Armando's Articles: II - Beethoven Transcriptions and the Hess 47 Trio WP

OrlandiArmando

Member

Posts: 234
City: San Biagio di Valpolcevera (Genova)

February 8, 2013, 23:58

Article appeared in the A.B.F. magazine on 12-12-2006.

CONCERNING THE TRANSCIPTIONS PRESENT

IN THE CATALOGUE OF BEETHOVEN'S WORKS

PART ONE – LIST OF WORKS

Beethoven did not love transcribing his own music, and this is also evident from a publication by Thayer of a fragment of a letter from the composer to the publishers Breitkopf & Hartel of Leipzig. Taking the veracity of Thayer's fragment for granted, which unfortunately remains the only source (Thayer, II, page 183), here is the full text of that missive:

Beethoven to Breitkopf & Hartel in Leipzig

(fragment)

Vienna, July 13, 1802

“Regarding the transcriptions, I am truly glad that you have rejected them. It is time to stop this rampant mania of wanting to transplant even pieces for piano onto string instruments, which are all radically different from one another. I firmly maintain that only Mozart was capable of reducing his own piano music for other instruments, and Haydn would be the same. And without wanting to place myself alongside those two great men, I maintain the same thing for my piano sonatas; because not only should entire pieces be completely omitted or modified,

but others should be added, and herein lies the greatest obstacle, which to overcome one would have to be the composer himself or at least possess the same capacity and inventiveness. Only once, solely following insistent prayers, did I transform one of my sonatas into a quartet for string (instr.) instruments, but I am certain that no one else could easily imitate me.”

This statement may seem perfectly legitimate from an exquisitely conceptual point of view; however, upon a thorough analysis of the various catalogues of Beethoven's works, very interesting details appear that contrast with the aforementioned assertions.

– WORKS WITH OPUS NUMBERS –

Let us analyze the list of Opus (we mean, by the word “opus,” the singular of the Latin word “Opera,” meaning work, composition). These “Opus” cover a publication period ranging from August 1795 (Opus 1 three trios for piano, violin and cello) to February 1838, eleven years after the composer's death (Opus 138 Leonore I Overture).

In this “corpus,” we find a high percentage of compositions that are transcriptions or arrangements of other works by the composer. In detail:

Opus 4 Quintet for two violins, two violas and cello, adaptation from Octet Opus 103.

Opus 16a Quartet for piano, violin, viola and cello, transcription from quintet Opus 16.

Opus 38 Trio for piano, violin and cello, transcription of septet Opus 20.

Opus 41, serenade for piano and flute, from Serenade Opus 25.

Opus 42, Nocturne for piano and viola from serenade Opus 8.

Opus 63 Trio for piano, violin and cello, transcription from quintet Opus 4.

Opus 64 Sonata for piano and cello, transcription from string trio Opus 3.

Opus 134 Fugue for piano four hands from Great Fugue Opus 133 for string quartet.

On second thought, a considerable number of transcriptions for a musician who wrote such a letter! Furthermore, at this moment we are focusing our attention on transcriptions,
and not on
reductions
for piano of his orchestral works, which punctually followed the publication of scores for the use of amateurs and the good bourgeoisie, which we will deal with elsewhere.

In reality, as is known, there is more than one Beethoven catalogue. In addition to the canonical Opus which brings together works having the direct blessing of their author, nowadays systematic research into every clue of Beethovenian creativity has gifted us other catalogues: WoO (Werke Ohne Opuszahl: Works without opus number), the catalogue by Swiss musicologist Willi Hess, which we will simply call Hess, and that of Biamonti. At the risk of being boring and pedantic, perhaps to make others pay for penalties that I have already paid, here is the list of works transcribed by the composer found in these other catalogues:

WoO – WERKE OHNE OPUSZALL –

-

No works. This detail leads us to some reflections: Since the catalogue includes many works that Beethoven did not deem worthy of being included in his “official” catalogue but which were published during his lifetime, all transcriptions made by him personally or by other musicians in his entourage (this aspect we will see later) were incorporated into his major catalogue, with very few exceptions, sometimes due to their fragmentary nature, reported below.

HESS WERKE VERZEICHNIS

In this case, I omit the transcriptions made by Beethoven of music by other composers (For example: Hess 35, 36, 37, 38 Hess Anhang 66 etc... and finally the works absolutely and"}{

without possibility of error, inauthentic and apocryphal.

We will go into detail about these works in the future, also because it is very interesting to note how many transcriptions and arrangements were composed in the first half of the nineteenth century, a nefarious century in many respects…

Hess 34 String quartet from the sonata Opus 14 number 1. Incidentally, this is the work Beethoven was speaking about in the aforementioned letter.

