All fingers and thumbs

Yehuda Schryer’s essay on his transcription of I. Albeniz’ Torre Bermeja

Some time ago, while introducing with the use of the left hand thumb over the
fingerboard (Classical guitar, The LH thumb revolution, July 2003), I included a few
musical examples showing its benefits.
I’d like now to go one step further: thanks to the use of this innovation (together with
a few other special techniques), guitar transcriptions can now be more faithful to the
original, and changes can be minimized. This will be shown in a new guitar version of
Albeniz’ Torre Bermeja, where the LH thumb, for the first time, is being treated like
equal member of the finger’s family, serving a double function: while in some cases it
allows an impossible combination to be performed, in some others it enhances
fluidity, as it can reduce the number of position shifts that would have been needed in
a traditional “non-LH thumb fingering”.
While analyzing in detail the transcription’s different features, it will become apparent
that the aim of this essay is to tempt the reader into a sensible extrapolation.

The nature of the transcription

As mentioned before, the general principle I have adopted was to stick to the original
whenever possible. As a result, the overall sonority of the piece becomes richer and
fuller, while its restored harmonies bring its musical depth back to life. Of course, this
will not make one's life easier, even beyond the LH thumb technique.
Inversely, one’s approach could be to follow the instrument’s “nature”, assuming that
the general musical idea may not suffer all that much from some needed (?)
compromises. Some parallel thirds are left out, in order to allow playing fluidity;
some harmonies are simplified, or even altered, and whole passages are transposed.
Luckily, in most cases, the guitar gets gracefully away with it, but now there is a
chance to minimize those instances: take the dim. 7th chords at bars 102-104. Quite
breathtaking, if I may say. Sorry, Isaac, this can’t be done on the guitar, a dim. triad
is as far as it will go. Fancy a bouquet of harmonics instead? Or a generous slide on
the 3rd string?
Forgive my cynicism, I am not suggesting that Tarrega, Llobet and other famous
transcribers of the past two centuries should be blamed for what may look now as
mannerism: they were part of a different musical world and had different .
But are we to accept their heritage as it is or go one step further? Of course there is no
simple answer to this question, and besides it has a lot to do with personal taste. From
my part, instead of adapting the music to the guitar, I have preferred to adapt the
guitar to it - whenever humanly possible, of course. In my experience, this generates
better results, while it encourages technical innovation. Eventually, it is often
surprising how a borrowed instrumental texture, one that seemed unsuitable at first,
turns to be most effective at the end of the day. But above all, the main reason why I
believe alterations should be minimized is that the original always proves to be
musically superior.
In fact, as we all know, some of the most inspired contributions to the instrument’s
repertoire were and are been made by non-guitarist composers: in many cases their
ignorance of the instrument is a blessing rather than a limitation, since there is no
danger they will fall in the trap of idiomatic clichés, as they “think outside the box”
by definition.

A critical analysis of the transcription

1) Texture modifications
1) The first common deviation from the original, consists in the note disposition of the
arpeggio, at the beginning of the piece: in most transcriptions the lower note of the
arpeggio is transferred to the downbeat, in order to allow “p” to be the first to go,
[p(3) i(2) m/a(1)] as in a typical guitar arpeggio.
One may go happily along with this, feeling it’s easier and perhaps more natural on
the guitar. But then, the original texture's finesse [i(2) m/a(1) p(3)] will be
compromised. The difference is subtle, yet significant.

Ex.1

Luckily, there is no problem playing the whole opening section according to original,
even within the bounds of standard technique. And if this RH formula initially feels
“fingerly unfriendly”, it’s only because it’s rather uncommon in the instrument’s
literature. In other words it’s not an incurable condition.

Smoothening up
2) In bars 6-7 the LH thumb is included for the first time. Here, as in the following
examples, it will be referred as "T".

Ex. 2

In this occasion the Left hand thumb is not used to rescue a lost situation, since a
traditional fingering could have been quite straightforward. Still this new fingering
eliminates a position shift that would have otherwise been necessary (V to VII),
enhancing the passage's fluidity..

3) The same principle applies - in a larger scale - on bars 55-63, where multiple
position shifts are avoided by the frequent use of the LH Thumb. Note the "piano like
position shift.

Ex. 3

"Piano like" All in one position, saving two

position shift position shifts each time

4) A similar thing can be seen in bars 90-95. Bars 90- can now be played in one
position, allowing 92 the harmony to be sustained to its full value:

1
2 4
4
3 T 2 3 3
1 T 1

Ex. 4 2
3 4 2
4 0

4
5) Follows a nasty jump to a high Gm chord (pos. XV bars 93-95), which now can be
avoided: a combination of the LH thumb half bar (pos. X) with the third LH finger
half bar (pos. XV) does the trick: chord connection becomes quite easy, as the
position shift is avoided.
Half bar with
LH thumb
Half bar with
4 ------------TCX 3rd finger
3 XV
1 TT 3

Ex. 5 5
2
3 3
2
Half bar with
3rd finger

Note that the high D can be kept down trough bars 94-95), as in the original.

