Klarinet Archive - Posting 000093.txt from 2009/03

From: Fred Jacobowitz <fbjacobo@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Schumann Fantasiestucke
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 00:07:01 -0400

Karl,
I beg to differ. It is perfectly possible (and done all the =
time) =20
for the pianist to play 2 against 3. If this pianist didn't do it, he =20=

was being sloppy. However, if you listen really closely, what sounds =20
like triplets in the piano RH is often actually duples. It can be =20
confusing to the ear, but I've noticed the phenomenon and have had to =20=

concentrate closely to hear that the pianist is actually doing it =20
correctly.
As for the notation, I wouldn't be surprised if it was not =
possible =20
with the printing technology of the time, to notate duples over =20
triplets, so what you are seeing is the only thing they can do, and =20
it would be understood that the notes shouldn't line up, even if they =20=

are printed so. When I took a music preparation course at Juilliard =20
(way back in the dark ages before computers), we examined some quite =20
interesting oddities.

Fred Jacobowitz

CASE CLOSED Musical Instrument Case Repair Service
Kol Haruach Klezmer Band
Ebony and Ivory Duo

You don't get harmony when everybody sings the same note.
~Doug Floyd

On Mar 18, 2009, at 9:58 PM, Karl Krelove wrote:
>
> I realize that it would be impossible to play the eighths as =20
> duplets and
> still maintain the triplets all in the right hand =96 so one way for =20=

> a pianist
> to actually play the cross-rhythm, maybe the only way (I=92m not a =20
> pianist),
> would probably be to play the triplet arpeggios with the left hand =20
> (after
> playing the half-notes on 1 and 3 in the bass staff =96 the first =20
> note of each
> triplet either coincides with the melody note or is a rest), a =20
> workout for
> the pianist. In three places the pianist plays a melodic eighth-=20
> note that
> does not coincide with a triplet note, and in two of those the =20
> piano and the
> clarinet play dotted-quarter-eighth-quarter in unison. Particularly =20=

> in the
> unison measures it seems inconceivable that the clarinet would play =20=

> even
> eighths while the piano persists in its _notes inegales_. An =20
> alternative to
> making the pianist work so hard would be to play the clarinet =20
> rhythm in
> imitation of the piano _inegales_. But _inegale_ style itself was =20
> mostly a
> French practice that was long gone by the mid-19th century and in =20
> any case
> was applied to music of a different character.
>
> The same problem of triplet-duplet notation within the piano=92s =20
> treble staff,
> of course, also occurs in many places in the other two pieces, as =20
> well as
> duplets in the clarinet against triplets in the accompaniment, but =20
> 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 =20
> (performance
> practice, earlier editions, etc.) to show Schumann meant for the =20
> piano and
> clarinet rhythms to contrast in the way they seem, at least in the =20
> era of
> recording, to be played? If not, when and why was this approach was =20=

> adopted.
> If they are really meant to be rhythmically different, why is the =20
> melody
> line in the piano notated as if it were the same as the clarinet=92s =20=

> part? If
> they really should be the same, which treatment =96 swung or straight =20=

> =96 is the
> most defensible choice?
>
> I know players must have thought about it =96 it=92s too obvious a =20
> problem.
>
> Karl
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>

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