Beethoven's Piano Sonatas

[Pat B]

Thanks for the responses. That's given me a lot to listen for.

[Brian]

One of the newer complete cycles on the block, Jean Muller's live cycle, taken from concerts from 2007-2009, almost escaped my notice.  Almost.  Now, I admit I knew and know next to nothing about Mr Muller beyond what's on the web – a Luxembourgian born in 1979 who has taken lessons from Gerhard Oppitz, among others – but that really doesn't matter.  I really only wanted to know how his Beethoven sounded.

Belated thanks for this writeup. I'm just listening to Jean Muller's Chopin ballades on a label called Fondamenta, and the playing is pretty darn good. Interestingly, Fondamenta gives you the same recording on two different CDs: one for hi-fi systems and one for laptop and car speakers. I put the latter on my laptop while mopping the floors and was struck by the fact that the sound didn't blow, although it remains to be seen whether the lack of truly quiet playing is because they tinkered with the sound or because of Muller himself.

By the way, thanks all for the outbreak of fascinating discussion on Op. 111!

[jlaurson]

L.v. Beethoven
Complete Piano Sonatas
Artur Schnabel
Musical Concepts
German link - UK link

Never quite got over having given away my Dante-set, after initial disappointment with Schnabel's playing. (Pollini he ain't!) Now a London cat kindly got me this copy, which is said to be one of the better remasterings out there. Will go and inquire... hitherto I've found the Naxos remasterings to strike the best compromise between clean and depth. Very conveniently space-saving slim-box!  Not officially but de-facto available in the US (due to copyright issues). Liner notes extant but a touch skimpy... but then, at that price this box is sold, that's a hard quibble to maintain.

[George]

L.v. Beethoven
Complete Piano Sonatas
Artur Schnabel
Musical Concepts
German link - UK link

Never quite got over having given away my Dante-set, after initial disappointment with Schnabel's playing. (Pollini he ain't!) Now a London cat kindly got me this copy, which is said to be one of the better remasterings out there. Will go and inquire... hitherto I've found the Naxos remasterings to strike the best compromise between clean and depth. Very conveniently space-saving slim-box!  Not officially but de-facto available in the US (due to copyright issues). Liner notes extant but a touch skimpy... but then, at that price this box is sold, that's a hard quibble to maintain.

I fully agree about the Naxos series!

Those who wish to compare the above transfer of Schnabel's LvB sonatas to seven others can do so here:

http://www.mediafire.com/folder/lvppl6vj4omdj/Schnabel_Beethoven_Samples

[jlaurson]

I fully agree about the Naxos series!

Those who wish to compare the above transfer of Schnabel's LvB sonatas to seven others can do so here:

http://www.mediafire.com/folder/lvppl6vj4omdj/Schnabel_Beethoven_Samples

I haven't compared them side-by-side... do you have any experience with the Musical Concepts remastering?

[George]

I haven't compared them side-by-side... do you have any experience with the Musical Concepts remastering?

Only via the clip above. The Naxos remain my favorite transfer for these performances.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I wonder if to some extent it's pianists trying to make it sound not like jazz—i.e. they can't un-hear the swing rhythms in the music as written, so they overdot to make it sound more "classical".

Ironically, in the Baroque period and surviving into the Classical, the combination of dotted eighth-sixteenth against quarter-eighth often meant that the last notes were to be played together, that is as triplets. The finale of Brandenburg 2, written in 2/4 with both dotted eighth-sixteenths and eighth note triplets was really equivalent to a 6/8 gigue. I even wonder if this rhythmic convention applies to the opening movement of the Moonlight, but perhaps with the slow tempo is really is a dotted eighth-sixteenth pattern against triplets.

But as for 111, in an article on the sonatas, William Kinderman analyzed tempo variation in 15 recordings of the slow movement, and found that many followed Schnabel's example (even though Schnabel's edition belied his own practice) - that is, playing the theme notably slower the than first three variations. Or the first three variations faster than the theme. This means a theme lasting about 3 minutes in Schnabel's recording and the first three variations lasting about 2 minutes each. But Beethoven indicates no change in tempo within the movement, and the changes in meter - 3/8, 6/16, 12/32 - still reflect an underlying 3/8 pulse.

Of the 15 recordings, Kinderman finds only two that preserve a fairly steady pulse throughout: Rosen from 1974 and Badura-Skoda from 1973. This means in Rosen's case (B-S is faster overall) the slowest third variation of all, but also the fastest theme. But Beethoven specifically marks the third variation L'istesso tempo (the same speed), and even though the dynamic is now forte, there are no accents for at least the first four bars of the variation - the result being, if Beethoven's steady pulse is observed, a less frenetic, jazzy feeling than we often experience.

