Vaughan Williams's Veranda

[Karl Henning]

Thanks Karl. Assuming that you mean this Jeffrey, as a subscriber, I should have unlimited emails. I need to check this out.

I did indeed mean your esteemed self.

[Irons]

There are some similarities to Holst, but these two composers don't really sound anything alike. Both composers could write some of the most gnarly, in-your-face modernistic music imaginable, but their individual "brands" (for lack of a better term) were totally singular and unique to them. If you play Holst's Mars from The Planets and the opening passage of RVW's 4th symphony, someone would definitely understand what I mean. Of course, these are one of many examples of both composers pushing the envelope. The point you make about an outward appearance of simplicity is an interesting one and this is one of the qualities that I think works in RVW's favor in that his music is accessible to anyone who has the ears for it, but he never downplays his intentions with the music and the complexity that can happen within it. I was first struck by the surface of his music, but when I dove deeper into it, I realized what a complicated person he was underneath this more welcoming musical exterior.

Mars is unique in Holst's output as it is as if written by another composer. Holst and Vaughan Williams shared a love for English folk music and here it is where to look for similarities between the two, I feel. I love Holst's "Somerset Rhapsody" which actually meets all the criteria of your perceptive analysis of RVW.

[Mirror Image]

Mars is unique in Holst's output as it is as if written by another composer. Holst and Vaughan Williams shared a love for English folk music and here it is where to look for similarities between the two, I feel. I love Holst's "Somerset Rhapsody" which actually meets all the criteria of your perceptive analysis of RVW.

Ah, but I try not to overlook their Modernist tendencies. As was written earlier, there's a lot of common ground between them, but both composers couldn't be more different from each other in terms of their musical languages. But, yes, English folk music certainly played a large part in both of their sound-worlds. It's kind of like what Bartók and Kodály were doing. Both composers were also close friends and shared musical thoughts with the other. Also, while there may be some overlap in their treatment of folk material, both of these composers had their musical paths and language that separated them. Bartók ended up going more more in the Modernist direction while Kodály continued his synthesis of folk music and Impressionism.

[Karl Henning]

Ah, but I try not to overlook their Modernist tendencies. As was written earlier, there's a lot of common ground between them, but both composers couldn't be more different from each other in terms of their musical languages.

I don't know, John. If I listen to, say, Egdon Heath and the Tallis Fantasia, I'm not hearing the work of two composers whose musical language is so utterly different as you appear to suggest.

[vandermolen]

Jeffrey, your In box is full.

OT
Hi Karl
Rob has kindly sorted it out so it's up and running again.

[Karl Henning]

OT
Hi Karl
Rob has kindly sorted it out so it's up and running again.

Splendid!

[vandermolen]

Extended review of the Elder cycle

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/Jun/VWilliams-syms-CDHLD7557.htm

I agree with him that 1 and 3 are highlights. I listened to 2 and 8 the other day and did not find them to be anything special, although the reviewer thinks highly of No.8. I haven't listened to 5,7 or 9 yet.

[Spotted Horses]

I've rid myself of the temptation to get the Elder set. Not that I put any faith in reviews or don't have high expectations. The question is "when will I ever have time to listen to it?"

I did like Brabbins in A London Symphony, maybe I'll pick up a few more of those, as they come out. And, conveniently, it is possible to purchase the symphony recordings without the uninteresting fillers ordering lossless downloads directly from Hyperion. I'm a mind the get the recording of Symphony No 5.

[vandermolen]

I've rid myself of the temptation to get the Elder set. Not that I put any faith in reviews or don't have high expectations. The question is "when will I ever have time to listen to it?"

I did like Brabbins in A London Symphony, maybe I'll pick up a few more of those, as they come out. And, conveniently, it is possible to purchase the symphony recordings without the uninteresting fillers ordering lossless downloads directly from Hyperion. I'm a mind the get the recording of Symphony No 5.

I'm working my way through the Elder cycle now. 'A Pastoral Symphony' is beautifully performed. I think that, so far, the Brabbins set is an excellent one, better than Manze or Elder as a whole. I quite like some of the fillers like the 'Variations for Orchestra'. Brabbins also uses the better (IMO) 1920 version of 'A London Symphony'. I'm revisiting the Hickox recordings as well. Listening to Elder's 'A Pastoral Symphony' at the moment, I think that he brings out the underlying tragedy of the work with some beautiful instrumental solos.

[Spotted Horses]

I'm working my way through the Elder cycle now. 'A Pastoral Symphony' is beautifully performed. I think that, so far, the Brabbins set is an excellent one, better than Manze or Elder as a whole. I quite like some of the fillers like the 'Variations for Orchestra'. Brabbins also uses the better (IMO) 1920 version of 'A London Symphony'. I'm revisiting the Hickox recordings as well. Listening to Elder's 'A Pastoral Symphony' at the moment, I think that he brings out the underlying tragedy of the work with some beautiful instrumental solos.

I do agree that the cuts RVW made to A London Symphony after the 1920 edition are regrettable. Nevertheless RVW left my favorite passages in, and my attraction to the Brabbins recording is that he did beautifully in that primary material. But I'm left wondering if RVW tinkered with those passages that remained, and that my enjoyment of Brabbins' recording is attributable to more opulent orchestration in the 1920 version, compared with the final version. It is possible to identify the passages that were cut (with your help) but I've never seen any comment on possible changes in scoring in the post 1920 revisions.

