# Arnold Schoenberg



## ClassicalMaestro

Happy Holidays Everyone

I'm always looking for more theory knowledge and would like to start writing for orchestra. I dabble and have written for small strings quartet. Nothing major.

I have recently bought Samuel Adler study of orchestration and Walter Piston - Harmony. But I hear Schoenberg was the best on the subject of Theory.

Any help would be appreciated.


----------



## mbhaub

Not sure what you're looking for. A thorough knowledge of theory is essential for writing for orchestra, but writing well for large ensembles is a whole different topic and one fraught with dangers and difficulties. And it depends on what type of music you want to write.

I assume you're trying to be self-taught? Nothing wrong with that, but it can be tough. For theory, I highly recommend a book written by Ricahrd Franko Goldman: *Harmony in Western Music*. There is no other book so concise, practical and thorough.

Orchestration books are notoriously bad at the one thing most people want to learn: how to write for FULL orchestra. All of the books explain the individual instruments and their families. Most do a terrible job of explaining the extraordinarily complex task of writing for the whole shebang. Adler is just as bad as most.

When I was learning to do it, the best teachers I had were the great composers of the past. The professor I was studying under had me go get scores of the masters and literally copy their score BY HAND onto blank paper with one major change: rewrite it in concert pitch. I got the insider's view on how and why these great composers and orchestrators wrote the way they did. Took a lot of time, but worth every minute. For text books, there was only one that really helped - the very old one by Ebenezer Prout: volume 2 is dedicated to orchestral combination, of course he wrote from a pretty traditional, late romantic point of view. But he explains everything so clearly.

The other book I found invaluable was one written by John Cacavas:* Music Arranging and Orchestration* which is written for practical application and how he did it. Very, very useful.

Another part of the puzzle is something I find very few people do anymore: read every score you can get your hands on. Read it "in your head". Read it along with a recording. You'll be amazed how much you can learn.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

mbhaub said:


> Not sure what you're looking for. A thorough knowledge of theory is essential for writing for orchestra, but writing well for large ensembles is a whole different topic and one fraught with dangers and difficulties. And it depends on what type of music you want to write.
> 
> I assume you're trying to be self-taught? Nothing wrong with that, but it can be tough. For theory, I highly recommend a book written by Ricahrd Franko Goldman: *Harmony in Western Music*. There is no other book so concise, practical and thorough.
> 
> Orchestration books are notoriously bad at the one thing most people want to learn: how to write for FULL orchestra. All of the books explain the individual instruments and their families. Most do a terrible job of explaining the extraordinarily complex task of writing for the whole shebang. Adler is just as bad as most.
> 
> When I was learning to do it, the best teachers I had were the great composers of the past. The professor I was studying under had me go get scores of the masters and literally copy their score BY HAND onto blank paper with one major change: rewrite it in concert pitch. I got the insider's view on how and why these great composers and orchestrators wrote the way they did. Took a lot of time, but worth every minute. For text books, there was only one that really helped - the very old one by Ebenezer Prout: volume 2 is dedicated to orchestral combination, of course he wrote from a pretty traditional, late romantic point of view. But he explains everything so clearly.
> 
> The other book I found invaluable was one written by John Cacavas:* Music Arranging and Orchestration* which is written for practical application and how he did it. Very, very useful.
> 
> Another part of the puzzle is something I find very few people do anymore: read every score you can get your hands on. Read it "in your head". Read it along with a recording. You'll be amazed how much you can learn.


Wow thank you for the great advice. I'm a classically trained guitarist and I do have some music theory training but nothing to advance when it comes to writing for other instruments. But I guess if you're creative and have a great imagination it shouldn't be too difficult especially with all the software that's available today. If it sounds bad it must be wrong but if it sounds good it must be right.


