2020. 2. 26. 09:54ㆍ카테고리 없음
Hi Chris,I still believe I'm right about Rachmaninoff writing his own piano transcription of 'Vocalise', although it is not mentioned in Maurice Hinson's 'The Pianist's Guide to Transcriptions, Arrangements and Paraphrases' which is usually highly reliable. Here is an excerpt I just lifted off the internet at answers.com. Link:'Rachmaninov wrote Vocalise for voice and piano, not setting a text to it, unlike the other songs in the Op. It immediately became popular, and the composer fashioned several transcriptions of the work, including one for piano and another for orchestra. In a sense, the orchestral version is the better of these two, because its string-dominated scoring more effectively captures the sustained sonorities of the original. That said, Rachmaninov, a brilliant composer of piano music and virtuoso pianist himself, compensated for his instrument's non-sostenuto tone by the scaling down textures and adding pedal runs and other coloristic effects.'
Vocalise, Daisies and Lilacs comprise his only three transcriptions of his own songs.David. Very interesting. I would like to see that transcription! I recorded the Richardson transcription some years ago, it's very good but I would have preferred Rach's own version if I had it.I just can't believe that at least half a dozen pianists and composers had the temerity to want to improve on Rachmaninov's own transcription. Rachmaninov was a transcriber pur sang - witness Lilacs and Daisies, absolutely perfect gems, not to mention his transcriptions of other composers.
Or has this one maybe only come to light recently, and did guys like Kocsis and Wild not know about it? Seems unlikely to me. H Chris,My sense is that Wild, who like Horowitz, had delved into the piano literature far wider and deeper than most pianists, was probably well aware of Rachmaninoff's own transcription of 'Vocalise'. But I think the answer.com write-up offers a clue. I have always thought that Vocalise lends itself poorly to the piano, a percussive instrument, as compared to voice (I think of Anna Moffo)-or at least violin or flute. This is cantabile in the extreme. So I surmise that Wild, for example, played Rachmaninoff's transcription, and-like the other transcribers ready for a challenge to overcome the limitations of the piano-said, 'I think I can do better!'
I just listened to Kissin's rendition on YouTube. There is no attribution to a transcriber, suggesting that it's Rachmaninoff's own transcription. (I hate that kind of vagueness, and I don't know all of the transcriptions.) Maybe that's it? It definitely sounds more robust than the Richardson version played by Gilels. I didn't find a score on the IMSLP. I bet someone at Pianophila might be able to produce it, so left an inquiry.
Those folks pull rabbits out of hats.David. Very interesting.
I would like to see that transcription! I recorded the Richardson transcription some years ago, it's very good but I would have preferred Rach's own version if I had it.I just can't believe that at least half a dozen pianists and composers had the temerity to want to improve on Rachmaninov's own transcription.
Rachmaninov was a transcriber pur sang - witness Lilacs and Daisies, absolutely perfect gems, not to mention his transcriptions of other composers. Or has this one maybe only come to light recently, and did guys like Kocsis and Wild not know about it? Seems unlikely to me. VocaliseWhen I finally got round to learning a piano transcription of this piece, like others here, I found something of a surfeit of versions dating back through the mists of time.What a treasure this gem is. Taking on a Rachmaninoff piece has, for me, an aura of the sacrosanct about it and so, like others here, I was keen to locate an original piano transcription (though I should interject here I have to agree with the article pointed to by Rachfan that we should probably give up trying to render it on solo piano and just enjoy the strings version) BUT.! To a pianist, there's something about holding a magical journey of counterpoint/chord/melody combination in our hands just as Rachmaninoff surely did when he dreamt up Op 34, no.14.Reading this thread and indeed my own detailed research has cast some doubt as to the existence of such a transcription.
Rachmaninov Vocalise Richardson Pdf Online
I have worked on each published version I could find, (last count was x9 genuinely different piano versions and some relatively recent) and am familiar with the details that set them apart from each other but still the prospect of an 'original' taunts and appears to regularly pop up like a friendly ghost preventing me from resting on any specific transcription preference. (Rachfan - the Kissin '93 encore performance was the Alan Richardson transc- 1951).As I'm unable to satisfy that nagging desire for an 'authorised piano transcription' (there are still avenues to explore eg: The Rach Society who I would like to cast their learned eye over a piano score that recently found it's way into my hands that I've never seen before and looks hopeful. I will report back if/when I make any progress) then a compromise for the performer has to be reached - and there's no shortage of choice.Rachmaninoff followers will all have their own idea of the man and his music, some will take a rational, erudite 'technical' approach, and others perhaps led more by their heart and feeling or a bit of both. My guide and my compromise centres around my belief that when Rachmaninoff transcribed at the outset perhaps initially a minor, but nevertheless hugely popular 'song without words' (a cutting edge idea for the times vis in the footsteps of Mendelssohn's Lieder) he already knew he had something very special and began working on 'resolving the piece's own ambition' to be something more - the conclusion of this I see as his transcription of Vocalise for string orchestra - surely the last word where nothing can be added or taken away? A somewhat rash and certainly biased conclusion on my part as I'm not a devotee of the soprano voice - something Antonina Nezhdanova I feel certain would have given me short shrift for even suggesting such a thought should she have lived the day to read such a thought! Check the link, it's an interesting read and some wonderful photographs of her.To close, I thoroughly recommend the relatively recent no-nonsense transcription by Takuya Shigeta. There's very little active information about him on the Web.
I did try to make contact - if only to offer him good wishes and praise on an excellent transcription job to which I like to believe the master himself might have given a nod of approval too. It has for me all the ingredients that I believe should be there, no more and no less. For anyone not familiar with this version you can peruse the score (provided the site is up and running - it's a bit temperamental)Good luck and happy playing years to all the readers here.Chris HartleyLondonP.S.I don't think there's a version for banjo yet? Thanks for your interesting post Chris. Some of your sentences I had to read a couple of times before they clicked together;-)So you are saying that there are nine different piano versions of Vocalise, and you tried them all? I was only aware of 4 so far (Richardson, Wild, Fiorentino, and Borodin).
You mention the Shigeta version which I did not know. It looks a bit bard-faced on paper but maybe that works. Which are the other ones? And as you surely are an expert on the piece now, which one do you prefer?Also, are you saying you have a score that could be an authentic Rachmaninov transcription?
Rachmaninoff Vocalise
That would be a major find. Still can't believe that he never made one himself.