Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827)

[Karl Henning]

There is ample documentation that composers corrected tempo prescriptions during rehearsals. From what I have read, almost always towards the slower side. I think even Rosen has a similar anecdote in one of his essays about a performance of a 20th century piece he participated in. They played in rehearsal and the composer said: that's too fast whereupon the musicians replied that they were already 20% slower than the composer's metronome marking...

And note that I don't even claim that his inner ear was faulty. It was basically right for the instrumental section (and the fact that a similar section in a piece without metronome markings is played usually at the fast reading of the controversial 84 seems to point to that as well) but not taking into account that a singer could hardly articulate his part at that frantic speed. I do not have Gardiner's recording and I am not sure if I have one that is as fast as his. But the section is usually played "in between" the controversial (literal: very slow and according to a probably error that confused dotted quarters and dotted halfs very fast) markings with considerable speeding up at/during the instrumental fugato.

Very good. And to be sure, I've revisited tempo marks afterward.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[Karl Henning]

Very good. And to be sure, I've revisited tempo marks afterward.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Mine, I mean ... not Beethoven's 0:)

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[(poco) Sforzando]

There is ample documentation that composers corrected tempo prescriptions during rehearsals. From what I have read, almost always towards the slower side. I think even Rosen has a similar anecdote in one of his essays about a performance of a 20th century piece he participated in. They played in rehearsal and the composer said: that's too fast whereupon the musicians replied that they were already 20% slower than the composer's metronome marking...

Yes, I brought this up in another discussion. The piece in question was Boulez's 3rd Piano Sonata (calm down, KenB), where Boulez asked Rosen to "suivez la sonorité" rather than obey the metronome mark.

[Jo498]

I have also read that Bartok's recordings as a pianist do not obey his own metronome markings although he was meticulous in those and even added total playing times to some scores. Most of his markings are also clearly on the fast side; I cannot be precise but I did a little comparison of Music for strings, percussion... a few years ago and especially the first slow movement was usually taken considerably slower than the marking (although there are some recording pretty close to it as well).
Don't get me wrong, I think such experiences add a "grain of salt" but I do not at all believe that Beethoven (and other composers who used the metronome) were completely off or deceiving on purpose or whatever.

[Karl Henning]

I have also read that Bartok's recordings as a pianist do not obey his own metronome markings although he was meticulous in those and even added total playing times to some scores. Most of his markings are also clearly on the fast side; I cannot be precise but I did a little comparison of Music for strings, percussion... a few years ago and especially the first slow movement was usually taken considerably slower than the marking (although there are some recording pretty close to it as well).
Don't get me wrong, I think such experiences add a "grain of salt" but I do not at all believe that Beethoven (and other composers who used the metronome) were completely off or deceiving on purpose or whatever.

Also (what must have been observed any number of times ere now), one must play into a space, and the same tempo will not well serve any given piece in all spaces;  and music which works at a specific metronome marking, and only at just that metronome marking, is a relatively rare occurrence, I should think.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Also (what must have been observed any number of times ere now), one must play into a space, and the same tempo will not well serve any given piece in all spaces;  and music which works at a specific metronome marking, and only at just that metronome marking, is a relatively rare occurrence, I should think.

All that is true; however metronome marks can at least suggest a ballpark range. (This is how Schoenberg envisioned them.) Good example: the trio to the scherzo in LvB 7, which is marked Assai meno presto vs. the main tempo of Presto. The metronome marking of dq=84 vs dq = 132 for the main movement should tell us not to slow down to an Adagio; Assai meno presto can still mean relatively fast in context. But there are recordings (Monteux comes to mind IIRC) where the trio slows to a crawl.

[Karl Henning]

All that is true; however metronome marks can at least suggest a ballpark range. (This is how Schoenberg envisioned them.)

Aye.  One reason I do often inscribe a metronome mark, myself 

[Jo498]

All that is true; however metronome marks can at least suggest a ballpark range. (This is how Schoenberg envisioned them.) Good example: the trio to the scherzo in LvB 7, which is marked Assai meno presto vs. the main tempo of Presto. The metronome marking of dq=84 vs dq = 132 for the main movement should tell us not to slow down to an Adagio; Assai meno presto can still mean relatively fast in context. But there are recordings (Monteux comes to mind IIRC) where the trio slows to a crawl.