[Pat B]

Ironically, in the Baroque period and surviving into the Classical, the combination of dotted eighth-sixteenth against quarter-eighth often meant that the last notes were to be played together, that is as triplets. The finale of Brandenburg 2, written in 2/4 with both dotted eighth-sixteenths and eighth note triplets was really equivalent to a 6/8 gigue. I even wonder if this rhythmic convention applies to the opening movement of the Moonlight, but perhaps with the slow tempo is really is a dotted eighth-sixteenth pattern against triplets.

Do you mean Brandenburg 5?

I am definitely not an expert on such historical notation, but I think the Moonlight would be a lot less interesting if those sixteenth notes were played as triplet eighths (aligned with the ostinato).

[(poco) Sforzando]

Do you mean Brandenburg 5?

I am definitely not an expert on such historical notation, but I think the Moonlight would be a lot less interesting if those sixteenth notes were played as triplet eighths (aligned with the ostinato).

Of course you're right on B5. And I agree on the Moonlight; I have tried it the other way and it sounds banal.

[aquablob]

Ironically, in the Baroque period and surviving into the Classical, the combination of dotted eighth-sixteenth against quarter-eighth often meant that the last notes were to be played together, that is as triplets. The finale of Brandenburg 2, written in 2/4 with both dotted eighth-sixteenths and eighth note triplets was really equivalent to a 6/8 gigue. I even wonder if this rhythmic convention applies to the opening movement of the Moonlight, but perhaps with the slow tempo is really is a dotted eighth-sixteenth pattern against triplets.

But as for 111, in an article on the sonatas, William Kinderman analyzed tempo variation in 15 recordings of the slow movement, and found that many followed Schnabel's example (even though Schnabel's edition belied his own practice) - that is, playing the theme notably slower the than first three variations. Or the first three variations faster than the theme. This means a theme lasting about 3 minutes in Schnabel's recording and the first three variations lasting about 2 minutes each. But Beethoven indicates no change in tempo within the movement, and the changes in meter - 3/8, 6/16, 12/32 - still reflect an underlying 3/8 pulse.

Of the 15 recordings, Kinderman finds only two that preserve a fairly steady pulse throughout: Rosen from 1974 and Badura-Skoda from 1973. This means in Rosen's case (B-S is faster overall) the slowest third variation of all, but also the fastest theme. But Beethoven specifically marks the third variation L'istesso tempo (the same speed), and even though the dynamic is now forte, there are no accents for at least the first four bars of the variation - the result being, if Beethoven's steady pulse is observed, a less frenetic, jazzy feeling than we often experience.

Ah, this is relevant indeed -- thanks for bringing it up!

You're misremembering just a few details, though:

1. The article in question is actually a contribution by Robert Winter to a book edited by R. Larry Todd titled Nineteenth-Century Piano Music (Kinderman's chapter, "Beethoven," follows Winter's directly, which is undoubtedly the source of your confusion).

2. He compared 14 recordings (the "15th" is Schnabel's edition), and his conclusions aren't quite as you remember. I'll just quote him:

[Edit: I stand corrected on the number of recordings Winter compares—Schnabel's recording is the 15th, and Schnabel's edition is the "16th"]

   Schnabel’s interpretation—while highly charged—seems to be considerably at odds with Beethoven’s more serene directives. It is, moreover, strikingly at odds with Schnabel’s own 1949 edition (also shown in Table 2.1), where the tempo fluctuations are considerably narrower. But Schnabel’s recorded (and presumably live) performance has exercised a much greater influence than his edition. Consider the practice of speeding up in vars. 1 and 2; eleven of the fourteen performances do this. Or consider Schnabel’s treatment of var. 4 as two separate variations with their own tempos; ten of the performances do this. Or consider the accelerando starting at measure 131 and continuing throughout the reprise; ten of the performances do this. Or consider the great slowing in the coda; eleven performances do this. Performances such as Ashkenazy’s betray the direct and overriding influence of Schnabel. In caricatured imitations of Schnabel, like that of Barenboim, we can almost imagine Schnabel’s ghost wringing his hands. It seems to make no difference whether one plays on a period instrument or a modern piano.
   Only the performances of Edwin Fischer and, to a slightly lesser extent, of his pupil Paul Badura-Skoda even approach the tempo prescribed by Haslinger or Czerny. What is most noteworthy, however, is that—regardless of tempo—not a single one of these performances projects a unified pulse throughout. Even had Beethoven left no indications about the tempo relationships among variations, the idea ought to have occurred to someone as simply an experiment. In the performances by Jacob Lateiner, Charles Rosen, and Rudolf Buchbinder we get glimpses of the equilibrium that Beethoven may have in mind, and the effect, however temporary, is in each instance magical. In the end, however, the shared features of the tempo relationships in these performances are far more noteworthy than their differences.

