# Haydn's piano trios



## Chordalrock

Which are the best ones?

Charles Rosen wrote something about the piano trios in Classical Style, something like they contain the height of his piano music or something. So I'm wondering which of them actually might.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Chordalrock said:


> Which are the best ones?
> 
> Charles Rosen wrote something about the piano trios in Classical Style, something like they contain the height of his piano music or something. So I'm wondering which of them actually might.


The best ones? I'd say my favourite one is No. 24 in D Major - the 1st movement is very intricate and underscores the contrast between major and minor modes. The 2nd is a 'learned', gloomy piece in the minor and the 3rd movement a lyrical ending. But just listen to the later ones, 24-32. The F-sharp minor, No. 26, is very good as well. Haydn also used its slow movement for the Adagio in symphony No. 102. But all of his trios are great to listen to, imo. The earlier ones are very good too.

No. 25 is the Gypsy trio - it has a gypsy-type finale with a Haydnesque rhythmic drive. No. 27 has some excellent melodies in its first movement. No. 29 has a nice, sprightly Allemande ending. And No. 31 has an elaborate first movement. Listen to the later ones first, I'd say.


----------



## Vaneyes

Chordalrock said:


> Which are the best ones?
> 
> Charles Rosen wrote something about the piano trios in Classical Style, something like they contain the height of his piano music or something. So I'm wondering which of them actually might.


My favorites are "28 - 31", and on this CD. :tiphat:


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Vaneyes said:


> My favorites are "28 - 31", and on this CD. :tiphat:


Oh yes, I forgot 28 - it has another of Haydn's short, gloomy gems - a baroque-type adagio in the minor. Love that one.


----------



## AH music

I'm new here and probably rushing in where angels would fear to tread..... Like all Haydn, very few poor moments anywhere in these attractive works. The very first movement of them all - strangely, long and slow - is gorgeous. Slight personal favourites seem to be nos 17, 27 and 30 (complete works rather than individual movements) but that by no means indicate they are the best! I have no formal musical background or training, just great pleasure from listening, can just about follow a score....


----------



## Chordalrock

Thanks all! These are good pointers.


----------



## Mandryka

I'll just recount that my own experience with these trios has been pretty eventful. I read Rosen's discussion where he praises them, duly bought the Beaux Arts set because it had received so many good reviews, and immediately felt totally let down by all but a handful of late trios. Subsequently I discovered some excellent performances on record, like the CD with Robert Levin and Bylsma, but they all tended to focus on the same handful of late trios.

I concuded that Rosen had overstated the case, as had the reviewers of BAT.

But then, the big discovery which made me change my mind about the music was the big set from Trio 1790. In their hands, every trio is exciting, entertaining, wonderful music, even the very early ones.


----------



## hpowders

Get any of the Beaux Arts Trio's performances of the Haydn Piano Trios. Delightful stuff!


----------



## Mal

I have the Beaux Arts Trio set. The ones I like the most are:

2, 5, 6, 13, 14, 16, 17, 22, 23, 25-28, 32, 36, 37


----------



## Pugg

hpowders said:


> Get any of the Beaux Arts Trio's performances of the Haydn Piano Trios. Delightful stuff!


Amen to this, :tiphat:


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

From what I hear in the samples, this record must be a blast:


----------



## Mandryka

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> From what I hear in the samples, this record must be a blast:
> 
> View attachment 79696


Impeccable playing but lacking the magic which would elevate it to the top shelf of Haydn trio recordings. It is workmanlike - a very high standard of workmanship, but workmanlike nevertheless.


----------



## Haydn man

Mandryka said:


> Impeccable playing but lacking the magic which would elevate it to the top shelf of Haydn trio recordings. It is workmanlike - a very high standard of workmanship, but workmanlike nevertheless.


I have listened to the above disc on Spotify
I thought it was first class recording and performance and enjoyed it immensely, however I am not familiar with the Beaux Arts Trio recordings which I believe are the bench mark


----------



## Mandryka

Haydn man said:


> I have listened to the above disc on Spotify
> I thought it was first class recording and performance and enjoyed it immensely, however I am not familiar with the Beaux Arts Trio recordings which I believe are the bench mark


The benchmark is Trio 1790.


----------



## Haydn man

I shall look for this on Spotify


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Mandryka said:


> Impeccable playing but lacking the magic which would elevate it to the top shelf of Haydn trio recordings. It is workmanlike - a very high standard of workmanship, but workmanlike nevertheless.


Hm, so your favourite is the Beaux Arts? I think it's a matter of taste at the end of the day. The Wanderer Trio just sounds spot on with the dynamics, to me at least. Very refreshing.


