# Schubert's Last Three Piano Sonatas



## peeyaj

Is there such thing that resembles like your approaching the heavens and universe? Like you're flying in the sky..

These last three works of Franz Schubert is a revelation. It's a pity that it is virtually neglected in 19th century. But what a piece of art it is.. They are beautiful, heavenly. The last one, D.960 in B-flat Major is my favorite (the 2nd movement is heartbreaking).

I have the recording of Horowitz and Brendel. What are your recommendations?


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

Brendel is good with D.960
http://www.amazon.com/Piano-Sonata-...0000E3KE/ref=cm_cr-mr-img/177-6698770-6397811

But I must confess that I cherish the two other 'great' Sonatas (D-major, D.850; G-major, D.894) even more than the final three.

Jenö Jandó does a great D.850
http://www.amazon.com/Piano-Sonatas-D-850-575/dp/B000069CUR/ref=cm_cr-mr-img/177-6698770-6397811

Arrau does the best D.894, unfortunately OOP but possibly yet available
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00000E4V5/ref=cm_cr_asin_lnk

http://www.amazon.com/Claudio-Arrau-Performs-Schubert-Box/dp/B00008NR7B/ref=cm_cr-mr-img


----------



## toucan

For Horowitz let's not confuse the 1953 recording, played by the O.P., indeed unsurpassable, with the latter DG recording, not so good at all. In his old age Horowitz had lost his touch somewhat.

Rostropovich said somewhere that it was through music not church that he was touched by a sense of spirituality. For me, the music that have best give me that sense are Schubert's last piano sonata, Beethoven's last piano sonata, and the first movement of Gustav Mahler's Seventh Symphony, the passage initiated by brass.

As is not rare with exceptional personalities, Horowitz could be quite critical of the general public. In his conversations with David Dubal he berates them for their inability to sense the spirituality of music; at best, he believed, they get shaken by the emotional excitement of music but ignore the religiosity of it.


----------



## Webernite

I'm partial to Richter in Schubert, but unfortunately he didn't record everything.


----------



## Toccata

So we return yet again to this well-worn topic which comes up regular as clock-work, if not here but elsewhere.

Schubert’s late sonatas, D 958-960, are obviously the most well known of his piano sonatas, but several of the earlier ones are also very good indeed, as has already been mentioned. 

Of the total 21 piano sonatas that Schubert wrote only about 13 are completed works, the rest being uncompleted either deliberately or because the missing sections are lost. Schubert started writing piano sonatas in 1815, at the age of 18. By the time he reached age 21, he had written nine sonatas altogether. A further four followed in the next couple of years (1818, 19), and then he stopped writing such works for about 4 years. 

It was in 1823 that he resumed with Piano Sonata No 14, D 784 (Grande Sonata), shortly after he discovered the illness which was eventually to lead to his premature early death. This work marked quite a change in his style, and is one of Schubert's most sombre, and some say deeply emotional, works. It's this work, D 784, which is probably my favourite of all Schubert's piano sonatas. 

Following D 784, there was a 2-year gap before the next three, Nos 15-17(D 840/845/850), ensued. Then followed No 18 (D 894) in 1826. As has already been been mentioned, these are very fine works indeed and I love them too. Finally, of course, came D 958-960, which were among the very last works that Schubert wrote a couple of months or so before his death in November 1828. They are fantastic, but I'm afraid that I've played them so often that I've grown a little tired now. 

I think Schubert's piano music is next only to Beethoven’s in overall quality, but in turns of sheer musical beauty my own opinion is that Schubert’s piano music is unsurpassed. Behind Beethoven and Schubert, I would place Mozart and Schumann, with Chopin following up behind. Some people reckon that Beethoven is light years ahead of Schubert and all the other piano composers. I read a large amount of such nonsense on another Board last year and couldn’t take that place seriously after reading such a load of guff. 

I have dozens of recordings of Schubert’s piano sonatas. Each time this subject comes (and as noted earlier it comes up very often on the various boards) I am amazed at the variety of favourite pianists that people have, with some quite weird and obscure names being mentioned on occasion. I often suspect that many people say they like the version they happen to have purchased, which was probably a chance event in the first place. And yet if they had heard a much broader selection they might well change their minds.

I will not bore anyone with details of my own favourites, except to say that I do no rate Horowitz as an outstanding Schubert interpretor, at any stage in his career. I know that Richter is well regarded with regard to Schubert. I have several of his recordings, but personally I find his style too long-winded. I believe he is "credited" with one of the longest D 960's in recording history. I would only say that I far prefer Alfred Brendel who gets it right for me in most departments.


