 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: theclarinetist
Date: 2004-07-13 01:19
I was wondering if anyone has played the Prokofiev Sonata (arr Kennan). I love the piece for flute and violin and have the Stoltzman version with orchestra (though I find some of his tempos irritatingly slow... I also think the piece is much more suited for piano than orchestra) but anyway... I was looking at the Composition Database which mentioned that the transcription isn't great and contains many awkward passages. Is this simply because it would be in E major or are their specific problems. I'm assuming the piece is for Bb clarinet, so if the awkwardness is key related, would playing it on A clarinet (in F major) make it better?? I would love to perform this piece and have the flute version (though my flute embouchure/sound is quite rusty - flute was my original instrument, though I haven't played seriously in 6 years). I could do it on flute (after many an hour of long tones) or I could play the clarinet version. I would prefer to play the clarinet version (assuming it isn't as problematic as the database says) because I feel my expressive capabilities on clarinet are superior to mine on flute. However, playing the flute version would give me incentive to get my sound back in shape. Any insights or advice from someone who has performed the clarinet transcription? Thanks!
DH
theclarinetist@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2004-07-13 01:56
I haven't performed it, but I don't feel the transcription is all that bad. I've just messed around with it in the wood shed...
And it's such a great piece that I'm willing to forgive any odd transcriptional moments!
Katrina
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: theclarinetist
Date: 2004-07-13 05:03
I agree... The piece is amazing... while this doesn't pertain to my original post, I would add that anyone who has not heard this piece for violin should definitely do so. I have the Andrey Bielov recording (Naxos) and it is amazing. The violin version is modified with double stops and some pizz and other "violiny" things, which I think really enhance it (plus, I think the violin is capable of capturing the extremes of tonal color in the piece better than flute or clarinet).
Also, a further note on the Stoltzman recording. I like his version with orchestra. However, I think (particularly in the in last movement) there are some spots where the piano part is so clear and beautiful, and that simplicity/clarity gets easily lost in the orchestral transcription. Similarly, at other times the percussiveness of the piano part (which I feel is essential) is lacking in the orchestral version. As far as I can find, however, it's the only recorded version for clarinet, so it's still worthwhile to hear!
DH
theclarinetist@yahoo.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-07-13 08:37
theclarinetist wrote:
> Also, a further note on the Stoltzman recording....
> As far as I
> can find, however, it's the only recorded version for clarinet,
Larry Combs has recorded it with piano (Summit DCD 125)
John Bruce Yeh has recorded it with chamber orchestra (Centaur CRC 2154)
The biggest problem with the Prokofiev transcription is that it keeps the clarinet too high...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-07-13 14:34
I agree with GBK. The tessitura is just too high. I have Larry Combs's recording and also heard him play it live. Even he sounded uncomfortable. It's gorgeous music, but made for the flute or violin.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: theclarinetist
Date: 2004-07-13 19:57
and an awful candidate for A clarinet then, unless you took much of it down an octave.... eh, I tried!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2004-07-14 01:39
Ken & GBK:
I (very) respectfully disagree. I think the clarinet sounds lovely in its higher registers. I just glanced through the music again, and see nothing which seems too high, although the transcription does NOT take advantage of the low chalumeau at all. There are only a few "high" G's, and I don't consider E6 to be that high, when listening or playing.
JMO...I don't think we can bring this discussion to facts.
Katrina
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-07-14 03:14
Katrina... The end of the 2nd movement has the clarinet doing what the violin does in its version:
F#6 - A#6 - B6 !!
The wide interval leaps in the 3rd movement and the broken arpeggio leaps in the 4th movement are also extremely difficult to do well ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom Piercy
Date: 2004-07-14 21:33
I've performed the Prokofiev many times, not using the Kennan arrangement, but using my own transcription/arrangement.
I studied both the flute and violin versions and came up with my own version - sometimes using ideas from the flute, sometimes from the violin, trying always to take into consideration what I think would be better suited for the clarinet.
I do think it worth performing; I actually think it comes across as a much stronger piece in the clarinet version than in the flute version. To me, the flute just doesn't have to power to effectively communicate the complete piece.
I think the high tessitura can certainly be a problem if not controlled properly; a singing, floating, effortless quality is needed up there for the most part. In some places, the higher tessitura actually can help accentuate the needed drama and tension.
Tom Piercy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mario Poirier
Date: 2004-07-14 22:43
Thanks to Corrine for alerting me of this post. I recently played the Proko (after 12 months of serious work). Things went very well over all.
