Five perspectives on "Body and Soul"

Claudia Emmenegger, Olivier Senn (Ed.)
A publication by the Lucerne School of Music
Five perspectives on "Body and Soul"
and other contributions
to music performance studies
CHRONOS
5
Proceedings of the "International conference on music performance analysis ,"
Lucerne 2009
Table of contents
Preface
7
OUVIER SENN > CLAUDIA EMMENEGGER
Five perspectives on "Body and Soul"
Recordings as sources for jazz - A performance history of "Body and Soul"
15
JOSE ANTONIO BOWEN
"Body and Soul" and the mastery of jazz tenor saxophone
29
MARTIN PFLEIDERER
Dexter Gordon 's ultimate "Body and Soul"
45
CYNTHIA FOLlO. ALEXANDER BRINKMAN
Transmigrations of "Body and Soul" - Three contemporary interpretations
of a jazz classic analyzed and applied to performance
61
J OHN GUNTHER
" ... mieux citron que jamais" - Thelonious Monk plays "Body and Soul"
77
DUVIER SENN
11
Cover illustration : Coleman Hawkins, ca. 1939, mr. jazz Photo Files,
Theo Zwicky, PO Box 737, CH-8049 Zurich, Switzerland.
© 2011 Chronos Verlag, Ziirich
ISBN 978-3-0340-1048-1
Methods of music performance analysis
On measuring and interpreting microtiming
MARc·ANTOINE CAMP, LORENZ KILCHENMANN, THOMAS VOLKEN, OLlVIER SENN
95 .
6
''The discography" or what analysts of recordings do before analyzing
7
III
Preface
ELENA ALESSANDRl
Measuring and describing music
127
MATTHIAS ARTER
The power of the Maestro - Statistical techniques to differentiate
conductors' interpretations
145
RICHARD TURNER
Transmission or interpretation?-Pierre Boulez's perfonnances
of Stravinsky's "The Rite of Spring"
169
JORG HUBER
Sound. space, and gesture in music theatre today
181
CLAUDlA DJ L UZIO
Authors
191
Index
195
The "International conference on music performance analysis" was held on July 1-2,
2009 in Lucerne, Switzerland. It was hosted by Lucerne School of Music (Hochschule Luzem - Musik) and it was organized in connection with the annual meeting
ofthe International Association of Schools of Jazz , which took place in Lucerne during the same week. The conference consisted of two symposia: the symposium "Five
perspectives on 'Body and Soul'" of July I focused on recorded versions of Johnny
Green's song "Body and Soul"; the symposium "Methods in music performance
studies" of July 2 discussed new ways of analyzing and describing recorded music.
The present volume publishes the papers held at the two symposia.
Five perspectives on "Body and Soul"
What kind of an object is a "tune" from the Great American Songbook? Does a given
tune possess any essential properties? And if so, what are they and in which way
does this alleged essence pervade, inhabit, or determine performed versions of the
song in jazz and popular music? In the symposium "Five perspectives on 'Body and
Soul'''l (July 1,2009), these questions were directed toward Johnny Green 's song,
which has been recorded several thousand times in the history of jazz-more often
than any other piece in the jazz repertoire. "Body and Soul" is probably the ultimate
paradigmatic jazz standard and therefore singularly appropriate as an object for this
kind of inquiry.
The first perspective on "Body and Soul," Jose Antonio Bowen 's (Dallas) article,
"Recordings as sources for jazz- A performance history of 'Body and Soul,''' analyzes an impressive number of recordings, ranging from the tune's early recording
history to the 2pt century. Bowen shows how certain properties and features of the :
song (text and melodic variants, accompaniment elements, key, tempo, etc.) enter
recording history at a certain moment, are taken up in other perfonnances, and either
127
Measuring and describing music
MAITHIAS ARTER
Ludwig van Beethoven's Fifth Symphony
What did an orchestra sound like at the end of the 19 i1i century? This was one of the
decisive questions of a research project at the Berne University of the Arts in which
the first extant recordings of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony were examined in order
to find significant differences concerning influence, traditions, and trends in the early
recording era, approximately between 1910 and 1933. Primarily, the project deals
with the history of orchestral playing and aims, through the investigation of musicians' perfonnance habits of the period in question, to deduce the reality of musical
perfonnance before the recording era, i.e. the 19th century.
