The importance of Piano for Orchestration/Composition

[aLfR3dd]

hi guys...i don't practise to much piano....i'm a beginner in reading/playing music....is it important to know how to play other peoples works or it's enough to understand how it is composed...thank u!

[Poolman]

The important thing is to understand other people's works. How you get there can vary, but playing them on the piano (or other keyboard instrument) is one of the best ways, if only because you can hear the harmonies.

But music is melody too. Not enough would-be composers are singers. Singing the melody lines can give you insight, and being a good singer means that you will likely compose memorable tunes.

(Granted that some great instrumental music may contain material that can neither be sung, nor played easily on the piano!)

Research has shown that performers tend to understand and enjoy music better than non-performers. So get practising!

Having said all that, a marvellous way to understand an orchestral work is to buy the score and enter it into a sequencer, using GPO for the sounds. Many of us in this forum do that, in order to study the arts of composition and orchestration. It's also fun - you get to play every instrument in the orchestra. The quickest way to work is by using a MIDI keyboard, another reason to practise piano.

[marnen]

i don't practise to much piano

I don't think it's necessary to play piano to compose well (but I play piano, so what do I know?). However, it is helpful, if not essential, to play <em>some</em> instrument well -- not necessarily virtuosically, but competently. This instrument could be voice, but for most people, a physical instrument outside their body seems to be more helpful.

i'm a beginner in reading/playing music

Get your reading skills up. That is the single most important thing you can do for your understanding of music. Besides, if you're composing music, you should be able to notate it.

....is it important to know how to play other peoples works or it's enough to understand how it is composed...thank u!

Learning to play a piece is one of the best ways to get intimately acquainted with it, and thus one of the best ways to study how it's composed. You can also do a lot through score study (along with listening), but that absolutely requires reading skills.

Learn to play.
Learn to read.
Learn some theory.
Keep practicing.
Keep writing.
Good luck! It's not easy, but it's incredibly rewarding.

[savanttrigger]

Not that I'm an expert, but I find the ability to sketch out/improvise possible harmonies with a piano invaluable when writing music (in addition to understanding other works as a performer)

[savanttrigger]

@poolman:

how exactly do you make entering score into notation software fun? I've always found it tedious. Am I just doing it differently? I tend to use the MIDI keyboard along with the number pad for step-time entering. I suppose real-time entering would be faster/more fun, but I've always found it to be terribly inaccurate :(

[Poolman]

@poolman:

how exactly do you make entering score into notation software fun? I've always found it tedious. Am I just doing it differently? I tend to use the MIDI keyboard along with the number pad for step-time entering. I suppose real-time entering would be faster/more fun, but I've always found it to be terribly inaccurate :(


Step-time entering is not too much fun, agreed. It is suitable only for notation programs, because it gives each note its full value, producing a result which looks good on paper but which gives a stolid quasi-legato in sound. For expressive results you need a sequencer, where real-time entry is virtually essential. You play with articulation, a mixture of legato and staccato, probably using the pedal to effect the legatos. There is also the mod-wheel to think about. This is my method, broken down:

1) Set the equipment up with computer on the right and Midi keyboard on the left, with the score on some kind of music stand behind it. Deal with a double page of music at a time, to avoid turning over whilst playing.
2) Set a convenient tempo in the sequencer. If that be the required tempo, well and good; if not, slow it down, drastically if necessary, to a tempo you can manage. Correct tempo will be set when the entire piece is finished, including any tempo changes.
3) Start with the Double Bass part. Play it in, using articulation and mod-wheel expression. This involves playing the melody with right hand and mod-wheel with left hand. If the part is too complicated for this, use two hands to play the melody and repeat adding the mod-wheel and/or pedal for legato. (I must confess I don't pedal legato most of the time, I rely on playing it legato.)
4) Now the cellos, then violas, 2nd violins, 1st violins. The fun has already started, as I hear the harmony and counterpoint build up. when finished, check for balance or other errors and correct them before going on.
5) Now I mute (turn off!) the strings and start on the woodwind in a similar manner, from the bassoons upwards. At the end of that, check the woodwind section for balance etc., within itself, and then together with the strings.
6) Horns, tuba, trombones, trumpets, percussion (in that order) can either be dealt with separately as before, or played on top of the strings and woodwind. It depends on the music: if plenty of brass, record separately; if little, as in Mozart, play on top of full ensemble.
7) Check, check, check for errors of balance, articulation, whatever.
8) On to next double page of score, and so on to the end.
9) Now enter correct tempo(s), play and enjoy. That's fun!

