Talk:Piano Sonata No. 31 (Beethoven)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

I moved the article back so that its title is what the work is called (I will never think of this work as his "Sonata No. 31", but always "Op. 110", and I am absolutely certain I am not in a minority among musicians). I think the other Beethoven piano sonata (and string quartet) articles should be similarly moved, as musicians in my experience know them all by opus number not by order of publication, but I recognise that consensus is required before this is done. --RobertG ♬ talk 17:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Turns out to be a fairly moot point as most users will probably use the boxes at the bottom to navigate through the various sonatas and quartets. 172.165.139.179 06:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I "moved" it back to Sonata No. 31, to match the other articles on Beethoven's piano sonatas. Though I agree with RobertG, I think it's either all the articles or none. Redkind 18:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

*Sigh*. I can live with it, and it's no big deal, but the titles of the articles on Beethoven's string quartets and piano sonatas are something which, in my view, Wikipedia has got absolutely wrong. And please don't do cut-n-paste moves! --RobertG ♬ talk 19:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Three movements?

umm, I dunno, but my recording appears to have four movements: a Moderato cantabile molto expressivo, an Allegro molto, an Adagio, ma non troppo, and a Fuga: Allegro ma non troppo. However, the article here seems pretty detailed for it to be wrong... It also says similar movements but with the Fugue as a part of the Finale. I haven' changed it, I'm just going to point it out. 24.226.77.23 (talk) 22:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. I believe CD producers do sometimes track the start of the first fugue in the finale separately, just as they sometimes provide separate tracks for sections in the finale of the Choral Symphony: nevertheless I think the (well-sourced) analysis in the article stands. --RobertG ♬ talk 08:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

You're correct (Robert) -- the arioso and fugue are a single interwoven movement. They're often separately tracked for the convenience of listeners, but Beethoven makes it clear they're a single movement when he brings back the arioso in G minor (shattering moment, that). Antandrus (talk) 14:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Alight then. 24.226.77.23 (talk) 13:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The file of the First Movement by Donald Betts says the compositor is Schumann,instead of Beethoven. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.244.192.164 (talk) 21:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Piano Sonata No. 1 (Beethoven) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 13:45, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Note the date of the foregoing notice. The discussion, now long closed, concerned whether to move the sonata articles to new titles incorporating opus numbers. The conclusion was not to do so. Drhoehl (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

"poi a poi": Brendel vs Rosen

1995/6 in The New York Review of Books:

1. "Beethoven's Triumph" by Charles Rosen, 21 September 1995
2. "Beethoven's Triumph", response by Alfred Brendel, 16 November 1995; includes Rosen's reply
3. "Getting Back to Life" by Alfred Brendel, 1 February 1996; includes Rosen's reply

Popcorn! -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:02, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Piano Sonata No. 31 (Beethoven)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ErnestKrause (talk · contribs) 14:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Article review comments currently in preparation. This may take a few days. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Lead section and main sections

Lead section

Current version is somewhat short. You might be able to get something like a 3 paragraph lead section if you follow the TOC of the article in its current form, with one paragraph per section. The lead section should summarize the current article after all your edits. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Will do after all other points have been addressed. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 15:51, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Lead expanded to 280 words (couldn't really include much of the nitty gritty musical analysis, since it's really difficult to summarize all of these specifics into one or two sentences for each movement) GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 19:27, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Composition

Fairly direct with an emphasis on the publisher funding and publication. History of Beethoven conception of the piece might be interesting. Is the any relation to the "Hammerklavier" which preceded the publication of the last three piano sonatas? None of the last 3 sonatas seem to have reached the same level of popular acclaim as the No. 29, and is there a reason for this tendency in Beethoven general productivity in his last years? Is there more to be said of Beethoven's physical health already mentioned somewhat, and did his hearing become worse during the composition of the last 3 piano sonatas? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

None of the sources explicitly discuss connection with Op. 106, nor any more details about Beethoven's health. Deafness does not seem to be a relevant point here, and the main health issues of jaundice and rheumatism during this time have already been mentioned (the chapter relevant to Op. 110 in Thayer's biography is titled "Attacks of Rheumatism and Jaundice"). As for "history of Beethoven conception of the piece", that would require some scholarly/published analysis of his sketches for Op. 110, which I have yet to find (the sources I have only go so far as to mention similarities between the contemporary Missa solemnis, which are already mentioned). Analysis of the piece's popularity and reception is even more sparse, with only a few contemporary critical reviews and a few more comments over the years (all of which that I could find are mentioned/summarized here). GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 15:22, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

If you have now seen the Gould comments then there is his useful comment that the late Beethoven string quartets appear to have been an influence on the composition of this sonata. You can likely use the Youtube citation since Gould is speaking in the first person and therefore is a reliable source for himself. Regarding the health issues, the biography of Beethoven I recall is that his hearing loss was gradual during the last full two decades of his life. It might be useful to at least comment if he was fully deaf at the time of composition of the No. 31 or if he still had residual hearing at that time. Separately, bringing in the fugue comments by Gould can be tied into the Hammerklavier, I think in a useful way. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I disagree on even bringing in deafness, because I have no sources which explicitly link deafness with the composition of this sonata. However, I added a summary of the Gould analysis into the passage on the third movement. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 17:30, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Form

Brendel and Schnabel are not the only performers to have commented on this sonata. There is a Glenn Gould video ready available on internet of him commenting upon the sonata and performing the adagio and fugue. Possibly some of that would be interesting to readers of this article. The color-coded musical score for the fugue looks a little novel, and the four colors seems to roughly corresponds to the textual analysis you provide though not completely. Your text speaks of the 4 note motif which Beethoven uses, and then the color code appears to indicate phrases of two notes coded to the same color followed by another two notes coded in another color. I am referring to your comment on the motif A♭–D♭–B♭–E♭. Possibly a chart of your color key with a key would be useful, or, to use the color codes in your actual text to aid in the explanations. As a general comment throughout the section, the wording "roughly ten minutes" does not appear as encyclopedic as something like "Performance time approxiamately ten minutes". You use 'roughly' several times in this section. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

The Gould analysis is interesting, and offers ideas for a potential Op. 106 and Op. 110 connection with regards to the fugue. Unfortunately, the Gould video seems only to be available in that form, and the proper citation of which might be tricky. "Roughly" has been changed to "approximately". I don't plan on discussing the different colors/color coding. It seems rather odd, as no other articles on fugues seem to do this. I will regenerate the score without coloring. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 15:39, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

That 'connection' is worthwhile adding to this article. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:42, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Done for both score change and Gould analysis. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 17:30, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Reception

It might be nice to see more about the reception of this sonata, and the history of the recorded performances (usually reflecting the principal concert setting successes for this sonata). Brendel, Schnabel and Gould were not the only performers and it would be nice to acknowledge some of the others. There is quite a number of complete Beethoven piano sonata compilations which have received much attention. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Besides Brendel, Schnabel, and Gould, do you have any other suggestions for finding a comprehensive history of notable performances of the sonata? Checking AllMusic and Presto Music return a bunch of results to sift through, not all of which are notable. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 15:52, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

The list of performers for the late sonatas alone appears in Late piano sonatas (Beethoven). Also, for the complete sonatas, it is worthwhile mentioning the complete set by the Canadian pianist Stewart Goodyear who receives high marks for it from TNYT [1]. To my knowledge, several leading pianists such as Vladimir Horowitz and Evgeny Kissin have not performed this sonata, possibly as an omission. Other notable pianists to make complete recordings of all 32 sonatas include Claudio Arrau, Paul Lewis, Daniel Barenboim, Mari Kodama, Alfred Brendel, Vladimir Ashkenazy, Maurizio Pollini, Richard Goode, and others, who might be mentioned in some way. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:41, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

All right, I added a link to that list in a new Recordings section, and mentioned many of the important recordings you listed above. I didn't include the "possible" omissions of Horowitz and Kissin, since I have not been able to confirm these omissions as intentional/significant in any way from reliable sources. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 18:47, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Comments

That should start things in a useful direction. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:19, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

@ErnestKrause: Thanks for your review. I have responded to your points. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 15:52, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

@ErnestKrause: Thank you for the prompt responses and resources. I have added/addressed all of the points. Please let me know if there's more I can do :) GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 19:27, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Those edits look like enhancements to the article in the lead section and the new section on performances. At present, the 4 segments of the musical scores you have added seem to have 3 of them using the preface of "Piano", and one of them not using the preface of "Piano". All 4 should be in the same format using the preface "Piano". Optionally, it might be nice to add an image for one of the exceptional artists you have listed in the new performance section if a good image is available on Wikimedia. Currently I am leaving this review open for a day or so to see if any other editors might have comments or insights. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

@ErnestKrause: These excerpts are all sourced from the same score (see the three by ClassicMan), and the last one doesn't have the instrument because it's not the beginning of a movement. I also don't see the necessity of adding an image of one of the performers because a) that image would not be relevant to the sonata itself and b) there is no precedence/custom for this on other classical composition articles. There is nothing exceptional or unique about how this article treats its performers compared to articles without images of the performer to warrant an image (unless of course, the performer is seen playing the sonata, but I have to find an image of that on WikiMedia). Finally, I assume the edits to the Reception, Recording, and Lead sections are to your satisfaction since you have no further comments on them? GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 15:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, on account of the score excerpts, I just cropped out the instrument name for the original 3, so now they are all uniform. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 18:36, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

List of items from Robert Greenberg

This is a list from the issues raised by Greenberg (2005, Beethoven's Piano Sonatas) in his book about the Beethoven sonatas. Pages 206-210 deal with this sonata.

• The writing of the last three sonatas overlaps in time with Beethoven's 'Immortal Beloved' incident and it is evident that the emotional impact is reflected on the composition since the dedication of No. 30 and No. 32 are to Maximiliana Brentano (her daughter) and to Antoine Brentano (the Immortal Beloved). If important to Greenberg, then should it be in this article?
  • First, nobody there is no consensus of who the Immortal Beloved really is, and an overlap does not necessarily warrant inclusion in the article. Furthermore, Beethoven's possible intent to dedicate the sonata to Antoine Brentano is already covered in the article. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 21:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

• Sonata No. 31 is the last one Beethoven composes in 3 movements. No.32 goes back to using a 2 movement structure. Also, historically, Beethoven composes 18 or his 32 sonatas in the 'three sonatas' triplets format contracted by him.
  • This does not seem to be a particularly interesting point, since many sonatas are in three movements. Also, the original edition by Schlesinger was actually published with four movements, so adding this fact in might only complicate matters further. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 21:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

• The scherzo in F minor in No. 31 is substantially different for its expressed range of dynamics than the scherzos composed during Beethoven's meddle period (his "Heroic" period). The bridge to the late period is fully marked in 1820-21,

• The adagio and recitativo is followed by "the sort of quasi-operatic recitative we would expect to hear in a passion by Bach or, indeed, a Solemn Mass by Beethoven", p 209.
  • The "operatic" nature of the recitative is already covered in the article, but feel free to add the references to Bach and the Missa solemnis yourself (I would rather not add it in myself, since I do not have direct access to the source and thus can not make the full citation) GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 21:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

• Folowing the "Klagender Gesang" lamentation of the third movement, the fugue subject is partially "derived from the first theme of the first movement", p210. Greenberg states that the Crucifixus passage section of the Missa Solemnis must be seen as influential of the "dramatically inspired third movement", p210.
  • Connections to the Missa solemnis, as well as the parallels between the fugue subject and the opening theme in the first movement are already mentioned. However, feel free to add in the Crucifixus connection yourself per above. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 21:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Let me know if that is useful. Beethoven's contemporaneous compositions and their influence might be well served by noting some of this. ErnestKrause (talk) 19:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

• @ErnestKrause: I appreciate the additional content, but as of now, I still have no idea what progress has been made and what criterion have been met for the GA review. So far this seems to me to be more of a peer review than a GA review. GeneralPoxter (talk • contribs) 21:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Conclusion: The Greenberg comments are optional. Article improvements appear consistent with peer review promotion. Article promoted. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:04, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 07:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the finale of Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 31 sees a gradual "return to life" and ends with a "passionate" and "heroic" coda? Source: Rosen 2002, p. 240; Cooper 1970, p. 195

• Reviewed: Maungwudaus

Improved to Good Article status by GeneralPoxter (talk). Self-nominated at 17:56, 13 August 2021 (UTC).

• – Hi @GeneralPoxter, thanks for contributing expanding this article on a well known Beethoven's sonata. The article in new wnough (promoted GA on August 13, 2021) and long enough (15774 characters). As it is a GA, it is within policy. Earwig's copyvio detector detects highest 20.6% similarity (violation unlikely). The hook is properly formatted, cited in the nomination as well as in the article. At 130 characters, it is under limit, and is interesting. Although I couldn't access the sources, it is assumed in good faith. A QPQ has been done. The nomination is good to go. Best of luck with the Featured article candidacy. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:05, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

To T:DYK/P1

Score excerpts

I have replaced the existing PNG scores with more professional looking SVG engravings based on urtext. Please let me know if you need more excerpts, e.g. the trio of the second movement. Thanks for bringing this to FA! intforce (talk) 11:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)