1324/5/6/7/8
JOHANN NEPOMUK HUMMEL
CHAMBER MUSIC
Hans Kann, piano
Albert Kocsis, violin
Zlatko Topolsky, violin
Franz Bartholomey, cello
Karl Stierhof, viola
Georg Weinhengst, flute
Edith Bauer-Slais, mandolin
JOHANN NEPOMUK HUMMEL (1778-1837)
MHS 1324
TRIO in E-FLAT MAJOR, Op. 12
1. Allegro agitato
2. Andante
3. Finale: Presto
TRIO in F MAJOR, Op. 22
1. Allegro moderato
2. Andante con Variazioni
3. Rondo alla Turca
TRIO in G MAJOR, Op. 65
1. Allegro con spirito
2. Andante grazioso
3. Rondo: Vivace assaie scherzando
MHS 1325
TRIO in G MAJOR, Op. 35
1. Allegro con brio
2. Tempo di Minuetto
3. Rondo: Vivace e scherzando
TRIO in E MAJOR, Op. 83
1. Allegro
2. Andante
3. Rondo
TRIO in E-FLAT MAJOR, Op. 96
1. Allegro con spirito
2. Andante quasi Allegretto
3. Rondo alla Russa: Allegro vivace
Hans KANN, Piano
Albert KOCSIS, Violin
Franz BARTOLOMEY, Cello
MHS 1326
SONATA in A MAJOR, Op. 104 for Cello & Piano
1. Allegro grazioso
2. Romanza: Poco adagio
3. Finale: Allegro non troppo
Franz BARTOLOMEY, Cello
Hans KANN, Piano
SONATA in E-FLAT MAJOR, Op. 5, No. 3 for Viola & Piano
1. Allegro moderato
2. Adagio cantabile
3. Rondo con noto
Karl STIERHOF, Viola
Hans KANN, Piano
MHS 1327
SONATA in D MAJOR, Op. 50 for Flute & Piano
1. Allegro con brio
2. Andante - Rondo: Pastorale
SONATA in G MAJOR, Op. 2, No. 2 for Flute & Piano
1. Allegro
2. Romanze: Poco andante
3. Rondo: Allegro
Georg WEINHENGST, Flute
Hans KANN, Piano
MHS 1328
SONATA in C MAJOR, Op. 37 for Mandolin & Piano
1. Allegro con spirito
2. Andante moderato siziliano
3. Rondo
Edith BAUER-SLAIS, Mandolin
Hans KANN, Piano
SONATA in B-FLAT MAJOR, Op. 5, No. 1 for Violin & Piano
1. Allegro moderato
2. Andante con variazioni
3. Rondo
Zlatko TOPOLSKI, Violin
Hans KANN, Piano
On May 20, 1789, the Musikalische Real- Zeitung, of
Speyer, printed the following notice, dated Dresden,
April 16:
"On 10 March Herr Hummel, a young pianoforte
player aged 9, native of Vienna and Mozart's pupil, was heard in public here to the admiration of every listener, with Mozart’s variations on ‘Lison dormoit'
and his grand concerto in C major He is to go to
Berlin from here. "
This performance was one of many that young "Herr
Hummel, " a child prodigy, had been giving at this time. In fact, by the time of this concert, the boy had already studied piano and composition with Mozart
Hummel's father was a conductor and Director of the
Imperial School of Military Music at Pressburg He originally attempted to teach his son violin, but when that failed the boy was allowed to study the piano.
His talent for that instrument soon manifested itself, and it was then that Johannes Hummel decided to speak to his friend Mozart about his son.
Accordingly, in 1786, they went to visit Mozart who
was busy working when they arrived. Nevertheless, he stopped what he was doing to greet his guests
then inquired about the nature of their Visit.
