Haydn's Haus

[Gurn Blanston]

Ha ha! Thanks for the confidence. 

Never heard about them. Care to elaborate, please?

Oh dear!   Mozart (and most other Austrian composers, I think) wrote a dozen or so 4-6 minute sonatas (orchestrated with 2 violins, organ, whatever other instruments are available) and which are played after (before?) the Epistle in the mass. They are generally quite tuneful, I enjoy just to listen to them on their own. Mozart's can be associated with specific masses, usually, in the same manner that his orchestral marches can be fixed to specific serenades.

I just find the concept that this clearly secular music was generally used during the mass to be quite interesting. Thought you might be too.

[Opus106]

I just find the concept that this clearly secular music was generally used during the mass to be quite interesting.

That took me by surprise when I read your post some pages ago. Along with the fact that Haydn had a wife*!



*No, not Boccherini.

[Karl Henning]

Oh dear!   Mozart (and most other Austrian composers, I think) wrote a dozen or so 4-6 minute sonatas (orchestrated with 2 violins, organ, whatever other instruments are available) and which are played after (before?) the Epistle in the mass. They are generally quite tuneful, I enjoy just to listen to them on their own. Mozart's can be associated with specific masses, usually, in the same manner that his orchestral marches can be fixed to specific serenades.

I just find the concept that this clearly secular music was generally used during the mass to be quite interesting. Thought you might be too.

Yes, a corner of my curiosity upon which I've not yet acted . . . .

(Maybe I read something about it in Gutman . . . .)

[Gurn Blanston]

That took me by surprise when I read your post some pages ago. Along with the fact that Haydn had a wife*!



*No, not Boccherini.

Seems to have taken him by surprise, as far as that goes.

[Gurn Blanston]

Yes, a corner of my curiosity upon which I've not yet acted . . . .

(Maybe I read something about it in Gutman . . . .)

You did, actually. Not enough to explain it, just the fact that it existed. Perhaps you (and Navneeth) would like to join the posse that I'm trying to organize to research it? 

[Elgarian]

These days I have consistently been listening to those Naxos discs and are really fantastic. I am especially in love with their two sopranos: Ann Hoyt and Julie Liston.

Oh yes. So am I. They seem perfectly attuned to those Masses.

[mszczuj]

( https://picasaweb.google.com/111844303066587835259/Esterhaza?authkey=Gv1sRgCMr8kp7Ct4_9xwE# )

Very cool! Is that you?

Can't you recognize me looking on my avatar?

I'm jealous if it is, I would certainly enjoy to go there! 

But it was not very enjoyable term as interiors were in restoration.

[Bogey]

This mass has traditionally been associated to St. Cecilia (and known as Missa Sanctae Caeciliae or Cäcilienmesse), but the fact is that it was composed "in honorem Beatissimae Virginis Mariae", probably to be performed in 1766, during the feast of Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, at the church of Mariazell. Perhaps the name Cäcilienmesse comes from a later version prepared for the Cäcilien-Congregation, or maybe from a performance on some St. Cecilia's day (22 November), but not from Haydn himself. Therefore, those names Missa Sanctae Caeciliae and Cäcilienmesse must be added to the other nicknames of  the Haydn's works. 

Ah!  Yes, and upon further thought, the Mass would not change for the music or the Saint that is being celebrated.  Feast of Saints are celebrated all the time at Mass (at least in the Catholic Church).  The Mass is, well, The Mass.  The Saint(s) may be mentioned here and there, but the sequence of the Mass and its attributes (save the readings) remains unchanged in procedure (keeping in mind the Third Roman Missel).  So, music that accompanies the Mass might vary, but the Mass would stay the same.  Sound right?

[Bogey]

. That would be Hob 22:8. It is actually (well, no surprise really, many years newer) a bit more free-flowing and condensed too. I prefer it, but hey, that's just me.

Took it in....a beauty!

