sir Malcolm Arnold

[Mirror Image]

The conductor here John Gibbons has quite a controversial take on the finale.  The score is clearly marked as crochet (quarter note) = 60 and the marking is "lento".  Gibbons plays it closer to = 80.  hence the total timing is around 17 minutes where as the other 3 commercial recordings are all 23-24.  His argument is two-fold; 1) Arnold as conductor often ignored his own markings (I'd counter that by saying Arnold was usually slower in those instances NOT faster) and 2) the faster tempo allows the music to flow to the final D major resolution and makes the finale less "hard won" and more optimistic.

I'm finding it hard to get the slower tempo out of my ear and in any case I think the ultimate resolution SHOULD be hard won and that the movement as a whole is devastating as you say at the slower tempo.  But Gibons has a track record of promoting British music in general and Arnold in particular so I'm loath to rush to judgement......

Yeah, I'm not sure how I feel about this kind of pacing of the final movement. I might have a go at Gibbons recording and buy a download of it like Andre did. Thanks for the feedback.

[Roasted Swan]

Been seriously digging Arnold's film music. He was a hell of a composer for the screen! I have volumes one and two of the Chandos series (are there any others in this series?)

No - Chandos 'just' did 2 volumes of Arnold's film music which is a shame given there is a lot more  There was 1 disc in the Marco Polo series;



worth getting the original release and not the Naxos re-release for the extended notes.  Pretty good versions - bits and bobs of both scores appear on Vol.2 of the Chandos survey.  Worth hearing Walton's Battle of Britain score since the rumour was always that Arnold "helped" (ie wrote) significant sections of that score including the most famous sequence - "Battle in the Air".  Other than that Arnold's film scores are really very under-represented on disc......

[vers la flamme]

No - Chandos 'just' did 2 volumes of Arnold's film music which is a shame given there is a lot more  There was 1 disc in the Marco Polo series;



worth getting the original release and not the Naxos re-release for the extended notes.  Pretty good versions - bits and bobs of both scores appear on Vol.2 of the Chandos survey.  Worth hearing Walton's Battle of Britain score since the rumour was always that Arnold "helped" (ie wrote) significant sections of that score including the most famous sequence - "Battle in the Air".  Other than that Arnold's film scores are really very under-represented on disc......

Hey, I didn't know that about Battle of Britain! Will certainly have to check that one out too. Been meaning to explore more of Walton's film music, and his music in general, anyway. And thanks for the rec on that Marco Polo disc. Looks like a good one.

[vandermolen]

Hey, I didn't know that about Battle of Britain! Will certainly have to check that one out too. Been meaning to explore more of Walton's film music, and his music in general, anyway. And thanks for the rec on that Marco Polo disc. Looks like a good one.

OT
I can't think of a better single CD representation of Walton's film music than this one, which includes 'Battle in the Air' from 'Battle of Britain' (I much prefer the original CD release cover):

[Daverz]

I was a bit taken aback by this review of an Arnold CD by Steven Kruger, one of the Fanfare writers I trust most:

"It is hard to listen to the music of Malcolm Arnold without contemplating a murder or a bank robbery. This cockney-born and frequently pickled composer is the William Walton of Britain's underbelly. Even his orchestral dances sound slightly smarmy. He invented, you could say, the musical sneer. Where Walton addresses the world above stairs, Arnold's music seems bound to the kitchen sink and the hotel down by the tracks. Even where there isn't a saxophone playing, it sounds as though there ought to be. An edge of menace emanates from it at all times. At its best, as in the scherzo to his Fifth Symphony, Arnold manages real humor. Nothing more harmful than a Shandy and chips. Yet in the same symphony, he composes a soupy Mahlerian slow movement of kitschy and questionable taste. Better in the movies.