"With some slight embarrassment I brought out my
request, " wrote Hummel's father:
"He listened to me with patience, but when I had finished he looked a bit doubtful and said, You know,
my dear friend, I don't much like taking on pupils; it
takes up too much of my time and disturbs me in my
work But let's see and hear what the boy is like, and
whether he's worth helping --Sit down at the piano,
then, and show us what you can do, he said to
Nepomuk The latter came out with a few small
pieces by Bach which he had carefully practiced, and spread them out. Mozart left him alone and he began Wolfgang had sat down beside me again and listened with his arms crossed. He became ever more
still, his expression ever more rapt, his eyes shone
more brightly and joyously During the performance
he nudged me gently with his arm a few times and nodded appreciatively towards me. When my boy had
finished the Bach, Mozart placed another and not
exactly easy composition before him, one of his own
this time, to see how good his sight-reading might be.
It went very well Wolfgang's attention grew from
minute to minute. Suddenly, with a look that sparkled and twinkled for joy, he put his hand on my knee, pressed it gently, and whispered to me, You must
leave the lad here with me, I shan't let him out of my
sight -- something can be made of him!' -- My
Nepomuk had just about finished the movement when Mozart got up, hurried over to him, put his hand on his head, and said, 'Bravo, bravo; you're a splendid lad Carry on like that and you will get on alright!. . .And to me he said, 'It's agreed, then, I’ll teach the lad, but he must live with me so that I can always have my eye on him He shall have everything free, lessons, lodging, food... ’ Shortly after, my son Nepomuk moved to Mozart's house, where he was treated like a son of the family He was as comfortable and well cared for as possible; Wolfgang looked after him like a father, and Konstanze cared for him like a mother "
We don't know how frequently Hummel actually had lessons with Mozart, nor do we know how Mozart taught his young charge piano and composition. Since Mozart believed more could be taught by demonstration then by actual words and "lessons," it is not unlikely that Hummel learned a great deal about piano playing by merely observing his mentor at work. One of Mozart's early biographers wrote on "trust worthy family authority," that Hummel had to play on the piano for his teacher, any new music which had come into the Mozart house. One evening, so the story goes, Hummel had fallen asleep waiting for the composer and his wife to return from a night out. When, they returned, Mozart found a piece of music which he was curious to hear: "Stanzerl," he said to his wife, "Wake Hans, and give him a glass of wine." As soon as the boy was awake and had drunk the wine, he played the composition then went off to bed Whether the story is apocryphal or pure fancy we don't know, it is known, however, that he took young Hummel wherever he went and that they frequently played piano duets He also declared that the boy would some day excel himself as a pianist. Hummel, for his part, became very fond of the Mozarts during the two years he lived with them. Many years later, in 1827, he pointed out the building he had lived in to his pupil, Ferdinand Hiller
“The master was completely lost in his memories," wrote Hiller "as he led me through the various rooms, which seemed not to have undergone any alteration, he described their former furnishings to me ‘Here', he said, 'stood Mozart's pianoforte, at which I had lessons, -- here was the writing desk at
which he composed -- here in this little room stood my clavier and there in the middle of the room was a billiard table. One day I tried to wield the cue and tore a hole in the cloth The punishment (he mimed it) was not slow in coming."
When Hummel left the Mozarts, his father took him on an extended concert tour of Bohemia, Germany, Denmark, England, Scotland and Holland. On his return to Vienna, in 1793, he undertook the serious study of composition with Albrechtsberger. He also received advice from Haydn, and many suggestions regarding operatic composition from Salieri It is than likely that Hummel and Beethoven became acquainted with one another at this time, since they both studied with Haydn and Albrechtsberger at the same time.
In 1803 Hummel returned to Vienna from a successful concert tour of Russia. A year later he became Kapellmeister to Haydn's former employer, Prince Esterhazy, at Eisenstadt He was dismissed from this post in 1811 because he neglected his duties, and returned to Vienna, where he lived as a teacher and performer, until 1816, at which time he became the Kapellmeister at the court in Stuttgart. This position he exchanged for a similar one in Weimer which he held until his death He was more fortunate in his Weimer post than he had been previously, in that he was given frequent leaves of absence which enabled him to go to Russia for a second time, in 1822, as well as to visit Paris in 1822 and 1829, and London in 1829 and 1833.
