What the world needs now is classical music! We are open for business and maintaining strict safeguards in our offices. Our colleagues' safety is our priority. Make use of our PDF downloads now and keep making wonderful music.
Flute Concerto in D minor (Badley e1) [Study Edition]
Year of Publication:
fl pr; pfte
Piano Reduction: Stapled / Parts: Unbound
Piano Reduction + Solo Part(s) (Hardcopy): $36.00 Piano Reduction + Solo Part(s) + CD (Hardcopy): $47.00 Piano Reduction + Solo Part(s) (PDF): $27.00
The present work was advertised in Supplement XIV (1781) of the Breitkopf Catalogue but was written, in all likelihood, during the mid-1770s. Although only a single copy of the work survives, a version in d minor for oboe is preserved in two other sources; one of these copies once belonged to the oboist Joseph Triebensee who was employed by the Schwarzenberg family. Like many of the composer's other flute concertos, the sole-surviving copy is in the possession of the Frst Thurn und Taxis Hofbibliotek in Regensburg. The wrapper reads: " Concerto a 5 Stroment [sic] in E / a / Flauto traverso Principale / Violino Primo / Violino Secondo / Viola [et 2 Corni in G ] / e / Basso /del Sigre Leopoldo Hoffmann ". The horn parts listed on the wrapper (in a new hand) did not belong to the original set of parts; moreover, they are not mentioned in the Breitkopf Catalogue entry nor do they appear in either of the two extant versions for oboe. In spite of their dubious claim to authenticity the parts have been included in the present edition although set in smaller type.
In the absence of both the autograph score and an authentic set of parts, this edition presents as faithfully as possible the intentions of the composer as transmitted in the Regensburg source. As is usual in Hofmann's concertos, there are no dynamic markings in the solo sections; these are left to the discretion and good taste of the performer. The style and notation of articulation and dynamic markings have been standardised throughout, and, where missing from the source, markings have been reconstructed from parallel passages; these are indicated by the use of dotted slurs or brackets. Like most eighteenth-century sources, the present manuscript is inconsistent in its notation of appoggiature ; these too have been standardised to minimise confusion. Obvious wrong notes have been corrected without comment; editorial emendations with no authority from the source are placed within brackets. Allan Badley