Arrangements of The Planets - why?

dave · Post by **dave** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:27 am

We are playing Mars, Jupiter and Uranus in our next SJWS concert, but two of the movements (Jupiter and Uranus), are not the orig. Boosey editions, they are arrangements (Jupiter is transcribed by Clark McAlister and edited by Alfred Reed, and Uranus is transcribed by James Curnow).

Now, I have played all of these before, but always the orig. Boosey edition. I thought that the Boosey edition was not a transcription, but that Holst wrote the parts directly for band, so I'm having trouble understanding why and what has changed. The Euphonium parts I remember for Jupiter and Uranus are different, but it has been several years. Does anyone have a copy of the Boosey Euphonium parts that they could scan for me - I'd like to do a side by side comparison. I have this feeling that some classic Euphonium literature has been desecrated, but maybe it is just that Boosey always managed to get more notes on a page than the modern publishers do...

Dave

iiipopes · Post by **iiipopes** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:45 am

People always try to "improve" on things. I'm no different. Also, if it was just reprinted, the company gets all the bucks. By getting an "arrangement" credit, the company has to split some royalties, depending on the contract. It's all $$$. Granted, you have some fine names on the arrangements, so have fun learning the different arrangements.

ufoneum · Post by **ufoneum** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:42 am

Dave,

You were correct in your assumption that you have the "other" arrangment of both Jupiter and Uranus. If you compare the euphonium parts for the original and the Curnow arrangment to Jupiter you will notice some very striking differences. First, the absence of anything difficult. Also, the B section has been eased up a little on the range.

Curnow did this arrangment so it could be played by most high school bands. The original is very difficult and I have personally heard some college aged ensembles tear into Holst's masterpiece. Anyway, here is the original part for your comparison. Hope this helps.

http://i2.tinypic.com/ounz84.jpg

http://i2.tinypic.com/ounzp2.jpg

http://i2.tinypic.com/ouo007.jpg

- Pat Stuckemeyer

tubaman5150 · Post by **tubaman5150** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:52 am

The Boosey arrangements are lacking as well. IMHO they are very poorly orchestrated.

Rick Denney · Post by **Rick Denney** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:03 pm

iiipopes wrote:People always try to "improve" on things. I'm no different. Also, if it was just reprinted, the company gets all the bucks. By getting an "arrangement" credit, the company has to split some royalties, depending on the contract. It's all $$$. Granted, you have some fine names on the arrangements, so have fun learning the different arrangements.

The orchestral version of the Planets was composed around 1915, and has passed into the public domain. It may be that the band parts were transcribed by Holst and published later by Boosey, and are still under copyright protection. Thus, working from the original orchestra parts would give the arrangers an opportunity to provide an arrangement that they think is either more effective or more suitable for a particular type of band.

Rick "who has played the Boosey band version of Jupiter and prefers the orchestral version" Denney

Chuck Jackson · Post by **Chuck Jackson** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:05 pm

A minor point, but the planets was finished in 1913. I wonder if Holst saw the subtle irony in Mars.

Chuck"nit-picking the data, not the person"Jackson

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:50 pm

This came up on the Community Music list some time ago when I commented that the old Boosey band arrangements weren't up to the standards of the original orchestral versions. I opined that they could hardly be the work of Holst.

Someone with a very good reference library did in fact confirm this and even had a name for the in-house arranger. It seems that in the old days that Boosey didn't always credit arrangers.

That being said, I've seen one of the newer Jupiter settings and it seemed more than a little brain-dead.

Rick Denney · Post by **Rick Denney** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:03 pm

Chuck Jackson wrote:A minor point, but the planets was finished in 1913. I wonder if Holst saw the subtle irony in Mars.

My sources (the Holst web site, in particular) say he composed it during the years 1914-1916. It's first performance, done in private, was with Boult on the podium, in 1918.

I think it's tempting from this distance of time to assume composers were commenting on contemporary wars when they write music about war. But in Holst's case, I think he has said that his inspiration was Indian mythology (as with Hymns from the Rig Veda), not the contemporary European scene. His friend Vaughan Williams had the same response to his 4th Symphony. He was always accused of having written a "war" symphony, but when asked what the work was about, his answers was always, "It's about F-minor".

