The Classic Orchestral Composers
"Sinfonia avanti l'Opera"--Its development into the
overture--Effect of this on orchestral composition--The
classical symphony--Haydn and his achievements--Exploring
the secrets of orchestral writing--Mozart and his notable
system--Condition of the symphony when Beethoven began writing.
The classic orchestral composers are those who wrote the classic piano
sonatas, and they developed their orchestral works on the same lines as
those of their piano works. The symphony, as I have already said, is
nothing more nor less than a sonata for orchestra; but it has its
special characteristics, and these deserve some attention. The word
"symphony" was first applied to separate instrumental portions of
operas. For instance, an extended introduction to an aria was called
"sinfonia." As ballet movements were introduced into operas, and
instrumental preludes came to be employed, these separate pieces were
more and more extended, and the term "sinfonia" came to be of
considerable significance. The early composers were compelled to seek
for some coherent design for their symphonies and as that played before
the opera was the most independent of all, it was that in which a
definite form first made its appearance. It was at first called
"Sinfonia avanti l'Opera"--"symphony before the opera." As such it was
written by Alessandro Scarlatti (1659-1725), and the French composer,
Giovanni Battista Lulli (1633-1687). Lulli's overtures, as they came to
be called, were divided into three movements, slow, lively, and slow,
without pauses between them. A diametrically opposite form to this came
to be known as the "Italian Overture." Its movements were lively, slow,
lively--like those of the three-movement sonata--except that there was
no pause between movements. The origin of this form is the same as that
of the alternating movements of the sonata. It took firm hold as soon as
it appeared, and from the beginning of the eighteenth century was the
acknowledged form.
The symphony now moved forward on much the same lines as those of the
piano sonata, and what has been said about the early steps in the
development of that form will apply to this one. It should be noted,
however, that the introduction of playing opera overtures at concerts
greatly aided the development of the symphony. The introduction of this
custom was due to the time-honored habit of going late to the opera. The
bustle of arrivals prevented the overtures from being heard, and so it
became the custom to play them separately. The early instrumental
concertos had very great influence on the development of the symphony,
because they showed composers the essential differences between piano
and orchestral composition. These were not like our modern concertos,
written to display the resources of some solo instrument, but were
literally concerts of instruments. In the earliest forms contrasts of
tone and power were obtained by using a single trio or quartet of
strings for the principal passages, and bringing in additional strings
(called "ripieno" instruments) to enforce the tone in the tuttis.
Alessandro Scarlatti wrote concertos of this sort. Sebastian Bach wrote
a number of concertos for instruments, and all of them are in the
three-movement form based on the Italian overture. Handel also wrote
concertos. But these concertos of Handel and Bach were in the
contrapuntal style, and the genius of the sonata form was tending always
toward the monophonic style. For that reason these concertos did not
have so direct an influence on the symphony as did the overture, which
naturally followed the vocal style of the opera.
The symphony in the early stages of the classical period, which began
with Emmanuel Bach, followed pretty closely the lines of the piano
sonata in form. E. Bach was at work writing symphonies when Haydn was a
little boy. It must be confessed, however, that his symphonies are less
distinct in form than his piano sonatas. It is because of the decided
clearness of the orchestral works of Haydn that he is celebrated as the
father of the symphony. He established the sonata form and it is not at
all surprising that he applied it successfully to his orchestral
compositions. Haydn wrote (or is said to have written) one hundred and
eighteen symphonies, beginning in 1759 and continuing to his later
years. His earliest works are so irregular and uncertain that they do
not throw much light on anything except his instrumentation. His
position as conductor of Prince Esterhazy's orchestra gave him abundant
opportunity to experiment with instrumental forms and effects, and his
symphonies written during his long service in the Esterhazy household
show steady advance in style. The Esterhazy orchestra contained in 1766,
six violins and violas, one 'cello, one double bass, one flute, two
oboes, two bassoons, and four horns. It was afterward enlarged to
twenty-two, including trumpets and kettle-drums. In 1776, after Haydn
had learned from Mozart how to use clarinets, two of these instruments
were added, making twenty-four in all. It was a pretty small orchestra
according to our present ideas, but it sufficed for the establishment of
the symphony.
