The great Eroica study
Matthew B. Tepper
dba...@camosun.bc.nospam.ca pondered what I'm pondering as follows...
>
>I have decided that the only justification for owning over 100
>recordings of the Eroica is to put together a document containing all
>their timings, including "normalisation" of the first movement repeat
>for closer comparison (as if timings told us everything).
Yup, that's the way to do it, and I had to do something very much like
that when comparing the timings of the recordings (only 20 back then!)
of the Berlioz _Grande Messe des morts_ for my 1983 M.A. thesis. (The
entire text of the thesis can be found at my Berlioz page, URL in sig.)
I do heartily agree with your cavil about timings. They certainly do
not tell everything; at best they can suggest, can be but a guide.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
My main music page --- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/berlioz.htm
And my science fiction club's home page --- http://www.lasfs.org/
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Deryk Barker
recordings of the Eroica is to put together a document containing all
their timings, including "normalisation" of the first movement repeat
for closer comparison (as if timings told us everything).
Anyway, I know there are two candidates for fastest on record (Coates,
1926, no repeat, Scherchen, 1958, repeat - see why I need the
normalization?) and I think I've just acquired the slowcoach.
Forget your Giulini (both of them), Barbirolli, Konwitschny, even the
Furtwaengler 8/12/52 (his slowest).
The winner, AFAIK, is the 25/9/70 Bonn Klemperer (NPO). The symphony
weighs in at a monumental 60:35, including a first movement 18:50ish
*without repeat*, which would normalise to around 22:55. The scherzo
(Coates: 3:30, normal average 5:00-5:30) takes 7:52....
Do we have a winner? (Does anyone else know this performance BTW?
Despite the tempos I find it quite compelling).
--
|Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept. | Music does not have to be understood|
|Camosun College, Victoria, BC, Canada| It has to be listened to. |
|email: dba...@camosun.bc.ca | |
|phone: +1 250 370 4452 | Hermann Scherchen. |
JJ
I find the Klemperer Bonn Eroica (the slowest performance of the piece I
know also) rather compelling as well, but it does drag at times, and
doesn't have the intensity of the best Klemperer performances. I believe
this is still available cheaply from Berkshire, btw.
Jon
Johannes Roehl
> I have decided that the only justification for owning over 100
> recordings of the Eroica is to put together a document containing all
> their timings, including "normalisation" of the first movement repeat
> for closer comparison (as if timings told us everything).
>
> Anyway, I know there are two candidates for fastest on record (Coates,
> 1926, no repeat, Scherchen, 1958, repeat - see why I need the
> normalization?) and I think I've just acquired the slowcoach.
>
> Forget your Giulini (both of them), Barbirolli, Konwitschny, even the
> Furtwaengler 8/12/52 (his slowest).
>
> The winner, AFAIK, is the 25/9/70 Bonn Klemperer (NPO). The symphony
> weighs in at a monumental 60:35, including a first movement 18:50ish
> *without repeat*, which would normalise to around 22:55. The scherzo
> (Coates: 3:30, normal average 5:00-5:30) takes 7:52....
So you forgot to "normalize" the scherzo, didn't you ?
I do not know the Coates performance, but he probably skips all of the
repeats there and then there is an unusual repeat in the new Zinman
recording I have never heard before. (I do not have a score right now, so
I can't tell exactly where it is, in the da capo section of the scherzo)
Johannes
--
So when the last and dreadful hour
This crumbling pageant shall devour,
The trumpet shall be heard on high
The dead shall live, the living die
And Music shall uptune the sky.
na...@alphalink.com.au
dba...@camosun.bc.nospam.ca (Deryk Barker) wrote [re slowest Eroica]:
> The winner, AFAIK, is the 25/9/70 Bonn Klemperer (NPO). The symphony
> weighs in at a monumental 60:35, including a first movement 18:50ish
> *without repeat*, which would normalise to around 22:55. The scherzo
> (Coates: 3:30, normal average 5:00-5:30) takes 7:52....
>
> Despite the tempos I find it quite compelling).
I find it tremendously compelling, possibly even more so than either of the
studio recordings. It may still be listed by Berkshire, if anybody's
interested.
Apart from this 1970 Klemperer the slowest recording I have is the one by
Asahina and the New Japan Philharmonic on Fontec. The timings are 21:09
(repeat included), 18:10, 6:50 and 13:28 - total 59:37. It could be that one
of the five or six other recordings that Asahina has made is even slower.
