The Orchestration Fence

Which side are you on? Compose and then instrument, or toss immediately onto an orchestral score? Alternately, word it thus: is the orchestration to be conceived at the same time as everything else, or do you mind melody, harmony, rhythm, work it together and then bother about instruments? Or in a third manner, is instrumental colour an element of music on a par with melody, harmony, and rhythm?

If you're not sure, try the following test. Take a basic C Major chord in root position an octave above middle C. Imagine it played by

1) Three trumpets

2) A section of muted celli, playing softly

3) Three contrabasses in harmonics

4) 1st, 2nd violins and violas, with the violas playing the root.

5) The same with the violas playing the G

6) Flute, clarinet and oboe (in descending order, the oboe holding the root)

7) The same, but replace the flute with a soprano saxophone (played classically, not popularly)

8) Vibraphone, piano and harp, either all playing the chord or each taking one note

9) Two horns and a bassoon

10) Celesta, mandolin, and viola d'amore.

If you claim all ten are the same chord, we're never going to get along.

Oh...and we were just getting along so well.

I think I'm gonna have to say THEY ARE THE SAME CHORD but, well, wouldn't they just sound different ?

As for sides, you appear to be on the side of compose and then instrument, yet something in your argument suggests tosser......... so I am confused. :happy:

"NOW MR JAZZ, YOU KNOW YOU SHOULDN'T BE IN HERE....... LET THE NICE NURSE TAKE YOU BACK TO YOUR ROOM. WE'VE MISSED OUR MEDICATION AGAIN, HAVEN'T WE ???"

It's the same chord, yes; but of course the tonal colours are going to be completely different, and the various overtones are going to make very different sounds.

Many choir directors experiment with combinations of individual voices in this way. Just today while rehearsing for our Lessons and Carols service at church, our choir director rearranged a number of voices during the Advent Responsory because although he had been pleased with the combination of voices during rehearsal, in the sanctuary everything sounded different. What he ended up with was much better than what he started with, even though all the same notes were sung.

Hmmm...

I still remember how shocked the tenors were when I made them sing below the basses in one piece... Yet the same melody, which can be played both by trumpet and trombone, will sound different on either -- in the one case an instrument playing low, in the other an instrument playing high...

Doesn't the interraction of overtones make it into a different chord? (You know I love arugment for its own sake...)

"Doesn't the interraction of overtones make it into a different chord? (You know I love arugment for its own sake...)"

That would be moot point (is that expression still used in English these days?). I suppose you're familiar with the overtone series. Different instruments provide a different mix of overtones for the same note (this can be analyzed using Fourier). A different instrumentation therefore gives a slightly different overtone mix. Yet I doubt whether this will imply a different chord. Overtones more than four tones away from the original note hardly play any role in the hearing process. Let's suppose we have the orchestra play a C-major chord and write down the most common (different) overtones:

C [ g e b-flat* ]

E

G [d b f* ]

*These notes really aren't in tune.

If we take into account the first three overtones, the only possible implied chord would be a Cmaj9 because of the b and d added to the mix. I think we can safely say that different instrumentation won't imply a different chord or harmony.

Ah, but it doesn't work quite that way. With most instruments, some overtones will be much stronger than others. Clarinets, for example, are almost all odd-numbered harmonics...

Ah, but it doesn't work quite that way. With most instruments, some overtones will be much stronger than others. Clarinets, for example, are almost all odd-numbered harmonics...

The 'first four' overtones I wrote down are actually the first seven overtones (I left out the octaves). The third and fifth overtone might be relatively strong, they still don't provide enough power (literally) to imply a different chord.

But they are. For a clarinet, the third is actually stronger than the first, and the fifth is almost as strong as the first.

Yet I doubt whether this will imply a different chord. Overtones more than four tones away from the original note hardly play any role in the hearing process. [/b]

Oh come on. Who told you that? Really, what's your source? But I do agree that different overtone mixes are very infrequently heard as different chords (because our brain perceives each harmonic complex as a gestalt "note" at the pitch of the fundamental).

*These notes really aren't in tune.

*tired grumble* More in tune than you'd expect.

In fact, if our harmonic system had better approximations of the 5th, 7th, and 11th harmonics, we could get some really interesting sounds going on where timbre and harmony intersect. Spectral music, anyone?

But back to the basic question. I have a lot of trouble dissociating timbre with everything else, leaving it off. But that doesn't mean that I'll always be able to compose with the final sound in mind. I guess that's what makes me a failed-experimentalist instead of a successful-experimentalist. Really, I compose so infrequently that I couldn't tell you my normal mode.

Also, hello humnab. I remember reading messages penned by you, but little else.

On 12/15/2005 at 1:17 AM, jacob said:

Oh come on. Who told you that? Really, what's your source? But I do agree that different overtone mixes are very infrequently heard as different chords (because our brain perceives each harmonic complex as a gestalt "note" at the pitch of the fundamental).

*tired grumble* More in tune than you'd expect.

In fact, if our harmonic system had better approximations of the 5th, 7th, and 11th harmonics, we could get some really interesting sounds going on where timbre and harmony intersect. Spectral music, anyone?

But back to the basic question. I have a lot of trouble dissociating timbre with everything else, leaving it off. But that doesn't mean that I'll always be able to compose with the final sound in mind. I guess that's what makes me a failed-experimentalist instead of a successful-experimentalist. Really, I compose so infrequently that I couldn't tell you my normal mode.

Also, hello humnab. I remember reading messages penned by you, but little else.

 

Exploring the blend of timbre and harmony in music composition can lead to intriguing results, especially in spectral music. Struggling to separate timbre from other elements doesn't determine success or failure in experimentation. Embracing your unique process and experimenting with different modes of composition can lead to growth as an artist.