----------



## peeyaj

Toccata said:


> So we return yet again to this well-worn topic which comes up regular as clock-work, if not here but elsewhere.
> 
> Schubert's late sonatas, D 958-960, are obviously the most well known of his piano sonatas, but several of the earlier ones are also very good indeed, as has already been mentioned.
> 
> Of the total 21 piano sonatas that Schubert wrote only about 13 are completed works, the rest being uncompleted either deliberately or because the missing sections are lost. Schubert started writing piano sonatas in 1815, at the age of 18. By the time he reached age 21, he had written nine sonatas altogether. A further four followed in the next couple of years (1818, 19), and then he stopped writing such works for about 4 years.
> 
> It was in 1823 that he resumed with Piano Sonata No 14, D 784 (Grande Sonata), shortly after he discovered the illness which was eventually to lead to his premature early death. This work marked quite a change in his style, and is one of Schubert's most sombre, and some say deeply emotional, works. It's this work, D 784, which is probably my favourite of all Schubert's piano sonatas.
> 
> Following D 784, there was a 2-year gap before the next three, Nos 15-17(D 840/845/850), ensued. Then followed No 18 (D 894) in 1826. As has already been been mentioned, these are very fine works indeed and I love them too. Finally, of course, came D 958-960, which were among the very last works that Schubert wrote a couple of months or so before his death in November 1828. They are fantastic, but I'm afraid that I've played them so often that I've grown a little tired now.
> 
> I think Schubert's piano music is next only to Beethoven's in overall quality, but in turns of sheer musical beauty my own opinion is that Schubert's piano music is unsurpassed. Behind Beethoven and Schubert, I would place Mozart and Schumann, with Chopin following up behind. Some people reckon that Beethoven is light years ahead of Schubert and all the other piano composers. I read a large amount of such nonsense on another Board last year and couldn't take that place seriously after reading such a load of guff.
> 
> I have dozens of recordings of Schubert's piano sonatas. Each time this subject comes (and as noted earlier it comes up very often on the various boards) I am amazed at the variety of favourite pianists that people have, with some quite weird and obscure names being mentioned on occasion. I often suspect that many people say they like the version they happen to have purchased, which was probably a chance event in the first place. And yet if they had heard a much broader selection they might well change their minds.
> 
> I will not bore anyone with details of my own favourites, except to say that I do no rate Horowitz as an outstanding Schubert interpretor, at any stage in his career. I know that Richter is well regarded with regard to Schubert. I have several of his recordings, but personally I find his style too long-winded. I believe he is "credited" with one of the longest D 960's in recording history. I would only say that I far prefer Alfred Brendel who gets it right for me in most departments.


Thank you very much for your information and insight. I only started listening to Schubert's sonatas ( with the exception of the three) and they are beautiful indeed. The last three sonatas are really special to my heart and they accompany me, in time of despair, joy, frustration and etc. I am hoping to find other gems in Schubert's piano works, the "Relique" one is looking good. The Wanderer Fantasy is a treasure!!

I chastised those people who dismissed the last three sonatas as long-winded and boring. Beautiful music is not long-winded and boring when you feel like you're in heaven..


----------



## Air

I think this sums up my thoughts as well as anything.

Increased time length just means a larger taste of heaven when it comes to Richter in Schubert.

Need I mention that Richter D.960 from Prague I can never stop talking about? :trp:


----------



## Edward Elgar

Murray Perahia is my choice. Everything about his playing is perfect.


----------



## Webernite

Air said:


> I think this sums up my thoughts as well as anything.
> 
> Increased time length just means a larger taste of heaven when it comes to Richter in Schubert.
> 
> Need I mention that Richter D.960 from Prague I can never stop talking about? :trp:


Richter had a Gouldian ability to make the structure of whatever he played become transparent. He might not have had Gould's attention to detail, but then Gould didn't have Richter's intuitive sense of phrasing. Richter always knew just how long to make a silence last, and had an amazing sense of the relationships between different levels of volume. I think that's what makes his Schubert so compelling. You get these brilliantly controlled shifts between _fortissimo_ and _pianissimo_, which sound demonic and Haydnsque at the same time.

Edit: This sort of thing. No other pianist can do this.


----------



## Polednice

Edward Elgar said:


> Murray Perahia is my choice. Everything about his playing is perfect.


+1

Blah blah blah blah


----------



## science

I come down on the side of loving Richter's D 960, and also Uchida's and Arrau's - all that I have heard.

However, D 960 is one of my absolute favorite works of music.


----------



## scytheavatar

My personal favourite is Lupu, his Schubert is the most balanced between being lyrical and being exciting. Perahia's last 3 is superb too, but one guy that's criminally underrated is Badura-Skoda. It's a shame that his recordings are so hard to find because his earlier Schubert set (on a Bösendorfer rather than the one on crappy Pianoforte) is far and away the best complete Schubert sonata set I have heard.


----------



## toucan

Alfred Brendel's playing is like his physical appearance: professorial, almost pedantic. His style of pianism is so uniform & wanting in variety one can't always tell which piece or even which composer - Haydn, Mozart, Schubert - he is playing, so uniform he makes them sound. But at least his recordings of late Schubert are on topic.

I am always disappointed with Pollini's performances of Schubert's lasts sonatas (when I am usually not disappointed with his late Beethoven). But he has made it a little bit of a specialty to play late works (Beethoven Schubert, Liszt, Debussy) and probably therefore deserves to be cited in this context. 

Eduard Erdmann is said to have been among those who rehabilitated Schubert's piano music and ORFEO has record of him playing the last Sonata.

Lili Kraus seems best on Schubert's earlier sonatas and also on his Waltzes & Dances, where her lightness of touch does wonders. But her recording of D960 is still well worth owning

Dame Myra Hess never fails to impress (apr), neither does Yvonne Lefebure (Disques du Solstice) - granted Beethoven not Schubert was her man.

It is useful to remind ourselves Vladimir Sofronitzki could excel in composers other than Scriabin (D 960 on Harmonia Mundi).

Sometimes Rudolf Serkin can be as uniform (a sea without waves) as Brendel. But I like him anyway. I guess I am prejudicial, discrimatory even. Discriminating. He did D 959 with Sony and D. 960 is available on Arkadia, when Arkadia is available at all.


----------



## tdc

This is all really good information for someone about to delve into Schubert's Piano Sonatas. I fell deeply in love with his impromptus (which I believe I read somewhere are just 'chopped up sonatas'), and have been listening to those off and on for the last three years or so. I'll be picking up some works of his late sonatas in the near future.


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

Yeah, for Schubert: Arrau, Richter, Lupu, Schiff, Brendel, Pollini, (Jandó and Wallisch on Naxos);
but if you want to hear something truly amazing, get Zilberstein for D.850:
http://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Sona...hen-Spinnrade/dp/B00000E52H/ref=cm_lmf_tit_12


----------



## Air

One of Richter's idols in his early days was the great Maria Yudina, whom his teacher Neuhaus had invited to teach at the Moscow Conservatory in the '30s. She was very eccentric, but Richter admired her and called her "immensely talented". He, after all, was a very humble chap.

But it's interesting to note that the tempos that Richter are often "criticized" today for in the d.960 were not so revolutionary after all, but - in many ways - came naturally to him from the example of Yudina who took the beginning even slower than he did. (The Iron Curtain didn't let many recordings from the West to flow through, I'm afraid, and it was Yudina, after all, that Stalin most admired.)








Sviatoslav Richter said:


> "...but Schubert's B flat major Sonata, while arresting as an interpretation, was the exact opposite of what it﻿ should have been." I have read through this sonata and Yudina does things with it that are not in, or contra-indicated in the score. But they are awfully interesting things. Terrible, but great.


The major difference between the playing of the two is that Yudina is far more intuitive, and tends to switch tempos in the spans of the slower, longer movements such as the 1st mvt. of the d.960. It's good that Richter corrects this - keeping the slow (but less slow) tempo steady throughout the entire length of the piece, which in my mind already demands a ton of respect as that can often be a near-impossible task. Of course, Yudina's interpretation is fascinating and I love it - it's pure genius, and one of the most creative out there... but all in all, I think most musicologists and musicians would agree that what she did was a bit too much - plain overboard.

Interestingly, Richter's favorite sonata was the d.894, not one of the three last sonatas.


----------



## scytheavatar

The last 3 are wayyyyyy too overplayed and while they are certainly masterpieces it's a shame that no one seems to pay attention to the other Masterpiece sonatas that Schubert has written. My personal favorite has always been D. 568.


----------



## toucan

Well, as the O.P's query regarding performances of the late sonatas has beeen answered, perhaps is there no more need to resist broadening of this thread into a discussion of all of Schubert's piano work. My latest "discovery" was unexpected: on a recently purchased AS Disc, which features Richter playing the Huttenbrenner Variations, a marvel: the seldom played 3rd Sonata in E Minor, D. 566. Such lightness and grace, especially a waltz-like part, that is stated the first time around 1:40 mn of the first movement and then restated twice later on. Richter probably lacks the lightness of touch the piece requires, but he does not botch it either. Besides, he deserves gratefulness for reviving this little-known gem. The CD also features D. 958, which if need be allows us to return to topic.

Michael Endres is useful on the early sonatas, if only because the Capriccio recording company published them separately, thereby sparing us having to buy a complete box set just to get the early pieces. Endres also recorded a 5-cd box set of Dances, Waltzes, Ecossaises, etc: all marvels, such inventiveness, this Schubert, the slightest piece containing an original idea, and often, more than one idea (also on Capriccio).

