Lee Hsiaopei

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date:___________________

I, _________________________________________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of:

in:

It is entitled:

This work and its defense approved by:

Chair: _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________

Hsiaopei Lee

The History of Viola Transcriptions and A Comprehensive Analysis of the Transcription for

Viola and Piano of Beethoven’s Violin Sonata Op. 30, No. 1

A thesis submitted to the

Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati

in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

in the Division of Performance Studies of the College-Conservatory of Music

2005

by

Hsiaopei Lee

B.M., National Taiwan Normal University, 1996

M.A., Columbia University, 1999

Committee Chair: Catharine Lee Carroll, DMA

ii

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this thesis is to discuss the transcription of Beethoven’s Violin Sonata Op.

30, No. 1 in A major into a work for viola and piano. This transcription will add greatly to the

lacking solo viola literature by transitional composers of Classical to Romantic period, increase

the viola repertoire for performers, and give viola instructors more choices to help their students

learn the style of early nineteenth-century music. Furthermore, the performance of this

transcription will enhance violists’ understanding of one of the most important composers in

music history.

The crux of this thesis contains a history of viola transcriptions, the relevance of

transcription, the difficulties encountered when transcribing a work for viola using specific

examples both from my own transcription and other arrangements, and a discussion of the

methodology behind these kinds of transcriptions with particular emphasis on my own

transcription of Beethoven’s Violin Sonata Op. 30, No. 1 in A Major. This thesis includes a

complete transcription of Beethoven’s Violin Sonata Op. 30, No. 1, with separate viola and piano

parts. In addition, this work serves as a valuable document for the transcription of viola literature,

a practical guide for choosing and arranging music, and an educational as well as artistic

contribution to the viola literature.

iii

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to express my sincere gratitude to my committee chair and also viola professor, Dr.

Catharine Lee Carroll, for her inspiration for this thesis as well as countless advice on

performing music, scholarly studies and life experience. I would like to thank another viola

professor Masao Kawasaki for his valuable suggestion when arranging the transcription, and his

tireless efforts to foster intellectual curiosity through his teaching. Without their support and

guidance, I would not be the musician I am.

Thank you to my committee members, Dr. Michael D. Fiday and Dr. Piotr J. Milewski.

Many thanks for your interest in my work and advice. Dr. Fiday’s careful reading has made this

thesis more complete and reader-friendly. Dr. Milewski’s special sharing of his opinions about

Beethoven’s violin sonatas was helpful for this work.

Special thanks to Mom and Dad for their constant support and understanding of my musical

career pursuit. Thank you for always believing in me and my abilities, and your patience while I

fulfill my dreams

1

CONTENTS

LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES ………………………………………………….. 4

CHAPTER

1. INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………… 7

2. RECENT VIOLA TRANSCRIPTIONS ……………………………………….. 10

3. LITERATURE TRANSCRIBED BY THE COMPOSER ……………………… 15

Johannes Sebastian Bach …………………………………………………… 15

Ludwig van Beethoven …………………………………………………….. 16

Johannes Brahms …………………………………………………………… 17

Franz Schubert ……………………………………………………………… 19

Max Reger ………………………………………………………………….. 20

4. LITERATURE TRANSCRIBED BY OTHER COMPOSERS …………………. 22

Franz Liszt ………………………………………………………………….. 22

Henri Vieuxtemps …………………………………………………………… 23

Zoltan Kodaly ……………………………………………………………….. 24

Hans Sitt ……………………………………………………………………... 24

Benjamin Britten ……………………………………………………………. 25

Lillian Fuchs ………………………………………………………………… 26

5. LITERATURE TRANSCRIBED BY VIOLISTS ………………………………... 28

2

Lionel Tertis …………………………………………………………………. 28

Paul Hindemith ………………………………………………………………. 31

William Primrose …………………………………………………………….. 31

Paul Doktor ………………………………………………………………….. 37

Milton Katims ……………………………………………………………….. 39

Vadim Borissovsky …………………………………………………………. 41

Watson Forbes ……………………………………………………………….. 42

Alan H. Arnold ………………………………………………………………. 44

Others ………………………………………………………………………… 45

6. THE PLACEMENT OF TRANSCRIPTIONS

IN THE VIOLA LITERATURE ………………………………………………… 47

7. CHALLENGES WHEN TRANSCRIBING WORKS FOR THE VIOLA ……… 55

8. METHODOLOGY ……………………………………………………………….. 63

An Overview of Beethoven Violin Sonata Op. 30, No. 1 …………………… 63

Preparation …………………………………………………………………… 65

Transcribing Steps …………………………………………………………… 66

First Movement ……………………………………………………………… 74

Second Movement …………………………………………………………… 80

Third Movement ……………………………………………………………… 82

3

9. CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………………. 89

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ………………………………………………………… 91

BEETHOVEN VIOLA SONATA OP. 30, NO. 1

Viola Part

Score

4

MUSICAL EXAMPLES

Example Page

1. J. S. Bach, Cello Suite No. 4, Prelude, mm. 5 ………………………… 34

2. Antonio Vivaldi, Cello Sonata No. 1, IV. Allegro,

mm. 34–42 (viola version) …………………………………………… 35

3. Bach, Cello Suite No. 5, Allegro, mm. 94–105 ………………………….. 36

4. Niccolò Paganini, Caprice No. 3, mm. 1–8 ……………………………… 57

5. César Franck, Violin Sonata, III. Recitativo-Fantasia,

mm. 32–36 (violin part only) ………………………………………….. 68

6. Franck, Violin Sonata, III. Recitativo-Fantasia,

mm. 32–36 (viola part / Schmidt) ……………………………………… 68


mm. 32–36 (viola part / Vieland) ……………………………………… 69


mm. 32–36 (viola part / Schwartz) …………………………………….. 70


mm. 32–36 (viola part / Carroll) ……………………………………….. 70

10. Johannes Brahms, Sonatensatz, mm. 254–259 (violin part only) ……….. 72

11. Brahms, Sonatensatz, mm. 254–259 (viola part only) …………………… 72

12. Ludwig van Beethoven, Violin Sonata Op. 30, No. 1, I, Allegro,

mm. 10–19 (violin part only) …………………………………………………. 75

13. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, I. Allegro, mm. 10–19 (viola part only) ……... 75

5

14. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, I. Allegro, mm. 38–64 (violin part only) …….. 76

15. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, I. Allegro, mm. 38–64 (viola part only) …….. 77

16. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, I. Allegro, mm. 101–116 (violin part only) ….. 78

17. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, I. Allegro, mm. 101–116 (viola part only) …… 78





22. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, II. Adagio, molto espressivo,

mm. 1–8 (violin part only) ………………………………………………. 81


mm. 1–8 (viola part only) ……………………………………………….. 81


mm. 44–47 (violin part only) ……………………………………………. 81


mm. 44–47 (viola part only) …………………………………………….. 81

26. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, III. Var. I, mm. 33–52 (violin part only) …….. 83

27. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, III. Var. I, mm. 33–52 (viola part only) ……… 83

28. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, III. Var. IV, mm. 90–108 (violin part only) ….. 85

29. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, III. Var. IV, mm. 90–108 (viola part only) …… 85

30. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, III. Var. V, mm. 109–119 (violin part only) ….. 86

6

31. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, III. Var. V, mm. 109–119 (viola part only) ….. 86

32. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, III. Var. V, mm. 143–163 (violin part only) …. 87

33. Beethoven, Violin Sonata, III. Var. V, mm. 143–163 (viola part only) ….. 87

7

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Although viola literature developed concurrently with that of the violin since the

seventeenth century, it never attained the status of works for its smaller sibling. The viola had

been ignored for almost two hundred years by most composers, and many audiences were not

exposed to it because of this lack of stage time. This problem can be attributed to many

factors, such as its lack of repertoire, its neglect by composers, and its “unpleasant” sound,

among others. Fortunately, at the close of the eighteenth century, composers discovered its

charming voice and gave this instrument a new position of respect in both ensembles and solo

compositions.

The viola was erroneously considered to be a minor solo instrument by many people

for several centuries. As Berlioz noted, “of all the instruments in the orchestra it is the viola

whose excellent qualities have been unappreciated for the longest time.”1 There were very

few melodies written for this instrument in eighteenth century ensemble music. This

inequitable treatment arose out of composers’ misunderstanding of the instrument, the

infrequent writing in four voices (usually in five parts at the time), and the presence of

amateurs or weak violinists in the viola section.2 However, with the improvement of its

1 Hector Berlioz, Treatise on Instrumentation, trans. Theodore Front, enlarged and rev. Richard Strauss

(New York: E. F. Kalmus, 1948), 60. 2 Ibid.

8

construction, its rediscovery by modern composers, and the gradual shift from a five-part to a

four-part scoring, the viola slowly attained a greater status in the orchestra as well as in

chamber music, even being given a chance to shine now and then as a solo instrument. Prior

to the nineteenth century, this inattention to the viola by composers had resulted in a lack of

repertoire.

By the twentieth century the viola truly gained a position of great respect. Today,

there are many more composers creating works for this instrument due to the inspiration of

virtuoso twentieth century violists such as Paul Hindemith (1895-1963), William Primrose

(1903-1982), and Lionel Tertis (1876-1975). Some of these works include Hindemith’s

fourteen viola pieces, the viola concertos of William Walton, Bela Bartok, Walter Piston, and

Alfred Schnittke, and the viola sonatas of Rebecca Clarke, Dimitri Shostakovich, and Arnold

Bax.

Violists have many twentieth-century pieces to choose from, yet little music from

earlier periods, especially from the transitional period between Classic and Romantic,

because of a gaping hole in the repertoire. After reviewing the major composers of this period,

I found that Beethoven did not compose a single original piece for the viola; therefore, I

decided that a transcription of his Violin Sonata Op. 30, No. 1 in A major for viola and piano

would provide violists with a viable performance piece characteristic of this transitional

period. The music is presented in a fully realized performance edition of viola part along with

9

a score with piano part. In the following chapters, I will provide a history of viola

transcription, discuss several important transcribers, describe the placement of these

transcriptions in the viola literature, and conclude with my own complete transcription of

Beethoven’s Viola Sonata, Op. 30, No. 1.

10

CHAPTER 2

RECENT VIOLA TRANSCRIPTIONS

The viola was seen for centuries as an accompanying instrument, and the

development of viola solo playing has lagged behind that of other string family members

except the double bass. Not until the beginning of the twentieth century did major growth of

the solo repertoire for viola occur and various viola schools in different regions of the world

emerge. In order to realize the potential of this new solo instrument and to enrich its own

literature, a large number of transcriptions from various musical eras were published in the

twentieth century.

Transcriptions represent a large portion of the viola literature, and are performed

frequently at viola recitals. Some examples are transcriptions of Schubert’s Arpeggione

Sonata and Brahms’s Sonatensatz; however, the viola scholar Franz Zeyringer holds a special

definition for transcribed music in his book Literature for Viola. Zeyringer categorizes viola

pieces into three groups: original works, borrowed works, and arrangements.3 The pieces

belonging to the second category are mostly early works for viola da gamba, an instrument

rarely used in modern time, or sketches of original viola music left incomplete by composers.

Today, many works in this borrowed work group are regarded as transcriptions or

arrangements by the public. As to the group of arrangements, only a selection of music is

3 Franz Zeyringer, Literatur für Viola (Hartberg: Schönwetter, 1976), 52.

11

listed in Zeyringer’s book. Literature for Viola contains approximately nine thousand original

and borrowed works, along with three thousand selected arrangements. These numbers

clearly show the importance of transcriptions in the viola literature.

Performing pieces transcribed from works for other instruments is not unusual for

violists, especially since violists rely on such transcriptions to play music before the twentieth

century.4 Mostly, viola transcriptions derive from music of other string instruments due to the

similar idiomatic writing, especially from the cello. This is because both the viola and cello

share the same tuning, albeit an octave lower for the open strings of the cello. For this reason,

most cello works can be played on the viola with little changes and almost no balance

problems with the accompaniment. Other transcribed music for viola comes from the

repertoire of wind instruments such as the clarinet, bassoon, or French horn due to the

similarities in timbre. Zeyringer offers his opinion about the media used for these

transcriptions:

Most suitable, however, are arrangements of cello works, as they are merely transposed at the octave and sometimes not at all. Arrangements of clarinet works also lend themselves well. The tone of the clarinet is very much akin to that of the viola, which is confirmed by the literature.5

Several concert pieces commonly programmed on recital programs nowadays are

arrangements or transcriptions. Examples of these works include J. S. Bach’s Six Suites for

4 Ibid. 5 Ibid.

12

Cello and Three Sonatas for Viola da Gamba and Cembalo, BWV 1027-29, Robert

Schumann’s Adagio and Allegro for horn, Franz Schubert’s Arpeggione Sonata, and Johannes

Brahms’s Two Sonatas for Clarinet and Piano, Op. 120, No. 1 and Op. 120, No. 2.

Although they never composed a solo piece featuring the viola, some major

composers including J. S. Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven were excellent violists. Beethoven,

for example, played the viola in the court orchestra of his native city of Bonn before he

permanently settled down in Vienna. His instrument is still on display there at the

Beethovenhaus. Unfortunately, he never completed a single original piece for the viola, only

leaving an unfinished manuscript of the beginning of a sonata, which is preserved in the

Universitätsbibliothek in Frankfurt am Main.6 The only piece he left for viola is an

arrangement, Notturno in D Major for Viola and Piano, Op. 42, which was transcribed from

his String Trio, op. 8. This transcription was composed as a result of financial pressure, and is

generally considered a minor piece because of its meager composition, which I will further

discuss in the next chapter.7

Mozart was an excellent player on both the violin and viola, and was one of a handful

of composers who wrote a solo concerto part for the viola before the nineteenth century. He

played the viola in chamber ensembles with Haydn, Dittersdorf, and Vanhal. While Mozart

6 Ibid., 56. 7 Henry Barrett, The Viola: Complete Guide for Teachers and Students, 2d ed. (Tuscaloosa, Ala.:

University of Alabama Press, 1978), 2.

13

composed many violin sonatas and five violin concerti, he only featured the viola in the

Sinfonia Concertante K. 364 for violin and viola. This piece and his five viola quintets have

been recognized as some of the finest works in the viola literature; however, it is a great

misfortune that Mozart did not leave a concerto or sonata for viola.

Not until Berlioz did the viola been featured as a soloist on stage in front of the

orchestra. Although not a violist himself, he was one of the first composers to explore the

value of the viola. Harold in Italy was commissioned by Paganini in 1834 as a viola concerto,

but he never performed the piece since he felt it was too simple to show off his great

technical ability. After viewing the manuscript of the first movement, Paganini remarked,

“there is not enough for me to do here. I should be playing all the time.”8 This composition

cannot be considered a true viola concerto since the viola solo part does little more than

accompany the orchestra after the first movement. Rather, it is more like an orchestra work

with an obbligato viola part. However, this piece stands in equal significance with Mozart’s

Sinfonia Concertante in the viola literature; violists believe both to be among the most

important and frequently performed viola solo works prior to the twentieth century.

The twentieth century was a high point for viola literature. A large number of viola

works in various guises were composed then—almost all of the currently important solo viola

concerti come from this period. Violists now have a greater selection of pieces from which to

8 David Cairns, trans., The Memory of Hector Berlioz (London: V. Gollancz, Ltd., 1969), 225: quoted

in The History of the Viola, vol. 1 (Ann Arbor, Mich.: Braun-Brumfield, 1993), 192.

14

choose, but the hitherto limited and narrow solo repertoire cause balance issues on a recital

program. The restricted choices of works prior to the twentieth century limit the variety of

program choices. Although music scholars place importance on discovering viola works from

different music periods that were never published, arranging, transcribing or editing pieces

seems to be the most effective way to expand the viola repertoire from before the twentieth

century.

Viola transcriptions are generally done by the original composer, and in some cases

other composers and even violists take on this task. In the following chapters I will provide

several examples and pieces from each category.

15

CHAPTER 3

LITERATURE TRANSCRIBED BY THE COMPOSER

According to the New Harvard Dictionary of Music, music transcription has been a

common practice since the fourteenth century, exemplified in many Renaissance

compositions for keyboard instruments and lute which were translated from vocal works.9

This musical practice of reworking exists throughout the remaining history of music. Some

examples are Brahms’s own arrangement of three orchestral Hungarian Dances for his piano

music for four hands, his Variations on a Theme by J. Haydn set from the orchestral version

for two pianos, and Ravel’s orchestral Tombeau de Couperin from his solo piano piece.10 In

this chapter, I will discuss some original transcriptions by major composers.

Johannes Sebastian Bach

J. S. Bach is one of the earliest masters who enjoyed the art of transcription. Not only

learning compositional technique by transcribing and rearranging works from other leading

composers, Bach’s free exchange of material among his compositions shows that he

considered transcription as a new composition.11 Sir Donald Tovey (1875-1940), a respectful

9 Don Michael Randel, ed., The New Harvard Dictionary of Music (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press

of Harvard University Press, 1986), 53, 866. 10 George S. Bozarth and Walter Frish, “Johannes Brahms: Works,” The New Grove Dictionary of

Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell, 2d ed., vol. 4 (New York: Grove, 2001), 201–04. 11 Leslie D. Paul, “Bach as Transcriber,” Music & Letters 34, no. 4 (1953): 308.

16

musical scholar, used to call Bach “the master who achieved the most astonishing translations

from one medium to the other,” in admiration of his marvelous composition skill.12 Bach’s

Sonata for Clavier and Viola da Gamba No. 1 in G, BWV 1027 from around 1720, was

originally a work for two flutes (BWV 1039). He later transcribed the work for the clavier

and viola da gamba in the late 1730s.13 Since the viola da gamba is not a common instrument

today, these three sonatas are often performed on the cello or the viola.

Ludwig van Beethoven

This arrangement practice can still been seen commonly in the Classical Period. Some

examples are the string quartets and trios by Mozart, who adapted Bach’s fugues to his

compositions.14 As mentioned before, Beethoven left us with no original solo works for the

viola. The Notturno in D Major for Viola and Piano, Op. 42 is an arrangement of an earlier

work, the Serenade in D Major, Op. 8. This work was completed for financial purposes, by

either Beethoven or his piano pupil Ferdinand Ries (1784 – 1838).15 Apparently Beethoven

was not satisfied with this piece. In a letter to Franz Anton Hoffmeister (1754-1812) on

September 22, 1803, he wrote: “The transcriptions are not my own but I have looked through

12 Ibid., 306. 13 Melvin Berger, Guide to Sonatas: Music for One or Two Instruments (New York: Anchor Books,

1991), 6. 14 Randel, New Harvard Dictionary, 53. 15 Ludwig van Beethoven, Notturno for Viola and Piano, Op. 42, rev. and ed. by Sydney Beck (New

York: G. Schirmer, 1949), iii-iv.

17

them and in places improve them. Therefore, I am not willing to have you state that I made

them, for that would be a lie and besides, I could find neither the time nor the patience for

such work.”16 According to Henry Barrett, this work is not a masterpiece; consequently it

disappeared from publishers’ catalogues. Sydney Beck shares his idea about the piece on the

note of his new version of Beethoven’s Notturno:

On close analysis, it appears extremely doubtful that the composer spent much time on this arrangement or that the revision could have gone, at most, beyond the correction of a few details. Aside from numerous examples of bad taste, the awkward writing for the keyboard could hardly have met with his approval, had he cared to take the trouble to examine it critically. Neither could he have been pleased (especially since he played the instrument himself) with the colorless treatment of the viola, even in an arrangement ostensibly nothing more than a piano solo piece with an obbligato viola part. These very weaknesses may account for the apparent lack of interest in the arrangement and its disappearance from publisher’s catalogues after 1890.17

However, this piece finally returned to the viola repertoire with the more adequate

twentieth-century transcription by Sydney Beck.18

Johannes Brahms

The most famous examples of transcriptions in this category of works transcribed by

the original composers are by Johannes Brahms in the Romantic Period. Inspired by the

famous clarinetist Richard Mühlfeld (1856-1907), Brahms composed several pieces for

16 Ibid. 17 Ibid. 18 Barrett, The Viola, 2.

18

clarinet shortly before his death, representing a resurgence of new compositions in his later

years. His Two Sonatas for Clarinet and Piano (Op. 120, No. 1 and No. 2) were completed

during the summer of 1894 in Ischl, and were premiered by Mühlfeld and the composer for

the sister of the Duke of Meiningen on September 19, 1894.19 Later, these two works were

transcribed for viola by Brahms after Joseph Joachim’s suggestion, and published under the

title of “Zwei Sonaten für Klarinette (oder Bratsche) und Pianoforte von Johannes Brahms

Op. 120. Nr. 1 F moll, Nr 2 Es Dur” in 1895.20 A violin version of these two pieces was also

published, but never gained prominence in the violin literature due to the existence of three

original violin sonatas by Brahms. In addition, the natural rich sonorities of both the viola and

the clarinet are well suited to evoking the unique melancholic feeling of Brahms’s final

compositions.

According to Colin Lawson, Brahms seemed to prefer the viola and piano adaptation

of these sonatas, for he believed the combination of these instruments provided a better

blend.21 Other scholars also prefer this particular version. Malcolm MacDonald (1948- ), for

example, noted that the darker huskier tones of the viola seemed to fit the elusive mood better

than the wispy and transparent clarinet.22 Donald Francis Tovey (1875-1940) showed this

19 Roy E. Bennett, “The Brahms Transcriptions of the Opus 120 Sonatas,” American String Teacher 36

(Winter 1986): 76–77. 20 Ibid., 78. 21 Colin Lawson, Brahms: Clarinet Quintet (Cambridge University Press, 1998), 41. 22 Ibid., 42.

19

opinion in his biography entitled Brahms:

The viola is querulous and strained just where the cantabile of the clarinet is warmest. The lowest octave of the clarinet is of a dramatic blue-grotto hollowness and coldness, where the fourth string of the viola is of a rich and pungent warmth. A comparison of Brahms’s viola part with his original clarinet part makes every difference of this kind vividly real, and these viola versions deserve frequent performances in public.23

Brahms employed the same piano part for both the clarinet and viola versions, but

added double stops and made some register changes in the viola part in order to

accommodate the range and timbre of the instrument. As to which instrument is better suited

to present these pieces is a personal taste, and another topic for discussion. In any case, these

works hold an important place in their respective repertoires.

Currently there are several performance editions of the Brahms sonatas arranged for

viola. The major differences in these editions are the register changes and articulation

markings made by the editors. Each edition has a variety of distinction and is adapted by

various violists in their released recordings. Performers have many editions from which to

choose, depending on their interpretation of Brahms’s music.

Franz Schubert

Schubert’s Arpeggione Sonata D. 821 was written for his friend Johann Georg Staufer,

inventor of a bowed-guitar instrument called arpeggione.24 Since the instrument is no longer

23 Ibid.

20

used today, this sonata has become one of the most important pieces of the Romantic period

for the viola. This work is also frequently performed on the cello, double bass or classical

guitar, as well as on the violin, clarinet or flute. Whether borrowed or arranged, the

Arpeggione Sonata is certainly not an original viola piece, but its musicality allows it to be

performed on other instruments instead of vanishing along with the arpeggione itself.

Max Reger

Like Brahms, Max Reger (1873-1916) transcribed some of his clarinet compositions

for viola. Reger wrote three sonatas for clarinet and piano. The first two, Op. 49, were written

in 1900 after he heard a performance of Brahms’s F Minor Clarinet Sonata.25 The Sonate

B-Dur Op. 107 was the last of the three completed in 1909, and was premiered by Reger

himself and the clarinetist Julius Winkler in the same year.26 Later, the composer transcribed

two versions of Op. 107, one for violin and the other for viola, probably under Brahms’s

influence. In the liner notes of a recording featuring Reger’s compositions for violin, Guido

Barth-Purrmann considers these string versions of Op. 107 independent works since they

were performed more than four times between 1909 and 1913.

The performance dates of the sonata attest to the fact that he himself (Reger) was

24 Riley, The History of the Viola, 189. 25 Lawson, Brahms’s Clarinet Quintet, 83. 26 Guido Barth-Purrmann, “Max Reger’s Compositions for Violin and Piano,” trans. Susan Marie

Praeder, in Max Reger, Violin Sonatas, Ulf Wallin and Roland Pöntinen, CPO 999 75202, 2000, 18.

21

behind these versions in his role as composer and was not simply responding to the publisher’s request to boost the safes figures of the printed music. . . .The string versions are not at all to be regarded as arrangements. Rather, they are translations of the text in keeping with the original, and the tonal modifications result from the specific expressive scale of the particular stringed instrument.27

Wilhelm Altmann (1862 – 1951) believes this last clarinet sonata is an important work among

Reger’s compositions, and also well-suited for the viola.28 This work is an important part of

the viola repertoire, even chosen today as required repertoire for international competition.

27 Ibid., 19. 28 Wilhelm Altmann, “Max Reger,” Cobbett’s Cyclopedic Survey of Chamber Music, ed. Walter

Willson Cobbett, vol. 2 (London: Oxford University Press, 1930), 283.

22

CHAPTER 4

LITERATURE TRANSCRIBED BY OTHER COMPOSERS

Many outstanding composers have enriched music repertory with their delicate

arrangements of other works of great musicality. Some well-known examples include

Busoni’s piano edition of Chaconne from Bach’s violin composition, Ravel’s orchestral

version of Pictures at an Exhibition from Moussorgsky’s piano piece, and Webern’s

orchestral arrangement of Musical Offering from Bach’s organ work. In this chapter, I will

discuss similar arrangements in the viola repertoire.

Franz Liszt

Harold in Italy is one of the most important works in viola literature from before the

twentieth century. Cherished by violists, the work is regarded as one of Berlioz’s outstanding

compositions because of its brilliant orchestration. In 1836, Franz Liszt even created a piano

and viola version. In his edition, the piano plays the orchestral part, while the viola part

remains unchanged. Maurice Riley stated that Liszt’s piano part followed Berlioz’s

harmonization throughout but is restrained from many pianistic idiomatic writings. The piano

part also never departs from the original mood or character of the composition.29 This

version, like many of Liszt’s other transcriptions, is a challenge for many pianists. For violists,

29 Hector Berlioz, Harold en Italie; Symphonie en Quatre Parties, Avec un Alto Principal, Op. 16.

Partition de Piano (Avec la Partie d’alto), ed. Maurice Riley (Michigan: University Music Press, 1959), ii.

23

it is not only a tool for rehearsing, but also a work suitable for a recital. According to Hugh

Macdonald, in a newly published version, more music is added to the viola line in the last

three movements:

The present arrangement is intended to make the work readily available to violists by providing a more playable piano reduction of the orchestral part and by giving the viola an element of the orchestral music when the soloist is otherwise silent. It may thus serve for rehearsals of the orchestral version and as a challenging study for violists.30

This edition provided more material on the viola part, which will increase its performance

opportunities in recital programs.

Henri Vieuxtemps

Henri Vieuxtemps (1820-1881) was an outstanding Belgian violinist and composer

in the late nineteenth century. Several of his violin compositions have become part of the

standard repertoire for violinists. Vieuxtemps also wrote several pieces for viola, including a

Sonata in B, Op. 36 (also for cello), Elegie, Op. 30 (scored for viola or cello and piano), and

Capriccio, Op. posth. These viola compositions display an operatic singing character and are

full of virtuostic violin style passages, as Vieuxtemps was a marvelous violinist and a

transcriber of many operatic airs for violin.

Not only a composer for viola, Vieuxtemps also transcribed works to contribute to

30 Hector Berlioz, Harold en Italie, Symphonie en 4 Parties Avec un Alto Principal, ed. by Hugh

Macdonald (Kassel; New York: Bärenreiter, 2001), iii.

24

the viola library. One of these is the Caprice, Op. 55, a work originally for violin. Besides

arranging his own works, he also transcribed other composers’ pieces. Examples include the

transcription for viola and piano of Mozart’s Clarinet Quintet, K. 581, and a short excerpt

from the French composer Félicien David’s (1810-1876) symphonic ode Le Désert, La Nuit

into a viola work.

Zoltan Kodaly

The Hungarian composer Zoltan Kodaly’s (1882-1967) arrangement of Bach’s

Fantasia Chromatica for viola solo is also a challenging piece in the viola literature. Violists

need a solid technique to be able to perform this work. Nonetheless, this piece is not

considered to be a well-composed work in Barrett’s view: “The piece suffers in comparison

to the original in that there is a general lack of resonance. The arpeggiated passages are a

realization of chords in the harpsichord score and give the work, at quick glance, a startling

resemblance to the Paganini Caprices.”31 However, this arrangement has become the selected

repertoire in important contests such as the Lionel Tertis Viola Competition.

Hans Sitt

Hans Sitt (1850-1922) was a violinist, composer, and the violist of the Brodsky

31 Barrett, The Viola, 3.

25

Quartet. He composed several works and etude books for viola, including the 15 Studies for

Viola, Op. 116, Practical Viola Method, Concertpiece in G minor for Viola and Piano, Op. 46,

Viola Concerto Op. 68, and Album Leaves for Viola and Piano, among others. Besides writing

music for viola, Sitt transcribed pieces from other composers, such as the Romance for viola

and piano by Max Reger, a work originally written for violin and piano.

Benjamin Britten

A pianist, composer, conductor, and violist, Benjamin Britten (1913-1976) was a

remarkable English musician in the twentieth century. Lachrymae Op. 48 was a piece

composed in 1950 and is frequently programmed in recitals. In 1932, Britten began arranging

for viola and piano a work from his teacher Frank Bridge’s (1879-1941) There is a Willow

Grows Aslant a Brook, which was originally composed for small orchestra. The arrangement

was finished in 1934, but was not performed publicly until 1988. The premiere of this work

was given by Nobuko Imai and Roger Vignoles on August 27th, 1988 as part of the Lionel

Tertis Competition and Workshop.32

32 Frank Bridge, There is a Willow Grows Aslant a Brook, arr. for Viola and Piano by Benjamin Britten

(London: Thames Publishing, 1990), i.

26

Lillian Fuchs

Known as one of the great American violists, Lillian Fuchs (1903-1995) was also a

teacher, violinist, and composer. Most of her compositions are for string instruments,

including a piano trio, a piano quartet, and several viola pieces and violin pieces inspired by

her brother, violinist Joseph Fuchs, who even encouraged Lillian to compose the piano

accompaniment for Paganini’s Caprices for him to perform in the recitals.33 A violinist in her

early career, Fuchs sought to have influential composers and musical styles represented in her

viola repertoire. Mozart was one of her favorite composers, but unfortunately he did not write

a solo viola concerto. In order to remedy this situation, Fuchs realized that an adaptation of a

work for an instrument with similar musical and technical demands would suffice. She

transcribed Mozart’s Violin Concerto in G Major, K. 216 for viola. She expressed this desire

in the forward of the publication:

It has been generally conceded that the absence of a Concerto for Viola by an acknowledged classic master has left a serious void in the limited literature for the instrument. In an endeavor to fulfill this need, I have chosen to recast the Mozart Violin Concerto in G Major (Köchel No. 216) for the viola. This work possesses an unusually “dark” register and an intimate beauty which, together with its color, range, and technique make it most suitable to the peculiarities of the viola. I offer this adaptation to all players of the viola with the sincere hope that it will, while enriching the repertoire for the instrument, afford pleasure to both player and listener alike.34

33 Amédée Daryl Williams, Lillian Fuchs, First Lady of the Viola (Lewiston: E. Mellen Press, 1994),

102. 34 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Concerto (Köchel No. 216) transcribed by Lillian Fuchs as Violin

Concert in G Major with Original Cadenzas (New York: M. Witmark, 1947), i.

27

Fuchs provides a classical cadenza in this transcription. According to David Sills, a former

viola professor who studied with Fuchs, the entire piece was not an unconscious

transformation of a violin edition, but was prepared as if it were a work originally intended

for viola.35 He believed that, “the editing is no mechanical translation of a violin edition, but

was done as for a viola work, continuing the concept espoused in the study materials and in

the Sonata Pastorale. The Cadenzas are of superior quality, and might with profit be studied

by violinists as well.”36 Although Fuchs designed her own score for viola and piano,

published in 1947, this transcription never gained much attention from violists.37

35 David Sills, “The Viola Music of Lillian Fuchs,” American String Teacher 35 (1985): 60. 36 Ibid. 37 Williams, Lillian Fuchs, 103.

28

CHAPTER 5

LITERATURE TRANSCRIBED BY VIOLISTS

To further expand the repertoire of the viola, many violists in the twentieth century

have not only commissioned works from current composers, but also made their own

arrangements of works from previous eras. Almost all of the prominent violists in the

twentieth century made important contributions to the viola repertoire by transcribing pieces

from other literature. Some of the most important violist transcribers include Lionel Tertis,

William Primrose (1904-1982), Paul Doktor (1919-1989), Milton Katims (1909-??), Vadim

Borissovsky (1900-1972), Watson Forbes (1909-1997), and Alan H. Arnold. Their

transcriptions provide a rich resource of performance literature and have inspired violists

following in their footsteps to continue expanding the viola library. Each of them has a

different viewpoint regarding the role of transcriptions in viola music. By comparing their

publications, each of them applies a different methodology to their editions. This chapter will

discuss some important violist transcribers in the twentieth century as well as their

approaches toward transcription.

Lionel Tertis

Lionel Tertis was the most influential English viola performer and teacher to make

significant efforts in extending the viola literature. He was the first of three outstanding

29

violists who switched from the violin to the viola during the first half of the twentieth century,

and demonstrated that the viola is a very viable instrument for recitals. Tertis’s fine

performances not only proved the viola’s worth as a solo instrument, but also inspired the

numerous works composed specifically for him. Hence, composers were challenged to write

pieces for his instrument in an idiomatic style, and to treat the viola as a separate entity in the

family of stringed instruments.

Meanwhile, Tertis dedicated his entire life to arranging pieces for his chosen instrument.

In his book My Viola and I, he shares his attitude toward these transcriptions:

[Once] you become a viola-player one of your most important duties is to strive to enlarge the library of solo viola music, by fair means or foul. Cajole your composer friends to write for it, raid the repertory of the violin, cello or any other instrument, and arrange and transcribe works from their literature suitable for your viola. The Pecksniffan attitude that it is sacrilege to transpose works from the original to another medium is fast disappearing. I have never had a qualm about making arrangements myself, providing of course that they sound well on the viola. . . . My urge to add to the library of viola music has always been strengthened by the fact that the great masters themselves rearranged no end of their works, for all sorts of instruments and combinations.38

Besides premiering contemporary compositions by composers such as Arnold Bax,

Ralph Vaughan Williams, Gustav Holst, Thomas Dunhill, and York Bowen, Tertis arranged

numerous standard string works for viola.39 Examples of these transcribed pieces include

Elgar’s Cello Concerto, Brahms’ Cello Sonata in E Minor, Op. 38, Mozart’s Clarinet

38 Lionel Tertis, My Viola and I: A Complete Autobiography (London: Paul Elek, 1974), 161–62. 39 Sheila Nelson, The Violin and Viola (London: Ernest Benn Limited, 1972), 191.

30

Concerto, and Mendelssohn’s Songs Without Words, Op. 19.40 Meanwhile he also transcribed

several important violin method books for the viola, including the Sevcik’s School of

Technique Op. 1, School of Bowing Technique, Op. 2, and Changes of Position and

Preparatory Scale Studies, Op. 8. These transcribed method books have become essential

pedagogical resources.

In addition to transcribing solo works for viola, Tertis also arranged and performed

pieces for viola ensembles. One example is Beethoven’s Trio for Two Oboes and English

Horn, Op. 87, which he transcribed for three violas. These viola chamber compositions not

only enriched the viola library, but also gave violists a particular pleasure and satisfaction to

work and perform together as a group.

Tertis not only transcribed and published works for the viola, but he also frequently

performed these arrangements in concerts, and distributed the music to his students. Several

of his recordings usually included some arranged or transcribed pieces along with works

written for him. His great effort to promote the viola as a true solo instrument was

indisputable and his numerous transcriptions not only expanded the viola library, but

encouraged later violists to continue his pioneering efforts.

40 Tertis, My Viola, 172.

31

Paul Hindemith

Paul Hindemith was a famous performer, composer, conductor, and teacher during the

first half of the twentieth century. A great violist himself, he composed over twenty pieces for

the instrument. In addition to debuting his own works, he also premiered concerti by other

composers such as William Walton and Darius Milhaud. Even though Hindemith did not

leave a single transcription for violists, he contributed much new music, including four viola

concertos, six pieces for viola and piano and four for unaccompanied viola.41 Hindemith’s

compositions for viola have become the basic repertoire for every violist. His viola concerto

Der Schwanendreher is considered equally important as the ones from Béla Bartok and

William Walton.

William Primrose

Completing this remarkable triumvirate of twentieth century violists is William

Primrose. Yehudi Menuhin (1916-1999) put it tersely: “If Lionel Tertis was the first

protagonist, Primrose was certainly the first star of the viola.” Although William Primrose did

not study with Tertis, Tertis’s gained acceptance as a violist by audiences in London

influenced Primrose’s career decision to play an instrument just beginning to establish itself

in solo repertoire.

41 David D Boyden and Ann M. Woodward, “Viola”, Grove Music Online, ed. L. Macy; available

from http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.libraries.uc.edu; Internet; accessed 4 April 2005.

32

Encouraged by Eugene Ysäye, Primrose pursued his career as a violist after studying

a few years with him.42 This change made his name synonymous with the viola just as the

name Heifetz was with the violin in the worldwide music circle. He became the most sought

after solo violist and performed the existing major works for viola and orchestra, such as

Berlioz’s Harold in Italy and Mozart’s Symphonie Concertante K. 364. To expand material

for recitals and increase engagements with orchestras, Primrose arranged and transcribed

many works for these performances and published them with his own bowings and fingerings.

In these publications, Primrose gave distinct bowings and fingerings that are different from

the traditional violin markings. In the foreword of the Bach Cello Suites, he pointed out the

inappropriate approach to fingerings:

[To] finger the viola as one would the violin is one of the greatest transgressions among players today, especially those violinists who are under the impression that performance on the viola is no more or less than playing on a “big fiddle.” Such blithe ignorance I deplore, and in my book on viola playing and technique I suggest that it is just such an approach that has caused the instrument to be regarded by the public as the dull dog of the string family.43

Three principles that Primrose followed while editing fingerings and bowings are the frequent

use of open strings and natural harmonics, superior application of adjacent fingers, and

greater exploit of string crossings.44 Furthermore, Primrose disagreed with the idea of

42 Riley, vol. 1, 231. 43 Johann Sebastian Bach, “Five Suites for Viola,” Great Performance Edition, ed. William Primrose

(G. Schirmer, Inc. 1978), 3–4. 44 Ibid.

33

blocking positions, so he suggested that his students consider the instrument as of one

position, and adapted the use of extensions as much as possible.45

Primrose believed that one of the most unique characters of the viola was its sonority,

especially the sound of its open strings. Although the pitches of the top three strings on the

viola match the lower three strings of the violin, these open strings do not carry the same

sound quality. He strongly encouraged violists to use more open strings and harmonics to

stress this distinction:

First of all, my attention was drawn to the different approach to viola fingerings when studying the many editings of Lionel Tertis. I have steadily maintained that a much freer use of the open strings and natural harmonics is not only permissible but suits the sonorities obtainable on the viola, where a similar resort to fingering would prove disconcerting in the case of the violin.46

Keeping the fingerings as simple as possible is Primrose’s rule for good performance.

Primrose’s regulations about using more open strings and harmonics not only bring out the

special sound sonority of the viola, but also ease technical difficulties in the meantime.

Without these technical restrictions, players can focus more on the music itself and gain more

room to express their musical ideas. Primrose gives an example to support his idea of using

more harmonics: “For instance, I use a great many harmonics in the 5th Caprice of Paganini.

It is well-known to violists that due to the size of the instrument, there is much difference in

45 Applebaum, “William Primrose,” The Way They Play, vol. 1, 253. 46 Bach, “Five Suites for Viola,“ ed. Primrose, 4.

34

fingerings and in the use of shifts.”47

Motivated by the violinist Josef Szigeti (1892-1973), Primrose used many adjacent

fingers on broken fifths.48 Considering the tension created in the left hand while pressing

down the interval of the fifth, Primrose suggests players try adjacent fingers to avoid the

stiffness. Examples are the fingerings in his edition of the E-flat Bach Suite:

However, the player needs to have a much more flexible left hand to handle the extra shifting

while trying this technique. In my opinion, this kind of shifting is more suitable for players

who have bigger hands or own a relatively small viola.

Bariolage is the string crossing skill that is often used to make timbre changes. In

considering the character of the piece and the effect of the sound quality on the melodic line,

47 Applebaum, “William Primrose,” The Way They Play, vol. 1, 257. 48 Bach, “Five Suites for Viola,“ ed. Primrose, 4.

35

using string crossings sometimes is a better choice than shifting on the same string. This kind

of example can be found in most of Primrose’s published music. The following music is an

example of Bariolage. Primrose transcribed six Vivaldi cello sonatas for the viola. The last

movement of sonata no. 1 is shown below. Primrose started the sixteenth-note passages with

the fourth finger in second position on the D string instead of in first position on the A string

to add a darker color to the soft line after the forte passage. One can also notice Primrose’s

use of open strings for the convenience and flexibility of position changes in this example.

The editing of fingerings and bowings for viola works was still a new practice during

Primrose’s time. He experimented with his ideas for these techniques and displayed them in

his editions, which give players a great help. He remarked on his editing of fingerings: “I use

many unorthodox fingerings which cause unusual and frequent string changes in the same

36

position, which the violinist could not possibly do without actually spoiling passages.”49

The following example is a comparison of Primrose’s idea of using fingerings. It is an

internal passage from the Allegro movement of Bach C Minor Cello Suite. One can see

Primrose’s use of adjacent fingerings on the interval of the fifth and use of open G back in

first position in the first measure of the example. Another use of adjacent fingering and open

strings for the same reasons can be found two measures later, followed by the use of

Bariolage for sonority purposes. The use of open G on the eighth note a few measures later is

not only a perfect way to highlight the returning of the subject, but also an example of how he

emphasizes the unique sound of viola’s open strings.

In his transcriptions, Primrose tends to keep the musical line in the higher register of the

viola. This approach is important for convincing the music world that the viola has sufficient

49 Applebaum, “William Primrose,” The Way They Play, vol. 1, 237.

37

projection to perform as a solo instrument. The Primrose transcriptions prove that the viola is

not only a good accompanying voice but also a viable solo instrument.

Primrose changed the public’s opinion about the viola. His highly respected scores and

books also have secured his posterity. In his book Playing the Viola, Primrose describes the

numerous arrangements and editions he made:

Transcriptions have been grist to the mill of instrumentalists and composers almost since the dawn of music as we know it. Johann Sebastian Bach is a prime example of the composer who helped himself liberally to the confections of his contemporaries. … In my own case, I have never had an original thought in my head in the matter of musical composition, while I have flattered myself that I am a likely lad when it comes to picking other men’s brains. But I have never ventured unless convinced that what was at hand for transmutation might evolve with shrewd alchemy into something that would not insult its origin.50

Besides being devoted to publishing and performing these transcriptions, Primrose reminded

violists of the 14,000 works for the viola listed in Zeyringer’s book Literatur für Viola. Many

of them are still not performed regularly. Therefore, while it is important to find suitable

pieces for transcription, violists need to simultaneously rediscover the value of their own

literature.

Paul Doktor

Paul Doktor was an active violinist and violist in the twentieth century. He received

his musical training as a violinist from his father who was the violist of the Busch String

50 Ibid., 184.

38

Quartet. Doktor switched to the viola in 1942 and later won the Geneva International Music

Competition, and also premiered viola concerti by Quincy Porter and Walter Piston.51 Doktor

had a totally different opinion than Tertis and Primrose regarding transcriptions, especially

those from violin works. In Doktor’s view, the viola is an expressive instrument and should

not try to imitate the virtuoso style of the violin: “[We] should be aware that the

instrumentalist is playing a viola, not a violin. Nor should it be his ambition to imitate the

violinist in performance of virtuoso pieces.”52 Meanwhile, he also believed that it is not

necessary to use transcriptions because he felt violists already have enough original works for

creating programs:

Let me start by saying that we must get away from transcriptions which have been made purely because editors feel there is a lack of viola material and then pad the literature with pieces which sound better on their original instruments. But whatever transcriptions are made, the piano part should be very carefully watched and musically adjusted. The question should be asked: would the original composer approve of the final result?53

While discussing published transcriptions, Doktor stated that it was very important to

choose works from instruments that share the same register with the viola. Hence, works

transposed a fifth down from the violin part are not suitable to perform on the viola. At the

same time, he added that a carefully edited piano part is an essential component of a good

51 Watson Forbes, “Paul Doktor,” Grove Music Online, ed. L. Macy; available from

http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.libraries.uc.edu; Internet; accessed 20 April 2005. 52 Samuel Applebaum and Sada Applebaum, “Paul Doktor,” The Way They Play, vol. 1 (Neptune City,

N.J.: Paganiniana Publications, Inc., 1972), 222. 53 Ibid., 224.

39

transcription. He preferred transcriptions made from works for the cello, such as Bach’s cello

suites, because the differences between the viola and cello are not as numerous as those

between the violin and viola, and therefore requiring fewer changes:

Transcriptions would be satisfactory if both the original instrument and the viola covered about the same range, such as the clarinet or horn. In the case of violin sonatas, the fifth-down transcription contributes a certain dullness to the solo part (which certainly wasn’t there in the original) and the viola thus suffers as a result: Listeners are apt to be confirmed in their mistaken belief that the viola has a dull sound. Such as transcription from violin to viola also presents an added complication, for the piano accompaniment is apt to be so low as to be acoustically untenable.54

Although Paul Doktor disagreed with Tertis and Primrose in the use of transcriptions, he

did acknowledge the lack of materials for beginning violists, and suggested transcribing

books for the violin to solve this problem. As a matter of fact, Doktor himself arranged and

published two books of solo pieces for beginners in order to expand the availability of

teaching materials. His other arrangements such as Schubert’s Arpeggione Sonata and

Mozart’s two Duets for violin and viola are also significant contributions for violists.

Milton Katims

A conductor and violist, Milton Katims was not only an active musician on the stage,

but also a publisher of a great deal of music for the viola. Most of his transcriptions are from

cello works, the remaining from violin and woodwind instruments. Katims seems to prefer

54 Ibid.

40

retaining the key of the original composition in his transcriptions. In some way, it is a more

considerate approach for both the player and those audience members with perfect pitch who

are already used to hearing the piece in the original key. Keeping the same key is also a

friendly approach for accompanists familiar with the original who might otherwise have to

relearn the piano part in a different key. However, performing in original key often requires a

violist with greater skill, especially the arrangements from the violin literature. Because

violists will get chances to stay in higher positions more frequently. Katims’s transcription of

the Bach Cello Suite No. 6 is one of the editions that remain in the same key. The gigue

movement is a tricky test for violists who choose to perform this edition.

Similar with Primrose’s approach to the melody line, Katims explored the high range

of the viola. His transcription of Schubert’s Arpeggione Sonata is one example. In this work,

he keeps the viola melody on the A string, which challenges the performer, yet brings the

audience more excitement at the same time. However, since insufficient technique might

decrease the beauty of the work itself, Katims provides another possible way to play these

passages on an optional staff printed below.

One of the distinguishing features of Katims’s transcription is his inclusion of many

dynamic, articulation, and phrase markings. Sometimes he indicates tempo markings and

performance durations as well. Studying these transcriptions informs the player about the

editor’s interpretation of the music. The fingerings (sometimes there are two fingerings

41

suggested in the same spot) also help while first learning the piece. But too many detailed

indications sometimes discourage a player’s own understanding of the music. Learning the

music through these markings while still maintaining an independent musical conception is a

consideration we should keep in mind at all times.

Vadim Borissovsky

Vadim Borissovsky, father of the Russian Viola School, is another great violist who

contributed a huge amount of transcriptions to the viola library. As the violist of the

Beethoven Quartet and as a viola professor of the Moscow Conservatory, Borissovsky edited

and arranged 253 works for viola. Most of the pieces are transcribed from works of

contemporary Russian composers. According to Riley, Borissovsky arrangements were

accepted not only by the violists but by the original composers:

Two of his (Borissovsky) last transcriptions for viola and piano were “Four Pieces” from music written by Shostakovich for the film The Gadfly, and “Seven Fragments” from Prokofiev’s Romeo and Juliet Ballet. Both are virtuoso works in the grand style. The composers not only approved these transcriptions, but encouraged them.55

Borissovsky showed his interest in transcriptions by not only transcribing works for viola but

also some for other instruments. Many of his transcriptions provide parts in addition to a

viola part, such as for the clarinet, supplied in the same publication.

