Hem | Om mig | Musik | Recept | Foto | Konst | Platser | Kemi | Eget skrivande | Texter | Tänkvärt | Humor | Filmklipp | Länkar | Ladda ner
Johann Baptist Vaňhal was one of the most popular and successful Viennese composers during his lifetime. History has, however, been unkind to his reputation, the result of irresponsible statements that were made by imaginative authors who were not acquainted with him or his circumstances. The general impression is that he was melancholy and depressed when, in truth, he appears to have been basically happy and personable. Wild claims have also been made that early in his career he was so overcome by madness caused by religious fervour that he burned some of his music. After that, the story goes, the quality of compositions deteriorated so much that he never realised the promise of his early works.
One part of Vaňhal’s reputation is, however, true. He was the first major composer of the time who was strong enough to renounce the offer of a ‘good’ – and terribly demanding position – and to live comfortably until he died in Vienna at the age of seventy-four. His success was possible because of his other personal characteristics. He was humble and deeply religious – not ambitious for fame, high position, or fortune. He was also shrewd, hard-working and sensitive to changing economic and social conditions. As a result he decided to cease composing symphonies and chamber music when the market in Vienna was drying up in about 1780, and began to explore other possibilities. The results were spectacular. He composed, for example, more than 247 works (mostly unpublished), large and small, for the church. He also wrote a huge number of pieces all of which centred around the keyboard. His compositions included serious works, such as the keyboard Capriccios, and songs and cantatas for voice with keyboard accompaniment. He also published many pieces for instruction and entertainment which became very popular, including imaginative pieces with descriptive titles such as The Battle of Trafalgar. In all he produced more than 1300 compositions in a wide variety of genres. To the present, only the symphonies and string quartets have been sufficiently studied to ascertain his complete contribution.
1. Allegro moderato
2. Andante molto
3. Tempo di primo
The Symphony in A major (Bryan A9) was probably composed ca 1775-78, at about the same time as the Symphony in C major, Bryan C11. That it was written by Vaňhal is not confirmed by any of the usual eighteenth-century catalogues or references; however, there are no contra-attributions. Its claim for legitimacy is confirmed by its stylistic factors, especially by similarities with other accepted works of the same period. The clearly established authenticity of the Symphony, Bryan C11, which in some respects it resembles, therefore serves as a touchstone for the A major work, especially in view of Vaňhal’s long-demonstrated creativity, innovative ability and interest in experimenting with approaches to composing symphonies.
The most striking feature of the Symphony is its overall construction as a multi-tempo one-movement symphony. The outer movements, brilliantly scored with oboes and clarini (in D), enclose a captivating central ‘movement’ in which Vaňhal makes magical use of a solo cello doubled at the upper octave by the first violins. This exuberant and powerful symphony has one further surprise to spring: the Finale concludes with a hushed quotation of the opening measures of the symphony thus emphasizing its unique structure in the most dramatic way possible.
1. Allegro con spirito
2. Andante
3. Presto
I believe that the Symphony in C major (Bryan C3) was one of the earliest of Vaňhal’s symphonies and that it was probably composed in 1760-62. The "No.1" inscribed on the title-page of the copy from the Doksy collection, now preserved in the Narodní Museum in Prague, helps to confirm that it is one of Vaňhal’s earliest symphonies and that he might even have written it before he came to Vienna. The Sinfonia is in three-movement Overture style with segue indicated between the movements in several versions. The basic instrumentation probably called for strings with a wind choir of two oboes, two horns, two trumpets (clarini) and timpani. However, some versions call only for clarini and others for horns only; some call for both and omit the timpani, as is the case in this recording. Regardless, it is a brilliant and exciting symphony which must have caught the attention of soirée audiences during Vaňhal’s first years in Vienna. The Finale (Presto) opens with a ‘stomping’ rhythm which permeates the entire movement; one wonders if the movement was ever danced to.
