Transcriptions of Chopin's Polonaise-Fantaisie, Op. 61, and ...

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI

EXPANSION OF THE FLUTE ROMANTIC REPERTOIRE: TRANSCRIPTIONS OF CHOPIN’S POLONAISE-FANTAISIE, OP. 61 AND BALLADE NO. 4, OP. 52, FOR

FLUTE AND PIANO

By

Vanessa Fourla

A DOCTORAL ESSAY

Submitted to the Faculty of the University of Miami

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Musical Arts

Coral Gables, Florida May 2020

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI

A doctoral essay submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Musical Arts

EXPANSION OF THE FLUTE ROMANTIC REPERTOIRE: TRANSCRIPTIONS OF CHOPIN’S POLONAISE-FANTAISIE, OP. 61, AND BALLADE NO. 4, OP. 52 FOR

FLUTE AND PIANO

Vanessa Fourla

Approved: _____________________________ _____________________________ Margaret Donaghue, D.M.A. Trudy Kane, M.M. Associate Professor, Clarinet Associate Professor Emeritus, Flute

_____________________________ _____________________________ Scott Flavin, M.M. Kevin Kenner, M.M. Lecturer, Violin Assistant Professor, Keyboard Performance _____________________________ _____________________________ Valerie Coleman, M.M. Guillermo Prado, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Performance, Dean of the Graduate School Chamber Music, and Entrepreneurship

FOURLA, VANESSA (D.M.A., Instrumental Performance) (May 2020) Expansion of the Flute Romantic Repertoire: Transcriptions of Chopin’s Polonaise-Fantaisie, Op. 61, and Ballade No. 4, Op. 52 for Flute and Piano Abstract of a doctoral essay at the University of Miami. Doctoral essay supervised by Professor Trudy Kane. No. of pages in text. (124)

This research paper explores the flute construction during the 19th Century and

examines the possible reasons that prevented major composers to compose for flute. It

shows how the tradition of transcriptions has evolved through the centuries and how

transcriptions offer valuable experience to performers of any instrument. In Chapter 2, a

table with a list as complete as possible of all Chopin’s works transcribed for flute is

presented, as well as a presentation of the flute Romantic repertoire. As there are a

limited number of original compositions for the flute composed in the Romantic era, this

project expanded the flute Romantic repertoire through the addition of two new

transcriptions for flute and piano: Chopin’s Polonaise-Fantaisie, Op. 61, and Ballade No.

4, Op. 52 for Flute and Piano.

In Chapters 3-5, this essay presents in detail the procedure of preparing transcriptions

for flute and piano and describes the issues that appear throughout this process. It can

serve as a guide on how to transcribe music for flute and piano. In addition, the

transcribed scores are provided, along with performance suggestions from the author.

This offers flutists the opportunity to experience first-hand Fryderyk Chopin’s mature

compositional style. Transcribing solo piano music for flute and piano is uncommon; this

project has brought to light issues that this kind of transcription could create and

presented possible solutions.

Even though these compositions are to be played on a different instrument than the

original, the author believes the intentions of the composer are satisfied. Chopin’s song-

like melodies were inspired from opera. A flutist can interpret his melodies adequately

with the instrument’s many tools similar to the human voice. Furthermore, these

transcriptions present musical and technical challenges for flutists, not frequently found

in the extant repertoire. These advanced musical and technical requirements will boost

flutists’ capabilities, enhance their musicianship, and challenge them to step out of their

comfort zone.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank all my committee members for their contribution to this project.

I am grateful to have been given the opportunity to study with Professor Trudy Kane and

thankful to have had her guidance and mentorship throughout this Doctoral degree. I

appreciate her chairing my essay committee and remaining on the committee even after

her retirement from the Frost School of Music. I would also like to thank Dr. Margaret

Donaghue, Professor Scott Flavin, and Professor Valerie Coleman for all their support

and their valuable feedback on this project. I would like to acknowledge Professor Kevin

Kenner for inspiring my interest in Chopin's music, and specially thank him for his

encouragement and useful guidance through researching and transcribing Chopin's music.

I would also like to extend my thanks to pianist Dr. Yianni Iliadis for working with me on

these demanding pieces and Dr. Steven Eckert for his assistance with this document.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF FIGURES v LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES vi Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 19th-century Demands for an Improved Flute ................................................. 1 Boehm Flutes ................................................................................................... 8 The Romantic Flute Repertoire ........................................................................ 12 History of Transcriptions ................................................................................. 13 The Value of Performing Transcriptions ......................................................... 14 Purpose of This Project .................................................................................... 16 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................ 17 Flute Repertoire Catalogues ............................................................................. 17 Chopin for Flute ............................................................................................... 17 3. METHOD ........................................................................................................ 23 Selection of the Pieces for Transcription ......................................................... 23 General Steps of Creating a Monophonic Line for the Flute ........................... 25 Creating the Piano Part .................................................................................... 28 4. THE CANTABILE STYLE IN CHOPIN’S MUSIC ...................................... 31 5. POLONAISE-FANTAISIE IN A-FLAT MAJOR, OP. 61 ............................. 34 The Procedure .................................................................................................. 34 Polonaise-Fantaisie in A-Flat Major, Op. 61, Full Score ................................ 53 6. BALLADE NO. 4 IN F MINOR, OP. 52 ........................................................ 75 The Procedure .................................................................................................. 75 Ballade No. 4 in F minor, Op. 52, Full Score .................................................. 89 7. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................ 117

BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ 120 Books, Articles, Encyclopedias, Dissertations ...................................................... 120 Scores and Recordings ........................................................................................... 122 Online Sources ....................................................................................................... 123

v

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1.1 Furstenau’s Table of Fingerings for C. ............................................................. 3

1.2 Furstenau’s Table of Fingerings for C-sharp. ................................................... 3

1.3 Mechanical Innovations in the Flute Mania Period. ......................................... 5

1.4 Mechanical Innovations in the Flute Mania Period (part 2). ............................ 6

1.5 DCM: William Henry Potter / Flute in C. London, to 1837, 1806 ................... 7

1.6 DCM: Potter / Flute in C. London, 1778 .......................................................... 7

1.7 DCM: Claude Laurent / Flute in C. Clear Glass, 8-keyed. Paris, 1826 ............ 7

1.8 DCM: Clinton & Co. / Flute in C. London, to 1871, 1871 ............................... 7

1.9 DCM: Theobald Boehm / Flute in C. Munich, 1847 ...................................... 10

1.10 DCM: Theobald Boehm / Flute in C. Munich, 1851 ...................................... 10

1.11 DCM: Theobald Boehm / Flute in C. Munich, ca. 1861................................. 11

1.12 DCM: Boehm & Mendler / Flute in C. Munich, ca. 1862-1888 ..................... 11

1.13 DCM: Maximilian Schwedler; Carl Kruspe, junior / Flute in D-flat. Leipzig,

1899................................................................................................................. 11

vi

LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES

Example Page

3.1 Op. 61, m. 1, solo piano .................................................................................. 24

3.2 Op. 61, m. 1, flute and piano ........................................................................... 24

3.3 Op. 61, mm. 254-258, solo piano.................................................................... 26

3.4 Op. 61, mm. 254-259, flute and piano ............................................................ 27

3.5 Op. 61, mm. 10-12, solo piano........................................................................ 28

3.6 Op. 61, mm. 10-12, flute and piano ................................................................ 28

3.7 Op. 61, mm. 152-159, solo piano.................................................................... 29


5.1 Op. 61, m. 1, flute and piano ........................................................................... 35

5.2 Op. 61, mm. 9-12, flute and piano .................................................................. 36







5.9 Op, 61, mm. 138-140, solo piano.................................................................... 41

5.10 Op. 61, m. 138, flute and piano....................................................................... 41

5.11 Op. 61, mm. 152-155, solo piano.................................................................... 42


5.13 Op. 61, mm. 183-186, solo piano.................................................................... 43

vii


5.15 Op. 61, m. 214, solo piano .............................................................................. 44


5.17 Op. 61, mm. 218-219, solo piano.................................................................... 45


5.19 Op. 61, mm. 226-230, solo piano.................................................................... 47


5.21 Op. 61, m. 249, solo piano .............................................................................. 48



5.24 Op. 61, mm. 268-269, solo piano.................................................................... 51


5.26 Op. 61, mm. 272-273, solo piano.................................................................... 52


6.1 Op. 52, mm. 1-3, flute and piano .................................................................... 75




6.5 Op. 52, mm. 101-102, solo piano.................................................................... 79


6.7 Op. 52, mm. 122-123, solo piano.................................................................... 81


6.9 Op. 52, mm. 175-176, solo piano.................................................................... 83

viii


6.11 Op. 52, mm. 191-192, solo piano.................................................................... 84


6.13 Op. 52, mm. 211-212, solo piano.................................................................... 85


6.15 Op. 52, mm. 223-224, solo piano.................................................................... 87


1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

19th-century Demands for an Improved Flute

In the second half of the 18th Century, the flute’s “Golden Age”1 started to

decline, and the one-keyed flute, or flauto traverso,2 was no longer at its peak. In order to

win back the flute’s popularity, flutists and flute makers began to experiment with

modifications to the instrument. Between the years of 1753 and 1758, the Schuchart

Senior flute, made by woodwind instrument maker John Just Schuchart (ca. 1695-

1768),34 had keys for F, B-flat, G-sharp, C-sharp, and low C. The keys were added to

improve the sound, improve the projection, and develop focus in the low notes. Another

modification was Richard Potter’s (1726-1806) pewter plugs,5 which were patented in

Potter’s flute in 1785.67

In France, the keyed flute made only a small impact and the flute’s Golden Age

had already suffered a deep decline. In 1794, “when an inventory of 113 dispossessed

aristocrats was taken, only a solitary boxwood Potter flute was found, among a few old-

fashioned woodwinds alongside numerous more current Érard fortepianos, harps, violins,

and guitars.”8 In 1795, the School for Military Band Musicians in Paris evolved into the

1 Ardal Powell, The Flute (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 71. 2 Rachel Brown, The Early Flute: A Practical Guide (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 14. 3 Powell, 111. 4 Christian Ahrens, "The London Woodwind Instrument Maker John Just Schuchart (Schuchardt)," 227. 5 “…chamfered discs of zinc or pewter, loosely fitted to the key shank and bedding into an inserted metal lining.” Philip Bates, “Pads,” Grove Music Online. 6 Powell, 112. 7 Friedrich von Huene, “On Richard Potter's Directions for His Flutes,” 220. 8 Powell, 124.

