Unsung Composers

...forthcoming from the label Nibiru:
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/ein-wiederentdecktes-romantisches-erbe/hnum/10870569

Interesting. Toccata has a couple of CDs of Veit's early string quartets of the 1830s and 40s, which are post-classical Mendelssohn-light as I remember. Judging by it's opus number, this symphony is a later composition, but IMSLP dates it to "1860 or earlier- some sources give 1833" - which isn't that helpful. Rediscovered Romantic Testimony doesn't really make sense, but I guess it's lost something in translation from the Czech, and I shouldn't carp - we should be pleased to have the opportunity to hear these very obscure pieces.

Is the Romanze and Finale really by this guy?   I am certain I have this on LP, and composed by Joachim (I think...........)

Why wouldn't there be two compositions with the same title?

In any case, I can't find a work with this title in the list of Joachim's compositions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Joachim#List_of_compositions

This source gives the date of composition and premiere of the Symphony as 1859:
https://www.klassika.info/Komponisten/Veit_WH/Symphonie/049/index.html

I note that the Symphony is dedicated to Rietz, who took over from Mendelssohn in Leipzig in 1848:
https://imslp.org/images/c/c6/TN-PMLP1213783-Symphonie_f%C3%BCr_Orchester%2C_op._49-4800.jpg
However, the video (see below) reveals that Mendelssohn premiered the Symphony in Leipzig - so we have a bit of a conundrum here, date-wise, as the latter died in 1847!

Full details of the contents of the CD here (including video), with Veit described as 'The Czech Mendelssohn':

Ouverture, Op.17
Andante, poco maestoso. Allegro molto 10:57

Romance & Finale for violin and orchestra
(N.B. These two movements are identical to the 2nd and 3rd movements of the Violin Concerto No.2, Op.11 'Hungarian', by Joseph Joachim)
Romance. Andante 07:32
Finale. Allegro con spirito 11:53
Milan Al-Ashhab – violin

Symphony E minor, Op.49
I. Andante. Allegro molto 14:30
II. Adagio 09:06
III. Allegro 05:51
IV. Allegro assai 07:34
L'Armonia Terrena,
Zdeněk Klauda conductor

https://cdmusic.cz/en/old-czech-music/veit-w.h.-overture-romanze-finale-symphony-m.al-ashhab-larmonia-terrena-z.klauda-%5Bid%3DNIBIRU01712231%5D (https://cdmusic.cz/en/old-czech-music/veit-w.h.-overture-romanze-finale-symphony-m.al-ashhab-larmonia-terrena-z.klauda-%5Bid%3DNIBIRU01712231%5D)

It is the exactly same piece that was attributed to another composer (Joachim?)  and recorded by Aaron Rosand and the Orchestra of Radio Luxembourg
It may have been wrongly attributed, but I assure you that there is but the one composition

Here's a list of Rosand's recordings on two pages - can you point out which one features the piece you mentioned, please?
https://www.discogs.com/artist/361074-Aaron-Rosand?page=1 
https://www.discogs.com/artist/361074-Aaron-Rosand?page=2

In fact, they are the second and third movements of the Second Violin Concerto by Joachim  (the "Hungarian").  An old Candide LP..........

You are right - my apologies! This is very strange!

I have emailed the label at nibiru@centrum.cz

That'll be an interesting exchange. So, who copied whom? My money is on Joachim being the composer and Veit making a copy for whatever reason. Study maybe?  This copy was then found amongst his papers and assumed to be a composition by him. FWIW the work doesn't feature on IMSLP's Veit worklist

The label replied straight away and have referred our query to the conductor, Zdeněk Klauda.

All very embarrassing for them. You'd have thought that someone would have twigged that those two movements were stylistically very different from the Symphony and Overture, judging by what we heard on the video.

Wouldn't the conductor and the musicians have realised somehing was amiss? How bizarre.

Extremely embarrassing, yes. Red faces all round, I imagine.

I have ordered the CD from jpc; I wonder whether I'll actually get hold of a copy or whether it'll quickly be withdrawn?

