Widor vs. Joby, Part 1: Symphony No. I

This is the first installment in a series on my take on playing the complete works of Charles-Marie Widor. See the first post in the series for an introduction and my philosophies behind this blog series. And as always, refer to John Near’s edition for important corrections in the scores that I might not necessarily mention.

Symphony I is up today. Visit my program notes on the piece. And of course, feel free to order the recording.

-----------------

Widor never hesitated to revise earlier works. He revised the first eight organ Symphonies a number of times over the years, yielding multiple editions. From one perspective, revision was a good thing, as it increased his baseline maturity across more works. On the other hand, it sometimes left a large work with uneven style or lapses in quality, not to mention a new crop of engraving errors at every turn. John R. Near to the rescue, with his exhaustive edition of all the organ Symphonies, available from A-R Editions. Get out your credit card and get the entire set.

All that to say that each Symphony “grew” on me in different ways. Had Widor left them all unaltered over time, I would probably have a predictably greater fondness for the later works, maybe even disdain for the salon-like youthfulness of the earlier ones. But with glimpses of mature genius in the earlier works due to his revisions, there are pockets of sheer bliss in all these pieces. Therefore, as it turns out, the First Symphony is one of my favorites. It is a bit long and dense, so I'm not yet sure if I could keep an audience's attention for the entire work, but I might try one of these days. As I told John Near, “The Fugue alone is utterly miraculous.”

Movement I, Prélude

Beginning: Widor calls for Réc-Ped but not Réc-Great. The Récit has only flutes 8 and 4 in the beginning, but on Widor’s instrument (and all over France) that’s audible enough to make a difference! He wanted only 8-foot on the Great, and that’s that. Here in the States, coupling the Swell 4-foot flute is not is not such a big deal because on many organs, that stop is either inaudible (therefore useless) or stentorian (therefore useless).

The articulation in the very first measures gets some rather interesting treatments. Some performers interpolate staccato on notes where Widor didn’t write them. He marked only the third and fourth notes of each four-note group in the Pedal staccato. That means that the second note into the third note is still legato. Had Widor wanted the last slurred note (the second) shortened, he would have added a staccato marking to it.

Furthermore, the manuals have no staccatos written; therefore they are legato. Had Widor intended anything else, he would have been fastidious about the markings. He made no assumptions when he wrote staccato throughout the entire movement in the Pedal. Therefore, there is no reason for him to assume that the performer would do the same thing in the manuals without specific instruction. Lesson: the French are very particular about their articulations. If you break after a slur when it is not so marked, you’re mixing German and British spices into French soup, and that’s not allowed!

Measure 21: Don’t hold the first beat any longer than one beat, so that the Positif entrance can be heard.

Measure 25: For matters of balance, I remove Great-Ped for this section, restoring it in measure 38. Widor didn’t mind such adjustments; someone like him was certainly cognizant that no two organs are alike. If the balance is good, then Widor would be pleased. I’ll be saying that a thousand times in this series.

Measure 29: The hands return to the Great there, but I don’t restore the Great-Ped coupler just yet. It makes a nicer appearance in 38, where it begins the ‘fugue’ subject again, this time against all three manuals coupled together (for the first time).

Measure 38: I add more Pedal here, just because.

Measure 70: This is the ‘recap.’ I prepare it by taking seriously the marked crescendo in 67 and by holding back in 69. Notice that the hands have not yet returned to the Great there – the Pedal begins the recap, as it began the movement.

Measure 80: Widor suggests full Swell (Récit) there, plus fully closed box. But he has left the decision of exactly when to close the box up to the performer. I close the box gradually throughout measures 78-79. But Widor also does not indicate exactly when to add full Swell. That has to be decided carefully, because it will affect any notes being played at the time. The third beat of 80 seems an obvious place so that the soprano can begin the phrase, but to add it there would render the third beat too much of an ‘event’ in the left hand and Pedal. I choose to add it precisely on the fourth beat, where something new is beginning in the soprano. It would be nice to add it on the downbeat of 80, where the left hand begins a new statement of the main theme, but again, that would render the right hand and Pedal suddenly too ‘important.’ Perhaps another organist might play that left hand statement on another manual with a grander registration. That would be a little fussy but okay with me.

Movement II

Careful getting too sentimental with this movement. The music is sentimental enough and risks being overblown if you sentimentalize the rhythm, as well. Widor was all about balance and cleanliness, not wallowing!

Measure 15: I reduce the Pedal to balance the Positif.

Measure 19: Caution: right hand remains on the Great.

Measures 23-28 are tricky. Too fast, and they sound frantic. Too free, and they sound directionless. Those measures just have to be perfect, I guess! In all seriousness, these measures might have to be your primary determiner of the opening tempo, so that the fast notes are in perfect proportion and sound like they actually belong.

Measures 44-54: Depending on which edition you’re using, you may need some corrections of quite a few notes. See John Near’s edition.

Measure 53: I remove Great-Ped for balance against the Récit. (There is a note being held there in the corrected version.) 