Hess 47 Fragment of a transcription for trio with piano, violin and cello from Opus 3, a work that will be analyzed in this article, also thanks to the concert held at Palazzo Tursi in Genoa, a historic residence that has also seen a Beethovenian “World Premiere” in its long history.

Hess 65 Klein Konzerfinale, transcription for solo piano of the final part of the third movement of the piano and orchestra concerto Opus 37.

Hess 88 Minuet for string quartet from the piano minuet Hess 33.

Hess Anhang 8 Quintet for flute, violin, two violas and cello from the sonata Opus 30 number 3.

Hess Anhang 10 “Andante favori” for string quartet, transcription from WoO 57.

(These two works, of unrecognized authenticity, are still an integral part of the Hess catalogue)

BIAMONTI – CATALOGUE OF THE WORKS COLLECTED BY GIOVANNI BIAMONTI

Biamonti 425 Trio for piano, violin and cello from the second symphony Opus 36.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The very recent research carried out by Professor Hans Werner Kuthen and published in the first volume of the Bonner Beethoven Studien, adds to this rich gallery also an autograph transcription of the piano and orchestra concerto Opus 58. This transcription is intended for piano and string quintet and would date back to the year 1807.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

In conclusion, a small reflection on this first part of general analysis. We can note that:

1) Beethoven did not consider transcriptions between different ensembles to be feasible, or rather conceptually interchangeable; on the contrary, he thought that these arrangements had to be carried out by rethinking the entire work. (see letter reported by Thayer)

2) On the contrary, his catalogues, especially the major one, contain a large number of transcriptions, especially in the golden period (1807-1808).

3) Even if the composer was personally averse to transcriptions, he made use of them until the penultimate year of his life (Opus 134). This, above all, for their economic aspect, since Beethoven had many doubts about the so-called conceptual quality of the transcribed work, but had no objection to the origin of his income. (pecunia non olet, said the emperor Vespasian, whom his son Titus had reproached for having imposed a tax on public sanitary services; a phrase perfectly applicable to the musician-businessman, who dealt with the sale of his own works with such ease).

4) Despite accurate research and numerous conjectures, at the current state it is almost impossible to establish which of these works were composed directly by the Maestro and which were performed by his willing collaborators, such as Ries and Czerny. (This essentially applies to the quartet of Works 41-42-63-64.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

PART TWO:

THE CONCERT OF OCTOBER 15, 2006

AND THE FIRST WORLD PERFORMANCE OF THE HESS 47 TRIO

IN ITS TWO MOVEMENTS

Palazzo Doria Tursi is currently the seat of the Municipality of Genoa, as well as the largest and most majestic building in via Garibaldi.

Called “Il Monarca” (Although in the centennial Republic of Genoa) by the Genoese, Nicolò Grimaldi commissioned the palace to the Imperiese brothers Domenico and Giovanni Ponsello, who completed the imposing construction between 1565 and 1579. Another famous possessor of the palace was Admiral Giovanni Andrea Doria, who purchased it at the end of the same century for fifty thousand gold scudi.

Subsequently it passed to his son Carlo, Duke of Tursi. In 1820 it came to the Savoy, after the unjust annexation of Genoa to the Kingdom of Sardinia in 1815. Since 1848 it has been property of the Municipality of Genoa.

The piano nobile, with the State Rooms, seat of the concert under examination, was frescoed in the mid-1800s by Nicolò Barabino and Francesco Gandolfi with the cycle Christopher Columbus at the Spanish court. In the Sala della Giunta, precious relics are preserved, including Paganini's “Guarnieri del Gesù” violin called “Il Cannone” from 1742 and the urn containing the ashes of Columbus.

Located in an enviable position along the “Strada Nuova”, it takes advantage of the

colors of the materials used for the construction of the facade: Carrara marble, slate and the most precious stone from Finale Ligure. The conformation of the underlying terrain was exploited for the unusual arrangement of spaces. The magnificent double staircase is almost the stage for the Via Nuova, a street lined by at least 20 buildings of capital importance, so much so that the prospect of the entire street was immortalized by Peter Paul Rubens, and which in the 19th century was known as Via Aurea.
Madame de Staël gave it an even more high-sounding name: Rue des Rois, the Street of Kings. Since 2006, the palace has been part of, along with the entire street and the "Rolli of Genoa", the UNESCO World Heritage site.

This exceptional venue served as the cradle for the absolute world premiere of an unknown page by Beethoven the transcriber, namely the fragment of the Trio for piano, violin and cello Hess 47, from the string trio op. 3. This transcription, original to the author, unfortunately breaks off at the 43rd bar of the second movement. The first edition, with description, is due to Wilhelm Altmann in « Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft », III (December 1920), pages 129-158. The autograph passed from collector Hans Prieger to benefactor H.C. Bodmer, who donated it to the Beethoven-Haus in 1956. Its catalogue number is SBH 713.

