IMSLP Forums

I am looking at the full score of the last section of the Nutcracker ("Finale and Apotheosis") on this page:
http://imslp.org/wiki/The_Nutcracker_(b ... ky,_Pyotr)

Score is here: http://imslp.org/wiki/Special:ImagefromIndex/03573

The key is Bb; the instruments are labelled as expected -- clarinets in Bb, horns in F etc -- but whereas the clarinets have the expected key signature -- two fewer (i.e. zero) flats, the horns also have a blank key signature, where I would expect one flat. But then the horn parts are full of Bb "accidentals", bringing us back to where I would expect.

Can anyone explain this?

Brian Chandler

This is pretty common for horn parts of the era. No matter the pitch of the horn, key signatures were not included. There was a discussion recently on the lilypond mailing list about this that may explain a bit more (Here's one post from the thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilyp ... 00067.html). Personally I prefer lots of accidentals to key signatures. This tradition has probably just made me lazy though. After getting used to parts with lots of accidentals instead of key signatures and then suddenly having a part with an f-sharp major key signature I have to start thinking a bit harder.

Many thanks -- that explains everything! (I exaggerate, but not much)

My current project is to arrange the Finale and Apotheosis at the end of the Nutcracker for two pianos. So many things have just become possible in a way they never were -- access to full scores of anything written before the copyright blackout, easy ways to find out why the original orchestral score has 'Apotheose' in Russian with a theta, and in the newer piano arrangement with a phi, and enough diversions to take up a whole day.

The comments in the other thread were useful too - so horn players are used to transposing on the spot...

Anyway, it's obviously worthwhile to learn how a standard conductor's score works, but I hope that at the same time there's a general realisation of the possibilities once scores are "musicXML objects", instead of page images. It should be trivial to print a study score with all the parts at concert pitch, and (at least optionally) avoiding the C clef. Ideally horn players should be offered the choice of key signatures or not... for example. (I know very little about the horn: I've only ever performed the rondo from Mozart's 4th concerto, in the Flanders and Swann version, of course.)

Brian Chandler

Imaginatorium wrote:
It should be trivial to print a study score with all the parts at concert pitch, and (at least optionally) avoiding the C clef.

While I agree with the desirability of having all computer-typeset full scores notated at concert pitch (or with appropriate octave transpositions for certain instruments -- double bass, piccolo etc.) and have posted on this topic here, I don't think you'll be able to get away with eliminating C clefs altogether. The viola line, in particular, would often be filled with too many hard-to-read ledger lines as a result of using a bass or treble clef instead of their traditional C clef. C clefs, at least in my experience, are easier to figure out than transpositions since the clef placement itself tells you the location of middle-C.

--Sixtus

"The comments in the other thread were useful too - so horn players are used to transposing on the spot..."

I dont believe that's accurate. The horn is a transposing instrument; a part written for Horn in F will sound
a perfect 5th lower than written. Key signatures or lack of same have no effect on the transposition.

jossuk wrote:"The comments in the other thread were useful too - so horn players are used to transposing on the spot..."

I dont believe that's accurate. The horn is a transposing instrument; a part written for Horn in F will sound
a perfect 5th lower than written. Key signatures or lack of same have no effect on the transposition.

He's right though. Horn players natively read in 'f', but are used to transposing on the fly from other keys back into 'f' (the common ones are horn in e, e-flat, d, c, b-flat basso, b-flat alto, and a). Historically, I believe this is part of why horn parts resisted key signatures for so long.

But those earlier horns were crooked, or...?

jossuk wrote:But those earlier horns were crooked, or...?

While I can see how transposing notation might have been useful in the early (pre-keyed) days of woodwind instruments, I have never understood the utility of transposing notation for any brass instrument. If they produced pitches solely depending on each note's place on the harmonic series I could understand how transposing notation might be useful. But re-crooking a natural horn into another key (or the introduction of valves in the 19th Century) doesn't automatically change all the pitches. The embouchure has to change and, more importantly, the frequency produced by the lips has to change too. A-flat above middle C, for example, might be a different harmonic depending on which crook (or valve) is employed, but the player is going to have to "buzz" the A-flat with his lips, regardless of the harmonic. Or am I missing something here?

--Sixtus

Kinda.

Let's say you have a horn with a pitch crooked in F. You switch it out for one crooked in D -- to get the D you have to play the open pitch that you previously played to get the F. Think about how much easier it is when both of these notes read C -- it's the exact same reason clarinets, saxophones, the English Horn, etc. share fingerings with the 'standard' instrument, you only have to remember one set of fingerings and there's less probability of getting confused.