Klarinet Archive - Posting 000092.txt from 2009/03

From: "Karl Krelove" <karlkrelove@-----.net>
Subj: [kl] Schumann Fantasiestucke
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:58:33 -0400

I=92ve spent the last couple of nights listening to the DVD produced by
Vandoren of a masterclass and interview with Karl Leister. One of the
students on the program plays the Schumann Fantasiestucke. Listening to =
them
work through the second piece reminded me of an old question I=92d long =
ago
forgotten about concerning the rhythm. Could be just a big, na=EFve hole =
in my
training and maybe the answer falls into the category of =93everyone =
[else]
knows that=85.=94

At the beginning of the Lebhaft the piano plays triplets in the treble
staff, but it also plays the melodic notes as a top voice above those
triplets. When the clarinet enters in, it plays the same melody as the =
top
voice in the piano part (while the piano goes on with its triplet
arpeggios). The piano and clarinet trade melody back and forth. =
Throughout
these exchanges, the piano=92s arpeggios are notated as triplets. The =
top
melodic eighth notes are, in the edition I own, notated as duplets (with
separate stems and beams), but with the second note clearly aligned with =
the
third note of each of the accompanying triplets. It is, whenever I=92ve =
heard
it performed, played by the pianist exactly as though the melody voice =
were
also written in triplets =96 the eighth notes are played as =
quarter-eighth.
When the clarinet plays, though, in every performance I=92ve heard, the =
eighth
notes are played as even duplets =96 =93straight=94 in the clarinet vs. =
=93swung=94 in
the piano melodic voice. It=92s always seemed odd to my ears that the =
rhythm
is treated so differently, especially given the notation of the upper =
voice
in the piano treble staff. (Mr. Leister didn=92t even bring it up.)

I realize that it would be impossible to play the eighths as duplets and
still maintain the triplets all in the right hand =96 so one way for a =
pianist
to actually play the cross-rhythm, maybe the only way (I=92m not a =
pianist),
would probably be to play the triplet arpeggios with the left hand =
(after
playing the half-notes on 1 and 3 in the bass staff =96 the first note =
of each
triplet either coincides with the melody note or is a rest), a workout =
for
the pianist. In three places the pianist plays a melodic eighth-note =
that
does not coincide with a triplet note, and in two of those the piano and =
the
clarinet play dotted-quarter-eighth-quarter in unison. Particularly in =
the
unison measures it seems inconceivable that the clarinet would play even
eighths while the piano persists in its _notes inegales_. An alternative =
to
making the pianist work so hard would be to play the clarinet rhythm in
imitation of the piano _inegales_. But _inegale_ style itself was mostly =
a
French practice that was long gone by the mid-19th century and in any =
case
was applied to music of a different character.

The same problem of triplet-duplet notation within the piano=92s treble =
staff,
of course, also occurs in many places in the other two pieces, as well =
as
duplets in the clarinet against triplets in the accompaniment, but the =
outer
sections of the second piece are where the contrast between otherwise
imitative melody segments is involved.

I guess my questions are =96 is there documention of any kind =
(performance
practice, earlier editions, etc.) to show Schumann meant for the piano =
and
clarinet rhythms to contrast in the way they seem, at least in the era =
of
recording, to be played? If not, when and why was this approach was =
adopted.
If they are really meant to be rhythmically different, why is the melody
line in the piano notated as if it were the same as the clarinet=92s =
part? If
they really should be the same, which treatment =96 swung or straight =
=96 is the
most defensible choice?

I know players must have thought about it =96 it=92s too obvious a =
problem.

Karl

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