A P
RACTICAL
H
ANDBOOK
-From Piano to Strings
B
Y
J
OSEPH
W
AGNER
R
EVISEDB
YP
ETERL
AWRENCEA
LEXANDERAlexander Publishing P.O. Box 1720 Petersburg, VA 23805
www.alexanderpublishing.com Alexander Publishing is the
Publishing division of Alexander University, Inc.
Professional Orchestration is a service mark of Alexander University, Inc.
Digital eBook edition published 2009 ISBN-13: 978-0-939067-47-3
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
No part of this publication may be stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, or reproduced, in any way, including but not limited to: photocopy, photograph, magnetic or other record, without the prior agreement and written permission of the publisher.
Every effort has been made to supply complete and accurate information. However, Alexander University, Inc., and its affi liates, assumes no responsibility for its use, nor for any infringement of the intellectual property rights of third parties which may result from such use.
FILE SHARING
This eBook is ONLY available from www.alexanderpublishing.com. If you have this fi le, or a print out and didn’t purchase it from Alexander Publishing you have an illegal copy and are depriving the author and publisher of their rightful royalties. Please visit www.alexanderpublishing.com to purchase a legal copy and inform us of fi le sharing abuse. Your honesty is much appreciated.
Cover design and layout by Caroline J. Alexander
1950-May your skills grow, develop & explode
from your efforts in this book & workbook.
Acknowledgements: A Word of Thanks Preface: A Simple Idea
Introduction: Getting the Most Out of “From Piano to Strings” Something to Avoid
Where and How to Start The Audio Examples How Labeled Support Materials
How to Approach Formal MIDI Mockups
How Maurice Ravel Approached Transcription Work Why You Should Start With Strings First
Give It Time
Working With the Reference Chart of Keyboard Idioms Conclusion
Chapter 1: Broken Intervals
1. Broken Octaves
2. Broken Octaves With Embellishments 3. Broken Octaves Combined With Thirds 4. Broken Sixths
5. Broken Thirds
6. Broken Sixths and Thirds Combined
Chapter 2: Broken Chords
. . . i . . . iii . . . ix . . . x . . . xi . . . xi . . . xi . . . xii . . . xii . . . xiii . . . xiii . . . xiii . . . xiii . . . xv . . . 1 . . . 1 . . . 4 . . . 6 . . . 7 . . . 8 . . . 10 . . . 11
Chapter 3: Melodic Lines & Figurations
1. Large Melodic Skips 2. Outlining a Melodic Line 3. Dividing a Melodic Line
4. Melodic Lines Combined With Repeated Note Patterns
5. Melodic Settings: Contrasts, Comparative Strengths, and Repeated Phrases
Chapter 4: Implied Bass Parts
Chapter 5: Single–Note, Interval & Chord Repetitions
1. Repeated Notes—Without Rests 2. Repeated Notes—With Rests 3. Repeated Intervals as Afterbeats
Chapter 6: Two– & Three–Part Music
1. Homophonic 2. Polyphonic 3. Style Mixtures
Chapter 7: Spacing Problems in the Middle Register
1. Large Harmonic Gaps
2. Sustained Notes, Intervals and Chords
Chapter 8: Contrast Problems Conditioned by Dynamics Chapter 9: Voice Leading
Chapter 10: Obbligato or Added Secondary Parts Arranged from Harmonic Progressions Chapter 11: Antiphonal Effects
Chapter 12: Tremolo Types Chapter 13: Dance Forms
APPENDIX I: Chart of String Unisons APPENDIX II: String Ensemble Templates Holberg Suite: For Piano Solo
Holberg Suite: For String Ensemble
. . . 29 . . . 29 . . . 35 . . . 37 . . . 38 . . . 42 . . . 43 . . . 47 . . . 47 . . . 48 . . . 49 . . . 55 . . . 55 . . . 59 . . . 61 . . . 65 . . . 65 . . . 66 . . . 69 . . . 71 . . . 75 . . . 79 . . . 81 . . . 83 . . . 89 . . . 91 . . . 95 . . . 113
T
his revision would not have been possible without the efforts of three outstanding individuals. Max Tofone at Max Tofone Music Services in Switzerland produced much of this work. With his new engravings in Sibelius of all the musical examples in From Piano to Strings and the Workbook. Max gave this work life by recording all the audio for both the Workbook and book. For the fi rst time in fi fty years, Dr. Wagner’s work has sound and Max produced it.Lance Bowling, President of Cambria Music is a former student of Dr. Wagner’s and has many of Dr. Wagner’s original papers including Dr. Wagner’s post-publication corrections of the original work. Lance and his assistant manually scanned each page of the book so we could have this vital reference. Lance also provided us with pictures of Dr. Wagner, which previously we had been missing.
Finally, a great tribute to the person who put it all together, my beautiful bride, Caroline. She has created a gracious layout that’s easy to read and to write notes in.
A
rthur Edward Heacox was born two years after the close of the American Civil War. He loved music, composing, teaching, and playing the string bass. In 1893, at the age of 26, Arthur graduated from Ohio’s Oberlin Conservatory, which at that time had both a conservatory and seminary. After graduation, Oberlin asked him to stay and teach two terms of ear training. This was besides the four terms of harmony and six terms of counterpoint Oberlin already taught its students.Arthur accepted.
Five years later, in 1898, Arthur took the experience he gained in teaching ear training and turned it into a top notch training method that earned him national recognition. It was titled simply, Ear Training. Six years later in 1904, he wrote Lessons in Harmony.
During his time at Oberlin, he took a sabbatical and went to Germany to study at the Leipzig Conservatory. From Leipzig he went to Paris where he studied with Vincent d’Indy at the Schola Cantorum. Because the Paris Conservatory had such a heavy emphasis on opera, mainly instrumental composers found it diffi cult to break into the Paris music scene. For that reason the Schola Cantorum was founded.
And he kept writing books. In 1917, he wrote Keyboard Training in Harmony and in 1922,
Harmony for Eye, Ear and Keyboard. Both books have been digitized by Google and can be
found at books.google.com.
Arthur’s books, like those of his teaching contemporaries—Goetschius, Richter, Prout, and Jadassohn, are all about skill development. There is no sense of the intellectual approach of knowledge for the sake of knowledge. With Arthur, and other educators of that period, knowledge learned must be knowledge applied.
Already recognized for his printed contributions to music education, Arthur would pen one more practical work and see it published in 1928 by the Oliver Ditson Company,
Project Lessons in Orchestration. Considering the titles Keyboard Training in Harmony and Harmony for Eye, Ear and Keyboard, it’s evident that Project Lessons in Orchestration is the
culmination of Arthur’s approach to using practically the keyboard in musical instruction and skill development. If he were alive today, he would feel right at home with today’s MIDI keyboards and sequencing programs and the way in which they can improve and enhance musical training privately and in the classroom.
