IMSLP Forums

Currently we have two different titles for this -- the Peters edition of three of them are under "3 London Trios"

http://imslp.org/wiki/3_London_Trios,_H ... n,_Joseph)

and Notenschreiber's arrangement of no.1, along with Hoger's guitar arrangement, is under "Divertimento, Hob. IV:I"

http://imslp.org/wiki/Divertimento,_Hob ... n,_Joseph)

Firstly, Grove Music says there were possibly 4 of them, so perhaps the number should be removed, i.e. "London Trios". Secondly, it was easier to just move the arrangements to the other page, but what they should be listed under is still up for discussion. "London Trios" is probably more common, but they must have been published under "Divertimento" at some point, because I've seen them many times under that name. However, Grove Music does not use it and lists them as "Trios".

I haven't added "Divertimento" into the alternate title field, nor have I tagged it yet for that word.

Finally, the Divertimento page is marked for deletion, now that the files are on the other page.

Ideas as to how to deal with the title?

I can´t find these trios ony more on the workpage of Haydn, perhaps a cache problem. But I don´t think, that it is good idea, to sort them under London Trios. We should
better follow the Hoboken catalog. In our list of compositions Hob IV., 1 is coloured red now. BTW: Everybody speaks from Haydn "London symphonies", but of course they
are not sorted in by this name.

The term "London Trios" is a nickname, covering four DIvertimentos for 2 flutes and cello, Hob IV:1 to 4. These are separate works, so should have their own work pages:

• Divertimento in C major, Hob.IV:1
• Divertimento in G major, Hob.IV:2
• Divertimento in G major, Hob.IV:3
• Divertimento in G major, Hob.IV:4 (incomplete)

On the current page for "3 London Trios, Hob.IV:1-3 (Haydn, Joseph)", the arrangements by Notenscheiber and Höger only relate to the first trio, and should be moved to "Divertimento in C major, Hob.IV:1 (Haydn,Joseph)".

The Peters 1959 edition needs to be split into its individual trios (Nos.1, 2 and 3), and moved to their individual work pages, after which the page for the "London Trios" can be deleted.

Agreed

They can easily go on individual pages, but if Grove Music doesn't list them by the name "Divertimento", which seems to indicate that Haydn's title was "Trio", where did the "Divertimento" title come from and should we be using "Trio" instead? Is there an autograph manuscript somewhere?

The Divertimento classification comes from the mammoth Hoboken catalogue of Haydn's works, which has the scope to go into more depth than is possible in Grove. As a matter of interest the first two in the set were originally published by Monzani in 1799 both as "Trios" and "Divertimentos", while only No.4 has the title "Trio" in Haydn's autograph. They were only published together as "London Trios" for the first time in 1938.

The original title for the first two compositions of Hob. IV in the Monzani edition is

“Two / ORIGINAL TRIOS, / FOR / Two German Flutes, / and VIOLONCELLO, / Composed while in England / By / D.R HAYDN.”

This is a quote from the Henle Urtext Edition from 2005. The autograph sources are of course mentioned too, but without exact title. But the editor
(Andreas Friesenhagen) only speaks from "Trios". Nevertheless i agree with the opinion, that we should not differ from the Hoboken catalog.

BTW, I splitted the set of the 3 London trios in three single files.

Thanks for the splitting. I've created the pages, but they don't sort well with key first. Can I change them to "Divertimento, Hob.IV:1, C Major" etc. so they sort in order with the rest of the Divertimentos?

Also, I haven't created a page for the 4th trio since we don't have any scores of that.

And would it be useful to leave the London Trios page with no files, but an explanation of titles and a redirect? Lots of people will look for them under that title (as I did many years ago, thinking my library didn't have them when it did)?

@Steltz. I have seen, that you copied Davydovs remarks concerning the "Trio versus Divertimento" problem on each work page. I don´t know, where his
information come from, but it contradicts in certain points the remarks of the forword of the Henle Urtext edition, which you can find here:
http://www.henle.de/media/foreword/0454.pdf.
May be one have to think it over.

@Notenschreiber - The source of the information is the Hoboken catalogue. See for example the French online version here

@Steltz - the Haydn page titles could do with more attention, particularly in respect of the usage of opus numbers and keys. Don't worry about it for now, and I'll look into it some more...

Thanks to you both for your help.

@ Davidov

On every workpage of the concerned Haydn Trios we now found the following comment:

"The Divertimento classification comes from the mammoth Hoboken catalogue of Haydn's works. As a matter of interest, the first two in the set were originally published by Monzani in 1799 both as "Trios" and "Divertimentos", while only No.4 has the title "Trio" in Haydn's autograph. "

The first statement is true, but I doubt that for the rest. This is my point, not that we follow the Hoboken Catalog in our titles, what is of course reasonable.
You may have the opinion, that those comments are not so important. But I think, a visitor of our website take this comments as "official" remarks of those
who are responsible for the content of this website. We should therefore care about that.

Hello Notenscheiber. Although I believe the comments aree accurate, they were only intended as a contribution to this discussion, so I'll remove them from the work pages where the context isn't clear.