Greatest 20th Century Symphonies

[Lethevich]

While I won't say the symphonies are better than the Cello Cto., I find them rather more than "trifling entertainments." Indeed, they are deep and multifaceted works, more emotionally and structurally complex than the CC. I can understand, however, why some people have trouble with them.

The 2nd symphony especially has a heck of a lot going on, emotionally and structurally. I can't wait until it does "click" for me, because it's ever fascinating, but I can't quite enjoy it yet...

[karlhenning]

While I won't say the symphonies are better than the Cello Cto., I find them rather more than "trifling entertainments." Indeed, they are deep and multifaceted works, more emotionally and structurally complex than the CC. I can understand, however, why some people have trouble with them.

'Trifling entertainments' is a mischaracterization of the pieces (they're far too substantial to be entertaining after the manner of Mozart symphonies . . . so I rather expect Dave was tugging a foot).  Speaking for myself, I have no trouble with the emotion, structure or complexity of the Elgar symphonies.  They just ("just") fail to move me to anything like the degree of the concerti.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

they're far too substantial to be entertaining after the manner of Mozart symphonies

You mean Cartellieri symphonies I think 

The 2nd symphony especially has a heck of a lot going on, emotionally and structurally.

That is both the attraction and the stumbling block in that piece, IMHO - there's almost too much going on; it's also full of that atmosphere of subterranean unease and worry that is characteristic of Elgar's best pieces. It's easy to understand why the relatively straightforward 1st Symphony was an instant hit, and the 2nd was an initial flop.

[DavidRoss]

'Trifling entertainments' is a mischaracterization of the pieces (they're far too substantial to be entertaining after the manner of Mozart symphonies . . . so I rather expect Dave was tugging a foot).  Speaking for myself, I have no trouble with the emotion, structure or complexity of the Elgar symphonies.  They just ("just") fail to move me to anything like the degree of the concerti.

Not so much foot-tugging as qualified in a way that's been neglected:  "compared to the VCC."  Certainly they're less trifling--though perhaps also less entertaining--than the Oscar Mayer Wiener Song.

Judge for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/v/aNddW2xmZp8

[drogulus]

The 2nd symphony especially has a heck of a lot going on, emotionally and structurally. I can't wait until it does "click" for me, because it's ever fascinating, but I can't quite enjoy it yet...

     It's a remarkable work, quite a departure from the 1st.

I have a CD of Elgar's Second Symphony played by the USSR Symphony Orchestra under Svelanov - it is a fine, if rather unidiomatic, performance, featuring the braying Soviet horns etc. Well worth investigating if and when it is back in circulation.

     One might have thought Barbirolli would produce a definitive interpretation of this piece. His EMI recording seems overblown and downright sloppy. I should probably go for the Boult/Lyrita. In the meantime the Handley/LPO is the one I would recommend to anyone interested in investigating it.

[vandermolen]

     It's a remarkable work, quite a departure from the 1st.

     One might have thought Barbirolli would produce a definitive interpretation of this piece. His EMI recording seems overblown and downright sloppy. I should probably go for the Boult/Lyrita. In the meantime the Handley/LPO is the one I would recommend to anyone interested in investigating it.

I think that there are two recordings by Barbirolli on EMI of Elgar's Second Symphony.  The earlier one is often more highly rated for being a sharper and more incisive performance.

[71 dB]

Personally, I find the concerto says just as much in a shorter and more concise form.

Well, Elgar's cello concerto is amazingly economic work.

I also prefer the thinner scoring.

Always? For me it varies. Today thin scoring, tomorrow thick. That's why we have symphonies and oratorios for "thick" days and violin sonatas and solo cello suites for thin days. People complain Elgar's thick "overblown" scoring but I think it's just that they have calibrated themselves with works by other composers with thinner style. I see it so that Elgar was one of those "brave" composers who took the scoring on the level 20th century symphonies deserve and what is logical considering the advantages in orchestration during the 19th century.

I also prefer the violin concerto to the symphonies at the moment, as I feel the soloist gives some much-needed focus and impetus, which is a slight difficulty I have with the symphonies.

Elgar's violin concerto is awesome.

The 2nd symphony especially has a heck of a lot going on, emotionally and structurally. I can't wait until it does "click" for me, because it's ever fascinating, but I can't quite enjoy it yet...

