Haydn and his Hornsignals, again
The Historian
>Does anyone have any recommendations for Haydn's "Hornsignal" symphonies? I
>am referring to his early symphonies with prominent horn parts, such as
>numbers 31 (The Hornsignal) and 72. What are the best recordings of these
>symphonies, and what other Haydn symphonies have virtuosic horn writing? I
>currently own two recordings of 31, both on Naxos - Toscanini and the NBC
>Symphony, and Drahos.
Since then I've picked up the complete Haydn symphonies on Brilliant,
so I now have a third 31.
My one recording of 72 is by The Hanover Band directed
>by Roy Goodman.
And again, now a second 72.
Simon Roberts the Haydnphile wrote:
"For 31 Hogwood (exciting portamento on the leaps in the first
movement) and
Harnoncourt. Other symphonies to consider: 48, with its horns-as-
trumpets
brilliance (Solomons/Sony), and 51 with its virtuosic writing for one
very high
and one very low horn, which go in opposite directions in the slow
movement (and
elsewhere) (Bruggen/Philips).
"Other symphonies have prominent horn parts, if not to the extent of
the above,
either alone or joined with trumpets (to thrilling effect in 56 and
90, for
example), but its hard to find recordings where they are afforded the
requisite
prominence - e.g., it's frustrating to read Landon going on about the
screaming
high horns in the finale of 52 and then listen to recordings where, if
you can
hear them at all, they sound more like slightly overweight clarinets
(Pinnock
comes closest in 52/iv but unfortunately omits the repeat)."
Any changes in recommendations over the past few years? Aside from the
Fischer set on Brilliant, I've individual recordings of 51 (Gobermann,
Drahos) and 73 (Goodman.) Any other recordings in which the horns ring
out?
ansermetniac
<neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Six years ago I wrote:
>
>>Does anyone have any recommendations for Haydn's "Hornsignal" symphonies? I
Toscanini NBC from acetates not the WRVR tapes. Berv, Berv, Berv
and Cerino. With Robert Bloom .and John Wummer
Abbedd
Ricky Jimenez
<neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Six years ago I wrote:
>
>>Does anyone have any recommendations for Haydn's "Hornsignal" symphonies? I
>>am referring to his early symphonies with prominent horn parts, such as
>>numbers 31 (The Hornsignal) and 72. What are the best recordings of these
>>symphonies, and what other Haydn symphonies have virtuosic horn writing? I
>>currently own two recordings of 31, both on Naxos - Toscanini and the NBC
>>Symphony, and Drahos.
I am under the impression that in at least one symphony, Haydn writes
for 4 horns. Was that 31?
Alan Cooper
news:ubo0f5t2n8i03dc3v...@4ax.com:
Yes, and also 13 and 39 as well as 72.
AC
Simon Roberts
news:edba52ea-5c5e-4f53...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
For 56, Hogwood (Oiseau Lyre), Goberman (on CD via Haydn House; avoid the
vile English CBS LP)) and Solomons (not on CD, but someone recently posted
all of his to concertarchive or symphonyshare, I think). I look forward to
Fey's getting around to them....
Simon
M forever
In another recent thread, I posted this link which is a short preview
of the beginning of 31 in Harnoncourt's recording:
Ricky Jimenez
<amco...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>> I am under the impression that in at least one symphony, Haydn
>> writes for 4 horns. Was that 31?
>
>Yes, and also 13 and 39 as well as 72.
I assume that he had the budget at Esterhazy to hire the extrra
players. I wonder why he didn't write for four for Paris and London.
I have read that the Paris orchestra was as large as a modern symphony
orchestra.
John
> On 03 Nov 2009 17:30:09 GMT, Alan Cooper
>
> >> I am under the impression that in at least one symphony, Haydn
> >> writes for 4 horns. Was that 31?
>
> >Yes, and also 13 and 39 as well as 72.
>
> I assume that he had the budget at Esterhazy to hire the extrra
> players. I wonder why he didn't write for four for Paris and London.
> I have read that the Paris orchestra was as large as a modern symphony
> orchestra.
Mozart mentioned the Paris orchestra in a letter to his father. If I
remember correctly, he was overjoyed to have a large string section at
his disposal, but I don't recall any mention of the brass or woodwinds.
mandryka
Don't you think that Fey is a little bit . . . brash and brazen?
I find his records the hardest HIPs to like. The prominence of the
brass and the sudden disorientating changes in dynamics and tempo.
But maybe it's an aquired taste.
Alan Cooper
By the late 1770s, Haydn settled into a routine of 7 wind parts (flute, 2 oboes, 2
bassoons, 2 horns) plus 2 trumpets on occasion (86, 88). In the London symphonies
he expanded the regular cohort to 10 by including a second flute and the 2
trumpets, and to a maximum of 12 with the addition of clarinets (99-101, 103, 104:
2 flutes, 2 oboes, 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, 2 horns, 2 trumpets). Never more than
two horns, although I doubt that the availability or affordability of players had
anything to do with it.
AC
M forever
> On 03 Nov 2009 17:30:09 GMT, Alan Cooper
>
> >> I am under the impression that in at least one symphony, Haydn
> >> writes for 4 horns. Was that 31?
>
> >Yes, and also 13 and 39 as well as 72.
>
> I assume that he had the budget at Esterhazy to hire the extrra
> players. I wonder why he didn't write for four for Paris and London.
> I have read that the Paris orchestra was as large as a modern symphony
> orchestra.
The band at Esterháza (note the count's name was Esterházy, but his
residence was Esterháza) originally had 4 horn players. In the early
1760s one left, one died. These two were not immediately placed. In
1765, they got two new horn players and that is when Haydn wrote this
symphony, and some of the others with 4 horns. The numbers are not
necessarily in the chronologically correct order. 72 was written much
earlier than the number suggests, not long after 31.
Bob Lombard
My take on Fey's Haydn is that it's a little plain and squared off, and
Haydn's sense of humor is not much evident. Plenty of brass and
percussion though.
bl
M forever
"A little plain and squared off" is a very nice and merciful comment.
I think what Fey does is horrible, pseudo-HIP, just mimicking the
"shock effects" of early HIP recordings, especially Harnoncourt's
recordings with the Concertgebouworkest - but without any of the
flexible liveliness and eloquence of the phrasing and rhythmic
springiness and flexibility of that performance style. "HIP" musicians
are sometimes accused of attracting attention to their otherwise
indistinguished music making with such shock effects and while that is
most often not true, I think it definitely is in Fey's case.
