Köchel, pp. 435, 436.Īlfred Einstein dated the work to 1780 in his third edition of the Köchel catalogue, renumbering it as K. 365b. On the strength of Ernst's testimony, which is far from unambiguous but clearly associates the work with Munich and with the Munich violinist Johann Friedrich Eck, the present writer has argued that in the form in which it now survives it represents Eck's working over of Mozartian material, and has suggested 1780–1781 as the date of its composition.
It is this to which Constanze here refers. Ernst (1745–1805), Konzertmeister to the King of Saxony.
In January 1800 there appeared an answer to this review, in the course of a communication from F. It was reviewed in the AMZ for October 1799 and curtly dismissed as an incompetent piece of work, which could not possibly be by Mozart. As Constanze herself mentions later in the course of this letter, it was first published (in 1799, as Op. 76) by André himself, or, at any rate, by his father, who was head of the firm till his death in June 1799. This is the Concerto in E ♭ (K. 268), the authenticity of which has so often been debated. Oldman believed that the work had stylistic similarities to Mozart's sinfonia concertante for violin and viola, K. 364, and that Eck was the completer of the work, writing in a footnote to p. 1469 of The Letters of Mozart and his Family Volume III: A common hypothesis made in the later half of the 19th century was that the piece was based on authentic Mozart material but constructed by a less skilled composer. Ludwig von Köchel dated the work to 1776 in his catalogue, labelling it K. 268. A contemporary writer had stated the work to have been composed in 1784 and that it had been played to Eck by Mozart, although Mozart's widow Constanze stated that if authentic, the work must have been composed earlier. This violin concerto was first published by Johann André in 1799.
Audio playback is not supported in your browser.
0 kommentar(er)