Since there are no orchestral recordings before 1906 or thereabouts,1 it is important to realize that the quarter-century in question is one of the most exciting times in
the history of interpretation: the transition from the 19 i1i century, which shall forever
remain silent, into the modem era where it became increasingly easy to document the
hi story ofinterpretation with recordings. It is also important to note that the beginning of the recording era lies exactly half way between the first perfonnance of the
composition in question and the present. Therefore, it is conceivable that lost traditions that are closer to Beethoven 's time might be unearthed by this sort of analysis
(although definitive proof of kinship between a recording of 1910 and a performance
of 1810 will most probably never be uncovered).
Before focusing on the comparison of diverging interpretations of the same music , various aspects of the research project will be explained, in order to give an idea
of the conlext and methodology.
129
128
1808 Vienna, December 20th: 1st Performance of Beethoven's Fifth
1840
Anton Schindler: 8eetho~n's Biography
--1" "So pocht das S,hid,>iil l an die Plorte"
1st and 2nd Recording of Beethoven's Fifth
f rf~d ! I.b ~'a,"
At,I\\;f r,,~.~_
1945
'L ' OS~C ~ Od!::" " ~ ~ reif. 'K':ch t'~t/f "
fk"UI r... :1<1'11 ... ,: C'rdll:~t.<t
MilY 8th: End of World Wilr 11
-7
1983
\,
~v
for victory · ,he-m,,'
lst recording "on period instruments" (no. 362"')
" '.1
ol! Utllel : - TI't ~;.;r,' '.~:
l!dll d
zoos
* ilccording t o Tak-ahas hi pOOS: 54)
Fig.!: Brief overview of the history of Beethoven's Fifth, including some milestones.
The recordings of Beethoven's Fifth, 1910-1933
The aim of undertaking a comprehensive study of the earliest recordings of
Beethoven's Fifth required the acquisition of all existing recordings, including re~
cent CD re-edits as well as material found in private collections and sound archives.
Unfortunately some recordings are still missing, either because they were not located
during the course of our investigation or simply because they were never released.
All recordings had to be converted into a format that would allow for mutual comparison.ln every single case there were issues such as missing repeats or severe distorsions of pitch and speed due to the conversion of the originals into digital fonnat.
A second step in the reserch process involved locating as much information as
possible about every individual recording. Figure 2 indicates the different recording companies, the countries in which the recordings were released, and also the
very important divide between acoustic and electric recording technology in 1925.
Consequently, it is not surprising that around this time there is a great increase in
recording activity, because every company was forced to renew their whole catalogue within a few years.
Orchestral archives - particularly in Berlin , London, and Vienna-proved to be
invaluable resources for orchestra1 material and scores, programs , lists of musicians ,
and other interesting details.
The recording of Franz Schalk provides an example of how these numerous
sources of information can lead to conclusions about the music . Schalk's recording
was made with the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra in the middle of their surruner
holiday, which lasted for two months.2 Surprisingly, the recording was not released
until 1932, following Schalk's death (according to "His Master's Voice - HMV").
However on listening , the reason becomes rather apparent: the famous opening of
the symphony "duh-duh-duh-daaaah" comes out sounding more like "duh-duhdududuh-dadaaaa."3 This most likely necessitated a second recording session, which
was not to be held for almost another two years. Strangely enough, the material of
the second session was never released and in 1932 it was the botched version of the
first session that appeared on the recording. Bearing in mind that this recording was
made in the middle of a summer vacation, when the musicians were likely to be
somewhat out of practice and not quite so attuned to each other as during the concert
season , the numerous imprecisions can be easily explained: unsteady intonation
in the woodwind section, imprecise entrances of the brass instruments, and many
ensemble problems in the strings.
In spite of all these problems the recording possesses a certain charm and the
sound of the orchestra is excellent, which is probably the reaso n for its unusually
long presence in the HMV catalogue of 17 (!) years. Additionally, the illustrious
name tag: "Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra" may have kept sales rates up until
130
131
Gennany
Explanations
1898
Comp.ny
Events
Yur of founding (If bela.!!
1910 ~
Fusion b!!tween Lindstrom and Ddeon company
Company name
L
Company's existence
2
Ddeon Is taken over by Lindstrom
Event number accord ing to the list on the right side (important change of ownership)
3
The UK Gramophon Company as an owner of Oeutsche Grammophon is expropriated by the German Empire.
4
An English subcompany Is founded by the American Columbia Phonograph Company
6
7
Columbia becomes a controlling shareholder of lindstrom, and later on of Pathe as well.
