In the year of Liszt’s bi-centenary and literally several days after the 200th anniversary of his birth (b. Raiding, 22 October 1811, d. Bayreuth 31 July 1886), it is fitting to draw back the relative curtain of obscurity surrounding his works (particularly organ repertoire) and give them the recognition they deserve. 2011, the Lisztian year (3) has already served as an inspiration for a number of scholars in striving to fill in the gaps of Lisztian scholarship. Performance practice issues (the art of tasteful registration, the ‘ethics’ of transcription, improvisation, and interpretative questions) raised by the study of Liszt’s organ works, may potentially transform the misunderstood perceptions of this composer, and empower performers with the knowledge and understanding needed for bringing Liszt, the phenomenal pianist but also organist, and 19th century virtuoso back into the spotlight. In order to do so most effectively, it is necessary to explore the matter from two, somewhat paradoxical, perspectives (which throughout the course of this investigation merged together on many points). Firstly even if one desires to follow the tenets of the 20th century modern ideology of following the letter of the score, ones needs to consider the limits of the score and missing information not contained therein. This is where performance practice study enters the scene by entailing a search for background information leading to an understanding of historical registration, instruments, practices that were not notated in the score because they were so prevalent during the time period in question etc. Secondly, one needs to realise that some Lisztian (and Romantic, to be more broad) practices have been lost to a deeper extent, than just not being notated in the score, giving way to more modern practices. Examples would include arpeggiation, dislocation, and general creative license in regards to interpretation (as opposed to rigidly following the letter of the score and the composer’s ‘intentions’). Additionally, a historical survey of the ‘historical or ‘authentic’ performance practice movement proves helpful in addressing the latter point by raising questions of subjectivity and expression in interpretation. Peter Hurford states that “We would be unwise to slavishly emulate the manner of performance ‘possibly’ employed by the composer, for the creator’s view of his own work is not ultimately definite” (4). Heckmann (5) suggests that interpretation is never correct or incorrect but only good or bad. In essence music is subjective, and little interpretative freedom is characteristic of the performance style dating from the 1970’s onwards into modernity (“Strict adherence to the composers' texts by no means assures authentic performances” (6)). One may ponder over the extent to which a work once published remains the property of the composer, or the performer to interpret, 18th/19th century aesthetics in general (in which the goal was to elicit an emotional response from the audience (7)) and the direct implications for transcription and historical Lisztian performance.
In the past (as part of my undergraduate thesis dealing with the genesis of the piano recital, and various attempts at recreating the form/style of Lisztian concerts) I have always approached Liszt from the perspective of innovations relating to performance/virtuosity (pioneering the solo piano recital, inventing a new form of pianistic technique, the concept of an artistic persona, a composer/virtuoso all in one) and not his works as such. My findings suggested that Liszt’s innovations, and ‘performance practices’ relating to the concert platform, were largely ignored in favour of the concert, recital and interpretative practices of the so called ‘Old German School’ (represented by Clara Schumann and others) who seem to provide a better match for the ideology of modern performance practices (concert form, interpretation) prevalent today. In essence, for all of Liszt’s virtuosity and fame of superstar proportions he was misunderstood and labelled ‘superficial’ by many of his contemporaries. (8) Similarly to the treatment of Haydn and his compositional output, Liszt’s legacy as a composer (particularly once outside the bounds of the pianistic) was ignored by scholars for decades, with many attributable reasons, for instance envy. (9) Another parallel can be drawn to Beethoven’s works, in that they too were misunderstood if not completely disregarded. (10) Liszt’s works deserve to be championed for their pivotal role in pioneering new forms, instrumentation, experimentation in tonality which would eventually lead the way to 20th century models implemented by Schoenberg, Berg and Webern. (The Prelude and Fugue on BACH contains chromaticism based on the diminished seventh chord (11) and the Mephisto Waltz no 4/Bagatelle without Tonality is an example of moving away from a distinguishable tonal centre). Whilst extensive research has examined biographical information, catalogues and treatment of works (particularly pianistic), a gap exists in regards to organ literature (in fact, it is difficult to obtain complete editions of the organ works, with rarer works often out of print) and performance practice scholarship as opposed to theoretical analysis (of surface level proportions).(12)
