Did Mozart write an impossible cadenza here?
I am arranging Mozart's Piano Sonata in C minor for a string trio and so far I have been able to copy Mozart note by note with no problems. That is, until I reached this:
The third of 3 cadenzas in a row. I tried copying the note values Mozart wrote down and I get a tad more than 5 beats worth of cadenza. But Mozart wrote the entire cadenza as 1 4/4 bar's worth. This is contradictory. Did Mozart write an impossible cadenza here?
And even if he didn't, how do I change the length of the bar for just the violin so that nothing is off afterwards in the cello and viola? Is that even possible? I have the score here, it is at bar 27 after the section break or if you want to use ctrl + F to search for the bar, it is bar 212 where the cadenza starts.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Piano_Sonata_in_C_minor.mscz | 50.91 KB |
Comments
I think it's pretty clear that Mozart means here "a lot of little fast notes, pretty freely, the latter part of which are even faster", not a clear metric notation.
In reply to I think it's pretty clear… by [DELETED] 1831606
Yes.
Cadenzas are played freely (Ad libitum).
It can be written as
(Ignore the metronome information)
If you try to play as it is written without changing the tempo, you cannot hear those notes even at the tempo of adagio. It just sounds like piano-saltato.
In reply to Yes. Cadences are played… by Ziya Mete Demircan
Oh, so I just need to put in long tuplets and my frustration with the notes not quite fitting into the bar will be over. I know how to do long tuplets, so thanks for the tip of writing the cadenzas as tuplets.
In reply to Oh, so I just need to put in… by Caters
Adding to the information pool here, it’s seldom that I see a score from IMSLP that doesn’t have an issue or two. Either an obvious, blatant, typo or a spot where the metrics just don’t add up to the proper value. But in (almost) every case so far, MuseScore has the flexibility to make it work.
The challenge as a transcriber is determining case-by-case whether to correct the problem, or to replicate it “as is” for historical accuracy.
If anyone is aware of an article that discusses the back-and-forth between the composer and publisher when creating a literal engraving, I would love to read it.
Best of luck with your project,
In reply to Adding to the information… by marty strasinger
This is not an "issue" or an "error", but the way rhythmically free passages sometimes were written. And IMSLP is not an edition whose editing policies can be taken to task -- they just present historical editions as they are. OP's issue, as she correctly claimed, is with Mozart, not IMSLP.
In reply to This is not an "issue" or an… by [DELETED] 1831606
Thanks for the correction. Still, when working in an environment that demands metrical precision (like a computer program) judgement calls are required when replicating something that was done by hand. At this stage MuseScore usually has a number of possible solutions to choose from.
In reply to Thanks for the correction… by marty strasinger
I agree completely.
Allso, it's not the same as a "22-tuplet" in, say, Chopin. This is a cadenza, where presumably, the metronome stops. While you can reproduce it visually with a tuplet in MS, the "22" should be hidden.
In reply to Thanks for the correction… by marty strasinger
Option 2:
If you wish, you can put an invisible eighth rest, and write with grace notes.
But you can't control it with metronome. And that section doesn't play.
In reply to If you wish, you can put a… by Ziya Mete Demircan
I think i prefer the tuplet method. But it is nice to know that there is more than 1 method.
What I have done in the past is:
Add the beats to the cadenza.
In all other instruments, make the visible rests line up with the cadenza
Select the unneeded rests and make them invisible.
This makes is both look and play correctly.