Best products from r/composer

Holy crap, this is great! Thank you so much. :)

I put my questions in bold so that they would be easier to find.

> You have 2 timpani written out; no no no. You have 1 player.

Yeah, figured as much. In Nodame Cantabile, a Japanese anime, there was only one timpanist and I've never seen more than one in all the concerts I've watched. I guess I banked on the possibility of replacing him/her with a more traditional instrument, as was said possible in the succeeding rounds.

> Overall, the score REALLY suffers because you're seeing 1-4 measures per page. Edit the layout so we can see 6-8 measures per page. The count will cut from 125 to a much lower number and it will be easier to navigate.

Hahahaha my voice major friend also pointed this out to me as one of my biggest mistakes. Which paper size do orchestras usually use though?

> This is probably why little feedback came through.

Oops.

> I see quickly three tremolo markings on the tuba and bass trombone. Based on another comment, do you think this is vibrato?

...yeah. For the parts I didn't know I just relied on MuseScore's render. Sorry about that. Really should have studied orchestration beforehand.

> 22 measures of the xylophone playing the same pattern is a little tiring, I would suggest not "verbatim" repeating for such long, long stretches, for any part.

Oh lol I actually got this from Steve Reich's Music for 18 Musicians. The marimba guy played the same thing for like 5 minutes? Hahahaha but I suppose only Steve can get away with it and not have his head bashed in by an irate percussionist.

> In measure 31 we see the first instance of offbeat tuplets. This is a huge no-no.

Oh wow I wasn't aware of this at all. I just thought it sounded neat. Definitely should have read a book first.

Actually, is there a booklet or cheatsheet that collects these hidden gotchas in one place? Might be easier to learn that way.

> At measure 57, is "trill" a vibrato for you? (IE computer playback)

Yes lol. They sound quite similar in MuseScore, though I should have known the difference already from my sax playing.

> Be aware of the need to breathe for ALL instruments.

Should I put breath markings then? My sax teacher told me the saxophonist should be able to figure it out and I just assumed it applied to all wind instruments.

> Your instrumentation allows you ONE tuba. (lol!)

Does this mean one can get away with longer patterns when there are multiple players around? Is it the prevailing convention that one player is expected to substitute for the other, and so on, to play such passages

> At measure 114, watch out for beaming.

...I confess that I usually just relied on MuseScore's automated beaming. But yeah, I have read about this issue somewhere and I should have known better lol.

> Below in the timpani is a confusing triplet. I would convert that (I think this is right, done hastily): quarter rest, half note, quarter note triplet (quarter note, then half note, inside)

I see. I suppose a lot of the notational stuff that's difficult to digest is about counting, especially since one usually has to have the experience of performing in order to see these difficulties (which are theoretically permitted by music notation's grammar).

> 120 Bass Clarinet, again, you should have eighth note tied to the whole note.

Hmm? What do you mean? Isn't it tied already?

> Your Xylo pattern at 150 comes on the 2nd sixteenth note of the downbeat while everything comes in right on 1 for their pattern. No other player is doing this, so it sounds like a huge error. "Is the xylophone player late? Are they drunk?" (seriously) I would reconsider this pattern (rhythmically).

I see. Does this mean that, as a general principle, I should have deliberately offbeat sections accompanied by another? Or lol perhaps I should choose my breaking-off-the-rhythm parts more carefully.

> 166 shows to me some accidental stuff: xylo might best be a D# and the Abs I see in the flute should be G#. Your motion leads to A and E (which are of the key) and point toward tonicization stuff. (Granted, I could be wrong but digesting this score is a lot so we'll let it go.) So you will want leading tones (half step below target, different letter) instead of chromatic notes (different pitch, same letter). Works functionally, easier to read, less sorting of "is it flat or natural?"

I admit, I don't really understand harmony all that well. I just tried what sounded okay but I suppose there's no skipping the whole theory.

> You might benefit from using the "repeat bar" symbol you've used constantly throughout the work in a singular part score for the timpanist, so when the pattern changes it will be very clear

I don't know how to specify which bars to repeat in MuseScore. :(

Am I right in assuming the divide-repeat thing means only to repeat the previous measure, as is the case for MuseScore playback? If so, then I don't really know how to represent the pattern I want so that the player repeats it properly while still showing the delay in the pattern's beginning.

> The lower you go and the closer together notes are, the muddier things sound.

