BaL 6.07.13 - Beethoven's Piano Sonata no. 32 in C minor Op. 111

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Do "we"? Not Bruckner? Not Chopin? Not your fantasy Tchaikovsky conductor?

Fidelio; the slow Movement of the Waldstein Sonata; the finale of the Bb major String Quartet. Are there any other examples of Beethoven "changing his mind" after he had completed a work?

I was thinking of his manuscripts, rather than the more obvious examples of completed works.

[Bryn]

Fidelio; the slow Movement of the Waldstein Sonata; the finale of the Bb major String Quartet. Are there any other examples of Beethoven "changing his mind" after he had completed a work? (Genuine question - not a smart-alec rhetorical: I can't think of any others.)

What about the 4th Piano Concerto? In his recording (Steinway D, IIRC) with Andrew Parrott, Brautigam uses Barry Cooper's transcription of Beethoven's amendments (made after publication). I will check but I think Cooper mentions other works Beethoven revisited in a similar manner. It's interesting to compare it with the recording he made with Charles Hazlewood for BBC2 and Radio 3's Discovering Music he used the usual score (played on historically apposite instruments).

http://www.sa-cd.net/showtitle/6212

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00fk86l (op. cit.)

[Roehre]

I don't know of any other changes Beethoven made after completion.....

At least there are the following ones (nearly all of these made after a performance or even after publication):


-piano trio opus 1/3 (re-composed as string quintet opus 104)
-string trio op.9/1 (IIRC): 2nd trio from scherzo removed
-piano sonata in c op.10/1: original slow(ish) mvt replaced and published separately (as WoO 52 iirc)
-piano sonata op.14/1 re-composed as string quartet
-piano concerto no.2 op.19 (repeatedly revised, original finale published as separate rondo (WoO 6))
-string quartets opus 18 nos. 1, 2 definitely completely revised, 3, 5 possibly.
-septet opus 20: recomposed as clarinet trio opus 38 (though this is only a mere transcription)
-violin sonata in A opus 30/1 (finale replaced - and re-used for opus 47)
-Waldstein sonata op.53- slow mvt replaced (and published as Andante favori)
-violin concerto op.61: violin part re-composed before publication, then also adapted for piano
-symphony no.5 (scherzo repeat)
-Leonore (revised twice, 3rd version is fidelio as we know it now)
-Fantasy opus 80: planned alternative introduction for string quartet to replace the piano-solo-introduction scrapped only weeks before publication
-christus am Oelberge op.85 revised and cut before publication
-symphony no.8 (12 bars at the end of 1st mvt replaced)
-Wellington's sieg (revised)
-string quartet in f op.95 (revised before publication)
-violin sonata in G op.96 (revised before publication)
-Octet opus 103: completely recomposed as string quintet opus 4, but before that the octet was revised, including replacing a new mvt to replace the original slow(ish) mvt.
-Hammerklavier op.106 just before publication the first bar of the slow mvt added
-Bagatelles op.119, originally a cycle of 7, extended to 11 under pressure of the publisher.
-Diabelli variations op.120. the original score did consist of only 21 variations. Before publication another 11 were added.
-String quartet opus 130: finale replaced and separately published as opus 133

Beethoven considered replacing the finale of symphony no.9

I've got the feeling that Bruckner's seemlingly endless revisions did have a good example (though Bruckner most likely knew only of the Fidelio changes)

[waldo]

My God, Roehre! How on earth do you know all this?

[Roehre]

My God, Roehre! How on earth do you know all this?

Reading, listening, enjoying (and making notes).
The Third programme was a treasure trove e.g., but there is a lot of literature about composers (not only Beethoven) and their working methods, and sometimes Discovering Music gave hints of what the composer might have had in mind or actually had in mind before deciding what the definitive version of his work had to be.
Only a couple of weeks ago R3 Music Matters (Saturdays 12.15pm) offered an excellent programme on composers' changing thoughts (examples of Beethoven, Brahms, Bruckner, Mahler, Sibelius i.a. were broadcast and discussed).

