What, in no uncertain terms, is "bad" orchestration?

[greg]

yeah, i always thought all the stuff i have on CD by Rachmaninov has pretty good orchestration (2nd Piano Concerto, Paganini Rhapsody, Isle of the Dead, and especially the Symphonic Dances).

i haven't studied the Rachmaninov symphonies, either, Karl

here's the first two:
http://imslp.org/wiki/Symphony_No.1%2C_Op.13_%28Rachmaninoff%2C_Sergei%29
http://imslp.org/wiki/Symphony_No.2%2C_Op.27_%28Rachmaninoff%2C_Sergei%29

anyone who can give examples of what's bad in here?

[Montpellier]

I don't think there's any "no uncertain terms" bad orchestration, except the stupid, of course, where instruments are scored out of compass or the composer (e.g.) places a flute in its lowest notes fff in an orchestral tutti.     

I was taught a while ago that Janacek's Sinfonietta was bad orchestration (with various examples pointed out like the last movement recap where a downward clarinet run follows the blast on 12 trumpets).   I admitted that the orchestration sounded weird especially the middle movements. 

Some time later when recordings appeared I listened to some of his early works where the orchestration sounded very 'standard' in that it sounded like it was composed orchestrally - that Janacek was thinking orchestrally no matter how he drafted his work.  I concluded that Janacek knew very well what he was doing with the Sinfonietta. 

[lukeottevanger]

I don't think there's any "no uncertain terms" bad orchestration, except the stupid, of course, where instruments are scored out of compass or the composer (e.g.) places a flute in its lowest notes fff in an orchestral tutti.     

I was taught a while ago that Janacek's Sinfonietta was bad orchestration (with various examples pointed out like the last movement recap where a downward clarinet run follows the blast on 12 trumpets).   I admitted that the orchestration sounded weird especially the middle movements. 

Some time later when recordings appeared I listened to some of his early works where the orchestration sounded very 'standard' in that it sounded like it was composed orchestrally - that Janacek was thinking orchestrally no matter how he drafted his work.  I concluded that Janacek knew very well what he was doing with the Sinfonietta. 

Every time this kind of thread comes up I make a point related to Janacek, and by extension to other composers, which I (obviously) think bears repeating. In the example you quote, and also in countless other places, Janacek is, in textbook terms, guilty of 'poor orchestration.' It is common for even the most Janacek-favourable conductors to lightly touch up his scores; it also used to be common for other conductors to heavily change things a la Rimsky-Korsakov (Talich, for example whose glitzy fashioning of the Cunning Little Vixen Suite is nevertheless a real treat!).

My own view, however, is that Janacek's orchestration works, and more potently than that of many more polished orchestrators, despite or even because of its flaws, because they spring from the same source as the rest of his musical language. He didn't regard orchestration as a supplementary skill to be applied from the outside, but as an integral part of the piece (dozens of his writings attest to this vividly, and of course there is the much-noted practice of drawing his own manuscript paper so as not to be tempted to write for instruments he didn't really need). For instance, often the 'faults' spring from keeping a particular music to a particular voice even if that leads to imbalances or unwieldy areas of tessitura - but this is precisely the point in his music, that the expression belongs to the individual instrument, that it is aesthetically wrong to transfer it to another instrument, and that strain on the player or the sound etc. are psychologically 'true'.

In any case, this is how I things are with Janacek; other composers find their own routes to a personal orchestral voice, and I think the finest composers tend to find an orchestration which is 'true' for them, which speaks with their own voice, and which even if it is academically incorrect could not be improved on in that respect.

[jochanaan]

There are no certain terms when it comes to orchestration.

Rachmaninoff:  I haven't done more than glance at any of his orchestral scores, but I think that only in his First Symphony (and maybe the unknown original version of the First Piano Concerto) could he be guilty, by any stretch, of less-than-exemplary orchestration.  I've played in the orchestra for the Second Concerto, and it's really wonderfully scored for woodwinds.  The Second Symphony has a big, full sound and seems to be very gratifying for the orchestra, while the Isle of the Dead is appropriately lean except for the big climaxes.  And as others have pointed out, the Paganini Rhapsody, the Third Symphony, and the Symphonic Dances are real marvels of concise, precise, colorful orchestration.

