The second-greatest orchestrator ?

[Roffe]

Hi guys,

I read a reviw on Amazon.com abour the Abbado/Quasthoff/von Otter "Des Knaben Wunderhorn :

Quote" A TRUE LANDMARK IN LIEDER RECORDING, September 9, 2002
By  J. C. Bailey (East Sussex United Kingdom) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)    

This review is from: Mahler - Des Knaben Wunderhorn / von Otter, Quasthoff, Berlin Phil., Abbado (Audio CD)
I received this album by accident, as a record club recording of the month that I had neglected to cancel. I could have returned it to the club, but decided to keep it because of the connections between "Des Knaben Wunderhorn" and Mahler's astonishing second symphony which I have loved for many years.
It turned out to be a lucky accident. These are flawless songs, perfectly exhibiting the craft of the second-greatest orchestrator in history. This new recording combines the talents of two of the greatest living lieder-singers with one of the few truly world-class teamings of orchestra and conductor. The sound quality is outstanding even by the best modern digital standards.

If GM is "the second-greatest orchestrator in history", Who is the best? Berlioz? Any comments  from you guys, or from J.C. Bailey.


Roffe

[John Kim]

I would imagine he was thinking about Wagner?

IMHO, I'd pick Wagner, Mahler, Strauss as the three greatest orchestrators. But each composer is different and has his own strengths, so there is no the greatest orchestrator.

Some may says it's Beethoven, or Brahms, or Bruckner, and I won't argue with them.

John,

[waderice]

If GM is "the second-greatest orchestrator in history", Who is the best? Berlioz?

As the orchestra, its instruments, and symphonic composition were continually evolving entities during the later part of the 18th, all of the 19th, and part of the 20th, it's a sure fact that all aspiring composers of the genre at any given point in the evolution tried to claim the position of "best orchestrator".  All tried to take advantage of the technical means available at any given point in time whenever they wanted to compose an orchestral work in that idiom.  Bottom line, the point can be argued ad infinitum.

Wade

[chalkpie]

Besides Mahler, I'd go with cats like Stravinsky, Ravel, Debussy, Ligeti, and maybe even Lutoslawski. Sorry, but the old guys didn't have the vast history of the Romantic era as did the 20th century composers, and those years of knowledge translates into infinitely more interesting and colorful orchestrations - well to my ears at least.

[barry guerrero]

Chalkpie has a solid  list, but I would definitely add Respighi and Penderecki. Among opera composers, Puccini is very good at orchestration.

[BeethovensQuill]

Would definitely agree with Barry that Respighi is up there with the best, as Waderice said you can add so many and argue a good case for each, Stravinsky i would add aswell, and id also put in a mention for Korngold,  some of you may disagree, but for me he had such a great command of the orchestra even at such a young age which shines through in the Sinfonietta.

[barry guerrero]

.   .    .   I certainly wouldn't argue against Korngold. Afterall, he made a very solid living in Hollywood.

[mahler09]

I could certainly see Ravel, Debussy, and Wagner who were mentioned above fitting this description.  Nielsen and Tchaikovsky were also great orchestrators!

[barry guerrero]

Frankly, I don't feel that Debussy was all that great of an orchestrator. It's my understanding that there were some attempts by others to try to make "La Mer" a bit clearer. There are important secondary lines in "La Mer" that you simply can not hear.

[Zoltan]

Someone who's able to bring the saxophone into the classical orchestra and treat it as a woodwind instrument without sounding awfully cheesy demands respect from me. Thus my vote for Rachmaninoff.

Other cases can be made as well: Mahler was proud of bringing the E-flat clarinet into the orchestra before Strauss and his use of it is well-known for us. The use of the piano as an orchestral instrument is another one I find very welcome (who started it?), thus we can use many facets of orchestration before we can call somebody a great orchestrator, yet, when some of them were not available for all of them (new instruments) or sounded different to them (brass) then a definite comparison can never be made, only ones with limitations, as Wade has already pointed out.

[waderice]

Someone who's able to bring the saxophone into the classical orchestra and treat it as a woodwind instrument without sounding awfully cheesy demands respect from me. Thus my vote for Rachmaninoff.

Other cases can be made as well: Mahler was proud of bringing the E-flat clarinet into the orchestra before Strauss and his use of it is well-known for us. The use of the piano as an orchestral instrument is another one I find very welcome (who started it?), thus we can use many facets of orchestration before we can call somebody a great orchestrator, yet, when some of them were not available for all of them (new instruments) or sounded different to them (brass) then a definite comparison can never be made, only ones with limitations, as Wade has already pointed out.

Saint-Saens, in his Organ Symphony (No. 3), is the earliest example I can think of using the piano as an orchestral instrument (in addition to the organ, of course, though I think Liszt was the earliest to use the organ as part of the orchestra).

Wade

[Freddy van Maurik]

This is one of those quite interesting questions on which it's really hard to achieve total agreement... but fun to discuss!

I'd vote for Rachmaninoff (1st part of the symphonic dances, as recorded by the Concertgebouw Orchestra on their label RCO Live: fantastic!!), but also for Puccini (parts of La Bohème and Tosca, when played well, can really blow me away). I'm not a huge Strauss-fan, but his Till Eulenspiegel is extremely well orchestrated. I may think of others before long, but these are my picks.

Freddy