Havergal Brian.

[John Whitmore]

Re the first reply - It is, literally, unbelievable, isn't it? And yet, somehow, wonderfully, it is true. 

Re the second - a bit later. 1992-4. Not the orchestra at its greatest, but it seemed pretty good to me. We played the Rudolfinum in Prague, Les Invalides in Paris, we premiered major works by Kancheli and Woolrich (both conducted by Brabbins, actually, to continue the Brian theme). It was all in all a fabulous time, but as a fledgling, teenage Brianite I was always well aware that I should have been around a few decades earlier....

Have you seen my website revamp? Do you have any pics or recordings from the early 1990s? The only thing I have from your time is Tannhauser/Stuart Johnson De Mont 1990. I need more....   http://www.lsso.co.uk/

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

One of the main things I, and I suspect most Brianites, love about HB is that unique orchestral sound he makes.

YES!

[John Whitmore]

YES!

Correct.

[John Whitmore]

Hi, ...I have been away a while listening to rather a lot of music lately, from 1600 to 2000 AD, to try and determine what I actually think of Havergal Brian's music in relation to everything else.  Well I think rather a  lot of it now actually... I may be a complete idiot, but there is a heck of a lot of boring stuff out there, lots of 20th C composers who, quite honestly are pretty crap (lets forget the millions of 19th C ones), or at least those that do not hold ones attention.

Conversely, listening to even early  Brian, such as the early English Suites, they are all rather good, and why are they not a staple part of the English classical repertoire.  Quite honestly, even obscure English punk bands from the 1980's get more recognition (I actually quite like some of them).  No 1, to my mind just chucks all the varied criticisms of HB right out of the water - no tunes? etc.  One of his early works and to my ears, a complete mastery of the orchestra is evident  .. ...well that's what it sounds like to me, and if anyone has any specific technical criticisms, then lets hear them...there is too much of, 'oh the bloke did not have a clue what he was doing' comments, even from people who are Brian fans. Can someone come up with some concrete criticisms rather than loads of rather allusive rubbish hearsay from some bloke that happened to play a Brian work in some amateur orchestra in the 70's, (which I have seen on various websites) (present company excepted of course).  Reading lots of stuff, there are a lot of reasons for why Brian's music might be difficult for individual players in orchestras, but I am not convinced that amateurishness (in the derogatory sense) is the reason.  I have just listened to No. 24 at full volume.  Its just absolute Genius.  I don't care if some spotty young horn player has a bit of difficulty getting his mouth round it.  Just listening to lots of works of others, I know that HB could produce the most extraordinary noise from, the brass say, maybe Mahler excepted.   I am now listening to the Burlesque Variations, even earlier, and Ok there are some longeurs, but  the genius, is to my mind, already apparent.

Quick update on this particular spotty individual. Principal horn with the LPO, Covent Garden and Glyndebourne. The boy did well...........
https://youtu.be/771oScrh9WI

[jon rady]

There is a lot of sense in these replies to my rather acerbic post .. its not wise to use the internet after maybe too many glasses of wine!  Apologies for any offense, I got a bit carried away by what I was actually hearing.  On reflection, I cannot be rude about anyone, amateur players in particular, who has a go at these obviously difficult scores, as I cant string 2 notes together.  I would love to know what the Moscow players think of the music and how its written, certainly their playing sounds enthusiastic?

[Albion]

I would love to know what the Moscow players think of the music and how its written, certainly their playing sounds enthusiastic?

This is one of the chief attractions of the two recent Naxos discs - the playing SOUNDS as though the orchestra believe in every single aspect of the composer's vision. This must, of course, be largely down to the advocacy of Alexander Walker but you can't MAKE an orchestra play (and practise) scores as technically difficult as Brian's with such conviction without enthusiasm from the players themselves (vide the Marco Polo No.2).

Brian says clearly to his performers "quod scripsi, scripsi, and you're either able to bloody well play it or you're not".

[Luke]

Have you seen my website revamp? Do you have any pics or recordings from the early 1990s? The only thing I have from your time is Tannhauser/Stuart Johnson De Mont 1990. I need more....   http://www.lsso.co.uk/

Sorry not to get straight back to you. I was leaving the house when you sent that message, for a quite two hour round trip drive which turned into five hours when the car broke down. Very expensive, it looks like. Not a fun evening at all....

Anyway, no recordings, no. It's a shame - I'd love to hear if our Shostakovich 5 was as good as I recall...probably not!

