Transcription of Bach's BWV 1043 "Largo"by anonymouson April 10th, 2009
I was reluctant to purchase this score, transcribing something like Bwv 1043 "Largo", which was clearly meant to be preformed by strings, can be disapointing. I gess it works because the piano is clearly a supporting, and underlining accentuation of the violin and cello parts. I have played this with my vioin partner only (she loves it too), I am looking forward to finding a cellist soon. It is such a soulfull and gorgeous work by Bach. The transription is very satisfying for the pianist.
Wonderful piece, sounds just like you would expect.by anonymouson January 20th, 2009
While it was written well and is a great arrangement for the choice of instruments, the cello part is heavily complicated by the part it needs to play. As a cello player for a number of years, the difficulty is quite a bit harder than the violin part because while the cello lacks an E string, the violin II part it plays seemingly doesn't take that into account.
Overall this peace is a great choice if you have a strong violin and cello player, and even better if the cello player is comparatively more experienced.
Nice instrumentationby June Diggleon April 29th, 2008
We used the Largo for church music and it worked out great. Our instrumentation was flute, cello and organ. 99% of the violin part is high enough for the flute, so you don't have to worry about taking things up an octave.
The piano part is quite easy, so your organist doesn't need to be great technically. The violin part is easy. The cello piece is hardest for the cellist because it moves around quite a bit.
The transcription was well orchestrated. Plus, the Largo is just a beautiful piece. It was well worth the money.
The cellest I played with was a professional and she did spend some time practicing to get comfortable with all the movement. I have a degree in music and play my flute as a side gig professionally.