Hummel wrote compositions In almost every form, including operas, masses, concerti (no symphonies), dances for piano solo and for orchestra, and a great deal of piano and chamber music.
Hummel was, however, far more important than the fore-going biographical sketch would indicate. Not only did he learn a great deal about composition from such teachers as Mozart, Haydn, Salieri and Albrechtsberger, but he acquired a basic technique of piano playing from Mozart as well. In his time, as we will see, he was regarded as one of the finest pianists in Vienna, and as a composer of music for the piano, he influenced nearly all the composers who came after him, including Chopin, Mendelssohn and early Schumann. Hummel's primary importance, historically, was as a pianist, partly because he passed on the tradition of Mozart, and partly because at the same time he pointed the way to a new school of pianistic virtuosity. This dichotomy, the classical versus the romantic in his method of playing is also noticeable in his music, and the results are always interesting, even if, as in the Sonata for Cello and Piano, Opus 104, they are sometimes a little disappointing.
Physically, Hummel was hardly prepossessing His face was pitted by smallpox, and he was crude, ungainly and slovenly. Czerny described him as a very striking young man, with an unpleasant, common-looking face that constantly twitched," and who wore "utterly tasteless clothing. He wore valuable diamond rings on almost all his fingers " Towards the end of his life he became so fat that it
was necessary to cut a place for him out of his dining table, at home and at court.
Beethoven, to whom external appearance meant little, thought highly of him as a person and as a composer, and refers to him in many of his letters, In 1814, he wrote the following brief note to Hummel, regarding his conducting the percussion instruments in a performance of "Battle Symphony:"
"Most Charming Hummel! Please conduct this time too the drum-rolls and cannonades with your excellent Kapellmeister and Master of the Ordnance's baton -- Please do so. If you would like me to cannonade you sometime, I am at your service, both body and soul -- Your friend
BEETHOVEN,"
Hiller, who visited Beethoven with Hummel as the great composer lay on his death-bed, wrote that they were always received with obvious pleasure by the dying man:
" .. .he appealed to Hummel in behalf of Schindler, of whom so much was spoken afterwards 'He is a good man, he said, who has taken a great deal of trouble on my account. He is to give a concert soon at which I promised my cooperation But now nothing is likely to come of that. Now I should like to have you do me the favor of playing. We must always help poor artists ' As a matter of course, Hummel consented The concert took place -- ten days after Beethoven's death-in the Joseph stadt-Theater. Hummel improvised in an obviously exalted mood on
the Allegretto of the A major Symphony; the public knew why he participated and the performance and its reception formed a truly inspiring incident "
As a composer Hummel was highly thought of by many of his contemporaries According to Chopin, the Viennese publisher Haslinger, virtually lived off the sale of his music, until it was replaced in the public favor by the waltzes of Johann Strauss senior, and Josef Lanner. Schubert thought so highly of him that he requested his publisher to dedicate his three last piano sonatas to him (Haslinger announced them for publication in 1829 after Schubert's death- but they were not printed until 1838, by Diabelli, at which time they were dedicated to Schumann ) Although Schumann felt Hummel's Etudes Opus 125 to be rather dry and uninteresting when compared to Chopin's Opus 10, he once wrote in a youthful letter to Friedrick Wieck, with whom he was contemplating studying the piano:
“I am busy studying the last movement of Hummel's F-sharp minor sonata. It is truly a great epic, titanic work; it is a portrait of a heroic spirit, struggling but resigned "
Several years later, in 1839 he wrote of the same work:
"It was Hummel who vigorously continued the Mozartean manner; his F-sharp minor sonata alone would perpetuate his memory
It was as a pianist, however, that Hummel attracted the most attention Czerny, who studied the piano with him, wrote of his playing around 1804:
