G. Schirmer editions - How bad are they?

[momopi]

I have some G. Schirmer books like First Lessons in Bach, Tschaikowsky's Album for the Young and Gurlitt's Albumleaf for the Young. I'm pretty content with them, besides I don't really expect them to be copies of the original because it says in the first few pages that they are editorial.

But are the editorial versions really that bad? Are there too many errors in Schirmer's editions?

[pianisten1989]

Well, I don't know in your pieces, but Schirmers uses to be rather bad. They sometimes make the music a bit easier to play when they remove some technical difficulties.

[quantum]

For the most part yes they are that bad.  To be fair, a lot of their editions were edited decades ago when there was a different school of thought towards scores.  In the interest of historical practices in music publishing, yes they are interesting to look at.  Even as an alternate opinion for a well educated musician.  IMO it is students who are at a loss, especially those introduced to such music for the first time, as they may interpret everything as the composer's word. 

What is unfortunate is that they are priced such that many students look only at the tag and buy the cheapest thing.  In many cases this is Schirmer.  This in the end does create a market for these outdated editions.  It may be good to note that many of them may be under public domain, and may be freely copied. 

I bought a copy of the Beethoven Sonatas for something like $4.  The date on it is 1894.  I show it to my students as an example of what NOT to get as one's first copy of the 32.  The editorial notes give one a chuckle. 


There are exceptions.  The Kirkpatrick selection of 60 Scarlatti sonatas is rather good and tends toward a more urtext style of editing.  If you read his book on Scarlatti he explains this in detail. 

If you want an edited version of a score, there are much better choices in tune with the times.  For example, I like the Alfred Edition of the Bach 2 & 3 part Inventions.  Editorial notes can be clearly distinguished from what the composer wrote.  The language used is not too academic for youngsters who would benefit from the Explication of ornaments, and historical notes. 

[rachfan]

I would agree that for the most part Schirmer editions are often lacking and are sometimes over-edited.  There are some exceptions though.  I do very much like the Sauer (in his time a wonderful artist) edition of the Brahms Short Pieces.  The Schirmer editions of Liszt's works are similarly quite acceptable.  The pianist and editor Rafael Joseffy worked with Liszt, and his Schirmer edition of Liszt's "Annees de Pelerinage--Italie", for example, is excellent.  In fact, I would consider any volumes edited by Joseffy, as he brought an intelligent and sensible approach to the task of editing.  His suggested fingerings in particular are often ingenious and are still admired and widely used today. 

Personally, I prefer urtext editions, but I'll consider non-urtext editions if the editor or editorial board is highly respected.  An example of that would be the Paderewski edition of the complete works of Chopin.  Paderewski brought together an editorial board comprised of some of the best scholars of his day.  Those volumes, while not true urtext as we think of the term today, are still the next best thing.  Schirmer's Chopin offerings cannot compete with the likes of Paderewski, Henle, or Peters.   

[quantum]

Personally, I prefer urtext editions, but I'll consider non-urtext editions if the editor or editorial board is highly respected.  An example of that would be the Paderewski edition of the complete works of Chopin.  Paderewski brought together an editorial board comprised of some of the best scholars of his day.  Those volumes, while not true urtext as we think of the term today, are still the next best thing.  Schirmer's Chopin offerings cannot compete with the likes of Paderewski, Henle, or Peters.   

I would like to echo your thoughts on the Paderewski edition and it can serve as an example of what an excellent edited edition may comprise.  My other favored Chopin edition would be the one by Jan Ekier. 

[momopi]

My level is too elementary too be able to distinguish bad editions from good editions. As for urtext, I've read somewhere that they do not have fingerings. At my level, I am still having difficulty playing without fingerings and I find it embarrassing to ask the teacher to put the fingerings all the time.

Can you suggest editions/publishers of music suitable for early intermediate piano student like me? Slightly simplified versions/editions are very much welcome.

Thanks. 

PS : I also found this link https://www.4shared.com/dir/2887881/7bbb2199/Piano_exercises_and_studies__books_.html
Can you guys tell which kind of editions are they?

[richard black]

As for urtext, I've read somewhere that they do not have fingerings

On the contrary, most of them do have fingerings, though perhaps not as many as some editions.

[iumonito]

Schirmer editions are great, if you know what you have in your hands.