Project Lessons in Orchestration neatly fi ts into that milieu of skill training. Ever looking
for better ways of teaching, Arthur looked for an experiential way to teach beginning orchestration. He found it by categorizing common piano devices and then showing how to translate them to orchestral scoring, starting fi rst with the strings and methodically moving to full orchestra. Students under Arthur’s watchful eye produced fi nished scores every week. The work would be critiqued and then performed by other students and sometimes faculty. There was no student workbook, only the work that students produced. The book contained 39 lessons, nearly every one a scoring assignment for which score and parts had to be produced. Though only 180 pages long, it easily needs two semesters to complete. Arthur’s approach was a simple idea that created a genuine breakthrough in combining composition and orchestration. No other textbook of the period duplicated it. It was truly an American original.
In 1931, three years after Project Lessons in Orchestration was published, the Oliver Ditson Company, one of the largest music publishers of its day, was bought by The Theodore Presser Company. Presser still holds the copyright and has never revised the book. But 31 years later, someone else did.
Joseph Wagner was born in 1900 in Springfi eld, Massachusetts. His family later moved to Providence, Rhode Island, where in 1918 he graduated from the Technical High School. After graduation, he enlisted in the U.S. Army and served during World War I. Following his release from the U.S. Army, Joseph Wagner studied privately, and later in 1921 attended the New England Conservatory where he graduated with honors, fi nishing four years of school in two. In 1923, the year of his graduation, he was appointed an Assistant Director of Music and Supervisor of Orchestras and Bands in the Boston Public School System. In 1924, he founded the Boston Civic Symphony which he lead for 18 years. It’s still going strong (in 2009, the Boston Civic Symphony celebrated its 85th Anniversary).
Five years later, in 1929, Joseph Wagner was appointed to the music faculty of Boston University where he taught orchestration and band scoring. No doubt, that’s when Arthur’s
book was sent to Joseph Wagner for textbook review. There’s no record if the two ever met or even corresponded with each other.
The ‘30s and ‘40s found Wagner making guest conducting appearances, conducting, and studying. From 1934–1935, Wagner was in Paris studying composition with Nadia Boulanger and conducting with Pierre Monteux and Felix Weingartner. Monteux had conducted the premier of Stravinsky’s Petrushka and Rite of Spring while Weingartner had been a student of Franz Liszt.
During that time, he wrote a number of works including two ballets, Dance Divertissement and Hudson River Legend.
1945, as Wagner wrote in an autobiographical sketch, “was the highest peak of his works.” That year his Symphony #2 debuted. Said the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, “…this new symphony, in spite of its Mahleresque length (35 minutes) has a great deal of meat in it— powerful pulsating use of instruments, skilled counterpoint, and an especially pleasant third movement. Restless drive and energy are its prime characteristics, and they hold the interest.” For the next 14 years, Wagner continued writing and conducting. But sometime in the 1950’s, he signed a contract to create two books, Orchestration: A Practical Handbook and
Band Scoring.
In researching Dr. Wagner’s life for the 50th Anniversary of the publication of A Practical
Handbook, I met Lance Bowling, president of Cambria Recordings. Lance was Dr.
Wagner’s private student when he taught at Pepperdine. Lance is an engaging fellow, has an encylopedic mind, and knows his Hollywood fi lm scoring history. By good fortune, Lance had in his fi les Wagner’s typewritten Report on Confi dential Market Survey, which is Wagner’s assessment of orchestration texts, how the subject was being taught, and why his proposed book was the winner.
Laying the two books side by side, Arthur Heacox’s breakthrough text was clearly the pattern for both Wagner books. But in the late 1950’s, Arthur’s book was already forgotten. In Wagner’s marketing report he lists it along with Walter Piston’s and Kent Kennan’s orchestration books, but Arthur is given no credit for being the cornerstone on which Wagner wrote.
By comparison, in tone and approach Wagner’s book is similar, yet radically different. Wagner acknowledged this obliquely when he wrote, “Other books have limited discussions and solutions along the lines of my Reference Chart, but they have not consistently carried out the idea for the entire work to be done by the student. Their books are not consistent on this point. Mine is consistent.”
Writes Wagner in his marketing brief, “This is the only work on the subject that consistently demonstrates the scoring of identical examples for strings, woodwinds, brass—and the full orchestra according to a completely new plan. This plan is incorporated in the Reference
diffi culty. Yet, its approach through scores of examples is suffi ciently broad and varied to add new ideas to an established technic.”
The Reference Chart of Keyboard Idioms contains 13 categories of pianistic devices. In the book, Wagner, like Arthur, used piano excerpts representing each device and orchestrated them. With each example, Wagner explains why he took the scoring approach he did. Said Wagner, “Although the Reference Chart is designed primarily for keyboard music, it is by no means confi ned or limited to the scoring of music exclusively from the medium. Full cognizance has been given to all composers who wish to study orchestration, whether they write sketches for piano, organ, or directly for orchestra. The use of the Reference Chart is intended so that the student’s scoring technic will become cumulative. He learns one thing at a time and soon discovers that each thing is related to the sum total of a complete technic.”
Wagner’s fi nal step was creating a workbook of piano examples refl ecting the Reference
Chart of Keyboard Idioms. One example is below, Chabrier’s Bourree Fantasque.
Wagner’s Conclusion for his market summary is worth reading.
“It seems to me,” he wrote, “that the one really important point to keep in mind in the promotion of this book concerns the following fact. There are a number of fi rst-class Treatises on the market and they cover more than a century in time. There was, therefore, no real need for another Treatise on this subject. My book was planned and designed, not as a Treatise, but as a Handbook, one which contained not only reference material, but also a concrete and specifi c attack on the problems which every novice orchestrator encounters with this subject. Therefore, it supplements and goes beyond existing Treatises by consistently providing material not heretofore found in this form.”
On publication, A Practical Handbook received rave reviews in academia from Boston University, the University of Wisconsin, the University of Nevada, what was then East Carolina College, and Columbia University.
Despite the reviews, A Practical Handbook was not able to break the hold that the more survey oriented books written by Piston and Kennan held.
In his fi les, Lance Bowling also had several of Dr. Wagner’s royalty statements from the publisher. Some years, A Practical Handbook sold as many as 1200 units, while one year saw a low of 189 units.
