The Worst First!

[greg]

just finished Elgar's 1st.

honestly, i'm pretty impressed (with an exception to most of the finale).
the best Elgar i've heard, and by that i mean the only Elgar i can say i truly liked after first hearing.
i give it 7/10.

i like it, but in a way it seems too simplistic. Except i wouldn't know how to explain this because my explanation would contradict my other observations....

[12tone.]

just finished Elgar's 1st.

honestly, i'm pretty impressed (with an exception to most of the finale).
the best Elgar i've heard, and by that i mean the only Elgar i can say i truly liked after first hearing.
i give it 7/10.

i like it, but in a way it seems too simplistic. Except i wouldn't know how to explain this because my explanation would contradict my other observations....

ROTF!!111 You had the LP going backwards!  Play it going forwards

OLOLOL!!!1#

[Sergeant Rock]

Definitely, MOST definitely, not Elgar's! A pox on those who claim that    It was enormously popular world-wide when it was first published and was admired by the great conductors of the time. I do not think they were wrong. Of no bearing on its worth, I'll say anyway that it's one of my favorite symphonies and has been for forty years. It's probably not a better symphony than the Second but it certainly pulls on my heartstrings with a firmer grasp.

I'm not sure who to nominate. Of the composers already mentioned often, I happen to love the Ives and Rach Firsts and can listen to the Dvorak with pleasure...occasionally. Scriabin's First?...never thrilled me. I'm going to listen to Golovanov's version tomorrow; if anyone can convince me that Scriabin isn't the worst, he can. If I dip into the second and third tiers, Stanford comes to mind. He'd qualify for worst Second through Seventh too    Just kidding...but he is a bit of a bore symphonically speaking. Thank god Elgar came along to rescue the British symphony.

Sarge

[val]

I insist: Charles Ives First Symphony. It is a work that reminds me of Dvorak (but drunk).

It's like the First Quartet. The music is nice, sometimes, but without real personality.

Very far from that splendid masterpiece, the 4th Symphony.

[Cato]

Concerning Rimsky-Korsakov's First vs. Third Symphonies.

With my wife gone last night I was able to revisit both of these.   

The First has a good deal of energy, with the opening movement giving you an impression for a while that you might have a Russian Beethoven here!  While not all the themes are overtly "Russian," the music has a drive that sustains one's interest.

To be sure, according to the notes, Rimsky revised the work heavily in later years: the original version charmed the Nationalists, but apparently had abrupt transitions and other awkward moments in the polyphony. Rimsky in fact simplified the symphony, with the purpose that an amateur or student orchestra would be able to play it. 

Karl Henning wondered if, in the Third Symphony, the conductor Jarvi might not be at fault for a lackluster reading.

After listening to it again, I think just the opposite: Jarvi and the Gothenburg orchestra do everything they can to squeeze something compelling from the notes.  The opening movement offers a little drama, and a little mystery now and then, which one hopes will be built up.  But no: the scherzo has a tippy-toeing moto perpetuo of little interest, the slow movement is just slow and repetitious, and the finale has a fairly nice theme which the composer does not do much with.

Although I think I will be a little less harsh, ultimately I just do not find the Third Symphony very compelling.  Truly disappointing.

[karlhenning]

Anybody here ever heard Furtwängler's #1? I won't lie: I couldn't finish it.

I won't lie:  I can't even approach it :-)

[springrite]

I won't lie:  I can't even approach it :-)

You should have warned me before i plunged into getting the second to see if it is any better.

[karlhenning]

Definitely, MOST definitely, not Elgar's! A pox on those who claim that    It was enormously popular world-wide when it was first published and was admired by the great conductors of the time. I do not think they were wrong.

Sure, Sarge.  It may be worth while repeating a remark that I have made several times.  In citing Elgar's First as a response to the OP, I was not claiming that it is abysmally bad. Of first symphonies to which I have listened over the past year, the Elgar stood out in my ears as the least entirely accomplished:  the 'Worst First'.

That's all I'll say at present.

[BachQ]

That's all I'll say at present.

I don't blame you.

71 dB, I think I said this once, but it needs saying again ***  These are not "anti-Elgar" tatements by any reasonable standard.