2

2

Conservatoire. In its first year, it employed five flute professors (one doubling the oboe),

nineteen clarinet professors, and twelve bassoon professors.9

As city centers in Europe expanded, larger performance spaces in the early 19th

Century demanded changes to the instruments, in order to meet growing orchestral string

and wind sections. Musicians transitioned from working as court musicians to becoming

travelling artists; they needed to build their audience while competing with other

instrumentalists. Contemporary composers started making use of all key signatures and

writing more often for the high register of the flute. Equal temperament was widely

accepted by the end of the 18th Century. The current traverso flute was no longer

adequate as the unevenness of the tone and intervals, the difficulty to overcome the

technical demands, as well as the limited dynamic range, made flute players seem weak

in comparison to other instrumentalists. The instrument was still sufficient for executing

the flute repertoire, but inadequate to meet the needs of orchestral playing at the time.

The keys of G and D major laid very well on the flute (F-sharp and C-sharp were higher

in pitch). Flute players complained about contemporary composers’ writing.10 German

flutist and composer Anton Furstenau’s (1792-1852) second flute method of 1844,

included nine different fingerings for C (Figure 1.1), and ten for C-sharp (Figure 1.2),

indicating the issues for tone and intonation of these notes.

9 Powell, 124. 10 Powell, 145.

3

Figure 1.1. Furstenau’s table of fingerings for C

Figure 1.2. Furstenau’s table of fingerings for C-sharp

4

Other instruments were in the process of change as well. During the late 18th and

early 19th Centuries, both the violin and bow were modified, creating a more brilliant

tone and stronger sound. The longer and raised fingerboard allowed for higher notes and

a more projected sound. These important improvements had a great impact on the

instrument’s popularity. Violin virtuoso Nicolo Paganini (1782-1840) was a ‘free artist’

and, with his outstanding virtuosity, helped establish the violin’s popularity.11

During the first half of the 19th Century, the fortepiano had already been

transformed into a seven-octave instrument, very close to the modern piano we have

today. Furthermore, to satisfy the demands for greater power, the piano makers were

progressively increasing the string diameters and tension, as well as the weight of the

hammers.12

By the 1820s, most flutists had adopted an eight-keyed or nine-keyed flute. 13 One

attempt to improve the sound was to begin using vibrato as a special effect. Flute makers

attempted to scientifically analyze flute tone production and to produce flutes based on

acoustic studies of the tube. They then started building flutes with bigger tone holes,14

thus giving flutists the ability to play with a larger sound. Different opinions on flute

making existed regarding the tone hole size, embouchure size and shape, cork stopper

position, experiments, calculations, number of tone holes (sometimes more than fingers),

width of the bore, and open/closed keys. Several attempts were made to change flute

construction, including a crystal flute, and a flute with the low notes B, B-flat, A, A-flat,

11 Powell, 132. 12 Edwin M. Ripin et al., "Pianoforte," in Grove Music Online. 13 Powell, 154. 14 Ibid, 135.

5

G, to match violin range. 15 Ardal Powell’s book The Flute refers to this period as the

“Flute Mania” period of the first half of the 19th Century. 16 Figures 1.3 and 1.4 show the

mechanical innovations in flute construction.

Figure 1.3. Mechanical Innovations in the “Flute Mania” Period

15 Ibid, 150. 16 Ibid, 160.

6

Figure 1.4. Mechanical Innovations in the “Flute Mania” Period (part 2)

7

Figure 1.5. William Henry Potter. DCM: William Henry Potter / Flute in C. London, to 1837, 1806. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0403/

Figure 1.6. Potter. DCM: Potter / Flute in C. London, 1778. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0405/

Figure 1.7. Claude Laurent. DCM: Claude Laurent / Flute in C. Clear Glass, 8-keyed. Paris, 1826. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0382/

Figure 1.8. Clinton & Co. DCM: Clinton & Co. / Flute in C. London, to 1871,1871. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/ dcmflute.0685/

https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0405/

8

Boehm Flutes

Theobald Boehm, one of the most important contributors to the fundamental flute

construction, built his first redesigned flute in 1831, with adjusted size and position of

tone holes, to give more resonance to the high register. He composed challenging pieces,

demanding technical abilities the previous flutes did not have. He also went on a tour to

showcase the eight-keyed flute built in his workshop in Munich.17 In 1832 he built

another, with added trill keys, and an open-hole system with ring keys instead of solid

covered keys. It also had a conical-bore and large tone holes.

Not many flutists were interested in buying this flute, since they had to relearn the

fingering system, and claimed that the evenness of the tone destroyed the flute’s

character.18 Louis Dorus19 was a big supporter of the ring-keyed flute, while Furstenau,

Tulou, and other professors at the Conservatoire were publicly stating their discomfort

towards Boehm’s new flute.20

With added modifications from Buffet21 and Dorus, the Boehm flute began to

gain recognition, and more flutists were willing to try it. By 1839, it had a closed G-sharp

key, a C-sharp to D-sharp trill key, and a few changes in the position of the mechanism,

which made it easier to play.

In 1847 Boehm built his most successful model. He used a cylindrical tube in

place of a conical bore. He also used a parabolic curve at the headjoint, which he believed

17 Powell, 143. 18 Ibid., 158. 19 Louis Dorus (1812-1896): French flutist and professor at the Paris Conservatoire. 20 Powell, 158. 21 Auguste Buffet Jeune (1789-1864): French instrument-maker, who developed an improved Boehm flute, and invented the Boehm-system clarinet.

9

had an important effect on tone production and the relative intonation of the octaves. He

also made the embouchure hole bigger, which produced a louder tone. Boehm added pads

to help cover the tone holes. Boehm preferred to make his flutes out of silver. However,

many flute players had difficulty adjusting, so he continued to make wooden flutes.

Eventually he came up with a combination of a wooden headjoint and a silver body, a

design which he supported and constructed until his death.

Boehm sold the rights to his design to flute makers in England and France, and

they started producing Boehm flutes from both wood and metal. By 1851, the Americans

had made their first Boehm flute. The French makers were using the open hole system,

with the keys of A, G, F, E, and D to be open-hole, what is now known as the “French

model flute.” In 1860, the silver Boehm flute was adopted by the Conservatoire and

opened the door to a new age of flute playing. That year, Paul Taffanel was the first

student at the Paris Conservatoire to win a premier prix using a Boehm system flute,22

but it took until the end of the century for the new system to be adopted widely. German

flutists were the last to start performing with Boehm system flutes. Schwedler23 resisted

the Boehm flute due to the limited capability (in his opinion) to produce nuances and the

monotonous sound in comparison to the older flutes. Instead he preferred to find his own

solutions to the defects of the simple-system flute.24 He used a German reformed flute,

with his own addition of an “oval and sharply undercut embouchure hole, with raised,

convex-shaped sides,” which produced a “voluminous reedy sonority.”25 After

22 Dorothy Glick, “Paul Taffanel and the Construction of the French Flute School” (MM Thesis, University of Kansas, 2014), 2. 23 Maximilian Schwedler (1853-1940): German flutist, teacher, and flute reformer. He was principal flutist at the Gewandhaus Orchestra, and flute professor at the Leipzig Conservatory. 24 Brown, 29. 25 Ibid., 30.

10

performing the premiere of Brahms’ Fourth Symphony in Leipzig he received a letter of

approval from the composer:

Dear Sir, I gladly repeat here in writing that I was very pleased yesterday not only about your excellent playing, but in addition about the especially full-bodied, beautiful and powerful tone of your flute! If an invention of yours has helped you in this, then it is to be praised most warmly and to be recommended most highly.

Respectfully yours, Johannes Brahms

Leipzig, February 1886.26

Figure 1.9. Theobald Boehm. DCM: Theobald Boehm / Flute in C. Munich, 1847. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0652/ Figure 1.10. Theobald Boehm. DCM: Theobald Boehm / Flute in C. Munich, 1851. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0782/

26 Brown, 30.



11

Figure 1.11. Theobald Boehm. DCM: Theobald Boehm / Flute in C. Munich, ca. 1861. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0177/

Figure 1.12. Boehm & Mendler. DCM: Boehm & Mendler / Flute in C. Munich, ca. 1862-1888. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0059/

Figure 1.13. Maximilian Schwedler; Carl Kruspe, Junior. DCM: Maximilian Schwedler; Carl Kruspe, junior / Flute in D-flat. Leipzig, 1899. Image. https://www.loc.gov/item/dcmflute.0062/



12

The Romantic Flute Repertoire

It was during the 19th Century that Romantic music blossomed. Unfortunately it

was during a transitional period for the flute, and that very likely took composers’

attention away from this instrument.

