What Classical Music Are You listening to Now? III

[smittims]

I don't know if anyone else knows of the Hungarian composer Rudolf Maros, active post-1945. I've long loved his Symphony for Strings from 1956, which I have on a 1963 Qualiton LP I bought second-hand in the 1970s. It's similar to Arthur Bliss' Music for Strings written over 20 years earlier, and I even wondered if Maros attended the Salzburg premiere of the Bliss, or maybe heard Boult's 78s made soon after .

[Stanfordian]

Verdi
'Un ballo in Maschera' opera in three acts
Riccardo - Carlo Bergonzi (tenor); Renato - Robert Merrill (baritone); Amelia - Leontyne Price (soprano); Ulrica - Shirley Verrett (mezzo); Oscar - Reri Grist (soprano); Silvano - Mario Basioli (baritone); Samuel - Ezio Flagello (bass); Tom - Ferruccio Mazzoli (bass)
RCA Italiana Chorus & Opera Orchestra / Erich Leinsdorf
Recorded 1966, RCA Italiana Studios, Rome
Orig release on RCA. Reissued & remastered CD set on Sony Music
A terrific performance!

[Stanfordian]

All of her discs are worth hearing. Is this a new issue?

Hello richardfinegold,

No, it's not a new issue. It's a straight replacement sent by the label for this 2004 CD that was bronzed.

[cria]

i listened recently to the Neruda Songs written for her by her husband, Peter Lieberson ... they almost rival the Strauss 4 Last songs for me.

They're absolutely wonderful "My love - if I should die before you ..." makes me cry.

[Ian Thumwood]

Was Shakespeare a Racist? There are many derogatory comments about the hue of Othello skin expressed by many of his characters. Was he anti semitic (The Merchant of Venice)? One wonders how many Blacks and Jews he actually encountered in Elizabethan England. He was probably more fascinated by the concept of these characters being outsiders, excluded at birth from ever fully trying to make their ways in the societies in which they lived, and the consequences they suffered from the malevolence of those societies .
I wouldn’t necessarily accept the problematic portrayal of Mozart in Amadeus as fact. It’s a great play but I am not sure the the playwright was representing it as a factual history. Many of the character traits were based on extrapolations from Mozart’s private letters. Others seem to be based by the way he cavorted with J.C. Bach, such as playing hide and seek around the Piano (one must remember that Mozart was an 8 year old boy at the time). In all probability his private statements did not correspond to the way that he comported himself daily, although certainly there were times that his real feelings broke through.
It is worth remembering that in Vienna Mozart was one of a very few musicians who was able to support himself by marketing direct to the public. His Piano Concertos were largely written for concerts that he gave to earn money to free himself from dependence from the Patronage system. He had many students from the Aristocracy. He was quite successful and made reams of money from all of this. He died destitute because the Continental upheavals caused his customer base to dry up, a circumstance beyond his control. If he was the babbling ninny depicted in Amadeus he would not have been able to accomplish this.
Mozart certainly had a scornful opinion of the competition. So did Beethoven, Wagner, Chopin…The true greats knew their worth and didn’t hide behind a veneer of false modesty. They may have been insufferable companions at the dinner table, but we exalt them for their artistry, not their table manners.
I have listened to Bologne music for sometime. It is frequently played on our local Classical station. It is quite enjoyable but it isn’t Mozart. Mozart could modulate, sending his music into unexpected directions and then bringing us back home. He could also “stop time” in his slow movements, a trait he shared with JS Bach, Vivaldi, and Beethoven. Other composers attempt this as well but thy just aren’t as successful at creating the feelings of repose and release that they did (think of the slow movements of Mozart’s PC 20, or the Beethoven Third PC, Bach’s Italian Concerto, or even the slow movements of The Four Seasons).
If Mozart did disrespect Bolougne for his skin color, it was because he disrespected all all competition and would find a physical trait to latch onto. If J.B. was Caucassian Mozart might have dinged him because his ears were to big

Richard

Apologies for the delay in responding. I think this is a fascinating post.

