Beethoven's tempi

[Peter]

Before the metronome, the German composer/flautist Johann Quantz (1697-1773) defined the use of tempo markings in his treatise on flute playing (which also includes other information on 18th century performance practice). He used the human pulse of 80 beats a minute as his guide and divided speed into fast or slow. These two groups were further sub-divided. Allegro assai was the fastest marking which he estimated at minim = 80. Adagio assai was the slowest at crotchet=40. These were the basic principles that governed tempi in the classical period. Daniel Turk (1756-1813) states that Allegro was considerably faster in the early 19th century than it had been 50 years earlier and the rule that speed was determined by the shortest note values was on the decline, though still applied as it was common for tempo to change within a movement. Beethoven is recorded as having conducted a performance of the Eroica lasting a full hour (presumably with repeats) - A performance in 1922 was listed as 52 mins and according to an article by F.Rothschild (1961) at 46mins.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
Beethoven is recorded as having conducted a performance of the Eroica lasting a full hour (presumably with repeats) - A performance in 1922 was listed as 52 mins and according to an article by F.Rothschild (1961) at 46mins.

This report does not indicate that this was solely the time for actual music played or the just the whole period from first note to last, including time for applause between movements etc (as usually happened then). I suggest the latter, an hour is impossible for the music on its own, even with repeats - the scherzo would have to be played adagio!! I have read a contemporary report describing Beethovens 'whirlwind' tempos.

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

[Peter]

I started this thread with the hope of continuing discussion about tempi here, rather than in the unrelated Debussy thread!

Clara Schumann really devoted herself to her husband's music for which she became renowned as an unsurpassed interpreter. She herself had little time for the empty virtuosity of many of her contemporaries or indeed their music, finding Liszt in particular repugnant! As to her Beethoven interpretations, it may well be that they left a lot to be desired in the 1830's and 40's when Schindler presumably heard her play, but she lived until 1896 and it is possible that her earlier interpretations would have changed - you cannot judge the young virtuoso against the mature artist, particularly when no recordings are available to us.

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

[Bob the Composer]

Originally posted by Peter:
Before the metronome, the German composer/flautist Johann Quantz (1697-1773) defined the use of tempo markings in his treatise on flute playing (which also includes other information on 18th century performance practice). He used the human pulse of 80 beats a minute as his guide and divided speed into fast or slow. These two groups were further sub-divided. Allegro assai was the fastest marking which he estimated at minim = 80. Adagio assai was the slowest at crotchet=40. These were the basic principles that governed tempi in the classical period. Daniel Turk (1756-1813) states that Allegro was considerably faster in the early 19th century than it had been 50 years earlier and the rule that speed was determined by the shortest note values was on the decline, though still applied as it was common for tempo to change within a movement. Beethoven is recorded as having conducted a performance of the Eroica lasting a full hour (presumably with repeats) - A performance in 1922 was listed as 52 mins and according to an article by F.Rothschild (1961) at 46mins.

That's all well and good, but with a composer like Beethoven who left Metronome markings, these remarks are totally unnecessary, the Metronome markings tell all that is needed, the words merely supplement the attitude.

Bob

------------------
I am not a number, I am a free man!

[Peter]

Originally posted by Bob the Composer:
That's all well and good, but with a composer like Beethoven who left Metronome markings, these remarks are totally unnecessary, the Metronome markings tell all that is needed, the words merely supplement the attitude.

Bob

I disagree - with the 3rd movement of Op.110 B gives no fewer than 8 different tempi instructions in as many bars - no metronome marks are indicated. B's metronome marks are controversial for several reasons - first they are not meant to imply a set pulse for the whole movement and secondly because it wasn't until he revised his original metronome marks for the 9th that he realised the error in Maezael's invention, he changed the first movement of the 9th from crotchet=126 to crotchet =88, and altered the other movements in the same proportion - an error of 50%. The composer Reger, found after carefully marking his works that he rarely approached 2/3rds of his own metronome mark and that the markings really represent the extreme permissible speed. More and more in the late works Beethoven relies on words to describe the tempo he wants.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
I disagree - with the 3rd movement of Op.110 B gives no fewer than 8 different tempi instructions in as many bars - no metronome marks are indicated. B's metronome marks are controversial for several reasons - first they are not meant to imply a set pulse for the whole movement and secondly because it wasn't until he revised his original metronome marks for the 9th that he realised the error in Maezael's invention, he changed the first movement of the 9th from crotchet=126 to crotchet =88, and altered the other movements in the same proportion - an error of 50%. The composer Reger, found after carefully marking his works that he rarely approached 2/3rds of his own metronome mark and that the markings really represent the extreme permissible speed. More and more in the late works Beethoven relies on words to describe the tempo he wants.

