THE TRANSCRIPTION AS A SUPPLEMENT TO NINETEENTH CENTURY REPERTOIRE

ANDRA ANNE COOK BOHNET, B.M. , M.M. A DISSERTATION IN FINE ARTS

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Approved

December, 1985 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am deeply indebted to Dr. Michael C. Stoune for his direction of this dissertation and to Dr. Richard A. McGowan for his helpful criticism. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Mr. James C. Sudduth, Dr. George W. Sorensen, and Dr. Marvin L. Moon, for their support

11 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii ABSTRACT iv LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vii I. THE FLUTE IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 1 II. A SURVEY OF NINETEENTH CENTURY FLUTE REPERTOIRE 11 III. THE ISSUE OF TRANSCRIPTION 23 IV. THE SELECTION OF PIECES FOR TRANSCRIPTION 31 V. TRANSCRIPTIONS PREPARED FOR THIS STUDY ^9 BIBLIOGRAPHY 85 APPENDICES 8? A. MENDELSSOHN: SONATA IN F MINOR, OP. k 8? TRANSCRIPTION FOR FLUTE AND PIANO B. DVORAK: SONATINA IN G MAJOR. OP. 100 110 TRANSCRIPTION FOR FLUTE AND PIANO C. DIETRICH, SCHUMANN, AND BRAHMS: F.A.E. SONATA 137 TRANSCRIPTION FOR FLUTE AND PIANO

• • • 111 ABSTRACT

During the nineteenth century the flute evolved, primarily through the work of Theobald Boehm, from a relatively primitive form to one of great sophistication based on acoustical principles. Its popularity during this period created a huge demand for flute music, most of which was supplied by prominent flutists or second-rate composers. This large body of music contains little of musical substance and is written in the extremely virtuosic style which was the norm for flute playing of the time.

This demand for virtuosic music probably caused the great composers of the nineteenth century to ignore the flute in their solo and chamber music, to the disappoint­ ment of present day flutists. Transcriptions for flute of works for other instruments by these composers can help to fill the void in the repertoire created by the lack of quality flute music from the Romantic era. These transcriptions can be beneficial to both the performer in search of quality repertoire and to the teacher looking for material to utilize in the study of the nineteenth century musical idiom. In selecting works for flute transcription in con­ junction with this study, the following limitations were imposed: no work was to be transposed from its original iv key, and all works considered must be scored for a solo instrument and piano. Their suitability for transcription was also determined by other musical considerations: range, tessitura and register, phrase structure, the adaptability of any idiomatic instrumental techniques, and compatibility of the piano part with the flute.

The results of the study are two-fold. First, a list of works from the nineteenth century which are deemed suitable for further investigation as flute transcriptions was compiled. Second, three flute transcriptions were made of works from this list, along with a discussion of the specific problems involved in the transcription process. Those works transcribed are 's Sonata in f minor for Violin and Piano, Op. 4, Antonin Dvorak's Sonatina in G ma.jor for Violin and Piano, Op. 100, and the F.A.E. Sonata for Violin and Piano written jointly by Albert Dietrich, Robert Schumann, and .

V LIST OF TABLES

1. Flute Repertoire by the Great Composers of the 21 Nineteenth Century 2. Transcriptions Currently Accepted in the Standard 29 Flute Repertoire 3. Works by Prominent Nineteenth Century Composers ^6 Suitable for Flute Transcription

VI LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 1. Ranges of the Flute, Violin, Clarinet, and Cello 3^

Musical Examples 1. Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, first movement, 1-9 51 2. Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, first movement, ^1-^9 52 3. Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, first movement, 212-12^ 53 4. Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, second movement, 129-131 55 5. Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, third movement, 52-53 56 6. Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, third movement, 57 151-153 7. Dvorak Sonatina, first movement, 72-76 60 8. Dvorak Sonatina, first movement, 171-17^ 61 9. Dvorak Sonatina, second movement, 29-32 62 10. Dvorak Sonatina, second movement, 80-83 63 11. Dvorak Sonatina, third movement, 14-8-55 6k 12. Dvorak Sonatina, third movement, 17-32 65 13. Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, I3O-I36 67 1^. Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, I66-I67 67 15. Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, 267-272 68 16. Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, 335-3^1 69 17. Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, 362-end 70 18. F.A.E. Sonata, first movement, 113-116 73 Vll 19. F.A.E. Sonata, first movement, 129-137 7^ 20. F.A.E. Sonata, third movement, 1-11 77 21. F.A.E. Sonata, third movement, 238-end 78 22. F.A.E. Sonata, fourth movement, 1-2 79 23. F.A.E. Sonata, fourth movement, ^7-^9, violin 80 2^. F.A.E. Sonata, fourth movement, 1^6-end 82

Vlll CHAPTER I THE FLUTE IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

The Evolution of the Flute The nineteenth century was one of great transition for the flute. This period saw the evolution of the instrument from a rather rudimental form to one of great technical and scientific sophistication.

The Early Nineteenth Century The actual instruments in use in the earliest part of the nineteenth century were far from standardized. On the one hand, the one-keyed flute of the Baroque period was still quite popular. This instrument consisted of a wooden tube with a conical bore, stopped at the large end. It contained a round or oval shaped embouchure hole near the stopper and six finger holes, which were spaced at the appropriate intervals to produce a natural scale of D major. Chromatic notes were produced by the use of cross- fingering, except for the D-sharp, which was attained by the use of the only key on the instrument. In contrast, the most complex instruments of the time had as many as seventeen keys. The practical norm, however, consisted of the eight-keyed flute. Like the one-keyed flute, the eight-keyed instrument had a conical bore with the large end at the embouchure, was usually made of wood, and had a natural scale of D major. The other keys were added to facilitate the playing of chromatic notes, which had previously been produced by the use of cross-fingerings. In addition to the standard key for D-sharp, the eight-keyed flute had keys to produce C-natural, B-flat, and G-sharp, plus two for F-natural, one for either hand. The remaining two keys extended the low range of the flute by adding a C-sharp and C-natural.

Although intended as an improvement on the one-keyed flute, the eight-keyed flute had many of its inherent problems. The wooden tube was subject to cracking and warping, which would distort the shape of the bore and disturb the key mechanism. The keys themselves were often mechanically unreliable and leaky. The fingering system was extremely awkward in any key which was too far removed from the natural scale of D major. Since the finger holes had to be accessible to the reach of the human hand, they could not be placed in their acoustically correct positions. This caused faulty intonation in the basic scale, as well as in any cross-fingerings used. The tone quality of the instrument was beautiful but delicate, very suitable for solo or chamber music, but easily overpowered in the setting of a symphony orchestra.

Flute players and instrument makers in the early nineteenth century were constantly trying to find ways to solve these problems. Experiments were made with glass in order to eliminate the problems associated with the cracking and warping of wood, but this created manufac­ turing and cost problems, along with the risk of accidental breakage. In attempts to solve awkward fingering problems, additional or duplicate keys were often added, solving the original problem but often creating others. Many modifica­ tions of keywork were made in an effort to increase relia­ bility. Placement and size of the finger holes were altered in order to improve intonation and tone quality, along with changes in the shape and size of the embouchure hole. The net result of all of these experiments was a marginally better flute, but one still fraught with problems.

It became apparent that, for any substantial improve­ ment of the flute to occur, it would have to undergo extensive redesigning. The place in musical history of Theobald Boehm, a virtuoso flutist and a goldsmith, was secured when he undertook this task, building the flute from scientific principles and finding the practical means with which to make them work. Boehm*s many years of dedica­ tion produced the instrument which is used almost univer­ sally, with only minor modifications, at the present time.

The Work of Theobald Boehm Although it is not within the scope of this paper to 4 mention all of the contributions of Theobald Boehm to flute construction, his basic innovations must be described since they play such a major role in the evolution of the flute during the nineteenth century. Boehm changed the shape of the flute tube from the conical bore which tapered toward the end, to a cylindrical bore with the head joint narrowing slightly in a so-called parabolic curve. This shape increased the volume of air present in the flute tube, resulting in a larger and fuller tone. much experimentation, Boehm reasoned that a larger embouchure hole would allow more air through this larger flute tube, assisting in the production of a larger tone. The shape of the embouchure hole was also changed from a round or oval opening to one more rectangular, but with rounded corners. This rectangular shape resulted in a wide and flat wall under the edge of the embouchure hole opposite the lips, allowing a wider airstream to enter the flute. In applying scientific principles to the flute, Boehm found that the finger or tone holes must be large, at least

More detailed information concerning Boehm's work can be found in his treatise: Theobald Boehm, The Flute and Flute Playing in Acoustical, Technical, and Artistic Aspects, trans. Dayton C. Miller (New York: Dover Pub- lications, 1964). 5 three-fourths of the size of the bore, and placed in their acoustically correct positions to ensure pure tones and good intonation. Thus, one note was necessary for each note of the chromatic scale. In order to implement this idea, Boehm devised an open-key system to cover the tone holes, since they were too large and they were too many to be covered by the fingers alone. The keys were also mechan­ ically organized so that the fourteen tone holes necessary for the correct implementation of the acoustically correct chromatic scale could be controlled by only nine fingers, the tenth, the right thumb, being used to support the instru­ ment. The Boehm flute was able to play in all keys with relative ease, and more importantly, with good intonation. During his experiments, Boehm worked with metal flute tubes because of their invulnerability to cracking and warping. He concluded that the expenditure of energy necessary to play the instrument was less in the case of these lightweight metal tubes, in fact directly proportional to the mass of the material used to make the instrument. Thus, a lightweight tube would be easier to blow than a heavy one, and a thin silver tube would be more responsive than a wooden one. Boehm used silver for the culmination of his efforts, the 18^7 flute, but he also continued to make wooden instruments in his system because it was very difficult for players used to the heaviness of wood to control the lighter silver instruments. Reactions to Boehm's Work The introduction of the Boehm flute met with reactions ranging from great enthusiasm to outright horror. Players recognized the great improvements in intonation and quantity of sound, but many, especially older players who had spent a lifetime learning to master the difficulties involved in playing the eight-keyed flute, were unwilling to undertake the task of learning a new fingering system. Many older players abandoned the instrument altogether to be replaced by younger players who had learned on the Boehm flute. Many instrument makers and players in England, impressed with the effect .of Boehm's scientific applications to the instrument, tried to design instruments using his acoustical ideas but preserving the old system of fingering from the eight-keyed flute. The result of these attempts was a rash of patents for new and improved flutes that only served to 2 muddy the commercial waters and to confuse the players. In Germany, the Boehm flute met with the most resist­ ance. Players were impressed with the improvements in intonation, but felt that Boehm had destroyed the character of the flute with the change in bore shape from conical to cylindrical. Many attempts were made to manufacture a

2 Nancy Toff, The Development of the Modern Flute (New York: Taplinger Publishing Co., 1979), p. 122. 7 so-called reform flute, which kept the conical bore of the eight-keyed flute, but utilized a more complex key system in order to improve intonation.-^^ The Boehm flute was adopted most readily in- France, where it became the official instrument of the Paris Conservatory. The high quality of Fjrench flute playing by the late nineteenth century, and its subsequent spread throughout Europe and the United States, ensured the eventual adoption of the Boehm flute as the standard instrument used throughout the Western world.

The Utilization of the Flute in the Nineteenth Century The flute had been a popular instrument during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and this popularity continued through the first half of the nineteenth century. The dawn of the nineteenth century saw the flute firmly entrenched as a member of the symphony orchestra, as the instrument of a number of popular virtuoso soloists, and as the avocation of a number of amateur players. The use of the flute in the orchestra during the nineteenth century reflected many of the improvements in instrumental design. The symphonies of Haydn usually

^Toff, pp. 82-83. Soff, p. 125. 8 confined the flute to a range of f_ "to fl--^ In the first decades of the nineteenth century the range of orchestral flute parts expanded in both directions. For example, Beethoven's Leonora Overture No. 3 calls for ad in an 3 exposed passage and his Eighth Symphony calls for a b-flat^. These notes represented the limits for an eight-keyed flute. In the latter half of the century, composers began to exploit the greater range possible on the Boehm flute. Tchaikovsky wrote a b for the second flute in his Sixth Symphony, and included the pitches k k . 7 c-sharp and d_ in several of his tone poems.' As the instrument improved the demands of the orches­ tral composers increased in other ways as well. By the latter portion of the nineteenth century most orchestral players played Boehm flutes and more passages of a soloistic nature were written for the flute. The composers also demanded an increased level of technical fluency throughout the range and in all keys. Outside of the orchestra, many nineteenth century

^The following pitch designations will be used through­ out this paper: Great C=C, Small C=£, Middle C-c^, and additional octaves notated as c£, a3, etc. Phillip Bate, The Flute; A Study of its History, Development, and Construction, rev, ed. (New York: Norton, 1979), pp. 179-180. "^Toff, p. 78. flutists made a comfortable living as soloists. These virtuosi toured continental Europe and England with con­ siderable success and enjoyed a status comparable to their string and keyboard colleagues. The most popular of these artists included Antoine Berbiguer, Theobald Boehm, Giulio Briccialdi, Jules Demeresseman, Johannes Donjon, Franz and Karl Doppler, Louis Drouet, Charles Nicholson, Wilhelm Popp, and Jean Louis Tulou, many of whom played on an o eight-keyed flute or other pre-Boehm instrument. The introduction of the Boehm flute caused a decline in many solo careers because the players were unwilling to change to a new fingering system and were soon outmatched by those younger players who had learned on the Boehm flute. The relative ease of learning the fundamentals of flute playing, combined with a comparatively low cost for an instrument, made the flute very popular among amateur music makers in the first half of the nineteenth century. Many specialized journals containing flute music and related material were published for this amateur clientele along with a large body of music, both newly composed and transcribed. These pieces, along with

o More detailed information concerning the careers of many of these soloists can be found in the following: Richard S. Rockstro, A Treatise on the Construction, the History, and the Practice of the Flute. 2nd ed. rev. 1928; rpt. (London: Musica Rara, I967). 10 instructional tutors, provided for every level of a flutist's abilities as well as all types of musical taste. The high price of Boehm flutes, along with the con­ fusion generated by the large number of rival systems, discouraged many amateurs from taking up the instrument in the latter half of the nineteenth century. As a result, the role of the flute as a drawing room instrument was greatly reduced and the popularity of the flute declined until well into the twentieth century.^

^Toff, p. 77» CHAPTER II A SURVEY OF NINETEENTH CENTURY FLUTE REPERTOIRE

The history and development of the flute throughout the nineteenth century had a great effect on the composi­ tion of music for the instrument. In the early part of the century, the popularity of the virtuoso soloists resulted in many pieces, mostly by prominent flutists or second-rate composers, designed to show off their technique and mastery of the eight-keyed flute. These virtuosic pieces demanded every possible skill at the disposal of the flutist: incredibly rapid finger technique, multiple tonguing, ornamentation, flexibility of the lips, breath control, and melodic interpretation. The large number of amateur flutists also stimulated the composition of numerous instructional pieces of various difficulties, salon pieces, and transcriptions of popular songs and operatic arias. Entire operas were even arranged for one or more flutes, making this very popular music more available to the general public.

The introduction of the Boehm flute by the middle of the nineteenth century served to further the tradition of virtuosic flute playing. Many flutist-composers, including Boehm himself, wrote pieces to exploit the capabilities of the new instrument. These pieces were composed in such a 11 12 manner as to be virtually impossible to play on the eight- keyed flute. They often included notes which were out of the range of the eight-keyed flute but quite possible on the Boehm flute. In addition, they were often written in keys which would have contained extremely awkward fingering patterns on the old system flute, but which were quite practical on the new instrument. This state of affairs continued until the last decades of the nineteenth century when , founder of the Societe des Instruments a Vent in 1879» professor of flute at the Paris Conservatory from 1893 to 1908, and leader of the new movement of French flute playing, revived such works as Bach's flute sonatas and Mozart's flute con- certi as alternatives to the second-rate flute music of his own century. The expertise of Taffanel and his students inspired some of the leading French composers of the time to write for the flute. Many of these works were commis­ sioned for the annual flute competition at the Paris Conservatory, for which a new piece was required each year. Although this competition occurred throughout most of the nineteenth century, the quality of these pieces improved markedly under the influence of Taffanel.

•^^Toff, p. 125. 13 Common Genres of Nineteenth Century Flute Repertoire The greatest number of the solo flute compositions of the nineteenth century can be included in one of the following catagories: air and variations, fantasias, and small character or salon pieces. The air and variations was probably the most prevalent form of solo flute music during this period. Its predict­ able nature required little compositional skill; thus, many of these pieces were written by professional flutists as showpieces for their own talents. The air is usually a well-known opera aria, popular song, folk tune, or other melody with a nationalistic character. Less often, an especially ambitious composer might compose his own air. The variations are usually of the melodic type, each one featuring a specific aspect of flute technique such as chromatic scales, arpeggios, ornaments, octave slurs, or multiple tonguing. The accompaniment is usually simple and often identical for the air and the subsequent varia­ tions. A large piece in this genre will occasionally have an introduction, usually of rhapsodic nature, which may or may not be thematically related to the air. An especially virtuosic finale, essentially a long coda, might also be included.

One of the typical pieces of this type which is frequently performed today is. Paul Genin's Carnival of 14 Venice, which contains a florid introduction and several variations. These variations each dwell on a specific aspect of flute technique. The accompaniment is very simple and identical for many of the variations. A more interesting piece from this genre is 's Introduction and Variations, D. 802, on the song "Trockne Blumen" from Die Schone Mullerin. The air itself is of greater interest, being one of Schubert's own songs. The fireworks of the variations occur in the piano part as well as in the flute part, making this piece a tour de force for both performers. The variations also contain variety in both meter and tempo. Unfortunately, most of the pieces in this genre are more of the quality of Genin's work than that of Schubert's. The lack of musical interest and utter predictability of many of these pieces is well brought out by the following quotation from Musical Opinion in I89O: Air first, then common chord variation (staccato), "runs" variation, slow movement with a turn between every two notes, and pump handle shakes that wring tears of agony from the flute; then the enormously difficult finale, in which you are up in the air on one note, then drop with a bang, which nearly breaks you, onto low C natural, only to bounce up again, hold on to a note, shake it (wring its neck, in fact), scatter it in all directions and come sailing down triumphantly on a chromatic (legato)

H. Macaulay Fitzgibbon, The Story of the Flute. 2nd ed. rev. (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1928), p. 110. 15 with a perfect whirlpool of foaming notes, only to be bumped and pushed about until you are exhausted. The fantasia or fantasy was second in popularity only to the air and variations during this time. These pieces are not as stereotypical as the air and variations, but common traits can be found. As the name implies, the fantasia is free in form, rhapsodic and virtuosic by nature. A typical fantasia contains several sections of various tonalities and tempi, often linked by cadenzas or similar material. A common thematic idea may help to unify the sections, but often they are musically unrelated. Many fantasias have a unifying trait in that the themes have a certain national flavor such as Spanish or Italian.

An example of this genre which is frequently performed today is the Hungarian Pastorale Fantasie by Franz Doppler. The themes are all Hungarian in character which gives the piece an overall feeling of unity. There are several distinct sections in various tonalities and tempi. The many cadenzas and other improvisatory effects give the work the aspect of great virtuosity. A subset of this genre is the operatic fantasy, where several well-known themes from an opera are used in the various sections of the fantasy. Some operatic fantasies also have a section which consists of an air and variations, merging the two forms into a virtuosic extravaganza. A typical example of the operatic fantasy is the 16 Fantasie (I9OO) by Francois Borne (18^0-1920). This work contains a number of the prominent themes from the

opera which are treated in a virtuosic manner. One section of the work even consists of the famous "Habanera" followed by two variations. The character pieces in the nineteenth century flute repertoire are similar in nature to those for piano, usually expressing a single mood or programmatic idea described by the title. They tend to be rather short, often in ternary form. These pieces, too, are infused by the virtuosity so desired by the nineteenth century flutist. They often exhibit such titles as "The Murmuring Brook" or "The Wind in the Trees" whose programmatic images provide for an extensive technical display by the flutist. The accompaniment is usually simple, serving merely as a harmonic foundation for the soloist.

An example of a character piece is a small work Pan: Pastorale for Flute by Johannes Donjon. The entire piece is less than two minutes long, is in ternary form, and evokes the pastoral mood of shepherd pipes. A piece of a more virtuosic nature would be Vogelsang (Song of the Bird) by Wilhelm Popp. As the title suggests, this piece tries to emulate bird sounds by the use of trills, rapid repeated notes, and quasi-melodic motives suggestive of the calls of the cuckoo and the nightingale. The accompaniments of both pieces are quite simple, providing the harmonic 17 foundations for the solo parts.

Representative Composers The composers of this repertoire can be divided into two groups. The first group consists of the virtuoso flutists themselves, who wrote myriads of pieces for their own use and for that of their students. The second group contains mostly second-rate composers who labored to provide material for this large group of consumers and to fill their pockets with the resulting profits. It is unfortunate that no composers of the talents of Liszt or Paganini existed among the flutists. The compositions of the flutist-composers are for the most part musically undistinguished. Although lacking in qual­ ity, there is no lack in the quantity of pieces produced by these virtuosi. In addition to the solo literature, they also wrote volumes of duets, trios, etudes, and instructional tutors. A list of the flutist-composers reads like a "Who's Who" of nineteenth century flutists. The best-known and most prolific of them include the following: Henri Altes (1826-1895), Joachim Andersen (18^7-1909), Antoine Berbiguer (1782-1838), Wilhelm Blodek (183^-1874), Theobald Boehm (179^-1881), Giulio Briccialdi (1818-1881), Jules Demeresseman (1833-1866), Johannes Donjon (1839-c. 1912), Franz Doppler (1821-1883), Anton Furstenau (1792-1852), Ernesto Kohler (18^9-1907), Wilhelm 18 Popp (I828-I903), Adolf Terschak (I832-I9OI), and Jean Louis Tulou (I786-I865). The non-flutists who wrote flute music during the nineteenth century most frequently included the instrument in chamber music settings. One notable exception was Daniel Friederich Kuhlau (1786-1832), who wrote for the instrument in a soloistic manner and is often referred to as the "Beethoven of the flute." He was of German birth and spent most of his life in Denmark working as a con­ ductor and pianist. While writing flute music primarily to supplement his income, Kuhlau was very skilled in writing for the instrument, and his prolific output of solos, duets, trios, and quartets holds a very special place in the repertory. Other non-flutists who included the flute in their compositional output are Muzio Clementi (1752-1832), Jan Dussek (I76O-I8I2), Johann Nepomuk Hummel (1778-1837), Conradin Kreutzer (1780-18^9), Ignaz Moscheles (179^-1870), Anton Reicha (I77O-I836), Karl Reinecke (182^-1910), and Louis Spohr (1784-1859). The works by these composers tend to be less virtuosic in nature and more in keeping with the chamber music idiom of the period. With the exception of the pieces by Reinecke, the solo works of these composers are little-known and seldom performed today. In this survey of the composers of the nineteenth 19 century flute repertory, a glaring omission demands inves­ tigation: what did the great composers of the Romantic era contribute to the repertoire of the flute? It has already been mentioned that the flute was a vital member of the orchestra during this time, and that the composers of orchestral works used the instrument frequently in a soloistic manner. Unfortunately, their interest in the flute stopped there. The solo and chamber works for the flute by the great composers of the nineteenth century are few indeed, and of those existing works, most are comparatively minor in stature. Table 1 illustrates the scarcity of these pieces. One cannot help but wonder why the great composers of the nineteenth century ignored the flute, even though it was one of the most popular instruments of the time. The composers might have been discouraged by the performer's enthusiasm for merely virtuosic pieces, and thus were not inclined to waste their creative efforts on the flute, when such pieces were cranked out by the hundreds by the flutists themselves or by other second-rate composers. 12 The wooden eight-keyed flute was not fit to fulfill the demands of the nineteenth century composers. Its uncertain intonation and small sound made it musically

^^Toff, pp. 78-79. 20 Table 1 Flute Repertoire by the Great Composers of the Nineteenth Century Composer Works Beethoven Allegro and Minuet in G major for two flutes, WoO 26 (1792) Trio in G major for flute, bassoon, and piano. WoO 37 (1786) Serenade in D major for flute, violin, and viola. Op. 25 (1801) Six National Airs with Variations for flute and piano. Op. 105 (1818) Ten National Airs with Variations for flute and piano. Op. 107 (1818) Berlioz Schubert Introduction and Variations for flute and piano (on "Trockne Blumen" from Di¥~ Schone Mullerin), D. 802 (1824) Weber Romanza Siciliana in g minor for flute and orchestra. Op. 47 (1805) Trio for flute, cello, and piano. Op. 258 (THI91 Schumann Mendelssohn Chopin Variations in e minor for flute and piano (on "Non piu mesta" from Rossini's La Cenerentola), (1824) Brahms Dvorak Elgar Liszt Smetana Tchaikovsky 21 Table 1: continued Composer Works Saint-Saens Tarentelle in a minor for flute and orchestra. Op. 6 (1857) Romance in Db major for flute and orchestra. Op. 37 (1871) Caprice sur des airs Danois et Russes for piano, flute, oboe, and clarinet. Op. 79 (1887) Odalette in D major for flute and orchestra. Op. 162 (1920) Faure Morceau de lecture for flute and piano (I898) Fantasie for flute and piano. Op. 79 (I898) 22 inferior to the violin and newly perfected piano which were much more capable of the intensity and expression required by the Romantic aesthetic. With the introduction of the Boehm flute by mid-century, and the subsequent myriads of rival systems, the confusion in the flute world at this time was enough to discourage any serious composition for the instrument.1 3-^ This situation remained until the end of the century, when Taffanel's high musical standards inspired some of his French compatriots to write for the flute.

^^Toff, p. 45. CHAPTER III THE ISSUE OF TRANSCRIPTION

It is unfortunate that the flutists of today are unable to perform and study the music of the great composers of the nineteenth century in other than an orchestral setting. The music of the Romantic period continues to enjoy a most hallowed place in today's concert halls. The majority of the traditional symphonic and operatic repertoire was composed in the nineteenth century, as well as a large quantity of the most frequently performed chamber music and solo piano literature'. The nineteenth century musical style is an indispensable part of our musical heritage. Quality transcriptions of solo works for other instruments by the great composers of the nineteenth century can help to fill this void in the flute repertoire, enriching the musical experience for both student and professional flutists.

The following quotation from the introduction of James Pellerite's Handbook of Literature for the Flute outlines his reasons for the inclusion of transcriptions in his catalog. In the past, several prominent composers have overlooked the flute as a solo instrument for one reason or another — Brahms, Chopin, and Mendelssohn, for example. This has created a void that could now be filled by some transcrip- 23 24 tions or arrangements. A total musical experience is vital to every flutist... An enormous variety of musical styles becomes available to us through works such as these. Various compositions could serve a particular purpose in the educational process and should be considered acceptable in the course of study. I have always respected the purist, who, of course, will not concur with the use of this kind of repertoire.1^ Pellerite stresses the desirability of the study of a variety of musical styles by the flute student. In particular, the study of the nineteenth century idiom, with its enduring popularity, should be a high priority.

Stylistic Considerations The musical style of the nineteenth century is worthy of study for several reasons. The major-minor system of harmony reached its culmination during this period, being pushed to its limits by the end of the century. Also, the nineteenth century composers excelled in the use of harmonic and melodic tension in order to build the intensity of a piece toward a tremendous climax. Music of the time was characterized by long and beautiful melodic lines, requiring the performer to be adept at the shaping and execution of phrases. Opportunities for expression and nuance are virtually unlimited, giving the performer more freedom than

14 -^^James Pellerite, A Handbook of Literature for the Flute, 3rd ed. (Bloomington: Zalo, 1978), p. vi. 25 in any modern musical style except for the aleatoric music of the twentieth century. The virtuosic flute literature written during the nineteenth century does not, for the most part, carry these traits to their fullest fruition. The harmonic language is usually mundane, and the emphasis on technical display does not allow for the building of tension and long melodic lines. Similarly, the lack of musical sub­ stance inhibits the performer in his quest for expression and interpretation. Since nineteenth century music forms such a large part of the orchestral repertoire, students should be familiar with the style of the period. The study of solo literature by the great orchestral composers can help to prepare students for a rewarding orchestral experience.

Expansion of the Repertoire At the present time, the flute has surpassed its popularity of the early nineteenth century. There are many prominent soloists with successful careers, hundreds of flutists holding orchestral and teaching positions, and thousands of amateur players. With a limited reper­ toire available from the nineteenth century, those pieces of merit are performed all too frequently, and pieces of little substance are performed for variety when many of them would be better left alone to remain in obscurity. 26 Transcriptions of works by the great composers of the nineteenth century can expand this area of the repertoire by providing more quality literature as an alternative to the mediocre fare which was described in the previous chapter. In recommending the use of transcriptions for the purpose of expanding the repertoire, the author is not suggesting wanton larceny of every great piece by every great composer. Rather, a little judicious borrowing by sensitive editors who are knowledgeable of the capabil­ ities of the modern flute and scholarly in their approach would serve as a solution to this problem which plagues students, teachers, and performers alike.

Historical Precedents for Transcription The transcription or arrangement has been an element of the musical scene throughout all periods of music history. Since the advent of music printing, publishers have published music in different formats to increase the market for their products. In the sixteenth century, vocal music was often represented as being equally suitable for instruments or for a combination of both voices and instru­ ments. During the Baroque period, pieces such as trio or solo sonatas were often written for any interchangeable treble instruments such as the violin, the flute, the recorder, or the oboe. The continue parts of these pieces 27 could also be played on any number of bass and keyboard instruments. As late as the nineteenth century many composers often indicated that their works were capable of being performed by more than one instrumental combination. For examble, Schumann's Phantasiestiicke, Op. 73 for clarinet and piano also carries the composer's sanction for perfor­ mance on the violin or cello. The transcription has figured prominently in providing literature for many other performance media. In the nine­ teenth century many orchestral works were arranged for the piano. The recipient of the orchestral transcription in the twentieth century is the concert band. Conversely, keyboard pieces have frequently been expanded for the orchestra, by the composers themselves as in Brahms's Variations on a Theme by Haydn or Dvorak's Slavonic Dances, or by others, as in Ravel's orchestration of Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition or Leopold Stokowski's orchestral arrangements of Bach's organ music. Many examples exist of composers transcribing their own works from one instrumental medium to another. Speaking only of pieces in the flute repertoire several instances come to mind. Mozart's Concerto, K. 3l4 for flute is his own transcription of the , K. 271, transposed up a tone and containing some modifications of the passage work. Prokofiev's Sonata in D major. Op. 94, originally written for flute and piano, was later transcribed by the 28 composer for the violin, with only minor changes in the solo part. Similarly, 's Duo for Flute and Piano was also later transcribed by the composer for the violin. Performers have provided much additional literature for their instruments through the use of transcription. A prolific nineteenth century arranger was Franz Liszt, who transcribed many of Wagner's music dramas, Beethoven's symphonies, Bach's organ works, and other famous orchestral works of his day for the piano. The advent of the copyright laws in the twentieth century has greatly affected this type of activity. Permission must be obtained from the composer to arrange any work under copyright. Furthermore, the development of the recording industry, radio, and television has enabled music to be heard by virtually anyone in its original form, reducing the market for such transcriptions as those of Liszt for the piano. Despite these difficulties, several transcriptions by twentieth century flutists have added significantly to the repertoire. With the permission of the composer, Jean-Pierre Rampal successfully transcribed Aram Khachaturian's for the flute, making minor changes to the solo line and providing a new cadenza, but otherwise keeping the original intact. More substantial changes were made to Joaquin Rodrigo's Fantasia para un 29 Gentilhombre, originally for guitar and orchestra, by flutist , who transcribed it for the flute with the composer's permission. A listing of the other transcriptions which are currently accepted in the flute repertoire can be seen in Table 2.

Table 2 Transcriptions Currently Accepted in the Standard Flute Repertoire Composer Title and Original Instrument(s) Transcriber Chopin Nocturne, Op. 9, No. 2 P. Taffanel (piano solo) Chopin Nocturne, Op. 15, No. 2 P. Taffanel (piano sol o? Franck Sonata in A major J.P. Rampal (violin and piano) and others Khachaturian Concerto in d minor J.P. Rampal (violin and orchestra) Pierne Sonata, Op. 36 J.P. Rampal (violin and piano) Rodrigo Fantasia para un Gentilhombre J. Galway (guitar and orchestra) Schubert "Arpeggione" Sonata, D. 821 J. Galway (arpeggione and piano) Schumann Three Romances, Op. 9^ J.P. Rampal (oboe and piano) Vivaldi "Four Seasons" Concerti, Op. 8 J. Galway 30 Ethical Considerations Unfortunately, in the case of the nineteenth century composers, we cannot ask them for permission to transcribe their works for the flute. These pieces are in the public domain and are therefore accessible to all would-be tran­ scribers with good or dishonorable intentions. The activity of transcription, a widespread musical phenomenon through­ out history, has been increasingly under attack from musical purists since about 1950. The scholarly pursuits of historical authenticity and accuracy in performance have put the transcription in a somewhat disreputable position. Perhaps those musicians favored by a large corpus of quality repertoire cannot understand the frustration,of those^dis­ ciplines where quality repertoire is at a premium. The purpose of the author is not to attempt to satisfy all of the criticisms of the musical validity of the transcription, but to propose a solution to a specific problem regarding the flute repertory. Past performance history has shown that transcriptions which work well from an aesthetic and musical standpoint will find their way into the repertoire, and that those which do not will forever reside in oblivion.

-^Malcolm Boyd, "Arrangement," The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (London: MacMillan, I98O), I, 63I. CHAPTER IV THE SELECTION OF PIECES FOR TRANSCRIPTION

Having determined that the transcription can play a significant role in filling the void in the nineteenth century flute repertoire, it is time to define the process of selection of pieces to be transcribed. Careful consider­ ation of many aesthetic and musical factors must be taken in order to decide whether or not a transcription will be possible, and if possible, whether it would be successful.

The Scope of this Investigation Since the nineteenth century flute repertoire is lacking in works by the great composers of the Romantic era, their works for other instruments will be the ones that are screened for consideration "in this study. The composers whose works will be examined include those who are acknow­ ledged to have been in the mainstream of musical development in the nineteenth century, and those whose works form a significant portion of the music heard in today's concert halls. To limit the scope of this investigation, only works scored for a solo instrument and piano will be considered, for the author believes that the immediate need for solo works will best be served by transcriptions for flute and

31 32 piano. This instrumental combination is more easily assembled than a larger group, and is more accessible to teachers and performers with limited resources. This arbitrary limitation should not be taken to infer that successful flute transcriptions could not be made from vocal works or works for a larger instrumental ensemble.