I do not know much about Mozart as he is not really a composer whose work appealed to me and , when I took piano lessons 30-odd years ago, my teacher imposed his prejudices on me so I am coming from his dismissal of Mozart as being a composer "who only had two ideas." (As a side note, my teacher studied with a pupil of Franz Lizst called Somer (?) but ended up being the most celebrated jazz musician around Southampton playing with the likes of Joe Harriott as well as having had career with some of the British big bands of the 30s/ 40s. In his opinion, Bach was THE towering genius but his taste generally sat between Chopin and Debussy and was maybe more biased towards early 20th centurty styles when he wrote work for the old incarnation of Radio 3. Of course, when writing jazz , he was more interested in Monk / Bud / Errol Garner / Bill Evans. There was one piece he wrote for NYJO which was a hommage to Bud Powell.) To pick up Smittims' comment, musicians will always have their bias and, in the case of my teacher, he always steered me away from the more "Classical" stuff which held little interest for him. Accordingly, the likes of Mozart, Clementi , Haydn and (to a lesser extent) Beethoven have not really been on my radar.

With regard to Mozart's personality, I have not read too much but agree that the Schafer play is largely fiction although he probably saved Salieri from disappearing from memory. What I am aware of is suggestive that he was pretty precocious but, as suggested, many composers have an elevated opinion of themselves. The fact that Haydn seems more modest and was able to demonstrate a sense if humour with his music does make me more inclined to explore him than Mozart who does not come across in a good light by our 21st century standards. There are his barbed assessments of his contemporary works but this is couple with his notorious scatalogical humour. Haydn always seems one of the good blokes whereas I think Mozart's personality would have been something that people would have had to suffer.

If I am honest, it is the social context of these musicians which if often more fascinating than their music. I would concur that Mozart and Beethoven were the pillars of this era yet I think it is intriguing to consider them in a social and maybe politcal context. I did not appreciate that Mozart was wanting to look beyond his patrons for composition and I am guessing that , writing for himself, he would have been less inclined to be "commercial" and knock something out that was "dumbed" down for the benefit of limited musical tastes or requirements of his bosses. I seem to recall a similar remark being made about Haydn although the positive reaction to his work in London indicates to me that he had a wide and popular following and that his audiences in this country were discerning. Haydn was clearly loved in the UK. What gets lost in the appreciation of this music is the fact that , for many composers of this era, writing and publication was a business and about making money. In light of this, I would imagine that there would be alot of egos rubbing up against each other and competition between the limited number of posts available. The negative aspects of Mozart's barbs should be taken in the light of this yet it struck me that the criticisms by Mozart that I am aware of have been wider - Bolougne criticised for his colour, Clementi criticised for being a typical Italian composer, etc, etc. They always seem more personal.

Although I had heard of Clementi before, I only started to read about him over the holiday period when I was looking for something to sight read. It is really revealing to learn about his life and to contrast it with Mozart. The fact that his life was so fascinating does add to his appeal. I had no idea that he grew up in the countryside in Dorset and that he Thomas Beckford as a patron. The Beckfords were amongst the most significant plantation owners in the West Indies and my mind is inclined to think along the lines of how aware was Clementi of the source of his employer's income. Doing further reading, I have discovered that there is also a slave trade link with Covent Garden where the profit from the slave trade was frequently used to finance operatic productions in the 18th century. One of the beneficiaries from this was Handel. Beckford was instrumental in setting Clementi up as a music publisher in London and the Italian was eventually able to become wealthy on his income from composition and publishing. I believe that I can correct in believing that he was far more successful in this respect than Mozart. When you hear music from the Baroque and Classical music, you encounter references to the patrons of the composers in liner notes / concert programmes yet the commercial drivers of composition in this period seems over-looked in my opinion. Clementi does seem quite a fascinating character and even more so when you realised that he was effectively naturalised in this country. I had never appreciated that and just assumed he had toured Europe but had Italy as a home base. Was it Beethoven who described Britain as a land without music ? It would be intriguing to have lived in those times and experienced how the music industry of that time worked so that you could judge whether this was a fair statement or maybe, as i sometimes suspect, this had something to do with a Germanic / Austrian perception that the music they were producing was more "important" , "significant" or just plain "better." Whilst historians tend to concentrate on a "Golden Age of English music" which followed in the wake of Purcell, and on to Handel it would be fascinating to see how the "music industry" of the later 18th / early 19th century functioned. Where did the money come to finance it, who went to the concerts, who were the composer's writing for , to what extent did foreigners contribute and were British composers unfairly neglected both in their own time and in the years that followed ?

