# Who are the three most accomplished orchestrators of all times in your opinion?



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Choose up to three options according to your personal criteria.

If you chose _Other(s)_, please tell me who here in the comments section.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Berlioz, Richard Strauss, Ravel. If you asked for 5 I'd include Mahler and Sibelius.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

I would have added Elgar and Britten to the list, but voted Ravel, Stravinsky and Ripyour Korsetsoff


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

I accidentally clicked the vote button instead of “other”, but my top 3 are Ravel, Mahler, and Brahms who is sadly missing from the list. It amazes me every time how he can create such rich, indulgent sounds through such a disciplined orchestral approach with small forces. Other missing names IMO are Bruckner, Dvorak, and Shostakovich.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Also it's a little bit of an apple/oranges thing. Bach, Haydn and Mozart's orchestras were much different from Mahler's and Ravel's. But the three older composers were certainly masters of the medium they knew. So the "modern orchestra" starting with say Berlioz should be considered separately, probably.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

So many excellent ones. 100 years ago it seems like everyone was scoring brilliantly. And why not?, they had plenty of great examples to learn from.

My other is Edward Elgar. His scoring is just stunning. The two symphonies, Falstaff, Enigma, the violin concerto, Starlight Express...and to think he was self-taught makes it all the more incredible.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Funny, I had a thought to make a thread about this just a couple hours ago.
S: Respighi
A: Tchaikovsky, Rimsky, Williams, Debussy

There is a gap between the marvels Respighi created and what others did. _The Roman Trilogy_ is the orchestration heaven. But Tchaikovsky and Rimsky were comparably great in their own time, and Respighi was Rimsky's student after all, so it is logical that he developed their art even further.

I voted for these three. If I could round to five, I would add Williams and Debussy.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Tough call - 
I went with:

Ravel
Stravinsky
Shostakovich/_other_

but Mahler, Beethoven, 
then Berlioz, Sibelius, R. Strauss, Wagner 
all rank very highly, IMO...


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

mikeh375 said:


> I would have added Elgar and Britten to the list, but voted Ravel, Stravinsky and Ripyour Korsetsoff


My grandpa always called RK _Rinsya Kawfeekup_. He loved the way Josef Spaghetti played the violin.


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

The sense of this poll seems to be the composers who wrote best for orchestra rather than musicians who orchestrated, or arranged, compositions of others for orchestra. There are some who belong to both camps, like Ravel who composed amazingly for orchestra but is also known for his orchestration (or “arrangement for orchestra”) of Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition; or Grofe who orchestrated for Gershwin but also composed his own orchestral works like the Grand Canyon Suite. Then there’s Stokowski who orchestrated Bach’s solo organ work and Harty who (re-)orchestrated Händel’s Water Music, and loads of other musicians, often conductors, who arranged (by way of orchestrating) this and that, like Morton Gould’s version of Bizet’s Carmen. So I’ll hold off on voting until I get a clearer idea of what this is about.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

The three Rs: Rimsky, Ravel, Respighi. But I also love Brahms' orchestra, and Sibelius.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Berlioz, Mahler, and Strauss.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Mozart, Mahler, and Takemitsu.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Wagner. Imagine inventing new instruments because not enough brass.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Simplicissimus said:


> Then there's Stokowski who orchestrated Bach's solo organ work and Harty who (re-)orchestrated Händel's Water Music,


Lucian Cailliet did a lot of the "scutwork" on the Stokowski/Bach transcriptions....Cailliet played bass clarinet in Philadelphia under Stoki....he also did some terrific band transcriptions of classical works...[Pix @ Exhib - Wagner - Elsa's Procession, Ring excerpts, etc]
I really dislike the Handel-Harty demolition of the H2O Music....Handel's original is so wonderful, so effective...the overblown, phony sounding Harty turns me right off....I always disliked playing it, and fortunately, with _authenticity, HIP_ movement, etc...it is seldom used....