Besides these transcriptions, Borissovsky made other contributions to the viola field.

55 Riley, vol. 1, 261.

42

In 1927 he met Hindemith in Berlin, and they formed “The Violist’s World Union.” However,

this organization for violists did not last long due to the rise in power of Hitler and the Third

Reich.56 Borissovsky also met the German musicologist Wilhelm Altmann (1862-1951)

before the war, and they published Literaturverzeichnis für Bratsche und Viola d’amour

(Wolfenbüttel, 1937), a repertoire list for viola and viola d’amore.57 The compilation is a

pioneering effort in viola literature, containing viola works from European, Russian, and

North American composers before 1937.

Watson Forbes

A well-known violist, teacher, chamber musician, and arranger, Watson Forbes left

violists innumerable editions and transcriptions. After deciding to become a violist with the

background as a violinist in the late 1920s, Forbes quickly noticed the problem of the lack of

solo viola repertoire.58 Forbes discussed three ways to resolve this problem:

I quickly realized that if I were to survive as a soloist I had to get busy in three directions, 1) actually investigate viola repertoire not yet published, 2) make arrangements and 3) persuade composers to write for the viola.59

Forbes encouraged his friends, colleagues, and teachers to compose viola works, and

56 Ibid. 57 Ibid. 58 Watson Forbes, “These I Have Loved,” Die Viola (1980): 85. 59 Ibid.

43

meanwhile made transcriptions either alone or in collaboration with someone else.

Forbes expressed his attitude toward transcriptions at the Sixth International Viola

Congress in 1978.60 Since the leading composers of the past such as Bach, Handel, Haydn,

Mozart, and Tchaikovsky did not leave any major work for solo viola, violists are at great

disadvantage when beginning to develop their own repertoire.61 For this reason, arranging

works of other media written by major composers can resolve this problem. Forbes pointed

out that even instruments with their own countless music such as the piano and violin

frequently use transcriptions to expand their repertory, and so violists should explore the

potential of arrangements.62 In response to the issue of authenticity, Forbes indicated that

even original works such as Beethoven’s symphonies and Bach’s unaccompanied sonatas for

violin are often performed in different styles due to advancements in instrument construction

and the resulting changes in sound. A slight loss of authenticity should be tolerated as long as

it does not affect the musicality.63

However, Forbes warned that the quality of the viola repertory is more important than

the quantity. He believed that arranging a work for another instrument is like translating a

book into a different language. He said that, “[the] ideal is to try and realize how the author

60 Watson Forbes, “The Value of Transcriptions,” The Strad 89 (April 1979): 1115. 61 Ibid., 1111. 62 Ibid., 1113. 63 Ibid., 1111.

44

would have written if he had had the new language in mind.”64 Meanwhile, Forbes also

emphasized that the role of the arranger is to represent the work accurately in respect to the

natural idiom of the instrument.65 The inclusion of too many individual editorial ideas of

editor is not proper in this situation. Forbes thus tried to keep music’s originality in his

editions. Most of his transcriptions do not have many personal markings of dynamics,

phrasings, and articulations, which often keep the player from a clear view of the music itself.

Many viola teachers recommend his edition of Bach Cello Suites because it is one of the

closest versions to the original manuscript.

Most of Forbes’s arrangements were taken from string pieces, a great majority from

Bach’s works. Examples include Bach’s 6 Cello Suites, 6 Sonatas and Partitas for Violin,

Brandenburg Concerto No. 6 (orchestra part arranged for piano), and others. Additionally,

Forbes published several books of short pieces from different musical periods for students at

different playing levels. He believed that viola beginners would benefit from studying music

from major composers instead of playing only original viola works by obscure composers.66

Alan H. Arnold

Alan H. Arnold also published many transcriptions with Viola World Publications. His

64 Ibid., 1113. 65 Ibid., 1115. 66 Ibid., 1115.

45

editions fall into three types: studies, repertoire, and ensemble works. The studies include

some etudes books, scale systems, and technical exercises. Most of the pieces in the

repertoire part are short in duration. Arnold borrowed or adapted this material from both

instrumental and vocal compositions. These transcriptions often serve as encore pieces in solo

recitals. Transcriptions for ensembles contain several famous compositions that were

originally for the violin, such as Vivaldi’s Concerto for Four Violins. These ensemble pieces

give violists more chances to perform as a group. In most of these transcriptions, Arnold

changed the key signatures of the original pieces. Some of them are a fifth lower than the

original key, like most transcriptions from the violin works. Some of them are a fourth higher,

representing works taken from the cello literature.

Others

In addition to transposing solo pieces from other media for the viola and piano, some

violists arrange works for the viola as a solo instrument with chamber orchestra. Yuri

Bashmet (1953- ), a student of Vadim Borissovsky, is one violist who continues to create new

performance possibilities for solo viola and his own string orchestra, the Moscow Soloists.

Bashmet seeks materials for concerts and recitals not only by commissioning modern pieces

but also by rediscovering forgotten or lost compositions. Bashmet’s recording of the viola

transcription of Brahms’s Clarinet Quintet in B Minor Op. 115 is one example. Another

46

example is the concert information indicated on his official website:

The 10th anniversary concert - 12 October 2002 - was a case in point. After Schoenberg's Verklärte Nacht - given in tandem with actors reading Richard Dehmel's original poem (the original inspiration for Schoenberg) - the Moscow Soloists honored Paganini in recognition of the 220th anniversary of his birth, with a reconstruction of a viola piece, before premièring Bashmet's own transcription of Giya Kancheli's String Trio.67

In addition to receiving many works composed for him from contemporary Russian

composers such as Alfred Schnittke, Sofia Gubaidulina, and Georgian Giya Kancheli,

Bashmet has also encouraged a growth in the viola literature far exceeding any previous

period in musical history.68

Other violists also tried to gain more performance opportunities by arranging pieces.

Wolfram Christ is currently an active violist whose recordings circulate throughout the world.

One of his recordings released by Koch is his arrangement of Bach’s Concerto in D major for

viola, strings, and basso continuo, reconstructed from BWV 169, 49 and 1053 with Berliner

Barock Solisten.69

67 Yuri Bashmet, “Moscow Soloists,” Yuri Bashmet’s Official Website: available from

http://www.yuribashmet.com/; Internet: accessed 19 April 2005. 68 Yuri Bashmet, “Expanding the Repertoire,” Yuri Bashmet’s Official Website; available from

http://www.yuribashmet.com/; Internet: accessed 19 April 2005. 69 Wolfram Christ, “New CD Releases,” WolframChrist’s Official Website; available from

http://www.wolframchrist.de/index.html; Internet; accessed 19 April 2005.

47

CHAPTER 6

THE PLACEMENT OF TRANSCRIPTIONS IN THE VIOLA REPERTOIRE

The viola solo repertoire can be divided into three categories: works from composers

who had particular interests in the viola or wrote in many genres, such as Berlioz,

Shostakovich and Walton; works composed by the virtuoso violinists or violists, such as

Paganini, Vieuxtemps, and Hindemith; and transcriptions. Transcriptions make up a huge

portion of the viola literature. Many scholars such as Malcolm Boyd feel it is necessary for

violists to use a great number of arrangements in order to extend the repertoire.70 Alexandre

Cellier and Fred Rothwell cited the viola as an example among several instruments that need

to rely on transcriptions: “Certain instruments, such as the viola, so deserving of admiration,

are created for so poorly as regards repertoire, that they are compelled to borrow from those

more richly endowed.”71 Transcribed music plays an important role in the development of

viola solo literature for the following reasons:

1. Enrichment – a remedy for the long-time ignorance of its capability as a solo

instrument by well-known composers

2. Performance – a key to improve the big gap in the viola repertoire before the

twentieth century

70 Malcolm Boyd, “Arrangement,” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley

Sadie and John Tyrrell, 2d ed., vol. 2 (New York: Grove’s Dictionaries, 2001), 66. 71 Alexandre Cellier and Fred Rothwell, “Is Transcription Permissible?” The Musical Times 66:992

(Oct. 1925): 901.

48

3. Pedagogical – a solution to enhance technical and musical training for younger

violists

The viola did not frequently receive a solo position on stage until the twentieth

century. Through performing transcriptions in public by excellent violists in the first half of

the twentieth century, the potential of the viola as a solo instrument was discovered. Violists

found that they are no longer limited to playing orchestral or chamber music. Tertis clearly

explains the common attitude toward the viola in his biography. When he decided to switch to

the viola and begin playing it as a solo instrument, the response he received from other

musicians was one of great doubt: “The consensus of opinion then was that the viola had no

right to be heard in solos, indeed the consideration of its place in the string family was of the

scantiest.”72 Even other violists questioned his motive:

In those days when it was the rarest thing to hear a viola solo, the upper range of the instrument was completely unexplored. Players of that time rarely climbed higher than the second leger line in the trevle clef! . . . As a student at the [Royal Academy of Music], I was able to accomplish this by playing the Mendelssohn and Wieniawski D minor concertos (of course a fifth lower but exactly as written for the violin) at two of the fortnightly students’ concerts there. The morning after my performance of the Mendelssohn, I met Alfred Gibson who was for a time the violist of the Joachim Quartet. Evidently he had been present at the concert for he greeted me with a menacing look and exploded: “I suppose the next thing is, you will be playing behind the bridge! The viola is not meant to be played high up – that is the pig department!”73

Tertis’s life-long efforts to promote the viola to the audience led him to refer to himself as “an

72 Tertis, My Viola, 16. 73 Ibid., 18.

49

obstinate, ill-rewarded, never-to-be discouraged viola soloist in days when most people had

not heard a viola solo in their lives.”74 As a matter of fact, his wonderful performances of

these transcriptions inspired significant works written for viola by different composers in the

twentieth century. Paul Cropper, one of Tertis’s students, recalled his teacher’s great

performance of an arranged piece: “The first time I remember hearing Tertis was one of the

most impressive performance of the Bach Chaconne that I have ever heard, a notoriously

difficult piece to bring off on the violin, but almost impossible on a very large viola.”75

As mentioned before, these numerous performances were influential to the compositional

style of original works for viola. Composers were free to explore the higher register of the

instrument, but meanwhile keep a warm sound on the C string. Tertis’s ability to manage

these transcriptions demonstrates that violists have the same capability as violinists to express

music. These transcriptions have opened the door for idiomatic writing for the viola.

As the viola gradually carves out its own place in the concert hall, the lack of solo

repertoire before the twentieth century still limits the diversity of a balanced recital program.

Using transcribed pieces on recital programs is one way to solve this shortage of

compositions. Most standard recital programs posted on bulletin boards of music

conservatories contain one of Bach’s cello suites, one of Brahms’s transcribed clarinet

sonatas, and Rebecca Clarke’s Viola Sonata. These standard programs show how viola

74 Lionel Tertis, Cinderella No More (London: Peter Nevill, 1953), 34–35. 75 Riley, vol. 1, 247.

50

repertoire has been enriched by transcriptions from earlier periods originally written for other

media. Meanwhile, many violists use short pieces from the violin repertoire as encore pieces

at the end of their recitals, some examples are Brahms’s Sonatensatz, Paganini’s Caprices,

and Kreisler’s Liebesfreud.

Adapting transcriptions not only balances a student’s recital program, but also creates a

more interesting program for professional violists. When programming a recital, one must

consider the great number of amateurs in the audience. The kind of music that will entice an

audience to attend the concert should be an important issue to consider when choosing the

repertoire. Watson Forbes recalled that the most pleasant viola recital he had ever heard was

full of arrangements.76

Violists have to learn a large quantity of transcriptions in order to expand their own

repertoire. As mentioned before, some international viola competitions even require

transcribed works, and I will further discuss its importance here. One of the most important

ones, the Lionel Tertis Viola Competition, is held every four years in England. Each

participant is required to prepare repertoire from five different categories. According to the

competition held in the summer of 2003, these five categories include viola sonatas, viola

concertos, solo works by Bach, commissioned pieces, and transcribed pieces. Transcribed

music is one of the requirements to complete this international competition in memory of

76 Forbes, “The Value of Transcriptions,” 1113.

51

Lionel Tertis, who devoted his entire life to transcribing numerous works for viola. The

William Primrose Viola Competition has similar requirements. Since Primrose also

contributed a large volume of transcriptions to the viola repertoire, a Primrose transcription is

one of required works for the competition. Violists have to play his transcriptions in both the

semi-final and final rounds.

A high standard of technical perfection is an important issue for every violist. Nowadays

violists are asked to possess the same technical ability as violinists. However, the shortage of

method books specifically for viola causes a problem. Transcribed etudes, especially from

those for the violin, resolve this problem. These educational-based transcriptions provide

enough resources for students at all levels to master solid technique.

There were no specific instruction manuals for the viola in the late seventeenth

century.77 It was not until Carl and Anton Stamitz appeared as viola soloists in the late

eighteenth century in Paris that viola method books began to appear in France, which was

over a half a century later than similar publications for the violin and cello had been

published.78 Soon, the appearance of good violists encouraged more and more composers to

write viola parts that included not only accompanying lines but also melodic material.

Gradually, technical mastery became a standard requirement for violists; therefore, method

77 Riley, vol. 1, 167. 78 Ibid.

52

books for viola came out slowly after the turn of the century in different cities such as

London, Vienna, and Leipzig.79

Although there are a few etude books written for the viola, including Bruni’s 25 Etudes

for Viola, Hoffmeister’s 12 Viola-Etuden, Campagnoli’s 41 Capricen, and three etude books

by Lillian Fuchs, violists still rely on transcriptions from violin etude books such as Kreutzer

42 Etudes and Rode 24 Caprices to achieve the technical facility of virtuosic violinists.

Primrose strongly suggested that students use Kreutzer 42 Etudes as much as possible:

At the point, I should like to say a few words about the Kreutzer Studies transcribed for the viola. They are magnificent. Students should know the meaning of each study thoroughly. Each one has a definite purpose. The pupil should, during his practicing, concentrate on that one purpose. These studies can be used for an entire lifetime!80

Franz Zeyringer gave his opinion about these transcribed etude books in his book Literatur

fur Viola:

Since the viola is played with the same techniques as the violin, it is entirely appropriate to take advantage of instructional methods for the violin. There is a plethora of arrangements of technical works, etudes, caprices, etc. of superior quality which can be used for viola instruction.81

These transcribed etude books offer more variety, and are more technical than those

originally written for viola. They have become an essential part of viola pedagogy.

Furthermore, in order to offer a wide range of pedagogical resources to different levels

79 Ibid., 167–69. 80 Applebaum, “William Primrose,” The Way They Play, vol. 1, 249. 81 Zeyringer, Literatur fur Viola, 60.

53

of students, viola instructors must rely on using transcribed materials. Using the wealth of

materials from the violin can help students obtain great skill and musical growth

simultaneously. Etudes widely used by teachers include those by Jacques-Fereol Mazas, H. E.

Kayser, Rodolphe Kreutzer, Federigo Fiorillo, and Jacques Pierre Rode. However, viola

teachers should not abandon original viola etudes. They are excellent materials for exploring

the lower range of the viola, which is not covered in violin method books. Therefore, relying

on material from both violin and viola etudes creates a more solid pedagogical foundation.

Besides the development of technique, teachers also need to utilize transcriptions to help

their students learn the wide spectrum of musical styles from all periods of history. Most

violists began their musical trainings on the violin, but later chose the viola as their primary

instrument. The shortage of solo repertoire for beginners creates pedagogical problems. Other

than parts to orchestral or chamber works, there is little viola music written before the

twentieth century. As a result, the best way to help students understand the characteristics and

features of different eras is by studying works for other instruments.

Transcriptions play a significant part in the development of viola literature. Unlike other

such instruments as the piano and violin that already have a wealth of music, the viola has to

count on transcriptions to include repertoire from before the twentieth century. Historically,

these transcribed works help the viola develop the solo role it deserves, create a balance in

recital programs, expand viola repertoire, and enrich the teaching resources that provide

54

instructors with a variety of material for training their students.

55

CHAPTER 7

CHALLENGES WHEN TRANSCRIBING WORKS FOR THE VIOLA

Transcribing works for the viola is more complicated than it may seem from choosing

the music to editing it. It is not just a mechanical process of changing the pitches or

transposing the key. Joseph Rawlins, a professor at the University of West Florida, argues that

a proper arrangement must suit the performer in four ways, in acceptance, quality, suitability,

and performance opportunity.82 His general ideas about arrangements apply to viola

transcriptions. In this chapter, I will describe the general problems one confronts when

writing transcriptions.

A good viola transcription requires at least the following features:

1. Maintenance of the viola’s idiomatic sound and playing

2. A familiarity with the original music in order to preserve the musical character

of the composer.

3. A suitable and comfortable arrangement for both the performer and the

audience.

In searching for material to transcribe, one must keep the suitability of the works for

viola performance in mind. A composition should not be transcribed if the original piece’s

musical intent cannot be reproduced within the technical limits of the viola. Despite the

82 Joseph T. Rawlins, “The Arrangement and Its Role in the Performer’s Repertoire,” American Music

Teacher 33:4 (1984): 26.

56

advances of instrument construction in the last hundred years as well as the technical

improvements made during the past century, the viola still cannot reproduce certain

characteristics of other instruments with ease. Some examples include the violin’s brilliance,

up-bow staccato in high position, repeated trills on the octaves, and chains of double stops in

tenths.

Paganini’s Caprices have become requirements for advanced viola study; but only a

portion of the 24 pieces in the book are suitable to perform on the viola in public. Since viola

strings respond slower and the distance between the intervals on the fingerboard are wider

than the violin, violists must put forth great effort to overcome not only the technical

problems but also the restrictions of the instrument while learning challenging works like

those of Paganini. Virtuosic violists such as William Primrose can demonstrate these showy

pieces without any difficulty, and these amazing performances can be heard in his recordings;

still, however, some of the caprices cannot be played on the viola as perfectly as they can on

the violin by most violists. Take caprice number three as an example: the first section of this

piece is an exercise for octaves and trills. After the octaves in the first measure, the player

suffers from technical inadequacy because of a three-beat trill at the octave and the following

chain of octave trills on long notes before the next section.

57

Most teachers would not suggest that every student focus on these caprices, for some may get

injured if trying too hard to learn these unidiomatic techniques. However, these caprices

provide excellent exercises for mastering virtuosic technique in the practice room, even if

some of them are not suitable to program in a concert.

Most transcriptions for the viola have been taken from string music, especially from

works originally written for violin or cello, because members of the string family have a

strong similarity in tone quality; additionally they rely on similar techniques to express music.

The viola carries a tender and sweet sound quality like the lower strings of the violin and a

warm depth of tone color like the cello; hence, transcriptions from both violin and cello are

largely used for violists. Robert Dolejší’s book Modern Viola Technique states that “musically,

the range and quality of the instrument adequately fill that noticeable gap between the higher

tones of the violins and the deep register of the cellos and basses. Its timbre, quality, and

58

color are distinct and unmatchable and are not to be imitated, neglected, or omitted.”83 The

transcriber should be mindful of this unique flexibility in sound at all times.

Since violists rely heavily on transcriptions of works for other string members, there

are many example editions of well-known works that illustrate the considerations made by

the editors. Bach’s Six Cello Suites have become standard repertoire for every violist.

Composed in Bach’s Cothen period, these compositions did not gain any attention until Pablo

Casals’s life-long dedication to the suites in the late nineteenth century. Viola editions began

to appear in the early twentieth century. There are a multitude of editions for performers to

choose from now, including those by Watson Forbes, Milton Katims, and William Primrose

(Suite no. 1-5), and each editor offers a different interpretation of Bach. Besides some

differences in fingerings, bowings, phrasing, articulations, and dynamic markings, the key of

the sixth suite is the most divergent for each edition. Milton Katims kept the original key of D

major to a goal to match the cello version. This goal creates several challenging moments for

the performer because the suite was originally intended for a 5-string cello. Violists who

chose this edition must constantly stay at the high positions, especially in the gigue

movement. Watson Forbes moved the entire work down a fifth to G major to reduce these

technical problems. He believed the tone color of the viola played on the high positions did

not suit music of this period:

For practical reasons, the suite has therefore been transposed from the original key of

83 Robert Dolejší, Modern Viola Technique (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1939): 1.

59

D major to G major. This transcription has been freely adapted to keep the viola part within a compass similar to that employed in the previous suites. It has also been found possible to reproduce, in this key, most of the chords as they appear in the original.84

Forbes’s edition resolves some technical problems that violists may come across, but for the

audience might present the familiar music in a different key. William Primrose eliminated the

sixth suite in his Bach edition because he thought this suite is not suitable to perform on the

viola. Since there are so many different editions from which violists can choose, it is a good

idea to have a copy of the cello manuscript on hand to decipher the true spirit and correct

interpretation of Bach’s music at a distance from editorial markings.

As mentioned before, although violists have received a great deal of transcriptions

from works for other string members, not every piece for violin or cello would be appropriate

to perform on the viola. The arrangement may not be playable on viola without numerous

changes; or the composition may lose its character after these changes. In addition, if the tone

color and character of the piece are difficult to carry on the viola, the transcription will not be

a valuable addition to the viola library. Furthermore, since some works in the violin or cello

repertoire are widely known, to perform them on the viola may reduce the value of the viola

as an independent solo instrument. For example, Tchaikovsky’s Violin Concerto would not be

a proper choice for a violist to program on a concert. Even if the player can overcome the

numerous technical problems on this work, the brilliant character will still be difficult to

84 Johann Sebastian Bach, Six Suites for Violoncello, ed. and transcribed for viola by Watson Forbes

(Boca Raton, Fl: Masters Music Publications, Inc), iii .

60

present on the viola, especially in the last movement of this concerto.

The Kreutzer Sonata is one of Beethoven’s famous violin sonatas; however, it is not

an appropriate choice for viola transcription. The opening chords are difficult to play well on

the viola in the original key, and if transposed down the melody would seem out of place to

listeners familiar with the piece. Besides, many passages demand strong energy and high

dynamic levels in order to retain the excitement. Many of them are almost impossible to

perform at original register when maintaining the original character at the same time.

Furthermore, performing the entire piece in another key is not a good choice since it is a

well-known violin work; it will lose the brilliant quality of the piece at the same time.

Transcribing music from violin works is more difficult than from works for the cello

because viola tuning is an octave above the cello but a fifth lower than the violin. Obviously

almost every violin composition is playable on the viola if the piece is transposed a fifth

lower from its original key; however, not every work is suitable to be performed in this way

when one considers how moving a fifth away from the original key drastically changes the

color and the character of the piece itself. It is difficult to imagine that some sparkling finale

movements of violin concerti can be performed in the same manner on a larger instrument in

a different key.

Some differences between the violin and viola should be noted before arranging

pieces from violin literature. The size of the viola is the first thing. Unlike the violin, which

61

has several standard sizes, there is no customary size for the viola. The body of the

instrument is longer, wider, and heavier than that of the violin, and the neck is also thicker. In

order to conquer this long-time problem of the size, violists naturally need more flexible

physical conditioning to play the instrument comfortably.

The viola also has longer and thicker strings which not only respond slightly slower

than those of the violin but also require more finger pressure from the left hand. In addition to

the strings, violists have to use more bow pressure on the right hand to produce a depth of

sound quality. In general, violists have to apply more weight from both hands to create a clear,

deep, and vibrant sound; therefore, more strength from both hands is required from every

good violist.

Violists must also master a frequent use of awkward string crossings and

widely-stretched positions. Violists rely on these techniques to avoid ceaseless position

changing. Also, frequent shifting causes more sliding sounds, which is undesirable for most

music. Furthermore, position stretching can be helpful when trying to play a long musical

phrase on the same string to preserve a single tone color. However, too many stretched

fingerings could cause extra tension and even injury to a player’s left hand since the violist

would logically need to stretch out their fingers more than the violinist. Most viola teachers

do not have their students work on some standard exercises for violinists, such as double

stops at the tenth, let alone on pieces filled with this kind of technique. Transcribers must

62

consider these innate differences in choosing and arranging their transcriptions.

