Why so much emphasis on arrangements having to sound good, or to be
faithful to the composer? 'Sound good' is an acquired taste, and in
different ambiances it must mean different things.
For many years I endured the 1-week accordion conference at Interlochen
MI, as it was simultaneous with their chamber music conference. Imagine
walking by a cabinful of accordionists (& percussion) attempting the
classics. After a while I relaxed my attitude. It doesn't have to be
regarded as an abomination on the face of the earth - in its own way it
was a real hoot, and now I miss them.
Some composers rearranged their own works, or left choices of
instrumentation up to us, or were troubled making a final decision about
how their composition should sound. Poulenc perhaps never thought of it
but his trio for trumpet, horn & trombone sounds much better on floboe,
horn and bassoon.
As I have suggested on this list before, it is well for hornists to
invade mainstream music when possible; some works improve from this hot
breath of new life, or at least they take on a new personality. Who is
sorry that the Beethoven trio for 2 oboes & english horn is arranged for
3 horns? No way it comes out as the same piece, but no matter. What a
monster.
Sure, some arrangements are duds. And so are some original compositions.
{ David Goldberg: [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
{ Math Dept, Washtenaw Community College }
{ Ann Arbor Michigan }
_______________________________________________
post: horn@music.memphis.edu
unsubscribe or set options at
http://music2.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
