the first movement of piano sonata in b-flat minor by julius …/67531/metadc699873/... · 9....

APPROVED: Pamela Mia Paul, Major Professor Elvia Puccinelli, Minor Professor Gustavo Romero, Committee Member Steven Harlos, Chair of the Division of

Keyboard Studies James C Scott, Dean of the College of Music Mark Wardell, Dean of the Toulouse Graduate

School

THE FIRST MOVEMENT OF PIANO SONATA IN B-FLAT MINOR BY JULIUS

REUBKE: A COMPARISON OF THREE EDITIONS FROM THE

PERFORMER’S POINT OF VIEW

Imre Pátkai, B.M., M.M.

Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

August 2014

Pátkai, Imre. The First Movement of Piano Sonata in B-flat Minor by Julius Reubke: A

Comparison of Three Editions from the Performer’s Point of View. Doctor of Musical Arts

(Performance), August 2014, 49 pp., 3 tables, 5 figures, 33 musical examples, bibliography, 36

titles.

The objective of this dissertation is to review the discrepancies between the first edition,

Stradal’s edition and Marzocchi’s edition of Reubke’s piano sonata, providing assistance for

performers by clarifying inconsistencies between the three editions. Information in reference to

major aspects such as fingerings, pedaling, phrasing, tempo markings is presented. Examples of

discrepancies found throughout the first movement are discussed in Chapter 3. Detailed

assessment of these discrepancies, accompanied by the author’s comments are listed in the

comprehensive comparison table in Appendix A. Additionally, directions are given in cases of

presumptive errors, and discrepancies are addressed with possible variant solutions. In

conclusion, the relative merit of the three editions is assessed in Chapter 4.

Copyright 2014

by

Imre Pátkai

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Pamela Mia Paul, for her

excellent guidance, caring and patience, and for providing me with and excellent atmosphere for

doing research.

Appreciation is also expressed to Dr. Elvia Puccinelli and Prof. Gustavo Romero, the

other members of the doctoral committee, for their helpful suggestions and comments.

Grateful acknowledgment is expressed to Rugginenti Editore Inc., for permission to

reproduce musical examples from the Critical Edition of the Complete Piano Works by the

German Composer Julius Reubke.

Special thanks must be given to Reuben Allred and Eldred Marshall for their valuable

suggestions in my English writing.

Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Julia, for her help in the digitalization process and

also for her continuous support during my doctoral studies.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vi

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES .............................................................................................. viii

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1

Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................... 1

Objectives ............................................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER 2. JULIUS REUBKE AND HIS PIANO SONATA ................................................... 5

Julius Reubke .......................................................................................................... 5

The Piano Sonata .................................................................................................... 6

CHAPTER 3. COMPARISON OF THE THREE EDITIONS WITH PERFORMANCE

CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................................................... 8

Various Editions of the Reubke Piano Sonata ........................................................ 8

Comparison of the Three Editions with Performance Considerations.................... 9

Misprints and Ambiguities .......................................................................... 9

Corrections in Marzocchi’s Edition .......................................................... 14

Errors in Marzocchi’s Edition ................................................................... 15

Enharmonic Spellings ............................................................................... 17

Tempo Markings and Expression Signs ................................................... 18

Phrasing and Dynamics............................................................................. 18

Fingerings and Pedaling ............................................................................ 19

iv

Cuts ........................................................................................................... 22

Author’s Suggestions ............................................................................................ 23

CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................... 27

APPENDIX A. DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE THREE EDITIONS IN THE FIRST

MOVEMENT ................................................................................................................... 29

APPENDIX B. RECORDINGS OF REUBKE’S PIANO SONATA .......................................... 39

APPENDIX C. FIGURES ............................................................................................................ 41

BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 47

v

LIST OF TABLES

Page

1. Comparison of phrasing and dynamics in the two recitativo sections ...............................19

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

C.1. Photograph of Julius Reubke................................................................................................. 42

C.2. The Second Theme Engraved in Neue Zeitschrift für Musik Prior to the First Edition ....... 43

C.3. Cover of the First Edition ...................................................................................................... 44

C.4. First Page of the Stradal Edition ........................................................................................... 45

C.5. Cover of the Marzocchi Edition ............................................................................................ 46

vii

LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES

Page

Example 1. Measures 5-7, First Edition........................................................................................ 10

Example 2. Measures 5-7, Marzocchi Edition .............................................................................. 10

Example 3. Measure 23, First Edition .......................................................................................... 11

Example 4. Measure 23, Stradal Edition ...................................................................................... 12

Example 5. Measure 23, Marzocchi Edition ................................................................................. 12

Example 6. Measure 31, First Edition .......................................................................................... 13

Example 7. Measures 30-31, Marzocchi Edition .......................................................................... 13

Example 8. Measures 18-19, Stradal Edition................................................................................ 13

Example 9. Measure 25, Marzocchi Edition ................................................................................. 14

Example 10. Measure 25, Stradal Edition .................................................................................... 14

Example 11. Measure 29, Marzocchi Edition ............................................................................... 15

Example 12. Measures 234-235, Marzocchi Edition, Amended F-natural ................................... 15

Example 13. Measures 50-52, Marzocchi Edition ........................................................................ 16

Example 14. Measures 51-53, First Edition.................................................................................. 16

Example 15. Measures 119-120, First Edition.............................................................................. 17

Example 16. Measures 119-120, Marzocchi Edition .................................................................... 17

Example 17. Measures 165-167, Marzocchi Edition, Enharmonic Spelling ................................ 18

Example 18. Measures 141/b-145, Marzocchi Edition ................................................................. 19

Example 19. Measure 18-20, Optional Pedaling .......................................................................... 20

Example 20. Measure 23, Stradal Edition .................................................................................... 21

Example 21. Measures 119-121, Stradal Edition.......................................................................... 22

viii

Example 22. Measure 81, Marzocchi Edition, Cadential Passage ................................................ 23

Example 23. Measure 83, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage ................................................... 24

Example 24. Measure 127, Marzocchi Edition, Proposed E-flat .................................................. 24

Example 25. Measure 125-126, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage .......................................... 24

Example 26. Measure 131, Marzocchi Edition, Proposed D-sharp .............................................. 25

Example 27. Measure 133, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage ................................................. 25

Example 28. Measures 151-152, Marzocchi Edition, Proposed A-natural ................................... 25

Example 29. Measures 44-46, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage ............................................ 25

Example 30. Measure 175, Marzocchi Edition, Inserted C-sharps ............................................... 26

Example 31. Measure 69, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage ................................................... 26

Example 32. Measure 206, Marzocchi Edition, Modified passage .............................................. 26

Example 33. Measure 202, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage ................................................. 26

ix

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of the Study

Julius Reubke's monumental work, the Piano Sonata in B-flat Minor, written in 1857,

alludes to his teacher's masterpiece, Franz Liszt's Sonata in B Minor (1853). Due to his tragically

short life, Reubke (1834-1858) was able neither to enrich the romantic piano repertoire with

further works, apart from a scherzo and a mazurka, nor to promote his compositions. Perhaps as

a result, his small output for piano has been neglected for almost a century. The fact that he was

referred to in The New Oxford Companion to Music as organist and composer only (neglecting to

mention that he was also a pianist)1 and that some Liszt biographies mistakenly list his death as

1854 speaks volumes.2

Beginning in the 1970s, musicians and musicologists started showing interest in

Reubke’s life and in his compositions. A comprehensive dissertation by Daniel Walter

Chorzempa was the first serious assessment of Reubke's life and work.3 Chorzempa’s research

included a trip to Germany (formerly East Germany) to visit local libraries to trace family

records.4 As a result of his substantial work, numerous details of Reubke’s biography were

clarified. Chorzempa's contribution to “Reubkology,” as he calls it,5 was followed by several

articles in various musical journals and magazines, among them those written by George B.

1. The New Oxford Companion to Music, ed. Denis Arnold (Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1984), 2:1560.

2. Sacheverell Sitwell, Liszt (New York: Dover Publications, 1967), 272. 3. Daniel Walter Chorzempa, “Julius Reubke: Life and Works” (PhD diss., University of Minnesota, 1971),

accessed January 14, 2014, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. 4. Ibid, Acknowledgements. 5. Ibid, 5.

