Luis Hernández

@danishali903 "...when Debussy orchestrated, he didn’t care about the number of instruments – it was all in the service of colour." OK, I think I didn’t express myself very well on this point. What I meant was that it’s not unusual for him to use a large number of musicians, precisely, as you say, to experiment with all those timbres and ranges. When you look at the instrumentation he uses in some of these orchestral pieces, you tend to think it’s going to sound ‘grand’ in the style of Mahler or something like that. But of course, he does it to create all those wonderful atmospheres. As for the harmonics played with a 5th touch, I agree, and that’s something I’ll bear in mind (i.e. using the 4th artificial harmonics). Cheers.

Hello It has a very classical sound. First of all, I find it strange that there are no cellos. Or is it the double bass line that’s written an octave higher? Apart from that, it all sounds rather ‘homophonic’ to me; in other words, although there’s a certain degree of counterpoint here and there, the melody is played on all the instruments for much of the time, either doubled or in octaves. Given that the rhythmic motif appears constantly, it does end up sounding a bit monotonous. I think that in a classical orchestration of this kind, there need to be some basic orchestral layers: a bass line (usually reinforced), a purer melodic line—not overwhelmed by too many instruments at once—and harmonic support. And then you can add counter-melodies, transitions, ‘riffs’ and ornamentation. All of this serves to emphasise the climactic moments.

Hello The score is just as terrifying as the music. The former in a downward sense, the latter in an upward sense. The music fulfils its purpose well.

Hi @danishali903 I appreciate your comments and will reply to a few in case anyone’s interested I don’t usually write expression slurs (legato) on the strings, except for very short groups of notes. Instead, if I want to do this, I specify ‘legato’ (as an articulation, which the software I use does recognise) and hide the text. Bear in mind that this is an exercise and that the economy of instrumentalists/instruments has not been the priority, although it was not intended to be used indiscriminately either. That is why there is a piccolo alongside the flute and the alto flute, because that line in bar 18 requires three instruments from the same family. The same applies to the four horns and the tuba. Another of the ideas is that, as far as possible, the families should sound harmonically complete, as in the chord in bar 9. As for the harmonics, they have all been checked and are feasible, though I may have made a mistake. I’ve had another look at the ones you mention and they’re fine. In this regard, I recommend this webpage, which lists all the natural and artificial harmonics that can be played (and those that are best avoided). https://conductit.eu/study-room/rehearsal/rehearsal-4/4-6-string-harmonics/ When it comes to orchestration, there are endless possibilities. Probably, by assigning a few lines to other instruments, I could have done without the piccolo or one of the two horns… But then again, let’s be realistic: when Debussy orchestrated, he didn’t care about the number of instruments – it was all in the service of colour. Best. Addendum The issue of legato slurs in the strings is something I’m going to consider writing about (always bearing in mind what they might do, as I understand it). It’s a more specific point. In fact, as I have a few final amendments to make to this orchestration, I’m going to include that point. Thank you. I’m still at 5% in my orchestration skills.

@Alex Weidmann @BlackkBeethoven Thank you for listening and commenting. Yes, virtual instruments do what they can, and well, I prefer to focus on the composition rather than on post-production with a DAW and so on. That’s why I use an editor (Dorico) with NotePerformer. There are indeed orchestral versions of Debussy’s preludes. Some are very famous, such as the arrangements by Colin Matthews or Stokowski. I must say I didn’t listen to them when I was working on my modest version. In fact, I didn’t even know they existed until I started exploring this piece. It’s been an interesting challenge because of the nature of the piece – so colourful, yet harmonically free and daring at the same time. It’s been a slow process, taking about two months, as I was working under the supervision (on a weekly basis) of a composer and teacher. I’m in a small group (four people) learning orchestration with him, and it’s fantastic… We usually work on shorter excerpts from pieces, but this one was the full work. In fact, there have been some subsequent modifications and improvements, but never mind. Soon we’ll be moving on to orchestrating pieces we’ve composed ourselves; we’ll see how it goes…

Hello It sounds brilliant to me. A good balance of textures, not always crammed full of all the vocals – I like that. The organ sound is a bit odd because of the attack-release or whatever, but then again, it’s such a massive instrument that it’s spot on. Well done.

Hello The important thing: a massive piece of work... Very interesting, it really draws me in, and it’s very well presented; the sound is brilliant. I must admit that variations aren’t really my favourite genre, but then again, when there’s quality, there’s quality. One thing I particularly liked is that, although some of the variations are very short, the transitions between them are, on the whole, very well executed. That gives it continuity, within the nature of the genre: variation. I’ll just mention a couple of things: One is a matter of personal taste: all those fast sections – vivace, presto, prestissimo, etc. – tire me out a bit. But as I say, that’s subjective. And another thing – this I do find a bit odd. Bars 20 and 24 in the first variation… My ears and brain weren’t prepared for that. Mind you, I’m no stranger to dissonance, but it has to be in context. Those extremely strong minor second dissonances – there aren’t any more powerful ones in the entire consonant tonal environment – sound like a mistake. If they’d been set up, if they were repeated… but like this, so suddenly and in isolation… You could have used other, more subtle dissonances here and there… Yes, we sometimes think that in music ‘anything goes’, but well, in moderation. Later on there are sections that include dissonances, but they’re well contextualised. Congratulations on your work.

