By Peter Lawrence Alexander

My lifelong love affair with arranging and orchestration began when I was in high school as I began hearing full arrangements in my head. But what was I hearing so I could write it down? That was the question that not only drove my search to learn, but also drives others who would learn to effectively arrange and orchestrate, too.

So for many, the first steps in the desire to learn orchestration and arranging starts with identifying what you’re already hearing in your musical memory, while going after new combinations to add to it.

This learning path is important because it illustrates both how music people learn and the goal of musical education for composers: to build musical memory so that intuition has something to draw from.

So when I and others like me started out, we often did so with a beginning set of unidentified musical memories that we couldn’t fully draw on until we knew what it was we were hearing, coupled with learning new scoring devices along the way, either from writing or score study.

With electronic scoring we create a new category: sounds that have never before existed which we must then learn, through application, how to use and score with.

While I was in college, a second question formed: How did the great composers teach themselves? This was later followed by, Who were the great orchestration teachers and how did they learn and ultimately teach orchestration to others?

Answering this question required reading lots of musical biographies. After arriving in Los Angeles, I expanded my biographical reading to include what educators call the learning styles inventory. This added new insights to what I had already discovered. Next, I added new insights gleaned from well known film composers and orchestrators who agreed to answer my questions.

What resulted from adding film composer interviews and the learning styles inventory to my existing research was a list of learning procedures that were consistent across all types of composers, even into the 21st Century, and modified only slightly with the inclusion of selective new technologies.

Further review of my research elicited a short list of orchestration book authors that film composers routinely consulted. In alphabetical order these authors were Hector Berlioz, Cecil Forsyth, Francois Auguste Gevaert, Charles Koechlin, Rimsky-Korsakov, Ebenezer Prout, and Charles Marie Widor.

Of the seven, four were French authors (Berlioz, Gevaert, Widor and Koechlin).

Over time, my research yielded two other French orchestration book authors, Jean Georges Kastner and Ernest Guiraud.

The addition of these two French authors now yielded a timeline for how orchestration was taught in Paris and across Europe over a 90-year period from 1837 (Kastner) to 1927 (Koechlin). In chronological order, the list includes:

Jean Georges Kastner (1837) Hector Berlioz (1843) Francois Auguste Gevaert (1863, 1885, 1890) Ernest Giuraud (1892) Charles Marie Widor (1904) Charles Koechlin (1927)

Of these six men, Kastner, Berlioz and Gevaert were the change agents who laid the foundation for how orchestration was taught and learned.

Pedagogically, what’s significant about these three is that they tapped into how music people learn and the goal of orchestration instruction and its method for composers: to build musical memory so that intuition has something to draw from.

What is equally significant, is that although he gets credit for it, the foundation as to how orchestration should be learned was not set by Rimsky-Korsakov, but primarily by Kastner, Berlioz, and Gevaert as it’s they who established the mentor model of teaching orchestration in print. And these men will be our focus to set the stage for both how music people best learn orchestration and how the Professional Orchestration series builds on this model for both individual study and classroom use.

Jean Georges Kastner
Kastner was an excellent composer, and a prodigious student who in his youth, mastered several instruments, including the piano and organ. By ten, he was playing in church on feast days. Early in life, his experiences in learning various instruments planted the seed for writing a work on instrumentation.

As he got older, his Lutheran parents wanted him to pursue theology, which he did, but the music within was so powerful that before he was twenty, Kastner had completed his first opera. So rather than pursue the ministry, he pursued composing. He completed three symphonies, five overtures, marches, and other works. He became the bandmaster of the Strasbourg National Guard where he developed into a respected conductor, and a beloved teacher.

At the age of 25, Kastner began writing his General Treatise on Instrumentation after having already written method books for voice, violin, cello, flute, oboe, clarinet, trombone and other instruments. In 1837, at the age of 27, the book that set the foundation for how orchestration would be taught was published, and shortly thereafter, adopted by the Paris Conservatory.

Having written methods for roughly one third of the orchestra’s instruments, and being a successful composer and conductor in his own right, Kastner was in an excellent position to determine just what such a work should contain.

What Kastner didn’t write is as instructive as what he did write.

Given his reputation, Kastner could have easily written a mini-method book for each orchestral instrument. Instead, he organized his instruction by les renseignements les plus essentiels, the information most essential, not the obvious, but the information that young composers have to search for, including the most suitable way to use each instrument in the score, and from a conductor’s experience, the good, or bad, effect it produces in one circumstance or another.

