Branching off from a thread on Dutch violin sonatas in the Recordings forum, where there was some question of how the lay of the land was, for violin sonatas (and more generally, smaller-ensemble instrumental music) in Europe and America between say 1830 and 1855 (and then perhaps 1855 and 1875)...
Before considering that a new thread was probably in order (which might be quite brief...) I wanted to continue the older one with this post - and so, selfishly, I shall...
"Some of Henri Bertini's chamber music, slightly tangentially (and from that general time), may deserve revival; one of his piano sextets is recorded, but also an editor @ IMSLP has been editing and MIDI-synthesizing a number of his piano and chamber works (a violin sonata, a piano sextet (a different one), several piano solo works, a piano trio, more might be in the pipeline. I find myself enjoying these very much."
(Actually, the Bertini trio op.43, possibly his 4th piano trio, was published before the time period in question - ca.1825 - but his 2 violin sonatas, opp.152 and 153 (E major and A minor), were published around 1845 and if they were composed around then also, may fit right in. So far 16 pages on IMSLP in the "Bertini category" (http://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Bertini,_Henri) have some form of recording (probably mostly MIDIs; also 14 pages in the category- not all of which have recordings attached, so overlapping- are edited by the same person, James Bailey.)
Let's ask the oracle! Charles Rosen's "The Romantic Generation" singles out 8 composers: Schubert, Mendelssohn, Meyerbeer, Schumann, Liszt, Bellini, Chopin and Berlioz, only 3 of whom are noted for their chamber music (of course Chopin dabbled a bit early on and Liszt came to it late in his career). Rosen reckons the whole generation was intimidated by Beethoven, whose death "hastened the rapid development of new stylistic tendencies". I can see how opera, solo piano and large scale orchestral writing all lend themselves naturally (although in different ways) to the "romantic" style, while other genres (chamber music, organ, oratorio) might be thought to represent a more austere and cerebral way of thinking. In other words, chamber music went temporarily out of fashion! I can think of very few composers of that generation who even attempted to write "programme" works for chamber groups - Onslow, Hirschbach (deadly!) and...?
In my library, I've identified many chamber composers for this era (1833-1850). String quartets and violin sonatas tend to dominate chamber forces. Of these (and excluding the sung composers), Lachner, Onslow, Donizetti, and Farrenc stand out for me in terms of sympathetic chamber composition.
JPE Hartmann (2 string quartets, 3 violin sonatas, 7 other works)
Onslow -many chamber pieces, of course
Mendelssohn -sung
Geijer (2 string quartets, 4 violin sonatas, 4 other works)
Verhulst (3 string quartets)
Bree (4 string quartets, 3 other works)
Franz Lachner (6 string quartets, 22 other works)
Krogulski (Piano quintet - it's the only piece I have from him, aside from the concerto in E and variations for piano and orchestra)
Macfarren (6 string quartets, 4 other works)
Burgmuller (4 string quartets, 2 other works in his short life)
Donizetti (18 string quartets, 26 other works)
Bennett (only 4 chamber pieces)
Farrenc (1 string quartet, 2 violin sonatas, 10 other works)
Moscheles (1 string quartet, 23 other works)
Berwald (3 string quartets, 1 violin sonata, 16 other works)
Loewe (4 string quartets, 1 violin sonata, 3 other works)
Reissiger (8 string quartets, 6 violin sonatas, in all, 71 chamber works)
Kalivoda (3 string quartets, many salon works for violin and piano)
Ellerton (at least 28 string quartets, 8 piano trios, a piano quartet, 4 string quintets, 3 string trios, and 13 duo sonatas)
Felicien David (3 string quartets, 10 other works)
Robert Schumann -sung
Ferdinand Hiller (3 string quartets, 6 piano trios, c. 28 chamber works)
Johann Rufinatscha (5 string quartets, 3 other works)
and, at the beginning of this period:
Ries and Czerny
Charles Rosen for all his insight is not a reliable guide here as he is dismissive of unsungs. He says so categorically in his "The Classical Style" about the hundreds of composers working at the time of Mozart and Haydn. He states again in the foreword to the second (iirc) edition of that book that he doesnt consider their music worthy of consideration and I can't see that his attitude would be any different to the romantic period. As Balapoel shows this was a very fertile period of chamber music!