The conductor has referred us to this part of an interview pubilished here...
https://www.casopisharmonie.cz/rozhovory/vice-je-vzdycky-vice-o-rakousko-uherske-hudbe-neznameho-pravnika.html
...and which I reproduce here in a modified Google translation:

Q. The violin composition will surprise everyone with its spirit and virtuosity, for violin lovers certainly a pleasant discovery. Music that seems to gently greet Dvořák, two generations younger. I can't believe that the solo part, reminiscent of Ernst or Slavík, was created by Veit without professional guidance. On the other hand, I perceive a dispute over authorship. So how is it that the signature under this work will not become a mystifying prank of the publisher?

Conductor: As for this composition, it is still largely unknown and a detective finish awaits us in the form of a comparison of the manuscript, allegedly a Veit score stored in the Czech Museum of Music, with which we have worked so far, and the manuscript of Violin Concerto No. 2 "Hungarian" by Joseph Joachim. The first movement of Joachim's Second Violin Concerto itself was premiered on April 9, 1859 in Weimar; the whole concerto was then premiered on May 2, 1859 in London, which is quite interesting. According to Grove, Joachim's autograph ought to be stored in Vienna. The second movement of this concerto is identical to Veit's Romance and the third movement to the Finale. The orchestral part coincides 1: 1, during a detailed examination of the solo violin part, Joachim's simplifications are evident, which are then much better played by the violin - whereas Veit's "original," as the interpreter of our recording, Milan Al-Ashhab, put it euphemistically, is playable only on the assumption of considerable fingering ingenuity, and even so is very uncomfortable, as if uncompromising. This is the most likely hypothesis: that Joachim ordered these two parts from Veit and then revised them so that they could be played well (let's understand: he was a technically exceptional violin virtuoso) and incorporated them into his second violin concerto. All this was most likely with Veit's knowledge and permission. The opposite alternative - that in Prague, where the music had no hope of being performed, Veit wrote the second and third movements (why only these and not the first?) of Joachim's Violin Concerto and, incomprehensibly, made it difficult to copy the solo part - is not very likely. In my opinion, it is almost out of the question. However, until a comparative analysis and further scientific study of these two sources of the same music has taken place, we can say nothing at all.

Question: Does anyone here really believe that Veit wrote this music? It's not in his style at all!

It is also available to stream on Spotify, but for how long, I wonder?

I don´t buy this convoluted explanation at all.  One of the many problems I have with this explanation is that the second and third movements seem to me to follow on stylistically from the first movement. No-one has yet dared to suggest that Veit composed that first movement.

Joachim was a more than competent composer with quite a few substantial orchestral works behind him before he composed the 2nd Violin Concerto. He had absolutely no need of Veit to "ghost" two movements for him, but if Veit did then he is to be commended for so successfully imitating Joachim's style that for 170-odd years no-one suspected that Joachim wasn't the author! Whilst I respect what the conductor says, on the evidence we have I think that the idea that Veit is their composer is wishful thinking.

I've just streamed Veit's lively Overture on Spotify, and the stylistic gulf between its Mendelssohnian and Weberesque style and Joachim's mature music is profound. It's very difficult to believe that it and the concerted works could come from the same pen.

There are many meritorious CDs available at a price much lower than this one. I will not subscribe to something meretricious.

I've ordered it for the Symphony and Overture. I'll ignore the rest, which is by JOACHIM!

I've told the conductor I don't believe his explanation.

Here's the label's video at YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzpMAdjTWwU

And here's the whole first movement of the Symphony (with echoes of Beethoven's 7th - it doesn't half go on a bit!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJewcRKuBXs
Second movement here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HykGRKZOYU0
Third movement:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWNFXVQsk6E
Finale:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBIymEftAbE

I'll be frank: this isn't a great work. And it's rather timidly conducted here (the first movement's supposed to be Allegro molto!) Was Veit the Czech Mendelssohn? No.

The Veit was published around 1860, but it seems wholly possible that it may have been composed substantially earlier.

Apparently according to Rietz' correspondence, Rietz premiered it on October 20 1859.

Quote from: Alan Howe on Saturday 26 February 2022, 18:50
I'll be frank: this isn't a great work. And it's rather timidly conducted here (the first movement's supposed to be Allegro molto!) Was Veit the Czech Mendelssohn? No.

I found it a thoroughly enjoyable work in a Loewian or Czernian vein, which sounds as though it was written a few decades before its premiere (IMSLP suggests 1833, which seems more likely), but not particularly outstanding (either negatively or positively) in any way.

