A question about orchestrations...

[Sandor 796]

I remember reading some time ago -this year I think- someone saying -I think it was Conrad Pope- that orchestrating a Williams-score is very different than orchestrating a score of Alexandre Desplat since Williams basically writes so much detail in his sketches whereas the sketches of Desplat require 'a lot more effort' from the orchestrator.

 

Does anyone remember this/know where I can find the related thread where this was quoted/stated?

 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

It was probably on Facebook, that's where the juiciest Pope quotes generally come from.

[karelm 2,903]

Desplat, a fine composer in his own right, has very simple sketches with the details left up to the orchestrator during discussions.  Desplat knows what he wants but there aren't details in the sketches.  I took a masterclass with Pope and he showed one of the cues he orchestrated from Benjamin Button and the before and after were quite different.  A melody with some idea of the instrumentation was present but there was no texture or information about the rhythmic accompaniment.  In JW, there is practically no difference between the sketch and the orchestration (or at least minimal changes if there is a minor error like a 5/4 bar has 4 beats but this is rare). 

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Wow!  Never knew this.  So Williams really does all the work himself, eh?  The orchestrators are more like copyists!

[Will 2,215]

Wow, I never realized how little even someone like Desplat specifies themselves in the sketches (although does Desplat relay the rest of the info verbally, meaning that most of the orchestration is still his idea?). And he seems to be revered by many here. 

 

How much would Giacchino do, then? 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

2 minutes ago, Will said:

Wow, I never realized how little even someone like Desplat specifies themselves in the sketches (although does Desplat relay the rest of the info verbally, meaning that most of the orchestration is still his idea?). And he seems to be revered by many here. 

 

How much would Giacchino do, then? 

 

Let's not go mixing up the words "revere" and "respect."  Of composers currently working today, I only revere Williams.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

4 minutes ago, Will said:

Wow, I never realized how little even someone like Desplat specifies themselves in the sketches (although does Desplat relay the rest of the info verbally, meaning that most of the orchestration is still his idea?). And he seems to be revered by many here.

 

Indeed!

 

Desplat gets all the credit when really, "his" music is basically all of the orchestrators doing. I find that despicable.

[Will 2,215]

2 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

Indeed!

 

Desplat gets all the credit when really, "his" music is basically all of the orchestrators doing. I find that despicable.

 

So really, on RO, Giacchino's orchestrators replaced Desplat's. 

 

(I'm kidding, by the way, I don't really believe that it's all the orchestrators, although it sounds like they often have a major role)

[Bilbo 3,709]

21 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

 

Let's not go mixing up the words "revere" and "respect."  Of composers currently working today, I only revere Williams.

 

 

Desplat is easily my favourite "modern" composer but I wouldn't put him on the same level as my three favourites (Williams, Shore, and Horner). I revere thos guys!

[bollemanneke 3,337]

This thread reminded me of a question I've had for some time now. Bear with me because 50% of what follows will probably be wrong.

 

Someone once told me that orchestrators are there to help composers decide who plays what, or rather, how many violins play a part etc. My first question is, isn't a composer qualified enough to decide these things?

 

But in this thread, people seem to imply that orchestrators actively 'fill up' sheet music, that they actually write extra music and that they sometimes only just receive basic melodies! So why aren't these orchestrators composing themselves without the composer who can't be bothered to write his stuff properly?

 

So, in short, why do orchestrators exist and what do they really do?

[Jilal 569]

On 5-12-2016 at 5:23 PM, Will said:

Wow, I never realized how little even someone like Desplat specifies themselves in the sketches (although does Desplat relay the rest of the info verbally, meaning that most of the orchestration is still his idea?). And he seems to be revered by many here. 

 

How much would Giacchino do, then? 

 

This thread doesn't make any sense at all. You're familiar with that VSL interview with Desplat, right?

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

My question is how this whole thing is still so mysterious to people after how many times it's been discussed here.

 

Orchestrators exist to help expedite the process of scoring a film, and in some cases to provide musical insight and essentially editing services.  

 

On one end of the spectrum, they do little more than transfer complete or mostly complete but condensed scores to full conductor's score format, a step which is quite time consuming (though ultimately can itself can bypassed if you don't mind annoying your copyists, increasing the chance of copy error, and conducting off a short score).

