"The Period of Wagner"
Carse begins by framing the chapter to the "mature" part of Wagner's career, or about 1850--1883. He points out that Wagner's work was not really accepted or widely performed until the end of his career. At this point in history the makeup of the average orchestra was pretty much set (in fact, it has changed little even since then). Growth in sheer size, however, is a Wagnerian effect; he was not very much interested in adding "any new element to it," he just needed it bigger. With regard to technology, the woodwind key mechanisms and valved brass instruments were considered default hardware by Wagner compositions.
There are four basic categories of composers in this period: advanced German composers like Wagner and Liszt; less stellar German composers of the "Gewandhaus" school; nationalistic French composers; and the Italian style, culminating in Verdi.
The work of Wagner himself is categorized as early (up to 1850) and later, or "mature Wagner" (after 1850), from Tristan to Parsifal. His work is possibly reminiscent of Weber and Meyerbeer. Wagner's harmony was composed vertically and at a large scale, "rich in tone" with "parts placed...to produce a full and sonorous volume of tone." He frequently and boldly had the strings doubling melodic parts at unisons or octaves, treated the woodwinds as soloists and numbered "to help them to cope with the greater tone-weight of the other sections of the orchestra," and exclusive use of valved horns and trumpets, a fully-chromatic brass choir.
His orchestration typically puts instruments to work "either in complete and satisfying harmony, or the instruments speak as frankly unrestricted melodists," as exemplified by his trademark use of brass in this manner. He treated the whole orchestra "as a compound of so many instrumental choirs," was skilled at using just the right forces for each effect, and was bold in their choice and usage. Wagner practically invented the "mega-orchestra," actually doubling many of the instruments from the traditional count.
After Logengrin Wagner's orchestration showed "a maturity of style which can hardly have developed suddenly during the tow or three years which passed between the production of Lohengrin and the composition of Das Rheingold." His style "seems wonderfully mellowed and ripe" compared to early works, weaving the instrumental parts intricately rather than having them "pop" into the score out of nowhere. In spite of this, he remained aware of the three basic tone qualities he was dealing with.
The Ring cycle is composed on a much broader scale, with much thicker instrumentation. There is much group orchestration, but it is in a style all Wagner's. He often sounds the bassoons with the horns rather than other winds; the brass are very clear and individual as a choir; string ensembles are more creative than with other composers. He still makes use of standard playing techniques, but develops them into something that seems novel ("legato arpeggios across the four strings" of a string instrument, for example). His Parsifal work, however, makes different textural use of much the same ensemble, having "a massive and dignified character of its own."
After a brief summary of Wagner's contribution, Carse begins discussing some of the other more important composers of the time. Franz Liszt is described as "a sympathizer...and [advocate] of Wagnerian principles," and wrote in much the same way (though he tended to be a bit more showy and effect-driven). He develops his orchestral effects from the texture of the music rather "than in intention."
Other German composers include Peter Cornelius, who Carse says showed "more enterprise in orchestration than is found in the average work of contemporary Germans;" Joseph Joachim Raff, whose harmonic style was rather fuller in tone than other "Gewandhaus school" colleagues; and Friedrich von Flotow, whose orchestration tended to be almost French in his style and Italian in its "briskness and brilliance."
"French composers' orchestration during the period of Wagner became more than ever strongly nationalized in style," the Carse goes on to say it is more Parisian then French per se. French composers borrowed some from Italian traits for a "graceful and attractive style in which clear, transparent coloring is the main feature which distinguishes it from the heavier and more thick-toned work of the lesser Germans of the same period." Melody and accompaniment are clearly differentiated, and the elementary tonal colors, rather than blending schemes, were the primary technique. French composers such as Louis Thomas, Charles Gounod, and Georges Bizet are praised for having "established a style of orchestration which is characterized by its clearness and economy of color, as well as by its fitness and delicacy."
Giuseppe Verdi is the culminating figure in Italian orchestration, eclipsing the work of such forebears as Donizetti and Bellini, and showing the influence of Wagner while "remaining true to national style." He remained musical, inventive, and intuitive to an old age "when most composers' powers show signs of stagnation." His parts "are harmonically wide-spread and full in body, rich and voluptuous in tone, without being thick or smudgy." He improved on (rather than redirected) the Italian style.
Carse then discusses Russian composers who might have been significant in their day had they not remained trapped in Russia. Rimsky-Korsakov, Mussorgsky, and Borodin had to wait for Tschaikovsky to become popular before their works would be received in Europe; Anton Rubinstein was only heard because he was a touring concert pianist. Carse also mentions English composers like George Macfarren and William Sterndale Bennett, whose works wore "neat and polished" if not stuck on the "placid path of the ÔGewandhaus' school," and the progressive Bohemian Friedrich Smetana.