Why bother?  71dB will turn any thread into an Elgar thread.  If you don't believe me, I can show you several Bruckner and Mahler threads that had to be locked because they were hijacked by 71dB.  His anti-Bruckner, anti-Mahler, anti-Shostakovich, anti-Beethoven ravings are among the most amusing reads to be found anywhere on the Internet ...... which is why I'm conflicted as to whether to ignore him, or urge him to continue with his blather.  This is entertainment, pure and simple. And, with his ongoing, incessant Dog and Poju Show, he constantly digs himself deeper into his hole of alienation by diminishing the intellects and aesthetics of those who disagree with him.

Which is why I don't take him seriously; and, as an unfortunate consequence, I am disinclined to consider Elgar's alleged "greatness" seriously.  Let's face it: 71dB and Elgar have been inextricably "bundled" together ....... and the more 71dB tries to elevate Elgar by diminishing other composers (including Beethoven, Shostakovich, Bruckner, Mahler, Brahms), the more repugnant many of us find this bundled Poju/Elgar entity ....... a pervasive entity which enjoys infecting any thread that will allow it ........

WITNESS: This thread has now been turned into an Elgar thread ........ Gee, what a shocker .........

[MN Dave]

I don't blame you.

Why bother?  71dB will turn any thread into an Elgar thread.  If you don't believe me, I can show you several Bruckner and Mahler threads that had to be locked because they were hijacked by 71dB.  His anti-Bruckner, anti-Mahler, anti-Shostakovich, anti-Beethoven ravings are among the most amusing reads to be found anywhere on the Internet ...... which is why I'm conflicted as to whether to ignore him, or urge him to continue with his blather.  This is entertainment, pure and simple. And, with his ongoing, incessant Dog and Poju Show, he constantly digs himself deeper into his hole of alienation by diminishing the intellects and aesthetics of those who disagree with him.

Which is why I don't take him seriously; and, as an unfortunate consequence, I am disinclined to consider Elgar's alleged "greatness" seriously.  Let's face it: 71dB and Elgar have been inextricably "bundled" together ....... and the more 71dB tries to elevate Elgar by diminishing other composers (including Beethoven, Shostakovich, Bruckner, Mahler, Brahms), the more repugnant many of us find this bundled Poju/Elgar entity ....... a pervasive entity which enjoys infecting any thread that will allow it ........

WITNESS: This thread has now been turned into an Elgar thread ........ Gee, what a shocker .........

It doesn't turn into an Elgar thread if you don't let it. Just don't respond to Elgar comments in non-Elgarian threads. Simple.

And that's all I have to say about that. 

[karlhenning]

What do you consider the 'worst first,' Dave?

[MN Dave]

What do you consider the 'worst first,' Dave?

I don't know from firsts.

[BachQ]

Dave, if you let me speak for you, I have a composer in mind ........

[MN Dave]

Dave, if you let me speak for you, I have a composer in mind ........

Noooo!!! 

[karlhenning]

If once the Dark Path you tread . . . . 

[Mark G. Simon]

Which is why I don't take him seriously; and, as an unfortunate consequence, I am disinclined to consider Elgar's alleged "greatness" seriously.  Let's face it: 71dB and Elgar have been inextricably "bundled" together .......

Only in your shallow mind. It should be the most basic thing to keep in mind that these foolish people who are fixated on certain composers are separate entities from the composers themselves. 71 dB is not Elgar. Pink Harp is not Debussy. Let them say what they will, ignore them and their comments will not derail threads.

But you're not going to do any such thing, are you? Because deep down you enjoy bullying people like 71 dB. You enjoy pursuing them like a pack of wild dogs after an errant sheep. This abhorrent behavior is your own responsibility.

[Wanderer]

Anybody here ever heard Furtwängler's #1? I won't lie: I couldn't finish it.

So far, the worthiest contender for the title.

[Don]

Only in your shallow mind. It should be the most basic thing to keep in mind that these foolish people who are fixated on certain composers are separate entities from the composers themselves. 71 dB is not Elgar. Pink Harp is not Debussy. Let them say what they will, ignore them and their comments will not derail threads.

Good to see that Mark made the above comments.  Linking Elgar with the extremist rantings of 71dB makes no sense to me. 

[Cato]

Concerning Furtwaengler's First:

So far, the worthiest contender for the title.

Speaking of conductor/composers: has anyone experienced Leonard Bernstein's First Symphony? 

Or       (dare I type this name?) Leif Segerstam's?   

This afternoon I will have an opportunity to listen to the Schubert First and will report on that!

[Kullervo]

Or       (dare I type this name?) Leif Segerstam's?   

I doubt most listeners have heard any of his 100+ symphonies (I think he's beat Haydn now).