Haydn: The London Symphonies

[Read Part One]   [Read Part Two]

There has never been anything like Franz Joseph Haydn's London Symphonies. The final twelve compositions for Haydn in this musical form are all distinguished. Some are “greater” than others but, altogether, no other composer has ever come close to creating a dozen consecutive symphonies of such high quality.

The story of how these came about begins with Johann Peter Salomon, a German-born violinist and concert promoter working in London. He was a long-time advocate for Haydn and introducing his music to new audiences. Salomon and Haydn likely first crossed paths in the 1780s, when Salomon was playing violin in German orchestras that performed Haydn's compositions. Recognizing Haydn's immense popularity and talent, the ambitious Salomon conceived of organizing concert seasons in London fully showcasing new symphonic works written by Haydn. Salomon reached out to Haydn with a generous financial offer to travel to London and provide him with symphonies for these concerts.

Intrigued by the opportunity, Haydn accepted Salomon's proposal and made two extended trips to London, from 1791-1792 and 1794-1795. Haydn and Salomon shared the considerable profits, and Haydn was extremely well compensated for these concerts and publishing his symphonies. Even after Haydn returned permanently to Vienna, Salomon continued organizing performances of the London Symphonies and maintaining a friendship with the composer he had brought to England.

Haydn composed a total of twelve brilliant new symphonies meant to be premiered at Salomon's concerts held in venues like the Hanover Square Rooms. These twelve works came to be known as the "London Symphonies" since they were written specifically for Haydn's time in London. The London Symphonies represent Haydn's mature symphonic output, demonstrating his confidence as an internationally renowned composer. They contain some of Haydn's most creative and joyful symphonic writing, showcasing his talents for melody, counterpoint, orchestration, and command of musical form. Many critics and listeners consider the London Symphonies to be Haydn's greatest achievement in the symphonic form. The London Symphonies helped cement the standard Classical symphonic structure and prove Haydn's enduring musical genius.

While other composers like Mozart and Beethoven produced numerous impressive symphonies, it is quite unique that Haydn wrote 12 symphonies of such consistent high quality all within a concentrated period of time for the same concerts in London. The inspiration of composing for new audiences, coupled with Haydn's experience and symphonic talents hitting their peak, seemed to bring out his very best symphonic writing. There is a freshness and verve in the London Symphonies revealing Haydn's joy of composition and desire to please his listeners.

The fact that all 12 of the London Symphonies have stood the test of time and remained audience favorites also shows Haydn's success in composing a dozen consecutive symphonic masterpieces. There is no weak link among these works - they all display Haydn as a consummate symphonist who was able to sustain inspiration and quality across multiple works in the same genre. They are a testament to Haydn's genius and status as the "father" of the symphony.

The core of the orchestra Haydn wrote for in these symphonies was the standard Classical era string section comprised of 1st violins, 2nd violins, violas, cellos, and double basses. To accompany the strings, Haydn included the typical woodwind instruments in pairs - 2 oboes, 2 bassoons, 2 flutes. The brass section was generally 2 horns and 2 trumpets, which could add moments of majesty. Timpani was also a convention of Classical symphonies that Haydn incorporated for climactic passages needing dramatic punctuation. Within this conventional symphonic ensemble, Haydn found ways to expand the timbral palette to suit the individual character of each symphony.

For example, in the "Military" symphony he added triangle, cymbals, and bass drum to imitate a Turkish janissary band. The "Clock" symphony features a supplementary wind band of horns, clarinets, and trumpets to portray the ticking clock motif. Opening the "Drumroll" symphony is a solo timpani roll. And for the grand "London" symphony, Haydn enlarges the wind section by including clarinets. So while Haydn stayed within the norms of instrumentation for a Classical symphony orchestra, he resourcefully altered the winds and percussion in order to highlight the distinct atmosphere and nicknames of each London Symphony.

Haydn's instrumentation in the London Symphonies shows some expansion and greater experimentation compared to his earlier symphonies composed while under the employ of the Esterházy court. In his earlier symphonies, Haydn tended to adhere to a more standardized Classical era orchestral ensemble. While he still used 2 oboes, 2 bassoons, 2 horns and occasional flutes, the overall wind and percussion writing was more conservative, with less prominence compared to the strings. There are of course exceptions in the earlier works, but generally Haydn had not yet enlarged the wind section with added instruments like clarinets.

With the London Symphonies, Haydn took advantage of the larger orchestral forces available in the concert halls and audiences of London. No longer needing to restrain instrumentation for the smaller Esterházy court, Haydn's orchestral imagination could run free. The London Symphonies showcase Haydn exploiting the wider range of colors, especially taking the woodwinds and brass into innovative territory with solos, expanded parts, and unusual additions like the percussion in the Military Symphony.

