GMG Classical Music Forum

The Music Room => Composer Discussion => Topic started by: Thom on April 12, 2007, 10:28:13 AM

Title: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Thom on April 12, 2007, 10:28:13 AM
I think Malcolm deserves a thread in the new forum. I really like to champion this man who was such a prolific composer. The core of his output are his 9 symphonies of which i rate his 9th the best. His music often balances between the dark and the light. Such was his life really. An exuberant man, loved by many and during his good spells a humorous, warm personality, who on the other hand was also suffering from mental disorders for which he was hospitalised several times. It all reflects in his music i suppose. I recently acquired the 3 boxed sets by Decca, that were to commemorate his 85th birthday in october last year. Arnold died a short time before his birthday.
Anyway, there were a few threads about Arnold in the old forum. I hope more of you feel the same about him as i do.

X
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Harry on April 12, 2007, 10:35:04 AM
Of course there are many admirers on this board, and since you have the complete works on three boxes, the Decca recordings we know your admiration.
Today I played this one, and good it is.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: bhodges on April 12, 2007, 10:43:46 AM
A few threads from the other board below (one started by XXXPawn!).  I just discovered this composer last fall, thanks to some of those Chandos recordings, and am very glad I did.  Was sad when he died just a short time after that...

Malcolm Arnold (http://www.good-music-guide.com/forum/index.php/topic,10337.0.html)

Sir Malcolm Arnold, 1921-2006 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/forum/index.php/topic,11089.0.html)

--Bruce
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Thom on April 12, 2007, 10:50:21 AM
Quote from: Harry on April 12, 2007, 10:35:04 AM
Of course there are many admirers on this board, and since you have the complete works on three boxes, the Decca recordings we know your admiration.
Today I played this one, and good it is.

I own this one Harry

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000000AQJ.02._SCLZZZZZZZ_SS500_.jpg)

and i think these quartets are very good indeed, his 2nd especially.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 12, 2007, 10:56:37 AM
Terry Teachout is a critic I usually don't have much sympathy with, but in this article from Commentary, I think he hits the nail on the head in regard to Arnold's real worth:


Terry Teachout: Discovering Malcolm Arnold

When Malcolm Arnold died in September, the obituaries in several of
England's leading newspapers referred to him in the headline as a
"film composer." The Guardian summed up his life's work as follows:


The tormented but irrepressible career of Sir Malcolm Arnold, the
most recorded British composer of all time and the first to win an
Oscar, ended last night with his death at the age of eighty-four.


Not until the fourth paragraph did readers of the Guardian learn
that in addition to scoring The Bridge on the River Kwai (for which
he won his Oscar in 1958) and 131 other movies, Arnold also found
time to write nine symphonies, two dozen concertos, and numerous
other orchestral and chamber works.


While the critical "appreciations" that ran the next day were
better informed, few did more than sketch the outlines of this
composer's controversial career, and they did so at times
evasively. The BBC, for instance, declared that "while some
regarded [Arnold] as one of the pre-eminent composers of his
generation, others saw him as superficial and flippant." The BBC
failed to mention that its own music controllers had long made no
secret of their disdain for his music.


Meanwhile, in American newspapers, Arnold's death went largely
unmentioned--for the good reason that his compositions are
virtually unknown to American audiences. To the extent that he has
a following in this country, it is mainly through the recordings
that have been made of his symphonies in recent years.^1 Indeed,
until a few months ago Malcolm Arnold was little more than a name
to me, too. In a lifetime of concert-going, I had never heard a
public performance of any of his works. All I knew was that he was
widely regarded as a lightweight--a judgment reinforced by his
bluff, breezy personal manner and the self-deprecating statements
he made about his own music. ("If you can say it in words of one
syllable, musically speaking, it's your duty to do so.")


It was only after learning that he suffered from a lifelong case of
manic depression so malignant it had brought his career to a
premature end that it occurred to me to question the received
wisdom about Arnold. Intrigued that he had none-theless managed to
produce a substantial body of work, I procured a copy of Malcolm
Arnold: Rogue Genius (2004), a biography by Anthony Meredith and
Paul Harris that has yet to be published in this country.^2 ^What I
read there was so fascinating that I decided to listen to Arnold's
Fifth Symphony, composed in 1961.


Most of the British critics who covered the premiere of this piece
did so in a brutally dismissive fashion. The London Observer's
Peter Heyworth, for instance, called it the work of a "tub-thumper"
who had "thrown the last shreds of discretion to the winds," while
the anonymous critic for the London Times claimed that it suggested
"a creative personality in an advanced stage of disintegration." To
my amazement, Arnold's Fifth turned out to be not a shoddy piece of
crowd-pleasing yard goods but a compelling, fully realized example
of mid-century modernism that was worthy of comparison with the
best symphonies of Prokofiev and Shostakovich. From the Fifth, I
went on to listen to the rest of his symphonies and a considerable
number of his other works. By the time I was done, it was clear to
me that Arnold, far from being a lightweight, was in fact a major
composer.


Why, then, had he been written off by the critics? Thereby, I was
to learn, hangs a tale of snobbery, provincialism, and aesthetic
ideology run rampant--as well as a chronicle of self-destructive
behavior that is, in the fullest sense of an oft-misused word,
tragic.


Much of Arnold's remarkable individuality can be explained by
taking a close look at his musical training and early professional
life. Born in 1921, he discovered jazz at the age of nine and
taught himself the trumpet in order "to play like Louis Armstrong."
He would remain interested in jazz for the rest of his life--the
slow movement of his Guitar Concerto (1957), for instance, is an
elegy for the great guitarist Django Reinhardt--and though its
influence rarely finds literal expression in his own works, the
pronounced streak of populism that became his trademark no doubt
stemmed from this early encounter.^3


In 1941, Arnold joined the London Philharmonic Orchestra, becoming
its principal trumpet player shortly thereafter. During his tenure
with the LPO, he performed a wide variety of orchestral literature
under such distinguished conductors as Sir Thomas Beecham, Wilhelm
Furtwängler, and Bruno Walter, all of whom were impressed by his
playing, as was everyone else who heard him. ("Why do you want to
be a composer?" Ralph Vaughan Williams asked him, apparently in
genuine bewilderment. "You're the best trumpet player in England.")


Arnold was, indeed, one of only a handful of important composers to
have been a professional orchestral player, as well as the only one
to have played a brass instrument, and the impact of these
experiences on his composing career cannot be understated. As he
would explain to an interviewer:


I have tried to treat definite, straightforward, understandable
material with the utmost simplicity in what I hope is an
interesting manner, treating every single orchestral sound and note
as meaning something and not to be wasted. When you sit in the
orchestra, as I have, you can't help seeing and being disgusted
with the waste of players' energies and talents on mountains of
useless padding.


Arnold also studied conducting with Constant Lambert, the
composer-critic who doubled as music director of the Sadler's Wells
Ballet (now the Royal Ballet). Unlike most British composers of his
generation, Lambert was decidedly Franco-Russian in musical
orientation; he was also closely familiar with early jazz, whose
rhythms and timbres he wove into The Rio Grande (1929) and his
Concerto for Piano and Nine Instruments (1931). It cannot be
coincidental that when Arnold started writing music of his own, it
was just as far removed as Lambert's from the prevailing tendencies
of English modernism. Though Gustav Holst's The Planets left its
mark on his style, Arnold's other musical models were not Edward
Elgar or Vaughan Williams but Berlioz, Mahler, Sibelius, and
(later) Shostakovich.^4


To this volatile brew of seemingly irreconcilable sources, Arnold
added an enlivening dash of the populism he had picked up from
Lambert and the jazzmen who inspired him in childhood. The result
was Beckus the Dandipratt (1943), a concert overture that became
the twenty-one-year-old composer's calling card. A comic scherzo
whose galumphing triple-time rhythms are reminiscent of the
"Uranus" section of The Planets, Beckus is in every other way a
wholly personal utterance, and its pawky wit and luminous
orchestration signaled the emergence of an arrestingly fresh new
voice in British music.^5


Like all such voices, Arnold's was initially viewed with suspicion.
In 1943 and for many years afterward, the British musical
establishment--including the BBC, which already played a key role
in the dissemination of new music in England--was both conservative
and provincial. Its bureaucrats, appalled by the extrovert vigor
and proliferating imagination of Arnold's early compositions, did
their best to keep them from being broadcast. As late as 1951, a
BBC apparatchik dismissed his First Symphony in an internal memo as
"blatant and vulgar . . . not the product of an adult musical
mind." But audiences responded with excitement to his engaging
blend of sophistication and the common touch, and eventually even
the BBC was forced to come around--for a time.


It helped that, by 1948, Arnold was earning enough money from his
film scores to leave the LPO and set up shop as a full-time
composer. A technician of near-Mozartean facility, he was capable
of turning out a half-dozen movie scores each year, and this highly
paid work made it unnecessary for him to curry favor elsewhere. In
the long run, however, it served him poorly, not only because it
diverted his energies from more substantial efforts but because his
film scores, while never less than professional, were rarely
inspired or memorable. In addition, Arnold's work in films provoked
resentment among critics--and colleagues--who viewed him as a
bumptious, unserious upstart with no right to be popular, much less
rich and famous.^6


With the public, however, it seemed throughout the 50's that
Malcolm Arnold could do no wrong. As a classical composer, he
continued to turn out a steady stream of large-scale orchestral and
chamber pieces, all of them received warmly. Aside from his first
five symphonies, composed between 1951 and 1961, he wrote a series
of concise, elegantly crafted concertos, most of them neoclassical
in style, for such noted soloists as the horn player Dennis Brain,
the guitarist Julian Bream, and the oboist Léon Goossens.^7


At the same time, and with equal ease, Arnold moved in the sphere
of light music, producing such ingratiatingly tuneful orchestral
miniatures as the two sets of English Dances (1950-51). A natural
comedian, he collaborated with the cartoonist Gerard Hoffnung on a
festival of musical parodies for which he wrote A Grand, Grand
Overture (1956), scored for three vacuum cleaners, a floor
polisher, and a large symphony orchestra complete with organ.^8


It is in the symphonies, however, that Arnold can be heard at his
best and most characteristic. All of them are broadly but never
rigidly traditional in form, and, though their flavor is
unambiguously contemporary, all maneuver fluently and naturally
within the parameters of functional tonality. Indeed, Arnold's
harmonic vocabulary, which juxtaposes prickly bi-tonal polychords
with sweet-sounding major-seventh cadences, is one of the most
immediately recognizable features of his style.


"So few composers have a distinctive sound--with air and light,"
Arnold observed in 1951. In common with Berlioz and Mahler, his
wind-dominated orchestral palette is unusually light-textured, with
brass and percussion held in reserve for fiery bursts of primary
color. Like Berlioz, he favors violent contrasts--one is never far
from catastrophe in an Arnold symphony--and like Mahler, he loves
to slip marches into his slow movements and finales, some funereal
and others explosively martial. Mahler is also the obvious
reference point for his use of quasi-popular tunes, some of which
are purposefully vulgar in effect.


Arnold was a passionate believer in the expressive power of melody,
and though he never pandered to audiences, he liked to please them
when he could. Revealingly, he once observed with admiration that
the novels of Somerset Maugham could be "read with pleasure by one
and all." That was his goal as well.


Above all, Arnold's symphonies are reflections of his complex,
frequently stormy emotional life. He once stated that "my
symphonies . . . are autobiographical, but I prefer them to be
approached as pure music," explaining the apparent paradox in this
way:


I like music because it is not connected with any time, place, or
particular thing. It is abstract emotion. As soon as you get words,
you're tied to a particular object or situation, inevitably, by the
use of words, which to me limits the vast horizons that music has
from an emotional point of view.


For this reason Arnold rarely spoke in public (or in private) about
the programmatic content of his symphonies, though he admitted that
the three movements of his Seventh Symphony (1973) were "in the
very loosest way . . . musical portraits" of his three children. It
is now thought that many of his other symphonies were based in
whole or in part on secret programs of a similarly autobiographical
nature. If true, this would shed light on such seemingly
inexplicable departures from conventional form as the startling
moment at the end of the Fifth Symphony when, immediately after the
full orchestra presents a resplendently triumphant D-major version
of the lyrical main theme of the slow movement. Arnold swerves
without warning into E minor, the austere key in which the symphony
begins, and brings the finale to a close with a stark coda that
trails off into dead silence.^9


Arnold was enraged by the contempt with which critics savaged his
Fifth Symphony. Asked by a reporter whether such notices embittered
him, he replied:


I'll tell you how bitter I am--only as bitter as a man who wants to
stand up and walk down the street and doesn't want people shouting
offensive, patronizing remarks after him. The critics have got to
live, but for Christ's sake why don't they let me live too?


Needless to say, Arnold was not the only composer to be raked over
the coals in the 60's by critics who wrongly believed tonality to
be obsolete. As much as anything else, their consistent refusal to
take him seriously stemmed from their long-simmering rage at the
provincialism of British musical life, and it was his bad luck to
be caught in the crossfire. But by then he had something far more
serious to worry about: the likelihood that he was going mad.


Mental illness ran in Arnold's family, and from adolescence onward
he showed signs of an underlying instability that went far beyond
the "eccentricity" on which the English pride themselves. As a
student he was notorious for his heavy drinking and sexual
excesses. In 1943 he appears to have been hospitalized for what was
then thought to be schizophrenia; in 1945 he enlisted in the army
even though he had previously claimed to be a pacifist, and a month
later shot himself in the foot in order to return to civilian life.
Thereafter, his life would be marked by recurrent psychotic
episodes, suicide attempts, and hospitalizations.


For a quarter-century, Arnold nonetheless managed to function as a
composer and conductor, though his bizarre behavior, exacerbated by
what in time developed into full-blown alcoholism, became steadily
more difficult to ignore or paper over. Naturally enough, many of
those unaware that he was mentally ill found his conduct
shocking--a fact that also helps to explain the distaste with which
he came to be regarded by a growing number of his fellow
musicians.^10


It is impossible to speak definitively of the extent to which
Arnold's music was affected by his mental illness, though it is
tempting to attribute some of its more extreme contrasts of mood,
as well as the explicit anguish of such later works as the dark,
tonally ambiguous Symphony for Brass Instruments (1978), to the
effects of manic depression.^11 What is clear, however, is that he
found it increasingly difficult to compose as his periods of mania
grew more frequent and intense, and after completing the Symphony
for Brass Instruments and the tempestuous Eighth Symphony (which he
wrote in a mental hospital), he seemed close to stopping
altogether. Between 1978 and 1982 he produced only one work, a
flimsy trumpet concerto, after which he fell silent once more.


In 1986, Arnold, who by that time was being cared for around the
clock by a nurse-companion, pulled himself together sufficiently to
write a four-movement symphony, his ninth and last. It is an
unsettling work whose paper-thin textures (most of it is written in
two parts) leave no doubt that his brain had been irreparably
damaged by decades of chronic alcoholism. Yet even with the modest
technical means remaining at his disposal, Arnold miraculously
contrived to spin out a (mostly) convincing musical argument,
though the symphony's bare simplicity led his publishers to reject
it, and it was not played in public until 1996.


The Ninth Symphony was not Arnold's last composition; he eked out a
dozen more pieces, none of them memorable and some only marginally
competent. But its finale, a 25-minute-long elegy that recalls the
last movement of Mahler's Ninth Symphony, was universally taken to
be his swan song. Arnold himself spoke of it as "an amalgam of all
my knowledge of life." He wrote no more music after 1990, slowly
withdrawing into the haze of dementia in the years that remained to
him.


By then, though, the collapse of the avant-garde monopoly and the
restoration of tonality that followed had led to a revaluation of
Arnold's music that continues to this day. A new generation of
musicians began to record his symphonies and other works, and these
recordings were praised by critics for whom the war against the
modernism-hating provincials of the 40's was no more than a
half-remembered episode in the history of British music. For the
first time since 1961, it was all right to like Malcolm Arnold.


Will it remain so? To second-guess posterity is the chanciest of
undertakings, but it certainly appears that his time has come at
last. For my part, I cannot recall the last time I have responded
so powerfully to the music of a classical composer with whom I was
hitherto unfamiliar. It filled me with chagrin to realize that the
creator of works like the Second and Fifth Symphonies, the Symphony
for Brass Instruments, and the concertos for guitar and two violins
(to name only a handful of Arnold's finest efforts) had been active
for the better part of my adult life. How, I wondered, could I have
overlooked a master who was hiding in plain sight all along?


Such, alas, is the anaesthetizing power of an unexamined consensus.
For, of all the many composers to whose careers the postwar
avant-garde laid waste, Arnold may well be the one whose posthumous
reputation is destined to soar the highest. Though it was only
months ago that I heard his music for the first time, I already
feel confident in ranking him with Elgar, Vaughan Williams, William
Walton, and Benjamin Britten as one of the greatest English
composers of the 20th century. I am no less confident that music
lovers of the 21st century will feel the same way.


Terry Teachout, COMMENTARY's regular music critic and the drama
critic of the Wall Street Journal, is at work on a biography of
Louis Armstrong. He blogs about the arts at www.terryteachout.com.


^1 The most readily available (and least expensive) complete set of
Arnold's symphonies is by Andrew Penny and the National Symphony
Orchestra of Ireland. They are coupled as follows: Nos. 1 and 2
(Naxos 8.553406), Nos. 3 and 4 (8.553739), Nos. 5 and 6 (8.552000),
Nos. 7 and 8 (8.552001) and No. 9 (8.553540). These CD's, and the
others referred to below, can be purchased by viewing this article
at Commentary's website, www.commentarymagazine.com, during the
month of November.
In addition, Vernon Handley's recordings of the symphonies are
included in the first volume of The Malcolm Arnold Edition, a newly
released series of three boxed sets available from amazon.co.uk.
These sets contain most of Arnold's major compositions, including
all of the works mentioned in this article (Decca 476 533-7, 476
534-3, and 476-534-8, 13 CD's).


^2 It can, however, be ordered from Amazon.com.


^3 The British Music Collection: Malcolm Arnold (Decca 468 302-2)
contains a performance of the concerto by Eduardo Fernandez, Barry
Wordsworth, and the English Chamber Orchestra.


^4 A typical example of Arnold's eclectic taste is the list of
pieces he cited as personal favorites on a 1960 edition of the BBC
series Desert Island Discs: Berlioz's Symphonie fantastique,
Elgar's Introduction and Allegro, a partsong by Holst, Purcell's
Fantasia Upon One Note, Sibelius' Fourth Symphony, Stravinsky's
Symphony of Psalms, Tom Lehrer's comic song "Fight Fiercely
Harvard," and a 1939 recording of "Dipper Mouth Blues" by Muggsy
Spanier's Ragtime Band.


^5 Rumon Gamba has recorded Beckus the Dandipratt and nine other
Arnold overtures with the BBC Philharmonic (Chandos CHAN 1029). The
1947 premiere recording of Beckus by Eduard van Beinum and the
London Philharmonic, on which Arnold can be heard playing trumpet,
has been reissued for the first time since its original release (on
78's) as part of the third volume of The Malcolm Arnold Edition.


^6 Because Arnold worked almost exclusively on English films, few
of which were seen outside the British Isles, his music for The
Bridge on the River Kwai (which he wrote in ten days) is the only
one of his scores with which American moviegoers are familiar.


^7 Seventeen of Arnold's concertos are included in the second
volume of The Malcolm Arnold Edition.


^8 The English Dances have been recorded by Bryden Thomson and the
Philharmonia (Chandos CHAN 8867). A Grand, Grand Overture is on
Rumon Gamba's Chandos CD.


^9 He would later explain that the Fifth Symphony is "filled with
memories of friends of mine who died young." The authors of Malcolm
Arnold: Rogue Genius identify one of the "friends" in question as
his older brother Aubrey, who committed suicide shortly before
Arnold began writing the symphony.


^10 Even Arnold's closest friends were stunned by some of his
wilder escapades. The critic and broadcaster John Amis described a
particularly notorious incident to the authors of Malcolm Arnold:
Rogue Genius: "On one occasion, and it was typical, he got through
an enormous meal--three or four dozen oysters, a couple of
carpetbag steaks, puddings, cheese, and with it all several bottles
of wine--before ending up on the floor having sex with a waitress."


^11 The British Music Collection: Malcolm Arnold contains a
spectacularly virtuosic performance of the Symphony for Brass
Instruments by the Philip Jones Brass Ensemble, for which the work
was written.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Thom on April 12, 2007, 10:59:48 AM
Quote from: Spitvalve on April 12, 2007, 10:56:37 AM
Terry Teachout is a critic I usually don't have much sympathy with, but in this article from Commentary, I think he hits the nail on the head in regard to Arnold's real worth:

Couldn't agree more!

X
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SonicMan46 on April 12, 2007, 11:03:15 AM
And for those just getting into 20th century English Composers, check out this more Generic Thread (http://www.good-music-guide.com/forum/index.php/topic,4392.0.html); plenty of discussion of Arnold and many others, along with dozens of CD recommendations.  I own about a dozen Arnold CDs (again most likely shown in the thread mention or those by Bruce), including all the Symphonies, which are excellent.  The three chamber music discs on Helios w/ the Nash Ensemble are quite enjoyable; but I'll willing to explore more of his output!  :)


(http://website.lineone.net/~nash_ensemble/cds/arnold1.jpg)  (http://www.wesleyclassics.com.au/library/images/2charnold.jpg)  (http://website.lineone.net/~nash_ensemble/cds/arnold3.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Catison on April 12, 2007, 04:06:14 PM
The Madison Brass Band (which I participate in) is playing his two Little Suites for Brass Band.  They are absolutely wonderful gems.

I've also really fallen in love with his 7th symphony.  I would like to get all the symphonies, so is there a box set worth obtaining?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Robert on April 12, 2007, 06:36:33 PM
Quote from: XXXPawn on April 12, 2007, 10:50:21 AM
I own this one Harry

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000000AQJ.02._SCLZZZZZZZ_SS500_.jpg)

and i think these quartets are very good indeed, his 2nd especially.

Do I love these quartets.  I have had these about 15 years... The first could easily be by Bartok or Shosty. a very disturbing quartet....a very uneasy allegro, a scherzo right out of Bartok frantic, shrieking, next a spooky andante, the insinuating rondo and the quiet coda.....the second is much larger more urgent. This one has some lush romantic themes  being undercut by various subversive dissonances and disruptions. .slow fast, slow. This  never seems to get resolved but comes to a sort of peace or consolation......awesome.... check it out......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Thom on April 12, 2007, 09:53:43 PM
What an accurate summary, Robert. I concur wholeheartedly. Amongst his chamber works there are also some great pieces. Still, his true greatness, I think, lies in the 9 symphonies, of which i rate the 5 (what an adagio!), 7 and 9th the greatest.

X
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Harry on April 12, 2007, 10:39:59 PM
Quote from: Catison on April 12, 2007, 04:06:14 PM
The Madison Brass Band (which I participate in) is playing his two Little Suites for Brass Band.  They are absolutely wonderful gems.

I've also really fallen in love with his 7th symphony.  I would like to get all the symphonies, so is there a box set worth obtaining?

I would say that the Naxos set would do very nicely, a good recording, fine performance, and the stamp from the composer, since he was there with many of the recording sessions.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Thom on April 12, 2007, 10:55:13 PM
Quote from: Harry on April 12, 2007, 10:39:59 PM

I would say that the Naxos set would do very nicely, a good recording, fine performance, and the stamp from the composer, since he was there with many of the recording sessions.

Good morning Harry,

Was he really there Harry? I mean with all his mental facilities? There is a brief interview with Arnold on the Naxos disk and he doesn't seem to be very coherent in his speech. I do want to belief though that Arnold's stamp is on the Penny recordings which are very good in my opinion (I think I prefer them over the Handley recordings in the Decca anniversary boxed set).

X
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Harry on April 12, 2007, 11:05:09 PM
Quote from: XXXPawn on April 12, 2007, 10:55:13 PM
Good morning Harry,

Was he really there Harry? I mean with all his mental facilities? There is a brief interview with Arnold on the Naxos disk and he doesn't seem to be very coherent in his speech. I do want to belief though that Arnold's stamp is on the Penny recordings which are very good in my opinion (I think I prefer them over the Handley recordings in the Decca anniversary boxed set).

X

Good morning to you too, my friend.

Altough his speech was impaired that does not mean he was not there with his mind. I read a interview with him shortly before he died, in which he clearly stated how happy he was during the recording sessions, and how happy he was with the results. Set your mind at rest about that. And if you listen to this Naxos set, there is no other conclusion than inspiring.
Handley's is a fine rendition, but for me less that the Penny recordings. Plus the Naxos sound is very good.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 12, 2007, 11:12:49 PM
Quote from: Catison on April 12, 2007, 04:06:14 PM
I've also really fallen in love with his 7th symphony.  I would like to get all the symphonies, so is there a box set worth obtaining?

Another vote for the Naxos box, one of the best things they've done IMHO.

That 7th Symphony is a scorcher, ain't it? It's like musical record of someone's psychological collapse.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Harry on April 12, 2007, 11:15:04 PM
Quote from: Spitvalve on April 12, 2007, 11:12:49 PM
Another vote for the Naxos box, one of the best things they've done IMHO.

That 7th Symphony is a scorcher, ain't it? It's like musical record of someone's psychological collapse.

As long as you enjoy it! ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Thom on April 13, 2007, 12:29:03 AM
Quote from: Harry on April 12, 2007, 11:05:09 PM
I read an interview with him shortly before he died, in which he clearly stated how happy he was during the recording sessions, and how happy he was with the results.

Harry, Do you happen to know the DVD documentary "Into the unknown region" about Arnold? Some time ago I bought this DVD. Interesting watching. At the end of his life Arnold was seriously suffering from dementia. Shocking to watch at the end of the DVD how Arnold is mumbling and rambling, already there in that unknown region, about 'malcolm bloody arnold' with a lot of hatred, who knows about what.

Anyway I don't want to dispute Arnold's stamp on the Penny recordings. Indeed they are very good and i must say, i prefer them over the Handley's recordings on the anniversary Decca boxed set. Indeed the sound of the Naxos cd's is superb.

X
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Harry on April 13, 2007, 12:47:18 AM
Quote from: XXXPawn on April 13, 2007, 12:29:03 AM
Harry, Do you happen to know the DVD documentary "Into the unknown region" about Arnold? Some time ago I bought this DVD. Interesting watching. At the end of his life Arnold was seriously suffering from dementia. Shocking to watch at the end of the DVD how Arnold is mumbling and rambling, already there in that unknown region, about 'Malcolm bloody Arnold' with a lot of hatred, who knows about what.

Anyway I don't want to dispute Arnold's stamp on the Penny recordings. Indeed they are very good and i must say, i prefer them over the Handley's recordings on the anniversary Decca boxed set. Indeed the sound of the Naxos cd's is superb.

X

The dementia did not cloud him all the time, and lots of his behaviour was attention seeking circus. When he had given up on life, life gave him up, and the dementia could grow at a fast rate.
I know the documentary yes, and he was treated badly by life, and some very nasty characters around him, did the rest, to instill him with hatred, that in the end destroys every human being, also Arnold.
It was good and soothing to him communicating with Penny about his Symphonies, and you can clearly hear the joy with which Penny is conducting.
For me these recordings are highlights!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Thom on April 13, 2007, 02:35:57 AM
Thanks Harry. I also read his biography 'Arnold, Rogue Genius' which clarifies a lot about the 'bad' people around him, and on the whole about his colourful (to say the least) life.

X
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: tjguitar on April 15, 2007, 05:54:52 PM
I bought the 3 DECCA box sets from Amazon UK, it was a pain because for whatever reason they aren't going to be released in the US and Amazon.com doesn't import them.  Thankfully it was a little bit cheaper than the advertised prices on amazon.co.uk because there is no VAT to international buyers (I'm guessing VAT is some sort of tax, that they include in their base price fro their UK buyers) I also used to have the naxos box and I still have mp3s but I sold it a while ago to buy new stuff, for whatever reason I stuck with the Handley, though the Penny is also quite good.


In addition to the 3 decca boxes (which are great!, though I wish they used clamp shell jewel cases instead of the soft boxes) and the 3 chamber music discs on hyperion shown above,  I also have these excellent Arnold CDs:

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000000AQB.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_V44977809_AA240_.jpg)(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000000AL5.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_AA240_.jpg)(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B0007SK9L0.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_V45992268_AA240_.jpg)
(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000000B0G.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_V45586653_AA240_.jpg)(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000005IDO.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_AA240_.jpg)(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000JJ4GF2.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_V44531597_AA240_.jpg)
(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B0000015A2.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_AA240_.jpg)(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00004YU77.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_V45827157_AA240_.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: S709 on April 15, 2007, 06:26:34 PM
Arnold's symphonies are all well worth exploring, but I especially love the 7th Symphony. The extremely violent dissonant passages, the tragic lamentations of the 2nd movement, and the totally unexpected little Celtic dance in the conclusion -- what a piece ! (I have only heard the Penny versions of all the symphonies).

Thanks to all for the interesting info in this thread so far.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Harry on April 15, 2007, 10:36:40 PM
Quote from: tjguitar on April 15, 2007, 05:54:52 PM
I bought the 3 DECCA box sets from Amazon UK, it was a pain because for whatever reason they aren't going to be released in the US and Amazon.com doesn't import them.  Thankfully it was a little bit cheaper than the advertised prices on amazon.co.uk because there is no VAT to international buyers (I'm guessing VAT is some sort of tax, that they include in their base price fro their UK buyers) I also used to have the naxos box and I still have mp3s but I sold it a while ago to buy new stuff, for whatever reason I stuck with the Handley, though the Penny is also quite good.


In addition to the 3 decca boxes (which are great!, though I wish they used clamp shell jewel cases instead of the soft boxes) and the 3 chamber music discs on hyperion shown above,  I also have these excellent Arnold CDs:


Impressive line up, and all good value! :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 16, 2007, 02:55:51 AM
I strongly recommend this new release of historic Arnold recordings:

http://www.play.com/Music/CD/GENBRWA/30/37/-/3298189/Arnold_Conducts_Arnold/Product.html?searchtype=genre

It is the first CD release of Arnold conducting Symphony 2 (I prefer it to the Groves; more urgent) and Symphony 1 is my favourite (Arnold takes it about 10 minutes slower than the competition, giving it a much more tragic, epic feel).  The Piano Concerto is great too as is Tam O'Shanter.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: tjguitar on May 08, 2007, 07:57:41 PM
New Arnold disc out. Has anyone heard it?


(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/515KPJWJDGL._SS500_.jpg)


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Arnold-Sound-Barrier-Sir-Malcolm/dp/B00006K08L

Hasnt been released in the US yet apparently.


edited to add there's another new one coming from Naxos, released in the US May 29th.

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Zjxk09HPL._SS500_.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Harry on May 09, 2007, 12:07:48 AM
Quote from: tjguitar on May 08, 2007, 07:57:41 PM
New Arnold disc out. Has anyone heard it?




edited to add there's another new one coming from Naxos, released in the US May 29th.

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Zjxk09HPL._SS500_.jpg)

I ordered it, and it will soon be in my home.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: tjguitar on May 09, 2007, 06:35:34 AM
Quote from: Harry on May 09, 2007, 12:07:48 AM
I ordered it, and it will soon be in my home.

I asked the Malcolm Arnold website about this CD and they responded w/ the following:


QuoteDear TJ

This is indeed a new Arnold recording that has recently been released on the Naxos label!

You might find the following information useful:


"ARNOLD, M. 8.570294  NAXOS

Chamber Music for Winds

Wind Quintet Op. 2 • Duo for Two Clarinets Op. 135 • Dream City • Hobson's Choice: Overture • Grand Fantasia • Overture • Suite Bourgeoise • You Know What Sailors Are: Scherzetto • Fantasy for Clarinet Op. 87 • Fantasy for Flute and Clarinet • Divertimento Op. 37 • 3 Shanties Op. 4

This disc includes some of Malcolm Arnold's lesser known chamber music for wind ensemble.  The repertoire is extensive and includes the Three Shanties and Dream City for wind quintet.  One of the most exciting pieces on this CD is the Wind Quintet Opus 2, only recently rediscovered in a box of music belonging to the late Stephen Walters, a former wind player for the London Philharmonic Orchestra.  This is the world premier recording.

The East Winds unites the talents of Victoria Soames, Judith Treggor, Joseph Sanders, Jonathan Hassan and Lizbeth Elliott in their first outing on Naxos".
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 10, 2007, 08:59:21 AM
Quote from: Xantus' Murrelet on April 15, 2007, 06:26:34 PM
Arnold's symphonies are all well worth exploring, but I especially love the 7th Symphony. The extremely violent dissonant passages, the tragic lamentations of the 2nd movement, and the totally unexpected little Celtic dance in the conclusion -- what a piece ! (I have only heard the Penny versions of all the symphonies).

Thanks to all for the interesting info in this thread so far.

Totally agree, it is a great work.  The Vernon Handley version is my favourite. I have really come to appreciate Symphony 6 more and more with its unexpected "blues" episode and great sense of looming tragedy.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: tjguitar on June 14, 2007, 08:16:11 AM
Quote from: Harry on May 09, 2007, 12:07:48 AM
I ordered it, and it will soon be in my home.


Have you heard this yet Harry?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Harry on June 14, 2007, 08:25:40 AM
Quote from: tjguitar on June 14, 2007, 08:16:11 AM

Have you heard this yet Harry?

Yes I did, fine music from Arnold on the light side.
Not first class compositions, but nice enough.
Don't expect to much. :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: PerfectWagnerite on June 14, 2007, 01:26:59 PM
Arnold is certainly more interesting than Telemann for example. Nobody is as un-interesting or as light as Telemann,.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: 71 dB on June 14, 2007, 02:35:55 PM
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on June 14, 2007, 01:26:59 PM
Arnold is certainly more interesting than Telemann for example. Nobody is as un-interesting or as light as Telemann,.

I think it's safe to say Telemann is more interesting than Giovanni Buonaventura Viviani.  ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: techniquest on June 14, 2007, 11:17:54 PM
I have the Naxos 'white box' set and agree with what has already been said about it - wonderful collection. I especially love the 5th symphony, and in particular the jaunty 3rd movement which, after a restless opening and bouncy, aggressive brass and strings suddenly becomes a lovely skipping 'half tune' on the woodwinds backed by lovely string chords - sunny summer day music :)
I have always loved the Piano Concerto for Three Hands and I really think it would be a great Last Night of the Proms piece with it's ott orchestration and fabulous tunes (it was a Proms commission after all); the best recording is the one with Phyllis Sellick and Cyril Smith at the pianos (for whom it was written).

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v214/Nantha/arnold.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Hector on June 15, 2007, 04:32:56 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on June 14, 2007, 02:35:55 PM
I think it's safe to say Telemann is more interesting than Giovanni Buonaventura Viviani.  ;D

Who?

However, I doubt it.

Telemann is played in multi-storey car parks at night to deter anti-social behaviour.

It works!

I bet you cannot say that of Viviani.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: techniquest on June 23, 2007, 10:23:50 AM
On the new program "Classical Britannia" last night on BBC4, there was a tiny bit of footage of Arnold conducting his own Grand, Grand Overture - specifically the part with the vacuum cleaners and rifles. How I would love to see all of that performance!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sef on April 09, 2009, 03:02:33 PM
I don't believe that I have heard one piece by this composer. However, in the late 70s I was at school in Northampton playing my Deep Purple Concerto for Group and Orchestra LP when some gentleman I didn't know started asking me all sorts of questions about it. Afterwards someone told me that it was Malcolm Arnold. I have absolutely no idea if they were pulling my leg or being totally serious. It was so long ago I don't remember much about it at all. Still, ranks alongside getting a kiss from Olivia Newton John at the airport when she was returning from the Eurovision song contest in 1974!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Benji on April 09, 2009, 03:22:12 PM
Quote from: Sef on April 09, 2009, 03:02:33 PM
I don't believe that I have heard one piece by this composer. However, in the late 70s I was at school in Northampton playing my Deep Purple Concerto for Group and Orchestra LP when some gentleman I didn't know started asking me all sorts of questions about it. Afterwards someone told me that it was Malcolm Arnold. I have absolutely no idea if they were pulling my leg or being totally serious. It was so long ago I don't remember much about it at all. Still, ranks alongside getting a kiss from Olivia Newton John at the airport when she was returning from the Eurovision song contest in 1974!

Lucky you! I would have loved to meet Sir Malcolm. He had a keen interest in pop tunes, forms of which often find their way into his music.

If you want a recommendation, let me know what you like in the way of other composers and i'll point you in the right direction! The 5th Symphony is always a good starting point I think and contains within it everything that is great about Arnold. There is a great recording on EMI conducted by the composer.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sef on April 09, 2009, 03:43:57 PM
Quote from: Benji on April 09, 2009, 03:22:12 PM
Lucky you! I would have loved to meet Sir Malcolm. He had a keen interest in pop tunes, forms of which often find their way into his music.

If you want a recommendation, let me know what you like in the way of other composers and i'll point you in the right direction! The 5th Symphony is always a good starting point I think and contains within it everything that is great about Arnold. There is a great recording on EMI conducted by the composer.
My favorites were recently described as the music that died after the war. Tonal with bite and jagged edges! From Mahler, Sibelius, Atterberg through Saygun to Hartmann to Pettersson. Where does Arnold fit into there?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on April 09, 2009, 04:35:20 PM
Mahler and Sibelius are the two composers Arnold most admired :) There are very considerable echoes of both composers in Arnold's music: Sibelius in the earlier symphonies and Mahlerian angst in the later ones. If you like Pettersson then the haunted, bitter, angry 7th and 8th Symphonies should appeal to you. The concertos, on the other hand, are mainly much lighter works.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: snyprrr on April 09, 2009, 04:40:12 PM
STRING QUARTETS: Arnold VS. Alwyn

anyone? How does Arnold No.2 compare with Britten No.3?

Also, of the 3 Arnold's (Naxos, Chandos, Guild), which would you recommend?

I've got Philip Jones doing the Sym for Brass.  GREAT!!!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: jowcol on April 09, 2009, 06:10:12 PM
I just have to chime in-- picking up the Naxos set of Symphonies is a good idea.  I didn't have the $$ to pursue the rest, but this was a strong cycle.

One thing about Arnold's symphonies-- you have to get ready for the sudden mood swings.   He's not one to endlessly develop a theme.

His writing for brass is excellent-- his orchestration grabs you very quickly.

I'd rank 5 as my very favorite-- it's the one that is the most structurally satisfying, and ending is haunting.  Symphony  7 mines some dark terrain, and has a lot of really violent juxtapositions, but it's not wallowing in self pity.   Easily my second favorite, and one that keeps pulling me back.  6 is a fun one- the jazzy interlude has  very sinister undertone.   2 and 4 are solid.  1 and 3 I'll need to spend more time with. 

I'll need to listen to 8 again-- it's a bit knotty, but didn't have the "in your face" quality that the 7th did.

I must admit I haven't yet opened to 9-- it  is much more subdued, and elegaic, but I plan to give it more listenings.

I've not regretted a single purchase-- particularly at the Naxos prices!

If you have succumbed to the madness of collecting symphonic cycles by British 20th century composers, Arnold certainly belongs up there with Alwyn, Rubbra, and Bax!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on April 09, 2009, 06:29:01 PM
I love Symphonies Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5-very Sibelian though they are :) Nos. 7 and 8 are tough works, written at a time of quite appalling personal circumstances for the composer.

Give No.9 more listening time though. It is really a quite astonishing work and its early neglect, indeed the scorn and derision which initially greeted the work, was scandalous. After three short, apparently inconsequential movements in Arnold's 'light' style there follows that extremely moving, long adagio finale which seems to provide an entirely apposite coda to Arnold's turbulent life. It is so seemingly simple, yet so profoundly elegiac that it never fails to move me emotionally. Penney's Naxos recording of the 9th(made in the presence of the composer) is the most impressive thing that both conductor and his Irish orchestra have done to date, in my opinion.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on April 09, 2009, 11:00:57 PM
Quote from: Benji on April 09, 2009, 03:22:12 PM
The 5th Symphony is always a good starting point I think and contains within it everything that is great about Arnold. There is a great recording on EMI conducted by the composer.

Great that you mention it. I think the Fifth isn't reffered to that often among the Arnold fans here. But as it happened to be the first one I heard, somewhere around 1979 and in the EMI recording with Sir Malcolm himself conducting, I've always had a week spot for it. I vividly recall the thrill of it, especially when I discovered that I coulf find e.g. the final movement's theme "trivial", even utterly banal, and yet great at the same moment.

Arnold's been one of my elementary lessons in music, later learned from Shosta and Mahler and RVW 9 as well: how `banality' may be used to great symphonic effects. I love all Arnold's symphonies, the Ninth no less than the others. But the Fifth remains a first love.

                        (http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/02/ciu/db/9e/7b6736c622a032da83e36110.L._AA240_.jpg)

Edit:
Quote from: jowcol on April 09, 2009, 06:10:12 PMI'd rank 5 as my very favorite-- it's the one that is the most structurally satisfying, and ending is haunting. 

Sorry, had overlooked this line, but totally agree.  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 03:54:54 AM
Quote from: Christo on April 09, 2009, 11:00:57 PM
Great that you mention it. I think the Fifth isn't reffered to that often among the Arnold fans here. But as it happened to be the first one I heard, somewhere around 1979 and in the EMI recording with Sir Malcolm himself conducting, I've always had a week spot for it. I vividly recall the thrill of it, especially when I discovered that I coulf find e.g. the final movement's theme "trivial", even utterly banal, and yet great at the same moment.

Arnold's been one of my elementary lessons in music, later learned from Shosta and Mahler and RVW 9 as well: how `banality' may be used to great symphonic effects. I love all Arnold's symphonies, the Ninth no less than the others. But the Fifth remains a first love.

I like the use of the word 'lesson' there, as I certainly agree Arnold takes some degree of personal study to really appreciate. Of course I don't mean formal study, but rather patience and an open, enquiring mind. Taken at face value, the 'pop' tunes in his music can easily be taken as banal, but as you imply it is just a natural extension of what Mahler did in incorporating the 'pop' music of his time. Perhaps just because Arnold's tunes seem more contemporary we are more accutely aware of their contrast with the surrounding music, and to some ears that might grate. Certainly it took some years for me to come around to the 4th and 6th, which are almost schizophrenic the contrast being so severe. But now I love them as much as the 5th.

The 3rd was my introduction to Arnold and I still think very highly of it. I discovered it at a time when I was exploring golden age film music, and I thought Arnold's 3rd quite Herrmann-esque. Of course, I later to came to realise it was actually Bernard Herrmann who was an anglophile, and who was friendly with Sir Malcolm. So perhaps we might say Herrmann's music was Arnold-esque?  ;D

Quote
                        (http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/02/ciu/db/9e/7b6736c622a032da83e36110.L._AA240_.jpg)

Yes, that's a disc I would recommend without reservation. A desert island disc for me maybe. The 5th is painfully touching under the direction of its composer, and Groves, as he did with so much music, injects an awesome intensity to the 2nd.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 03:59:34 AM
Quote from: Sef on April 09, 2009, 03:43:57 PM
My favorites were recently described as the music that died after the war. Tonal with bite and jagged edges! From Mahler, Sibelius, Atterberg through Saygun to Hartmann to Pettersson. Where does Arnold fit into there?

I think the rest of the team did a fab job of answering your question, i.e. he fits in perfectly! Nothing more I can add, except to point you at the disc Christo posted the picture of, which has Arnold conducting his 5th in the reocrding I mentioned to you.  ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on April 10, 2009, 04:08:13 AM
One of the reference books that I find most useful to me is "The Pimlico Dictionary of Twentieth Century Composers" by Mark Morris. Obviously, in any such text, there are verdicts on particular composers with which I strongly disagree. Morris has little time for composers like Tubin, Hovhaness, Robert Simpson, Malcolm Williamson or George Lloyd whilst he does admire Havergal Brian and Allan Pettersson.

Arnold's music is described as "depressingly banal" and written "in an idiom whose basis is so anachronistic that...it seems to have little relevance". One wonders what it is supposed to have "relevance" to ???
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 04:42:27 AM
Quote from: Dundonnell on April 10, 2009, 04:08:13 AM
One of the reference books that I find most useful to me is "The Pimlico Dictionary of Twentieth Century Composers" by Mark Morris. Obviously, in any such text, there are verdicts on particular composers with which I strongly disagree. Morris has little time for composers like Tubin, Hovhaness, Robert Simpson, Malcolm Williamson or George Lloyd whilst he does admire Havergal Brian and Allan Pettersson.

Arnold's music is described as "depressingly banal" and written "in an idiom whose basis is so anachronistic that...it seems to have little relevance". One wonders what it is supposed to have "relevance" to ???

Should a dictionary only really contain hard fact / biographical info, and not highly-subjective [and worthless  >:D ] opinions?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on April 10, 2009, 04:52:29 AM
Quote from: Benji on April 10, 2009, 04:42:27 AM
Should a dictionary only really contain hard fact / biographical info, and not highly-subjective [and worthless  >:D ] opinions?

To be fair to Morris, he states quite clearly in the introduction that he makes no claims to objectivity :)

It is-actually-an extremely valuable book in many ways. Between 2-4 pages each on composers like Brian, Daniel Jones, Rubbra, Pettersson, Rosenberg etc etc. is not bad coverage!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sef on April 10, 2009, 05:39:53 AM
Quote from: Benji on April 10, 2009, 03:59:34 AM
I think the rest of the team did a fab job of answering your question, i.e. he fits in perfectly! Nothing more I can add, except to point you at the disc Christo posted the picture of, which has Arnold conducting his 5th in the reocrding I mentioned to you.  ;D
Thank you all for your recommendations. Fortunately I can listen to the Naxos Catalogue on line for free, so I can try before I buy. However, knowing where to start is always helpful. Sounds like 5 first, then 7.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on April 10, 2009, 08:20:07 AM
Quote from: Sef on April 10, 2009, 05:39:53 AM
Thank you all for your recommendations. Fortunately I can listen to the Naxos Catalogue on line for free, so I can try before I buy. However, knowing where to start is always helpful. Sounds like 5 first, then 7.

Starting with No.5 would be just fine but I would query going on to No.7 next :o It is a dark and challenging work! Any of the first four might be better.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 09:45:22 AM
Quote from: Dundonnell on April 10, 2009, 08:20:07 AM
Starting with No.5 would be just fine but I would query going on to No.7 next :o It is a dark and challenging work! Any of the first four might be better.

Agreed. I'd suggest 5, 2, 3, 4, 6 then maybe have a break and listen to his delightful sets of orchestral dances to build up some positive energy before the draining experiences of 7 onwards. Sounds like a great evening in, actually.  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: not edward on April 10, 2009, 01:30:22 PM
I'd agree with the 5th as a good place to start. To be honest, the first four haven't really stuck in my mind--they're enjoyable but I find they lack the emotional depth of the later works. The 7th is my unquestioned favourite of the nine, though all of the last three symphonies certainly provide tougher listening than the first six.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 11, 2009, 02:42:52 AM
He is one of my favourites too. And he signed an autograph for me at a concert in London to commemorate his 75th birthday  :). The concert included Symphony No 5 - a wonderful work. Actually I like all his symphonies (as with Bax and VW) but I think that the odd numbered ones are the best - although I increasingly like the haunting Symphony No 6.There is some great film music and I love the Concerto for Two Pianos also.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 11, 2009, 03:26:06 AM
Quote from: edward on April 10, 2009, 01:30:22 PM
The 7th is my unquestioned favourite of the nine,

Mine too, but I find them all worth hearing. The 4th comes close to the spirit of the 7th in its sheer wackiness, though.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on April 11, 2009, 03:59:48 AM
For once ;D I will eschew further discussion of Arnold's symphonies to put in several good words for the rest of his ouput :)

There are so many examples of Arnold's amazing facility to produce tuneful, jolly music which is also quite brilliantly scored for orchestra and/or soloists. Jeffrey has mentioned the marvellous Concerto for Two Pianos(Three Hands) but my favourites include the wonderful Dance sets-particularly the English Dances and, of course, the Scottish Dances(anyone who could write the quite gorgeous and beautiful tune in the third of the Scotish Dances can be forgiven anything ;D), the Overture 'Tam O'Shanter' and any or all of the concertos written with an orchestral player's understanding of the capacities of so many different instruments.

