Orchestral, Continuous Melody's and volume automation

[Brownz]

Whats up guys, I am just wondering when composers write scores, do they ever loop the same chord progression but just change the melody or is it just a constant influx of melodys and chord progressions, say if im in the key of c and I do c-g-am-f thats the end of my chord prog do I just repeat but change the high octaves on a brass or strings instead or completely change the progression?

And also when it comes to volume automation and tempo automation, I see guys on youtube changing the tempo of the orchestral when the crash hits? How much do they increase the tempo by and for how long and over what time? And also same for the volume automation, How many bars over time does a strings build up to transition into a brass?

Also I see composers using velocitys and volume automation on there strings for e.g. Is the volume automation on strings and velocitys the same, I see them manually increasing the volume automation of an instrument in the piano roll and then decreasing and increasing it like a curve? For what reason is this if they have velocity to use?

Sorry for the questions

I made this, I loop the strings every 10 bars I think, I don't no if this is suitable for orchestral in an advert e.t.c?

 

[krushing]

Whats up guys, I am just wondering when composers write scores, do they ever loop the same chord progression but just change the melody or is it just a constant influx of melodys and chord progressions, say if im in the key of c and I do c-g-am-f thats the end of my chord prog do I just repeat but change the high octaves on a brass or strings instead or completely change the progression?

You do whatever you want. Repeating patterns and motifs/phrases are often used, but theoretically there are no rules here.

And also when it comes to volume automation and tempo automation, I see guys on youtube changing the tempo of the orchestral when the crash hits? How much do they increase the tempo by and for how long and over what time? And also same for the volume automation, How many bars over time does a strings build up to transition into a brass?

Why would there be a set time for any of this? Especially if we're talking about film scores, all these would be an interplay of the film & the music. You could be scoring Gladiator or Dumb And Dumber - is a buildup gonna be the same length for both of these? Naturally there are conventions and clichés, but they're not rules.

Also I see composers using velocitys and volume automation on there strings for e.g. Is the volume automation on strings and velocitys the same, I see them manually increasing the volume automation of an instrument in the piano roll and then decreasing and increasing it like a curve? For what reason is this if they have velocity to use?

Volume is just volume; velocity affects how the instrument sounds (and in the case of a sample set, which samples are played). If you bow a violin really softly or really hard, they're going to sound completely different.

 

[bandcoach]

krushing has answered a lot of your questions already: here are some different or equivalent answers

Whats up guys, I am just wondering when composers write scores, do they ever loop the same chord progression but just change the melody or is it just a constant influx of melodys and chord progressions, say if im in the key of c and I do c-g-am-f thats the end of my chord prog do I just repeat but change the high octaves on a brass or strings instead or completely change the progression?

The chord sequences or progressions tend to be longer than what we experience in dance music - you might use the same chord for over 32 bars or as little as 1 bar - the musical effect is what is important not the number.

Melodically you are looking at using the same idea and developing it over time. At the same time you may create secondary melodic themes that entirely replace the original melodic theme or may even be juxtaposed with the original them at some point in the piece - whether it uses the same chords or it's own unique chords is down to the creativity and inventiveness of the specific composer....

Orchestrationally, you may move from instrumental choir to instrumental choir or even use them to present opposing yet unifying ideas, or even use different members of each choir to create a solo grouping that is opposed to the larger forces of the rest of the orchestra - the choices are endless and they are all yours to make or not

And also when it comes to volume automation and tempo automation, I see guys on youtube changing the tempo of the orchestral when the crash hits? How much do they increase the tempo by and for how long and over what time? And also same for the volume automation, How many bars over time does a strings build up to transition into a brass?

You are describing rallentando, ritenuto, ritardando, meno mosso - all techniques for slowing down - or accelerando, pui mosso]/i] both techniques for speeding up. The duration of either is more to do with your desired musical and emotional effect, rather than some pre-determined length - music knows no limits when it comes to expressing ideas. It will, however, allow itself to be caged in small periods of time to fulfill the function of music for dance, but even then it is always trying to break out

Also I see composers using velocitys and volume automation on there strings for e.g. Is the volume automation on strings and velocitys the same, I see them manually increasing the volume automation of an instrument in the piano roll and then decreasing and increasing it like a curve? For what reason is this if they have velocity to use?