 

On the other end they may have a very active hand in the actual orchestrational decisions and they may even cross more into "arranger" territory by adding actual musical material.  

 

All depends on the background and methods of the composer.  

 

The big examples are well known.  In the first group, you have the Williams, Goldsmith, Horner, and Zimmer type thing.  Yes, Zimmer - while his music isn't being written down, it exists in a quite complete and "orchestrated" audio/MIDI form which only requires transcription in order to be played by the live musicians -  Bruce Fowler and company are then more often transcribers than orchestrators, but there's a bit of both happening.

 

In the latter group, think of Daft Punk scoring Tron with Joseph Trapanese.  The robots don't have an in depth knowledge of how to write for the orchestra, but they have enough musical sensibility to have good ideas.  Trapanese is there to finesse things and to get it all to work, to put the ideas in action in an intelligible and fluent way.

 

It's a subject which is essentially the equivalent of learning that Santa Claus isn't real for some film music fans.  Of course some guys like Davis, Shore, and Morricone do it all themselves - they simply work fast enough.  For most composers, orchestrators are another set of eyes to make sure no stupid mistakes have occurred, and a time saver when it comes to score preparation and copying.  The two extremes above are, well, extremes.

[bollemanneke 3,337]

Thank you! Well I never read any discussions about this, hence the question.

 

So when you say that some orchestrators have to transcribe music for an orchestra, what happens with handwritten scores like Williams writes them? I am just guessing here, but does that mean every note has to be rewritten on a computer?

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Some may work that way, going from the handwritten sketches into a notation program, but generally it's done by hand, and then the final manuscript is broken up into parts by copyists using quality engraving software. It really depends though, there's no one way that this stuff happens. Computers have both complicated and simplified the process.

[Will 2,215]

26 minutes ago, Jilal said:

 

This thread doesn't make any sense at all. You're familiar with that VSL interview with Desplat, right?

 

Not really. When I posted it a while back I was really just noting that Desplat used VSL, which I learned just from the title of course. I may have watched a bit but I can't remember anything. 

 

I'll watch it tonight. 

 

There's probably a video about Gia's process somewhere too. 

[Jilal 569]

Just now, Will said:

 

Not really. When I posted it a while back I was really just noting that Desplat used VSL, which I learned just from the title of course. 

 

I'll watch it tonight. 

 

In short, based on that interview I'd say he spends hours and hours every day working very minutely.

[mrbellamy 6,272]

50 minutes ago, Prerecorded Briefing said:

My question is how this whole thing is still so mysterious to people after how many times it's been discussed here.

 

Orchestrators exist to help expedite the process of scoring a film, and in some cases to provide musical insight and essentially editing services.  

 

On one end of the spectrum, they do little more than transfer complete or mostly complete but condensed scores to full conductor's score format, a step which is quite time consuming (though ultimately can itself can bypassed if you don't mind annoying your copyists, increasing the chance of copy error, and conducting off a short score).

 

On the other end they may have a very active hand in the actual orchestrational decisions and they may even cross more into "arranger" territory by adding actual musical material.  

 

All depends on the background and methods of the composer.  

 

The big examples are well known.  In the first group, you have the Williams, Goldsmith, Horner, and Zimmer type thing.  Yes, Zimmer - while his music isn't being written down, it exists in a quite complete and "orchestrated" audio/MIDI form which only requires transcription in order to be played by the live musicians -  Bruce Fowler and company are then more often transcribers than orchestrators, but there's a bit of both happening.

 

In the latter group, think of Daft Punk scoring Tron with Joseph Trapanese.  The robots don't have an in depth knowledge of how to write for the orchestra, but they have enough musical sensibility to have good ideas.  Trapanese is there to finesse things and to get it all to work, to put the ideas in action in an intelligible and fluent way.

 

It's a subject which is essentially the equivalent of learning that Santa Claus isn't real for some film music fans.  Of course some guys like Davis, Shore, and Morricone do it all themselves - they simply work fast enough.  For most composers, orchestrators are another set of eyes to make sure no stupid mistakes have occurred, and a time saver when it comes to score preparation and copying.  The two extremes above are, well, extremes.