It is just such a dreadful tragedy that a man who so obviously loved life should have been dealt such a rotten hand and should have endured such pain(admittedly some self-inflicted) during his later life :(
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: donaldopato on April 11, 2009, 04:24:06 AM
One of my favorite Arnold pieces is the less known "Philharmonic Concerto" from 1976. A three movement concerto for orchestra, it was written for the London Philharmonic and Haitink to be performed on their US bicentennial tour. I heard it live back then, likely my first exposure to Arnold.  A fascinating  passage in the first movement for snare drum and harp stayed in my memory for years until I was able to snag a recording. As I discovered, this piece and the passage was so typical of the quirky, jagged Arnold late works. The LPO label has two recordings of it, one with Handley and one with Haitink.

And, being an accomplished trumpet player, few composers can write as effectively for the orchestral trumpets as Arnold. They are as distinctive as Stravinsky's woodwinds in my opinion.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 11, 2009, 10:58:55 AM
Quote from: Dundonnell on April 11, 2009, 03:59:48 AM
For once ;D I will eschew further discussion of Arnold's symphonies to put in several good words for the rest of his ouput :)


One thing I like about Arnold is that he took brass seriously (he would, being a trumpeter). The 1st Brass Quintet (I haven't heard the 2nd) and especially the Symphony for Brass Instruments are superb achievements in that too-rare genre, Serious Brass Music.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Benji on April 11, 2009, 11:29:02 AM
Quote from: Spitvalve on April 11, 2009, 10:58:55 AM
One thing I like about Arnold is that he took brass seriously (he would, being a trumpeter). The 1st Brass Quintet (I haven't heard the 2nd) and especially the Symphony for Brass Instruments are superb achievements in that too-rare genre, Serious Brass Music.

Just on that topic, serious brass music, do you know Philip Wilby's Revealations Symphony for double brass band?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 11, 2009, 11:59:32 PM
Quote from: Benji on April 11, 2009, 11:29:02 AM
Just on that topic, serious brass music, do you know Philip Wilby's Revealations Symphony for double brass band?

No. In fact, I don't even know Philip Wilby  :'(
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on April 12, 2009, 01:02:32 AM
Quote from: Dundonnell on April 11, 2009, 03:59:48 AM
For once ;D I will eschew further discussion of Arnold's symphonies to put in several good words for the rest of his ouput :)

There are so many examples of Arnold's amazing facility to produce tuneful, jolly music which is also quite brilliantly scored for orchestra and/or soloists. Jeffrey has mentioned the marvellous Concerto for Two Pianos(Three Hands) but my favourites include the wonderful Dance sets-particularly the English Dances and, of course, the Scottish Dances(anyone who could write the quite gorgeous and beautiful tune in the third of the Scotish Dances can be forgiven anything ;D), the Overture 'Tam O'Shanter' and any or all of the concertos written with an orchestral player's understanding of the capacities of so many different instruments.

It is just such a dreadful tragedy that a man who so obviously loved life should have been dealt such a rotten hand and should have endured such pain(admittedly some self-inflicted) during his later life :(

As so often, I can only utter full agreement.  :)

But let me add another personal favourite. I think all of Arnold's concertos are never less than pleasant, but the one that I love most is his Guitar Concerto Op. 67 (1959). In the past, I owned an LP with Julian Bream performing it, and that version (now on cd in the Julian Bream Edition, but I don't have it) is probably still the best.

Recently, I've been playing this version (mostly for the sake of the Lennox Berkeley concerto):

                                (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Xx2aN_OeaFo/Sc6O0HgUUHI/AAAAAAAAA8I/mxlyI87e79w/s320/CHAN%25209963.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: not edward on April 13, 2009, 09:54:47 AM
I've heard a lot of favourable comment regarding the Philharmonic Concerto. Are there any recommendable recordings available currently? I've tended to prefer Arnold in darker mood--the wild outbursts in works like the 7th symphony work extremely well within the overall rather bleak context of the work: are there other works in this vein? (I only know the symphonies and some of the concerti.)

There's a sense, I think, in which the later Arnold is a more harmonically conservative analogue to Schnittke
in his polystylistic tendencies. I do wonder if it's in part related to the fact that both were phenomenal film composers as well as creators of concert works of great personality--but perhaps that's a topic for another thread.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 14, 2009, 12:16:28 AM
Quote from: edward on April 13, 2009, 09:54:47 AM
There's a sense, I think, in which the later Arnold is a more harmonically conservative analogue to Schnittke
in his polystylistic tendencies. I do wonder if it's in part related to the fact that both were phenomenal film composers as well as creators of concert works of great personality--but perhaps that's a topic for another thread.

Interesting observation. I would locate the "polystylism" of Arnold above all in his notoriously erratic and manic-depressive personality - I think Schnittke's approach was quite different, more intellectual. One also has to factor in Arnold's appreciation for pop-music forms and his early love of jazz. In this way he is analogous to pre-modern composers who made use of the pop (or folk) music of their own time.

Curiously, when I first heard Schnittke's 8th Symphony, it reminded me strongly of Arnold's 9th.

For what it's worth, my pet nickname for Arnold is "the pocket Shostakovich."
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: donaldopato on April 14, 2009, 06:02:29 PM
Quote from: edward on April 13, 2009, 09:54:47 AM
I've heard a lot of favourable comment regarding the Philharmonic Concerto. Are there any recommendable recordings available currently? I've tended to prefer Arnold in darker mood--the wild outbursts in works like the 7th symphony work extremely well within the overall rather bleak context of the work: are there other works in this vein? (I only know the symphonies and some of the concerti.)

There's a sense, I think, in which the later Arnold is a more harmonically conservative analogue to Schnittke
in his polystylistic tendencies. I do wonder if it's in part related to the fact that both were phenomenal film composers as well as creators of concert works of great personality--but perhaps that's a topic for another thread.


See my post above if you missed it, re Philharmonic Concerto. The LPO label has one with Handley LPO # 13 and one with Haitink LPO 23. I marginally prefer the Haitink as I heard him do it live. But the Handley has some great disc mates including a fine 6th Symphony and Beckus the Dandipratt Overture.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Lethevich on April 21, 2010, 03:29:50 PM
I've played his concerto for two pianos (on the EMI twofer with syms 1, 2, 5) a few times recently - a good piece with a memorable middle movement in which ravishing strings descending into various scenes of nightmarishness. Then there is a typically revolting Arnoldian pop-bassline influenced finale which is a hoot.  It's not a masterpiece like RVW's perennially underrated work, but it has a certain Schnittke-lite feeling of the macabre and burlesque which is pure enjoyment to listen to.

The viola concerto (Conifer) is up next - one of those Arnold works which goes in one ear and out the other with me, or at least has done in previous listens. Giving it a fresh go this time.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on April 21, 2010, 03:31:11 PM
 :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Lethevich on April 21, 2010, 04:14:48 PM
:D

Quote from: Lethe on April 21, 2010, 03:29:50 PM
The viola concerto (Conifer) is up next - one of those Arnold works which goes in one ear and out the other with me, or at least has done in previous listens. Giving it a fresh go this time.
Well, that came and went without much impact once again... :-\ The same for Tam O'Shanter, which has always sounded like much ado about nothing - it's propelled by bustle alone.

This occasional difficulty I have with Arnold reminds me of Brahms' description of Anton Rubinstein's compositions. He was quoted as saying that he admired the composer's music, but he wished that Rubinstein took more care over his compositions (presumably opposed to churning them out at a high turnover). It's a criticism which could very easily be applied to Arnold as well, and to some extent sabotages the exploration of his output. But then, this slight sour taste couldn't be anything other than appropriate for such a prickly figure with his moods and swings, the music feels close to his flawed personality...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scarpia on June 12, 2010, 04:36:28 PM
I know Arnold from a recording of the Symphony No. 9 on Naxos.  Now I've managed to obtain Hickox's symphony cycle and have started at No. 1. 

It is a really nice piece.  Arnold has a great ear for arresting sonorities, particularly involving brass.  The first movement, which seems to be constructed from a deceptively simple melodic cell, uses brilliant orchestration in a very original way.  I especially loved a passage near the end of the middle section of the second movement (andante) in which various soaring melodies are heard against and ominous thrumming from the low instruments in the orchestra.  The finale starts as a vigorous fugal movement (again, wonderful use of brass) which is followed by a grotesque little military march, which almost immediately yields to a breathtaking "maestoso" ending (the highlight of the entire piece) with quirky Shostakovichesq "wrong note" melodies and strangely shifting harmonies.

I am definitely an Arnold admirer.

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 12, 2010, 09:58:11 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on June 12, 2010, 04:36:28 PM
A know Arnold from a recording of the Symphony No. 9 on Naxos.  Now I've managed to obtain Hickox's symphony cycle and have started at No. 1. 

It is a really nice piece.  Arnold has a great ear for arresting sonorities, particularly involving brass.  The first movement, which seems to be constructed from a deceptively simple melodic cell, uses brilliant orchestration in a very original way.  I especially loved a passage near the end of the middle section of the second movement (andante) in which various soaring melodies are heard against and ominous thrumming from the low instruments in the orchestra.  The finale starts as a vigorous fugal movement (again, wonderful use of brass) which is followed by a grotesque little military march, which almost immediately yields to a breathtaking "maestoso" ending (the highlight of the entire piece) with quirky Shostakovichesq "wrong note" melodies and strangely shifting harmonies.

I am definitely an Arnold admirer.

Symphony No 1 is one of my favourite works by Arnold.  Basically I like the odd numbered symphonies + more recently I've come to admire the rather elusive Symphony No 6 - also the Concerto for Two Pianos is good fun.

The CD below is one of my favourite Arnold discs.  It has his fine performance of Symphony No 1 and the only release of him conducting Symphony No 2 as well as a classic performance of his fine 5th Symphony etc.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scarpia on June 13, 2010, 12:20:59 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on June 12, 2010, 09:58:11 PM
Symphony No 1 is one of my favourite works by Arnold.  Basically I like the odd numbered symphonies + more recently I've come to admire the rather elusive Symphony No 6 - also the Concerto for Two Pianos is good fun.

I am not reproducing your experience regarding even vs odd numbered symphonies.  Listened to Symphony No 2, and found it equally compelling, perhaps more so, compared with the first.  The one movement here which, perhaps, didn't convince was the scherzo.  The first is mainly in a bucolic vain, with the gentle opening music stated with wonderful grandeur toward the end of the movment.  The third movement, a grim slow movement builds to a monumental climax towards the middle.  The one aspect of it that left me somewhat puzzled is the way it backs away from that climax towards a conclusion which takes very long to arrive.  The final is also a wonderful piece, with a lively theme, interrupted by two very effective fugato passages (the first, particularly stirring one mostly for brass instruments) before coming to a spendid, extroverted coda.

I wouldn't say Arnold's gift is in the development of theme, so much as in the ability to cloak those themes in plendid orchestration and wonderfully, often dissonant harmonies.

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 13, 2010, 01:55:11 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on June 13, 2010, 12:20:59 PM
I am not reproducing your experience regarding even vs odd numbered symphonies.  Listened to Symphony No 2, and found it equally compelling, perhaps more so, compared with the first.  The one movement here which, perhaps, didn't convince was the scherzo.  The first is mainly in a bucolic vain, with the gentle opening music stated with wonderful grandeur toward the end of the movment.  The third movement, a grim slow movement builds to a monumental climax towards the middle.  The one aspect of it that left me somewhat puzzled is the way it backs away from that climax towards a conclusion which takes very long to arrive.  The final is also a wonderful piece, with a lively theme, interrupted by two very effective fugato passages (the first, particularly stirring one mostly for brass instruments) before coming to a spendid, extroverted coda.

I wouldn't say Arnold's gift is in the development of theme, so much as in the ability to cloak those themes in plendid orchestration and wonderfully, often dissonant harmonies.

Actually, I like all Arnold's symphonies (I could say the same of Bax). Probably my favourites are 1 and 5 (coupled together on Vernon Handley's fine old Conifer CD). You might like the performance of Symphony No 2 on the EMI CD I mentioned earlier - it is quite different to the Groves performance.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scarpia on June 13, 2010, 01:58:20 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on June 13, 2010, 01:55:11 PM
You might like the performance of Symphony No 2 on the EMI CD I mentioned earlier - it is quite different to the Groves performance.

I looked for that CD, but did not find it available.  The recording I am listening to is not Groves, but Hickox.  The recording is splendid in every way, particularly the superb audio engineering.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51hRVwBER%2BL._SL500_AA280_.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 13, 2010, 02:31:00 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on June 13, 2010, 01:58:20 PM
I looked for that CD, but did not find it available.  The recording I am listening to is not Groves, but Hickox.  The recording is splendid in every way, particularly the superb audio engineering.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51hRVwBER%2BL._SL500_AA280_.jpg)

CD is available here, although you will not go wrong with the Hickox or Handley series:


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Arnold-conducts-Philharmonia-Orchestra/dp/B000MCIB6Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1276468043&sr=1-1





Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 12:13:25 AM
Malcolm Arnold is also one of my favorite composers.  I love the Tam O' Shanter Overture the best.  But I also love all of his other overtures as well as the English, Irish, Scottish, and Cornish Dances.

I have heard all nine of his symphonies as I purchased the CD set on Naxos which I quickly sold as I didn't like the sound quality so currently I only have Symphony No. 4 conducted by Malcolm Arnold himself on Lyrita which I enjoy a lot, but it is his shorter works I really love, so I am not actively seeking his other symphonies.

My best sounding Arnold recording is Overtures on Reference Recordings, a 24 Bit 88.2kHz music file downloaded from HDTracks. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on June 14, 2010, 04:45:40 AM
Once again I thank you all for the conversation (particularly how Arnold relates to Shostakovich and Mahler). Although Arnold was one of the first composers I listened to as a kid (Tam O'Shanter was on a LP I got from the library--the LP included a conductor's baton  ;D ) I haven't seriously listened to him (even though I own quite a bit: 1-4 Penny, 6 Handley, 9 Penny and the Dances). The last time I tried any of the symphonies, they didn't make an impression. Completely my fault--must have been the mood I was in because I listened to 1 and 2 last night after the football match and was blown away. How is it possible that I've ignored this music for 40 years?

Anyway, I ordered Penny's 5, 6, 7, 8 (unlike Teresa I really like the sound of the Naxos discs and Penny, according to ClassicsToday, takes the music slower than Hickox or Handley, which appeals to me). I also ordered the twofer with 1, 2, and 5 that Vandermolen thinks so highly of, and the String Quartets.

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 14, 2010, 05:53:07 AM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on June 14, 2010, 04:45:40 AM
Once again I thank you all for the conversation (particularly how Arnold relates to Shostakovich and Mahler). Although Arnold was one of the first composers I listened to as a kid (Tam O'Shanter was on a LP I got from the library--the LP included a conductor's baton  ;D ) I haven't seriously listened to him (even though I own quite a bit: 1-4 Penny, 6 Handley, 9 Penny and the Dances). The last time I tried any of the symphonies, they didn't make an impression. Completely my fault--must have been the mood I was in because I listened to 1 and 2 last night after the football match and was blown away. How is it possible that I've ignored this music for 40 years?

Anyway, I ordered Penny's 5, 6, 7, 8 (unlike Teresa I really like the sound of the Naxos discs and Penny, according to ClassicsToday, takes the music slower than Hickox or Handley, which appeals to me). I also ordered the twofer with 1, 2, and 5 that Vandermolen thinks so highly of, and the String Quartets.

Sarge

I'm sure you'll enjoy those Sarge - let us know what you think.  Just ordered this - issued for Arnold's 75th Birthday. It used to be prohibitively expensive second-hand (it is long deleted) but has recently come down in price.  I especially want to hear 'Song of Simeon'. Funny cover picture too.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 16, 2011, 08:39:25 PM
Time to revive this thread...

I went on an Arnold binge a few years ago. I bought all of the Andrew Penny recordings of the symphonies, bought all of Hickox's recordings, Bryden Thomson's recording of the dances, the Decca box of concertos (wanted the other Decca sets but they were out-of-print), an overtures set with the composer himself conducting (on Reference Recordings), and the Chandos recording of overtures (w/ Rumon Gamba I believe?). Anyway, I like his music a lot. I think the symphonies are his strongest point because they display the real breadth of the man and his abilities as a composer of symphonic music.

I think it's time to revisit the symphonies.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 17, 2011, 12:33:05 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 16, 2011, 08:39:25 PM
I think it's time to revisit the symphonies.

Same for me - it's been a while. I did listen to the 3rd Symphony recently, and it reminded me how great his range of expression was. He could write a solid piece of quasi-Sibelius like the 3rd, and then follow it up with the wacky, pop-influenced 4th. As with Vaughan Williams, each symphony has its own very distinctive profile.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 17, 2011, 12:46:33 AM
I generally think that the odd numbered symphonies are the best ones - but I have increasingly come to appreciate No 6 - a disturbing work.

I really like this CD:

[asin]B000H4VZIK[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: DavidW on April 17, 2011, 06:42:34 AM
Quote from: Velimir on April 17, 2011, 12:33:05 AM
Same for me - it's been a while. I did listen to the 3rd Symphony recently, and it reminded me how great his range of expression was. He could write a solid piece of quasi-Sibelius like the 3rd, and then follow it up with the wacky, pop-influenced 4th. As with Vaughan Williams, each symphony has its own very distinctive profile.

I thought I was the only one that liked the 3rd and 4th!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 17, 2011, 07:11:06 AM
Quote from: haydnfan on April 17, 2011, 06:42:34 AM
I thought I was the only one that liked the 3rd and 4th!

You are not alone after all! I like 'em both, although neither is my favorite. However, the ghostly little palindromic scherzo of the 4th might be my single favorite mvt. in the Arnold symphonies. An exquisite piece of musical clockwork.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 17, 2011, 07:28:58 AM
Quote from: Velimir on April 17, 2011, 07:11:06 AM
You are not alone after all! I like 'em both, although neither is my favorite. However, the ghostly little palindromic scherzo of the 4th might be my single favorite mvt. in the Arnold symphonies. An exquisite piece of musical clockwork.

I like them both as well. I listened to them again last night. I need to listen to the Penny recordings as I haven't even opened them up yet (I've owned them for a few years), which means I haven't even heard the 7th, 8th, and 9th symphonies. This will change today!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Lethevich on April 17, 2011, 07:52:12 AM
I find that pompous march towards the end of the finale of the 4th always provokes an involunteraly grin, reminds me of a popular tune I cannot put my finger on.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: jowcol on April 22, 2011, 09:22:05 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 17, 2011, 12:46:33 AM
I generally think that the odd numbered symphonies are the best ones - but I have increasingly come to appreciate No 6 - a disturbing work.

I really like this CD:

[asin]B000H4VZIK[/asin]

The "Death Samba" in the 6th is a lot of fun...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on July 28, 2011, 08:02:48 AM
So Malcolm Arnold's Cello Concerto has finally been recorded :)

http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Naxos/8572640

This is a work which has-to date-had a bad press. Julian Lloyd Webber gave the first performance. It is a late work-1988-and was originally subtitled "Shakespearean".
It will be interesting to find out if it does have merit after all.

I can't help thinking that there are one or two other British cello concertos which, perhaps, deserved recording more than the Arnold: the Robert Simpson, the Lennox Berkeley and the Arnold Cooke for example. (The Berkeley doesn't even get any discussion in Peter Dickinson's study of the composer yet it is a decent piece).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Lethevich on July 28, 2011, 08:17:15 AM
That Cooke cello concerto is a fine work, unfortunately he wrote in a style which has fallen dreadfully out of favour even compared to late tonalists. I can't see many likely recordings of his orchestral work on the horizon, even the symphonies :-X
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on July 28, 2011, 08:37:52 AM
While I was on sabbatical( :D) you started a thread on Cooke-

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,15987.msg400206.html#msg400206

I would certainly have joined in there but what I would have said has already been said so I won't repeat except to say that any composer as highly regarded as Cooke was by Havergal Brian must be worthy of exposure :) :D More from Dutton please!!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on September 21, 2011, 05:48:17 AM
Just listened twice through to the Arnold Cello Concerto, Op. 136 on the new Naxos disc.

It is not a great cello concerto but it's previous neglect does seem astonishing! The first movement is jolly in the familiar Arnold style but the central Lento has the sad, reflective melancholia which I find so moving in Arnold's music, particularly, for obvious reasons, in his later music. The last movement attempts jollity at times but its lyricism is tinged with sadness and regret in an almost Elgarian sense. The concerto is played with all his usual skill by Raphael Wallfisch.

Two points-as Rob Barnett notes in his Musicweb review, the title "The Shakespearean" has mysteriously disappeared from the work without explanation for either the original title or its removal. The other, which Barnett does not comment on, is that this is a performing edition made in 2000 by David Ellis to a Concerto originally composed in 1988. What changes have made by Ellis? It is important to know this sort of information and the author of the cd booklet notes should tell us.

The disc also contains a Concertino for Flute and Strings(arranged by Ellis from the Flute Sonatina), a Saxophone Concerto(again arranged by Ellis, this time from the Piano Sonata), the Fantasy for Recorder and String Quartet, and the acerbic, Bartokian Symphony for Strings of 1946.

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2011/Sept11/Arnold_CC_8572640.htm
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on September 21, 2011, 08:38:17 AM
Quote from: Dundonnell on September 21, 2011, 05:48:17 AMa performing edition made in 2000 by David Ellis to a Concerto originally composed in 1988. What changes have made by Ellis? It is important to know this sort of information and the author of the cd booklet notes should tell us.

Some useful background information from Malcolm Arnold: Rogue Genius (Anthony Meredith and Paul Harris):

Malcolm was to write five works in his first year at Attleborough [1987], including a Recorder Concerto for Michala Petri and a Cello Concerto for Julian Lloyd Webber. The therapeutic value from this was immense, but his impaired capability, which he had somehow miraculously transcended in the Ninth Symphony, led to a lack of invention and substance. The Cello Concerto with its pages of scales and arpeggios was a worry for Julian Lloyd Webber as it was scheduled to be played at the Festival Hall. He eventually decided to go ahead with it, not wanting to upset Malcolm, and was thankful the critics were kind. But it was not an easy occasion ...

It has re-emerged recently, however, in a revised version by David Ellis, commissioned by Anthony [Day, Arnold's full-time carer]. David's comments are instructive:

"As soon as I saw the score I could see the muddle in Malcolm's mind. As in the Fantasy for Recorder and String Quartet, another disaster of this period, he was turning the page before he had finished."

The slow movement, for example, started with a sombre little theme, after which there was a bare section with the cello playing arpeggios.

"They're nice arpeggios, but clearly there should be a tune in the orchestra going on at the same time. Malcolm would have heard it , but forgot to write it down. So I've written one in, springing, as it would have done, from the first subject."

While filling in the empty score David also reduced the orchestra, which helped tone down a number of exaggerations, which David believed were the result of muddled thinking.

"There were also some silly things. A piccolo and two flutes, for example, which were hardly used. The second flute only played one note, the very last of the first movement! That's not the real Malcolm. He would never have done that."

The alterations and additions are not simply Arnold pastiche, David at one stage giving a solo to an instrument Malcolm strongly disliked, the cor anglais, 'simply because it suited the music'. More than just an effective repair job, the Arnold-Ellis Cello Concerto is an attractive work in its own right, but, being something of a hybrid, it has so far struggled to find favour.

In other words, Malcolm Arnold supplied the thematic and structural skeleton and David Ellis fleshed out the bones. Although the work clearly does not stand in the front rank of Arnold's concertos (and there are many that do), I still think that it is nothing short of miraculous that the skeleton was written at all! David Ellis has succeeded in producing a coherent work in the spirit of Malcolm Arnold, and works from Arnold's final period (including the 9th Symphony and the Robert Kett Overture) are worth hearing.

:)

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on September 21, 2011, 03:53:06 PM
Many thanks(again ;D), John :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: John Whitmore on February 02, 2012, 02:14:38 AM
The Leicestershire Schools Symphony Orchestra's 1967 PYE Golden Guinea recording of Malcolm Arnold's Divertimento is now available as an excellent refurbishment for download. It's coupled with Tippett, Mathias and Ridout conducting their own works. A snip at around £3.
http://www.klassichaus.us/
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on February 02, 2012, 04:37:57 AM
Nice to see the Malcolm Arnold thread up near the top again! I know most of the symphonies,but some of them mainly from Arnold's own performances,which are wonderful to hear,but maybe not the best way to hear them,the first time around. I should know! I recently 'invested' in the Naxos cycle [and Handley's 7 & 8] and this has really transformed my opinion of these symphonies. Yes,I liked them before,but like some people I had a few reservations about whether some of them really hung together,No 4,in particular! Well,now I'm a convert. In my opinion,everything John says about these symphonies is dead right. In fact,I think this is easily one of the finest symphonic cycles by a British composer. Also,no one assimilated popular and classical idioms as well as Arnold,except Gershwin,I suppose (Grant Still & Devreese are pretty good!) And yes,the Sixth is one of the most compelling. Oh,and the Seventh,some of it inspired by 'The Chieftains'! How original,can you get? I just wish some of those so called critics would stop moaning and nit picking. Maybe,they could impress us all by composing something better?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on February 02, 2012, 10:34:38 AM
I like Malcolm Arnold a lot. I only own one complete cycle of his symphonies w/ Andrew Penny, but I own all of Hickox's symphony recordings too (he did, if I remember correctly, Nos. 1-6 --- very good performances). I wish Decca didn't pull the plug on their symphony set with Handley. I own the concerti box, but that symphony set is the one I really was wanting.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on February 04, 2012, 12:38:09 AM
I have the Penny, Hickox/Gamba and Handlet sets of the symphonies - all are good but Handley is my favourite. Penny is great in No 9 and Hickox in 1, 5 and 6. although for years I subscribed to the view that the odd numbered symphonies are the best I increasingly listen to No 6. I especially like No 1. Arnold's own EMI versions of 1,2 and 5 are essential listening. He takes No 1 much slower than his rivals and I think that it works well.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on February 04, 2012, 02:04:02 AM
Quote from: Albion on September 21, 2011, 08:38:17 AMThe second flute only played one note, the very last of the first movement!

A normal thing to do for a second flautist. But perhaps only in High Modernism ..  8)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Martin Lind on February 10, 2012, 11:52:43 AM
Malcolm Arnold, sometimes I like him, sometimes I don't like him at all. I like his symhonies who are great music, I enjoy his lighthearted ( the older he became less lighthearted) symphonic dances. I like also some pieces of chamber music. I  found a CD with sinfoniettas and concertoes less inspired, I didn't like his piano music, and my newest acqisation, his concertoes for 2 pianoes ( Naxos) left me completely cold.

I think overall that he was very interesting for me for quite a time but lost alot of his facination. Other composers ( for example in the moment Max Reger) are much more interesting in the moment but this may change again.

Regards Martin
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on February 10, 2012, 11:56:47 PM
Quote from: Martin Lind on February 10, 2012, 11:52:43 AM
Malcolm Arnold, sometimes I like him, sometimes I don't like him at all. I like his symhonies who are great music,

Over the last week, I listened to his whole symphonic cycle for the first time in a couple of years. It's interesting how perceptions change.

I still put #7 at the top, but I find it less nightmarish than I used to, more entertaining and fantasy-like. The one that has risen most in my estimation is #6. Not only is it very compact and well-constructed, but I think it integrates the pop/jazz influences more smoothly than his other symphonies.

I like #3 less than I used to. As I said above, a nice piece of quasi-Sibelius, but it lacks the individualistic character of the others. I still find #1 full of interesting ideas but half-baked in construction (why does the music just die halfway thru the 1st mvt?). At the other end, I like #8 more than I used to - it makes more sense if you know it's from his "depressive" period.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: not edward on February 12, 2012, 09:22:19 AM
Quote from: Velimir on February 10, 2012, 11:56:47 PM
Over the last week, I listened to his whole symphonic cycle for the first time in a couple of years. It's interesting how perceptions change.

I still put #7 at the top, but I find it less nightmarish than I used to, more entertaining and fantasy-like. The one that has risen most in my estimation is #6. Not only is it very compact and well-constructed, but I think it integrates the pop/jazz influences more smoothly than his other symphonies.

I like #3 less than I used to. As I said above, a nice piece of quasi-Sibelius, but it lacks the individualistic character of the others. I still find #1 full of interesting ideas but half-baked in construction (why does the music just die halfway thru the 1st mvt?). At the other end, I like #8 more than I used to - it makes more sense if you know it's from his "depressive" period.
Interesting points; I need to re-listen to the Arnold symphonies, perhaps after my current Lutoslawski binge is over. #6 and #8 are the two that I've been wanting to re-evaluate for a while; maybe they could crack my #7-#9-#5 trinity of favourite Arnold symphonies. I've never been quite sure how to interpret #7, myself, though I assume that the composer's intention probably was to make it fit two separate programs (one nightmarish, one fantastic--or perhaps Fantastique, in the Berliozian sense) equally well.

For whatever reason, I've never really warmed up to the first four; to me they lack the sense of danger that make #5 - #8 so compelling (I think Arnold's structural assertiveness took leaps and bounds forwards with the 5th, giving him the confidence that he could throw in apparently bizarre digressions without detracting from the main narrative flow).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on February 12, 2012, 03:28:59 PM
Quote from: edward on February 12, 2012, 09:22:19 AM
Interesting points; I need to re-listen to the Arnold symphonies, perhaps after my current Lutoslawski binge is over. #6 and #8 are the two that I've been wanting to re-evaluate for a while; maybe they could crack my #7-#9-#5 trinity of favourite Arnold symphonies. I've never been quite sure how to interpret #7, myself, though I assume that the composer's intention probably was to make it fit two separate programs (one nightmarish, one fantastic--or perhaps Fantastique, in the Berliozian sense) equally well.

For whatever reason, I've never really warmed up to the first four; to me they lack the sense of danger that make #5 - #8 so compelling (I think Arnold's structural assertiveness took leaps and bounds forwards with the 5th, giving him the confidence that he could throw in apparently bizarre digressions without detracting from the main narrative flow).

Have you heard Arnold's own interpretation of the Seventh Symphony?? He takes it at such a slower speed-ten minutes longer than the quickest on record-that it almost becomes a different work.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on February 12, 2012, 09:33:56 PM
Arnold conducting his Symphony No. 7? :o His own versions of Symphonies 1, 2, 3 and 5 are well known - but where do we find this one?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on February 12, 2012, 11:10:27 PM
Quote from: edward on February 12, 2012, 09:22:19 AM
For whatever reason, I've never really warmed up to the first four; to me they lack the sense of danger that make #5 - #8 so compelling

I'm surprised you don't like the 4th Symphony, since that's where he really struck out in a new direction, I think. It belongs to a sub-genre I enjoy, which I call "anarcho-symphonies" - so stuffed with diverse and clashing elements that they acquire a sort of paradoxical unity in the process. Other anarcho-symphonies include Shostakovich 4 and 15, Nielsen 6, Rochberg 1, and a couple of others I'm forgetting at the moment.

Quote from: Dundonnell on February 12, 2012, 03:28:59 PM
Have you heard Arnold's own interpretation of the Seventh Symphony?? He takes it at such a slower speed-ten minutes longer than the quickest on record-that it almost becomes a different work.

And speaking of the 4th, I think that's what you have in mind here:

http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=10697
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: not edward on February 13, 2012, 04:54:43 AM
Quote from: Velimir on February 12, 2012, 11:10:27 PM
I'm surprised you don't like the 4th Symphony, since that's where he really struck out in a new direction, I think. It belongs to a sub-genre I enjoy, which I call "anarcho-symphonies" - so stuffed with diverse and clashing elements that they acquire a sort of paradoxical unity in the process. Other anarcho-symphonies include Shostakovich 4 and 15, Nielsen 6, Rochberg 1, and a couple of others I'm forgetting at the moment.

And speaking of the 4th, I think that's what you have in mind here:

http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=10697
Hmm. I remember absolutely nothing about the 4th; should give it another try.

I'd guess the couple of anarcho-symphonies you're missing would be Schnittke 1 and--perhaps the defining work of the genre--Popov 1. (One could probably make a pretty good case for Prokofiev 3, too.)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on February 13, 2012, 05:04:46 AM
Quote from: Christo on February 12, 2012, 09:33:56 PM
Arnold conducting his Symphony No. 7? :o His own versions of Symphonies 1, 2, 3 and 5 are well known - but where do we find this one?

Yes Colin - we need to know  :o :o :o
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Dundonnell on February 13, 2012, 05:51:25 AM
No....I DID mean Arnold conducting is own Seventh (not the Fourth) :)

'Unsung Composers', gentlemen ;D

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on February 15, 2012, 12:26:45 AM
Quote from: Dundonnell on February 13, 2012, 05:51:25 AM
No....I DID mean Arnold conducting is own Seventh (not the Fourth) :)

'Unsung Composers', gentlemen ;D

Thanks Colin.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: jowcol on February 15, 2012, 02:19:20 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on February 15, 2012, 12:26:45 AM
Thanks Colin.

That phrase may also lead you to his symphonic study "Machines"
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: raduneo on April 07, 2012, 05:09:32 PM
I have just listened to his 4th Symphony (the Andrew Penny version), and I have rarely been so impressed by a SYmphony on a first hearing!

From the abundence of popular tunes, GREAT use of brass, the fun and playful rthythms of the outer movements, to the blues melodies of the slow movement, to the explosion of popular tunes in the finale (that remind one a bit of the military fanfare moments in the fast movement of a Shostakovich Symphony), this Symphony is a nicely constructed and packed with solid amounts of fun! Not to mention that beautiful romantic melody that shows up around the middle of the first movement! It may not be the most ground-breaking of most deep symphony out there, but it is beautifully contsructed, well orchestrated, well constructed, and just plain FUN. For what it sets out to do it's a work of genious! :)

Ok, I am done rambling, I just had to pay hommage to a man for whom my appreciation is growing! :)

(his value is recognized in a book called Surprised by Beauty; there's a chapter on him, where he is called the "Polenc of the British", which to SOME extent I feel is a good comparison. Yes, I am aware that the later symphonies change the page quite a bit, and not all his symphonies are this light and fun)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on July 19, 2012, 04:13:42 AM
A recording of Arnold's First Symphony (BBC Concert Orchestra,Keith Lockhart) is features on the CD accompanying the current issue of BBC Music Magazine - recorded live in Birmingham earlier this year.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on July 20, 2012, 09:13:01 AM
Quote from: raduneo on April 07, 2012, 05:09:32 PM
I have just listened to his 4th Symphony (the Andrew Penny version), and I have rarely been so impressed by a SYmphony on a first hearing!

From the abundence of popular tunes, GREAT use of brass, the fun and playful rthythms of the outer movements, to the blues melodies of the slow movement, to the explosion of popular tunes in the finale (that remind one a bit of the military fanfare moments in the fast movement of a Shostakovich Symphony), this Symphony is a nicely constructed and packed with solid amounts of fun! Not to mention that beautiful romantic melody that shows up around the middle of the first movement! It may not be the most ground-breaking of most deep symphony out there, but it is beautifully contsructed, well orchestrated, well constructed, and just plain FUN. For what it sets out to do it's a work of genious! :)

Ok, I am done rambling, I just had to pay hommage to a man for whom my appreciation is growing! :)

(his value is recognized in a book called Surprised by Beauty; there's a chapter on him, where he is called the "Polenc of the British", which to SOME extent I feel is a good comparison. Yes, I am aware that the later symphonies change the page quite a bit, and not all his symphonies are this light and fun)
It was the Andrew Penny recording which 'did it' for me. I remember quite enjoying Arnolds own performance on the Lyrita label,but remaining unconvinced. There was allot of colourful orchestration,a marvellous slow movement;but it lacked the cohesion of the Fifth. The finale was quite good fun,but it just seemed 'bitty' & tagged on. Later on other recordings emerged & Arnolds leisurely pace became apparent. I haven't got them to hand,but I seem to remember they were quite astonishing! Needless to the Andrew Penny recording was a revelation. Suddenly the whole work seemed to come together. I even remember raving about the work on the Havergal Brian thread! :o ;D The same goes for the entire cycle;although I must confess,I have not heard the ninth. Mixed opinions on various threads & reviews & the apparent sombreness of the work,have put me off!
  Arnold's assimilation of classical & popular idioms is truly astonishing. I now feel that he is one of the few composers ever to have,convincingly,pulled off this rare feat! Others,that come to mind,being;Gershwin,Bernstein,Grant Still (at his best) & possibly,some,Frederic Devreese.
  I would not entirely dismiss Arnold's account of his Fourth,however. He is,after all,the composer;then there's the Lyrita 'engineering' & an exceptionally powerful reading of the slow movement!
His fifth (emi) is a classic,of course!

A marvellous symphonic cycle. It would be nice to know the concert halls were resounding to the musical glories of these works! But,I have to say,it took Penny to convince me!
  Strange to think that,back in the early eighties,most of the symphonies were commercially unavailable. I think the Fourth symphony was accessible via an Aries pirate Lp. I remember,as a youngster,listening to a programme on Radio 3,about the symphonies. They played snippets & I kept thinking,'That sounds VERY intriguing? I wonder what the rest is like?'
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: The new erato on July 21, 2012, 05:30:49 AM
Sir was a great composer in his best moments (and several of the symphonies are really great); and stuff like this makes me like him even more:

http://www.overgrownpath.com/2006/10/malcolm-arnold-and-rock-idols.html (http://www.overgrownpath.com/2006/10/malcolm-arnold-and-rock-idols.html)

"Arnold stepped in at this point, rapped his baton on the music stand and spoke to the orchestra as only one of their own could, saying 'I don't know what you think you are doing! You're supposed to be the finest orchestra in Britain, and you're playing like a bunch of c***s. Quite frankly, with the way it's going, you're not fit to be on the stage with these guys, so pick yourself up and let's hear some b******s ... We're going to make history tonight, so we might as well make music while we're doing it!'"

This when the RPO showed disrespect to Deep Purple during a joint recording project.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on August 13, 2012, 01:10:57 AM
The "disrespect" was well-deserved, BTW. I was exposed to a lot of Deep Purple in the 1970s and 1980s and learned to hate them.  ;D Malcolm Arnold is a hero and fine composer, no quarrels about that.  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on June 08, 2014, 10:21:03 AM
Judging by the age of the last post in this thread, Malcolm Arnold is not particularly popular with a large fan base.  I relistened to his Symphony No. 4 just now and forgot what a wonderful composer he is of tunes, drama (and wit), plus well structured epic symphonies. 

I am curious what others think about Arnold the symphonist and his place in music history?  Great composer or incidental/forgettable?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 08, 2014, 10:38:45 AM
Quote from: relm1 on June 08, 2014, 10:21:03 AM
Judging by the age of the last post in this thread, Malcolm Arnold is not particularly popular with a large fan base.  I relistened to his Symphony No. 4 just now and forgot what a wonderful composer he is of tunes, drama (and wit), plus well structured epic symphonies. 

I am curious what others think about Arnold the symphonist and his place in music history?  Great composer or incidental/forgettable?

Great composer although the odd numbered symphonies are the best in my view + No 6 which I like more and more.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold SQ2
Post by: snyprrr on June 08, 2014, 05:31:40 PM
String Quartet No.2

Arnold wrote this in response to the death of his son. Perhaps not since Frank Bridge's Piano Trio No.2, in answer to the carnage of WW1, has such a personal elegy...

Let's try again. I can think of no other String Quartet that wears its broken heart on its sleeve quite like Arnold's most poignant ode to the death of his son. There is a moment when Arnold's voice becomes so quiet, and the melodic voices begin a misterioso passage, that is as sublime as any such moment in Beethoven or Schoenberg.

If the Janacek SQs were inspired by severe tragedy, instead of unrequited love, they might have given the feeling of unbridled grief that Arnold puts on display here- like hearing the embarrassing wails of a stricken parent, the innermost palpitations of hopelessness. Truly, tragedy never sounded so heartfelt as it does here.

This SQ is one of the great 'first person' confessionals of the post-WW2 era, as it pertains to the music of tradition (as opposed to the avant garde). A truly Romantic outpouring of one's -

anyhow- great stuff!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold SQ2
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on June 08, 2014, 06:40:32 PM
Quote from: snyprrr on June 08, 2014, 05:31:40 PM
String Quartet No.2

[review snypped]

This SQ is one of the great 'first person' confessionals of the post-WW2 era, as it pertains to the music of tradition (as opposed to the avant garde). A truly Romantic outpouring of one's -

anyhow- great stuff!

I have yet to check out his chamber music. Thanks for the review. Are you listening to the Naxos disc?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold SQ2
Post by: snyprrr on June 09, 2014, 07:14:48 AM
Quote from: Velimir on June 08, 2014, 06:40:32 PM
I have yet to check out his chamber music. Thanks for the review. Are you listening to the Naxos disc?

yes- though I'm sure the Chandos is equally nice...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on June 09, 2014, 10:35:15 AM
Snip, what do you think of his 1st String Quartet? The samples I heard were very Bartokian (not a sound I generally associate with this composer).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: snyprrr on June 09, 2014, 11:42:17 AM
Quote from: Velimir on June 09, 2014, 10:35:15 AM
Snip, what do you think of his 1st String Quartet? The samples I heard were very Bartokian (not a sound I generally associate with this composer).

It's obviously from a different era. I'd have to listen again- totally blipped- but I do believe it's fairly standard fare. Maybe that 'Vitae' piece is better, I'll check.

ACK! ???

Yea, the opening is quite discordant! Bartokian, I'd say!haha Gritty. Rawsthorne? 1949. The notes say to look to the Symphony No.1 for comparisons. Early Hindemith? Aggressive. I'm actually surprised that he's being somewhat abstract here. I'm going to have to get back to it later. I'm glad you pointed it out just now- it forced me to objectify, as if I've heard a new work altogether! 18mins.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on June 09, 2014, 12:15:48 PM
Quote from: snyprrr on June 09, 2014, 11:42:17 AM
ACK! ???

That sounds promising. I'll have to put that disc on my "to get" pile.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: snyprrr on June 10, 2014, 07:55:26 AM
Quote from: Velimir on June 09, 2014, 12:15:48 PM
That sounds promising. I'll have to put that disc on my "to get" pile.

:laugh:

;)

I also like the Symphony for Brass Instruments. Deeply felt
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on January 30, 2015, 07:03:24 AM
I recently bought the Chandos set of the symphonies as I became unhappy with the Naxos versions I owned. Suddenly I can hear all the detail and with the truly spectacular sound quality that Arnold's music deserves. The Gamba set of 7 & 8 was a bit of a shocker though. Talk about manic! He really does take the Seventh at a heck of a lick! I'm used to the Handley version which seems just right to my ears. It's also the first performance I ever heard. That said,even if the Gamba performance sounds excessive,or even more than a little ott;considering the circumstances in which it was composed (and state of mind) maybe Gamba has a point! It certainly is a very intriguing performance. That said,it still sounds a bit too ott for me! And I'm not sure if frantic is actually a better word for describing it than manic,which means not so good!
The Conifer recording I have of 7 & 8 is very good;but sounds thin after the Chandos recording. Once your ears re-adjust it sounds,as I said........very good! The sixth is probably my favourite Arnold symphony. I wonder how this compares to the Chandos performance? The other music on the cd is very nicely chosen and I love the artwork!! I keep meaning to buy it! (It's on my list!)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on January 30, 2015, 09:06:23 PM
Warts and all, I still prefer the Penny cycle. I'm sure Penny received plenty of input as Sir Arnold was present for all of the recordings. This doesn't make them 'definitive' performances of course, but it's as close to the composer as we'll ever be without the man himself on the podium.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on January 31, 2015, 11:08:04 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 30, 2015, 09:06:23 PM
Warts and all, I still prefer the Penny cycle. I'm sure Penny received plenty of input as Sir Arnold was present for all of the recordings. This doesn't make them 'definitive' performances of course, but it's as close to the composer as we'll ever be without the man himself on the podium.

Thank god, MI! Cilgwyn had me worried  ???...I thought I'd have to buy another cycle  ;D

Seriously, I'm quite happy with Penny's and the composer's own recordings.

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on January 31, 2015, 06:31:49 PM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on January 31, 2015, 11:08:04 AM
Thank god, MI! Cilgwyn had me worried  ???...I thought I'd have to buy another cycle  ;D

Seriously, I'm quite happy with Penny's and the composer's own recordings.

Sarge

Good to hear we agree on this matter, Sarge. I think it's time to give cilgwyn the bazooka. ;) ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on January 31, 2015, 08:49:49 PM
How about Arnold's 9th? Wow, that last movement never fails to move me. Under Gamba and Handley, it sounds good, but Penny transforms the music into a 'farewell to life'.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 31, 2015, 11:20:44 PM
There is a new release of Symphony 7 on Dutton which is very enjoyable although perhaps not as good as Vernon Handley's version.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on February 01, 2015, 03:00:43 AM
Overall, I consider the Handley cycle on Conifer as a standard, even more so than the Penny for Naxos, though I completely agree that Penny's Ninth is something very special indeed and an absolute first choice (and also a moving one, as it feels as a sort of personal farewell by the composer, who was involved in the recording, I think).

The composer's own recordings always provide an extra clue and especially his own Fifth (EMI) remains unsurpassed IMHO (his own performance of the Seventh, found as a radio recording on the Art-Music Forum, is remarkably slow and tensionless as compared to Handley).

That said, I confess I haven't heard the Gamba set yet, so maybe cilgwyn's enthusiasm is very well deserved and it does compete with Handley's Seventh and Eight (my first choice for both).

BTW, I heard the lesser known Eight live in Dordrecht (near Rotterdam), last Summer, with a combined Dutch and German amateur orchestra under conductor Tobias van de Locht (name sounds Dutch, but he's German) who's doing the 'first complete cycle on the Continent', these years. The conductor is clearly a Malcolm Arnold specialist and he managed to make it a commemorable performance, even with these non professional forces.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on February 01, 2015, 03:31:53 AM
I have always like the First Symphony very much. The composers own version on EMI is extraordinarily slow compared with the other recordings but it is the one I most often return to.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on February 01, 2015, 07:51:08 AM
Quote from: Christo on February 01, 2015, 03:00:43 AM
Overall, I consider the Handley cycle on Conifer as a standard, even more so than the Penny for Naxos, though I completely agree that Penny's Ninth is something very special indeed and an absolute first choice (and also a moving one, as it feels as a sort of personal farewell by the composer, who was involved in the recording, I think).

The composer's own recordings always provide an extra clue and especially his own Fifth (EMI) remains unsurpassed IMHO (his own performance of the Seventh, found as a radio recording on the Art-Music Forum, is remarkably slow and tensionless as compared to Handley).

That said, I confess I haven't heard the Gamba set yet, so maybe cilgwyn's enthusiasm is very well deserved and it does compete with Handley's Seventh and Eight (my first choice for both). AS to the remainder of the cycle.....maybe I'm just a mug for that lush 'Chandos sound'. I love it! ;D

BTW, I heard the lesser known Eight live in Dordrecht (near Rotterdam), last Summer, with a combined Dutch and German amateur orchestra under conductor Tobias van de Locht (name sounds Dutch, but he's German) who's doing the 'first complete cycle on the Continent', these years. The conductor is clearly a Malcolm Arnold specialist and he managed to make it a commemorable performance, even with these non professional forces.
I think I'm heavily outnumbered in my enthusiasm for the Chandos cycle! Time for a tactical retreat?! ;D Difficult to argue with MI due to Arnold's involvement and apparently theNaxos cycle was his own first choice. Actually,I'm not sure if I really like the Gamba performance of No 7! That said,I would suggest that anyone interested in Arnold's Seventh should try it. He really does take it at a hectic pace! Even if you don't like it I think it's worth having in your collection. I was a bit taken-a-back by it,to be honest! That said,my favourite performance is Handley's on Conifer.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on February 01, 2015, 08:00:25 AM
Quote from: cilgwyn on February 01, 2015, 07:51:08 AMActually,I'm not sure if I really like the Gamba performance of No 7! That said,I would suggest that anyone interested in Arnold's Seventh should try it. He really does take it at a hectic pace! Even if you don't like it I think it's worth having in your collection.