After the 18th century organ music lost pride of place compared to the Baroque period when every reputable composer composed for the instrument. Although the ranks of organ literature were enriched by Beethoven’s pieces for mechanical clock, Rossini’s little organ pieces, Mozart/Haydn’s mechanical organ compositions and German organ composers such as A.W Bach, Ritter, Fischer, J.G Topfer, J.C.H Rinck (characterised by smooth legato technique, a marked departure from the detached nature of Baroque articulation) and Hesse a substantial body of literature did not exist. Composers became frustrated with the instrument’s lack of expression, necessity for block dynamics, bland registration, unstable wind supply, and lack of registrational aids. Whilst Baroque music could thrive on the former, the spirit of Romanticism required far more and categorised the organ as an inadequate vehicle. Nonetheless, Felix Bartholdy Mendelssohn rose to the challenge as the only influential German composer (for organ) of the first decade of the 19th century. Although a staunch proponent of terraced dynamics and polyphonic texture in Bach’s organ pieces (and instrumental in the ‘Bach Revival’), Mendelssohn’s works contain elements of the Romantic aesthetic of expression. At a time preceding the arrival of the swell pedal (used for crescendo and diminuendo effects) Mendelssohn manipulated registration in order to achieve a similar outcome (in his sonatas published in 1845). (13)
In England, France and Germany the development of the ‘expressive’ organ was closely interlinked. The “bombastic thunderstorm improvisations” (14) of Lefébure-Wély in Paris are a good example, with the phenomenon spreading over to Germany via Lemmens and Vogt. Liszt was present at the latter’s Freiburg Cathedral thunderstorm criticised by George Sand. He reportedly sat down at the organ console afterwards to give a perfect rendition of an improvisation on Mozart’s Dies Irae (complete with chimes/bell effects). The mid 19th century saw the rise of more imitative stops, no doubt influenced by the legendary Cavaille-Coll who started revolutionary organ-building work in 1833 (Paris). In Germany, the Ladegast organ was installed at Meresburg Cathedral in 1855. The country’s largest instrument at the time, it in all likelihood had no expressive capacity (although Rechsteiner (15) argues that it did possess a rudimentary swell pedal precursor), but encompassed many imitative stops and limited registrational aids. Therefore, when trying to recreate the conditions of historical instruments, it is necessary to consider their limitations. Evidence (analysis of Liszt’s organ works from the Weimar period, student recounts and the fact that Liszt’s Fantasy and Fugue on ‘Ad nos’ and Prelude and Fugue on BACH are considered peak romantic literature even though written well before all peak developments) suggests that Liszt composed music well before his time, foreshadowing the late Romantic/symphonic direction of organ building and literature. Later instrumental developments (particularly of the symphonic, and 20th century concert organ type) allow for the execution of the fast tempi, and registrational effects his performance style needs.
During his Weimar period (1848- 1861) Liszt thoroughly immersed himself in the footsteps of the organ tradition, and the revival of Bach’s organ works, (transcribing six of Bach’s organ Prelude and Fugue’s for piano and playing/hearing numerous instruments in the region) together with composers such as Mendelssohn and Schumann who played a pivotal role in championing the lost works and legacy of the Great Master. “Liszt could not tolerate the cautious, colourless renderings [of Bach] prevailing in Germany at the time” (16) In fact, he criticised Alexander Gottschalg, one of his students, for playing a Bach fugue all on one manual. “In terms of technique it is totally satisfying … but where is the spirit? … Surely Bach did not play his works in such a manner; he, whose registrations were so admired by his contemporaries! When you are playing on a three-manual instrument, why should the other two manuals be ignored?” (17)
The above raises challenging implications for modern performance practice. In modern performance practice, Bach is performed strictly, perhaps rigidly, with no major registration changes, keeping to block dynamics. Still, there is place for subtle changes, bringing out imitation/echo effects etc. Since the Bach revival occurred during the Romantic era, it is necessary to remember that Bach organ performance did not change into the clean and precise renditions of today, overnight. Composers instrumental to the revival (Mendelssohn, Liszt and others) would have played Bach with a penchant for Romantic registration practices (employing crescendos, imitative stops, transcribing and taking other liberties with the text).
Transcriptions would have also challenged the modern notion of adherence to the score. After all, the piano is a transcription instrument (a large body of repertoire played prior to the advent of the modern piano is in essence a transcription). While the romantic era was rampant with transcribing and improvisation, it was well grounded in earlier practice (for example the Bach-Vivaldi Concerto transcriptions for organ).
