Beethoven's String Quartets

[Jo498]

It is also the officially final and published form of the piece. (So leaving it out is a little like playing the Waldstein with the Andante favori instead of the "Introduction" although as pointed out above this sonata was probably never played publicly with the Andante favori.)
While I have enough recordings so that the skipping of the later finale would not be a dealbreaker for me I definitely think that it should be included.

[The One]

I don't know if even this would help.

"Why did you decide not to record the second finale of op.130?
Christophe Coin (cellist of QM): Even though Beethoven did a magnificent job on this later alternative, and included elements present in the earlier movements according to his usual cyclic procedure, in our view it represents a compromise in the face of the lack of understanding of his contemporaries, who forced him to reconsider his score when they rejected the Große Fuge. We wanted to respect Beethoven's initial choice.

The Große Fuge op.133 – like the fugue in the Cello Sonata op.102 no.2 – is still enigmatic for us today in its savage perfection, and any attempt to change the slightest note to 'make it easier' shocks the ear. We come to it when we're already exhausted by the concentration the Quartet op.130 requires: this 'great fugue', like an ice-cold bath after a physical effort, gives us an incredible shot of energy."

I called Mr Coin and told them how misguided they were.

[amw]

It is also the officially final and published form of the piece. (So leaving it out is a little like playing the Waldstein with the Andante favori instead of the "Introduction" although as pointed out above this sonata was probably never played publicly with the Andante favori.)

I would honestly listen to a recording that restored the Andante favori (although leaving out the introduction is probably a mistake). I guess I do generally prefer the first conception of compositions though, except maybe Bruckner 8 and Mahler 6.

We wanted to respect Beethoven's initial choice.

Basically. I think after a performance of Op.130/133 the replacement finale can be played as an encore, but on CD it's always optional, imo. (Though it is in its own way a radically destabilising piece, with a much more open ending than the Grosse Fuge, showing what Beethoven had learned from composing Op.131 and 135 in the meanwhile.)

[Jo498]

My point was that the arguments for initial vs. final published form are usually equally good/bad if they mainly stress "first" vs. "last". The very fact that it was either the first or last conception does not really provide a good argument.

And Beethoven very rarely did revisions like this after public performances had taken place (unlike Handel, Schumann, Bruckner and others), so there are no clear parallel cases but we know that he did not change his mind easily and the rather modest additional compensation from the publisher can hardly have been what made him do the revision (I think Kerman writes that it was a sum roughly corresponding to Beethoven's typical monthly expenses, so not a lot of money.) A better case could probably be made that he hoped to reach a wider audience more easily in the revised version. But apparently he also took great care to make sure that the fugue was published, also in the 4hand version.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

The Lindsays recorded the cavatina twice (because of the way it is linked to both finales) but not the rest of the quartet. The Elias Quartet has recorded Op.130 twice, once with the Grosse Fuge and once with the replacement finale, but it is of course a live cycle, ostensibly.

The Mosaïques and Edding recordings of Op.130 leave out the replacement finale because of their view of historically informed performance and therefore trying to replicate the conditions under which the work was first performed (when the movement did not exist yet).

Thanks for filling in the blanks!

... So he was both stubborn and practical, depending on the context.

So I don't think that settles the question of the finale in any way. Neither can one claim that Beethoven really regretted the fugue final and preferred the final form nor is it plausible that he gave in so quickly to the publisher's wishes.

Correct by all means. And that was my humble goal: To point that the question is decidedly not settled. And that therefore the decision of the Eddings or Mosaiques or other quartets might give cause for personal lament -- but are hardly egregious. 

My point was that the arguments for initial vs. final published form are usually equally good/bad if they mainly stress "first" vs. "last". The very fact that it was either the first or last conception does not really provide a good argument.

Also a very good point. It just serves as argumentative fodder for our own preferences. I.e. in Mahler... where I happen to think that Mahler's second thoughts were absolutely wrong... and use early Mahler against later Mahler because I happen to prefer it Scherzo-Andante.

[Cato]

So, when all is said and done, we have two excellent choices for the finale in question!

It is quite possible that one will choose the Grosse Fuge for a while, but then suddenly decide that the alternate Finale fits the mood.  This process could take decades! 

As the Scarecrow says in The Wizard of Oz, "Of course, some people go both ways!"  Perhaps one will want to play both endings for an ultimate slam-dunk ending! 

Concerning the Bernstein/Vienna Philharmonic version of the Opus 131:

Playing a beautiful late Beethoven quartet as if it's hysterical Mahler sans brass and woodwinds; those awful sforzandi and drawnout tempi... Awful, tasteless and completely unnecessary.

None of that occurred to me, but...ears can be quite different! 

The recording Lenny professed being most proud about, if I don't misremember.

Given his output, that is quite a statement!  0:)

[The One]

The recording Lenny professed being most proud about, if I don't misremember.

Did you mean "...if I am not making it up right now" ?

Edit: This ended with embarresment for me. "Hail JFL's Brain!"

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Did you mean "...if I am not making it up right now" ?

That's not completely out of the question, though I really do think it's more than that, in this case. I know it's one reason I bought this CD (which is not the same as saying it's true - only that I believed it to be true). But I think I've seen something along those lines mentioned since.

Via Hurwitzer, I found a reference (not the one I thought I had seen... but perhaps good enough?)

In Jonathan Cott's book Dinner with Lenny, which contains Bernstein's last interview, the conductor identifies two recordings as his favorites: Shostakovich's Leningrad Symphony with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, and his string orchestra version of Beethoven's Quartet in C sharp minor, Op 131.

[Mandryka]

His daughter says

I know for a fact that of all his recordings, he was most proud of Beethoven's "Opus 131" with The Vienna Philharmonic strings. That piece, one of the very late quartets, challenges any chamber ensemble with wild meter and tempo changes, and sudden mood swings. For a full orchestral string section to sound as tight as a group of four is truly a dazzling accomplishment. And the effect is thrilling.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/leonard-bernsteins-99th-conversations-with-jamie_us_599ee5bde4b0a62d0987ad3f

[The One]

That's not completely out of the question, though I really do think it's more than that, in this case. I know it's one reason I bought this CD (which is not the same as saying it's true - only that I believed it to be true). But I think I've seen something along those lines mentioned since.

Via Hurwitzer, I found a reference (not the one I thought I had seen... but perhaps good enough?)

I have the book:

...

[I walk over to the CD player as LB holds up a CD.]

LB: This is my personal favorite record that I've ever made in my life, if you'd really like to know.

[LB places the disc in the CD player and tells me that we're going to be listening to an orchestral transcription of Beethoven's great C-sharp Minor Quartet, op. 131 that he recorded with the sixty string players of the Vienna Philharmonic in 1977.]

LB: This is so beautiful and extraordinary that I dedicated it to my wife—it's the only record I've ever dedicated to anyone. And I had to fight with the Vienna Philharmonic string players to get them to do it—I actually received personal letters from them saying that it was an impossible undertaking: "Four people can't play that, how can sixty play it?" Well, they can.
I doubled the basses—we had seven of them, and you've never heard basses play so gorgeously—and doubled the cellos judiciously but didn't change a single note or dynamic marking. And finally they loved doing it. You can't understand any Mahler unless you understand this piece, which moves and stabs—and with its floating counterpoint. The orchestra and I performed it at the Odeon of Herodes Atticus in Athens in the open air, and the audience just went out of their skulls. Let me play it for you.
...

I don't know about copyright limits so I'll stop typing here

[Baron Scarpia]

¨
That seems slightly misguided to me. The substitute movement was still an original Beethoven composition and it would be interesting to hear it played  as they thought it might originally have been played.

Finally, someone agrees with me! I don't necessarily believe that the revised finale is a better conclusion to the work than the Grosse Fuge, but it s the last piece of music Beethoven completed, and it is well worth hearing, even as an encore.

[Cato]

Finally, someone agrees with me! I don't necessarily believe that the revised finale is a better conclusion to the work than the Grosse Fuge, but it's the last piece of music Beethoven completed, and it is well worth hearing, even as an encore.

Amen!  0:)

I have the book:

LB: This is so beautiful and extraordinary that I dedicated it to my wife—it's the only record I've ever dedicated to anyone. And I had to fight with the Vienna Philharmonic string players to get them to do it—I actually received personal letters from them saying that it was an impossible undertaking: "Four people can't play that, how can sixty play it?" Well, they can.
I doubled the basses—we had seven of them, and you've never heard basses play so gorgeously—and doubled the cellos judiciously but didn't change a single note or dynamic marking. And finally they loved doing it. You can't understand any Mahler unless you understand this piece, which moves and stabs—and with its floating counterpoint. The orchestra and I performed it at the Odeon of Herodes Atticus in Athens in the open air, and the audience just went out of their skulls. Let me play it for you.

That "Mahler comment" is an interesting statement!

[Florestan]

Performance is a science

Indeed. A science so well-established, whose basic laws are so well-known and whose theories are so confirmed by experimental data, that there are just about as many performances as there are performers.

we know almost everything about Beethoven's time

There are some minor details yet to be expanded upon, though; for instance how the music sounded to ears who had not yet heard anything post-Beethoven.

[The One]

Louis Spohr on Late Quartets: "indecipherable, uncorrected horrors."

Igor Stravinsky on Grosse Fuge: "an absolutely contemporary piece of music that will be contemporary forever"

Richard Wagner on the first movement of No 14: "reveals the most melancholy sentiment expressed in music".

Franz Schubert on No 14: "After this, what is left for us to write?"

[Mandryka]

Richard Wagner on the first movement of No 14: "reveals the most melancholy sentiment expressed in music".

I wonder what people make of this. I mean, I know some melancholy performances (Busch) and some less melancholy ones. My favourite op 131/i is more spooky than melancholy (Vlach), and then there's Brooklyn Rider . . .

Igor Stravinsky on Grosse Fuge: "an absolutely contemporary piece of music that will be contemporary forever"

Anyone feel like unpacking this? I ask really because I'm interested in the idea of contemporary in plastic arts. I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that it says nothing really about the art itself . . .

[amw]

I mean I think it's probably not as melancholy as Winterreise, or the final chorus of the St John Passion, or whatever. But also I don't think there's anything inherently melancholy to the music. The emotional world is probably better described as dramatic, a sort of impassioned operatic ensemble in the form of a fugue, or something like that. (which again has its precedents throughout Bach)

[Herman]

You can't understand any Mahler unless you understand this piece, which moves and stabs—and with its floating counterpoint. The orchestra and I performed it at the Odeon of Herodes Atticus in Athens in the open air, and the audience just went out of their skulls.

It's funny. Used to be Haydn and Mozart (and even Bach) were performed in a lousy manner, to make people hear the ways they preceded the almighty Beethoven.

Fortunately no one does that anymore.

And here Bernstein does the same thing with Beethoven, making him a precursor of Mahler.

[Daverz]

It's funny. Used to be Haydn and Mozart (and even Bach) were performed in a lousy manner, to make people hear the ways they preceded the almighty Beethoven.

Fortunately no one does that anymore.

And here Bernstein does the same thing with Beethoven, making him a precursor of Mahler.

Performed in a lousy manner?  No.

[Herman]

I found that I have only three cd of the Talich late seventies early eighties 'Hommage' series.

The Harp (74), coupled with 59/1
Op 130, coupled with 59.2 (btw the 130 has the short finale)
Op. 132 coupled with 135.

So, if I'm to go hunting for other issues from this series, which one should come first? 131 or 127? or any other one? which Talich recording (from the Hommage series) impressed you most?

[Mandryka]

I found that I have only three cd of the Talich late seventies early eighties 'Hommage' series.

The Harp (74), coupled with 59/1
Op 130, coupled with 59.2 (btw the 130 has the short finale)
Op. 132 coupled with 135.

So, if I'm to go hunting for other issues from this series, which one should come first? 131 or 127? or any other one? which Talich recording (from the Hommage series) impressed you most?

I don't know why you're being so cautious Herman, stop dithering and get the lot.

The sound, I mean the capture of the sound, and the way they balance the voices and their dynamics and timbre, is so really unique. Same for the conception - they're poised and delicate, but not at all gentlemanly, because they're expressive.

I like very much the 131, especially the fugue. But really the whole quartet is a pleasure to hear if you're open to it. On the other hand I think you may also enjoy hearing their op 18s and their 133. That's it - get the op 18s! The scale of their style fits the music like a glove, and they often play with a smile on their face.

One thing I've recently discovered is that, for early music at least, Michel Bernstein commissioned or indeed wrote himself some very good essays for the Valois and Astrée booklets. If anyone has any of the essays for the Beethoven it would be great if they would upload them - I only know them through the cheap re-edition on Dolce Volte. (I just found an essay for Calliope by Patrick Szersnovicz which is maybe not so interesting.)