You will have learned something about orchestration and composition, every time. And it shows the value of having keyboard skill.

[marnen]

Step-time entering is not too much fun, agreed. It is suitable only for notation programs, because it gives each note its full value, producing a result which looks good on paper but which gives a stolid quasi-legato in sound. For expressive results you need a sequencer, where real-time entry is virtually essential.

A couple of points:

1. You only need expressive results if the computer is going to be performing the piece. If a real person will be reading the part, they'll put the expression in when they play it. I find that I can take this into account when listening to unexpressive computer playbacks. YMMV.

2. Computer playbacks from notation are no longer necessarily completely unexpressive. Finale's Human Playback feature actually does a pretty good job of adding expression in appropriate places. It works quite well for audio proofreading, and might be suitable for performance in certain cases.

<strong>Edit: </strong> I see that you were talking about entering an existing piece into a notation program, whereas I was talking about original composition. Sorry for the confusion. With existing pieces, another good way to study the score is to play it on an instrument that can accommodate such things (generally piano). Your score-reading skills will be developed, which is always a good thing for a composer.

I used to compose on paper and then enter the notation into Finale, much in the way you're describing. Several years ago, I switched to composing directly on the computer, so I no longer have to take that extra step, and I can hear quick playbacks of what I'm working on as I'm working on it, even if it's not the sort of thing that's playable on the piano or another instrument I play.

You will have learned something about orchestration and composition, every time.

Yup. Remember that the great composers of a century or two ago studied scores by copying them out longhand (a complete set of Beethoven symphony scores exists in Wagner's hand...).

And it shows the value of having keyboard skill.

Well, it shows the value of having some instrumental skill. Remember that there are other ways to control a synthesizer than from a keyboard: there are guitar controllers, MIDI violins, woodwind controllers...

[TomcatII]

Professor Poolman,

How do you start the next two pages after you've finished the first two? Do you use punch in recording or do you just place the cursor at the first new measure and then use a metronome count down or what? In other words, how do you get a smooth continuation so that the sequence doesn't sound cut and pasted and not quite fitting smoothly together?

Thanks,
Tom

[Poolman]

Professor Poolman,

How do you start the next two pages after you've finished the first two? Do you use punch in recording or do you just place the cursor at the first new measure and then use a metronome count down or what? In other words, how do you get a smooth continuation so that the sequence doesn't sound cut and pasted and not quite fitting smoothly together?

Thanks,
Tom
Well, I'm using metronome anyway (in Sonar) with a bar count-in. Suppose the new page starts at bar 20, then I start recording at bar 19 (Sound-on-sound). Having heard the music of bar 19, I can come in correctly in 20.

Having said that, a fault I sometimes commit is making the last note of bar 19 too short , necessitating a bit of later editing. The best way to avoid the fault is this: say the last note is a crotchet on beat 4, the trick is to press the key down on 4 and release it exactly on 5 (1 of the next bar). With practice it iusually works fine. A more tricky problem occurs when using the mod-wheel over the page! Tricky to pick up exactly where you left off. This usually requires an edit. I still find it all fun.

[Frodo]

The important thing is to understand other people's works. How you get there can vary, but playing them on the piano (or other keyboard instrument) is one of the best ways, if only because you can hear the harmonies.

In the "bad old days" many moons ago when I was still in middle school I had never even heard of a sequencer, much less could have afforded one and we didn't own, nor could I play the piano (my primary instrument were ww's: flute/clarinet). The way I came to realize harmonies was by getting 2 tape recorders. I would play one line into the recorder, then play it back as I read the next line and recorded the two lines on the second tape recorder. I repeated this process over and over on the subsequent lines. By the time I got, say, a quartet or quintet recorded, the background noise was quite atrocious! But it got the job done and gave me a sincere appreciation for harmonies and counterpoint. [Note: I do not recommend this method. :) ]

[Nickie Fønshauge]

producing a result which looks good on paper but which gives a stolid quasi-legato in sound. For expressive results you need a sequencer
You obviously don't know Finale's Human Playback :rolleyes: :)

[Poolman]

You obviously don't know Finale's Human Playback :rolleyes: :)

Well, no I don't; I only know Sibelius' ditto and it is fair but limited.