I ordered Gamba (7, 8, 9) a few hours ago. I only have Penny in those symphonies; could use alternative interpretations.

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on February 01, 2015, 09:24:54 AM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on February 01, 2015, 08:00:25 AM
I ordered Gamba (7, 8, 9) a few hours ago. I only have Penny in those symphonies; could use alternative interpretations.

Sarge

You won't be disappointed. I like that set and it is good to hear alternative versions.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on February 02, 2015, 01:19:44 PM
I listened to Gamba's Arnold 7th this evening as cilgwyn was making such a song and dance about it  :)
It is rather a manic performance but I did rather enjoy it and I think that the symphony lends itself to different interpretations. Yes, you must listen to 'Noah'  8)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on February 04, 2015, 02:17:39 AM
Point taken! ;D

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on February 04, 2015, 05:30:04 AM
Okay, will listen to it in Spotify. Saves some smuggling.  ;)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on February 04, 2015, 11:31:00 AM
Quote from: Christo on February 04, 2015, 05:30:04 AM
Okay, will listen to it in Spotify. Saves some smuggling.  ;)

Excellent point - must do more of this.  8)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on February 04, 2015, 11:31:57 AM
Quote from: cilgwyn on February 04, 2015, 02:17:39 AM
Point taken! ;D

Was only joking and enjoy our exchanges. Will listen again to the new Arnold 7 on Dutton and report back.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: tjguitar on October 27, 2015, 05:22:16 PM
Has anyone picked this up? For these works, I only have the Decca box of the Handley Conifer recordings...

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81QieLB-BpL._SL1500_.jpg)

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: psu on October 30, 2015, 02:56:34 AM
I've listened to that on Apple Music, and it's probably on Spotify too.

I am not that familiar with the piece, but it didn't seem to me to be that different from the other available recordings.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on April 21, 2016, 12:41:01 PM
It's taking a while, but I'm finally starting to appreciate the Ninth Symphony. Vastly different from the other symphonies, but still a great work in its own way. It's a Final Symphony in the tradition of Tchaikovsky 6 and Mahler 9.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 21, 2016, 03:00:04 PM
Quote from: Maestro267 on April 21, 2016, 12:41:01 PM
It's taking a while, but I'm finally starting to appreciate the Ninth Symphony. Vastly different from the other symphonies, but still a great work in its own way. It's a Final Symphony in the tradition of Tchaikovsky 6 and Mahler 9.

Yes! The last movement of Arnold's 9th is a farewell to all and his resignation from this thing we call life.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lescamil on April 21, 2016, 10:01:14 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 21, 2016, 03:00:04 PM
Yes! The last movement of Arnold's 9th is a farewell to all and his resignation from this thing we call life.

Except that he wrote it 20 years before his death.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Karl Henning on April 22, 2016, 03:04:04 AM
Quote from: lescamil on April 21, 2016, 10:01:14 PM
Except that he wrote it 20 years before his death.

Got his musical affairs well in order, then?  8)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 22, 2016, 03:29:51 AM
Quote from: lescamil on April 21, 2016, 10:01:14 PM
Except that he wrote it 20 years before his death.

But wasn't Arnold's mental state quite unstable for those remaining years? I seem to have read about this and that he had people that had to take care of him.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: mc ukrneal on April 22, 2016, 03:35:15 AM
Quote from: lescamil on April 21, 2016, 10:01:14 PM
Except that he wrote it 20 years before his death.
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 22, 2016, 03:29:51 AM
But wasn't Arnold's mental state quite unstable for those remaining years? I seem to have read about this and that he had people that had to take care of him.
All true. He had a caretaker and I believe had dementia for at least 5-10 years before he died. In any case, his life was quite bleak at times  - he even attempted to commit suicide. So by the time he wrote this, I think we can safely say that his state of mind was not exactly upbeat about the remaining portion of his life. If I remember correctly, there are also parts of his ninth that refer to Mahler's ninth.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: amw on April 22, 2016, 03:45:42 AM
Quote from: lescamil on April 21, 2016, 10:01:14 PM
Except that he wrote it 20 years before his death.
He suffered from a form of dementia (probably Alzheimer's); a "living death". His body certainly kept living for another 20 years, but his mind was already almost dead as far as I'm aware.

Re the Yates 7th mentioned above—I find it excellent at capturing the piece's mixture of lightness and insanity, perhaps even better than Gamba (though for me Gamba is preferable for its added weight). I generally prefer this faster approach to the slower one favoured by Handley, Penny or for that matter the composer ._.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Karl Henning on April 22, 2016, 04:38:35 AM
Quote from: amw on April 22, 2016, 03:45:42 AM
He suffered from a form of dementia (probably Alzheimer's); a "living death". His body certainly kept living for another 20 years, but his mind was already almost dead as far as I'm aware.

Well . . . did he anticipate this by writing a "farewell to all this we call life" symphony ahead of the dementia?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Heck148 on April 22, 2016, 05:58:28 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 22, 2016, 04:38:35 AM
Well . . . did he anticipate this by writing a "farewell to all this we call life" symphony ahead of the dementia?

Hi, Karl - I did not go thru the entire Arnold Thread - but a favorite Arnold work of mine - is his
"Three Shanties for WW 5tet"
this piece is a real hoot - definitely Arnold in the humorous, extroverted, playful mode -
lots of great raspberries, hoots, blats, f#rts, belches..intentional "wrong" notes, grating minor 2nds, etc.

It's a real standard for WW 5tet - not that hard, but it has its moments, with some tricky rhythmic parts... It has to be played with an outrageous panache, a go for broke, melodramatic effect, making the most of the jokes and musical pranks...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Karl Henning on April 22, 2016, 06:03:34 AM
Quote from: Heck148 on April 22, 2016, 05:58:28 AM
Hi, Karl - I did not go thru the entire Arnold Thread - but a favorite Arnold work of mine - is his
"Three Shanties for WW 5tet"
this piece is a real hoot - definitely Arnold in the humorous, extroverted, playful mode -
lots of great raspberries, hoots, blats, f#rts, belches..intentional "wrong" notes, grating minor 2nds, etc.

It's a real standard for WW 5tet - not that hard, but it has its moments, with some tricky rhythmic parts... It has to be played with an outrageous panache, a go for broke, melodramatic effect, making the most of the jokes and musical pranks...

Don't think I've ever seen it, Heck.  The only Arnold I've played is the band transcription of the Scottish Dances, which is indeed good fun.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Heck148 on April 22, 2016, 09:20:43 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 22, 2016, 06:03:34 AM
Don't think I've ever seen it, Heck.  The only Arnold I've played is the band transcription of the Scottish Dances, which is indeed good fun.

yes, Arnold wrote several suites of Dances - Irish, Scottish, English x2; Cornish...great stuff, very melodic and light-hearted...great light classical repertoire, they should be performed more often. in same vein as Dvorak Slavonic Dances.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 22, 2016, 09:51:28 AM
Although this is a composer's discussion, not a recordings one, I suggest anybody still not knowing where to jump into the Arnold bandwagon could do far worse than to embrace almost all of it, as presented in this ultra cheap Sony set:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51pNY1bL9tL._SY355_.jpg)


Youthful symphonies (1-3), "middle" symphonies (4-6) and "mature/late" symphonies (7-9), plus concertos, overtures, dances from all over the composer's life can be found and will provide hours of alterantely introspective and exuberant music.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 22, 2016, 11:35:56 AM
Quote from: André on April 22, 2016, 09:51:28 AM
Although this is a composer's discussion, not a recordings one, I suggest anybody still not knowing where to jump into the Arnold bandwagon could do far worse than to embrace almost all of it, as presented in this ultra cheap Sony set:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51pNY1bL9tL._SY355_.jpg)


Youthful symphonies (1-3), "middle" symphonies (4-6) and "mature/late" symphonies (7-9), plus concertos, overtures, dances from all over the composer's life can be found and will provide hours of alterantely introspective and exuberant music.
An excellent idea although these cheapo Sony boxes have no notes. I think that the odd numbered symphonies are best although I now rate No.6 very highly.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on April 22, 2016, 12:14:25 PM
(https://img.discogs.com/StOMWvrsPcqm9IJxSyepxcX4N4g=/fit-in/600x450/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-6148109-1412273516-8515.jpeg.jpg) (https://img.discogs.com/H7Y9L5mJN0Y2CRjtJi46XrleTw4=/fit-in/600x450/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-6148109-1412273498-8341.jpeg.jpg)

And he was "hip," too! Sometimes I miss 1970 radio London.  :-X

Ok, back to his own music after this obtrusive break in the proceedings.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 23, 2016, 10:22:05 AM
Quote from: Scion7 on April 22, 2016, 12:14:25 PM
(https://img.discogs.com/StOMWvrsPcqm9IJxSyepxcX4N4g=/fit-in/600x450/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-6148109-1412273516-8515.jpeg.jpg) (https://img.discogs.com/H7Y9L5mJN0Y2CRjtJi46XrleTw4=/fit-in/600x450/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-6148109-1412273498-8341.jpeg.jpg)

And he was "hip," too! Sometimes I miss 1970 radio London.  :-X

Ok, back to his own music after this obtrusive break in the proceedings.
I have the Deep Purple CD too.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006)
Post by: Scion7 on April 23, 2016, 05:12:52 PM
And he was "hip/cool" once more!

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51K8syETQ1L.jpg)

[asin]B000083OFF[/asin]

This is superior to "Concerto for Group and Orchestra" (slightly) and it was a one-off; Blackmore plays beautifully but this was not his type of music. (Blackmore in Guitar World 1978: "I like proper Classical - the Baroque ... more medieval music.")  Glad this was recorded but it took decades to convince everyone to release it.  Orchestra of the Light Music Society (!) conducted by Sir Malcolm Arnold w/Deep Purple performing Lord's Gemini Suite.
The studio album that Lord issued under his own name is good but not this good!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 23, 2016, 06:39:01 PM
Getting back to Arnold and NOT wanting to turn this into a Deep Purple discussion, what would you guys say are your 'Top 5 Favorite Works' from this composer? I'd have to ponder for awhile with my answer, so the floor's completely yours. :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006)
Post by: Scion7 on April 23, 2016, 08:40:03 PM
Well, I am not familiar with the vast majority of his music - he was prolific, and most of this will not have been recorded anyway.

      chamber and solo instrumental                                                      Ballet
===============================                       ==============================
Wind Qnt, op.2, 1943,                                                                     Homage to the Queen, op.42, 1953
3 Shanties, op.4, wind qnt, 1943                                                      Rinaldo and Armida, op.49, 1954
Trio, op.6, flute, bn, va, 1943                            Solitaire, 1956 [= English Dances, opp.27, [Op.33 with added Sarabande and Polka]
Qnt, op.7, flute, bn, hn, violin, va, 1944                                           Sweeney Todd, op.68, 1959
Str Qt no.1, op.23, 1949                                                                 Electra, op.79, 1963
Phantasy for String Quartet 'Vita Abundans'  (1941)
Divertimento, op.37, flute, oboe, cl, 1953
piano Trio, op.54, 1956                                                                                Film Scores
oboe Qt, op.61, 1957                                                                    ===============================
Qnt, op.73, 2 tpt, hn, trbn, tuba, 1961                                                No Highway (H. Koster), 1951
Trevelyan Suite, op.96, 10 wind, 1967                                                It Started in Paradise (C. Bennett), 1952
Str Qt no.2, op.118, 1975                                                                  The Sound Barrier (D. Lean), 1952
Brass Qnt no.2, op.132, 1988                                                             Albert RN (L. Gilbert), 1953
Divertimento, op.137, wind octet, 1988                                               Hoboeson's Choice (Lean), 1953
Fantasy, op.140, rec, str qt, 1990                                                       The Belles of St Trinian's (F. Launder), 1954
Duo, op.10, flute, va, 1945                                                                  The Sea Shall Not Have Them (Gilbert), 1954
Variations on a Ukrainian Folksong, op.9, piano, 1946                          1984 (M. Radford),  1955
Sonatas no.1, op.15, violin, piano, 1947                                              I Am A Camera, 1955
Sonata, op.17, va, piano, 1947                                                           The Deep Blue Sea,  1955
2 Bagatelles, op.18, piano, 1947                                                         Tiger in the Smoke, 1956
Children's Suite, op.16, piano, 1948                                                    The Bridge on the River Kwai (D. Lean), 1957
Sonatina, op.19, flute, piano, 1948                                                     Dunkirk,  1957
Sonatina, op.28, oboe, piano, 1951                                                    Island in the Sun, 1957
Sonatina, op.29, cl, piano, 1951                                                         The Inn of the Sixth Happiness, 1958
8 Children's Pieces, op.36, piano, 1952                                               The Key, (Carol Reed), 1958
Sonatina, op.41, rec, piano, 1953                                                       The Roots of Heaven,  1958
Sonata no.2, op.43, violin, piano, 1953                                               Suddenly Last Summer, 1959
5 Pieces, op.84, violin, piano, 1964                                                      Whistle Down the Wind,  1961
6 Pieces, op.84, violin, piano, 1965
Fantasies: op.86, bn, 1966, op.87, cl, 1966, op.88, hn, 1966, op.89, flute, 1966, op.90, oboe, 1966, op.100, tpt, 1969, op.101, trbn, 1969, op.102, tuba, 1969, op.107, gui, 1971, op.117, hp, 1975
Duo, op.85, 2 cello, 1965
Sonata, op.121, flute, piano, 1977                                                                Brass Band
Fantasy, op.127, rec, 1986                                                                  ========================
Fantasy, op.130, cello, 1987                                                                     2 Little Suites, op.80, 1963
Duo, op.135, 2 clarinets                                                                                                 op.93, 1967
3 Fantasies, op.129, piano                                                                        The Padstow Lifeboat_March, Op.94, 1967
                                                                                                              Fantasy, Op.114a, 1974
                                                                                                               Little Suite Nr.3, Op.131, 1987
                                                                                                            HRH The Duke of Cambridge, march, op.60, 1957

    Orchestral works
=================================================================== 
Sym. for Str, op.13, 1947                                             Horn Concerto, Op.11, 1945
Sym. no.1, op.22, 1949                                               Clarinet Concerto (No.1), Op.20, 1948
Sym. no.2, op.40, 1953                                               Conc., op.32, piano 4 hands, str, 1951
'Toy' Sym., op.62, 1957                                               Oboe Conc., op.39, oboe, str, 1952
Sym. no.3, op.63, 1957                                               Flute Conc. no.1, op.45, 1954
Sym. no.4, op.71, 1960                                               Harmonica Conc., op.46, 1954
Sym. no.5, op.74, 1960                                               Concerto for Organ & Orchestra, Op.47, 1954
Sym. no.6, op.95, 1967                                               Serenade, op.50, guitar, str, 1955
Sym. no.7, op.113, 1973                                             Horn Concerto Nr.2, Op.58, 1956
Sym. for Brass, op.123, 1978                                       Guitar Concerto, Op.67, 1959
Sym. no.8, op.124, 1978                                  Grand Concerto Gastronomique for Eater, Waiter, Food and Orch, op.76, 1961
Sym. no.9, op.128, 1986                                              Violin Concerto for 2 violins, Op.77, 1962
                                                                                   Conc., op.104, 2 piano (3 hands), orch, 1969
Larch Trees, tone poem, op.3, 1943                              Conc. for 28 Players, op.105, 1970
Beckus the Dandipratt, comedy overture., op.5, 1943     Viola Conc., op.108, va, chbr orch, 1971
Divertimento no.1, op.1, 1945, lost                              Flute Conc. no.2, op.111, 1972
Festival Overture., op.14, 1948                                     Clarinet Conc. no.2, op.115, 1974
The Smoke, overture., op.21, 1948                               Fantasy on a Theme of John Field, op.116, piano, orch, 1975
Little Suite no.1, op.53, 1948                                       Philharmonic Conc., op.120, 1976
Divertimento no.2, op.24, 1950                                    Trumpet Conc., op.125, 1982
Serenade, op.26, small orch, 1950                                Conc., recorder, chbr orch, op.133, 1988
English Dances, set 1, op.27, 1950                               Shakespearean cello Conc., op.136, 1988
English Dances, set 2, op.33, 1951
Machines, sym. study, op.30, 1951
A Sussex Ov., op.31, 1951                                            Sym. Suite, op.12, lost
The Sound Barrier, rhapsody, op.38, 1952                      Little Suite no.3 (A Manx Suite), op.142, 1990
fluteourish for a 21st Birthday, op.44, 1953                    Roboeert Kett Ov., op.141, 1990
Sinfonietta no.1, op.48, small orch, 1954                        Tam o'Shanter, ov., op.51, 1955
Divertimento no.2, op.75, 1961                                     Carnival of Animals, op.72, 1960
4 Scottish Dances, op.59, 1957                                      Overseas, march, op.70, 1960
Commonwealth Christmas Ov., op.64, 1957                    Sinfonietta no.2, op.65, 1958
Little Suite no.2, op.78, 1962                                         Peterloo, overture., op.97, 1967
Sinfonietta no.3, op.81, 1964                                         4 Cornish Dances, op.91, 1968
Water Music, op.82, wind, perc, 1964                             Fantasy for Audience and Orch, op.106, 1970
A Sunshine Ov., op.83, 1964, lost                               Anniversary Ov., op.99, 1968
The Fair Field, ov., op.110, 1972                                    A fluteourish, op.112, 1973
4 Irish Dances, op.126, 1988                                        4 Welsh Dances, op.138, 1989
fluteourish for a Battle, op.139, ww, brass, 1990
A Grand Grand Ov., op.57, org, 3 vacuum cleaners, fluteoor polisher, 4 riflutees, orch, 1956
Variations on a Theme of Ruth Gipps, op.122, 1977
Salute to Thomas Merritt, op.98, 2 brass bands, orch, 1987

-- I have updated this list for new info I uncovered and will do so when I run across a correction.


All the symphonies that I've heard I liked pretty much.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: The new erato on April 23, 2016, 10:37:32 PM
Violin Concerto for 2 violins, Op.77, 1962

I've always had a weak spot for this. The way the two violins "chase" each other in the last movement (IIRC) is completely and utterly charming, and great fun. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 23, 2016, 10:51:51 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 23, 2016, 06:39:01 PM
Getting back to Arnold and NOT wanting to turn this into a Deep Purple discussion, what would you guys say are your 'Top 5 Favorite Works' from this composer? I'd have to ponder for awhile with my answer, so the floor's completely yours. :)

Ok John, my top five Deep Purple albums are...hahaha  8)

Back to Arnold:

Symphony 1
Symphony 5
Symphony 6
Symphony 7
Concerto for Piano (three hands)

I'm not that keen on the recent Dutton issue of Symphony 7. Vernon Handley's is my favourite here. I like Arnold's own very slow version of Symphony 1 although Hickox is terrific here too. I like both Arnold and Hickox's version of Symphony 5. I like all available versions of Symphony 6. Nothing wrong with the Naxos cycle either and I like their Symphony 9.



Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on April 24, 2016, 07:55:37 AM
Five of my Arnold favourites - don't know if they're my absolute favourites, and I love all of his orchestral music, both serious and light; at least they come up spontaneously:

Serenade for Guitar and Strings, Op. 50 (1955)
Guitar Concerto, Op. 67 (1959)
Symphony No. 5 (Op. 74, 1961)
Symphony No. 7 (Op. 113, 1973)
Symphony No. 9 (Op. 128, 1986)

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 24, 2016, 08:00:17 AM
Quote from: Christo on April 24, 2016, 07:55:37 AM
Five of my Arnold favourites - don't know if they're my absolute favourites, and I love all of his orchestral music, both serious and light; at least they come up spontaneously:

Serenade for Guitar and Strings, Op. 50 (1955)
Guitar Concerto, Op. 67 (1959)
Symphony No. 5 (Op. 74, 1961)
Symphony No. 7 (Op. 113, 1973)
Symphony No. 9 (Op. 128, 1986)
Don't know the guitar works well but totally agree about the symphonies. I must listen to No.9 again soon - the mahlerian last movement is especially affecting.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 24, 2016, 11:02:34 AM
The guitar concerto is a small gem.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 24, 2016, 12:15:20 PM
Quote from: André on April 24, 2016, 11:02:34 AM
The guitar concerto is a small gem.
Which recording would you recommend Andre? (Don't know how to do the acute accent on my computer).  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 24, 2016, 12:46:58 PM
I have two: Michael Conn and John Lubbock, label IMP,
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/2158YKK3MNL.jpg)

and the compilation by Craig Ogden and Richard Hickox. on Chandos

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51PCiE2-VrL.jpg)

I would say, go for the program !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 24, 2016, 12:47:18 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 24, 2016, 08:00:17 AM
Don't know the guitar works well but totally agree about the symphonies. I must listen to No.9 again soon - the mahlerian last movement is especially affecting.

I listened earlier this morning and found it completely affecting indeed. The whole symphony is magnificent. I played the Andrew Penny recording on Naxos.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 24, 2016, 10:09:09 PM
Quote from: André on April 24, 2016, 12:46:58 PM
I have two: Michael Conn and John Lubbock, label IMP,
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/2158YKK3MNL.jpg)

and the compilation by Craig Ogden and Richard Hickox. on Chandos

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51PCiE2-VrL.jpg)

I would say, go for the program !
Thanks Andre  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 24, 2016, 10:10:01 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 24, 2016, 12:47:18 PM
I listened earlier this morning and found it completely affecting indeed. The whole symphony is magnificent. I played the Andrew Penny recording on Naxos.
That's the one I shall be playing after work today. :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 09:38:36 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 24, 2016, 10:10:01 PM
That's the one I shall be playing after work today. :)

Excellent! I listened to his Symphonies Nos. 5 & 6 (Penny) earlier and enjoyed them a lot. Symphony No. 5 has always been a favorite. That first movement always reminds me of being in a circus for some reason, but this circus turns to tragedy towards the end. Love it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 09:39:32 AM
Quote from: André on April 24, 2016, 12:46:58 PM

and the compilation by Craig Ogden and Richard Hickox. on Chandos

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51PCiE2-VrL.jpg)

I would say, go for the program !

That's a very good disc indeed.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 25, 2016, 12:57:55 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 09:38:36 AM
Excellent! I listened to his Symphonies Nos. 5 & 6 (Penny) earlier and enjoyed them a lot. Symphony No. 5 has always been a favorite. That first movement always reminds me of being in a circus for some reason, but this circus turns to tragedy towards the end. Love it.
I've been sidetracked by phone calls so haven't been able to listen to No.9 yet. 5 and 6 are two of the best. I first got to know of Arnold's music through a fine old EMI LP of Arnold conducting Symphony 5. I first heard No.6 used in a rather disturbing sequence in the documentary about Arnold when it was used to depict his mental disintegration.
I treasure the programme that he signed for me at the concert I attended of his music in London many years ago.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 01:08:53 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 25, 2016, 12:57:55 PM
I've been sidetracked by phone calls so haven't been able to listen to No.9 yet. 5 and 6 are two of the best. I first got to know of Arnold's music through a fine old EMI LP of Arnold conducting Symphony 5. I first heard No.6 used in a rather disturbing sequence in the documentary about Arnold when it was used to depict his mental disintegration.
I treasure the programme that he signed for me at the concert I attended of his music in London many years ago.

Wow, that's so great you got to meet him! What do you think of Symphonies 7 & 8? I think I'll give these a spin tonight after a short Prokofiev-a-thon. 8)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 25, 2016, 02:20:37 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 01:08:53 PM
Wow, that's so great you got to meet him! What do you think of Symphonies 7 & 8? I think I'll give these a spin tonight after a short Prokofiev-a-thon. 8)
No.7 is one of the greatest. I prefer the Vernon Handley version to the others. No.8 is enjoyable but not as good IMHO.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 03:07:51 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 25, 2016, 02:20:37 PM
No.7 is one of the greatest. I prefer the Vernon Handley version to the others. No.8 is enjoyable but not as good IMHO.

Thanks, Jeffrey. Here's a fair question for you (and everyone else), what is your favorite Arnold symphony cycle: Handley, Hickox/Gamba, or Penny?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 03:10:08 PM
Cross-posted from the 'Purchases' thread:

Quote from: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 02:16:20 PM
Just bought:

(http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/jpegs/150dpi/034571150710.png) (http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/jpegs/150dpi/034571150727.png)

(http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/jpegs/150dpi/034571150734.png)

What does everyone think of Arnold's chamber music? I'm quite interested in hearing more of it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 25, 2016, 03:11:59 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 25, 2016, 12:57:55 PM
I first heard No.6 used in a rather disturbing sequence in the documentary about Arnold when it was used to depict his mental disintegration.

That's curious, because I've always associated No. 7 with mental disintegration. Specifically, it sounds like the soundtrack to a nervous breakdown.

No. 6 is really interesting as a symphonic piece that manages to integrate jazz sounds & procedures without coming across as imitative or derivative.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 04:32:36 PM
Quote from: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 25, 2016, 03:11:59 PM
That's curious, because I've always associated No. 7 with mental disintegration. Specifically, it sounds like the soundtrack to a nervous breakdown.

No. 6 is really interesting as a symphonic piece that manages to integrate jazz sounds & procedures without coming across as imitative or derivative.

I know the 7th is a searing testimonial of neurosis, but the last movement of Arnold's 4th is pretty much the antithesis of sanity as well. :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006) - chamber music
Post by: Scion7 on April 25, 2016, 04:46:34 PM
Violin Sonata Nr.1 sprints along at a nice pace and is over before you tire of it.

The second Violin Sonata has a different sound. Lots of pizzicato. Some showy piano in it.

Piano Trio Op.54 is modernist-romantic, and sometimes dissonant - again, the piano technique is to the fore.

The Five Pieces for Violin and Piano Op.84 can be a little jazzy sounding in the 'perpetual movement' section.  The 'Ballad' is quite nice.

I like his clarinet pieces - his Fantasy for Solo Clarinet is melodious and is ripe for adapting to some larger combo - if it hasn't already been?  The Sonatina for Clarinet & Piano Op.29, Sonatina for Oboe & Piano, and the Suite Bourgeoise for Flute, Oboe and Piano would make for a tuneful recital.

Interesting music.  There's so much more I have not heard (yet).

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006) - chamber music
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 05:06:16 PM
Quote from: Scion7 on April 25, 2016, 04:46:34 PM
Violin Sonata Nr.1 sprints along at a nice pace and is over before you tire of it.

The second Violin Sonata has a different sound. Lots of pizzicato. Some showy piano in it.

Piano Trio Op.54 is modernist-romantic, and sometimes dissonant - again, the piano technique is to the fore.

The Five Pieces for Violin and Piano Op.84 can be a little jazzy sounding in the 'perpetual movement' section.  The 'Ballad' is quite nice.

I like his clarinet pieces - his Fantasy for Solo Clarinet is melodious and is ripe for adapting to some larger combo - if it hasn't already been?  The Sonatina for Clarinet & Piano Op.29, Sonatina for Oboe & Piano, and the Suite Bourgeoise for Flute, Oboe and Piano would make for a tuneful recital.

Interesting music.  There's so much more I have not heard (yet).

Thanks for this, Scion7. I listened to Three Shanties, Op. 4 for wind quintet and enjoyed it a great deal. Coincidently, I listened to Violin Sonata No. 1, Op. 15 as well and thought it was great. This kind of got the ball rolling for me to check out recordings of his chamber music, which led to me buying those Nash Ensemble Hyperion recordings. I suppose I could have gone the Naxos route, but the Nash Ensemble have always been one of my favorite chamber groups.

BTW, what is your favorite Arnold symphony cycle: Handley, Hickox/Gamba, or Penny and why?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on April 25, 2016, 05:29:44 PM
I very rarely get duplicate sets of pieces - and wouldn't do that for Arnold's works.  I have BBC Phil/Gamba for Symphonies 7, 8 & 9,  and Arnold himself for Symphony No.1, 2 & 5 - for a song in the used bins in Charlotte.

Someday I'll have to go to YT and check out others.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 06:00:51 PM
Some composers are worth acquiring more recordings and, for me, Arnold is one of those composers as his music can be approached in several different ways.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 08:08:01 PM
Quote from: tjguitar on October 27, 2015, 05:22:16 PM
Has anyone picked this up? For these works, I only have the Decca box of the Handley Conifer recordings...

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81QieLB-BpL._SL1500_.jpg)

I bought this recording tonight. Pretty excited to hear another performance of Symphony No. 7. This is such a psychotic work, but truly great IMHO.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lescamil on April 25, 2016, 08:56:30 PM
Quote from: tjguitar on October 27, 2015, 05:22:16 PM
Has anyone picked this up? For these works, I only have the Decca box of the Handley Conifer recordings...

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81QieLB-BpL._SL1500_.jpg)

Have had this one for a while. I got it for the Fantasy, where Donohoe once again proves to be a very masterful pianist. Once again he gives a very meaty interpretation, and his sharp-edged playing works very well here. The Philharmonic Concerto is also well-played and very exciting here under Yates. Need a few more listens of the Symphony before I can comment.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 25, 2016, 10:28:23 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 25, 2016, 03:07:51 PM
Thanks, Jeffrey. Here's a fair question for you (and everyone else), what is your favorite Arnold symphony cycle: Handley, Hickox/Gamba, or Penny?
Difficult and interesting question. I think that they all have their strengths. Overall probably the Handley set but I love Hickox in No.1,5 and 6. No one would be disappointed with the Naxos cycle which was made in the presence of the composer.
As to individual symphonies my favourites are:
No1 Arnold/Hickox
No2 Groves
No3 Arnold (Everest)
No 4 Arnold (Lyrita) but I don't know the others so well
No 5 Arnold (EMI)/Hickox
No 6 Handley
No 7 Handley
No 8 Gamba (but I don't know the others so well)
No 9 Penny
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on April 26, 2016, 01:17:18 AM
An intrigue about Arnold's 4th Symphony is the fact that Arnold's own recording (LPO, Lyrita) takes a whopping 54 minutes (including 18 mins each for the 1st and 3rd movts.), compared to just 37 minutes for Penny and Handley's recordings. I wonder what the composer's intentions were with the symphony...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on April 26, 2016, 02:37:31 AM
Well, Arnold was a conductor-for-hire besides being a composer - I trust his conducting of his own works as far as realizing what the composer wanted.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 05:17:00 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 25, 2016, 10:28:23 PM
Difficult and interesting question. I think that they all have their strengths. Overall probably the Handley set but I love Hickox in No.1,5 and 6. No one would be disappointed with the Naxos cycle which was made in the presence of the composer.
As to individual symphonies my favourites are:
No1 Arnold/Hickox
No2 Groves
No3 Arnold (Everest)
No 4 Arnold (Lyrita) but I don't know the others so well
No 5 Arnold (EMI)/Hickox
No 6 Handley
No 7 Handley
No 8 Gamba (but I don't know the others so well)
No 9 Penny

Thanks, Jeffrey. For whatever reason, I haven't been too interested in hearing the composer himself conduct his own music. In fact, one of the recordings he conducted (I believe the one with his Symphony No. 4) received a 'CD From Hell' title from Hurwitz. Even though I don't care much for Hurwitz, we seem to share some commonality for the same kind of music.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on April 26, 2016, 05:53:39 AM
The original manuscript of Arnold's 7th Symphony has been rediscovered by the composer's daughter on eBay.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/25/missing-symphony-by-one-of-englands-greatest-composers-discovere/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/25/missing-symphony-by-one-of-englands-greatest-composers-discovere/)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 06:20:06 AM
Quote from: Maestro267 on April 26, 2016, 05:53:39 AM
The original manuscript of Arnold's 7th Symphony has been rediscovered by the composer's daughter on eBay.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/25/missing-symphony-by-one-of-englands-greatest-composers-discovere/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/25/missing-symphony-by-one-of-englands-greatest-composers-discovere/)

I read about this last night. Amazing! I'm sure preparations will be made to record it (or at least I hope they will).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 06:25:15 AM
Forgive me for doing this, but I think some biographical information is needed in this thread since Arnold's music is seeing some interest lately around here:

(http://www.bruceduffie.com/arnold4.jpg)

Sir Malcolm Arnold's 60-year career has shown him to be perhaps the most versatile and prolific of the many British composers who emerged in the post-World War II era. Born in Northampton in 1921, Arnold was trained as a composer and trumpeter at the Royal College of Music from 1938 to 1941 (under Gordon Jacob for composition and Ernest Hall for trumpet), after which he won a trumpet position with the London Philharmonic Orchestra. After a promotion to principal trumpet in 1942, Arnold's career there was interrupted by two years of military service (1944-1945) and a year with Adrian Boult and the BBC Symphony (during the 1945-1946 season). Arnold returned to the London Philharmonic in 1946, but soon found that composition was exercising an increasingly strong hold over his musical attention. Upon receiving the Mendelssohn scholarship in 1948 (which, in addition to prestige, provided the young composer with funds to spend a year in Italy), Arnold resigned from the orchestra to devote himself to composition (and, later, conducting) on a full-time basis.

Arnold's output over the next 50 years was prodigious: nine symphonies, 20 concertos, five ballets (including a version of Sweeney Todd in 1959), and a seemingly inexhaustible supply of smaller pieces for all kinds of ensembles. A successful secondary career as a film composer resulted in over 80 scores, including the Academy Award-winning Bridge on the River Kwai. Arnold has been the recipient of many public and academic honors, including honorary doctorates from the universities of Exeter, Durham, and Leicester, and the Ivor Novello Award for "Outstanding Services to British Music" in 1986. Named Commander of the British Empire in 1970, he was further honored in 1993 when his name appeared among those selected as Knights of the British Empire.

His resistance to identification with any of the various and ubiquitous "schools" of composition during the latter half of the twentieth century earned him the unbridled displeasure of many critics and fellow composers. On the surface, his music seems more intended to welcome audiences than to put his formidable technical skills on display, or to make musical or artistic "progress." While at times the overly accessible surface contours of his work (particularly the large-scale orchestral pieces) obscure the fundamental tensions that drive the music at a deeper level, Arnold's sense of craftsmanship -- an aristocratic pride that prohibits him from engaging in what he sees as vulgar twentieth century techniques, while also perhaps causing his music-making to fall short of its deeply expressive potential -- has resulted in an enviable consistency of output. Arnold named Berlioz as an inspiration; influence also came from a composer who provided England with its wartime anthem and who was always more popular in England than on the Continent -- the similarly anti-modernist and individualist Jean Sibelius.

[Article taken from All Music Guide]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 26, 2016, 07:52:05 AM
Interesting post John. Thank you. I finally listened to No.9 this morning. In the end I played the Gamba version as it was closest to hand. Had my attention gripped throughout an extraordinary work. The mahlerian last movement is incredibly moving as it is clear that, in it, Arnold is 'signing out' even though he had many more years to live. The last movement echoes that of Mahler's 9th Symphony although one section reminded me of the slow movement of Shostakovich's 8th Symphony. Been listening to his film music on my way to and back from work today.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kishnevi on April 26, 2016, 07:53:25 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 06:20:06 AM
I read about this last night. Amazing! I'm sure preparations will be made to record it (or at least I hope they will).

The music is known and recorded.  The hubbub is simply about the original autograph copy....unless someone notices important differences between the autograph and the published versions.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 07:55:25 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 26, 2016, 07:52:05 AM
Interesting post John. Thank you. I finally listened to No.9 this morning. In the end I played the Gamba version as it was closest to hand. Had my attention gripped throughout an extraordinary work. The mahlerian last movement is incredibly moving as it is clear that, in it, Arnold is 'signing out' even though he had many more years to live. The last movement echoes that of Mahler's 9th Symphony although one section reminded me of the slow movement of Shostakovich's 8th Symphony. Been listening to his film music on my way to and back from work today.

It certainly is an exhilarating symphony, Jeffrey. Glad you enjoyed yet again. I have Gamba's performance on the way, so it'll be interesting to compare/contrast his performance with Penny and Handley.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 07:56:15 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 26, 2016, 07:53:25 AM
The music is known and recorded.  The hubbub is simply about the original autograph copy....unless someone notices important differences between the autograph and the published versions.

Thanks for this, Jeffrey. I'm sure there aren't any differences between the version we know and the original, but, if there is, I'd love to hear his original thoughts.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 26, 2016, 10:59:59 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 05:17:00 AM
Thanks, Jeffrey. For whatever reason, I haven't been too interested in hearing the composer himself conduct his own music. In fact, one of the recordings he conducted (I believe the one with his Symphony No. 4) received a 'CD From Hell' title from Hurwitz. Even though I don't care much for Hurwitz, we seem to share some commonality for the same kind of music.

A "CD from Hell" from Hurwitz is something that is either truly appalling or that shakes the hurwitzer to his foundations (anus sphincter contracting painfully). I have 2 Arnold discs where he conducts his own music: symphony no 3 (Everest) and the disc of Overtures (on Reference).
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51YTVs6pfIL.jpg)

The latter is from his late years and is utterly different from other discs of his overtures. Be that as it may, it just happened to be my first ever disc of Arnold's music and it caught my attention instantly.

Therefore, forgive me for not believing Hurwitz' musical or physiological malaises to be of any import to my appreciation  ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on April 26, 2016, 11:42:20 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 05:17:00 AM
Thanks, Jeffrey. For whatever reason, I haven't been too interested in hearing the composer himself conduct his own music. In fact, one of the recordings he conducted (I believe the one with his Symphony No. 4) received a 'CD From Hell' title from Hurwitz. Even though I don't care much for Hurwitz, we seem to share some commonality for the same kind of music.

Quote from: André on April 26, 2016, 10:59:59 AM
A "CD from Hell" from Hurwitz is something that is either truly appalling or that shakes the hurwitzer to his foundations...Therefore, forgive me for not believing Hurwitz' musical or physiological malaises to be of any import to my appreciation  ;D

The Hurwitzer's bitch about Arnold's performance of the Fourth concerns the tempi:

"He stretches the first and third movements to a fairly ridiculous length, and the entire work takes more than 54 minutes, as opposed to a bit less than 40 from Handley (Decca/Conifer), Hickox (Chandos) or Penny (Naxos). Even the finale hangs fire, sounding labored, even tortured, rather than rhythmically taut and vigorous. The result, however interesting in terms of the instrumental detail that it reveals, materially misrepresents the music's rhythmic energy, urgency, and wit. Listening becomes a punishment..."


The main thing I took from that negative review is "instrumental detail." I love detail. And since I can usually appreciate broader interpretations of anyone's music, the review actually encouraged me to order the CD. (I also have trouble believing the composer "misrepresents" his own music.) That Jeffrey lists it as his favorite helped persuade me too.

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 07:06:25 PM
Quote from: André on April 26, 2016, 10:59:59 AM
A "CD from Hell" from Hurwitz is something that is either truly appalling or that shakes the hurwitzer to his foundations (anus sphincter contracting painfully). I have 2 Arnold discs where he conducts his own music: symphony no 3 (Everest) and the disc of Overtures (on Reference).
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51YTVs6pfIL.jpg)

The latter is from his late years and is utterly different from other discs of his overtures. Be that as it may, it just happened to be my first ever disc of Arnold's music and it caught my attention instantly.

Therefore, forgive me for not believing Hurwitz' musical or physiological malaises to be of any import to my appreciation  ;D

That is a great Arnold disc, Andre. I, too, own it. I need to give it another spin as it's been too long. Oh, I don't subscribe to a lot of what Hurwitz writes, but I just feel that sometimes I actually agree with him. Having not heard the Arnold conducted performance of his 4th, I can't say whether I believe him or not, but, at this juncture, I can say that I have a lot of Arnold in my collection and I really don't need anymore (not that you were suggesting I buy anything just a general comment).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 26, 2016, 07:10:26 PM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on April 26, 2016, 11:42:20 AM
The Hurwitzer's bitch about Arnold's performance of the Fourth concerns the tempi:

"He stretches the first and third movements to a fairly ridiculous length, and the entire work takes more than 54 minutes, as opposed to a bit less than 40 from Handley (Decca/Conifer), Hickox (Chandos) or Penny (Naxos). Even the finale hangs fire, sounding labored, even tortured, rather than rhythmically taut and vigorous. The result, however interesting in terms of the instrumental detail that it reveals, materially misrepresents the music's rhythmic energy, urgency, and wit. Listening becomes a punishment..."


The main thing I took from that negative review is "instrumental detail." I love detail. And since I can usually appreciate broader interpretations of anyone's music, the review actually encouraged me to order the CD. (I also have trouble believing the composer "misrepresents" his own music.) That Jeffrey lists it as his favorite helped persuade me too.

Sarge

I'm pretty mixed when it comes to interpretations. On one hand, I do like a broader approach, but on the other hand, I don't want a conductor to get too bogged down in a passage where I feel doesn't need to be expanded by slowing it down. I can appreciate a lot of different kinds of interpretations as long as I believe the conductor knows what they're doing and yields results that make my ears perk up and allow me to feel the music along with them. It's all subjective really.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 26, 2016, 10:15:01 PM
I think that Arnold's drawn out performance of Symphony 1 works well and is my favourite version. I need to listen to other recordings of Symphony 4 which is the one I know least.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 27, 2016, 03:24:13 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 26, 2016, 10:15:01 PM
I think that Arnold's drawn out performance of Symphony 1 works well and is my favourite version. I need to listen to other recordings of Symphony 4 which is the one I know least.

I refer to Symphony No. 4 as Arnold's 'Barnum & Bailey' symphony, because the first movement really reminds me of circus music. The interesting thing about this first movement is towards the end the circus turns tragic and the clowns, acrobats, and ringmaster seem to be in some sort of mourning. :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006) - chamber music
Post by: Scion7 on April 27, 2016, 05:53:52 AM
The Oboe Sonatina Op.28 (1951)  is on one of the Nash CD's - correct?
I have the performace by Katsya Watanabe and David Johnson from 2009.

[asin]B003VY9WM4[/asin]

Oboe Sonatina, Op. 28
ARNOLD-Watanabe, Johnson
Leggiero-Andante con moto-Vivace
1951

NOT 1952, by the way - that is a mistake some references make that I've seen online.  According to Craggs 1998 book, Malcolm Arnold-A Bio-Biography, it was composed in 1951.

Strange piece - the opening is serious, but has a nice melodic feel.
The Andante is melancholy and has a haunting tune.  Hopefully the Nash folks took it at the same tempo as this performance did.  I can't imagine it slower or faster.
Then, it finishes off with a happy-go-lucky Vivace !


Arnold composed this sonatina, and also a concerto for oboe -
the Oboe Concertino is an orchestrated version of the sonatina by Roger Steptoe,
and it is therefore a hybrid work not entirely Arnold's - has Rafe elements to it.
I can see why Steptoe, like Ravel with Mussorgsky, saw the orchestrated potential for the piece.



Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 28, 2016, 03:21:14 AM
I don't know the Oboe Sonatina, but, yes, I do believe it's in the Hyperion series (w/ the Nash Ensemble) of chamber music. Arnold's chamber works are largely unexplored territory for me. I also felt that revisiting the symphonies (I only lack listening to Symphonies 1 & 2 again) that there was so much I missed from the previous listen. These are really complex works, but I found them immediately attractive. The concerti are still a blindspot for me in a way as I've heard so much of that music about six years ago, but haven't revisited it since, although I do believe I heard the Guitar Concerto not too long ago. Very nice work.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 28, 2016, 05:18:14 PM
Cross-posted from the 'Listening' thread:

Quote from: Mirror Image on April 28, 2016, 05:02:12 PM
Now:

(http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_500/MI0000/957/MI0000957204.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)

English, Scottish, Cornish, & Irish Dances
Excerpts from the ballet 'Solitaire'


The lighter side of Arnold is no less enjoyable. Enthralling disc.

Such an awesome recording. Does anyone else here own it?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Heck148 on April 28, 2016, 05:23:40 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 28, 2016, 05:18:14 PM
Cross-posted from the 'Listening' thread:

Such an awesome recording. Does anyone else here own it?
Yes...I've had it for a long time - just today listening in the car...neat disc...really fun music...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 28, 2016, 05:36:21 PM
Quote from: Heck148 on April 28, 2016, 05:23:40 PM
Yes...I've had it for a long time - just today listening in the car...neat disc...really fun music...

Indeed! It's been in my collection for a long time as well. I wish Thomson had conducted more of Arnold's music, especially the symphonies. Imagine Thomson in the 9th. I'm salivating just thinking about it. :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 28, 2016, 06:04:18 PM
For those interested, here's Tony Palmer's documentary film on Arnold on YT:

https://www.youtube.com/v/W93ye83wJ6w

I haven't watched myself, but I really hope it stays on YT.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006] - chamber music cont.
Post by: Scion7 on April 28, 2016, 07:21:23 PM
Sonata for Flute and Piano, Op.121  (1977)
Allegro-Andantino-Maestoso con molto ritmico

Has a weird last movement - kind of like a showtune in parts - not my favorite chamber work from Arnold but worthwhile.


Quintet for Flute, Violin, Viola, Horn and Bassoon, Op.7  (1944)
Allegro con brio-Andante con moto-Allegretto con molto

A serious work that also has some light-hearted comedic melody 'chase' lines.


Sonatina for Flute & Piano, Op.19  (1948)
Allegro-Andante-Allegretto languido

Sometimes violent piano in the first movement; the Andante is another wonderful, haunting tune that Arnold often comes up with - and the 3rd movement is another happy-go-lucky type of ending that is sort of jarring considering movements I and II.


Sonatina for Recorder and Piano, Op.41  (1953)
Cantilena-Chaconne-Rondo

Another melodic piece - Arnold seems to pull these out of his hat at-will.  The Rondo is very nice.  The limited range of the recorder keeps the work from getting too "serious."


Fantasy for Recorder and Strings (or Quartet version), Op.140   (1990)
Andante e mesto-Allegro-Lento e mesto-Allegretto-Vivace

I find a lot of Arnold 'schizophrenic' - he can turn a piece from a melancholy, thought-provoking movement to a sunny, optimistic section immediately following. This certainly is the case between the 2nd and 3rd movements.


Sonatina for Clarinet & Piano, Op.29  (1951)
Allegro con brio-Andantino-Furioso

Arnold could write very well for the clarinet.  Again, a wistful second movement - followed up by a eastern-feel aggressive final movement.


Anybody that can compose such fine chamber music is a right decent sod in my book.  Chambernut should be on here someplace helping out on this thread.  Probably off lying around with his bird and a pint.
 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on April 28, 2016, 11:38:03 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnA1IMnLZr4

(http://s32.postimg.org/6mntp14b9/Arnold_Purple.jpg)

A serious problem with obesity need not, and did not, hinder his enthusiasm.   :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 03:19:41 AM
Ah, a very nice piece I found on YouTube (that does not appear to have been issued on LP or CD) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4RcOPeQscs

Divertimento, Op.137, for wind octet   (1988)
(2 oboes, 2 B-flat clarinets, 2 bassoons, 2 horns)
Allegro-Larghetto-Vivace-Allegro-Alla Marziale

Commissioned for Camerata Wind soloists with financial assistance for Northwest Arts
Dedicated to Janet Hilton


Performance Notes by  © Piers Burton-Page (sorry Piers, I nicked it) :

For some reason best known to the composer's subconscious, the new Divertimento for Wind Octet also turns out to be one of the most tightly-organised of the composer's much more recent pieces! Is this, perhaps, a response to the suggestion of looseness inherent in the title Divertimento?