Measure 136: I add Réc-Ped for better balance during the Récit crescendo. I continue to ‘toggle’ Pedal couplers on and off throughout this movement and throughout all the Symphonies; by now, you get the idea. It’s always about balance, and Widor knew that.

Measure 164 into 165: Widor has a vague notation there in the left hand. The lower E-flat is tied. To most eyes, that means ‘break the other notes,’ right? But not so fast: 1) the right hand was given a quarter rest – why not the upper notes of the left hand? Widor appears to want them treated differently (as in not broken?). 2) The higher E-flat in the left hand may tie to 165 – it’s not important enough to break, as if it were a melody of some sort. And if you do break it but not the D-flat under it, then the D-flat suddenly takes on more importance than it deserves. 3) The other two voices in the left hand may move legato into 165. Experiment with all this. Don’t forget: from Widor onward, legato unless otherwise instructed.

Movement III: Intermezzo

My brain thinks ‘soothing’ when it sees ‘intermezzo.’ Not at all so here. Neither in Symphony 6.

Widor left out the Pedal coupler indications at the beginning, but it should probably be Great and Réc to Pedal. He also left out manual coupler indications. See John Near, and see what the music says to you, too. And again, I’ll change Pedal couplers here and there to balance.

Notice that Widor places a tenuto on the first note of each measure. He also did something similar in his revision of the famous Toccata. He is trying not only to give each downbeat some strength, but he’s also trying to help the performer understand that ‘excessive speed kills.’ His metronome marking is far too fast, not only for the acoustics he was used to but also for the pipes to speak. It was common for him and others to extol the rapid repeat rate of Cavaillé-Coll actions, which was indeed nice, but the pipes themselves will still need some time to move the air and speak completely. My tempo is approximately 108 on my recording. Acoustic and organ action will always dictate the proper tempo, and Widor knew that.

Measure 47: I close the Réc there, to hear a more pronounced dialogue with the Positif.

Movement IV: Adagio

Throughout this movement, I use the Pedal to help with wide left hand reaches. It requires lots of pistons to cancel Pedal stops and add the necessary couplers so that it sounds like the left hand, and then to return the Pedal to its own function. But I am a champion of legato at all costs, and so I use the technology available to me. Were I ever to play this piece in France, I would owe my registrants a nice dinner afterward.

Measure 25, beat 4: I remove the Great-Ped for balance. Ditto measure 44.

Measure 64, beat 8: I move the right hand to the Récit there. It makes a smoother transition.

Measure 67: According to the location of his directive within the staves, Widor asks both hands to move to the Positif. But the notes are so thick with ties there that there is no ‘clean’ way to do that. Therefore, I never move the left hand at all, and I move the right hand to the Positif in measure 68, beat 3 (tied to 4). That also creates the fringe benefit of matching more closely Widor’s similar manual terracing beginning in measure 71, this time with Great against Positif.

Movement V: Marche Pontificale

Shameless piece! Don't be shy.

Measure 24: For my recording, I’m afraid I misread this measure as the first measure of the first ending, which meant that for the second ending, I skipped it and went straight to m. 29. But when I discovered my error, I still kind of preferred my way! And so the error remains on the recording. Widor, please forgive me.

Measure 68: I smooth out this manual change by moving the left hand to the Great for the last three sixteenths.

Measures 77-81: use your pistons generously for a smooth crescendo! Ditto 180-190.

Measure 104: I play the alto voice on the Positif to enhance the diminuendo.

Measure 153: Widor does a most curious thing here, using the Pedal to assist the left hand with large leaps. I don’t recall that he ever does that again. I reduce the Pedal and add all the Pedal couplers so that the 'drop-off' for the lower notes is not terribly noticeable. It was nice of Widor to write that measure that way to assist the left hand with those wide leaps, but if he’s just using the Pedal to help with those quick notes, then I feel the registration should match more closely. Furthermore, he doesn't always show such mercy with wide leaps, such as in Symphony IV, movement 3, measure 36, left hand, or Symphony IV, movement 4, measures 242-243, right hand.

Measure 220: The left hand jump into measure 221 is treacherous, and I don't like shortening the final sixteenth triplet to get there. I smooth that out by moving the lowest manual voice of 220 to the Pedal so that the Pedal is now in octaves. That glides smoothly into 221, where the Pedal is already in octaves. Sneaky am I.

Movement VI: Méditation

This movement lays bare a recurring decision between when to break and when to tie/legato. The repeated dotted quarters of the first few bars are easy enough to perform, but in measure 4, where there is now presumably legato motion available between notes, does one play legato when possible and break repeated notes? Or does one retain the fully broken notes that the first three measures established? My ear wants to maintain that broken feel as a gentle "pulse" for the piece, even though the presence of moving notes makes breaking no longer necessary. Nevertheless, for my recording I took the “purist” approach: In measure 7, from the first chord into the second, I took the upper and middle left hand notes legato and broke the lowest note. Moving into the next chord, I tied the Cb as instructed, broke the Gb, and played the Eb to Db legato. There are many, many examples in this movement (and the entire genre) of that ‘division of labor’ within a single chord, where each voice may require separate treatment depending on its role in the moment, and I feel too many performers don't pay enough attention to details like that. I like to think that no amount of obsession with those details is too much.

