Beethoven in Period Performances

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

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Sorin Eushayson

#480
From what I understand Schoonderwoerd is going to have the 1st & 2nd concerti out in the future, which will probably make his the best Beethoven piano concerti set thus far...  I understand that's not saying much.  I also understand certain someones here have had less than flattering things to say of his current Beethoven...





I gave the newer album a fairly nasty review due to the lack of Beethoven's own drum & piano cadenza in the '6th' and was pretty hard on his work on the 3rd, though I now realise his is probably the best of it I've heard (again, not saying much).  Also, this is the only recording of Beethoven's piano arrangement of his violin concerto (Op. 61a, 'No. 6') on period instruments, which will no doubt be of interest to the avid period Beethoven collector (I still can't help but think of it as an incomplete recording, however, due to the lack of that cadenza).

That is all - let the Schoonderwoerd bashing commence!  ;)

Wanderer

Quote from: Sorin Eushayson on October 27, 2008, 10:01:00 AM
I gave the newer album a fairly nasty review due to the lack of Beethoven's own drum & piano cadenza in the '6th' and was pretty hard on his work on the 3rd, though I now realise his is probably the best of it I've heard (again, not saying much).  Also, this is the only recording of Beethoven's piano arrangement of his violin concerto (Op. 61a, 'No. 6') on period instruments, which will no doubt be of interest to the avid period Beethoven collector (I still can't help but think of it as an incomplete recording, however, due to the lack of that cadenza).

Do they give a reason why that cadenza wasn't used? Which cadenza is used instead?

Sorin Eushayson

Quote from: Wanderer on October 27, 2008, 11:59:40 AM
Do they give a reason why that cadenza wasn't used? Which cadenza is used instead?
The reason given is that it utilized techniques that were not possible on the pianos of Beethoven's time, which is just not true; in fact, the piano Schoonderwoerd uses in the recording could have perfectly handled that cadenza!  He uses a lame, half-minute improvisation instead, it's a real wet blanket.  A major strike against that recording...  :(

(poco) Sforzando

Quote from: Sorin Eushayson on October 28, 2008, 03:09:31 AM
The reason given is that it utilized techniques that were not possible on the pianos of Beethoven's time, which is just not true; in fact, the piano Schoonderwoerd uses in the recording could have perfectly handled that cadenza!  He uses a lame, half-minute improvisation instead, it's a real wet blanket.  A major strike against that recording...  :(

I have already discussed the first issued of these wretched recordings in considerable detail. Suffice to restate that Sch's inadequate cadenzas, obvious demonstrations of his complete lack of understanding of the role of the cadenza in Beethoven's concertos, are more than enough to thoroughly invalidate this project.
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

PerfectWagnerite


lukeottevanger

Quote from: Rod Corkin on October 27, 2008, 04:31:41 AM
Forget the Broadwood and Beethoven. Really they are not very good intruments for his music compared to the Viennese models, which is why the vast majority of Beethoven fortepiano recordings use Viennese designs. I should know because I have most of them. The Broadwoods were pretty crude sounding in comparison - dull, clanky machines lacking in clarity. Anyone who has read all about Beethoven and the pianos of his day will realise that the Viennese models came closer to his ideal, certainly closest to the ideal instrument for playing his compositions (which is really the only thing we should consider). There has been so much propaganda written about the Broadwood it's laughable.

Well, after hearing the two instruments side-by-side I can't square my experience with this description at all: the clarity of the Broadwood and its bright, complex tone was in fact particularly marked next to the Viennese piano, which had a peculiar combination of short sustain and tonal amorphousness (it was nevertheless a fine instrument in its own right). Nor do I think that the pianist - who certainly has 'read all about Beethoven and the pianos of his day', and, what's more, actually plays the music - ought to be discounted. But, hey, who knows...

Sorin Eushayson

Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on October 28, 2008, 05:57:08 AM
What's the deal with the hermaphroditic cover picture?
Don't know, but ever since I first saw that album cover I subconsciously depict Arthur Schoonderwoerd as that man in the hat, sitting at the fortepiano!  ::)

Bunny

Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on October 28, 2008, 05:57:08 AM
What's the deal with the hermaphroditic cover picture?

The cover is typical of portraits from the early 19th century especially in the "Biedermeier" style of a gentleman dressed in the highest fashion.  Don't read so much into it, because there isn't that much.  The problem is that the artist seems to have been more of a "society" painter than a great portraitist such as Goya or Ingres.  Attention to clothing was extremely important to the subjects as it was the clothing that demonstrated the subject's class, taste and wealth (Ingres especially emphasized the richness of the clothing). 

