# Wanderer Fantasy by Franz Schubert



## peeyaj

The Fantasie in C major, Op. 15 (D. 760), popularly known as the Wanderer Fantasy, is a four-movement fantasy for solo piano composed by Franz Schubert in November 1822. It is considered Schubert's most technically demanding composition for the piano. Schubert himself said "the devil may play it", in reference to his own inability to do so properly.

The whole work is based on one single basic motive, from which all themes are developed. This motive is distilled from the theme of the second movement, which is set in C-sharp minor and is a sequence of variations on a melody taken from the lied Der Wanderer, which Schubert wrote in 1816. It is this set of variations from which the work's popular name is derived.










The four movements are played without a break. After the first movement Allegro con fuoco ma non troppo in C major and the second movement Adagio, follow a scherzo presto in A flat major and the finale, which returns to the key of C major. This finale starts out as a fugue but later breaks into a virtuoso piece.

Richter recording of it is legendary.. It is very virtuosic but he successfully combined Schubert lyricism and technical difficulty.

Hear it:






What do you think of this piece? Do you have any favorite recordings?


----------



## kv466

While among my favorite pieces from Schubert, I haven't compared enough to know my ultimate favorite. I like the way Brendelfly understands the piece but not entirely the way he executes it. Still looking.


----------



## Praeludium

I think it's a strange work. I find the motive, as it is first presented, particularly dumb and rough, and the writing sometimes very strange, and yet he manages to make a beautiful piece of music with amazing moments.


----------



## Polednice

This is one of my favourite pieces for solo piano by any composer, and I think its grandeur and drama is on a scale that surpasses Beethoven. Although Beethoven's solo piano compositions no doubt outmatch Schubert's in general, Schubert had moments of sublime brilliance - such as this piece along with the late sonatas - and I prefer these by quite a distance to the best of Beethoven.

As peeyaj already knows, my preferred recording is Maurizio Pollini:










However, after having not listened to it for a considerable amount of time, I listened to the Richter recording this morning and was very impressed. I think that the Richter and Pollini recordings are probably on par, though they both have different qualities - we all know why Richter's reigns supreme, because of immense force coupled with subtle emotion where it is needed. At times, though, I find some of the fantasy's details are a little clouded. That's where I prefer Pollini because, as with many of his recordings, his technique and sound are crisp and minutely detailed, so I hear everything that happens. If only you could mix and match the best of both!


----------



## Ukko

I am in agreement with _Poley_ re excellence. However, as suggested by Schubert, there is another 'avenue of appreciation'. Clifford Curzon recorded the work, had one of those mental BZZZRT!! things (dreaded in concert by many musicians) at a critical place, had a helluva time recovering - and the recording was issued. Mr Curzon was not a super-duper virtuoso, but his technique was plenty good enough to play the Wanderer... without the BZZRT.

I just looked at amazon.com, and didn't find a recording of this work by Schnabel. His technique was also plenty good enough. ?


----------



## Very Senior Member

I quite agree that this work is at least on a par, if not better, than anything written of a similar nature up to this point in time, including anything written by Beethoven, who was suposed to be the great piano innovator. Rather like a previous poster, I slightly prefer Pollini's version over Richter but there's not much in it. Pollini's playing, as usual, is excellent on this CD. It is slightly longer by almost a minute, which I find a slight negative point, but the sound is cleaner and virtually hiss-free, unlike Richter's which sounds a bit noisy to me. Brendel's version on the Phillips label would be my third choice as it's rather less attention grabbing than either Richter or Pollini, although still techically very impressive. Brendel is better at the more mellifluous piano works of Schubert, like the sonatas, as I generally dislike Richter's very slow, over-ponderous style. I heard a good live version by Paul Lewis at the Wigmore Hall, London last December, which I have recorded as it was broadcast on the radio. It sounded pretty good at the time but upon further comparison it's not in the same league as Pollini or Richter, not having quite the same dynamism as these other versions. In case anyone might be tempted to try it, don't bother with the Berezovsky version of the Wanderer Fantasy as orchestrated by Liszt. It's rubbish compared with the real thing.


----------



## Polednice

Very Senior Member said:


> In case anyone might be tempted to try it, don't bother with the Berezovsky version of the Wanderer Fantasy as orchestrated by Liszt. It's rubbish compared with the real thing.


