Korngold Film scores

[ewk]

Regarding the BBC prom concert, is there a chance to watch it outside the UK? As far as I see, only the audio is available.
Or has anyone downloaded it?

If the BBC only sold these recordings, I would easily buy  all of the John Wilson stuff!

[Alan Howe]

Gentlemen: please try to keep posts on K's film music separate from those on Der Schneemann. You'll see that I've had to re-allocate the foregoing posts.

[ewk]

Dear Alan, thanks for sorting the threads! I wasn't sure where to post my last post as the threads were so intertwined.

[Alan Howe]

Regarding the multiplicity of suites/arrangements of K's film scores, I have a question: Unless they were officially sanctioned by the composer himself, can they really be said to be purely by Korngold? Wouldn't a purist view be to get as close as possible to the full film score - or to use only arrangements made by Korngold?

In any case who decides which arrangement is better than another?

[brendangcarroll]

Regarding Korngold's own arrangements of his film scores, there are only four genuine "suites" arranged by him and these are:

The Adventures of Robin  Hood
Juarez
The Private Lives of Elisabeth & Essex
The Constant Nymph

Robin Hood was prepared for concert use in 1938 and published as such. the other three were specially compiled overtures for performance at the world premieres of these films, conducted by Korngold before the film began.

All other suites since were assembled from the original scores either by Charles Gerhardt (superb - not one note of Korngold's was changed)  or more recently John Mauceri (Robin Hood) or someone called Patrick Russs (Sea Hawk, Captain Blood, Elisabeth & Essex and Prince & the Pauper) commissioned by Deutsche Grammophon for Andre Previn's very lacklustre CD. Mr Russ made very unmusical cuts, even combining cues that should not have been joined together, and he even split the famous love music from Sea Hawk into two cues separated by other music, thereby ruining Korngold's beautiful melodic line and structure completely. Unfortunately this perverse "arrangement" by Russ is now published by Schott in Germany so it is likely to become the performance norm. John Wilson went back to the old Gerhardt suite for his recent concert in London. There is one other SEA HAWK 'arrangement' that has been recorded a few times and is to be avoided. This is by conductor Stanley Black who decided that Korngold's final cue was not good enough....so he composed his own!

As for who decides about these things, that is a very good question. It seems that 'anything goes' with Korngold's fllm music because Warner-Chappell don't give a damn. just as long as the fees and royalties keep on rolling in (which they do....$$$$$).

[Alan Howe]

All other suites since were assembled from the original scores either by Charles Gerhardt (superb - not one note of Korngold's was changed)

But some music must have been omitted - so doesn't omission count as change?

I also have Rumon Gamba's edition of the suite from The Sea Hawk (Chandos) - how does that compare?

Overall, I can't help feeling that we have a mess of competing versions of what Korngold actually wrote. Surely, as I suggested before, the only genuine, i.e. Korngold-only compositions are what he himself actually wrote or arranged...

[brendangcarroll]

I think you are being highly pedantic as to what constitutes a suite, Alan. If you desire to hear Korngold's film music WITHOUT anything omitted, then that is not a suite but a recording or performance of the entire score. Only the recordings made by William Stromberg (prepared by John Morgan from the original score materials held in the Warner archive at USC) would qualify and these are not suites per se.

Rumon Gamba's CD was his own personal selection of cues taken from the full score and parts, and arranged to fit onto one CD. The score for SEA HAWK runs 106 minutes if one played through from bar one until the end!

None of the music included in these suites alter what Korngold actually wrote - it is only a question of which cues are left out.

Charles Gerhardt made a wonderful LP on the now defunct Chalfont label  (reissued by Varese Sarabande on CD) of a very large chunk of KINGS ROW (48 minutes worth in fact) which works very well indeed as an extended suite and would be ideal in concert as a major item on any programme. It is all Korngold - no other hand has touched the music or added to it in anyway.

[Alan Howe]

None of the music included in these suites alter what Korngold actually wrote - it is only a question of which cues are left out.

Of course it does! If I omit a section from a piece of music I've effectively changed what the composer wrote.