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Wagner, Mahler and Beethoven though I'd also add Shostakovich and Bruckner to this list. They possessed the skill of very masterful and virtuosic orchestration. Wagner is sometimes just showing off - I mean, six different leitmotifs combined and concurrently played by different orchestra sections.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

In the pre-late Romantic crowd, you didn't list Haydn. He was the best of his time, IMO, though not one of the best of _all_ time.

I think Mozart often needs to be played with HIP orchestras for his orchestration skills to shine.

Sibelius and Mahler tie for my third choice. I am surprised Sibelius is left out of polls like this-- just listen to his 4th and 6th symphonies if you doubt his skills as an orchestrator.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

annaw said:


> Wagner, Mahler and Beethoven though I'd also add Shostakovich and Bruckner to this list. They possessed the skill of very masterful and virtuosic orchestration. Wagner is sometimes just showing off - I mean, six different leitmotifs combined and concurrently played by different orchestra sections.


I love the brass-heavy sound of Bruckner symphonies, but I think Mahler is more versatile.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

I'll go with Ravel, Mahler, and Respighi for their flashiness and color. I'm considering the matter sort of independently of the needs of the music. But good music does not need flashy orchestration, and I tend to prefer the more subtle, understated timbres of (e.g.) Brahms and Bruckner, who let the music speak for itself.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

annaw said:


> Wagner, Mahler and Beethoven


While it's apparent Ravel and Mahler are brilliant orchestrators, some things are simply harder to orchestrate 




Has Ravel tackled this sound on a more epic scale? I could picture it.


----------



## Guest (May 13, 2020)

mikeh375 said:


> I would have added Elgar and Britten to the list, but voted Ravel, Stravinsky and *Ripyour Korsetsoff*


I was going to add Gordon Jacob, or as I used to call him, "Gordon Bennett !!" during our orchestration homework assignments.
Good thread, by the way; very difficult to answer.


----------



## Guest (May 13, 2020)

Really hard poll. After some reflection and a rather nice Alsace Sylvaner _vin nature_, I went for Berlioz, Wagner and Mahler.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Villa-Lobos needs to be considered in any conversation about great orchestrators as do Messiaen and Boulez. Not to mention Jacob Druckman, whose skill with orchestration was legendary.


----------



## Guest (May 13, 2020)

Knorf said:


> Villa-Lobos needs to be considered in any conversation about great orchestrators as do Messiaen and Boulez. Not to mention Jacob Druckman, whose skill with orchestration was legendary.


Fair enough. 
I was goingf to add *Scelsi* until I learnt that his orchestrations were not by his direct hand. That was a real eye-opener for me.


----------



## Guest (May 13, 2020)

We mustn't forget that there are some great orchestrators/composers working in the film sector, composers who really know their craft. I have great admiration for those that have this skill.


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

Voted Berlioz, Mahler, Rimsky. Hard poll with only three options available 
Could have included Respighi and Wagner (after all, Wagner invented these Wagner tubas, didn't he? And Respighi predated modern sci-fi movie soundtracks for at least half a century.)


----------



## EmperorOfIceCream (Jan 3, 2020)

I would add Berg and Dutilleux to this list. Both of them were not highly prolific, but they mainly wrote meticulous and complex orchestral music and have totally striking, uncanny, and beautiful sounds unlike any other composer.
Dutilleux, Mvt. V of _Tout un monde lointain_: 



Berg, _Lulu Suite_: 




Besides them, I choose Mahler and Debussy, who were definitely big influences on Berg and Dutillux respectively.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Knorf said:


> Villa-Lobos needs to be considered in any conversation about great orchestrators as do Messiaen and Boulez. Not to mention Jacob Druckman, whose skill with orchestration was legendary.


Same with Schoenberg...one of the very best...


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Azol said:


> ....And Respighi predated modern sci-fi movie soundtracks for at least half a century.)


Respighi is the model for all of those big, Biblical extravaganzas of the 50s and 60s....Elmer Bernstein, and most definitely Miklos Rosza...Ravel, Richard Strauss influence is quite prevalent in 20th century film scoring...


----------



## Gray Bean (May 13, 2020)

Would have to add Elgar and Vaughan Williams to the list. Especially Elgar..


