 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2007-06-16 18:16
I am currently teaching the Debussy Premiere Rhapsodie to one of my advanced students in preparation for competition.
Although I played it many years ago in college and have subsequently refreshed my brain of it in recent years, I can not find my old marked music (Durand edition) which I used in college. Hence, I now have a new (unmarked) copy of the Durand as well as the original Durand pocket orchestral score (1911) from my own personal library.
I am also aware that there is a Henle edition and an edition by David Hite although I haven't seen either.
Are there any NOTE corrections to be made in the Durand?
Specifically - In the theme at the Scherzando, in the 14th measure of #6, the final 16th note C is marked C natural. However in bar 18, the final 16th note C is unmarked, signifying a Cb. Is that correct?
Also - the 2nd measure of #7, is the final unmarked 16th note C a Cb, as implied?
I have made the changes in dynamics which correspond to the score, and used Greg Smith's many astute comments about performance from his past article the Clarinet magazine, but would appreciate any note corrections that I am missing.
My student and I would be grateful...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda ★2017
Date: 2007-06-16 18:28
The copy I have is an Elkan-Vogel. edition. Bar 14 of the Scherzando has a C natural marked as you say. Bar 16 is a rest, but you may be referring to bar 18, where in this edition the final 16th-note C is unmarked, indicating that the Cb accidental continues to the end of the bar.
Also at the second bar of 7, this edition leaves the final C unmarked, so one would think that it, too, would be a Cb.
Whether this is correct is another story.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: donald
Date: 2007-06-16 20:25
Alessandro Carbonare used to have the autograph score of this on his website- i downloaded it some years ago but now can't find it. I recall he had written an article about some of the note corrections etc- maybe you can google Carbonare and see what you find?
donald
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: hartt
Date: 2007-06-16 21:19
GBK
Although I haven't played it in over 35 yrs I have 2 copies of the Durand edition.
One copy is annotated by Opperman and indicates ONLY tempo and dynamic markings.
The other copy is annotated by Keith Stein. The changes you address are not indicated.
However, besides, tempo / dynamic / phrasing markings there IS a 2 note correction made by Stein.
This correction is in the fifth bar after # 12.
It indicates the triplet of the thrid beat as.....D#, E natural, G
Thus, the first two notes of this triplet are half step higher than written.
regards
dennis
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2007-06-16 21:30
The 5th bar after #12 is the "famous" controversial measure in regard to whether the final triplet on beat 3 is D-Eb-G or D#-E-G.
It has been addressed in a number writings, the best being by Dennis Nygren:
http://www.woodwind.org/clarinet/Study/Debussy.html
No one has made a case for conclusive evidence, one way or the other.
I have always liked the sound of D-Eb-G.
It's probably from hearing so many modern recordings played that way ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif) ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2007-06-17 00:56
FWIW,
In his edition, David Hite explicitly marks both the C's in question as C natural. I don't know what his authority was for this. Where he makes some other decisions, he generally gives some justification in his accompanying notes -- but nothing on this.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2007-06-17 03:25
Jack ...
Thanks for checking the Hite edition for me.
Interesting that the C's in question are marked as C naturals in his edition.
Much appreciated ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 2E
Date: 2007-06-17 11:18
in my durand edition, they are indeed unmarked suggesting C flats. to my amazement I've never actually noticed this before. I've always heard them played as C naturals in recordings and performances and merely followed suit unthinkingly. It certainly would imply a Cb though ...
2E
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2007-06-17 16:51
I've always just played those C's as naturals and the triplet at the end as written. I'll read my old muni band and college friend Dennis N's report, but I kind of like it just the way I always heard it played. I think the changes discussed here--while they may be historically or theorecally justified--would make the solo a bit less interesting. I have no other alterations to report from my tattered old college Durand edition. Just my artistic two pennies worth this Sunday AM.........
Happy F days, all you Dads out there.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2007-06-17 18:32
I don't know what the original source is (though it appears to be French) but the clarinet part in the Orchestra Musician's CD ROM edition has both of the C's in question marked as C-naturals. I can't compare it with the 1910 orchestral score though because I haven't had any luck downloading the score -- I get the cover, then a blank page and then Acrobat crashes.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 2E
Date: 2007-06-18 09:41
I'd be making sure to check the different versions' piano parts in addition to the solo part. My durand version also has them as unmarked suggesting Cb.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2007-06-18 11:50
There's no equivalent ambiguity in the complete reprise of this theme 16 bars before figure 11 (the bar in question is 11 bars before figure 11), which settles the question definitively for me.
Having a Cb seems to me not to make musical sense -- it doesn't DO anything, after all; plus I'd have thought that if he'd wanted a different note the second time he'd have written a cautionary accidental.
It's worth noting that the misprinted diminuendo at the beginning of 4 bars after figure 10 in the clarinet part should be a crescendo, like the subsequent bar, as in the Durand piano score. And it's interesting that the MS is without dynamics at this point -- and even lacks the chromatic scale leading to the coda, as you can see in Morrigan's penultimate download.
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2007-06-18 14:11
Charles Neidich says that piano version was put out in a rush and has many errors. Debussy always intended that the piece be played with orchestra, and he meticulously corrected the orchestral score. Charles said he has compared the orchestral score with the MS, and the score is the place to go. Mark has VERY kindly posted the score at the link he provided.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2007-06-19 09:31
Ken Shaw wrote:
>> Charles Neidich says that piano version was put out in a rush and has many errors. Debussy always intended that the piece be played with orchestra, and he meticulously corrected the orchestral score. Charles said he has compared the orchestral score with the MS, and the score is the place to go.>>
...apart from the misprint in the clarinet line, bar 6? Or should we play an Fb there?-)
Tony
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
