SCHEIBE AND SCHULZ
(F-09)
1. Scheibe and Schulz
Johann Adolph Scheibe (1708-1776) – Leipzig,
Hamburg, Denmark – knew JS Bach in Leipzig – knew Telemann and Mattheson in
Hamburg – also a composer, but best known as critic
The Critischer Musicus was published serially from 1737 through 1740 –
issued in single volume in 1745 –18th-century buzzwords: nature, Affects,
melody, freedom
Contra J.S. Bach - READ from Buelow
– Scheibe (29 years old)
knew Bach and held him in high regard –
Scheibe as a
composer – Many symphonies, music for the Danish court – funeral music
for monarchs
Johann Abraham Peter Schulz (1774)
J.A.P. Schulz (1747-1800) - Student
of Kirnberger - Then a music director in Berlin and Copenhagen - Helped K. out
with articles promised to Sulzer from letter S on – Later became Kapellmeister
in Denmark
Context of Sulzer's Allgemeine Theorie der schönen Künste –
general dictionary of the arts
Composed keyboard music and several
operas – no symphonies that I know of - The only music by Schultz that people
still play or sing is “Oh, come little children” (the
Christmas carol)
2. Questions from prep
1.
Does Scheibe define a symphony?
Briefly paraphrase his definition.
How does it differ from what we mean by a symphony today?
No single definition – assumes
reader knows what he is talking about
Three genres (standard): church,
theater, chamber – “chamber” turned into later symphonies
Assumes connection with vocal works
in church and theater
Assumes that symphony has 3
movements but doesn’t state (states that church symphony may have 2 movements)
2.
What does Scheibe mean by harmony?
How does his meaning differ from the way we use the word today?
p.3 – harmony has to do with middle
voices – how bass line is realized by instruments – how full, how complex
theater vs. banquet
melody trumps harmony – melody = upper
part
3.
Does Schultz define a symphony?
Briefly paraphrase his definition.
How does it differ from what we mean by a symphony today?
Schultz defines at beginning: “instrumental
music for many voices” – historical definition vs. overture – Also defines via
instrumentation: violins, violas, bass, oboes, horns, flutes, Strings must be
doubled – 3 mvts. unstated
Later definition of purpose:
“prepare listeners for an important musical work . . . summon up all the
splendor of instrumental music”
follows up with many traits – e.g. easy to
sightread, bold ideas, strongly marked rhythms, etc
church, chamber, theater again
list of composers
4.
Why does Schultz mention an “instrumental chorus”? Why does he mention a “Pindaric ode”? What is the purpose of these comparisons?
instrumental chorus – novelty of part doubling,
different kind of “expression”
Pindaric ode – vs. epic or lyric
poetry – validates art that is grand rather than intimate
5.
What things does Scheibe discuss about symphonies that are missing from
Shultz? What things does Schultz discuss
that are missing from Scheibe?
Scheibe – form, social contexts,
validity of style
Schultz – Traits (more familiar
now), composers (large repertory now)
3. Scheibe on form (p. 4-5)
p.4 - HANDOUT
Meant to apply mainly to concert symphonies
1-part vs. 2-part – In 2-part, part 1 is repeated (p.4)
What are basics of analysis? – Theme
and key – Theme = “Haupterfindung” and “Nebensätzen” – Key defined by cadence
Theme and key coincide at beginning and double bar
Move to V or III
Development? ("change
key more than once")
Recap? ("return in lively and unforced manner") - but only to key, not to theme
Follow same order of
themes after double bar as before?
Less detailed discussion of 1-part form w/o double bar
Other stuff in Scheibe
melody vs. harmony (above)
character of mvts. 2 and 3 (p.5)
Concertante writing - p. 5-6
4.
(omit) Early descriptions of the symphony – Scheibe and Schultz begin a
long tradition descriptions of symphony organization, i.e. sonata-allegro form,
becoming more and more detailed and explicit.