I had heard the piece for the first time 30 years ago (on the flute) and loved it since then. I was flaggergasted a few years ago when I heard it on Larry Comb's CD and so happy to discover the Kennan's adaptation.
Kennan of course made many decisions. I also found a recording of a version for clarinet created in the 40's. Kennan's is much better.
The tessiture of the piece was not an issue for me since things actually fall nicely up there. As a comparison, I am currently working on Copland's concerto for next year and the altissimo requirements of the Copland are much more depanding than Proko's, even if the latter piece was not written for the clarinet in the frist place.
Over the 12 months of my work, I have studied extensively many flutes and violin versions, changing things here and there from Kennan'. But toward the end, I realized that Kennan's judgement was far better than mine and my public performances are essentially alligned with Kennan's choice.
Here are a few suggestions:
Mvt1: Violins tend to drag; flutes tend to rush. It is important to choose a tempo that fits with the player's mood and allows the maintenance of good support to navigate these wide intervals in long phrases. I settled down to 86 with peak of speeds (around 90) in the second theme of the exposition (repeated later). Your flute friends will be impressed by the superior way the clarinet can play its little solo at 4. Make sure the piano keeps building energy during 6 and 7 (with the clarinet gliding on top of a gathering storm). It is hard for them and they must build an explosive climax one bar at the time.
Overall in this mvt, voicing the intervals and excellent air support are crucial to maintain the etheral feel of the music.
Mvt2: Clarinets have a weighthy sound. They can convey intent with conviction at slower speeds than the flute. I found that 76 was just perfect for my horn. This was actually confirmed to me by many flute and violon friends who observed that the piece sounded amazingly good even if I played it much slower than they are used to (Galways plays it at 110 for instance - you cannot hear a thing...). At 11, I cheated (played a straigth C scale) using a secret fingering for the top G (middle F!!! with the venting key) provided by my clarinet teacher and not in any book I have).
In the mischevous middle portion (18) of the movement, I added to arpegios played by the flute, essentially playing the middle part non-stop. My pianist loved it.
At the end of the mvt, the little arppegio (trying to approximate the violon pizzzicatto) was to high for me. I PLAYED MYSTEROUSLY TWO OCTAVE BELOW WRITTEN (so that I was not boringly in line with the piano ending), making sure that my little ending was essentially bounced just right off the piano (not too late, not too late - like a ball dropping off the keyboard). It worked beautifully and effectively to surprise the audience. These were the only major changes I made to the mvt.
Mvt3 again must not be dragged. I ended up about 56, essentially choosing a tempo whereby the strings of sixplets could be played clearly later without feeling rushed, adapting the rest of the speed acordingly. As in most adagio, there are millions things to say about tone quality and phrasing. At the end forinstance, finish so ever gently (but never loose your center), and get ready for the immediate explosive start of mvt 4 (make sure piano is ready to go NOW!). Audiences will love it.
Mvt4 is the killer. There is not way out, it needs work, work and work. My finishing speed was 118. I actually cheated a bit before 33 (hush... this is a secret) and took a # out of a D because the sliding was just too fast for me. Besides that, the movement is a pure exercize in stamina in a challenging key for the clarinet.Get your scale of E Major, B Major, D# Minor and G# Minor perfectly in your fingers, that will help. This movement also has the only portion where I felt that no amount of adaptation would work for the clarinet, namely the grace note arpegios where one really feel like being outragously showy (as requested by my pianist) but we clarinetists remain limited to play them way too low for the feel of the piece. On the other end, the pastoral middle (36) works better on the clarinet than on anything else (again, do not drag here). So go figure.
There is an excellent article in a past issue of the Clarinet on this piece. The key point: the phrases are long and churning forward. No dragging allowed - this is a show-off piece. Keep a reserve of energy as the end is simply pyrotechnic. As my coachers emphazize to me many times, Proko is not Brahms. With Proko, what you see is what you get. There is no hidden meaning in the music. Play as written, master the technical demand, keep the energy high, and go!
There are too many interpretation details to put in a post. But the bottom line is that the piece works very well for the clarinet 99% of the time. What a joy!
Mario Poirier
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2004-07-15 18:36
Ok, GBK,
You do have me there with the second movement. I am unable to check email/internet from home right now due to a faulty phone jack, so I'm at the public library and can't check the score, but I'll believe you any day...
And those notes are high. But they also appear in the Bartok Contrasts. Granted they will sound lower since that movement's on A, but you still gotta have the same control! In other words, they're not unheard-of...but you knew that, eh? 
Katrina
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
