Karajan in Beethoven's Symphony 5 - he used 8 horns ?!!

[M forever]

Of course, Immerseel's recordings with the smaller string section are probably much more accurate

Not necessarily, because

It was quite customary in the 18th and early 19th century to double the winds if a larger string section was available, for instance for concerts in larger venues. Beethoven's 4th, 7th, 8th, and 9th symphonies were premiered with doubled wind sections which means there were actually 8 horns for the premiere of the 9th since it has 4 parts rather than the typical 2 of all the other symphonies (except for the Eroica which has 3 horn parts).

[Symphonien]

Ah ok, very interesting. I guess it all really depends on the size of the string section available then. I don't know that much about "HIP", so would those larger string sections have been comparable to that of the average symphony orchestra today?

[jochanaan]

Ah ok, very interesting. I guess it all really depends on the size of the string section available then. I don't know that much about "HIP", so would those larger string sections have been comparable to that of the average symphony orchestra today?

Yes and no.  It wasn't often that Mozart or Beethoven actually encountered such larger string sections; the Paris orchestra was slightly unusual in that regard.  (I'd have to look and see how many strings played, say, for the premiere of Beethoven's Ninth.)  Nowadays sixty, seventy or more strings in an orchestra are commonplace.

And as a woodwind player, I've never thought it was quite fair that the string section could be beefed up as much as possible while the woodwinds were limited to one player per part.  Yes, our tones are more penetrating, but there's a limit! And there's no particular reason a large group of wind players can't play together, sensitively and in tune, as anyone who's heard a really good concert band can attest.

[M forever]

And as a woodwind player, I've never thought it was quite fair that the string section could be beefed up as much as possible while the woodwinds were limited to one player per part. 

They aren't. That's what this thread is about.
But even when people use smaller string sections because they think it is more "authentic", they sometimes use rather more strings than may have been used in comparable historical situations. Of course, the respective volumes produced by strings, woodwinds and brass have changed in different degrees, so a 1-to-1 copying of known historical section sizes does not necessarily give the most " authentic" results either. It should be remembered that the Eroica was first played with 3 first and second violins, 2 violas, 2 celli, 2 basses. You rarely ever see something like that. You typically see 8, 10, 12 first violins in "chamber" orchestras, too.
When I ran my own chamber group in Berlin, we once played the 5th and  7th symphonies with 4 first and 4 second violins, 3 violas, 3 celli, and 2 basses and that worked extremely well. The violins were not at all drowned out by the winds, especially as all of them were very good players, and 4 really good players who play with big tone and good articulation, in tune and well together can produce a much more carrying and projecting sound than 10 people who don't play together that tightly or maybe not completely in tune. What it did change though was that some of the often underexposed parts, especially the bassoons were much more audible, they were as audible as the celli, so whether they played or not did make a very noticeable difference even in tuttis where you normally don't hear them at all.
And you could *actually hear* the clarinets reinforcing the strings at the beginning of the 5th symphony, giving those opening statements a very special color and quality. That was the only time I think I have ever heard that. Also, in the last movement, when the contrabassoon reinforces the bass line, it makes a huge difference when you can actually hear it (which is pretty fun since it is working very, very hard in that finale).

[jochanaan]

...When I ran my own chamber group in Berlin, we once played the 5th and  7th symphonies with 4 first and 4 second violins, 3 violas, 3 celli, and 2 basses and that worked extremely well. The violins were not at all drowned out by the winds, especially as all of them were very good players, and 4 really good players who play with big tone and good articulation, in tune and well together can produce a much more carrying and projecting sound than 10 people who don't play together that tightly or maybe not completely in tune. What it did change though was that some of the often underexposed parts, especially the bassoons were much more audible, they were as audible as the celli, so whether they played or not did make a very noticeable difference even in tuttis where you normally don't hear them at all.
And you could *actually hear* the clarinets reinforcing the strings at the beginning of the 5th symphony, giving those opening statements a very special color and quality. That was the only time I think I have ever heard that. Also, in the last movement, when the contrabassoon reinforces the bass line, it makes a huge difference when you can actually hear it (which is pretty fun since it is working very, very hard in that finale).

Oooh, I would have loved to hear that!

I've heard some Mozart sacred music done with one string player to a part.  It was beautiful, and the balance was as perfect as anyone could wish.  I definitely agree that having a few good players is better than adding more players who may or may not play as well as your "core" group.

[M forever]

Oooh, I would have loved to hear that!

