[mtmailey]

I love the repeats without them the music would be dull.

 

[KenOC]

That said, I just listened to Beethoven's Eroica today, and Herr von Karajan omitted the exposition repeat in the first movement. I felt instantly cheated, discombobulated even...

According to Beethoven's brother, he couldn't decide whether to drop that repeat or keep it in. He rehearsed it both ways over several days, and finally decided to keep it. But it seems to have been a near thing!

 

[Woodduck]

According to Beethoven's brother, he couldn't decide whether to drop that repeat or keep it in. He rehearsed it both ways over several days, and finally decided to keep it. But it seems to have been a near thing!

Ha! He could have asked me - if he could have asked me.

 

[Alydon]

The omission of repeats are most noticeable on historic recordings especially in music from the classical era and this seems disconcerting on the modern ear, as though part of the music has been missed out. I'm thinking of the Haydn string quartet recordings by the Pro Arte Quartet, and some of the movements result in beings ridiculously short - part of the problem was of course the restriction of the 78rpm, and many other recordings have this feature.

On the other hand too many repeats can be a burden - Harnoncourt's set of Haydn's Paris symphonies seemed to have everything repeated and this just sounds overdone - as is some of Britten's Mozart. Sviatoslav Richter said he felt cheated if the obvious repeats weren't observed, and I wholly agree, especially in the Schubert D960.

 

[gardibolt]

One can hardly be doing a historically informed recording of Beethoven that omits the repeats. He was very particular about his noted repeats being taken and would fly into a rage upon hearing that someone skipped the repeat. The mention of the 2nd movement of the 9th is a good example---he wrote at least three letters, plus express directions in two copies of the score, specifying exactly what he wanted. But most conductors seem to feel free to ignore that expressed intent. Of the recordings I have, only Blomstedt with the Staatskapelle Dresden, Hogwood with the AAM, Klemperer with the Philharmonia, Leibowitz (Reader's Digest), Toscanini 1939 and 1952 and Zinman with the Tonhalle Zurich play the movement correctly with the right repeats. They are ignored by: Bernstein with the NY Phil (1964), Bernstein with the Bavarian RSO (1989), Busch with the Danish RSO, Furtwängler 1942 Berlin and 1943 Stockholm and 1951 Bayreuth; Jochum with the London SO; Karajan 1955 with the Philharmonia (both stereo and mono); Karajan 1963 with Berlin; Szell with Cleveland; and Walter with the Columbia SO.

Yes, I find these to be important issues. And just a shade OCD.

 

[Triplets]

I think they serve more of a purpose when the music is new unfamiliar. Most of what we listen to is no longer new and unfamiliar. If they really serve a structural purpose, then they should be retained. Otherwise, it;s optional. Certainly some pieces suffer if they are always observed, such as Schubert's C Major Symphony.

 

[KenOC]

Well, Beethoven can play it his way, and I can play it mine. That's what music editing programs are for, after all. Now Schubert -- there's a real problem child!

 

[Le Peel]

Karajan's account of Beethoven Symphony No. 5, mov. 4 sounds like film music. All of the fault of omitted repeats.