Johannes Roehl
> On Nov 3, 4:56 pm, Ricky Jimenez <ricky...@bestweb.net> wrote:
>> On 03 Nov 2009 17:30:09 GMT, Alan Cooper
>>
>> <amcoo...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>>>> I am under the impression that in at least one symphony, Haydn
>>>> writes for 4 horns. Was that 31?
>>> Yes, and also 13 and 39 as well as 72.
>> I assume that he had the budget at Esterhazy to hire the extrra
>> players. I wonder why he didn't write for four for Paris and London.
>> I have read that the Paris orchestra was as large as a modern symphony
>> orchestra.
>
> residence was Esterh�za) originally had 4 horn players. In the early
> 1760s one left, one died. These two were not immediately placed. In
> 1765, they got two new horn players and that is when Haydn wrote this
> symphony, and some of the others with 4 horns. The numbers are not
> necessarily in the chronologically correct order. 72 was written much
> earlier than the number suggests, not long after 31.
Actually it was probably written a couple of years _before_ 31. Some
commentators think that 31 was more or less an "improved version" of 72,
as they are very similar with concertante elements, prominent horns and
variations as finale.
I think one reason why Haydn did not write for four horns later was that
it would have made the pieces more difficult to produce elsewhere. Four
horn players must have been an extraordinary luxury that even Eszterhazy
wanted to afford only for a few years. Orchestral balance may have been
another consideration. If one takes into account that many of the
early/middle symphonies were done with about a dozen string players or
less (e.g. 4-3-2-1-1) two horns seem quite sufficient.
Johannes
Simon Roberts
news:01d8e5e6-053c-41ac...@g27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 3, 8:52�pm, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote
>> innews:edba52ea-5c5e-4f
> 53-ad3a-93...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > Six years ago I wrote:
>>
>> > Any changes in recommendations over the past few years? Aside from
>> > the Fischer set on Brilliant, I've individual recordings of 51
>> > (Gobermann, Drahos) and 73 (Goodman.) Any other recordings in which
>> > the horns ring out?
>>
>> For 56, Hogwood (Oiseau Lyre), Goberman (on CD via Haydn House; avoid
>> the vile English CBS LP)) and Solomons (not on CD, but someone
>> recently poste
> d
>> all of his to concertarchive or symphonyshare, I think). �I look
>> forwar
> d to
>> Fey's getting around to them....
>>
>> Simon
>
> Don't you think that Fey is a little bit . . . brash and brazen?
No, but I understand why someone might. But "brash and brazen" seems to
me to describe (part of) the sonority Haydn wrote into several of his
symphonies. If nothing else, what he does strikes me as a welcome
corrective to the vast majority of Haydn recordings, which err in the
opposite direction.
> I find his records the hardest HIPs to like. The prominence of the
> brass and the sudden disorientating changes in dynamics and tempo.
>
> But maybe it's an aquired taste.
Tastes usually are....
Simon
The Historian
How about 90? I have Fischer and Kuijken. The horns are too polite in
both, but less so in Kuijken's recording. You know who has posted EA/
OSR, but I'd rather not go there.....
mandryka
> mandryka <howie.st...@googlemail.com> wrote innews:01d8e5e6-053c-41ac...@g27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 3, 8:52 pm, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> innews:edba52ea-5c5e-4f
>
> >> > Six years ago I wrote:
>
> >> > Any changes in recommendations over the past few years? Aside from
> >> > the Fischer set on Brilliant, I've individual recordings of 51
> >> > (Gobermann, Drahos) and 73 (Goodman.) Any other recordings in which
> >> > the horns ring out?
>
> >> For 56, Hogwood (Oiseau Lyre), Goberman (on CD via Haydn House; avoid
> >> the vile English CBS LP)) and Solomons (not on CD, but someone
> >> recently poste
> > d
> >> all of his to concertarchive or symphonyshare, I think). I look
> >> forwar
> > d to
> >> Fey's getting around to them....
>
> >> Simon
>
> > Don't you think that Fey is a little bit . . . brash and brazen?
>
> No, but I understand why someone might. But "brash and brazen" seems to
> me to describe (part of) the sonority Haydn wrote into several of his
> symphonies. If nothing else, what he does strikes me as a welcome
> corrective to the vast majority of Haydn recordings, which err in the
> opposite direction.
>
> > I find his records the hardest HIPs to like. The prominence of the
> > brass and the sudden disorientating changes in dynamics and tempo.
>
> > But maybe it's an aquired taste.
>
> Tastes usually are....
>
> Simon- -
Agreed -- and I will keep my Fey recirdings and I'll bey new ones as
they come out.
Thanks, by the way, for putting me onto Blum's 60 -- now that's the
sort of sonics I like.
In fact the whole thing, not just the balance but the sheer energy of
it, is top notch.
The Historian
I see Amazon is listing Blum's recordings of four symphonies,
including 60, available January 1. Is this for real, folks? I
understand Artemis, owner of the Vanguard tapes, went under a couple
of years ago.
Johannes Roehl
> On Nov 3, 3:52 pm, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote innews:edba52ea-5c5e-4f53...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> Six years ago I wrote:
>>> Any changes in recommendations over the past few years? Aside from the
>>> Fischer set on Brilliant, I've individual recordings of 51 (Gobermann,
>>> Drahos) and 73 (Goodman.) Any other recordings in which the horns ring
>>> out?
>> For 56, Hogwood (Oiseau Lyre), Goberman (on CD via Haydn House; avoid the
>> vile English CBS LP)) and Solomons (not on CD, but someone recently posted
>> all of his to concertarchive or symphonyshare, I think). I look forward to
>> Fey's getting around to them....
> How about 90? I have Fischer and Kuijken. The horns are too polite in
> both, but less so in Kuijken's recording. You know who has posted EA/
> OSR, but I'd rather not go there.....
IIRC Simon likes Br�ggen here, who IMO is too slow in the first movement
(I was rather underwhelmed all in all and got rid of it). My favorite
here is Dorati (very hard to get outside the box). Fischer is weak here,
his #91 is better, but all of 88-91 are not among the better recordings
in the box.