Sale I takeove r (The lighter end shows the company which is taken over;
no colour change: fus ion.)
4
L...-.:-.---Further existence after takeover
Recordinl (name of conductor). The year of recording is shown by the position in the graph
(see time scale at the left and right e nd).
The recording label is the One which appears above in the same line.
Reading example; Seidler· Winldu's recording dates from 1923 and appeared IJnder the
lobel "Polydor" of "Deu/sch .. Grommophon".
Reading example; Weingartner made jour recordings under the Columbia label.
- Wlher
Leipziger Polvphon Musikwerke AG buy the Deutsche Grammophon AG.
,
Electrola is founded as a subcompany of the English Gramopllon Company.
Electric & Musical Industries Ltd. {EM!} arise through fusion between Columbia and the Eng li sh Gramophon
Company.
Recording never releaSed
Label: It is assigned to the company which produced recordings under this label.
The sign applies to all following recordings listed, ufltil the next label name is Indicated.
Fig.2: All documented recordings of Beethoven s Fifth between 1910 and 1933 indicating
labels, companies, and origin.
133
132
Tab.!: click&play, sections o/the different recordings with their durations (in seconds)
~ Ut".,ll'll'" <onco~ '~ ~.I,bo..'I I""th
&0.",,''''''' ~' > , ,,,1
"' 1 ' C"~",,!"", ."'d l" h : ,o<o'.i"R "Y· " ""
Im d"""nt'"""",....... !d. ... J
IIfK
".
... ~ ...n...... I ..... d;"' .... _
... y ..,,,
!I·: .... ''''. ,."
",,· "<I,
".
...'
Kark
Nikisch
Ronald 1
Weingartner 1
Fuftwangler
Ronald 2
Weingartner 2
Strauss
Szenkar
>1'1
,M'
ht rl'C",4I~1
.r,.,,,,,... ..~> ,~. '"_
...
r' '~ " """'"
O<' ''<' ''.lr., .. ,~ r~ c""' ... ,.[
00
o 0
o
Fig.3: Schalk's recording with the Vienna Philharmonic in the context oflhe other HMV-
productions oJ Beethoven's Fifths; on the left side the documented studio-recordingsJrom
Berlinfrom 1913 until 1949.
their second recording of the piece was released in 1948, conducted by Herbert von
Karajan.1t is interesting to note that by 1948 the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra had
Rosenstock
Schalk
Stokowski
Toscanini 3
Weingartner 3
Toscanini 4
Weingartner 4
Klemperer
1-16
1-17
1-18
1-19
1-20
24.30
30.76
28.40
30.26
28.10
30.06
29 .13
28.41
30 .1 9
27.90
27.17
30.66
29.11
31.21
30.59
29.89
28.52
12.67
15.42
14.69
15.93
14 .92
15.20
14.82
13.68
15.06
14.38
14.34
15.56
15.23
15.59
15.73
14.84
15.06
16.05
17.70
18.60
19.03
18.23
18 .69
18 .25
16.00
18.14
17.58
17.90
17.38
17.93
18.64
18.06
18.06
17.52
20.57
25.14
25.26
27.22
24.65
27.20
25.37
22.05
25.25
23.48
24.51
24.88
23.31
26.26
23.70
25.80
24.39
14.71
18.00
17 .88
19.45
17.46
19 .55
18.16
16.18
18.97
16.53
18 .03
17.96
15.86
19.01
16.34
18.38
17.04
in early recordings. Part of the current project was the development of a precise way
of measuring tempo changes, to create graphic visualizations and to compare our
results with today's recordings.
Rather than measuring the tempo of every single bar, the average tempo of a given
of the State Opera.
phrase was etablished. Central to this process was the development of a computer
program4 that enabled the formatting and tracking of all recordings according to the
selected phrases in order to compare the various aspects in question with great ease.