Movement VII: Finale

Measures 57-61: Widor moves both hands to the Positif, but given the fugue subject in the left hand beginning in measure 58, I prefer to move only the left hand. My right hand will join on the Positif in 62.

Measures 80-81: lots of pistons!

Measure 106: For my recording, I gave in to a nagging desire to end this piece without so many reeds in the Great and Pedal. Widor doesn’t indicate a decrescendo, but on the particular organ I recorded on, it just sounded better to back off for the end, just like Widor did at the end of the Gothique and the Romane. Widor forgive me -- I don't re-write your music so boldly very often!

Widor vs. Joby: Introduction

My arguments with Charles-Marie Widor have been numerous and intense. He demands much of the fingers and feet, but he always demands so much more of the brain, the ears, and the soul. He always wins the arguments, as should any composer. But I also win because I learn so much.

I recorded all ten of Widor’s solo organ Symphonies, plus his later works Suite Latine, Bach’s Memento, and the Trois Nouvelles Pièces. That makes me a Widor expert, right? Well, it certainly makes me more fortunate than I ever thought I’d be. I never thought I’d be learning my way through all those works, many of which had previously just sat in my growing score collection for many years. I never thought I’d experience this transcendent music rendered even more transcendent on the organs I chose to record them on. So NOW I’m an expert, right? Sure.

For this music, I have already written about the recording sessions and the organs I recorded on. In the present series I’ll be offering the many tiny refinements I made for myself to what’s on Widor’s pages, much as I did with Franck a few years ago. I’ll address my approaches to them all, one opus at a time, until they’re done. Meanwhile, here are some general comments and methods:

----------------------------------

In his Bach edition co-edited with Albert Schweitzer, Widor constantly admonished the organist to make their own decisions, indeed to search out their own path to decisions. Widor was careful to remind that his editorial was truly editorial and not absolute. He also allowed similar freedom in his own music, depending on the organ; not every gadget existed on very organ, and not every note could be played the same way on every organ. And let’s not forget that the organ Widor was used to was an anomalous, whopping five-manual monster, whereas his given registrations are for the more conventional three-manual organ.

In much French Symphonic organ music, coupler indications are not included with the registration directives at the top. Rather, you have to look into the score for coupler hints. “G.P.R.” in the manual staves indicates, “Play on the Great, and couple the other two manuals to it.” “P.R.” means, “Play on the Positif with the Récit coupled to it.” “G” means, “play on the Great with nothing coupled to it.” And so forth. For all movements in all the Widor works, I scribbled coupler indications among the stop registrations. That saves a few seconds when registering on the next organ.

Friend, Manual I/II Transfer is your friend. And in my book, “friend” is anything that helps makes manual changes smoother. “Thumbing” among manuals is a thing, even back to Bach and earlier. In the English or American configuration, where the Great manual is in the middle, it is possible to “thumb” to either of the other manuals. But Widor's Great was on the bottom, and so he was able to thumb from the Positif in either direction, but from the Great only up to the Positif. But not so fast – he couldn’t even do THAT, as it turns out, because he had, for lack of more room to explain it here, TWO Great manuals, which means that his Positif was the THIRD manual up, and his Récit was the FOURTH manual up. So virtually all thumbing I do in Widor is just because I can and not at all because Widor necessarily could.

Therefore, whenever I am compelled by a small, inner voice to make a change to venerable music, such as the slight alterations I'll be sharing in this series, I do so by first considering how the composer might have played a certain passage, given the instrument they played regularly. Once I have done that and have determined that I can make use of a slightly different method or technology on another organ, then I make the change and the notation, exclusively in the interest of clarity of voices or of manual change convenience. (I don't re-compose the piece.) I make a very great number of little changes, none of which should be felonious but all of which add a little more polish to things.

A few additional thoughts:

1) Widor was not exhaustively researched until John R. Near came along. Do yourself a favor and get Near’s two books on Widor's life and thoughts on organ playing, plus Near's editions of the Symphonies (A-R Editions), and the Bach’s Memento (Crescendo Music Publications). You won’t be disappointed; you will be overcome in equal parts by Widor’s genius as well as Near’s exhaustive care in reporting.

2) Recordings of the Symphonies abound and are still being made, and I haven’t found a bad one yet. Pick one. Or four.

3) Widor’s music “translates” differently when recorded vs. performed live. Many live performances offer excerpted movements only, whether to allow more time on a program for other composers or because the performer doesn’t like all movements of an opus. I have gone the excerpt route only twice. Now I’m a believer in all or nothing. I like to perform the Bach’s Memento and Symphonies 3, 5, 6, 8, and Romane in recital. I’ll be working to get No. 7 and Gothique planned on future programs. The others (1, 2, 4) are no less wonderful, but they have a harder time “fitting” into my programming.

4) For what it’s worth, I’m entitled to a least favorite, am I not? Number 4.

5) My favorite? It’s a tie between Romane and Number 8.