What we are confronted with is a five-movement work, again with some of the movements virtually running into one another, and again with some close-knit thematic integration. Listen out for the opening flourish that runs through the entire ensemble and forms the very first thing they play. The rising seventh occurs again and again throughout the whole piece, very obviously, and bind it together with classical rigidity. The octet ensemble is classical, too: pairs of oboes, clarinets, horns and bassoons, with the first member of each pairing given occasional moments in which to shine - the first clarinet in particular, for Janet Hilton is not just a close musical friend, but the commissioner and dedicatee of this octet!

Arnold begins, then, with a three-four allegro that is very much in the nature of a prologue; it is very short, and sets out the basic material, much of it stated in unison and most of it fortissimo. The ensuing larghetto, in common time, is also short, and seems principally concerned to develop the inherent somewhat spare lyricism contained in the motif of sevenths that is again prominent. The third-movement vivace is in compound triple time, and moves with vehement speed and almost hectic energy. There is plenty of virtuoso writing, particularly for the clarinet; some wild dynamic contrasts; and not one but two abrupt cut-offs - a favourite Arnold device this! A four-bar maestoso coda wittily echoes a theme from the first movement. The fourth movement is a three-four allegro, very fast and again almost scherzo-like, and there is more than a hint of a sardonic waltz about it before the music peters out in a clarinet solo. Arnold stipulates a lunga pausa before the final movement, a four-four piece marked 'alla marziale'. The rhythms are indeed march-like, and the march tune is not so much a cousin as a twin brother to the sevenths motif heard at the outset. This march is much the most substantial part of the Divertimento, a weighty piece exploring a variety of moods and even setting the march theme against a variety of new material that includes a fanfare-like flourish, and a sinuous, even chromatic motif first given out on the oboe and quickly taken up by the horn. Once again a lean clarinet heralds the ending, which is forceful and very brief. We shall, hopefully, have been entertained - but also challenged! Malcolm Arnold completed his Divertimento for Wind Octet in May 1988, at his home in Attleborough, Norfolk.

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 29, 2016, 04:05:49 AM
Quote from: Scion7 on April 28, 2016, 11:38:03 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnA1IMnLZr4

(http://s32.postimg.org/6mntp14b9/Arnold_Purple.jpg)

A serious problem with obesity need not, and did not, hinder his enthusiasm.   :)
He thinned out a lot in his later years!
I listened to two versions of Symphony 4 (Arnold on Lyrita and Hickox on Chandos).
The Arnold version is almost 15 minutes longer!
Whilst Arnold's drawn out version of Symphony No.1 works very well in adding gravitas to the work I felt that it made much less sense in Symphony 4 and much prefer the Hickox recording where there is a much greater sense of urgency. Some sections reminded me of Leonard Bernstein's 'Symphonic Dances from West Side Story'. I hardly know Symphony 4 possibly because for many years I only possessed the Lyrita recording and didn't make much sense of it. I now have a much higher opinion of the score. No.8 is the other one I hardly know so will be listening to that again soon.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Karl Henning on April 29, 2016, 04:07:51 AM
Quote from: Heck148 on April 28, 2016, 05:23:40 PM
Yes...I've had it for a long time - just today listening in the car...neat disc...really fun music...

Quote from: Mirror Image on April 28, 2016, 05:36:21 PM
Indeed! It's been in my collection for a long time as well. I wish Thomson had conducted more of Arnold's music, especially the symphonies. Imagine Thomson in the 9th. I'm salivating just thinking about it. :)

Good, clean fun!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 08:58:23 AM
LPO–0013
© 2004 London Philharmonic Orchestra Ltd
Recorded live at the Royal Festival Hall, London, on 24 September 2004
Total playing time: 69:08
DDD Stereo
Released September 2006

(https://www.lpo.org.uk/recordings-and-gifts/index.php?option=com_tessitura_bridge&task=thumbnail&width=650&height=400&path=/images/merchandise/CD0013RIC.jpg)  [asin]B000H4VZIK[/asin]

Oops!  Scrolling back to page 5 or so, I see that Vandermolen already covered this one.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 10:47:20 AM
Quote from: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 08:58:23 AM
LPO–0013
© 2004 London Philharmonic Orchestra Ltd
Recorded live at the Royal Festival Hall, London, on 24 September 2004
Total playing time: 69:08
DDD Stereo
Released September 2006

(https://www.lpo.org.uk/recordings-and-gifts/index.php?option=com_tessitura_bridge&task=thumbnail&width=650&height=400&path=/images/merchandise/CD0013RIC.jpg)  [asin]B000H4VZIK[/asin]

Oops!  Scrolling back to page 5 or so, I see that Vandermolen already covered this one.

I haven't heard that recording. How is audio quality and performances?

On another note...

I've really been digging this recording today:

(https://www.chandos.net/hiresart/CHAN%2010293.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 11:04:57 AM
Sounds fine - the advances in live recording (and shushing up that old man in row three with the hacking cough) have made this sound much better technically than any early studio stereo recording.

I really like the Philharmonic Concerto.  The "Chacony" should appeal to your Shostaphenia ... Dmitrisociative disorder.   :D

I've been catching up on this composer since reading this thread and found especially in the chamber music a real swiftee giftee.
I was still in England when he conducted the DP concerto and the furor in the press both pro and con lasted perhaps a week with the various talking heads on the BBC.  This probably added more fuel to the angst of those ultra-modernist critics who already disliked him.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 11:10:30 AM
Quote from: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 11:04:57 AM
Sounds fine - the advances in live recording (and shushing up that old man in row three with the hacking cough) have made this sound much better technically than any early studio stereo recording.

I really like the Philharmonic Concerto.  The "Chacony" should appeal to your Shostaphenia ... Dmitrisociative disorder.   :D

I've been catching up on this composer since reading this thread and found especially in the chamber music a real swiftee giftee.
I was still in England when he conducted the DP concerto and the furor in the press both pro and con lasted perhaps a week with the various talking heads on the BBC.  This probably added more fuel to the angst of those ultra-modernist critics who already disliked him.

Very nice except that I do not suffer from Shostaphenia ... Dmitrisociative disorder. I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM!!!! >:( :P

My coach tells me the first step to this disorder is admitting I have a problem...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 11:19:22 AM
Of COURSE you don't.   0:)


(pssst ... Karl - is the sedative ready?)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Karl Henning on April 29, 2016, 11:22:57 AM
Dart gun at the ready!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 11:28:03 AM
Get the air bubble out.   ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: André on April 29, 2016, 11:46:59 AM
Quote

On another note...

I've really been digging this recording today:

(https://www.chandos.net/hiresart/CHAN%2010293.jpg)

With good reason. It's an excellent conspectus of some of the composer's Overtures - really, tone poems the size of Dvorak's -, but I have to recommend the composer's recording (on Reference, already discussed here) as one that brings these works' sheer dimension into much bigger focus - again by dint of slower, bigger readings.  He also interprets other overtures than those on the Chandos - so really, the two are complementary both in terms of approach and repertoire.


Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: vandermolen on April 29, 2016, 12:02:22 PM
Quote from: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 08:58:23 AM
LPO–0013
© 2004 London Philharmonic Orchestra Ltd
Recorded live at the Royal Festival Hall, London, on 24 September 2004
Total playing time: 69:08
DDD Stereo
Released September 2006

(https://www.lpo.org.uk/recordings-and-gifts/index.php?option=com_tessitura_bridge&task=thumbnail&width=650&height=400&path=/images/merchandise/CD0013RIC.jpg)  [asin]B000H4VZIK[/asin]

Oops!  Scrolling back to page 5 or so, I see that Vandermolen already covered this one.
Yes, it's a great CD - one of my Arnold favourites, especially for Symphony 6 but it's a great programme generally. I also like the 'Inn of the Sixth Happiness' film music. The film features Robert Donat's poignant final appearance 'we shall not meet again I think' are his final words in the film - a great actor and a great CD.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 12:11:51 PM
(http://s32.postimg.org/mcc5nzavp/Back.jpg)  (http://www.newfocusrecordings.com/site/assets/files/2321/fcr123_cover.750x0.jpg)

The physical CD is available at least from CD Universe.  A very nice program - the Arnold selection, 5 Pieces for Violin and Piano, Op.84  (1965), has jazz elements in the Moto perpetuo.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 29, 2016, 12:37:12 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 28, 2016, 06:04:18 PM
For those interested, here's Tony Palmer's documentary film on Arnold on YT:

https://www.youtube.com/v/W93ye83wJ6w

I haven't watched myself, but I really hope it stays on YT.

The documentary is excellent - watch the whole thing.  It is quite tragic how demented and alone he was.  A really troubled and sad shell of a person.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 12:42:17 PM
Quote from: relm1 on April 29, 2016, 12:37:12 PM
The documentary is excellent - watch the whole thing.  It is quite tragic how demented and alone he was.  A really troubled and sad shell of a person.

I watched 'Part I' last night and I'll continue with 'Part II' tonight. Indeed, it's certainly disheartening to see his own mental decline.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 29, 2016, 01:06:17 PM
Right now listening to this:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ETZTZS90L.jpg)

Arnold's First symphony - already jolly and sarcastic in I, quietly anguished and enigmatic in II, etc.

And his 5th, possibly his most 'popular' work in the genre. As with Beethoven, Mahler, Prokofiev, Tchaikovsky, Shostakovich: a 'people's symphony'.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 01:21:51 PM
Duo for Flute & Viola, Op.10  (1945)
ARNOLD
Andante quasi allegretto-Allegro-Allegretto ma non troppo

First performance December 1946 in London.

Another sound work for the players, and enjoyable to hear, although the first two movements are much stronger than the last.


Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 29, 2016, 02:26:39 PM
What do you all think of seven through nine? It seems they got increasingly terse and grim along with his deteriorating sanity.   It doesn't have quite the Mahler sense of existential strife but clearly personal demons. Then again, maybe I'm reading too much into that documentary.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 29, 2016, 02:47:22 PM
Quote from: André on April 29, 2016, 01:06:17 PM
Right now listening to this:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ETZTZS90L.jpg)

Arnold's First symphony - already jolly and sarcastic in I, quietly anguished and enigmatic in II, etc.

And his 5th, possibly his most 'popular' work in the genre. As with Beethoven, Mahler, Prokofiev, Tchaikovsky, Shostakovich: a 'people's symphony'.
That is a GREAT CD combining possibly my two favourite Arnold symphonies. I think that No.1 was written after he shot himself through the foot to get out of military service and No.5 commemorates friends who died young:
Like this CD too:
[asin]B00004SUM3[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 04:06:55 PM
Quote from: André on April 29, 2016, 01:06:17 PM
Right now listening to this:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ETZTZS90L.jpg)

Arnold's First symphony - already jolly and sarcastic in I, quietly anguished and enigmatic in II, etc.

And his 5th, possibly his most 'popular' work in the genre. As with Beethoven, Mahler, Prokofiev, Tchaikovsky, Shostakovich: a 'people's symphony'.

I'm quite anxious to revisit Handley's Arnold series. I do own the original Conifer recordings with Handley, but one plus of that budget set is the remastered 24-bit audio, but I remember the original recordings had a great sound to them. I'll have to listen to Symphony No. 1 tonight.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 04:10:16 PM
Quote from: relm1 on April 29, 2016, 02:26:39 PMWhat do you all think of seven through nine? It seems they got increasingly terse and grim along with his deteriorating sanity.   It doesn't have quite the Mahler sense of existential strife but clearly personal demons. Then again, maybe I'm reading too much into that documentary.

I love all of those symphonies, but the 9th gets my vote for the best Arnold symphony of them all. The feeling of resignation and hopelessness run deep throughout that symphony. That last movement Lento is one of the most magnificent things I've ever heard in music. The thematic material is so straightforward, but underneath this lies a deep pool of loneliness, anguish, and heartbreak.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 29, 2016, 05:21:38 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 04:10:16 PM
I love all of those symphonies, but the 9th gets my vote for the best Arnold symphony of them all. That feeling of resignation and hopelessness run deep throughout that symphony. That last movement Lento is one of the most magnificent things I've ever heard in music. The thematic material is so straightforward, but underneath this lies a deep pool of loneliness, anguish, and heartbreak.

I agree with you.  Where would you place him in the 20th century British symphonic group?  Post Britten but a peer to Alwyn?  Sub-Walton?  His own thing?  I hear zero of Vaughan Williams so he seems a different approach the British sound.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 05:30:29 PM
An unashamed eclectic . . . a valedictory Ninth (1986) clearly modelled on Tchaikovsky and Mahler. The Second (1953) follows in the line of English Pastorals that stretches back to Holst and Vaughan Williams and even earlier, and was and remains widely played; while the Third (1957), in somewhat similar vein . . .  The early influence of Sibelius, textural and emotional, is replaced by the more all-embracing aspirations and even the thematic contours of Mahler. Along with Berlioz, these composers were regularly described by Arnold as forming his private pantheon.    - from The New Grove

I pretty much agree with the editors' consensus on Arnold.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 05:32:39 PM
Quote from: relm1 on April 29, 2016, 05:21:38 PM
I agree with you.  Where would you place him in the 20th century British symphonic group?  Post Britten but a peer to Alwyn?  Sub-Walton?  His own thing?  I hear zero of Vaughan Williams so he seems a different approach the British sound.

Yes, he doesn't really belong to the same musical world as Vaughan Williams nor do I really align him with composers like Alwyn, Walton, or Britten. He certainly shared nothing in common with those post-RVW composers like Moeran, Finzi, or Howells. Sigh...I think it's best we just give Arnold his own category. :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 29, 2016, 06:08:46 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 05:32:39 PM
Yes, he doesn't really belong to the same musical world as Vaughan Williams nor do I really align him with composers like Alwyn, Walton, or Britten. He certainly shared nothing in common with those post-RVW composers like Moeran, Finzi, or Howells. Sigh...I think it's best we just give Arnold his own category. :)
But that would make him an innovator. I don't think I've heard anything from him would I see as his being innovative (and I have all the symphonies).  I do find him quite unique but borrowing too.  There is some pastiche, pop music,  and Brittish pomp too. It's a complicated mix but I do not see him as an innovator at all.    That does not mean I do not fully enjoy it. Maybe he's something like a popular version of Hoddinott. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 06:13:12 PM
Quote from: relm1 on April 29, 2016, 06:08:46 PM
But that would make him an innovator. I don't think I've heard anything from him would I see as his being innovative (and I have all the symphonies).  I do find him quite unique but borrowing too.  There is some pastiche, pop music,  and Brittish pomp too. It's a complicated mix but I do not see him as an innovator at all.    That does not mean I do not fully enjoy it. Maybe he's something like a popular version of Hoddinott.

Being an innovator and having a unique compositional voice are two different things in my view. What I meant is that no one really sounds like Arnold. He didn't innovate anything and didn't need to --- he borrowed from popular music, folk music, and melded it all into a unique synthesis.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 29, 2016, 10:57:31 PM
I think that Mahler is the most obvious influence on Arnold with the juxtaposition of the serious and grotesque/banal material. I consider this an asset and part of Arnold's appeal.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on April 30, 2016, 12:23:41 AM
However, Arnold was also a prolific composer of (very good!) chamber music - which only occasionally reflects a Mahlerian feel. I hear Jazz elements and also some English music house comedic influences, and I wonder how aware he was of Bliss, Bowen, Alwyn, Bax, et al - not so much to be influenced in his sound, but by the challenge of their extensive chamber works.  In a few pieces there is an impression of Rafe's influence.  And while it is sad that he had depression over much of his life, its influence on his composing is what gave his music his edge in a lot of ways.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006] - brass
Post by: Scion7 on April 30, 2016, 01:30:22 AM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51NOJRfR8NL.jpg)
     
[asin]B000JJ4GF2[/asin]

From start to finish, great listening.
Also, points out the mistaken notion that Arnold's works post-Symphony Nr.9 were "not memorable," as the critic stated on page one of this thread.
The Little Suite No.3 for Brass, Op.131  (1987) and Brass Quintet No.2, Op.132  (1988)  -  as well as the previously mentioned Divertimento for Wind Octet, Op.137  (1988),  puts that myth to bed.
Note to fans of Anthony Braxton - you will find that the leap from his music to this CD is not large.  ;)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 30, 2016, 05:20:04 AM
There's an early work called 'Larch Trees' I think which shows some VW influence.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 05:32:28 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 29, 2016, 10:57:31 PM
I think that Mahler is the most obvious influence on Arnold with the juxtaposition of the serious and grotesque/banal material. I consider this an asset and part of Arnold's appeal.

Exactly and he's not unlike Shostakovich or Schnittke in this regard either.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 30, 2016, 05:39:50 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 05:32:28 AM
Exactly and he's not unlike Shostakovich or Schnittke in this regard either.
Very much agree. Thinking about it I agree that Sibelius and Walton (whom Arnold was friends with) were also influences but Mahler stands out most.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 05:44:30 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 30, 2016, 05:39:50 AM
Very much agree. Thinking about it I agree that Sibelius and Walton (whom Arnold was friends with) were also influences but Mahler stands out most.

Speaking of the Sibelius influence, I was listening to Symphony No. 2 last night and was awestruck by some of these Sibelian musical passages that reminded me of Sibelius' own symphonies. I hear a minimal Walton influence, though. I read that Arnold also cited Berlioz as an influence. I think Arnold was quite aware of the music of other composers, but, like any good composer, he just found his own avenue and pursued it relentlessly.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 05:52:54 AM
Quote from: Scion7 on April 30, 2016, 12:23:41 AM
However, Arnold was also a prolific composer of (very good!) chamber music - which only occasionally reflects a Mahlerian feel. I hear Jazz elements and also some English music house comedic influences, and I wonder how aware he was of Bliss, Bowen, Alwyn, Bax, et al - not so much to be influenced in his sound, but by the challenge of their extensive chamber works.  In a few pieces there is an impression of Rafe's influence.  And while it is sad that he had depression over much of his life, its influence on his composing is what gave his music his edge in a lot of ways.

This is certainly true. His chamber music speaks of a very different composer than what we're used to hearing in the orchestral works, especially the symphonies. More jazzy and perhaps even a bit of a Neoclassical feel to some of the music. For such a prolific composer, I'm amazed at the consistency in his oeuvre. His music never is reduced to mere note-spinning. There always seems to be some kind of ongoing narrative in the music.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 06:55:22 AM
Quote from: Scion7 on April 29, 2016, 08:58:23 AM
LPO–0013
© 2004 London Philharmonic Orchestra Ltd
Recorded live at the Royal Festival Hall, London, on 24 September 2004
Total playing time: 69:08
DDD Stereo
Released September 2006

(https://www.lpo.org.uk/recordings-and-gifts/index.php?option=com_tessitura_bridge&task=thumbnail&width=650&height=400&path=/images/merchandise/CD0013RIC.jpg)  [asin]B000H4VZIK[/asin]

Oops!  Scrolling back to page 5 or so, I see that Vandermolen already covered this one.

I just bought this recording. Looking forward to hearing it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 30, 2016, 06:59:36 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 29, 2016, 06:13:12 PM
Being an innovator and having a unique compositional voice are two different things in my view. What I meant is that no one really sounds like Arnold. He didn't innovate anything and didn't need to --- he borrowed from popular music, folk music, and melded it all into a unique synthesis.

I agree with you.  It isn't so much that he "belongs in his own category" but that he falls in several categories in a distinct way.  Very, very few belong in their own category.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 07:01:23 AM
Quote from: relm1 on April 30, 2016, 06:59:36 AM
I agree with you.  It isn't so much that he "belongs in his own category" but that he falls in several categories in a distinct way.  Very, very few belong in their own category.

I suppose my comment was a bit 'over the top'. I certainly agree with your sentiments here.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 30, 2016, 09:22:01 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 05:44:30 AM
Speaking of the Sibelius influence, I was listening to Symphony No. 2 last night and was awestruck by some of these Sibelian musical passages that reminded me of Sibelius' own symphonies. I hear a minimal Walton influence, though. I read that Arnold also cited Berlioz as an influence. I think Arnold was quite aware of the music of other composers, but, like any good composer, he just found his own avenue and pursued it relentlessly.
Totally agree.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: vandermolen on April 30, 2016, 09:22:44 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 06:55:22 AM
I just bought this recording. Looking forward to hearing it.
Am sure you'll really like it. Let us know what you think. :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006] - Chamber joy
Post by: Scion7 on April 30, 2016, 09:30:05 AM
Oboe Quartet, Op.61 (1957)
Allegro non troppo-Allegretto-Vivace con brio
Written for Leon Goossens on the occasion of his 60th birthday - first perfoimance: Cambridge, University Music School, 2 May 1957 by Leon Goossens (oboe) and the Carter String Trio - wasn't published until 1966.

Another schizophrenic piece - the opening is light, airy - the 2nd movement is strange and mysterious and could be the soundtrack for filling Dracula's boxes with his native earth  - the Vivace has a melody that stays with you and is a sort of 'Pied Piper' dance.  A real provocative work due to its veering from one course to another.

[asin]B014KP5VMC[/asin]

String Quartet No.1, Op.23  (1949)
Allegro commodo - Vivace - Andante- Lento - Tempo primo - Allegro con spirito

[asin]B000MRP1TG[/asin]

A serious work throughout - very modernistic, but not as aggressive as some - the technique does not venture into Bartok String Quartet 3 or 4 territory.

String Quartet No.2, Op.118  (1975)
Allegro - Maestoso con molto rubato, Allegro vivace - Andante - Allegretto, Vivace, Lento

[asin]B000000AQJ[/asin]

Dedication: Hugh Maguire   First perfoimance: Dublin, the Castle, 9 June 1976, by the Allegri String Quartet

More melodic, less extreme than the first quartet.  The 2nd movement reminds me of the Bach sonatas for violin.  The last movement changes gears a couple of times with some nice plucking in the Vivace.  The only slight disappointment was in the third movement - seemed a bit aimless to these ears. Another very serious work.

Phantasy for String Quartet 'Vita Abundans'  (1941)

[asin]B00005B65O[/asin]

Nicely constructed, with an ascending scale overlaid with an almost Indian-sounding motif. Won 2nd place in the 1941 W.W. Cobbett prize for composition.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 30, 2016, 12:00:42 PM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51CCKHERZ9L.jpg)

First listen ever to the concerto for two pianos (three hands) which seems to be on many a compilation. Once again Arnold confounds by making sounds that remind one of MacDowell, Ravel, Gershwin, but that could never come from another hand than... Arnold

Too bad Sony did not retain the (beautiful) original jackets from the Conifer discs.

I just ordered these, my interest in Arnold being rekindled by this discussion:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/613JigbE4VL.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91uW82Gs%2BeL._SX522_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81jOblGOhpS._SX522_PJautoripBadge,BottomRight,4,-40_OU11__.jpg)

I have these works already (plus the Naxos set), but Arnold, like VW is a major composer who deserves exposure and warrants duplication.

Is the Chandos Hickox box set recommended ?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on April 30, 2016, 12:44:08 PM
^ Yes, those are ugly covers - ugh.
At least the British Composers series are dignified visually.  I have that set, too.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006] - fine cuisine
Post by: Scion7 on April 30, 2016, 06:09:52 PM
Listening to the Organ Concerto, and making grilled mesquite chicken sandwiches on toasted sesame seed buns with 4-blend Mexican shredded (melted) cheese, lettuce, tomato, and mayo.  Yarm yarm yarm nom nom nom.  :)   I worked hard in the yard today - I deserve them.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 07:14:13 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 30, 2016, 09:22:44 AM
Am sure you'll really like it. Let us know what you think. :)

Will do, my friend. 8)

Quote from: André on April 30, 2016, 12:00:42 PM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51CCKHERZ9L.jpg)

First listen ever to the concerto for two pianos (three hands) which seems to be on many a compilation. Once again Arnold confounds by making sounds that remind one of MacDowell, Ravel, Gershwin, but that could never come from another hand than... Arnold

Too bad Sony did not retain the (beautiful) original jackets from the Conifer discs.

I just ordered these, my interest in Arnold being rekindled by this discussion:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/613JigbE4VL.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91uW82Gs%2BeL._SX522_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81jOblGOhpS._SX522_PJautoripBadge,BottomRight,4,-40_OU11__.jpg)

I have these works already (plus the Naxos set), but Arnold, like VW is a major composer who deserves exposure and warrants duplication.

Is the Chandos Hickox box set recommended ?

(Wipes drool from mouth and goes searching Amazon...)

Is the Chandos set recommendable? Absolutely, although I haven't heard the Gamba performances of Symphonies 7-9 yet. Hickox's performances are very fine IMHO.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 30, 2016, 08:17:31 PM
I received the Complete Conifer Recordings set today and I'm looking forward to digging into everything this box set has to offer. It must be said that I do own the original Conifer releases of Handley's cycle (w/ those cool looking covers), but one reason I bought this set was 1. to have Handley's cycle in remastered sound and 2. to have access to a lot of other recordings that have been OOP for years. I suppose a third reason would be the price was right. Hard to pass it up. It's funny that these cheap budget box sets end up being worth a good bit once they go OOP, which, without a doubt in my mind, will happen sooner or later.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 30, 2016, 10:46:15 PM
Quote from: André on April 30, 2016, 12:00:42 PM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51CCKHERZ9L.jpg)

First listen ever to the concerto for two pianos (three hands) which seems to be on many a compilation. Once again Arnold confounds by making sounds that remind one of MacDowell, Ravel, Gershwin, but that could never come from another hand than... Arnold

Too bad Sony did not retain the (beautiful) original jackets from the Conifer discs.

I just ordered these, my interest in Arnold being rekindled by this discussion:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/613JigbE4VL.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91uW82Gs%2BeL._SX522_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81jOblGOhpS._SX522_PJautoripBadge,BottomRight,4,-40_OU11__.jpg)

I have these works already (plus the Naxos set), but Arnold, like VW is a major composer who deserves exposure and warrants duplication.

Is the Chandos Hickox box set recommended ?
Those are amongst my favourite Arnold discs Andre, especially the two conducted by Arnold himself. It includes my favourite recording of Symphony 1 (much longer than other versions) and Symphony 5 is the version I grew up with. EMI issued a double CD set including Arnold conducting symphonies 1 and 5 and an older recording of him conducting Symphony 2 (instead of Groves). I love the double piano concerto too, which is great fun as well as serious.  :)
[asin]B000MCIB6Q[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006)
Post by: Scion7 on May 01, 2016, 08:18:06 AM
"Toy" Symphony, Op.62 (1957)  -- this was written for children/children's orchestra?  I listened to it on YouTube - can't say I like it.

Fantasy on a Theme of John Field, Op.116 (1975) - ah, this is more like it.   :)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61zSh82%2BuTL.jpg)

[asin]B000VIFLYG[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 01, 2016, 09:15:33 PM
Quote from: Scion7 on May 01, 2016, 08:18:06 AM
"Toy" Symphony, Op.62 (1957)  -- this was written for children/children's orchestra?  I listened to it on YouTube - can't say I like it.

Fantasy on a Theme of John Field, Op.116 (1975) - ah, this is more like it.   :)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61zSh82%2BuTL.jpg)

[asin]B000VIFLYG[/asin]
That is an excellent disc.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on May 01, 2016, 11:42:49 PM
H.R.H.The Duke of Cambridge, Op.60  (1957)
       March for Military Band 

Written to celebrate the Royal Military School of Music's centenaiy in 1957.
Dedication: Lt.-Co. David McBain
First perfoimance:   Twickenham, Kneller Hall, 28 June 1957
Band of tlie RMSM (Kneller Hall), conducted by Rodney Bashford

(http://s32.postimg.org/r6hr171d1/Irish_Guards.jpg)

The only Malcolm Arnold track on the LP / CD.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on May 02, 2016, 01:20:27 AM
Concerto for 28 Players, Op.105  (1970)
Vivace-Larghetto-Allegro
Commissioned by the Stuyvesant Foundation
First performance: London, Queen Elizabeth Hall, 25 April 1970.
English Chamber Orchestra, conducted by Malcolm Arnold

Excellent composition-the Vivace has a modernistic tune that reminded me in parts of the soundtrack-theme for "Patton" and there are some nice soft-loud dynamics; the Larghetto is strong in the strings, and the Allegro is a gallop and a march tune, but then the tempo slows drastically down.  I'm starting to think the Vivace may be one of the best things he ever did?


Variations for Orchestra on a Theme of Ruth Gipps, Op.122  (1977)
Introduction and Theme: Allegro moderato-Variation I: Vivace-Variation II: Alla marcia-Variation III: Lento-Variation IV: Vivace-Variation V: Allegretto-Variation VI (Finale): Maestoso
First perfoimance:   London, Queen Elizabeth Hall, 22 February 1978.
Chanticleer Orchestra, conducted by Ruth Gipps

Powerful work with lots of chromaticism and dynamics.  I hope Ms. Gipps appreciated it.  8)


Little Suite no.3 (A Manx Suite), Op.142   (1990)
Allegretto-Allegro-Allegretto-Lento-Allegretto
Commissioned by: Department of Education for the Manx Youth Orchestra under the
patronage of the Isle of Man Bank Ltd in celebration of the Bank's 125th anniversary
First perfoimance:   Douglas (IoM), Villa Marina, 8 December 1990.
Manx Youth Orchestra, conducted by Malcolm Arnold

Much more light-weight - it's a pleasant time-passer (or waster).  It's possible I've heard this before on a Classical station and it just never stuck.  There are much worse things for a school orchestra to be spending time on.


Little Suite Nr.2, Op,78    (1962)
Overture (Allegro moderato)-Ballad (Andantino)-Dance (Vivace)
Written for the Fainham Festival
First perfoimance: Famham, Parish Church, 13 May 1963.
Combined orchestra of Farnham Grammar School and Tiffin
School, conducted by Dennis Bloodworm First London: Royal Festival Hall, 15 May 1964.
London Junior and Senior Orchestras, conducted by Oliver Broome

The first movement is sort of dispensable, the Ballad is nice, the Dance moves along but not a lot to it.


Little Suite Nr.1, Op.53  (1948)
Prelude: Maestoso-Dance: Allegretto-March: Allegro con brio
In 1955, Arnold renamed "To Youth" (Written for the National Youth Orchestra of Great Britain) to  "Little Suite No. 1 (for orchestra)" which became Opus 53, with the central movement retitled Dance (Allegretto)

More "Arnold lite" - I like the 3rd movement more than the first two.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51WZRlmtMVL.jpg)

[asin]B000000B0G[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: Scion7 on May 02, 2016, 03:08:41 AM
On YT, there is a live recording of A Grand Grand Overture, Op.57 for organ, 3 vacuum cleaners, fluteoor polisher, 4 riflutees & orchestra, (1956) - with Arnold conducting the Hoffnung (alias Morley College) Symphony Orchestra in-concert.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ0xAOlzYZE

A studio version with better acoustics but not as much 'spirit'  -  along with other fine overtures like A Sussex Overture, Opus 31, and The Smoke, Op.21.  An alternative to the Arnold Overtures (Reference Recordings) disc -->

(http://s32.postimg.org/5q071dkyt/smaller_Covers.jpg)

[asin]B0007SK9L0[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold [1921-2006]
Post by: vandermolen on May 02, 2016, 03:56:10 AM
Quote from: Scion7 on May 02, 2016, 03:08:41 AM
On YT, there is a live recording of A Grand Grand Overture, Op.57 for organ, 3 vacuum cleaners, fluteoor polisher, 4 riflutees & orchestra, (1956) - with Arnold conducting the Hoffnung (alias Morley College) Symphony Orchestra in-concert.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ0xAOlzYZE

A studio version with better acoustics but not as much 'spirit'  -  along with other fine overtures like A Sussex Overture, Opus 31, and The Smoke, Op.21.  An alternative to the Arnold Overtures (Reference Recordings) disc -->

(http://s32.postimg.org/5q071dkyt/smaller_Covers.jpg)

[asin]B0007SK9L0[/asin]
Following discussions here have just ordered the Chandos disc.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006) - Safety Dance
Post by: Scion7 on May 02, 2016, 02:54:25 PM
4 Scottish Dances, Op.59  (1957)

My fave rave-up of all the dances - the LPO and Arnold are excellent.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71tRykuPt4L._SX522_.jpg)

[asin]B000027QVJ[/asin]


4 Welsh Dances, Op.138  (1989)
4 Irish Dances, Op.126  (1988)
4 Cornish Dances, Op.91  (1968)
English Dances, set 1, Op.27  (1950)
English Dances, set 2, Op.33  (1951)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/711vPiW35rL._SX522_.jpg)

[asin]B00000149N[/asin]

Penny is an alternative, but personally I think the Arnold/LPO set on Lyrita is better recorded and has the better performances, and it sounds like everyone was having a smashing good time.
All the dances are very tuneful and exciting - the contrast between them and his three "Little Suites" for orchestra is striking.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 02, 2016, 03:08:42 PM
Listening to this:

(http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_400/MI0000/953/MI0000953955.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)

The first movement is labeled 'Energico'. And yet the atmosphere is that of suspense, unease, anguish even. What a composition !

Following the listening of this set, and before I listen to the incoming (*) Hickox one, I'll revisit the Penney on Naxos. I have extremely fond memories of it.

(*) Incoming: in my mailbox, that is. It's not new, just that I've ordered it this week.  ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 02, 2016, 09:53:54 PM
Quote from: André on May 02, 2016, 03:08:42 PM
Listening to this:

(http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_400/MI0000/953/MI0000953955.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)

The first movement is labeled 'Energico'. And yet the atmosphere is that of suspense, unease, anguish even. What a composition !

Following the listening of this set, and before I listen to the incoming (*) Hickox one, I'll revisit the Penney on Naxos. I have extremely fond memories of it.

(*) Incoming: in my mailbox, that is. It's not new, just that I've ordered it this week.  ;D
It was this CD which alerted me to how good Symphony 6 was. Following that I noted its use in a disturbing sequence in a film about Arnold to illustrate his mental breakdown.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on May 02, 2016, 10:08:57 PM
Quote from: André on May 02, 2016, 03:08:42 PM
Listening to this:

(http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_400/MI0000/953/MI0000953955.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)

Quote from: vandermolen on May 02, 2016, 09:53:54 PM
It was this CD which alerted me to how good Symphony 6 was.

That was my first Arnold CD. I didn't buy it specifically for the Symphony, though, but rather Tam O'Shanter, the first Arnold piece I ever heard. It was on a LP of overtures borrowed from the library when I was a teen. The record came with a conductor's baton! Great fun, great listen.

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006)
Post by: Scion7 on May 03, 2016, 12:25:47 AM
Now - this is a little strange:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL6E9y9llz8

The Fantasy for Audience and Orchestra, Op.106  (1970) 

- there is some very attractive instrumental passages - but mixed in with this silly audience participation singing that horrid little tune - ugh.  ???  Commissioned by the BBC - it remains unpublished - and this is the first and only (?) performance - First performance: London, Royal Albert Hall, 12 September 1970.
BBC Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Colin Davis.
Rule Britannia . . . I would have had to have had a few to get into this in 1970 - far too the serious young man. Bizarre.  :-\
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006)
Post by: Scion7 on May 03, 2016, 03:14:38 AM
The piano music is not comparable with his other work, although none of it is terrible.
The Piano Sonata (1942)  and the Three Pieces (1943) show how much improved the Three Fantasies, Op.129 (1986) [dedicated to Eileen Gilroy] are.

The Three Pieces (1937) would be a good break between heavy/serious pieces by other composers at a piano recital - they are light and melodic and very short.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51tXwhAncyL.jpg)

[asin]B000007O0N[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006) - Fantasy odds 'n' ends
Post by: Scion7 on May 03, 2016, 01:23:16 PM
Fantasies:

Fantasy for Solo Bassoon, Op.86   (1966)
Fantasy for B flat Clarinet, Op.87  (1966)
Fantasy for Flute, Op.89   (1966)
Fantasy for Oboe solo, Op.90  (1966)
Nice stuff, these short pieces sound like they were written for students - the Clarinet fantasy is a little more profound.

Fantasy for Horn, Op.88   (1966)
Fantasy for Bb Trumpet, Op.100  (1969)
Fantasy for Trombone, Op.101   (1969)
Fantasy for Tuba, Op.102  (1969)
These are all well-written and fun. They are collected with other longer pieces on the Nimbus set of Arnold brass works. The trumpet fantasy is especially well-written - Arnold's instrument!

Fantasy for Guitar, Op.107   (1971)
A serious work of about twelve minutes long, divided into: Prélude-Scherzo-Arietta-Fughetta-Arietta-March-Postlude
It was dedicated to guitarist Julian Bream, who premiered it at Queen Elizabeth Hall, London, in May 1971.
Introspective.

The Fantasy for Harp, Op.117  (1975) is something different. 
  I. Lament 
  II. March 
  III. Nocturne 
  IV. Scherzo
This is dedicated to Osian Ellis, and was first performed by him in January 1976 in London.
Clocking in at about eleven minutes, this is a serious work. Played as a continuous movement,
the opening is beautiful and the piece works its way through a variety of somber moods.
This has a fantastic nocturne segment.  Why some critics said Arnold didn't show emotion is unfathomable after hearing a piece like this.  It might be successful as a transcription for piano - but it would have to be carefully done.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/517JvHRcCTL.jpg)

[asin]B0000037G3[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006)
Post by: Scion7 on May 04, 2016, 02:16:32 PM
What do you think about the Harmonica Concerto, Op.46  (1954)? 
Grazioso-Mesto-Con brio
1954

This is an instrument which is very rarely found in a classical music composition.

Critic Ivan March, back in 1994,  stated in Gramophone:

"Malcolm Arnold work, one of this composer's best miniature concertos, written in 1954 for the BBC Proms, is very appealing too. The music is exuberantly melodic in the manner of the English Dances-Arnold was a happier man then and could conjure up brass whoops with confident panache-the orchestra most effectively scored (minus woodwind) to give the soloist a strong, reedy profile. The Mesto centre-piece excludes strings; it is unexpectedly dirge-like, with dark brass sonorities and percussion providing a sombre accompaniment. The mood lightens wittily and irrepressibly in the spirited Con brio finale, which has another unforgettable swinging melody floating over a rocking bass rhythm."

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51M3d15-ApL._SX450_.jpg)   (http://s32.postimg.org/obiheqgo5/sm_Harm_Con_Vinyl.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 05, 2016, 09:40:28 AM
Never heard of the Harmonica Concerto. I couldn't find any reference to it on Amazon.

Meanwhile, listening to the Clarinet # 2, Horn # 1, Flute # 2 concertos and Piano Duet concertos.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006) re: harmonica concerto
Post by: Scion7 on May 05, 2016, 11:08:27 AM
Quote from: André on May 05, 2016, 09:40:28 AM
Never heard of the Harmonica Concerto. I couldn't find any reference to it on Amazon..

The back cover was posted above, with the RCA vinyl LP cover of a different recording.

[asin]B000000ATZ[/asin]

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 05, 2016, 03:21:28 PM
Thanks, Scion !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 05, 2016, 09:52:03 PM
I have the Harmonica Concerto on a great old RCA LP with Larry Adler and Morton Gould conducting:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SB-6786-LARRY-ADLER-Plays-Arnold-Bengamin-Vaughan-Williams-Ex-LP-Record-/301848825949
Pity it's never been on CD. I listened to the Chandos Arnold Ballet music CD yesterday which I enjoyed, especially 'Elektra' which is a very dark work indeed (as is appropriate), reminiscent of the sound-world of Symphony 7. I also liked the Suite 'Homage to the Queen' which is, also appropriately, in a more popular style.
The Arnold Harmonica Concerto was also on a BBC Radio Classics CD which is still very cheap online:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/BBC-Radio-Classics-Imperial-Harmonica/dp/B000026G78/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1462514857&sr=1-1&keywords=Harmonica+BBC+radio+classics
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 06, 2016, 06:12:54 AM
Just listened to the Guitar Concerto for the First time (Bream/Rattle/EMI). What a wonderful work, very restrained (for Arnold) eloquent and poetic. I enjoyed the Takemitsu coupling too. Many thanks for the recommendations here for the Arnold Guitar Concerto.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold (1921-2006)
Post by: Scion7 on May 06, 2016, 07:42:09 AM

Concerto for Flute and String Orchestra No.1, Op.45  (1954)

(https://img.discogs.com/5CDXFSfO-jkiPQjM2vuF3kqc90Q=/fit-in/600x597/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-5348599-1391177487-3733.jpeg.jpg)  (https://img.discogs.com/PMKeeKH4zX7JSZNe9iI503sUAV8=/fit-in/600x466/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-5348599-1391177510-7720.jpeg.jpg)

Tuneful 10 minutes.   :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 06, 2016, 03:33:43 PM
Symphony no 9, second movement, starting at 1:00. The theme is almost that of Juliet in Prokofiev's ballet. Hard to miss: it is developed at length in the rest of the movement. BTW this is labeled 'Allegretto'. And yet it unolds slowly and almost sadly.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on May 06, 2016, 03:52:23 PM
Quote from: André on May 06, 2016, 03:33:43 PM
Symphony no 9, second movement, starting at 1:00. The theme is almost that of Juliet in Prokofiev's ballet. Hard to miss: it is developed at length in the rest of the movement. BTW this is labeled 'Allegretto'. And yet it unolds slowly and almost sadly.

...and is absolutely gorgeous.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 06, 2016, 04:25:58 PM
Indeed. It is heart-rendingly beautiful. And the last movement (Lento) is absolutely shattering by its calm resignation, its refusal to shake heavens, its low dynamic marks - it practically never rises above mf, its ghostly countenance. It's a miracle that Arnold found the guts to utter the serene last chord.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on May 06, 2016, 05:01:52 PM
Quote from: André on May 06, 2016, 04:25:58 PM
Indeed. It is heart-rendingly beautiful. And the last movement (Lento) is absolutely shattering by its calm resignation, its refusal to shake heavens, its low dynamic marks - it practically never rises above mf, its ghostly countenance. It's a miracle that Arnold found the guts to utter the serene last chord.

...then there's the last movement. 8) I agree with every word you wrote above (of course). Resignation both spiritually and emotionally seems to be the main undercurrent in Arnold's 9th.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 06, 2016, 10:22:36 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 06, 2016, 05:01:52 PM
...then there's the last movement. 8) I agree with every word you wrote above (of course). Resignation both spiritually and emotionally seems to be the main undercurrent in Arnold's 9th.
Very much agree with you and Andre.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on May 07, 2016, 10:56:15 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on May 06, 2016, 10:22:36 PM
Very much agree with you and Andre.
+1
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on May 17, 2016, 04:10:27 PM
Quote from: André on April 29, 2016, 01:06:17 PM
Right now listening to this:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ETZTZS90L.jpg)

Arnold's First symphony - already jolly and sarcastic in I, quietly anguished and enigmatic in II, etc.

And his 5th, possibly his most 'popular' work in the genre. As with Beethoven, Mahler, Prokofiev, Tchaikovsky, Shostakovich: a 'people's symphony'.

I finally received this CD (took like a month to get!) and found it relevatory.  It makes me need to hear more.  There is a wonderful and unique combination of wistfulness, tunefulness, edginess, and melancholy but all mixed with taught dramatic craftiness.   The music is nowhere near as simple as I thought on first listening years ago.  Arnold is very unique but also familiar and I am actively seeking out more.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 17, 2016, 11:07:00 PM
Quote from: relm1 on May 17, 2016, 04:10:27 PM
I finally received this CD (took like a month to get!) and found it relevatory.  It makes me need to hear more.  There is a wonderful and unique combination of wistfulness, tunefulness, edginess, and melancholy but all mixed with taught dramatic craftiness.   The music is nowhere near as simple as I thought on first listening years ago.  Arnold is very unique but also familiar and I am actively seeking out more.
It's a great CD - fine performances of my two favourite Arnold symphonies. They are all excellent but my favourites are the odd numbered ones + the disturbing No.6. Also worth hearing Arnold's own ultra slow version of No.1.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 20, 2016, 10:45:36 AM
reposted from the 'What are you listening to?' thread.


(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41DRy0vg%2BNL.jpg)

Symphony no 9, with Andrew Penny. Last time I heard it, earlier this month, it was the Handley version. I'm not sure which one is more to my taste. Every time I hear this extraordinary work I fall in a trance and forget aount mundane considerations such as playing and interpretation. Of course this is made even harder by the fact that this is 'difficult' music, by which I mean it is by some margin his most profound score, exploring as it does all the facets of his style - doleful, disquieting, achingly sad, jolly, sarcastic, biting - to a degree previously firmly kept in check.

(reposted in the Malcolm Arnold thread)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on May 20, 2016, 06:44:38 PM
As I mentioned several times, for me, the 9th is more about resignation and 'throwing in the towel' which is, essentially, Arnold's bowing out of this existence and perhaps his last word on where he stands in his own life. The Penny performance is still my favorite even after I heard Gamba and Handley.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on September 23, 2016, 12:19:54 AM
Today (September 23rd) marks the 10th anniversary of Arnold's passing. I'll spin something in his honour today.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 23, 2016, 01:32:14 AM
Quote from: Maestro267 on September 23, 2016, 12:19:54 AM
Today (September 23rd) marks the 10th anniversary of Arnold's passing. I'll spin something in his honour today.
Me too. Thanks for mentioning this significant anniversary.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on September 23, 2016, 03:15:00 AM
I'm going to have to put on the Ninth again later after reading these posts!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on September 23, 2016, 06:29:24 AM
As I write, I'm about halfway through the Lento finale of the Ninth Symphony. It's taken me a while, but now I see how powerful this work really is, despite it's apparent sparsity. Written in 1986, so this work has been with us (albeit for its initial years just as notes on Arnold's manuscript paper) for 30 years this year.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on September 23, 2016, 10:25:51 AM
I'll go for something cheerful and typically arnoldian: his Guitar Concerto.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 23, 2016, 10:34:43 AM
Like Andre, I've gone for some lighter Arnold. This CD (should the picture appear) that I bought as it was a gap in my OCD CD Arnold collection. It is, in point of fact, a charming disc and features a lovely note from Arnold himself in the booklet:
'Hearing these Robert Irving recordings once more is like meeting an old and well-loved friend for, although they are now reaching middle age , they sound as fresh as they did some 40 years ago [Arnold wrote this in 1996], when I sat in the studio and heard Robert [Irving] and the wonderful Philharmonia play my compositions.'

Also included is Arnold conducting his movie score for 'The Sound Barrier' - a lovely disc.

[asin]B0000263TW[/asin]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on September 23, 2016, 10:52:10 AM
Quote from: Maestro267 on September 23, 2016, 06:29:24 AM
As I write, I'm about halfway through the Lento finale of the Ninth Symphony. It's taken me a while, but now I see how powerful this work really is, despite it's apparent sparsity.

It has grown in my estimation too. The last time I listened to Arnold's complete symphony cycle, I ranked it dead last. Hearing it again today (in memoriam), I can't understand why I didn't appreciate it more. It's a masterpiece, no doubt.

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SymphonicAddict on March 03, 2017, 04:50:18 PM
In my marathon of symphonies of many composers, the turn was now for Malcolm Arnold. The cycle of symphonies of Naxos is absolutely astounding!!! This is the kind of music and symphonies that I enjoy more. Definitely, the best symphony is the 5th, one of the greatest British symphonies ever. Also I liked a lot the 3rd, 4th, 7th and 8th, but all 9 are excellent, without any exception.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on March 04, 2017, 03:49:47 PM
I concur with your assessment.

For 1, 3, 4 and 5 as well as the Symphonic Dances and the Overtures I suggest a listen to Arnold's own recordings. Absolutely fascinating (and very well recorded). Arnold as conductor is uniformly slower than others in his own music, sometimes startlingly so. He is not afraid to underline the dark currents that go through his works.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SymphonicAddict on March 04, 2017, 06:48:47 PM
Quote from: André on March 04, 2017, 03:49:47 PM
I concur with your assessment.

For 1, 3, 4 and 5 as well as the Symphonic Dances and the Overtures I suggest a listen to Arnold's own recordings. Absolutely fascinating (and very well recorded). Arnold as conductor is uniformly slower than others in his own music, sometimes startlingly so. He is not afraid to underline the dark currents that go through his works.

