Burgmüller / Schuncke / Hummel
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
“In this way I want to put all manner of nice »Ich will damit allerhand hübsche Ge danken ideas into the work, which is intended to put ins Werk setzen, und die Sache soll Feuer a bomb under the musicians!” unter die Musiker machen!« LUDWIG SCHUNCKE BURGMÜLLER / SCHUNCKE / HUMMEL BS 008 NORBERT LUDWIG JOHANN NEPOMUK BURGMÜLLER SCHUNCKE HUMMEL 1810 – 1836 1810 – 1834 1778 – 1837 Piano Sonata in F minor op. 8 Piano Sonata in G minor op. 3 Piano Sonata No. 5 Klaviersonate f-Moll “Grande Sonate” in F-sharp minor op. 81 Klaviersonate g-Moll Klaviersonate Nr. 5 fis-Moll 01 I Allegro molto 06:58 02 II Romanze. Andante – 04 I Allegro 06:35 08 I Allegro 09:17 06:51 Più moto – Tempo I 05 II Scherzo. Molto Allegro 02:51 09 II Largo con molt’ espressione 08:12 03 III Finale. Allegro molto 06 III Andante sostenuto 03:35 10 III Finale. Vivace 08:46 11:04 e con fuoco 07 IV Finale. Allegro 08:08 TOTAL TIME 72:31 Recording: b-sharp studio Berlin, April 10–14, 2016 Recording Producer: Philipp Nedel / Recording Engineer: Martin Kistner HEIDI Editing: Dirk Fischer / Photos: Uwe Arens / Artwork: Le_Palmier Design fortepiano Piano: copy of C. Graf piano (1819) made by Paul McNulty p & c 2018 b-sharp / www.b-sharp.biz TSAI BETWEEN could also be described as the period Hummel, Norbert Burgmüller and response to the emotionally, uncom- between Beethoven and Schumann. Ludwig Schuncke are among the most monly tempestuous, even uncompro- BEETHOVEN AND interesting. In their own way, each of the mising Appassionata on the one hand, SCHUMANN Although Ludwig van Beethoven died three had a positive influence on Schu- as well as to the overwhelmingly chal- By Robert Funk in 1827, the zenith of his writings for mann’s development or his self-discov- lenging Hammerklavier on the other. In piano was achieved in the early 1820s; ery, whether as a source of inspiration, his op. 81, the composer fully explores his last piano sonata, op. 111, was pub- a kindred spirit, or as a close personal the boundaries of what is possible, in lished in 1822. Robert Schumann, on friend. All three contributed not insig- which he, of course, follows Beethoven When three (nowadays) hardly known the other hand, began his professional nificantly to “smoothing the path” from in principle; but he breaks totally new piano works by three (nowadays) composing career writing solely for Beethoven to Schumann. ground in the detail, revealing numer- only moderately respected compos- piano, gradually finding his own style ous possibilities which were to become ers appear together on a CD, questions from 1830 onwards. No doubt Bee- The oldest of them was Hummel. Born in virtually idiomatic for the later Roman- almost inevitably arise. Why music by thoven was of immense importance Bratislava in 1778, he had, so to speak, tics, such as Schumann. these composers, of all people? Why to the young Schumann. However, for the mixed blessing of being Beetho- these pieces in particular? And why, him to actually become the Schumann ven’s immediate contemporary. While Norbert Bürgmüller, born in Düsseldorf on top of all this, are they presented whom we admire today for his original- he won over audiences in grand style in 1810, belonged to the same genera- together in this manner? ity, a certain artistic emancipation was and largely stifled the competition tion as Mendelssohn, Chopin, Liszt, and necessary, especially from the great (among them Beethoven) as a pianist Schumann. His biography reads like a The piano sonatas by Hummel, Burg- example of Beethoven. For exactly this and improviser, his compositional tragedy. Inherently mentally unstable, müller, and Schuncke on this record- process of emancipation, it is logical work was quickly overshadowed by the Burgmüller never really enjoyed success ing were all composed between 1819 and 1832. During those years, at least in for quite different (contemporary) ref- oeuvre of the master from Bonn. Only as a professional musician despite des- central European culture, a significant erences to have then played a decisive with such exceptional works (but unfor- perate efforts. He lived, so to speak, in intellectual change was taking place role. Franz Schubert was key, albeit tunately only “exceptional” works) as a state of crisis, and died at the age of which, in the historical sense, is gener- mainly after 1839, and of course Carl the Piano Sonata in F-sharp minor op. twenty-six (under mysterious circum- ally regarded as the shift from so-called Maria von Weber. In addition to these, 81, presented here, was Hummel able stances), without being able to leave “Classicism” to “Romanticism”. Far more however, perhaps even above all, are to counter Beethoven’s genius with behind a large number of significant concretely and also more pointedly various (nowadays) less well-known something really weighty. This sonata works. The few which he completed were (possibly even more provocatively), it names, among which Johann Nepomuk may well be