# Great Orchestrator but poor composer



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

I can't help but think that Joachim Raff falls into this category. His music with the exception of few are quite superficial and shallow, but even with that they are well orchestrated. I would even rank him above Brahms as an orchestrator, but Brahms' music has the depth, the passion and the intellectual sustenance that Raff's lacks. The same for Schumann. Raff was a better orchestrator that Schumann but Schumann's 4 symphonies surpasses Raff's 9 in depth and uniqueness.

Do you guys know of any other composers that are stuck with this quandary of being a great orchestrator but mediocre composer at best?

In my opinion, Bruckner, Mahler, Wagner, Tchaikovsky, Mozart and Beethoven provide the perfect synthesis between orchestrator and composer.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I would take Raff's fifth symphony over any of the Schumann four. And he composed 11, not 9, symphonies. Not just a great orchestrator, but a great composer.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

ScipioAfricanus said:


> ...
> 
> Do you guys know of any other composers that are stuck with this quandary of being a great orchestrator but mediocre composer at best?
> 
> ...


Can't properly comment on Raff, my experience with him is limited. I know he orchestrated some of Liszt's works, so I'd guess that yes he was good at orchestration. With Liszt, upon first getting to know his _A Faust Symphony_, which he orchestrated himself, I thought that it was (in the first two movements) lacking colour and a bit boring. The third movement I was fine with, very colourful. But then I realised his aim, to build up the colour as he goes along, not give you everything at once, not overload you. That's how I kind of see it, matching the narrative maybe. But I really like that work now, incl. it's kind of different or even quirky orchestration.

I'm wary of pulling down composers for bad orchestration as it can lead to judging their composing. There was a former member here who pulled down Sibelius compared to R. Strauss, when they were totally different. Not even worth comparing them. Sibeliius the master of the _black and white_ type of restrained palette, R. Strauss a very able composer in a more flamboyant, colourful, extravagant style. Both where unique, so I don't see a real reason to elevate one and put in the toilet another. They could do what they wanted, they had variety within their styles.

I think I hardly know any _good orchestrator_ but _bad composer_. Guys like Albeniz where not good, or not much interested in orchestration, but they got others to do it for them. I think ultimately orchestration is not as important as composing, but of course often it's hard to separate the two.

I'm truly stumped.


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

Lots of music pieces on Wikipedia.

just listen to Mendelssohn's 4th symphony down this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._4_(Mendelssohn)



----

I have Solti version for around 7 years.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Rimsky's orchestrations are much more skillful than his compositions are deep - but that is mostly a comment on his orchestrating skill.


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

I find Rimsky-Korsakov to be rather this way. His orchestration is fabulous, his compositions bore me to death.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

"It struck me that Tchaikovsky, who was above all a lyrical and melodic composer, had introduced operatic elements into his symphonies. I admired the thematic material of his works less than the inspired unfolding of his thoughts, his temperament and the constructural perfection." - Glazunov about Tchaikovsky


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

I believe Saint-Saens is the poster boy for this, no? He was about 50 years too late with the kind of music he wrote but I'll be damned if it isn't well written.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> I would take Raff's fifth symphony.


Raff's Symphony no 5 is well orchestrated shallowness. The only Symphony worth mentioning of Raff is his 3rd Im Walde, which served as the model for Brahms 3rd. Im Walde is one of the most perfectly composed symphonies in terms of orchestration, and intellectual content. It is quite satisfying. But no way Raff's 5th beats all of Schumann or any of Schumann's 4.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

Couchie said:


> I believe Saint-Saens is the poster boy for this, no? He was about 50 years too late with the kind of music he wrote but I'll be damned if it isn't well written.


Saint Saens music is not that shallow, but he was too much of the eclectic. He didn't know if he was a Brahmsian or a Wagnerian or a German or Frenchman. But yes his orchestrated much better than he composed.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

ScipioAfricanus said:


> Raff's Symphony no 5 is well orchestrated shallowness. The only Symphony worth mentioning of Raff is his 3rd Im Walde, which served as the model for Brahms 3rd. Im Walde is one of the most perfectly composed symphonies in terms of orchestration, and intellectual content. It is quite satisfying. But no way Raff's 5th beats all of Schumann or any of Schumann's 4.