1

Stauffer,6 Roy A. Johnson7 and Raymond Songayllo.8 In addition to Chorzempa's undertaking,

there are two other dissertations, one by Matthew Clark Manwarren9 and the other by Humberto

Ribeiro de Almeida,10 that are of interest due to their analytic and aesthetic approach towards

Reubke's piano sonata. No research, however, has been pursued relating to the practical

performance issues that confront every performer.

Recently there has been a small resurgence of interest in Reubke’s piano sonata, with a

number of pianists deciding to perform it. Unlike with the standard repertoire, these performers

have limited sources to study: they have to rely primarily on their musical instinct and on their

general understanding of the romantic era. Up until 2008, only two editions were available from

which to study the sonata, one from 1871 and the other from 1925. A new critical edition was

published by Paolo Marzocchi in 2008.11 In addition to publishing this edition, Marzocchi also

recorded the sonata on the CPO label in the same year.12 His recording joins other

interpretations, among them by Jean Guillou13 and Till Fellner.14 The new edition, accompanied

by the new recording of the work, adds a great deal to a performer’s understanding of the

6. George B. Stauffer, “Reubke: Revisited,” Music 7, no. 3 (March 1973): 27-31. 7. Roy A. Johnson, “Julius Reubke: A Promise Unfulfilled,” Clavier 20, no. 4 (April 1981): 33-35. 8. Raymond Songayllo, “A Neglected Masterpiece,” Journal of the American Liszt Society 18, no. [4?]

(December 1985): 122-128. 9. Matthew Clark Manwarren, “The Influence of Liszt's Sonata in B Minor on Julius Reubke: A Study of

Reubke's Sonata in B-flat Minor for Piano and the Sonata on the Ninety-Fourth Psalm for Organ” (DMA diss., University of Cincinnati, 1994), accessed January 14, 2014, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

10. Humberto Ribeiro de Almeida, “A Study of Julius Reubke’s Piano Sonata in B-flat Minor” (DMA diss., University of California, Santa Barbara, 2006), accessed January 14, 2014, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

11. Julius Reubke, “Piano Sonata in B-flat Minor,” in Critical Edition of the Complete Piano Works by the German Composer Julius Reubke, ed. Paolo Marzocchi (Milano: Rugginenti, 2008), 1-49. It will be referred to later as Marzocchi.

12. Julius Reubke, “Sonata in B-flat Minor for Piano,” by Paolo Marzocchi, recorded December 13-14, 2008, with Luca Scandali (organ), on Julius Reubke: Complete Works for Piano & Organ, CPO 777 467-2, 2009, CD.

13. Julius Reubke, “Sonata for Piano in B-flat Minor,” by Jean Guillou, recorded 1989, on The Sonatas of Julius Reubke, Dorian Recordings DOR-90106, 1989, CD.

14. Julius Reubke, “Sonata for Piano in B-flat Minor,” by Till Fellner, on Schumann: Kreisleriana – Reubke: Piano Sonata, Paris Erato Disques 0630-12710-2, 1996. CD.

2

sonata.15 It is hoped that an appraisal and comparison of these three editions will contribute to

the formulation of deliberate, educated interpretive choices on the part of the performer.

Objectives

The purpose of a critical edition is to “transmit the text that best represents the historical

evidence of the sources.”16 In other words, a modern, reliable critical edition should assist the

performers in framing their own answers to the following fundamental questions (according to

Eva Badura-Skoda):17

• What did the composer write? (Source criticism)

• What did the composer mean to write? (Textual criticism)

• How ought the composer to have written, in order to be generally understood today?

(Elucidation of the text)

The three editions of Reubke’s piano sonata show a number of discrepancies that might

be confusing to deal with. The first two editions share common mistakes that are generally

corrected in Marzocchi’s critical edition. His edition, however, contains new misprints and

occasional suggestions of alternate notes and phrasing.

The chief goal of this present undertaking is to provide detailed information in reference

to major aspects in the first movement of Reubke's piano sonata such as fingerings, pedaling,

phrasing, tempo markings in view of the three accessible editions. Additionally, directions are

15. List of recent recordings may be found in Appendix B. 16. James Grier, The Critical Editing of Music: History, Method, and Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1996), 156. 17. Eva Badura-Skoda, “Textual Problems in Masterpieces of the 18th and 19th Centuries,” The Musical

Quarterly 51, no. 2 (April 1965): 306, accessed February 14, 2014, http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2084/stable/741272.

3

given in cases of presumptive errors, and discrepancies are addressed with possible variant

solutions.

One of the main objectives of this research is to provide assistance for performers

roaming in the maze of mismatching data found in the three editions. With this end in view,

Chapter 3 addresses the performance aspects mentioned above. In addition, an exhaustive

comparison table is presented in Appendix A. Thus it is possible for the performers not only to

ponder pivotal issues discussed in the main body of the text but also to sort out all the

discrepancies discovered between the three editions. In conclusion, the relative merit of the three

editions is assessed in Chapter 4.

4

CHAPTER 2

JULIUS REUBKE AND HIS PIANO SONATA

Julius Reubke18

Friedrich Julius Reubke was born in Hausneindorf (Germany) on March 23, 1834. His

father, Adolf Reubke, was an esteemed organ builder. Reubke had two younger brothers, Carl

Ludwig Emil (born in 1836) and Carl Ludwig Gebhardt Otto (born in 1842). Emil became an

organ builder, while Otto pursued a career as an organist and a pianist. Reubke’s initial musical

studies were conducted by two local cantors, Johann Christian Stollte and Friedrich Kramer.

Later he took lessons from Hermann Bönicke (1821-1879) and perhaps from August Gottfried

Ritter (1811-1885) as well in the nearby town of Quedlinburg.

In 1851 Reubke went to Berlin to study at the Musikschule für Gesang, Klavier und

Komposition (founded in 1850 by Julius Stern and later named Konservatorium der Musik).19

While there, he studied composition with Adolf Bernhard Marx (1795-1866) and piano with

Theodor Kullak (1818-1882). Reubke’s only other piano works (the mazurka and his scherzo)

were composed during this period.

Reubke might have met with Liszt when he arrived in Berlin to conduct in 1855. Hans

von Bülow was the soloist in Liszt’s Piano Concerto in E-flat Major on that concert. Bülow

became very friendly with Reubke and referred to him as “the best student of the Conservatory

[in Berlin], who possesses great abilities as a composer and interpreter” in one of his letters to

Liszt.20 In 1856 Reubke moved to Weimar to study with Liszt. The two years he spent in

18. Based on Chorzempa’s article in Grove Music Online, s.v. “Julius Reubke,” accessed April 28, 2014, http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2081/subscriber/article/grove/music/23267pg2?q=reubke&search=quick&pos=3&_start=1#firsthit, and on his dissertation: Chorzempa, 11-134.

19. Almeida, 3. 20. Hans von Bülow, Briefe und Schriften, ed. Marie von Bülow (Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1896-

1908), 2:139, quoted and translated in Johnson, 33.

5

Weimar formed the most noteworthy period in his career both as a performer and as a composer.

He soon became one of the “brightest stars” of the Altenburg along with Alexander Ritter.21

Both of his two major works, the organ sonata and the piano sonata were composed during these

years.22 Certainly he was one of the “miraculous results” of Liszt's pedagogy.23

In December 1857 Reubke moved to Dresden probably to become more independent both

artistically and financially. He joined the Dresdner Tonkünstlerverein, actively participating in

its concerts as a pianist. His other commitment was to promote Liszt’s compositions in Dresden.

Although Reubke arrived to Dresden with great plans, these plans remained unfulfilled due to his

failing health. In May 1858, only a few months after he settled in Dresden, he had to move to

Pillnitz to seek medical attention. He died of tuberculosis there on June 3, 1858.24

The Piano Sonata

Reubke completed his piano sonata in February 1857.25 The composition “caused a well-

deserved sensation in the Weimar artistic circles,” even “Liszt himself played it with

predilection.”26 The piece is based on a three-note fragment taken from Liszt’s piano sonata in

B-Minor. There are instances of “near quotation” from the Liszt sonata in the recitativo

sections.27 The influence of Liszt and Wagner is evident in Reubke’s sonata,28 yet his work

21. Alan Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years 1848-1861 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993), 195.

22. Julius Reubke: The 94th Psalm, Sonata for Organ in C-Minor (composed in 1857, inspired by Fr. Liszt: Fantasy and Fugue on the Chorale Ad Nos, Ad Salutarem Undam).