[Gurn Blanston]

Ah!  Yes, and upon further thought, the Mass would not change for the music or the Saint that is being celebrated.  Feast of Saints are celebrated all the time at Mass (at least in the Catholic Church).  The Mass is, well, The Mass.  The Saint(s) may be mentioned here and there, but the sequence of the Mass and its attributes (save the readings) remains unchanged in procedure (keeping in mind the Third Roman Missel).  So, music that accompanies the Mass might vary, but the Mass would stay the same.  Sound right?

Yep. Back in my altar boy days, it was pretty much a saint-a-day. The Missal had a thumbnail sketch of each one, and maybe a small homily relating the reason for sainthood and how it should inspire one. But the mass never changed.

[Gurn Blanston]

Took it in....a beauty!

Yes, it is rather. My favorite of the early masses (except, perhaps, the 'Grosseorgelsolomesse' (Hob 22:4 of 1768)).

[Gurn Blanston]

Part 6

1757

Well, let's move forward to 1757. I'm not sure I understand the sudden appearance of so many works, beginning in this year. Did Haydn suddenly find his muse? Or conversely, is it a case of manuscripts being preserved where previously they weren't? My personal belief is that his expanding social circle, which now included the likes of the famous Countess Thun and the Fürnburg family (for whom he wrote his first divertimentos/string quartets) served the dual purpose of spurring on his composing as well as providing an environment in which his music could survive. I haven't seen a better explanation than that, although there probably is one.

And speaking of those divertimentos, we now encounter something that will plague us for the next 2 decades, so I might as well explain my solution here now. The dates listed for these "Divertimenti a Quattro", which were NOT composed as sets but merely assembled into Op 1 & 2 many years later by publishers, are narrowed down to the years 1757-61. In order to put a representation across that time line, I took the 10 authentic works and placed 2 in each of the 5 years. Who can possibly know the actual order of composition? Possibly it was 3 in '57, 3 in '59 and 4 in '61!?!   So I just went with what gave the best representation. If that invalidates this entire list for you, then it's time to bail out right now, because this is only one example where the dates of composition are a best guess; many interpret that to mean that they are simply a wild-ass guess, but that isn't so, there are nearly always many pieces of circumstantial evidence to support them.

Lots and lots of music in this year. Some groundbreakers too, like the first symphonies. AND the first string quartets (well, as near as dammit). And many string trios. When one keeps in mind that it was commonplace to compose in sets of 12 in that time, the 12 string trios don't seem so unusual. The 8 keyboard trios are a little more unusual number, although there could easily be 4 missing, or else it might be a set of 6 (also very common) plus a pair of singles. It is so hard to know absolutely what the story is.

Biographically, and probably lending a lot of weight to the sudden outburst of music for the year, 1757 is almost certainly the year in which Haydn was hired to be the musical director for Count Karl Joseph Franz Morzin. This not only gave him the luxury of time to compose and play, but also provided him with the necessary security to allow him to exercise that talent that he had worked so hard to develop. Plus, a band to play his music. That was better than money (which he didn't get a lot of).

The music of 1757;

Hob 01_001 Symphony in D
The Hanover Band / Goodman
Hob 01_037 Symphony in C
Academy of Ancient Music / Hogwood


Hob 02_20 Divertimento a nove Stromenti in F for 2 Oboes, 2 Horns, 2 Violins, 2 Violas & Basso
Haydn Sinfonietta Wien / Huss


Hob 03_01 Divertimento in Bb for Strings Op 1 #1   
Hob 03_02 Divertimento in Eb for Strings Op 1 #2   
Hamburg Soloists / Emil Klein


