Favourite Symphonist?

Well, obviously I agree about Haydn. Though Mahler is also my favourite. There is the famous quote about a symphony being the world and there is something all encompassing about his finest works, I think this is especially true of the third symphony. The length of a journey he can take the listener on is quite something to - for example the long journey through the night that is the seventh symphony. I quite often feel drained after listening to a good recording in a way I do with few other works. There is also, I think, a particular genius to his orchestration - take the relative simplicity of the opening of the first symphony - a very simple tune passed round various sections, the simplicity only really became apparent when I looked at a score, as he gets such variety from the orchestration. There is also his boldness, stretching the form with things like the 8th, which it could be argued isn't really a symphony at all. Or putting what is in effect a horn concerto in the middle of the 5th. So Mahler it is.

Except, of course, that Beethoven is my favourite too. I think Bernstein put it best in an illustrated talk on the 3rd where he described the genius of Beethoven of being not simply that he surprises you constantly (which he does) but that once he as done so it seems the only logical thing that could have been done, I think this is especially true of, say, the opening of the 4th piano concerto on solo piano. Then there is the sheer excitement and joy of the 7th. The wonders of the frequently underestimated 8th, wonderfully light in Mackerras's hands or almost as draining and weighty as a Mahler symphony in the hands of Colin Davis. So, Beethoven it is.

Except, of course, that Sibelius is my favourite too. I never cease to be amazed at how visually evocative these works are, and at the wonderful textures he creates. Despite the well recorded differences between him and Mahler, the world versus Sibelius's severity of form, I think they actually achieve much the same thing. Despite their disparate forces, architecture and length I think his 7th has a lot in common with Mahler's 3rd. Then there is the neglected Kullervo symphony, which is quite simply staggering when performed well.

But what about Brahms. I find it much harder to describe what I like about Brahms, but when played well his symphonic writing is magnificent, whether it be the lighter reading of Walter or the heavier Furtwangler. There is richness to his music and texture that seems his own.

And Schubert. Whether it be the Mozartian 5th or the drama and majesty of the great c major, which is surely amongst the finest of all symphonies ever composed. The earlier works are not quite so compelling though.

Mozart is another favourite of mine too, and I could listen endlessly to works such as the Prague and Jupiter. Even the earlier symphonies, when played well, have a wonderful sparkle.

And then there are the likes of Dvorak (the 6th and 8th especially, and the wonderful tone poems), Bruckner (especially the 1st and 6th), Tchaikovsky, Mendelssohn or Schumann and Shostakovich.

Sorry, but as you may by now have gathered, I'm not very good at favourites.


regards, Tam

I have the same favourite as Tam. :-)

But seriously it depends entirely on my mood - some days I need some Sibelius, other days only a jolly Mozart will do, when I can't decide Haydn is a good bet. Beethoven I need to be in the mood to pay attention to.

Sorry George, just realised I'm writing more about my psyche than the music, but the two are related most days.

TTFN Ian

George,


Its a bit early for me to proclaim a favorite so ask again in about five years when I've had time to digest the many different attempts at a great Symphony.



Dean..

Dear Dean,

Nicely put! It is a great journey, and for each of us leads in a slightly different direction as Ian so well puts it!

Dear Tam and Ian,

Lovely for me to read your words.

Dear All,

Please don't be shy,

This is not a group hug agreement thread, but a place to share our individual favourites.

Thanks for so far. George

The symphonists that most clearly speaks to me are Bruckner and Shostakovich. I love the grandiose, mountaineous aspects of Bruckner and parts of his slow movemnets are achingly beautiful. Especially I love his 5th, 8th and 9th symphony. These also has mysterious aspects like the misterioso beginning of the 9th. My favourite Bruckner condutors are among others Fürtwangler, Jochum, Giulini, Wand and Schuricht.

When it comes to Shostakovich I really like his use of percussion like in his 8th symphony. I also find them emotional (like some beautiful parts of the 5th) and exciting. They're especially moving when you think about the tough life DSCH had under Stalin.

These are the composers who use a language that I feel most familiar with. I also love Beethoven and Brahms. Mahler as well, but not for all moods. Haydn and Sibelius I should listen to more in the future.

Don't forget RVW!