In the process of selecting works of this type for transcription, it is believed inadvisable to transpose them from their original keys. While transposition could be somewhat advantageous in adapting a work for the flute, any advantages gained would be outweighed by the disadvan­ tage to the pianist of possibly having to learn the same piece in two different keys. This view does not imply that the piano parts to these pieces may not be altered in any way, but transposition of any work from its original key will not be considered for this study. A brief examination of the repertoire for a solo instrument and piano from the nineteenth century shows that the largest quantity of this music is written for the violin. Other favored instruments include the cello and clarinet. The large body of violin music is especially appealing to the transcriber of flute music since the two instruments are very similar in many aspects, including range and technical facility. 33 Musical Considerations Before any piece can be transcribed, several musical aspects should be examined to determine its suitability for the new medium. These aspects include range, tessitura and register, phrase structure, adaptability of the idiomatic instrumental techniques, and the compatibility of the piano part with the new instrument.

Range When considering a transcription from one instrument to another, it is important to be aware of their ranges. The flute has a range of over three octaves. The lowest note the flute can produce is c_, although many flutes today have an extension which will permit them to play b, one half step lower. The highest range of the flute 4 1 can extend to g_, three and one half octaves above c , but the notes above c_ become increasingly more difficult to finger and produce, so that flute music is rarely written above d4 . Figure 1 illustrates the comparitive ranges of the flute, violin, clarinet, and cello, since these instruments

Most professional flutists in the United States play on flutes that have a B-foot (extension). Among students the B-foot is less common, but increasingly popular among high school and college students. 34 are the recipients of most of the literature to be considered for transcription.

8 8

k k £L w ^

Flute Violin Bb Clarinet Cello

Figure 1: Ranges of the Flute, Violin, Clarinet, and Cello

The open notes indicate the full possible ranges, while the filled notes suggest practical limits. The written notes of the Bb clarinet sound a whole step lower. It is obvious from the illustration that the range of the violin compares the most favorably with that of the flute. The upper limits are identical, while the violin range extends a few notes lower. A comparison of the flute and the clarinet ranges shows more discrepancy, especially in the lower limits. The concert pitch equivalent of the lowest note of the clarinet is nearly one octave below that of the flute, while the upper limit of the flute range is approximately a fifth higher. Clearly, many 35 range adjustments would have to be made to transcribe clarinet music for the flute. The range of the cello is virtually an exact duplicate of that of the flute, merely transposed two octaves lower. This observation raises interesting possibilities; entire cello pieces could be transposed up two octaves and be entirely playable on the flute. However, the change of a solo part from bass to treble could wreak havoc with its compatibility with the piano part, so any work of this type should be approached with extreme caution.

During the process of transcription for the flute, notes out of range must be brought within its compass. The easiest way of dealing with this problem is to transpose those notes out of range by an octave until they fall within the limits of the flute. In order to preserve phrase integrity, it is generally advisable to transpose the entire phrase containing these notes. Surrounding phrases might also have to be transposed to prevent constant changes of octaves which would cause the musical result to be rather disjunct.

Tessitura and Register Another factor which should be considered in the selection process is whether or not the tessitura of the piece in question is suitable for a flute transcription. Each register of each instrument has its own unique 36 qualities, and sometimes the same music played on different instruments can take on an entirely different character. The flute range encompasses three distinct registers. The lowest of these, from c^ to _c_, is the softest and least penetrating. It is easily covered by the piano in forte passages. The middle register, from c_ to c^, is stronger and easier to project than the low register. The most brilliant and penetrating register of the flute is the highest, from c^ to the top of the range. As a result of these tendencies, the sound of the flute tends to increase in volume as the pitch rises. A good player can counteract this tendency to a certain extent, but it is very difficult to play extremely loudly in the low register and extremely quietly in the upper register.

In comparison, the low register of the violin is full and rich in quality. As the pitch of the violin gets higher, the tone becomes increasingly more brilliant and intense, but less full. 17' Thus the violinist can play very loudly in the lowest register and very softly in the highest. This trait should be noted when transcribing violin music for the flute. Any low register passages for the violin, even if they fall within the range of

17 ^Kent W. Kennan, The Technique of Orchestration, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970), p. 7. 37 the flute, might have to be transposed up an octave if the accompaniment is full and the dynamic level is forte. Also, high, quiet passages for the violin will be very difficult to execute on the flute. Too much writing in either extreme register might render a violin piece impractical for flute transcription. The clarinet, like the flute, has three distinct registers. Its lowest register, from ^ to d_, is dark in color and strong. The middle register, from e-flat to b-flat , tends to be rather dull in quality and weak. The notes in the highest register, from bi_ to the top of the range are clear and bright, and become increasingly more piercing above c^. The clarinet has a tremendous dynamic range, able to play extremely softly in all registers, and able to play very loudly in all registers except the middle. In comparing register quality, the major differences between the flute and clarinet occur in the low and middle registers. The low register of the clarinet can be played with much more authority than that of the flute, while the middle register of the flute is stronger than that of the clarinet. Almost any musical passage which features the low register of the clarinet would have to be transposed

^^Kennan, pp. 85-86. 38 an octave higher in order to be playable on the flute. The resulting transposition would fall primarily in the low register of the flute, its weakest. This situation could create balance problems with the piano, as well as possibly changing the musical character of a piece. Thus, any transcription of clarinet music for the flute must be carefully investigated for its feasibility because of this discrepancy. The lowest register of the cello, encompassing the C and G strings, is rich and full-bodied. The middle register, characterized by the D string, is brighter and very warm in quality. The highest register, played on the A string, is vibrant and singing, and becomes increas­ ingly more intense as one ascends. ^ When considering the transcription of cello music for the flute, the following factors should be noted. If the entire cello part is transposed two octaves higher it will fall within the range of the flute. The rich lower register will then be played by the weakest register of the flute, and the poignant upper register of the cello will be played by the brilliant and penetrating upper register of the flute. As was mentioned previously, this two octave trans­ position might result in considerable incompatibility

%ennan, pp. 24-25 39 of the solo and piano parts. As a general rule, those pieces which exploit the particular characters of the extreme registers of one instrument will probably not be suitable for transcription to another. Those works which stay within a kind of middle ground can probably be transcribed more success­ fully, because fewer problems with dynamic levels and register qualities will result.

Phrase Structure Since the flute is a wind instrument, care must be taken in composition or transcription to allow the flutist ample opportunity to breathe during the course of a piece. Actually, the flute takes more air to play than the other woodwind instruments, a consideration that is of the utmost importance in writing for the flute. Well written flute music will take this factor into account, but the transcription of music from other instrumental repertoires can cause problems in this regard. Most of these problems will occur with music for stringed instruments. A bowed string can produce contin­ uous sound for a great length of time, where the flute sound must be broken periodically, if only for a moment, to accommodate the breathing of the player. Thus, extremely long phrases easily played on a stringed instru­ ment must be divided into smaller parts in order to be 40 played on the flute. In many cases this can be done quite successfully, and with great musicality, if the flutist is sensitive to the structure and the nuances of the piece. Obviously, the easiest place in a musical line for a flutist to breathe is during a rest. Additional places in which a breath may be taken without too much disturbance include the following: after a cadence, after a long note, after a tie, after the first note of a measure, between repetitions of a sequence, and between the notes of a large interval. Since most melodic structures contain one or more of these elements, appropriate breathing places can usually be found. Breathing problems are most likely to be encountered in a long series of rapid notes. If a flutist has to play a passage of rapid notes of equal value which is too long to be played in one breath, he has one of two options. First, he can catch small breaths between the notes. These small catch breaths can be musically successful if the rhythm of the passage can be slightly distorted in order to accommodate them. If this is not the case the second option should be used; the player can leave out a note or two in order to catch a breath and keep the integrity of the rhythm of the passage. Somewhat akin to the problem of breathing is that of endurance. It is very taxing to play the flute, or any 41 wind instrument, for a long period of time without a rest, for the facial muscles as well as the breathing mechanism tend to fatigue. Therefore, it is important for any flute transcription to include some rests in the solo part if it is fairly lengthy. These rests, even if only a measure of two in length, will enable the player to remove the instrument from the lips, relax the embouchure, and perhaps swallow or moisten the lips.

One must be careful then, in the examination of string pieces for flute transcription, to see that they have an appropriate phrase structure to accommodate breathing and that they contain adequate rest for the player. Music that does not meet these specifications will sound awkward and unfinished even when performed by the best of players; and it will be especially unrewarding in the hands of a student.

Idiomatic Instrumental Techniques While instruments distinguish themselves chiefly by their unique tone colors, their construction also contrib­ utes to certain idiomatic traits which can be exploited in composition for them. Too many of these idiomatic traits can render a piece unsuitable for transcription to another instrument. Other than the difference in sound generators, the chief difference in the construction of the clarinet and 42 the flute is that the flute behaves as an open pipe while the clarinet acts as a closed pipe. This causes the flute to overblow at the octave, while the clarinet overblows at the twelfth. Octave slurs are therefore quite charac­ teristic of flute writing while rather awkward on the clarinet. Similarly, slurs of a twelfth on the clarinet are quite natural but more difficult to produce on the flute.

The stringed instruments differ greatly from the wind instruments in construction, and thus posess many different idiomatic traits. Certain devices such as pizzicato, bowed tremolo, and multiple stops are integral parts of string technique. The adaptability of these traits to the flute is thus a problem which must be faced in transcribing for the flute. The pizzicato has no equivalent in nineteenth century flute technique. Although many twentieth century avant- garde flute pieces use key clicks to obtain a somewhat similar effect, this technique remains something of a special effect. Thus it would be unsuitable as an alter­ native to pizzicato in a nineteenth century piece because the pizzicato was a very standard string technique of the time. In transcribing pizzicato passages for the flute, it would be more advisable to use staccato notes in a melodic section, or if the pizzicato is accompanimental, to omit the passage entirely from the flute part. 43 Stringed instruments are capable of producing either measured or unmeasured bowed tremolos which can be used to great dramatic effect. The measured tremolo can often be duplicated by double tonguing on the flute if the principal notes change fairly quickly. In a long, sustained measured tremolo, double tonguing is an inadequate solution, because it is difficult for the flutist to maintain the appropriate level of intensity while playing many rapid repeated notes. Some solutions to this problem would be to either sustain the note in question or to trill it, choosing the solution which best fits the particular context. The unmeasured tremolo could be approximated by the flutter- tongue, but its use as a special effect in twentieth century music renders it unsuitable as a nineteenth century technique. Again, probably the best solution to this problem would be to either sustain the note in question or to trill it.

Stringed instruments are capable of playing up to four notes simultaneously, as chords or in a limited poly­ phonic manner. The flute is basically a melodic instrument, although twentieth century avant-garde flute music does contain some multiple sonorities. These multiple sonorities would be unsuitable as substitutes for string multiple stops because, generally, their tone quality differs greatly from that of the standard flute tone. Multiple stops can be adapted for the flute in several ways. The 44 lower notes of a chord can be arpeggiated and written as grace notes to the upper note of the chord. In many cases the open chord structures of the multiple stops can be revoiced into a closed position in order to make the grace notes more characteristic of flute technique. String passages which contain arpeggiated forms of multiple stops in accompanimental or rhythmic figures can often be revoiced as well. In some cases, all notes of a chord except the most melodically important can be omitted altogether. In the case of a quasi-contrapuntal section for a stringed instrument, only one line may be played on the flute. Depending on the circumstances, it may be possible to add the other line or lines to the piano part. Most other matters of string technique can be success­ fully duplicated on the flute. Bowing indications such as slurs, staccato, tenuto, and accents have equivalents in flute technique. Any articulation changes that would need to be made in transcribing for the flute would tend to be minor in nature.

Compatibility of the Piano Part Of those changes which might be made in the solo part during the transcription process, the one that could most directly affect the compatibility of the solo and piano parts is octave transposition. As it was previously stated, the process of transposing a cello piece up two ^5 octaves so it could be played by the flute might result in serious incompatibility. The change of a bass line to treble could result in inverted counterpoint and chord structures, possibly depriving a piece of its harmonic foundation.

