The Pavane in F-sharp minor op.50 was written in 1887, and similar to Ravel’s work got its name from the slow processional Spanish court dance it is based on. The original orchestration is for strings, double winds, two horns and optional choir (with the latter apparently singing some random verses about the helplessness of man, as written by the cousin of the patron Elisabeth Comtesse Freffulhe, Robert de Montesquiou-Fezensac). Also suited for inclusion of dancers, the Pavane became immediately popular and was an inspiration to Faure’s pupils Ravel (Pavane pour une infante defunte) and Debussy (“Passepied” from Suite bergamasque).
The Pavane in F-sharp minor in Lynsdale-Nock’s version becomes a Pavane in E minor, effectively transposing the whole piece a tone down (therefore in B minor in horn pitch, with two sharps). It is like reading the original score in horn in B flat, most of the time basso, sometimes alto (for example the flute solo at the beginning). The range of the horn is almost used to its fullest, with pedal C sharps (and optional double pedal B’s at the end), and several top B’s in the high parts. To give you an idea: the last chord includes five B’s in different octaves. Could the transcription have been a semitone higher, in C minor? Certainly, and the colour of the three flats might have matched the cool, somewhat haunting character of the original even better, but then again, colours and associated keys are a matter of opinion and interpretation, and therefore no fault can be found in Lynsdale-Nocks decision to stay within the realms of the sharps.
The distribution of parts is similar to the Candide overture arrangement, with the twelve horns divided into three sections, 1-4, 5-8 and 9-12. Within these sections the roles are not as clear cut, with each sub-section (in pairs, 1+2, 3+4, etc.) carrying the tune and accompaniment at different times. The only clear roles are given to horns 11 and 12, as the main bass providers.
So how does it sound? Well, as beautiful as the original, especially if played expertly with the right combination of attack and sound. It is certainly not one of the easiest arrangements, mainly due to the extended range used, but there is nothing really unplayable in it, and none of the parts look scary (unless you are a high player and happen to pick horn 12). As with Deep River, this is a work to show off the full beauty of the horn sound, but at the same time impress with good range control and matching of sounds from all registers. It doesn’t always have to be the fingers that do the work.
Credits
Provision of review score: John Lynsdale-Nock (Corniworld)