Urtext vs. Schirmer Beethoven op.2 no.1
Damien J. Bradley
Kalmus Urtext edition (which I am borrowing), and the G. Schirmer
'single' printing of it (which I have been using recently instead of the
Dover volumes because it is small). I only went thru the first movement
and the differences were striking. It's amazing what liberties some
idiot editors take with this stuff. In the schirmer I was finding extra
grace-notes, extra slurs, one wrong note, extra staccatos, extra dynamic
amd tempo markings markings, idiotic fingerings, and even a crescendo
where the urtext says decresc. Geez, that's the last time I use
schirmer.
Damien
Robert Silverman
interesting viewpoints on familiar repertoire by distinguished musicians
of a century ago, but they cannot be used for serious study of these
pieces. 2 exceptions: Kullak in the Beethoven concerti and Bischoff in
the Mozart concerti. Those guys were very modern in their approach to
editing, and I am told, even had access to valuable material that has
since been destroyed in 2 world wars.
http//www.robert-silverman.com
http//www.mp3.com/robertsilverman
(lots to hear, nothing to buy, new material added weekly)
Bill Pearce
should not be used except out of curiosity to see what the editor, Hans
von Bulow, added. Bulow was, of course, a great pianist (whose wife
left him for Wagner, which must have been somewhat annoying), but his
editing (perhaps "arranging" is a more apt term) is very much 19th
century - i.e. it is not exactly echt Beethoven, but Beethoven as Bulow
thought he should have written the music. Bulow also laid his hands on
Bach and I remember how appalled my piano teahcer was years (quite a
few) ago when he told me to get the Bach Italian Concerto, so I picked
up the Schirmer edition and it turned out to be a Bulow-edited version.
Needless to say, I was very quickly told to go back and buy the Kalmus
edition.
Some of the Schirmer editions are ok, on the other hand. They
published two sets of Chopin: Rafael Joseffy and Carl Mikuli. I used a
number of the Mikuli volumes, which are reasonably reliable and have
some neat fingerings. Mikuli was a Chopin pupil and perhaps some of the
fingerings reflect Chopin's own ideas.
But I imagine that Schirmer never purported to put out "urtext" type
editions. Sometimes they went a little overboard in the other direction
I have a Schirmer edition of the Liszt Spanish Rhapsody (I forget the
editor at the moment) that is virtually a re-write of the piece.
Bill Pearce
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Peter T. Daniels
> The Schurmer edition of the Beethoven sonatas is notoriously bad and
> should not be used except out of curiosity to see what the editor, Hans
> von Bulow, added. Bulow was, of course, a great pianist (whose wife
> left him for Wagner, which must have been somewhat annoying),
Didn't he continue to conduct Wagner (premieres, even) afterward?
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@worldnet.att.net
Howell
"Damien J. Bradley" wrote:
Yeah, it's mainly the result of a music scholar's liberal interpretation.
My issue with Schirmer is that the scores tend to be overloaded with
unnecessary information. I sometimes find them handy for a quick form
analysis check, but there is just too much stuff on a given page for
sight-reading purposes.
--
Franklin
Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps.
-- Emo Phillips
sch...@gefen.cc.biu.ac.il
: But I imagine that Schirmer never purported to put out "urtext" type
: editions. Sometimes they went a little overboard in the other direction
: I have a Schirmer edition of the Liszt Spanish Rhapsody (I forget the
: editor at the moment) that is virtually a re-write of the piece.
There is (or was) a Schirmer "urtext" edition of the Beethoven piano
sonatas. I'm not sure if it's a ripoff of the B&H complete works edition
(which the Kalmus definitely is), but the critical apparatus seems to
be fairly serious. Also note that (at least in the Schirmer edition)
von Bulow only edited the "famous" sonatas. Someone else (Thalberg?) did
the rest of them.
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You go on playing Bach your way, and I'll go on playing him *his* way."
-- Wanda Landowska
Clovis Lark
> In rec.music.classical Bill Pearce <wppp...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> : But I imagine that Schirmer never purported to put out "urtext" type
> : editions. Sometimes they went a little overboard in the other direction
> : I have a Schirmer edition of the Liszt Spanish Rhapsody (I forget the
> : editor at the moment) that is virtually a re-write of the piece.
> There is (or was) a Schirmer "urtext" edition of the Beethoven piano
> sonatas.
I don't believe Schirmer ever published an Urtext.