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

It's Wagner, Mahler and Strauss for me.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> Same with Schoenberg...one of the very best...


True. _A Survivor From Warsaw_, for example, is on my short list for the most perfectly orchestrated piece, ever.


----------



## Josquin13 (Nov 7, 2017)

I voted for Maurice Ravel, Gustav Mahler, & Richard Strauss--whose orchestrating abilities are mind blowing to hear in the concert hall. But I've also long admired Haydn, Mozart, Rimsky-Korsakov, Stravinsky, Debussy, Sibelius, Wagner, Bruckner, J.S. Bach, Biber, Du Caurroy, Monteverdi, & Handel in this capacity, too, & of course Brahms & Beethoven.

I chose Ravel over Debussy by a narrow margin, & largely due to Ravel's extraordinary Debussy influenced ballet, Daphnis et Chloe, but I see Debussy as an underrated orchestrator. His La Mer is astonishing to hear in the concert hall; as are the Sirénes movement from his Trois Nocturnes, Jeux, the opera Pelléas et Méiisande, and Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun.

La Mer: 



Sirénes:



Jeux: 



Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun: 



Pelléas et Mélisande: 



Daphnis et Chloe: 




In addition, the orchestration in Igor Stravinsky's "The Firebird" or "L'oiseau de feu" ballet is totally brilliant, as well: 




I also find the orchestration skills of French composer Charles Koechlin to be remarkable. Interestingly, Koechlin was the composer that Debussy asked to orchestrate his late ballet, Khamma, when Debussy had become too ill to do so himself in the last years of his life: 



. Koechlin was brilliant at matching & arranging the various timbres of diverse instruments, and especially in his chamber music, such as his late 1949-50 chamber arrangement of his 1916-17 solo piano work, Paysages et Marines, his two "Primavera" Quintets, and all of his music for wind instruments. Koechlin's ability to handle a full orchestra was extraordinary, too (although today Koechlin's symphonies are sadly neglected and remain unrecorded, with the exception of one or two long ago BBC radio broadcasts, and a couple of recordings of his unnumbered "Seven Stars Symphony", Op. 132). A listen to the orchestral version of Koechlin's solo piano work, "Les heures Persanes", should be sufficient enough to understand why Debussy asked him to orchestrate Khamma: 



. Koechlin's teacher, Gabriel Faure, likewise asked his pupil to orchestrate his Pelleas et Mélisande: 



. "Le Buisson ardent" is another fascinating work from the standpoint of orchestration: 




Among more recent composers, I've admired the symphonies of Vagn Holmboe, Walter Piston, Oliver Knussen, and Vincent Persichetti in this regard; as well as Gustav Holst and Vaughan Williams (who sometimes gets dismissed as a bad orchestrator, which I've never understood, since I think that RVW was a brilliant orchestrator). They were all fine orchestrators, and not surprisingly excellent teachers, too. Holmboe's Symphony no. 8--entitled "Sinfonia Borealis"--is particularly stunning, & especially the thrilling "Tempo giusto" 2nd movement, which I find reminiscent of Wagner: https://www.amazon.com/Holmboe-Symphonies-Nos-8-9/dp/B0000016JU. Holst's "The Planets" is another tour de force from the standpoint of orchestration: 



.

Speaking of which, what do people think are the best books on the principles of orchestrating, as written by a composer?

--Rimsky-Korsakov's?: https://www.ebay.com/p/1052897?iid=...MIwoyE7tix6QIVEo3ICh17fQJoEAQYAyABEgJiGPD_BwE

--or Koechlin's huge 4 volume treatise on orchestration?: 
https://www.amazon.com/TraitÃ©-de-lorchestration-Volume-1/dp/0045024359
https://www.amazon.com/KOECHLIN-ORCHESTRATION-WRITING-STRUNGS-Charles-Koechlin/dp/B00MNRTX9M
https://www.di-arezzo.com/music/5000238/charles-koechlin-treaty-of-orchestration-vol-4-.html

--or Walter Piston's book, "Orchestration" (& "Harmony and Counterpoint"): https://www.amazon.com/Orchestratio...en-20&linkId=cc97c4dbcb58d1e64640f55626ae7ba4

--or the treatises by Berlioz and Richard Strauss?:https://www.amazon.com/Treatise-Ins...en-20&linkId=2b19358c6ddee7c8f6abc06d78c3f2d3

Or, some other?


