# Beethoven: op.130 - which version?



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

As this is a case not dissimilar to the notorious Andante-Scherzo order in Mahler's 6th, I am trying a poll on Beethoven's quartet B flat major op.130. 

Background:
At its premiere this piece was played with the fugue op.133 as finale. As audiences really struggled with that piece (while two short movements before were applauded and encored) the publisher and friends persuaded Beethoven to publish the Grand fugue as a separate piece and compose and alternate finale. Beethoven eventually this (and additionally arranged the fuge op.133 for piano four hands to make it more accessible to connoisseurs) and until the mid-20th century (or at least the 1930s) performances were mostly with the new finale. 
However, since the 1950s-60s many ensembles have played the fugue as finale and we now find recordings that don't even give the alternate finale as an option.


----------



## Monsalvat (11 mo ago)

I'm used to the "published version." I see that the Emerson String Quartet put the Große Fuge after the Cavatina, and then the new finale after the Große Fuge! The Tokyo Quartet also did this in their 1992 recording. The Große Fuge is a big enough piece to hold its weight as a standalone movement so I am happy to let it sit on its own; however, just because I'm not used to hearing this performed the way Beethoven originally intended doesn't mean I wouldn't like it if I tried.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

I actually agree with the rationale behind the published version too - OP.130 works better with the Cavatina as the emotional center of the Quartet, which the Fugue kind of throws out of whack. 

Either way you're in for a lot of fabulous music.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

I'm torn on this one. It's pretty clear that Beethoven intended the Grosse Fuge as the finale, as it was performed at the premiere. But to my ears, I agree that the GF is really a work that stands alone, and doesn't quite "fit" with the rest of the work in the way that the new finale does.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

After the premier a number of musicians, his publisher, and others appealed to Beethoven to compose a different movement. Although Beethoven was known to have been a headstrong personality, he did compose a different last movement, apparently agreeing that the Grosse Fuge was better as a stand-alone work and the quartet better with a more traditional finale.

Ensembles have the right to perform the quartet as they see fit, presumably thinking that audiences today can more easily assimilate the Grosse Fuge which the audience of Beethoven's day struggled with. Audiences can respond either positively or not.

But this is not exactly comparable to the Mahler situation.

I generally think that in cases such as these, what the majority of musicians do is the deciding fact. Not what the membership of TC thinks, or reasoned arguments one way or the other. The choices that quartets make regarding performance are the final arbiter, and I am happy to let that process play out and feel no need to weigh in with my irrelevant opinion.


----------



## 4chamberedklavier (12 mo ago)

Voted "Both versions are equally valid and interesting", but I prefer to combine them, with the substitute allegro finale first, followed by the grosse fuge. The intensity of the fugue makes it a better fit for a finale, but I can't leave out the allegro because IMO its theme is more memorable than the other movements'


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Sometimes, it depends what mood I'm in but often I'm really not that bothered which ending is on a recording or used in a live concert. I have recordings with the original GF ending and lots with the alternative but I rather like when I'm given the option so I can play it with the alternative ending and then follow it up with the GF. For me, the more Beethoven the better and that's my guilty pleasure. Forced at gunpoint I'd probably say I prefer it with the alternative ending, as it 'fits' better but I couldnt be without the GF. Does all that make sense?


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

I don't like the substitute movement, and I think the Grosse Fugue works wonderfully as the last movement... so that's how I listen to this quartet.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Livly_Station said:


> I don't like the substitute movement, and I think the Grosse Fugue works wonderfully as the last movement... so that's how I listen to this quartet.


Ditto..............................................


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I see that I should have excluded the 3rd option to force people into a decision 
I more or less went full circle. 
Like many newbies I was rather puzzled by the fugue, then fascinated and preferred the fugue version but I never disliked the replacement finale. Now I am rather neutral, can see that the fugue tends to overwhelm the movements before (while the replacement finale works well within the divertimento style of some movements) and the fugue can stand on its own as a separate piece. There is, however, no denying that it was conceived as finale for op.130. I also see now the point that the whole work might have to be conceived and played differently depending on the finale chosen, so the pracitice of simply having both option on one disc would not solve this.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

SanAntone said:


> not comparable to the Mahler situation.


Exactly........... 


hammeredklavier said:


> In the case of the Beethoven, many recordings clearly indicate that they're separate works, Op.130 and Op.133, and discuss the history and Beethoven's own intentions, in the associated booklets or descriptions.
> "Pushing" the S-A version as something authentic or Mahler himself intended, without telling the "truth" behind it is a different matter entirely.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

Of course situations with two different versions of a piece being both played and argued for are comparable. (Hint: That something is comparable does not mean that it is exactly the same, of course there are differences...) 
If someone thinks a composer's final decision should be absolutely binding, the reversal to the "original version" is problematic. But it is not seen that way here, precisely because it was the original version. That in the Mahler case the "original version" was printed but never conducted by Mahler is one difference but that doesn't make the cases incomparable. The arguments that "original structure" could overrule a final decision by the composer seem rather similar in both cases.
But please keep the Mahler stuff to the respective threads, there are already at least two of them.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

BTW, I remembered there was a very similar thread to this a few years ago. This is the link for those that want to read the comments there, too.....

Beethoven's op.130: Original or Alternative Finale?


----------



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

I think I've only ever listened to the alternative finale once. I usually programme it to play the first five movements then the Grosse Fuge to create a 55-minute work on equal (or greater?) footing with Schubert's mighty Fifteenth Quartet in G.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

I am with the majority : Both versions are equally valid and interesting


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

I prefer to have the alternative finale after the Cavatina, and listen to the Grosse Fuge as a stand-alone work. That being said, recordings of Op 130 should have both finales on disc so listeners can choose which finale they want to hear.

The Grosse Fuge is among my favorite works of all time-- probably my #1-- but I think it unbalances Op 130.


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

I’m pretty sure that Swafford in his biography of Beethoven says that the finale was substituted as players (as well as audience) found it too difficult. We must remember that the string playing in those days was not nearly as good as it is today. I think many groups play the original today because the standard stream playing has risen so incredibly. When I heard the Amadeus quartet many years ago they played the Grosse Fugue its own


----------



## justekaia (Jan 2, 2022)

LVB conceived his SQ with an unusual structure and he considered that it was meant for future generations not for his contemporaries. Playing the opus 130 without the fugue is simply a mutilation of a masterpiece and LVB relented and composed an adequate alternative only for commercial reasons. 
An uninformed audience cannot place LVB's quartets in time. Most people believe it is contemporary music.That is how innovative LVB's quartets were. 
It is beyond me that any serious music lover would prefer the alternate version or worse play the two possible endings. Forcing a artist of LVB's calibre to soften up his masterpiece is not acceptable. 
The fugue is simply one of the greatest pieces of music ever, belongs to SQ 130 and deserves an orchestral version like the one Karajan graciously provided.


----------



## justekaia (Jan 2, 2022)

ORigel said:


> I prefer to have the alternative finale after the Cavatina, and listen to the Grosse Fuge as a stand-alone work. That being said, recordings of Op 130 should have both finales on disc so listeners can choose which finale they want to hear.
> 
> The Grosse Fuge is among my favorite works of all time-- probably my #1-- but I think it unbalances Op 130.


You seem to know more about balance than LVB himself.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

justekaia said:


> .... Forcing a artist of LVB's calibre to soften up his masterpiece is not acceptable.
> The fugue is simply one of the greatest pieces of music ever, belongs to SQ 130 and *deserves an orchestral version l*ike the one Karajan graciously provided.


For some people, creating orchestral versions of chamber masterpieces is an even more heinous crime than creating an alternative ending.


----------



## justekaia (Jan 2, 2022)

Merl said:


> For some people, creating orchestral versions of chamber masterpieces is an even more heinous crime than creating an alternative ending.


I doubt that these people include composers like Dvorak, Barber, Bartok, Ravel, Rachmaninov, Shostakovich to name a few. I also believe Karajan can be trusted as a caretaker of the heritage of classical music and did not commit heinous crimes.Roll over.


----------

