Dear friends,
Maybe you will say: again a thread on Von Herzogenberg? It's most likely that in the former Forum Von Herzogenberg already had a thread of his own. I cannot remember that. In that case, my apologies. But on the other hand I like to share my enthusiasm for the music of this great composer.
Over the past months I've bought the cpo discs of the 2 Symphonies, the 3 Cello Sonatas, the Piano Trios 1 & 2, the double CD with the Piano Quartets, the String Trios op. 27 and the Legends for Cello and Piano, and last but not least the Piano music on the Toccata Classics label. A lot of new music to discover and which I thoroughly enjoy.
To say it without any hesitation: I've never heard music which is (at least to me) so reminiscent of Brahms, especially the chamber and piano music. If I didn't know better, I should say it is Brahms. The warm and intimate atmosphere, all those delicious themes, the marvellous musical developments, full of subtle details, depth, well, it's all most captivating.
Reading all the interesting booklet notes you find words like "...his [Brahms] own mirror image", "... the Brahms epigone par excellence" and so on. And it's a fact, Brahms was Von Herzogenberg's hero. So what?
By the way, it's interesting to read about the relationship between the two composers and the role, or to put it better: the influence Elisabeth (Lisl), Von Herzogenberg's "warm and radiant, witty and intelligent, and very feminine" wife had on Brahms, her former piano teacher.
Brahms's style or not, all the melodies are Von Herzogenberg's own compositions. In the end we all love to listen to beautiful classical music, so who cares?
If the music of Von Herzogenberg was a woman, I must confess that I've completely fallen in love with her...
I'm interested to read your comments and if you are also as enthusiastic as I am. Any more suggestions? Other CD's?
----
I wish all Forum members a very happy Christmas with a lot of wining and dining, and... beautiful music.
Peter
I absolutely love his music too. As far as Brahmsian influence is concerned, it's obviously there - but only HvH could have written his 2nd Symphony, especially that oddly oriental-sounding scherzo. And when we (eventually) get the recording from cpo of the Odysseus Symphony (from his Lisztian period) and the VC (from much later), we will know far more about him.
He is, of course, an intellectual composer - much less straightforwardly attractive than, say, Gernsheim. Nevertheless, if you enjoy a good work-out, the rewards are great.
Hello
Reading this new thread on Herzogenberg, made me get out again the CPO cd of Herzogenberg's Symphonies no 1 and 2. I purchased the cd quite some time ago. Although I quite liked his music at the time, I felt that Herzogenberg was essentially "inferior Brahms"! Listening to the music again, I felt my earlier judgement was far too hasty and now feel that there is a great deal more to his music than I had first thought! Thank you Peter and Alan for forcing me to re-evaluate Herzogenberg's music.
Cheers
Dennis
Yours is an experience that I have had many, many times! And it can happen with any music, whether sung or unsung. So I suppose the lesson I have learned is: persist and re-listen. And then re-listen again!
Hi all
The aristocrat Herzogenberg's music is increasing in status the more I hear of it. Yes, folks, this gentleman IMHO was a master musician. Joke - I imagine him to be somewhat dour but not averse to joining Brahms for a beer or three or five when the mood was on him. But perhaps not.
Whatever, his E minor Mass, op 87 has not been mentioned. It should be. Romantic era masses can be wondrous -and there are a surprising number of them available in recorded form.
Alan, I am really grieved and disappointed about the non-appearance of the disc featuring His Lordship's violin concerto and Odysseus Symphony. It will be the musical event of the season when it does happen. Is there there any possible practical reason for non-release, eg, copyright issues? Am desperate for any straw of comfort.
regards
Peter
There's just no news from cpo about a release date - sorry. Which probably means it'll be out soon! Or not...
For those who can read German please view http://www.herzogenberg.ch/Violinkonzert-BW-Einfuehrung.htm (http://www.herzogenberg.ch/Violinkonzert-BW-Einfuehrung.htm)
Well, there's a truckload of chamber music by Herzogenberg, and I've never heard any of those CDs, so I cannot speak to him as a composer of chamber music. But I've got the CD of his two symphonies and can say quite certainly that, in regard to symphonies, at least on my stereo, he's competent, but he ain't Brahms or anywhere close to Brahms. That said, if another CD of orchestral music is released, I'd be tempted to buy it. He's good enough on his own, without reference to Brahms.
