Malcolm Bilson Plays Dussek, Cramer, Haydn/John Field: The Piano Concertos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bilson plays Dussek, Cramer, Haydn. Malcolm Bilson, replica of 1 798 5-/2 octave Longman & Clementi fortepiano by Chris Maene (2003). Dussek: Sonata in ?-flat Major, Opus 44 (The Farewell; 34:31); J. B. Cramer: Eleven Variations on Ein Madchen oder Weibchen wunscht Papageno sich from Mozarts Magic Flute (6: 1 01; Joseph Haydn: Sonata in ?-flat Ma ior, Hob. XVI: 52 (2 1 : 1 0). Notes in English by Malcolm Bilson on the Pianoforte School and these compositions. Recorded in the Glenn Gould Studio, Toronto, September 1 1-12, 2007. ©2008. Bridge 92O3. $17.98. Rating: **** Field: Piano Concertos. Miceal O'Rourke, unidentified modern piano. London Mozart Players. Matthias Bamert, conductor. Concertos 1-7; Divertissement no. 1 in E Major (Hopklnson 1 3A, 1 809); Rondeau in ?-flat Ma|or; Nocturne no. 16 in F Major (H62, ? 1 836); Fortepiano Quintet in ?-flat Major (H34, 1815); Divertissement no. 2 in A Major IH14A. 1810). Notes in English and French by Eve Barsham. Recorded at Blackheath Concert Halls, 1994-96. This compilation 2008. Chandos Records 19468(4) X. Four discs. $39.98. Rating: **** As we know from communications with members of the American Society, you ate indeed interested in the music created by Beethoven's contemporaries. Indeed, without knowing the music sounding around Beethoven, how can we assess what is truly original and novel about his works and their experiments? Thus, we include reviews of these extraordinary recordings of Jan Dussek (1760-1812), John Baptist Cramer (1771-1858), Franz Joseph Haydn (1756-1809), and John Field (1782-1837). Malcolm Bilson's latest CD includes what have been described as the greatest fortepiano sonatas penned by Joseph Haydn and Jan Dussek. These two compositions, both in ?-flat Major, are substantial works not only in seriousness but also in duration. Dussek 's four-movement sonata of 1799, for example, runs 34:31 . Cramer variations, cheery and entertaining, are welcome intermediary diversions between the two sonatas, a palate cleanser between two substantial courses. I urge you to buy this CD for rwo reasons. One: Dussek's sonata, The Farewell, which should be part of your understanding ofwhat the world of fortepiano sonatas was all about in 1799. (You'll like the Cramer and Haydn too, but the Dussek is the real discovery.) Two: Bilson's ten pages of liner notes are fascinating, and even important, fot their comments about the works and performance practices. What makes The Farewell so compelling? Perhaps it's because the sonata is replete with the following Beethoven i an traits: mercurial changes of mood, brilliant exploitation of the sound potential of the fortepiano (especially in the passages that make the most of the contrast of registers), intense depth of feeling, virtuosity of technique (the transfer of ideas between hands), unanticipated moments of beauty and gentleness, both harmonic and tonal adventurousness, and overall grear contrasts in the interior emotional landscape of the work. Which means that did not own any of these traits, though they indeed also characterize his music. Blasphemous or not for a journal, I'll argue that this work is as interesting as any of the sonatas written by this date (that includes the sonatas through Opus 22). Dussek's sonata, like Beethoven's, commands your attention: it's simply not background music, even in the Age of the iPod. in fact, I'll warrant that if you try to make it background music, you'll dice off part of a finger in the kitchen, send a computer file into the farthest unknown regions of the Internet at your desk, or insist your dinner companions shut up for a moment and enjoy the boeuf bourgogne while you all pay attention. first movement is massive, clocking in at twelve minutes in length. slow introduction is searching and exquisitely pained; the beautiful rocking theme that begins the exposition is unexpectedly gentle and lyrical after such a darkly inward introduction. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".