Johann Christian Bach Symphonies 1/2 

I am sure he is enjoying his life in his next births 😊😇😉

Mozart actually worshipped CPE and JC Bach.

@@jaikee9477 - Largely due to the efforts of Baron van Swieten’s ‘Sunday Afternoon Soirees’ after 1781 when Mozart was Re-Introduc’d to both JS & CPhE Bach but also to the Music of Handel & other Baroque Contrapuntalists - you can see the influence of the northern German school in the first movement of M.’s Klavier Concerto in E-flat K.449 which was left as an unfinish’d musical fragment in c. November 1782 judging from Alan Tyson’s careful study of the manuscript papers’ watermarks (the first two bogen of (4) sides of the compleated MSS date from Oct 1782 -whereas the rest of the MS uses a different Colour shade of ink & a watermark dating from c. Nov-Dec 1783 Listen especially to the CPhE stile baseline in the development section of the 1st movement of K.449 dating from 1782-Mozart’s ‘Bach Reintroduction Year…’

The achievements of CPE and JC Bach did not end the Baroque any more than they started the Classical period. Both however - in very different ways - contributed to the development of the new Classical style.

Me too. They were a birthday present from my wife.

Soberbio, dramatico al mismo tiempo; con un toque de misterio, lo que me encanta de una sinfonia!

InstaBlaster.

Saudações.

@@lucassanches-g3c saudações Lucas.

+Brian Knapp IMO the op 18 no 4 in D is the best from this set.

That G-moll is just gorgious...

Kelvyn Chin This is obviously an opinion rather than a fact; in one respect you are right, Opus 18 No 4 is a fine work. Opus 18 was put together by the London publisher Forster in the weeks just before JC’s death on New Year’s Day 1782 and was compiled from various sources. Nos 1, 3, and 5 are all for double orchestra and are comparable in quality with almost anything except Haydn and possibly one or two of Mozart’s best written before 1780. The three single orchestra works are more variable: No 2 is the overture to his opera ‘Lucio Silla’, it is a very fine work, No 4’s slow movement is adapted from the Andante from the overture to ‘Temistocle’, it is also a great symphony, No 6 was put together by or on behalf of Forster from movements from the overture and ballet movements from ‘Amadis de Gaule’; it is the least successful work of the six, especially as one or two ‘improvements’ were made by the editor which were not to the work’s advantage. The whole of the set was put together from music from throughout the 1770’s by the publisher; it was not composed as a set and JC himself probably knew little about it. JC’s Opus 6 No 6 - rather like Mozart Symphony 25 (K183) - was a one-shot attempt at a ‘sturm und drang’ type symphony. Both the JC and Mozart symphonies were prompted by Haydn’s g minor Symphony 39; for both also, their works were completely untypical.

Brian Knapp You might find my comment (above) of some interest.

IT'S A VERY EARLY RWEMBRANDT. AND IT IS IN MY HOMETOWN: THE RIJKSMUSEUM IN AMSTERDAM

John Lawrence ynjl

i think the word you're looking for is "would" instead of "will"

It seems like the deists of the World like to give credit to their imaginary man in the sky. Give credit to the MAN who composed this piece

You’re sort of right, this symphony - Opus 18 No 6 - was put together from the overture plus two ballet movements from his French opera as you state. It is however, perhaps the least successful of the magnificent Opus 18 symphonies being an odd Allegro - Andante - Allegretto - Allegro, with the English editor/publisher at the time making some minor alterations to JC’s original - these alterations were not to the work’s advantage. The opera overture is a superior work, and better than this pasticcio, or pot-pourri. The odd numbered symphonies of Opus 18 Nos 1, 3, and 5 are all written for double orchestra, whilst the even numbered ones for the more usual single orchestra are opera based overtures: Opus 18 No 2 is from Lucio Silla, No 4 uses the Andante from Temistocle, and No 6 is from Amadis de Gaule as you correctly identified.

Christian Bach was very much superior than Sebastian.....the FACT is that Sebastian was PROMOTED because of his religion.....Sebastian was protestant and Christian was CHRISTIAN!.....POLITICS AS ALWAYS.

Yes....Christian was Catholic.

Christian was a much better musician than Sebastian......a political PLOT against him just because he was..... CATHOLIC !

Alejandro Linares. I very much doubt that the current popularity of JS Bach in comparison to his son has anything to do with religion. I understand that in his lifetime JC Bach was much more popular than his father. This was because JS Bach's style was considered over elaborate, relying aa it did on polyphony. The fashionable style at the time was the Galant style whch eventually developed into the Classical style of Haydn and Mozart. In fact JC Bach met Mozart in London and the fact that Britain was Protestant and JC Bach was Catholic did not prevent him from thriving. The reason why JS Bach is now more popular than his son and is due to the Bach revival started by Felix Mendelssohn and because JS Bach's musical style is sufficiently different from the later Classical and Romantic styles to be interesting. JC Bach's style seems far less interesting. It is similar to the later Classical style but less interesting than the music of Mozart. I don't think JC Bach was a better composer than his father.

Clive I very much appreciate your comment. I didn´t know that Christian was more popular than his father, and this fact is important. You know that overtime historians impose facts, criteria and ultimately.... taste.....don´t you think this is a valid consideration?

so it was not Johanne Bach who wrote these?

+Southee Boult These Symphonies are composed by Johann Christian Bach, the son of Johann Sebastian Bach.

oh i see thanks!

David Xiao JC bach 1735 - 1782 symphonies not invented???

Johann Christian Bach was a contemporary of Mozart and Haydn. They were all writing symphonies around the same time. I think some of Haydn's earliest symphonies were composed before any of J. C. Bach's.

Like on July 2nd, 2020

Mau365PP ...and the second JC Bach was Mozart.

I agree !!

@@elaineblackhurst1509 Mozart was second to none

Modestoney You appear to have missed the point of my reply. More generally, whilst what you say is generally true, there are a few areas where Mozart does in fact sometimes come second to Haydn (though I agree with you that he is second to no other of his contemporaries).

@@elaineblackhurst1509 I think i knew what you meant. My reply ambiguously points out that - all historical succession and influences aside - Mozart is unique and not the second of anything.

Thanks!

Jeff Barouch He influenced Mozart

It is obvious JC Bach's style has influenced Mozart, and is the true origin of what we consider to be the mozartian style. I personnally consider JC Bach's music to be written in an purer mozartian style than even Mozart's works ;-)

When JC Bach passed away, Mozart wrote "What a loss for music! ".

Mozart got much better in his later works when he developed his own quasi-romantic style. Some of his early works just sound like a knockoff of JC. Edit- I personally believe that JC had a much better command of the gallant style than anyone else.

Oma Fladder that’s a painting by Rembrandt called « the music lesson » which is in the Rijksmuseum. One of his more elusive works, quite enigmatic. Who is giving the lesson? Who is the old woman top right ? Why is there a pile of books?

​@@johnlawrence2757 Just checked: 'The Music Lesson' is by Vermeer. This painting by Rembrandt is often titled 'The Music Party' (1626). The Rijksmuseum/ Amsterdam calls it 'Music Company'.

@@christian_traxler clearly there must be a distinction so no confusion exists with the Vermeer. It’s possible that whilst the museum label is “The Music Party” there may be some kind of inscription on the frame that calls it “The Music Lesson” Clearly it isn’t a party: it’s quite surprising, at that time, to have a young woman, of the class this one is, able to read music. Rembrandt was a genius whose vision surpasses any other artist, and he is clearly satirising the young woman who has been sent, with her chaperone, to the house of the musicians ( the books: she would not have been able to read, either). The Vermeer clearly takes place in the home of the child performing and the “ instruction” is clearly by a visitor. But she is playing by ear. The content of the Vermeer is much less complex than the Rembrandt. Vermeer wasn’t in the same class as Rembrandt as an artist. He probably knew this painting, and used the same n title as homage to the Master In the Rembrandt the woman obviously has not been able to accept instruction from these lower class plebs, and has therefore taken control of the performance. (They haven’t got copies of the score, you note) . That’s why they look so indignant. I imagine the power of the British Royal Family might have had something to do with ending the confusion Sorry to disappoint you yet again

@@johnlawrence2757 Interesting comment!. Thank you. That's one of that certain paintings that tell a story like a movie. I like this too.

@@christian_traxler yes he did make movie stills - especially with his biblical pictures. He used models as if they were method actors and he had the inventive power of Shakespeare. Van Gogh was also a great admirer. He seems to have been an inspiration to every Dutch painter!

The composers Haydn and JC Bach merely developed the classical style, which was already founded by the early members of the Mannheimer schule, around 1750. Both Haydn and Bachs sons were greatly influenced by this new form of symphonic music.

Ray Wood No one composer is really the father* of the classical style. Many composers were responsible for different aspects of the developments and the gradual change from the Baroque to the Classical; indeed, some of those changes pre-dated 1750 as the dying Baroque lingered into the 1760’s with composers like Telemann and Rameau, whilst the early Classical had begun c.1740. The two styles therefore ran simultaneously for about 25 years between c1740 and 1765. Those changes evident in the new Classical music included: - technical developments in older instruments themselves; - the development of new instruments, most obviously for example the clarinet; and, - the quite rapid change from harpsichord to fortepiano/piano; - new techniques in playing almost all instruments; - what composers actually composed, for example the change from concerti grossi and suites of dance movements to symphonies; - the abandonment of the basso continuo; - changes to how concerti were composed; - a different way of using the orchestra creating very new sounds; - the development of sonata form rather than the binary form of Scarlatti, or series of dance movements in the suites of Bach and Handel for example in keyboard works, or ritornello form in concertos; - greater use of dynamics; - the reform of the rather static opera seria of the Baroque period: - a new type of audience and demands for published music; - changing audiences and their expectations of music; - et cetera (the list is endless). Some of the earliest symphonies written in the newer style written from c.1740 on, came from composers such as: GB Sammartini (Milan) Johann Stamitz, Fils, Holzbauer, and Richter (Mannheim) Wagenseil and Monn (Vienna) Et al. What is probably true to say is that the genius of Haydn and Mozart, through a series of far deeper works of the highest originality and quality that are still both played and recorded regularly, produced works far removed from the background entertainment music common at the time (Haydn in particular, and Mozart post-1781) that almost single-handedly established the symphony, string quartet, sonata, concerto, opera, and other chamber music forms - in fact, in almost every genre, as the yardstick by which future composers would be judged, from Beethoven to arguably the present day. These two key figures restored music to the levels of the Baroque, though in a totally new and different way, after the largely rather slight, easy, and unchallenging music of the galant or rococo music of intervening period. Almost no other composer, whether Bach’s sons, Gluck, Boccherini, Paisiello, Cimarosa, the composer’s of the Mannheim School - especially Johann Stamitz - or anyone else had the fundamental and lasting impact of Haydn and Mozart on every form of music; it is true however that they almost all contributed something. I normally exclude Beethoven from the list of ‘Classical’ composers; some prefer to include him with the Romantics whilst yet others cannot make up their mind and split him between the two by ending the ‘Classical period in 1820, something which is a poor compromise, inaccurate and unhelpful. Beethoven, apart from a few very early works, really does not sound like Haydn or Mozart; I normally refer to his works as ‘post-Classical’ as the majority of his works are quite clearly of a different age. Though Beethoven’s debt to Haydn and Mozart is obvious, his particular genius was very distinctive and his shadow stretches forward across the nineteenth century (and beyond), not back to the eighteenth; the masterworks of Beethoven are of a very different nature from those of his two greatest immediate predecessors. Put a slightly different way: think of the early symphonists - listed above - as first generation; Mozart and Haydn as second generation; and Beethoven as third generation et cetera. * Believing in a ‘Father of the Symphony’ or ‘...Classical style’, makes about as much sense as believing in Father Christmas/Santa Claus.

After JS Bach dye, JC Bach went to Italy for studying music, and he learnt the italian classical music

@@Ali-sy1gk This is not exactly correct; after the death of their father JS Bach in 1750, the fifteen year old JC moved to live with his half-brother CPE in Berlin for about six years. During this time in Berlin, CPE continued to teach JC, and after he moved to Italy, he became the pupil of probably the most famous teacher of the age, Padre Martini in Bologna. Following this, in 1760 he became organist in Milan cathedral until 1762 when he moved to London where he spent the rest of his life. Arguably, no composer ever had such a fine trio of teachers. You are quite correct that the Italian style he learnt in Italy supplanted almost everything else he had ever learned.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EKF0rUr2_iE.html Let me sare of Berlin Concert of J.Chrisitian (not Sebastian) Bach in Moscow Tchaikovsky Conservatory. Enjoy please.

Mozart sounds like J. C. Bach

Flávio Giannini. On the contrary Mozart was influenced by JC Bach. They met when Mozart was eight and JC Bach was a grown man.

haha

He was before Mozart. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EKF0rUr2_iE.html Let me sare of Berlin Concert of J.Ch. Bach in Moscow Tchaikovsky Conservatory. Enjoy please.