Vagn Holmboe (1909-1996)

[Brian]

I thought I would never be saying this considering I struggled so long with Holmboe's music but he's slowly becoming one of my favorite composers (a long list I know). I don't know why I struggled, but his music is simply magnificent. I know Orfeo is a huge fan and I have say that his ongoing commentary on this thread has helped me come to appreciate the composer much more. Christo even knew Holmboe and it was wonderful reading his account of getting acquainted with the man behind the music.

So... can I remind you now that Holmboe's book "Experiencing Music" is a fascinating read? 

[Karl Henning]

I've got that book in my wish list yet

[Mirror Image]

So... can I remind you now that Holmboe's book "Experiencing Music" is a fascinating read? 

Thanks for reminding me about the book. Do you know Holmboe's music well, Brian?

[Madiel]

So is the 6th your favorite Holmboe symphony?

No. If I was picking just one I think it would be the 8th.

[vandermolen]

No. If I was picking just one I think it would be the 8th.

I also greatly admire No 8 and regret that my fine old Vox/Turnabout LP of the work (my introduction to Holmboe) never made it to CD.

[Brian]

Thanks for reminding me about the book. Do you know Holmboe's music well, Brian?

"Well," maybe not, but I do know and enjoy several symphonies (No. 3 hits it out of the park, for me), the symphonic cycle of four ... forget-what-they-are-called-works, the concertos album from last year with his smashing viola concerto, and a few chamber symphonies.

The book actually does not require extensive knowledge of Holmboe's music; he remarks on his own processes as a composer, listener, and thinker. It is actually very interesting to hear how certain works came to be and the evolution they go through from brain to paper.

[Mirror Image]

No. If I was picking just one I think it would be the 8th.

I'll probably be making my way around to the 8th quite soon as I seem to be listening to the whole cycle again.

[Mirror Image]

"Well," maybe not, but I do know and enjoy several symphonies (No. 3 hits it out of the park, for me), the symphonic cycle of four ... forget-what-they-are-called-works, the concertos album from last year with his smashing viola concerto, and a few chamber symphonies.

The book actually does not require extensive knowledge of Holmboe's music; he remarks on his own processes as a composer, listener, and thinker. It is actually very interesting to hear how certain works came to be and the evolution they go through from brain to paper.

I agree with you about Symphony No. 3 'Sinfonia Rustica'. A fine work with such an earthy, folky feel to it.

[Brian]

I agree with you about Symphony No. 3 'Sinfonia Rustica'. A fine work with such an earthy, folky feel to it.

Uh-oh. I was thinking of the sacred one. Maybe that's 4. ...or 5. I forget!

[Madiel]

Uh-oh. I was thinking of the sacred one. Maybe that's 4. ...or 5. I forget!

Sinfonia Sacra is No.4. The choral one. Probably my least favourite, personally.

[amw]

Uh-oh. I was thinking of the sacred one. Maybe that's 4. ...or 5. I forget!

4.

I think my favourites might be 5, 11 and possibly 9 but it's been a while. The 4 Symphonic Metamorphoses are also now in my possession, on the listening pile (although currently buried beneath a fair amount of Nono, Taneyev and Zorn).

[Mirror Image]

Sinfonia Sacra is No.4. The choral one. Probably my least favourite, personally.

+1 Not one of my favorites either.

[Brian]

Sinfonia Sacra is No.4. The choral one. Probably my least favourite, personally.

Wait I don't remember voices either. Let me check my listening log.

Aha! It was No. 5 after all! So my favorite Holmboe so far is No. 5, the Metamorphoses, and the Viola Concerto. Much more exploring to do.

[Madiel]

Wait I don't remember voices either. Let me check my listening log.

Aha! It was No. 5 after all! So my favorite Holmboe so far is No. 5, the Metamorphoses, and the Viola Concerto. Much more exploring to do.

Aha. Right. You probably thought 'sacred' because No.4 and No.5 are on the same disc.

I do like No.5 a lot, and it was my entry point. I actually think No.5 and No.3 are amongst the most similar 'pairs' in the series, so ironically you may well agree with Mirror Image about No.3!  I think they're two of the most immediately approachable of the symphonies.

[Madiel]

Well, I just did one of those slightly nutty list-making things I do, and with some help from random.org I created a shuffled list of the 25 'symphonic' works which I'm now going to listen to over the next month or so.