(poco) Sforzando

Quote from: Bunny on October 30, 2008, 06:55:18 AM
The cover is typical of portraits from the early 19th century especially in the "Biedermeier" style of a gentleman dressed in the highest fashion.  Don't read so much into it, because there isn't that much.  The problem is that the artist seems to have been more of a "society" painter than a great portraitist such as Goya or Ingres.  Attention to clothing was extremely important to the subjects as it was the clothing that demonstrated the subject's class, taste and wealth (Ingres especially emphasized the richness of the clothing). 

Just so no one misses the point, a detail is reproduced in the inside of the album that makes the painting look notably phallic.
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

Bunny

#489
Quote from: Sforzando on November 03, 2008, 07:19:30 AM
Just so no one misses the point, a detail is reproduced in the inside of the album that makes the painting look notably phallic.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar smoke. 

More interesting than the butt of a whip is the cockade on the gentleman's hat which shows that he was a sympathizer with the French Revolution!  I think the point is not that there are phallic symbols in the portrait (recognition of such symbols says more about the viewer than the portrait), but that it is a portrait of a contemporary of Beethoven (Pierre Sériziat, David's brother-in-law).   

Btw, if you are really interested in this portrait, which is by Jacques Louis David, (below is the companion portrait of the gentleman's wife and son) you can easily look it up.  Neither is the greatest of portraits -- both remind me of the insipid works of David's late period when he lived in Brussels churning out portraits of the local aristocracy and haute bourgeoisie.  David needed the stimulus of historic events and personages to reach greatness (Paul Marat Dead in his Bath, Consecration of Napoleon and Coronation of Josephine, for instance).  By the time he painted these portraits, he was out of favor with the regime because of his close association with both Robbespierre and Marat. 

 

These portraits have various clues put in them to tell us about the subject: the cockade on his hat to show him as a revolutionary; the whip which marks him as someone who owns his own horses and therefore a man of consequence and wealth, the red complexion to show that he is comfortable out of doors...  All of these are conventions of portrait painting from the period.  Phallic symbols?  I think not.  What is most conspicuous in these works is the wealth demonstrated by the clothing, a declaration that a new aristocracy was on the rise.

(poco) Sforzando

#490
Quote from: Bunny on November 03, 2008, 07:58:18 AM
I think the point is not that there are phallic symbols in the portrait (recognition of such symbols says more about the viewer than the portrait), but that it is a portrait of a contemporary of Beethoven (Pierre Sériziat, David's brother-in-law).

"Phallic symbols?  I think not," sniffs Bunny. The record producers chose to blow up a tiny detail from the lower left of the painting, which reproduced as it is out of context couldn't possibly be phallic. This says more about the record producers than the viewer. Equally pointless is the fact that 8 pages in the booklet (4 English, 4 French) are devoted to an analysis of this portrait, which has at best a tenuous connection to the music on the recording.

I certainly would like to know what was so incendiary in this post from "Bunny" that moderator Que had to censor part of it.
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

(poco) Sforzando

#491
Quote from: Que on November 16, 2008, 06:10:14 AM
Maybe, just maybe, not al editing is censorship, Sforzando.
I resized the pictures so that they could fit next to each other.

But I do find the "phallic symbols" disussion rather off topic and the attachement to your post unnecessarily provocative.

Q


The attachment to my post is nothing more and nothing less than a representation of the 5 inch square blowup of this section of the painting as reproduced in the aforementioned booklet. Hence your objection would be better directed to the producers of the recording.

And I take your finding my attachment "unnecessarily provocative" as confirmation that the producers' intent was, indeed, phallic. It is not off topic for the simple reason that the producers chose to emphasize this element of the painting when they designed the booklet.
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

Drasko

While we're at phallic symbols, couldn't this pass as one as well?

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Sforzando on November 16, 2008, 06:24:28 AM
The attachment to my post is nothing more and nothing less than a representation of the 5 inch square blowup of this section of the painting as reproduced in the aforementioned booklet. Hence your objection would be better directed to the producers of the recording.

And I take your finding my attachment "unnecessarily provocative" as confirmation that the producers' intent was, indeed, phallic. It is not off topic for the simple reason that the producers chose to emphasize this element of the painting when they designed the booklet.