A second data set was a list of timings for all sections, which were then transferred
to a rnetronomic scale of beats per minute in order to create the following graphs,
Measuring music
which include Beethoven's original tempo indications, as published in 1817.
already recorded the Fifth Symphony four times in the studio (not to mention the
numerous live recordings), as had the second big orchestra of Berlin, the Orchestra
The second movement was divided into 28 phrases, determined in order of musical context. The construction of this movement made it quite easy to define the
Many things in music are quantifiable, such as time, tempo, intonation, and sound
spectra. Since the historical recordings in question do not render the timbres faith-
phrases, since the two alternating themes (bar 1 to 22 , bar 23 to 37) are varied three
fully due to the limited possibilities of early recording technology, timbral aspects
times and are always the same length. The first four phrases are shown in example 1.
will not be taken into consideration here. It is also notable that, on the recordings in
question. the tempi are seldom steady. Although there are remarkable differences
between the conductors, in most cases, even where there is a steady tempo it very
often changes after a few bars or at the beginning of a new phrase , a common issue
In old recordings there is generally a fairly steady speed within the phrases, but
sign ificantly differing tempos from one phrase to another. In 14 of the 18 recordings
the second phrase is a bit slower, the third a bit faster, and the fourth phrase even
faster. Therefore, despite differences in absolute tempo, the recordings are similar
134
135
p
·
.i ·
"~,
. . ·
""i
l
,
·
-
~(
h
~
*a
~
. .
.
j:1 ~
l'
~:ltt
.. ,
~
g Jg
,
•
It is interesting to read what Felix Weingartner (1906:75) himself wrote about this
movement: "The Tempo is con moro, therefore quite animated. If we don't respect
the con moro, the movement becomes rather tedious; if the conductor forgets the
andante, he loses the intimacy [".] the tempo 92 transforms the andante into an allegretto, I think that 84 is correct."6
(
~
\\
- -
--
• ,•
i"<
, ,
f'
~
, • ,.
~'
.
\\il
...
- · ~I
~
~
-- --
-
i
.1
·
,
,
'-
~-.
I
..
•
~:
.
.
<;
~
- -
--
.
cE
If.'
!
"'. ~
.
(~
IW'
·
,! ,!
-
,
··
·
~
I;
N
. . .
,
'. P
,.
"
,
"
:;u
• ! ej ! li
~;
!i
u.!
u .!
:i
I
I• i
j
LB
i
Ex. 1: Beethoven s Fifth, second movement; definition of the phrases 1 to 4.
i
. .
,
~
<
..
~I~ fli
,
f-'
in tenns of relative tempo. Two recordings (Richard Strauss and Eugen Szenkar)
start in the same way but slow down a little bit in the fourth phrase. Only two recordings present a completly different profile from this "slower-faster-even faster"
pattern: Friedrich Kark aud Landon Ronald in his second recording (1926). Neither
conductor slows down in the second phrase, but instead, both continously increase
the tempo from phrase to phrase. In a selected comparison, the same profile was
detected in a modem interpretation (Sir John Eliot Gardiner, 1994).
A second example (figure 6), the tempo design of the four recordings by Felix
Weingartner, reveals the differences as well as the similarities between different
perfonnances by a single conductor within 10 years. It is noteworthy and unique in
the history of recording to have four studio interpretations of the same piece by the
same conductor in such a short period.
We see that in his first (acoustic) recording he practises what he preaches and
takes an average tempo of about 84 bpm. Three years later the same conductor gives
the movement a completely different character as can be clearly seen in the graph
(figure 6). The much faster tempo tumes the movement into an allegretto, just as
Weingartner predicted. To date, no recording of Beethoven's fifth Symphony has
been taken as fast as this second recorded perfonnance by Weingartner.
Weingartner's third recording is a bit slower in general but contains the biggest
tempo modifications between the phrases of all the examined recordings. This is
quite surprising because Weingartner was considered a modern conductor in his
day, who already adhered to the original score fairly strictly and was not at a11 iden~
tified with the romantic tradition of Richard Wagner, Haus von Biilow, aud Arthur
Nikisch, in whose interpretations one might expect this kind of tempo fluctuation.
This example shows that one should not take a conductor's reputation at face value,
but rather view it in the context of its time.
The fourth and final of Weingartner's recordings is the slowest of all, which is
not surprising , given that it was recorded in the the very resonant acoustics of the
Abbey Road Studio No. I. The curve shows the exact same fluctuations of tempo as
before. One of the most interesting results that is easy to recognize on the graphs is
the idiomatic style of a given conductor's interpretation. Even though the average
speed may vary considerably, the shape of the curve remains practically identical.
This is an example of the kind of insight to be gained from this sort of graph; ;
a coherent representation that provides an overview of how an interpretation is
shaped. The graph does not address mauy other aspects of perfonnauce, such as
137
136
I
!
100
90
,ro
bars
1
11
.,,
o
!I
10 !