What you are actually seeing in these videos is an old, sequencer only, trick to emulate the swell and ebb of a crescendo/decrescendo: increase the volume to mimic a crescendo, decrease the volume to mimic a decrescendo. the notes can be at nay velocity and all that we perceive is an increase in the volume for that playing style.

This is better achieved with the expression continuous controller (MIDI CC#11) these days rather than the volume continuous controller (MIDI CC#7)

Sorry for the questions

never apologise for wanting to know more

However, if you are serious about writing for orchestra then find yourself a teacher who will guide you through the ins and outs of writing for the various parts of the orchestra as well as creating music for these larger, amorphous contexts (film and game - although game music does tend to be more predictable than film music).

I also recommend that you invest 100's hours (literally weeks and weeks and weeks weeks) of time to analysing music you want to emulate - identify how the instruments are used, how the tempo is changed and yet at the same time how it maintained, how the crescendos and changes in dynamics affect the sound you are trying to create, how percussion is used and very definitely how chords and pitch are used to achieve the desired effect...

 

[MarcDHall]

I think somewhere people have mixed up chords progressions with pads.

If you are really talking about orchestration then there is no such thing as 'chords' in the sense most people use it in more modern genres. A chord progression is an abstraction. It's the theoretical harmonic framework of the music. A chord progression is like a schematic or a mental description. The reality of the notes being played in the track are a different thing.

Ultimately an orchestra is made of instruments only a couple of which can play chords. Most play 1 pitch at a time. I think if you start thinking of orchestras as having parts of them that play chords, you've deviated a long way from what an orchestra is.

This is exactly what 'pads' are. Even the name says it. They are there to pad out the sound. The idea (whether intentional or accidental) is to take all the 'chord progression' stuff and place it in 1 place. Call that the pads or chords. This, I think, is a very limiting idea.

I've seen a few tutorials on making orchestral type of music in which they start with a pad style chord progression, then go through tweaking the midi adding transition notes here and there to step from notes to notes. This type of 'orchestral' music is instantly recognizable and very generic in sound. A lot of generic soundtrack orchestration uses this... and most people even think this is 'classical'.

 

[bandcoach]

The orchestra itself can play chords. So can the strings, much in the same fashion as playing chords on a mandolin without the frets. As too can the keyed percussion: piano, vibraphone, marimba, xylophone, glockenspiel, celeste/celesta.

The remaining instruments with the exception of some exotic woodwind techniques (Bartolozzi chords) play one note after the other.

However, any orchestral work from the Baroque, Classical, Romantic and Nationalist periods can be broken down into chordal movement. Even solo works or works for small ensemble carry the same burden. After all, the Harmonic Axis (Schenker) is I-V-I: i.e. all movement in any work of the above periods is an effort to move from the tonic to the dominant and back to the tonic. There are those who suggest that Schenker should be ignored, but if you truly analyse the many forms in use, these can be reduced to a harmonic movement that embodies the concept of I-V-I and the preparation of V-I (Cycle of 5ths movement).

Most pop producers do reduce the orchestra to a single instrument concept and so view it as being a gigantic medium for producing chord progressions. The fact that this is only one aspect of the many uses it can be put to should not be ignored; however, it is also an important first step to understanding how the orchestra might be used.

I agree that too many people treat it as a pad and do not avail themselves of the more subtle uses to which it can be put. Such subtler shades of use come to be appreciated over time.

In the end though orchestral writing can be reduced to the following layers of arranging technique:

1. Melody
2. Counter-Melody
3. Harmonic movement
4. Rhythmic impetus

even if we were to use the double melody double counter melody that is often found in works that use counterpoint, this is still the basic form of usage.

Where it differs in use within the orchestra is to apportion each choir (Woodwind (WW), Brasswind (BW) and Strings (S)) to one of the first three roles and the Percussion to the last role (although all parts should be involved in creating and maintaining rhythmic impetus).

This is similar in nature to apportionment of roles within a big band except that there we have WW (mostly saxes doubling on all other WW)|Trumpets|Trombones|Rhythm section: the rhythm section can be further broken down into Harmonic movement (Piano|Guitar) and rhythmic impetus (Bass|Drums|Percussion).

We can also create hybrid instrumental groups by using individual instruments from each choir (WW|BW|S) to fulfill each role, thus making the orchestra a rich, diverse source of sound opportunities and possibilities. Using an orchestral well is the study of a lifetime for most composers, but one which is mastered early if you begin early.....