1. Andante molto – Allegro moderato
2. Adagio molto
3. Finale: Allegro
The Symphony in D major (Bryan D17) is one of three symphonies published in 1780 as Op.10 by J. J. Hummel in Berlin. They were the last of Vaňhal’s symphonies to be newly published and I estimate that they were composed ca 1779. All the evidence suggests that these symphonies were commissioned by Hummel and that the extant manuscript sets of parts in various archives were copied direct from Op.10 rather than from an earlier source. The Symphony is a fine work; I believe that it is one of Vaňhal’s best. From the haunting D minor introduction scored for strings (with muted violins) to the dashing and brilliantly composed finale, the work is uniformly strong and quite the equal of any of Haydn’s symphonies of the period. At first glance it appears to be in three movements, but the Andante molto opening has a life of its own – much the same as the Adagio openings to Mozart’s ‘Linz’ Symphony No. 36 in C major, K. 425, composed in 1783 and to Symphony No. 38 in D, K. 504, composed in 1786. Mozart’s prominent use of the chromatic rising figure in the introductions to both symphonies is similar to that found in bars 33-35 of Vaňhal’s introductory movement. Further, his use of Vaňhal’s opening motif from the introductory movement as the basic ingredient for the Poco Adagio second movement of K. 425 suggests that Mozart may have been impressed with Vaňhal’s Sinfonia at some point before he composed K. 425. Certainly the critic C. F. Cramer was impressed. Writing in the Magazin der Musik in Hamburg in 1783 he said: "may Herr Vaňhal not be prevented ... from giving us more such symphonies".
1. Allegro con brio
2. Andante cantabile
3. Finale: Adagio più andante – Allegro
One of Vaňhal’s late symphonies, the Symphony in C major (Bryan C11) was most likely composed during the period 1775-78. One contemporary copy of the work is styled Sinfonia comista / con per la sorte diversa on the title-page. The headings for the individual movements are marked, I. Sinfonia la Speranza / Allegro con Brio, II. Andante cantabile / il sospirare e Languire, and III. at the beginning: Finale: la Lamentazione / Adagio piu Andante and after 17 bars L’Allegrezza / Allegro. The symphony is, therefore, a programmatic work, whose individual movements are supposed to portray varied moods: I. ‘Hope’, II. ‘Sighingly and Languidly’ and III. ‘Lamentation’, followed by ‘Gaiety, Cheerfully and Festive’. It must have been composed for an imaginative patron who would have appreciated being informed by the titles and intent of each movement. The upbeat mood (hope) established by the busy and active opening movement in C major sets up expectations that the happy tone will continue. The expectation is, however, dashed by the lengthy slow movement in C minor and the dark mood created by its scoring with parts for divided violas, horns in E flat and, in some sources, two bassoons. The solo introduction (also in C minor) to the Finale movement would also have surprised contemporary listeners and the musically astute among them would have been pleased to recognise that the Adagio introduction contains a figure that foreshadows both of the main motifs from which the following Allegro is constructed. The final outcome caused by the triumphant C major finale must surely have delighted audiences of the time.
1. Allegro moderato
2. Andante arioso
3. Minuetto
4. Allegro
One of Vaňhal’s early symphonies, Symphony in B flat major (Bryan Bb3) was probably composed between 1762 and 1764. It was well known in its time; there are five contemporary catalogue references to the work; a dozen manuscript copies are preserved in an equal number of archives; and four prints of it were issued by publishers, including Bremner, whose Periodical Overture No. 47 was published in London in 1775. This work demonstrates a number of facets of Vaňhal’s musically imaginative and innovative nature, not least among them his highly developed sense of orchestral colour – he features his little wind choir of two oboes and two horns at times almost in the manner of a concertino group – and a predilection for unusual phrase lengths which invests the music with such rhythmic and structural interest. The lovely second movement Andante arioso, scored for strings alone, also makes wonderful use of this technique: its opening nine-bar phrase, answered by a five-bar phrase, imparts a slightly unsettling quality to the music for all its grace and transparency. With the Menuetto the wind instruments return and Vaňhal makes striking use of his wind quartet in Menuetto II which, coincidentally, shares a number of important thematic links with Menuetto I. The wind quartet is treated in a concertino fashion in the Finale, just as it was in the first movement, alternating piano with the tutti forte strings within the overall sonata scheme. And again, as they were in the first movement, the motifs from which the movement springs are contained within the opening theme Vaňhal is, at this stage, experimenting with the content of his symphonic movements but his basic principles of construction are established.
1. Allegro molto
2. Cantabile
3. Finale: Allegro
Vaňhal was not only an excellent and imaginative composer; he was also innovative and alert to the opportunities of the moment. One of the most outstanding examples of his musical astuteness in music concerns his use of multiple horns. The five horn parts in the Symphony in D minor (Bryan d2) are more than have been found to date in any other eighteenth-century symphony. The work was doubtless written for one of only a few orchestras, e.g., those of Prince Esterházy or the Prince of Thurn und Taxis, in whose collections copies of it are still found.
