BaL 22.04.23 - Schubert: Symphony no. 5 in B flat D. 485

[Ein Heldenleben]

I'd be equally interested to know how radically the NSA (which is not I think available for online perusal) differs from the old standard 1884. There's nothing beyond that J. Brahms edition on IMSLP, which suggests that was the sole option for many years - but perhaps some of the Schubertian experts here will know differently.

See my post #120 . I am definitely NOT A Schubert expert though.

[Master Jacques]

Interestingly on the first page of the Barenreiter the violin note F at the end of the Bflat rising triad in Bar 6 and at the first inversion of f major in bar 8 are crotchets whereas in the Brahms B and H they are minims. That is quite a major difference. The only dynamic indication on both scores is a pp at the opening (repeated in bars 3 and 5 ) and the odd accented note.
Unfortunately only page one of Barenreiter is readily previewable. The B and H is on IMSLP.
The crotchets would explain the slightly cut off feeling to the end of these phrases but they are what modern scholarship suggests.

Thank you very much - the 'minim v. crotchet' difference is as interesting as it is helpful, and certainly explains what Gaigg was up to - though she certainly overdoes the brevity of the crotchet, by quavering it every time and bashing it, as if it were marked alla whack-a-mole.

[Note to self: read all new posts before cherry-picking one for reply!]

[Maclintick]

Interestingly on the first page of the Barenreiter the violin note F at the end of the Bflat rising triad in Bar 6 and at the first inversion of f major in bar 8 are crotchets whereas in the Brahms B and H they are minims. That is quite a major difference. The only dynamic indication on both scores is a pp at the opening (repeated in bars 3 and 5 ) and the odd accented note.
Unfortunately only page one is readily previewable.

Thanks, EH. That previewable first page of autograph on the Bärenreiter gives confirmation that there are subtle differences between it and the 1884 version. I can't afford to download the whole NSA version, unfortunately, but it does seem that the latest HIPP versions incorporate the changes, as one would expect.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Thanks, EH. That previewable first page of autograph on the Bärenreiter gives confirmation that there are subtle differences between it and the 1884 version. I can't afford to download the whole NSA version, unfortunately, but it does seem that the latest HIPP versions incorporate the changes, as one would expect.

YES WELL MASSIVE CORRECTION TO # 120

After Maclintick’s post above. I got on the Barenreiter digital download site and on that those pesky F’s are in fact minims. On the preview on the music notes site they look exactly like crotchets but that is because they are smaller and are sitting on a line I guess.

[Master Jacques]

YES WELL MASSIVE CORRECTION TO # 120

After Maclintick’s post above. I got on the Barenreiter digital download site and on that those pesky F’s are in fact minims. On the preview on the music notes site they look exactly like crotchets but that is because they are smaller and are sitting on a line I guess.

I'm rather glad to find that Brahms is redeemed, at least as far as the written note value is concerned. It looks therefore as if we're dealing with a question of HIPP, as in the case of what to do with the held minims in the cellos and basses at the start of the Don Giovanni overture (the 'statue' chords). Hold on to them? Or treat them as crotchets, as in the upper parts? Older performances did the former, modern ones the latter. Is this a similar case, I wonder?

Though in favour of giving those initial minims full play (rather than cutting them to crotchets - let alone quavers - and bashing them out staccato, which certainly is not marked in either edition) doing so is sensitive to the extensions of the theme in bars 10, 14 and so on, where it is absolutely necessary to give the minims full value. That is perhaps why not observing them initially produces a perversely ungracious effect.

[Maclintick]

YES WELL MASSIVE CORRECTION TO # 120

After Maclintick’s post above. I got on the Barenreiter digital download site and on that those pesky F’s are in fact minims. On the preview on the music notes site they look exactly like crotchets but that is because they are smaller and are sitting on a line I guess.

Ah...we're going to have to rely on Richard B for access to the NSA, as AFAIK he's the only forumista who's posted observations derived from it, aside from the previewable Page 1 autograph you mention, EH. I have several reference works, Brown, Newbould, McKay, Deutsch, Wollenberg (most up-to-date on my shelves -- 2011), but none of the examples they quote differ from 1884 in dynamic markings.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Well I’ve now gone and downloaded the Barenreiter but it’s too late to do a comparison as my eyes have already let me down once . I have to say at first glance how little difference there is on page one of the new edition and the Brahms edition. The other thing is the lack of dynamic markings apart from the pps

[Master Jacques]

Well I’ve now gone and downloaded the Barenreiter but it’s too late to do a comparison as my eyes have already let me down once . I have to say at first glance how little difference there is on page one of the new edition and the Brahms edition. The other thing is the lack of dynamic markings apart from the pps

Little difference on Page 1 to be sure. On the second sample page (from the finale) there are some differences in the sforzando markings between the two editions - some of them a bit weird in the NSA, which has more of them; while logical and regular in the B&H - but nothing to frighten the horses.

[jayne lee wilson]

SCHUBERT Symphony No.5 /B’Rock Orchestra/René Jacobs (Pentatone CD)

Like JEG and Harnoncourt, Jacobs is an analytic visionary, a conductor who always sees the whole work and shapes it and his manoeuvres accordingly; but sometimes throws in a local disordering for fun, to make us listen, prick-up-your-ears. Seeks, above all, to make it new. “Charming” Schubert? Oh God, anything but that; lets start with discipline; sing dreamy songs and find the wistful in the pastoral; then have some fun and pitch into the wild vivace madness for the final flourish. The score is just the beginning, right?

So Jacob’s 1st movement is quite strictly controlled, but with his vital young band, never less than fully alive and with a glistening translucency of tone from winds and strings alike. Solos to ponder, to marvel at; play on repeat. A lovely, flowing andante……(keep moving, keep moving on…)…
Then the fun & games start in the minuet: tempo épater-les-bourgeois, a sudden/prolonged pause…..a galop to the end!
Very quick, more scherzo than minuet, but with swing and schwung and fluidity of line; airy, lofted rhythms. Very danceable - for magic movers....

The finale is even faster, dramatically direct - but just listen to what happens at the second appearance of the 2nd subject; by the end of the development we've arrived at a laidback state of grace; or it is nowhere fast? The respite is brief.
With such effortless agility, the movement has never sound so fully (and micro-dynamically) alive as this. Repeats are scarcely ever literal with Jacobs, always creatively exploited (sometimes startlingly so); your focus sharpens on the momentary, unexpected prolongation of a pause. His brilliantly virtuoso players respond with marvellous inner dialogue, a terrific sense of fun in the exchanges they throw across the acoustic.

With state-of-the-art recorded sound, this is the most original and exciting 5th I’ve heard so far, and easily my No.1 recommend for any ears seeking a refresher: adventure and enlightenment in the one package tour.

(Not the least of the attractions of Jacobs’ cycle are his extraordinary notes to all of the symphonies in the Pentatone booklets. He analyses every movement, from section to section, in great and revealing detail, both from the harmonic/thematic/structural POV and in richly emotive and poetic language too, with the breadth and depth of musical understanding only available to the most gifted performers.
He notices things others may not, e.g. the thematic connection between the 5th’s minuet and finale, and offers fascinating comment on the Mozart 40th Symphony as Schubertian intertext, with several specific cross-references).

[Goon525]

Thanks, Jayne, and hope you feel better soon. Would you prefer the Jacobs to the COE/Harnoncourt, a set which I think we both fell for when it came out a couple of years ago? Maybe ‘prefer’ isn’t quite the right word - I think you’re suggesting Jacobs isn’t a likely BaL winner, but nevertheless definitely worth a listen.

[Bryn]

Looks like Savall is working in the opposite direction to Jacobe, starting his survey with the last two symphonies. I wonder when the former's 5th will appear?

[Ein Heldenleben]

Little difference on Page 1 to be sure. On the second sample page (from the finale) there are some differences in the sforzando markings between the two editions - some of them a bit weird in the NSA, which has more of them; while logical and regular in the B&H - but nothing to frighten the horses.

I can’t see much difference between the NSA and B a& H scores in the first movement. But it’s a bit like those spot the difference games that I was never that good at . Interestingly the NSA has guidance note on Schubert’s use of accents and sfz . Unfortunately I can’t cut and paste but in essence they are are ambiguous and it’s often difficult to work out to which instrument they refer. That is obviously a bit of a licence to do what you like ..I mean creatively reinterpret.

PS does anybody play this work pianissimo? It all sounds at best piano/mezzoforte

[Ein Heldenleben]

I can’t see much difference between the NSA and B a& H scores in the first movement. But it’s a bit like those spot the difference games that I was never that good at . Interestingly the NSA has guidance note on Schubert’s use of accents and sfz . Unfortunately I can’t cut and paste but in essence they are are ambiguous and it’s often difficult to work out to which instrument they refer. That is obviously a bit of a licence to do what you like ..I mean creatively reinterpret.

PS does anybody play this work pianissimo? It all sounds at best piano/mezzoforte

PPS Congrats to Jacobs and B’Rock band who play the opening pianissimo and the fiddles play a proper staccato downward run. Hats off ! Really beautifully done.

Slightly over narrow stereo mage though and very rhs skewed.

[Master Jacques]

Interestingly the NSA has guidance note on Schubert’s use of accents and sfz . Unfortunately I can’t cut and paste but in essence they are are ambiguous and it’s often difficult to work out to which instrument they refer. That is obviously a bit of a licence to do what you like ..I mean creatively reinterpret.

That's interesting to know, thank you very much. The guidance seemingly explains the NSA's licence with adding extra sfz markings, quite inconsistently on that sample page from the finale.

[Ein Heldenleben]

That's interesting to know, thank you very much. The guidance seemingly explains the NSA's licence with adding extra sfz markings, quite inconsistently on that sample page from the finale.

Yes and indeed The plot is thickening . The Penguin Record review asserts that Brahms added extra bars in his edition. I’m just not patient enough to work out what those might be.