Don’t you just love getting hit with a great piece you didn’t expect to hear, just randomly found you at the right moment! This piece hits home to me like this. Keep savoring and keep classical close to your hearts...Cheers.
@@mikur919 Good question, and the answer depends on how you define greatest, along with the balance between objectivity and subjectivity in one’s selections. I would struggle with only 10, and taking Haydn alone, of his 107 (sic) symphonies, I count 65 as absolutely essential listening, 41 as essential listening, and just 1 as required listening (in order to say you know *all* 107); of the 65 ‘absolutely essential listening’ symphonies, I could nominate almost any of them depending on the exact criteria. As a comparison, regarding Mozart, I would nominate from just Symphonies 38 39 40 and 41 as they are so far ahead of all the rest as to destroy the competition (Haydn’s are too varied to cause this to happen); and with Beethoven I would choose from just five: Symphonies 3 5 6 7 9 (a very unoriginal choice). If asks to nominate just one Haydn symphony for list of the ‘Ten Greatest Symphonies Ever Written’ I may nominate the f# minor Symphony 45 (‘Farewell’) of 1772; absolutely nothing to do with the pantomime of the exiting musicians, but because it is the greatest symphony of through-composition and cyclic integration prior to Beethoven’s 5th of 1808 and is composed on an inspirational high from first note until last. Composers from other periods on application, but as a completely left-field choice: CPE Bach’s Symphony in e minor Wq 177 (original strings only) or Wq 178 (with CPE’s added wind parts).
@@elaineblackhurst1509Can you tell me what through composition and cyclic integration mean Dr. Blackhurst? I don’t know those terms. BTW Thank you for all of your thoughtful commentary on Haydn. It’s helped me a lot.
@@illinoisgrappler4193 *James Webster* has written a c.400 page book entitled: *Haydn’s ‘Farewell’ Symphony and the idea of Classical Style* *Through-composition and Cyclic Integration in his Instrumental Music* Cambridge University Press (1991) I clearly cannot summarise such a lengthy, detailed, and comprehensive study in a short RUclips reply, but in short, Webster demonstrates that in this work (and others), Haydn through-composed the works in the sense that the individual movements are linked together in a cycle, and that the cyclic integration is shown for example in the progressive form of individual movements, structural and gestural links between the movements, and extra-musical associations. (Mostly taken from the back cover summary on the book itself). Webster suggests that the ‘Farewell’ symphony is arguably Haydn’s ‘…most extraordinary composition’, and in this highly-respected book that is essential reading for anyone interested in the composer, he goes into an astonishing level of detail and analysis to explain why. If you have an understanding of some of the key features of Beethoven’s Symphony 5 of 1808 which is similarly integrated and unified, then you will begin to understand in part some of Webster’s widely accepted analysis of Haydn’s Symphony 45 of 1772. If you search some performances of the ‘Farewell’ symphony on RUclips, you will find some more detailed thoughts from myself on this subject; the Haydn 2032 series by Giovanni Antonini in particular where I have appended two lengthy reviews on both the symphony itself, and the performance. These comments are particularly detailed, both of which I think you will find of interest in answer to your original question. Hope that’s a helpful response to a very good question, and thank you for your kind comment about some of my other Haydn contributions which I am pleased you find useful.
that opening, my goodness. what a genius! nobody was producing music anywhere close to this brilliant during this time. and I mean nobody. yeah, Haydn had peers, but they simply weren't on this level!
c p e bach composed his hamburg symphonies in 1977, twelve years before haydn composed this one. "he is the father, we are the children" (mozart) haydn also great, of course! best wishes
ricardo moyano Your comment is undermined by factual indiscipline. The six string symphonies (Wq 182), composed whilst CPE was in Hamburg were composed in 1773. Also written in the same city, the four orchestra symphonies with twelve obbligato instruments (Wq 183), were written in 1775. Haydn wrote ‘La passione’ in 1768; it therefore predates both sets of symphonies by CPE by some years. The purported quote from Mozart is completely irrelevant to all these works, and both composers. The CPE works are written in his customary empfindsamer Stil, but with no restrictions as to difficulty, fantasy, and with no concessions to popular taste; the Haydn is a dark, intense, and profound sturm und drang work possibly intended for performance on Good Friday. One of the greatest, most influential books ever written about music in this period: The Classical Style (1971) by Charles Rosen, states simply that Haydn at this time was writing music ‘...on a level that no other composer of Haydn’s time could equal or even approach.’ This view has never been challenged seriously. You’re absolutely right: Haydn is great of course.
Peter Balastèr You are correct; but what is your point ? Do you mean the g minor Symphony Opus 6 No 6 (published 1770) which is JC Bach’s only symphony in anything resembling a more serious style ?