Six contemporary catalogues or references to the symphony are known and four manuscript copies of the work are preserved. All the evidence points to 1773-74 as the date or its composition. Vaňhal obviously considered it to be an important commission and planned to write a symphony that would accommodate the five hornists as well as an excellent oboist. At this stage in his career he was either ambivalent about composing Menuetto and Trio movements or the commissioner was not interested to have one. At any rate it is a three-movement work that is aesthetically satisfactory and complete.
The first and last movements are clearly meant to feature the five horns. Together with the two oboes, they fill in the harmony of the wind choir, and indeed, carefully complement the entire orchestra. The result is a uniquely rich orchestral timbre, especially in the tonic-key portions of the first and last movements where full harmony is achieved. It was undoubtedly one of the main reasons why the symphony was chosen for performance in Regensburg Cathedral on Good Friday in 1781.
In addition to the striking use of the horns and the beautiful solo for oboe, the highly-integrated symphonic construction of the first movement is remarkable. The entire movement is based upon three motifs heard in the opening thematic statement. The movement is harmonically very rich, not only in localised harmony but also in terms of tonal architecture; the recapitulation contains a monumental deflection from D minor to C minor via the unexpected key of B flat major. It constitutes a real interruption of the normal tonal scheme of sonata form and gives the effect of a false recapitulation or even of a second development.
The second movement, Cantabile, is a full-scale concerto movement for oboe, complete with orchestral ritornelli. Vaňhal doubtless knew the capabilities of the player for whom he composed the work; it does not demand a virtuoso performer but this attractive and lyrical movement provides opportunities for the player to ornament and includes the expected fermata for a cadenza and a written-out solo retransition to the recapitulation.
The Finale differs in style from the first movement but it too has interesting harmonic charms added to the forceful horns in the passage leading to the recapitulation. Again there is a stress on romantic harmonies, especially the Neapolitan sixth and the beautiful ending which, with its alternation of a minor and D minor chords, provides both a plagal effect and a Tierce de Picardie.
1. Allegro
2. Andante molto
3. Minuetto: Allegretto
4. Finale: Allegro ma non troppo
Vaňhal’s Symphony in G major (Bryan G11) is one of his later works; it was probably composed some time during the years 1775-76. Its authenticity is attested by three contemporary catalogues and other references, and by three copies that have been found. At least one of them was copied by Viennese copyists, which lends a special element of authenticity.
The charming opening movement is every bit as finely wrought as its counterpart in the Symphony in D minor (Bryan d2). Once again, the opening phrase provides the thematic nucleus from which the entire movement is derived, and by shortening or avoiding harmonic-rhythmic cadences, a feeling is imparted of almost constant motion. The movement ends with a short codetta that reminds us of the lovely opening theme – followed by an emphatic repetition that provides a vigorous conclusion.
The Andante molto, scored for strings with a flute which mostly doubles the first violin at the upper octave, is a charming movement of elegant simplicity. Although the flute part is not strictly necessary it lends a wonderful delicacy of colour to the orchestration. The Menuetto & Trio is marked Allegretto, an indication that Vaňhal believed the tempo should move along. The melodic quality and symmetrical construction of both the Menuetto and Trio betray their origin, in the dance. The rhythmic after-beats in the winds together with the rollicking character of the string melody in the Trio suggest the character of a Ländler.
The tempo and character of the opening of the fourth movement seem better fitted to a leisurely opening movement than a finale, but this impression is dispelled in the powerful development section with its continuous forte marking and vigorous counterpoint. The sudden cessation of this activity and the simultaneous reduction in dynamic level at the moment of retransition to the recapitulation is the masterstroke of a symphonist of genius.
1. Allegro (molto)
2. Andante
3. Menuetto and Trio
4. Contratantz: Presto
The Symphony in E minor (Bryan e3), is one of Vaňhal’s earliest symphonies and may have been composed about 1760-62. The use of the minor mode is unusual for the time and shows that Vaňhal’s fascination with the expressive possibilities of the turbulent minor-key style existed from the outset of his professional career. It permeates the entire first movement, the Menuetto, and most of the last movement, a lively Contratanz in which one might logically expect the brightness of the major mode.
