Curious about choral parts of symphonies.

[Mr. Stevens Senior]

Let me see if I can put it another way.  Awhile back, I was having all sorts of difficulty putting my music files onto an external hard drive.  No end of trouble migrating the files, finding them again, playing, etc.  I found a website that discussed Itunes file management and the fellow who wrote the article started out with a nice section about Itunes design strategy (a/k/a "philosophy") of file management, and what that meant for users trying to manage Itunes files.  I found that one section very helpful because it oriented my perception to the concerns and priorities of the system designer.  It let me understand what the designers were trying to accomplish, what they valued and what their objectives were.

I don't want to be convinced to enjoy choral or vocal parts in symphonies.  I've already said they're not to my liking.  But that doesn't mean they will always be disagreeable to me; I don't see the point in just passing over/ignoring something that great minds have obiously spent a good deal of effort and thought to create.  So I would like to understand more about why symphonic composers choose to include choral or vocal parts in symphonies.  What are they valuing, what's important to them, what factors or purposes influence their decisions to include choral or vocal pieces.  If I could understand what the composers are trying to accomplish, I could progress in my appreciation of their decisions to use choral or vocal works.  In my book, that progress of understanding is enjoyment, at least of a sort.

Maybe there's no reason whatsoever for those choices.   Or maybe it's like asking why a painter uses X blue instead of Y blue for a sky.  But I thought I'd ask because nothing ventured, nothing gained.

[prémont]

I just heard Nielsen's "Espansiva" with a version of the Andante that substitutes clarinet and trombone for the soprano and tenor. Works surprisingly well...but I still prefer it with voices.

Sarge

Did so yesterday (I suppose you think of the Bostock recording). Yes it works well, but the striking effect of the version with voices is completely lost IMO.

[Karl Henning]

Did so yesterday (I suppose you think of the Bostock recording). Yes it works well, but the striking effect of the version with voices is completely lost IMO.

Yes, indeed: it is an exquisite timbral touch!

[mszczuj]

Did so yesterday (I suppose you think of the Bostock recording). Yes it works well, but the striking effect of the version with voices is completely lost IMO.

For me the beginning of the vocalise  is the most striking beautiful effect in all Nielsen symphonies. It is really like the expansion of listener's mind abilities.

[Madiel]

Let me see if I can put it another way.  Awhile back, I was having all sorts of difficulty putting my music files onto an external hard drive.  No end of trouble migrating the files, finding them again, playing, etc.  I found a website that discussed Itunes file management and the fellow who wrote the article started out with a nice section about Itunes design strategy (a/k/a "philosophy") of file management, and what that meant for users trying to manage Itunes files.  I found that one section very helpful because it oriented my perception to the concerns and priorities of the system designer.  It let me understand what the designers were trying to accomplish, what they valued and what their objectives were.

I don't want to be convinced to enjoy choral or vocal parts in symphonies.  I've already said they're not to my liking.  But that doesn't mean they will always be disagreeable to me; I don't see the point in just passing over/ignoring something that great minds have obiously spent a good deal of effort and thought to create.  So I would like to understand more about why symphonic composers choose to include choral or vocal parts in symphonies.  What are they valuing, what's important to them, what factors or purposes influence their decisions to include choral or vocal pieces.  If I could understand what the composers are trying to accomplish, I could progress in my appreciation of their decisions to use choral or vocal works.  In my book, that progress of understanding is enjoyment, at least of a sort.

Maybe there's no reason whatsoever for those choices.   Or maybe it's like asking why a painter uses X blue instead of Y blue for a sky.  But I thought I'd ask because nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Well, you'd probably have to start by asking Beethoven (or finding anything he said on the topic).  Because for at least a while after that there probably some composers doing it primarily because Beethoven had done it.

But for Beethoven it was a radical step.

As much as anything, it's about blurring the lines between genres and creating new ones, which has gone on throughout history.  As I understand it, Beethoven had thought about setting the Ode to Joy for a very long time, and Wikipedia has helpfully pointed out to me that he had already done something similar in the Choral Fantasy, op.80 - and the Wiki claims that op.80 was intentionally designed to unify different genres as the finale of Beethoven's "mega-concert" in December 1808. I don't really know the piece but this does seem at least plausible.

