|
Post by fuguestate on Jul 30, 2018 20:02:09 GMT
Dave suggested to post this as a discussion, so here goes: I've been thinking about orchestrating my Fantasia Sonata lately, ever since I wrote it, in fact. I already have some idea of the instrumentation of a good number of passages. However, I'm running into a roadblock with the first 4 bars or so. I feel like these opening bars are extremely important for setting the tone of the whole piece, and will likely influence a lot of orchestration decisions later on. Yet I have no particular sound in mind, not even a general idea (like strings only, or strings + ww, etc.). How does one go about deciding on instrumentation when orchestrating a piano work? Are there any tips / rules of thumb that you guys use? Any general approaches? Structural considerations that I may not have thought of? I realize the question is really broad and unspecific, but I'm asking this specifically with the aforementioned passage in mind. Hopefully that helps narrow it down enough to make this a meaningful discussion. (And just a side-note that should I actually embark on this project, I will probably rewrite most of the accompaniment figures from the piano version, since the pianisms obviously don't carry very well into an orchestral setting. So I already have some ideas about how to do this in many other passages... but I'm still drawing a blank for the opening bars.)
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Jul 30, 2018 20:09:29 GMT
Study Ravel's "Mother Goose". It was originally a piano work. Maybe it will give you some ideas.
Also listen to John's Grieg work on this site. Do it with the piano score. (I'm pretty sure they're all available on IMSLP.)
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 30, 2018 22:20:57 GMT
I'm hearing WW over some strings in the beginning. Not very specific. You'll have to experiment.
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Jul 31, 2018 17:04:21 GMT
You do want it for full orchestra (or at least chamber orchestra) or chamber ensemble? I would determine that first.
This is how I would think about the orchestration.
Looking at the first four bars, you have a piano melody that sits in the middle-lower part of the G-clef. Assuming you don't want to change the octave, this actually limits the most effective instrumentation.
Let's start with the standard winds.
It's low for the solo flute or flutes (especially at a piano dynamic and with strong accompaniment), good range for oboe, kind of a meh range for clarinet (least expressive and crosses the break), too high for bassoon. For brass, it's too high for french horn, not characteristic of trombones and I don't think trumpet is probably the character you're looking for (though that might be worth a try--or save it for later).
So oboe it is. But wait a minute... if you look only a few bars ahead the melody dips down quite a bit, well below the range of an oboe (which gets quite honky in its bottom notes). Do you want all that melody played by the same instrument? If so, maybe this should be an English Horn solo. EH is quite evocative and I think would fit well with the "like a narrative" character you're going for.
OK, so we have English Horn. Do you want to double the melody with strings? Of course violins would handle this range well, even down to the low G in m. 5. Violins will also blend well with EH. So it's really just a question of... do you want the opening to have the character of a solo voice or an ensemble? As expressive as strings are, a solo wind instrument will be the most expressive of all. If combined, it will lose some of its individuality. My vote goes for solo EH.
But hold on... I went through all that spiel without looking far enough ahead. Now I see at measure 6 the melody returns. I think it would be cool to do that in a different way than the opening. So maybe the first time it's violins and the second time it's EH (or oboe, since it goes higher the second time)? Going from the sweeping opening to the more intimate... I like that.
So, melody in the beginning is covered. Let's get on to the accompaniment.
Let's start with the 2nd voice in the right hand. Now, consistent with a piano piece, you've written quarter notes on beats 1 and 3. However, given this is all slurred and pedaled, what's happening musically is more of a sustained harmony throughout 2 beats of the measure. There are lots of orchestration options for this range near middle C--horns immediately come to mind, especially given the somewhat Romantic tonal language, but if the opening melody is violins, you might just want a string accompaniment. The opening D-C-D-Bb-B all playable by the 2nd violins, but in measure 5 you have the low F#, which could only be played by viola. So maybe have viola play this 2nd voice throughout? Also, the low notes of a violin can be somewhat intense, whereas viola is a bit more mellow in that range.
OK, left hand. Now this is standard piano figuration, but not nearly as idiomatic for orchestral instruments. Although this is all playable by cellos, it might be to split this out into a repeating pattern amongst more than one instrument (or section). For example, first G played by bass and the following three notes played by cello, as a pattern repeated throughout this passage. I thought maybe the three-note group should go the violas, but by measure 2, it's already out of range (and we've already given the 2nd voice in the right hand to violas), so cello it is.
