Advertising and Web Hosting on Woodwind.Org!

Klarinet Archive - Posting 000608.txt from 2004/08

From: Tony Pay <>
Subj: Re: [kl] Mozart Quintet Question for Dan and Tony
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:57:48 -0400

On 20 Aug, "Shaw, Kenneth R." <> wrote:

> I've re-read the discussion of repeats in the Mozart Quintet but am
> unclear on whether you would repeat the second half of the first
> movement. Repeat? Or no repeat?

I do it, as I said elsewhere.

> If you would repeat, and observing Dan's distinction between
> ornamentation and invention, where is invention possible in the second
> half?

I don't do much in that movement.

It's important to realise that repetition has many other functions than
providing opportunities for embellishment.

> The descending [ascending] arpeggio figure from the clarinet's first
> entrance becomes the subject of a development by the strings, with the
> clarinet doing only simple ascending and descending arpeggios. It's
> tempting to try something different there, but the texture is so thick
> that, for me, it would be difficult to invent anything that wouldn't make
> the passage indigestible.

I agree. The clarinet part has a different purpose there.

> I'm also unsure about the rest of the second half. Mozart already makes
> variations from the first half, and there are none of the semi-blank
> sections that Mozart left, for example, in his piano concertos, where he
> merely left a few guidelines and made it up as he went along during the
> performance.


> And to re-ask the question, if I find no opportunities for invention in
> the second half, does that mean that at least when I perform it, I
> shouldn't make the repeat?

No, it doesn't mean that.

Away to Baden-Baden to play Rheingold again.

_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE
tel/fax 01865 553339

... Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc.

     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact