Koechlin: A Treatise on Orchestration

Foreword

Write a new treatise on orchestration? what's the point! There are some excellent ones.
Besides, why should I want to teach this art? The genius of discoveries, you have it, or you
have not. And this genius (as Gevaert rightly said), it is not the master who insults you. So?...

Yes, but it is necessary that the pupil, even and especially well endowed, should not be
unaware of certain principles or facts of experience. Although these may not constitute
absolute rules, it is well to admit their authority for everyday use. A young musician of genius
will be able to discover new orchestral arrangements, and sometimes contrary to the norm (at
least in appearance): that he does not want us nevertheless to tell him what is known about
this "norm".

If one tries to go deeper into the question by studying musical texts, it is not long before one
realizes that the application of these "principles" has an infinite diversity, corresponding to a
number Of extremely considerable examples. This makes us understand why, so often,
teachers give pupils indications which are not found in most of the treaties. And, no doubt, a
Treatise on Orchestration can not be complete, given the excessive richness of the sound
materials and their combinations. It is hoped, however, that a new presentation, based on
assiduous and lengthy research, will fill some of the earlier gaps. The plan of our work is as
follows:

I. STUDY OF THE VARIOUS INSTRUMENTS, their resources and their characteristics. (=

INSTRUMENTATION PROPERLY SAYED.)

II. EQUILIBRIUM OF THE SONORITIES: capital question, and on which one does not
always insist enough.

III. WRITING OF THE VARIOUS GROUPS, AND COMBINATIONS OF THESE

GROUPS.

IIIa. STUDY OF THE VARIOUS COMPOSITIONS OF THE ORCHESTRA, from the

smallest groups to the most numerous meetings of instruments.

IV. ORCHESTRATION OTHERWISE (various ways of writing a piece of orchestra and

distributing the instruments that realize the "orchestration" of this writing).

V. THE COLOR OF THE ORCHESTRA, due to writing as well as stamps 1.

I must now insist on what may be relative in my indications: for example, about the balance
of sounds. For it depends, to some extent, on the executions themselves. Simply note that
most of my advice implies medium-sized instrumentalists; With aces, with appropriate shades,
with a large number of repetitions almost everything can "sound" quite well; But these are

1 orig. timbres (op. prev.)

exceptional conditions. - The acoustics and the dimensions of the concert halls are also
involved: the "Strings" are much more sonorous at the "Old Conservatory" than at the Opera;
Their relations with the "Bois" and the "Brass" are thus modified. Certain orchestrations are in
their place only in an intimate atmosphere; Others only assume their full value in vast spaces.
For the moment, medium-sized rooms (Chatelet, Thtre Sarah-Bernhardt, Salle Gaveau) will
be supposed to be played with normally composed orchestras, like those of our Symphonic
Associations.

Finally, if the listener is in a bad position (for example, near the orchestra or in a "bathtub"),
the balance is destroyed: first violins and brass too outside, some "under" . Is it necessary to
specify that all the indications of our work relate to the sounds perceived in good places?2

Here are some "practical tips".

And first, in orchestration, do not be afraid to imitate: not to copy slavishly, but to know how
to take advantage of what others did before you. The greatest masters have acted in this way
(and often even for the composition proper). Do not want to be "original". It is easy to place
the flutes below the bassoons, or to confide to the violas the bass of a singing of a tube: but it
must come about, and we deem it necessary to perform, first, normal sounds.

As much as possible, stick to the usual orchestral formations: know how to write full and
sound with the "Bois par 3", 4 Horns, 3 Trumpets, etc. But in certain cases and for certain
musical ideas, we will need less usual instruments (Oboes d'amour, Saxophpne, Ondes-
Martenot, etc.). So, do not be afraid to use it ...

Of two traits which will seem to you of equivalent effect, choose the easiest. We never get to
the "difficult". Sometimes, however, it is conducted through themes, rhythms, and life itself.
But do it only wisely, after having verified that any variant would destroy the character of the
sentence. Besides, not only must the passage be playable, it will be well to avoid that it is
accessible only to virtuosos of first force.

In general, the simplicity of the means is preferable. One is surprised, on reading, that the
most striking of the effects are obtained by the masters with "almost nothing": this nothing
which in reality is everything, and that it was only a question of finding. There are more than
one example in Weber, Berlioz, Bizet, Claude Debussy, and even Maurice Ravel.

