Thanks Atserriotserri !
-
Thanks Atserriotserri !
-
I listened to Rob's Luchesi music I recorded in Nero's (Rob's a very nice guy, believe it or not! We had a good chat for an hour an a half). This consisted of some symphonies, harpsichord concerto, some church music including a requiem. This I thought would be good for stylistic comparison with the Joseph and Leopold cantatas and the concerto WoO4 (although the L music was written around the time B was born, but still can be considered as mature as L was circa 30 years old). All I can say from this comparison is that there is no stylistic link whatsoever. The keyboard style in the concerto bares no resemblance whatsoever to B's WoO4 concerto.
I though the L requiem might shed some light on the Joseph cantata but here too there was simply no comparison at all stlyistically, not one iota. I will go on to say that WoO36 and the Joseph/Leopold cantatas sound much much better than the Luchesi music, though the latter is not bad in itself. There are some what I could call Mozartian flavours here and there but nothing concrete enough worry any hard core Mozart devotee.
Robert is you have some Luchesi chamber music I'd like to hear that too. More evidence please!
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 04-27-2006).]Comment
-
Hi Rod,
This music by Luchesi was written in Italy even before his arrival in Bonn in 1771 - i.e. its light years away, stylistically, from the music of the Wiener Klassik (as mentioned from the outset) - the same as is the music of Sammartini and others of this same time. It was these Italians who were hugely important in Germany and Austria during these years during the formative years of the symphony and these, of course, are really experimental works. What a pity that Luchesi (a chapter on which is found in the multi-volumed work from 12 years LATER by De La Bordes in Paris describing his symphonies as being in great demand all over Germany (without any reference to Haydn or Mozart) have completely vanished. Then too, we have the reference in 1783 to works in the style of Haydn being written in Bonn by Dantoine - the pen-name of Luchesi up until 1784. We also have a piano concerto given to Mozart by Luchesi in Italy which Mozart continued to perform until well in to the 1780s. And we have no less than 25 symphonies (16 of them today attributed to Haydn and 9 of them to Mozart) at Estense Library - all of which indisputably came from Bonn and which existed before 1784.
The simple fact is that the works of Luchesi (other than those he wrote for Hadyn and Mozart) have entirely vanished despite all the above. They have been assimilated in to the mature works of Mozart and Haydn. And the works of Dantoine have, also, completely disappeared.
No-one is arguing on the basis of these works from 1769 to 1771.
As regards the style of Beethoven, I again refer you to the set of sonatas Op.1 by Luchesi published in 1772 at Bonn (these being the very first works ever published in Bonn) who have astonished listeners by anticipating Beethoven style by almost a decade.
Luchesi wrote for Haydn and for Mozart. He did so from Bonn. He was not the only composer whose music has been sucked in to the vortex of those two composers works.
Tantalising but true. And of course (as mentioned many times) not a single work by Mozart was held at Bonn Chapel archives in 1784. Nor is Mozart recorded as being a writer of symphonies in Vienna up until that year.
Luchesi lived and worked for almost 20 years at Bonn. He even married and died there. Yet, virtually no single work from this period exists in his name. That too is yet another strange fact surrounding this composer.
The name of Dantoine appears again - immediately after the death of Mozart. He begins writing stage works at Bonn. These too (like the earlier works of that name in Haydn style) have also completely disappeared.
And therefore, as things stand, we have the great archives at Estense Library in Modena which, till this day, in many ways, testify to huge irregularities in the official careers of Haydn and Mozart. (Many of the works there in the name of Haydn and Mozart have had their covers ripped off, often their title pages also, so as to obscure, or try to, their true origin. Amongst these are many, many symphonies and masses falsely attributed after 1784 to both Haydn and Mozart.
I therefore urge any fair-minded researcher to become familiar with the actual documentary evidence in Modena, which will confirm beyond all reasonable doubt that works claimed by both Haydn and Mozart as having been written by them after 1784 were, in actual fact, already in existence BEFORE that date at Bonn - being compositions of the Kapellmeister there - Andrea Luchesi.
Regards
Robert
Comment
-
The Passion is from 1774/76, one sinfonia is from 1784 and even this is not in the league of the Beethoven pieces in question. In all honesty the cantatas and quartets have more in common with late Beethoven than Luchesi at this time to my ears. Luchesi would have had to have had a total musical death and rebirth to have produced WoO36. Is such a thing possible? If so how did this miraculous transformation from mediocrity to genius occur in such a short period of time?Originally posted by robert newman:
Hi Rod,
This music by Luchesi was written in Italy even before his arrival in Bonn in 1771 - i.e. its light years away, stylistically, from the music of the Wiener Klassik (as mentioned from the outset)
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 04-27-2006).]Comment
-
Hi Rod,
These three trios from Bonn (WoO36.1 and WoO36.2 and also WoO36.3) have a long and complex history. In my view we should step back for a moment and consider the possibility that a solution is found not so much by noting the 'Mozartean' contents of these works as being the crucial issue but, instead, (temporarily) regard them as three of what must have been a set of 6 trios. A fourth of this set of six may be the very one which by a remarkable coincidence is today being discussed on the Mozartforum website - this known till 1910 in Koechel as C.22.01.