The late symphonies' richer palette reflects Haydn's increased confidence and desire to showcase the virtuosity of the London musicians. The expanded instrumentation allowed Haydn to vividly capture the essence of each symphony's nickname and enhance the drama, surprise, and emotional depth of the music. So while subtle, the greater freedom and adventurousness of orchestration is an important evolution in Haydn's London Symphonies.

With his London Symphonies, Haydn made full and innovative use of the winds and horns in a way he had not done before, giving them greater prominence and importance alongside the strings.

Throughout most of Haydn's 104 symphonies, the strings tend to dominate while the winds and brass play more of a supplementary role. They might have brief solos or certain highlighting moments, but largely exist to provide harmonic support.

Yet in the London Symphonies, Haydn truly gives the winds and horns an equal footing with the strings. He composes prominent wind solos, clever wind choruses in conversation with the strings, more complexity in the wind parts, and overall brings these instruments to the forefront rather than just using them for embellishment.

Special mention should be made of the clarinet.  For most of his life, Haydn's employer, Prince Esterházy, had no clarinets in his orchestra.  The instrument had been around for ages but had only become widely available in 1780's.  Esterházy saw no use for the newfangled instrument so Haydn rarely composed for the clarinet.  Most of the London Symphonies contain two clarinets, but some of the 12 have none at all, as was his (enforced) custom.

Haydn had access to a larger orchestra during his time in Paris which resulted in the "Paris Symphonies" Nos. 82-87. However, he did not necessarily compose those symphonies with the full ensemble in mind. The Paris Symphonies could still be easily played by the smaller orchestras that were typical during that time.

In contrast, with the London Symphonies, Haydn specifically composed the music to spotlight the talents and expanded forces of the orchestras available in London. The London Symphony orchestra size was likely around 40-50 players, significantly larger than Haydn’s Esterházy orchestra which was probably less than 20 players.

Haydn intentionally tailored the London Symphonies to highlight sections like the winds and brass in ways that would only work with the bigger London ensembles. The greater complexity and prominence of the woodwind writing starting in Symphony No. 93 and continuing throughout the series shows Haydn had the London orchestras in mind. Passages with layered winds and brass would simply not have the same impact with a smaller ensemble.

So while Haydn had larger orchestras available before, the London Symphonies represent Haydn intentionally exploiting the size and scope of the London orchestras as an essential part of his expanded symphonic vision, rather than simply writing music that could be optionally expanded. The symphonies were conceived for grand performance by these exceptional ensembles.

It is safe to say that, having evolved over the last decade of his compositions, Haydn finally made full use of winds and horns for the first time with the London Symphonies, giving them their due with the strings which generally carried all of Haydn's 104 symphonies. 

Since the London Symphonies are all distinguished, I'll first treat them collectively then highlight my favorites.

Symphony No. 93 is notable for its grand introduction (one of Haydn's best), lyrical melodies, and vibrant finale. The surprise pauses and dynamic contrasts add dramatic flair. The Minuet, compared with all others before, shows incredible sophistication and is Haydn's best such movement in all his body of work.

Symphony No. 94 "Surprise" is famous for the "surprise" loud chord in the otherwise soft slow movement, creating a playful moment which follows an engaging first movement. Also notable for the fiery finale. Every movement compliments all the others. This is one of the world's greatest symphonies even today. A total delight!

The orchestration in Symphony No.95 highlights individual wind instruments like oboe and bassoon in an innovative way. There is only one flute, however. A driving, invigorating opening gives way to a stately, ordered Andante. It features a wonderful piece for solo cello, the only instance of this in any of his symphonies. Some claim this movement had special sentimental value to Haydn, serving as his retrospective over decades of work as a composer. It ends joyfully with a rollicking peasant dance.

"Miracle" is the lofty nickname given to Symphony No. 96. It is mysterious and harmonically experimental. So named from the story of a falling chandelier of candles before its premiere. I'll say more about this one in a moment.

The opening Adagio – Vivace in Symphony No. 97 is marvelous and features an extended section for winds. It is a sophisticated and riveting piece of music employing style closer to Romantic than Classical, though, of course, Haydn ultimately stays in his traditional lane. He was last great “classical” composer before the Mozart/Beethoven Romantic revolution. The Presto finale is another example of more significant parts for horns and and winds. This symphony proves that Haydn has truly become the master of a complete orchestra.