The typical Malcolm Arnold piece chugs metallically into being using Stravinsky's neoclassic manner. The Symphony for Strings on this CD is a good example of this. (I detect that Arnold cribs some figurations from the Tubin Fifth Symphony, then just written.) But the real model is the Stravinsky Concerto in D. Unfortunately, just as it gets started, Arnold's music comes to an abrupt halt with a sarcastic chord. Then out of a metallic and quivering silence, something sneeringly unpleasant emerges, sits there, noodles around, and then continues with a little more Stravinsky. What I dislike about the music is that this manner of writing pretends to profundity without delivering any. It allows Arnold to showcase his catchy melodic ideas and bits of snark without developing them. There is far less real music to be found in the Symphony for Strings than in a similar piece such as the Britten Simple Symphony.

That said, there are aficionados. And these performances are good and sound good. The Saxophone Concerto has its moments, and manages to proceed in a fairly direct manner, perhaps because it started out life as a piano sonata. Hard to create those unpleasant long sneers on the piano. And the Cello Concerto seems a fairly healthy piece. But be forewarned: There is no real warmth in this music. It is like being in Brighton on a rainy day: It is grey and cold; there is the smell of cooking grease in the air, and somebody standing under a lamppost has his eye on your wallet."

[Roasted Swan]

I was a bit taken aback by this review of an Arnold CD by Steven Kruger, one of the Fanfare writers I trust most:

"It is hard to listen to the music of Malcolm Arnold without contemplating a murder or a bank robbery. This cockney-born and frequently pickled composer is the William Walton of Britain's underbelly. Even his orchestral dances sound slightly smarmy. He invented, you could say, the musical sneer. Where Walton addresses the world above stairs, Arnold's music seems bound to the kitchen sink and the hotel down by the tracks. Even where there isn't a saxophone playing, it sounds as though there ought to be. An edge of menace emanates from it at all times. At its best, as in the scherzo to his Fifth Symphony, Arnold manages real humor. Nothing more harmful than a Shandy and chips. Yet in the same symphony, he composes a soupy Mahlerian slow movement of kitschy and questionable taste. Better in the movies.

The typical Malcolm Arnold piece chugs metallically into being using Stravinsky's neoclassic manner. The Symphony for Strings on this CD is a good example of this. (I detect that Arnold cribs some figurations from the Tubin Fifth Symphony, then just written.) But the real model is the Stravinsky Concerto in D. Unfortunately, just as it gets started, Arnold's music comes to an abrupt halt with a sarcastic chord. Then out of a metallic and quivering silence, something sneeringly unpleasant emerges, sits there, noodles around, and then continues with a little more Stravinsky. What I dislike about the music is that this manner of writing pretends to profundity without delivering any. It allows Arnold to showcase his catchy melodic ideas and bits of snark without developing them. There is far less real music to be found in the Symphony for Strings than in a similar piece such as the Britten Simple Symphony.

That said, there are aficionados. And these performances are good and sound good. The Saxophone Concerto has its moments, and manages to proceed in a fairly direct manner, perhaps because it started out life as a piano sonata. Hard to create those unpleasant long sneers on the piano. And the Cello Concerto seems a fairly healthy piece. But be forewarned: There is no real warmth in this music. It is like being in Brighton on a rainy day: It is grey and cold; there is the smell of cooking grease in the air, and somebody standing under a lamppost has his eye on your wallet."

Of course it is hard to take this kind of writing "seriously" when in the first line he incorrectly says Arnold was born in London - no it was Northampton.  Likewise, it does not help when it is full of "sounds-clever-means- nothing" phraseology.  I have no idea why he thinks Walton (a working class Oldham lad) writes for above stairs and Arnold below let alone what that actually means in musical terms.  Possibly the idea of an element of menace pervading much of Arnold's music is interesting but hardly unique amongst composers.  The way Arnold suddenly side-steps into a breezy melody is often used as a brick-bat as though he was incapable of some good old rigorous serious musical development and a retrograde inversion of a tone row so he fell back on a tune instead.

