Czerny Piano Concerto No.1 in D minor (1811-12)

[Alan Howe]

Pretty lengthy, as is Czerny's wont, at over 40 minutes, this is nevertheless a fascinating work with resonances of Beethoven, but also looking forward, with Hummel, to Chopin. Great writing for four horns, by the way.

The new Naxos recording with Rosemary Tuck and English Chamber Orchestra under the 87 year-old Richard Bonynge is well worth getting hold of.

[Mark Thomas]

Yes, it's so Beethovenian for the first two movements, it could almost be by Ries. The light-headed horn-dominated finale is great fun, which would seem to owe something to Weber, were it not also so typical of later Czerny. As in her other performances of the Czerny concertos for Naxos, I do find Rosemary Tuck could sometimes do with a rather lighter touch, and this is particularly true in the finale, but for once her solidity seems exactly right in the first two movements. Bonynge, of course, is a class act in this sort of repertoire. Well worth every penny, cent etc.

[JimL]

I just listened to the fragment on Naxos.  I MUST have this.  The beginning could easily have influenced the opening of his mentor's 9th Symphony (rather a change of pace, wouldn't you think?) not in terms of the tonal ambiguity, but at least in terms of the orchestral texture and mood-setting.  What I wouldn't give to hear the entire 1st movement.  In scale (a nearly 25 minute-long first movement?) it surpasses anything by Beethoven, even the violin concerto (I would suspect a fair amount of virtuoso padding, but one can't tell from that sliver, which is all tutti.) This could be a seminal work in the development of the Romantic piano concerto style, along with Beethoven's 3rd, the Hummel 2nd and 3rd, and the Dussek G minor.

[eschiss1]

Of piano concertos written by 1812 it does seem to have one of the longer first movements I've seen, one way or another. (Mozart's C major K.503 - just in # bars in the first movement huge for its time, and the concerto itself about 30 minutes in all - was an earlier step in that direction, though its slow movement is longer - Czerny, like Beethoven in his 4th concerto, gives us a brief slow movement in between two longer ones (4 minutes in Czerny's case, though Czerny's still ends up 40 minutes long in this performance, a little longer than a typical performance (35-38 minutes ca.?) of Beethoven's 1809 5th piano concerto.) (I have, for now, access to full tracks @ Naxos and will give a listen to the whole thing soon, I'm convinced, I'm convinced. Most recently used that to listen to the first movement of Pizzetti's terrific symphony in two different performances both on Naxos, but anyhow, as to Czerny... I wonder - does anyone remember if someone is now recording all of his  symphonies (however deliberately?) cpo, say?

(Not that those are the only worthwhile neglected Czerny works awaiting (revival and) peremptory dismissal at modern critics' pens, of course, but as with his string quartets and large choral works, only a few of them have been recorded- or even given modern performances, I think. Or maybe any at all?)

[Alan Howe]

It certainly has a terrific D minor opening - which does indeed sound very Beethovenian. The difference is that sooner or later Czerny's habit of what I would call 'noodling' to no great effect kicks in - and it's during these passages that one senses a sort of stasis when the music should be moving forward. Nevertheless, this is a pretty amazing piece for its period.

Interestingly, Beethoven PC5, although apparently composed in 1809, wasn't performed until 28th November 1811 in Leipzig, so one assumes that Czerny couldn't have heard that great work before composing this D minor concerto. Of course, Czerny was a pupil of Beethoven's for three years from 1801, so who knows what Czerny knew of his teacher's music?

Is this work in the Beethoven class? No, but, it's definitely far more than a work of mere historical significance. It's fully repertoire-worthy.

[eschiss1]

Interesting to think Czerny may have learned things about composition that show up at best (I think I hear them sometimes) very occasionally in Czerny's own music- about precomposition and motivic writing, so many other things for which one now only wishes one could have a Beethoven for a teacher.

[JimL]

Interesting that the Op. 214 Concerto has been called No. 1, and the Op. 28 Concerto is unnumbered. So now this one is the 1st?

[Alan Howe]

Well, I can't find the D minor Concerto in any list of Czerny's compositions, e.g:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Carl_Czerny

...so what is the work's provenance?

[eschiss1]

At a guess, an edition by the pianist... will see if one can contact her online and ask where she found the mss...

[Alan Howe]

The back of the inlay says: 'scores prepared by Mike Harris and Alan Jones'. Rosemary Tuck wrote the booklet notes.

[eschiss1]

and she also helped write the cadenza, but yes, I should read more carefully. Thanks!

[Alan Howe]

Thing is, who exactly are Messrs Harris and Jones?

[eschiss1]

dunno about Harris. Alan Jones may be the same as the editor of a Romantic Sketchbook for piano and some other things, so at least his name appears elsewhere in Romantic-era-musicology/editing contexts.

[Alan Howe]

Rather common names, though, aren't they? Think Naxos'll have to be approached for more info.

[JimL]

I got the download, and I have to say that the piece is everything I had hoped it would be and maybe even a little more.  The funny thing about it is that when I first heard that Hyperion was going to do the Moscheles PCs I was hoping that Moscheles' 1st Concerto was going to be something like this Czerny piece - long, brilliant, yet serious.  Imagine my surprise when the Moscheles 1st turned out to be a kinderkonzert, and this Czerny piece turned out to be the real deal!