Looking at these composer's lives on line, I get the impression that the fascination with the music has led listeners to forget the contexts within which these composers worked. You tend to forget the commercial pressures they were working under and the competition amongst them for a finite number of jobs which would probably have diminished after the Napoleonic Wars. With the political uphevals of the early - mid 1800s, the source of revenue from the royal courts around Europe must have diminished. I am summising that this probably accounted alot for the utalitarian function of the music changing and the demand for the "Romantic" style of composition which was more intimate and reflected the absence of more stately patrons. Other than Haydn and the Esterhadze court, the issue of patrons and the commissioning of music in that era is something that has escaped me but I do not doubt it was a dog-eat-god world. I think that Haydn and Clementi were still able to flourish up to a point after these times.

This does lead me on to another thought and that is how aware were people in the Classical Period of what was being composed? What this limited to the rich and emerging middle classes and did the likes of Mozart / Haydn / Beethoven have a following in the provinces? I do not live too far aware from Jane Austen's house in Chawton and her music collection is often discussed. She was an amateur pianist yet her own collection of manuscript is largely devoid of works by those composers we consider to be significant 220 years ago. The most famous name in her collection is Playel but he is hardly a familiar name in Classical music these days. Was she aware of Haydn and Mozart ?

I must admit that I am passionate about history and the 18th and 19th centuries are periods in time which are particularly fascinating as there was so much political, social and economic changes. It would be good to reach about classical music in the context of other political events so that you can appreciate how certain composers / publishers would have benefited from their audiences having greater disposible income , how their patrons changed over time and even their relevance to the public, a large proportion of whom would probably be more familiar with courser styles of music such as folk songs and ballads. How come Haydn was able to have such a wide following in the UK and how much of this was attributable to Europe's hostility towards Napoleon ? Historians are keen to discuss how agriculture and industry evolved during the 18th century. I have never read an account that has considered the musical profession of that time.

[pastoralguy]

I have listened to Lars Vogt leading and soloing with the Northern Sinfonia in both the Brahms Piano Concertos and really enjoying them for their combination of athleticism and poetry. The cellist in 2/IIIhas a lean tone with perfect intonation. I really like the tempos in I of PC1, swift without being rushed and a perfect antidote for most new recordings that tend to really bog it down. I’ve ordered the CDs for both
Thanks to PG for bringing them to my attention

[pastoralguy]

Igor Stravinsky. Violin Concerto.

James Ehnes, violin.

BBC Philharmonic conducted by Sir Andrew Davis. Superb music making and a marvellous recording. So much orchestral detail I’ve not noticed before.

[Pulcinella]

Igor Stravinsky. Violin Concerto.

James Ehnes, violin.

BBC Philharmonic conducted by Sir Andrew Davis. Superb music making and a marvellous recording. So much orchestral detail I’ve not noticed before.

This new (5 January 2024) release had passed me by.
I look forward to investigating it.

[pastoralguy]

This new (5 January 2024) release had passed me by.
I look forward to investigating it.

The whole disc terrific.

[Stanfordian]

'The Fire that Breaks from Thee'
Holst
Walt Whitman Overture, Op. 7
Stanford
Violin Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 162
Milford
Violin Concerto in G minor, Op. 47
Rupert Marshall-Luck (violin)
BBC Concert Orchestra / Owain Arwel Hughes
Recorded 2014 Watford Colosseum, Hertfordshire
EM Records, CD

[richardfinegold]

Richard

Apologies for the delay in responding. I think this is a fascinating post.