Comparing Britten's Simple Symphony to Arnold String Symphony is downright odd - you can't help feeling that the word symphony and the presence of strings was enough to allow a comparison.   I fully accept that Arnold may not be to everyone's taste but this kind of "review" - let's be frank its not a review its a deeply personal hatchet job - does no credit to the writer.  If you do want to dismantle a body of work for its perceived failings you need to do it in a measured and objective way and let the evidence you produce speak for itself.  A few damp-squib 'gags' aimed at the gallery just show you up for what you are - ignorant.  To adapt a quote from  Mr Kruger (Freddie to his friends I assume?); "What I dislike about the review is that this manner of writing pretends to insight and wit without delivering any".

[amw]

It's very strange for a reviewer to get snitty about a composer producing "low art" for the "working classes", when that composer has an entire aesthetic that depends on the juxtaposition of "low art" with "high art" and the revelation that the two are in fact not particularly different. This takes away the notion that classical music represents some exalted and elevated plane inaccessible to the masses, and is therefore rather threatening to critics who have formed an entire cultural identity around their artistic consumption making them a priori more sophisticated than everyone else.

[foxandpeng]

I was a bit taken aback by this review of an Arnold CD by Steven Kruger, one of the Fanfare writers I trust most:

"It is hard to listen to the music of Malcolm Arnold without contemplating a murder or a bank robbery. This cockney-born and frequently pickled composer is the William Walton of Britain's underbelly. Even his orchestral dances sound slightly smarmy. He invented, you could say, the musical sneer. Where Walton addresses the world above stairs, Arnold's music seems bound to the kitchen sink and the hotel down by the tracks. Even where there isn't a saxophone playing, it sounds as though there ought to be. An edge of menace emanates from it at all times. At its best, as in the scherzo to his Fifth Symphony, Arnold manages real humor. Nothing more harmful than a Shandy and chips. Yet in the same symphony, he composes a soupy Mahlerian slow movement of kitschy and questionable taste. Better in the movies.

The typical Malcolm Arnold piece chugs metallically into being using Stravinsky's neoclassic manner. The Symphony for Strings on this CD is a good example of this. (I detect that Arnold cribs some figurations from the Tubin Fifth Symphony, then just written.) But the real model is the Stravinsky Concerto in D. Unfortunately, just as it gets started, Arnold's music comes to an abrupt halt with a sarcastic chord. Then out of a metallic and quivering silence, something sneeringly unpleasant emerges, sits there, noodles around, and then continues with a little more Stravinsky. What I dislike about the music is that this manner of writing pretends to profundity without delivering any. It allows Arnold to showcase his catchy melodic ideas and bits of snark without developing them. There is far less real music to be found in the Symphony for Strings than in a similar piece such as the Britten Simple Symphony.

That said, there are aficionados. And these performances are good and sound good. The Saxophone Concerto has its moments, and manages to proceed in a fairly direct manner, perhaps because it started out life as a piano sonata. Hard to create those unpleasant long sneers on the piano. And the Cello Concerto seems a fairly healthy piece. But be forewarned: There is no real warmth in this music. It is like being in Brighton on a rainy day: It is grey and cold; there is the smell of cooking grease in the air, and somebody standing under a lamppost has his eye on your wallet."

Well, we are all different. But no. Not even a little bit.

I know we all hear different things in our music, but as someone who despairs of florid whisky reviews which wax lyrical about 'the faint taste of hospital corridors, creosote and notes of caramelised string infused with engine oil', when all I observe is good malted barley and smoke, I am a little bemused by this review. Heavy on the words, but little meaningfully to do with the thing described.

[Roasted Swan]

It's very strange for a reviewer to get snitty about a composer producing "low art" for the "working classes", when that composer has an entire aesthetic that depends on the juxtaposition of "low art" with "high art" and the revelation that the two are in fact not particularly different. This takes away the notion that classical music represents some exalted and elevated plane inaccessible to the masses, and is therefore rather threatening to critics who have formed an entire cultural identity around their artistic consumption making them a priori more sophisticated than everyone else.

well said!

