Beethoven's Piano Sonatas

[(poco) Sforzando]

Which "terms" are you talking about? The styles? I don't think one can put one composer into a specific tradition or not. It's the style of the composition that qualifies as "classical" or "romantic". Therefore, as far as the sonatas are concerned before op 53 are classical compositions, after op 53 are romantic...regardless of one's thoughts

The terms I was referring to, and the styles as well, were Classic and Romantic. And no, Beethoven did not wake up one morning and say, "Yesterday I was a Classicist! From today on I am a Romantic!" Whatever peripheral elements of Romanticism one can trace in Beethoven, the essence of his style always remained Classical, regardless of how he expanded the Classical language. And by "style" I refer to his use, as stated above, of harmony, form, and key-structure.

[Jo498]

It seems also very odd to draw a line at op.53. If one means the typical forms of movements (sonata form etc.) Beethoven is "classicist"/classical. There are some freer pieces but a bunch of them are rather early, like op.27 "quasi una fantasia"(the second obviously also corresponds to romantic clichees in emotional expression). In op.31 Beethoven includes a piece with some "romantic" features (mood, some freedoms in the first movements), namely the "Tempest" sonata and and almost neoclassicist one, the G major.
There is only one "free" fantasy by Beethoven (op.77) and this is not a major piece, compared to most sonatas.

[ajb]

I can't respond to the first answer because it is irrelavant to my iteration... but it might be best for everyone if you both revisited basic knowledge on styles, forms, Beethoven's life, etc. instead of re-designing them to fit with your opinions...no offense intended at all

[Florestan]

I can't respond to the first answer because it is irrelavant to my iteration... but it might be best for everyone if you both revisited basic knowledge on styles, forms, Beethoven's life, etc. instead of re-designing them to fit with your opinions...no offense intended at all

Well, excuse us benighted poor devils. We can hardly wait for your knowledge to illuminate the darkness of our minds...

[Jo498]

o.k., so op.27/1 with an improvisatory andante (with fast middle section), Scherzo, slow-intro and Sonata-Rondo finale is "classical" whereas op.106 with 4 movements following the typical sonata movement types and in the usual forms (except for the finale fugue) is romantic? How so? These are, admittedly, very superficial criteria but they are enough to cast doubt on simple dividing lines.
Or, put differently: Does op.27/1 or op.106 sound more like Chopin or Schumann? Neither sounds like Chopin or Schumann?! So which criteria make one piece classical the other romantic?

[(poco) Sforzando]

o.k., so op.27/1 with an improvisatory andante (with fast middle section), Scherzo, slow-intro and Sonata-Rondo finale is "classical" whereas op.106 with 4 movements following the typical sonata movement types and in the usual forms (except for the finale fugue) is romantic? How so? These are, admittedly, very superficial criteria but they are enough to cast doubt on simple dividing lines.
Or, put differently: Does op.27/1 or op.106 sound more like Chopin or Schumann? Neither sounds like Chopin or Schumann?! So which criteria make one piece classical the other romantic?

Irrelavant to his iteration. But for those genuinely interested in the musical issues, the most thorough argument for placing Beethoven in the Classical tradition is the chapter on "Beethoven's Later Years" in Charles Rosen's The Classical Style (2nd edition from 1997 only). As Rosen states, "In general, Beethoven's originality reveals itself not by frustrating the conventions that he learned as a child, but by magnifying them beyond the experience or expectations of any of his contemporaries." Elsewhere Rosen speaks of Beethoven's "preservation of the traditional formal procedures of his youth. . . . What separated him from the composers of the 1820s was his refusal to alter the fundamental aspects of the stylistic language he had learned as a child, although he expanded the limits of this style in ways that earned him the astonishment and incomprehension of his contemporaries." Using a detailed set of examples, Rosen demonstrates how Beethoven "rejected no part of the eighteenth-century tradition."

For a useful contrasting (though to my mind less persuasive) discussion of the relation of certain features of Beethoven's reputation and musical personality to the new Romanticism, see Maynard Solomon's "Beethoven: Beyond Classicism" in Winter and Martin's Beethoven Quartet Companion.

[Jo498]

I have to check whether my German translation of Rosen's book already contains this addition (but I seem to remember that this point is clearly made in what I read, no matter if this is included). I have the quartet companion and IIRC, Solomon points out that, partly following Rosen's lead the "mainstream" of the last 40 years places Beethoven firmly in the classical tradition.

[Pat B]

My hypothesis about the key characteristics is that they existed in older tuning systems and affected many of the wind instruments still in Mozart's and Beethoven's time. So they have a vague and weak basis in objective features (like the open strings of the violin) but most of it comes from later tradition because of prominent works in the key, like Beethoven's 5th symphony for all those c minor -> major per aspera ad astra pieces.