Changes of only one octave can have adverse results as well. For example, if the right hand of the piano part was doubling a violin part in the low register an octave above, and the violin part were raised an octave to make it playable on the flute, a unison doubling would occur along with a more barren texture. In a case like this, it might be advisable to transpose the right hand of the piano part down an octave to where the violin was originally in order to preserve the fullness of the original texture. Generally, a problematical situation will occur if the solo part is voiced in the middle of the texture. If the solo part is on top of the texture already, raising it an octave will usually not affect its compatibility with the piano part.

Works to be Considered for Flute Transcription Table 3 contains a list of works which are worthy of investigation as possibilities for flute transcription. These pieces were selected because they comply favorably with the requirements and ideals stated in this chapter. 46 Many other works by these composers were examined by the author, but were deemed unsuitable for further consider­ ation as possible flute transcriptions because they did not conform to the above criteria.

Table 3 Works by Prominent Nineteenth Century Composers Suitable for Flute Transcription Composer Work Beethoven Rondo in G major for violin and piano, WoO 41 (1794) Cello Sonata in g minor. Op. 5, No. 2 (1796) Violin Sonata in D major. Op. 12, No. 1 (1798) Violin Sonata in A major. Op. 12, No. 2 (1798) Violin Sonata in a minor. Op. 23 (1800) Violin Sonata in G major. Op. 30, No. 3 (1802) Violin Sonata m G major. Op. 96 (1812) Berlioz Reverie at caprice for violin and piano. Op. 8 (1841) Schubert Sonatina in D major for violin and piano, D. 384 (1816) Sonatina in g minor for violin and piano, D. 408 (1816) Rondo in b minor for violin and piano, D. 895 (1826) , Fantasia in C major for violin and piano, D. 934 (1827) ~ Weber Six Sonatas Progressives for violin and piano, J. 99-104 (1810) Schumann Phantasiestucke for clarinet and piano (violin or cello ad lib.). Op. 73 (1849) Fiinf Stiicke im Volkston for cello and piano (violin ad lib.). Op. 102 (1849) F.A.E. Sonata for violin and piano, second and fourth movements (1853) ^7 Table 3: continued Composer Work Mendelssohn Violin Sonata in f minor. Op. 4 (1823) Violin Sonata in F major (1838) Lied ohnonne Wortworxe imn D manomajor for cello and Tlano, Op. 109 (1845) Chopin Introduction and Polonaise in Cums u or for cello and piano, Op. 31 (1830) Cello Sonata, Op. T5 (1846) Brahms Violin Sonata No. 1 in G major. Op. 78 (1879) Violin Sonata No. 2 in A major. Op. 100 (1886) F.A.E. Sonata for violin and piano, third movement (1853) Dvorak Romance in f minor for violin and piano. Op. 11 (1873) Nocturne in B major for violin and piano Op. 40 (1875) Mazurek for violin and piano. Op. 49 (I879) Violin Sonata in F major, Op. 57 (1880) Romanticke kusy for violin and piano. Op. 75 (1887) Sonatina in G major for violin and piano. Op. 100 (1893) Elgar Romance for violin and piano. Op. 1 (1873) Une , pastourelle, et virelai for violin and piano. Op. 4 (1887) Mot d*, Bizarrerie for violin and piano. Op. 13 (1889) . for violin and piano. Op. 15 (1897) La cappricieuse for violin and piano. Op. 17 (1^91) Violin Sonata in e minor. Op. 82 (I9I8) Liszt Duo for violin and piano, S. 127 (1832) Zweite Elegie for violin and piano (cello ad lib.), S. 131 (1877) Romance oublie6 for viola and piano (violin or cello ad lib.), S. I32 (1880) La lugubre gondola for violin• anandd pianp: o (cello ad lib.), S. 134 (1882"^^ ) 2 Smetana Z domovinum)y —for violin and plan0— , T. 128 48 Table 3: continued Composer Work Tchaikovsky Souvenir d'un lieu cher for violin and piano. Op. 42 (1878) Saint-Saens Berceuse in Bb major for violin and piano. Op. 38 (1871) Violin Sonata No. 1 in d minor. Op. 75 (1885) Violin Sonata No. 2 in Eb major. Op. 102 (I896) Tryptique for violin and piano. Op. 136 (1912) Elegie for violin and piano. Op. l43 (1915) Elegie for violin and piano. Op. I60 (I921) Oboe Sonata, Op. 166 (1921) Faure Violin Sonata No. 1 in A major. Op. 13 (1876)^ Romance m Bb major for violin and piano. Op. 28 (1883) Violin Sonata No. 2 in e minor. Op. 108 (I916) R. Strauss Violin Sonata in Eb major. Op. 18 (I883)

Transcribed in conjunction with the following: Grant J. Cahoon, "A Flute Transcription: Franz Schubert's Fantasia in C Major for Violin and Piano, Op. 159»" thesis, Brigham Young University I98O. 2 Published during the course of this study as a flute transcription. -^Published during the course of this study as a flute transcription. CHAPTER V TRANSCRIPTIONS PREPARED FOR THIS STUDY

Three works from the list in the previous chapter have been transcribed for the flute in conjunction with this study: Felix Mendelssohn's Sonata in f minor for violin and piano. Op. 4, Antonin Dvorak's Sonatina in G major for violin and piano. Op. 100, and the F.A.E. Sonata for violin and piano, written jointly by Albert Dietrich, Robert Schumann, and Johannes Brahms. These pieces were selected for several reasons. First of all, they fit the criteria for selection discussed in the last chapter. Secondly, they are fairly substantial in length, suitable for presentation in a serious recital situation. The pieces selected were written over a period of seventy years: the Violin Sonata of Mendelssohn was written in 1823, the F.A.E. Sonata dates from 1853, and Dvorak's Sonatina was composed in 1893. Finally, the works chosen appeal to the musical taste and standards of the author.

Mendelssohn: Sonata in f minor. Op. 4 This sonata is a work of Mendelssohn's youth, composed in 1823 when he was fourteen years of age. As a result, the piece is rather simple in its structure and straight­ forward in its musical approach. As a whole, it is not virtuosic in nature, although it does contain short cadenzas 49 50 in both the solo and piano parts. This sonata is especially noteworthy in that it contains very few idiomatic traits for the violin, only one pizzicato chord and six multiple stops. The piece contains ample rest in the solo part, and the phrases are of a length easily playable on the flute. As a result of these traits, this sonata needed few alterations in order to be transcribed for the flute. By far, the most common change that needed to be made was raising the violin part an octave in places in order to either render those notes below the range of the flute play­ able, or to give the flute more dynamic potential. The piano part was not changed at all as the octave transposi­ tions did not cause any compatibility problems. The following section will highlight any interesting problems encountered in transcribing this piece for the flute. A complete listing of those changes made to the piece can be found in Appendix A, along with the resulting full score for flute and piano.

First Movement; Adagio-Allegro moderate The first problem occurs in the opening cadenza, measure one, because the b-flat is too low for the flute (Example 1). Transposing measures 1-5 up an octave not only brings this note into the flute range, but places the entire phrase into a range more appropriate for a flute cadenza. The indicated crescendo will occur naturally, and 51 a solid sforzando is now possible on the g-flat^.3. It would also be possible to play measures 6-9 an octave higher on the flute in order to keep the integrity of the cadenza as a whole, but the resulting d-flat is difficult to produce on the flute, as well as rather piercing in tone quality. Because the b-flat on the fourth beat of measure 5 is out of the flute range, it needs to be raised an octave, along with the tied note on the first beat of measure 6. The rest of the phrase can be played as is.

a. violin

Adagio i-fc ^

ad ttdit. Jtaeit.

p lento

b. flute

nd mil. JUrH.

p lant«

Example 1: Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, first movement, 1-9 52 In measures 41-49 the violin part falls between the hands of the piano part (Example 2). This is characteristic of violin writing, but not so of flute writing, where the flute is usually found at the top of the texture. In order to allow the flute to be more easily heard, especially in the forte section, this passage has been raised an octave.

a. violin

£ ^ ^m b. flute

Example 2: Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, first movement, 41-49 53 The turn in measure 213 requires the execution of a b (Example 3). Since many flutes in use today have a B-foot, this will not cause a problem for those players who own such an instrument. Those players without a B-foot can play measures 212 to the end an octave higher with no undesirable results.?0 ^

rit

Example 3' Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, first movement, 212-214

Second Movement: Poco adagio Much of the second movement has been raised an octave in the process of transcribing it for the flute. In all cases this was done because of the incompatibility of the low ranges of the violin and the flute. The octave trans­ position has not only rendered the music playable on the flute, but has put this movement into the flute's most lyri­ cal and expressive register. In certain cases, for example measures 58-65, the octave transposition has also enabled

20 The low b is also called for in measure 110 of the second movement and in measure 180 of the third movement. 54 the flute to be heard more easily against a very heavy piano part. The last two measures of this movement contain the first multiple stops encountered in this piece (Example 4). Since both the £ and e-flat cannot be played at once, one or the other must be chosen to be played on the flute. In the last measure the £ must be played because it supplies the third of the Ab major chord, the tonal center of the movement. The e-flat can be omitted since it is not necessary to insure the proper function of the chord. In the previous measure, on beats two and three, either the £ or the e-flat may be played since the arpeggio in the right hand of the piano part supplies all of the necessary pitches. The e-flat has been chosen for the flute part in this measure, since some melodic interest will be gained by the change from the e-flat to the c_ in the last measure-. It should also be noted that this phrase has been transposed up an octave to accommodate the b-flat and £ in measure 129-

Third Movement: Allegro agitato Octave transposition has been used in several instances in this movement for both range adjustment and to put the flute into a more sparkling register. Virtually the entire coda of the movement, from measure l8l to the end, has been raised an octave to enable the flute to sing out 55 a. violin

dimin.

b. flute

Example 4: Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, second movement, 129-131 above a very active piano part. This transposition will also add more brilliance to the accents. This movement contains the only pizzicato writing in the piece, the chord in measure 53 (Example 5). This chord has been adapted for the flute by writing the lower two notes as grace notes, raising the e-flat"^ an octave so that the resulting arpeggio is in closed position. An arpeggio in this position will respond more easily on the flute than one in open position, especially in a fast tempo. 56

a. violin b. flute

ptH.

laPr^n* iT ^ ^ fci 13=^ •£± ^ ? f 7 I gjniijj'n'ii ^^^^^m

Example 5: Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, third movement, 52-53

The only instance in this piece where actual pitches have been changed occurs in measures 152 and 153 (Example 6) The b-flat and a-flat are out of the range of the flute, but putting them or the entire phrase up an octave would destroy the contour of the section beginning in measure 114, which has been steadily lowering in range and lessening in intensity. Changing the last three notes of the violin part to a b-flat"^, e_^, and f^, respectively, allows the solo line to keep descending, and avoids any octave dis­ placement. Furthermore, the resulting b-flat to e_ continues the pattern of fifths begun in the second half of measure 151. These new notes do not change the harmony in any way, except for deleting the third of the chord from the first best of measure 152. This note is quickly supplied in the arpeggio in the left hand of the piano part, so in this rapid tempo, its momentary absence is hardly noticed. 57

a. violin b. flute

fefe L'^i ' y wt- ST ^ fcjz! m=^ 2=r > •> i 1 ^ |j T^ )i w ) I f^ 9 '^w >yJ^ ^^ ^ s '/^"l> ilrtJlTlJ di^ffMlfJ ^ ^ ^

Example 6: Mendelssohn Violin Sonata, third movement, 151-153

Conclusion Mendelssohn's Sonata in f minor. Op, 4, works very well as a flute transcription. The youthful charm and clarity of form of this work enable it to be musically gratifying for both listener and performer. The relative lack of technical difficulty renders this piece suitable for study by the advanced high school student, as well as by college students or professional performers. The sonata can be studied and performed in its entirety, or the second movement can be studied or performed alone. The beautiful and lyrical melodies of the second movement make it especially useful as a vehicle for teaching phrasing and the use of tone color. This sonata, although it is relatively ignored in the violin repertory, serves as a useful addition to the flute repertoire. 58 Dvorak; Sonatina in G major. Op. 100 The sonatina is a mature work of Dvorak, written for his children in 1893 during his tenure as the director of the National Conservatory in New York. The American flavor of the New World Symphony can be heard in the first two movements of the piece, especially in the second, which was also published separately under the title of "Indian Canzonetta," albeit without the composer's permission. The third and fourth movements favor Dvorak's national heritage, containing Slavic themes and rhythms. This piece is a standard in the violin repertoire, and its charm and lyricism make it an appealing target for a flute tran­ scription. The transcription process for this piece was much more involved than that of the Mendelssohn. As a whole, this work required a similar amount of octave transposition, but contained more multiple stops, tremolos, and idiomatic string writing which needed to be adapted for the flute. In several instances, the piano part has been changed to either avoid unison doubling with the solo part, or to include certain notes from multiple stops which cannot be played on the flute, but which are harmonically important. The following section will discuss the most interesting problems encountered in transcribing this piece for the flute. A complete list of the changes made, along with the resulting full score for flute and piano, can be found 59 in Appendix B.