Naun.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Deryk Barker
: On 2 Feb 1999, Deryk Barker wrote:
: > I have decided that the only justification for owning over 100
: > recordings of the Eroica is to put together a document containing all
: > their timings, including "normalisation" of the first movement repeat
: > for closer comparison (as if timings told us everything).
: >
: > Anyway, I know there are two candidates for fastest on record (Coates,
: > 1926, no repeat, Scherchen, 1958, repeat - see why I need the
: > normalization?) and I think I've just acquired the slowcoach.
: >
: > Forget your Giulini (both of them), Barbirolli, Konwitschny, even the
: > Furtwaengler 8/12/52 (his slowest).
: > The winner, AFAIK, is the 25/9/70 Bonn Klemperer (NPO). The symphony
: > weighs in at a monumental 60:35, including a first movement 18:50ish
: > *without repeat*, which would normalise to around 22:55. The scherzo
: > (Coates: 3:30, normal average 5:00-5:30) takes 7:52....
: So you forgot to "normalize" the scherzo, didn't you ?
: I do not know the Coates performance, but he probably skips all of the
: repeats there
No, they're all there.
Deryk Barker
: In article <795sfa$h46$3...@news.islandnet.com>,
: > weighs in at a monumental 60:35, including a first movement 18:50ish
: > *without repeat*, which would normalise to around 22:55. The scherzo
: > (Coates: 3:30, normal average 5:00-5:30) takes 7:52....
: >
: > Despite the tempos I find it quite compelling).
:
: I find it tremendously compelling, possibly even more so than either of the
: studio recordings. It may still be listed by Berkshire, if anybody's
: interested.
It is - mine arrived a week ago and the new catalogue a few days later
- with it still there.
:
: Apart from this 1970 Klemperer the slowest recording I have is the one by
: Asahina and the New Japan Philharmonic on Fontec. The timings are 21:09
: (repeat included), 18:10, 6:50 and 13:28 - total 59:37. It could be that one
: of the five or six other recordings that Asahina has made is even slower.
I have one very slow TA, I must check which one it is.
Deryk Barker
Scherchen's 1958 VSO performance.
For starters this is, I think, a clear winner in the speed stakes for
the first movement. He clocks in a 14:30 including repeat, which
"normalises" to 11:51 without - thus beating Albert Coates (12:12) by
almost 3%.
What strikes me as even more surprising - perhaps - given Scherchen's
reputation as something of a wild man is that both exposition and
exposition repeat (I'd thought I'd better time both, perhaps averaging
them would be best for normalisation - thought?) clock in at 2:39, to
the second.
Of course this is complicated by Coates's superfast scherzo, which
probably still makes him fastest overall.
Watch this space.
Curtis Croulet
contemplative are the Klemperer and Scherchen records." (C. G. Burke, "The
Beethoven Symphonies Reconsidered," High Fidelity, Jan 1957, p. 98).
Interestingly, Burke's paradigms of fast and slow would not arouse as much
comment today. "Fast" versions in 1957 were E. Kleiber, Reiner, Toscanini
(1949) and Leinsdorf's first recording, all since left in the dust by the
stereo Scherchen, Norrington, Gardiner and Harnoncourt. Similarly, "slow"
acquired new meaning with the later Klemperers, Giulini and Konwitschny. An
Eroica picked at random from a 1957 record bin would have been much more
likely to conform to the (then) general concensus of how the piece should
go.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
MWKluge
In article <79tnc6$fb4$1...@nntp.pe.net>, "Curtis Croulet" <curt...@pe.net>
writes:
The earlier Scherchen, while noticeably slower than his later performances,
isn't exactly glacial. The timings are:
14:42 15:35 5:50 12:23
Mark K.
MWKluge
>Scherchen's 1958 VSO performance.
>
>For starters this is, I think, a clear winner in the speed stakes for
>the first movement. He clocks in a 14:30 including repeat, which
>"normalises" to 11:51 without - thus beating Albert Coates (12:12) by
>almost 3%.
>
>What strikes me as even more surprising - perhaps - given Scherchen's
>reputation as something of a wild man is that both exposition and
>exposition repeat (I'd thought I'd better time both, perhaps averaging
>them would be best for normalisation - thought?) clock in at 2:39, to
>the second.