I'll try to get some recordings you're talking about  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on March 05, 2017, 12:48:58 AM
This is a very nice set:
[asin]B000MCIB6Q[/asin]
It's ridiculously expensive on Amazon.com but cheaper on Amazon.UK
Andre is right that Arnold conducts his own powerful First Symphony, which is possibly my favourite, much slower than any other version. The cycles on Naxos, Chandos and the Vernon Handley set are all good.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 10, 2017, 03:04:15 AM
I finally got around to buying ths cd. I've had it on my sights for ages. I must say,the performance of the Sixth is first class. Preferable to the Hickox recording,which was the only one I had. Although,I did have an off-air tape once! This is my favourite Arnold symphony. The fifth was my favourite until I heard the Sixth. I happen to think that his Sixth is a marvellous symphony. I feel it assimilates popular and serious concert music even more successfully (and concisely!) than the Fifth. My favourite recording of the latter being Arnold's own emi recording. I also like all the other pieces on this Conifer cd. I love his Fantasy on a theme of John Field,and well remember,taping it off the radio. A lovely and very imaginative piece of music. The Sweeney Todd Suite is fun,and Tam O' Shanter too!! A wonderful selection,and a truly fantastic cd! I like the eye catching artwork,too! Very nice,indeed! Incidentally,I have a 2cd of orchestral works by the American composer,George Chadwick;and I think his Tam O'Shanter Overture is very fine,too. In fact,I actually think it's probably even finer;and in a fair world,imho,it would be a popular choice in concerts around the world. By the way,I think Chadwicks best music is very good,indeed. Imaginative,colourfully orchestrated. It deserves better than it gets! (Like Arnold at his best!) 

(http://i.imgur.com/1JOZQXW.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on August 10, 2017, 06:05:24 AM
Quote from: cilgwyn on August 10, 2017, 03:04:15 AM
I finally got around to buying ths cd. I've had it on my sights for ages. I must say,the performance of the Sixth is first class. Preferable to the Hickox recording,which was the only one I had. Although,I did have an off-air tape once! This is my favourite Arnold symphony. The fifth was my favourite until I heard the Sixth. I happen to think that his Sixth is a marvellous symphony. I feel it assimilates popular and serious concert music even more successfully (and concisely!) than the Fifth. My favourite recording of the latter being Arnold's own emi recording. I also like all the other pieces on this Conifer cd. I love his Fantasy on a theme of John Field,and well remember,taping it off the radio. A lovely and very imaginative piece of music. The Sweeney Todd Suite is fun,and Tam O' Shanter too!! A wonderful selection,and a truly fantastic cd! I like the eye catching artwork,too! Very nice,indeed! Incidentally,I have a 2cd of orchestral works by the American composer,George Chadwick;and I think his Tam O'Shanter Overture is very fine,too. In fact,I actually think it's probably even finer;and in a fair world,imho,it would be a popular choice in concerts around the world. By the way,I think Chadwicks best music is very good,indeed. Imaginative,colourfully orchestrated. It deserves better than it gets! (Like Arnold at his best!) 

(http://i.imgur.com/1JOZQXW.jpg)

This entire series is first rate.  I do prefer Malcolm's own conducting on No. 4 and 1 though but these are all good and this particular CD is thoroughly wonderful.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 10, 2017, 08:58:10 AM
After listening to Vernon Handley'magnificent recording of Arnold's eighth and Seventh Symphonies I've put this Chandos set on. I find Hickox's interpretations of the symphonies a tad bland. Therefore I'm pleased to react positively to Rumon Gamba's Seventh. He takes the faster sections very fast indeed!! ??? In fact,in his hands they seem quite manic. I like the rest of the performance,too. An exciting performance with spectacular sound quality adding to the drama. I still prefer Handley;but this is very good. I think it's a pity he didn't get to record the earlier ones,on this basis.........although,he did,for the BBC! I downloaded off-air recordings of some of them at the Art Music Forum. Unfortunately (or fortunately?!) Arnold's own recordings of some of his symphonies,understandably,grabbed my attention;after finding them on Youtube. I'll have a listen to Gamba's recordings of 5 & 6,when I have the time! The eighth next. Not a favourite. I DO like the way it begins (that tune). I'm just not sure the invention is as consistent,throughout, as it is in some of his earlier symphonies. Anyway,another listen now! The controversial Ninth,I find strangely absorbing. Although,I need to listen to that one a bit more,before I can really make my mind up.

(http://i.imgur.com/nY3zEhv.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 10, 2017, 09:01:55 AM
I can remember listening to a programme on Radio 3,back in the eighties (?) about Arnold's symphonies. Several of them had yet to receive a commercial recording. I remember being intrigued by all the descriptions of the symphonies,with their assimilation of popular music. The stuff about No's 4 (Notting Hill,exotic sounding percussion!) No 6 (Charlie Parker!) and No 7 (Irish music,The Chieftains!!) was particularly mouth watering!! ??? ;D I kept thinking.....what do they sound like?!! ::) ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on August 10, 2017, 10:04:53 AM
Quote from: cilgwyn on August 10, 2017, 08:58:10 AMTherefore I'm pleased to react positively to Rumon Gamba's Seventh. He takes the faster sections very fast indeed!! ??? In fact,in his hands they seem quite manic.
Did you hear Arnold conducting his Seventh (as a download from the Unsung or Art-Music forum? Much, IIRC well up to ten minutes, slower.  ???
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 10, 2017, 10:39:12 AM
No,I haven't. I recently downloaded allot of files from there,avoiding some of the older ones,that often seemed to be in poor sound. However,after listening to Arnold's performances,with the BC Northern SO,on Youtube,I enjoyed his Fourth which was in poor sound (but listenable) by the extremely hi-tech trick of increasing the bass on my mini hi-fi!! ;D After listening to Handley and Gamba,whose tempi really did surprise me,when I first heard his recording;hearing Malcolm Arnold conducting a super slow version is a definite must!! Indeed,I have just downloaded it! I prefer to listen on a cd player;so I will wait until I get some more cdr-s,before I listen to it. I need to transfer a pile of 1966 BBC Studio recording of G & S operettas,so that will happen soon!
(I have just visited the AMF and downloaded the file,now). Is Arnold's performance of his Seventh on a par with his controversial Lyrita Fourth,I wonder? I can't wait to hear it!!

I am really warming to Gamba's Seventh. I prefer Handley;but I think his fast tempi do work for me. I remember when I first put his recording on,thinking,"Whoa,that's fast!" But I think it's an interesting and exciting performance. As to the Hickox performances. I think Hickox was a very fine conductor. That said,I find his performances of Arnold's symphonies a tad bland. I wish I could say otherwise!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 10, 2017, 02:44:14 PM
Quote from: cilgwyn on August 10, 2017, 03:04:15 AM
I finally got around to buying ths cd. I've had it on my sights for ages. I must say,the performance of the Sixth is first class. Preferable to the Hickox recording,which was the only one I had. Although,I did have an off-air tape once! This is my favourite Arnold symphony. The fifth was my favourite until I heard the Sixth. I happen to think that his Sixth is a marvellous symphony. I feel it assimilates popular and serious concert music even more successfully (and concisely!) than the Fifth. My favourite recording of the latter being Arnold's own emi recording. I also like all the other pieces on this Conifer cd. I love his Fantasy on a theme of John Field,and well remember,taping it off the radio. A lovely and very imaginative piece of music. The Sweeney Todd Suite is fun,and Tam O' Shanter too!! A wonderful selection,and a truly fantastic cd! I like the eye catching artwork,too! Very nice,indeed! Incidentally,I have a 2cd of orchestral works by the American composer,George Chadwick;and I think his Tam O'Shanter Overture is very fine,too. In fact,I actually think it's probably even finer;and in a fair world,imho,it would be a popular choice in concerts around the world. By the way,I think Chadwicks best music is very good,indeed. Imaginative,colourfully orchestrated. It deserves better than it gets! (Like Arnold at his best!) 

(http://i.imgur.com/1JOZQXW.jpg)
That CD with Symphony 6 is, I agree, terrific. I always thought that the odd numbered symphonies were the best but No.6 is an exception. There is an especially manic section which was used, very appropriately in my opinion, to illustrate Arnold's mental breakdown in the TV documentary about him. Tam O'Shanter Overture is great fun too. Altogether a great CD.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 11, 2017, 07:20:45 AM
I bought it,mainly,for the Sixth;but I like everything on it. I remember recording the wonderful John Field Fantasy off the radio. The Sweeney Todd Suite is great fun and the Tam O'Shanter Overture is Arnold at his tuneful,witty,imaginative best. The Sixth is my favourite Arnold symphony. I think it is very powerful,and the way Arnold assimilates popular music influences into his music is very clever indeed. The only other composer I can think of that has managed this as well is Morton Gould,in his third symphony;which is unfortunately,one of the few works to impress me by the,so called,'American Malcolm Arnold'. I do like his Latin American Symphonette,though (particularly his own recording,with the LSO) and he was a fine,and underrated conductor.

I listened to Rumon Gamba's recording of Malcolm Arnold's Ninth symphony,after listening to his recording of the Seventh,which I now like very much (although,Handley's is my favourite). I found the Ninth very absorbing,indeed. In fact,it is a real suprise after the eighth,and I think one of his most inspired and fascinating creations. I can't really see why it caused so much consternation? I think it is very impressive,indeed!
Out of curiosity,I listened to off-air BBC studio recordings of Rumon Gamba conducting Arnold's Fourth and Sixth Symphony. I feel he is much more attune to Arnold's idiom than Hickox;and I think it is a pity he didn't record the whole cycle for Chandos,instead. Handley is my favourite,though.

Christo asked me if I had heard Arnold conducting his Seventh Symphony? The answer was an unfortunate.No! Apparently,he is "well up to ten minutes slower". I looked in the Chandos booklet with the Rumon Gamba set of Symphonies 7-9. According to the timings I saw there,Arnold took just under one hour! Gamba,takes around (Where's the cd?!!) thirty one minutes! That means Arnold's account is nearly twice as long!!! ??? :o I just had to download this,after reading Christo's post. It is now on my pc. I hope to put it on a cd-r as soon as possible (for my personal use!). I enjoyed Arnold's accounts of No's 4,5 & 6,with the BBC Northern SO,last night. The Youtube derived (via Audacity) recording on my cd-r of the Fourth is poor;but a bit of bass on my mini hi-fi made for a fascinating and absorbing listen. I do wish Lyrita would release these recordings on cd. If they can give us George Lloyd conducting,these are certainly worthy of the same honour! The Fourth ,in particular,needs to be heard in better sound (if possible).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 11, 2017, 01:00:39 PM
Quote from: cilgwyn on August 11, 2017, 07:20:45 AM
I bought it,mainly,for the Sixth;but I like everything on it. I remember recording the wonderful John Field Fantasy off the radio. The Sweeney Todd Suite is great fun and the Tam O'Shanter Overture is Arnold at his tuneful,witty,imaginative best. The Sixth is my favourite Arnold symphony. I think it is very powerful,and the way Arnold assimilates popular music influences into his music is very clever indeed. The only other composer I can think of that has managed this as well is Morton Gould,in his third symphony;which is unfortunately,one of the few works to impress me by the,so called,'American Malcolm Arnold'. I do like his Latin American Symphonette,though (particularly his own recording,with the LSO) and he was a fine,and underrated conductor.

I listened to Rumon Gamba's recording of Malcolm Arnold's Ninth symphony,after listening to his recording of the Seventh,which I now like very much (although,Handley's is my favourite). I found the Ninth very absorbing,indeed. In fact,it is a real suprise after the eighth,and I think one of his most inspired and fascinating creations. I can't really see why it caused so much consternation? I think it is very impressive,indeed!
Out of curiosity,I listened to off-air BBC studio recordings of Rumon Gamba conducting Arnold's Fourth and Sixth Symphony. I feel he is much more attune to Arnold's idiom than Hickox;and I think it is a pity he didn't record the whole cycle for Chandos,instead. Handley is my favourite,though.

Christo asked me if I had heard Arnold conducting his Seventh Symphony? The answer was an unfortunate.No! Apparently,he is "well up to ten minutes slower". I looked in the Chandos booklet with the Rumon Gamba set of Symphonies 7-9. According to the timings I saw there,Arnold took just under one hour! Gamba,takes around (Where's the cd?!!) thirty one minutes! That means Arnold's account is nearly twice as long!!! ??? :o I just had to download this,after reading Christo's post. It is now on my pc. I hope to put it on a cd-r as soon as possible (for my personal use!). I enjoyed Arnold's accounts of No's 4,5 & 6,with the BBC Northern SO,last night. The Youtube derived (via Audacity) recording on my cd-r of the Fourth is poor;but a bit of bass on my mini hi-fi made for a fascinating and absorbing listen. I do wish Lyrita would release these recordings on cd. If they can give us George Lloyd conducting,these are certainly worthy of the same honour! The Fourth ,in particular,needs to be heard in better sound (if possible).
What an interesting post! Have you heard Morton Gould's 'West Point Symphony' cilgwyn (No.4 I think)? It is an absolute hoot - especially in the Mercury recording. Arnold also takes much longer than anyone else in his underrated Symphony 1 - my favourite along with Nos 5 and 6. That Gamba set is very good indeed and I like your point that he should have recorded the whole cycle of symphonies.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 14, 2017, 02:07:06 PM
Quote from: tjguitar on October 27, 2015, 05:22:16 PM
Has anyone picked this up? For these works, I only have the Decca box of the Handley Conifer recordings...

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81QieLB-BpL._SL1500_.jpg)
I think I can just about see this cd artwork with my glasses off! ??? ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 15, 2017, 01:43:57 PM
After buying the cd of Handley's Sixth (see previous post) I couldn't resist this one any longer,with it's entertaining fill-ups (a dull term for such delights I know!) and the lovely,colourful artwork. Hopefully,it will be coming through my letterbox soon!

(http://i.imgur.com/Hc7C1ww.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on August 15, 2017, 03:46:16 PM
Quote from: cilgwyn on August 15, 2017, 01:43:57 PM
After buying the cd of Handley's Sixth (see previous post) I couldn't resist this one any longer,with it's entertaining fill-ups (a dull term for such delights I know!) and the lovely,colourful artwork. Hopefully,it will be coming through my letterbox soon!

(http://i.imgur.com/Hc7C1ww.jpg)

You are doing exactly what I did.  Are you trying to copy me?  If so, next for you will be No. 1 and 5 in this excellent series.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 15, 2017, 11:08:54 PM
Quote from: relm1 on August 15, 2017, 03:46:16 PM
You are doing exactly what I did.  Are you trying to copy me?  If so, next for you will be No. 1 and 5 in this excellent series.
1 and 5 are my favourites - that is a great CD in a great series.
IMHO No.5 is the best of the cycle.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 16, 2017, 01:44:28 AM
Hm! It could be No's 3 & 4. Going by artwork. No's 1 & 5!! ::) ;D I must admit,No5 always used to be my favourite.......until I heard No 6. I think that's even finer,to my ears! Although,received opinion would tend to be on your side. I think No 7 is my next favourite. That is so original. A shame Arnold doesn't get his due in the concert halls. John Whitmore,over at the Havergal Brian thread,reckons it's snobbery. I remember if you argued his case at the old Radio 3 forum (the official BBC one) you would get accused of conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 16, 2017, 02:37:12 AM
No 4 is also growing on me,more and more! I remember being unconvinced by those intrusions in the finale. After listening to Arnold's own performance (not the Lyrita recording) I'm starting to really enjoy it. And those intrusions (inspired by the Notting Hill riots?) are meant to be disconcerting intrusions,aren't they? There's something a bit Ivesian about them. Except that Ives would have more than one band! There's allot of tension under the surface. The jolly tune in the first movement is not all that it seems. The slow movement,one of Arnold's greatest!

NB: I must have a listen to Rumon Gamba's performance. The off-air recordings I heard,of his performances of the Arnold symphonies,are in very good sound.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 16, 2017, 07:33:04 AM
I'm listening to the BBC studio recording of Arnold's Fourth,conducted by Gamba,now. I'm not a musician,but I much prefer this to the Hickox performance. It just has more,Oomph;to use a very un-technical term! Those Hickox performances,constantly,strike me as a tad bland,whenever I try listening to them. This is so much more lively. The percussion is exciting. I haven't got to the last movement,yet. This recording downloaded from the Art Music Forum,is in very good sound. I seem to remember someone saying that Hickox was unconvinced by the last three symphonies,and that's why Gamba took over. Chandos should have booked Gamba for the whole cycle,going by what I'm hearing! :(
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: bwv 1080 on August 16, 2017, 07:51:43 AM
This does not get played or recorded enough

https://www.youtube.com/v/3VFw6cvWV78
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on August 16, 2017, 04:31:26 PM
Quote from: cilgwyn on August 16, 2017, 07:33:04 AM
I'm listening to the BBC studio recording of Arnold's Fourth,conducted by Gamba,now. I'm not a musician,but I much prefer this to the Hickox performance. It just has more,Oomph;to use a very un-technical term! Those Hickox performances,constantly,strike me as a tad bland,whenever I try listening to them. This is so much more lively. The percussion is exciting. I haven't got to the last movement,yet. This recording downloaded from the Art Music Forum,is in very good sound. I seem to remember someone saying that Hickox was unconvinced by the last three symphonies,and that's why Gamba took over. Chandos should have booked Gamba for the whole cycle,going by what I'm hearing! :(

I'm a musician and my favorite version is the Lyrita recording https://www.amazon.com/Symphony-No-4-Malcolm-Arnold/dp/B000056Z63  which is epic.  I don't want a different version because his phrasing is so spot on.  Arnold saw himself as Mahlerian by way of Sibelius (two of the greatest 20th century symphonists) and along with his No. 7 and 9, this performance of his No. 4 proved it.  Remember in Mahler, he incorporated his local influences, the fact that there was a fireman's funeral march he recalled in his youth showed up in Symphony No. 10.  This is how to listen to Arnold.  It isn't Ives, it is more Mahler.  Folk/national music but with local influences as part of the great life questions.  Ives would overlap them which Arnold does not do but rather interrupts. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 17, 2017, 12:05:51 AM
Quote from: relm1 on August 16, 2017, 04:31:26 PM
I'm a musician and my favorite version is the Lyrita recording https://www.amazon.com/Symphony-No-4-Malcolm-Arnold/dp/B000056Z63  which is epic.  I don't want a different version because his phrasing is so spot on.  Arnold saw himself as Mahlerian by way of Sibelius (two of the greatest 20th century symphonists) and along with his No. 7 and 9, this performance of his No. 4 proved it.  Remember in Mahler, he incorporated his local influences, the fact that there was a fireman's funeral march he recalled in his youth showed up in Symphony No. 10.  This is how to listen to Arnold.  It isn't Ives, it is more Mahler.  Folk/national music but with local influences as part of the great life questions.  Ives would overlap them which Arnold does not do but rather interrupts.
This is the Symphony I least know by Arnold and I have that Lyrita recording so thanks - you have encouraged me to listen to it again.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 17, 2017, 07:48:09 AM
Ives is one American composer I'm not too keen on! I think his Fourth Symphony is an extraordinary piece of music. A visionary masterpiece! Even so,I don't want to listen to it too often! ::) Oh well,each to his own! ;D I wouldn't like to compare Arnold with a composer like Mahler. I don't really understand all these comparisons with Mahler,anyway? Just because Arnold incorporates elements of popular music,and mixes in some angst,? That makes him like Mahler?! No,the great thing about Arnold,really is,he just sounds like Arnold! That's one of the great things about his music, Just a few bars,and you know it's him. More Arnoldian than Mahlerian,if you ask me! Forget Mahler! Arnold's too individualistic for such a comparison, Listen to him because he's Arnold, not Mahler! That's how to listen to Arnold! :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 17, 2017, 07:55:40 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 25, 2016, 10:28:23 PM
Difficult and interesting question. I think that they all have their strengths. Overall probably the Handley set but I love Hickox in No.1,5 and 6. No one would be disappointed with the Naxos cycle which was made in the presence of the composer.
As to individual symphonies my favourites are:
No1 Arnold/Hickox
No2 Groves
No3 Arnold (Everest)
No 4 Arnold (Lyrita) but I don't know the others so well
No 5 Arnold (EMI)/Hickox
No 6 Handley
No 7 Handley
No 8 Gamba (but I don't know the others so well)
No 9 Penny
A very useful guide! :)
I'll stick to Gamba and Handley,for the Ninth,though!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 17, 2017, 10:00:45 PM
Quote from: cilgwyn on August 17, 2017, 07:55:40 AM
A very useful guide! :)
I'll stick to Gamba and Handley,for the Ninth,though!
I'll listen to their versions again.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on August 17, 2017, 10:32:47 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on August 17, 2017, 10:00:45 PM
I'll listen to their versions again.
I also stuck to the Penny Ninth - it has the atmosphere of the unique occasion, a sort of farewell to the composer.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 18, 2017, 08:12:15 AM
Quote from: Christo on August 17, 2017, 10:32:47 PM
I also stuck to the Penny Ninth - it has the atmosphere of the unique occasion, a sort of farewell to the composer.
+1
I agree that there is an emotional appeal to this disc as Arnold was there.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 20, 2017, 06:44:36 AM
I must admit I didn't warm to the Naxos cycle. I'm not a fan of that label,either. Something about the sound quality and presentation,just turns me clean off!. That said,I have been quite impressed by their recent Brian releases. So there is hope for me!! ;D  I get the point about Malcolm Arnold being there. I didn't collect their release of the Ninth. At the moment,I'm perfectly content with Rumon Gamba's recording;and the Ninth,far from being the gloomy outpouring I expected from numerous posts and reviews,is actually,in it's own way,a quite uplifting experience. I now regard it as one of Arnolds finest and most absorbing creations. An inspiring coda to one of the most original and rewarding symphony cycles by a British composer. I will certainly think about adding that Naxos release to my collection!

By the way,I finally listened to Arnold's own recording of his Symphony No 7. I made a cd-r up;adding his recording of the Sixth,which I acquired via Youtube. For my own use,I might add! I don't like listening via the pc;and I can add some bass,via my mini hi-fi! As to the all important music!! Wow! It really is a slow performance!! Arnold takes passages at an absolute snail's space,to put it mildly. I normally like Arnold's interpretations. I listened to his Lyrita recording of the Fourth,yesterday. This was the recording that actually put me off Arnold's Fourth,when I bought the cd,some years ago! I actually ended up selling it to a lady in the market!! Now,after listening to Arnold's earlier recording (on Youtube) and listening to his recording of the Fifth (not the emi recording) and Sixth,I can honestly say that,I now like it! After listening to Hickox's (imo) rather bland interpretation,and Gamba's (imo) very good (but probably not as good as Handley) I was again thinking,"My goodness that is slow!",and worrying about what the finale was going to be like. But after a while,the magic took hold. Arnold draws this symphony out to truly epic length;and I was wrong first time around. It works!! This is particularly apparently in the slower,quieter parts of the first movement,making that exotic percussion sound quite ominous! There is a feeling of tension,and an underlying menace,which you just don't get in other recordings. The slow movement is taken at a glacial pace. This is,imo,one of Arnold's most inspired movements. The overall impact is tremendous. I came to the end of this symphony feeling that it might really be one of the most original and individual symphonies ever composed by a British composer! (As opposed to greatest,please note!) Maybe,an over the top response;but listening to this symphony ,in this recording,really is quite an experience,once it (and the music,itself) finally "clicks"! A quite mesmerising experience,to be honest. I just had to go and play it through,all over again. His earlier (premiere,I believe?) is also a very rewarding experience. I hope someone will eventually release it,and his other recordings of 5 (again,not the emi) and 6,on a cd! In better sound,of course> I do like those posh announcements,though!! ;D

Which Brings me back to his recording of the Seventh. I haven't really made up my mind about this performance............yet,to be honest!! The sound quality of the off-air recording,via,the Art Music Forum,doesn't exactly help. (Although,please note;I am grateful to the provider!!) The announcement that precedes it prepares you for the worst! The sound quality is truly apalling! Then,almost miraculously;just before the music begins,the sound,quite dramatically,improves. Not that dramatically,really,but by the standards of what preceded it. At any rate,it's a quite clear,albeit,a little boxy,with some buzzing sounding interference at a few points. More curiously.....there are unexpected contributions from what might be a police radio (taxi,or ambulance station?!!) which at one point become very loud. The contributions made by a Scotsman,who sounds a bit like the SNP leader,Alex Salmond. But that may have been my fevered imagination!! Not that I minded,really. It reminded me of my youth;when I used to listen to all kinds of odd transmissions on my transistor radio. One of them a policeman informing the station that he was going to visit my parent's house!! Fortunately,they weren't going to clap me in irons. Some kids had pulled the gate off it's hinges and thrown it in the hedge!! Presumably,there is a recording out there,of this performance,without these strange (if oddly,entertaining) contrubutions!! Very interesting to listen to,however. According to my cd-r timing;Arnold takes,52:46 over the Seventh Symphony. Handley takes,37:43,and Gamba,31:52!!

NB: Anyone listening to the AMF download,of Arnold conducting his Seventh,needs to bear in mind that listening to Police radio transmissions,is a criminal offence!! ??? ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on August 22, 2017, 03:08:08 AM
It could be a taxi on the other hand? Wait a minute. I'm supposed to be listening to the music!! For anyone who hasn't heard it. You can hear Arnold conducting his Seventh at the Art Music Forum. You have to register first,like here;and preferably (to be polite) contribute some posts! The sound quality is good enough for listening purposes......with some interesting additions (see previous post).

I loved the Conifer cd of Handley's Second. Very savvy of the label,to couple it with some of Arnold's most humorous and imaginative compositions. The cd opens with his Grand Grand Overture. I love the finale to end all finale's that seems to take several minutes like minded companions. In the past I've found the SEcond Symphony,with it's St Trinian's style finale,a bit much for me! However,alongside it's similarly upbeat companions,it's finally revealed as the superbly orchestrated and entertaining opus it is. The slow movement is more serious,of course.

I received the emi cd of Arnold's First.coupled with the Concerto for 2 pianos (3 hands) and some other pieces,today.. Tam O shanter,is one of them. I haven't had time to listen to it yet.

On Saturday,I received the Phoenix reissue of Arnold's Symphony No 3 and Four Scottish dances on Saturday.;along with the Conifer release of Symphonies 1 & 5. The Arnold recordings on the Phoenix cd were originally released on the Everest label,with a rather bizarre image of the lower half of kilted figure doing a highland fling,or something? The Phoenix cd has a much more restful photograph of a Scottish loch. Very nice! This is Arnold in more serious vein. I think there is some more upbeat music in amongst all the gloom and bleakness. I seem to remember not liking this symphony much when I first heard it,quite some years ago. I was probably expecting something in a simiar vein to the Fifth;which I had been playing to death!  I think I will probably have changed my mind,now. I will listen to these two cd's again,as soon as possible. It will be nice to have this impressive cycle in it's entirety in such excellent recordings. I was never really happy with the Hckox cycle. I think I was seduced by that lush,boomy Chandos sound. In hindsight I feel they are all just a tad bland. The strings do sound wonderfully lush in the finale of the Fifth,though! The Chandos cycle seemed to improve spectacularly (for me,anyway) when Rumon Gamba took over. Alas too late! But not quite! The good news is that he recorded the cycle for the BBC,and they have the off air recordings at the Art Music Forum! The Handley cycle of the Fifth is now my favourite,after Arnold's own (with Gamba in third place).

I've got Richard Strauss' opera Daphne on the (cordless) headphones at the moment. It's like listening to a massive tone poem,with voices. No need for a libretto,here! Lucia Popp as Daphne had one of the most heavenly voices. I thought I would be switching this one off!! ??? ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 22, 2017, 05:06:05 AM
Quote from: cilgwyn on August 22, 2017, 03:08:08 AM
It could be a taxi on the other hand? Wait a minute. I'm supposed to be listening to the music!! For anyone who hasn't heard it. You can hear Arnold conducting his Seventh at the Art Music Forum. You have to register first,like here;and preferably (to be polite) contribute some posts! The sound quality is good enough for listening purposes......with some interesting additions (see previous post).

I loved the Conifer cd of Handley's Second. Very savvy of the label,to couple it with some of Arnold's most humorous and imaginative compositions. The cd opens with his Grand Grand Overture. I love the finale to end all finale's that seems to take several minutes like minded companions. In the past I've found the SEcond Symphony,with it's St Trinian's style finale,a bit much for me! However,alongside it's similarly upbeat companions,it's finally revealed as the superbly orchestrated and entertaining opus it is. The slow movement is more serious,of course.

I received the emi cd of Arnold's First.coupled with the Concerto for 2 pianos (3 hands) and some other pieces,today.. Tam O shanter,is one of them. I haven't had time to listen to it yet.

On Saturday,I received the Phoenix reissue of Arnold's Symphony No 3 and Four Scottish dances on Saturday.;along with the Conifer release of Symphonies 1 & 5. The Arnold recordings on the Phoenix cd were originally released on the Everest label,with a rather bizarre image of the lower half of kilted figure doing a highland fling,or something? The Phoenix cd has a much more restful photograph of a Scottish loch. Very nice! This is Arnold in more serious vein. I think there is some more upbeat music in amongst all the gloom and bleakness. I seem to remember not liking this symphony much when I first heard it,quite some years ago. I was probably expecting something in a simiar vein to the Fifth;which I had been playing to death!  I think I will probably have changed my mind,now. I will listen to these two cd's again,as soon as possible. It will be nice to have this impressive cycle in it's entirety in such excellent recordings. I was never really happy with the Hckox cycle. I think I was seduced by that lush,boomy Chandos sound. In hindsight I feel they are all just a tad bland. The strings do sound wonderfully lush in the finale of the Fifth,though! The Chandos cycle seemed to improve spectacularly (for me,anyway) when Rumon Gamba took over. Alas too late! But not quite! The good news is that he recorded the cycle for the BBC,and they have the off air recordings at the Art Music Forum! The Handley cycle of the Fifth is now my favourite,after Arnold's own (with Gamba in third place).

I've got Richard Strauss' opera Daphne on the (cordless) headphones at the moment. It's like listening to a massive tone poem,with voices. No need for a libretto,here! Lucia Popp as Daphne had one of the most heavenly voices. I thought I would be switching this one off!! ??? ;D
Those three Arnold CDs are amongst the best IMHO. I'm glad you've got the endearingly old-fashioned looking Phoenix recording of Arnold's Third Symphony and Scottish Dances with the castle on the loch photo - great stuff! Also that EMI CD with Symphony 1 taken very slowly by Arnold is my favourite versions and I love the other items on that disc. Much the same for the terrific combination of Handley's recordings of symphonies 1 and 5 - probably my two favourite Arnold symphonies on the same CD. So, you have done well cigwyn.
I will not, however, comment on your liking for Richard Strauss.  :P
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on October 22, 2017, 11:42:43 AM
Time to revive this thread. I finally finished listening to all the Arnold symphonies - surely one of the most underrated (if not necessarily consistent) symphonic cycles of the 20th century. Here are my impressions of each:

1: A fine work with a distinct Sibelius influence, if lacking the personality of his later works. My favorite part of the work by far is the grandiloquent, rather Waltonian ending section.

2: The outer movements are, to a considerable degree, the most positive and optimistic in Arnold's symphonic output and are reminiscent of his orchestral dances with their catchy tunes and bright orchestration. The mood darkens quite a bit in the two central movements, though. In this way, the work rather resembles Sibelius' own 2nd symphony. The scherzo, with its biting brass and percussion outbursts, brings to mind the demonic scherzi of the first symphonies of Walton and Bernstein. The slow movement is a grim funeral march that builds to a hair-raising climax. This movement foreshadows the more nightmarish passages in his 6th and 7th symphonies. Overall, a fantastic work which is surprisingly coherent.

3: This is the Arnold symphony I remember least well. It's not bad, I just didn't find it to be memorable.

4: A work which has many fine moments but rather fails to hang together for me. Of particular note is the "big tune" second theme of the first movement, which is unabashedly tonal and bears the imprint of pop music. There's some colorful and vaguely threatening percussion writing throughout the piece, but the mood never turns as dark as I had expected considering what it was supposedly inspired by (the Nottingham Hill race riots).

5: This is Arnold's masterpiece and one of the greatest symphonies of the 20th century IMO. The first movement, marked "tempestoso", is more mysterious than tempestuous, with haunting carillon-like passages contrasting with more aggressive ones. The second movement begins with a touching, Mahlerian melody. Whether it is sincere or ironic is up for debate it seems, but I prefer to view it as the former. Clouds eventually gather and the movement progresses towards a brutal climax, but dies back away to the tranquility of the opening. The scherzo's outer sections feature jazzy woodwind figurations over a walking bass line, and in the middle section a delightful, distinctly "pop" tune becomes the center of attention. The finale opens with a militaristic "call to arms", including a humorous recurring piccolo solo. The mood becomes increasingly more agitated until a glorious, "Hollywoodesque" reprise of the theme from the second movement occurs. Though it seems like a happy ending is in store, a stroke on the tubular bells is followed by a shattering E minor chord and the music plunges into the abyss, ending on a low E played by the cellos and basses with those deathly tolling bells in the background. This is perhaps the most devastating ending I know in classical music - it never fails to shock and disturb me. Richard Whitehouse, who wrote the notes for the Naxos recording of the 5th and 6th symphonies, describes the symphony as a "brilliantly successful study in aspiration and failure" and I completely agree.

6: There's a highly successful integration of "serious" and "popular" elements in this symphony, in particular. The first two movements have a shadowy, threatening feel. The second movement is notable for the jazzy drumbeat that breaks out towards the middle. The finale has a much more affirmative feeling, ending with a resounding A major coda. Somehow it feels incongruous to the first two movements.

7: Arnold's most disturbing symphony - even more so because each of the three movements was dedicated to one of his children. The first movement is a symphony in itself - it is aggressive and cataclysmic but there are also moments of romantic lyricism and grotesque parody. The cowbell plays a large role in this work - not as a symbol of pastoral tranquillity as in Mahler but rather one of terror. The second movement traverses a bleak, haunted landscape which we are led through by a despairing solo trombone. As in symphonies 2 and 5, this movement reaches a brutal climax. The finale is only slightly less disturbing, containing one section which sounds like a Celtic folk band.

8: This symphony gets off to a strong start, seeming to continue in the nightmarish vein of the 7th, however the mood becomes more introverted with the repetition of a solemn marching tune which becomes a bit tiresome after a while. The slow movement continues in the same reflective mood. As usual with Arnold, it is hard to pin down what the mood of the finale is - affirmative or ironic? After the gripping opening, I thought this symphony to be a bit disappointing.

9: The overall reflective mood of the 8th returns in the first two movements, but the textures are sparer and the ideas more haunting. The third movement is a classic Arnold scherzo with brilliant brass writing. But none of these movements prepares us for the profound utterance that is the nearly half-hour-long final Lento, which is an incredibly moving valedictory statement that finally comes to rest on an ethereal D major chord. Has Arnold finally found peace?

In order of preference, I'd rank them like so: 5, 2, 7, 9, 4, 6, 1, 8, 3
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on October 22, 2017, 12:16:38 PM
Quote from: kyjo on October 22, 2017, 11:42:43 AM
I'd rank them like so: 5, 2, 7, 9, 4, 6, 1, 8, 3

For me: 5, 4, 2, 1, 8, 6, 9, 3, 7

I wish I liked 7 more but so far, nope. I'll give it another try soon.

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on October 22, 2017, 01:10:19 PM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on October 22, 2017, 12:16:38 PM
For me: 5, 4, 2, 1, 8, 6, 9, 3, 7

I wish I liked 7 more but so far, nope. I'll give it another try soon.

Sarge

It's a strange work for sure, Sarge. I haven't completely assimilated it myself to be honest.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on October 22, 2017, 02:46:46 PM
Man, I love Arnold's 7th! I love it's kaleidoscopic, demented musical demeanor. I think it's one of his most disturbing works and gives a glimpse into Arnold's psyche as the 9th also seems to show another side of the composer that we hadn't heard previously.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: amw on October 22, 2017, 05:07:13 PM
7 is the only one I really like. It's kind of a musical equivalent to Sartre's Nausea, capturing the claustrophobia and absurdity of existence and the meaninglessness of musical signifiers. I mean he didn't think of it that way himself (actually it encodes the names of his children as musical ciphers and incorporates homages to them, he may have seen it as an attempt at reconciliation) but his mental state at the time evidently made him unusually receptive to such an existentialist and even nihilistic view of music. Even the "triumphant" final F major cadence, utterly conventional in nature, does not arise from the music itself and is simply arbitrarily placed after the point where Arnold stopped writing. After musical syntax and the language of "light music" that Arnold wrote in have been systematically broken down for 31 minutes, their sudden reassertion is not only meaningless but violent and shocking.

Sorry if that was pretentious. For recordings I like Gamba and Yates.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on October 22, 2017, 05:22:15 PM
Quote from: kyjo on October 22, 2017, 11:42:43 AM

In order of preference, I'd rank them like so: 5, 2, 7...

Quote from: Mirror Image on October 22, 2017, 02:46:46 PM
Man, I love Arnold's 7th! I love it's kaleidoscopic, demented musical demeanor. I think it's one of his most disturbing works and gives a glimpse into Arnold's psyche as the 9th also seems to show another side of the composer that we hadn't heard previously.

Quote from: amw on October 22, 2017, 05:07:13 PM
7 is the only one I really like. It's kind of a musical equivalent to Sartre's Nausea capturing the claustrophobia and absurdity of existence[...]For recordings I like Gamba and Yates.

Three votes for Arnold 7. I'll listen again later today, probably Gamba.

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on October 22, 2017, 05:39:03 PM
Let us know how you get on with it, Sarge.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on October 22, 2017, 06:28:30 PM
The 7th is indeed one of Arnold's most important works. I'd be hard put to express a preference btw 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9. I could place them in any order depending on the time of the day or the weather outside  :D.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on October 22, 2017, 06:38:21 PM
Quote from: amw on October 22, 2017, 05:07:13 PM
7 is the only one I really like. [...] his mental state at the time evidently made him unusually receptive to such an existentialist and even nihilistic view of music.

I think I said earlier that when I first heard it, I thought "this is a musical record of someone's nervous breakdown." A really unsettling piece. Keep the light on while listening.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold BRASS QUINTET
Post by: snyprrr on October 23, 2017, 07:24:07 AM
Enjoyed the Brass Quintet yesterday (PJBE)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold BRASS QUINTET
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on October 23, 2017, 02:31:39 PM
Quote from: snyprrr on October 23, 2017, 07:24:07 AM
Enjoyed the Brass Quintet yesterday (PJBE)

Yes, that's a good one. I have it on this excellent sampler disc:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ngabbzVhL._SY355_.jpg)

BTW there is apparently a second brass 5tet. However, I've never seen a recording of it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on October 23, 2017, 10:05:33 PM
Quote from: André on October 22, 2017, 06:28:30 PMThe 7th is indeed one of Arnold's most important works. I'd be hard put to express a preference btw 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9. I could place them in any order depending on the time of the day or the weather outside  :D.
Exactly my favourites too.  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: cilgwyn on October 24, 2017, 04:39:45 AM
My favourites,too. Although,I like them all,really;in the sense that I don't feel that any one of them has wasted my time. And they just make a very satisfying cycle. The eighth is the weakest one,for me. But even that begins well (I like the tune!). Inspiration seems more thin on the ground,after that! And then Arnold surprises me,by ending his cycle with one of his most absorbing and fascinating creations!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on October 24, 2017, 06:06:01 AM
Quote from: cilgwyn on October 24, 2017, 04:39:45 AM
My favourites,too. Although,I like them all,really;in the sense that I don't feel that any one of them has wasted my time. And they just make a very satisfying cycle. The eighth is the weakest one,for me. But even that begins well (I like the tune!). Inspiration seems more thin on the ground,after that! And then Arnold surprises me,by ending his cycle with one of his most absorbing and fascinating creations!

+1 As with the symphonic cycles of Mahler, Sibelius, RVW, and Nielsen, the Arnold cycle really takes the listener on a complex journey (although, admittedly, a more unevenly inspired one in Arnold's case).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on October 24, 2017, 07:07:57 AM
Quote from: kyjo on October 24, 2017, 06:06:01 AM
+1 As with the symphonic cycles of Mahler, Sibelius, RVW, and Nielsen, the Arnold cycle really takes the listener on a complex journey (although, admittedly, a more unevenly inspired one in Arnold's case).

Arnold's symphonies are interesting, but I wouldn't put them in the same company as those composers.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on October 24, 2017, 08:08:36 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on October 24, 2017, 07:07:57 AM
Arnold's symphonies are interesting, but I wouldn't put them in the same company as those composers.

Oh, I wouldn't either! I was just saying that the sense of "journey" and development over the course of Arnold's symphonic cycle is similar to that of the composers I mentioned.
Title: Re: Sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on October 24, 2017, 08:38:44 AM
So what are everyone's favorite Arnold compositions outside of the symphonies? I must confess I'm pretty unfamiliar with the rest of his output, but I've started listening to his orchestral dances which are absolutely delightful.
Title: Re: Sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on October 24, 2017, 10:16:19 AM
Quote from: kyjo on October 24, 2017, 08:38:44 AMSo what are everyone's favorite Arnold compositions outside of the symphonies? I must confess I'm pretty unfamiliar with the rest of his output, but I've started listening to his orchestral dances which are absolutely delightful.
I know only a part of his big oeuvre, was always to lazy to try them all. But some personal faves are:

From his concertos:
      Guitar Concerto, Op. 67 (1959) - his finest, IMO
      Serenade for Guitar and Strings, Op. 50 (1955) - small but great
      Flute Concerto No. 1 (Op. 45, 1954)
      Flute Concerto No. 2 (Op. 111, 1972)
Some orchestral pieces:
     Serenade for Small Orchestra, Op. 26 (1950)
     Philharmonic Concerto, Op. 120 (1976)
The Dance Suites: (both the Chandos and Naxos compilation CDs are fine): 
     English Dances, Set 1, Op. 27 (1950)
     English Dances, Set 2, Op. 33 (1951)
     Four Scottish Dances, Op. 59 (1957)
     Four Cornish Dances, Op. 91 (1966)
     Four Irish Dances, Op. 126 (1986)
     Four Welsh Dances, Op. 138 (1988)
The Sinfoniettas:
     Sinfonietta No. 1, Op. 48 (1954)
     Sinfonietta No. 2, Op. 65 (1958)
     Sinfonietta No. 3, Op. 81 (1964)
The Divertimentos:
     Divertimento No. 1, Op. 1 (1945)
     Divertimento No. 2, Op. 24 (1950), revised as Op. 75 (1961)
Title: Re: Sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on October 25, 2017, 11:32:02 AM
Quote from: Christo on October 24, 2017, 10:16:19 AM
I know only a part of his big oeuvre, was always to lazy to try them all. But some personal faves are:

From his concertos:
      Guitar Concerto, Op. 67 (1959) - his finest, IMO
      Serenade for Guitar and Strings, Op. 50 (1955) - small but great
      Flute Concerto No. 1 (Op. 45, 1954)
      Flute Concerto No. 2 (Op. 111, 1972)
Some orchestral pieces:
     Serenade for Small Orchestra, Op. 26 (1950)
     Philharmonic Concerto, Op. 120 (1976)
The Dance Suites: (both the Chandos and Naxos compilation CDs are fine): 
     English Dances, Set 1, Op. 27 (1950)
     English Dances, Set 2, Op. 33 (1951)
     Four Scottish Dances, Op. 59 (1957)
     Four Cornish Dances, Op. 91 (1966)
     Four Irish Dances, Op. 126 (1986)
     Four Welsh Dances, Op. 138 (1988)
The Sinfoniettas:
     Sinfonietta No. 1, Op. 48 (1954)
     Sinfonietta No. 2, Op. 65 (1958)
     Sinfonietta No. 3, Op. 81 (1964)
The Divertimentos:
     Divertimento No. 1, Op. 1 (1945)
     Divertimento No. 2, Op. 24 (1950), revised as Op. 75 (1961)

Thanks very much Johan - those should keep me busy for a while! :)
Title: Re: Sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on October 25, 2017, 11:40:10 AM
Quote from: kyjo on October 24, 2017, 08:38:44 AM
So what are everyone's favorite Arnold compositions outside of the symphonies? I must confess I'm pretty unfamiliar with the rest of his output, but I've started listening to his orchestral dances which are absolutely delightful.

The first Arnold piece I ever heard was the Tam O'Shanter Overture. Great fun, and proof that one can depict a drunkard in music  ;D

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on October 25, 2017, 11:47:46 AM
Tam O'Shanter is a hoot ! It's been recorded a few times. Actually, his overtures are almost as good as any of Dvorak's or Sibelius' tone poems, which they are in all but name (they all depict places or events). The Rumon Gamba disc is comprehensive - although not complete - but his feel for the music is generic compared to the composer's own performances. Go for it by all means (it's available used for less than 6$):

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71SMnhi-e%2BL._SX522_.jpg)

As for Tam O'Shanter, the Naxos disc under Paul Daniel is my reference.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 19, 2018, 05:46:45 PM
Question: If you had a friend who was reluctant to take on Arnold as a "serious" composer, what work would you show them to demonstrate that is a misconception given his quirky reputation?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: arpeggio on April 19, 2018, 06:35:58 PM
For me it would be any of his symphonies.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SymphonicAddict on April 19, 2018, 06:42:34 PM
The Fifth and Ninth Symphonies (especially the elegiac final movement).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: arpeggio on April 19, 2018, 06:57:55 PM
FYI I am currently listening to the following set:

[asin]B01B17C4TK[/asin]

I have completed listening to all of the symphonies.  That is why I recommended them.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kishnevi on April 19, 2018, 07:34:41 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on April 19, 2018, 06:57:55 PM
FYI I am currently listening to the following set:

[asin]B01B17C4TK[/asin]

I have completed listening to all of the symphonies.  That is why I recommended them.

The concertos are even better.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: amw on April 19, 2018, 10:25:46 PM
Quote from: kyjo on October 24, 2017, 08:38:44 AM
So what are everyone's favorite Arnold compositions outside of the symphonies? I must confess I'm pretty unfamiliar with the rest of his output, but I've started listening to his orchestral dances which are absolutely delightful.
The Symphony for Strings is sometimes excluded from surveys of the symphonies but is pretty good. Also the Concerto for 28 Players, Concerto for viola & chamber orchestra, Fantasy on a theme of John Field, and both string quartets.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 20, 2018, 01:00:54 AM
The uneven numbered symphonies are the best + No.6
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: arpeggio on April 20, 2018, 02:55:45 PM
As far as more dramatic works I am currently through disc seven of the Arnold set I acquired.

There are two works on that CD that are new to me: Philharmonic Concerto and the Symphony for Strings.  To my highly subjective and biased ears these are awesome.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SurprisedByBeauty on April 26, 2018, 01:09:49 AM
Checking in.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SymphonicAddict on March 04, 2019, 03:16:09 PM
The Double Violin Concerto is fantastic. It's the closest side to works by, say, Tippett or Britten, but always with the humorous feel to it. It knows how to blend bitterness with madness and quite a bit of hope, perhaps? Well, music is so subjective (or too, depends on the side of coin you want to see it).

Another singular work by him is the Guitar Concerto. It exudes personality and committed wit. Terrific music!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on March 05, 2019, 04:39:28 AM
Quote from: SymphonicAddict on March 04, 2019, 03:16:09 PM
The Double Violin Concerto is fantastic. It's the closest side to works by, say, Tippett or Britten, but always with the humorous feel to it. It knows how to blend bitterness with madness and quite a bit of hope, perhaps? Well, music is so subjective (or too, depends on the side of coin you want to see it).

Another singular work by him is the Guitar Concerto. It exudes personality and committed wit. Terrific music!
Interesting Cesar. I enjoyed Tam O' Shanter on the car radio today.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SymphonicAddict on March 05, 2019, 12:24:55 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 05, 2019, 04:39:28 AM
Interesting Cesar. I enjoyed Tam O' Shanter on the car radio today.

