{"id":3855,"date":"2016-09-05T08:00:12","date_gmt":"2016-09-05T06:00:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.henle.de\/blog\/en\/?p=3855"},"modified":"2016-09-04T16:42:46","modified_gmt":"2016-09-04T14:42:46","slug":"don%e2%80%99t-miss-a-beat-the-first-movement-of-saint-saens%e2%80%99-2nd-piano-concerto","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/2016\/09\/05\/don%e2%80%99t-miss-a-beat-the-first-movement-of-saint-saens%e2%80%99-2nd-piano-concerto\/","title":{"rendered":"Don\u2019t miss a beat! The first movement of Saint-Sa\u00ebns\u2019 2nd piano concerto"},"content":{"rendered":"

As editors we are occasionally confronted with questions that at first glance appear straightforward. In the case of Saint-Sa\u00ebns\u2019 2nd<\/span><\/sup> piano concerto in g minor op. 22 (1868) this concerns the work\u2019s opening, more specifically, the question of where the first movement\u2019s measure numbering is to start. Can this question actually become a problem? Yes, it can\u2026. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Saint-Sa\u00ebns\u2019 concerto opens, that is, with a piano solo section notated as metrically free to resemble a spun-out improvisation, and concludes only at the close in two regular measures in 4\/4 time. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span> <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Autograph, pp. 1-2<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/span>The section consisting of motivic sequences and virtuoso runs looks at first like a cadenza, so to speak, at the \u201cwrong\u201d spot. From the perspective of the classical solo concerto, starting the first movement with a cadenza (instead of placing it before the coda) would be absurd: The virtuoso \u201cimprovisation\u201d with the motivic-thematic material so compellingly presupposes its exposition and development. But the first impression of Saint-Sa\u00ebns\u2019 opus 22 opening with a cadenza is already contrary to two facts: <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>First of all, the introductory section is repeated at a later spot (mm. 95ff.), this time, though, integrated within a regular meter and accompanied by sustained chords in the strings. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Secondly, a section explicitly designated as a \u201ccadenza ad libitum\u201d, working up the main ideas in the classical manner, shows up about in the middle of the first movement (mm. 66ff.), although again located at the \u201cwrong\u201d spot from the classical perspective, for only thereafter does a kind of recapitulation follow. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span> <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Autograph, p. 35<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/span>The opening section is therefore an introduction upstream of the orchestral entrance, where heard is a crucial motive of the main theme (the rotary motive b flat\u2013a\u2013b flat<\/span><\/em>), thus in fact setting the stage for the following main movement, though the introduction seems anything but essential. Unfortunately, neither drafts nor extensive sketches are extant for the 2nd<\/span><\/sup> piano concerto, so that whether the introductory section was planned from the outset or only came along relatively late must remain open. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Whereas the contemporary printed editions only have rehearsal letters for orientation, today\u2019s editions can no longer exclude measure numbers.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>But where now in the first movement should these measure numbers begin? With the first notated measure, say, with the \u201cfirst beat\u201d of the solo introduction? Or, not until after the introduction, with the orchestral entrance? <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>In preparing the new Henle edition of the piano reduction (HN 1355<\/a>) I have opted to number the measures from the orchestral entrance, and indeed for the following reasons: <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n