Having worked through the book and workbook myself privately with the noted Hollywood orchestrator, Albert Harris (who was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for his guitar composition for Andres Segovia), it became obvious to me why the book didn’t take off as it might have.
First, it takes time to fi nish. More than a semester.
Second, a lack of students and faculty to play the student’s work. Consequently, no one knew if what they were writing was correct.
Third, it takes a pianist playing at Grade Level V or above to perform many of the Piano examples in both the book and Workbook.
Happily, this newly revised version solves many of these problems.
Since each section takes roughly one semester each to complete, we’ve broken the larger book into three smaller ones entitled From Piano to Strings, From Piano to Woodwinds, and
From Piano to Orchestra. Reviewing Dr. Wagner’s marketing brief, this fulfi lls his vision of
seeing his work used individually, in private instruction, and at the academic level. The examples in each individual From… to… book were re-typeset in Sibelius by Max Tofone of Max Tofone Music Services in Switzerland. This enabled us to create MIDI fi les for every example which can then be used in virtually any notation program with a sampled orchestra component, or any sequencing program with other orchestral sample library programs (which can now be used in many notation programs).
With Sibelius’ ability to work with commercially available software instruments, Max tested several sampled grand pianos and ultimately settled on one from TruePianos. He then re-edited the Sibelius piano fi les for both the book and Workbook and recorded all of the piano parts. So for the fi rst time in 50 years, Orchestration: A Practical Handbook has
sound.
The solution to knowing what your homework sounds like is solved with sample libraries. Nothing replaces live players, but you do have an approximation with sample libraries,
and Brass supports From Piano to Woodwinds. Finally, Volumes 3 forward support From Piano to Orchestra.
Then there are the MIDI Mockup studies we have from the Master MIDI Mockup Course by Andrew Blaney.
Consequently, whatever you need, Alexander Publishing has it for you.
Back to Joseph Wagner. In 1963, four years after the publication of Orchestration: A Practical
Handbook, he was appointed Composer-in-Residence at Pepperdine University where he
stayed for the next decade.
Dr. Wagner passed away suddenly on Saturday afternoon, October 12, 1974. An avid baseball fan, he rescheduled a private composition appointment after the World Series game had been completed. When his student arrived, the student could hear the television, but Dr. Wagner didn’t respond to repeated knockings. Finding the landlord, the student asked him to open the door to Dr. Wagner’s apartment. They found him sitting on a sofa— lifeless.
Cause of death was reportedly a ruptured aneurism on his artery. Dr. Wagner’s remains were returned to Rhode Island where he was buried next to his parents in Pawtucket, Rhode Island.
Of Dr. Wagner, Nicolas Slonimsky, a close friend who conducted the fi rst performance of Charles Ives’ Three Places in New England, said that Joseph Wagner was one of America’s great undiscovered composers.
The year 2009 marked the 50th Anniversary of the publication of Orchestration: A Practical
Handbook and the 85th Anniversary of the founding of the Boston Civic Symphony.
We take great pride in this anniversary year of continuing Dr. Wagner’s impact, founded on the pioneering work of Arthur E. Heacox, with this newly engraved edition, which for the fi rst time brings this great work alive with sound and by empowering you to expand your skills by also recording your solutions.
Peter Lawrence Alexander Petersburg, Virginia Spring 2009
F
rom Piano to Strings is the fi rst of the three handbooks in the Professional Orchestration: A Practical Handbook series. As the title implies you learn how to take piano worksand effectively score them for strings. You do this by looking at piano techniques codifi ed by Joseph Wagner in his Reference Chart of Keyboard Idioms and seeing how they’re applied to the string section. The same piano examples are next applied to the woodwinds (From Piano to Woodwinds) and then to the full orchestra (From Piano to Orchestra).
To get the most out of this handbook, there are several things I recommend you do. Copy one or two sets of the String Ensemble worksheets found in Appendix 2. Take them to a copy center and run off 100 or more copies on pre-punched three–hole paper.
With your copies you need a 3-ring, D-ring binder and 30 divider tabs—one tab for each technique in the book and workbook. Working your way through each technique will give you a reservoir of valuable models of many scoring types that you’ll return to many times—provided you do the following.
If you’re in school and you have students available to perform your work, record as many examples as you can, then later, go back through, and on your String Ensemble sheets, critique your score for what worked, what could have been improved, and what didn’t
Getting the Most Out of
“From Piano to Strings”
Orchestral string libraries, because of the way they’re recorded, are bigger sounding than live strings. If you work with sample libraries exclusively and then suddenly hear your work performed by live players, you’ll be shocked at how small it sounds by comparison. This is a common problem with those who sequence primarily and don’t balance their sequencing by attending live performances to re-adjust their ears (aural imagination). Once you’ve recorded your work this way, the next best step is then preparing to do the MIDI mockup. Listening to one “generic” string program for each instrument forces the musical imagination to ponder what additional bowing techniques are required to make your work stand out and sound professional. Most string sample libraries today, with the possible exception of the Vienna Symphonic Library, require individual tracks for each articulation. Consequently, you may discover that a “simple” assignment becomes rather involved when attempting to do a MIDI mockup. Comparing back to your recorded examples will demonstrate what your sample library is genuinely able to achieve in effectively representing your work.
If you only have a single library, and your work begins to sound “synthy” or you hear the dreaded “organ” sound from your examples, you’ll know, now by experience, why in my music technology columns, books, and classes, I recommend the use of at least two string libraries to avoid these recording realities.
How to work out the various solutions available to you. Each homework example will have many possible solutions to them. Working out these solutions will come faster by using Professional Orchestration 2A: Orchestrating the Melody Within the String Section. Here you’ll fi nd 63 never-before-published techniques for string ensemble worked out across the low, medium, high, and very high registers. Each homework example will offer several different string technique opportunities. Recognizing them and then working out individual solutions for each is a sure way to build your technique and sound professional in your work results. Your goals may not be “going” professional, but sounding professional is always better than sounding amateurish.
Something to Avoid
Many will disagree with me, especially manufacturers, but I strongly encourage you not to do your homework initially in a notation program, but instead, do it manually (oh my gosh!) with pencil or pen so that your total focus is on the music and not fi guring out or getting the software program to do what you want/need it to do. Even though doing your homework initially in the computer sounds or seems faster, in the end it doesn’t advance you because you don’t develop the same eye/hand insights that come from doing the work manually.
Students often argue with me on this point in our online Professional Orchestration classes, because it doesn’t seem to be fast enough.
Fast does not build your skills. Consistency does.
