Well, I may be in the minority but I like this Leppard orchestration of the Grand Duo better than the Joachim. I think Leppard's effort is more sonorous and the orchestration is more Schubertian. I hope I can find this version somewhere on CD.
Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, but having spent time with this, I found myself going back to the Joachim as having a better instrumental blend. It is not at all for me a matter of how "Schubertian" it may or may not sound, it is rather a matter of when I listen which impresses me as being more effective in presenting the material. To be sure, the Joachim is not perfect by any means, and there are things I will carp at in it, but all is said and done, the Joachim at least for me holds pride of place.
There is a surge in tempo in this performance shortly after the opening. As this new tempo holds for the remainder of the movement, I must assume that very opening was taken too slowly.
A Bennett I was referring to the beginning of the second theme when it enters, at 1:24. But perhaps I should check the parallel passage in the recapitulation as well.
The tempo is quite steady transitioning into the second theme and continuing on. The only noticeable deviation from the prevailing tempo is in the first phrase (mm. 1-8), which I think is within taste.
A Bennett There are a number of factors, regarding any change or fluctuation in tempo.Is anything marked in Schubert's four hand score, or in Joachim's or Leppard's respective versions, or are these just an interpretive idea on the part of the conductor?By the way, I feel that each such case should be taken on its individual merits. I am implying that simply because something is marked in the score, it should not be assumed that it is necessarily beneficial to putting the music across coherently and rationally, or on the other hand, that a conductor's individual ministrations are in any way not beneficial.And in many instances in the repertoire, a composer may ask for a surge in tempo, a piu mosso, so to speak, yet it is never made clear just where the tempo is supposed to resettle back to the original, if at all.I'm sure that you've been confronted with this latter question, oftentimes quite vexing.
I do not find the very subtle changes to be so noticeable as to classify them as conscious or concerted efforts to convey the music in any particular way. They are, to me, simply the result of the very common issue of orchestras not maintaining an absolute tempo. The only instances in this performance where the tempo is obviously being altered to change the affect are the end of the exposition and some places in the coda. I think your concerns and ruminations are all valid, I am simply responding to your comment that the "opening was taken too slowly" where I find the tempo variance negligible. Of course this entire idea of orchestrating the work is created out of speculation. Schubert never made any claims or indications that his sonata would or could be made into a symphony. Schumann was obsessed with the notion of the existence of the "Gastein Symphony" that Schubert wrote about in letters to his brother and friends; speculating this was it is just another of his attempts to find the work. There's a very good chance that the "Gastein Symphony" is in fact Schubert's ninth symphony. Incidentally, this sonata lends itself well to the purpose of a symphony, but it is equally if not more at home as a four-hand piano sonata.
Well, I may be in the minority but I like this Leppard orchestration of the Grand Duo better than the Joachim. I think Leppard's effort is more sonorous and the orchestration is more Schubertian. I hope I can find this version somewhere on CD.
Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, but having spent time with this, I found myself going back to the Joachim as having a better instrumental blend. It is not at all for me a matter of how "Schubertian" it may or may not sound, it is rather a matter of when I listen which impresses me as being more effective in presenting the material. To be sure, the Joachim is not perfect by any means, and there are things I will carp at in it, but all is said and done, the Joachim at least for me holds pride of place.
Thanks for the upload. .this is wonderful
Yes, this version sounds like Schubert.
To Classical Symphony - I agree with you; it is interesting, but I am used to the Joachim and after closer examination of both actually prefer it.
There is a surge in tempo in this performance shortly after the opening. As this new tempo holds for the remainder of the movement, I must assume that very opening was taken too slowly.
***** The tempo fluctuation is marginal and within taste, I don't think you need to assume anything along those lines.
A Bennett I was referring to the beginning of the second theme when it enters, at 1:24. But perhaps I should check the parallel passage in the recapitulation as well.
The tempo is quite steady transitioning into the second theme and continuing on. The only noticeable deviation from the prevailing tempo is in the first phrase (mm. 1-8), which I think is within taste.
A Bennett There are a number of factors, regarding any change or fluctuation in tempo.Is anything marked in Schubert's four hand score, or in Joachim's or Leppard's respective versions, or are these just an interpretive idea on the part of the conductor?By the way, I feel that each such case should be taken on its individual merits. I am implying that simply because something is marked in the score, it should not be assumed that it is necessarily beneficial to putting the music across coherently and rationally, or on the other hand, that a conductor's individual ministrations are in any way not beneficial.And in many instances in the repertoire, a composer may ask for a surge in tempo, a piu mosso, so to speak, yet it is never made clear just where the tempo is supposed to resettle back to the original, if at all.I'm sure that you've been confronted with this latter question, oftentimes quite vexing.
I do not find the very subtle changes to be so noticeable as to classify them as conscious or concerted efforts to convey the music in any particular way. They are, to me, simply the result of the very common issue of orchestras not maintaining an absolute tempo. The only instances in this performance where the tempo is obviously being altered to change the affect are the end of the exposition and some places in the coda. I think your concerns and ruminations are all valid, I am simply responding to your comment that the "opening was taken too slowly" where I find the tempo variance negligible.
Of course this entire idea of orchestrating the work is created out of speculation. Schubert never made any claims or indications that his sonata would or could be made into a symphony. Schumann was obsessed with the notion of the existence of the "Gastein Symphony" that Schubert wrote about in letters to his brother and friends; speculating this was it is just another of his attempts to find the work. There's a very good chance that the "Gastein Symphony" is in fact Schubert's ninth symphony. Incidentally, this sonata lends itself well to the purpose of a symphony, but it is equally if not more at home as a four-hand piano sonata.