Ludwig van Beethovens Third Symphony - Essay Example

Beethoven Introduction Broadly accredited for being one of the most essential symphonic compositions in western songs, Ludwig van Beethoven’s third symphony is simply a masterpiece. Beethoven’s semi-programmatic name, “Eroica,” the intense size, exceptional formal organization, as well as developmental history of the composition, all together, opened up too many variables to permit a remarkable analytical approach to the composition, which is mutually settled upon by the musical community reasonable, as supported by over 200 years of serious attempts to do precisely that. This essay will specifically look at Movement 1 that was done by two orchestras. The two orchestras are the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra and the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra. This paper seeks to offer one reasonable analysis, the spotlight being mainly on the organization of thematic aspects of the two recordings in the third symphony that give the work a “symphonic” or cyclical quality. Compare. The orchestras are performed in mini-sonata form. This is because the oboe and flute in both played the main melody. There is no playing of countermelody Also the orchestras end with recapitulation where fugue is maintained by all strings. The two recordings start ambitiously with one of the greatest opening movement of any symphony composed to date. The orchestras also dispense the movement with an unhurried section. The total performing time of each recording is approximately 15 to 18 minutes. The Baltimore Chamber Orchestra performance is analyzable as a prolonged symphonic form with some rondo elements. Instead of the tidiest, foursquare assortment of first time, which frequently packs it up at the selected stand and time aside for the next event; Beethoven’s symphony utilizes a thematic group wherein the same material takes on numerous distinct personalities. The development of the recordings, similar to the rest of the pieces, is characterized by remarkable rhythmic and harmonic tension owing to dissonant chords, as well as long passages of syncopated tempos. Most amazingly, the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra initiates a novel melody in the development part, breaking the classical tradition, which the development section simply works with present materials. The development sections of the recordings lead back into the recapitulation; particularly, the horns seem to come in early with the tonic melody whereas the strings are still playing the leading chord. The Eroica symphony is a funeral hymn in C minor accompanied by a trio in C major. It carries multiple forgets, and its somberness has led to its being utilized in public funerals. The tempos of the two recordings were slightly different with the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra is slightly faster than the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra. The first passage of the Eroica symphony is a series much similar to the second phase of the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra, in that they utilize a melodic sequence, which unfolds all through the violins and winds. This begets a second and more energetic passage at the closing stages of the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra. Consider the rhythmic aspect of the melody in the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra, the team shifts this into the accompaniment and prolongs it because it interpolates three-quarter rests. The phrasing also appears to change from a beat-two orientation, witnessed through his organization to a beat-one orientation to the eighth note functions as a precursor. The curve of the Eroica symphony is actually similar, even though it is much more disjunct. In both orchestras, the finishing is a set length of variations and fugue on a subject Beethoven had formerly composed for The Creatures of Prometheus – his ballet music. Contrast. Oboe of Vienna Orchestra has a sharp sounding than Baltimore’s which penetrated through staccato. The flute that played the melody in Vienna had a varied volume and its tempo was fast. In Baltimore, the flute had equal volume and its tempo was slow. Vienna’s violins were faster and louder compared to Baltimore’s. The characteristics and mood between Baltimore and Vienna orchestras were slightly different. The Baltimore Orchestra took into account more than just an instrumental playability and range compared to the Vienna Orchestra. The Baltimore Orchestra took into account what the instrument is mainly good at doing and changed the fundamental musical ideas accordingly. This is why their solos were clearer. For instance, when using the woodwinds, the Baltimore Orchestra decided to add trills and grace notes in order to enhance the melody. The Vienna Orchestra, on the other hand, had more dynamics than the Baltimore Orchestra. Their dynamics were extremely powerful and it offered more gave them more strength. They incorporated extremely loud moments, extremely soft moments plus everything in between. The sound quality of the Baltimore Orchestra was full of bass unlike the Vienna Orchestra. The Vienna Orchestra attacked their sound more with a piano as compared to the Baltimore Orchestra, which used the bass guitar more. The Vienna Philharmoniker and the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra composition have an allegretto and allegro kind of tempo respectively. Baltimore is at a vivacissimamente while Vienna is at vivacissimo. The Vienna Philharmoniker orchestra starts on a vivacissimo tempo. This means that it starts very quickly and lively then followed by a series of rallentando (progressive slow pace) and Accelerando (increase in pace). The increase in tempo by the conductor in vienna is sharper, quick and vigorous. The Baltimore Chamber Orchestra starts on a vivacissimamente tempo. Meaning it starts very faster and more lively. Its progressive series of rallentando and Accelerando is slow and less vigorous. It tends to have a ritenuto tempo which means that it works in a slowing manner and lean towards a more “held back” feel. The dynamic contrast between the two orchestras mostly lies in the technique of switching abruptly between very soft to very loud and very loud to very soft. The Vienna Philharmoniker switches very abruptly between soft and loud tempo. This brings about a sharper sound and what makes it pronouncing is the crescendo that gets the whole orchestra like a freight train. On the other hand, the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra is not that abrupt in switching between soft and loud tempo which brings out a “held back” like feeling. It gives out a mood that can be translated to; if someone sets the volume too low, he might miss out on the quiet and peaceful composition that comprises a healthy portion of the song. The recordings are a landmark in the history of the classical symphony for numerous grounds. The pieces are almost twice as long as symphonies by Mozart or Haydn. The Baltimore Chamber Orchestra performance has only been roughly as long as all Classical symphonies, taking into account that the exposition repeat is considered. The recordings cover more emotional and expressive grounds when compared to earlier works, and they are often cited as the start of the Romantic age in music, hence their tender, emotional and affectionate mood. The Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra, in essence, displays a prominent array of emotion, from the depression of the major funeral March theme, in the relative comfort of happier, main episodes. The closing of the recordings show a similar diversity, and is of significance in the overall scheme that was practically unheard of in the past. The opening subject of the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra is not similar to the overture to the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra. In Baltimore Chamber Orchestra, the horn-solo enters with the main subject four bars prior to the "actual" recapitulation. Conclusion. I would prefer Baltimore Chamber Orchestra. This is because it has some enhanced element that outshines Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra. Baltimore has a first tempo that gave the performance that hype that moved the audience. Additionally, Baltimore was energetic and also the character’s mood was appealing. This is not to say that the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra was not good, but the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra was better (Tippett & Harper 54). The musician, in the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra, has only offered the audience a glimpse of his melodic thought. It does not grant itself in its full effect only after the inclusion of some bars.” Vienna lacked any warning: the texture moved to the next theme without giving the audience to digest and acknowledge. Therefore Baltimore Chamber Orchestra was better than Vienna. Reference Brahms, Johannes. Symphony No. 3. S.l.: LSO, 2005. Print. Read More