Me too, but I was kind of "in the middle of it" since I also played in the performances. Well, I did get a slightly more "neutral" impression, too, because I also conducted some of the rehearsals (with another bass player filling in when I wasn't playing myself) and performances (we played that twice in Berlin with a "real" conductor although he was actually not a "real" conductor either but a member of the BP) and then a few times more in outlying smaller cities in churches and community culture centers and places like that with yours truly making a fool out of himself in front of the band.
Yes, I have a very critical attitude towards conductors and conducting in general, which doesn't mean I don't still very much respect those who are really, really good at it, but on the other hand, I know that it is actually very easy to do OK when you are a little musical, have a clear idea of what the music should sound like, and aren't totally retarded when it comes to the physical part of it. That's really just a basic talent which some people have and some don't, just like some people are good at speaking freely in front of a group and some aren't - which doesn't mean that the former have more to say. Conducting is really like acting, in many respects, and while a lot of people can actually get on stage and recite a text, only few can do it really, really well - and it's exactly the same about conducting.
Unfortunately, I don't have any recordings of that.  There were some made, but I did that stuff together with a partner who was supposed to take care more of the "business" side of things while I was supposed to put together the programs and organize the musicians - which was fairly easy since there are tons of very good young musicians in Berlin, advanced students, recent graduates, young pros, and if you grow up in that scene, you simple know everyone or at least the people everyone knows and which really "draw" other musicians. I had a few key players, like an oboe player who I had somehow known forever and who at that time was the english horn player at the Deutsche Oper Berlin and then became one of the principals of the Staatskapelle Dresden, and just having him made sure that a lot of other great woodwind players wanted to come and play with the group, too, because of the other players and fun programs - for very little money, because we didn't make much from the concerts, of course.
Anyway, my "partner" turned out to be pretty incompetent but we had started the thing together, so I stuck with him longer than I should have. But for me, loyalty is very important even if it is not returned. It is a matter of personal pride, of sticking to your word. Which proved not such a good idea in that respect because I kept him on when a lot of people already told me openly that I was an idiot for not unloading him. Which was true. He embezzled some of the meagre funds we had and we had a huge and very final falling out over that. Unfortunately, at that time, he also had the recordings we had made and which he had been supposed to give to a studio for professional mastering...
Which is BTW one of the main reasons why I drifted into the whole cinema technology thing because literally a few days after the "breakup" - which led me to cancel the next concerts which promised to sell rather well - it was an all-Mozart program at the Kammermusiksaal of the Philharmonie, during the Christmas holidays - because I didn't have the backup funds to guarantee the musicians' fees - my "partner" had decided he needed some of the oney and that he could "gamble" on the concert selling well, but it was absolutely out of the question for me because the people who were to come and play trusted me, and I would never have risked their fees - anyway, literally a few days after that catastrophe, I got a good offer to work for a large movie theater chain in the technical department, a very convenient and welcome way to get out of the financial problems this situation had caused me, too, and get a little distance between me and all the stress involved in putting all that together and then seeing it fall apart because of this act of treason. I lost hearing in my right ear for a week because of all that stress...
I actually did work both in the cinema field and also in organizing and playing in concerts parallel to that for a while, maybe two years or so - not my own concerts, stuff I got hired to put together by people who had seen what I had done with that group and liked it - and I also at one point got a chance to go work for a rather powerful agency but I had already seen how much pulling strings and how much shifty stuff is going on "behind the scenes" and I would never have been able to reconcile that with my personal integrity. So I turned that down and I am still happy I did and started making a good career in another, maybe less "artistic" field, but with solid and honest work rather than playing management games. This, BTW, is also why I am so critical of all those "young stars" which get lifted onto the podiums by powerful agents, and not necessarily for their "talents" and "abilities".
Some day though, I think, I will put together something like that again. Maybe. It was a shitload of work but also very fun and very satisfying.
Years later, I found an MC which we had made from one of the DATs so we could listen to it in the car. It was the recording of a concert with works by Jean Francaix who we had invited to come to the concert - and who, to our complete amazement, actually came to Berlin even though we couldn't offer him a fee, just the train ticket and the hotel. But he liked the idea of young people playing his music, so he came and supported us. The tape also contained selections from another program we had played, strings only, with Debussy's Danses for harp and strings and Vaughan Williams' Thomas Tallis Fantasia. That was very strange to listen to that, many years later, like an echo from a former life. That was when I was packing up my stuff to move to the US, and since I didn't have the time to transfer it to CD, I must have put it in storage with a lot of my other stuff in my mother's house. I asked her to go look for it a while ago, but she didn't find it. Next time I am going back to Berlin, I will turn the house upside down to find it and make a copy of it 

[Renfield]

Long-winded, partly off-topic, certainly on a tangent, but a very interesting story nonetheless, M.

[M forever]

Yes, sorry, I am just sitting here sipping Bacardi&Coke, relaxing at the keyboard after a pretty stressy day. The main reason I remembered that was that I am very annoyed that there are so many people on the loose who don't "dare" to do something like that even though it is really interesting and musically very rewarding. You may have noticed how even a lot of people who either pretend to be "HIP" or who take a "classicist", "HIP-influenced" approach categorize the pieces into the "lighter" and the "heavier" ones, so they often play the Eroica or 5th or 7th with bigger forces and the 4th or 6th or 8th with smaller forces even though the 4th and the 8th were actually premiered with doubled winds and large string sections while the Eroica was first played by a very small ensemble, smaller even than the one we used. One of the reasons I did that was simply because I wanted to hear it and play it that way, as big chamber music! 