[ardcarp]

On a very general point, the way we see things now, (a) that a composition reaches its final form, is frozen that way by publication and can never be tampered with, and (b) that a performance (discounting aleatoric stuff) must not deviate by one iota from the urtext was not the way things were seen before the 20th century. Some of the great pianists of the past would 'improve' a Baroque or Classical piece by adding texture and maybe by reharmonising, and would often 'preludise' before the piece and would continue to improvise after. Maybe this should be taken into account when we worry about a composer (or others) changing or modifying things. It was probably the norm.

[Sir Velo]

Having listened again, DON's take on the Brendel selected for inclusion in the survey is not so outrageous. Brendel's later version is ponderous and portentous by turns. What is surprising, however, is the omission of Brendel's magisterial 70s performance (available on a Philips Duo of all the late sonatas). Sir Isaiah Berlin was of the opinion that Brendel's Beethoven was that of an intermediary between the great man and us. This performance has all the profundity one could wish for. I'd be interested in why it was overlooked in favour of the later, infinitely weaker performance.

[ardcarp]

Sir Isaiah Berlin was of the opinion that Brendel's Beethoven was that of an intermediary between the great man and us.

I'd like to hear the early Brendel performance. As far as the above is concerned, I am sure every performer has had a few (very few) metaphysical moments when he/she feels to be a mouthpiece, a medium, an intermediary between dead composer and audience. It is pure illusion, of course, and even more so when a third party gets carried away along these lines. In the old days when oratorio was attended and listened to with deep reverence, it was quite common (and I think of my long-dead parents) for people to weep silently when, for instance, Isobel Baillie forged a direct line to God via Jesus via Handel. The audience knew her Redeemer lived.

This is not meant to sound blasphemous...it just illustrates the emotional power of music.

[waldo]

I'd like to hear the early Brendel performance.

As you probably know, there is also an earlier set from the 60s on Vox. I haven't heard it, but some say is has more dash and spirit than the later sets.......

I do, however, have the 70s Philips set (it took about three years to persuade someone at work to trust me with it), but never thought that highly of it. Plenty of panache and energy, but the overall interpretations never really grabbed me. The later ones, especially, lack mystery and weight and at this time in his career Brendel liked to underplay the left hand, so bass lines are often a bit soggy and lack definition. Overall, I think of it as quite a "neutral" performance - professional and immaculate, but just a bit dull.

[Thropplenoggin]

I always wondered why I could never warm to Paul Lewis's soporific playing; the other day I learned he was taught by Brendel.

[Richard Tarleton]

I always wondered why I could never warm to Paul Lewis's soporific playing; the other day I learned he was taught by Brendel.

What are you trying to say, Throppers?

Are you thinking of specific performances, or recordings, here? I greatly admire his very dynamic recording of the Diabelli (wandering off thread here), my other favourite versions being Kovacevich and Brendel on Vox.

I saw Lewis in concert before hearing any of his records - he played a remarkable programme of Liszt (lots of Liszt), Clementi, Busoni and Bach. Soporific it wasn't. Profound, mature beyond his then years, yes. As for Brendel - I'm with Sir Isaiah there.

[waldo]

I always wondered why I could never warm to Paul Lewis's soporific playing; the other day I learned he was taught by Brendel.

Right on the money. I have never been able to understand the praise for Paul Lewis's Beethoven. Dull and also badly recorded.

(Though I do like his playing on the Mozart Piano Quartets with the Leopold Trio.........)

[BBMmk2]

Agreed, RT. Everytime i here Paul Lewis's playing he is really one for the most profund and all helped, I am sure by his teacher's instruction.

[ardcarp]

It's just occurred to me that John Lill has not been mentioned. He is, IMO, a great Beethovenian, and after hearing him play one of the sonatas one always feels he has a tremendous grasp of the architecture of the piece. I've heard him many times live, but never playing Op 111. Didn't he record all the piano sonatas? And if so, are they still available?

[BBMmk2]

I heard him at the school, where i work, and he nplayed Prk's Toccata, woith greerat aplomb and bravura!