Charles Villiers Stanford

[vers la flamme]

The 6th symphony is definitely a good choice for what to listen to next. I posted enthusiastically about it last year when I first heard it.

Including, I think, a recommendation to me in another thread where I was asking about little known late romantic symphonies. Somehow this resulted in me purchasing the 3rd on disc instead of the 6th, but I'll be getting the 6th in the mail soon enough and I'll let you know what I think!

The nautical song cycles I mentioned have a more unique sound, very British, almost reminding me of Arthur Sullivan, perhaps (I don't know anything about 19th century British music so maybe this touchstone is off). Perhaps it's the English lyrics that give me this impression, but they definitely sounded more English than the 3rd symphony, which reminded me of something like Mendelssohn's Scottish symphony filtered through Brahms and Dvorák. It was an enjoyable listen however with some memorable moments, and it excited me to hear more of Stanford's music.

[Albion]

Including, I think, a recommendation to me in another thread where I was asking about little known late romantic symphonies. Somehow this resulted in me purchasing the 3rd on disc instead of the 6th, but I'll be getting the 6th in the mail soon enough and I'll let you know what I think!

The nautical song cycles I mentioned have a more unique sound, very British, almost reminding me of Arthur Sullivan, perhaps (I don't know anything about 19th century British music so maybe this touchstone is off). Perhaps it's the English lyrics that give me this impression, but they definitely sounded more English than the 3rd symphony, which reminded me of something like Mendelssohn's Scottish symphony filtered through Brahms and Dvorák. It was an enjoyable listen however with some memorable moments, and it excited me to hear more of Stanford's music.

The slow movement of Symphony No.6 is sublime, are as those of the 1894 and 1911 Piano Concertos. Otherwise Symphonies 3, 4 and 5 all contain wonderful music but No.7 is pretty dry (likewise the 1899 Violin Concerto and the 1888 Suite for Violin and Orchestra, although Jeremy Dibble's re-orchestration of the 1918 Violin Concerto proves it to be a lovely work). This is a splendid disc, mostly focussed on fairly late Stanford:

[Albion]

For the major orchestral works, other than Concertos, I'd go for Lloyd-Jones (Naxos) in the Symphonies and Handley (Chandos) in the Irish Rhapsodies. The Handley Irish Rhapsody performances have been collated and repackaged twice (where you can enjoy them as a sequence) and the earlier one is preferable as you get the Concert Piece for Organ and Orchestra, the "Oedipus Rex" Prelude and the Clarinet Concerto:



the 1911 Piano Concerto and the "Down Among the Dead Men" Variations can be had as a stand-alone disc...

[vers la flamme]

Favorite discs featuring Stanford's choral music? I can't stop listening to "The Blue Bird" after Roasted Swan showed it to me the other day. Nor can I stop listening to the 3rd symphony! This composer's music is really speaking to me at the moment, for some unknown reason.

[vers la flamme]

I'm glad you are enjoying Stanford! The 3rd symphony was also my introduction to his orchestral music. The 6th symphony is definitely a good choice for what to listen to next. I posted enthusiastically about it last year when I first heard it. I think the 6th symphony is more original than the 3rd. The 2nd movement has one of the most beautiful English Horn solos, and the theme reappears in the Finale, leading to a very satisfying ending. I haven't listened in a while, but I recall his Intermezzi for clarinet and piano as being enjoyable, too.

Can finally report back to you with my thoughts on the 6th, and I agree, it's a very beautiful work, especially the slow movement. I agree, it is more original than the 3rd, but I like both a lot.

I don't think I realized how prolific and well-served on disc Stanford was, but there's a lot out there. I'm enjoying everything so far. He has been criticized for his conservatism, but he was good at what he did.

[lordlance]

Is Stanford's music usually... low-voltage? I heard half of his Concert Piece for Organ and Orchestra which was described as:

The Concert Piece for organ, brass, drums and strings, composed in 1921, had never been performed until this recording was made recently—eight publishers had rejected it. There is an epic, heroic quality in this fine and noble music, which is played with her customary flair by Gillian Weir.

Hardly heroic. Lacked dynamism.

[Mapman]

Is Stanford's music usually... low-voltage? I heard half of his Concert Piece for Organ and Orchestra which was described as:

Hardly heroic. Lacked dynamism.

Some of Stanford's music could be called "low-voltage". One of Stanford's influences seems to be Brahms, so I find the character of some Stanford similar to gentler Brahms.

However, some of his music is heroic or higher-energy. The finale of Symphony #3, and Irish Rhapsody #2 come to mind.

