Eureka, Eroica kicks some major @ss!

Hmm...George Szell, Erich Kleiber, Toscanini, Furtwangler (Berlin PO), Walter, Klemp - I would listen to any of those before Solti (but then I'm a contrarian).

Kleiber is really interesting - sometimes it sounds like Mozart, sort of placing the 3rd into a context.

Phil

Ross and Phil both mention some great Eroica performances. (Though Ross did forget to mention whether he so reveres the mono or the stereo version. Either is above average.) I tend toward either the Furtwangler (with the VPO on EMI) or Erich Kleiber at the moment. I like such widely contrasting approaches. (My preference is subject to change over time.) There is currently that Jochum recording out in the DG box. It's pretty good, too. Alas, Solti does not rank to highly for me.

I'm not going to recommend any other Eroica recordings. Isn't it testimony to this symphony's power that virtually every performance will get you excited?

I'd like to point to a bunch of sister symphonies you might enjoy. After all, apart from the Napoleonic Heroics and the funeral march, the Third is Beethoven's first work in which he fully explores the beauty of the orchestra. (In the Fourth, my favorite Beethoven symphony, he takes it little further yet: sound is the subject here.)

In a purely musical light the Eroica is the third and last of the great classical E flat major symphonies. The first one is Mozart's 39th symphony (1788), the second one is Haydn's 99th symphony from 1794, and Beethoven 1806 Eroica is the last one to exult in the particular sonorities E flat major gave to the 1800 orchestra. It's a great tonality for the horns and clarinets of the era, giving the orchestra a romantic colour and a kind of energy that seems unique to E flat.

Just listen to the first movements of these three symphonies: they all start with a big opening chord, as if the orchestra's saying 'Hey ho, let's go - where doing E flat major now!' There's a kind of raucous unstoppability to this music that seems to belong to the symphony form in its first incontestable glory. That's why it's apt that Beethoven uses E flat major in his first mature symphony, like Haydn and Mozart did in their late pieces.

(It's interesting that these symphonies are also the end of the line. The next big E flat major symphonies I can think of are Schumann's 3d 'Rhenish' (same opening chord) and Bruckner's 4th 'Romantic' symphony. That's 1850 and 1874, I believe.)

So my recommendation is get a recording of the Haydn 99 and Mozart 39. It's wonderful music.

Herman

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross Blackman:
Todd, I actually prefer Klemperer's stereo eroica. Erich Kleiber is also a great performance, though it doesn't have good sound.

Ross

---

It's refreshing to find someone else who prefers the stereo. A lot of critics and other netizens seem to prefer the mono, which is a great recording, but I, too, prefer the stereo.

Kleiber's set is so good that I can overlook the less than stellar sound. I have to able to listen past sound; a lot of my favorite recordings are from the days of mono. This problem seems more acute in Beethoven than many other composers.

Stereo Klemperer also gets my vote - no-one else seems to balance the orchestra quite so well, particularly in the funeral march.

I'd also give mention to Furtwangler's Berlin Phil live performance from 8th December 1952, which is well ahead of the studio version.

On another Klemperer note, I was recommended his 1957 Festival Hall live account of Beethoven 9 on Testament recently. It really is a stunning perforance, and the sound is superb, so much so, that Walter Legge wanted to use this rather than the studio version that was eventually released.

David

It was great to read of Herm's admiration for LvB's 4th Symphony. It's an under-rated symphony, and I just don't understand why.

What's this about an E. Kleiber cycle? I know of a promotional box by London, I think, with Kleiber conducting different orchestras in various symphonies, and IIRC not every symphony was conducted by EK.

As an admirer of his 3rd, 5th, 6th, & 7th, I ask: how can I get 1, 2, 4, 8, and 9 conducted by EK?

Thanks.

Another one

If you can take pretty poor mono sound, then another recording well worth seeking out is Toscanini's 1939 performance on RCA Victor - absolutely electric, and surprisingly fluid. I got it free with a copy of BBC Music Magazine about a year ago. Also comes with one of the best Egmont Overtures that you are likely to hear.

David

Self-indulgent twaddle?

In honor of the recent sale of the manuscript of Beethoven's 9th, I thought I would listen to it this morning. I've got one version from Herrewege and another from Furtwangler, and I decided to go with the latter.

As I listened, I was struck (as I occasionally am) with how long and drawn out the thematic development tends to be with most classical music. To a large extent, it seems entirely superfluous. Each movement presents a few ideas, and those ideas are dragged out and paraded about in myriad ways, when they could be concentrated into a much more intense, dynamic, and shorter performance. Hell, the first three movements of the 9th could be compressed into 10 minutes, without losing much! The resulting performance would be much more enjoyable and just as significant.

I can only rationalize this approach as being self-aggrandizement (and perhaps self-satisfying masturbation) on the part of the composer. Stretching the thematic development out to those extremes is unnecessary for the purpose of presenting the musical ideas.

I suppose shorter works wouldn't be taken as "seriously" by people who don't understand it's not about how long, how much, etc., but about the musical message. It reminds me of people who evaluate stereos using specifications, and not their own ears.

I say, "Stop wasting my time, and get to the point!"

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross Blackman:
That _is_ a joke, Mike, right?

---

I suppose it's a bit of a wind-up, but I'm actually rather serious about the matter. I often get bored waiting through the "drone" of thematic development. The whole approach seems overly pedantic, most of the time.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross Blackman:
Mike, I'm all in favour of iconoclastic opinions; stupid ones I'm less enthusiastic about. If you're getting bored listening to Beethoven, perhaps it's time to return to your collection of prog rock records.

---

It's interesting that you should mention that. As I was listening to the 9th, I was struck at how much "noodling" was going on with the musical ideas, which is a complaint often levelled at prog rock. The thematic development seems almost to be a practice in permutations, rather than a purposeful, focused musical/emotional expression.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

...never thought of the 9th as great music, but the sentiment grabs people every time...some very nice sentiment, BTW, which are sorely lacking in my part of the world, where only rich, white corporate so and sos get to be classed as 'brothers'..

Oh, and Mike, I'd stay away from Indian classical music if I were you. You'll miss a lot of what music offers, but you will avoid long developments and noodling.

Try LvB's 4th?

Regards.

Phil

Beethoven's Fourth

Mike has a point in his boutade regarding the Ninth, in that it is the first really long symphony, breaking with the mould that (mostly) Haydn had created in the nineties. The other big classical long symphony, obviously, is Schubert's great C major, which didn't get performed for decades, until Schumann had coined the himmlisches Länge slogan. If it was long, it was heavenly long. Another thing of Beethoven's Ninth is that most of the symphony has to be taken as a prelude to the finale. Well, I rest my case.

With Beethoven and Schubert the classical form is problematically extended to fit romantic ambitions. By the time Bruckner was writing his huge symphonies the material and the ambitions were more compatible. Try one of those for twaddle (or how about Sibelius)!

Of course I don't agree with you, Mike, in that the development section, in which the theme material is run through all kinds of flaming hoops of modulation and modification, is really the most exciting part of a symphony. On the other hand, you seem to be pleading for the kind of music Stravinsky, Prokofiev, and even Tchaikovsky wrote when they were composing ballet scores. In this genre melodic invention is of primary importance, and when a melodic idea has run its course you move on to the next. I love it just as much as a good classical development section.

Hey, Phil, so you like the Fourth, too? The reason why it's rarely mentioned, is fairly obvious. It doesn't have a nametag. The third has the Eroica / Napoleon thing. The Fifth has the Fate motiv everyone knows. The Sixth is about babbling brooks and thunderstorms. Even the Seventh (my other favorite) has a tag, i.e. apotheosis of the dance (whatever that means). The Fourth is about nothing but the music.

I love the Fourth, and even better, I love every single movement. How often does that happen? I love the high-low sonorities particular to this work, and the crazy, fanciful turns the melodies take, most particularly in the latter two movements. And if you're at a good performance it's just one big bath in orchestral sound, with subtle choirs in the woodwind section, weird blasts in the brass and all those lovely solos for clarinet, bassoon and oboe.

The delicate orchestral balance makes it a very tough piece to perform and / or record. The famous Carlos Kleiber recording (live with the Bavaria Orchestra on Orfeo) for instance is rich on energy, but the woodwind section gets drowned out by massive strings and loud brass. Of recent recordings I like the 2000 Abbado with the Berliner - and to show you what a bad person I am: I have never even started the Eroica that's coupled with Abbado's Fourth. I like the Gardiner, too. Sorry, no oldies. This music really has to be fleet footed. So that's perhaps the last reason why it's rather impopular. Often it is badly played.

So anyone with a favorite Fourth?

Herman

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Hanson:

I can only rationalize this approach as being self-aggrandizement (and perhaps self-satisfying masturbation) on the part of the composer.

---

Quite an interesting idea, Mike, even if it is entirely wrong. Is the Ninth long? Well, yes it is. Is it too long? No it is not. (Well maybe in a bad performance.) But to say that the first three movements of the symphony can be compressed into 10 minutes is beyond absurd. How long should the adagio be in your estimation? Five minutes? How precisely could that be accomplished? I just can't imagine having a brief build-up to the greatest conclusion to any symphony. That just makes no sense. Of all symphonies, the Ninth must be long.

If you're so into less and shorter development, do try some Elliot Carter. You won't find much of that repetition so prevalent in other composers’ works.

As to the Fourth, I agree that it is a great symphony – as are all of Beethoven’s symphonies – but it is pretty clear why it is so underrated and under-recorded: it comes between the Third and the Fifth! Enough said. Right now, I’m partial to Bernstein’s Sony recording of the Fourth, though Abbado’s recent set has sounded nothing but great from what I have heard of it, so perhaps I’ll have to buy yet another symphony cycle. (Why just one or two symphonies when one can get all nine?)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Hanson:
I can only rationalize this approach as being self-aggrandizement (and perhaps self-satisfying masturbation) on the part of the composer.

---

To go by the responses so far, Mike, I think you'll at least have to tweak the "self" in the above phrase. Most people seem to be quite satisfied by this piece of compositional masturbating. Also keep in mind Beethoven was quite deaf at the time. So there wasn't that much in it for himself.

Herman

So I signed on to ask for recommendations on the 4th after listening to a couple of recordings...and find Herm asking for people's favorites and Todd suggesting Bernstein.

I put Klemperer and Bernstein on the LP12; I took the Klemp off about half way into the 1st movement. Maybe it's because I have an Angel recording instead of a UK label; maybe I just don't like his conducting on this piece.

I DID like the Bernstein very much, but I still have a memory of listening to an FM broadcast of the 4th that was fantastic (but I've forgotten the orchetsra & conductor).

Well, I'll give it a rest and then try my Toscanini and Furtwangler recordings. And, like Herm, I'd be delighted to hear the preferences of others.

I believe the same R. Wagner who coined 'apotheosis of the dance' called the 4th a 'Greek maiden between two Norse' something or others (gods? valkyries?). Well, if it's a 'maiden' it's a very passionate and approachable one. :-)

Perhaps it IS difficult to perform as well as it needs to be. If all I had were the Klemperer version, I wouldn't be a fan - yet I like Klemp in the 3rd, 7th, and Mozart and expected to like his 4th.

Ah, well. It's great to write and think about music I enjoy.

Regards.

Phil

One recording of the fourth very much worth listening to is Carlos Kleiber's live version with the Bayerisches Staatsorchester (on Orfeo, I think).

And for the seventh, it'll be the same conductor with the Vienna Philharmonic on DG.

Despite the rather predictable response to Mike's question, I do think that he has a point, even if he chose the wrong piece to tilt against. I have a strong preference for chamber music (string quartet, solo piano, lieder), in part because orchestral music can and often does become pompous and long winded. There are notable exceptions ; long pieces that don't outstay their welcome would include IMHO Wagner's Parsifal and Mahler's sixth (which gets my vote for the greatest symphony ever written).

Don't get me wrong, everybody! I don't have a problem with length, per se. My complaint is with repetitions that are (perhaps) intellectually intriguing, but have little (or no) impact on emotional progression. The first three movements of Beethoven's 9th represent a good example of this: we hear numerous recurrences of a few simple motifs, with somewhat amusing chord progressions and counterpoint. It feels like it's constantly starting over, stabbing the beast from different angles. Eventually I begin to ask, "Isn't it dead already?" After a while I feel both bludgeoned from the carnage and sedated by the redundancy, without getting the impression that I've experienced the epic emotional journey that should have occurred given the duration and purported significance of the work.

