Classical Quiz (cont.)

Maybe my hints were a bit misleading because Spohr is known mostly for his violin concerti and larger chamber works, not his operas.

The story behind his signature is as follows: At a concert at some noble's place a string quartet by a fellow named Fesca was played, with much success. One of the movements in Fesca's quartet started with the notes spelling out his name, which the audience found very original.

The composers Spohr and Hummel were attending that concert and were promptly taunted for their "unmusical" names.

But Spohr wouldn't take the blame and used his imagination to spell his name musically after all:

This is the beginning of his string quartet op. 29 in E-flat. The po. stands for piano, and the qarter rest looks somewhat like the old German letter "r".

Spohr then had this engraved on his signet.

Nice one, Todd! It's on you...

???

Cheese

Who was it ?

Cheese

Cheese

What do you mean, "hm"?

Just about every single classical music person on this forum seems to be a Furtwanglerite, except me… So how should I know?

However, I do have sense of having heard about this. The high Isolde notes were supplied by Elisabeth Schwarzkopf.

So now I'm hoping and praying I'm wrong, so I don't have to think of a New Quiz Question.

After all, the answers are the easy part.

Herm

quote:

---

After all, the answers are the easy part.

---

Your turn then !

Cheese

Okay, let's give Brahms another shot. Brahms seems to go down really well in the Classical Quiz.

Anyone familiar with the Double Concerto for Violin and 'Cello (op 102)? I like it a lot.

However, the question is what was Brahms' agenda for writing this unusual piece (apart from purely musical reasons)? Why a double concerto?

Gentlemen, the clock is running...

Herm

I knew Brahms would be a success!

So let me give you a hand.

It's basically an old story, involving two men and a woman. A violinist (and a pretty famous one at the time), another string player, and a woman who got in between.

Now, why did Brahms write the double concerto?

Herm

Yes, James, you're completely right. Joseph Joachim was arguably the best violinist of the late 19th Century, and Brahms and he were long time friends.

The only problem was, Joachim was married to an opera singer, Amelie Weiss, and Joachim was terribly jealous. He was touring, she was touring, and he was sure she was doin' it all the time.

It ended in a nasty divorce. And Brahms made a big mistake. He tried to help, but he helped the wrong way… He tried to persuade Joachim that his jealousy was unfounded and when Joachim didn't believe him, Brahms chose Amelie's side…

So where does the Double Concerto come in?

Clearly these Brahms questions are no good. The idea of the Double Cto was: Brahms felt really bad about alienating Joachim over the divorce.

So he wrote the Double Cto, so as not to make it too obvious, with the cellist Robert Hausmann as a sort of go-between between the composer and the fiddler.

I listened to the Kremer / Maisky / Bernstein recording today. I'm not too hot about any of these performers, but I guess it's the best of Bernstein's Brahms project in Vienna.

So a new question. It's about a piano player, who, like Horowitz, had a nervous breakdown, and thought (unlike Horowitz) he'd be a better h. being and / or musician if he played in factory halls elevating the working man.
(We're talking Fiat car plants, here.)

So what's his name? (He's alive & kicking, by the way.)

Herm

[This message was edited by herm on WEDNESDAY 23 January 2002 at 08:41.]

Come on, we're talking about one of the top pre-eminent pianists of the 1960 &c era. None better. At this very moment - not a good time in the industry - Deutsche Grammophone is shipping big boxes of a special edition of this artist (recently profiled in the New Yorker - and I'm putting this in Italics)

He's that big.

So, how hard can it be?

Herm

Yes, of course it's Maurizio Pollini. Some think he's a soulless performer; to others he's a romantic demon.

In the late sixties he got into a crisis, and played lunch hour concerts for auto workers at the Fiat plant - and he wasn't playing Chopin polonaises. No sir, these guys were getting the real thing, like Schoenberg pieces and Webern miniatures. I love this. And it makes me guess he truly has the romantic demon.

I love his Mozart collaborations with Boehm too. (You, apparantly have a Beethoven cto, and, yes, each and every one of these 1970 -73 Boehm VPO things is to die for.)

So, at last, it's your turn, Todd.

Herm

Anyway, which conductor has recorded Smetana's Ma Vlast more times than any other? His interpretations are the finest available, IMO, and his last recording one of the finest of any work by any composer directed by any conductor.

May I come back one sec, Todd? I agree: that remastered two-disc with Beethoven sonatas is truly magical. I don't know what he does, or what the engineer does, but it's like he doesn't play a keyboard. He's playing on sheer sunlight. Especially in the 111 and, more interestingly, the 109 variation mvt.

And of course the Prokofiev 7th sonata is a milestone, too.

I love this man.

Back to Smetana

------------------

Todd Arola's Quiz Question was:

which conductor has recorded Smetana's Ma Vlast more times than any other? His interpretations are the finest available, IMO, and his last recording one of the finest of any work by any composer directed by any conductor.

[This message was edited by herm on FRIDAY 25 January 2002 at 08:35.]

Cheese

Or are you still glued to the new CDX?

Herm

He recorded it five times. I own four of them. The late 50s Decca set (now on Belart) is not a great version with less than inspired playing (from the Vienna Philharmonic!) and terrible Decca spotlighting. The early 50s mono Mercury set with the Chicago Symphony is one of the most intense versions of the cycle I have heard and is definitely worth owning. The 1970 Boston SO set on DG is sort of the opposite, kinda laid back but with sumptuous playing. I do not yet own the version with the BRSO (on Orfeo), of all orchestras, but have heard it and it, too, is superb. The finest version Kubelik, or anyone, ever recorded was his final live set from 1990 with the Czech Philharmonic on Supraphon. It is nearly as intense as the Chicago set, but in a more endearing way. The playing is top notch, the orchestra apparently encouraged to greatness, and there is a sense of occasion and joyousness. A truly inspired performance.

Your turn Phil.