Ferdinand Hiller

[Alan Howe]

...and we have to remember that all sources of information are potentially inadequate and merely await the next addition, emendation, excision, etc.

[Gareth Vaughan]

Hmm... yes. Up to a point. Lord Copper. Many of the mistakes in Grove could have been avoided by a little bit of research rigorously undertaken.

[Alan Howe]

Quite so, Gareth. I certainly found that when researching Percy Sherwood.

[JimL]

I have thoroughly acquainted myself with the two chamber works downloaded here: the Grand Piano Quartet No. 3, and the Piano Quintet.  I find myself asking, somewhat rhetorically, what is the barrier to greatness?  What is it objectively about these two works that resulted in them gathering dust while the quartets and quintets of Schumann, Brahms, Dvorak et al fill the programs?  To make it even more easy, what is it subjectively about them?  Don't get me wrong, I can't find anything myself.  This is, in my mind, simply great music. 

[eschiss1]

my concentration seems to have gone physically downhill lately - sleep troubles? - I keep promising myself I will listen to the Hiller and other recent downloads, I manage a few, I turn on others and - no fault of theirs, I am sleepy to begin with- I fall asleep for the most part. (Those I listen to at the right time I enjoy wonderfully- the Reizenstein concerto for instance.) The Hiller works, soon. But the Brahms (piano) quintet has risen so mightily in my estimation from a high place already since I was introduced to it- two decades ago or so? - that I can't imagine not wanting all, - I would not by any means want to drop the Brahms, not in the best performances- it is simply too good, and all the more remarkable for being only his opus 34 (well, among published works). (The chromatically- troubled, ambiguous, finale slow opener was not at all the only thing that impressed Schoenberg, for instance. Rightly so...) (The two string quintets likewise... anyhow. Sorry.) Some of the Romantic chamber works that fill the programs very regularly - see that http://bachtrack.com site for a sort-of-representative view of what programs look like in various places this season - do, I of course can only agree - deserve this far less than others (while Schumann's quintet gets me less than his other chamber works- especially the wonderful first violin sonata - I prefer all of the works you mention to some of the works programmed on a regular basis. (Subjectively I will admit I am not fond of Schubert's Trout, or of a lot of light music. With exceptions.)
 I could conjecture a few reasons just offhand.
BTW someone mentioned Edward Cowie recently? A string quartet of his is being performed later this month in Bristol...

[Alan Howe]

Although this post is prompted by the upload (courtesy of Mathias) of various works by Hiller, I thought it appropriate to post my initial reactions here...

Well, first I must say that I am absolutely thrilled to hear the first movement of the Symphony in E minor, Op.67 "Es muss doch Frühling werden" which dates from the late 1840s. This is much more than simply the sort warmed-over Mendelssohn that one might expect. Instead, it is a dramatic, exciting movement of no mean thematic interest and compositional invention which makes me want to hear the rest of the piece - urgently. It has some absolutely thrilling brass writing and a momentum which hardly seems to let up for the fourteen minutes or so of its duration. How on earth has this wonderful music got forgotten?

[chill319]

Re Hiller's E minor first movement, I'd like to second Alan's encomium. This is stirring and masterly music by a composer with something to say. And the Berlin Chamber Orchestra acquits itself handsomely.

During the 1840s, Hiller, like Schumann, was a force to be reckoned with, and still among the more advanced German composers. His first piano sonata is IMHO second only to Chopin's opus 35 in originality among works of its immediate period (the Liszt -- in a class by itself-- comes later). His experiments with mixed meters in the etudes and the second sonata, were well ahead of their time. His second piano concerto, with it's revolutionary treatment of the soloist, showed a way to go, dramatically, beyond the Mozart/Kalkbrenner model. His translation of the Ghazal into pure music expanded the boundaries of prosodic music well beyond existing, typically recitative-derived efforts.  We now know that he was an original symphonist as well.

[Mark Thomas]

I coming late to this re-appraisal of Hiller as I've been away for a few days but, having listened through a couple of times to the first movement of his "revolutionary spring" Symphony and sampled the choral works, I can only add my voice to those praising this music. I've always felt that Hiller was essentially a Mendelssohn-with-water composer and even the three piano concertos issued by Hyperion didn't totally dispel that impression, although they do have their moments. But first came the Piano Quintet and Piano Quartet broadcasts a couple of months ago, and now these performances, and suddenly one can why it was that in the 1840s and 50s Hiller was accorded so much respect from even the likes of Liszt (although no doubt not from Wagner). Both the chamber works and the Symphony torso display strong powers of invention and imagination, allied to a flair for the dramatic and both engage and enthuse the listener. The choral works clearly influenced Bruch, who was Hiller's star pupil. We must hear more, starting with the succeeding three movements of the Symphony.

[kolaboy]

I've always been curious about Hiller the operatic composer - as opposed to Hiller the symphonist (still hoping for a Romilda revival) - but I must agree that this symphonic movement far exceeded my expectations. I suppose that the relative weakness of certain parts of  the Konzertstuck must have prejudiced me a bit... as well as Schumann's less than enthusiastic review of the op.15 Etudes...

[eschiss1]

I'll listen soon- Schumann does praise what I imagine is this symphony in that letter to Hiller (and I am now guessing that the praise was probably quite sincere, for all that it was coupled to regret that he couldn't conduct it himself that 1849 season. (Only just back yesterday.)

[JimL]

I coming late to this re-appraisal of Hiller as I've been away for a few days but, having listened through a couple of times to the first movement of his "revolutionary spring" Symphony and sampled the choral works, I can only add my voice to those praising this music. I've always felt that Hiller was essentially a Mendelssohn-with-water composer and even the three piano concertos issued by Hyperion didn't totally dispel that impression, although they do have their moments. But first came the Piano Quintet and Piano Quartet broadcasts a couple of months ago, and now these performances, and suddenly one can why it was that in the 1840s and 50s Hiller was accorded so much respect from even the likes of Liszt (although no doubt not from Wagner). Both the chamber works and the Symphony torso display strong powers of invention and imagination, allied to a flair for the dramatic and both engage and enthuse the listener. The choral works clearly influenced Bruch, who was Hiller's star pupil. We must hear more, starting with the succeeding three movements of the Symphony.

I've been listening to the Hyperion CD again while considering these comments, and it's funny but I have almost the opposite take on the concertos (well, the last 2, anyway.)  Compared to Mendelssohn, I find Hiller's music much more robust, and far less "watered-down".  The 3rd concerto, especially, is conceived on a far grander scale than any of the 3 single-piano concertos left by dear Felix, and the celebrated F-sharp minor work has an earthy vigor to it that Mendelssohn can't even approximate in his music.

[Alan Howe]

I too have found Hiller's PC3 a very definite development away from Mendelssohn, its scale being greater than any concertante work by by the older composer. In the same way, Reinecke's PC3 seems to me a substantial step removed from Schumann/Mendelssohn. It seems there was more than one way in which the conservative tradition was developed in the nineteenth century. We don't have to reduce it to Brahms...

[JimL]

And the 2nd concerto is even more concentrated than any of the Mendelssohn concertos, with a cadenza in the first movement that actually serves as a part of the recapitulation, rather than an elaboration tacked onto it.  I disagree with that conductor wholeheartedly.  Hiller is definitely overdue for a reappraisal.

[Alan Howe]

I agree, Jim. Hiller definitely demands reassessment. Urgently.

[Mark Thomas]

Yes, I agree too - as I hope is clear from my post which Jim quoted.