Robert Simpson(1921-1997)

[Harry]

When Robert Simpson's music was released on Hyperion aeons ago, I bought all that came out. His music and I clicked right away, and thus reminds me how long it is ago I had this music in my player. Must rectify this soon......

[relm1]

When Robert Simpson's music was released on Hyperion aeons ago, I bought all that came out. His music and I clicked right away, and thus reminds me how long it is ago I had this music in my player. Must rectify this soon......

I don't really click with his music.  I've tried to like it but am generally ambivalent to it.  Maybe I need to give it another go.

[Maestro267]

As he's a major British symphonist of the 20th century, I am very interested to hear this music. What symphonies would be a good starting point?

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

As he's a major British symphonist of the 20th century, I am very interested to hear this music. What symphonies would be a good starting point?

If you like the neo-classical style, get the disc with symphonies 2 & 4.

If you like more large-scale romantic, get #9.

[vandermolen]

As he's a major British symphonist of the 20th century, I am very interested to hear this music. What symphonies would be a good starting point?

I'd also suggest 1 and 3.

[Harry]

As he's a major British symphonist of the 20th century, I am very interested to hear this music. What symphonies would be a good starting point?

I would listen to all of them. There is not a weak work amongst his oeuvre.

[SymphonicAddict]

I've listened to the first 9 symphonies and I can say none of them are bad, rather the opposite, tremendously invigorating. The Nielsen influence is more evident until the 4th, so for newbies I'd recommend the first 4 symphonies to begin. From the 5th on the atmosphere is more "mystic" and disquieting, being the 9th the highest point of this cycle, a true masterpiece full of drama that conveys a strong sense of energy and evolution, something really brilliant.

[vandermolen]

I've listened to the first 9 symphonies and I can say none of them are bad, rather the opposite, tremendously invigorating. The Nielsen influence is more evident until the 4th, so for newbies I'd recommend the first 4 symphonies to begin. From the 5th on the atmosphere is more "mystic" and disquieting, being the 9th the highest point of this cycle, a true masterpiece full of drama that conveys a strong sense of energy and evolution, something really brilliant.

Thanks for the helpful summary Cesar - more incentive for me to listen to Simpson again.

[arpeggio]

I've listened to the first 9 symphonies and I can say none of them are bad, rather the opposite, tremendously invigorating. The Nielsen influence is more evident until the 4th, so for newbies I'd recommend the first 4 symphonies to begin. From the 5th on the atmosphere is more "mystic" and disquieting, being the 9th the highest point of this cycle, a true masterpiece full of drama that conveys a strong sense of energy and evolution, something really brilliant.

Big Simpson fan.  I am jealous of people who can do a better job of explaining his music tham I can.

[cilgwyn]

After reading these recent posts,I just had to stop resisting temptation,and buy some more Robert Simpson symphonies. I intended to buy the cd of 6 & 7,but,pheweee,look at the prices!!! I ended up buying the cd of symphonies 1 & 8,which was at a reasonable price! I now have No's 1-5,8 & 9 (or will have shortly!). Hyperion have deleted most of their Simpson symphony cd's,including the box set,and s/h prices are rocketing!! I'm not paying over £20 for a Robert Simpson cd,sorry!! Thanks to the Art Music Forum,I do have downloads of No 6 and the Piano concerto,however. I've got quite enough to get on with,for the time being,now,anyway!!

[vandermolen]

After reading these recent posts,I just had to stop resisting temptation,and buy some more Robert Simpson symphonies. I intended to buy the cd of 6 & 7,but,pheweee,look at the prices!!! I ended up buying the cd of symphonies 1 & 8,which was at a reasonable price! I now have No's 1-5,8 & 9 (or will have shortly!). Hyperion have deleted most of their Simpson symphony cd's,including the box set,and s/h prices are rocketing!! I'm not paying over £20 for a Robert Simpson cd,sorry!! Thanks to the Art Music Forum,I do have downloads of No 6 and the Piano concerto,however. I've got quite enough to get on with,for the time being,now,anyway!!

cilgwyn, don't forget that there is the Horenstein version of Symphony 3 which I like very much. It's available on Amazon UK in its two CD manifestations for under £10. I have to say that I prefer the Unicorn release with the giant Sun above a British landscape (I was going to say 'English' but realised that you might take offence, especially after your World Cup comment  ) to the other one with Simpson and his pipe. There is also the terrific Boult CD with Symphony 1 coupled with Orr's Symphony in One Movement, which I love and Fricker's Symphony 2 with its very exciting final section. However, I'm sure that you're happy with the Handley version.