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

*Glazunov* deserves a mention. Not was he only a master of the orchestra, he orchestrated and edited works of Borodin (Third Symphony, Petite Suite, Prince Igor) as well as those of Tchaikovsky. Rimsky-Korsakov had even asked him for his advice on occasion.

*Bax* was also a great orchestrator. *Florent Schmitt* was not bad either.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I had to give Bach a vote, since his compositional ability is unparalleled in the sense of his music generally sounding great in so many varied instrumental arrangements. His compositions seem to somehow have beautiful orchestration built in, I can't think of another composer quite like that. Perhaps orchestration wasn't his focus to the same degree as later composers, however the aural result is such that him receiving no votes in this poll seemed an injustice to me. 

The St Matthew Passion, cantata BWV 82, the concertos, etc etc. --> brilliant orchestral color.

I also voted for Ravel and 'other', I'm not sure yet who my third choice is. I quite like Bartok's orchestration in a number of his works, particularly the concertos.


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

Berlioz - obviously. 
Wagner - double obviously.
The third...I went for Stravinsky, out of the remaining candidates I feel like he has the most range in this category. But I'd probably change my mind tomorrow.


----------



## bz3 (Oct 15, 2015)

Wagner, Berlioz, and Rimsky-Korsakov. Lots of possibilities but I'd never leave out Wagner.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

I voted for Strauss, Ravel and Respighi, but I would like to add these whom I consider worth mentioning too:

Bantock
Rachmaninov
Martinu
Korngold
Alwyn
Arnold
Walton


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

MusicSybarite said:


> I voted for Strauss, Ravel and Respighi, but I would like to add these whom I consider worth mentioning too:
> 
> Rachmaninov


Rachm'n'ff ?? A great orchestrator??!! You must be kidding....


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

Another how the hell should I know list?

Every one on the list wrote some great bassoon parts except Bach. Every bassoon part I have ever played in a Bach piece was boring. Maybe Heck148 knows of some.


----------



## TalkingPie (May 15, 2020)

Im shocked Rimski doesn't stick out as much as Ravel. 

I mean it's the same size as Beethoven... Beethoven was a better composer for sure, but he had a very limited orchestral palette at his disposal and never tried to think outside of the box that much (his music doesn't need gimmicks to sand out tho)


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Josquin13 said:


> .................................................
> Speaking of which, what do people think are the best books on the principles of orchestrating, as written by a composer?
> 
> --Rimsky-Korsakov's?: https://www.ebay.com/p/1052897?iid=...MIwoyE7tix6QIVEo3ICh17fQJoEAQYAyABEgJiGPD_BwE
> ...


You've named some good books. I don't know the Koechlin but will look it up as it sounds interesting, I'm still a sucker for a good read on orchestration after all these years.
Sammuel Adler's book can be added to your list. It comes with cd's too. Alfred Blatter also wrote a decent treatise. Gardner Read wrote a book on orchestral combinations, somewhat dry but it does fire the timbral imagination. There's one by Kennan too, but I don't know that one.
A good entry level book is Orchestral technique by Gordon Jacob.

Apart from those, the best bet is to keep your head in scores and better still, write them out in short score if you are a novice. (I'm not referring to you Josquin13...)


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

John Williams is really, really underrated as an orchestrator here. As if my ears couldn't already tell, I've read accounts of professionals who worked with him describing him as a 'brass god', a composer with a 'second-to-none' knowledge about strings, and a capital 'e' excellent command of winds and percussion. One L.A. orchestrator and musician once told me that _Empire Strikes Back _alone is the best film score for percussion, tuba, trombone, and the bassoon in a hundred years of people working in the genre, including Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Vaughan Williams, Walton, Bax, and Alwyn mentioned here.