Symphony No. 98 is lyrical and unconventional, especially the tragic/stormy slow introduction. The adagio is superb, with wonderful dramatic tension that is satisfyingly resolved. Haydn's musical wit is showcased throughout the work. Only one flute again, for some reason. The lively finale contains several great parts of brass and winds. At almost nine minutes, it is the longest Presto finale Haydn ever composed.

The second set of London Symphonies came the following year (1795) beginning with Symphony No. 99 which is festive and punctuated by lots of fanfare writing. Displays Haydn's humorous high spirits, particularly in the opening movement. The Adagio features one of his most pronounced sections for winds and is perhaps the most emotive of all his slow movements. The finale is a great example of his playfulness.

Symphony No. 100 is nicknamed "Military" due to its memorable martial theme with unusual percussion and trumpet solos. Dramatic and powerful. Perhaps too powerful for its time. Some of the aficionados thought its heavy use of percussion was vulgar. But it soon became and audience favorite. In addition to a heavier than usual part of winds, the second movement features solo trumpet, with fierce fanfare passages that aggressively interrupt the strings, giving the trumpets an uncharacteristically military, dominant role. In the finale, Haydn alternates between robust, marching sections and lighter melodic passages, building the movement to an unrelenting, exhilarating finish.

Symphony No. 101, know as "Clock", is notable for the steady "ticking" rhythm throughout mimicking a clock. This is Haydn's longest symphony “clocking” in at about 30 minutes. One of my lifelong favorites. More on this one in a moment.

Mournful and stormy at times, Symphony No. 102 is a study in contrasts beginning with a deceptively bright, major-key opening. It is full of surprises. There are no clarinet parts here, the only of his last symphonies to revert to his Esterházy court instrumentation. It opens with deceptive gentility, but keeps veering into the minor mode with a feeling of melancholy pervading much of the work. The Finale turns tempestuous. Haydn makes rich use of both chromatic and harmonic ambiguity that, once again, approaches Romantic effect.

Symphony No. 103, nicknamed "Drumroll", opens with a famous drumroll. Then proceeds into great depths with basses and cellos stately and poignant before it takes flight triumphantly. This is a remarkable opening, ahead of its time. The finale features the trumpet supported by winds, with several fanfares. This one feels operatic in parts. Just an incredible listening experience.

Symphony No. 104 "London" - Haydn's last is grand and cocky throughout. The first movement feels like Haydn is anticipating Beethoven with a wonderful mix of heaviness and lightness. An exceptional study in contrasts. The finale rondo is cheerfully exhilarating and virtuosic in character, reflecting Haydn's desire to make full use of the expert musicians performing this farewell.

In fact all of these symphonies are helped in no small part by the fact that the London musicians were all virtuosos of their respective instruments. This was the most talented orchestra Haydn ever worked with. Instead of restraining himself to tailor his compositions to available talent, he enjoyed the opposite freedom, the ability to tailor all symphonic parts to competent musicianship.

It's evident Haydn intentionally meant for the winds to shine and be integral in the London Symphonies, rather than be overshadowed by the strings. In Symphony No. 93, for example, Haydn gives the oboes and bassoons quite extensive parts. There are several passages and even an entire section where the oboes take over the melody from the first violins, something very unusual in a Classical symphony. The oboes also have a memorable solo in the trio section of the third movement minuet. Throughout the symphony, the winds are on more equal terms with the strings.

In Symphony No. 104, Haydn makes amble use of clarinets which was very rare for him to feature for reasons given above. I suppose he was comfortable with them by now.  In the slow introduction, the clarinets have a striking chordal passage showcasing their rich lower register. The clarinets blend with the strings and other winds throughout, providing new colors. There is also an extended section in the first movement development dominated by the clarinets and bassoons trading short motives. Here, Haydn relies just on the winds to move the music forward and build tension.

My two personal favorites are Nos. 94 with its humor and 101 with is clockwork pacing. Symphony No. 94 "Surprise" and Symphony No. 101 "Clock" both contain so many of the elements that make Haydn's music brilliant. The "Surprise" symphony has such wit and playfulness. The opening is stunning.  The quiet, lilting second movement suddenly interrupted by that bold fortissimo chord is startling yet humorous, showing Haydn's sense of fun. At over 8 minutes, the Minuet is the longest such movement he composed. I also enjoy the vigorous finale which drives to an exhilarating close. No. 94 was one of the first symphonies I ever heard and I have listened to it many dozens of times. It is truly a great symphonic work.

Symphony No. 101 draws me in with its perpetual motion "ticking" rhythm dominating so much of the music. The clockwork element gives it such a unique, memorable character. Haydn also does amazing things developing this rhythmic motif. The majestic gravity of the introduction balanced against the almost frantic faster sections also creates compelling musical drama.