In general, there are two ways to transcribe violin works for the viola. One is to keep

most passages in the same register as the violin version, moving only some unplayable or

unsuitable phrases an octave lower than the original melody. The piano part thus usually

remains unchanged, which is a friendly adoption for pianists. The other is to move the entire

piece to another key, usually a fifth down or a fourth up from the original key. It is more

complicated to arrange works in this way. Several possible combinations of transposition are:

(a) moving both the violin and piano parts a fifth down; (b) moving the violin part a fifth

down but the piano part a fourth up; (c) moving both the violin and piano parts a fourth up; (d)

and moving the violin part a fourth up but the piano part a fifth down.

As to what kind of approach the transcriber will take is a case-by-case decision. The

transcriber has to consider the most suitable register for the player to present the piece on the

viola, and then decide the register for the piano (or accompanying) part. Therefore, creating a

transcription is more complicated than mere copying. I will discuss these problems in more

detail, using examples from the Beethoven Violin Sonata, Op. 30, No. 1, in the following

chapter. I have transcribed the Beethoven Violin Sonata, Op. 30, No. 1 in the original key

because transposing this work to another key would result in the loss of its original character.

The piano part will remain the same except for a few dynamic changes.

63

CHAPTER 8

METHODOLOGY

I will discuss methods and procedures used in transcription citing my arrangement of

Beethoven’s Violin Sonata and some other transcriptions as examples. Music examples will

be provided when discussing a specific process, and a complete comparison between the

violin and my viola versions of the Beethoven sonata will conclude this chapter.

An Overview of Beethoven Violin Sonata Op. 30, No. 1

The ten sonatas of Ludwig van Beethoven are considered to be among the greatest

challenges of the violin repertoire. The Beethoven sonatas compare in difficulty to the solo

partitas and sonatas of J.S. Bach. Beethoven’s sonatas are well known not only for their

musical and expressive weight but also for their technical difficulty.

Nine of the ten violin sonatas were composed between 1797 and 1803, when Beethoven

was in his late twenties and early thirties.85 These were the years that Beethoven wrote his

first large compositions, including the op. 18 string quartets, the first three symphonies, the

first three piano concerti, and several of his best-known piano sonatas. Although most of the

violin sonatas were composed in his first compositional period, each of them shows great

85 Douglas Johnson and Scott G. Burnham, “Ludwig van Beethoven: Work List,” The New Grove

Dictionary of Music Online, ed. L. Macy; available from http://www.grovemusic.com; Internet; accessed 7 October 2002.

64

variety in style and uniqueness in character. In 1802, Beethoven composed a set of three

violin sonatas Op. 30 for Czar Alexander I of Russia.86 Sonata No. 1, Op. 30 is the first one

of this set, but the sixth of the ten sonatas. It is a three-movement piece. Originally Beethoven

composed a brilliant, exciting finale movement for this piece, but later he placed that

movement as the last movement of the Kreutzer Sonata and substituted a lyrical theme and

variations as the conclusion of this piece.87 In 1812, Beethoven wrote his tenth violin sonata

op. 96 in G major. Other important pieces composed in the same year include the seventh and

eighth symphonies. The roles of the violin and piano in Beethoven’s violin sonatas are equal

in importance. In essence, the role of the violin is no longer to accompany the piano part.

After reviewing all of his violin sonatas, I believe the Spring Sonata, Op. 24 in F Major

is the most suitable choice for transcription because of its lyrical character and the

accessibility of its F major tune to the viola. However, this sonata has already been

transcribed for viola by Watson Forbes. Although Sonata Op. 30, No. 1 is not well-known

among the ten, this work is a good second choice due to its singing character and the more

moderate register of the violin melody.

86 Melvin Berger, Guide to Sonatas: Music for One or Two Instruments (New York: Anchor Books,

1991), 60. 87 Ibid.

65

Preparation

There are several steps the transcriber should take before actually transcribing the

piece. Getting an authentic version of the original music is the first priority. Some popular

works have various performing editions with different editorial choices in phrasing and

articulation. These individual opinions affect the resulting work. Choosing an accurate and

reliable critical edition will directly affect the quality of the transcription.

Currently there are at least six different editions of the complete Beethoven Violin

Sonatas that are easily accessible. These editions have various markings from different

editors. Max Rostal’s edition published by G. Henle Verlag is one of the most reliable editions

of Beethoven Violin Sonatas recommended by most violin teachers, because it is the

publication based on the autograph and the original editions. Therefore, I have transcribed my

viola transcription of the sonata op. 30, no. 1 from the Henle edition. Watson Forbes’s

transcription of Beethoven’s Spring Sonata Op. 24 in F Major published by Peters Edition is

another helpful reference since it is the only viola transcription of a Beethoven violin sonata

currently available.

After selecting an edition, the next step is to study the music. Listening to different

recordings is a good way to understand the work. There are many good recordings available,

such as those featuring Pinchas Zukerman, Henryk Szeryng, David Oistrach, Arthur

Grumiaux, Gidon Kremer, and Joseph Szigeti, among others. Through studying different

66

recordings, one can easily get an accurate picture of the piece, which thus accelerates the

procedure of transcribing. It is helpful for the editor to keep several editions and recordings

on hand when transcribing the music.

Transcribing Steps

In this Beethoven transcription, I will keep the original key; therefore, the piano part

will remain the same with only a few changes to dynamics. The main adjustment to the viola

part will be register changes. In deciding the register for each passage, one has to consider not

only the viola’s own range, but also the shape of melodic phrasings as well as the contour of

the accompanying part. If some short motives in a larger phrase are playable in the same

register, while others must be moved an octave lower, it is more suitable in most cases to

keep the entire phrasing in the same shape an octave lower. The register of the accompanying

part is also important to consider before making any changes to the viola part. If the

accompanying part has rich harmonies, violists must make an extra effort to balance their

sound in the lower register. The higher register of the viola usually resonates more clearly

against a dense accompanying part.

Even though Beethoven’s Violin Sonata Op. 30, No. 1 is not a popular sonata among

his ten, its lyrical character makes it suitable to present on the viola. There are not too many

wide register leaps in this work, and most passages stay in the middle register of the violin,

67

which transcribes easily into the higher register of the viola with little octave changes.

However, in order to maintain its original character as a violin sonata familiar to audiences,

some passages need to stay in the same register in a higher position. These instances will be

discussed later.

Some notes need to be rearranged to suit the register of the viola. If a violin passage

lowered an octave for the viola includes a few notes out of range, then an adjustment of the

notes is required. Three editions of the Franck Violin Sonata provide different versions of the

section with the shift in triplets to sixteenth notes in the third movement. The first edition by

Reiner Schmidt follows the melodic shape of the violin and moves the entire triplet passage

an octave down with some necessary notes changes at the end to keep the line in a playable

register for the viola. Schmidt chose to begin the following sixteenth notes in the lower

register and return to the original register one bar later.

68

In Joseph Vieland’s edition, he moved the first measure of triplets down an octave, and

kept the second measure of triplets in the same register as the violin version. The musical

direction of the phrase leading up to the sixteenth-note passage remains the same without any

note changes. But keeping both triplet measures in the same register may diminish the ease of

the musical line.

69

Another arrangement is by Felix Schwartz. He left this passage exactly the same as the

violin edition, which gives the violist a huge challenge in performing the first measure. Since

the character of this movement is gentler than the dark and radical sound of the second

movement, violists will find it difficult to present this passage in high positions without too

many extra sliding sounds.

70

In addition to these three editions, some violists have created their own versions for

performing this piece. In Catharine Carroll’s performance edition, she moves the entire triplet

passage down an octave to maintain the musical shape of the violin version. Instead of

beginning the first sixteenth-note measure in the low register, she presents the last group of

triplets in the previous measure an octave higher.

71

Each editor has various concerns when arranging the works. I believe any version

following the musical shape of the original in a comfortable register for the violists is a good

choice. Therefore, among these Franck Violin Sonata transcriptions, I recommend Catharine

Carroll’s performance edition.

Some chord tones must be rearranged to suit the sonority of the viola, in particular for

the resonance of the open strings and for the convenience of negotiating the pitches. An

example of this situation concerns the final chords of Brahms’s Sonatansatz. The last six

measures of this work contain a harmonic progression from the dominant to tonic. The violin

holds a C major chord in second inversion as the piano makes harmonic changes. In first

position a violin can present this chord clearly and with great sonority using open strings.

Although violists can also play this chord, it will not sound as brilliant as on the violin.

Therefore, Milton Katims uses the root position of the C major chord in his viola edition.

With this revision, the viola can also produce a round and broad open string sound to match

the character of the original violin work.

72

One similar example occurs in the third movement of my transcription. Variation four of

the third movement is a two-part dialogue between the string and keyboard. The violin starts

with a short, crisp question and the piano follows with a long, legato answer. Later the piano

borrows the light-hearted figure of the violin and develops it up to the end of the variation.

The string part of this variation is made up of chords; therefore, besides moving the register

73

an octave down, some rearrangements of notes are necessary. I will discuss this point further

later in the chapter.

After making some adjustments in octave and chord tone in the viola part, one should

play through the entire piece with the pianist before any further change. Since the piano part

will remain virtually the same as the violin version, there will not be any note or phrasing

changes. The main changes to the piano part are dynamic markings. The piano must drop at

least one dynamic level whenever the viola is in a low register. Playing through the piece

with the pianist will also result in more changes to the viola part. Presenting the viola part

beautifully without too much effort, while also remaining balanced with the piano part are the

main concerns the transcriber should have in this procedure.

The next step after editing the melodic line is to make adjustments of bowings,

fingerings, and articulations. The G. Henle Verlag edition, for example, provides fingerings

and bowings as a helpful reference. I have tried to keep most bowing from the G. Henle

Verlag edition, but made some necessary changes in octave and voicing, which may involve

more string crossings and position changes. These changes usually require simultaneous

adjustment in bowing direction to keep a clean and precise connection between both hands.

The following section is a detailed comparison between the original violin sonata and

the viola transcription with clear musical examples.

74

First Movement

Allegro

The main differences in this movement between the violin original and the viola

arrangement are octave changes, and the reasons vary in each case. The first change occurs in

mm. 10 –19, which is a part of the first theme. Although the entire phrase can be performed

on the upper two strings in the higher positions, the musicality of the theme may be lost due

to the frequent shifts on the A string. Since the motive in the piano is presented entirely with

the left hand for the first twenty bars, keeping the entire viola part an octave lower will match

the singing quality of the smooth motion in the piano line. This change also brings the two

voices close to each other, which creates a more intimate dialogue. Because the viola stays in

the middle register in this phrase, I suggest that the pianist make the crescendo from mm.

15 –19 only to mezzo forte instead of forte.

75

The two voices finally sing together beginning in m. 21. Unlike the previous little

motive that always moves by step, the string voice joins this motive with a leap of the fourth

in forte. It is helpful to keep the original tune mostly on the A string to highlight this little

surprise. The second change occurs from m. 38 to the downbeat of m. 63, which falls into

three small sections. The piano starts the fluent second subject in m. 34, and a string

accompaniment of sustained notes joins in for mm. 38 –41. I have moved this four-measure

figure an octave lower in order to expose the C string sonority. The viola takes over the

second subject in mm. 42 –49, which I have placed an octave lower to avoid the difficulties

of high positions. I also have lowered the piano dynamic to pianissimo in the triplet passages,

and the forte to mezzo forte in the crescendo in m. 49 for balance. The passage from m. 54 to

76

the down beat of m. 63 is also an octave lower for the same positioning issue. I suggest that

the violist play in fortissimo during this passage to continue the energetic character that the

piano carries from m. 49. I have kept the eighth notes in measure 63 the same, because the

viola can project better in the original register and meanwhile create more room for the

following decrescendo.

77

Some octave changes also occur in the development section. I moved the material in mm.

101 –04 down an octave since the piano also stays in its low register. After a three-bar rest,

the viola joins the piano to develop different material based on the second theme. I have kept

this passage from m. 108 to the downbeat of m. 116 an octave lower for a richer sonority and

comfortable execution, but return to the original register at the second beat of m. 116 to get a

more brilliant sound on the sforzando. I also suggest that the pianist play the crescendo to

mezzo forte instead of forte during the passage of mm. 110 –12.

78

The next change is during mm. 121 –33, where the viola starts a long transition back

to the recapitulation. I have moved the entire passage down an octave since the viola can get

a better sound quality in this register. Again, I suggest that the piano take the crescendo only

to mezzo forte in m. 132.

79

Another change in this transitional passage is made seven measures before the recapitulation.

I have set this passage an octave lower than the violin version during mm. 144 –52 to aid its

sonority. Also, by staying in the viola’s middle register the transitions are made with ease.

80

Some necessary octave changes are also needed in the recapitulation. Since most of

these changes have already been discussed in the exposition, one can apply the same ideas to

understand the alterations I have made.

Second Movement

Adagio molto espressivo

This elegant second movement creates great intimacy between the piano and the

violin. Although it is a five-part rondo form, some variation elements are present between the

two instruments. Often the piano repeats the melody with some ornaments immediately after

the violin, which creates a dialogue characteristic of chamber music. The major concern I had

while arranging this movement for viola was how to preserve the gentle and tender character.

Since the viola already has a singing quality to its sound, this lyrical movement fits it

well, with only two changes needed. The first one is with the beginning statement. I have

started the melody an octave lower than the violin part since it fits the stability of the viola’s

middle register. This change also creates more variety and a little delightful surprise when

viola returns to the same melody in the original register in m. 27.

81

The next change is in the C section of the rondo after the second opening statement

dialogue between the two instruments. I have lowered the viola down an octave in mm. 44 –6.

I have kept the last note of m. 46 in the original register to help make a smooth return to the

next section.

82

Third Movement

Allegro con Variazioni

This movement is a theme with six variations. The entire movement creates a simple

but elegant character, which matches the previous two movements well. The theme is

reminiscent of a German dance set to classical alberti figures on the keyboard. The melody

stays in the middle to low registers on the violin, performed mostly on the lower three strings.

These registers match that of the higher three strings on the viola. For this reason, I have

maintained the theme without any change.

The first change made to this movement occurs in variation one, which presents a fluid

and fast triplet conversation between the viola and the piano. I have changed the register

down an octave during the first part of this variation for technical ease. The viola line returns

to the original register after the long notes in the second section; however, I have lowered the

melody again in the triplet measure during the repeat for the same reason.

83

Variation two contains a chain of eighth notes which can be performed an octave lower

in the viola’s low to middle register. However, this change may diminish the character and

sound against the low piano melody. Therefore, I have chosen to keep the original register to

84

give violists the challenge of exploring the high position on the A string.

I have made no changes to the third variation. However, the major change I’ve made

to this movement is in variation four. It is impossible to play these chords on the viola, so

essential alteration is required. I have preserved the top two notes and the shape of the

moving chords, but placed the viola an octave lower than the violin version. The order of the

notes in the chords is not exactly the same as in the violin version, but the chords will sound

similar because I have preserved most of the notes without changing the harmonies. As

mentioned earlier in this chapter, the character of the viola line in this variation is light and

crisp in contrast with the piano’s lyrical, long line. The key to presenting these chords is to

keep them short and precise. It is not easy to carry out this character with many string

crossings; therefore, I considered reducing the string crossing while reorganizing the chords.

Meanwhile, I have substituted some grace notes instead for original notes in order to keep the

delightful character in soft dynamic.

85

I have made two changes in variation five. The opening statement from m. 109 is an

answer to the piano theme in a minor key. I have moved the viola line down an octave not

only to reduce the technical difficulty, but also to match the darker character. The lines of the

violin and piano stray quite far away from one another in the original version, but lie closer

together in the viola version.

86

Another change occurs at the end of this variation. I have lowered the viola version down an

octave to ease the transition from a flat key to a sharp key. I suggest that the piano lower the

dynamic level at the crescendo from mm. 149 –50 for balance.

87

The final variation, Allegro, ma non tanto, begins with a piano statement followed by

the string’s response. Unlike Beethoven’s other “Heroic” style works composed around the

same time, this movement does not reach a magnificent finale with a dramatic climax; instead,

88

the work concludes in an upbeat and joyful mood. I leave this variation without any change

since the entire violin line can be performed on the viola with ease.

Besides the note changes, I have also included suggested bowings and fingerings.

Enclosed is my complete transcription of the Beethoven Viola Sonata Op. 30, No. 1, both the

viola part and score.

89

CHAPTER 9

CONCLUSION

Many reasons exist for the lack of attention given to the viola. The famous quote from

Johann Joachim Quantz’s On Playing the Flute in 1752 explains the situation in the middle of

the eighteenth century:

The viola is commonly regarded as of little importance in the musical establishment. The reason may well be that it is often played by persons who are either still beginners in the ensemble or have no particular gifts with which to distinguish themselves on the violin, or that the instrument yields all too few advantages to its players, so that able people are not easily persuaded to take it up.88

Since the viola had been considered an accompanying instrument, violists did not own many

works from major composers during this period.

Not until a generation of viola virtuosos appeared at the dawn of the twentieth century

did the viola achieve a solo role on the stage. Even though there has been an increase in solo

opportunities and in the quality compositions written for the viola through the twentieth

century, the lack of its own repertoire from previous musical periods has caused both

performance and educational problems. In order to resolve these problems, violists must

essentially rely on transcriptions to expand their own repertoire. Many leading violists such

as Lillian Fuchs, William Primrose, and Lionel Tertis strongly support the use of

88 Johann Joachim Quantz, On Playing the Flute, trans. Edward R. Reilly (New York: Schirmer, 1966),

237: quoted in Ann M. Woodward, “Observations on the Status, Instruments, and Solo Repertoire of Violists in the Classical Period,” Journal of the Violin Society of America 9:2 (1988): 81.

90

transcriptions, and a great majority of their own published transcription is still widely used by

violists today.

I believe my transcription of Beethoven Violin Sonata Op, 30 No. 6 is a practical

approach to enriching the viola literature from historical periods. This work is well-suited to

the sound and technical aspects of the viola, and has already gained two public performances.

Besides my transcription and the Spring Sonata transcribed by Watson Forbes, certain

movements from Beethoven’s other violin sonatas such as the slow movement of Sonata Op.

30 No. 2 can also be performed well on the viola. I suggest that violists spend more time

exploring more possibilities to enrich our own library. It is my hope that this study of

transcription history for the viola, together with my own transcription of Beethoven’s violin

sonata op. 30, no. 1, will provide a handy resource for both educators and performers.

91

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Bachmann, Alberto. An Encyclopedia of the Violin. New York: Da Capo Press, 1966. Barrett, Henry. The Viola: Complete Guide for Teachers and Students, 2d ed. Tuscaloosa, Ala.:

University of Alabama Press, 1978. Berger, Melvin. Guide to Sonatas: Music for One or Two Instruments. New York: Anchor

Books, 1991. Berkley, Harold. The Modern Technique of Violin Bowing. New York: G. Schirmer, Inc.,

1941. Berlioz, Hector. Treatise on Instrumentation. Translated by Theodore Front, Enlarged and

Revised by Richard Strauss. New York: E. F. Kalmus, 1948. Boyden, David D, Sonya Monosoff, Boris Schwarz, Klaus Marx, Rodney Slatford, Carleen

M. Hutchins, and others. The New Grove Violin Family. The New Grove Musical Instruments Series. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1989.

Boyden, David D. The History of Violin Playing. London: Oxford University Press, 1956. Cooper, Barry, ed. The Beethoven Compendium: A Guide to Beethoven’s Life and Music.

London: Thames and Hudson, 1991. ________. Beethoven. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Dalton, David. Playing the Viola: Conversations with William Primrose. New York: Oxford

University Press, 1988. Dolejší, Robert. Modern Viola Technique. Chicago, Ill.: The University of Chicago Press,

1939. Flesh, Carl. The Art of Violin Playing. Vol. 2. New York: Carl Fischer, Inc., 1939.

92

Gerle, Robert. The Art of Bowing Practice: The Expressive Bow Technique. London: Stainer & Bell, 1991.

Hodgson, Percival. Motion Study and Violin Bowing. Urbana, Ill.: American String Teachers

Associations, 1958. Krayk, Stefan. The Violin Guide. Hollywood, Calif.: Highland Music Company, 1966. Lawson, Colin. Brahms: Clarinet Quintet. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Lorrin, Mark. Dictionary of Bowing and Tonal Techniques for Strings. Miami Beach, Fla.:

Folk World, Inc., 1968. Menuhin, Yehudi, and William Primrose. Violin and Viola. New York: Schirmer Books, 1976. Mozart, Leopold. A Treatise on the Fundamental Principle of Violin Playing. 2d ed.

Translated by Editha Knocker. Preface by Alfred Einstein. New York: Oxford University Press, 1951.

Nelson, Sheila. The Violin and Viola. London: Ernest Benn Limited, 1972. Pinksterboer, Hugo. The Rough Guide to Violin & Viola. New York: Distributed by the

Penguin Group, 2000. Primrose, William. Technique is Memory: A Method for Violin and Viola Players Based on

Finger Patterns. London: Oxford University Press, 1960. ________. Walk on the North Side: Memoirs of a Violist. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young

University Press, 1978. Quantz, Johann Joachim. On Playing the Flute. Translated by Edward R. Reilly. New York:

Schirmer, 1966. Randel, Don Michael, ed. The New Harvard Dictionary of Music. Cambridge, Mass.:

Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1986. Kerman, Joseph, and Alan Tyson. The New Grove Beethoven. New York: W. W. Norton,

1983.

93

Riley, Maurice. The History of the Viola. Vol. I. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Braun-Brumfield, 1993. ________. The History of the Viola. Vol. II. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Braun-Brumfield, 1991. Rostal, Max. Beethoven, the Sonatas for Piano and Violin: Thoughts on Their Interpretation.

Translated by Horace and Anna Rosenberg. London: Toccata Press, 1985. Seagrave, Barbara Garvey, and Joel Berman. The A. S. T. A. Dictionary of Bowing Terms for

String Instruments. Urbana, Ill.: American String Teachers Association, 1968. Slonimsky, Nicolas, rev. Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. New York: G.

Schirmer, 1965. Solomon, Maynard. Beethoven. New York: Schirmer Books, 1977. Stoeving, Paul. The Art of Violin-Bowing, A Theoretical and Practical Manual for Students,

and an Aid to the Work of Professional Teachers. New York: G. Schirmer, 1904. Stowell, Robin, ed. The Cambridge Companion to the Violin. New York: Cambridge

University Press, 1992. ________. The Early Violin and Viola: A Practical Guide. New York: Cambridge University

Press, 2001. ________. Violin Technique and Performance Practice in the Late Eighteenth and Early

Nineteenth Centuries. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Szigeti, Joseph. The Ten Beethoven Sonatas for Piano and Violin. Edited by Paul Rolland.

Urbana, Ill.: American String Teachers Association, 1965. Tertis, Lionel. Beauty of Tone in String Playing. New York: Oxford University Press, 1938. ________. Cinderella No More. London: Peter Nevill, 1953. ________. My Viola and I: A Complete Autobiography. London: Paul Elek, 1974. Tours, Berthold. The Viola. Edited by Alfred Gibson. New York: Novello, Ewer, 1902.

94

Williams, Amédée Daryl. Lillian Fuchs, First Lady of the Viola. Lewiston: E. Mellen Press,

1994. Yampolsky, I. M. The Principles of Violin Fingering. Translated by Alan Lumsden. London:

Oxford University Press, 1967. Yost, Gaylord. The Spivakovsky Way of Bowing for Violinists and Violists. Pittsburgh:

Volkwein Bros. Inc., 1949. Zeyringer, Franz. Literatur für Viola. Hartberg: Schönwetter, 1976.

DISSERTATIONS AND THESES

Kosmala, Jerzy S. “An Adaption for Viola and Piano of Jean Martinon’s Concerto Giocoso

for Violin and Orchestra.” DMA thesis, Indiana University, 1972. Kramer, Richard A. “The Sketches for Beethoven’s Violin Sonatas, Opus 30: History,

Transcription, Analysis.” Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1973. Straka, Leslie Myron. “Jean-Marie Leclair, Sonatas for Violin and Continuo, opus 5, I--VI

Transcribed for Viola.” DMA thesis, Arizona State University, 1987.

