Dvorak's Den

[Madiel]

PS In fact, everybody else thinks that "opus 4" is Symphony No.2, and "opus 10" is Symphony No.3, so I find myself thinking that someone putting together that set got distracted at some point or troubled by the lack of opus numbers and grabbed them off a symphony list.

Because I seriously cannot find any independent source that agrees with Brilliant/Stamitz - the only things I can find that think "opus 4" and "opus 10" are string quartets are quoting from that box set.

But I don't think Brilliant are especially known for making mistakes of that kind. Most of what I've seen of theirs online is fine.

[Chris L.]

PS In fact, everybody else thinks that "opus 4" is Symphony No.2, and "opus 10" is Symphony No.3, so I find myself thinking that someone putting together that set got distracted at some point or troubled by the lack of opus numbers and grabbed them off a symphony list.

Because I seriously cannot find any independent source that agrees with Brilliant/Stamitz - the only things I can find that think "opus 4" and "opus 10" are string quartets are quoting from that box set.

But I don't think Brilliant are especially known for making mistakes of that kind. Most of what I've seen of theirs online is fine.

So the Op. 4 & Op. 10 on the Brilliant set are actually the other two quartets you mentioned with the missing Op. numbers?

[Madiel]

So the Op. 4 & Op. 10 on the Brilliant set are actually the other two quartets you mentioned with missing Op. numbers?

I believe so. That other website should help sort it out, it neatly shows the list of the quartets, and based on the keys and a process of elimination it must be.

[Chris L.]

I believe so. That other website should help sort it out, it neatly shows the list of the quartets, and based on the keys and a process of elimination it must be.

I also find it odd that they only bothered to include the catalog numbers for 4 of the works on this set, B17, B57, B120 & B152. The rest do not have any catalog numbers listed, even though they all have them according to that website. Why?

Yeah... the Brilliant/Stamitz set leaves a lot to be desired in the way of academic research. I'm glad I asked about this, otherwise I may have gone on believing these works had the correct Op. numbers. Thanks Orfeo!

[Madiel]

Every work should have a B number (for Burghauser). Burghauser made his catalogue because the opus numbers are a bit unreliable. Mostly this isn't Dvorak's fault, it's the fault of his publisher, who changed the opus numbers of early works that he published once Dvorak was famous, so that people would think they were brand new works. For example, the quartet that is now known as "opus 80" was actually "opus 27" on Dvorak's manuscript.

It's a real pity, because it does seem that Dvorak was quite conscientious about his opus numbers. The front pages of his manuscripts usually have a very clear number on them.

[Jo498]

The Brilliant set is licensed from Bayer Records, so it might be possible they just copied the mistakes.

[Madiel]

Good heavens, is no-one listening to poor Antonin?

Those of you who hang around on the Brahms thread know I've been going through all the big Brahms chamber works chronologically (very, very slowly, as is my habit). I decided to do the same over here with Dvorak as I own the big ticket items: the string quartets, piano trios, piano quartets, some quintets, the sextet.  I don't have any of the works for violin and piano though (am I right in thinking they're smaller scale besides the sole violin sonata?).

I'm also cheating by skipping the earliest works and beginning with String Quartet No.7 (op.16/B.45), which to me is when Dvorak has solved some earlier problems and embarked upon his more mature style. See previous discussions about my 'Burghauser limit'!  It's also apparently the first of his chamber works that came out in print, which is a landmark in itself.

I'm not sure whether I'm going to try to write about them all like I've been doing with the Brahms... I suppose one of the reasons I do these listening exercises is to become more familiar with individual pieces, and their individual character. The standout movement of SQ No.7 for me is the scherzo. But I enjoy the whole thing, lots of flowing melodies in the first couple of movements and then a finale that enjoys a good gallop.

[Jo498]

The most famous violin/piano piece is the "sonatina" op.100 Dvorak wrote for his children. It's fairly lightweight but quite characteristically Dvorakian and very nice. The actual sonata is earlier, somewhat longer and there are a bunch or shorter pieces, probably not all essential listening. But the sonata and the sonatina are certainly worthwhile, more important works than the early string quartets.

[asin]B00000356O[/asin]

[Madiel]

Thanks, duly noted.

It seems I can digest Dvorak more easily than Brahms, because I've already decided to move on to String Quintet No.2 (op.18 but for Simrock who turned it into 77/B.49)

[asin]B000002ZW6[/asin]

This is the quintet with double bass, and personally I really notice the difference this makes to the texture. It seems to add a mellowness to the music... the way the work starts, hesitatingly, certainly gives that impression, and I find the way the 1st movement picks up and works towards a strong conclusion really interesting. The 'poco andante' 3rd movement uses the double bass very effectively, steadily and quietly punching out a rhythm that the higher instruments flow over. I think that's my favourite movement, but the whole thing is enjoyable (as so much Dvorak is!).

