The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: CDC
Date: 2018-08-09 04:18
I’m just starting to play through this movement and work out how I’m going to practice it. There are 4 bars (bars 37, 41, 81, 85) where you have a trill immediately followed by a descending chromatic passage. In my edition (from IMLSP, Durand 1921), 3 of these trills end with turns leading to the following note in the next bar. However, the second trill at bar 41 (which differs by having two trilled minims instead of one trilled semibreve) has no turn.
It makes sense to me and “feels right” (to me) to put a turn at the end of this second trill. As well as being consistent, I also feel that these trills echo the two trills in the first movement, which also end in turns. However, I haven’t heard any recordings where people do this.
At the end of the day I’m just playing for my own enjoyment, and so it doesn't really matter what I do. However, I've just started reading Saint Saens' memoirs "Musical Memories" and am getting the feeling that this was a man of extremely firm opinion! If he didn't put a turn there, then he probably didn't for a good reason. Also, if I ever decide to sit exams, this movement would be on the list, and I would not wish to make a faux pas or offend the examiners!
Any thoughts?
Col
Colin
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: nellsonic
Date: 2018-08-10 05:30
The notation is your first guide. The performance tradition is your second. If you want to buck both indicators that's on you. You'd best be extremely convincing and polished with this if you have any hope of getting a positive reaction from a knowledgeable clarinet audience.
If you are just informally exploring some ideas, there's no harm in that. Heck, you can learn tons by rearranging or improvising on a passage like this and have lots of fun in the process.
The secret to knowing what's appropriate is doing your homework - as you are by asking the question, listening, etc. - and then considering WHY you are doing what you are doing and for WHOM.
Anders
Post Edited (2018-08-10 07:29)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: dorjepismo ★2017
Date: 2018-08-10 06:33
Always thought it sounded right without adding grace notes in that bar, the way he wrote it. I do mess with the articulation in a few places, though. A lot of French stuff has a light, natural, spontaneous style that almost sounds like you're making it up as you go along. I don't think we should actually do that, but I wouldn't want to get too solemn about it either.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CDC
Date: 2018-08-10 13:29
Thanks for your responses, they’re very helpful. I’m just starting to work on this movement, and knowing now that there is no tradition of adding a turn in that bar will inform my practice. I might experiment with it for fun, though.
Colin
Post Edited (2018-08-10 13:30)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2018-08-10 19:47
Quote:
At the end of the day I’m just playing for my own enjoyment, and so it doesn't really matter what I do. However, I've just started reading Saint Saens' memoirs "Musical Memories" and am getting the feeling that this was a man of extremely firm opinion! If he didn't put a turn there, then he probably didn't for a good reason.
I suppose you're doing F# to G# as your graces?
The likely reason why Saint Saens didn't use these graces is that the music here is moving into the key of C minor, which requires an F natural (concert Eb).
So if you wanted to get some graces that fit the harmony, you would need an F natural to G#, which creates an augmented second and is therefore unusable. Or you could do G natural to G#, which creates an inelegant chromaticism, clashes with (if you pardon the theory jargon) the French augmented-sixth chord in the piano part, and is therefore also unusable.
Alternately, then, you could avoid all these harmonic headaches and just leave out the graces, as Saint Saens has it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: CDC
Date: 2018-08-11 05:36
Thank you, that explanation makes a lot of sense!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
|