The Fantasy and Fugue on ‘Ad nos’ was written in 1850, and premiered at Meresburg Cathedral for the newly restored organ (completed by North German organ builder Friedrich Ladegast between 1853-1855). It included 4 manuals, 81 stops, 5, 685 pipes, 37 chimes, and was the first example of the romantic organ in Germany, with precursors of crescendo divisions/pedals. Ladegast was an apprentice of iconic German organ builder Silbermann and Cavaille-Coll in Paris. Sadly the instrument was restored back to ‘Baroque’ specifications, however a rebuild back to its romantic state is currently pending. Reubke (a pupil of Liszt) was also inspired by the instrument, as were Schumann and Mendelssohn.
Whilst two of Liszt’s ‘best’ and monumental organ works were centred around Weimar, his extensive concert activity across many geographical and cultural boundaries (entailing access to different types of instruments) may have had significant influence on his organ works. In later years, Liszt was on familiar terms with the French organists centred around Cavaille-Coll (Saint-Saens, Widor, Chauvut) in the 1860’s and 70’s (Saints-Saens’ organ symphony is dedicated to Liszt, Franck dedicated his organ recital to Liszt in 1866 at Saint-Clothilde (18) and Bruckner played the organ at Liszt’s memorial service in Bayreuth (19).
An average performance of the ‘Ad nos’ lasts 30 minutes and the work is solely mono-thematic, based on the chorale theme from Meyerbeer’s opera ‘Le Prophet’. Mirroring a symphonic poem in treatment and structure, it creates its own set of dramatic activity rather than relying on the dramatic content of the opera.
Liszt’s piano students have received sound documentation, either through his correspondence or historical recordings, which reveal significant liberties with the score, changing tempi, ‘Brahmsian’ rushed crescendo, dislocation and arpeggiation. (20) It is fascinating to attempt to ascertain whether those practices were carried through to the organ since Liszt acted as a mentor to a group of Weimar organists studying with Johann Topfer, the municipal organist in Weimar, fine performer, organ builder and organist with forward looking ideas on organ registration. (Liszt coached Gottschalg, Winterberger, Carl Muller-Hartun, and others. (21)
Winterberger premiered the ‘Ad nos’ at Meresburg Cathedral and took the piece on tour through Holland and other parts of Europe. Liszt was often viewed in a derogatory light due to a lack of pedal technique, however he made up for this deficiency through Winterberger’s performances of his works. “Alexander Winterberger … operates with his feet in a way that others can not manage with their hands, and that sureness in the handling of the pedal-board gives his playing an amplitude and magnificence which I have never before encountered, although I have heard the most renowned organists”. (22) Liszt devised a notation system for pedalling, in use before the heel-toe system of Lemmens, Mendelssohn and was known for fast tempi (According to Gottschalg, his pedalling could not keep up with what Liszt demonstrated on the manuals).
Liszt’s only documented public recital was held on May 1843 at Moscow’s Evangelical Church of Sts Peter and Paul. The repertoire included a Fugue by Handel, and Beethoven transcriptions (Piano Sonata in A flat major, op. 26 and the slow movement of the Fifth Symphony). His legacy lives on through his Weimar organ students. No direct organ recordings of Liszt or the students exist (Liszt died 9 years before the invention of the phonogram) but American recordings from the 1930’s studied by Rechsteiner (23) point to fast tempi and textual modification.
Additionally recordings of Alfred Sittard (directly connected to the Berlin Organ School of the 19th and 20th centuries which consisted of names such as Max Reger and Karl Straube) are an enlightening find. Recorded on a historic 163-stop organ in Harburg, 1912 (damaged during World War II) they are the only remaining record of the instrument and “showcase great musicianship, an excellent sense of drama, and virtuoso technical ability with glaring textual liberties in the ‘Ad nos’.” (24)
Along with improvisation, transcription is an art regularly associated with the legacy of the ‘composer-virtuosos’ of the 19th century. Liszt had an urn at his concerts for audience requests and would routinely improvise on requested themes. ‘Ad nos’ possesses many improvisational qualities, especially in the Fantasy section, which in its freedom is reminiscent of the North German ‘stylus phantasticus’. The work additionally exists in a four-hands version, and Busoni wrote a transcription (rare edition) for piano (25). Conflicting sources (26) suggest that Liszt could have also written a transcription for piano but the original manuscript and subsequent editions are lost. He did however write a transcription of the Prelude and Fugue on BACH, and two versions of the piece (the shorter, 1870 version is the one commonly played now) (27).