60
1
:.......:39
,,
.'••••• ••• •••• ,'.
E go '
1
32
-f·, .. ·····:;
••••• • •-•••:
D.
2J
23
tempo reference (92)
'"
r,----------------------------------------------------------,
i bars
h
..... . .....-~
• •• ". . . . . . . .;~
=
.----------.
_
,---,,
C - --
,-_.,-,- 1, - . -- -.'
.----.
49
59
71
81 88
98
IH 1241ll __ l4e
I
,
I
I
,_I
I
- - - 10seanlnl 3 (1931)
,
12 39
160167176185 195
-
-
L__.-,__
r-:
Rona ld 1 (1922)
'"
229 239
t_:---~
,,
• ... Strau55 (1928)
~
'I
23
:
..... Gardiner (1994)
•
•
11
,q" :JLl
r·:····:···\ ..
...:
- - - Furtwa engler (1926)
~
t
I
-
-.:
...•.•: ,- _.._--
I
t ____ _ ..
i
tempo refe rence j92)
50 -'-----
- - ' " •••
We'vrtnef 1 U914}
Wping~n"", 2 (1'l) 1)
Wt ms·rt:'le13j1932}
Weingmnct 4 (1933)
Fig .6: Tempo profile a/the second movement: the jour Weingartner-recordings.
Fig.4: Some examples a/the speed afthe phrases 1 to 4; mostly
similar designs, with a little difference in (he case oj Strauss (second
movement, bars 1-38).
,
HO ;"
bars
100
-t----t----+---r--+
11
23
'" ~i - ......----o
c. so ,.--_ -
~ !
m ___ •
...
i-
32
39
r-""'"
---.-. --r-
--- I r---.1
1
-- .-~
-
JF':----J~
tempo reference (92.)
_
Ka rk (1910)
- - - Ronald 2 (1926)
- - Klemperer (1934)
----
Fig.5: The other tempo-profile of the second movement's beginning;
Friedrich Kark, Landon RonaLd with his second recording and, additionaify, Olto Klempere,s (bars 1-38).
articulation , balance , vibrato, sound , rhythmical freedom or tempo rubato , and is
not appropriate for all kinds of music. However, even though many parameters are
not directly visible in the graphs we can still infer a number of interesting aspects
from the collected data .
At firs t one would think that the average speed parameter is not applicable due to
the numerou s fermatas in the first movement. However, on comparing the different
durations of the fermata-dense sections one does obtain an exact profile of how long
the conductors hold the fermatas: Strauss keeps them very long throughout the whole
movement ? Arturo Toscanini and Kark a bit shorter, John Eliot Gardiner, who is
included again as an example of a contemporary conductor, holds the fermatas for
an even shorter stretch of time. In all sections that do not contain any fermatas, Ri chard Strauss in 1928 was quite close to Beethoven's speed and much closer than
Toscanini five years later. It is striking that already the very first recording of the
Fifth (by Friedrich Kark) should provide us with an example of a very fast tempo - a
very similar tempo-profile to Gardiner's - but with much longer fermatas. The Karkrecording maintains a much steadier tempo than the other early recordings and is the
only one to use the original bassoons in the recapitulation of the beginning of the
second theme (bar 303) instead of replacing them with the horns as was customary
well into the 1960s '
In order to understand the specific challenges faced by a musician of the early 20~
century one must be aware of the basic difference between acoustical and electrical
recording procedures . From 1926 onwards, orchestras were able to make recordings
using their usual size and instrumentation and in their usual acoustic environment,
139
138
.~
r---------------------------------------------------------,
bars
I
1115
~~
»
)06
370
l'S
n. r--It--+-+---+---H---!--+---+---+<-4---4-----+--+--~=::!-;;t--+-l
----I
,r . . .
----·-
j
\~/ - - obotude nza
2fem'''tiu (bil 479 and 41121
- . - - --
\
Ml
I~
... Jf.-l
CV
tempo ""el~nc~ (lOB)
-
Kirk rl9I0)
,('.. \
,_\
·1
A ::j
\ _1
--
'~rm~li' Cb" 24 9 lnd 252)
- - - Slril,ls.s 119211)
-
TO$~.l'Ilni
4 [l'}l3}
•• ••
G~,diM'
11994)
Fig.7: Tempo graph of the first movement, some obviously diverging examples .
whereas the studio conditions of the acoustic era may have altered the manner of
playing significantly, since the balance of the orchestra in a studio was very unnatural for the musicians compared to a perlonnance in a concert hall. Furthermore,
it was customary that a virtually complete wind and brass section (12 to 17 players including added tuba in the case of Beethoven 's Fifth) was complemented by
a string ensemble of approximately 12 players .' As a result, the strings tend to use
much more vibrato and play more tenuto in order to achieve a bigger sound, and
they are prone to exaggerate the articulation so as to provide the recording horn with
excessively clear signals. This distorted sound-image was also the reason that many
conductors and orchestras in this era preferred not to make any recordings at all.
