Missa Omnium Sanctorum (completed: Kyrie 1)

Here https://www.breitkopf.com/search?__clear=&q=zelenka+zwv+21 you can buy a full score (219 €) and a piano score (21,90 €) . I don´t have tried to order the scores, but it should work, i think. On the other hand, parts are only available by rental. This is very unsatisfactory. The edition is from 1989, it is probably an "urtext edition" and should therefore be public domain in the EU. Some libraries have this volume of "Erbe deutscher Musik", so it can be uploaded at IMSLP, for example. To extract parts by OMR should be not very difficult.

Quote from Elwro

It's a disgrace that one cannot easily gain access to the score of one of Zelenka's masterpieces. I went to a few sheet music stores in Europe and was always given an offer of trying to order a score for a few hundred Euros, but no guarantee (i.e., I'd have to wait and see if it's even possible at all.) The options I found myself online suggested I can try to 'rent' performance material, for an undisclosed price. Any sensible person will refuse to participate in such a nonsensical practice.

This is truth indeed, I found the same when searching for ZWV 20 Missa Dei Filii for performance recently. Both score and parts were very difficult to source. In the end, the parts were bought off Ensemble Inégal, and the score was rented at a price which was haggled down from the ~£1000 (!) which was quoted to us by a hire & copyright company in London.

Creating open access sheet music of Zelenka's 'greats' is a very good idea. I am very new to typesetting, but I can give a go at the wonderful Benedictus.

May be it´s a problem to buy a score of ZWV 20, it is out of stock (see here: https://www.breitkopf.com/search?__clear=&q=zelenka+zwv+20)
But many libraries have the vol. 100 from "Erbe deutscher Musik", where it is contained, so one can loan the score.
Much more difficult is it to get parts!
Urtext editions are protected in Germnay for 25 years. Parts of it, for example the foreword, has a protection for 70 years after the
death of the author of the text. (Sometimes it may be difficult to decide, if the realization of the continuo is protected as original work
of its author, but this is usually not part of an urtext edition).

OK, this was great fun. My first typeset score (I picked the shortest & most intimately orchestrated movement on purpose!), the Benedictus ZWV 21:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p5zp…WV_21_Benedictus.pdf?dl=0

I am now going on to the leaping whirl of the Osanna fugue, and aim to do the Sanctus afterwards.

Edit: I would appreciate any thoughts about the note in the Alto in bar 14. In the autograph manuscript, both in this bar and bar 13, the notes written for Alto are different to what is being sung by the Soprano. I personally like the harmony of G (Soprano) and E (Alto) that is notated in bar 14. But, after consulting both Inégal's recording and Collegium 1704's live youtube one (who used Inégal's score...), it's clear that they don't have the two voices diverge, but stick to the one note, G. Therefore I've used that note, in brackets, in the typeset.
Those two bars for S&A are very confusing. They seem to have been penciled (?) in, or are certainly written with a different instrument. Could be a Zelenka-error I guess.

Quote from Elwro

Congratulations on the score!
I'll modify the thread title accordingly

edit: Unfortunately I don't know how to do that...

Ah, yes, I tried to change a Live Performances thread, where I had originally titled it "West Germany concerts" to "Western Germany" (I realised that it evoked pre-1990 Germanies...), but it only changed the bold secondary title (the one on your actual post).... Not sure what would be the best thing to do about that.

Thanks for the thoughts on the S & A - I thought that may be the case. It's nice to know that he wasn't always on the ball with things

In his first editon Wolfgang Horn writes in the critical report:

" 13,14 A: d´, e´ statt a´, g´. T.13 ist im Autograph der erste Takt auf einer neuen Seite, der Ton d´ wird durch die Harmonie als falsch
erwiesen. Mit Sicherheit wollte Zelenka hier nicht von der Unisono-Führung der Singstimmen abweichen"

Accordingly his edition has a´ in bar 13 and g´ in bar 14 in the alto voice.

Well done on this, the typesetting is great.

Regarding bar 13/14, I agree with Elwro. Bar 13 just looks like a 'typo'. Zelenka has corrected it in pencil. Bar 14 is odd, but I would assume that this is also an error as it is inconsistent with the rest of the music. I think the note has just been put on the wrong line of the staff. Ive seen this a few times in Dresden scores where there are lots of C clefs. Sometimes when parts are duplicated, while copying one line into the next, the composer forgets about the different clefs.

Just a couple of hopefully helpful observations - I noticed that you may need to remove the slur in the last beat of bar 21. The manuscript has only the daggers there, it's a complete change of articulation in the strings. I think the forte marking is also just on those dagger notes, not before. You could in theory save paper space by merging the soprano and alto lines, for a practical performance you don't need those lines separated out even though that's how it looks in the original.

I've been working on the large Credo movement if that's any help to anyone.

Quote from Rik1

Well done on this, the typesetting is great.

Regarding bar 13/14, I agree with Elwro. Bar 13 just looks like a 'typo'. Zelenka has corrected it in pencil. Bar 14 is odd, but I would assume that this is also an error as it is inconsistent with the rest of the music. I think the note has just been put on the wrong line of the staff. Ive seen this a few times in Dresden scores where there are lots of C clefs. Sometimes when parts are duplicated, while copying one line into the next, the composer forgets about the different clefs.