> I'm not sure if it's a ripoff of the B&H complete works edition
Breikopf also never published Urtexts.
> (which the Kalmus definitely is), but the critical apparatus seems to
Kalmus isn't ripping anyone off. They reprint only music in public domain
and Breitkopf's old plates are just that.
sch...@gefen.cc.biu.ac.il
: In rec.music.classical sch...@gefen.cc.biu.ac.il wrote:
:> There is (or was) a Schirmer "urtext" edition of the Beethoven piano
:> sonatas.
: I don't believe Schirmer ever published an Urtext.
You're going to have to not believe a lot harder -- I have a copy of Volume
Two of the Beethoven Sonatas, published by Schirmer, edited by Krebs, and
with the word "URTEXT" in big letters on the front cover. If you really
care to know, I could check the publication number for you. This is
a different edition than the Bulow/Lebert -- in fact, the sonatas are
divided differently between the volumes in the two editions.
HTH!
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"What I do object to is uninformed malicious pandering to low level
uncouthness, even if it comes from the holiest of lands, Israel!"
-- Kenneth Lane, Wagnerian Romantischer Heldenspammer
Clovis Lark
> In rec.music.classical Clovis Lark <cl...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
> : In rec.music.classical sch...@gefen.cc.biu.ac.il wrote:
> :> There is (or was) a Schirmer "urtext" edition of the Beethoven piano
> :> sonatas.
>
> : I don't believe Schirmer ever published an Urtext.
>
> You're going to have to not believe a lot harder -- I have a copy of Volume
> Two of the Beethoven Sonatas, published by Schirmer, edited by Krebs, and
> with the word "URTEXT" in big letters on the front cover. If you really
> care to know, I could check the publication number for you. This is
> a different edition than the Bulow/Lebert -- in fact, the sonatas are
> divided differently between the volumes in the two editions.
Yes, please do pass along the pub. number. I'd be very interested to
check this out.
Ptnegun
>Two of the Beethoven Sonatas
Yes, I too have the Beethoven Sonatas (both volumes) marked urtext. This was
at one time (the 50's) considered the best. I also have both volumes published
by Henle which, while there is no credit given to an editor, includes many
idiosyncratic fingerings. I like to work from my old Schirmer.
Patrick
sch...@gefen.cc.biu.ac.il
: In rec.music.classical sch...@gefen.cc.biu.ac.il wrote:
:> I have a copy of Volume Two of the Beethoven Sonatas, published by
:> Schirmer, edited by Krebs, and with the word "URTEXT" in big letters on
:> the front cover. If you really care to know, I could check the publication
:> number for you.
: Yes, please do pass along the pub. number. I'd be very interested to
: check this out.
It's catalog numbers 1769 (Vol. 1) and 1770 (Vol. 2). It's listed at
http://www.schirmer.com/S/library/pf.htm
They also sell the Bischoff edition of the Well-Tempered Clavier, which
is, AFAIK, an Urtext edition. They also are selling Bach's Italian
Concerto edited by Rosalyn Tureck, and which they claim is an Urtext edition.
(http://www.schirmer.com/S/keyboard/pf_b.htm)
-----
Richard Schultz sch...@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
Verne Foster MacKinnon
< snip >
> http//www.mp3.com/robertsilverman
> (lots to hear, nothing to buy, new material added weekly)
Robert:
Just a "heads-up" re your enclosed links.
Each is missing the ":", as in;
-> http://www.robert-silverman.com
-> http://www.mp3.com/robertsilverman
Best,
V.
--
"... to absent friends ..." mailto:fm4...@attglobal.net
< Netscape Communicator 4.75 / IBM 2138-E86 / PentiumII 300 / Win98SP1 >
Charley
library are truly wonderful editions. For example, the John Field
"Nocturnes" by Schirmer are perhaps the best edition available in print
anywhere. And certainly, all the Rachmaninoff (Rachmaninov) works are
the *official* editions, proofed by the composer himself. But it is
also true that some editors employed by Schirmer took great liberties
with editions, but this same criticism can be levied at any other
publisher as well. I would not say by any means that Kalmus is at all
better than Schirmer. In fact, Kalmus scores contain many wrong notes
and bad editing also. Anyone who has ever attempted to teach or play
the Kalmus Bach Inventions or Mozart Sonatas will testify to the truth
of this statement.
Urtrext editions are not necessarily superior to edited editions. It all
depends on what the consumer wants to use the music for after purchase.