[vandermolen]

I was having a sort out of my CDs today and the first Robert Simpson one that I came across was of Symphony 11 and the Nielsen Variations. I was interested to see that the Symphony was not conducted by Vernon Handley but by the dedicatee, Matthew Taylor. Anyway, I played the CD this evening and I'm sorry to say that my attention wandered after a very short time. The symphony reminded me of a massive piece of scaffolding which, when removed, reveals no building - in other words, an impressive structure with no content. Others will disagree. I found it totally unmemorable. When Simpson, a man of great integrity, wrote about Bruckner and Nielsen it was invariably about 'the struggle for B flat major' or whatever (I have no understanding of the technicality of music). Simpson's Symphony 11 sounded to me like 'the struggle' for a particular key without anything else - in other words it's all structure and not much else. It reminded me of my attempting to read Mervyn Peake's novel 'Gormenghast' and giving up as I felt that the descriptions became an end in themselves rather than being properly integrated into the narrative. This is largely my view of Simpson (or at least his later symphonies). My loss - as I know how much others enjoy his music. I must listen to symphonies 2 and 4 next as others here rate them highly. I enjoyed the Nielsen Variations even less than the Symphony. Much of Simpson's work still sounds sub-Nielsen to me. Please don't feel that I have to have big tunes to appreciate a piece of music. Scores like Norgard's Symphony 1, Wordsworth's Symphony 2 and Blomdahl's Symphony 1 mean a lot to me and they are hardly full of melodies. I will persevere with Simpson however and will always be grateful for his promotion of Havergal Brian whom I consider a much greater composer.

[calyptorhynchus]

When Simpson, a man of great integrity, wrote about Bruckner and Nielsen it was invariably about 'the struggle for B flat major' or whatever (I have no understanding of the technicality of music). Simpson's Symphony 11 sounded to me like 'the struggle' for a particular key without anything else - in other words it's all structure and not much else.

After about the Symphony No.6 (SQs 7 onwards) Simpson didn't use progressive tonality so much as intervalic argument to structure his works (though the works still have a tonal argument). (Interestingly so did Rubbra in his later symphonies). You can read about this in the CD liner notes to the Hyperion series.

I love the Symphony No.11, I hear as a tribute to Holmboe, I believe that when Simpson was writing it he had heard that Homboe, whom he revered, as quite ill. It was the last orchestral work he wrote before he suffered the stroke that destroyed his creativity.

[PerfectWagnerite]

I was having a sort out of my CDs today and the first Robert Simpson one that I came across was of Symphony 11 and the Nielsen Variations. I was interested to see that the Symphony was not conducted by Vernon Handley but by the dedicatee, Matthew Taylor. Anyway, I played the CD this evening and I'm sorry to say that my attention wandered after a very short time. The symphony reminded me of a massive piece of scaffolding which, when removed, reveals no building - in other words, an impressive structure with no content.

Yes that is exactly how I feel but I couldn't put in in such apropos words as you. I used to have the Hyperion set. I remember Symphony #9 had a really annoying talk by Simpson regarding how his symphony was one "wedge" opening after another. The word "wedge" must have been used 50 times in the 20 minute talk. That and this rather presumptuous claim on the backcover didn't help:

[SymphonicAddict]

I was having a sort out of my CDs today and the first Robert Simpson one that I came across was of Symphony 11 and the Nielsen Variations. I was interested to see that the Symphony was not conducted by Vernon Handley but by the dedicatee, Matthew Taylor. Anyway, I played the CD this evening and I'm sorry to say that my attention wandered after a very short time. The symphony reminded me of a massive piece of scaffolding which, when removed, reveals no building - in other words, an impressive structure with no content. Others will disagree. I found it totally unmemorable. When Simpson, a man of great integrity, wrote about Bruckner and Nielsen it was invariably about 'the struggle for B flat major' or whatever (I have no understanding of the technicality of music). Simpson's Symphony 11 sounded to me like 'the struggle' for a particular key without anything else - in other words it's all structure and not much else. It reminded me of my attempting to read Mervyn Peake's novel 'Gormenghast' and giving up as I felt that the descriptions became an end in themselves rather than being properly integrated into the narrative. This is largely my view of Simpson (or at least his later symphonies). My loss - as I know how much others enjoy his music. I must listen to symphonies 2 and 4 next as others here rate them highly. I enjoyed the Nielsen Variations even less than the Symphony. Much of Simpson's work still sounds sub-Nielsen to me. Please don't feel that I have to have big tunes to appreciate a piece of music. Scores like Norgard's Symphony 1, Wordsworth's Symphony 2 and Blomdahl's Symphony 1 mean a lot to me and they are hardly full of melodies. I will persevere with Simpson however and will always be grateful for his promotion of Havergal Brian whom I consider a much greater composer.