What else? Well, normally I would give some passing thought to percussion. But I really can't see how it fits here. None of this opening seems particularly suited to brass (except perhaps french horns for sustained harmonies), so I would save them for later.
Some other things:
-Consider adding some sustained harmony notes that aren't written in the piano score. Again the piano figurations suggest a lot of harmonies that could be emphasized with additional sustained notes (while the strings will be there to articulate the "motion" of the accompaniment). Orchestration doesn't have to be a 1:1 with the piano. -There is somewhat of a call and response nature to the first 2 measures and the follow 2 measures. There may be an opportunity to delineate that a bit more with the orchestration. Maybe 1st violins play the first two measures and 2nd violins play the next two--that would also avoid the issue of having too many violins on the melody at the opening...
Anyway, these are my initial thoughts about how you might go about orchestrating it. Orchestration really is all about making choices and there is almost always one choice that is clearly better than the other (or more in line with the composer's intent--which you know better than anyone!).
|
|
|
Post by gx on Jul 31, 2018 17:35:26 GMT
This is a most effective approach to the question, John. Clear and comprehensive! Time for HS to take the bull by the horns:)
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Jul 31, 2018 18:00:21 GMT
Well done, John. Great way to approach this.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 31, 2018 19:35:31 GMT
Still hearing WW over strings at the beginning. Of course you'll have to change octaves. Why would that be a problem? You're changing sounds and timbre anyway. Not a big fan of clarinet here, but it has nothing to do with the break, which isn't really a problem, anyway. Sustained strings under the WW. Then strings take over when the melody returns. Save brass and percussion for later.
No need to baby instrumentalists. It's their job to overcome "limitations" of their instruments and make music. Did you all know that there is a "break" for French Horn? Horns are double instruments. Lower notes are played on the Eb side and upper notes are played on the F side. Two complete instruments in one. Parts could be played on either one, but tradition has the switch over at a particular note. Absolutely no one worries about the French Horn break because players make it work.
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Aug 1, 2018 15:31:26 GMT
Still hearing WW over strings at the beginning. Of course you'll have to change octaves. Why would that be a problem? You're changing sounds and timbre anyway. Not a big fan of clarinet here, but it has nothing to do with the break, which isn't really a problem, anyway. Sustained strings under the WW. Then strings take over when the melody returns. Save brass and percussion for later. No need to baby instrumentalists. It's their job to overcome "limitations" of their instruments and make music. Did you all know that there is a "break" for French Horn? Horns are double instruments. Lower notes are played on the Eb side and upper notes are played on the F side. Two complete instruments in one. Parts could be played on either one, but tradition has the switch over at a particular note. Absolutely no one worries about the French Horn break because players make it work. Hi Bob, It's not about "baby"-ing the instrumentalists, but making orchestration decisions based on what is best-suited for the instruments at hand. ALWAYS. The throat tones just below the "break", while navigable by any serious clarinetist, are considered the ugliest and least distinctive notes on the instrument (except perhaps the highest shrieks). Even if it's easily "playable", why would one want to score the opening of a piece using the worst notes of a particular instrument? The point of my lengthy, rambling response to fuguestate was to show at least the "approach"--i.e., a constantly evolving set of really specific decisions based on one's best knowledge of writing for the instruments available (it's also critical to be looking both forward and backward as you make those decisions--what have I used before and what do I want to save for later?). Of course changing or doubling octaves is an option here, but that is yet another decision should be made for a specific reason relating to the best range and idiomatic writing for specific instruments, not a gut feeling about what will work. This is especially important if one is using basic MIDI sounds that will not convey accurately how the lines actually would sound with real players. John
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 1, 2018 21:36:05 GMT
Hey John,
I'm not trying to be difficult. But I know of professional clarinetists who might disagree with you.
But, why indeed would anyone start a piece with the worst notes on an instrument. Consider the opening of the Rite of Spring. The bassoon part is in a very high treacherous range. Yet players do it all the time, and make it sound good. Because that's their job.
Of course orchestrating a piano piece is not for the weak of heart. If I were to try it, I think I might study Pictures at an Exhibition.