Then you car trip was quite fun! Tam O' Shanter is such a hilarious piece.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on March 05, 2019, 01:30:15 PM
Quote from: SymphonicAddict on March 05, 2019, 12:24:55 PM
Then you car trip was quite fun! Tam O' Shanter is such a hilarious piece.
Indeed - I prefer it to the Beckus overture.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on March 07, 2019, 11:33:49 AM
Tam O'Shanter was my first "favourite" piece of CM on the 1st LP I ever bought from Rushworths & Draper in Liverpool.  Part of the Decca "World of Classics" series - this one was called "Dance Macabre".  I still think the version on that recording is the best there has ever been - Sir Alexander Gibson and the New Symphony Orchestra of London (re-released on a Decca Eloquence disc now - witches brew or somesuch).  Brilliantly boozy trombone solo and thunderous storm and ride!  Love it.  The piece that makes you realise that Arnold DID in fact ghost write most of Walton's "Battle in the Air" for the film "Battle of Britain" - all of the Arnold tricks are in both pieces
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Sergeant Rock on March 07, 2019, 11:56:09 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on March 07, 2019, 11:33:49 AM
Tam O'Shanter was my first "favourite" piece of CM on the 1st LP I ever bought....

One of my first favorites too. Not a purchase but Tam was on the first classical LP I borrowed from the nearby city library after I acquired my driver's licence when I was 16. It was a compilation LP (different composers) but Tam is the only piece I remember. The LP did come with a baton for air conducting!  ;D

Sarge
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on March 07, 2019, 01:20:26 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on March 07, 2019, 11:33:49 AM
Tam O'Shanter was my first "favourite" piece of CM on the 1st LP I ever bought from Rushworths & Draper in Liverpool.  Part of the Decca "World of Classics" series - this one was called "Dance Macabre".  I still think the version on that recording is the best there has ever been - Sir Alexander Gibson and the New Symphony Orchestra of London (re-released on a Decca Eloquence disc now - witches brew or somesuch).  Brilliantly boozy trombone solo and thunderous storm and ride!  Love it.  The piece that makes you realise that Arnold DID in fact ghost write most of Walton's "Battle in the Air" for the film "Battle of Britain" - all of the Arnold tricks are in both pieces
Very interesting about 'Battle in the Air' by far the best music in 'Battle of Britain'. I seem to recall that Arnold conducted the extract for the film.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on March 07, 2019, 03:00:41 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 07, 2019, 01:20:26 PM
Very interesting about 'Battle in the Air' by far the best music in 'Battle of Britain'. I seem to recall that Arnold conducted the extract for the film.

Arnold conducted ALL of Walton's music that was (except for Battle in the Air) subsequently ditched for the Ron Goodwin score, which of course Goodwin conducted.  The DVD release of the film offers the viewer the (rare) option of watching with either the Goodwin score or the complete Walton score.  The difference the music gives to the key scenes in terms of emotional impact and tone is striking.  To be honest Walton spends too much time rehashing various versions of Orb & Sceptre and/or variants on Siegfried's horn call but even 2nd rate Walton is worth hearing.  Musically, "Battle in the Air" is easily the highlight in both versions and all the more effective for the director's choice to ditch any dialogue or sound effects and rely simply on the nervous energy of the music.  The Goodwin closing credits have no equivalent in the Walton score and is a passage of near-genius - a very simple figure built on a simple chord as a solo Spitfire flies through a blue sky - emotionally rather powerful

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on March 13, 2019, 11:41:40 AM
I discovered two Arnold works recently that I don't believe I've voiced my enthusiasm for yet:

Concerto for 2 Pianos 3 Hands (Concerto for Phyllis and Cyril): What a riot of a work! It may descend into "kitsch" at times, but it is too much fun for me to care! Moreover, the slow movement is gorgeous and contains one of those treasurable Arnoldian tunes.

https://youtu.be/zMI5WDjvY1c

Peterloo Overture: Written in commemoration of the deadly Peterloo massacre of 1819, this work begins with a noble, hopeful tune (reminiscent of the "big tune" of the 5th Symphony) which is soon disrupted by martial snare drum rhythms (a la Nielsen 5). This leads into a violent, chaotic "battle scene" which contains some of the most edge-of-your-seat exciting music that Sir Malcolm ever wrote. Soon, the action dies down, paving the way for a grandiose reprise of the opening "big tune", replete with triumphantly chiming bells. Wow! If the 1812 Overture is so popular, why can't this be too?

https://youtu.be/8CsTC8rLN80

Some might view works like these as "overblown" or "trite", but for me they only confirm Arnold's genius.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on March 13, 2019, 01:30:28 PM
Quote from: kyjo on March 13, 2019, 11:41:40 AM
I discovered two Arnold works recently that I don't believe I've voiced my enthusiasm for yet:

Concerto for 2 Pianos 3 Hands (Concerto for Phyllis and Cyril): What a riot of a work! It may descend into "kitsch" at times, but it is too much fun for me to care! Moreover, the slow movement is gorgeous and contains one of those treasurable Arnoldian tunes.

https://youtu.be/zMI5WDjvY1c

Peterloo Overture: Written in commemoration of the deadly Peterloo massacre of 1819, this work begins with a noble, hopeful tune (reminiscent of the "big tune" of the 5th Symphony) which is soon disrupted by martial snare drum rhythms (a la Nielsen 5). This leads into a violent, chaotic "battle scene" which contains some of the most edge-of-your-seat exciting music that Sir Malcolm ever wrote. Soon, the action dies down, paving the way for a grandiose reprise of the opening "big tune", replete with triumphantly chiming bells. Wow! If the 1812 Overture is so popular, why can't this be too?

https://youtu.be/8CsTC8rLN80

Some might view works like these as "overblown" or "trite", but for me they only confirm Arnold's genius.
I particularly like the Concerto which is great fun. It was coupled on an EMI LP with the excellent concertos for three hands by Arthur Bliss and Gordon Jacob. Sadly the Jacob never made it to CD.  :(
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on April 18, 2019, 07:08:59 AM
Another great BBC documentary on I-player for a few more days about Arnold, focused on the River Kwai soundtrack :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00041td/discovering-series-1-3-the-bridge-on-the-river-kwai-malcolm-arnold (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00041td/discovering-series-1-3-the-bridge-on-the-river-kwai-malcolm-arnold)

Might have to venture into his soundtracks once i have gone through his symphony cycle.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on April 18, 2019, 07:25:01 PM
Quote from: Papy Oli on April 18, 2019, 07:08:59 AM
Another great BBC documentary on I-player for a few more days about Arnold, focused on the River Kwai soundtrack :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00041td/discovering-series-1-3-the-bridge-on-the-river-kwai-malcolm-arnold (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00041td/discovering-series-1-3-the-bridge-on-the-river-kwai-malcolm-arnold)

Might have to venture into his soundtracks once i have gone through his symphony cycle.

You might want to listen to his concerti or the chamber music next before venturing into his music for film.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on September 28, 2019, 08:56:43 AM
I  am currently discovering the music of Sir Malcolm (beyond some film music and the dances) and love it. This forum has been a great guide regarding where to start etc, (many thanks!) and I am currently reading the Meredith/Harris "Rogue Genius". Are there any recordings available of Sir Malcolm playing the trumpet ? He seems to have been very highly valued as a player but I can't find any recordings...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on September 28, 2019, 11:13:21 PM
I think that the old van Beinum/Decca/LPO 1st recording of Beckus the Dandipratt features Arnold....... I think!!  Recorded December 16th 1947 at the Kingsway Hall London....... I think
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 28, 2019, 11:35:07 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on March 07, 2019, 11:33:49 AM
Tam O'Shanter was my first "favourite" piece of CM on the 1st LP I ever bought from Rushworths & Draper in Liverpool.  Part of the Decca "World of Classics" series - this one was called "Dance Macabre".  I still think the version on that recording is the best there has ever been - Sir Alexander Gibson and the New Symphony Orchestra of London (re-released on a Decca Eloquence disc now - witches brew or somesuch).  Brilliantly boozy trombone solo and thunderous storm and ride!  Love it.  The piece that makes you realise that Arnold DID in fact ghost write most of Walton's "Battle in the Air" for the film "Battle of Britain" - all of the Arnold tricks are in both pieces
Thanks for this information RS. I've been looking for that performance for decades and without your post would have remained unaware of it. I really look forward to hearing Gibson's version of 'Tam O'Shanter' and as a fan of 'Jonathan Creek' I'm also looking forward to the Saint-Saens as well! Just ordered this. It didn't cost me £200 either!  :)
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SymphonicAddict on September 29, 2019, 04:02:56 PM
Quote from: Carshot on September 28, 2019, 08:56:43 AM
I  am currently discovering the music of Sir Malcolm (beyond some film music and the dances) and love it. This forum has been a great guide regarding where to start etc, (many thanks!) and I am currently reading the Meredith/Harris "Rogue Genius". Are there any recordings available of Sir Malcolm playing the trumpet ? He seems to have been very highly valued as a player but I can't find any recordings...

Arnold is a hell of a composer. Almost everything by him is sheer brilliance. I don't know any recording where he plays the trumpet, but I do know his brass pieces are exhilarating.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on September 29, 2019, 04:07:56 PM
And a very special conductor, too. His own recordings are markedly more accented (slower tempi, rythmic accenting) than those of any other conductor who recorded his music (the symphonies of course, but also the Dances and the Overtures).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Alek Hidell on September 29, 2019, 06:15:43 PM
Quote from: Carshot on September 28, 2019, 08:56:43 AM
I  am currently discovering the music of Sir Malcolm (beyond some film music and the dances) and love it. This forum has been a great guide regarding where to start etc, (many thanks!) and I am currently reading the Meredith/Harris "Rogue Genius". Are there any recordings available of Sir Malcolm playing the trumpet ? He seems to have been very highly valued as a player but I can't find any recordings...

Dunno the answer to your question, Carshot, but welcome to the forum!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 30, 2019, 12:12:29 AM
Quote from: André on September 29, 2019, 04:07:56 PM
And a very special conductor, too. His own recordings are markedly more accented (slower tempi, rythmic accenting) than those of any other conductor who recorded his music (the symphonies of course, but also the Dances and the Overtures).

Yes. His own recording of his First Symphony is extraordinary compared with other recordings. Much slower - but I prefer it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on September 30, 2019, 06:33:07 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 30, 2019, 12:12:29 AM
Yes. His own recording of his First Symphony is extraordinary compared with other recordings. Much slower - but I prefer it.

Have you heard his version of No. 7?  It's extremely slow and like you, I prefer his conducting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TaAOT0RMmU
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 30, 2019, 06:58:43 AM
Quote from: relm1 on September 30, 2019, 06:33:07 AM
Have you heard his version of No. 7?  It's extremely slow and like you, I prefer his conducting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TaAOT0RMmU

No, never heard it but will listen later. Thank you  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on October 01, 2019, 02:13:12 AM
For those interested in "Arnold conducts Arnold" this 2-CD set is one of the gems of the defunct BBC Radio Classsics series

(https://www.picclickimg.com/d/w1600/pict/383026657330_/SIR-MALCOLM-ARNOLD-The-Composer-Conductor-2-CD-75th.jpg)

Some excellent performances of familiar(ish) repertoire but also real rarities/only available versions of "Song of Simeon" for example.  Arnld had a happy knack of being able to write music for younger performers that embodied all the best facets of his style.  Song of Simeon may not be top drawer/vintage Arnold but still worth a lesson.  Another piece along these lines that I had on LP but as far as I know has never made it to CD is "Song of Freedom Op.109" for choir and brass band.  Again simple/populist in style but none the worse for that.

Of course there are then several interesting "Arnold conducts NOT Arnold".... again BBC archive recordings are the source here (BBC Music Magazine - Arnold conducts Elgar Froissart) / (BBC Radio Classics - Arnold conducts Purcell Abdelazer Suite)

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41IsEuNZkbL.jpg)

or

(https://albumartexchange.com/coverart/gallery/za/zaranelsova_elgarcelloconcerto_bg7f.jpg)
thankyou for the advice on how to post the images!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on October 01, 2019, 09:17:26 AM
None of the pictures show...  :(
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on October 01, 2019, 09:40:59 AM
Quote from: André on October 01, 2019, 09:17:26 AM
None of the pictures show...  :(

any advice on posting images / not relying on Amazon-US for album artwork gratefully received.....!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on October 01, 2019, 12:32:01 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on October 01, 2019, 09:40:59 AM
any advice on posting images / not relying on Amazon-US for album artwork gratefully received.....!

A case of the blind leading the blind here I fear, but I'll do my best.

On my iPad I click on the CD or LP image I want and then click on 'save image'

Then on the forum after I've written my post I click on 'Attachments and other options'

Than I click on 'attach-choose file'

Then I click on the image I want (from my saved images) to post which should attach it to the post.

Then I click 'post' and it should magically appear with the message.

Hope this helps
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: JBS on October 01, 2019, 12:59:20 PM
Open the image as a separate tab in your browser.
Copy the URL
Then in the GMG post you are writing, hit the BBS image button, the one with Mona Lisa
So you get this
[img  ]....[/img  ]
Insert the image URL where I put the ...
You can add a height function to the opening img bracket for any pixel value up to 480.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on October 01, 2019, 03:58:42 PM
Lately I discovered a quite extraordinary and substantial Arnold work, the Fantasy on a theme of John Field for piano and orchestra [1975]. It opens startlingly with Arnold in his best "nightmare" mode before the Field nocturne is stated in its (more or less) unadorned simplicity. The theme is subjugated to variety of kaleidoscopic and phantasmagorical transformations before the piece comes to a thrilling finish. Utterly mind-blowing stuff! It's undoubtedly now one of my favorite Arnold works and further confirmation of his genius. The Donohoe/Yates performance on the CD below in excellent in all regards:

[asin]B00S4U3STS[/asin]

https://youtu.be/h1qaekhBl0s (different performance)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SymphonicAddict on October 01, 2019, 04:44:12 PM
Quote from: kyjo on October 01, 2019, 03:58:42 PM
Lately I discovered a quite extraordinary and substantial Arnold work, the Fantasy on a theme of John Field for piano and orchestra [1975]. It opens startlingly with Arnold in his best "nightmare" mode before the Field nocturne is stated in its (more or less) unadorned simplicity. The theme is subjugated to variety of kaleidoscopic and phantasmagorical transformations before the piece comes to a thrilling finish. Utterly mind-blowing stuff! It's undoubtedly now one of my favorite Arnold works and further confirmation of his genius. The Donohoe/Yates performance on the CD below in excellent in all regards:

[asin]B00S4U3STS[/asin]

https://youtu.be/h1qaekhBl0s (different performance)

Sounds fantastic, Kyle. I do remember hearing that work, but somehow I don't remember it very well. Thanks for the heads up.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on October 01, 2019, 09:12:44 PM
Quote from: SymphonicAddict on October 01, 2019, 04:44:12 PM
Sounds fantastic, Kyle. I do remember hearing that work, but somehow I don't remember it very well. Thanks for the heads up.

I'm sure you'll enjoy it, Cesar! I'm not sure why the CD cover isn't appearing in my above post; anyway, it's a Dutton CD containing the Fantasy, the 7th Symphony, and the Philharmonic Concerto. The performers are the RSNO under Martin Yates and pianist Peter Donohoe. (The work has also been recorded by Naxos and Conifer.)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on October 02, 2019, 12:24:35 AM
I have just bought the Philharmonic Concerto & Symphony No.7 and Fantasy on a theme of John Field recoding Kyjo discusses. It is on sale at the Dutton site – currently £2.99 USD: $3.72 approx EUR: €3.31 401 JPY plus postage.

https://www.duttonvocalion.co.uk/proddetail.php?prod=CDLX7318
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on October 02, 2019, 02:11:00 AM
Quote from: Carshot on October 02, 2019, 12:24:35 AM
I have just bought the Philharmonic Concerto & Symphony No.7 and Fantasy on a theme of John Field recoding Kyjo discusses. It is on sale at the Dutton site – currently £2.99 USD: $3.72 approx EUR: €3.31 401 JPY plus postage.

https://www.duttonvocalion.co.uk/proddetail.php?prod=CDLX7318

Good spot Carshot - I've ordered a copy.  There are other good bargains to be had on the Dutton website.  Not the easiest to navigate but some big discounts across their back catalogue - some right down to 99p (plus p&p).  I was quite surprised to see how many of their discs are marked out of print - so I guess with these offers.... "once they're gone they're gone"
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on October 02, 2019, 10:51:53 AM
Quote from: Carshot on October 02, 2019, 12:24:35 AM
I have just bought the Philharmonic Concerto & Symphony No.7 and Fantasy on a theme of John Field recoding Kyjo discusses. It is on sale at the Dutton site – currently £2.99 USD: $3.72 approx EUR: €3.31 401 JPY plus postage.

https://www.duttonvocalion.co.uk/proddetail.php?prod=CDLX7318
Yes, it's a fine disc. This is one of my very favourite Arnold CDs (actually two CDs):
(//)
Fabulous in all respects.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on October 07, 2019, 12:55:40 PM
Thoroughly enjoying this marvellous performance of 'Tam O'Shanter' - great fun!
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on October 08, 2019, 11:32:31 PM
I recall this CD caused quite a stir on release early 90's among the audiophile fraternity. Top-notch sound and used extensively for demo at hi-fi shows of the period.

(https://img-4.fruugo.com/product/7/66/20621667_max.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on October 09, 2019, 04:34:21 AM
Quote from: Irons on October 08, 2019, 11:32:31 PM
I recall this CD caused quite a stir on release early 90's among the audiophile fraternity. Top-notch sound and used extensively for demo at hi-fi shows of the period.

(https://img-4.fruugo.com/product/7/66/20621667_max.jpg)

My favourite Arnold disc !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on October 09, 2019, 06:08:36 AM
I have that disc - it sold me on my very expensive stereo it sounded so amazing! 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on November 20, 2019, 02:01:27 AM
Since my first post in September I have been immersing myself in the wonderful music of Malcolm Arnold. "Rogue Genius" by Meredith and Harris is a fascinating and riveting account of his life and work and well worth reading. Has anyone here read the Paul Jackson biog? I was lucky to find a copy at a reasonable price. The CD of Malcolm conducting his own overtures is as good as those who recommended it here said, and more. Another CD I play constantly is the EMI Bournemouth Sinfonietta one recorded in the 1980's, including original performers (Richard Adeney, flute and John Wallace, trumpet) showing how it should be done. Of the symphonies I prefer the Vernon Handley recordings but we are lucky to have several good recordings to listen to. The Hyperion chamber music albums are also great
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 20, 2019, 04:53:30 AM
Quote from: Carshot on November 20, 2019, 02:01:27 AM
Since my first post in September I have been immersing myself in the wonderful music of Malcolm Arnold. "Rogue Genius" by Meredith and Harris is a fascinating and riveting account of his life and work and well worth reading. Has anyone here read the Paul Jackson biog? I was lucky to find a copy at a reasonable price. The CD of Malcolm conducting his own overtures is as good as those who recommended it here said, and more. Another CD I play constantly is the EMI Bournemouth Sinfonietta one recorded in the 1980's, including original performers (Richard Adeney, flute and John Wallace, trumpet) showing how it should be done. Of the symphonies I prefer the Vernon Handley recordings but we are lucky to have several good recordings to listen to. The Hyperion chamber music albums are also great
He was 'Composer of the Week' on BBC Radio 3 recently.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on November 20, 2019, 05:27:50 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 20, 2019, 04:53:30 AM
He was 'Composer of the Week' on BBC Radio 3 recently.

Thank you for that heads-up, Jeffrey. Downloading the podcasts on BBC sounds now.

I listened to the Rubbra shortened version recently, that was really good.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 20, 2019, 06:54:15 AM
Quote from: Papy Oli on November 20, 2019, 05:27:50 AM
Thank you for that heads-up, Jeffrey. Downloading the podcasts on BBC sounds now.

I listened to the Rubbra shortened version recently, that was really good.

My pleasure Olivier  :)
The bits and pieces from the programmes that I heard in my car sounded really interesting, including the slow movement from Symphony No.2 My brother was at university with his son.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on November 20, 2019, 06:56:54 AM
Quote from: Carshot on November 20, 2019, 02:01:27 AM
Since my first post in September I have been immersing myself in the wonderful music of Malcolm Arnold. "Rogue Genius" by Meredith and Harris is a fascinating and riveting account of his life and work and well worth reading. Has anyone here read the Paul Jackson biog? I was lucky to find a copy at a reasonable price. The CD of Malcolm conducting his own overtures is as good as those who recommended it here said, and more. Another CD I play constantly is the EMI Bournemouth Sinfonietta one recorded in the 1980's, including original performers (Richard Adeney, flute and John Wallace, trumpet) showing how it should be done. Of the symphonies I prefer the Vernon Handley recordings but we are lucky to have several good recordings to listen to. The Hyperion chamber music albums are also great

I came across Arnold's symphonies 1 - 6 on three Chandos CD's by Hickox at a price too good not to buy. I am slowly working my way through the set and find Arnold difficult to evaluate. His music is never dull, quite the opposite, you will never drop off listening to an Arnold symphony. But I do ask myself for all the surface polish do they have depth? I actually think they do and up to 4 I enjoyed 2 and 3 with 5 and 6 to come. Sometimes I find there is too much for effect - he overeggs the pudding. There is a mighty cymbal crash and I think what is the reason for that.
I do not always like the Chandos sound but this set is the best I have heard from the label.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2019, 07:01:04 AM
Quote from: Irons on November 20, 2019, 06:56:54 AMI came across Arnold's symphonies 1 - 6 on three Chandos CD's by Hickox at a price too good not to buy. I am slowly working my way through the set and find Arnold difficult to evaluate. His music is never dull, quite the opposite, you will never drop off listening to an Arnold symphony. But I do ask myself for all the surface polish do they have depth? I actually think they do and up to 4 I enjoyed 2 and 3 with 5 and 6 to come. Sometimes I find there is too much for effect - he overeggs the pudding. There is a mighty cymbal crash and I think what is the reason for that.
I do not always like the Chandos sound but this set is the best I have heard from the label.

His Symphony No. 9 is his most personal work and my favorite of his symphonies. I can take or leave most of his other music, though.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on November 20, 2019, 07:12:01 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2019, 07:01:04 AM
His Symphony No. 9 is his most personal work and my favorite of his symphonies. I can take or leave most of his other music, though.

I have a little way to go before the 9th but I will certainly bear your heads up in mind.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 20, 2019, 09:08:11 AM
My favourites are 1,5 and 6. I recall enjoying No.9 on Naxos and must give it another listen to.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on November 22, 2019, 07:33:07 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 20, 2019, 04:53:30 AM
He was 'Composer of the Week' on BBC Radio 3 recently.

I listened to the one-hour summary version this afternoon. Contrasting to say the least... a man with his demons, drinking & mental health issues, his history of repeated domestic violence....and the same man composing such ironic and goofy music with hoovers and polisher... IIRC the liner notes of the Penny cycle made mentions of that "contrasting character" but the extent of it in this programme is quite a shock.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on November 22, 2019, 09:57:25 AM
Speaking of the man's contrasts and personal demons, the 7th symphony is a work of great mental turmoil and anguish. It is quite an emotional ride. Written in 3 movements, Arnold dedicated it to his 3 children. If I was one of the dedicatees I'd wonder if my dad really loved me.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on November 22, 2019, 10:29:10 AM
Malcolm Arnold's family suffered from both poor mental health and bad luck. Two aunts ended their days in an asylum, one committing suicide. A brother was lost in combat in WW2. A brother and sister died as young adults from cancer. A brother and his wife committed suicide. At least one cousin committed suicide. Malcolm suffered from schizophrenia and manic depression and who knows what else. Friends suspected he had had a lobotomy at some stage. He spent long periods in institutions' receiving at times massive insulin doses and electric shock treatment. None of this excuses the appalling way he treated a number of people but it helps to understand. As I mentioned above the book "Rogue Genius" covers all of this and how it found expression in his life and his music. Another good resource is Tony Palmer's biographical film "Toward the Unknown Region", a Story of Survival available on DVD.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on November 22, 2019, 10:48:23 AM
Quote from: Carshot on November 22, 2019, 10:29:10 AM
Another good resource is Tony Palmer's biographical film "Toward the Unknown Region", a Story of Survival available on DVD.

I'm pretty sure that's the title for Palmer's film on Vaughan Williams. Unless it also happens to cover Arnold as well, in which case I'm prepared to stand corrected.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on November 22, 2019, 10:54:25 AM
Just double checked, the Vaughan Williams one is "O Thou Transcendent"
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on November 22, 2019, 12:14:55 PM
Ah yes! That's it! My bad.

I did borrow Rogue Genius from a library a few years ago. Fascinating read, and it goes into a bit of analysis/detail of the works themselves, which is something I'm personally very interested in.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on November 23, 2019, 12:33:19 AM
Quote from: Carshot on November 22, 2019, 10:29:10 AM
Malcolm Arnold's family suffered from both poor mental health and bad luck. Two aunts ended their days in an asylum, one committing suicide. A brother was lost in combat in WW2. A brother and sister died as young adults from cancer. A brother and his wife committed suicide. At least one cousin committed suicide. Malcolm suffered from schizophrenia and manic depression and who knows what else. Friends suspected he had had a lobotomy at some stage. He spent long periods in institutions' receiving at times massive insulin doses and electric shock treatment. None of this excuses the appalling way he treated a number of people but it helps to understand. As I mentioned above the book "Rogue Genius" covers all of this and how it found expression in his life and his music. Another good resource is Tony Palmer's biographical film "Toward the Unknown Region", a Story of Survival available on DVD.

Thank you for the additional information, Carshot. So, even the radio programme was tame in its telling of the story. Will have to look up that book.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on November 25, 2019, 02:29:39 PM
Quote from: Carshot on November 22, 2019, 10:29:10 AM
Malcolm Arnold's family suffered from both poor mental health and bad luck. Two aunts ended their days in an asylum, one committing suicide. A brother was lost in combat in WW2. A brother and sister died as young adults from cancer. A brother and his wife committed suicide. At least one cousin committed suicide. Malcolm suffered from schizophrenia and manic depression and who knows what else. Friends suspected he had had a lobotomy at some stage. He spent long periods in institutions' receiving at times massive insulin doses and electric shock treatment. None of this excuses the appalling way he treated a number of people but it helps to understand. As I mentioned above the book "Rogue Genius" covers all of this and how it found expression in his life and his music. Another good resource is Tony Palmer's biographical film "Toward the Unknown Region", a Story of Survival available on DVD.

What an interesting and tragic reading. It offers much more contextual information about the great man and his oeuvre.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on November 25, 2019, 04:38:42 PM
Quote from: Carshot on November 22, 2019, 10:29:10 AM
Malcolm Arnold's family suffered from both poor mental health and bad luck. Two aunts ended their days in an asylum, one committing suicide. A brother was lost in combat in WW2. A brother and sister died as young adults from cancer. A brother and his wife committed suicide. At least one cousin committed suicide. Malcolm suffered from schizophrenia and manic depression and who knows what else. Friends suspected he had had a lobotomy at some stage. He spent long periods in institutions' receiving at times massive insulin doses and electric shock treatment. None of this excuses the appalling way he treated a number of people but it helps to understand. As I mentioned above the book "Rogue Genius" covers all of this and how it found expression in his life and his music. Another good resource is Tony Palmer's biographical film "Toward the Unknown Region", a Story of Survival available on DVD.

What's your point?  Lots of people had poor mental health and bad luck. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on November 25, 2019, 11:28:09 PM
Quote from: relm1 on November 25, 2019, 04:38:42 PM
What's your point?  Lots of people had poor mental health and bad luck.

I'm supposing the point is that Arnold's mental health issues made him the composer he turned out to be.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 26, 2019, 12:10:07 AM
Quote from: Irons on November 25, 2019, 11:28:09 PM
I'm supposing the point is that Arnold's mental health issues made him the composer he turned out to be.

I think that's probably true. The very 'dark' sections of symphonies 6 and 7 come to mind.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on November 26, 2019, 01:22:20 AM
Test(https://www.good-music-guide.com/Users/me/Desktop/_107222368_gettyimages-1147874096_zpsrz234nc1.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on November 26, 2019, 01:53:45 AM
Quote from: relm1 on November 25, 2019, 04:38:42 PM
What's your point?  Lots of people had poor mental health and bad luck.

The point from Carshot was, I think, that Arnold's mental and family situation was even darker than what was already bleakly conveyed in the BBC programme I alluded to 2 posts above his, therefore accentuating the contrast I had mentioned in my message.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on November 26, 2019, 02:01:10 AM
Having read some of these dark biographical details about his life, my interest in this composer is now piqued. Call it morbid fascination, if you must, but I want to hear his music now. I like what I heard of the 9th symphony, is this a good place to start? Or must one work his way up to it?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on November 26, 2019, 02:09:51 AM
I found the 9th to have the stronger impact but the rest of the cycle very interesting too.

Besides the symphonies, I can recommend this one for his overtures, from the bonkers (grand grand festival overture) to the very moving (Peterloo), through the drunken stroll (Tom O'Shanter):

[asin]B0007SK9L0[/asin]


Check also his various dances.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on November 26, 2019, 06:14:48 AM
Quote from: Papy Oli on November 26, 2019, 02:09:51 AM
I found the 9th to have the stronger impact but the rest of the cycle very interesting too.

Besides the symphonies, I can recommend this one for his overtures, from the bonkers (grand grand festival overture) to the very moving (Peterloo), through the drunken stroll (Tom O'Shanter):

[asin]B0007SK9L0[/asin]


Check also his various dances.

Good recommendation.  I loved the Grand Grand Festival Overture so much because it really pokes fun at itself and just won't end.  It reminded me of that Viktor Borge bit where he's conducting an orchestra and stuck on the penultimate note, not sure how to end the piece as he scurries around looking for the final page which is of course just a downbeat.  I'm sure it was a hoot to hear at its premiere.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on December 07, 2019, 05:29:56 AM
I am very, very impressed with this CD and this work...:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51oc6rbjDTL.jpg)

... Malcolm Arnold's 9th symphony, Andrew Penny/Ireland NSO on Naxos. So sparse, pained, beautiful. It has been some time since my first listen to a new composer has spoken to me quite so directly. I was not expecting to enjoy this so much.

Having gotten that out of the way, I do now want to explore more of his music. I'm thinking this may be a good next step:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51T5onrKy2L.jpg)

... if a composer's 9th symphony is this great, then it follows (per the Beethoven Theorem) that the 5th symphony must also be great, no?  :D

... but I am more than open to suggestions from those who actually know Arnold's music well. I will likely be following up on Papy Oli's recommendation for that Overtures CD as well.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on December 07, 2019, 05:45:28 AM
The 5th is Arnold's most popular symphony. It is not without dark undercurrents, but bitterness and anger are kept at bay. Watch for the Big Tune, it's irresistible.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on December 07, 2019, 05:51:39 AM
Quote from: André on December 07, 2019, 05:45:28 AM
The 5th is Arnold's most popular symphony. It is not without dark undercurrents, but bitterness and anger are kept at bay. Watch for the Big Tune, it's irresistible.
Agreed, it's been my favourite since I was sixteem (closely followed by No. 9).  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on December 07, 2019, 06:04:04 AM
I ended up ordering the Andrew Penny disc with symphonies 5 and 6. I couldn't resist after listening to some of the first movement of the 5th. It sounds awesome.

Any word on the Sony Masters set with the Vernon Handley recordings? Looks like a bargain.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on December 07, 2019, 06:12:46 AM
All three sets of Arnold symphonies are excellent: Penny, Handley, Hickox/Gamba. They offer different but not dissimilar takes on the music and are excellent technically.

That being said, I consider mandatory the purchase of everything Arnold himself recorded. His view of his own music is entirely his own, and sometimes miles away from anybody else's. Start with the Lyrita disc of no 4 and the Reference disc of Overtures. Day and night compared to any other.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on December 07, 2019, 06:19:01 AM
Quote from: André on December 07, 2019, 06:12:46 AM
All three sets of Arnold symphonies are excellent: Penny, Handley, Hickox/Gamba. They offer different but not dissimilar takes on the music and are excellent technically.

That being said, I consider mandatory the purchase of everything Arnold himself recorded. His view of his own music is entirely his own, and sometimes miles away from anybody else's. Start with the Lyrita disc of no 4 and the Reference disc of Overtures. Day and night compared to any other.
Agreed on all points, strongly recommended.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on December 07, 2019, 06:21:37 AM
Quote from: André on December 07, 2019, 06:12:46 AM
All three sets of Arnold symphonies are excellent: Penny, Handley, Hickox/Gamba. They offer different but not dissimilar takes on the music and are excellent technically.

That being said, I consider mandatory the purchase of everything Arnold himself recorded. His view of his own music is entirely his own, and sometimes miles away from anybody else's. Start with the Lyrita disc of no 4 and the Reference disc of Overtures. Day and night compared to any other.

Arnold's own recording of the 4th Symphony is 54 minutes, compared to the average of around 35-40 minutes.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on December 07, 2019, 07:06:52 AM
Quote from: Maestro267 on December 07, 2019, 06:21:37 AM
Arnold's own recording of the 4th Symphony is 54 minutes, compared to the average of around 35-40 minutes.

His own BBC performance of the Seventh from 1973 (have the radio recording, not sure if it appeared on cd) lasts over 50 minutes, compared to 37:43 (Handley), 38:04 (Penny) and especially the two quickies under Yates (31:20) and Gumba (Chandos, 31:52). A staggering difference of almost twenty minutes.  ;)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on December 07, 2019, 09:14:07 AM
Quote from: Christo on December 07, 2019, 07:06:52 AM
His own BBC performance of the Seventh from 1973 (have the radio recording, not sure if it appeared on cd) lasts over 50 minutes, compared to 37:43 (Handley), 38:04 (Penny) and especially the two quickies under Yates (31:20) and Gumba (Chandos, 31:52). A staggering difference of almost twenty minutes.  ;)

That live performance of the 7th (available on youtube) is jaw dropping. I didn't make it an outright recommendation because I think the 7th is Arnold's bleakest, angriest, most pessimistic work. It certainly sounds like that under him. So, not an entry point into his art, both as a composer and conductor, and of course not as technically excellent as the Lyrita, EMI, Reference and Everest discs he recorded. When I heard it it prompted me to listen to the other 3 recordings of the works I have. I needed to be hear them through the prism of the composer's own performance.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on December 07, 2019, 11:15:30 AM
Coincidentally I've been working my way through Andrew Penny's boxed set of the symphonies in my car in chronological sequence. I listened to No.7 today which I think is one of the best, especially the first movement. Penny's performance seemed a little underpowered compared to Vernon Handley's which was my first encounter with the work. Still, I think that Penny's is a valid interpretation, if not quite so dark. I'm looking forward to listening to 8 and 9. The odd numbered ones + No.6 remain my favourites. I hardly seem to know No.4 but intend to get further acquainted with it. I have Arnold's Lyrita version as well as those by Penny, Handley and Hickox.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on April 19, 2020, 02:24:51 PM
Just heard the 7th under Handley. I had never heard this work in a most formidable way as today. It's absolutely riveting and full of surprises which make sense along the three movements. The 2nd movement has that spooky and lugubrious atmosphere you often find in some Shostakovich's works. The accelerando near the minute 11 gave me chills, such a striking effect. Now, the transition that reaches the English dance in the 3rd movement also was a shocking moment, rather surrealistic. Even more shocking is the ending: several fortes in F major like it concluded 'happy'. This is an incredible work, and I think it's my favorite by this composer.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 19, 2020, 02:50:21 PM
+1.

I've listened to various versions a few weeks ago, including the composer's interpretation (available on YT). I came out of this convinced that the 7th is Arnold's most stunning work.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on April 19, 2020, 03:00:17 PM
I have Arnold's 7th on Naxos, but have never listened to it. I ought to change that ASAP.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 19, 2020, 04:16:03 PM
It is interesting to me that while Arnold was alive, I generally thought of him as being a lightweight, pop culture composer too interested in flamboyance and flash rather than depth.  Now I think the opposite, he is a dark and troubled composer who sometimes had moments of jollity.  It isn't so much that I am better acquainted with his works now than I was in my youth as I heard all his symphonies except no. 9 by the late 1980's and when I heard the No. 9, I found it underwhelming wishing for a more climactic or conclusive rather than ambiguous finale.  Now, I think I understand his music much better and hear the subtle rage, darkness, and bitterness but also the complexity and profundity I missed earlier.  Don't get me wrong, I always enjoyed his music but for vastly different reasons now.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on April 20, 2020, 03:43:25 AM
Quote from: André on December 07, 2019, 09:14:07 AM
That live performance of the 7th (available on youtube) is jaw dropping. I didn't make it an outright recommendation because I think the 7th is Arnold's bleakest, angriest, most pessimistic work. It certainly sounds like that under him. So, not an entry point into his art, both as a composer and conductor, and of course not as technically excellent as the Lyrita, EMI, Reference and Everest discs he recorded. When I heard it it prompted me to listen to the other 3 recordings of the works I have. I needed to be hear them through the prism of the composer's own performance.

Thankyou (belatedly!) for this post Andre - I will listen to this recording today.  As an aside - goodness me isn't the BBC a phenomenal resource for/supporter of music.  I put "Malcolm Arnold Symphony No.7" into YouTube and as well as this Arnold conducts Arnold (with the BBC SO) there's Groves with the BBC PO and Downes also with the BBC PO.  I've been listening to some broadcast Bax via YouTube recently as well and its just the same.

When we come out of the other side of this current crisis we must remember the Conservative/Boris Johnson's intention to destroy the BBC as we know it and not forget that in a wave of post-pandemic gratitude.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 20, 2020, 04:42:41 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on April 20, 2020, 03:43:25 AM
Thankyou (belatedly!) for this post Andre - I will listen to this recording today.  As an aside - goodness me isn't the BBC a phenomenal resource for/supporter of music.  I put "Malcolm Arnold Symphony No.7" into YouTube and as well as this Arnold conducts Arnold (with the BBC SO) there's Groves with the BBC PO and Downes also with the BBC PO.  I've been listening to some broadcast Bax via YouTube recently as well and its just the same.

When we come out of the other side of this current crisis we must remember the Conservative/Boris Johnson's intention to destroy the BBC as we know it and not forget that in a wave of post-pandemic gratitude.
Such a good point!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on April 20, 2020, 11:22:03 AM
Damn, this is dark! (The 7th). That second movement is agonizing. Very well done I think. Great use of percussion and brass. Each of Arnold's symphonies that I've heard thus far are very unique from one another. He may have reinvented his whole symphonic idiom every time.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 20, 2020, 01:29:28 PM
Arnold composed the 7th as a portrait of his children in three movements. Either the family was dysfunctional, or its paterfamilias had a weird sense of humor.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on April 20, 2020, 02:47:45 PM
Quote from: André on April 20, 2020, 01:29:28 PM
Arnold composed the 7th as a portrait of his children in three movements. Either the family was dysfunctional, or its paterfamilias had a weird sense of humor.

Why not both?  :o
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 20, 2020, 04:10:36 PM
Quote from: Symphonic Addict on April 20, 2020, 02:47:45 PM
Why not both?  :o

I know nothing about the Arnold tribe, but I agree we can't exclude that possibility.

8)

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 20, 2020, 09:33:05 PM
Quote from: André on April 20, 2020, 04:10:36 PM
I know nothing about the Arnold tribe, but I agree we can't exclude that possibility.

8)

I think that one of Arnold's children was severely autistic. My brother was at university with another one of Arnold's sons, Bob Arnold, who always turned up and sat very seriously in the audience whenever his father's music was performed.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on April 21, 2020, 07:31:57 AM
Yes, his youngest son Edward is autistic and the 7th is a fantastic work, best heard in the Vernon Handley recording (Conifer, now Sony) rather than the too-hurried Rumon Gamba (Chandos), odd because Gamba's 2001 BBC broadcasts of 1-6 are perfectly judged!

Arnold's symphonic cycle as a whole ranks IMHO among the finest large-scale British contributions of the 20th century alongside RVW, Arnold Bax, Havergal Brian, Alun Hoddinott, Daniel Jones and Robert Simpson...

:)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on April 21, 2020, 09:40:36 AM
Quote from: Albion on April 21, 2020, 07:31:57 AM
Yes, his youngest son Edward is autistic and the 7th is a fantastic work, best heard in the Vernon Handley recording (Conifer, now Sony) rather than the too-hurried Rumon Gamba (Chandos), odd because Gamba's 2001 BBC broadcasts of 1-6 are perfectly judged!

Arnold's symphonic cycle as a whole ranks IMHO among the finest large-scale British contributions of the 20th century alongside RVW, Arnold Bax, Havergal Brian, Alun Hoddinott, Daniel Jones and Robert Simpson...
:)
Totally agreed on all points, the Conifer/Handley it is. Another disappointing performance BTW - however much I admire him otherwise - is the one by Martin Yates with the Royal Scots on Dutton. A better choice makes Andrew Penny with the Irish NSO for Naxos, though Handley is a clear No. 1 in the Seventh.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on April 21, 2020, 10:09:18 AM
I passed on the Dutton release, though the repertoire chosen for the disc couldn't be faulted: it just seemed rather redundant given the competition! Handley secures (to me) the best cycle of the whole 9, and it is odd indeed that Richard Hickox relinquished 7-9 to Gamba feeling that they didn't represent Arnold at his best (though his 1-6 are splendid)! Gamba's set is worthwhile if only for the lovely Oboe Concerto,Op.39 which is otherwise unavailable.

Andrew Penny is excellent as well (on Naxos), but anybody really interested in Arnold is urged to seek out the (sadly now deleted) boxes of symphonies (11, including those for strings and brass) and concertos (17 out of 20, minus those for oboe, trumpet and organ which can be found elsewhere) released by Decca in 2005.

:)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 21, 2020, 01:32:40 PM
+1 for Handley's cycle. His No.6 is special too but Hickox's was also good. Arnold's very slow recording of No.1 is my favourite recording of that fine work.

Coincidentally my brother just posted this extract:


The programming of a Malcolm Arnold concert on R3 got me looking up his Guardian obituary online, which was written by a trombonist. It includes an incident that he thought was symbolic of why Arnold was never made Master of the Queen's Music:

"... those who decide such matters must have realised that, with his leftish tendencies and unpredictable sense of humour, Arnold could not be relied on to maintain the necessary level of imperial bombast without doing something silly. In a concert in Manchester in the late 1960s, I boldly led the trombone section of the BBC Northern Symphony Orchestra (now the BBC Philharmonic) into the chords at the end of Tchaikovsky's Hamlet four bars too late, so that as Arnold finished conducting the piece, we carried on. He thought this was great fun, raised his baton again and continued to conduct with exaggerated gestures until we were done, finishing with as tragic an expression as he could manage through his stifled laughter "
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 21, 2020, 04:14:32 PM
Agreed that the Vernon Handley cycle is excellent but Arnold's own is the superior interpretation and his versions are far different than the others.  He tends to be hyper dramatic so his No. 3 is the darkest one I've heard, his No. 4 is the most epic I've heard, his No. 7 is the slowest I've heard, etc.  I don't think there is a recording of No. 8 and 9 from him though.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 21, 2020, 05:55:50 PM
Quote from: relm1 on April 21, 2020, 04:14:32 PM
Agreed that the Vernon Handley cycle is excellent but Arnold's own is the superior interpretation and his versions are far different than the others.  He tends to be hyper dramatic so his No. 3 is the darkest one I've heard, his No. 4 is the most epic I've heard, his No. 7 is the slowest I've heard, etc.  I don't think there is a recording of No. 8 and 9 from him though.

For me Arnold's own interpretations are not only arresting, but truly revelatory. His account of the 7th brings the despair quotient to bleeding levels. And his 4th towers above all others IMO. Same with his disc of overtures (on the Reference label).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Alek Hidell on April 21, 2020, 07:04:36 PM
I've heard the Penny and Handley symphony cycles, but now you guys have given me a hankerin' to hear Arnold's own. But a cursory look suggests that the performances are not easy to find - several seem not to be available on CD at all. Maybe someone already said this, but did he conduct (i.e., record) all nine? Are they available in any kind of collection?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 21, 2020, 09:52:30 PM
Quote from: Alek Hidell on April 21, 2020, 07:04:36 PM
I've heard the Penny and Handley symphony cycles, but now you guys have given me a hankerin' to hear Arnold's own. But a cursory look suggests that the performances are not easy to find - several seem not to be available on CD at all. Maybe someone already said this, but did he conduct (i.e., record) all nine? Are they available in any kind of collection?

This was a great album. The CD is absurdly priced on Amazon.com but you can get it as an MP3 download.
However, the CD with the blue cover is available much more cheaply and includes Arnold's unique performance of Symphony No.1. Tam O' Shanter and the double Piano Concerto are great fun as well, although the PC has its serious moments.

(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on April 21, 2020, 10:50:07 PM
Quote from: relm1 on April 21, 2020, 04:14:32 PM
Agreed that the Vernon Handley cycle is excellent but Arnold's own is the superior interpretation and his versions are far different than the others.  He tends to be hyper dramatic so his No. 3 is the darkest one I've heard, his No. 4 is the most epic I've heard, his No. 7 is the slowest I've heard, etc.  I don't think there is a recording of No. 8 and 9 from him though.
Fully agreed (again). Am happy to have them all, the Seventh - to answer Alek Hidell - only as a broadcast recording uploaded from the 'Art-Music Forum' as will have done most of us here. Still, my favourite remains the Fifth under Arnold himself (available in a couple of guises with EMI) - the one it all began with back in the 1970s (for me).  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on April 22, 2020, 02:19:04 AM
Quote from: Albion on April 21, 2020, 10:09:18 AM

Andrew Penny is excellent as well (on Naxos), but anybody really interested in Arnold is urged to seek out the (sadly now deleted) boxes of symphonies (11, including those for strings and brass) and concertos (17 out of 20, minus those for oboe, trumpet and organ which can be found elsewhere) released by Decca in 2005.

:)

Just to check regarding Handley, the cycles with the Royal Phil Orch on the Sony Conifer recordings boxset and the Decca edition are one and the same, correct ? thank you.




Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on April 22, 2020, 03:03:40 AM
Quote from: Papy Oli on April 22, 2020, 02:19:04 AM
Just to check regarding Handley, the cycles with the Royal Phil Orch on the Sony Conifer recordings boxset and the Decca edition are one and the same, correct ? thank you.

Yes, they are the same recordings, although the concertos for guitar, harmonica and recorder (which were licensed to Decca) are not included. Even so a splendid and highly recommended bargain.

:)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on April 22, 2020, 03:24:11 AM
thank you Albion.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 22, 2020, 05:15:10 AM
Quote from: Christo on April 21, 2020, 10:50:07 PM
Fully agreed (again). Am happy to have them all, the Seventh - to answer Alek Hidell - only as a broadcast recording uploaded from the 'Art-Music Forum' as will have done most of us here. Still, my favourite remains the Fifth under Arnold himself (available in a couple of guises with EMI) - the one it all began with back in the 1970s (for me).  :)
Yes, for me too - on LP.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 22, 2020, 05:17:08 AM
This is one of my favourite Arnold CDs. It's a unique combination of two of my favourite Arnold symphonies. I like all the odd numbered ones + No.6
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on April 22, 2020, 08:33:42 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 22, 2020, 05:17:08 AM
This is one of my favourite Arnold CDs. It's a unique combination of two of my favourite Arnold symphonies. I like all the odd numbered ones + No.6
(//)

Never quite sure why - but No.6 is the only one I DON'T really enjoy.  Never quite bought into the 'jazz tribute' bit and also the string writing is so darn hard every recording I have is a bit of a mess and the icing on the cake is the ending which I simply don't like.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 22, 2020, 12:46:57 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on April 22, 2020, 08:33:42 AM
Never quite sure why - but No.6 is the only one I DON'T really enjoy.  Never quite bought into the 'jazz tribute' bit and also the string writing is so darn hard every recording I have is a bit of a mess and the icing on the cake is the ending which I simply don't like.
There was a very tormented section (first movement I think) which was used to gripping effect, in connection with Arnold's complete mental breakdown, in a TV documentary about the composer. It has stayed with me ever since. I quite like the bizarre 'jazz intrusion'. I'm less keen on 2 (one of the most popular) 4, and 8 but need to listen to them again.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on April 22, 2020, 02:13:19 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 22, 2020, 12:46:57 PM
There was a very tormented section (first movement I think) which was used to gripping effect, in connection with Arnold's complete mental breakdown, in a TV documentary about the composer. It has stayed with me ever since. I quite like the bizarre 'jazz intrusion'. I'm less keen on 2 (one of the most popular) 4, and 8 but need to listen to them again.

