 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: srattle
Date: 2010-01-26 08:34
Hi, sorry if this has been discussed before, I took a quick look and didn't find what I'm looking for.
1. How 'should' the first figure (which is repeated throughout) be played? I have heard many theories on it, but never with particularly good reasoning behind, other than "it sounds better"
2. related to my first question, how should one build the tempo in accordance to these kind of passages in the 1st movement?
3. What tempo should the 2nd mvt be? I find the fear in this piece is that it has 3 mvts with the same tempo (essentially). Should this be the case? I have played around with the second movement being much slower than the first (and a lot more regal.
4. I have also played around with using some kind of quarter tones/micro tones in the trio section. . .too much? Would Mozart have used this if he knew about it?
(#4 isn't really too serious, just having some fun, no need to flame)
anyway, those are my questions. hopefully someone has some insight!
Thanks
Sacha
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2010-01-26 14:37
Sherman Friedland has a short but interesting take on the first movement tempo at http://clarinetcorner.wordpress.com/?s=kegelstatt. I'm not sure I agree with his quite slow tempo, but I do agree that the written-out turns should be played in tempo, twice as fast as they would be with a turn sign.
Rosario Mazzeo discusses the trio in his book, but I haven't read that section recently enough to say anything. See http://test.woodwind.org/Databases/Klarinet/1994/09/000124.txt
For me, the great hazard is letting the second movement become ponderous. Particularly if you make the first movement stately, as Sherman advises, the second should have some movement. I try to think of it as flowing, one beat to the bar.
In the trio, you lay out the lyrical figure and the violist has strongly contrasting, gruff responses. If you like, you're the toreador and the viola is the bull. If you do something unusual (such as quarter-tones), it reduces the contrast.
The third movement smiles all the way, with you and the violist cooperating rather than fighting, working off one another's figures.
Ken Shaw
Post Edited (2010-01-26 14:39)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2010-01-26 15:42
Yes, play the "turns" on the up beat.
My tempo markings are as follows:
Movement 1 (6/8): 1/8 note = 180
Minuet: 1/4 note (3/4) = 180
Rondo: 1/4 note (4/4) = 144
The three movements' different time signatures avoids the monotony of keeping a metronome set to the same rate for all three movements.
The Minuet should definitely NOT be counted in 1
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2010-01-26 15:45
I have also wondered about the tempo of the first movement. If one really tries to play it as Mozart wrote the rhythm of these turns, then one must really take a tempo far slower than one usually hears, in order for the turns not to sound ridiculous. Many people just play the turns almost half as fast, but I think this must be wrong, or otherwise why would Mozart have bothered to write them out every time?
So, I agree with Mr Friedland that the movement should be played not too fast. But I disagree with his correlation between tempo and whether the piece is in 2 or in 6. Just because one plays it slowly doesn't mean that one has to feel it in 6.
I like to think about the Kegelstatt trio as a 4-movement work, where the 1st movement is missing. Seen in this way, one doesn't feel bad about playing the 1st movement like a 2nd movement! :-)
Try to listen to Gilles Thomé's recording on period instruments. I think his tempi are pretty good.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: salzo
Date: 2010-01-26 19:10
I prefer the first movement on the faster side. And the rhythm in question should be played as written. Mozart knew how to write a "turn"-and he did not in this case.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