ESSAYS AND ARTICLES

Altmann, Wilhelm. “Reger, Max.” Cobbett’s Cyclopedic Survey of Chamber Music. Edited by

Walter Willson Cobbett. Vol. 2. London: Oxford University Press, 1930. Applebaum, Samuel, and Sada Applebaum. “Lillian Fuchs.” The Way They Play. Vol. 2,

209-23. Neptune City, N.J.: Paganiniana Publications, Inc., 1972. ________. “Lionel Tertis.” The Way They Play. Vol. 1, 262-70. Neptune City, N.J.:

Paganiniana Publications, Inc., 1972. ________. “Milton Katims.” The Way They Play. Vol. 1, 233-42. Neptune City, N.J.:

Paganiniana Publications, Inc., 1972.

95

________. “Paul Doktor.” The Way They Play. Vol. 1, 222-32. Neptune City, N.J.:

Paganiniana Publications, Inc., 1972. ________. “William Primrose.” The Way They Play. Vol. 1, 243-61. Neptune City, N.J.:

Paganiniana Publications, Inc., 1972. Bennett, Roy E. “The Brahms Transcriptions of the Opus 120 Sonatas.” American String

Teacher 36 (Winter 1986): 76-9. Borem de Oliveira, Fausto. “A Brief History of Double Bass Transcription.” Bass World: The

Journal of the International Society of Bassists 21 (Fall 1996): 8, 11-2, 15-6. Boyd, Malcolm. “Arrangement.” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Edited

by Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell. 2d ed. Vol. 2, 65-71. New York: Grove’s Dictionaries, 2001.

Boyden, David D, and Ann M. Woodward. “Viola.” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and

Musicians. Edited by Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell. 2d ed. Vol. 26, 687-95. New York: Grove’s Dictionaries, 2001.

Bozarth, George S. and Walter Frish. “Brahms, Johannes: Works.” The New Grove

Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Edited by Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell.. 2d ed. Vol. 4, 201-19. New York: Grove’s Dictionaries, 2001.

Cellier, Alexandre and Fred Rothwell. “Is Transcription Permissible?” The Musical Times 66:

992 (Oct. 1925): 900-2. Forbes, Watson. “Doktor, Paul.” Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy (Accessed 20 April 2005),

<http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.libraries.uc.edu> ________. “The Value of Transcriptions.” The Strad 89 (April 1979): 1111-5.

________. “These I Have Loved.” Die Viola (1980): 85-9. Gibb, James. “Legacy of A Great Scot.” The Strad 108 (1997): 1238-9. Howard-Jones, Evlyn. “Arrangements and Transcriptions.” Music and Letters 16 (1935):

96

305-11. Ingram Malcolm. “Watson Forbes: In Remembrance.” Journal of American Viola Society

13:2 (1997): 68-9. King, Hyatt A. “The Hand of the Arranger.” The Musical Times 83:1188 (Feb., 1942): 41-3. Paul, Leslie D. “Bach as Transcriber.” Music & Letters 34, No. 4 (Oct., 1953): 306-313. Potter, Tully. “Watson Forbes.” The Strad 102 (1991): 622-3. Rawlins, Joseph Thomas. “The Arrangement and its Role in the Performer’s Repertoire.”

American Music Teacher 33 (1984): 26-8. Reynolds, Christopher. “Ends and Means in the Second Finale to Beethoven’s Op. 30, No. 1.”

Beethoven Essays: Studies in Honor of Elliot Forbes. Edited by Lewis Lockwood and Phyllis Benjamin. 127-45. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1984.

Sills, David. “The Viola Music of Lillian Fuchs.” American String Teacher 35 (1985): 59-61. Taylor, Roger H. “The Solo Viola Literature of the Classic Period.” American String Teacher

16 (1966): 15-9. Woodward, Ann M. “Observations on the Status, Instruments, and Solo Repertoire of Violists

in the Classical Period.” Journal of the Violin Society of America 9:2 (1988): 81-104.

WORKS

Bach, Johann Sebastian. “Five Suites for Viola.” Great Performance Edition. Edited by

William Primrose. Milwaukee, Wisc.: G. Schirmer, Inc., 1978. ________. 6 Cello Suites for Viola Solo. Edited by Milton Katims. New York: International

Music Company, 1982. ________. Six Suites for the Viola. Edited by Louis Svećenski. Milwaukee, Wisc.: G.

Schirmer, Inc., 1916.

97

________. Six Suites for Violoncello, Transcribed for Viola. Transcribed by Watson Forbes. Boca Raton, Fl.: Masters Music Publications, Inc., n.d.

Beethoven, Ludwig Van. Notturno for Viola and Piano, Op. 42. Edited by Sydney Beck. New

York: G. Schirmer, Inc., 1949. ________. Sonata for Violin and Piano No. 6 in A, Op. 30. Edited by Kreisler. New York:

International Music Company, n.d. ________. Sonata for Violin and Piano Op. 24 in F Major “Spring Sonata.” Edited by

Joseph Joachim. Transcribed by Forbes. New York and London: Edition Peters, 1960. ________. Sonaten für Klavier und Violine, Band I. Edited by Max Rostal. New York and

London: G. Henle Verlag Edition, 1978. ________. Sonaten für Klavier und Violine, Band II. Edited by Max Rostal. New York and

London: G. Henle Verlag Edition, 1978. ________. Sonaten für Pianoforte und Violine. Edited by Joseph Joachim. New York and

London: Edition Peters, n.d. ________. Ten Violin Sonatas. Edited by Francescatti. New York: International Music

Company, n.d. Berlioz, Hector. Harold en Italie, Symphonie en 4 Parties Avec un Alto Principal. Edited by

Hugh Macdonald. Kassel, New York: Bärenreiter, 2001. ________. Harold en Italie; Symphonie en Quatre Parties, Avec un Alto Principal, Op. 16.

Partition de Piano (Avec la Partie d’alto) par F. Liszt. Paris, Brandus, 1880. Edited by Maurice Riley. Michigan: University Music Press, 1959.

Brahms, Johannes. Complete Sonatas for Solo Instrument and Piano. New York: Dover

Publications, Inc., 1989. ________. Sonatensatz. Transcribed by Milton Katims. New York: International Music

Company, 1949. Bridge, Frank. There is a Willow Grows Aslant a Brook. Arranged for Viola and Piano by

98

Benjamin Britten. London: Thames Publishing, 1990. Franck, César. Sonata in A Major for Viola and Piano. Edited by Vieland-Casadesus. New

York: International Music Company, 1958. ________. Sonate für Violine und Klavier A-dur. Arranged by Felix Schwartz. Paris:

Breitkopf & Härtel, 2001. ________. Sonate pour Violon et Piano. Paris: Editions Musicales du Marais, 1990. Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. Concerto (Köchel No. 216)/Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart;

Transcribed from the “Violin Concert in G Major with Original Cadenzas by Lillian Fuchs. New York: M. Witmark, 1947.

Paganini, Niccolo. 24 Caprices: for the Viola. Transcribed by L. Raby. Melville, New York:

Belwin Mills Publishing Corp., n.d. Vivaldi, 6 Sonatas for Viola and Piano. revision and realization of the Figured Bass by Luigi

Dallapiccola, Transcribed and Edited by William Primrose. New York: International Music Company, 1955.

DISCOGRAPHY

Beethoven, Ludwig Van. “A-dur, Op. 30 No. 1; No. 7 C-moll, Op. 30 No. 2; No. 8 G-dur, Op.

30 No. 3; Encore: Contretanz B-dur; Contretanz Es-dur; WoO 14, Nos. 4, 7.” The violin Sonatas. Anne-Sophie Mutter and Lambert Orkis. 289 457 622-2 Deutsche Grammophon, 1998. Compact disc.

________. “Sonata for Violin and Piano No. 6 in A, Op. 30 No. 1.” The Complete Sonatas for

Violin and Piano. Joseph Szigeti and Claudio Arrau. AB 78876 Grammofono 2000, 1944. Compact disc.

________. “Sonata in A Major, Op. 30, No. 1; Sonata in C Minor, Op. 30, No. 2. “ Sonatas

for Violin and Piano. Vladimir Ashkenazy and Itzhak Perlman. CS 6958 London, 1974-7. LP.

________. “Sonate Nr. 6 A-dur, Op. 30, 1.” Sonaten für Klavier und Violine. Arthur

99

Grumiaux and Clara Haskil. 6733 001 Philips, 1967. LP. ________. Sämtliche Violinsonaten=Complete Violin Sonatas. David Oistrach and Lew

Oborin. 835 247 AY Philips, 1967. LP. ________. The Complete Violin Sonatas. Vol. 2. Ingrid Haebler and Henryk Szeryng. 446

524-2 Philips, 1995. Compact disc.. ________. Violin & Piano Sonata No. 5 in F Major, Op. 24: Spring; Violin & Piano Sonata

No. 6 in A Major, Op. 30, No. 1. Pinchas Zukerman and Daniel Barenboim. VCL 9045 Vox Cum Laude, 1973. LP.

________. Violin Sonatas. Fritz Kreisler and Franz Rupp. GR-2055--GR-2059 Angel Records,

1936-6. LP. ________. Violinsonaten. Gidon Kremer and Martha Argerich. 453 743-2 Deutsche

Grammophon, 1997. Compact disc. Reger, Max. Violin Sonatas. Ulf Wallin and Roland Pöntinen. CPO 999 752-2, 2000. Compact

disc.

B ### 43 ..Allegro

p..œœ ‰ Œ ∑ pŒ œ

1≤ œ# ˙ œ œ œ œScresc.

œ13 œ32 œdecresc.

.œ Jœ œ œÍ.œ ‰ Œ

B ###9 ∑ p.2≤ œ œ œ02 œ1≥ œ œ œ .œ≤ Jœ œ3 œn œ œ

cresc.

œn 3≤ .œ Jœ œ3 œ œ œ œ3 œ œ2 œ œŸ2≤

B ###18 œ# 2 œ œ.1

fœn 1 Œ Œ ∑ & pŒ Œ œ≤3 œ œ œ œ.2 œ.f

œ œ œ.0 œ#≥ œ œ œ œ# œ Sœ.04œ.≤1 œ# pœ œ œ

& ###26

œ œn œ œ. œ. œ Œ Œ3

pŒ œ≤1 œ œ4 Œ Œ 3 œ#

Ÿ .œ∑jœ œ œ œ∑ œ œ# œ B

B ###p

38

.˙≥

.˙ œ œ# œ œ Œ Œ pœ≥1 .œ Jœ# œŸ œ# œ .œ

4Jœ Sœ#Ÿœ œ .œ Jœn œ3 œ œ œ œ# œ

B ###S

46 œ.1 œ.2≤ œ# .3≤ œ œ œ. Sœ. œ# .≤ œ.≤ œ œ œ. SJœ#

.≤ œ œ.≥ œ. œ. œ.( ) Œ Œ 4fŒœ.1 œ.S˙ œ4 œ œ. œ.

B ###56 œ# .1 œ. œ. œ. œœœœœ0 œœœ œ1 œœœœœœœ0 œ œœœ œ3 œœœœœœœ œ# œœœ œ3œœœœœœ œ# œ4 œœœ

decresc.

œ.≥ œ.≥ œ. œ. œ# . œ.

B ### p61 Œ

≤4 Œ ≤ fœ≥ Œ œ

.≥ œ# .≥decresc.

œn .2 œ.1 œ.2 œ# .1 œn .0 œ.4pŒ≥3 Œ ˙# 1 œ2 Œ Œ

Sonata No. 6 Op. 30, No. 1Ludwig van Beethoven

Beethoven Viola Sonata Op. 30 No. 1Movement I Viola Page 1

Viola

1

1

1

B ###68 ∑ πŒ Œ œ≤ œ. œ.≤ œ œ. Œ œ≥ œ. Œ œ≤cresc.

.˙ ˙# 1 œ# 1p Sœ. ≥4

B ### pdecresc.

76.œ Jœn≤4 œ œ œ# œ œ. Œ

œ œ œ# œ œ. Œœ≤3 œ œ# œ ˙ œ# œn≥3 œ œ œ#

cresc.

˙ œ# œn≥4 œ œœ≤

B ### ..p83

1 .œ ‰ Œ ∑Í2 .œ ‰ Œ ∑

cresc.

.œ≤2 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ1 œ4 œ .˙n

B ###90 Jœ œn œ Jœ fJœ œ œ Jœ Jœ œ œ Jœ Jœ œ œ Jœ Jœ

œœ œœ Jœœ œ Œ Œ

B ###96 3& œŸ .œ∑jœ œn œ œ∑œ œ œ B p Sœ.

≥ œ.≤1 œ.≤ œ œ œ.

Sœ.≥ œ.≤1 œ.≤ œ œ œ.

cresc.

œ œ œ.≤ œn .≤ œ.4 œ. pœ2 Œ Œ 3

B ### p S108 œ.( )

≤ .œ≥ Jœn Sœ œ#1 .œ≥ Jœn

0

cresc.

œ# œ# 1 œ œn 1 œ0 œ œn œ≥ œ œ œ œn 1 f Sœ.≤ œn .≤ œn

Sœ œb ≤ œ0 œ# œ

B ###114 œ œn ≤ œ œ# 3 œ# 3 œn 1 œ≥4 œn œ œ# œ œ# 3 Sœ.3 .œ Jœn≥

Sœ.0 .œ3 Jœ# 1 œ2 œ œ œ# œ œœ œœ œ# 4 œ œ œ# œ1 œœœ œœ œ œ œœ

B ###120 œ# 1 Œ Œp.œ≥2 œ# œ œ œ œ œ

cresc.

.˙ .œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ pœ Œ Œ .œ2 œ œ œ œ œ œ

cresc.

.1

1

Movement I Viola Page 2

1

1

B ###127 .œ œ œ œ œ œ œpœ Œ Œ .œ

2 œ# 1 œ œ œ œ œ cresc.

.˙n 3 .œ œ# ≤ œ œ œ œ œfœn œ œ

4œ œ œ œ# œ# 1 œ œ œ œ

B ###133 œ.0≥ œ.≥ œ.≤ œ# .≥ œ# .≤ œ.≥pŒ≤ Œ ≤ f

œ Œ Œ ∑ pŒ≥ Œ ˙# ≤ π

..˙n œœ Œ Œ 2

B ###144 Œ Œ œ≤ Œ Œ œ≤ Œ Œ œ≤ Œ Œ œ≤ Œ Œ œ≤ Œ Œ œ≤cresc.

Œ Œ œ≤ .œ œ≥3 œ œ œ œ3 œp.œ ‰ Œ

B ###153 ∑pŒ œ≤1 œ# ≥ œ œ œ œ

Scresc.

œ3 œ œdecresc.

.œ Jœ œ œ Í.œ ‰ Œ ∑

B ###p

161 .≤ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ .œ Jœ œ œn œ œcresc.

œn .œ Jœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œŸ

B ###169 œ# œ œ. fœn Œ Œ ∑ pŒ Œœ≤ œ œ œ œ. œ.

fœ œ œ. œ# œ œ œ œ œ

Sœ.œ.≤ œ#

B ###p

176 œ œ œ œ œn œ œ. œ. œ Œ Œ 3p

Œ Œ œ≥ œ Œ Œ pŒœ≤ œb

Sœb œ œn œ œ œ œ œ

B ### p186 œ Œ œ œ Œ Œ 3

& œŸ .œ∑jœ# œ œ œ∑ œ œ œ B p.

≥ .˙ œ œ œ œ Œ Œ

1

1 1

1


B ###197 œ .œ Jœ œŸ œ# œ .œ Jœ SœŸœ œ .œn Jœ œ œ œ œ œ œ

Sœ. œ.≤ œ.≤ œ œ œ.

Sœ. œ.≤ œ.≤ œ œ œ.

SJœ.≤ œ≥ œ.≥ œ# . œn .

B ###204 œ Œ Œ 4fŒ œ. œ.S˙ œ3 œ œ. œ.0 œ.4 œ.0 œ. œ. œ4 œ0 œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

B ###213 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ4 œ œ0 œ

decresc.

œ.≥ œ.≥1 œ. œ.1 œ. œ.pŒ≤

Œ ≤

B ###f

218 œ Œ œ.≥ œ.≥decresc.

œn . œ. œ. œ# .1 œn .0 œ. pŒ≤ Œ ˙# ≤ œ Œ Œ ∑ πŒ Œ œ≤ œ œ. œ

≥

B ###226 œ. Œ œ≥ œ. Œ œ≤cresc.

.˙ ˙ œ2p Sœ.3 2

decresc.p.œ Jœn ≤ œ œ œ œ œ. Œ œ1 œ0 œ œ œ. Œ œ

≤ œ œ œ

B ###cresc.

234 ˙ œ# œn≥3 œ œ3

œ pœ Œ Œ.œ≥ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ Œ Œ .œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ˙ œ œn œ œ

B ### S242 ˙ œn ≤ œ œ œ0

cresc.

œ.1 ‰ œ# 2≥ œ œ œ œ œ œ. ‰ œ#≥1 œ œn œ œ œ œ. ‰ œ#

1 œ œ œ œ œ&

& ### f247 œ.3 œ...1 œ.2 œ...4 Œ Œ ∑ π

.œ≥2 œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ.≤04 Œ Œ

1


1

B ## 42 p SAdagio, molto espressivo..œ2 Jœ .œ œ3 œ

3

œ. œ.S

.œ Jœ .œ œ œ0 œ.2≤ œ.≥cresc.Jœ0≤ œ Jœ œ

≥ œ œ ≥œ3 œ œ œ≤ jœ .œ œ .œ œ

B ##8

Jœ≥ œ≤4 œ œ& p Sœ

≥.œ2œ .œ œ .œ œ œ .œ œ œ2 œ Sœ

0

.œ œ .œ œ .œ œ œ .œ œ œ0œœn

cresc.

jœœ œ œ# œ..œœjœœ

& ## Sp15 jœœ œ jœœœ œ jœœ ‰ ‰ jœ≤ œ .œ

1œ œ≤ œ≤ œ .œ œ# œ≤ ≈ œ

≤cresc.

3

œ1 œ# œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

& ##f S S decresc.

20 .œ≥ œ œ œ œ≤ œ≥4 œ œ≥ œ œ Bp.œ≤2 œ .œ œ .œ œ .œ œ .œ œ .œ œ .œ œ .œ œ

cresc.

.œ œ .œ œ .œ œ .œ≤ œ

B ## S decresc.

24 jœ≥ œ3 œ# 2 œ3 jœ# 2

œ≤3 œ œ#Ÿ œ# œ# œ œ œ œUu

U

& p S.œ≤3 Jœ .œ œ œ œ.≥ œ.≤

S.œ3 Jœ .œ œ œ œ. œ.

& ##cresc.

31

Jœ œ2Jœ œ

3 œ œ≥ œ3 œpœ≤ œ≤ jœ .œ œ .œ œ

cresc.

Jœ œ≤4 œ œB p S

œ≥ .œ2 œ .œ œ .œ œ œ .œ œ0 œ2 œ

B ##S

37 œ0 .œ œ .œ œ .œ œ œ .œ œ œ œœncresc.Jœœœ≤ œ# œ ..œœ J

œœSpjœœ œ jœœœ œ Jœœ ‰ Œ ∑

B ## p S44 œb ≤ œn p Sœb

œp cresc.

œn ≤ œ œ≥ œn œb œ ≤œb œ œ œ œb ≥œn œ pœb œ œn œ œ œ0 œ. œ. œ œn œ. œb . œ œ œ. œn .

Beethoven Viola Sonata Op. 30, No. 1Movement II Viola Page 1

Viola

1

B ##S

48 œb ≤≥ œ0 œb œn œ œ œb œ0 œ œ œ œS

œ œb œb œ œ œ œb4 œ œ œ œ0 œ

1

cresc.

œ.0≥ œ≤ œb œn œ œb œ.œb≥ œn œ œ œb

pJœ0 ‰ ‰ Jœ

≥

B ##cresc.

52. .œn œ œ œ

SrKKœ .œn 3 œ3 œ2 œ≤ œ≥

p cresc.

Jœ2≤ œ Jœ

1 œ œn≥ œ œpJœ ‰ ‰ Jœ

≤ Jœ ‰ ‰ jœ≥1

B ##cresc.

58 3œ œ≤ œ.≥ œ3 œ2 œ.≤2 œ œb œ.≥0 œ œ œ.≤ Jœn≥ ‰ Œ pŒ œ≤

SŒœn≥3

p cresc.

œ œ≤3 œ

B ## p (colla parte)

63 œUŸ2 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ JœU .œ≤0 œ3

& S.œ Jœ .œ œ œ œ. œ.

S.œ3 Jœ .œ œ œ œ.≤ œ.≥

cresc.Jœ≤ œ2Jœ≥

& ##69 œ3≤ .œ œ≤3

œ≥ œ œ.≤3pœ≥ œ≤ jœ .œ≥ œ .œ œ

cresc.

Jœ≥ œ≤ œ œB Spœ≥ œ œ2 œ1 .œ œ .œ œ œ .œ œ œ2 œ

Sœ0 œ œ œ .œ œ .œ œ

B ##75 œ .œ œ œ œœncresc.Jœœ œ≤1 œ œ œ# 1 œ œ œ0 œ œ ..œœ J

œœSpjœœ œ jœœœ œ Jœœ ‰ Œ p

œ≥2 œ œ œ œ œ œ

B ##cresc.

81 jœ œ œ œ œ≥1 œ2 œ# 3 œ# 1 œ œ œ≥ œ œ#pœ# œ Œ ‰ œ œ œ

cresc.

‰ œ œ4 œ ‰ œ œ4 œpœ≤2 œ œ0 œ œ œ œ1 œ œ œ. œ œ

B ##88 œ2 œ œ œ œ œ ≈ œ œ œ œ œcresc.

≈ œ≤0 œ4 ≈ œ≤ œ ≈ œ≥ œ ≈ œ≤ œdecresc.Sœ œ0 œ1 œ œ œ œ2 œ0 œ œ

≥3 œ4 œ πpJœœ ‰ ‰ Jœ

≤1 .œ Jœ3

Movement II Viola Page 2

B ##93.œ .œ3 œ œ2

3

œ œ œ3

œ œ œcresc.

.œ œ1 .œ4 œ .œ œ .œ œp.œ œ .œ œ .œ œ .œ œ

cresc. pœ .œ2 œ Jœ

.Jœ≤2 Jœ. ‰ ‰ Jœ

B ##99 Jœ. ‰ ‰ Jœ2& fJœ. ‰ ‰ Jœ

≥4pœ. œ.≤ ‰ Jœ.

decresc.

‰ ≈ . RÔœ≤ œ ‰ ≈ . RÔœ≤1 . .œ≥ œ≥0

πpizz.œ0 œ0 ≈ jœœ ‰ jœœ ‰ Œ

U

3

Movement II Viola Page 3

B ### Cp dolce

≥3 2 .4 œ2 œ. œ.≤ œ3 œ œ œcresc.

.˙ œ œ 3 œ.1S≤ œ œ# œ.4 œ.

B ### S S7

œn 3 œ œ.≤ œ.≤1 œ œ œ..≤ œ.≤ ˙ œ. Œ ∑ p≥ ˙ w œ œ≤ œ œ

cresc.

œ≥ Œ œ.≤ œ.1

B ###S

14 ≤ œ œ œ. œ.S Sœ œ1 œ.≤4 œ.≤ œ œ

1œ.≤œ.≤

p˙2œ.1 œ.≤3 ˙ œ. œ. ˙ œ œ œ# œ jœ œ# ≤ œ2≤ rœ œ œ œ œ

B ###20.˙ œ.≤

cresc.

˙ œ.1≤ œ.≥Sœ 4 œ4 œ œ. œ≤ .œ. œ .œ. œ1 .œ. œ4 Jœ0 ‰ Ó

pww13≥ ww≤

B ### ### C27 œœ ≥ œ œ. œ≤4 œ œ0 œ œ œ œ

cresc.

œ≥ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ≤

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ0 œ œ œœ Œ Ó

B ### C .. ..Var. I

33 ∑ 2p 3

œ.≤ œ œ3

œ. œ. œ.0 œ.2 œ4 œ# œ. œ.3 œ. œ Œ Ó 2p

1

3

œ.≤ œœ

3

œ. œœ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ œ. Œ Ó

B ### ..422

3

œ≥ œ. œ

3

œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ.0 œ. œ. œ.pw w

cresc.

œ œ#≤ œ œ

≥& p

3œ. œ≥œ

3œ. œ œ œ. œ œ œn. œ œ#

& ### .. ### Ccresc.

