Missa Omnium Sanctorum (completed: Kyrie 1)

    I don't agree with bar 28 in either Seb's or the Breitkopf edition :) Now I see there was already some discussion about it. But in my opinion it's better to keep the viola part as it is written, namely "g4 a2 g4". You cant really say that changing it to "g4 a4 g2" is "following the vocal parts". And the oboe's 3rd quarter note is clearly written as "a". In my opinion such a dissonance doesn't pose too much of a problem and in fact I think it's something that happens in Zelenka. If we really wanted to "follow the vocal parts" we should also change the next measure in Oboe 1, so that it would really follow the altos. But somehow no one is suggesting that :) In my opinion, if we're not doing it here, why do it one measure earlier, if the manuscript is clear?


    edit: just noticed the soprano-alto parallel fifths in bar 27 :)

    Quote from Elwro

    I don't agree with bar 28 in either Seb's or the Breitkopf edition :) Now I see there was already some discussion about it. But in my opinion it's better to keep the viola part as it is written, namely "g4 a2 g4". You cant really say that changing it to "g4 a4 g2" is "following the vocal parts". And the oboe's 3rd quarter note is clearly written as "a". In my opinion such a dissonance doesn't pose too much of a problem and in fact I think it's something that happens in Zelenka. If we really wanted to "follow the vocal parts" we should also change the next measure in Oboe 1, so that it would really follow the altos. But somehow no one is suggesting that :) In my opinion, if we're not doing it here, why do it one measure earlier, if the manuscript is clear?


    edit: just noticed the soprano-alto parallel fifths in bar 27 :)


    Thought I'd chime in as this is interesting. I'd agree with Elwro actually. It's an awkward passage and looks odd on the manuscript. But I don't personally see how changing the oboe 3rd beat to 'G' (as it shows 'A' in the manuscript) and having the viola part as "g4 a4 g2" improves it that much.


    What's odd is that the note G in the Alto and Tenor lines clash with the figures in the continuo bass line which is showing a 5/3 chord on the F second beat. This suggests it should still be a 5/3 on beat 3. If you take out the vocal lines, all the orchestral parts match and fit the harmony in the figures. This would suggest the vocal lines are wrong. But changing the Alto and Tenor lines would break up the horizontal melodic lines which are important in this style of writing. As you'd have to change too many notes of the orchestra parts to try and smooth out these clashes, the editing is then maybe going a bit too far towards re-writing Zelenka


    So, as it isn't obvious if one of the notes is a 'typo' it might be best to just keep it as the manuscript and put it down to the fact Zelenka is more concerned with the horizontal vocal lines working for him than the vertical harmonic movement of the orchestra.


    Very interesting, and not something I've noticed in the other movements.

    Xanaseb, first, thanks very much for your work! But there's something more. You write "for violins I & II in bar 29 I have retained Zelenka's specified notes" but I think you have not. I just consulted the score. It is clear to me that bar 28 starts with an eighth note in both instruments and continues with the syncopated quarters. I think the syncopations are crucial for how the whole thing sounds. So bar 28-29, violin 2, are "c8 c4 c4 c4 c8~c8 c4 f8 f4 e8 d8", and for violin 1 they're "e8 c4 c4 c4 c8~c8 c4 c8 c4. c8".


    Thanks again for making the score available to everyone!


    Rik1, thanks for the very interesting ideas!

    Hi everyone,


    I think we have a final copy:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/nix7…_21_Osanna_score.pdf?dl=0


    Elwro: Yes, that was more or less how I actually typesetted them in the first version (see the first dropbox link), but I needlessly changed my mind after hearing about the Breitkopf edition 'following the vocal parts' ... but that was only for bar 28, not bar 29, so really I shouldn't have changed those violins in bar 29 at all. My bar 28 was totally off however due to my lack of musical experience (I misinterpreted the first two notes, which led me to make the next notes dotted...)
    But now it is fine, I believe. It's good to learn! Do let me know if I got it right, at last ;).


    Notenschreiber: thanks for the image, that was of great help in clearing up things!


    Rik1: Wow, pretty interesting stuff. This is only a few bars which could be easily looked over (in fact, I *did* look them over easily). But, they are just perfectly written to bring an extremely satisfying ending to an awesome fugal setting. The unhinged nature is very inspired, just like so much of Zelenka's late Masses.