In any case, I'm curious to hear Brabbins in the 5th symphony.

(One minor question, I haven't seen the Brabbins recording of the 1920 A London Symphony on Amazon.com. I wonder if there is an issue with the 1920 version being public domain in Europe, but not in the U.S., due to complexities of copyright laws.)

[Roasted Swan]

I do agree that the cuts RVW made to A London Symphony after the 1920 edition are regrettable. Nevertheless RVW left my favorite passages in, and my attraction to the Brabbins recording is that he did beautifully in that primary material. But I'm left wondering if RVW tinkered with those passages that remained, and that my enjoyment of Brabbins' recording is attributable to more opulent orchestration in the 1920 version, compared with the final version. It is possible to identify the passages that were cut (with your help) but I've never seen any comment on possible changes in scoring in the post 1920 revisions.

In any case, I'm curious to hear Brabbins in the 5th symphony.

(One minor question, I haven't seen the Brabbins recording of the 1920 A London Symphony on Amazon.com. I wonder if there is an issue with the 1920 version being public domain in Europe, but not in the U.S., due to complexities of copyright laws.)

As far as I am aware there are no changes to the actual orchestration - they were purely structural.  The orchestra used in the final version remains large; triple woodwind, full brass including parts for a pair of cornets as well as the usual 2 trumpets, harp and fairly extensive percussion.  In performance RVW would occasionally suggest orchestral tweaks "on the fly" to aid clarity in a particular performance or whatever but these did not make it into revised scores (Symphony 6 is the exception with the original Scherzo published and recorded before RVW changed his mind).  The number of revisions to Symphony 2 is pretty unique in this composer's output.

[vandermolen]

I do agree that the cuts RVW made to A London Symphony after the 1920 edition are regrettable. Nevertheless RVW left my favorite passages in, and my attraction to the Brabbins recording is that he did beautifully in that primary material. But I'm left wondering if RVW tinkered with those passages that remained, and that my enjoyment of Brabbins' recording is attributable to more opulent orchestration in the 1920 version, compared with the final version. It is possible to identify the passages that were cut (with your help) but I've never seen any comment on possible changes in scoring in the post 1920 revisions.

In any case, I'm curious to hear Brabbins in the 5th symphony.

(One minor question, I haven't seen the Brabbins recording of the 1920 A London Symphony on Amazon.com. I wonder if there is an issue with the 1920 version being public domain in Europe, but not in the U.S., due to complexities of copyright laws.)

Which is your favourite passage? Mine is just before the end; it had sadly disappeared by 1936.

[relm1]

Which is your favourite passage? Mine is just before the end; it had sadly disappeared by 1936.

I like that moment too.  The ending is full of shifting colors and moods, and I can understand from a purely musical point of view, it belabors the point, but there are lots of moments of magic in the earlier versions that are sadly lost.

[Spotted Horses]

Which is your favourite passage? Mine is just before the end; it had sadly disappeared by 1936.

I may be a cretin, but I have never been attracted to Vaughan Williams' tendency to write movements that end in a quiet passage. I'm straining my memory, but I'd say my favorite passages in A London Symphony are the climax in the second half of the second movement and the boisterous march theme in the finale.

[vandermolen]

I may be a cretin, but I have never been attracted to Vaughan Williams' tendency to write movements that end in a quiet passage. I'm straining my memory, but I'd say my favorite passages in A London Symphony are the climax in the second half of the second movement and the boisterous march theme in the finale.

Why does that make you a 'cretin'? It sounds like a perfectly valid point of view to me.

[vandermolen]

I like that moment too.  The ending is full of shifting colors and moods, and I can understand from a purely musical point of view, it belabors the point, but there are lots of moments of magic in the earlier versions that are sadly lost.

Totally agree - I just wish that he had kept that most moving section in! I can no longer listen to the 'final' version without being acutely aware of that missing section - it spoils the symphony for me. Even Michael Kennedy said that the excision meant that the transition to the Epilogue was too abrupt.

[Spotted Horses]

Why does that make you a 'cretin'? It sounds like a perfectly valid point of view to me.

Just because I don't appreciate the subtle bit, only the crowd-pleasing parts.

[vandermolen]

Just because I don't appreciate the subtle bit, only the crowd-pleasing parts.

I don't see it that way at all - we all see/hear things differently. There is no 'right way' to listen to a VW symphony or any other piece of music. My tastes are far from subtle - Ravel's 'Bolero' for example.

[calyptorhynchus]

I piece of musical trivia I remember is an assertion I read that Sibelius's 4th (1911) is the first symphony to end other than f or louder (it ends mf).

But VW's London is certainly the first symphony to end niente.

[Karl Henning]

I don't see it that way at all - we all see/hear things differently. There is no 'right way' to listen to a VW symphony or any other piece of music. My tastes are far from subtle - Ravel's 'Bolero' for example.

Psshaw!! You say that as if there were no subtleties to appreciate in the Boléro!!