Orchestral and Classical Discussion

[Callenby]

For some reason there's not yet a thread dedicated to the best of all genres - orchestral!

I know there's the orchestral subgenre thread but I don't feel that it was quite leading to in-depth discussion and there is a ton to discuss!

I don't have a huge introductory post in mind so I'll mostly leave it open. But basically, for me, the term orchestral is too broad, so this thread can also be for discussion of everything that, for better or for worse, is commonly labeled as "classical" - that is, forms dating as far back as Gregorian chants all the way up to contemporary practice. This includes (post)minimalism, pandiatonicism, polytonality, atonality, tintinnabuli, polystylism/collage music, New Complexity, and anything else that is rooted in the same milieu. These may not get as much attention nowadays as dubwubwhateverstep but they are very much alive and kicking.

Here are some of my personal favorites but this is by no means a comprehensive selection:

Dies Irae - Gregorian chant

Spoiler video:

The Rite of Spring - Stravinsky

Spoiler video:

Piano Trio in E-flat major, 2nd mvt. - Schubert

Spoiler video:

The People United Will Never be Defeated - Rzewski

Spoiler video:

Which artists are you listening to? Which artists or styles have you just discovered that you'd like to share? Ever thought about experimenting with a certain style or technique but need more info or a little push? Any other thoughts on these underappreciated styles?

Have at it!

[ChocolateChicken]

I love orchestral music! Unfortunately, I don't get nearly as much exposure to orchestral music outside of film scores that I really like.

Spoiler One of my favorites:

But of course, I adore Mozart's work. I don't care what you fools say, Mozart > Beethoven. I like Mozart's uplifting songs most of all, and I love his technique of melodies being started by one instrument, and replaced and continued by other instruments before being completed. Genius composer, he was.

[Conduit]

I'm just learning the unaccompanied Bach suites for cello right now, and I have to say they're pretty nice, if a little overplayed.

I'm not really big into classical really, I tend to listen to much more film and trailer music. On that note is that something included in this thread? From the the OP I'm guessing this is more classically oriented.

[Callenby]

Mozart < Beethoven.

So you're saying Beethoven is better than Mozart? I agree wholeheartedly. Indeed, the Romantic era was definitely the best.

I'm just learning the unaccompanied Bach suites for cello right now, and I have to say they're pretty nice, if a little overplayed.

I've been playing those for fun, too! It's just the first one that's overplayed, really. There's a lot more to it than most people realize (two hours' worth of material!).

On that note is that something included in this thread?

I don't see why it can't include that. There's plenty of overlap and it would make an interesting dynamic, I think, because soundtracks are by nature different to music written specifically for a concert or direct listening. We often enjoy listening to it by itself anyway. There's certainly discussion to be had there.

[ChocolateChicken]

Mozart < Beethoven.

So you're saying Beethoven is better than Mozart? I agree wholeheartedly. Indeed, the Romantic era was definitely the best.

OH GOD, typo. Fixed now. I meant Mozart is better. Although, Beethoven was technically part of the classical era, but he was important in the transition between the Classical Era and the Romantic one. Also, Mozart was one of his biggest influences, which means he had very good taste.

And I'm not sure if I like the Romantic Era or the Classical Era better! I think I like the Classical Era a lot because that's when Mozart and folks made made music that was enjoyable and memorable for everyone. And the Romantic Era was a period of experimentation, which I also dig, and gave birth to some really lovely songs as well, but also those fuckin' freak show songs composed to illustrate fear, nightmares, and confusion. Like, woah.

I really like "The Unanswered Question" by Charles Ives from the Romantic period; despite how much unsettling it is to listen to, the string section is super beautiful, and I like how well the song makes its point.

Spoiler Fighting answers:

[Fimbulin]

So this is a thread on classical forms? Like Passacaglia and Rondo and Sonata Allegro and Ternary forms? Or is it a discussion on eras?

[Callenby]

And I'm not sure if I like the Romantic Era or the Classical Era better! I think I like the Classical Era a lot because that's when Mozart and folks made made music that was enjoyable and memorable for everyone. And the Romantic Era was a period of experimentation, which I also dig, and gave birth to some really lovely songs as well, but also those fuckin' freak show songs composed to illustrate fear, nightmares, and confusion. Like, woah.

I really like "The Unanswered Question" by Charles Ives from the Romantic period; despite how much unsettling it is to listen to, the string section is super beautiful, and I like how well the song makes its point.

That's why I love Romanticism. Even though Classical and Baroque show how beautiful forms can be, I just prefer the expressiveness of the Romantic era (while still being tonal. Say what you will, but I still much prefer tonality to atonality).

Here's a good example of your last point:

Spoiler video:

And it's funny that you bring up The Unanswered Question because I almost included it in my original post (it seems we can only have four YouTube links in a single post).

So this is a thread on classical forms? Like Passacaglia and Rondo and Sonata Allegro and Ternary forms? Or is it a discussion on eras?

It's for whatever people want to discuss. Incidentally, I'm attempting to write a passacaglia at the moment. It's more trouble than you might think something based on a single repeating passage would be.

