Beethoven in Period Performances

Started by Que, April 07, 2007, 07:34:50 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

(poco) Sforzando

Quote from: Rod Corkin on July 16, 2008, 11:59:46 AM
Hey you've hit on something there, I don't need Savall!! I could do the music direction myself at least as good!!

If your music direction is as good as your grammar . . . .
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

scarpia

#401
Quote from: Sforzando on July 16, 2008, 01:08:34 PM
If your music direction is as good as your grammar . . . .

He'll be fine, as long as he doesn't get stuck with orchestral musicians that ask all sorts of supercilious questions, for example:

Principal trumpet to Corkster:  Could you clarify "like Savall does it, but even better"? 

karlhenning

Quote from: Sforzando on July 16, 2008, 11:49:49 AM
Then your business acumen must be very weak indeed.

Not his business acumen, only.

M forever

The Savall recording is a bang-blare-hack-and-slash fest which I can understand some shallow listeners find "exciting", but it is a very one-dimensional performance and seriously lacking in just about any other musical respect. There is no "benchmark" performance for this enormously complex piece of music anyway, but there are many performances in various performing styles which are far better (or "for better") than this, so there is really no need for a complete cycle from him at all. He is really good in his special field of baroque performances although most of what I have heard from him in that area is also rather formulaic, but we really don't need any more pseudo-HIP Beethoven performances, not any more than we need more boring and shallow "conventional" or "traditional" performances on recordings - we already have way too much of all that anyway.

Sorin Eushayson

Quote from: M forever on July 16, 2008, 02:24:29 PM
The Savall recording is a bang-blare-hack-and-slash fest which I can understand some shallow listeners find "exciting", but it is a very one-dimensional performance and seriously lacking in just about any other musical respect.
I take issue with being called a shallow listener.  After years of listening to Karajan and Furtwangler, I found that Savall's recording released the essence of this music.  I've heard Norrington's, several of Karajan's, Furtwangler's, Gardiner's, Bernstein's, the Hanover Band's, Immerseel's, Bohm's, Toscanini's, and many others; none come close.  If you don't like Savall's performance that's fine - say you don't like HIP and be done with it; just don't degrade those who think it's brilliant whilst doing so.  0:)

M forever

Sorry, I can't do you that favor. I have been very interested in "HIP" for decades, have intensely studied many aspects of period performance and played in period instrument ensembles myself, as well as in "modern" ensembles exploring "historically informed" techniques, so unfortunately, I can't just say "I don't like HIP".

I didn't call you specifically a "shallow listener", but you sure come across as one. You certainly don't seem to know what "HIP" actually is. I don't think you know what "the essence" of this music is either. I don't think anyone really does. I certainly don't. But I know that whatever it is, there isn't much of that in Savall's performance because he doesn't explore the relationships between notes, motifs, phrases, he just forces the music into a fairly tight stylistic straightjacket and parades it around. And a lot of what he does there isn't even necessarily stylistically from the time of the music's composition. There are a number of playing style anachronisms going on (obviously a result of his intense involvement in baroque and his apparently nearly completely non-involvement in late classical music), so one can't even really call that "HIP".

(poco) Sforzando

Quote from: M forever on July 16, 2008, 06:32:58 PM
Sorry, I can't do you that favor. I have been very interested in "HIP" for decades, have intensely studied many aspects of period performance and played in period instrument ensembles myself, as well as in "modern" ensembles exploring "historically informed" techniques, so unfortunately, I can't just say "I don't like HIP".

I didn't call you specifically a "shallow listener", but you sure come across as one. You certainly don't seem to know what "HIP" actually is. I don't think you know what "the essence" of this music is either. I don't think anyone really does. I certainly don't. But I know that whatever it is, there isn't much of that in Savall's performance because he doesn't explore the relationships between notes, motifs, phrases, he just forces the music into a fairly tight stylistic straightjacket and parades it around. And a lot of what he does there isn't even necessarily stylistically from the time of the music's composition. There are a number of playing style anachronisms going on (obviously a result of his intense involvement in baroque and his apparently nearly completely non-involvement in late classical music), so one can't even really call that "HIP".

