Innovative Instrumentation

I think that as composers we are all trying to do something new and innovative that nobody else has done before. One of the ways to do that is in unique, non-stanndard instrumentation for classicail music. Or maibe there is an instrument in the orchestra that is used commonly, but dosen't get the spolight enough, or has extended technuiqes that nobody uses.

So, lets discuss instrumenation, everything from a liuqin to a Tabla to an Ocarina, there are no limits! And lets not leave out electronic instruments.

I think that the Ocarina in perticular makes a great addition to the orchestra. It's tone IMO is more verstiale than the recorder, and its fully chromatic with a good range depending on the ocarina.

Heres an ocarina concerto:

Speaking of fipple instruments, for something with a little more breathy tone, maybe a chromatic tin whistle would be nice in an orchestra. (yes, such a thing exists):

http://www.tinwhistles.us/jubilee/store/whis-chromatic.htm

So yes, lets discuss non-standard instrumentation.

I think a lot of this has been done before. The reasons instruments like these don't get into the orchestra as regular members is because they're not useful for orchestral music. The ocarina, for example, is far too quiet to be used successfully in loud passages. It would only offer an occasional variant in tone color that wouldn't justify its inclusion IMO since good players are hard to find. The fipple flutes and flageolet were phased out when a better alternative, the transverse flute, came into being in the Baroque period. Same with the Clarinet replacing the Chalumeau or the valved horn replacing the old (and softer) hunting horn. The reason the orchestra is the way it is today is because it works as a whole. Even though they're occasional idiosyncrasies, on the whole, the orchestra is a very fine-tuned ensemble that needs little messing with to be made the best that it can be. That's why I'm always reluctant to start adding instruments just because it can play 4 bars of a weird tone color when I can save the money and simulate that same sound with multiple instruments elsewhere.

I think a lot of this has been done before. The reasons instruments like these don't get into the orchestra as regular members is because they're not useful for orchestral music. The ocarina, for example, is far too quiet to be used successfully in loud passages. It would only offer an occasional variant in tone color that wouldn't justify its inclusion IMO since good players are hard to find. The fipple flutes and flageolet were phased out when a better alternative, the transverse flute, came into being in the Baroque period. Same with the Clarinet replacing the Chalumeau or the valved horn replacing the old (and softer) hunting horn. The reason the orchestra is the way it is today is because it works as a whole. Even though they're occasional idiosyncrasies, on the whole, the orchestra is a very fine-tuned ensemble that needs little messing with to be made the best that it can be. That's why I'm always reluctant to start adding instruments just because it can play 4 bars of a weird tone color when I can save the money and simulate that same sound with multiple instruments elsewhere.

Ligeti used ocarinas in his violin concerto, they're cool.

Well the point is mostly, mixing orchestra with other stuff is fine but forget having it performed unless you're a millionaire.

Much smarter is writing for CHAMBER orchestra and messing with stuff there. It's a much more flexible thing and you can try out all sorts of sounds and instruments and whatever. Or maybe just a ensemble with the stuff you'll, you know, actually use?

Since I get the impression a lot of kids writing for orchestra do it out of a sense of duty/tradition rather than because they really need such a big variety of instruments.

Since I get the impression a lot of kids writing for orchestra do it out of a sense of duty/tradition rather than because they really need such a big variety of instruments.

But is that duty/tradition such a bad thing?

I prefer orchestra personally for two reasons: the massive palette of colors available, both large and small, heavy and subtle; and the massive sound it can make when combining everyone together. No instrument, except perhaps the organ (though it is not as versatile as the orchestra), can fulfill both of those reasons alone.

But is that duty/tradition such a bad thing?

I prefer orchestra personally for two reasons: the massive palette of colors available, both large and small, heavy and subtle; and the massive sound it can make when combining everyone together. No instrument, except perhaps the organ (though it is not as versatile as the orchestra), can fulfill both of those reasons alone.

Whatever your reasons, they should be better than "cuz everyone else does it."

As for your reasons, it's really a taste thing. If it's for "massive palette of colors" you can get probably much more variety from an ensemble using extended technique than a full orchestra that doesn't use extended techniques, but of course YOU probably don't like those colors. Likewise if you're looking for loudness there's a lot of ways to make things loud rather than simply increasing the number of people (though it helps.)

Ligeti used ocarinas in his violin concerto, they're cool.

We should probably just talk more about the Ligeti Violin Concerto, because it is one of my favorite pieces. Of all time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCcA_8PgF6U&feature=related

And the use of Ocarinas is completely stunning. Of course, he's Ligeti, he can away with asking ridiculous things of his players.