“Even at that time Hummel had reached the pianistic proficiency -- within the limits of the instruments of that time -- for which he became so famous later. While Beethoven's playing was remarkable for his enormous power, characteristic expression, and his unheard-of virtuosity and passage work, Hummel's performance was a model of cleanness, clarity, and of the most graceful his elegance and tenderness; all difficulties were calculated for the greatest and most stunning effect, which he achieved by combining Clementi's manner of playing, so wisely gauged for the instrument, with that of Mozart. It was quite natural, therefore, that the general public preferred him as pianist, and soon the two masters formed parties, which opposed one another with bitter enmity. Hummel's partisans accused Beethoven of mistreating the piano, lacking all cleanness and clarity, of creating nothing but confused noise the way he used the pedal, and finally of writing willful, unnatural, unmelodic compositions, which were irregular besides. On the other hand, the Beethovenites maintained that Hummel lacked all genuine imagination, that his playing was as monotonous as a hurdy-gurdy, that the position of his fingers reminded them of spiders, and that his compositions were nothing more than arrangements of motifs by Haydn and Mozart."
In 1816, the Bohemian composer, Tomaschek, wrote of Hummel's playing:
"Hummel's touch was more feminine than virile, and
reminded me for the most part of Wölfel's playing When I recall that both men, competent artists, were Mozart's pupils, I am tempted to conclude that the master also did not possess a vigorous touch Such a conclusion, however, would stand in direct contradiction to his compositions, which sound quite full-bodied "
Hummel excelled at improvising, and there are two vivid descriptions of his extempore playing In 1814, Spohr and he were invited to a musicale that a mutual friend was having:
"It was there that I first heard Hummel play his wonderful Septet, as well as other compositions he was producing at that time, I was most attracted, however, by his improvising, which remains to this day unmatched by any other artist. I remember with the greatest pleasure one evening in particular when he fairly outdid himself. The party was on the point of breaking up when a few of the ladies, thinking it still too early, asked Hummel to play some waltzes, Gallant and accommodating as he always was toward the ladies, he seated himself at the piano and played the desired waltzes, at which the young people in the next room began to dance. I and some of the other artists present gathered around the piano, our hats in our hands, and listened No sooner had Hummel noticed this new audience then he began to improvise freely, holding, however, to the steady waltz rhythm in order not to disturb the dancers. He took the most striking themes and figures from my own compositions and those of others that had been played in the course of the
evening's program and wove them into his waltzes, varying them more fancifully with each repetition. Finally he worked them into a fugue, giving full rein to his contrapuntal wizardry, without ever disturbing the pleasure of the dancers. Then he returned to the gallant style and ended with a bravura which was extraordinary even for him, still exploiting the themes he had originally selected, so that the whole extravaganza had the character of a fully rounded composition
Several years later, the English writer on music, Henry F Chorley, heard him improvise and wrote: "By none who have heard Hummel's improvisation can it ever be forgotten, It was graceful, spontaneous, fantastic The admirable self-control of his style as a player. . .so far from leading him to hamper his fancy or humor, enabled him to give both the fullest scope -- inasmuch as he felt that he could never ramble away into a chaos, under pretext of a light from Dream-land. The subjects he originated in improvisation were the freshest, brightest, most various conceivable: his treatment of them could be either strict or freakish, as the moment pleased; -or he would take the commonest tune, and so grace, and enhance, and alter it, as to present it in the liveliest forms of a new pleasure, I remember once to have heard Hummel thus treat the popular airs in Auber's “Massaniello," for an hour and a half, throwing off a Neapolitan fantasia with a felicity in which his unimpeachable beauty of tone and execution were animated by the bright spirit of the south, as he wrought together the Chapel Hymn, and the Fisherman's Chorus and the Tarantella, and Massaniello's air by the side of the sleeping Fenella."
