Haydn's Haus

[Jo498]

I don't think we know it in the case of earlier pieces but I have read the idea that in the case of that unfinished quartet he might have started with them because they were easier to compose. Obviously, in the classical era the first movement is almost always the longest, most weighty and complex and the finale also became a special challenge in the late classical era.

[Madiel]

I don't know that they were Haydn specifically, but I'm sure I've heard of other examples of composers doing the same thing.

[SonicMan46]

Piano Sonatas - best pick on the modern piano?    Currently, I own the top 4 boxes, 3 on period instruments which I will keep (unless some newer fortepiano set is released?) - BUT, for a modern piano box, I've had Derzhavina for quite a while and have noticed some others being made available - the bottom row is just four that I could find and don't believe that Bavouzet (up to V. 10) has been boxed up yet?  Don't have the room to ADD but could cull Ekaterina depending on comments (and likely some previewing on Spotify) - SO, what are some favs on modern instruments?  Dave

Apropos topic for me - just starting a close perusal of my Haydn collection and have accumulated a lot of duplication and triplication (and even more in certain genres) - regarding the Keyboard Sonatas on period instruments, I own the 3 sets below; also have Bart van Oort in the non-sonata works on fortepiano and Ekaterina Derzhavina on modern piano - looking forward to comments & recommendations.  Dave

       

     

[Jo498]

Buchbinder was something of a standard recommendation in earlier times (when it was one of very few choices). I have probably heard bits of it but no clear memory. 1970s-80s Buchbinder is often a bit hard-hitting, fast and straightforward to a fault (although not unidiomatic, he's Austrian after all, grew up in Vienna (born in Bohemia).

I have not heard Jando or Bavouzet but I think the latter got very good reviews and is probably the only challenge to Derzhavina. I had all or most of Piazzini's on separate older Arte Nova discs and got rid of them during several stages of culling, the final one after I had bought Derzhavina. Piazzini is pretty good, in good sound but not as distinctive. Unless you dislike Derzhavina sometimes a bit romantic/dreamy approach (but I think it's a good contrast to the usually faster/straighter HIP approaches) I doubt that any of the 3 modern boxes will be an improvement in either sound or interpretation. (Bavouzet being the most recent with probably the best sound might be a challenger but fairly pricey, I guess).

[MusicTurner]

Of complete sets, I've only had the Brilliant Classics set on historical pianos + the Olbertz one previously, so not a connoisseur at all ... I found none of them satisfying and culled them, getting Jando in stead. Jando is fine, generally light and rhythmical, but I'm pretty sure he can also be a bit restrained at times, compared to other completists and not at least individual sonatas recordings, in some sonatas. I remember sampling a good deal of McCabe before choosing Jando, deciding for Jando in the end. Can't recommend Olbertz, who I found bland; in the Brilliant set it was mainly the instrumental sound that was off-putting in itself for me.

[SonicMan46]

Buchbinder was something of a standard recommendation in earlier times (when it was one of very few choices). I have probably heard bits of it but no clear memory. 1970s-80s Buchbinder is often a bit hard-hitting, fast and straightforward to a fault (although not unidiomatic, he's Austrian after all, grew up in Vienna (born in Bohemia).

I have not heard Jando or Bavouzet but I think the latter got very good reviews and is probably the only challenge to Derzhavina. I had all or most of Piazzini's on separate older Arte Nova discs and got rid of them during several stages of culling, the final one after I had bought Derzhavina. Piazzini is pretty good, in good sound but not as distinctive. Unless you dislike Derzhavina sometimes a bit romantic/dreamy approach (but I think it's a good contrast to the usually faster/straighter HIP approaches) I doubt that any of the 3 modern boxes will be an improvement in either sound or interpretation. (Bavouzet being the most recent with probably the best sound might be a challenger but fairly pricey, I guess).