23. Arthur Friedheim, Life and Liszt: The Recollections of a Concert Pianist, ed. Theodore L. Bullock (New York: Taplinger, 1961), 49.

24. Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years 1848-1861, 488. 25. Songayllo, 123. 26. Richard Pohl, “Julius Reubke zum Gedächtniß,” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, 48, no. 25 (June 18, 1858):

Supplement p. 1, quoted and translated in Johnson, 34. 27. Songayllo, 123. 28. Johnson, 34.

6

shows “formidable originality.”29 Two weeks after Reubke’s death an extensive obituary was

published as a supplement of the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik written by Richard Pohl. In this

article Reubke is referred to as such a composer who “… did not reproduce, rather he created

from the Complete, and from the Whole.”30 Pohl also recalls Reubke’s ars poetica that the

composer had shared with him:

“No one can touch or rob me of my artistic belief,” he once said to me, “but I feel no necessity to speak out against someone or even to defend myself against the attacks of an opponent. For what purpose? We will convince them as little as they will conquer us! I am active as a composer and virtuoso in the spirit of our movement as much as I can be; but I only wish to speak through my music…”31 Reubke’s innovative compositional ideas foreshadow “the styles of late Liszt, Mahler,

Brahms, Reger and even Elgar.”32 Liszt was very pleased with the sonata although he knew that

the composition would provoke “rap and hiss” among listeners who are not welcoming of new

aesthetic ideas.33 Liszt’s students looked upon the sonata as a work that honored not only Reubke

but the “Weimar Ideal” itself.34 Despite the fact that remarkable pianists engaged in learning the

piece and even Liszt himself appreciated the composition,35 Reubke's piano sonata has never

become widely known or performed.

29. Alan Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years 1848-1861 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993), 196.

30. Richard Pohl, “Julius Reubke zum Gedächtniß,” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, 48, no. 25 (June 18, 1858): Supplement p. 1, quoted and translated in Chorzempa, 83.

31. Richard Pohl, “Julius Reubke zum Gedächtniß,” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, 48, no. 25 (June 18, 1858): Supplement p. 1, quoted and translated in Chorzempa, 126. The obituary includes an engraving of the 2nd theme of the first movement of the piano sonata (see Appendix C).

32. Songayllo, 123. 33. La Mara, ed, Briefwechsel Zwischen Franz Liszt und Hans von Bülow (Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel,

1898), 194, quoted and translated in Stauffer, 28. 34. Stauffer, 28. 35. Chorzempa, 273.

7

CHAPTER 3

COMPARISON OF THE THREE EDITIONS WITH PERFORMANCE CONSIDERATIONS

Various Editions of the Reubke Piano Sonata

“His Sonata must be printed. Should it involve expenses, I subscribe according to the best

of my ability.”36 This is what Bülow wrote to Felix Dräseke shortly after Reubke passed away.

Although Reubke’s friends and colleagues were fascinated by his piano sonata, it took almost

fourteen years until the first edition came out in 1871, edited by the composer’s brother, Otto.37

According to Marzocchi’s research, this edition was reprinted twice within the next two

decades,38 and at least once since 1980.39

For almost a century, only organists cultivated Reubke's legacy by keeping his organ

sonata in their repertory.40 In 1925 August Stradal41 was motivated to transcribe and publish

Reubke's organ sonata for piano perhaps hoping that his arrangement of this relatively popular

piece would shed some light on the composer's piano sonata as well.42 It doesn't seem to be

coincidence that he attached his own edition of Reubke's piano sonata to his transcription. In the

preface, Stradal expresses his desire to bring the piano sonata out of its “long sleep.”43 While he

may not have succeeded in this part of his dream, Stradal's interpretative edition continues to be

36. Hans von Bülow, Briefe und Schriften, ed. Marie von Bülow (Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1896-1908), 3:181, quoted and translated in Chorzempa, 125.

37. Julius Reubke, Sonata für das Pianoforte, ed. Otto Reubke (1871; repr., Leipzig: J. Schuberth, [2005?]).

38. Marzocchi, 72. These reprints are labelled as ‘B’ and ‘C’ in Marzocchi’s Critical Notes. One of them was part of a compilation volume. Unfortunately there is a great confusion with the dates in the Critical Notes.

39. Marzocchi refers to a reprint edition (marked ‘E’) from 1984. The library record of the copy that the investigator consulted with shows [2005?].

40. Julius Reubke: The 94th Psalm, Sonata for Organ in C-Minor (composed in 1857, inspired by Fr. Liszt: Fantasy and Fugue on the Chorale Ad Nos, Ad Salutarem Undam)

41. Bohemian pianist. A. Stradal was also a Liszt-student. 42. Julius Reubke, Sonata for Pianoforte in B-flat Minor, ed. August Stradal (1925; repr., [?]: Musica

Obscura, [1984?]). It will be referred to later as Stradal. 43. Chorzempa, 273. Unfortunately the Musica Obscura Edition does not include Stradal’s preface nor does

it indicate any reference to the date of publication. However Chorzempa, in his Appendix D.4 clarifies that this is a reprint of the Stradal Edition.

8

an invaluable source for those who embark on studying Reubke's piano sonata. This edition was

also reprinted several times.44

The recent, critical edition was released in 2008.45 This is the first compilation of the

complete piano works of Julius Reubke. Paolo Marzocchi, the editor of this volume has been

generous with additional study-aids: besides his explanation of his editing criteria and his

Critical Notes he has also supplied an extensive analysis of the sonata and an outline of its

formal structure, as well as a bibliography relating to Julius Reubke. All information is provided

in Italian and in English. Marzocchi’s undertaking is highly appreciated by Leslie Howard who

in the preface to the edition states:

Maestro Paolo Marzocchi … has assembled all of Reubke’s extant piano music for the first time, in a scrupulously researched Urtext edition, for which we should all be profoundly grateful, and to which we should respond by programming these excellent compositions when and whenever possible.46

Comparison of the Three Editions with Performance Considerations

Instances discussed in this section are samples that best represent the totality of

discrepancies found throughout the first movement. The rest of the discrepancies, accompanied

by the author’s comments, may be identified in the comprehensive comparison table in

Appendix A.

Misprints and Ambiguities

Misprints seem to be inescapable. Anything going through multiple stages of formation

44. First reprint in 1940 according to Stauffer, 31. Another reprint (Musica Obscura Edition) dates back to the mid-1980s. Songayllo, 122 writes about it as the “recent re-issue” in his article from 1985. Marzocchi, 73 writes about “numerous copies” but does not specify reprints.

45. Marzocchi, 1-49. 46. Ibid, III.

9

involving several people is subject to errors. The first obvious discrepancy occurs in the bass line

in measures 6-7. B-double flat is slurred here to an A both in the first edition and in Stradal’s

edition. Due to the key signature, this A is supposed to be an A-flat (see example 1). However,

the strong feel of the half cadence cries out for an enharmonically spelled yet through-sustained

A-natural. The real question is this: if the composer wanted a half step here, why is it not

reinforced by a courtesy accidental before the A-flat? Marzocchi's edition is the only one that

takes a stand by suggesting a natural sign on the downbeat of measure 7 (see example 2).

Example 1. Measures 5-7, First Edition

Example 2. Measures 5-7, Marzocchi Edition

Apart from the stronger feel that a half cadence would provide here, Marzocchi supports

his argument with the enharmonic relationship between B-double flat and A-natural as the most

plausible explanation of the tie stretching between them.47 One could perhaps argue for the A-flat

as being part of an inverted, augmented (and distorted) outline of the opening motif (B-double

47. Marzocchi, 73. First note from the Critical Notes.

10

flat—A-flat—F).

Measure 23 poses quite a few issues to be solved. First, there is the rhythm of the outer

voice in the right hand. It seems only sensible that Marzocchi swaps the right hand voices on the

first two beats. Thus the ascending chromatic line is visually reinforced. However, he moves one

step further by changing its rhythm. Although his alteration conforms to the triplets in the middle

voice, yet the “more marked rhythmic character” is better supported by the thirty-seconds found

in the other editions (see examples 3-5).48

The absence of sharp signs before notes A and D on beat four of measure 23 seems to be

an error. There is no question about the justification of these accidentals on the last two 16th notes

(amended in Marzocchi’s edition) as they appear to be part of the secondary dominant chord of

the G-sharp minor in the next measure. It can be assumed that the second 16th of beat four should

be an A-sharp as well (see also examples 3-5).