Can Finale make a swell during a held note? Can it produce subtleties of articulation like those I can make whilst actually playing live on a Midi keyboard? E.g. some notes legato, some staccato, some barely detached, all during the same phrase? Not to mention that some notes will have greater velocity, producing different attack characteristics from GPO...

Terry

[Nickie Fønshauge]

Can Finale make a swell during a held note?

Yes.
Can it produce subtleties of articulation like those I can make whilst actually playing live on a Midi keyboard? E.g. some notes legato, some staccato, some barely detached, all during the same phrase?

Yes, of course.
Not to mention that some notes will have greater velocity, producing different attack characteristics from GPO...

Happens automatically. Can be adjusted en masse or individually.

[ginhar]

Can Finale make a swell during a held note? Can it produce subtleties of articulation like those I can make whilst actually playing live on a Midi keyboard? E.g. some notes legato, some staccato, some barely detached, all during the same phrase? Not to mention that some notes will have greater velocity, producing different attack characteristics from GPO...

In my experience using Finale's Human Playback and GPO, I would simply say that it works well within realistic expectations. Sometimes I have really liked the results it produces- usually during slow sustained passages. For example, if an instrument finishes a passage on a long note, HP will automatically diminuendo it down into the ensemble, rather than the normal sharp cutoff. This is very convenient, except when you want it to stay strong (if you write a crescendo in it will stay strong, but god forbid you want it to crescendo).

HP is most useful to me for automatically doing the articulations in a piece. The expressiveness is OK, but sometimes you will need to add extra or redundant markings to get the exact effect you want, and it is never as good as when you do it in real-time. So to your questions, I would answer "yes, to a degree, if you work with it". If you're writing for humans, it's not worth it.

Mike

[karelm]

To answer the original question - I believe it is an important skill to be able to play the piano as a composer. With that said, I am a terrible pianist but here is what I found.

I decided to apply to music conservatory to study composition, where the composition faculty heavilly stressed piano ability believing that the keyboard is the best multi-function tool for composing. Since I didn't know how to play a piano (and have terrible left/right hand coordination) I took a year off from composing just to focus on the piano. By the end of the year, I could play a few Chopin preludes (the easy ones) and a Bach invention and a few other things but what I found is that my composition did improve. One thing to note, to be able to play the piano as a composer is not the same degree of skill needed to play the piano as a pianist. You use the instrument for different things.

I think I found that my ability to improvise harmonic ideas or melodic ideas on the piano did help me see the light of how great the possitive impact on composing would be if I had years more experience with piano. I don't think it is important to play that well, but any skill you gain on piano (if not some other instrument) will only help your composing.

Karim

[dpc]

Can not everything be said on the piano? Igor Stravinsky

[jack meginniss]

I'm definitely not a Stravinsky, far from it, but I support the theory that composing orchestral music from the piano is fine for developing melodic and harmonic ideas, but not necessarily for orchestration itself.
It is easy to fall into the habit of thinking in terms of block chords or in terms of what can be played easily by two hands. I use to do this. Many people that are new to classical music seem to not realize, or forget, that orchestral music is generally composed of individual lines that when played simultaneously form chords and these chords can be very broad and more complex than what can be played by two hands on a piano.

[Poolman]

I'm definitely not a Stravinsky, far from it, but I support the theory that composing orchestral music from the piano is fine for developing melodic and harmonic ideas, but not necessarily for orchestration itself.
It is easy to fall into the habit of thinking in terms of block chords or in terms of what can be played easily by two hands. I use to do this. Many people that are new to classical music seem to not realize, or forget, that orchestral music is generally composed of individual lines that when played simultaneously form chords and these chords can be very broad and more complex than what can be played by two hands on a piano.
I agree absolutely with this. In teaching orchestration I get my pupils to orchestrate piano works, mainly because the material is easily available. They often have difficulty in re-spacing chords in an orchestral manner because they feel bound to transcribe the notes too literally. But after a few mistakes they get the hang of it and become more adept in thinking orchestrally.