Without stirring the urtext myth, old Schirmer editions are notable for having editorial enhancements, which (in great advantage when compared with the more hypocritical recent editions by the likes of Peters and Henle) clearly indicate are not original to the text.  I for one adore having notes of Hans von Bulow available to me when studying a Beethoven sonata, or Kullak when going through a concerto.  The one studied with Liszt, the other with Czerny, both of whom were much closer to Beethoven than I am in about every respect.

More recent Schirmer editions are either excellent highly-edited books (like Tony Newman's edition of the Well-tempered Clavier) or very good "urtext" editions (like their Scriabin).  Some excellent XX and XXI century music is only available from Schirmer, like the Corigliano concerto and the two fantasias.

That being said, I agree an old Schirmer book should not be your primary or your first edition for things like the Beethoven sonatas, Bach, Mozart, etc.  But then, why on earth would you buy such thing with so much of it being available for free online at places like IMPLS?

If you like bound books, consider always Dover, which generally has good reprints (not always, but mostly).  And you have to get over this fetish of having fingerings pre-provided in your score.  Fingering is an act of decision-making regarding technique.  It will serve you well to do your own, and if you can't then you do need your teacher to give you the principles that will enable you to do so, no matter how young or inexperienced you are.

Best wishes,
IU

[momopi]

What is IMPLS?

[a-sharp]

quantum - most teachers I know around here consider Paderewski to be the definitive for Chopin - perhaps the Ekier too...  But, *personally* ... I hate my Paderewski Ch. etude book only for one annoying reason - the binding $ucks! After months often weekly use (2-3 etudes), the darned thing still won't stay open. Does this bother anyone else but me, I wonder. Grrr. By contrast, the Dover Beethoven Sonata books I've had for years and they are still holding together, and most of the time stay open with a bit of 'encouragement.'

I've tried to "break' the spine of my Paderewski book a half dozen times - i think I've even stood on it - it still won't stay open, LOL

[faulty_damper]

The coordinators of the Chopin International Piano Competition don't consider the Paderewski edition to be the definitive edition.  It contains some obvious errors: some minor, some very significant.  They recommend the National Edition of the Works of Frederyk Chopin edited by Ekier.

You can find them here:
https://chopin-nationaledition.com/cennik.php

[a-sharp]

Didn't know that - thanks for the info. ~A.

[quantum]

quantum - most teachers I know around here consider Paderewski to be the definitive for Chopin - perhaps the Ekier too...  But, *personally* ... I hate my Paderewski Ch. etude book only for one annoying reason - the binding $ucks! After months often weekly use (2-3 etudes), the darned thing still won't stay open. Does this bother anyone else but me, I wonder. Grrr. By contrast, the Dover Beethoven Sonata books I've had for years and they are still holding together, and most of the time stay open with a bit of 'encouragement.'

I've tried to "break' the spine of my Paderewski book a half dozen times - i think I've even stood on it - it still won't stay open, LOL

I personally don't like broken spines, and try to keep my books in as new condition as possible.  I'm aware of the problems the Paderewsi staying open, but a couple of large clips usually solve the problem.  It also encourages me to memorize as fast as possible when a book doesn't stay open.   I'd still rather use it than some other editions as preference to it's content.

If you really dislike the binding of a book, you could take it to a book binder to have it rebound.  They could cut the spine off, and put it in cone binding and even hard cover if you wanted.   

[a-sharp]

hey - thanks - it was really just my personal way of whining - not a huge complaint, although, given then no one here really knows me & I don't expect that to communicate in text form, I understand why it was taken the exaggerated way the way it was.

There's no way I'd go through the trouble of rebinding my book.

It still think it's a bit of PITA, though.

[faulty_damper]

You can also have books library bound, i.e. hardcover, clothbound (or leather bound) with gold (or silver) foiling.  It'll make even the worst edition beautiful.  It can be done by yourself if you purchase the materials.  This wouldn't work well if the original binding is perfect bound as the binding may still fall out but would work very well for sewn bindings.

[rc]

You can also have books library bound, i.e. hardcover, clothbound (or leather bound) with gold (or silver) foiling.  It'll make even the worst edition beautiful.  It can be done by yourself if you purchase the materials.  This wouldn't work well if the original binding is perfect bound as the binding may still fall out but would work very well for sewn bindings.

What a good idea!  I can be pretty rough on my books, and custom binding would be a fun little side-project/hobby to dabble in.

