Franz Lachner

[John H White]

I would say that Lachner's later symphonies were probably more influenced by Beethoven than Schubert. If you want hear a Lachner work that sounds almost like pure late Schubert, try his string quartet in A Op 76, obtainable on the Amati label played by the Rodin Quartet.

[Alan Howe]

I think that Beethoven's symphonies cast a shadow over the entire symphonism of the nineteenth century - including Schubert, Lachner and everyone else. What I find interesting - and significant - is that Schubert and Lachner did not follow Beethoven in the expansion of the symphony to include voices along the lines of B9. There is also something quite extraordinary in the composition of such an epic-scale (hour-long), purely orchestral symphony as L5 in the mid-1830s. This scale is not approached by anyone else, with the exception of Rufinatscha in his own 6th Symphony from the mid-1860s, until the emergence of Bruckner (and Rubinstein - although the latter does not operate in his longer symphonies at anything like the level of inspiration). Raff 1 is, of course, a very lengthy symphony too, but, with its 5-movement structure, proved to be - at least as far as length was concerned - an early symphonic one-off in a cycle in which a classicising concision would become more typical than Romantic expansion.

[John H White]

I'd love to know why Lachner abandoned the symphony at the age of 48. He then seemed to go into retro mode, producing a series of 7 "Neo Baroque" style suites over a number of years, each one ending with a fugue.
However, his string quartets of that later period are by no means retro, becoming more and more advanced in style, unlike those of his brother Ignaz, who stuck to Schubert and Haydn as his models. All the surviving quartets of these composers have been available on the Amati Label for some years, played by the Rodin String Quartet. Well worth hearing.

[christopherfifield]

Hello to all. Sorry I have not been contributing much, but recording work (Robert Hermann Symphonies 1 and 2 out on Sterling very soon) and my PhD on the 19th century German symphony's fall and rise have kept me busy. Mustn't stay long now, as I should be writing up. However I was pleased to read all the positives about Lachner, to which I must add that my thesis is going backwards in time from 1851-1876 and now starts with the deaths of you know who in 1827 and 1828 (as I do not consider Mendelsson (pace No.3 and to a certain extent No.4) or Schumann as PRIMARILY symphonists). So that leaves us with a symphonic crisis lasting 50 years! Into the mix must be thrown Kalliwoda, who is an incredibly important figure, Spohr and Lachner as three who kept the genre alive in the 1830s. (Remember this is German or German speaking (i.e. Austrian/Bohemian too) only so no Berlioz please. The Lachner/Schubert connection is surely there, I'm convinced he had a sighting of the Great C major. Remember Lachner 5 was a competition symphony, so maybe its length was because lots of boxes had to be ticked to satisfy the jury (Raff No.1 did the same thing 25 years later if not so long a work). Then Lachner stops for 15 years, but has a last hurrah with No.8 in the year of Schumann's last (No.3 in 1851). He turns to Suites (Volkmann to Serenades), a soft option for the symphony, prescribed format, popular with the public, programmable, short. Listen to Kalliwoda 1 whose Scherzo Schumann used (first eight notes and its canonic imitation) in his 4th 16 years later. Some glorious music in Kalliowda's seven, including No.3 with its five-note motto theme one of his children kept hammering out on the piano! He is all Sturm und Drang in the minor, cheery and Rossinian in the major. I'm sure you all knwo them.

By the way I hope to conduct Lachner 8 next February with my Lambeth Orchestra. We haven't ratified my programme yet (Kalinnikov 1 in December, York Bowen viola concerto next July, Taneyev Suite for violin and orchgestra (if a concert performance of Tosca falls through rather than over the battlements!) may interest some). Committee meeting on Sunday. Let's hope they have the courage to go along with me!!

Good to read your posts again.  Excuse the ramblings above! Christopher Fifield

[John H White]

Many thanks, Christopher, for your very informative latest contribution. I must definitely make the effort to get up to London for your February concert to hear one of my favorite composers in the flesh, as it were. I'm sure the conductor on that Marco Polo CD took that Andante introduction far too slowly---sounds more like funeral pace than walking pace!
It might interest you to know that I was at school down your way back in the 40's. Sadly, my school closed in the 60s and they built a huge great comprehensive on our lovely school playing field.
   Of course, we mustn't forget Lachner's connections with Bruckner, who studied counterpoint with Lachner's old teacher, Simon Sechter. After seeing the score of Bruckner's F minor Study Symphony, Lachner offered to programme it in one of his concerts but, in the end, nothing appears to have come of this.
I also suspect that Bruckner got his idea for brassy climaxes from Lachner.
    I'm intrigued by what you have to say about Kallivoda's symphonies as, to the best of my knowledge, only Nos. 3, 5, 6 & 7 have been recorded. Maybe you and your orchestra would be interested in filling in the gaps sometime.
   Anyway, I look forward to your forthcoming Hermann release.
In the meantime, I wish you every bit of luck with your very worthwhile PhD project. If you haven't done so already, I strongly suggest you get in touch with Dr Harald J Mann, who appears to be a world authority on the Lachner family and their music. If you point your browser at Rain am Lech+ Lachner you'll probably find him. I'd have done so myself but my knowledge of German is rather limited.