interpreted as a directed mostly published posthumously, and consequently, had only a belated effect, if death as early as 1834, when he was not It has been proved that Robert any at all, on musical history. His ambi- even 24 years old. The Grand Sonata in Schumann was very well acquainted tious Piano Sonata in F minor op. 8 is one G minor op. 3 from 1832 is Schuncke’s with all of these three sonatas. Direct such work. The amazing product of a most mature, most impressive work traces of Hummel’s masterpiece can teenager, it was not published until 1839. – and is, incidentally, dedicated to easily be identified in Schumann’s early Like Hummel before him, the young Schumann. The latter responded imme- piano works. Listen to and analyse, for composer mainly followed the pattern of diately, by dedicating the no less grandi- example, the very brilliant Allegro in Beethoven’s Appassionata. Nonetheless, ose Toccata op. 7 to his friend. B minor op. 8 (1831) and compare it with Burgmüller, Beethoven’s extreme with the introductory Allegro from the tension gives way to a rather dream-like Beethoven’s long shadow unmistaka- F-sharp minor Sonata op. 81. The finale and melancholy atmosphere. The liter- bly stands over the Sonata op. 3, from of Schumann’s Concert sans orchestre ally Romantic middle movement comes the thematic material and its corres- in F minor op. 14 (1836), which was com- across as particularly remarkable. It is ponding musical treatment, up to and posed much later on, also represents a a piece which already strongly antici- including the overall arrangement of response to Hummel’s breakneck final pates Frédéric Chopin’s Second Ballade the form of the piece. Nevertheless, the movement. Both pieces fall into the (F major, op. 38). music itself appears to aim for some- category of “Höllenritt”. Not musico- thing fundamentally different: it is logically significant, but nevertheless Ludwig Schuncke was originally from no longer (as perhaps in the spirit of quite touching, is the clear allusion to Kassel and by a circuitous route ended Beethoven) an unvarnished confession, Schuncke’s Piano Sonata op. 3 which up in Leipzig around 1833. There, he nor does it primarily seek blunt expres- Schumann wrote into the first move- quickly became one of the closest sion; rather, it is sometimes enigmatic, ment of his famous Piano Concerto in friends of Robert Schumann, who was as if pointing to a mystery. Schuncke A minor op. 54 (1841/45). Right at the practically the same age as him. To an consequently finds himself well in the dramatic climax, at the beginning of the extent, Schunke had enjoyed a suc- realm of Romanticism and, from this cadenza, the music of his one-time com- cessful career until then (primarily a position, (most skilfully) uses Beethove- panion is almost quoted and thereby pianist). But then, unfortunately, he was nian musical tools to his own purposes. lovingly remembered. stricken with tuberculosis, which was Any accusation of epigonism would widespread at that time. This led to his therefore be unwarranted. TRANSLATION: INNES WILSON ZWISCHEN bezeichnen würde. Weitaus konkreter spielte eine tragende Rolle, wenngleich wurde sein kompositorisches Schaf- und außerdem pointierter (womöglich hauptsächlich nach 1839, und sicherlich fen vom Œuvre des Bonner Meisters BEETHOVEN UND sogar provokanter) gefasst, ließe sich Carl Maria von Weber. Darüber hinaus doch bald in den Schatten gestellt. SCHUMANN aber auch sagen: Es war dies die Zeit aber auch – vielleicht sogar vor allem Allein mit solchen Ausnahmewerken Von Robert Funk zwischen Beethoven und Schumann. – diverse (heutzutage) weniger promi- (allerdings leider nur »ausnahmswei- nent klingende Namen, unter denen sen« Werken!) wie der hier aufgenom- Ludwig van Beethoven starb zwar erst Johann Nepomuk Hummel, Norbert menen Klaviersonate fis-Moll op. 81 1827, den Zenit seines Klavierschaffens Burgmüller und Ludwig Schuncke mit konnte Hummel dem Beethoven’schen Wenn drei (heutzutage) kaum bekannte erreichte er jedoch bereits in den frühen zu den interessantesten gehören. Jeder Genius etwas wirklich Gewichtiges ent- Klavierwerke von drei (heutzutage) 1820er Jahren; die letzte Klaviersonate von den dreien hat Schumanns Ent- gegensetzen. Diese Sonate darf wohl nur leidlich beachteten Komponisten op. 111 wurde 1822 veröffentlicht. Robert wicklung bzw. Selbstfindung auf eigen- als gezielte Reaktion auf die emotio- zusammen auf einer CD erscheinen, Schumann dagegen begann seine pro- tümliche Art positiv beeinflusst, sei es nal ungemein aufwühlende, ja kom- dann wirft das fast zwangsläufig einige fessionelle Komponistenlaufbahn als als Inspirationsquelle, Geistesverwand- promisslose Appassionata einerseits Fragen auf. Warum ausgerechnet Musik reiner Klavierkomponist und fand ab ter oder enger persönlicher Freund. sowie auf die spieltechnisch überwälti- von eben diesen Tonschöpfern? Warum 1830 allmählich zu seinem ureige- Jeder von den dreien hat nicht unerheb- gend anspruchsvolle Hammerklavier- gerade diese Stücke? Und warum nen Stil.