Thus, Kastner was the first to provide what I call instrumentation notes for each instrument. Their purpose was to give the composer just what he needed to know how to write playable parts, and for anything else, ask the musician.

Kastner’s model has been the standard ever since, modified only in 1914 by English composer and musicologist, Cecil Forsyth in his book Orchestration. Here, Forsyth essentially wrote the mini-method per instrument that Kastner and others had avoided. Forsyth’s model was followed by Kent Kennan, Walter Piston and others and has become the standard teaching approach in American academia. I call these texts the Reference Model. But to be sure, Jean Georges Kastner is at the heart of these works as they still follow his outline.

Kastner advised two additional steps for learning effective instrumental writing. The first was to get method books for each instrument and the second, as I’ve already mentioned, was to talk with and question competent musicians to gain their insights.

In short, Kastner set student expectations by letting them know, quietly, that they weren’t going to leran everything they needed to know from his one book. To learn the craft, they would still have to exert effort on their own beyond the printed page.

His sage advice holds true today.

Hector Berlioz
Berlioz was mostly self-taught. By the time he went to Paris to study medicine and to follow in the footsteps of his father, a successful physician, Hector was proficient on the guitar, the flute, and the flageolet. To learn and master harmony, he purchased books and worked his way through them on his own. When arriving in Paris, he went to the library of the Paris Conservatory to study the scores of Gluck, which he copied by hand to learn from the great master.

After earning his degree, he decided to pursue music full time, at which point his father promptly cut his monthly allowance in half. Unlike Kastner who had married into money, Berlioz had to scramble to make a living. Fortunately, he was as good with words as he was with notes, and for thirty years, Berlioz supplemented his income by writing concert reviews. He also became an excellent conductor, known for conducting his own works and those of others.

By 1837, the year Kastner’s book came out, Symphonie fantastique had been written and performed, and Berlioz was well on his way to becoming a renown composer. But in the 1840s, and for the next twenty or more years, Berlioz had to travel outside of France to get performances and the recognition he deserved.

Feeling that Kastner was not as detailed as he could have been, Berlioz wrote his own instrumentation book, the literary tone of which was also written from the eye of an observant conductor.

Berlioz’ purpose in writing was to look at the mechanical issues (articulations) involved with each instrument along with the quality of tone, character and expression of each. Beyond that, Berlioz explained, was to enter into, “the realm of inspiration.”

Kastner and Berlioz are similar in approach in that both provided instrumentation notes.

But from a teaching perspective, Berlioz took the learning process to the next step which enhanced the entire orchestration learning experience. Drawing (no doubt) from his time copying scores in the Paris Conservatory library, Berlioz included in his book, full-page full-score examples from the works of other composers and his own for students to analyze.

Seeing the technique within the context of the full score, Berlioz’ readers learned both the technique and compositional insights.

What Berlioz formalized in print was the chief learning technique used by earlier composers, including Bach, which was to take a piece of music, copy it, reduce it to condensed score to better see how the composer wrote, and then to experiment by bringing those techniques into their own writing.

From Berlioz we learn that the chief success skill in art, or any field, is the ability to teach yourself. Copying and reducing scores is to the composer what copying a great masterpiece hanging in the Louvre is to artists to learn brush strokes, form, and the use of color and lighting.

Berlioz’ book soon eclipsed Kastner’s and it would reign as the leading text of its kind for the next nineteen years.

Most are familiar with the Berlioz update by Strauss re-published by Dover Publications. However, two earlier editions can be found on line to see what Berlioz wrote originally. In 1858, an English translation was made by Mary Cowden Clark, which can be found on This is labeled the second edition. Later, Mary Cowden Clark did a third edition English translation, published by Novello, which also can be found by way of Internet search.

Francois Auguste Gevaert
In the United States, 1863 was the year of Vicksburg, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, and Chickamauga. But in Paris, it was the year the son of a Belgium baker, Francois Auguste Gevaert, released his Treatise on Instrumentation which, because of Gevaert’s groundbreaking approach to teaching instrumentation and orchestration that still echoes today, overtook Berlioz.