No.2 was the first LP of Arnold I had - given to me by my uncle - using the same picture that is on that EMI twofer mentioned earlier - I'm pretty sure that was a studio photo of the 2nd Symphony session.  I like that Symphony a lot and am very fond of 8 too.  No.7 is finally clicking with me - I think the "3 family portraits" thing is a bit of a red-herring. (PS:  I'm another Cancerian!)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on April 22, 2020, 04:45:42 PM
Those timing differences in symphonies as conducted by Arnold are indeed peculiar. I should give them a spin at some point.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Alek Hidell on April 22, 2020, 08:19:09 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 21, 2020, 09:52:30 PM
This was a great album. The CD is absurdly priced on Amazon.com but you can get it as an MP3 download.
However, the CD with the blue cover is available much more cheaply and includes Arnold's unique performance of Symphony No.1. Tam O' Shanter and the double Piano Concerto are great fun as well, although the PC has its serious moments.

Thanks, vandermolen! I've added both to my (absurdly long) wishlist. And thanks to Christo, too, for the info he provided.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 22, 2020, 10:42:21 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on April 22, 2020, 02:13:19 PM
No.2 was the first LP of Arnold I had - given to me by my uncle - using the same picture that is on that EMI twofer mentioned earlier - I'm pretty sure that was a studio photo of the 2nd Symphony session.  I like that Symphony a lot and am very fond of 8 too.  No.7 is finally clicking with me - I think the "3 family portraits" thing is a bit of a red-herring. (PS:  I'm another Cancerian!)
Good to know  :)
Actually I don't dislike No.2 it is just not one of my favourites. I prefer Arnold's own performance to the one by Groves, good as that is (I had the LP).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on April 23, 2020, 04:34:56 AM
Inspired somewhat by this thread and the symphony discussion, I've begun what I hope to be a complete playthrough of the 9 symphonies in order. Listening to No. 3 now (after 1 & 2 yesterday), and I keep forgetting about that wonderful series of chords (ending with B minor) just before the slow movement's final climax. That sequence reminds me a bit of the chord sequence just before the horn comes in for the finale of Stravinsky's The Firebird.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on April 23, 2020, 11:37:40 AM
In my experience what I've felt is that there is a Nielsenian tinge in the Symphony No. 1 and a Sibelian one in the No. 2 (1st movement). The Chandos recordings are incredibly clear, potent, vigorous in Nos. 1-4. Nos. 5 and 6 sound better in the Naxos recordings (powerful bass drum in No. 5).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on May 24, 2020, 02:36:25 PM
I've been listening to Arnold's symphonies a lot recently. The ones that really do it for me are 5, 6, 9 & now 4, which I just heard for the first time, but was quite impressed; I found it to be kind of a spiritual sibling to the 5th. I'm listening to the Penny/Ireland cycle on Naxos. These performances are really brilliant, top notch, to the point where I seriously wonder why I've never heard of this conductor or orchestra in any other context.

As for Arnold, his music is sometimes dark, but always colorful, even at its most sparse. I can't put my finger on what it is about his music that is so captivating, as it doesn't exactly seem like the kind of thing I would normally jive with.

I think once I've had my fill with the symphonies (I have the disc with 1 & 2 en route to me, which will complete the Penny cycle for me) I will try and check out the concertos. The man wrote a ton of them, and actually was extremely prolific in many genres before he, like Sibelius, essentially retired and didn't write much of anything for the last few decades of his life.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on May 24, 2020, 03:09:39 PM
Quote from: Symphonic Addict on April 19, 2020, 02:24:51 PM
Just heard the 7th under Handley. I had never heard this work in a most formidable way as today. It's absolutely riveting and full of surprises which make sense along the three movements. The 2nd movement has that spooky and lugubrious atmosphere you often find in some Shostakovich's works. The accelerando near the minute 11 gave me chills, such a striking effect. Now, the transition that reaches the English dance in the 3rd movement also was a shocking moment, rather surrealistic. Even more shocking is the ending: several fortes in F major like it concluded 'happy'. This is an incredible work, and I think it's my favorite by this composer.

I ought to listen to the Handley recording. I've only heard the Penny recording which is good, but, as others have commented, lacks the last amount of drama and character.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on May 24, 2020, 03:21:45 PM
Quote from: kyjo on May 24, 2020, 03:09:39 PM
I ought to listen to the Handley recording. I've only heard the Penny recording which is good, but, as others have commented, lacks the last amount of drama and character.

It's definitely better, Kyle. You won't go wrong with it (I hope!).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on May 24, 2020, 04:27:30 PM
The 7th and 8th both are, by a wide margin, the two most difficult of the symphonies for me, and perhaps the darkest (if not the 9th). I wonder if anyone else shares this perspective with me. I'm sure I owe them both another run through or two or three at least before forming any real opinions on them.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 24, 2020, 04:41:29 PM
The 7th is definitely his darkest, starkest symphony. It is almost frighteningly intimidating - especially in Arnold's own interpretation: grim, massive, punchy. What was he thinking ?  ???

The 8th I find harder to relate to. Must give it another airing - make that three, actually  ;D.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on May 24, 2020, 04:55:50 PM
Quote from: André on May 24, 2020, 04:41:29 PM
The 7th is definitely his darkest, starkest symphony. It is almost frighteningly intimidating - especially in Arnold's own interpretation: grim, massive, punchy. What was he thinking ?  ???

The 8th I find harder to relate to. Must give it another airing - make that three, actually  ;D.

The 8th is my least favorite of his symphonies, though I've only listened once - must give it another go.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on May 24, 2020, 04:59:03 PM
Quote from: kyjo on May 24, 2020, 03:09:39 PM
I ought to listen to the Handley recording. I've only heard the Penny recording which is good, but, as others have commented, lacks the last amount of drama and character.

You remind me, Kyle, I need to revisit Handley's 9th. Arnold's 9th is one of the greatest British symphonies I know. So devastatingly beautiful, poignant but also anguished. Will probably queue this up tonight.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 24, 2020, 11:08:22 PM
Quote from: vers la flamme on May 24, 2020, 02:36:25 PM
I've been listening to Arnold's symphonies a lot recently. The ones that really do it for me are 5, 6, 9 & now 4, which I just heard for the first time, but was quite impressed; I found it to be kind of a spiritual sibling to the 5th. I'm listening to the Penny/Ireland cycle on Naxos. These performances are really brilliant, top notch, to the point where I seriously wonder why I've never heard of this conductor or orchestra in any other context.

As for Arnold, his music is sometimes dark, but always colorful, even at its most sparse. I can't put my finger on what it is about his music that is so captivating, as it doesn't exactly seem like the kind of thing I would normally jive with.

I think once I've had my fill with the symphonies (I have the disc with 1 & 2 en route to me, which will complete the Penny cycle for me) I will try and check out the concertos. The man wrote a ton of them, and actually was extremely prolific in many genres before he, like Sibelius, essentially retired and didn't write much of anything for the last few decades of his life.
I'm sure you'll enjoy 1 and 2. 2 is comparatively well known but I actually prefer the darker and more turbulent No.1.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on May 26, 2020, 10:02:13 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on May 24, 2020, 11:08:22 PM
I'm sure you'll enjoy 1 and 2. 2 is comparatively well known but I actually prefer the darker and more turbulent No.1.

Arnold's 1st must surely be one of the darkest first symphonies by any composer! It's an unsettling, sometimes nightmarish work, especially in the eerily spare slow movement. The finale concludes the work on a more positive note with a memorable and inspiriting chorale theme in the coda. The 2nd is a more stylistically disparate work but I enjoy it greatly. The first movement is the most untroubled movement in any of his symphonies - sheer pastoral bliss. The heart of the symphony - the slow movement - couldn't be more different and is a tragic funeral march which rises to a terrifying climax. It's one of Arnold's finest symphonic movements. IMO the definitive recordings of both symphonies is Hickox and the LSO on Chandos - sheer magnificence!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on June 14, 2020, 12:06:50 AM
I recently bought on ebay a couple of letters regarding/from composers I admire.  This is from Sir Charles Groves to Alan Poulton about Malcolm Arnold.  Poulton wrote a catalogue of Arnold's music for Faber in the 1980's so I assume this was used/requested as the preface?  Interesting and insightful in its own right I thought...

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on June 18, 2020, 07:42:01 AM
Quote from: kyjo on May 26, 2020, 10:02:13 AM
Arnold's 1st must surely be one of the darkest first symphonies by any composer! It's an unsettling, sometimes nightmarish work, especially in the eerily spare slow movement. The finale concludes the work on a more positive note with a memorable and inspiriting chorale theme in the coda. The 2nd is a more stylistically disparate work but I enjoy it greatly. The first movement is the most untroubled movement in any of his symphonies - sheer pastoral bliss. The heart of the symphony - the slow movement - couldn't be more different and is a tragic funeral march which rises to a terrifying climax. It's one of Arnold's finest symphonic movements. IMO the definitive recordings of both symphonies is Hickox and the LSO on Chandos - sheer magnificence!

Right, I will give Arnold another go - I have the Hickox recording - unlike most posters I find his music, difficult to put in words, but a tad contrived. I hear the "terrifying climax" but not convinced by it. He is a composer that ticks every box for me, and yet I have so far not fallen under his spell.
Kyle, you could not be a more effective advocate for Arnold's music and after mulling over your post for a few days, Arnold here I come! :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 18, 2020, 09:54:38 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on June 14, 2020, 12:06:50 AM
I recently bought on ebay a couple of letters regarding/from composers I admire.  This is from Sir Charles Groves to Alan Poulton about Malcolm Arnold.  Poulton wrote a catalogue of Arnold's music for Faber in the 1980's so I assume this was used/requested as the preface?  Interesting and insightful in its own right I thought...
Very interesting letter RS. I have Groves's recording of the 2nd Symphony.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Thom on July 10, 2020, 01:59:36 AM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41XBMDZ9K1L._SX311_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

I recently reread this excellent biography of Malcom Arnold, of whom I am a big fan. Interesting stuff. His life was wild with ups and downs, never dull. In the end he suffered from dementia.
I can also recommend this excellent documentary:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51YXBFJF9BL._AC_.jpg)

I plan to revisit Arnold's output the coming weeks, starting with the symphonies. Looking forward to that.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on July 10, 2020, 05:20:26 AM
Quote from: Thom on July 10, 2020, 01:59:36 AM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41XBMDZ9K1L._SX311_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

I recently reread this excellent biography of Malcom Arnold, of whom I am a big fan. Interesting stuff. His life was wild with ups and downs, never dull. In the end he suffered from dementia.
I can also recommend this excellent documentary:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51YXBFJF9BL._AC_.jpg)

I plan to revisit Arnold's output the coming weeks, starting with the symphonies. Looking forward to that.
+1 both are excellent.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on July 11, 2020, 06:47:07 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on July 10, 2020, 05:20:26 AM
+1 both are excellent.

I must admit I was uneasy with the Palmer movie and the sequences filmed with a clearly distressed/disturbed Arnold.  I appreciate that permissions would have been obtained but I did not feel the need to see him in that condition - surely it is/was enough to be told.  Also, the orchestral excerpts are very well played but I found their filming in moody black backgrounds and tight close up rather mannered as I recall.  Not a film I have ever had the wish to return to.....
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on July 11, 2020, 10:34:25 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on July 11, 2020, 06:47:07 AM
I must admit I was uneasy with the Palmer movie and the sequences filmed with a clearly distressed/disturbed Arnold.  I appreciate that permissions would have been obtained but I did not feel the need to see him in that condition - surely it is/was enough to be told.  Also, the orchestral excerpts are very well played but I found their filming in moody black backgrounds and tight close up rather mannered as I recall.  Not a film I have ever had the wish to return to.....

And that's my general problem with Palmer's documentaries on composers. He feels the need to be edgy when, quite frankly, there's no need in it. Like the various scenes of corpses in his Vaughan Williams documentary. Completely unnecessary, IMHO. I much prefer the Bridcut documentary on Vaughan Williams (and his Britten and Elgar, too). I feel Bridcut is more 'professional' and sincere in his narrative whereas Palmer just feels like he's out to shock his audience.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on July 11, 2020, 12:21:23 PM
I take the point about filming Arnold in a distress state and the scenes of starving children in conflict zones accompanying Vaughan Williams's 9th Symphony were totally inappropriate. I still enjoyed those films much more than the one about Holst which told us next to nothing about his private life with over-long musical extracts.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 24, 2020, 08:23:02 AM
New release or rather reissue:
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on September 24, 2020, 10:02:21 AM
In looking on Amazon for this re-release I found this - a premier recording of The Dancing Master. "Originally intended as an opera for television, Malcolm Arnolds collaboration with film-maker and librettist Joe Mendoza, The Dancing Master, Op. 34, was considered too racy for viewers in the 1950s and subsequently rejected for broadcast and largely forgotten. Conductor John Andrews, with the BBC Concert Orchestra and a stellar cast, breathes new life into this operatic gem, here receiving its first recording. With its cast of larger-than life Restoration caricatures the trapped heiress, the scheming maid, the over-protective guardian, and the handsome rake the opera showcases Arnolds taste for exuberant satire and tender Romanticism in equal measure." I ordered it today.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 24, 2020, 10:55:13 AM
Quote from: Carshot on September 24, 2020, 10:02:21 AM
In looking on Amazon for this re-release I found this - a premier recording of The Dancing Master. "Originally intended as an opera for television, Malcolm Arnolds collaboration with film-maker and librettist Joe Mendoza, The Dancing Master, Op. 34, was considered too racy for viewers in the 1950s and subsequently rejected for broadcast and largely forgotten. Conductor John Andrews, with the BBC Concert Orchestra and a stellar cast, breathes new life into this operatic gem, here receiving its first recording. With its cast of larger-than life Restoration caricatures the trapped heiress, the scheming maid, the over-protective guardian, and the handsome rake the opera showcases Arnolds taste for exuberant satire and tender Romanticism in equal measure." I ordered it today.
V interesting. Thanks for posting about it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on September 25, 2020, 08:03:49 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 24, 2020, 08:23:02 AM
New release or rather reissue:
(//)

How does the Bostock performance of the 5th compare to the others available, in your view?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on September 25, 2020, 08:05:45 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 24, 2020, 10:55:13 AM
V interesting. Thanks for posting about it.

+1
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on September 25, 2020, 08:46:46 AM
 ???  ???  :blank:

(https://static.qobuz.com/images/covers/42/90/0190374929042_600.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 25, 2020, 12:47:06 PM
Quote from: kyjo on September 25, 2020, 08:03:49 AM
How does the Bostock performance of the 5th compare to the others available, in your view?
Compares well IMHO Kyle - one of the better releases in the ClassicO series. I like the Handley recording as well.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on September 25, 2020, 01:48:24 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 25, 2020, 12:47:06 PM
Compares well IMHO Kyle - one of the better releases in the ClassicO series. I like the Handley recording as well.

Would you put Bostock's No.5 ahead of;

Arnold
Handley
Hickox
Penny

Simple answer...... no.  So as with nearly all of Bostock's recordings of any repertoire, it is NOT bad, but as soon as comparisons are on offer, others versions are almost without exception better
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on September 25, 2020, 03:13:48 PM
Quote from: Papy Oli on September 25, 2020, 08:46:46 AM
???  ???  :blank:

(https://static.qobuz.com/images/covers/42/90/0190374929042_600.jpg)

:laugh: What? How on earth does Malcolm Arnold count as a contemporary American composer?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on September 25, 2020, 03:52:19 PM
<painful facepalm emoticon>   Gads!  What a blunder!  'orrible cover, btw
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Christo on September 26, 2020, 12:22:02 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on September 25, 2020, 01:48:24 PM
Would you put Bostock's No.5 ahead of;

Arnold
Handley
Hickox
Penny

Simple answer...... no.  So as with nearly all of Bostock's recordings of any repertoire, it is NOT bad, but as soon as comparisons are on offer, others versions are almost without exception better
Not in the case of Ruth Gipps' Symphony No. 2, where Bostock's recording is the best, so far.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on September 26, 2020, 01:37:03 AM
Quote from: Christo on September 26, 2020, 12:22:02 AM
Not in the case of Ruth Gipps' Symphony No. 2, where Bostock's recording is the best, so far.

really!?  The Gamba is much more dynamic and better played too surely.....
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 26, 2020, 12:09:02 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on September 25, 2020, 01:48:24 PM
Would you put Bostock's No.5 ahead of;

Arnold
Handley
Hickox
Penny

Simple answer...... no.  So as with nearly all of Bostock's recordings of any repertoire, it is NOT bad, but as soon as comparisons are on offer, others versions are almost without exception better

I'd put it alongside Handley but think that it's just as enjoyable as the others.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on December 29, 2020, 08:58:47 PM
Not a fan of Palmer's films, but for those that want to see it, his Arnold documentary has been uploaded via YouTube in its entirety:

https://www.youtube.com/v/uZsuYbn8DaE
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on December 30, 2020, 07:41:59 AM
I've been seriously enjoying Arnold's overtures as of late --- both the Arnold conducted recording on Reference Recordings and Gamba's recording on Chandos. These are such fun works and sometimes it's great to 'let your hair down' so to speak, which Walton's Portsmouth Point Overture also has done for me when I listened to it several nights ago. What I like about Arnold and Walton especially is their ability to not take everything so seriously and I find that whole English 'stiff upper lip' attitude doesn't apply to these composers, but I think it speaks of their particular generation. The lip started loosening with Elgar, Delius, Holst and then Vaughan Williams and the generations after these composers.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on January 01, 2021, 03:03:28 AM
Let's hope this centenary year brings Arnold to a bit more prominence, certainly for his serious works.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on January 01, 2021, 07:29:28 PM
Quote from: Maestro267 on January 01, 2021, 03:03:28 AM
Let's hope this centenary year brings Arnold to a bit more prominence, certainly for his serious works.

I certainly hope so, but I doubt it. I think if anything what we'll see is a rehashing of performances that any Arnold fan already owns. Let's hope that Chandos and Naxos has something up their sleeves.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 01, 2021, 11:16:13 PM
Quote from: Maestro267 on January 01, 2021, 03:03:28 AM
Let's hope this centenary year brings Arnold to a bit more prominence, certainly for his serious works.
+1
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: springrite on January 25, 2021, 06:18:05 PM
I have had about a dozen Arnold CDs for more than two decades. I don't really know why I have so many, for I hardly ever listen to them and the have left little or no impression and I had no inclination to go back to them, until...

Last weeks I re-listened to most of them. Some of the works are so powerful suddenly! I especially like symphonies 5 and 7. The dances (Scottish, English...) and The Return of Odysseus are wonderful works as well!

I am repeating the listening this week.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 25, 2021, 11:32:22 PM
Quote from: springrite on January 25, 2021, 06:18:05 PM
I have had about a dozen Arnold CDs for more than two decades. I don't really know why I have so many, for I hardly ever listen to them and the have left little or no impression and I had no inclination to go back to them, until...

Last weeks I re-listened to most of them. Some of the works are so powerful suddenly! I especially like symphonies 5 and 7. The dances (Scottish, English...) and The Return of Odysseus are wonderful works as well!

I am repeating the listening this week.
Interesting. I prefer the odd numbered symphonies + No.6
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on January 26, 2021, 06:28:10 AM
Quote from: springrite on January 25, 2021, 06:18:05 PM
I have had about a dozen Arnold CDs for more than two decades. I don't really know why I have so many, for I hardly ever listen to them and the have left little or no impression and I had no inclination to go back to them, until...

Last weeks I re-listened to most of them. Some of the works are so powerful suddenly! I especially like symphonies 5 and 7. The dances (Scottish, English...) and The Return of Odysseus are wonderful works as well!

I am repeating the listening this week.

Which conductors do you have because there is a huge range in interpretation making them feel like completely different works depending on who you listen to.  This sort of could be summed up as those interpretations from everyone and those conducted by Arnold himself which are quite different.  For me, Arnold is the conductor to go with.  If you can't find one (such as I don't think he recorded No. 9), then any other alternative will be satisfactory but the Arnold ones are revolutionary making you understand the music in a different way.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: springrite on January 27, 2021, 08:43:13 AM
Quote from: relm1 on January 26, 2021, 06:28:10 AM
Which conductors do you have because there is a huge range in interpretation making them feel like completely different works depending on who you listen to.  This sort of could be summed up as those interpretations from everyone and those conducted by Arnold himself which are quite different.  For me, Arnold is the conductor to go with.  If you can't find one (such as I don't think he recorded No. 9), then any other alternative will be satisfactory but the Arnold ones are revolutionary making you understand the music in a different way.
I do have Arnold with #3 and the Scottish dances, Penny with #5 and Handley with #7. (I think I used to have Hiddox with #5 and #6 before, until it became one of the many that was borrowed but not returned)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 27, 2021, 09:46:05 AM
Quote from: springrite on January 27, 2021, 08:43:13 AM
I do have Arnold with #3 and the Scottish dances, Penny with #5 and Handley with #7. (I think I used to have Hiddox with #5 and #6 before, until it became one of the many that was borrowed but not returned)

I agree with relm 1 especially in relation to Arnold's own recording of Symphony No.1 which is much slower than any other recording but which IMO has much more gravitas and is much more powerful and moving.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on January 27, 2021, 10:12:25 AM
Quote from: springrite on January 27, 2021, 08:43:13 AM
I do have Arnold with #3 and the Scottish dances, Penny with #5 and Handley with #7. (I think I used to have Hickox with #5 and #6 before, until it became one of the many that was borrowed but not returned)

Yikes! This has only happened to me one time (thankfully, not with a classical recording) and I swore that after this incident I would never lend out anything from collection. I'm more than happy to burn someone a copy of a recording, however.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on January 27, 2021, 12:17:15 PM
Quote from: relm1 on January 26, 2021, 06:28:10 AM
Which conductors do you have because there is a huge range in interpretation making them feel like completely different works depending on who you listen to.  This sort of could be summed up as those interpretations from everyone and those conducted by Arnold himself which are quite different.  For me, Arnold is the conductor to go with.  If you can't find one (such as I don't think he recorded No. 9), then any other alternative will be satisfactory but the Arnold ones are revolutionary making you understand the music in a different way.

+ 1

Arnold's performances of symphonies 4 (Lyrita), 7 (concert recording available on YT) and some Overtures (on Reference) make all others sound like rushed dry runs. His conducting style was weighty and strongly accented.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 27, 2021, 03:25:42 PM
In 2001 Rumon Gamba conducted the BBC Philharmonic in a splendid live Arnold symphony cycle broadcast on BBC Radio 3. Here, to complement his interpretations of numbers 7-9 issued on Chandos, are the first six:

https://www.mediafire.com/folder/v9kzlcq7aagcl/Arnold+-+Symphonies+1-6+(Gamba,+2001) (https://www.mediafire.com/folder/v9kzlcq7aagcl/Arnold+-+Symphonies+1-6+(Gamba,+2001))

:)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 28, 2021, 12:06:04 AM
Quote from: Albion on January 27, 2021, 03:25:42 PM
In 2001 Rumon Gamba conducted the BBC Philharmonic in a splendid live Arnold symphony cycle broadcast on BBC Radio 3. Here, to complement his interpretations of numbers 7-9 issued on Chandos, are the first six:

https://www.mediafire.com/folder/v9kzlcq7aagcl/Arnold+-+Symphonies+1-6+(Gamba,+2001) (https://www.mediafire.com/folder/v9kzlcq7aagcl/Arnold+-+Symphonies+1-6+(Gamba,+2001))

:)

More treasures Albion - thankyou!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on March 21, 2021, 08:22:58 AM
I was delighted to find, on a shopping expedition to Waitrose, that the new BBC Music Magazine (April) includes a feature on Malcolm Arnold and that the cover disc features performances of symphonies 2 and 4. I'm currently listening to Symphony No.2 (BBC Concert Orchestra/Barry Wordsworth) which sounds like a most impressive performance, with a very deeply felt and slower-than-usual slow movement. To me it sounds like a much deeper work than it does, for example, in the Groves performance, good as it is. Recordings from the Arnold Festival in Northampton in 2018 and 2019:
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on March 21, 2021, 12:55:19 PM
Not the first I've heard this "English Shostakovich" business, but personally I don't agree with that assessment. If anything, I do hear some similarities between Arnold and another Russian composer: Sergei Prokofiev. But Arnold is quite the original voice.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on March 21, 2021, 01:04:17 PM
Quote from: vers la flamme on March 21, 2021, 12:55:19 PM
Not the first I've heard this "English Shostakovich" business, but personally I don't agree with that assessment. If anything, I do hear some similarities between Arnold and another Russian composer: Sergei Prokofiev. But Arnold is quite the original voice.

I guess some could associate them because of the irony and rawness both [Shostakovich and Arnold] stamped on their works, but they handled those features in very personal and distinctive ways each other.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on March 21, 2021, 04:15:56 PM
The comparison is obvious.  It's not talking about musical style.  It's the merger of populism and pathos.  Sarcasm, wit, and drama tinged with pessimism.  They share these attributes fully in common.  Their difference is Mahler.  The epic and existential transformation. Elgar had loads of German and Slavic influences as did Shostakovich which I hear none of this in Arnold.  In Arnold's No. 9, I hear more Russian (Tchaikovsky Pathetique) than Bohemian/Viennese Mahler 9.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on March 21, 2021, 06:38:59 PM
Quote from: vers la flamme on March 21, 2021, 12:55:19 PM
Not the first I've heard this "English Shostakovich" business, but personally I don't agree with that assessment.

I think the affinities are obvious, but with a catch: Arnold is influenced mostly by the lighter, more eccentric DSCH symphonies (1, 6, 9, 15).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on March 21, 2021, 11:33:08 PM
Quote from: Archaic Torso of Apollo on March 21, 2021, 06:38:59 PM
I think the affinities are obvious, but with a catch: Arnold is influenced mostly by the lighter, more eccentric DSCH symphonies (1, 6, 9, 15).

An interesting point although maybe Arnold's 'Peterloo Overture' (1967)  owes something to the massacre scene in Shostakovich's 11th Symphony 'The Year 1905' composed ten years earlier in 1957.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on March 22, 2021, 12:01:43 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 21, 2021, 11:33:08 PM
An interesting point although maybe Arnold's 'Peterloo Overture' (1967)  owes something to the massacre scene in Shostakovich's 11th Symphony 'The Year 1905' composed ten years earlier in 1957.

I personally don't hear much/any musical link between Peterloo and The Year 1905 excepting they happen to depict massacres.  Coincidentally, I listened to Peterloo recently and was struck that if you ever needed "proof" that Arnold wrote "Battle in the Air" from Battle of Britain for Walton its in this Overture.  The film score came only a year or so after the overture so no surprise that Arnold's musical palette is exactly from that period but he really does 'lift' some of the musical gestures from his own overture.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on March 22, 2021, 02:44:24 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on March 22, 2021, 12:01:43 AM
I personally don't hear much/any musical link between Peterloo and The Year 1905 excepting they happen to depict massacres.  Coincidentally, I listened to Peterloo recently and was struck that if you ever needed "proof" that Arnold wrote "Battle in the Air" from Battle of Britain for Walton its in this Overture.  The film score came only a year or so after the overture so no surprise that Arnold's musical palette is exactly from that period but he really does 'lift' some of the musical gestures from his own overture.
I only meant the 'massacre music' actually. I'm sure you're right about Arnold and 'Battle in the Air'.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on March 24, 2021, 12:33:14 PM
Damn, all of this talk about Arnold's music and now I'm going to have to listen to some! He certainly is one of the more distinctive English composers. I need to see if I can find that BBC Music Magazine issue with him on the cover, but I'm not making a 30 min. drive to Barnes & Noble to get it that's for sure.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Daverz on March 24, 2021, 01:00:07 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on March 24, 2021, 12:33:14 PM
Damn, all of this talk about Arnold's music and now I'm going to have to listen to some! He certainly is one of the more distinctive English composers. I need to see if I can find that BBC Music Magazine issue with him on the cover, but I'm not making a 30 min. drive to Barnes & Noble to get it that's for sure.

I don't think there are many bad Arnold recordings.  For the symphonies, I'd be hard pressed to choose between Handley, Penny and Hickox.  I'd probably have to give the edge to Hickox in those works he was able to get to.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on March 24, 2021, 01:19:00 PM
Quote from: Daverz on March 24, 2021, 01:00:07 PM
I don't think there are many bad Arnold recordings.  For the symphonies, I'd be hard pressed to choose between Handley, Penny and Hickox.  I'd probably have to give the edge to Hickox in those works he was able to get to.

Yes, both Penny and Hickox have done fine work in Arnold. I find Handley less convincing in the symphonies, but rather good in everything else I've heard, but this may be because those other works don't have a lot of recordings.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on March 24, 2021, 02:22:35 PM
Here's an interesting newspaper photograph from 1962 that I picked up recently (shame about the fold!).  Arnold & Bliss looking at the original manuscript of Holst's The Planets at an exhibition of scores on London's South Bank...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on March 24, 2021, 03:38:57 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on March 24, 2021, 02:22:35 PM
Here's an interesting newspaper photograph from 1962 that I picked up recently (shame about the fold!).  Arnold & Bliss looking at the original manuscript of Holst's The Planets at an exhibition of scores on London's South Bank...

That's a wonderful photograph!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on March 24, 2021, 03:41:58 PM
Quote from: Daverz on March 24, 2021, 01:00:07 PM
I don't think there are many bad Arnold recordings.  For the symphonies, I'd be hard pressed to choose between Handley, Penny and Hickox.  I'd probably have to give the edge to Hickox in those works he was able to get to.

Your preference should certainly be on any by the composer himself.  He was far and away the best advocate for his music and his interpretations are quite different from others who read the music as notes on a page they are interpreting where he took it as feelings the notes couldn't express.  Unfortunately, he didn't record all the symphonies but maybe two thirds of them.  I'm a yank so don't fully understand the BBC but maybe the BBC has his performances of all the symphonies that might eventually be released (I'm looking at you Lyrita).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on April 02, 2021, 02:44:56 AM
For me, the only real disappointment in Arnold's work is that he never wrote a full-length Concerto with the weight of his symphonies. They're predominantly on the short and light side, whether in terms of length or forces.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 02, 2021, 03:34:28 AM
My favourite recordings:
No.1: Arnold (EMI)
No.2: Arnold (EMI) or Groves (EMI)
No.3: Arnold (Everest)
No.4: Arnold (Lyrita)
No.5: Arnold (EMI), although the recording is not the best IMO - otherwise Handley or Hickox
No.6: Handley (Conifer)
No.7 Handley (Conifer)
No.8 (not too sure)
No.9 (Penny)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 02, 2021, 07:13:19 AM
Quote from: Maestro267 on April 02, 2021, 02:44:56 AM
For me, the only real disappointment in Arnold's work is that he never wrote a full-length Concerto with the weight of his symphonies. They're predominantly on the short and light side, whether in terms of length or forces.

But I disagree.  Though brief, his 2 piano concerto (3 hands) is quite epic and his John Field Piano Concerto is symphonic in scope. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 02, 2021, 07:15:45 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 02, 2021, 03:34:28 AM
My favourite recordings:
No.1: Arnold (EMI)
No.2: Arnold (EMI) or Groves (EMI)
No.3: Arnold (Everest)
No.4: Arnold (Lyrita)
No.5: Arnold (EMI), although the recording is not the best IMO - otherwise Handley or Hickox
No.6: Handley (Conifer)
No.7 Handley (Conifer)
No.8 (not too sure)
No.9 (Penny)

A respectable list.  I wish Lyrita would release more of his radio broadcasts in cleaned up audio because No. 7 was broadcast and very different from Handley.  Who knows what else is out there that Arnold himself recorded.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 02, 2021, 08:13:27 AM
Quote from: relm1 on March 24, 2021, 03:38:57 PM
That's a wonderful photograph!
+1
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 02, 2021, 08:15:20 AM
Quote from: relm1 on April 02, 2021, 07:15:45 AM
A respectable list.  I wish Lyrita would release more of his radio broadcasts in cleaned up audio because No. 7 was broadcast and very different from Handley.  Who knows what else is out there that Arnold himself recorded.
The Symphony No.1 conducted by Arnold is quite extraordinary - much slower than other performances, which gives it much more gravitas.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 02, 2021, 09:52:15 AM
Arnold is slower in everything he recorded: symphonies 1-5, 7 and the overtures (substantial tone poems in all but name). Why is anybody's guess. Other conductors presumably conduct according to the scores' indications, so one would imagine the composer would do the same, but no. And the truth of the matter is that he is substantially more interesting than anybody else (esp. in the overtures and symphonies 3, 4 and 7).

A strange case indeed.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 02, 2021, 04:08:00 PM
Quote from: André on April 02, 2021, 09:52:15 AM
Arnold is slower in everything he recorded: symphonies 1-5, 7 and the overtures (substantial tone poems in all but name). Why is anybody's guess. Other conductors presumably conduct according to the scores' indications, so one would imagine the composer would do the same, but no. And the truth of the matter is that he is substantially more interesting than anybody else (esp. in the overtures and symphonies 3, 4 and 7).

A strange case indeed.

Hmm, interesting point.  So if he had conducted No. 9, which as far as I know he never did, but has the longest single ending of his oeuvre, perhaps his ending would be 40 minutes or so.  Fascinating.  Imagine his No. 9 being 70 minutes long.  I think I would be powerfully epic in its pace elevating him to a symphonic titan. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on April 03, 2021, 10:16:59 AM
Quote from: relm1 on April 02, 2021, 07:13:19 AM
But I disagree.  Though brief, his 2 piano concerto (3 hands) is quite epic and his John Field Piano Concerto is symphonic in scope.

Agreed, especially in regards to the John Field Fantasy which is an epic, phantasmagoric work. Also his lovely Guitar Concerto is far from insubstantial with a c. 12 minute long slow movement. But yes, most of his concerti tend to be quite brief and are a bit of mixed bag in terms of quality imo. The most disappointing of all is his late Cello Concerto Shakespearean, which shows evidence of his declining mental state late in life...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on April 03, 2021, 04:12:48 PM
Quote from: kyjo on April 03, 2021, 10:16:59 AM
Agreed, especially in regards to the John Field Fantasy which is an epic, phantasmagoric work. Also his lovely Guitar Concerto is far from insubstantial with a c. 12 minute long slow movement. But yes, most of his concerti tend to be quite brief and are a bit of mixed bag in terms of quality imo. The most disappointing of all is his late Cello Concerto Shakespearean, which shows evidence of his declining mental state late in life...

Why, what don't you like about his revised Cello Concerto?  I think it is very much Arnold and a very enjoyable work.  It's taught and has many lovely moments showing his love of dance, melody, and drama with hints of darkness and pathos throughout.  Very Arnold.  Why do you consider it "the most disappointing of all"??  >:(
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on April 06, 2021, 06:50:01 AM
Quote from: relm1 on April 03, 2021, 04:12:48 PM
Why, what don't you like about his revised Cello Concerto?  I think it is very much Arnold and a very enjoyable work.  It's taught and has many lovely showing his love of dance, melody, and drama with hints of darkness and pathos throughout.  Very Arnold.  Why do you consider it "the most disappointing of all"??  >:(

I'll have to give it another chance due to your enthusiasm! ;)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on April 06, 2021, 10:57:35 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on March 24, 2021, 12:33:14 PM
Damn, all of this talk about Arnold's music and now I'm going to have to listen to some! He certainly is one of the more distinctive English composers. I need to see if I can find that BBC Music Magazine issue with him on the cover, but I'm not making a 30 min. drive to Barnes & Noble to get it that's for sure.

Having just visited the forum for the first time in a while thanks for the heads up about this issue. I have just ordered it today (at £6.99, cover price I think, including postage) from:

https://www.buysubscriptions.com/back-issues/bbc-music-magazine-back-issues

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on April 06, 2021, 01:59:12 PM
Quote from: kyjo on April 06, 2021, 06:50:01 AM
I'll have to give it another chance due to your enthusiasm! ;)

My memory is that YOUR memory is right Kyjo!  I seem to recall that the original version of the work was withdrawn and that it needed a lot to create what is called the "performing edition" on the Wallfisch/Naxos recording.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 28, 2021, 09:25:52 PM
Douglas Bostock doesn't get much praise here but I agree with this review of his (inexpensive), newly re-issued, recording of the 5th Symphony and shorter works (the St Trinians music is great fun and I like the short Mosolov-like work 'Machines' which is included but not mentioned on the front of the CD):
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2021/Apr/Arnold-sy5-ALC1424.htm
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on April 29, 2021, 08:05:50 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 28, 2021, 09:25:52 PM
Douglas Bostock doesn't get much praise here but I agree with this review of his (inexpensive), newly re-issued, recording of the 5th Symphony and shorter works (the St Trinians music is great fun and I like the short Mosolov-like work 'Machines' which is included but not mentioned on the front of the CD):
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2021/Apr/Arnold-sy5-ALC1424.htm


This fine disc is also found as no 9 from this set:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81DGpexynYL._AC_SL400_.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on April 29, 2021, 09:33:22 AM
Quote from: André on April 29, 2021, 08:05:50 AM
This fine disc is also found as no 9 from this set:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81DGpexynYL._AC_SL400_.jpg)
One of the best in the set I think.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on May 06, 2021, 02:00:00 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on April 28, 2021, 09:25:52 PM
Douglas Bostock doesn't get much praise here but I agree with this review of his (inexpensive), newly re-issued, recording of the 5th Symphony and shorter works (the St Trinians music is great fun and I like the short Mosolov-like work 'Machines' which is included but not mentioned on the front of the CD):
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2021/Apr/Arnold-sy5-ALC1424.htm
(//)

I am a complete novice re: Malcolm Arnold, so am not only grateful for this thread, but for the recommendation of this as a starting point to his work. I'm listening for the second time this morning after an insomniacs intro in the wee small hours earlier. No idea how he is utterly new to me, but it is a great listen so far. I've been in Joly Braga Santos yesterday, so finding this another accessible pleasure.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on May 06, 2021, 03:24:25 AM
Quote from: foxandpeng on May 06, 2021, 02:00:00 AM
I am a complete novice re: Malcolm Arnold, so am not only grateful for this thread, but for the recommendation of this as a starting point to his work. I'm listening for the second time this morning after an insomniacs intro in the wee small hours earlier. No idea how he is utterly new to me, but it is a great listen so far. I've been in Joly Braga Santos yesterday, so finding this another accessible pleasure.

Two great composers who are accessible but NOT shallow.  As mentioned elsewhere Arnold conducting Arnold is especially revelatory.  Almost as if the mood swings are even more pronounced when he is conducting.  Of course Arnold did suffer from mental health issues himself so perhaps not such a surprise that he knowingly or otherwise emphasised that side of his own work......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on May 06, 2021, 06:50:28 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on May 06, 2021, 03:24:25 AM
Two great composers who are accessible but NOT shallow.  As mentioned elsewhere Arnold conducting Arnold is especially revelatory.  Almost as if the mood swings are even more pronounced when he is conducting.  Of course Arnold did suffer from mental health issues himself so perhaps not such a surprise that he knowingly or otherwise emphasised that side of his own work......

Agreed. I've read back through the entire Arnold thread over the last day, and have learned a great deal. I suspect that this week I have something of an immersive journey ahead in making my way through the various cycles of symphonies, but look forward to it immensely. It seems each has high points, but I will be particularly looking out for Arnold himself. I do also want to watch the Palmer film, despite the stated caveats.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 06, 2021, 09:27:57 AM
Quote from: foxandpeng on May 06, 2021, 02:00:00 AM
I am a complete novice re: Malcolm Arnold, so am not only grateful for this thread, but for the recommendation of this as a starting point to his work. I'm listening for the second time this morning after an insomniacs intro in the wee small hours earlier. No idea how he is utterly new to me, but it is a great listen so far. I've been in Joly Braga Santos yesterday, so finding this another accessible pleasure.
I'd say that was a good starting point for MA. As for Braga-Santos, I think that symphonies 1-4 are terrific. You could also pick up a boxed set of the (MA) symphonies relatively cheaply. These are both good starting points. I like the combination of symphonies 1 and 5 on a single disc:

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on May 06, 2021, 02:39:37 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on May 06, 2021, 09:27:57 AM
I'd say that was a good starting point for MA. As for Braga-Santos, I think that symphonies 1-4 are terrific. You could also pick up a boxed set of the symphonies relatively cheaply. These are both good starting points. I like the combinstion of symphonies 1 and 5 on a single disc:
[/img]

I will make that part of my priority listening, thank you! I've gone through 1-5 today in the Chandos/Hickox set, which has been a good beginning. I look forward to hearing more :-)

The Braga Santos symphonies have been longstanding favourites, so I've had a tuneful couple of days on the whole.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on May 07, 2021, 03:16:44 AM
I've been in Symphony 2 this morning with the Hickox and Handley versions, and have found it pretty satisfying, to be honest. I have to say that I prefer the Hickox version here, particularly in the Lento, which carries a gravity that I think is lacking in the Handley. There are hints of what I enjoy in Pettersson 7 which aren't as apparent for me in Handley. Probably my novice status speaking.

I think there is something significant to be said for hearing the composer conducting his own work, however. The Warner Classics release may not be as well produced, but surely Arnold's own interpretation can't be discounted as a lens to how this piece was meant to feel. Hickox still wins, so far, for me though.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on May 08, 2021, 07:49:49 PM
Quote from: foxandpeng on May 07, 2021, 03:16:44 AM
I've been in Symphony 2 this morning with the Hickox and Handley versions, and have found it pretty satisfying, to be honest. I have to say that I prefer the Hickox version here, particularly in the Lento, which carries a gravity that I think is lacking in the Handley. There are hints of what I enjoy in Pettersson 7 which aren't as apparent for me in Handley. Probably my novice status speaking.

I think there is something significant to be said for hearing the composer conducting his own work, however. The Warner Classics release may not be as well produced, but surely Arnold's own interpretation can't be discounted as a lens to how this piece was meant to feel. Hickox still wins, so far, for me though.

Have you heard the Penny performance on Naxos? It's quite good, too.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on May 08, 2021, 10:56:07 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 08, 2021, 07:49:49 PM
Have you heard the Penny performance on Naxos? It's quite good, too.

+1 for the Penny cycle in general.  The NSO Ireland was also the orchestra used in the Palmer documentary (for what that's worth)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on May 09, 2021, 03:57:37 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 08, 2021, 07:49:49 PM
Have you heard the Penny performance on Naxos? It's quite good, too.

I've grabbed them for listening during the coming week. Heard the 2nd today, back to back with the Hickox, and enjoyed the real immediacy of the recording. I'm not sure I'm sufficiently musically literate to describe what I'm hearing, but it's certainly worth having alongside the others. As most of the movement timings are very similar, it is harder to separate them by preference.

Hearing 2 so much in the last week has made me appreciate Arnold as a composer. Lots more listening to the 3 cycles for the week ahead.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on May 09, 2021, 07:01:30 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on May 08, 2021, 10:56:07 PM
+1 for the Penny cycle in general.  The NSO Ireland was also the orchestra used in the Palmer documentary (for what that's worth)

Ah, very nice. I wasn't aware of that this orchestra was used on that documentary ---- cool, you learn something new every day.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on May 09, 2021, 07:02:02 PM
Quote from: foxandpeng on May 09, 2021, 03:57:37 PM
I've grabbed them for listening during the coming week. Heard the 2nd today, back to back with the Hickox, and enjoyed the real immediacy of the recording. I'm not sure I'm sufficiently musically literate to describe what I'm hearing, but it's certainly worth having alongside the others. As most of the movement timings are very similar, it is harder to separate them by preference.

Hearing 2 so much in the last week has made me appreciate Arnold as a composer. Lots more listening to the 3 cycles for the week ahead.

Very nice. I need to get back to Arnold at some juncture.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on May 26, 2021, 03:03:00 AM
Finally got round to listening to the BBC Music Magazine cover disc of the Arnold 2nd & 4th Symphonies.  Very well played by the BBC Concert Orchestra as expected but rather underwhelmed by both performances.  They seem to emphasise the whimiscal character of both works and miss the darker element almost completely.  Most apparent in the slow movement of No.2 and the sharp emotional contrasts of the open movement of No.4. Both performances feel rather superficial.....
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on May 26, 2021, 03:19:31 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on May 26, 2021, 03:03:00 AM
Finally got round to listening to the BBC Music Magazine cover disc of the Arnold 2nd & 4th Symphonies.  Very well played by the BBC Concert Orchestra as expected but rather underwhelmed by both performances.  They seem to emphasise the whimiscal character of both works and miss the darker element almost completely.  Most apparent in the slow movement of No.2 and the sharp emotional contrasts of the open movement of No.4. Both performances feel rather superficial.....

Who's conducting?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on May 26, 2021, 03:43:59 AM
Quote from: kyjo on May 26, 2021, 03:19:31 AM
Who's conducting?

Barry Wordsworth in No.2 & Keith Lockhart in No.4.  I used to dep with the BBC CO and they are both very good conductors - just not "under the skin" of these works....
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 26, 2021, 05:20:48 AM
Arnold is the man for symphony no 4. It's on Lyrita. Dark and tragic.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on May 26, 2021, 05:35:40 AM
Quote from: André on May 26, 2021, 05:20:48 AM
Arnold is the man for symphony no 4. It's on Lyrita. Dark and tragic.

It could be argued Arnold almost goes too far the other way - no whimsy just doom!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 26, 2021, 09:32:46 AM
That's why he's essential ! No Arnold, not enough doom !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on May 26, 2021, 10:02:32 AM
Quote from: André on May 26, 2021, 09:32:46 AM
That's why he's essential ! No Arnold, not enough doom !

One for the UK readers.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNNRL_IB9m0

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on June 04, 2021, 06:50:49 AM
Listening to Symphony 8 this morning, and the recurring melody in the first movement is now firmly stuck in my head and driving me nuts because every time I hear it, I'm unable to place what he is quoting.

Is this just pure Arnold, or is there a hymn refrain or particular piece he is referencing from elsewhere?

Also, would this recurrence be correctly described as an ostinato?

TIA 😁
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on June 04, 2021, 07:57:04 AM
Quote from: foxandpeng on June 04, 2021, 06:50:49 AM
Listening to Symphony 8 this morning, and the recurring melody in the first movement is now firmly stuck in my head and driving me nuts because every time I hear it, I'm unable to place what he is quoting.

Is this just pure Arnold, or is there a hymn refrain or particular piece he is referencing from elsewhere?

Also, would this recurrence be correctly described as an ostinato?

TIA 😁

If its the little "whistleable tune" - the tune itself is a lift from his own filmscore for "The Reckoning"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Reckoning_(1970_film)#:~:text=The%20Reckoning%20is%20a%201969,features%20music%20by%20Malcolm%20Arnold.

Arnold lifts the melody exactly as is from film to symphony and in which there is an undercurrent of "Irish Pride"  and violence which led some commentators to infer an Irish Nationalist sympathy in Arnold's choice of melodic style - something he denied.  Piers Burton-Page in his book "Philharmonic Concerto - The Life & Music of Sir Malcolm Arnold" explains this in greater detail.  Certainly there would seem to be an undercurrent of 'meaning' to Arnold's creation of such a catchy ditty of a melody......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on June 04, 2021, 12:47:20 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on June 04, 2021, 07:57:04 AM
If its the little "whistleable tune" - the tune itself is a lift from his own filmscore for "The Reckoning"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Reckoning_(1970_film)#:~:text=The%20Reckoning%20is%20a%201969,features%20music%20by%20Malcolm%20Arnold.

