Repeats in Older Recordings

[pastoralguy]

There's a moment in Previn's 'Swan Lake' recording where a small section is repeated. However, the flute goes noticeably flat at the end which happens again in the repeat! I don't imagine it would happen twice so I can only assume that some tape editing is involved.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

... one function of repeats in this music was surely to maximise the audience's acquaintance with the musical material given that many if not most of them would never hear the piece again, a precaution which isn't necessary any more...

No - but the other functions of the repeat are still necessary; the (re-)establishment of the Tonic to ensure that the sense of "return" is heightened in the Recap (which is why some later 19th Century composers didn't feel the need for a repeat - or, more positively, felt the need not to repeat); the placing and timing of the Movement/work (the Eroica without the repeat always creates a sense of premature climax when the E minor section comes too soon - in fact all symphonic climactic points sound disjointed if the repeats are ignored); and the sheer joy of hearing the Music again - what's the hurry? What do people think they have to do that they can jettison a couple (or more) minutes of Music in order to do it?!

[Dave2002]

I believe that some works by Schubert with ALL the repeats may become intolerable to some, or indeed many.

[Richard Barrett]

No - but the other functions of the repeat are still necessary; the (re-)establishment of the Tonic to ensure that the sense of "return" is heightened

Agreed, although I'm not sure of the extent to which this would have been conscious at the time, as with ideas of "pacing" which are inevitably conditioned by historical developments in the meanwhile. As for Schubert, if you're tired of something when you hear it for the fourth time, maybe you didn't like it that much the first time! Peter Gülke's essay accompanying Andreas Staier's recording of Schubert's last three sonatas makes a very enlightening comparison with Hölderlin's poem "Mein Eigentum", where the poet conjures up a beautiful arcadian world and ends with an imprecation to the Fates not to remove this vision too soon from his eyes. I think this says something essential about the fear of silence and emptiness that might lie behind Schubert's compulsive prolongations (far from the idea of "heavenly length"!).

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I believe that some works by Schubert with ALL the repeats may become intolerable to some, or indeed many.

You may well be correct - but they are essential to Schubert.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Agreed, although I'm not sure of the extent to which this would have been conscious at the time

Well, the "conventions" (such as they are) of the Sonata principles arose because of the greater exploration of "modulation"/"Tonicization" that emerged (?from more "rigid" temperament systems that made this more "practical"?) in the middle of the Eighteenth Century. Thematic material is often of less "significance" than Tonal manoeuvring in the early Sonata structures to the extent that the thematic material of the First Group/Subject was not that infrequently used again in the Second - it's the difference(s) in Tonality that's the - <ahem> - key here, I think. And the fun with "false Recapitulations" isn't possible if the composer didn't expect at least some of the audience to be able to follow the changes in Tonality.

as with ideas of "pacing" which are inevitably conditioned by historical developments in the meanwhile.

You're right - I did write "pacing"; but I meant "placing" - what happens and when it happens.

[Richard Barrett]

Thematic material is often of less "significance" than Tonal manoeuvring in the early Sonata structures to the extent that the thematic material of the First Group/Subject was not that infrequently used again in the Second - it's the difference(s) in Tonality that's the - <ahem> - key here, I think.

This is certainly true of Scarlatti's sonatas of course. Here (to my ears at least) the importance of the repeats (which some people don't play!) is to do not so much with hearing the same music more than once, but with each structural junction point being different - at the beginning we go from silence to tonic, from the first section to its repeat we go from dominant to tonic, from the repeat to the second section from dominant to dominant, from the second section to its repeat from tonic to dominant, and at the end from tonic to silence. Most of the sonatas follow this scheme, and many involve much more complex modulations within each half (the well-known K491 is a good example of this). So for me it's to a great extent a question of these moments of change from one musical state to another.

[mathias broucek]

Before too long someone's going to mention Mahler 6, I fear....

[Pulcinella]

This is certainly true of Scarlatti's sonatas of course. Here (to my ears at least) the importance of the repeats (which some people don't play!) is to do not so much with hearing the same music more than once, but with each structural junction point being different - at the beginning we go from silence to tonic, from the first section to its repeat we go from dominant to tonic, from the repeat to the second section from dominant to dominant, from the second section to its repeat from tonic to dominant, and at the end from tonic to silence. Most of the sonatas follow this scheme, and many involve much more complex modulations within each half (the well-known K491 is a good example of this). So for me it's to a great extent a question of these moments of change from one musical state to another.

I like that idea, Richard.
A not dissimilar thing happens with the Tarantella in Pulcinella, where there is an (oft-omitted) repeat.
AFTER the repeat, we get the wonderful (imho) section of solo quartet playing (pizzicato, très sonore) in 3/4 against the rest of the orchestra in 6/8.
I always want to hear the repeat (staying in 6/8) before the change, third time round.

And of course there is the (in)famous omission of the repeat in Stravinsky's Movements (the Rosen recording) in its first CD release, only fairly recently restored (to my and Bryn's delight, amongst that of others, I'm sure!).

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Before too long someone's going to mention Mahler 6, I fear....

You just have!

(Of course, of all Mahler's reconsiderings and mind-changes, the Exposition Repeat was never anything that he considered removing - and, as it is only the second time in the Ten/Eleven Symphonies that he did this, I don't think that ignoring it is a creditable option for performers.)

[Bryn]

,,, all Mahler's reconsiderings and mind-changes, the Exposition Repeat was never anything that he considered removing - and, as it is only the second time in the Ten/Eleven Symphonies that he did this, I don't think that ignoring it is a creditable option for performers.

Though Sir Charles Mackerras was clearly of a different opinion in this regard on at least one recorded occasion.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Though Sir Charles Mackerras was clearly of a different opinion in this regard on at least one recorded occasion.

Indeed, as was Barbirolli - I cannot see/hear how the omission can be justified, though.

[Richard Barrett]

I cannot see/hear how the omission can be justified, though.

The exposition repeat is one of the somewhat numerous things I don't really like about Mahler 6 - not the fact that it's played but the fact that Mahler wrote it. It gives the structure of that movement a stolidity that to me is unMahlerian. But this is no reason not to play it (or as a listener to/student of the work to try to understand it!).

[Dave2002]

You may well be correct - but they are essential to Schubert.

Even in the repeated sections?

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

There's a moment in Previn's 'Swan Lake' recording where a small section is repeated. However, the flute goes noticeably flat at the end which happens again in the repeat! I don't imagine it would happen twice so I can only assume that some tape editing is involved.

Ah, you've noticed it too.