Example 3. Measure 23, First Edition

48. Marzocchi, 73. Marzocchi gives the following reasoning in his second Critical Note: “This passage is ambiguous. In 19th century editions (as well as in Stradal’s edition), the group of rising notes in the right hand is in two rhythmically contradictory subdivisions. The upper subdivision is correct (a group of 12 sixteenth notes over a duration of two quarter notes). The lower subdivision in sixteenth notes and thirty-second notes was probably meant either to help bring out the inner voice or give this passage (and other subsequent similar passages) a more marked rhythmic character; however it should be written in eighth and sixteenth notes (with two triplets of sixteenth notes for each fourth note in the left hand).”

11

Example 4. Measure 23, Stradal Edition

Example 5. Measure 23, Marzocchi Edition

The rhythmic structure of measures 30-31 is another puzzling issue (see example 6).

These measures are identical in terms of their rhythmic scheme, both possessing a redundant

8th note value in the first edition and also in Stradal’s edition. Four solutions appear to be

plausible:

• Constriction of the second beat

• Additional beam on the third beat

• Additional beam on the fourth beat

• Omission of the eighth rest at the end of the measure

(or its equivalent: ending on a sixteenth note followed by a sixteenth rest)

12

Example 6. Measure 31, First Edition

Marzocchi chose the last option. In his edition there is a 16th note followed by a 16th rest

at the end of these measures (see example 7).


His choice is absolutely valid. However, keeping the eighth rest by applying one of the first three

options rather than the fourth, would not only underline the rhetorical effect of this passage but

also correspond with the breathing spaces found on beat three of measure 7 (see examples 1-2)

and also on beat four of measure 19 (see example 8).

Example 8. Measures 18-19, Stradal Edition

13

Corrections in Marzocchi’s Edition

There are numerous misprints in the first edition that were copied unaltered into Stradal’s

edition. Marzocchi deserves the credit for correcting these errors. Measure 25 is one of those

places where both first edition and Stradal’s edition share the same misprint. On beat four of this

measure Marzocchi corrects left hand E to G-sharp to maintain the “rising melodic pattern” (see

example 9).49 Interestingly, Stradal places a sharp sign before that E yet it does not solve the

problem (see example 10). Marzocchi’s correction is the only feasible solution which maintains

consistency within the measure and which corresponds with measure 29 (see example 11).



49. Marzocchi, 74. Fourth note from the Critical Notes.

14


All corrections made in Marzocchi’s edition are based either on following the lucidity of

patterns or on conformity with surrounding harmonies. Example 12 is an instance where errors in

the first edition (copied unaltered to Stradal’s edition) are so obvious that performers would

probably fix them automatically. However, it is reassuring to have them corrected in

Marzocchi’s edition.50

Example 12. Measures 234-235, Marzocchi Edition, Amended F-natural

Errors in Marzocchi’s Edition

Although Marzocchi has corrected numerous misprints found in earlier editions, his

critical edition is not free from errors either. These errors include a missing sharp sign before C

in measure 23 (see examples 3-5 above) and passages put in the wrong octave (in measures 104,

50. Further instances in measures 23, 28, 92, 93, 98, 173, 188, 192, 205 and 232 may be identified in Appendix A.

15

117 and 139).51 However, the most disturbing misprints are those of omitted notes. In measure

51 middle C is left out from the chord on beat three (see example 13). Unfortunately the same

error is repeated in measure 157 in the context of a D major chord.52



Another instance can be found in measure 120, where the last note of the scale is omitted

in Marzocchi’s edition (see examples 15-16).53

51. The octave E in the left hand on the downbeat of m. 104 should be printed an octave lower. Marzocchi’s apparent misprint differs from the other two editions. The same kind of obvious mistake appears in the second half of m. 117, where the left hand’s motif is transposed one octave too low. Comparing it with the other editions and with the right hand’s texture makes clear that it is an error. Thirdly, there is a missing 8va sign in the right hand on the first two beats of m. 139. It can be considered a misprint not only because the other editions have the 8va sign, but also because without this sign, the two hands would collide with one another.

52. According to the other editions, in these measures the left hand should copy the inverted major chord from the right hand.

53. The last E-flat obviously should be part of the scale especially since it concludes with a Neapolitan chord (F-flat Major) on the next downbeat. This is a very typical error in the age of copy and paste. (Beats 2-4 are identical with the exception of the very last E-flat. Beat 2 was probably copied and transposed to beats 3 and 4.)

16



Enharmonic Spellings

There are six places in the first movement where Marzocchi arbitrarily employs

enharmonic spelling. Specific illustration of this issue is given in measure 166 (see example 17).

In Marzocchi’s edition D-natural on the fourth beat is spelled here as C-double sharp while the

other editions keep it as D.54 While enharmonic spelling in this measure might be rationalized by

the ascending bass line, it creates a dichotomy between C-double sharp and D-natural above it.

54. Further instances in measures 48, 60, 181, 233 and 267-68 may be identified in Appendix A.

17

Example 17. Measures 165-167, Marzocchi Edition, Enharmonic Spelling

Tempo Markings and Expression Signs

Tempo markings and expression signs show the most consistency in all three editions

throughout the first movement of the piano sonata. The only minor discrepancy between them

occurs in measure 71. Stradal reinforces the existing marcato signs here by printing marcato il

basso in his score. Although the editions do not generate issues related to tempo markings and

expression signs, deliberate interpretation of these cues is of course vital to an informed

performance.55

Phrasing and Dynamics

Faithful implementation of subtle inflections in dynamics and phrasing are vital to a

successful interpretation. While there is almost complete concordance between these markings in

all three editions, there are nonetheless some discrepancies with regard to analogous phrases.56

For example, the collation of dynamic and articulation signs in the two recitativo-like sections

55. One of the main challenges in performing this sonata with its heavy reliance on monothematicism is the avoidance of monotony. In view of this challenge it is absolutely essential to observe the gradation of the tempo markings in the first movement. The tempo markings increase in three increments during the movement (m. 1: Allegro maestoso, m. 120: Allegro appassionato, m. 242: Allegro con fuoco). Contrasting with this gradual acceleration of tempo, there are two rhetorical quasi recit sections inserted into the flow. The strict observance of these tempo markings is crucial to maintaining cohesion in this sprawling movement.

56. Although all three editions agree on the markings, it is important for the performer to consider the discrepancies between the markings in the first and second statements.

18

19

(in measures 37-53 and 142-159) seems to indicate that the second occurrence of the passage is

more dramatic. Instead of the harmony unfolding from the unison, as in measures 37 and 44, D

major presents itself as a twist in measure 143. The absence of the legato slur across measures

143-145 can be understood as a reinforcement of this surprise although it is amended in

Marzocchi's edition (see example 18). Systematic comparison of this two recitativo sections is

presented in Table 1.

Example 18. Measures 141/b-145, Marzocchi Edition

Table 1. Comparison of phrasing and dynamics in the two recitativo sections (all editions are alike)

Measures 37-53 Measures 142-159

m. 37-39 under legato slur No legato slur in m. 143-145 (although it is amended in

Marzocchi)

Gradual drop of dynamics after in m. 37-40 and

44-47

subito after in m. 143 and 150

Gradual transition to the first recitativo in m. 40

( – – )

More contrast in approaching m. 146 ( – – )

No tenuto signs on the last chords before recit. in m.

39 and 46

Tenuto signs in analogous places: in m. 145: LH only, m.

153: BH

Dynamics alternating between and in m. 40-49 throughout in m. 146-155

within in m. 44 after subito in m. 150

Fingerings and Pedaling

There is no fingering included in the first edition. Pedal markings appear only in

measures 2-19 and 284-323 (the latter is part of the second movement). Reubke either did not

have time for final revisions to his score or he assumed that whoever embarked on playing his

sonata would have the skills necessary to devise their own fingerings. His pedal markings are

typically applied in places where either blocked or arpeggiated chords overarch between distant

registers of the keyboard (see examples 1 and 8 above). In contrast, Stradal’s edition contains

numerous fingerings and pedal markings. Stradal introduces different kinds of pedaling

suggestions to enhance legato playing and enrich sonority by enabling the strings of the piano to

resonate in conjunction with one another. There are also a few spots in his edition where senza

Pedale is indicated.57 Helpful as Stradal’s suggestions are, they are not comprehensive, leaving

plenty of room for the performer to make his own choices. Measure 19 offers an example of an

arpeggiated chord with suspension that spans over almost six octaves (see example 8 above).

