# Vivaldi 'vs' Albinoni



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Many obvious parellels are drawn between the two composers, not least of all their championing of the solo baroque concerto (as opposed to the concertino baroque concerto employed by Corelli).

However, I am trying to work out why I like Albonini more than the celebrated Vivaldi, when it comes to their concerto output.

My hypothesis is that, while Vivaldi is perhaps more 'bold' in his phrasing and ryhthms, Albinoni is more contrapuntal. Take the following, final concerto movement, samples:





 (Albinoni)





 (Vivaldi)

These are picked at random, from the very same HIP ensemble. The Albonini sounds much richer in texture to me than the Vivaldi.

If so, could the more homophonic textures of Vivaldi be due to him being more in touch with modern (roccoco/galant) trends, or rather because he was writing largely for an ameatuer group of musicians in the form of, essentially, high school girls?


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Contrapuntal richness is certainly part of it. For me Albinoni was also the better melodist, and by some distance. Try for example the slow movement of the oboe concerto in D minor, Op.9 no.2. His oboe concertos in particular abound in such gems. Vivaldi's music is fun but IMHO Albinoni's has an extra touch of class.

I don't know the answer to your closing question, but my money would be on a simple difference of taste and outlook between the two composers and, like you, I definitely find Albinoni's the more congenial.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Surely, Vivaldi had many more strings to his bow? I mean he excelled in quite a wide range of elements while Albinoni was a much more limited composer. It seems to me that you could get a representative taste of what Albinoni can do with one or two CDs but you would need many many more to get a real feel for Vivaldi's capability. He developed over time, he excelled in writing not only concertos but also church music .... and he should also be taken seriously as an opera composer. Perhaps, though, there is a lot more to Albinoni than I have heard. I know the Op. 5 and Op. 9 concertos but not much more. Am I missing something special?


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

enthusiast, 

I was only talking about their respective concertos. Of course, Vivaldi wrote about 50 times more concertos than A. However, i’m not sure you will find much in way of stylistic variation. 

by all means, if there are Vivaldi sonatas with more complex textures than the example i posted, i would welcome a listen. I realise I posted a single movement from a single concerto where V wrote some 500 or so! I am familiar with his cello, bassoon, and oboe concertos mostly.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Animal the Drummer said:


> Contrapuntal richness is certainly part of it. For me Albinoni was also the better melodist, and by some distance. Try for example the slow movement of the oboe concerto in D minor, Op.9 no.2. His oboe concertos in particular abound in such gems. Vivaldi's music is fun but IMHO Albinoni's has an extra touch of class.
> 
> I don't know the answer to your closing question, but my money would be on a simple difference of taste and outlook between the two composers and, like you, I definitely find Albinoni's the more congenial.


Thanks for your thoughts, mate. I know Vivaldi wrote a lot of music for an amateur group of young female musicians, but I'm not sure who he intended his concerti for.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Enthusiast said:


> Surely, Vivaldi had many more strings to his bow? I mean he excelled in quite a wide range of elements while Albinoni was a much more limited composer. It seems to me that you could get a representative taste of what Albinoni can do with one or two CDs but you would need many many more to get a real feel for Vivaldi's capability. He developed over time, he excelled in writing not only concertos but also church music .... and he should also be taken seriously as an opera composer. Perhaps, though, there is a lot more to Albinoni than I have heard. I know the Op. 5 and Op. 9 concertos but not much more. Am I missing something special?


Interesting post but we'll have to agree to differ. With respect, the question of the scope of a composer's output doesn't seem to me to tell us a great deal about the quality of that output - Chopin for example wrote very little outside the solo piano repertoire. What counts, IMHO of course, is the respective quality of each piece, and there - though I accept it's a matter of individual taste - I would stand by the view that Albinoni's are by and large more melodically inspired, more varied in character and richer in texture. Try the oboe concertos op.7 for a further comparison in addition to those you've cited. :tiphat:


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

RogerWaters said:


> enthusiast,
> 
> I was only talking about their respective concertos. Of course, Vivaldi wrote about 50 times more concertos than A. However, i'm not sure you will find much in way of stylistic variation.
> 
> by all means, if there are Vivaldi sonatas with more complex textures than the example i posted, i would welcome a listen. I realise I posted a single movement from a single concerto where V wrote some 500 or so! I am familiar with his cello, bassoon, and oboe concertos mostly.


Ah, OK. Now it is true that Vivaldi wrote many concertos that were merely hack work. I believe he was tapping into the brand new tourism market. But he also wrote many concertos that were of fine quality and very original - the Op.3, Op.4, Op.8 and Op.9 sets are all quite varied and are also different from each other. I'm not sure the same can be said for Albinoni. Much as I enjoy his Op.5, Op.7 and Op.9 concertos and much as I appreciate his special melodic gifts (most in the slow movement), I do not think they have so much variety. I do think that, even if we just stick to the concertos, Vivaldi emerges as the bigger and more original of the two.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Animal the Drummer said:


> Interesting post but we'll have to agree to differ. With respect, the question of the scope of a composer's output doesn't seem to me to tell us a great deal about the quality of that output - Chopin for example wrote very little outside the solo piano repertoire. What counts, IMHO of course, is the respective quality of each piece, and there - though I accept it's a matter of individual taste - I would stand by the view that Albinoni's are by and large more melodically inspired, more varied in character and richer in texture. Try the oboe concertos op.7 for a further comparison in addition to those you've cited. :tiphat:


Agreeing to differ is fine - it usually comes down to that in TC debates! - but I cannot resist wondering how you can feel that Vivaldi's best concertos lack the quality of Albinoni's.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

As indicated in the post you quote above, I accept it's a matter of individual taste, but mine leads me to the view that Albinoni's are more melodic, more varied in character and richer texturally, i.e.in the inner parts. Vivaldi's seem to me to rely first and foremost on a kind of insistent rhythmic vitality, which is fine and attractive in its own way but which I find ultimately less rewarding.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

One advantage for Vivaldi is that the top period instrument bands have recorded his music; I doubt that Albinoni has had as much advocacy on record.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Albinoni has given me one of the finest works in my music collection, a piece I turn to again and again, and, when I do, often end up repeating two or three or more times. Simply a wonderful work.

The Oboe Concerto Op.9 No.5 in C Major.

It's done beautifully on this NAXOS disc by Anthony Camden (oboist) and the London Virtuosi.















As upbeat and "bouncy" a work as you'll ever want to hear, yet with a contrasting (though brief) middle movement that plumbs the depths of pathos like nobody until Tchaikovsky came onto the scene.

But, with all of that said, I'm not willing to part with my rather substantial Vivaldi collection any time soon.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

I don't think I have anything by Albinoni except for the _Adagio_. There's not much by Vivaldi I listen to apart from the _Four Seasons_, _Concerto for Diverse Instruments_, and Isaac Stern's _Vivaldi Gala_ anthology where he joins Jean-Pierre Rampal, David Oistrak, Itzhak Perlman, and Pinchas Zukerman on various Vivaldi duobles and one triple. Stern, Perlman, and Zukerman really kick in it into turbo on the Vivaldi Triple.


----------



## BobBrines (Jun 14, 2018)

Without getting into the discussion at hand, one needs to spend some time with Vivaldi's concertos written after OP 12. I suggest some of the Carmignola/Marcon collaborations of the "late concertos. The numbered opuses were largely collections of stuff Vivaldi had on hand at the time. The "Four Seasons" had been circulating in manuscript for some five years before OP 8 and the first draft of "la Tempest de mare" (RV98) was written around 1710. OP 7 contains at least one spurious violin concerto and the attribution of of the two oboe concertos to Vivaldi is laughable.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Bulldog said:


> One advantage for Vivaldi is that the top period instrument bands have recorded his music; I doubt that Albinoni has had as much advocacy on record.


Not as much advocacy, no, but some:

Dombrecht has a fine selection of Albinoni's oboe concertos, taken from both Op. 7 and OP. 9:






Ensemble 415 a fine rendition of the Op. 2 sonatas:






Harmonices Mundi a fine rendition of the Op. 10 violin concertos:


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> Agreeing to differ is fine - it usually comes down to that in TC debates! - but I cannot resist wondering how you can feel that Vivaldi's best concertos lack the quality of Albinoni's.


Albinoni, I think, has slightly more counterpoint. If you like counterpoint in your baroque music, Vivaldi will therefore come up short in comparison!

(This is not to say Vivaldi lacks his own unique features: such as a certain novel rhythmic vitality and phrasing, which I believe influenced Bach).


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> Ah, OK. Now it is true that Vivaldi wrote many concertos that were merely hack work. I believe he was tapping into the brand new tourism market. But he also wrote many concertos that were of fine quality and very original - the Op.3, Op.4, Op.8 and Op.9 sets are all quite varied and are also different from each other. I'm not sure the same can be said for Albinoni. Much as I enjoy his Op.5, Op.7 and Op.9 concertos and much as I appreciate his special melodic gifts (most in the slow movement), I do not think they have so much variety. I do think that, even if we just stick to the concertos, Vivaldi emerges as the bigger and more original of the two.


You've raised two issues here: variety and originality. Now, i'm no expert, but variety is what I understood Vivaldi to completely lack, by popular consensus. Just because he has more concerti does not mean they are more diverse, in terms of musical structure. Of course, they will be more diverse in terms of which solo instrument features. If this is what you meant then we agree!

In terms of originality, I think quality precedes it in importance (and quality was the topic of my original post). In any case, I believe Albinoni turned to the solo concerti before Vivaldi. However, it may be the case that Vivaldi did more novel things with it after embracing it - such as stripping it of counterpoint!

View attachment 138711


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

There is a lot of reuse in Vivaldi because he was making one piece available in many forms for the market of the day, that should not be confused with a lack of originality.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

JAS said:


> There is a lot of reuse in Vivaldi because he was making one piece available in many forms for the market of the day, that should not be confused with a lack of originality.


