# How was Beethoven as an orchestrator?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Another thread made me think about this. Not a poll, but asking for your opinions and thoughts.

Warning: May be a trick question!


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

One of the greatest the world as seen, pure and simple.


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

You mean orchestration? It fits his music well. Someone may compare him with later composers, but I have to say that the orchestration approaches of classical era and romantic era serve different purposes, they are not quite comparable.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

I see him slagged for it on occasion. I wouldn't say he's one of the greatest, but I won't join in the slagging. To be honest, I'd like to hear his works orchestrated by someone else just to see.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Warning: May be a trick question!

How was Beethoven as an orchestrator, _yes he was_, you don't need us to tell you that.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

2 words:

Strings. Predominant.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> 2 words:Strings. Predominant.


I think if you hear his music performed on an orchestra of a size similar to those in his time, the picture is somewhat different. He was even (in his first symphony) criticized for writing music too fitting for a wind band.

Current orchestras have far more strings, but he specified the numbers (usually small) for the wind parts. So things now are a bit out of balance. Mahler tried to remedy this in his re-orchestration of the 9th symphony.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Always looking for trouble, KenOC.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Beethoven was a great orchestrator as he achieved the effects his music needed to achieve what he wanted. Just listen to the Pastoral Symphony - all done with marvellous skill. In fact, I can never see why anyone could doubt his genius in this realm.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> Always looking for trouble, KenOC.


And sometimes, thank goodness, finding it.


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

GreenMamba said:


> I see him slagged for it on occasion. I wouldn't say he's one of the greatest, but I won't join in the slagging. To be honest, I'd like to hear his works orchestrated by someone else just to see.


This!!! Imagine if Scriabin had orchestrated his 9th???


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

GreenMamba said:


> I see him slagged for it on occasion. I wouldn't say he's one of the greatest, but I won't join in the slagging. To be honest, I'd like to hear his works orchestrated by someone else just to see.


To me such a post of gob-smacking. You have one of the greatest (many would say THE greatest) geniuses in the history of music and you say you want to hear his work orchestrated by someone else. I think Lud was perfectly capable of conveying exactly what he wanted.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

DavidA said:


> To me such a post of gob-smacking. You have one of the greatest (many would say THE greatest) geniuses in the history of music and you say you want to hear his work orchestrated by someone else. I think Lud was perfectly capable of conveying exactly what he wanted.


What what what? The orchestral tyro Beethoven barely knew an oboe from an English horn. Haydn could have told him, but he was too busy gallivanting off to London to make a pile of money. And where was Berlioz when Beethoven needed him? Ah, what a cruel world!


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

DavidA said:


> To me such a post of gob-smacking. You have one of the greatest (many would say THE greatest) geniuses in the history of music and you say you want to hear his work orchestrated by someone else. I think Lud was perfectly capable of conveying exactly what he wanted.


What's the purpose of arrangements and orchestrations anyway?


----------



## Hildadam Bingor (May 7, 2016)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> 2 words:
> 
> Strings. Predominant.


Not entirely his fault. Taruskin memorably shreds Norrington for taking the coda to movement 3, symphony 9 at the prescribed speed but still missing the point and, like everybody else, foregrounding the filigree of the strings instead of the melody in the winds, and I've noticed a point in the finale of symphony 6 where everybody does the same.


----------



## Hildadam Bingor (May 7, 2016)

re: OP - As good as it had to be.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

KenOC said:


> What what what? The orchestral tyro *Beethoven barely knew an oboe from an English horn. H*aydn could have told him, but he was too busy gallivanting off to London to make a pile of money. And where was Berlioz when Beethoven needed him? Ah, what a cruel world!


So what if it sounds fine! Actually Berlioz was in debt to Beethoven as was Wagner and a whole host of others.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Exactly as good as he needed to be for the music he composed.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

DavidA said:


> To me such a post of gob-smacking. You have one of the greatest (many would say THE greatest) geniuses in the history of music and you say you want to hear his work orchestrated by someone else. I think Lud was perfectly capable of conveying exactly what he wanted.


Sure, why not? I'm not saying replace B's own scores, but why not hear a different arrangement? It would be informative.

Liszt arranged the symphonies for piano.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

You certainly can't mistake Beethoven for any other symphonic composer. That's a great accomplishment in itself. He may not be as refined as Mozart or others, but as Debussy was quoted as saying, "genius can dispense with taste".


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I don't (or seldom) notice the orchestration when listening to Beethoven. I notice Beethoven.


----------



## satoru (May 29, 2014)

Beethoven, who didn't like the limitations of the instruments at his time, often orchestrated the music as he wanted to hear, rather than what's playable by average orchestra members. One example is timpani and you can read about it in following Wiki article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_timpani_in_the_18th_and_19th_centuries

At least he was aware of the limitations of trumpet, since he omitted unplayable notes by the instrument at his time. I hear more and more orchestras fill in the missing notes to make trumpet sound more "natural", presenting the whole theme, instead of pieces of notes here and there. You can clearly hear that effect in the first presentation of the theme in unison near the beginning the 1st movement of the 9th. I also noted that a lot of flutists start that theme with D7, instead of D6 in the original score, in line with violins. I think it makes the flute line closer to what Beethoven wanted to hear. About this last statement, I think we can have a lot of discussion. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Weston said:


> I don't (or seldom) notice the orchestration when listening to Beethoven. I notice Beethoven.


Kinda hard not to notice such a gigantic and charismatic musical personality, eh?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

GreenMamba said:


> Sure, why not? I'm not saying replace B's own scores, but why not hear a different arrangement? *It would be informative. *
> 
> Liszt arranged the symphonies for piano.


What would it inform us about?


----------



## QuietGuy (Mar 1, 2014)

According to Leonard Bernstein, not good.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

DavidA said:


> What would it inform us about?


About what Beethoven was doing orchestration-wise. It's easy to just take it for granted, or to judge only at the most basic level of how "colorful" it is. Of course, there are many here who can just read the score and figure out everything that's going on.

This doesn't have to be negative toward Beethoven. You want to appreciate his orchestration? Listen to how one of his more ordinary contemporaries would have done it (if it were possible).


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Weston said:


> I don't (or seldom) notice the orchestration when listening to Beethoven. I notice Beethoven.


The story goes that Stravinsky was once as "what makes good orchestration?," and answered "when you are unaware that it is orchestration."


----------



## TwoPhotons (Feb 13, 2015)

Perfectly suited for the music he was writing, though that in itself is an understatement since there _are_ moments where I think to myself "Wow, this is great orchestration!" when listening to a Beethoven symphony.

For example, listen from 30:55 here:






First the violins play the melody, then at 31:01 the cellos take over in the bass while winds enter up high, and finally the brass comes in with those heroic chords, all done to achieve a very effective build-up. Beethoven is essentially layering different ideas on top of each other, but it's all done with such clarity and logic of instrumentation that it's never too much for the audience.

As for a more flamboyant example, I just love it when the whole orchestra comes in here at 10:08 here:






Just beforehand, we hear the winds stubbornly spell out a dotted dance figure while the strings keep teasing the audience with an entry. And when they finally _do_ enter for good, the dance rhythm is handed over to the low strings...and what a great choice of orchestration! The sound of the basses and cellos perfectly compliments the high winds. Bassoons simply wouldn't have worked as well, as they wouldn't have been "dull" enough.

But here's the bit I really love - if you look at the score, you see that only the strings are playing during that moment; the rest of the orchestra only comes in for those "ta da" punctuations. But the main melody is barely audible! It's just the first violins playing that in unison, while you've got 2nd violins _and_ violas playing a frenzied figure _in octaves_, and the cellos and basses play their own dotted rhythm theme. Someone might say that this is therefore poorly orchestrated, that the "accompaniment" has too much going on in it, such that you can barely hear the melody in the first violins. But Beethoven knew what he was doing, which is that he was deliberately going for a wild and frenzied atmosphere. It is almost like watching the players of a string quartet sit down and begin playing their instruments in the proudest and most ecstatic way possible, each of them trying to get their part heard. Yes, the result may _sound_ messy, but it is also incredibly jubilant, as if you were breaking free of something. This moment at least proves to me that Beethoven was not merely "giving parts to the instruments", but had an excellent sense of which instruments to use to produce a certain effect. If you played a piano transcription of this moment, the effect would be lost (listen to the Liszt transcription from 10:55 - good, but it is almost like listening to an entirely different piece).


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

GreenMamba said:


> About what Beethoven was doing orchestration-wise. It's easy to just take it for granted, or to judge only at the most basic level of how "colorful" it is. Of course, there are many here who can just read the score and figure out everything that's going on.
> 
> This doesn't have to be negative toward Beethoven. You want to appreciate his orchestration? Listen to how one of his more ordinary contemporaries would have done it (if it were possible).


We know was Beethoven was doing when we listen to his music.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Even the deaf Beethoven retained an incredible ear for voicing, timbres, and harmonies, owing little even to his earlier compositions. Here's his Op. 127 quartet:






Or just listen to a couple of minutes from the slow movement:






Certainly nothing like this had been written or even imagined before!


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Tovey wrote about a conductor who saw the Missa Solemnis score open on his desk, pointed to the first chord, and remarked how extraordinary is was that you "could recognize any common chord scored by Beethoven."


----------



## Autocrat (Nov 14, 2014)

I'll have a go. 

Symphony No.5, opening 5 bars. Strings, one octave. And...a couple of clarinets in unison with the violins. Probably the most recognisable chunk of music in the universe. 

Take away the clarinets and it just isn't the same - a masterpiece of orchestration.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

MarkW said:


> Tovey wrote about a conductor who saw the Missa Solemnis score open on his desk, pointed to the first chord, and remarked how extraordinary is was that you "could recognize any common chord scored by Beethoven."


Even Beethoven wasn't averse to borrowing a "common chord" or two. Listen to the very distinctive opening chord of his Emperor Concerto:






Now listen to the opening chord to Haydn's 99th Symphony, also in E-flat:






Coincidence? If you believe that, I've got a bridge or two to sell you. :lol:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Even Beethoven wasn't averse to borrowing a "common chord" or two. Listen to the very distinctive opening chord of his Emperor Concerto:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A case of one composer using something from his forebears. Music is full of it. Wagner's 'tristan' chord was first used by Lizst


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

DavidA said:


> We know was Beethoven was doing when we listen to his music.


Some people are content with that. To each his own.

Personally, I greatly appreciate analysis like that by Two Photons above.


----------

