Great spot! As a (very) amateur bassoonist I can tell you he was blowing out some saliva that had gone into one of the holes. No one ever said hte bassoon was in any way easy!
Each piece in classical music is often a musical story, expressing emotions and meanings in a powerful manner. Every note and musical section contributes to telling a meaningful and emotional narrative.
This is a superb performance of symphony n°87, which H.C. Robbins Landon calls “this stepchild of the Paris Symphonies”. For no apparent reason the work has been practically forgotten since the end of the 18th century until the appearance of LP recordings. This is all the more surprising after listening to such a powerful rendering as Antonini's. My first reaction at the start of the first movement was: “More moderate than 'usual' “. A much more striking case is Antonini's tempo of the first movement of symphony n°69 (CD n°12; no video because of the pandemic), which also is marked “Vivace”: there Antonini unbelievably needs nearly two minutes longer than Hogwood (8'10” compared to 6'19”; Derek Solomons needs 6'49”), and all three conductors play both repeats. I had a discussion about this issue with Antonini, and he explained that for him, coming from the Baroque, “Vivace” is a bit slower than “Allegro”, and this was still true by the end of the 18th century. It was only in the course of the 19th century that “Vivace” was understood as being faster than “Allegro”, and that is what we still think today. In the booklet of the next CD, n°13 (symphonies n°31, 48, 59), Antonini writes a highly interesting and informative article “Vivace ma non troppo” in response to a review in the Gramophone magazine in which the tempo of the first movement of n°69 was criticized for being too slow. In the case of n°87, however, one soon adapts to his approach, thanks to the energy and power of the performance. As mentioned concerning the performance of symphony n°24, Antonini again finds a particular delight in prolonging the pause at bar 122 (end of the development section, 2 ¾ bars silence) to enhance its dramatic effect, as he does too before the repeat of the second part of the last movement. The magnificent second movement is a hymn-like Adagio. Although being in sonata form, but without any repeats, the movement gives the impression of a free fantasia. The instrumentation is particularly beautiful, with many prominent wind parts. Interestingly, this is Haydn's last symphony in A major. In particular, it's rather surprising that among the twelve London symphonies NONE is in A major, neither, by the way, is there one in F major: four (!) are in D, two each in E flat, G, B flat and C (one major, one minor) - I deliberately exclude here the “exotic” keys E and H (sorry: B major in English: see comment by EB below) which, though, Haydn used earlier on (n°12, n°29 and n°46, respectively). In Beethoven's symphonies the keys are more evenly distributed: all principal keys are represented at least once, except G major which is conspicuously missing. Hence, Haydn's n°100 of 1794 is the last G major symphony until Dvorak's n°8 of 1889, soon followed by Mahler's n°4 of 1899/1900. I don't see any common character among Haydn's A major symphonies. In any case n°87 doesn't share the brilliance of n°5, n°59 and n°65 with their prominent horn parts.
I have often wondered why there was no C major symphony, and in particular not one to end the second ‘London’ set; there are precedents including by Haydn himself - the set of six for Paris, and those from the first London visit;* Mozart’s final three, and Michael Haydn’s set of six, both from 1788 being two other obvious cases. (There are of course examples where this is not the case: Haydn Symphonies 6-8, 76-78, 79-81; Dittersdorf’s six extant ‘Ovid’ symphonies, and many others). I think the other striking omission - the absence of a minor key symphony in the second set - is more easily explained. It was simply that Symphony 95 in c minor was probably the least successful of the first set; I think Haydn was acutely tuned into his London audience, and was very aware of what they liked - or liked less well - to an extraordinary degree. The German ‘H’ is largely a mystery to 99% of the English-speaking world; B major (German H) is of course the key signature of Symphony 46 in English. (A point intended obviously for wider readership). Regarding A major, I checked Christian Schubart’s Ideen zu einer Aesthetic der Tonkunst (1806) as I think it does reflect to some degree late 18th/early 19th century feelings about different keys, something of which was probably understood by Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven. ‘A major - This key includes declarations of innocent love, satisfaction with one’s state of affairs; hope of seeing one’s beloved again when parting; youthful cheerfulness and trust in God’. Whether or not the absence of an A major symphony amongst the twelve ‘London’ symphonies is reflective of Schubart’s aesthetic summary, or has anything to do with the composer’s own state of mind, or his his attitude to the London audience is a debatable point. As ever, thank you for your interesting contribution; I have half-finished some observations about the recently uploaded Symphony 24 which hopefully will appear in due course, but you rather beat me to it. * Others may not be aware that the correct order of the ‘Paris’ symphonies as explicitly stated by Haydn is: 87 85 83 84 86 82 And the first six ‘London’ symphonies: 96 95 93 94 98 97 (82 and 97 being of course the C major symphonies).
