It's time to vote in the Orchestration Challenge 13!

[oldbob]

Interesting questions... there's a huge range of possibilities from the purely intellectual composition to the song composed only by ear. Personally I use both approaches, depending on the destination of my music and various parameters. But I must say I highly respect the intellectual process of reasoning and even calculating in music sometimes as one that can give original and beautiful results. If the ear is always there judging and making choices there is no risk to write absurd music. My favourite music is a blend of both the work of the left and the right emispheres of the brain, and most of it (the music) don't fall into the category of "song". Actually, most of the songs I hear on the radio or on tv I find very boring, with notable exceptions, of course... but I think that even great songwriters like Stevie Wonder do have thoughts like "how can I combine these chords or where do I take this melodic line so that when it ends I will be half tone higher than where I started?" Ok, I apologize for my english, just wanted to drop a line on my point of view

PS I have enjoyed all of the entries, sincerely. And Randy, to me this is more than arranging, so much musicality goes into the process of developing a given theme...

[chesterdesmond]

My question was more about intent than discussing semantics. The funny (or perhaps ironic ) part is that I actually hesitated to use the word "songs" but figured I could slip an exceptionally common umbrella term past you guys. In any case, this statement has answered my question:

I'm sure Roberto wouldn't mind me saying, he was looking for a purse out of a pig's ear.

I liked all of the entries in one way or another and thought it was quite interesting to hear the theme used in so many different ways, it's difficult to pick a favorite but have narrowed it down through repeated listens. This challenge is a cool idea.
I had every intention of attempting an entry to this challenge but once the entire framework of my (very limited) theoretical knowledge was toppled by examining the structure of the scale I decided not. OLDBOB, you have single-handedly put a temporary stop to my educational pursuits...I hope you are happy!

[trentpmcd]

I'm here to add another reply to this thread to point out that none of these pieces are "compositions"--they are arrangements of the theme composed and presented by Roberto.

So, “The Musical Offering” is a great composition by Frederick II that Bach just happened to make a nice arrangement for? I don’t think so – “The Musical Offering” is 100% Bach despite the fact that Frederick created the theme. Webern later made an arrangement of the 6-voice fugue – the fugue was Bach’s but the orchestration, etc. was Webern’s.

Throughout history a very large amount of music has been based on themes others have written. I could sit here all day giving example after example, but I just want to give 4 quick ones…

Bach’s Chorals are arrangements of traditional hymns (he harmonized existing songs) but his Cantatas that are based on the themes of those Chorals are original compositions, some of the greatest ever created. Yes, they use the choral themes, but they go so far beyond the originals.

Folk tunes have been used in Art Music since Art Music existed. It’s hard to think of a great composer who didn’t at least once put a folk tune in one of their compositions. I’ve rarely heard of those compositions called arrangements.

Is Beethoven’s Opus 120 an arrangement of a work by Diaballi? OK, here it is a set of variations which is a little closer, but it is also one of Beethoven’s greatest achievements, one of the great achievements of early 19th century music. It goes far beyond a simple arrangement of a waltz – there is a large-scale structure, smaller-scale workings and micro scale changes throughout. A set of variations can fall in the middle between arrangement and composition, but in this case it is defiantly a composition.

I recently studied a piece by Schumann that ends with a quote from a Beethoven piece. The whole work is based on variations of motives derived from the Beethoven quote so that the quote seems to be derived from the piece instead of the other way around. This is pure Schumann who was just paying tribute to his musical hero.

I guess we need to define what n arrangement is. I feel that in an arrangement the original piece is changed but always still there – very little new is added. Examples would be re-harmonizing, changing large blocks (like putting a verse before a chorus instead of after, changing the location of a bridge, etc.), changing the instrumentation. The original is still recognizable – it is still there.

If I take the Beatles song “I Want to Hold Your Hand” and change it around – re-harmonize it, change the order, score it for large orchestra, etc. – that would be an arrangement. It is still recognizable as the song “I Want to Hold Your Hand” even though it is now much longer and more complex.

If I took the theme of “I Want to Hold Your Hand” and made a large scale work that took it out of the song context – ripped it into component motives, created new themes from these motives, had a large scale development, made large scale structures that have nothing to do with song form, etc., it would not be an arrangement, it would be an original composition based on the theme of the Beatles “I Want to Hold Your Hand”.

Roberto gave out a theme but there is no composition associated with it, at least none that I have heard, it is just a raw theme – primordial material to make a composition, not a composition in its own right. If I did nothing more than harmonize the theme he gave, maybe repeat it with a slightly different harmonization, add a basic intro and closing, then it is an arrangement. On the other hand, if I took it and created new themes or developed the theme in new ways, it is composition based on the theme by Roberto.