47 w œ 3 œpœ œ1≥ œ œ2B

1

3

œ. œ 0≤ œ3

œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ# . œ. w2œ Œ Ó &

Beethoven Viola Sonata Op. 30 No. 1Movement III Viola Page 1

Allegretto con Variazioni.

Viola

1

& ### Cp

Var. II

dolce

53

œ3 œ œ rœ œ≤ œ œ œ .≥ œ œ œ# ≤ œ œ œ œn

4

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ≥œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

1

& ### ..cresc.

II58 œ≤ œ# œ œ œ œ

4 œ3 œ4 œn2≥ œ3 œ2 œ3 œ1 œ2 œ1 œ2p

1œ≤1 œ2 œ# 3 œ4 Jœ.1œ≥3œ# œ p

2œ≤ œ œ# œ Jœ. œ≥2œ#1

œ

& ### ..62

œ œ#1

œ œ œ# œ1 œ4 œ IIœ œ œ œ4 œ# œ œ2 œ1 œ

3œ œ œ œ œ# œ

1

œcresc.

œ œ œ1œ1 œ œ œn œ# œ œ œ œ œ1 œ œn œ

& ### .. ### CI

67œ≥ œ3 œ œ1 œ1 œ œ3 œ œ≥1 œ œ# œ œn 3 œ4 œ1 œ

p1œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ p

2œ œ œ œ jœ ‰ Œ

& ### C ..Var. III

71 Œ œ ˙Ó Œ œ.

0≤S.˙ œ# .

1

S3 œ œ.≥1 œ œ œ≥ œn 4 œ

cresc.œ Œ Œ œ.

0≤

& ### ..S76 œ. œ. œn 2 œ S

œ 3 œŸ 1œ Œ3

‰ œ4≤œ

3

œ œ œ0

œ Œ Œ œ.0≤ 2œ. Œ

3

‰ œ1≤œ

3

œ œ œ

& ### ..S

81 œ. œ.≤ ˙

Sœ œ.

3 œ# 3 œ œ4 œ 3œ. œ œ

3œ. œ œ03

œ. œ œ3

œn . œ œ

& ### .. ### CS

85 œ. œ.≤ ˙

S Sœ œ.≥ œn 2 œn œ.≤ œ

Sœ œ# .≥ .œ œ.≤ œ. œ.3 1œ Œ

3

‰ œ≤ œ 3œ.0 œ4 œ2œ Œ Ó B

Movement III Viola Page 2

B ### C ..p

Var. IV90 jœ œœ≥ Œ jœœ œœ

≤ Œ œœœ.≥ Œ Ó 2

p cresc.

jœ œœ≥. Œ jœœ œœ.≥ œœœ

ƒœœ. Œ Ó 2

B ### .. .. nnn Cpjœ#œœ.≥ Œ jœœœ. Œ œœœ. Œ Ó

2jœ1 œœ.32≥Œ jœ1œœ.24

Œ œœœ.112 Œ Ó 2

B C pVar. V

Œ ≤ œ œ œ#≥1œ1œ œ œ œ œ≤ œ œ4 œ œ

≥ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ#1

œ2 œ2 œ

0

Bcresc.

114 œ4 œ œ œ œ#1 œ2 œ≤3 œ œ#≥2 œ3 œ1 œ# 2

pœ≤4 œ œ œ# œn

≥1 œ# 2pœ.3 Œ Ó

pÓ ˙≥3 œ2 ˙ œ1

B120 œ œ œ1 œ œ œ œ œ œ Œ Œ œ≥

cresc.

œ ˙1 œ œdecresc.

œ œ3 œ1 œ œ1 œpœ0 œ# œ œ œ( ). œ≥& œ œ œ# œ

&126 œ œ# œ œ œ#1 œ4 œ œ

cresc.

œ œ#≤ ≥1 œ2 œ# 3 œ≤ œ œn œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œb

decresc.

œ≤ œ œ œ#

&p

132 œ œ œ œ œ Œ B pŒ œ#≥ œ# œ# œ œ œ≤ œ œ œ œ# œ4 ≤≥

cresc.

œ œ œ œ œ.≥ œ1≤ œ œ

B137 œ3 œ œ œ# œ. œ#4≥ œ œ

S pœ≤ ˙u≥3 œœ Œ œœ Œ œœ# S

œœ≤2 U≥ œ3≤ œb

pwwbU

Tempo I

∑


1

B p143 Œ œ0≤ .œ. œb .œ. œ .œ. œ .œb . Œ Ó pŒ

œb≤ .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ. Œ Ó pŒœb≤ .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

B148 œ .œ. Œ Ócresc.

Œ œb ≤ .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ. Írœb ˙ ˙ œb . Œ Ó S

≥ ˙ œ.Œ Ó S

≥ ˙

B ### 86155œ.Œ Ó

S≥ ˙ œ. Œ Ó pÓ

œ≤ .œ. Œ Ó œ≤ .œ.Œ 3 Ó Œ ‰U

B ### 86Var. VI

164 ‰Allegro, ma non tanto5 .œS œ œ œ. œ

ŸS œ œ œŸS œ œœ

dolce

..œœ œœ œ œ œŒ ‰Œ Jœ? B œ œ œ œ Jœ .œ œ œ œ

B ###175rœ3 œ œ# œ œ1 JœŸn .œ3 œn . Jœ1

≤cresc.

œ œ4 œ.≤ œ Jœ.1 ≥≤S.œ œ œ œ.≤1

S SœŸ œ œ.1≥ œŸ œ œ.≤ .œ œ. ‰

B ###p

181 œ.≤ œ# .1 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.( œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. ) œœ ‰ Œ .cresc.

œ.≤1 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.Sœ.≤ œ.≤ œ.≥ œ.≤ œ.≥ œœ.≤ œœ.( )≥ œ.≤ œ.≤ ‰ œ.≤ œ.≤

B ###pII

188 œ ‰ Œ œ3≤ œ& œ#1œ2œ.≥ œ œ œ.

1≤ œ œ≥ œ# œ4 œ1 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ#3 œ œ.≤ œ.≤ œ. œ.4 œ œ œ œ0 œ œ

& ###192

œ œ œ œ0 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ#1 œ

cresc.

œ# œ œ.≥ œ œ œ.1≤S fJœ œ4 œ œ4 œ œ œn œ.2 œ≥ œ œ# œ œn œ œ œ œ# œ œ ‰ Œ ‰


& ###197 ∑ p .œ#≥1 œ œ1 œ .œ œ Jœ .œ# 1 œ œ1 œ# .œ œ Jœ# 2 .˙n 1

π.˙ .˙ .œ .œ

& ###206 .œ .œcresc.

.˙S.œ# 2 .œ3≥

fœ œn ≤ œ œ1 œ œ

Sœ œ0 œ.≥ œŸ2 œ œ. œ ‰ Œ ‰ π.œ

≥ .œ .œ≤ œ Jœ

& ###214 .œ# œ œ1 œ .œ œ Jœ .œ# 1 œ œ1 œ# .œ œ Jœ# .˙n 3

cresc.

.˙ .˙decresc.

.œ .œ .œ .œ≥

& ### π223 .œb .œ .œb .œ .˙ .˙ .œ .œ .œ .œ

cresc.

.˙S.œ .œ≥

fœ3 œ œ œ1 œ œ

& ###S

232 œ œ0 œ.2≥ œŸ œ œ pœ‰ Œ ‰ Œ ‰ Œ jœ

≤3

cresc.

.œ1 .œ .œ1 œ œ≥4 œp.œ .œ œ3 ‰ Œ jœ.

1≤cresc.

œ œ œ. œ œ œ.3≥

& ###240 .œ œ œ œ œ œpœ ‰ Œ jœ( ).

≤cresc.

œ œ œ. œ œ œ.≥pœœ ‰ Œ jœ≤

cresc.

œ œ œ. œ œ œ.≥p cresc.

œœ ‰ œ≥ œ œ. œœ ‰ œ≤ œ œ.≤

& ### f247 œœ

jœœ œœjœœ œœ.( œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ. ) ƒ

œœ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ


1

B

&?

###

###

###

43

43

43

..

..

..Viola

Piano

Allegro

Allegro

p..œœ ‰ Œ

....œœœœ ‰ Œ

..œœpœ3 œ œ œ œ œ

∑

∑

œ5 œ œ1

pŒ œ œ#

.˙3

.4

˙ œ

œ œ œ1

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ1œ œ

Scresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ

œ œ œ5Sœ

1œ2œ

decresc.

decresc.

.œ Jœ œ œ

œ œ œ œ2

œ# œ œ

B

&?

###

###

###

Í8 .œ ‰ Œ8 .œ

Í‰ Œ..œœ œ œœ œ œ œ

∑

∑œ œ œ

1

p.˙

Œ œ2 œ#.˙4 &

œ œ œ

1 œ

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ1 œ œ

œ .œ Jœ

œ œ5 œ

œ1 œ2 œ# ?

œ œn œ œ

œ œ5 œœ1œ2œ

cresc.

cresc.

œn .œ Jœ

œ œ œœn œ œ

B

&?

###

###

###

16 œ œ œ œ œ œ16

œ œ œœ1œ œ

œ œ œŸ

1 œŸ

.1

œ# œ œ.

œ2œ œœ.

4

.2

f

F

œn Œ Œ &

œœ ‰œ#2 œ œ œ œ œ1

..˙S

∑

œ.5

..˙4œ.2 œ# 1

p

p

Œ Œ œ

œ

..˙œ œ

œ œ œ œ. œ.

œ œ œ œ. œ...˙n

Ludwig van Beethoven

Beethoven Viola Sonata Op. 30 No. 1Movement I Page 1

Beethoven Viola Sonata Op. 30 No. 1

&

&?

###

###

###

f23 œ œ œ. œ# œ œ œ œ œ

23

œ2œ œ. œ#

2

f œœ œ œ œ

..˙S

Sœ.œ. œ#

œ. Œ Œ

..˙œ. œ#

p

pœ œ œ

Œ Œ œ3

..˙œ# œ

œ œn œ œ. œ.œ œ œ œ. œ.

..˙f

œ Œ Œ

œ ‰ œ#1œ œ œ œ œ

œœ‰ œ#3œ œ œ œ œ

S

∑

œ. œ.œ.

œ. œ.œ.

S

∑

œ.œ. œ.œ.œ. œ.

&

&?

###

###

###S S

30 ∑30 œ. œ.

œ.

œ. œ. œ.&S

pŒ œ œ

œ.3

œ. œœ23 œœdecresc.

œ Œ Œœ œ œ œ œ3 œ œ œ# œ

œœœœ# Œ Œ

∑

œ. œ.3 œ.2

Œ Œ œ2p

∑

œ1 .œ Jœ#

œ œ œ œ œ œ

∑ B

œŸ[œ# œ .œ Jœ3

œ œ œ œ œ œ

B

&

&

###

###

###S

36 ∑36 œ#Ÿ œ œ .œ Jœ

œ œ œ œ œ# œ

∑

œ1 œ3 œ œ œ# 3 œ

œ œ œ2 œ œ œS

p.˙

œ. œ. œ# . œ œ œ.

œ œ œ œ œ œS

.˙

œ. œ# . œ.1 œ3 œ œ.

œ œ œ œ œ œcresc.

œ œ# œ

œ#1 œ œ.3 œ.1 œ.4 œ.

œ œ œ œ œœ œ

œ Œ Œ

3

œ œ œ3

œ5 œ œ 3

œ œ œœœœ Œ Œ ?

Movement I Page 2

B

&?

###

###

###

p

π

42 œ .œ Jœ#42

œ5

œ œ œ∑ œ œ œ œ œ

œŸ œ# œ .œ Jœ

Œ Œ

œœ œ œ œ œ5œ œ œ œ#

3

Sœ#Ÿ œ œ

.œ Jœn

œ1 œ œ# œ œ

1 œ# 4 œ œ œ3

œ Œ Œ

œ œ œ œ œ# œ

œ Œ Œ

œ œ œ œ œ5

œ œ œ œ

Sœ. œ. œ# . œ œ œ.

œ

2œ œ1 œ4œ œ œ2 œ œ

œ Œ Œ

B

&?

###

###

###

S47 œ. œ# . œ. œ œ œ.

47 œ1 Œ ‰ jœ2

œ œ œ œ œ5 œ œœ œ# 3

S

cresc.

Jœ# .œ œ. œ. œ.

œ œ œ# œ œ1 œ# 4 œ œ œ

œ Œ ŒSF

œ.( ) Œ Œ

œ.2 3

jœ# jœœœœ## œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ&

∑

œ rœ‹ œ.( rœ‹ œ.)

œœœœ## œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ

B

&

&

###

###

###p

51 ∑51 rœ‹ ˙ œ# œ œ# 3 œ

œœœ5 œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœcresc.

∑

œ# œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ5 œ œ œ

œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ

∑

œ œ# œ œ# œ œ œ1 œ œ œ œ3 œ


f

f

Œ œ. œ.

œ5 œ3 œ œ œ4 œ œ œ œ#4 œ œ œ

œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ#2 œœœ

Movement I Page 3

B

&

&

###

###

###

S

S

55 ˙ œ œ œ. œ.

55 œ œ œ œœœ œ œœœ œ œ

jœ Jœ œ œ œ œ?

œ# . œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œœ œ œœœ œ œœœ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ# œ œ œ

œœ œ œ œ# œ œ œ œœ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

B

&?

###

###

###

59

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ# œ œ œ œ

59 œœœ Œ Œ

œœ Œ Œ

decresc.

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ# . œ.

∑

∑p

pŒ˙

Œ ˙

.˙

Œ ˙

Œ ˙#3

.˙f

f( )

œ Œ œ. œ# .

œœœ œ œ œ œ1 œ œ œ# œ œ3 œ1 œ

œœ Œ Œ

B

&?

###

###

###

decresc.

decresc.

64 œn . œ. œ. œ# . œn . œ.

64 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ# . œ.

∑p

pŒ ˙

Œ ˙

.œ2 œ œ œ œ œ œ

Œ ˙#

Œ ˙

.œ œ# 3 œ1 œ2œ

1œ3œ2f

œ Œ Œ

œ Œ Œ

Rœ œ œ œ œn œ œ3 œ# œ œ3œ1œ4

decresc.

∑

∑

œ. œ. œ. œ.3

œ# . œ.

Movement I Page 4

B

&?

###

###

###π

π69 Œ Œ œ

69 ∑

.˙#Œ ˙

œ. œ. œ

Œ Œ œ5 œ œ# œœœ# œœ œœ

œ. Œ œ

œ. Œ œ œ œ# œœœ Œ œœ#

œ. Œ œ

œ. Œ œ œ œ# œœœ Œ œœ#

cresc.

cresc.

.˙

˙ œ#4

..˙

˙# œ#

œn œ œ œ#...˙n

B

&?

###

###

###

p S

p

75 œ. ˙

75

œ Œ Œ

œœœ Œ Œ

p

p

decresc.

.œ Jœn œ œ œ# œ

Œ Œ œœŒ Œ œœ#

œ. Œœ œ œ# œ

œ5 œ œ# œ Œ

œœ Œ œœœ#œœ

œ. Œœ œ œ# œ

Œ œœ œ# œ Œ

œœœ Œ œœœ#cresc.

˙ œ#

∑

...˙p

œn œ œ œ#

Œ Œ œ#3

...˙n

B

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..cresc.

cresc.

81 ˙ œ#81 ˙ œ#

œ œœœœœ

œn œ œœ

œn œ œ5 œœœœ ‰ œ#

3œ1œ2œ1

œ3œ2

p

p

1 .œ ‰ Œ1 ....œœœœ ‰ Œ

..œœ œ3 œ œ œ œ œ

∑

∑

œ œ œ

Í

Í

2 .œ ‰ Œ2 ....œœœœ œ2 œ œ œ œ œ

..˙

∑

œ œ2 œ

.˙ .˙nMovement I Page 5

B

&?

###

###

###

Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~cresc.

cresc.

87 .œ œ œ œ œ œ œ87 .˙

..˙

œ œ œ

.˙

..˙

.˙n

.˙

..œœ3 œ œ œ1 œ œ œ

Jœ œn œ Jœ

Jœ œ œ Jœ

œ œ œf

fJœ œ œ Jœ

Jœ œ œ Jœ3

œ5 œ œ

Jœ œ œ Jœ

Jœ œn œ Jœ3

œ œ œn

B

&?

###

###

###

93

Jœ œ œ Jœ93 Jœ œ œ Jœ3

œ œ œ

Jœœœ œœ J

œœ

Jœn œ œ Jœ23

œ œ# œdecresc.

œ Œ Œ

œn œ œ œ3 œ œ

œŒ Œ &

p

∑

œ œ œ œ œ œ

Œ Œ œndolce

∑

œ1 .œ Jœ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

∑

œŸ œ# œ .œ Jœ3

œn œ œ œ œ œ

B

&

&

###

###

###S

99 ∑99 œŸ œ œ .œ Jœ

œ œ œn œ œ œ

∑

œn 1 œ3 œ œ œ2 œ

œ œ œ2 œ œ œ1?p

p Sœ. œ. œ. œ œ œ.

œ.3œ. œ.4

œ.∑ œ.œ.

Sœ. œ. œ. œ œ œ.

œn2

Œ Œœn .. œ.œ. œ.œ. œ.

cresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ. œn . œ. œ.

œ.4

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.œ Œ Œ

Movement I Page 6

B

&?

###

###

###

p

pS

104 œ Œ Œ104 jœ ‰ œ.

1 œœ.4.œn Jœ3 S

S

∑

œ œ œ œ#1 œ3

œ œ# .œ Jœn3

cresc.

∑

œ œn œ œ œn œœ œ# œ œn

3œn œ2

∑

œ1œ# œ œn œ œœ œ3œ œ œ œ

p

p Sœ.( ).œ Jœn

œ. œ. œnœ Œ Œ

S

S

œ œ# .œ Jœn

œ œ œ1 œ# 2 œ

∑

B

&?

###

###

###

cresc.

cresc.

110 œ# œ# œ œn œ œ

110 œ œ œ œ#3 œ œn

2

∑

œn œ œ œ œ œn

œn œ2 œn œ# œ1 œ

∑

f S

S

S

F

œ. œn . œn

œn . œ.1 œ

œœn . ..œœn 2 Jœœ4

S

S

S

œ œb œ œ# œ

œ œn œ œ# œ

œœn œœ#4

..œœ Jœœ

œ œn œ œ# œ# œn

œ œn œn œ œ# 1 œ4

œœœ œœ#4

œœn œœn œœ# œœ#4

B

&?

###

###

###

115 œ œn œ œ# œ œ#115 œ œ# œ œ œ.

3

œ.2

œœ œœn4œœ œœ. œœ. œœ.

Sœ. .œ Jœn

œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ2œ# œ1

œ œ œ œ œ œ

Sœ. .œ Jœ#

œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œS

œ œ œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ# œ

œ# . ..œœjœœ

œ œ œ œ œ œMovement I Page 7

B

&?

###

###

###S

119 œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

119 œœ...œœ jœœ##

œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ# Œ Œ

œœ œ2 ‰ jœ

4 ‰ Jœ#?

jœœ ‰jœ2 ‰ jœ# ‰

p

p

.œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ

‰ Jœ# ‰ Jœ1 ‰ jœ&

Jœ# ‰ jœ5 ‰ Jœ ‰

cresc.

cresc.

.˙

‰ jœ ‰ Jœ ‰ jœ#jœ ‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ# ‰


‰ Jœ# ‰ jœ ‰ Jœ ?

Jœ# ‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ‰

B

?

?

###

###

###

p

p

124 œ Œ Œ124 ‰ jœ ‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ

jœ ‰jœ ‰ jœ ‰

.œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ

Jœ ‰ jœ ‰ Jœ ‰

cresc.

cresc.

.˙

‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ ‰ jœ&

jœ ‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ ‰


‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ ‰ jœ ?

Jœ ‰ Jœ ‰ Jœ ‰

p

p

œ Œ Œ

‰ jœ# ‰ Jœ# ‰ jœ

jœ#‰ jœ# ‰ jœ

‰

B

?

?

###

###

###

129 .œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ129 ‰ Jœ ‰ jœ ‰ Jœ

jœ ‰ jœ ‰jœ ‰

cresc.

cresc.

.˙n

‰ Jœ# ‰ Jœ# ‰ Jœ &

jœ# ‰ Jœ# ‰ jœ ‰


‰ jœ ‰ jœ ‰ Jœ#

Jœ ‰ jœ ‰ Jœ ‰

f

F

œn œ œ œ œ œ œ# œ# œ œ œ œ

‰ Jœ Œ Œ

œ Œ Œ

œ. œ. œ. œ# . œ# . œ.

∑

∑

Movement I Page 8

B

&?

###

###

###p

p134 Œ ˙

134 Œ ˙

.˙

Œ ˙

Œ ˙#

.˙f

fœ Œ Œ

œœ35

œ œ œ1

œ œ œ# œ#1jœ4 œ œ#

1 œ œ

œ Œ Œ

∑

œ.1 œ. œ. œ# . œ# .1 œ.

∑p

pŒ ˙

Œ ˙

.˙

Œ ˙#

Œ ˙

.˙

B

&?

###

###

###

π

π

140 ..˙n

140 ...˙#

≈ œ4 œ œ# œ œ3œ œœ. œ.

œœ Œ Œ

œœœ# œœœ œœœ

œ# . œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.2

cresc.

∑...˙

≈ œ4 œ œ œ œ4œ œ#œœ œœ3

∑œœœ œœœ œœœ

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ# . œ.π

Œ Œ œ

Œ ˙˙n

.˙

Œ Œ œ

Œ ˙#.3

B

&?

###

###

###

146 Œ Œ œ

146 Œ ˙˙n

.˙#

Œ Œ œ

Œ ˙

.1

Œ Œ œ

Œ ˙˙n

.˙

Œ Œ œ

Œ ˙

.˙

cresc.

Œ Œ œ

Œ ˙

.˙


œœœ5œœœ4

.˙œœœ5

p

p

.œ ‰ Œ

‰ Œ

..œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ

...œœœ

Movement I Page 9

B

&?

###

###

###

153 ∑153 ∑

œ5 œ œ

pŒ œ œ#

.˙

.4

˙ œ

œ œ œ1

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ1œ œ

S

S

cresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ1œ2œ

decresc.

decresc.

.œ Jœ œ œ

œ œ œ œ2

œ# œ œ

Í

Í

.œ ‰ Œ

.œ ‰ Œ

..œœ œ œœ œ œ œ

B

&?

###

###

###

160 ∑160 ∑

œ œ œ

p.˙

Œ œ œ#.˙

&

œ œ œ

1 œ

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ œ œ

œ1œ œ

œ .œ Jœ

œ1 œ5 œ

œ1 œ2 œ#?

œ œn œ œ

œ œ œœ1œ œ

cresc.

cresc.

œn .œ Jœ

œ œ œœ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œœ œ œ

B

&?

###

###

###

168 œ œ œŸ

168

˙1

œŸ

.1

œ# œ œ.

œ2œ œœ..˙

f

f

œn Œ Œ

œœ ‰œ#2 œ œ œ œ œ1

..˙S

∑

œ. Œ Œ

..˙œ.2 œ# 1

p

pŒ Œ

œ

Œ Œ œ

..˙œ œ Œ

œ œ œ œ. œ.

œ œ œ œ. œ...˙n

Movement I Page 10

B

&?

###

###

###

f

f

174 œ œ œ. œ# œ œ œ œ œ

174

œ2œ œ. œ# œ œ œ œ œ

..˙

S

S

œ.œ. œ#

œ.

..˙œ. œ#

p

pœ œ œ

œ3

..˙œ# œ

œ œn œ œ. œ.

œ œ œ œ. œ.

..˙f

œ Œ Œ

œ ‰ œ# œ œ œ œ œ

œœ ‰ œ# œ œ œ œ œS

∑

œ. œ.œ.

œ. œ.œ.

B

&?

###

###

###S

180 ∑180

œ.œ.. œ.œ.œ. œ.S S

∑

œ. œ.œ.

œ. œ. œ.&

pŒ Œ œ

œ.œ3 œn

œ. œœ œœœS

œ Œ Œœ œ1 œ4 œ œ œ œ# 3 œ#

œœœ# Œ Œ ?

p

p

Œ œ œb

œ. œn œ

Œ œ œn

Sœb œ œn œ œ œ œ œ

œœn Œ Œ

œ Œ Œ &p S

pœ Œ œ

Œ œ œ

Œ œ œœ2

B

&

&

###

###

###decresc.