We must therefore be all the more grateful for the recording of Beethoven 's Fifth by
Arthur Nikisch and the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra: in spite of the early recording
date (1913) it sounds like a complete orchestra and provides a great deal of insight
into the reality of orchestra playing of that period .'O
Describing
If the aim is to discover forgotten traditions of interpretation through analyzing early
orchestra recordings , it is important to ascertain which recordings possess the greatest relevance for that purpose. Several features define the style of interpretation at
the beginning of the 20'" century, as has been shown conclusively by Robert Philip
(2004). These features include unsteady tempos; frequent use of portamento; little
or no use of vibrato; frequent use of tempo rubato andjeu inegal (vertical freedom);
and widely diverging realizations of dotted rhythms. The following descriptions use
a non-judgmental, clear, intelligible, and differentiated vocabulary. To facilitate direct comparisons the exact number of portamentos are quantified. In each case, the
origin of a given feature of interpretation is identified as either a single musician's
choice, a conductor's idiom , or simply the tradition of the orchestra. The second
theme of the first movement provides an example of this method of descriptive
comparison:
All spots where portamentos occur in at least one of the recordings are numbered,
with bolded text signifying a very prominent portamento and italics signfiying one
which is very discreet. Additionally, the characteristics of each recording - focus~
ing on the aforementioned stylistic devices-have been identified. The list below is
chronological and does not cover all existing recordings (figure 2) , but represents a
selection of the most interesting examples. Included in the discussion is a recording
that has not yet been mentioned: Mengelberg's 1922 recording ll , which consists of
only the first movement. 12
Friedrich Kark (Odeon Orchestra , 19 10)
5 portamentos : 1 2 3 4 10
quite nervous and restless throughout; played with continuous vibrato (very small ensemble)
Arthur Nikisch (Berlin Philharmonic, 1913)
6 pOrtamentos: I 234 7 12
relaxed , no vibrato at all ; clarinet and flute with slightjeu inegal, almost baroque 4-bar
phrasing
l osef Pasternack (Victor Symphony Orchestra, 1916/1 7)
3 portarnentos: 1 2 4
calm character, almost without vibrato , clarinet with slight jeu intgal.
Willern Mengelberg (New York Philharmonic , 1922, only the first movement was recorded)
5 portamentos: 1 23 4 6
very expressive, heavy vibrato, played quite loudly and evenly ,jeu intgal of clarinet and
flute
Felix Weingartner 1 (London Symphony Orchestra, 1924)
1 portamento: 2
calm , virtually no phrasing , almost without vibrato, clarinet with slightjeu inega/
Landon Ronald 2 (Royal Albert Hall Orchestra, 1926)
5 portamentos: 1 234 14
expressive, many dynamic details (crescendi to the middle of each slur), without vibrato
141
140
1st 'IioIIn with flutl!
18~al
Ex.2: Melody of the second theme of the first movement, with all portamentos occuring at
least once in the recordings in question.