@@elaineblackhurst1509 There seems to be a typo in the first sentence of your comment: IMHO it should read “G major” instead of “C major” (or perhaps I just don't get your point...). And sorry for my obvious oversight: I've now replaced the German "H major" by the correct English "B major" in my original comment above. Concerning Haydn's symphony n°100 being the last in G major for nearly 100 years: for the sake of completeness and scholarliness I should have given the complete quotation from Daniel Heartz: “With Symphony No. 100, Haydn closed his legacy of late orchestral masterpieces in the key of G, a tetralogy made up of Symphonies Nos. 88, 92, 94 and this work. For whatever reasons, his successors avoided G as a main key in their symphonies, as if Haydn had exhausted its greatest possibilities. Neither Beethoven, nor Schubert adopted G for any of their symphonies. They were followed in this regard by Brahms, Schumann, Mendelssohn and Tchaikovsky. Antonin Dvorak broke the chain with his brilliant symphony No. 8 in G of 1889, soon followed by Gustav Mahler's Symphony No. 4 in G (1899/1900).” (Daniel Heartz, “Mozart, Haydn and Early Beethoven - 1781-1802”, W.W. Norton & Company, 2009, p. 501).
@@robertspruijtenburg3625 My reply was really musing on your observation that Haydn 87 was his last A major symphony. As an A major work, Symphony 87 (1785) was preceded by seven earlier Symphonies: 5 14 21 28 59 65 and 64 (the last being in 1773), a gap of twelve years. The C major line is considerably longer, twenty works compared to eight, with Symphony 97 being the last, but there are no gaps of twelve years. In short, I thought about your comment about no A major work at all for London, but then added the observation that the absence of both a C major symphony and a minor key one in the second series in England was also interesting. The ‘H’ observation as you must have realised was not intended as any sort of correction, but as being helpful to non-German speakers who generally speaking, find German key signatures very difficult. I myself have to stop and think when faced with: English B = German H English B flat = German B
@@elaineblackhurst1509 Thank you for this explanation: now I follow you. By the way, above I've considerably extended my comments on n°87 (and a bit on n°24 too).
@@robertspruijtenburg3625 As ever, there is much to consider here which as ever, I will do with due diligence. The issue of Giovanni Antonini’s chosen tempi for the ‘Allego’ first movements has been an interesting development in the series as I see a pattern emerging of more moderately paced opening movements contrasting with more rapid Minuets and Finales; it is a matter on which I have developed some new thinking in terms of the overall shape and pacing of the symphonies as a musical and artistic whole, thoughts that are overwhelmingly positive. Needless to say, I find Giovanni Antonini’s vision of each of the symphonies intelligent, original, and musical - with only the occasional exception (I have a real issue with Antonini’s interpretation of the Moderato e maestoso of the first movement of Symphony 42, but then I also have an issue with Robbins Landon’s bizarre thoughts on this work as well). I am sure you know how much I - and others - value your insights and invaluable contributions into this series, especially with your proximity to the Basel centre of activity, thank you very much as ever.
I've always thought that the "Paris" symphonies are the apex of Haydn' orchestral genius...and this last one of the six is a particular favourite (at least with me): the finale is unsurpassed! Wonderfully performed here by the Basel orchestra and the amazingly energetic Giovanni Antonini.
