# Texture



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

When instruments play together (eg flute and oboe or flute and clarinet), should I accept the texture of the combined sounds, or should I still hear two separate instruments simply playing at the same time?

I ask because one of the main differences between recordings is that some miking and mixing aims to pick up the orchestra as a whole, while others want to separate instruments as often as possible.

Another example is the use of piano with the orchestra...I'm thinking of Prokofiev's 5th Symphony for example where you can sometimes hear the piano separately and sometimes you hear just an added timbre to the overall sound. 

What is a composer aiming at...separation or combination?


----------



## 4chamberedklavier (12 mo ago)

Accept what comes naturally to you, less nerve-wracking that way. Whether instruments should be separated or combined seems like something the composer leaves open for interpretation. 

Anyway, that's the nice thing about having a diversity of recordings. There's something for everyone.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Forster said:


> When instruments play together (eg flute and oboe or flute and clarinet), should I accept the texture of the combined sounds, or should I still hear two separate instruments simply playing at the same time?
> 
> I ask because one of the main differences between recordings is that some miking and mixing aims to pick up the orchestra as a whole, while others want to separate instruments as often as possible.
> 
> ...


This is what I would do when you listen -- it won't come naturally at first, but it soon will:

Assume the performer is aiming at separation. If that seems to make things interesting to hear, excellent. If not, assume he was aiming at combination. Note that this may vary from passage to passage.

Note that I also say performer, not composer.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

The composer is aiming at an equal combination of timbre in most cases. Performers when they hear they are doubled will concentrate on combining with the other instrument if the combination is featured for a successful blend. Overall balance and interpretation of such is open to subjectivity from the conductor, but from a composer's pov, if they write a line that has say an oboe and a flute in unison, they expect the overall timbre that's heard to be an equal mixture. For example, under certain musical conditions, the flute doubling an oboe, may well temper the nasal quality of the oboe. The art of mixing timbre for orchestration is a vital skill for a composer.

The concept of 'unison doubling' as it's called (as opposed to octave or multi-octave doubling), can be taken into more complicated timbral scenarios such as one instrument playing louder than the other, or perhaps one instrument doubling only certain notes, or even playing the same line with a different articulation (perhaps accented against smooth for example). But generally speaking, melodic doubling especially is more often intended to be an equal timbral mix.

As a listener Forster I suggest you might want to listen to the combined sound rather than try to hear the individual instruments as it seems to me that that's the reason for the composer scoring that way in the first place..ymmv as always and tbh, either way is fine so long as you enjoy it.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

> What is a composer aiming at...separation or combination?


I would say both. It's like a choir: SATB are each their own individual registers and you're aware of that kind of separation but at the same time they combine into one organic whole. Also a good blending of instrumental timbres in orchestral instruments is a good demonstration of a composer's skill. Some things work together, some don't.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

What Mike said ^ ^ ^. 

There are also many cases where a line is doubled at the octave to produce a unique combined timbre that really can't be sorted as separate sounds — that is, one can hear the separate instruments but their timbre is altered to something new by the interplay.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

mikeh375 said:


> The composer is aiming at an equal combination of timbre in most cases. Performers when they hear they are doubled will concentrate on combining with the other instrument if the combination is featured for a successful blend. Overall balance and interpretation of such is open to subjectivity from the conductor, but from a composer's pov, if they write a line that has say an oboe and a flute in unison, they expect the overall timbre that's heard to be an equal mixture. For example, under certain musical conditions, the flute doubling an oboe, may well temper the nasal quality of the oboe. The art of mixing timbre for orchestration is a vital skill for a composer.
> 
> The concept of 'unison doubling' as it's called (as opposed to octave or multi-octave doubling), can be taken into more complicated timbral scenarios such as one instrument playing louder than the other, or perhaps one instrument doubling only certain notes, or even playing the same line with a different articulation (perhaps accented against smooth for example). But generally speaking, melodic doubling especially is more often intended to be an equal timbral mix.
> 
> As a listener Forster I suggest you might want to listen to the combined sound rather than try to hear the individual instruments as it seems to me that that's the reason for the composer scoring that way in the first place..ymmv as always and tbh, either way is fine so long as you enjoy it.


Yes assuming that when he said that instruments are playing together, he means that they are playing the same tune simultaneously, homophony, rather than they are playing heterophonic or contrapuntal music.

The other thing I'll add is that in some textures it's for me impossible to hear the instruments as blend -- cornet and organ for example (there's a recording of Italian music with Bernard Foccroulle and Lambert Colson)


----------

