Thread: L. Beethoven

Originally Posted by Crudblud

We may have to have words...

:P You like his stuff better on the original harpsichord? I'm that way with Bach. Maybe I've just heard lousy performances, but honestly there's so many damned trills, it just sounds better realized on an instrument that can produce notes at different dynamics

Originally Posted by BurningDesire

:P You like his stuff better on the original harpsichord? I'm that way with Bach. Maybe I've just heard lousy performances, but honestly there's so many damned trills, it just sounds better realized on an instrument that can produce notes at different dynamics

I can't really stand baroque keyboard music on piano and much prefer the harpsichord, yet my favourite recording of the Goldbergs is actually on accordion, so work that one out. Personally, I favour Scott Ross in these matters, his recordings of Bach, Couperin, Scarlatti and Rameau are outstanding.

Most, if not all of the great composers, were forward thinkers for instrumentation and sound. They had to be. It was an integral part of the creative and communicative process.

Unfortunately and ironically, backward/period thinking can often be perceived as a modernistic tool to sell records in the name of scholarship.

I think there's room for both, but we must not kid ourselves when truth in the matter is warranted.

^Okay, so who is kidding themselves? Or am I reading too much in to what you're saying?

Originally Posted by Vaneyes

Most, if not all of the great composers, were forward thinkers for instrumentation and sound. They had to be. It was an integral part of the creative and communicative process.

Unfortunately and ironically, backward/period thinking can often be perceived as a modernistic tool to sell records in the name of scholarship.

I think there's room for both, but we must not kid ourselves when truth in the matter is warranted.

I am very much a HIP enthusiast when it comes to Baroque or Renaissance music. Most of the latest recordings are by period instrument ensembles, so many audiences are used to it. If it is compared with older style presentations of the 60s and 70s the differences are very noticeable. Each one to his tastes, but I much prefer the newer recordings.

I used to be indifferent to HIP for classical period music, including Beethoven, but gradually I've moved more in favour of HIP. I can't help but feel that iit's more likely that the music of any especially good composer, like Mozart and Beethoven, should sound best performed on the instruments it was written for, using the techniques commonly adopted at the time isofar that research can discover them.

The main caveat to this is that I'm not all that keen on the use of forte pianos in the case of Beethoven's solo/chamber works, or Mozart's for that matter. I'm pretty sure that if a modern Steinway (or similar) was somehow available to any of these classical/early romantic composers they would bite your hand off to acquire one.

Originally Posted by Very Senior Member

I am very much a HIP enthusiast when it comes to Baroque or Renaissance music. Most of the latest recordings are by period instrument ensembles, so many audiences are used to it. If it is compared with older style presentations of the 60s and 70s the differences are very noticeable. Each one to his tastes, but I much prefer the newer recordings.

I used to be indifferent to HIP for classical period music, including Beethoven, but gradually I've moved more in favour of HIP. I can't help but feel that iit's more likely that the music of any especially good composer, like Mozart and Beethoven, should sound best performed on the instruments it was written for, using the techniques commonly adopted at the time isofar that research can discover them.

The main caveat to this is that I'm not all that keen on the use of forte pianos in the case of Beethoven's solo/chamber works, or Mozart's for that matter. I'm pretty sure that if a modern Steinway (or similar) was somehow available to any of these classical/early romantic composers they would bite your hand off to acquire one.

First and foremost, it's what you/I/we enjoy. IOW, what fits our ears.

I obviously take issue with, "...it's more likely that the music of any especially good composer, like Mozart and Beethoven, should sound best performed on the instruments it was written for, using the techniques commonly adopted at the time insofar that research can discover them." And of course with those who want to blanket most of the 19th century with period play.

Convincing period application gets less and less as we progress through Haydn, Mozart, and LvB. Apart from some early LvB, there's almost nothing left for the periodists.

Originally Posted by Crudblud

^Okay, so who is kidding themselves? Or am I reading too much in to what you're saying?

From the brief paraphrase, you're probably not reading enough.

Originally Posted by Vaneyes

Convincing period application gets less and less as we progress through Haydn, Mozart, and LvB. Apart from some early LvB, there's almost nothing left for the periodists.

What about mid and late Beethoven? I would of thought that there has been quite a lot of interest in HIP, or periodic instrument, approaches here.

I'm no expert of the amount of interest there may be in HIP/period instruments later in the 19th C, but I would have thought that your bold assertion that "there's almost nothing left" after early Beethoven is too strong.

For example, I would have thought that some of Schumann's orchestral works (mainly his symphonies) have received reconsideration on HIP principles in terms of size of orchestra, choice and balancing of instruments. That alone, I would have thought, makes your assertion look questionable, and there could be other examples.

Originally Posted by Very Senior Member

What about mid and late Beethoven? I would of thought that there has been quite a lot of interest in HIP, or periodic instrument, approaches here.

I'm no expert of the amount of interest there may be in HIP/period instruments later in the 19th C, but I would have thought that your bold assertion that "there's almost nothing left" after early Beethoven is too strong.

For example, I would have thought that some of Schumann's orchestral works (mainly his symphonies) have received reconsideration on HIP principles in terms of size of orchestra, choice and balancing of instruments. That alone, I would have thought, makes your assertion look questionable, and there could be other examples.

Have my assertions denied interest or actual recordings? Hardly. Quite the opposite. Otherwise, I wouldn't be having this discussion with you.

Keep clam. I/we are not as fanatical as some on both sides of the issue. I consider myself more of a centrist.



"Asinine stuff...a complete and absolute farce...Awful. Nobody wants to hear that stuff. I don't." -- Pinchas Zukerman

Originally Posted by Vaneyes

Have my assertions denied interest or actual recordings? Hardly. Quite the opposite. Otherwise, I wouldn't be having this discussion with you.

Keep clam. I/we are not as fanatical as some on both sides of the issue. I consider myself more of a centrist.

I was merely asking why your cut-off was "early" Beethoven", as opposed to late Beethoven. And to point out that some of Schumman's ochestral works benefit from a period approach in terms of a smaller size of orchestra and a careful balancing of instruments to avoid muddy textures.

Originally Posted by Very Senior Member

I was merely asking why your cut-off was "early" Beethoven", as opposed to late Beethoven. And to point out that some of Schumman's ochestral works benefit from a period approach in terms of a smaller size of orchestra and a careful balancing of instruments to avoid muddy textures.

Eroica in period, no thanks. Re Schumann's "muddy textures", I detect JEG theory. And on that, I bid adieu.

So i noticed that TV didn't have a Beethoven fan club so i took the liberty to make one.
Everyone who enjoys his music are allowed to join./ Warmly welcomed!
http://www.talkclassical.com/groups/...an-shrine.html

To be honest, one of the main reason why I think of Beethoven so highly is because of his string quartets. I just can't find anything else resembling them. For some reason I think he wrote in the voice of a human, rather than in the voice of an epoch or a certain style.

Originally Posted by Chrythes

To be honest, one of the main reason why I think of Beethoven so highly is because of his string quartets. I just can't find anything else resembling them. For some reason I think he wrote in the voice of a human, rather than in the voice of an epoch or a certain style.

Exactly, you can spend much time trying to put him into a specific category/style, but his music is none of these. He may be a classic in form, but a truly romantic in expression. I "hear" emotions in Beethoven's music that I have never heard anywhere else. It is like I can live in his music, be it popular (like symphonies, concertos) or not. A "normal" human being could have never succeeded in doing something like this.