We should probably just talk more about the Ligeti Violin Concerto, because it is one of my favorite pieces. Of all time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCcA_8PgF6U&feature=related

And the use of Ocarinas is completely stunning. Of course, he's Ligeti, he can away with asking ridiculous things of his players.

Is he really asking for ridiculous things? Or is he asking his players to do what is essential to the music?

In most instances, I find that Ligeti never asks for an effect or an instrument that isn't absolutely essential to the work.

Whatever period of his output or in whatever genera -- comedic pieces, theater works, "serious" works, whatever.

I think that's what the conversation here should be. Using what is absolutely essential to the work, not "lets throw in random scraggy to make it seem like we know what we're doing and people will think its cool".

You can use whatever non-standard instruments you want, you can keep adding and adding to your work. But, guess what? That doesn't mean its going to be a good work, or "innovative".

There is way more color, "innovative instrumentation", and whatnot in Ligeti's "Ten Pieces for Woodwind Quintet", Lachenmann's Second String Quartet, or Crumb's piano pieces than in, say, Lindberg's "Kraft" or Mahler's Eight Symphony.

Adding "weird" instruments, or more instruments, etc. is a cop out. Use what's essential, weed out the excess, and explore what you have. Don't add another instrument to that piano trio you're working on just because you get stuck.

Check out some of theese extended flute technuiqes.

http://www.sfz.se/flutetech/index.htm

Tounge Ram sounds like some of the pvc pipe instruments that the ble man group uses.

Also, I may have just missed something, but I didn't hear or see an ocarina at all in that video.

Check out some of theese extended flute technuiqes.

http://www.sfz.se/flutetech/index.htm

Tounge Ram sounds like some of the pvc pipe instruments that the ble man group uses.

Also, I may have just missed something, but I didn't hear or see an ocarina at all in that video.

Because they aren't used in that video. Check here at 2:50, which is later in the concerto than the first video.

re@discussion: I think adding "weird" instruments and doing it well is one of the most awesome things in classical music. When it's done well there's no way you could substitute the new instruments for instruments that are already present an in orchestra. I think those ocarinas bring a colour to that section that is really spine chilling and alien, to replace them with clarinets or flutes would make it boring - the point in having those notes there at all is completely lost.

Now my idea of using different instruments is to use them sparingly. Write a piece using instruments you know you have access to with people that can play them. I could use a soprano trombone, a (true) baritone horn, a helicon, an ophicleide, a sackbut, a shofar, a bass flute, a sitar, any number of ethnic drums, a number of ocarinas and recorders, a bass saxophone, a Native American flute, an octave violin, five string electric violin, a shawm, a zither, a didgeridoo, a dulcimer, a shakuhachi, a bugle, panpipes, a fife, a turkish clarinet, a melodica, a variety of harmonicas, a sarrusaphone, a cornett, a cornet, a serpent, a tarogato, a cimbasso, a bass trumpet, a kalimba, a banjo, a ukelele, a huqin, a baroque trumpet, a quartfagott (or was it quint?), a mellophone or mellophonium, a mandolin, pan drums, and a number of other instruments that are escaping my mind at the moment... ... ... ... ... ... ... My point is, THAT'S A LOT OF INSTRUMENTS and I know personally someone in my region (by region I'm actually mostly referring to my classmates in university and connections from there) that can play and has an instrument on that list. In some cases more than one. I don't mean you have to use them all at once, but if you really take a look around yourself you'll find some interesting things at your disposal if you're willing to get the people to play along. More than half of those instruments are classmates that might just be willing to sit in on a piece. Another chunk are professors, and the rest are old acquaintances. I say if you want to use something unusual and you can - why not? And in my opinion not a single one of those instruments I put can be replaced by another instrument that is similar. If it could, then why are there two different instruments if they sound close enough to the same to not be noticeable?

So yeah, I think if you have the means, go ahead and add that flavour - experiment. Wagner had the right idea when he decided it wanted Wagner tuben. Bruckner used them too, as did other composers. It's a different sound. Not a euph., not a horn, not a tuba, not a bone, nothing. That's about as extreme as you can get - he wanted a new instrument all together and guess what? Now we have it.

I want an instrument made for me... how cool would that be??? Think about being a composer having an instrument -made- just for you, to be performed for the first time playing your work. Heh, that's pretty cool. I'd have to think long and hard about this... what kind of instrument would I want my name associated with? Maybe a trumpet or a french horn variant of some sort... I dunno.

Hey, Wagner did it, why can't we all do it?

The Ligeti concerto is one of the greatest pieces.....ever, ever, ever, ever, ever. Ever, ever.

