# Berg Piano Sonata Breaks Performers



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

In my view there are three great recordings of this Sonata: 

1. Hamelin 

2. Perahia 

3. Gould (I believe the piece escapes Gould at times) 

I have heard this Sonata break many performers. The way they play it manifests how they hear the music, and most of them have no idea what's going on... example Hélène Grimaud. When she plays this sonata it sounds like her hands are at war. To me, this manifests that her ear is exceedingly limited; she plays the music like she is deeply puzzled by it. But she is not the only one, I have heard many pianists deliver a confused performance of this piece. Lets be fair, the Berg sonata does require a seasoned ear to appreciate it. 

I love Berg's romantic thrusts in this sonata. When played competently I find the piece to be very pleasing, haunting, dramatic, beautiful. Hamelin's version, in my opinion, is the least abrasive or in-your-face interpretation.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Your post presents an irresistible challenge to me to see whether my perception of the Berg Sonata leads me to the same conclusions as yours. I think I largely agree with you about the excellence of the specified performances, except in the case of Gould's, which I find somewhat exaggerated, angular, and at times ugly, even though solid in its own eccentric way, as his performances often are.






Hamelin's is quite the opposite: sensitive and subtle, even to a fault, unmannered, daringly rhapsodic but not quite falling into incoherence (the danger amidst such waves of far-ranging chromaticism). His performance brings to my mind late Scriabin and the second piano sonata of Rachmaninoff.






For me, none of them work such a miracle of coherence as Perahia, and he does it without either downplaying or exaggerating the work's passionate turbulence. A superb balancing act: late Romanticism with Classical poise.






Grimaud rather abandons herself to that turbulence, crashing through the waves rather than riding them, not finding the assured footing that Hamelin and Perahia do.






This beautiful hyperromantic beast needs to be kept on a leash without being strangled. If we need to pick an ideal animal trainer, I'll take Perahia.


----------



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

Very much appreciate your articulate and detailed replies here. It's nice to hear intelligent feedback on this sonata. I agree with you about Gould. I also agree that Perahia is "a miracle of coherence." I think I prefer Hamelin's performance, not for technical reasons, but merely for idiosyncratic reasons. I like the softer, yet controlled touch, _lovely phrasing_, and very much love the way he presents the bass octaves in the left hand. I find them to be more enjoyable this way. For all future performances of this sonata I suspect people will say, "its good, but it's no Perahia."


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

What about Pollini?


----------



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

Pollini sounds too choppy and scattered in _rhythm_ for me (_maybe I mean to say his timing seems a bit off to me_). I am dumbfounded by the ability this sonata has to expose the subtle imperfections of a performer. We are talking about some of the best pianists in the world broken by this piece.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Klassic said:


> Pollini sounds too choppy and scattered in _rhythm_ for me (_maybe I mean to say his timing seems a bit off to me_). I am dumbfounded by the ability this sonata has to expose the subtle imperfections of a performer. We are talking about some of the best pianists in the world broken by this piece.


Yeah - just pulled it out after not hearing it for years and it's not compelling. AGree on Hamelin, echo Woodduck's reservations about Gould and will have to try the others


----------



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

I would also argue that the trouble that so many artists have with this piece is due to the advanced and sophisticated nature of atonal music. Is the botched playing of this sonata, by some of the world's greatest pianists, not proof that atonal music requires an exceedingly advanced ear? Think about it, though Gould was at the first stages of understanding precisely this fact about atonal music, not even his advanced ear could handle the realization of the Berg sonata. I suspect he knew it was superior to the technical and emotional aspects of Beethoven and the like, but this knowledge alone did not provide him with the ability to play it. Atonal music, was at this point, quite new in the performance sense of the term. Gould is to be applauded for using his position to make people understand the value of atonal music (or just modern music in general). After listening to much classical music my ear requires something modern. There is _much_ to be said for modern music. One must remember that the Berg sonata is not merely an exercise in technical theory, here Berg is actually expressing his feelings.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Never planned on listening to Berg's piano sonata until now, but my curiosity is piqued. Love TalkClassical!!


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

But the Berg sonata is not atonal by any definition. It's in B minor.