More harmony woes. 😅

The book I'm using for this kind of stuff (and as a general intro to music theory in general is Peter Westergaard's An Introduction to Tonal Theory. Came across it in a library and it reads like a really clear mathematics textbook, which I really like lol. I tried Rameau but it just isn't for me.

> long tones (chords), more thoughtful use of dynamics (volume), and thoughts about instrumentation. Do you really need the bassoon or bass clarinet? Do you?

Would you mind expanding on that last point? Do you mean one is superfluous in the presence of the other? Or is it because they're pretty hard to come by? (I heard a bassoonist in the music department who spent $9500+ on his!)

Anyway, thank you so much for these comments! I don't know how to express my gratitude. This kind of feedback is the stuff of dreams for beginners like me and I really, really appreciate the time you spent writing it. I promise to keep every single one of them in mind when I write my next set of pieces and beyond.

It'll definitely help you to understand each orchestral instrument's strengths and weaknesses. I would fanatically recommend investing in a copy of The Essential Dictionary of Orchestration. It has everything you'll ever need to know about just about every orchestral instrument. It includes what they are good at doing and how they are normally used, special considerations for each instrument, the dynamic ranges at every extreme of the instrument's range, what that range is, how to notate them on the page (this is particularly helpful for percussion), and much more.

​

For example, I just popped my copy open to a random page. It's on the Horn in F (French Horn). Here's some stuff it has to say about it.

"Tonal and Dynamic Qualities"

"Low Register"

"In this register the tone quality lacks focus, is tuba-like, unsolid and quite dark. This subdued tone is more apt to provide a supportive "presence" than a confident tone. Projection is poor and intonation problems are more likely to be encountered in this register.

"Middle Register"

"Here, the horn in F is the most characteristic-sounding. The tone quality can vary from warm, dark, and haunting to velvety, noble and heroic. At louder dynamics and/or when ascending the register, the tone becomes brighter and projection increases. The best control of the instrument is offered in this register."

"High Register"

"Ascending the high register, the tone becomes progressively more brilliant and exciting. The higher the player ascends, the more difficult it is to play softer dynamic levels. Consequently, notes above written high G are almost impossible to play softly."

​

And it doesn't stop there!! It continues on to list general characteristics of the French Horn like its extremely wide range and ability to blend into an orchestra, technical considerations like its lack of agility compared to other brass instruments, tips on notating for them since there's historical reasons to notate them a certain way, and even possible special effect indications like "brassy," "bells up," "lontano," muting, etc. as well as what they all mean. (I didn't know what lontano meant until I read it for this comment.)

Take note that I did NOT add in that bolded text myself. The book actually does that so you can take a glance at it just for quick tips if you want.

Seriously I can't recommend that book enough. It'll only run you $10, fits your pocket, and is a resource you'll consistently turn to when you wonder about a certain instrument. (I turn to it often, anyway).

10/10 for sure.

I thought I might be walking into a buzz saw with this one...

Right, so I won't dispute that your large scale structure looks like sonata form, but a successful exposition, development and recapitulation requires very distinct themes in order to work. As other comments have noted, the thematic material lacks character and direction. That's a huge problem if you're writing in sonata form as the thematic material is primary over any considerations of large scale formal structure.

The distinction between the A and B sections should be dramatic and easily recognizable. This piece is much too homogeneous, in my estimation. Stylistically, it sounds like a sort of binary waltz form, not what I would hear as a sonata in the spirit of the great 18^th and 19^th century works.

Also, key changes (or at least tone center shifts, if you aren't writing tonal music) play an incredibly important role in Sonata form, but I'm having trouble discerning contrasting key centers here. This detracts from the internal conflict one likes to hear in a sonata, especially a short one like this.

Finally, I believe the development could be much longer. One truly important aspects of a modern sonata form is the extent of the development. The more far off field you go, the longer its temporal extension, the more tension you can build before the recapitulation. Listen to any of the first movements of Beethoven or Schubert sonatas and you'll hear what I mean. I'm not saying you should be writing something of the magnitude of Schubert's 960 or anything, but proportionally, your development could be two or three times longer, minimum.

Hopefully this clarifies where I'm coming from. My initial comment wasn't nearly as specific or helpful as it could have been (in fact it was basically inaccurate). What I'm trying to convey here is that Sonata form is so very much more than an extended binary form, and in that respect you have a lot of room left to explore.

One more book recommendation: Charles Rosen's Sonata Forms

Thank you!