I don't think I'm being pedantic in insisting that any shortened version of a full film score, whether involving arrangement, alteration or omission by some other hand, should properly read 'Korngold, arr. A. N. Other' - unless the composer himself did the work. That would certainly make life easier for the poor customer, i.e. me, who is faced with a number of compositions all with same title, but containing different selections of the music involved.

[Alan Howe]

...by the way: are Stromberg's recordings any good?

[brendangcarroll]

I am afraid you have missed my point.

A suite, by its very definition, omits a very large amount of music from the original film score. Does that make it somehow invalid or  "change what the composer wrote"? Of course it doesn't. A suite can only ever present selctions of the music.

The suites I have indicated, all present Korngold's work exactly as he wrote it, no key changes or alterations to the orchestration or any other changes whatsoever.

Stromberg's recordings are very good indeed and even restore sections that were CUT from the film before release!

[Gareth Vaughan]

I think that the situation here is that when it comes to writing music for films quite often more music is written than is actually used in the final cut. Where a suite is made of the various musical cues, whether by the composer or by some other person, so long as it contains only music written by the composer we can be fairly certain that the composer's overall musical intention is not compromised. But where it is pulled apart, rewritten or added to we are right to be sceptical (and critical). Film scores - and, indeed, all theatrical music - has by its nature to be fluid: quickly altered to suit the director's plan; changed as the circumstances of production and/or post-production demand. So it's essentially much less of a solid structure than concert music - which is why, reprehensibly I suppose, conductors and arrangers sometimes feel they can treat it cavalierly.

[brendangcarroll]

I agree totally, Gareth.

Which is why I warned everyone away from the wretched Patrick Russ "suites" used for Andre Previn's CD. Such libertie were taken with the music that frankly, the composer's intentions were ignored and an entirely false impression created.

[Alan Howe]

A suite, by its very definition, omits a very large amount of music from the original film score. Does that make it somehow invalid or  "change what the composer wrote"? Of course it doesn't. A suite can only ever present selctions of the music.

How is one to know whether any particular selection would have been approved by the composer, though?

And how on earth is the non-expert expected to make judgments as to the merits of the various suites/selections on offer?

Take, for example this webpage of search results on The Sea Hawk:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/Search_engines.htm?cx=partner-pub-7131039333392991%3Astvzk0-7fwo&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=korngold+sea+hawk&sa=Search
It features:
1. Gamba/Chandos: 76:57
2. Kojian/Varèse Sarabande: 44:28
3. DePreist/Delos: 8:06
4. Gerhardt/RCA: 8:08
5. Previn/DGG: 17:19 

In addition, there's Stromberg/Naxos (1hr 54:07)

So you'll forgive me for being confused!

[TerraEpon]

Yeah I don't get the odd thing about suites -- plenty of more traditional classical music has suites made out of it, often by other hands. Just taking a selection  of pieces from a larger work and presenting them in sequence isn't actually /altering/ anything. It might be changing the context, but after all film music (and any other incidental music such as that which underscores radio, ballet, theater, etc) is inherently made to be part of a whole rather than an entity in and of itself. While I for one DO enjoy hearing complete music as a whole, there's still nothing wrong about taking out a few of the pieces and putting them into a tighter structure with less downtime.

I personally don't think a simple act of selecting bits from a whole constitutes 'arranging' -- compiling would be a good word for it. Or even 'selected' or whatever. Certainly I would agree that some note should be made but it's hardly such a big deal as you're making it. Think of a film score like a work with many movements (usually called 'cues) and a suite takes a select number of these cues. Each cue will stiill has a distinct beginning and ending, just like movements in a symphony (of which there are obviously exceptions in both cases)

While it's true that The Sea Hawk has a few options of varying length, at the same time I don't think anyone would see the last three on the list and wonder if it's the whole thing, or worry about if the composer made the "suite" selection or not -- the issue of if any of the music is specifically altered (be it in orchestration or even cutting within cues) is a different one and any notation on THAT end should certainly be noted.

[Alan Howe]

I've come to the conclusion that short suites excerpted from complete film scores are not for me: I much prefer something close to the whole thing. Listening to Gamba's selection from The Sea Hawk greatly increases one's appreciation of the scale and achievement of Korngold here. In short, it's magnificent, fully in line with his great predecessors, such as Strauss, Zemlinsky, Schreker. etc.