But I don't think it's too terribly ridiculous to ask for ocarinas and slide whistles (which are also in that piece) in a piece like that, which obviously no one is going to be able to perform except for the top ensembles since it's so difficult (and if you're the New York Phil, well you can come up with a couple of ocarinas). You sort of have to take into account who you're writing for. Also, most of the time people aren't asking for 920 different instruments - there's usually just like one glass harmonica in Donizetti or one cimbalom in Stravinsky or one kithara in Ohana. The only big one I can think of off the top of my head that called for larger ensembles of "weird" instrumentation is Harry Partch, and a lot of his stuff is just for those instruments exclusively.

Like SSC mentioned, it's much easier working with that kind of thing in a chamber orchestra/small ensemble setting (plus there are the difficulties inherent in performing a piece for 2893749287498292982339847299 person orchestra to think about). Ehh.

The Ligeti concerto is one of the greatest pieces.....ever, ever, ever, ever, ever. Ever, ever.

But I don't think it's too terribly ridiculous to ask for ocarinas and slide whistles (which are also in that piece) in a piece like that, which obviously no one is going to be able to perform except for the top ensembles since it's so difficult (and if you're the New York Phil, well you can come up with a couple of ocarinas). You sort of have to take into account who you're writing for. Also, most of the time people aren't asking for 920 different instruments - there's usually just like one glass harmonica in Donizetti or one cimbalom in Stravinsky or one kithara in Ohana. The only big one I can think of off the top of my head that called for larger ensembles of "weird" instrumentation is Harry Partch, and a lot of his stuff is just for those instruments exclusively.

Like SSC mentioned, it's much easier working with that kind of thing in a chamber orchestra/small ensemble setting (plus there are the difficulties inherent in performing a piece for 2893749287498292982339847299 person orchestra to think about). Ehh.

Yeah but he also asks for the first violin to be tuned 55 cents higher than normal, and the first viola 114 cents lower than normal. Not to mention very difficult music for all the players, include just and equal temperament at the same time, extended techniques, complex thymus etc. But because he is Ligeti, and he is writing for the best people in the world, so he can get away with anything he needs. And it is for a small orchestra.

AntiA, what instrument do you want made for you?

Yeah but he also asks for the first violin to be tuned 55 cents higher than normal, and the first viola 114 cents lower than normal. Not to mention very difficult music for all the players, include just and equal temperament at the same time, extended techniques, complex thymus etc. But because he is Ligeti, and he is writing for the best people in the world, so he can get away with anything he needs. And it is for a small orchestra.

Girllllll. I saw it performed live at the Saint Louis Symphony, dat scraggy was crazy. But you're right yeah, there are a lot of things besides just the instrumentation that are out of the reach of anyone but the top ensembles.

Yeah but he also asks for the first violin to be tuned 55 cents higher than normal, and the first viola 114 cents lower than normal. Not to mention very difficult music for all the players, include just and equal temperament at the same time, extended techniques, complex thymus etc. But because he is Ligeti, and he is writing for the best people in the world, so he can get away with anything he needs. And it is for a small orchestra.

That's not unusual, scordatura has been around forever.

That's not unusual, scordatura has been around forever.

Micro-tonal scordautra in an orchestral setting? No. Micro-tonal orchestral music is a pretty recent phenomena. Especially something this specific is even more of a recent thing.

Ocarinas have been around forever.

And Voce, you are incredibly lucky. I don't live in a city and I've hardly seen any good new music performances. No one around here would think about doing a piece like that.

Micro-tonal scordautra in an orchestral setting? No. Micro-tonal orchestral music is a pretty recent phenomena. Especially something this specific is even more of a recent thing.

Ocarinas have been around forever.

And Voce, you are incredibly lucky. I don't live in a city and I've hardly seen any good new music performances. No one around here would think about doing a piece like that.

String tuning by default is microtonal, since it's a pure-fifths thing. 55 cents and 114 cents come from Just intonation, one of the earliest forms of tuning (especially since Pythagorean tuning is a 3-limit Just intonation).

If you've looked at a lot of the other threads, you'd know by now that microtonality is anything but a recent phenomena.

Not to diminish the quality of Ligeti's work -- he's a fantastic composer (one of my favs) and its a wonderful piece. But that stuff has been around for awhile.

Microtonal scordautra (and microtonality that "specific"), even if we're treating it as a "pretty recent phenomena", was around (in the 20th Century) for decades before Ligeti wrote his Violin Concerto.

In terms of microtonal orchestral writing "that specific", still decades before Ligeti (if we're still keeping it in the 20th Century).