All I'm saying is that composing for instruments you don't play, or at the very least, have played in groups with (a lot), is extremely difficult. And even those with good working knowledge have to go back and fix things. Beethoven comes to mind. The rest of us have to slog through the best we can. Then we give our hearts work to a live group. Sounds OK. Just a tweak here and there and it's perfect. But then a different group plays it and it's totally different. Just great.
Yes, there are "best practices" to follow. But not all the time.
|
|
|
Post by gx on Aug 2, 2018 6:01:39 GMT
Bob, iirc, Stravinsky said that he purposely wrote it - so that it would convey a sense of (paraphrasing) the bassoonist struggling to climb that high. He wanted to hear the struggle.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 2, 2018 12:03:52 GMT
Exactly.
Look, you can avoid certain ranges of certain instruments, which s fine. Although it's a gray area for me because those things differ from player to player. Or you can use them to your advantage. But first you have to know how instruments play together though out their ranges, articulations, and various tone qualities. A life time struggle to be sure.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Aug 2, 2018 18:30:05 GMT
When I re-listen, I hear a particular bass figure after the two note run-in: Illustration for rhythmic purpose rather than particular notes but following the LH timing-wise. Low strings with woodwinds or horns, maybe. HS, would you be willing to export and upload the raw midi in case I feel like tinkering and want to save myself a few minutes? Nice analysis and breakdown, John!
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Aug 3, 2018 23:04:18 GMT
This is what I meant about the opening. Seems like a fairly standard way to do it. Just thought I'd throw it out there. soundcloud.com/user-737777673/gm-1Kind of goes along with Dave's idea.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 10, 2018 18:02:31 GMT
Thanks, everyone, for your incredibly useful tips and discussion. I apologize for not responding earlier, as I was on the road, and I thought you guys were worth a more substantial reply than I had time for then.
John, thanks for the very detailed help with the process of how one might go about deciding on orchestrating something. Even though I've sortof done this kind of decision-making before, it was more a gut-feeling thing; but having it spelt out explicitly like this is extremely helpful for keeping me on track when faced with a situation where I don't have a clear gut feeling about which way things should go.
One small question that remains, though: how would one go about deciding whether something is better arranged for full orchestra, or better kept to a smaller ensemble? I realize the question is vague and highly subjective, but I'm just wondering if you have any tips from your own experience that might help with such decisions.
Anyway, as a more general comment on this piece in particular, I'm actually considering mainly only the melody and general basslines as the defining factors that need to be preserved in the orchestration; things like filling out the harmony, altering inner voices, etc., are all on the table. I'd probably rewrite most of the inner voices / harmony notes to be more idiomatic to orchestral instruments / orchestral accompaniment styles. Pianisms like the specific arppegiations, etc., are, with a small number of exceptions, all fair game to be completely rewritten.
Another angle that I've been thinking about, and perhaps you more experienced orchestrators can provide some tips with, is the overall arc of how each passage is orchestrated. I apologize for not knowing the terminology for this... but what I mean is, how the opening passage is orchestrated may influence the available options for subsequent passages. If I go with strings-only for the opening bars, for example, then in m.7 I could introduce a WW, say, for contrast and also adding a bit of interest, and perhaps have a vertical crescendo as it builds up to m.12. OTOH, if I go with WW + strings for the opening bars, as Bob suggests, the WW timbre is already heard from the beginning, so I'd have to use something else if I wanted a more marked contrast. And these early decisions would influence other orchestration decisions down the road in similar ways.
How do you guys go about making such decisions? Do you just go by gut feeling, or what you already hear in your inner ear, or do you use some method of laying down different options in a chart of some sort, to help with deciding which way to go? Again, I've been doing this on some level before, in a gut-feeling, ad hoc sort of way; but I feel that if there's some method to lay out these over-arching decisions in a higher-level way, it would greatly help in avoiding making short-sighted decisions early on that limit the options available later.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 10, 2018 18:13:51 GMT
Bob Porter: That's a nice orchestration! Thanks for taking the time to mock it up. I wouldn't quite write it that way, though, but then you wouldn't have known that. I guess my main struggle is with how it would influence subsequent orchestration decisions, as I described in my previous post. If I go with WW + string + pizz bass, for example, it kinda sets the tone for what contrasts I could have in m.12. It would limit the effectiveness of introducing WW's as part of a vertical crescendo in mm.9-11. Going into the higher register too early would limit what I can do later for dramatic effect. Etcetera, etcetera. All tough decisions for me.
|
|