Some of what we hear in the challenges are arrangements, some are original compositions based on a theme. I think saying all the compositions in all of the challenges are just arrangements is a great injustice to people who spent quite a bit of time writing original compositions that happen to incorporate the theme given at the beginning.

Anyway, just my 2 cents….

[diligamus]

There are a Lot of people on this Forum, and it's disproportionate to have only the 11 or 12 voters who have participated so far. We could easily have 100 or more votes cast during these Challenges.

It's neat for the listener to hear what nine different people can do with the same material. And I feel the same as you -- it is disappointing that more people don't vote. I did.

I wondered if maybe a more accessible premise would generate more listener interest? But then I took a look at the number of votes cast in previous challenges:

#12 - 94 votes
#11 - 38 votes
#10 - 36 votes
#09 - 32 votes
#08 - 80 votes
#07 - 35 votes
#06 - 31 votes
#05 - 30 votes
#04 - 38 votes
#03 - 36 votes

No obvious pattern here, is there? Unless you want to conclude that northernsounds lurkers are just wild about whole-tone pieces!

(BTW I don't know what happened to #01 and #02 -- I couldn't find them with the search feature.)

[rayzalaf]

Now we are keeping this thread high on the page.

Nothing like a bit of aggro ? sorry debate.

Ray

[wrayer]

I must admit I wrote two entries for this challenge, but only submitted one. I felt the first one I wrote (the one I liked the best, by the way) would be too obvious and would allow others to know who the arranger/composer was. So I opted for a more flamboyant entry. And quite frankly, it was not as good as the original. I may post the original after this competition is over.

I don't believe any of the entries were academic in their solutions. Different approaches by different folk (different strokes for different folks). The jazz ones are very impressive and usually draw the winning votes. That does not take away from the creativity of the other works. I found them all very enjoyable to listen. Even the epic No. 1.

My 2 cents

[oldbob]

I wondered if maybe a more accessible premise would generate more listener interest? But then I took a look at the number of votes cast in previous challenges:

#12 - 94 votes
#11 - 38 votes
#10 - 36 votes
#09 - 32 votes
#08 - 80 votes
#07 - 35 votes
#06 - 31 votes
#05 - 30 votes
#04 - 38 votes
#03 - 36 votes

you should consider the number of people voting, not the number of votes... challenge 12, for instance, had 35 voters

[rbowser-]

Excellent, Trent!

OK! You and Roberto have convinced me--To do as much with the raw material as these entries did is more than arranging. I was just passing on what I was taught and have always thought--That a composition had to be entirely original material, and an arrangement is based on something the writer either was given or that he took, and an orchestration is yet different--an expansion on an already fairly well developed composition.

The only thing I found off in your reply, Trent, was that you said that to call these entries arrangements "...is a great injustice to people who spent quite a bit of time writing original compositions..." As if arranging music isn't as honorable, difficult, creative thing to do as composing. That doesn't seem right to me.

And since orchestrating, arranging and composing are all equally "difficult" time-consuming and creative tasks, it doesn't really matter what the process is that these musicians engaged in to arrive at these pieces, except to very fastidious academics.

Like I said, I was passing on what I was taught, and Certainly didn't mean to be demeaning or minimizing what was accomplished in these pieces.

Whether or not the theme Roberto composed is a "sow's ear"--lol--well, I suppose as compared to the immediately hummable "Happy Birthday To You," but it's as musical as the themes for many musical compositions--arrangements--orchestrations--WHATEver they are!

Randy B.
(rbowser)

[trentpmcd]

The only thing I found off in your reply, Trent, was that you said that to call these entries arrangements "...is a great injustice to people who spent quite a bit of time writing original compositions..." As if arranging music isn't as honorable, difficult, creative thing to do as composing. That doesn't seem right to me.

You are absolutely right and I stand corrected.

Most of my favorite Jazz composers were also arrangers, often great arrangers. It takes a different skill but a great skill nonetheless.

And those Bach Chorals I wrote about – although they were “just” arrangements (harmonizations), these Chorals almost define Western Harmony for the next 150 years – most harmony textbooks are more “Bach Harmonization of the Chorals” textbooks.

This year I am going to see the BSO play Mussorgsky’s “Pictures at an Exhibition”. Ravel’s arrangement (orchestration) is fantastic. It isn’t “just” an arrangement, it is a great work of art. And yet, it is still Mussorgsky’s music.

Anyway, I don’t mean to be down on arrangers, orchestrators, etc. These are not “lesser” arts and I am sorry I more or less said so in my other post. I ahve a lot of respect for good arrangers.

But it does make for an interesting conversation.

[trentpmcd]

I may post the original after this competition is over.

Do it - I'd like to hear still another take on this.