Of complete sets, I've only had the Brilliant Classics set on historical pianos + the Olbertz one previously, so not a connoisseur at all ... I found none of them satisfying and culled them, getting Jando in stead. Jando is fine, generally light and rhythmical, but I'm pretty sure he can also be a bit restrained at times, compared to other completists and not at least individual sonatas recordings, in some sonatas. I remember sampling a good deal of McCabe before choosing Jando, deciding for Jando in the end. Can't recommend Olbertz, who I found bland; in the Brilliant set it was mainly the instrumental sound that was off-putting in itself for me.

Thanks Guys for the comments - I culled out McCabe for Derzhavina and found the reviews on Buchbinder and Olbertz to be somewhat dated w/ 'older' sound - Piazzini piqued my interest, available at BRO for $45 USD, but could not find any great reviews, in fact rather disappointing; and Jando - meh?  SO, that leaves Bavouzet but will wait to see if he's done at V.10, and if Chandos will box up his recordings at a decent price, but even than I'm still quite pleased w/ Ekaterina - may just stay pat for the moment.  Thanks again.  Dave

[Jo498]

$45 is o.k. for Piazzini; I wouldn't pay more, it was a budget series/label from its first publication. I got the 5-6 discs I had back then (probably early 2000s?) mostly to get to know the pieces or fill gaps between others I had. Sound was good, but not exceptional, AFAIR. (I also didn't like the haphazard order of the sonatas on the discs)

I have the Schornsheim and Derszhavina boxes and a whole lot of singles to several discs anthologies: Gould, Brendel, Hamelin, Staier, Schiff, Andsnes, Vogt, Richter, Pogorelich... which is plenty for me although obviously the dozen or so more famous sonatas dominate most anthologies. That's also why I didn't get any of the expensive Bavouzet vols. and ignored the older complete recordings. There is another complete set by the late Franco-lebanese pianist Walid Akl (Discover) but this seemed also uneven in both sound and interpretation (I had a couple of discs long ago).
Despite liking a few of the sonatas quite a bit, I think as a body of work they are not as quite as important as Haydn's quartets, symphonies, piano trios (and actually served quite well on disk by now, considerably better than the trios).

[amw]

I like Derzhavina a lot honestly—haven't seen the need to acquire significantly more Haydn on modern piano since that point (only the Hamelin sets). Walid Akl is also pretty good, but yes, uneven, and also probably difficult to find these days without access to a library. Similarly, fairly happy with Schornsheim on period instruments, although I'm more likely to look for a HIP alternative there in the future.

[Karl Henning]

I like Derzhavina a lot honestly—haven't seen the need to acquire significantly more Haydn on modern piano since that point (only the Hamelin sets). Walid Akl is also pretty good, but yes, uneven, and also probably difficult to find these days without access to a library. Similarly, fairly happy with Schornsheim on period instruments, although I'm more likely to look for a HIP alternative there in the future.

I enjoy the Derzhavina, too.

[DavidW]

Piano Sonatas - best pick on the modern piano? 

Outside of the box Brendel and Richter.

[DavidW]

I was listening to some Haydn symphonies this morning and I wanted to say that the adagio in the 13th symphony was surprisingly sublime.  Maybe it is just me, but if you haven't heard it in awhile, check it out.

[Karl Henning]

I was listening to some Haydn symphonies this morning and I wanted to say that the adagio in the 13th symphony was surprisingly sublime.  Maybe it is just me, but if you haven't heard it in awhile, check it out.

Queuing up some "Papa" is never a bad suggestion:

https://www.youtube.com/v/SIu6gK4DIHg

Just what mine ears needed this morning, Davey, thanks!

[SonicMan46]

Haydn's String Quartets - over the last few days in the 'listening thread', there has been a LOT posted on various performances of these works (see all of the 'quotes' at the bottom) - believe that I've gathered most of them for posterity in this more dedicated thread on Papa.  Obviously, MIs vs. PIs enters the discussion, plus support (for or against) certain groups dominates the discussion.  Of the PI groups, the London Haydn Quartet (LHQ) has received little respect (raked across the coals in ClassicsToday by Hurwitz et al), and seems generally not liked in the forum from the comments below.