I have not heard Kuijken, though, but I found his readings of 82-87
decent, but rather plain and not very colorful, so I gave those away as
well. I still haven't heard the newer Rattle, the older one is quite
nice, but too tame in the brass department.
Has anyone heard Wolff's with the Frankfurt orchestra?
I have his 88, 89, 91, which is very lively, but again maybe too polite
(more or less in the "sparkling" Marriner tradition), so I didn't get
his 90 (which was oddly coupled anyway).
This symphony is a favorite of mine, but there doesn't seem a recording
of it anywhere close to Jacobs' 91/92.
Johannes
The Historian
> The Historian schrieb:
>
> > On Nov 3, 3:52 pm, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote innews:edba52ea-5c5e-4f53...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>
> >>> Six years ago I wrote:
> >>> Any changes in recommendations over the past few years? Aside from the
> >>> Fischer set on Brilliant, I've individual recordings of 51 (Gobermann,
> >>> Drahos) and 73 (Goodman.) Any other recordings in which the horns ring
> >>> out?
> >> For 56, Hogwood (Oiseau Lyre), Goberman (on CD via Haydn House; avoid the
> >> vile English CBS LP)) and Solomons (not on CD, but someone recently posted
> >> all of his to concertarchive or symphonyshare, I think). I look forward to
> >> Fey's getting around to them....
> > How about 90? I have Fischer and Kuijken. The horns are too polite in
> > both, but less so in Kuijken's recording. You know who has posted EA/
> > OSR, but I'd rather not go there.....
>
> (I was rather underwhelmed all in all and got rid of it). My favorite
> here is Dorati (very hard to get outside the box). Fischer is weak here,
> his #91 is better, but all of 88-91 are not among the better recordings
> in the box.
Fischer seems to have improved as the series continued. Nimbus
recorded the "London" and other later symphonies first.
> I have not heard Kuijken, though, but I found his readings of 82-87
> decent, but rather plain and not very colorful, so I gave those away as
> well. I still haven't heard the newer Rattle, the older one is quite
> nice, but too tame in the brass department.
Hurwitz at Classics Today panned it in typical style, calling Rattle
the "Anti-Haydn."
Johannes Roehl
> On Nov 4, 11:46 am, Johannes Roehl <parrhe...@web.de> wrote:
>> The Historian schrieb:
>>> How about 90? I have Fischer and Kuijken. The horns are too polite in
>>> both, but less so in Kuijken's recording. You know who has posted EA/
>>> OSR, but I'd rather not go there.....
>> IIRC Simon likes Br�ggen here, who IMO is too slow in the first movement
>> (I was rather underwhelmed all in all and got rid of it). My favorite
>> here is Dorati (very hard to get outside the box). Fischer is weak here,
>> his #91 is better, but all of 88-91 are not among the better recordings
>> in the box.
>
> Fischer seems to have improved as the series continued. Nimbus
> recorded the "London" and other later symphonies first.
Yes! He certainly has! His 31 is quite decent, IIRC, although in this
piece I do clearly prefer the period instrumet sonorities of
Harnoncourts or Hogwoods.
As for the symphonies from 82 onwards there usually are plenty of decent
choices (except for 90 ;-)) I still think that the box is nice to have
for many of the early and middle symphonies, although in most cases
slightly better recordings can be found, sometimes with a lot of effort.
BTW has anyone heard the box of all the symphonies by Dennis Russell
Davies with a Stuttgart Chamber Orchestra?
Johannes
M forever
In this case though, I have to admit I agree with Hurwitz. The tam-tam
and the cymbals are basically inaudible throughout the whole set. What
a catastrophe.
Simon Roberts
> On Nov 3, 3:52�pm, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote
>> innews:edba52ea-5c5e-4f
> 53-ad3a-93...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > Six years ago I wrote:
>>
>> > Any changes in recommendations over the past few years? Aside from
>> > the Fischer set on Brilliant, I've individual recordings of 51
>> > (Gobermann, Drahos) and 73 (Goodman.) Any other recordings in which
>> > the horns ring out?
>>
>> For 56, Hogwood (Oiseau Lyre), Goberman (on CD via Haydn House; avoid
>> the vile English CBS LP)) and Solomons (not on CD, but someone
>> recently poste
> d
>> all of his to concertarchive or symphonyshare, I think). �I look
>> forwar
> d to
>> Fey's getting around to them....
>>
>> Simon
>
> How about 90? I have Fischer and Kuijken. The horns are too polite in
> both, but less so in Kuijken's recording. You know who has posted EA/
> OSR, but I'd rather not go there.....
Um, yes; besides, EA's horns play an octave too low. Everyone's horns
are too polite for my taste in this work (including Goodman's, which,
unique on discs, uses an edition which omits trumpets and timpani but
keeps the alto horns). I prefer Bruggen to Kuijken - similar sonority,
but he generates more swagger (more than Weil does, too). Blum is very
disappointing after his magnificent 60, but Dorati is surprisingly good
here; one of the best performances in his decidedly uneven box.
Rattle/BPO is one of his better efforts, especially in the finale.
Simon
ansermetniac
wrote:
>
>Um, yes; besides, EA's horns play an octave too low.
H.C.R.L. says if you use trumepts it is C basso. EA usses trumpets
Abbedd
Gerard
>
> H.C.R.L. says if you use trumepts it is C basso. EA usses trumpets
>
> Abbedd
What lanquizz is this?
Simon Roberts
news:f4r3f5hq3kral7l0j...@4ax.com:
Dorati, who uses Landon's edition, doesn't do that; nor does anyone else.
Simon
Heck51
wrote:>
> >Does anyone have any recommendations for Haydn's "Hornsignal" symphonies? >>
A fine version of #31 that I've not seen on CD was the old Turnabout
LP -
Rilling/Stuttgart Bach Collegium - also a good version of #59, "Fire"
I also have Drahos, OK, not spectacular, and Harnoncourt from '92 -
very brassy natural horns. An horn-playing buddy of mine loves the
recording as a curiosity - says the horns sound like kazoos!!
I also have a version [mvt I only] of Dennis Brain with an English
orchestra from London, 1952. good but not great, I still prefer
Rilling. I wish it made it to CD.
the Drahos recording of Sym #51 on Naxos is very fine - with Swedish
Cham Orch. very excellent horn playing - the high horn player
repeatedly bulls-eyeing the stratospheric concert Bbs.
ansermetniac
wrote:
>ansermetniac <anserm...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>news:f4r3f5hq3kral7l0j...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:22:45 -0600, Simon Roberts <sd...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Um, yes; besides, EA's horns play an octave too low.