This is easy. Beethoven. Then Mahler. Then a host of lesser beings: Brahms, Dvorak, Bruckner, Haydn, Mozart, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Martinu, Sibelius, Schubert, Schumann, and undoubtedly a few others.

Probably pushing it here but since we are talking favorites I immensely enjoy Richard Strauss in the context of a symphony, for exploring a combination of previous romantic styles from Schumann, Tchaikovsky Mendelssohn and others before creating and perfecting his own form of symphony, the symphonic poem.

Todd and George, is this allowed?

If I could pick only one I would have to go with Beethoven.

Everything is allowed Jeremy! Except being horrible to each other! That can be left to those who insist such behaviour is seemly and mostly contribute in the non-musical sections, especially the Dist Audio Section! Thinking of the Hifi Corner and the Dist Audio, I do occasionally cause annoyance by insisting on mentioning music, but rarely get a reply. Even if it is only a request for a play-list! Music is only a peripheral interest for many there I suspect!

Richard Strauss and the symphony. There is the Sinfonia Domestica as a titled example perhaps, but I think he wrote a sort of style of symphony anyway in his tone poems, didn't he?

ATB from George

Prompted by this thread I just listened back to back to 3 Beethoven 5ths:
The famous C Kleiber recording with the VPO, His Dad's Concertbouw recording from '53 and the more recent Mackerras recording with the Liverpool PO.

All three are different , the CK being bold, powerful and confident. The EK I find a bit more nuanced and get the feeling he is not trying to impress as hard as his son. After listening to the other two the Mackerras sounds too fast (not something I had felt when listening to it in isolation). But it has an attractive power and drive.

So today Beethoven is my favourite - but whose Beethoven ? ... Luckily I don't have to choose :-)

Ian
(I know this is appropo nothing at all, but you did say 'Everything is allowed' on this thread.)

Dear Ian,

Thread turn is good!

Consider two more Fifths for your listening!
Jos van Immerseel with a period instrument orchestra which I listened to a couple of months ago in the broadcast one Saturday of new releases, and Klemperer's rather special [IMO] recording with the Philharmonia from 1955, corrently available on Great Recordings Of The Century on EMI.

These are different again, but wonderful as well [IMO]!

ATB from George

The 5th is far from being my favourite Beethoven, maybe because it gets played so much. But amongst my favourite readings are Solti, with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra (though I'm not sure that it's available outside the complete box). Like much of the cycle there is rather too much Solti in the performances, but the drama is incredible, and there timpani punctuates the first movement wonderfully.

There there is Barenboim and the West Eastern Divan Orchestra. Of course the unique ensemble lends a special something, and doubtless the fact that they gave a performance I attended in Edinburgh a few weeks before the Ramallah concert from which the recording is taken. But they bring a wonderful freshness and joy to the music.

regards, Tam

Years ago I determined that one of my goals would be to have a music collection that would encompass the full gamut of music from early music to say the mid 20th century. So I have listened to most everything already listed so far (except the Martinu) I think. So at the risk of being boring or predictable I have to say that even though I could listen at will to anything, inevitably, in symphonic music I will always listen to Beethoven first and for whatever reason almost exclusively, it seems. A distant 2nd and 3rd, for me would be Schubert and then Brahms. Not that I don't like anything else; I quite like Haydn, Mozart, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Dvorak, Tchaikovsky,Rachmaninov, DeBussy, Ravel etc. too but I just feel that Beethoven is where it all really began.

I appreciate the fact that when I listen to Beethoven it is like having a serious conversation with a close, trusted friend. In earlier music than Beethoven, it was quite unheard of and unfashionable to consider music as some sort of conduit that tried to access an individual's emotions and search, probe, or question any emotional values in one's life. The difference to me is akin to how everybody today might say "Hello" to a passerby or ask "How are you doing today," but no one really expects a "truthful" reply. "I'm well, thank you," will suffice. Then with Beethoven and onwards, (in general), he is clearly telling the listener how he feels about something; you know when Beethoven is struggling, questioning, joyful, prodding, mad, angry, frustrated etc. This makes me feel very close and connected to Beethoven because I sense that he was a human being just like me. No pretense or walls, just good old honesty.

So another vote for L. van Beethoven from me.

Best Regards,
Doug

Mahler, Arnold, RVW, Shostakovich - that order. Invidious to have to choose, though.