Symphony 2 is far more than competent. It's an absolute joy from start to finish.
Morning All,
I have 2 CDs of his music - I find the cello sonatas especially good. I was recently bought the Quintet and trio (with oboe) - both on CPO and it is all thoroughly good music!
As Alan will confirm, I have tried really hard with Herzogenberg. I have around 15 CDs of his music and have listened to them assiduously, waiting for the epiphany which you all report but I'm afraid that my Pauline Conversion is yet to come. I just find him dull, to me having (Odysseus excepted) the outward form of Brahms but without the inner strength or warmth. In the time honoured phrase: "It's not you - it's me). I know it, I've tried and I guess that I will go on trying but after quite a few years I'm resigned to the fact that no matter how hard you may attempt to persuade me otherwise (and Alan has tried very hard), Herzogenberg is just gong to remain a pleasure foregone for me.
I can only plead: Symphony No.2!! It's glorious, uplifting, warm-hearted, memorable - and quite different from Brahms, although recognisably from the same conservative tradition. Go on, Mark - give it another go!
OK, I'll bite. I'm ordering the symphonies disc. How about Die Geburt Christi? There are 2 recordings available on Amazon...any clear choice there? I've been considering it for years, but there were cutting words of Brahms lurking in the back of my mind...
Alan, are there particular chamber works to start with? 'Must haves', as it were?
Best, David
The chamber music is of a uniformly high standard: you could buy any of the cpo CDs with confidence - so it all depends what you like: sonatas, strings only, piano + strings. Follow this link to jpc's Herzogenberg page to try out some audio samples...
http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/home/search?fastsearch=herzogenberg&rubric=classic&pd_orderby=score (http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/home/search?fastsearch=herzogenberg&rubric=classic&pd_orderby=score)
I would describe Die Geburt Christi as more of an acquired taste, but there are some samples of that too.
Wow, Mark.
I love both symphonies very much, but his chamber music... That's a real find. I experience absolutely warmth, depth, and all those characteristics of real craftmanship. Herzogenberg really knows how to touch the heart. But here we go again... it's all based upon a very personal taste, I know.
His chamber music is gorgeous. Both symphonies are very appealing, but not of the same level as Brahms. But so what? They are still very pleasant to listen to and definitely not superficial. How I long for the release of his Violin Concerto. And what a pity that the score of his Cello Concerto obviously got lost. But we must be very happy with all the chamber music, which is released over the past years.
Alan, Peter, as I said, I know it's my loss but no matter how many times I put on some Herzogenberg (heaven knows, I have enough!) and will myself into a receptive, positive mood the same thing happens: nothing!
I'm resigned to just not getting it but I'm pleased for those of you who do.
Hello
Have just listened to the Herzogenberg symphonies again and agree with you Alan re - symphony no 2. I much prefer it to no 1. If I were a little critical though, I feel that the finale of no 2 at times wanders a little but all in all, makes for an enjoyable listen.
Cheers
Dennis
I always felt that the finales to the first and fourth movements of the Herzogenberg 2nd ought to be swapped - the first mvt concludes with such a firm gesture that it would make a good ending to the entire work.
- but then, who am I to advise Herzogenberg...?
Sometimes it's so hard waiting patiently...Well, just a few more days... Please view at http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/Heinrich-von-Herzogenberg-Violinkonzert-A-Dur-WoO-4/hnum/8752507 (http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/Heinrich-von-Herzogenberg-Violinkonzert-A-Dur-WoO-4/hnum/8752507)
Finally I found at a reasonable price the CD "Romantiker im alten Berlin" on the FSM label with piano music played by Irma Hofmeister. I wanted the disc because of Ludwig Berger's Grande Sonate pathétique in C minor, op. 1 (I already have his revised version op. 7, marvellously played by Frederick Marvin).