The family hope was that young Gevaert, who was born July 31, 1828, would follow in his father’s footsteps and continue in the stable family business of baking. But seeing his great musical talent, at the age of thirteen his family enrolled Francois in the Ghent Conservatory. He advanced so quickly that by fifteen he was playing the organ in the Jesuit church. He even won the Prix de Rome of Belgium for musical composition.

Gevaert lived in Paris for just one year. But during his stay he was commissioned to write yet another opera, and then in 1850 he moved to Spain for a year where he wrote his Fantasia sobre motivos espanoles (Fantasia on Spanish Motifs) winning him the order of Isabella the Catholic. He briefly visited Italy and Germany before returning home to Ghent, Belgium in 1852, a year after his teacher and founder of the Ghent Conservatory, Martin-Joseph Mengal had died. Like Berlioz and Kastner, Mengal had also been a student of Antoine Reicha when as a young man he had studied at the Paris Conservatory.

In 1852 Gevaert was just twenty-four, but over the next nine years, he wrote a new opera annually, after having already written four of them, two in 1848 alone when he was just twenty.

Gevaert’s Teaching Style.
Gevaert writes in a style similar to the U.S. Army Field Manual on Leadership Training, direct and to the point. Unlike Berlioz who started his Treatise with a grand dramatic full page two-column introduction, Gevaert suspended with the preface and jumped right in with Part One, Introduction, and starting in the very first paragraph, boldly and with certainty defined the orchestra:

The orchestra, in its widest sense, is the shape in which instrumental polyphony is realized just as the choir is intended to carry vocal polyphony.

He explained that to learn instrumentation, his book was divided into two parts:

This art is divided into two parts. In the first part, each instrument is considered in isolation, the point of view of its sound, its mechanism, its expressive character. The second part deals with the simultaneous use of instruments and different ways of combining their sounds together (my translation).

This is a dramatic first, the instruments alone (like Kastner and Berlioz) and then in combination!

Off in a gallop, his whole first section is about the different types of orchestral ensembles. His first few pages give a very brief history of the orchestra until finally at page ten numbered paragraph 6, Gevaert gives the size of the orchestra for which to compose, whether for the theatre or the concert hall.

His next section covers a brief history of the military band explaining that it’s composed entirely of wind instruments and percussion. Then he writes about instruments used in writing fanfares, and finally, the size of a chamber orchestra.

Catching a breath, Gevaert, building on Kastner and Berlioz, created a series of charts dividing the orchestra into four classes: strings (bowed and plucked including harp, guitar, and mandolin), winds (woodwinds and brass), percussion, and keyboard.

At last we arrive at Part One Chapter One, where the teaching practices so common today first appear.

Starting with the second position, Gevaert is the first to layout the pitches in each string position on the violin as a scale.

Then on page 20 numbered paragraph 18, Gevaert, without fanfare, begins laying the foundation for teaching coloristic orchestration by dividing the violin’s range into the low, medium, and high registers, fifty-nine years before Rimsky-Korsakov who was about nineteen when Gevaert’s book was published.

For the rest of the first section, like Kastner and Berlioz before him, Gevaert stays with providing instrumentation notes for describing the “mechanism” of each instrument. All of the instrument’s registers, where appropriate, are divided into three parts except for the clarinet which for the first time is divided into four. Rather than reproduce full page scores, Gevaert uses highly detailed condensed ones.

In the first part of this work we looked at each instrument irrespective of its combination with other sounds. Now we will unite the various instrumental sections, what role each will play in the assembly, and exposing the practice in this respect by all the composers of the modern era.

Such brashness! Gevaert is going to expose the practice of creating instrumental combinations as done by the modern composers.

It’s a mighty sales promise to live up to!

And on page 110, Gevaert began delivering on his promise by producing a simple chart which, for the first time in print, organized the entire range of the orchestra into the low, medium, and high registers, and within that, the range divisions of each instrument. This is the beginning of what I call Span of Orchestration™.

A modern recording engineer looking at this chart would see the foundation for a three-band parametric EQ. A composer looking at it, who knows the ranges of each instrument, would observe in a glance that the first group of instrumental combinations, which today we also call doublings or devices, can occur wherever two or more instruments are in unison with each other.

Gevaert’s chart is still accurate today and I’ve applied his concepts to the 70th Anniversary Edition of the Spectrotone Chart™, created by four-time Academy Award® nominee for best film score, Arthur Lange.