>>
>> H.C.R.L. says if you use trumepts it is C basso. EA usses trumpets
>
>Dorati, who uses Landon's edition, doesn't do that; nor does anyone else.
>
>Simon
Landon says theire is a choice
C alto makes it sound ridiculous
Abebdd
Tom Wood
> M forever schrieb:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 3, 4:56 pm, Ricky Jimenez <ricky...@bestweb.net> wrote:
> >> On 03 Nov 2009 17:30:09 GMT, Alan Cooper
>
> >> <amcoo...@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
> >>>> I am under the impression that in at least one symphony, Haydn
> >>>> writes for 4 horns. Was that 31?
> >>> Yes, and also 13 and 39 as well as 72.
> >> I assume that he had the budget at Esterhazy to hire the extrra
> >> players. I wonder why he didn't write for four for Paris and London.
> >> I have read that the Paris orchestra was as large as a modern symphony
> >> orchestra.
>
> > 1760s one left, one died. These two were not immediately placed. In
> > 1765, they got two new horn players and that is when Haydn wrote this
> > symphony, and some of the others with 4 horns. The numbers are not
> > necessarily in the chronologically correct order. 72 was written much
> > earlier than the number suggests, not long after 31.
>
> Actually it was probably written a couple of years _before_ 31. Some
> commentators think that 31 was more or less an "improved version" of 72,
> as they are very similar with concertante elements, prominent horns and
> variations as finale.
>
> I think one reason why Haydn did not write for four horns later was that
> it would have made the pieces more difficult to produce elsewhere. Four
> horn players must have been an extraordinary luxury that even Eszterhazy
> wanted to afford only for a few years. Orchestral balance may have been
> another consideration. If one takes into account that many of the
> early/middle symphonies were done with about a dozen string players or
> less (e.g. 4-3-2-1-1) two horns seem quite sufficient.
>
> Johannes
Mozart wrote for 4 horns on occasion as well: Symphony K. 132,
Symphony K. 183 (the Little G minor), the Kyrie in d K. 341, the early
opera Betulia Liberata K. 118 -- and of course the Gran Partita K.
361. Hiring 4 horn players was indeed probably something of an
extravagance, but also it may have been reserved to make a special
effect.
Tom Wood
John
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:22:05 -0600, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >ansermetniac <ansermetn...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> >news:f4r3f5hq3kral7l0j...@4ax.com:
>
> >> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:22:45 -0600, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>>Um, yes; besides, EA's horns play an octave too low.
>
> >> H.C.R.L. says if you use trumepts it is C basso. EA usses trumpets
>
> >Dorati, who uses Landon's edition, doesn't do that; nor does anyone else.
>
> >Simon
>
> Landon says theire is a choice
>
> C alto makes it sound ridiculous
>
> Abebdd
I wish you'd make up your mind. First, Robbins Landon says C basso
with trumpets; now, there is a choice. Even with trumpets, the horns
are still in C alto. And as Haydn knew exactly what he was doing, who
are you to contradict him? Maybe the OSR couldn't play it as written,
or weren't on top form when they recorded it (most orchestras have
their off-days), but that doesn't mean that everyone else's
performances are "ridiculous" -- and they aren't.
And before you start shouting "moron"; "stfu"; "you are totally
clueless", and so on; we're *all* entitled to a point of view.
ansermetniac
wrote:
Whjy don't you read carefully what I wrote before you qoute me.
Now STFU cluieless moron
You are entitled to a point of view. But to valiudate it by denying
my credentials is bullshite
Abbedd
John
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:42:29 -0800 (PST), John <johntat...@ymail.com>
Perhaps you should read what *I* wrote more carefully.
Now STFU cluieless moron
I knew you'd say that.
> You are entitled to a point of view. But to valiudate it by denying
> my credentials is bullshite
Read my post again. You'll see that I haven't denied *anything*.
Anyway, have it your own way. I'm too tired to argue and I'm going to
bed.
Gerard
So you do not deny that you valiudated it !!
Greg
<snip>
> BTW has anyone heard the box of all the symphonies by Dennis Russell
> Davies with a Stuttgart Chamber Orchestra?
>
> Johannes
Sorry, not yet. Another series of interest is Weil's new one of the
London symphonies with the Cappella Coloniensis. I believe there are
2 discs available:
http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/Joseph-Haydn-Symphonien-Nr-93-95-96/hnum/4287569
http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/Joseph-Haydn-Symphonien-Nr-94-97-98/hnum/5915278
Has anyone heard either of these?
Greg
John
Heaven forfend! (I'm off to bed).
Gerard
>
> Mozart wrote for 4 horns on occasion as well: Symphony K. 132,
> Symphony K. 183 (the Little G minor), the Kyrie in d K. 341, the early
> opera Betulia Liberata K. 118 -- and of course the Gran Partita K.
> 361. Hiring 4 horn players was indeed probably something of an
> extravagance, but also it may have been reserved to make a special
> effect.
>
> Tom Wood
Mozart wrote to his father about a concert:
"The symphony went magnificently and had the greatest success. There were 40
violins, the wind instruments were all doubled, there were 10 violas, ten double
basses, eight violoncellos and six bassoons."
He was very enthousiast about this specialoccasion, probably performing symphony
No. 34.
His Notturno KV 286 was written for 4 orchestras.
ansermetniac
wrote:
>Anyway, have it your own way. I'm too tired to argue and I'm going to
>bed.
Exactly what John Bryant used to say
Abbedd
John
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:03:15 -0800 (PST), John <johntat...@ymail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Anyway, have it your own way. I'm too tired to argue and I'm going to
> >bed.
>
> Exactly what John Bryant used to say
>
> Abbedd
I really wouldn't know. Good night.
The Historian
> On Nov 3, 11:26 am, The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com>
> wrote:>
>
> > >Does anyone have any recommendations for Haydn's "Hornsignal" symphonies? >>
>
> A fine version of #31 that I've not seen on CD was the old Turnabout
> LP -
> Rilling/Stuttgart Bach Collegium - also a good version of #59, "Fire"
That "Fire" turns up on an old Concerto Royale set:
> I also have Drahos, OK, not spectacular, and Harnoncourt from '92 -
> very brassy natural horns. An horn-playing buddy of mine loves the
> recording as a curiosity - says the horns sound like kazoos!!
