8th symphony beat

[Enrique]

Hello Enrique, nice to see you here.
As Peter says above are later examples of the great composers ending their 1st movement codas in a soft manner.
Bruckner is such an example - in his first version of the 8th symphony he ends in the usual blazing glory ... then in the 2nd version he ends softly.
Which do you prefer?

1st version (blazing glory ending to the coda): https://youtu.be/_kS_qrQb_mY?t=835

2nd version (soft ending to the coda): https://youtu.be/95r6c9Cv16Y?t=842

Well, I think it's an unfair question Philip. I should first listen to the entire movement, at least, to be in a condition to feel whatever I can be supposed to feel. I sometimes after having listened to some passage where there is a climax, say: I'll tell the boys to listen from, say, 34:30. But then I see it could never produce the effect I suppose it is going to produce if that person has not been prepared, by the composer himself, for that extraordinary moment.

Humm... I think I like speaking a lot. All of a sudden the temptation is too great. I'll tell you later.

[Peter]

Hello Enrique, nice to see you here.
As Peter says above, there are later examples of the great composers ending their 1st movement codas in a soft manner.
Bruckner is such an example - in his first version of the 8th symphony he ends in the usual blazing glory ... then in the 2nd version he ends softly.
Which do you prefer?

1st version (blazing glory ending to the coda): https://youtu.be/_kS_qrQb_mY?t=835

2nd version (soft ending to the coda): https://youtu.be/95r6c9Cv16Y?t=842

Thanks for that - very interesting as I'm not familiar with the first version but I'll have to listen properly to the whole thing when I've more time to form an opinion.

[Quijote]

Well, I think it's an unfair question Philip. I should first listen to the entire movement, at least, to be in a condition to feel whatever I can be supposed to feel. I sometimes after having listened to some passage where there is a climax, say: I'll tell the boys to listen from, say, 34:30. But then I see it could never produce the effect I suppose it is going to produce if that person has not been prepared, by the composer himself, for that extraordinary moment...

Yes, you're quite right, posting a short passage out of context is hardly going to convince anyone either way!
Anyway, now that you've had a chance to hear both versions of the 1st movement, which one would you opt for?
For me, the second version, those soft "dying" cellos and basses in the last bars are magical.

[Quijote]

Many great composers 'hear' the music in their head and only resort to the piano to try things over, so this would be nothing to do with his deafness. Berlioz considered composing at the piano the death of all originality - Stravinsky on the other hand always worked from the piano! It has however been demonstrated with some composers that they do actually 'hear' their music in the head faster than they play it so there may be something in this - however we know tempo was of great importance to Beethoven and I imagine he would have taken a great deal more care over the matter.

Yes, I've read that too, and I think it's not only composers who perhaps do that. What I mean is, if you take a piece that you know well (and have played it yourself), when you read through the score away from your instrument don't you find that the time it takes to "play it through in your head" differs (faster or slower) than when you physically play it? It's almost as if the virtual, "in your head" tempo works perfectly well whatever the real "physical" tempo is supposed to be.
But regarding whether composers compose at the piano or on manuscript only, you remember that Beethoven's advice to his student Archduke Rudolf was that he should combine both approaches.

[Quijote]

The above is a point I'd like to develop (in a cursory way) on the thread launched by poster Yolhanson called "Beethoven's 9th, I get it now" ...

[Michael]

Yes, I've read that too, and I think it's not only composers who perhaps do that. What I mean is, if you take a piece that you know well (and have played it yourself), when you read through the score away from your instrument don't you find that the time it takes to "play it through in your head" differs (faster or slower) than when you physically play it? It's almost as if the virtual, "in your head" tempo works perfectly well whatever the real "physical" tempo is supposed to be.
But regarding whether composers compose at the piano or on manuscript only, you remember that Beethoven's advice to his student Archduke Rudolf was that he should combine both approaches.

This has brought back a memory of a fascinating interview with a famous conductor (I can't remember who it was - possibly Karajan) but he was discussing the subject of mental listening (if there's such a term).

He might be having breakfast and a piece of music would come into his head. (Let's say Beethoven's 9th as we're on that subject). He would run through some of the opening section in his mind and then forget about it as he attended to other non-musical chores.

About half an hour later or so, the music would come back into his mind and he was always astounded to find that when it resumed, it had reached the point where the actual piece would have reached in real time. In other words, the music seemed to have been going on in his subconscious while he forgot about it. (I think he tested it one time and his brain seemed to have kept the same tempo he would have applied in a performance.)