----------



## Mandryka

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Hm, so your favourite is the Beaux Arts? I think it's a matter of taste at the end of the day. The Wanderer Trio just sounds spot on with the dynamics, to me at least. Very refreshing.


I was disappointed by BAT. It's too smiling and cheerful, which I think doesn't do the music justice. There's a feeling of the production line of the complete set too.

It's a long time since I explored Haydn trios and I expect there have been some excellent recordings which I've not heard. But the best Haydn Trio recordings I know are:

Oistrakh-Oborin-Knushevitsky
Trio 1790
The ones with Gilels
The ones with Levin
The ones with Hantai
Casals-Thibaud-Cortot
Goldberg and Lilli Kraus and ???

And a notch or two below

Janigro/Fornier/Badura Skoda
Trio Wanderer
Schiff/Shiokawa/Pergamenschikow

Of all of these the one which stand out the most are the ones with Oistrakh-Oborin-Knushevitsky


----------



## Mal

Mandryka said:


> The benchmark is Trio 1790.


For me, and my guidebooks, the benchmark is the Beaux Arts Trio. Why not accept them as the benchmark and say why you think your favourites are better?


----------



## Mandryka

BAT are too elegant, too smiling, too cheerful, too comforting, too genial, too lyrical. There's not enough edge, they're not emotionally dark enough. I think Haydn's music is more interesting than that. And quite often they feel to me as though they're just running through the music, especially in the first four or five discs.

I suspect BAT bought into the "papa" Haydn idea. But now we know that that myth doesn't do the music justice: performances by Ranki and Beghin and Harnoncourt and Rosbaud and the Salomon quartet etc have revealed this.

Maybe they were the benchmarks when they were released, and maybe sunsequent guidebooks have cut and pasted Edward Greenfield etc. But times have moved on and the benchmark's changed.


----------



## Vaneyes

Mandryka said:


> I was disappointed by BAT. It's too smiling and cheerful, which I think doesn't do the music justice. There's a feeling of the production line of the complete set too.
> 
> It's a long time since I explored Haydn trios and I expect there have been some excellent recordings which I've not heard. But the best Haydn Trio recordings I know are:
> 
> *
> Oistrakh-Oborin-Knushevitsky*
> Trio 1790
> The ones with Gilels
> The ones with Levin
> The ones with Hantai
> Casals-Thibaud-Cortot
> Goldberg and Lilli Kraus and ???
> 
> And a notch or two below
> 
> Janigro/Fornier/Badura Skoda
> Trio Wanderer
> Schiff/Shiokawa/Pergamenschikow
> 
> Of all of these the one which stand out the most are the ones with *Oistrakh-Oborin-Knushevitsky*


"OOK" is bang on, marvellous playing in very decent 1950/1 Moscow sound. But only two Trios, right? I don't put any of the others you list in the "OOK" or "BAT" league.

The Haydn Keyboard Trios haven't been greatly served by HIP. I can't stand Trio 1790 for interps, intonation, playing, and sound recording. To my ears, the best HIP for these Trios is Trio Goya on Chandos Chaconne. Sadly, only one album, and with a questionable theme title. They're the group I'd like to hear more from, not Trio 1790. Less or nothing would be more from Trio 1790. Cheers! :tiphat:


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

The Trio Fontenay's Haydn should also be mentioned:









As regards hip in Haydn's trios, I do like the Van Swieten Trio recordings, as well as Levin/Beths/Bylsma:

















I think hip performances are great in their own ways. I'd probably give a slight edge to modern instrument performances though, simply because the modern piano has obvious advantages in terms of textural variety.


----------



## brotagonist

I have the third one and I can endorse it


----------



## Mandryka

Vaneyes said:


> "OOK" is bang on, marvellous playing in very decent 1950/1 Moscow sound. But only two Trios, right? I don't put any of the others you list in the "OOK" or "BAT" league.
> 
> The Haydn Keyboard Trios haven't been greatly served by HIP. I can't stand Trio 1790 for interps, intonation, playing, and sound recording. To my ears, the best HIP for these Trios is Trio Goya on Chandos Chaconne. Sadly, only one album, and with a questionable theme title. They're the group I'd like to hear more from, not Trio 1790. Less or nothing would be more from Trio 1790. Cheers! :tiphat:


Thanks for mentioning trio Goya, which I hadn't heard (of.) They're on spotify and I've listened to the C major trio, and I like it.


----------



## Mandryka

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> The Trio Fontenay's Haydn should also be mentioned:
> 
> View attachment 79747
> 
> 
> As regards hip in Haydn's trios, I do like the Van Swieten Trio recordings, as well as Levin/Beths/Bylsma:
> 
> View attachment 79748
> 
> 
> View attachment 79749
> 
> 
> I think hip performances are great in their own ways. I'd probably give a slight edge to modern instrument performances though, simply because the modern piano has obvious advantages in terms of textural variety.