You have your opinions (even though you state them as if they were a fact), I have mine (which I clearly stated as an opinion).


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> You have your opinions (even though you state them as if they were a fact), I have mine (which I clearly stated as an opinion).


i take umbrage to your opinion  hence my strong counter opinion.


----------



## mleghorn (May 18, 2011)

The last few minutes of the first movement of Tchaikovsky's 3rd symphony is all orchestration with no theme or ideas.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> You have your opinions (even though you state them as if they were a fact), I have mine (which I clearly stated as an opinion).


Hey, _AR_, it's all opinion here - no matter how emphatically stated.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

*Saint-Saens* is often poo-pooed as being bad music, or outdated, or superficial, or what's been said above. I don't think he was an innovator, or not a big one, but so what? In any case, he was a composer who strongly valued tradition when many where going for Wagnerian excess.

But he did absorb a lot from Liszt, who admired his music and they where friends, and even Wagner's innovations would not have passed him by. Like Bizet and Gounod, Saint-Saens went back to the wigs and mined their art to make new art in the spirit of the Romantic age. Examples that are in the repertoire are his _Cello Concerto #1_ and _Piano Concerto #4_, which fuse Liszt's concept of thematic transformation with Baroque and Classical forms/techniques updated and given a new kind of veneer. The opening of his _Piano Concerto #2_ is pure Bach, but with a very dark and emotionally intense undertow.

Then there are works which have stood the test of time in the repertoire, eg. the _Sym.#3 'Organ_,' and _Violin Concerto #3_, more showpiece type works, but quite sophisticated. & who has written a more moving or better tune in a short piece as _The Swan_? Indeed, the whole _Carnival of the Animals _is a classic, and even better with Ogden Nash's witty and whimsical narration. So many celebrities and great actors have done it, it really holds a unique place in the classical children's repertoire (& adults can enjoy it too!).


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

I can't edit/erase my post anymore. I misunderstood the title in reversed way.

And about this thread, I don't know. Maybe Glenn Gould as conductor, very few compositions.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Some might say this about Richard Strauss at times. I think I did recently. Not here, but I said it. Its not always true, but with some pieces it is.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Until you get into the realms of 20th century film music, I don't really think there is, really, such an animal as you're hoping to define.

Less imaginative, less concerned with color, perhaps.

Those citations nominating Rimsky-Korsakov in this "slot" are about as close as any candidate I could think of, I might toss Ottorino Resphigi into the arena with the lions along with Rimsky, though. Even there, these two composers wrote a lot of 'successful' pieces, which I would not begin to name as 'poor.'

Poor -- well 'poor' is the Pierne first piano concerto, across the board, music, and unimaginative orchestration  The qualities, good or bad, most often go hand in hand.


----------



## Jaws (Jun 4, 2011)

Sibelius??


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Jaws said:


> Sibelius??


Hah. You must be in the wrong thread.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

clavichorder said:


> Some might say this about Richard Strauss at times. I think I did recently. Not here, but I said it. Its not always true, but with some pieces it is.


Well, as I said a few days ago on another thread, R. Strauss' passion was for vocal music, esp. opera, with it's added dramatic/narrative elements. Purely orchestral music was his second option, he said that he did his tone poems (well, a good deal of them) as fillers between opera commissions. That's okay, today's American composer John Adams works in a similar way, I think. Doesn't make them bad at orchestral or instrumental music, it just means that their stronger music is in the vocal and opera realms.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Sid James said:


> *Saint-Saens* is often poo-pooed as being bad music, or outdated, or superficial, or what's been said above. I don't think he was an innovator, or not a big one, but so what? In any case, he was a composer who strongly valued tradition when many where going for Wagnerian excess.
> 
> But he did absorb a lot from Liszt, who admired his music and they where friends, and even Wagner's innovations would not have passed him by. Like Bizet and Gounod, Saint-Saens went back to the wigs and mined their art to make new art in the spirit of the Romantic age. Examples that are in the repertoire are his _Cello Concerto #1_ and _Piano Concerto #4_, which fuse Liszt's concept of thematic transformation with Baroque and Classical forms/techniques updated and given a new kind of veneer. The opening of his _Piano Concerto #2_ is pure Bach, but with a very dark and emotionally intense undertow.
> 
> Then there are works which have stood the test of time in the repertoire, eg. the _Sym.#3 'Organ_,' and _Violin Concerto #3_, more showpiece type works, but quite sophisticated. & who has written a more moving or better tune in a short piece as _The Swan_? Indeed, the whole _Carnival of the Animals _is a classic, and even better with Ogden Nash's witty and whimsical narration. So many celebrities and great actors have done it, it really holds a unique place in the classical children's repertoire (& adults can enjoy it too!).


Saint-Saens was actually an early champion of Wagner. Somewhere along the line he became an ultraconservative and Wagner fell out of favour (not unheard of obviously) as well as Liszt. Then also Debussy, R. Strauss, Stravinsky, ie. every major figure involved in the progression of music. He was stuck in the classical era. As he had natural talent rivalling Mozart and Mendelssohn, he's just hugely wasted talent. He was one of my early favourites as a classical listener but as I became more and more exposed to classical the hatred for this man just kept building and building. Unless I am unwittingly exposed I look forward to never hearing another Saint-Saens piece for the rest of my life.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

^^Saint-Saens' status as radical or conservative or both is still a topic of much debate. Yes, he was in the progressive camp early on - lumped in with Liszt and Wagner. The influence of both is apparent, and he was associated with both of them. He was asked to conduct the premiere of Rheingold but turned it down, and he arranged a thing or two for Liszt - who said Saint-Saens' 4th piano concerto was the best since Beethoven's.

Debussy and Ravel admired him when they where younger. There is obvious connection with them, his music (similar in some ways to theirs) not really being over the top or too emotional, more elegant, restrained and refined, typically French. Of course, later Ravel said Saint-Saens would have done better to build Howitzer rifles duing WW1 than compose neo-classical pastiche. But that's the rub, he was going into neo-classicism of a kind about 50 years before any of them. To him it was already there early on, but after WW1 (the end of his life) it became fashionable in Modernism. Talks to me to be a kind of ideological thing, not only musical. But the late wind sonatas, though not cutting edge by that time, do speak to how even late in life he could turn out music of value and quality.

A list of works in the performing repertoire that he has tells me he's not 'wasted talent.' 
- Organ Symphony
- Piano Concertos 2, 4, 5 (esp. #2)
- Violin Concerto #3
- Carnival of the Animals
- Cello Concerto #1
- Various stand-alone encore/showpiece type works, eg. Introduction & Rondo Capriccioso
- A number of chamber works, eg. the oboe sonata, clarinet sonata are among the most popular sonatas for those instruments

Those are the main things I can think of, but doubtless there are others.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

My favourite piece of his was actually "Danse Macabre" which Liszt was quite taken with as well I guess because he transcribed it for piano. This is probably his most innovative piece (which isn't saying much) but the climax is very satisfying with the whirling violins.

His music is not _bad_ (per the thread, great orchestrator) but had he been in the progressive camp, (or at least, less of a stuck-in-the-past bigot) what would have he produced? 
_
Damn_ better music than he did.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

^^I think he may well be a _hybrid_ between progressive/radical and traditionalist (or conservative, if we want to use a more loaded word). So what? Many composers are like that, they retain what they need from the past and build on it. They synthesise innovations of their time. Although I don't like Wagner, he did loom large as an innovator of the second half of the 19th century. However, as I said, Saint-Saens was doing neo-classicism about half a century before it came (back?) in vogue. Everything old is new again kind of thing. He also took on board innovations of Wagner and Liszt. This reminds me of what someone said to me in my earlier days here, I was poo pooing Saint Saens. He said to me, sounds like you want Saint-Saens to be German, not French. A different aesthetic, I think it's good to keep it in mind. He's not as heavy or full on as Wagner or even Liszt in some cases, neither are Debussy and Ravel, for example - but they're no worse for it, for simply being themselves.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Couchie said:


> My favourite piece of his was actually "Danse Macabre" which Liszt was quite taken with as well I guess because he transcribed it for piano. This is probably his most innovative piece (which isn't saying much) but the climax is very satisfying with the whirling violins.
> 
> His music is not _bad_ (per the thread, great orchestrator) but had he been in the progressive camp, (or at least, less of a stuck-in-the-past bigot) what would have he produced?
> _
> Damn_ better music than he did.


My god, do you realise how thrilling it is when you write about music other than Wagner as being "not bad?" 

Great orchestrator, poor composer: Respighi. Now yell at me all you like


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

ScipioAfricanus said:


> Do you guys know of any other composers that are stuck with this quandary of being a great orchestrator but mediocre composer at best?


Tchaikovsky for a start.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Jeremy Marchant said:


> Tchaikovsky for a start.


False start; go to the back of the pack.


----------



## Jaws (Jun 4, 2011)

Jeremy Marchant said:


> Tchaikovsky for a start.


And Sibelius


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Jaws said:


> And Sibelius


Nah................


----------



## jani (Jun 15, 2012)

Jaws said:


> And Sibelius










...........


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

I like Raff. I have a piano trio that is very well-constructed, and pleasing to hear. However, if he were a more gifted composer than Robert Schumann, or even came close, he would be the best kept secret in Western Music. RS is not famous because he was a mentally tortured man in some romantic sort of way, but because of works like the Symphony No. 2 in C major Op. 61 and the song cycle _Dichterliebe_ Op. 48 - two immortal works among many. Just my opine.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

Klavierspieler said:


> I find Rimsky-Korsakov to be rather this way. His orchestration is fabulous, his compositions bore me to death.


Rimsky is an opera composer as Wagner. He composed 15 operas (i am happy to say I have all of them). His operas are awesome. When you don't know his operas, you don't know R-K. I agree his symphonic music is not the best, however they are not boring IMHO.

Sincerely,

Martin


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

jani said:


> View attachment 5986
> 
> ...........


Yeah, with Sibeluis it's poor orchestration and poor composer.


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

Mahler ?  He is not really a poor composer, but anyway, he is a better orchestrator than composer.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

Renaissance said:


> Mahler ?  He is not really a poor composer, but anyway, he is a better orchestrator than composer.


C'mon guys! I am the new moderator. you will have a warning if you denigrate good composers!!!!!!! Mahler is GOOD, Sibelius sometimes could be a bit boring but he's good.

When I went to Helsinki, I decided to go to Ainola, Sibelius' house. A long way plenty of snow (of course it was in winter). Lot of snow, forests... the snow was touching my knees....We finally arrived (my mother always followed me in my adventures) and the house was closed for vacation...enough reason to hate the composer...But I forgave him... I am a nice guy.

Martin, moderator named by Nikolai Myaskovsky


----------



## jani (Jun 15, 2012)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> C'mon guys! I am the new moderator. you will have a warning if you denigrate good composers!!!!!!! Mahler is GOOD, Sibelius sometimes could be a bit boring but he's good.
> 
> When I went to Helsinki, I decided to go to Ainola, Sibelius' house. A long way plenty of snow (of course it was in winter). Lot of snow, forests... the snow was touching my knees....We finally arrived (my mother always followed me in my adventures) and the house was closed for vacation...enough reason to hate the composer...But I forgave him... I am a nice guy.
> 
> Martin, moderator named by Nikolai Myaskovsky


With the words of COAG *YOUR OPINION IS WRONG!*


----------



## jani (Jun 15, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Yeah, with Sibeluis it's poor orchestration and poor composer.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

jani said:


> With the words of COAG *YOUR OPINION IS WRONG!*


I don't give a sibelius!