Of the MI groups, much seems OOP and/or outrageously expensive as 'used' items, and of newer recordings (many recommended below), I find the selections are incomplete and costly too.  Off Spotify this morning - and still trying to get a better handle on MI SQ versions (Op. 33 & Op. 76, respectively of those shown), I listened to the Angeles & Kodaly SQs (both complete sets available there) - for me both sounded fine - so, looked up some reviews of the Kodaly SQ (the other is OOP and too expensive on Amazon USA) which are attached and quite impressive, even an 8/8 from ClassicsToday! 

SO, just trying to place these postings in one place and gleam any more comments, although maybe enough has been said?  Currently, all of my Haydn SQ collection use PIs (except Nomus in Op. 50), i.e. the groups below in my posts, including all of the LHQ to date - my feeling is to cull them out and add a fairly complete (and acceptably priced) MI group.  Dave

 

I'm actually with Madiel but not hating.  I just think London Haydn is overrated, they're fine but not exceptional.

Thanks Madiel & David for your thoughts on the London Haydn Quartet (LHQ); as I'm listening to them along w/ the Q. Festetics (QF) & now Q. Mosaiques (QM) in a kind of A:B comparison, I'm preferring the Quatuors period instruments and performances more - also returned to the Haydn Haus thread and searched on the LHQ - numerous posts w/ much varied opinions about the group - I was likely somewhat awed that the series was still ongoing and many of the reviews quite positive (and some dreadful such as the Classics Today reviewers - however, when Hurwitz goes that low I feel he must have eaten a bad meal -  ).  At any rate, I'm quite happy with the period recordings of QF and QM, so a third might not be needed in my collection - perhaps I should look for a 'modern performance'?  Thanks again - Dave

I wasn't aware that Hurwitz had trashed the LHQ, or at least this particular recording. In fact I think I missed this whole series until I saw it mentioned on this forum here 6 years ago or so. As I was so well-provided with Haydn and also couldn't really like the slow "moderato" movements in the first movements (although I found myself some other recordings a bit on the fast side, the LHQ (still looks like a particle accelerator acronym) seemed just too slow) of op.9,17,20 I always put off buying on of that series, even for the later volumes...

Yes the Festetics reign supreme in my book.  For MI on the pre-Op 20 SQs I prefer Kodaly, and on Op 20 onwards Angeles and Auryn.  The former is oop though, and the latter is expensive.

The Dorics have done some good Haydn SQ.  Modern instruments and style, but HIP-informed, a world away from LHQ (who I too don't like very much) but also a world away from QF and Kodaly for that matter.

Yep David - I've been looking at the MI offerings on Amazon and not much available from your post-Op. 20 suggestions above - the Kodaly box of 25 discs is going for $80 - not ready to buy (have about $20 credit there at the moment) but curious about the packaging, i.e. I hope that this is not 25 single jewel boxes vs. paper or cardboard sleeves?  Any help appreciated - thanks.  Dave

Looks like sleeves: https://denigma.io/post/226  I collected them individually back in the day.

I don't actually own a recording of op.9 as yet, in part because there aren't many options available and some are hard to acquire on physical disc. Kodaly for modern? Otherwise you already have a couple of the groups that I know about. Did Mosaiques do op.9?

I have 2 boxes of Q. Mosaiques and Op. 20 is their earliest recording; Op. 9 I have w/ the London HQ and the Q. Festetics, the latter would be a good choice for period instruments from your feelings about he Londerers - Dave

I really don't mean to sound sour - but I can't really conceive of spending money in this day and age, on the Kodaly recordings.  Still less spending precious time actually listening to them, even free on Spotify say.  And yes, I did buy a few of them, 'back in the day' - and they were OK, back in the day - but they sound hopelessly old-fashioned now.  Only if it is a complete quartets integrale that is wanted, should they even be a consideration.  But Haydn's quartets are not an even body of work - the early Ops are really only of historical/musicalogical interest, and the late Ops don't really add to what he achieved with Ops 20 and 33.  Best to listen selectively IMHO when there are so many outstanding 'singles' available.

