Peter Clark Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 I have just started working on this and a comparison of bar 9 with 11 raises a suspicion - the bars are identical except that in bar 11 the LH g# minor first inversion semiquaver chords at the second quaver which appear in bar nine are replaced by e major first inversion semiquavers at the same measure. I wonder if this is correct? Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Clark Posted July 16, 2010 Author Share Posted July 16, 2010 Paul Derrett has contacted me to say that my suspicions were correct. He has the original edition in which bars 9 & 11 are identical. I have the Crescendo edition. Peter PS This information is given with Paul's kind permission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giwro Posted July 16, 2010 Share Posted July 16, 2010 It would be nice probably to contact the folks at Crescendo and let them know of the misprint - I'm sure they'd like to know! Best, G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Clark Posted July 16, 2010 Author Share Posted July 16, 2010 Have so done! P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bevington Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Paul Derrett has contacted me to say that my suspicions were correct. He has the original edition in which bars 9 & 11 are identical. I have the Crescendo edition. Peter PS This information is given with Paul's kind permission. Thanks for the corrections, Peter. What do you make of bar 49 (Crescendo edition, so should be page 7, top system second bar). Going along with usual practice the Ds in the RH would of course be 'natural' despite the D# in previous bar and in the LH. My copy has D naturals, but I am not convinced . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiffaro Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Thanks for the corrections, Peter. What do you make of bar 49 (Crescendo edition, so should be page 7, top system second bar). Going along with usual practice the Ds in the RH would of course be 'natural' despite the D# in previous bar and in the LH. My copy has D naturals, but I am not convinced . . . JOR, I'm inclined also to think that there is a missed sharp in bar 49 on the d''. The harmonic rate of change in bars 46 to 53 would support this. However, taken at the speed that I've heard some play this, I'm not sure that most listeners would hear the difference! As Latry said when a student was playing "Dieu parmi nous" very fast, 'vif et puissant' might mean as fast as the piece can by understood by the listener rather than as fast as your fingers can play. At speeds that are too fast, I think some of the rhythmic interest in Fête is lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Clark Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 Thanks for the corrections, Peter. What do you make of bar 49 (Crescendo edition, so should be page 7, top system second bar). Going along with usual practice the Ds in the RH would of course be 'natural' despite the D# in previous bar and in the LH. My copy has D naturals, but I am not convinced . . . Don' have the score to hand at the moment - howver I will contact Paul again as he has the oroginal printing, Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Carr Posted July 24, 2010 Share Posted July 24, 2010 Don' have the score to hand at the moment - howver I will contact Paul again as he has the oroginal printing, Peter Hi, is it the 8/16 bar before the 11/16 bar? if so, my (also original) copy has D#s. Infact there are no D naturals until the tonality shifts in bar 47 as the 2nd inversion c maj chord in the left hand ends on the first quaver of the bar. If you send me an email address I have the whole original scanned and could send it to you 'for educational purposes'... I didn't read your original post until the answers had already come in from, PD but have followed with interest. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolsey Posted July 24, 2010 Share Posted July 24, 2010 What do you make of bar 49 (Crescendo edition, so should be page 7, top system second bar). Going along with usual practice the Ds in the RH would of course be 'natural' despite the D# in previous bar and in the LH. My copy has D naturals, but I am not convinced . . . Bar 49 in my H W Gray edition has RH: semiquaver E sharp; quaver D sharp; semiquaver A sharp; quavers B and D sharp [accidental still in force from second note]. Many of us have been around long enough to know that proof-readers and typesetters are not infallible - especially when the notation contains abundant accidentals. One's eye and ear - together with a grasp of the musical context - are the final arbiters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timothyguntrip Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Sorry to bump this thread up again - I'm planning to play this work in recital later this year. Bar 150 also seems to contain an obvious misprint in the pedal line - but would anyone be able to give a complete list of misprints against the original edition? I'm also playing from the Crescendo edition, so would be most grateful to hear of any others I may have overlooked. Best regards VA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now