I just played the first movement of the A minor trio, Hob XV:18 by Trio Fortenay and by 1790. It was a really instructive thing to do, because it makes so clear that the "debate" is not about instruments, but about the conception of the music. It's the drive and articulation which make 1790's Haydn sound more like interesting music than Fortenay's, though Fortenay is elegant, refined, good for a royal salon maybe.

It's a long time since I gave Haydn any serious time, next time I do I'll check the Van Swieten.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Mandryka said:


> I just played the first movement of the A minor trio, Hob XV:18 by Trio Fortenay and by 1790. It was a really instructive thing to do, because it makes so clear that the "debate" is not about instruments, but about the conception of the music. It's the drive and articulation which make 1790's Haydn sound more like interesting music than Fortenay's, though Fortenay is elegant, refined, good for a royal salon maybe.
> 
> It's a long time since I gave Haydn any serious time, next time I do I'll check the Van Swieten.


Well, I guess it's both - each interpreter highlights and brings forward different aspects of the music. 1790 ...hm, I'll have to gave that one a listen .


----------



## PeterF

Though I very much like Haydn's Piano Trios, I slightly prefer Haydn's piano sonatas.


----------



## bz3

Hmmm I want to get more into Haydn outside of the symphonies and quartets, of which I'm relatively familiar with the more popular ones. Where would one recommend starting in his piano trios?


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

PeterF said:


> Though I very much like Haydn's Piano Trios, I slightly prefer Haydn's piano sonatas.


It's like apples and oranges imo, both are great in their own ways.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

bz3 said:


> Hmmm I want to get more into Haydn outside of the symphonies and quartets, of which I'm relatively familiar with the more popular ones. Where would one recommend starting in his piano trios?


Start with Piano Trio 25 - the 'Gypsy', probably his most famous one, then go through 24 and 26-30, these are considered his best. There are plenty of other excellent trios though. They're very fun to listen to .


----------



## maladie

The Grieg Trio have done some recordings with some of them and they're really quite fantastic (and the recording is as well!)


----------



## Vasks

While I am satisfied with my BAT set and while I am also glad to hear that other ensembles can pull out more from the trios than BAT, at the end of the day that's not so easy to do. For me, many of the trios are light-weight. Not only is the poor cello often confined to play a mildly embellished bass line, but even the violin sometimes is treated as an add-on especially as some the trios were rewrites of piano sonatas. For me, late FJH string quartets are far more interesting.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Vasks said:


> While I am satisfied with my BAT set and while I am also glad to hear that other ensembles can pull out more from the trios than BAT, at the end of the day that's not so easy to do. For me, many of the trios are light-weight. Not only is the poor cello often confined to play a mildly embellished bass line, but even the violin sometimes is treated as an add-on especially as some the trios were rewrites of piano sonatas. For me, late FJH string quartets are far more interesting.


Well, the later Piano Trios, 24-31 have more independence for the individual players and are some of Haydn's most elegant works. They're sort of like 'mini Creations' for three instruments (the way I think of them  ).


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

I like the trio 1790 a lot, actually listening to them for the first time now. I've listened to trio wanderer on spotify quite a bit and own the beaux arts trio on cd. I could listen to any of them all day long!


----------



## Pugg

Chordalrock said:


> Which are the best ones?
> 
> Charles Rosen wrote something about the piano trios in Classical Style, something like they contain the height of his piano music or something. So I'm wondering which of them actually might.


And... did you made your mind up yet


----------



## Eva Yojimbo

If I had to pick a favorite it would probably be #44. The darkness of that middle movement comes out of nowhere. Depending on tempo/performance, one can make it sound as dire as anything in Mozart or Beethoven:






Anyone that accuses the BAT of being cheerful needs to relisten to that performance. I've yet to hear any other bring out such emotional depths. However, I would also suggest that the BAT set should be supplemented by a HIP version. My favorite of those that I've heard is probably the 1790, though I tend to hear less differences in them than non-HIP.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Eva Yojimbo said:


> If I had to pick a favorite it would probably be #44. The darkness of that middle movement comes out of nowhere. Depending on tempo/performance, one can make it sound as dire as anything in Mozart or Beethoven:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that accuses the BAT of being cheerful needs to relisten to that performance. I've yet to hear any other bring out such emotional depths. However, I would also suggest that the BAT set should be supplemented by a HIP version. My favorite of those that I've heard is probably the 1790, though I tend to hear less differences in them than non-HIP.


Actually, I personally think that Beethoven was influenced conceptually by this piece when he composed his 4th Piano Concerto. The 2nd movement there is also very dark and lies in strong contrast to the rest of the movements.