In addition to 80 years of personal orchestra experience (since childhood), where "he asked every musician about details of their instruments", and decades of conducting, he likely read most of the books and manuscripts of the composers and authors mentioned in this thread. He has fused together (and I do not mean an A->B->C sort of polystylistm, but rather an 'ABC' syncretism) so many styles of music, that his only equal in diversity of music was probably the late Jerry Goldsmith.

Over the years he has made deliberate fine choices about the keys of instruments (think: Ab clarinets in a select one moment of _The Phantom Menace_, for example), and sometimes even their nature, such as calling for an electronic celeste instead of an acoustic one in the opening of _Harry Potter_, and combined orchestral colours in virtually every way over his 200+ hours of music composed. His class of sound is immediately recognizable. To that you may add all sorts of jazz instruments, and even miscelaneous objects used to make music (in the recent _The Last Jedi_). The presence of not immediately obvious electronic instruments in a lot of his music even if they do influence the overall effect is something that never ceases to surprise people.

While no single piece of his goes to the orchestrational complexity level of Respighi, whom I consider the non plus ultra of orchestration, the diversity of Williams' choices is nothing short of marvelous. His concerti for various instruments, while "not intended to replace Dvorak" as he once said about the cello concerto, are very highly regarded and considered rewarding to play by world class artists.

Of course he has his "orchestrators", but they all multiple times declared themselves to be merely glorified copyists, who are called orchestrators mostly because that's the skill level necessary to not blunder when dealing with Williams' ideas written in shorthand, and that despite that he is still always ahead of them.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

One tale you might like to know Fabulin.
He was at Abbey road Studios recording a score (sorry, I should be able to remember which one but bloody can't. I'll shout it out at tea time and frighten the wife probably). The cue was brass heavy and between takes he would purposely dither over some detail in the score with a wink, in order to give the brass players a breather. That is typical of the true gentleman he is.
I was recording there once too, whilst he was in studio 1 recording Harry Potter. When I'd finished, I hung around in the canteen/bar all night just to see him. Can you believe he didn't come in, I mean how inconsiderate...hic...hic...shorry I'm late love etc etc etc.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

mikeh375 said:


> One tale you might like to know Fabulin.
> He was at Abbey road Studios recording a score (sorry, I should be able to remember which one but bloody can't. I'll shout it out at tea time and frighten the wife probably). The cue was brass heavy and between takes he would purposely dither over some detail in the score with a wink, in order to give the brass players a breather. That is typical of the true gentleman he is.
> I was recording there once too, whilst he was in studio 1 recording Harry Potter. When I'd finished, I hung around in the canteen/bar all night just to see him. Can you believe he didn't come in, I mean how inconsiderate...hic...hic...shorry I'm late love etc etc etc.


Sounds about right. He is always super-mindful of the brass players, considering the amount and dynamics of what he writes for them. He used to be a trombonist and a trumpeteer himself at one point.

I've recently heard a story how the LSO musicians in 1977 complained that he did not want them to smoke in the recording room, and how they went to the pub every time after the recording sessions, but he didn't come like a British composer would.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

arpeggio said:


> Another how the hell should I know list?
> 
> Every one on the list wrote some great bassoon parts except Bach. Every bassoon part I have ever played in a Bach piece was boring. Maybe Heck148 knows of some.


I love Bach parts!! Great bass lines... B'burg cto #1 has an excellent part, so does b minor Mass - excellent duet soli with bass and horn (Quoniam)...
I've also played some cantatas that had fine bassoon parts.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

TalkingPie said:


> .....
> I mean it's the same size as Beethoven... Beethoven was a better composer for sure, but he had a very limited orchestral palette at his disposal and never tried to think outside of the box that much (his music doesneed gimmicks to sand out tho)


Beethoven was a great orchestrator, who really pushed the envelope, esp for the woodwinds and brass...same with his string writing - Leonore #3, Symphony #4, #6...
Beethoven greatly expanded the standard orchestra, as well...adding piccolo, contrabassoon, 4 horns, trombones, percussion to the standard mix.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

arpeggio said:


> Another how the hell should I know list?
> 
> Every one on the list wrote some great bassoon parts except Bach. Every bassoon part I have ever played in a Bach piece was boring. Maybe Heck148 knows of some.