The available repertoire from each era is indeed strongly related to instrumental

development. It is common knowledge that the Romantic period offers very limited

repertoire for flutists. There are only a few substantial Romantic works originally written

for the flute, while other instruments have an extensive Romantic repertoire. Some of the

most commonly performed works originally written for flute are:

• Reinecke: Sonata Undine, Concerto in D major, Ballade • Widor: Suite • Mercadante: Flute Concertos • Schubert: Introductions and Variations on Trockne Blumen • Boehm: Grande Polonaise • Borne: Carmen Fantasy • Doppler: Fantaisie Pastorale Hongroise • Taffanel: Andante Pastoral et Scherzettino • Chaminade Concertino

Some popular examples of flute Romantic transcriptions are:

• Franck: Sonata in A major (violin) • Schumann: Three Romances (oboe) • Paganini: 24 Caprices (violin) • Faure: Sonata (violin) • Tchaikovsky: Lensky’s Aria (voice) • Brahms: Sonatas (clarinet) • Dvorak: Sonata (violin)

13

History of Transcriptions

Machen Sie es wie Sie wollen, machen Sie es nur schön (Do it how you like, but make it beautiful)27

- Johannes Brahms

The word “transcription” mostly refers to a literal transfer of music, whereas

arranging is usually a more liberal procedure, demanding creativity from the arranger.

Grove Music Online describes transcription as “copying a musical work, usually with

some change in notation or in layout,”28 while arrangement is described as the

“reworking of a musical composition, usually for a different medium from that of the

original.”29 In the Harvard Dictionary of Music, transcription is defined as “ the

adaptation of one composition for a medium other than its original one,” while

arrangement is defined as “the adaptation of a composition for a medium different from

that for which it was originally composed, usually with the intention of preserving the

essentials of the musical substance.” However, many times those two words are used

interchangeably among musicians, as well as music scholars. For this essay, the word

transcription will refer to a close to literal transfer of the music, while arrangement will

refer to a more liberal, free, expanded or simplified version of the original.

Arrangements and transcriptions have always been a convenient way of playing

any music, adjusted for the available instruments. This procedure became widespread “at

least as early as the 14th through the 16th Century, when numerous vocal works (both

27 Peter Walls, History, Imagination, and the Performance of Music (Woodbridge, UK: The Boydell Press, 2003), 86. 28 Ter Ellingson, "Transcription (i)," in Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online, accessed 6 Sep. 2018, http:////www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000028268. 29 Malcolm Boyd, "Arrangement," in Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online, accessed 31 Aug. 2018, http:////www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000001332.

14

sacred and secular) were arranged for keyboard instruments and the lute.”30 Bach’s

arrangements of Vivaldi concertos are a great example of Baroque arranged repertoire,

followed by Mozart’s arrangements of some of Bach’s fugues for string trio and

quartet.31 Many other famous composers have been great supporters of transcriptions,

such as Liszt, Prokofiev, Ravel, Rimsky-Korsakov and Rachmaninoff, all having

arranged a large amount of music. Beethoven worked on multiple arrangements,

including 179 folksongs for voice and piano trio, and several other piano trios and piano

quartets. Arrangements have over time served different purposes, including: helping

composers “perfecting themselves in a particular form, technique or medium,”32

demonstrating a performer’s virtuosity, contributing to the study of works and

composers, or promoting specific composers, etc. Additionally, some relatively new

instruments, such as the saxophone, mostly rely on arrangements for their Baroque,

Classical, and Romantic repertoire.

The Value of Performing Transcriptions

Transcriptions serve as an excellent supplement to any instrument’s repertoire and

many performers have dedicated themselves to exploring music intended for instruments

other than their own. But why should performers bother to concern themselves with

repertoire originally written for other instrument(s)? Aren’t there already plenty of works

well-suited for their instrument? Every performer should recognize and benefit from the

value of playing transcriptions. Such experiences contribute to a well-rounded musician,

30 Harvard Dictionary of Music, “Arrangement.” 31 Harvard Dictionary of Music, “Arrangement.” 32 Malcolm Boyd, "Arrangement," in Grove Music Online.

15

stimulate creativity, and serve as inspiration for developing versatility. Transcriptions can

be used as pedagogical material, create variety in recital programs, and provide a great

opportunity to explore the limits of our instruments.

Transcriptions are not abundantly common, so they can serve as an excellent

addition to any recital as a means to create variety and include the “unusual” without

compromising the quality of the music. A program that has variety, but also maintains

high quality music, will be more appealing and satisfying to the audience. This is

something every performing artist should have high on their list of priorities when

compiling recital repertoire. Performing transcriptions can be a very useful learning

experience since they are exposing the instrument’s strengths and weaknesses. When

performing music not as well-suited to the instrument, musicians discover areas of their

playing that need more work, what is convenient and what is not. Then, adjustments can

be made to help the music flow more smoothly, thus giving a significant boost to the

player’s flexibility. Performing transcriptions provides an opportunity to be creative,

often challenging the performer in new ways. This facilitates the invaluable goal of

getting performers out of their comfort zones while they practice how to maintain

comfort and experiment with the instruments’ limits. This can include – expanding the

dynamic range, increasing virtuosity, and enriching the tone color palette. In the end, this

experimentation could even result in discovering an innovative, groundbreaking new

technique.

Also, when spending time listening to other instruments or vocalists, performers

can incorporate what they learn into their playing. Maybe it is the singer’s legato, the

violinist’s vibrato, or the pianist’s expressive rubato, that they try to emulate; these can be

16

an addition to their performance skillset and can become a part of their personal style.

Many great flutists have developed a unique style or a new technique by utilizing features

from other instruments, such as flutist Robert Dick’s borrowings from the electric guitar,

Wil Offermans from the saxophone, and James Galway from opera singers, among

others.33 Transcriptions can also be utilized as teaching material, since repertoire for

some instruments might be missing from entire eras. Performers can study and

experience music from those eras through transcriptions. Transcriptions offer the

opportunity to explore and learn from a specific composer or style. Aside from pedagogy,

creativity, and program variety, transcriptions also offer an opportunity to play beloved

music, regardless of the medium.

Purpose of this Project

This research project will offer flutists the opportunity to perform works by

Chopin and explore his mature musical style. It will also contribute to a more complete

musical knowledge of the Romantic period. There are a limited number of original

compositions for the flute composed in the Romantic era, and these transcriptions will

serve as a supplement to the Romantic flute repertoire, which includes few compositions

from major 19th-century composers. This essay will present in detail the procedure of

preparing transcriptions for flute and piano, and describe the issues that appear

throughout this process. In addition, the transcribed scores will be provided, along with

performance suggestions from the author. Furthermore, it will hopefully give motivation

to other flutists to transcribe more Romantic music, not only Chopin’s, but from other

composers as well.

33 Information comes from personal communication with these flutists.

17

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Flute Repertoire Catalogues

Hans Vester’s Repertoire Catalogue of 1967 includes 10,000 titles of flute works,

arranged alphabetically by composer’s surname. This makes it very challenging to

distinguish the Romantic works from other periods. James Pellerite’s Handbook of

Literature for the Flute (1978) has the works catalogued by grades of difficulty, however

Nancy Toff’s The Flute Book (2012) includes a repertoire catalogue by era. Toff’s list of

Romantic works is significantly shorter than other periods, covering only twenty-one

pages, while Baroque covers forty-five, Classical thirty-four, and Modern sixty-five.

Within the Romantic repertoire list, there are many listings of flute professors and

students from the Paris Conservatoire, including Henri Altès, Jules Demersseman,

Johannès Donjon, Louis Drouet, Paul-Agricole Génin, Jules Mouquet, Paul Taffanel, and

Jean-Louis Tulou. Also considering Taffanel’s persistence for commissions of new

works, this supports the need for more flute works from the 19th Century.

Chopin for Flute

Chopin only composed one work for flute and piano, Variations on a Theme by

Rossini. He was most likely in his early teens when he wrote this piece and it was

published posthumously. As a result, flutists have almost exclusively experienced his

music through transcriptions. In fact, there have been many published transcriptions of

Chopin’s music for solo flute, and flute with piano. Almost all of the works that have

18

been transcribed are his character pieces,34 including the Etudes opp. 10 and 25,

Mazurkas, Nocturnes, Preludes, and Waltzes. Parts of large works have been done as

well, such as the Marche Funebre from the Sonata op. 35, and Andantino from Ballade

op. 38.

Arranger Otto Standke (1832-1885) showed a strong interest in transcribing

Chopin’s music for flute, creating multiple transcriptions, most of which were initially

published in collections from Litolff. WorldCat has listed thirty-seven works under

Standke’s name in seventy-two publications.35 It is worth noting that famous flutists and

pedagogues Paul Taffanel, Philippe Gaubert, and Giulio Briccialdi also created some

transcriptions of Chopin’s works. Another flutist who has created many transcriptions of

Chopin’s piano works is Robert Stallman (1946 - 2019). His publication The Romantic

Flutist: Chopin, includes ten waltzes and ten nocturnes. International Music Company

published his transcriptions of twenty-two of the twenty-four etudes, opp. 10 and 25.

34 Maurice Brown, “Characteristic [character-]piece," in Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online, accessed 20 Apr. 2020. https://www-oxfordmusiconline-com.access.library.miami.edu/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000005443. 35 http://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no2011109295/.

19

36 https://www.carlfischer.com/shop/woodwinds/fl/the-romantic-flutist-chopin.html. 37 https://repository.monash.edu/items/show/67502#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0.

Title Opus Number Transcriber Publisher Publication

Date

Mazurka in F sharp minor Op. 6 No. 1 Otto Standke

Polskie Wydawnictwo Muzyczne SA through Presser

2006

Litolff 19__

Mazurka in C-sharp minor Op. 6 No.2

Standke (transcribed in D minor)


2006

Litolff 19__

Nocturnes Op. 9 Nos 1-3 Standke Litolff 18__ Nocturnes Op. 9 Nos 1-2 Robert Stallman Fischer36 2017

22 Etudes Op. 10 & Op. 25 Stallman International

Music Company 2005

Melody from Fantasy on Polish Airs

Op. 13 Ary van Leeuwen

Zimmermann37 ca. 1890

Nocturnes Op. 15 Nos. 1-2

Paul Taffanel


2006

Stallman Fischer 2017

Nocturne Op. 15 No. 2 Taffanel Leduc ?

