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

[scarpia]

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? 

Besides, people back then weren't half deaf from walking around with their ipods blasting through their ear-buds all day.  I'm often irritated that any form of music, which previously would have been played acoustically, now has to be amplified with a PA system because people are incapable of actually being quiet and listening, unless the music is so loud that they can't make themselves heard above it.

[M forever]

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? 

Again, you can't compare the situation to what it is like today. That simply doesn't make sense. So many factors are different. All we can learn from studying the available data is what orchestra sizes were used and what relative relationships the sections of the orchestras had. It doesn't matter what ensemble sizes Beethoven "normally" had, or what he would have liked to have, or maybe not, if the musicians were paid or not, if they had bad teeth and bad breath or not. These may be interesting historical details, but they only give us very little information about how the music was actually played, they just give us some basical outlines of logistic and social realities back then.

BTW, the Theater an der Wien is not a very big theater. It seats maybe 1000 and if you are in it, it looks actually quite small. Concert halls back then were not necessarily more alive acoustically in general than they are today. They had very little actual concert halls anyway. Some of the large halls that may have been available on occasion which were also dance halls and ball rooms probably had a rather "alive" acoustic, but a lot of theaters didn't, because they had/have a lot of carpeting and draped surfaces etc.

[M forever]

Besides, people back then weren't half deaf from walking around with their ipods blasting through their ear-buds all day.  I'm often irritated that any form of music, which previously would have been played acoustically, now has to be amplified with a PA system because people are incapable of actually being quiet and listening, unless the music is so loud that they can't make themselves heard above it.

You are right. Back then, people weren't half deaf from their ipods. Those that were half deaf were so because they had all sorts of nasty diseases and infections or no means to cure ailments brought about by accidents. Some people (like Beethoven, for instance) became deaf from illnesses which could easily be treated today. So they didn't need ipods.

[FideLeo]

These may be interesting historical details, but they only give us very little information about how the music was actually played, they just give us some basical outlines of logistic and social realities back then.

I think knowing the actual size of the orchestras back then is VERY SIGNIFICANT to our understanding of how the music was played, not just a matter of logistics, if we also have some ideas of the kinds of space they played in.  As recent research in that field shows, Beethoven apparently didn't adapt his forces much at all to the various sizes and acoustics of rooms he played in.

BTW, the Theater an der Wien is not a very big theater. It seats maybe 1000 and if you are in it, it looks actually quite small. 

The Theater an der Wien in 1800s seated 2,200 people (and another of the famous venues for Beethoven's performances, Karntertortheater, 2,400) if Immerseel's figure is to be trusted.  Where do you get your figure of 1,000?   

Immerseel also concluded from evidence presented in Stefan Weinzierl's book that most halls Beethoven played in "had wooden benches, stone floors, plaster walls" and therefore had very little in common with today's concert halls in terms of acoustic qualities. 

[scarpia]

Beethoven was deaf because he was an alcoholic and consumed large quantities of a certain variety of wine, which was sweetened with lead.  (Lead is is extremely damaging to the central and peripheral nervous system.)  This was confirmed when a lock of Beethoven's hair that had been preserved was tested, and contained such high levels of lead that the investigators expressed some surprise that he managed to live as long as he did.  Certainly people had short lifespans in those days, but I've not come across any claim that deafness was particularly common.  On the other hand, I've seen modern studies where investigators stop people on the street and ask to measure the volume levels of the headphones they are wearing.  A large fraction are playing a volume levels that are known to be damaging.

You are right. Back then, people weren't half deaf from their ipods. Those that were half deaf were so because they had all sorts of nasty diseases and infections or no means to cure ailments brought about by accidents. Some people (like Beethoven, for instance) became deaf from illnesses which could easily be treated today. So they didn't need ipods.

[M forever]

I think knowing the actual size of the orchestras back then is VERY SIGNIFICANT to our understanding of how the music was played, not just a matter of logistics, if we also have some ideas of the kinds of space they played in.

I also think knowing the sizes of orchestras is very important, but we do know that anyway, and the available data shows us that a number or various sizes where used and the factors which dictated the absolute sizes of orchestras were often more logistical and financial than artistical. I don't think you understand that while some of the theaters in Vienna had (relatively small) permanent ensembles, the whole situation was much less standardized and institutionalized than it is today where cultural institutions such as symphony orchestras and opera houses have a relatively large number of full-time salaried, professional musicians (who, these days, can actually make a dignified living) that can be drawn upon to form pretty much any commonly used ensemble sized, from the chamber group to the full Wagner and Strauss orchestra. t wasn't like that back then. The social situation supported only a small number of full-time professional musicians and since theaters were rather small (see below), that was OK for day-to-day operations. Concerts were not organized in regular series with permanent ensembles either, they were put together on the fly according to what financial means and other logistical factors allowed.
We can however learn that they tried to preserve the basic balances between sections of the orchestras by, e.g. doubling winds if available. That tells us a lot about the sound picture they aimed for. I haven't had time yet to read all of the article you sent me, but the data I have seen so far completely underline that. One detail jumped into my eye: that they actually had *2 contrabassoons* for one performance. If any modern conductor did that, pseudo-HIP purists would cry out and accuse him of "megalomania"...

As recent research in that field shows, Beethoven apparently didn't adapt his forces much at all to the various sizes and acoustics of rooms he played in.

Exactly. And why? Because the governing factors were not artistic ideals, but logisitical realities. They had to make to do with whatever they could get. So there were no standards or ideals when it comes to exact size of orchestras, rooms, and their acoustics.

The Theater an der Wien in 1800s seated 2,200 people (and another of the famous venues for Beethoven's performances, Karntertortheater, 2,400) if Immerseel's figure is to be trusted.  Where do you get your figure of 1,000?   

http://www.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/bildung_und_kultur/kultur/theater_und_musik/021278.html
Plus, I have been in the theater. Have you? It is actually fairly small, high (3 or 4 balconies), but rather short. The Kaerntnertortheater may have been a little bigger, but not much - which is why they razed it and built the new opera house next it. But even the modern Staatsoper (which was built and rebuilt much later of course) which is a fairly large opera house "only" seats 1850. Have you ever been in any of these or comparable historical venues (public halls, ball rooms, theaters) from that and earlier periods? Some have very reverberant acoustics, some have very dry acoustics (esp. a lot of the older theaters). There was no "acoustic ideal" and no "standard acoustic", just like today.

Immerseel also concluded from evidence presented in Stefan Weinzierl's book that most halls Beethoven played in "had wooden benches, stone floors, plaster walls" and therefore had very little in common with today's concert halls in terms of acoustic qualities. 

That can't be generalized at all (see above). Modern concert halls don't have standard acoustical properties either anyway. What book is that? I know of an audio engineering handbook edited by a guy of that name.

[jochanaan]

...the factors which dictated the absolute sizes of orchestras were often more logistical and financial than artistical...

A very good point!  What Bach or Beethoven may have wanted, and what they could afford to get, were probably two very different things.