[cmg]

Schirmer editions are great, if you know what you have in your hands.

 And you have to get over this fetish of having fingerings pre-provided in your score.  Fingering is an act of decision-making regarding technique.  It will serve you well to do your own, and if you can't then you do need your teacher to give you the principles that will enable you to do so, no matter how young or inexperienced you are.

Best wishes,
IU

I don't agree with this viewpoint.  Fingering is a tedious pain in the ass, and I really appreciate good editorial suggestions.  Schnabel, for one, has some interesting ideas for Beethoven and it saves me lots of time in learning a score.  I really appreciate fingering suggestions.  They save time and energy.  You can reject them if they don't fit your hand.  Otherwise, they are a helpful first entry into any score.

Furthermore, I sightread a lot of two piano and four-hand stuff with friends (Beethoven, Mozart symphonies, etc.) and some Dover editions have fingering that really makes the sight-reading easier.  We all appreciate editorial suggestions, particularly "on the fly."     

[iumonito]

Furthermore, I sightread a lot of two piano and four-hand stuff with friends (Beethoven, Mozart symphonies, etc.) and some Dover editions have fingering that really makes the sight-reading easier.  We all appreciate editorial suggestions, particularly "on the fly."     

You read numbers fast! 

You are entitled to your view point, of course.  My view is that if you don't understand the principles behind the fingering, you waste way more time.  Once you understand the principle, you don't have to write your fingerings down, except for exceptional, creative fingerings that may need a reminder.  Your fingering choices become second nature.

[iumonito]

What is IMPLS?

It is the dislexic's version fo this site:

https://imslp.org/wiki/Main_Page

[general disarray]

You read numbers fast! 

You are entitled to your view point, of course.  My view is that if you don't understand the principles behind the fingering, you waste way more time.  Once you understand the principle, you don't have to write your fingerings down, except for exceptional, creative fingerings that may need a reminder.  Your fingering choices become second nature.

No, we understand your point.  But when you are sight-reading stuff and the editor throws a  finger number your way to indicate that a scale passage won't run in the normal fashion, you are grateful.  It's exactly this kind of fingering that alerts you to the need to violate the "principle," that you are happy for the warning.   

[faulty_damper]

No, we understand your point.  But when you are sight-reading stuff and the editor throws a  finger number your way to indicate that a scale passage won't run in the normal fashion, you are grateful.  It's exactly this kind of fingering that alerts you to the need to violate the "principle," that you are happy for the warning.   

I agree with your statement but only up to a certain point.  Any given fingering is to help the reader of a certain technical ability, i.e. the reader who doesn't have the ability not to need them.  Those that don't need them, even in the most awkward of passages, would find any given fingering obtrusive because the score is giving more information that it needs to.  It's like reading a book and the editor gives a suggestion of how to articulate the tongue to pronounce a certain word.  If the reader is inexperienced with the word, it may be helpful.  But if the reader already knows the word, that would be annoying and perhaps even insulting to his intelligence.

This leads to the an aspect of editorial choice: do you publish an edition for students who lack functional knowledge (i.e. providing fingerings) or do you publish an edition for those who are functionally fluent (i.e. don't provide fingerings)?

Schirmer clearly tailors to the student learner.  As such, most of their published scores generously include editorial fingerings.  From this aspect, would it be correct to say that Schirmer is "bad" because it tailors to the needs of the student?

Barenreiter takes the functional path of a score that regards neither the student nor the fluent reader; it publishes works without regard to it's practical realizations.  In more colloquial terms it's "scholarly".

Henle takes the middle-of-the-road approach.  It provides fingers from slightly to very complicated passages thus facilitating the learning of the work.  This approach tailors to the intermediate student learner who doesn't need generous fingerings.

These three different approaches to editing tailor to certain audiences.  Such editions should be given careful thought before using them because it can be of aid or hindrance regardless of the users' abilities.  As such, it would be unscrupulously biased to say that Schirmer is "bad" or Henle is "good" - they each tailor to a specific audience.

[momopi]

Ok. Thank you very much for all your replies.

So, what I really want to know is - what do you think of G. Schirmer's edition of First Lessons in Bach, Tschaikowsky's Album for the Young and Gurlitt's Albumleaf for the Young?

Because they are the ones that I have.

PS: I also have Heller's op 45 and op 16 and one by Concone, but I'm not using them yet.