Nocturnes Op. 15 Nos. 1-3 Standke Litolff 18__

Grande Valse Brillante Op. 18

Standke in Valses de Fr. Chopin

Litolff 188-?

Andante Spianato (First Movement only)

Op. 22 Standke in Compositions Diverses

Litolff ca. 1900

Polonaise in C sharp minor Op. 26 No. 1 Grzegorz

Olkiewicz


2006

20

38 http://ks4.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/f/fa/IMSLP531323-PMLP1969-Briccialdi_Estudio_sobre_ chopin_Fl.pdf. http://ks4.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/b/ba/IMSLP531324-PMLP1969-Briccialdi_Estudio_sobre_ chopin_Pno.pdf 39 https://mediaprocessor.websimages.com/rotate/undefined/http://www.giuliobriccialdi.com/ 122%20Studio%20di%20Chopin.jpg. 40 Leduc Flute Thematic Catalogue. 41 https://repository.monash.edu/items/show/67499#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0.

Etude in F minor

Op. 25 No. 2 Guilio Briccialdi Schott 38 ? Op. 25 No. 3 Aug. Cranz39 ?

Polonaise Op. 26 No.1 Standke in Compositions Diverses

Litolff ca. 1900

Nocturnes Op. 27 Nos. 1-2

Standke

Litolff 18__


Prelude in E minor Op. 28 No. 4 Olkiewicz


2006

Prelude Op. 28 No. 4 Standke in Compositions Diverses

Litolff ca. 1900

Prelude in A major Op. 28 No. 7 Olkiewicz


2006


Litolff ca. 1900

Prelude Op. 28 No. 15

Philippe Gaubert in Les Classiques De la Flute40 (originally in Db/transcribed in D major)

Alfonse Leduc 41 1928


Litolff ca. 1900

Impromptu in A flat major Op. 29 Emil Prill


2006


Nocturne Op. 32 No. 1 Stallman Fischer 2017

21

42 https://repository.monash.edu/items/show/67406#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0. 43 https://repository.monash.edu/items/show/67511#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0.

Valse Brillante Op. 34 Nos. 1-3


Litolff 188-?

Waltz in A minor Op. 34 No. 2

Prill


2006


Grand Valse Brillante Op. 34 No. 3 Stallman Fischer 2017

Marche Funebre from Sonata


Litolff 42 ca. 1900


Nocturne Op. 37 No. 1 Stallman Fisher 2017

Andantino from Ballade Op. 38

Standke in Compositions Diverses

Litolff ca. 1900

Valse Op. 42 Standke in Valses de Fr. Chopin

Litolff 188-?

Polonaise Op. 40 No.1 Standke in Compositions Diverses

Litolff ca. 1900


Nocturne Op. 48 No. 2 Stallman Fischer 2017


Berceuse Op. 57 Standke in Compositions Diverses

Litolff ca. 1900

Nocturne Op. 62 No. 1 Standke Litolff 18__

Valse Op. 64 Nos. 1-2


Litolff 43 188-?

22

In addition to the manuscripts, the scores consulted for the transcriptions are from

the urtext National Edition, edited by Jan Ekier.

44 https://repository.monash.edu/items/show/67436#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0.

Valse Op. 64 No. 1 Taffanel in Classiques de la flûte

Leduc 1959

Valse Op. 64 No. 1

Ary van Leeuwen (for two flutes and piano)

Zimmermann44 1997

Valse Op. 64 Nos. 1-3 Stallman Fischer 2017

Largo from Fantaisie– Impromptu


Litolff ca. 1900

Waltzes Op. 69 Nos. 1-2 Stallman Fischer 2017

Waltz in B minor Op. 69 No. 2 Herman Zanke


2006

Waltzes Op. 70 Nos. 1-2 (Post.) Stallman Fischer 2017

Waltz in E minor Post. Stallman Fischer 2017

Nocturne in C# minor Post. Stallman Fischer 2017

23

CHAPTER 3

METHOD

“Chopin was a genius of universal appeal. His music conquers the most diverse audiences. When the first notes of Chopin sound through the concert hall there is a happy sigh of recognition. All over the world men and women know his music. They love it. They are moved by it. Yet it is not ‘Romantic music’ in the Byronic sense. It does not tell stories or paint pictures. It is expressive and personal, but still a pure art. Even in this abstract atomic age, where emotion is not fashionable, Chopin endures. His music is the universal language of human communication. When I play Chopin I know I speak directly to the hearts of people!”

-Artur Rubinstein

Selection of the Pieces for Transcription

This project is focused on two transcriptions for flute and piano of compositions

written by Chopin for solo piano. Works written for instruments other than the piano

were not taken into consideration. While it is very common for monophonic

instrumentalists to share favorite repertoire pieces, for the purpose of this project the

author decided to go beyond the ordinary and prepare two new transcriptions of Chopin’s

works originally written for solo piano. As most of his character pieces have already been

transcribed, the larger scale works were examined before deciding which ones were

suitable candidates. In the opinion of this flutist, a piano work suitable for flute

transcription should meet a few criteria. The first would be for it to include many melodic

lines throughout the piece. Also the most suitable music is that in which large intervals

are rare. In addition, virtuosic sections should be appropriately tested for playability on

the flute.

24

In solo piano music, there is a plethora of examples in which both hands of the

pianist are needed to create a texture, thick writing and consequent chordal movement.

This thickness makes transcription for a single line difficult. In addition, music written

beyond the flute’s range can easily be adjusted to an appropriate register, but frequent

jumps within phrases and extended arpeggios would be very challenging to adapt. In an

effort to maintain the transcribed score as close to the original as possible, alterations

have been kept to a minimum for this project. In some instances, adjustments were

needed to preserve the musical intentions of the composer, since the flute’s acoustic

delivery in different registers differs markedly from the piano’s. For example, in the

opening measure (Examples 3.1 & 3.2) the flute line had to be transferred an octave

higher. This adjustment was made in order for the opening statement to be projected well,

as it would have been if played by the piano.

Example 3.1. Op. 61, m. 1, solo piano

Example 3.2. Op. 61, m. 1, flute and piano

25

After compiling as complete a list as possible of Chopin’s piano works

transcribed or arranged for flute and/or flute and piano, the author listened to a large

number of recordings of solo piano works not included in the list while observing the

scores. These were narrowed down to a selection of possible works, including Ballade

No. 1, Scherzo No. 2, Ballade No. 4, and Polonaise-Fantaisie in A-flat major. The next

step was to acquire a hard copy of the music and attempt to play a few sections on the

flute. Some melodic portions that would suit the flute appropriately became immediately

apparent; at the same time there also existed complicated excerpts barely playable at first

sight. After becoming more acquainted with these pieces, this author chose to transcribe

the Polonaise-Fantaisie in A-flat major and the Ballade No. 4.

General Steps for Creating a Monophonic Line

Once the works were chosen, the flute part was created. At first, the obvious

melodic lines were extracted from the score and directly copied to the flute part. Some

sections did not appear to have one obvious melodic line, or they had more than one

suitable line to choose from. Those sections were all tested on the flute and then chosen

according to the ones which sounded and felt better. For sections with a much thicker

texture, recordings by well-respected pianists were consulted in order to determine which

voices were highlighted. In some instances the flute was given a secondary, or

accompaniment line. For example, in measures 254-268 the flute has the secondary line

(Examples 3.3 & 3.4). It was logical to give this secondary line to the flute, as the piano

cannot sustain these long notes, and they decay through the thick texture underneath. For

the flute and piano version, the piano keeps the main theme in octaves in the left hand,

26

and the secondary theme is played on the flute, an octave higher. The octave change was

made so the pianist could feel free to execute the fortissimo, while the flutist can easily

project the flute line, without being completely covered by the strong low octaves of the

piano.

Example 3.3. Op. 61, mm. 254-258, solo piano

27

Example 3.4. Op. 61, mm. 253-259, flute and piano

The goal for these specific transcriptions was to create works in which the flute is

utilized as much as possible. Although the flute plays a prominent role, and the flute line

is mostly highlighted, there are multiple portions where the flute tone needs to blend with

the piano, and the two instruments are equally used to create a texture. In measures 9-12

from Op. 61, the flute plays the original low register notes for the purposes of the texture

(Examples 3.5 & 3.6). In this case the flute line was not intended to be distinct, but rather

blended into the piano harmonics.

28



Creating the Piano Part

Initially, the piano part was made up of the musical text that is not included in the

flute part. This then had to be adjusted in order for the two instruments to be able to blend

and support each other. Furthermore, the piano part was adapted in a way to make it as

easy as possible to read. These highly demanding pieces require sincere dedication from

the concert pianist to achieve clarity in the technical virtuosic sections. The versions for

29

flute and piano will undoubtedly include a piano part of greater difficulty than a standard

collaborative piano part, however, not as difficult as the original. The piano part of the

transcription should be notated in the most convenient way. Since a considerable amount

of material is taken away from the right hand staff and given to the flutist, some of the

left hand staff material was moved to the right hand staff. This material remained in the

same register, written to be played with the pianist’s right hand, in order to logically

divide the work between the pianist’s hands (Examples 3.7 & 3.8).


30


31

CHAPTER 4

THE CANTABILE STYLE IN CHOPIN’S MUSIC Naturalness is a major principal for Romantic music and Chopin’s style is no

exception. Inspired from the cantabile style, his music incorporates principles from the

most natural musical instrument, the human voice. As a pianist, his playing was

extremely delicate and light; his pianissimo was extraordinary and he played fortissimo

very rarely.45 His playing and his compositions also frequently exhibited a sorrowful

tone. He was able to transcend the mechanical limitations of the keyboard and allow the

piano to “sing”.46 His playing has been described as a “flute-like murmur” 47 and “simple

and noble” 48. To achieve the ease and naturalness of the human voice, his playing

exhibited many singing qualities: clarity, expression, punctuation, accentuation, phrasing.

