The Art-Music, Literature and Linguistics Forum
March 28, 2024, 09:46:03 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Here you may discover hundreds of little-known composers, hear thousands of long-forgotten compositions, contribute your own rare recordings, and discuss the Arts, Literature and Linguistics in an erudite and decorous atmosphere full of freedom and delight.
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Mussorgsky but not Ravel

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Mussorgsky but not Ravel  (Read 870 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
relm1
Level 4
****

Times thanked: 23
Offline Offline

Posts: 360


View Profile
« on: November 15, 2017, 02:05:50 am »

but really, I prefer the piano original to all of them.


Indeed :)) Dear old Modeste never gave any hint that it was any kind of 'unfinished' orchestral work... and as you rightly say, his faithful collaborator Rimsky never took on such a project :)

There are more than 600 orchestrations of this fabulous work (including one by yours truly which lies somewhere between Tushmalov and Ravel and includes an organ in the final moments)....
If anyone is interested in hearing, here is an excerpt from my version:
http://picosong.com/wnby9


Hello Relm1 - I really like your version of the Catacombs, it is very atmospheric.  Did you orchestrate the whole work?   Is it available to buy or download anywhere?  Please do tell us more, and about yourself as well!

Thank you Christopher.  Yes the whole work was orchestrated but truthfully, the performance wasn't very good and I am not comfortable sharing it all.  Lot's of cracked notes and inconsistent rhythms.  I performed the bass trombone part in the premiere performance and mixed the recording.  Overall it wasn't horrible but isn't what I would consider reflective of my intentions.  My orchestration is 33 minutes long and is scored for 3.3.3.3/4.3.3.1/timp+3/hp/celesta/organ (ad lib)/strings.  I adore the Ravel version but also wanted to make some practical changes.  I simplified some of the orchestration so it would be more playable and less demanding (Ravel does some very complex rhythms and double/triple stops that aren't fully necessary unless you have a suburb orchestra).  In Bydlo, the melody is given to a tuba in a very high register (typically requiring the performer to switch to a euphonium to hit the very high G# notes).  For me, I have the first phrase to the tuba and let the first horn pick up the higher notes.  It is the same note but fits their range better.  So why did Ravel put a tuba in that role?  He either knew that particular tubist could nail it or wanted the note to sound off.  I didn't want that.  I wanted more security.  I will tell you since I was the orchestrator and bass trombonist who sat next to the tuba that they were terrified of what Ravel wanted so my version is more tuba friendly while keeping the same musical intention.  As far as my background, I have a masters degree in composition and have orchestrated or arranged many works.  I have my own version of Bach's fantastic Passacaglia and Fugue in C minor for orchestra and Rachmaninoff's Prelude in B minor that has been performed in concert.  This week my suite of themes of Puccini operas is being performed in concert.  I am currently working on my Symphony No. 2. 
Report Spam   Logged

Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum


Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy