BaL 2.07.22 - Beethoven: Missa Solemnis

[Petrushka]

Mario - great post, thanks!

Barbirollians - I too have the Kubelik on Orfeo and agree with your assessment.

May I put in another shout for the Masur? Recorded in 1972 on the Berlin Classics label it's got top notch soloists and magnificent chorus and it's a terrific performance that grips you from first note to last. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mass-Major-...ar%2C67&sr=1-7

[gradus]

A great post Mario, even in Jacobs performance the stature of this music is plain but compare him to what for example Toscanini achieves and imv Toscanini is far closer to realising what the music is conveying. Must look out for the Kubelik too.

[Ein Heldenleben]

... which says more about O level music (which perhaps luckily I never took) than about Beethoven!

I distinctly remember my O level music teacher ( good musician who’d been taught by Matyas Sieber ) knocking a mark off in SATB chorale exercises for doubled thirds , parallel octaves etc. He thought it was ridiculous as well…
Beethoven is full of doubled thirds…

[Ein Heldenleben]

Thank you EH – didn’t notice that!

May I ask why? Parallel 5ths & 8ves I know about (even though they send me crazy searching for them), but why is this bad – considered bad choral writing, or what?

I think it’s something to do with creating a overly “rich “ harmonic texture . The third is the note that defines the chord so the idea is not to overemphasise it. That’s how it was explained to me. Thing is what if you want a “rich “ texture?

[silvestrione]

I think it’s something to do with creating a overly “rich “ harmonic texture . The third is the note that defines the chord so the idea is not to overemphasise it. That’s how it was explained to me. Thing is what if you want a “rich “ texture?

I think that's well put. Perhaps I was indoctrinated when young, but certainly if I improvise an idle chordal sequence on the piano and end on a tonic chord with two thirds in it, it sounds 'thick' to my ears: in fact the opposite of rich, or at least of 'glowing', which needs just the one third. Beethoven of course, like Haydn did on one occasion, would say 'the rules are all my obedient humble servants'. But it's good to know them first, so here's a vote for the traditional O Level Music.

[HighlandDougie]

I could write a book about how this work moves me (but I shan’t be doing so of course – your loss clearly ).

On the old BBC Messageboards I wrote a whole paragraph about just the final bar of the “Gloria”. This bar has sent me crazy ever since I heard it. The bar, 569 on the score is in 3/4 time and in D Maj. So far so good. However, the final tutti chord is on the first beat, i.e., the strongest beat in the bar. So far, again so good. But the chorus is carrying on, for two quavers and a crotchet, on the three syllables of glo-O-RI-A. This is mad (at least to a struggling Grade 6 Theory elderly student)!

The first beat of the bar is the strongest, which is on the 1st quaver for “O”. The second quaver in this last bar is on “RI”, which is part of the 1st strongest beat. And the chorus finishes, I would suspect exhausted, on the second beat of the bar with a crotchet “A”. We are then left with a crotchet rest to round off the bar, leaving us with a suspension in mid-air, as if an echo in some vast Brucknerian cathedral. I repeat, this is mad! WHERE is the strongest beat, as the orchestra has now finished and the chorus is singing on the weaker two beats of the bar? Surely this is not syncopation, is it?

And there is surely no “muddiness” here, is there, either aurally or literally?

And I now read on this thread that some conductor decides to whisper this last Gloria, clearly marked ff in bar 546, a full 23 bars before the finish – no diminuendos, no crescendos, no accelerandos, no ritardandos, simply to be played through as written, with the additional punch of a final sf on all instruments, leaving the chorus totally exposed. But pity Beethoven, what did he know, the deaf old man? A high F note for the sopranos, singing on after the orchestra has finished – yes, let’s change that to pp as Beethoven got it wrong. Guess the name of one conductor of whom I shall be wary from now on.

It really is difficult for me to control my Mediterranean temperament when I hear sacrilege such as this, butchering a work considered (forget my own over-egging-the-pudding comments), a towering achievement for its composer.

Pianoman, I have the Zinman recording, and find it rather earth-bound in comparison to Toscanini’s heaven-storming 1940 account. Nevertheless, I’m pleased you enjoyed it.

Pulcie, I will never join the ranks of the Forum Police and insist my opinion rates above yours – and you’re right, our friendship far supersedes any differences of opinion.

Kea, although there is much that I like about JEG, and I do find his execution of some Mozart works “cruel” in the literal meaning of the word, he simply has to tamper with that last Gloria bar, doesn’t he? He has his admirers here, so I’d best move on.

Petrushka, may I add a third ground-shaking moment to your list please? It occurs in the Gloria, bar 185, where Beethoven uses the very rare (for him) fff notation for the pater O-mnipotens (Almighty Father), the sopranos screaming the syllable on a high Ab. I don’t think you have to be religious to understand the significance of this moment. Toscanini does, ensuring his forces try their utmost to blast you out of your comfortable listening environment.

I apologise for my rant (I’m afraid I’m not blessed with that British self-restraint), and I apologise for my gushiness.

Can’t wait for the 2nd, though!

One of the great things about the forum is that a passionately expressed and argued post - thanks, Mario - has one scurrying to the shelves to listen - well, immediately, to the work in question. I would be lying if I said that the MS was a work often in the CD player - yes, it's great but just a bit daunting (and, I think, really deserves to be heard in the flesh). Anyway, the live Haitink has ben languishing on my shelves for too long so currently being uplifted by the late great BH giving it his all. Fine performance (very much like the tenor and baritone) but the rather congested recording quality does it no favours. Must be hellishly difficult to achieve a good balance among chorus, soloists and orchestra so a minor quibble.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I think that's well put. Perhaps I was indoctrinated when young, but certainly if I improvise an idle chordal sequence on the piano and end on a tonic chord with two thirds in it, it sounds 'thick' to my ears: in fact the opposite of rich, or at least of 'glowing', which needs just the one third. Beethoven of course, like Haydn did on one occasion, would say 'the rules are all my obedient humble servants'. But it's good to know them first, so here's a vote for the traditional O Level Music.

Thank you for confirming that I am not misremembering ! I know piano writing is different to choral but anyways :
Beethoven ends the first movement of his Opus 109 piano sonata with two Emajor triads - identical in both hands on the low part of the piano register - complete with doubled third . It sounds thick and over rich - but very much a contrast with all the arpeggiated chords that make up the first movement. It really sounds like a rest - a moment of repose.
He starts the final variation movement with a beautifully voiced e major chord that sounds lovely on the piano. Then the first inversion of that chord : again beautifully voiced . Often thirds on the piano don’t sound that good because they are not quite in tune.
Who is to say what is right and what is wrong ? . With LvB all just sounds right ..which is what matters.

[gurnemanz]

I'm largely immune to 'atrocious' recorded sound having grown up listening to MW radio! I couldn't care less about Toscanini's poor recorded sound, its the performance that counts and to me that shines through.

Likewise. I had the 1940 version in my not large collection of LPs as a student and played it when I needed uplifting and consoling (Mischa Mischakoff's beautiful violin solo in the Benedictus). Inspiring communication from orchestra and choir and soloists, eg Björling and Kipnis. I had a large Beethoven poster on my wall, on which I had enthusiastically inscribed the LvB quote: "Von Herzen, möge es wieder zu Herzen gehen" ... and it did. The recording is still special for me and my favourite of the three Toscanini versions I have on CD.

At a 1970 Prom I enjoyed my first live performance with Eugen Jochum conducting the Concertgebouw Orch (Ernst Haefliger, tenor) and I came back for more a year later for Colin Davis with BBCSO in the the surprising venue of Westminster Cathedral. After a long gap, the next one was John Eliot Gardiner's late night Prom in 2014.

My immense admiration for this work was enhanced still further a few years ago when as a very average bass I actually got to sing in it and appreciate the beauty of the work, and the fiendish challenge of some sections, from the inside. It is miles beyond our own local choir but a much bigger choir nearby dared to take to it on and had invited singers from neighbouring choirs to join them.

[Mario]

If anyone is interested, there is a commentary on the MS by everyone’s favourite reviewer, Mr David Hurwitz.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=david+hurwitz+missa+solemnis&docid=608034311393718352&mid=B600DDF1A2287401B905B600DDF1A2287401B905&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

He discusses readings by (in alphabetical order),

Leonard Bernstein (twice) with the Westminster Choir (no one’s favourite choir, apparently)
Herbert Blomstedt (his current favourite)
Wilhelm Furtwängler (apparently, he was scared of attempting the work, or as DH says, “he didn’t have the chops to pull it off”)
Sir John Eliot Gardiner
Nicholas Harnoncourt
Marek Janowski
Otto Klemperer
Rafael Kubelik (coupled with the 9th)
Helmut Rilling
Robert Shaw (as conductor)
George Szell
Arturo Toscanini
David Zinman (I have this recording and the chorus is the Schweizer Kammerchor, so I don’t know what DH is talking about).

The review is about thirty seven minutes long.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Funny remark about Furtwangler not having the “chops” to pull off the Missa Solemnis . He managed ok with the 9th which interpretatively is probably more demanding . Not to mention The Ring which Furtwangler had a pretty good stab at….
Do great religious works need much interpretation? I would think a lot of the demands are around ensemble , tempo and not killing the choir. The last thing this work needs is a “vision “ forced on it.

[Bryn]

If anyone is interested, there is a commentary on the MS by everyone’s favourite reviewer, Mr David Hurwitz.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=david+hurwitz+missa+solemnis&docid=608034311393718352&mid=B600DDF1A2287401B905B600DDF1A2287401B905&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

He discusses readings by (in alphabetical order),

Leonard Bernstein (twice) with the Westminster Choir (no one’s favourite choir, apparently)
Herbert Blomstedt (his current favourite)
Wilhelm Furtwängler (apparently, he was scared of attempting the work, or as DH says, “he didn’t have the chops to pull it off”)
Sir John Eliot Gardiner
Nicholas Harnoncourt
Marek Janowski
Otto Klemperer
Rafael Kubelik (coupled with the 9th)
Helmut Rilling
Robert Shaw (as conductor)
George Szell
Arturo Toscanini
David Zinman (I have this recording and the chorus is the Schweizer Kammerchor, so I don’t know what DH is talking about).

The review is about thirty seven minutes long.

Oh, I think I'll get by without his 'help'. I guess that was videoed before the release of the Suzuki, to which I am currently listening in surround sound. I downloaded it ages ago, when eclassical had it on promotion, and I only just got round to unzipping the surround FLACs, copying them to a USB stick and playing them in the Oppo.

(I have this recording and the chorus is the Schweizer Kammerchor, so I don’t know what DH is talking about).

Neither does he.

[RichardB]

If anyone is interested, there is a commentary on the MS by everyone’s favourite reviewer, Mr David Hurwitz.

[Master Jacques]

I am with you on "vision". That's an airy nothing, invented by critics who have little precise to say about why one performance might be different from another. Good conductors have an idea what they want musically, but smile at the false philosophical/religious idea of being "visionary". That's not how any performance of the Missa Solemnis works.

As for David Hurwitz ... he is the stopped clock of critics: right twice a day, wrong the rest of the time. I remember that on one occasion (I forget the work, but the conductor was Barbirolli) he rudely dismissed the pungent and characterful Hallé brass section as incompetent. When questioned, he knew nothing about the great, northern English brass tradition, and simply condemned the section because it didn't sound exactly like the New York Phil. For him, Manchester was just some provincial backwater, so how could they do things properly, in their own way?

[Mario]

As for David Hurwitz ... he is the stopped clock of critics: right twice a day, wrong the rest of the time.

Wonderful! Simply wonderful!

[Pianoman]

Yaaaaawwwnnn.....