[Albion]

The concert of Stanford's "Elegiac Ode", Op.24 and Te Deum, Op.66 due to have been given in Wales on 6th May has been cancelled because of the bloody coronation circus. It has not thus far been rescheduled and may not ever happen - rehearsals must have been underway for some time and these two works are major gaps in the Stanford discography (it was due for release by Lyrita)...

 

[lordlance]

Some of Stanford's music could be called "low-voltage". One of Stanford's influences seems to be Brahms, so I find the character of some Stanford similar to gentler Brahms.

However, some of his music is heroic or higher-energy. The finale of Symphony #3, and Irish Rhapsody #2 come to mind.

Brahms is hardly low-energy. His orchestral music can be ferocious even if there are gentler exceptions like the Third Symphony but then there's the titanic piano concertos and the First Symphony.

[Maestro267]

The concert of Stanford's "Elegiac Ode", Op.24 and Te Deum, Op.66 due to have been given in Wales on 6th May has been cancelled because of the bloody coronation circus.

 

It says something that for a brief moment I thought this was a euphemism for coronavirus.

[Albion]

It says something that for a brief moment I thought this was a euphemism for coronavirus.

The upcoming farrago of nonsense at Westminster Abbey will be just about as dismal and probably cause fatalities as people realise that they have to actually bloody pay for the bun-fight. Meanwhile, Stanford is left in limbo...

[Maestro267]

That's a bit extreme but OK. And Stanford's been in limbo for ages so it's simply status quo.

Brahms is hardly low-energy. His orchestral music can be ferocious even if there are gentler exceptions like the Third Symphony but then there's the titanic piano concertos and the First Symphony.

Brahms is incredibly low energy compared to Wagner, Liszt, Stravinsky, Mahler, Strauss etc.

[Albion]

That's a bit extreme but OK. And Stanford's been in limbo for ages so it's simply status quo.

Brahms is incredibly low energy compared to Wagner, Liszt, Stravinsky, Mahler, Strauss etc.

Agreed, much as I love Brahms he never seems to get his kerjangers going. Compare with Dvorak and Tchaikovsky...

[lordlance]

That's a bit extreme but OK. And Stanford's been in limbo for ages so it's simply status quo.

Brahms is incredibly low energy compared to Wagner, Liszt, Stravinsky, Mahler, Strauss etc.

Well if you want to keep Tchaikovsky as the barometer then very few can measure. He's the king of climaxes. But Liszt? Eh. He's not terribly good at orchestral music much as I love him.

Brahms isn't low energy in the overtures, the finale of the first symphony and piano concertos. How can they be classified as low energy? In my view the low energy composers like Debussy and Ravel that make me snore because of their preoccupation with writing "sensuous" music.

[Maestro267]

But Brahms wrote a ton more music than the examples you mentioned. And keep Ravel out of this! It's rich and ecstatically luxurious music! Lose yourself in it...

[Luke]

Dramatic misrepresentation of Debussy/Ravel there. Do I really need to spell out the hundreds of intoxicating reasons why?

[Luke]

But Brahms wrote a ton more music than the examples you mentioned. And keep Ravel out of this! It's rich and ecstatically luxurious music! Lose yourself in it...

Not only that, but hard to imagine e.g. a more 'high energy piece than La valse turns into. One of the most consumately realised conceptions in music....the way it grows and blossoms and blooms and, somewhere along the way, by the finest orchestral and harmonic gradations imaginable, goes overripe, decays, eats itself, eventually destroys the waltz itself. Is there a more masterly masterpiece?

Similar things happen in the D minor concerto; the finale of the G major is as high spirited as you can get. Examples abound.

[DavidW]

These posts are so bizarre.  I have no idea how one is defining high vs. low energy and who has it or who doesn't.  I wouldn't describe any composers listed thus far as low energy, not by a long shot.

[Spotted Horses]

That's a bit extreme but OK. And Stanford's been in limbo for ages so it's simply status quo.

Brahms is incredibly low energy compared to Wagner, Liszt, Stravinsky, Mahler, Strauss etc.

I have rarely encountered a statement that I disagree with more.

[Brian]

Not only that, but hard to imagine e.g. a more 'high energy piece than La valse turns into.

I was thinking the same thing about the finale of Brahms' Second Symphony.

I do think there is a pattern/trend of Brahms conducting that sells his vitality short. If people go too far down the "autumnal" road of interpretation, they can ignore some of the physicality that his music is full of.