I do not know much about Mozart as he is not really a composer whose work appealed to me and , when I took piano lessons 30-odd years ago, my teacher imposed his prejudices on me so I am coming from his dismissal of Mozart as being a composer "who only had two ideas." (As a side note, my teacher studied with a pupil of Franz Lizst called Somer (?) but ended up being the most celebrated jazz musician around Southampton playing with the likes of Joe Harriott as well as having had career with some of the British big bands of the 30s/ 40s. In his opinion, Bach was THE towering genius but his taste generally sat between Chopin and Debussy and was maybe more biased towards early 20th centurty styles when he wrote work for the old incarnation of Radio 3. Of course, when writing jazz , he was more interested in Monk / Bud / Errol Garner / Bill Evans. There was one piece he wrote for NYJO which was a hommage to Bud Powell.) To pick up Smittims' comment, musicians will always have their bias and, in the case of my teacher, he always steered me away from the more "Classical" stuff which held little interest for him. Accordingly, the likes of Mozart, Clementi , Haydn and (to a lesser extent) Beethoven have not really been on my radar.

With regard to Mozart's personality, I have not read too much but agree that the Schafer play is largely fiction although he probably saved Salieri from disappearing from memory. What I am aware of is suggestive that he was pretty precocious but, as suggested, many composers have an elevated opinion of themselves. The fact that Haydn seems more modest and was able to demonstrate a sense if humour with his music does make me more inclined to explore him than Mozart who does not come across in a good light by our 21st century standards. There are his barbed assessments of his contemporary works but this is couple with his notorious scatalogical humour. Haydn always seems one of the good blokes whereas I think Mozart's personality would have been something that people would have had to suffer.

If I am honest, it is the social context of these musicians which if often more fascinating than their music. I would concur that Mozart and Beethoven were the pillars of this era yet I think it is intriguing to consider them in a social and maybe politcal context. I did not appreciate that Mozart was wanting to look beyond his patrons for composition and I am guessing that , writing for himself, he would have been less inclined to be "commercial" and knock something out that was "dumbed" down for the benefit of limited musical tastes or requirements of his bosses. I seem to recall a similar remark being made about Haydn although the positive reaction to his work in London indicates to me that he had a wide and popular following and that his audiences in this country were discerning. Haydn was clearly loved in the UK. What gets lost in the appreciation of this music is the fact that , for many composers of this era, writing and publication was a business and about making money. In light of this, I would imagine that there would be alot of egos rubbing up against each other and competition between the limited number of posts available. The negative aspects of Mozart's barbs should be taken in the light of this yet it struck me that the criticisms by Mozart that I am aware of have been wider - Bolougne criticised for his colour, Clementi criticised for being a typical Italian composer, etc, etc. They always seem more personal.

Although I had heard of Clementi before, I only started to read about him over the holiday period when I was looking for something to sight read. It is really revealing to learn about his life and to contrast it with Mozart. The fact that his life was so fascinating does add to his appeal. I had no idea that he grew up in the countryside in Dorset and that he Thomas Beckford as a patron. The Beckfords were amongst the most significant plantation owners in the West Indies and my mind is inclined to think along the lines of how aware was Clementi of the source of his employer's income. Doing further reading, I have discovered that there is also a slave trade link with Covent Garden where the profit from the slave trade was frequently used to finance operatic productions in the 18th century. One of the beneficiaries from this was Handel. Beckford was instrumental in setting Clementi up as a music publisher in London and the Italian was eventually able to become wealthy on his income from composition and publishing. I believe that I can correct in believing that he was far more successful in this respect than Mozart. When you hear music from the Baroque and Classical music, you encounter references to the patrons of the composers in liner notes / concert programmes yet the commercial drivers of composition in this period seems over-looked in my opinion. Clementi does seem quite a fascinating character and even more so when you realised that he was effectively naturalised in this country. I had never appreciated that and just assumed he had toured Europe but had Italy as a home base. Was it Beethoven who described Britain as a land without music ? It would be intriguing to have lived in those times and experienced how the music industry of that time worked so that you could judge whether this was a fair statement or maybe, as i sometimes suspect, this had something to do with a Germanic / Austrian perception that the music they were producing was more "important" , "significant" or just plain "better." Whilst historians tend to concentrate on a "Golden Age of English music" which followed in the wake of Purcell, and on to Handel it would be fascinating to see how the "music industry" of the later 18th / early 19th century functioned. Where did the money come to finance it, who went to the concerts, who were the composer's writing for , to what extent did foreigners contribute and were British composers unfairly neglected both in their own time and in the years that followed ?