One of the chief pitfalls is a big two-handed chord from Beethoven, with the two hands two octaves apart, and a four-note chord low down in the left hand. This was to get the maxiumum sound from his piano (which was not so full a timbre as modern pianos anyway). This sounds dreadful if literally transcribed for orchestra. Rimsky and others have given us the correct answer: space out the chords like the harmonic series: octaves in the bass and the intervals getting gradually closer as you go higher.

Let's not decry the piano as a source of good music, though. Many of Ravel's successful orchestral works were composed for piano first. Perhaps he was thinking ahead a bit?

Terry Dwyer

[greatgreybeast]

This thread is getting a bit stale, but I wanted to comment on using the piano for developing melodies.

Due to such things as sense-memory and simply the mechanical limitations of how our fingers work, you will probably find that when you write exclusively on the piano, you tend to arrive at somewhat similar music, in a structural sense. I find that my results when "doodling" on the keyboard are fundamentally different than what I arrive at through singing (I hum a lot in the car, and highly recommend it - I've heard a rumor that Danny Elfman came up with the theme for Batman while on a plane, and ran to the bathroom to hum it into a tape recorder). I get yet a third result by writing directly into the sequencer with keyboard and mouse. And there are variations within those, of course. And, if you play another instrument, that again might be different.

This is a potential trap if you are not aware of it, but can also be used to great advantage. I am just a beginner at composing, but have now scored three short student films. With one project, I developed the main theme on the piano, and subsequently developed almost all the music on piano, trying to keep a similar "energy" and type of motion to my hands. Thus, despite the appearance of several melodies and harmonies and moods and so forth, the music has a certain structural consistency - it all clearly belongs to the same work. The next project I approached from a completely different angle (voice), and the result was a very different score.

Of course, such variation is not what everybody is after, but in film/TV/gaming, it is usually an admirable trait of the composer to be able to shed their own personality and bring a unique quality to each work (as much as possible). And that begins with how you approach the very act of composition.

Here's hoping this is useful to somebody. :)

-Robin

[benhillyard]

Just to add my tuppence worth:
I've been travelling for almost a year now and have been deprived of a piano or keyboard for that time (unless you count those programs that turn your computer keyboard into piano keyboard - not exactly very playable!). While frequently annoying, I've found that it's forced me to develop my musical imagination i.e. trying to imagine what a piece of music is going to sound like, rather that jumping straight to the piano to play it. I've found that my writing process has got quicker and the music I'm writing has changed as a result as things are possible in my head that aren't on piano. I'm sure when I go home I'll be using the piano a lot less for writing. Having said that, I often visualise a piano keyboard when working out harmonies etc.

Ben

[Aeterna]

I think that the Piano is a powerful tool for the beginning composer, because you can quickly and easily hear how notes sound together. That said, once you have a more developed idea in your head of how notes sound together in general, I think it's better to step away from the piano and let your mind do the work. I've found that using piano or notation software during the actual composition process tends to make my music less cohesive, the ideas shorter and more disjointed. That's because when I'm on the piano or on Finale, I tend to think linearly -- what comes next? Whereas when all I'm using is my head and some staff paper, I think globally work out the details within a larger context.

[dpc]

My reference to the piano and Stravinsky's remark did not actually contain the approach to composing but rather the point that any composition can be heard or stated at that instrument. The many references in this thread to the importance of a linear approach compositionally (melodic lines) are exactly true. It depends on the style.

Most of the great composers composed at the piano in this sense: they checked their work with it. No matter the style they would simply play and listen to their parts at the piano. Also remember whenever a new work was published or even in the manuscript stage, the way people (producers, other composers, friends etc.) would hear the new work would be at the piano. In fact very accurate and succint judgements were made about a new work's worth or value from piano realizations. The decision to produce a new work (say a ballet) would be made soley from a piano rendition. This was Stravinsky's point about everything being able to be said on the piano.

[greatgreybeast]

My reference to the piano and Stravinsky's remark did not actually contain the approach to composing but rather the point that any composition can be heard or stated at that instrument.
I completely understand that. Actually, for clarity, I see this thread as leaning in at least three different directions - piano in the sense Stravinsky means it, to demo one's work / piano as a tool for composition / piano as computer interface.

And, I wonder to what extent piano is still valuable in the first case. After all, creating preview renditions of music is one of GPO's primary functions.

-Robin