NOTATIO

JJP wrote: ↑25 Aug 2024, 18:22
If I need to indicate a phrase, then there is some other problem in the writing that must be addressed. In fact, I can’t think of a single instance where slurs as phrase markings were particularly helpful.

May we perhaps place a worldwide moratorium on the use of slurs to indicate phrases in any music that is meant for performance? We will let the theorists keep them for analysis.

Hear, hear! In most tonal music, the phrases are either obvious or intentionally ambivalent and phrase marks are not only unnecessary but actually harmful.

Speaking of theorists. Schenker lead a one-man crusade against the phrase marks that editors of piano and other music were adding to the classical canon. In one essay "Away with phrase marks" he gave numerous examples of how phrase marks lead to distortion. I was planning to do a post on this subject a while ago and made the following example:

An example of phrase marks in an an over-edited 19th century edition Chopin's famous Nocturne in E-flat.
Here are Chopin's slurs from the original edition:
At H the dramatic leap of the pickup note to the first main note is enhanced by non-legato.

At I the slur binds together the important melodic progression G-F-E flat

At J the pickup is now connected to initiate a series of connected 1/8 note 1/4 note leaps that decorate the melodic motion G-A flat

At K the passing note G is connected to the note from which it originates, not separated from it as in the edited version. This prevents sectionalization of the melody.

At L the F is separated from the passing note to distinguish it as an important structural note coming from the initial G in measure 1 and leading to the final E flat in m. 4, (the same melodic progression as in m. 1 and no accident). The following G is connected to the D to show that it decorates the D and this clarifies the sequence in thirds F -D/ E flat-C; the four notes are not slurred to show that they are to be played tenuto, not legato, and underlined intensely.

At M the B flat is connected to the high D to show that the D is decorative, as are the following C-B flat A flat G- A flat, which are a written out turn that refers back to the C B flat-A flat-G in m. 2. And the following C-D E flat is slurred to make clear that the the C and D are passing notes continuing on from the first B flat in the measure and leading to the E flat to end the phrase.

All of this information is lost in the edited version.

John Ruggero wrote: ↑25 Aug 2024, 21:07 Speaking of theorists. Schenker lead a one-man crusade against the phrase marks that editors of piano and other music were adding to the classical canon. In one essay "Away with phrase marks" he gave numerous examples of how phrase marks lead to distortion. I was planning to do a post on this subject a while ago and made the following example:

An example of phrase marks in an over-edited 19th century edition Chopin's famous Nocturne in E-flat.

That example… The phrase marks seem to have been a way to compensate for the confusion caused by implying 6/8 meter. I guess we all make choices that ”seemed like a good idea at the time”.

That’s fascinating about Schenker. I was thinking of him when I said we should preserve phrase marks for theorists. They are quite effective in his analysis.

As you perhaps imply, Schenker's "analytical" slurs don't show phrasing either, but are often brackets that link together the notes that belong to single linear progressions. They are an outgrowth of the legato slurs that one finds in actual music, such as the slur over m. 1 in the example.