Musical questions and answers thread

[MrGongGong]

This doesn't surprise me at all . But I'd still go for something you (think you) know really well - whatever it is - since it's very familiarity will be to your advantage - your brain simply won't have to bother assimilating a new piece and can concentrate on how that piece you know so well is notated.

I know this very well

[Pabmusic]

I know this very well

I think we had that as wallpaper in the downstairs loo once.

I got to know it very well …

[Serial_Apologist]

I think we had that as wallpaper in the downstairs loo once.

I got to know it very well …

I think the work must be founded on London Klee.

[MrGongGong]

I think we had that as wallpaper in the downstairs loo once.

I got to know it very well …

This is (of course) a "Listening Score" rather than a "playing" one.
But wonderful stuff

[EdgeleyRob]

One to sleep on folks.
Why does Robert Schumann's orchestral writing come in for so much criticism by the experts ?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

One to sleep on folks.
Why does Robert Schumann's orchestral writing come in for so much criticism by the experts ?

Possibly because:

1) They're not "experts" (or, at least, not experts in Schumann's orchestral Music).
2) They want it to sound more like Mendelssohn's.
3) Schumann came relatively late in his career to writing orchestral Music. This gives them the excuse (which they cite as "evidence") to say he never really mastered orchestral technique (or some other such guff). He certainly had practical problems with the vagueries of valveless brass instruments (on one occasion at the start of the First Symphony) - but that is AFAIK the only actual error in any of the works. He had as individual an idea about how orchestral instruments might sound as he had about rhythm in his Piano Music, but no "expert" suggests that those should be altered. The real acid test is in the re-orchestrations by others (some of whom should have known better): the Music sounds less convincing when given "more expert" orchestration.

Schumann knew what he was doing and what was best for his own Music, and had much hands-on experience as a conductor in his later years. Play what he wrote (and preferably on the instruments he was accustomed to hear) and his orchestration works wonderfully.

[Pabmusic]

...Why does Robert Schumann's orchestral writing come in for so much criticism by the experts ?

Possibly because:

1) They're not "experts" (or, at least, not experts in Schumann's orchestral Music).
2) They want it to sound more like Mendelssohn's.
3) Schumann came relatively late in his career to writing orchestral Music. This gives them the excuse (which they cite as "evidence") to say he never really mastered orchestral technique (or some other such guff). He certainly had practical problems with the vagueries of valveless brass instruments (on one occasion at the start of the First Symphony) - but that is AFAIK the only actual error in any of the works. He had as individual an idea about how orchestral instruments might sound as he had about rhythm in his Piano Music, but no "expert" suggests that those should be altered. The real acid test is in the re-orchestrations by others (some of whom should have known better): the Music sounds less convincing when given "more expert" orchestration.

Schumann knew what he was doing and what was best for his own Music, and had much hands-on experience as a conductor in his later years. Play what he wrote (and preferably on the instruments he was accustomed to hear) and his orchestration works wonderfully.

It's an interesting question, since it is by no means obvious that Schumann couldn't handle an orchestra well. It is true that he was quite thin-skinned and took criticisms to heart, so that he is increasingly 'safe' in his orchestration as the years go by. But then, so were a dozen or more composers of the mid-late 19th C.

I've conducted several Schumann works, including the Rhenish twice. The main problem I had with the Rhenish was to inject colour into the first movement, which carries on for long spans at fever pitch with almost unchanging orchestration. But I don't consider that a fault - Schumann just makes the conductor think a bit more than other composers. Likewise the (very difficult) Overture, Scherzo & Finale which could get bogged down with dotted rhythms if the conductor doesn't think it through carefully before anyone plays a note.

Remember too that Schumann was one of the earliest composers for whom 'orchestration' was a major thing. How often do we criticise Beethoven's, let alone Haydn's? I blame it all on Weber and Berlioz. (Mendelssohn's orchestration was just too perfect - unfair competition.)

[Roehre]

Why does Robert Schumann's orchestral writing come in for so much criticism by the experts ?

I concur with pabmusic and FHG, but I want to point out too, that these "experts" nearly all are from later generations. There is hardly contemporary negative criticism re Schumann's orchestrations.
A point in this case is that Mendelssohn conducted Schumann without altering a single note - which he did from time to time with other (dead or alive) composers' works.