The style of the opening bar in a symphony, whether it opens with a vigorous forte or a quiet, singing piano, does much to determine its effect. The former seems to be indicated by both of the sources used in the creation of the edition used here, but there is also stylistic evidence to suggest that this may be one of the first examples of Vaňhal composing a symphony with a quiet, singing opening that continues as sustained-style melodic material, a conscious move away from the forte rhythmic openings typical of his earliest works. Another interesting aspect of the Symphony in E minor is the canonic Menuetto which accentuates the severity of the minor mode. The Trio, however, is a perfect foil with its gentle homophonic textures and prominent flute parts. Vaňhal’s originality as a composer is also evident in his choice of finale, a Contratanz, a popular movement found in numerous serenades and divertimenti but lent an unusual character in this instance by being cast in the minor mode. Furthermore, the pianissimo ending of the movement enhances the sudden mood of E major that buoyantly energizes the final section of the Contratanz, and it brings the last movement, Kehraus-like, to its expected rousing conclusion.
1. Allegro
2. Andante
3. Menuetto and Trio
4. Allegro
The Symphony in C major (Bryan C1), composed between 1763-1765, must have been one of Vaňhal’s best known symphonies because it is listed in six contemporary catalogues and eighteen manuscript copies of it survive. Furthermore, it was published in Paris and London, but, apparently, it was little known in Bohemia. The reasons for its popularity are not difficult to surmise. It is brightly and effectively orchestrated and at times Vaňhal even uses the wind choir independently of the strings to produce the full sound of the modern orchestra.
At this period of his career as a composer of symphonies Vaňhal was experimenting with structure. C1, for example, is one of a pair of symphonies (along with A5) whose first movements are based on a simple motive that is introduced in the first bar and extended into a three-bar ‘theme’. Rather in the manner of a ritornello, this theme launches all of the major structural phases of the movement including both the development and recapitulation sections. The germ-motive is also used in developmental passages and as the basis for other figures. The movement has enough thematic components for a complete sonata form structure although it lacks the full-size piano-cantabile theme encountered in the composer’s later symphonies. The movement, with its constant and resourceful employment of the opening motive, reveals Vaňhal’s early interest in composing highly-organized music in the modern symphonic style. The remarkable second-movement Andante is canonic throughout with most of the action occurring between the first and second violins. An interesting feature is that the points of imitation constantly change in diminution from three to two bars, to one bar, to 1/2 + 1/2 bar, and finally to a unison-octave in bar 17. The Trio, played by the strings, also has something special to offer; a rather long chorale-like melody with irregular phrases that looks as though it might be a chant melody rather like those occasionally employed by Haydn. If so, the source of the non-modal melody has not yet been identified. The finale is serious; playful but not tuneful because of the fragmentary nature of the melodic material. It is busy and in constant motion except for cadences at the ends of the exposition and development. The dynamics are interruptive and in spite of the fact that a large proportion of the movement is marked piano, there is no piano-cantabile melody. As it scampers to its conclusion, it is the perfect complement to the slow second movement and the chorale-style of the Trio.
1. Allegro
2. Andante
3. Menuetto ma Allegretto
4. Allegro molto
The Symphony in C major (Bryan C17), is one of Vaňhal’s later symphonies, composed in all probability between 1775 and 1778. It is listed in two eighteenth-century catalogues and seven manuscript copies of the work have been found in private archives, including Prince Esterházy’s, which means that it was performed by Joseph Haydn.
The style of the symphony’s first movement shows that it follows the tradition of the ‘Overture style’, i.e. predominantly forte and constantly moving, composed of short, active and fragmentary figures strung together in irregular phrases with limited contrast of piano or cantabile-style melodic material. The movement is based on two figures both of which are presented in the opening bar. A close derivative is also prominently featured in both the second movement and the finale, giving a cyclic effect to the entire symphony. Vaňhal’s assured handling of the orchestra is evident in the variety of textures and sounds he employs in the course of the movement and above all in the detail of the orchestration. His sensitive orchestration is also evident in the enchanting Andante with its delicious use of the wind choir. The Minuetto and Trio, probably marked Menuetto ma allegretto in the original (meaning that it was not to be performed slowly), is scored for full orchestra although the trumpets and timpani assume a subdued rôle so that the total effect is not as brilliant as it might have been had the trumpets played the complete melody line. In the Trio the flute is scored in the traditional manner by doubling the melody an octave higher than the first violin. The Allegro molto finale is rapidly moving and brilliant, an appropriate final movement for a C major symphony with trumpets and timpani. The opening two-bar piano motive provides the thematic basis for the entire movement. Vaňhal’s ability to create large-scale musical structures out of so little material is one of his great strengths as a composer and in this he can be compared directly with Haydn. At times, however, his capacity for musical invention is if anything even more impressive and the references to important thematic material from the first and second movements in the finale of the symphony brilliantly emphasize the cyclic unity of the symphony and cannot have gone unnoticed by Haydn when he directed performances of the work at Eszterháza.