But the disc also features Acht Veränderungen für das Pianoforte, op. 3 (1865), a lovely piano piece of variations, lasting almost 12.5 minutes. This is another gem by Von Herzogenberg. I love this composer, like Gernsheim, more and more.
By the way, the above mentioned CD also features a Capriccio Appassionato in B minor, op. 49, a beautiful piano piece by Ernst Rudorff (1840-1916). Has anyone ever heard of Rudorff?
Yes, Rudorff is on my list as a composer to investigate - unfortunately there's almost nothing of his on CD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Rudorff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Rudorff)
It is a quite idle threat and will leave everyone else quite unaffected, but the next time I see a Brahms versus Herzogenberg posting I shall turn off my computer! Consider the plain facts: they were born 10 years apart, B (despite the cigars) outlived H by 7 years; they lived in approx the same place; participated in the same broad culture and had similar audiences; both had a veneration for JSB and the tradition; they wrote approximately the same amount, and for orchestra, chamber, keyboard and voices (the B worklist is in fact slightly longer, and contains more songs, but then he had 7 years longer at it than H). So inevitably there are 'similarities' between their musics.
But this (typically male!) preoccupation with whether one is 'better' or at a 'greater level' (and what on earth do those easy tags mean?) is plain daft. Whether we wished it or not we all had B embedded in our minds before we learnt to play conkers - at school, the first music lessons, the culture in which we grew up. Even now we bump into B in lifts, public spaces, TV adverts. There is a long history of B performance. People have strong views on 'right' and 'wrong' ways to perform B. It is a measure of B's utter glorious greatness as a composer that we want to go on listening to B, and most times, except in the hands of Mr Gardiner, with immeasurable joy.
Now H, for good or ill, hasn't experienced that. My teachers hadn't even heard of H. We only discovered H a few years ago, and felt very very lucky to have done so. There is no real performance history with H. The man on the Clapham omnibus still hasn't heard of H. H isn't in our bloodstream or musical genetic makeup in the way that B is.
Now when we ask 'is X a truly great composer?' I think in a way we're asking 'can X withstand the test of time?', 'Do we want to go on listening to X, and with huge satisfaction, despite already knowing these works very well?'. To my mind B passes that test with the most radiant flying colours. H hasn't yet had that opportunity. Thus we just can't go about asking whether one is greater than the other. Who knows? Only time will tell.
As for me, I couldn't now do without either B or H, and will only finally be comforted if I receive an assurance that I can go on listening to them in the hereafter (when I can finally escape the likes of many who have been recorded in the Naxos American Classics series). And I put anyone to the test: just listen to a few passages in either B or H. Unmistakenly it could just not be written by the other, anymore than a passage of Mozart be confused with one of Haydn. 'Is Haydn on the same level as Mozart?' What a very silly, time-wasting, and futile question! So, please, an end to this B vs H debate!
Still, Brahms is the better man ;)
David
In the 2nd half of the 19th century Brahms is everywhere. Brahms is a giant. Brahms is the benchmark.
So many sung and unsung composers are compared with Brahms. Take booklet notes, not only those in CD's of Von Herzogenberg, Gernsheim, Wilhelm Berger, just to name a few, but also in many others, you will find nearly always comparisons with Brahms. Recently I bought a CD titled "In the Shadow of Brahms, Vol. 2" (I bought it for Wilhelm Berger's Trio, op. 94).
So many high Romantic works are compared with Brahms, whether we like it or not. I wonder what Brahms himself would think of this.
We know that many of Brahms's contemporaries tried to develop their own style, and some were pretty successful. Just think of Rufinatscha. But others tried to imitate him, because his music was so beloved by a broad audience, because... well, he was just great and successful, and he was such a strong personality. Brahms was an example to many more conservative composers. Some composers were proud to be a member of the Brahms circle of friends.
But I think that it's sometimes very easy in a discussion or a CD review to compare the music with Brahms, because when you listen to that particular piece of music more carefully, you hear and realize that the composer has created a work which is all of its own. Comparing with Brahms can be too simplistic and even unjustified.