From my reading I believe the marks we have by Beethoven as they finally stand can be taken as generally reliable in terms of the mechanics of M's metronome. Certainly bearing in mind our earlier discussion re the Eroica they can be taken absolutely seriously. However, I agree they are not in theory necessary as there is always enough info in the score, but in practise even performances today prove they are as necessary now as they were then - when all manner of mis-interpretations must have existed - if only to guard the works from the deviant personal preferences of even the 'best' most famous conductors. When the conductor and/or performer is honest enough to the music to make him/herself 'dissappear', then metronomes will be a thing of the past. Trouble is not many musicians and conductors have the strength of character to be that honest.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
As to her Beethoven interpretations, it may well be that they left a lot to be desired in the 1830's and 40's when Schindler presumably heard her play, but she lived until 1896 and it is possible that her earlier interpretations would have changed - you cannot judge the young virtuoso against the mature artist, particularly when no recordings are available to us.

Well, in Schindler's book the tempi were being judged by the Leipzig AMZ and himself. They describe how she performed the finale of the 'Tempest' at a rocketing pace. I suppose it depends what you regard as a rocketing pace. With this movement I think it is easy to lose discipline and do precisely what CS apparently did - the temptation must be great to ignore the allegretto indication and just 'go for it' from the 1st bar. But that does not make for a great pianist. They describe with other works she plays too quick for her own ability, though she gets some praise in other respects. S was writing in 1860, I'll have to check when the reviews occured. Am I correct in recalling you have a vested interest in upholding the good name of CS, or was it someone else!?

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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 07-19-2001).]

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
S was writing in 1860, I'll have to check when the reviews occured. Am I correct in recalling you have a vested interest in upholding the good name of CS, or was it someone else!?

I defend her as an artist for many reasons, not merely because I can trace my teaching ancestry back to her pretty directly.

Well I can also quote from the Leipzig AMZ - 'We do not like to compare......but we must admit that the quiet , beautiful, correct, and refined playing of Frau Dr.Schumann was more effective than the stormy extravagances of Herr Liszt.' - 1841. Of some 200 reviews of Clara Schumann's playing, only 10 were unfavourable, including Schindler's outright hostility. She was her own severest critic and was sensitive to critcism of her fast tempos - in response to a critic she wrote in 1856 'But, dear friend, why do you wish to deny that I have occasionally taken tempos that are somewhat too fast?....I believe that now and then this reproach may have been justified. This does happen to me, particularly with the very pieces that I love so much that I lose myself in them and forget myself completely. Of course, that should not happen - the artist should always be master of his feelings. Well, now - I will strive to do better and the reproach will certainly be useful to me.' That sounds a very modest and decent response to criticism. In later life the chief criticism was that she always played the same pieces, but neither her interpretation nor her artistry were ever questioned.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:

I defend her as an artist for many reasons, not merely because I can trace my teaching ancestry back to her pretty directly.

Well I can also quote from the Leipzig AMZ - 'We do not like to compare......but we must admit that the quiet , beautiful, correct, and refined playing of Frau Dr.Schumann was more effective than the stormy extravagances of Herr Liszt.' - 1841. Of some 200 reviews of Clara Schumann's playing, only 10 were unfavourable, including Schindler's outright hostility. She was her own severest critic and was sensitive to critcism of her fast tempos - in response to a critic she wrote in 1856 'But, dear friend, why do you wish to deny that I have occasionally taken tempos that are somewhat too fast?....I believe that now and then this reproach may have been justified. This does happen to me, particularly with the very pieces that I love so much that I lose myself in them and forget myself completely. Of course, that should not happen - the artist should always be master of his feelings. Well, now - I will strive to do better and the reproach will certainly be useful to me.' That sounds a very modest and decent response to criticism. In later life the chief criticism was that she always played the same pieces, but neither her interpretation nor her artistry were ever questioned.

