 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: aminor
Date: 2007-07-12 14:19
I have a mordent with a natural sign above it over a "B". The key signature is G. The mordent indicates that I would go down to the "A" right? And the "A" is not sharped in the song. So why is there a natural sign? I'm confused - please explain and thank you so much.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-07-12 14:37
If the mordent looks like an m, then it's an upper mordent, so you play the written note and then the note above it as quickly as possible, and then back to the written note for the rest of the duration.
If it has a vertical line through it, then it's a lower mordent. So you play the written note and then the note below it quickly, then back up to the written note.
The natural above it means the upper note of the mordent is natural - and as it's on a B it means play the C natural above it. Is there a C# before the B with the mordent? The natural sign is there to cancel out a previous C#, or reinforce the fact you play a C natural instead of a C#.
On lower mordents, the accidental will be placed below the mordent.
You'll also see accidentals above trills to tell you what to do with the upper note.
And above or below (or above AND below) turns (~) as well to tell you how they should be performed.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
Post Edited (2007-07-12 14:37)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: aminor
Date: 2007-07-12 15:31
It's definitely just a plain ole mordent which you are calling lower mordent. I call the mordents with the line through them: mordents
and the ones without the line through them: inverted mordents and you say upper mordents.
So, it's an mordent/lower mordent. (An M with a vertical line through it) which means I go down to the "A".
The "A" was never sharp or flat previously. It's in 3/4 and there is only the half note "b" with the mordent sign above it and a quarter note high B.
So why would the "A" of the mordent be indicated to be natural - it already is natural.
Thanks for your patience.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-07-12 16:11
A mordent WITHOUT a line through it is an upper mordent, so you go UP to the note above (like a trill, but without continuing the trill for the rest of the duration of the note). So if you see the note C with a mordent above it, you play C-D-C____.
An inverted mordent - the one with a line through it - goes DOWN to the note below. So an inverted mordent above a C will be played C-B-C____.
Accidentals are placed above upper mordents as it's the upper note of the mordent that is altered, and on inverted mordents the accidental will be below as that's the note that will be altered.
So if a mordent above a B has a sgarp above it, you play B-C#-B____.
If an inverted mordent above a C has a flat below it, you play C-Bb-C____.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: aminor
Date: 2007-07-12 16:55
Whether it's a mordent or an inverted mordent (we disagree), it would either be up to a C or down to an A and the sign above the "mordent" is an accidental sign which means to go down to the A and make it natural. It's not a flat sign or a sharp sign - it's a natural sign.
I was taught that mordent = line down - frowns go down.
and
inverted mordent = no line - go up. (like a face without any lines, it stays up.)
You are saying that no line is an upper mordent which I agree with. But I say it's also called inverted mordent.
And you say that an inverted mordent has the line going through it but I say that's called Mordent.
At least we agree that the line means go down. Oh well, never mind, this is too complicated for text. Thank you for your time and attention.
Kathleen
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: grifffinity
Date: 2007-07-12 17:05
aminor,
ChrisP is quite correct in his description of a mordent. Here is a visual:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordent
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2007-07-12 17:10
Sorry, Chris. While your use of "upper" and "lower" mordent is correct. According to both an early music book I have and Clarke's Dictionary of Musical terms, [and, as it turns out, Wikipedia], the ornament with the line is the mordent (goes down), the ornament without the line is the inverted mordent (goes up). I think Kathleen has it right this time.
Grifffinity, read the definition in Wikipedia (which, for once has it right):
"In music, a mordent is an ornament that means that the note is to be played in rapid alternation with the note below." [emphasis mine]
Best regards,
jnk
Post Edited (2007-07-12 17:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: grifffinity
Date: 2007-07-12 17:36
From wiki a little lower down:
"It should be noted that in the Baroque period, a Mordant (the German equivalent of mordent) was what later came to be called an inverted mordent and what is now often called a lower mordent. In the 19th century, however, the name mordent was generally applied to what is now called the upper mordent. This confusion over the meaning of the unadorned word mordent is what has led to the modern terms upper and lower mordent being used rather than mordent and inverted mordent."
Chris statement that the M is considered an upper mordent and an M/w slash is a lower mordent is correct.
Post Edited (2007-07-12 17:40)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: FDF
Date: 2007-07-12 18:02
My Random House dictionary says that a mordant is an “embellishment consisting of a rapid alteration of a principal tone with the tone a half or a whole step below it, called single or short when the auxiliary tone occurs once and double or long when this occurs twice or more.” An illustration shows an “m” with a vertical line for a single an “m|v” (my poor attempt to show the symbol) with a vertical line after the second wave to show a double or more (the illustration also gives notation). Is this correct?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2007-07-12 22:44
Kathleen, is there a C# in the same bar or in the bar before the mordent?