Hob 05_01 Divertimento á tre in Eb for 2 Violins & Bass   
Hob 05_02 Divertimento á tre in F for 2 Violins & Bass   
Hob 05_06 Divertimento á tre in Eb for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05_08 Divertimento á tre in Bb for Violin, Viola & Bass
Hob 05_11 Divertimento á tre in Eb for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05_13 Divertimento á tre in Bb for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05_15 Divertimento á tre in D for 2 Violins & Bass
Das Wiener Philharmonia Trio
Hob 05_03 Divertimento á tre in b for 2 Violins & Bass   
Hob 05_04 Divertimento á tre in Eb for 2 Violins & Bass   
Hob 05_07 Divertimento á tre in A for 2 Violins & Bass   
Hob 05_10 Divertimento á tre in F for 2 Violins & Bass   
Hob 05_12 Divertimento á tre in E for 2 Violins & Bass   
Camerata Berolinensis


Hob 15_01 Trio (Divertimento) in g for Keyboard & Strings   
Hob 15_34 Trio (Divertimento) in E for Keyboard & Strings   
Hob 15_35 Trio (Divertimento) in A for Keyboard & Strings   
Hob 15_37 Trio (Divertimento) in F for Keyboard & Strings   
Hob 15_38 Trio (Divertimento) in Bb for Keyboard & Strings   
Hob 15_40 Trio (Divertimento) in F for Keyboard & Strings   
Hob 15_41 Trio (Divertimento) in G for Keyboard & Strings   
Hob 15_C1 Trio (Divertimento) in C for Keyboard & Strings   
Trio 1790


Hob 16_G1 Sonata (Divertimento) #4 in G for Keyboard   
Yuko Wataya


The first symphonies are here, the first symphonies are here!!! If you haven't listened to them, then on your first listen please tell me if I'm the only one who felt that they were recognizably Haydn. This seems to have been an arena in which his unique voice could be heard right from the start. In these earliest ones, the only readily available PI choices are Goodman & Hogwood. I chose one of each because I like them both and wanted good representation. You could go with either one if you are still shopping and not feel at all slighted whichever you ended up with. Except, of course, Goodman's use of a (barely audible to me) harpsichord continuo while Hogwood disparaged the concept. The question of whether it is appropriate has never been adequately resolved, although I am in the camp that maintains that the use of continuo was so universally accepted that there was no need to notate it. In any case, both of these sets of symphonies are strong contenders. If you have access to really obscure and totally OOP CD's, you will be able to discover that L'Estro Armonico / Solomons also made a set called "The Morzin Symphonies", which I have some recordings that a friend made from his LP's, but I can't recommend them, no matter their wonderful quality, since I have taken a solemn vow to not recommend things that no one can find anywhere so you don't hunt me down and put a stake through my heart....

I find it quite odd that the earliest string quartets (I will call them that in the interest of moving along) do not appear to have ever been recorded in toto by a period instrument group. I do have a pair of them in a future year that I will introduce, but for this year, my best choice is this Hamburg Soloists / Klein performance, which is more than acceptable in any case, it is downright good! As a bonus, it also contains the works that used to be quartets + 2 horns, which have now been returned to their proper place among the Hob 2 divertimentos. The only other recording that I have is a nicely played one by the Kodaly Quartet on Naxos, and I think the Tatrai actually go back as far as these also. But the nicely burnished sound of the Klein group makes an old HIP/PI as content as possible, given the metal strings.

I really wish that there were more recordings of the string trios of Hob 5 to choose from. If more people would hear these, I have no doubt that they would be popular. As it is, the set by the Vienna Philharmonia String Trio, which was only released beginning in 2002 (Vol. 1 recorded in 2001) is the only complete set ever made, and is virtually impossible to find complete today. The other choice, and my favorite, is the 2 disks by the Camerata Berolinensis. It appears that they were shooting for a complete PI cycle, but disk 2 was released in 2006 and they haven't been heard from since.   In any case, if the opportunity arises for you to acquire any of these disks, please avail yourself. No regrets!

