However, I have engraved it both ways, according to composer preference. Is there any historical evidence to point to one method or the other as being preferred?
-- Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday, February 23, 2004, at 09:39 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
Oh, sure. The 1/3 Hi 2/4 Lo tradition long pre-dates Berlioz. See, for example, the little Mozart g-minor symphony (number 25)) with pairs of horns in Bb and G. Or the Haydn Hornsignal Symphony. Or even Beethoven's Ninth. Berlioz was merely documenting a practice that had begun decades earlier.
Even Berlioz departed from his own recommendation at times. Nuits d'ete at times uses 3 horns in 3 different keys, and while the 2nd part is generally lower than 1 and 3, they all cross at times. Nuits d'ete may pre-date the orchestration treatise, but Berlioz remained extremely creative with his horn key choices, and the parts often crossed as the harmonic situations demanded.
Johannes Gebauer wrote:On 23.02.2004 17:21 Uhr, John Howell wroteWell, I am not an expert on horn parts, but the tradition of having high andBerlioz specifically recommended using 2 pairs of horns in 2 different keys so you could write more different notes by trading off horns. (And this is also the beginning of the tradition of having high specialists and low specialists in the horn section, with 1st and 3rd, not 1st and 2nd, being the high specialists.)
low horn specialists must be older than that. You certainly have it in the
18th century. You didn't have 4 of them, but there were high and low parts,
and players that specialized on one of them.
Incidentally the Berlin Concertmaster Johann Gottlieb Graun produced (ie
composed) some of the most difficult (ie high) horn parts in the 18th
century.
Johannes
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
