@hermitage59 said:

BW,
2 Parts is a good start, don't knock it or think you're not keeping up.

I wrote 8 WHOLE bars with a Cello and Viola last night! Then I tried adding the Violins and I TOTALLY FAILED!! HA. No, I will keep trying. This is actually a great exercise. It's quite humbling because for a second I thought I was getting good with Opus 1, and maybe I was, but I think I need to concentrate on this for a little while before going back to bigger orchestras. It seems pretty invaluable.

-BW

What you could try Horse, is instead of doing it right out with the solo string choir, doing it with just 4 part piano first - that was maybe already suggested. If it sounds good that way, then maybe you could then start to substitute each individual piano part with Cello, Viola and the 2 Violins.

One way to maybe get started without getting way ahead of ourselves here - is to use the cello and viola as a sort of driving engine. I remember years ago, sitting in on a quartet and the judge saying afterwards how well the cello knitted everything together. Of course, he was being constructive and well meaning - in actual fact it was a dreadful racket, but that's of no matter. I personally feel that writing a dreadful racket every now and again has great benefits and can do the world of good. But anyway........

Then make statements with a violin - sort of like a question - and then answer that statement with the second violin. Kind of like they're having a conversation. Sometimes it sounds like 2 people talking at once when listening to string quartets - but there again, I don't listen to half as much music as I should do. [H]

I thought about writing it with piano first, and I may end up doing that, but I was too excited to start my first quartet, I needed to actually hear the instruments.

I think I will spend the day listening to some of the greats and try to rip them off the best I can. Which is what all great composers do, right? [[;)]]

-BW

@Horse Opera said:

I think I will spend the day listening to some of the greats and try to rip them off the best I can. Which is what all great composers do, right? [[;)]]

-BW

Yes - absolutely!

"HB didn't write one, did he?

He didn't play the piano either.

And he's still considered one of the great orchestrators - what a hero!!! "
- JohnA

That's true, though Berlioz was a very unusual person. He's also considered one of the major revolutionaries in the whole history of music, since his Symphonie Fantastique completely altered the course of the symphony's development. He also once conducted a concert with 1000 performers, using a sword as a baton. That's MY kind of conductor! Forget these limpwristed little wimps today. Has anyone read his Memoirs? That is one of the most entertaining books on music ever.

Alex’s great comments got me thinking about what might help you and others in your shoes. Two part soprano and bass writing is really a basic key to good part writing. As you've found out, just those two parts will generally define a composition, so it runs to reason that when you are harmonizing a melody (soprano), the next thing you would do is write the bass line making sure it is consistent with "the rules:"

Motion

In considering linear movement between two parts, voices can move together in the same general direction (parallel motion), in different directions (contrary motion), and one part moving while the other stays or repeats the same note (oblique motion).

You will rarely run into trouble writing contrary and oblique motions. You might frequently want to write in parallel motion though, but will need to understand what to watch out for. It’s important to note that parallel motion refers to any two notes moving in the same general direction, not just two of the same interval. For example, c and g (fifth) moving up to d and b (sixth), or consecutively to d and a (fifth) are both parallel movements, the later type being an important distinction when the consecutive intervals are a fifth, octave, or unison, which should all be avoided.

Spacing

You will rarely get into much trouble writing in two parts, soprano and bass, because the voices are far enough apart in register not to conflict. When adding alto and tenor parts however, it will be important to keep track of how far apart the notes are spaced. While some suggest that there should be no more than an octave distance between any two adjacent upper parts (soprano and alto, or alto and tenor), you will probably have better results limiting that distance to a sixth. Because of acoustical principals, some suggest that any distance is okay between the tenor and bass voices, but you may be happier with your results if you keep the distance no greater than an octave.

