# SS 28.12.19 - Haydn #11



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

A continuation of the Saturday Symphonies Tradition:

Welcome to another weekend of symphonic listening!

For your listening pleasure this weekend:

*Franz Joseph Haydn (1732 - 1809)*

Symphony No. 11 in E flat major, H. I/11

1. Adagio cantabile
2. Allegro
3. Menuetto con trio
4. Presto
---------------------

Post what recording you are going to listen to giving details of Orchestra / Conductor / Chorus / Soloists etc - Enjoy!


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

Another weekend is upon us and another Symphony is up for your listening enjoyment. Thanks to Mika for stepping in last week during my absence as I was unfortunately traveling before I realized I had forgot to post it last Thursday before I left Friday morning. Anywho, it's the last Symphony of 2019 and it's only fitting to go out with the King of the Symphony, Papa Haydn and his eleventh. I always get a kick out of the Trio in this one for the lag created by the guy an 8th note behind the others. I hope everyone has a happy and safe New Year's.

I'll be listening to this one:







Antal Dorati/Philharmonia Hungarica


----------



## Mika (Jul 24, 2009)

My choice


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

It's Hogwood for me - period instruments.


----------



## D Smith (Sep 13, 2014)

Adam Fischer here for me.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Dorati here. ……………………………...


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Dortai for me .......................


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Bulldog said:


> It's Hogwood for me - period instruments.


Hogwood is the first one that popped up on YouTube so I gave it a listen. Wow! The Adagio is beautiful! And the AAM ensemble sounds superb throughout this work.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

It has to be Dorati for me, but I shall delve into another version or two 
Great way to finish 2019


----------



## cougarjuno (Jul 1, 2012)

Those earliest of Haydn symphonies never seem to get their due. Fischer for me.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I'll be with Fischer too.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

The Haydn 11th! That should prove a refreshing ear wash for a lot of folks, including me. And, for a 20 minute symphony, there's no reason not to listen to several interpretations. I have at least four on hand, and I'm currently listening to the Hogwood via the internet. It's not like this is the Brian _Gothic_ or one of Furtwangler's symphonies, where one has to plan a vacation day in order to really delve into it.

Thanks for suggesting this wonderful work by Papa Haydn.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

Going to listen to Max Goberman and the Vienna State Opera Orchestra


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I quite enjoyed it as a pleasant example of Haydn's art. I seems not to be one his more striking or inventive pieces, though. Or perhaps I am missing something?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Listened to Dorati’s performance of this symphony. It’s a not atypical example of Haydn’s music-making and of good quality as always. Unfortunately there’s a pretty major error in its construction. The opening Allegro, sturdy and in good spirits, has somehow been placed second after a rather lengthy and attractive Adagio, which should obviously follow it. Then the symphony proceeds without further error through the Menuet/trio and the Presto finale. Nobody seems to have found fit to correct the mistake in the order of the initial movements.

Of course we need to forgive Haydn the occasional oversight. In composing so many symphonies, so quickly, careless moments are bound to sneak through. Even Homer nods!


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ You would think that such an error would be corrected by conductors? Perhaps Dorati (and Fischer and probably others) didn't think it an error so much as an experiment?


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Sorry, but I cannot hear any error in this whatsoever. Slow-fast-slow-fast, not conventional, but hardly incompatible. No.5 is the same, both are described by Wikipedia as "sonatas de chiesa". Or were you being too clever with your jesting??

Predictably, I rather enjoyed this work! Listened to Dorati and to Gobermans. Structure-wise it's different, maybe overall not a giant among the 104+, but OK Haydn is still pretty stupendous stuff!!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ You would think that such an error would be corrected by conductors? Perhaps Dorati (and Fischer and probably others) didn't think it an error so much as an experiment?


As Dorati said at the time, "Fix it? No, nobody will notice anyway. And we still have to get 12 and 13 in the can before five!"


----------



## Ras (Oct 6, 2017)

CnC Bartok said:


> Sorry, but I cannot hear any error in this whatsoever. Slow-fast-slow-fast, not conventional, but hardly incompatible. No.5 is the same, both are described by Wikipedia as "sonatas de chiesa". Or were you being too clever with your jesting??
> 
> Predictably, I rather enjoyed this work! Listened to Dorati and to Gobermans. Structure-wise it's different, maybe overall not a giant among the 104+, but OK Haydn is still pretty stupendous stuff!!


AFAIK at the time of early Haydn the 4 movement symphony structure/form (1. Fast/2. Slow/3. Menuet/4. Rondo) known today hadn't been established yet.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Prior to #11, #s 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 were 4-movement works. Of these (in fact of _all _Haydn's symphonies before #11) only #5 opened with a slow movement.

Just to note - I don't think it proves anything except that slow-movement openings were unusual for Haydn at the time.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Indeed to both of the above. So where's the ERROR???


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

CnC Bartok said:


> Indeed to both of the above. So where's the ERROR???


You must have missed the smiley at the end of my post. It was intended to imply...oh, never mind! :scold:


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

KenOC said:


> You must have missed the smiley at the end of my post. It was intended to imply...oh, never mind! :scold:


It was at the end of the wrong paragraph.


----------

