Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Reinecke Appreciation Thread!

Carl Reinecke is mostly known for his Undine Sonata for the Flute and the Piano, and quite rightfully so! Such a delightful work for the repertoire that deserves to be five times wider.
But I find his chamber works utterly delightful. I've been a long time advocate of his Piano Concerto No. 3 in C Major, which is one of the greatest concertos of the romantic era, but his violin sonata (which hasn't been recorded yet), cello sonatas, piano trios, and piano quintet are all masterful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1tOc90Hs08
Here is Reinecke's Third Piano Concerto. It has so much beauty! So lush, so delightful, and so heartfelt. This really isn't one of the run-of-the-mill romantic concertos. The third movement's toccata is to die for.


http://youtu.be/b9cKhr9k6K0?t=20s
First movement of the quintet. It's not the best recording out there (there is no commercial recording of this piece), but it is quite lovely. So expansive!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV0_WDLf_AQ
Intermezzo from his Quintet.

Okay, I listened to the whole thing.

I guess that's all I'm going to say, because every time I try to say more, it starts getting too harsh even by my rather lenient standards, and I delete it.

To each one's own! It took me some time to grow on me, but I really love that work.

I cannot agree with that.

There are many concertos that I'd place above that, including those by Scharwenka, Moszkowski, Henselt, Paderewski......

The 'Undine' sonata is indeed a very fine piece, and if not well-known to the general public, it is a favourite with accomplished flutists. Some years ago I worked extensively with a flutist, and we had a lot of fun performing it.

I can understand the friendly attraction of the piano concerto, but with due respect it does pale a bit compared to Scharwenka or Moszkowski.

Ah, that's understandable. I absolutely adore Moszkowski's concerto. So very charming!
I'm not too fond of Scharwenka's concertos. I should give them another chance, perhaps.

I gave the concerto another listen, this time with the score. It has a very honest, open and affectionate appeal. How could one not like it? Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

I would start with the 1st in Bb Minor. It is a dazzling tour de force, and I am frankly amazed that it is not even in the fringes of the standard repertoire. It certainly deserves better.

The 4th in F minor is also a fine work, and some people prefer it to the 1st. The 2nd and 3rd have some terrifically inspired movements (3rd movement in the 2nd, 1st movement in the 3rd), but overall the concertos are less than the sum of their parts.

Also check out Scharwenka's chamber music. The Piano Quartet Op 37 and the Piano Trio Op 45 could easily be revived.

I am quite interested in chamber music -- I definitely will check out his trios! And I would definitely give another chance to Scharwenka's concerti.

Are you familiar with Respighi's Piano Concerti? They are also some of the finest.

But as for Reinecke, I would love to perform his E Minor Violin Sonata, but there is no known recording of it available -- not even from the amateurs.

The violin sonata is a great piece.


Why does that stop you from playing it?

Indeed it is! Kyung wha Chung and Zimerman's rendition is quite fabulous -- I also love the R. Strauss violin sonata coupled in there.

And I would say fear and uncertainty that cause hesitation in trying out a completely unplayed piece. Reinecke also has a fabulous piano trio that hasn't been recorded. It's hard to tell if it is good work worthy of being tackled.

But again, I think there are no second rate composers; there exists only second-rate performances.

Haha, kudos for my being able to sightread, but my personal opinion often gets challenged by the general consensus more often than I would like to.
I could only read some of the piano solo parts, and they were quite terrific. I can't say much for the other parts.

Here's one for $4.97
http://www.classicalarchives.com/work/894009.html
It's on the first or second page of google results for "reinecke violin sonata" There may be less easily google-able recordings out there too. Enjoy

You guys didn't really think that I would stay silent did you?

Carl Reinecke extensively used the common 19th century performance techniques of the breaking of hands, arpeggiation, improvisation, and tempo rubato. Therefore this recording of his Piano Concerto No. 3 is not in the same universe of how the composer played it, and intended it to be played.

In his book "Off The Record", Neal Peres Da Costa uses Reinencke's recording of the Piano Concerto K537 to elucidate these techniques.

Here is Reinecke's entire recording of the Adagio of the K488 A Major Concerto, that I excerpt in my video. In it, there are significant examples of added ornamentation, which is the way the whole world played Mozart, Dr. Mark C!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_ELXJNMIE8

Thank you for your valuable insight. However, I wasn't talking about the appropriateness of techniques and whatnot.

And what a find! Thank you for your link. I'll definitely buy the Violin Sonata.

Nope. By the way, I can't stand that Mozart recording.

I second that, its cringe worthy.

Maybe they had to roll the crap out of it to make it sound on those old piano rolls.

For the record, it was the very first Mozart recording (1905), by an 81 year old man who was concertizing this music when he was 19 (in 1843)! He was considered the premier Mozart pianist of the 19th century.

Further, if you get to the age of 81, then we will see what you sound like on raw, un-edited tape.

The point is that, as has always been with me, the pianists of the day followed the well held traditions of performance established by the composers themselves.

Robert Levin, who is considered the greatest Mozart researcher/pianist alive, stated to me that the composer only improvised (changed things up) in the Cadenzas, the Fantasies, and the Rondos.

Dr. Neal Peres Da Costa and I strongly disagree because, albeit limited as it was, the entire keyboard performing world did not come to a stop when Mozart came on the scene.

Accordingly, I will quote from Dr. Peres Da Costa's response to me:

"Styles, customs and practices simply do not vanish overnight. Treatises from the 1750s onwards still discuss in great detail the practices of ornamentation. It was part and parcel of an improvisatory style of and attitude to performance that was still very much valued in the time of Liszt and Chopin. It is inconceivable that Mozart's singers sang exactly what was handed to them by Mozart no matter how meticulous he was in his notation. The great singers of Mozart's time were trained in the Italian bel canto tradition which prized the ability to ornament with skill and taste among other things. And instrumentalists followed suit or at the very least were advised to do so. A slow movement from a Mozart piano concerto is nothing more than an aria with orchestral accompaniment. I believe you are absolutely right in thinking that any talented musician of Mozart's era was expected to embellish a simple melody, anything else would have seemed nonsensical, unmusical and unsophisticated. Even the amateurs of the era would have ornamented."

Louis,

I realize this is an old thread, but just found it as I have just now been reading about Reinecke. Is it your opinion that performance of Mozart-written pieces in the 18th and 19th centuries would have been less true to the score, and more ornamented, i.e. more like Reinecke's interpretation, than pianists of today would venture? And if so, what if anything does this mean for the early-music movement?

Please, lets not turn this into one about late 19th-century/early 20th-century performance practices, thats a discussion that has been held endlessly elsewhere for little use. As for Reineckes music, I'm very glad it gets some attention here - indeed he wrote some very fine pieces, and I need to check them out better. Some friends played his horn trio sometime ago, wihch seemed rather intriguing!