# Bach Goldbergs vs Beethoven Diabelli variations?



## aeschylus

Two masterpieces.

Which one do you rate more highly, and why?

What qualities do they have? What do they say to you?


----------



## Bulldog

I don't do any rating, but I must prefer Bach's Goldbergs because I listen to it a lot more and own more recordings of the work. I also generally prefer Bach to Beethoven who doesn't stand a chance with the Bulldog.

Both works are wonderful for the same reasons: great melodies, variety of expression and form, and variations that easily stand on their own while also presenting a continuity of musical precision and progression.

What they say to me is - "all is right with the world".


----------



## KenOC

Hard to choose. The affinity between the two works was apparent from early on. When Diabelli published Beethoven's set in 1823, his announcement included these words: "...indeed all these variations, through the novelty of their ideas, care in working-out, and beauty in the most artful of their transitions, will entitle the work to a place beside Sebastian Bach's famous masterpiece in the same form." Not just marketing puffery in this case!


----------



## MrTortoise

They are universes large enough to contain each other and I'm privileged to be able to visit both.


----------



## Musicophile

I personally found the Goldberg significantly more "accessible", and only recently fell in love with the Diabelli's (thanks to Schiff and Staier, on my blog I've explained why: http://musicophilesblog.com/2015/05/28/beethoven-diabelli-variations-an-acquired-taste/).

Both are absolute masterpieces.


----------



## Mandryka

The strange thing about the Goldberg Variations is that JSB brings back the aria at the end. I think it was an original move, can someone who knows about early music confirm that no one had done that before in a set of variations? I guess he must have been saying something about memory and time, I don't know. Has this been explored by anyone? Contrast that with the extraordinary light hearted ending of the Diabelli Variations, after a sort of spiritual struggle in the variations which come just before. I wonder what Beethoven was saying there, how it ties up with Beethoven's ideas about the meaning of life.


----------



## KenOC

Don't know about pre-Bach, but repeating the theme at the end was a common practice in the Classical period (Beethoven's Op.109 being a good example). Maybe Bach was the model for this. An alternative was ending up with a big noisy virtuosic fugue, which Beethoven also did. He kind of combined both in the Diabellis, except that instead of repeating the theme he transfigured it into an ethereal minuet, which was at least formally an archaic form by then. But it worked.


----------



## Ukko

Mandryka said:


> The strange thing about the Goldberg Variations is that JSB brings back the aria at the end. I think it was an original move, can someone who knows about early music confirm that no one had done that before in a set of variations? I guess he must have been saying something about memory and time, I don't know. Has this been explored by anyone? Contrast that with the extraordinary light hearted ending of the Diabelli Variations, after a sort of spiritual struggle in the variations which come just before. I wonder what Beethoven was saying there, how it ties up with Beethoven's ideas about the meaning of life.


Talk Classical has an unusual number of contributing members, which make it a cornucopia of varying 'takes' on compositions. I had never thought of the Diabellis as being involved with the meaning of life. I had them -as a whole - as a study on how to make crude satire evolve into something not crude at all. Thanks, Mandryka.


----------



## Mandryka

Ukko said:


> Talk Classical has an unusual number of contributing members, which make it a cornucopia of varying 'takes' on compositions. I had never thought of the Diabellis as being involved with the meaning of life. I had them -as a whole - as a study on how to make crude satire evolve into something not crude at all. Thanks, Mandryka.


I'd never thought of it as evolving! You get some pretty crude moments popping up right through. Anyway we know that Beethoven was interested in religion and metaphysics so chances are that he was keen to make his music say something deep.


----------



## Egyptian

Musicophile said:


> I personally found the Goldberg significantly more "accessible", and only recently fell in love with the Diabelli's (thanks to Schiff and Staier, on my blog I've explained why: http://musicophilesblog.com/2015/05/28/beethoven-diabelli-variations-an-acquired-taste/).
> 
> Both are absolute masterpieces.


cool blog!

I've never listened  Will get on it today!


----------



## Steatopygous

I didn't like the sound of this thread when I read the title. Why versus? Why should they in any way be in opposition? But the discussion has been interesting. 
I'm not sure why the Diabelli variations are so seldom played in recital, compared with the sonatas. Length and complexity probably has something to do with it. But that hasn't held back the Goldbergs. Then again, the Goldbergs are played far more often in recital than the Well-Tempered Clavier (I've had the privilege of hearing Schiff and Hewitt do them 20 years apart).


----------



## Musicophile

Egyptian said:


> cool blog!
> 
> I've never listened  Will get on it today!


Thanks!

While on topic, in the meantime I have also written about my favorite Goldberg version_

http://musicophilesblog.com/2015/07/15/bachs-goldberg-variations-and-the-brilliant-pierre-hantai/


----------



## Brouken Air

Steatopygous said:


> I didn't like the sound of this thread when I read the title. Why versus? Why should they in any way be in opposition?


I fully agree... We should not mix up musical masterpieces with greyhound racing 
:tiphat:


----------



## Aleksandar

Bach for me. It took me some time to get Diabelli Variotions. It makes more sense thinking about it more in terms of Beethoven later style than the standard variations exercise. I have to thank Jan Swafford and his excelent Beethoven biography for making me give them another chance.


----------



## KenOC

If memory serves, Schiff gave some recitals in the past year (including LA) that included both the Goldbergs and the Diabellis. Heavy duty!


----------



## DavidA

I must confess to loving both.


----------



## Guest

One will be able to make a three-way comparison when this comes out in October!


----------



## Musicophile

Kontrapunctus said:


> One will be able to make a three-way comparison when this comes out in October!


The link seems to be broken.


----------



## Guest

Musicophile said:


> The link seems to be broken.


That's because there is no link...


----------



## DavidA

As a young man Rudolf Serkin played the Goldbergs as an encore. It was Adolf Busch who promoted the young Rudolf Serkin's European career, presenting him as a soloist in Bach's Brandenburg Concerto No. 5 at Serkin's Berlin debut in 1921. Serkin, recalling this in the magazine Clavier, said: "I was 17 years old. At tne end of the concert, because it had been a great success, Busch pushed me out, saying I should play an encore. 'What shall I play?' I asked. 'The Goldberg Variations,' he replied, as a joke. (Without repeats, the Bach work takes half an hour to perform.) And I took him seriously. When I finished there were only four people left: Adolf Busch, Arthur Schnabel, Alfred Einstein [ the musicologist ] and me."


----------



## Pugg

Kontrapunctus said:


> One will be able to make a three-way comparison when this comes out in October!


And I love it very much :tiphat:


----------



## Guest

The Goldbergs, hands down. Not that I don't love the Diabelli Variations, but the Goldberg Variations are a standout masterwork by a man that already has so many standout masterpieces.


----------

