Pachelbel's Canon in D

[Guest]

Hello forum, </P>


Can anybody please recommend a good and readily availablearrangement of Pachelbel's Canon in D for organ. </P>


As lovely as the piece is in it's original form, it by no means lies easily under the fingers for keyboard. (My own attempt at arraging it for organ has just left me frustrated![8o|] ) But then couples do insist on requesting this piece for weddings, so I would be most interested if anyone has any versions which struck them as succesful i.e. playable, but not simplified to rediculous lengths so as to make it sound lacking in substance.</P>


Any ideas gratefully recieved!</P>


Cheers in advance.</P>


J</P>

[soubasse32]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



Sorry I can't recommend a good version, only a perspective...</P>


My solution has always been to advise couples to have something else. It's always worked for me [:D] - I've only had to play it once or twice, out of many hundreds of weddings.</P>


I've never cared for it, and don't think it works well on the organ. If you explain that there are organ pieces that sound much better (because theyare idiomatic), folks are usually convinced.</P>

[Havoc]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D

My solution has always been to advise couples to have something else.

</P>

LOL! It isn't that Pachelbel wrote nothing for the organ or that no other composer wrote something usable.</P>

[soubasse32]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D

[quote user="Havoc"]

My solution has always been to advise couples to have something else.

LOL! It isn't that Pachelbel wrote nothing for the organ or that no other composer wrote something usable.[/quote]Exactly.</P>


I think one of my objections is that the accompanying chords make a very long sustained line. To my ear, this seems to be the dreaded 'droning of the organ' thatnon-organists like to complain about. I think the bride &amp; groom hear the ideal version in their imagination, played by a string quartet; the reality is that the congregation may be thinking "gee that organist is awful - how dreary"! [:S]</P>


My typical recommendation is formusic that is a bit more rhythmic, something that suits a processional: dignified,ceremonialand festive.</P>


Anotherpiece in chaconne form that works well (though is a bit tricky) is the Chaconne from 'King Arthur' by Purcell. It has been transcribed for organ by Bryan Hesford.</P>


Ideally though, I would opt for music that was written for organ.</P>

[Clarion]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



[quote user="soubasse32"]I think the bride &amp; groom hear the ideal version in their imagination, played by a string quartet; [/quote]</P>


So . . . what do you figure would be an appropriate substitute for a wedding? Come Sweet Death!!? [6] </P>


Ironically, my kids opted forthe Canon for their wedding. Theywent with the Canon with the ideal version firmly planted in their imagination, played by a string quartet.Through friends at the church, participants in theUniversity of Toronto music faculty;theyarranged for a string ensemble fromU of T music department to do the Pacelbel stuff, along with the pre-service musak sound. It worked out in a most satisfactory manner.</P>


I happen to have a somewhatancientten page transcription of the Canon in D arranged and edited for organ by S. DrummondWolf.Whileappropriatelysimple in construct, anddoes fine on it's own; italso provides a reasonable foundation to build upon and do otherstuff! [;)] </P>

[rodenstock01]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



Here's a link. http://www.sheetmusicplus.com/store/..._-recs-_-link2</P>


As for me, I just use a simple piano transciption and dummy it up with sustained chords and pedal along with the chord progression. D-A-Bm-F#-G and back. Easiest thing you can do and does the trick. There are some pieces like this that you just can't get away without doing. Another one is the Schubert Ave Maria which is completely tired out in my wedding and funeral book. As we know, there are more appropriate and fascinating pieces out there but certain things kind of come with the job. Hope this helps.</P>

[soubasse32]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



[quote user="Clarion"][quote user="soubasse32"]I think the bride &amp; groom hear the ideal version in their imagination, played by a string quartet; [/quote]So . . . what do you figure would be an appropriate substitute for a wedding? Come Sweet Death!!? [6] Haaar! [/quote]Come Sweet Death sounds more like it would be much more to your liking for a wedding, especially since you've said:[quote user="Clarion"]Dr. Phibesisa very much an ingrained featureof our family culture and humour.[/quote][:D]</P>

[Guest]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



I do agree soubasse32, it really doesn't work well on organ at all. </P>


Thank you everyone for all your suggestions. Unfortunately on this occasion I will have to find some kind of solution as the couple particularly requested it, though I might delete it from my current list of suggestions.I might perhapsimprovise on what is quite awell knownchord progression, much like a chaconne, throwing in some of the more recognisable strains of melody, though it wouldn't be anything remotely like acanon.</P>


Cheers guys.</P>

[afuller5]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



Jasper,</p>

I have an easy version from a Hal Leonard Wedding book. The book is available here at Music Dispatch.</p>

Send me a private message and I will see about getting you a copy.</p>

Allen
</p>

[jck56]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



Jasper,</P>
<P mce_keep="true"></P>


Could I recommend an alternative: Handel's; <U>"Larghetto from Xerxes"</U> ? It has that slow mellow texture. There are transcriptions both for piano and for organ. </P>
<P mce_keep="true"></P>


Amateur Jerry</P>

[Cymbell]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



I like the S. Drummond Wolf edition. Very nicely laid out and easily playable.</p>

Can cut between sections if need be to shorten or lengthen out the music</p>

</p>

[Guest]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



I have the edition "Canon in D", Johann Pachelbel arranged by S. Drummond Wolff. I have played this quite a few times and find that it sounds pretty good and matches the original effect well. This edition is published in 1977 by Concordia Publishing House, St. Louis, Missouri.</p>

Address:</p>

Concordia Publishing House </p>

3558 South Jefferson Avenue</p>

St. Louis, Missouri 63118</p>

I like this arrangement quite well. It is actually a transcription of a chamber music piece, however it sounds great on the organ. The arrangement does not give suggested registrations but I find that generally it sounds best using flutes and strings. I like to bring out solo lines using the diapason or sometimes the tibia with a 2 2/3 and 1 3/5 to simulate a clarinet. Good luck in finding a new copy!!</p>

Allan
</p>

[Guest]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



The S. Drummond Wolf edition from Concordia is one of the standard arrangements.</p>

You also might find the arrangement in "Wedding Music for Manuals" by Malcom Archer, from Oxford University Press, to be useful. It is more accessible than the Wolf arrangement, and still quite nice. The "Wedding Music for Manuals" also has arrangements of most of the other pieces that seasoned organists are loathe to admit they know how to play.
</p>

[PipeOrganKid]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D

I love the "Canon". I learned it on the piano Spring 08 to play for a wedding. Now I took my piano music to my organ lesson and am learning it on the organ. Let me tell you, for small hands it is a lot easier on the organ because your feet can take some notes off the bass. My teacher got it from Theodore Presser Company. You can get it for organ there, too, but it will probably be wimpier than the piano solo. I just play the right hand the same as I would on piano (connecting on some parts more, of course) and play the bottom half notes (D A B F# G D G A) with my footsies and and the bass eight notes with my left hand.

[Guest]

Re: Pachelbel's Canon in D



This series of posts got me interested in the Canon again. I have found the music and started practicing the organ arrangement referred to in previous posts. It sounds great on my organ!</p>

</p>