Example 19 illustrates the author’s innovative approach to pedaling in this measure which

prevents the diminished chord from disappearing on the 3rd beat.58

Example 19. Measure 18-20, Optional Pedaling

Every performer's hand is unique in size and shape. For that very reason a particular

fingering that works well for one pianist might be disadvantageous for another. Finding the most

suitable fingering takes lengthy experimentation. In addition to convenience, there is another

57. In measures 71, 117 and 221. 58. The proposed idea here is to change the pedal on the 3rd beat and to hold F and D throughout the beat.

According to all three editions, these two notes are not part of the 3rd beat (see example 8 above). Yet, holding them down would give the possibility of clearing the pedal in order to obtain a more convincing resolution of the suspension.

20

indispensable aspect of fingering, namely its correspondence with the musical texture. Examples

20 and 21 provide samples of various fingerings. These examples are taken from Stradal's

edition, additional fingerings by the author are italicized. In example 20 Stradal's suggestion of

using the middle finger on the white keys of the chromatic passage in measure 23 is displayed

along with the author’s alternate suggestion of the fifth finger (printed in italics). Although the

use of the middle finger on these keys works well, utilizing the fifth finger instead would

encourage the right hand to turn towards the top of the passage. Moreover, instead of applying

side motions it would allow the right arm to move back and forward. Thus not only the ascent of

the right hand would be more secure but the balance between stressed and unstressed notes of the

chromatic scale would be enhanced as well. As a result, the “more marked rhythmic character” is

easier to achieve.59


Example 21 shows Stradal’s fingering in measures 119 and 121. He suggests the use of

the left hand on E-flats with stems down in measure 120. However, the author suggests using the

left hand not only on these E-flats but also on the very first and last 16ths of this bar. Using the

left hand on these additional notes will result in an “edgier” scale rendition. This sound and color

serve as a preparation for the upcoming Allegro appassionato in measure 121.

59. Marzocchi assumes that the 32nd notes in the other two editions probably suggest a more marked rhythmic character of this passage (see discussion of m. 23 and footnote 48 on p. 11).

21

Example 21. Measures 119-121, Stradal Edition

Each performer should experiment with the various fingerings offered either in Stradal’s

edition or in this study. It is conceivable that in some cases performers will find further variants

that will better support their own interpretations.

Cuts

Reubke apparently conceded the fact that his sonata might be too lengthy for some

audiences. There is in fact an optional cut included in the first edition between measures 221 and

242. All editions include this option with a transitional measure-long ossia, that combines the

thunderous octave-passage of measure 220 with the pick-up motif before measure 242.

Interestingly, utilizing this cut would shorten the duration by about 40 seconds only, while it

would compromise the overall structure of the sonata by the omission of the only section that

embodies the “procedure of balance of larger sections.”60

In spite of the fact that Songayllo recognizes the significance of this procedure, he goes a

few steps further by proposing another, almost half-movement-long cut between measures 84

and 188. He claims that employing further cuts would support the “unity” of the composition.61

60. By this term Songayllo refers to the resemblance between the “penultimate section of the first movement (m. 221-241) and the final, climatic passage of the entire sonata” (m. 660-682). Songayllo, 125.

61. Ibid, 127.

22

Indeed, an abridged rendition might be an appropriate response if one is concerned only with

appeasing an audience with a sort of “commercial adaptation” of the work.62 However, it is the

author’s opinion that only playing the sonata in its entirety would capture the “artistic impulse”

that drove the composer to write his work.63

Author’s Suggestions

“The editor’s critical understanding of the musical style, in its historical context, provides

the final criterion for decisions regarding the musical text.”64 Marzocchi’s alterations are based

on critical thinking and on following the composition’s inner logic. The following suggestions

from the author of this study are based on these same principles, as well as on significant time

spent studying and performing the work.

Example 22 presents a cadential passage. Although not indicated in any edition, it is

highly recommended that the trill be executed with A-sharp due to the harmonic environment

(see the chord on beat one).

Example 22. Measure 81, Marzocchi Edition, Cadential Passage

62. Grier, 18. 63. Ibid. 64. Ibid, 36.

23

Moreover, the same passage is repeated two measures later as the next link of the ascending

sequence. There the trill falls on B, therefore the semitone execution is absolutely out of question

due to the key signature (see example 23).

Example 23. Measure 83, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage

The following pairs of examples (24-25, 26-27, 28-29, 30-31 and 32-33) propose further

alterations based on the same principle. The first example in each pair presents the alteration

itself while the second example underlines it by displaying its analogous passage.

Example 24. Measure 127, Marzocchi Edition, Proposed E-flat

Example 25. Measure 125-126, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage

24

Example 26. Measure 131, Marzocchi Edition, Proposed D-sharp


Example 28. Measures 151-152, Marzocchi Edition, Proposed A-natural

Example 29. Measures 44-46, Marzocchi Edition, Similar Passage

25

Example 30. Measure 175, Marzocchi Edition, Inserted C-sharps


Example 32. Measure 206, Marzocchi Edition, Modified passage


26

CHAPTER 4

CONCLUSION

The first edition by its very nature may be deemed the one that is the closest to the

composer’s intentions. Although we have no information about the autograph, we have every

reason to believe that Otto Reubke owned it (or its copy). In the absence of an autograph we can

only assume that he faithfully transcribed it when he made his edition. Marzocchi used this

edition as a basis for his own text.65

Stradal’s edition may be considered as a performing edition due to its extensive pedal

markings and fingerings. Some musicologists believe that interpretive editions constitute a sort

of oral history in that they relay their editors’ personal suggestions.66 The merit of this edition is

its fidelity to the first edition. Stradal keeps not only every aspects of the original text (stem

directions, hand distribution, page layout) but even its misprints too.

Editing music starts with comprehensive research and investigation.67 Marzocchi’s work

is noteworthy. In addition to collecting new data and presenting Reubke’s presumed ideas, he is

the first person to publish Reubke’s complete piano works. Marzocchi assessed contradictory

information from the previous editions and presented his suggestions with justification in the

Critical Notes. However, in some cases his changes to the text are not explained.68 Marzocchi

corrected a great deal of errors found in the earlier editions. Nevertheless, there are at least seven

instances of major errors in the first movement alone in Marzocchi’s critical edition.69 The

65. Marzocchi, 70. 66. Grier, 13. 67. Ibid, 36. 68. Marzocchi claims that editorial additions are always distinguished either by brackets or dotted lines (see

Marzocchi, 71). In reality however, far too many alterations are not indicated. For complete details refer to Appendix A.

69. The author refers to omitted or misprinted notes as major errors. In some cases these errors are the result of the missing 8va sign or they are simply put in the wrong octave.

27

relatively high number of misprints seems to call for a revised second edition especially since

this edition is outstanding in most other ways. More distinction between original text and

editorial revisions would be desirable in a future edition. In one of her articles Badura-Skoda

recognizes that the idea of a faultless edition “is a goal worth striving for,” but it is most likely

utopian as well.70

Several suggestions were provided by the author pertaining to issues of dynamics,

phrasing, fingering and pedaling. In some cases alternate notes were suggested based on

consistency. It is regrettable that no manuscript of the sonata is available today.71 Thus

performers must rely on the comparison of the available editions and on their instincts.

It is impossible to answer every question pertaining to what the composer might have

intended. “The truth [in many cases] is simply not ascertainable.”72 Raising every possible

related question however should be a minimum requirement. Performers have to develop

“critical” thinking, much as editors do.73 Moreover, they need to be prepared to evaluate printed

editions, to draw conclusions from differing sources and to add innovative ideas of their own.

Implementing ideas presented in this study is absolutely essential for any performer who intends

to revive the original composition without merely following one or another edition mechanically.