The Chiaroscuros, Zaide, Doric, Dudok, Casals, Hanson - all demand to be heard, and I daresay others too - but all just cherry-pick from Haydn's highlights - they make these selections, so we don't have to.  The Mosaiques are fairly comprehensive from Op20 onwards, and a bit easier on the ear than the Festetics IMHO, although the latter are recommendable too.

I beg to differ. I listened to them recently and was mightily impressed, especially by the minuets and the adagios. Incidentally, the performers were the Kodaly.

Another vote here for the Kodalys.

You've got to be kidding me. Have you ever actually listened to op.76?

Which, by the way, is generally considered one of the Kodaly Quartet's high points.

Claiming that Haydn didn't keep progressing after op.33 is like saying that he didn't need to bother with the Paris and London symphonies. In the case of the quartets there's an evident flaw in that the later quartets were written for a different purpose to the earlier ones. The opus 71/74 set were consciously written for public performance in London, in a concert hall, after Haydn's previous experience, because the whole idea of public performances was developing at that time. Each of them starts with a loud and strong musical gesture so that the audience would shut up and listen. They are among the first works of 'chamber music' that aren't actually intended for a noble's chamber.

It's honestly very silly to torpedo the earliest works as being of 'historical interest' and yet ignore the importance of history to Haydn's later work. One of the reasons that Haydn's career is so important is that he straddles important societal changes. And he did it with damn good music, whether as a junior court musician, a Kapellmeister or the most famous composer in Europe.

Amen, brother!

But op.76 has also the largest discography with many famous and excellent recordings. By now, we have a spectrum of good recordings for most quartets from op.20 on (although not all are as well served as op.20 or 76 and 77).
I don't share the enthusiasm about the Kodaly (although this is based only on a handful of their discs) but I think these recordings were valuable (especially at a time) when there was far as available and they were solid cheap option for getting to know the pieces or closing gaps. But I wouldn't recommend getting the lot unless very cheap. I wouldn't even recommend getting the Angeles although I prefer them (sometimes a bit generic but more lively than Kodaly) or the Buchberger (probably the cheapest, lively but rough and ready in intonation and sound).
It's also simply wrong (although I'd say that op.33 roughly corresponds to the "Paris" symphonies despite being 5 years earlier). Neither is it justified to ignore op.9 and 17, if only to appreciate the steps made with op.20+33. (I also prefer some pieces in op.9 and 17 to some in op.33 or even later works). While I would not claim huge significance for op.1+2 they are also enjoyable works.

When I first started listening to Haydn's SQs I really thought that after awhile I would only listen to Op 20 and later.  I'm surprised to find that after all these years I still regularly listen to and enjoy the Op 9 and 17 string quartets.

[DavidW]

Queuing up some "Papa" is never a bad suggestion:

https://www.youtube.com/v/SIu6gK4DIHg

Just what mine ears needed this morning, Davey, thanks!

Wow that was an incredible performance!!

[Jo498]

I bought the first Haydn quartet discs in the mid-1990s (I might have had the "Emperor" before on a mixed sampler). Among the first few were a live recording with the Lindsays (ASV) and op.20,4-6 with Kodaly. Back then there was no complete box (except maybe the 1970s Aeolian but this was not always available and didn't have good reviews, the Kodaly series was still in progress and the Tatrai/hungaroton were rather expensive (mostly) 2-disc-sets)
I can't trace the whole collecting over more than 20 years but I had cobbled together most of the better known quartets when the light blue Angeles box appeared in the early 2000s.
I eventually bought it because it seemed an easy way to get the lot.
Since then my vague goal has been to have in addition to the Angeles one recording on old instruments and another one on modern instruments. For some of the opus numbers with richer discography I kept more and for op.1+2 I have less.