 

We should probably put this post in the F.A.Q. thread or something. Or make one with common Williams and film score questions.

[Gnome in Plaid 219]

I think this is the quote you're looking for:

On 10/3/2013 at 8:17 AM, Alex Shore said:

More Conrad Pope comments!

Scott ask...

Would love to see one of his sketches one day. Are they like JW's sketches? 7-8 lines short score?

Conrad Pope says...

I can't comment on anything I'm working on, Scott- I hope you understand, and what I'm about to write pertains in no way to my current work or the people I'm presently working with or for. It's merely a "rumination" about composers' "sketches" from someone who's work a long time, on many different films as an orchestrator. I'm often asked about JW's sketches, so here goes: JW's sketches AREN't sketches per se--- they are what the Germans refer to as a particell --- a short SCORE. The only composers who come close or equal that, whom I've worked for, are Jerry Goldsmith, Don Davis and William Ross-and, whose sketches I've seen: Bruce Broughton.

In addition to being composers, these gentleman are and were "students" of the craft as well as original, thoughtful orchestrators/arrangers in their own right-- besides being composers! Their kind of "sketch" has dynamics, articulations and is reasonably complete and "orchestrally" conceived--- properly notated durations for the choirs, for the tempi they've chosen, etc.etc., "conductorly savvy", etc. That said, most writers today provide an mp3 and a MIDI sequence---- and call themselves "John Williams" because, after all, isn't THAT the music, isn't it all there ( if you've heard the "sequence"? No, sadly.) A well written short score is a novel, a letter which--- through the individual use of notation - can reveal an artistic soul. That many don't appreciate the coordination of the hand, eye and ear is an ever increasing problem today-- because, frankly, these skills are less relevant in today's music production mill.

As one of my teachers replied to me when I said "Boy, writing music is hard", he said: "Writing music isn't hard, COMPOSING music is hard". I know my rambling this doesn't answer your question directly--- as I can't, but I hope it offer my view into-so called "sketching"--- which everyone does. No matter how you sketch, you always reveal the composer- and musician- you are. JW is "ne plus ultra".

I also read somewhere that Horner would sketch directly to orchestral manuscript paper, and that his orchestrators largely just added doublings.  Without access to sketches (although some from Williams, Goldsmith, JNH, and various Golden Age composers are floating around), the comparison to the final scores is all hearsay.  For example, I'm not sure where the "Danny Elfman can't read music" myth came from, since an FSM article clearly shows otherwise: http://www.boingo.org/articles/FSMarticle2.html

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

I know several people now who do that - writing right into full score, without sketching or anything. All of them young, too, which is encouraging. If you can put it all together well enough in your head or in some abstract visual form beforehand, and you're meticulous enough to write duplicate parts and doublings yourself (or just "col X"), why not? I'd love to not have multiple drafts clogging up my workflow.

[Will 2,215]

On 12/7/2016 at 4:50 PM, Jilal said:

 

In short, based on that interview I'd say he spends hours and hours every day working very minutely.

 

Just watched the video.

 

Immensely interesting. My respect for Desplat goes up considerably. 

[karelm 2,903]

One other reason why composers might enlist orchestrators (and even orchestrators might hire orchestrators if they are composing their own film) is simply the time pressures and demands of the job.  Most high profile jobs have very high pressure and tight schedules.  Let's say the composer has to compose and complete two minutes of finished orchestral score per day to make their scoring date.  Then something they've already done has to be revised to fit a new film edit.  For example, if there is a late re-edit or re-shoot after the scoring is done, they might now have to score 3.5 minutes per day to make their scoring date and the pressure can get very intense.  They might also have written 3 or 4 (sometimes many more) versions of the same cue and it just isn't getting approved.  You are now up to 4 to 5 minutes needed per day.  This is where someone who can take a sketch and reliably flush it out to top standards is invaluable and becomes a trusted ally. As grey, err...Prerecorded Briefing mentioned, it can range from taking what was given to you and flushing it out for full orchestra to adding or changing musical material.  It is not unusual for a composer to have serious chops but need a ghost or someone to embellish their idea just to make their schedule.  For example, the composer received late changes requested to their cue but they don't have time for it because maybe they are in the session.  So you could be asked to arrange the idea to fit the directors latest notes while preparing the orchestration.  The orchestrator is in effect a service to the composer and the composers success on their project is your success.