[Madiel]

I've moved on to Piano Trio No.1, op.21 (B.51)

[asin]B0011FEGUS[/asin]

I am most definitely falling in love with the 1st movement. There's something so sunny and confident about it. It's the longest movement so far in this exercise (13.5 minutes on this version), but doesn't outstay its welcome. Admittedly I haven't listened to Dvorak's earliest works this time around, but my recollection is that listening to them was tiring rather than invigorating. By the time of these 'early' works I'm listening to (about 1874-5) he has SO much more control of structure and maintaining variety for the ear.

The 2nd movement, Adagio molto e mesto, has real intensity of feeling. The allegretto scherzando is rather lyrical and not a full-on scherzo. Like so much Dvorak it's a total delight - I think Haydn is the only other composer who can make me smile so regularly. After that, the finale is a really satisfying conclusion, rolling along with just the right amount of inevitability.

Thoroughly enjoyable all round.

[Madiel]

What does Dvorak do straight after writing a fine Piano Trio No.1 (okay, actually his third but the others are gone)?

Write a possibly even finer Piano Quartet No.1, op.23.

[asin]B000002ZKL[/asin]

And we really are talking a short timeframe here. Dvorak recorded his dates of composition fairly consistently. Op.21 was finished on 14 May 1875 (as was op.22) and op.23 was started on 24 May. And the quartet took him less than 3 weeks.

Only 3 movements this time, but the work as a whole is actually longer (at least on my recording). The opening Allegro moderato is a superb 15-minute epic, with the distinctive rhythm of the opening cropping up again and again. It's expansive, it's lyrical, and I think it's the best movement yet in this listening exercise. The middle movement is a theme & variations with plenty of feeling. The finale is a fairly sunny affair, but has lots of surprising shifts of rhythm.

Great stuff. I don't know why the focus tends to be so much on Dvorak's works from 10-20 years later, because these pieces from 1874-5 when he first got his scholarship and could concentrate on composing are top notch.

[Brian]

I refer to 1875 as the "miracle year" where Dvorak took a massive leap forward, from diverting composer to great composer. And that is in part because of my unending love affair with the string quintet Op. 77 (with bass), which began at a live concert in college. Lord, I love that piece, even the discarded "bonus" slow movement (Nocturne in B). One of the biggest thrills of discovering Dvorak, for me, was the theme about a minute into the scherzo - it uses only 4-5 notes, repeated over and over, but those 4-5 notes...magic. Amazed me, at the time, that you could tug such emotion out of such apparently-minimal effort. Economy of style, but luxury of expression.

[mc ukrneal]

I refer to 1875 as the "miracle year" where Dvorak took a massive leap forward, from diverting composer to great composer.

Not really. His first four symphonies are more than diverting, as is the cello concerto (and a number of chamber works). 

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

What does Dvorak do straight after writing a fine Piano Trio No.1 (okay, actually his third but the others are gone)?

Write a possibly even finer Piano Quartet No.1, op.23.

Both of those piano 4tets are top-shelf chamber works. I slightly prefer Op. 87 for its tighter structure and dramatic sense, but the early one is wonderful too in its relaxed charm. I have both of them on the New Vlach Qt. Naxos CD.

Great stuff. I don't know why the focus tends to be so much on Dvorak's works from 10-20 years later, because these pieces from 1874-5 when he first got his scholarship and could concentrate on composing are top notch.

I can understand the focus on the mature works, but the early works have their own attraction. I had a general "Op. 40 rule" for a long time where I would discount works with lower opus numbers, but that rule has turned out not to hold very well.

[Madiel]

As can be seen from my posts, I currently have an "op.16" rule...

Today I've been listening to both Piano Trio No.2 (op.26) and String Quartet No.8 (should be op.27, Simrock made it op.80). They were written one straight after the other, in early 1876.

I'm not going to keep waxing lyrical about all the movements, because it's a bit repetitive. Oh okay, apart from highlighting the middle movements of the quartet...

What I will mention is the sheer stupidity of some commentary you can find in liner notes. Dvorak's first daughter was born on 19 August 1875 and died on 21 August 1875. He was working on an opera at the time, and these 2 chamber pieces are the first works written after that.

On the one hand, my CD of the Piano Trio says "people keep looking for great tragedy in the Trio but that isn't really Dvorak's style", and I pretty much agree with that. But my string quartet box drops this great clanger:

The years 1874 and 1875 were highly successful for Dvorak [then lists the successes]. It is therefore difficult to understand why the works Dvorak wrote at the beginning of 1876 bear so many marks of melancholy, disquiet and anxiety.

Which is just incredibly dense. It'd be one thing to not comment at all, but to comment on the tone of the music and say "gosh, he should've been happy, we've got no clue why he might not have been" is absurd. And the same liner notes actually mention the death of 2 more of Dvorak's children in 1877.