Janacek:  I've only played a suite from The Cunning Little Vixen, but that suite is full of the most glorious orchestral effects; not even Mahler outdid him in instrumental color.  Also, in the Sinfonietta's third movement are some piccolo runs in the top octave that most conductors thought were unplayable as written.  Well, as a flutist who has sometimes played piccolo, I can tell you that, if you can play it on flute, you can play it on piccolo, even in the top octave (except for the two or three lowest notes that the piccolo doesn't have keys for).  Charles MacKerras and the Vienna Philharmonic, in their recording, do those piccolo runs as written; they're far more effective and brilliant that way than as usually played.  So, here at least, Janacek apparently knew more than his "advisors."

Beethoven:  How much of the great master's supposedly "inferior" orchestration skill is due to the fact that instruments and orchestral size have changed tremendously in two hundred years?  When he wrote his symphonies, woodwind instruments didn't yet have keys, just fingerholes! And they were still using "alto, tenor, and bass" trombones; only the tenor used the same "home" scale as a modern trombone.  Also, it was common practice in those days to use doubled woodwinds even with the smaller string bodies common then; in modern-sized orchestras, unless the woodwinds are doubled or even tripled, you lose them in the loud sections.  A good period or HIP recording shows just how radical and masterful Beethoven's orchestration was compared to other composers of that time.

Incidentally, Berlioz recommended an orchestra of 119 as "standard."

[Kullervo]

Thanks for the insightful posts. This thread has accomplished exactly what I wanted, and that is to show that there is no real definition for bad orchestration. Outside of technical problems, it's all a matter of taste.

[Larry Rinkel]

Thanks for the insightful posts. This thread has accomplished exactly what I wanted, and that is to show that there is no real definition for bad orchestration. Outside of technical problems, it's all a matter of taste.

Well, yes. And remember as well that when the composers you are likely to hear on recordings are generally well-trained in orchestration; and in those cases where their orchestration is faulty, the conductor is likely to have touched it up, often without acknowledgment.

[greg]

Outside of technical problems, it's all a matter of taste.

but this is debatable, too- try reorchestrating a nicely-orchestrated work (although to where all the instruments can be heard), and make it suck. It's possible. When composing, you know which instruments to use next would sound good and which would sound bad. The exits or entrances of "colors" can be too soon or too late, it really depends on the timing

[Kullervo]

but this is debatable, too- try reorchestrating a nicely-orchestrated work (although to where all the instruments can be heard), and make it suck. It's possible. When composing, you know which instruments to use next would sound good and which would sound bad. The exits or entrances of "colors" can be too soon or too late, it really depends on the timing

I did say it's a matter of taste, and what you just highlighted is entirely dependent on taste.

[greg]

I did say it's a matter of taste, and what you just highlighted is entirely dependent on taste.

well, if i let a noob composer reorchestrate a famous/succesful symphony (though as i said, making sure technical problems are cared for), i doubt many people would like the reorchestrated version better.

or...... if i let two composers orchestrate, say, a piano sonata- one is famous, the other one doesn't know what they're doing. I think one would be liked more than the other, probably, or at least be recognized as more professional.

[Kullervo]

well, if i let a noob composer reorchestrate a famous/succesful symphony (though as i said, making sure technical problems are cared for), i doubt many people would like the reorchestrated version better.

Who knows? I will cite the oft-repeated instance of Rimsky-Korsakov reworking Mussorgsky's works. R-K may have been the superior orchestrator, but is this really an improvement?

[greg]

Who knows? I will cite the oft-repeated instance of Rimsky-Korsakov reworking Mussorgsky's works. R-K may have been the superior orchestrator, but is this really an improvement?

i don't know much of what he reworked- you mean reorchestrated?
reorchestrating something that has already been orchestrated is a bit...... well, usually it doesn't work out 
but if you presented them a random piano sonata, told both to orchestrate, and then later their orchestrations were presented to a group of judges after listening to the concert, who do you think would win? that's what i mean 

[Larry Rinkel]

well, if i let a noob composer reorchestrate a famous/succesful symphony (though as i said, making sure technical problems are cared for), i doubt many people would like the reorchestrated version better.

or...... if i let two composers orchestrate, say, a piano sonata- one is famous, the other one doesn't know what they're doing. I think one would be liked more than the other, probably, or at least be recognized as more professional.

