Non-Symphonist Symphonies

[Grazioso]

Huh?

The symphonies of many composers form a well-known core of their output, but there are some composers who have composed symphonies and had those works largely overshadowed by their pieces in other genres. I'm thinking of composers like Wagner, Holst, Lalo, Boccherini, Smetana, Grieg, Respighi, Rimsky-Korsakov, et al.

Any particular ones worth hearing? Any that have been unjustly ignored?

Boccherini is unusual in this category, in that he composed relatively extensively in the genre: over two dozen symphonies. While they won't cause anyone to forget Haydn or Mozart, they are definitely worth a listen, sharing the melodiousness and sunny Mediterranean warmth of his chamber music.

[Lethevich]

This subject interests me and I'm glad somebody brought it up. I noticed the problems with the "symphonist" designation from using last.fm. I used the "symphonist" tag for composers of at least one or two major works, but it was hard to know where to draw the line. Elgar easily made the cut, despite only writing 2.5, because of their prominence. Walton too. Rimsky also made it for me, simply by dint of writing three which vaguely resembled Scheherazade. Without Scheherazade's popularity, I may not have included him. Boccherini is a major symphonist of his period - I think that current perceptions should be ignored in the face of clear facts - during his time his symphonies were very notable works.

The non-symphoniest brigade doesn't only have to contain writers of student works (Grieg, Wagner, Smetana, Suk) - Marx's solitary Herbstsymphonie is superb, as is Hausegger's Natursymphonie. Korngold's is a masterpiece in its style, as is Bliss's A Colour Symphony, Eisler's Deutsche Sinfonie, Goldmark's Rustic Wedding Symphony (he wrote two, but I don't really think of him as a symphonist - or anything, really, just a writer of quality curiosities) as well. Despite the quality of these works, I would not consider any of them to be a "symphonist".

Koechlin wrote many but it's hard to think of him as a symphonist due to how eclectic they are, and how arbritrary the designation can seem.

Edit: More strangeness: somebody like Friedrich Gernsheim who wrote four numbered works in the Brahms mould I would easily consider a symphonist, and yet I would consider every one of his symphonies inferior to the works included on my list of non-symphonist symphonies.

[Florestan]

Boccherini is unusual in this category, in that he composed relatively extensively in the genre: over two dozen symphonies. While they won't cause anyone to forget Haydn or Mozart, they are definitely worth a listen, sharing the melodiousness and sunny Mediterranean warmth of his chamber music.

A good choice agreed on all accounts, although La casa del Diavolo has a rather dark outlook --- try Il Giardino Armonico with Giovanni Antonini for a thrilling performance.



OTOFMH I'll throw in Carl Maria von Weber, with two splendid early Romantic symphonies.

[Lethevich]

Along the lines of Weber, Gounod wrote a worthy two, which have been quite widely recorded considering how merely "decent" they are.

[MishaK]

Is Franck a non-symphonist for having written only one? Liszt with the Dante and Faust symphonies which hardly ever get performed? Saint-Saens, who wrote a few, but only No.3 gets performed reasonably regularly?

[Lethevich]

I think that Liszt falls in with Strauss as writing two mature works entitled symphonies, but which don't really do enough to justify their break from their previous series of tone poems. Admittedly with Liszt, he does seem to have felt the need to create more ambitious works to live up to the title.

Strauss also wrote two student symphonies, the second of which is decent but I can't muster much enthusiasm for it.

[Grazioso]

Is Franck a non-symphonist for having written only one?

For my part, it's not a question of how many, but rather how much attention a composer's symphonies have received vis-a-vis his or her works in other genres and whether that level of attention is reasonable or unjust.

Berlioz, for example, wrote only a few symphonies, but one of them is a seminal work that's well established in the core repertoire. Messaien only wrote one, yet it's one of his most famous pieces and widely recorded.

[The new erato]

Weill certainly should qualify as his oeuvre in general is very unsymphonic. No2 in particular is a good one!

[Grazioso]

Boccherini is a major symphonist of his period - I think that current perceptions should be ignored in the face of clear facts - during his time his symphonies were very notable works.

Thank goodness Boccherini's reputation is starting to flourish anew. He was a major composer (and recognized as such in his day) who for a long time was treated more like a cute historical curiosity.

I can't wait for the day when integral recorded sets of his works in various genres (quartets, quintets, etc.) are as common as they are for Haydn and Mozart.

Korngold's is a masterpiece in its style

Agreed. I was stunned the first time I heard it. I think it's one of the great 20th-century symphonies and deserves at least the respect accorded his other music.

[Bulldog]

Thank goodness Boccherini's reputation is starting to flourish anew. He was a major composer (and recognized as such in his day) who for a long time was treated more like a cute historical curiosity.

I can't wait for the day when integral recorded sets of his works in various genres (quartets, quintets, etc.) are as common as they are for Haydn and Mozart.

I admire your optimism, but you've got a very long wait ahead of you (some of it past your expiration date).

[Grazioso]

I admire your optimism, but you've got a very long wait ahead of you (some of it past your expiration date).

Most likely, but stranger things have happened in classical music recording...

[Bulldog]

Most likely, but stranger things have happened in classical music recording...

Well, the way you're feeling now about Boccherini is how I felt back in 1970.  The past forty years hasn't resulted in any appreciable change, and I don't even have another forty ahead of me.

[jimmosk]

I think Bizet's Symphony in C stands near the top of this odd little genre. Another major example imho is Nino "more than just film scores" Rota, whose three symphonies are genial while still being serious, and at times even weighty. 

