Schumann 4 1841 or 1850

[Guest]

I listened last night to the fourth of the four concerts given in Berlin with Rattle and the BPO of the recent Schumann/Brahms symphonic cycle.
Each concert paired the same numbered symphony from each composer.
However the final concert Schumann 4/Brahms 4 used the 1841 "Urfassung" or original version. Schumann never published this, he worked on this for 10 more years and heavily revised it until he finally published it in 1951.

I much prefer the "normal" version, as I am sure the orchestra does too, if insecurity on entries and dodgy intonation are anything to go by". The first version is a curiosity, as far as I am concerned, without any of the greatness apparent in the later version.
Of course, it is played without the great transition between the 3rd 4th movements, and that is the most significant loss.

In a symphonic cycle series of two of the great German romantic composers of the 19th century, I would humbly suggest that the "Urfassung" has no place there, it should be contained in a concert of oddities.
It certainly unbalanced the concert to a great degree. I find the 1851 version one of the greatest of 19th century symphonies, but this fails totally as a first half to the 4th of Brahms in the second half.
Thoughts?
I hope that the BBC will pick up this series.

[Roehre]

I listened last night to the fourth of the four concerts given in Berlin with Rattle and the BPO of the recent Schumann/Brahms symphonic cycle.
Each concert paired the same numbered symphony from each composer.
However the final concert Schumann 4/Brahms 4 used the 1841 "Urfassung" or original version. Schumann never published this, he worked on this for 10 more years and heavily revised it until he finally published it in 1851.

I much prefer the "normal" version, as I am sure the orchestra does too, if insecurity on entries and dodgy intonation are anything to go by". The first version is a curiosity, as far as I am concerned, without any of the greatness apparent in the later version.
Of course, it is played without the great transition between the 3rd 4th movements, and that is the most significant loss.

In a symphonic cycle series of two of the great German romantic composers of the 19th century, I would humbly suggest that the "Urfassung" has no place there, it should be contained in a concert of oddities.....

I am afraid I disagree completely here.
It is not by chance e.g. Brahms preferred the 1841 version, the Sinfonische Fantasie (or Fantasie für Orchester).
It shows Schumann at his best, without giving in to the more "balanced" symphony-in-4-mvts-structure of the op.120 version.
The orchestration is lighter, the themes more "phantastically" eleborated and the structure tighter.
I much prefer the Sinfonische Fantasie, not an oddity, but a major work within Schumann's output.

It's not the first time that a discussion re Schumann 4's versions is around on these boards, btw.

[kea]

Judging from the JEG recording which includes both, I rather prefer the 1841 version to the 1851 one, though it has its moments of awkwardness (e.g. the never-to-be-heard-again themelet that materialises after the opening of the finale) and one can see why Schumann felt compelled to revise it. The orchestration is definitely superior and the piece "flows" much better without the later repeats (the same is true of the Davidsbündlertänze) despite, or because of, the unclassical proportions.

This is in line with my normal preferences in Schumann which place his best works between 1833 and 1839, with a relative falling-off in quality on either side—though even his weakest works are so profoundly in tune with my way of thinking that I can't help but love them, I also must recognise the loss in energy and originality.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

It's always fascinating to hear the original thoughts of composers like Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Tchaikovsky and Vaughan Williams, and I appreciate the work of those who make these available to us. But in general I think the composers' final versions are the ones to go for, Schumann 4 being a prime example. For me, his later version is his finest work, though as I said, it's great to have both versions.

[rauschwerk]

Hans Gal (BBC Music Guide) suggests taking the first version with its superior orchestration and adding to it the transitions from the opening intro to the first allegro and from Scherzo to Finale. It really surprises me that no-one has tried this.

[vinteuil]

... with Schumann, as with Wordsworth, I find the earlier versions far more compelling - I am eternally indebted to John Eliot G whose CD first showed me the benefit of this in this Symphony

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

... with Schumann, as with Wordsworth, I find the earlier versions far more compelling - I am eternally indebted to John Eliot G whose CD first showed me the benefit of this in this Symphony

I "prefer" the 1850 version simply because I know it better. The only recording I have of the 1841 original is performed by The Authentic Orchestra conducted by Derek Solomons, who, for all his competence, neither matches the performances of the later version as recorded by Furtwangler, Karajan or Kubelik, nor offers any valuable insights of its own. I keep intending to see if I can get Goodman's set with the Hanover Band at a miserly price - or seeking out JEG via Spotify.