187 œ Œ Œ187 œ œ œ3 œ œ œ œ œ œ3

œœœ Œ Œ

∑

œ œ œ.3 œ.2

Œ Œ œ2

p

∑

œ1 .œ Jœ#

œ œ œ œ œ œ

∑

œŸ œ# œ .œ Jœ3

œ œ œ œ œ œS

∑

œŸœ œ .œn Jœ#

œ œ œ œ œ œ

∑œn œ œ œ3 œ œ

œ œ œ2œ œ œ

Movement I Page 11

B

&

&

###

###

###

p

S

193 .˙193 œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œS

.˙

œ. œ. œ.1 œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œS

œ œ œ

Jœ2œ œ.3 œ. œ.

œ œ œ œ œœ œp

œ Œ Œ

3

œ2 œ œ3

œ5 œ œ3œ œ4

œœœ Œ Œ ?

œ .œ Jœ

œ5 œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ

œŸ œ# œ .œ Jœ

Œ Œ

œ œ2œ4

œ œ5

œ œ œ œ#3

œ

B

&?

###

###

###

S199 œŸ œ œ

.œ Jœ

199

œ2 œ œ1œ4 œ1 œ3 œœ œ

œ Œ Œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ Œ Œ

œ œ œ œ œ5 œ œœ œ


œ œ œ

œ2

Œœ œ œ1 œ

4

œ

1 œŒ


œ Œ ‰ jœ2

œ œ œ œ œ5œ œ œ œ#

3

S

cresc.

Jœ.œ œ. œ# . œn .

œ œ œ œ œ1 œ4 œ œ œ

œ Œ Œ

B

&?

###

###

###f S

204 œ. Œ Œ204 œ.2 ˙

Jœ#jœœœœ# œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ&

∑œ rœ# œ. rœ# œ.

œœœœ# œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ œœœœp

∑˙ œn œ œ3 œ

œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœcresc.

∑

œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œœœœ œœœ œœœœ œœœ œœœœ œœœœ

Movement I Page 12

B

&

&

###

###

###

208 ∑208 œœœ œ# œœ œ1 œ œ œ œ3 œ


f

f

Œ œ. œ.

œ5 œ3 œ œ œ4 œ œ œ œ4 œ œn œ

œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ ?

S

S

˙ œ œ œ. œ.

œ3œ4œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

B

&?

###

###

###

212 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

212 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ



œ œ œ œ œ œ


œœœ Œ Œœœ Œ Œ

decresc.

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

∑

∑p

pŒ˙

Œ ˙

.˙

B

&?

###

###

###

217 Œ ˙

217 Œ ˙

.˙

f

f

œ Œ œ. œ.

œœ œ œ œ œ4œ1œ œ jœ

5 œ5 œ œ1 œ

œ Œ Œ

decresc.

decresc.

œn . œ. œ. œ# . œn . œ.

œ. œ.1 œ. œ. œ. œ.

∑

p

p

Œ ˙

Œ ˙

.œ2 œ œ œ œ œ œ

Œ ˙#

Œ ˙

.œ œ# 3 œ1 œ œ œ œ2Movement I Page 13

B

&?

###

###

###f

222 œ Œ Œ222 œ Œ Œ

œ œ œ4 œœn œ œ

3œ œ œ

3œ œ &

decresc.

∑

∑

œ.3 œ. œ. œ.3 œ.œ.

π

π

Œ Œ œ

∑Œ ˙.˙#

π

œ œ. œ

Œ Œ œ œ œ œ

œœ# œœ œœ

B

&

&

###

###

###

226 œ. Œ œ226 œ. Œ œ œ œ œ

œœ Œ œœ#

œ. Œ œ

œ. Œ œ œ œ œ

œœ Œ œœ#cresc.

cresc.

.˙

˙ œ# 4

..˙ ?

˙ œ

œn œ œ œ˙ œn.˙

p

p Sœ. ˙

œ Œ Œœœ Œ Œ

B

&?

###

###

###

decresc. p

p

231 .œ Jœn œ œ œ œ

231 Œ Œ œœŒ Œ œœ#

œ. Œ œ œ œ œ

œœœ œ œ œ Œ

œœ Œœœœ# 31

œ. Œ œ œ œ œ

Œ œ œ œ œ Œœœœ2 Œ œœœ#

cresc.

cresc.

˙ œ#

∑...˙

œn œ œ œ

Œ Œ œ3

...˙

p

p

œ Œ Œ

˙ œ

œ œ œ.˙Movement I Page 14

B

&?

###

###

###

237 .œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

237 œn œ œ5

œ œ œ.˙

S

œ Œ Œ

˙ œn

œ œ œ.˙


œn œ œ3

œ œ œ.˙

˙ œ

œ Œ Œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

œn œ œ


œ œ œ œ œ œ

S˙ œn

œ Œ Œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

B

&?

###

###

###

243 œ œ œ243 .œ3 œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

cresc.

cresc.

œ. ‰ œ# œ œ œ œ œ

œ. ˙

œœ.‰ œ# 3 œ œ œ œ# œ

œ. ‰ œ# œ œ œ œ œ

œ. ˙

œ. ‰ œ#3œ1œ œ1œ3œ

œ. ‰ œ# œœ œ œ œ

&

œ. ˙

œ. ‰ œ#3œ œ œ œ œ&

&

&

&

###

###

###

f

f

247 œ. œ... œ.

247 œ. œ. œ.

œ.5 œ. œ.

œ... Œ Œœ.Œ Œ

œ. Œ Œ ?π

∑

Œ œœ œœ.˙

π.œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ

...˙

œ œ œ.˙

œ. Œ Œ

œœ. Œ Œ

œ. Œ ŒœMovement I Page 15

B

&

?

##

##

##

42

42

42

Viola

Piano

p S

Adagio, molto espressivo.

Adagio, molto espressivo.

p S

.œJœ

≈ .

œ.œ

2

œ..œœœ

..œœœ

.œjœ

.œ œ œ œ. œ.

..œœœ..œœœ..œœœ#..œœ œ

2

œ œ œ#

S

S

S

.œJœ

..œœ

œ.œœ

.œ

1 Jœ#

..œœœ

..œœœ

.œ œ œ œ. œ.

œ œn œ

..œœœ..œœœ..œœnœ..œœ œ

B

&

?

##

##

##

cresc.

cresc.

5

Jœœ

Jœ

..œœ

1

œ .œ œ.œ# œ.œœ

œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ

.œœ.œœœ œ œ œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ œ œ#

p

p

œ œjœ .œ œ .œ œ

.œ œ.œ œ.œœ.œœ

˙

œœ

cresc.

cresc.

Jœ

œ œœ&

.œ œ

œ .œ œ

.œ œ4

jœ

œ

œœ

5

œœ

3

œœ

2

&

&

?

##

##

##

p

p

S

S

9

œ .œœ.œ œ.œ œ

.œ5

Jœ

..œœœ.œœ.œœ.œ œ

œ .œœ œ œ

.œ4

œ œ œ. œ.

.œœ .œ œ .œ

œ

1

.œ

4

œ#

S

S

œ .œœ.œ œ

.œ œ

.œJœ

.œœ.œœ.œœ.œ#

1

œ

œ .œœ œ œœn

.œ œ œ œ.œœn.

.œœ .œ œ .œ

œ

1

.œn4

œ

Beethoven Viola Sonata Op. 30 No.1Movement II Page 1

&

&

?

##

##

##

cresc.

cresc.

13

jœœ

œ œ# œ

J

œœœ

œ

J

œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.

.

œ

œ

jœ

œ

J

œ

œœ

œ

jœ

œ#

#

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ#

œ#

.œ

œ

S

S

p

p

jœ

œœ

jœœœ œ

œ

œ

œ œn œ œŸœ œ

.œœ.œ œ

.œœ.œ

œn

cresc.

jœœ‰ ‰ j

œ

Jœ ‰ ≈ .

œ5

.œ3 œ

?

..œœ œ

1

.œ# œ .œn

2

œ.œœ

&

?

?

##

##

##

p

17

œ.œ œ œ œ

.œœ..œœœ..œœœ..œœœ

.œjœ1

œ .œ œ# œ ≈ œ

.

.œœ# œ

..œœœ..œœœ..œœœ

œœ

cresc.

cresc.

3

œ œ# œ#3œ œ œ

3œ œ œ

3œ œ œ

..œœœ..œœœ..œœœ..œœ#œ

.

.

œ

œ

jœ

œ

f

f

S

Sdecresc.

decresc.S

.œ œ œ œ œœn œ œ œ

œ B

J

œœœnœœœ

œœœ

4

œn&

œ

œ

œ

œ

B

&

?

##

##

##

p

p

21.œœn.œœ.œœ.œœ

œ

1.œ

2

œœ œ

.

.

œ

œ

jœ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ.œœ.œœ

œ .œ œœ ≈ œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

cresc.

cresc.

.œœ.œ

œ.œ

œ.œ

œ

7

œ

3

œ œ œ# œ

1

œ œ

6

œ œ œ œ œ œ

6

œ œn œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ

.

.

œ

œ

jœ

œ

Movement II Page 2

B

&

?

##

##

##

S

S decresc.

24jœ

œœ#

œ

.œ4

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ# œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

p

p

jœ#

œœ œ#

rK

œ#œ œ œ œ# œ œ

œ# œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

jœ

œ‰ Œ

B

&

?

##

##

##

26U

&

˙

U

Ÿ[

œ#œ# œ œ œ

œ

U

˙˙#U

p S

p S

.œnJœ

≈ .

œn.œœ..œœœ

..œœœ

.œjœ

.œ œ œ œ. œ.

..œœœ..œœœ..œœœ#..œœ œ

œ œ œ#

S

S

S

.œJœ

..œœ

œ.œœ..œœœ

..œœœ

.œ

Jœ#

&

&

?

##

##

##

30.œ œ œ œ

.œ.

œ œn œ

..œœœ..œœœ..œœnœ..œœ œ

cresc.

cresc.

Jœœ

Jœ

œ œ œ

..œœ œ .œ œ.œ# œ.œœ

œ œ œ œ œ

.œœ.œœœ œ œ œ

1

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ œ œ#

p

p


.œ œ.œ œ.œœ.œœ

˙

œœ

Movement II Page 3

&

&

?

##

##

##

cresc.

cresc.

34

Jœœ œ

œB

.œ œ

œ .œ œ

.œ œ

jœ

œ

œœœœœœ

p

p

S

S


.œJœ

..œœœ.œœ.œœ.œ œ

œ .œœ œ œ

.œ œ œ œ. œ.

.œœ .œ œ .œ

œ.œœ#

S

S


.œJœ

.œœ.œœ.œœ.œ# œ

B

&

?

##

##

##

38 œ .œœ œ œœn

.œ œœœ.œœn.

.œœ .œ œ .œ

œ.œnœ

cresc.

cresc.

J

œœ

œ œ# œ

J

œœœ

œ

J

œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.

.

œ

œJ

œ

œ

J

œ

œœ

œ

jœ

œ#

#

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ#

œ#

.œ

œ

Sp

Sp

jœ

œœ

jœœœ œ

œ

œ

œ œn œ œŸœ œ

.œœ.œ œ

.œœ.œ

œn

B

&

?

##

##

##

π

42

J

œœ‰ Œ

Jœ ‰œ œ

J

œœ ‰ œ œ

∑

œbœ

œbœ

S

p S

p

œbœn

œb œœœb

˙

˙b

b

p S

Sp

œb

œ

œœœbbœœœ

˙

˙b

b

p

p cresc.

cresc.

œn œœ œn œb œ

œb œn œ œn œb œnœ

œœœnb

( )

œœœœbn

œ

œn

n

œ

œn

Movement II Page 4

B

&

?

##

##

##

p

p

47 œb œ œn œ œ œ œ.œ. œ œn œ.œb.œ œ œ.œn.

jœœœbn

‰ Œ

jœ

œb

b ‰ Œ

S

S

œb œœb œn œ œ œb

œ œ œ œœ

œbœ

œn

n

˙

˙b

b

S

S

œ œbœb œ œœ

œb œ œœ œœ

œb

œ

œ

˙

˙b

b

B

&

?

##

##

##

cresc.

cresc.

50

œ.œ œb

œn œ œb œ.

œb œn œ œ œb

œn3 œ œ œ œ

1œ œ œ œb

3

œ11 œn œ

6

œ4

œ1 œb œ œn œ œ œ œ

3

œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ

3

œ œ œ

6

œb œ œ4

œ œ œ œn

œ

œn

n

œ

œn

B

&

?

##

##

##

p

p

51

Jœ ‰ ‰ J

œ

6

œb

œn

2

œb

4

œ œœ

6

œ œœ œ œœ

˙

˙b

b

cresc.

cresc.

. .œn œn œ œ

œ œnœœœ œ œ œ

œœœ œ

˙

˙

S

S

rKK

œ.œn œ œ œ œ

œ œnœn œ œœœ œœœ œœ

.

.

œ

œ#

#

J

œ

œ

Movement II Page 5

B

&

?

##

##

##

p

p cresc.

cresc.

54

J

œ œJ

œ

œ œb

2

œœ œœœ œœ

œœ œn

.

.

œ

œn

n

J

œ

œn

n

œ œn œ œ

œ

1 œ

2

œ

œ

œ œn

4

œ

œ œ

œ

œ œ

œœœœœœœœ

cresc.p

p

J

œ

‰ ‰Jœ

jœœ

œ

‰ ≈ . œ

.œ œ4

œ

œ

œ œœœ œ œœ œœ œ œ

B

&

?

##

##

##

S

57

Jœ ‰ ‰

jœ

œ3

3

œ œ œn .jœ œ œ œ. jœ œ œ œ.

œœ œnœ œ œ

œœ œœ# œ œ

cresc.

cresc.p

3

œ

œ œ.3œ œ œ.

3œ œb œ.

3

œ œ œ.

œ œ

Jœ‰ ≈ œ

œ

3

œ. œ. œ.

œ œœœœ œ œ œ

œ œn œ œ

S decresc.

Jœn‰ Œ

œ œ œ œn .jœ œ œœ. jœ œ œœ.

œœ œnœ œ œœœœœœœ

p

p

Œ

œ

œœœ# Œ

œœœ#b Œ

B

&

?

##

##

##

S

S

61

Œ

œn

œœœ#

nŒ

œ

œb

b Œ

p cresc.

pcresc.

œn œ œ

œ

œ#

#

œ

œ

# œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œb

b

œ

œ

b œ

œ

œ

œ

p

p

(colla parte)

œ

UŸ

œœ œ œ œ œ œ

œ

JœU

.œ

œ

&

œŸU

œ#œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ

JœU

‰

œ

œ

U

J

œœœ

U

‰

Movement II Page 6

&

&

?

##

##

##

S

S

64 .œJœ

3≈

œœ

3

œ œœ

œ œ œœ

4

œn œ

..œœ

J

œœœ

.œ œ œ œ. œ.

œ œ œœ œ œœ#

4

œ œ

œœ œ

œœ œœœœ#

S

S

.œJœ

œ

œ

1

œ œ œœ

œ

5

œ œœ

4

œ œ

..œœ3

jœœœ#

.œ œ œ œ.œ.

œ œ œ

œœ œ

œnœ œ

œ œœ

œœ œœnœœ

&

&

?

##

##

##

cresc.

cresc.

68

Jœœ

Jœ

œ.œ œ

3

œ œ

2

œœ#

3

œ œ œœœ

œœ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ .œ œ3œ œ œ.

œœœœœœœœœ œ

3

œ œ.

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œœ

œ#

#

p

p


œ

2

œ œ œ œ œœœœœœœ

˙

œœ

cresc.

cresc.

Jœœ œ œB

3

œ œ

œ≈œ

œ

≈œ

œ œ. œ. œ.

jœ

œ

œœœœœœ

B

&

?

##

##

##

p

S

S

p

72œ

3

œ œœ.œ œ.œ œ

.œ .œ œ

3œœœœ

3œœœœœœ œ œœ

œ .œœ œ œ

. .œ4

œ œ œœœ3

œœ

œœœœœœ œ

œ

1

œœ

4

œ# œ

S

S

œ

3

œ œœ.œ œ.œ œ

..œœ.œ œ

œœœœœœœœœ œ# œœ

œ .œœ œ œœn

. .œ3

œœœœœ œœn

œœœœœœ œ

œœœn4

œœ

Movement II Page 7

B

&

?

##

##

##

cresc.

cresc.

76

J

œœ

3

œ

œ œ

3

œ#

œ œ

3

œ

œ œ

J

œœœ

œ

J

œ

œ

œ

œ œ

œ

œ œ

œ

œ œ

œ

œ œ

.

.

œ

œJ

œ

œ

J

œ

œœ

œ

jœ

œ#

#

œ

œ œ

œ

œ œ

œ#

œ# œ

œ

œ œ

Sp

Sp

jœ

œœ

jœœœ œ

œ

œ

œ œ œ œŸœ œ

œœ œœ œ œœœ œn

œœ œ

π

J

œœ‰ Œ

.œœ.3

.œ. œ. .œ. œ. .œ. œ.

J

œœ ‰ Œ

B

&

?

##

##

##

p

80 œ3œ œ œ

3œ œ œ

..œœ.œœ...œœ.œœ...œœ.œœ...œœ.œœ.

∑

cresc.

rKK

œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ#

..œœ.œœ...œœ.œœ...œœ.œœ...œœ.œœ.

∑

œ# œ œ œ œ œ#

.

.œœ.

œœ.

.

.œœ.

œœ.

.

.œœ.

œœ.

.

.œœ.

œœ.

∑

p

p

œ# œ

Œ

jœœ‰

3

≈œ2

œ#

3

œ œ œ#

.

.œœ

. œœ

. ..œœ

. œœ

. ..œœ

. œœ

. ..œœ

. œœ

.

B

&

?

##

##

##

84

‰ œ œ œ

œœ1

œœ3

œ œœ4

œœ

..œœ. œœ. ..œœ. œœ. ..œœ. œœ. ..œœ. œœ.

cresc.

cresc.

‰ œœ œ

rK

œ

œ œ œ œ.3

œ. œ.œ. œ.1

..œœ. œœ. ..œœ. œœ. ..œœ. œœ. ..œœ. œœ.

‰ œ

œ œ

œ# œ œ œ.œ. œ. œ. œ.1

.

.œœ

. œœ

. .

.œœ

. œœ

. .

.œœ

. œœ

. .

.œœ

. œœ

.

p

p

œœœ œ œœ œœ œœ.œ œ

œ# œ .œœ.œ5

œn

œœ œ

œœ

œ

Movement II Page 8

B

&

?

##

##

##

88œœœ œœ œ≈ œ œœœœ

Jœ2

œ .œœ

œ

œ

œ

œ

cresc.

cresc.

≈ œœ≈œœ

≈œœ

≈

œ œ

œ

3

œ œ œ.

3

œ. œ. œ.

œ

œ

œ

œœ

œœ

œ

S

S

decresc.

œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ

œœ œ

œ5

œ œT

.œ œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

œ

π

πp

J

œœ ‰ ‰ J

œ

.œ

œ..œœœ..œœœ..œœœ

jœ

œ

‰ Œ

B

&

?

##

##

##

92.œ

J

œ

..œœœ

..œœœ

..œœœ

..œœœ

. .œ œ . .œ œ

.œ .œ œ

..œœœ..œœœ..œœœ..œœœ

˙

œ

3

œ œ œ

3

œ œ œ

.

.œœ œ

.

.œœ œ

.

.œœ œ

.

.œœ œ

. .œ œ# . .œœ

cresc.

cresc.

.œ

œ.œœ.œœ.œ œ

jœœ

‰ ‰ .œ œ

œ

2

.œ œ .œ œn

B

&

?

##

##

##

p

p

96.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

.œ

œ

jœ

œJœ

. .œ

3

œ . .œ œ

cresc.

cresc. p

p

œ .œœ

J

œ.

Jœ

œ4

6

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ.œ3

œ

1

.œ

3

œœ. œœ

4

Jœ.

‰ ‰ Jœ

Jœ.... ‰ ‰ J

œ

J

œœ.

‰ ‰ J

œœ

Jœ.

‰ ‰ Jœ

&

Jœ..‰ ‰

jœœ

J

œœ.

‰ ‰ Jœ

Movement II Page 9

&

&

?

##

##

##

f

f

100

Jœ.‰ ‰ Jœ

jœœ.

‰ ‰jœœœ

Jœ.

‰ ‰

jœœœ

p

p

œ. œ.

‰ Jœ.

jœœœ.

‰jœœœ

‰

jœœœ.

‰ jœ

œ

‰

decresc.

decresc.

‰ ≈ . RÔ

œ œ

jœœœ

‰ ‰≈ .rK

œ

jœ

œ

‰ Œ

‰ ≈ . RÔ

œ. .œ œ

jœœ

œ

3‰ ‰ ≈ .

rK

œ

J

œ

œ

‰ Œ

π

π

pizz.œœ ≈ jœœ

‰

jœ

œ

21

‰ ‰ ≈ .rK

œ

4

J

œ

œ

‰J

œœ

°

‰

jœœ

‰ ŒU

jœ

5

.œ

U

˙˙

U

Movement II Page 10

B

?

?

###

###

###

C

C

C

Viola

Piano

p

p

dolce

dolce

˙ ˙

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œww

.˙ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ˙ ˙

œ. œ. œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ.˙ œ3

cresc.

.˙ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ2 œ

œ ˙ œ.

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ˙ ˙

B

?

?

###

###

###

S6 ˙ œ œ# œ. œ.

œ œ œœ jœ œ5 jœ2œ œ4œ œ#

S Sœn œ œ. œ. œ œ œ.. œ.

jœ œ jœ œ œ œ. œ.œ œ3 œn œ

˙ œ. Œ

œ1 œ œœœ3 œ Œ

&

œ4 5 œœœ œ2œp

∑

˙ ˙

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œw

p˙ ˙

.˙ œ


w

œ. œ. œ1œ3œ œ


B

&?

###

###

###cresc.

12 œ œ œ œ

.˙ œ2


cresc.

œ Œ œ. œ.

œ ˙1 œ.2


S

S

˙ œ œ œ. œ.

˙3 œ œ# œ. œ.

œœ4 œ œœœ œœ œ œœ# 4œSS

S S

S

œ œ œ. œ. œ œ œ. œ.

œn 4 œœ. œ. œœ œ. œ.

œœ3 œœœœ œœn œ œ œ

p

p

˙ œ.œ.

˙ Jœ.

œ œ œ œœ5œœ œœ Œ

˙ œ. œ.

œœ2

œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œœ# œ œ œ



Beethoven Viola Sonata Op. 30 No. 1Movement III Page 1

B

&?

###

###

###

18 ˙ œ œ œ# œ

œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œœ œ# œ œ

jœ œ# œ rœ œ œ œ œ

œ3

1

œ œ3

œ œ œ œ œœ œ# œ œ

.˙ œ.

œ.œ3 œ œ œ œ

1 œ œ

œ2 œ1

œ3

œ œ œ œ œ

cresc.

cresc.

˙ œ. œ.

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ1

œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ

S

S

œ ˙ œ œ

œ4œ œ œ2

œ3

œ œ œœn1

œ œ œ œ œ œ3 œ2

B

&?

###

###

###

23 œ. œ .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

œ4œ1œ4

œ œ œœ œœ1œœ œ œ1 œœ œ

œ Jœ ‰ Ó

œ4

œ œ œ1œ2œ œœ

œ Œ Ó

p

p

ww

˙3 œ. œ.

œ#3

œ1œœœœœœ

ww

˙2 œœ œ# œ

œ2

œ œ# œœœ œœ

œœ ˙ œjœ4 œ# œ rœ œœœœ

œœ œ# œœœœœ2

œ. œ œ œ œ œ œœ

.˙ œ

œ. œœ3œœœ œ œ

B

&?

###

###

###cresc.

cresc.

29 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

˙ œ. œ.

œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œS

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œŸ œ# 2 œ3 ˙ œ3 œn

œn œ œ œ œ œ œ3 œ2


œ.2 œ .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

œ1œ œ# œ œ1 œ œ œ

œœ Œ Ó

œ5 jœ ‰ Ó

œn œ œ œ œŒ

Movement III Page 2

B

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..

Í

Var. I33 ∑

‰ œ2œ

‰ œ2œ ‰ œ

1œ ‰ œ1 œœœ.œ. œ.