Voice Leading

The next step is to combine the concepts of motion and spacing into how all these voices move in time, sometimes called voice leading. A good goal is to write lines which when taken by themselves show both interest and independence. Generally the upper voices will move mostly by steps and an occasional small skip, while the bass line will reflect more frequent and wider skips. The important thing to note here is that the voices shouldn’t cross each other. It’s hard to describe without notation, but say the bass is on c and the tenor is a fifth above at g. if the tenor moves up a step to a, and the bass jumps up an octave to c, that’s a voice crossing problem (where if the bass went no higher than the tenor’s a, everything is cool). It’s also important to note that ALL the rules apply to ALL the partsjust because there aren’t parallel fifths between the alto and tenor lines doesn’t mean that they’re okay between the soprano and tenor, for example (they’re just harder to catch sometimes).

As all the musical examples above are great, your goal is part continuity over time. It does no good to write great parts for two bars only to have to break the rules in the third to get out of a jam. Students often have trouble getting this continuity down when referring to longer pieces, so nearly everyone learning this stuff “gets” to go through the Bach chorales as Dave suggested above. They will not only teach continuity, but Bach remained creatively faithful to the rules so you can depend upon them. If you don’t want to buy the book, just go to the library (or maybe search the internet) and photocopy a few to get started. Copy the choral melody to whatever you use for notation and then don’t look at Bach’s harmonization until you have finished with your own. Then go back and compare the two and voila - you will be amazed at what you learn!

Alan Belkin, who teaches composition at Montreal has some great stuff on his website. A short easy read, but packed full of the kind of things no composer regardless of ability should neglect to take the time to look over. Here’s a link to his notes on harmony (be sure to explore his other stuff, counterpoint, orchestration, etc., too):

http://www.musique.umontreal.ca:16080/personnel/Belkin/bk.H/harm.PDF

@Horse Opera said:

I wrote 8 WHOLE bars with a Cello and Viola last night! Then I tried adding the Violins and I TOTALLY FAILED!!

I think you totally succeded but perhaps not the way you expected. The task was made more difficult by starting it seems with supporting voices and trying to add the melody later. If you try starting with the melody and then adding the bass line, what you need to do with the alto and tenor will be clearer (as will likely be your perception of success). If on the other hand, the viola had the melody, you will make life easier early on by working through some hamonizations with the melody in the soprano; satb = vn 1, vn 2, va, vc, if a string quartet or as Paul points out sometimes just a whole lot easier at the keyboard. Keep up the good work and attitude!

BW,
That's the spirit. And don't feel humiliated by failure. Do you really think the great composers didn't write crap when they started?

Here's another really useful exercise i proudly failed at many times before it started to come together.

3/4 time at the tempo of a stately waltz. (Not too quick.)

Cello in the bass. 2nd violin stuck permanently on G4 dotted minims.
Viola playing off beats, and here's the exercise. You can only write one note for the viola, not doubled in any way. And your range is restricted to the distance between the cello note and G4. Each bar represents a chord. First bar G, second bar C and so on alternating between the two.
Important. Try to vary the note the viola plays for the same chord each time it occurs. E.g. First chord (G) the viola plays D offbeats. What does it sound like? Fairly straight. You need this straight sound to give more complex chords that follow their 'surprise factor.' Next chord (C) Violas play offbeat E4's. You have a third between the viola and the 2nd violin, and the potential for a sixth if you give the cello a G3 in the bass. (Remember the post about inversions). What does it sound like? It's the tonic chord (C) but it's unfinished because you don't have the C in the bass. Even more important, you've doubled the G in the 2nd violins and the octave sounds weak. (You are after all, actually playing 2 notes, the viola E, and the Cello and 2nd violin G.) OK. So try different notes in the cello and viola, remembering the basic chord structure, and keep the 2nd violin on a G4 throughout.
It's a great exercise because you only have two notes to give the 'impression' of a complete chord against the G4 of the 2nd violins. And, you'll hear the individual tonal characteristics of each instrument whilst experiementing. Important to retain this information, because too many of today's film scores sound 'Grey', because so much of it is everything lumped together in great towering blocks of harmony, each instrument cancelling out the tonal characteristic of another.