>
>Of course this is complicated by Coates's superfast scherzo, which
>probably still makes him fastest overall.
>
>Watch this space.
Deryk stated previously that Coates took the Scherzo and Trio repeats. I dug
my copy of old Victor album G2 out of the basement, and sat down with it, the
Claremont CD, and the score. Coates does indeed take the repeat in the Trio.
However, at 1:09 in the Scherzo where the repeat should begin, he skips the
repeat and plays the second-time ending.
This performances still normalizes from 3:39 to just 4:37 if one accounts for
that repeat (58 seconds of music). By contrast, the Scherchen 1958 recording
takes 5:23. Scherchen is still quicker overall due to his speeds in the other
movements (and accounting for the first movement repeat). The normalized
timings if Coates had taken the same repeats are: Scherchen 43:30, Coates
44:31. BTW, the Claremont turns out to be an excellent transfer of the Coates
Eroica, better than my copy of the 78s.
Mark K.
Curtis Croulet
>isn't exactly glacial. The timings are:
>
>14:42 15:35 5:50 12:23
No repeat I assume? 14:42 is spot on for a "consensus" timing ca. 1957.
Simon Roberts
: >The earlier Scherchen, while noticeably slower than his later performances,
: >isn't exactly glacial. The timings are:
: >
: >14:42 15:35 5:50 12:23
: No repeat I assume? 14:42 is spot on for a "consensus" timing ca. 1957.
Correct; no repeat. I was listening to this again today; a thrilling
performance....
Simon
Vincent Ventrone
> Correct; no repeat. I was listening to this again today; a thrilling
> performance....
mono Eroica? If so I'm pleased to see that someone else has it -- just
got mine from Abend, though I haven't listened to it yet...
Deryk Barker
: Curtis Croulet (curt...@pe.net) wrote:
: : >The earlier Scherchen, while noticeably slower than his later performances,
: : >isn't exactly glacial. The timings are:
: : >
: : >14:42 15:35 5:50 12:23
:
: : No repeat I assume? 14:42 is spot on for a "consensus" timing ca. 1957.
: Correct; no repeat. I was listening to this again today; a thrilling
: performance....
Indeed, althogh I think it's c1951 isn't it?
Sacqueboutier
--
Don Patterson
* DCP Music Printing
* Professional Computer Music Typeset
* Music Arrangements
* don...@erols.com
* Asst. Principal Trombonist
* "The President's Own"
* United States Marine Band
http://www.marineband.hqmc.usmc.mil
The views expressed are my own and in no way
reflect those of "The President's Own" United
States Marine Band or the United States Marine Corps.
Curtis Croulet
C. G. Burke's article cited in one of my posts. Scherchen's mono was
considered to be slow by Burke, yet the timings provided by Prof. Kluge
suggest that it was actually on the mark for the consensus tempos of the
time. "Fast" or "slow" in Burke's day didn't include anything as speedy as
Gardiner/Norrington/Harnoncourt, nor did it include anything as somnolent as
Konwitschny, Guilini or the later Klemperers.
In fairness to Burke, just before his remark about Scherchen, he says: "The
Eroica, like all the major orchestral works of Beethoven, is intolerant of
wide deviations from its tempos, which must be sensed. It is so sensitive
that even within permissible limits its character changes. Given a beat a
little quick, it sounds urgency, combativeness. A little slow, it veers to
majesty, to Olympian contemplation. The nature of the accentuation employed
will re-enforce or weaken the dominant mood, and thus the Steinberg
projection, which is neither fast nor slow, inclines more to majesty than to
combat, through the considered measure of the conductor's stroke; and the
Kleiber, no faster than several others, sends out a worry of tenseness by a
stinging accent seldom relaxed."
So when Burke was speaking of fast or slow, he was thinking of the overall
effect, not the stopwatch timing or metronome beat.
Curtis Croulet
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, CaliforniaMarine Corps.
MWKluge
In article <7a4i8k$sqh$1...@news.islandnet.com>, dba...@camosun.bc.nospam.ca
(Deryk Barker) writes:
>: : >The earlier Scherchen, while noticeably slower than his later
>performances,
>: : >isn't exactly glacial. The timings are:
>: : >
>: : >14:42 15:35 5:50 12:23
>:
>: : No repeat I assume? 14:42 is spot on for a "consensus" timing ca. 1957.