Interesting. I find this "benchmark" recording on the blatant side myself, very aggressive and over-balanced towards the winds. I would like to know in more detail what you mean by the comments I italicized above, and if there are any "HIP" Eroicas you consider successful. I can only say I don't find this recording (even though it uses period instruments and follows most of B's metronome marks) anywhere near as convincing as Erich Kleiber, Klemperer mono, Bernstein NYPhil, or Toscanini 1938, just to take some favorites (I certainly haven't heard more than a small fraction of the available recordings).
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

Sorin Eushayson

#407
Quote from: M forever on July 16, 2008, 06:32:58 PM
Sorry, I can't do you that favor. I have been very interested in "HIP" for decades, have intensely studied many aspects of period performance and played in period instrument ensembles myself, as well as in "modern" ensembles exploring "historically informed" techniques, so unfortunately, I can't just say "I don't like HIP".

I didn't call you specifically a "shallow listener", but you sure come across as one. You certainly don't seem to know what "HIP" actually is. I don't think you know what "the essence" of this music is either. I don't think anyone really does. I certainly don't. But I know that whatever it is, there isn't much of that in Savall's performance because he doesn't explore the relationships between notes, motifs, phrases, he just forces the music into a fairly tight stylistic straightjacket and parades it around. And a lot of what he does there isn't even necessarily stylistically from the time of the music's composition. There are a number of playing style anachronisms going on (obviously a result of his intense involvement in baroque and his apparently nearly completely non-involvement in late classical music), so one can't even really call that "HIP".
Okay, I guess we'll agree to disagree with this one, but I really don't see the need for name-calling in this instance; it's very unbecoming and counter-productive.  And I know what a historically-informed performance is, thank you very much; I happen to think Savall does a brilliant job with Eroica.

Lilas Pastia

Does HIP Beethoven necessarily imply adherence to the metronome marks? The HIP Eroica by the Collegium Aureum boasts quite measured speeds in the allegros, whereas the non HIP Scherchen VSOO Eroica trips along at lightning speed, as per the metronome marks. I personally find the latter more satisfying musically than Savall's, which is interesting mainly for its sound (the instruments and the balances). And by 'interesting' I don't necessarily mean enjoyable. At least not consistently. But I suppose this recording does serve a purpose, if only to show the limitations of academicism.

The good old BPO Böhm is as close to solving most of the Eroica's challenges than any other version I've heard. And the 'mystery' Janowski one is also a crackerjack effort I find hugely involving. Its excitement is genuine and natural, not forced on the music. These two never give the impression that the conductor is on a mission. Hailing from a totally different aesthetic, Colin Davis' stately and immensely imposing SD version is another favourite. I'll take those any day over Savall.

(poco) Sforzando

#409
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on July 17, 2008, 05:24:53 PM
Does HIP Beethoven necessarily imply adherence to the metronome marks? The HIP Eroica by the Collegium Aureum boasts quite measured speeds in the allegros, whereas the non HIP Scherchen VSOO Eroica trips along at lightning speed, as per the metronome marks. I personally find the latter more satisfying musically than Savall's, which is interesting mainly for its sound (the instruments and the balances). And by 'interesting' I don't necessarily mean enjoyable. At least not consistently. But I suppose this recording does serve a purpose, if only to show the limitations of academicism.

Well, that's the point, LP, isn't it? That Scherchen is a great performance (as is his equally amazing 8th on the 2-CD set of his I have), but what makes it superior to the Savall (IMO) is Scherchen's sense of the flow and architecture of the work. With Scherchen we get Allegro con brio; with Savall we get dotted half = 60. And even though Savall quotes Beethoven's own statement that the metronome marks are not intended to be applied unvaryingly throughout the movement, Savall seems to be trying grimly and relentlessly at all costs to keep to those posted speeds whether they suit the character of the music or not.