We'll have to leave it at that then, not being able to judge her performances for ourselves. However, this tendancy to rocket through a piece certainly existed well into the 20th C from what I have heard, whichever chain of teaching was responsible for it. I recall also our discussion regarding the level of value that should be ascribed to such ancestoral chains of teaching!

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

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
We'll have to leave it at that then, not being able to judge her performances for ourselves.

That is fair comment, but I have a few more points to add in defense of Madame Clara - In 1841 she wrote 'I pity the musician who has no understanding of this magnificent art (Beethoven's Sonatas). The less I play in public now, the more I hate the whole mechanical world of the virtuoso showpieces; concert pieces like Henselt's Etudes, Thalberg's Fantasies, Liszt etc. have become quite repugnant to me.'

After the 1840's she was one of the few pianists of her generation to consistently programm Beethoven sonatas in her recitals.

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

[Bob the Composer]

Peter, Rod, in such cases as when there are no metronome markings, then interpretation becomes more important. But where there's a metronome marking, I'd say that's a pretty good indication of what Beethoven wanted. The words indicate the spirit of the piece, for you can play at the markings, but still not get the spirit right. They are important too.

Bob

------------------
I am not a number, I am a free man!

[Peter]

Originally posted by Bob the Composer:
Peter, Rod, in such cases as when there are no metronome markings, then interpretation becomes more important. But where there's a metronome marking, I'd say that's a pretty good indication of what Beethoven wanted. The words indicate the spirit of the piece, for you can play at the markings, but still not get the spirit right. They are important too.

Bob

I do agree that B's metronome marks are a good indication or guide if you like, but we know from other sources that B never played in a rigid metronomic fashion so interpretation is just as important. I think B resorted to more words in the later pieces precisely because he realised the metronome was no more than a guide.

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

[Joy]

Speaking of tempo, I recently heard the 8th Symphony performed by The Chicago Symphony Orchestra and it was the fastest version I had ever heard! Especially the Allegro vivace. I mean they were flying!! I wonder why some orchestras play so different than others, either faster or slower!?! I imagine it has a lot to do with the conductor's interpretation but this was really too fast. I prefer the slower version.

Joy

[Rod]

Originally posted by Joy:
Speaking of tempo, I recently heard the 8th Symphony performed by The Chicago Symphony Orchestra and it was the fastest version I had ever heard! Especially the Allegro vivace. I mean they were flying!! I wonder why some orchestras play so different than others, either faster or slower!?! I imagine it has a lot to do with the conductor's interpretation but this was really too fast. I prefer the slower version.

Joy

Allegro vivace sounds pretty fast to me and I think really shouldn't be a point of contention, but this is not so for many conductors. If B asks for vivace but one is hearing something one knows fine well is not vivace, but say, ma non troppo, then the conductor is taking a liberty as far as I am concerned. If one doesn't like the genuine vivace tempo but prefers a slower one, then one simply does not like the music as B intended, but rather a distortion of it. Is this not a logical position or am I talking b*ll*cks? I totally p*ssed someone off a day or two ago making precisely this point, so I hope my wording is more polite and diplomatic on this occasion.

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

[Joy]

Originally posted by Rod:
Allegro vivace sounds pretty fast to me and I think really shouldn't be a point of contention, but this is not so for many conductors. If B asks for vivace but one is hearing something one knows fine well is not vivace, but say, ma non troppo, then the conductor is taking a liberty as far as I am concerned. If one doesn't like the genuine vivace tempo but prefers a slower one, then one simply does not like the music as B intended, but rather a distortion of it. Is this not a logical position or am I talking b*ll*cks? I totally p*ssed someone off a day or two ago making precisely this point, so I hope my wording is more polite and diplomatic on this occasion.

When I say I like the 'slower version' I'm merely talking about comparisons I make concerning other recordings I have heard. I am not a musician so I wouldn't know what actual allegro vivace should sound like compared to vivace in general (if I'm making that clear)? I can only go with what sounds good to me. Other versions I have heard they seemed to slow it down a bit and these versions sounded better to my ear. Of course, I prefer the genuine article. Maybe that's how I should have stated it. Anyway, I think you know what I mean now (I hope). And, yes, you are more polite now, thank you very much.
I don't take offense that easily.
Joy