{"id":1729,"date":"2014-02-03T08:00:02","date_gmt":"2014-02-03T07:00:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.henle.de\/blog\/en\/?p=1729"},"modified":"2015-06-15T08:10:25","modified_gmt":"2015-06-15T06:10:25","slug":"1729","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/2014\/02\/03\/1729\/","title":{"rendered":"D or C\u266f? What does Ravel want the violinist to play in \u201cTzigane\u201d?"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"attachment_2969\" style=\"width: 171px\" class=\"wp-caption alignleft\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Maurice_Ravel_1925.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-2969\" decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1735\" src=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Maurice_Ravel_1925.jpg\" alt=\"Maurice Ravel (1875-1937), 1925 (Licence: PD)\" width=\"161\" height=\"213\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-2969\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Maurice Ravel (1875-1937), 1925 (Licence: PD)<\/p><\/div>\n<p>Maurice Ravel\u2019s concert rhapsody \u201cTzigane\u201d is known to exist in three versions: in the original for violin and piano (April\/May 1924), in the slightly-later version for violin and or\u00adches\u00adtra (July 1924) as well as in a version for violin and lu\u00adth\u00e9\u00adal, (October 1924); the luth\u00e9al, only just developed and then quickly given up again, is a string-instrument device that when installed in the upright or grand piano makes it possible to generate a new sound register that Ravel used here primarily to imitate the sound of the Hungarian cim\u00adba\u00adlom.<!--more--><br \/>\nAmong the few recordings with violin and luth\u00e9al one from 1995 with Chantal Juillet and Pascal Rog\u00e9 is certainly re\u00adcom\u00admen\u00addab\u00adle.<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" width=\"640\" height=\"480\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/Nbqn7evcRo4?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"autoplay; encrypted-media\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>During preparation of the new edition of the \u201cTzigane\u201d version with piano (<a title=\"HN 587\" href=\"http:\/\/www.henle.de\/en\/detail\/index.html?Title=Tzigane+for+Violin+and+Piano_587\" target=\"_blank\">HN 587<\/a>), a pas\u00adsa\u00adge of the violin part from the closing stretta came into focus that though it appeared clear at first, is anything but, upon closer examination.<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_3002\" style=\"width: 597px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_Markiert-Kopie.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-3002\" decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1737\" src=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_Markiert-Kopie.jpg\" alt=\"Fig. 1: Piano version, mm. 328\u2013333.\" width=\"587\" height=\"440\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_Markiert-Kopie.jpg 928w, https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_Markiert-Kopie-300x224.jpg 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 587px) 100vw, 587px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-3002\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Fig. 1: Piano version, mm. 328\u2013333.<\/p><\/div>\n<p>In all the printed editions the first four notes of measure 331 (start of the Accelerando) read <em>d<\/em><sup>3<\/sup>\u2013<em>c<\/em>\u266f<sup>3<\/sup>\u2013<em>c<\/em>\u266f<sup>3<\/sup>\u2013<em>b<\/em><sup>2<\/sup>. This corresponds indeed with the subsequent measure, however only for the first half of the measure. But on the other hand, an exact analogy to measure 329 emerges since mm. 328\u2013329 are directly repeated. Measures 329 and 331 are thus the same \u2013 except for the 2nd note, for in measure 329 the sequence reads at the start <em>d<\/em><sup>3<\/sup>\u2013<em>d<\/em><sup>3<\/sup>\u2013<em>c<\/em>\u266f<sup>3<\/sup>\u2013<em>b<\/em><sup>2<\/sup>. Could it be that in spite of the agreement of all printed sources there is still a misprint here?<br \/>\nJust a glance into the manuscripts helps with the question of <em>d<\/em> or <em>c<\/em>\u266f as the 2nd note in measure 331. And as a matter of fact: In the autograph of the orchestral version Ravel clearly notates <em>d<\/em><sup>3<\/sup> in measure 331, not <em>c<\/em>\u266f<sup>3<\/sup>:<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_3002\" style=\"width: 560px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_2_Markiert-Kopie.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-3002\" decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1755 \" src=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_2_Markiert-Kopie.jpg\" alt=\"Fig 2: Autograph of the orchestral version, mm. 330\u2013333.\" width=\"550\" height=\"860\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_2_Markiert-Kopie.jpg 611w, https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_2_Markiert-Kopie-191x300.jpg 191w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 550px) 100vw, 550px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-3002\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Fig 2: Autograph of the orchestral version, mm. 330\u2013333.<\/p><\/div>\n<p>But why then, as can thereafter be seen, does a <em>c<\/em>\u266f<sup>3<\/sup> again appear in the first edition of the orchestral version?<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_3002\" style=\"width: 582px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_3_Markiert_-Kopie.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-3002\" decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1759 \" src=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/Tzigane_3_Markiert_-Kopie.jpg\" alt=\"Fig. 3: Orchestral version, mm. 330\u2013332.\" width=\"572\" height=\"653\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-3002\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Fig. 3: Orchestral version, mm. 330\u2013332.<\/p><\/div>\n<p>As documented by several prominent details that are matching, it was not Ravel\u2019s au\u00adto\u00adgraph, but the printed solo part of the piano version that served as model for the pub\u00adli\u00adca\u00adtion of the solo violin in the orchestral version \u2013 or else the solo part was later aligned with that of the original version.<br \/>\nSo, the question as to whether <em>d<\/em> or <em>c<\/em>\u266f is the correct note shifts to the original ver\u00adsion. On\u00adly a look into the autograph of this original ver\u00adsion could bring ultimate clarification \u2013 if then that were only possible. This autograph could be located through an inventory list pre\u00adpared in the 1960s \u2013 more precisely, there are two manuscripts, presumably a first draft as well as a subsequent fair copy \u2013 in the private \u201cCollection Taverne\u201d (Montreux\/ Switzerland) that is unfortunately inaccessible for the time being.<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/HN-0587.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"alignright size-full wp-image-1761\" src=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/HN-0587.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"194\" height=\"257\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/HN-0587.jpg 600w, https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2014\/02\/HN-0587-227x300.jpg 227w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 194px) 100vw, 194px\" \/><\/a>Thus, the question to date cannot be clarified with final cer\u00adtain\u00adty, but much suggests that smuggled into the original print was an error that has been reproduced repeatedly ever since.<br \/>\nUp to now violinists had indeed no choice, they had to play this <em>c<\/em>\u266f since it was notated in all editions. We are now taking remedial action, for Jean-Fran\u00e7ois Mon\u00adnard, the editor of our new edition appearing in spring 2014, has decided to take <em>d<\/em><sup>3<\/sup> as the 2nd note in measure 331 and to refer in a footnote to the <em>c<\/em>\u266f<sup>3<\/sup> differing in the prints.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Maurice Ravel\u2019s concert rhapsody \u201cTzigane\u201d is known to exist in &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/2014\/02\/03\/1729\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[86,416,3,415,323,282,320],"tags":[162,163,31,97,15,141],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1729"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1729"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1729\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1729"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}