# Why is the 3rd movement of Brahms' 3rd played so slowly?



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

The movement is clearly marked Poco allegretto and playing it on the piano it sounds perfect to me like that, reminiscent of his chamber works, with a wonderfully playful essence. Nonetheless most conductors play it terribly slow, making Brahms' 3rd symphony longer than it needs to be.

What's the justification?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

If it makes it longer then that is for the good!

But I'm not sure I get what playfulness you are looking for in it. Perhaps conditioned by the versions I have heard, I don't hear it as playful music. Of the versions I have to hand Celibidache's Munich PO recording and Harnoncourt's are slightly more fleet than most. Even Dausgaard - from a sample on the Presto site - is barely faster.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

I like quicker tempos in practically everything, and having had to play this symphony several times that third movement does seem interminable sometimes. The decision a conductor makes is based not on the opening section, but the later episodes where a quicker pace would seem cartoonish. This is where that ability to look at the big picture, the architecture of the movement, and knowing where you're going is so important. And the emotional climate - this is melancholy for sure - calls for more sensitive treatment. And no doubt a lot of it is tradition. Even Toscanini who wasn't known to drag, took about 6.5 - 7 minutes. This symphony is terribly difficult to conduct - all of it. My favorite recording is ancient: the Walter NYPO. He brings that 3rd movement in under 6 minutes. The whole symphony bustles along.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

IMO, the 3rd movement of the Brahms 3rd tolerates a fair range of tempos.

This may be the Bruno Walter one referred to above at 5:36:






Here is one that clocks in at 6:10:






And then, there is this by Levine that is almost a 1 1/2 min longer than the Walter version at 7:02:


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

mbhaub said:


> I like quicker tempos in practically everything, and having had to play this symphony several times that third movement does seem interminable sometimes. The decision a conductor makes is based not on the opening section, but the later episodes where a quicker pace would seem cartoonish. This is where that ability to look at the big picture, the architecture of the movement, and knowing where you're going is so important. And the emotional climate - this is melancholy for sure - calls for more sensitive treatment. And no doubt a lot of it is tradition. Even Toscanini who wasn't known to drag, took about 6.5 - 7 minutes. This symphony is terribly difficult to conduct - all of it. My favorite recording is ancient: the Walter NYPO. He brings that 3rd movement in under 6 minutes. The whole symphony bustles along.


I don't know if melancholy is what it is, I feel a much more purely romantic and idealistic nature, and with faster pizzicato can easily made to have a playful element contrasting with the dramatic main theme. Most conduct it with only one feeling in mind throughout but it has much more potential and depth.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

The problem with the Third Symphony is that it can be played classically, romantically, quickly, lightly or broadly. Brahms wasn't prescriptive about exactly how it should be played. I know he was fascinated by tempi but he knew that speed wasn't important and disliked the metronome. To me, Brahms doesn't suit a 'one size fits all' approach, thus I can appreciate both slower and brisker accounts as long as they make sense. Listening to Alsop's account, last week, I was struck by how important the right phrasing, and particularly the pulse, is that for this symphony and in that respect Alsop gets it bang on (as does Walter, Sanderling and Levine). I'm currently listening to Gielen's reading and it's surprisingly broad for him. Often I find that conductors who over-romanticise the 3rd movement turn it into a schmaltzy soup (Bernstein's later account especially) but if played too po-faced it lacks warmth (Mackerras, Ticciati). I'm certainly not an expert on reading music and scores but I believe the 3rd is notoriously difficult to conduct.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Different conductors do different things but as far as speed is concerned I am not sure I hear much variety. I can see that some take longer than others to do the movement but find it hard to relate that to the speed I am hearing. Can anyone suggest examples of a fast one and a contrasting slow one?


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> Different conductors do different things but as far as speed is concerned I am not sure I hear much variety. I can see that some take longer than others to do the movement but find it hard to relate that to the speed I am hearing. Can anyone suggest examples of a fast one and a contrasting slow one?


Tbh, apart from the odd extremes, most performances of the 3rd movement clock in around the 6:30 mark (nearly all are in 6 minute territory. Abbado, Szell, Nowak, Levine, Herbig, etc all weigh in around 6:30. However here's two extremes. The first is Bernstein's later schmaltz-fest (his late Brahms is, IMO, awful) which clocks in at a mighty 7 and a half minutes. 3rd movement starts at 26:54 in the video below. Listen how he draggggggs the main theme out (ugh!).






Contrast that with Alsop's beautifully measured approach and one which doesn't sound rushed but at 5:50 is one of the shorter accounts. Walter was a conductor whose earlier recordings were often shorter than 6 minutes too but his later Columbia account doesnt sound that much diffetent and comes in between 6 and 7 minutes.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

For me Haitink's LSO version made it into my favourite Brahms' symphony easily. I feel the tempos are just right. Here he is giving a masterclass on conducting the symphony, and explaining some of the difficulties. I had the Szell for a long time and hated it.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Merl said:


> I'm certainly not an expert on reading music and scores but I believe the 3rd is notoriously difficult to conduct.


It is! The opening alone: it's too fast to conduct it in 6, too slow for 2. So you have to somehow convey that inner pulse using your whole body. Breathing with the phrasing is essential, as is a smooth, controlled stick. A good orchestra will "read" a good conductor and the movement just flows naturally, the conductor really having to take control at the ritards and such. With a bad conductor the tempo begins to sag and trying to play your part feels like swimming in molasses. Maybe it's just me and my age, but I don't think that there are so many great Brahms conductors out there anymore. It seems that in the '30s through '60s there was an abundance of fine Brahmsians. Today? Not so much.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

He's not alive any more but Abbado was a great Brahms conductor.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Looking briefly at my recordings there's not many who take the 3rd movement at less than 6 minutes. Mengelberg, Walter, Alsop, Toscanini (sometimes) and Jochum (in London not Berlin) were some of the swifter ones. Even Mackerras, Berglund and Ticciati were broader with a more HIP approach. Van Zweden is bang on 6 minutes in his very good account.


----------