As a composer, Hummel is just as underrated today as he was overrated in his own time. His piano music is now looked upon as rather brilliant but somewhat devoid of genuine musical ideas -- and if we were to hear only his rondos and pieces d'occasion as examples of his compositions, we might agree that the musical value of his works is indeed slight. But such compositions as his Parthia for wind octet, his Three Marches for Band, the clarinet quartet and the Septet Opus 74, are of an entirely different nature. In these works the serious composer is present in almost every measure Even when he is coy, as in the scherzo of the clarinet quartet, or writing "light" music for the nobility, as in his Three Marches (composed for Alexander I of Russia), there is genuine musical validity. In his once popular Septet (which Czerny said caused a sensation when it was first performed in Vienna, around 1820, because of its novelty and brilliance), and in his Parthia for winds, we have not only fine music, but also the crux of why his music is so looked down upon today There are many features of the piano writing in the Septet which evoke memories of Schubert and Chopin-early romanticism The wind Parthia, on the other hand, is definitely in the Viennese tradition of Mozart's serenades for winds. As a result we find that Hummel does not fit easily into the category of a classical composer -- although he was steeped in the tradition of Mozart and Haydn -- nor does he quite fit into the romantic era, since despite some remarkably prophetic works, such as the Trio in E, Opus 83, one is always aware of his classical orientation
There is another aspect of Hummel's musical
personality which might have some bearing on the reason for his popularity in his own time, and the lack of it in ours In his quest for fame and the financial security that usually accompanies it, he made concessions to his public in many of his compositions This is especially noticeable in his piano works, such as the Polonaise Opus 55, "La Bella Capricciosa," In this work, despite a fine, and at times almost Chopinesque introduction, the polonaise itself never really gets off the ground, the reason being, it would seem, because of a rather common-place theme and its excessive length, and rather pointless and too frequent modulations. The piano Sonata in f minor, Opus 20, an otherwise excellent work, is completely marred by the coda to the last movement in which the theme from the last movement of Mozart's Jupiter Symphony'" is quoted without rhyme or reason The same thing occurs in the finale of the Sonata Opus 50, for flute and piano, where, curiously enough, the same theme is quoted, in a different setting The results, unfortunately, are very much the same. For a man who studied with some of the greatest Composers the world has ever known, it would not be unreasonable to expect a higher degree of discipline and self-criticism than Hummel manifested in the works just mentioned. For a composer who could write such a splendid first movement as that of the Sonata Opus 104 for cello and piano, it would seem inexcusable on his part to write a second and third movement which, by comparison, lack most of the originality and spirit of the first. Changing times and tastes would not tolerate such a thing of a Mozart, a Schubert or a Schumann, who rarely, if ever showed such lapses of taste, nor would it tolerate such a thing in a Hummel,
who unfortunately did.
Hummel's proximity in time to Mozart, Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Schumann, is another factor which has lead to his neglect. Within their own terms, their music is a greater part of their era than Hummel's so that they can more easily capture the spirit of the times in which they lived. Hummel had the misfortune to represent the transition from the classical to the romantic era in his music, so that while he is a reflection of one, he doesn't quite catch the light from the other. No matter how well his works may be written, if his music is compared to that of Haydn, Mozart or Beethoven, it is found wanting in conciseness and economy of means, and if it is compared to the romantic composer, it is regarded as rather dry and old-fashioned. In a word, he can't win!
Barring comparisons, however, and taking Hummel on his own terms, it is possible to find his music not only tuneful, very well written for whichever instrument he chooses to write for, and frequently, exciting and always (except for a few of his early works) the master of his craft. Certain short-comings in some of his compositions are inexcusable and these concessions to public taste have taken their toll of his present day reputation, but there are many fine pieces which could be and should be better known, such as his Six Bagatelles for the piano, his Preludes in all the major and minor keys, Opus 67 (composed before Chopin wrote his Opus 10), the Piano Sonata in E-flat, Opus 10, and many of the works included on these records, such as the Flute
Sonata Opus 50, (including the inexplicable quotation from the Jupiter Symphony"), the Viola Sonata Opus 5, No. 3, and some of the piano trios. These works, and others, might well be performed today with gratifying results, since they would give the concert-going public a chance to hear worthwhile but seldom played music, and the instrumentalists might find the music intellectually -and technically --stimulating.
