Who has the fastest 7th?

[chrisg]

If I was directing, I'd have the (natural, of course) horn players play with 'bells' turned forward to get a more prominent sound

Why Rod, I'm shocked, shocked! Good for you, but I'd do you two better by doubling the horns and having them stand up Mahler style.

cg

[chrisg]

The horns are good, but not great. Kleiber with the VPO has better sound from the brass. With Monteux I simply an pointing out the speed which goes back to Euphony's original question. Your survey is quite good on speeds and Papa Monteux's is an excellent performance that provides velocity in the 4th movement comparable to Von Karajan's speed.

Too bad about the horns. Thanks to this thread, I'm about OD'd on the finale of the 7th, but that will pass. I'd still place Mackerras and Harnoncourt 1st, with Bruggen, and Davis right behind. For pure speed, it's Bruggen. Removing the first repeat, I figure he times in at 6:15, which sounds just a little too hectic for me. Still, it's great fun as an alternative. The horns register, but it's the trumpets that tend to dominate.


Is the recording by Sir Colin Davis still available?

Not in the U.S. apparently. Mymusic.com, an excellent Canadian source, does list it. It's on an EMI "double fforte", oddly coupled with a reasonably good Schubert 9th (Szell / Cleveland), and some nothing special Rossini Overtures conducted by Davis.

More than any other Beethoven symphony, I find the 7th varies greatly in recorded performance quality within the 4 movements.

Agreed. I still haven't found one I'm completely satisfied with.

This finale is one of the few movements in the Symphonies where I prefer a much faster tempo than indicated. All my favorites time at around 8:30 or less, while the metronome chasers (i.e. Gardiner, Norrington, Zander) take about 9:00.

cg

[euphony131]

Originally posted by chrisg:
If I was directing, I'd have the (natural, of course) horn players play with 'bells' turned forward to get a more prominent sound

Good for you, but I'd do you two better by doubling the horns and having them stand up Mahler style.

cg

Ah-Ha! By jove! That's it! "Mahler-style" with "bells" turned forward and double the number of horn-players! Now there's a performance guaranteed to rock the house! Oh, let's do away with convention and formality altogether and usher back the days of unbridled Romanticism! God, what I wouldn't give to see all the stodgy, stuffy, pedantic Rules done away with!

BTW, I thought Zinman's use of brass for the 7th was pretty darn close to jaw-dropping. Maybe not as frenetic and fast as I'd like for the 4th movement, but the best -- overall -- that I've heard. Check out the enchanced sound of double-basses & cellos (or is it just the double-basses? Correct me if I'm wrong) in the Marcia Funebre of the 2nd movement! Wow!

Rod, when you said "bells turned forward" I assumed you meant having the "umbrella-like" opening of a brass instrument pointed forward at the audience, but don't most orchestras already do that? If not, then shame on them! Of course, I suppose not all brass pieces are capable of being "turned forward" -- how would one do that with a tuba for instance?

Anyway, here's an estimate of my "Dream 4th movement" from the 7th symphony: WITH REPEATS and played with double the number of brass players in "Mahler-style" and completed in a red-hot, blistering 7 minutes flat. 7 minutes for the 7th -- even sounds catchy. With that, even the most electronically-equipped metal rock band would be blown away by its adrenaline-pumping fervor. Just what Beethoven would've wanted!

Who knows? Maybe even 6:30 time would be possible without distorting the coherency. Or how about 5:50 with repeats? 5:50! Whoaaaaaa! And dare we tread into the land of 4:45 time? Or would one need metha-amphetimines to keep up? Personally, I say -- LET'S JUST GO ALLLLLL OUT!

In an age where Classical Records do not sell, I can't understand why conductors aren't trying for more dynamic interpretations. After all, they've got nothing to lose (nobody's buying their records anyway) and everything to gain (an MTV video and mass markets might open up for them! They might get "groupies," start a Renaissance for Classical Music, they can start wearing sharp Armani suits instead of penguin outfits, give encores, have lights and lasers and fanfare and paparrazzi and...ah-oh...there I go again...getting ahead of myself). Sigh.

[This message has been edited by euphony131 (edited 01-22-2001).]

[This message has been edited by euphony131 (edited 01-22-2001).]

[Rod]

Originally posted by euphony131:
Ah-Ha! By jove! That's it! "Mahler-style" with "bells" turned forward and double the number of horn-players! Now there's a performance guaranteed to rock the house! Oh, let's do away with convention and formality altogether and usher back the days of unbridled Romanticism! God, what I wouldn't give to see all the stodgy, stuffy, pedantic Rules done away with!

Rod, when you said "bells turned forward" I assumed you meant having the "umbrella-like" opening of a brass instrument pointed forward at the audience, but don't most orchestras already do that? If not, then shame on them! Of course, I suppose not all brass pieces are capable of being "turned forward" -- how would one do that with a tuba for instance?

This is nothing to do with romantisism, It's just I don't see the logic of having an instrument that projects sound AWAY from its intended audience! You can do what you like with the tuba, I would never be in my orchestra in the first place. I was unaware that Mahler did the same thing, but I have heard of it being done by baroque performers. If it means the player can't shove his hand down it, all the better. It does not mean you physically redesign the horn, you just hold it in a different manner - this is more feasible with the 'natural' horn design I specified. As I also said I have a pre-Romantic picture of a chap playing the natural horn with the 'bell' (I believe this is the correct term, someone correct me if I'm wrong) pointing forward and upward above with his head!!

Rod

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Rod]

Originally posted by chrisg:
If I was directing, I'd have the (natural, of course) horn players play with 'bells' turned forward to get a more prominent sound

Why Rod, I'm shocked, shocked! Good for you, but I'd do you two better by doubling the horns and having them stand up Mahler style.

cg

What's there to be shocked about? I'm not into doubling where it's not required, for one loses clarity and bite that one hears from the natural horn especially. Personally I prefer smaller orchestras - no more than 60 in total, accoustics allowing - for Beethoven at least.

Rod


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Peter]

Originally posted by euphony131:

Anyway, here's an estimate of my "Dream 4th movement" from the 7th symphony: WITH REPEATS and played with double the number of brass players in "Mahler-style" and completed in a red-hot, blistering 7 minutes flat. 7 minutes for the 7th -- even sounds catchy. With that, even the most electronically-equipped metal rock band would be blown away by its adrenaline-pumping fervor. Just what Beethoven would've wanted!

Why double the number of Brass players ? Surely if the authentic movement has taught us anything, it is to get a way from the vast overblown romanticised interpretations of the late 19th century - Mahler was a prime culprit in this. I don't understand your desire for the extreme, both in volume and in speed - it sounds as though you want a cacophany instead of Beethoven.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[chrisg]

...(much ranting snipped)...Personally, I say -- LET'S JUST GO ALLLLLL OUT!

e131,

Knock it off ok? If you continue to insist on trying to have a little fun around here, you will be sentenced to "Junior Member" status forever.

ps. (if you find one that really rips, let me know)

cg

[euphony131]

Originally posted by chrisg:
[b]
Knock it off ok? If you continue to insist on trying to have a little fun around here, you will be sentenced to "Junior Member" status forever.

ps. (if you find one that really rips, let me know)

cg

LOL! I'll let you know Chris!

BTW -- Peter, I don't view Mahler as a "prime culprit" of "vast overblown romanticised interpretations" nor is such a label necessarily a bad thing in my opinion.

Many critics in fact said the same of B's Nineth when it first premiered; I believe words like "overblown," "ridiculous" and "incomprehendsible" were readily thrown about.

Thus I think it better to be labelled "overblown" and "romantic" than stodgy and prosaic -- gasp! Oh god! Not the "P" word!

In fact, I see a kind of spiritual geneology from Beethoven to Berlioz and finally to Mahler. "Rules? What rules! We go our own way, lay down our own path. Follow if you dare!" If that's being overly romantic than give me Romaticism PLUS three extra helpings on the side!

I'll take a Berlioz-inspired, Mahlerian-sized orchestra of 450 playing their guts out to B's 7th symphony, 4th movement at rip-roaring speed and exhiliration over any minuscle chamber orchestra with their frocks and wigs and playing at Grandma speed anyday! Lest we forget, I do believe it was Beethoven who began the trend towards larger orchestras and more dynamic sound.

Beethoven is not Bach. Beethoven is not Mozart. Beethoven is not some dainty Mr. Dandy with his ever-so-fine hankie (Cool rhyme, eh?). Beethoven is Beethoven. He is Prometheus. He is Fire. Unleash him.

[This message has been edited by euphony131 (edited 01-23-2001).]

[Peter]

Originally posted by euphony131:


Beethoven is not Bach. Beethoven is not Mozart. Beethoven is not some dainty Mr. Dandy with his ever-so-fine hankie (Cool rhyme, eh?). Beethoven is Beethoven. He is Prometheus. He is Fire. Unleash him.

Nor is he Mahler ! No Beethoven Symphony requires the forces employed for the Symphony of 1000 ! No doubt you think Handel's Messiah should be performed in much the same way (a la Mahler) - so therefore we have to conclude that the bottom line for you is Size!



------------------
'Man know thyself'

[euphony131]

Originally posted by Peter:
--- we have to conclude that the bottom line for you is Size!

Not just "Size" but Speed, Passion, and Fervor. An ALL-OUT, FLAT-OUT BACCHANAL ought to be mandatory for the Allegro con brio of the 7th. Wagner didn't call that symphony, "The Apotheosis of Dance" for nothing. How many of us have not moved our feet to the whirling beats in that symphony? Hardly a one I'm sure.

I'm just saying we shouldn't stymie ourselves with archiac convention. Let's break the shell! And while we're at it, let's bring in choreographed female dancers, sound-activated lasers, confetti strewn from the ceiling, riotus fanfare, joyous ecstasy...oops...there I go again. Double-sigh.

I think what we have here are two camps of thought -- Old School vs. New School. Perhaps examplified in the 19th century by the Hadyn School vs. the Beethoven School.

Don't get me wrong. I like Haydn, Mozart and I absolutely adore Bach. But Beethoven is nothing like them. His music just begs to played to the HILT with as much UNrestrained emotion as possible.

Don't just saunder out there half-dead in a stiff penguin suit and play the 4th movement at a tempo that a snail would scoff at. And you can't blame young people for not listening to Classical Music when that's your idea of "excitement."

Now truthfully, who wouldn't buy a recording that featured a 150-450 member sized orchestra ripping out the Allegro Con Brio at blistering speed and with a ferocity that bordered on sheer mania? Passion, my friend, it's all about Passion.

[chrisg]

e131,

For using the "P" word three times in one post, you are hereby found guilty of being a hopeless "Romantic."

For the balance of 2001, or sooner if you can prove you have come to your senses, you WILL confine your listening as follows:

Keyboard music: Fortepiano performances of B's music; harpsichord only for Bach, and the rest of that crowd.

Orchestral music: Original instruments only, as conducted by, Hogwood, Norrington, or Gardiner. No fair sneaking in Savall, I have his Eroica, and he does the "P" thing. Any Furtwangler, and it's another year. Beecham's "Messiah", and it's lights out for you.

All music written after 1827 is off limits.

Enjoy,

cg

[Luis]

Originally posted by euphony131:
Now truthfully, who wouldn't buy a recording that featured a 150-450 member sized orchestra ripping out the Allegro Con Brio at blistering speed and with a ferocity that bordered on sheer mania? .

A copy for me please! (Size rules!)

[euphony131]

Originally posted by chrisg:

-- you WILL confine your listening as follows:

Keyboard music: Fortepiano performances of B's music; harpsichord only for Bach, and the rest of that crowd.

Orchestral music: Original instruments only, as conducted by, Hogwood, Norrington, or Gardiner. No fair sneaking in Savall, I have his Eroica, and he does the "P" thing. Any Furtwangler, and it's another year. Beecham's "Messiah", and it's lights out for you.

All music written after 1827 is off limits.

Why Chris, I do believe you just described Rod and Peter's idea of Heaven -- sans the Gardiner of course for Rod. LOL!

You sooooooo fun--nie.


[This message has been edited by euphony131 (edited 01-24-2001).]

[~Leslie]

OK, I didn't really scrutinize this thread but I think I got the general gist of it, and it's hilarious.

I clocked my humble recording of the 4th mvt of the 7th w/ Janos Ferencsik conducting at 137 BPMs. Ending at 7.06. Repeats? elephino.

Do I like bold horns? Yes, part of the Beethoven allure.

Do I like volume, with big orchestras? With this composer, yes, yes, yes. ~

[Peter]

Originally posted by euphony131:

Why Chris, I do believe you just described Rod and Peter's idea of Heaven -- sans the Gardiner of course for Rod. LOL!

You sooooooo fun--nie.

It just goes to show how the medium of the internet has a long way to go, because neither Chrisg nor yourself seem to understand my position - so I'll spell it out :

1) I ACTUALLY PREFER MODERN TO AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENTS.

2) I THINK HISTORICAL PERFORMANCES ADD A VALUABLE NEW DIMENSION AND THROUGH ROD'S ENTHUSIASM I HAVE COME FROM A POSITION OF DISMISSAL TO ONE OF APPRECIATION.

3) Chrisg - I play Scarlatti on the piano myself.

4)I AGREE THAT MANY PERFORMANCES OF B ARE FAR TOO LAME - AND INDEED THE FINALE OF NO.7 IS OFTEN TOO SLOW - The introduction to no.7 is often TOO fast, as is the introduction to The Consecration of the House on my Kurt Massur recording !

5)I BELIEVE THAT THE COMPOSER'S DIRECTIONS SHOULD BE FULLY OBSERVED - SO IF HE ASKS FOR ALLEGRO CON BRIO - HE SHOULD GET HIS CON BRIO. IF HE ASKS FOR 2 HORNS, HE SHOULD HAVE 2, NOT 20.

6)I DO NOT THINK THAT AN ORCHESTRA OF MAHLERESQUE PROPORTIONS IS RIGHT FOR BEETHOVEN - NOR IS A CHAMBER ORCHESTRA OF BACH.

7)AS LONG AS A PERFORMER RESPECTS BEETHOVEN - I CAN RESPECT THE PERFORMER.

You can call this dogmatic if you like Chrisg, I think it is open minded and common sense.



------------------
'Man know thyself'