Willi Hess, strangely, in his catalogue and at the top of the score (SBG, volume IX, 1965, page 51 et seq.), indicates an extremely fluctuating composition date: from 1800 to 1817. Although one must admit the enormous fortune of the trio - serenata Opus 3, it seems at least improbable that the author went back to work on an opera 20 years older so much later.

Furthermore, we must not overlook the fact that in 1807 the author published the sonata for cello and piano, with Artaria as Opus 64, also a transcription of the aforementioned trio Opus 3.

Contrary to what Hess thought, who did not believe the sonata was by Beethoven's hand, we cannot ignore the article that appeared in the "Wiener Zeitung" on March 27, 1807. In said article, it is read verbatim that the sonata was composed "sozusagen unter Beethovens Augen" (as it were under Beethoven's eyes), that it was given an opus number, and that the author and publisher were very satisfied with this work.

So satisfied, I think, that we can attribute to this period, namely 1806-1808, the Beethovenian torso Hess 47; yet another exploration of the thematic material of the Serenade.

The first movement - Allegro con Brio – in E-flat major, 288 bars, has reached us in its entirety. Making the obvious comparisons between the trio Op.3, the sonata Op.64 and Hess 47, one can easily see how refined this movement already is. Analyzing the score together with the members of the "Frank Bridge Trio" Giulio Glavina, Mariangela Marcone and Roberto Mazzola, we immediately realized that the performance of this first movement of the trio was certainly possible.

Purtroppo (Unfortunately), the same cannot be said for the second movement, which breaks off at measure 43. The second movement of Trio Opus 3 – Andante – in B-flat major consists of 141 bars, so Beethoven transcribed about a third of the original.

The violin part remains almost unchanged compared to the source score of the trio Opus 3, while the viola part is transposed to the left hand of the piano, creating a curious effect of "middle notes" that tend to flatten the sound. However, this sensation is balanced by the cello part, which restores depth and balance to the whole.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Raab, Armin:

Authentische und zweifelhafte Bearbeitungen Beethovens für Klavier und Violoncello / Armin Raab. – 2004. – Faks. (Noten), Notenbeisp.

In: Beethovens Werke für Klavier und Violoncello : Bericht über die Internationale Fachkonferenz Bonn, 18. – 20. Juni 1998 / hrsg. von Sieghard Brandenburg, Ingeborg Maaß und Wolfgang Osthoff. – Bonn : Beethoven-Haus, 2004. – (Veröffentlichungen des Beethoven-Hauses Bonn : Reihe 4 ; 15). – S. 283-304

Kempter, Peter Kyle:

Beethoven's cello sonata, op. 64 : a comparative study and new edition of the sonata originally transcribed from the string trio, op. 3 / by Peter K. Kempter. – Ann Arbor, Mich. : UMI, 1998. – VII, 160 S. : Ill., Notenbeisp.

Paper copy published by University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Houston, Univ., Diss. (DMA), 1998

Dorfmüller, Kurt:

Eine wiederentdeckte Cellosonate Beethovens? / Kurt Dorfmüller. – 1992

In: Münchener Beethoven-Studien / on behalf of the Beethoven-Gesellschaft München edited by Johannes Fischer. – München ; Salzburg : Musikverlag Emil Katzbichler, 1992. – S. 128-130

Vespasiano Tito Ottocento Madame de Staël Raab, Armin Kempter, Peter Kyle Dorfmüller, Kurt

danielescarpetti

Member

Posts: 1,032
City: Castel San Pietro Terme

February 12, 2013, 18:06

I am feeling inspired and therefore have plenty of time, and today I will dedicate myself to you, dear Armando; I will do so with the premise that you should not take offense at some criticisms I will make in an absolutely friendly manner. I think that people like you, if they did not exist, would have to be invented because what you have done, are doing, and will do for our Ludwig van Beethoven is so much and so important, and the esteem I feel for you is immense.

After this preamble, I come to what you wrote.

I am absolutely convinced that what Beethoven wrote in that letter should be taken literally (precisely) – something that did not always happen because he too often told tall tales: Beethoven absolutely did not love transcribing his music and when he did, he did so reluctantly, using the left hand and solely for the purpose of earning a few pennies, which never hurt.

In reality, among the works you mentioned, two others are missing: the Violin Concerto and Orchestra Opus 61, transcribed for piano and orchestra, and the String Quintet Opus 104, which was a reworking of the Trio Opus 1. The addition of these other two works might seem to support your thesis, but in reality, in my opinion, it is not so.