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

As Napoleon had said once, j'ai raison, tu as tort! (I am write, you are rongue)


----------



## powerbooks (Jun 30, 2012)

Not Richard Strauss.

While he may not be the first rate composer, his compositions were top notch especially for opera and vocal. In that sense, I don't think his orchestration is superior than his composition!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

I can't believe I said this:



ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Yeah, with Sibeluis it's poor orchestration and poor composer.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I can't believe I said this:


Well, when you are an audacious 15 yo boy who thinks "I know it all" (15 yo boy being really equivalent to all that), it happens.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

aleazk said:


> Well, when you are an audacious 15 yo boy who thinks "I know it all" (15 yo boy being really equivalent to all that), it happens.


Hey! I'm still 15 for about another month!


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2013)

So, this thread again, eh?

I wonder now I was able to resist contributing to it. Especially as it seems pretty clear that there's some confusion about orchestration. The remarks so far seem (though since they're so vague, it's no more than seem) to be directed at instrumentation. And I suppose one could separate that activity out from composition, though I'm not sure what it would get you. But orchestration? Nah. That is part and parcel of composition, as Sid suggested already. (That might be why I didn't contribute last year. Sid had already said what I would have said.)

Anyway, far as I can see, great orchestrator but poor composer is a null set. Kinda like "great at putting words together but a poor poet." Or "great with color but a poor painter." But I suppose there will be those who are able to separate those activities out and find people who were good at one but not the other. Not an ability I have, I guess.


----------



## Perotin (May 29, 2012)

Well, I think there are different qualities to be found in (classical) music and there are composers, that excel in some and underperform at others. Some are good melodists, like Mozart or Schubert, others are good orchestrators like Rimsky-Korsakov or Strauss, some are good at counterpoint like Bach, others at development of themes like Beethoven and some have feeling for chords like Debussy and Skriabin. I know, some will get mad at me for this, but I can name Berlioz as being good orchestrator and ,if not poor composer, at least poor melodist.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

aleazk said:


> Well, when you are an audacious 15 yo boy who thinks "I know it all" (15 yo boy being really equivalent to all that), it happens.


You think he's changed then ?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Perotin said:


> Well, I think there are different qualities to be found in (classical) music and there are composers, that excel in some and underperform at others. Some are good melodists, like Mozart or Schubert, others are good orchestrators like Rimsky-Korsakov or Strauss, some are good at counterpoint like Bach, others at development of themes like Beethoven and some have feeling for chords like Debussy and Skriabin. I know, some will get mad at me for this, but I can name Berlioz as being good orchestrator and ,if not poor composer, at least poor melodist.


Was Berlioz trying to be a melodist then,strange remark in my opinion.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> "It struck me that Tchaikovsky, who was above all a lyrical and melodic composer, had introduced operatic elements into his symphonies. I admired the thematic material of his works less than the inspired unfolding of his thoughts, his temperament and the constructural perfection." - Glazunov about Tchaikovsky


Some say Mozart introduced ideas he could have used in an opera into his orchestral works. Maybe that is part of Tchaikovsky's admiration of Mozart.


----------



## Perotin (May 29, 2012)

moody said:


> Was Berlioz trying to be a melodist then,strange remark in my opinion.


As far as I know, all composers that lived between renaissance era and atonal period tried to be good melodists.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

some guy said:


> So, this thread again, eh?
> [...]
> Anyway, far as I can see, great orchestrator but poor composer is a null set. Kinda like "great at putting words together but a poor poet." Or "great with color but a poor painter." But I suppose there will be those who are able to separate those activities out and find people who were good at one but not the other. Not an ability I have, I guess.




Oh, I think you have the ability. Applying my grotesque sense of metaphor... many minds have a hallway wherein some doorways are paired side-by-side, sharing a single door which is hinged between them. The hinges have a cammed spring arrangement, so that both doorways cannot remain open at the same time. One doorway opens into The Orchestration Room, the other doorway into The Composition Room.

Your door is missing the spring, but you can close a doorway if you want to.

:tiphat:


----------