Yet that represents nothing more nor less than his hand holding the handle of his riding crop or buggy whip. A rather standard pose in the day. If we look at any object that is shaped cylindrically and of a certain dimension, such as Drasko's hat brim example, then we are being rather obsessive in that regard, are we not? And to what end?  ::)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Haydn - String Quartets Opp.54 & 74 - Endellion String Quartet - String Quartets Op. 54 (Hob. III: 57-59), 'Tost I', String Quartet in C major Op. 54 No. 2: III. Menuetto (Allegretto)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

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

(poco) Sforzando

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 16, 2008, 06:43:36 AM
Yet that represents nothing more nor less than his hand holding the handle of his riding crop or buggy whip. A rather standard pose in the day. If we look at any object that is shaped cylindrically and of a certain dimension, such as Drasko's hat brim example, then we are being rather obsessive in that regard, are we not? And to what end?  ::)

One opens the gatefold of this album (of which Drasko shows us the cover) and this is the first thing one sees, before one sees the complete portrait, and isolated from its insignificant role in that piece. Why show this particular detail, blown up so large, if not to emphasize the phallic aspect of the handle? Give me one good reason why the producers of this album chose to waste an entire page of the booklet on this element of the portrait. As for your presumption that this is nothing more than a riding crop, why should Que have found this image so "provocative"?
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Sforzando on November 16, 2008, 07:19:49 AM
One opens the gatefold of this album (of which Drasko shows us the cover) and this is the first thing one sees, before one sees the complete portrait, and isolated from its insignificant role in that piece. Why show this particular detail, blown up so large, if not to emphasize the phallic aspect of the handle? Give me one good reason why the producers of this album chose to waste an entire page of the booklet on this element of the portrait. As for your presumption that this is nothing more than a riding crop, why should Que have found this image so "provocative"?

Well, I never saw it as phallic, although I read the notes a couple of times. I guess it's there is you are looking for it. Although I can't imagine to what end they were reaching by doing this. What good is symbolism without a point? Are they saying Beethoven was a prick? Hell, we all know that. :)   So if it is indeed symbolism, and not a product of wishful thinking, it can only reflect on the producers, not the product. I have little regard for producers... ;)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Endellion String Quartet - String Quartets Op. 54 (Hob. III: 57-59), 'Tost I', String Quartet in G major Op. 54 No. 1: III. Menuetto (Allegretto)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

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

(poco) Sforzando

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 16, 2008, 07:34:47 AM
Well, I never saw it as phallic, although I read the notes a couple of times. I guess it's there if you are looking for it. Although I can't imagine to what end they were reaching by doing this. What good is symbolism without a point? Are they saying Beethoven was a prick? Hell, we all know that. :)   So if it is indeed symbolism, and not a product of wishful thinking, it can only reflect on the producers, not the product. I have little regard for producers... ;)

Neither do I. I am hardly "looking for it," on the contrary it jumped out at me. But you give me one good reason why they chose to isolate this one detail. I can't imagine to what end either, but I can't see why they needed a 4-page essay on this painting and had virtually nothing to say about the music.
"I don't know what sforzando means, though it clearly means something."

adamdavid80

Quote from: Drasko on November 16, 2008, 06:32:30 AM
While we're at phallic symbols, couldn't this pass as one as well?

Sometimes - for those of us without hat fetishes - the brim of a hat is just a brim of a hat...
Hardly any of us expects life to be completely fair; but for Eric, it's personal.

- Karl Henning

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: adamdavid80 on November 16, 2008, 08:28:31 AM
Sometimes - for those of us without hat fetishes - the brim of a hat is just a brim of a hat...

We cigar smokers resent the expropriation of our personal Freud quote by hat brim fetishists   >:(

:)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Endellion String Quartet - String Quartets Op. 74 (Hob. III: 72-74) 'Apponyi', String Quartet in G minor Op. 74 No. 3, 'The Rider': II. Largo
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

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

Bunny

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 16, 2008, 07:34:47 AM
Well, I never saw it as phallic, although I read the notes a couple of times. I guess it's there is you are looking for it. Although I can't imagine to what end they were reaching by doing this. What good is symbolism without a point? Are they saying Beethoven was a prick? Hell, we all know that. :)   So if it is indeed symbolism, and not a product of wishful thinking, it can only reflect on the producers, not the product. I have little regard for producers... ;)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Endellion String Quartet - String Quartets Op. 54 (Hob. III: 57-59), 'Tost I', String Quartet in G major Op. 54 No. 1: III. Menuetto (Allegretto)


Quote from: Sforzando on November 16, 2008, 07:42:11 AM
Neither do I. I am hardly "looking for it," on the contrary it jumped out at me. But you give me one good reason why they chose to isolate this one detail. I can't imagine to what end either, but I can't see why they needed a 4-page essay on this painting and had virtually nothing to say about the music.

Sometimes it's nice to have a little cultural context, especially for those who are not as well informed about the history or the art of the period.  Although this particular portrait was done well before Beethoven wrote the concertos, the styles of dress had not altered and the 5 concerto was supposedly inspired by Napoleon who rose to power as a direct consequence of the fall of Robbespierre, events and personages directly related to both the portraitist and the subjects. 

Phallic symbols are all over the visual arts; some intended, some not, and some merely in the mind of the beholder.  When one describes the subject of a portrait as being "hermaphroditic" (more accurately one should say androgynous) when that is so clearly not the case, then more is in the eye of the beholder than on the canvas.