Johann Gottfried Arnold (1773-1806) Cello Concerto Op.1 on Klassik-resampled

[fahl5]

Johann Gottfried Arnold Celloconcerto op.1 (1804)

In my ears it is music which makes me simply addictive. Of course there is much more to talk about this music. I am for instance not that happy with associations with Mozart and Haydn, meanwhile those were the leading Composers of Arnolds Time and Beethoven was still as young when Arnold grew up but in my ears this music is at least as much or perhaps even more romantic as the music of the young Beethoven and I am really surprised about the handling of the Orchestra, I would not have expected in this quality in a Concerto written by the Instrumentalist himself.

I hope you like this recording, and that I may let you hear more Arnold Concertos soon....
best
fahl5

[Alan Howe]

More romantic than the Eroica (composed 1803-4) - or the slow movement of the Triple Concerto (1803) or 3rd Piano Concerto (1800-1)? Hmm, I think not. Such comparisons do Arnold no favours at all - it's like comparing a giant with an ordinary mortal.
However, the Arnold is certainly a very attractive piece - well worth a commercial recording, I would have thought. Thanks to Steffen for doing so much work to bring it to our attention.

[fahl5]

Oh I did not at all intended to make Beethoven any smaller.
I just meant, that the musical thinking seem me to have less resemblance with the viennese classical idiom of Haydn or Mozart than with Beethoven and later 'more romantic composers'.
On the other hand to me it seem to have a musical quality, which I would not expect necessarily from a virtuoso who wrote concerts for him self. 

[Alan Howe]

What you said was:

...this music is at least as much or perhaps even more romantic as the music of the young Beethoven...

I disagree. What I hear is a composer, like many of his period, moving on (a little) from the late classicism of Mozart and Haydn, but with nowhere near the proto-romantic power of the Beethoven of the same period. As I said before, this sort of exaggeration does unsung composers such as Arnold no favours - because it raises expectations that cannot be met.

So: a really attractive cello concerto, but let's be a bit more realistic...

[fahl5]

as I said "more romantic" (than the "young" Beethoven)  (and not "better" then the Beethoven around 1800).
This is just my personal impression in respect to the musical idiom (I am sure that we consent, that one can not that easy refer to any "proper definition" of romantism, especially in time of transitions from (or to) other musical idioms)

But of course this is not a all any comparison in respect to the quality of music, and it should not at all do any one "a favour" but just experss my personal impression about the musical idiom, which at this time has been afaik especially for lesser know composers around 1800 pretty often less serious, less inspired and how I would calll it "less romantic".  (Remember that Schubert was seven years old when Arnold wrote this concert. We are talking of the generation of Anton Reicha, Johann Baptist Cramer who - however interesting some of their compositions definitly are - seem to be in my eyes still pretty far from being likewise "romantic" compared for instance with the music we can hear from J.G.Arnold.) 

And of course it is most "realistic" if it comes to the musical idiom to refer to the most influencial composers of the time. That is the reason, why I refered to the "young" Beethoven (which means definitly the Beethoven befor 1800) who if ever would be beside Haydn and Mozart one of the most propable possible influence for the musical development of a composer of nearly the same age. And this "young Beethoven" meanwhile he still is presumable one of the most influencial composers for the whole romantism, was in his early works in many aspects still much more dependent to the classical idiom defined by composers like Haydn and Mozart than the later Beethoven around and after 1800. ...so  just to be "a bit more realistic": give a musical influence the time to be realised in the own style of a composer.

I fear you simply misunderstood something, which I hope I could correct this way.
At least we seem to consent, about the still astonishing quality of this concert...

[Alan Howe]

I didn't misunderstand you at all. I fear you have misunderstood me! So, to repeat: I disagree with you, Steffen. Arnold's music is definitely and audibly not more romantic than the music of the young Beethoven - as the examples cited of pieces by the latter from the same period clearly demonstrate. As for the Arnold concerto, I certainly wouldn't describe it as 'astonishing' either. While you are entitled to your opinion, which I respect, my assessment of the Arnold is somewhat more modest. You must, in this case, allow us to agree to disagree...

[fahl5]

We know first Compositions of the "young Beethoven" beginning from ca 1782, his Trios op.1 seemed to be composed around 1793, When he composed ca.1802-1804 the  Eroica op.55 and the Tripleconcert op.56 he was already 32-34 and an experienced and well established composer. Beethoven has at that time already wrote his "Heiligenstadt Testamant" If you call this this man the "young Beethoven" than the only 35 years old Mozart and Schubert died definitly really "young" (I hope you know, that the average lifespan in the 18th Century was for men ca. 35,6 years!)

