Liszt's Beethoven symphonies

[Roehre]

A couple of days ago I listened to Liszt arrangements of Beethoven symphonies.

These transcriptions, made by Liszt in 1863/'64 (there are others for 5-7 made in 1837), are really good.
Liszt shows he understands Beethoven as well as transcribing instrumental/orchestral pieces in such a way that the original colours most of the time don't get lost, in the process accentuating the latter’s revolutionary musical thinking as well.
This is Liszt looking forward to his own 1880s late works too, e.g. the Debussy-like introduction to the 1st mvt of op.60, stressing the structure and the power of Beethoven, without virtuosity taking over.

Liszt shows that he knows his trade, and IMO better than Beethoven did: for this we only have to listen to Beethoven’s own transcription of the introduction to Symphony 7 1st mvt and compare it with both made by Liszt.

I definitely do appreciate the finale of 9 in this 2-hands piano version without any vocal part, in this way showing how related the musical worlds of 9 and the Diabelli-variations actually are, after peeling off that vocal layer, and also showing IMO that a purely orchestral finale might have been the better solution to conclude those magnificent 3 first mvts of 9.

What I did realize after listening to these transcriptions: apart from the vocal/choral parts in 9 these symphonies are still thought within a framework which makes it possible to play them as string quartet. This is something –I think- not possible anymore with the Symphonie Fantastique, only six years younger than Beethoven 9.

The 1837 transcriptions of 5,6 and 7 are IMO bravuro Liszt, much more showpieces than just reliable transcriptions of these works, though I must admit that Liszt hardly adds anything to the melodic structures to increase the degree of difficulty, mainly doublings, meant for at least twelve fingers.


Other opinions?

[Sorrano]

Thanks for sharing all that! It's interesting what you can find out from different perspectives of the same work. It had never occurred to me that there might be any relationships between the Diabelli variations and the 9th Symphony. That is something to look into!

[Chris]

They are fantastic works. They are one of only a few works I have been compelled to buy multiple versions of. There is so much there it seems one pianist cannot explore it all, no matter how great he is. I would like to try them myself one day, but it turns out they are rather difficult - Liszt actually wrote some pretty demanding piano music. Who knew?

[Peter]

Well the Liszt of 1837 was of course a different creature to the Liszt of the 1860s and we have to be thankful that he waited before completing the transcriptions. Unsurprisingly he had particular trouble with the 9th and originally opted for a two piano version - fascinating to compare with the later solo piano which is an extraordinary attempt to solve the problems the work presents, quite an achievement.

As to an instrumental finale being a better solution I often wonder if the reason this argument is put forward is simply down to the popularity of the finale? No one ever complains of the choral finales in Mahler which obviously took their inspiration from Beethoven.

[Roehre]

As to an instrumental finale being a better solution I often wonder if the reason this argument is put forward is simply down to the popularity of the finale? No one ever complains of the choral finales in Mahler which obviously took their inspiration from Beethoven.

I don't think so, as IMO as stand alone piece the Ode to Joy would still be great piece. But IMO it simply doesn't reach the power of the three previous movements.
The musical relationship between finale 9 and the Diabelli-variations (as unveiled by the Liszt 2-hand-version w/h vocals) shows that the mvt in itself is definitely not bad music. It's only not really fit for purpose. On top of that: the finale is a variation movement, which follows a double-variation movement, in symphonic terms hardly the best of solutions to conclude a symphony.

Re Mahler's 2 choral finales: Symphony 2 ends with a finale which is a logical conclusion of the symphonic argument (and it is not a variation mvt ).
The eighth is a choral symphony anyway, but even there the finale (i.e. the 3rd part of the 2nd mvt [consisting of: -slow part - "scherzo-like"-part - finale]) is the conclusion of a symphonic argument, and also "recycling" two ideas from the very beginning of mvt 1 and thereby connecting the Veni Creator Spiritus with Alles weibliche.

[Peter]

I don't think so, as IMO as stand alone piece the Ode to Joy would still be great piece. But IMO it simply doesn't reach the power of the three previous movements.
The musical relationship between finale 9 and the Diabelli-variations (as unveiled by the Liszt 2-hand-version w/h vocals) shows that the mvt in itself is definitely not bad music. It's only not really fit for purpose. On top of that: the finale is a variation movement, which follows a double-variation movement, in symphonic terms hardly the best of solutions to conclude a symphony.

Re Mahler's 2 choral finales: Symphony 2 ends with a finale which is a logical conclusion of the symphonic argument (and it is not a variation mvt ).
The eighth is a choral symphony anyway, but even there the finale (i.e. the 3rd part of the 2nd mvt [consisting of: -slow part - "scherzo-like"-part - finale]) is the conclusion of a symphonic argument, and also "recycling" two ideas from the very beginning of mvt 1 and thereby connecting the Veni Creator Spiritus with Alles weibliche.

Well we'll have to disagree about the Beethoven finale - perhaps Mahler got the idea of recyling ideas from previous movements from Beethoven's finale?

[Quijote]

Talking of Mahler, it seems to me that he was the first (in his 9th) to begin a Scherzo with a ländler. Quite unusual, given that the ländler is usually played in the Trio section, no?

[Peter]

Talking of Mahler, it seems to me that he was the first (in his 9th) to begin a Scherzo with a ländler. Quite unusual, given that the ländler is usually played in the Trio section, no?

Yes.

[Roehre]

Talking of Mahler, it seems to me that he was the first (in his 9th) to begin a Scherzo with a ländler. Quite unusual, given that the ländler is usually played in the Trio section, no?

Yes and no. The scherzo of 1 starts as a Ländler.