I didn't take the first list it gave me. I avoided clumps of chamber symphonies or sinfonias, and when it gave me a list with Symphony no.6 at the very end I just thought noooooooooooo and tried again. 

EDIT: I can post thoughts as I did with the quartets if people wish... but that risks me dominating the thread rather. As if I don't have that tendency already. Or, I could post the list if anyone is mad enough to join me! Hehe.

[Mirror Image]

No poster dominates any thread and the reason why is if you have something you want to say that helps others to understand the composer better, then you could very well spawn not only conversation between new listeners but experienced ones as well. So post away!

[Karl Henning]

EDIT: I can post thoughts as I did with the quartets if people wish... but that risks me dominating the thread rather. As if I don't have that tendency already. Or, I could post the list if anyone is mad enough to join me! Hehe.

Please be at liberty, I find your posts of interest.

[Madiel]

Chamber Symphony No.2, 'Elegy' op.100 (1968)

[asin]B0081UG17M[/asin]

Hmm. Well, interesting that it was a 'chamber' symphony that got listed first. I've checked, the orchestra is indeed smaller for the 'chamber' works compared to the normal symphonies, but listening to this recording you'd hardly notice. One of the striking things about this particular work is how big it sounds. In terms of length/scale, this one is also just as big as any of the regular symphonies (and bigger than quite a few of them).

Another thing that is fairly striking about this particular work is the sense of colour, from the vibraphone at the very beginning onwards. I've mentioned before that to me 1960s Holmboe is often more 'difficult' than the works of other periods. This work strikes me as beginning to shift away from that, having more of the translucent texture that I associate with '1970s' Holmboe.

The opening climbing motif in the low strings pervades the first movement, and then it turns up at various points in the other movements, most clearly in the fourth. The movements certainly have a uniformity of mood, which is fairly somber and a bit unsettled/certain (not surprising given the subtitle).

In terms of being unsettled, one of the notable things is that halfway through the fourth movement, there's a false ending. It sounds for all the world like the work is finished, with a big climax, a couple of strong unisons and a long silent pause. But then the music starts up again, more hesitantly. The actual end is a lot weaker and doesn't feel resolved. In fact I'd argue each movement sounds less resolved than the one before.

[Madiel]

Symphony No.12 op.175 (1988)

[asin]B0000016MM[/asin]

Wow.

I've just had one of those glorious moments where a Holmboe work has truly 'clicked' for me. It feels like the scales have fallen from my eyes.

I know I've had some trouble with symphony no.12 in the past. I seem to remember I appreciated it more the last time I tried it, but that was over 2 years ago. Today, though, it just WORKED the very first time. And a passage in the first movement that I'd never understood and always felt was a bit 'unsymphonic' completely made sense.

Because I've finally realised something that the liner notes of the symphonies box set don't mention: this is a dance. In the same way as symphony no.3 nearly 50 years earlier, this is full of dance rhythms. More than that, it's dance from around the 16th century. You could easily make this the soundtrack to The Tudors or some other royal historical fiction, with courtly dances and jousting tournaments. For the louder moments there's blaring trumpets, and for the quieter 'dances' there's wonderful use of harp (almost unique, the only other symphony that has harp is Sinfonia in memoriam).

I can't believe I haven't picked this up before, but I guess I wasn't expecting it. None of the other later symphonies feel like this. Just brilliant, vital music from a 79-year-old composer.

[Mirror Image]

Interesting.  I too have worried about posting too much in certain threads (at times it appears as if I am the only one posting there).  But I usually post nothing more than a link to the music, I prefer to put the music out there to speak for itself, thinking that someone might listen and comment, to which I would probably respond, and a discussion might develop.  But I've noticed that people rarely comment on the music, so all that is left is a series of posts with a links to music.

I consider myself a complete novice when it comes to classical since I've only been listening for 5 years or so. Anytime I can read a well-considered post from someone who actually knows how to get their points across and, in the process, give others an idea about the music, then I'm all for it. I, of course, don't claim I know anything about this music and listen to what my mind and heart enjoy without any explanation as to why. I hope to be able to get the whys, but, again, I just don't have enough experience or really even the know-how to explain why I enjoy something without coming across as a total moron, which, in most cases, I end up doing anyway. All of this said, it's best I leave these kinds of things for people who do have an idea of what their talking about.