professional brass player has a usable 3 octave range. Much like strings. Sure, clarinet sounds different in different ranges. So what. Use that. Hard to play pp in low register on bassoon? I've heard it done many times. Weak oboe sound in upper range? I characterize it more as soft, gentle, light. Each group of instruments have strong points and weak points. Strings have little power and guts. Thus they aren't used to convey that type of thing. We need to learn how to use all instruments. Use them for what they can do. Not lament what they can't. I submit that things that are tiring to the ear might not be well written. Consider that Beethoven didn't use a lot of brass because most modern brass instruments didn't exist yet. Your paragraph on scale of compositions is total bias. And that's OK. We all do it. Look, my musical experience seems to be totally different from yours. I grew up playing trumpet, though not very well. But well enough to get a Music ED degree with a major in trumpet. I played all kinds of music in all kinds of groups. I know what instrumentalists are capable of. I know how instruments sound together. Take what you read in books with a grain of salt. I'm not arguing at all. just passing on what I've learned.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 14, 2018 9:46:33 GMT
I suppose this is something reasonable people are going to disagree on, so I don't really want to press the argument. But just for the record, I have to say that I find wind ensembles consistently grating on my ears, especially wind-only chords. Wind + horns is not so bad, as the horn sound tends to smooth out the edge a little. I also can't stand the organ sound for long periods of time, though I do enjoy Saint-Saens' organ symphony where it is complemented by the rest of the orchestra. My ear is more tolerant of the brass timbres; but if I had to listen to a 30-minute brass symphony, I think I would be tempted to turn down the offer. I wasn't suggesting using only winds and brass, but not being afraid to entirely switch to them, or radically change the orchestration balance in a short space of time. Indeed, strings have many possibilities, but so do winds and brass. Rips, bends, flutter, trills, many many more I've never even ventured into. If you use the strings for "interesting sounds to keep the ear from getting tired", you are still only using strings, and it will blur together. As for the inconsistencies and weaknesses of winds, I've not noticed drawbacks of timbral changes through the range. Woodwinds are a vital part of my orchestrations, to add colour under strings or brass as well as holding their own when needed. The range of winds, from contrabassoon to piccolo, is enormous. Naturally, just like I did, I think you're going from rote description - irl, these purported drawbacks are not nearly as severe. If you just don't like them, that's fine - Aurich has a similar perspective when discussing some soundtrack composers. But winds and brass are clearly not tiring to the general ear, or they wouldn't feature so prominently in both soundtracks and classical pieces short and long. Plenty of symphonies full of brass and winds! Isn't the romantic era where orchestras began to get larger and orchestration therefore more elaborate, though? The era and composers that influenced a lot of modern soundtrack writing which you would find tiring but which owes a lot to burgeoning classical instrumentation?
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 14, 2018 13:35:22 GMT
Whoa Dave, I think you're reading a lot more into what I wrote than I actually meant. Obviously, I wasn't saying that one should avoid using winds and brass altogether! They are clearly extremely useful to add color or even play entire passages on their own, since otherwise why even have them in the orchestra at all! What I meant was the difference between turning to the strings as the workhorse for various musical needs and on occasion winds and brass, vs. turning to, say, the brass by default and occasionally using winds / strings.
But clearly, opinions differ on this, so I'm not going to press this point. It's just gonna be a matter of taste, and as Mike likes to say, there's no accounting for taste.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 14, 2018 13:43:44 GMT
And on the subject of tiringness to the ear, it's a matter of prolonged, sustained usage, it doesn't mean the very act of using winds or brass will tire the ear - on the contrary, they can provide quite the opposite: add lots of interest to a passage if used correctly. But if they are continuously heard for 30 minutes nonstop, they tend to fatigue the ear more than strings playing for the same 30 minutes. But again, this seems to be a matter of taste, and there's no accounting for taste. Rock music lovers don't mind listening to nonstop percussion for hours on end, so who's to say that they should be listening to violins instead?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 15, 2018 17:23:32 GMT
Whoa Dave, I think you're reading a lot more into what I wrote than I actually meant. Obviously, I wasn't saying that one should avoid using winds and brass altogether! They are clearly extremely useful to add color or even play entire passages on their own, since otherwise why even have them in the orchestra at all! What I meant was the difference between turning to the strings as the workhorse for various musical needs and on occasion winds and brass, vs. turning to, say, the brass by default and occasionally using winds / strings. But clearly, opinions differ on this, so I'm not going to press this point. It's just gonna be a matter of taste, and as Mike likes to say, there's no accounting for taste. Fair enough. We all just want everyone to be the best they can be, and I suppose Bob and I read you as "I will use only strings forever, chumps!" I'd also like to disagree with Bob saying strings have no guts. Guts aplenty in a string section!
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Aug 15, 2018 19:25:25 GMT
Catgut to be a little more specific.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 15, 2018 21:28:36 GMT
Catgut to be a little more specific. So many variants on that being an urban myth spread by string-makers that I don't know if the urban myth is what's mythical, and older strings actually were catgut.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 15, 2018 22:54:55 GMT
Gut strings are still very much in use. String manufacturers I recall saying that cat intestines were never used. However cattle intestines are.