Now, if this is correct a solution may be as follows. That a composer wrote a set of six piano trios which he submitted via Bonn to Mozart only two or three of which were actually used by Mozart - the others floating at Bonn.
As your liner notes say for the 3 trios you lent me today, these 3 Bonn trios (WoO36.1-3) have affinities to earlier violin sonatas that are attributed to Mozart.
Set aside Luchesi for a moment as their most likely composer. Consider if you will that in some way Bonn (i.e. using Luchesi) was receiving works from a network that eventually ended up in the hands of Mozart, whether these were actually by Kozeluch, Luchesi, Myselivec, or others. And thus, though these 3 works were later attributed to Beethoven they all, collectively, come from a set of 6 that appear to have been offered to Bonn (and from Bonn to Mozart) only two or at most three of which became 'officially' Mozart's own.
So you see nobody can afford to be dogmatic on such an issue. I suggest this as a solution - that Luchesi was already working from Bonn to supply Mozart and that this conduit of supply, involving several composers (Jesuit, you will note) used Luchesi and continued to do so throughout the adult career of Mozart.
A fairly full story of the arguments reference attribution of these pieces can be found on the Mozart Forum written by Dennis Pajot.
(I have, as you already know, previously suggested the Mozart violin concertos were actually supplied to Mozart by his long-time friend Josef Myslevicek.)
So you have various choices.
The convention says that these are works of Beethoven despite one trio long being attributed to Mozart - now to Beethoven.
I think that, in fact, there were 6 piano trios written by a person who was linked to Bonn. On balance I think the solution is that they were all written by Josef Myslivec and were all submitted to Bonn, to Luchesi, acting then as a conduit to Mozart. Mozart took two of them but the other 4 continued to float in limbo - three of them today being attributed wrongly to Beethoven as Wo36.1-3 and a fourth that which until 1910 was wrongly attributed to Mozart himself.
Such a solution would explain the links between these works and even earlier violin sonatas still attributed to Mozart.
Is that clear ???? (Sorry)
Regards
R
[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-27-2006).]Comment
-
Dear Atserriotserri,
Your letter is very interesting. Yes, I myself have looked very closely at these quartets dedicated by Mozart to Haydn. In my view they are very, very crucial to unravelling the entire career of Mozart. Why ? Well, if you note the dedication letter written (in Italian) that precedes them in the first published edition you will see something highly unusual in what Mozart says there.
I won't go in to it here. But if it's of interest will do so.
Regards
Robert
Comment
-
It is clear Rob, but to be honest once more there is more promise in WoO36 than the typical Mozart chamber piece as far as I am concerned, whether M composed it or not! I have the radical position myself that first period Beethoven's trios and sonatas are better and more advanced than anything produced by Mozart at a similar age. Even B's op16 I think is far preferable to Mozart's more highly regarded effort which it is usually coupled with on CD.Originally posted by robert newman:
I think that, in fact, there were 6 piano trios written by a person who was linked to Bonn. On balance I think the solution is that they were all written by Josef Myslivec and were all submitted to Bonn, to Luchesi, acting then as a conduit to Mozart. Mozart took two of them but the other 4 continued to float in limbo - three of them today being attributed wrongly to Beethoven as Wo36.1-3 and a fourth that which until 1910 was wrongly attributed to Mozart himself.
Such a solution would explain the links between these works and even earlier violin sonatas still attributed to Mozart.
Is that clear ???? (Sorry)
Regards
R
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 04-27-2006).]Comment
-
--------------------Originally posted by robert newman:
Dear Atserriotserri,
Your letter is very interesting. Yes, I myself have looked very closely at these quartets dedicated by Mozart to Haydn. In my view they are very, very crucial to unravelling the entire career of Mozart. Why ? Well, if you note the dedication letter written (in Italian) that precedes them in the first published edition you will see something highly unusual in what Mozart says there.
I won't go in to it here. But if it's of interest will do so.
Regards
Robert
Just out of general interest. Did Mozart compose any of his works?
And the famous Professor Toboga? Where does he teach?
Agnes.
-----------
Comment
-
Well Rod, I respect your opinion, that these are trios by the young Beethoven. You know the arguments against that, of course. I think they are trios that came to Bonn and were somehow part of the Bonn archives, written in a 'Mozartean' style for the simple reason that they were always intended for Mozart in Vienna, but that for reasons I don't know he used only two or three.