First of all, I think we all recognize the above-mentioned CD blurb as patently ridiculous. What is it supposed to mean for a key to be "spirited" or "divine?" It almost seems like an experiment by the author: how absurdly would I have to write for MSR to not use it?

But more generally I think the idea of characteristics of keys is interesting.

In the context of string instruments, the key can affect the sound, but it would be hard to generalize that into an adjective. Maybe a specifically sound-related word like "resonant" -- I'm thinking of the Bach Chaconne, but even then, it would be more accurate to say that d minor is conducive to resonance, than to say "d minor is resonant." The piece still had to be written (and played) in a way that brings that out.

In the context of an equal-tuned keyboard, the very definition of equal tuning is that each interval is the same regardless of key. The only difference between keys is the pitch, so saying "A Major is cheerful" is sort of like saying "440 is cheerful."

In the context of a keyboard with any unequal tuning, I think it's plausible that different keys have different characteristics. But:
1. The differences are probably subtle, especially for common keys.
2. Any description of any key will also depend on which unequal tuning is used. For example, if somebody says g minor is the key of "discontent" (as in the above link), that might be valid in one tuning but not another. The difference of intervals in g minor between two tunings might be more than the difference of intervals in one tuning between g minor and d minor.
3. Some of the descriptions will be more apt than others. Calling C Major "pure" seems reasonable in a tuning where C-G is exactly 3:2 and C-E is exactly 5:4. But even in this case, it would not be hard to write music in C Major that would not be described as "pure." IOW the subtle characteristics of a given key in a given tuning might be completely unrecognizable in a piece of music in that key performed with that tuning.

The more I think about it, the flimsier it seems. Maybe it wasn't an interesting topic after all.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I have to check whether my German translation of Rosen's book already contains this addition (but I seem to remember that this point is clearly made in what I read, no matter if this is included). I have the quartet companion and IIRC, Solomon points out that, partly following Rosen's lead the "mainstream" of the last 40 years places Beethoven firmly in the classical tradition.

The chapter from which I quoted was added only in the second edition.

[Todd]

My two discs of Takahiro Sonoda's Evica cycle arrived today.  I'm a big fan of Sonoda's Denon cycle, but I was secretly hoping that this set, recorded much later in the pianist's life, would be in poor sound or that the pianist's technique would have declined so that I would have a reason not to buy the remaining discs.  I listened to chunks of the critical Op 31 sonatas, and now it looks like I will have to buy the rest of the set.  The set is in better sound than the earlier cycle, and Sonoda is in fine form. 

[Todd]

.
[asin]B006UTDG3S[/asin]

[asin]B00LXTM63G[/asin]


Mordecai Shehori (?) appears to be at the beginning of recording and/or releasing a complete cycle, among a very wide assortment of other items.  Anyone familiar with his playing?

[Oldnslow]

I have his Connassieur(sp) Society CD of Scarlatti, Beethoven (Opus 2, no 3) and Brahms Paganini Variations. Very fine  New York pianist. I don't have any of his more recent recordings on his own label.

[Holden]

I have the Scarlatti disc mentioned by OldnSlow which is excellent but not necessarily a recommendation for any Beethoven he might offer.

However, both CDs are on Spotify if you want to preview them (which I am doing right now in the 20 minutes I've got before going out to coach our swimmers). Already the Waldstein shows an interesting approach with a very minimal use of the sustain pedal in places.

[king ubu]

So, which Scarlatti would that be, Alessandro or Domenico? The mind sorta boggles either way ... the music of the future, played in the present ... and recorded, too 

[Jo498]

very probably Domenico. There is some keyboard music by Alessandro but I don't think anyone recorded it on a modern piano.

[Brian]

Interview with fortepianist Penelope Crawford (by me)

[Todd]

Interview with fortepianist Penelope Crawford (by me)

No to all 32?   

[North Star]

No to all 32?   

At least it wasn't a definite no.
And after the Schumann, I expect there won't be a Crawford disc in some time since she didn't record anything this spring.   

[Sergeant Rock]

Interview with fortepianist Penelope Crawford (by me)

Superb interview, Brian. Did you talk to her in person?

Sarge

[George]

Picked this up yesterday and can't stop listening to it. Such beauty, power and grace! This guy is great. Speaking of Guy, I also picked up Francois Frederic Guy's 3 volumes of Beethoven sonatas. I forget, what you you folks think of his Beethoven?

I also (finally) got Claude Frank's set. And a second copy of Backhaus's stereo set in like new condition, so if anyone wants to buy a copy, PM me.