Skip to main content

Musical adapations that were meant to be

Every now and then you come across a piece of music that has been transfered to a different instrument or body of instruments to the ones it was originally written for. Often such translations are painful. Grieg's piano concerto rendered on a kazoo, say. Or to be less facetious, a brass band rendition of a string quartet.

However occasionally, just one in a thousand of these perversions produces something better than the original. I can think of two examples. Purists might not agree, but I think that Ravel's orchestration of Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition is better than the composer's original piano version. Even more dramatic is Samuel Barber's transformation of his Adagio for Strings into the vocal Agnus Dei. The Adagio is a striking and wonderful work, but when Barber transfered it to voices it was given a haunting, gut-wrenching quality that isn't there in the original, making it quite possibly the most emotionally power piece of music ever written.

So here's your challenge, if you choose to accept it. Can you name other pieces that have been improved by being moved away from the composer's instruments of choice?
Labels:

Comments

  1. Roger Witney13 March 2010 at 11:56

    So Verklarte Nacht doesn't count, then?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brian Clegg13 March 2010 at 13:22

    Not sure what you mean, Roger.

    If you think the orchestral arrangement is better than the original, then yes, that's exactly the sort of think I'm looking for - and the more the merrier.

    If, on the other hand, you are offering a brass band arrangement, I think I would have to decline.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Roger Witney13 March 2010 at 13:47

    A brass band arrangement? Now, there's an idea!! No, I just think the string orchestra version is lusher than the original sextet, but that's not exactly a proper re-orchestration. Can't think of anything else at present.

    ReplyDelete
  4. cromercrox13 March 2010 at 16:30

    J. S. Bach's 'The Art of Fugue' was probably conceived as 'pure music', not intended for performance on any particular instrument. The first recording I heard of this was on a church organ, and it sounded like a pointless dirge, the voices indistinct. Then I got a string-quartet version and it made much more sense.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Brian Clegg14 March 2010 at 14:57

    I would suggest, Henry, that was down to poor choice of registration on the part of the organist - a good organist can really make the Art of Fugue sing. As you say, quite a few Bach pieces don't really have a natural home, but as such can't really qualify in my search for pieces that are better elsewhere than where the composer first evisaged them.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Unknown17 March 2010 at 20:51

    I am an organist currently battling my way through one of J.S.Bach's trio sonatas - BWV529 in C major. I love this music, but I recently heard it played on two violins and a cello with harpsichord continuo. It was absolutely brilliant!

    Peter Main

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp
117 comments
Read more

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor
25 comments
Read more

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense
6 comments
Read more