On balance (and having recently heard quite a bit of this Mysliveck I think that he rather than Kozeluch) has much more to do with the Mozart violin works than may be appreciated at this time. But that's my personal view - though I agree that it relegates Luchesi to the role of a musical agent of sorts for those particular works.
Rgds
Comment
-
Dear Agnes,
You asked if Mozart composed any of the works today attributed to him.
Well, there are 6 early quartets that I think he is definitely the composer of. And there is that hideous Serenata Nottorno, KV 286.
There is 'The Impressario', the legendary (error filled) miracle of the Allegri Miserere (for which we have no documentary evidence at all), and, no doubt I could think of various other works.
Of Mozart's involvement in many works I have little doubt, though as an arranger and even as a very gifted arranger.
That he composed various contradances and minuets is not beyond belief.
I think we must simply look piece by piece at his total output. When the new Koechel arrives it will be interesting to see how many works clearly NOT by Mozart are still in its main section - it will not surprise me if this exceeds 30 works.
Robert
[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-28-2006).]Comment
-
I think you misunderstand me. Bach had little impact with his own time period and that immediately following (isn't this thread about his impact on 18th Century music?) on account of his genres being "old fashioned" and not progressive. His harmony, theory, and etc. have had an undeniable impact in the subsequent centuries, but I think the next generation of composers as well as those who had the saavy to adapt to changing times are the ones who had the greater impact.Originally posted by Rod:
Thanks but Bach's music is so progressive its today globally acknowledged by jazz musicians and virtually every other sort of musician. To suggest this music is not progressive is, to me, astonishing. But I respect your opinion.
Regards
Robert Newman (in coffee shop with Rod!)
[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 04-27-2006).]Comment
-
Originally posted by robert newman:
Dear Agnes,
You asked if Mozart composed any of the works today attributed to him.
Well, there are 6 early quartets that I think he is definitely the composer of. And there is that hideous Serenata Nottorno, KV 286.
There is 'The Impressario', the legendary (error filled) miracle of the Allegri Miserere (for which we have no documentary evidence at all), and, no doubt I could think of various other works.
Of Mozart's involvement in many works I have little doubt, though as an arranger and even as a very gifted arranger.
That he composed various contradances and minuets is not beyond belief.
I think we must simply look piece by piece at his total output. When the new Koechel arrives it will be interesting to see how many works clearly NOT by Mozart are still in its main section - it will not surprise me if this exceeds 30 works.
Robert
--------------
Are you joking or are you serious?
And how did you arrive at these conclusions?
I hope your book will be properly referenced. Or are you writing a novel.
And who is Professor Toboga?
Agnes.
[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-28-2006).]Comment
-
I consider it highly urgent that you share your expertise with Neal Zaslaw, the editor of the New Koechel: <naz2@cornell.edu>Originally posted by robert newman:
When the new Koechel arrives it will be interesting to see how many works clearly NOT by Mozart are still in its main section - it will not surprise me if this exceeds 30 works.
Comment
-
If I'm not mistaken Mr Zaslaw will shortly share his expertise with you too - in the arrival of the new edition of Koechel. It's this which has already been refered to here.
Incidentally, Zaslaw himself has written that at present Koechel holds over 20 works that are not Mozart's in its main section.
The last time I wrote to Mr Zaslaw was to ask what steps he and his colleagues have taken to familiarise themselves with 'Mozart' manuscripts at the Estense Library in Modena at at places like Regensburg. I received no reply and was so busy myself that no doubt his reply has escaped me too.
Regards
[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-28-2006).]Comment
-
Agnes,
You write -
Are you joking or are you serious?
And how did you arrive at these conclusions?
I hope your book will be properly referenced. Or are you writing a novel.
And who is Professor Toboga?
You are asking questions that need a straight answer. Which specific area do you think I may be joking ?
You hope my book will be properly referenced. Certainly, it will be so well researched and referenced it will contain amongst other things illuminating answers received directly in many cases from Mozartean experts themselves - some of whose writings are available from amazon dot com and other sources. Who can do better than that ? As you know, students learn from such things all the time. In the thousands of other cases where footnotes are required, you will find so many you will need a chiropodist !
As to the qualifications of Prof Taboga - if I'm not mistaken he studied the same subjects as Herr Koechel. You can ask him yourself on his website of course. He may be a botanist like Koechel ? Is that OK ? If not, he is certainly a man who has published many works already. Does that count ?
I do not know his blood group or his DNA profile. But Mr Taboga has not slavishly followed the official archives as though they were reliable. He has done rather better.
Robert
[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-28-2006).]Comment
Comment