The only arrangement of a Prokofiev work I know is Rudolf Barshai's string orchestra transcription of the set of piano pieces called Visions Fugitives. Prokofiev apparently authorised Barshai to do it for him...

 

It's a curious rumor for sure, but to be honest, I find it highly unlikely that it would be true, especially since Prokofiev was known for orchestrating (into suites) and re-orchestrating many of his own ballets, symphonies, operas and chamber works (i.e. Cinderella, Lt. Kije, Overture on Hebrew Themes, Love for Three Oranges, Piano Sonata No. 4, Symphony No. 4 (revision), etc.). It would be hard to believe that such an avid fan of orchestration would so heavily rely on another musician to do all the "grit" work for him. It may be true that some helped (maybe this was the case in his Soviet years), but from what I know about Prokofiev, he was probably too proud of a man to give such a task - so integral to the work as you mention - to another human being. I've never read such a statement either - I've always heard references to "Prokofiev's orchestration", which seems to clearly point to the fact that they are indeed his own. Listening to his symphonies, ballets, and suites, one can easily hear the same humor and sarcasm in the orchestration that one would expect to find in many of his greatest piano works. It isn't too hard to imagine the composer having fun with such a task actually.

For the record, I would not consider it a fraud on Prokofiev's part even if the rumor was somehow proven to be true. In my opinion, orchestration is only a very small part of a deal, and many great works of the past by great composers have benefited and suffered from the orchestration of others - sometimes to the point that such "fiddling around" with the original score has almost become irrelevant in terms of who gets the ultimate "credit". For example, I think no less of Mussorgsky even though many of his works today we know mainly through the orchestrations of his peers, most notably Rimsky-Korsakov.

 

For the record, I would not consider it a fraud on Prokofiev's part even if the rumor was somehow proven to be true.

If an orchestration is done by someone other than the composer, and the score carries only the composer's name, it most certainly is a fraud. Our opinions are obviously different regarding how much an orchestration is a part of a given score, but if you found that Prokoviev's 5th Symphony, for example, was orchestrated by some ghost orchestrator, you wouldn't feel the same way about Prokofiev. I bet my life you wouldn't.

 

If you are really, really familiar with a composer's works, then you should often be able to tell by listening whether a one-off piece has been orchestrated by another. Even works of debatable/uncertain authorship that are often attributed to the composer in question, you can be reasonably confident that it was or wasn't by him/her.

 

Well, I think that although Prokofiev did orchestrate his own music, he wasn't very good at it, already from the beginning. He got most of his tips from Gliere and Liadov, Liadov being the one who probably gave him that ability to sound really light and thin. In many ways, that's his weakness, because he couldn't often do otherwise, unlike Shostakovich, whose orchestration was his strength. I've heard rumors that he would get help from people to orchestrate maybe a measure or something that he didn't know how to do right, but not a whole work.

He also composed at the piano, meaning he played what he was doing at the piano often, and that's another reason why his music may sound thin, a piano can't quite be as thick as an orchestra. I always find it ironic when he would arrange (for example) his ballet music into piano pieces, because that's what they were in the first place.

 

Great. Now I'll be wondering who orchestrated Peter and the Wolf for him…

 

As far as I know,rumors of Prokofiev farming out his orchestration to others are false.
He may have gotten some help and tips from other composers, but that's not farming the work out
This HAS happened with a limited number of composers,such as Faure.
But for a composer not to orchestrate his own works is rather like a painter drawing the lines in a painting but leaving some one else to do the colors . That just isn't done in the art world.
Actually, I don't think that Prokofiev's orchestral works or operas a re badly orchestrated; they are very colorful and imaginatively scored.

 

It's nonsense. If you listen to any of Prokofiev's orchestral works, you will hear that there's a consistency of style and sound throughout his composing career. Some say he wasn't a very good orchestrator. I disagree. Although sometimes he miscalculates how well a particular detail of instrumentation might cut-through the orchestral texture, I enjoy his singular use of the orchestra (and he'd have had to have had the same 'orchestrator' for around 45 years to have achieved it through someone else).

 

Orchestration isn't some kind of work that you can hire others to do for you and still claim credit for composing the music. If this sort of thing has been happening in the music world, it must be one of the biggest frauds. Imagine if Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra was orchestrated by someone else. How much of it would have been Bartok's music?

Actually this is exactly the standard in the movie soundtrack industry. The composer whips up the music in a midi sequencer and the actual scorewriting and deciding how voices are broken up for the various instruments of the orchestra is done by a team of hired 'orchestrators'. The orchestrators rarely receive any credit. I believe Howard Shore is the only major film composer who both writes and orchestrates his own music.