[Fimbulin]

A single repeating passage? sounds like most EDM to me. ;) ;)

[Callenby]

A single repeating passage? sounds like most EDM to me. ;) ;)

SHOTS FIRED
Is that how you use that meme?

Also, here's some atonality I actually enjoy.

Spoiler video:

[Callenby]

Alright, so I have a topic I'd like to discuss.

https://soundcloud.com/embertone/bach-embertone-blakus-cello

This is the Prelude to Bach's first Unaccompanied Cello Suite (the same one mentioned above) played entirely from a computer. Sounds pretty authentic, no? If I didn't already know it was a VSTI I might have assumed that it was an actual recording.

Sampled libraries have reached such sophistication that an entire soundtrack might be created in a DAW without us ever realizing it. In fact, some composers may never even pick up an instrument but can only simulate its virtuosity. If they make a mistake then they can easily just go back and edit it until it's perfect.

My question is: can the track above be considered to be an authentic performance? Even if they used a MIDI controller I think we can agree that it wouldn't be the exact same thing as someone who continuously practiced this piece and recorded it in one sitting. So what does that make this? In the future, will the performance aspect keep being diminished until it's no longer deemed necessary for a successful musician?

I'm deliberately leaving a lot of terms, like authentic and successful, undefined at the moment since they are not always so clear cut.

[Conduit]

As a composer I am overjoyed by how far samples have come. I don't have access to an orchestra or live players, but I do have access to a computer and being able to realistically mock-up songs is amazing.

As a performer I'm still fine with it. That track would take a lot of post processing through things like automation to sound like that. Nobody would go to a symphony hall and listen to a recording. The joy of instruments is in playing them live, and samples will never be able to do that. When you walk past a cellist playing in the subway theres a quality that will never be reproduced by computers.

[Fimbulin]

To me, the cello suite by the blakus cello there sounds fake. Maybe it's because I watch live cellists all the time and I couldn't possibly see one of them expressing the song that way. Listen to Yo Yo Ma and compare the recordings and you'll see what I mean. As far as cello libraries go, I've used the blakus cello since Robinson first started the project, and it's been the best I've heard for a solo cello. The recording posted above sounds like a piano performance and not a cello performance with the way it has been performed. I think it could have been done better.

Also: There's something about how a cello resonates that libraries haven't been able to figure out yet. I think it has something to do with the strings that are not being played still faintly sounding together.

[Callenby]

stuff

Okay, but that's entirely missing my point...

As a composer I am overjoyed by how far samples have come. I don't have access to an orchestra or live players, but I do have access to a computer and being able to realistically mock-up songs is amazing.

As a performer I'm still fine with it. That track would take a lot of post processing through things like automation to sound like that. Nobody would go to a symphony hall and listen to a recording. The joy of instruments is in playing them live, and samples will never be able to do that. When you walk past a cellist playing in the subway theres a quality that will never be reproduced by computers.

Yes, it does provide more opportunities to those of without access to performers or quality recording equipment, I just don't know if we can even anticipate all of the possible ramifications of this. Meaning, although the software and programming may not be substituted for live performance yet, what if in the future people stop going to concerts because they'll have access to something close (or, to them, close enough) that can be conveniently accessed at home? What if audiences begin to lose their ability to discern the difference between a live recording and machine-generated? That's pretty hypothetical, yes, but I don't think it hurts to ask.

I also have a related question. Let's say you record a piano performance into MIDI. Since that's you playing from start to finish, then that's no less of a performance, right? Let's also say that you make a few mistakes and then edit them afterward. No big deal, right? Well, now let's say that you only recorded half of it yourself and used a mouse to add in all the really difficult stuff. Suddenly, it's quite a different thing we're talking about. But those are pretty much two opposite possibilities on a very wide spectrum with a lot of nuance in between.
So, in short: How much can you edit a performance until it can no longer be considered one?

[Mijka]

I'll do some researches on the net, but is it possible to start a list of the different Classical subgenres on this topic ?

Would be awesome :3.

[Callenby]

I'll do some researches on the net, but is it possible to start a list of the different Classical subgenres on this topic ?

Would be awesome :3.

Uh, sure, I guess. There's not a whole lot else going on here.

[Fimbulin]

Classical music isn't separated into genres. People separate pieces by eras or by structure or by instruments or by compositional devices used. There is no bpm separation or timbre/tonal quality separation in classical music, as there is in modern musical styles. Those two things make up most of the genre separations that people know today. If you want to try to modernize classical music into a list of how the orchestral instruments can be used, then go ahead. It may start something like this. . .

Epic (eg. Verdi's Requiem- Dies Irae)

Piano Arrangements

Violin Concertos

String Quartets

German Operas

... and the list could go on and on and on. To my knowledge, nobody has tried to make a modernized complete list of "subgenres" and made it fully comprehensive before giving up. If you include 21st century music then good luck, because most of the wacko 21st century compositions aren't even classified by anything other than the composer's last name ~ as if his name was a genre!!!!

[Mijka]

Heh, funnily enough i started to describe orchestral compositions like you did in a similar thread (talking about "epic" and instrumental composition).

