Rapsodie espagnole by Ravel

  • Participant
    Elizabeth Volpé Bligh on #145442

    We are playing Rapsodie Espagnole by Ravel next month, and there are several mistakes in the harp part which have been corrected before. One spot has always puzzled me, though. In the Habanera, a figure occurs at reg. #7, but recurs with a slight change in rhythm at reg. #9. It is so similar that I can’t help wondering if this is another mistake in the part. Off the topic of mistakes: in the Feria movement, the harp parts could be made much more manageable by giving the lower staff at reg. #7 to the second harp, and swapping the registers in the left hand at the end of the bars at reh. #8 and after reh. #22. (It avoids making the left hand do the leap…if you look at both of the parts together, you will see what I mean.) In fact, the leap can be avoided completely, since the final chord in those figures is mostly covered by the other harpist.

    rosalind-beck on #145443

    We have not played this in awhile, but I see from my part that I added a flag to the sixteenth to turn it into a 32nd note at rehearsal 9 to make it confirm to rehearsal 7. Also, I’m pretty certain the rhythm sounds the same in those two spots on all the recordings I have ever heard. Love, love, love this magical piece. So atmospheric and evocative.

    Elizabeth Volpé Bligh on #145444

    There was a Nieweg/Bradburd edition ©1989 then a 2nd edition(©1997) with more corrections, after I was able to consult the manuscript.

    Reh. 9 should be notated exactly the same as Reh. 7 per the manuscript. The Nieweg/Bradburd Kalmus A3434 2nd edition(©1989 and ©1997) score and part has the correction. Both times the 32nd rest, 32nd note is correct. The original 1908 Durand Part is wrong, the original Score is correct.

    -Clinton Nieweg

    rosalind-beck on #145445

    That should be “conform” not “confirm.”

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • The forum ‘Professional Harpists’ is closed to new topics and replies.