Starting with the strings, Gevaert covers the most basic unison and octave combinations still used today, then shows how the role of the strings change when the winds or voice carry the main theme, illustrating his points with condensed score examples from the composers of the day.

Gevaert treats the woodwinds in a similar manner, following with a section demonstrating how to blend strings and woodwinds.

The brass are treated individually, then as a section, then their role within the orchestra.

Next follows writing for voice and orchestra, for which Gevaert was a master. But unlike Berlioz, Gevaert illustrates his points with examples from other composers, not himself.

Finally he covers scoring for solo instruments.

Orchestral Coloration
This is Gevaert’s next major section where he completely fulfills his sales promise.

Orchestral coloring is based on the ideal property that musical sounds not only express, but also paint so that orchestral coloration belongs to the realm of imagination and feeling.

Gevaert starts with modes and tone.

The various features of our modes (major and minor) are the most powerful and most spontaneous musical expression since it exerts its influence independently of the realization of the idea whether vocal or instrumental.

Tone has to do with the individual instrument based on what its made of and the method of tone reproduction.

Gevaert then explains timbre and register:

Each of the countless mixtures provided by the various instruments can be so useful in a given circumstance. Like the painter, the musician likes to color the drawing with all hues, all shades, sometimes its timbres are based in a perfect suavity.

The affinity of the timbres is determined by 1) the matter of the instrument (wood, copper, etc), 2) the mode of production (bowed, blown, percussive, etc).

The secondary quality that’s discerned in the timbre is color. However, without coming down to too minute peculiarities, note here the existence of three broad categories which we call clear tone, dark timbre, and mixed tone (light and dark).

Clear tone relates to oboes, trumpets, the chanterelles of stringed instruments. In the dark timbre, the bassoons, the chalumeau of the clarinets, the low strings of stringed instruments. The mixed tone is represented by the clarinets (in the medium and high), for flutes, horns, registers working with string instruments

If you systematically gather a group of timbres belonging to the same color, we arrive at the effects of a rare energy of expression, but naturally, the variety and nuance are missed. (My translation).

These principles can be seen in action on the Spectrotone Chart.

Gevaert’s next section is The Harmonic Arrangement of The Instrumental Ensemble which explains how the harmonic overtone series is used to structure vertical voicings.

Finally, he closes with writing Brass Music and Fanfares and an appendix with supplemental information organized by chapter.

With his terse writing style, Gevaert accomplished all this in just 237 pages.

Gevaert’s Treatise on Instrumentation rose like a rocket. In one book Gevaert had explained the critical thinking skills needed for coloristic orchestral writing. He demonstrated with clear examples how to go about it, so that like Berlioz, he taught the reader how to teach himself, in other words, how to begin thinking orchestrally.

There had never been a book like it before, nor has there been another book like it going into the twentieth and now twenty-first century. Not even Rimsky-Korsakov, accomplished what Gevaert did.

Four years later, Gevaert was brought back to Paris where he became the chef de chant at the Grand Opera, a position he maintained until war broke out with Germany. At that point, he returned to Belgium where he became the music director of the Brussels Conservatory.

For twenty-two years, Gevaert’s Treatise was virtually unchallenged until it was finally bested in 1885 – by Gevaert himself with his revised two volume series starting first with instrumentation followed in 1890 with the first full treatise on modern orchestration.

His New Treatise on Instrumentation expanded the range divisions from three to four, and added to that a sub bass region for the orchestra as a whole and for selected individual instruments. Gevaert significantly expanded the percussion section, and added both a sax section and a special section on the new Wagnerian instruments.

Course of Methodical Orchestration , published in 1890, was a tour de force which took Gevaert another five years to write. As its name implies, Gevaert methodically walks the reader through the thinking of writing for each orchestral section, then the orchestra as a whole, and finally for various sized ensembles.

From a pure teaching perspective, both volumes are breathtaking in scope for what they teach and accomplish. And no one, not even today, has done it better, including myself. Hence, credit where credit is due.

Gevaert and Span of Orchestration.
One major piece of instruction which originated with Gevaert is what I call Span of Orchestration. To explain briefly, Span of Orchestration is counterpoint applied to the orchestra. Again, Gevaert first divided the orchestral range from lowest pitch to highest pitch, into three parts: low, middle, and high (1863) which he revised to be in five-parts in 1885 (sub bass, low, medium, high, and very high).