A perusal of the four-hands version helps in filling in performance practice gaps applicable to the organ version. (28) For example, in all the recordings perused, the ossia pedal line found in the Budapest edition (29) (sourced from the four- hands version but missing in other editions) is omitted.
Feruccio Busoni, although never a student of Liszt, “became a celebrated Liszt scholar and pianist. … His playing of Liszt’s works met with the approval of Liszt pupil Arthur Friedham” (30) The transcribed material is sometimes left verbatim however in most instances pedal lines are doubled, runs are added and other usual romantic treatment is applied. Busoni’s remarkable technique is a match for this monumental piece in its piano version. Reversed analysis may also be useful for providing insight into performing the organ version as the various pianistic effects give an indication of timbre/colour indicative of registration choice.
In Liszt’s original, organ writing is transformed by pianistic elements carried through to the organ. A number of virtuoso pianists were also organists (or composed for organ) and this is evident in the works they left behind (for example, Mendelssohn, Saint-Saens, Mozart related to piano-organ connection) (31). Criticised as a defect in Liszt’s organ compositions, the pianistic elements are actually strong points. On a mechanical action organ (when compared with a piano) clearer tonal control and clarity is possible (although it is more difficult to achieve legato, and a smooth tone in ‘Ad nos’ due to the absence of the sostenuto pedal and continuity of sound, though the benefit of continuous sound is that it can be modified after the attack, unlike on the piano). Another benefit includes the added possibilities that pedals, registration and manual changes can provide in creating a tonal palette of sound and the marked difference between each organ (resulting in multiple interpretations).
Yves Rechsteiner, a performance practice scholar, organist, and harpsichordist recorded a historical project of Liszt’s complete organ works at Schweren Cathedral, on a Ladegast organ preserved in original condition. (32) His rendition of Liszt’s organ masterpieces was hailed as groundbreaking and yet unnecessary and disruptive to the clarity of the chorale (Meyerbeer) theme (even though skilful). I analysed the scale of the modifications and was expecting modifications of epic proportions. In actual fact, the improvisations verge on ornaments, runs and minor cadenza passages (all easily missed if not careful) showing how scandalous it is to depart from the ingrained letter of the score. (33) In my opinion, Rechsteiner’s rendition of the Prelude and Fugue on BACH is mesmerising (with tempo fluctuations) capturing the essence of Lisztian style more completely than in the ‘Ad nos’ which seems to drag on a bit (here the tempo appears steadier).
According to Rechsteiner’s findings and my observations, playing Liszt requires organ action that will not hinder precision and alacrity, registrational aids, more stable wind pressure, attack, and no delay in sound. All of the above were a hindrance in the Winterberger performance at Merseburg cathedral, which is why historical reproductions can only go so far. Therefore, to play Liszt in the spirit of his intentions requires concert hall instruments, which offer no hindrances in regards to tempi. Liszt composed the ‘Ad nos’, Prelude and Fugue on BACH, Variations on Veinen, Klagen, Sorgen, Zagen (1863) with the aid of a pedal-piano acquired in 1854 (consisting of three manuals, plus pedal-board. As such he did not face any of the hindrances mentioned above). It is indeed fascinating to discover that a performance of Liszt at Verbrugghen Hall, on a non-romantic organ may well be a step on the way to a historical performance. The inhibitions of developing organs, and cathedral acoustics are removed, and there are no physical limits beyond performer limitations. According to Mark Swed, Liszt’s ‘Ad nos’ should be played madly, frenetically, put simply: too fast. “That care, while appreciated, was the loose leash. Ultimately, a stubborn Lisztian wants neither reason nor restraint, rather full- out madness. But as I said, it was a nasty night, and Haselbock left us just sane enough to hit the waterlogged freeways while still so Liszt-logged that this nutty, magnificent music danced to the rhythm of every insistent raindrop.” (34). This is far removed from the cautious interpretations advocated today.