Wilhelm Furtw angler (Berlin Philharmonic, 1926)
3 portamentos: 1 3 6
fiat and static phrasing. vibrato throughout
Felix Weingartner 2 (Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, 1927)
5 portamentos: 1 23414
calm and even in dynamic , rather sober; almost without vibrato
Richard Strauss (Berlin State Opera Orchestra, 1928)
3 portamentos: 1 24
very relaxed at fi rst, after 77 continuous accel. , almost without vibrato
4-bar phrasing after 75
Joseph Rosenstock (Berlin State Opera Orchestra, 1929)
no portamentos
calm , rather sober, after bar 75 4 bar-phrasing. flute with slight jeu inegal, almost without
vibrato
Franz Schalk (Vienna Philharmonic, 1929)
7 portamentos: I 23 4 5 8 14
quite busy, almost without vibrato
Leopold Stokowsky (Philadelphia Orchestra, 1931)
3 portamentos: 1 23
very calm, steady sound, with vibrato throu ghout
dynamic clearly shaped, 4 bar-phrasing after 75
Arturo Toscanini 4 (New York Philharmonic, 1933)
2 portamentos: 2 4
slight vibrato throughout, darinet a bit slower, rubato and with jeu inegal, dearly separated
2-bar phrasing 75 to 82
Felix Weingartner 4 (London Philharmonic , 1933)
7 portamentos: 12 3491113
vibrato throughout, dynamic phrasing, 2-bar phrasing after 75
On the basis of this list the orchestras can be categorized according to their
proximity to the 19th~century traditiun. In this case «conservative" means following old tradition in details like restricted and differing use of vibrato, regular use of
portamento and open strings, as well as rubato,jeu inegal and varied realization of
dotted rhythms. "Modern" means greater emphasis on fidelity to the original score
(something that was rather new at that time), less rubata, even use of vibrato, clean
articulation and fingerings (less use of portarnento), quite strict realization of dotted
rhythms, and prosaic phrasing.
Ochestras that can be identified as "conservative" were the Royal Albert Hall ,
London Symphony, Royal Philharmonic, Vienna Philharmonic, and London Philharmonic. Those identified as "modern" were the Berlin State Opera, Philadelphia.
"Conservative" orchestras whose style became " modern" during the period in question were the Berlin Philharmonic and the New York Philharmonic.
A categorization cannot be made in the case of the two studio orchestras, "Odeon"
and "Victor," due to their strongly distorted sound quality.
It is astonishing to be able to make this classification -one that holds true even
on close inspection of the entire symphony - based on an excerpt of less than 20 seconds. The descriptive list also allows for a differentiation between the orchestral
playing and the conductor's influence. A good example of this distinction can be
found in the three recordings by the Berlin State Opera Orchestra, all made within
one year (1928129), with the conductors Eugen Szenkar, Richard Strauss and Joseph
Rosenstock. and as an inverse example, in the four aforementioned recordings by
Felix Weingartner with four different London orchestras.
Conclusion
"Das Beste der Musik steht nicht in den Noten" ("the best things in music are not in
the score"), as Gustav Mahler used to say (Waller 1936:63). By that he presumably
meant that the interpreters must help the composers in creating the work of art , the
"Kunstwerk." If live perfonnance is the representation of the actual "Kunstwerk,"
then we must admit that a recording will always remain a mere reflection of the real
thing. Often it is only the circumstances which determine the degree of success of
a recording . and its resemblance to the original live perfonnance. In order to understand early recordings and their inherent perfonnance traditions it is necessary
to illuminate the available sound documents from all angles and with a variety of
approaches. The goal is to establish a sort of psychograph of every single recording,
which can provide much more expectation than might be suspected at first listening. Along with superficial information, such as orchestral size, players involved,
production circumstances and biographical data , the comparison of recordings pro-
142
vides one of the most interesting sources of insight. The juxtaposition of quantifiable
details and concise descriptions provides an understanding of the developments in
the history of interpretation and enables us to rediscover-and perhaps even reenact-traditions long thought to have faded beyond recognition. It is a way to have
the silent 19th century speak to us anew in the 2PI.
143
Weingartner FeJix (1932) . Bri~ish Symphony Orchestra. Naxos, 8.110861.
Weingartner Felix (1933). London Philharmonic Orchestra. Naxos , 8.110913.
Notes
ReJerences
Muck Peter (1982). Einhundert lahre Berliner Philharmonisches Orchester. Tutzing: HaIlS
Schneider.
Philip Robert (2004). Performing music in the age oJrecording. New Haven and London :
Yale University Press.
Strauss Richard (1936/37). Anmerkungen zu den Auffiihrungen von Beethovens Symphonien.
Neue Zeirschriftfor Musik 125 (1964), pp.250-260.
Takahashi Toshiro (2005). Discography of Beethoven's Symphony no.5. Abiko City: Abiko
Audio Fan Club.
Walter Bruno (1936). Gustav Mahler. Wien: H. Reichner.
Weingartner Felix (1906). Ralschlagefiir Auffohrungen der Symphonien Beethovens. Leipzig:
Breitkopf & Hartel
2
3
4
5
6
Recordings of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony mentioned in the text
Furtwangler Willhelm (1926) . Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra. Naxos, 8.111003.
