Chamber Concertos

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

An interesting genre, don't you think? because of the history of the word 'concerto' and its various associations with instrumental combinations, orchestral and virtuosic music, the 'chamber concerto' has come in various guises itself. But in the 20th Century and onwards, you get all these chamber concertos by Berg, Ligeti, Carter, Mantovani, Webern and Stravinsky (I don't know of many) which all differ in approach and even with very different interpretations of the title 'chamber concerto.'

So I'm wondering what other stuff is out there, titled 'Chamber Concerto' or something similar, and what different approaches composers have had to compose such pieces.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Bruno Mantovani's Chamber Concerto no. 2 is a personal favourite

https://youtu.be/cmX6xalf0RI

[Jo498]

Some of Hindemiths "Kammermusiken" (opp. 36 and 46) are de facto chamber concertos and called thus in subtitles.

[EigenUser]

I'm a big, big fan of the Berg and Ligeti ChCs. So nothing too new/unusual from me.

But, what would be the difference (if any) between a chamber symphony and a chamber concerto? To me, the Berg is a true chamber concerto since the two soloists (piano and violin) are accompanied by a chamber ensemble of winds. The Ligeti is more of a chamber symphony since each section is treated virtuostically.

And while we're on the topic of chamber symphonies, I will mention that I have no idea why Schoenberg decided to call his Chamber Symphony No. 2 a "chamber symphony". There's nothing chamber about it! It is scored for a full orchestra with full string sections. It was originally supposed to be scored for a chamber ensemble when he started composing it in the early 1900's, but it's odd that he didn't update the name when he expanded its orchestration and finished the piece in the late 1930's.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

The Schoenberg Chamber Symphony no. 2 is indeed a little odd....I noticed when I was looking at the score recently. I suppose it could be suitable for chamber orchestras?

[Cato]

Karl Henning's Out in the Sun is something of a Kammerkonzert.

https://www.youtube.com/v/n-95rYkIbmE

[Madiel]

Holmboe wrote 13 numbered works that were initially called chamber concertos. At some point he changed them to simply concertos, most likely because the size of the orchestra in a few of them grew rather too big. Nevertheless, they are concertos and most of them are for a chamber orchestra.

[Brian]

Avner Dorman has written a number of concertos for soloist and chamber orchestra, since about 1990. When last I explored his music (a couple years ago), I really enjoyed them. He likes improbable solo instruments: one is for piccolo, another for mandolin.

[Monsieur Croche]

The Schoenberg Chamber Symphony no. 2 is indeed a little odd....I noticed when I was looking at the score recently. I suppose it could be suitable for chamber orchestras?

Most generally, Chamber Orchestra denotes an orchestra with a fair to significant smaller body of instruments than a full symphonic ensemble.
I found one listed general average of the number of instruments of "Chamber Orchestra":
8 violins (two sections) 3 or 4 violas, 2 or 3 cellos, 1 or 2 basses; the wind section is single winds, with little or no "heavy brass."

This was a pretty standard size through to the end of the 18th century, i.e. ca. 24 - maybe 30 players... appropriately what could fit in, including appropriate to the acoustics, a 'Kammer/Chambre/Chamber, then meaning a good sized-room [often large enough that by contemporary standards we might call it a small hall] which accommodated the group and a small audience.

With but a few more strings added to that above registration, that is a typical early through mid Classical era orchestra, until the later classical era when Beethoven and others began regularly using the winds in pairs, and a horn, or pair of horns were more routinely included.

That the definition has some latitude re: 'how many instruments' is clear: many a Mozart Symphony or Piano Concerto did not use more -- or many more -- players than in the number of specific instruments listed above, and were thought of in that time as a full symphonic ensemble vs. 'chamber symphony.'

Chamber Symphony also does not include that more stringent expectation of the nature of Chamber Music, i.e. it could be symphonic music with doublings for fuller sound and effects, where no matter how many instruments, chamber music is generally associated with the specific nature of an instrumental texture of several instruments, with "one player, one part: no doubling." -- here the distinction is no longer about what fits in a 'Kammer' or small hall, but is about the nature of the writing.

Schönberg's Kammersymphonie No.1 op.9 is for fifteen solo instruments...
1 Flute/Piccolo, 1 Oboe, 1 English Horn, 1 E-flat Clarinet, 1 Clarinet, 1 Bass Clarinet, 1 Bassoon, 1 Contrabassoon, 2 Horns, and a string quartet of 2 Violins, Viola, Cello, Double Bass... is chamber music by both its instrumentation and the manner of how it is written.
It is also a pretty gnarly and often enough rowdy, full sounding work that plays well in a venue as large as a concert hall.

