Question about playablility

[Sid Humphreys]

Musch easier to read this way, but as I sat to play these four measures, it was difficult to play the last note of measure 1 with the third finger and grab the first note of measure 2 with the fourth finger (I do have small hands). The rest was fine. For that particular spot, I would play the last last beat of measure 1 as RH-1,2,3,4 LH-1,2 picking up first beat of measure 2 with 4th finger. Re arranging from piano to harp isn’t always as easy as putting the notes into groupings like this but I appreciate your attempt! If you will be working with an orchestral harpist, they can make the adjustments from this point if the rest of the piece is consistent with what you have shown us so far. Perhaps when this piece is performed, you could ask the harpist if you could have a copy of their markings and save them. Good job!

[carl-swanson]

I didn’t go to the harp to try it, but looking at the new example, my first inclination is to play it LH 4(E), RH 321(B,E,G),LH 321, RH 32123(the turnaround), etc. This shows you how the rhythmic baring does not conform to how the arpeggio is actually played. If the harpist is comfortable using the left hand for the turnaround, and the tempo is fast, then it could also be played LH 4321, RH 4321, LH212(the turnaround) and the rest the same fingering as the way up. This way there is only one hand(the left hand) crossing over, which is more efficient movement, and allows the player to glance at the conductor more easily.

[Elizabeth Volpé Bligh]

This really looks very simple to me, as it is in your example above. Any professional harpist will be able to figure out their own fingerings, and left hand turnarounds are fine unless they are so high up on the harp that we either can’t get our left hands into the small space or we punch ourselves in the nose. This register is fine for the left hand. The fingering that I suggested will lead smoothly to the next bar.

[Sid Humphreys]

Dear Elizabeth, of course it looks simple to you. You are an accomplished orchestral harpist. It looks simple enough to me as well as Carl I’m sure. But this question was posed to the “typical harpist.” While the few measures looked simple to me, I sighed at the thought of having to once again re-write a piece. We don’t know what the rest of the piece looks like, only what has been shown. You are right, any professional harpist will be able to figure it out. Some of us would just like for others (especially conductors) to realize that the harp is not a piano. Is that fair that we harpists have to do this and the rest of the ensemble don’t? The simple editing that he has done so far is greatly appreciated and it gives the harpist more time to spend playing the piece rather than editing.

[carl-swanson]

Sid- Thank you. I agree completely. The current problem of course is the composer who writes sitting at a synthesizer and pushes the “harp” button and writes a harp part from that, often 5 finger patterns, often hands on top of each other, often undoable chromaticism. If a composer brought me what looked like an unplayable part, and told me that he had composed this on a synthesizer, I would tell him to perform the part on a synthesizer, since that was what he wrote it for.

[Elizabeth Volpé Bligh]

You don’t always have to suggest the fingering in your beaming. I think most musicians would rather have the beaming reflect the rhythm. Your original excerpt at the top of the page is much more legible to me than this last one. I don’t use the same fingering as Saul’s, so it would not be helpful for me to see it this way. I prefer the most straightforward representation, and we harpists can use our pencils to indicate our own preferences.

[Author]

Posts