œ. &

∑

‰œ1œ‰œ1 œ‰œœ‰œ œ

3

œ.4 œ.œ. œœ.

2

∑

‰œ œ ‰œ œ# ‰œ œ ‰œœ2

œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ.

p 3

œ. œ œ3

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ# œ. œ. œ.

œn Œ Ó

œœ.3Œ Ó ?

Í

œ Œ Ó

‰ œ2œ‰œ1œ‰œœ‰œœ

œœ. œ.4 œ.œ.&

B

&

&

###

###

###..

..

..38 ∑

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œœ‰ œœ

œ.4œ. œ. œn .

3

∑

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ2 œ ‰ œ1 œ

4

œ. œ# .2œ. œ# .

p13

œ. œ œ3œ. œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ

1œœ ‰ œ4œ

œ Œ œ œ œ4œ œ œÓ?Í

œ. Œ Ó

‰ œ œœ3 œ2 œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ œœœ.œ. œ.

œ. &

B

&

&

###

###

###..

..

..42 23

œ œ. œ3œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

2œœ Œ ‰ œ.5œ. œ. œ. œ.

œ Œ Ó ?

p

p

w

‰ œ3œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ

œ# .2œ. œ. œ.

w

‰ œ2œ ‰ œ

1 œ ‰ œ1 œ ‰ œ2œ

œ. œ.4œ. œ.

cresc.

cresc.

œ œ# œ œ&

œ œ œ3 œ œ5 œ3 œ1 œ3 œ œ œ# 2 œ

œ2˙ œ

2

Movement III Page 3

&

&?

###

###

###p

p46 3œ. œ œ

3œ. œ œ œ. œ œ œn. œ œ#

œ Œ3

‰ œ œ 3œ œ œœœ Œ Ó

cresc.

cresc.

w

3

œn 2œœ1 œ ‰ œœ œ ‰ œœ œ ‰ œœ œœ.2œ. œ. œ.

œ ˙ œ

‰ œ œ ‰ œ1 œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ1 œ3

œ. œ.4

œ. œ.2

p

pœœ œ œ

‰ œ2 œ1 œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ.˙ œ

&

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..50 1 3

œ.œ œ

3

œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ# . œ. B1œ

3

‰ œ3 œ3

œ. œ.3œ.

3

œ. œ# .3œ.

œœ Œ Ó

w &

3œ. œ œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ œœ# .2

œ. œ. œ.

2

œ Œ Ó2œ œ œ4 œ œ œ

4

œ Œœœ Œ Œ œœ

&

&?

###

###

###

p dolce

Var. II53

œ œ œ rœ œ œ œ œ

∑ ?

∑p

.˙ œ œ

.˙1 œ#

Ó ˙

œ# œ œ œ œn œ œ œ

œ. œœ.4 œœ. œœ.4

œ.3 œ. œ. œ.1


œœ ‰ jœ2 œ1 œ œ œ

œŒ Ó


œ œ3 œ œ œ œ œ1 œ

∑

Movement III Page 4

&

?

?

###

###

###

..

..

..cresc.

cresc.

58 œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ# œ œ1 œ4 œ# œn œ

Ó ‰ œ4 œ œ#

œn œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œn 3 œ

œ œ œ œ œn œ5 œ œ

p1 œ œ œ# œ Jœ. œ œ# œ1 œ1 œ œ# œ Jœ.

2 ‰ Œ

jœ œ Jœ2Jœ1 ‰ Œ

p2œ œ œ# œ Jœ. œ œ# œ2œ1œ œ# œ Jœ. ‰ Œ

jœ œ Jœ Jœ ‰ Œ

&

?

?

###

###

###

..

..

..

p

62

œ œ# œ œ œ#œ œ œ

‰ œ3 œ œ Jœœ14

œ1 œ œ# œ

œ œ œ œ œ# œ œ œ

Jœœ œœ œœ œœ Jœœ

œ2 œ1 œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ# œ œ

Jœœ1 œœœ5 œœœ œœœ Jœœœ

œ œ œ œ

cresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ œ œ œ œn œ#

Jœœœœœ œœœ œœœ J

œœœ

œ œ2 œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œn œ

Jœœœ œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ J

œœœœ

œ1 œ œ œ

&

?

?

###

###

###

..

..

..67 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

Jœœœ œœœ œœœœ Jœœ

œ1 œ5 œ œ œ

decresc.

decresc.

œ œ œ# œ œn œ œ œ

Jœœ œœ œœ œœ Jœœ4

œ5œ œ œ˙ ˙

p

p

1œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ1Jœœ œ Jœ Jœ ‰ Œ

œ œ jœ ‰ Œ˙

p

p

2œ œ œ œ jœ ‰ Œ2

Jœœ œ Jœ Jœ ‰ Œ &

œ œ jœ ‰ Œ˙

Movement III Page 5

&

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..

S

Var. III71 Ó Œ œ.

Œ œ. ˙

3œ œ œ 3œ œ1œ3

3œ œ2œ1

3œ œ œ

S

S

.˙ œ# .œ œ.1 ˙

œ œ œ1 œ œ œ œ1 œ3 œ1 œ4 œ2 œ1

SS˙ œ œ. œ

œ .œ œ Ÿ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ2 œ3 œ œ1 œ

&

&?

###

###

###

74 œ œ œ œœ Œ Ó

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ2œ œ1 œ3 œ

cresc.

cresc.

œ Œ Œ œ.

Œ œ. œ. œ.

œ œ2 œ œ1 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ1 œS

Sœ. œ. œn œ.˙ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ1 œ# 3 œ2 œ œ4 œ œ

&

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..S

S

77 œ ˙ œŸ

œ œ Ÿ

œ œ# œ œ œ3 œ œn œ œ œ# 3 œ œ

1œ Œ3

‰ œ œ3

œ œ œ1œ Œ Ó

œ1 œ3 œ œ œ3 œ#œ œ2œ1œn œ œ

S

œ Œ Œ œ.

Œ œ. ˙

œ œ œ œ œ1œ3œ œ2œ1œ œ œ

Movement III Page 6

&

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..802œ. Œ

3

‰ œ œ3

œ œ œ2œ Œ Œ œ.1

œ1 œ3 œ œ œ3 œ#œ œ3 œ1 œ2 œ œ1

S

Sœ. œ. ˙.˙ œ.

œ#4œ2œ3œ1 œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ4

œ2

S

Sœ œ. ˙

.˙ œ.

œ œ2œ3œ1 œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ3

œ2

&

&?

###

###

###p

83 œ# œ œ œœ. œ. œŸ .œ œ#

œ œ œ œ1œ# œ œ œ œ1 œ œ œ

3œ. œ œ3œ. œ œ

3

œ. œ œ3

œn . œ œœ

Œ Œ œ.

œ œ œ# œ. œ4œ œ. œ

3œ œ. œ

2œS

Sœ. œ. ˙.˙ œ.

œ. œ œ œ1 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ4

œ

&

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..S

S

S

S

86 œ œ. .œn Jœ. œ

œ. ˙ œ

œ œ œ1 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

S

S

œ œ# . .œ œ. œ. œ.

œ œ. .œŸ Jœ

œ œ3

œ œ œ œ4

œ œ œ œ1œ œ

1œ Œ3

‰ œ œ 3œ. œ œ1œ. Œ Œ œ.

œ œ3 œ œ œ3œ œ. œ

2œ œ. œ

2œ1

2œ Œ Ó B

2œ Œ Ó

œ œ2 œ3 œ1 œ œ œŒ

Movement III Page 7

B

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..p

Var. IV90

jœ œœ. Œ jœœ œœ. Œ

∑

∑p

œœœ. Œ Ó

Ó ˙# ˙Ó

2

∑

˙ œn œ œ œ˙ ˙˙ 1

∑

˙ œ Œ˙ œœ œ3 œ œ Œ.˙

p cresc.

jœ œœ. Œ jœœ œœ. Œ

∑

∑

ƒ

ƒp

ƒp

œœ. Œ Ó

Ó 5˙

ww# 4p

∑

˙ œ œ25 œœ œ œ œœ œ2 œ œ5œ œ5

B

&?

###

###

###

..

..

..

..

..

..97 1 ∑1 .˙35 œ˙ .œ Jœœ œn 2 1˙#4 5˙

pjœ œœ. Œ jœœ œœ. Œ

œ Œ Óœœ Œ Óœ

cresc.

2 ∑2˙ œ

1œ œ.25

œ.˙ œ œ œ

œ œn œ3 œ.1 œ.w

p

p

jœ# œœ. Œ jœœœ. Œ

œœ#13 Œ Ó

œœ Œ Óp

œœœ. Œ Ó

∑

œœœœ. Œœœœœ. Œ

∑

œœœœ## . Œœœœœ# . Œ

œ œ œ œ œ1œ# œ œ. œ. œ. œ.

B

&?

###

###

###

..

..

.. nnn

nnn

nnncresc.

103 ∑œœœœ. œ# . œ. œ. œ. œ.4 œ. œ.

œ. œ. œ. œ.ffjœ œœ. Œ jœ

œœ. Œ

œn Œ Ó

∑ƒf

œœœ. Œ Ó

œœœ. Œœœœœ. Œ œœœ.Œœœ. Œp

∑

Œ œ œ œ5 œ œ œ œ œ3Œ œœ32 œœ œœw

1 ∑1˙ œ œ œ

.5œ.

Œ œ2 .œ Jœ‰ œ œ œ .œ jœw

2 ∑2˙ œ ŒŒ œ œ‰ œ œ œ œ Œ.˙

Movement III Page 8

B

&?

p

p

Var. V109

Œ ˙ œ œ

∑

˙ ˙

œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ

∑

.˙ œ3

œ œ œ œ

∑

.œb jœ1 .œ#Ÿœ# œ

œ œ œ œ

∑

.˙ œ5

œ œ œ œ œ# œ œ œ

∑

œ ˙ œ1

cresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ œ œ# œ œ

∑

.2

œ œ

B

&?

115 œ œ# œ œ œ#

∑

œ œ œ œ œ1 œ œ œ

p

p

œ œ œ œ# œn œ#

∑

˙ œ œ œ œ

p

p

œ. Œ Ó

˙ ˙Ó ˙œ

3œ œ5

pÓ ˙

.5 œ˙ ˙œ#14

œ5

œ3

œ œ2œ œ

œ ˙ œ

.œb jœ .œ#Ÿ œ# œœ œ œ œ

1

B

&?

120 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

.˙ œ2

œ œ œ œ

œ Œ Œ œ

œ ˙1 œ2

œ1œ œ œ œ# 5 œ œ œ

cresc.

cresc.

œ ˙ œ œ

.˙ œ œ

œ1œ œ œ œ# œ œ

decresc.

decresc.

œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ#

3œ œ œ#

p

p

œ œ# œ œ œ( ). œ

˙ œ. Œœ œ œ œ# œn . œ3

Movement III Page 9

B

&?

125 œ œ œ# œ

Œ œ# œ# œ#

˙ œ. œ.

œ œ# œ œ

Œ œœœ#n œœœ Œ

4œ œ# œ# œ

œ# œ œ œ

∑jœ2œ# œ

2jœ œ3œ# œ œ#

1

cresc.

cresc.

œ œ# œ œ#

∑

.˙ œ3

œ œ œn œ œ

Œ œ# œ# Œ

˙ œ. œ.

B

&?

130 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œb

Œ œœœœ# œœœ Œ

œ4˙ œ

2œ

decresc.

decresc.

œ œ œ œ#

∑

œ œ3.œ. œ .œ. œ .œ

. p

pœ œ œ œ œ Œ

Ó Œ œ3 œ

œ2jœ ‰ Œ œ

pŒ œ# œ# œ#

˙ œ. œ.

œ œ œ#2 1 œ4

œ œ œ œ

˙ œ œ# œ# œ

œ œ# 1 œ2 1 œ4

B

&?

135 œ œ œ# œ

jœ4 œ# œ rœ œ œ# œ œ#

œ# œ2œ1œ

cresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ œ œ. œ œ œ

.˙ œ

œ œ# œ œ#

œ œ œ œ# œ. œ# œ œ

˙ œ. œ.

œ œ4

œœ œœ œœ

S

S

p

p

œ ˙U œœ

œ ˙U œ3 œœœ(˙u)

œœœ

Movement III Page 10

B

&?

139 Œ œœ Œ œœ#

Œ œ .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

œœœ Œ œœœœ# Œ

S

S

Adagio

Adagio

œœU œ œb

œ5 .œ. ....˙˙bU

œœ ....˙bu

p

pwwbU

....˙bU

gggggggg œ œwwwwbu°

p

Tempo I

Tempo I

senza

∑

˙b ˙Œ œ°

.œ. œb .œ. œ .œ.

pŒ œ .œ. œb .œ. œ .œ.

˙b ˙˙b

œ .œb .Œ Ó

B

&?

144 œ .œb . Œ Ó

˙b ˙Œ œ .œ. œb .œ. œ .œ.

pŒ œb .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

˙b ˙˙˙#

œ .œb .Œ Ó

œ .œ. Œ Ó

˙˙b

˙#?

Œ œb .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

pŒ œb .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

˙b ˙#

œ .œb .Œ Ó

B

?

?cresc.

148 œ .œ. Œ Óœœœb ˙ œœ

Œ œb .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

cresc.

Œ œb .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.œœ œœ œœ œœ

œb .œ. œ3 .œ. œ .œ. œ# .œ.

Í

Fp

rœb ˙ ˙

œœ œ2 .œb . œ .œ. œ2 .œ.&

œŒ Ó

œb . Œ Ó

œ .œb .1 œ2 .œ. œ5 .œ. œ2 .œ.

∑


B

&?

S

S

152 ˙ ˙

Œ œ2 .œ. œ5 .œ. œ2 .œ.

œœœ# Œ Ó

œ.Œ Ó

œ .œ. œ2 .œ. œ4.œ. œ2 .œ.

∑

S

S

˙ ˙

Œ œ2 .œ. œ5 .œ. œ2 .œ.

œœœ Œ Ó

œ.Œ Ó

œ5 .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.∑

B

&?

S

S

156 ˙ ˙

Œ œ2 .œ. œ5 .œ# .2 œ2 .œ.

œœœ# Œ Ódecresc.

œ. Œ Ó

œ5 .œ. œ2 .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.∑

p

pÓ œ .œ. Œ

œ3 .œ. œ2 .œ. œ .œ. œ .œ.

œ# .œ. Œ Ó

Ó œ .œ. Œ

œ3 .œ. œ2 .œ. œ .œ. œ œ. ≈ rœ

1

œ# .œ. Œ Ó

B

&?

###

###

###

86

86

86decresc.

160 ∑

œ.4 ≈ œ

1œ.3 ≈ œ œ. ≈ œ œ. ≈ œ∑

∑

œ. ≈ œ œ. ≈ œ œ. ≈ œ œ. ≈ œ∑

π

∑

œ. ≈ œ# œ. ≈ œ œ. ≈ œ œ. ≈ œ∑

∏

Ó Œ ‰U

œ. ≈ œ# œ. ≈ œ œ. ≈ œ jœU

Ó Œ ‰U &


B

&

&

###

###

###

86

86

86dolce

Var. VI164 ‰

jœ1

‰

Allegro, ma non tanto

Allegro, ma non tanto

∑

œ œ œ œ1 Jœ

œ5œ œ œ jœ2.˙

∑

.œ œ œ15 œ

.œ œ œœ2 œœ1.˙

∑

rœ3 œ1 œ# œ œ

1 jœnŸ

œœ32

œœ œœ œœ jœœ.˙

∑

.œ jœn ‰ jœ

..œœ jœœ ‰ ‰.˙cresc.

∑

œ œ2 œ. œ. Jœ.

1

œ œ œ. œ.jœ.1.˙

B

&

&

###

###

###S

170 ∑

.œ3 œ œ œ.2

.œ2œ œ4 œ#

S S

∑

œŸ œ œ. œŸ œ œœ.

œ1 œ œ œn 1 œ œ ?

dolce

Œ ‰ Œ Jœ

..œœ41 rœœ œn1 œ œ4 œ2 œ?

œ1

œ# œJœ ‰ ‰

œ œ œ œ Jœ

œ2 œ œ œ œ œ œ2 œ œ œ œ1 œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

.œ œ œ œ

œ1 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ4 œ2 œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

B

?

?

###

###

###

175rœ œ œ# œ œ JœŸ

n

œ œ œ1 œ# 4 œ œ œ œ2 œ1 œ4 œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

.œ œn . Jœ

œ1 œ œ œ4 œ œ œ2 œ1 œn 3 œ œ œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

cresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ. œ Jœ.

œ2 œ3 œ œ1 œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ

œ œ œ œ. œ.œ.1

S

ƒ

.œ œ œ œ.

œ œ œ# 4 œ œ œ œ4 œ œ œ œ œ

œ.2 œ# . œ. œ.4 œ. œ# .


B

?

?

###

###

###

S S

S S

S S

179 œŸ œ œ. œŸ œ œ.

œ2 œ œ1 œ5 œ3 œ œ œ5 œ œ œ œ

œ.( œ. œ. œn .1 œ. œ. )

.œ œ. ‰

‰ œ œ œ œ ‰ œ œ œ œ&

œ5œ œ œ ‰ œ2

œ ‰ ‰

p

p

œ. œ# . œ. œ. œ. œ.

œ4 œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ# .3

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

œ# œ1 œ œ# œ1 œ œ œn œ œ œ œ

œ.2

( œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

B

&?

###

###

###

183 œ.( œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. )

œ# 2 œ œ œ3 œ œ œ4œ œ œ œ3

œœ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. )

œœ ‰ Œ .

œ œ œn œ#4 œ1 œ# 2 œ1 œn œ# œn 1 œ# œ

œœ ‰ Œ ‰

cresc.

cresc.

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

œ œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ.3( œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

S

S

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œœ.

œ# œ1 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ. œ. œ. œ.4œ. œ# . )

1

B

&?

###

###

###

187 œœ.( ) œ. œ. ‰ œ. œ.

œ œ5 œ œ œ2 œ œn œ œ œ5 œ# œ

œ.œœ.5

œœ.œ. œœ.5

œœ.2

cresc.

pœ ‰ Œ œ œ&

œ2œ œ œ

5

œ2

œ œœ5 œ œ œ œ?

œœœ ‰ ‰ œœ œœp

œ# œ œ. œ œ œ.

œ1 œ4 œ œ œ# 1 œ4 œ1 œ œ œ œ œ5

œœ## . œ.2 œ. œ. œ. œ.

œ œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ œ2 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ. œ. œ. œ.( œ. œ.


&

?

?

###

###

###

191 œ# œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ3 œ œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. )

œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ# œ

œ4 œ œ2 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ &

œ ‰ Œ ‰

cresc.

cresc.

œ# œ œ. œ œ œ.

œ2œ œn œ œ

1 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ.3( œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

S

S f

f

f

Jœ œ œ œ œ œ œn

œ3œ œ œ œ

2œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

3

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.

&

&?

###

###

###

195 œ. œ œ œ# œ œn œ œ œ œ# œ

œœ œ5œœ13

œ œœ œ œœœ œ œœœ œ œœœ œ

œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. )

p

œ ‰ Œ ‰

œœ3œ2œ œ œ œ

œ ‰ Œ ‰

∑

œ œ œ œ œ œ.œ5

.œ

p.œ# œ œ œ

œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ.œ1

œ œ œ#

.œ œ Jœ

œœ œ2 œ œ œ œ.œ5

.œ

&

&?

###

###

###

200 .œ# œ œ œ#

œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ.œ#1

œ œ œ#

.œ œ Jœ#

œœ œ œ œ œ œ.œ5

.œ

.˙n

‰ œ2 œ œ3 œ œ.˙#

π

π

.˙

‰ œ œ œ œ œ.˙#

.˙

‰ œ œ œ œ œ.˙#

.œ .œ

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ.œ# .œ


&

&?

###

###

###

206 .œ .œ

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ.œ# .œ

cresc.

cresc.

.˙

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ.œ#1

.œn

S

S

.œ# .œ

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ.œ# .œn

1

f

f

œ œn œ œ œ œ

‰ œ5 œ œœ œœ œœœ œ1œ œ œ

1œ#

S

S

œ œ œ. œŸ œ œ.

œœ œœ œœ ‰ œœ œœœ. œ. œ. œ œ œ

π

œ ‰ Œ ‰

œœ œ2œ œ œ œ

œ ‰ Œ ‰

&

&?

###

###

###

π212

.œ .œ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

∑

.œ œ Jœ

œ œ œ œ œ œ

.œ .œ

.œ# œ œ œ

œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ.œ1

œ œ œ#

.œ œ Jœ

œ2 œ œ œ œ œ

.œ .œ

.œ# œ œ œ#

œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ.œ# œ œ œ#

.œ œ Jœ#

œ œ œ œ œ œ

.œ .œ

&

&?

###

###

###

218 .˙n

‰ œ œ œ. œ. œ.

.˙#&

cresc.

cresc.

.˙

‰ œ œb œ œ œ

.˙n

.˙

‰ œ œb œ œ œ

.˙n

decresc.

decresc.

.œ .œ

‰ œb œb ‰ œ œ

.œn .œ

.œ .œ

‰ œb œb ‰ œ œ

.œn .œ

π

π

.œb .œ

‰ œb œn ‰ œ œb

.œb .œn


&

&

&

###

###

###

224 .œb .œ

‰ œb œn ‰ œ œb

.œb .œn

.˙

‰ œn œb œ œ œ

.˙n

.˙

‰ œ œb œ œ œ

.˙n

.œ .œ

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ

.œn .œ

.œ .œ

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ

.œn .œ

cresc.

cresc.

.˙

‰ œ œ œ œ œ

.˙n2

&

&

&

###

###

###

S

S

230 .œ .œ

‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ

.œ .œ1?

f

f

œ œ œ œ œ œ

‰ œ œœœ4 œœ œœ

œ œ œ1œ2œ œ#

S

S

œ œ œ. œŸ œ œ

‰ œ œ œœ œœ.13

œ.1( œ. œ. ) œ œ œ

p

p

œ ‰ Œ ‰

rœ2 .œ4 1 .œ2

œ œœ2

œœ œ5

œœ œœ

Œ ‰ Œ jœ.œ œ œ œ

œ œœ œœ œ œœ œœ

&

&?

###

###

###

cresc.

cresc.

235 .œ .œ.œ .œ

œ1 œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

.œ œ œ œ

œ ‰ Œ Jœ.3

œ œ# 3 œ1 œ4 œ œ œœ3œn œ œ2

œ

p

p

.œ .œ

œ œ2 œ. œ2 œ œ.


œ ‰ Œ jœ..œ3 œ œ œ œ œ



&

&?

###

###

###cresc.

cresc.

239 œ œ œ. œ œ œ.

œ œ œ. œ5 œ œ.

œ1 œ# œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

.œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ ‰ Œ Jœ.

œ œ# 3 œ1 œ œ œ œ œœn œ œ œ

p

p

œ ‰ Œ jœ( ).œ œ œ. œ œ œ.


cresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ. œ œ œ.œ2 ‰ Œ Jœ.( ).

œ5 œ œ œ œ œ2 œ œ3œ œ œ2

œ

&

&?

###

###

###

p

p

243 œœ ‰ Œ jœœ œ œ. œ œ œ.


cresc.

cresc.

œ œ œ. œ œ œ.œ ‰ Œ Jœ.( )

œ œ œ œ œ œ2 œ œ3œ œ œ

3

œ

p

p

cresc.

cresc.

œœ ‰ œ œ œ.œ œ œ. Œ ‰œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œœ ‰ œ œ œ.œ œ œ. Œ ‰œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

&

&?

###

###

###

f

f

247 œœjœœ œœ

jœœœ5 œ œ1 œ5 œ œ2 œ œ œ œ œ œ

œ.( ) jœœ.œœ. jœœ.

œœ.( œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ. œœ. )œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

œœ. œœ. œœ.œœ. œœ. œœ.

ƒ

ƒ

œœ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ.œ‰ œœœœ ‰

œœ ‰ œœ ‰

œœœœœ ‰ Œ ‰

œœ‰ Œ ‰


Lee Hsiaopei

Documents

allegretto con variazioni

willow grows aslant

cobbetts cyclopedic survey

catharine lee carroll

ernest benn limited

harold en italie

walter willson cobbett

oxford university press