Not the "Czech Mendelssohn", no - not the same talent or dedication (he was a musical amateur for much of his life), but still quite influential in the musical life of Prague (a German city at that point). It may well be that that relative lack of talent caused him to stay in Prague, rather than find employ at some local German court - like what happened to his compatriot Kalliwoda: a much better composer, but one who worked in Germany for most of his life, and therefore could not really contribute to the development of such a thing like a Czech school. So, not the "Czech Mendelssohn", but perhaps the "Czech Glinka".

What I find annoying about this release - quite apart from the obvious misattribution of Joachim's music to Veit - is the hype generated by the performers and label concerning the composer's standing in relation to Mendelssohn. This sort of thing may be good publicity at the outset, but in the end unjustified hype, as here, can only result in disappointment and cynicism.

I don't dispute that, but the losers will be the performers, the label and Veit's reputation, none of which I care about very much. No one with any knowledge who listens to the music will be taken in by the hype or the misattribution.

I'd just mention here the opposite approach taken by Schweizer Phonogramm in relation to Joseph Lauber. No hype, no exaggeration - rather, a modest and honest presentation of his music which has grown his reputation and that of the label and performers.

We all have to consider this in the light of classical music recording marketing (i.e., little at all). Concert venues do this all the time, though - using a better-known entity to draw people to lesser-known works, even if the association is ... unconvincing. I've seen a Glazunov overture marketed as "early Stravinskian" a few years ago. So to me, it sounds as though they simply did a copy-paste of the concert blurb, and rather overplayed their hand. Not correct, but neither is it the end of the world.

Hijacking Joachim, if it's true, is far worse in my view.

I took delivery of the CD this morning - and guess what? The booklet makes absolutely NO mention of the fact that the Romanze & Finale are identical with the last two movements of Joachim's VC2. The only mention of Joachim is a passing reference to him playing second violin in the London Beethoven Quartet. Is this igorance or just plain dishonesty?

I feared, Alan, that the booklet would be silent.  Perhaps it was printed before the conductor gave that specious explanation, out of ignorance. and then the booklet was persevered with, out of mendacity.  Personally, I think it´s disgraceful that the innocent buyer is being kept in the dark.

The notes on the music were written by the conductor!

I am actually feeling rather angry about that.  The Symphony is pretty catchy, and, as I personally like possessing CDs, I would have bought it, despite the expensive price. But I don´t see why I should pay that price for what is looking more and more like economy with the truth.

If your barometer for early Stravinsky is his first few published works, Glazunov being early Stravinskyian isn't a stretch, just a causal reversal (but causality wasn't stated.)

So: ignorance or dishonesty? Or the former followed by the latter after the truth emerged?

I found this article (in Czech) and can see that Joachim is mentioned in reference to the Romanze & Finale (foot of 2nd column), but can't work out how to translate it. Can anyone help?
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10228349144700563&set=a.10208648257390693 (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10228349144700563&set=a.10208648257390693)

I've changed my mind somewhat about the Symphony now that I've listened to it through carefully a couple of times. I still think the first movement could be swifter in this performance, but it's clearer to me now where it 'sits' historically, i.e. somewhere between Beethoven/Schubert and Mendelssohn. Overall it's well done here, with nice pointing throughout, although ideally it needs a bigger orchestra.

How on earth anyone might believe the Romanze & Finale movements are by Veit, though, is still quite beyond me.

Because they wanted to believe it, Alan.

Oh, quite. That much is obvious. But that makes them purveyors of fakery, not serious musicologists. I've encountered many people whose basic attitude is 'Don't confuse me with the truth', but this takes the proverbial biscuit. And they'll be found out...

They have been .....

Quotecan't work out how to translate it. Can anyone help?

