orchestration

I tend to divide orchestrators into two "camps": Strong/effective and
"experimental/fragile".

By "experimental/fragile" I mean when the orchestration sounds often
"fragile", as if it takes some good skill on the part of the performers
to pull it off. "Strong/effective" is when the orchestra is
acoustically well-managed so it seems to "meld together" effortlessly,
to be almost "invulnerable"--rock solid.

Into the "strong" category go Ravel and Sibelius, Berlioz, Strauss,
Tchaikovsky and early Stravinsky, Schonberg---recently Murail, John
Adams, and others.

Into the second go mid-(i.e. neo-classic)-late Stravinsky and much Mahler,
recently, Xenakis, Babbitt, etc.

(I might also posit a 3rd category, called "crudely double everything".
Here I'd put Bruckner, Philip Glass, Shoshtakovitch, etc. (I'm being a
little tongue-in-cheeck here.) (By the way, I love Bruckner, Shoshti- and
non-orchestral Glass)).

This is all very rough and journalistic, and exceptions abound, and of
course is my opinion, but nonetheless is a strong feeling I get having
listened to a lot of orchestra music.

Mahler is an interesting case: in Symphonies 2, 3, 6, the orchestration
seems thick, strong, invulnerable.

In nos. 1 (yes, it is not necessarily a chronological phenomenon) 4, 5, 7,
and 9, (I don't know 8 well enough to comment), we see a lot more
experiment, particularly with

1) klangfarbenmelodie techniques ---i.e. a very rapid passing
of the melody between different, heterogeneous families and instruments
and combinations
2) counterpoints with bizarre combinations. . .for example,
in the last movement of #9, there is a very soft counterpoint between two
lines, one in the upper-mid register, played by flute, and another in the
very low register, played by basses(!) This may not sound like a big
deal, but when you hear it, it's wierd! It sounds, as I say, very
"fragile". . . . . and yet, moving (emotionally), at the same time.

In regards to klangfarbenmelodie, one can posit a line, going
from total klangfarbenmelodie (new instrument for each note), to regular
old one-inst-plays-the-whole-tune. If so, Mahler has examples all along
this line . . . there's a wonderful spot in #4, 1st movement, a moment
before the big climax in the devlopment section, where the melody gets
passed, something like: strings---oboes--clarinets--violins--horn. It's
quite amazing. A good performance pulls it off.

Ravel or Sibelius or early Stravinsky would never do this kind of
thing. . . .their music is just rock-solidly orchestrated.

Incidentally, Sibelius is a great composer (well, sometimes)--the
5th Symphony for example . . . a work I'd call "perfect" in every way.

bye

CBailey

>1) klangfarbenmelodie techniques ---i.e. a very rapid passing
>of the melody between different, heterogeneous families and
>instruments and combinations

Weird... this wasn't in the message listing when replied to
monz about hocketing. Is this the term for hocketing?

>Incidentally, Sibelius is a great composer (well, sometimes)--the
>5th Symphony for example . . . a work I'd call "perfect" in every
>way.

I have 4 here. Drat! Care to recommend a recording?

-Carl

> From: clumma <carl@...>
> To: <metatuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:39 PM
> Subject: [metatuning] Re: orchestration
>
>
> >1) klangfarbenmelodie techniques ---i.e. a very rapid passing
> >of the melody between different, heterogeneous families and
> >instruments and combinations
>
> Weird... this wasn't in the message listing when replied to
> monz about hocketing. Is this the term for hocketing?

"Klangfarbenmelodie" is German for "tone-color melodies" or
"melodies of timbres". Basically, the idea was Schoenberg's,
and it forms the dazzling conclusion to his theory as presented
in 1911 in _Harmonielehre_.

Schoenberg was thinking along the lines of actually sustaining
the same pitches throughout while continuously changing the
orchestration, so the the only melody one would hear would
be the one produced by the shifting emphases and de-emphases
of various partials among the different instruments.

But yes, Mahler did indeed chop up his melodies and pass
them around the orchestra this way too. But note, when
Christopher says it did not necessarily follow a chronological
order, that all his life Mahler continually revised his
symphonies, particularly the orchestration. The "1st Symphony"
as it was written in 1888 was a far different animal than
the one that's currently published and known by that title.

>
> >Incidentally, Sibelius is a great composer (well, sometimes)--the
> >5th Symphony for example . . . a work I'd call "perfect" in every
> >way.
>
> I have 4 here. Drat! Care to recommend a recording?

IMO, Sibelius's 4th is w a y better than his 5th.
I'd rank his best in the rough order: 4, 5, 2, 1, all the others.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

> "Klangfarbenmelodie" is German for "tone-color melodies" or
> "melodies of timbres". Basically, the idea was Schoenberg's,
> and it forms the dazzling conclusion to his theory as presented
> in 1911 in _Harmonielehre_.

He may have been the first to suggest an entire piece made of
it, but he certainly didn't invent hocketing. By far the best
and most clever application of the technique I know of is in
Beethoven's late string quartets.

-Carl