The revision of the Sinfonische Fantasie (1841) into the Fourth Symphony (1851) shows that here Schumann's music became structurally less audacious, and his orchestration more "middle of the road" - after listening to Wagner and Raff and with his experience as conductor in Düsseldorf under his belt.

The "thick" orchestration and the doubling of lines became a problem after the instruments developed more into those with which we are familiar. Recent recordings of Stravinsky and Ravel with early 20C instruments show that this development hadn't stopped yet even in their days. Gardiner's Schumann set shows what a difference it makes to use instruments Schumann was familiar with.

[Rolmill]

Gardiner's Schumann set shows what a difference it makes to use instruments Schumann was familiar with.

Yes, that was going to be my (non-expert) comment on this question - Gardiner's excellent set makes it quite clear to me that any supposed "problems" stem from a mixture of using the 'wrong' instruments and unsympathetic conducting. Thanks to fhg, Pabmusic and Roehre for their interesting points.

[Richard Barrett]

Yes, that was going to be my (non-expert) comment on this question - Gardiner's excellent set makes it quite clear to me that any supposed "problems" stem from a mixture of using the 'wrong' instruments and unsympathetic conducting. Thanks to fhg, Pabmusic and Roehre for their interesting points.

That is certainly true about Gardiner (and Herreweghe too in fact). And Abbado's only Schumann recording, made very late in his life, of the 2nd symphony (which is my own favourite of the four) shows that it can be done with modern instruments too. Actually this is the recording I'd play to someone who needed to be convinced that the supposed failings of Schumenn's orchestration are somewhat illusory. The remaining problem as far as I'm concerned is one which Schumann's orchestral music shares with his piano music and song accompaniments: he's very reticent to go outside a restricted pitch-register, and in orchestral music this creates a situation where things can seem to get in each other's way, unless (as Pabmusic says) the conductor is careful to keep the lines in a dynamic balance with one another.

(And, tangentially, there is plenty of orchestration being done right now which is just as "safe" as Schumann's.)

[richardfinegold]

I think we had that as wallpaper in the downstairs loo once.

I got to know it very well …

[EdgeleyRob]

Possibly because:

1) They're not "experts" (or, at least, not experts in Schumann's orchestral Music).
2) They want it to sound more like Mendelssohn's.
3) Schumann came relatively late in his career to writing orchestral Music. This gives them the excuse (which they cite as "evidence") to say he never really mastered orchestral technique (or some other such guff). He certainly had practical problems with the vagueries of valveless brass instruments (on one occasion at the start of the First Symphony) - but that is AFAIK the only actual error in any of the works. He had as individual an idea about how orchestral instruments might sound as he had about rhythm in his Piano Music, but no "expert" suggests that those should be altered. The real acid test is in the re-orchestrations by others (some of whom should have known better): the Music sounds less convincing when given "more expert" orchestration.

Schumann knew what he was doing and what was best for his own Music, and had much hands-on experience as a conductor in his later years. Play what he wrote (and preferably on the instruments he was accustomed to hear) and his orchestration works wonderfully.

That's what I think.

I've been reading up a bit on orchestration recently and only asked the question because Schumann's writing for orchestra seems to get some stick.

As usual the forum never fails,many thanks Roehre,Pabs,RB and Ferney for your fascinating replies,appreciated.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

This one has always puzzled me. Looking at the Boosey & Hawkes miniature score of Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture, the brass section has two different instruments that appear to be kinds of trumpet: 2 "pistoni" in B flat and 2 "trombe" in E flat. What is the difference (apart from the pitch)?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

This one has always puzzled me. Looking at the Boosey & Hawkes miniature score of Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture, the brass section has two different instruments that appear to be kinds of trumpet: 2 "pistoni" in B flat and 2 "trombe" in E flat. What is the difference (apart from the pitch)?

It's the same in the Eulenburg edition, too. I've always presumed the "pistoni" are the "cornet a piston" such as found in Berlioz' Symphonie Fantastique, whilst the Trumpets are the usual orchestral trumpets?

[makropulos]

It's the same in the Eulenburg edition, too. I've always presumed the "pistoni" are the "cornet a piston" such as found in Berlioz' Symphonie Fantastique, whilst the Trumpets are the usual orchestral trumpets?

It's "Pistoni" in the Jurgenson first edition as well. And yes, I agree, these must be cornets (à pistons). There are also trombe a pistoni - in other words valve trumpets - but I don't think that's what Tchaik means here since his actual trumpet parts are for valved instruments.