However, why shouldn't we, as members of this Forum, compare some composers and their works with Brahms? If I read in a thread that a certain composition is in the style of Brahms, I usually buy it, and I've never been disappointed.
Still, Brahms was the greater composer. Nevertheless, Herzogenberg was a very fine composer indeed - as were, say, Gernsheim and Fuchs, who are often compared to Brahms. I think such comparisons are inevitable - and acceptable provided that they are made with an open mind as to the quality of other composers' music. And I too couldn't now live without these newly-rediscovered masters.
BTW the facts: Herzogenberg was born 10 years later than Brahms, but only outlived him by 3.
To be contentious: only Draeseke, Raff and Rufinatscha match Brahms' stature - because they wrote great music that could never be mistaken for Brahms'.
While I might not have put in the same terms, I generally agree with Petershott's comments. Naming some as 'great' and others as 'inferior' is exactly what has turned the iron repertory into its present petrified state (although there are encouraging developments looming).
Generally speaking, I'm not at all interested in the question whether Herzogenberg's work was better or worse than Brahms's. Both have composed works that I love, B possibly a few more than H, but then again I know more of B's works than H's.
The *historical* importance of Brahms vs. Herzogenberg is an altogether different matter, and one which can be determined far more easily than any question of (personal or general) aesthetics. But I firmly believe that making influential and therefore important composers the 'greats' is a bad mistake.
"Naming some as 'great' and others as 'inferior' is exactly what has turned the iron repertory into its present petrified state"
I can't agree with this. Recognising that there are different levels of achievement did not creat the "masterwork repertoire". What created it was a destructive attitude unique to classical music, one which has been well described by conductor (and etc) Leon Botstein, which I recently posted, but which got lost in a discussion of the particular merits of Henry Cowell:
"...[the problem]... rests in the mistaken but recalcitrant idea that first, the standard repertory today reflects the collective and legitimate aesthetic judgment of history and therefore a quasi-Darwinian process of objective selection, and second, that music is an art that demands competitive comparison, that only works befitting the attribute "masterpiece" deserve the time and effort to be heard and played in concert...
For some odd reason, changing inherited impressions has become much harder in music than it has in either painting or literature. In music, the unremitting standard of the "masterpiece" is more of an excluding factor than it is in any other art. Why does listening to a piece of concert music require a judgment to determine it is not something else—perhaps by Stravinsky, Mozart, Mahler, or Copland? We do not read books this way, and we do not view paintings this way. We do not furnish our homes with paintings and prints and objects that way. No one can argue that the idea that a painting of Botticelli or a play by Shakespeare are daunting and overwhelming examples of the triumph of human imagination. But the greatest Botticelli or Shakespeare need not diminish our appreciation of other paintings and plays. We do not reject plays and paintings old or new in our theaters and museums because they are not Botticelli and Shakespeare. We do not demand that the only things performed or displayed are by Botticelli and Shakespeare. We profess a wider and more eclectic range of appreciation for unquestionably excellent examples of human expression in painting and writing. Yet in music, a dominant snobbery apparent in writers, performers, and listeners would shut down the exercise of curiosity. Young performers and conductors learn and offer almost exactly the same historical repertoire that their counterparts did thirty and fifty years ago. Concert promoters encourage this. But ...[t]here is a wide range of music that inspires, ennobles and delights audiences who have the insight to listen to a work in relation to their personal preferences or opinions, not in relation to what they have learned are the narrow group of the "best" composers and compositions.
Our reasons for performing unfamiliar repertoire are not about searching for lost treasures. We are not on some sort of Antiques Roadshow, trying to assess rare work by some pre-existing standard of comparative values. We are not in the business of being musical truffle hounds. Rather, we perform ...music...to show not rarity but the unexpected vastness, quality, and depth of musical expression that is available to be heard within the history of music. Our only standard is that it is music that deserves to be enjoyed and experienced. The music must have the inspiration and craftsmanship to capture the attention of those who love to play and listen. Not every work will take its place alongside an acknowledged masterpiece, but it doesn't have to. As in other arts, all kinds of music contribute to an unimaginably large and varied experience, in which anyone will eventually find something they like. For those who restricted their capacity for the joy of music to a few famous works (an unreasonable fragment of cultural history), they may find that repetition of those works will ultimately eviscerate their power to move the listener by eroding the essential reactions of surprise and engagement those works inspire."
