Orchestration of a haunting Scherzo fragment by Mendelssohn for his 6th symph. ?

[gprengel]

Hello, recently I discovered a wonderful Scherzo fragment for string quartett by Mendelssohn from his last year in 1847 (published posthum as op. 81,3) As it is in a-minor I think I could use this as a Scherzo for my project of Mendelssohn's 6th unfinished symphony in C Major and so I orchestrated it in the last 4 days (actually nights ;-) - I like it a lot ... Would you say it could be used for a symphony Scherzo eventhough it does not have a Trio?

http://www.gerdprengel.de/Scherzo81.mp3

It would come after the first movement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsSbVr-RyqI

and before the Andante

http:// https://youtu.be/dzjXaJBPfBQ


Gerd

[Alan Howe]

It sounds far too fast to me - sorry!

[Mark Thomas]

It's an attractive piece but I do agree with Alan, Gerd, the tempo is much too fast.

[gprengel]

it is the same tempo as in all quartett recording that I have heard like  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99QhMayyWNI  ( at 5:20 )   or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUmz_CR87qM

[Mark Thomas]

Fair enough, I take your point, but they're string quartets and it just sounds too fast when orchestrated, or a least it does in this digital rendition.

You asked whether it would be an appropriate Scherzo for your "Mendelssohn's Sixth" project: the material is certainly very attractive and wouldn't sound out of place, but a Scherzo lasting only 3:35 in a symphony with opening and slow movements both lasting over 11 minutes would surely be inappropriately short? Maybe using it as the basis for the outer sections of a conventional ternery (ABA) Scherzo-Trio-Scherzo movement would be more typical of Mendelssohn's innate sense of balance, although I appreciate that you'd then have to find, or invent, a suitable trio passage. Doing that, though, might make the Scherzo movement overall come in at between 8 and 9 minutes, which strikes me as something one would expect in a Mendelssohn symphony with two other such substantial movements. I'm trying to be helpful, not critical, you understand. I couldn't begin to attempt what you're doing.

[Alan Howe]

I must agree with Mark. Frankly, it's a 'gabble' for an orchestra at this tempo.

[gprengel]

Dear Mark, I'll think about the tempo, eventhough I actually like it this way ... For a symphonic Scherzo indeed it is too short, you are right. Maybe I find a proper little work or song by Mendelssohn which I might use for a Trio...

[Alan Howe]

the tempo, even though I actually like it this way

But it doesn't work!

[gprengel]

Alan, Mendelssohn had made an orchestration of the Scherzo of his Octett and used this also for his 1st symphony and this has a comparable tempo and character. Would you here also say that it is too fast ? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQN8GybGyQI

[Alan Howe]

Irrelevant, I'm afraid. You are the one doing the orchestration, not Mendelssohn. You can't claim to know what he would have done in this particular case. And the fact is, of course, that he didn't orchestrate this piece!

There are great dangers in guessing what a composer might or might not have done. A modicum of humility is required!

[eschiss1]

to be clear, we're talking about op.81/3, the quite complete afaik capriccio (not scherzo) in E minor for string quartet from 1843? (There's also Op.81/2, a scherzo in A minor, op.81/2, a complete scherzo, from 1847.) I first heard these works in college (especially op.81/2 - op.81 nos.3 & 4 are marginally less performed than nos.1 & 2, but all of them were published in 1850.)

[Reverie]

I'm afraid I also think it's too fast.

You have to think of the players especially the poor woodwind at that speed.

A useful rule of thumb is that fast movements are played too fast whilst slow movements are played too slow. This applies very much to Baroque music but pretty much in everything.

Don't get me started on metrenome markings!

[gprengel]

"There's also Op.81/2, a scherzo in A minor, op.81/2, a complete scherzo, from 1847"
Oh, I am sorry, eschiss, - I refer indeed to Op.81/2 !  (op.81/3 however is also VERY beautiful, but not a scherzo...)

[eschiss1]

The op.81 set indeed is lovely.
I find them somewhat brief (concise...) but not fragmentary in the sense of incomplete. So I was confused. Or is the 1850 published version itself a completion and not just editing work (I know the lines can blur some), likewise Rietz' 1877 edition? Anyhow, cheers!

[eschiss1]

Whether a scherzo for a long symphony would necessarily be longer, btw, is not clear to me. Is there something about it being a symphony? Because Beethoven seemed to think a brief scherzo in a very long Hammerklavier piano sonata (which has been symphonically orchestrated by others) was -fine-...