In which case, it's not so much a single decision/reason as a gradual process of taking different elements and a great composer thinking "well, why shouldn't I combine these into something new?"

[Purusha]

I'm not an expert, but from what i understand the choral part of the 9th symphony is not actually a symphonic movement, but a cantata, or a cantata/symphony hybrid of sort. I think the effect such an abrupt change of form right at what should have been the climax to the entire symphony was calculated to create an atmosphere of absolute transcendence, as if Beethoven had gone beyond the symphony and lead us to some heavenly ground that was no longer bound to any formal rule, just pure and unrestrained splendor.

[mahler10th]

I'm not an expert, but from what i understand the choral part of the 9th symphony is not actually a symphonic movement, but a cantata, or a cantata/symphony hybrid of sort. I think the effect such an abrupt change of form right at what should have been the climax to the entire symphony was calculated to create an atmosphere of absolute transcendence, as if Beethoven had gone beyond the symphony and lead us to some heavenly ground that was no longer bound to any formal rule, just pure and unrestrained splendor.

***pounds the table***

Well said!

[jochanaan]

Any more help on appreciating the theory or reasoning behind choral/vocal parts would be appreciated.   I'm interested in it because it doesn't appeal to me; but if there were some canon or reason (e.g., composers add choruses or vocal parts to achieve D, x, or Z), I could make a start at elevating my aesthetic sense.

Every choral symphony that I know has some program to it, even Beethoven's Ninth, so it would seem that composers decide to add voices to help portray some such program.  This seems to remain true even when the voices are used wordlessly, as in Debussy's Nocturnes or Holst's The Planets.  But perhaps some musician or listener with more experience than I can name a vocal symphony or symphonic work with no program...(Actually, I seem to remember once hearing a concerto for coloratura soprano, without words, and orchestra, perhaps by Glazunov...?)

And I agree with Karl: The human voice is the fountainhead of all instruments, so why ban it from symphonies?

[aukhawk]

First time I heard my recording of Shostakovich's 13th symphony, which didn't come with a translation, I ignored the words and thought it was an okay piece of music.
SECOND time I heard it, I sat there with a text and translation that I'd found on the internet, and the passage about Anne Frank in the 1st movement sent massive tingles down my spine.

Great way to learn a language too - though you might acquire a rather unusual vocabulary and florid style, may raise an eyebrow or two 

Thanks to another Shostakovitch piece, I know the Russian phrase "Davai, topor" ** and I'm keen to work this into my conversation some day.

** _{translated in the sleevenote as "Give me the axe" ie, "executioner, I'm ready".}

[vandermolen]

I find the finale of Miaskovsky's 6th Symphony much more moving with the (optional) chorus chanting their lament at the end than without it. Svetlanov's recording unfortunately does not include the chorus.

[Karl Henning]

Every choral symphony that I know has some program to it, even Beethoven's Ninth, so it would seem that composers decide to add voices to help portray some such program.

A (possible?) exception being the Shostakovich Third, for which (I was reading the other day) he had written the instrumental "foreword" of the piece before the text for the choral finale had even been written! : )

[pjme]

Darius Milhaud third symphony has a (wordless) chorus in the slow movement . That movement has the character of a prayer . The chorus enters imperceptibly and the contrast with the loud chords of the orchestra is quite overwhelming.
The symphony was written in 1946 , a commission from Radio france to celebrate the Allied victory. The last movement is a short Te Deum for chorus and orchestra( hence the subtitle Hymnus Ambrosianus) - 4 soloists from the chorus can be heard in 4 interludes. It ends the symphony in a majestic, solemn hymn - incl. stuttering castanets and tambourine.

And, why not : Ravel describes his Daphnis et Chloé as a "symphonie chorégraphique! His use of a wordless chorus is both incredibly refined and powerfull.
There are many more symphonies with vocal parts - Erki Melartin's nr 4 '(Summer) has a superb slow movement with three female singers ( no words) that is as intoxicating as Nielsen "Espansiva"!

Bernstein ( nr 1 and 3) , Joly Braga Santos ( 4 & 6), Roy Harris ( nr 4 ...), Charles Tournemire : check out the Finale of symphony nr 6 on You Tube - a huge wallop with bells, tamtams and wordless chorus that sends shivers down the spine!  etc.( + countless contemporary works!)  Voices add great color to the score. Or are just simply necessary to pass the message!

P.