[ocelot 508]

On 12/8/2016 at 1:29 AM, Prerecorded Briefing said:

My question is how this whole thing is still so mysterious to people after how many times it's been discussed here.

 

Orchestrators exist to help expedite the process of scoring a film, and in some cases to provide musical insight and essentially editing services.  

 

On one end of the spectrum, they do little more than transfer complete or mostly complete but condensed scores to full conductor's score format, a step which is quite time consuming (though ultimately can itself can bypassed if you don't mind annoying your copyists, increasing the chance of copy error, and conducting off a short score).

 

On the other end they may have a very active hand in the actual orchestrational decisions and they may even cross more into "arranger" territory by adding actual musical material.  

 

All depends on the background and methods of the composer.  

 

The big examples are well known.  In the first group, you have the Williams, Goldsmith, Horner, and Zimmer type thing.  Yes, Zimmer - while his music isn't being written down, it exists in a quite complete and "orchestrated" audio/MIDI form which only requires transcription in order to be played by the live musicians -  Bruce Fowler and company are then more often transcribers than orchestrators, but there's a bit of both happening.

 

In the latter group, think of Daft Punk scoring Tron with Joseph Trapanese.  The robots don't have an in depth knowledge of how to write for the orchestra, but they have enough musical sensibility to have good ideas.  Trapanese is there to finesse things and to get it all to work, to put the ideas in action in an intelligible and fluent way.

 

It's a subject which is essentially the equivalent of learning that Santa Claus isn't real for some film music fans.  Of course some guys like Davis, Shore, and Morricone do it all themselves - they simply work fast enough.  For most composers, orchestrators are another set of eyes to make sure no stupid mistakes have occurred, and a time saver when it comes to score preparation and copying.  The two extremes above are, well, extremes.

Yes you are right, the orchestrator's role in Hollywood is anything the composer needs, but even more so than what you said. In may instances, the orchestrator is actually writing parts of the score, and in some cases a lot of the cues in the movie as the composer might not have time to do so.

 

You'll hate me for saying this probably after our last back and forth, lol, but I had lunch with Conrad a while ago and I won't name the composer or the movie but he said he came on to the project and it was a rewrite and the composer said to him and the other orchestrators. Take these cues and write "Me", so he asked, well do you want to give me any themes? And the Composer said, no, you know what I sound like.... Conrad also said that if he could just orchestrate Williams he would be a happy man as 1. Williams makes his job be a glorified copyist, no more than that and 2. Williams works on a schedule of certain hours a day and stops in the afternoon, which puts him on a beautiful similar schedule daily, without him getting frantic calls at 4 am to save certain cues or re-orchestrate this or that.

On 12/8/2016 at 1:42 AM, Prerecorded Briefing said:

Some may work that way, going from the handwritten sketches into a notation program, but generally it's done by hand, and then the final manuscript is broken up into parts by copyists using quality engraving software. It really depends though, there's no one way that this stuff happens. Computers have both complicated and simplified the process.

I can't for the life of me use a computer or samples, so I am at a huge disadvantage nowadays. I just go pencil to paper for ideas and then just orchestrate it straight into finale and even then, I don't have it set up with a keyboard so it's painstakingly slow clicking in one note at a time for a cue using a 90+ piece orchestra. I should get off my ass and learn how to do the other stuff but you know, too old to learn maybe...

[karelm 2,903]

2 hours ago, ocelot said:

Yes you are right, the orchestrator's role in Hollywood is anything the composer needs, but even more so than what you said. In may instances, the orchestrator is actually writing parts of the score, and in some cases a lot of the cues in the movie as the composer might not have time to do so.

 

You'll hate me for saying this probably after our last back and forth, lol, but I had lunch with Conrad a while ago and I won't name the composer or the movie but he said he came on to the project and it was a rewrite and the composer said to him and the other orchestrators. Take these cues and write "Me", so he asked, well do you want to give me any themes? And the Composer said, no, you know what I sound like.... Conrad also said that if he could just orchestrate Williams he would be a happy man as 1. Williams makes his job be a glorified copyist, no more than that and 2. Williams works on a schedule of certain hours a day and stops in the afternoon, which puts him on a beautiful similar schedule daily, without him getting frantic calls at 4 am to save certain cues or re-orchestrate this or that.