Movements and shades will be specified with the utmost care. For the movements it is good to
refer to the metronome, but its indications must not be tyrannical: sometimes the tempo of a
piece can vary, slightly, depending on the size of the rooms and the number of performers.
Besides, a strictly metronomic interpretation is the most anti-musical sovereignty; Finally, it
happens also that the author is mistaken himself.3

2 The best are the highest. - The orchestra chairs are among the worst (except at Salle Pleyel, those who are quite
far from the instrumentalists).
3 See, on this subject, the M.M. = 144 for the Bourre Fantasque of Chabrier, and M.M. = 78 for the Clair de
Lune by G. Faur: movements faster than those of Ed. Risler (dedicatee of the work of Chabrier), and Gabriel
All in all, the main purpose of the metronome will be to prevent the movement from being
pressed too much, a tendency that is unfortunate and peculiar to our age, haunted by the desire
to move quickly. Now, sometimes, this hastiness removes strength and even life from the
pieces: it weakens the impetus by a mean and agitated conception.4

As for the fluctuations of the movement in the course of a melodic phrase, they are realizable
(with a flexible orchestra led by a good conductor) if this sentence is not fast, and especially if
each sixteenth note or sixteenth note is not marked . But in a fast and rhythmic Allegro one
can hardly yield on short values. There are rhythmic intentions of detail, intimate suppleness
to which the orchestra lends itself poorly (except for a soloist, andante or adagio motif).

As for the rall. (Or rit.), note that the conductor, quite often, slows down beyond what one
would like, breaking from organ, to specify: short, if you wish that its duration is not very
long.

Very useful also, in some cases, to mark "breaths" (by the sign ') or stop times (by [korona]).
Well antended, the: press, or: without pressing, must be distributed wisely; But they are
sometimes necessary.

The indication of the character of the sentence may have its raison d'etre, and we advocate it:
1. At the beginning of a piece or period, in order to put the orchestra and its conductor in the
atmosphere of the artwork; 2. certain measures which are particularly expressive, whether
mild or harsh.

The connections and shades require great precision. It often happens that instrumentalists do
not all have the same nuance, especially in modern music. In Bizet, in Lalo, one finds ff with
horns, with p (or even pp) with trombones; In Messidor of Alf. Bruneau, in Franck's
Redemption, the voice sings on an orchestra whose shade is marked p. As for the use of ppp
or fff, it should not be feared 5; Only use it for good reasons. Above all, avoid these extreme
nuances not in the natural technique of the instrument (unnecessary to describe ppp for the b-
veliki of the bassoon, or for the acute counter-ut of the flute; Unnecessary to describe fff to
the serious do of the flute).

Some treatises deprecate the mp, considering it is confusing. Yet it is very simple; All
composers agree that mp is stronger than p, and less strong than mf. This nuance, moreover, is
so frequently found that it may be "passed into musical mores" as well as mf.

The "classics" (and some modern ones) often write fp, or ffp. It may be good to specify when
to go from f to p, because the difference is considerable between ... and ...6

As for sfz (or sffz), an abbreviation of sforzando, it is a relative shade and does not
necessarily mean f, - still less ff! Almost always the orchestras accentuate it to excess, - a bad
Faur when he accompanied his Clair de Lune.
4 Notably for the Prelude of Carmen and that of the Arlesienne.
5 Bizet sometimes writes fff, and often ppp (or even, as well as Berlioz, pppp.)
6 We can also write: ... or: ...
habit taken with the music of Beethoven (and which is already debatable about Mozart). It
must therefore be remembered that, in a passage p, the sfz means mf rather than f; And mp in
a passage pp.

Crescendo and diminuendo are gradual shades; He was not wrong, the cappellmeister
humorist who thus warned the performers: "Gentlemen, cresc, means p, dimin. means f ".

Note also that the "bellows": <and>, being much more visible than the letter indications:
cresc. And dimin., Instrumentalists tend to accentuate the nuance indicated by these
"bellows". A moderate crescendo is realized more naturally by: "cresc. Poco a poco". On the
other hand, the sign> will always be good for the diminuendo, because in general an orchestra
does not diminish sufficiently after a f.

We can also write: pp ... cresc. Poco a poco ... mf ... semper crescendo, f <ff (or vice versa,
from ff to pp). In any case, it is a good idea to specify the nuance of a cresc. Or a dim: p <mf>
pp.7

7 Note that the indication pp after ppp will be less well understood than "minus ppp". Similarly, indicating ff
after fff is not as clear as: "minus fff".