That awesome key change to get back to the main subject in the finale. That's very advanced for the time. Great little symphony. Haydn at his best without a doubt..
It is a great symphony - true; but it has to be said that Haydn had absolutely nothing to do with the conception of the symphony (a point at which a father’s presence is essential), nor was he present at the birth, as when he wrote his first symphony in 1757 (Symphony 1 Hob. I:1), the symphony was already a gangly teenager of at least 17 years of age. The Mannheim composer Johann Stamitz died in 1757 having written about sixty modern early-Classical symphonies, and alongside him need to be added Richter, Fils and Holzbauer, along with Wagensiel and Monn in Vienna, and Sammartini and Brioschi in Milan (and others). All these composers have a far greater claim to be ‘father’ of the form, but in fact the whole idea is a nonsense as the symphony originated in the hands of different composers in different parts of Europe over a number of years, the only common feature being that the symphony was a development of the Italian sinfonia avanti l’opera, but it became an independent concert piece rather than an opera overture.
"La Passione o il quacchero" (1768) Se il primo titolo è quello ufficiale, il secondo appare nondimeno su alcune copie dell'epoca e in una di esse si precisa, in lingua italiana, che questa sinfonia "serve da compagna" al "Filosofo" dello stesso autore n.22. L'ipotesi che l'opera si ispiri alla Passione di Nostro Signore Gesù Cristo sembra infondata, anzitutto perché Haydn aveva già scritto una sinfonia sull'argomento (n.26), in secondo luogo perché essa non contiene alcun corale e, pur adottando la forma di sonata da chiesa, ha un tono pensoso, ma non religioso. Il titolo "Passione" va dunque inteso nel senso di "emozione", una emozione intensa che si sprigiona dai quattro movimenti, tutti in minore. LDC
MrFiddler66 Interessante: ma il soprannome ‘Il quacchero’ è spurio e non viene utilizzato da quasi nessuno; d’altra parte però, ‘La passione’ aiuta a capire il significato della sinfonia.
@@mauromedina1821 Sturm und drang was a phenomenon that lasted c.1767-1775 largely centred on Vienna; the greatest works in this style are by Haydn who produced works - to use Charles Rosen’s words in his still standard reference work The Classical Style (1971): ‘…on a level that no other composer of Haydn’s time could equal or even approach’. Examples of Rosen’s words in music would be: String quartets Opus 20 Piano sonatas in A flat Hob. XVI:46 and c minor Hob. XVI:20 Symphonies 26, 44, 45, 49 for example. There are single examples of sturm und drang-type symphonies by Mozart - Symphony 25 (K183), and JC Bach - Opus 6 No 6, along with a number of works by Viennese composers such as Vanhal and Dittersdorf. Beethoven (b.1770) wrote *no* sturm und drang-style music - a long past fashion by the time he arrived in Vienna in November 1792 - though elements of the style were inherent to his own compositional genius, in a similar way that it was also assimilated into later music by Mozart and Haydn.
there is a bit of that, more so in B's early works, especially the first two symphonies where you can see what he's taken from the master and applied to his own style.
@@dameinoferrall2400 It was actually Haydn who first so described Kraus when the latter visited Eszterhaza in 1783 where he both performed and dedicated the magnificent c minor symphony VB 142 to Haydn. Haydn described Kraus as: ‘…the first genius I ever met’. Haydn wrote in a letter:* ‘J’y reconnais Kraus. Quelle profondeur de pensees - quelle talent classique’. Later, on hearing of his death, he put Kraus in exalted company by remarking: ‘Too bad about that man, just like Mozart! They were both so young’. Hope you find these quotations useful to back up your rightly placed enthusiasm for a very fine but relatively unknown contemporary of Mozart** and Haydn. * A rare letter in French, the majority by Haydn are in German or Italian. ** Interestingly, Kraus made the trek out to Eszterhaza to meet Haydn, but didn’t hang around in Vienna to wait for Mozart who had been to Salzburg and was returning via Linz.
Don’t you just love getting hit with a great piece you didn’t expect to hear, just randomly found you at the right moment! This piece hits home to me like this. Keep savoring and keep classical close to your hearts...Cheers.
One of the ten greatest symphonies ever written.
What are the other 9?
@@mikur919
Good question, and the answer depends on how you define greatest, along with the balance between objectivity and subjectivity in one’s selections.
I would struggle with only 10, and taking Haydn alone, of his 107 (sic) symphonies, I count 65 as absolutely essential listening, 41 as essential listening, and just 1 as required listening (in order to say you know *all* 107); of the 65 ‘absolutely essential listening’ symphonies, I could nominate almost any of them depending on the exact criteria.
As a comparison, regarding Mozart, I would nominate from just Symphonies 38 39 40 and 41 as they are so far ahead of all the rest as to destroy the competition (Haydn’s are too varied to cause this to happen); and with Beethoven I would choose from just five: Symphonies 3 5 6 7 9 (a very unoriginal choice).