 

Whether it's the standard or not has no bearing on what is actually going on with such a practice. I understand that sometimes a great composer simply doesn't have the experience to orchestrate and someone else does it for him/her. In such cases, it aught to be mandatory for both to be credited as the authors of the piece.

 

I don't think he orchestrated his piano works.

 

I totally disagree.

First, his orchestration is often richer and thicker than Shostakovitch's (will come back to in a moment).

He was in fact an expert in knowing the capabilities of each instrument and how to blend them. Think for instance of the heavy textures of the 3rd Symphony, or the carefully shaped curves in the 4th - for instance in the 2nd movement where flute, then horn, will join a phrase to lend colour and then drop out. "Peter and the Wolf" could not have been conceived by one without Prokofiev's feel for the characteristics of each instrument. And the dazzling Scythian Suite where he finds amazing picturesque or powerful effects unknown before him.

It is true that his orchestration was disliked in some circles because it didn't fit the Romantic tradition - yes, he could be quite 'earthy', even harsh, at times. But that to me is a sign of individuality and creativity and not incompetence.

As for starting with the piano, many composers did this - even the great orchestrator Mahler. Ravel himself admitted that he would usually first write for the piano - having no idea how he was going to later orchestrate it! Interestingly though, for the Classical Symphony Prokofiev set himself the task of writing it directly to score away from the piano - in which he succeeded brilliantly.

As far as I know only Mozart, Shostakovitch, Rimsky-Korsakof and Resphighi composed directly to full score as a routine matter. Are we to say then that all other composers were poor orchestrators?

To those who listen to this ridiculous rumour - I say: listen to his music! Study his scores! You will see the stamp of his authenticity - and excellence - in the orchestration.

 

Thread wasn't be used the last 5 years

 

I think some of this comes from a supposed statement by Shostakovich (in Testimony) that Prokofiev had his students do some orchestration for him. I can easily imagine this, not so much as a labor-saving device but to give his students experience. He might mark out the instrumentation, passage by passage, and let his students have at it. He would have the last word of course!

Shostakovich claimed that his own orchestral works were conceived as orchestrated. And it seem true that Prokofiev generally started with a piano score. But his own orchestration is characteristic and often novel, and quite effective.

 

That seems a likely source of the notion. I've always admired the distinctive sound of Prokofiev's music, including its orchestration, which seems quite integral to it. Listen to Cinderella, for example. Sonic enchantment.

 

I think there is some sense among some conductors that his string writing was unidiomatic -- but his ear for winds was extraordinary

 

Shostakovich wrote in his testimony: But composing at the piano was always a secondary way for me. That's for the deaf and those who have a poor sense of the orchestra. Yet there are"great masters" who keep a staff of secretaries to orchestrate their epochal opuses.‡ I never could understand that way of increasing
"productivity."
‡A reference to Sergei Prokofiev.

 

In Israel Nestyev's book Prokofiev, p. 216, Nestyev describes Prokofiev's particular method of orchestrating his works that he used almost exclusively from 1925 on. I am no scholar of musical notation, but it seems to have allowed P to completely attend to the creative orchestration while allowing students, others, to mechanically copy down the final, complete score. I remember Harlow Robinson used the actual name for this technique (it had a name) in his definitive biography, but I can't recall it. Here is the Nestyev reference as a Google book:

https://books.google.com/books?id=P...zszLAhVFWz4KHe9SCqoQ6AEIGzAA#v=onepage&q=prokofiev orchestration method&f=false

 

There is no reliable source for claims that Prokofiev did not orchestrate his own music. The basis for these claims likely begins with the fact that Prokofiev barely passed a course in instrumentation with Rimsky-Korsakoff when he was a 16 year old conservatory student. This was not for want of talent, but from a general disdain of "academic" courses. In fact, he openly challenged R-K in front of the class, and disputed R-K's critiques of his exercises. R-K called him "capable but immature."