David
It happened. After the first time I've heard this piece of music, I already said to myself: this is going to grab me by the throat after a few more hearings. And it did. How heavenly beautiful, so touching, so emotional. I'm talking about the gripping slow 2nd movement of the Odysseus Symphony, called Penelope. I cannot get this music, the main theme, anymore out of my head. It reminds me of Sibelius, maybe Mahler, but it is not possible, because Herzogenberg composed it in 1872.
In my perception it is by far the most moving, original music Herzogenberg composed. This goes directly into my heart. How much I love all the other music by Herzogenberg, now I am in a sort of confusion.
Herzogenberg, why did you after your opus 16 turn yourself to Brahms? Why not developed a whole style of your own, maybe based upon Wagner & Liszt, but with unpredictable melodies, so beautiful in the style of Penelope? This is so far from Brahms, quite progressive, but at the same time so utterly late romantic. And yes, the other three movements are surprisingly beautiful as well. Just give it a chance to grow into you.
Sit down, make sure you cannot get disturbed, and listen to this amazing, most thrilling music. I love to learn what you think of it. Penelope in particular.
"Music seems to be understood best by its proximity to other music that is
more familiar. We do not hear what we hear... only what we remember."
Morton Feldman - "Give my regards to 8th street" (p209)
I have found that one of the major prerequisites of listening to so called unsung composers in general is to try to "check ones ears at the door", so to speak, and just listen to the music.
In the case of Herzogenberg, I have found his work so compelling that the fact that it might at time inhabit a sound world similar to that of Brahms' music seems secondary at worst and actually a plus. I get to hear some new music in the vein of music that I like, as opposed to the umpteenth run through the Works of the "master".
Brahms never used the orchestra the way that Herzogenberg does in his two symphonies (the new CPO CD is on its way from GErmany as I write this). In fact his treatment of the brass as fully chromatic (vs. Brahms treatment of trumpets and horns as if they were still valveless) gives Herzogenbergs symphonies a color that Brahms never had in his orchestral work.
Just my two cents.
I think petershott,peter1953 & edurban have summed up the situation very well, but I will add my two bob's worth. (it might only be worth a zac !)
However, I , like most, will always make comparisons, as we need a benchmark to determine what we like & disilike. My brain is rusted onto the 19th & early 20th century period, but I have hundreds of CDs of modern works, music which, for me, often requires often intense concentration. My appetite for new works will never be satisfied, and I am happy to listen to anything. (at least once, or give away to friends like the Schnabel CDs & others.)
In the past, there was too much snobbery in music. Those geniuses, like Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Schumann,Brahms, Liszt, Wagner etc whose works of undeniable quality were generally easily acceptable, and pursued by rich patrons, made it very difficult for the Herzogenbergs, Raffs,Draesekes etc. Some, like Ries, were brilliant performers, and managed to disseminate some of their works before the public, but always the comparison with Beethoven or other majors.. Some composers just gave up trying to compete, and had to earn a living teaching or performing. The popular composers drew the crowds, and there was no money to be made with the unknowns, even in those days.
It was that snobbery, which I hope does not exist today,(at least not to the same extent), that relegated many competent composers to the archives. We today are discovering those gems, and much remains to be unearthed. Today's main problem, as in previous times, is money, and CD companies are not benevolent societies. They hope to make a profit on their outlay, and small labels such as Sterling,deserve our support. Except for half a dozen or so, I have all the Sterling CDs, and even if some of the content is occasionally mediocre, I will always buy & try, as Bo Hyttner is a confirmed romantic music lover. I have my favourites with other labels, and do my best to support them. At least today, the ability to promote world-wide, with instant information at our fingertips, (i/net), will continue to unearth & rescue many worthy unsungs from the archives. And all of us have different perceptions with music. And I thank God for that !Finally, I love all the Herzogenberg music I have heard so far, and am waiting patiently for the Odysseus Symphony. Ethel Smythe was a pupil of H, and an "intimate"(not my word) friend of Elisabeth.