I'm almost positive that I was at that Tannhauser performance, though - in fact I specifically remember the thrill of hearing those trombones in that tune. It was quite formative, in fact. But I wasn't in the orchestra at that date, and I think it must have been one of those end-of-year concerts in which the other, younger, orchestras in the 'pyramid' also got their big night out at the De Mont, looking up at the LSSO players with awe! That would explain why I was there - I hadn't graduated to the top band yet. I remember hearing them do Romeo and Juliet and Till Eulenspiegel in similar circumstances. To return to our earlier theme, I remember that this particular concert in 1993 (by which time I was playing too - I think we did Tchaikovsky, the Mouse King battle from Nutcracker, among other things....) was overshadowed for me and a few other players by the 7-1 defeat at the hand of Newcastle earlier that day. Remember that one? How things change! 

Somewhere I have three formal pics of the orchestra. Two are in Paris, one outside Les Invalides before the final concert of our tour and one during the applause at the end - that would be August 1993, I think, SJ's final concert, a very emotional one, climaxing with that memorable Shostakovich 5. The other is the regulation annual orchestra photo of the next year's orchestra, which means it can only be a few months later. I don't know where any of these are OTTOMH, though I'm sure they are somewhere. Meantime, I do have this very, very, very low res scan of the post-concert Les Invalides one; I'm the last blur on the right in the cello section, desk 4  :

[Luke]

I remember hearing them do Romeo and Juliet and Till Eulenspiegel in similar circumstances.

...and also - it's all coming back to me now - at least one of The Planets (I remember Mars) and a symphony which, bizarrely enough, I've always remembered with bemusement as being by Roy Harris and numbered Symphony no 7 1/2!! But I've also known that this can't be right and indeed Google strongly hints to me that it must have been Don Gillis, Symphony no 5 1/2. So that little mystery is cleared up anyway...

[John Whitmore]

Luke, so that we don't take this board over,please send me an email via the LSSO website and we can exchange messages there. I can send you the Tannhauser recording if you like.

[John Whitmore]

There is a lot of sense in these replies to my rather acerbic post .. its not wise to use the internet after maybe too many glasses of wine!  Apologies for any offense, I got a bit carried away by what I was actually hearing.  On reflection, I cannot be rude about anyone, amateur players in particular, who has a go at these obviously difficult scores, as I cant string 2 notes together. I would love to know what the Moscow players think of the music and how its written, certainly their playing sounds enthusiastic?

My gut feeling is that are simply doing their jobs. Orchestras play whatever they are given to play and do it to the best of their ability. Liking or disliking the actual music doesn't come into it. Amateurs and kids tend to put in a more enthusiastic shift if they like the music. Pros just play the stuff and get paid. The Moscow band is clearly very good but the credit for the final result has to lie with the conductor. He loves the music and he gets the best out of his players. A dull unmotivated conductor would have had a different outcome. The orchestral players will have the same views as the general public - some will like the music, some will put up with it and others will dislike it. They are people doing a job and they have different musical tastes.

[Hattoff]

There's a very, very good review in the latest, much improved, Gramophone magazine of the latest Brabbins, Brian CD by Guy Rickards. I don't have it to hand to replicate but will do so if nobody gets there before me; it's one of the best.
I think he is a fan.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Guy Rickards is a long-standing member of the HBS...

[cilgwyn]

Are you a subscriber,Hattoff? My local WH Smiths only had the May issue! And I've only just bought that,really! Funny,as soon as I start buying Gramophone again IRR Magazine comes to an end. A coincidence,of course! I thought Gramophone had improved. It's still populist stuff compared to IRR's in depth approach,though. A potentially interesting article on Welsh composers (for example) confined to a single page and the next page devoted to a list of,mostly,pictures of cd sleeves,with a smattering of text. None of that celebrity c***,though....and hopefully,no more of those ludicrous covers showing how Beethoven would be dressed if he was alive today or how Havergal Brian would look if he was a Goth!! (The other kind! )

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Guy Rickards is a long-standing member of the HBS...

Erratum: It seems Guy Rickards loves HB, without still being an HBS member...

[cilgwyn]

I'm not a member,but I love Havergal Brian!

HOLD THAT GRAMOPHONE!!

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I'm not a member,but I love Havergal Brian!

A sin of omission is still sin. Get thee to a confessional!

[Hattoff]

I forswore the Gramophone about twenty years ago. The Brian review was shown to me by a friend. The magazine has definitely improved from the rag it was. I'll buy the June issue tomorrow and copy the review here.

[Hattoff]

It's just as well that Guy Rickards is not a member; he can't be accused of bias. Some critics don't see us aficionados as the loveable tykes we really are.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Fair point.

'Loveable tykes'... Yes. 

[cilgwyn]

It's just as well that Guy Rickards is not a member; he can't be accused of bias. Some critics don't see us aficionados as the loveable tykes we really are.

So,that makes two of us! And yes,we are loveable! Put 'em up Andrew Clements....put em up,I say!! Rrrruuuff!!