Your top 3 symphonists

[Lisztianwagner]

Won't argue with that Ilaria, exactly the same as mine

Apart from you including Vaughan-Williams, and me Tchaikovsky 

[madaboutmahler]

Apart from you including Vaughan-Williams, and me Tchaikovsky 

Ah, I meant to include Tchaikovsky as well!

[karlhenning]

Exactly the sort of thread which I find unnecessary and impossible! ; )

[Lethevich]

(The response isn't only to this post, but to the last page or so.)

Pettersson is a much more distinctive composer than Holmboe in my opinion.

They draw heavily from the same source in their early symphonies. While they don't sound harmonically like Sibelius or Nielsen, they both shape kernels of their music's development following their models. I consider the two very similar up until their 9th (or thereabouts) symphonies beyond the surface elements, although Pettersson leans towards complexity, and Holmboe to concision, which they would both explore in more depth later. By the end Pettersson is writing highly mechanical music, and Holmboe almost alienatingly lucid.

Both favour a very symphonic means of thinking based on long-lines - Pettersson in making whole symphonies into one structure, Holmboe by his metamorphosing method giving a unity to the material. They both during early maturity include a few spices to keep the listener interested before abandoning these later on. With Pettersson it's the melodramatic aspects of 6-8 which make the knotty and dense music more compelling to many, with Holmboe it is mild aspects of folk music, which while never particularly over-exploited, are fully synthesised into his music even once it seems to have been abandoned.

Both sound like no other, and by their maturity are so far into the cultivation an individual idiom that although Pettersson's music is written uniquely abrasive manner, I don't find it fair to consider that as neccesserally demonstrating superiority due to its immediate recognisability. For example, the music of Kapustin (to resurrect this old chestnut) is immediately recognisable to me, regardless of its merits.

[Grazioso]

(The response isn't only to this post, but to the last page or so.)

They draw heavily from the same source in their early symphonies. While they don't sound harmonically like Sibelius or Nielsen, they both shape kernels of their music's development following their models. I consider the two very similar up until their 9th (or thereabouts) symphonies beyond the surface elements, although Pettersson leans towards complexity, and Holmboe to concision, which they would both explore in more depth later. By the end Pettersson is writing highly mechanical music, and Holmboe almost alienatingly lucid.

Both favour a very symphonic means of thinking based on long-lines - Pettersson in making whole symphonies into one structure, Holmboe by his metamorphosing method giving a unity to the material. They both during early maturity include a few spices to keep the listener interested before abandoning these later on. With Pettersson it's the melodramatic aspects of 6-8 which make the knotty and dense music more compelling to many, with Holmboe it is mild aspects of folk music, which while never particularly over-exploited, are fully synthesised into his music even once it seems to have been abandoned.

Both sound like no other, and by their maturity are so far into the cultivation an individual idiom that although Pettersson's music is written uniquely abrasive manner, I don't find it fair to consider that as neccesserally demonstrating superiority due to its immediate recognisability. For example, the music of Kapustin (to resurrect this old chestnut) is immediately recognisable to me, regardless of its merits.

Interesting observations. I must say, though, that's its the lucidity that draws me to Holmboe (hence my reference to him being reminiscent of Sibelius), though I can see how some might hear that as severity or remoteness.

[mszczuj]

Beethoven
Bruckner
Mahler

Or may be Haydn not Mahler- I was absolutely bored while listening last time to the latter. (The older Bernstein set.) Must check them both. Probably about 2014.

[Geo Dude]

Like a previous poster, I'll take Beethoven as a given.

1. Brahms
2. Sibelius
3. Mozart

[Mirror Image]

My top 3 symphonists?

1. Bruckner
2. Mahler
3. Vaughan Williams

Oh goodness what in the world was I thinking? Now my list would look like this:

1. Shostakovich
2. Vaughan Williams
3. Sibelius

[DavidW]

MI, I didn't know that you used to like Mahler!

[Mirror Image]

MI, I didn't know that you used to like Mahler!

I didn't either. I don't know what I was thinking.

[Lisztianwagner]

Oh goodness what in the world was I thinking? Now my list would look like this:

1. Shostakovich
2. Vaughan Williams
3. Sibelius

As a matter of fact it was a great surprise to see Mahler instead of Shostakovich in your list.

[Mirror Image]

As a matter of fact it was a great surprise to see Mahler instead of Shostakovich in your list.

It was for me too.

[Lisztianwagner]

It was for me too.

.......but Mahler had been a better choice

[DavidW]

My list might be Haydn, Beethoven, Mahler.

[Cato]

Bruckner, Mahler, Hartmann.

[Scion7]

IF I had to narrow it down to just three on a space station hurtling out of the solar system,
I suppose it would be Beethoven, Brahms, and Mahler -

but I'd be aching for Mozart, Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, and a few from Bruckner, Schubert and ....

I think to cover all the styles you'd need more than just three.  Prokofiev was brilliant with orchestration.

[jlaurson]

Bruckner, Mahler, Hartmann.

I like Hartmann in there! 

Still, I'd probably have to say:

Haydn
Bruckner
Sibelius

Don't know why everyone seems to include Bruckner without questioning... but somehow his symphonies are the epitome of "symphonic".

[TheGSMoeller]

1. Haydn
2. Prokofiev
3. Bruckner

Now there's a good lineup.

[Elnimio]

Haydn
Havergal Brian
Alan Hovhaness




just kidding

[Bogey]

Beethoven
Mozart
Vaughan Williams....at least I believe he is moving into this position.