On hearing the fine first movement of the TRIO IN EFLAT, OPUS 12, it is easy to see why Mendelssohn thought so highly of Hummel's music, and why Hummel's other contemporaries regarded him so highly. Here is music which contains the logical qualities of construction to be found in the works of Haydn and Mozart, but it is still a part of the 'new" music of the early 19th century. The piano writing is not only idiomatic, it is varied texturally and perhaps most important, although the piano is very much in evidence, it never overshadows the violin or cello. In this movement, too, one gets an early glimpse of the young Hummel as a virtuoso pianist, for who else at that time could write such a brilliant piano part but a person who was writing for himself? We find examples of difficult piano writing in Beethoven's piano trios and violin and piano sonatas, but in the present trio there is a brilliance and effect which is as new (for the time) as it is varied. The one serious short-coming of an otherwise excellent movement is the last three measures. Like Beethoven and his problems with the last measures of the first movement of the "Eroica Symphony'", Hummel had his problems with ending this movement. He
attempted to refer to the fermatas in the exposition and recapitulation, but in so doing, he apparently worked himself into a situation from which he found no ready solution. Rather than work at the problem and attempt different solutions, Hummel appears to have taken the obvious and least effective one of going from one held chord to another by way of arpeggios a la cadenza. The last chord is also the final chord of the movement The result is an emotional let-down for the non-professional listener and an astonished "how could you…” from practical musicians, who up to this point might well have found the piece a welcome addition to their repertoire.
The second movement, andante, is a well-written, tuneful and generally smooth-flowing composition in three-part form There is also an interesting lyrical quality about it which seems closely related to Mendelssohn's Songs Without Words.
If Mendelssohn had preceded Hummel, it would have been easy to point to the last movement of this trio as characteristically Mendelssohnian The fact is that Hummel probably wrote the present composition long before Mendelssohn wrote his first trios, and it is not difficult to find in this last movement all the things which the younger composer loved -- plenty of fast moving scales and arpeggios, contrapuntal interplay between the instruments, melodic fragments that flit in and out of the figure-work, and lots of interesting modulations. It is all excellent Mendelssohn, except that it was written by Hummel.
Neither the music or recordings of the TRIOS OP. 22 and 65 were available to this writer when these notes were being written
The TRIO OP. 35, in G, is in a style which is harmonically and melodically more closely related to the trios of late Mozart and early Beethoven, than the earlier Trio Opus 12. This coupled with the fact that the last movement is a kind of distant echo of Havdn's "Gypsy Rondo" from the Trio in G (Hoboken No. 25), and that it also includes a theme reminiscent of that from Beethoven's C minor piano concerto, lead one to suspect that it was composed in what was then called an easy and familiar style." There are no wide-ranging modulations in this work, and the parts for the three instruments are technically relatively simple. The piano part of the concerto-like first movement, for example, can be played by most amateur home-music makers. The second movement, tempo di minuetto, and the last movement, a rondo, also require little in the way of technical skill on the part of the performers.
In contrast to most of the other trios on these records, the TRIO OPUS 83, in E, is called a Grand Trio," and grand it is, with respect to length and style In this work, too, Hummel's affinity for early romanticism is indicated in such things as the modulations to distant keys, the type of writing for the piano (with lyrical melodies in the right hand two or more octaves away from the left) and the very nature of the themes, their accompaniments and working out, which, while showing the influence of his classical training, also show his awareness of the changing musical styles.