If there is, the natural sign is cancelling the C# out, or a reminder that the upper note of the mordent over the B is a C natural instead of a C#.
What I've been taught is that a mordent (looking like /\/\) starts on the written note, goes UP to the next note in the scale and back to the written note.
A mordent with a vertical line through it's centre (looking something like /\|/\) is called an inverted mordent, where the written note is played, then the note BELOW is played, and then back to the written note for the rest of the duration of the note value it is placed above.
A mordent is played on the note, and not before the note.
But as far as accidentals go, placed above means the upper note of the mordent is altered, and if placed below, the lower note of the inverted mordent is altered.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2007-07-13 10:26
...further on in Wiki it says: Mordent....what you get in your car from an accident.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: aminor
Date: 2007-07-13 15:08
Hi Chris, there is no C# in the measure or before. And it's a mordent with a line through it which means I would go down to the "A" and it was never sharp or flat.
The note is B, I would then mordent down to the A quickly and back up to the B. Or maybe I will just improvise and go up to the C and back to the B.
It's probably a typo and I'm just going to ignore the accidental sign. Thanks for all your help.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2007-07-13 15:51
Kathleen,
Who is the composer and what is the work and measure number in question? (Or is that a secret? )
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: aminor
Date: 2007-07-13 17:06
The song is called "Andante Grazioso" by Charles Callahan. I could fax it to someone Monday. I can't remember the measure but it's in the first part of the song.
Thanks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2007-07-13 20:20
Well, guess what! There is actually a sample pdf of the first page of the organ score for this piece online at:
http://www.morningstarmusic.com/pdfs/20-974.pdf
I think you are right that there is a typo. But the question is, "What is it, exactly." Is it simply the inclusion of the unnecessary natural (and, in the wrong place at that for a [lower] mordant)? Or could it be that the mordant sign is incorrect and it should have been an [upper] inverted mordant?
First consider the mystery of the unnecessary natural in your part. Notice that the organ score, unlike the clarinet part, is in d-minor. In this key, if the composer actually intended an [upper] inverted mordent (rather than the lower mordent we see in the printed part), the natural sign makes sense because it tells the player to play from A to B-natural, rather than to Bb. Transposed to e-minor for your Bb clarinet, the accidental becomes unnecessary but we can probably conclude that the arranger simply carried the form of the ornament through to the transposed part. In any case, it does no harm, because it would be played the same with or without the natural sign, as you noted.
The other issue, however, is which type of mordent to play. Clearly the part is marked with a [lower] mordent but is this what Callahan really intends? One clue may be the natural sign. If this were truly a [lower] mordent, any accidental should be below, not above it (and, even in the organ part, a natural on the lower side would not be necessary). But we also should consider what's going on in the organ part at this point.
While the clarinet is playing a half-note (concert) A, with as yet an undetermined mordent, the organ is playing an eighth-note C# with an [upper] inverted mordent, followed by a eighth-note B-natural, followed by a quarter note A that ends the phrase. This suggests that perhaps Callahan (and Dethier?) intended you to play an [upper] inverted mordent up to B-natural with both parts resolving on A.
So there is almost certainly a typo because an accidental above a [lower] mordent is incorrect notation. The two most likely candidates for the correct notation are:
1. a [lower] mordent with no accidental. This is the simple solution but then why include the natural in the organ part, let alone the clarinet part.
2. an [upper] inverted mordent where the upper note is (concert) B-natural. This would explain the accidental in the organ part but not in the clarinet part (careless error when preparing the clarinet part?). The composer uses mordents in other places in the work both in the clarinet and the organ parts. With the exception of this one, however, they are always (at least on the sample page) [upper] inverted mordents. There is no rule that says a composer can't vary ornamentation but (unless there are clearly some lower mordents in the rest of the piece) it seems odd that he would do that here in the clarinet part -- especially against an [upper] inverted mordent in the organ part. And note that the organ part in measures 11 and 12 is identical to the clarinet part in measures 3 and 4. Finally, while I think that all the possible interpretations of the ornament (upper/lower, natural/flat) actually sound OK with the organ part, the A to B-natural has the most symmetry with the organ part. The B-natural in the clarinet's mordent anticipates the B-natural in the organ part.
So, some things for you to consider. My vote would obviously be for (2) but, ultimately, it's up to you. A peek at the original might solve the problem immediately but I don't know if that's possible.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