The bulk of the rumors originate in Testimony which, as everyone should know by now, is an untrustworthy source (if not an outright fraud). Nothing in that book not corroborated by other, credible sources can be taken as the word of Shostakovich. The author of Testimony (whoever that might be) claims that some of P's ballet scores (The Stone Flower was one) were orchestrated by a timpanist in the Bolshoi orchestra named Pogrebov. (p. 37) Now, Prokofiev was not well during his work on this ballet, and the choreographer and directorate of the Bolshoi demanded frequent revisions and generally subjected P to all sorts of indignities. This was no doubt related to Prokofiev's recent official sanction in the composer's union (1948). Prokofiev was even hospitalized during some of this work. It is not unlikely, therefore, that some of the demanded revisions, cuts and reorderings were not done by Prokofiev's hand. And such work would require some reorchestration, which is probably where Pogrebov came in (if indeed he did). Bottom line, this stuff about The Stone Flower is unfair and amounts to vile slander as it is stated in Testimony. I do not for a moment believe Shostakovich said any of this.

The main basis in Testimony is on page 228, where the author mentions "masters who keep a staff of secretaries to orchestrate their epochal opuses." However, the only indication that this statement was about P is in a footnote by Solomon Volkov, and he gives no basis for this attribution.

What Strange Magic seems to be referring to (#22 above) is the use of copyists creating parts from a short score, which means one for piano (with sometimes a few extra staves) on which all of the instrumentation is indicated. The copyists in this case simply transcribed the parts in the short score for the instruments indicated, thus having no creative input in the orchestration process. Robinson discusses this on p. 194, at which time he cites this commonplace practice as the source of the unfounded accusations that P did not orchestrate his own works. (See Harlow Robinson's Sergei Prokofiev.)

Bottom line: These accusations have no credible basis whatever. Prokofiev orchestrated his own works.

 

I have heard nearly every work of Prokofiev's that involves an orchestra. As others have said, Prokofiev's style and orchestral sound world are immediately identifiable and consistent from his first orchestral works around 1908-10 until his last in 1952. I have never considered Prokofiev a 'poor orchestrator'; indeed his very idiosyncratic orchestral sound is part of what makes his music so appealing. Certain of Prokofiev's ballet scores were tinkered with terribly in their early years (cuts, re-orderings, additions) and it is possible that another hand other than the composer's might have been additionally involved in helping make the necessary adjustments, but I consider the suggestion that he didn't do his own orchestrations outrageous.

 

Delicious Manager,

If you are still active on Talk Classical, could I get some more information on Shostakovich recordings. Shostakovich is my favorite composer and I would like to buy Shostakovich symphonies on vinyl records. Your 2011 Shostakovich list is very helpful, along with some of your other posts that I found on different Shostakovich threads.

If you return to the old Thread: "Best Shotakovich Symphony Recordings", I wrote a longer message asking for some advice on specific Shostakovich recordings. I just joined Talk Classical and I cannot, yet, send a private e-mail. The only reason I am responding here is because this your most recent post on Talk Classical.

 

@EdwardBast: As I do not have access to Robinson's book, could you check again for the name that was/is used for this particular technique of notation that P used? It did/does have a name, as I recall, and I'm curious to learn again what it is called. Thanks in advance.

 

I'm not sure what you are looking for. Composing in short score (or piano score) is what he did. If there is another standard word for this, other than "delegating," I don't know it. Nevertheless, I looked on the relevant pages in Robinson and didn't find one.

 

I can't speak to the issue of Prokofiev, but many film and stage composers use orchestrators.

As has already been pointed out, Bernstein used and credited his orchestrators for West Side Story.

Into the Woods score credits Sondheim's orchestrator. I think the orchestrator for Sweeney Todd was as well. Yes, LAMag . com to the rescue: Jonathan Tunick orchestrated the original productions of Company, Follies, A Little Night Music, and Sweeney Todd.

I sincerely doubt that Irving Berlin orchestrated Annie Get Your Gun.

Sondheim and Bernstein, however, gave an awful lot of explicit notes as to HOW those orchestrations should be made.

However, many film composers, back in the day anyway, DID use orchestrators. This was sometimes because of the tight timelines composers were given to create a soundtrack, and sometimes because they may have been great composers but lousy orchestrators. I seem to recall that in the 1930s it would be typical for the head of the studio music department to get credit for the score. And there was one soundtrack composer who couldn't even read music, just hummed it to his copyists.

 

However, many film composers, back in the day anyway, DID use orchestrators. This was sometimes because of the tight timelines composers were given to create a soundtrack, and sometimes because they may have been great composers but lousy orchestrators. I seem to recall that in the 1930s it would be typical for the head of the studio music department to get credit for the score. And there was one soundtrack composer who couldn't even read music, just hummed it to his copyists.

...nothing much has changed Zach, even the bit about composers humming to those who know how to read music. It's all a lot more efficient today though, even actually during recording sessions thanks to notation software and printers.