----------



## mikeh375

Do exactly what mbhaub did. Don't just read scores, also copy them (or sections thereof) out onto a few staves as in a short score, perhaps section by section to see how the instruments are combined, taking note of any interlocking, juxtaposition etc, along with spacing, doubling, phrasing, range and dynamics. Doing this will reinforce any insights into the various ways instruments can be combined and doubled. If you do it orchestral section by section, a picture will build up as to how to combine the whole orchestra and what works for any given situation. Ultimately, the goal is to be able to think orchestrally at the composing stage and not as an afterthought.

A word of warning re. software. Anything can be made to work with samples and/or midi, good or bad and if it sounds good to uninitiated ears, it doesn't mean to say it is practical or realistic. Also, one only has to listen to a GM, or in some cases, sampled Sibelius playback of a great score to see the damage that can be done to well written music when played electronically. High end samples are admittedly far superior, especially those from OT, VSL and SFA et al, but they are only as convincing as the knowledge that has programmed them and they are limited to general techniques with the odd effects patches here and there. 

Idiomatic writing takes several years of study as does orchestration - the more you put into study and exercises, the better you will become but be prepared for the long haul if you want to do it well or to a professional standard. Online resources exist too but there is no easy route.


----------



## Rogerx

https://www.talkclassical.com/4505-arnold-schoenberg-1874-1951-a.html?highlight=Arnold+Schoenberg
Perhaps you find info in this earlier thread


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

Thanks
Studying scores sounds like the smartest thing to do.


----------



## mbhaub

Yes, studying scores is a smart thing. And fortunately almost any score you would want from the masters is available for free nowadays. But not always: One of the most frustrating things about score study is that so many that we want to see, to learn from, you can't get. I'm talking about pops arrangements and movie music. And light classical, too. For decades there were composers who wrote for salon orchestras - people like Ketelbey, Farnon, Coates, Herbert and many others. Music in copyright is really difficult to access, and even then you can often only get a condensed score. I love the sound that someone like George Melachrino could wrest from an orchestra, but learning his method was a challenge. I finally borrowed a couple of his arrangements, copied all the orchestral parts to create full score and voila! His voicing, doublings and all became clear. I also learned to never trust computer software. I like to use Finale, and listening to it's playback can sure pinpoint wrong notes and such. But it doesn't come close to what a real orchestra will sound like. And getting orchestra time to read music is very difficult and often expensive. In that regard I'm lucky as I have access to two groups that will read and usually play anything I arrange. Arranging for smaller ensembles is easier and the computer can actually do a decent job playing it back.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

I do have a couple of scores I just haven't found the time to look them over but I am going to make time. I have Star Wars, Superman and Psycho. I'll have to look up Melachrino. I often compose small string quartets because there's not much instrumentation and it's also a lot of fun. I use sibelius with garritan plugin.


----------



## mikeh375

ClassicalMaestro said:


> I do have a couple of scores I just haven't found the time to look them over but I am going to make time. I have Star Wars, Superman and Psycho. I'll have to look up Melachrino. I often compose small string quartets because there's not much instrumentation and it's also a lot of fun. I use sibelius with garritan plugin.


Whatever you use CMaestro, do consider supplementing it with study as to what is actually possible and what sounds well in the real world because there is always a danger that a novice (not necessarily you of course) will be influenced by the actual sound of the playback, much to their own creative detriment. This is a real danger to potentiality within a composer, one that can be compounded by practices such as midistration. There is nothing wrong with scoring for a faux, digital musical world of course and there is plenty of great music written this way, but if you want total mastery and a freedom from creative constraints (ie sample limitations), then the road is longer and harder. Clearly it's down to what your priorities are but do bear in mind that the more you know, the more creative you can be and the more prepared and able you will be. Besides, samples sound at their most convincing when they ape reality in all aspects of performance.

John Williams famously does not use digital means to create his music and as a result, his scores are vibrant, idiomatic, unbounded and imaginative - part of the great tradition of orchestral writing stretching back to late romanticism. To achieve that level of competence and creative freedom requires more than a DAW but it's only consistent and focused hard work and time that is asked of one - a small price to pay for the personal rewards given. I wish you well in your studies, whichever way you decide to create.


