Beethoven the Conductor

[chrisg]

From Harold Schonberg's "The Great Conductors"

"Ignaz von Seyfried has left us a famous and unforgettable description of Beethoven as a conductor: (the italics are mine)

Our master need not be prestented as a model in respect of conducting, and the orchestra always had to take care in order not to be led astray by its mentor, for he had ears only for his own works and was ceaselessly occupied by manifold gesticulations to indicate the desired expression. He often made a downbeat for an accent in the wrong place. He used to suggest a diminuendo by crouching down more and more, and at a pianissimo he would creep almost under the desk. When the volume of sound grew, he rose up also as if out of a stage trap; and with the entrance of the full power of his orchestra he would stand on the tips of his toes almost as big as a giant and waving his arms seemed to soar upwards to the skies. Everything about him was active, not a bit of his body idle, and the man was like a perpetuum mobile. He did not belong to those capricious composers whom no orchesta in the world would satisfy. At times, indeed, he was altogether too considerate and did not even repeat passages that went badly at rehersal. "It will go better next time," he would say. He was very particular about expression, the delicate nuances, the equable distribution of light and shade as well as an effective tempo rubato, and without displaying vexation would discuss them with the individual players. When he observed that the players would follow his intentions and play together with increasing ardor... his face would be transfigured with joy, all his features beamed with pleasure, a pleased smile would play around his lips, and a thundering "Bravi, tutti!" would reward the successful achievement."

I love the language in this account, it reminds me of watching Leonard Bernstein in action. It is impossible for me to believe that the unimaginative phrasing, robotic by the metromone tempos, underpowered and generally souless playing characteristic of so many "authentic" and "traditonal" performances compares to what Beethoven truly indended. Play only what is written? How are "expressiveness", distribution of "light and shade", and (gasp!!) an "effective tempo rubato" written so as to convey the composers full intentions? I presume that the best orchestral players Vienna had to offer could read music, so why the need to discuss them with the individual players?

I can easily imagine Beethoven ranting at the likes of Hogwood, Norrington, Gardiner, etc. that his music needs to be played "with increasing ardor." The fact is that we don't know what a truly "authentic" Beethoven performance sounded like. To claim otherwise ignores much of the evidence. The score and nothing but the score? Based on this account, and plenty of others describing Beethoven's own piano playing, musicians with the ability to interpret the score, such as Furtwangler and Richter, may be much closer to the truth than what passes for authenticy today.

cg

[This message has been edited by chrisg (edited 01-27-2001).]

[Serge]

You're right in saying there is no way to know what an authentic performance sounded like. We don't have the opportunity to knock on Beethoven's front door and ask him "How exactly did you want us to play this?" or even "Do you suppose future generations could play your music on different instruments or in different styles and still retain the value of your work?". He's gone; all we have is intuition and a few clever ideas.

I think the failure of artistic critique occurs when one who is critiquing is not willing to allow themselves to open up to a new method. All of you certainly know by now my frustration with Rod over his incapacity to see worth in anything outside his closeted collection of musical "truths" and his disdain to our views. I have always tried not to say that one thing is less valuable than another. While I have preferences, I don't attempt, or don't consciously attempt, to proselytize because that falls out of the concept of fairhanded critique and becomes something more sinister: the pontification of a self-serving zealot. Forgive me for thinking that, but try to tell me why I shouldn't.

Beethoven was a flamboyant conductor, and it clearly mirrors a need for his music to be played with equal flamboyancy. How do you define that? Every conductor from Furtwangler to Toscanini to Bernstein to Abbado will determine that differently, and that is where one of the greatest pleasures of a lifetime of classical music appreciation comes from: listening to the almost-infinite span of interpretation.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Serge:

I think the failure of artistic critique occurs when one who is critiquing is not willing to allow themselves to open up to a new method. All of you certainly know by now my frustration with Rod over his incapacity to see worth in anything outside his closeted collection of musical "truths" and his disdain to our views. I have always tried not to say that one thing is less valuable than another.

There is a good deal of evidence from contemporary performers/music teachers remarks, and also finger indications in early editions of scores to assess use of techniques such as vibrato and rubato in those days, I have read such accounts myself. Also the change technically in the instruments obviously results in the introduction of new techniques not possible on ealrier instruments, and vice versa. The 'collection of truths' is not of my sole invention (I wish it was, then I'd think I was REALLY smart), on the contrary! Regarding the piano, I recommend you read 'Beethoven on Beethoven' by William Newman, who generally (but not totally) sees things the way I do. They stock it in Borders.

Rod

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

[chrisg]

Rod,

Newman's "Beethoven on Beethoven", subtitled "Playing his piano music his way," is a classic case of an author over reaching in his title. I picked this up hoping for some real insights on performance practice in Beethoven's own words, but that gets pretty much shot down by the author on Page one, paragraph two.

"But the point needs to be made at once that only infrequently can one document Beethoven's intentions with hard evidence - that is, with proof in the score itself, or a positive declaration by a trustworthy witness if not by Beethoven. Most of the time one must rely on circumstantial evidence of one sort or another - chiefly on deductions from analysis and reasoning, or from analogous practices in other circumstances. For example, one may hope to determine an appropriate tempo for a piano passage by finding an analogous passage in one of the chamber works that Beethoven marked with his own metronome tempos. But even the circumstantial evidence may be lacking, or may be too slim to accept. Then, since some decision has to be made before a performance can take place, the only answer that remains is an educated guess based on artistic intuition and experience!"

So much for the book's title. Except for the strange remark of "finding an analogous passage" in a chamber work in order to relate it to a piano work, I agree with his conclusion.

Still, there is much of interest in the book, but much of it is beyond the non-musican. Of particular interest to me was the section entitled "Beethoven as a Performing Pianist," with contemporary accounts by such notable and reliable sources as Carl Czerny and Ferdinand Ries, his two star pupils. Beethoven the pianist sounds very consistent with the account of his conducting that started this thread.

cg

[Peter]

Originally posted by chrisg:
Beethoven the pianist sounds very consistent with the account of his conducting that started this thread.

cg

From the accounts I have read of Beethoven as a pianist, he would have a hard time of it up against today's standards - he was unsurpassed as an improviser, but when it came to performing his own works, much technical untidiness was apparent - the same goes for his conducting. I think we have to remember though that the virtuoso of the mid 1790's was not the same as the Beethoven afflicted by deafness a few years later.

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

[Serge]

I wonder if his technical untidyness affected the reception of his concerts by the audience (the ones where he was soloist). Ludwig played a number of public concerts, but I don't seem to recall any mention of post-concert critique. Does anyone here know?

[Peter]

Carl Czerny speaks of B's wonderful cantabile tone and legato chords - he goes on to say 'his playing did not posses that clean and brilliant elegance of certain other pianists.'

Mosheles writing in 1814 said 'his actual playing gave me less satisfaction, because it was neither clean nor precise, yet I could still notice many traces of a once great virtuosity.' At this date of course, his deafness can be blamed for these deficiencies.

Most of B's appearances as a pianist before a large audience would have taken place in his earlier years, though there was the famous 1808 concert (riot!) where his playing was overshadowed by the fiasco that ensued.

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

[Peter]

Originally posted by chrisg:
Play only what is written? How are "expressiveness", distribution of "light and shade", and (gasp!!) an "effective tempo rubato" written so as to convey the composers full intentions? I presume that the best orchestral players Vienna had to offer could read music, so why the need to discuss them with the individual players?

The score and nothing but the score? Based on this account, and plenty of others describing Beethoven's own piano playing, musicians with the ability to interpret the score, such as Furtwangler and Richter, may be much closer to the truth than what passes for authenticy today.

cg

This has never been my position! I have never advocated the mere robotic playing of notes ! The Score is paramount yes, but then interpretation is essential. What I mean is that if B writes Forte he doesn't want Piano. If he writes Staccato, he doesn't want Legato. If he writes a Crotchet, he doesn't want a minim, if he writes D natural, he doesn't want D# etc........ That is what I mean by being true to the score - everything else such as balance of sound, the degree of Staccato or Legato, the flexibility of tempo are matters of personal interpretation which are equally important.

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

[chrisg]

Originally posted by Peter:
Carl Czerny speaks of B's wonderful cantabile tone and legato chords - he goes on to say 'his playing did not posses that clean and brilliant elegance of certain other pianists.'

the quote continues, "but on the other hand it was energetic, profound, noble, with all the charms of smooth and connected cantabile and particularly in the Adadio, highly feeling and romantic. His performance, like his compositions, was a musical painting of the highest class, esteemed only for its general effect."

More from Czerny, "Wheras Beethoven's playing excelled in its extraordinary strength, character, and unprecedented bravura and fluency, Hummel's performance was the model of the highest purity and clarity, the most ingratiating elegence and delicacy."

"Extraordinary as his playing was when he improvised, it was frequently less successful when he played his printed compositions, for, as he never had patience or time to practise, the result would generally depend on accident or his mood; and his playing, like his compositions, was far ahead of its time, the pianofortes of the period (until 1810), still extremely weak and imperfect, could not endure his gigantic style of performance."

Ferdinand Ries wrote, "When Beethoven gave me a lesson, he was - contrary to his nature, I might say - remarkably patient... When I missed something in a passage or struck notes and leaps falsely that he frequently wanted brought out, he rarely said anything. Only if I failed in the expression, in the crescendos and such, or in the character of a piece, did he get provoked, since, as he said, the former was an accident, but the latter revealed a lack of knowledge, or feeling, or care. The former happened to him very often, even when he played in public."

General comments not directed at you Peter:

That Beethoven was not as technically polished as some others is true, but it's obvious from these and plenty of other accounts that getting all the notes right was very much of secondary importance. It's all about energy, strength, bravura, feeling, expressiveness, a "gigantic style of performance," at once noble, profound, charming and romantic. And from the quote that started this thread, characterized by delicate nuances, light and shade, an effective tempo rubato, and ardor.

What a road map for performers, and how rarely even attempted, no less realized. That goes for conductors as well as pianists. These accounts, from two friends that studied with Beethoven, premiered many of his works, played under his supervision, and most importantly, heard him play, are the real "authentic" performance practices. Yet, in one drab recording after another, they are ignored. I don't mean to single out Bernard Roberts (he's no worse than most) but his sonata set was given as a primary recommendation in another thread. What's missing are basically all of the above adjectives used to describe how Beethoven played his own music. Underplayed dynamics, unwavering tempos, and deadpan expression take their place. Nice "readings," but I prefer "performances."

I just realized that I'm an "authentic" fan after all.

cg

[Peter]

Originally posted by chrisg:

That Beethoven was not as technically polished as some others is true, but it's obvious from these and plenty of other accounts that getting all the notes right was very much of secondary importance. It's all about energy, strength, bravura, feeling, expressiveness, a "gigantic style of performance," at once noble, profound, charming and romantic. And from the quote that started this thread, characterized by delicate nuances, light and shade, an effective tempo rubato, and ardor.

Fair enough - I daresay to hear Beethoven play his own works was a revelation (wrong notes as well!) , and who would not swap all their Brendel's, Ashkenazys, Pollinis etc.. for the experience ? - No guarantee though that we'd necessarily enjoy it - Moschelles for one was not impressed (though this was in 1814 when B's deafness was more advanced).
Since performance standards of the time were generally low, it is hard for us today to put into context any appraisal of a particular pianist from then. This is simply another of those impossible to know arguments which Beethoven was all too keen on leaving us!

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

[euphony131]

Yes, I'll take a PERFORMANCE over a "nice reading" anyday as well. Who cares for limp-wristed delicacy, dainty elegance, pall-like austerity if BRAVUARA, ADOUR, AND PANACHE are absent? That is precisely the problem with CM today, and little wonder it's been relegated to its "museum" status; so many pedants and stiff-collars intent on bleeding the passion out of everything they touch; they want the music to sound as dead as they feel: "Yes, I am so superior, I am playing CM, see how superior I am? I get all the notes correct! No mistakes! You see! I am superior! I keep my emotion in check, I don't let loose, I play perfectly, correctly, I don't read anything into anything, I just read the notes, only the notes, I keep my eyes on the scoresheet, I am better than a robot! More machine-like than the Terminator. You see? I am superior!" GAG!

That Beethoven apparently did not place so much importance on getting the notes "correct" as much as getting the FEELING/FIRE is all the proof we need to go for more emotional flair. I also doubt very much Beethoven played any one sonata the same way twice. I think he was more like Horowitz and would play the same piece differently depending upon how he felt or deemed relevant. He must've know there were countless different ways to approach a piece.

[Peter]

Maybe, but for my money, I'd rather have both - a pianist who can interpret and bring music alive without a fistful of wrong notes. Why do you have to have one without the other ? Why does a note perfect performance have to mean a stilted performance ? - are you saying that for an exhilarating performance wrong notes are inevitable ? I accept that the notes are not everything, and I would rather listen to a performance with a few wrong notes that was alive and meaningful than a note perfect flat rendition, but it is possible to be note perfect and musical as well !

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by chrisg:
What's missing are basically all of the above adjectives used to describe how Beethoven played his own music. Underplayed dynamics, unwavering tempos, and deadpan expression take their place. Nice "readings," but I prefer "performances."

I just realized that I'm an "authentic" fan after all.

Have to bring some balance here! Czerny also said, in B's early days at least, that B maintained a fairly strict tempo throughout, with the occasional speeding up or holding back the tempo used only on occasion as an effect. The constant use of rubato typical of today robs the music of much of the momentum that is the essence of Beethoven - and this is as true for the later works as for the early. I prefer them played pretty much 'straight' as B directs, especially the allegros, but of course not robotically so. The underplayed dynamics is merely a problem caused by an instrument that is too loud and too thickly toned and incapable of sharp attack. The player tends to restrict him/herself lest the sound become grotesque.

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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 02-10-2001).]

[Rod]

Originally posted by chrisg:

I just realized that I'm an "authentic" fan after all.

cg

May I also add that the rubato used commonly today on todays instruments is almost IMPOSSIBLE to replicate on the Viennese instruments B was familiar with, even the later 6.5 octave models. Fp players I have heard trying to play rubato in the modern sence fail, without exception, to produce a convincing effect. The fp simply does not have the same capacity to 'mould' the sound as the modern piano. Considering it has been established here that pianists today are superior to those of yesteryear, I suppose rubato as we know it would have rarely been attempted in B's day. Instead more emphasis must have been placed on the correct phrasing of the melody within a stricter tempo. Thus if B was deliberately composing piano works that required such flexibility they would have undoubtedly all been failures using the technology he was familiar with.

[chrisg]

May I also add that the rubato used commonly today on todays instruments is almost IMPOSSIBLE to replicate on the Viennese instruments B was familiar with, even the later 6.5 octave models.

Hello Rod, glad to see you're back. Taking rubato off the table, all of the accounts still point to this:

It's all about energy, strength, bravura, feeling, expressiveness, a "gigantic style of
performance," at once noble, profound, charming and romantic. And from the quote that started this thread, characterized by delicate nuances, light and shade, and ardor.

You also wrote:

The underplayed dynamics is merely a problem caused by an instrument that is too loud and too thickly toned and incapable of sharp attack. The player tends to restrict him/herself lest the sound become grotesque.

My comment on underplayed dynamics was directed at Roberts, and most others I've heard. Pianists like Richter and Gilels have no such problem, and produce nothing grotesque to my ears. Again, based only on what I've read, the instruments of Beethoven's time couldn't handle the dynamics he wanted. He was continually breaking his pianos in the attempt, though I can't say whether or not this was true while his hearing was still intact. Another variable is that the instrument was changing and improving over his lifetime.

Rod, I'd love to hear Beethoven played on a period piano in a way consistent with the accounts of Czerny and Ries. On the front page, recordings by Paul Komen are recommended. Is he your pick? If you don't mind listing some specific favorite recordings of yours, I'll give them a try.

cg