Piano teachers will tell you that edited editions that contain pedal
editing get NO criticisms from Festival Judges, but when a teacher
marks pedals in an urtext edition, a judge will always be quick to
criticize the pedal usage. This is just a fact.
I highly recommend Maurice Hinson's scholarly editions of many Beethoven
works from Alfred Publications. He documents his manuscript sources and
defends his choices when two different manuscripts contain score
variants. He has not done the complete Sonatas of Beethoven, but his
editions thus far are first class, with pedal editing marked.
But I have to agree with Mr. Howell, that in many Schirmer scores, the
primary goal seems to be paper-saving. If anyone has ever played the
Kuhlau Sonatinas or Clementi Sonatinas in the Schirmer editions, you
probably are now wearing eyeglasses from the resultant strain. A case
in point is that in the Schirmer edition of the Kuhlau Sonatina, Op.
20, No. 1, the first movement is 2.5 pages in the Schirmer edition, and
the same movement is 4 pages long in the Alfred edition. However, not
all the Schirmer scores are jammed with notes in this manner.
The scores published by Dover are not really practical for playing or
teaching in most instances. They are excellent for comparison with
other editions, but primarily, they are excellent "follow-along" scores
for those who wish to read the score while listening to a performance.
They would be my last choice for teaching/learning scores.
Best reagds,
Charles K. Moss
"Howell" <" franklin.howell"@BLOCKfmr.com> wrote in message
news:39E6D7F4...@BLOCKfmr.com...
> My issue with Schirmer is that the scores tend to be overloaded with
> unnecessary information. I sometimes find them handy for a quick form
> analysis check, but there is just too much stuff on a given page for
> sight-reading purposes.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> In defense of G. Schirmer, please let me state that many works in their
> library are truly wonderful editions. For example, the John Field
> "Nocturnes" by Schirmer are perhaps the best edition available in print
> anywhere. And certainly, all the Rachmaninoff (Rachmaninov) works are
> the *official* editions, proofed by the composer himself. But it is
> also true that some editors employed by Schirmer took great liberties
> with editions, but this same criticism can be levied at any other
> publisher as well. I would not say by any means that Kalmus is at all
> better than Schirmer. In fact, Kalmus scores contain many wrong notes
> and bad editing also. Anyone who has ever attempted to teach or play
> the Kalmus Bach Inventions or Mozart Sonatas will testify to the truth
> of this statement.
> The scores published by Dover are not really practical for playing or
> teaching in most instances. They are excellent for comparison with
> other editions, but primarily, they are excellent "follow-along" scores
> for those who wish to read the score while listening to a performance.
> They would be my last choice for teaching/learning scores.
In what sense are Kalmus and Dover reprints "editions"? Aren't they
simply reproductions of selections from the Gesamtausgaben of the 19th
century? (Dover usually adds an English glossary for German, though not
for Italian, expressions.)
Michael Brago
Charley wrote:
> In defense of G. Schirmer, please let me state that many works in their
> library are truly wonderful editions. For example, the John Field
> "Nocturnes" by Schirmer are perhaps the best edition available in print
> anywhere. And certainly, all the Rachmaninoff (Rachmaninov) works are
> the *official* editions, proofed by the composer himself. ...
In addition to "historical" editions, another gem from Schirmer is the three
hundred Scarlatti sonatas edited by Hashimoto, a Kirkpatrick student. Notes
on the text and occasional varients are provided at the end of each volume
and don't clutter up the page at all (unlike the Kalmus Bach editions edited
by Bischoff). Seems there's good and bad from every publisher--even G.
Henle screws up with the ridiculous fingerings in the Beethoven sonatas.
James Boyk
> ...The scores published by Dover are not really practical for playing or teaching in most instances....
Gosh, I use Dover all the time. The Schenker Beethoven is the only
edition which preserves which staff B. put the notes on, and the way the
stems run; and it's astonishing how much these things matter to getting
Beethoven's ideas. The Broder Mozart sonatas is excellent; it was the
first-ever 'urtext' of these works. The Debussy is I believe the
original Durand edition. Chopin is the Paderewski edition, with its
exemplary and reassuring editorial notes.
Dover editions are well bound, and well-printed on good paper. These
points ought to be automatic; but as we all know, they are not. My Tovey
edition of Bach WTC--a superlative edition--has a binding that falls
apart. My "Wiener Urtext" editions use paper whose white coating rubs
off--along with the notes!--when pencil eraser is used on it. (I'm the
one who first drew the publisher's attention to this problem, decades
ago; they promised to change from the chalk-coated paper they were
using; apparently they didn't change.) And so on.