Both these symphonies display Haydn's talents for invention, emotion, and storytelling purely through instrumental music. The instantly recognizable nicknames attached to these works also testify to how successfully Haydn conveyed extra-musical ideas like surprise and clockwork. Even over 200 years later, these innovative symphonies continue to delight and surprise listeners.

As mentioned earlier, No 96 is nicknamed "the Miracle" for reasons that have nothing to do with the music itself. That is a shame since it truly is one of his best symphonies it should be nicknamed based upon the music it might not be called "Miracle." Hmmm.  On second thought maybe the title still applies.

Before the performance, much of the audience had come forward to observe the orchestra and likely Haydn himself up close on stage. It was just then, while the hall was still filling up, that one of the theater's gigantic candle chandeliers crashed into the seats behind where this group was standing. Thankfully, since the performance had not yet begun, (miraculously) no one was injured.  The sensational story clearly became attached itself to the symphony afterwards, resulting in the evocative if still slightly misleading "Miracle" nickname.

Upon reflection and listening to it again after many years, maybe "Miracle" is still an appropriate title after all, as it takes some miraculously inventive composition on Haydn's part to generate such an emotionally potent and dramatic work using only the abstract language of music. The symphony truly conjures up feelings of darkness, strangeness and triumph over adversity.

So while the original basis for the nickname was coincidental, this is absolutely one of Haydn's greatest symphonic achievements. Focusing on the musical substance reveals just how appropriately the "Miracle" imagery suits this bold, imaginative work. Haydn created a symphonic miracle through his genius alone!

As I mentioned in Part One, after these 12 symphonies Haydn was to live another 14 years and compose other pieces such as his great oratorio The Creation.  But he was finished with the symphonic form.

The London Symphonies are a must-listen for any classical music fan, as are a great many other Haydn symphonies detailed in Part One and Part Two of the this complete 104 symphony tour (106 counting “A” and “B”). Looking back over the vast body of work, I discovered many distinctive and distinguished musical moments and entire symphonies I did not know about. Like I said in the beginning, there is no such thing as a “bad” Haydn symphony. All of them are a joy to experience. Given the consistently high quality and staying power of a wide number of compositions it is easy to see why he is named “the father of the symphony.”

But some of them rise to actual greatness in the grand scheme of classical music itself. Back when I did my initial assessment of Haydn's symphonic work I chose No. 88 as one of the greats. On this tour, however, I no longer felt that way. It is clearly distinctive but it is only “half-great” compared to everything to which I've listened since the start of this year. New works signaled to me and their movements lifted me joyfully.

In my original scoring I gave Haydn ten points compared with all other composers. He finished in a tie for fourth place with Shostakovitch and behind Mahler, Beethoven and Mozart (in that order). Though some of my selections have changed, I think ten points is still a proper amount for Haydn. Fourth place on this list isn't bad when compared to the mighty heights of those ahead of you.

This tour revealed that Haydn's “great” symphonies are Nos. 6, 45, 60 (a real eye opener for me), 82, 83 (purely as an example of his humor), 94 (his greatest and one of the world's finest), and 101. That totals seven points plus I add another three points (the scoring for a symphony which “won” its given category) for the fact that Haydn composed a dozen incredible symphonies in a row at the end of his career, an unparalleled achievement belonging to him alone. You simply cannot go wrong listening to any Haydn symphonies but listening to those listed in this post will most assuredly brighten your day while satisfying both your ear and your mind. I'm so glad I did this from start to finish. It was quite a rewarding journey!

Written with assistance from Claude.ai

Note: 12/8/2023 - I read this article yesterday in The Imaginative Conservative.  It details the close personal admiration and friendship between Haydn and the much younger Mozart.  Haydn thought Mozart was brilliant.  Mozart called Haydn "grandpapa" and greatly admired the man.  Upon learning of Mozart's untimely death, Haydn was stricken with grief.  So much so that he worked an "Elegy to Mozart: into Symphony No. 98.  I knew of the mutual admiration already.  I did not realize No. 98 had anything to do with Mozart until now.

It reads:  "Haydn paid tribute to Mozart in the second movement of a symphony he wrote for his London tour a few weeks after his friend’s death. The Adagio of Symphony No. 98 begins with a close quotation of the beginning of the Agnus Dei of Mozart’s Coronation Mass, and the transition from the exposition to the development quotes from the second, slow movement of Mozart’s famed “Jupiter” Symphony. Moreover, the sombre character of the entire movement—surely the most deeply expressive of any movement in Haydn’s symphonic oeuvre—clearly is meant as an elegy to, in Leopold Mozart’s works, 'the miracle that God allowed to be born in Salzburg.'"