The student who prefers the jack rabbit to the hedgehog as a learning role model will accumulate lots of recorded data and will appear to himself and some friends to be a rather great genius compared to his “slower” colleague who chooses to develop his or her skill set in such a way that quality music can be written with, or without, electricity.
While it may not be modern, a great deal of success has been achieved over the past several hundred years by composers who wrote by pen with piano and only sunlight, candle, or gas lamp to show the way.
Where and How to Start
I’ve now described how to approach your homework. Now let’s consider how to approach the book’s examples.
Even though MIDI fi les exist for each example, ignore them for now.
Initially, with your String Ensemble sheets, write down Dr. Wagner’s solution to the example in the book. Go through and study his explanation of his solution.
Then, challenge it and reorchestrate it!
In short, come up with alternate solutions. Just because the teacher wrote the example (and the book!) doesn’t mean that you the student can’t come up with equal or better solutions.
The Audio Examples
There are two types of audio examples. There’s one set for the book and a different set for the Workbook—available for separate purchase from www.alexanderpublishing.com.
The Book
The audio examples for the book are used for each individual handbook. Max Tofone, who produced this edition for us, recorded only the piano parts, not the strings. Listen to the audio examples fi rst, then study Dr. Wagner’s solution.
If you have a sequencing program, import the audio fi le into your sequencer. Below it create a starting string template based on the string libraries you have. Record the solution and study it for its compositional value fi rst, not how the recording sounds.
The Workbook
Listen to the Workbook audio example numerous times before you attempt to score it. Many of the piano examples have a brisk tempo. It’s not just about the notes. You have to think about the bowings, too. After the example is fi rmly fi xed in your imagination, looking at the printed part, now begin working out the bowings and possible string combinations. Once you’ve done that, now begin working out your solutions on your String Ensemble sheets. Later, record your work.
consistency enables you to see the thinking behind the scoring of each example for each orchestral section.
For the Workbook—The Workbook examples are very challenging. They’re organized by the Reference Chart of Keyboard Idioms. You use these examples with all three sections of Professional Orchestration: A Practical Handbook: From Piano to Strings, From Piano to
Woodwinds, and From Piano to Orchestra.
Support Materials
You will get far more out of this book if you know your string devices and combinations. You can fi nd these meticulously organized for you in two volumes of the Professional
Orchestration Series. Volume 1: Solo Instruments and Instrumentation Notes covers all the string
basics and bowings. Volume 2A: Orchestrating the Melody Within the String Section covers all the combinations for the string section plus beginning divisi writing techniques.
Having gone through both the book and Workbook with the Pulitzer Prize nominated composer Albert Harris, I can cite by experience how much more you’ll get out of From
Piano to Strings by having these Professional Orchestration titles available on your library
shelf.
Dr. Wagner often talks about Homophonic writing and dance examples. For a complete discussion of this with many examples, you’ll want the second volume in our revision of Percy Goetschius’, The Homophonic Forms of Musical Composition.
How to Approach Formal MIDI Mockups
Initially, you’ve already created a 5-track template for the string section: Violins 1, Violins 2, Violas, Cellos and Basses. And you picked one string program only for each track. The next level is creating a formal MIDI mockup. As you listen to the initial version for the homework example you scored, mark your pencil score as to where articulation (bow) changes take place. Test and pick your programs. Then set up a new fi le in your sequencer, assign the appropriate articulations per track, and proceed with your mockup. Depending on your library, most likely there will be just one articulation per track. As a result, you’ll go from just fi ve basic tracks to potentially 15–30 or more, per MIDI mockup.
Once you get the feel for doing the MIDI mockup, the next step is learning to edit it for a professional sound. Andrew Blaney’s Master MIDI Mockup Course, available from Alexander Publishing, walks you through many techniques for strings, and the whole orchestra. You can also study many wonderful examples for each stringed instrument created by composer Jay Bacal for the Vienna Symphonic Library’s Vienna Instruments. These are available as a gift with many of the Alexander Publishing bundles for the
Professional Orchestration series.
Should you not have one of these bundles, please contact us and we’ll send you as a free gift, download links for Mr. Bacal’s examples which include MP3 and MIDI fi les for your personal study.
How Maurice Ravel Approached Transcription Work
In his own transcriptions (the technical name for this kind of work), Ravel started by fi rst orchestrating the piano work for strings, and then meticulously assigned lines and colors to the rest of the orchestra.
If necessary, he would add bars (as he did in Mother Goose Suite), or rewrite sections. However, when he orchestrated the music of others, he was far more conservative keeping closer to the original work with minimum changes as he did with Mussorgsky’s Pictures
At An Exhibition.
Ravel’s contemporary, Charles Koechlin, who orchestrated for both Debussy and Cole Porter, was more liberal in his approach, adding chord fi llers (additional chord tones) and sometimes melodic lines not in the original work.
Dr. Wagner tended to follow Koechlin’s approach.
Why You Should Start With Strings First
You start fi rst with From Piano to Strings for several reasons.From a commercial perspective, there’s more work for writers for string scoring. Work options include jingles, album work, commissions, game scoring, fi lm/TV writing, original web site work, works for string ensemble, concert commissions, and much more. A second reason is to teach you that there’s no such thing as the perfect solution. Some solutions are stronger than others, but there are many solutions. Develop as many as you can.
And then there’s the third reason, the reality of the marketplace in the early Twenty First Century which is for the composer/arranger knowing how to do MIDI mockups. Every example in this book and in the Workbook challenge and push orchestral libraries to new levels of writing demand. We take note of these concerns where appropriate.
Give It Time
If you work these examples thoroughly, it will take a semester to do them (14 weeks or so). Should you choose to record your solutions with sample libraries, add more time.
Working With the Reference Chart of Keyboard Idioms
The Chart is organized in a practical problem/solution format. You can go through and study each technique methodically, or dip in to see how to score a passage you may be wrestling with.
I. Broken Intervals 1. Broken octaves
2. Broken octaves with embellishments 3. Broken octaves combined with thirds 4. Broken sixths
5. Broken thirds
6. Broken sixths and thirds combined II. Broken Chords
1. Left-hand broken chords in close position 2. Left-hand broken chords in open position 3. Broken chords spaced for two hands
4. Broken chords in right-hand with implied melodic line 5. Broken chords with blocked melodic and rhythmic patterns 6. Arpeggiated chords
III. Melodic Lines & Figurations 1. Large melodic skips 2. Outlining a melodic line 3. Dividing a melodic line
4. Melodic lines combined with repeated note patterns; nonmetrical passages 5. Melodic settings: contrasts, comparative strengths, and repeated phrases IV. Implied Bass Parts
V. Single-Note, Interval & Chord Repetitions VI. Two- & Three-Part Music
1. Homophonic 2. Polyphonic 3. Style mixtures
VII. Spacing Problems in the Middle Register 1. Large harmonic gaps
2. Sustained notes, intervals, and chords VIII. Contrast Problems Conditioned by Dynamics IX. Voice Leading
X. Obbligato or Added Secondary Parts Arranged from Harmonic Progressions XI. Antiphonal Effects
XII. Tremolo Types
Conclusion
Now that you know how to get the most out of From Piano to Strings, turn the page to get started, and have a great time growing and enhancing your skills.
