Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto 1 - wrong note?

[Brian]

Stephen Hough thinks he has proof of a wrong note that's been played in Tchaikovsky's First Concerto since the very beginning. It's in the flute solo at the start of the slow movement...

But, as interesting as this is, it's nothing to me compared to the 'wrong note' which the flute plays at the start of the 2nd movement. The 'F' has always bothered me but there it was in all scores (except Gerald Abrahams's Eulenberg edition with no footnote or explanation) and on virtually all recordings (Yevgeny Sudbin's is the only exception I know of). I played it a few times in concerts with the 'F' corrected to a 'B flat' but only my instinct was my guide, and when I came to record it I felt I had to abide by the evidence rather than change a note according to my taste and preference. But actually not just taste and preference: here are four musical reasons why I thought the 'F' was wrong:
- The theme appears numerous times and only once with the 'F'. No logical explanation for this.
- The shape of the 4-bar theme is a 5th up and a 5th down – symmetrical and elegant. The 'F' spoils this.
- If the accompaniment were not pizzicato but held string notes we would hear the horrid clash of 'G flat' and 'F' on the last quaver beat. This is bad harmony (especially how it resolves to the octave) and Tchaikovsky was too good a craftsman to have let this pass.
- When, in the coda, there is a change to two 'A flats' there is a change from the pattern – so much more touching if all the other times it has reached up to the 'B flat'.

More here
And a follow-up article here

-

Personally I like the "wrong" note. That way the piano isn't repeating the main tune; it's "correcting" it, or presenting its own version. True dialogue.

[Octave]

Personally I like the "wrong" note. That way the piano isn't repeating the main tune; it's "correcting" it, or presenting its own version. True dialogue.

I like this!  Thanks for the link.  This might change the piece for me.

[Parsifal]

I like this!  Thanks for the link.  This might change the piece for me.

That Hough would insist on introducing one wrong note into a 40 minute score is going to change the piece?  Puzzling.

[Octave]

That Hough would insist on introducing one wrong note into a 40 minute score is going to change the piece?  Puzzling.

Oho, Scarpia's on the hunt!

[Sergeant Rock]

Oho, Scarpia's on the hunt!

You want to borrow my bazooka? For defensive purposes only, you understand

Sarge

[Brian]

That Hough would insist on introducing one wrong note into a 40 minute score is going to change the piece?  Puzzling.

It is about as prominent a note as one can imagine...

[Parsifal]

It is about as prominent a note as one can imagine...

I couldn't say, I never made it that far into the Tchaikovsky piano concerto.   

[Sergeant Rock]

I couldn't say, I never made it that far into the Tchaikovsky piano concerto.   

After that powerful introduction (the theme never to be heard again) it's all downhill anyway.

Sarge

[Brian]

How do you two like the Second Concerto?

[Parsifal]

After that powerful introduction (the theme never to be heard again) it's all downhill anyway.

Sarge

My sentiments exactly.

How do you two like the Second Concerto?

Never heard a note of it.  I think the only Tchaikovsky I've ever heard all the way through consists of Symphonies 4, 5, 6 and the Nutcracker (got free ballet tickets that would have been awkward to refuse).

[Sergeant Rock]

How do you two like the Second Concerto?

Prefer it to the First (although, really, I don't hate the First as much as my previous post might have implied; I think it's more a matter of overexposure to it in my wild and abandoned and uncritical youth).

Sarge

[some guy]

That's the thing about all this ultramodern music; you can't really tell if there's a wrong note or not.

[Superhorn]

  Unfortunately, we'll never know exactly what Tchaikovsky wanted . Whhen people talk about the "composer's intentions", they don't realize that composers change their minds .  So you have to be very creful about asseting what  a long dead composer actually wanted .

[jochanaan]

I've often wondered about that note myself.  It sounds weak compared to the lovely Bb played every other time the theme occurs.

[Parsifal]

I've often wondered about that note myself.  It sounds weak compared to the lovely Bb played every other time the theme occurs.

Heavens forbid we should attribute the Tchaikovsky the subtlety implied by the idea he might vary the theme.

I find Hough's reasoning invalid at every point:

- The theme appears numerous times and only once with the 'F'. No logical explanation for this.

Every recurrence of a theme must be played identically unless the composer can present a "logical" explanation?

- The shape of the 4-bar theme is a 5th up and a 5th down – symmetrical and elegant. The 'F' spoils this.

It is impossible that Tchaikovsky wanted the elegance to be revealed by the piano rather than the flute?

- If the accompaniment were not pizzicato but held string notes we would hear the horrid clash of 'G flat' and 'F' on the last quaver beat. This is bad harmony (especially how it resolves to the octave) and Tchaikovsky was too good a craftsman to have let this pass.

If the accompaniment were not pizzicato?  But it is pizzicato.  Tchaikovsky was know as a pedant schoolmaster who put rigid adherence to rules of harmony above expression?

- When, in the coda, there is a change to two 'A flats' there is a change from the pattern – so much more touching if all the other times it has reached up to the 'B flat'.

More touching according to who?

The silliest point is in one of the follow-up articles.  The only evidence for Hough's claim is a manuscript copy of the work where the B-flat was penciled in, which Hough assumed was done by Tchaikovsky.  A scholar revealed that the manuscript in question was a copy made for von Bulow and was never in Tchaikovsky's possession.  Hough claims that this revelation and that implication that the modification was done by von Bulow rather than Tchaikovsky makes him even more sure that Tchaikovsky wanted the note changed to B-flat.  Huh?

I don't think I will be getting any more recordings by Hough.  The fact that he is evidently a half-wit will spoil the enjoyment. 

[The Six]

Every recurrence of a theme must be played identically unless the composer can present a "logical" explanation?

I would say it is odd to "vary" the theme the first time it's played.

Or does the flute play it properly the first time, and every other time we hear it it's a variation?

[Karl Henning]

I would say it is odd to "vary" the theme the first time it's played.

Give a listen to the final movement of the Eroica sometime 

[The Six]

Beethoven is certainly not above being odd!

[Karl Henning]

Sure! 

[Opus106]

Give a listen to the final movement of the Eroica sometime 

I think I may have asked this question before, when the topic came up elsewhere, but I'm not sure if it was answered, so here's it again: how does one know that one particular transformation of a 'thematic material' is the theme, while the rest are variations? Before posting this, I tried my best to 'follow' a recording with a score [PDF], but with this version I couldn't notice any indication of a thema.

EDIT 0: Of course I'm referring to the works/movements where the theme isn't explicitly stated at the beginning and which instead start with a 'variation' (also Rach's 'Paganini' Rhapsody?).

EDIT: And my apologies to Brian for derailing this topic.