For the better-known mid-life and later sonatas, good pianist as Endres is, I'd still recommend any of the big guns you happen to prefer.

I am surprised by the relative outcry against the later sonatas this thread seems to reflect! As he sensed death approaching Schubert felt and saw certain spiritual realities that not everyone is allowed to sense. And with his late music, he allows us a glimpse of them. Such depth of perception!


----------



## tdc

toucan said:


> Well, as the O.P's query regarding performances of the late sonatas has beeen answered, perhaps is there no more need to resist broadening of this thread into a discussion of all of Schubert's piano work. My latest "discovery" was unexpected: on a recently purchased AS Disc, which features Richter playing the Huttenbrenner Variations, a marvel: the seldom played 3rd Sonata in E Minor, D. 566. Such lightness and grace, especially a waltz-like part, that is stated the first time around 1:40 mn of the first movement and then restated twice later on. Richter probably lacks the lightness of touch the piece requires, but he does not botch it either. Besides, he deserves gratefulness for reviving this little-known gem. The CD also features D. 958, which if need be allows us to return to topic.
> 
> Michael Endres is useful on the early sonatas, if only because the Capriccio recording company published them separately, thereby sparing us having to buy a complete box set just to get the early pieces. Endres also recorded a 5-cd box set of Dances, Waltzes, Ecossaises, etc: all marvels, such inventiveness, this Schubert, the slightest piece containing an original idea, and often, more than one idea (also on Capriccio).
> 
> For the better-known mid-life and later sonatas, good pianist as Endres is, I'd still recommend any of the big guns you happen to prefer.
> 
> I am surprised by the relative outcry against the later sonatas this thread seems to reflect! As he sensed death approaching Schubert felt and saw certain spiritual realities that not everyone is allowed to sense. And with his late music, he allows us a glimpse of them. Such depth of perception!


Good to know about Endres, thanks. I can already tell the Schubert Sonatas are pieces I am going to go over again and again and have multiple different recordings of. Now I know what to look out for.


----------



## Duke

scytheavatar said:


> My personal favourite is Lupu, his Schubert is the most balanced between being lyrical and being exciting. Perahia's last 3 is superb too, but one guy that's criminally underrated is Badura-Skoda. It's a shame that his recordings are so hard to find because his earlier Schubert set (on a Bösendorfer rather than the one on crappy Pianoforte) is far and away the best complete Schubert sonata set I have heard.


I have the Lupu Imprumptu in G flat major and I think it is sublime. Sadly I dont have the recording for these sonatas but will have to search for it. I didnt know it existed.


----------



## scytheavatar

Duke said:


> I have the Lupu Imprumptu in G flat major and I think it is sublime. Sadly I dont have the recording for these sonatas but will have to search for it. I didnt know it existed.


http://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Pian...EKKE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1300545422&sr=8-1

Buy this now.


----------



## Bernard OHanlon

Kempff D 960 from the 1967 is sui generis


----------



## Mandryka

Bernard OHanlon said:


> Kempff D 960 from the 1967 is sui generis


There's a 960 by Kempff from the 1950s which I prefer in fact, recently released on this CD, I can't find a better image. 








The piano sound is good, the instrument well balanced like those pianos that Edwin Fischer used to record with.


----------



## chesapeake bay

you have to admire Decca's diligence


----------



## Omicron9

I like the Schiff versions on Decca. Pollini is a good contrast. Also Richter for D.960.
Lupu for sheer dynamics if nothing else.

Regards,
-09


----------



## JACE

I'm not a huge fan of Pollini (in general), but I think his recordings in this repertoire are superb.


----------



## EnescuCvartet

Bernard OHanlon said:


> Kempff D 960 from the 1967 is sui generis


I have the Kempff/Schubert-Complete Sonatas LP box-set and yes, it is fantastic. These are the '67 recordings. 9-LP's from _Deutsche Grammophon_.


----------



## EnescuCvartet

BTW - hello. I meant to say that on my first post but instead I'll say it on this, my second. *I wonder what's up with the required-dozen-posts before being able to access one's profile page. I'm guessing to dissuade spammers?

Anyways, for those who read this, it's a pleasure to be here. Looking forward to classical music discussions in the near future.


----------



## PeterF

I too have the Kempff box of Schubert piano sonatas, and it is excellent. Along with the Kempff performances, the following are also versions I recommend.

D.958 - Klien, Perahia, Lewis
D.959 - Rudolf Serkin, Klien, Perahia
D.960. - Rudolf Serkin, Brendel, Perahia, Klien, Richter


----------



## Omicron9

Just to go one step further: I tend to hear Schubert's final three piano sonatas (D.958 - D.960) as one large work. They all sound very connected to me, and when I hear one of them, I need to hear all three. Truly some fine and outstanding compositions.

-09


----------



## Pugg

JACE said:


> I'm not a huge fan of Pollini (in general), but I think his recordings in this repertoire are superb.


Jace.....where are you......


----------



## AfterHours

Great to see you've become so enamored with these! His 20th and 21st, especially, sit among my all time favorite works, and even rival Beethoven's best Piano Sonatas.

I've listened to many renditions but never heard the following selections topped for his 20th and 21st. Truly in a class of their own.

*Piano Sonata No. 21 in B-flat Major - Franz Schubert (1828)*
Leon Fleisher (2004) / Available on Spotify as follows: http://store.hmv.com/HMVStore/media/product/62094/01-62094.jpg

*Piano Sonata No. 20 in A Major - Franz Schubert (1828)*
Maurizio Pollini (1983) / Available on Spotify as follows: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51-iyriaMOL._SS500.jpg / Available on YouTube:


----------



## chromatic owl

AfterHours said:


> Great to see you've become so enamored with these! His 20th and 21st, especially, sit among my all time favorite works, and even rival Beethoven's best Piano Sonatas.


I think it's Beethoven who rivals Schubert here...


----------



## Pugg

chromatic owl said:


> I think it's Beethoven who rivals Schubert here...


We can do a poll on that subject.......


----------



## DavidA

I have quite a number of recordings of these miraculous works. Richter, Pollini, Kempff, Lupu, Gilels, Fleisher, Perahia

All worth a listen


----------



## AfterHours

DavidA said:


> I have quite a number of recordings of these miraculous works. Richter, Pollini, Kempff, Lupu, Gilels, Fleisher, Perahia
> 
> All worth a listen


I agree with all of those (though I don't think I've tried Gilels yet). Off the top of my head I would add Brendel (for all three) Andsnes (particularly #21), Goode (at least 20 and 21) and, for forte-piano, Andreas Staier (20, 21) is exceptional.


----------



## AfterHours

chromatic owl said:


> I think it's Beethoven who rivals Schubert here...


Personally, I'd rank "only" (no small achievement!) Schubert's last 2 among Beethoven's greatest sonatas, though he has other exceptional ones. My top 10 _between the two of them only_ would go something like...

1. Beethoven 32
2. Schubert 21
3. Beethoven 23
4. Beethoven 30
5. Schubert 20
6. Beethoven 29
7. Beethoven 8
8. Beethoven 31
9. Beethoven 21
10. Beethoven 14

And if you're interested in a rare artist since that managed to rival both of them with a solo piano work as recently as 1981, check out Anthony Davis' rather obscure album, Lady of the Mirrors:






Believe it or not, I'd probably rank Lady of the Mirrors as high as #2 on the above list!


----------



## ToneDeaf&Senile

For D 960, I've lately became partial to *an interpretation found at YouTube by Lazar Berman*, quite different from performance I own on CD. One thing that intrigues me about Berman's recording is that he takes the first movement repeat, as few do. (My CD doesn't.) Those few times I've heard others take the repeat persuaded me it was best ignored. Yet Berman makes about as good a case for its inclusion as can be imagined. In his hands I don't mind it at all, though it adds yet more length to an already lengthy movement.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

The problem with ignoring the repeat is that it goes flush against Schubert's very clear intentions as evidenced by a bridge passage which specifically leads back to the repeat in question. It's certainly true that the movement becomes a very long one indeed with the repeat included, but when I hear a performance or a recording without it I get a distinct sense of the composer turning in his grave!


----------



## Mandryka

Interesting that Schnabel, who I think valued following the score pretty highly, left out the repeat. And Curzon.

(Just listening to Schnabel again, first time in years, I was struck by the highly strung quality, I think that was a contemporary criticism. Curzon on Orfeo is really outstanding, repeat or no.)


----------



## lextune

Any D960 without the 1st mvmt repeat is total trash. It is impossible to argue against the repeat. Without it one, quite literally, misses the peak of the mvmt. The FF trill in the bowels of the piano! How can anyone think that removing something so completely distinctive, and incredibly dramatic, can do anything but cripple Schubert's obvious intentions.


----------



## helenora

and when I saw a title of a topic of this thread I thought it is about "last three pieces" ( for piano) so dear to my heart, but alas when I open the thread and read the title through it stated : "last three .....sonatas"


----------



## Mandryka

lextune said:


> Any D960 without the 1st mvmt repeat is total trash. It is impossible to argue against the repeat. Without it one, quite literally, misses the peak of the mvmt. The FF trill in the bowels of the piano! How can anyone think that removing something so completely distinctive, and incredibly dramatic, can do anything but cripple Schubert's obvious intentions.


I agree it's an interesting question, any ideas about the answer?

Here are some comments by Alfred Brendel on the matter



> Another argument put forward by the exponents of the B flat sonata repeat emphasizes the amazing newness of the transitional bars; they add something to the piece that would otherwise remain unsaid and, supposedly, change the perception of its character. Even if there were not so many other factors-the generosity of the exposition, the literal recapitulation, the lyrical character of all the themes as well as of the following Andante, the balance of the movements-working against the advisability of this repeat, I would, for once, have to be at odds with Schubert's judgment. Which elements in the course of the B flat sonata would justify the emergence of the transitional bars in question? Where are they announced? The transition is not to be compared to the irrational explosion in the Andante of the A major sonata: that has a psychological connection to the bleak melancholy of the movement's beginning, as well as to the chromatic episodes of the preceding Allegro. By contrast, the transitional bars of the B flat sonata upset the magnificent coherence of his movement, whose motivic material seems quite unconnected to the new syncopated, jerky rhythm. Is the material or atmosphere of the transition taken up anywhere in the later movements? Should its irate dynamic outburst rob the development's grand dramatic climax of its singularity? Most painful to me, however, is that the trill, which is so important to the understanding of the sonata's main theme, is to be played fortissimo, while elsewhere in the movement remaining remote and mysterious. Schubert's first draft still presents the trill, after a relatively brief exposition, in pianissimo.


www.nybooks.com/articles/1989/03/16/schuberts-last-sonatas-an-exchange/


----------



## Vaneyes

Lewis, Lupu, Sokolov. :tiphat:


----------



## helenora

ToneDeaf&Senile said:


> For D 960, I've lately became partial to *an interpretation found at YouTube by Lazar Berman*, quite different from performance I own on CD. One thing that intrigues me about Berman's recording is that he takes the first movement repeat, as few do. (My CD doesn't.) Those few times I've heard others take the repeat persuaded me it was best ignored. Yet Berman makes about as good a case for its inclusion as can be imagined. In his hands I don't mind it at all, though it adds yet more length to an already lengthy movement.


Thank you. Berman is often forgotten, but he was an amazing pianist, what a tone. Usually they say that Richter's interpretation of Schubert is superb but compare interpretation of this sonata I find Berman is the finest among two of them.
Clear harmony , perfect tempo , fine phrasing.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Mandryka said:


> I agree it's an interesting question, any ideas about the answer?
> 
> Here are some comments by Alfred Brendel on the matter
> 
> www.nybooks.com/articles/1989/03/16/schuberts-last-sonatas-an-exchange/


Interesting but simply not relevant, would be my view. If the composer's written it, it's not for Brendel or anyone else to imagine they know better. And I write that as a long-time admirer of Brendel's playing, not least (as a rule) in Schubert.


----------



## lextune

Brendel thinks he understands the Sonata better than Schubert. He comes right out and says that writing the trill in fortissimo is painful to him. So he just hacks it off. The entire repeat, and the nine extraordinary transition bars that Brendel demonstrably fails to understand.

Schubert's intentions are clear. They are written down for God's sake. It is bad enough to remove any repeat, but you might be able to make structural arguments (which Brendel, and others, certainly try to do), in some sonatas/pieces. In D960, the nine transitional bars are Schubert literally screaming at us (fortissimo!) that 'this is no ordinary exposition repeat!' It must be played. It is the peak of the mvmt. I can hardly even believe that this position has be be defended...

I am actually a huge fan of Brendel. I love his Beethoven. I am endlessly interested in all three of his traversals of the Sonatas. I love his Mozart, and his Haydn, his Liszt. Even many of his Schubert recordings are quite wonderful. But he is worse than just wrong about D.960. I don't know what happened to make him want to try and defend his utterly ridiculous position, but it boils down to: he doesn't like the Sonata, so he gouged the length, and most notable bars, out of it, and made up a convoluted defense that culminates in him trying to explain to us how much Schubert failed to understand his own work.

I won't go on and on, I will just reiterate my original sentiment: any performance of D.960 that removes the 1st mvmt repeat is worthless trash, and tell a short related story: 
I will never forget the first, and last, time I heard Maestro Brendel play D.960. It was a Sunday afternoon (some time in the mid-90s) at Symphony Hall in Boston. The moment he passed on the repeat I involuntarily let out an audible gasp. He looked out at the audience disapprovingly, but I was the one who felt as if I had been robbed.


----------



## lextune

https://crosseyedpianist.com/2012/12/14/to-repeat-or-not-to-repeat-thoughts-on-schuberts-d960/


----------



## Mandryka

There's a similar type of performance challenge in the outburst in the middle of the andantino of 959, how to stop it just sounding juvenile and silly. I think some pianists have found solutions there, but you know, not so many people take the repeat in 960, missing an opportunity or avoiding impossible challenge, depending on your point of view.

Of course you could just take it all naively, and relish the strangeness of the trill or the outburst. It's only music after all!


----------



## Selby

Stephen Hough on Schubert repeats:

"This movement's nine first-time bars ( 117- 125) have been the subject of a certain controversy for two reasons: first because of their strange, dislocated character; and secondly because they force the pianist to repeat the movement's exposition. Hence they have often been omitted. I feel that they are important, not only because the same genius who wrote the rest of the work also wrote these bars, but also because their radical nature should alert us to a hidden message beyond the obvious. This weird, stuttering, hesitating passage has an important psychological significance in the structure of the movement: it emphasizes the fact that even in the most lyrical moments there lies disquiet; it contains the only example of the shuddering bass trill played ff- a terrifying glance of 'recognition'; it is a premonition of drama to come in the development section, and it enables both the return of the opening bars and the C sharp minor second-time bar to have a greater, magical effect. The other objection - that repeats for Schubert were a convention he was unable to shake off, and that to hear the exposition once is enough - doesn't convince me. These nine bars are as far from convention as is possible, and a repeat is never a duplicate. It is ultimately a matter of patience, with the music, with oneself - of allowing something time to unfold and to grow."

~

I believe that Alfred Brendel has earned the right to his opinion and to play as he pleases.


----------



## Star

lextune said:


> Brendel thinks he understands the Sonata better than Schubert. He comes right out and says that writing the trill in fortissimo is painful to him. So he just hacks it off. The entire repeat, and the nine extraordinary transition bars that Brendel demonstrably fails to understand.
> 
> Schubert's intentions are clear. They are written down for God's sake. It is bad enough to remove any repeat, but you might be able to make structural arguments (which Brendel, and others, certainly try to do), in some sonatas/pieces. In D960, the nine transitional bars are Schubert literally screaming at us (fortissimo!) that 'this is no ordinary exposition repeat!' It must be played. It is the peak of the mvmt. I can hardly even believe that this position has be be defended...
> 
> I am actually a huge fan of Brendel. I love his Beethoven. I am endlessly interested in all three of his traversals of the Sonatas. I love his Mozart, and his Haydn, his Liszt. Even many of his Schubert recordings are quite wonderful. But he is worse than just wrong about D.960. I don't know what happened to make him want to try and defend his utterly ridiculous position, but it boils down to: he doesn't like the Sonata, so he gouged the length, and most notable bars, out of it, and made up a convoluted defense that culminates in him trying to explain to us how much Schubert failed to understand his own work.
> 
> I won't go on and on, I will just reiterate my original sentiment: *any performance of D.960 that removes the 1st mvmt repeat is worthless trash, and tell a short related story: *
> I will never forget the first, and last, time I heard Maestro Brendel play D.960. It was a Sunday afternoon (some time in the mid-90s) at Symphony Hall in Boston. The moment he passed on the repeat I involuntarily let out an audible gasp. He looked out at the audience disapprovingly, but I was the one who felt as if I had been robbed.


I have a recording of Brendel's last concert where he plays the D960 and omits the repeat. This omission is regrettable imo but to call this masterly performance 'worthless trash' is a ridiculous overstatement and would make me question your musical judgment. Perhaps Schnabel and Curzon are also 'worthless trash'?


----------



## lextune

Star said:


> I have a recording of Brendel's last concert where he plays the D960 and omits the repeat.


Of course he does. He has stated he doesn't like it. And that he would never play it.



Star said:


> This omission is regrettable imo but to call this masterly performance 'worthless trash' is a ridiculous overstatement


It is not an overstatement. And the performance is certainly not 'masterly'. The Sonata is missing a damn limb. *You *can certainly still enjoy it, but it is gouged. And as such, it is impossible to say one has even presented the Sonata as Schubert wrote it, let alone performed it 'masterly'.



Star said:


> Perhaps Schnabel and Curzon are also 'worthless trash'?


Neither of them are worthless trash, (nor is Brendel; whom I have already stated I love). Schnabel is, in fact, one of my pianistic Gods.
Any interpretation of D.960 without the repeat is indeed trash though. Surely you can see the distinction...?


----------



## agoukass

I have many recordings of these works, but the one that I always keep coming back to is one made by Wilhelm Kempff as a part of his sonata cycle. One of the things that I love about is how he captures the eerie, almost frozen stillness of the second movement in D. 960 and the extraordinary lyricism of D. 959's finale. 

As far as repeats go, I think that they are necessary to the structure of Schubert's music. I never liked the Rubinstein recording of D. 960 precisely because he skipped over it in the first movement and just kept going. Yes, I've heard the justification that it makes the sonata longer. Yes, I've heard that it's not necessary, but it is. It's right there in the score.


----------



## lextune

Again, how in the world can anyone argue this....

With the repeat: as Schubert wrote it:

Exposition, leading to a strange rhythmic shift, that builds to a cataclysmic, fortissimo trill, deep in the bass. 
Exposition repeat (and if the interpreter is worth listening to; new colors, new avenues)
Now at the end of the exposition the second time, we have those three ethereal chords leading to:
Development 
Recapitulation

Without repeat:

Exposition
Development 
Recapitulation

Like it or not, removing the repeat, and it's striking, shocking, material, neuters the movement. 
And it *certainly* completely changes (destroys/defaces) Schubert's intention.

One can like it better smoothed over, and neutered if one likes. Such is subjectivity. 
But only a fool seeks to claim it is as Schubert intended, (he could not have been more clear, or more adamant), or even worse, that it is "better" with out the "painful" "mistake" of the added material.


----------



## lextune

agoukass said:


> I have many recordings of these works, but the one that I always keep coming back to is one made by Wilhelm Kempff as a part of his sonata cycle. One of the things that I love about is how he captures the eerie, almost frozen stillness of the second movement in D. 960 and the extraordinary lyricism of D. 959's finale.


Yes, Kempff's Schubert is amazing.


----------



## Selby

lextune said:


> Any interpretation of D.960 without the repeat is indeed trash though. Surely you can see the distinction...?


I disagree that it is trash. Artists take liberties with interpretation often.

My opinion, let Brendel do Brendel.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Interpretation is one thing, but completely flouting the composer's clear instructions is another. Brendel actually plays that sonata beautifully for the most part so I wouldn't use the word "trash" either, but truncating the music as he does is a serious error of judgment which IMHO does disfigure an otherwise estimable performance.


----------



## Mandryka

Brendel offers this idea in support of rejecting the loud trill.



> The transition is not to be compared to the irrational explosion in the Andante of the A major sonata: that has a psychological connection to the bleak melancholy of the movement's beginning, as well as to the chromatic episodes of the preceding Allegro. By contrast, the transitional bars of the B flat sonata upset the magnificent coherence of his movement, whose motivic material seems quite unconnected to the new syncopated, jerky rhythm. Is the material or atmosphere of the transition taken up anywhere in the later movements? Should its irate dynamic outburst rob the development's grand dramatic climax of its singularity? Most painful to me, however, is that the trill, which is so important to the understanding of the sonata's main theme, is to be played fortissimo, while elsewhere in the movement remaining remote and mysterious.


I agree with him that the trill seems disconnected to what comes before or after, and I agree that this makes it unlike the outburst in D959. People who want to keep the repeat and loud trill in there seem to enjoy the incoherence it creates.

In Milan Kundera's novel The Unbearable Lightness of Being, there's an artist who, as a student, was forced to paint in a soviet realist style. One day some red paint spilt on one of her paintings, creating a sort of stain which disfigured the conventional beauty of the image. She thought it enhanced her work.

I suppose the trill is the same sort of idea. Like someone spils some paint in a lovely picture to bring into play some nasty negative things. Put like that it sounds like a puerile gesture! Sorry.



Selby said:


> Stephen Hough on Schubert repeats:
> 
> " . . . This weird, stuttering, hesitating passage has an important psychological significance in the structure of the movement: it emphasizes the fact that even in the most lyrical moments there lies disquiet . . . "
> 
> .


This is interesting because it makes Schubert sound so modern, it's the sort of idea that you don't find again until Schoenberg as far as I know. I wonder what people think of this sort of anachronistic rationalisation.



Animal the Drummer said:


> . . . truncating the music as he does is a serious error of judgment which IMHO does disfigure an otherwise estimable performance.


I like the idea of disfiguring, because, as far as I understand him, Brendel's claim is that the repeat and trill disfigured Schubert's otherwise estimable composition.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Well, as I read Brendel's comments his complaint is one of musical incoherence rather than one of disfigurement as such, but for me it makes little difference either way because (IMHO of course) there is no acceptable reason for refusing to follow such explicit instructions by the composer. A performer who does that isn't simply putting his own interpretative gloss on a piece - he's recomposing that part of it altogether, and (again IMHO) in doing so he goes too far.


----------



## lextune

Animal the Drummer said:


> there is no acceptable reason for refusing to follow such explicit instructions by the composer. A performer who does that isn't simply putting his own interpretative gloss on a piece - he's recomposing that part of it altogether


This is exactly right.


----------



## Selby

^ I like Brendel's re-composition.


----------