70. Badura-Skoda, 303. 71. Ibid, 316. 72. Grier, 181-182. 73. Ibid, 181.

28

APPENDIX A

DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE THREE EDITIONS IN THE FIRST MOVEMENT

29

30

Abbreviations:

FE. First Edition

S. Stradal Edition

M. Marzocchi Edition

RH Right hand

LH Left hand

BH Both hands

N. 5 Fifth note from the Critical Notes

in Marzocchi Edition

p. Page

m. Measure

b. Beat

b. 2-3 single occurrence across 2nd and 3rd beats

b. 2 and 3 occurrence on both 2nd and 3rd beats

12-14 single occurrence across 12th, 13th and 14th

measures

Measure Discrepancy Author’s comment

1 S. on note …

3 S. on b. 1 and 3 …

4 S. on b. 1 …

S. missing on b. 3-4 …

7 M. LH b. 1: suggested A See N. 1 on p. 73

M. b. 1 and 2: missing -s …

M. amended on b. 3 …

8 S. LH b. 1: missing on low C …

M. b. 1: added Should indicate editorial addition with

brackets

S. on note …

10 M. b. 1: added Should indicate editorial addition with

brackets

S. missing on the last …

11 FE. and S. last slurred to next downbeat Probably error, corrected in M.

12 FE. LH b. 1: with stem up …

12, 13, 14 S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 …

M. b. 3-4: -s with –s -s with -s in both FE. and S.

M. b. 2 and 4: missing in middle voice …

14 M. RH b. 1: with stem down …

FE. b. 3: missing in middle voice …

15 S. on b. 1, on b. 4 …

M. on b. 1, on next downbeat missing in FE.

See m. 17 and 19. In S. on m. 15 b. 4

15, 17, 19 M. missing slurs on passages …

19 M. LH b. 1: missing on …

22 M. LH illegible tie between b. 3-4 …

22, 24, 26, 28 S. on b. 1-2 …

23 S. missing crescendo and diminuendo signs …

M. RH 8ths and -s in contour voice Both FE. and S. have -s with -s instead.

See N. 2 on p. 73

M. RH b. 1-2: swapped voices Swapping voices in M. clarifies the texture

FE. LH b. 1: instead of …

M. RH b. 4: missing before C …

M. RH b. 4: amended …

31


23 (cont’d) M. RH b. 4 amended before A Same amendment needed on 2nd of b. 4

M. LH b. 4: illegible tie on D …

24 M. LH b. 1: missing tie on D …

25 M. LH b. 3: amended before D Missing in both FE. and S.

M. LH b. 4: corrected G E in both FE. and S. See N. 4 on p. 74

26 M. RH b. 1-2: all -s on one beam In both FE. and S. the last two -s of b. 1

are on separate beam with stems up, b. 2:

stems up as well

M. LH b. 1: octave B with extra stem N. 5 on p. 74 mistakenly refers to this as a

half note. ‘23’ should be corrected to ‘28’ in

N. 5

M. LH illegible tie between b. 2 and 3 …

27 M. LH b. 2: preceding is detached from the

slur

Becomes consistent with m. 23, 25 and 29

M. LH amended slur between b. 3 and 4 Becomes consistent with m. 23, should

indicate editorial addition with brackets

28 M. LH b. 1: corrected C octave Obvious error. See N. 6 on p. 74

FE. LH b. 3-4: stem down …

29 S. RH b. 2: missing before F …

M. RH b. 4: missing -s before D and F …

30 S. LH b. 1: stem up …

S. LH b. 1: slur extends until b. 3 …

30, 31 S. LH b. 1: on first chord …

M. LH b. 1: . on first chord Probably intended to be . Other editions are

inconsistent

M. BH b. 3: -s grouped as 2+4 …

M. BH b. 4: last note and last rest are

constricted to -s

See N. 7 on p. 74

32 S. RH amended triplet signs …

33 FE. LH b. 3-4: stems down …

34 M. LH b. 4: missing slur …

S. LH: on each note …

35 S. LH: on the first three note,

on b. 4

…

36 S. on b. 2 …

38, 39 S. on each chord …

39 M. dim. sign extends to next downbeat …

40, 41, 42, 43 S. on LH broken chords …

43 M. LH b. 3: stem down …

FE. b. 4: in one voice only …


46 M. dim. sign extends to next downbeat …

47, 48, 49 S. on LH broken chords …

32


48 M. b. 2: A spelled enharmonically as B …

50, 52 S. on b. 1-2 …

51 S. on b. 1 and 3 …

M. LH b. 3: missing C, stem up on E LH should have the same chord as RH

53 M. LH missing whole rest in 2nd voice …

54, 56, 57 S. on b. 1 and 3 …

56 M. RH b. 3: stem down on C …

57 M. LH b. 1: mutual stem …

58, 60 S. on b. 1, on b. 3 …

59, 61 S. on b. 1-2 …

60 M. LH b. 4: C spelled enharmonically as B …

M. LH b. 2: stem down Clarifies the texture

FE. LH b. 4: stem up …

62, 63 S. on each beat …

63 M. LH b. 4: written in the LH system …

M. RH b. 3-4: stem down …

M. LH b. 3-4: amended slur …

64 M. RH b. 2 and 3: -s on mutual stems …

S. on b. 1, on b. 4 …

65 S. on b. 1, on b. 3 …

66 S. on each beat …

67 M. LH b. 2 added …

67, 69 S. on b. 1, on b. 3 …

M. RH b. 4: missing …

68, 70, 72, 74 S. on each beat …

69 M. RH b. 3: stem of B on the wrong side …

71 S. b. 1: “senza Pedale”

b. 2: “(marcato il basso)”

…

S. LH b. 2-4: missing slur …

72, 74 M. RH b. 2-4: stem up …

M. LH b. 1: stem down …

73 M. RH: stems up …

75 M. LH after b. 1: amended …

S. on b. 1 and on the

arpeggiated B7 chord

…

76, 77, 78, 79,

80, 81, 82, 83

S. on each chord …

81, 83 M. BH b. 4: clarified tripled rhythms See. N. 10 on p. 74

82 M. RH b. 1: stems colliding at cross staff …

84 S. on b. 1 and 3 …

86 M. LH b. 2: no cross staff notation …

M. RH b. 1 and 4: stems down …

33


86 (cont’d) S. on b. 1 …

87 S. on b. 1 and 3-4 …

88, 90 S. on b. 1-2 and 3-4 …

89 M. RH b. 3-4: -s grouped as 4+4 …

89, 91 S. on b. 1-2 …

92 M. RH: -s grouped as 6+6+6+6 M. is the most consistent throughout m. 92-

97

92, 93 M. RH b. 4: amended before E Should indicate editorial addition with

brackets

S. on b. 1-2 and 3-4 …

93 S. RH: -s grouped as 3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3 …

95, 99 S. on b. 1-2 …

96 M. RH b. 4: stems up …

96, 97 S. on b. 1-2 and 3-4 …

97 FE. LH b. 1: stem up …

98 M. LH b. 2: amended before G Should indicate editorial addition with

brackets

99 FE. LH b. 3 and 4: Corrected to in both S. and M.

100, 101 S. on b. 1 and 3 …

101 FE. RH b. 4: stems down …

102 M. LH b. 1: stem down …

S. on each beat …

103 FE. RH b. 1: …


104 M. LH b. 1 written in one too high octave …

M. LH b. 1: missing …

M. RH b. 4: middle C is written in …

S. on b. 1, 2, 4; on b. 4 …

105 FE. RH b. 1: missing …

107, 109 S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 …

110 M. RH b. 1-4: amended slur …

111 M. LH b. 3: missing Corresponds with m. 107 and 109

111, 112, 113,

114, 115, 116

S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 …

112 M. b. 1: missing …

112, 113, 114,

115

Stem directions:

discrepancy between the 3 editions

FE. appears to be the most consistent

115 M. LH b. 1: D is written in …

117 M. LH b. 3-4 written in one too low octave …

S: “(senza Pedale)” …

120 M. RH b. 1: added after the E octave It might not be necessary as stem directions

suggest the RH to be involved in the

following scale pattern

34


120 (cont’d) M. RH b. 4: omitted E at the end of the scale …

121 M. LH b. 1: stems down,

the first chord is written in

…

M. LH b. 4: stems down …

122 M. RH b. 1-2: no cross staff writing …

M. RH b. 1-2 and 3-4: mutual beam …

FE. LH b. 2-3: stems down …

S. RH b. 4: stems down …

123 M. RH b. 1 and 3: missing -s …

FE. RH b. 4: missing …

M. LH b. 1 and 2: missing -s on the -s …

M. LH b. 3-4: added crescendo sign Both in FE. and S. m. 123 and 126 appear

above one another therefore. Cresc sign is

placed between the staff systems therefore its

questionable to which m. does it belong. M.