I quite like the idea of a piano and orchestra arrangement, as the piece certainly has concerto-esque qualities (though of course it would never match the original - it's just for a bit of fun once in a while), but Liszt is the last composer I'd have wanted to orchestrate it, his skills in that department being rather small. There's a better recording of it by Solti and Bolet, but the orchestral part is so dull that no amount of virtuosity can bring it near the experience of a solo version.


----------



## Vaneyes

This is one of my least favorite pieces. If I never heard it again, it would be too soon.


----------



## Lisztian

Polednice said:


> I quite like the idea of a piano and orchestra arrangement, as the piece certainly has concerto-esque qualities (though of course it would never match the original - it's just for a bit of fun once in a while), but Liszt is the last composer I'd have wanted to orchestrate it, his skills in that department being rather small. There's a better recording of it by Solti and Bolet, but the orchestral part is so dull that no amount of virtuosity can bring it near the experience of a solo version.


Liszt was NOT a poor orchestrator. He only really began starting to learn orchestration in the mid 1840s, and finally retired from the concert platform in 1848. The Wanderer Fantasy arrangement dates from 1851 I believe, and i'd be surprised if it was anything more than an exercise (that, knowing his hectic schedule, didn't have enough time to do well in). The tone poems and symphonies, while inconsistently orchestrated, were highly inventive and original for their time and, while in their final forms may attract heaps of criticism, they were highly influential in developing a new kind of orchestration that many later composers would perfect. Besides, when these works are actually given good performances they are highly enjoyable works and the orchestration actually sounds, for the most part, satisfactory. The last movement of the Faust Symphony is a prime example of brilliant, highly original and innovative orchestration. But, if you look a bit later into the 60s and his oratorio 'Christus,' that's a different animal altogether. Christus, over its 3 or so hours, is a beautifully orchestrated work. It's highly effective and very innovative for the mid 60s. You see, in Weimar, with his hectic schedule, he was still learning how to, and experimenting, with orchestration - and he slowly improved over time. Listen to his two episodes from Lenau's Faust in the early 60s, from just before he left Weimar. The orchestration in these works is remarkable for their time and highly effective. On the whole, posterity shows his orchestration is inconsistent (but sometimes good) in his tone poems and symphonies that were written during the 50s, but from the 60s on he tends to be good-very good. I'll link a couple videos below...











In the next video, listen from 24:34-33:30.


----------



## Polednice

I think you made adequate points yourself to demonstrate that Liszt's orchestration was rarely intriguing, and your choice of "satisfactory" is apt in general. I'll leave it at that as I don't want to spoil a nice Schubert thread.


----------



## Romantic Geek

Polednice said:


> I think you made adequate points yourself to demonstrate that Liszt's orchestration was rarely intriguing, and your choice of "satisfactory" is apt in general. I'll leave it at that as I don't want to spoil a nice Schubert thread.


There was a recent paper at a conference of music theory that discussed the differences between Liszt's orchestration and Schubert's original notation, entitled "Liszt's Recomposition of the Wanderer Finale, and What It Tells Us About Schubert's Finale Problem." Essentially, the author of the paper, Timothy Best, argued that Schubert actually succeeded in his Finale, in comparison to Liszt's recomposition, which glazed over important elements of the work. I wish I could remember the specifics of the talk, but I remember it being incredibly thought provoking.

On a side note, I love how this work is in the Dover collection of "Schubert's Complete Shorter Piano Works." Yeah...real short piece!


----------



## PianoMan

Praeludium said:


> I think it's a strange work. I find the motive, as it is first presented, particularly dumb and rough, and the writing sometimes very strange, and yet he manages to make a beautiful piece of music with amazing moments.


Ok, I know I'm about a month late to the party here, but I wanted to chime in as I've both listened to and played this work a bunch of times. I really don't like it very much, and would happily never play any of it again save for the Adagio. The original motive, as quoted above, really does tend to get on my nerves, and Schubert's transitions between the sections in the opening Allegro can be pretty poor at times. I think Liszt was much more successful in his attempts to link material (like in his tone poems) than Schubert was attempting to do here.

What has always impressed me about the piece, other than the Adagio, is the form. Schubert was pretty innovative in this regard IMO, and the piece as a whole can be seen as a melding of symphonic form (Allegro - Adagio - Scherzo - Finale) and of sonata-allegro form, where the Allegro is the Exposition, the Adagio is the Development, the Presto is the Recapitulation, and the Finale is a Coda. I am aware that the key areas, particularly in the Presto, don't align with the "perfect" sonata-allegro form, but to me, the way the material is treated and themes return does align.