I like the Parahia recording, am a little less enamored of the Barenboim recording in DG's Berg set, and also enjoy Uchida's recording coupled with her excellent version of the Schoenberg Concerto.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Klassic said:


> I would also argue that the trouble that so many artists have with this piece is due to the advanced and sophisticated nature of atonal music. Is the botched playing of this sonata, by some of the world's greatest pianists, not proof that atonal music requires an exceedingly advanced ear? Think about it, though Gould was at the first stages of understanding precisely this fact about atonal music, not even his advanced ear could handle the realization of the Berg sonata. I suspect he knew it was superior to the technical and emotional aspects of Beethoven and the like, but this knowledge alone did not provide him with the ability to play it. Atonal music, was at this point, quite new in the performance sense of the term. Gould is to be applauded for using his position to make people understand the value of atonal music (or just modern music in general). After listening to much classical music my ear requires something modern. There is _much_ to be said for modern music. One must remember that the Berg sonata is not merely an exercise in technical theory, here Berg is actually expressing his feelings.


The harmonic idiom of the Berg Sonata is highly chromatic and unstable, but not atonal, and despite its excursions the piece is structurally anchored in B-minor. Compare a bit of Schoenberg:






or a bit of Boulez:






or Babbitt:






Berg's harmony is much closer to Wagner:


----------



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

While you are correct that this Sonata is not, in a strict sense of the term atonal, perhaps we can say it's at the brink tonality. In any case it's a good introduction to modern music. "_The sonata also makes use of a three-note motivic cell - consisting of a perfect fourth plus an augmented fourth, spanning a major seventh - often found elsewhere in the early atonal music of Schoenberg, Berg and Webern._" All Music Guide to Classical Music


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Not atonal, but the extreme complexity of its harmony must contribute to the difficulty of interpreting it.

In interpreting a tonal work, you have a feeling of "where you are" in musical space - this must become quite difficult to maintain in a piece like Berg's.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Klassic said:


> While you are correct that this Sonata is not, in a strict sense of the term atonal, perhaps we can say it's at the brink tonality. In any case it's a good introduction to modern music. "_The sonata also makes use of a three-note motivic cell - consisting of a perfect fourth plus an augmented fourth, spanning a major seventh - often found elsewhere in the early atonal music of Schoenberg, Berg and Webern._" All Music Guide to Classical Music


There is no strict sense of the term atonal, really. It's just a catch-all term for music that is contemporary and doesn't align with traditional common practice methods. The Viennese Trichord, that cell you're referring to, is also prominent in music by Britten (War Requiem) and Shostakovich (Symphony No. 4), as well as in some of the earlier works of Schoenberg.


----------



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

_ "There is no strict sense of the term atonal, really. It's just a catch-all term for music that is contemporary and doesn't align with traditional common practice methods."_ Then in light of this definition why would we not consider the Berg Sonata to be atonal, unless of course, we are speaking in a strict sense of the term? According to this definition I believe we could call the Berg Sonata atonal, as it does not "align with traditional methods," but we could not call it atonal in any strict sense of the term, as in "lacking a tonal center." Anyhow, my point is not to quibble over the fine tuning of the tonality of this sonata, my main point is that it stands as a complex, beautiful piece of modern work that tries and exposes the ear of any performer who dares to play it. Also, to many people this sonata sounds unpleasantly atonal; many people would probably consider it to be empty, abstract noise. I would argue, the point at which a listener can appreciate the Berg sonata is a point that their ear has advanced in understanding music.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Klassic said:


> but we could not call it atonal in any strict sense of the term, as in "lacking a tonal center."


Which describes none of the music by the Second Viennese School or anyone else usually called atonal. That's why the term is such nonsense in practice, and allows no real strict definition.

The Berg Sonata does align with common practice methods of defining a key and central triad, modulating to other key areas, and relating all of these by root progressions. You're right that this process is veiled somewhat in the piece by its pervasive chromaticism and emphasis on non-diatonic collections such as the whole tone scale, but it is entirely subsumed into a traditional framework.


----------



## Stirling (Nov 18, 2015)

Mahlerian - I think he's defining it as "music I do not understand", after that everything follows logic.

Normally I do not tell jokes, but this poster is too far.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

In spite of it being a short work, there is a lot of space for varied interpretations in it. I remember comparing a lot of recordings a couple of years ago, and including two additional, more randomly accumulated ones, I ended up with these, very different from each other, and all interesting for various reasons, IMO:

- 2 different Goulds
- Yudina
- Barenboim DG
- F. Say 
- Y. Loriod

+ Arciuli/stradivarius
+ Hill/naxos


----------



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

joen_cph said:


> In spite of it being a short work, there is a lot of space for varied interpretations in it. I remember comparing a lot of recordings a couple of years ago, and including two additional, more randomly accumulated ones, I ended up with these, very different from each other, and all interesting for various reasons, IMO:
> 
> - 2 different Goulds
> - Yudina
> ...


Do you have a favorite?


----------



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

*"I remember comparing a lot of recordings a couple of years ago, and including two additional, more randomly accumulated ones, I ended up with these, very different from each other, and all interesting for various reasons..."*

This is another reason I would argue this sonata is so great: _perhaps_ no sonata tells us more about the performer and his ear. It is truly an amazing experiment to listen to this piece played by several different performers.... (yes, of course you could say that all pieces of music are played differently, that they all tell us about the performer's ear, but not like this piece does).
*
"All interesting for various reasons,"* here I would argue that what is truly interesting is the Berg sonata itself. A pianist decides to play this piece at their own risk.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> The harmonic idiom of the Berg Sonata is highly chromatic and unstable, but not atonal, and despite its excursions the piece is structurally anchored in B-minor. . . . . . .
> 
> Berg's harmony is much closer to Wagner:


Actually, when you mentioned Rachmaninoff's Second Piano Sonata in your first post, I think that was by far the closest comparison for the harmonic language of this piece, the major difference (well, one of them) being that Rachmaninoff articulated his structure more distinctly and more often with clear resolutions and cadence points. But in between, many passages from either could have been interchanged. The Berg was written just a few years before the Rachmaninoff but I think it highly unlikely there was influence back and forth.

Yudina's performance is interesting and extreme. Great intensity and with a long-term sense of line and motion throughout.


----------



## Dedalus (Jun 27, 2014)

This thread prompted me to listen to this piece played by different performers. So far I've just started off with the Glenn Gould performance, and I just thought a couple of the comments on youtube were funny so I thought I'd share them.



> This psychotic non-music suits this psychotic non-musician PERFECTLY.﻿





> It's more about appreciating this type of music than liking it! I, personally, cannot stand listening to music this dissonant and with no direction but I can appreciate the talent and skill put into the composition. I understand it but that's doesn't mean I like listening to it and I think that's what people are tricking themselves into doing. It's not pleasant on the ear, even if you do understand it! ﻿


Heh... So we're all just "tricking" ourselves into appreciating this "non-music"... Youtube comments can be pretty funny stuff.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

> Do you have a favorite?


Not really, it depends on my mood of the day - how much subjectivity I want - the piece can be made quite desperate-sounding, IMO - versus "cool clarity" ... I don´t mind artists reputedly taking liberties with scores.

BTW, Gould´s performances vary a lot; the early Moscow lasts around 8:30 (like Loriod´s);
one of the CBS-Sony recordings 13:05.


----------



## Fat Bob (Sep 25, 2015)

OK, I'm not a pianist so I may have misunderstood this quote referring to Gould and the Berg sonata -


Klassic said:


> I suspect he knew it was superior to the technical and emotional aspects of Beethoven and the like,


But is this not underestimating the complexities of "Beethoven and the like "?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Woodduck said:


> The harmonic idiom of the Berg Sonata is highly chromatic and unstable, but not atonal, and despite its excursions the piece is structurally anchored in B-minor.


I think it's misleading to say that it is in B minor. This ignores the direction Berg was heading in, away from stable tonality, and saying "it's in B minor" seems to want to emphasize its conformity to tradition, rather than its departure from tradition. It does both.

My imprint of this work was on vinyl LP, by Beveridge Webster. Anybody recognize that name? I didn't think so. I first "grokked" it (gained a true visceral understanding of it) as I was falling asleep with headphones. When I emerged from sleep, the meaning of the sonata dawned on me.

Thus, I also understood how the aesthetic was connected with the concept of the unconscious, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and Freud.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

millionrainbows said:


> I think it's misleading to say that it is in B minor. This ignores the direction Berg was heading in, away from stable tonality, and saying "it's in B minor" seems to want to emphasize its conformity to tradition, rather than its departure from tradition. It does both.
> 
> My imprint of this work was on vinyl LP, by Beveridge Webster. Anybody recognize that name? I didn't think so. I first "grokked" it (gained a true visceral understanding of it) as I was falling asleep with headphones. When I emerged from sleep, the meaning of the sonata dawned on me.
> 
> Thus, I also understood how the aesthetic was connected with the concept of the unconscious, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and Freud.


