The interpreter

[Athea]

A few weeks ago I listened to the recording of Beethoven's seventh symphony (I don't remember the orchestra and the conductor), and when the second movement began I had a good mind to exclaim: Are you going mad? Why so quickly?...It was the fastest version of that movement I have ever heard...

Well, I want to talk about a very important person in music: the interpreter.

When we listen to a certain musical work, is it a result of the interpretation that we are once enthusiastic about the depth of the music, whereas during the other performance of the same composition we can be, say, bored? These people can change a lot – the tempi, atmosphere, general impression – but are they able to change the statement of the composer? The "soul" of the composition? And may they do that at all? How much does it depend on the interpretation?

[Peter]

Interpretation is a minefield and many artists differ in their approach and their tastes. The trouble is that prior to Beethoven, most composers were not so insistent on score markings, so much is left to the performer's discretion. Even with Beethoven and later composers, it is impossible and undesirable for every little nuance or inflection to be written down. There is no absolutely correct performance, however there are definitely incorrect ones where the composer's markings are not observed. Beethoven is known to have used far greater variety of tempi in playing his works than is indicated. Chopin remarked that Liszt played his (Chopin's) etudes better than de did himself!

In 1823 in a conversation book, Schindler wrote 'so I am to mark the 2nd movt of the A maj symphony Minim=80?' Unfortunately we do not have Beethoven's reply, but in any case the Allegretto marking implies a quicker tempo than is generally given.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Athea:
... And may they do that at all? How much does it depend on the interpretation?

Beethoven depends 90% on interpretation and 10% technical, the latter you can be trained, the former you are born with and is the harder to get across to the student.

For some reason the composers I like best (Beethoven and Handel) rely the most on a pin-point interpretation for the music to succeed, but paradoxically this is the best music. Tempo is the main concern for sure but there are other issues. Handel was forgotten for 200 years because nobody knew how to play it anymore, now he has been resurected and performaces of previously unknown works are huge hits with audiences.

Beethoven was decimated by late-Romantic syrup as the 20th Century progressed, and this is still going on today in the main-stream despite the brief influence of the authentic instrument movement during the late 1980s and 90s.

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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 08-17-2006).]

[Marek Krukowski]

Originally posted by Peter:
Interpretation is a minefield and many artists differ in their approach and their tastes. The trouble is that prior to Beethoven, most composers were not so insistent on score markings, so much is left to the performer's discretion. Even with Beethoven and later composers, it is impossible and undesirable for every little nuance or inflection to be written down. There is no absolutely correct performance, however there are definitely incorrect ones where the composer's markings are not observed. Beethoven is known to have used far greater variety of tempi in playing his works than is indicated.

I think there is yet another problem. Musical notation is not the fully adequate representation of music. It works only because it is written for musicians who knows the style of music which is represented in it. I suppose the well known example is interpretation of the waltzes of Strausses. There is tradition of playing them with specific pulse which in fact as far as I know is not represented in notation. Trying to play music exactly as it is written is asking for catastrophe (the most apocalyptical one occured probably in Solesmes).
I am sure we have completly lost the key to understanding the style of Viennese Classics. The most permanenet formal experimentator in the whole history of music is universallly regarded as oldfashion simple traditionalist "Papa Haydn". Mozart, the greatest master of expression who sometimes with only one chromatic note managed to reveal all depths of human soul is believed to be the unconscious child whose music is nothing but elegant play of sounds (sometimes I think this is real curse that Eine kleine Nachtmusik has been preserved). And the greatest philosopher between composers, the most indefatigable portraitist of ideas (in platonian sense of this word) seems to be interesting because of his biography, which people think is the main, almost the only factor of his music.

Horror.

Marek

[Nightklavier]

Originally posted by Rod:
For some reason the composers I like best (Beethoven and Handel) rely the most on a pin-point interpretation for the music to succeed

Rod - I'm curious, then... Who has, in your opinion, the best interpretation of the piano sonatas, the string quartets, the piano concerto's, the missa solemnis, the cello sonatas and violin sonatas?

[Marek Krukowski]

Chopin remarked that Liszt played his (Chopin's) etudes better than de did himself! [/B]

Not exactly so. Chopin wrote "I am writing without knowig what my pen scribbles, because in this very moment Liszt is playing my etudes and carry me out of sphere of reasonable thoughts. I woud like to steal him the method he plays my own compositions."
But:
First: This was a letter to Hiller written by Chopin and Liszt(and Franchomme) together - and in the same letter Chopin wrote that his own etudes are magnificent but they would exist only to the moment when Hiller etudes would be issued.
second and most important: Chopin probably never plays his music in the same way.

By the way if there is no to muchgood classical music recordings, there are practicaly no acceptable Chopin records. The main reason is of course playing his music on Steinways instruments (it sounds to me like playing harp music on tower bells), the second is lack of good old instruments. Almost all Pleyels and Erards I have heard on records have some problems with some sounds. The only exeption was Pleyel from Belgium which was presented in Warsaw about two years ago. Preludes played on them by Piet van Kuijken were absolute miracle.

Marek

[Rod]

Originally posted by Nightklavier:
Rod - I'm curious, then... Who has, in your opinion, the best interpretation of the piano sonatas, the string quartets, the piano concerto's, the missa solemnis, the cello sonatas and violin sonatas?

You think I can answer just like that? I mention my choice for the violin sonatas in the Beethoven violin chain, but just because something is the best available does not mean it is a perfect interpretation, there is plenty to fault in all of my favourites. Beethoven is the worst performed music you will experience in terms of what it has potentially on offer and what you typically receive from the performer/s.

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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 08-18-2006).]

[Nightklavier]

Originally posted by Rod:
You think I can answer just like that?

Ok, just indulge me once. Which recording do you prefer for the piano sonatas? Even if it's just the late sonatas, which pianist do you think comes close to playing Beethoven well? And "well" could still mean bad, but not completely awful.

Rod, I ask this because I'm actually wanting a good recommendation for the piano sonatas. So many people regurgitate the long list of Barenboim, Brendel, Ashkenazy, Arrau, and fifty others. Tell me your pick.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Nightklavier:
Ok, just indulge me once. Which recording do you prefer for the piano sonatas? Even if it's just the late sonatas, which pianist do you think comes close to playing Beethoven well? And "well" could still mean bad, but not completely awful.

Rod, I ask this because I'm actually wanting a good recommendation for the piano sonatas. So many people regurgitate the long list of Barenboim, Brendel, Ashkenazy, Arrau, and fifty others. Tell me your pick.

At the Authentic Instrument mp3 page at the main site I provided samples from my A-list Beethoven collection, did you not hear any of that? You can look back through the chains here as I discussed each one. I used to have the Perlman/Ashkenazy complete Beethoven violin sonatas set but I gave it away after I heard the Schroeder/van Immerseel set. I have Paul Badura-Skoda's complete piano Sonatas which is not perfect but is the only complete set I still have in my posession. There are other individual disks by other performers that are very good, but you may notice that the majority of my A-List performers use authentic instruments (like those above). I don't even consider buying a Beethoven CD these days if it is not performed this way, though of course these instruments do not in themselves guarantee a good interpretation!

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



[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 08-18-2006).]

[Fidelio]

Originally posted by Athea:
A few weeks ago I listened to the recording of Beethoven's seventh symphony (I don't remember the orchestra and the conductor), and when the second movement began I had a good mind to exclaim: Are you going mad? Why so quickly?...It was the fastest version of that movement I have ever heard...

Well, I want to talk about a very important person in music: the interpreter.

When we listen to a certain musical work, is it a result of the interpretation that we are once enthusiastic about the depth of the music, whereas during the other performance of the same composition we can be, say, bored? These people can change a lot – the tempi, atmosphere, general impression – but are they able to change the statement of the composer? The "soul" of the composition? And may they do that at all? How much does it depend on the interpretation?

It's a shame you do not recall the recording.....it may have been based on the new edition of the symphonies by Jonathan Del Mar.

[Joy]

Originally posted by Peter:


In 1823 in a conversation book, Schindler wrote 'so I am to mark the 2nd movt of the A maj symphony Minim=80?' Unfortunately we do not have Beethoven's reply, but in any case the Allegretto marking implies a quicker tempo than is generally given.

The 7th Symphony was from 1811-1812 so why did it take Schindler and Beethoven so long in marking the movements (1823)? Thanks!



------------------
'Truth and beauty joined'

[Rod]

Originally posted by Joy:
The 7th Symphony was from 1811-1812 so why did it take Schindler and Beethoven so long in marking the movements (1823)? Thanks!

Well I don't think Beethoven started working on metronome marks until 1817 (the gadget was in its infancy then). Certainly by 1823 Beethoven had long provided marks for the 7th, so what Schinder was doing I have no idea, if indeed this note is genuine.

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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 08-18-2006).]

[Hofrat]

Originally posted by Rod:
Well I don't think Beethoven started working on metronome marks until 1817 (the gadget was in its infancy then). Certainly by 1823 Beethoven had long provided marks for the 7th, so what Schinder was doing I have no idea, if indeed this note is genuine.

Dear Rod;

If I am not mistaken, Beethoven was preparing a booklet for publication. In this booklet, Beethoven indicated his suggested metronome markings for his previously published works. That is the reason of the 1823 conversation book entry of Schindler.


Hofrat

[Rod]

Originally posted by Hofrat:
Dear Rod;

If I am not mistaken, Beethoven was preparing a booklet for publication. In this booklet, Beethoven indicated his suggested metronome markings for his previously published works. That is the reason of the 1823 conversation book entry of Schindler.

Hofrat

Did not in 1817 Beethoven have a pamphlet published giving metronome marks for the first eight symphonies (and the septet)?

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

[Fidelio]

Originally posted by Hofrat:
Dear Rod;

If I am not mistaken, Beethoven was preparing a booklet for publication. In this booklet, Beethoven indicated his suggested metronome markings for his previously published works. That is the reason of the 1823 conversation book entry of Schindler.


Hofrat

In 1817 Beethoven had a pamphlet published (by Steiner) giving metronome markings for his first eight symphonies and the Septet, op. 20, and another, soon after, for the string quartets to date (op. 18, 59, 74, and 95). He provided metronome indications for the Piano Sonata (op. 106), Meeresstille (op. 112), Opferlied (op. 121b) and the Ninth Symphony, and wrote frequently to Schott’s of his intention, eventually unfulfilled, to send directions for the Missa Solemnis. As Kolisch states, the fact that Beethoven was prepared to adopt metronome indications for important works confirms that tempo is an essential part of the musical idea, as does Beethoven’s letter of 1826 to Schott’s: ‘The metronome markings will be sent to you very soon. Do wait for them. In our century such indications are certainly necessary. Moreover, I have received letters from Berlin informing me that the first performance of the symphony [No. 9] was received with enthusiastic applause, which I ascribe largely to the metronome markings’.
Despite this, Beethoven’s metronome markings have not been generally accepted.
As conductor John Eliot Gardiner said: "It's very difficult to say anything intelligible or intelligent about the metronome marks of Beethoven, because it is clear that when he went deaf - whether his metronome was accurate or not - his perception of time, sitting at his desk, writing, was very different to that of a musician or human performer standing in a concert hall and articulating his music. I feel very strongly that they should be used as a basis for interpretation but not as a straight-jacket."