I know exactly what they come from, the natural harmonics of a double bass in fact. I know about string instrument tunings because I play double bass myself! No need to be so pretentious.

Orchestras are very generally very conservative - more so than other genres, they hardly play 20th century music at all, let alone microtonal 20th century music which requires special training to be able to play. I know very well that it's been around for a while, but in the orchestral medium, it's like a baby. 20th century is recent for an orchestra. And while microtonal music has been around, it hasn't come into prominence until more recently - and it still isn't prominent, making it UNUSUAL.

I was pointing out that it's a difficult piece for an orchestra to put on. Of course there are more difficult pieces, I wasn't saying it was the epitome of difficulty. But I like this piece, and I derailed this topic a little to talk about the piece, and I think that derailment was a bit obvious.

String tuning by default is microtonal, since it's a pure-fifths thing. 55 cents and 114 cents come from Just intonation, one of the earliest forms of tuning (especially since Pythagorean tuning is a 3-limit Just intonation).

If you've looked at a lot of the other threads, you'd know by now that microtonality is anything but a recent phenomena.

Not to diminish the quality of Ligeti's work -- he's a fantastic composer (one of my favs) and its a wonderful piece. But that stuff has been around for awhile.

Microtonal scordautra (and microtonality that "specific"), even if we're treating it as a "pretty recent phenomena", was around (in the 20th Century) for decades before Ligeti wrote his Violin Concerto.

In terms of microtonal orchestral writing "that specific", still decades before Ligeti (if we're still keeping it in the 20th Century).

What? I wouldn't exactly call just intonation microtonal... Not at low limits anyway.

I know exactly what they come from, the natural harmonics of a double bass in fact. I know about string instrument tunings because I play double bass myself! No need to be so pretentious.

Orchestras are very generally very conservative - more so than other genres, they hardly play 20th century music at all, let alone microtonal 20th century music which requires special training to be able to play. I know very well that it's been around for a while, but in the orchestral medium, it's like a baby. 20th century is recent for an orchestra. And while microtonal music has been around, it hasn't come into prominence until more recently - and it still isn't prominent, making it UNUSUAL.

I was pointing out that it's a difficult piece for an orchestra to put on. Of course there are more difficult pieces, I wasn't saying it was the epitome of difficulty. But I like this piece, and I derailed this topic a little to talk about the piece, and I think that derailment was a bit obvious.

Just because it gets played less than Beethoven's violin concerto, or because microtonal pieces don't get played a lot (they actually get played more than you'd think) doesn't mean that Ligeti's doing something radically new or innovative here, since it really isn't.

Just because it gets played less than Beethoven's violin concerto, or because microtonal pieces don't get played a lot (they actually get played more than you'd think) doesn't mean that Ligeti's doing something radically new or innovative here, since it really isn't.

No, it isn't new or innovative, I never said it was. I just wanted to talk about the piece, because I like it, so I derailed the thread, which I already admitted multiple times. We should stop now, and actually talk about innovative instrumentation rather than continue this pointlessness - if there's anything to talk about.

As for the rate of microtonal performances, I don't live in a city, and the new music scene is very limited here. I've only seen a couple performances of microtonal music in my lifetime (most of which were pretty bad because the musicians weren't up to snuff), and probably hundreds of new music performances, so I'm just going of my experience here. Then again you compose a lot of microtonal music, so you probably deal with it a lot more than the average person - or average new music person. Simply put: there aren't many new music performances, and there are even less performances of microtonal music, especially in the context of an orchestra.

Why are people arguing about tuning and "micro-tonal" music in a thread about innovative instrumentation? If you want to start up another thread on tuning systems, by all means do so... but try to stay on topic if at all possible. Thanks!

The point was if microtonal music in orchestra was innovative or not. I don't think it really is, regardless or not if it gets played so I'm with Charlie.

I don't think it's derailing, but it's kind of a moot point to discuss anyway.

I think that there's probably other stuff that could be innovative, but I really can't think ATM of anything, since a lot of stuff has been done already...

The point was if microtonal music in orchestra was innovative or not. I don't think it really is, regardless or not if it gets played so I'm with Charlie.

I don't think it's derailing, but it's kind of a moot point to discuss anyway.

I think that there's probably other stuff that could be innovative, but I really can't think ATM of anything, since a lot of stuff has been done already...

What about spectrally mapping harmonic sounds and re-synthesizing the harmonics so that the intervals within a given tuning system that doesn’t approximate the harmonic series well will sound consonant?

Like this:

http://eceserv0.ece.wisc.edu/~sethares/mp3s/dabo_girl.html