It seems Schönberg thought with the completion of the op.9 that he had reached his mature style, and he began the second Kammersymphonie shortly after having completed the first in 1906. His style was changing, and I think that had him, after several later stabs over several years at completing it, abandon the work. He did again turn his full attention to those sketches -- about 33 years after his completion of the op.9

The instrumentation of the op.38...
2 flutes (2nd doubling piccolo), 2 oboes (2nd doubling cor anglais), 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, 2 horns, 2 trumpets and strings
...is well near enough what most would call a full symphonic ensemble. The handling of those forces is both symphonic at times, i.e. as per the late romantic with its treatment of bloc sections of the instrumental families together or in opposition, while it as often uses lesser mixed forces in a chamber music like approach and texture. "Chamber Symphony" seems appropriate enough, while the op.9, fifteen solo instruments, is very much another kind of critter.

[amw]

Not titled Chamber Concertos but using the same principle: Janáček's Capriccio and Concertino, both for piano and odd combinations of instruments. Also not called a Chamber Concerto, Skalkottas's 3rd Piano Concerto is for piano accompanied by ten wind instruments and percussion, I imagine it didn't get the chamber designation due more its length (1000+ bars and 50-60 minutes).

[Monsieur Croche]

Not titled Chamber Concertos but using the same principle: Janáček's Capriccio and Concertino, both for piano and odd combinations of instruments. Also not called a Chamber Concerto, Skalkottas's 3rd Piano Concerto is for piano accompanied by ten wind instruments and percussion, I imagine it didn't get the chamber designation due more its length (1000+ bars and 50-60 minutes).

Thanks for broadening, quite legitimately I think, the boundary areas. The Janacek pieces you cited are fine examples. I had thought to 'go to this same place' you have, but was at the moment too lazy to light that torch.
---ComposerOfAvantGarde and I have been friendly colleagues for several years. I know this thread and another he made are motivated by a curiosity about scores which use a smaller chamber orchestra down to a handful of instruments that can still project something more overt than the more cliche concept of 'chamber music,' that the reason I thought of this other repertoire.

That in mind, it is not the form so much as any genre where the soloist/soloists and the rest of the ensemble have roles which put them now and then in the fore of the texture, with a fair amount of back and forth play being very much what the piece is about. the only difference of consideration is by way of degrees, i.e. how much 'time in the sun' is given to one instrument, or instruments from the ensemble, and the frequency of those roles changing from fore, to either middle or background in the overall texture. The other matter of degree is how virtuoso-display the writing is, solo and for the ensemble in general.

A few modern-contemporary works featuring harpsichord fall in this area. I doubt if the more concerto-grosso / chamber concerto aspect of these was accidental, the harpsichord presence reminding composers of those older forms, and their approach taken while composing those works reflects this.
---Apologies in advance, for all my love of orchestral / instrumental, I remain 'keyboard / piano-centric,' too.

I think these in some way are or somewhat overlap into this area:

Stravinsky:
Concerto in E-flat 'Dumbarton Oaks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmS0fUASrW8
Concerto in D for [small] string orchestra, this a bit lesser-known.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6Yq3B5Nd_E

Alfredo Casella: Concerto per quartetto d'archi op.40, string quartet concerto.
Manuel De Falla ~ Concerto for flute, oboe, clarinet, violin, 'cello and Harpsichord... the title says / implies a lot.
Elliott Carter ~ Sonata for flute, oboe, 'cello and Harpsichord... NB the title, again.
Vittorio Rieti ~ Concerto for Harpsichord and chamber orchestra / Serenata per violino concertante e piccola orchestra.

Arthur Honneger ~ Concertino for piano and orchestra [a fine and enjoyable piece I think not near widely enough enjoyed.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uRnAG3wJpE
Joseph Fennimore ~ Concerto Piccolo for Piano and Chamber Orchestra

Straying farther:
Francis Poulenc ~ Aubade,  concerto chorégraphique pour piano et 18 instruments This wonderfully odd duck is a concertante work and a 'chamber ballet.' The piano has a tremendous brief toccata which opens the work, and then its role is completely obbligato through the remaining episodes. Its particular mix, and Poulenc's manner in writing for the strings and winds is pretty much a one off in music literature. It is unique, makes a wonderful sound, and well worth a study to see the what and how it is done.
Piano solo, 2 flutes, 2 oboes/English horn, 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, 2 horns, trumpet, timpani, 2 violas, 2 cellos, and 2 basses.

Another ballet score which is exemplar of 'getting a lot out of a handful of instruments is Copland's original score of Appalachian Spring, for, including a piano, a total of thirteen instruments.
Ditto Saint-Saens' Le carnaval des animaux for eleven players, thirteen instruments:
two pianos, two violins, viola, cello, double bass, flute (and piccolo), clarinet (C and B♭), glass harmonica, and xylophone.

Darius Milhaud ~ Six petit symphonies Each symphony's total duration is between ca. three + or four + minutes; registration is a handful of instruments, homogeneous and mixed, with [I think] the maximum being a dectet of winds. They are polytonal and polyphonic to a degree where in a way, in most of these, everyone is a soloist all the time 

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Thank you so so much for all the informative posts, especially to amw for piquing my curiosity with the Skalkottas! The Milhaud pieces you refer to, M. Croche, are pieces of which I am especially fond.

