One of the most grown-up review sites around
One of the most grown-up review sites around

Search MusicWeb Here


International mailing

  Founder: Len Mullenger              Founding Editor: Rob Barnett              Contact Seen and Heard here

Some items
to consider

  • Henze Kammermusik 1958
  • Mozart Flute Quartets
  • Schubert complete piano works
  • Sammartini: 6 Concerti grossi
  • Henze Kammermusik 1958

CD and Blue-ray Audio

CD and Blue-ray Audio

CPE Bach Cantatas
a revelation

Biber: Sacred Choral Works
Don't miss it

Jonathan Dove

Tommie Haglund
Unique and Powerful music

Organ Fireworks

Highly Entertaining

A triumphant performance

Bruckner Symphony 4
One of the finest I have heard

A most joy-inducing recording

A winning partnership

A Lohengrin to treasure.


REVIEW Plain text for smartphones & printers

Support us financially by purchasing this from

Bach vs. Haydn 1788/90
Franz Joseph HAYDN (1732-1809)
Trios for piano flute and violoncello
Trio in D (H XV,16) [21:33]
Trio in F (H XV,17) [17:34]
Trio in G (H XV,15) [23:55]
Piet Kuijken (fortepiano), Barthold Kuijken (transverse flute), Wieland Kuijken (cello)
Carl Philipp Emanuel BACH (1714-1788)
Quartets for harpsichord, flute and viola
Quartet in G (Wq 95 / H 539) [15:58]
Quartet in a minor (Wq 93 / 537) [14:06]
Quartet in D (Wq 94 / H 538) [14:19]
Ewald Demeyere (harpsichord), Barthold Kuijken (transverse flute), Ann Cnop (viola)
rec. 2014, AMUZ, Antwerp, Belgium. DDD
ACCENT ACC 24293 [63:03 + 44:24]

By and large Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach and Joseph Haydn are allocated to different stylistic periods in music history. The former is associated with a period which is called Empfindsamkeit or Sturm und Drang; this was also the time in which the galant idiom manifested itself. Haydn, on the other hand, is considered one of the three great representatives of the classical era. However, they were largely contemporaries. Bach was almost twenty years older than Haydn; the latter was clearly influenced by him, but Bach in his turn appreciated the oeuvre of Haydn. When Bach died in 1788 Haydn had already established himself as one of the main composers of his time. Only three years later he was received in England as the greatest composer in Europe.

The present disc combines two series of compositions by Bach and Haydn which were written at about the same time. The three quartets for keyboard, transverse flute and viola by Bach date from 1788, the year of his death. Haydn composed his three trios for keyboard, flute and cello in 1789/90. This makes their juxtaposition on this set historically plausible. It is also quite interesting to compare them.

In his liner-notes Barthold Kuijken writes: "The stylistic differences between the two [composers] are enormous. In Bach, we find Sturm und Drang (storm and stress), Empfindsamkeit (sensitivity), contrasts and unexpected events. In Haydn, alongside his typical wit and moving depth, we find (apparent) simplicity, clear forms, elegance, charm and the cantabile of Viennese classicism". In general terms that seems a very good characterisation. However, it doesn't cover the whole oeuvre of both masters. The opening movement from Haydn's Trio in D recorded here, for instance, is certainly not devoid of surprises, especially a number of unexpected general pauses.

The two composers also differ in regard to the place of the transverse flute. Bach composed a large number of works for the flute or with an important flute part, including solo concertos and solo sonatas. That is not so much the effect of his employer for a number of years, Frederick the Great of Prussia, being a fanatical player of the instrument; after all, he hardly appreciated the style of his harpsichordist. It was rather the fact that the flute was the most popular instrument among amateurs which inspired Bach and other composers to write for it. Chamber music was mostly aimed at amateurs, and that explains why the flute takes an important place in Bach's chamber music oeuvre. Haydn, by contrast, composed very little for the flute. The three trios recorded here are the only example of this scoring in his catalogue. He didn't compose any flute quartets - for flute and string trio, another highly popular genre in the second half of the 18th century - or sonatas for keyboard and flute. As far as we know there is only one concerto and that has been lost. Even so, chamber music by Haydn with a flute part is regularly performed and recorded. In such cases we are making do with arrangements by contemporaries: Haydn's music was very popular, and amateurs wanted to play it. That created a whole market for quartets, trios and other pieces in which one of the parts - mostly originally written for the violin - was arranged for flute.

The three trios are the result of a commission of the London publisher Bland. He issued first the trios in D and G, and later the third in F. At the same time they were published by Artaria in Vienna. It is interesting to note that in the latter trio the flute could be replaced by a violin. At the title page of the first two trios in the London edition the exact scoring is not given, only the keyboard (fortepiano or harpsichord) is mentioned, "with accompaniment". Whether a cello is added is probably down to the interpreters. It is worth mentioning that the cello largely supports the left hand of the keyboard part; as with all Haydn's piano trios it can be omitted. However, the fortepianos of the time were rather weak in the bass, and that makes the inclusion of a cello plausible. The three trios are different in character: the trios in D and in G are comparable in that both are in three movements, the first being longer than the two remaining movements. The closing movements are in rondo form, the middle movements are of a pastoral character. The Trio in F has two movements and therefore falls into the category of the divertimento. The second movement is a menuet.