First Movement: Allegro risoluto The first major change in the first movement is necessitated by the double stops in the violin part in measures 72-76 (Example 7). The repeated b-flat and d_^ provide harmonic support for the melody in the left hand of the piano part, but only the d^ can be played on the flute. Beginning in measure 72 through the first beat of measure 75, the b-flat can be put into the right hand of the piano part, and then changed to the left hand on the second eighth note of measure 75 for the rest of the bar. The b-flat is already doubled on the first beat of measure 76 when the piano takes over both notes of this repeated note figure while the violin rests. Although the color change in the flute version is not as great as in the original, the passage can still be effective with proper balance between the flute and piano parts on the repeated notes.

The first instance of octave transposition in this movement occurs in measures 116-134, where the recapitu­ lation of the movement begins. The dynamic level at the beginning of the movement is mezzo-forte where it is forte in measure ll6. Raising the solo part an octave at this point not only makes this effect easier to produce, but also offers a change of color from the exposition of the 60 piece. In addition, the a on the second beat of measure 130 is also brought into range.

a. violin

b. flute

Example 7: Dvorak Sonatina, first movement, 72-76

The other section of this movement which contains octave transposition of the solo part occurs from measure 163-174. Although there are no range problems in this passage, raising the flute part an octave provides more intensity for the fortissimo dynamic level. This creates a problem, however, from measure 17I-I74 by creating a unison doubling with the right hand of the piano part (Example 8). Dropping the right hand of the piano part an octave will not only solve this problem but will also 61 preserve the fullness of the original texture

a. violin

^ •0"»' -^

^^ ^ m ^ ff JS j^ ^ ^=« Mfr 'F^ s ^

b. flute

Example 8: Dvorak Sonatina, first movement, 171-174

Second Movement: Larghetto Measures 29-32 of this movement contain double stops in the original violin part which serve as an accompaniment to the thematic material in the right hand of the piano part (Example 9). Both notes are doubled in the left hand of the piano part so the harmonic importance of the double stops is not critical, but they do add rhythmic interest to this passage. In the transcription, the flute part 62 alternates the two pitches of the double stops while preserving the rhythm of the original figure.

a. violin

b. flute

Example 9: Dvorak Sonatina, second movement, 29-32

Harmonic considerations are of prime importance when transcribing the double stops in measures 80-83 for the flute (Example 10). In measures 80 and 82 the lower note, d can be safely deleted because it is merely doubling the upper note an octave lower. In measures 81 and 83, however, the e-flat . which is not present in the piano part, is mandatory to the function of the German augmented 63 sixth chord. The e-flat"^ has been added to the tremolo in the right hand of the piano part, preserving the harmonic function of these measures. In addition, measures 82 and 83 have been transposed up an octave, the grace note being added as a substitute for the lower note of the double stop as well as to help facilitate a smooth connection for the change of octave. This octave transposition is necessary in order to preserve the contour of the following phrase which ends on a £, out of the range of the flute.

a. violin

b. flute

Example 10: Dvorak Sonatina, second movement, 80-83 64 Third Movement: Scherzo Although virtually all of the violin part of this movement falls within the range of the flute, the entire solo part has been transposed up an octave for the flute transcription. The tone quality and responsiveness of the upper two registers of the flute are much more suitable for a scherzo than that of the lowest, which tends to be some­ what sluggish in a rapid tempo. This octave transposition has created problems in two places with the piano part, in measures 9-l6 and 48-55, by creating unison doublings with the right hand (Example 11). The original texture has been restored by dropping the right hand of the piano part an octave in these two passages.

a. violin

-r Tr \i'T~'nr^ 11 I I ill cresc.rsc. '"/ fi,,e.

flute

Fine.

•&^ ^m i m u ^ Fine. .-H ^'.r. i 't I I ^^ ^ I ^

^ y Example 11: Dvorak Sonatina, third movement, kd-55 65 The accompanimental figure in measures 17-31 of the violin part has also been altered in the transcription process (Example 12). The widely spaced intervals are easily produced on the violin by changing strings with the 11 p bow, since the d_ and a^ are open strings and the f-sharp is played on the E string. The execution of this type of pattern in a rapid tempo is more awkward for the flutist because the embouchure must be altered slightly for each large interval. By revoicing this pattern so that it falls almost entirely within the middle register of the flute range, it can be played quite easily on the flute, and the exuberant spirit of this movement is more easily maintained.

a. violin

b. flute

Example 12: Dvorav^^k Sonatina, third movement, 17-32 66 Fourth Movement: Finale The sonatina as a whole contains few extended rests for the soloist. In fact, no rests occur at all in the second and third movements. As a result, endurance prob­ lems can occur for the flutist in performance. In antici­ pation of this condition, two additional long rests have been added to the solo part in the fourth movement, in measures 13O-I36 and 317-325 (Example 13). In both cases the original violin part contains an accompanimental figure of syncopated repeated notes. The left hand of the piano part in these instances also has an accompani­ mental figure of eighth notes. The second and fourth notes of each measure of this piano figure double exactly, with one exception, the syncopated figure in the violin part. In the flute transcription, the violin part has been omitted entirely in these sections, resulting in a color change, but in no loss of rhythmic or harmonic integrity. In measure 133, the exception noted above, the eighth note figure does not occur in the original piano part, but has been added to the transcription in order to continue this pattern throughout the passage. The corresponding section in measures 319-325 does not require this change as the eighth note pattern is present throughout. 67

a. violin

b. flute

Example 13: Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, 130-136

Measures I66-I67 contain a tremolo in the violin part (Example 14). In the flute transcription this has been deleted. The resulting notes in the flute part are merely sustained and have been tied together. The flute part in the passage preceeding and including these measures has also been raised an octave. a. violin b. flute

Example l4: Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, I66-I67 68 In measures 267-272 octave transposition of the solo part has resulted in a unison doubling with the right hand of the piano part. As has been the case in previous situations, the right hand of the piano part has been dropped an octave in order to preserve the original texture (Example 15).

a. violin

b.. flute

^•- A yi yi^ y» ^ -j''j-* L[.'h^ i h\ii j.ii~\, r^ir.i

Example 15: Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, 267-272

The descending line in the violin part in measures 335-341 ends on a g, out of the range of the flute. Octave transposition of this entire phrase would not be appropriate because the transposed passage would fall mostly in the highest register of the flute range. 69 resulting in a tone quality too brilliant for this quiet passage (Example 16). Thus, in the flute transcription only the last four notes of the phrase have been raised an octave, preserving the original contour of the phrase, but bringing- the last note into the range of the flute.

a. violin Tempo I.

b. flute

Tempo I.

Example l6: Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, 335-341

The final portion of the movement, measures 362-376, contains continuous sixteenth notes in the violin part (Example 17)- While these can be played by the flute, a passage of this length offers the flutist no opportunity to breathe, and the passage will lack somewhat in intensity as a result. In order to facilitate the appropriate impact of 70 this section in the flute transcription, several changes have been made to the original violin part. The repeated sixteenth notes in measures 362-368 have been reduced to their melodic basis of quarter and eighth notes. Measures 367 to the end have been raised an octave in order to take advantage of the brilliant upper register of the flute. The flute part does contain the original sixteenth notes in measures 369-376 as this section is short enough for the flutist to maintain maximum intensity. The multiple stops in the last three measures have also been necessarily altered in order to make them playable on the flute. The results of these changes can also be seen in this example.

a. violin

fz fz r=

T ^p.^ F«i*.f-ii*j_ ii*>*"i^<_ !)*<_ r^

fiu mosso

b. flute

"7= Ji ^

fia mtto

Example 17 J Dvorak Sonatina, fourth movement, 362-end 71 Conclusion Dvorak's Sonatina in G major. Op. 100, is extremely successful as a flute transcription. Its indisputable beauty and charm make the piece enjoyable for performers and listeners alike. This piece is much more demanding, from both a technical and endurance standpoint, than the Mendelssohn Violin Sonata. The work would probably be most appropriate for study and performance by somewhat mature performers, either college students or professionals. The third movement could, however, be performed alone quite successfully by an accomplished high school student. This piece is most deserving of a place among the standard flute repertoire, not just as a representative of the nineteenth century repertory, but as a fine composition by a great composer.

F.A.E. Sonata The F.A.E. Sonata is an interesting work from both a historical and musical standpoint. It was composed as a gift for the violinist Joseph Joachim at the suggestion of Robert Schumann. The sonata was presented to Joachim at a concert on October 27, 1853. The first movement was written by Albert Dietrich, a pupil of Schumann's, the second and fourth movements were written by Schumann himself, and the third movement was written by Johannes Brahms. The letters in the title, F.A.E., were taken 72 from Joachim's motto "Frei Aber Einsam" (free, yet lonely) and were to designate the pitches used for the thematic material of the work. The motive appears in all movements except for the third, where for some unknown reason, Brahms declined to employ it. This piece was chosen for flute transcription for several reasons. First, it offers the opportunity to deal with the music of three different composers. Secondly, the work is very amenable to transcription for the flute. Finally, the circumstances of its composition give it a unique place in musical history. The following section will highlight the most interesting problems encountered in transcribing the F.A.E. Sonata for the flute. A complete list of those editorial changes made can be found in Appendix C, along with the full score for flute and piano.