And yes, Liszt's orchestration of this was...guh. I have no issue with his orchestration in his later life though!

Edit: I should also note, that I am a HUGE fan of most of Schubert's writing, and I fully plan on learning all of his late piano sonatas before I kick the bucket!


----------



## peeyaj

Just heard it today in succession, I am never tired of it especially the Richter's recording. It is such a great piece when you want some kind of uplift of mood. The fourth movement rocks. Liszt is kinda obsessed with it. I wonder why.


----------



## bharbeke

I heard the version by Murray Perahia, and it is outstanding.


----------



## DavidA

This is a fantastic work, especially bearing in mind Schubert himself was not a virtuoso pianist.

The two best versions are by Richter and Pollini. The playing on both is pretty awesome and if Richter just shades it, it's not by much.


----------



## ptr

The WF is one of my favourite FPS piano works, on the side of Richter, *Edwin Fischer* is the true master of the work, he brings out emotions in Schubert that very few other pianists do!

/ptr


----------



## Ravndal

I love the wanderer fantasy as well. Have heard several recordings, but not found the perfect one yet. Currently listening to Simon Trpceski.


----------



## joen_cph

I prefer some selected piano sonatas, the Moments Musicaux, Impromptus and Drei Klavierstücke.

In the WF, I like a more flexible tempo or quasi-improvised approach than Richter/EMI, such as Kuerti´s old Monitor LP for example; Karolyi is unusually fast (18:09)


----------



## TurnaboutVox

This work really divides people here, doesn't it?

I'm on the 'dislike' side, which I find odd because I am very fond of Schubert's piano sonatas, the Impromptus and Moments Musicaux and listen to them regularly - but I even manage to forget from time to time that the 'Wanderer Fantasy' exists!

This is despite the fact that I have owned a copy of Pollini's recording for 25 years. I just don't like it at all - it's not very 'Schubertian' to my ears...


----------



## moody

The very great pianist Elly Ney decided ,at the age of 76,to make a last batch of recordings. They included all the Beethoven concerti,a number of the sonatas,Mozart,and other items but also including the Wanderer Fantasy. It is an experience from times past and fascinating.


----------



## DavidA

TurnaboutVox said:


> This work really divides people here, doesn't it?
> 
> I'm on the 'dislike' side, which I find odd because I am very fond of Schubert's piano sonatas, the Impromptus and Moments Musicaux and listen to them regularly - but I even manage to forget from time to time that the 'Wanderer Fantasy' exists!
> 
> This is despite the fact that I have owned a copy of Pollini's recording for 25 years. I just don't like it at all - it's not very 'Schubertian' to my ears...


I think 'schubertian' covers quite a few styles, of which the Wanderer fantasy is one. Schubert didn't just write sunny music a la Trout.


----------



## ptr

DavidA said:


> I think 'schubertian' covers quite a few styles, of which the Wanderer fantasy is one. Schubert didn't just write sunny music a la Trout.


I agree, Schubert is at his best when he breaks the 'schubertian' mold and becomes more deeply personal like with the WF!

/ptr


----------



## TurnaboutVox

DavidA said:


> I think 'schubertian' covers quite a few styles, of which the Wanderer fantasy is one. Schubert didn't just write sunny music a la Trout.


I would not describe Winterreise, the 12th, 14th and 15th String Quartets, the String Quintet or the last 3 piano sonatas, which are amongst my favourite works in Schubert's oeuvre, as 'sunny music'.


----------



## moody

TurnaboutVox said:


> I would not describe Winterreise, the 12th, 14th and 15th String Quartets, the String Quintet or the last 3 piano sonatas, which are amongst my favourite works in Schubert's oeuvre, as 'sunny music'.


Actually nobody did ,did they?


----------



## DavidA

TurnaboutVox said:


> I would not describe Winterreise, the 12th, 14th and 15th String Quartets, the String Quintet or the last 3 piano sonatas, which are amongst my favourite works in Schubert's oeuvre, as 'sunny music'.


This us the point. Schubert wrote in different styles, moods, etc.. Like all great composers he wrote in a variety of styles, so no particular one can be alone generalised as Schubertian.


----------



## moody

Ravndal said:


> I love the wanderer fantasy as well. Have heard several recordings, but not found the perfect one yet. Currently listening to Simon Trpceski.


I've got Cyprien Katsaris doing it with Ormandy and the Philadelphians. I've always liked the work.