I will be checking out these works tonight I think, once I get a chance to sit down and listen to some more stuff.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Karl Henning's Out in the Sun is something of a Kammerkonzert.

It's a beautiful small piece for 10 instruments, but being essentially contemplative in style, it does not seem to me to embody the virtuosic elements I'd expect from a concerto.

[Karl Henning]

It's a beautiful small piece for 10 instruments, but being essentially contemplative in style, it does not seem to me to embody the virtuosic elements I'd expect from a concerto.

I see what you mean, nor have I any quarrel with that. The interlocking rhythms do demand unflagging attentiveness from the players. Technically, not virtuosic (as you observe), yet it does require very fine players, and all at or near the top of their game.

[Turner]

I´ll list some more, mostly rare stuff, and I don´t expect detailed reactions to them

1) Wikipedia has a list of some 20th century "concerti da camera":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concerto_da_camera


2) further:

Elisabeth Lutyens: 6 chamber concertos

Karl Birger Blomdahl: Chamber Concerto, recorded

Schnittke. Several of the concertante works employ chamber ensembles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Schnittke

Viktor Suslin: Concerto for Violin & Chamber Orchestra

Poul Ruders: Chamber Concerto "4 Compositions", recorded

Kurt Weill: Concerto for Violin & Winds, recorded

Jaroslav Jezek: Concerto for Violin & Winds. An interesting and talented composer, contemporary with say Weill. Recorded.

Tristan Keuris: Chamber Concerto, for accordeon & ensemble - recorded

Elena Firsova: at least 5 chamber concertos

Niels Viggo Bentzon: one recorded chamber concerto, by this hugely productive composer

Vyacheslav Artyomov: Concerto for 13, recorded & worth hearing

Jan Maegaard: Chamber concerto no.2, a crystalline, beautiful and modern work, has been recorded, at least on LP

K.A. Hartmann: at least one Kammerkonzert, recorded

H.W Henze: Kammerkonzert

Jørgen Bentzon wrote at least 3 chamber concertos - not recorded, I think

Harald Genzmer: at least an oboe concerto with chamber orchestra

[Monsieur Croche]

I see what you mean, nor have I any quarrel with that. The interlocking rhythms do demand unflagging attentiveness from the players. Technically, not virtuosic (as you observe), yet it does require very fine players, and all at or near the top of their game.

I listened to Out in the Sun not long ago. Very pleasant piece, too. [Thanks, Karl Henning.]

"Virtuoso," is so often found written or spoken in only the one context of the "pyrotechnical," that many forget it's actual meaning:

vir·tu·o·so
ˌvərCHəˈwōsō/
noun
noun: virtuoso; plural noun: virtuosi;
    a person highly skilled in music or another artistic pursuit.

When a piece demands a lot from the players by way of technique, counting, extremes of range, etc. while at the same time not being near to overtly virtuosic or pyrotechnical,
that is a "quiet virtuosity."
---"Virtuosity" as per its real definition does include the subtle as well as the flashier display of skill, but with near to Everyman thinking the word is about only the more pyrotechnical feats and displays, maybe it is time to have a phrase like "quiet virtuosity" on the scene.

[(poco) Sforzando]

"Virtuoso," is so often found written or spoken in only the one context of the "pyrotechnical," that many forget it's actual meaning:

"Virtuosity" as per its real definition does include the subtle as well as the flashier display of skill, but with near to Everyman thinking the word is about only the more pyrotechnical feats and displays, maybe it is time to have a phrase like "quiet virtuosity" on the scene.

I'm well aware of the meaning of the word. It is related to "virtue" as well as to its older meaning of "power," as in Chaucer's Canterbury Prologue: "Of which vertu engendred is the flour" (By the power of which the flower is created). However, by your definition of "quiet virtuosity," there's scarce a piece of music that would be exempt, and there are many works that are far harder than they sound in the hands of a true virtuoso. But there's nothing unreasonable in expecting a bit of not-so-quiet virtuosity in a piece supposedly in concertante style.

[Karl Henning]

... But there's nothing unreasonable in expecting a bit of not-so-quiet virtuosity in a piece supposedly in concertante style.

Of course.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

I listened to the Skalkottas piano concerto no. 3 last night. Over an hour long! That would require serious virtuosic skills in endurance and stamina! A cool piece though. I haven't heard or played much Skalkottas, but what I have has been so worth it.

[amw]

I listened to the Skalkottas piano concerto no. 3 last night. Over an hour long!

Sounds like you listened to Geoffrey Douglas Madge's performance! He doesn't play the piece at its designated tempi due to what seems to be a lack of technical skill (according to the metronome marks: http://issuu.com/scoresondemand/docs/concerto_no3_piano_and_winds_33223). Just for the pianism I think I would recommend the other recording, by Danae Kara, who is somewhat better on the tempo front and also plays more of the notes. >.> (Approximate timings should be closer to 19' / 20' / I'm not sure but probably about 15', the triplet semiquavers feel like they "should" be about as fast as possible. 54 minutes is still pretty long, of course.)