# Composing for strings



## Jord

At the minute i'm writing a piano piece accompanied by 2 violins, a viola, cello and a bass. I understand harmony and i think i can understand how to write for strings, but as i'm new to it is there any specific rules you must obey when writing for strings, the way i'm composing at the minute is
Bass, really basic, commonly root notes of the chords on piano
Cello, like the bass but slightly more melodic
Viola, like the Cello/Bass part but in harmony
Violin II, Similar to Violin I, often harmonising with it, playing in unison or playing a contrasting rhythm
Violin I, following the chords on piano not in harmony, playing a more rhythmical part or arpeggiated chords based on what the piano's doing

is this a good way to go about composing for strings or not? or is there anything i've missed?


----------



## Aramis

Jord said:


> is this a good way to go about composing for strings or not?


This is super ultra conventional and unimaginative way to go about composing for strings. Depart from the ideas you just described by all possible occassions.


----------



## Ramako

Aramis is correct in that it is not a terribly interesting method for writing for strings, but it is a method and a sound place to start - it is conventional for a reason after all.

I would recommend reading through some string quartet scores while listening to the music - Haydn's op. 33 might be a good set to consider - score. This isn't too stressful, and you will absorb a lot by doing it about how to write for strings.


----------



## Jord

Okay thanks


----------



## Kopachris

The main thing to keep in mind for strings is bowing. Up bow, down bow, legato. jete, staccato, marcato, etc. all sound different. Rule of thumb: any notes placed under a slur are sounded in a single bow stroke, up bow has a tendency to crescendo, and down bow has a tendency to decrescendo.


----------



## pendereckiobsessed

If anyone has a question about writing for strings, you can ask me. I am a string player (I play viola and violin, and know a lot about the cello and bass).


----------



## Jord

I looked a bit at Haydn's Op.33 string quartet score for 'The Joke' and Shostakovich's String Quartet No.8, they've both helped me understand more on string writing, but is there any pieces you'd recommend me to check out, what i'm looking for is mainly string pieces accompanying piano, sustained notes, very 'flowing' is a way i would describe it, a thick texture to just accompany and emphasise what the piano is doing, as if the piano part is built upon it


----------



## pendereckiobsessed

Jord said:


> I looked a bit at Haydn's Op.33 string quartet score for 'The Joke' and Shostakovich's String Quartet No.8, they've both helped me understand more on string writing, but is there any pieces you'd recommend me to check out, what i'm looking for is mainly string pieces accompanying piano, sustained notes, very 'flowing' is a way i would describe it, a thick texture to just accompany and emphasise what the piano is doing, as if the piano part is built upon it


I can only think of Schittke's concerto for piano and strings at the moment. The Schnittke is fantastic, and uses ALOT of good effects but the score is hard to obtain....

When I think of more Ill post them, but Good luck!


----------



## Jord

Kind of like that, except more tonal. That piece confused me :lol:


----------



## pendereckiobsessed

I couldn't think of any tonal examples... Sorry Jord
But you could always look at piano quintets/quartets, even though they are problably not exactly what you have in mind, they can give you an idea of what you want


----------



## Lukecash12

Just look at Schubert's piano quintets. There is typically an adagio movement, or a slower movement in 3/4, that fits your description. The most popular would be the Trout Quintet, and if I remember right it's either the second or third movement that fits your description pretty well. Schubert is a great role model when it comes to composing for strings in chamber music.


----------



## Jord

thanks that's the kind of piece i was looking for


----------



## PetrB

You've proscribed the most banal and conventional 'filler' sort of arranging possible, I'm afraid.

Ideally, even if 'background' the string parts should have some independent lives of their own, so the whole is a collective contribution by all members.

Accompaniment, by its nature is somewhat subservient, but that does not mean a mere doubling of the piano harmony. 

Having said that, listen to the Bach Double keyboard concerto in C major, and recognize that the strings are there only for body and sustain (two harpsichords with no real sustain capacity are the very good reason for the strings choice). The strings have absolutely no independent material: in fact, the work, performed on two pianos (with more 'body' of sound and sustain capacity), without the strings, can be done without detriment or sense of loss.

Pop arrangements often use the strings as mere 'harmonic pad.' So much, as far as 'legitimacy' or what is thought of your piece, will be determined by the nature of the music itself. It can be quite annoying for first, the players, and second, the audience, if it clearly sounds like the strings are a secondary afterthought. The players have nothing interesting or rewarding to play -- not engaging your players is the first fracture in hoping for a successful communication with the audience, unengaged players playing what they think is gratuitous fill are not likely to turn in an enthusiastic or meaningful performance.


----------



## Jord

I've only written about a minute of my composition so far on piano because i can't get passed the string part :lol: and the first subject/idea probably lasts about 30-40 seconds. the first subject is very melodic and piano based, whereas the second subject the piano plays arpeggios and i was planning on the strings really emphasising what the piano was doing, sounding really dramatic and deep.

in the first subject i've written a extremely basic string accompaniment, then after reading some of the comments here and analyzing some of Shostakovich's and Haydn's string works i wrote another version of it much more 'independent', still the same feel to it, but without the piano it sounded much better, and still worked with the piano, but the simplistic version sounds so much better with the piano.

At times it will be extremely boring for the strings in this piece, like you said about Bach's double keyboard concerto the strings are only there for body and sustain, however it's not because of the lack of sustain on the piano, the piano part is almost constantly sustained, it's just too thicken the piece out a bit and give the piano part something to stand upon as i'd call it as well as emphasising what the piano is doing


----------

