Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Changing chromatic scales to diatonic scales is not in character with the music. There are also tempo considerations. After spending a number of years mastering Salzedo’s brilliant transcription of Debussy’s Clair de Lune, and finally realizing some more fluid fingerings at the climactic moments, I decided, as beautiful as it is, it was not worth the amount of time it took to master it on the harp, compared to what it takes a pianist to learn it. For them it is an intermediate kind of solo, a little more difficult than Debussy’s Reverie, but for us it is a major endeavor! Therefore, when considering a piece for transcription, one must consider whether it will be worth amount of preparation required. I looked at Smetana’s die Moldau, and realized there was much gorgeous detail that could be played by a virtuoso, that Trnecek had glossed over with his endless arpeggios up and down. But after a while, I realized, given the length of the piece, it would just be too physically exhausting, plus it would wear out the ears of the listeners with too much detail. Transcriptions are as much an art as they are a skill.
Stravinsky taking the time to write a harp part perfectly? Hah! How many composers do that? I think the masters didn’t bother because they knew they could rely on professionals to do what was best, and they didn’t have time. Those who take the time may still not get it right. It’s what all orchestral musicians do, adapt, correct and fix.
When audibility is a problem, one then plays the harmonics with the left hand, and doubles them with the right hand one octave higher, to enrich the tone. It preserves the quality of the harmonics as long as they predominate the right hand, and the right hand makes them sound all the more lucid and liquid.
It’s always amusing to be accused of doing what others are already doing.
How generous of you, Carl, to admit that Salzedo had some useful innovations. But never presume to speak on my behalf or to know what I think, because you don’t.
His innovations were, in fact, widely accepted by many great musicians, and inspired a great many compositions, such as the Concerto by Ginastera, to name just one. The only reason Dewey Owens did not continue using Salzedo’s harmonics notation was, as he personally told me, because a certain teacher in the Midwest had stated there is a complete ban on any music using his harmonics for her and all of her students; so he didn’t want to give up the sales, or was pressured not to by his publisher, and that is why you may not find them notated so in his music. Not for any artistic reasons.I think tuning forks are the way to start, a B and an E or C and F. That way you can teach about fifths and overtones.
Youtube videos are not different, as far as I know. You need permission to post copyrighted music. Hence the apologetic statements by people who post, and definitely do not monetize your uploads. It is the sheer volume that prevents regulation, and YouTube’s unwillingness to do it. So, you may find a computer noticing your arrangement and blocking it. The simple solution is, keep it private, not public. Should it be public, anyway? What is your purpose in posting it? An alternative is to make a website and post it there, or on perhaps a Facebook page. Frankly, YouTube is so clogged with junk, it is a trial to find anything.
If you are going to do any kind of recital, ideally, you memorize the music thoroughly. Then, if you play from the music, you can consult it rather than depend on it, and read it for its meaning rather than its necessity. If you get the music to that point, your anxiety will probably have disappeared long before. At this point, you need to finish learning by a month prior, and spend the next month making it secure. So pick something that seems fairly easy. No music is really easy.
Tournier loved to write the musically correct pitch, and not the enharmonic that was played. Writing the enharmonic pitch prevents one from following the harmonic flow of the music.
Salzedo, being the artistic genius that he was, unparalleled except perhaps for Bochsa, was anything but “idiotic.” For one, he followed the custom of other instruments where harmonics are notated where they SOUND, and when you are editing printed music, then of course, you are notating a harmonic as it sounds. He made many improvements in the “traditional” notation for harp, which was anything but consistent. I have no doubt that once he adopted that improved notation, he discovered that everyone was playing harmonics better, because they were focused on the result and not the execution, which is so often faulty. I know that I find my harmonics are always better when they are notated as sounding, not as played. And that is why I maintain use of Salzedo’s notation in my music.
Of course, a pianist is not at all qualified to talk about harp notation. It takes a lot of expertise to do so.
As for Mahler, his harp writing is clearly not literal. It is approximate. You are free to play the chord notes you can reach. I hope you know that you can omit any note that is played in a lower octave. The harmonics are indicated as sounds he wants, not how they are played, just as the chords are not. The ones in thirds I would say are definitely both harmonics, and since they cannot be played as written, they definitely have to be played one octave below. Use your ears, listen to the context and think of the time in which it was written, and Mahler’s music, which was lush in tone color. I’m sure the massive chords are meant to be divided. I hope you have a second harpist playing. I would actually suggest four harps, since he was apparently dreaming of a massive, masculine sound.
My favorite puzzle in a Mahler part was when he wrote “mediator” in the harp part, apparently calling for a plectrum/pick.There is no one set system of levels. Publishers have their own systems, too. I have often wondered if it would help to have one set system. Many of them use five levels, but ten seems more accurate. It’s somewhat arbitrary assigning levels. I believe the American Harp Society has some sort of system for its competitions, unless it is up to whoever is doing the organizing. You certainly have Beginners, Advanced Beginners, Beginning Intermediate, Intermediate, Advanced Intermediate, Advanced; then you diverge into collegiate or conservatory tracks, Young Professional, and one can go on to Professional and Artist. But from Advanced on, the repertoire might all be the same. One thing I strongly disagree with is categorizing people by age. It discriminates against those who start later. I think how long one has studied is more relevant. As for assigning music, it depends if you are baby-stepping progress or allowing for big steps, or both. But generally speaking, one can assign a general valuation to most pieces. How it is used is another matter. And then, there are editions of the Sonata by CPE Bach that range from somewhat difficult to very difficult, and the same for the Handel Concerto. There is a base level of musical challenge that remains regardless of edition. I think it would probably be worthwhile to establish a committee to assign levels to music to have a consistent point of reference. But, then, there are musical difficulties and technical difficulties, two completely different animals. Not an easy task.
Salzedo did use a squared fermata for a brief hold, but that doesn’t look appropriate there. I can’t think of any other reason for a symbol there.
It is due to the software used to copy the music, which did not give the proper choices of symbols. It’s not a likely spot for an accent or a fermata. Unless Galais makes it clear elsewhere, I would ignore it until a musical reason becomes clear. You could also write to Galais or to the publisher for clarification. This is why uniform notation symbols are so important.
Just playing through etudes will not accomplish much of anything. You may end up with a very stiff, thick way of playing. It’s how you play them that matters. It’s how you use exercises, or repertoire, that matters. It’s all in the way you move.