Oardiner John Eliot (1996). Orchestre romantique et revolutionnaire . 000, Archiv produclion 439900.
Kark Friedrich (1910). Odeon Symphony Orchestra. Wing, WCD 62.
Klemperer Otto (1934). Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra.Archiphon ,ARC-136/38 [live].
Mengelberg Willem (1922). New York Philhannonic Orchestra (only first movement). Pearl,
GEMM CDS 9922.
Nikisch Arthur (1913). Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra. Dutlon, CDBP 9784.
Pastemack Josef (1916/17). Vox Symphony Orchestra. Never released on CD.
Ronald Landon (1922). Royal Albert Hall Orchestra. Never released on CD.
Ronald Landon (1926). Royal Albert Hall Orchestra. Never released on CD.
Rosenstock Joseph (1929). Berlin State Opera Orchestra. Never released on CD.
Schalk Franz (1929). Vienna Philharmonic. Dante, 09449.
Stokowski Leopold (1931). Philadelphia Orchestra. Music&Arts, 1173.
Slrauss Richard (1928). Berlin State Opera Orchestra. Naxos, 8.110926.
Toscanini Anuro (193 1). New York Philharmonic Orchestra. Naxos, 8.110844.
Toscanini Arturo (1933). New York Philharmonic Orchestra. Naxos, 8.110840.
Weingartner Felix (1924). London Symphony Orchestra. Sinsheido (Japan), Complete Weingartner Edition vol. 6 , SGR 8526.
Weingartner Felix (1927). Royal Symphony Orchestra. Sinsheido (Japan), Complete Weinganner Edition vo1. 5, SGR 8525.
7
8
9
10
11
12
The first recordings with a symphony orthestra which are not just accompaniments for singers
could be a series of recordings that Carles Sabajno (1874· 1932) made conducting the "Orchestra
sinfonica alia Scala di Milano". All titles released on the label "His master's voice":
Georges Bizel: Carmen-Selection (1906, marrice 925c)
Edward Elgar: Salut d'amour (1906, malrice 92Ic (0546)
Georges Bizet: Carmen-Ouverture (April 1907, matrice 1045c)
Richard Wagner: Ride o/the Valkyries (late 1907, matrice l10281hb) and Prelude to Act 3 of "Lo hengrin" (late 1907, matrice lll34b).
According to the detailed concert programs in the archive of the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra,
the last concert of the season 1928129 took place on August 21 at the Salzburg Festival and, incidentally, only two days before there was a performance of Beethoven's Fifth with Schalk. The first
concert of the following season was on October 27; exactly in between the recording in question.
Listen to this beginning: www.marterart.chlforschung.html.September 2.20ID.
click&pLay by Slephen Lumenta, <02008 Berne University of the Arts
Klemperer 's version is an addition to this list. Since it was recorded on January 1 1934 it does not fit
the time frame of 1910 to 1933, but is included due to the exceptional importance of the conductor.
"Das Tempo ist con moro, daher ziemlich bewegt. Wild das con moto ubersehen, so dehnt sich der
Satz zu langweiliger Breite; vergisst der Dirigent aber l ... ] das Andante, so nimmt er diesem Satz
jede Innigkeit und an ihre Stelle tritt ein gleichgtiltiges TandelspieJ mit t6nenden Phrasen."
Richard Strauss (1936137 :255) prescribes to hold all fermatas in the first movement for six measures
and he recommends "very long fermatas!" also for ms . 268 (oboe cadenza).
FeJjx Weingartner (1906:71) writes: "However, their effect (of the bassoons) [ ...] in this place as it
appears in the first part [ .. .) is abominable, simply ridiculous." And Richard Strauss (1936/37:255)
simply writes: "bar 303-305: horns"
In the case of Josef Pastemack's recording the second wind players are completely omitted.
According to a photo in Muck (1982, vcl. 1:416) that shows the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra
during the very first of its recordings in 1913 (excerpts of Wagner's Parsifal, Alfred Hertz. conducting) there must be about 18 strings involved: 6-5-3-2-2 .
Although Mengelberg recorded only the first movement with the New York Philharmonic, this
recording is included due to its most interesting context: Mengelberg succeeded Gustav Mahler
as principal conductor of this orchestra and is therefore the link between the 19th century and the
later tradition of Toscanini.
Listen to this excerpt of all recordings: www.marterart.chlforschung.html.September2.2010.