>
> I also have a version [mvt I only] of Dennis Brain with an English
> orchestra from London, 1952. good but not great,
Ditto this. I forgot I had the Naxos recording by the American Horn
Quartet, on a disc with the Schumann Konzertstuck and concertos by
Handel and Telemann. It didn't make much of an impression.
I still prefer
> Rilling. I wish it made it to CD.
>
> the Drahos recording of Sym #51 on Naxos is very fine - with Swedish
> Cham Orch. very excellent horn playing - the high horn player
> repeatedly bulls-eyeing the stratospheric concert Bbs.
Agreed. I prefer it to Goberman, which I culled, and Schwarz/SCO,
which I kept for the couplings.
Gerard
Exactly what you should do the next 30 years.
CharlesSmith
>
> Mozart wrote for 4 horns on occasion as well: Symphony K. 132,
> Symphony K. 183 (the Little G minor) ....
Far too much horn in K183, IMHO. For the minor key work Mozart
obviously felt the need to have a pair pitched in each of the tonic
and the relative major. For his later Gmin (no.40) he followed Haydn's
practice for minor key symphonies - one in each key for the minor key
movements. Hear, for example, the wonderful independent-part horn
writing in Haydn's no.44, the Trauer, which I'm sure must have
influenced Mozart's horn writing for No.40.
Charles
Pierre Paquin
Conductor
Bavarian Radio Symphony
Orchestra HAYDN: Symphony N� 31 in D Major "Hornsignal"
HAYDN: Symphony N� 73 in D Major "The Hunt"
at http://www.haydnhouse.com/HH16.htm
These are a very good performances
Pierre
"The Historian" <neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:edba52ea-5c5e-4f53...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> Six years ago I wrote:
>
>>Does anyone have any recommendations for Haydn's "Hornsignal" symphonies?
>>I
>>am referring to his early symphonies with prominent horn parts, such as
>>numbers 31 (The Hornsignal) and 72. What are the best recordings of these
>>symphonies, and what other Haydn symphonies have virtuosic horn writing? I
>>currently own two recordings of 31, both on Naxos - Toscanini and the NBC
>>Symphony, and Drahos.
>
> Since then I've picked up the complete Haydn symphonies on Brilliant,
> so I now have a third 31.
>
> My one recording of 72 is by The Hanover Band directed
>>by Roy Goodman.
>
> And again, now a second 72.
>
> Simon Roberts the Haydnphile wrote:
>
> "For 31 Hogwood (exciting portamento on the leaps in the first
> movement) and
> Harnoncourt. Other symphonies to consider: 48, with its horns-as-
> trumpets
> brilliance (Solomons/Sony), and 51 with its virtuosic writing for one
> very high
> and one very low horn, which go in opposite directions in the slow
> movement (and
> elsewhere) (Bruggen/Philips).
>
> "Other symphonies have prominent horn parts, if not to the extent of
> the above,
> either alone or joined with trumpets (to thrilling effect in 56 and
> 90, for
> example), but its hard to find recordings where they are afforded the
> requisite
> prominence - e.g., it's frustrating to read Landon going on about the
> screaming
> high horns in the finale of 52 and then listen to recordings where, if
> you can
> hear them at all, they sound more like slightly overweight clarinets
> (Pinnock
> comes closest in 52/iv but unfortunately omits the repeat)."
Pierre Paquin
"mandryka" <howie...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:01d8e5e6-053c-41ac...@g27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 3, 8:52 pm, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> > Six years ago I wrote:
>
> > Any changes in recommendations over the past few years? Aside from the
> > Fischer set on Brilliant, I've individual recordings of 51 (Gobermann,
> > Drahos) and 73 (Goodman.) Any other recordings in which the horns ring
> > out?
>
> vile English CBS LP)) and Solomons (not on CD, but someone recently posted
> Fey's getting around to them....
>
> Simon
Don't you think that Fey is a little bit . . . brash and brazen?
I find his records the hardest HIPs to like. The prominence of the
brass and the
"sudden disorientating changes in dynamics and tempo."
Exactly the problem with Fey. Sound like too much Harnoncourt type
manipulation!
I do like the gutsy brass and timpani though
Pierre
The Historian
> On Nov 4, 4:27 pm, Heck51 <dgallagh...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 3, 11:26 am, The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:>
>
> > > >Does anyone have any recommendations for Haydn's "Hornsignal" symphonies? >>
>
> > A fine version of #31 that I've not seen on CD was the old Turnabout
> > LP -
> > Rilling/Stuttgart Bach Collegium - also a good version of #59, "Fire"
>
> That "Fire" turns up on an old Concerto Royale set:
>
>
> > I also have Drahos, OK, not spectacular, and Harnoncourt from '92 -
> > very brassy natural horns. An horn-playing buddy of mine loves the
> > recording as a curiosity - says the horns sound like kazoos!!
>
> > I also have a version [mvt I only] of Dennis Brain with an English
> > orchestra from London, 1952. good but not great,
>
> Ditto this. I forgot I had the Naxos recording by the American Horn
> Quartet, on a disc with the Schumann Konzertstuck and concertos by
> Handel and Telemann. It didn't make much of an impression.
It still doesn't. Fischer is much better in the Hornsignal, and in the
Schumann the American Horn Quintet is no threat to the supremacy of
the CSO/Barenboim recording.
> I still prefer
>
> > Rilling. I wish it made it to CD.
>
> > the Drahos recording of Sym #51 on Naxos is very fine - with Swedish
> > Cham Orch. very excellent horn playing - the high horn player
> > repeatedly bulls-eyeing the stratospheric concert Bbs.
>
> Agreed. I prefer it to Goberman, which I culled, and Schwarz/SCO,
> which I kept for the couplings.
And I slightly prefer Fischer here.
The Historian
> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote innews:b6a7ee55-4980-4fa3...@r31g2000vbi.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 3, 3:52 pm, Simon Roberts <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> innews:edba52ea-5c5e-4f
Is the latest reissue of the Dorati Haydn symphonies an improvement
over the 1991 transfers? The 1991 boxes come with notes and are
available cheaply from Amazon resellers. I might buy a box or two
rather than get the entire 33 disc set.
mandryka
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well I have just bought Drahos's 51 for 35p new from amzon! I am
looking forward to comparing it with my only other 51 -- Weil/
Tafelmusik.