Another new genre for this year is the Keyboard Trio. I don't claim to be a purist (maybe a wannabe purist ) but since the sound of the harpsichord on these Trio 1790 recordings grew on me to the point that I don't care for others, I went with just this one set. AFAIK, there is no other that encompasses the full extent of these works with the correct period instrument. If you don't care for the sound of the cembalo, I can easily recommend the Van Swieten Trio here too. And for you MI guys, the Beaux Arts Trio's eternally entertaining recordings are still a solid choice. Trio 1790 for me, though....

And for the year's sole keyboard sonata, I chose Wataya, also because of the instrument. Schornsheim plays it on a cembalo, and so does Beghin, while Brautigam and Ursula Dütschler both use fortepianos. Wataya, however, plays it on a clavichord, and it really sounds natural and very nice. There are other versions out there (on modern instruments), but ultimately I am quite content with this one.

Please inundate me with feedback, comment, complaint, question etc. It makes me think and I appreciate that.

[mc ukrneal]

Part the 6th;

The first symphonies are here, the first symphonies are here!!! If you haven't listened to them, then on your first listen please tell me if I'm the only one who felt that they were recognizably Haydn. This seems to have been an arena in which his unique voice could be heard right from the start. In these earliest ones, the only readily available PI choices are Goodman & Hogwood. I chose one of each because I like them both and wanted good representation. You could go with either one if you are still shopping and not feel at all slighted whichever you ended up with. Except, of course, Goodman's use of a (barely audible to me) harpsichord continuo while Hogwood disparaged the concept.

All of the disks mentioned are PI with the exception of the Klein quartets. If there is a PI version of these works, I haven't seen it yet. I do have 2 of them on a different disk, but neither of these is included. We can discuss some differences when we get there though. There are some.

Please inundate me with feedback, comment, complaint, question etc. It makes me think and I appreciate that.

Very interesting. I am not sure I agree quite as strongly as you that the early symphonies are 'recognizably Haydn'. When I first listened, I was surpirsed at how un-Haydn (can I say that?) these are. It is only when you start to listen to them back to back to the later ones that I realized there was more there than I orignially thought. It may also have to do with to whom and to what you compare them, so perhaps this is not a cut and dried area. Maybe I'll listen to them with the Londons (an every other one type thing) to see if something jumps out at me. A fun listening exercise.

Just a thought as well, but maybe you will want to add a separate divertimento post that will put them all into context of the 20 years on top of your current intent? It might be interesting, though I am not sure how much extra work that would take for you.

[Gurn Blanston]

Very interesting. I am not sure I agree quite as strongly as you that the early symphonies are 'recognizably Haydn'. When I first listened, I was surpirsed at how un-Haydn (can I say that?) these are. It is only when you start to listen to them back to back to the later ones that I realized there was more there than I orignially thought. It may also have to do with to whom and to what you compare them, so perhaps this is not a cut and dried area. Maybe I'll listen to them with the Londons (an every other one type thing) to see if something jumps out at me. A fun listening exercise.

Yes it is, and just what I was hoping you would do. One consistent thing you will see in the symphonies, and the London's provide a good example of it, is that Haydn included a lot of concertante writing for solo instruments from beginning to end. He is one of the very few composers who was around for the period of time that it took for that to be part of his work. In the 1750's, the modern symphony was beginning to emerge from the Italian sinfonia, and that had its roots in the concerto grosso which was of course based on having soloists throughout. Listen for some of those parts early and late, as an example of Haydnesque composing.

Just a thought as well, but maybe you will want to add a separate divertimento post that will put them all into context of the 20 years on top of your current intent? It might be interesting, though I am not sure how much extra work that would take for you.

Extra work is of no significance, since this is my hobby after all. But I do want to understand exactly what you are asking for and I would like to comply with that, since it sounds interesting if I take your meaning. Do you mean to track the use of 'divertimento' from the beginning to the point where each genre reached its eventual name and style? I think I can do that. I'll have a go.