----------



## mikeh375

A classic that is a wealth of good resource and it's free online....

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/33900/33900-h/33900-h.htm


----------



## mbhaub

Yeah - a real classic and with lots of real-world, practical advice. And lots of scores (his, of course) to demonstrate. RK was the teacher and inspiration of Respighi, Ravel, Prokofieff, Shostakovich and many others. Not a bad track record.


----------



## MAXSWAGGER

ClassicalMaestro said:


> I have recently bought Samuel Adler study of orchestration and Walter Piston - Harmony. But I hear Schoenberg was the best on the subject of Theory.


Yes, he was the best on the subject of theory for sure. If you want become the best theoretical master ever walked this planet I can highly recommend his books. If you don't have his books in your bookshelf - no theoretical master will ever respect or even love you - imagine what a greek tragedy that would be. Unbelievable...

I can sell them to you. Just hurry up - everybody who wants to become a great theoretical master wants to have this books now. :lol:


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

Great thank you.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

mikeh375 said:


> A classic that is a wealth of good resource and it's free online....
> 
> http://www.gutenberg.org/files/33900/33900-h/33900-h.htm


Thank you I'll check it out. I'm looking for small easy scores to study. Any recommendations?


----------



## millionrainbows

Get a DAW like LOGIC and then add Vienna Orchestral samples, then a book about how to orchestrate in that app. Then you can hear your results immediately. This is how movie soundtracks are made.


----------



## mikeh375

ClassicalMaestro said:


> Thank you I'll check it out. I'm looking for small easy scores to study. Any recommendations?


Perhaps start light with some string music as the string section often plays the most in a score - Elgar, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak Serenades perhaps. Mozart would be a good start too as the language is easily digested and one could learn about simple wind and brass combinations.

There's a truth to Millions post above about DAWs too. I have Logic and most sample libraries and one can indeed do a good job of recreating combinations and ensembles but it requires much effort and skill in different areas. There are some traps one can fall into too if DAW meddling isn't backed up with real world knowledge.

For me, I have never once regretted learning the traditional way by listening, writing out in short score passages from great works that impressed or displayed things I didn't know about and keeping my head permanently poked into a score. Some fluency in transposition should be practiced too to facilitate quicker reading of scores.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

mikeh375 said:


> Perhaps start light with some string music as the string section often plays the most in a score - Elgar, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak Serenades perhaps. Mozart would be a good start too as the language is easily digested and one could learn about simple wind and brass combinations.
> 
> There's a truth to Millions post above about DAWs too. I have Logic and most sample libraries and one can indeed do a good job of recreating combinations and ensembles but it requires much effort and skill in different areas. There are some traps one can fall into too if DAW meddling isn't backed up with real world knowledge.
> 
> For me, I have never once regretted learning the traditional way by listening, writing out in short score passages from great works that impressed or displayed things I didn't know about and keeping my head permanently poked into a score. Some fluency in transposition should be practiced too to facilitate quicker reading of scores.


I use a DAW and have some nice samples. But I'm learning the traditional way. I have some music theory knowledge and I have been studying four part harmony. I like the composers you suggested.


----------



## mikeh375

ClassicalMaestro said:


> I use a DAW and have some nice samples. But I'm learning the traditional way. I have some music theory knowledge and I have been studying four part harmony. I like the composers you suggested.


That's great CM, you wont regret it. In my media career, the briefs I received came in the form of many diverse styles of music and not one of them over-awed me, or had me scrambling for creative purchase thanks to my training. Having a strong technical background is such an integral part of composing for ensembles and a solid foundation with which to compose.

You are probably proficient with a DAW, so why not get hold of some recordings and scores and do some mock-ups. This is doubly beneficial in that you learn orchestration and improve your DAW/Template/production skills at the same time. You will know that strings are hardest to replicate, even with the best on offer, but a lot of instructive study and practice can still be done.