Many conductors, for instance, slow down slightly for the second subject in the first movement; I barely hear this in Savall (or for that matter Norrington LCP), and yet both Schindler and Moscheles concur that Beethoven played his own music with some degree of tempo flexibility. One turns to a 19th-century edition of the piano sonatas like that of von Bülow and Lebert to see metronome marks that vary as the music becomes more tranquil or animated.* And of course conductors in the Furtwängler tradition are well known for considerable tempo fluctuation. So the question is, who are the real HIPsters here? the Savalls and Norringtons who hit the metronome marks and then stick with them like a car on cruise control, or the Bülows and Furtwänglers who respond to the shapes of the phrases in Beethoven's music and adjust their tempos accordingly - as the composer appears to have wished?

I have some other problems with that Savall performance - the overly prominent brass playing for one, but I think he is least satisfactory in the funeral march, and again it's his eye on the metronome that does him in. The great originality of the funeral march is that, although it is ostensibly an A-B-A form, the return to the A section is expanded by the addition of three or four episodes - I call them tropes - that turn this movement into something far more monumental, dramatic, and gigantic. One of these episodes starts at bar 158, with a single fortissimo Ab in the low strings ushering in a passage that in the right hands can sound like a musical depiction of the Last Judgment.** If you want to hear a "benchmark" performance that wrings every drop of intensity out of this section, indeed the whole movement, turn to Bernstein NY Phil. Bernstein really digs into that note, and holds back slightly behind the downbeat to give greater weight to the start of this new episode. Savall on the other hand just drops the Ab strictly in tempo, with virtually no attempt to characterize the episode, and in what feels an almost tame manner.

I think Savall has his moments, mainly in the more active music when he isn't pushing too hard, but for all his period timpani and metronome marks, to my mind he hasn't gotten the full measure of this piece by a long shot.

=========
* http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/6/66/IMSLP03168-Beethoven-PianoSonataNo18Lebert.pdf
**http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/e/e2/IMSLP13851-Beethoven_-_Symphony_No.3__Mvt.II__ed._Unger_.pdf


(Edited to change one sentence where poor proofreading had distorted my intented meaning considerably.)
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

Lilas Pastia

Thanks, Sfz, that's very interesting.

But OTOH there's a limit to the illuminations one gets from the liberties taken by conductors of the Furtwängler generation. I've never taken to any of his Beethoven, because whenever he departs from the main tempo of a movement, it sounds contrived and pasted on. I think that whatever the speed adopted, the chosen tempo should be adhered to with minimal variations from one musical paragraph to another, and certainly not within a phrase. Beethoven knew what he was doing when he wrote tempo indications within a movement.

I'm not sure metronome marks should be followed. Beethoven on crack sounds wrong to me. The anger and trepidation inherent to the music are certainly conveyed, but not the drama and grandeur. And let's not confuse agitation with excitement. I should certainly like to listen to that Bernstein NYP version. The later WP one is excellent but somewhat constrained by Bernstein's powerful bear hug. The music lacks oxygen. Again, my model is Böhm's utterly natural, inevitable pacing. More urgently dramatic in Berlin, more flowingly affectionate in Vienna.

M forever

Quote from: Sorin Eushayson on July 17, 2008, 02:33:30 PM
And I know what a historically-informed performance is, thank you very much

Really? Then you can answer Sforzando's questions about the stylistic anachronisms I mentioned earlier. I am traveling on business, have an extremely long and hard day behind me and as I am sitting here in a hotel room, I don't find the energy to write a detailed reply, even though I would like to continue the discussion and respond to Sforzando's and Pastia's interesting posts.

I will get back into the discussion maybe tomorrow night or on the weekend. In the meantime, you can dazzle us with your HIP expertise, answer Sforzando's questions and refute his criticisms, and explain why you
Quote from: Sorin Eushayson on July 17, 2008, 02:33:30 PM
happen to think Savall does a brilliant job with Eroica.

I will then pick up from there.

(poco) Sforzando

#412
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on July 17, 2008, 07:33:57 PM
Thanks, Sfz, that's very interesting.