Haydn improved not only in his method of developing the subjects of his
movements, but in his knowledge of the kinds of themes best fitted for
orchestral treatment, which are organically different from those suited
to the piano. His experiments in instrumentation went far towards
assisting composers to a true knowledge of the art of orchestration
(writing for orchestra). He himself learned rapidly from the trials of
his own combinations by the Esterhazy band. In his early days, for
instance, he frequently wrote the same part for his first and second
violins and the same part for his violas and basses, so that his strings
were playing in only two real parts, and his harmony was very thin. His
treatment of the wood wind was crude at first, but his experiments
rapidly improved this, and by 1770 he had introduced the now familiar
style of making the wind instruments intone long chords, while the
strings played figured passages, or _vice versa_. The movements of all
his symphonies are very short, and one who looks for great breadth or
depth in them will be disappointed. They are bright and genial, except
in their slow movements, which are generally tender without being
pathetic. In the first movements the working out is usually short, and
not at all involved, as if Haydn were timid about presenting too much
for intellectual consideration at one time. The finale is generally in
rondo form, so that there is only one real working out in the whole
symphony.
It must be borne in mind that the public taste of that time would hardly
have been prepared for such advanced works as those of Beethoven, even
if Haydn's technic of composition had been equal to the task of writing
them. The composer was thoroughly in accord with the spirit of his time,
and his influence in popularizing good music cannot be over-estimated.
Haydn's later works show a marked advance over his earlier ones, which
must be attributed to the influence of Mozart. The reader will remember
that Mozart's life began after and ended before Haydn's. Mozart also had
opportunities to learn something about the possibilities of orchestral
music while he was at Mannheim in 1777. The band there was one of the
finest in Europe at the time, and its excellent achievements in light
and shade no doubt gave Mozart many valuable suggestions. Mozart wrote
forty-nine symphonies, but only three of them are heard often to-day:
that in E-flat major, op. 543, that in G minor, op. 550, and that in C
major, op. 551, commonly called the "Jupiter" symphony. These were his
last three symphonies, written in 1788, and it is notable that in none
of the three is the full Beethoven orchestra employed. All three use
only one flute. The E-flat symphony has clarinets, but no oboes. The
other two have oboes, but no clarinets. The G minor has no drums nor
trumpets, and none has trombones. Nevertheless, by the pure beauty of
their melodic subjects, the clearness of their discussion, and their
general grace and symmetry, these works have succeeded in maintaining a
place among living music. They are most satisfactory examples of the
kind of composition produced in the classic period, the period of pure
beauty in music. It is difficult to discuss the work of Mozart with
judicial calm, even at this distance from the time of its performance.
Contemporaneous records all bear such enthusiastic testimony as to the
extraordinary genius of the wonderful boy that it is difficult to avoid
injustice to his works. We must remember that in Mozart's boyhood, when
he wrote his first symphonies, the form of the sonata was still
uncertain, and we must, therefore, be satisfied with finding in his
precocious compositions a keen perception of the value of balance and
continuity.
It was after writing his first three symphonies that Mozart began
to hear operas, and this greatly improved his style. His Parisian
symphony, opus 297, produced in 1778, shows the results of his
operatic study as well as his attention to the Mannheim band. The
first movement is decidedly irregular in form, abounding in different
melodies and striking harmonies. The subjects are dramatic in feeling,
but in construction are essentially orchestral. In his last three
symphonies he shows a complete mastery of the organization of the
orchestral sonata in its then stage of development, which was chiefly
his work. A peculiarity of Mozart's style was its generous employment
of free counterpoint,--that is, polyphonic writing in which the
different voices occasionally intone different melodies (or parts
of them) at the same time, without adherence to canonic law. This
kind of counterpoint is common in modern orchestral composition. Otto
Jahn, the authoritative biographer of Mozart, says:--
"The perfection of the art of counterpoint is not the distinguishing
characteristic of this symphony [C major] alone, but of them all [the
last three]. The enthralling interest of the development of each
movement in its necessary connection and continuity consists chiefly in
the free and liberal use of the manifold resources of counterpoint. The
ease and certainty of this mode of expression make it seem fittest for
what the composer has to say. Freedom of treatment penetrates every
component part of the whole, producing an independent, natural motion of
each. The then novel art of employing the wind instruments in separate
and combined effects was especially admired by Mozart's contemporaries.
