Klarinet Archive - Posting 000367.txt from 2000/06
From: "Tony Pay" <tony_pay@-----.com>
Subj: SV: [kl] Alf Horberg's comments
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 12:27:33 -0400
(BTW, I do want to make it clear that I'm writing this from a
temporary account. I won't be reachable on this email address for
very much longer, I hope. What a naff editor.)
I'm looking forward to what Alf has to say tomorrow. But meanwhile,
I've been thinking further about one aspect of the matter on my own.
I wrote:
>Alf Horberg wrote:
>
> > --- As for bar 298-299 it has given me headaches trying to
> > figure out what to do with it. It just doesn't feel right. The
> > whole phrase is descending in the parallel place in the
> > exposition. Here suddenly, in the recapitulation bar 298 it
> > jumps up one octave in the same manner as we recognize from
> > other places in the 1803 edition.
>
>But again, look at the orchestra. This time, just violins and
>violas, *higher*, accompanying the change of octave after the
>first beat of 298. And this time, the orchestra needs the low
>clarinet for the bass of the first inversion chord at the
>resolution in bar 300. The clarinet's concert C# is taken up by
>only the cellos on the last beat of that bar as we (clarinet
>players, I mean) return to the soprano line -- which I find a
>wonderful touch. Sure, the switch of octaves in 298 is a surprise
>-- but that sort of effect is often a positive feature of this
>particular work.
>
>And as I say, FDFD *need not* be felt as a defect. (Could you
>think of her a little differently, and let her into your heart,
>perhaps?-)
>
> > I want to go with your suggestion to play it one octave lower
> > and change bar 299 so it becomes identical, or similar to bar
> > 111 in the exposition, playing down to low D. The 16th in bar
> > 299 would be: b.g.f.low d.f.g.b.d.f.g.b.d.f.d.b.d./c.
I have to confess that, trying this out, I've changed my previous
opinion that this solution won't work; it does work very well.
Thanks, Alf.
Because, with Alf's idea:
You still get a change of octave in 298, which works well with the
violins and violas in 298;
My reasoning about requiring the clarinet for the first inversion
isn't strong, because the first inversion is already there, with 2nd
violins in the bass;
Though I always liked the 'cello echo of the low C#, I find I can
equally like their unprepared entry.
So now I have a choice.
This is all quite independent of the 'low B' question, of course.
Tony
--
... You like these math ones? How about: lim 3 = 8 ?
w -> oo
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org