Certainly influenced by common paterns used to describe classical music...

Btw, when you said "People separate pieces by eras or by structure or by instruments or by compositional devices used", it really look like some kind of "sub-genres" (or whatever word we use to describe it) classification to me.
There's differences in classical composition and a lot of them share the same components, making them fill in many different "groups".

The fact that classical music is an old medium that grew slowly could make it harder to classify in a modern way, but there's certainly different genres out there. While writing about it, i even start to be confident that back in their time, some "classical" compositors were thinking about some sub-genres and even arguing about them ^^.

By the way, i just started searching a little after writing this and i fond some lists... funnily enough, it's the first time i found something on the french wiki that is not clearly on the english wiki :

• Sacred classical music genres
• Vocal classical music genres
• Instrumental classical music genres

And some others i found in the regular english web :

• Operas genres
• Classical genre graph
• Classical genre timeline

Even Freewave's good old RYM list have some classical genres (~11) and "modern" classical genres (~12), and others should have done advanced ones.

Welp, like some of my other recent "researches", i just learned that i don't know that much and should study a lot more . Not very surprising, knowing we speak about the wide "classical music" topic.


Edit :
_______________________

Uh, sure, I guess. There's not a whole lot else going on here.

I feel like i hijacked the main discussion now, maybe i did read the topic diagonally... shame on me.
I'd like to add my advice on the "authentic performance" topic you brought (wow, is this even correct english ? Feel free to correct me if needed ~~).


In a odd way, i can see a link between your question and an other topic on wich i did some "researches" recently... i am currently interested in mixing some brony songs to make an "early 2014" mixtape for Radiobrony.fr, and i started to study a bit about DJ-ing and stuff... there's the link : it's a widely accepted fact in the "mixing" community that performing a good live mix requires quite different skills (should i say "more" ?) than doing a regular mixtape at home/studio.
Looks like a very regular trend.

The main difference being the difficulty to do a live performance : a good one show all the experience and preparation time the performer had behind him.
On the other hand, the home/studio mixer requires some "mixing" skill too, but the "amazing-ness" is different, because we know that the person who made this track had a lot of time to make it, and maybe this extra time helped him/her to polish the track... and as the same time the polishing could have removed something that made live music sound crisp and warm (you know, the "little things" that make 2 performers give a different... performance for the exact same song, for example i even heard some people are collecting different performances of Vivaldi's "The Four Seasons" ballet)

It could be like judging two sculptures, one done during a short live-performance and the other done after months / years of work. Definitely, the two productions could feel equally awesome, but in different ways.
I found recently a picture on this topic that shows some of my feelings about this :



Back to classical composition, i don't think "live" performance will ever disappear. There's room for "more" than lives and recorded ones, but i don't know where's the limit between a mainly-live performance and a mainly-edited performance.

[Fimbulin]

If everyone stops playing instruments and starts using Kontakt instead then nobody would exist to make us lovely sample packs. ;)

[Conduit]

If everyone stops playing instruments and starts using Kontakt instead then nobody would exist to make us lovely sample packs. ;)

Re-sample other libraries :P

[Callenby]

I feel like i hijacked the main discussion now, maybe i did read the topic diagonally... shame on me.

Don't worry about it. Really, any discussion is better than no discussion.

I'd like to add my advice on the "authentic performance" topic you brought (wow, is this even correct english ? Feel free to correct me if needed ~~).

Yes, that's perfectly fine English.

In a odd way, i can see a link between your question and an other topic on wich i did some "researches" recently... i am currently interested in mixing some brony songs to make an "early 2014" mixtape for Radiobrony.fr, and i started to study a bit about DJ-ing and stuff... there's the link : it's a widely accepted fact in the "mixing" community that performing a good live mix requires quite different skills (should i say "more" ?) than doing a regular mixtape at home/studio.
Looks like a very regular trend.

The main difference being the difficulty to do a live performance : a good one show all the experience and preparation time the performer had behind him.
On the other hand, the home/studio mixer requires some "mixing" skill too, but the "amazing-ness" is different, because we know that the person who made this track had a lot of time to make it, and maybe this extra time helped him/her to polish the track... and as the same time the polishing could have removed something that made live music sound crisp and warm (you know, the "little things" that make 2 performers give a different... performance for the exact same song, for example i even heard some people are collecting different performances of Vivaldi's "The Four Seasons" ballet)

The variation or improvisation of a certain performer is a really good point. No two musicians will interpret something the exact same way. I don't think demand for musicianship will ever die out, but in this age of globalization the appreciation for it might be diminished to the point where nobody, even the most famous, can expect to make a living off of it.

It could be like judging two sculptures, one done during a short live-performance and the other done after months / years of work. Definitely, the two productions could feel equally awesome, but in different ways.
I found recently a picture on this topic that shows some of my feelings about this :

Sculpture might not be the best example, but I get what you mean. And I like that comic. I'll have to remember in the future.

Back to classical composition, i don't think "live" performance will ever disappear. There's room for "more" than lives and recorded ones, but i don't know where's the limit between a mainly-live performance and a mainly-edited performance.

Yeah, I don't think any of us really can know.