Rimsky taught Stravinsky orchestration by having the younger composer orchestrate passages from works like Beethoven piano sonatas. Then Rimsky would explain what he might have done differently.

[greg]

Rimsky taught Stravinsky orchestration by having the younger composer orchestrate passages from works like Beethoven piano sonatas. Then Rimsky would explain what he might have done differently.

i've tried orchestrating parts of Prokofiev's Sonatas but gave up because i didn't have good enough staff paper, but now i could do it on the computer. Hey, maybe i will sometime! Probably the 7th, then 6th, then 2nd. I'd even add them to my opus list. And then the Scriabin 10th.

well, sounds like Rimsky's method was pretty decent; if he taught Stravinsky after all!

[Kullervo]

i've tried orchestrating parts of Prokofiev's Sonatas but gave up because i didn't have good enough staff paper, but now i could do it on the computer. Hey, maybe i will sometime! Probably the 7th, then 6th, then 2nd. I'd even add them to my opus list. And then the Scriabin 10th.

well, sounds like Rimsky's method was pretty decent; if he taught Stravinsky after all!

Do you use the program Sibelius? I used that a bit when going through Wuorinen's book on composition. Pretty fun.

[Florestan]

Do you use the program Sibelius? I used that a bit when going through Wuorinen's book on composition. Pretty fun.

Now that'll be one helluva music: Prokofiev's sonatas orchestrated by Sibelius. 

[greg]

Do you use the program Sibelius? I used that a bit when going through Wuorinen's book on composition. Pretty fun.

no, i wish....
i use that cheap piece of junk Noteworthy Composer, it's extremely limited and totally useless for making orchestral scores, unless you just want a sound file. Even then, it's a bit hard.
i have know idea when i'll have the money to afford something like that, but when i do i think i'll get Finale instead

[abidoful]

A bad orchestration is when the composer has something in his mind and falls short, for example creating a full tutti sound. Sometimes Shumann sounds "strange" in that respect, especially his 4th Symphony. Maybe Bruckner is also little eccentric...? Berg and Pfitzner are sometimes very thick with dark colours and low brasses...

[False_Dmitry]

no, i wish....
i use that cheap piece of junk Noteworthy Composer, it's extremely limited and totally useless for making orchestral scores, unless you just want a sound file. Even then, it's a bit hard.
i have know idea when i'll have the money to afford something like that, but when i do i think i'll get Finale instead

In fairness, Noteworthy Composer is a deliberately cut-down version of Finale, intended to promote the "real thing" by way of its tiny cousin.  It's ok for tinkering with, and if your needs are simple (viz you want to write-down some piano music or songs) it is not entirely without merit.  Of the various bits of music software that are legitimatel free, it's the best one.  I think you need to have a special kind of mind to get anywhere with LilyPond

I can thoroughly recommend Finale, though, and it's a workhorse tool to which I have frequent recourse.  The learning curve is far less steep than Sibelius, yet the program is just as capable and feature-laden as Sib.  If you've already used NoteWorthy, you are halfway there before you start - the interface is the same.  Strongly recommended to get hold of a cheap midi keyboard for inserting your raw note data    Everyone has his/her own criteria for what they need from music software of course...   but if for example you have a show going up in two hours time, and the last-minute-replacement soprano tells you "I can't sing that number in that key, I want it a minor third lower"...  the pure joy of being able to do an instant transposition and reprint all the orchestral parts within 15 mins cannot easily be expressed in words 

[greg]

Well, I've actually tried both Finale and Sibelius since then (please don't ask how I obtain them)  . Although I used to have a bias for Finale, after actually trying both of them out, I much prefer Sibelius. It just seems more straightforward and easier to use.


(though I haven't gotten around to using both extensively)

[kishnevi]

Another freeware possibility is Musescore (find it at Musescore.org)

For me, it's chiefly useful in showing how much I don't know about how to write music