The more you know and more importantly do, the better you'll be.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

mikeh375 said:


> That's great CM, you wont regret it. In my media career, the briefs I received came in the form of many diverse styles of music and not one of them over-awed me, or had me scrambling for creative purchase thanks to my training. Having a strong technical background is such an integral part of composing for ensembles and a solid foundation with which to compose.
> 
> You are probably proficient with a DAW, so why not get hold of some recordings and scores and do some mock-ups. This is doubly beneficial in that you learn orchestration and improve your DAW/Template/production skills at the same time. You will know that strings are hardest to replicate, even with the best on offer, but a lot of instructive study and practice can still be done.
> 
> The more you know and more importantly do, the better you'll be.


I appreciate all you help. I was just checking out your website and listened to your scores I hope one day I compose something that good. Great work!


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

mbhaub said:


> Not sure what you're looking for. A thorough knowledge of theory is essential for writing for orchestra, but writing well for large ensembles is a whole different topic and one fraught with dangers and difficulties. And it depends on what type of music you want to write.
> 
> I assume you're trying to be self-taught? Nothing wrong with that, but it can be tough. For theory, I highly recommend a book written by Ricahrd Franko Goldman: *Harmony in Western Music*. There is no other book so concise, practical and thorough.
> 
> Orchestration books are notoriously bad at the one thing most people want to learn: how to write for FULL orchestra. All of the books explain the individual instruments and their families. Most do a terrible job of explaining the extraordinarily complex task of writing for the whole shebang. Adler is just as bad as most.
> 
> When I was learning to do it, the best teachers I had were the great composers of the past. The professor I was studying under had me go get scores of the masters and literally copy their score BY HAND onto blank paper with one major change: rewrite it in concert pitch. I got the insider's view on how and why these great composers and orchestrators wrote the way they did. Took a lot of time, but worth every minute. For text books, there was only one that really helped - the very old one by Ebenezer Prout: volume 2 is dedicated to orchestral combination, of course he wrote from a pretty traditional, late romantic point of view. But he explains everything so clearly.
> 
> The other book I found invaluable was one written by John Cacavas:* Music Arranging and Orchestration* which is written for practical application and how he did it. Very, very useful.
> 
> Another part of the puzzle is something I find very few people do anymore: read every score you can get your hands on. Read it "in your head". Read it along with a recording. You'll be amazed how much you can learn.


Harmony in Western music is almost like Walter Pistons Harmony book.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

mikeh375 said:


> Do exactly what mbhaub did. Don't just read scores, also copy them (or sections thereof) out onto a few staves as in a short score, perhaps section by section to see how the instruments are combined, taking note of any interlocking, juxtaposition etc, along with spacing, doubling, phrasing, range and dynamics. Doing this will reinforce any insights into the various ways instruments can be combined and doubled. If you do it orchestral section by section, a picture will build up as to how to combine the whole orchestra and what works for any given situation. Ultimately, the goal is to be able to think orchestrally at the composing stage and not as an afterthought.
> 
> A word of warning re. software. Anything can be made to work with samples and/or midi, good or bad and if it sounds good to uninitiated ears, it doesn't mean to say it is practical or realistic. Also, one only has to listen to a GM, or in some cases, sampled Sibelius playback of a great score to see the damage that can be done to well written music when played electronically. High end samples are admittedly far superior, especially those from OT, VSL and SFA et al, but they are only as convincing as the knowledge that has programmed them and they are limited to general techniques with the odd effects patches here and there.
> 
> Idiomatic writing takes several years of study as does orchestration - the more you put into study and exercises, the better you will become but be prepared for the long haul if you want to do it well or to a professional standard. Online resources exist too but there is no easy route.


Quick question:
How do you get your music heard after you compose something you think is good?


----------



## mikeh375

ClassicalMaestro said:


> Quick question:
> How do you get your music heard after you compose something you think is good?