If asks to nominate just one Haydn symphony for list of the ‘Ten Greatest Symphonies Ever Written’ I may nominate the f# minor Symphony 45 (‘Farewell’) of 1772; absolutely nothing to do with the pantomime of the exiting musicians, but because it is the greatest symphony of through-composition and cyclic integration prior to Beethoven’s 5th of 1808 and is composed on an inspirational high from first note until last.
Composers from other periods on application, but as a completely left-field choice:
CPE Bach’s Symphony in e minor Wq 177 (original strings only) or Wq 178 (with CPE’s added wind parts).
@@elaineblackhurst1509Can you tell me what through composition and cyclic integration mean Dr. Blackhurst? I don’t know those terms. BTW Thank you for all of your thoughtful commentary on Haydn. It’s helped me a lot.
@@illinoisgrappler4193
*James Webster* has written a c.400 page book entitled:
*Haydn’s ‘Farewell’ Symphony and the idea of Classical Style*
*Through-composition and Cyclic Integration in his Instrumental Music*
Cambridge University Press (1991)
I clearly cannot summarise such a lengthy, detailed, and comprehensive study in a short RUclips reply, but in short, Webster demonstrates that in this work (and others), Haydn through-composed the works in the sense that the individual movements are linked together in a cycle, and that the cyclic integration is shown for example in the progressive form of individual movements, structural and gestural links between the movements, and extra-musical associations.
(Mostly taken from the back cover summary on the book itself).
Webster suggests that the ‘Farewell’ symphony is arguably Haydn’s ‘…most extraordinary composition’, and in this highly-respected book that is essential reading for anyone interested in the composer, he goes into an astonishing level of detail and analysis to explain why.
If you have an understanding of some of the key features of Beethoven’s Symphony 5 of 1808 which is similarly integrated and unified, then you will begin to understand in part some of Webster’s widely accepted analysis of Haydn’s Symphony 45 of 1772.
If you search some performances of the ‘Farewell’ symphony on RUclips, you will find some more detailed thoughts from myself on this subject; the Haydn 2032 series by Giovanni Antonini in particular where I have appended two lengthy reviews on both the symphony itself, and the performance.
These comments are particularly detailed, both of which I think you will find of interest in answer to your original question.
Hope that’s a helpful response to a very good question, and thank you for your kind comment about some of my other Haydn contributions which I am pleased you find useful.
@@illinoisgrappler4193
I wrote you a detailed answer to this question yesterday but it appears to have disappeared; can you see it ?
that opening, my goodness. what a genius!
nobody was producing music anywhere close to this brilliant during this time. and I mean nobody. yeah, Haydn had peers, but they simply weren't on this level!
c p e bach composed his hamburg symphonies in 1977,
twelve years before haydn composed this one.
"he is the father, we are the children" (mozart)
haydn also great, of course! best wishes
ricardo moyano
Your comment is undermined by factual indiscipline.
The six string symphonies (Wq 182), composed whilst CPE was in Hamburg were composed in 1773.
Also written in the same city, the four orchestra symphonies with twelve obbligato instruments (Wq 183), were written in 1775.
Haydn wrote ‘La passione’ in 1768; it therefore predates both sets of symphonies by CPE by some years.
The purported quote from Mozart is completely irrelevant to all these works, and both composers.
The CPE works are written in his customary empfindsamer Stil, but with no restrictions as to difficulty, fantasy, and with no concessions to popular taste; the Haydn is a dark, intense, and profound sturm und drang work possibly intended for performance on Good Friday.
One of the greatest, most influential books ever written about music in this period: The Classical Style (1971) by Charles Rosen, states simply that Haydn at this time was writing music ‘...on a level that no other composer of Haydn’s time could equal or even approach.’
This view has never been challenged seriously.
You’re absolutely right: Haydn is great of course.
and J.C.Bach Symphony Op. 3 No. 1 etc. published in 1765?
Peter Balastèr
You are correct; but what is your point ?
Do you mean the g minor Symphony Opus 6 No 6 (published 1770) which is JC Bach’s only symphony in anything resembling a more serious style ?
@@peterbalaster1647
you're saying that it's on the same level as this?
1st movement (somber)
0:01 begins
2nd movement
11:12 begins | 12:58 moment |
3rd movement
17:38 begins
*4th movement
22:38 begins | 23:58 moment
That awesome key change to get back to the main subject in the finale. That's very advanced for the time. Great little symphony. Haydn at his best without a doubt..
The father of the symphony. This is a great symphony.
It is a great symphony - true; but it has to be said that Haydn had absolutely nothing to do with the conception of the symphony (a point at which a father’s presence is essential), nor was he present at the birth, as when he wrote his first symphony in 1757 (Symphony 1 Hob. I:1), the symphony was already a gangly teenager of at least 17 years of age.