Yes, it is a complex work but everything works perfectly as always with Elgar. I had to hear it 6-7 times before I felt I understand everything. Fortunately Elgar has layers and his works open to us layer by layer so at least for me the first time is always enjoyable too (and makes me very interested to understand more).

[DavidRoss]

Well, Elgar's cello concerto is amazingly economic work.

Compared to Wagner, Bruckner, and Mahler, at least.

[jochanaan]

Hmmm... (I've heard Elgar #1 once, #2 not at all, but the Cello Concerto many times and I've also played it in orchestra, so perhaps my comments will be a little prejudiced.)

I suspect the reason many of us prefer Elgar's Cello Concerto to his Symphonies is more emotional than technical.  Symphony #1 is an essentially optimistic work, while the Concerto is essentially pessimistic and thus more in tune with 20th- and 21st-century angst.

[vandermolen]

Hmmm... (I've heard Elgar #1 once, #2 not at all, but the Cello Concerto many times and I've also played it in orchestra, so perhaps my comments will be a little prejudiced.)

I suspect the reason many of us prefer Elgar's Cello Concerto to his Symphonies is more emotional than technical.  Symphony #1 is an essentially optimistic work, while the Concerto is essentially pessimistic and thus more in tune with 20th- and 21st-century angst.

Surely Elgar's Second Symphony is shot through with a sense of foreboding - the end of Empire etc. I think that there are also some dark currents in Symphony No 1. Both symphonies I find more 'emotional' than 'technical'. Today I bought the CD with Elgar conducting his own First Symphony which I am looking forward to playing.

[eyeresist]

The "Greatest 20th Century Symphonies" thread is turning into the "Elgar" thread 

I like the symphonies, but they seem bloated to me, and I don't think he handled the structures as well as he might (the symphonies near the 1 hour mark, while the vc concerto is half that).

I think this is the unfortunate influence of his period. Elgar is very much a peer of Mahler and R Strauss, IMO, but his efforts to partake in the humungousness of Late Romantic symphonic music worked against what I might characterise as his typically taciturn English nature. OTOH, I believe his symphonies would benefit from performances at once much swifter, and more romantically expressive in the older tradition.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I believe his symphonies would benefit from performances at once much swifter, and more romantically expressive in the older tradition.

Judging by Elgar's own recordings, he would agree with you. So would some later conductors, like Solti, who deliberately took Elgar's recordings as a model.

[eyeresist]

Judging by Elgar's own recordings, he would agree with you. So would some later conductors, like Solti, who deliberately took Elgar's recordings as a model.

Axiomatic but untrue - Solti is swifter than the modern standard, but without the shaping of the older performances.

[schweitzeralan]

Not if I"m in the room.   

V--What standard do you propose for judging "greatness" if not posters' favorites?  I presume you have something in mind other than sheer size (Mahler's 8th must contend)...?

Or, in the absence of an agreed upon standard, perhaps I'm not the only one who would be interested in hearing what qualifies these works as "great" in the judgment of their advocates...?

So many great ones over the centuries mentioned on This thread.  There is one symphony I think is superb.  The problem is that it was not yet recorded for general distribution. I received it courtesy of the Joseph Marx Society.  I'm referring to the "Herbstsymphonie."

A couple of months ago I posted a thread on masterworks with sustained intensity.  Many works mentioned on this thread relate to this.  Then so does the "Herbstsymphonie.  I believe it was fairly recently performed in New York.

Thia "Autumn Symphony is not a work that contains just "moments" of inspiration. Marx wrote several interesting works with superb sections, at least in my perspective.  Marx must have been consumed by supreme genius upon composing this work.  Early 1920,s I believe.  It is an exhilarating, intensely romantic, subtle color infusions, dramatic work with absolutely no "weak" passages.  I listen to it over and again, and it is still fresh for me.  Just a personal asseveration.

[Sef]

I think that there are two recordings by Barbirolli on EMI of Elgar's Second Symphony.  The earlier one is often more highly rated for being a sharper and more incisive performance.