In the first movement to this excellent trio, one occasionally hears melodic phrases which seem to recall Chopin, especially by the manner in which they are set for the piano, although we should more properly say that Chopin's music is occasionally reminiscent of some of Hummel's. The distribution of the melody between the piano and the strings is particularly effective in the middle of the fine second movement. Here, amidşt an abundance of running notes in the piano, and constantly changing keys, the lyrical mood is always in evidence, and in a curious way, so is the legacy of Mozart and Beethoven -- one senses the discipline of their training, even if it shows signs of having been slightly modified.
The last movement, a rondo, is extremely demanding on the pianist, and it is here that one can form some idea of the type of performer Hummel was, Yet, with all the virtuoso writing, one never receives the impression that there are too many notes. There are a few lyrical moments in this whirwind movement, too, and it is to Hummel's credit that he was able to bring them in and take them out, without in any way affecting the flow of the music.
One would hardly suspect that the composer of the Trio Opus 83 also wrote the TRIO Op. 96 in E-flat. The reason for this "classical" trio lies in the fact that Hummel represents a transition between two eras, and was, in his own way, sympathetic to both. Arnold Schoenberg once wrote that all composers, no matter how complex their music, occasionally experience the desire to write in the style of their youth or in the manner of a bygone age -- and he
wrote his Variations in B-flat for Band, long after he had established himself as a composer of 12-tone music. With Hummel the situation was similar: After writing two romantic" concerti for the piano, several piano trios and other works, we find his occasionally composing pieces like the trios Opus 35 and 96. A look backwards perhaps, but done with all the mastery of the true artist, who can draw upon the past, take from it that which suits his needs, and discard the rest.
It is only necessary to hear the first few measures of the TRIO OPUS 96 to recognize the difference between a grand trio (like Opus 83) and the more conservative and classically oriented works he simply called "trios." Opus 83 begins leisurely with a gradual unfolding of the themes. The piano part is generally either more brilliant and more virtuosic, and more varied in the use of the upper, middle and lower registers. Opus 96, on the other hand, might almost have been written by the mature Mozart of the trios K.502 and 542. The structure of the first movement, for instance, is concise, the themes follow each other quickly and are, in general, similar in contour to themes found in the instrumental music of the late 18th century. The second movement, andante quasi allegretto, combines the elements of the rondo and theme and variations. The variations are sometimes joined by bridge passages, so that the listener is scarcely aware that a new variation has begun. The last movement, rondo alla Russe, is based on the Russian song “Kamarinskaya." This melody was also used by Glinka in an orchestral work of that name, and by Liadov in his Eight Russian Folk Songs for orchestra. It is not out of the
realm of possibility that this trio was composed for some royal Russian amateur, since in addition to the use of the Russian melody, there is a quasi-salon quality in parts of the movement in which several passages border dangerously on the galop The movement, however, is full of humor and little musical artifices (such as the miniscule fugato which is over almost before it has really begun), all of which are brought about effortlessly and without any change of mood.
There are passages in the first movement of the SONATA Op. 104, for cello and piano, which almost sound like Schumann There are other passages which almost sound like Mendelssohn, and there are other passages which almost sound like middle period Beethoven Where, then is something that sounds like Hummel? This, in brief, is the problem, and the answer is simple: It all sounds like Hummel, because his later compositions are frequently a mixture of early romantic and late classical styles. The first movement of this sonata is a fine example of this mixture of styles, and is also a summation of Hummel's dilemma. On the classical side he was overshadowed by the music of Beethoven, Haydn and Mozart, all of whom he knew personally On the romantic side his music was overshadowed by that of Mendelssohn, Schumann, Chopin and Liszt, some of whom he also knew While Hummel was influenced by the classical tradition of piano playing, he himself exerted no little influence on romantic music and the "new" style of playing
The first movement of the SONATA Op. 104, points up all of Hummel's good qualities as an early romantic composer: Notice, for example, the almost Brahmsian quality of the opening cello solo, or the rich, full writing of the piano part during the first minute or so of the movement. Notice, too, the lyrical, almost Mendelssohnian second theme. The development section is a mixture of styles: The classical technique of fragmentation a la Beethoven, coupled with the piano style generally associated with Mendelssohn, and sometimes we seem to recognize shades of early Schumann. Yet, Hummel did it all first and showed the way to the younger composers, most of whom acknowledged their debt to him, and their fondness for many of his compositions.