[Bonehelm]

Is it just me or is Mahler Chamber Orchestra a completely contradicting, paradoxical, oxymoronic name?

[FideLeo]

It's just you -- Mahler had composed chamber music.    Not to mention that his symphonies and lieder were performed in arrangements for chamber ensembles as early as 1910s (and probably in his times as well).

ps.  It is likely that the Berliner Staatskapelle that Oskar Fried used to record the 2nd was a chamber orchestra in HvK terms!

[FideLeo]

You may have noticed how even a lot of people who either pretend to be "HIP" or who take a "classicist", "HIP-influenced" approach categorize the pieces into the "lighter" and the "heavier" ones, so they often play the Eroica or 5th or 7th with bigger forces and the 4th or 6th or 8th with smaller forces even though the 4th and the 8th were actually premiered with doubled winds and large string sections while the Eroica was first played by a very small ensemble, smaller even than the one we used.

HvK probably didn't use 8 horns for his 8th's in performance or recording!

[M forever]

HvK probably didn't use 8 horns for his 8th's in performance or recording!

Sometimes, it actually helps if you actually read a thread before posting.

[FideLeo]

Sometimes, it actually helps if you actually read a thread before posting.

I did, but I had to skip a few longwinded posts. 

[FideLeo]

In Beethoven's time, the large scale concerts always included both professionals and amateurs among players -- a condition that is not the norm in our days -- and remarks concerning his use of extra complements in strings or/and in woodwinds must be taken with that fact in mind.  If it was just professionals, Beethoven's orchestra was actually quite small, and this of course means no doubled winds at all.   Those interested in more documented information can seek out, among other sources, Clive Brown's Early Music article on "The Orchestra in Beethoven's Vienna.

[Lethevich]

It's just you -- Mahler had composed chamber music.    Not to mention that his symphonies and lieder were performed in arrangements for chamber ensembles as early as 1910s (and probably in his times as well).

Plus many passages of his syms are on a chamber scale...

[jochanaan]

Me too, but I was kind of "in the middle of it" since I also played in the performances...

Off-topic comment: Sometimes I feel that, as an oboist, I have "the best seat in the house." It's certainly the loudest! The only group I have trouble hearing is the first violins, and that can be a problem since I usually have at least one passage in unison with them in every piece. I just have to trust that they can hear me and are actually listening as they play!

[M forever]

I did, but I had to skip a few longwinded posts. 

If you skipped my longwinded post on the top of this page, you haven't really missed anything about the topic because that was more about my own experiences with playing these pieces in a very small configuration and how that came about.

The information about what Karajan did and didn't do when it came to doubling was in a not very longwinded post at all on p.1. You might want to go back to that if you want to know about that.

Speaking of knowing,

In Beethoven's time, the large scale concerts always included both professionals and amateurs among players -- a condition that is not the norm in our days -- and remarks concerning his use of extra complements in strings or/and in woodwinds must be taken with that fact in mind.  If it was just professionals, Beethoven's orchestra was actually quite small, and this of course means no doubled winds at all.   Those interested in more documented information can seek out, among other sources, Clive Brown's Early Music article on "The Orchestra in Beethoven's Vienna.

do you have that article? Can you post it here or email it to me (I will PM you my email address). I would like to read that. I don't quite understand what the question of whether or not the musicians were full-time professionals or not has to do with orchestra sizes in general.

[jochanaan]

...I don't quite understand what the question of whether or not the musicians were full-time professionals or not has to do with orchestra sizes in general.

It might make the difference between community-orchestra quality and world-class quality.  Although I have to say I've known some professionals who could really play.  My own father was a physicist who could also play violin very well.

[M forever]

God for him! But you can't look at this subjects in modern terms such as "community orchestra" and "world class orchestra". The general situation of professional musicians and the "music scene" in general back then was completely different from what it is today. Besides, where they got the players and if they were paid or not still doesn't have anything to do with absolute orchestra sizes and relative numbers of players in wind and string sections. What we can learn from historical data is that when available, large forces were often used and winds were typically doubled to retain the same kind of balance smaller ensembles had - which is generally much more favorable for the winds, the woodwinds in particular, than in typical orchestra sizes as they developed later in the 19th century. So to perform music from the era with large string sections and double the winds to balance these larger string sections is definitely not a stylistical "crime" as such and assuming that small ensembles are automatically somehow "HIP" is definitely wrong.

[FideLeo]

So to perform music from the era with large string sections and double the winds to balance these larger string sections is definitely not a stylistical "crime" as such and assuming that small ensembles are automatically somehow "HIP" is definitely wrong.

No indeed but large scale performances employing double winds or 12 to 100 first violins were rare compared to today--  Beethoven's "regular" orchestra had only 4 - 6 first violins even if it was for large spaces seating 2,000 people like Theater an der Wien.  Obviously the concert halls back then were more "alive" acoustically than the modern ones -- must be different ideals in sound?