Jump to content

Orchestration: PART 1 (woodwinds) discussion


Recommended Posts

Guest QcCowboy
Sorry, i didnt know contrabasson transpose an 8va lower. I've corrected this and also add a F dynamic. Im taking as a guide the harmonic's scale, doing larger gaps in the bass part, closer in the upper part. I would like to know if this is ok. Whata bout the clarinet in this attempt? Too far?? thanks!

hope you're aware the piccolo also transposes, right?

your chord is rather bottom-heavy and "pungent" because of it.

I would avoid the bassons in 3rds. If what you are loking for is that "harmonic series" effect, then the bassoons should not be a 3rd apart in that register.

The oboes are in their strongest most pungent register, while the two flutes are in a relatively weak range. The flutes will more than likely be overpowered by the strong reeds below them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 209
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

oooppss....sorry for the piccolo i wont forget it. I think this attempt is much better, i can feel more union between instruments. What about basson 1 doubling in unison contrabasson?

Ex3chord(3).pdf

PDF
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest QcCowboy

I think generally (and it's a VERY general guideline) I would avoid pure woodwind chords where double-reed instruments double each other.

It can certainly be used to good effect. So it's not because it's anything "absolute". however, the tone of the double-reeds doesn't lend itself well to unison doubling with other double-reeds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks for the advice. I remove one of the bassons and also im sending my excercise 4.

Ex3chord(3).pdf

EX4WW.pdf

PDF
Link to post
Share on other sites

I corrected this according to your critique and removed all offending mistakes! (I hope)

Orchestration - Woodwinds 4.pdf

PDF
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest QcCowboy
I corrected this according to your critique and removed all offending mistakes! (I hope)

good stuff. my only concern might be the very sudden change in density at measure 10 where you remove a flute AND a clarinet.

you might have continued the clarinet another measure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fixed. Shall I move on to the remaining exercises now?

Orchestration - Woodwinds 4.pdf

PDF
Link to post
Share on other sites

When doing these excersices i came up with a couple of questions. Most important is this issue:

When I have an FF dyanmic i require to have the orchestration close togeter as much as i can, this implies doubling and doubling of active tones like the sensible (idk how this is in english), in the case i have an FF over a dominant chord for example. Is this ok???

I dont know if im posting in the correct forum, but to give continuity to this lesson, also i already sent my excercise No. 4 a couple of replys up.:whistling:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest QcCowboy

(Sensible = "leading tone" in english)

Don't think in terms of 4-part harmony, where single doublings of chord tones are a serious preoccupation.

Here we are dealing with larger textures.

If you are considering unison, octave, and double-octave doublings, then any 4-part issues should already have been dealt with.

In other words, your music, reduced to its 3 or 4 componant voices, should ahve already dealt with any "doubling" issues. Now that you are setting it for a full orchestra you are facing new types of concerns, such as density, and register.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...