Chopin’s cantabile style, sometimes includes sections clearly inspired by opera.49

From his students’ testimonies it is known that his main pedagogical approach was based

on simulation of singing.50 He believed that music had to be inspired from singing

qualities in order to be conclusive,51 and he encouraged his students to frequently listen

to Italian singers, who at the time were singing in Parisian theaters. To Chopin,

45 Roy Howat, Naomi Shohet, and Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger, Chopin: Pianist and Teacher: As Seen by His Pupils (United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 56. 46 Jonathan Bellman, and Halina Goldberg, Chopin and His World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2017), 103. 47 Ibid, 105. 48 Howat, Shohet, and Eigeldinger, Chopin: Pianist and Teacher, 42. 49 Stephanie Lynne Frakes, “Chopin's "Cantabile" in Context,” (Ph.D. diss., The Ohio State University, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2012). 50 Ibid, 44. 51 Ibid, 15.

32

imitating singing qualities would bring naturalness, ease, and a more convincing

performance.52

Chopin was very fond of the Italian Belcanto style and he incorporated many of

these singing qualities into his playing, composing, as well as teaching. Chopin’s

composition teacher, Józef Elsner, was an important figure in the Polish National Opera.

From Chopin’s early age, he identified these qualities in his writing and encouraged him

to pursue his potential in operatic composition.53 Elsner found that Chopin had a natural

gift creating evocative music, a required qualification for any opera composer. He, and

many others, had hoped that Chopin would take advantage of these skills and contribute

to the repertoire of this genre.

As a teacher, Chopin recommended to his students to listen to good singers,54 and

even suggested that they take singing lessons. In order to achieve a performance as

natural as possible, he believed that pianists should listen to Italian singers. At the time,

remarkable Italian artists were frequently performing in Parisian theaters. To Chopin, the

ease and simplicity of their style could serve as an excellent example for pianists to

imitate and incorporate this naturalness into their playing.55 A significant aspect of

Chopin’s style is the use of rubato. He believed that rubato could not easily be taught, as

it requires a “certain musical intuition.”56 Although it implies a freedom in time, he

supported the idea that the values should still be recognizable and the rhythm should be

treated with respect. This makes the music flow naturally. To him, rubato was a simple

52 Howat, Shohet, and Eigeldinger, Chopin: Pianist and Teacher, 44. 53 Bellman and Goldberg, Chopin and His World, 105. 54 Howat, Shohet, and Eigeldinger, Chopin: Pianist and Teacher, 44. 55 Ibid, 44. 56 Ibid, 50.

33

nuance of movement and slight fluctuations of the speed. By borrowing time from other

values, there is the possibility of highlighting certain more important notes. He did not

believe that rubato should be exaggerated; on the contrary, he told his students that the

music would sound better if played straight rather than played with an untasteful rubato.

To achieve an instinctive, reasonable effect, he would teach his students to keep a steady

tempo in the left hand, while the right hand can freely move in a varied speed.

Emulating a singer can be done more easily on the flute since the flute has

qualities close to the human voice. Sustaining, doing crescendo through a single note,

legato playing, and vibrato are all shared attributes of the flute with vocal performance.

Chopin’s song-like melodies are ideally suited to a flute transcription. Polonaise-

Fantaisie in A-flat major and Ballade No. 4 in F minor are no exceptions, as they consist

of many melodic sections which can be adjusted and played on the flute.

In his playing the great artist [Chopin] rendered most exquisitely that kind of agitated trepidation, timid or breathless[…] He always made the melody undulate like a skiff borne on the breast of a powerful wave; or sometimes he made it hover like an airy apparition suddenly sprung up in this tangible and palpable world. In his writings, he at first indicated this way of playing – which gave such an individual stamp to his virtuosity – by the term ‘tempo rubato’: stolen, broken time – a rhythm simultaneously supple, abrupt and languid, vacillating like the flame under the breath that agitates it, like the corn in the field waving under the soft pressures of the warm air, like the tops of trees bent hither and thither by a strong breeze. But as the term taught nothing to whoever already knew, and said nothing to those who did not know, understand, and feel, Chopin later ceased to add this explanation to his music, persuaded that if one had the sense of the music, it would be impossible not also to divine this rule of irregularity. Also, all his compositions must be played with that kind of speech-like, accented lilt, that softness [morbidezza], the secret of which it was difficult to grasp if one had not often heard him play in person. He seemed to wish to teach this style of playing to his numerous pupils, especially his compatriots to whom, more than to any others, he wanted to communicate the breath of his inspiration.57

- Franz Liszt

57 Howat, Shohet, and Eigeldinger, Chopin: Pianist and Teacher, 51.

34

CHAPTER 5

POLONAISE-FANTAISIE IN A-FLAT MAJOR, OP. 61

Three years before his death, Chopin composed Polonaise-Fantaisie, a work that

marked the beginning of his new style, which after Jeffrey Kallberg and Maria

Piotrowska is now referred to by scholars as “last Chopin.”58 Numerous sketches and

notes in the manuscript indicate the composer’s struggle. The hybrid title came last, and

implies a complex, unusual form. He confessed: ‘I’d like to finish something that I don’t

yet know what to call’.59 Polonaise-Fantaisie integrates heroic gestures, a feature that

Chopin used extensively in his mature Polonaises, with the improvisatory and

melancholic character of a Fantaisie. The work’s intricate form consists of ostensibly

unconnected sections; however Chopin managed to maintain continuity among the

episodes. Thematic material often returns modified and transformed, and ultimately the

music triumphs on a majestic ending.60

The Procedure

Beginning with the first forte (f) in measure 1, the top voice of the flute part is an

octave higher, keeping the flute timbre distinct from the outset. The rest of the notes

remain in the piano part. Doubling the E-flat in the original register maintains the

richness of the chord. The choice was made to leave the original arpeggio after the chord

58 Mieczysław Tomaszewski, “Polonaise – Fantasy Op. 61”, on the The Fryderyk Chopin Institute website, accessed March 31 2020, https://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/composition/detail/name/61/id/129. 59 Ibid. 60 Ibid.

35

in the piano part, while the flutist sustains the E-flat (Example 5.1). The same principal is

applied to measure 2. Measures 3-5 had to be written one octave higher as well to be

playable on flute. Transitional measure 6 is in the piano part only, and the rolled chord is

written to be played as a block chord on the piano with two grace notes before the B-flat

in the flute.


The melody in measures 9-15 is written in the flute part in the original register, to

maintain the blend between the two instruments (Example 5.2). In measures 15-17 the

main melody continues in the bass clef; based on the register and texture of this melody,

it would be called a “cello melody” among pianists (Example 5.3). It works well to assign

the secondary melody to the flute for those measures in the original octave. To highlight

the switch in voicing, the flute dynamic was adjusted to a piano (p) marking. In the

second beat of measure 17, the flute part switches back to the leading voice, so a mezzo

forte (mf) marking was added. The end of this introductory section, as well as the

transitional measures 22-23, were written in the piano part only.

36



The next section (measures 24-66) begins with the main theme on the flute

(Example 5.4). This is the first time the theme appears in the music, and in the original

manuscript it comes after a decrescendo, without a dynamic marking. In the Polish

edition, mezza voce is put in parentheses. Since is clear that the first appearance of the

theme should be gently played, the flute part was given the melody in the original, low

register. A mf in the flute part and a p in the piano part were added in order to maintain

the balance of the melody and the accompaniment. Since all the voices are written in very

37

close registers, it would be difficult to clearly hear the melody from the flute without

these dynamic marking changes.


In measure 28, the B-flat of the previous measure resolves to an A-natural in the

form of a grace note. This, as with most of the grace notes in Chopin’s music, is to be

played on the beat.61 As in the flute transcription the pianist would not have to play the

following C on the downbeat of measure 28, in order to clearly hear the resolution of the

B-flat, the A-natural is written in the piano part as an eighth-note. (Example 5.5).


61 John Petrie Dunn, Ornamentation in the Works of Frederick Chopin, (London, UK: Novello and Company, 1921), 40.

38

In measure 43, a fermata and a breath mark were added on the second beat (D-

flat) so the flutist would give closure to the previous phrase, accommodate a breath, and

clearly rearticulate the repeated note beginning the reappearance of the theme. In measure

65, the rolling chord has been removed, and a C grace note has been added in the flute

part, an octave higher. This is a very common vocal device that Chopin often utilizes,

cercar della nota,62 and functions as a portamento delay of the E-flat. The following

section (measures 66-91) includes scalar gestures divided between the two staffs

(Example 5.6). The sixteenth notes of the treble clef were moved to the flute part, which

now takes over and completes the gesture begun by the piano. The first sixteenths of the

third beat play a double role; connecting the lower and upper voices. These notes have

been written in both the piano and the flute part, so the transition between the two

instruments is smooth and the gestures sound unified.


Transitional scales in measures 92-93 have been written in the piano part. The

next section begins in measure 94, with the return of the main theme, this time in E-flat

62 Howat, Shohet, and Eigeldinger, Chopin: Pianist and Teacher, 113.

39

major. This melody has been written in the flute part one octave higher, so the flutist will

be able to project this important melodic line. Later in this section the texture becomes

thicker, so an octave higher is required for the optimum balance (Example 5.7).


In measure 112, as previously mentioned, the A-natural is the resolution of the B-

flat, written as a grace note in the original piano score. In the transcription, it has been

written in the piano part as an eighth-note and fully resolve the B-flat, since the pianist

will not be playing the C on the downbeat. Almost all the grace notes in Chopin’s music

are to be played on the beat,63 something that majorly contributes to his musical style,

and should be followed by the flutists as well.

