Talk:Symphony No. 8 (Schubert)

Untitled

It seems that this symphony was not unfinished but put aside because very personal: Schubert seems to have had a dream which marked him deeply and which he remembered in every detail. This symphony counts this vivid dream and represents its musical realisation or its analysis - psychoanalysis, even if this word was not yet invented, but most of the romantics analysed their dreams - . I can't find any book or encyclopedia that talks about this, if anyone has suggestions plz let us know.

There's a "citation needed" note for the comment in the first paragraph about the "B minor entr'acte from Schubert's incidental music to Rosamunde". Anthony Burton wrote liner notes to the Deutsche Grammophon recording of the Unfinished, performed by the Philharmonia Orchestra conducted by Guiseppe Sinopoli. (DG Dig 445 514-2: the 1999 Penguin Guide awards a rosette to the performance.) Burton's liner notes say: "It has been suggested that the powerful Entr'acte in B minor from Schubert's Rosamunde incidental music of 1823 is the missing finale of the Symphony, and indeed it is a match for the first two movements in scoring -- with three trombones added to the standard classical orchestra -- as well as in key." The 99 Guide also reviews a set of Schubert symphonies by the Academy of St Martin in the Fields conducted by Neville Marriner (Phillips Dig 412 176-2) on page 1244, writing that the Unfinished is "here completed with Schubert's Scherzo filled out and the Rosamunde B-minor Entr'acte used as finale". Do those count as "citations"? References to this business of the B-minor Entr'acte seem to be common knowledge in the field, so maybe we don't really need a citation. Jim Hardy 19:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

"The key of the symphony was virtually unprecedented"

I find this especially amusing considering I was just listening to a B minor symphony by C.P.E. Bach, who died before Franz Schubert was born. Anyway, it cites only three very famous composers as supposed evidence for this odd claim, and I believe this is a mistake. This statement need not be included. It adds nothing to the article. Friedrich Schneider, C.P.E. Bach, Ordonez (all these in my CD collection right at hand), Dittersdorf wrote at least one (unrecorded so far as I know)... this is without really looking. Hardly unprecedented, certainly not "virtually unprecedented". The fact that I have 3 that I have found IMMEDIATELY in my collection and know of one other would probably indicate that with some real digging a much longer list could be produced. Can't this misleading statement be removed without harming the article? Smyslov 20:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Brian Newbould in his book on the Schubert Symphonies (p.187) calls B minor "a key very rare in the Classical symphonic repertory" and even "It may be that Schubert's is actually the first B minor symphony of all time". Clearly, just from the examples you give, that isn't true. I've changed the wording to 'unusual' rather than 'unprecedented'. Perhaps B minor was more common for pre-Classical symphonies than those of the Classical period? Has anyone ever done a statistical analysis of symphonic home keys for the various period? Might be interesting. Cenedi 10:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Iy isn't that rare a key at all and I have no idea why Newbould was write that. Gingermint (talk) 04:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

It is because brass instruments didn't cope well with sharp keys, until valves were added in 1815, and Schubert took advantage of the innovation. Even Beethoven had to use 'natural' horns. Schubert's orchestration: 2 flutes, 2 oboes, 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, 2 horns, 2 trumpets, 3 trombones, timpani, and strings. In B minor, this was a radical move.~

Three in a bar

Today's anonymous addition: "One possible reason for Schubert's leaving the symphony incomplete is the predominance of the same rhythm (three-in-a-bar). The first movement is in 3/4, the second in 3/8 and the third (an incomplete scherzo) also in 3/4. Three movements in a row in exactly the same rhythm does not occur in any of the symphonies, sonatas or chamber works of the great Viennese composers." Three comments: (1), yes, well, it may be a possible reason, but are we dealing here with the contributor's speculation, or can this theory be referenced? (2) It probably shouldn't be in the head summary but in a later portion of the article. (3) That's an AWFUL lot of "symphonies, sonatas and chamber works". Again, can we have a reference to support the statement, or are we supposed to check by going through them all ourselves? Cenedi (talk) 10:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Also: Haydn 45. Double sharp (talk) 17:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Horn and Trumpet keys

Contrary to what was asserted earlier, horns and trumpets could most certainly be crooked -- or keyed -- in B natural: this is a very unlikely reason for the work to have remained difficult to finish. Additionally, there are many examples in the works of previous composers requiring horns and trumpets to change their crooks if the music uses harmonies too foreign to the instruments' crooks. Unless there are citations to support the idea that the piece was left unfinished because of difficulties in orchestrating for the brass instruments, this idea should not be presented. User:JosiahboothbyJosiahboothby (talk) 23:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

It makes more sense for the D.708a fragment: despite being in D major, the climax in the finale is in A-flat major, meaning that despite the brass instruments being sorely needed at such a climactic moment, they can't play... (Newbould points this out as a reason why many of the sketched symphonies were never orchestrated. Although it does make me wonder why Schubert would write this way for a projected symphony, if he knew it would cause orchestration problems...) Double sharp (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

(Nevertheless, crooks in B natural were not easily obtained at that time, so it may well have been a reason. Haydn had to specifically ask for crooks for F-sharp and B natural for his 45th and 46th symphonies, and even then he got what could be called a "semitone extensor" that would lower the pitch by one semitone, making a G horn into an F-sharp horn.) Double sharp (talk) 08:12, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Casper the friendly ghost?

Wasn't it featured prominently in the Casper the Friendly Ghost short "Boo Bop"? minespatch 19:24, 8 February 2009 (PT)

I don't recall the exact title, but I recall an episode from the 1950s series that dealt with Casper meeting Schubert (or his ghost) in which he assists him in wrapping up the work, complete with a performance of self-playing instruments. 99.40.197.2 (talk) 06:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

ORF 2

The Austrian Television used the main theme to recognise its channel 2, besode the "Wiener Walzer" in ORF 1. 91.17.239.77 (talk)--

Smurfs

Did you know that the Symphony was used as the theme song for Gargamel? 70.188.129.194 (talk) 15:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep. All the pop culture stuff has been removed. After a while, the numerous references tend to dominate and at some point completely take over the article. DavidRF (talk) 16:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

• Actually, it's all supposed to fact, man. Fact. 70.188.129.194 (talk) 23:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Scherzo: The Scherzo is the big B minor and is an extra part added to the Symphony it was a sketched work by Brian Newbould. Brian Newbould actually plays it in the orchestra. It was sketched by Schubert's friends. It is a beatiful peace. Its sappose to be like one of the other symphonies.

Allegro Molto Moderato: This movement is taken from the opera Rosamunde is an opera and Act 1 Scene 1 was taken And the Ballet 1 is also part of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by S010959 (talk • contribs) 11:52, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Rosamunde was not an opera, it was a play with incidental music. The play itself is lost, though its plot is known. Otherwise, only Schubert's music survives.Kostaki mou (talk) 05:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't really like his scherzo. It just isn't as interesting as the first two movements, to me. Hans Gál's writing on this scherzo is really worth reading. Maybe something that should be tried is discarding the scherzo altogether and just playing the relevant entr'acte from Rosamunde as the finale. (Because the end of the scherzo is just too similar to the beginning of that entr'acte.) Legge's completion on IMSLP has the scherzo segue directly into the finale with an attacca: it is an interesting idea, but I don't think it really works completely?! Just my $0.02. Double sharp (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Written Musical Examples

It would be very nice to have written musical examples and more of an analysis of the work. Something less simplistic. Gingermint (talk) 04:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

"the first two pages of a scherzo in full score, and the remainder of the scherzo in piano score"

I find this somewhat confusing as it implies there is a complete piano score for the scherzo. From what I have read it exists only as fragments. Clarification or a citation is needed here.Graham1973 (talk) 23:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

There is, sort of (it's not completely scored: it thins out towards the end and by the time he reaches the trio only the melody is present). p.11-13 of this pdf contains the sketch. Double sharp (talk) 17:09, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Rosamunde B minor entr'acte

I'm interested to listen to the Rosamunde entr'acte cited as possibly intended as a finale for the symphony. However, there are two entr'actes and neither of them appears to be in B minor, so I'm confused! The URL [1], makes no reference to Rosamunde or to any entr'acte. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed Addis (talk • contribs) 17:24, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

It's the first one. For some reason on YouTube you will typically see the D major one as No. 1 (and the B-flat major one as No. 2), bumping them all down by one. There are really three. Various recordings of Newbould's completion of this symphony are available; the fourth movement is this entr'acte. Double sharp (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Horribly written, not like an encyclopedic article

What is this drivel?

That Hüttenbrenner neither had the work performed, nor even let the society know he had the manuscript is curious and has spawned various theories. Was he given an incomplete score by Schubert and was waiting for the rest before saying anything? If so, he waited in vain throughout the six remaining years of Schubert's life. After Schubert's premature death in 1828 (of typhus as a complication of syphilis), why didn't Hüttenbrenner then make the existence of the manuscript known? Do the torn pages suggest he had somehow damaged the piece and managed to lose, or even inadvertently destroy, the last two movements?[5] Was guilt therefore the reason he kept silent about the work's existence for 37 years after Schubert died? Could personality factors like introvertedness or jealousy have been at play here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.228.159 (talk) 15:54, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, it's not a great article at all, is it? Fortunately, there are a ton of studies on this symphony, so fixing it should not be a problem, and you could do it yourself if you wanted to. The Hüttenbrenners did indeed act very strangely about their posession of this symphony, but of course we should not included speculation, other than that which can be cited to reliable sources. Double sharp (talk) 13:07, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

"the first two pages of the start of a scherzo"

Regarding this and the remaining horribly-written sections quoted above, we've known that most of it has been wrong since 1968, when, to quote Brian Newbould (Schubert and the Symphony, p.181), "Christa Landon discovered a second page of the full score of the scherzo (up to then it was thought only the first page existed) it was established that Schubert had cut this page out of the score before sending it to Hüttenbrenner, and that this was definitely the last page to be scored by Schubert, as blank pages follow it. The first page of the scherzo could not be removed, as it backed on to the last page of the slow movement." Double sharp (talk) 15:28, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Considered FIRST Romantic Symphony?

That line I removed in the introduction to this article is unnecessary, and unsourced, I should add. And one can argue that symphonies 3 to 9 of Beethoven and those of Weber, as well as symphonies 2 to 6 of Schubert, are Romantic. Also, saying Beethoven never composed in a Romantic style is just like saying that none of the songs by The Beatles are rock music. Classicalfan626 (talk) 23:57, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Now it is sourced. Furthermore, there is quite a prominent viewpoint from Rosen and others (which I daresay I agree with) that Beethoven never composed in a Romantic style outside An die ferne Geliebte. (Schubert's earlier symphonies are more post-classical than Romantic, as are Weber's; Rosen gives 5 as an example.) The music may sound Romantic, but it is always constructed completely according to Classical principles, even as these principles are adapted to larger (e.g. Op. 106) or smaller (e.g. Op. 109) canvasses. Anyway, it says "sometimes" (even though IMHO any viewpoint considering Beethoven more Romantic than Classical is at best superficial and at worst completely wrong-headed). Double sharp (talk) 05:09, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

It's evident from reading through the notes on the two finished movemsnts in this article - and even from listening to the work - that Schubert makes heavy use of harmomic suspension. Cadenzas end in unexpected modulations, the fabric of the music is halted by pauses, lone brass notes and sudden dissonances, the direction of the music often avoids the kind of firm development that Haydn and Beethoven had made part of sonata form, in favour of drifting harmonics and chromaticism. All of which points forward to Bruckner and Brahms, to the late romantics, and brings a tone of melancholy longing and grief to the music. 83.254.135.30 (talk) 22:44, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

There are no cadenzas; it is difficult to find more unexpected modulations than the ones in the development of Mozart's B-flat major Concerto KV 595; dramatic pauses may be found in almost every Haydn symphony; it is difficult to find more sudden dissonances than the ones (say) in Mozart's G minor Quintet; and the central section of the first movement of the Unfinished clearly shows the harmonic instability and fragmentation of motif characteristic of Classical development. If the second movement shows none, that is not unusual for a Classical work, where the slow movement often shows very little harmonic tension in favour of lyricism and turns to resolution immediately (e.g. Mozart's Quartet KV 575). Even the "opening up of space" in the beginning of the development is foreshadowed by Beethoven's Op. 111. It certainly points the way forward to Romanticism, having a very unclassical looseness about it, a completely rounded-off first subject group which leads to a much more relaxed second subject group. But it is surely not for the reasons you suggest. Double sharp (talk) 07:32, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Well, I meant tonal cadences - the movement of a tune, or stretch of development, towards climax or return to the tonic of the larger piece, not a solo cadenza (as in a Viennese concerto). At many points in the two extant movements, Schubert is delaying an expected resolution and/or "changing lanes" with the music by making an unexpected harmonic shift. I didn't want to point overtly to Wagner's Tristan score, he is much more radical, but the method of setting up an expectation of harmonic release and rest and then turning sideways, to avoid it, has something in common. As for Beethoven's final piano sonata, op. 111: yes, it has a similar kind of wide vertical space and drifting harmonics, but it is anything but a standard Vienna classical work, hardly even a standard Beethoven work. In many ways, it points far ahead into the future. And by the way, the sonata and the symphony were written in exactly the same year. 83.254.130.68 (talk) 16:34, 27 August 2017 (UTC) (slight change of IP)

Op. 111, like many of the late works of Beethoven, is a bit of a funny case. In its sound and conception, it is strikingly original and eccentric; and yet it follows the sonata principle of Viennese classicism more strictly than perhaps even he ever did before. The musical material of the first movement all comes from the introduction and its three diminished sevenths, and the second movement is the grandest synthesis he had made of the sonata principle and variation form, and one would be tempted to call it unsurpassable had he not exceeded himself with the Diabelli Variations. I am also not sure how there is much in the way of drifting harmony within it; the large tonal areas are very clear, and while of course the harmony moves through various keys without defining them whenever Beethoven engages in development, that is a necessity to get from one clearly defined tonal area to another. Only when the initial key is unstable and hazily defined, as in for example Schumann's Fantasy in C major or Davidsbündlertänze, would I think that "Romanticism has arrived" fully, embracing the musical grammar as well as its sound. The late Beethoven definitely has a great influence on Romanticism, but that has more to do with his sound and prestige than his compositional thinking, as is obvious when you consider Mendelssohn's early homages to the sonatas Op. 90 amd Op. 101 and the quartet Op. 132. We all know that all artists can go back to "the day before yesterday" (to quote Charles Rosen) and find something strikingly fresh and original, but then we are not talking about the work but its reception.

I do take your point about the year, and perhaps Op. 109 would have been a better example. Even then, I really don't hear much of Wagner in the Unfinished (I start to detect that he is coming about the time of late Chopin ^_^), because any piece of tonal music at all with any ambition cannot simply just go to the tonic at its first opportunity, or it should never be able to sustain itself for more than a minute: there would be no harmonic movement to drive it along. It has to set up that expectation, frustrate it, and ultimately either give in to it or come up with something even more convincing. And while Schubert and Wagner no doubt do this, so do Mozart and Haydn, and it seems to me that the tropes Schubert uses in the Unfinished (a lot of harmonic sequences, for one) are closer to the practice of the latter two than to Wagner. Double sharp (talk) 00:21, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

It seems to me that one of the most significant arguments for calling the Unfinished the first Romantic symphony, given the importance of harmony over melody in the classical style, is the fact that it ends completely convincingly in the "wrong" key, showing how weak the classical tonal relationships have been made by Schubert (they will soon be totally destroyed by Chopin and Schumann, with only a partial revival by Brahms forthcoming). The use of the major subdominant as a goal and resolving force seems to point all the way forward to Chopin's F minor Ballade and Alkan's Quasi-Faust, although neither actually ends outside the tonic (and for the second we must remember that for nineteenth-century harmony D-sharp minor and its relative F-sharp major are pretty much the same key). So here we have a singular case where Schubert, although clearly the forefather of the next generation, is more daring without returning to firm classicism as in the Great C major Symphony, G major Quartet, and C major Quintet. Double sharp (talk) 06:13, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

P.S. An even better case for it might be made by appealing to the Romantic ideal of the Fragment. Double sharp (talk) 03:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)