For Kalivoda besides the 3 string quartets and salon pieces there are also (I think?...) 3 piano trios (opp.121, 130, 200, the last pub.ca.1854 or so). I wasn't aware that Moscheles composed a string quartet (then again, until last year, I wasn't aware that Dussek composed 3, and rather good ones- though in 1812, so rather early for this post. Anyhow, as ever, live and learn- the more the better...)
Right, Kalivoda and Moschele's chamber works are generally brillant style, but include some serious pieces.
For Kalivoda:
Piano Trios in f minor, D, and Eb (opp 121, 130, 200) 1842, 1844, 1845
Among his other more serious chamber works, maybe the Fantasy in D for 2 violins, 2 pianos and harmonium, Trio pathetique for 3 violins, Op. 220, Fantasy in F for viola and piano, Op. 204. I'm not sure as I haven't heard any recordings of them.
For Moscheles:
Piano Septet in D, Op. 88
Piano extet in Eb, Op. 35
Piano Trio in c minor, Op. 84
Sonate concertante in G for piano and flute/violin, Op. 79
Sonate concertante in A for piano and flute, Op. 44
Cello Sonatas in Bb and E (opp 34, 121)
Moscheles String Quartet (in d minor) has no opus number. Mentioned here (but no details):
http://www.earsense.org/chamberbase/works/detail/?pkey=3707
also by Moscheles variations on a Bohemian folksong for "Pianoforte, Violino, Clarinette und Violoncell", To jsou koně, Op.46. (Clarinet part can be taken by viola, etc.) (See this information about a copy in a Prague library (http://opac.rism.info/search?documentid=550255269), composed by 1824 (published before 1826 by Steiner of Vienna)...
Lets not forget the chamber music of Henri Reber. His 1st 3 Piano Trios were composed approx - 1837, 1840, 1850. There's also his Quartet from 1830 and String Quintet from 1850. Hope some more of his chamber music comes on CD as well as the completion of the trios - I believe the only ones left are trios 1 & 2.
I believe that, barring the big 3 of Schubert, Mendelssohn and Schumann, virtually all composers of chamber music in this era continued in what might be termed the "classical" style, without really embracing the romantic ethos or, indeed, adding anything to what had already been said by Haydn and Mozart. I've been hoping to prove otherwise by combing imslp, but failed to discover any really forward-looking string quartets before the 1860's and precious little even then. One honourable exception is the Op.1 E minor Quartet of Ambroise Thomas (1833) which Verdi seems to have been well acquainted with!
And Alkan and Volkmann (and to my ears several of the others on Balapoel's list) (whose chamber output at least intersects this period), of course, but you did say several exceptions :) (among which I'd add Onslow in a number of his works.) but no, not a surprising conclusion; that you include Mendelssohn might have surprised many of his contemporaries, I am guessing.
I'd add Reicha's quartets and other chamber music, but (1) I don't really know them yet (though the works I do know, I am more and more impressed by), (2) Most are of course from before the 1830s as he died in 1836...
Volkmann's works are certainly impressive, but only three (of his 17 chamber pieces) intersect with this period, most are from the 1850s-1860s, well 4 if you count the Piano Trio No. 2 (1850). :)
oh, any will do, on the early or the late end... otherwise one's looking for a composer whose whole flourishing-period was stuck to 20 years, in an extreme case. Though of course given that there are in history a number of composers by whom we know only one piece (even saying for certain that they're not some other composer using a pseudonym for that one work... tangent, tangent, tangent) that's not -that- unusual, true.