First Movement: Allegro (Dietrich) This movement as a whole required relatively few alterations in the process of transcription for the flute. Some octave transposition was necessary in order to bring certain passages into the range of the flute or to provide more projection for the solo part. Several articulations have been changed. In most cases this was not because they were unsuitable to the flute itself, but because the movement was inconsistent in its articulation of 73 similar passages. Those changes made are minor, but provide for a more cohesive performance. Idiomatic passages for the violin in measures 113-116 necessitated alterations to adapt them for the flute (Example 18). It is rather awkward for the flutist to execute the articulation required in measure 113, beats three and four, so the sixteenth note doubling has been left out in the flute version and the eight note triplets are performed straight. The repeated f-sharps in measures 114-116 are uncharacteristic of flute writing and would not be very effective in performance. A trill on the upper note of the double stop has been substituted for this figure. It will provide the necessary intensity of sound in a manner which is more characteristic of flute technique.

a. violin

b. flute

Example 18: F.A.E. Sonata, first movement, 113-116 74 The octave b's in the violin part in measures 130-137 require alteration in transcription for the flute (Example 19). Since the previous phrase ends on b_, this note is sustained in measures I3O-I33. The diminuendo to the subsequent pianissimo in measures 133-134 makes it desir­ able to drop the flute an octave to b_ in measure 134. This change of octave also gives the flutist a necessary opportunity to breathe.

a. violin

dim. s M ^^ ^ i a^SsE *> •# ^^ » 11] f jrp dim. • »"4 iCE l I ! I I -»• ^m 3^ ^^^ # # # T^ # •# jjjj^J f TT # * *

SSVT9S8,

Example 19: F.A.E. Sonata, first movement, 129-137 75

b. flute

W i .li i • - i'J'J'i'i'i"i'i'J'4 ^^

i i 'i'i 'Ji|J4}|i J

Example 19: continued

Second Movement: Intermezzo (Schumann) Only one change was made to the second movement in transcribing it for the flute. Measures 31-43 have been transposed up an octave. This change puts all notes into the range of the flute and also intensifies the crescendi in measures 34 and 40. The resulting color change of this octave transposition also adds greatly to the effectiveness of this movement in performance. 76 Third Movement: Allegro (Brahms) The opening of this movement, measures 1-11, is too low for the flute, so it has been raised an octave by necessity (Example 20). In addition, the forte dynamic level and the overall character of the piece require very crisp articulation in the first two measures. This is not easily done on the flute on g_, so these two measures have been raised an additional octave to insure clarity of articulation and rhythm. All similar passages through­ out the movement have been treated in the same manner, with the exception of measures l40-l43. In these measures, the return of the opening section, the dynamic level is piano, thus enabling the flutist to effectively play g_ in this passage. Many other instances of octave transposition occur in this movement. The heavy piano part and character of the themes in measures 32-52 and I66-I87 render them much more effective if played in the upper register of the flute. The same is true of the coda of the piece, from measure 238 to the end (Example 21). In addition, the multiple stops in measures 238, 256, 257, and 258 have been revoiced and arpeggiated as grace notes leading to the upper note of the chord. This has not been done in measure 254 because the resulting grace notes would inter­ fere with the conclusion of the trill in the previous measure. 77

b. flute

Allefro

\^\%\t'-'^l •'ill I i^~'< 'till *' I . . ! . •••!•.'?< P7

jitt,^f f i5l!: #*T=^ ^^ ¥ ^^I ^ ==i- .^^-!.-:.=£» -^-' ^ 5 S ^^W^ 1 m

Example 20: F.A.E. Sonata, third movement, 1-11 78 a. violin

b. flute

Example 21: F.A.E. Sonata, third movement, 238-end 79 Fourth Movement: Finale (Schumann) This movement, by far, demanded the most changes of any in this study when transcribing it for the flute. It was necessary to raise much of the violin part an octave in order to enable the flute to cut through a rather thick piano part. The movement also contains several multiple stops which had to be adapted in various ways. In partic­ ular, the solo part of the coda of the movement had to be entirely reworked so it could be played on the flute. The following example shows how many of the multiple stops have been treated in the flute transcription (Example 22). The chords have been revoiced from open to closed position and written as grace notes to the highest pitch. This type of musical material occurs in measures 2, 6, 8, 57, 58, 82, 86, 88, 137, and 138.

a. violin

Markiertes, ziemlich lebhaftes Tempo

^ ^^ i5i ^J\ i f

b. flute

Markiertes, ziemlich lebhaftes Tempo

Example 22: F.A.E. Sonata, fourth movement, 1-2 80 The pizzicato chords in measures k7'k'9 and 127-129 have been deleted entirely from the flute transcription (Example 23). Attempts at treating them in a manner similar to the previous example or in playing only the upper note of the chord proved to be unsuccessful. The resulting three measures of rest for the flute in both cases are welcome indeed to the performer who plays virtually non-stop during the rest of the movement.

pus.

Example 23: F.A.E. Sonata, fourth movement, 47-49, violin

Measures 143 to the end of the movement form a virtuosic coda for the soloist, the only section of this type in the entire sonata. This section was undoubtedly written as a tribute to Joachim's virtuosity on the violin, and it needed extensive revision to be performed success­ fully on the flute. There are several distinct problems in adapting this section for the flutist. First of all, many of the scale and arpeggio figures include notes below the range of the flute. Also, in many instances, there is 81 no opportunity for the flutist to breathe. Lastly, in some instances too many notes are present in too short of a time to be practical for accurate execution on the flute. Rather than describing each change in detail, both parts, the original violin version along with the revised flute part, can be seen in the following example (Example 24). An attempt has been made to preserve as much of the character of the original violin part as possible while keeping the resulting flute part within the bounds of feasibility for performance.

Conclusion Of the three pieces transcribed for this study, the F.A.E. Sonata is the least successful when performed in its entirety. The first movement is quite lengthy and rather out of proportion to the rest of the work. The last movement is somewhat unimaginative compositionally, and, in the author's opinion, would not be any more enhanced in performance in its original form than in the flute version. The two middle movements, however, are well written and can be performed quite successfully as a pair or separately. The second movement can be easily played as a short solo by the high school student. The third movement is more technically challenging, but is very suitable for the college student. Both movements, as well, can be enjoyed by the professional performer as representative works in NN-^

32 a. violin

F.A.E. Sonata, fourth movement, l46-end 83

b.' flute

Example 24: continued 84 the styles of their respective composers and are deserving of a place in the nineteenth century flute repertoire. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baines, Anthony. Woodwind Instruments and their History. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1962. Bate, Phillip. The Flute: A Study of its History, Devel­ opment, and Construction. Rev. ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1979. Boehm, Theobald. The Flute and Flute Playing in Acoustical, Technical, and Artistic Aspects. Trans. Dayton C. Miller. New York: Dover Publications, 1964. Boyd, Malcolm. "Arrangement." The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. London: MacMillan, I98O. Brown, Howard Mayer. "Flute." The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. London: MacMillan, I98O. Cahoon, Grant J. "A Flute Transcription: Franz Schubert's Fantasia in C Major for Violin and Piano, Op. 159." Thesis. Brigham Young University I98O. Carse, Ad^m. The History of Orchestration. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1925. DeLorenzo, Leonard. My Complete Story of the Flute. New York: Citadel Press Inc., 1951. Fitzgibbon, H. Macaulay. The Story of the Flute. 2nd ed. rev. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, I928. Kennan, Kent W. The Technique of Orchestration. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1970. National Flute Association. Music Library Catalog. 3rd ed. Ed. Ronald L. Wain. NFA, 1985- Pellerite, James. A Handbook of Literature for the Flute. 3rd ed. Bloomington, In.: Zalo Publications, 1978. Pierreuse, Bernard. Flute Literature. Paris: Editions Musicales Transatlantiques, I982. Rockstro, Richard S. A Treatise on the Construction, the History, and the Practice of the Flute. 2nd ed. rev. 1928; rpt. London: Musica Rara, I967.

85 86 Toff, Nancy. The Development of the Modern Flute. New York: Taplinger Publishing Co., 1979. Vester, Franz. Flute Repertoire Catalogue: 10,000 Titles. London: Musica Rara, I967. APPENDIX A

MENDELSSOHN: SONATA IN F MINOR. OP. 4 TRANSCRIPTION FOR FLUTE AND PIANO

87 88 List of Alterations 21

First Movement Measure(s) Comments 1-6 solo part, octave higher 25-26 solo part, octave higher 41-49 solo part, octave higher 2 94-97 solo part, octave higher except for b-flat in measure 96 98-102 solo part, octave higher 113-118 solo part, octave higher 123-136 solo part, octave higher 146-147 solo part, d2, b-flat, and £, octave higher

Second Movement Measure(s) Comments 20-26 solo part, octave higher 58-65 solo part, octave higher 72-87 solo part, octave higher 92-108 solo part, octave higher 115-end solo part, octave higher

21 The following edition was used as a basis for the transcription: Felix Mendelssohn, Sonata in f minor for Violin and Piano, Op. 4, ed. Friederich Hermann (Frankfort C.F. Peters, n.d.). 89 Second Movement: continued Measure(s) Comments 121 solo part, articulation changed 130 solo part, articulation changed, lower note deleted from the double stops 131 solo part, upper note deleted from the double stop

Third Movement Measure(s) Comments 29-31 solo part. octave higher 37-43 solo part. octave higher 49-50 solo part. articulation changed 53 solo part, pizzicato chord revoiced and written as grace notes to upper note 57-58 solo part. articulation changed 61-63 solo part. octave higher 67-76 solo part. octave higher 84-122 solo part. octave higher 152-153 solo part, g-'- changed to b-flat"^, b-flat changed to eT, a, changed to Xi 166-171 solo part. octave higher 173-175 solo part. octave higher 182-194 solo part. octave higher 200-215 solo part. octave higher 214-215 solo part, lower note deleted from double stops 90

SONATE

Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy (1809-1847) op. 4

Flute

Piano

6 ^ Allegro moderato

ritard. ^ M ^ IJ j ^^ tjjs ^^j lljj ^3E P

rilmnl. 91

d»ie* A . a tempotempo , i tZ^ ^ ^ zac it^ig^r"^ Jl" jjJJIlJJJJ m ^ ^ g

irfki S" J'i> f I ^ ^ ^ ^N JlJJliJiiJ ^

48 ^^^^^^ I i-mm 92

80 IfA? |i.|''"^ - ^ r ^ ^'fr,ri,i|i, .i„j„|, I O in I iTi ' I ei>pr^i»mt9 3 m -»- ^4*- i \i ^S u •J * - in '«•- -«- ::>«»£ i^m xc

86 ^^^^^^ I I I II ^^^^ •s==& I _ ii ^^^ iJ^'Lxar ^s p J 'Tij I \\m Jj 93

105

^^ ^rfffffTM J"in' I £ m f^'fiTi

^^ ^ ^i m ^ i ^ ? ^^ E 124Ir- ^ ^ r ir r r r rr r r r ir /»ro r»/. 4 ttmpo te \t rrrrrrvr^pr f^W^'rrf r f f * i*^Sp F^-" * ^ tempo

^ ^^^^ ^ ^ i

129

J J .^J J U i ^^ ^^ 94

144

150 [J ii' >_ i-O rTS^^^^^^^^^ ^ £ (J'";M f ?= g P ^= yrh- # r> S ^ ^^ I ^l-V J^>T ^ fe ? 5 aempre f 95

162

180 96 97

Pooo adagio 98 99

I'' JJJJJJJJ 100 101

102

106

110 102

114

V 'H ;'•* < i^^^^m fljJUjIj ^^

118

121 103

Allegro agitato ^ ^^ f'-\h\nf' i '•""^rfirrQ^ ^m ^m ^ r."j'i> Ii ^i M ^ ^ ^^ I ^ p-* ^^ ^ 4-=-

^^^ • • • • L -^ i|j' iTrriTi' IJ' jllLI. 4lJjjjJU.lJLJJJiJjlfV^^'-"l i 104

3^

d ^ ^Ni ^5i s ^ J' I Ml n ^p ^ yr 4'- 11 I r^ TZJB. ^ ^ ¥ # ¥ » # V J Tf 7 ^ i i ^ ±± i ? ^ ?