I can't for the life of me use a computer or samples, so I am at a huge disadvantage nowadays. I just go pencil to paper for ideas and then just orchestrate it straight into finale and even then, I don't have it set up with a keyboard so it's painstakingly slow clicking in one note at a time for a cue using a 90+ piece orchestra. I should get off my ass and learn how to do the other stuff but you know, too old to learn maybe...

 

You should think of it somewhat differently.  Technically orchestration is a specific job but with the intent to be a good service to your composer/client, you might have to do other jobs as well such as score prep (part creation), arranging, and sometimes ghosting (and all of it with a positive attitude - you'll need to find other avenues to vent).  Each professional needs to know where they draw the line of requiring an additional fee and valuing their own self worth.  Those who consider themselves irreplaceable and act live divas are usually not called back.  So there is an art to how and when you push for more respect, recognition, payments, official credits, cue sheet credits, etc.  These entrepreneurial skills are not taught to most musicians so there is a steep learning curve based mostly from mistakes and failures, mentors, and advice from trusted colleagues. 

 

Conrad's story is not so unusual.  I know one situation where the hired composer never heard the music he was supposed to have written until the recording sessions.  That is a far extreme and very unusual but it happens.  I do not blame the ghosts, arrangers, and orchestrators.  They were trying their best to salvage a very tough business situation for their client who shall remain nameless.  Most composers fall in to a general category of proficient, perhaps not experts nor specialists, they give credit where credit is due, and very grateful for the services of a skilled orchestrator and musical partner.  Orchestration is a craft and good orchestrators are nuanced and quite fond of their specialty.  If you are also a pro at score prep and arranging those are added bonuses that means you can command a higher fee.  Technological skills that you might lack would also add to your valued services.  If you are a diva and complain about it, word will get around and you'll be unemployable so will have to do even crappier gigs to make ends meet. 

[ocelot 508]

10 minutes ago, karelm said:

 

You should think of it somewhat differently.  Technically orchestration is a specific job but with the intent to be a good service to your composer/client, you might have to do other jobs as well such as score prep (part creation), arranging, and sometimes ghosting (and all of it with a positive attitude).  Each professional needs to know where they draw the line of requiring an additional fee and valuing their own self worth.  Those who consider themselves irreplaceable and act live divas are usually not called back.  So there is an art to how and when you push for more respect, recognition, payments, official credits, cue sheet credits, etc.  These entrepreneurial skills are not taught to most musicians so there is a steep learning curve based mostly from mistakes and failures, mentors, and advice from trusted colleagues. 

 

Conrad's story is not so unusual.  I know one situation where the hired composer never heard the music he was supposed to have written until the recording sessions.  That is a far extreme and very unusual but it happens.  I do not blame the ghosts, arrangers, and orchestrators.  They were trying their best to salvage a very tough business situation for their client who shall remain nameless.  Most composers fall in to a general category of proficient, perhaps not experts nor specialists, they give credit where credit is due, and very grateful for the services of a skilled orchestrator and musical partner.  Orchestration is a craft and good orchestrators are nuanced and quite fond of their specialty.  If you are also a pro at score prep and arranging those are added bonuses that means you can command a higher fee.  Technological skills that you might lack would also add to your valued services.  If you are a diva and complain about it, word will get around and you'll be unemployable so will have to do even crappier gigs to make ends meet. 

Very true. So far I have orchestrated all my cues and pieces before going to anyone. I go straight into finale and it's fully fleshed out so it's just note checking and part extraction for them to do. I don't know how to write in sketch form and I'm a bit of a control freak when it comes to my stuff. As good as that is because it's all me, sometimes I think I should ease off and let go somewhat so I can write faster and also, it's a good way to learn from an expert orchestrator. However, so far so good. If I get behind in time I will of course do that, I'm not dumb. But very true about the diva thing, not just for orchestrators but for composers too.... I think the key is to work with people you respect and like, then there is a natural flow between all parties.