Robert Simpson(1921-1997)

[vandermolen]

Not necessarily - I consider his work inconsistent.  Some pieces I quite like - others, meh.

I like Simpson's Symphony 3 as well, especially in that famous old Horenstein recording.

[kyjo]

I trudged through all of the Simpson symphonies a couple years ago, and, for the most part, they left me cold (I did, however, enjoy the earlier, accessible Nielsen Variations quite a bit). Recently, I decided to revisit a couple of them, and my reactions were more positive. I particularly found myself enjoying the epic Sixth - its first movement, which depicts the emergence of life from a fertilized cell, moves inevitably towards a shattering climax representing the moment of birth. The second movement is more relaxed, but builds excitingly to a memorable ending on a simple D major triad. I echo many of the sentiments towards Simpson's music have been voiced previously in this thread - I find it very impressively written, and often powerful and exciting, but too emotionally detached for me to truly love and connect with it. After all, he did excise the original slow movement of his Fourth Symphony because he found it "too emotional" (hopefully we'll get to hear it someday). Nevertheless, I recognize him as one of the great 20th century symphonists (even if he sometimes sounds like "Nielsen without the tunes", as Jeffrey so accurately put it earlier in the thread ) , and I shall persist in trying to appreciate his music more.

P.S. I wonder when we're gonna get a new recording of Simpson's Piano Concerto, which is supposedly one of his most accessible works. The only recording of it has long been out of print.

[relm1]

I trudged through all of the Simpson symphonies a couple years ago, and, for the most part, they left me cold (I did, however, enjoy the earlier, accessible Nielsen Variations quite a bit). Recently, I decided to revisit a couple of them, and my reactions were more positive. I particularly found myself enjoying the epic Sixth - its first movement, which depicts the emergence of life from a fertilized cell, moves inevitably towards a shattering climax representing the moment of birth. The second movement is more relaxed, but builds excitingly to a memorable ending on a simple D major triad. I echo many of the sentiments towards Simpson's music have been voiced previously in this thread - I find it very impressively written, and often powerful and exciting, but too emotionally detached for me to truly love and connect with it. After all, he did excise the original slow movement of his Fourth Symphony because he found it "too emotional" (hopefully we'll get to hear it someday). Nevertheless, I recognize him as one of the great 20th century symphonists (even if he sometimes sounds like "Nielsen without the tunes", as Jeffrey so accurately put it earlier in the thread ) , and I shall persist in trying to appreciate his music more.

P.S. I wonder when we're gonna get a new recording of Simpson's Piano Concerto, which is supposedly one of his most accessible works. The only recording of it has long been out of print.

I haven't heard No. 6 but your description inspires me to put it on my playlist.  I too find Simpson hit or miss.  It isn't bad, it just doesn't compel me to listen further.  I do enjoy the Vernon Handley recording of Symphonies No. 3 and 5 but understand from a good source (Malcolm MacDonald) that Simpson loathed that series.  So perhaps my mixed feelings of his music are based on unidiomatic interpretations. 

[calyptorhynchus]

(I did, however, enjoy the earlier, accessible Nielsen Variations quite a bit)..... After all, he did excise the original slow movement of his Fourth Symphony because he found it "too emotional" (hopefully we'll get to hear it someday).

The Nielsen variations are from 1982, so around the time of the 8th Symphony. Simpson didn't excise the original slow movement of 4, the only thing he did was alter the tempo from Adagio to Andante. And you can hear the earlier version, there is a recording of a BBC broadcast of 4 before Simpson made his change at Albion's Archive https://www.mediafire.com/?yqrs5q7n92j17#39gklf97ua449 .

[calyptorhynchus]

I do enjoy the Vernon Handley recording of Symphonies No. 3 and 5 but understand from a good source (Malcolm MacDonald) that Simpson loathed that series. 

I don't think he loathed them, he just thought Handley could have done better. One of his beefs was that conductors didn't rehearse modern music enough (and as a BBC producer he certainly had experience of this). This is understandable as modern music tends to be programmed alongside older music and people know what the older music is supposed to sound like so conductors rehearse this more because they will be judged on their interpretation of the more familiar stuff. When RS's 8th was premiered by the Royal Danish Orchestra under Semkow the conductor didn't rehearse the 8th at all, not a bar of it, so the first performance was effectively the first play-through*. You can see why Simpson felt aggrieved.

*Actually that performance stands up pretty well, all things considered, you can hear it on Youtube.

[relm1]

I don't think he loathed them, he just thought Handley could have done better. One of his beefs was that conductors didn't rehearse modern music enough (and as a BBC producer he certainly had experience of this). This is understandable as modern music tends to be programmed alongside older music and people know what the older music is supposed to sound like so conductors rehearse this more because they will be judged on their interpretation of the more familiar stuff. When RS's 8th was premiered by the Royal Danish Orchestra under Semkow the conductor didn't rehearse the 8th at all, not a bar of it, so the first performance was effectively the first play-through*. You can see why Simpson felt aggrieved.