Well I'd first programme and mix it to the best of your abilities if you use a playback of some sort and get the score up to pro level as best you can. Then you could try sending it to various musicians/groups to see if they would be interested in the work. The better the mock-up, the more a group will be willing to pay attention and the more professional the score is, the more the work will be taken seriously. You don't need a mock-up as such as just a score will do, but if players can hear a little more accurately what is on the page, it can make their decision easier.

Try pitching your work to local bands/musicians and the amateur scene in general too if your score is playable at that level. One could also purposely write to amateur standard to increase performance opportunities. Check out what's available in your area and see if any groups would be willing to take on a new piece..

If you have some spare cash , you could always get a recording done. You could also try some remote recording. I am working with a violinist at present in this way. He has a set-up at home that allows him to record himself. He sends me the files and I insert them into my DAW. You can easily find musicians with recording facilities online with sites like Fiverr.

There are also competitions to enter but there is virtually no chance of winning one so make sure you don't pay too much for entry unless your are totally confident in your work and feel it deserves a shot. It has to be said though that you will rarely get a response from anywhere unless you are lucky so be prepared, but also, don't let rejection put you off.

You could also self-publish, posting your work on-line using one of the many streaming services, or even create your own website.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

mikeh375 said:


> Well I'd first programme and mix it to the best of your abilities if you use a playback of some sort and get the score up to pro level as best you can. Then you could try sending it to various musicians/groups to see if they would be interested in the work. The better the mock-up, the more a group will be willing to pay attention and the more professional the score is, the more the work will be taken seriously. You don't need a mock-up as such as just a score will do, but if players can hear a little more accurately what is on the page, it can make their decision easier.
> 
> Try pitching your work to local bands/musicians and the amateur scene in general too if your score is playable at that level. One could also purposely write to amateur standard to increase performance opportunities. Check out what's available in your area and see if any groups would be willing to take on a new piece..
> 
> If you have some spare cash , you could always get a recording done. You could also try some remote recording. I am working with a violinist at present in this way. He has a set-up at home that allows him to record himself. He sends me the files and I insert them into my DAW. You can easily find musicians with recording facilities online with sites like Fiverr.
> 
> There are also competitions to enter but there is virtually no chance of winning one so make sure you don't pay too much for entry unless your are totally confident in your work and feel it deserves a shot. It has to be said though that you will rarely get a response from anywhere unless you are lucky so be prepared, but also, don't let rejection put you off.
> 
> You could also self-publish, posting your work on-line using one of the many streaming services, or even create your own website.


Thanks for the great advice. I just composed a short orchestral piece on logic using EW Symphonic Orchestra. I was thinking about putting it on soundcloud or spotify. Creating a website would be fun too. Do I need to copyright it?


----------



## mikeh375

If your piece is atonal, I shouldn't worry too much about copyright as it is highly unlikely to be stolen. That said it's probably best to register it with maybe a royalty organisation to be safe. If your piece is in a popular style, i.e. trailer, filmic or pop, then I would definitely copyright it because the internet is a wild west when it comes to rights. Btw, I forgot to mention library companies as an outlet for making money in my last post. I'm out of the game now and wont be much help there but I know some have made a decent living out of royalties but it does take time and luck to get to that stage. Still, it might be worth checking out. 

Do you know the VI-C forum? You can get lots of advice there on film, trailer, libraries and general business practices and pitfalls, as well as a lot of info and tips on software instruments and DAWs.

On VI-C I've read some troubling things about Soundcloud's policies regarding uploaded music so check them out thoroughly before posting there. You could of course self-publish and copyright your work via your own publishing company.


----------



## Woodduck

mikeh375 said:


> If your piece is atonal, I shouldn't worry too much about copyright as it is highly unlikely to be stolen.


And if it _were_ plagiarized, who would know?


----------



## mikeh375

Woodduck said:


> And if it _were_ plagiarized, who would know?


...naughty...


----------



## SanAntone

Woodduck said:


> And if it _were_ plagiarized, who would know?


The composer, obviously. Also, there are some of us who are able to hear atonal works and tell them apart.


----------