Just a couple of hopefully helpful observations - I noticed that you may need to remove the slur in the last beat of bar 21. The manuscript has only the daggers there, it's a complete change of articulation in the strings. I think the forte marking is also just on those dagger notes, not before. You could in theory save paper space by merging the soprano and alto lines, for a practical performance you don't need those lines separated out even though that's how it looks in the original.

I've been working on the large Credo movement if that's any help to anyone.

Display More

Thanks for pointing that out! Totally missed my eye, and it happened because I used copy & paste so much.
The S & A merger did cross my mind indeed, I might take that on too. All the expanded arpeggiations make it unwieldy - I can easily see why Zelenka 'bis'-ed them!

I've already uploaded it on to IMSLP, not entirely sure how to remove and re-upload...

Good luck with the Credo to end all Credos

Quote from Elwro

Just for kicks, look at the very last pages of Poppe's "Missa S. Antonii Paduani":
http://digital.slub-dresden.de…8_tif/jpegs/448849178.pdf

Take a look at the Benedictus (it's at the very end, after Dona nobis pacem!). Again, sopran doubles the alto, while the strings have something like an ostinato... but the basso and tenor sing two imitative lines also!

edit: wasn't it Zelenka who copied Poppe's manuscript?

Nice find!!
He didn't copy it, but made lots of alterations&additions in red ink, according to this page on Stockigt's online resource, hofkirche catalog 1765 (the copyist, Horn identifies as 'ZS 1'). It also says that the 'NB Benedictus quaere Folio 23' mark, that Zelenka makes before the Agnus Dei, refers to Benedictus which is now at the end of the Pisani Mass ((ZWV40) http://digital.slub-dresden.de/werkansicht/dlf/89623/1/).
Which begs the question, what was this 'Folio 21' Benedictus intended for? **

Would be great to study it and compare to ZWV 21.. also would be great to actually hear some of F.L.Poppe's stuff, it seems to have been quite inspiring!

*Edit: SLUB are raising funds to carry out restoration work on this very Mass. Here's a link for it, and a number of other projects. Click on the images to get a few nice high-res, close up photos (including Zelenka's red ink additions).

**Edit 2: At the end this is written: 'Osanna Da Capo | Folio 21'. So, the Osanna section from 2 pages earlier. The reference in Stockigt's online Hofkirche Catalog to ZWV 40 from Pisani's Mass is possibly an error. She doesn't mention this particular Benedictus, but states this: "At the time of viewing this source, Zelenka’s autogr. of a Benedictus setting [ZWV 40] was kept at the conclusion of the score." Seeing the existing set of parts would help clear things up.

Quote from Xanaseb

Thanks for pointing that out! Totally missed my eye, and it happened because I used copy & paste so much.
The S & A merger did cross my mind indeed, I might take that on too. All the expanded arpeggiations make it unwieldy - I can easily see why Zelenka 'bis'-ed them!

I've already uploaded it on to IMSLP, not entirely sure how to remove and re-upload...

Good luck with the Credo to end all Credos

Replacing files at IMSLP is very easy. You have to click on the little number #413298 near the download arrow and then just follow the instructions.
Added: The copyist of the Poppe mass is not Zelenka, according to W. Horn it is the Schreiber ZS 1

Quote

Replacing files at IMSLP is very easy. You have to click on the little number #413298 near the download arrow and then just follow the instructions.
Added: The copyist of the Poppe mass is not Zelenka, according to W. Horn it is the Schreiber ZS 1

Thank-you, and thanks to you and Carolus for the IMSLP page edits last week, you are lightning-fast mods, doing a great service

The Osanna fugue Any comments appreciated again.
For easier performance, I expanded out the bis/repeat in bar 26, as per Elwro's suggestion (thanks!).
https://www.dropbox.com/s/v51m…1_Osanna_score__.pdf?dl=0

Next up the Sanctus - and we'll have a full section of the MOS sorted!

Sebastian

I realized some differences between your Osanna edition and the urtext edition at Breitkopf:

m.25 Ob1/S Half note d instead of e
Ob2/Vl2 Last quarter note g instead of f

m.28 Ob1 3. quarter note g instead of a
Viola 2. quarter note a, then half note g

According to the editors critical report he corrected the autograph in m.28, following the vocal parts.

Quote from Notenschreiber

I realized some differences between your Osanna edition and the urtext edition at Breitkopf:

m.25 Ob1/S Half note d instead of e
Ob2/Vl2 Last quarter note g instead of f

m.28 Ob1 3. quarter note g instead of a
Viola 2. quarter note a, then half note g

According to the editors critical report he corrected the autograph in m.28, following the vocal parts.

Display More

Thanks for this!
The bar 25 errors somehow escaped me.
As for the Breitkopf edition of bar 28, that needs some consideration, but they're probably right to do that. It was hard to know what to do in the violins because his note lengths didn't add up, so I decided to create a different rhythm... perhaps needlessly.
I am trying to hear what Bernius and Viktora do in their recordings, but it's somewhat difficult.