126 seems to be more logical choice due to

its analogous place in m. 124.

125 FE. RH b. 3: missing …

126 M. LH b. 1-4: mutual beam Becomes consistent with m. 124

M. b. 2-4: crescendo sign See comment of m. 123

127 FE. LH b. 3: missing on G …

FE. LH b. 4: missing after G …

128 M. LH b. 1: amended on first chord …

S. b. 1: missing …

129 M. b. 2: crescendo sign includes b. 4 …

130 S. LH b. 1-4 stems up …

131 M. b. 2: crescendo sign includes b. 3 …

FE. RH b. 1: stem down …

M. LH b. 1-2: mutual beam Becomes consistent with m. 129 and 133

134, 135, 136,

137, 138

S. on each beat …

M. LH slurs always reach b. 2 and 4 Other editions are inconsistent

135, 136, 138 S. LH b. 3-4: stems up …

135, 137 S. RH b. 2 and 4: stems up …

137 M. LH b. 3: slur placed under the beam …

139 M. LH b. 1: missing …

M. RH b. 1-2: missing 8va sign …

S. on b. 1, on b. 2, on b. 3 …

M. LH b. 3-4: stems up …

140 S. on b. 1 …

M. RH b. 1-2: stems up …

143, 144, 145 S. on each chord …

M. RH: these measures are under legato slur Corresponds with m. 37-39, 44-46, 150-152

35


145 S. on b. 3 …

146, 147, 149 S. on b. 1, on b. 2 …

148 S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 …

149 M. LH b. 3: stems down …


153, 154, 156,

158

S. on b. 1, on b. 2 …

155, 157 S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 …

156 M. b. 4: added Corresponds with m. 50

157 M. LH b. 3: missing D LH should have the same chord as RH

160-171 S. same pedal markings as in m. 54-65 …

163 M. LH: common stems …

M. RH b. 3: common stem …

164 M. RH b. 1: common stem …

164, 165 S. LH: bass line’s articulation is adjusted to m.

166-167

…

164, 166 FE. LH b. 2 and 4: stems up …

166 M. LH b. 4: D spelled enharmonically as C …


169 M. LH b. 3-4: amended slur …

171, 172 M. LH: added slur between b. 4 and 1 Corresponds with m. 65-66


M. LH b. 1: missing arpeggio …

173 M. RH: grace note passage extended with B Becomes consistent with m. 67, 69 and 175


173, 175 S. LH b. 4: added …

grace note passages stems down …

173-176 S. same pedal markings as in m. 67-70 …

174 FE. And S. LH b. 1: missing slur Probably forgotten due to page break

175 M. LH b. 4: stems down …

176 M. LH b. 1: missing arpeggio and …

M. RH b. 2: stems down …

177, 179 M. RH b. 4: D is written in LH system …

M. LH b. 4: stem down …

S. on b. 1 …

178 M. LH b.1 : stem down …

M. LH: slur spreads over b. 2-4 Becomes consistent with m. 176 and 180. In

other editions slur includes b. 1


180 S. LH b. 1: stem up …

181 M. LH b. 3-4: G-s spelled as F …

M. LH b. 4: missing on low C octave …

36


181 (cont’d) S. on b. 3-4 (starting with the

low C octave)

…

182, 184, 186,

187

S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 Alignment of is inconsistent

183 FE LH b. 4: In S: In M:

FE. RH b. 1-4: missing legato slur …

183, 185 S. on b. 1, on b. 4 …

184 FE. LH b. 4: missing . …

S. RH b. 2: stems up …

185 FE. LH b. 4: missing -s …

186 M. RH b. 2: stems up …

M. LH b. 3: amended Same needed on the last note of m. 186

and 187 (see m. 192-195) Should indicate

editorial addition with brackets

188 M. RH b. 2: amended before G Obvious error (see m. 190)

188, 189, 190,

191

S. on b. 1, on b. 4 …

189 FE. LH b. 3: stems up …

S. LH b. 4: amended …

190 M. RH b. 1: amended Same needed in m. 188 (see m. 182)

M. LH b. 3-4: swapped voices …

191 M. LH b. 4: down stem on and are

missing

…

M. LH b. 4: amended -s Should indicate editorial addition with

brackets

192 M. RH b. 3: amended before last D …

192, 193, 194 S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 …

193 S. middle voice b. 1: “lH” …

194, 195 S. middle voice b. 1: “rH”, b. 3: “lH” …

196 S. RH b. 1: top note on separate stem …

198 M. RH b. 1: stem up Corresponds with m. 196

199 M: LH b.1 : missing …

200, 201, 202,

203, 204, 205,

206, 207

S. on b. 1 …

201 M. RH b. 1: -s on separate beam …

202 M. RH b. 1: –s with stems up …

205 M. RH b. 4: third is F G in FE. and S. is obvious error (see m.

204, 206)

M. LH b. 2-4: slur is below Placing above would be more logical

207 S. LH b. 2-4: slur is above Clarifies the texture

208 FE. LH b. 1: Dot is redundant

S. on b. 1 and 3 …

37



210 FE. LH b. 4: slur ends on the Reaches next downbeat in the other editions.

In M. it has a strange shape

213 FE. RH b. 1: stem up …

M. LH b. 4: amended Should indicate editorial addition with

brackets

FE. LH b. 4: missing legato slur …

214 M. LH b. 2-3: amended legato slur …

S. RH b. 2: missing legato slur …

S. RH b. 4: missing …

215 FE. RH b. 2: stem down …

S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 …

216 S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 …

217 S on b. 1 …

M. LH b. 4: redundant at the end …

220 M. BH b. 1: missing -s in the ossia …

M. LH b. 3-4: stems down in the ossia …

221 S. “senza Pedale” …

227 M. b. 1: missing …

228 M. RH b. 3: stem down …

FE. RH b. 2 and 4: missing dots on -s …

229 FE. RH b. 1: stem up …

M. LH b. 1-2: -s are grouped as 2+3 …

M. RH: missing -s on the chords printed mistakenly on b. 1

229, 231, 232,

233, 234, 235,

236

S. on b. 1 and 3, on b. 2 and 4 Alignment of -s are inconsistent



232 M. RH b. 4: amended before C …

233 M. LH b. 1: B is spelled enharmonically as C …

234 M. RH b. 4: amended before F …

235 M. RH b. 1: amended Should indicate editorial addition with

brackets

237 M. LH b. 3-4: stems up …

238, 240 S. on b. 1 and 3 …

239 M. LH: missing -s on b. 1, 2 and 3 …

240 M. LH: missing -s on b. 1 and 3 …

241 S. on b. 1 …

FE. LH b. 3: stem up …

242, 243, 245,

248, 250

S. on b. 1, on b. 2 …

250 M. amended on b. 1 Corresponds with m. 243, 245, 248

38


250 (cont’d) M. RH b. 1: stems up …

251 M. LH b. 1-4: stems down …

M. RH b. 4: amended on Corresponds with m. 244, 246, 249, 252-254

252 S. RH b. 3: stem down …


258 S. RH b.2 : missing before D-s …

260, 261 M. RH b. 1-2: stems up …

261 FE. LH b. 1: missing before top D …

262 M. RH b. 1: A instead of B See N. 17 on p. 75

M. LH b. 4: A instead of B Misprint

263 M. LH b. 4: G instead of F Probably error. F would be part of the

chromatic scale before next downbeat

264 S. RH b. 2: missing …

FE. RH b. 1: In other editions


264, 267 S. on b. 1, on b. 4 …

265, 268 S. RH b. 3: stem down …

265, 266, 268,

269

S. on b. 1 and 3 …

265-266,

268-269

S. missing crescendo signs …

266, 269 S. RH b. 1 and 3: stems down …

267 M. RH b. 2-4: D spelled enharmonically as E …

268 M. RH b. 1: D spelled enharmonically as E …

270 S. b. 1: omitted on triplet -s …

270, 272 M. RH b. 4: amended -s …

270, 271, 272,

273

S. on b. 1, on b. 3 …

APPENDIX B

RECORDINGS OF REUBKE’S PIANO SONATA

39

Year Performer Label

1970 Raymond Lewenthal ?

1993 Jean Guillou CD Dorian #90106

1995 Claudius Tanski CD MDG #0344

1996 Till Felner CD Erato #12710

1999 Mario Patizzi CD Dynamic #2027

2003 Rechard Raymond CD Analekta #23172

2006 John Owings CD Super Audio Hybrid Pro Organo #7201

2007 Anthony Hewitt Divine Art #DDA 25064

2009 Paolo Marzocchi CD CPO #777464

2009 Klaus Sticken Thorofon/Zebralution

40

APPENDIX C

FIGURES

41

Figure C.1. Photograph of Julius Reubke

42

Figure C.2. The Second Theme Engraved in Neue Zeitschrift für Musik Prior to the First Edition

43

Figure C.3. Cover of the First Edition

44

Figure C.4. First Page of the Stradal Edition

45

Figure C.5. Cover of the Marzocchi Edition

46

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Friedheim, Arthur. Life and Liszt: The Recollections of a Concert Pianist. Edited by Theodore L.

