Visualizing The Orchestra

When composing music for orchestra, how can one know what the music will sound like when it's actually played? I don't happen to have an orchestra laying around that I can use to test my music, and the score writing softwares (such as Finale or the free alternative MuseScore) generally use some cheap General MIDI SoundBanks, so I can't get a good idea of what the finished music will actually sound like.

Also, I'm a bit wary about creating a mockup using an orchestral sample library, such as EWQLSO, cause I don't want to compose the music such that it sounds right when played by the sample library, but not when played by an actual orchestra. I've heard some people say that that can happen if you aren't careful, since sample libraries do not fully reflect what the orchestra actually sounds like.

So, does anyone have any tips for getting an accurate idea of what the music will sound like while composing? I'd appreciate any advice or opinions on the subject. Thanks!

Short answer: No computer or software will give you an accurate idea of how an orchestra will sound. I would advise studying scores and listening to music, and reading orchestration/instrumentation texts. 

I think performing in or going to see a live orchestra is the best way, but listening while studying scores is also good. But yes, whatever program you're using will never be as accurate as a live performance. You basically have to predict how your music will sound based on prior experiences.

Good advice so far - use your ears.

As you get more experience, you'll be able to better visualize (audiolize?) the music in your head; however, you also can't be afraid to write things that you don't know exactly what it'll sound like! 

Thanks for the tips. What scores would you recommend I study to learn good orchestration (besides Gustav Holst's "The Planets")?

Pretty much anything by Ravel, Stravinsky, Mahler, Wagner, R. Strauss, Rimsky-Korsakov should suffice.

And Tchaikovsky.

Rachmaninoff is also pretty good. His orchestration sounds really good and its not hard to analyze and understand.

Also give Mahler some special attention. His orchestration technique is phenomenal, it almost feels like every note is used to its full potential. His 5th symphony is the easiest symphony to listen and to get into.

Also don't forget about 20th century. Bartok, Messiaen, Lutoslawski, Stravinsky and Shostakovich are also good for studying orchestration, among composers of late 20th century I'd suggest Lindberg, Aho and Tüür. Also pay attention to avantgarde music. Although most of it sound dreadful there are some good examples of instrumental or group specifics and effects which may be used in "humane" way.

I also recommend studying Berlioz, particularly his Symphonie Fantastique.

Now that we've recommended absolutely everyone, how about:  listen to orchestral music you like, with the score open in front of you, so you can figure out how it achieves certain effects and apply them in your own work.  (:

Great suggestions everyone. Unfortunately, a lot of my favorite orchestral works come from film music (not the increasingly cliche Zimmer-esque 'epic' hollywood sound, rather, John Williams, Howard Shore, Thomas Newman, etc.), and the scores for these pieces are rather difficult to come by. However, the classical composers are a great place to build a foundation. Thanks for the ideas.

Great suggestions everyone. Unfortunately, a lot of my favorite orchestral works come from film music (not the increasingly cliche Zimmer-esque 'epic' hollywood sound, rather, John Williams, Howard Shore, Thomas Newman, etc.), and the scores for these pieces are rather difficult to come by. However, the classical composers are a great place to build a foundation. Thanks for the ideas.

I know the compsers you've mentioned. You really don't need their scores. You can learn them by ear by listening to the films. If you have a decent synth that sounds like strings and brass, etc. you can play along with the film and learn it. If you cannot do this, I'm not sure that a score will help you. What I mean is, learning by listening is key. For example, take John Williams score for the film "Accidental Tourst." It's mostly piano. It's simple. But is it? The actual music is much more complex than the eventual orchestration. But can you HEAR it? The music, I mean?

Also don't forget Brahms!!

His Hungarian Dances are very rich orchestral works and also short ones. Very good to be analyzed and read!

I know the compsers you've mentioned. You really don't need their scores. You can learn them by ear by listening to the films. If you have a decent synth that sounds like strings and brass, etc. you can play along with the film and learn it. If you cannot do this, I'm not sure that a score will help you. What I mean is, learning by listening is key. For example, take John Williams score for the film "Accidental Tourst." It's mostly piano. It's simple. But is it? The actual music is much more complex than the eventual orchestration. But can you HEAR it? The music, I mean?

Yes, actually. I learn almost all the music I know by listening, but there are certain things that are difficult to distinguish just by listening, particularly parts played by doubled or sometimes tripled instruments. Sometimes I will listen to a piece and attempt to transcribe it by ear, but this does result in the problem of not being able to tell if I have listened and transcribed correctly since I cannot see what the actual score looks like, nor hear an orchestra play my version to see if they match up.

Long story short, there's no way to tell for sure if I am actually getting the whole picture just by listening.

Have you checked out Thomas Goss' channel "Orchestration Online"? 

https://www.youtube.com/user/OrchestrationOnline

Have you checked out Thomas Goss' channel "Orchestration Online"? 

 

https://www.youtube.com/user/OrchestrationOnline

Ah, yes. He does have some pretty useful advice there.

So, what I'm doing this morning... I've gotten to the point on a piece where it's mainly sorted out and I'm trying to decide about nit-picky details of the organ part.  Doublings, what octave to put something in to best lead into the instrument/voice that enters next... (Orchestration for organ if you will.)  I've got my piece I'm working on open on my laptop and a stack of scores next to me on the couch.  Rather than studying composing in general, and studying scores in general, which feels dauntingly huge, I'm looking at the scores of the masters to address specific questions in this specific piece.  

I know I want to have a moving bass line in the organ here that does this certain thing, but that makes it dissonant with the vocal bass part and that feels like a no-no just listening to it.  Flipping through my Bach and Handel, can I find a spot where their notes are flowing similarly on the page just at a glance?  Yes I can!  So what's different about the way they handled the situation from the way I'm handling it here?  Ah!  Yes, the dissonance is there in Bach's score too, but only on the weakest division of the beat.  I have dissonance on, not a strong beat, but a medium-y strong beat, and that's what's sounding off.  Change that...  

I have a place where all the parts build and then drop out, and we're left with a solo line over an organ pedal.  What octave should I put that pedal note in for best support of the solo while keeping a feeling of sudden simplicity emerging from complexity and bombast?  Glances through some Handel... well, just looking at the way the notes are flowing on the page, I can find a spot where he did something similar...  He flips the inversion of a chord in the orchestra parts at a convenient spot a few beats before all the parts drop out, allowing him to put the pedal note in doubled octaves down an octave from the solo line.  Let's try that!  

Sometimes it's easier to go hunting for the answer to a very specific question about your own work than it is to try to learn all the things that make someone else's work great.