This is more or less the first classical piece I ever wrote and had performed by real musicians. It was originally intended as a string quartet (no guitar), and it's sort of like a "coming of age piece" - I added the guitar because it's "my instrument" (I studied jazz guitar quite at length for the last three or four years).

I took two central themes or motivic cells - one is DSCH (D Eb C B), Shostakovich's name transcribed enharmonically and the other is just a series of descending intervals - G, D, C#, F#. I chose the first one because Shostakovich's String Quartet's really inspired me (i.e. made me want to write something like that). The second one I got from the Swedish atonal sight-singing textbook Modus Novus, and I really like the sound of it as well as the melodic and harmonic possibilities that it offers (a minor second, a minor ninth, various fifths and fourths).

The three movements were basically trying to take these through all the different "styles" or idioms that I like, while still keeping it one piece, so the first is a sort of post tonal style with some rhythmic semi-complexities (the second theme being a nod to the opening of Shostakoivch's seventh quartet), ending with a ground bass in the soprano (1st violin and guitar) while the other three instruments alternate between a kind of jig going up by quarter tones and an interrupted tremolo.

The second movement was meant to be more "spacy", less rhythmical, quiet, ambient, quarter-tone, exploring some guitar techniques that I've used quite a lot in "free" playing, but putting it in the context of the string quartet, while also bringing the two elements together.

The third movement, finally, is supposed to be the most tonal and lyrical, while still using the two motivic cells. The guitar first appears in a very classical, traditional role, but is the either paired or contrasted with the cello, and ending with a lyrical line in octaves with the violin. The last few notes is the DSCH theme, untransposed, but the last note (B) is taken as Cb in an Ab minor chord, played only by the guitar; this is the first time this note is played in the context of this chord, and I wanted the ending to just be at a completely different place, which is why the other strings stop right before that chord in the guitar as well.

All in all, the things that I mentioned (thematic continuity through different styles in different movement) wasn't really as marked as I wanted it to be; it all came out as pretty similar modernist wailing. But I'm glad you liked it, thanks for listening! :)

The part of theory that made composition most accessible to me was studying form. By that I mean the high-level organizational structure. For example, Sonata form, verse-chorus form, 12-bar blues form, etc. It's not just about those specific templates, but rather why they actually work. For example, what is it about verse-chorus form that makes it so universal for most of pop music. Once you feel comfortable analyzing form, it's easier to start composing with that sort of road-map ahead of you. For example, with a song, if you know you'll want to use verse-chorus form, it's a lot easier to proceed with writing music with those pieces in mind (the chorus should be catchy, the verse should properly showcase the lyrics, maybe I want a really unexpected bridge to build up tension before the final chorus, etc). Without having form in mind, writing music ends up being sort of free-form and doesn't have a sense of direction or "journey" (which of course can be intentional).

If you're ok with learning from a very classical point of view, I highly recommend "Classical Form" by William E Caplin. (There's also a workbook version). This book has nothing to do with teaching composition directly, but it really opened my eyes in terms of understanding how a piece of music is structured so that it "makes sense." Simple things we might take for granted but actually make a big difference in keeping music sound coherent, like how do you introduce a melody but highlight its importance? How do you develop a melodic idea so that the listener can follow along with your thought process? etc.

It does require a decent amount of theory background though. There is a classroom workbook version that goes over a some of it, but you'll need to feel comfortable at least with reading sheet music and analyzing chords. I would say at the very least, you want to be familiar with everything past a college Music Theory 1 course.

textbook:

https://www.amazon.com/Classical-Form-Functions-Instrumental-Beethoven/dp/019514399X

workbook version:

https://www.amazon.com/Analyzing-Classical-Form-Approach-Classroom/dp/0199987297

Hello! Piano is my primary instrument (although I don't perform) and I've been teaching piano for 10 years.

I'll be interested to see how quickly your fingers do pick up the instrument. In my experience, the big challenge with piano is the fact that you're expected to do so many different things at the same time. Voice division happens not just between your two hands (although that can be challenging enough at first) but it also often happens between fingers of the same hand. Every instrument has its hurdles, and this is the big one for piano. But it's not really a hurdle, it's more like a constant uphill battle. I would be very surprised if you worked at it for several months and then one day it just "clicked"; it's more like a very gradual process.

My point is, I've had many very dedicated (and older) students and this is always what trips them up. It can be frustrating to understand all of the theory surrounding the music, and to be able to read the sheet music with ease, but then you can't even play a relatively simple song after hours and hours of practice. Just keep that in mind!

