What is Beethoven's weakest opus

[Michael]

Just to cheer everybody up, I thought I'd mention the fact that "Wellington's Victory" was Beethoven's greatest success (financially at least) in his lifetime.

[PaulD]

Thanks Peter. I did not not Vaughan Williams' quote but it is spot on!

[Peter]

Since I started this thread and read your interesting posts, I asked myself again what I meant by "weakest opus". I think I meant weak in the sense of deficient orchestration or arrangements, lack in development or organisation of themes, etc. Mahler thought that the ninth needed re-orchestration and he did rearrange some segments. But was he right to do so? Should the integrity of a piece of music be left alone (let alone "covers" which are meant as giving another texture to a piece rather than fixing it). Or perhaps "covers" are intentional and acceptable ways for artists to fix what they don't like in a piece.

Yes I think as I mentioned previously that many of the responses have been about personal preferences rather than merits of the works themselves. I'm sure Beethoven would have been amongst the first to admit that Wellington's victory was not amongst his best works, but he himself had a soft spot for it because it achieved such success for him. He disparaged his early sonatas and I'm sure no one here would make the argument that in terms of musical achievement they match the late sonatas? To be frank the fugue finale of Op.106 has never greatly appealed to me, but I recognise that it's a much greater work than the finale of Op.2/1 for example which I enjoy more! Vaughan Williams's remark about his own 4th symphony comes to mind "I don't much like it, but it's what I meant!".

As for Mahler's retouchings, that is a different matter and no I don't think it is right to do that.

[PaulD]

Since I started this thread and read your interesting posts, I asked myself again what I meant by "weakest opus". I think I meant weak in the sense of deficient orchestration or arrangements, lack in development or organisation of themes, etc. Mahler thought that the ninth needed re-orchestration and he did rearrange some segments. But was he right to do so? Should the integrity of a piece of music be left alone (let alone "covers" which are meant as giving another texture to a piece rather than fixing it). Or perhaps "covers" are intentional and acceptable ways for artists to fix what they don't like in a piece.

[Albert Gans]

I feared that the Choral Fantasy and the Triple Concerto would turn up in the list, and I strongly disagree with those choices. There are a few listed, like Christus am Ölberge or Wellington's Victory, which I can understand would turn up and can sense why.
The fact that the answers are so diverse indicates to me that there is no 'real' weakest work. Moreover, it seems to point to something that I always have thought is near to unique for Beethoven: that his music covers all tastes, feelings and areas of life and therefore each one of us, even as great admirers, can find plenty to love and at least a few things we do not consider our favourites.

[Michael]

One piece comes to mind that I am not at all keen on is - Beethoven's Turkish March, Op. 113 . I realize I may be alone on this one.
Even a genius can have a bad hair day.

Yes - it is a bit annoying and repetitious, Megan. Although it started out as a set of piano variations and they show what can be done with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYeu6KAWLME




.

[Megan]

One piece comes to mind that I am not at all keen on is - Beethoven's Turkish March, Op. 113 . I realize I may be alone on this one.
Even a genius can have a bad hair day.

[Michael]

Well, if I have to choose it would be his early quartets. I don't know why, but I hate that sound of almost mozartian music. I don't know what's your opinion on this quarters, but I don't like them at all...

I know I'm going a bit off topic here but I came to the early quartets a number of years after I had become familiar with the middle and late ones and - apart from No. 1 - I didn't like them either. However, Beethoven always needs time (in my case anyway) and I now find them - plus the string trios and the quintets - absolutely indispensable.

It is true that Beethoven's individual voice comes through only intermittently but I don't find them overtly Mozartian (apart from No. 5). If anything, I think he was trying to compete with Haydn at the time of composition. In any case, nearly all of Beethoven's work up to 1802 or so reflects the prevailing "classical" sound of the time - and almost everybody sounded like Haydn or Mozart (and vice versa).

The F major quartet, however, is the cream of the crop. Even the first version which he gave to his friend Amenda and then comprehensively revised, was already breaking new ground. He wisely put it first on the agenda but it is more likely that No. 3 was the first to be written - possibly even in Bonn. It's a beautiful work without any other pretentions than to please the ear (as is No. 2, nicknamed the "Compliments Quartet".)

However, in No. 4, you are in full C minor mode and, in the last movement of the last quartet of the set, you have a major breakthrough. Titled "La Malanconia", parts of it sound like late Beethoven with a very anguished opening which breaks out into a kind of manic waltz. Nothing much like it had been written before and I'm sure Haydn must have heard it with the same apprehension as he felt for the C minor piano trio seven or eight years before.

[Peter]

I am astonished about the works which have been mentioned here. I do love "Wellington's Sieg" (especially the victory part), I definitivly love the Triple Concerto, Ruins of Athens and King Stephan, the Christ oratorio, "Elise", ...

What I dislike are "Der Glorreiche Augenblick" op. 136, most of the op. 18 quartetts and the String Trios or the piano variations op. 34 ....

Well I think we're getting away from the thread title - it isn't about personal likes or dislikes, rather the quality of the music. I also like the Ruins of Athens and King Stephen, but they're not in the same league as Egmont or Coriolanus. Nor is the triple concerto a match for any of the other Beethoven concertos, despite being highly enjoyable.

I'm surprised you're astonished at the works mentioned Gerd, as most musicologists have cited them as not first rate Beethoven. What surprises me is your choice of Op.18 and the string trios which are amongst the best of early Beethoven! My favourite of these works is Op.18/1 - I admit the others in the set don't greatly appeal, but they are still fine compositions.

[gprengel]

I am astonished about the works which have been mentioned here. I do love "Wellington's Sieg" (especially the victory part), I definitivly love the Triple Concerto, Ruins of Athens and King Stephan, the Christ oratorio, "Elise", ...

What I dislike are "Der Glorreiche Augenblick" op. 136, most of the op. 18 quartetts and the String Trios or the piano variations op. 34 ....

[Pastorale]

Well, if I have to choose it would be his early quartets. I don't know why, but I hate that sound of almost mozartian music. I don't know what's your opinion on this quarters, but I don't like them at all...

[Peter]

Thank you Peter for the information. I just checked the CD and it says that the cadenza is Biamonti 511 no.1). I assume it must be one of the good cadenzas so I will go back and listen to the whole piece again with a different ear.

Beethoven's cadenzas were for the unusual combination of piano and timpani - they were later arranged for the violin (and timpani) by Max Rostal, Eugène Ysaÿe, Christian Tetzlaff and Wolfgang Schneiderhan. To my mind they are the best cadenzas written for the violin concerto.

For what it's worth, more recently, the violin concerto has also been arranged as a concerto for clarinet and orchestra, by Mikhail Pletnev.

[PaulD]

Thank you Peter for the information. I just checked the CD and it says that the cadenza is Biamonti 511 no.1). I assume it must be one of the good cadenzas so I will go back and listen to the whole piece again with a different ear.

[Peter]

I own a CD of the violin concerto but arranged as a piano concerto (D.Barenboim). Apparently it is from Beethoven himself. It is difficult to get used to and it does not sound as inspired. Has anyone heard this before?

Yes Beethoven provided this for Clementi in London as he felt the work would have more success as a piano concerto - I agree that it pales in comparison to the original, but what is inspired are the cadenzas Beethoven provided for this version - they have been transcribed for violin.

[AeolianHarp]

In the movie "Beethoven lives upstairs" (which by the way is not as bad as it sounds), the lady who owns the house starts playing Fur Elise in front of Beethoven. Beethoven does not seem too impressed and asks who wrote that piece... She says it's from him and he seems surprised and a little annoyed.

I love this film! It's the most accurate portrayal of Beethoven on film. I know that scene well. My fave scene is when the boy is awoken at night by water dripping onto his bed, so he sneaks upstairs and opens Beethoven's door to see Beethoven stood in only a pair of trousers with his room in a mess and sees Beethoven humming and pacing the room composing!