[Mirror Image]

I was a bit taken aback by this review of an Arnold CD by Steven Kruger, one of the Fanfare writers I trust most:

"It is hard to listen to the music of Malcolm Arnold without contemplating a murder or a bank robbery. This cockney-born and frequently pickled composer is the William Walton of Britain's underbelly. Even his orchestral dances sound slightly smarmy. He invented, you could say, the musical sneer. Where Walton addresses the world above stairs, Arnold's music seems bound to the kitchen sink and the hotel down by the tracks. Even where there isn't a saxophone playing, it sounds as though there ought to be. An edge of menace emanates from it at all times. At its best, as in the scherzo to his Fifth Symphony, Arnold manages real humor. Nothing more harmful than a Shandy and chips. Yet in the same symphony, he composes a soupy Mahlerian slow movement of kitschy and questionable taste. Better in the movies.

The typical Malcolm Arnold piece chugs metallically into being using Stravinsky's neoclassic manner. The Symphony for Strings on this CD is a good example of this. (I detect that Arnold cribs some figurations from the Tubin Fifth Symphony, then just written.) But the real model is the Stravinsky Concerto in D. Unfortunately, just as it gets started, Arnold's music comes to an abrupt halt with a sarcastic chord. Then out of a metallic and quivering silence, something sneeringly unpleasant emerges, sits there, noodles around, and then continues with a little more Stravinsky. What I dislike about the music is that this manner of writing pretends to profundity without delivering any. It allows Arnold to showcase his catchy melodic ideas and bits of snark without developing them. There is far less real music to be found in the Symphony for Strings than in a similar piece such as the Britten Simple Symphony.

That said, there are aficionados. And these performances are good and sound good. The Saxophone Concerto has its moments, and manages to proceed in a fairly direct manner, perhaps because it started out life as a piano sonata. Hard to create those unpleasant long sneers on the piano. And the Cello Concerto seems a fairly healthy piece. But be forewarned: There is no real warmth in this music. It is like being in Brighton on a rainy day: It is grey and cold; there is the smell of cooking grease in the air, and somebody standing under a lamppost has his eye on your wallet."

A poorly written review with nothing more than an axe to grind with no real intent with getting on with it. I imagine this Mr. Kruger loves to hear himself talk.

[vandermolen]

I listened right through this excellent CD in a car journey yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed every work (apart from the 'polka' from Solitaire). Arnold's (v slow) performance of Symphony No.1 is my favourite version. Maybe because for many years it was the only version I knew (on LP) the other recordings sound much too fast to me. I also really like the Concerto for Two Pianos and 'Tam O'Shanter' which is great fun. Also yesterday I listened to Andrew Penny's recording of the 9th Symphony, made in the presence of Arnold. I was very gripped by it - it seems to owe a bit of a debt to Mahler's 9th Symphony. Penny's is my favourite version.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Just want to say that I have been listening to Arnold's symphonies the past few days. I started with no. 5, conducted by the composer himself, which made me an instant convert. Fascinating, gripping music. What I like about the music is its variety and unpredictability, its freedom.

[Roasted Swan]

Just want to say that I have been listening to Arnold's symphonies the past few days. I started with no. 5, conducted by the composer himself, which made me an instant convert. Fascinating, gripping music. What I like about the music is its variety and unpredictability, its freedom.

very good concise description!

