 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: charlie_star_uk
Date: 2007-01-06 21:00
I realise I could answer my own question by going to a music shop no doubt... but I was rehearsing this piece yesterday and the pianist I was working with started the first movement slower than we usually play it. We played all three through and discussed it at the end. It was actually very enjoyable to play slower, though maybe the structure does not work unless the second one also is slower...
Anyway, in my Peters edition the metronome marks are given but it is not mentioned whose they are... whether Schumann's (who I hear often put wildly fast met marks) or maybe Clara's or the editors. I think the metronome markings make a lot of sense (80 for the first, 138 for the second and 160 for the third - which incidentally makes the third one double the tempo of the first).
Does anyone have any knowledge on this? I am performing it on Monday, and will stick with how I enjoy playing it, but am interested to know whose idea these tempos were?
Thanks,
Charlie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Iceland clarinet
Date: 2007-01-06 22:10
The orginal version Soiréestücke which is a bit different specially the endings of the movments since the have attacca at the very ending that means that this work should be played as one movment without brake. The urtext edition I have from Faber Music from 1985 and is edit by Alan Hacker and Richard Platt has no metronome marks at all only the tempo given in German words. They(Alan Hacker and Richard Platt) thought it was publised as Fantasiestücke so the movments could be played seperatly and would be played more often.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Danny Boy
Date: 2007-01-06 22:16
I always play the Fantasiestucke attacca, as marked in my Peters Edition.
I can't shed any light on the source of the metronome marks though.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2007-01-06 22:56
Charlie wrote, in part:
>> ....in my Peters edition the metronome marks are given but it is not mentioned whose they are... whether Schumann's (who I hear often put wildly fast met marks) or maybe Clara's or the editors....[I] am interested to know whose ideas these tempos were?>>
According to the editors of the Henle edition, they appeared for the first time, in brackets, in a "Neue durchgesehene Ausgabe" (new revised edition) published in 1852 by the publisher C. Luckhardt three years after the original publication of the pieces by them in 1849. The Henle editors also say that despite the claim of revision, the two editions are identical apart from the addition of those metronome marks. It's not clear who added them.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: charlie_star_uk
Date: 2007-01-07 09:12
Many thanks for replies.
Tony, what do you think of the metronome markings given?
P.S. Did the Brahm's info I sent you make more sense? It was so clear when first described to me!
Charlie
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2007-01-07 13:29
Charlie wrote:
>>Tony, what do you think of the metronome markings given?>>
Depends on the acoustic, how the pianist plays it, and....so on. I think the Fantasiestuecke, particularly the first two, work well if you take a quite flexible view of tempo; but those numbers seem not unreasonable as a basis.
>>Did the Brahm's info I sent you make more sense? It was so clear when first described to me!>>
Yes, I can now see that the St Matthew Passion Chorale and the beginning of Op 120 no. 1 both go, mi la soh fa mi (to fill the rest of you in, someone had claimed a relationship between the two pieces), and perhaps that was intentional, I don't know.
Brahms's debt to existing works is very often on a more abstract level, though. I've mentioned here before that the opening of his clarinet quintet and the opening of the Mozart clarinet quintet share the feature that the violins move first in parallel thirds and then in parallel sixths; see:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=215222&t=82028
...for a reference to Charles Rosen's discussion of similar examples.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jane84
Date: 2007-01-07 15:40
As far as I know, it's common to play nr. 1 a bit faster and nr. 2 a bit slower than the markings. I think they work fine, though.
-jane
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2007-01-07 16:22
David Shifrin tends to play the first movement quite a bit slower and so does Depeyer..does it work faster> sure...but the piano player is under quite a bit of stress already with the way Schumann sets up the left hand.
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