[mc ukrneal]

Extra work is of no significance, since this is my hobby after all. But I do want to understand exactly what you are asking for and I would like to comply with that, since it sounds interesting if I take your meaning. Do you mean to track the use of 'divertimento' from the beginning to the point where each genre reached its eventual name and style? I think I can do that. I'll have a go.

Well don't do it for me unless you want to do it for yourself. Yes - that was a good part of it. Since we cannot be sure of the exact timing, a broader look at what he was composing, how they developed, and their influence on other works (or vice versa) might reveal more than just sticking a couple in there to intersperse them in particular periods. Not being an expert on this area, I don't know if there is enough info on the general time period or order they were written that gives this enough value, but it seemed like it could be revealing. Perhaps you or others will have other ideas to transform this one, but that was what I was thinking.

[Elgarian]

Please inundate me with feedback, comment, complaint, question etc. It makes me think and I appreciate that.

Comment (inane and otherwise) I can provide, but I don't know enough to say anything that will make you think! I bought a raft of those Goodman sets a while back - Presto had a great deal going on them, and I munched away at them like chocolates as they kept dropping through the letterbox every few days. Shame Goodman's cycle was never finished.

To be honest, it never occurred to me to ask whether those early symphonies sounded like Haydn. I just walloped them into the player and found them eminently likeable, eminently approachable (perhaps more so than the more mature and famous London and Paris sets), without thinking consciously about them very much. I think I'm still at the stage of building up a basic familiarity with his musical arena - no, wait - musical arenas. All those trios and divertimenti are still unexplored territory for me (meanwhile, a heap of bargain Festetics quartets dropped through the door yesterday (hoorah!!), and it'll take me a long time to work through them all).

I'm away for a week or so starting tomorrow - so my silence here will not be a sign of a lack of interest, but merely a lack of presence....

[Gurn Blanston]

Well don't do it for me unless you want to do it for yourself. Yes - that was a good part of it. Since we cannot be sure of the exact timing, a broader look at what he was composing, how they developed, and their influence on other works (or vice versa) might reveal more than just sticking a couple in there to intersperse them in particular periods. Not being an expert on this area, I don't know if there is enough info on the general time period or order they were written that gives this enough value, but it seemed like it could be revealing. Perhaps you or others will have other ideas to transform this one, but that was what I was thinking.

No, even the string quartet bible, "The String Quartets of Joseph Haydn" by Grave and Grave admits defeat in that particular aspect. There is no apparent linear progression throughout Opera 1 & 2, nor even any concrete reason to call them Opp 1 & 2, since they are all approximately equal in ideas and development of same. Hoboken started by calling Op 1 #1 "Hob III:1" since there was no other place to start, it seems.

I do agree with you though, if one could be absolutely certain of anything from that time, it would gave a pediment on which to build. But what I see so far is that back in those early days, he simply wrote 'divertimenti' (in the pure sense of 'entertainment music') for whichever combination of instruments presented itself. His ones for 2 violins, viola & Baßo were not, in his mind, string quartets. But at that pleasant summer outing at the Fürnburg's, these were the instrumentalists who were present to play. Then, ex post facto, he realized the potentialities of the grouping and moved along with it. Nothing I have read (which is everything I can get my hands on) solidly suggests that it was any more than that.

Has anyone had a go at those string trios? I am inordinately fond of those. I point out that the only one in the form that became the norm for the genre, that is, violin, viola & Baßo (cello?), was composed early times here, being #8 in Bb. All the rest were for 2 violins and Baßo. If these seem like an inordinately large number, keep in mind that this sort of music was nearly always collected into folios of 6 or 12, sometimes more. Thus the 12 string trios and the 6 (plus an odd one) keyboard trios are actually typical of the time.

[Gurn Blanston]

Comment (inane and otherwise) I can provide, but I don't know enough to say anything that will make you think! I bought a raft of those Goodman sets a while back - Presto had a great deal going on them, and I munched away at them like chocolates as they kept dropping through the letterbox every few days. Shame Goodman's cycle was never finished.

