Question for the music majors: ornament vs. articulation?

What is the difference between an "ornament" and an "articulation"?
 
Wikipedia defines "ornament" as synonymous with "embellishment", meaning a musical flourish that's not essential to carrying the melody. Bends, for example.
 
It defines "articulation" as the method used to join notes, such as legato and glissando. If this is the proper full definition, then I've been mis-using the term by calling pizzicato an articulation. So have most makers of orchestral sample libraries. 
 
So, two questions for you music majors:
 
1. Is an articulation just the method of transitioning between notes, or does it also encompass how the note was initiated? E.g., is a hammer-on an articulation? 
 
2. Is a trill an ornament or an articulation? How about vibrato or using a whammy bar?

I was not a music major but I did self-study Baroque performance practice at one point.
 
A trill is definitely an ornament, although a Kontakt orchestral library would probably invoke it via keyboard articulation, so some confusion is natural.  Early keyboard music is played replete with ornaments, although they were rarely indicated in the score.  Somewhere in the early classical period this practice largely disappeared and explicitly written ornamentation became the common practice.  So, a valid question is: if there's a mordant or trill in the score, is it an ornament in the first place or part of the composer's intent and an integral part of the music?

Hi,
 
Can a music minor respond?
 
From a writing perspective, the difference is blurred some. If you are an instinctive writer, you simply follow your inner movie and it's all about how well, and how fast you can articulate/translate what is in your inner movie. Later, when you are done writing it, you might want to embellish it a bit, and that would be an ornament for me.
 
How's this done in music? Funny you should ask ... I did a film version of the first act of TOSCA for a directing in Opera class (instructor was Peter Mark - Virginia Opera Emeritus these days) and it went really well, and the film version I had was well written and it had some very nice details ... for example ... look at the score of the aria coming up in that piece ... and you will find that in all the instruments, there is in the middle along with his tears, a single violin, that goes ... plunk, plunk, plunk, plunk, downwards like 5 or 6 times, and that was it ... and this crazy mind person, decided that was a close up of a tear falling ... hitting the beard, falling and hitting what he was wearing, then falling again and hitting his legs, and then to the ground ... to get absorbed by the straw on it.
 
I could say that ... this particular instrument was added to add a subtle moment to the music, that most of us will never find or hear ... but ... there it was. 
 
My version was a film version with the sets on film on a scrim in the backstage ... and the singing done up front, but moments like this one could be super-imposed easily enough  while he is singing, and the camera would follow that tear, even if we had to fake it some, since no one can see a tear from the 3rd row, and we do not have to place him in the front! 
 
The opening was even better ... men on horses, going towards the church, and all of the filming is done from ground level, so all you see is the horses' feet, until the last moments when the camera can pan out and we see him taken to the jail!
 
Peter's comment? ... "... just about solved every problem that opera has ever had in a stage!" .... and I said ..."let's do it!" ... sadly, it never happened. But I think it would have been a massive show and would blow out a lot of opera traditions that can better be worked on film, instead of the "make believe" sets. 
 
PS: I have not tried Turandot in the same spot ... but I don't know how I can top Renata Tebaldi dwelling with Birgit Nillson. And Leinsdorf directing of course!

bitflipper
...
My conclusion: In most sampled instruments, some of the programmable options are going to be ornaments and some are articulations. It would be clumsy to draw a distinction on a Kontakt UI, so vendors simply use "articulation". Except for this particular product I'm reviewing, which calls them "ornaments". Neither is correct, but both get the idea across.

It's all composition ... really. And it's sort of like asking Frank Zappa, why that vacuum cleaner sound was added that apparently does not do anything for the music ... until you listen to it from a distance, and then it sounds like ... hmmm ... that makes the music a bit different! 
 
In the rock'n'roll format, I'm not sure that this won't be visible as much ... and sometimes sound incorrect or off kilter. Jazz has the excuse that everyone can do something different, but in general ... it's the "whole piece" that has to stand up ... not just one element. I tend to look at the whole thing, rather than one thing.

bapu
I've missed Pedro's articulations.
 
Or are they ornaments?

I'm just waiting for the thread about accidentals.  That's apparently my best musical talent. 

rumleymusic
Yeah, articulation is reserved for the attack and release of a note (accent, staccato, legato, marcato etc.).  Ornaments are added notes like trills, grace notes, and quick runs and are usually notated with a symbol (or improvised in many cases).   There are other special techniques that do not fall under either category such as muting or bowing alterations.  

Good answer, thanks. And pretty much what I'd guessed. So hammer-ons and pull-offs would be articulations, since they don't add notes but instead refer to how the note is generated. I'm guessing slides fall into that category, too. But not mutes? What is the musical notation for a mute?

Hi,
 
Sorry ... didn't think this was a detail on a synthesizer or the like. I thought it was a more generic music question!

Bit
 
Articulation is how the note (or sound) is actually produced.
Ornamentation is how you decorate a note.
 
KISS Method
 
Clifford

Thanks for the education, everybody!
 
My question arose as I was reviewing a Kontakt instrument that listed playing variations as "ornaments", while most sampled instruments call them "articulations". That got me thinking about what the difference is, and if one term is more appropriate than the other.
 
I've concluded that neither is accurate as they're commonly used with sampled instruments, but it's not convenient to separate them. If it was me, I'd called them "variations". Or "de-boreifiers".

Fascinating in regards to many articulations markers for the 'Bow' (i.e.violin), butt even more fascinating are wind instruments, which involves many clever uses of the 'Tongue'.

Hi dmbaer,
 
Nice find, there's a lot of content I would not be able to remember all that, but thanks for that link.   No matter the years of experience, I'm always learning something
 
My nephew is studying to be a music teacher, and plays guitar in heavy metal bands.  Its been years since I last taught music (piano)!  Anyway, I record, keep notes, lyrics/notation, including project notes such as, track list, virtual instruments + special notes i.e. techniques used... all that including my songs recorded on (CD/DVD). Therefore I won't shed a tear if all hard drives (and backups) fail.  I really don't care if I had to re-record my songs, I love challenges and always strive to better my last effort.
 
I should call my home recording studio, 'Neanderthal' or something like that.

bitflipper
 
I wonder sometimes if sight-reading sheet music won't eventually become an arcane skill, like reading Latin or tanning hides.

I started playing without the need for sight-reading and I prefer to write/play with feel, I love music, music is my life.  I guess most musicians are like this, aww heck some of the greatest musicians can't sight-read at all 
 
My mother inlaw can sight-read really well but her performances are not so great. Most of her years (time) was spent studying health care instead -- she worked at the local hospital for more than 30 years and is now happily retired, she's a wonderful lady   Anyway, another example would be a brother and sister (young students - under 12 years old), the sister loved playing piano and practiced every day, she is extraordinarily talented, highly skilled at both sight-reading and performance. Whereas her brother did not really want to learn how to play piano, his performance was average at best. I blame the parents for forcing him to continue learning the piano (the kid didn't want to play piano or any other instrument) -- you can't just learn how to sight-read and that's it (no daily practice; no honing actual performance skills). Nonetheless, that kid might go on to be a music teacher but his actual playing/performance skill will not be extraordinary.