Beethoven/Liszt transcriptions

Post by s***@nycap.rr.com
What do people who own the Liszt transcriptions of the Beethoven symphonies think of them, generally? I'm not looking for recommendations of recordings. I'm interested in whether the concept of listening to these works played on a piano is satisfying. Do you play them often? And like them? Are they worthwhile?
MIFrost

Why not listen? The music is of course great. The arrangements are
done with tremendous skill. And there are 3 different versions to
choose from on Spotify. How satisfying an experience it is depends
greatly on the quality of the recording. I listened first to the
Katsaris version which I vowed never to listen to it again. I am in
the middle of going through the Scherbakov version. which I find has
much better piano sound, less banging and the performances breathe
better. There is also a set by Martynov which I hope to get to in a
few months.

KimDenmark

2020-08-25 12:41:44 UTC

Hi, I´ve been listening to and obviously enjoying the transcriptions, since Katsaris´ recordings started to appear in the mid-80s.
I´m quite the pianophile; I love the sound of the piano and connect very easily with music played on the piano. At the time the recordings became available I really enjoyed the more virtuoso-like pianism ( I was a young man ) and the transcriptions are if nothing else enormously demanding and Katsaris´ execution of them is phenomenal. I also happen to like the way, he makes music out of them as well…
To me, the transcriptions were and are also a way to experience the structure of the symphonies without “ being distracted “ by the instrumentation. Beethoven, who is a Demi-God to me, relies so much on themes, rather than melodies and the percussive possibilities of the piano is well suited to bring the themes front and center. The same goes for Beethoven´s use of distinct rhytms and dynamics.
The transcriptions are of course the work of Liszt ( who was very proud of his achievement ), but knowing that Beethoven used to compose at the piano, I like to imagine that listening to the transcriptions, I experience a sort of “ ur-editions “; hearing how the first patterns of what became the symphonies sounded like back in Vienna…
Even though it wasn´t want you asked about, I´d like to add, that the Katsaris recordings are the most satisfying to my ears, heart and mind. Scherbakov is really good, too.

Mandryka

2020-08-25 15:24:00 UTC

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

Susan Frost

2020-08-25 17:41:16 UTC

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

I wondered if anyone felt that way. Taking Ricardo's suggestion I listened to Katsaris on Spotify and as I listened I kept feeling like I really wanted to hear an orchestra. I felt I was being short-changed hearing the symphonies on the piano. Not for me, I guess.

MIFrost

Frank Berger

2020-08-25 18:18:42 UTC

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

Have you done the same kind of evaluation of other
transcriptions for piano? Is this a question of the works
having been written for orchestra by one of the greatest
composers who ever lived and that therefore any
transcription will necessarily be inferior music, or is it
that you (we) are solidly imprinted on the originals? How
about the reverse - piano compositions arranged for
orchestra? Are the originals (almost) always better?

M&S Frost

2020-08-25 18:51:20 UTC

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

No other evaluations, to be honest. The other way around is a different story, for me. I like Mussorgsky's "Pictures" in either form. Same with Satie Gymnopadaes (sp). Debussy's "Prelude to the Afternoon of the Faun." Just examples. How about you?

MIFrost

Frank Berger

2020-08-26 00:19:14 UTC

Post by M&S Frost

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

I can't generalize. I suspect I like what I'm used to. I
listened to Katsaris' #5 today. If I had never heard the
original, I would probably have been blown away. As it was,
I wasn't. I listened to a few minutes of Gould and it seemed
a lot better. Re: Pictures at an Exhibition, I like both
versions equally.

Mandryka

2020-08-26 08:00:38 UTC

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

Mandryka

2020-08-26 09:01:01 UTC

I think Katsaris is particularly dreadful - fast bravura. Biret is much more my cup of tea.

Neil

2020-08-28 14:29:31 UTC

Post by M&S Frost

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

Gould is slow and steady in the 5th and 6th, and I from what I can figure out has adapted the Liszt transcriptions to suit his own tastes. (I've never listed with the music in front of me).

He's a lot slowly than Villa in the 5th for sure.