[Brian]

Which is just incredibly dense. It'd be one thing to not comment at all, but to comment on the tone of the music and say "gosh, he should've been happy, we've got no clue why he might not have been" is absurd. And the same liner notes actually mention the death of 2 more of Dvorak's children in 1877.

Yeah, what a dumb quote, yeesh. "Why, I've never heard of a man having professional successes that outpaced his personal happiness!" [ignores half of artists on earth]

[Madiel]

Listening to String Quartet No.9 (op.34) tonight. Dedicated to Brahms.

[asin]B00002DEH4[/asin]

It's funny, I kind of didn't warm to this one at first, and then I was seriously taken with the 3rd movement Adagio (which multiple commentaries single out for special mention) and also the finale.

For some reason the 1st movement is reminding me of Schubert's 13th quartet (Rosamunde), even though I haven't listened to that for ages and they're probably barely alike... and the acceleration at the end of the movement is very Dvorak and not at all Schubertian. The 2nd movement Polka seems to stop and start in some surprising places.

And then the Adagio, con sordino, comes across as a very different sound-world. Veiled and also rich, with lots of double stops. It's almost as if I'm suddenly listening to a quintet or sextet.

Then the finale is a quartet again, skipping and waltzing along, rarely free of an insistent drumming rhythm.

Perhaps not my favourite work overall, despite the riveting Adagio, but still thoroughly good quality and well worth a listen.

[Madiel]

I've been playing the Sextet op.48 (B.80) today. A lot.

[asin]B000002ZL3[/asin]

And reading about it. This was apparently one of Dvorak's first significant international successes, right around the same time as the first set of Slavonic Dances as well. It was premiered in Berlin and made it to London and New York within a matter of months. It's also apparently the first time there's a "Dumka" in one of his works.

Lots of great tunes, as usual, but to me it feels as if there are closer connections between many of them this time around. In the opening movement it's the distinctive contour and dotted rhythm of the 2nd subject that makes the biggest impression. But it's rhythmically not that different from the 1st subject, and then the theme of the Dumka really has an echo of the opening movement's 1st subject.

The finale stands out for me. It's a theme and variations, which is straightforward enough, but the theme has these delicious and ambiguous harmonic twists in it. I particularly love one variation where the 3 upper voices have ghostly sustained notes while the 3 lower voices do the main work underneath.

There's of course a great richness and colour to the music thanks to having 6 instruments to work with.

[Madiel]

Having wandered off to other music for a bit, I'm back at String Quartet No.10, op.51 (B.92).

[asin]B00002DEH4[/asin]

Nicknamed "Slavonic", and with some justification for once because this was a commissioned work (itself a sign of Dvorak's growing fame), and the quartet specifically asked the composer for a work with Slavic character.

The very opening is, at least on this recording, one of the most wonderfully serene things. It's just glowing and warm. And indeed the whole movement has that sort of feel to it. For me it's one of those pieces of music to just sink back into in pleasure.

The following Dumka is like some medieval song, complete with strummed accompaniment, very lyrical and still quite warm despite it's minor key. And then it breaks out into this vibrant dance in the middle. The Romanza is all lyricism and passion.

After that the finale adds some rhythm and sparkle to proceedings. Truth be told I'm not quite as in love with this movement as the rest, but it's a lot of fun and I think that's more the point of it.

All in all I tend to think this is one of my favourite Dvorak chamber works, which given the general standard is a pretty big call.

[Madiel]

If I had the violin sonata it would've appeared next...

...but I don't yet so I'm up to String Quartet No.11, op.61 (B.121).

And wow. There's just something really special about the way this quartet manages to hover between major and minor at important points. The first movement (which is a very lengthy one by mature Dvorak's chamber standards) does it straight away, and while the whole movement flows beautifully, it never really becomes openly sunny in mood.

Several sources describe this quartet as the nearest Dvorak gets to Beethoven, and I can kind of understand what they mean. There's a little bit of a sense of tension, and also an emphasis on motivic development. I mean, there are still most definitely tunes (this is Dvorak!), but it's not expansively lyrical.

Some passages of the 2nd movement poco adagio e molto cantabile have the same sense of harmonic shifts, of teetering between major and minor, and a real yearning quality. In fact it reminds me of Faure. Not exactly the same, but those characteristics give the music similar emotional qualities to Faure's chamber works.

The 3rd movement is more of a genuine scherzo than some of Dvorak's equivalent movements. The 4th movement is a bit dance-flavoured, but the main theme has this off-key beginning that seems to fit with the harmonic qualities of the whole work. And at one point I'm quite sure there's a reference back to the 1st movement, even though none of the brief commentaries I've read mention it.

I do an absolutely terrible job of describing my reactions to Dvorak, I know. In some ways the reaction keeps being the same, because at its heart all about the incredible lyricism he brought to classical-romantic forms. But so many of them are so good. And this quartet is satisfying the entire way through, and just a tiny bit more 'intellectual' in feel than some of the others.