@@edwardhoward5525 Composers’ choice of keys is always interesting, the biggest mysteries in the case of late-Haydn being: i) The absence of a minor key symphony in the second set of ‘London’ symphonies. ii) The absence of a C major symphony to conclude the second set of ‘London’ symphonies.
Mi pare che le ultime prove dei nostri abbiano perso di smalto. Specie le due parigine affrontate non hanno minimamente la poesia e la cura cui Antonini e i suoi sodali ci hanno abituato con le meraviglie degli anni '60 e '70, cui davvero hanno restituito il giusto valore. Mi pare (mi pare) che da un po' di tempo vivano di questa rendita con piattezza.Peccato! Questa sinfonia 87 non aggiunge molto, anzi, a tante ottime letture assai recenti e reperibili sempre su RUclips. Confido, sempre con stima, nelle prossime 4 parigine!
I’ve mentioned it elsewhere, but perhaps it needs repeating here that this is the first, not the last of the six ‘Paris’ symphonies. In a letter to his publisher Artaria in Vienna, Haydn explicitly stated that the works were to be engraved (published) as follows: *87 85 83 84 86 82* Artaria’s arbitrary 82-87 makes no musical or artistic sense whatsoever if listening to the six symphonies as a set.
Perfectly paced tempos! Orchestra sounds enthusiastic and enjoying the performance.
各パートの躍動感溢れる､素晴らしい演奏を聴け感無量です。👏👏🤩‼️
Bellissima Sinfonia
Another amazing performance.
Every moment in Haydnsymfonies is glorious!
12:58 He really loves his bassoon. ❤
haha good eye.
Great spot! As a (very) amateur bassoonist I can tell you he was blowing out some saliva that had gone into one of the holes. No one ever said hte bassoon was in any way easy!
Wonderful! Both Haydn and the orchestra.
You keep getting it so right ! Respectful tempi - wonderful texture and care for dynamics
Each piece in classical music is often a musical story, expressing emotions and meanings in a powerful manner. Every note and musical section contributes to telling a meaningful and emotional narrative.
Hayden so großartig gespielt
Великолепно. Спасибо за запись.
This is a superb performance of symphony n°87, which H.C. Robbins Landon calls “this stepchild of the Paris Symphonies”. For no apparent reason the work has been practically forgotten since the end of the 18th century until the appearance of LP recordings. This is all the more surprising after listening to such a powerful rendering as Antonini's.
My first reaction at the start of the first movement was: “More moderate than 'usual' “. A much more striking case is Antonini's tempo of the first movement of symphony n°69 (CD n°12; no video because of the pandemic), which also is marked “Vivace”: there Antonini unbelievably needs nearly two minutes longer than Hogwood (8'10” compared to 6'19”; Derek Solomons needs 6'49”), and all three conductors play both repeats. I had a discussion about this issue with Antonini, and he explained that for him, coming from the Baroque, “Vivace” is a bit slower than “Allegro”, and this was still true by the end of the 18th century. It was only in the course of the 19th century that “Vivace” was understood as being faster than “Allegro”, and that is what we still think today. In the booklet of the next CD, n°13 (symphonies n°31, 48, 59), Antonini writes a highly interesting and informative article “Vivace ma non troppo” in response to a review in the Gramophone magazine in which the tempo of the first movement of n°69 was criticized for being too slow. In the case of n°87, however, one soon adapts to his approach, thanks to the energy and power of the performance. As mentioned concerning the performance of symphony n°24, Antonini again finds a particular delight in prolonging the pause at bar 122 (end of the development section, 2 ¾ bars silence) to enhance its dramatic effect, as he does too before the repeat of the second part of the last movement.
The magnificent second movement is a hymn-like Adagio. Although being in sonata form, but without any repeats, the movement gives the impression of a free fantasia. The instrumentation is particularly beautiful, with many prominent wind parts.