Marcus.
Hi sirs.
I'm an Italian classical listener-aficionado.
I've an authentic passion on unsung composer.
I beg you pardon, but I didn't find a "New members introducing" section in our forum, so here I am.
Exactly today I was listening to Herzogenberg First on CPO disc. I think that's a bit "reactionary", with no negative meanings: it place itself along Beethoven-Spohr-Schubert legacy, rather than Brahms-Schumann's. I'm right?
I think that Beermann rendition is very polite and accurate, but maybe I would like a little more fire in conducting.
Excuse me, but English isn't my native language.
Welcome, Empfindsamer!
For me Herzogenberg 1 is modelled on Brahms 1. Herzogenberg 2 is a more personal and individual work.
I'll listen the Second tomorrow.
Thanks.
Quote from: Empfindsamer on Tuesday 22 June 2010, 20:55
(...) it place itself along Beethoven-Spohr-Schubert legacy (...)
This legacy covers and influenced the whole of the 19th century. For me, there's a clear line between Beethoven & Schubert, every composer coming after that more or less influenced by either of those composers. Your 'Brahms-Schumann legacy' as well. However, I must agree with the Herzogenberg 1 being (although quite nice) rather conservative. I also agree with your comment about the conducting - but I'm not really sure much more fire would help this symphony; I think the lack of fire is (dare I say?) partially the composer's 'fault'...
IF we're talking about symphonies, that is. Because, as a chamber music aficionado, the Herzogenberg 1 to me means his amazing first piano quartet, which I hold in much higher regard than his second! ;D Anyway, welcome to the forum!
Thanks.
I think I'll buy some other cds of Herzogenberg, specially vocal works.
Hi all
A warm welcome to Empfindsamer.
One of the highlights of the year (for me) has been the release) of a CPO disc featuring Herzogenberg's Odysseus Symphony (1870s) and his Violin Concerto in A minor (1889). I believe the recording has been discussed previously, but I heartily commend to anyone exploring this composer's work. The concerto was a real surprise - am still basking in the afterglow after listening to it again this evening.
regards
Peter
Um, that's A Major, Peter. Of course we're all so used to talking about minor key works here on this forum. ;D
I eventually listened to Herzogenber's 2, and I think it's definitely better than 1. More "romantic".
Quote from: Empfindsamer on Tuesday 22 June 2010, 20:55
I beg you pardon, but I didn't find a "New members introducing" section in our forum, so here I am.
In the suggestion's section you can find the thread you are looking for!
Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere, but it's worth noting that the indefatigable Leon Botstein is slated to conduct the U.S. premier of Herzogenberg's Symphony 1 on 25 Jan 2013 in a program that also includes Dvorak Symphony 4 and Brahms Symphony 4.
That's great news for those of you who live stateside. Perhaps we'll be able to read a report in due course...
I finally got around to listening to Herzongenberg's Symphony #2, and it's absolutely fantastic! And I swear, the opening of the first movement sounds so much like the opening to a movie, I can't even believe it hasn't been used for that purpose yet. I don't think I've ever, in my entire life, heard a more film-music-sounding passage from pre-film times. Right now, this is one of my favourite openings to a symphony. The whole thing is pretty nice and tuneful, has a lot of very interesting rhythmic content, and to my ears is very expertly orchestrated. That scherzo is an odd, at times introspective, rambling journey that I found very attention-holding. It's odd that none of the melodies really stick in my head, but the work as a whole makes a pleasant impression in all departments
This is one piece that I think would be well-received by a lot of listeners if they were exposed to it. Have only this and the 1st symphony reached CD thus far? I'm going to have to buy that cpo disc, especially since people keep talking up the Symphony #1 so much.
His 'Odysseus' Symphony has been recorded, along with the Violin Concerto, Josh.