Melody can be in any register as can any background line (sustained, rhythmic, or figurative). Consequently, with this common sense approach, a better understanding of orchestral composition can be more easily grasped by the student with much of the mystery removed.

Two Teaching Models
In summary, these authors represented two teaching models. The first is the reference book model which is usually supported with a workbook, and sometimes, CDs with audio examples. It’s the dominant model used in the American collegiate system today.

The second model is the mentor model and its path, started by Berlioz and Gevaert, and continued by Guiraud (1892), Rimsky-Korsakov (1922), Koechlin (1927), and now myself with the multivolume Professional Orchestration™ series and its supporting video lecture series.

To be sure, both models teach instrumentation, which, in point of fact, is what’s being taught in the typical one semester class offered in the senior year. The difference in the two approaches is how you go about teaching orchestration.

The key difference is that the mentor model actualizes Rimsky-Korsakov’s observation that orchestration is composition, by teaching instrumentation within the context of a full page orchestral score, requiring the student to transpose the examples being studied to concert key, and then to reduce the example to condensed score.

Three clear student benefits emerge from this approach.

1.The student learns score analysis and how to teach themselves, which is a success skill in any field;

2.Instead of seeing a single line musical example that lightly illustrates the articulation covered, the student sees the technique in score context, and so, learns a starting list of orchestration devices, which means the student is actually learning orchestration!

3.Within Professional Orchestration, the majority of instrumental examples, where practical, are organized by the low, medium, high, and very high registers per instrument. As a result, the student further learns orchestration by seeing how scoring can change depending upon the instrumental register the theme is assigned to. In short, with the mentor approach, the student begins the process of learning how to think orchestrally.

How Music People Learn Music: What Berlioz and Gevaert Tapped Into
What Berlioz and Gevaert tapped into was knowing how to teach based on how music people learn.

Located on the brain are seven centers of thinking processing each with its own location, and they fire, or loop (to be more scientific), in a pattern unique to the individual. These seven thinking processes are intrapersonal, interpersonal, linguistic, visual/spatial, kinesthetic, logic/math and finally, music. A music person, then, is someone who’s thinking process starts with music in the first or second position of the loop.

Characteristics of Music People
Some characteristics of music people include having a strong gut sense (often mistaken for being perfectionistic). Gut sense is understood when you hear a songwriter or composer say things like, “It’s almost there,” or, “I just haven’t got it yet.” In prose writing, this “gut sense” process is explained by the statement, “the best stuff isn’t written, it’s rewritten.” Gut sense simply means that something inside you let’s you know when you’ve hit it.

Continuing, music people learn by intuition (vs. by reason with those where logic/math is high in the looping process). How this comes about I explain below.

Music people can focus for long periods of time. They see patterns. They may hum or sing to themselves, or use rhythm to aid as they learn (tapping, thumping, etc.) Of singular importance is that music people do not always do well in a traditional school setting, even music school.

What we should always keep in mind when teaching music in general and orchestration specifically is that many of the greatest composers and songwriters had no formal academic education. Instead, they learned primarily with effective private teachers and selected books that mentored in print.

But for many, it was the private teacher, not the classroom, who laid the foundation for their later success.

The role of the private music teacher was best expressed by Nadia Boulanger when she said, “I desperately try to make a pupil understand that he must express what he wants; I don’t mind whether he agrees with me or not, so long as he can tell me: ‘This is what I want to say, this is what I love, this is what I’m looking for.’ ”

Boulanger’s method, clearly, is not the method of classroom music instruction where the objective is to cover x amount of material in a specific period of time. In looking at Boulanger’s three criteria, if queried, most composers with long term successful writing careers can respond to each by citing what they want to say, what they love, and what they’re looking for.

In line with how they best learned is the reality is that they were all driven to both learn and succeed. All put in long hours developing their craft to do so.

