Beethoven as Orchestrator

[Chaszz]

"Beethoven was a mediocre orchestrator." - Leonard Bernstein.

I was shocked by this when I read it years ago - how dare he! As time went on, I began to agree with it. Symphony #2 is, IMHO, brilliantly orchestrated. The majority of the symphonies, composed after Beethoven's deafness, I think do not measure up when judged purely in terms of orchestration and tone color. I feel the same about the orchestral parts of the other major orchestral works, the concertos, etc. No doubt this is because of his deafness, I would think.

I would except the 6th and 8th sympnonies from this judgment.

Please allow me a moment to hide behind my desk before you start hurling rocks and tomatoes in my direction.

- Chaszz

[Peter]

Well logic would defeat your argument - how could his deafness have made him a bad orchestrator in the 5th and 7th Symphonies and a good one in the 6th and 8th? I cannot agree with Bernstein's remark.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
"Beethoven was a mediocre orchestrator." - Leonard Bernstein.

Did the 5th rate conductor/composer put forth any examples of this mediocrity?

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

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
"Beethoven was a mediocre orchestrator." - Leonard Bernstein.

I was shocked by this when I read it years ago - how dare he! As time went on, I began to agree with it. Symphony #2 is, IMHO, brilliantly orchestrated. The majority of the symphonies, composed after Beethoven's deafness, I think do not measure up when judged purely in terms of orchestration and tone color. I feel the same about the orchestral parts of the other major orchestral works, the concertos, etc. No doubt this is because of his deafness, I would think.

I would except the 6th and 8th sympnonies from this judgment.

Please allow me a moment to hide behind my desk before you start hurling rocks and tomatoes in my direction.

- Chaszz

Perhaps in comparison to Berlioz and Mahler was Beethoven not as effective an orchestrator. But among his own peers he is as good as any of them if not better. I think the overtures are some of his finer examples of effective orchestration.

[Joy]

Don't forget this is only one man's opinion. (Bernstein's). Beethoven was among his favourite composers nevertheless. They played Beethoven's 7th Symphony, 2nd movement, at Bernstein's funeral.

Joy

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by Peter:
Well logic would defeat your argument - how could his deafness have made him a bad orchestrator in the 5th and 7th Symphonies and a good one in the 6th and 8th? I cannot agree with Bernstein's remark.

He didn't say bad, he said mediocre. There is a big difference.

The 6th is tone colored to relect the moods of nature, thus the extra incentive for color. The 8th is animated by a sense of pure joy, like the 2nd, and this may also be an incentive reach for extra color. These two symphonies, like the 2nd, are happier throughout, rather than being fields for titanic struggle, as some of the other symphonies are.

Bernstein was not in any way trying to denying Beethoven's supreme greatness as a composer, and said so. I knew this would probably bring a few brickbats. I myself do not ordinarily enjoy Beethoven's orchestral works AS ORCHESTRATION, the way I can for example, Mozart's later symphonies or Wagner's Siegfried Idyll or Die Meistersinger. That's not to say they're not great works.




[This message has been edited by Chaszz (edited March 31, 2003).]

[chopithoven]

Originally posted by Rod:
Did the 5th rate conductor/composer put forth any examples of this mediocrity?

LOL.

[Chris]

I'd have to seriously disagree. I think Beethoven was a master orchestrator. Certainly a lot of the enjoyment I get from Beethoven's works (including the later works) is directly from the orchestration. I think the 7th symphony is wonderfully orchestrated, in fact - one of my favorites in that respect. I'm not sure what else I can say about it!

[Peter]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
He didn't say bad, he said mediocre. There is a big difference.

Indeed, but your remarks implied that Beethoven's deafness was a possible cause of this 'mediocrity' - clearly this cannot have been the case. There are many examples of Beethoven's innovative approach to orchestration - look at his original and highly effective use of timpani in the 4th and 8th symphonies, Emperor concerto and the scherzo of the 9th for example. The wonderful use of woodwind in the slow movement of the Emperor concerto and the trio of the 7th symphony scherzo - the examples are in fact so numerous that I can't understand what Bernstein was on about - now had he been talking about Schumann and possibly Brahms, that is another matter altogether.

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

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by Peter:
Indeed, but your remarks implied that Beethoven's deafness was a possible cause of this 'mediocrity' - clearly this cannot have been the case. There are many examples of Beethoven's innovative approach to orchestration - look at his original and highly effective use of timpani in the 4th and 8th symphonies, Emperor concerto and the scherzo of the 9th for example. The wonderful use of woodwind in the slow movement of the Emperor concerto and the trio of the 7th symphony scherzo - the examples are in fact so numerous that I can't understand what Bernstein was on about - now had he been talking about Schumann and possibly Brahms, that is another matter altogether.

Whoa. Brahms' 3rd Symphony is I think wonderfully orchestrated. It has a beautiful autumnal feeling to it.