Although theoretically the keyboard part can be played at the harpsichord, the fortepiano seems the most plausible option, certainly if one realizes that these trios were published in England where this instrument had fully established itself. In this recording Piet Kuijken plays an interesting instrument, from the Longman-Clementi workshop and dating from 1799. However, in its sound it is quite close to instruments with a Viennese action: this allows a speechlike interpretation which is far harder to realize on most fortepianos with English action, especially Broadwoods. That seems appropriate, because Haydn composed them before his first stay in London. At that time he was only acquainted with Viennese instruments, and that must have been the sound he had in his mind while writing these trios.

The quartets by Bach are clearly intended for either professional players or highly-skilled amateurs. Kuijken suggests that these pieces may have been composed for some of the children of the Jewish banker Itzig in Berlin. Two of them, Sara and Zippora, were keyboard players. Sara's husband Salomon Levy played the flute and her elder brother Benjamin the viola. The two sisters were in close contact with Carl Philipp Emanuel and his elder brother Wilhelm Friedemann, and very interested in the music of members of the Bach family, including Johann Sebastian. They were well-versed in playing the keyboard: Sara regularly performed keyboard concertos by Emanuel and by his father and commissioned Emanuel's concerto for harpsichord and fortepiano.

Scoring has always been a subject of debate. Bach called these works quartets but then only mentioned three instruments on the title page. In his personal catalogue he added "and bass". There are various theories about this. Some believe that the term "quartet" only refers to the number of parts, and point out that the right and left hand of the keyboard are treated on equal terms. This contrasts with what was common in works for keyboard solo and for keyboard with instruments, in which the left hand was confined to an accompanying role which could then be supported by a string bass. Others think - especially considering Bach's description in his own catalogue - that the addition of a cello is expected without mentioning it. This can be compared with the use of a string bass in a basso continuo part which use was never indicated. The cellist could simply follow the left hand of the keyboard and now and then add something of his own.

We could consider a third option. Maybe Bach wanted to leave it to the performers to decide whether or not to use a cello, depending on the choice of keyboard. This brings us to another issue: which keyboard instrument Bach had in mind? The original manuscript in the archive of the Berlin Singakademie and Bach's own catalogue specifies clavier which in the 18th century was mostly a reference to the clavichord. It could also refer to any strung keyboard instrument, and in this case the clavichord itself has to be excluded. The keyboard part has the indication clavicembalo. However, the keyboard part includes quite a number of dynamic indications and this suggests the use of the fortepiano. That could be the reason Bach added "and bass", probably meaning ad libitum. The fortepiano had established itself as a serious alternative to the harpsichord, but especially some of the older types were rather weak in the bass. In that case a cello could be useful to reinforce the keyboard's bass part.

Here it was decided to use the harpsichord, and omit the cello. The decision to use a harpsichord is partly based on practical considerations: the lack of a really appropriate instrument. A Silbermann was considered too old-fashioned, a Stein or Walter "too 'classical', too 'Mozartian', too modern, too extroverted". The presence of dynamic markings in the keyboard part doesn't exclude the use of a harpsichord. This seems a very plausible option. A fortepiano is certainly not out of the question, but too often performers out of laziness turn to a copy of a Walter fortepiano. It is praiseworthy that Kuijken and his colleagues have realized that such an instrument is not appropriate and were willing to accept the consequences.

These quartets are every inch vintage Emanuel Bach. The many twists and turns we know from his keyboard works are very much present here as well. That is perfectly conveyed in these performances. One doesn't miss a more dynamic keyboard, such as the fortepiano. However, the balance is not ideal: the flute is too dominant in relation to the harpsichord. It is the latter which should have the lead here, but it is somewhat underexposed. Even so, these are outstanding performances. I would even consider the interpretations of Haydn's trios as the best available right now. That has everything to do with the choice of the fortepiano which turns out to be the ideal instrument for these pieces. Piet Kuijken plays with great panache, in a really speechlike manner, with clear dynamic accents. The differentiated treatment of dynamics is one of the features of these performances. This is Haydn at his very best.

The overall quality of these performances and the combination of two series of pieces which are so characteristic of their respective composers make this set a winner. Even if you have good recordings of these works in your collection there is every reason to add this set.

Johan van Veen


Gerard Hoffnung CDs

Advertising on

Donate and get a free CD


New Releases

Naxos Classical

Musicweb sells the following labels
Acte Préalable
(THE Polish label)
Altus 10% off
Atoll 10% off
CRD 10% off
Hallé 10% off
Lyrita 10% off
Nimbus 10% off
Nimbus Alliance
Prima voce 10% off
Red Priest 10% off
Retrospective 10% off
Saydisc 10% off
Sterling 10% off

Follow us on Twitter

Subscribe to our free weekly review listing

Sample: See what you will get

Editorial Board
MusicWeb International
Founding Editor
Rob Barnett
Seen & Heard
Editor Emeritus
   Bill Kenny
Editor in Chief
MusicWeb Webmaster
   David Barker
MusicWeb Founder
   Len Mullenger