Simon Roberts
> Is the latest reissue of the Dorati Haydn symphonies an improvement
> over the 1991 transfers? The 1991 boxes come with notes and are
> available cheaply from Amazon resellers. I might buy a box or two
> rather than get the entire 33 disc set.
To the extent you're asking me, I'm afraid I don't know - I have the 1991
version.
Simon
John
> The Historian <neil.thehistor...@gmail.com> wrote innews:a97fa51e-7ae3-4ae5...@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > Is the latest reissue of the Dorati Haydn symphonies an improvement
> > over the 1991 transfers? The 1991 boxes come with notes and are
> > available cheaply from Amazon resellers. I might buy a box or two
> > rather than get the entire 33 disc set.
>
> To the extent you're asking me, I'm afraid I don't know - I have the 1991
> version.
>
> Simon
How many reissues are there? My box says 1996, and it sounds fine to
me.
david...@aol.com
> Leopold Ludwig,
> Conductor
> Bavarian Radio Symphony
> HAYDN: Symphony Nº 73 in D Major "The Hunt"
> athttp://www.haydnhouse.com/HH16.htm
>
> These are a very good performances
> Pierre
I haven't heard Leopold Ludwig in classical repertory, but I've been
knocked out by everything I've heard him conduct. The only other
performance of Lulu I like as well as the EMI recording with Leopold
Ludwig is Bruno Maderna on the RAI. Both are the unfinished version,
of course.
-david gable
Bob Harper
> On Nov 5, 9:27 am, "Pierre Paquin" <HaydnHo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Leopold Ludwig,
>> Conductor
>> Bavarian Radio Symphony
>> HAYDN: Symphony N� 73 in D Major "The Hunt"
>> athttp://www.haydnhouse.com/HH16.htm
>>
>> These are a very good performances
>> Pierre
>
>
> I haven't heard Leopold Ludwig in classical repertory, but I've been
> knocked out by everything I've heard him conduct. The only other
> performance of Lulu I like as well as the EMI recording with Leopold
> Ludwig is Bruno Maderna on the RAI. Both are the unfinished version,
> of course.
>
> -david gable
(Philharmonia O) is outstanding.
Bob Harper
The Historian
1991, in 8 separate boxes.
1996, in one box
2009, in one box sans notes.
John
Thanks. And I should have said that the discs sound fine; the box is
completely silent. At 30 quid it was a real bargain, even though the
booklet isn't exactly comprehensive.
Gerard
>
> Thanks. And I should have said that the discs sound fine; the box is
> completely silent.
That how I like it the most: silent boxes and fine sounding discs.
> At 30 quid it was a real bargain, even though the
> booklet isn't exactly comprehensive.
Quid=?
Simon Roberts
The Historian
> wrote:>
>
> > >Does anyone have any recommendations for Haydn's "Hornsignal" symphonies? >>
>
> A fine version of #31 that I've not seen on CD was the old Turnabout
> LP -
> Rilling/Stuttgart Bach Collegium - also a good version of #59, "Fire"
>
> very brassy natural horns. An horn-playing buddy of mine loves the
> recording as a curiosity - says the horns sound like kazoos!!
>
> I also have a version [mvt I only] of Dennis Brain with an English
> Rilling. I wish it made it to CD.
I picked up two more last night - a 1960s Szell/Cleveland broadcast
and the Maezendorf/Vienna Chamber Orchestra recording, the latter part
of the 'forgotten' Haydn symphony set. The mono sound on the Szell is
pretty good for a broadcast, but the Cleveland horns are having a bad
day in the first movement. I wish they'd done this in the studio. The
Maezendorf recording is wonderful - his horns have more bite, if less
polish, than Fischer, and he's not afraid to linger in the slow
movement.
ansermetniac
Did you hear the Toscanini I just posted. Superb horns
Abbedd
Gerard
>
> Did you hear the Toscanini I just posted. Superb horns
>
> Abbedd
The only Toscanini (or whatever) you just posted is:
"Where is the crap the commercially bought rice puddings have so they
can make it in January and sell it in December? Where is the crap they
put in to hold it together?"
Heck51
<<The mono sound on the Szell is
> pretty good for a broadcast, but the Cleveland horns are having a bad
> day in the first movement. I wish they'd done this in the studio.>.
that's too bad. unfortunately, "there's no hidin' in Haydn"
<< The Maezendorf recording is wonderful - his horns have more bite,
if less
> polish, than Fischer, and he's not afraid to linger in the slow
> movement>>
That one sounds interesting...
ansermetniac
<dgall...@comcast.net> wrote:
> and he's not afraid to linger in the slow
>> movement>>
Sentimental fool
Abbedd
Heck51
> Sentimental fool
Have you even heard the recording you stupid ass-wipe??
nobody cares what you think, powell. You are nothing. you can do
nothing, you've done nothing, your opinion isn't worth a sack of
crap.
You will never gain the respect of the musical community, which you
crave so desperately...it simply won't happen...you are outside,
looking in, forever.
ansermetniac
Does the conductor of your community orch know that you are mentally
ill ????
Abbedd
The Historian
> On Nov 7, 12:16 pm, ansermetniac <ansermetn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sentimental fool
>
> Have you even heard the recording
Guys, can you take it outside this thread, please? We've all been
discussing Haydn in a civil manner here. Let's keep it that way.
The Historian
I have the Naxos issue from ten years ago. I agree the horns are
pretty good.
ansermetniac
The sound I offer is superior
Abbedd
Heck51
> Does the conductor.....>>
more inane gibberish babbled by a musical nothing. a leading question
based upon faulty assumptions not in evidence. the flawed question is
not addressable.
answer the question, jackass - have you even heard the recording in
question??
M forever
I just downloaded and listened to the 31st, then deleted it. It sounds
like shit in a sardine can, even after some reverse EQ is applied.
There are some noticeable digital artifacts as well which were most
likely caused by your amateurish playing around with signal processing
software you don't understand. It's not really that hard to learn
these things properly, seriously. There are lots of good books and
there is also a lot of good information about audio engineering on the
net. You just have to bring some basic understanding of physics with
you. We know you don't have that, but once you get to the level of
understanding of, say, someone in 9th grade, you should be able to
proceed to learn how sound and sound processing actually works.
