Schubert's Piano Sonata D 960

Started by AB68, March 04, 2009, 11:40:08 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

XB-70 Valkyrie

If you really dislike Bach you keep quiet about it! - Andras Schiff

Dr. Dread


sul G

Yes, but the sound quality on that recording isn't up to much, I'm sure you agree...



Jo498

Does anyone know of a discography?

I am wondering about the tempo indication and tempo of the first movement. "Molto moderato" is very uncommon and usually used a modifier, e.g. in "Allegro molto moderato" (although this particular combination is also uncommon). In Haydn and Beethoven "Moderato" movements are often highly embellished with figurations in (demi-semi? semi-demi-quavers) whereas Schubert's figurations (like the turn at the end of the second theme) are 16ths, there are only a few arpeggio flourishes with 32nds, also tone repetitions in triplets that seem to indicate a fairly flowing tempo.

Now there is the curious fact, that "early" recordings of that sonata tend to a comparably brisk tempo, basically an "Allegro moderato", close to the first movement of Beethoven's trio op.97 that shares the key and has a somewhat similar main theme. In fact, of the fastest interpretations I find, all but one (Lupu) are before 1970 or by "older" pianists born in the early 20th century. (unless indicated without exposition repeat)

Schnabel 1937 13:54
Wührer 1950s 12:31
Erdmann 1951 (Radio Bremen, there are more recordings/broadcasts but I have only this)  12:13
Annie Fischer 1960 12:45
Horowitz (date?) 13:07 (Urania, not sure where this stems from, his late DG is 19:14 incl. the repeat which is still faster than "typical" more recent performances)
Curzon (rec date? in Decca box) 13:15
Lupu 18:15 (incl. repeat would be ca. 13:30 without)
Haskil (?) 13:41 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqd7VG21Apw
Sofronitsky 1956 14:03 (there is another much slower one at 17:30 on youtube)
Rubinstein 14:17 (there is later slower one)

With repeat they would take ca. 17-19 min.
Nowadays almost all pianists take the repeat and they are typically around 20-22 min; the fastest "recent" one I am aware of (but there are probably many I have not checked) is Lupu and he is faster than Schnabel but considerably slower than Wührer, Fischer or Erdmann.

Now in the meantime there obviously was Richter who played that movement very slowly, ca. 24 minutes (w/ repeat).
While most more recent interpretations don't go quite that slow (except for some outliers, Afanassiev at >28 min...) they all seem to agree on a far more "moderate" tempo than most 50-60 years.
As Schubert's sonatas were not played frequently before the mid-20th century, one can wonder if those earlier pianists simply assumed that "molto moderato" would be modifying an implicit "allegro" and if they were correct in this. Or if Richter and his followers are correct and this is a considerably slower movement.

There is another movement with the same tempo indication (but 12/8 time), the first one of D 894. Richter is even slower here but fewer have followed him. Because of the different time signature etc. I don't think a comparison helps much to get a plausible tempo for D 960,i. The first mvmt. of D 887 has "Allegro molto moderato", this is in 3/4 and does have 16th triplets figurations and very quite different themes, so again, not much help here.
Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.
- Blaise Pascal

Mandryka

Afanassiev took about 28 minutes for the Denon, but seemed to rethink the approach for the ECM recording which takes about 22 minutes.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

Mandryka

Can we talk about Arrau's 960 - I think it's sensational, the balance of the voices is really revealing. It's becoming my favourite 960.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

Turner

#68
QuoteI am wondering about the tempo indication and tempo of the first movement. "Molto moderato" is very uncommon and usually used a modifier, e.g. in "Allegro molto moderato" (although this particular combination is also uncommon). In Haydn and Beethoven "Moderato" movements are often highly embellished with figurations in (demi-semi? semi-demi-quavers) whereas Schubert's figurations (like the turn at the end of the second theme) are 16ths, there are only a few arpeggio flourishes with 32nds, also tone repetitions in triplets that seem to indicate a fairly flowing tempo.

Now there is the curious fact, that "early" recordings of that sonata tend to a comparably brisk tempo, basically an "Allegro moderato", close to the first movement of Beethoven's trio op.97 that shares the key and has a somewhat similar main theme. In fact, of the fastest interpretations I find, all but one (Lupu) are before 1970 or by "older" pianists born in the early 20th century. (unless indicated without exposition repeat)

Schnabel 1937 13:54
Wührer 1950s 12:31
Erdmann 1951 (Radio Bremen, there are more recordings/broadcasts but I have only this)  12:13
Annie Fischer 1960 12:45
Horowitz (date?) 13:07 (Urania, not sure where this stems from, his late DG is 19:14 incl. the repeat which is still faster than "typical" more recent performances)
Curzon (rec date? in Decca box) 13:15
Lupu 18:15 (incl. repeat would be ca. 13:30 without)
Haskil (?) 13:41 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqd7VG21Apw
Sofronitsky 1956 14:03 (there is another much slower one at 17:30 on youtube)
Rubinstein 14:17 (there is later slower one)

With repeat they would take ca. 17-19 min.
Nowadays almost all pianists take the repeat and they are typically around 20-22 min; the fastest "recent" one I am aware of (but there are probably many I have not checked) is Lupu and he is faster than Schnabel but considerably slower than Wührer, Fischer or Erdmann.