Aj-l

PC aE ^ Ea ^5E )i 'i^'' nrvjiv^^^i r p ? •r p •r ^'^l m iq J V . ^ ? ^^ P m ^^^^^^m

rl^rjiH^Ci:;!^^ 105

^^J^CTT^ 106

10? ,j>'i,i r f I','if r-j' f T—r rn^ *ri

i^ ^ =F=?= ^ 1=? ^ # KTC ^ r^ m ^ w '>^"l> J ^ i s ^ rui; ^ ^ ±i ^ ^=^ 112

117 107

123

130

137

1^^

151 108

150

j'''"'Jiii|'il'!/|'iflti'|'F^'?| j^iJiJl.Q

>"^h> j\f y > y li^^^ ?^3E ±* Cyrt T^ N'T ^ ^A 'r ^ i ^ P ^ 109

191

197

202

208

214 APPENDIX B

DVORAK: SONATINA IN G MAJOR, OP. 100 TRANSCRIPTION FOR FLUTE AND PIANO

110 22 111 List of Alterations

First Movement Measure(s) Comments 3 solo part, articulation changed 11 solo part, articulation changed 14 solo part, articulation changed 26 solo part, articulation changed 30 solo part, articulation changed 42 solo part, articulation changed 55 solo part, articulation changed 70 solo part, articulation changed 72-76 solo part, lower note of double stops deleted 72-74 piano part, repeated b-flat added to right hand 75 piano part, repeated b-flat added to left hand 86 solo part, articulation changed 97 solo part, articulation changed II6-I34 solo part, octave higher 118 solo part, articulation changed 126 solo part, articulation changed 132-I34 solo part, articulation changed

22,Th e following edition was used as a basis for the transcription: Antonin Dvorak, Sonatina in G major for Violin and Piano, Op. 100 (Londonl Simrock, 189^). 112 First Movement: continued Measure(s) Comments 141 solo part, articulation changed 143 solo part, articulation changed 145 solo part, articulation changed 157 solo part, articulation changed 159 solo part, articulation changed 161 solo part, articulation changed 163-174 solo part, octave higher 166 solo part, lower note of double stop deleted 167-168 solo part, lower notes of double stops deleted 171-174 piano part, right hand octave lower 183-187 solo part, octave higher

Second Movement Measure(s) Comments solo part, articulation changed 2 solo part, articulation changed 4 solo part, articulation changed 6 solo part, articulation changed 9 solo part, articulation changed 10 solo part, articulation changed 12 solo part, articulation changed 29-32 solo part, double stops changed to alternation of pitches in same rhythmic pattern 37 solo part, articulation changed 113 Second Movement: continued Measure(s) Comments 38 solo part, articulation changed 56-58 solo part, lower notes of double stops deleted, articulation changed 72-75 solo part, articulation changed 80 solo part, lower note of double stop deleted 81 solo part, lower note of double stop deleted 81 piano part, e-flat added to tremolo in right hand 82-87 solo part, octave higher 82 solo part, lower note of double stop written as grace note 83 piano part, e-flat added to tremolo in right hand 85 solo part, articulation changed

Third Movement Measure(s) Comments 1-16 solo part, octave higher 9-16 piano part, right hand octave lower 17-31 solo part, eighth note figures revoiced with most notes an octave higher 32-55 solo part, octave higher 48-55 piano part, right hand octave lower 56-63 solo part, octave higher 64-85 solo part, octave higher 114 Fourth Movement Measure(s) Comments 21 solo part, articulation changed 29 solo part, articulation changed 84-103 solo part, octave higher 89 solo part, lower note of double stop deleted I3O-I36 solo part, deleted 133 piano part, eighth note figure continued as in previous measures I58-I97 solo part, octave higher I66-I67 solo part, tremolo deleted, notes sustained and tied 247 solo part, articulation changed 250 solo part, articulation changed 267-292 solo part, octave higher 267-273 piano part, right hand octave lower 279 solo part, lower note of double stop deleted 319-325 solo part, deleted 338-341 solo part, octave higher 362-368 solo part, repeated sixteenth notes reduced to principal note values 367-end solo part, octave higher 377 solo part, lower notes of triple stop deleted 378 solo part, lower notes of triple stop revoiced and written as grace notes 379 solo part, lower note of double stop deleted 115 SONATINA.

I. Antoa Dvorak, Op. 100. Allegro riaolDta Flute

^^ Piano i'i^Ji;\''i'ii\iii ^ ^^^ ^ ^ ^p £ m i I ^ 116

rf -J -~» --s» ^' 117

76

izf^Ufc LJLflL ["^"^ Tr 11 r±^^.\A±^f_l.P fP . if m 118

126 119

15Z 120

175

** J.iJ. Ji ^^ ?^ m ^ i tm. 1^ J! m ^m ^ ^ ^ i ^ 1 s i i ¥ Z i £

n/«r«. im t»wip9 •m* wmdt» immqmiiU m^ dfc i im ^ W ritnrd. m./em^oma /to tnmquiUo ?p U- mi i ^^ A ^^ ^^ ^ ^ /I

^2 r:\ ^ ^ ^^ ^ -»T- ^ «a. *

^ * 121

n.

Larghetto. 122 123

Foco pin mosao.

»iJ7m w tmrn ••WMvr ^—amr. 1=ff?} ^i ^ m w H ¥

^ ^ ^ ^ £ i t^ ^ar F r ^

56 Menombsso, Tempo I.

^ ^^ i '•' '^ '.' I w Mt» £ ^«=T g ^ 124 125

Scherzo. Multo vivace. m. 126

i za > : ^ ^m ^ ^ £ i^^^ ^m ;c » #

^^ i ^^ z ^ ^ ^ i ^ f

D. C. Scherzo al Fine. 127

IV. Finale. Allegrro.

i ^ m m i^^^%^ m•9 S ^m=^mp V tup i m mm% ^ 0 ^ m

i i^rt ^^ w ^e ^ S s^ s a ^ i >! V ;i V 128

IH tempo rifiird.

38 f m I (f r I I i $ m a i i^ i ^ ^ nP ^

^ m ^ * ^ • ^W 129 130

106 Molto tranqnilTo.

118

130

139 131 si I 132

218

224 ^ 133

232

251

m ttmpo 3^^ ^ :iv Jiv s g* ^

^ ' g "^ ,fi ^ ^^ 25.7 134 135

295 136 APPENDIX C

DIETRICH, SCHUMANN, AND BRAHMS: F.A.E. SONATA TRANSCRIPTION FOR FLUTE AND PIANO

137 138 List of Alterations2^ -^

First Movement Measure(s) Comments 10 solo part, articulation changed 19-26 solo part, octave, higher 59-60 solo part, articulation changed 67-72 solo part, octave higher 87-90 solo part, octave higher 105 solo part, articulation changed 113 solo part, repeated sixteenth notes reduced to primary note values 114-117 solo part, repeated eighth note triplets changed to sustained trill, lower notes of double stops deleted I3O-I33 solo part, lower notes of double stops deleted I34-I37 solo part, upper notes of double stops deleted 139 solo part, articulation changed 15O-I5I solo part, articulation changed I54-I55 solo part, articulation changed 176-I85 solo part, octave higher 190 solo part, articulation changed 192 solo part, articulation changed

23 The following edition was used as a basis for the transcription: Dietrich, Schumann, and Brahms, F.A.E. Sonata for Violin and Piano (New York: Heinrichshofen, 1935). 139 First Movement: continued Measure(s) Comments 204-211 solo part, octave higher 206-207 solo part, articulation changed 224 solo part, articulation changed 238-261 solo part, octave higher 240-241 solo part, articulation changed 244-245 solo part, articulation changed 275-279 solo part, octave higher 299 solo part, articulation changed

Second Movement Measure(s) Comments 31-43 solo part, octave higher

Third Movement Measure(s) Comments

1-2 solo part, two octaves higher 3-11 solo part, octave higher 8 solo part, lower notes of double stops deleted 30 solo part, two octaves higher 32-52 solo part, octave higher 78-84 solo part, octave higher 81 solo part, lower notes of double stops deleted 140-150 solo part, octave higher 147 solo part, lower notes of double stops deleted 140

Third Movement: continued Measure(s) Comments 166-187 solo part, octave higher 213-219 solo part, octave higher 216 solo part, lower notes of double stops deleted 238-end solo part, octave higher 238 solo part, lower notes of chord revoiced and written as grace notes

25^-255 solo part, lower notes of chord deleted 256-259 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes

Fourth Movement Measure(s) Comments 1-24 solo part, octave higher 1 solo part, articulation changed 2 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes 6 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes

8 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes

34-37 solo part, octave higher 44-46 solo part, octave higher 44 solo part, articulation changed 47-49 solo part, pizzicato chords deleted 56-78 solo part, octave higher 57 solo part, repeated thirty-second notes reduced to sixteenth notes I4l Fourth Movement: continued Measure(s) Comments 57-58 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes 75 solo part, repeated thirty-second notes reduced to sixteenth notes 75-76 solo part, lower notes of chords deleted 79-81 solo part, lower notes of chords deleted 81-104 solo part, octave higher 81 solo part, articulation changed 82 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes 86 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes 88 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes 112-117 solo part, octave higher 121 solo part, articulation changed 124-126 solo part, octave higher 127-129 solo part, pizzicato chords deleted I37-I38 solo part, octave higher 137 solo part, repeated thirty-second notes reduced to sixteenth notes, lower notes of chord on third beat deleted, lower notes of chord on beat four revoiced and written as grace notes 138 solo part, lower notes of chords revoiced and written as grace notes 145 solo part, beats three and four octave higher l46-end solo part, substantially rewritten, see Chapter V, Example 24 142

F. A. E.

Albert Dietrich AllSfTO Flute

Piano 143

<«U)L • ^ «ii 'Sul 144 145 146

105 T4

jjN iM m'

* <«a. 147

U ijii i \ii i^ n\im jii '" i ^j 'i 'Ji'J 'J i 'i 'J 'i 'i 'i' U^i^i^i^i^i^'Jl-'PJQ-'pp P 148

150

155

160 ^ '' ^ rf^''^-ofitato ^ ^ ^i^^'^j^'O^h'O^rirnvirii a^iimio 149

171

l?5

181 ii ^m jujt r J ^ ^ ^ i [a/tffliipol ^ ^ = ^ .fl*^ ^ ^ :z 188 150

200

206

211

217

223 151

229 152

264 153

287

290

MiM^inS I ^iLi^jm^ 293 i-iterA

njJ'S^;LIiL 299

^»'S«a. 154

302

305 ^

310

j! J ^ iJjJjTHB ^^^^ i ^ ^^ P Jf PP Ulk •liTTjrJ ^^ 3^£ • I • ^g xc ? ^

.£2=1 iJ_^S Ji I ^ 5S 3 J*s * * Ms m M ^ d m ^^S ^ PP 319. 155

n Intermezzo

Robert Schumann DKt,

Bewegt,doch nicht zn schneil 156

13. n?

£ € M n [!r3^ ^^W s J i Ii I TT i a5" 157

n 'Ml f I' iik, 158

Ailcfro Johannes Brahms 159 160

Jtpoco tpoeo ^im g>,^ir75> •

  • ,\\\\ n'iMF ,>';|^ 'fif' J11||i Lu'ir 'I'r s5=3= iiii4 ' liiU Ijlli Uiii lijJi Ijiij: 999 #. ^999.' 9999- 9999. 9-*99. -^it-m-^ 161 162

    126 163 164

    192

    198

    t ^^ fffritiTfr ^m ^ ppto a pof dim.

    ^ w w w 204

    210

    tdt i V t E^ ^ $ I f >if|F iJTi ^^ CT9SCm ^^s^m 9±z ^iriT^ ^A^.Alf' •4-^- 165

    222 ~1. 166

    IV Finale Markiertes, zMmlicta lebhaftes Tempo Robert Schumann

    Markiertes, ziemlich lebhaftes Tempo

    r f

    -oj i m i^^ '§^ ^ :5 < 167 168

    '•^" t h V J iJ J' V f i;i J ^ p y J) ^^ =^^^ •) J' • ^ i. J .169

    ..Ht^-g . f , f ,^

    5fe ^^ ^ 'ff "•TJjiJ ^ •^ s, • --^^L-v 3=I« ^ •y t y •* 1 •> f I J I 5=^ & f ^ f J r^i; r I n 170

    jllj.,. ^,v^. iW^^ 171

    ^^ y » * 172

    102 ie* £ m m i f^^m^ ^^

    ^^ •l"l»^.j,.l f ^ 173

    112

    116

    120

    i II" J ' ' Ij^^ Jg J'^ iJ'M J j^% 124 . > _ ......

    if''j'j,j.j,|].i,^'^^ I ^"^1" j ^ J J. j,^^^^^^^

    128 174

    ',«¥ j f -f 175 176