Bullock. New York: Taplinger, 1961. Grier, James. The Critical Editing of Music: History, Method, and Practice. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1996. Hamilton, Kenneth. After the Golden Age: Romantic Pianism and Modern Performance. Oxford,

NY: Oxford University Press, 2008. Jerger, Wilhelm. The Piano Master Classes of Franz Liszt 1884-1886: Diary Notes of August

Göllerich. Edited and translated by Richard Louis Zimdars. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1996.

Leimer, Karl. Rhythmics, Dynamics, Pedal: And Other Problems of Piano Playing. Translated by

Frederick C. Rauser. Philadelphia PA: Theodore Presser, 1938. Liszt, Franz. Selected Letters. Edited and translated by Adrian Williams. Oxford: Clarendon

Press, 1998. Newman, William S. The Sonata Since Beethoven: The Third and Final Volume of A History of

the Sonata Idea. 2nd ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1972. Rosen, Charles. Sonata Forms. Rev. ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1980. Schonberg, Harold C. The Great Pianists. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1963. Schumann, Robert. On Music and Musicians. New York: Pantheon Books, 1946. Siloti, Alexander. My Memories of Liszt. London: Methuen Simpson, 1986. Sitwell, Sacheverell. Liszt. New York: Dover Publications, 1967. Walker, Alan. Franz Liszt: The Final Years 1861-1886. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996. ________. Franz Liszt: The Virtuoso Years 1811-1847. 6th rev. ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell

University Press, 2004. ________. Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years 1848-1861. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,

1993. ________. Reflections on Liszt. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2005.

47

Williams, Adrian. Portrait of Liszt by Himself and his Contemporaries. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.

Articles Badura-Skoda, Eva. “Textual Problems in Masterpieces of the 18th and 19th Centuries.” The

Musical Quarterly 51, no. 2 (April 1965): 301-317. Accessed February 14, 2014. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2084/stable/741272.

Brown, Clive. “Rediscovering the Language of Classical and Romantic Performance.” Early

Music 41, no. 1 (February 2013): 72-74. Accessed February 14, 2014. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2546/content/41/1/72.full.pdf+html?sid=35ea4d25-1e6f-4e9d-9658-a6222912fe58.

Johnson, Roy A. “Julius Reubke: A Promise Unfulfilled.” Clavier 20, no. 4 (April 1981): 33-35. Katz, Marco. “Hearing Through Our Eyes: Musical Archives and Authentic Performance.”

Popular Music and Society 31, no. 4 (October 2008): 511-527. Accessed February 14, 2014. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:3772/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=387bb815-1639-4787-8e65-04783980e1cd%40sessionmgr114&vid=2&hid=107.

Lehtonen, Heidi-Maria, Henri Penttinen, Jukka Rauhala, and Vesa Välimäki. “Analysis and

Modeling of Piano Sustain-Pedal Effects.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 122, no. 3 (September 2007): 1787-1797. Accessed February 14, 2014. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2700/docserver/fulltext/asa/journal/jasa/122/3/1.2756172.pdf?expires=1392501153&id=id&accname=458997&checksum=015C144471A9C70EA4ADBD8B8912A57C.

Morrison, Bryce. “Reubke and Liszt-Busoni.” Music and Musicians 26, no. 3 (November 1977):

46-47. Repp, Bruno H. “The Effect of Tempo on Pedal Timing in Piano Performance.” Psychological

Research 60, no. 3 (September 1997): 164-172. Accessed February 14, 2014. http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/557/art%253A10.1007%252FBF00419764.pdf?auth66=1392673136_7dbadc454cd1b3da359ee4dd0d857166&ext=.pdf.

Songayllo, Raymond. “A Neglected Masterpiece.” Journal of the American Liszt Society 18, no.

[4?] (December 1985): 122-128. Stauffer, George B. “Reubke: Revisited.” Music 7, no. 3 (March 1973): 27-31. Treitler, Leo. “History and the Ontology of the Musical Work.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art

Criticism 51, no. 3 (Summer 1993): 483-497. Accessed February 14, 2014. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2084/stable/pdfplus/431520.pdf?&acceptTC=true&jpdConfirm=true.

48

http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2084/stable/741272

http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2546/content/41/1/72.full.pdf+html?sid=35ea4d25-1e6f-4e9d-9658-a6222912fe58

http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2546/content/41/1/72.full.pdf+html?sid=35ea4d25-1e6f-4e9d-9658-a6222912fe58

http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:3772/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=387bb815-1639-4787-8e65-04783980e1cd%40sessionmgr114&vid=2&hid=107

http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:3772/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=387bb815-1639-4787-8e65-04783980e1cd%40sessionmgr114&vid=2&hid=107

http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2700/docserver/fulltext/asa/journal/jasa/122/3/1.2756172.pdf?expires=1392501153&id=id&accname=458997&checksum=015C144471A9C70EA4ADBD8B8912A57C



http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/557/art%253A10.1007%252FBF00419764.pdf?auth66=1392673136_7dbadc454cd1b3da359ee4dd0d857166&ext=.pdf

http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/557/art%253A10.1007%252FBF00419764.pdf?auth66=1392673136_7dbadc454cd1b3da359ee4dd0d857166&ext=.pdf

http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2084/stable/pdfplus/431520.pdf?&acceptTC=true&jpdConfirm=true

http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2084/stable/pdfplus/431520.pdf?&acceptTC=true&jpdConfirm=true

Scores Reubke, Julius. Sonata für das Pianoforte. Edited by Otto Reubke, 1871. Reprint, Leipzig: J.

Schuberth, [2005?]. Reubke, Julius. Sonata for Pianoforte in B-flat Minor. Edited by August Stradal, 1925. Reprint,

[?]: Musica Obscura, [1984?]. Reubke, Julius. “Piano Sonata in B-flat Minor.” In Critical Edition of the Complete Piano Works

by the German Composer Julius Reubke, edited by Paolo Marzocchi, 1-49. Milano: Rugginenti, 2008.

Recordings Fellner, Till. Schumann: Kreisleriana–Reubke: Piano Sonata. Paris Erato Disques 0630-12710-

2, 1996. CD. Guillou, Jean. The Sonatas of Julius Reubke. Recorded 1989. Dorian Recordings DOR-90106,

1989. CD. Marzocchi, Paolo (piano) and Scandali, Luca (organ). Julius Reubke: Complete Works for Piano

& Organ. Recorded July 9-10 and December 13-14, 2008. CPO 777 467-2, 2009. CD.

Dissertations Almeida, Humberto Ribeiro de. “A Study of Julius Reubke’s Piano Sonata in B-flat Minor.”

DMA diss., University of California, Santa Barbara, 2006. Accessed January 14, 2014. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

Chorzempa, Daniel Walter. “Julius Reubke: Life and Works.” PhD diss., University of

Minnesota, 1971. Accessed January 14, 2014. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Manwarren, Matthew Clark. “The Influence of Liszt's Sonata in B Minor on Julius Reubke: A

Study of Reubke's Sonata in B-flat Minor for Piano and the Sonata on the Ninety-Fourth Psalm for Organ.” DMA diss., University of Cincinnati, 1994. Accessed January 14, 2014. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

49

the first movement of piano sonata in b-flat minor by julius …/67531/metadc699873/... · 9....

Documents