    Yes, it now looks exactly as the manuscript. Such an odd ending now seeing it complete, the orchestra and choir moving through the suspensions at different times very slowly (adagio) and then coming together by the second half of bar 29. I must admit superficially it doesn't look as slick as say a JS Bach composition but Zelenka isn't that kind of composer!

    Quote from Xanaseb

    Hi everyone,


    I think we have a final copy:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/nix7…_21_Osanna_score.pdf?dl=0


    ...to summarise:


    In bar 28: After Rik1 & Elwro's comments, I decided against the Breitkopf version and instead used the specified autograph score notes in Oboe 1 and the Viola.


    In bar 29: I corrected my violin I & II errors, to follow the score properly.


    I wonder what Adam Viktora / Ensemble Inégal's score shows in these bars :)


    Thank-you all,


    Seb

    Quote from Rik1

    Yes, it now looks exactly as the manuscript. Such an odd ending now seeing it complete, the orchestra and choir moving through the suspensions at different times very slowly (adagio) and then coming together by the second half of bar 29. I must admit superficially it doesn't look as slick as say a JS Bach composition but Zelenka isn't that kind of composer!


    A case of "*** this, I want to still experiment even though I'm in my 60s" ;)

    +

    H.

    SS.

    OO.

    B.V.M.

    A.M.D.G.

    B.V.M.

    OO.

    SS.

    H.

    +

    Edited once, last by Xanaseb: For some reason 's o d' got censored... ().

    It's been a long time, but I have the Sanctus ready. Once again, scrutiny and proof-reading would be much appreciated (hopefully with fewer issues than last time ;) ).


    I have a question about the range of the baroque violins and viola - could they actually play the unison sections with the bass, even when it goes down to A (in the C2 octave) in the viola (bar 35) and B (C2) in the violins (bar 46)? Surely not, when the G string limits it to g below c' (middle C)...
    Zelenka doesn't write anything to help out here, should I alter the notation to keep it within range, or is there something I'm missing?


    https://www.dropbox.com/s/kq0k…S_ZWV_21_Sanctus.pdf?dl=0

    Quote from Xanaseb

    It's been a long time, but I have the Sanctus ready. Once again, scrutiny and proof-reading would be much appreciated (hopefully with fewer issues than last time ;) ).


    I have a question about the range of the baroque violins and viola - could they actually play the unison sections with the bass, even when it goes down to A (in the C2 octave) in the viola (bar 35) and B (C2) in the violins (bar 46)? Surely not, when the G string limits it to g below c' (middle C)...
    Zelenka doesn't write anything to help out here, should I alter the notation to keep it within range, or is there something I'm missing?


    https://www.dropbox.com/s/kq0k…S_ZWV_21_Sanctus.pdf?dl=0


    Great, I'll have a look through.


    When upper strings are asked to double the bass, they actually play the notes an octave higher (as in bars 78-81). It's really just short hand, but is also similar to a 'bassetto' (which Vivaldi used a lot), where bass clef appears in the violin lines. The bass clef is an indication to the player that they are now playing the bass line, but the sounding notes are an octave higher than written (including viola). I assume players at the time were used to doing this and could read all clefs, though in Dresden the copyists used to put the notes into the right clefs an octave higher. The first beat of bar 36 confirms this.


    For a score, you could leave as is but for performing parts the violin and viola lines would need to be put into the appropriate clef's transposed up an octave. You might want to do it in the score anyway though to avoid the constant jumping between clefs.

    Quote from Rik1

    Great, I'll have a look through.


    When upper strings are asked to double the bass, they actually play the notes an octave higher (as in bars 78-81). It's really just short hand, but is also similar to a 'bassetto' (which Vivaldi used a lot), where bass clef appears in the violin lines. The bass clef is an indication to the player that they are now playing the bass line, but the sounding notes are an octave higher than written (including viola). I assume players at the time were used to doing this and could read all clefs, though in Dresden the copyists used to put the notes into the right clefs an octave higher. The first beat of bar 36 confirms this.


    For a score, you could leave as is but for performing parts the violin and viola lines would need to be put into the appropriate clef's transposed up an octave. You might want to do it in the score anyway though to avoid the constant jumping between clefs.


    Ah, that clears it up! Pretty logical :)

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login