In measure 123, a shift back to the original register was chosen. The line D-E-flat-

F in measures 122-124 was a convenient spot for the shift; the flute part was given a

breath mark after the E-flat, and then switches to the lower register for the pickup to the

63 Ignacy Paderewski, Critical Commentary to Chopin Complete works Volume V, “Scherzos,” by Fryderyk Chopin, ed. Ignaci Paderewski (Crakow, Poland: National Printing Works, 1978), 90.

40

downbeat F (Example 5.8). The F in the bass line is an authentic cadence to B-flat major

and leads to the next, embellished melodic section. In the last beat of measure 126, there

is a rapid gesture which has been adjusted into a compressed version to fit within the

flute’s range.


In measures 128-131, the required power of the piano’s low and middle ranges for

the f, would only be best executed in the flute’s high register, and thus these measures

have been written an octave higher than the original. To maintain the intensity of

measures 134-135, which links the sixteenths before and after, it was necessary to write

the flute part an octave higher as well. This gives the flutist room in which to make the

crescendo in measure 135. In measure 138 of the original, the two F-sharps play two

different roles: the first one is the last note of the previous phrase, resolving the G into an

F-sharp minor chord, while the second F-sharp an octave lower functions as an upbeat

into the E-sharp of the following downbeat (Example 5.9). In the transcription this is an

opportunity for the flutist to breathe for the following long phrase, so a breath mark has

been placed right after the first F-sharp. The second F-sharp has been placed an octave

41

higher, as well as the whole phrase after it, to accommodate the flute range (Example

5.10).

Example 5.9. Op, 61, m. 138, solo piano


The following transitional material of measures 145-151 has been written in the

piano part as it appears in the original. These measures contain mostly chordal

movement, transitioning from F-sharp major to the new B major key area of the next

section. In measure 152, new thematic material is presented in the two outer voices of the

42

original (Example 5.11). In the transcription, the melody of the left hand was transferred

to the flute part (Example 5.12). In measure 152, while the flute is playing the five

eighth-note upbeats into measure 153, the piano pedal should remain down, so as to

sustain the B major chord for the whole measure. The bass notes of this section have been

kept in the piano part. These notes are playing an important role in setting the base for the

chord to build. Furthermore, these bass notes have not been doubled in the flute line, thus

leaving an eighth-note rest for the flutist to breathe. Since the majority of this bass line

have been transferred to the flute part, some material from the right hand has been written

in the left hand, for the sake of readability.



43

Measures 181-198 have two distinct materials, the melody and the

accompaniment (Example 5.13). The melody of this section has been written in the flute

part, and the piano chordal accompaniment has been split between the two staves for

almost all this section, in order for it to be read and played with less effort (Example

5.14). To improve coordination between the flutist and the pianist, the communicatively

demanding trilling section of measures 199-205 has been minimally adjusted. The dots

from the first eight-notes of measure 202 have been removed, and the grace notes from

measure 205 have been written only in the flute part. In measures 206-214, the flute part

again includes the bass line of the original, adapted in a playable register.



44

Measure 214 begins the recapitulation, once again using the embellished

arpeggios from the opening (Example 5.15). These arpeggios are well-suited for the flute,

and the arrival notes fit comfortably into the flute register. However, the four repetitions

cannot fit in the range; they had to be divided in the two parts. The piano part has the first

two motives and the flute part the last two (Example 5.16). The same applied to the

second statement as well.



The next section in measures 216-222, uses thematic material from the previous

sections as well, this time in F minor (Example 5.17). The right-hand melody was written

45

in the flute part, and the accompaniment in the piano (Example 5.18). As previously, the

full chords have been divided between the two piano staves, for the pianist’s

convenience. Transitional measures 222-225 have been written in the piano part, to give

the flutist the opportunity to breathe and set up for the following section, the coda.



46

Starting in measure 226, the sextuplets have been written in the flute part an

octave higher, to fit the flute range. In the second sixteenth-note of measure 228, the part

has been switched back to the register of the original (Example 5.19). In measure 229, the

chord of D-flat major is arpeggiated, with the addition of the embellishing neighbor of E-

flat on the downbeats. After the arpeggio arrives on D-flat on the second sixteenth-note

of the third beat of this measure, the flute part has been given an eighth-note rest, for

breathing purposes and to also highlight that the phrase has concluded (Example 5.20).

The following two sixteenth-notes, A-flat and D-flat, act as pickup notes to the D-

naturals of measure 230 and have been written in the piano part. To smoothly transition

to the next phrase of this section (measure 230) and ensure that there will be no gap

between the running notes, all four sixteen notes of the last beat of measure 229 have

been written in the piano part. The same procedure has been followed in measures 230-

233. In the final measure of this phrase, measure 233, there is an arpeggiated E-major

chord, with the addition of the F-sharp passing note, connecting the G-sharp and the E.

After the arpeggio arrives on the tonic, E, the flute part has an eighth-note rest. In

measures 234-241, as previously, the right-hand material of the original has been written

in the flute part, an octave higher. In these measures, no rests have been written in the

flute part. The flutist should coordinate with the pianist and breathe on the barlines when

needed.

47



48

In measures 242-249 the first theme comes back and is written in the flute part.

The original notation and register fit well the instrument, so no modifications needed.

The forte assai indication should be enough for the flutist to play with a rich, resonant

tone, and project as much as possible above the thick piano texture. In measure 249, the

20-note figure on beat three, has been reduced to 14 notes (Examples 5.21 & 5.22).

Breathing can be challenging in this final section, so the flutist should be aware of the

piano technicality and take the opportunity to breathe when there is a large interval in the

piano part. For instance, between the two first sixteenth-notes of measure 251 it would be

an excellent moment for a breath, as the pianist will need a moment to jump up to the

second eighth-note of the same measure (Example 5.23).



49


The last section begins at measure 254 with a very thick texture. It includes a

dotted pattern in octaves in the bass clef, a chordal triplet pattern in the treble clef, along

with a sustained melodic line in the same staff. In the flute transcription the flute line has

been given the melodic line, also placed an octave higher for projection reasons. This

melodic line, although it has the highest notes, is not the most important melody.

Considering that the piano cannot sustain the long notes, this high melody should be

treated as equally important to the dotted pattern of the left hand, as these two lines

complement each other. From measure 268 through 280, several changes have been

made. When played as a solo piano piece, this is one of the most demanding passages for

the pianists. The triplets with the repeated notes can be an obstacle and make the

accelerando very challenging (Example 5.24). As instrumentalists collaborate with

pianists of various levels and sometimes have to prepare the piano parts in a short amount

of time, this section has been altered and the piano part has been made slightly more

50

simple. In measures 268-271 the middle voice with the triplets has been written in the

flute part (Example 5.25).

In measures 272-280 the flute part is a combination of two lines: the notes of the

top line with the triplet rhythm of the middle line, all placed an octave higher (Examples

5.26 & 5.27). This allows the flutist to bring out the melodic line and set their preferred

tempo with the triplets. Furthermore, it allows the pianist to follow the flutist easier, as

they will have only the dotted eighth – sixteenth pattern. Although the two lines have

different notation, one with triplets and the other with dotted eighth – sixteenth patterns,

first and last notes of the figures are to be played together. The dotted eighth was used by

Chopin as a way to notate this figure, but as we see in his manuscripts it was meant to

match the rhythm of the triplets and this pattern should be executed as a triplet figure.

51



52



Measures 280-281 have been left to the piano part so the section can fade out in

the low register and smoothly transition to the next, soft chordal section. In this short

section, the flute part combines notes from the upper and the middle lines and is also

placed an octave higher. The piano part has remained the same with the original and all

the harmonic structure stays the same, so the flute line is only adding a slight shimmer on

the top two voices. For the final ff chord, the flute part has been given the high A-flat, so

the flute sound will fit nicely into the thick chord and project as necessary for the finale

of the piece.

53

Polonaise – Fantaisie in A-flat major, Op. 61, Full Score

75

CHAPTER 6

BALLADE NO. 4 IN F MINOR, OP. 52

The Procedure

In the introduction, measures 1-7, the top line has been written in the flute part.

The register and the dynamics are well-suited for the instrument, so no changes were

needed. The melody is doubled an octave lower in the piano. An option would be to leave

the first three notes out of the piano part to give the flutist flexibility to begin the piece

freely. This would alternate the timbre of the two octaves of the original, so it was left as

written (Example 6.1). The theme in measures 8-36 has been written in the flute part as

well (Example 6.2). Originally in a strong piano register, Chopin marked it with mezza

voce. Although it is not necessary for dynamic purposes, as the middle register of the

flute is not as strong, the marking has been transferred to the flute part as an expressive

and stylistic direction. The transition in measures 36-38 has been kept the same as the

original piano part, to maintain the bass quality and smoothly shift to the next thematic

material.


76


The next section in measures 38-46 includes a moving bass line and a chordal

melody on the top. The top voice has been transferred to the flute part without removing

it from the piano (Example 6.3). This combination creates an integrated tone color from

the two instruments. The flute sound adds a shimmer on the top of the harmonic structure

instead of completely taking over the melodic material. In order for this effect to occur,

the flutist should play immensely soft, with a blending tone. In measure 45, the flutist

sound should progressively come out of the texture and prepare the return of the initial

thematic material.

77


The mezza voce marking in measure 46 has been removed, so the flute can be

heard above the thick chordal movement of the piano, while in the middle register. A

stronger dynamic also connects measures 45-46 smoothly. In measure 58 the main theme

returns, this time supported by sixteenth notes in the piano and a sustained crescendo

through measure 62. A mf has been added to the flute part so the flutist feels free to play

with a fuller sound. Although this section (measures 58-68) could have been written an

octave higher, it was left in the original register to follow the register shift in measure 69

and subsequently lead to the ff in measure 71 (Example 6.4). Starting at the second

eighth-note on measure 71, all the material is written in low notes. The flute part has been

written in the original registers and not transposed an octave higher, as in measure 71 the

chordal movement has a harmonic, textural character rather than melodic. As a result, the

flute part stays in the low register and is a part of the texture. These low notes have been

kept in the piano part as well to provide support and keep the dark color of this transition.

