Today's broadcast in the Polish Fantasies series on Polish Radio featured an orchestrated version of Zarebski's Piano Quintet Op.34 in addition to Zelenski's Piano Concerto and Lipinski's Violin Concerto No.2.
Of even more interest to me were songs, choral works and piano pieces by Eugeniusz Pankiewicz, a pupil of Josef Wieniawski whose Violin Sonata was also played.
I recorded the broadcast if any of the items listed appeal to members.
They all sound eminently uploadable, please, Mike.
Agreed. Sounds very interesting, Mike.
Yes, that would be delightful.
Jerry
small correction
pianists' first name is Ewa and the orchestra is named Amadeus (not Amadeusz) - ChO of the Polish Radio of Poznan
Even smaller correction:
" pianist's " not "pianists' "
Actually, the program schedule clearly gives the name as " Amadeusz".
On a more relevant note, I find that the orchestration of the Zarebski quintet detracts from the intimacy of this lovely quintet.
Any other viewsz on thisz?
just for clarification ;)
http://www2.polskieradio.pl/amadeus/default_main_en.asp (http://www2.polskieradio.pl/amadeus/default_main_en.asp)
You can't have it both ways!
If you don't accept "Eva" for "Ewa", why object to " Amadeusz" for " Amadeus"?
I found it pleazant but had expected some kind of full orchestration (never assume anything, Jer.....) and was disappointed that it seems to be just strings - no winds, no brass, nothing else. So, a piano quintet with the quintet beefed up considerably??
Jerry
For final clarification: the spelling is clearly AMADEUS in both the original Polish and when translated into English:
http://www2.polskieradio.pl/amadeus/ (http://www2.polskieradio.pl/amadeus/)
The pianist's name is clearly EWA Pobłocka:
http://www2.polskieradio.pl/amadeus/solo_en.asp (http://www2.polskieradio.pl/amadeus/solo_en.asp)
These things are easily checked. Now back to the music, please...
I want the final word on this subject, Alan!
This is what appears on the program schedule:
Juliusz Zarębski, opr. Agnieszka Duczmal Kwintet fortepianowy g-moll op.34 wyk. Ewa Pobłocka – fortepian, Orkiestra Kameralna PR ,,Amadeusz" dyr. Agnieszka Duczmal;
This same spelling is to be found on numerous other web sites.
Another small correction: you always leave off the cedilla in " Zarębski"
The final word is this: the program schedule is clearly and unambiguously WRONG. We should go by the orchestra's own website, not by mistakes perpetuated on other websites. For the record, the correct name of the orchestra in Polish is as follows:
Orkiestry Kameralnej Polskiego Radia Amadeus
And by the way, it is not a cedilla beneath the letter e - it's an 'ogonek'. FWIW, I (and, I suspect others) leave it out because (a) I hadn't spotted it in the first place and (b) I can't be bothered to locate it on my keyboard. Furthermore, I have no specialist expertise in the Balto-Slavic languages and their diacritics beyond what I can turn up on the internet, so I'm liable to make a lot of omissions. Best not to pretend I know when I don't.
As I said, back to the music...
When it comes to unusual diacritics I usually either search for "unicode" and special characters etc. or I look for somewhere - like Polish Wikipedia, say - that I can cut-and-paste the relevant character from (since at least in my iTunes I like getting such things right if I can. And then a new version of iTunes comes out and messes unicode up - ah, never mind)
Quite. Never mind.
As a Pole I only add the following
The form Orkiestry Kameralnej Polskiego Radia Amadeus is Genitivus i.e. website of /recording of ...
the Nominativus is Orkiestra Kameralna Polskiego Radia Amadeus
:)
Great, Marek. Thanks. That's a good example of the sort of ignorance on my part that I mentioned before. Of course, Amadeus remains Amadeus.
Back to the music, I regret that I must agree with Mike's reaction, namely that the orchestration detracts from the intimacy of the piece. As I listened, I kept thinking "this just doesn't sound right". Perhaps the orchestration has given too much prominence to the piano too at the centre, and reduced the remaining instruments to an accompaniment of variable integrity. The original quintet is a fine piece without any changes.
Are Mike and I alone in having reservations about it?
No, you're not. I first heard the orchestration last year and thought that it was a poor effort. I'm not against such arrangements at all and there are are some fine examples out there (we have a thread on the subject somewhere), but for me this one is simplistic and destroys the intimacy and immediacy of the Quintet without adding anything of its own.