By strange coincidence I was just listening to clips of Volkmann's first two quartets and thinking he wasn't too far out of the frame. As to Mendelssohn, I do feel that his Op.12 in Eb (1929) is the first truly "romantic" quartet, but is it heresy to suggest he laid the tragedy on a bit thick in Op.80..?
hrm - moreso than Mendelssohn's Opus 13 of 1827 or for that matter than several of Beethoven's or Schubert's late quartets? Maybe...
As to Mendelssohn's opus 80... except for a few isolated other works here and there (I really should go hear Die erste Walpurgisnacht...), he'd played the part of the restrained gentleman most of his life, and then his sister dies; I forgive him. But heresy against what exactly?
Heresy against the idea that deep emotion stimulates (demands?) "passionate" music. A certain detachment is surely necessary to produce any piece of craftsmanship, so the grief has to be in a sense simulated. As of course with "Death and the Maiden", which is the other "first romantic string quartet"!
Oh, no argument there at all, actually. (The story behind the making of the work doesn't hold water - in detail - to a person who knows about composing. I still find it, along with his D major quartet and 2nd string quintet, to be among his very best works anycase :) )
Thalberg's op.79 piano trio is not bad at all, and he mostly keeps his virtuoso tendencies in check. The Marco Polo Alkan chamber music disc is warmly recommended, and the middle movement of the Grand Duo Concertant is quite remarkable. Only Alkan could have written it.
Think you mean Op. 69 - for the Piano Trio in A major? A too twitchy finger on the keyboard here. Yes, the work is certainly "not bad at all", but you sound grudging in your admiration for it. Heavens, if I told my wife that the meal she put on the table last night was 'not bad at all' I'd have been promptly dispatched to the doghouse (and without the CD player for company).
Quote from: petershott@btinternet.com on Tuesday 30 July 2013, 15:47
Think you mean Op. 69 - for the Piano Trio in A major? A too twitchy finger on the keyboard here. Yes, the work is certainly "not bad at all", but you sound grudging in your admiration for it. Heavens, if I told my wife that the meal she put on the table last night was 'not bad at all' I'd have been promptly dispatched to the doghouse (and without the CD player for company).
Umm, I do indeed! A bit grudging, perhaps - in the sense I find it hard to argue it's a masterpiece, but it clearly has merit. The Alkan I quoted, for example, is surely better - certainly more "interesting".
On reflection I find Balapoel's list up above very revealing - just 25 names from a whole generation and a whole continent. Fast forward 50 years to 1880 and it would be easy to find 100, probably a lot more. Focusing down to string quartets, out of 21 who contributed to the medium only 14 I think are either commercially recorded or represented on IMSLP. England was of course a backwater, but Macfarren seems to be the only one to have actually had a quartet published before 1850. I think what we're seeing is a combination of stunned silence after Beethoven, and a feeling that chamber music isn't a naturally "romantic" medium.
Indeed - I've been mulling over Balapoel's illuminating list ever since he contributed it. Many of my most treasured works here, and if I can't go on listening to them if and when I get to heaven then I declare immortality to be a real swizz.
I emit a squeal of protest over Balapoel's inclusion of Franz Lachner, but failing to add Ignaz (7 utterly marvellous string quartets plus 6 piano trios and at least 1 string trio) and perhaps also Vinzenz (with his 1 string quartet).
I have a high regard for Dussek's 3 Op. 60 quartets, and even more so for Reicha. The more I discover about Reicha the more I think him an extraordinarily gifted and innovative composer. The recent Toccata disc is a wonder... and it is heralded as 'Volume 1'. More treats coming up methinks. More evidence of Reicha's innovations in chamber music is provided in three MDG discs of works written for a variety of wind instruments and string quartet. However both composers are maybe just a little too early for this particular thread - Reicha died in 1836.