>:
>: Correct; no repeat. I was listening to this again today; a thrilling
>: performance....
>
>Indeed, althogh I think it's c1951 isn't it?
>
>
Scherchen's mono Eroica on Westminster WL 5216 was issued in the US in the
Autumn of 1953; the sleeve bears a 1953 copyright.
Mark K.
Deryk Barker
:
: Scherchen's mono Eroica on Westminster WL 5216 was issued in the US in the
: Autumn of 1953; the sleeve bears a 1953 copyright.
Is this a different recording from the one (Ultraphon? recently issued
on Tahra?
Simon Roberts
: Simon Roberts wrote:
: > Correct; no repeat. I was listening to this again today; a thrilling
: > performance....
: Are you listening to the new Japanese Universal Victor reissue of the
: mono Eroica? If so I'm pleased to see that someone else has it -- just
: got mine from Abend, though I haven't listened to it yet...
No; mine's in a box from Tahra devoted to his recordings released on
Ultraphon.
Simon
Simon Roberts
: Scherchen's mono Eroica on Westminster WL 5216 was issued in the US in the
: Autumn of 1953; the sleeve bears a 1953 copyright.
If that's the same as the VSO Ultraphon/Supraphon recording issued by
Tahra, that was recorded in Dec/Jan 1950/1951 (the Tahra box is no more
precise than that). Of course, Tahra may be wrong (wouldn't be the first
time, I believe) -- or is there another Scherchen performance?
Simon
MWKluge
In article <7a5dl7$qqa$4...@netnews.upenn.edu>, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu
(Simon Roberts) writes:
Scherchen recorded the work for both Ultraphon and Westminster. The Ultraphon
recording appeared on 78s (listed in WERM Supplement I), and is listed as with
the Vienna Symphony. I would guess Tahra's date is correct. C. G. Burke was
writing of the 1953 Westminster recording, with the Vienna State Opera
Orchestra. Scherchen also recorded Haydn's Symphony 92 for both firms.
Mark K.
Simon Roberts
: In article <7a5dl7$qqa$4...@netnews.upenn.edu>, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu
: (Simon Roberts) writes:
: >If that's the same as the VSO Ultraphon/Supraphon recording issued by
: >Tahra, that was recorded in Dec/Jan 1950/1951 (the Tahra box is no more
: >precise than that). Of course, Tahra may be wrong (wouldn't be the first
: >time, I believe) -- or is there another Scherchen performance?
: Scherchen recorded the work for both Ultraphon and Westminster. The Ultraphon
: recording appeared on 78s (listed in WERM Supplement I), and is listed as with
: the Vienna Symphony. I would guess Tahra's date is correct. C. G. Burke was
: writing of the 1953 Westminster recording, with the Vienna State Opera
: Orchestra. Scherchen also recorded Haydn's Symphony 92 for both firms.
So does that make three Eroicas (those two plus stereo Westminster)? If
so, do you (does anyone) know if the 1953 Westminster is available
anywhere on CD?
Simon
MWKluge
In article <7a7a5h$2h9$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>, si...@dept.english.upenn.edu
(Simon Roberts) writes:
The following is copied from another posting:
>Are you listening to the new Japanese Universal Victor reissue of the
>mono Eroica? If so I'm pleased to see that someone else has it -- just
>got mine from Abend, though I haven't listened to it yet...
This would imply the 1953 recording is indeed available from Japan. There is,
however, even a fourth Scherchen Eroica, from his Beethoven cycle with the
Swiss-Italian Radio Orchestra given in Lugano in 1965. I don't know about its
current availability.
Mark K.
Simon Roberts
: The following is copied from another posting:
: >Are you listening to the new Japanese Universal Victor reissue of the
: >mono Eroica? If so I'm pleased to see that someone else has it -- just
: >got mine from Abend, though I haven't listened to it yet...
: This would imply the 1953 recording is indeed available from Japan. There is,
: however, even a fourth Scherchen Eroica, from his Beethoven cycle with the
: Swiss-Italian Radio Orchestra given in Lugano in 1965. I don't know about its
: current availability.
Thanks for the clarification. I had forgotten about the Lugano one, which
is apparently available in Japan in a box containing all the symphonies
from that series.
Simon
Deryk Barker
And unfortunately the Westminster 1953 CD is already sold out,
according to Abend.