I don't know why I start these things. I think unconsciously I just like to get myself into trouble.

[Gurn Blanston]

I fear that I am at a loss to know what exactly is being said here. I know that it cannot be that he means "not a great part writer", since there was no one greater, although a very few (Mozart, Haydn) who were as good. The balance given to the various parts is tremendous, and the rhythms and harmonics emanate correctly from each section as they could in no other way. So that leaves the "tone color" aspect, which I suppose could be stretched to be covered by deafness issues. I note that in B's works with higher Op numbers, there is a notable absence of wind music. OP 71, 81b, 87 & 103 are all wind ensembles, but written much earlier and published later. This leaves the piano works and string quartets, which have distinguished yet not variable tone color. Perhaps this lack of variety can be construed as poor orchestration, but the quality of the music is so good that one has trouble finding fault with it. I would be interested to know what was actually being said here, since it is difficult to formulate any kind of cogent argument against such a general statement. It makes me just want to say "mediocre, my @#%"
Regards, Gurn

[This message has been edited by Gurn Blanston (edited March 31, 2003).]

[Peter]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
I note that in B's works with higher Op numbers, there is a notable absence of wind music. OP 71, 81b, 87 & 103 are all wind ensembles, but written much earlier and published later. This leaves the piano works and string quartets, which have distinguished yet not variable tone color. Perhaps this lack of variety can be construed as poor orchestration, but the quality of the music is so good that one has trouble finding fault with it.

B's lack of interest in wind ensembles in his later output reflect a general trend.
I don't agree with your comments about tone colour re. the sonatas and quartets! Just look at the new sonorities Beethoven created with his unusual spacing of parts in the late works for example - I really think this deaf argument is silly - to imply that he wrote great music (the greatest ever) and then claim because he was deaf it doesn't sound as good as it could is really rather contradictory! It stems from the 19th century view that somehow B's late works were a decline in his powers due to his deafness - most people today assume the opposite position.

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

[This message has been edited by Peter (edited April 01, 2003).]

[Peter]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
Whoa. Brahms' 3rd Symphony is I think wonderfully orchestrated. It has a beautiful autumnal feeling to it.

I don't know why I start these things. I think unconsciously I just like to get myself into trouble.

I think it is a very interesting point you have raised. With Brahms I said 'possibly' as there is a general opinion that orchestration wasn't his forte! I don't really agree with that, but his 1st piano concerto provides the reason why this view is held - I agree with your description of the 3rd as Autumnal - I think of the 2nd as 'Summer'.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
I fear that I am at a loss to know what exactly is being said here. I know that it cannot be that he means "not a great part writer", since there was no one greater, although a very few (Mozart, Haydn) who were as good. The balance given to the various parts is tremendous, and the rhythms and harmonics emanate correctly from each section as they could in no other way. So that leaves the "tone color" aspect, which I suppose could be stretched to be covered by deafness issues. I note that in B's works with higher Op numbers, there is a notable absence of wind music. OP 71, 81b, 87 & 103 are all wind ensembles, but written much earlier and published later. This leaves the piano works and string quartets, which have distinguished yet not variable tone color. Perhaps this lack of variety can be construed as poor orchestration, but the quality of the music is so good that one has trouble finding fault with it. I would be interested to know what was actually being said here, since it is difficult to formulate any kind of cogent argument against such a general statement. It makes me just want to say "mediocre, my @#%"
Regards, Gurn

[This message has been edited by Gurn Blanston (edited March 31, 2003).]

I too am slightly at a loss without further elaboration from Bernstein. I am reminded of a quote which said Mozart's was the Best quartet writing, but Beethoven wrote the best quartets. B 's manner of writing is perhaps not in the ideal from the music professors standpoint, but from the artistic standpoint (the only standpoint to be considered) it is unsurpassed - some may rember my Parthenon analogy of music, you have to construct it a little imperfectly to make it look (or sound in this case) perfect. Beethoven was the smartest composer that's for sure! Better even then Bernstein!!

Re winds: I can say there is plenty of wind instrument action in the symphonies. Perhaps he abandoned the form as chamber music because wind instruments on their own can sound (in my opinion) rather monotonous in tone themselves.


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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited April 01, 2003).]

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Chris:
I'd have to seriously disagree. I think Beethoven was a master orchestrator. Certainly a lot of the enjoyment I get from Beethoven's works (including the later works) is directly from the orchestration. I think the 7th symphony is wonderfully orchestrated, in fact - one of my favorites in that respect. I'm not sure what else I can say about it!

The most serious charges against Beethoven's orchestration that I've heard are in regards to the brass in the 9th Symphony and the Misa Solemnis, and most particularly in regards to the trombone. However, I think that some of his shining orchestral moments, particularly in the overtures, are due specifically to the usage of the brass instruments. And keep in mind the use of timpani in the 4th, 8th, and 9th Symphonies, as well as the piano version of the violin concerto. This is not mediocrity.