I can't really disagree that the piece's anchoring in B minor is tenuous - maybe no more than a formality. I guess people could argue about how much time a piece has to spend in its home key before we can say that it's _in_ that key. It certainly opens with its main theme in B minor, returns to B minor at the exposition repeat, and ends in B minor, and although I haven't seen the score, I think it touches on B minor in a few other places. Otherwise it's all over the place. Maybe all I can say in my defense is that the Berg Sonata has more to do with B minor than the Schoenberg Chamber Symphony #1 has to do with E Major. That piece actually has the unmitigated chutzpah to begin by cadencing in F, a gesture more striking than the brief flurry of E Major that follows and soon vanishes into the harmonic flux.

And yes, I do remember Beveridge Webster. His parents must have been drinking the night he was conceived.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Woodduck said:


> I can't really disagree that the piece's anchoring in B minor is tenuous - maybe no more than a formality. I guess people could argue about how much time a piece has to spend in its home key before we can say that it's _in_ that key. It certainly opens with its main theme in B minor, returns to B minor at the exposition repeat, and ends in B minor, and although I haven't seen the score, I think it touches on B minor in a few other places. Otherwise it's all over the place. Maybe all I can say in my defense is that the Berg Sonata has more to do with B minor than the Schoenberg Chamber Symphony #1 has to do with E Major. That piece actually has the unmitigated chutzpah to begin by cadencing in F, a gesture more striking than the brief flurry of E Major that follows and soon vanishes into the harmonic flux.
> 
> And yes, I do remember Beveridge Webster. His parents must have been drinking the night he was conceived. *(???-ed.)*


Well, even with his impaired motor skills and diminished intelligence, he was able to convey the essence of the Berg 1 to me.







https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beveridge_Webster


I will concede that the sonata sounds "minor-ish."

As to Schoenberg's scoring of the chamber symphony in a key signature, this was probably so the players would feel more secure. What is the alternative, no key signature at all, or changing signatures, which might scare conductors off?

After all, Arnie wanted his music to be heard. I think the reasons are purely practical.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

millionrainbows said:


> As to Schoenberg's scoring of the chamber symphony in a key signature, this was probably so the players would feel more secure. What is the alternative, no key signature at all, or changing signatures, which might scare conductors off?
> 
> After all, Arnie wanted his music to be heard. I think the reasons are purely practical.


Given that he did use changing key signatures in the Chamber Symphony, that he himself cited it as an example of how he could structure a piece where everything is related to a key, and that he did give up key signatures shortly thereafter, your reasons don't make sense to me.

After all, the key signature is distinctly less than helpful, given how many accidentals are all over the page.

It's obvious that to Schoenberg, the Chamber Symphony was a work in E major. Hey, what do you know, it sounds like it's centered in E major to me too!


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

As a side remark, *Webster*´s Schumann _Noveletten_ and his _Hammerklavier_ are great, IMO; his Stravinsky double LP less interesting. I also have his Ravel LP but don´t remember it, whereas I haven´t heard the Berg-Schönberg one. I´d grab it, if I saw it - now having that extra story about its content ;-).


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> Given that he did use changing key signatures in the Chamber Symphony, that he himself cited it as an example of how he could structure a piece where everything is related to a key, and that he did give up key signatures shortly thereafter, your reasons don't make sense to me.
> 
> After all, the key signature is distinctly less than helpful, given how many accidentals are all over the page.
> 
> It's obvious that to Schoenberg, the Chamber Symphony was a work in E major. Hey, what do you know, it sounds like it's centered in E major to me too!


Well, it's always sounded very tonal to me, as well. I shouldn't have even gotten involved in the discussion. The only thing that sounds "out there" to me is the use of fourths. Beyond that, I'll take CS2 any day.


----------



## Klassic (Dec 19, 2015)

The real point is not the key signature, but the transparency this sonata creates in relation to the performer who dares to play it. The room for variation, perhaps due to the complexity of the harmony, structure... call it what you will, is quite astounding.


----------