R
epeated intervals and chords are generally avoided in piano music, being unidiomatic and unpianistic. The composer of piano music approximates the effect of repetition by means of broken or arpeggiated intervals or chords. It’s a technical expedient playable at most dynamic levels and tempos. However, as repetitions of notes and intervals present no diffi culties for the string player, most broken intervals can be effi ciently transcribed as repeated intervals without losing their identity.1. Broken Octaves
a. Bass Register
Please see next page for example.
Example S-1
1
2
3
2
4
4
The broken octaves in Example S-1 have been arranged to offer some contrast between the starting piano and the following crescendo measures and can serve as a model for all subsequent intervals in this category. The bass part at (2) emphasizes the pulse of the repeated Cs in the cello part while the added quarter notes, starting in the fi fth measure, give greater strength and vitality to the crescendo of the last measures. The omission of the viola part (1) points up the fact that instruments should not be used “just to fi ll in.” Actually, this delayed entrance of the violas creates a new interest.
Attention should be given to the rearrangement of the directional lines of the second violin and viola parts at (3). This change compensates for the rising melodic line in the fi rst violin part and the necessity of having the progression in open position (4). Close positions can be resumed as the bass part rises in contrary motion to the melodic line, with the intervals to be played as double stops (non-divisi).
Additional Comments. At bar 5 in the example, the right hand plays four-part harmony, then in bar 6, goes to three-part harmony. In jazz writing for bar 5, you could divide the chord between Violins 1 and 2 using Beethoven’s voicings. Arrangers like Nelson Riddle or Robert Farnon would have given parts 1 and 3 to Violins 1 and parts 2 and 4 to Violins 2. A new inner line would then be created for the Violas.
With sampled strings, unless a library is used that has divisi parts that blend well with full sectional parts, bars 5 and 6 will sound heavy and unnatural.
b. Treble Register
The moderately slow tempo and soft dynamic in Example S-2 makes three versions of this broken octave possible—a literal transcription in addition to the two ways given here. In the faster tempos with stronger dynamics, the version with the repeated octave is advised. Attention is also directed here to the scoring of the duet phrase in the lower treble since it places the violas above the second violins. This has been done in order to take advantage of the viola’s unique tonal color in this register as compared to the violin. It’s an application of the fact made earlier that the high and low strings are more distinctive than the middle ones.
Additional Comments. Andante is a walking tempo. Beware of strict quantization in electronic scoring because of the triplets. Instead of divisi with Violins 1, Dr. Wagner’s solution could be applied to Violins 1 and 2, with Violas on the melody and Cellos on the harmony line.
2. Broken Octaves With Embellishments
For practical purposes the Beethoven excerpt on the facing page can be divided into two parts: The rising scale coupled with the embellished A in the bass and the broken embellished octaves in the treble starting in the fi fth measure. The repetition of melody with its changed tessitura is another salient feature. The embellished A (1) has been raised an octave so that the two-octave gap in the middle register is eliminated and a better balance achieved between the octave melody and the rising bass part. With the dynamic of
piano, the pizz. bass gives ample support to the arco cellos.
At (2) the grace note indicates the need of a sustained octave for the last four measures. The broken embellished octaves, starting at (3) in the divided violin parts, establish a pattern for this fi guration. The second violin part here maintains the broken-octave effect. However, if stronger dynamics are used, it would be advisable to repeat the fi gure literally in the lower octave. At (4) the last three notes of the viola part have been raised an octave as the low B is not playable and the original tessitura of these three notes, if not changed, would cause an undesirable spacing problem in the middle register.
Additional Comments. This is a very demanding excerpt for electronic strings requiring a genuine spiccato bowing (violins and violas), a good detache for the violas, and later Violins 1. Pitches marked for under a single bow need a legato program.
Example S-3
3
2
1
The setting of this excerpt at [a] is adequate at all speeds and dynamics but will obviously be non-legato. A legato effect in fast tempos is possible with all broken intervals with one part played as repeated notes provided the other part (the highest part whenever possible) is played legato [b]. For moderate-to-slow tempos, the settings given at [c] and [d] can be used with discretion for the medium-to-soft dynamics.
Additional Comments. Solutions [a] and [b] are challenges for repeated notes/round robin programs. Listen carefully to the piano recording. The articulations must not be too rigid and machine-like.
Example S-4
4. Broken Sixths
There are two major considerations involved in transcribing a series of legato broken sixths as here indicated by Beethoven. The continuous eight-note movement must be maintained—
legato—throughout the passage. The problem is to integrate these characteristics so that
they are idiomatically practicable.
Example S-5
2
This adaptation of broken sixths applies the principle of having one legato part combined with a second, non-legato part carrying out the rhythmic notation. It’s a setting possible at all tempos and dynamic levels.
At (1) the fi rst violins are divided in octaves to compensate for the stronger forte dynamic as well as to fi ll the need for greater sonority as the fi gure ascends to a higher range. The entrance of the bass part at (2) requires a three-octave spread to avoid the large gap in the middle register and to add emphasis value to this part.
Additional Comments. The Violins 2 part is a challenge for repeated notes/round robin programs. If repeated notes are ineffective, a new eighth note line can be created by having F go down to D, E down to C, etc.
5. Broken Thirds
There is very little difference between the method of arranging these intervals for strings and that given for sixths. The type of adaptation is determined by the style, tempo, and dynamic of the passage in question.
Similar treatment can, of course, be applied to broken intervals in the tenor and bass ranges as shown in Examples S-6 [c] and [d]. The versions given at Examples S-6 [a] and [c] are called for in fast tempos while those at Examples S-6 [b] and [d] are playable in most moderate and slow tempos. (See the second movement of Beethoven’s Sixth Symphony for
string parts in broken thirds.) The upper eighth note stems (cello) in Example S-6 [c] have an
alternative modifi cation which permits a legato effect for broken intervals at fast tempos.
Continuous legato thirds are possible only when arranged as indicated at (1). This contrary-motion principle, if applied to repeated chords (Fig. S-1b), allows the full chord to sound with legato phrasing.
