early music review

Ensemble Tourbillon, Petr Wagner
71:57
Accent ACC 24294

[dropcap]B[/dropcap]efore I move on to be critical, I would just like to say that the music on this CD deserved to be recorded and that when I wasn’t “ah, but…”-ing in my head, my toes were tapping along with the lively performances. Enjoyable as those are, though, they are unlikely to be quite what the composer had in mind for his music. Having told us that Schmierer (about whom biographical information is scant) was one of those German composers referred to as “Lulliste”, the booklet notes quote selected passages from the preface to the publication (readily available online) to justify changing the instrumental line-up. They do not, however, mention that a four-part texture is not traditional for Lully (who preferred a strong treble line, three violas and a strong bass); Charpentier did write in four parts quite often, but not for two violins – his top line (like Lully’s) split for trio sections. Reading the entire preface reveals that fact that Schmierer’s part names are Violin, Violetta, Viola and Basso; he suggests that the Violin be doubled, and the Basso… Just as one would expect from a Lulliste, in fact. So Ensemble Tourbillon’s decision to double all parts except the Viola in Suite 5 is slightly perverse – in fact, it would have been more in keeping with Schmierer’s instruction either to put both oboes on the Violin part, or to have double reeds play all four lines; since Suite 6 is performed by double reeds with plucker, the decision not to include the taille in Suite 5 is even stranger. Similarly replacing “Violin 1” of Suite 3 with a flute might have worked better if the Violetta part had been played on a soprano viola rather than a violin – the slightly darker timbre would allow the flute to ring out over the others more clearly. And why does the gamba play Bass in three sonatas and Viola in another? I am sure that in certain circumstances, musical ensembles in court and civic situations would have had to make do with whichever instruments were available at the time, but such line-ups were surely not what the composer hoped for, and surely we owe it to him to present these pieces in their very best light. If the overtures are Lulliste (though lacking any of the gravitas), the short dance movements that complete the suites (only six of the projected 12 survive – or perhaps were ever printed?) reminded me of Schmelzer’s balletti for insertion into Viennese opera productions with short phrases and often abrupt or oddly extended cadences. Beautifully played and as professionally recorded as these performances are, I would like to hear Schmierer’s music played by a larger ensemble.

Brian Clark

[wp-review]

Roel Dieltiens cello, Richte van der Meer cello, Konrad Jung-hänel theorbo, Robert Kohnen hpscd/org
TT
Accent ACC24304
G. B. Bononcini, de Fesch, Domenico Gabrielli, Geminiani, Marcello & Vivaldi

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]hese recordings, made in 1990 and 1991, are attractively packaged, with the two CDs labelled ‘The Beginnings’ and ‘The Flowering’, the latter consisting solely of sonatas by Vivaldi and Geminiani. The pernickety might well query the inclusion of sonatas by Willem DeFesch (op.13 no. 6 in A minor c.1750) and Giovanni Battista Bononcini (Sonata in A minor from the ‘Six Solos for Two Cellos’) under the first disc’s title as being a little perverse. That apart, these are generally stylish performances, accompanied by theorbo, harpsichord and organ. The beginnings of the solo repertoire for the instrument are justly represented in the cello works by Domenico Gabrielli (d. 1690). Although they occupy more than half of Disc 1, taking up 16 tracks, they are confusingly listed as two sonatas on the CD box). In fact these tracks constitute the collection of unaccompanied Ricercari, the canon for 2 cellos as well as the two sonatas with theorbo and cello continuo. The Ricercari were virtuoso works in their time, with much free florid passage work adorned with multiple stopping, and the canon is an interesting piece. A strange feature in Dieltiens’ playing is his use of vibrato on expressive notes, the wideness of which at times sounded similar to the beaten vibrato specifically used in the French repertoire for the bass viol. With the three 18th-century sonatas on Disc 1 (the two mentioned above plus Benedetto Marcello’s Op. 2 no. 4), however, we are on more familiar territory.

The continuo texture chosen for three Vivaldi sonatas (RV 40, 42, 46) on Disc 2 is with organ and double bass, which some may find disconcerting. The three from Geminiani’s op. 5 set (nos 2, 3 and 6), published in 1746, employ the more customary harpsichord and cello continuo. The extremely slow tempi of the movements marked largo was worrying for, as we know, the indication implies a moderate speed, faster than adagio. Some may not like Dieltiens’ persistent spiccato-like style of playing in some of the allegro movements, often found in HIP performances in the 1990s and now more out of fashion. The booklet consists of a good essay on the develop-ment of the cello sonata in Italy with particular reference to the works on the discs, but lacked movement titles and track listings, with no detail on the instruments used in the performances, let alone any biographical information. I am surprised that Accent could not have found room to include at least the basic movement information. Overall I enjoyed Disc 1 more, especially for the rarely recorded Gabrielli pieces.