His treatment of the stringed instruments showed a progress not less
advanced, as, for instance, in the free treatment of the basses, as
characteristic as it was melodious. The highest quality of the
symphonies, however, is their harmony of tone-color, the healthy
combination of orchestral sound, which is not to be replaced by any
separate effects, however charming. In this combination consists the art
of making the orchestra as a living organism express the artistic idea
which gives the creative impulse to the work, and controls the forces
which are always ready to be set in motion. An unerring conception of
the capacities for the development contained in each subject, of the
relations of contrasting and conflicting elements, of the proportions of
the parts composing the different movements, and of the proportions of
the movements to the whole work; finally, of the proper division and
blending of the tone-colors,--such are the essential conditions for the
production of a work of art which is to be effective in all its parts.
Few persons will wish to dispute the fact that Mozart's great symphonies
display the happiest union of invention and knowledge, of feeling and
taste."
Haydn's later works gained much from their composer's study of the clear
form, the pure orchestral idiom, and the musical beauty of Mozart's.
Furthermore the orchestral descriptions of chaos, the birth of light,
spring, summer, etc., in "The Creation" and "The Seasons" were made
possible to Haydn by Mozart's experiments in instrumental tone-coloring.
But this is aside from the present subject. It will be well for the
reader now to grasp a few defined facts as to the state of the symphony
when Beethoven took it up. Here I must again appeal to a master of the
subject, Dr. Parry, who says:--
"By the end of their time [Haydn's and Mozart's] instrumental art had
branched out into a very large number of distinct and complete forms,
such as symphonies, concertos, quartets, trios, and sonatas for violin
and clavier. The style appropriate to each had been more or less
ascertained, and the schemes of design had been perfectly organized for
all self-dependent instrumental music. Both Haydn and Mozart had
immensely improved in the power of finding characteristic subjects, and
in deciding the type of subject which is best fitted for instrumental
music. The difference in that respect between their early and later
works is very marked. They improved the range of the symphonic cycle of
movements by adding the minuet and trio to the old group of three
movements, thereby introducing definite and undisguised dance movements
to follow and contrast with the central cantabile slow movement. Between
them they had completely transformed the treatment of the orchestra.
They not only enlarged it and gave it greater capacity of tone and
variety, but they also laid the solid foundations of those methods of
art which have become the most characteristic and powerful features in
the system of modern music. Even in detail the character of music is
altered; all phraseology is made articulate and definite; and the
minutiæ which lend themselves to refined and artistic performance are
carefully considered, without in any way diminishing the breadth and
freedom of the general effect. There is hardly any branch or department
of art which does not seem to have been brought to high technical
perfection by them; and if _the world could be satisfied with the ideal
of perfectly organized simplicity without any great force of
expression_, instrumental art might well have stopped at the point to
which they brought it."
Dr. Parry has, in the passage which I have italicized, touched the
marrow of the matter. Haydn's and Mozart's symphonies, however they may
have impressed their contemporaries, appeal to us through their perfect
transparency, their balance of form, their fluency of instrumental
language, and their simple beauty of style. The working out parts of
their symphonies, for instance, are devoted wholly to the exposition of
the musical fruitfulness of their subjects. There is nowhere any
evidence of an attempt to employ the apparatus of the symphony for a
systematic communication of emotion. These works do, indeed, at times
arouse our feelings, but there is no conviction that their composers
designed them to speak a message of the inner life to us. They are the
perfect embodiments of pure musical beauty, and it was not till
Beethoven took up the form which they had perfected that it became the
definite embodiment of feeling, the systematic means of expression.
What has already been said about Beethoven's piano sonatas applies with
equal propriety to his symphonies. But something may be added, because
the symphonies exhibit Beethoven's characteristics in their most
imposing garb, and it is through them that he comes into his most
influential relations with the great mass of music lovers. But as
Beethoven's symphonies mark a transition from the classic to the
romantic era, it will be more logical to consider them in a chapter
including the romantic writers.