In my experience it is fairly common to slow almost to a crawl. The only older conductor I am pretty sure came close to the proper relation was Toscanini. At least I distinctly remember that I was surprised when I heard one of his recordings of that piece because I had "learned" it with a very slow trio.

[(poco) Sforzando]

In my experience it is fairly common to slow almost to a crawl. The only older conductor I am pretty sure came close to the proper relation was Toscanini. At least I distinctly remember that I was surprised when I heard one of his recordings of that piece because I had "learned" it with a very slow trio.

I myself "learned" on Toscanini 50 years ago. In his "Compleat Conductor," Gunther Schuller provides a table comparing about 50 tempi for this section, with Celibidache taking first prize at dq=44 and Toscanini, Reiner, and Norrington being among the few that get it right. Of course Harke de Roos will probably tell us all why 44 is too fast as well. But Beethoven could have helped things by writing a tempo mark like Un poco meno presto rather than Assai meno presto.

[Jo498]

Sure, but I think this is precisely why Beethoven genuinely welcomed the metronome. Maybe "un poco meno presto" would have meant 100 or 108 vs. 132 or whatever.
As you mentioned Tchaikovsky, his 5th has not only the rather zippy (but plausible for "allegro con anima") 104 in the first movement, but at bar 170 "molto più tranquillo" ... 92! only about 10% slower.


I find it strange if a piece starts with a descpription like "poco sostenuto" as IIRC both Beethoven's 7th and Brahms' 1st do. This could be almost everything from a fairly broad largo to a flowing andante and would make more sense if there was a prior tempo indication to be related to.

[Parsifal]

Sure, but I think this is precisely why Beethoven genuinely welcomed the metronome. Maybe "un poco meno presto" would have meant 100 or 108 vs. 132 or whatever.
As you mentioned Tchaikovsky, his 5th has not only the rather zippy (but plausible for "allegro con anima") 104 in the first movement, but at bar 170 "molto più tranquillo" ... 92! less than 10% slower.


I find it strange if a piece starts with a descpription like "poco sostenuto" as IIRC both Beethoven's 7th and Brahms' 1st do. This could be almost everything from a fairly broad largo to a flowing andante and would make more sense if there was a prior tempo indication to be related to.

Neither "molto piu tranquillo" or "poco sosetnuto" are "tempo" markings. They are performance instructions. There is no unique tempo at which music is "tranquil."

[(poco) Sforzando]

Neither "molto piu tranquillo" or "poco sosetnuto" are "tempo" markings. They are performance instructions. There is no unique tempo at which music is "tranquil."

Literally, perhaps no. But the cases are quite different. In the Tchaikovsky, the "tranquillo" is relative to the original tempo marking, and there is both a metronome mark and an ensuing stringendo, returning to tempo primo, to confirm that the instruction implies a slowing of the tempo.

In the Brahms 1 and Beethoven 7 intros, the markings [Un] poco sostenuto are absolute, and conductors have to intuit a tempo where the music is "somewhat sustained." It doesn't help in the Brahms (or perhaps it does) that the coda is marked Meno allegro, and does this mean a return to the original tempo of the introduction, or a different tempo altogether? I'm too tired to develop this any further right now, but this is apparently a case where Brahms at least felt an indication of musical character would suffice to imply the intended tempo, and Beethoven of course adds a metronome mark. The problem is discussed both in Bernstein's The Joy of Music and Gunther Schuller's The Compleat Conductor.

[jlaurson]

latest on Forbes:

Classical CD Of The Week: Nelson Freire's Bumble-Bee-Beethoven

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jenslaurson/2016/09/16/classical-cd-of-the-week-nelson-freires-bumble-bee-beethoven

Ludwig van Beethoven, Piano Concerto No.5, Piano Sonata op.111, Nelson Freire (piano), Gewandhausorchester Leipzig, Riccardo Chailly (conductor), Decca

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Latest on Forbes:

Beethoven And Schubert Almost On Original Location: A REsounding Success



Schubert's Great C major Symphony[2] is a challenge for a "REsound" project, since the only place it 'sounded', in Schubert's time, was in his head...

[Karl Henning]

To paraphrase Jeeves, I believe Beethoven has given general satisfaction.