1. Allegro
2. Adagio
3. Menuetto and Trio
4. Allegro, “La Tempesta”
The Symphony in E flat major (Bryan Eb1), is unique among Vaňhal’s works. The descriptive title la Tempesta which is written at the beginning of the last movement, together with its style and content, sets the movement and the symphony apart from any of Vaňhal’s other symphonies. The la Tempesta finale (176 bars) can be analyzed as a movement in truncated sonata form. Its title, however, demands a more imaginative interpretation, and it is possible that it represents a storm in four episodes. The other three movements also differ from their counterparts in other symphonies and, together, they give the impression that the entire work may have been intended to represent a ‘theme’. They do not have descriptive titles, but, like the finale, are treated differently from conventional sonata form; e.g. the mid-point repeat bars are lacking from both the first and second movements. Moreover, all movements prominently feature the rising semiquaver ‘storm’ figure from the finale which gives the entire work a cyclic sense. It seems that Vaňhal has composed a work that describes different aspects of the seasons. The bright, active mood of the first movement with its constant motion of related figures and motives together with the rapidly rising semiquaver ‘storm’ figure prominently displayed, could represent the mood of spring. The intense minor mood of the second movement with its siciliano rhythm, adagio tempo, chromaticism, and slowly rising semiquavers, could suggest the languid mood of summer. Beginning forte with the same rapidly-rising scale passages as the first and last movements, the Menuetto is contrasted with its placid Trio (piano) whose murmuring arpeggio quavers are suddenly punctuated by two-bar forte interjections. Many suggestions have been made regarding its programmatic intention. Could it be a winter day in which blustery winds are suggested by the forte running semiquavers of the storm-motive, while the piano Trio sections portray a lull in the action and the quiet quavers depict falling snow?
Paul Bryan
1. Allegro
2. Andante
3. Menuetto
4. Allegro
The Symphony in D major, (Bryan D2), is one of Vaňhal’s earliest symphonies and was probably composed during the years 1763-1765. Judging from the number of references to the work in contemporary thematic catalogues and the thirteen reliable manuscript sources that survive it must have been unusually popular. It was probably well-known in London since it was published there as Periodical Overture No. 53 by Bremner. As is so often the case with Vaňhal’s symphonies it is impossible to establish for whom the work was composed. Its bright key and full orchestration with two dialoguing wind-choirs suggests that it was created for a patron who wanted the dynamic and brilliant effect typically produced by the inclusion of trumpets and timpani. It is one of Vaňhal’s earliest symphonies and in the first movement especially one can distinguish between his Baroque heritage, manifest in the movement’s forward-driving momentum and employment of short melodic units punctuated by frequent dynamic shifts, and his new-found interest in longer melodic lines, which would become one of the hallmarks of the mature classical style. The surprise intrusion of a new theme in the central section of the movement is well-judged and shows a composer who even at this relatively early stage of his career is not content slavishly to follow established conventions but rather explore and develop new solutions to the problems of form. The other movements are also very attractive and worthy of close examination both on account of their musical qualities and the manner of their construction. The derivation of each from the motifs which open them and the remarkable irregularity created by the use of asymmetrical phrases, such as in the Menuetto, are highly effective and lend the music a peculiar lilting grace which is so much part of the eighteenth-century Viennese tradition. The rapidlymoving perpetual-motion finale with its scurrying string writing and braying trumpets brings the work to a rousing brilliant D major conclusion.
1. Allegro moderato
2. Andante
3. Menuetto moderato
4. Allegro molto
The Symphony in C minor (Bryan c2) is one of a number of impressive minor-key works composed by Vaňhal in the mid-1760s and early 1770s. In one extant source the work is misattributed to Joseph Haydn who coincidentally was a great admirer of Vaňhal’s symphonies and performed a number of them with the Esterházy orchestra. This work is one of the finest symphonies Vaňhal composed during his early years in Vienna. Like the Symphony in D major it has a number of stylistic features that belong to the older tradition while exhibiting many forward-looking techniques that would become an integral part of his style in the 1770s. The relentless drive of the outer movements is reminiscent of the Baroque, and also of the so-called Sturm und Drang style most often associated with Haydn’s minorkey symphonies composed during the years ca 1768-1772, but the eleven-bar piano cantabile theme that opens the work anticipates the type of thematic construction and phrase morphology encountered in the mature classical style. The larger than usual instrumentation and the manner in which the hornsoboes quartet and trumpets-timpani trio are employed suggest that the symphony might have been written for a special occasion. The entire work shows Vaňhal’s early fascination with the minor mode and it is, in fact, the only one of his symphonies in which all the movements are in the minor mode.
