MOTUnation.com

Try this:

http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/for ... on-On-line" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is an on-line forum/text based on Rimsky-Korsakov. All the sound examples play back, and you can see the score as you hear the music. The course must have been offered a few years ago, but the links work!

There are also some "suggested exercises" involving virtual instruments, etc.

Bravo, mj. Brilliant find.

One great way of studying both orchestration and MIDI realization at the same time is taking existing scores and re-creating them with your libraries.

Start with something smaller (i.e. string orchestra, or a late 18th century orchestra piece) and work your way up.

Use your favorite recording of the piece as a template to work towards - for sound, for phrasing, for dynamics, for sense of room, for tempo, etc. etc.

In fact, one very good method is to first put the real recording in DP and copy the tempo map from it, which will teach you a thing or two about "musical" tempo fluctuations. Believe me, fluid tempo is one of the big secrets of believable MIDI orchestration... then you add the VIs and MIDI tracks into the same DP project, enabling you to quickly A-B with the real deal as you create your MIDI version.

Inputting a good musical score note for note gives you a front-row seat for good orchestration (and composition), and emulating the real recording bar for bar will teach you everything there is to know about what a recorded real orchestra sounds like, and how to approximate it with "fake musicians".

Also, after you've done this a couple of times, there will be much more of an "aha!" effect when you then read Rimsky Korsakov or similar orchestration books - they'll act as summaries for things you've already observed in the wild, so to speak, and therefore the lessons will stick much better.

I like, Kubi.

The forum that gets heavily into MIDI orchestration is

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/

I remembered reading a thread there on early reflections and their use in mockups, did a quick search and found 36 threads.

A book you might be interested in is

http://www.castlewood-media.de/?p=55&lang=en

although I don't have it, looks like it covers many areas you are looking at.

And if you're looking for some scores go to

http://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Composers

Kubi wrote:One great way of studying both orchestration and MIDI realization at the same time is taking existing scores and re-creating them with your libraries. ....

I agree that it's a great idea, and this is sort of what I was driving at in my first post. It is one of my favorite exercises because from the very start, there is no question that the score "works". It helps isolate important parts of the process where the brain doesn't have to deal with compositional elements and where elements of mixing, balancing, and instrumental doublings get more attention.

There are a couple of challenges to watch out for, and they both deal with some aspect of using samples:

1. If a score requires 2 or 3 flutes and unisons are required, there could be phase problems unless one adds separate sets of samples for the 2nd and 3rd flutes. If one's library has patches containing a2 or a3, all the better. The downside, of course is that this approach requires more resources. This would apply to all winds and most brass (except for tuba).

2. String divisis using samples creates that age-old odd problem where "dividing" 16 first violins into two parts actually makes for 32 violins rather than 8+8. Without something like LASS which apparently handles the challenge of doing divisis, the only real solution would be to go easy on the velocities to avoid textures from becoming unrealistically dense.

This stuff isn't exactly earth-shattering, but they do represent a couple of ways virtual orchestration and real orchestration necessarily differ. Despite all this, mocking up an existing score is a great exercise full of epiphanies.

Thank you, all for your thoughtful input. I did end up purchasing a book on MIDI orchestration. Unfortunately, it's on back order from Sweetwater. I guess I just have to wait.

mjmoody wrote:Try this:

http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/for ... on-On-line" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is an on-line forum/text based on Rimsky-Korsakov. All the sound examples play back, and you can see the score as you hear the music. The course must have been offered a few years ago, but the links work!

There are also some "suggested exercises" involving virtual instruments, etc.

In past years, I've been an active member of the NorthernSounds forum. It's a GREAT forum, very friendly, with many talented composers/sequencers found there. (Some of the people there were very helpful to me when I decided to get back into the composing thing a number of years ago. I own them a debt of gratitude.)

If you check the credits to this on-line Rimsky-Korsakov orchestration forum/text, you'll see my name on it (Edward Fiebke). I was part of the larger team that put it all together. (I contributed some of the PDF-file scoring examples that went into making this forum.) Creating it really was a team effort. I've read through that Rimsky-Korsakov forum a couple of times (a couple of years ago). It is very helpful and informative.