So, luckily for me, I don't find a problem with Dover scores. And
they're also cheap!
-James Boyk
("Caltech" in email address does not imply endorsement of message
contents by Caltech.)
George Gilliland
out, easy to read, and Cheap! Dover is just a great publisher in all areas.
Actually I think I remember reading that they bought most of their musical plates from an old distinguished
music publisher that went out of business, but the name escapes me now. . . this was in an obit for their
founder (whose name also escapes me) who recently died. They're based in Mineola, Long Island, and they're a
highly respected, almost revered, publisher here in New York.
I think they're still releasing new books made from these original plataes because their music library seems
to be growing. There are more on the shelf each time I go to Borders. The plates are apparently in excellent
condition, judging from the quality of the printing.
George
Dwight Munroe
news:39FC5744...@caltech.edu...
> Charley wrote:
>
> > ...The scores published by Dover are not really practical for playing or
teaching in most instances....
>
> Gosh, I use Dover all the time. The Schenker Beethoven is the only
> edition which preserves which staff B. put the notes on, and the way the
> stems run; and it's astonishing how much these things matter to getting
> Beethoven's ideas. The Broder Mozart sonatas is excellent; it was the
> first-ever 'urtext' of these works.
Thanks. Just read a review of various editions of the Mozart Sonatas in the
magazine Piano & Keyboard (Sept/Oct issue - see
http://www.pianoandkeyboard.com), in which Malcolm Bilson speaks kindly of
this "ancient" edition. Even though the source material was "the most
reliable sources available at the time" (1960), the book still holds up well
(and is, I believe, still one of the only editions complete in one volume).
Bilson does not include the Dover in his discussion. He compares the
Barenreiter, Henle, Konemann, Presser, Universal Edition, and Associated
Board versions of the Mozart. Pretty good article overall. (And the Broder
continues to be our best-selling piano book, throughout the years.)
((Shamless plug - Of course, if you just want all of the sonatas, plus
everything else Mozart wrote for piano, and are not choosy about editions,
there's CD Sheet Music's Complete Piano Works on CD-ROM for a mere $14.95.
Print what you want, whenever you want.))
> The Debussy is I believe the original Durand edition.
It kind of has to be... Debussy's works came out of copyright relatively
recently, and we've only just seen subsequent editions being released.
Several of these "new editions" are nothing more than the Durand, with new
publisher names cut-and-paste over theirs. Pity. Debussy is going to be
another great example of the whole "urtext debate", as new editions
multiply. In fact, about a decade or so ago, Howath started a new line of
Debussy Complete Works in gorgeous hardbound editions, purportedly the
definitive editions of Debussy works. The series will comprise some 32
volumes (should look nifty on a bookshelf) and is highly impressive, from
what I've seen. Unfortunately, this series is not for the timid of wallet.
When I started at Presser, folks were complaining that the Durand edition of
the Preludes was selling for $4.00 each ("highway robbery!"), and they
reached a high point of $16.00 each (US, of course). The Howath is
published in one volume, but the lowest price I've seen is $150.00. Still,
if you absolutely have to have THE edition of Debussy's Preludes, this is
it.
> Chopin is the Paderewski edition, with its exemplary and reassuring
editorial
> notes.
Bless you, my son. Anything I can do to perpetuate this opinion, I will do.
And yet, we also sell the Associated Boards edition (London), and the fairly
new Lemoine "Urtext" editions (Paris). Each has its good points, but the
names "Chopin" and "Paderewski" are and have been entwined for many years.
So may it ever be.
> Dover editions are well bound, and well-printed on good paper. These
> points ought to be automatic; but as we all know, they are not. My Tovey
> edition of Bach WTC--a superlative edition--has a binding that falls
> apart.
(Sorry to hear that! How long had you had it, before this happened?)
> My "Wiener Urtext" editions use paper whose white coating rubs
> off--along with the notes!--when pencil eraser is used on it. (I'm the
> one who first drew the publisher's attention to this problem, decades
> ago; they promised to change from the chalk-coated paper they were
> using; apparently they didn't change.) And so on.
>
> So, luckily for me, I don't find a problem with Dover scores. And
> they're also cheap!