2020-08-27 09:54:22 UTC

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

To protect the environment! Do you realize
how much CO2 the brass and the winds produce?

dk

JohnGavin

2020-08-27 15:43:56 UTC

Post by dk

Total waste of time. These things had a point before the existence of recordings but I can't see any reason to listen to a piano transcription of a Beethoven symphony today.

To protect the environment! Do you realize
how much CO2 the brass and the winds produce?
dk

I used to have keen interest in transcriptions and paraphrases. Now I ask the question - is the transcription as good or better than the original? One that IS as good as the original is Rachmaninov’s transcription of Mendelssohn’s Scherzo from Midsummer Nights Dream. Yuja plays it very well. Check YouTube. Two that are better IMO, are Rachmaninov’s treatment of Kreisler’s Liebesfreud and Liebeslied. On the other hand none of Busoni’s Bach transcriptions are as good - partially because the sound of large and deep organ pipes don’t translate well on any piano.

Henk vT

2020-08-27 16:52:49 UTC

Post by JohnGavin
On the other hand none of Busoni’s Bach transcriptions are as good - partially because the sound of large and deep organ pipes don’t translate well on any piano.

It depends on what you expect from a transcription. I love Ravel's Pictures as much as the original. It doesn't occur to me to compare them. The same goes for Busoni's Bach transcriptions. When I play (the easier ones), I don't think of Bach for a moment.

Henk

JohnGavin

2020-08-27 18:40:01 UTC

Post by JohnGavin
On the other hand none of Busoni’s Bach transcriptions are as good - partially because the sound of large and deep organ pipes don’t translate well on any piano.

Agree about Ravel.

I never made a point of comparing either - but not so long ago I was listening to Nicholai Demidenko’s fine recording of the Bach-Busoni St. Anne’s Prelude and Fugue and it came as a sort of revelation - why listen to this when the best organ recordings covey the music so much better? Maybe it’s a matter of valuing time, which is an increasingly finite commodity.

Henk vT

2020-08-27 19:28:48 UTC

Post by JohnGavin
I never made a point of comparing either - but not so long ago I was listening to Nicholai Demidenko’s fine recording of the Bach-Busoni St. Anne’s Prelude and Fugue and it came as a sort of revelation - why listen to this when the best organ recordings covey the music so much better? Maybe it’s a matter of valuing time, which is an increasingly finite commodity.

<g> Indeed, if we had more time it would probably be easier for us to listen to a piece of music (original, paraphrase, transcript, variation) as it presents itself to us.

Henk

raymond....@gmail.com

2020-08-28 00:31:07 UTC

Post by JohnGavin
On the other hand none of Busoni’s Bach transcriptions are as good - partially because the sound of large and deep organ pipes don’t translate well on any piano.

I fully agree, which is why I never really bother about transcriptions at all.

Ray Hall, Taree

Al Eisner

2020-08-29 01:44:09 UTC

On the other hand none of Busoniâs Bach transcriptions are as good - partially because the sound of large and deep organ pipes donât translate well on any piano.

I agree that Busoni's Bach renditions are like separate compositions.
Another example of this is his version of the Chaconne. On the other
hand, the Brahms left-hand transcription of this work really does sound
to me like Bach. (It even preserves much of the difficulty of the
original, because it doesn't have the other hand to fill in.) When
well performed. I actually prefer to listen to the Brahms version.

--
Al Eisner

c***@gmail.com

2020-08-29 16:08:54 UTC

Post by Al Eisner

Post by JohnGavin
On the other hand none of Busoni’s Bach transcriptions are as good - partially because the sound of large and deep organ pipes don’t translate well on any piano.

I agree with Henk and Al. Most transcriptions in the 19th century were intended to allow for domestic performance of works that would have gone unheard otherwise. Particular favorites of mine are the various reductions of Mozart opera highlights for wind ensemble. But Liszt and Busoni "transcriptions" hardly fall into that category. I like Godowsky's use of the word "metamorphosis" to describe what's going on. My favorite "Chaconne," fwiw, is Tausig's, but there are so many.

The transcriptions that I dislike are guitar versions of Spanish piano works. So much of the genius of Granados' "Spanish Dances," for example, lies in his *representation* of the guitar on the piano. Rendering the music on the guitar misses the point entirely. Just one person's opinion; ymmv.

AC

MiNe109

2020-08-29 16:30:43 UTC

Post by c***@gmail.com
The transcriptions that I dislike are guitar versions of Spanish
piano works. So much of the genius of Granados' "Spanish Dances,"
for example, lies in his*representation* of the guitar on the piano.
Rendering the music on the guitar misses the point entirely. Just
one person's opinion; ymmv.

The guitarisms of Fallas Seven Spanish Folksongs don't necessarily work
on the guitar!

Stephen

Neil

2020-08-25 19:59:53 UTC

I love Glenn Gould's 5th and 6th.

number_six

2020-08-26 18:08:28 UTC

I have the Harmonia Mundi cycle - recorded by various pianists.

Transcription is a valid, important part of the experience of music.

But that is no guarantee of the success of any particular effort.

While I enjoy Liszt's versions, they are adjunct to the original versions.

Neil

2020-08-28 14:26:12 UTC

Joseph Villa

Sounds like he is playing a Baldwin!

Frank Berger

2020-08-28 14:42:09 UTC

Post by Neil

Joseph Villa http://youtu.be/yVsaTpDUgkc
Sounds like he is playing a Baldwin!

Wondering what you mean by that? I'm no expert on pianos,
but I recall that the tuner/technician from whom I purchased
a Knabe upright grand around 1980 mentioned that around 1900
or so Baldwins were as good as Steinways. Before they
started giving them away on game shows.

Ricardo Jimenez

2020-08-28 16:03:35 UTC

On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:42:09 -0400, Frank Berger

Post by Neil

Joseph Villa http://youtu.be/yVsaTpDUgkc
Sounds like he is playing a Baldwin!

Are there any currently active pianists that play the Baldwin in
concerts? Steinway seems to claim 97% of them with the rest Yamaha,
Fazioli and Bösendorfer (owned by Yamaha).

MiNe109

2020-08-28 16:35:28 UTC

Post by Ricardo Jimenez
Are there any currently active pianists that play the Baldwin in
concerts? Steinway seems to claim 97% of them with the rest Yamaha,
Fazioli and Bösendorfer (owned by Yamaha).

Last I remember is Earl Wild.

Frank Berger

2020-08-28 16:44:22 UTC

Post by Ricardo Jimenez
Are there any currently active pianists that play the
Baldwin in
concerts? Steinway seems to claim 97% of them with the
rest Yamaha,
Fazioli and Bösendorfer (owned by Yamaha).

Last I remember is Earl Wild.

Do piano companies pay performers to play their pianos. If
not, why not? Are musicians above such things?

MiNe109

2020-08-28 16:55:44 UTC

Last I remember is Earl Wild.

Do piano companies pay performers to play their pianos. If not, why
not? Are musicians above such things?

Steinway artists aren't paid. They have to have purchased a Steinway so
the opposite. Musicians would be happy to be paid but the Steinway
Artists page says there are "more than 1,600" of them so payment would
require deep pockets.

The last piano publicity stunt I recall was the 2020 Grammy Awards where
a Roland Facet Grand Piano was featured.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=tKuTgx6UmxI&feature=emb_logo

Frank Berger

2020-08-28 17:28:18 UTC

Post by Ricardo Jimenez
Are there any currently active pianists that play the
Baldwin in
concerts? Steinway seems to claim 97% of them with the
rest Yamaha,
Fazioli and Bösendorfer (owned by Yamaha).

Last I remember is Earl Wild.

Do piano companies pay performers to play their pianos.
If not, why not? Are musicians above such things?

Steinway artists aren't paid. They have to have purchased a
Steinway so the opposite. Musicians would be happy to be
paid but the Steinway Artists page says there are "more than
1,600" of them so payment would require deep pockets.
The last piano publicity stunt I recall was the 2020 Grammy
Awards where a Roland Facet Grand Piano was featured.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=tKuTgx6UmxI&feature=emb_logo

I presume they would only pay the biggest stars, so that's
really not a good explanation. Maybe Steinway has a near
monopoly and doesn't need to complete for artists. I'm
thinking of athletic equipment manufacturers who routinely
pay star athletes to use their equipment. Or all sorts of
companies that pay star athletes to endorse the products.
Even major college athletic programs are in on it. From an
economic point of view, we'd have to explain why another
piano company doesn't do it to compete with Steinway. I
know that Steinway has competition from as mentioned above,
Yamaha, Fazioli and Bosendorfer. Maybe they collude to
avoid this kind of competition. Or maybe the market is just
too small to bother. A good question for an economics exam.

MiNe109

2020-08-28 19:34:00 UTC

Post by Ricardo Jimenez
Are there any currently active pianists that play the Baldwin
in concerts? Steinway seems to claim 97% of them with the
rest Yamaha, Fazioli and Bösendorfer (owned by Yamaha).

Last I remember is Earl Wild.

Do piano companies pay performers to play their pianos. If not,
why not? Are musicians above such things?

I presume they would only pay the biggest stars, so that's really not
a good explanation.

That's too bad as it's the actual fact. Says Steinway: Today, more than
98 percent of the world's active concert pianists - over 1,700 artists -
bear the title "Steinway Artist". Each owns a Steinway. All choose to
perform on Steinway pianos exclusively. Importantly, none are paid to do
so; their only inducement is the unrivaled sound and responsiveness of
their Steinway pianos.

Maybe Steinway has a near monopoly and doesn't need to complete for
artists.

That's likely.

I'm thinking of athletic equipment manufacturers who routinely pay
star athletes to use their equipment. Or all sorts of companies that
pay star athletes to endorse the products. Even major college
athletic programs are in on it. From an economic point of view, we'd
have to explain why another piano company doesn't do it to compete
with Steinway. I know that Steinway has competition from as
mentioned above, Yamaha, Fazioli and Bosendorfer. Maybe they collude
to avoid this kind of competition. Or maybe the market is just too
small to bother. A good question for an economics exam.

Steinway has a greater ability to provide concert instruments.

2020-08-29 08:06:51 UTC

Post by Frank Berger
I presume they would only pay the biggest stars, so that's
really not a good explanation. Maybe Steinway has a near
monopoly and doesn't need to complete for artists.

"Near Monopoly" ?!? Aren't we too charitable?
How about a stranglehold?

Post by Frank Berger
I'm thinking of athletic equipment manufacturers who routinely
pay star athletes to use their equipment. Or all sorts of
companies that pay star athletes to endorse the products.
Even major college athletic programs are in on it. From an
economic point of view, we'd have to explain why another
piano company doesn't do it to compete with Steinway.

$250k grand pianos are slightly more expensive than
athletic shoes or race skis or tennis rackets.

dk

JohnGavin

2020-08-29 14:39:27 UTC

Post by dk

Post by Frank Berger
I presume they would only pay the biggest stars, so that's
really not a good explanation. Maybe Steinway has a near
monopoly and doesn't need to complete for artists.

"Near Monopoly" ?!? Aren't we too charitable?
How about a stranglehold?

$250k grand pianos are slightly more expensive than
athletic shoes or race skis or tennis rackets.

Here’s an interesting factoid:

Steinway has never turned a profit on it’s concert grand division.

Frank Berger

2020-08-30 01:22:59 UTC

Post by dk

Post by Frank Berger
I presume they would only pay the biggest stars, so that's
really not a good explanation. Maybe Steinway has a near
monopoly and doesn't need to complete for artists.

"Near Monopoly" ?!? Aren't we too charitable?
How about a stranglehold?

$250k grand pianos are slightly more expensive than
athletic shoes or race skis or tennis rackets.
dk

I don't see the relevance of the cost of a piano. I would
not expect Steinway to give an artist a Steinway. It is
conceivable that they might pay Yuja Wang or Lang Lang to
use one. That they apparently don't may be due to the two
factors mentioned already. They don''t have to due to their
market dominance or they have colluded with Bosendorfer not
to. Or some other reason not mentioned.

graham

2020-08-28 19:21:58 UTC

Last I remember is Earl Wild.

Do piano companies pay performers to play their pianos. If not, why
not? Are musicians above such things?

It appears that they lend you one when you become a "Steinway artiste".

Neil

2020-08-29 15:09:43 UTC

Last I remember is Earl Wild.

Bolet was a Baldwin guy.

Frank Berger

2020-08-28 16:43:16 UTC

Post by Ricardo Jimenez
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:42:09 -0400, Frank Berger