In a way, it seems that the composer is trying to impress me with dazzling musical skills, without the core ideas being substantial enough to weather the storm. I think herm hit upon something here, as I don't get this sensation (as often) with later works. Interestingly, though, I also don't feel this way about some earlier works, like Bach's Goldberg Variations. Even though I can always sense the presence that same core idea, each variation seems like a significant representation of that idea. I never think to myself, "Oh no, there's that little motif again!" Instead, I feel like there's an amazing concept fueling this train, and it's visiting many wonderful stops.

Even Mahler's 9th is better in this respect. Yes, he repeats his ideas, but those ideas take many minutes to evolve. When the idea begins to reoccur, I realize that I've already been on a long, emotionally tumultuous journey. In contrast, in Beethoven's 9th I hear constantly repeated motifs, paraded about in different guises, but the arc of each idea doesn't seem significant enough. BTW, I do notice how each of the first three movements of Beethoven's 9th alludes to the final one. They just spend too much time repeating themselves, and in the end they I almost perceive them as annoying sycophants ("almost", but not quite).

Of course, Beethoven isn't always guilty of this. His earlier symphonies included repetition, but I wasn't as put-off by it as I was by the 9th. For example, the Allegretto from his 7th Symphony has only two major thematic ideas, and most of the movement is centered on one of them. However, the overall emotional impact and variation is truly impressive. Again, I think herm comment may have hit the nail on the head.

In the end, it all comes down to personal preference. There are many musical works that perfectly press my buttons, which would not have the same impact on others. What I report is what I perceive: nothing more and nothing less.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Furtwangler, Kleiber, Karajan . . . so many intriguing choices to explore.
Thanks to all for the good input. I'm going to have to start with Klemperer on EMI.

"There's a kind of raucous unstoppability to this music that seems to belong to the symphony form in it's first inconstestable glory>"

Thats exactly one of the reasons why I like this music and others by Mozart and Hayden. It has that sort of Rocking-pulsing drive. I'll difinately follow up with the Hayden & Mozart as cross referenced here by Herm.

Regards

Max

PS Why is it that here in the Naim Forum, we come to expect (And respect) hijacked threads in SOME shape or form?!

I actually have things to do today, whicb makes a great change for me, so I've just skimmed this topic. However, I feel compelled to reply to Mike:

Not everyone's going to agree with this but I think a lot of Beethoven recordings of the late 20th century are poor because they're played too slowly and pompously. I'm sure that's not what Beethoven intended - he even specified a much faster tempo than has been popular recently. Please find a version of the ninth that's been recorded by a repected conductor and orchestra at the "right" tempo, and tell us if you still feel the same way.

I don't even have a ninth, so I can't recommend anything. As for the third, I have three versions [all on LP - sorry CD-lovers], none of which I can remember very well:

Roger Norrington, London Classical Players: this is the sort of "authentic" performance that I'd like to be able to recommend wholeheartedly but somehow, according to my memory of it, something is missing. Maybe it sounds better on CD - it's got to be worth a try.

Fritz Reiner, CSO: I'm very fond of Reiner and the CSO but I cannot recall ever having listened to this. I've never disliked anything by Reiner - which is pretty amazing for cynical, ungrateful me. I'd always recommend Reiner as a worthwhile starting point, even if you end up preferring something else.

Finally, Witold Rowicki, Warsaw National Philharmonic: Last time I listened to it, I stopped listening part way through. Maybe it was my hi-fi...

I was going to say I'll listen to these and report back but I ought to have remembered that I can't, since I've just boxed up my power amp to sell it! Well, I'll listen to them when I have something to listen to them on.

--J

quote:

---

Originally posted by JeremyD:
Please find a version of the ninth that's been recorded by a repected conductor and orchestra at the "right" tempo, and tell us if you still feel the same way.

---

It was Furtwangler, who is certainly one of the more respected conductors of Beethoven's works. I'll give both my versions another listen, but I'm worried that the repetition will cause detrimental effects.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Lees:
Listen to the Norrington/London Classical Players' 9th. It's all over _much_ quicker!

---

That does look interesting. I might just give it a go.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-