There's probably a better choice for you, self-teaching isn't my area of expertise because of course whatever book I choose for my students, I'm there heavily supplementing and modifying it. But I do generally like Alfred's adult beginner course. You can expect typically several songs per concept before moving on (although it varies), so if you feel as though you've easily mastered something you can skip the next song or two and move on to the next element. They have several courses with several names, you want the one linked below. It wraps up piano, theory, and technical exercises... you can't get one that has piano and exercises without theory but oh well.

https://www.amazon.com/Adult-All-One-Course-Lesson-Theory-Technic/dp/0882848186/ref=pd_sim_14_4?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0882848186&pd_rd_r=1DH8WFM7G5TPK6EWGPP3&pd_rd_w=JPSME&pd_rd_wg=7clgx&psc=1&refRID=1DH8WFM7G5TPK6EWGPP3

I also like the "A Line a Day: Sight Reading" series. They're just bitesized sight reading exercises with increasing difficulty. The books are skinny, there's at least 4 (that's as far as I own up to) and I think it's just a nice package of exercises.

https://www.amazon.com/Line-Day-Reading-Bastien-Basics/dp/0849794226

sonata #1 sounds like a psuedo Beethoven/Liszt

sonata #2 sounds like a young psuedo Mozart. It sort of feels like you are trying to stuff the music into the form, like trying to stuff a genii into a bottle. The Genii doesn't always cooperate.

-)

sonata #3 sounds like a psuedo Mozart, but is much more masterful than your earlier efforts. it is the more accomplished, and seems much more listenable and enjoyable. It sounds like you are starting to put in additional layers so that everything isn't obvious on the first go around. This is a very good thing to do. It sounds like you are starting to have fun with the form. It has a good flow.

Keep this up, and we won't have to shoot the critics.

Recommended reading: Charles Rosen: Sonata Forms

Basso Continuo (Figured Bass)-You do not need to learn how to read it fluently or anything, but it is the building block of the composers of that time. This is especially prevalent in the Baroque period. Study it, play it, listen for it. This helps to truly understand and write good cadences and tropes of that time.

Bach - Bach is king when it comes to tonal harmony and modulation.
Study his Harmonized Chorales and learn how he constructs his harmonic phrasing and cadences.

Counterpoint - I used this book by Kent Kennan. Learn the basics of good voice leading. This is a huge subject and requires study and practice, but it is crucial to replicating the music. This will help you develop the tools needed to construct the forms and sounds of that time.

This is a good starting place. Keep in mind people spend entire lifetimes learning this stuff. God speed.

Nice composition. I listened to the whole thing. It's a bit shaky on a technical level in some places (lines sometimes step on each other, though you comment that you like that kind of thing; some notes sound a bit like filler too, which is a streamlining thing), but the ideas and pacing are solid. It sounds like you've taught yourself well, and you're evidently familiar with the literature. You might want to read up on some contemporary music theory just to feel like you're in the loop. For a long time, I harbored anxieties about my own writing just because I was unaware of what was going on in the world. It was a purely psychological thing, and my writing was fine, but that kind of thing affects creativity. (If you don't feel this to be the case, don't worry. I'm describing my experience more than I am trying to analyze yours.) The two big books in classical form right now are William Caplin - Classical Form and James Hepokoski and Warren Darcy - Sonata Theory. Both are hefty tomes, but the main points are quite digestible and compact.

If I were the one teaching you (which we could arrange, if you'd like), I'd hit counterpoint hard. You don't have poor counterpoint or anything like that; I bring this up because it seems your style is strongly modeled on 18th and 19th century music and a close examination of counterpoint in those styles would strengthen your own writing.

University professors might be able to teach you (and if you show them this trio, I think they would be happy to work with you), but you might also seek out a grad student as they tend to be cheaper. Are you involved in the classical music scene in your area? There might be a composer (or a performer with experience in composition and teaching) whom you might want to work with.

In no particular order, here are some things that come to mind:



Modes of Rhythm

Anthony Wellington teaches slap bass and rhythm using the "Modes of Rhythm" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asYfvMzjk7M

This is an interesting approach to working with rhythm.


Arranging for Large Jazz Ensemble by Dick Lowell

https://www.amazon.com/Arranging-Large-Jazz-Ensemble-Pullig/dp/0634036564/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=dick+lowell&qid=1554352576&s=gateway&sr=8-4

Good resource for jazz arranging



The Study of Orchestration by Samuel Adler

https://www.amazon.com/Study-Orchestration-Third-Samuel-Adler/dp/039397572X/ref=sr_1_2?crid=270ZIQBMLZL3O&keywords=study+of+orchestration&qid=1554354116&s=gateway&sprefix=study+of+orc%2Caps%2C203&sr=8-2

I have the 3rd edition. Get it used rather than new. This is a popular choice when studying instrumentation and orchestration for orchestral/chamber music.