It's a little tricky sometimes, but it's not rocket science either. So
don't let yourself be frustrated too quickly! Good luck!
As for the performance, it's pretty mediocre and musically
uninteresting, the horn playing is OK but nothing special either.
Quite a bit of intonation problems and some wrong notes in the second
movement, too.
BTW, the included score contains a number of errors and is just as
outdated as Toscanini's "interpretation", or rather, lack thereof.
Recordings like these remind us why around that time, some people
started wondering whether this music should really be played that
mechanically and with lack of nuances, just because there isn't more
written in the score. A lot of what has happened in and through the
"HIP movement" in the meantime may be doubtful and sometimes just as
little convincing, or even downright ridiculous, but dire, uninformed
performances like this one remind us why it can be so valuable to
actually learn a few things about period instruments, performance, and
esthetics rather than just playing through the written notes without
any stylistic knowledge or feeling.
M forever
I just looked for these recordings and didn't know that he - the name
is Märzendorfer (alt.splelling Maerzendorfer), BTW, not "Maezendorf" -
recorded all the Haydn symphonies before Dorati. Interesting. I
couldn't find these recordings available anywhere soon. I would be
interested in at least sampling a little bit. Märzendorfer conducted
at the opera in Berlin regularly when I was younger.
The Historian
Yes, I should have looked it up rather than trust my memory.
M forever
So where did you find this recording?
The Historian
Symphonyshare.
M forever
Aha! Thanks for the tip. Looks like someone took the trouble and
transferred and uploaded a lot (all?) of these recordings there. I
just grabbed #31 which I agree is quite nice, but I don't find it
entirely convincing either. I think the horns are too "tamed" although
I think Harnoncourt OTOH, while I like the brassy sound of the horns a
lot, really overdoes it a little here, and also in the stomping
heaviness of some of the accents in the string playing, in particular
in the last movement. At least both have a cello and a double bass
solo in the last movement instead of two cello solos as it incorrectly
appears in the older editions of the score.
Bob Lombard
>
> I just looked for these recordings and didn't know that he - the name
> is M�rzendorfer (alt.splelling Maerzendorfer), BTW, not "Maezendorf" -
> recorded all the Haydn symphonies before Dorati. Interesting. I
> couldn't find these recordings available anywhere soon. I would be
> interested in at least sampling a little bit. M�rzendorfer conducted
> at the opera in Berlin regularly when I was younger.
Maybe you can - and are willing to - enlighten me on pronunciation here.
I think I understand the difference between 'maez' and 'maz', the former
calls for what I think of as a flat 'a' sound. Map rather than something
close to mop. But add the 'r', and it doesn't signify. Hillbilly
Northern New Englanders have a limited sound palate anyway.
bl
M forever
> M forever wrote:
>
> > I just looked for these recordings and didn't know that he - the name
> > recorded all the Haydn symphonies before Dorati. Interesting. I
> > couldn't find these recordings available anywhere soon. I would be
> > at the opera in Berlin regularly when I was younger.
>
> Maybe you can - and are willing to - enlighten me on pronunciation here.
> I think I understand the difference between 'maez' and 'maz', the former
> calls for what I think of as a flat 'a' sound. Map rather than something
> close to mop. But add the 'r', and it doesn't signify. Hillbilly
> Northern New Englanders have a limited sound palate anyway.
>
> bl
The Ä sound, as in "mäz" or "maez" indeed sounds close to the a in
English "map", maybe a little less nasal though, or like "let". A
plain A sounds more like in "father".
The R depends a lot on the dialect or accent. In some south German and
Austrian dialects, it is rolled at the tip of the tongue at the
beginning and in the middle of words and a single flick of the tongue
at the end of words, while in middle and northern German dialects, it
is not rolled but a slightly rasping, "gargling" sound in the throat
rather like in French, although in the middle and at the end of words,
it almost disappears and is only heard as a very faint A sound,
similar to "uh". So "dorf" would sound like "dorrf" in the south and
more like "doh-af" in other parts.
So "Märzendorfer" would sound something like "Mettsen-doh-afa" or
similar, but with rolled Rs. Not easy to explain English.
The Historian
All of them. I've now listened to 22, 30, 31, 39, and 73. They make a
good contrast to the Fischer recordings, and in one case (30) I prefer
Märzendorfer. Fischer seems to drive the opening of 30 very hard, and
Märzendorfer is a little more relaxed-sounding.
number_six
> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:14:50 -0800 (PST), Heck51
>
> > and he's not afraid to linger in the slow
> >> movement>>
>
> Sentimental fool
>
> Abbedd
Been listening to the Four Tops?
ansermetniac
Can't help myself
Abbedd
Bob Lombard
> On Nov 7, 5:50 pm, Bob Lombard <thorsteinnos...@vermontel.net> wrote:
>> Maybe you can - and are willing to - enlighten me on pronunciation here.
>> I think I understand the difference between 'maez' and 'maz', the former
>> calls for what I think of as a flat 'a' sound. Map rather than something
>> close to mop. But add the 'r', and it doesn't signify. Hillbilly
>> Northern New Englanders have a limited sound palate anyway.
>>
>> bl
>
> The � sound, as in "m�z" or "maez" indeed sounds close to the a in
> English "map", maybe a little less nasal though, or like "let". A
> plain A sounds more like in "father".
>
> The R depends a lot on the dialect or accent. In some south German and
> Austrian dialects, it is rolled at the tip of the tongue at the
> beginning and in the middle of words and a single flick of the tongue
> at the end of words, while in middle and northern German dialects, it
> is not rolled but a slightly rasping, "gargling" sound in the throat
> rather like in French, although in the middle and at the end of words,
> it almost disappears and is only heard as a very faint A sound,
> similar to "uh". So "dorf" would sound like "dorrf" in the south and
> more like "doh-af" in other parts.
>
> So "M�rzendorfer" would sound something like "Mettsen-doh-afa" or
> similar, but with rolled Rs. Not easy to explain English.
Thanks much, Michael. The difference between the vowel sounds in 'map'
and 'let' involves both the tongue and the soft palate. If one makes the
change, but only with the soft palate, there is a middle ground. Your
representation of the North German 'r' ending looks like how I would
represent the Boston method. BTW it is very difficult for one from my
background to roll an 'r'; the tongue just doesn't work that way easily.