Now, I'm not normally the world's greatest fan of Strauss. Jeremy asked if he was allowed, can't think why not. After all, he did write Eine Alpensinfonie (and various other symphonic or tone poems). But this new recording of said work from Mariss Jansons and the Concertgebouw (coupled with a decent, as it were, Don Juan) on the orchestra's own label is quite something, and for once I agree with a Gramophone editor's choice:



regards, Tam

one i haven't heard yet.

Mike,

It's well worth a hearing. I also like the fact that while it is a live recording, the applause at the end is on a separate track. For once, I can programme out the moron who shouts "Bravo" just as the last notes fade away.
It also comes with a superb version of Don Juan.

And in my view, it is definitely "symphonic", so I can add Strauss to my list which includes pretty well all the symphonists mentioned above, together with Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninov, Miaskovsky and Hovhaness. I can't resist a good tune.

On impulse, I just bought a set of Robert Simpson's symphonies in a sale. Something totally new for me to explore. I can't recollect ever having heard anything by him before.

Regards,
Ken

I have been away from this forum for a long time, having had other things to think about, such as a wife in very poor health. Let's hope I can contribute a bit more in future.

It really is difficult to choose one's favourite composer of symphonies. I take the view that, even though I love the symphonies of Mozart (mostly), Beethoven and Schubert, if I had to do without them I could, as there is much more music by these composers. You might even say that symphonies are not central to their music. Mozart shows his genius at least as much in his operas, concertos and chamber music, Beethoven in his piano sonatas and quartets, Schubert in his chamber music and especially, of course, his Lieder. I would be content to hear just those.

With Haydn his symphonies are central to his work, along with his quartets, and doing without them would be essentially doing without Haydn. Even more so with Mahler: there is not much other than his symphonies.

Brahms is more difficult. I feel his symphonies are so important even though there are only four and there are vast quantities of other works. He seems to have put everything he had into the symphonies. Likewise Vaughan Williams.

Schumann's symphonies - well, I hardly ever listen to them. Bruckner: magnificent but I like his choral music more. Mendelssohn: I love the fourth but the rest are less compelling. Shostakovich: his symphonies represent the public face of the Soviet Union and as such are only part of Dimitri. His quartets are the opposite face.

So, who are my favourite symphonists? With many misgivings, I have to say firstly Mahler and secondly Vaughan Williams. When I have become better acquainted with Haydn I may revise this opinion.

Best regards to you all, David

It is easy enough to say who is your favourite [in my case Beethoven] but if I may move the thread a bit off topic [if Fredrick does not object] I think another good idea would be to ALSO mention other symphonists you like and who you feel are neglected .... otherwise it will just be votes for Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven .. and so on in historical order.

I would recommend Honneger and in particular his 2nd symphony [It's for strings and -- in just the last movement -- trumpet. It's one of the first dissonant pieces that I really enjoyed]. The other Honneger symphonies are good too. Another interesting work is the Chausson symphony [he just wrote the one].

James H.

Honneger King David - spectacular!

quote:

Originally posted by KenM:
It's well worth a hearing. I also like the fact that while it is a live recording, the applause at the end is on a separate track. For once, I can programme out the moron who shouts "Bravo" just as the last notes fade away.
It also comes with a superb version of Don Juan.

I wish they'd left the track off entirely - as you say, an absolute moron determined to get his voice in first and ruin it for everyone else. You can programme, but on a 24 track CD it's a right royal pain. That notwithstanding, I would say it's my disc of the year so far.

quote:

On impulse, I just bought a set of Robert Simpson's symphonies in a sale. Something totally new for me to explore. I can't recollect ever having heard anything by him before.

Is that the Handley set on Hyperion - very interesting box.


regards, Tam

Tam,
It is indeed the Handley set. I've only listened to the first disc (Symphonies 1 and 8) so far but I am very impressed. I'm also puzzled as to why he is not more popular.
Regards,
Ken

Hi to all the music lovers,

For me one is above all ( sorry to say that ) although is said about him that he wrote the same symphony 9 times, others said that he is second only to Beethoven as a symphonist and that he was at his best with his last and incomplete 9th...of course I'm talking about Anton Bruckner, my Favourite no. 8- The Apocalyptic.

Bye,
Fabian

Beethoven, with the caveat that if Mozart had lived as long as Beethoven,he would have eclipsed everyone in every kind of composition!!