----------



## Mandryka

Eva Yojimbo said:


> If I had to pick a favorite it would probably be #44. The darkness of that middle movement comes out of nowhere. Depending on tempo/performance, one can make it sound as dire as anything in Mozart or Beethoven:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that accuses the BAT of being cheerful needs to relisten to that performance. I've yet to hear any other bring out such emotional depths. However, I would also suggest that the BAT set should be supplemented by a HIP version. My favorite of those that I've heard is probably the 1790, though I tend to hear less differences in them than non-HIP.


Are there any others where the BAT aren't cheerful? Or is that the only bit?


----------



## Eva Yojimbo

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Actually, I personally think that Beethoven was influenced conceptually by this piece when he composed his 4th Piano Concerto. The 2nd movement there is also very dark and lies in strong contrast to the rest of the movements.


Interesting! I never heard that, but it would make sense. As much as I love Beethoven's 4th PC (it's my favorite of his), I never quite understood that middle movement. It always hovered there like its own separate, lonely island.



Mandryka said:


> Are there any others where the BAT aren't cheerful? Or is that the only bit?


I think there are a few others, but I can't recall which. A better question would be "how many others are there where Haydn isn't cheerful?" I think the answer is: not many. Even that movement, which is marked allegretto, isn't nearly as dark if played much faster. Definitely a case of BAT taking interpretative liberties.


----------



## Mandryka

Eva Yojimbo said:


> Interesting! I never heard that, but it would make sense. As much as I love Beethoven's 4th PC (it's my favorite of his), I never quite understood that middle movement. It always hovered there like its own separate, lonely island.
> 
> I think there are a few others, but I can't recall which. A better question would be "how many others are there where Haydn isn't cheerful?" I think the answer is: not many. Even that movement, which is marked allegretto, isn't nearly as dark if played much faster. Definitely a case of BAT taking interpretative liberties.


Well I think if you listen to other trios you'll here a much more complex emotional range. BAT seem to be believers in the "papa" image, but in fact Haydn's music is more complex than that.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo

If BAT really believed in the "papa Haydn" image it's hard to imagine them taking the 44th that slowly, contra to the actual tempo marking. I'm not so sure that Haydn intended the trios to have a complex emotional range. It is important to remember that a great deal of music from the classical era WAS designed as pleasing, light entertainment. This doesn't mean that it doesn't contain great musical riches or any emotional range, but I think expecting romantic-like extremes as being common is a bit much. Can you name specific performances by other performers of a given work that might illustrate what you're talking about in comparison with BAT?


----------



## Mandryka

Eva Yojimbo said:


> Can you name specific performances by other performers of a given work that might illustrate what you're talking about in comparison with BAT?


Ensemble 415.

Wax,. X,max s,cm


----------



## KenOC

I previewed some trios from the Haydn Trio Eisenstasdt and found them not a lot different from the BAT, though perhaps a bit better recorded. They could be had very cheaply then, but seem quite expensive right now.


----------



## kanishknishar

Just to clear something up:

Are we using Landon's catalog numbers or the *Hoboken-Verzeichnis*?


----------



## Rhombic

Number 41. Quite quite nice.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

He wrote very good piano trios. The early ones might not be the best, but they are still good.


----------



## Pugg

I wish I could writhe music as good as Haydn did.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

Pugg said:


> I wish I could writhe music as good as Haydn did.


It took him years of practice to become that good.


----------



## Pugg

Johnnie Burgess said:


> It took him years of practice to become that good.


Who cares, his music is for posterity.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

Pugg said:


> Who cares, his music is for posterity.


You have to practice if you want to be that good.


----------



## Pugg

Johnnie Burgess said:


> You have to practice if you want to be that good.


You sound like my piano teacher.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

Pugg said:


> You sound like my piano teacher.


Perfect practice makes perfect. Not just practice.


----------



## Omicron9

Chordalrock said:


> Which are the best ones?
> 
> ,,,snip...


All of them. The Beaux Arts recording is a great starting (and/or ending?) point.


----------



## Heliogabo

I'd like to mention the 4 volumes by Kungsbacka trio (Naxos). No one has mentioned it but they're quite enjoyable and in supersound.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

My absolute favorite Haydn.Too many of these wonderful gems to list. As performed by the Beaux Arts Trio, which I consider to be in a class by itself here.


----------



## Pugg

Haydn67 said:


> My absolute favorite Haydn.Too many of these wonderful gems to list. As performed by the Beaux Arts Trio, which I consider to be in a class by itself here.


​
Must have for all Haydn fans.


----------



## KenOC

Agree. There are at least two complete sets that are excellent.


----------