There is a fast-tonguing method for 'stopping' notes on a woodwind that
involves a somewhat similar action (it's really more like how a snake
'tastes' the air, but...). I've wondered if that is easier to develop if
one's native language includes rolling/trilling 'r's.
bl
M forever
> M forever wrote:
> > On Nov 7, 5:50 pm, Bob Lombard <thorsteinnos...@vermontel.net> wrote:
> >> Maybe you can - and are willing to - enlighten me on pronunciation here.
> >> I think I understand the difference between 'maez' and 'maz', the former
> >> calls for what I think of as a flat 'a' sound. Map rather than something
> >> close to mop. But add the 'r', and it doesn't signify. Hillbilly
> >> Northern New Englanders have a limited sound palate anyway.
>
> >> bl
>
> > English "map", maybe a little less nasal though, or like "let". A
> > plain A sounds more like in "father".
>
> > The R depends a lot on the dialect or accent. In some south German and
> > Austrian dialects, it is rolled at the tip of the tongue at the
> > beginning and in the middle of words and a single flick of the tongue
> > at the end of words, while in middle and northern German dialects, it
> > is not rolled but a slightly rasping, "gargling" sound in the throat
> > rather like in French, although in the middle and at the end of words,
> > it almost disappears and is only heard as a very faint A sound,
> > similar to "uh". So "dorf" would sound like "dorrf" in the south and
> > more like "doh-af" in other parts.
>
> > similar, but with rolled Rs. Not easy to explain English.
>
> Thanks much, Michael. The difference between the vowel sounds in 'map'
> and 'let' involves both the tongue and the soft palate. If one makes the
> change, but only with the soft palate, there is a middle ground.
You also somehow have to articulate the "Ä" further to the front in
the mouth, and allow the jaw to drop slightly.
> Your
> representation of the North German 'r' ending looks like how I would
> represent the Boston method.
I was actually thinking of that since I live in Boston and the way
some native speakers pronounce words like "Harvard" ("Haa-vaad) and
"Dorchester" ("Doa-chesta") definitely reminds me of that. There are
some connections there with some British English accents which
obviously derive from Anglo-Saxon which in turn comes from northern
Germany. Even though the Anglo-Saxons left that area 1500 years ago,
the similarities in the way some sounds are formed and how some words
are intoned, particularly when you hear one of the local rural
dialects, as far as these haven't vanished in the meantime, is still
pretty striking. Not only the elusive "R" but also the strong nasal
component and the way many vowels are bent and stretched are still
somewhat obvious parallels.
It is a well known fact anyway that the general tone of a language or
dialect is extremely resistant, even if the vocabulary changes over
time. If you hear Finnish and Hungarian speakers, the languages
actually sound very similar, even though the actual words are
completely different (and therefore the differences are more obvious
to those who understand one or both of the languages but if you listen
to them superficially "from a distance", they sound quite similar).
Same about Korean and Japanese, BTW, which have next to nothing in
common as far as vocabulary is concerned, but "from a distance" one
can detect a common tone and melody.
It is also interesting to see how intonation and melody shift across
the territory a language occupies, and often get closer to neighboring
languages as they approach the border regions.
It has often struck me that while Austrian German and Italian are very
obvious two different languages with a distinctly different repertoire
of sounds, they actually have a lot in common in the way some vowels
are drawn out and the speech melody is formed.
> BTW it is very difficult for one from my
> background to roll an 'r'; the tongue just doesn't work that way easily.
> There is a fast-tonguing method for 'stopping' notes on a woodwind that
> involves a somewhat similar action (it's really more like how a snake
> 'tastes' the air, but...). I've wondered if that is easier to develop if
> one's native language includes rolling/trilling 'r's.
It may not be quite as difficult for you as you think. A big mistake
is to start out from the native sound and try to modify it. The
English "R" as it occurs particularly in American English and the
rolled "R" are actually two completely different sounds which have
next to nothing in common. A lot of rolled "Rs" are also simply rolled
once whereas some try to "trill" it all the time, which can be very
difficult. The single rolled "R" is actually much closer as a sound to
"D" and "L" and in many languages, it is articulated in the same
place, as a very short "D" or "L" sound. It is interesting to note
that many Japanese speakers pronounce their "R" at the beginning of
words ("rahmen") much more like an "L".
Highly interesting subject, I think.
Steve Emerson
<ca2272e4-71e7-45f7...@p33g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
The Historian <neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote:
> All of them [Maerzendorfer's Haydn recordings]. I've now listened to 22, 30, 31, 39, and 73. They make a
> good contrast to the Fischer recordings, and in one case (30) I prefer
> M�rzendorfer. Fischer seems to drive the opening of 30 very hard, and
> M�rzendorfer is a little more relaxed-sounding.
In case of interest, there was a lengthy thread about six months ago,
here, in which Simon Roberts and I (mostly Simon) uploaded 8 or 10 of
the late symphonies, and a number of people discussed them. It might
point you to some others that you'd also like. Maerzendorfer's #90,
which neither of us uploaded, is certainly of interest too; I think you
were asking about the work not long ago.
On Hornsignal, I'm not sure I've ever heard it, but there's a Leslie
Jones recording, and Jones is consistently very good about keeping the
brass parts from getting lost. It might be among the Jones Haydn that
Haydn House has been issuing from LPs; in any case copies of the record
are ubiquitous and cheap (just guessing that as an historian, you....).
SE.
Gill Smith
--
http://www.gillsmith999.plus.com/
Gerard
> did he ever compose in a minor key?
Yes.
For instance symphonies #45, 44, 39, 34, 26, 78, 52, 49, 95, 83, 80.
Johannes Roehl
> did he ever compose in a minor key?
Yes. I can't be more specific, but quite a bit of the "Zigeunerbaron"
Ouverture is in the minor ("gypsy style"). Also a very beautiful phrase
in the Fledermaus (both ouverture and operetta), in the oboe IIRC, but
just listen to the ouverture, it's hard to miss. As for whole pieces,
several "exotic" dances or marches (Egyptian whatever) are in the minor.
Johannes
Gill Smith
news:7los2qF...@mid.individual.net...
thought it had to be 'exotic' stuff!
it was leafing through my book of Strauss waltzes I noticed they were all in
major keys
--
http://www.gillsmith999.plus.com/