Haydn's Haus

[Mandryka]

Without going back and listening again after a couple of years, my main recollection is that they seemed to drag in places where they should have been forging ahead. Ideally I am always looking for a crisp, clean sound and never dragging. In many spots the sound seemed muddy to me. This is not the norm for them, or for gut strings in general. If you would compare Op 50 to their recording of Op 64, you would think it was a different band. 

I like the thick dark sound of Festetics in op 50 because it's full of colour, the sound is interesting because of the timbres. The cello is really nice I think.

You'd have to locate the moments when they drag for me to comment properly, but it's true that I'm open to less than lithe styles. I'm not at all bothered by their tempos in fast movements.

I think you're exaggerating the differences between op 50 and op 64 from the Festetics.

I haven't heard anythiing from the Salomon.

[Gurn Blanston]

1772 was a watershed year in Haydn's work record. It was the year he turned 40, maybe that served as some sort of impetus to up his game, so to say.  I have been working for the last week on just trying to encapsulate the three symphonies of the year. Here is my modest effort, it's not in B Major, but I like it anyway.

The greatest year for symphonies (so far)

Thanks for reading, glad to discuss.

[Gurn Blanston]

I like the thick dark sound of Festetics in op 50 because it's full of colour, the sound is interesting because of the timbres. The cello is really nice I think.

You'd have to locate the moments when they drag for me to comment properly, but it's true that I'm open to less than lithe styles. I'm not at all bothered by their tempos in fast movements.

I think you're exaggerating the differences between op 50 and op 64 from the Festetics.

I haven't heard anything from the Salomon.

Like so many other people, when I relisten after a few years away, as I did this morning with this one, things sound different somehow. In this case, that is true too. I came to this set after 5 years enjoying the Tokyo Quartet, and the differences in sound were huge to me at the time. It does have a different timbre from Op 64, and of course I exaggerated the degree of it, not that anyone else ever would do such a thing, I know.  

I have the entire set of the Salomon's, they are not god's gift to Haydn, but they are deserving of more than the obscure fate they have gained to date. Perhaps it is a lack of Op 76 which doomed them...

It will be interesting to see what the Haydn London Quartet come up with for their Op 50. Damn, I hope it's a gem!

[Old Listener]

Like so many other people, when I relisten after a few years away, as I did this morning with this one, things sound different somehow. In this case, that is true too. I came to this set after 5 years enjoying the Tokyo Quartet, and the differences in sound were huge to me at the time. It does have a different timbre from Op 64, and of course I exaggerated the degree of it, not that anyone else ever would do such a thing, I know.  

The ambiance of the Op. 50 and Op. 64 recordings sounds different to me.

[Sergeant Rock]

1772 was a watershed year in Haydn's work record. It was the year he turned 40, maybe that served as some sort of impetus to up his game, so to say.  I have been working for the last week on just trying to encapsulate the three symphonies of the year. Here is my modest effort, it's not in B Major, but I like it anyway.

The greatest year for symphonies (so far)

Thanks for reading, glad to discuss.

"The genius of fine ideas and fancy of Haydn, Ditters and Filtz were praised, but their mixture of serious and comic was disliked, particularly as there is more of the latter than the former in their work, and as for rules, they knew but little of them..."


That quote tends to confirm the North German stereotype 

Sarge

[Gurn Blanston]

"The genius of fine ideas and fancy of Haydn, Ditters and Filtz were praised, but their mixture of serious and comic was disliked, particularly as there is more of the latter than the former in their work, and as for rules, they knew but little of them..."


That quote tends to confirm the North German stereotype 

Sarge

  I can't imagine Haydn taking that personally (which he certainly did): it and a thousand others are aimed at Austria and Austrians in general, who not only had a totally different culture, but were Catholics besides!   Some of these quotes are gems, I'll use some more down the road. Too good to let pass.

[Gurn Blanston]

The ambiance of the Op. 50 and Op. 64 recordings sounds different to me.

Yes, I think so. It isn't just the gravitas of the music, it's the whole package. Of course, if I was picking out one set for people to try out, it would be Op. 64.

[Gurn Blanston]

I've been listening to the Opus 20 quartets a lot lately. My latest essay discusses a bit about their context and some interesting aspects of them. Please check it out, I always enjoy discussing with you.

Not just great symphonies, string quartets to go with them!

Thanks for reading!

[torut]

Bought this last night - very enjoyable! Now I'm tempted to start collecting the Wiener Philharmonic Trio's discs of Haydn string trios, although they seem a bit spendy and hard to come by.

[asin]B000CAKZJO[/asin]

I bought this vol. 1 of the string trios by Camerata Berolinensis, heard it twice so far, and I was really surprised. I particularly like the B minor trio, Hob.V:3, which is very touching. The sound is clean and pure. I guess it may be due to that the trio consists of 2 violins and a cello, and period instruments are used. I had anticipated something light, entertaining music, but it is tranquilizingly beautiful.

[...] they are fine works, nothing lame or beginnerish about them.

I agree.

[torut]

I've been listening to the Opus 20 quartets a lot lately. My latest essay discusses a bit about their context and some interesting aspects of them. Please check it out, I always enjoy discussing with you.

Not just great symphonies, string quartets to go with them!

Thanks for reading!

Thank you for this, it was an interesting read. I remember reading a book or article telling that Op. 33 was the groundbreaking work, truly the first inventive quartet, or something like that. I myself cannot make a conclusion by just hearing the music , but this kind of discussion is stimulating.