Interestingly, this is Haydn's last symphony in A major. In particular, it's rather surprising that among the twelve London symphonies NONE is in A major, neither, by the way, is there one in F major: four (!) are in D, two each in E flat, G, B flat and C (one major, one minor) - I deliberately exclude here the “exotic” keys E and H (sorry: B major in English: see comment by EB below) which, though, Haydn used earlier on (n°12, n°29 and n°46, respectively). In Beethoven's symphonies the keys are more evenly distributed: all principal keys are represented at least once, except G major which is conspicuously missing. Hence, Haydn's n°100 of 1794 is the last G major symphony until Dvorak's n°8 of 1889, soon followed by Mahler's n°4 of 1899/1900.
I don't see any common character among Haydn's A major symphonies. In any case n°87 doesn't share the brilliance of n°5, n°59 and n°65 with their prominent horn parts.
I have often wondered why there was no C major symphony, and in particular not one to end the second ‘London’ set; there are precedents including by Haydn himself - the set of six for Paris, and those from the first London visit;* Mozart’s final three, and Michael Haydn’s set of six, both from 1788 being two other obvious cases.
(There are of course examples where this is not the case:
Haydn Symphonies 6-8, 76-78, 79-81; Dittersdorf’s six extant ‘Ovid’ symphonies, and many others).
I think the other striking omission - the absence of a minor key symphony in the second set - is more easily explained.
It was simply that Symphony 95 in c minor was probably the least successful of the first set; I think Haydn was acutely tuned into his London audience, and was very aware of what they liked - or liked less well - to an extraordinary degree.
The German ‘H’ is largely a mystery to 99% of the English-speaking world; B major (German H) is of course the key signature of Symphony 46 in English.
(A point intended obviously for wider readership).
Regarding A major, I checked Christian Schubart’s Ideen zu einer Aesthetic der Tonkunst (1806) as I think it does reflect to some degree late 18th/early 19th century feelings about different keys, something of which was probably understood by Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven.
‘A major - This key includes declarations of innocent love, satisfaction with one’s state of affairs; hope of seeing one’s beloved again when parting; youthful cheerfulness and trust in God’.
Whether or not the absence of an A major symphony amongst the twelve ‘London’ symphonies is reflective of Schubart’s aesthetic summary, or has anything to do with the composer’s own state of mind, or his his attitude to the London audience is a debatable point.
As ever, thank you for your interesting contribution; I have half-finished some observations about the recently uploaded Symphony 24 which hopefully will appear in due course, but you rather beat me to it.
* Others may not be aware that the correct order of the ‘Paris’ symphonies as explicitly stated by Haydn is:
87 85 83 84 86 82
And the first six ‘London’ symphonies:
96 95 93 94 98 97
(82 and 97 being of course the C major symphonies).
@@elaineblackhurst1509 There seems to be a typo in the first sentence of your comment: IMHO it should read “G major” instead of “C major” (or perhaps I just don't get your point...). And sorry for my obvious oversight: I've now replaced the German "H major" by the correct English "B major" in my original comment above.
Concerning Haydn's symphony n°100 being the last in G major for nearly 100 years: for the sake of completeness and scholarliness I should have given the complete quotation from Daniel Heartz: “With Symphony No. 100, Haydn closed his legacy of late orchestral masterpieces in the key of G, a tetralogy made up of Symphonies Nos. 88, 92, 94 and this work. For whatever reasons, his successors avoided G as a main key in their symphonies, as if Haydn had exhausted its greatest possibilities. Neither Beethoven, nor Schubert adopted G for any of their symphonies. They were followed in this regard by Brahms, Schumann, Mendelssohn and Tchaikovsky. Antonin Dvorak broke the chain with his brilliant symphony No. 8 in G of 1889, soon followed by Gustav Mahler's Symphony No. 4 in G (1899/1900).” (Daniel Heartz, “Mozart, Haydn and Early Beethoven - 1781-1802”, W.W. Norton & Company, 2009, p. 501).