[Amore di Viola]

Would this be the right place to try to start a conversation on the Piano Sonatas, especially the 'no-names'? Or has this already been talked through years ago?

I am trying to work my way through all 32, but it is difficult! I keep going back, listening and relistening – this way I won't hear anything else until sometime in 2019.... I started by buying a set played by Anne Øland. Her style is lucid, but very harsh and somewhat monotonous, and I noticed some rhytmical peculiarities that I had to check in the score: They could not be permitted in any way. So I trashed the set after a few sonatas and bought Annie Fischer. It was like landing on another planet! That's when I realized (again) that in the perception of a piece of music, there are four actors: The composer, the tradition, the artist and the listener. 
I couldn't help myself. When I arrived at number seven, I wondered whether the start of the first movement could be interpreted differently – so I bought the Andras Schiff set. Now I'm back to the first sonatas again – comparing, enjoying.

So. From my experience so far, most of those sonatas are – can I say masterpieces without just stating the totally obvious? They are not just pieces to be revered and put on a shelf, to me they are burning hot, each with their own unique characteristics. Of course there is an enormous development – going from 1 to 32 the universe changes – but still, number 1 in f minor is not a beginner's work! Starting with a Mannheimer Rocket right up to a sprightly four-note figure, that ends up dominating the entire first movement. Vienna, here I come! For the first three movements at least, we are still firmly within the Wiener-classical boundaries (which, by the way, is no bad thing. The best art is created when the artist pushes against limits of form. When all form is rejected you get a century of bicycle wheels and urinals. Boring!)

Fischer plays the first movement very intensely and slightly faster than Schiff. Schiff makes some marked rhytmical variations – what are they called? Micro-rubatos? but uses less damper. Fischer does not repeat the development part, which in my book makes sense, because the coda is so forceful. All in all, a comment which I guess could be repeated many times over the sets, Schiff is more classical, Fischer more romantic in the interpretations. Schiff stays pays very close attention to all details of the score, Fischer allows herself more liberties.  What riches to have so many opportunities!

The second movement is slow, beautiful, a bit pensive, but not profound or tragic or anything.  Just – melodious. Here I prefer Fischer's slower take, but that is strictly a matter of personal taste.

Third movement, menuetto. How I have come to love the menuettos and scherzos! Here Schiff's more restrained style really makes the movement shine. The way he plays the trio would have make ol' Johann Sebastian soft.

But the fourth movement, prestissimo. Fischer goes all in, plays like there's no tomorrow. Absolutely gorgeous! This, I guess, is one of the first movements where Haydn must have become worried: What is he up to? There is still some breathing space here and there in the movement, but overall it grabs you, rushes along and doesn't let you go until it slings you to the ground – the final, deep F.


Would anybody chip in here? Do my comments make sense?  What are your experiences with the first – and the set?
Any interpretations of the first to recommend, and why?

What does the recording quality mean to you? I must admit I can be bugged by the analog hiss on some of the Fischer sonatas  (and, for that matter, a bit of coughing here and there on Schiff).

And of course, to repeat my first question, did you already have that discussion years ago, and I am just not aware of it?

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Hey Amore di Viola. Probably this is the thread you are looking for... one of the most active Beethoven threads, at that.

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,2302.3580.html

[Amore di Viola]

Hey Amore di Viola. Probably this is the thread you are looking for... one of the most active Beethoven threads, at that.

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,2302.3580.html

Whoa! 180 pages! Y'know, I think I'll just shut up and read, before deciding whether I have something sensible to add... Thanks a lot for the advice, SurprisedByBeauty 

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Whoa! 180 pages! Y'know, I think I'll just shut up and read, before deciding whether I have something sensible to add... Thanks a lot for the advice, SurprisedByBeauty 

Every new opinion and question and idea is welcome and helpful, even if it's been covered in some way. That said, reading through some of that thread will be sure to yield many valuable morsels from you, especially from our in-house LvB expert (and maniac), Todd.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Whoa! 180 pages! Y'know, I think I'll just shut up and read, before deciding whether I have something sensible to add... Thanks a lot for the advice, SurprisedByBeauty 

Only 80 pages. The other 100 pages must've been a repeat that wasn't taken.