Sorry, but afaik the years after 1800 belong more or less to the middle Period of Beethovens oeuvre. It is in my Eyes not that likely that this music could have had any influence on a Celloconcert of Arnold already published in 1804 (which means at least however composed  before being published). On the other hand: If Beethoven shows in 1802-1804 strong aspects pointing forward to the romantic music, this would in my eyes not at all implicate, that all of his comtemporarys composers at that time are also already quite used in writing music which reminds us ( or at least "me") today in some aspects more at romantic music of "later composers" than works of the "young Beethoven" (thinking for instance at his first two symphonies or first two pianoconcertos written befor 1801).

In this view in my personal impression the music of Arnold seems to me at least astonishingly serious and inspired (not to remind, that the time of the great composings virtuosos Paganini, Liszt, Chopin also belongs more to the romantic, than to the classical period), And this my personal impression I just wanted to be allowed to express and just want to be not misunderstood.

Of course everyone is "allowed" to disagree with whatever he has fun to do.  And as moderator you are also allowed to delete whatever you like. But I definitly did no where dispute or denied anyones personal feelings in what ever point (I personally would only be for my side a bit more cautious with anything "definitly" when it comes to personal impressions at least). As I said I just want to be clear and correct understood in the musical references I cited to express my personal impression of that music. And I hope I was able to make my musichistorical references in this point now a bit more clear and understandable for you.

Meanhile of course you are allowed to disagree with what ever you like.
I just want to be understood right in what I said, and still do not have the impression, that you really do so.

Perhaps we easier come together in the opinion, that Arnold seem (at least to me) to be "as" romantic as Beethoven (who also  was an extremly lookong forward composer), which at least is imho still much more as one can say about the most active composer of Arnolds Lifetime.

Or in short: I at least like composers being so versatile in handling the large symphonic orchestra, composing as much melodicly inspired, as passionate brilliant and still simply "serious". Therefor I hope perhaps at least some of the people here might nevertheless enjoy likewise this stiill nearly complete forgotten music.

[Alan Howe]

The problem, Steffen, was your original thesis - comparison of Arnold with the young Beethoven. If I misunderstood, that is down to your lack of clarity as to what you meant. Now that you are finally being clearer, you are evidently comparing music by the 30+ year-old Arnold not merely with the young Beethoven, but with the 'boy Beethoven' - i.e Arnold's Cello concerto written at the age of around 30 with music by Beethoven dating from 10-20 years earlier. This makes no sense at all. The only meaningful comparison is between what two composers were writing at approximately the same time. So what if Arnold was writing something more romantic-sounding than the Beethoven of 10-20 years before? That would be nothing surprising - in fact it's what one might expect. And in fact that's precisely what we have in Arnold's CC - a modestly attractive work written in a fundamentally late-classical idiom with proto-romantic features which you can find in works by quite a number of lesser, but nevertheless interesting composers of the period. So, as I said, I disagree with your opinion and I find your comparisons practically meaningless.

Anyway, although I think you're wrong about Arnold's CC, you're definitely right about Nicodé's Gloria! - although I'd really like the opportunity to download the piece for more comfortable listening away from my computer...

[fahl5]

A.  No a comparison is no "thesis" at all, but nothing else than simply a comparison.
My personal Impression of this comparison is nothing more or less but my personal impression. It has no other "meaning" but to comunicate my personal impression no matter if you disagree or not.

B. before 1800 does not necessarily mean 20 years before.

This is true for each example I named (Sorry I thought you already knew the facts):
1.  Symphony  op.21 finished 1799 premierd 1800 is clearly depended on Mozart and Haydn
2. Symphony op.36 finished and premiered 1802 is still far from pointing to the 19th century romantism
1. Pianoconcert  op.15 premiered 1800 (finished 1801) is clearly depended on Mozart and Haydn
2. Pianoconcert op.19 (meanwhile he began it 1788) premiered 1795 is clearly depended on Mozart and Haydn
So at least as far as I know Beethoven was neiter 1795 (25 Years old) "a boy" nor he was in 1801 (31 Years old)

Since Beethoven became known as brilliant Pianist like Arnold beame known as Cello-virtuoso I personally still think that for Arnolds first Celloconcerts the situation is pretty good compareable at least with Beethovens first two Pianoconcerts. And if it comes to the amount of pre-romantic musical idiom, I still think that Arnold starts composing his first Concert (of course a few years later than beethoven second - but) only short after Beethovens "first" Pianoconcert. And if you compare those two "first" concerts at least in in my impression the one of Arnold seems to me "astonishingly" clearly more pre-romantic.  This is simply what I always meant and said. I hope it might be at least now understandable.