Dave, I probably should have used the term Punch. At least not like brass.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 22, 2018 5:59:55 GMT
Okay, so today I actually got round to sketching out this piece in short score, and it's been quite helpful. But I have more questions.
First, in the opening bars I hear in my head some kind of woodwind timbre doubling parts of the melody, but the melody is in pretty low register, and the only winds that could play it that low are clarinet and bassoon. The clarinet timbre is pretty close to what I have in mind, but the melody sits right on The Break, and I'm feeling a bit nervous about writing a solo clarinet part in that register. Bassoon would work better, but I'm reserving that sound for a later passage, and don't want to "spoil the surprise" this early on. So I'm thinking either to double the clarinet with the violins, or should I transpose it an 8ve above? If I keep the melody on the violins in the original register and add a wind an 8ve above, it should be perceived as continuing in the original low register, right? Is that reasoning sound?
Second, some passages appear to want glorious brass chords, so I'm thinking at least 2 horns + 2 trumpets + 2 trombones. I also need a blaring brassy low bass line, so tentatively a bass trombone as well, but the bass line dips below the bottom of the trombone range. Would it make sense to move it an 8ve up and add a contrabassoon below? Or should I go straight to a tuba?
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 22, 2018 20:29:49 GMT
May I suggest that you stop concentrating on the limitations of instruments and instead rejoice in their tonal possibilities. You wrote things for piano in a certain register because you wanted a certain sound. But other instruments in that same register don't have the same effect as piano. The orchestra doesn't limit you, it sets you free. Let it. Be bold. be brave. To hell with the break. If you're not sure about brass, listen to some good concert band stuff. Better yet, listen to some concert band transcriptions. There's a lot of powerful stuff out there. Listen to almost anything by Canadian Brass. Toccata and Fugue comes to mind.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 22, 2018 21:09:50 GMT
Okay, so today I actually got round to sketching out this piece in short score, and it's been quite helpful. But I have more questions. First, in the opening bars I hear in my head some kind of woodwind timbre doubling parts of the melody, but the melody is in pretty low register, and the only winds that could play it that low are clarinet and bassoon. The clarinet timbre is pretty close to what I have in mind, but the melody sits right on The Break, and I'm feeling a bit nervous about writing a solo clarinet part in that register. Bassoon would work better, but I'm reserving that sound for a later passage, and don't want to "spoil the surprise" this early on. So I'm thinking either to double the clarinet with the violins, or should I transpose it an 8ve above? If I keep the melody on the violins in the original register and add a wind an 8ve above, it should be perceived as continuing in the original low register, right? Is that reasoning sound? Second, some passages appear to want glorious brass chords, so I'm thinking at least 2 horns + 2 trumpets + 2 trombones. I also need a blaring brassy low bass line, so tentatively a bass trombone as well, but the bass line dips below the bottom of the trombone range. Would it make sense to move it an 8ve up and add a contrabassoon below? Or should I go straight to a tuba? I second Bob, but if you're perceiving repeated issues with range, why not transpose the entire piece? You're not breaking the rules by doing that. I wrote something this week that ends with strings only, and really wanted to add woodwind solos. For some reason I felt I was betraying myself and the piece to do so - based on a wholly arbitrary decision to have strings only. Stupid attitude, it sounds far better now. Don't be beholden to principle. If everything is in an uncomfortable range, change it. If bassoons work, use them. The surprise should come with the writing and not the usage.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 22, 2018 22:00:41 GMT
I suspect that the reason I'm having trouble with range is because I'm not really mapping what I hear in my head to actual instruments correctly. That's why I mentioned transposing by octaves... now that I think about it again, I think it's really just a matter of applying the age old "trick" of "wrapping" an out-of-range part up/down an octave; when the line is doubled, as it is in this case, the listener won't even hear the leap.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Aug 23, 2018 8:40:41 GMT
Teoh, Don't worry about the break, players overcome that sort of technicality and besides, the actual break is from bflat to b natural. I hear your opening theme on the clarinet quite naturally and I also believe that given the expressive nature of it, you should keep it solo. If I was arranging it, I'd go to the clarinet as the timbre suits the emotion imv. If you want to, have a listen to one of my pieces also in Gminor that has 1 and then 2 clarinets in thirds in exactly the range your theme is in. Listen to the first piece on the page, it's called AT&T 'Belly Buttons' link
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 23, 2018 14:14:25 GMT
Teoh, Don't worry about the break, players overcome that sort of technicality and besides, the actual break is from bflat to b natural. I hear your opening theme on the clarinet quite naturally and I also believe that given the expressive nature of it, you should keep it solo. If I was arranging it, I'd go to the clarinet as the timbre suits the emotion imv. If you want to, have a listen to one of my pieces also in Gminor that has 1 and then 2 clarinets in thirds in exactly the range your theme is in. Listen to the first piece on the page, it's called AT&T 'Belly Buttons' linkWhat a lovely piece! Brings to mind some of Joby Talbot's orchestrations for Neil Hannon/The Divine Comedy, and of course Ratatouille and Amelie because that's the fate of accordions in music. Or is it a concertina?
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Aug 23, 2018 14:53:52 GMT
My vote is still English Horn! EDIT: Oboe.
|
|