Re: Misleading autobeaming in 3/4

[Craig]

Hi Damian,

I am looking at my copy of the famous Scherzo opus 4 of Brahms.  (Kalmus
Edition) The beaming is clearly r4 r8 8[ 8 8] all over the place, since
the main them is r4 r8 8[ 8 8].  I see this as an expediting right hand
of Mr. Brahms, I bet 100 euros that the original manuscript is beamed
the same way.

I can go get my scores of quintets, quartets, and symphonies, and show
the same beaming.

Craig Bakalian


On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 07:07 -0400, address@hidden wrote:
> sorry to be a pedant, but...
> 
> traditionally, 4. [8 8 8] is the exception to the rule that you
> subdivide the 8ths 2,2,2 in a 3/4 bar
> 
> Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin, Liszt, Brahms and Ravel do
> this consistently. It is also normal for Debussy apart from in the
> late violin sonata .
> 
> the occasional exception to this exception is in phrasing like this:
> 
> 4.( 8)-. 8[(  8]) or 4.( 8)-. 8[(  8] 
> 
> I'm sorry to contradict David but you'll be hard pushed to find many
> published examples of 4. 8 [8 8] that don't have mitigating phrasing
> circumstances (e.g. Rachmaninov prefers a strict 2,2,2 at slow tempi).
> There are, otoh, literally thousands of examples of 4. [8 8 8] in 3/4
> time from the baroque through late-romantic periods - it is certainly
> not 'wrong' even though it 'should' be logically