>
> -James Boyk
Again, if you don't mind "cheap" (we prefer "inexpensive"), and you want to
avoid totally any binding problems, you should be squaffing up CD Sheet
Music. It's the "cheapest", quickest, best way to build an incredible
library of sheet music for those who just want "all the notes".
In the meantime, we still consider for publication new editions that come
our way, always looking for that one that can be called THE edition.
...and the Broder continues to sell like hotcakes.
dwight
Remove "spamX" to reply.
...and now for something completely different:
http://www.cdsheetmusic.com
Peter T. Daniels
Books haven't been printed from "plates" in about 50 years. They're
printed from photographic images, and the quality of the photographic
image depends entirely on the quality of the original copy that's being
reprinted (in Dover's case).
George Gilliland
> printed from photographic images, and the quality of the photographic
> image depends entirely on the quality of the original copy that's being
> reprinted (in Dover's case).
Actually books are rarely even printed from film anymore. They now use digital direct-to-plate technology on most
large runs. (yup, I make my living in dreary world of digital pre-press!)
The Dover quality is very fine from a graphic standpoint, so if they're printed from photo stats, as you suggest,
then they're being printed off film made directly from the original hand-engraved copper or aluminum plates, most
of which date back pretty far.
A good example of how poorly things turn out when music is reprinted merely using photo stats shot from printed
paper are the Schirmer editions, which get progressively fuzzier each reprint.
But it is conceivable that Dover's books could still be printed from these original plates as well. There are a
number of specialty presses that specialize in print runs using original plates on vintage presses purchased from
retired press rooms. This might even cost less than actually shooting all the plates.
Print went photographic earlier than music, incidentally, which was still being engraved by hand well into the
'60s in the U.S., and possibly later. And it was, and is an art, that required some discretion on the part of
the engraver, who needed to have some musical knowledge in order to space the phrasing in a logical way. All the
Dover editions excel in this area.
Music engraving is not a totally lost art, by the way. It's still being done in Germany. This I know from an
article in the Heidelberg Magazine. . .
G.
Radu Focshaner
> Music engraving is not a totally lost art, by the way. It's still being done in Germany. This I know from an
> article in the Heidelberg Magazine. . .
And Koneman (Budapest) editions are "computer engraved".
Peter T. Daniels
>
> > Books haven't been printed from "plates" in about 50 years. They're
> > printed from photographic images, and the quality of the photographic
> > image depends entirely on the quality of the original copy that's being
> > reprinted (in Dover's case).
>
> Actually books are rarely even printed from film anymore. They now use digital direct-to-plate technology on most
> large runs. (yup, I make my living in dreary world of digital pre-press!)
>
> The Dover quality is very fine from a graphic standpoint, so if they're printed from photo stats, as you suggest,
> then they're being printed off film made directly from the original hand-engraved copper or aluminum plates, most
> of which date back pretty far.
No, Dover editions routinely contain an acknowledgment to the library
that supplied the original they photographed.
The original plates are rarely retained; they're far more valuable to
the owner as copper to be turned into the plates for the next item to be
published. (C.P.E. Bach sold the plates of *Musical Offering* because
there was no need to keep them, and he needed the money.)
> A good example of how poorly things turn out when music is reprinted merely using photo stats shot from printed
> paper are the Schirmer editions, which get progressively fuzzier each reprint.
I've always thought things like that (see e.g. Hardy Boys or Loeb
Classical Library printed until the 50s or 60s) happened because they
kept using the same _metal_ plates again and again until they're
squashed practically flat.
> But it is conceivable that Dover's books could still be printed from these original plates as well. There are a
> number of specialty presses that specialize in print runs using original plates on vintage presses purchased from
> retired press rooms. This might even cost less than actually shooting all the plates.
>
> Print went photographic earlier than music, incidentally, which was still being engraved by hand well into the
> '60s in the U.S., and possibly later. And it was, and is an art, that required some discretion on the part of
> the engraver, who needed to have some musical knowledge in order to space the phrasing in a logical way. All the
> Dover editions excel in this area.
Literal engraving of music (with burin on copper) died out long before
computer setting of music. See e.g. the various *War Requiem* scores --
handwritten. For *Carmina Burana*, only the choral parts are engraved
(and, stupidly, separated into men's and women's copies!); the full
score, mini score, and piano reductions are handwritten.
> Music engraving is not a totally lost art, by the way. It's still being done in Germany. This I know from an
> article in the Heidelberg Magazine. . .
These days "engraving" also refers to calligraphic score preparation --
and even computer setting with e.g. Finale2001.