And here is a link to his "Table 2.1" comparing the performances: http://books.google.com/books?id=rfESTJIEYaUC&pg=PA45

[(poco) Sforzando]

1. The article in question is actually a contribution by Robert Winter to a book edited by R. Larry Todd titled Nineteenth-Century Piano Music (Kinderman's chapter, "Beethoven," follows Winter's directly, which is undoubtedly the source of your confusion).

I will plead guilty to carelessness, but not to confusion. Winter is indeed the author, but it's perfectly legitimate to refer to his contribution as an article.

2. He compared 14 recordings (the "15th" is Schnabel's edition), and his conclusions aren't quite as you remember. I'll just quote him:
[Edit: I stand corrected on the number of recordings Winter compares—Schnabel's recording is the 15th, and Schnabel's edition is the "16th"]

Ahem.

Looking at that chart again, I see Fischer is another whose tempo scheme preserves B's sense of a steady pulse, and I should have acknowledged that. I was paying more attention to the chart than to Winter's commentary. I did however listen to Rosen on the drive to work this morning, and the relative calm of his 3rd variation is notable compared to Schnabel's and others I have heard (even though Rosen himself uses the word "jazzy" in talking about that variation in his book on the sonatas). I would very much like to hear Fischer.

[Brian]

Inspired by this thread, I'm listening to Annie Fischer's performance right now (via Naxos Music Library). Her way with this variation is special and curiously human. What appeals to me is that you can sense she wants to play it more quickly: there's just an unscored tug, the slightest impulsive shift in each phrase, but she always reins it in. This seems clearest at the start, when at the start of every phrase she seems to say "calm down, Annie," and observe the music more strictly than before. Pretty great example of a "weakness" in a performance actually being a strength, at least to my ears, since I was delighted.

And yes, it is less "jazzy."

[Todd]

Inspired by this thread, I'm listening to Annie Fischer's performance right now (via Naxos Music Library).

Which performance? 

[Brian]

Which performance?

Whoops, Hungaroton ("big box"). Is the other one BBC live?

[jlaurson]

The (artificially 'enhanced?') reverb on her first movement of op.111 is certainly bordering the ridiculous. Sounds like kids played sound-engineer.

Holy mackerel... this is not good at all. Sound goes in and out, damp and overly bright in turns... she's just bungled a fistful of notes in one fell swoop... and one wonders, if that's at all representative of the whole set. (Schnabel's 111 certainly isn't, lest his set be much less well regarded, too.)

[Todd]

Whoops, Hungaroton ("big box"). Is the other one BBC live?

EMI, from the 50s.

[Parsifal]

This one is in the shopping cart and about to drop, I think.

[asin]B00DWOBNAM[/asin]

[aquablob]

I will plead guilty to carelessness, but not to confusion. Winter is indeed the author, but it's perfectly legitimate to refer to his contribution as an article.

I really meant "confusion" in the sense of "having mistaken something for something else" / "having mixed two things up," not in the sense of "having been bewildered." No condescension intended.

Ahem.

Looking at that chart again, I see Fischer is another whose tempo scheme preserves B's sense of a steady pulse, and I should have acknowledged that. I was paying more attention to the chart than to Winter's commentary. I did however listen to Rosen on the drive to work this morning, and the relative calm of his 3rd variation is notable compared to Schnabel's and others I have heard (even though Rosen himself uses the word "jazzy" in talking about that variation in his book on the sonatas). I would very much like to hear Fischer.

And now I'll plead guilty to carelessness—I was paying more attention to Winter's commentary than to his chart, and I see now that your comment was perfectly consistent with the latter.

Speaking of Kinderman, his recordings of the last 3 sonatas are much more interesting than Jed Distler would have us believe.

[Drasko]

Looking at that chart again, I see Fischer is another whose tempo scheme preserves B's sense of a steady pulse, and I should have acknowledged that. I was paying more attention to the chart than to Winter's commentary. I did however listen to Rosen on the drive to work this morning, and the relative calm of his 3rd variation is notable compared to Schnabel's and others I have heard (even though Rosen himself uses the word "jazzy" in talking about that variation in his book on the sonatas). I would very much like to hear Fischer.

It should be this one:

http://www.youtube.com/v/fc78baFyMOs

[Brian]

Oh. Poop. I assumed it was Annie Fischer forgetting there was an Edwin. Well, her theme DID seem faster and variation #3 did seem slower...