*Actually that performance stands up pretty well, all things considered, you can hear it on Youtube.

Fair point but what composer on earth would think they had enough rehearsal time?  I thought it was something more than this. 

[kyjo]

The Nielsen variations are from 1982, so around the time of the 8th Symphony. Simpson didn't excise the original slow movement of 4, the only thing he did was alter the tempo from Adagio to Andante. And you can hear the earlier version, there is a recording of a BBC broadcast of 4 before Simpson made his change at Albion's Archive https://www.mediafire.com/?yqrs5q7n92j17#39gklf97ua449 .

I stand corrected! Thanks.

[calyptorhynchus]

Two CDs with a bearing on Simpson: both from the CRQ label which republishes older recordings or radio broadcasts. http://crqeditions.co.uk/

CRQ CD290-291 Is a double album of two Prom Concerts from 1966 with Charles Groves conducting. The first has a splendid performance of Haydn Symphony No.93 (the one with the bassoon fart joke in the slow movement) and a performance of Simpson's Third Symphony. This is  high powered performance like Horenstein's account, perhaps even better than his. The first movement is just a boiling cauldron of musical energy, and when I hear it in a fine performance like this I can't understand why this music isn't played more often and isn't considered the standard of comparison for late C20 symphonic music. The second movement, of course, is a three part structure of slow movement - scherzo like movement and finale, the whole evolving with majestic purpose and eloquence (and just as much musical energy).

In the main the Hyperion Handley recordings just lack that extra electricity that the Groves and Horenstein 3s, the Boult 1, and some of the radio recordings have. But I think the stature of the music can be seen in them anyway, particularly in Handley's 9 & 10, which are so obviously monumental that no-one could mistake this.

[The second disk is another Prom, where Groves conducts Walton's Scapino and VW's Serenade to Music, both fine performances. The last work is Delius's Appalachia... Delius isn't my cup of tea.]

Well worth getting, though don't expect modern sound.

[calyptorhynchus]

The second disk is  CRQ CD268 which has Simpson conducting Beethoven's 3rd. In the introduction Simpson explains he wanted to perform Beethoven's 3rd as Beethoven would have wished (he doesn't use the term 'authentic performance'). He does this with modern instruments but in the strength that Beethoven's orchestra would have had (ie fewer strings), and by discarding any changes that conductors have made over the years to the score (motivated by the need to rebalance the sound for an orchestra with more strings, or where it was perceived that Beethoven was limited by the natural brass instruments of his day).

The result is an amazing performance, and not, as you might expect from Simpson's sceptical comments about Beethoven's metronome in his writing, very slow at all.

The coupling is the first radio broadcast of Havergal Brian's Sinfonia Tragica (No.6), which Simpson produced. This is a useful comparison with the two commercial recordings available.

[JohnP]

Two CDs with a bearing on Simpson: both from the CRQ label which republishes older recordings or radio broadcasts. http://crqeditions.co.uk/

CRQ CD290-291 Is a double album of two Prom Concerts from 1966 with Charles Groves conducting. The first has a splendid performance of Haydn Symphony No.93 (the one with the bassoon fart joke in the slow movement) and a performance of Simpson's Third Symphony. This is  high powered performance like Horenstein's account, perhaps even better than his. The first movement is just a boiling cauldron of musical energy, and when I hear it in a fine performance like this I can't understand why this music isn't played more often and isn't considered the standard of comparison for late C20 symphonic music. The second movement, of course, is a three part structure of slow movement - scherzo like movement and finale, the whole evolving with majestic purpose and eloquence (and just as much musical energy).

In the main the Hyperion Handley recordings just lack that extra electricity that the Groves and Horenstein 3s, the Boult 1, and some of the radio recordings have. But I think the stature of the music can be seen in them anyway, particularly in Handley's 9 & 10, which are so obviously monumental that no-one could mistake this.

[The second disk is another Prom, where Groves conducts Walton's Scapino and VW's Serenade to Music, both fine performances. The last work is Delius's Appalachia... Delius isn't my cup of tea.]

Well worth getting, though don't expect modern sound.

Steve Schwartz at Classical Net agrees and believes that Simpson stands at least with Shostakovich and compares his string quartets to those of Beethoven and Bartok

http://www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/h/hyp66905a.php

[cilgwyn]