[Wakefield]

I think this new CPO release looks extremely enticing:





http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/joseph-haydn-schottische-lieder-englische-canzonetten/hnum/3097659

[Gurn Blanston]

Thank you for this, it was an interesting read. I remember reading a book or article telling that Op. 33 was the groundbreaking work, truly the first inventive quartet, or something like that. I myself cannot make a conclusion by just hearing the music , but this kind of discussion is stimulating.

Thank you. Well, yes, for years some influential musicologists have stated that Op 33 was ~the beginning of the Classic Era. As though there actually was such a thing!    A few notable exceptions to that were Donald Tovey, whom I quoted, and Robbins-Landon and Laszlo Somfai, who doesn't always fall on the right side of things, but in this case he did. As Tovey says, Op 20 has it all. Further efforts were not an improvement, they were variations on a theme. That sounds like the beginning has been reached, to me.

I agree, this IS stimulating, especially if history is your ideal.

[Gurn Blanston]

I think this new CPO release looks extremely enticing:





http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/joseph-haydn-schottische-lieder-englische-canzonetten/hnum/3097659

It will be mine. I actually have 3 or 4 disks of this same type already, I never tire of them. The concept of duplicating a salon atmosphere for a recital has great appeal for me.

[Karl Henning]

I've been listening to the Opus 20 quartets a lot lately. My latest essay discusses a bit about their context and some interesting aspects of them. Please check it out, I always enjoy discussing with you.

Not just great symphonies, string quartets to go with them!

Thanks for reading!

Thank you, this is on the top of my morning reading over tea tomorrow!

[TheGSMoeller]

I've been listening to the Opus 20 quartets a lot lately. My latest essay discusses a bit about their context and some interesting aspects of them. Please check it out, I always enjoy discussing with you.

Not just great symphonies, string quartets to go with them!

Thanks for reading!

Fine job, Gurn.
The Op.20 are excellent, and I love that you chose The London Haydn Quartet for a rec. I feel they explore the furthest depths of these quartets.

[Gurn Blanston]

Fine job, Gurn.
The Op.20 are excellent, and I love that you chose The London Haydn Quartet for a rec. I feel they explore the furthest depths of these quartets.

Thanks, Greg, I'm pleased you enjoyed it. For me, when the LHQ started out (in Op 9 & 17), they were just too serious. Those works blossom with a lighter touch. When they got to Op 20 & 33 they seemed to have found their footing, and the results are far better.

These last two essays have been the most difficult so far, since I think the works involved are the finest music of its time, everyone knows this music, and it wouldn't do to screw up!     I'm pleased though, no death threats (to date...).   

[Karl Henning]

Thanks, Greg, I'm pleased you enjoyed it. For me, when the LHQ started out (in Op 9 & 17), they were just too serious.

Probably too intent on showing the world that the quartets were world-class art.

[Gurn Blanston]

Probably too intent on showing the world that the quartets were world-class art.

And that they were world-class players. Which they are. I would love to hear them play Op 1 & 2, now that they are a bit mellower. With a violone instead of (or doubling, why not?)) the cello, of course....

[torut]

Thank you. Well, yes, for years some influential musicologists have stated that Op 33 was ~the beginning of the Classic Era. As though there actually was such a thing!    A few notable exceptions to that were Donald Tovey, whom I quoted, and Robbins-Landon and Laszlo Somfai, who doesn't always fall on the right side of things, but in this case he did. As Tovey says, Op 20 has it all. Further efforts were not an improvement, they were variations on a theme. That sounds like the beginning has been reached, to me.

I agree, this IS stimulating, especially if history is your ideal.

In the new preface, written in 1997, of Charles Rosen's The Classical Style (I have not read it at all, just read only the preface ), Rosen mentioned a complaint by Alan Tyson that Rosen begins the discussion of the string quartets with Op. 33, and Tyson believed the earlier works (Op. 17 & 20) should be studied in greater depth. Rosen wrote that 'obbligato accompaniment' ("a texture in which the accompanying voices, while still subordinate to the main voice, are created from the same motifs that make up the principal themes") first appeared in Op. 33. I don't know if that is true. (No such things in Op. 20? And how significant is it?) Also he wrote that Haydn "applied his symphonic experiments to quartets literature for the first time." (Yes, I need to read the book to understand what it means ...)

[Gurn Blanston]

In the new preface, written in 1997, of Charles Rosen's The Classical Style (I have not read it at all, just read only the preface ), Rosen mentioned a complaint by Alan Tyson that Rosen begins the discussion of the string quartets with Op. 33, and Tyson believed the earlier works (Op. 17 & 20) should be studied in greater depth. Rosen wrote that 'obbligato accompaniment' ("a texture in which the accompanying voices, while still subordinate to the main voice, are created from the same motifs that make up the principal themes") first appeared in Op. 33. I don't know if that is true. (No such things in Op. 20? And how significant is it?) Also he wrote that Haydn "applied his symphonic experiments to quartets literature for the first time." (Yes, I need to read the book to understand what it means ...)

No doubt; Rosen is writing for more educated people than myself.   However, it is important to understand that not everyone agrees with him. Are those two things he mentions also the two defining properties for Classic Style? They would seem to be by his personal interpretation of it, but clearly not everyone is in agreement. And in fact, the real question is more essential than this; is there such a thing as Classic Style, and does it differ in any substantial way from what preceded it and what followed it? Is Classic style primarily homophonic music written by the rules of the tonal system? And if so, then why is Haydn Classical and Tchaikovsky Romantic? They both wrote music that was primarily homophonic and which conformed to the rules of the tonal system. If you are me, then you look at this as a secondary issue because the history of the music is more interesting than the structure. I suppose the fact that I find a lot more literature devoted to structure than to history is the root of my occasional rant.