March 27, 200719 yr Hi, I have a question, for two violins and cello, would it be alright to have all three instruments play the canon of Pachelbel's canon, or should the two violins play the melody and the cello the basso continuo part? Are either of those arrangements acceptable?
March 27, 200719 yr I don't think the piece itself is acceptable but I don't see why that wouldn't work for it
March 27, 200719 yr Author I don't think the piece itself is acceptable but I don't see why that wouldn't work for it What? You don't like it?
March 27, 200719 yr Author I hate it Oh. That's too bad. It's an absolutely beautiful piece. But that's for another thread.
March 27, 200719 yr I'm not sure, not having the score in front of me, but isn't the Pach. Canon a 3-part canon? I think it would lose a BIT of its contrapuntal charm from only being played by 2 violins if your cello is playing the bassline. It IS a bit overdone.. but it's still a lovely piece.
March 27, 200719 yr Author I'm not sure, not having the score in front of me, but isn't the Pach. Canon a 3-part canon? I think it would lose a BIT of its contrapuntal charm from only being played by 2 violins if your cello is playing the bassline.It IS a bit overdone.. but it's still a lovely piece. Does it need the bass part? Yes, I agree, it is a little over played, but oh well. It'd be really cool if people started playing the Gigue, that, if I remember correctly goes after the canon.
March 27, 200719 yr Funny... Yeah, 'tis. I have seen that before and I subscribed to all of his videos. I do not like the piece either. It is ok I suppose, but it just loops around and around in a circle. It is essentially a pop song WAY back in the day. It is like a wind up toy that is on the verge of exploding all of its gears all over the place.
March 27, 200719 yr Does it need the bass part? No way would I play this without the bass/cello part, though you might get away with omitting the keyboard continuo instrument. I would never perform it without all three parts...as QC said, it would lose a third of its contrapuntal charm and texture. I'm inclined to say that anyone who hates Pachelbel's Canon in D hasn't heard it played as was originally intended. I hated it too until I heard an early music ensemble play it at a lively clip with tons of character and personality. It shouldn't be a slow dirge with too much vibrato, but sadly that's how it's come down to most of us via modern musicians who didn't know any better.
April 23, 200718 yr Yeah... Hogwood's version is my favorite version of Pachelbel's... For the fact that it's a ground bass variation form in a canon, I think Pachelbel did pretty well... I'd like to see anyone else write a 2 measure long ground bass, and then write a three-part canon above it and keep it interesting... All I know is that I can't do that. And please, don't have the cello play the canon part... that's not the cello part... maybe you violinists can double-stop the third part amongst yourselves.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.