78


The downbeat of measure 72, low D-flat, is the end of the transition begun in

measure 70, as well as the beginning of a new section. To indicate a possible and

recommended breath for the flutist, the slur after the d-flat has been broken. This allows

the flutist to be able to play until at least the downbeat of measure 77. From the third

sixteenth-note of measure 76 to the first of measure 77, the melody has been transferred

to the flute part an octave lower, as it is out of the instrument’s range. The part returns to

the original range at the second sixteenth-note of measure 77 and stays until the low C of

measure 79. Then, the piano part takes the end of the section to the low notes and the

transition into the new section.

The second part of measure 84 introduces new thematic material. This bilateral

phrase develops until measure 99. The piano part has been given the first part of this

phrase, introducing the new theme. After the first part, the eight-bar phrase, a cadence

leads to the second part, which has been written for the flute. This short section is

doubled by the two instruments. The flute sound adds a shimmer and varies the tone color

79

for the second part of the phrase, as the crescendo in measures 92-95 and the added notes

in the left piano hand indicate a growth and added presence compared to the first half.

In measures 100-101 the top voice has been written in the flute without being

doubled in the piano. In measure 101 the low F-sharp is below the flute’s range, so it has

been replaced with a D (Examples 6.5 & 6.6). The D is a more suitable note than an F-

sharp an octave higher, since the F-sharp next to the E-flat (second sixteenth-note of

measure 101) would create an augmented second interval. In addition, the D is the root of

the D major chord of that measure, as well as the note that has been used for the previous

two downbeats. For the second section of this phrase, measures 102-103, the flute is

doubling the piano in the top voice. Although there are sixteenth-note rests in between

the notes in measures 102-103, the slur above this section has been kept, in order to

maintain a connection between these notes. The same changes have been made to the

second part of the section, measures 103-107, until the transitional As in measure 107.


80


In measures 108-111 the slur has been removed from the flute part and has been

replaced with a legato marking. This maintains the connection between the notes, while

at the same the lack of slur will give clearer articulations, imitating the piano. Measures

117-119 have been transferred to the flute part an octave lower to fit in the range.

Measures 121-124 have been written in the original, low register, although the thick

texture requires the flutist to meet greater demands of projection (Example 6.7 & 6.8).

These measures produce a dark color, focused on low harmonics. Despite the challenge,

it is appropriate for the flute to remain in the same timbral area. In measure 128, the

chord rolls have been removed. In measures 129-132 the parts have been written the

same as the beginning, with the flute playing the top line.

81



The main theme returns in measure 135, this time in canonic form, and the flute

part has been given the top melody as at the beginning. This section daintily fits the flute

range, articulation, and shaping attitudes, so there were no necessary changes to be done.

The variation section, starting at measure 152, is mostly suitable for the flute with one

exception: in measure 163 the octave shift goes above the flute range, so it is transcribed

82

an octave lower. In order to smoothly transition and return to the original register in

measure 164, the C in the second beat has been replaced with a G-flat. As the chord is an

A diminished, both notes would serve the purpose of the chord well. A low C could be

played but it would likely interrupt the accelerando and the continuity of the flowing

sixteenth-notes. The piano part has been given the transition to the next section, gradually

moving through the lower registers, to the downbeat of measure 169.

Measures 169-191 develop the secondary thematic material. For this section, the

melodic material of the top voice has been written in the flute part. The register,

dynamics, and phrasing are well-suited for flute playing, and the leggiero marking on the

sixteenth-notes in the piano part makes the balance between the two instruments ideal. In

transitional measures 175-176, an idiosyncratic Chopin phenomenon occurs: without

changing the meter, the note groupings imply a different meter (Example 6.9). Even

though these two measures have straight sixteenth-note triplets, the eighth-note top stems

indicate that the notes are to be played in groups of four and the melodic material to be

sustained further. To emphasize this, the eighth-notes have been written in the flute part,

also maintaining the slur (Example 6.10). To follow the lead of the original and point out

the triplet-form writing, the triplets have been retained.

83



In measures 191-194, the arpeggiating movement in both voices has been divided

between the two parts (Examples 6.11 & 6.12). While the repeated notes are rearticulated

by the flutist, the slurs have been adjusted to manipulate the acoustic result. The

arpeggios extended slightly below the flute range, so a few of the notes had to be shifted

an octave higher. The ascending lines in measures 195 and 197 are compacted, adjusting

octaves to make the line idiomatic for the flute. The chordal material throughout

measures 196-202 is exceptionally thick and written in the most powerful registers of the

84

piano. The flute part has been transferred an octave higher to project above this thick

texture.



For the end of this section, in measures 201-202, the flute part has been

transferred two octaves above the original, as the composer marks these notes fff in the

piano’s most robust range. In addition, for the last three notes, the flute part follows the

middle line, which has the moving notes E-D-C, leading to the root of the C chord.

85

Measures 203-210 have been written only in the piano part, as in the original. This serves

as a break from the combined flute and piano timbre, and it allows the flutist to prepare

for the upcoming coda. Furthermore, it allows the chordal texture to remain, avoids

highlighting any notes from the texture, and keeps the natural decay of all the notes

together, something that would not happen if the flute would play in this section.

Starting in measure 211, the coda is thick in texture, mostly composed of

sixteenth note triplets (Example 6.13). After extensive study and comparison of

recordings, the most distinct lines have been chosen and written in the flute part. In the

original, measures 211-212 are written an octave higher in measures 213-214. If the flute

were to play these low notes within the rich piano texture, the notes would not adequately

match the strength of the piano’s low harmonics. For this reason, measures 211-212 have

been transferred to the flute part an octave higher (Example 6.14). Since measures 213-

214 are to be played differently, a ff marking has been added to the flute part.


86


The downbeat of measure 215 serves as a conclusion to the previous phrase, as

well as the beginning of the following scale. For this transcription, the ending note has

been chosen for the flute part, while the piano plays the beginning of the scale. The flute

takes over the top note of the scale on the second sixteenth note. The A-flat is of more

importance, as it is highlighted in the form of an eighth note, and this avoids a large leap

on the flute. The same rule has been applied to the second beat of measure 215 and the

downbeat of measure 216. In measures 219-222, the low voice of the piano left hand

dominates. Even though projection is difficult in its lowest notes, the flute part has

written in the original register to stay within the texture and support the harmony. To

imitate the piano’s articulation, the slur above these low notes has been removed.

Measure 223 has an ascending line, from which the flute part has been given the middle

voice (Example 6.15 & 6.16). This line arrives to a high A, a well-suited note on the flute

for this arrival. The high E-flat of the top voice is out of range. Furthermore, the piano

part only has the first and the third sixteenth notes, making it more fluent and convenient

for the pianist. The five eighth notes of the top voice of measure 224 have been written in

87

the flute part, also transferred an octave higher for better projection. The slurs have been

removed as well, so to accommodate the intention of the natural piano articulation in a

forte setting. For measure 225, the same rule as measure 223 has been applied.

Example 6.15. Op. 52, mm.223-224, solo piano


The registers in measures 227-230 have been slightly compressed into the flute’s

range. To make the register transitions smoother, register shifts on the downbeats have

88

been avoided. The scale in measure 231 has been transferred to the flute part an octave

lower, while the scale in measure 232 has been written in the same register as the

original. To smoothly and accurately transition to the four-grouped sixteenth-notes, the

arpeggio in measure 233 has been written in both the piano and the flute part, with the

flute playing up to the C above the staff. This pattern is repeated four times, gradually

shifting to the lower notes. For the transcription, the first two times are given to the

piano, while the last two are given to the flute, doubled by the piano all the way to the

downbeat of measure 237. For the last four chords that mark the finale of the work, the

flute part has been given the top notes of the chords. The first two are written in their

original registers, the third has been raised an octave higher, and the last one has been

raised two octaves, in order to have the maximum strength and projection. An F grace

note has also been added for additional emphasis to this dramatic ending.

89

Ballade No. 4 in F minor, Op. 52, Full Score

117

CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSION

The flute construction during the early 19th Century lacked the requisite evolution

for the era’s new acoustical demands. The instrument could not produce the necessary

volume and was problematic with intonation, tone, and technical flexibility. Even though

the flute was popular in previous centuries and many Baroque and Classical composers

were eager to compose for this instrument, the flute repertoire gradually ebbed during the

Romantic era. Evidence of the lack of flute ownership, low popularity, and frantic efforts

to improve the instrument’s construction, indicate Romantic composers’ choice not to

write for the flute.

The purpose of this project has been to expand the flute Romantic repertoire

through the addition of two new transcriptions for flute and piano. These will offer

flutists the opportunity to experience first-hand Fryderyk Chopin’s mature compositional

style. Even though these compositions are to be played on a different instrument than the

original, the intentions of the composer were to be satisfied. Chopin’s song-like melodies

were inspired from opera. A flutist can interpret his melodies adequately with the

instrument’s many tools similar to the human voice. Furthermore, these transcriptions

present musical and technical challenges for flutists, not frequently found in the extant

repertoire. These advanced musical and technical requirements will boost flutists’

capabilities, enhance their musicianship, and challenge them to step out of their comfort

zone.

Transcribing solo piano music to flute and piano is uncommon; this project has

brought to light issues that this kind of transcription could create, and presented possible

118

solutions. The registers chosen for the flute part should be carefully selected, as the

piano’s strongest range is the lowest while for the flute it is just the opposite.

Additionally, when the two instruments play in the same (or close) registers it results to a

more blended timbre, while different registers make the two instruments more distinct.

