Hummel Note
Research notes of composer Hummel
§2. The Music-Historical Role of Hummel’s Piano Concertos
Hummel’s piano concertos are not merely “transitional relics” bridging the Classical and Romantic eras; rather, they played a निर्णative role in advancing music history in the following three dimensions.
1. Expansion of the Fortepiano’s Limits and Technical Innovation
The piano concertos of Johann Nepomuk Hummel were composed in close relationship with the capabilities of the Viennese-action fortepiano of his time. Unlike the heavier English and French instruments (such as those by Érard and Pleyel), which produced a fuller and more sustained tone, the Viennese action was characterized by its extremely light touch and its rapid attack and decay (Reference ⑨).
Hummel exploited these physical characteristics to the fullest. Compensating for the instrument’s lack of sustain, he developed a compositional style filled with rapid, transparent scale passages—often likened to a “string of pearls”—as well as wide-ranging leaps, intricate arpeggios, and finely detailed ornamentation such as delicate trills. The level of virtuosity he demanded pushed the instrument to its technical limits and endowed the piano part with sufficient brilliance to compete with the increasingly dense orchestral textures of the post-Beethoven era, including more independent wind writing and powerful tutti passages (Reference ⑩).
2. A Paradigm Shift in Notation and Performance Practice: The Emergence of the “Work” Concept
During the Classical period—especially in the piano concertos of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart—ornamentation and cadenzas were largely entrusted to the performer’s improvisational skill. The score functioned primarily as a structural framework for performance. However, the rise of the bourgeoisie in the late 18th and early 19th centuries dramatically transformed patterns of musical consumption. Music publishing expanded across Europe, and both amateur musicians and professionals without advanced improvisational training began to purchase newly published scores in large numbers.
Hummel responded to this shift with remarkable acuity. In his 1828 treatise Klavierschule, he explicitly stated that the concerto had acquired a “new form.” He established the practice of writing out in full not only cadenzas and fermata passages—previously improvised—but also detailed ornamental figures within the melodic line (Reference ⑪). This marked a decisive transformation: the concerto was no longer an ephemeral, improvisation-based performance event, but instead became a fully fixed, autonomous work of art (Werk) in which the composer’s intentions were precisely encoded in the score.
3. A Direct Lineage to Early Romanticism (Chopin and Liszt)
Perhaps the most significant aspect of Hummel’s historical position is his direct influence on the next generation of Romantic composers, including Frédéric Chopin, Franz Liszt, and Felix Mendelssohn.
In particular, Chopin studied Hummel’s Piano Concertos in A minor (Op. 85) and B minor (Op. 89) intensively, adopting them as structural and stylistic models for his own concertos. The characteristic style—where the piano sings an elegant, bel canto-inspired melody over a restrained orchestral accompaniment, enriched with ornamental figuration—as well as pianistic devices such as parallel thirds and sixths and sweeping arpeggios across the keyboard, can be directly traced to Hummel’s legacy. When the young Chopin met Hummel in Warsaw in 1828, he was deeply inspired by the master’s praise and encouragement, gaining confidence in his artistic direction (Reference ⑫).
Similarly, the fact that Liszt chose Hummel’s B minor Concerto (Op. 89) for his Paris debut demonstrates that, for the emerging generation of virtuosi, Hummel’s works represented the highest standard and an essential model to emulate.
§3. The Historical Evolution of Hummel’s Reception
Contemporary Reception: A Deified Master
During his lifetime, Johann Nepomuk Hummel enjoyed an almost deified reputation throughout Europe (Reference ⑲). He was regarded as the legitimate successor to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and stood at the pinnacle of Vienna’s pianistic world as a virtuoso. His popularity and financial success far surpassed those of Franz Schubert and were considered on par with Ludwig van Beethoven. Whenever his piano concertos were published, pianists across Europe eagerly performed them, and music enthusiasts rushed to purchase the scores.
Although Robert Schumann was often critical of many of Hummel’s works—particularly the more superficial variations and shorter pieces—he held his major compositions, such as the Piano Concertos in A minor and B minor and the Piano Sonata in F-sharp minor (Op. 81), in high esteem, regarding them as touchstones (showpieces) for pianists of the time.
Later Reception: Oblivion through Instrumental and Aesthetic Change
However, after Hummel’s death in 1837, his reputation faded with remarkable سرعة, and his concertos disappeared from the core repertoire (Reference ⑬). Two structural factors contributed to this decline.
First, there was a growing incompatibility with the physical evolution of the piano. By the mid-19th century, the instrument had developed into the modern piano—with a robust iron frame, heavier action, greater volume, and longer sustain—epitomized by makers such as Steinway & Sons. Hummel’s concertos, however, were conceived for the lighter Viennese-action fortepiano, characterized by rapid decay. His textures, filled with delicate passagework and intricate figurations designed to compensate for this quick decay, tend to sound blurred and overly dense on the modern instrument, reducing them to what can seem like empty virtuosity when performed without stylistic adaptation.
Second, a shift in aesthetic ideology played a decisive role. From the late Romantic period into the 20th century, musical values became increasingly centered on the profound spiritual depth associated with Beethoven and the philosophical and emotional intensity of Richard Wagner. Within this framework, Hummel’s refined, elegant music—deliberately avoiding extreme emotional outbursts—came to be dismissed as “Biedermeier” superficiality or mere decorative virtuosity. Moreover, the transformation of the musician’s role—from composer-performer to autonomous artistic figure—further marginalized his legacy. For a long time, music historians treated the period between the peaks of Classicism (Mozart, Beethoven) and Romanticism (Chopin, Schumann) as a mere “valley,” overlooking Hummel’s innovations.
Present Reception: Revival through the HIP Movement
From the late 20th century to the present, the rise of the Historically Informed Performance (HIP) movement has led to a significant reassessment of Hummel, both academically and in performance practice. This movement has not only revived interest in period instruments but also facilitated the rediscovery of previously neglected composers.
Recordings from the 1980s by Stephen Hough played a particularly important role in accelerating Hummel’s revival. Subsequent performances and recordings by artists such as Howard Shelley further contributed to a broader recognition of the true value of Hummel’s concertos. Today, they are increasingly understood as occupying a crucial “blind spot” in music history—bridging the structural clarity of the Classical style with the lyrical expressiveness of Romanticism.
In the present day, Hummel is steadily reclaiming his position: no longer merely a “forgotten composer,” but a central figure who conveys the essence of early 19th-century Viennese musical culture.