Looking at these composer's lives on line, I get the impression that the fascination with the music has led listeners to forget the contexts within which these composers worked. You tend to forget the commercial pressures they were working under and the competition amongst them for a finite number of jobs which would probably have diminished after the Napoleonic Wars. With the political uphevals of the early - mid 1800s, the source of revenue from the royal courts around Europe must have diminished. I am summising that this probably accounted alot for the utalitarian function of the music changing and the demand for the "Romantic" style of composition which was more intimate and reflected the absence of more stately patrons. Other than Haydn and the Esterhadze court, the issue of patrons and the commissioning of music in that era is something that has escaped me but I do not doubt it was a dog-eat-god world. I think that Haydn and Clementi were still able to flourish up to a point after these times.

This does lead me on to another thought and that is how aware were people in the Classical Period of what was being composed? What this limited to the rich and emerging middle classes and did the likes of Mozart / Haydn / Beethoven have a following in the provinces? I do not live too far aware from Jane Austen's house in Chawton and her music collection is often discussed. She was an amateur pianist yet her own collection of manuscript is largely devoid of works by those composers we consider to be significant 220 years ago. The most famous name in her collection is Playel but he is hardly a familiar name in Classical music these days. Was she aware of Haydn and Mozart ?

I must admit that I am passionate about history and the 18th and 19th centuries are periods in time which are particularly fascinating as there was so much political, social and economic changes. It would be good to reach about classical music in the context of other political events so that you can appreciate how certain composers / publishers would have benefited from their audiences having greater disposible income , how their patrons changed over time and even their relevance to the public, a large proportion of whom would probably be more familiar with courser styles of music such as folk songs and ballads. How come Haydn was able to have such a wide following in the UK and how much of this was attributable to Europe's hostility towards Napoleon ? Historians are keen to discuss how agriculture and industry evolved during the 18th century. I have never read an account that has considered the musical profession of that time.