[Carshot]

Has anyone here heard this yet?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Centenary-Celebration-Margaret-Fingerhut-Recordings/dp/B09BL99JTT/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=0748871064027&qid=1636445136&qsid=262-0520078-4946728&s=music&sr=1-1&sres=B09BL99JTT&srpt=ABIS_MUSIC

"SOMM Recordings is delighted to mark the 100th anniversary of Sir Malcolm Arnold's birth with seven first recordings of arrangements for violin and piano played by Peter Fisher and Margaret Fingerhut. A prolific composer with a prodigious gift for memorable melodies and technical brilliance, Malcolm Arnold – A Centenary Celebration reflects both the serious and lighter sides of one of the most distinctive voices of post-war British music. Making their SOMM Recordings debuts are violinist Peter Fisher, hailed by The Times as 'one in a handful of the world's finest musicians', and British music champion Margaret Fingerhut who has been described by Gramophone as a pianist of 'consummate skill and thrilling conviction'. The pair have been playing together in an admired partnership since 2016."

[vandermolen]

Informative review of new 9th Symphony recording:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2021/Nov/Arnold-sym9-TOCC0613.htm

[André]

Informative review of new 9th Symphony recording:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2021/Nov/Arnold-sym9-TOCC0613.htm

Excellent review, very informative and fully aware of the reviewer's own biases (we all have them). Thanks, Jeffrey !

[vandermolen]

Excellent review, very informative and fully aware of the reviewer's own biases (we all have them). Thanks, Jeffrey !

My pleasure André. Here's another (rather negative one). I may well still get the disc, although I'm very happy with Andrew Penny's excellent first recording on Naxos, made with Arnold in the studio:
https://www.britishmusicsociety.co.uk/2021/10/malcolm-arnold-symphony-no-9/

[relm1]

My pleasure André. Here's another (rather negative one). I may well still get the disc, although I'm very happy with Andrew Penny's excellent first recording on Naxos, made with Arnold in the studio:
https://www.britishmusicsociety.co.uk/2021/10/malcolm-arnold-symphony-no-9/

I don't know, was Faber Music really "horrified to see that much of the music was stripped back to two part writing"?  That doesn't make a lot of sense and the first professional performance is excellent I feel.  I like the slow meditative and simple approach to the end because I feel it wraps up not just a cycle, but a man.  There were moments of jollity, beautify, raunch, but in the end, a long, slow, lonely decline.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awIxuj_DCsw

[Roasted Swan]

I don't know, was Faber Music really "horrified to see that much of the music was stripped back to two part writing"?  That doesn't make a lot of sense and the first professional performance is excellent I feel.  I like the slow meditative and simple approach to the end because I feel it wraps up not just a cycle, but a man.  There were moments of jollity, beautify, raunch, but in the end, a long, slow, lonely decline.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awIxuj_DCsw

Probably "horrified" is a rather emotive word to use.  For sure there was significant 'concern' expressed both by the Faber editorial team and the score reading department of the BBC.  The truth is that the score IS quite unlike anything else Arnold every wrote which positively bubble over with orchestral colour and counterpoint and almost an excess of detail.  The error that both Faber and BBC made was to assume that somehow the score represented a literal/visible decline - a cognitive failing.  In the liner note for the new Toccata release, Timothy Bowers makes an excellent case for the idea that Arnold recognised that his abilities were in some way diminshed but that he then created a work which was still true to himself as a person and composer albeit within a more constrained technical framework....

[relm1]

Probably "horrified" is a rather emotive word to use.  For sure there was significant 'concern' expressed both by the Faber editorial team and the score reading department of the BBC.  The truth is that the score IS quite unlike anything else Arnold every wrote which positively bubble over with orchestral colour and counterpoint and almost an excess of detail.  The error that both Faber and BBC made was to assume that somehow the score represented a literal/visible decline - a cognitive failing.  In the liner note for the new Toccata release, Timothy Bowers makes an excellent case for the idea that Arnold recognised that his abilities were in some way diminshed but that he then created a work which was still true to himself as a person and composer albeit within a more constrained technical framework....

The reason this is bullshit is the exact same could be said about any major composer's final work.  Take Shostakovich No. 15 where he quotes random works from his youth.  The publisher could say he didn't go in the dark direction of the 14th and the 15th proved evidence of mental decline.   Same with RVW No. 9.  This is a major assertion with no evidence and should be challenged.