# A/B Comparison's of Beethoven's "Moonlight" Sonats



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

*Sonata No. 27, No. 2 "Moonlight"
*
Even though this sonata (the opening, anyway) is familiar to many listeners to the point of banality, I listen to it freshly every time I hear it. The sonata is unusual, in that its opening sounds more like a Prelude than a sonata introduction; also, it's only three movements instead of the usual four.

It is progressive in its vision, ushering-in the Romantic side of Beethoven, with its emotional power and mood-setting evocations of moonlight and darkness, a stillness and solitude which reflects the individual Beethoven as touching other individuals in a poetic, personal way. 
It is not detached or objective, but desires to connect with listeners on a personal level. Compare this sonata to Sonata No. 10, and the difference is apparent; number 10 is Mozartian, craftsmanlike, and presents idea after idea in a cursory way, as if they were on exposition as ideas. It differs from Mozart, no doubt, in its fondness for lower-register passages, and its rhythmic drive; but it does not seem to be trying to 'set a mood' like the 'Moonlight' does.

My first two comparisons involve Ronald Brautigam's fortepiano version on BIS, with Evgeny Kissin's 1997 RCA version.

Brautigam's fortepiano (the instrument itself) sound so good, and is recorded so well, that I forget that is is an old instrument until loud passages give it away. His opening movement is very sensitive, and tender.

The second mvt, Allegretto, is declamatory and majestic in nature; this does not translate as well to the fortepiano as does a modern piano. It needs more power than Brautigam's fortepiano can muster.

He plays the third movement, Presto agitato, at a very brisk tempo, even fast. For a fortepiano, that's taking a big chance. He pulls it off very well, and I don't seem to miss the dynamic range as I did earlier; maybe it was due to the player, not the instrument. But the virtuoso runs are very clear, and very fast. I am very impressed by Brautigam's whole series, and I suggest it strongly as a good introduction to the fortepiano.

Evgeny Kissin: what can I say, except phenomenal. His opening does not have the intimacy that Brautigam's has, and I'll leave it at that. The second mvt is much better, although on an abstract level, this movement seems like a cursory gesture on Beethoven's part, made only to usher-in the fiery third mvt, which speeds through the ether like a chariot (of fire), and has all the earmarks of Beethoven the dramatist. Such urgency, such fire. Kissin is good on this kind of stuff; he definitely kicks it into high gear. He means business, and his facility is without question, like a flawless diamond. It's no wonder he is sometimes compared to Horowitz.
















(work in progress)


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

*Pollini vs Brautigam (Op. 27/2)*

I'll paste this section of a post I made in another thread since it's relevant.

This is a phenomenal work that should be listened to with its startling innovations in mind, not an image of a moonlit lake! The Moonlight moniker doesn't add any relevant context or historical background. Sonata #14 (Op. 27/2) along with the Sonata #13 (Op. 27/1 "Quasi Una Fantasia") and Sonata #12 (Op. 26 "Funeral March") _are a stretch of three "Sonatas" in which not a single movement are in Sonata form_!

Keep in mind that it wasn't the nickname that gave it its immense popularity, according to Jan Swafford, the sonata "ascended quickly to feverish popularity, on its way to becoming one of the most famous pieces ever written. Its mythical status was well established in Beethoven's lifetime. The reason is the rapt and dolorous atmosphere unlike anything heard before - and no less with the ease with which the opening movement lies under the fingers and within the affections of amateur pianists."

He continues, "By way of relief comes a relaxed scherzo with elegant and winsome themes. Then the most shocking movement of that year's pieces: the finale is marked Presto agitato, which conveys its implacable ferocity. The whispering arpeggios of the first movement have become a torrent of arpeggios that rise to whiplash offbeat chords. As in the previous sonata, the finale is the focus and pay of the whole. The mystery and incipient tragedy of the first movement have boiled into fury, expressed in a virtuosity that is the antithesis of the first movement's simplicity" (pg. 286-287, Swafford)

Once again, I'm going to go with *Maurizio Pollini* since I just recently finished his complete Beethoven cycle. It's still fresh in my mind. The comparsion with will be with *Ronald Brautigam* on period fortepiano. Both Pollini and Brautigam take the first movement rather slowly, this has become the norm. I feel it works this way but I also enjoy it at a brisker tempo, it creates tension and unease, for a different interpretation. The middle movement is almost like a interlude rather than a middle movement proper, similar to the Waldstein. The gravity of Op. 27/2 is on the outer movements (perhaps a bit more in the Finale). If you'll forgive the aside, Beethoven throughout his life experimented with placing the gravity in different places, would it be in the first movement like in the Third symphony, or would it be principally in the Finale like the Ninth, or spread throughout like the Seventh where the energy doesn't let up from beginning to end. For the sketch of the planned Tenth symphony, Beethoven wrote that he was working a creating a new "Gravitational force". Who knows in what direction he would have gone, would he have left the Late Period style behind in favor of a new style?

Both Brautigam and Pollini handle the "elegant and winsome" themes wonderfully in the second movement. The third movement, "Presto Agitato" is where I really judge a performance of this sonata. I still find this movement shocking, it's one of those _sui generis_ movements, where did it come from? How could it have been written at the turn of the century, just a year or two after the close 1700's? It's the "Agitato" in Presto Agitato that I want to hear, it shouldn't sound merely like a "Presto". Pollini makes it sound agitated, almost to the point of instability but it's Pollini and you know he's always in control. It sounds like it's on a wild ride but still on a fixed track (that's not a complaint). Brautigam's swift tempi and hammering of the notes also brings out the agitated nature of the Finale, the rawness of sound of the fortepiano helps as well. *Pollini and Brautigam are my favorite recordings of Op. 27/2. Brautigam's my pick for fortepiano and Pollini for modern grand piano*.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

In German, it's "Mondschein," which, if translated literally, would be the "Moonshine" sonata.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

millionrainbows said:


> In German, it's "Mondschein," which, if translated literally, would be the "Moonshine" sonata.


Beethoven might have had a bit too much Moonshine when he wrote that Finale! :lol:


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I am continually impressed by Brautigam. I've got to get the rest of that series.

And now, for something completely different:


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Moonlight was NOT Beethoven's name for it. It has nothing to do with Beethoven's intentions. 

There's a performance issue in the first movement. Beethoven wanted the dampers off in the first movement. No one does this on a modern piano that I know, except for Schiff and Gulda in his first recording of it for DECCA. It's quite a brave thing do because you get that reverberation. Gulda stopped doing it after that DECCA recording

Personally I like the way Schiff plays it -- I like the fast tempos. And I like the halo of bass which the reverb gives to the first movement. A real spooky castle with ghosts and rattling chains at the witching hour.

You've got to stop thinking of that first movement as lovers in a row boat on a still lake in summer, and start thinking Hammer House of Horror.

Added later - HJ Lim may be worth checking out, I have a vague memory that it was interesting.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Beethoven might have had a bit too much Moonshine when he wrote that Finale! :lol:


The finale is one of those Promethian acts of defiance, like the finale of the Hammerklavier and the Grosse Fugue. How it makes sense in the context of the other two movements is an interesting and difficult question.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> The finale is one of those Promethian acts of defiance, like the finale of the Hammerklavier and the Grosse Fugue. How it makes sense in the context of the other two movements is an interesting and difficult question.


Oh, I know, it's one of my all-time favorite movements. It completely blows me away, the shocking effect doesn't wear off.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> The finale is one of those Promethian acts of defiance, like the finale of the Hammerklavier and the Grosse Fugue.* How it makes sense in the context of the other two movements is an interesting and difficult question.*


How the Finale makes sense in the context of the other two movements. Depends on the way you interpret the first movement, there are two main ways of reading the first movement:

1. Tranquil yet dolorous, the tenacity of the Finale would work as its antithesis. 
2. If you interpret the first movement as a build-up of tension and unease, which it can certainly sound like at a brisk enough tempo, then the Finale isn't its antithesis, rather it's the release of the pent up energy. In the exact same way that the Waldstein's Finale is the "payoff" of the first movement.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

^ I agree DiesIrae. And the second movement works so well as an even greater delay of release with its tentative emotion, which makes the finale even more powerful!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> How the Finale makes sense in the context of the other two movements. Depends on the way you interpret the first movement, there are two main ways of reading the first movement:
> 
> 1. Tranquil yet dolorous, the tenacity of the Finale would work as its antithesis.
> 2. If you interpret the first movement as a build-up of tension and unease, which it can certainly sound like at a brisk enough tempo, then the Finale isn't its antithesis, rather it's the release of the pent up energy. In the exact same way that the Waldstein's Finale is the "payoff" of the first movement.


I'd say these two perspectives aren't entirely incompatible, but that the second gets at the essence of it. The middle movement then gives you a relaxed breather and makes the sudden explosion of the finale as shocking a contrast with the second movement as it is a necessary release of the muffled tension of the first. That tension is there even if you go for the "moonlight" approach, but I'm convinced that a more urgent tempo is correct, as indicated by the "cut time" signature. It isn't supposed to be idyllic music, but something much more complex and unsettling.


----------