A thoughtful post on your part. I will try to reply without being redundant and reiterating points made previously.
My main comment would be that we simply cannot judge the politics and social mores of previous generations by modern criteria. A great deal of the wealth that fueled the rise of intellectual capital and appreciation of the Arts that led to the rise of England in the Georgian through Edwardian era were based upon colonialism. You mention the exploitation of the New World colonies, but let’s not forget the Indian sub continent, the Malay Archipelago, the Chinese of Hong Kong, Egyptian cotton…. Colonialism wasn’t the only reason for the rise of Great Britain, but certainly the luster of the Empire would have been much less without it, just as certainly as the USA would not have achieved its status without the exploitation of people of color.
And what of the attitude of contemporary Britains?. You mention Jane Austen, certainly one of the most insightful and astute artists of all time. In Mansfield Park the family scion spends most of the book out of sight managing his plantation in Antigua (I think). Jane has many comments of sympathy for his labors but not a jot about the slaves, who statistically would have had a 50% chance of expiring in 5 years? Do we cancel JA for her lack of concern? Do we stop admiring earlier societies that built enduring monuments with the sweat of the enslaved?
Mozart, Clementi , Haydn, and numerous others were revolutionary spirits in that they were trying to reduce their dependency on aristocratic patronage. The rise of the middle classes, or what Marx and Engels sneeringly dismissed as the petit bourgeois, created a demand for music. Regarding England, I don’t think that Beethoven described it as the Land Without Music (Wagner?). It may surprise you to know that both Haydn and Beethoven probably made more money off of arrangements they made of English and Scottish folk songs than they ever did from the works for which they are esteemed by history. Beethoven in particular needed this income during the relatively fallow decade that preceded his late period. It was said that Beethoven loved the little ditties he churned out. Clementi almost certainly was aiming at the domestic music market. Dvorak and Sibelius probably made more money for their home piano music
,which is not only ignored by History but wasn’t particularly well regarded by its creators. The Great Composers couldn’t spend all their days banging out masterpieces for our appreciation centuries later. They had to eat, they had families that depended upon them (Bach had 20 kids). Beethoven and Brahms were two individuals who deliberately spurned domestic bliss because they knew it would interfere with their ability to create, but even these self styled olympians churned out plenty of hausmusik to pay for their schnitzel and beer (both had extended families to support). Really, the wonder for me is how did these figures rise above the dross of daily life to produce music revered centuries later? Most of it wouldn’t have been possible without the elevation and the demand for music by the middle classes.
The musical sophistication of eighteenth century Austria and Germany was very high. To think that there were families with enough facility to play Mozart or Haydn quartets in their music rooms, or Beethoven Sonatas on their home pianos, is to me inconceivable. The sophistication of the British Public of the time was several ticks lower (and the USA, several notches lower still). Mozart wasn’t “dumbing down” very much, nor Haydn, whose musical puns that fall flat on contemporary ears but would have been widely appreciated in Vienna.
It sounds like your tastes were imprinted by your teacher, and that you have had difficulty moving off that early conditioning. That is difficult as we can’t retire our brains and the adolescent brain soaks up attitudes and rarely divests them in later life. I was more into exploration as I didn’t have a teacher scowling at me. I am taking piano lessons as an adult beginner. I like my teacher but I can see where if I didn’t already have an appreciation my tastes would have been permanently skewed by his attitudes


So

[smittims]

I love that Walt Whitman overture, Stanfordian. One can sense the love of Whitman's poetry which fired Holst's inspiration. An interesting foil, perhaps, to Charles Ives' Robert Browning overture , commemortaing a poet who, unlike Whitman, hasn't inspired many composers.

Another fine early work of Holst is his tone poem Indra, prompted by his Sanskrit studies. It was played at the Proms some years ago, and the presenter's question to his guest (who was known to have Indian ancestry) ' well, did that sound much like Indian music ?' must rate as one of the most crass remarks I've ever heard in Radio 3!

[Pianorak]

https://youtu.be/mUxUBf90PRU

Louis Lortie playing Chopin Etudes Op. 25 -- Mesmerising performance.

[smittims]

Parsifal, the famous 1962 Bayreuth recording. Every time I hear this I marvel at how good it is. It was a great consolation to me fifty years ago at a crisis, and helped me see that life was worth living.

[Stanfordian]

Cyrille Dubois – 'So Romantique!'
French Opera Aria collection: Auber, Boieldieu, Clapisson, Delibes, Donizetti,
Thomas, Dubois, Godard, Gounod, Halevy, Luce-Varlet, Saint-Saëns & Silver
Cyrille Dubois (tenor)
Orchestre National de Lille / Pierre Dumoussaud
Recorded 2021 Auditorium du Nouveau Siècle, Lille
Alpha Classics, CD

Pavel Kolesnikov – Reynaldo Hahn 'Poèmes & Valses'
Selection of 53 Poèmes – 'Le rossignol éperdu' for solo piano
Selection of 10 Premières valses – 'Invitation à la valse' for solo piano
Pavel Kolesnikov (piano)
Recorded 2021, St Silas the Martyr, Kentish Town, London
Hyperion, CD
Superb works and performances!