Other good orchestration online resources:

http://resources.music.indiana.edu/isfee/

https://www.vsl.co.at/en/Academy/Instrumentology/


The Secrets of Dance Music Production

https://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Dance-Music-Production/dp/0956446035/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=attack+magazine&qid=1554356008&s=gateway&sr=8-1

I haven't checked this one out completely, but it's an interesting resource for electronic music with great visual analysis


And if you're looking for things to improve your composing skills, definitely study counterpoint. Start with Species counterpoint then move to other styles/eras. Learning this completely changed my perspective of theory and why we learn it.


Hope that helps.

Great job! Everything I wrote when I was 17 was shit, so congrats on being awesome!

Nice resolutions and voice leading! Try to avoid the parallel resolutions between the vln2 and cello that pop up from time to time. A good mental discipline is that every time a voice resolved to a root or a fifth of a harmony, make sure it’s contrary.

I’m not sure if you’ve been exposed to Fux Modal Counterpoint, but you should learn it and live by it if you want to compose in the Baroque, classical, or romantic idioms.

https://www.amazon.com/Study-Counterpoint-Johann-Joseph-Parnassum/dp/0393002772

Best of luck!

The book: https://www.amazon.com/Counterpoint-4th-Kent-Kennan/dp/013080746X

Thnx for the composers you mentioned. I'll check out your channel!

>And honestly, I think it's great that you've developed such a career with something you are good at, and very passionate about.

Actually I work as a software engineer. But music is my passion. And occasionally my 2nd profession.

>Same genre, same methods of writing, but once you hear those solemn strings and brass, we know it's Zimmer.

Yeah, I don't disagree with that. For example Allan Holdsworth played fusion. But you can tell it's him and not just another "fusion guy". "Film music" is just an umbrella term covering many genres. My point was that Baroque is somewhat limited (compared to other approaches) to what you can do stylistically and it has been done. But maybe the composers you mention will change my mind.

>I too am working on developing mine.

Good luck!

Hey there, masters student in music composition here. Many, many kudos to you for throwing your stuff out there for all to see; I wish I could say I did the same at your stage in the game.

My undergraduate teacher would always harp on being absolutely meticulous with notation in our lessons. It is the first thing a conductor sees before a note is even played, and may mean the difference between your piece and another's getting performed. Plus, your music is your art and your craft, it should look as great as it sounds.

I would highly recommend you get your hands on Elaine Gould's Behind Bars, or maybe Heussenstamm's less intimidating Norton Manual of Music Notation to start with. These are just a few of the resources I've used thus far for everything relating to notation in music.

A few things I noticed are below, and I apologize if any of this is beyond MuseScore's capabilities:

1. Always start with some kind of tempo indication and dynamic level; this instantly gives the casual peruser something to latch on to, and sets the mood for the piece.
   
2. Make sure the division and grouping of beats is always clear. This is probably the most complicated to describe, but examples include beat 4 of m.5, RH, or beats 2/3 of m.14, LH. These could easily be misread by performers. I reference you to the above manuals or another musician who can explain it in person.
   
   
3. Accidentals, both "actual" and cautionary, as well as notation of pitches using the same written pitch class. Check out m.27, LH. It might be clearer to notate as "G-Bb-Cb-Bb-Cb", to avoid the confusion of the repeated "B". Avoid weird intervals like augmented seconds, diminished fourths, etc. A same-but-different scenario occurs between m.25-26, LH, where a G# and a G are written close to each other, but over the bar. The bar line cancels all accidentals, but the performer may not always realize it until it's too late.
   
   
4. Above all else, consider performance practice. For those that don't play the instruments they're writing for, this can be difficult. I recently wrote for guitar for the first time, and I spent hours trying to figure out if sonorities I wanted were congenial or even possible. For example, m.37, RH is impossible for any piano player, but can easily be restructured to have the lowest C in the left hand. A good player will do this naturally, but it's best to write it as exact as possible.
   
   I apologize that this is long-winded, music notation is complicated. But hopefully these tips get you started! Always think what you would want to see if given a completely new score to read, and write that.