Wonder if we'll ever get more of John Lodge Ellerton? That was a wholly new name to me. I've also got a suspicion that - contra Matesic - there may well be a considerable amount of British chamber music composed in the period and that, at the time, it got squeezed out by chamber music composed in Germany and is now overlain by dust. (Would involve a lot of grubbing about to establish this, but it seems to me very plausible).
A more general point: I'm a little puzzled by Matesic's observation (in two posts) that chamber music might not be a naturally 'romantic' medium. I don't get that one at all. Relative to what conception of 'romantic'? If a typically romantic work places premium on 'feeling', then surely most of the works mentioned in Balapoel's list and elsewhere in the thread are paradigm manifestations of romanticism?
Although it's believed that a lot more chamber music was composed in Britain during the early 1800's, largely under the auspices of the Society of British Musicians, practically none of it was published and the manuscripts all appear to have been lost (my source for this is Christina Bashford of the University of Illinois. Also Nicholas Temperley). Four of Macfarren's unpublished quartets do survive, but they don't show any influence of first generation romantics like Schumann and Berlioz (some Mendelssohn to be sure, but rather stiff and unfeeling). Ellerton was a rich amateur who was able to fund himself. I've seen more than 30 of his quartets (played most of them too - 3 are on IMSP along with Macfarren's), and although not lacking in charm they all come out of the same "classical" mould with only the faintest of hints that he was writing 50 and more years after Mozart.
Of course the argument as to how to define "romantic" music is hopelessly subjective. One of my favourite criteria (although not a necessary or sufficient one) is departure from the "classical" forms derived from Haydn and Mozart but which were only codified into what we call "sonata form" structure much later. I believe Czerny takes some of the blame for that. Whoever the culprit, the rules were slavishly followed in Britain and elsewhere to the extent that any deviation was practically forbidden. So (excepting Bennett and Field and probably a few others) free-thinking romanticism hardly seems to have raised its head in Britain before the Parry/Stanford generation.
Much of Louis Spohr's chamber output seems to fit into this period. I would particularly recommend the odd number piano trios. Beethoven complained that Spohr's music was too chromatic so he must in that respect to be rather more avant garde than Beethoven, putting him well into the romantic camp. Leaving aside the six 3 movement quartoirs Brilliant, where the other three instruments form a sort of "backing group" for the first violin, in the remaining quartets scherzos and minuets occur in roughly equal numbers. So Spohr might be regarded as a rather "conservative" romantic.
Franz Lachner's younger brother Ignaz wrote in a rather more conservative style and, in general, I tend to find his string quartets rather more melodious. I'm especially partial to his six piano trios, in which a viola takes the place of the more usual cello.
btw, looked into the statement I made about "the story about the making of.." re Mendelssohn's quartet in F minor. Not a matter of unsung music, but I don't want to allow a (fairly seriously, it seems) false statement of mine to stand, either; it seems to have been true, at least in chronological detail. R. Larry Todd in Mendelssohn, A Life in Music gives the chronology as more or less begun July 9 1847 (scherzo sketched), finished September 1847; Fanny had died only a few months before, for some of which time Mendelssohn hadn't been able to compose at all.
Quote from: petershott@btinternet.com on Friday 02 August 2013, 11:36
I emit a squeal of protest over Balapoel's inclusion of Franz Lachner, but failing to add Ignaz (7 utterly marvellous string quartets plus 6 piano trios and at least 1 string trio) and perhaps also Vinzenz (with his 1 string quartet).
Well, to be fair, most of Ignaz Lachner's music falls outside the bounds:
Piano Trios 2-6 (published after 1855)
Except for possibly String Quartet No. 1, all the others are later as well
For Vinzenz Lachner, he only has a few, and most are after the period in question, except for Piano Quartet in g minor and string quintet in C. But I could have included him:
-pieces for cello and piano (op 16, 65, 4 pieces caracteristiques (1844)
-piano quartet
-2 string quartets, and variations for same
-moderato for solo violin
-piece for violin and piano