The scope of this investigation has centered around two focal points, that of filling in the gaps of performance practices not discernable in the notation of the score but, crucial to the informed performance of selected Liszt organ works (particularly the Fantasy and Fugue on ‘Ad nos Salutarem Undam’) and lost Lisztian (and 19th century) practices which are foreign to the strict adherence to the score/predominance of composer’s intentions that modern performance styles champion. In investigating the former, it was necessary to move away from the rigid and sometimes pedantic interpretations of Liszt’s organ music that can be arrived at by looking at the score only, to performances that will incorporate stylistic practices that were a given for Liszt, his organ students and other 19th century contemporaries. In application this leads to a more pianistic treatment of the ‘Ad nos’, with agile and facile passagework, greater rhythmical and textual freedom (particularly with accelerando and rushing at peak points) fast, even frenetic, tempi (as indicated by historical recordings, correspondence, and other scholarship), and a deeper grounding on what is allowable in the work based on an understanding of different editions and versions such as the four-hands Liszt version and Busoni transcription. Beyond that, a historical performance of Liszt’s ‘Ad nos’ and other organ works also entails a willingness to engage in a personal interpretation, showcasing not just the composer but also the performer of the work. Artistic freedom lies at the core of 19th century performance practice, and as such has its place in modern renditions of the work. Originally, the decision to perform the ‘Ad nos’ on the Verbrugghen Hall organ (not a romantic organ) could have been frowned on by some modern specialists. However, throughout the course of this investigation the decision has emerged from that of one based on personal interpretation alone to one with historical basis (based on the benefits modern organs possess when compared with their developing, Romantic counterparts).
Discography
Bleicher, Stefan Johannes. Complete Organ Works. Comp. Franz Liszt. Arte Nova Classics LC 3430. 1998.
Haselbock, Martin. Liszt, F.: Organ music, Vol. 1. Comp. Franz Liszt. New Classical Adventure NCA60157-215. 2005.
Howard, Leslie. The complete music for solo piano, Vol. 17 - Liszt at the Opera II. Comp. Franz Liszt. CDA66571/2. 1992.
Herrick, Christopher. Organ Dreams 4. Comps. Franz Liszt, et al. Hyperion Records Limited CDA67436. 2005.
Rechsteiner, Yyes, Monique Simon, and Amandine Beyer. Liszt: Organ Works. Comps. Franz Liszt, Felix Mendelssohn and Johann Sebastian Bach. 2005.
Salle, Lise de la. bach liszt lise de la salle. Comps. Johann Sebastian Bach and Franz Liszt. Naïve. 2005.
Bibliography
Bethards, Jack M. "A Brief for the Symphonic Organ (Part One)." The Diapason 96, no. 9 (Sep 2005).
Busoni, Ferrucio B. Franz Liszt Fantasie und Fuge über den choral 'Ad nos, ad salutarem undam'. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.
Caldwell, John, Christopher Maxim, Barbara Owen, Robert Winter, Susan Bradshaw, and Martin Elste. "Keyboard music." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/14945pg2 (accessed September 7, 2011).
Carter, Gerard. Rediscovering the Liszt Tradition. Ashfield, NSW: Wensleydale Press, 2006.
Corleonis, Adrian. "Liszt: Organ Works / Yves Rechsteine- Notes & Reviews." ArkivMusic.com The Source for Classical Music. http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=92322 (accessed September 7, 2011).
Elcombe, Keith. "Review: Making Music on the Organ by Peter Hurford." Early Music (Oxford University Press) 17, no. 2 (May 1989).
Fabian, Dorottya. "The Meaning of Authenticity and The Early Music Movement: A Historical Review ." International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music (Croatian Musicological Society ) 32, no. 2 (Dec 2001): 153-167.
Gibbs, Christopher H., and Dana Gooley. Franz Liszt and His World. Princenton: Princenton University Press.
Hamilton, Kenneth, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Liszt. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Hurford, Peter. Making Music on the Organ. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Kregor, Jonathan. Liszt as Transcriber. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Liszt, Ferenc. Összes Orgonaműve: Sämtliche Orgelwerke I. Edited by Sándor Margittay. Budapest: Editio Musica Budapest, 1970.
Ochse, Orpha. Organists and Organ playing in Nineteenth-Century France and Belgium. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994.
Rechsteiner, Yves. "Franz Liszt et l'orgue, quelques remarques sur l'utilisation de l'orgue à son époque." yves-rechsteiner.com. June 24, 2010. http://www.yves-rechsteiner.com/articles (accessed September 7, 2011).
Bethards, Jack M. "A Brief for the Symphonic Organ (Part One)." The Diapason 96, no. 9 (Sep 2005).
Busoni, Ferrucio B. Franz Liszt Fantasie und Fuge über den choral 'Ad nos, ad salutarem undam'. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.
Caldwell, John, Christopher Maxim, Barbara Owen, Robert Winter, Susan Bradshaw, and Martin Elste. "Keyboard music." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/14945pg2 (accessed September 7, 2011).
Carter, Gerard. Rediscovering the Liszt Tradition. Ashfield, NSW: Wensleydale Press, 2006.
Corleonis, Adrian. "Liszt: Organ Works / Yves Rechsteine- Notes & Reviews." ArkivMusic.com The Source for Classical Music. http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=92322 (accessed September 7, 2011).
Elcombe, Keith. "Review: Making Music on the Organ by Peter Hurford." Early Music (Oxford University Press) 17, no. 2 (May 1989).
Fabian, Dorottya. "The Meaning of Authenticity and The Early Music Movement: A Historical Review ." International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music (Croatian Musicological Society ) 32, no. 2 (Dec 2001): 153-167.
Gibbs, Christopher H., and Dana Gooley. Franz Liszt and His World. Princenton: Princenton University Press.
Hamilton, Kenneth, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Liszt. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Hurford, Peter. Making Music on the Organ. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Kregor, Jonathan. Liszt as Transcriber. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Liszt, Ferenc. Összes Orgonaműve: Sämtliche Orgelwerke I. Edited by Sándor Margittay. Budapest: Editio Musica Budapest, 1970.
Ochse, Orpha. Organists and Organ playing in Nineteenth-Century France and Belgium. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994.
Rechsteiner, Yves. "Franz Liszt et l'orgue, quelques remarques sur l'utilisation de l'orgue à son époque." yves-rechsteiner.com. June 24, 2010. http://www.yves-rechsteiner.com/articles (accessed September 7, 2011).
Saffle, Michael. Franz Liszt: a guide to research. 2nd Edition. New York & London: Routledge, 2004.
Saffle, Michael. "The "Liszt Year" 2011; Recent, Emerging and Future Liszt Research." Notes (Music Library Association) 67, no. 4 (Jun 2011).
Searle, Humphrey. "The Organist's Repertory. 6: Liszt's Organ Music." The Musical Times (Musical Times Publications) 112, no. 1540 (Jun 1971): 597-598 .
Stinson, Russell. " Franz Liszt ." In The reception of Bach's organ works from Mendelssohn to Brahms, by Russell Stinson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
—. The reception of Bach's organ works from Mendelssohn to Brahms . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Swed, Mark. "Music Reviews: Liszt finds a kindred spirit in the organist." Los Angeles Times. February 22, 2005. http://articles.latimes.com/2005/feb/22/entertainment/et-organ22 (accessed October 17, 2011).
"The International Historical Organ Recording Collection: Alfred Sittard - Selected recordings from 1928-38." The International Historical Organ Recording Collection. March 7, 2009. http://ihorc.blogspot.com/2009/03/alfred-sittard-selected-recordings-from.html (accessed September 23, 2011).
Walker, Alan. "Music Reviews." Edited by Frances Barulich. Notes, Second Series (Music Library Association) 48, no. 2 (Dec 1991): 665-669.
Walker, Alan, Maria Eckhardt Rena, and Charnin Mueller. "Liszt, Franz." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/48265pg18 (accessed October 3, 2011).
Wolff, Christoph, Walter Emery, Peter Wollny, Ulrich Leisinger, and Stephen Roe. "Bach." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. . http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/40023pg10 (accessed September 7, 2011).
Endnotes
1. Fabian, Dorottya. “The Meaning of Authenticity and The Early Music Movement: A Historical Review.” International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music (Croatian Musicological Society) 32, no. 2 (Dec 2001): 153-167.
2. Adrian Corleonis, “Liszt: Organ Works / Yves Rechsteiner- Notes & Reviews,” ArkivMusic.com The Source for Classical Music, http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=92322.
3. Michael Saffle, “The "Liszt Year" 2011; Recent, Emerging and Future Liszt Research,” Notes (Music Library Association) 67, no. 4 (Jun 2011).
4. Peter Hurford, Making Music on the Organ (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990) and Keith Elcombe, “Review: Making Music on the Organ by Peter Hurford,” Early Music (Oxford University Press) 17, no. 2 (May 1989).
5. Quoted in Dorottya Fabian, “The Meaning of Authenticity and The Early Music Movement: A Historical Review,” International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music (Croatian Musicological Society ) 32, no. 2 (Dec 2001): 153-167, 158.
6. Aldrich, 1957 quoted in Fabian, 159.
7. Fabian, 162.
8. Kenneth Hamilton, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, ed. Kenneth Hamilton (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 28.
9. Michael Saffle, Franz Liszt: a guide to research, 2nd Edition (New York & London: Routledge, 2004), 9.
10. Saffle, Franz Liszt: a guide to research.
11. Humphrey Searle, “The Organist's Repertory. 6: Liszt's Organ Music,” The Musical Times (Musical Times Publications) 112, no. 1540 (Jun 1971): 597-598.
12. Michael Saffle, Franz Liszt: a guide to research and Michael Saffle, “The "Liszt Year" 2011; Recent, Emerging and Future Liszt Research,” Notes (Music Library Association) 67, no. 4 (Jun 2011).
13. John Caldwell, Christopher Maxim, Barbara Owen, Robert Winter, Susan Bradshaw and Martin Elste, “Keyboard music,” Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/14945pg2 (accessed September 7, 2011), The Romantic Section.
14. John Caldwell et al, 3.
15. Yves Rechsteiner, “Franz Liszt et l'orgue, quelques remarques sur l'utilisation de l'orgue à son époque,” yves-rechsteiner.com, 24 June 2010, http://www.yves-rechsteiner.com/articles (accessed September 7, 2011).
16. Alan Walker, “Music Reviews,” ed. Frances Barulich, Notes, Second Series (Music Library Association) 48, no. 2 (Dec 1991): 665-669, 667.
17. Gottschalg (1899, translation from Sutter 1977) quoted in Russell Stinson, “ Franz Liszt,” in The reception of Bach's organ works from Mendelssohn to Brahms (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 117.
18. Walker, 668.
19. Walker, 669.
20. Gerard Carter, Rediscovering the Liszt Tradition (Ashfield, NSW: Wensleydale Press, 2006).
21. Walker, 667.
22. Liszt‘s letter quoted in Walker, 668.
23. Rechsteiner, “Franz Liszt et l'orgue”.
24. “The International Historical Organ Recording Collection: Alfred Sittard - Selected recordings from 1928-38,” The International Historical Organ Recording Collection, 7 March 2009, http://ihorc.blogspot.com/2009/03/alfred-sittard-selected-recordings-from.html (accessed September 23, 2011).
25. Ferrucio B Busoni, Franz Liszt Fantasie und Fuge über den choral 'Ad nos, ad salutarem undam' (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel).
26. Yves Rechsteiner, “Franz Liszt et l'orgue” and Jonathan Kregor, Liszt as Transcriber (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010). Jonathan Kregor, Liszt as Transcriber (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010) and Walker, “Music Reviews”
27. Humphrey Searle, “The Organist's Repertory. 6: Liszt's Organ Music,” The Musical Times (Musical Times Publications) 112, no. 1540 (Jun 1971): 597-598, 597.
28. Leslie Howard, The complete music for solo piano, Vol. 17 - Liszt at the Opera II, comps. Franz Liszt, CDA66571/2, 1992 and Kenneth Hamilton, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, ed. Kenneth Hamilton (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
29. Ferenc Liszt, Összes Orgonaműve: Sämtliche Orgelwerke I, ed. Sándor Margittay (Budapest: Editio Musica Budapest, 1970).
30. Gerard Carter, Rediscovering the Liszt Tradition (Ashfield, NSW: Wensleydale Press, 2006), 42.
31. Orpha Ochse, Organists and Organ playing in Nineteenth-Century France and Belgium (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994).
32. Yyes Rechsteiner, Monique Simon and Amandine Beyer, Liszt: Organ Works, comps. Franz Liszt, Felix Mendelssohn and Johann Sebastian Bach, 2005.
33. Adrian Corleonis, “Liszt: Organ Works / Yves Rechsteine- Notes & Reviews,” ArkivMusic.com The Source for Classical Music, http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=92322 (accessed September 7, 2011).
34. Mark Swed, “Music Reviews: Liszt finds a kindred spirit in the organist,” 22 February 2005, http://articles.latimes.com/2005/feb/22/entertainment/et-organ22 (accessed October 17, 2011).