Too bad Simpson's 11 didn't fulfill your expectations. Coincidentally, today I also heard that symphony finishing the cycle and I had a very different view of it than yours. The 11 is possibly his weakest one but I did find it with content, it has some exciting moments and intriguing nature, maybe Simpson often repeated the formula with some of his symphonies making them kind of similar. Overall, my favorites are the 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 9.

[vandermolen]

After about the Symphony No.6 (SQs 7 onwards) Simpson didn't use progressive tonality so much as intervalic argument to structure his works (though the works still have a tonal argument). (Interestingly so did Rubbra in his later symphonies). You can read about this in the CD liner notes to the Hyperion series.

I love the Symphony No.11, I hear as a tribute to Holmboe, I believe that when Simpson was writing it he had heard that Homboe, whom he revered, as quite ill. It was the last orchestral work he wrote before he suffered the stroke that destroyed his creativity.

Thanks for this. Actually I preferred the second movement to the first. I think that I should try some of the earlier symphonies other than 1 and 3 which I already know and like. I'm aware how much Simpson means to others and some consider him one of the great 20th century symphonists so it is clearly my loss. I recall that in the spoken introduction to Symphony 9 Simpson talks about the structure of his music but then says something along the lines of 'none of this matters if the music does not appeal to you' and that is my experience, so far, with Symphony 11. Holmboe's music, as a whole, has much greater appeal to me and I find it more memorable.

[vandermolen]

Too bad Simpson's 11 didn't fulfill your expectations. Coincidentally, today I also heard that symphony finishing the cycle and I had a very different view of it than yours. The 11 is possibly his weakest one but I did find it with content, it has some exciting moments and intriguing nature, maybe Simpson often repeated the formula with some of his symphonies making them kind of similar. Overall, my favorites are the 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 9.

Thank you Cesar and there were some moments, especially in the second movement which appealed more to me - interesting that you consider No.11 to be the weakest - probably not a good place for me to start my re-exploration of Simpson but good to find someone else who admires Symphony 1.

[vandermolen]

Yes that is exactly how I feel but I couldn't put in in such apropos words as you. I used to have the Hyperion set. I remember Symphony #9 had a really annoying talk by Simpson regarding how his symphony was one "wedge" opening after another. The word "wedge" must have been used 50 times in the 20 minute talk. That and this rather presumptuous claim on the backcover didn't help:

Thank you! The notes accompanying Symphony 11 make some comparisons with Mahler and Sibelius which I did not really see myself. With Simpson I often feel that the sum is less than the parts.

[relm1]

I was having a sort out of my CDs today and the first Robert Simpson one that I came across was of Symphony 11 and the Nielsen Variations. I was interested to see that the Symphony was not conducted by Vernon Handley but by the dedicatee, Matthew Taylor. Anyway, I played the CD this evening and I'm sorry to say that my attention wandered after a very short time. The symphony reminded me of a massive piece of scaffolding which, when removed, reveals no building - in other words, an impressive structure with no content. Others will disagree. I found it totally unmemorable. When Simpson, a man of great integrity, wrote about Bruckner and Nielsen it was invariably about 'the struggle for B flat major' or whatever (I have no understanding of the technicality of music). Simpson's Symphony 11 sounded to me like 'the struggle' for a particular key without anything else - in other words it's all structure and not much else. It reminded me of my attempting to read Mervyn Peake's novel 'Gormenghast' and giving up as I felt that the descriptions became an end in themselves rather than being properly integrated into the narrative. This is largely my view of Simpson (or at least his later symphonies). My loss - as I know how much others enjoy his music. I must listen to symphonies 2 and 4 next as others here rate them highly. I enjoyed the Nielsen Variations even less than the Symphony. Much of Simpson's work still sounds sub-Nielsen to me. Please don't feel that I have to have big tunes to appreciate a piece of music. Scores like Norgard's Symphony 1, Wordsworth's Symphony 2 and Blomdahl's Symphony 1 mean a lot to me and they are hardly full of melodies. I will persevere with Simpson however and will always be grateful for his promotion of Havergal Brian whom I consider a much greater composer.

Why you little *(#@*!.  Actually, I agree with you.  Simpson seems to be a music scholar/musicologist who wrote music.  He generally understands what the material needs structurally or architecturally, just doesn't have the talent to pull it off which is fine.  Some composers have a lot of talent but lack the skill/architecture (perhaps Mussorgsky). 

[JohnP]

Well!, Steve Schwartz at Classical Net believes that Simpson stands at least level with Shostakovich and his string quartets bear comparison with Beethoven and Bartok. Vandermolen and relm1 don't think he's up to much. Fascinating....http://www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/h/hyp66905a.php