Klarinet Archive - Posting 000771.txt from 2000/06

From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: Re: [kl] Mozart Concerto
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 00:47:40 -0400

On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 20:55:48 -0400, bhausman@-----.com said:

> At 09:51 PM 6/19/2000 +0100, Ian Black wrote:

> > Bill,
> >
> > I agree with all of your reasoning for playing that section (311 by
> > my Eulenberg mini score) in the lower chalumeau region, but where
> > the violins have an A and a C#, and the viola also has the A and
> > these are the only instruments accompanying at this point, I would
> > favour the E (thumb and L1 - concert C#) instead of the low F
> > (concert D) to replace the out-of-range C. Although the F would not
> > be out of place as a passing note, the strings share an A and a C# -
> > does it not make more sense when we replace the A to do so with a
> > C#? I think so.
>
> I found my counting error, but I don't think I follow you. That would
> seem to make a huge leap out of the lower chalumeau territory, unless
> I misunderstand you. Ignoring the repeated C's, I am suggesting the
> passage will be a repeated up and down scale pattern: A, G, F, E, F,
> G, A, G, F, E, F, G, A, F, G, E, all played with the right hand alone
> (in case this was not clear in my earlier post). The only change is
> the substitution of the second F in each series for the unattainable
> C.

In your terminology, and with the barlines shown by '/', his suggestion
is A, G, F, E, E', G, / A, G, F, E, E', G, / A, G, F, E; the E'
represents the 'thumb and L1' E.

I agree with him that this works better than putting in an F, because
it's a better accompaniment to the violin line, both harmonically and
because it too phrases by the bar. I take your point about the move
from the chalumeau territory -- though 'huge leap' is surely an
exaggeration (just a major 3rd from the pivot C, and it gets to be
motivic too:-) -- but I think that here, that consideration takes second
place.

> As I recall, this is what Benny Goodman played in his 1956 recording,

As does this consideration:-)

> and it works fine.

In the end, it's a matter of personal judgement, of course.

As is what you do in the first movement, bar 333, on an ordinary
clarinet. Here, if I didn't have a basset clarinet, I'd play in the
chalumeau: ACAF EGCG ACAF EGCG, which doesn't appear in any edition I've
seen. Hacker suggests something rather like Bill's/Goodman's solution
for 311: ACAF EGFE ACAF EGFE -- which is also possible.

Anyhow, repeating the previous bar, or returning to the top octave for
the first half of it, may keep the notes, but it doesn't keep the
all-important 'three registers' register change, which is surely the
point of the passage, whether you believe the 333 numerology or not.

(BTW, Jack Brymer sometimes used to *leave that bar out*, by analogy
with the exposition.)

Bars 145, 146, 147 are better all down the octave, it seems to me,
contra NMA:

145 is CGEG CEGC E (the first CGE going *downwards*)

146 is CF#AC F#ACEb F# (the second note, F# is the *low* F#)

147 is C#EGC# EGC#E G (the first *two* notes, C#E going *upwards*)

In fact, once you've decided, for reasons of larger scale dramatic
pacing, to play these bars in the lower register, I feel this version is
psychologically almost forced on you. It's the only way to keep the
'one object per bar' quality of the original, and to make the sequence
of lowest notes in each arpeggio rise, again as in the original; but
I've never come across it. NMA/Barenreiter inexplicably opts for about
the worst possible solution.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE GMN family artist: www.gmn.com
tel/fax 01865 553339

... When I grow up I want to be a message.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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