1. Allegro molto
2. Adagio molto cantabile
3. Menuetto I and II
4. Finale: Allegro molto
The magnificent Symphony in A flat (Bryan Ab1), composed in all likelihood in Vienna about 1772-1773, is unique among Vaňhal’s symphonies both on account of its key and the use of a horn soloist in the second movement. Although the work appears to have circulated reasonably widely in manuscript, it was never published in the composer’s lifetime. Symphonies in the key of A flat major are seldom encountered in the eighteenth century. Vaňhal’s choice of such an unusual key is, therefore, interesting and might well reflect aesthetic considerations, the special effect (Affekt) of the key itself. Equally, however, it might have been to complement the second movement which features a solo horn (in E flat), accompanied by a choir of strings con sordino, and two oboes, a lovely effect that results from the timbre of the horn combined with the swirling semiquaver-dominated, gossamer sound of the muted strings. The horn part is carefully written. It is confined to the notes available on the natural horn without handstopping and is less demanding than the second movements of the horn concertos by Mozart and Haydn, but it still requires a player with flexibility and the ability to traverse the range from c1 to c3. One might suppose that it would be playable by the average first hornist who would be encountered in the normal Viennese orchestra, that is, not a virtuoso. It would be interesting to know for whom this symphony was written, and who was the horn player entrusted to perform the lyrical second movement.
By the time Vaňhal composed the Symphony in A flat major he had already written more than fifty symphonies. It is a serious work, the product of a mature composer whose concept of what a symphony should be was well established in his mind. Each of its four movements has full-blown proportions: the first and final movements are in sonata form and have three lengthy themes. The second movement is a song-form sonata with exposition, a middle section of seventeen bars with a new thematic idea mostly in E flat minor, and a recapitulation. It could easily be the second movement of a horn concerto. The attractive melodic lines of the Menuetto and Trio feature unusual phrase lengths created by various techniques of phrase extension, including dialoguing between the strings and the four-voiced wind choir in the Trio. The extended tempo indications on the movements, as, for example, for the second movement, which is not simply Adagio but Adagio molto cantabile, while Minuetto I is qualified with ‘ma un poco allegro’, is a typical way whereby Vaňhal sought to control performances of his later symphonies.
1. Allegro ma non molto
2. Andante molto grazioso
3. Menuetto I and II
4. Finale: Allegro ma non troppo
Composed around 1772-1773 when Vaňhal was in his mid-thirties, the Symphony in G major (Bryan G6), like the previous work, is one of Vaň hal’s later symphonies and like them it employs many of the same techniques of musical organization. Here, however, Vaňhal reverts to the kind of experimentation found in his earlier symphonies. He superimposes a rondo-like use of the main theme upon the basic sonata principle with its well-defined tonal scheme and pattern of exposition-development-recapitulation. The result is that there are six complete statements of the opening theme the head motif of which also serves its usual constructional function throughout the movement. The musical organization of the movement is subtle and highly original; the return of the head-motif in the last bars is unexpected yet provides the most appropriate and satisfying conclusion to this supreme example of Vaňhal’s technical skill as a composer. The second movement is also constructed according to sonata principles with a continuous melodic flow extending the opening figure with its lilting, quavernote rhythm. The solo flute part mostly doubles the first violin melody an octave higher. The movement would be complete without it, but it would be sorely missed were it absent, since it lends such a distinctive colour to the movement. A further instance of Vaňhal’s sensitivity to orchestral colour can be heard at one point where he writes the viola part above both the first and second violin parts.
One of the most interesting aspects of the eighteenthcentury Viennese symphony is the gradual transformation of the minuet from a dance to something more abstract and stylized. That Menuetto I and II are here clearly not intended for dancing is at once apparent on account of their employment of irregular phrase-lengths and occasional cross accents created by the use of szforzandi in the internal voices. In movements such as these, and in many of Haydn’s later minuets, are to be found the seeds of the Beethovenian scherzo. The sprightly Finale is also a finelywrought movement and the surprising dominance of the minor mode in the powerful development section, which vacillates between A minor, E minor and D minor, gives the movement a depth that its perky opening theme seems to belie.
Paul Bryan and Allan Badley