... or you could all save up for the next ten months and come watch it with me on Saturday April 3 2010:

Chicago Symphony Orchestra

Elgar 2

Chicago Symphony Orchestra
Sir Mark Elder, conductor
Elena Urioste, violin


Tippett -   Concerto for Double String Orchestra
Vaughan Williams -   The Lark Ascending
Elgar -   Symphony No. 2

[schweitzeralan]

I would agree with just about all these choices, although the Simpson still eludes me (No 1 is my favourite of his), I would go for BS Symphony No 4, although No 3 is also magnificent, especially the last movement. Holmboe's 7th Symphony stands very high in my estimation. Vermeulen (in my 'complete edition'   )I will listen to again today. Tubin's 1st, 2nd and 4th are my favourites.

There are so many great ones including that are are unknown or Even recorded.  This is not unlike a confession as I'm listing personal favorites which may not seem great to our posters. 'll bite and a few that I consider transcendental.
Honneger's 5th
VW's 4th and 6th
Bax's 3rd. 5th, and 6th
Tchaikovsky's "Manfred"
Krein's 1st Symphony "After Scriabin;"
Gliere's 3rd.
Barber's 1st (all may not agree here!)
Uuno Klami's "Symphonie enfantine"

Schostakovich's 10th Symphony
Paul Creston's 2nd, (underrated)
Sibelius' 4th, 5th, and 6th
Suk "Asrael" Symphony
Marx "Herbstsymphonie"

[vandermolen]

There are so many great ones including that are are unknown or Even recorded.  This is not unlike a confession as I'm listing personal favorites which may not seem great to our posters. 'll bite and a few that I consider transcendental.
Honneger's 5th
VW's 4th and 6th
Bax's 3rd. 5th, and 6th
Tchaikovsky's "Manfred"
Krein's 1st Symphony "After Scriabin;"
Gliere's 3rd.
Barber's 1st (all may not agree here!)
Uuno Klami's "Symphonie enfantine"

Schostakovich's 10th Symphony
Paul Creston's 2nd, (underrated)
Sibelius' 4th, 5th, and 6th
Suk "Asrael" Symphony
Marx "Herbstsymphonie"

Once again I am in agreement. Tell me about Krein's First Symphony which I don't know. Coincidentally I have recently been playing Creston's Second Symphony (which I have on Koch, Chandos and Naxos  ). I agree that it is one of the great American symphonies, as is David Diamond's Third Symphony which should also be much better known. I don't know the Marx either. I love Honegger's 5th but No 3 is his greatest IMHO.

ps added later: I'm interested to see that Alexander Krein wrote a piece entitled 'USSR, Shock Brigade of the World Proletariat'!

[The new erato]

For another great, but virtually unknown, symphony let me add Frank Martin's. Buy the Chandos (I've probably plugged it before, though).

[schweitzeralan]

Once again I am in agreement. Tell me about Krein's First Symphony which I don't know. Coincidentally I have recently been playing Creston's Second Symphony (which I have on Koch, Chandos and Naxos  ). I agree that it is one of the great American symphonies, as is David Diamond's Third Symphony which should also be much better known. I don't know the Marx either. I love Honegger's 5th but No 3 is his greatest IMHO.

ps added later: I'm interested to see that Alexander Krein wrote a piece entitled 'USSR, Shock Brigade of the World Proletariat'!

Krein is not a particularly prolific composer.  He did compose a good deal of vocal pieces.  I have several piano sheet music, plus the one recording of the Symphony and the exquisite Piano Sonata.  He has a great "feel" of what I would call "color" in his work.  Not literal.  Not synesthetic.  His few works that I know are subtle and engaging.

[Sergeant Rock]

Mahler, 6th Symphony
Sibelius, 4th Symphony
Brian, 1st Symphony, 'Gothic'
RVW, 5th Symphony
Harris, 3rd Symphony
Pettersson, 15th Symphony
Nielsen, 6th Symphony
Elgar, 1st Symphony
Stravinsky, Symphony in Three Movements
Martinu, 5th Symphony
Tubin, 6th Symphony
Orthel, 2nd Symphony
Hartmann, 6th Symphony
Prokofiev, 6th Symphony
Shostakovich, 4th Symphony
Honegger, 3rd Symphony
Bax, 1st Symphony
Moeran, Symphony in G minor

and the list goes on...

My three are at the top of Jezetha's list.

Sarge