I listened to Simpson's third,a few weeks ago,and I DID enjoy it! The recording was the one on the old Unicorn Lp. (I got it off Youtube and put it on a cd-r.) I remember liking it,when I was a youngster. I particularly enjoyed those quiet 'space-y' (as in 'outer space) sounds in some of the quieter moments,which seemed to reflect Simpson's interest in astronomy. I even thought of buying the Hyperion cd;which I used to own. After reading a whole load of posts on various forums;I decided not to! There does seem to be a consensus of opinion on Simpson's music. One,being that his music lacks warmth,and an emphasis on form,to the detriment of other qualities which generally endear one to a composer. Also,a worrying amount of posts which speak of initial enthusiasm,only to be followed by,not listening to them much,or at all. Interestingly,I also notice,on the Hyperion website,that the box set has been deleted and some of the Hyperion cd's are archive,only! Also,while deleted cd's of composers often fetch high prices from sellers,Simpson's are all usually "dirt cheap"! I must admit,I did like his Fifth and Ninth,at first;only to,later,follow the trajectory of some (allot) of the posts I read! I have to say,in his defense;I do admire what he did for Havergal Brian. Also,I once wrote a rather over enthusiastic letter to him;only to receive a letter from his wife informing that he had suffered a stroke,and thanking me for my letter. I wrote another letter apologising for my first letter. I received a lovely reply from his wife (Angela) telling me not to worry;and thanking me for my letters. I remember thinking what a nice person to have written that! It was terrible,the stroke he had! I believe it affected him in such a way that pain killing drugs had no effect!!

[vandermolen]

I like Symphony 1 (Boult) and 3 (Horenstein), the others I struggle with. To me they sound a bit like Nielsen without the tunes, but I wil persevere with Nos 2, 4 and 9 following recommendations here.

This is pretty much still my view of Simpson's music. Symphony 1, his PhD thesis from Durham, remains my favourite although No.3 is very impressive and powerful.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Robert Simpson is one of those intelligent and masterly artists whose world-view limits their range of expression. I respect and admire him, and I appreciate several of his symphonies, like 3 and 9. But I hardly ever feel the urge to listen again. There is a hard objectivity to his music and a one-sided interest in process and structure, but not in aid of expression. And that, to me, is a weakness. Havergal Brian may be his inferior in overall symphonic planning, but his work is all expression and dramatic contrast, all structural surprise.

[cilgwyn]

Yes,I remember my initial enthusiasm,soon died down. Usually,I would expect to collect all the others,if I liked something,that much. Of course,sometimes,there's a reason why you can't. In the case of Simpson,interest just seemed to fizzle out. And yet,when I first heard the Hyperion recordings of 3 & 5 and nine,I remember playing them quite allot. I even had my late mother sit through the Ninth,with me. I thought it was that good. I seem to recall it received some praise in Gramophone,at the time;and it was one of their recordings of the year (or month?). Judging from their website,I get the feeling that even Hyperion might be getting cold feet? Although,they do make periodic deletions,of course!
Yes,a bit like Nielsen,without the tunes........and warmth. The Fifth is a case in point. Very cleverly constructed. But,maybe too clever-clever,for it's own good. I agree with Johan about Havergal Brian. Daniel Jones is another example. There's a humanity and warmth there;which draws me back.
I don't want to sound too disparaging,though. I wish I could compose;and Robert Simpson was obviously a clever man and wrote books.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Bruckner is also strangely objective and cosmic, but his universe was animated by the divine. Simpson 'only' saw matter and energy and process. That seems to be not enough to draw people in. The past few weeks I have been lured into really exploring George Lloyd's symphonies... I have three of them on a loop: 6, 7 and 9. Would never happen with Simpson. Alas.

[Baron Scarpia]

Robert Simpson is one of those intelligent and masterly artists whose world-view limits their range of expression. I respect and admire him, and I appreciate several of his symphonies, like 3 and 9. But I hardly ever feel the urge to listen again. There is a hard objectivity to his music and a one-sided interest in process and structure, but not in aid of expression. And that, to me, is a weakness. Havergal Brian may be his inferior in overall symphonic planning, but his work is all expression and dramatic contrast, all structural surprise.

I think the structure usually turned out to be a surprise to Brian himself, as well.

Seriously, I've never been able to get into Brian because the music seemed too haphazard. I like some structure, a skeleton to hold the music together. The works would be amusing at first listen, but the more I listened the less I enjoyed them.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I think the structure usually turned out to be a surprise to Brian himself, as well.

Seriously, I've never been able to get into Brian because the music seemed too haphazard. I like some structure, a skeleton to hold the music together. The works would be amusing at first listen, but the more I listened the less I enjoyed them.

Completely legitimate. I think those studies by Malcolm MacDonald certainly aided my understanding. But apart from that - I simply fell for the music, it spoke my language. You cannot engineer love or appreciation.

[calyptorhynchus]

At the risk of carrying on my role of the one-man Simpson fan club I have to say that I don't share any of these views. I think that even if Simpson was simply a intellectualising materialist then his music would still be interesting enough to engage, but in fact the more I listen the more I hear the actual emotions that are in play. It's fascinating to hear Simpson in various places verging close on the English pastoral (Herbert Howells was his teacher, he loved Vaughan Williams' music).

Try the first String Quintet, gorgeous music. Or the String Quartet no.10, the actual voices of angels 

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Your advocacy is much appreciated, calyptorhynchus!

[arpeggio]

At the risk of carrying on my role of the one-man Simpson fan club ...

Just because I have not submitted any posts does not mean that I am not a member of the Simpson fan club.