6) The 3rd finger and 4th finger half bars, like the thumb, can alternate with the other
fingers as well, saving several position shifts: see bars 96-98:

TCXIII
3 3 TCX 3 CVIII CVIII 4 4
1 1 3 CI CI
2 2 2
Ex. 6 3
2

The LH th. ½ The 3rd finger ½ bar

bar alternates with the The 4th finger ½
alternates with the 1st finger ½ bar bar
fingers 1, 2 & 3 alternates with
the 1st finger ½ bar

7) Similarly, in bars 110-111 the combination of the LH thumb with the 3rd finger half
bar enables the inner voice (b flat) to be sustained to its full length and to reproduce
the running parallel thirds; moreover, the longer tone sustain and sheer power of the E
bass (which is now played on the 4th string, instead the 3rd) provides a better
foundation to the harmony, while it supplies a more convincing drive towards the
explosive climax of the piece (111).

T 4 3
. T3 T
3 . 3
2 1 1
Ex. 7 3
4

Bars 82 the inner voice B flat can be sustained through the bar, and in the next (83) it
can be struck again twice, under the running thirds. After the initial chord one you’ll
find a half bar with the 4th finger (F and A on 3rd and 2nd strings) then the LH hand
thumb, and finally a finger replacement (on the same note that was previously stopped
with another finger). A bit intricate, but possible. As in the previous example, the
richness of the restored original harmony "transforms" the passage most significantly.

Take a look at bar 25: the E should be sustained trough the next eight note, as G A
and C# join it. In most guitar transcriptions the G replaces the E on the 4th string. The
fingering I suggest requires a big hand, I know. For smaller hands a LH thumb variant
can come handy.
Bars30-33 are perhaps the most difficult to master, as the use of the LH thumb is
more difficult on lower positions. And if that weren't enough, a complex finger
substitution goes on while the bass is being held. But taking the trouble is worthwhile,
for the original harmony and texture can be reproduced faithfully now. Note that the
bass F doesn't need to be transposed now, and that it can be sustained through bars 30-
31, as in the original. Subsequently the D flat that follows is restored as an inner voice
of the chord whereas before it stole the role of the bass.
Bar 32: A four note F chord can now be reproduced. In most guitar versions the inner
voices (C nat. an A) are omitted, leaving the previous B flat and D flat (bar 32)
unresolved.
Bar 34: note the combination of the full bar on I pos. (with the 1st finger, for a change!
) with the half bar with the 3rd finger on the pos. III. The B flat on the bass can be
held through the next bar (Bar 35) while the original harmonies below the melody line
can be faithfully reproduced.
Bar 46: The arpeggio formula was left unaltered: note the rapid shift of the LH thumb
from X pos. to VII pos.: the D on the 4th string is followed in unison on the 3rd string.
Very effective and not as difficult as it may seem.
Bar 47. The Low E had to be transposed an octave higher. Sorry! Actually, the Low E
and the high C could have been played together, but then one can’t play the following
arpeggio. Or better said ” I can’t” (so far…).
Bar 48. Much like bar 30, only easier, without the finger substitution.
49-50: Llobet and some others transcribe this passage an octave lower. I prefer to
leave it is as it is. Note the accompanying basses in bar 49.
Bar 50. The original harmony was reproduced, yet the inner voices of the chord had to
be rearranged.
Bar 51: the B flat under the C# is often omitted. Here it has been left in.
The passage at bars 64-60 is often modified, for the sake of instrumental
convenience/effect. One could say that as long as the harmony is the same, the
disposition of the notes in the arpeggio doesn’t matter all that much. Sorry, I have to
disagree: It’s the difference between spending and wasting, I am not friendly with
coffee machines that swallow the change, sorry. And besides, there are several
traditional fingerings that can be used to perform this passage according to the
original, with ease and effect. Please have a look at my solution, I hope you’ll like it.
Note the fingering at bar 54: No deviations from the original, and no position change
through the bar, thanks to an inverted hinge bar at pos V. The unison (C) will be
performed on two adjacent strings: (4) and (3). Truthful and effective.
Bar 78-81 Note the fingerings that allow the whole harmonic passage to be played in
thirds, while keeping the original bass and tenor voices unaltered (low D and A).
In order to achieve this, sometimes a natural harmonic has been combined with an
artificial one, over a natural sound bass. In one instance, while producing an Harm.
Art. “i” is held diagonally towards the strings, so as to stop two notes in two adjacent
positions at the same time; “a” strikes them both in an upward rasgueado fashion.
Bar 85 Another dirty little trick. E on 5th string is produced by a slur while the G
above it is played as an open string. This enables a non-squeak transaction to the next
chord, while keeping the tone color of the thirds on the wired strings. Like a couple of
horns, if you like.
Bars 107-108: Here an octave shift seems to be unavoidable… but there is really no
need, and besides it’s musically unadvisable, for by now we are on the verge of the
final climax. Here the string should be stopped with the tip of the left hand thumb and
not with its side, as it usually does.
Bar 146-148: some arrangements omit the parallel thirds some don’t. I like to leave
them on. Special attention should be given to the Right hand fingering, so that the fast
thirds will not sound strained.
Note the last three notes on bar 148, where a descending slur (D)and the RH (F and B
flat) work in synchrony producing a three notes chord..
Bar 157: the top note of this chord is often transcribed as a harmonic F#, while in fact
should be a high A. Too bad, since the arpeggio progression on the D chord does not
reach its final target. In the present version the high A is reproduced as a natural
sound, while the lower notes of the chord are Harmonics F# and D (XIX).