Figure S-1a
Figure S-1b
6. Broken Sixths and Thirds Combined
Transcription of intervals in this category follows the same principles given for Examples S-4 and S-5. String transcriptions of all broken intervals should include complete interval representation along with basic rhythmic notation.
Additional Comments. For electronic scoring, version [a] requires considerable editing at this tempo to accommodate the long/short bowings so that the line breathes properly.
1. Left-Hand Broken Chords in Close Position
Broken Chords
Example S-8
1
In Example S-8, the second-violin part, derived from the harmony (1), fi lls the harmonic gap created by the rising melodic line. One moving part in eighth notes (viola) is suffi cient here for the piano dynamic. The repeated F’s in the cello supply the rhythmic pulse for each measure (2). This excerpt is an example of homophonic two-part writing expanded idiomatically for four voices. It has the texture of string quartet music.
Additional Comments. To enhance the motion, consider pizzicato on the Cello part.
Example S-9
Figure S-2
1
2
3
4
Example S-9 continues the study of close-position chords but with a different rhythmic pattern and a changed melodic problem in the treble. The octave melody is continued in the fi rst violins at (1). Fifths of triads serve well as starting and sustaining notes for common tones in chord progressions (second violins). The triplet fi gure in the viola part (3) derives from the top notes of the original piano triplet. Rearranged fi gurations of this kind should consist of the smallest possible intervals, always moving toward the nearest positions of succeeding chord tones. The cello bowing at (2) is recommended for extracted bass parts with similar notation. The bass pizz. (4) defi nes the rhythmic pulse of each measure. Triplet notations, as used here, should not be transcribed as in Fig. S-2 except in slow tempos. Additional Comments. For electronic scoring, a slight accent on the fi rst pitch of each triplet should be considered. The effect of two-against-three will otherwise be lost. Carefully listen to the recorded piano example.
In Example S-10 on the next page, broken close-position chords in low ranges present entirely new diffi culties not associated with those in the middle register. Chords in this category needs redistribution retaining the rhythmic element and tessitura of the lowest bass notes. These changes can be examined by comparing the parts (3, 4, 5) with the original chord positions. Added harmonic fi llers (1 and 2) are worthy of part interest whenever possible. Their design and movement are infl uenced by the context of the passage. (Musical context, as used here, includes all pertinent elements of style, texture, phrasing, and dynamics which can infl uence a presentation.) Intentional octave passages (6) should remain free of harmonizations.
Additional Comments. For electronic scoring, the challenge is in making the trills properly connect.
Please see next page for example.
Example S-10
1
2
3
4
5
6
The use of the damper pedal is signifi cant in planning the scoring of this excerpt, for it indicates the need of a maximum string sonority. The descending chromatic line (2) with the continued E combines with the divided cellos (3) to complete the chord structure, the
pizz. bass (4) giving the rhythmic pulsation which can be sustained slightly by means of vibrato. Transcription of the treble parts is literal (1). Enharmonics (viola part—fourth
measure) are often a desirable device for promoting better intonation with most string players, especially when Cb and Fb are involved.
Additional Comments. An additional, more colorful solution is to switch parts by putting the Violas on Violins 2 and moving Violins 2 to the Violas part.
Example S-11
2. Left-Hand Broken Chords in Open Position
1
2
3
Another setting of chords in this classifi cation (Example S-12) is given to show the addition of a second rhythmic part (1) which includes the outlining bass notes so essential to the stability of the harmonic progressions. The ranges and tonal strength of the melodic treble justify this addition.
Additional Comments. For electronic scoring, the divisi Violins 1 will require at least velocity editing so that the parts aren’t overbearing.
Example S-12
1
Example S-13
Further application of the principles used in the two previous examples can be applied to this progression by Brahms shown in Example S-13. This fi guration, broken into two parts, has the thirds continuously in the violas, while the cellos and bass combine to clarify the bass part.
3. Broken Chords Spaced for Two Hands
Example S-14
3
2
1
1
In Example S-14 on the previous page, the broken chords have two distinct points of interest. First, there is the necessity of establishing the continuous sixteenth-note motion for the fi rst three measures. The second concerns the two contrasting melodic lines which can be extracted from the fi rst and last notes (lows and highs) of the progression.
The given forte dynamic suggests tutti scoring with a maximum of sonority. The implied melodic lines in the treble and bass are spaced so that the double rhythmic parts in the second violins and violas can function freely. This scoring plan has cohesion within a prescribed range spread.
Although this example is concerned chiefl y with broken chords spaced for two hands, it’s also a good illustration of quasi-contrapuntal entrances (1) as well as of troublesome distributions of melodic and harmonic elements as found in the piano original (2). The entrances at (1) have been arranged to give an antiphonal effect, with the violin parts of the last four measures covering the range of the full melodic line (2). The close-position chords in the bass (3) have been opened to supply harmonic balance for the revised treble parts. In general, it should be established that numerous broken-chord progressions in this classifi cation won’t always be adaptable to string transcription, for pianistic music, at its best, is least practicable when transcribed for orchestra.
Additional Comments. For electronic scoring, neither the 16th nor 8th passages are triplets. The 16ths are in groups of six. The eighth notes starting in bar 4 of the example have a feel of three, but not triplets.
This two-part succession of broken chords for two hands is included in this discussion in an effort to show various ways of adaptation not casually obvious. It presents a challenge to the idea of “making something out of nothing” in a structural sense. These two parts in contrary motion clearly indicate an implied melodic line and harmonic progression. It can therefore be rearranged from either of these points of view depending upon its place in a full context.
On the facing page, the rhythmic second-violin part in Example S-15b acts as a central pivot for the literal fi rst violin and viola parts. The inclusion of the cello is for further sustained unity, and its use would be optional, depending upon the full context of the passage. In Example S-15c, the two outside parts outline the implied melodic design while the inside parts remain unchanged from the original version.
Example S-15b
Example S-15d
When this type of transcription is desired, the two parts can be assigned to any instruments capable of playing them in their entirety and without unnecessary range diffi culties. There is a unique example of this style of two-part writing in the middle of the Adagio section of Saint-Saen’s Symphony No.3. Here, the composer establishes a dialogue of two-part counterpoint similar to the Mozart excerpt previously discussed, which subsequently serves as a background on which the principal melodic material is superimposed.
These illustrations effectively demonstrate the premise that there can be several ways of orchestrating a given phrase or passage, each quite different from the other, but each quite possibly correct. The fi nal choice must, as always, be governed by the appropriateness of the scoring within a specifi c musical context.