Here's Google's translation from the scanned page's Czech (I've highlighed the relevant sentences):

"Václav Jindřich Veit (1806-1864) was one of the leading figures in Prague's musical life. He was a respected and popular composer. an excellent pianist and a respected music organizer. His work is dominated by vocal and chamber works, but there are also several remarkable orchestral compositions. Today, Veit is a composer perfectly "forgotten", his music has completely disappeared from the concert stage. So we can only admire the entrepreneurial courage of the Nibiru publishing house, which at the end of last year launched a CD with three of Vito's most interesting orchestral works. The recording opens with the Concert Overture, Op. 17 from the early 1840s. The song consists of a slow introduction and an allegory main part. It impresses with its compositional sophistication and, above all, its masterful instrumentation, which we will appreciate all the more considering that Veit was essentially a self-taught in the composition. The final composition of the disc is the magnificent four-movement Symphony in E minor, Op. 49 from the late fifties. The composition was performed in the Gewandhaus in Leipzig shortly after its completion - October 20, 1859, and shortly afterwards, on November 29, 1859, it was also performed (under the direction of František Škroup) in Prague. The extraordinarily mature work is characterized by a generous formal layout (footage reaches almost 40 minutes) and extraordinary intellectual and compositional ingenuity. The instruction then far exceeds the concert overture in color. The "Historical Judgment" was unfair to this symphony - the composition would have nothing to do with the works of Veit's much more famous "romantic" contemporaries and would certainly deserve more frequent performances. The publisher included Romance and the finale for violin and orchestra with the Concert Overture and Symphony in E minor. The manuscript of this work is stored in the music history department of the Czech Museum of Music. The composition does not have an opus number and the manuscript does not contain any more detailed information - neither about the time of creation nor about the performance. Veit does not even mention this work in any of the lists of his compositions. And to make matters worse, shortly before the "baptism" of this CD (which took place on December 3, 2021 in St. Lawrence's Church in Malá Strana), one of the members of the Larmonio Terrena Orchestra found out by chance that Romance and finale figure as the second and third movements. in Violin Concerto No. 2 in D minor (In Ungarischer Weiset op. 11), by one of the most famous violinists of the 19th century, Joseph Joachim (1831-1907). The two movements are Veit and not Joachim, but to be sure of this we will need a more thorough detective search. On interpretative side, this recording deserves only words of praise.N Zdeněk Klauda elaborated all three works in the smallest detail, almost as if it were The orchestra plays extremely colorfully (excellent breaths) and inspired, and most importantly - all orchestral players play with obvious personal interest. and Milan Al-Ashhab His performance in Romanci and the finals - whoever the author is - is amazing. The artist masters a great technique that he can apply perfectly (Joa-chim's Second Violin Concerto is one of the most difficult violin concerts ever), and emotions gush from his playing. It has a wonderful instrument by Nicola Amati from 1662 with a beautiful full, warm honey tone, which in slow cantilenas it "catches the heart". The listener will certainly also appreciate the high-quality and sculpturally captured sound of the recording as well as the carefully prepared four-language booklet with a well-founded and lively stylized text by Jaromír Havlík, with accompanying commentary by conductor Zdeněk Klauda and a rich pictorial appendix. All this is offered by the Nibiru publishing house in an exclusive polygraphic processing with a reproduction of a magical image by Bohuslav Reynek on the front cover."

Thanks, Mark! So, one of the members of the orchestra found this out! It's clear now that the recording had been signed off and the 'error' only discovered afterwards. That's bad enough, but to argue that the Romanze & Finale is actually by Veit in the face of all the stylistic evidence smacks of an attempted cover-up after the event.

By the way, Ilja's mention of Carl Loewe (whose two symphonies were written in 1834/5) is entirely appropriate here. They too sound very like they belong in the gap between Beethoven/Schubert and Mendelssohn - ignoring, of course, the latter's very early No.1. 

I note that the CD is now unavailable from Amazon (you can still get the download). I wonder whether this is because my review had featured the controversy about the Romanze & Finale...?

I have posted a similar review at jpc where the CD is still available for purchase.

Mine  arrived from Prague this afternoon.
Apart from the seamless way Joachim´s concerto moves from the (overlong) first movement to these second and third movements, in my opinion, those seem to be on a higher plane than the offerings of Veit.  (Of the music I have so far heard of Joachim, this concerto is his finest). Veit´s symphony isn´t at all bad and i would date it from the 1830´s (haven´t checked what the booklet says about that, but then,frankly,what is the booklet worth?) But when they all thought Veit had composed the Romanze and Finale, did they think that they had stumbled on a real find? More fool them if they did, and now they want to take the paying public as fools too.

I enjoyed the Symphony: the CD's worth having for that alone.