To be honest, it never occurred to me to ask whether those early symphonies sounded like Haydn. I just walloped them into the player and found them eminently likeable, eminently approachable (perhaps more so than the more mature and famous London and Paris sets), without thinking consciously about them very much. I think I'm still at the stage of building up a basic familiarity with his musical arena - no, wait - musical arenas. All those trios and divertimenti are still unexplored territory for me (meanwhile, a heap of bargain Festetics quartets dropped through the door yesterday (hoorah!!), and it'll take me a long time to work through them all).

I'm away for a week or so starting tomorrow - so my silence here will not be a sign of a lack of interest, but merely a lack of presence....

Wonderful bit there, Alan. Delighted that our previous discussions yielded pleasure for you.

My very first of the early symphonies was the Dorati/"London/Decca Weekend Classics" disk of "Morning, Noon and Night", symphonies 6-8. Wasn't at all sure what to expect when I popped it in, since my total Haydn symphony listening began with Paris and ended with London. But right from the first movement I felt right at home, with a familiar composer speaking a familiar language. I don't know for sure what being "Haydnesque" consists in structurally, but whatever it is, it was present from early on. At least to MY ear.

I wholeheartedly believe that you will be very pleased with the Festetics. Your aesthetic sensibility seems congruent with my own, and I surely am. As for the trios, the 2 ( ) disks by Camerata Berolinensis are both available at a good price, and I think would also give solid satisfaction. Recordings of these works are so thin on the ground as to be virtually non-existent. In the other series, which is 6 disks (and very nice they are), after 2 years I still only have the first 4. And that was a real effort.

For the early keyboard trios (and the late ones for that matter), if you haven't already got the van Sweiten Trio's box on Brilliant, then I understand the Trio 1790 set on cpo comes available in Europe for a great price from time to time. I use it mainly for the harpsichord in the early works, but there are dozens of great versions of the later ones.

[Leo K.]

Gurn, you got me getting my big Haydn box out this morning to listen to more of those early symphonies, which I felt were revelatory when I started listening to them for the first time. I began this box last month, starting with the D major Symphony on the first disk. I too heard Haydn's language right away, despite his first efforts here.

Like his Op.1 divertimentos for four strings (on the Naxos complete string quartet collection), his language and personally are right there! I am glad to be finally hearing the early works and enjoying them just as much as the late work. It is a bad habit of mine to stick to the late works of my favorites, but I guess it depends on the availability, and the interest. In Mozart, for example, I stick to his late works simply because I know his early work, and I want the time to explore the unknown 

[Gurn Blanston]

Gurn, you got me getting my big Haydn box out this morning to listen to more of those early symphonies, which I felt were revelatory when I started listening to them for the first time. I began this box last month, starting with the D major Symphony on the first disk. I too heard Haydn's language right away, despite his first efforts here.

Like his Op.1 divertimentos for four strings (on the Naxos complete string quartet collection), his language and personally are right there! I am glad to be finally hearing the early works and enjoying them just as much as the late work. It is a bad habit of mine to stick to the late works of my favorites, but I guess it depends on the availability, and the interest. In Mozart, for example, I stick to his late works simply because I know his early work, and I want the time to explore the unknown 

Leo,
Ah, so you are liking that Davies box. Great! One of the things that I am hoping to do here is to present the chronology a bit more clearly. I have put some of that info in here and there, but it's so hard to keep track of. I am very nearly tempted to start naming my ripped files as "Hob 01_037 Symphony #2 in C...." and see if that won't help me remember them a bit more. I wish the publishers would have some sort of a go at that, but not likely, I guess.

Interesting that your take on the early symphonies was the same as mine. I guess there is a variety of reactions to the early works. I happen to like the early works of many composers, Haydn and Mozart particularly. The people (and they are legion!) who won't listen to any Mozart below K 250 simply don't know what they are missing.