Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Moderator: kcleung

varnis
forum adept
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:44 pm

Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby varnis » Sat Mar 12, 2016 3:14 pm

Hi, I am in the process of finalising typeset parts for the Rachmaninov Rhapsody and I would love to get some preliminary feedback. I don't play harp and would therefore be hugely appreciative if someone who does could comment on the harp part that I posted today (here).

I am particularly interested to hear if going to one staff for cues is acceptable (The Tema as example), and whether the pedalling is acceptable/functional.

General comments about harp parts are also appreciated!

jossuk
active poster
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 1:48 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby jossuk » Sat Mar 12, 2016 3:33 pm

File not showing yet, but I believe the Rhapsody will not be P. D. in the U. S. for some time.

Sallen112
active poster
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 12:52 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby Sallen112 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 7:23 pm

The piece won't be PD in the USA until 2030.

About the quality of the Typeset, looks really fantastic! I think as you said of going to one staff and switching back to two is pretty common for harp orchestral parts anyway with cues really helps! We could definitely use a typeset of all parts of the Rachmaninoff Op.43. The manuscript parts above are of OK quality and would rather have those files be used for study but not to play of perform off of. Would you be able to upload a typeset full score and the piano solo part of the piece too? If you can do this for all of it, yours would be the first performable set (you probably going to have to diligently review the parts for errors down the road if there are mistakes so you can correct them) on here.

Also I don't play harp either but I have seen Grand staff parts for harp (and piano orchestral parts or celesta) look like the way you have done them before.

varnis
forum adept
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:44 pm

Re: Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby varnis » Sun Mar 20, 2016 3:22 pm

Thankyou Sallen for the comments, I have tried to make the parts all as usable as possible.

My limits of knowledge about the harp sadly show through, so I'm hopping someone knows about harp pedalling and would be willing to correct the likely many mistakes in my pedalling (copied mostly from the pencil markings on the manuscript).

I recently played off my typeset parts with my university orchestra and everyone seemed satisfied, which is always a relief, despite the usual things like harmonic notation for strings and flute players loving/hating octave lines. Another question for people is repeat bar notation, most of the wind section commented that they hadn't seen it much before, I was under the impression that it was a common thing?

daphnis
Copyright Reviewer
Posts: 1609
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 7:15 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby daphnis » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:16 pm

Just out of curiosity, why are you going to such efforts to typeset parts to a piece which has perfectly serviceable parts already?

varnis
forum adept
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:44 pm

Re: Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby varnis » Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:13 am

I'm not entirely sure I would call the parts serviceable, and I would be very leery of handing out the manuscript set to an even semi-professional orchestra.
Additionally I did them for a concert that I recently played in, so they've already been sued once, and the couple of people who have played it before rather enjoyed not having to count the ledger lines (the manuscript parts have the thing where notes with ledger lines aren't proportionally placed).

daphnis
Copyright Reviewer
Posts: 1609
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 7:15 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby daphnis » Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:28 am

I don't mean the manuscript parts that are available here, on IMSLP, but rather the "traditional" set of parts which are most commonly used (most come via rental) from the Foley publication, now Boosey & Hawkes. It seems a bit like recreating the wheel unless you're trying to correct upon some number of errors that are apparent in the Foley/B&H publication.

varnis
forum adept
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:44 pm

Re: Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby varnis » Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:42 pm

So if my orchestra (funded by my university) can't really afford to rent parts to a work that's PD i suspect others are in the same boat. I've also done all the work already apart from proof-reading and general tidying, so no more effort is required.

My goal is clearly to have a set of error-free parts, so if the foley copies have errors then even more reason to actually publish my set surely?

daphnis
Copyright Reviewer
Posts: 1609
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 7:15 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human

Re: Rachmaninov Paganini Harp Comments

Postby daphnis » Thu Apr 14, 2016 12:32 pm

You, or anyone else for that matter, are certainly welcome to spend days and months producing typeset parts to a piece which is in the canon of modern orchestras and has a well-established engraving which is used everywhere. The problems with doing this all again is when you aren't producing a critical edition and therefore don't have access to all the sources, and, due to that and the fact that humans make mistakes no matter how careful, there will inevitably be differences from what is in the established engraving versus what someone on the Internet publishes in a typeset sourced from a single source: an ambiguous manuscript uploaded to a website (Tarakanov).


Return to “Other”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest