1

I am trying to learn this solo, but to better my sounds, I am trying to play along to a recording once I get it down with a metronome. IN measure 58 there seems to be a repeat, however, in every performance I can find that isn't in the score. That or they are playing a totally different part not in the score.

This score is exactly the same as what I have in my book of classical tunes. https://musescore.com/user/27667841/scores/6551312

Here is an example of someone playing this extra section.

7
  • 1
    That score doesn't absolutely seem very reliable, it's probably just a "simplified" version. There's nothing "repeated", it's missing more than half of that prelude, and that's a lot of very important stuff too. Why don't you check it on imslp.org, for example? Mar 8 at 22:50
  • Actually, even between those printed versions there are some drastic differences in the second half, but this seems to be what I hear most often. imslp.simssa.ca/files/imglnks/usimg/6/6e/… Mar 8 at 23:13
  • What drasticly different versions are you referring to? Mar 8 at 23:20
  • Look at this version (page 47): imslp.simssa.ca/files/imglnks/usimg/b/b4/… Mar 8 at 23:24
  • 2
    @musicamante It would be helpful to turn these comments into an answer so that users can see that it has one.
    – Aaron
    Mar 9 at 1:23
4

As many examples can be seen in various reliable editions of the piece (for example, at imslp), the only actual differences are mostly ornaments, writing of voices, technique markings and slurs, stems/flags/groupings and some dynamics, while the structure remains intact as it can be listened in the embedded video as well as thousands of other audio/video sources around the web.

The score reported in the link is a shortened version, probably intended for beginners.

On a personal note, I don't really see the point in skipping so much important material, as more than half of the piece is missing, the missing parts are not that difficult compared to what's left (and they are very important for its structure too): it is a difficult piece, there's no benefit in shortening to make it "easier", if the result completely denaturalize it.

2
  • I think the purpose of doing so in the book I was using is that it is a classical fakebook, and they want things to fit on 1-2 pages where possible. In that sense, It's a cool survey of the styles, but now I know that if I like a piece I will need to get the original. It's a cool way to work on sight reading and learn about composer's styles, without having to invest too much time into a piece you may not like. Mar 9 at 16:41
  • @bartcubrich I see your point, but I still believe it's not a very good practice: as said, that's not an easy piece, and if you're going to play it (at least on the violin) you probably already know that style. Also, a "fakebook" would make sense for excerpts, short melodies, more or less as they do with common themes with children methods (the usual "Ode to Joy", for instance). With a piece like this, you've already got to almost half of it, "cutting" it down, especially like that, is just a pity (some would say it's a shame). Mar 9 at 17:57

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.