Rick "whose sources could be wrong, of course" Denney

windshieldbug · Post by **windshieldbug** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:13 pm

Ralph Vaughan Williams wrote:It's about F-minor

See? There you go! That's a war key if I ever heard one!

Chuck Jackson · Post by **Chuck Jackson** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:30 pm

Apples and oranges, Rick. The premier was given by Boult in 1918, I have a couple of sources that say the piece was completed in 1913 and revised heavily at the insistence of Boult, a source that comments that it was a work in progress that wasn't given it's premiere until 1922. I'm going to stick by my 1913 sources. I have read somewhere (I will research tonight) that Holst was shaken by the out break of the war. Being a follower, and some say closet practioner, of eastern mysticism, he felt that a certain amount of world karma enthused his writing as a portent of things to come.

I have seen the same writings about VW's 4th. It truly was a backlash against the war, and probably a strange paen to Buttersworth, a very gifted composer and friend who was killed in the First World War. VW's pacifist leanings are not so well known, but present in alot of his music of that time.

Chuck "who apologizes for the somewhat academic nature of his reply, but enjoys the mental jogging that has taken place"Jackson

windshieldbug · Post by **windshieldbug** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:34 pm

Fight! Fight! War!

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:57 pm

Chuck Jackson wrote: I have seen the same writings about VW's 4th. It truly was a backlash against the war, and probably a strange paen to Buttersworth, a very gifted composer and friend who was killed in the First World War. VW's pacifist leanings are not so well known, but present in alot of his music of that time.

George Butterworth? Composer of "Bredon Hill" and other really nice songs?

Chuck Jackson · Post by **Chuck Jackson** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:47 pm

I knew I should do this at home. No, Sir Arthur Butterworth lived a long and glorious life. I can't for the life of me remember the name of VW's friend who was killed in WWI, but by VW's accounts he was ther greatest of their generation. Any help before I tear through my references at home?

Chuck"who REALLY IS growing into his gray hair"Jackson

Chuck Jackson · Post by **Chuck Jackson** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:50 pm

I give up. make that Sir George Butterworth. Of all things I miss, I miss my mind most.

Chuck

prototypedenNIS · Post by **prototypedenNIS** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 3:45 pm

with all due respect, if someone wanted to work out an arrangement of "The Planets" from it's original form, they should look at the piano duet score, as it was originally written.

The orchestral arrangement was an afterthought.

That, and Holst didn't really like the planets that much... he felt it overshadowed his other works.

windshieldbug · Post by **windshieldbug** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 3:48 pm

prototypedenNIS wrote:with all due respect, if someone wanted to work out an arrangement of "The Planets" from it's original form, they should look at the piano duet score, as it was originally written

The Planets: Holst/Williams

Albertibass · Post by **Albertibass** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 3:55 pm

windshieldbug wrote:
prototypedenNIS wrote:with all due respect, if someone wanted to work out an arrangement of "The Planets" from it's original form, they should look at the piano duet score, as it was originally written
The Planets: Holst/Williams

Williams....vaughn williams?

windshieldbug · Post by **windshieldbug** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:01 pm

Albertibass wrote:
windshieldbug wrote:
prototypedenNIS wrote:with all due respect, if someone wanted to work out an arrangement of "The Planets" from it's original form, they should look at the piano duet score, as it was originally written
The Planets: Holst/Williams
Williams....vaughn williams?

John "Vaughan" Williams...

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:43 pm

Chuck Jackson wrote:I give up. make that Sir George Butterworth. Of all things I miss, I miss my mind most.

S'okay, Chuck - I know what that feels like (or maybe I can't remember). "Bredon Hill" has been on my stand this past week. I'm a bit of a fan of pre-WWI art songs.

But young George wasn't a "sir", was he? I can't find a mention of his being knighted. There was a trench named after him, though--he died at age 31.

Albertibass · Post by **Albertibass** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:50 pm

well i don't know the skill level of the group you are playing with, but i played jupiter in all county orchestra this dec. And i was disapointed. It was the waterd-down version, and yeah wasn't that exciting. But that is because the conducter didn't feel we could do it. anywho i guess thats a reason. (for a high school level orchestra). i can't find a reason for a capable group.