Albinoni-Hickman: Sonata, "Saint Mark" - II

[MikeMason]

That sucker is high/hard.i usually just veto it

[PhilGreen]

Hi Bloke, we regularly play this in our concerts and, unless the upper parts have been changed without telling me, I play the D and it sounds fine. Just listened to a recording of a concert we did recently and it DID sound OK.

[jeopardymaster]

I'm 99% sure the note is correct.

[JB]

On beat 3 in measure 30 of mvt. II, there is a D in the bass against an A♭ chord in the other four parts...Does anyone have a pre-brass quintet version of this piece that could be referenced?

Short answer: Yes, and the questionable note appearing in the print part is correct.


Long answer:
I believe the original Albinoni of “San Marco” is No. 11 of his 12 Trattenimenti armonici, Op.6, for which the score is in two staves only -- violino, plus the violone part and the cembalo part are on the same second line. The Violone/Cembalo part is unrealized, with figured bass numbers.

The chord as it appears in the original does contain the same note in the bass (although the quintet arrangement is transposed into a more brass-friendly key).

A number of arranged settings have been made over the years, including for solo trumpet, and I believe it was from one of these settings that Mr Hickman created his quintet arrangement. What this means, of course, is that someone other than Albinoni created the “written out” figured bass realization to create a fully-written accompaniment, and by extension it would be “someone else’s realizations/voicings” that Mr Hickman likely used.

The “note in question” as written in the David Hickman arrangement is correct. (Additionally, I am quite certain it is not a misprint, either. I was very fortunate to read this arrangement with Mr Hickman playing tpt I when it was a pencil-written part before it was published. The note is the same in that part – I know because a great many years ago I did a side-by-side comparison of the two parts once it became published.)