But OTOH there's a limit to the illuminations one gets from the liberties taken by conductors of the Furtwängler generation. I've never taken to any of his Beethoven, because whenever he departs from the main tempo of a movement, it sounds contrived and pasted on. I think that whatever the speed adopted, the chosen tempo should be adhered to with minimal variations from one musical paragraph to another, and certainly not within a phrase. Beethoven knew what he was doing when he wrote tempo indications within a movement.

I'm not sure metronome marks should be followed. Beethoven on crack sounds wrong to me. The anger and trepidation inherent to the music are certainly conveyed, but not the drama and grandeur. And let's not confuse agitation with excitement. I should certainly like to listen to that Bernstein NYP version. The later WP one is excellent but somewhat constrained by Bernstein's powerful bear hug. The music lacks oxygen. Again, my model is Böhm's utterly natural, inevitable pacing. More urgently dramatic in Berlin, more flowingly affectionate in Vienna.

Actually, with Furtwängler I was being deliberately provocative. I don't like his careening tempo changes myself. But within an overall basic pulse, I think there is room for subtle flexibility as called for by the character of the music. (The other day I played the Hammerklavier Adagio at home twice: first as I normally would, at about metronome eighth=75, and found I took just under 17 minutes for the movement, with a fair amount of tempo fluctuation. Then I set the metronome to Beethoven's eighth=92 and played the entire movement at that speed without variation. It definitely felt more like than an Andante in 2 than an Adagio sostenuto in 6, and what's more, there were any number of passages where I felt I was straining to "keep up" with the metronome when my instincts told me to be more expansive.)

I addressed my skepticism about B's metronome marks in an earlier post on this thread.
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

PerfectWagnerite

I just think Savall's Eroica is a bit slick and superficial. The whole work just flies by with basically the same tempo, dynamics, and balance which makes for some extremely tedious listening. In fact as "quick" as this reading is it seems to take much longer to listen to than say Klemperer, who adopts a much more deliberate tempo. The stiffness in tempo as Sforzando mentioned aside, notice how little dynamic contrast there is in the woodwinds. Whether it be oboe or flute they play with the same bland, small-tone, mezzo-piano. I just point out three instances, first at approximately 50 seconds into the movement there is a wind dialogue between flute and oboe. Here it just sounds like a non-event. There is no dept to the tone of the instruments. Again at about 5:50, then again with the flute solo at about 8:05. All in all a very pedestrian effort in my opinion.

If you want to try the first movement you can find it here.

Don

Quote from: Lilas Pastia on July 17, 2008, 05:24:53 PM
Does HIP Beethoven necessarily imply adherence to the metronome marks?

No.  HIP doesn't even necessarily imply use of period instruments.

Lilas Pastia

QuoteNo.  HIP doesn't even necessarily imply use of period instruments.

It's a grab bag of ideas and playing techniques, then?

FideLeo

Quote from: Don on July 18, 2008, 01:04:53 PM
No.  HIP doesn't even necessarily imply use of period instruments.

I guess that depends on how informed one wants to be in these matters.  ;)
HIP for all and all for HIP! Harpsichord for Bach, fortepiano for Beethoven and pianoforte for Brahms!

Que

This has just been reissued. If I'm not mistaken it's HIP.
Any comments? :)



Q

Rod Corkin

Quote from: Que on August 09, 2008, 11:53:12 PM
This has just been reissued. If I'm not mistaken it's HIP.
Any comments? :)



Q
I bought it, not very good I'm afraid. Totally lame tempi throughout. But it was very cheap so no great loss. Their disk of Op1 Nr 1 & 2 is much better, though also on the broad side.
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/classicalmusicmayhem/

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Rod Corkin on August 12, 2008, 11:18:27 AM
I bought it, not very good I'm afraid. Totally lame tempi throughout. But it was very cheap so no great loss. Their disk of Op1 Nr 1 & 2 is much better, though also on the broad side.

Rod,
Did you find that they keep much the same tempi as the Mosaiques? Even though the playing is lovely on those quartets, the slow tempi drove me nuts. :-\

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)