I agree with Heck148, here. But I also love playing continuo parts. Not many of the cantatas have bassoon obligato, but some do. And of course Bach regularly used bassoon as a member of the continuo. Anyway, check out BWV 18, 42, 104, 150, 155, 197, 208, and several others. And let's give props to the St. John Passion for having a contrabassoon part. By the way, Kevin Hall made an excerpt book, very scholarly, of all cantatas with bassoon parts.


----------



## ZeR0 (Apr 7, 2020)

I went with Beethoven, Wagner, and Mahler, but I just as easily could have gone with Stravinsky, Ravel, and Strauss. Also, I'm missing Bruckner, Brahms, and Sibelius from this list.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

Heck148 said:


> Rachm'n'ff ?? A great orchestrator??!! You must be kidding....


Symphonic Dances, Rhapsody on a theme by Paganini, Symphony No. 3, The Bells, Symphony No. 2, The Rock, Caprice Bohemien, The Isle of the Dead (among others) tell me the opposite.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Interesting results so far. Beethoven and Mozart doing better than Korsakov, Berlioz, Strauss or Respighi is unexpected to me.


----------



## SearsPoncho (Sep 23, 2020)

No Shostakovich?


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

R. Strauss is toping the poll with some difference from Korsakov (2nd) and Berlioz (3rd) Bruckner's absence (his late symphonies are especially top orchestrated) is the weak point of this interesting poll. Beethoven isn't a great orchestrator. Is the greatest composer in human history. Mahler is the greatest analyst of orchestral form(s), but not all together the top orchestrator. Bach has no place in this poll.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Although I voted for Ravel, I think this poll is meaningless. It's like asking who was the better harmonist, between Palestrina and Debussy.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> Although I voted for Ravel, I think this poll is meaningless. It's like asking who was the better harmonist, between Palestrina and Debussy.


Perhaps the poll makes more sense to you if you consider how well each composer did in orchestration in your perception considering the musical tools they had at their disposal in their respective times: a relative rather than absolute perspective.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

My list:

1. Stravinsky
2. Mahler
3. Sibelius 
4 Brahms
5. Strauss
6. Bruckner
7. Ravel
8.Tchaikovsky
9. Beethoven
10. Shostakovich
11. Wagner
12. Berlioz
13. Mozart
14. Prokofiev
15. Debussy
16. Nielsen
17. Bartok
18. Haydn
19. Dvořák
20. Schubert


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Dimace said:


> R. Strauss is toping the poll with some difference from Korsakov (2nd) and Berlioz (3rd) Bruckner's absence (his late symphonies are especially top orchestrated) is the weak point of this interesting poll. Beethoven isn't a great orchestrator. Is the greatest composer in human history. Mahler is the greatest analyst of orchestral form(s), but not all together the top orchestrator. Bach has no place in this poll.


I agree. Bach was a conventional orchestrator, no superior to Handel or Vivaldi or any other top composer of his time. What he did with harmony is what makes his music stand out. There are dozens of composers "inferior" to Bach who had more interesting orchestration.


----------



## BenG (Aug 28, 2018)

Schoenberg, I believe is one of the greatest 20th century orchestrators. Just look at Gurrelieder or 5 pieces for orchestra.


----------



## BenG (Aug 28, 2018)

Heck148 said:


> Rachm'n'ff ?? A great orchestrator??!! You must be kidding....


Are _you_ kidding? Haven't you heard the Isle of the Dead? one of the greatest pieces of orchestration around! And what about his 2nd Symphony. I don't know where you get the idea that Rachmaninoff's not a great orchestrator, but he undoubtedly is.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

chu42 said:


> I agree. Bach was a conventional orchestrator, no superior to Handel or Vivaldi or any other top composer of his time. What he did with harmony is what makes his music stand out. There are dozens of composers "inferior" to Bach who had more interesting orchestration.