But let's go in order, disregarding the trifles of the Hess catalog – perhaps you will not agree with this statement of mine, but personally, I think so! -

You assert that: « Despite accurate research and numerous conjectures, at the current state it is almost impossible to establish which of these works were composed directly by the Master and which were performed by his willing collaborators, such as Ries and Czerny. (This essentially applies to the quartet of Works 41-42-63-64. » It will surely be as you say, but I have other information, which is as follows: regarding Opus 41, the transcription of the Serenade Opus 25, according to recent studies based on manuscript analysis, it has been established that it is not an original work by Beethoven but a third-hand one. The composer then revised the whole thing. Opus 42, the reworking of Opus 8, was carried out by F. X. Kleinheimz and also revised by Beethoven. Opus 63, the reworking of Opus 4 – which in turn was a reworking of Opus 103 – according to the scholar Cooper, occurred without the authorization and intervention of Beethoven, and the same applies to Opus 64.

Now Armando, whatever it may be, one thing seems absolutely evident to me: all these transcriptions are clearly inferior in quality compared to the originals and, at this point, I prefer to think that it was not Beethoven who made them because they would not be very worthy of his abilities.

The works that Beethoven certainly transcribed are also all inferior to the original, although one must recognize a greater accuracy: Opus 4, as Abrahm said: « (...) is not a simple arrangement... it is a new work from many points of view. (...) ».

Surely Hess 34, the transcription of Opus 14 no. 1, is also inferior, which in itself is not a sonata masterpiece, just like Opus 16a of Opus 16 and opus 38 of Opus 20.

A different discussion applies to the transcription of Symphony No. 2 Opus 36 into a Trio for piano, violin, and cello, where: « (...) the effectiveness of the symphonic discourse becomes the vehicle for a sonic experimentation that changes from top to bottom: although it is the piano's task to give body to the structure of the discourse, the violin and cello are not in a subordinate position, since they are responsible for defining that timbral element which in Beethoven no longer has anything decorative about it, but is an integral part of the sense of the composition. » as stated by the talented Stefano Catucci, whom I always enjoy listening to on Radio Tre.

At this point, only Opus 104 and Opus 134 remain in the game.

Let's start with Opus 134, the transcription for piano four hands of the Great Fugue Opus 133. One can also speak of four hands regarding its gestation because, as far as I know, it was entrusted by Beethoven to his pupil Anton Halm under pressure from the publisher Artaria; however, later on, not at all satisfied, he decided to revise it personally. Anyway, even here, whatever it may be, it is undeniable that the transcription is clearly inferior to the original despite having its fans.

I deliberately left Opus 104 for last, certainly not because of its importance, which is not enormous, but because it is linked to a beautiful novel by Vikram Seth. This transcription was also previously completed by an unknown hand and then taken up by Beethoven with the help of Kaufman, as results from letter no. 1158 of August 14, 1817. On the manuscript of Opus 104, one can then read the following words: « Trio arranged (...) by Mr. Good Will, and updated by five parts in appearance and five parts in truth, and in this way elevated from a state of great misery to a truly important position. August 19, 1817. N.B. The"

the original score of the Quintet in three parts was offered in solemn holocaust to the gods of hell » And this in the face of those who claim that Beethoven was devoid of spirit.

I was speaking of Vikram Seth's novel "A Suitable Boy" [Note: context suggests 'A Suitable Music' or similar, but translating literal title/context] "A Constant Music" Longanesi & C. publisher: for those who haven't read it, it is the story of a violin player in search of that rare Beethoven quintet and other parallel stories that intertwine, but what I like to report here is its ending which moves me every time I read it:

« Music, this music, is a sufficient gift. Why ask for happiness, why hope not to suffer? It is enough, it is a sufficient blessing to live day by day and hear this music – not too much, otherwise the soul might not endure it – from time to time. »

OrlandiArmando

Member

Posts: 234
City: San Biagio di Valpolcevera (Genova)

February 12, 2013, 21:07

Dear Daniele,

I love what you wrote very much, (I like this) and opinions - because that is what it's about - can differ greatly. I love your way of writing very much regardless of how you present yourself or whether I agree with you or not. In fact, the limitations of articles that must be written in three pages are manifold, as is the cutting of numerous details. Ultimately, however, I do not like foreplay, as they are nonetheless precursors to penetrations, and I always hope to personally choose the lover who manages to possess me. As for being invented, I hope you can write directly to my wife to convince her of my... importance.! Well dear Daniele, get well soon from your flu! I always look forward to your writings with authentic pleasure (perhaps writings that can spark new posts), but do not use lubricants: I have personal ones of excellent brands that satisfy my every need.

Friendship and brotherhood