I pretty much think you are right. Slow interpretations seemed rare.

Haskil on my Philips LP (rec. 1951) has a stated timing of 13:06; the 13:41 one could be the 1957 recording by her.

Horowiz´s early RCA (rec. 1953) is 13:02 on my LP.

Anda (1960) is 14:39.
Also, for example, Kempff did a Decca in 1950, and Badura-Skoda one in 1960, but I don´t have the timings.

Yudina however (1947), another early recording, is 21:57.

Jo498

#69
Thanks for the info, I found the Haskil only on youtube, was not aware that there are several recordings; the early Horowitz is probably the same as on that Urania CD
The 1960s stereo by Kempff is already on the slower side >21 min, can't find the timing of the earlier Decca.
Interesting that there is at least one slow early one, namely Yudina.

As for Arrau, his fairly late (1980) Studio recording clocks at 20:07 with repeat, so while not nearly as fast as the early recordings mentioned above, it is on the fast side of the "new normal" which I find remarkable for a pianist who is often on the slow side (especially in his lateish recordings, take his 10:49 for the andante of the sonata in that recording or the slowish finale of the c minor D 958). So I think that Arrau is also (barely) a data point for the "earlier recordings/older pianists played this movement considerably faster" thesis.
Likewise, Haskil, Fischer and others mentioned above are not exactly speed demons in other repertoire. Therefore I think that this really shows a different general idea, namely that it is basically "allegro moderato", despite the uncommon "molto moderato". (Somewhat surprisingly, Schnabel who seems fast compared to most recent recordings, is actually among the slowest of the olders ones!)

Basically, the "slow" recordings of earlier times (also Serkin with 21 min or so) are roughly like the average/median (or even slightly faster than that) interpretations of the last 40 years. And while there might be some out there, I am not aware of any fastish recordings by "younger" pianists with the exception of Lupu (1994). The two "HIP" recordings I have are also slowish or (new) average respectively: Staier 21:59, Lahusen 20:38.

Ad Afanassiev: I was told that the ECM is actually an earlier recording (1985) that was only published much later. Another very slow recent one is Korstick (cpo, 25:35)

I found another fastish one, Andras Schiff's more recent on ECM at 18:33, but this is still slower than Lupu and the "older" recordings.

There is another bunch slightly faster than the typical new tempi (20-22 min with repeat) but they are usually about a minute slower than Lupu.

Horowitz (DG) 19:14
Badura-Skoda 19:24; 19:41
Todd Crow 19:24
Koroliov 19:32
Jörg Ewald Dähler (HIP) 19:09
Pollini: 18:56
Zhu Xiao Mei 19:27

no repeat:
Goode 14:04
Barenboim (Erato) 14:05
Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.
- Blaise Pascal

amw

Södergren 1984 is 13:16 (not 14:05 as listed on the LP sleeve)
Lefébure 1979 is 13:15
Fleisher 1956 is 13:39

Goldstone 2001 is 18:04
Hobson 2000 is 17:55

It does seem like the average performance tempo of Schubert has slowed way down recently though. 22 minutes, which is practically an adagio, seems to be exceeded by more pianists than all three of us have listed combined.

(when I personally play the movement it usually ends up in the 17:30-18:00 range with repeat and this has always felt like the "right" tempo.... of course I grew up on a steady diet of Schnabel)

Jo498

I actually think that the movement "works" at a broad range of tempo but I have not listened to Richter recently. But it is puzzling that the faster half of that range (that was the "normal" around 1960) seems to have largely disappeared with a few exceptions.

In the last days/week I heard Arrau's and Zacharias' recordings (around 20 and 20:40 respectively) and I found this tempo quite good. It is a clearly slower than a typical allegro moderato (like the "old" ones or Lupu) but still flowing.
Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.
- Blaise Pascal

zamyrabyrd

It was a surprise to read in Interpretating Bach at the Keyboard by Badura-Skoda, that tempi in the Baroque era were considerably faster. This inference was derived from a discovery of "organ-rolls", many of them destroyed but enough remaining to upset entrenched beliefs about slower speeds.

Clara Haskil's rendering of the Bb Sonata of Schubert is one of my absolute favorites, although I grew up with Schnabel's.
Noteworthy are her trills, crafted with the precision of a violinist, which she was also.
"Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one."

― Charles MacKay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds

Mandryka

#73
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on August 14, 2017, 07:40:58 AM
It was a surprise to read in Interpretating Bach at the Keyboard by Badura-Skoda, that tempi in the Baroque era were considerably faster. This inference was derived from a discovery of "organ-rolls", many of them destroyed but enough remaining to upset entrenched beliefs about slower speeds.


This must refer to musical clocks and barrel organs. Were there mechanical reproductions of Bach's music, for example? It would be nice to know more about what PBS was referring to exactly, I don't have the book.

There's some really nice things

https://www.youtube.com/v/uvGDFZN3SoA
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

Omicron9

I have easily a half-dozen recordings of this piece.  I like them all for differing reasons, but the two to which I most often gravitate, other than Richter which has already been discussed, is Schiff and Pollini.

-09
"Signature-line free since 2017!"