Mostly in German:
J.A. Scheibe, Der Critischer Musikus, 1739/ 1745
J.A.P. Schulz – “Simphonie” in Allgemeine Theorie der schönen Künste
(ed. Sulzer), 1774
Georg Vogler, Kurpfälzische Tonschule, 1778 (2 themes),
Heinrich Christoph Koch – Introductory Essay on Composition (part
3), 1793
Francesco Galeazzi, Elementi teorico-pratici di musica, 1796
Anton
Reicha, Traité de haute composition
musicale,1824–6
Carl Czerny, Vollständiges Lehrbuch der musikalischen Composition, 1837
Adolf Bernhard Marx, Die Lehre von der musikalischen Komposition,
praktisch-theoretisch,1838
5.
Leonardo Leo – Amor vuol sofferenza (Naples, 1739) – sinfonia
L Leo (1694-1744) – Neapolitan
composer of serious and comic operas
A “typical” Italian sinfonia of
early 18th century
Fast-slow-fast
SCORE?
No connection to rest of the opera
PLAY – listen for character and form
Character of 1st mvt –
duple – strings and oboes – contrasting themes, repeated – sonata-like, but no
development or recap
Character of 2nd mvt –
triple, songlike – similar to Scarlatti but final declamatory section
introduces last movement
Character of 3rd movement
– triple, dancelike (Corelli et al) – contrasting themes – binary
How does this fit descriptions of
Scheibe and Schultz?
Theater symphony – 3 movements
Instrumentation – “splendor of
instrumental music”?
Form – fits Scheibe
Bold ideas? Twists and turns? – probably not
2nd movement
6.
Vivaldi Concerto in E minor RV 133
Ripieno concerto – i.e. concerto w/o
soloists, “accompanying” instruments - Characteristics of genre:
strings only
4-part scoring
no soloist
mostly homophonic, non-fugal
F-S-F
movement scheme
ritornello structure (tri- vs. bi-ritornello)
Review
ritornello structures – DIAGRAM
T S T S T S T
T1 T1 T1 T1
I → X
→ Y → I
solo/tutti – ritornello/episode – head
motif/incidental themes
Ripieno
concerto has no solo-tutti alternation – form otherwise same
PLAY beginning
Character of 1st theme –
forceful, unison
Stark thematic contrast between m.1
and m.4 ff. – 1st is harmonically stationary, 2nd modulates
Mvt 1 HANDOUT – PLAY listen for
alternation of ritornellos and “episodes” (?) – mark ritornelli and keys
1 5 10
13 21
25 38 43 49 53 61 65
T1 T2 K T1
T1 T3 (T4 ) T1 T2
T1 T2 T1
I
→ I → iv iv→
VI →
III → i
Last movement – PLAY beginning
listen for character – triple meter dance,
PLAY through - listen for form by ear - not a binary - This
is a rondo - T1
returns over and over in the same key
How does this fit descriptions of
Scheibe or Schultz?
Instrumentation
– lacks winds, no concertainte
Form
– ritornello rather than sonata-like
Character
– a little bold?
Last
movement is sprightly
7. Scheibe Sinfonia
in D major (a 16)
Probably written for Danish court
(i.e. after Critischer Musikus)
No score available – let’s work by
ear
PLAY mvt 1 – listen for whether it
corresponds to Scheibe’s own description
Themes – Head motif + modulator
Form? – 2 parts with 1st not repeated,
I → V – BUT sounds like a ritornello, why? (because
there’s no real I/V or theme polarity
But much stronger contrasts between
sections than Vivaldi
extensive concertante work
Melody vs.
harmony? –
avoids complexities
PLAY
mvt II a bit – can’t compare because I didn’t give you what Scheibe says about
2nd movements
Review rounded binary – DIAGRAM
T1 :|| T1 T1 :||
I V V
→ I
PLAY
mvt III a bit – This will be a rounded binary – listen for the form – Note how
this also corresponds to a very simple version of Scheibe’s 2-part 1st
movement form, except part is repeated also