(Similarly, I have a preference for the 1840 Prelude over the 1804 text, simply because that's the one I studied at "A"-level - the original doesn't sing in the veins of my imagination nearly so joyfully.)

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-x3wvrd1WA

[vinteuil]

(Similarly, I have a preference for the 1840 Prelude over the 1804 text, simply because that's the one I studied at "A"-level - the original doesn't sing in the veins of my imagination nearly so joyfully.)

... an 1840 Prelude? You must inform the Wordsworth Trust immediately! A new Wordsworth text will be an extraordinary event...

Me, I have a soft spot for the two-book 1798/1799 Prelude and the five-book 1804 Prelude. Do you know the 1804 Prelude? It's a bit of a rarity... I refer most often to the thirteen-book 1805 Prelude. The fourteen-book 1850 Prelude one looks to, with a sigh, to see how Wordsworth deliquesces into a Tennysonian Tory Anglicanism...

But if you know of an 1840 - that would be great...


[ Have to say that m'tutor was a Wordsworth. And a Wordsworth scholar. Whose main work was producing editions of the various states of The Prelude... ]

[slarty]

Well the 1841 certainly seems to have it's followers, but it should really be classed as another symphony. Although the thematic material is mostly the same, by the time Schumann published the 4th in 1851 it had taken on a totally different character. So maybe it should be listed as his second symphony and nos 2 to 4 would then become 3 to 5.

I really do hope that the Beeb gives everyone a chance to hear it as broadcast last night.
Anyone desperate to hear it can PM me.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

... an 1840 Prelude? You must inform the Wordsworth Trust immediately! A new Wordsworth text will be an extraordinary event...

Me, I have a soft spot for the two-book 1798/1799 Prelude and the five-book 1804 Prelude. Do you know the 1804 Prelude? It's a bit of a rarity... I refer most often to the thirteen-book 1805 Prelude. The fourteen-book 1850 Prelude one looks to, with a sigh, to see how Wordsworth deliquesces into a Tennysonian Tory Anglicanism...

But if you know of an 1840 - that would be great...


[ Have to say that m'tutor was a Wordsworth. And a Wordsworth scholar. Whose main work was producing editions of the various states of The Prelude... ]

There are not <doh>s enough in the universe ...

(For "1804 ... 1840", please read "1850 ... 1805".)

[cloughie]

Well the 1841 certainly seems to have it's followers, but it should really be classed as another symphony. Although the thematic material is mostly the same, by the time Schumann published the 4th in 1851 it had taken on a totally different character. So maybe it should be listed as his second symphony and nos 2 to 4 would then become 3 to 5.

I really do hope that the Beeb gives everyone a chance to hear it as broadcast last night.
Anyone desperate to hear it can PM me.

Please don't go there - they've already confused the old order with Schubert. For the record I prefer the later 4 and Furtwangler still the one to beat!

[Roehre]

Please don't go there - they've already confused the old order with Schubert..

apart from the fact that no.1 "Spring" is (at least!) Schumann's second symphony, following the Zwickau-symphony in g-minor.

[Hornspieler]

In his boxed set of 1971/2, HvK gives two recordings of Nº 4 (Opus 120) - one with the Berlin Philharmonic and the other is with the Vienna Philharmonic.

Whether they are both of the same version, I am not sure, but the Berlin one features a solo violin.

HS

[slarty]

In his boxed set of 1971/2, HvK gives two recordings of Nº 4 (Opus 120) - one with the Berlin Philharmonic and the other is with the Vienna Philharmonic.

Whether they are both of the same version, I am not sure, but the Berlin one features a solo violin.

HS

Hi HS
They are both the same version(1851) -the first - the BPO, is his studio recording - the second was issued as a bonus - it is a live performance with the Vienna Philharmonic from the musikvereinsaal on the 24th may 1987 and is superb. It was a Sunday morning concert with Mozart's symphony 41 in the first half.
It was an interesting experiment to include a live performance in the studio box set, unfortunately DGG did not continue this idea in other box sets of his.