Let me add something, even though it goes beyond the specific work in question; by chance, I came across an example just today. This is part of the first page of E. Elgar’s Concerto for Violin and Orchestra. A dense piece… Note that for the contrabassoon and the tuba it says ‘ad lib’ (ad libitum). This does not mean that these instruments should ‘play whatever they like’. It means this: -Optional instruments: The contrabassoon and tuba may be omitted. -Lack of players: If the orchestra does not have them, the piece is performed as normal. -Conductor’s decision: The conductor decides whether to include these instruments. This is what I was referring to earlier. Best regards.

Good luck! That's a very good one. I’ve been thinking about the comment on the role of the contrabassoon here, following on from what’s already been said. I understand that you’d like to use the woodwinds as a bass line in those sections; that’s simply a matter of timbre and so on. Although I’m a firm believer in absolute freedom when it comes to composing, it’s true that I also bear in mind certain general principles. One is the ‘economy’ of instruments. Although I’ll never have a symphony orchestra or anything of the sort at my disposal, I do like to write as realistically as I can. That’s why, if the parts for one instrument can be played by another, I don’t use it. The other principle is to double the bass (an octave up or down), and I notice you do this. This is something I was taught very early on. And there’s a reason for it: the low register is the least audible to our ears. There are exceptions, of course: when the orchestral texture is very light, it isn’t necessary. In this piece, most of the notes for the contrabassoon can be played by the bassoon. Let’s say up to the low C (B flat, actually). To put it another way, I might have used the bassoon for that contrabassoon line and supported it on the lowest notes with the tuba or the double bass. There are sections of the contrabassoon part that can be taken over by bassoon 2, for example in bars 22 and 24. It’s true that the bassoons are in part 2, but it isn’t necessary (with those dynamics – diinuendo and ppp). Well, anyway, that’s just my opinion, based partly on how I learnt it. I was taught that instruments such as the contrabassoon, the bass clarinet, and even higher-pitched ones like the piccolo, were there for when the standard instruments couldn’t play the parts. Sometimes I’ve been guilty of wanting to be too literal when transposing a piano piece for the orchestra. But I’ve also realised that there are times when you have to take certain liberties or make changes to adapt the sound to the orchestra. Best regards.

A lovely, expressive little piece. It reminds me of those solo instrumental phrases that Messiaen would suddenly write into his works. I think it makes excellent use of the oboe’s most effective range, bringing out the expression in some of the high and low notes as well. As for the notation, well, it depends on how you look at it or interpret it. In my view, the piece is in D flat major. There are a few moments where it strays from the key (bars 12 and 13, and also 20 and 21) only to return immediately. There are indeed many passing or incidental notes. Even though a piece is for a solo instrument, the harmony is implicit (whether tonal or otherwise). It would be interesting to harmonise this.

It’s a beautiful piece and your version is fantastic. It’s restrained and balanced, without any superfluous filler that ultimately makes it sound muddy and indistinct. And it sounds absolutely lovely. You’ve done a great job of separating the different voices implicit in the keyboard version, and that voice leading accounts for a large part of the orchestration’s success. In my opinion. I think the brass section is good, as it’s handled delicately and adds that touch of colour. I also really like the English horn, though I do tend to hear it more in solo passages than in the ensemble because it has such a distinctive timbre. Orchestrating a fugue is a bit different; I did one recently (by Bach). And well, I think with these styles you have to be very faithful to the original and add very little (in terms of melody or harmonies). And keep the parts very well separated. In this case, there’s an added difficulty because, although it’s a Baroque-style fugue, it’s clearly Romantic, meaning that, as well as the horizontal voices, Franck allows himself to add chords and thicken the textures as he pleases. A challenge that can be very rewarding.

Canope transposed pitch.pdfCanope transposed pitch.pdfThis is a piece that I consider to be special. I have spent weeks working on it bit by bit, making one decision after another. It is Prelude No. 10 from Debussy’s Second Book, entitled ‘Canope’. A canope is the vessel in which the remains of mummies were stored in ancient Egypt; these were sealed with small sculptures of Anubis’s head. The piano piece is spectacular, with harmonies that defy all logic within the tonal world. I’m providing the score in concert pitch and in transposed pitch. Canope.mp3 Canope concert pitch.pdf Canope transposed pitch.pdf Link to the piano original version:

Wow, this sounds truly symphonic. I really liked it. To be honest, the whole business of bands is a bit of a mystery. Where I live, there are loads of them – they’re street bands… marching bands? What stands out here is that there are loads of clarinets. They’re bands designed to accompany parades and play ‘pasodoble’-style music and the like. I suppose there are lots of different set-ups.

@Alex Weidmann Thank you for listening. Yes, the piano version is very different – more ‘intimate’, perhaps? – despite that crescendo. I was in no doubt that the brass section was meant for that part... When I orchestrate something that already exists (for piano, generally speaking), I have two options: 1) to be as faithful as possible, which in some cases is almost essential, 2) to recreate the piece for the orchestra. In this case, it usually turns out quite differently.

Hello, This modified version flows very naturally and feels more balanced. I also like the fact that the transitions between sections are smooth.