4. Broken Chords in Right-Hand With Implied Melodic Line
As shown on the following two pages, a string adaptation of this typical example of Mozartian pianistic music entails considerable readjustment to insure adequate representation of its salient features. Careful examination of the triplet fi guration reveals an independent melodic line which mast be integrated with the isolated two-note phrases occurring in the measures with the cross-hand parts. Other notes within the triplet movement are good material for secondary parts in the treble. The real problem lies in maintaining idiomatically a legato effect for the middle strings without resorting to out-of-proportion technical diffi culties. The version given here seeks to arrive at the general legato effect through the use of one or two sustained parts paired with repeated notes.
Additional Comments. The melody line in Violins 1 is derived by playing the arpeggiated triplets as block chords. Viewed this way, it becomes readily apparent how the Violins 2 part was created.
Please see next page for example.
5. Broken Chords With Blocked Melodic and Rhythmic Patterns
Example S-17
1
The setting of this vigorous Beethoven passage follows the basic method used for Example S-16, though not neglecting differences of dynamics and ranges. Its spacing and style are affected by the stretto (overlapping or piling up of short bits of thematic material), the embellished D pedal point and the general legato phrasing in the fi rst eight measures. Try, when possible, to reduce music in this category to four-part structure. By doing this, all voice lines fall into natural ranges which otherwise might seem obscure. In this example, the application of this method automatically necessitates raising the embellished pedal point an octave (1) so as to facilitate full chord representation. The bass part (2), with its unison pizz.-arco, emphasizes the cello as being the true bass instrument of the string section, not the contrabasses, as might be imagined.
Note:
In general, it’s advisable not to write single-line bass parts for the contrabasses without unison or doubling of some kind. The bowing for all the strings here has been arranged to produce an accumulative effect of sonority and tension as indicated by the stretto.
Although this example is primarily concerned with the disposition of broken chords, it also covers spacing for the close-position chords in the bass part. The fortissimo dynamic requires a maximum of sonority which, in this case, can be aided by double stopping for the violas and cellos.
6. Arpeggiated Chords
As shown in Example S-19 on the facing page, string arrangements of arpeggiated chords differ from their pianistic counterparts in one important respect; it’s a technicality to which the non-string player must pay particular attention. Piano chords in this category usually have the repetitions of full chord spreads arranged so that no notes are repeated successively, either within the chord limits or in its repetitions. Pianistic technique allows interval skips up to an octave, downward or upward, for repetitions but not repeated notes of the same pitch.
However, string-arpeggiated chords are idiomatic only when repeated notes of the same
pitch occur as starting notes for each change of bow. This is a technical expedient which
cannot be ignored or overlooked.
Additional Comments. Effective arpeggiated chords are also produced using either triple stops or quadruple stops. See Professional Orchestration Volume 1: Solo Instruments and
Instrumentation Notes for a complete list per stringed instrument.
1. Large Melodic Skips
Large melodic skips in all forms and sizes are natural characteristics of music for keyboard instruments where no intonation diffi culties exist. Unfortunately, string players must
make their own pitch, which automatically raises the spectre of possible faulty intonation,
especially for rapid passages with non-diatonic large intervals. Passages containing questionable interval patterns in this category may frequently be revised idiomatically for strings by dividing them into two parts arranged to relieve awkward skips, yet retaining the full fl avor of the original.
The theme in Example S-20 is called a compound line because two melodic thoughts are built into it. Variations a-d are created with this in mind.
Melodic Lines & Figurations
Example S-20a has the essentials of the piano excerpt in an advisable setting that retains all the features of the original: phrasing, off-beat accents, and basic one-voice texture. It’s playable at all speeds and dynamic levels.
If played non-legato, this Weber excerpt has two additional settings which change its texture but add sonority and rhythmic drive. Both are further illustrations of the diversifi cation possible from limited source material.
Example S-20b
Note:
In moderate-to-slow tempos, the original fi guration could be played literally, with one slight change which utilizes the repeated note plan for bow changes as in Example S-20b.
Example S-21 combines broken chords with broken octaves to be played fortissimo. This dynamic can be best achieved by dividing this fi guration into two parts so that a maximum of speed and sonority can be maintained.
Here, the pianistic sequence is decidedly awkward for strings and requires divisions that keep the parts within limited ranges, thereby preventing undue shifting of positions. In this connection, it’s advisable to maintain rhythmic patterns once established.
Example S-20d
In the fi nal analysis, all revisions of melodic lines with large skips must be determined by the extenuating provisions of tempo and dynamic level. Certainly, it’s far more preferable to have idiomatic string writing than to needlessly force string players into fi gurations and phrases which belong under the fi ngers of a pianist.
Although professional violinists would have no major intonation diffi culties with a literal playing of this melody, players with less technical skill might experience uncertainties with intonation. For that reason, division of the melody, as given, is desirable if the treble part is to sound natural and unforced.
Please see next page for example.
2. Outlining a Melodic Line
The study made of the previous classifi cation is a good prerequisite for outlining a melodic line, since both subjects are workable by much the same technique. Most examples in this category combine a rhythmic fi guration with an implied melodic line. By isolating these elements, two distinct and independent parts can be formed. These separate parts can be determined by applying the principles of harmonic analysis. Once the melody in most elemental form is established, its rhythmic counterpart can be adjusted to fi t the rhythmic representation of the original.
Example S-24
Example S-25
Example S-26
Example S-27
1
3. Dividing a Melodic Line
Subject matter in this classifi cation follows rather closely along the lines established for the previous two Reference Chart entries. The purpose here is to not only revise melodies with possible large intervals, but to intentionally develop a two-voice structure which will add interest and variety to otherwise static harmonic fi llers. In Example S-28 this theory is practiced, resulting in a dialogue for the violins which retains the salient features of the original piano theme.
Example S-28
The divided melodic line for the second violin in Example S-28 eliminates the middle-gap tonal voids between the original treble and tenor parts and makes a smooth transition to the harmonic fi ller at (1).
Example S-28
4. Melodic Lines Combined With Repeated Note Patterns
Example S-29
1
3
Whenever melodic lines are combined with repeated note patterns, it’s necessary to separate these elements according to their respective functional uses. Frequent dislocations of normal spacing can be expected in this category, resulting from purely keyboard considerations. Your job, as orchestrator, is to achieve maximum sonority from a revised structure that places each string part in its most advantageous playing position.