I must not mark that it stll makes the comparison more "realistic" that Arnold was exactly at the same age when he published his first Celloconcert, as Beethoven was when he published his still very classical "first" Pianoconcert.

C. "proto-romantic features"
Finally I understand at least that you also see "proto-romantic features". Please let me know the "number of lesser, but nevertheless interesting composers" of the age of Beethoven who are already in the very first years of the 19th century ready to write works with such pre-"romantic-features"  Reicha? Wilms? Cramer? Wölfl?

It would be quite interesting and of course inspiring for me and my project, if you could help me a bit with naming me those in this meaning really very "early romantic" composers who are really exactly at the same time as Arnold already showing such "proto-romantic features".

(Yes in my eyes one even could find some of such "proto-romantic features" in the music around Carl Phillip Emanuel Bach  that was one reason (among other) why I am strongly interested in the Graun-Brothers and Benda Brothers and produced some first-time-recordings of their in parts still "unsung" works but of course hesitatet to talk about here because this if really to early for 19th century "romantism"  in sensu strictu)


(Gloria)
Thank you for your friendly reaction on my Nicodé-project. I am sorry, that I still found no other way to allow listening but keeping the chance of comunication with the users and later amelioration whenever I fell the necessity.
Perhaps see the good thing: it is at least completly free to listen for you as it is for me this way to put it online - this is unfortunatly a very strong argument, when it comes to music which is not in the focus of paying user masses.

best
fahl5

[Alan Howe]

I personally still think that for Arnold's 1st Cello Concerto the situation is pretty good - comparable at least with Beethoven's first two Piano Concertos

Steffen, each time I read a reply, you change the terms of your comparison - very frustrating. It's like trying to pin jelly to a wall. Now, instead of citing works including those by the very young Beethoven going back to 1782 (a date you suggested) for the purposes of comparison, you finally alight on works by LvB with which Arnold's CC may be properly compared, i.e. those from his early maturity which hark back to late-classical models. Fair enough. But is is "more romantic" than these works? No. And, with Arnold's work dating from 1804 (the date you gave), he's actually well behind the Beethovenian curve.

So, your argument does not convince at all. And all the while Arnold's estimable work is disappearing amidst the smoke generated by comparisons with Beethoven who, just as Arnold's CC appears, is galloping off into the stylistic distance. That's my thesis (which just means my 'argument', by the way) - und damit ist Schluss!

No: other composers should be cited for comparison purposes here - e.g. J. L. Dussek (PC Op.29, 1795) or Reicha (Symphony in D, 1799) who, like Arnold, sit in that fascinating period when late classicism is developing into early romanticism. If you had begun here, Steffen, I'd have been with you. But you chose the wrong composer with whom to compare Arnold.

Now it's over to others to decide for themselves. Has anyone else managed to give Arnold's CC a listen? Or am I the only one?

[Mark Thomas]

OK. That's the last word in this argument. Sometimes you just have to agree to disagree, as Alan suggested several posts ago. It would be a real advance if members could be mature about posts disagreeing with an opinion of theirs, and not treat them as an insult which demands a furious and emotional rebuttal. A debate is a positive thing from which we all benefit. We learn little from argument.

[semloh]

I still haven't listened to it, so don't have an opinion as to the merits of the concerto in question, but - comparisons with other composers' music aside - it seems that we have two members who at least agree that it is a very attractive work, worthy of a commercial recording.

So, perhaps members will ignore the somewhat heated exchanges and join me in giving it a listen.... 

[semloh]

Steffen,
Maybe you could put together an mp3 version of the concerto, as you have re-sampled it, and upload it to UC? This would be convenient for members, and enable them to give it a more considered hearing.
Just a thought.

[fahl5]

Hi Semloh
Thank you for your friendly interested answer. From the view of a UC-User I understand your request for an seperate upload at the UC-Forum. Since the recordings are on one hand also of interest for others (imslp, VSL, etc.) and on the other hand I would like to keep the chance to update any of my recordings whenever I see the necessity I prefer to load them up only once and comunicate them for other which might be interested via links. I hope this would be neverthelese not to inconvenient for UC-Users.
best
fahl5