@@robertspruijtenburg3625
My reply was really musing on your observation that Haydn 87 was his last A major symphony.
As an A major work, Symphony 87 (1785) was preceded by seven earlier Symphonies:
5 14 21 28 59 65 and 64 (the last being in 1773), a gap of twelve years.
The C major line is considerably longer, twenty works compared to eight, with Symphony 97 being the last, but there are no gaps of twelve years.
In short, I thought about your comment about no A major work at all for London, but then added the observation that the absence of both a C major symphony and a minor key one in the second series in England was also interesting.
The ‘H’ observation as you must have realised was not intended as any sort of correction, but as being helpful to non-German speakers who generally speaking, find German key signatures very difficult.
I myself have to stop and think when faced with:
English B = German H
English B flat = German B
@@elaineblackhurst1509 Thank you for this explanation: now I follow you. By the way, above I've considerably extended my comments on n°87 (and a bit on n°24 too).
@@robertspruijtenburg3625
As ever, there is much to consider here which as ever, I will do with due diligence.
The issue of Giovanni Antonini’s chosen tempi for the ‘Allego’ first movements has been an interesting development in the series as I see a pattern emerging of more moderately paced opening movements contrasting with more rapid Minuets and Finales; it is a matter on which I have developed some new thinking in terms of the overall shape and pacing of the symphonies as a musical and artistic whole, thoughts that are overwhelmingly positive.
Needless to say, I find Giovanni Antonini’s vision of each of the symphonies intelligent, original, and musical - with only the occasional exception (I have a real issue with Antonini’s interpretation of the Moderato e maestoso of the first movement of Symphony 42, but then I also have an issue with Robbins Landon’s bizarre thoughts on this work as well).
I am sure you know how much I - and others - value your insights and invaluable contributions into this series, especially with your proximity to the Basel centre of activity, thank you very much as ever.
These guys are good !! My Pappa Haydn.
Joseph Haydn is neither your ‘Pappa’ (sic), nor was he the Pope.
Absolutely marvelous 🎶
I've always thought that the "Paris" symphonies are the apex of Haydn' orchestral genius...and this last one of the six is a particular favourite (at least with me): the finale is unsurpassed! Wonderfully performed here by the Basel orchestra and the amazingly energetic Giovanni Antonini.
Lange Rede, kurzer Sinn 😂passen Sie auf die Straße, wenn Sie in Ihrem Auto die wunderschöne Musik hören 😂
@@elaineblackhurst1509 I think it needs a nickname! How about Alpha and Omega (it's Haydn's last symphony in A). All other suggestions welcome.
@@edwardhoward5525
Composers’ choice of keys is always interesting, the biggest mysteries in the case of late-Haydn being:
i) The absence of a minor key symphony in the second set of ‘London’ symphonies.
ii) The absence of a C major symphony to conclude the second set of ‘London’ symphonies.
Great playing
💕💕💕💕
Mi pare che le ultime prove dei nostri abbiano perso di smalto. Specie le due parigine affrontate non hanno minimamente la poesia e la cura cui Antonini e i suoi sodali ci hanno abituato con le meraviglie degli anni '60 e '70, cui davvero hanno restituito il giusto valore. Mi pare (mi pare) che da un po' di tempo vivano di questa rendita con piattezza.Peccato! Questa sinfonia 87 non aggiunge molto, anzi, a tante ottime letture assai recenti e reperibili sempre su RUclips. Confido, sempre con stima, nelle prossime 4 parigine!
I’ve mentioned it elsewhere, but perhaps it needs repeating here that this is the first, not the last of the six ‘Paris’ symphonies.
In a letter to his publisher Artaria in Vienna, Haydn explicitly stated that the works were to be engraved (published) as follows:
*87 85 83 84 86 82*
Artaria’s arbitrary 82-87 makes no musical or artistic sense whatsoever if listening to the six symphonies as a set.
It is 88, not 87…
Colossal
Drop a like
Ifelt like I'm over the Debussy‘s moon