The fi rst step in this process is to insure the continuous repetition of the rhythmic pattern, spaced to allow unhampered representation of each entrance as it occurs. For this reason, the viola part (1) has been raised an octave and, in this tessitura, has clarity and coherence plus avoiding subsequent middle-register harmonic voids. Also, rapid notes in very low ranges are never clear, especially when two voices are set in the same timbre, for they always result in a meaningless rumble of sound rather than articulate note pitches. A distinction of difference can be made in this connection. If one moving part (cello) is combined with one stationary part (bass) there’s less chance of thickness in these parts (2). The octave double stop here (3) adds tonal strength for the cadence. You should also study the fi rst measure with its special adjustments due to the missing F# in the second violins.
Nonmetrical Passages. Uneven, cadenza-like groupings of notes that can’t be metrically divided are best transcribed for a solo instrument, since they’re impractical in any other form (4).
In the example on the facing page, the rhythmic treble part in Example S-30 is a typical pianistic device which is not literally applicable to strings, except in very slow tempos and dance forms which have note pulsation with afterbeats. Its objective is to “simulate” the sound of one or two guitars. The continuity of the rhythmic pattern is maintained in the second violins and violas, while the interchange of pizz. in the fi rst violins and cellos brightens up the passage considerably. Note the continuance of the viola part at (1).
Example S-30
5. Melodic Settings: Contrasts, Comparative Strengths
and Repeated Phrases
Finding the proper setting for a melody in orchestration is a matter of prime importance. When the leading melodic line in any passage can be set off clearly from its surrounding counterparts (rhythmic fi gurations, sustained harmony parts, secondary counterpoints, and obbligatos), the way has been cleared to secure the fi rst element of balance. A number of factors contribute to the realization of this distinguishing quality.
a. Contrast. The element of contrast is vital to all scoring if it’s to be alive. A melody which remains endlessly in the same range and timbre is apt to become a dead melody.
b. Tonal Strengths. The orchestrator’s task is to provide clarity of defi nition in all parts. This element of balance can be attained through an understanding of comparative instrumental strengths. There is considerable variety in the tonal strengths of string instruments as a result of inherent differences in their playing ranges. The highest strings in each instance have far greater tonal strength than the two middle strings. On the other hand, the lowest strings have a rich, sonorous quality which carries well.
c. Spacing. Every important phrase needs freedom of movement. To accomplish this, all component parts require spacings that allow defi nition while recognizing the characteristic timbre of each instrument and its strong and weak playing ranges.
d. Repeated Melodic Phrases. Phrases in this category can acquire extra tonal interest through the contrast of timbres and playing tessituras. The orchestrator can extend this phase of scoring with short, antiphonal canonic imitations.
A
ll the subject matter in Chapter 3 is pertinent to implied bass parts. Actually, the methods used for the extraction and arrangement of two parts from a single voice line in either the treble or bass registers remain unchanged. It’s the line of direction which changes. In working with this problem in the treble range, the implied melody was always apparent from combinations of the highest notes. Extracting implied bass parts reverses this directional process, for here the lowest bass notes in a single voice line usually become the ones which can constitute an independent bass part. Voice lines adaptable to this treatment frequently appear as broken chords and at other times as mixed tenor-bass parts.When these phrases occur, the lowest notes usually have frequent repetitions thus establishing implied bass parts.
Whether or not to use implied bass parts can be decided only after the following questions have been analyzed and answered: (1) What is the texture of the music? (2) In what context does the passage occur? (3) Would the addition of an implied bass part help or hinder a phrase which might be played as one voice and by one instrument? (4) Should an added bass part remain in its original tessitura or should it be lowered an octave to give support to the harmonic structure? (5) Will the division of a single voice line upset the balance and natural fl ow of the original part? These are the questions that the orchestrator must answer
Example S-31a
Additional Comments. The divided Violins 2 parts could also be marked for double stops to be of equal strength to Violins 1.
F
urther study of this classifi cation is concerned only with the variety of ways in that repeated notes in any form can occur in keyboard music and their possible adaptations for strings.1. Repeated Notes — Without Rests
Single-Note, Interval
& Chord Repetitions
Additional Comments. For electronic scoring, care should be taken so that the cello part stands out and isn’t dominated by the upper strings.
2. Repeated Notes — With Rests
Additional Comments. Electronically, with quantizing, a more literal rendering of this example is possible by keeping the melody with Violins 1, putting the top two pitches of the afterbeat accompaniment with Violins 2, and the bottom pitch with the Violas. Or, since the bottom pitch of the afterbeat accompaniment is G, and G is already in the melody, remove the G, and split the afterbeat accompaniment top two pitches between Violins 2 and Violas. Care should be taken in which bowings are selected. Spiccato would be a good choice.
3. Repeated Intervals as Afterbeats
Occasionally, passages occur in piano music with divided repeated-note patterns alternating between the two hands. This pianistic device is variable in both structure and dynamic levels. As literal transcription is impractical, the best approach to orchestral adaption is by reducing the full passage to its most elementary rhythmic plan. From this reduction, new idiomatic dispositions can be made of the melodic and harmonic elements, free of pianistic implications.
Example S-34
Additional Comments. While repeated notes can be used here, a more literal rendering can also be scored.
Example S-35
The objective in scoring passages similar to Example S-36 must be to arrange proper representation of both the rhythmic fi gures and harmonic parts when they occur. Often these elements can be combined as shown at (1). Note how the voice lines are continued at (2) and not dropped an octave as in the original at (3). The rhythmic-harmonic plan follows
Example S-36
Figure S-5
1
2
Example S-37
1
2
Example S-37 on the preceding page shows an enharmonic for the viola at (2) since the B below is not on the instrument. The repeated notes at (1) are as indicated in Fig. S-5.
M
usic can be stylistically divided into two categories—homophonic and polyphonic, each in turn having a direct bearing on its respective texture. These textures present certain specifi c problems in orchestration. They are soluble only through an evaluation of the musical intentions of the composer in the realms of compositional techniques and structural styles. Your major concern in scoring music in this category should be governed by accepted practices covering the place of harmony in these two distinctly different styles. Two- and three-part passages are standard textures for much keyboard music. They are, however, less general in orchestral music and should therefore be examined in detail for their full implications.1. Homophonic
Homophonic music can best be described as a single melody with a harmonic accompaniment. Neither the number of parts nor their harmonic complexity alters this defi nition. With it there is an absence of formalized counterpoint, although good voice leading can be present.
Music in this category can frequently benefi t from the addition of harmonic fi llers, especially in middle registers. However, their inclusion should not alter melodic or bass ranges.
This next excerpt, on the facing page, is a mixture of two- and three-part writing in the homophonic style. The second violin and viola fi llers follow the established rhythmic designs of the treble and bass, which is desirable in maintaining continuity. The pizzicato bass part gives the right support without being too heavy.