This should be considered while transcribing, as the flute might have either the main

melody, a countermelody, an accompanying line, or adding to the texture. In order to

achieve the appropriate voice hierarchy, the dynamics have to sometimes be adjusted. For

example, in order to fulfil a low-octave passage that in the original solo piano score is

marked mf, it might possibly need to be adjusted to f when transferred to a flute part.

Another important aspect of these transcriptions is the difficulty of the piano part. The

transcriber should consider that the pianist might not always have the ideal amount of

time to adequately prepare such challenging collaborative repertoire, and also to rehearse

with the flutist. The transcription should be as easy to read as possible, dividing the notes

between the pianist’s two hands, considering transferring music to different clefs when

needed, and adjusting the writing to reduce collaboration issues between the two

musicians if possible. For instance, when there is a line passing around the two

instruments, it is better to double the few notes surrounding the pass so the transition

from flute to piano and back would be smooth and connected. In many cases, to remain

within the flute range the material has to be transferred to a different register than the

original. In order to make the register shifts less noticeable, the shifts should be in the

middle of beats and not on the downbeats. The register shifts should follow the phrasing;

obvious placement should be avoided.

119

While there is not a substantial quantity of piano literature that is suitable for flute

transcriptions, throughout the massive piano repertoire many selections would be

appropriate. This doctoral essay will hopefully serve as inspiration for further research on

the flute Romantic repertoire and motivate other flutists to create additional transcriptions

as well.

120

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books, Articles, Encyclopedias, Dissertations

Ahrens, Christian. "The London Woodwind Instrument Maker John Just Schuchart (Schuchardt)." The Galpin Society Journal 62 (2009): 287-88. http://www.jstor.org.access.library.miami.edu/stable/20753639.

Alphonse Leduc. Musique Pour Flûte: Catalogue Thématique. Paris: A. Leduc, 1990. Bellman, Jonathan D., and Halina Goldberg. Chopin and His World. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press, 2017. Bieber, Arnold. “Adapting, Transcribing, and Arranging World Music for Western

Instrumental Performance.” EdD diss., Columbia University, 1997. Bohnet, Andra Anne Cook. “The Transcription as a Supplement to Nineteenth Century

Flute Repertoire.” PhD. Diss. Texas Tech University, 1985. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Brown, Rachel. The Early Flute: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 2002.

Dulmage, Barbara S. “The Art of Transcription as Reflected in Bach’s Concertos BWV 592-596.” DMA diss., The University of Iowa, 1997.

Dunn, John Petrie. Ornamentation in the Works of Frederick Chopin. London, UK:

Novello and Company, 1921. Glick, Dorothy. “Paul Taffanel and the Construction of the French Flute School.” MM

Thesis, University of Kansas, 2014. Frakes, Stephanie Lynne. “Chopin's "Cantabile" in Context.” Ph.D. diss., The Ohio State

University, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2012.

Gray, Kristine Elizabeth. "Johannes Brahms, Cello Sonata no. 2, Op. 99: A Transcription and Technical Guide for Alto Saxophone and Piano." Order No. 10016862, Boston University, 2016. http://access.library.miami.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/1767428625?accountid=14585.

Hinz, Bob. “Transcribing for Greater Musicality.” Music Educators Journal 82, no. 1

(July 1995): 25.

121

Howard-Jones, Evelyn. “Arrangements and Transcriptions.” Music & Letters 16, no. 4

(October 1935), 305-311. Howat, Roy, Naomi Shohet, and Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger. Chopin: Pianist and Teacher:

As Seen by His Pupils. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Keller, Hans. "Arrangement for or Against?" The Musical Times 110, no. 1511 (1969):

22-25. doi:10.2307/953723. Nestico, Sammy. The Complete Arranger. New York: Fenwood Music, 1993. Nettl, Bruno. “Transcription.” In The Harvard Dictionary of Music, 4th ed. Cambridge,

MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2003. Paderewski, Ignaci. Critical Commentary to Chopin Complete works Volume V,

“Scherzos,” by Fryderyk Chopin. Edited by Ignaci Paderewski. Crakow, Poland: National Printing Works, 1978.

Pellerite, James. A Handbook of Literature for the Flute. Bloomington, IN: Zalo

Publications, 1978. Powell, Ardal. The Flute. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002. Sun, Hsiao-Mei. “Studies and Performances of Transcriptions for Cello from the Violin

Repertoire.” DMA diss., University of Maryland at College Park, 2004. Swanson, Christina Marie. “Adding to the Viola Repertoire by Arranging: A Study on

Methods of Arranging Music for Viola from Clarinet, With an Original Arrangement of the Saint-Saens Clarinet Sonata in E-flat, Op. 167.” DMA diss., University of Arizona, 2003.

The Harvard Dictionary of Music, 4th ed., s.v. “Arrangement.” Toff, Nancy. The Flute Book: A Complete Guide for Students and Performers. New

York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Urso, Rena Marie. "Cesar Franck's Violin Sonata in A Major: Performance Practice

Problems for Flutists." Order No. 1380321, California State University, Long Beach, 1996. http://access.library.miami.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/304330179?accountid=14585.

Vester, Frans. Flute Repertoire Catalogue: 10,000 Titles. London: Musica Rara, 1967.

122

Von Huene, Friedrich. "On Richard Potter's Directions for His Flutes." The Galpin Society Journal 50 (1997): 220-28. doi:10.2307/842574.

Walls, Peter. History, Imagination, and the Performance of Music. Woodbridge, UK: The

Boydell Press, 2003.

Scores and Recordings

Chopin, Frédéric. “Ballade no. 4 in F minor, op. 52.” On Chopin - 4 Ballades, Barcarolle

& Nocturne. Kevin Kenner. DUX 0521, 2005, compact disc. Chopin, Fryderyk. “Ballade No. 4 in F Minor, Op. 52.” On Chopin 4 Ballade, Barcarolle,

Fantasie. Krystian Zimerman. Deutsche Grammophon 00028942309029, 1988, streaming audio. https://uml-nml3-naxosmusiclibrary-com.access.library. miami.edu/catalogue/00028942309029.

____. “Ballade No. 4 in F Minor, Op. 52.” On Vladimir Horowitz: The Chopin

Collection. Vladimir Horowitz. RCA Records, streaming audio. https://uml-nml3-naxosmusiclibrary-com.access.library.miami.edu/ catalogue/886448149767

____. “Ballade No. 4 in F Minor, Op. 52.” On Chopin. Pollini, Maurizio. Deutsche

Grammophon, streaming audio. https://uml-nml3-naxosmusiclibrary-com.access.library.miami.edu/catalogue/00028947799085.

____. “Polonaise No. 7 in A-Flat Major, Op. 61, "Polonaise-fantaisie.” On Chopin: 8

Polonaises 4 Impromptus. Arthur Rubinstein. RCA Records, streaming audio. https://uml-nml3-naxosmusiclibrary-com.access.library.miami.edu/ catalogue/886445755930. https://uml-nml3-naxosmusiclibrary-com.access.library.miami.edu/catalogue/888880769862.

____. “Polonaise No. 7 in A-Flat Major, Op. 61, "Polonaise-fantaisie.” On Chopin: Piano

Music. Vladimir Horowitz. RCA Records, streaming audio. ____. “Waltz Op. 64, No. 1.” Performed by Frank Badollet (flute). On Chopin’s Waltz.

Recorded February 04, 1902. Victor 472, streaming audio. http://www.loc.gov/jukebox/recordings/detail/id/5124.

____. “Polonaise No. 7 in A flat major, Op. 61 'Polonaise-fantaisie'” in Polonezy.

National Edition 26B, Vol. II. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Muzyczne, 1973.

____. “Ballade No. 4, Op. 52” in Ballady, National Edition. Krakow: Polskie

Wydawnictwo Muzyczne, 2017.

123

“Chopin : Ballade No. 4 in F minor, Op. 52.” Alfred Cortot. YouTube video. 9:28. Posted by “Richard Hilo.” https://youtu.be/PegKq2soukw.

Polonaise-Fantaisie Op. 61 on “Mikhail Pletnev — Chopin recital — live 2006.”

YouTube video. 1:34:00. Posted by “ADGO.” https://youtu.be/56FDqoTAUU0?t=2674.

“Chopin: Polonaise-Fantaisie Op.61 in A-flat.” Sviatoslav Richter. YouTube video.

12:11. Posted by “Ashish Xiangyi Kumar.” https://youtu.be/177qJoCI9Zw.

Online Sources

Bates, Philip. “Pads.” In Grove Music Online. Accessed 1 Nov. 2018.

https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.20685. Boyd, Malcolm. "Arrangement." In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online.

Accessed 31 Aug. 2018. http:////www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000001332.

Online Chopin Variorum Edition website. chopinonline.ac.uk. Ellingson, Ter. "Transcription (i)." In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online.

Accessed 6 Sep. 2018. http:////www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000028268.

Fryderyk Chopin Institute website. http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/. IMSLP. Petrucci Music Library. https://imslp.org/. Library of Congress. Dayton C. Miller Collection.

https://www.loc.gov/collections/dayton-c-miller-collection/. Monash University. Monash Collections Online. https://repository.monash.edu. Ripin, Edwin M. et al. "Pianoforte." In Grove Music Online. Accessed 1 Nov. 2018.

http:////www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000021631.

Tomaszewski, Mieczysław. “Polonaise – Fantasy Op. 61”, on the The Fryderyk Chopin

Institute website. Accessed March 31 2020, https://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/composition/detail/name/61/id/129.

124

University of Chicago Library, Digital Activities and Collections. Chopin Early Editions.

http://chopin.lib.uchicago.edu/.

Transcriptions of Chopin's Polonaise-Fantaisie, Op. 61, and ...

Documents

Transcript of Transcriptions of Chopin's Polonaise-Fantaisie, Op. 61, and ...