chamber arrangements of chopins concert works-libre

Chamber Arrangements of Chopin's Concert WorksAuthor(s): Halina GoldbergSource: The Journal of Musicology, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Winter 2002), pp. 39-84Published by: University of California PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jm.2002.19.1.39 .

Accessed: 10/03/2015 08:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheJournal of Musicology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 140.182.176.13 on Tue, 10 Mar 2015 08:57:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jm.2002.19.1.39?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Volume XIX ¥ Number 1 ¥ Winter 2002The Journal of Musicology © 2002 by the Regents of the University of California

39

Chamber Arrangements ofChopinÕs Concert Works

H ALIN A GOL DBER G

The existence of Fryderyk ChopinÕs works forpiano and orchestra in authorized chamber versions is implied in 19th-century editions of ChopinÕs music, his correspondence, the con-temporary press, and letters among his publishers. Questions concern-ing these arrangementsÑtheir whereabouts, the nature of ensemblesinvolved, and the circumstances of these performancesÑhave beenraised in passing in scholarly literature over the last several decades, although not precisely articulated and never fully addressed.1 The general tendency to regard ChopinÕs orchestrations as faulty and not

My warmest thanks to A. Peter Brown, Linda Cummins, JeffreyKallberg, and Michael Strasser for their suggestions. I am alsograteful for help in locating and accessing source materials toPawel- Bagnowski, George Platzman, Michael Spudic; and to themusic collections personnel at the Biblioteka Narodowa and theFrederic Chopin Society in Warsaw, the Biblioth�que Nationalein Paris, and Pierpont Morgan Library in New York. Many of myhypotheses needed to be tested in performance, for which I amindebted to Gerald Robbins and the student ensemble at theAaron Copland School of Music, Queens College, CUNY, led bythe late Ronald Roseman; and to my colleagues Noel Engebret-son, Patrick Rafferty, Spencer Martin, and students at the Schoolof Music, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa. For the preparationof the Þnal copy, many thanks go to Maxwell Dulaney, JoshuaMartin, and Amanda Palmer.

1 Aleksander Fraþczkiewicz, ÒInstrumentacja koncert—w Chopina,Ó Muzyka 3Ð4(1952): 75Ð82; ZoÞa Lissa, ÒChopin w s«wietle korespondencji wsp—l-czesnych mu wydaw-c—w,Ó Muzyka 1 (1960): 3Ð21; Krystyna Kobylan«ska, Rekopisy utworów Chopina: Katalog, 2vols. (Cracow: Polskie Wydawnictwo Muzyczne, 1977); Ewald Zimmermann, ÒChopin ijego orkiestra,Ó Rocznik chopinowski 17 (1987): 125Ð33; John Rink, Chopin: The Piano Con-certos (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1997); and Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger, ÒPremiersconcerts de Chopin ˆ Paris (1832Ð1838),” L’univers musical de Chopin (Fayard, 2000),191Ð227, originally published in Music in Paris in the Eighteen-Thirties, ed. Peter Bloom(Stuyvesant, N.Y.: Pendragon, 1987).



the journal of mus icology

meriting discussion reverberates in the dismissive attitudes of somewriters, while others concentrate on apologetic inquiries into ChopinÕsstyle of instrumentation. More signiÞcantly, though, much of the prob-lem resides in the conßicting signals emanating from 19th-centurysources and faults in our own comprehension of ChopinÕs musical mi-lieu. Thus, any attempt to respond to questions concerning chamberversions of ChopinÕs concert pieces must take into consideration thespeciÞc venues and contexts for 19th-century concert performancesand address the aesthetics of transcription. Not every question pre-sented by this complex subject can be conclusively answered here, but Iwill seek to map out the issues at hand, as well as suggest some ways ofinterpreting sources and possible directions for future research.

I. Chopin’s Performances and Contemporary Meanings of “Quartet”

Uncertainties concerning the ensembles that performed with Chopinrelate to the series of semi-private rehearsals that took place in Warsawduring 1830; two public concerts in FranceÑhis Parisian debut in 1832

and the 1838 beneÞt concert in Rouen; and a private Parisian per-formance in March of 1832 (see Table 1). In several instances, relatingdirectly or indirectly to these performances, the term quartet (or sometimes quintet) is used to designate the accompanying group: in ChopinÕs letters, in the letters of his potential Parisian publisher Aristide Farrenc, and on the title pages of his concert works in earlyeditions, which seem to freely alternate the terms quartet and quintet.2Since this terminology is incongruous with information found else-where, we must question the make-up of the accompanying groups forChopinÕs performances and consider whether our own notions of whatis meant by quartet and orchestra coincide with those of Chopin andhis contemporaries.

During his last years in Poland, Chopin was rapidly gaining a repu-tation as an exceptional pianist. At last, it was decided that the time wasripe for him to be presented to audiences, Þrst in Poland and laterabroad, in public virtuoso concerts. The young pianist had performedin Warsaw on many occasions beforehand and had already won acclaimin Vienna, but this time he was to be featured as the principal artist. Itwas to be his ofÞcial introduction into the world of virtuoso pianism inan event understood by his contemporaries as speciÞcally devoted topublic display of instrumental and compositional skill:

2 The original French edition of the F minor Concerto lists a ÒQuatuorÓ on its titlepage, while the German edition speciÞes ÒQuintuor.Ó J—zef Michal- Chomin« ski and TeresaDalila Turl-o, A Catalogue of the Works of Frederick Chopin (Cracow: Polskie WydawnictwoMuzyczne, 1990), 106.

40



goldberg

[A concert] is intended mainly for self-presentation of an artist, evenalready known to the public; thus, it forces him into somewhat self-indulgent splendor. One might say the point is not so much music,but the artist, the show, even in the most noble sense, regarding thevirtuoso or the composer.3

Concerts of this kind demanded the inclusion of fantasias or variationson familiar themes and a concerto, preferably composed by the virtu-oso himself. To that end, Chopin concentrated his creative energies on

41

3 Ruch muzyczny, 1859, 417, an anonymous review of J—zef WieniawskiÕs matinee per-formance. Ruch muzyczny, a periodical devoted in its entirety to music, was edited by J—zefSikorski, who graduated from the conservatory shortly after Chopin and like him was astudent of Elsner. All translations are mine unless otherwise indicated.

TABLE 1

ChopinÕs Performances of His Concert Works in Chamber Arrangements

7 February 1830 F minor Concerto, Warsaw, at home, reduced orchestra(?). See Tomaszewski, 42.

3 March 1830 F minor Concerto and Fantasy on Polish Themes, Warsaw,at home, reduced orchestra (?). See Powszechny dziennikkrajowy, 4 March 1830 and Kurier warszawski, 5 March1830.

15 September 1830 E minor Concerto, Warsaw, at home, Òquartet.Ó SeeChopinÕs letters to Tytus Woyciechowski, 31 August1830, Korespondencja, 1:132 and 18 Septemeber 1830,Korespondencja, 1:138.

22 September 1830 E minor Concerto, Warsaw, at home, Òthe complete or-chestra except for trumpets and tympani.Ó See ChopinÕsletter to Tytus Woyciechowski, 22 September 1830, Kore-spondencja, 1:141; Kurier warszawski, 23 September 1830;and Powszechny dziennik krajowy, 24 September 1830.

26 February 1832 F minor or E minor Concerto and Variations on Là cidarem, Paris, Salle Pleyel, quintet (?). See Eigeldinger,201Ð02.

14 March 1832 E minor Concerto, octet (?). See diary of Clara Wieck,Rink, 111.

11 March 1838 E minor Concerto and Andante Spianato and Polonaiseop. 22 (?), Rouen, H™tel de Ville, reduced orchestra (?).See Eigeldinger, 218.




readying his works for piano and orchestra, especially the two pianoconcertos: the F minor for the Warsaw concerts that took place inMarch, and the E minor for the planned European tour, but also Þrstperformed in Warsaw as part of the October 11 ÒfarewellÓ concert.4

These public concerts were preceded by a number of rehearsals at the ChopinsÕ salon in the Krasin«ski Palace. The history of these re-hearsals can be traced through a trail of reports, both in the daily pressand in ChopinÕs correspondence, but the information about ensemblesaccompanying Chopin is incomplete and confusing. In some instances,Chopin himself reports playing with a quartet, while others refer to performances with orchestral accompaniment.

Chopin used the term quartet speciÞcally in reference to concertoaccompaniment on two occasions; both instances are found in letters to Tytus Woyciechowski written in late summer of 1830, some weeks before the premiere of the E minor Concerto. On August 31, Chopininformed his friend of a planned rehearsal of the entire concerto in quartet.5 Some two weeks later, Tytus was told that the rehearsal actuallyoccurred (with considerable delay), that the performance left Chopinmoderately content, and that another practice with quartet was plannedbefore an orchestral rehearsal.6 On September 22, Fryderyk wrote againto his friend in the midst of preparations for a trial that day with Òthecomplete orchestra except for trumpets and tympani,Ó which was totake place at his house.7 The next day a newspaper reported:

The other day, in his house, in the company of his friends and thegreatest masters and connoisseurs in our capital city, Chopin rehearsedhis second concerto (E minor) for the Þrst time with an orchestra.8

And indeed, the house was full of connoisseurs and friends: an audi-ence of about twenty, it appears.9 It is difÞcult to conceive that Chopin

42

4 ChopinÕs concertos were subsequently published in reverse order: the E minor asnumber 1, op. 11, and the F minor as number 2, op. 21.

5 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 31 August 1830, Ko-respondencja Fryderyka Chopina, ed. Bronisl-aw Edward Sydow, 2 vols. (Warsaw: Pan«stwowyInstytut Wydawniczy, 1955), 1:132.

6 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 18 September 1830,Korespondencja, 1:138.

7 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 22 September 1830,Korespondencja, 1:141.

8 Powszechny dziennik krajowy, 24 September 1830, no. 265.9 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 22 September 1830,

Korespondencja, 1:141. Chopin mentions by name Ernemann, Kurpin«ski, Soliva, Czapek,Kessler, Elsner, Ledoux, Dobrzyn«ski, Molsdorf, Sol-tyk, Poletyl-l-o, Kaczyn«ski, and Philippeus.Naturally ChopinÕs parents and sisters, as well as his old teacher Záywny would be present.For information on these and other members of ChopinÕs Warsaw musical circles seeHalina Goldberg, ÒMusical Life in Warsaw During ChopinÕs Youth, 1810Ð1830Ó (Ph.D.diss., City Univ. of New York, 1997).



goldberg

and the newspaper announcements truly had in mind rehearsal with afull orchestraÑeven with a modest-size orchestra, the small salon wouldhave to somehow hold a crowd of about 50 (see Fig. 1).

The information about the F minor Concerto, performed earlierthat same year, is still more incomplete, mainly because of the hiatus inChopinÕs correspondence between January 14 and March 27, the pe-riod preceding public performance of the concerto.10 There exists amention of a February 7 rehearsal at ChopinÕs home with a reduced orchestra.11 Also, on March 4 the daily Powszechny dziennik krajowy re-ported a rehearsal of the F minor Concerto and the Fantasy on PolishThemes, op. 13, with the accompaniment of a full orchestra in front of agathering of musicians and music lovers at the Chopin home.12 Giventhe scarcity of information, it is not at all clear whether any of these rehearsals involved a quartet.

During his Parisian years Chopin played his concert works in pri-vate settings on more than one occasion. The diary of Clara Wieck de-scribes one such private performance at Abb� BertinÕs on 14 March1832. Given the information that MendelssohnÕs Octet in E major, op. 20, was played that night as well, Rink infers that in this instanceChopin might have been accompanied by strings.13

Two of the public performances in France also raise questionsabout the accompanying ensembles. Since there was no orchestra pres-ent during ChopinÕs Parisian debut at the Salle Pleyel on 26 February1832, many writers have assumed that Chopin played alone, reducingall the tuttis, or was accompanied by a second piano. For instance, At-wood concludes that Kalkbrenner accompanied Chopin.14 Accordingto Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger, there are no grounds for this assertion un-less we can assume that Kalkbrenner played from memory. Eigeldingersupports his belief with the arguments that the work was not yet avail-able in print, and that we have no reason to suspect that the second piano part, existing today only in FranchommeÕs hand and not pub-lished until 1860, was available during the composerÕs lifetime. Instead,

43

10 After this lapse of over two months, the Þrst letter that we have is addressed to Tytus and describes in considerable detail FryderykÕs two public concerts, which tookplace on March 17 and 22. Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn,27 March 1830, Korespondencja, 1:114Ð17.

11 Mieczysl-aw Tomaszewski, Chopin (Poznan«: Wydawnictwo Podsiedlik-Raniowski iSp—l-ka, 1997), 42.

12 Powszechny dziennik krajowy, 4 March 1830. Also, Kurier warszawski, 5 March 1830,no. 62.

13 Rink, 111n13, based on information provided by Claudia Macdonald and JeffreyKallberg.

14 William G. Atwood, Fryderyk Chopin: Pianist from Warsaw (New York: Columbia Univ.Press, 1987), 267.

43




he suggests that the participation of BaillotÕs quintet in the Þrst half ofthe concert may be indicative of string quintet accompaniment.15

Orchestral participation in the 12 March 1838 concert in Rouen islikewise debatable: It is uncertain whether Chopin performed the soloversion or was accompanied by some sort of chamber orchestra.16 Chopinvisited Rouen at the invitation of Antoni Orl-owski, his colleague duringthe years at the Warsaw Conservatory. A beneÞt concert for Orl-owski,which Chopin gave on 12 March 1838 at the H™tel de Ville, was an-nounced and reviewed in several newspapers.17 The following day, theJournal de Rouen reported that because of the conßicting performance ofLa Juive at the Th�‰tre des Arts, several singers and instrumentalists couldnot participate in ChopinÕs performance. The originally planned pro-gram had to be alteredÑsupposedly by cutting orchestral participation

44

15 Eigeldinger, 201Ð02.16 Ibid., 218.17 Écho de Rouen, 12 and 13 March 1838, Journal de Rouen, 10, 13, 14, and 15 March

1838, Revue et Gazette musicale de Paris, 25 March 1838, 135. Eigeldinger, 226Ð27. Theconcert is also mentioned in ChopinÕs obituary in the Journal de Rouen, 1 December 1849.Ibid., 335.

�gure 1. A watercolor of the ChopinsÕ salon at the Krasin«ski Palace,made by Antoni Kolberg in 1832. Lost during World War II,reproduced after Leopold Binental, Chopin (Paris, 1934),plate XVI


http://www.jstor.org/action/showImage?doi=10.1525/jm.2002.19.1.39&iName=master.img-001.jpg&w=311&h=212



goldberg

Ñyet the recollection of this performance in ChopinÕs obituary writtenfor Journal de Rouen refers to the excellent musical partnership betweenChopin and Orl-owski in the concerto. This comment contradicts the be-lief that Chopin played the solo version and, according to Eigeldinger,in absence of a written second piano version, suggests chamber accom-paniment. Eigeldinger raises the probability of this performance beingaccompanied by some kind of an ensemble consisting of amateurs and older professionals, members of the Soci�t� Philharmonique deRouen.18 The inclusion of SpohrÕs Nonet in F major, op. 31 (violin, vi-ola, cello, double bass, ßute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon, and French horn)in the same performance further supports the likelihood of chamberaccompaniment.19

The multiple ensemble possibilities for these performances directour attention to the perplexing issue of the number of players intendedto accompany the pianist in chamber versions of ChopinÕs concertworks. ChopinÕs letters speak of quartet and orchestral rehearsals; thenewspaper reports, an orchestral performance in the Chopin salon; the1832 concert at the Salle Pleyel might have featured a quintet; the pri-vate performance at Abb� BertinÕs might have involved as many as eightstring players; and the Rouen concert could possibly have been accom-panied by a chamber orchestra. To put it simply: Did a quartet consist of four string players or did the name denote a differently constitutedchamber ensemble?

Polish 19th-century sources offer some possible interpretations forChopinÕs use of the term quartet and account for the multiplicity of en-sembles that seem to have accompanied his concert performances. Itappears that in the 19th century the term quartet was used in the Polishlanguage to designate a variety of groups:

[Muzyka kammerowa Ñfrom musica da cammera] is not the most descrip-tive term: Þrstly, because it is a foreign expression; secondly, since itdoes not differentiate between this kind of music and concert salonmusic, which has as its purpose opportunity for display of individualinstruments. Whether and what other expression would be more suit-able we leave to etymologists; for now we restrict ourselves to the useof the expression: quartet music [muzyka kwartetowa]. We must how-ever mention that under this title we do not just understand a quartetof four instruments, but also quintets, sextets, duets, tercets, quartetsand quintets with the piano, ßute or other wind instruments. Finally, itis known that the proper music da cammera includes ensemble piecesfor seven or eight musical instruments.20

45

18 Ibid., 218.19 Rink, n11, 110.20 Fr. Stevich from Pul-awy, Ruch muzyczny, 1 March 1861, 165Ð66.




The cited article raises two important points. First, it talks about twokinds of chamber music: the Þrst group consistent with our understand-ing of what chamber music is, and the second group more appropri-ately belonging to the genre of salon or concert music. This differentia-tion was well known in French music of the early 19th century, whosecritics and publications distinguished among several different kinds ofquartets including véritables quatuors, true quartets in the tradition ofHaydn, Mozart, and Beethoven; quatuors concertants, a speciÞcally Frenchchamber genre comprising works for a variety of instrumental combina-tions, treating the constituent instruments as equal partners, but des-tined for the music amateur and therefore less demanding in terms ofinstrumental skill, form, harmonic, and emotive language than theirGerman counterparts; and quartours brillants, in reality accompanied vi-olin solos, which echoed the early 19th-century penchant for virtuos-ity.21 Second, the article clearly states that the term quartet does nothave to denote four players. The author of this article is rather mis-guided in his etymological designation of the word quartet [kwartet] asless foreign-sounding than cammera [kammerowa], but the gist of his argument remains the same. At least in Poland, quartet did not alwaysmean four performers.

This broader meaning of the word quartet might have been used inprofessional circles, while it remained unfamiliar to the public at large.In a report from Poznan«, one Teobald Klepaczewski (probably a pseudo-nym) describes the audienceÕs reaction to an unusual concert announce-ment, which promised a Òquartet ÞnaleÓ to a public concert. Such anevent would be unheard of during the time when true chamber musicstill belonged in more intimate venues intended for connoisseurs; apublic concert would consist of overtures, symphonies, concertos, concert arias, etc., but never chamber works as we know them:

A quartet concluding a concert?! (And you complain to high heavensthat in Poznan« music is being neglected, but quartets are performedin public concerts.) It said plainly under no. 8: QUARTET. After theseventh number of the program, the doors to the stage opened, andmany members of the audience stretched out their necks to see whothe amazing and surprising artist might be. But instead of the geniushead of an artist, out emerged the neck of a double bass, followed bythe Þrst violin, and the second violin, and the third and so forth, untilon the stage stood part of one of the local orchestras, numbering twelve,with the leader thirteenth, and performed . . . an overture. Such wasthe quartet that appeared on the posters intriguing so many minds.22

46

21 Jean Mongr�dien, French Music from the Enlightenment to Romanticism: 1789–1830,trans. Sylvain Fr�maux (Portland: Amadeus, 1996), 292Ð99.

22 Ruch muzyczny, 10Ð26 April 1857, 27Ð28.

46



goldberg

A performance of this kind may be depicted in the lithograph entitledÒSymphonic ConcertÓ (see Fig. 2).

We Þnd a description of such a chamber orchestra in Tygodnikmuzyczny i dramatyczny, a Warsaw weekly journal devoted to music, whichwas published during the years 1820Ð21 by Karol Kurpin«ski, the direc-tor of WarsawÕs opera theater, composer, and a conservatory professor.Kurpin«ski was among the guests invited to ChopinÕs 1830 private re-hearsal of the E minor Concerto (see n9 above), and he was the con-ductor of the Warsaw premiere of ChopinÕs F minor Concerto. His1821 article explains that excellent performers are capable of achievingpowerful results in small numbersÑfour violins, one viola, one cello,one bass, one ßute, two oboes or clarinets, two French horns, and onebassoon make up a small orchestra that is capable of performing sym-phonies by Mozart and Haydn with the greatest accuracy. Good musi-cians (especially wind players who can control their sound) can over-come the imbalance in numbers. This ensemble, to which the authorrefers at one point as Òthe quartet,Ó makes for a marvelous effect in thesalon.23

This tradition of chamber orchestras performing orchestral musicand the use of the term quartet in reference to such performances provide a viable explanation for the orchestral rehearsal of the E minorConcerto reported by Chopin and the newspapers. Given the size ofthe ChopinsÕ salon, it is easier to fathom an orchestral performancewith a 12-member orchestra than with a full orchestral ensemble. Al-though Kurpin«skiÕs article cautions that the quartet orchestra will disap-pear in the vast space of a theater, for which the author recommendssixteen, or at least twelve violins,24 evidence is found elsewhere that onoccasion the smaller ensemble was used in public performing spaces aswell, and that such performances were not limited to Poland.25

Similar practice elsewhere in Europe has been documented byJoann ƒlart, in his study of RouenÕs concert scene between 1770 and1825. ƒlart has determined that the symphonies of Johann Franz XaverSterkel were typically performed in Rouen by chamber orchestras. Hisconclusions resulted from the evidence of the sources: All 22 sym-phonies are preserved in sets of parts consisting of only one of eachÑfirst violin, second violin, viola, cello/bass, oboe I, oboe II, horn I, horn II

47

23 Tygodnik muzyczny i dramatyczny, 7 (23 May 1821): 26.24 Ibid.25 Public performances of this kind often took place in Warsaw, though it is not al-

ways clear what ensemble is being described. For instance, a newspaper tells us that during the 1830 Easter season ÒHaydnÕs oratorio Die sieben letzten Worte unseres Erlösers amKreuze was performed at the former Paulite Church with the accompaniment of a quar-tet.Ó See Goldberg, ÒMusical Life in Warsaw,Ó 459.



the journal of musicology

—while orchestral parts for operas performed in Rouen always containmultiple copies of string parts (at least two or three). These �ndingsare also consistent with Élart’s evaluation of the performing venues forSterkel’s symphonies—most of Rouen’s small concert halls hostingthese kinds of performances could not hold a full orchestra.26 Thus,Élart’s research into the local concert tradition presents an additionalargument in favor of Eigeldinger’s hypothesis that Chopin’s last publicperformance of his E minor Concerto in Rouen involved a chamber or-chestra. This is further reinforced if we consider that the group of mu-sicians needed for Spohr’s Nonet (violin, viola, cello, double bass, �ute,oboe, clarinet, bassoon, and French horn) also performed that nightand is only a few players short of what sources describe as the typicalchamber orchestra.

The evidence for the use of reduced orchestras, often referred to asa quartet, in place of a full orchestra is undeniable; however, sourcesmake it clear that the term quartet was used to denote other chamberensembles as well. The above-quoted article in Ruch Muzyczny, detailingthe many meanings of quartet, clearly makes that claim, and other

48

26 Joann Élart, Circulation des quatre symphonies ouvre VII de Johann Franz Xaver Sterkelde l’Allemagne à Rouen: un itinéraire singulier du gout musical de 1770 à 1825 (M.M. diss.,Univ. de Rouen, 1999).

Þgure 2. A lithograph by R. Babajev held in the Central State Museumof Musical Culture (Moscow), reproduced after Musik-geschichte im Bildern: Konzert, vol. 4 no. 2




goldberg

contemporaries of Chopin corroborate it. When writing of Chopin’s“quartet arrangements,” the Parisian publisher Aristide Farrenc (whoseinvolvement with Chopin’s concert works is detailed below) de�nes theensemble as “a double quartet and a bass.”27 In Poland, we are told thatKonstanty Wolicki transcribed a symphony by Ignacy Feliks Dobrzynskifor a double string quartet plus a bass for the Monday musical soirees atthe “Warsaw home of a music lover” [Count Józef Cichocki] and, after a successful performance, was asked to make arrangements of other symphonic works by Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Onslow, and others.28

Notably, all three musicians mentioned in the article were Chopin’sclose acquaintances from his Warsaw musical circles.29 If a string nonet,consisting of a double quartet plus a bass, was among the instrumentalcombinations typically used in place of an orchestra, then the 1832 pri-vate performance of Chopin’s concerto (most likely, the E minor) atAbbé Bertin’s, having been played side-by-side with Mendelssohn’sOctet scored for a double string quartet, could possibly have involved adouble quartet with or without a bass. Noteworthy are Mendelssohn’sinstructions for the Octet to be played in the symphonic manner, point-ing to a concept of sonority that is aesthetically closer to the tradition of reduced orchestral sound than to the true chamber tradition.30

Arranging symphonic compositions for chamber groups was remark-ably popular during the 19th century; suf�ce it to glance at publishers’catalogues to see the never-ending lists of concertos and �ashy virtuosoworks, overtures, symphonies, and even dramatic works. Everywhere inEurope, hundreds of chamber arrangements were published: pieces bycontemporaries and masters of past eras; works by minor composersand Beethoven’s symphonies;31 compositions featuring the piano andother solo instruments; arrangements labeled quartet or quintet, andsometimescalling for additional instruments (see Fig. 3).32

All this evidence suggests that, while chamber performances of or-chestral works (or works with orchestra) were very much a part of the

49

27 Aristide Farrenc to Carl Friedrich Kistner, Paris, 4 May 1832. Lissa, 9. See quotebelow.

28 Ruch muzyczny, 10–26 April 1857, 27–28.29 For extensive discussion of Warsaw’s musical salons, Chopin’s involvement with

them, including the one hosted by Count Józef Cichocki, and his musical connectionswith Wolicki, Dobrzynski, and Cichocki, see Goldberg, Music in Chopin’s Warsaw, forthcom-ing from Oxford Univ. Press.

30 See the composer’s directions in the original score. Eric Werner, Mendelssohn: ANew Image of the Composer and His Age, trans. Dika Newlin (London: Collier-Macmillan,1963), 118.

31 Among the hundreds of symphonic arrangements, worth mentioning are JohannPeter Salomon’s transcriptions of 24 Haydn symphonies (including the 12 London Sym-phonies) for a string quintet, �ute, and piano ad libitum. Mongrédien, 297.

32 Carl Friedrich Whistling and Adolph Moritz Hofmeister, Handbuch der musikalis-chen Literatur 1829 (repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1975).




50

Þgure 3. Carl Friedrich Whistling and Adolph Moritz Hofmeister,Handbuch der musikalischen Literatur 1829 (repr. Hildesheim:Olms, 1975), Instrumentalmusik




goldberg

51

Þgure 3. (continued )





52

Þgure 3. (continued )




goldberg

early 19th-century tradition, the ensemble size was by no means �xed:On occasion, quartet instruments were doubled and a double bass wasadded resulting in a nonet performance; in other instances, obbligato orad libitum winds would be included in the arrangement. The apparentlypopular option of using a reduced orchestra of about 12 memberswould not be attested by speci�c editions; since it did not require tran-scription, a set of regular orchestral parts would be used by the players.Only the consistent presence of single rather than multiple parts forthe strings in preserved sets and contemporary descriptions of suchperformances can attest to this practice.

In light of the seemingly in�nite variety of ensembles used in theperformance of orchestral works, the question arises whether an en-semble corresponding to our notion of a string quartet or quintet wasever intended. That question cannot be answered conclusively beforeconsidering the manuscript and published musical texts, but in at leasta couple of instances we can infer string quintet accompaniment. Thepresence of Baillot’s string quintet during Chopin’s Parisian debut inFebruary of 1832 can be interpreted as evidence of string quintet ac-companiment. More explicitly, a newspaper review of the 1845 Warsawperformance of Chopin’s Larghetto and Rondo, given by the 15-year-old Jadwiga Brzowska, states that she was accompanied by a “quintet of string instruments led by her father.”33 These instances, though notconstituting positive proof, at least suggest that in some cases a quartetor quintet were just what today’s audiences expect them to be: a groupof four or �ve speci�c string instruments.

Having established the widespread practice of using chamber-sizeensembles for performances of orchestral works, and having docu-mented the broader meaning of the word quartet, we must address thewhereabouts of Chopin’s quartet versions, if they indeed existed, andascertain whether Chopin himself provided quartet versions for eitherone of his concertos or his other works with orchestra. Furthermore, wemust ask whether our assertions concerning the nature of chamber en-sembles used in performances of Chopin’s concert works are in any waycorroborated by manuscript and printed sources.

II. Scores for Chamber Accompaniments: Evidence of the Sources

The question of the quartet versions’ whereabouts has received onlycursory mention in musicological literature. In his 1952 article on

53

33 Józef Sikorski, “Wspomnienie koncertowe,” Biblioteka warszawska, 1845, vol. 1:361.Jadwiga Brzowska was a niece of Karol Kurpinski and the daughter of Józef Brzowski, a composer and conductor who was Chopin’s colleague at the conservatory. A �ne pianist, she won international acclaim as a performer and teacher.




ChopinÕs use of the orchestra, Aleksander Fraþczkiewicz commentedbrießy that title pages of both concertos prove that there existed quar-tet versions of these works, but no such scores could be located.34 Morerecently, Ewald Zimmermann acknowledged the existence of the quartet/quintet versions in passing, suggesting that the differences betweenthem lay in the presence or absence of the bass.35 More enlighteningare the brief comments by Eigeldinger and Rink36 based on informa-tion from a 1960 article by ZoÞa Lissa, in which she examines the cor-respondence between ChopinÕs publishers. From her research we learnof an 1832 letter from the Parisian publisher Aristide Farrenc, in whichFarrenc informs Friedrich Kistner in Leipzig that he has secured therights to ChopinÕs opp. 11, 13, 14, and 21 (the two concertos, Fantasyon Polish Themes, op. 13, and the Rondo à la krakowiak, op. 14); all inboth orchestral and quartet versions.37 This and other publishersÕ let-ters suggest that in 1832 there existed quartet versions in manuscript.38

In her Catalogue, Krystyna Kobylan«ska carefully listed all referencesto quartet/quintet versions for each of ChopinÕs works with orchestra.As sources she used the above-cited publishersÕ letters, references inChopinÕs own correspondence, and listingsÑcomplete with pricesÑfound on the title pages of many early printed editions of ChopinÕsworks (see Fig. 4).39 Kobylan«ska proposes that, at least for some ofthese chamber versions, primary manuscript sources were at one timeavailable. However, not one such manuscript is known to be extant. Tocomplicate matters, locating original printed scores of these quartet/quintet arrangements also presents problems.

F minor Concerto: Published Chamber Parts

Early editions of ChopinÕs music are dispersed in libraries aroundthe world, and at present no complete catalogue of major holdings isavailable.40 In a preliminary survey of a few major collections, three in-stances of the F minor Concerto in what appears to be a quintetarrangement were located: in the Special Collections Department at

54

34 Fraþczkiewicz, 80.35 Zimmermann, 126.36 Eigeldinger, 202 and Rink, 20.37 Aristide Farrenc to Carl Friedrich Kistner, Paris, 17 April 1832, Lissa, 7. Ulti-

mately, it was not Farrenc, but Maurice Schlesinger who secured the rights to publishthese works in France.

38 See also Aristide Farrenc to Carl Friedrich Kistner, Paris, 4 May 1832, ibid., 9. Forextensive description of ChopinÕs relationship with his publishers, see Jeffrey Kallberg,ÒChopin in the Marketplace,Ó in Chopin at the Boundaries: Sex, History, and Musical Genre(Cambridge: Harvard Univ., 1996), 161Ð214.

39 Kobylan«ska, Rekopisy utworów Chopina.40 Christophe Grabowski, who has written extensively on original French editions of

ChopinÕs works, is now preparing such a catalogue, but until his research is completedone must consult each library collection individually.



goldberg

the University of Chicago Library; at the Frederic Chopin Society inWarsaw; and in London, at the British Library.41 These are all copies ofthe same publication: the Leipzig edition of Breitkopf & Härtel, datedafter 1840, with plate number 5654. The accompaniment for each oneof these sets consists of �ve parts: �rst violin, second violin, viola, andcello notated with bass, but mostly on individual systems.

55

41 Chicago, Univ. of Chicago Library, Special Collections Department, M614 C54C74, see George W. Platzman, A Catalogue of Early Printed Editions of the Works of FredericChopin in the University of Chicago Library (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Library, 1997), 88;London, British Library, h.473.c, see Laureen Baillie and Robert Balchin, The Catalogue ofPrinted Music in the British Library to 1980 (London: K. G. Saur, 1981), 12:24; Warsaw, TheFrederic Chopin Society, 2335/n.

Þgure 4. E minor Concerto, Leipzig: Fr. Kistner, 1833, cover page;London, British Library, h.473.d . By permission of TheBritish Library







At �rst glance, it seems that these parts constitute a performance-ready chamber accompaniment, but upon closer inspection the accom-paniment appears altogether unplayable. Rather than incorporatingmelodic lines of the woodwinds and brass, the quintet parts are identi-cal with those of the orchestral strings. The result is an ostensibly in-complete score. Several important counter melodies are absent, amongthem the waltzing lines of the clarinet, bassoon, and �ute against thecascading piano �guration of measures 81–128 in the third movement;or the upward bassoon line that extends the fermata in measures 167–69 of the same movement. Missing are the woodwind choir’s responsesin the dialogue between strings and woodwinds which opens and con-cludes the Larghetto; the woodwind responses in measures 129–41 ofthe Allegro vivace; and numerous other solos. More importantly for thelogical �ow of the music in the third movement, there is no sound at allin measures 309–14 where the clarinets link two sections of piano �gu-ration, and silence also replaces the famous horn call at measure 406.Finally, the most blatant omission: the woodwind solo at the opening ofthe second theme (measures 34–47) in the Maestoso, resulting in thecomplete cessation of sound for eight and a half measures—presumablya musical absurdity (see Ex. 1).

An explanation that �rst comes to mind is that the wrong set ofplates was used by the printer: The plate numbers found on the quintetparts (5654) correspond to the plates used in the full set of orchestralparts of the original 1836 Breitkopf & Härtel edition.42 However, sincethis hypothesis cannot be immediately con�rmed, and the dismissal ofthis set of string parts may be somewhat hasty, let us reserve our judg-ment for the time being and examine evidence concerning the E minorConcerto.

E minor Concerto: Published Chamber Parts

The concerto known as no. 1, op. 11, was originally published in1833 by Kistner in Leipzig and Schlesinger in Paris.43 There appears tobe no distinct, separately published set of quintet parts for this work.However, a vital clue is found in the earlier-mentioned letter, in which

56

42 The original 1836 edition was published by Breitkopf & Härtel in Leipzig (pl. no.5654) and Schlesinger in Paris (pl. no. 1940). John Rink discusses in some detail thecomplex circumstances concerning the original publication of Chopin’s F minor Concerto.See Rink, 20–22 and in n39, 113–14.

43 London, British Library, h.473.d, see Baillie and Balchin, 12:24. Other collec-tions I have examined contain only the piano part of the Kistner edition. Paris, Biblio-thèque Nationale, D. 17831 is the full set of parts for Schlesinger’s �rst edition of op. 11.There are considerable differences between the French and German original editions, in-cluding articulation, rhythm, and pitch variants. The arrangement of parts central to myargument, however, is present in both editions.



goldberg

Aristide Farrenc indicates the composer’s participation in the arrange-ment process:

The composer is to scrupulously correct his manuscripts, mark in thescore in small notes the solos of the wind instruments in the quartetvoices, so that his works could be performed by a double quartet and a bass.44

The information that Chopin was expected to indicate the wind solosin small notes within the string parts is essential, because it is within thepublished orchestral string parts that the chamber arrangements areembedded.45

A closer look at the original Kistner edition of 1833 reveals that thethree plate numbers found on the title page—1020, 1021, and 1022—refer to the versions with orchestra, quintet, and for piano solo, respec-tively. The piano part (marked with plate numbers 1020, 1021, and

57

example 1. F minorConcerto, Maestoso, mm. 34–47. Eulenburgedition

44 Aristide Farrenc to Carl Friedrich Kistner, Paris, 4 May 1832, Lissa, 9.45 This idea was �rst proposed by Eigeldinger, 202 and repeated by Rink, 20.

Chopin Concerto no. 2, op. 21, © 2001 Eulenburg & Co GmbH and Ernst Eulen-burg Ltd © renewed. All Rights Reserved. Used by permission of European American Music Distributors LLC, sole US and Canadian agent for Eulenburg & Co GmbH andErnst Eulenburg Ltd.





1022; see Fig. 5) has the orchestral reduction written in, in smallerprint. Thus, it can be played either without accompaniment (1022), oraccompanied (1020 and 1021). Similarly, within the string parts (plates1020 and 1021; see Fig. 6), wind solos are transcribed in smaller notes,thus allowing strings to play as a quintet only (1021), or to performwith full orchestral accompaniment (1020), leaving out the small musi-cal print. The winds, used only in the orchestral version, carry a singleplate number (1020). Here, the occasional small print cues have a dif-ferent, more familiar function. Appearing primarily before solo passages,they are intended as prompts for the player (in the manner typical ofmodern orchestral cues).

It is puzzling why at present not one set of quartet parts for the E minor Concerto corresponding to Kistner 1021 can be located. If19th-century catalogues as well as title pages of the original and subse-quent editions offered such a purchase option, if the arrangements writ-ten in small notes were usable, if Chopin himself reported chamber re-hearsals of the E minor Concerto in Warsaw, and if there is a record ofother such performances, why did not a single such set survive?

My research turned up only one possible candidate. In the collec-tion of the Frederic Chopin Society in Warsaw survives a set of photo-copies of the Kistner edition of op. 11 consisting of piano with ‘Quin-tour’: �rst and second violins, viola, cello, and bass. These copies, madein 1952, are identi�ed as a reproduction of an original belonging tothe Königliche Bibliothek, Berlin.46 Thus far, I have not been able todetermine the whereabouts of the original print from which the 1952

photocopy was made, but the existence of this print, once ascertained,would attest to the circulation of the pl. no. 1021 set. Unfortunately,within the music of the Berlin parts there is no indication that the set as a whole was used for performance: The piano part is heavily markedwith rehearsal letters and numerous commentaries in German, but thestring parts, completely devoid of any annotation, appear to have neverbeen used.

It is clear that the 1021 set was intended for piano and strings only,but it, like the “faulty” Breitkopf & Härtel parts for op. 21, presentsproblems. Many of the transcribed wind solos are awkwardly written orat times even unplayable. Consequently, frequent alterations of the writ-ten text are preferable or necessary: For example, the D of measure424 would not be sustained but rather repeated on the second half ofthe second beat, if the violinist instinctively re-articulates the A . Moreobviously, the multiple occurrences of simultaneous legato and pizzi-cato articulation, for instance in measures 419–20 (see Fig. 7), cannot

58

46 Warsaw, The Frederic Chopin Society, F. 802. Eigeldinger mentions an exemplarpreserved in Leipzig, Deutsche Staadsbibliothek, Mus. 7997. Eigeldinger, n51, 332.



goldberg

be executed as written—the B and C must be played legato or simplyleft out. The frequent writing in thirds and octaves, though often foundin soloistic, virtuoso style, is foreign to orchestral and chamber stringparts, as are other double stops. These problems disappear when thestring parts are divided between two players, making it likely that this

59

Þgure 5. E minor Concerto, Leipzig: Fr. Kistner, 1833, I. piano, page4; London, British Library, h.473.d . By permission of TheBritish Library





arrangement was intended for the ensemble described by Farrenc (adouble string quartet, with a bass) rather than a string quartet. Like-wise, in the 1877 arrangement by Hofmann of the E minor Concerto,the awkwardness of the string parts and the designation ‘divisi’, foundin the two violin lines, demand the presence of second players on

60

Þgure 6. E minor Concerto, Leipzig: Fr. Kistner, 1833, violin I, page1; London, British Library, h.473.d. By permission of TheBritish Library





goldberg

these parts; thus a performance by a double quartet plus a bass can be inferred.47

The second set of problems—the lack of wind solos in the tuttis ofthe transcriptions—cannot be resolved by doubling string parts. Whenthe strings accompany piano solos, those parts are correct and self-suf�cient: the essential wind melodies are consistently written into thestring parts. However, the wind solos are conspicuously absent from thetutti sections, even when their presence is needed to maintain the musi-cal �ow: as, for instance, in the central woodwind phrase of the secondtheme (mm. 77–84), or in the concluding passage of the second tutti,modulating into the C major of the second solo (see Ex. 2).48 Althoughhere the problems are not as obtrusive as in the F minor Concerto’squintet set, string accompaniment thus performed hardly quali�es as acomplete and satisfactory musical rendition.

The chamber parts found among the extant original publicationsof Chopin’s concertos are decidedly problematic. The F minor, with its nonsensical gaps in accompaniment, seems entirely useless; the Eminor’s awkward string writing is remedied by a “divisi” performance ofa double string quartet, but the missing wind melodies in tuttis still render it imperfect. Moreover, the degree to which the arrangementsare attributable to Chopin is unclear. These uncertainties call for an examination of the extant sketches and autographs in the hope of dis-cerning the composer’s intentions with regard to instrumentation andhis participation in the arrangement process.

Manuscript Sources for the Concertos and Other Concert Works

Searching autograph sources for further clues concerning the cham-ber versions yields only modest results. One feature of Chopin’s compo-sitional process is evident: the importance of the piano/orchestralshort score. The piano reductions of orchestral tuttis with written in in-strumental indications, found in all early publications of Chopin’s con-cert works, are also present in every one of the extant manuscripts. Notonly do the manuscript sources bear witness to Chopin’s authorship,but at least in some cases they suggest that for Chopin the �rst phase oforchestrating entailed writing out the piano/orchestral short score.

In the absence of a complete manuscript source for the E minorConcerto, we are left with a single surviving autograph fragment of the

61

47 Richard Hofmann’s arrangement was published in 1877 by Kistner (pl. nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 4870). The parts for Hofmann’s arrangement are marked “Quintett-Stimme.” Chicago, Univ. of Chicago Library Special Collections Department, M554 .C54C696, see Platzman, 61; Warsaw, The Frederic Chopin Society, 413n; Paris, BibliothèqueNationale, Vmg 6605.

48 Hofmann’s quintet arrangement of this concerto recti�es all these problems, andit is truly self-suf�cient.




orchestral opening in a piano version.49 However, there can be no claimthat this piano version represents an early compositional phase, since itprobably postdates the publication of the work: The undated fragment isinscribed “1er Concerto,” a designation not used in print until later edi-tions and re�ecting the chronology of publication rather than composition.

For the F minor Concerto we have a partial autograph—the pianopart of the Stichvorlage produced for Breitkopf & Härtel (see Fig. 8).50

Written in Chopin’s hand, the piano part contains reductions of orches-tral tuttis with the names of instruments written in; the orchestral voicesin score are added by an unknown copyist. In this case, the belief that thepiano/orchestral shorthand was conceived prior to the orchestral scorerather than being a transcription is supported not only by the disposi-tion of the Stichvorlage, but also by a fragmentary sketch. The sketch is preserved in the manuscript score of the op. 8 Trio, which is dated by the composer “1829,” the year in which the F minor Concerto was conceived.51 It contains a few measures of the �rst movement, the orchestral fragment having been sketched in piano reduction.

Manuscripts for Chopin’s other concert works provide furtherproof of Chopin’s authorship of the orchestral reductions and theirpresence in the early phases of composition. The fragmentary workingautograph of the introduction to the Fantasy on Polish Themes, op. 13,is written in a piano/orchestral shorthand, with just the very openinggiven a complete notation in score.52 In the case of the working manu-

62

49 Vienna, H. Wertitsch. See Chominski and Turlo, 102. This manuscript is notmentioned by Kobylanska.

50 Warsaw, Biblioteka Narodowa, Mus. 215. See Chominski and Turlo, 106. Themanner in which this source �gures in 19th-century publications of this concerto and ahypothetical stemma are discussed by Rink, 20–22. Some of his points were �rst ad-dressed by Ewald Zimmermann, the Henle Urtext editor of the Chopin concertos. Zimmermann, 129–33.

51 Warsaw, The Frederic Chopin Society, M/1. See Chominski and Turlo, 106.52 Geneva, Biblioteca Bodimeriana, Ms.11671. See Chominski and Turlo, 94. Ac-

cording to this catalogue and Kobylanska’s (96–98), this is the only surviving source forthis work, but Répertoire International des Sources Musicales lists a full manuscript in score in the possession of the Staadsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Mus. ms.3590. Online RISM A/II: Music Manuscripts after 1600 <http://www.rism.harvard.edu/rism/online.html> Accessed October 13, 2001.

Þgure 7. E minor Concerto, Leipzig: Fr. Kistner, 183, violin I, mm.410–35; London, British Library, h.473.d. By permission ofThe British Library

410

422



goldberg

script of Rondo à la krakowiak, op. 14, which contains the complete piecein score, the piano is engaged throughout, playing a reduction in thetuttis.53 Sketches for the same composition, found among the pages of

63

example 2. E minor Concerto, Allegro maestoso, mm. 358–84. Kalmusedition

53 Cracow, Muzeum Narodowe, Oddzial Czartoryskich, Ms. 2751. See Chominskiand Turlo, 190.





64

Þgure 8. F minor Concerto, partial autograph; Warsaw, BibliotekaNarodowa, Mus. 215

Chopin’s manuscript of op. 2, contain some orchestral ideas in pianoreduction, with the solo entry marked “pianoforte.”54

The manuscript sources for the B major Variations Là ci darem fromMozart’s Don Giovanni, op. 2, are the most extensive among Chopin’sconcert works. They include some fragments,55 a complete privateworking autograph in full score,56 and the Stichvorlage for Haslinger,not in score but rather as a piano part throughout, including tutti sec-tions in piano reduction.57 Here, the piano reduction appears in allphases of composition: It is present throughout in the autograph of thefull score, in the Stichvorlage it is provided instead of an orchestral

54 New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, The R. O. Lehman Collection, Chominskiand Turlo, 191. Kobylanska’s information about this sketch is incorrect. Kobylanska, 99.

55 Variations III and V in Vienna, H. Wertitsch. Chominski and Turlo, 228.Kobylanska incorrectly cites the location of this sketch as Paris, Archives Pleyel. Série A,no. 5. Kobylanska, 37 (I am indebted to Jeffrey Kallberg for this observation). Fragmentof the introduction in New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, The R. O. Lehman Collec-tion, Chominski and Turlo, 228.

56 New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, The R. O. Lehman Collection, Chominskiand Turlo, 228. Kobylanska’s information about the whereabouts of this manuscript andthe description that she quotes from Hoesick are inaccurate. Kobylanska, 35.

57 Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. 16789. Chominski and Turlo,228.




goldberg

65

score, marked with the names of the instruments, and in the sketchfragment of the third variation several measures of the piano part arefollowed by the orchestral section in piano reduction.58

Unfortunately, none of the manuscript sources for the concertoscontains any direct evidence pertaining to quintet arrangements, al-though a couple of details deserve comment. The sketch of the orches-tral introduction contained within the autograph of op. 2 at the Pier-pont Morgan Library makes a signi�cant point. In this completeorchestral score of the piece the introduction is to be played by solowoodwinds, but in the same manuscript—among the pages of sketches—another variant of the introduction is found, a string version that wasultimately chosen by the composer for the Stichvorlage and the pub-lished version. This change may have been made on purely aestheticgrounds (the string version is musically more intricate), but the com-poser may have had practical reasons for this substitution: concern thatshowcasing woodwinds at the very opening of the piece could causehurdles in a chamber string performance.

Another signi�cant, though small, addition appears in the auto-graph manuscript score of the Rondo à la krakowiak, op. 14 (see Fig. 9).At the very beginning, the open �fth F–C played by the French horns isadded by Chopin as an afterthought in the �rst violin and viola linesand marked in both parts Corno. This is very much in the manner bywhich wind parts are added as small notes to the published stringparts.59

One could hope that additional information could be gatheredfrom orchestral parts, but not much is known about them. The impliedexistence of handwritten orchestral parts is unambiguous: Chopin re-peatedly performed his concert works with orchestra before they wereavailable in print. Naturally, such a conclusion can be inferred fromperformance and publication dates, but hints are also to be found inChopin’s correspondence. From a letter to Tytus Woyciechowski, welearn that the parts for the E minor Concerto were copied by Chopin’sconservatory friend, Józef Linowski, whose dire �nancial circumstancescaused him to seek every opportunity for employment,60 but at least inone instance, the Rondo à la krakowiak, op. 14, the parts were written in

58 The disposition of this fragment is erroneously labeled by Kobylanska as pianoone and piano two. Kobylanska, 37.

59 In reference to this composition, Chominski and Turlo claim that Kobylanskamust be wrong in her suppositions concerning the existence of quartet or quintet ver-sions, because “a performance without wind instruments, in this case, is rather dif�cult toimagine” (Chominski and Turlo, 191). It appears that their conclusion does not take intoconsideration the very essence of such transcriptions, which presumes the inclusion ofwind solos within the quartet/quintet parts.

60 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 31 August 1830, Korespondencja, 1:132.



th

e jo

ur

na

l o

f m

usic

ol

og

y

66

Þgure 9. Rondo à la krakowiak, autograph; Cracow, Muzeum Narodowe, OddzialCzartoryskich, Ms. 2751 (Foundation of the Czartoryski Princes at the Na-tional Museum in Krakow)

This content dow

nloaded from 140.182.176.13 on T

ue, 10 Mar 2015 08:57:51 A

MA

ll use subject to JSTO

R T

erms and C

onditions



goldberg

Chopin’s hand. Relating the story of the aborted Viennese perfor-mance of this piece, Chopin notes:

We had to start the Rondo several times, since the orchestra was gettingmixed-up and blaming it on bad handwriting. The cause of all thisconfusion were rests, written differently at the bottom and differentlyon top, though it was said that the top ones meant only numbers. Itwas partially my fault, but I expected that they would understand me;instead, they were angered by this lack of accuracy.61

It is regrettable that we do not have any of these sets of parts. Theycould shed light on questions pertaining to chamber accompaniments,especially Linowski’s set, which according to the composer’s letter wasintended for the quartet performance at the Chopins.

The extant manuscript sources for Chopin’s concert works withouta doubt establish the composer as the source of the reduced orchestraltuttis. However, apart from the two instances discussed above, whichcan be interpreted as Chopin considering alternative strings-only per-formances, they contain no direct evidence supporting Chopin’s au-thorship of the chamber versions. Nor do they provide explanations for the de�ciencies of the existing chamber parts, as these can only beunderstood in light of performance practices prevalent in the early19th century.

III. Performance Practice Evidence: Keyboard Reductions

The dilemma presented by the incomplete orchestration in thetutti sections of the problematic quintet arrangement of the F minorConcerto is easily solved if we reconsider Chopin’s concert works in theiroriginal compositional/performing context: the Mozartian/Hummeliantradition of the piano concerto. Within this practice, which was upheldnot only by Mozart and Hummel, but also by Beethoven, the pianist wasexpected to play along in the tuttis.62 Chopin’s training and early musi-cal experiences were rooted in this aesthetic, which during his lifetime

67

61 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 12 September1829, Korespondencja, 1:104.

62 A vast body of research pertaining to this topic is now available. Among the mostsigni�cant studies of Mozart concertos are Dexter Edge, “Manuscript Parts as Evidence of Orchestral Size in the Eighteenth-Century Viennese Concerto,” in Mozart’s Piano Con-certos: Text, Context, Interpretation, ed. Neal Zaslaw (Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan, 1996),427–60; Ellwood Derr, “Basso Continuo in Mozart’s Piano Concertos: Dimensions ofCompositional Completion and Performance Practice,” in Mozart’s Piano Concertos, 393–410; Linda Faye Ferguson, “Col Basso and Generalbass in Mozart’s Keyboard Concertos:Notation, Performance, Theory, and Practice” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton Univ., 1983);idem., “Mozart’s Keyboard Concertos: Tutti Notations and Performance Models,” Mozart-Jahrbuch (1984–85): 32–39. On Beethoven, see Tibor Szasz, “Beethoven’s Basso Con-tinuo: Notation and Performance,” in Performing Beethoven (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.Press, 1994), 1–22.




was to be superseded by new trends effecting both compositional con-cepts and performance practice within the concerto genre. Groomedin the continuo tradition (during his conservatory years he had studiedpractical �gured bass with Vaclav Wilhelm Würfel),63 Chopin main-tained the 18th-century tradition of placing the keyboard and bass linestogether: In all of his surviving scores the cello/bass parts are consis-tently found below the left hand of the piano part. He remained closeto the concerto models of his predecessors, and thus the idea of the piano being active in the tuttis would have been perfectly acceptable to him.

During his childhood and adolescence Chopin played a number ofconcertos by his elders; among them, on 24 February 1818, during his �rst public performance at the Radziwill Palace, the eight-year-old Fryderyk played Voytech Gyrowetz’s Piano Concerto in E minor.64

Gyrowetz’s concertos, which required the pianist to play along in thetutti sections, were purportedly published in the modernized fashion,with continuo in tuttis written out in chords rather than �gured bass, ina manner advocated by Abbé Vogler.65

In his Betrachtungen, Vogler closely relates the �rst movement of aconcerto to a sonata, his discussion resembling the manner in whichMozart transformed existing galant keyboard sonatas into concertos.66

He explains that he had his six concertos

scored and engraved in a manner that allows three different kinds ofrendition: as solo sonatas (the tutti parts having been realized on thekeyboard staff), as accompanied sonatas, or as actual concertos, em-ploying the ad libitum string and wind parts included in the musicalsupplements.67

Chopin embraced this concept of a concerto most clearly in his slightlylater work, Allegro de concert, op. 46. Presumably �rst conceived duringhis early years in Paris as an opening movement of his third concerto,op. 46 was published only in 1841 as a solo piano piece.68 The ritor-nello sections of this work possess an undeniably orchestral character

68

63 The details of Chopin’s musical education are discussed by the author elsewhere.See Halina Goldberg, Music in Chopin’s Warsaw (forthcoming).

64 Ibid.65 Zimmermann, 126.66 See Edwin J. Simon, “Sonata into Concerto: A Study of Mozart’s First Seven Con-

certos,” Acta Musicologica 31 (1959): 170–85. The concept of generic proximity, which al-lows for a degree of interchangeability between the sonata and the concerto, goes all theway back to Georg Muffat’s Armonico tributo (1682).

67 Floyd K. Grave and Margaret G. Grave, In Praise of Harmony: The Teachings of AbbéGeorg Joseph Vogler (Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska, 1987), 97–98.

68 On the provenance of this work see Rink, 89–92.



goldberg

(so much so that the work has been orchestrated more than once),though no markings of orchestral tuttis (verbal or through small print)and no indications of orchestration appear in original sources.69 Ap-parently, for Chopin a concerto had the right to an independent exis-tence as a solo piano workÑa tradition hailing back to BachÕs ItalianConcerto and cultivated by many composers of the 18th and early 19thcenturies.

More speciÞcally, the custom of substituting in the keyboard partfor the missing orchestral voices may have also been rooted in 18th-century tradition. Neal Zaslaw, troubled by the ßaws resulting from theremoval of wind parts in a quattro arrangements of MozartÕs concertos,hypothesized that the performer provided Òwhat was lost by the absenceof the winds by improvising imaginative continuo realizations in the tuttis.Ó70 In the case of ChopinÕs arrangements, the substitute functionof the piano is even more evident, since the pianist does not have to im-provise in place of the missing wind partsÑthey are already written intothe piano part of the tuttis.

A further conÞrmation of this practice is found in a published workby Ignacy Feliks Dobrzyn«ski, ChopinÕs classmate at the Warsaw Conser-vatory and likewise a student of J—zef Elsner.71 In the preface to hisSancte Deus for four solo voices, choir, and orchestra, published in fullorchestral score in 1861, he provides the following instructions:

Desiring to make the performance of this work as accessible aspossible, I placed on the last three systems a single vocal line and piano or organ, which are to be used only in the absence of the choirand orchestra. If the full ensemble is present, the single voice and organ or piano do not belong to the performance.

I call to the attention of the less experienced Mssrs. Organists,that all more difÞcult Þgurations and tremolos in the piano part per-tain only to that instrument with the intention of giving some sense of

69

69 Allegro de Concert, op. 46, the original edition Paris, Schlesinger 1841 (M. S. 3481),Paris, Biblioth�que Nationale, Vm7 2454. Autograph manuscript Stichvorlage, Warsaw,Biblioteka Narodowa, Mus. 227. Julian FontanaÕs copy, New York, Pierpont Morgan Library,The Heineman Foundation. Chomin«ski and Turl-o, 69.

70 If indeed MozartÕs a quattro arrangements of his concertos are meant to employfour strings only. The question of how many performers MozartÕs term quattro denotes ap-pears to parallel questions raised in the present study. Neal Zaslaw, ÒContexts for MozartÕsPiano Concertos,Ó in Mozart’s Piano Concertos: Text, Context, Interpretation, 9Ð12.

71 Incidentally, there is also an often repeated claim that Dobrzyn«ski orchestratedChopinÕs concertos, an assertion that supposedly originated with Adam MŸnchheimer(who himself re-orchestrated ChopinÕs E minor Concerto) and was Þrst reported in Fer-dynand Hoesick, ÒPogaweþdka o Chopinie z Adamem MŸnchheimerem,Ó Sl-owacki i Chopin(Warsaw: Trzaska, Evert i Michalski, 1932), 2:253. This claim has been largely discredited;see Stefan S«ledzin«ski, ÒNa temat domniemanego udzial-u I.F. Dobrzyn«skiego w instrumen-tacji koncert—w Chopina,Ó Muzyka 1Ð2 (1955): 16Ð31.




the [original] instrumentation; at the organ they are to be replaced bysustained notes.

Finally, an explanation that the present composition may be per-formed in threefold fashion

1o A full orchestra, solo voices, and a choir (as large as possible).2o String quintet with a bass, solo voices, and a choir. The wind

instruments must be replaced by the organ or the piano (where every-thing is written in).

3o Only in the absence of all the above resources, the solo voiceand organ or piano should be used.

NB. Although the solo voice is rendered in the G clef, it would bepreferable to perform sections marked Soprano, Alto, Tenore, Basso(solo) using the proper voices. This will enhance the effect and variety.

The Esteemed Artists and Amateurs are most kindly asked to fol-low the above remarks.

Author72

In his directions and in the score, Dobrzyn«ski provides three instrumen-tation optionsÑanother instance of instrumental interchangeabilitytypical of much of the contemporary music published in Poland andelsewhere.73 Most signiÞcant for the present discussion is his secondoption, where the accompaniment of string quintet with a bass is com-pletedin the piano reduction, substituting for the absent wind instruments.

It is apparent that Chopin had this kind of performance in mindfor his chamber arrangements of the concertos. The evidence of thescore is compelling: If the piano plays ChopinÕs keyboard reduction ofthe orchestral parts along with the quintet in tutti sections, the seem-ingly unplayable Breitkopf & HŠrtel quintet accompaniment for the F minor Concerto becomes usable, and the deÞcient textures of the Eminor Concerto become complete (see Ex. 3).

From this investigation emerges a map of performance practicesthat allowed for a variety of accompanying ensembles, along with pub-lished sources that accommodated the various possibilities, the key-board being the binding glue that restored any signiÞcant harmonicand motivic elements missing from the tuttis. The instrumental parts ofChopinÕs concert works as they exist in the early editions are correctand usable, intended by the composer and his publishers to serve arange of possible accompanying ensemblesÑwhich were to provide

70

72 Ignacy Feliks Dobrzyn«ski, Swiety Boz·e [Sancte Deus] for Four Solo Voices, Choir,and Orchestra (Warsaw: Kaufmann & Co; Leipzig: Peters, 1861). After a reproduction inWojciech Tomaszewski, Warszawskie edytorstwo muzyczne w latach 1772–1865 (Warsaw: Bib-lioteka Narodowa, 1992), 285.

73 Ibid., 166. However, Dobrzyn«skiÕs piano concerto, characterized by much moresymphonic orchestral treatment, does not contain a piano reduction of tuttis. Autographmanuscript of the full orchestral score in the Warsaw Music Society, Ms. 2761. In AlinaNowak-Romanowicz, Klasycyzm 1750–1830, The History of Polish Music, vol. 4 (Warsaw:Sutkowski Edition, 1995), 61.



goldberg

perhaps not always the ideal, but often the only practical, solution forperformance.

IV. Performance Practice Evidence: Chopin and His Orchestras

Thus conceived works inform not only new performance optionsand score sources, but also a wide-ranging array of implications con-cerning the relationship among Chopin, his audiences, and his orches-tras, including: the aesthetics of transcription; collaboration between the

71

example 3. E minor Concerto, Allegro maestoso, mm. 356–85, quintetarrangement in score, generated from the instrumentalparts of Kistner’s pl. no. 1021 set. In the interest of nota-tional uniformity and clarity, the editor amended the orig-inal text in several places.





performer, the ensemble, and the conductor; and Chopin’s orchestra-tion choices. Having carefully examined manuscripts and prints, we cannow take a fresh look at the composition and size of Chopin’s orches-tras. We can also ask who were his conductors and in what manner didthey lead their ensembles.

Nineteenth-Century Orchestras and Conductors

Rehearsing and conducting, although still new concepts in the early19th century, appear to be integral to Chopin’s performances with or-chestra. However, our own notions of rehearsing and conducting are

72

example 3. (continued )




goldberg

frequently not applicable. In 1830, Chopin wrote about the imminentrehearsal of the E minor Concerto:

Already this week I am to rehearse the entire Concerto in quartet, sothat at Þrst this quartet can communicate with meÑget accustomed abitÑwithout which, says Elsner, an orchestral rehearsal would not pro-ceed smoothly.74

The actual public performance was conducted by Carlo Soliva, mainlyremembered as the principal voice professor at the Warsaw Conservatory.After it took place, Fryderyk, pleased with SolivaÕs direction, reported:

Had Soliva not taken my score home, had he not looked through itand conducted in such manner as to keep me from running at break-neck speed, I do not know what would have happened yesterday. Buthe was able at all times to restrain us all, so, I am telling you, never yethave I happened to play so calmly.75

The two comments from the composer yield a number of interestingpoints. We learn that a rehearsal with a chamber group, probably con-sisting of core orchestral players, was intended to facilitate working withthe full orchestra, that Soliva conducted or at least learned the musicfrom a full orchestral score,76 and that the main virtue of SolivaÕs con-ducting resided in his ability to control the tempo of the performance.

ChopinÕs collaboration with Soliva was preceded by several earlierconcerts with the orchestra: most notably, the 1830 Warsaw perfor-mances of the F minor Concerto with Kurpin«ski conducting, and hisdifÞcult, though triumphant, debut in Vienna in 1829. The orchestraat the Viennese KŠrntnerthortheater was led by Vaclav Wilhelm WŸrfel,ChopinÕs continuo and organ teacher who returned to Vienna in 1824.Obstacles were mountingÑthe players, as mentioned earlier, were fuss-ing about ChopinÕs handwriting and resented having to play underWŸrfel. The result was so dismal that the composer was advised to dropthe piece in question (Rondo, op. 14) from the program. He did so,but insisted on including it in the concert that took place a week later,when the initial success won him the good graces of the orchestra. Thistime it received most enthusiastic reception from the players. Eventhen, a reviewer commented that Chopin needed to improve Òhis

73

74 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 31 August 1830, Ko-respondencja, 1:132.

75 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 12 October 1830,Korespondencja, 1:147.

76 Chopin does not use the word nuty (notes/music), but partycja (orchestral score,from French partition; modern Polish uses the German-based partytura).




adeptness in playing with orchestra.Ó77 In the process of telling the story,Chopin provides a number of important facts: A rehearsal took place,the person who rehearsed the orchestra was not necessarily the same asthe person who led it in performance, and he himself played with themusic (as did Moscheles, Hummel and Herz) aided by a page-turner.78

These and other reports of ChopinÕs public concerts prominentlyfeature a conductor, and in his descriptions, Chopin uses the same wordas the one used in modern Polish to denote conducting (dyrygowac ).Yet given the transitional nature of conducting practices during the pe-riod under discussion, one must question the location of the orchestralleader, the manner in which he would lead the ensemble, and the kindof musical score used for this purpose.

The modern norm of an independent conductor, directly facingthe orchestra and silently guiding the previously rehearsed ensemblewith a baton, was introduced by Berlioz and Mendelssohn in the 1830s;earlier conductors would often conduct from the keyboard or from theÞrst violin chair. It must also be remembered that none of the works for piano and orchestra were published in full orchestral score duringChopinÕs lifetimeÑscore editions of the two concertos Þrst appeared inthe 1860s: the F minor by Breitkopf & HŠrtel (pl. no. 10721);79 andthe E minor issued by Kistner as pl. no. 3050.80 Surviving sources in-clude several complete manuscripts in score (opp. 2, 14, and the partialautograph of op. 21), but we have no certainty that conductors usedthese in performance, rather than following other practices still com-mon during this transitional stageÑdirecting the ensemble from theÞrst violin or the keyboard part. Castil-Blaze, for instance, deemed thefull score a Òuseless impedimentÓ that unnecessarily occupied the con-ductor with Òturning pages without having time to read them,Ó and advocated the use of a score reduced for the keyboard with indicationsof instrumental entries.81 As late as 1878, Deldevez felt that a new work must be studied from the full score, but only in some cases alsoconducted from it.82

74

77 Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Literatur, Theater, und Mode, Vienna, 29 August 1829.After Atwood, 203.

78 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 12 September1829, Korespondencja, 1:104.

79 Chomin«ski and Turl-o, 107. Probably around 1863. Zimmermann, 128.80 Chomin«ski and Turl-o, 104. Based on the catalogue number, Zimmermann sug-

gests that the score was published after 1866. Also, it is important to notice that whereasthe orchestral score of the F minor Concerto follows the original manuscript and the Þrst edition, in which the piano part is engaged throughout the piece, the slightly laterorchestral score of the E minor Concerto contains only solos in the piano partÑthe reductions of the tuttis are replaced by rests. Zimmermann, 128.

81 He also claims that through him numerous publishers became acquainted withthis system in 1828. Daniel J. Koury, Orchestral Performance Practices in the Nineteenth Cen-tury: Size, Proportions, and Seating (Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI Research, 1986), 80Ð81.

82 Ibid., 82.



goldberg

In light of these widely varying practices, and in the absence of theoriginal manuscript or printed parts that can be linked directly to spe-ciÞc performances, it is impossible to ascertain the manner in whichKurpin«ski or Soliva conducted in Warsaw, and even though Soliva stud-ied the orchestral score, it cannot be assumed that he conducted fromone. Similarly, the manner of WŸrfelÕs conducting in Vienna must re-main speculative. Reports on conducting practices in ViennaÕs theatersin the mid 1820s suggest that the director was essentially a time-beater.83

Could WŸrfel, who was a keyboard player, have Òsat at a queer-tonedlong pianoforte and beat time with a roll,Ó as did the conductor at theLeopoldstadt Theater?84 In Paris, two of ChopinÕs concerts were led byFran�ois-Antoine Habenck, the conductor of the Soci�t� des Concertsdu Conservatoire. Habeneck, who conducted from a carefully markedviolin part with the bow of his violin, was celebrated for his extraordi-nary control of the ensemble, but even his conducting was occasionallydescribed as rather noisy.85 Did Orl-owski, who was a capable violinist,also conduct the chamber accompaniment for ChopinÕs performanceat Rouen from the Þrst violin? And what was used for conducting, whenothers, who most likely had no access to the manuscript full scores, performed ChopinÕs works: for instance, in the earlier-mentioned 1845

quartet performance of ChopinÕs Larghetto and Rondo by Jadwiga Brzowska, conducted by her father (a pianist); or in the Warsaw concertperformance of ChopinÕs Adagio and Rondo, given by Edward Wolff before his departure for Paris in 1835?86

Until more source information is available, no deÞnite answers tothese questions can be presented. Given the fact that there were nopublished orchestral scores for these works (and even when they wereavailable in manuscript, they might have been used for study only), theÞrst violin parts, and even more so the keyboard reductions, could havebeen used to direct the accompanying ensemble. The published key-board parts of ChopinÕs concert works, with instrumental indications in the reduced tutti sections, were perfectly suited for the function ofthe piano-conductor (in the manner of our modern piano-conductorscore).87 Likewise, the violin parts used to lead the orchestra would require instrumental cues for use by the conducting concertmaster.

75

83 Ibid., 65 and 74.84 Sir George Smart, Journals. After Koury, 65.85 Ibid., 66Ð67 and 81. The most famous comments to that effect are by Berlioz, but

given BerliozÕs grudge against Habaneck, one must approach his anecdotes with caution.86 Wojciech Záywny, Warsaw, to Fryderyk Chopin, Paris, 12 June 1835, Korespondencja,

1:258.87 The piano-conductor is a keyboard reduction of the score, with key instruments

marked in; as such it serves as a text for the conductor, but it is also used by the pianist,who is expected to Þll in for the absent instruments. In that sense, it is a direct descen-dent of the 18th-century keyboard continuo and 19th-century piano reductions.




The small-print transcribed woodwind solos complemented by theÒTuttiÓ and ÒSoloÓ indications found in the Violin I part of the E minorConcerto could conceivably serve this purpose, but these are lacking inthe F minor Concerto. The absence of printed sources, however, doesnot settle the problemÑhand-written or hand-annotated parts couldvery well have provided the needed information. Whatever the answers,we must guard against modern assumptions about the conductorÕs rela-tionship with the performing ensemble, and remain aware of the possi-bilities presented by early 19th-century practices. We also need to con-sider that a run-through with a chamber group was seen as a valuablepreparation for a full orchestral rehearsal, even though it is not clearwhether the conductor of the public performance was actually involvedin rehearsing the group, and how much bigger than the chamber ensemble was the full orchestra.

The actual size of groups designated in the Chopin literature as or-chestras is not easy to determine, but bits of information found in con-temporary sources suggest that it varied. The surviving published sets ofparts for ChopinÕs concert works typically include one imprint for eachstring instrument, with one exceptionÑthe partial set of op. 21, con-sisting of the following parts only: 5 Þrst violin, 5 second violin, and 3viola.88 Naturally, for a performance with a larger orchestra the addi-tional string parts could have been hand copied, as often was the case,but thus far I have not been able to locate any such sets from the Þrstpart of the 19th century.

Some sense of typical sizes for ensembles that accompanied ChopinÕsconcert performances in Warsaw can be gathered from an article byKarol Kurpin«ski, the director of the Warsaw Opera orchestra (the en-semble that premiered both Chopin concertos) and conductor of the F minor premiere. In 1821, Kurpin«ski described an ensemble suitablefor a large theater space:

A theater orchestra can achieve everything with sixteen violins, buttwelve has to be considered the absolute minimum, which cannot bereduced without falling into wild cacophony [note: our orchestra con-sists of eight violinistsÑif only they all played on good instrumentsand wind players would moderate their breath, the disproportionwould not be so great].89

This ensemble was enlarged on special occasions, for instance the 1821

production of SpontiniÕs La Vestale, but there is no reason to believe

76

88 Schlesinger, plate 1940. Paris, Biblioth�que Nationale, D. 17832.89 Tygodnik muzyczny i dramatyczny, 7 (23 May 1821): 26.



goldberg

that it was substantially larger at the end of the decade, when it accom-panied ChopinÕs concerts at the National Theater.

WarsawÕs situation probably closely resembled the conditions else-where in Europe. Although the general tendency throughout the 19thcentury was for an increase in orchestral size, the progress was neitherchronologically steady nor geographically uniform. A few orchestrashad 30 or more violins: this was by no means typical, nor was it even theimmutable norm for these larger ensembles. Each musical establish-ment maintained its individual standard, determined by local tastes and available resources. For instance, in 1823, while BerlinÕs Kšniglich-Preussische Kapelle had 89 players and the Dresden Kšniglich-SŠchsische Kapelle employed 69 musicians, Hanover Square Rooms inLondon hosted the Þrst performance of the Royal Academy of Musicconsisting of an oboe, two pianos, four violins, viola, cello, and bassÑachamber orchestra of 10 players.90 Furthermore, the size of a speciÞcorchestral ensemble often ßuctuated, depending on the nature of aparticular performance and the availability of performing forces: theSoci�t� des Concerts du Conservatoire in Paris ranged between 31

violins (total of 86 musicians in the entire orchestra) in 1828, the yearof the actual founding, and 10 violins (total 30) for a 1835 beneÞt concert at the Od�on.91 With all this in mind, we need to consider thatthe orchestras that accompanied ChopinÕs concert performances variedconsiderably in size, but most likely were never as large as late 19th- andmost 20th-century ensembles used in performances of ChopinÕs music.

The awareness of differences in orchestral size and the coexistenceof various chamber instrumentations Þgure prominently in our under-standing of ChopinÕs orchestrations. His concert works must be seen as reßecting the changeable nature of the relationship between thesoloist, the ensemble, the conductor, and the musical text, typical ofearly 19th-century orchestral practices.

Chopin as Orchestrator

The most severely criticized aspect of ChopinÕs work is his writingfor the orchestra, the concertos having been re-orchestrated and im-proved by editors countless times on grounds of inadequacy and du-bitable authorship. Despite the lack of direct evidence for his involve-ment with the orchestration of the two concertos, there is no solid basisfor the often-voiced doubts as to ChopinÕs authorship of the orchestra-tions. It is difÞcult to imagine him as entirely disinterested in orchestral

77

90 Koury, 160Ð61.91 Ibid., 158Ð59.




color, given his oft-quoted comment about the musical aptness ofmuted stringsÕ Ònasal, silvery toneÓ in the Adagio of the E minor Con-certo,92 and the ingenious (though never implemented) idea of substi-tuting viola for the violin in the printed edition of the op. 8 Trio, in or-der to provide a better balance with the cello.93 While it is true thatscarcity of manuscript sources for the concertos (and their absence in the case of the Polonaise, op. 22) weakens claims of authenticity, the existing autograph scores and sketches for opp. 2, 13, and 14, ne-glected in discussions of ChopinÕs orchestrations, constitute positiveproof of ChopinÕs involvement with his orchestrations, and the numer-ous revisions in these sources show his attention to voicing, doubling,and the instrumentation of solo passages.

To be adequately judged, the orchestration of ChopinÕs concertworks must be considered within the aesthetics of the early 19th-centuryorchestra and virtuoso concerto, rather than the symphonic concertotradition that followed, as has been the case. Within this quite ßuid no-tion of orchestral sonority and a different concept of interaction be-tween the ensemble and piano, ChopinÕs orchestration choices may bebetter understood. Some pertinent issues were already raised by Alek-sander Fraþczkiewicz, who in 1952 argued before the editors of the Na-tional Edition for not tampering with ChopinÕs orchestrations and forletting them stand within the concerto brillant tradition to which theybelonged.94 Similar sentiments were expressed by Ewald Zimmermannin connection with his edition for Henle Verlag.95 However, it is not justthe concerto brillant trivialization of the tutti/solo dialogue in favor ofvirtuoso display, but also the demand for interchangeability of perform-ing forces that appear to have shaped ChopinÕs orchestration choices.Like Abb� Vogler or Ignacy Dobrzyn«ski, Chopin was scoring his concertworks with several performing ensembles in mind.

The critics of ChopinÕs orchestrations (Abraham, Niecks, Hoesick,and Berlioz, among them) invariably refer to the scarcity of indepen-dent accompanying motifs in the strings, which most often just sustainharmonies, and the use of the same instrumentsÑhorn (less commonlytwo at the same time), a bassoon (almost invariably one), a ßute, an oboe,and a clarinet (or sometimes two)Ñin sections where orchestral instru-ments accompany piano solos with countermelodies. According to

78

92 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 15 May 1830, Kore-spondencja, 1:125.

93 Fryderyk Chopin, Warsaw, to Tytus Woyciechowski, Poturzyn, 21 August 1830, Korespondencja, 1:132.

94 Fraþczkiewicz, 82.95 Zimmermann, 133.



goldberg

Fraþczkiewicz, the greatest fault of ChopinÕs orchestration is his treat-ment of oboes and clarinets, which create a muddled, unclear sonorityby frequently crossing and doubling each other.96

This scoring makes much better sense in the context of the diverseperforming options employed, whether Chopin was consciously think-ing about the performability of the accompaniment by the variouschamber groups or simply was following the contemporary concertobrillant models conceived within this tradition. The sparse writing forthe strings in solo accompaniments is unavoidable if strings are to takeover the wind parts in quartet performanceÑin particular during solosections when the piano, occupied with its own part, could not Þll infor the missing winds. It also makes sense that when winds accompanypiano solos it is virtually always one bassoon, one ßute, clarinets (or oneclarinet and one oboe), and horns (often in pairs). The remainingwindsÑsecond bassoon, second ßute, oboes (or second oboe and sec-ond clarinet), and where used, trombones, trumpets, and the secondpair of French hornsÑwould not be present in a chamber orchestraand therefore cannot be given independent melodic function. In thecase of the E minor Concerto, oboes and clarinets double each other intuttis, but oboes almost never appear in solo accompaniments, suggest-ing that only clarinets would be called for in a chamber ensemble.Chopin does not write countermelodies involving just any combinationof wind instruments, but instead he uses the instruments that are avail-able to him in the typical salon orchestra; other instruments serve onlyas reinforcements in tuttis, when a full orchestra is available.

Whether these compositions were accompanied by a chambergroup or a full orchestra, the sound that Chopin had in mindÑacoustics, choice of instruments, sense of ensembleÑhad to be unlikethose to which we are accustomed. Such different sonority could pro-vide a better balance, perhaps solving the problem of what Fraþczkiewiczcalls Òpaper notes,Ó sounds that could be effective if heard, but whichare covered up by piano Þgurations.97 These would less likely be over-powered by the appreciably smaller string section of the orchestra andthe lighter, early 19th-century piano with its highly differentiated regis-ters. Since the interaction in these performances was as much depen-dant on the soloist and the accompanying instruments as it was on the conductor, the performing experience was much closer to themaking of chamber music, fostering a sense of balance and dialoguebetween piano and orchestra.

79

96 Fraþczkiewicz, 81Ð82.97 Ibid., 82.




Contemporary Aesthetics of Orchestration and Chamber Transcriptions

ChopinÕs audiences, it appears, considered his orchestrations notjust adequate but original in their attempt to rise above the customarydominance of the solo instrument in the concerto brillant tradition. After ChopinÕs 1829 Viennese performances of opp. 2 and 14, criticscommented that he Òdeviates from the usually accepted pattern ofother virtuososÓ in his Òdesire to produce good musicÓ98 and praisedhim for the Òserious attempt to weave the orchestra and piano parts ofhis composition in an interesting style.Ó99 In Warsaw, after the premiereof the F minor Concerto, he was commended for the accompanimentnever distorting or overpowering the principal instrument, but ratheraugmenting and ennobling its beauty.100 In 1834, his concerto wasagain extolled for Òmuch subtlety in his instrumentation.Ó101 The roleorchestral size played in these evaluations is most apparent in the responses to two different Parisian performances of the E minor Con-certo. ChopinÕs last public Parisian performance of this work underHabeneckÕs direction at the Salle Favert (Th�‰tre Italien) was ap-plauded, while the overtures to Oberon and William Tell were found dis-appointing Òdue to the size of the theater, which was too large for thesmall orchestra.Ó102 In contrast, his 1832 performance at the conserva-tory under the direction of Narcisse Girard, which probably involved amuch larger orchestra, was perceived as having a rather Òheavy orches-tration.Ó103 The unfavorable views of his orchestration appeared laterand were codiÞed, like many other Chopin stereotypes, by Niecks in his1888 Frederick Chopin as a Man and Musician, to be repeated ad in�nitum by modern writers.104

The 19th-century reception of performances with chamber accom-paniments was much more problematic. These arrangements belongedto an established performing tradition that allowed inclusion of orchestral works in the salon, and as such, they were perfectly accept-able.105 However, their function extended further still, for chambergroups also accompanied public concerts when a decent orchestra was unavailableÑpossibly for ChopinÕs 1832 performance in the Salle

80

98 Allgemeine Theaterzeitung, Vienna, 1 September 1829. After Atwood, 204.99 Wiener Zeitung für Kunst, Literatur, Theater, und Mode, Vienna, 29 August 1829.

Ibid., 203Ð04.100 Kurier polski, Warsaw, 26 March 1830. Ibid., 215.101 Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, 1834. After Fraþczkiewicz, 78.102 Gazette musicale, Paris, 12 April 1835. After Atwood, 226.103 Revue musicale, Paris, 26 May 1832. Ibid., 220.104 Rink, 28Ð30.105 The 18th-century English tradition of such performances is discussed by Zaide

Elisabeth Pixley, ÒThe Keyboard Concerto in London Society, 1760Ð1790Ó (Ph.D. diss.,Univ. of Michigan, 1986).



goldberg

Pleyel, for his Rouen concert of 1838, and as documented in the caseof BrzowskaÕs 1845 Warsaw performance of the E minor Concerto. The critical reception of such performances varied. Naturally, as the18th-century aesthetics of chamber accompaniment started to fade, thereception became more severe. For instance, in 1858, a writer com-mented on musical connoisseurs recognizing that in a concerto the orchestra with its instrumental color is an indispensable component of the aesthetic whole. Therefore, those artists who perform such com-positions solo or with an incomplete orchestra, Òfor instance with quintet as out of necessity it is often done here,Ó sacriÞce the author for personal display.106 Still, the critics were also aware of the difÞculties ingathering a capable orchestra:

What can a composer do if his ten Þngers and one musical instrumentdo not sufÞce, when he needs an orchestra, vocal soloists, and a cho-rus. The only possibility is using the theaterÕs resources and these areseldom made available because the administration is not willing totake Þnancial risks. (Comment: in other countries in these situationsgood amateur orchestras step in. But in Warsaw, though there aremany music lovers, one cannot even dream of it.)107

The goal, however, justiÞed the means, even in a symphony, where the aesthetic transgression caused by the reduction of sonority to a chamber ensemble was more discernible:

Naturally an engraving, even the best, is not able to replace a painting,which contains the other half of meaning in its color; however if the painting is not available, it is better to at least have an engraving, as long as the thought and contour of the original are faithfully rendered.108

Interestingly, these words echo almost exactly the thoughts ofE.T.A. Hoffmann, expressed in reference to piano transcriptions.109

The role of piano transcriptions in the dissemination of operatic andconcert works is well documented and has been discussed by musicscholars on numerous occasions.110 Polish period sources also readily

81

106 Ruch muzyczny, 2 April 1858, 113.107 Biblioteka warszawska, 1852, vol. 3:577.108 Ruch muzyczny, 10Ð26 April 1857, 28.109 Quoted by Thomas Christensen, ÒFour-Hand Piano Transcription and Geogra-

phies of Nineteenth-Century Musical Reception,Ó Journal of the American Musicological Society 52 (1999): 264.

110 See Christensen, op. cit.; idem., ÒPublic Music in Private Spaces: Piano-VocalScores and the Domestication of Opera,Ó in Music and the Cultures of Print, ed. Kate VanOrden (New York: Garland, 2000), 67Ð93; and Helmut Loos, ÒZur KlavierŸbertragungvon Werken fŸr und mit Orchester des 19. und 20. JahrhundertsÓ (Ph.D. diss., Univ. ofBonn, 1980).




acknowledge the pianoÕs special function in bringing orchestral musicinto the salon:

The piano (. . .) gains esteem in the salon, where it alone becomes asmall orchestra: whether a ßuent hand performs musical works or ac-companies a singing voice. . . . When it is difÞcult to put together aquartet, a piano, two or three voices, and a score of Mozart, Pa‘r, orRossini will sufÞce to create a splendid concert.111

Arguments used in aesthetic debates concerning piano and chambertranscriptions paralleled each other in weighing the practicalities ofgathering an able orchestra against the artistic merit of arrangements;but ultimately, no matter how dissatisÞed with the inÞdelities of sound,the commentators agreed that having a less-than-ideal performance waspreferable to not having one at all. And reducing an orchestra to achamber ensemble was preferable to simply replacing it with a piano.

V. Conclusions

The recognition of historical performance contexts for ChopinÕsconcert works ushers in an array of performance practice implications.The concertos are masterpieces of stile brillantÑthey embrace theadaptability of orchestral sound characteristic of this aesthetic and presume accompaniment by an appropriately sized orchestra. Forcing late 19th-century sonority upon them or upon other orchestral works ofthe early 19th century is an aesthetic violation, compared by Koury toÒrepainting Ingres or Delacroix in the colors of Monet or Van Gogh.Ó112

With that in mind, modern orchestral performances of ChopinÕs con-cert works will beneÞt from a more appropriate balance and better interaction between the pianist and the ensemble.

The adventurous pianists who nowadays perform and recordchamber versions of the Chopin concertos should not be hasty in dis-missing the quartet parts offered by the original editions and replacingthem with later or modern arrangements. They may also wish to investi-gate all ensemble options available to them, while being aware of the broader meaning of the term quartet and the ßexible makeup of the accompanying ensemble, mutable according to the needs and cir-cumstances of the performance. The option of the pianist playing intuttis in these chamber performances also needs to be considered. Tothat end, we must reclaim ChopinÕs piano reductions of the tuttis, avail-able in all original sources but removed from modern scores, starting

82

111 L- ukasz Gol-eþbiowski, Gry i zabawy róz·nych stanów (Warsaw: GlŸcksberg, 1831),234Ð35. Gol-eþbiowski, known for his early historical studies of Warsaw, frequented thesame intellectual and social circles that welcomed the young Chopin.

112 Koury, 1.



goldberg

with the 1860s Kistner publication of the E minor Concerto in full orchestral score.

Ultimately, our perception of 19th-century audiences as havinglearned orchestral music almost exclusively through the medium of apiano transcription needs to be revisited. ÒChamber music arrangementspopularized opera or even symphonies,Ó concluded Jean Mongr�dienwhile commenting on the countless chamber settings for most variedcombinations published with a piano-conductor score.113 Indeed, thethousands of transcriptions for chamber ensembles made throughoutthe 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century remain virtu-ally unknown to music historians. Entire archives wait to be exploredÑsufÞce it to glance at the catalogue of orchestral scores in the music li-brary of the Grand Casino de Vichy, where one can Þnd thousands ofarrangements, including all of BeethovenÕs symphonies transcribed forchamber orchestra and a piano-conductor.114

As engraving was the means by which art images were transmittedin the absence of photography, transcriptions served a similar purposein disseminating music before recording technology became available.While the piano transcription was an indispensable component of thistradition, it was not the only method of gaining familiarity with musicalrepertory. Connoisseurs who attended musical salons were likely to hearand perform concert music in chamber transcriptions; to continue themetaphor, the practice was comparable to a color lithograph of an oilpainting instead of a black-and-white engraving. From the Beethoven-authorized arrangements of his concertos for piano and quintet115 toSteinÕs transcriptions of MahlerÕs symphonies for SchoenbergÕs privatechamber concerts,116 generations of listeners came to know concertos,symphonies, and other orchestral works through the medium of cham-ber ensemble transcription. It is time we recognize such transcriptionas the most realistic rendition then available of the original sonority,and as an important vehicle for the dissemination of orchestral musicprior to the advent of the phonograph.

University of Alabama

83

113 Mongr�dien, 297Ð98.114 Vichy. Centre dÕetudes et recherches ÒPatrimoine musical.Ó Bibliothèque d’orchestre.

Catalogue des partitions d’orchestre (Clermont-Ferrand: AREPAMA, 1997). Chamber arrange-ments of orchestral works with piano-conductor continue to be published, primarily forthe student orchestra market.

115 Hans-Werner KŸthen, ÒThe Newly Discovered Authorized 1807 Arrangement ofBeethovenÕs Fourth Fortepiano Concerto for Fortepiano and String Quintet: An Adven-turous Variant in the Style of the Late Cadenzas,Ó The Beethoven Journal 13 (1998): 2Ð11.

116 Jerry McBride, ÒOrchestral Transcriptions for the Society for Private Musical Performances,Ó Journal of the Arnold Schoenberg Institute 7 (1983): 113Ð26.




ABSTRACT

Although 19th-century sources imply the existence of ChopinÕsconcert works in chamber versions, modern scholarship has never fullyaddressed their whereabouts, the nature of ensembles involved, andthe circumstances of those performances. References to performancesof orchestral works Òin quartetsÓ found in ChopinÕs letters have tradi-tionally been understood as designating performances either by thestring section of a symphonic orchestra or by an actual string quartet.However, accounts by ChopinÕs contemporaries show that the termÒquartetÓ was used to denote not just an ensemble of four string instru-ments, but also chamber music in general and orchestral music per-formed by a variety of salon-size groups, including chamber orchestras.

Evidence from ChopinÕs manuscripts and early editions, as well asreferences in other 19th-century sources (press, correspondence, etc.)are presented to explore the make-up of the various ensembles and tointerpret the existing musical texts for such performances. The samehistorical and musical data determines that chamber renditions re-quired the pianistÕs participation in the tuttis, in the vein of the 18th-century continuo. Acknowledging these traditions places ChopinÕs con-cert works in a new performance-practice context and sheds light onChopinÕs scoring choices. Moreover, it alters our perception of 19th-century audiences having learned orchestral music almost exclusivelythrough the limited medium of piano transcriptions.

84



chamber arrangements of chopins concert works-libre

Documents

chopin paris

chopin fayard

jstor terms

jstor archive

cambridge university

thefrederic chopin society

chopin ijego orkiestra

terms conditions of