Ian Graham-Jones

[wp-review]

Accademia Daniel, Shalev Ad-El
67:17
cpo 777 645-2
GWV301, 302, 306, 337 & 468

[dropcap]I[/dropcap] had never before come upon the suggestion that Uta Wald makes in the booklet notes that the impetus for Graupner to start writing purely instrumental music came in 1729 when the woodwind player Johann Michael Böhm fled to the court of Ludwigsburg near Stuttgart under threat of arrest for stealing – his salary had not been paid for a long time, so one might imagine he was desperate! The key point was, though, that he took all his music with him. Graupner, it seems, though technically responsible for all music at the court, had been so busy supplying music for performances in the chapel that he had more or less relied upon Böhm to take care of non-liturgical repertoire. For the present disc, Accademia Daniel have chosen solo concertos for violin, viola d’amore and bassoon, as well as a concerto that combines three bass soloists (chalumeau – a popular instrument in Darmstadt, it seems – cello and bassoon), and one of several of the composer’s Entratas “per la Musica di Tavola”, to all intents and purposes an orchestral suite, though eschewing the French overture associated with that form. All of the concertos are in the fast-slow-fast three movement form and have little in common with the Vivaldian model; in fact, the solo instrument is more just another colour on the composer’s palette. With that idea in mind, the wanton addition of a recorder to the final movement of the suite is easily forgiven. Graupner’s music takes some getting used to – what seem like normal baroque movements take some unexpected harmonic twists and turns, and his melodies frequently surprise; these players are well used to his music now, and their easy facility is reflected in some delightful performances.

Brian Clark

[wp-review]

Aapo Häkkinen
78:54
Naxos 8.573087
BWV818, 819, 832, 895, 896, 899-900, 917, 918, 922, 933-938, 952, 959, 961 & 993

In addition to the works listed on the title page of this CD, there are a large number of lesser-known works by Bach, some of which were quite unknown to me. They show Bach experimenting in a number of styles, sometimes sounding more like Telemann, sometimes more galant; at other times more rhapsodic or even more like an intellectual exercise in complex fugal forms. These factors alone would make this an interesting CD, but what makes the music work is the quality of the playing and Häkkinen’s choice of instrument. Recorded in a Finnish church, he uses a 1970 harpsichord by Rutkowski & Robinette after the 1760 Hass in the Yale instrument collection which has 1 x 16’, 2 x 8’, 1 x 4’ and 1 x 2’ (though this rank was not included by Rutkowski & Robinette), with buff stops to the upper 8’ and lower 16’. The instrument was beautifully prepared in a variety of temperaments for different sections of the pieces: 1/6 comma meantone, Kellner and Sorge. In the acoustic of the church and recorded exceptionally well, this gives a range of tone from the bell-like (the opening Prelude in A major is played on the 4’) to the ringingly rumbustious when the 16’ is used as well.

We know surprisingly little about Bach’s harpsichords. The only maker whose name is directly associated with Bach is Michael Mietke, the Berlin maker who delivered a harpsichord to Köthen in 1719, and none of his instruments that survive have a 16’. And while Zacharias Hildebrandt, who had care of the harpsichords in Leipzig churches at the end of Bach’s life, did build a large-scale instrument with a 16’ register, there is no evidence that Bach had one or used one. Yet on the evidence of the ringing clarity of the 16’ on this instrument in fugal writing as well as in the suites, I am persuaded that we should not dismiss the use of a large instrument of the Hildebrandt style being used in HIP of Bach.

David Stancliffe

[wp-review]

Trio Sonatas op. 3 Suite op. 8 Camerata Köln
75:15
cpo 777 867-2

I gave the first issue in this series a warm welcome and am happy to extend the same to this release. Indeed, the word ‘exemplary’ is not out of place here. Both flutes and recorders are played with a chunky rich sound to which the pitch (390) is a well-chosen contributing factor; instrumentation is varied, though within Hotteterre’s stated parameters; the playing is unfailingly stylish; and the lively booklet essay (German/English) addresses issues of context, content and performance practice. Oh – and it’s lovely music.

David Hansell

[wp-review]