The effort of writing such a splendid first movement must have been almost too strenuous, since the second movement, poco, adagio, a "Romanze," is more classical in style and harmonic vocabulary. By far the most interesting part of the movement is the minore, in which we come close to early romanticisrn without ever achieving the breadth and beauty of the first movement.
The third movement, a rondo, seems almost like an attempt to capture the quality of the first. Somehow, inspiration seems to be lacking, so that although Hummel the craftsman can write a "correct" movement, it lacks a certain amount of life and warmth Devices such as canons, sudden modulations to unrelated keys, brilliant piano writing
(and some interesting passages for the cello), all leave one feeling that something is not quite right, that the notes are there, but the music and beauty we have been expecting is missing
The SONATA Op. 5, No. 3 in E-FLAT, for viola and piano was composed in 1798, and is one of three sonatas Hummel dedicated to the Princess of Denmark. Although the work still shows the influence of Mozart in its themes and piano writing, the ensemble writing is very interesting and the viola part no doubt endeared him to his viola playing friends, just as it has made him friends among the viola players of our own time.
The SONATA FOR FLUTE AND PIANO, Op 2, No 2, was composed when Hummel was twelve years old, and was dedicated to the Queen of England. It is the work of a precocious child and shows little of the originality that characterize many of his later compositions. Mozart's influence is obvious throughout the work with regard to style and melodic ideas. Particularly Mozartian is a melodic fragment in the first movement (from the first movement of the piano concerto K 482), and one in the last, which seems to have been derived from the last movement of K.527.
There is a world of difference between the early Sonata Opus 2 No. 2, discussed briefly above, and the present SONATA in D, Op 50, also for flute and piano, The early sonata, with its echoes of Mozart, is the work of a ten year old boy, the present piece is a composition by the master composer The writing tor
flute is always interesting and there is a constant "give and take," between the flute and piano, which is the very essence of chamber music.
The melodic and harmonic language of the first movement of the SONATA Op. 50 is that of early romanticism, and is in fact not unlike Schubert in the manner by which the themes unfold and in its harmonic variety. The second movement, andante is solemn, and not unlike some of the slow movements of Beethoven's middle-period piano sonatas. The entire movement is based on a three-note motif played in the bass on the piano, like muffled tympani beats. There is, in fact, a sense of sadness about the movement, and it seems more closely related to the poetic unhappiness of Mendelssohn and early Schumann, than to the controlled feelings of Haydn or Mozart, or the violent outbursts of Beethoven.
There is a folk-like quality about the theme of the last movement, rondo pastorale, which may be responsible for its being called "pastorale " In the middle of the movement there is a curious quotation from the last movement of Mozart's Jupiter Symphony," which catches the listener by surprise Unfortun ately, the change of pace in this section mars an otherwise fine movement.
Unfortunately neither the music nor the recordings to the SONATA in C, Op. 37, for mandolin and piano, were available when these notes were written In addition to the sonata, however, Hummel also wrote a fine concerto for mandolin and orchestra.
Hummel's Opus S comprises three sonatas It was published in 1798 and dedicated to the Princess of Denmark. The SONATA in B-FLAT is the first of two such works in the volume, the third being the Sonata for Viola and Piano, discussed elsewhere in these notes. Despite some very pleasant ideas which occur from time to time in this composition, it lacks the overall unity and finesse which are so much in evidence in works like the Sonata Opus 50, or the Trio Opus 12
Douglas Townsend