I completely agree! I think that is the combination of a very fine orchestration plus a superbe melodic and harmonic romantic inspiration. His music for orchestra is still one of the favourites of every musician. Thank you for your comment!
Fascinating presentation. And Korsakov was a great orchestrator. The first miniature score I bought was Scheherazade, just to see what was happening in the orchestration. So many greats with unique orchestral styles: Berlioz, R Strauss, Mahler, Tchaikovsky, Ravel, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Stravinsky - - oh and Vaughn Williams! Sinfonia Antartica is a great score to investigate . . .
Sheherazade is a superb example of orchestration, so many things to learn from the score. I don't know Sinfonia Antartica very well, thanks for the tip!
I read his book and his excellent autobiography and I agree with all your 5 points. Reading scores and transposing them to MIDI has taught me the most - especially Glazunov scores -RK's prodigy.
Excellent advice! There’s no substitute for deep study of the scores of great orchestrators. Rimsky-Korsakov, Berlioz, Ravel, Debussy, Mahler, Sibelius are at the top of my personal list.
Love some great orchestration, but I have to admit, the complexity and expertise in writing great orchestration is one of the reason I prefer writing chamber music---the other reason is that you can really hear the voice of individual performers. The standard chamber ensembles are already well balanced and there's much less to think about in terms of duplication of harmonies and things. With a orchestra, it's possible to have a great idea and make a mess of the execution. With a string quartet (for example), your great idea is probably going to sound great because it's so much easier to come up with a beautiful, balanced arrangement for a smaller ensemble. Of course, this preference is probably reflective of the fact that I'm still near the beginning of my "journey" as a composer.
Thank you so much for your very interesting point! I believe this is the right choice for every starting composer and the principles of chamber music are maybe the most authentic. Orchestra can be seen as something really complicated, and it really is. As you say, in chamber music you can really feel the voice of every individual musician and it's so beautiful. I think you're right and no one says that a composer is obliged to write for orchestra, although it is a very fascinating art.
Tchaikovsky is #1 for me. Rimsky is cool and charming, and sometimes moving. But P.I. Tchaikovsky is earth- shatteting; brilliant; monumental; most versatile of all the great composers.
Korsakov's importance goes beyond his music, I think. He was the teacher of many russian composers (Stravinsky, above any other) and his book of orchestration is still valid. He somehow helped to develop the modern russian classical music. But, I totally understand what you mean. Tchaikosvky is one of the favourite composers by a lot of classical music lovers, no doubt!
It's curious, because less than a week ago I was thinking about these 2 composers and reached the exact opposite conclusion. Tchaikovsky can be colorful and touching, but also can be formulaic, kitsch, neurotic, and his large-scale works can have some flaws (something he himself admitted). R-K was, on the other hand, a true original, not constrained by stale models. Him having travelled the whole world shows in his sense for the exotic and novel. His music always flows and goes straight to the point, while his orchestration is unparalleled. He was also much more influential and ahead of his time.
Thank you Jan! I know, it is difficult, it takes time and a good teacher is necessary, but it is possibile to know how to write for orchestra, for sure
Many people nowadays use composition software and sound libraries, almost like improvising at the (computer) keyboard. If it sounds balanced as a virtual composition, and if it is never to be performed by real players, does it actually matter if it is well orchestrated from an academic point of view?
That's a good point! Composition softwares and sound libraries, although they may be presented as the future of music, they can already be replaced by A.I. and the effort of the "producer" will be even smaller. Anyway, I really hope that LIVE music will always exist
In over 50 years I never did find someone who could teach me orchestration. I'd show a potential teacher the fascimile and explain what I wanted, and they'd go "Yikes!' and bail on me. Needless to say I stuck to writing mostly music for piano. I tried hiring orchestrators a number of times but when they noticed the composition was a complex modern fugue, any enthusisam would turn to sick dread before my eyes. I never learned anything useful about orchestrration that way, but I learned a lot about people.
Thank you so much for sharing your experience! I learned orchestration trying to re-orchestrate existing pieces of music starting from Haydn and Mozart to the most complex composers, from 1700's to 1900's symphonic music. In other words, from a score based mostly on a string orchestra plus a few winds, to a very large orchestra. Maybe I can do a video about this process, in the future. One of the only things I can suggest is to study orchestration using other composer's music, not your our own compositions. This way it's easier, I think, to focus only on orchestration problems.
@@gregmonks Yeah, but you can acquire many skills separately before you begin to use them together. Orchestrating other people will teach you things that will make it easier to orchestrate your own.
