 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: BflatNH
Date: 2009-01-26 23:38
I'd like to do some pieces that were written for other instruments (piano, strings, etc.) on clarinet. However, when originally written for instruments (e.g. piano) that may not need convenient places to breathe, how much latitude can I take in modifying the piece to insert a breath or take a measure or two to breathe? Are there any general thoughts on what is reasonable or how much license you get when arranging for a different instrument?
Thanks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2009-01-26 23:49
When and where are you going to perform these pieces?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BflatNH
Date: 2009-01-27 00:22
Right now, relatively small recitals and church.
Later, depends on what opportunities open up and what I can do.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2009-01-27 01:06
My own opinion, having spent many hours playing violin etudes and solo pieces on clarinet for my own amusement (never in performance), is that you breathe in the most musical places that give you time.
The easiest elements of the violin notation to ignore if necessary are the bowing marks. If you need to break a slur to breathe after a sustained note, it's less destructive of what the composer wrote than leaving out notes.
If it's a perpetual motion kind of piece with no sustained notes or natural phrase endings (and you don't circular breathe), you may need to leave a note or two out.
Of course if you're playing with an accompanist, you can transcribe a phrase or period into the accompanist's part to give yourself a breather for a few bars.
Lots of times you can simply take a little extra time at phrase endings and make time for a breath without destroying the music. Your accompanist, if you're playing with one, should know where you're likely to do it.
In any case, there are really no "rules" about any of this. You can basically do what you need to do, and unless you're planning to perform in Carnegie Hall for an audience of critics who know the originals, no one much will care or even know what you've changed. And if it's too destructive of the music, it may just be a poor piece to play on clarinet in the first place.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MBrad
Date: 2009-01-27 03:50
If there are no natural phrase endings it's probably not going to work very well on clarinet! You may need to set some restrictions as to what you choose for arranging--there are practical limits to the instrument that can't always be compensated for.
Otherwise, the first piece that comes to mind is the Schumann Romances, if you are looking for examples. If you're really doing research, I'm sure you'll be able to find a number of already-arranged works. Find the originals and see how your favorites have handled it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2009-01-27 05:18
Amen! Discretion may be the single most under-rated facet of arranging.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2009-01-27 14:35
Pieces originally written for harpsichord and for plucked stringed instruments, such as lute or guitar, often transcribe well for wind instruments, because notes on plucked strings have a short hang-time. That means that even if the musician lets the note ring freely (by leaving the key pressed down on the harpsichord, for instance), the note naturally fades away, sometimes all the way to silence, before the full written duration of the note. On harpsichord music, the full written duration mainly tells the musician how long to wait before playing the *next* note.
In contrast, pieces for instruments such as pipe organ or bowed strings, where the musician can easily keep a tone going at full volume almost indefinitely, can be very difficult to transcribe for any wind player who doesn't do circular breathing. I heard a wild (and cautionary!) example just this past Saturday, at the 32nd International Saxophone Symposium (George Mason U. Patriot Center for the Arts, Fairfax, Virginia). Chien-Kwan Lin, a virtuosic saxophone player, performed a hair-raising transcription of the Chaconne from Bach's D minor Partita for solo violin. This quiet, polite, small man, wearing a conservative business suit, walked out on the Harris Theater stage and, without introducing himself or his program, bowed deeply, closed his eyes -- then performed the musical equivalent of a werewolf transformation, as he launched into this astonishing ferocity of notes.
I don't know who wrote that outrageous transcription, but it was full of complications, including many appoggiaturas and acciaccaturas to add the harmonies that the violinist would play as double-stops. Lin added to the difficulties by starting off the piece at such a high level of volume and tension that he left himself almost nowhere to go, and when he tried to increase the sturm-und-drang, he pushed himself and his Selmer sax past the limits. He began to blast out a screeching tone quality with an unfortunate number of wrong notes. But even so, I came away unable to decide whether I loved or hated what he'd done. He absolutely, completely held my attention -- but in rather the same horror-stricken way that watching a train barrelling at top speed over a trestle bridge as it begins to collapse over a chasm would hold my attention! He did make it across the bridge and received thunderous applause (or as thunderous as a shamefully tiny audience could produce), but sheesh, how many years does he take off his life when he plays this way?!
I can completely understand why everybody wants to transcribe Bach's Chaconne for every instrument, including -- I swear I'm not making this up -- the kazoo. It's magnificent music. It's one of my own favorite pieces. My favorite performances are those of violinist Nathan Milstein, whom I once heard play the entire Partita live *as an encore* (!) in a recital at the Kennedy Center. But play it on the saxophone? On the clarinet? No. Leave it alone.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LarryBocaner ★2017
Date: 2009-01-27 15:07
Listen to great singers and flutists. Their "instruments" require more air than ours does, and they have mastered the art of "hiding" breaths by not associating them with any of the artifacts (like diminuendi and ritardandi) that often accompany our breathing on clarinet. If you listen carefully to Fisher-Dieskau, Sinatra or Rampal you will discover breathing places that are very innovative, but not at all perceived by casual listening.
Vaughn Williams' "Six Studies in English Folk Song" is a good case in point. Originally written for cello, some of them are unplayable on the clarinet as published, unless you circular breathe! However it is no big deal to insert needed breaths with little or no damage to the music, using the techniques of vocalists, brass players and flutists. Might even be a good idea for serious clarinetists to take a few voice lessons with a good teacher -- we have much to learn from them!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2009-01-27 16:29
In the 72 (32 + 40) Rose etudes, the problem of having no "natural" breathing places comes up frequently.
You need to spend some time fiddling with things --identifying the phrases and grabbing air where it makes sense. Sometimes, it may be appropriate to hold back at the end of a phrase and then grab a breath before coming back to tempo.
A recent issue of The Clarinet discussed the possibility that Cavallini used double breathing in order to make long, long phrases like Paganini.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