----------



## Ukko

If you enjoy mysteries, ponder Clifford Curzon's version.


----------



## moody

Ukko said:


> If you enjoy mysteries, ponder Clifford Curzon's version.


Very enigmatic,but what do you mean ?


----------



## Ukko

moody said:


> Very enigmatic,but what do you mean ?


Ponder the possibilities which explain why he allowed its release. The recording documents a 'train wreck'.


----------



## Blancrocher

Indeed, I still remember with horror the way it crashed into all those beautifully played impromptus:

http://www.amazon.com/Great-Pianists.../dp/B00000I940

I take it you don't agree it should have been included on a small selection of his best performances?


----------



## Ukko

Blancrocher said:


> Indeed, I still remember with horror the way it crashed into all those beautifully played impromptus:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Great-Pianists-22-Clifford-Curzon/dp/B00000I940
> 
> I take it you don't agree it should have been included on a small selection of his best performances? :lol:


The guy who collated that series is active on rec.music.classical.recordings - Tom Deacon. You could ask him.

One possibility is its demonstration of Heart. He struggled mightily and found his way back. Mind you, I am not knocking Curzon as pianist or person; mental hiccups lie in wait for all of us. Why though, was the recording released?


----------



## Blancrocher

Ukko said:


> Why though, was the recording released?


OK, I've interrupted my constant stream of Bruckner to check it out. I'm not sure if it was your intent, but you've made listening to it irresistible to me!






*ps* I think I see what you're getting at, but on first hearing I'm glad it's out there. I'm a sucker for idiosyncratic performances of Schubert's piano works as a rule, though.

Thanks for the mention of it.


----------



## Ukko

Blancrocher said:


> OK, I've interrupted my constant stream of Bruckner to check it out. I'm not sure if it was your intent, but you've made listening to it irresistible to me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *ps* I think I see what you're getting at, but on first hearing I'm glad it's out there. I'm a sucker for idiosyncratic performances of Schubert's piano works as a rule, though.
> 
> Thanks for the mention of it.


Hah! I listened to the performance you linked... and didn't hear what I expected to. That YouTube is of only the first two mvts though . Maybe I'm thinking of this recording, from 1954?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00004NK2A/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used


----------



## ShropshireMoose

The Curzon was the first performance I bought, and I don't have any problem enjoying it. As to why it was issued, it was recorded in 1949, and though tape was being used by then, it may not have been recorded on tape, in which case, editing was not an option (and they tended not to edit, even when using tape, in those early days). Also, wrong notes were not yet regarded as the almighty sins against humanity that they now seem to have become. If the spirit of the piece was captured, then for many this was the prime consideration in releasing a recording.
Getting back to the Wanderer, I love Edwin Fischer's performance too, also I have two very fine live performances by Jorge Bolet, recorded from broadcasts in 1984/5, it is a shame he never recorded the solo version commercially. Arthur Rubinstein's recording from 1965 is very fine too, his playing of the slow centre section is particularly beautiful. How lucky we are to have all of this available.


----------



## Ravndal

I too had to check out that version by Curzon. I loved it!


----------



## ptr

ShropshireMoose said:


> ... I have two very fine live performances by Jorge Bolet, recorded from broadcasts in 1984/5, it is a shame he never recorded the solo version commercially...


I would love to have heard Bolet in the WF, he's one of my favourite pianists!
What are the source of the recordings You have, BBC? There are two cuts on Youtube; with LSO and George Solti from 1986 and from the Cheltenham Festival 1984. I much prefer the latter "original" version then the Liszted version with orchestra! There's something with how Bolet moves across the piano so flamboyantly, but soft to the touch that really arouse my appetite for Schubert!

/ptr


----------



## ShropshireMoose

What are the source of the recordings You have, BBC?

/ptr[/QUOTE]

Yes, they come from BBC broadcasts. One is the Cheltenham Festival, 1984. The other a recital given on 17th January, 1985, which I've dated, but, unusually for me, preserved neither venue, nor commentary! I also have a live performance by Bolet of the orchestral version with the London Symphony Orchestra/James Conlon from the Liszt Centenary Concert that was given in the Royal Albert Hall on 31st July, 1986. All of it very enjoyable. I saw him several times in London in the 1980s and he really was a wonderful artist, and quite charming when I went backstage to meet him. Happy days.


