Ordonez, Karl von: Symphony in B minor (Brown Bm1) (AE118)

Ordonez, Karl von (1734-1786)

For a part-time composer Ordonez was surprisingly prolific. In addition to his two operatic works - a marionette opera, Musica della Parodie d'Alceste and a Singspiel, Diesmal hat der Mann den Willen - Ordonez is known to have composed a significant amount of church music (now lost), a secular cantata, 73 symphonies, a violin concerto and a large corpus of chamber music of which the 27 authenticated string quartets are of particular importance. Ordonez's sophisticated experiments with cyclic unity and his liking for contrapuntal textures gives much of his music a very distinctive and original quality. His symphonies were widely disseminated in manuscript copies and Abb Stadler noted that they "received great applause". A number of scholars have drawn attention to Ordonez's predilection for minor key works although the proportion of minor key symphonies in his oeuvre does not differ signficantly from that found in the works of Haydn, Vanhal and Dittersdorf. The choice of B minor, however, is unusual and suggests a composer sensitive to the tonal nuances of different keys. As is the case with so many of his symphonies, it is impossible to establish an accurate composition date for the present work. The autograph is missing; there are no corroborative entries in contemporary thematic catalogues; and no significant clues (beyond a fairly wide chronological band established by paper types) in either of the two extant sets of parts. This edition is based on a set of MS parts preserved in the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, under the shelfmark S.m. 3717; the wrapper reads: "Sinfonia In C. / à / 2. Violini / Viola / 2. Oboe / 2. Corni / Violoncello / e / Basso / Del Sig: Carlo d'Ordonez".

The edition seeks to present as faithfully as possible the intentions of the composer as transmitted in this source. The style and notation of articulation and dynamic markings have been standardised throughout, and, where missing, markings have been reconstructed from parallel passages. These are indicated by the use of dotted slurs or brackets where appropriate. Like most eighteenthcentury sources, the Viennese manuscript is inconsistent in its notation of appoggiature; these too have been standardised to minimise confusion. Obvious wrong notes have been corrected without comment; editorial emendations with no authority from the source are placed within brackets. Allan Badley