Unpopular Opinions

[Mahlerian]

Resurrecting this thread.  Don't know if it has been mentioned before in this thread, but upon re-listening to Op 130, I must say that the revised ending is much better than the Grosse Fugue, and there is a somewhat plausible chance that I never listen to the fugal ending again.

The Fugue is more closely connected to the motivic material of the other movements than the replacement, and on those grounds alone I think it is the better ending.

[Parsifal]

Resurrecting this thread.  Don't know if it has been mentioned before in this thread, but upon re-listening to Op 130, I must say that the revised ending is much better than the Grosse Fugue, and there is a somewhat plausible chance that I never listen to the fugal ending again.

Don't make that choice until you have heard Furtwangler's Weiner Philharmoniker recording.

[mc ukrneal]

Discussing possible titles for the Foote thread is more interesting than his music.

Oh, Karl. That's not nice - and from a fellow composer! I think you better hot foote it out of here!!

[Karl Henning]

Oh, Karl. That's not nice - and from a fellow composer! I think you better hot foote it out of here!!

It's not my opinion--I've not heard any Foote yet  But it would be an unpopular one.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Jo498]

Don't make that choice until you have heard Furtwangler's Wiener Philharmoniker recording.

But one cannot listen to Furtwängler as the ending of the quartet because it is fugue only.

I think both options are valid: As Mahlerian said, the fugue is motivically more clearly related to material of the earlier movements and makes for a stunning finale, similar to the 9th symphony or op.106. But it also tends to overwhelm the rest of the piece and it can stand on its own quite well (although obviously the motivic relations are somewhat moot if op.133 is played alone).
The rondo finale is more in line with the divertimento character of movements 2-4 and does not overwhelm the rest.

[Parsifal]

But one cannot listen to Furtwängler as the ending of the quartet because it is fugue only.

I think both options are valid: As Mahlerian said, the fugue is motivically more clearly related to material of the earlier movements and makes for a stunning finale, similar to the 9th symphony or op.106. But it also tends to overwhelm the rest of the piece and it can stand on its own quite well (although obviously the motivic relations are somewhat moot if op.133 is played alone).
The rondo finale is more in line with the divertimento character of movements 2-4 and does not overwhelm the rest.

Depends on how you interpret Todd's statement. I assumed he would not listen to the Fugue, full stop.

Originally I was a stickler for Beethoven's original intention, but have come around to preferring the replacement finale. The consensus of the linear note writers seems to be that Beethoven's original choice was right and he was cowered into producing a more palatable finale by the publishers. But when did Beethoven ever take suggestions? He must have come to feel that the Fugue was over that top and better as a freestanding piece.

[Todd]

Depends on how you interpret Todd's statement. I assumed he would not listen to the Fugue, full stop.

As an ending to the quartet only.  Stand-alone for string orchestra is fine. 

[(poco) Sforzando]

Oh, Karl. That's not nice - and from a fellow composer! I think you better hot foote it out of here!!

Now you've really put your foot in it.

[Karl Henning]

Footwängler

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Ken B]

Discussing possible titles for the Foote thread is more interesting than his music.

Karl, with Foote in mouth!

[(poco) Sforzando]

But one cannot listen to Furtwängler as the ending of the quartet because it is fugue only.

I think both options are valid: As Mahlerian said, the fugue is motivically more clearly related to material of the earlier movements and makes for a stunning finale, similar to the 9th symphony or op.106. But it also tends to overwhelm the rest of the piece and it can stand on its own quite well (although obviously the motivic relations are somewhat moot if op.133 is played alone).
The rondo finale is more in line with the divertimento character of movements 2-4 and does not overwhelm the rest.

I am less concerned with the motivic relations than with the progression of the movements, and the Fugue does overwhelm the rest of the quartet while the rondo is more in keeping with the earlier movements, as well as being a delightful movement in itself that has no other place to be heard except possibly as an encore piece. With the Fugue, Beethoven had achieved something very original: a self-contained one-movement work that contains within it the equivalent of an opening movement, moderately slow movement, and scherzo finale. It's the only movement from all the quartets that can stand alone as an independent work.

[North Star]

I am less concerned with the motivic relations than with the progression of the movements, and the Fugue does overwhelm the rest of the quartet while the rondo is more in keeping with the earlier movements, as well as being a delightful movement in itself that has no other place to be heard except possibly as an encore piece. With the Fugue, Beethoven had achieved something very original: a self-contained one-movement work that contains within it the equivalent of an opening movement, moderately slow movement, and scherzo finale. It's the only movement from all the quartets that can stand alone as an independent work.

So does Bach's Partita no. 2 for solo violin need a new finale, too? 

[Ken B]

So does Bach's Partita no. 2 for solo violin need a new finale, too? 

As long as we all agree Beethoven's 9th needs a new final, I'm happy!

[Madiel]

Originally I was a stickler for Beethoven's original intention, but have come around to preferring the replacement finale. The consensus of the linear note writers seems to be that Beethoven's original choice was right and he was cowered into producing a more palatable finale by the publishers. But when did Beethoven ever take suggestions? He must have come to feel that the Fugue was over that top and better as a freestanding piece.

And it is far from the only time that Beethoven went switching movements.

If it's unpopular opinions we're after, maybe I should start a campaign to re-insert the Andante Favori back into the Waldstein piano sonata. And put the finale of the Kreutzer violin sonata back in its rightful place.

[(poco) Sforzando]

But when did Beethoven ever take suggestions?

Not often. But he also came to accept the suggestions that made "Leonora" the familiar "Fidelio" we know.

[Jo498]

The difference between the Waldstein and op.30/Kreutzer cases and op.130/133 is that the changes in the first two pieces took place before they were performed publicly. op.130 was performed with the Fugue and while the two short movements had to be encored, the fugue was met with puzzlement. Except for the complicated history of Leonore/Fidelio I think op.130/133 really is the only case of a major change in a piece that had been considered finished and was publicly performed in Beethoven's oeuvre.

[Parsifal]

As long as we all agree Beethoven's 9th needs a new final, I'm happy!

I think I have expressed that unpopular opinion as well, maybe on this thread. I recall reading that Beethoven himself was dissatisfied with the finale of the 9th and had plans to replace it with an instrumental finale. That would have been something to hear, had he lived long enough to carry through with it.

Basically, I think the finale of the 9th would work fine on its own as a Cantata. The silly stunt of audition and rejecting the themes of the previous movements before the ode to joy theme is introduced brings home to me the lack of an organic connection between the first three movements of the 9th and the finale. And, to cap it off, if Beethoven hadn't introduced a chorus in his symphony, maybe no one else would have dared and we would have been spared numerous dreadful choral symphonies.

But of course, it is one of the most popular symphonies in history, so who am I to criticize?

[PotashPie]

I think it is unpopular to go against the idea that music is basically a sensual experience, and needs less "brain" input;

...or that listening "without thinking," like sinking into a warm bubble-bath, is somehow just as rewarding as listening with intellectual awareness.

I am against this "mindless" approach. I am constantly making efforts to penetrate the meaning of music as I listen, and it has been paying-off big time.

The more I read and understand about music, the better and more immersive my listening experience becomes.

This is based on a proper "cart and horse" relationship between sensuality and the intellect. The intellect should know when to "let go," as well as when to "kick in" and be the guide.

This leads to a well-balanced blend of intellect, and sensuality, which I call "intuitive listening."

[starrynight]

The consensus of the linear note writers seems to be that Beethoven's original choice was right and he was cowered into producing a more palatable finale by the publishers. But when did Beethoven ever take suggestions? He must have come to feel that the Fugue was over that top and better as a freestanding piece.

Or he was happy just to get some more money at that point with the Grosse Fugue published separately.

[Jo498]

This is discussed in the literature. He got a little more money but not so much that it should have been a decisive factor (as he had to compose the alternate finale he also had to do more work for that money). As far as I remember he also agreed to do the 4-hand version when they had agreed to publish it separately so it could also have been the case that Beethoven really wanted people to understand the piece more deeply if it was separated and also available to be played on piano.