I'm very fond of ol' Tony Dvorak's seventh symphony--sadly, for years now, the History Channel has used it whenever they show Nazi film clips--just another of a host of reasons not to watch the teevees. But it is a wonderful minor key symphony (my favorite kind--Ol' Johnny Mozart only wrote two, the 25th and the 40th, both in G minor--i prefer the 25th). You should really czech it out . . .
Oh, and i found a collection of all 108 (yes, 108) Haydn symphonies for about $100, and snapped it up immediately. It's really an eye-opener. Not only did ol' Joe invent the string quartet while still very young, but he completely invented the modern symphony in an age when it was still a rare "party piece," running about 8 or 10 minutes. He not only writes them in four movements at a time when they were commonly in three--he plays with the tempo constantly. He wrote 104 as far as the scholars of the 19th century are concerned. But there are also Symphonies "A" and "B." Prior to the 1970's, Symphony A was only known in a piano quartet format, but a complete score has been unearthed. Symphony B was written on a commission as a divertimento (or so it has always been thought), but the man who paid the commission had it rescored for string chamber orchestra, and apparently ol' Joe rescored it as a full symphony. The 63rd symphony was also completely rescored, and the score found in the 1970's shows that it is the original, and the one in the repertoire was the rescored version--they differ radically, and can be said to be separate symphonies. Additionally, there is a simphonia concertante in B-flat, in three movements, but with the characteristic horn parts which Haydn introduced to the simphonia concertante when he created the modern symphony. The recordings also include a rescore of the 22nd and 53rd symphonies, and alternative ending movements for several of them. It is from London recordings, Antal Dorati and the Philharmonia Hongarica.
truth
Setanta, thanks for the interesting info. Yeah, "papa Haydn" was papa to a lot of music and musical forms. I recall reading the quartet is the symphonic orchestra writ small. The first fiddle later became the first fiddle SECTION--the same for second fiddles, violas and cellos. All the other instruments were later added for color. This is one reason why I do not have the same depth of feeling for BAND performances. Without the strings, it's like sex without a partner, good--damn good--but not enough.
One thing i loved about it, Boss, was that the view of Haydn is usually of the old man--Papa Haydn. But this was a window into the creative genius of the young man, in his twenties and thirties. I'm a fool for a good symphony, and am much more likely to seek out good recordings of a composers symphonies than any other work. This was a dream find for me.
truth
I can imagine. I found a collection of Beethoven's symphonies--not nearly as large as Haydn's,of course, but he DID enlarge Haydn's orchestra to the size we see today--but a thrilling find nevertheless.
Mozart, so i have read, did not take Louie on as a student, because he said he would have no career as a concert pianist. Ol' Joe did take him on, however, and Beethoven learned almost everything he knew about composition which did not come naturally from Haydn. Interesting trio, when seen against the backdrop of their times, whether from simply a perspective of the history of music, or the broader canvas of the general history.
truth
To me, Beethoven is the greatest. I say this believing that comparisons between consumates is spurious. But, aside from the beauty of his music, his work ranges from the classical styles of Haydn/Mozart to what is virtually contemporary music, i.e., his incredible late quartets.
But, let's get back to the topic at hand.
JLN, A little diversion from religeous forums are always a welcome respite. BTW, If you haven't been to London, but plan to visit, do not miss the British Museum Library where one can see the original compositions written by many of the classical greats including Beethoven and Mozart. Even the Beatles.
truth
C.I., thanks. I just wrote that down on a piece of paper which I then put into my travel folder. London is one of the places I most want to visit, especially after reading all the works of Anthony Trollope. My wife has been there and says it is one of the most hospitable places she has ever visited. I guess she went to the right parts of town. Oh, and thirty years ago.
JLN, When you make definite plans, don't forget to contact the A2Kers in the UK and Walter. I'm sure they'll all be happy to see you. When I visited last March, we met at the ye old Cheshire Cheese, a pub once frequented by Charles Dickens. It's a must.
London is EXPENSIVE. So bring lots of money. Also, watch out for theives, although there's theft in most major cities. When I went my experience with the locals was good. They were very hip (in london), and pollite. The food in most places stunk, but I found a couple good restaurants - the places that were were pricey
.
I'm thinking about going to grad school abroad, maybe in England. Isn't there an art school in London?
The main theme from the Rachmaninov lst Piano Concerto was turned into a popular song, "Full Moon and Empty Arms."
The level of endorphines and seratonin does have something to do with the efficiency of the immune system.
As PS said, London is very expensive. A cup of coffee and donut costs US$5, so bring lots of cash.
The dollars worth about .60c in the UK, but especially in London.
PS, Here's a link on art schools in London.
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?srch=105&FORM=AS5&q=art+schools+in+London%2c+England
However, even though you don't go to school, the many art galleries is like a good education in art. The National Gallery, both Tates, and other galleries are full of old and new masters. When I go to London, I always go to the National Gallery, and spend hours there. One of my favorites in the world.
truth
C.I., great suggestions.