How about Bortkiewicz, who's much more known for his piano works but has two fiery, Rachmaninovian symphonies?  Or Kabalevsky and Khachaturian, whose concertos (and, in the latter case, ballets) are heard far, far more than their symphonies? Lars-Erik Larsson is most widely-known for his neoclassical miniatures, but he has three quite excellent symphonies, which are for the most part in the Romantic tradition. 

One name that I think is finally leaving this list is Villa-Lobos, whose symphonies are finally starting to get some fraction of the attention paid to his Bachianas.

And I'll disagree, in passing, that all three of Rimsky-K's symphonies "vaguely resemble Scheherazade". His Second certainly does, but the other two are quite formally constructed, rather than rhapsodic. They're like two more Balakirev symphonies.

-J

[Grazioso]

Well, the way you're feeling now about Boccherini is how I felt back in 1970.  The past forty years hasn't resulted in any appreciable change, and I don't even have another forty ahead of me.

In recent years, recordings of his works have flourished, at least relatively, with quite a number of new discs released by Brilliant, CPO, Virgin, Harmonia Mundi, Naive, Cappricio, etc. We've gotten an eight-disc set of the symphonies, plus new complete sets of the clavier quintets, guitar quintets, cello concertos, cello sonatas, etc. Not a bad start.

[jochanaan]

Along the lines of Weber, Gounod wrote a worthy two, which have been quite widely recorded considering how merely "decent" they are.

Are you including the "Petite Symphonie" for winds?  It's a lovely piece and a very valuable addition to the wind-ensemble repertoire, right up there with the Mozart and Dvorak serenades.

Dukas certainly should be added to this list, with his very fine Symphony in C.  Same with Stravinsky; his symphonies by no means form a central part of his output, although they are certainly masterful.  (I'm not including the "Symphonies of Wind Instruments" since it redefines the word "symphonies.)  And I think Paul Hindemith qualifies too; I know of three symphonic works from his pen, but only the Symphony in Eb is a "pure" symphony; the "Mathis der Maler" symphony is more like a suite from the opera, and the Symphonic Metamorphoses is also more like a suite than a symphony.

[Superhorn]

   Paul Dukas is known only for his familiar "Sorceror's Apprentice", but his only symphony is a magnificent work,
   without a doubt one of the greatest of French symphonies. As is well-known, this composer was extremely self critical and destroyed most of his music, apparently including another symphony.
   The symphony in C dates from 1897, and is in three movements .  It's full of ardor,nobility and sweep, and   is wonderfully melodious .   When you hear it, you'll wonder where it's been all your life and ask yourself  " why don't conductors perform this?" 
   There have been a number of recordings, and the EMI CD with Martinon and the ORTF orchestra is greatly admired by CD collectors who know the symphony. I first got to know it back in the 70s from a superb Decca LP with Walter Weller and the LPO, coupled with the Sorceror's apprentce. Unfortunately, this has yet to appear on CD as far as I know, but if it ever does, grab it !   
   There are other recordings by Slatkin on RCA with the French National, which I haven't heard, and Jean Fournet and a Dutch orchestra on Denon, as well as Yan Pascal Tortelier on Chandos. 
   Slatkin did the Dukas symphony several years ago with the New York Philharmonic. 
   But don't miss this symphony if you don't know it !  I wonder if the other symphony Dukas wrote was any good. 
    Composers aren't always the best judges of their own music, so who knows if he destroyed a genuine masterpiece? It's entirely possible.

[Lethevich]

Hindemith is a good suggestion, not known as a "symphonist" but wrote quite a few in varying forms. There are the two "opera" works, but also others for band, in concerto for orchestra style, etc:

Mathis der Maler, Die Harmonie der Welt, Symphonia Serena, Symphony in B-flat (maybe two - one for band - it's hard to tell whether it's a revision or not), Sinfonietta, Pittsburgh Symphony.

I hadn't heard of that Gounod, thanks for the suggestion.

[jimmosk]

To further stump for Rota's symphonies, I went and located YouTube snippets from his opening of his First http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdDVMFzKfJE and the complete scherzo of his Second http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVJSY7K7wb8
Sadly, the performances (especially of the First, which can soar in the right hands) aren't nearly as good as the recording with the Japan Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra under Naoto Otomo on the Japanese label Firebird... but that CD is very out of print: http://www.amazon.com/Nino-Rota-Symphony-Collection-1911-1979/dp/B000I6P1ZU

[some guy]

Someone needs to mention Kodály pretty soon.

Oh, there. Some guy just did.

And Ives. I don't think anyone would call Ives a "symphonist." But he wrote at least one superb symphony and at least two other pretty fine ones.

Otherwise, there's Francis Dhomont's Frankenstein Symphony and Robert Ashley's In Memoriam Crazy Horse symphony.

Otherotherwise, another accolade for Webern's excruciatingly superb symphony and Schoenberg's excellent Chamber Symphony No. 1. And another vote for focussing on the music first, too!

[jochanaan]

Hindemith ... Symphony in B-flat (maybe two - one for band - it's hard to tell whether it's a revision or not)...

No, the Symphony in E flat is a much different composition.  And I had forgotten the Symphony for Band!  It's a very fine piece too.  It's surprising that Hindemith's symphonic output isn't better-known, most especially the E flat Symphony--a genuine masterpiece but very seldom performed or recorded; I only know of the Bernstein recording...

I hadn't heard of that Gounod, thanks for the suggestion.

A worthy piece.  If anything, I like the two middle movements better than the outer ones.  The second is a lovely aria for flute, and the Scherzo rocks!