The Starting Point for Teaching Orchestration Today
With these points in mind, where, then, is the starting point for learning orchestration both individually and in the classroom?
For pattern/stepwise learning, the steps to learning are:

1. Instrumentation Notes;

2. Seeing the technique within a full page score;

3. Transposing the score to concert and condensing it;

4. Singing and meditating on individual instrumental parts to build the musical imagination;

5. Scoring Technique.

How Professional Orchestration™ Teaches Orchestration To the Individual and The Classroom
Professional Orchestration™ series follows the mentor model of how the great orchestration teachers taught and how the great composers learned. It’s multi-volume purpose is to present in an organized manner the vocabulary of orchestration, arranged, where appropriate, by the low, medium, high and very high registers. I supplement the series with the Spectrotone Chart™ created by four time Academy Award® nominee for best film score, Arthur Lange, and three specific video lecture series I created, Writing For Strings, Visual Orchestration™ and Scoring Stages™.

This approach constitutes my contribution to the literature of learning orchestration, which I learned on the “streets” of Los Angeles – the hard way.

Professional Orchestration™ follows the pattern/stepwise approach to learning including the use of creating MIDI mock-ups after full page score examples have been transposed and condensed. The steps are:

1. Range, Tone Color, and Instrumentation Notes per instrument (aided with the Spectrotone Chart);

2. Seeing the technique within the context of a full page score (app. 8.5” x 11.0”);

3. Transposing the score to concert and condensing it;

4. Doing a MIDI mock-up of the condensed example;

5. Taking what’s been learned and creating an original two-minute composition for solo instrument only (no accompaniment) to both demonstrate the student has read the material and to “cement” the technique in the student’s musical imagination so that it’s ready for use. The composition functions as a weekly test and is gradable. If the compositions are good, the student leaves orchestration class with a beginning demo reel and some works for initial self-publishing.

Audio and Building Musical Memory
One would think having audio would be critical for building musical memory. But historically, in the absence of MP3s, composers built the audio portion of musical memory by singing individual parts, attending live concerts to learn what instruments sounded like and by asking musicians questions.

Consequently, the five steps I’ve listed above are the crucial ones.

But focused audio listening is also important. And I have four goals that explain why.

The first goal of focused audio listening as I see it, is the pleasure of listening to all kinds of music, and to build a repertoire of listening which is a large part of building musical memory.

The second goal is that focused listening is part of how a composer works. It’s not play time. You don’t need to “multitask” to justify the time spent listening. Listening itself is working.

Third is to build conception, focus, comprehension, and attention combined with learning musical forms. Musical form includes song form, and longer compositional forms. A large part of composing/orchestrating is the ability to hear the whole work (song or movement) in your head without MIDI mock-ups!

Fourth, to hear score excerpts within the context of the movement to know how the expert was approached and left.

“To listen is an effort, and just to hear is no merit. A duck hears also,” said Stravinsky.

To accomplish these goals, the student (for volume 1) is a given the complete movement in MP3 format for a majority of the works in which the score excerpt is found. This way, the student can listen when, where and on what they choose to listen on. Next, students are given spread sheets with timings for each recorded excerpt. Thus, the learning approach is overview, then zoom in. If the student chooses to do a MIDI mock-up, they can import the audio file into their sequencing program, cut out the excerpt, and then begin the mock-up with the MP3 excerpt sitting in their arrange tracks.

I’ve gone one extra step by creating a Concert Series Package which has an average 20-minute concert for each orchestral instrument. The goal of these mini-concerts is teaching the student what the instruments sound like in each register and the compositional opportunities available with a capable musician. You would think this wouldn’t be necessary in an age where we’re surrounded by music. But I also discovered what Ebenezer Prout did in the 1880s, which is that some students not only don’t know what some instruments sound like, but also they don’t know what they look like either! So this is why I added the Concert Package.

This answer to the questions posed to me in writing by collegiate orchestration teachers turned out to be longer than I though it would be.

But I did this, because I wanted to tell the story of these three men and how they impacted orchestration instruction, and how the Professional Orchestration series builds on the foundation of their labor and love while adding its own contribution to the learning process.

Right now there are three Professional Orchestration volumes which cover the basic orchestral vocabulary. The fourth volume, Orchestrating the Melody by Combining Orchestral Sections is now being written but I haven’t announced a date for it yet because it’s a huge endeavor.

The place to start in the series is volume 1 with either the Basic Home Study Bundle or the Master Home Study Bundle. To either bundle I also recommend adding in The Spectrotone Course: Visual Orchestration – Basic Edition.

If you want to add a second semester to your offerings, Writing For Strings with supplemental video instruction is ready to go.

The discounted bundle prices are only available for learners ordering direct. For bookstore ordering, please write

You Should Also Check Out This Post:

More Active Posts: