Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner New Cooper edited Beethoven sonata set from ABRSM

I started on the Schirmer years ago (Bulow and Lebert) and moved to the Henle edition. The Henle lays flat at all times whether it's on a grand or an upright. It may be older, but there's only so many revisions and scholarly "discoveries" until you're playing a piece that no longer is Beethoven. Somehow, I think Beethoven would have laughed at some of the small details that scholars harp on. While they may be important for interpretation, Beethoven would probably have said "enough! just play it!"

I prefer the Master's prose to an editor's prose, unless - like you say - I need an occasional view apart from my own.

Took a while to get here - but they finally came today. I quickly looked at three of the sonatas I've recently been working on. It's a very fine edition and from my limited exposure to them, I'd take them over the Henle - more helpful information - excellent binding - though not sewn. The print is exceptionally clear - the best of any edition i have - and I have six others...

A lot of thought went into this edition - even the page turns seem to be in better places than I've seen in many other editions.

Since I'm a psycho I'm reporting before I've spent hours with the books - but I have to say my initial impression is this is a superb edition.

I'm going to spend some more time with it over the coming days - will let you know if there's anything else to say.

I ordered it a little over a week ago. Of course, it's Oxford, so they don't exactly bother to reply after the initial purchase order e-mail. It would be nice to know if it was coming, but that would of course require them to do something convenient for customers. Sigh....

Good point, though it's still a transitive verb requiring a direct object, as Bruce pointed out, even though that direct object is oneself.

What am I laying down to sleep? Me. I am laying *me* down to sleep. Though shouldn't it read, "I lay *myself* down to sleep," since, you're right, it is reflexive?

Bruce <smile>, you still have it backwards. Yes, the book is an object. The book assuredly does not place itself on the piano rack to lie open. It is laid open by an animate critter (a person). Sorry, the whole thing about transitive/intransitive is just something that grammarians made up last century to hopelessly confuse a mostly simple point. Same thing with who and whom. There's a simple way to remember which one to use, and then there's a way that people who teach English but don't actually speak or write it use. Believe me: the simple way is the way you want to go!!

Here's part of a usage note (under the verb "lay") from the Merriam Webster Collegiate Dictionary:
Bruce has this one right, but he is swimming against the tide of popular usage.

Never mind. I finally broke out the English manual. I thank God that I don't find myself teaching "lie" and "lay" very often. Bruce is write. In present tense, a book "lies" on the music rack. Don't ask me how I got part of that rule twisted about a bit! Well, good, I learned something new, for when that situation crops up in a paper somewhere!

er...Bruce is "right," not "write." Well done!

Bruce is correct, as always. This is one of my many word usage pet peeves. My wife (the Phi Beta Kappa) will tell one of the girls to "lay" in bed. My routine response is "Lay what? An egg?"

I have the first two volumes edited by Stewart Gordon (Alfred), which I strongly recommend. He refers constantly to all previous editions, eleven total. To my knowledge, this is unique among Beethoven editions. This is especially helpful for working out ornaments. Gordon will typically say something like, "These six editors suggest playing it like this, while these other five suggest this, which this editor prefers." I had both volumes spiral-bound at Kinko's. I also have Tovey's, which I enjoy for his erudite commentary, and Schenker's, whose fingerings are always creative and worth studying. The latter is also the best buy, two volumes by Dover.

Cheers,

Craig

originally posted by Pianojerome:
What you say seems right, that the reflexive is a special case of subject - transitive verb -object.
I think the "me" in place of "myself" is an archaic or poetic usage.

Thanks so much for reporting back.
I had followed this thread, but your post (which was the most important feedback in the thread) somehow got buried in the fascinating English grammar discussion .

I may keep an eye out on the set for when/if it goes on sale. SheetMusicPlus had a sale on ABRSM and Peters editions last month, so hopefully they'll have another one soon.

Yes, mine just showed up out on the front porch today. They shipped it in a bag that was sized to contain a small child, but fortunately only had the Beethoven package in there. Did anyone mention yet that not only do you get three nice-sized, very legible volumes of Urtext, but you also get three audio CD's that contain additional commentary on performance and techniques for deriving sound similar to what Beethoven would have been experiencing when he was writing? Really super-nice set. It's hard to call paperback editions of something heirloom quality, but seriously, if you've got a pianist in your familay somewhere who is serious, this would be something to bestow to them in a will. Only a hundred bucks, but just really nice. If you don't wish to die, you could always probably just buy it for them as a gift.

stevedavis1776,
Thanks for your feedback on it. I just found a sampler pdf on the Peters/ABRSM website, and it looks like a fantastic edition.

I'm still using my Schnabel set (which is beyond worn-out, and practically disintegrating before my eyes ). I was leaning towards the Henle, but between you and kluurs, I am thinking this Cooper set may be the one to get.

I'd be interested in more comments from those who have received their copies. In particular, one complaint about the Henle edition is that it normalizes Beethoven's various articulation marks (dots, lines, and wedges) into dots. How does Cooper deal with this issue (since this is an area where it's hard to be sure what Beethoven wrote)?

Also, could you link to the sampler pdf? I can't seem to find it.

Gabe Racz,

Here is the sampler pdf:
http://www.edition-peters.com/pdf/ABRSM_Beethoven.pdf

Cooper appears to take the articulation marks very seriously. There are definitely distinctions between wedges and dots, though I hope some of the owners of the set will chime in as well. Also, he has Beethoven's fingerings in larger text so you can differentiate them from the editor's fingerings.

The problem with making a distinction between dots and wedges is that Beethoven wasn't always precise about notating them: he was usually in too much of a hurry to still the quill long enough to stop confusing his printers. I wonder if this edition gives it's wedges and dots as gospel markings or just editorial markings and if editorial, are they pointed out as such..

Mattardo,
Good point, although I would imagine Cooper was more than aware of this issue.

On p.7 of the sampler, he writes (regarding dashes and staccatos),

"The use of staccato dots is strikingly systematic in this movement in all sources, appearing on repeated chords and light scale passages while dashes appear on arpeggio patterns. The autograph score must therefore have contained some evidence for this distinction, and the engravers of the sources clearly believed it was significant and worth preserving".

Ok, have new sources surfaced (the long-lost manuscript of Op. 106, for example) that this new edition takes into account?

Thanks for the link to the pdf! This looks very interesting.

I'm curious too if there are "new" sources taken into account. I put "new" in quotes since the Henle edition, for example, is 50 years old (and that's the one I happen to have on hand for comparison). Not to mention that the source itself would be old, but would be newly discovered. ;-)