The Mannheim composer Johann Stamitz died in 1757 having written about sixty modern early-Classical symphonies, and alongside him need to be added Richter, Fils and Holzbauer, along with Wagensiel and Monn in Vienna, and Sammartini and Brioschi in Milan (and others).
All these composers have a far greater claim to be ‘father’ of the form, but in fact the whole idea is a nonsense as the symphony originated in the hands of different composers in different parts of Europe over a number of years, the only common feature being that the symphony was a development of the Italian sinfonia avanti l’opera, but it became an independent concert piece rather than an opera overture.
7:45, lacrimosa style
wow good ear thanks for pointing that out
Such figure is called "Seufzer / sigh / suspiratio" motif.
It's a pity that there was an advertising break BEFORE the 1st mvt ended! Aaaaargh!
That's truly an abomination in a work as magnificent as Symphony #49 of Haydn!
"La Passione o il quacchero" (1768) Se il primo titolo è quello ufficiale, il secondo appare nondimeno su alcune copie dell'epoca e in una di esse si precisa, in lingua italiana, che questa sinfonia "serve da compagna" al "Filosofo" dello stesso autore n.22. L'ipotesi che l'opera si ispiri alla Passione di Nostro Signore Gesù Cristo sembra infondata, anzitutto perché Haydn aveva già scritto una sinfonia sull'argomento (n.26), in secondo luogo perché essa non contiene alcun corale e, pur adottando la forma di sonata da chiesa, ha un tono pensoso, ma non religioso. Il titolo "Passione" va dunque inteso nel senso di "emozione", una emozione intensa che si sprigiona dai quattro movimenti, tutti in minore. LDC
could you please translate this into english, i want to know what you say
MrFiddler66
Interessante: ma il soprannome ‘Il quacchero’ è spurio e non viene utilizzato da quasi nessuno; d’altra parte però, ‘La passione’ aiuta a capire il significato della sinfonia.
Reminds me of Beethoven's Appassionata
Because is Sturm und drang
@@mauromedina1821
Sturm und drang was a phenomenon that lasted c.1767-1775 largely centred on Vienna; the greatest works in this style are by Haydn who produced works - to use Charles Rosen’s words in his still standard reference work The Classical Style (1971):
‘…on a level that no other composer of Haydn’s time could equal or even approach’.
Examples of Rosen’s words in music would be:
String quartets Opus 20
Piano sonatas in A flat Hob. XVI:46 and c minor Hob. XVI:20
Symphonies 26, 44, 45, 49 for example.
There are single examples of sturm und drang-type symphonies by Mozart - Symphony 25 (K183), and JC Bach - Opus 6 No 6, along with a number of works by Viennese composers such as Vanhal and Dittersdorf.
Beethoven (b.1770) wrote *no* sturm und drang-style music - a long past fashion by the time he arrived in Vienna in November 1792 - though elements of the style were inherent to his own compositional genius, in a similar way that it was also assimilated into later music by Mozart and Haydn.
there is a bit of that, more so in B's early works, especially the first two symphonies where you can see what he's taken from the master and applied to his own style.
Painting please?
@Daniel Velásquez I had completely forgotten this. (Any relation to the painter Diego Velasquez?)
Sounds very similar the Joseph Martin Kraus's symphonies.
you mean Kraus sounds similar to Haydn. this is circa 1768
the piece I think you're referring to by Kraus wasn't produced until 1783.
@@dameinoferrall2400 Kraus' symphony might sound a little bit retrospective, but it is a masterpiece nevertheless.
@@HenkVeenstra666
nobody said it wasn't. Kraus was a genius, and wrote outstanding music.
@@dameinoferrall2400
It was actually Haydn who first so described Kraus when the latter visited Eszterhaza in 1783 where he both performed and dedicated the magnificent c minor symphony VB 142 to Haydn.
Haydn described Kraus as:
‘…the first genius I ever met’.
Haydn wrote in a letter:*
‘J’y reconnais Kraus. Quelle profondeur de pensees - quelle talent classique’.
Later, on hearing of his death, he put Kraus in exalted company by remarking:
‘Too bad about that man, just like Mozart!
They were both so young’.
Hope you find these quotations useful to back up your rightly placed enthusiasm for a very fine but relatively unknown contemporary of Mozart** and Haydn.
* A rare letter in French, the majority by Haydn are in German or Italian.
** Interestingly, Kraus made the trek out to Eszterhaza to meet Haydn, but didn’t hang around in Vienna to wait for Mozart who had been to Salzburg and was returning via Linz.
@@elaineblackhurst1509
cheers!
"Like" on 22 August 2017
Better than Solomons. Very sprightly 'Allegro di molto'!