Ted

The Rimsky-Korsakov book is great, except that you learn only about RK's orchestral process. Now for most of us, that would be enough for one lifetime to master-- or even to just aspire to. In that category, there is the Berlioz "Treatise" to the same effect.

But so much has happened to orchestral music since the days of RK and HB. Take Mahler for a start, but even that goes back over a century.

I say this not to the exclusion of RK and HB. I say it because those of us genuinely into the study of orchestration ought to be equally interested in the history and evolution of orchestration.

In addition to RK and HB, there's Ravel. For those who do the Facebook thing (I don't), there's THIS among other resources. Oh, there's Debussy, Hindemith, Berg, etc.

But here's another part of it: The great symphonists remain the giant elephants in the room. Brahms, Schubert, Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn. Further, there's Cantaloube. Who here knows about the genius of Cantaloube? This guy KNEW the orchestra like the back of his hand. Delibes? The list goes on, and most people don't even know it.

What about Gretchaninov?

And Alexander Tcherepnin?

There are so many disregarded geniuses who never wrote books on orchestration, but I wish they had.

We live in a time where diversity is a necessity. One may not like jazz-- but to pretend it doesn't exist is to live in denial. That said--- I spent two hours last night watching a concert of John Mayer and Keith Urban and was totally blown away. A few months ago I watched a previously unreleased vid of BB King and Stevie Ray Vaughn--- all blues. AMAZING.

To me, it's not what it sounds like. It's what it feels like. I don't care if it's orchestral or rock or R&B. Music must testify and make a convincing and valid "closing argument". Music need not be intellectual, but it should at least stimulate the intellect. Music need not be emotional, but it should carry the power to move the listener emotionally. Music need not be classical to be classic.

Just saying-- Rimsky-Korsakov was but one genius. But RK knew NOTHING of the geniuses who followed him.

In other words, one's search for books on any given subject will most likely lead to the necessity of building library!!

Okay. I just finished listening to Carl Nielsen's "Clarinet Concerto" and am about to go through the Beatles "Anthology" DVDs.

There are two types of music-- interesting and boring, or maybe I'm just borderline insane.

Hi Frodo -

Just finished reading your most recent post. I appreciate your passion in orchestration! It's a trait that I admire.

It seems that we both share the same philosophy about orchestration (which I know very little about!), music and life in general. The more one knows about any given subject, the better! Within the world of music, this would include different "styles" of orchestration as well as different genres of music. In the world of nursing (which is my chosen profession), this would involve becoming certified in one's chosen specialty. (For example, when I worked in oncology, I was "OCN" - Oncology Certified Nurse, which was no simple and easy feat to accomplish!) Bottom line is this, and I think that you would agree, it's worthy and a good "work ethic" to be the best that one can in one's chosen vocation.

Very cool. . .

Frodo wrote:
There are two types of music-- interesting and boring, or maybe I'm just borderline insane.

+1
welcome to the club
I say if the insanity is borderline, don't fight it
lol
jump right in & embrace it.
It's way more enjoyable!

kg-- thanks for the vote of confidence in the insanity department!! I gave up fighting it ages ago.

You know, I can listen to Karel Husa's "Apotheosis Of This Earth" then rock out on The White Album only to find myself listening to "Revolution Number 9" which leads me right back to the Husa piece. That was what 1973 was like for me (when I first heard the Husa work)-- discovering all sorts of strange dots to connect.

On a side note-- one thing that blew my mind with the Husa piece is that the orchestra starts talking towards the end-- in some cases, they actually scream!! The piece was written in 1921, so what's considered to be "contemporary" is now almost a century old.

It was a real shift of the para-dig-'em. I don't think I've ever recovered (and don't plan to).

I still see dots floating thru space still, occasionally
free entertainment lol
Haven't heard of Husa , I will check it out.

kgdrum wrote:I still see dots floating thru space still, occasionally
free entertainment lol

You see those dots, too? And all this time I thought they were just "floaters"!!

When they synchronize with the music in your mind it is quite lovely;)

Insanity. . . .

One of my favorite compositions is one titled, 4'33 , You all have probably heard it before.

I can listen to this piece over and over and over and over again. . . .





(The orchestration possibilities of 4'33 are literally limitless.)