I agree, and went ahead with the purchase for that reason only

Absolutely. The Symphony is certainly worth an occasional listen, although it's no masterpiece, but the Overture is instantly forgettable. I saw no point in downloading the Joachim concerto movements. I don't believe that the performers or the label deliberately set out to deceive, but were caught out by poor musicology in not recognising the Joachim movements and over-hyping the genuine, but run-of-the-mill, Veit pieces.

I have now read the booklet, written by the conductor.
Apropos of the Romanze and Finale, it specifically states "At the time of its completion there simply was not an appropriate musician to perform the piece and thus it had to wait for its performance until today. You can listen to it on this CD in its world premiere"

That's absolute rubbish, of course.

I don't have the booklet as I downloaded the Veit recordings but I don't understand how the conductor could justify that statement. Where are the references to back it up? I believe it's been stated elsewhere that there's no mention of the two movements in Veit's own papers.

I am quite amazed by what has happened here. My faith in CD liner notes/booklets has been well shaken. I had always assumed that they could be trusted. We have occasionally found accidental mistakes - wrong movement order, incorrect marking of movements, and so on - but this appears to be wilful deception! Obviously, some labels can reasonably be taken as more reliable than others, and the identity of the author is a key factor, but I shall be less trusting in future.

For earlier "fun with liner notes", try practically anything with late music by Roslavets, if memory serves, or other stuff with similar unacknowledged musicological intervention. (I'm thinking of the Naxos recording of the so-called Roslavets violin sonata no.6 (incidentally the most Romantic of the works on the disc, and given a date of 1940 for whatever reason, though I think the ms is without date); the notes to the score admit that there is nothing on the manuscript identifying the work even as a sonata, it just happens to maybe-fit a place in the composer's work catalog (but who knows, the work might be missing or lost, too), but point is, -none- of that makes it to the Naxos notes.)

I phoned Czech Music Direct who are selling the CD in the UK and they knew nothing about the problem with the Romanze & Finale. It seems that those involved in the project are keeping stumm and hoping nobody will notice.

Money talks or, in this case, fear of losing it silences.

I've also forewarned Presto before they advertise it as a new release.

The Veit Symphony continues to grow on me.  The main melody in the opening movement is sticking in my memory and it reminds me of that arresting Concert Overture of Julius Rietz, which is probably no surprise as the two men were pretty good friends, I believe.

Yes, it's a good piece. Alone worth the price of the CD.

For a year now Presto haven't listed this CD for sale. The shame is the Veit's fine Symphony is handicapped by being coupled with music that isn't by him at all.

Also: the label makes no mention of the 'problem piece' - if it ever did:
https://www.nibiru-publishers.com/en/detail/romantic-testimony/#tab-content1

Totally agree,Alan.   The Symphony is well worth repeated hearing, but the label has shot itself in the foot.

Listening again to Veit's Symphony I was struck by two things. Firstly, what an enjoyable piece it is. Nothing too revolutionary for the 1830s or 40s maybe, but with memorable material that's used intelligently and with quite a few diverting passages to maintain one's interest. Secondly how tin-eared must those responsible for the CD be, not to have recognised the stylistic gulf between it and the two movements from Joachim's concerto, which so clearly come from a later generation? Good though it is, they might be forgiven not knowing the Hungarian Concerto as it's hardly mainstream repertoire but, on the evidence of the Symphony and Overture, to not realise that Veit is most unlikely to have composed those two movements really does beggar belief.

I revisited the accomplished Veit Symphony yesterday, and was minded to check on YouTube to see if Alan's corrective note had inspired a thread. The reply, from the perpetrators,has so far gone unchallenged. It is very lengthy, and, in the words of Sir John Moore,when complaining about Admiral Sir Sidney Smith, "very impudent".

They know they're wrong, Terry. We found them out, as we did Hans Franke!

I rather enjoyed Gareth's riposte on that thread.  It pulled no punches!

Me too.

Well, I was incensed when I read such vacuous tripe! Joachim didn't need Veit to write his concertos for him, quite apart from the fact that the idiom is completely different from that of Veit's symphony - as everyone who hears the disk remarks (except, apparently, the artists who produced it - really?!!).

It's truly beyond belief, Gareth. They've made a big mistake, but aren't big enough to admit it.

Exactly so, Alan.