Error in Tchaik 4

[PWtuba]

In the Edwin F. Kalmus edition of Tchaikovsky's 4th Symphony, Movement One, there is a measure omitted in the tuba part. The first measure of each line is numbered. After letter I as in Isaac, The fifth line is numbered 182. Including measure 182, there are four measures in that line. The next line is numbered 187, when it should be numbered 186. By listening to the recording, I have determined that either measure 182 or measure 183 has been erroneously omitted from the tuba part. Has anyone else encountered this? Know which measure? And know what notes the tuba part has?

[JB]

I do not have access to the part at the moment, but the answer is YES, there is a bar missing in that edition. Check the part against the score yourself: (it can be found (and downloaded, if you wish) here)

http://imslp.org/wiki/Symphony_No.4,_Op ... tr_Ilyich)

[JB]

Actually, on that same link you can access (or download) the individual parts. Just looked; compare the bass trombone part against the tuba part and you will find the missing bar (aside from some octave displacement, it is the same lick).

See the parts here:
http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/d ... wBrass.pdf

(They have used the same edition to which you have referred, and the same error is found in the tuba part.)

[Todd S. Malicoate]

It's even worse...because of the missing bar, the measure labeled "182" is really measure "183"!!!

The missing bar is measure 179...copy the bass trombone part down an octave except for the very last note, which is in unison. Good eye!

[Bob Kolada]

It's a cadenza!

[Ken Herrick]

Now, don't that jes take the cake. Two of the most famous tuba concerti have mistakes in the printed parts. Maybe RVW had somthin ta do wit disun 2??

[PWtuba]

Problem solved. We don't have a bass bone in our orchestra, otherwise I might have figured it out myself. Thanks JB and Todd!

[Art Hovey]

The missing measure is penciled into the Cherry Classics version, but it is hard to read.
When I played it last year I used Sibelius to print out a neater version and scotch-taped it onto my part:

http://www.box.net/shared/1k4xtivkbk

(I changed the key signature to make it easier to read.)

[gary]

I have an old Kalmus part the is correct except at 177 the first note is a b-natural and Art has an e-flat.
Does anyone know which is right?

[imperialbari]

:

[Art Hovey]

Here's the tuba part with the missing bar restored and the bad note corrected. You can print it out, use scissors to remove everything after bar K, and tape it onto the original Kalmus tuba part.

http://www.box.net/shared/1k4xtivkbk

Here's the Cherry Classics version:

http://www.box.net/shared/tgg5ba80ud

Apparently someone photocopied the missing bar from the score and taped it in, but it was not quite successful.

[windshieldbug]

Remember, kids: Kalmus parts are NOT an accepted source for debates...

[PWtuba]

Good heavens. Is that large number of errors typical for most editions of large orchestral pieces, or is this piece (or are these publishers) an anomaly?

[musikfind1]

Tchaikovsky Sym No. 4 - Tuba part
The Kalmus reprint A 6150 (The better German Edition) from Breitkopf has now been corrected by Kalmus and includes the missing measure.
The Kalmus reprint A 2190 (Russian Edition) also has the correct measure included.

[tclements]

There IS an edition that has this error reparied, I just forgot which one it is.... Thanks to Mr. Hovey for the elegant repair!

[musikfind1]

[quote="bloke"]' nearly always a better idea (if one exists) to find a Breitkopf & Härtel edition of any given piece. The Kalmus editions also tend to clumsily typeset (shifting to the left or right loudness markings, crescendi/diminuendi, etc...)
=======
Kalmus reprints exactly what is on the original plates, so the mistakes will still be in the reprint. Only when an editors name is listed does Edwin F. Kalmus LC. publish a correction of the original edition. Kalmus is correcting the mistakes in the European publications as fast as they can.