Your notation is fine, no problem there at all. If you want, you could put a indication above the staff when it first appears showing the grouping, e.g. half, half, dotted half | dotted half, half, half (sort of like you would with a metric modulation), but it's certainly not essential, since your notation is clear.

Whole rests are the norm for empty bars in any meter, as are multi rests, so you're fine there too.

It's worth picking up the Elaine Gould book Behind Bars for issues like this and many more. It's an excellent resource that will serve you well in all compositional endeavours.

All good! As a composer myself, I ALWAYS send my works to performers and ask, could you understand how to play exactly this with simpler notation? The answer is usually yes!

This book is AMAZING. My friend got it, and we have been pouring over it ever since, absorbing as much as we can and rehashing our scores to make as much sense to performers as possible.

https://www.amazon.com/Study-Counterpoint-Johann-Joseph-Parnassum/dp/0393002772/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=gradus+ad+parnassum&qid=1555859668&s=gateway&sr=8-1

Awesome! Appreciate that. This is not going to be easy. But I love challenges.

Thanks! The manuscript I use is the Warner Bros 75-page A3 manuscript pad, 18 Stave Landscape. You can order it from Amazon here.

EDIT: Also, manuscript choice is surprisingly important - I was gutted several years ago when my favourite manuscript paper company Panopus went into liquidation. Took me a while to find a good alternative :)

This book is awesome.

https://www.amazon.com/Jan-LaRue-Guidelines-Style-Analysis/dp/0899901565

​

-Recurrence (repeat the theme, you can do this at any moment)

-Developement (variations are a quite good example of how to do this)

-Response (piano after forte, tutti after solo... Similar or same phrasing, play with other elements to make a "conversation")

-Contrast (just do anything else)

I learned from Gardner Read. The Norton Manual of Music Notation is handy. It's old enough (30 years) that it has some material on manuscript preparation, but you can just skip that. What I currently have is Elaine Gould's Behind Bars, which I like but is probably overkill.

I'm not sure quite what you mean by "the emotional connotation side of music theory." If you're looking for e.g. what 17-18C musicians thought and wrote about the "doctrine of the affections", there are historical texts out there. But books that try to go deeper, i.e. to help you understand why a certain piece makes you feel a certain way, are doubtful, and I haven't found any of use in my own work.

[The Study of Orchestration by Sam Alder] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Study-Orchestration-Third-Edition/dp/039397572X/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1396568479&sr=8-5&keywords=orchestration) is a good one, although a bit expensive.

Fundamentals of Composition by Arnold Schoenberg is one I really enjoyed, and goes from simpler forms and melodies to much more advanced areas.

Can't speak on the exercises you seek, but best composition book I've ever come across is David Cope's Techniques of the Contemporary Composer.

Might have to dig around the web for an affordable copy, though.

But here's the thing - years down the road, after you've written a bunch of music, you'll look back on this and probably not want to have it performed. You'll say "Wow, I can't believe I used to write music that sounded like that". I'm not saying that to imply that it's bad music, I'm saying that because that is the progression that all composers go through. When you finally have an opportunity to have a large work performed, you're not going to want it to be something you wrote long ago when you were a college student just starting out, you're going to want it to be something fresh that uses your most up to date musical skills.

Also, you don't have to take an orchestration class to learn how to orchestrate, you just need to study scores and get an orchestration book. I highly recommend starting with this pocket orchestration book, which is very cheap and contains most of the basics you need.

I would suggest this book https://www.amazon.ca/Study-Counterpoint-Johann-Fux/dp/0393002772 to help with making baselines- Basically, you bass line must be in 'Counterpoint' with the melody, usually below the melody- If better voice leading would entail moving voices in the same octave- do it. It is all so that the melody remains principle.

I like Cope's - Techniques of the Contemporary Composer.

Some of it is a little outdated. I think score study of works you really like is what will be the most fruitful.

Sure thing, heres the amazon link for now

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/0571527094/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1474157595&sr=8-1&pi=SX200_QL40&keywords=a3+manuscript+paper&dpPl=1&dpID=41Onk%2BCmKfL&ref=plSrch

Careful study of this book will teach you everything you need to know about counterpoint:

http://www.amazon.com/Study-Counterpoint-Johann-Joseph-Parnassum/dp/0393002772/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407209207&sr=1-1&keywords=gradus+ad+parnassum

Depending on exactly what style you're looking for: Fundamentals of Musical Composition - Arnold Schoenberg

Essential Dictionary of Orchestration