----------



## Guest

Before reading the recent contributions to this thread, I had three versions of Schubert's Wanderer Fantasy D 760: Richter, Brendel, Pollini. The order in which I liked them were Richter first, and the other two somewhat behind. 

In the light of recent suggestions, I have acquired "youtube" versions of this work by Elly Ney and Clifford Curzon. The version by Elly Ney is competent but taken rather too slowly for my liking and in comparison with the others, and if I'm not mistaken it seems to get into a slight muddle in the last three minutes or so, not mention a few wrong notes. I quite like the version by Clifford Curzon but overall don't find it any better than those by Brendel and Pollini. 

In my estimation the version by Richter (on EMI 23080) is still the best of those that I have. I've read favourable comments about Richter's interpretation in several other places. Richter's finger work in this recording is startling throughout. This is the version I would recommend.

The orchestral version of D 760 transcribed by Liszt (S 366) is worth a listen but I don't find it to be in the same league of enjoyment as the original piano version.


----------



## moody

Partita said:


> Before reading the recent contributions to this thread, I had three versions of Schubert's Wanderer Fantasy D 760: Richter, Brendel, Pollini. The order in which I liked them were Richter first, and the other two somewhat behind.
> 
> In the light of recent suggestions, I have acquired "youtube" versions of this work by Elly Ney and Clifford Curzon. The version by Elly Ney is competent but taken rather too slowly for my liking and in comparison with the others, and if I'm not mistaken it seems to get into a slight muddle in the last three minutes or so, not mention a few wrong notes. I quite like the version by Clifford Curzon but overall don't find it any better than those by Brendel and Pollini.
> 
> In my estimation the version by Richter (on EMI 23080) is still the best of those that I have. I've read favourable comments about Richter's interpretation in several other places. Richter's finger work in this recording is startling throughout. This is the version I would recommend.
> 
> The orchestral version of D 760 transcribed by Liszt (S 366) is worth a listen but I don't find it to be in the same league of enjoyment as the original piano version.


I find your comments on the Elly Ney recording rather strange. If what you heard was the Colosseum recording I referred to it was a studio recording. As she was then very advanced in years it is not impossible that a mistake was made. But knowing the lady's character I'm sure she would have insisted on a re-take. As for speed ,I suppose that is up to the pianist's judgement and the record does not list timings and I don't want to play though half a dozen versions really for comparison.


----------



## ptr

ShropshireMoose said:


> Yes, they come from BBC broadcasts. One is the Cheltenham Festival, 1984. The other a recital given on 17th January, 1985, which I've dated, but, unusually for me, preserved neither venue, nor commentary! I also have a live performance by Bolet of the orchestral version with the London Symphony Orchestra/James Conlon from the Liszt Centenary Concert that was given in the Royal Albert Hall on 31st July, 1986. All of it very enjoyable. I saw him several times in London in the 1980s and he really was a wonderful artist, and quite charming when I went backstage to meet him. Happy days.


Thanks for the info SM, I will have to look for a transfer of the Cheltenham Recital!
I quite envy anyone who have heard Bolet live, I was to young and innocent while he was still active and never close enough to any venue he played to ever get a chance!

/ptr


----------



## Mandryka

Partita said:


> Before reading the recent contributions to this thread, I had three versions of Schubert's Wanderer Fantasy D 760: Richter, Brendel, Pollini. The order in which I liked them were Richter first, and the other two somewhat behind.
> 
> In the light of recent suggestions, I have acquired "youtube" versions of this work by Elly Ney and Clifford Curzon. The version by Elly Ney is competent but taken rather too slowly for my liking and in comparison with the others, and if I'm not mistaken it seems to get into a slight muddle in the last three minutes or so, not mention a few wrong notes. I quite like the version by Clifford Curzon but overall don't find it any better than those by Brendel and Pollini.
> 
> In my estimation the version by Richter (on EMI 23080) is still the best of those that I have. I've read favourable comments about Richter's interpretation in several other places. Richter's finger work in this recording is startling throughout. This is the version I would recommend.
> 
> The orchestral version of D 760 transcribed by Liszt (S 366) is worth a listen but I don't find it to be in the same league of enjoyment as the original piano version.


I'm more fond of the Ney's second recording than you by the sound of it, just because it's totally coherent - it's as if all four parts are taken in one single breath. I hadn't perceived that it was specially slow. However it is not one of the recordings which I would recommend most enthusiastically. They would be Elisso Virssaladze, Claudio Arrau and V V Sofronitsky.


----------

