{"id":4491,"date":"2017-07-03T08:00:14","date_gmt":"2017-07-03T06:00:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.henle.de\/blog\/en\/?p=4491"},"modified":"2020-01-21T10:49:01","modified_gmt":"2020-01-21T09:49:01","slug":"non-stop-lombardic-rhythm-on-a-minute-text-problem-in-mozarts-d-minor-string-quartet-k-421","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/2017\/07\/03\/non-stop-lombardic-rhythm-on-a-minute-text-problem-in-mozarts-d-minor-string-quartet-k-421\/","title":{"rendered":"Non-stop \u201clombardic\u201d rhythm? On a minute text problem in Mozart\u2019s d-minor String Quartet K. 421"},"content":{"rendered":"

The exceptionally lighthearted D-major Trio of the Menuetto in Mozart\u2019s otherwise so darkly dramatic d-minor String Quartet K. 421 has always been one of my favourite pieces. The first violin, with its \u201cpizzicato\u201d accompaniment by the lower strings, cleverly plays there with reminiscences of folk music: on the one hand, it is quite obviously striking up a yodel, recognisable by the simple triadic melodicism flipping repeatedly from \u201cchest\u201d to \u201chead\u201d voice, just like a real alpine yodler<\/a>; on the other, the entire movement is almost prototypically pervaded by the so-called \u201clombardic\u201d rhythm, unmistakeable signs, for instance, of Scottish, Hungarian or Slavic folk music (recognisable in the inverse-dotted, syncopated rhythm):<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

K. 421, Trio, measures 1-4<\/p><\/div>\n

Let\u2019s listen to the short piece in the Jerusalem String Quartet\u2019s magnificent performance:<\/p>\n

K. 421,Trio, Jerusalem String Quartet<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\nhttps:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2017\/07\/KV-421Trio-Jerusalem-String-Quartet.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

As most Henle blog readers already know, I am currently working on Urtext editions of all the Mozart string quartets. Volume IV<\/a> has already appeared, volume III with the six quartets dedicated to Haydn is appearing next year (2018). That\u2019s where we\u2019ll also find our little trio. And just this trio includes a small editing problem, not at all so easy to solve. Here it is, briefly \u2013 and I\u2019d be greatly interested in hearing your opinion about it: that is, one time only in his autograph manuscript, in measure 14, Mozart does not<\/span> notate the movement in the \u201clombardic\u201d, but in the \u201cnormal\u201d dotted rhythm:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

K. 421, Trio, autograph, measures 14-16<\/p><\/div>\n

A writing error? Possibly, for even a Mozart can occasionally make a slip of the pen. And in a sense, making the matter more difficult is that in the first edition just this spot is engraved and printed as expected, that is, in lombardic rhythm.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

K. 421, Trio, first ediiton, violin 1, measures 14-16<\/p><\/div>\n

This first edition was published in 1785 by the Viennese publishers Artaria, virtually right under Mozart\u2019s nose, and is in this respect of prime importance as a source. However, by virtue of the fact that the printed score does indeed include much done hastily and imprecisely, even to additions (especially dynamic markings) going beyond the autograph at numerous spots, these additions and corrections are so striking that they can only go back to Mozart himself. So, it is clear that in the parts material copied from the original autograph score, he refined and corrected his text. Mozart\u2019s private performances of the \u201cHaydn Quartets\u201d are documented in his correspondence. The parts material that he corrected, to then serve the music engraver as engraver\u2019s model, is of course lost.<\/p>\n

All<\/span> of the many printed editions from the 19th<\/sup> century up until about the middle of the 20th<\/sup> century are based on this first edition. Our spot in question is \u2013 of course \u2013 always in the lombardic rhythm. Numerous recordings from the period up to about 1960 document this problematic<\/em> reading, since most string quartets of the early 20th<\/sup> century played from the Edition Peters, much used then, but now without value because its text is not that of a critical edition. Here is an example by the heroes of my youth, the Juilliard Quartet:<\/p>\n

K. 421,Trio, Juilliard Quartet<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/files\/2017\/07\/KV-421Trio-Juilliard-Quartet.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Until Alfred Einstein came and produced the 10 \u201cfamous\u201d Mozart string quartets, critically edited for the first time according to modern methods (published in 1945 by Novello publishers). A turning point in the history of this edition, for Einstein was able to expose and rectify innumerable traditional errors in this work, as well as also in the d-minor quartet, through meticulous comparison with the autograph<\/a>. He takes the K. 421 trio passage from the autograph without any commentary. Ludwig Finscher\u2019s source- and text-critical editorial work for the New Mozart Edition (NMA, 1962), and the B\u00e4renreiter parts material are based on Einstein\u2019s edition (taking over Einstein\u2019s correct decisions, but unfortunately also many of his errors). At our spot, this edition reproduces the autograph reading, not that of the first-edition, thus not the lombardic rhythm, but:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

K. 421, Trio, measures 14-16 (NMA)<\/p><\/div>\n

There are no string quartets known to me that would not follow this text today. Yet which version is the correct one, that is, which did Mozart want? Both sources, autograph as well as first edition, rank as primary. A virtually insoluble conflict. Certainly, Mozart\u2019s autograph is clear, and the first-edition\u2019s engraver (or the copyist of the engraver\u2019s model, now lost, on which this edition is based) could also have made a slip of the pen. But just the same, Mozart also could still have corrected this little passage before publication.<\/p>\n

I am not certain what to edit in the main text. \u00a0Personally, I like the autograph version better \u2013 and I could also give a musico-stylistic reason for that. But editing is indeed not a matter of taste. Shouldn\u2019t I most likely comment on this spot in the critical report and\/or perhaps even give the respective alternative reading as an \u201cossia\u201d footnote? But what do you think, string-quartet players and Mozart fans amongst our blog readers? What arguments can you contribute? I am keen to know and grateful for your interest!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The exceptionally lighthearted D-major Trio of the Menuetto in Mozart\u2019s … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[604,603,3,275,601,213,602],"tags":[605,28,600],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4491"}],"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\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4491"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4491\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5720,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4491\/revisions\/5720"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4491"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4491"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.henle.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4491"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}