Try this, it's actually quite fun as a challenge, because the viola gives you the key to how high or low you should write for it, and with 1st violins generally more occupied with melody or high notes (Very general statement), the 2nd violin, Viola, and Cello represent more of a 'chord machine'. Used well together, you get a full sound without having to use everything in the orchestra all the time. (BIG mistake)
Take notes of which combination works and sounds best, including the transitition from one chord to another. e.g. Cello playing a G3 bass (G chord), viola playing a D4. Next chord, Viola on C4 and Cello on E3. Interesting, unfinished sound.

I'll try and dredge up some more from the mental soundbank later.


Regards,

Alex.

BW,

After you've had a go at the Waltz exercise with just two chords, you may be ready for something a little more challenging.

Same rules with the following exception, 2nd violin to follow the progression with no more than one step taken away from the previous note. e.g. G-G-A-G-F...etc.

Here's a progression, remembering to keep the cello on bass, and the viola playing off beats. (2 and 3)

C-G-G-C-F-D-G-G-C-G-G-C-Dminor-G-C-C

I will introduce another chord here, that of the 7th. In the above example the G chord would sound fairly straight in repetition. The flat, or dominant 7th of G is F, so the chord represented as four notes from the bottom up would be:
G B D F

When you get to this chord in your progression try using the F in the viola. It will sit close to the continued G dotted minim being played by the 2nd violins, but the interval between F and G is a Major second, and as the 7th of a chord is strong 'sound', the interval is to a very general extent acceptable in this context.

At this stage and at this level you also have the opportunity to hear some of those amazing VSL articulations. Try the cello pizzicato, and the viola legato. Then the other way round. Which one sounds 'better'? How about the cello playing legato, and the viola playing tremolo. There are many variations, and if you experiement at this stage with the type of sound combinations that work or don't, you also start to build that library in your head as an orchestrator, full of practical knowledge and ideas.

Regards,

Alex

Good Lord!

Thanks Alex, and everybody. This is a lot to take in, but I will do it one step at a time.

This weekend I think I will go back to writing with the piano, this seems to be the most efficient way to write, at least for now. I'm not familiar enough with the staff to hear a pitch in my head and know where it goes. But I'm getting better at hearing the "voices" and figuring out what note corresponds on the piano.

-BW

The title of the movie is,

THE CURSE OF THE QUANTIZE BUTTON!!!!!

and it has affected most of us.

Many music computer users don't have keyboard skills, and given this is the most likely form of input, it's important to devote time to improving these skills.
For players, we can all remember the hard work as beginners, playing scales and long notes to improve dexterity and for wind players the stamina that goes into a good embouchre.
With our computer based technology, we need to to practise too. Trying new things, learning about samples, and sequencers, and programs and ram and rom and cpu load, and a myriad of things. We sit for hour after hour, writing, programming, and improving as we devote so much time to this, our passionate pursuit. But how many actually spend half an hour per day practising their keyboard skills? Scales have their uses, for example, playing a run for violins naturally, as a human being, with some notes slightly shorter or longer than others, and the flexible tempo we play based loosely around a metronomic foundation.

Then, we have the quanitze button. A marketing tool of unpparalleled success. Now, those who don't have keyboard skills can plonk in their notes, hit the button and voila, a metronomically perfect line, on the beat every time. Some say this is essential, and gives those with limited skills an opportunity to make music.
I partially agree, but is the output music?

I, and probably several others here, have had formal training playing piano and other instruments, so we can play lines fluidly and fluently, relying on a consistency developed from years of practise and study. But for those who haven't, and are using a piano keyboard for the first time, the quantize button can seem a real saviour, correcting all those stilted and unweildy input attempts, and turning the result into 'Music.'

If you want your music to sound live, then play live, and if neccessary, practise.
It's not a chore to be resented or derided, but an investment in your future. Imagine the time you could save, if you played everything in naturally, and imagine the live result you would get. No longer the robotic feel, and the clearly audible 'sequencer result', but a living piece of music, imperfect in it's lack of metronomic precision, but far more live as a result.

I encourage all of you to be successful and realise your potential.
Half an hour each day will pay big dividends in the future, and reduce the perceived need for that curse of the music software program, the quantize button. Really, it's just an excuse for not becoming a better player, isn't it?

I wish you all, success.

Regards,

Alex.