Listening to Beethoven #52 – Piano Trio in C minor Op.1/3


The Cafe Griensteidl, on Michaelerplatz, Vienna by Reinhold Völkel

written by Ben Hogwood

Piano Trio in C minor Op.1 no.3 for piano, violin and cello (1792-94, Beethoven aged 23)

Dedication Prince Charles Lichnowsky
Duration 32′

Listen

Background and Critical Reception

Beethoven was already leading his audiences into new sound worlds and structures with the first two piano trios of his Op.1 set – but with the third installment he cut many of the cords tying him to the past. In his booklet notes accompanying the Florestan Trio’s recordings of the trios on Hyperion, Richard Wigmore takes up the story.

“In the first two trios Beethoven’s subversiveness was still cloaked in the language of the classical comedy of manners. But in the Piano Trio in C minor Op.1 no.3, it erupted in a work of startling explosive vehemence and dark lyric beauty.” Haydn, who had recently returned to Vienna from London, was in the audience with the work’s dedicatee Prince Lichnowsky. He was full of praise for the first two works in the set but had reservations around the third. Those reservations, according to a diary entry from Beethoven’s pupil Ferdinand Ries, led Haydn to advise his pupil not to publish the work. The truth, it seems, was more subtle – Haydn not necessarily critical of the musical content but airing doubts about its difficulty for the musicians of the day and its challenging content for the Viennese audiences. They were not accustomed to hearing music of such assertiveness and drama in the form of the piano trio.

Beethoven was his own man here – with the influences of Mozart less keenly felt. As Wigmore writes, “the music is profoundly Beethovenian in its abrupt, extreme contrasts, with violent rhetoric (the first page alone is peppered with sforzando accents) alternating with intense pathos and yearning lyricism”.

Thoughts

A very different atmosphere inhabits the third of Beethoven’s Op.1 piano trios. From the outset there is a chill down the spine of the music, a shiver as the bare octaves from the three instruments announce the opening theme. The mood is similar to that of Mozart’s Piano Concerto no.24, also in C minor – which gives an idea of the orchestral concepts behind Beethoven’s writing. It sets the tone for further outings in this key, with foreboding tones and a repressed energy suggesting the music could erupt at any minute. In contrast to the first two works in the set, it grabs the initiative and looks forward with every opportunity.

The ‘coiled spring’ is kept largely intact in the first movement, though the music does threaten to run away at times, often countered by the calmer second theme. The next movement is serene but retains a serious demeanour to start with, loosening up as its theme and variations format unfold – shaking off its ‘slow’ tag, too, with variations such as the driving third, with lots of attack on the piano, and the jaunty fifth. The fourth variation, set in E flat minor, is laden with melancholia.

The Scherzo finds Beethoven setting a relatively sombre mood, with the first real smile on the face of the music arriving in the tumbling piano figure that opens the ‘trio’ section. This is where he moves from minor key to major, moving from shade to sunlight.

For many the Finale provides a telling shift in Beethoven’s expression, with the sudden outbursts and syncopated rhythms of its main theme. Here the ensemble sounds so much more than violin, cello and piano, as though a whole orchestra were punching out the statement. This is where the no-holds barred approach has its roots, and the energy levels remain high through towards the end. This makes the closing bars even more striking, a brooding coda only heightening the feeling that this is a beginning, a statement of clear intent. Even at the end there is little resolution, the performers’ emotional energies spent, what little solace, there is clouded by what has gone before.

One can only imagine the atmosphere when the first audiences in Vienna heard it, and Haydn’s relative shock at such a bold, aggressive tone. What a striking piece it is, reaching moods barely hinted at in Beethoven’s output until now. The Piano Trio no.3 sets a precedent for all the other ‘traditional’ forms – symphony, piano concerto, string quartet and instrumental sonatas – combining formal innovation with deeply expressed emotions which liable to change like the wind.

Recordings used

Castle Trio (Lambert Orkis (piano), Marilyn McDonald (violin), Kenneth Slowik (cello) (Warner Classics)
Florestan Trio (Susan Tomes (piano), Anthony Marwood (violin), Richard Lester (cello) (Hyperion)
Beaux Arts Trio (Menahem Pressler (piano), Daniel Guilet (violin), Bernard Greenhouse (cello) (Philips, 1964 recording)
Wilhelm Kempff (piano), Henryk Szeryng (violin), Pierre Fournier (cello) (Deutsche Grammophon)

The Castle Trio are great to listen to here, as they capture the sense of originality that first audience would have experienced. Their account features some very impressive fingerwork from Lambert Orkis and intense expression from the string players. Another recording on ‘period’ instruments to mark up is that by Andreas Staier, Daniel Sepec and Jean-Guihen Queyras. It is superbly played, taken at daring speeds and arguably plumbing even greater emotional depths.

Szeryng, Fournier and Kempff inhabit the drama of the outer movements in particular but there is a great intensity between them throughout. The slow movement variations are more expansive but tastefully so.

Once again the Florestan Trio have the measure of this music but also its inherent drama – where they are well-matched by the superb Beaux Arts Trio.

Spotify links

The playlist below compiles the recordings made by the Castle Trio, Beaux Arts Trio and the ensembles of Kempff-Szeryng-Fournier and Staier-Sepec-Queyras:

You can chart the Arcana Beethoven playlist as it grows, with one recommended version of each piece we listen to. Catch up here!

Also written in 1794 Haydn Symphony no.101 in D major ‘Clock’

Next up Der freie Mann WoO 117

Listening to Beethoven #51 – Piano Trio in G major Op.1/2


Vienna coffee house (18th century) (Anonymous painter)

written by Ben Hogwood

Piano Trio in G major Op.1 no.2 for piano, violin and cello (1792-94, Beethoven aged 23)

Dedication Prince Charles Lichnowsky
Duration 33′

Listen

Background and Critical Reception

The second of Beethoven’s three piano trios, Op.1, is a substantial work. As with the first it sets out a number of innovations in the form – structured in four movements rather than three, and giving the strings much more say in the melodic material so that they are on an even footing with the piano. This time Beethoven adds an expansive introduction to the first movement, taking it even closer to the profile of a Haydn symphony.

While the first piece in this triptych of piano trios had its origins in Bonn, this second instalment appears to wholly originate from Vienna, Beethoven working at it through 1793 and 1794. Its choice of key, G major, presents it as a complement to the oft-used E flat major of the first trio, meaning the set of three could be performed in a sequence if the performers had the stamina!

The extra demands on the performers are noted, however. Susan Tomes, talking to Arcana about this work, noted that “Op.1/2 is extremely difficult for the piano particularly, and it has to sound so effervescent, like a Mozart opera in piano trio form. It’s actually very difficult.”

Richard Wigmore, in his notes for the Florestan Trio’s recording on Hyperion, writes how the G major trio ‘immediately establishes its symphonic scale with an imposing slow introduction – something unheard of in a piano trio, and rare even in a string quartet’. Of the slow movement, he writes, ‘It is characteristic of the young Beethoven’s search for an increased profundity of expression that the second movement…combines a siciliano lilt with an unprecedented hymn-like solemnity.’ Meanwhile the finale ‘is another movement that infuses Haydn’s spirit with Beethoven’s own brand of boisterousness.’

Thoughts

The expansive first movement shows Beethoven completely at home in this medium. He allows plenty of time to set out the key and allow a few decorative but meaningful flourishes from the piano, harking back a little to the Baroque period. Soon however he becomes more impatient, and the music moves smoothly into the main body of the movement. A charming statement from the piano is picked up by the strings and the three instruments have fun developing its dance-like qualities.

There is often the sense that Beethoven is playing with his listener, and this comes through in the exchanges that close out the first movement. Elsewhere the music softens, nowhere more so than the second movement, marked Largo con espressione, where the composer opts for the more exotic key of E major to express his feelings. This is a beautiful and restful ten minutes of music, with both violin and cello given plenty of melodic material in their higher registers.

A pure sense of musical enjoyment comes through in the last two movements. The cello takes the lead in the third movement Scherzo, possibly for the first time in this form, while the trio section hints at a darker diversion but quickly returns to the light courtesy of trills on the piano. This is a slightly furtive movement, but gives way to a sparkling finale, emulating Haydn with some of its jokes. The running theme resembles Rossini’s William Tell overture (still 35 years away)

Beethoven’s second is the most substantial Piano Trio to date – but little would have prepared his listeners on what was to follow.

Recordings used

Castle Trio (Lambert Orkis (piano), Marilyn McDonald (violin), Kenneth Slowik (cello) (Warner Classics)
Florestan Trio (Susan Tomes (piano), Anthony Marwood (violin), Richard Lester (cello) (Hyperion)
Beaux Arts Trio (Menahem Pressler (piano), Daniel Guilet (violin), Bernard Greenhouse (cello) (Philips, 1964 recording)
Wilhelm Kempff (piano), Henryk Szeryng (violin), Pierre Fournier (cello) (Deutsche Grammophon)

The Castle Trio are again invaluable guides on how this music might of sounded in its first performance. Their sound can be brittle (to our ears at least) in the slow movement especially, no matter how affectionately it is played. Again the Florestan Trio are excellent in this music, with an affectionate ear for Beethoven’s inventions and in the finale a tempo which really does justice to the composer’s marking of Presto. Wilhelm Kempff, Henryk Szeryng, Pierre Fournier clock in at just over 35 minutes in a very expansive version, lovingly played if offering a lot more heart-on-sleeve. Again the Beaux Arts Trio are excellent guides in their long-established recording from 1964.

Spotify links

The playlist below compiles the recordings made by the Castle Trio, Beaux Arts Trio and the Szeryng-Fournier-Kempff trio:

You can chart the Arcana Beethoven playlist as it grows, with one recommended version of each piece we listen to. Catch up here!

Also written in 1794 Viotti Violin Concerto No.27 in C major

Next up Piano trio in C minor Op.1 no.3

Listening to Beethoven #50 – Piano Trio in E flat major Op.1/1


View of coffee house in Praterallee, Vienna (1810, thought to be by Joseph Koll)

written by Ben Hogwood

Piano Trio in E flat major Op.1 no.1 for piano, violin and cello (1792-94, Beethoven aged 23)

Dedication Prince Charles Lichnowsky
Duration 32′

Listen

Background and Critical Reception

Opus 1 was an extremely important milestone in the life of Beethoven. With it he was determined to make a statement, particularly as a newcomer to Vienna – and the pieces behind that statement were subject to a great deal of care and revision before publication. He chose the medium of the piano trio very deliberately, opting for a form that Haydn and Mozart had not dominated, and where there was room for development and innovation.

The second and third trios were begun in 1793, soon after arrival in Vienna, but the first in E flat major is thought to have been started in Bonn prior to that. All three were completed for Prince Lichnowksy, at whose home they were first heard in 1794. It is thought Haydn – now Beethoven’s teacher – heard each of the three pieces before he left for London. There were some reservations about the third work, of which more when that piece is the focus, but the first two were warmly received.

Beethoven’s innovations for Op.1 are set around a recalibration of the piano trio format, giving the three instruments – piano, cello and violin – greater equality. Until now Haydn had used the piano as a dominating instrument with stringed accompaniment, but in the slow movement of the first trio in E flat major Beethoven sides more with Mozart, giving the strings more prominence and greater freedom of expression.

He also changed the structure of the trio, expanding it from three to four movements, thinking along a more symphonic line. The ‘new’ movement would be a Minuet or Scherzo (a quicker movement laced with humour and energy), the structure similar also to string quartets of the time.

Praise for the first trio in the set is uniform. Richard Wigmore, writing in his notes for the Florestan Trio recording on Hyperion, enjoys the ‘luxuriant’ second movement, ‘with a first episode fashioned as a soulful love duet for violin and cello’. The third movement is ‘the first of Beethoven’s true scherzi’…which ‘ leaves its minuet model far in the background’. Meanwhile the finale ‘suggests Haydn in its verve and brilliance, and in the witty capital Beethoven makes of the initial leaping figure’.

Thoughts

Beethoven’s first ‘official’ published statement is in the key of E flat major, his ninth work to date to occupy that key. It is where he feels most at home, and, if the opening melody is anything to go by, it is a place where he can use the simplest of melodies as the basis for a whole movement. The second theme of the first movement is a nice, tender contrast, but both provide plenty of material for the composer to develop, which he does with a smile on his face. This is wonderfully open, airy music, which would have projected far beyond the small confines of the room in which it was first performed.

The slow movement has a songlike appearance (hence its Italian tempo marking Adagio cantabile) and provides a meaningful contrast, with music of real depth. The colours of piano with the stringed instruments’ greater involvement are beautifully shaded. The third movement has an appealing delicacy, again making much from what seems like very little material to construct an appealing dance form. There are some quite sudden interjections here, Beethoven’s ever changing musical moods beginning to surface on a regular basis.

The composer may use an unlikely melody from which to hang the finale, but Beethoven makes it work, taking the unconventional leap at the start of the melody and pushing the music forward with plenty of sparkle and wit. This is music to be enjoyed, though it comes at a price for the performers!

The sound has really filled out compared to Beethoven’s first unpublished essays in the form, with much more body to the strings but also greater technical demands on the pianist, no doubt to impress the Viennese audience and to ensure the pieces were not copied. In an enclosed, private space it would have made an extremely strong impression with its bright colours and heartfelt melodic statements.

Recordings used

Castle Trio (Lambert Orkis (piano), Marilyn McDonald (violin), Kenneth Slowik (cello) (Warner Classics)
Florestan Trio (Susan Tomes (piano), Anthony Marwood (violin), Richard Lester (cello) (Hyperion)
Beaux Arts Trio (Menahem Pressler (piano), Daniel Guilet (violin), Bernard Greenhouse (cello) (Philips, 1964 recording)
Wilhelm Kempff (piano), Henryk Szeryng (violin), Pierre Fournier (cello) (Deutsche Grammophon)

The fortepiano can be a bit too probing in its timbre but there is a really pleasing zip and enthusiasm in the Castle Trio’s performance, further energising the music. Occasionally the fortissimo playing can over-egg the pudding, but generally the balance is good.

The Florestan Trio present a beautifully weighted account, which works firstly because of the dexterity of Susan Tomes, under whom every note has meaning but always with the strings in mind. The Minuet has an appealing delicacy, while the finale really gets airborne at a terrific pace.

Spotify links

The playlist below compiles the recordings made by the Castle Trio, Beaux Arts Trio and the Szeryng-Fournier-Kempff trio:

You can chart the Arcana Beethoven playlist as it grows, with one recommended version of each piece we listen to. Catch up here!

Also written in 1794 Haydn Symphony no.100 in G major ‘Military’

Next up Piano trio in G major Op.1 no.2

Talking Heads: Beethoven through the eyes of Susan Tomes

interview by Ben Hogwood

As part of our celebrations of the 250th anniversary of Beethoven’s birth in 2020, Arcana is talking to leading classical performers to get their perspective on the composer’s music. Pianist and writer Susan Tomes has a rich, four-decade history of Beethoven performance and recording, culminating in a complete set of the Beethoven piano trios made with the Florestan Trio for Hyperion. In this interview she talks of the challenges and rewards in playing the composer’s music – and why he remains the most original of all.

We begin, however, at the start. “I don’t remember the first time I ever played Beethoven’s music,” she says, “but there must have been a number of pieces I learned when I was a child, in Associated Board exams. My music teacher gradually introduced me to the easier sonatas and pieces, so I don’t have a moment where I remember first encountering Beethoven. It has always been an important thread, as it is for all pianists.”

Was there a specific line in the sand with the piano trios? “Not as such, but Britain has always been a great nation of sight readers, and that has always made it possible to read through things when you get to playing chamber music with colleagues. As a teenager, when I attended a Saturday school at the Royal Scottish Academy of Music, I started playing chamber music, and we would sight read some of the easier Beethoven piano trios – not that any of them are very easy! Then I was in a number of different chamber music settings such as Prussia Cove, and over the years I think I’ve played all of them there with all kinds of different people. I must have played all these pieces not just with my professional, long standing groups but with different combinations of people. I really have played them a lot, and it’s amazing how every time you work on them with somebody there is a load of stuff to discuss.”

She tells of the many layers in Beethoven’s writing. “It’s difficult to know where to start, because they are very multifaceted pieces of music, and an awful lot of thought went into them on Beethoven’s part. There is always a lot you have to discuss and work through with whoever you’re playing them with. That’s something that is amazing about his music; you never get to the point where you think, “Well, I’ve cracked that, I know how that needs to be performed!” Sometimes you get that with other composers, where you feel like you’ve ‘got the measure’ of it, and you know how it needs to be put across so the audience can understand it. With Beethoven it’s not like that, it’s like a very deep well you are always having to look into, and every group of three people who play it will have slightly different ingredients to bring to it. It’s always a big task, even if you know them, a huge mountain that you have to climb all over again. I do know how to play the notes, and I know how I feel about lots of things with the pieces, but if you’ve got three very good musicians, each with their own kind of hinterland of musical experience, a lot of ingredients get mixed in and you start having to look at things from other points of view.”

Tomes is passionate about the effect the composer’s music has had on her own life. “It’s always a very enriching experience playing Beethoven trios. Before we had the Florestan Trio we had the quartet, Domus, and we all found that if the group was going to break in a division of opinion it was either two against two or three against one, or four different views. With a trio it is mysteriously different and feels like a more balanced set, as you have one of each type of instrument, so it feels like a tripod with a more stable structure. Everyone has their responsibility within the piece, which is theirs alone and not shared with anybody else.”

It is a natural presumption that a string quartet might be more balanced, but she is not so sure. “There is something interesting about the dynamic of a trio, where you tend to get three different personalities that work well together, perhaps more so than in a string quartet – if they’re all very different then they have perhaps got problems! A string quartet has to sound so blended to be really convincing; somehow with a piano trio you can even get three soloists that will work well as a piano trio, and that’s sometimes how you hear them. However I did come to feel that three well-known soloists working together briefly on a trio is never going to be as satisfying a result as three people who had really put the work in with one another over a long period of time on this music. I believe you can still get further if you’re really committed to doing it with the same group. It’s a difficult thing to explain but there is something about the mental landscape that you get to share, and the experience of playing it together. It’s a satisfying thing to work at a body of pieces like the Beethoven trios.”


Beethoven’s musical autograph for the Piano Trio in D Major Op.70/1, the ‘Ghost’ – an exhibit in the Morgan Library & Museum, New York

Talk turns to each of the trios individually. “My experience of them is that they are all very different in character”, she says. “There are seven of the major trios – the three of Op.1, Op.11, the two of Op.70, then the Archduke and a few miscellaneous pieces. There are seven big ones, and six that are strictly for violin, cello and piano as the Op.11 piece is for clarinet. It’s very sweet and works better with the clarinet I think.”

Each work has its own identity. “I feel these pieces have very distinct personalities of their own, which is a thing I think Beethoven was particularly good at. If you compare them with the piano trios of Mozart, which are perhaps more similar to one another, I always feel that he posed himself different questions with each of the trios, and set out to answer those questions. Because of that the trios have a different artistic personality, which I think is quite an achievement of Beethoven’s.”

Is Beethoven picking up the baton from Mozart rather than Haydn in his writing for the piano trio? “When Beethoven was in his early twenties and studying with Haydn I think Haydn had not yet been to England, and he hadn’t published what we think of as his great piano trios, so probably it was Mozart if anyone that Beethoven was picking up from. It is as though he made a conscious choice to start with trios because it was a format that was perhaps not Mozart’s greatest success. Mozart had mastered the string quartet and the opera, the symphony and the piano concerto, but the piano trios are possibly not one of his really top genres. Perhaps it was a smart idea of Beethoven’s to set out with a type of music where there was room to show that he had something new to offer. He probably intended them for amateur musicians of a rather posh kind or in aristocratic circles, and was probably writing for experienced musicians more than the public concert hall at that point.”

The Florestan Trio made their Hyperion recordings in the Henry Wood Hall in London, and Tomes gives an honest appraisal of them. “Recording sessions I have always found very arduous”, she says. “At no other point do you have to play pieces of music over and over and over, with absolute maximum attention to detail and energy, so I have always found it a very stressful experience. It became obvious very early on that you really didn’t want to leave mistakes on the finished product. I started off saying to our producer that I felt as long as the atmosphere was right and the spirit was right then I didn’t mind about mistakes. Our producer said, ‘Trust me, you will mind if you hear wrong notes and mistakes on the finished product, you will wish that you had taken the time to correct them!’ So we took that attitude the whole way through, and we did make sure that everything was absolutely right at some point during the day. Hopefully we tried to get as many things right as we could on the first take, but that is never possible and the more people you have involved the less possible it is. Even you yourself might hit a lucky streak, but as sure as eggs is eggs somebody else will not play ball, and then you can’t use it. With three people playing exposed parts it multiplies the things that could go wrong simultaneously.”

The demands are clear. “I can’t say I’m a fan of recording, because I’m concentrating so hard on accuracy and at the same time trying to maintain the right kind of mood and spirit, which is really hard. As it goes through the day you find the accuracy rate tends to go down, and sometimes the atmosphere or spirit of the thing can go up. If that happens at a time when you’re making mistakes and getting tired, then that’s not good either. I think most of our recordings ended up being a patchwork of takes from different parts of the day, put together in such a way that they were accurate and had the right feeling behind them. I would not personally have been involved in the editing process, because I just thought I would get so confused by trying to put things together, and would be listening for those takes where I was good or played everything right! I might be tempted to select those rather than one where one of my colleagues was absolutely brilliant. I would happily leave that mainly to Andrew Keener, who as a producer is a brilliant editor. He knew us well enough to know we wouldn’t be happy with just the accurate takes; that he had to find something which had the right feeling about it as well.”

Are there any particular technical challenges about playing Beethoven? “One thing I would like to make clear about the piano trios is that I think the piano parts are as demanding as any of his piano parts, be they solo sonatas, even the concertos. I have played that repertoire as well and honestly think the piano parts in the trios contain as many technical challenges. There is the additional challenge of collaborating with others. Technically they are very challenging, and even from the start. Op.1/2 is extremely difficult for the piano particularly, and it has to sound so effervescent, like a Mozart opera in piano trio form. It’s actually very difficult. At the other end of the spectrum is the Archduke trio, where you need a lot of stamina and a lot of physical strength and energy to play. It keeps going at such a pitch for 40 minutes that you really do need to work up to that.”

As for Beethoven’s originality and invention, Tomes is in no doubt. “Whenever I was working at the trios I always had the feeling that Beethoven could really out-think any composer who came after. Today’s composers know so much about compositional techniques, and modern techniques that he never thought of, but in a way Beethoven has more inventiveness than anyone. Although he was writing in conventional keys, rhythms and notation, the way he constructs from little cells of musical material, and the way he can build enormous structures from small things, and the range of moods and emotions that he can somehow convey; he has such an extraordinary brain and imagination. I always came out feeling that one has to respect Beethoven more than anyone. The power of his thinking is quite amazing really.”

Initially this could be intimidating. “When I was a child I found a lot of Beethoven’s music off-putting almost, I found it over dramatic. You know his typical sudden changes of mood and pace – when I was young I couldn’t understand what he was driving at, I thought it was showing off. It gradually dawned on me, the kind of enormous terrain of feeling and imagination that he was trying to get down on paper. The more I got to know it the more I could see what a giant composer he was, and in a way I think more than anybody else – and I say that as someone whose favourite composer is Mozart – but I think Beethoven is so varied. One can say that even in the six or seven trios, just the number of styles he can write in and the number of things he can suggest to the listener puts him practically in a category of his own.”

You can listen to clips from the Florestan Trio’s recordings of the complete Beethoven Piano Trios at the Hyperion website here For more on Susan Tomes’ writings, head to her own website. Her book Beyond The Notes – which is strongly recommended – includes a chapter on rehearsing Beethoven’s first published trio, which Arcana will be appraising soon.

Listening to Beethoven #49 – Rondo for piano and orchestra in B flat major


Portrait of Beethoven as a young man by Carl Traugott Riedel

Rondo in B flat major WoO 6 for piano and orchestra (1793, Beethoven aged 22)

Dedication not known
Duration 9′

Listen

Background and Critical Reception

This work bears all the hallmarks of the last movement of a piano concerto, so it comes as no surprise to learn that it was originally intended as the finale for Beethoven’s Piano Concerto no.2 in B flat major, Op.19. This work was particularly long in the making, for it was begun – and more or less finished – in Bonn but held back from full publishing until 1801.

The Rondo, composed in 1793, stands alone, and is used by some pianists as an attractive filler to recordings of the concertos. It was not published in the composer’s lifetime, and the solo part needed completion by Beethoven’s student Carl Czerny before it was finally issued in 1829. Beethoven replaced the Rondo with another finale for the concerto, probably in 1794,

Writing about the piece in the booklet for his recent recording on Naxos, Boris Giltburg suggests the composer ‘felt that the Rondo was too jovial and gallant in spirit, and that the deeply poetic second movement (of the concerto) required a much more energetic, irreverent and humorous finale as a counterweight.’ He opts for the original version in his performance ’only adding short transitions and a cadenza where indicated by Beethoven. In my opinion, the Rondo is a lovely standalone piece, fun and carefree, and it deserves to be played—though I fully agree with Beethoven’s decision to remove it from the Concerto proper.’

Thoughts

The piano begins this piece with a bright, rippling theme, with Beethoven in effervescent mood. The strings respond with lilting syncopations, before the orchestra offer a fuller response. This is music with its roots in the dance, leading you to wonder if Beethoven was indeed experiencing new forms of dance in Vienna.

The piano has plenty of room for display, with quickfire ascents and descents, and extended passages with the fingers playing octaves apart. Beethoven does take room for the second theme, however, piano and strings uniting in a softer, detached melody which still has a dance lilt to it.

The piano leads the orchestra the whole way through, adding flicks and tricks to the mix while the orchestra look on. It is a classic concerto finale, and while at this stage we will take Boris Giltburg’s word for its successor being more suitable for the Piano Concerto no.2, we will have to try it out when the chance arises!

Recordings used

Ronald Brautigam (piano), Norrköpping Symphony Orchestra / Andrew Parrott (BIS)
Boris Giltburg (piano), Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra / Vasily Petrenko (Naxos)
Sviatoslav Richter (piano), Wiener Symphoniker / Kurt Sanderling (Deutsche Grammophon)

Ronald Brautigam’s version is unclear, but the shorter duration of his and Sviatoslav Richter’s recordings would suggest they have taken on Czerny’s revisions. Both versions are excellent, but Richter’s rapport with the orchestra in the softer passages is lovely. The freshness of Boris Giltburg’s account and the newness of the recording tips the scales in his favour, for he clearly loves the piece.

Spotify links

Boris Giltburg, Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra / Vasily Petrenko (Naxos)

Ronald Brautigam, Norrköping Symphony Orchestra / Andrew Parrott

Sviatoslav Richter (piano), Wiener Symphoniker / Kurt Sanderling (Deutsche Grammophon)

You can chart the Arcana Beethoven playlist as it grows, with one recommended version of each piece we listen to. Catch up here!

Also written in 1793 Haydn 3 String Quartets Op.74

Next up Piano Trio no.1 in E flat major Op.1/1