|
|
|
|
This is something that I find really amusing.
I find it many many times easier to write for orchestra than to write for chamber ensemble.
In fact, I could probably write an orchestal work of the same duration as a chamber work in half the time.
Is this also true for anyone else?
Chamber music requires a lot of attention be paid to the individual instruments and also the composer needs to think harder to create new colours. There are so many limits associated with chamber works that realising ideas in an orchestral situation is much easier.
If there's anyone that finds chamber works easier, do you have any advice for a composer like me, who can't stand all the limits of chamber music?
PS - Solo music is fine. I have an understanding of those sorts of limits. It's just chamber ensembles that bug me.
|
|
|
|
For me the opposite is true - I'm more comfortable writing chamber music (although I'm not extremely comfortable with either medium). I think my problem with orchestral music has something to do with not being able to see the forest for the trees.
I'd much rather take my cues from the individual instruments. Harmonically speaking, you get a completely different set of possibilities from a guitar than from, say, a marimba, and I think that this is an exciting thing that can really steer a piece in a certain stylistic direction - more so if you had to write for both instruments at once. Each instrument pulls the piece in a different direction. I also like to look at the history of what has been written for the individual instruments - not just the classical history but folk history, and any other genres that the instrument participates in. Depending on the instrumentation you're working with, you could end up writing something that's quite different from your usual output.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TGoodman
EugeneMarshall