[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GG: Beethoven/Liszt SIXTH Symphony
jerry and judy wrote:
>
>
> The 9th, what can I say?, not only is the piano an inadequate substitute
> for orchestra, but it can't begin to approach the expression of the voice.
This is a mere habit of listening. I think the opposite is the case, that the difference of instrument is a
purely formal distinction. The substance of the music is present, especially with Cyp's performance, as much as
with the orchestral. Indeed, it grows on one. I have listened to Cyp's 9th more often than an orchestral
version. The second movement is especially magnificent.
> Beethoven's aims in the 2nd and 3rd movements are adequately communicated
> on the piano.
Agreed.
The last movement is downright comical in certain passages,
> IMO.
Does that stem from the music or the transcription.
Liszt hesitated about whether to publish the finale. In 1864 he
> wrote,"After a great deal of experimentation in various directions, I was
> unable to deny the utter impossibility of even a partially satisfactory and
> effective arrangement of the fourth movement. I hope you will not take it
> amiss if I dispense with this and regard my arrangements ( )... complete at
> the end of the third movement of the Ninth. -" Simple piano scores of the
> 4th mvmnt had already existed for the use of choir leaders etc. Yet, a few
> months later, he finished the chorale finale and the set was published in
> 1865.
Why not?
>
> Imagine the acrimony if Glenn had seriously recorded the Ninth!?! Anybody??
Sounds like snobbery. It's a fine transcription. He would have done it justice.