Beethoven Violin Concerto
The Great Beethoven Violin Concerto
- Details
- Hits: 15387
Beethoven, born in 1770 and passing away in 1827, composed his only violin concerto, Op. 61, in 1806. During this period, he also wrote the Symphonies 4 and 5, Piano Concerto No. 4, the ‘Appassionate’ Piano Sonata, and the Rasumovsky Series of String quartets.
It is widely agreed that Beethoven’s Violin Concerto is the greatest of the four great violin concertos, alongside those composed by Brahms, Tchaikovsky, and Mendelssohn. Interestingly, Mendelssohn’s concerto was in E minor, while the others were all written in D major. Notably, Brahms, Tchaikovsky, and Beethoven only composed one violin concerto throughout their lives.
Like many great musical works, Beethoven’s Violin Concerto was not well-received upon its first performance in 1806. However, it has stood the test of time and is now widely accepted by both violinists and audiences.
The concerto was first performed by Franz Clement in 1806 but was not well-received. It was in 1844, during a performance by violinist Joseph Joachim with Mendelssohn as conductor, that the piece finally gained widespread acceptance.
It was speculated that after Beethoven published the Violin Concerto, he wrote a Piano version, likely requested by some of his supporters. I had been searching for the recording of this Piano version, Op. 61a, only to discover that the original violin version became more popular than the Piano version. I do manage to find a 2-CD recording of both the Piano and Violin versions of the Concerto. In these recordings, Beethoven’s own candazas were used. Beethoven never actually wrote any candeza for the violin, but did compose a few for the Piano version of the concerto. His candaza includes a section where timpani accompany the solo piano. The piano candazas were adapted for the violin in this recording.
Beethoven’s Violin Concerto is written in a classical three-movement form. The first movement is a structurally complex, not so fast in pace Allegro ma non Troppo. The second movement is a sweet, gentle, and lyrical Larghetto. The final movement is a dance-like Rondo Allegro. During performance, there is no break between the second and third movements.
The first movement is grand, long, and structurally complicated. It definitely tests the ability of the soloist and conductor. I often feel that it doesn’t sound like a traditional violin concerto. Throughout the movement, the violin feels like it’s accompanying the orchestra. Many beautiful musical themes are presented by the orchestra. The solo violin seems to be running scales and appegios, as if the violinist is practising his skill. The composer did give the soloist some beautiful phrases, but they are never long. Only if you’ve listened to great violin masters interpreting the parts will you realise the depth and meaning behind all those running notes. Just like appreciating a glass of wine or a cup of Chinese tea, the more you listen, the more you’ll understand the effort the soloist needs to put in to make the notes musical.
And let’s not forget the very original beginning of the movement – the four light strokes by the timpani. This is probably the first time a concerto has been started this way. These four wonderful strokes actually form part of the first theme in the first movement – what a genius Beethoven!
The second movement is calm and soothing. It’s a very special feeling when a female violinist plays it. Just like the first movement, the solo violin plays a role of bridging the gaps between the musical phrases played by the orchestra. At the end of the second movement, there’s a very short and lively cadenza, and then the music goes into the last energetic and dance-like final movement.
To me, the final movement is the one that finally sounds like a violin concerto. The violin becomes active and proactive, leading the orchestra into a merry celebration. It starts by playing the first theme on the G string, and the pace is fast and lively. The ending is quite humourous: the orchestra thins out, leaving only the violins section playing notes slurred, and the volume gets softer and softer, leaving only the solo violin. Just when you thought there were some more stories to tell, the orchestra and the solo violin ended the movement with two loud chords!
As mentioned earlier, Beethoven himself didn’t write a cadenza for the solo violin. It was customary at that time for the cadenza to be left for the soloist to improvise to show off their skill. There are few cadenzas for this concerto. One is long and expanding at the end of the first movement, one is short between the second and third movements, and just before the end of the third movement, there is another one. There are many versions of cadenza written for this concerto. The most popular one is the version written by Fritz Kreisler. Kreisler wrote a fantastic cadenza for the end of the first movement, using double stoppings to run two first movement themes concurrently on the solo violin. I felt that Kreisler’s cadenza, while allowing the soloist to show off their skills, also gels very nicely with the original themes. Another popular version was written by Joseph Joachim. It’s also well written, but sounds more masculine when compared to Kreisler’s version.
I have close to 100 versions of this great concerto. The recent 2002 live recording by Anne-Sophie Mutter (SACD DG 471633-2) is probably the longest. The recording times for the three movements were 27’09, 10’58, and 10’11, respectively. Mutter’s interpretation in this recording was very different from her early recording with Karajan. Some people say that her great exposure to modern classical has affected her way of interpreting the traditional classical.
Comparing to Mutter’s Beethoven violin concerto, Heifetz (JM-XR24003) played very fast. The three movements took 20’33”, 8’45”, and 8’23”, with a total difference of 12 minutes. Just the first movement had a time difference of about 6 minutes between Mutter and Heifetz. Many classical music lovers may not agree with Heifetz’s tempo for the first movement, but I personally find it fine. Heifetz’s choice of tempo allows for beautiful surprises in the first movement, which can only be achieved at that pace. Mutter used cadenzas written by Kreisler, while Heifetz modified those written by Auer and Joachim.
Although I like both interpretations from Mutter and Heifetz very much, these two versions maybe controversial. There are so many recordings out there, but I would just like to recommend some versions that I felt are more ‘representative’:
