Stravinsky's Movements for Piano and Orchestra

[Bryn]

Help! I don't have the score and am in a quandary regarding the observing or not of the exposition repeat in the first movement. When the 1961 Rosen/Stravinsky recording was issued on LP, the repeat was observed, as it was when Richter recorded it in 1984, and indeed it has been in every other performance of the work that I have heard. However, in every CD transfer of the Rosen/Stravinsky recording (including the new Sony Rosen boxed set) the repeat had been excised. Did the composer change his mind about the repeat, or is this just sheer recidivist insulting incompetence by Sony?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

The repeat is marked in the score - together with prima volta and seconda volta bars, so four bars of Music is lost if the repeat isn't observed (or a redundant extra four bars added, I suppose, if they're played but the repeat isn't done?!) - none of the literature I own on the work (White, Babbitt, Walsh, Routh, Straus) mention any change-of-mind from the composer, nor is any ossia marked in th score. On the whole, recidivist insulting incompetence is the more likely "reason".

[Bryn]

I decided that if Sony are not going to correct their error, I would have a go at faking it myself. So, having checked the overall dynamics of the exposition and its repeat in on the LP version, and found that Rosen played the repeat marginally more softly than the first time (a 1dB difference in the RMS level), I ripped the first movement from the new CD box version, copied the exposition (minus the first ending), dropped its RMS level by 1dB and pasted it between the first and repeat endings. Sounds quite convincing, and at least it's less of a mess than Sony made of their edit.

PM me is you have the CD and would find my reconstruction edit of the first movement useful.

[Serial_Apologist]

i decided that if sony are not going to correct their error, i would have a go at faking it myself. So, having checked the overall dynamics of the exposition and its repeat in on the lp version, and found that rosen played the repeat marginally more softly than the first time (a 1db difference in the rms level), i ripped the first movement from the new cd box version, copied the exposition (minus the first ending), dropped its rms level by 1db and pasted it between the first and repeat endings. Sounds quite convincing, and at least it's less of a mess than sony made of their edit.

Pm me is you have the cd and would find my reconstruction edit of the first movement useful.

we promise not to tell anyone

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

we promise not to tell anyone

I'm hoping Bryn gets a PM request from SONY!

[Rolmill]

Brief but relevant comments (and from an interesting source) on this subject here. Seems like fhg's "redundant extra four bars" are indeed present, so the incompetence explanation is clear favourite!

[Bryn]

Brief but relevant comments (and from an interesting source) on this subject here. Seems like fhg's "redundant extra four bars" are indeed present, so the incompetence explanation is clear favourite!

Indeed, as mentioned earlier in this thread, I do not have the score, so it was a combination of fg's comment re. the clear presence of the repeat in the score, and Raymond Clarke's response to 'Scratcher"s review on amazon.co.uk that led me to attempt the fake but effective 'reconstruction'.

[Pulcinella]

Bryn

You might have discovered this already.
The score is available here:

http://www.scorser.ru/download.aspx?id=B9478ABE392FA2C289FBCA9AD0623C16&ip=-1358037643

I have just treated myself to a s/h copy of the Crossley performance on Sony.
I have the Rosen, Beroff, and Mustonen too, but not the Osborne. Anyone have it and like it?
I see too that there is a new recording on Chandos: Bavouzet/Sao Paolo/Tortelier.

I have a distant memory of a review of a recording (perhaps the Hyperion one when it came out) that mentioned a disparity in timing of the first movement (presumably in comparison with the Rosen version), wondering if it was simply played much more slowly! The reviewer must not have known about the repeat!

[makropulos]

Bryn

You might have discovered this already.
The score is available here:

http://www.scorser.ru/download.aspx?id=B9478ABE392FA2C289FBCA9AD0623C16&ip=-1358037643

I have just treated myself to a s/h copy of the Crossley performance on Sony.
I have the Rosen, Beroff, and Mustonen too, but not the Osborne. Anyone have it and like it?
I see too that there is a new recording on Chandos: Bavouzet/Sao Paolo/Tortelier.

I have a distant memory of a review of a recording (perhaps the Hyperion one when it came out) that mentioned a disparity in timing of the first movement (presumably in comparison with the Rosen version), wondering if it was simply played much more slowly! The reviewer must not have know about the repeat!

I certainly enjoyed Osborne's Hyperion disc when I last listened to it. And for the Movements what about Margarit Weber (dedicatee) and Fricsay in the Fricsay orchestral box?
It's most irritating that Sony has perpetutated its error in the new Rosen box.

[Pulcinella]

Dare we hope that this new set has the repeat restored?

http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Sony/88875026162

[HighlandDougie]

Dare we hope that this new set has the repeat restored?
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Sony/88875026162

Alas, not restored. It's the same as in the earlier CD version I have (the timing is 2'20" in both). Otherwise, the re-mastering of the earlier recordings is impeccable (the 1946 Symphony in Three Movements does not sound like a recording made almost 70 years ago).

[Pulcinella]

Alas, not restored. It's the same as in the earlier CD version I have (the timing is 2'20" in both). Otherwise, the re-mastering of the earlier recordings is impeccable (the 1946 Symphony in Three Movements does not sound like a recording made almost 70 years ago).

Ordered the set yesterday; looking forward to being reunited with the original LP cover artwork, which will bring back many happy memories.
Too bad that the opportunity to correct this editing error was not taken.

[BBMmk2]

I believe your in the wrong job, Bryn!

[HighlandDougie]

Ordered the set yesterday; looking forward to being reunited with the original LP cover artwork, which will bring back many happy memories.
Too bad that the opportunity to correct this editing error was not taken.

Contrary to what I said in the earlier post - and I can't check as I neither have a score nor know the work - I've read a suggestion in a post on another forum that the repeat has been included. I hope that Pulcinella will be able to clarify the position in due course.

[Bryn]

Contrary to what I said in the earlier post - and I can't check as I neither have a score nor know the work - I've read a suggestion in a post on another forum that the repeat has been included. I hope that Pulcinella will be able to clarify the position in due course.

A comment on the one customer reviewso far uploaded to amazon.co.uk asserts that the repeat has been restored, and that other egregious editing errors have been corrected. However, given Sony's history in this matter, I eagerly await confirmation from Pulcinella, not only of the presence of the repeat, but that the repeat is not simply a copy and paste job such as I finessed. I note that Movements is not listed as being among those being newly remastered ( http://www.amazon.co.uk/Igor-Stravin...rds=stravinsky ).