Listen to his 6th clavier concerto (a reworking of the 4th Brandenburg). His handling and blending of the instruments is brilliant. Also compare Bach's orchestration in BWV 1083 to the "conventional" Pergolesi original. The harmony is made to stand out by orchestration.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

BenG said:


> Are _you_ kidding? Haven't you heard the Isle of the Dead? one of the greatest pieces of orchestration around! And what about his 2nd Symphony. I don't know where you get the idea that Rachmaninoff's not a great orchestrator, but he undoubtedly is.


LOL!! Rachm'ff is a terrible orchestrator, and the 2 pieces you've named are 2 of the worst....so thick, muddy, overly murky texture, obscures all sorts of detail...Rach actually puts in some interesting inside parts and attractive lines,but he covers them all up with the excessively heavy scoring....it is frustrating to play...he makes so many fundamental orchestration mistakes.....believe me, I know, I've tried to make his parts work for some 40-50 years, unsuccessfully, I'm sorry to say.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

BenG said:


> Schoenberg, I believe is one of the greatest 20th century orchestrators. Just look at Gurrelieder or 5 pieces for orchestra.


Yes, Schoenbetg - brilliant orchestrator...very clear,very colorful and imaginative.


----------



## Isaac Blackburn (Feb 26, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> LOL!! Rachm'ff is a terrible orchestrator, and the 2 pieces you've named are 2 of the worst....so thick, muddy, overly murky texture, obscures all sorts of detail...Rach actually puts in some interesting inside parts and attractive lines,but he covers them all up with the excessively heavy scoring....it is frustrating to play...he makes so many fundamental orchestration mistakes.....believe me, I know, I've tried to make his parts work for some 40-50 years, unsuccessfully, I'm sorry to say.


Considering that Rachmaninoff heard his own works performed in concert and was quite satisfied, he undoubtedly achieved exactly the sound he wanted. There is always the fantasy, the sense of being somewhere that could, but doesn't quite exist, achieved with masterfully controlled timbre and colorful harmony.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> LOL!! Rachm'ff is a terrible orchestrator, and the 2 pieces you've named are 2 of the worst....so thick, muddy, overly murky texture, obscures all sorts of detail...Rach actually puts in some interesting inside parts and attractive lines,but he covers them all up with the excessively heavy scoring....it is frustrating to play...he makes so many fundamental orchestration mistakes.....believe me, I know, I've tried to make his parts work for some 40-50 years, unsuccessfully, I'm sorry to say.


Wow, even the Symphonic Dances and the piano concerti? I definitely respect your opinion because you are such an experienced musician, but his orchestration always sounds rich and colorful to my ears. However, as a pianist, I do see your point - he does have a tendency to write very thick textures with frustratingly awkward figurations and tricky inner voices. When played well it achieves a great effect, but maybe he subconsciously transferred his "huge hands" approach from writing for the piano to the orchestra.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Isaac Blackburn said:


> Considering that Rachmaninoff heard his own works performed in concert and was quite satisfied, he undoubtedly achieved exactly the sound he wanted....


I don't know about that....the excessively thick texture obscures so much detail, it's hard to imagine that he wanted it to be covered up.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Wow, even the Symphonic Dances and the piano concerti? I definitely respect your opinion because you are such an experienced musician, but his orchestration always sounds rich and colorful to my ears. However, as a pianist, I do see your point - he does have a tendency to write very thick textures with frustratingly awkward figurations and tricky inner voices. When played well it achieves a great effect, but maybe he subconsciously transferred his "huge hands" approach from writing for the piano to the orchestra.


He just gets carried away with the thick, heavy texture....if re-orchestrated, much would be revealed....the Pag/Vars actually works pretty well, overall...


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

I would say Rachmaninov was very competent but not a standout orchestrator. When I think about his works I think about great piano writing over lush but fairly uniform textures.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Tchaikovsky, R. Strauss and Offenbach.


----------