What I kept (in addition to Angeles)
op.1 Petersen
op.9 Buchberger, Festetics (Arcana)
op.17 Auryn, Festetics (culled Kodaly with one half of them, that was decent but not really worth the space)
op.20 Hagen, Mosaiques, Tatrai (culled Festetics because Mosaiques seems clearly better and Kodaly 4-6 I found dull, especially in my fav #4)
op.33 Weller (in a box), Casals, Apponyi, Auryn (I am not totally happy with any of them, that's why I have so many, I culled Buchberger although it's not bad at all)
op.42 (Lindsay, on that early disc mentioned above)
op.50 Festetics (until LHQ the only HIP), Amati, (culled the solid Nomos that seemed a bit dry compared to the others)
op.54 Amadeus (another cheap box) , Juilliard, Festetics (culled the solid Endellion and Smithson (only 1+2, short disc too much space)
op.55 Amadeus, Festetics, Panocha
op.64 Festetics, one half of Mosaiques (prefer them to Festetics but the 2nd disc is impossibly expensive), Amadeus (box), "Caspar da Salo" (on supercheap PILZ) + several "larks"
op.71 Auryn (in their older recording), Griller, Amadeus, Festetics
op.74 Griller, Amadeus, Festetics + several "riders"
op.76 Carmina, Tatrai, Mosaiques 1/2 with ABQ and Eder and some more of this one in anthologies
op.77 Mosaiques, Kuijken and some in anthologies

+ the historical Pro Arte (when it came out in a cheap box although I honestly don't get what's so great about them)
+ some singles/anthologies with Juilliard, Jerusalem, Hagen, Lindsay, Schuppanzigh

Of course, since I basically stopped collecting these works, the LHQ and several other recordings, Doric, whatever appeared but mostly of the opus numbers I already felt provided quite well with.
I am not as great a fan of the Amadeus and Festetics as it might seem but the latter were almost the only game in town on old instruments for many works in the early 2000s when I bought them and the Amadeus were in a cheap slim box I kept for convenience. I don't love their first violin, they have their high points and often good energy and expression; like the Lindsay they have faults but generic lively elegant Haydn is not one of them. I like the Auryn and they have very good sound but didn't find them great enough to shell out for their other volumes. Same goes for the Leipzig (except I didn't even shell out for a single volume...) It seems hard to avoid some genericity when recording such a huge body of work in a comparably short time.

[DavidW]

Oh the Griller Quartet!  Their Op 77 is truly dynamite!!

[amw]

Haydn's String Quartets - over the last few days in the 'listening thread', there has been a LOT posted on various performances of these works (see all of the 'quotes' at the bottom) - believe that I've gathered most of them for posterity in this more dedicated thread on Papa.  Obviously, MIs vs. PIs enters the discussion, plus support (for or against) certain groups dominates the discussion.  Of the PI groups, the London Haydn Quartet (LHQ) has received little respect (raked across the coals in ClassicsToday by Hurwitz et al), and seems generally not liked in the forum from the comments below.

I am a LHQ partisan, although one of very few on here. They're popular among other musicians I know, and not very popular among non-musician classical listeners. No idea why. We've been over this I think though.

Right now I'm listening to the Kodály and Fine Arts Quartets in op. 50 no. 3, and liking both of them a lot, even if intonation is at times sketchy. (But then I also have and like the Lindsay Quartet non-integral—only op. 20 thru 77—which has the same problem.) Haydn is largely indestructible, I guess.

I may explore the Fine Arts recordings a bit more just out of curiosity.

[SonicMan46]

Thanks Guys for the comments - impressive collection Jo... - I had the Buchberger box but culled it from my collection a while back, probably when I started to buy the LHQ recordings.  Dave

[Madiel]

Now trying the Petersen in op.1/1. I'd just seen them as an option on Idagio and then read it was Jo's choice.

It sounds pretty good. A bit livelier than the Auryn. Not sure I actually want it QUITE that lively, but clearly a good performance.

[staxomega]

Queuing up some "Papa" is never a bad suggestion:

https://www.youtube.com/v/SIu6gK4DIHg

Just what mine ears needed this morning, Davey, thanks!

Instead of calling him papa, would saying "yes daddy!" when listening to Haydn be too lewd