No, but it is, almost by definition, a lack of variety.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

RogerWaters said:


> No, but it is by definition a lack of variety.


There might well be variety in what remains if you first simply eliminate the obvious duplication.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

JAS said:


> There might well be variety in what remains if you first simply eliminate the obvious duplication.


Not sure what you mean, sorry. You said, accurately I think, that he was replicating one piece in multiple forms. If you remove the 'multiple forms' you are left with the one piece?


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

RogerWaters said:


> Not sure what you mean, sorry. You said, accurately I think, that he was replicating one piece in multiple forms. If you remove the 'multiple forms' you are left with the one piece?


He was not merely replicating only _one_ piece. He was replicating various pieces, each being recast in forms for different applications. Those basic pieces are what one would evaluate for variety.

I am not sure that I understand why we are so quick to sneer at someone who was just trying to make a living, and successfully.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

RogerWaters said:


> You've raised two issues here: variety and originality. Now, i'm no expert, but variety is what I understood Vivaldi to completely lack, by popular consensus. Just because he has more concerti does not mean they are more diverse, in terms of musical structure. Of course, they will be more diverse in terms of which solo instrument features. If this is what you meant then we agree!
> 
> In terms of originality, I think quality precedes it in importance (and quality was the topic of my original post). In any case, I believe Albinoni turned to the solo concerti before Vivaldi. However, it may be the case that Vivaldi did more novel things with it after embracing it - such as stripping it of counterpoint!
> 
> View attachment 138711


As I and others have noted not all of Vivaldi was of the top drawer. He wrote a lot to commissions from tourists visiting Venice and most of this material was formulaic and merely repeating what he had already done. But there is a lot of variety among his better work. You are maybe going to ask me how can we know which ones are his better work? In the end (I'm sorry!) it is by listening but the concertos collected in opus numbered sets were mostly his more original work - albeit work that he might have gone on to imitate in response to a customer.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

JAS said:


> He was not merely replicating only _one_ piece. He was replicating various pieces, each being recast in forms for different applications. Those basic pieces are what one would evaluate for variety.
> 
> I am not sure that I understand why we are so quick to sneer at someone who was just trying to make a living, and successfully.


I'm not sure anyone is sneering at anyone in this thread! Instead, it seems you are taking issue with a series of reasonable, if not entirely standard, claims:

1. That Vivaldi's concerti output is characterised by repitition as opposed to any deep sense of variety
2. That Vivaldi's concerti output is charactersed by less contrapuntal complexity than Albinoni's 
3. That Vivaldi's originality, when it comes to his concerti output, is characterised by the above-mentioned move towards simpler textures (a 'negative'), along with rhythmic novelty, bold phrasing (and more virtuosic solo passages) (a 'positive').


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> But there is a lot of variety among his better work.


How would you qualify 'a lot'? Just different solo instruments? Or variety on a deeper level of compositional form and ideas?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Different solo instruments? Not at all important. Form? Perhaps not much but that applies to most Italian Baroque concertos in general. Ideas? Yes. Are they are a deeper level? I'm not sure how I would measure that - a plumb-line, echosounding? - but I feel the answer is yes.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

RogerWaters said:


> I'm not sure anyone is sneering at anyone in this thread! Instead, it seems you are taking issue with a series of reasonable, if not entirely standard, claims. . .


I am arguing for a somewhat more sophisticated view. I am arguing that the reuse of material does not necessarily eclipse the idea that he also displays variety in the core works. (There can even be a kind of creativity in the recasting of material for different arrangements.)

Also, the question, I thought, was about variety, and now it seems to have shifted to include complexity. I am not going to knock either Albinoni or Vivaldi, and I admit to fundamentally disliking these head to head, competition-based frames for discussing composers or compositions. I like compositions by both composers, and fully intend on continuing to do so.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

JAS said:


> I admit to fundamentally disliking these head to head, competition-based frames for discussing composers or compositions. I like compositions by both composers, and fully intend on continuing to do so.


I began this thread simply to ask the question whether I was right in detecting more *counterpoint *in A than V, and whether this is why _I_ like A more than V. I find comparing the technique of two different composers extremely helpful for my own understanding of classical music. For some reason the thread then turned into an attempt to show that V is 'better' than A. No one was telling anyone to dislike V and to listen to A instead at the start :tiphat:


----------



## ribonucleic (Aug 20, 2014)

I'll just say that "Vivaldi vs Albinoni" sounds like an Italian UFC match.

Tonight... they settle this _in the octagon_.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

ribonucleic said:


> I'll just say that "Vivaldi vs Albinoni" sounds like an Italian UFC match.
> 
> Tonight... they settle this _in the octagon_.


You might like to actually read my initial post!


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

And it was "Vivaldi 'vs' Albinoni" (noting scare quotes), in anciticaption of this very autism. I guess I should have titled my post "A limited inquiry into the contrapuntal differences in the concerti of Vialdi and Albinoni, without assumption as to the ultimate superiority of one over the other"!


----------