Arnold lifts the melody exactly as is from film to symphony and in which there is an undercurrent of "Irish Pride"  and violence which led some commentators to infer an Irish Nationalist sympathy in Arnold's choice of melodic style - something he denied.  Piers Burton-Page in his book "Philharmonic Concerto - The Life & Music of Sir Malcolm Arnold" explains this in greater detail.  Certainly there would seem to be an undercurrent of 'meaning' to Arnold's creation of such a catchy ditty of a melody......

That's really interesting, thank you 😊. I have come to greatly appreciate Arnold's symphonies and information like this adds another layer again.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on June 04, 2021, 04:12:08 PM
Very interesting and pertinent indeed. Thanks, RS !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on June 04, 2021, 08:06:32 PM
Once again I'm enamored by the majesty, warmth, and color of Arnold's Homage to the Queen ballet music:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41bHxj1gIOL._SY355_.jpg)

This whole disc is fantastic, but Homage to the Queen is the standout for me. One of my favorite works by Arnold.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 04, 2021, 10:11:43 PM
My brother (who was at university with Arnold's son Bob) forwarded me this amusing anecdote from Arnold's obituary:

'While listening to his first symphony on R3's Afternoon Concert I looked up Malcolm Arnold – clearly a very erratic character – online and found his Guardian obituary, which included this pleasing reminiscence from the obituarist:



In a concert in Manchester in the late 1960s, I boldly led the trombone section of the BBC Northern Symphony Orchestra (now the BBC Philharmonic) into the chords at the end of Tchaikovsky's Hamlet four bars too late, so that as Arnold finished conducting the piece, we carried on. He thought this was great fun, raised his baton again and continued to conduct with exaggerated gestures until we were done, finishing with as tragic an expression as he could manage through his stifled laughter.'

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on June 06, 2021, 03:38:22 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on June 04, 2021, 10:11:43 PM
My brother (who was at university with Arnold's son Bob) forwarded me this amusing anecdote from Arnold's obituary:

'While listening to his first symphony on R3's Afternoon Concert I looked up Malcolm Arnold – clearly a very erratic character – online and found his Guardian obituary, which included this pleasing reminiscence from the obituarist:



In a concert in Manchester in the late 1960s, I boldly led the trombone section of the BBC Northern Symphony Orchestra (now the BBC Philharmonic) into the chords at the end of Tchaikovsky's Hamlet four bars too late, so that as Arnold finished conducting the piece, we carried on. He thought this was great fun, raised his baton again and continued to conduct with exaggerated gestures until we were done, finishing with as tragic an expression as he could manage through his stifled laughter.'



He seems to have been massively colourful, with all of the extremes that brought with it. Reminiscent of Ted Hughes in some regards - similarly complex, profoundly memorable, but undoubtedly difficult for those close to him.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 06, 2021, 04:24:27 AM
Quote from: foxandpeng on June 06, 2021, 03:38:22 AM
He seems to have been massively colourful, with all of the extremes that brought with it. Reminiscent of Ted Hughes in some regards - similarly complex, profoundly memorable, but undoubtedly difficult for those close to him.
Yes, I'm sure you are right.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on June 06, 2021, 02:45:01 PM
Quote from: kyjo on June 04, 2021, 08:06:32 PM
Once again I'm enamored by the majesty, warmth, and color of Arnold's Homage to the Queen ballet music:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41bHxj1gIOL._SY355_.jpg)

This whole disc is fantastic, but Homage to the Queen is the standout for me. One of my favorite works by Arnold.

The complete ballet was one of my latest revelations by this composer:

(https://cdn.naxosmusiclibrary.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/0724356612051.jpg)

It's in very good mono.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on June 08, 2021, 08:09:15 PM
Quote from: Symphonic Addict on June 06, 2021, 02:45:01 PM
The complete ballet was one of my latest revelations by this composer:

(https://cdn.naxosmusiclibrary.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/0724356612051.jpg)

It's in very good mono.

I greatly look forward to hearing the whole ballet!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on June 09, 2021, 06:04:56 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on June 04, 2021, 10:11:43 PM
My brother (who was at university with Arnold's son Bob) forwarded me this amusing anecdote from Arnold's obituary:

'While listening to his first symphony on R3's Afternoon Concert I looked up Malcolm Arnold – clearly a very erratic character – online and found his Guardian obituary, which included this pleasing reminiscence from the obituarist:



In a concert in Manchester in the late 1960s, I boldly led the trombone section of the BBC Northern Symphony Orchestra (now the BBC Philharmonic) into the chords at the end of Tchaikovsky's Hamlet four bars too late, so that as Arnold finished conducting the piece, we carried on. He thought this was great fun, raised his baton again and continued to conduct with exaggerated gestures until we were done, finishing with as tragic an expression as he could manage through his stifled laughter.'



What a charming story!  :laugh:
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 09, 2021, 11:42:37 PM
Quote from: relm1 on June 09, 2021, 06:04:56 AM
What a charming story!  :laugh:
Yes, it made me laugh too!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on July 05, 2021, 08:22:49 AM
For any who missed it there is a fascinating programme about Arnold's score for "The Bridge on the River Kwai" on iPlayer. Sixty minutes including a performance by the BBC Concert Orchestra. Much recommended.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00041td/discovering-series-1-3-the-bridge-on-the-river-kwai-malcolm-arnold

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on July 21, 2021, 04:42:46 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on December 29, 2020, 08:58:47 PM
Not a fan of Palmer's films, but for those that want to see it, his Arnold documentary has been uploaded via YouTube in its entirety:

https://www.youtube.com/v/uZsuYbn8DaE

I took time to watch this film on the life of Malcolm Arnold last night, and found it illuminating and really quite powerful. I appreciate that not everyone would find it helpful to see some of his more distressed and less lucid scenes, but as a perspective on the life of this remarkable man, it is very instructive. I've got to know Arnold's symphonies in the last 2 - 3 months, and some of his film music and other pieces, and rate him extremely highly. It certainly brings home the distinction between the character of a person and the art that they create, and in a cultural climate where grave moral offences or socially unacceptable opinions or behaviour can condemn an artist to obscurity or periphery, is a reminder that art stands apart.

Listening to Rumon Gamba's interpretation of Symphony 1 at the moment on Youtube, and it is excellent.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on July 21, 2021, 05:50:29 AM
Quote from: foxandpeng on July 21, 2021, 04:42:46 AM
I took time to watch this film on the life of Malcolm Arnold last night, and found it illuminating and really quite powerful. I appreciate that not everyone would find it helpful to see some of his more distressed and less lucid scenes, but as a perspective on the life of this remarkable man, it is very instructive. I've got to know Arnold's symphonies in the last 2 - 3 months, and some of his film music and other pieces, and rate him extremely highly. It certainly brings home the distinction between the character of a person and the art that they create, and in a cultural climate where grave moral offences or socially unacceptable opinions or behaviour can condemn an artist to obscurity or periphery, is a reminder that art stands apart.

Listening to Rumon Gamba's interpretation of Symphony 1 at the moment on Youtube, and it is excellent.

I agree, it's a very fine documentary and illuminating to see him at the final stages of his life.  This doesn't distress me but helps round out the story of the man.  Estranged, a bit forgotten at the end of a very long and productive life.  Still a mystery to those that loved him (his kids).  But I felt it did a great job of taking us through the journey - warts and all - of this major composer.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on July 21, 2021, 12:47:18 PM
Quote from: relm1 on July 21, 2021, 05:50:29 AM
I agree, it's a very fine documentary and illuminating to see him at the final stages of his life.  This doesn't distress me but helps round out the story of the man.  Estranged, a bit forgotten at the end of a very long and productive life.  Still a mystery to those that loved him (his kids).  But I felt it did a great job of taking us through the journey - warts and all - of this major composer.

Bearing in mind his early schizophrenia diagnosis, it would be interesting to read an up to date examination of his life that is more sympathetic to issues of neurodiversity and unmedicated mood swings/mania/depression. It wouldn't exonerate his behaviour, but it may allow history a more tempered, and in time, a more favourable assessment of his extremities.

As with many who are neurodiverse, I have little doubt that his creativity, intensity of activity, and financial/sexual/addictive tendencies were all tied in.

Perhaps such considerations have already been made in published works, and I am simply unaware. In any case, it bears some pondering.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on July 21, 2021, 02:39:24 PM
I was not comfortable with the filming of those sequences - or at least their inclusion in the documentary.  I don't need visual "proof" that Arnold was suffering from a condition and neither do I require that as an explanation for aspects of his behaviour historically.  I simply know that if it was me or a relative of mine I would not want it shown to the world - especially if I was not in a position to make an informed decision on my own behalf.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on July 21, 2021, 04:59:24 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on July 21, 2021, 02:39:24 PM
I was not comfortable with the filming of those sequences - or at least their inclusion in the documentary.  I don't need visual "proof" that Arnold was suffering from a condition and neither do I require that as an explanation for aspects of his behaviour historically.  I simply know that if it was me or a relative of mine I would not want it shown to the world - especially if I was not in a position to make an informed decision on my own behalf.

What is your thought of seeing Kurt Douglass as the mighty gladiator in Spartacus in the height of his prowess and seeing him after his stroke as a disabled man with limited mobility?  Should others not be allowed to see this once mighty warrior as a crippled if you are "don't need visual "proof" that he becomes broken mortal?  I hope this doesn't come across as rude, I don't mean it to be.  My dad was a mighty tough guy, a military man who eventually became broken and lame in his dying moments.  That was life.  It isn't a bad thing and not something others should dictate what the image of their life should be.  It is what life is.  A process of dying and not everyone is that comfortable with it.  If you don't like that, then you sort of need to deal with it.  It is life. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on July 21, 2021, 07:02:35 PM
Quote from: relm1 on July 21, 2021, 04:59:24 PM
What is your thought of seeing Kurt Douglass as the mighty gladiator in Spartacus in the height of his prowess and seeing him after his stroke as a disabled man with limited mobility?  Should others not be allowed to see this once mighty warrior as a crippled if you are "don't need visual "proof" that he becomes broken mortal?  I hope this doesn't come across as rude, I don't mean it to be.  My dad was a mighty tough guy, a military man who eventually became broken and lame in his dying moments.  That was life.  It isn't a bad thing and not something others should dictate what the image of their life should be.  It is what life is.  A process of dying and not everyone is that comfortable with it.  If you don't like that, then you sort of need to deal with it.  It is life.

I'm not going to say you came across rude, but preachy certainly comes to mind. We all know we're not going to get out of this life alive. Some of us prefer to not see it acted out in front of us, especially in a documentary on a composer that we admire. You don't need visuals to know about Arnold's condition. This is the problem that I had with Palmer's documentary as well. Like most of his films that I've seen on composers, the goal seems to be to provoke controversy and shock instead of talking about the composer's music and giving the viewer something of value. This, to me, is of greater interest than his mental condition.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on July 21, 2021, 07:11:00 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on July 21, 2021, 02:39:24 PM
I was not comfortable with the filming of those sequences - or at least their inclusion in the documentary.  I don't need visual "proof" that Arnold was suffering from a condition and neither do I require that as an explanation for aspects of his behaviour historically.  I simply know that if it was me or a relative of mine I would not want it shown to the world - especially if I was not in a position to make an informed decision on my own behalf.

I concur completely. I came to the documentary wanting to know more about Arnold's music and there's very little discussion of it in Palmer's film. In several of the Palmer films I've seen on composers, I came away confused and saddened. Not because of what the composers went through but because the documentaries could've been so much more had they actually stayed on track with talking about the music. Anyone can buy a book on a composer and read a biography about their life. I think some of the best programs on composers I've seen have been the Tilson Thomas series Keeping Score. These are informative and he sticks with the music and keeps his own personal interjections about the composer's life to a minimum. He's not out to stir the pot or shock people. I think he just wanted to share his knowledge of the composer and what an impressive fountain of knowledge he is!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on July 21, 2021, 11:14:13 PM
Quote from: relm1 on July 21, 2021, 04:59:24 PM
What is your thought of seeing Kurt Douglass as the mighty gladiator in Spartacus in the height of his prowess and seeing him after his stroke as a disabled man with limited mobility?  Should others not be allowed to see this once mighty warrior as a crippled if you are "don't need visual "proof" that he becomes broken mortal?  I hope this doesn't come across as rude, I don't mean it to be.  My dad was a mighty tough guy, a military man who eventually became broken and lame in his dying moments.  That was life.  It isn't a bad thing and not something others should dictate what the image of their life should be.  It is what life is.  A process of dying and not everyone is that comfortable with it.  If you don't like that, then you sort of need to deal with it.  It is life.

Having been with both my parents when they died of dementia, I am not sure I need lecturing about the arc of life.  My personal opinion was that I did not feel that the film was "better" for showing those sequences.  Clearly mental health and battles with it were a defining aspect of what made Arnold the composer he was but I don't need a visual prompt for the point to be made.  Clearly, those who were responsible for Arnold's welfare at that time felt that these images would be more powerful than words alone.  I respect that decision but - as I said - it is not the choice I would make for myself or my own - that's about privacy not denial.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on July 22, 2021, 04:55:13 AM
I think that much depends on the motive for showing distressing sequences - if they are integrated into the overall narrative and help us to understand the man and/or his music better, then there may be an argument for showing them. However, in the documentary on Vaughan Williams ('O Thou Transcendent') which Palmer made, I felt that images of dying children during the Biafran Famine, which accompanied the Ninth Symphony, were purely gratuitous and added nothing to our understanding of the composer or his music. I think that this was less the case with the distressing images of Arnold (which is what stands out most in my memory when I recall the film) but I can understand both arguments about them being there.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on July 22, 2021, 06:08:31 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on July 21, 2021, 11:14:13 PM
Having been with both my parents when they died of dementia, I am not sure I need lecturing about the arc of life.  My personal opinion was that I did not feel that the film was "better" for showing those sequences.  Clearly mental health and battles with it were a defining aspect of what made Arnold the composer he was but I don't need a visual prompt for the point to be made.  Clearly, those who were responsible for Arnold's welfare at that time felt that these images would be more powerful than words alone.  I respect that decision but - as I said - it is not the choice I would make for myself or my own - that's about privacy not denial.

Fair enough.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on July 22, 2021, 06:25:14 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on July 21, 2021, 11:14:13 PM
Having been with both my parents when they died of dementia, I am not sure I need lecturing about the arc of life.  My personal opinion was that I did not feel that the film was "better" for showing those sequences.  Clearly mental health and battles with it were a defining aspect of what made Arnold the composer he was but I don't need a visual prompt for the point to be made.  Clearly, those who were responsible for Arnold's welfare at that time felt that these images would be more powerful than words alone.  I respect that decision but - as I said - it is not the choice I would make for myself or my own - that's about privacy not denial.

All valid points and it's actually a shame that you had to reiterate this opinion when what you wrote initially is as clear as it could be.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SonicMan46 on August 12, 2021, 07:50:28 AM
Arnold Symphonies - which set and does one need at least two different ones?   :laugh:

In the last few days, I've been listening to my Malcolm Arnold collection, just 12+ CDs, but includes all of the Symphonies - this morning selected the ones below for a review and liked both Handley's & Penny's performances; the rest are all w/ Penny.  On Amazon, the Penny & Hickox (Chandos) recordings are now boxed, and I believe a number of sets w/ Arnold conducting exits; the Handley on Conifer does not seem to be in a box? 

Now, I know many have given their opinions on which sets and even which individual performances are their favorites - but any new thoughts - at the moment I'm happy w/ what I own and really do not need a duplicate set, but fickleness affects us all here -  8)  Dave

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/4123CS4PVDL.jpg)  (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/716-DnmM8vL._SL1200_.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Daverz on August 12, 2021, 11:09:05 AM
Quote from: SonicMan46 on August 12, 2021, 07:50:28 AM
Arnold Symphonies - which set and does one need at least two different ones?   :laugh:

In the last few days, I've been listening to my Malcolm Arnold collection, just 12+ CDs, but includes all of the Symphonies - this morning selected the ones below for a review and liked both Handley's & Penny's performances; the rest are all w/ Penny.  On Amazon, the Penny & Hickox (Chandos) recordings are now boxed, and I believe a number of sets w/ Arnold conducting exits; the Handley on Conifer does not seem to be in a box? 

Now, I know many have given their opinions on which sets and even which individual performances are their favorites - but any new thoughts - at the moment I'm happy w/ what I own and really do not need a duplicate set, but fickleness affects us all here -  8)  Dave

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/4123CS4PVDL.jpg)  (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/716-DnmM8vL._SL1200_.jpg)

The Handley recordings were in a box for all of 5 minutes.

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51htn27dWEL.jpg)

https://www.amazon.com/Sir-Malcolm-Arnold-Complete-Recordings/dp/B01KBHXR3S

If I only wanted one single box, I'd probably get the Naxos.  I love the Hickox recordings, but he only recorded up to No. 6 before he died.  I don't know the Gamba recordings that fill out that set.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 12, 2021, 11:36:07 AM
Quote from: SonicMan46 on August 12, 2021, 07:50:28 AM
Arnold Symphonies - which set and does one need at least two different ones?   :laugh:

In the last few days, I've been listening to my Malcolm Arnold collection, just 12+ CDs, but includes all of the Symphonies - this morning selected the ones below for a review and liked both Handley's & Penny's performances; the rest are all w/ Penny.  On Amazon, the Penny & Hickox (Chandos) recordings are now boxed, and I believe a number of sets w/ Arnold conducting exits; the Handley on Conifer does not seem to be in a box? 

Now, I know many have given their opinions on which sets and even which individual performances are their favorites - but any new thoughts - at the moment I'm happy w/ what I own and really do not need a duplicate set, but fickleness affects us all here -  8)  Dave

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/4123CS4PVDL.jpg)  (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/716-DnmM8vL._SL1200_.jpg)

For what its worth - I happen to know that Arnold used to listen to the Penny cycle most himself........
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on August 13, 2021, 06:22:25 AM
Quote from: SonicMan46 on August 12, 2021, 07:50:28 AM
Arnold Symphonies - which set and does one need at least two different ones?   :laugh:

In the last few days, I've been listening to my Malcolm Arnold collection, just 12+ CDs, but includes all of the Symphonies - this morning selected the ones below for a review and liked both Handley's & Penny's performances; the rest are all w/ Penny.  On Amazon, the Penny & Hickox (Chandos) recordings are now boxed, and I believe a number of sets w/ Arnold conducting exits; the Handley on Conifer does not seem to be in a box? 

Now, I know many have given their opinions on which sets and even which individual performances are their favorites - but any new thoughts - at the moment I'm happy w/ what I own and really do not need a duplicate set, but fickleness affects us all here -  8)  Dave

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/4123CS4PVDL.jpg)  (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/716-DnmM8vL._SL1200_.jpg)

I'd finish getting all of the Penny series on Naxos. For me, it's the best complete symphony cycle. The Hickox is good, but, of course, he passed away before he could finish it and I just don't rate Gamba too highly in the last three symphonies (even though he's generally quite good in Arnold's music --- his disc of overtures is excellent for example). I'm pretty ambivalent about the Handley cycle, although he's quite good in the concerti, but there aren't a lot of recordings of these works outside of this box.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: SonicMan46 on August 13, 2021, 07:06:12 AM
Quote from: Daverz on August 12, 2021, 11:09:05 AM
The Handley recordings were in a box for all of 5 minutes...............

If I only wanted one single box, I'd probably get the Naxos.  I love the Hickox recordings, but he only recorded up to No. 6 before he died.  I don't know the Gamba recordings that fill out that set.
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 12, 2021, 11:36:07 AM
For what its worth - I happen to know that Arnold used to listen to the Penny cycle most himself........
Quote from: Mirror Image on August 13, 2021, 06:22:25 AM
I'd finish getting all of the Penny series on Naxos. For me, it's the best complete symphony cycle. The Hickox is good, but, of course, he passed away before he could finish it and I just don't rate Gamba too highly in the last three symphonies (even though he's generally quite good in Arnold's music --- his disc of overtures is excellent for example). I'm pretty ambivalent about the Handley cycle, although he's quite good in the concerti, but there aren't a lot of recordings of these works outside of this box.

Thanks Guys for the comments above - except for Symphonies 3 & 4, I have the remainder of the works w/ Penny in separate jewel boxes (bought before the Naxos box was released) - now as for Handley doing Nos. 3 & 4 on Conifer, the reviews (attached two) are excellent w/ the Fanfare commentator giving Handley the slight edge over Penny; SO, maybe I'll just keep what I have in my collection.  Dave :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on August 13, 2021, 04:14:01 PM
Quote from: SonicMan46 on August 13, 2021, 07:06:12 AM
Thanks Guys for the comments above - except for Symphonies 3 & 4, I have the remainder of the works w/ Penny in separate jewel boxes (bought before the Naxos box was released) - now as for Handley doing Nos. 3 & 4 on Conifer, the reviews (attached two) are excellent w/ the Fanfare commentator giving Handley the slight edge over Penny; SO, maybe I'll just keep what I have in my collection.  Dave :)

My opinion is that you should prefer the conductors own interpretations first.  He was an excellent conductor.  They are significantly different than the other recordings and emphasize the gravitas and dissonance.  Not all are commercially available.  I don't know if he conducted his symphonies after No. 7 but his version of 1-7 should be preferred.  I know 1 - 5 are commercially available and 6 and 7 are on youtube.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on August 13, 2021, 04:44:09 PM
Quote from: relm1 on August 13, 2021, 04:14:01 PM
My opinion is that you should prefer the conductors own interpretations first.  He was an excellent conductor.  They are significantly different than the other recordings and emphasize the gravitas and dissonance.  Not all are commercially available.  I don't know if he conducted his symphonies after No. 7 but his version of 1-7 should be preferred.  I know 1 - 5 are commercially available and 6 and 7 are on youtube.

+1 to that.

Nos 4 (on disc), 7 (on YT) and the Overtures (on Reference) are stunningly different from all other versions. His interpretations should supplement a good cycle - that's Penny or Handley for me. I find Hickox/Gamba less interesting.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: amw on August 13, 2021, 07:15:25 PM
I should probably revisit the symphonies other than No. 7, of which the two essential recordings are the composer himself, unreleased, & Martin Yates on Dutton. I have the Handley cycle from the Decca boxes but rarely if ever listen to most of it (I guess I also listen to the Symphony for Strings with some frequency).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 13, 2021, 09:40:10 PM
Gramophone Magazine (September) has a feature on Malcolm Arnold.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Brian on August 27, 2021, 08:44:18 AM
(https://cdn.naxosmusiclibrary.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/8.553406.jpg)

It's been nearly a decade since I last attempted the Malcolm Arnold symphonies, which I gave up on at that time, thinking they were very tough to crack. Since then I've come to enjoy the guitar concerto, dances, and light music. And in October, Naxos is reissuing the Penny cycle in a slimline box with a bonus disc of all the dances. Decided to start reattempting the symphonies with 1.

No. 1 - the sound world immediately reminds me of the Walton symphonies, but there is less internal consistency and more episodic variation between moods and emotions. The result is a more chaotic, disturbing journey that, while not actually very menacing or weird or dissonant minute-by-minute, succeeds in disorienting the listener. The finale is the weirdest, a sort of very loud circusy version of the finale of Sibelius 3, since it gets taken over partway through by a very jaunty carnival theme. Unlike Sibelius' tune, this is clearly ironic or sarcastic in some fashion.

Overall, honestly, this was high-intensity listening which required a lot of close attention and tired me out. Was planning to proceed to 2 directly, but that was exhausting.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on August 27, 2021, 10:23:58 AM
Very good post, Brian !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 27, 2021, 11:57:37 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 12, 2021, 11:36:07 AM
For what its worth - I happen to know that Arnold used to listen to the Penny cycle most himself........
Interesting - I think that he may have attended the recording sessions.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 27, 2021, 11:59:09 AM
Quote from: André on August 27, 2021, 10:23:58 AM
Very good post, Brian !
+1
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on August 27, 2021, 01:20:33 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on August 27, 2021, 11:57:37 AM
Interesting - I think that he may have attended the recording sessions.

Quite sure he was present at least for the recording of the 9th. The disc features a somewhat lengthy interview between composer (who was then far past his peak of lucidity, sadly, but still intriguing to hear) and conductor.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Brian on August 27, 2021, 01:38:44 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on August 27, 2021, 11:57:37 AM
Interesting - I think that he may have attended the recording sessions.
This disc (1/2) says "in the presence of the composer" on the back cover, too.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 27, 2021, 01:49:48 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on August 27, 2021, 11:57:37 AM
Interesting - I think that he may have attended the recording sessions.

He did - but I think he was at the Hickox recordings as well......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 27, 2021, 10:40:27 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 27, 2021, 01:49:48 PM
He did - but I think he was at the Hickox recordings as well......
Yes, I was thinking that too RS and I recall a nice photo of Arnold and Hickox at a recording session. I especially like Hickox's recordings of symphonies 1 and 2 and 5 and 6.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 31, 2021, 02:32:14 AM
In case it was missed - Sakari Oramo conducted a really fine account of Symphony No.5 at the Proms a few days ago.  It can still be heard on the BBC Sounds app for the next month here;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000z1lq

Really well played - perhaps the very last 'big tune' was a bit slower than I'm used to hearing but the closing bars of the symphony - the bleak in memoriam - was very moving indeed.  A good Prom all round - just a little disappointed that John Foulds was represented by his genial but ultimately lightweight Le Cabaret Overture.  This was always meant to be an inconsequential work so I'm sorry that a rare Foulds outing at the Proms did not represent him with something of greater musical merit (fun and well-played though it was).  The Walton Viola Concerto always moves me - another well played slightly pensive performance.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 31, 2021, 03:31:18 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 31, 2021, 02:32:14 AM
In case it was missed - Sakari Oramo conducted a really fine account of Symphony No.5 at the Proms a few days ago.  It can still be heard on the BBC Sounds app for the next month here;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000z1lq

Really well played - perhaps the very last 'big tune' was a bit slower than I'm used to hearing but the closing bars of the symphony - the bleak in memoriam - was very moving indeed.  A good Prom all round - just a little disappointed that John Foulds was represented by his genial but ultimately lightweight Le Cabaret Overture.  This was always meant to be an inconsequential work so I'm sorry that a rare Foulds outing at the Proms did not represent him with something of greater musical merit (fun and well-played though it was).  The Walton Viola Concerto always moves me - another well played slightly pensive performance.
Looks like a very good concert. What was the Charlotte Bray work like? I've heard Arnold's 5th Symphony live - decades ago when I managed to get the composer to sign my programme. I much prefer Walton's Viola Concerto to the Violin Concerto.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 31, 2021, 03:59:02 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on August 31, 2021, 03:31:18 AM
Looks like a very good concert. What was the Charlotte Bray work like? I've heard Arnold's 5th Symphony live - decades ago when I managed to get the composer to sign my programme. I much prefer Walton's Viola Concerto to the Violin Concerto.

I must admit the Bray rather left me unmoved.  At only a first listen it seemed rather contemporary/generic with high-lying angular string lines not signifying a lot.  At least it was short. 

The Radio 3 presenter was very enthusiastic about the Arnold and the interval talk was detailed about the composer too.  The shock is that this was the 1st Arnold symphony at the Proms in 26 years.  I know I like Arnold a lot so I'm biased but it does seem crazy that a British composer of that significance should have his significant works so under represented at a British music festival.......  Do listen to this performance - it is very fine indeed.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 31, 2021, 04:46:22 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 31, 2021, 03:59:02 AM
I must admit the Bray rather left me unmoved.  At only a first listen it seemed rather contemporary/generic with high-lying angular string lines not signifying a lot.  At least it was short. 

The Radio 3 presenter was very enthusiastic about the Arnold and the interval talk was detailed about the composer too.  The shock is that this was the 1st Arnold symphony at the Proms in 26 years.  I know I like Arnold a lot so I'm biased but it does seem crazy that a British composer of that significance should have his significant works so under represented at a British music festival.......  Do listen to this performance - it is very fine indeed.
Will do if I can. I'm with you about Foulds by the way. Seeing 'A World Requiem' live in London (same performance as released by Chandos) was a very moving experience.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on September 02, 2021, 07:45:51 PM
Quote from: Brian on August 27, 2021, 08:44:18 AM
(https://cdn.naxosmusiclibrary.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/8.553406.jpg)

It's been nearly a decade since I last attempted the Malcolm Arnold symphonies, which I gave up on at that time, thinking they were very tough to crack. Since then I've come to enjoy the guitar concerto, dances, and light music. And in October, Naxos is reissuing the Penny cycle in a slimline box with a bonus disc of all the dances. Decided to start reattempting the symphonies with 1.

No. 1 - the sound world immediately reminds me of the Walton symphonies, but there is less internal consistency and more episodic variation between moods and emotions. The result is a more chaotic, disturbing journey that, while not actually very menacing or weird or dissonant minute-by-minute, succeeds in disorienting the listener. The finale is the weirdest, a sort of very loud circusy version of the finale of Sibelius 3, since it gets taken over partway through by a very jaunty carnival theme. Unlike Sibelius' tune, this is clearly ironic or sarcastic in some fashion.

Overall, honestly, this was high-intensity listening which required a lot of close attention and tired me out. Was planning to proceed to 2 directly, but that was exhausting.

Arnold's 1st is one of the darkest and most disturbing first symphonies written by anyone IMO, and I enjoyed reading your description of it. His most accessible symphonies are probably nos. 2, 4, and 5, though they're all great!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on September 03, 2021, 11:05:41 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 31, 2021, 02:32:14 AM
In case it was missed - Sakari Oramo conducted a really fine account of Symphony No.5 at the Proms a few days ago.  It can still be heard on the BBC Sounds app for the next month here;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000z1lq

Really well played - perhaps the very last 'big tune' was a bit slower than I'm used to hearing but the closing bars of the symphony - the bleak in memoriam - was very moving indeed.  A good Prom all round - just a little disappointed that John Foulds was represented by his genial but ultimately lightweight Le Cabaret Overture.  This was always meant to be an inconsequential work so I'm sorry that a rare Foulds outing at the Proms did not represent him with something of greater musical merit (fun and well-played though it was).  The Walton Viola Concerto always moves me - another well played slightly pensive performance.

I enjoyed all the performances. The talk between the host and guest was interesting, too. I didn't know Arnold's 5th contained a tone row !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on September 03, 2021, 04:27:06 PM
Quote from: kyjo on September 02, 2021, 07:45:51 PM
Arnold's 1st is one of the darkest and most disturbing first symphonies written by anyone IMO, and I enjoyed reading your description of it. His most accessible symphonies are probably nos. 2, 4, and 5, though they're all great!

What are other examples of "darkest and most disturbing first symphonies" since this is just one of those?  Actually, this might be worth a thread of its own...top five darkest first symphonies.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: amw on September 03, 2021, 05:37:24 PM
Technically Arnold's first symphony is the Symphony for Strings op. 13, which I actually prefer to most of the numbered symphonies, but that's a side issue. (The only numbered Arnold symphony I rate is 7. I will someday revisit all of them to be sure about that, I guess.)

(Darkest first symphonies: KA Hartmann, 'Attempt at a Requiem'? But also not technically his first symphony.)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on September 06, 2021, 04:28:35 PM
Quote from: amw on September 03, 2021, 05:37:24 PM
(Darkest first symphonies: KA Hartmann, 'Attempt at a Requiem'? But also not technically his first symphony.)

Listening now...I'm LOVING KA Hartmann,'s No. 1, so thanks for suggesting!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on September 07, 2021, 07:25:14 AM
Quote from: relm1 on September 06, 2021, 04:28:35 PM
Listening now...I'm LOVING KA Hartmann,'s No. 1, so thanks for suggesting!

Is this your first exposure to Hartmann's music?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on September 08, 2021, 04:21:02 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on September 07, 2021, 07:25:14 AM
Is this your first exposure to Hartmann's music?

Yes.  I realize this is the Malcolm Arnold thread so how did we get here?  Regarding Hartmann, it is so clear how Germanic music evolved from Mahler -> Schoenberg -> Berg/Webern -> Hartmann -> Henze.  To me, I har Hartmann and Henze as counterparts.  I'll confess being new to Hartmann but what i heard felt transitional.  You can hear the Berg and Henze in him. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on September 08, 2021, 05:34:53 PM
Quote from: relm1 on September 08, 2021, 04:21:02 PM
Yes.  I realize this is the Malcolm Arnold thread so how did we get here?  Regarding Hartmann, it is so clear how Germanic music evolved from Mahler -> Schoenberg -> Berg/Webern -> Hartmann -> Henze.  To me, I har Hartmann and Henze as counterparts.  I'll confess being new to Hartmann but what i heard felt transitional.  You can hear the Berg and Henze in him.

Transitional or not. I love Hartmann.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on October 02, 2021, 07:43:03 AM
Arnold: Dances [Penny]


(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xbcAAOSwXi9b0vhp/s-l1600.jpg)


English Dances Opp. 27 & 33
Four Scottish Dances Op. 59
Four Cornish Dances Op. 91



These Dances are very nearly my introduction to the music of Malcolm Arnold. I do have his Guitar Concerto played by Julian Bream on LP.

These are highly stylised interpretations and not at all what I was expecting, for some reason, and I am far from being disappointed with the result. The orchestration is wonderfully fulsome and expansive and the tempi are mixed, ranging from the slow and engaging to the wonderfully exciting and boisterous. The quicker tempi are really very well driven. The presentations are all very entertaining and engaging.
I cannot comment on the ethnology of the dances other than the Irish ones and, to some extent, the Scottish dances [Celtic cousins]. The Scottish dances do resonate with this Irishman so that cannot be bad! The opening and concluding dances, in particular, have that essential Scottish flavour.
I absolutely love that Arnold presented four independent Cornish dances; a separate culture and nation within the UK. It is also pertinent that this music is edgy and somewhat disconcerting and triumphal.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on October 02, 2021, 08:40:18 AM
Quote from: aligreto on October 02, 2021, 07:43:03 AM
Arnold: Dances [Penny]


(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xbcAAOSwXi9b0vhp/s-l1600.jpg)


English Dances Opp. 27 & 33
Four Scottish Dances Op. 59
Four Cornish Dances Op. 91



These Dances are very nearly my introduction to the music of Malcolm Arnold. I do have his Guitar Concerto played by Julian Bream on LP.

These are highly stylised interpretations and not at all what I was expecting, for some reason, and I am far from being disappointed with the result. The orchestration is wonderfully fulsome and expansive and the tempi are mixed, ranging from the slow and engaging to the wonderfully exciting and boisterous. The quicker tempi are really very well driven. The presentations are all very entertaining and engaging.
I cannot comment on the ethnology of the dances other than the Irish ones and, to some extent, the Scottish dances [Celtic cousins]. The Scottish dances do resonate with this Irishman so that cannot be bad! The opening and concluding dances, in particular, have that essential Scottish flavour.
I absolutely love that Arnold presented four independent Cornish dances; a separate culture and nation within the UK. It is also pertinent that this music is edgy and somewhat disconcerting and triumphal.

Really? Then you'll be in for a treat. Arnold is my second favorite English composer. Almost all what I've heard by him has left me with a good ear taste, whether the music is optimistic or troubled. A fascinating composer overall.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on October 02, 2021, 08:53:16 AM
Quote from: Symphonic Addict on October 02, 2021, 08:40:18 AM
Really? Then you'll be in for a treat. Arnold is my second favorite English composer. Almost all what I've heard by him has left me with a good ear taste, whether the music is optimistic or troubled. A fascinating composer overall.

I will finish the Dances CD tomorrow and then I look forward to continuing the journey.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on October 03, 2021, 02:56:06 AM
Arnold: Dances [Penny]


(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xbcAAOSwXi9b0vhp/s-l1600.jpg)


Four Irish Dances Op. 126
Four Welsh Dances Op. 138



Although again stylised, I do readily recognise the essential musical language in the Irish dances and slow airs. The choice of individual scoring is appropriate and somewhat representative of type here.
I like the Welsh dances. They are filled with passion, atmosphere, emotion, agitation and turbulence. The scoring is also very fine and varied and is engrossing.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on October 03, 2021, 05:16:04 AM
Really digging the Film Music Vol 2 disc on Chandos. What a composer.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on October 04, 2021, 06:02:04 AM
Quote from: aligreto on October 03, 2021, 02:56:06 AM
Arnold: Dances [Penny]


(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xbcAAOSwXi9b0vhp/s-l1600.jpg)


Four Irish Dances Op. 126
Four Welsh Dances Op. 138


Although again stylised, I do readily recognise the essential musical language in the Irish dances and slow airs. The choice of individual scoring is appropriate and somewhat representative of type here.
I like the Welsh dances. They are filled with passion, atmosphere, emotion, agitation and turbulence. The scoring is also very fine and varied and is engrossing.

As far as I'm aware still the only recording of the Welsh Dances.  As ever with Arnold - if you can check out Arnold conducting Arnold, his Lyrita dsics of the Dances (except Welsh) is really fine......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on October 09, 2021, 02:36:56 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on October 04, 2021, 06:02:04 AM
As far as I'm aware still the only recording of the Welsh Dances.  As ever with Arnold - if you can check out Arnold conducting Arnold, his Lyrita dsics of the Dances (except Welsh) is really fine......

Thank you for the recommendation.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on October 09, 2021, 05:29:17 AM
We're approaching the centenary of Arnold's birth, on October 21st, 12 days away as I write, if people want to make listening plans.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on October 09, 2021, 12:08:22 PM
Quote from: Maestro267 on October 09, 2021, 05:29:17 AM
We're approaching the centenary of Arnold's birth, on October 21st, 12 days away as I write, if people want to make listening plans.
My father would have been 100 on 20th October.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on October 09, 2021, 07:31:54 PM
Quote from: Maestro267 on October 09, 2021, 05:29:17 AM
We're approaching the centenary of Arnold's birth, on October 21st, 12 days away as I write, if people want to make listening plans.

Sure. I'll do an Arnold-a-thon on the 21st. 8)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on October 20, 2021, 11:34:57 PM
Alas, today is the big day! Happy 100th, Sir Malcolm!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on October 23, 2021, 10:02:21 AM
Sir Malcolm's centenary is celebrated by Naxos! Does anyone know if this is a re-boxed re-issue or anything different (re-mastered?) to that originally issued?

https://naxosdirect.co.uk/items/malcolm-arnold-complete-symphonies-and-dances-centenary-edition-567063?utm_source=Naxos_News&utm_medium=ecard&utm_content=Arnold-Complete-Symphonies-Dances_cd&utm_campaign=NaxosUK-NDUK-Ecard102021
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on October 23, 2021, 11:08:14 AM
Same performances, probably not remastered, because 1) they're recent recordings (1995-2000) and 2) the box would loudly proclaim it otherwise  :D. This is the second time the symphonies are repackaged by Naxos in a slimline box. This time around they added the Dances, a swell idea: great stuff, in superb performances and sound. If you don't already have the individual issues, go for it. If you do, go for it all the same and save space on your shelves - I did that when the  'white box' came out: sold the individual discs and replaced them with this:

(https://img.discogs.com/6__9zlrLQGpD2xcf0VvIvhWlszA=/fit-in/422x421/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-3628687-1394479995-7718.png.jpg)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on October 27, 2021, 09:08:39 AM
I listened to the BBC Radio 4 programme about Arnold. It was ok but nothing special and didn't tell me anything new. I didn't see the point of interviewing a psychiatrist who had never met Arnold. I thought that, by far, the most interesting interviewee was Arnold's daughter Catherine. Notwithstanding his mental illness Arnold was obviously, at times, a deeply unpleasant person. I'm only grateful that when I asked him for his autograph I wasn't subjected to a mouthful of vitriolic abuse (he kindly signed for me without comment). I found the presenter of the programme, Simon Heffer, to be rather too smug and self-satisfied for my liking.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on October 27, 2021, 10:48:54 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on October 27, 2021, 09:08:39 AM
I listened to the BBC Radio 4 programme about Arnold. It was ok but nothing special and didn't tell me anything new. I didn't see the point of interviewing a psychiatrist who had never met Arnold. I thought that, by far, the most interesting interviewee was Arnold's daughter Catherine. Notwithstanding his mental illness Arnold was obviously, at times, a deeply unpleasant person. I'm only grateful that when I asked him for his autograph I wasn't subjected to a mouthful of vitriolic abuse (he kindly signed for me without comment). I found the presenter of the programme, Simon Heffer, to be rather too smug and self-satisfied for my liking.

I met Katherine (with a K) Arnold several times as well as meeting his carer Anthony Day.  The sad truth is that both of them seemed to care passionately about the man and his music.  I have no knowledge of who was/is "right" in the dispute over Arnold's will and estate but its so sad that such a genius legacy is in some way tainted by his behaviour when he was alive and/or the contested estate after he died........
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on October 27, 2021, 10:56:33 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on October 27, 2021, 10:48:54 AM
I met Katherine (with a K) Arnold several times as well as meeting his carer Anthony Day.  The sad truth is that both of them seemed to care passionately about the man and his music.  I have no knowledge of who was/is "right" in the dispute over Arnold's will and estate but its so sad that such a genius legacy is in some way tainted by his behaviour when he was alive and/or the contested estate after he died........
Totally agree and thanks for spelling correction. My wife is Catherine (with a C) but known as Katy - all v confusing!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on October 31, 2021, 09:50:24 AM
Just been listening to this new release;

(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiOTI0NzI0NC4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6MzAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE2MzA2NzgwNzN9)

A curious coupling in that it combines Arnold at his most light-hearted with his ultimate bleak austere symphony (a masterpiece for me).  Gibbons is a tad controversial in the Symphony's finale in that he is 7 minutes(!) quicker than any of the other 3 recordings - 17 mins as opposed to 23/24.  Its certainly different, but too soon to feel if different good or different bad....!

But a couple of thoughts - the first new recording of this work in 20 years and (as far as I can tell) the first disc issued of a major Arnold orchestral work in his centenary year.  Rather a sad observation from where I sit.......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on October 31, 2021, 11:13:01 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on October 31, 2021, 09:50:24 AM
Just been listening to this new release;

(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiOTI0NzI0NC4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6MzAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE2MzA2NzgwNzN9)

A curious coupling in that it combines Arnold at his most light-hearted with his ultimate bleak austere symphony (a masterpiece for me).  Gibbons is a tad controversial in the Symphony's finale in that he is 7 minutes(!) quicker than any of the other 3 recordings - 17 mins as opposed to 23/24.  Its certainly different, but too soon to feel if different good or different bad....!

But a couple of thoughts - the first new recording of this work in 20 years and (as far as I can tell) the first disc issued of a major Arnold orchestral work in his centenary year.  Rather a sad observation from where I sit.......
What an interesting release - and you make a very good point. I must listen to No.9 again.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on October 31, 2021, 12:55:41 PM
I wasn't aware of this release either  :o. Just downloaded it from Spotify.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on October 31, 2021, 04:11:57 PM
Seriously he was a freakingly brilliant and quirky composer. Just revisited his A Grand, Grand Festival Overture, Op. 57 from the Chandos CD. Gosh, this is the epitome of hilarity!!! Since it includes bells and organ, you can imagine how epic it is! And how he parodies Beethoven is nothing short of genius. What a hell of a work!!! That ending is an eargasm.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on October 31, 2021, 05:26:36 PM
Quote from: Symphonic Addict on October 31, 2021, 04:11:57 PM
Seriously he was a freakingly brilliant and quirky composer. Just revisited his A Grand, Grand Festival Overture, Op. 57 from the Chandos CD. Gosh, this is the epitome of hilarity!!! Since it includes bells and organ, you can imagine how epic it is! And how he parodies Beethoven is nothing short of genius. What a hell of a work!!! That ending is an eargasm.

Totally agree!  I was already a big fan but when I heard this work, I just loved him twice as much!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on October 31, 2021, 05:57:52 PM
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?)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on October 31, 2021, 07:58:50 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on October 31, 2021, 09:50:24 AM
Just been listening to this new release;

(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiOTI0NzI0NC4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6MzAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE2MzA2NzgwNzN9)

A curious coupling in that it combines Arnold at his most light-hearted with his ultimate bleak austere symphony (a masterpiece for me).  Gibbons is a tad controversial in the Symphony's finale in that he is 7 minutes(!) quicker than any of the other 3 recordings - 17 mins as opposed to 23/24.  Its certainly different, but too soon to feel if different good or different bad....!

But a couple of thoughts - the first new recording of this work in 20 years and (as far as I can tell) the first disc issued of a major Arnold orchestral work in his centenary year.  Rather a sad observation from where I sit.......

I consider Arnold's 9th to be an absolute masterpiece. The last movement is devastating. In a way, it's kind of like the Lento found in what would be Schnittke's last symphony, the 8th. I never considered Schnittke's final symphony to be the 9th as the composer was in frail health when he wrote it and when the work premiered he asked for the work to be withdrawn to never be played again. Anyway, I should revisit this Arnold symphony and really his music in general. He's one of my favorite British composers.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on November 01, 2021, 01:03:41 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on October 31, 2021, 07:58:50 PM
I consider Arnold's 9th to be an absolute masterpiece. The last movement is devastating. In a way, it's kind of like the Lento found in what would be Schnittke's last symphony, the 8th. I never considered Schnittke's final symphony to be the 9th as the composer was in frail health when he wrote it and when the work premiered he asked for the work to be withdrawn to never be played again. Anyway, I should revisit this Arnold symphony and really his music in general. He's one of my favorite British composers.

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......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on November 01, 2021, 05:57:42 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on November 01, 2021, 01:03:41 AM
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......

That's an interesting take.  I'd also say based on Arnold's temperament, he was not optimistic but very dark and the slower performance helps imbue the work with a greater sense of hopelessness and pessimism.  The D major at the end is very timid, not optimism but almost resignation.   Slightly off topic, but did anyone here see the Martin Scorsese movie, "Silence"?  It is a very long but expertly gripping story with fabulous acting and an incredibly moving story.  The final shot in the film has the same attitude to me as Arnold's 9th final D major moments. 


Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on November 01, 2021, 06:47:17 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on November 01, 2021, 01:03:41 AM
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.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on November 01, 2021, 07:23:09 AM
Quote from: vers la flamme on October 31, 2021, 05:57:52 PM
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;

(https://img.discogs.com/KwKshL4f3mnIBm5Og0sgn3mjnBc=/fit-in/600x596/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-3628583-1494510410-8058.jpeg.jpg)

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......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on November 01, 2021, 01:26:22 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on November 01, 2021, 07:23:09 AM
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;

(https://img.discogs.com/KwKshL4f3mnIBm5Og0sgn3mjnBc=/fit-in/600x596/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-3628583-1494510410-8058.jpeg.jpg)

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.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 01, 2021, 02:10:50 PM
Quote from: vers la flamme on November 01, 2021, 01:26:22 PM
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):

(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Daverz on November 01, 2021, 03:32:31 PM
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."

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81uXZWUOCOL._SX522_.jpg)

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on November 02, 2021, 12:00:22 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 01, 2021, 03:32:31 PM
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".
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: amw on November 02, 2021, 05:51:45 AM
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.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on November 02, 2021, 06:33:00 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 01, 2021, 03:32:31 PM
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."

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81uXZWUOCOL._SX522_.jpg)

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.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on November 02, 2021, 07:01:58 AM
Quote from: amw on November 02, 2021, 05:51:45 AM
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!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on November 02, 2021, 09:37:29 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 01, 2021, 03:32:31 PM
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."

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81uXZWUOCOL._SX522_.jpg)

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.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 02, 2021, 11:10:44 PM
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.
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on November 08, 2021, 10:01:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on November 08, 2021, 10:45:20 PM
Quote from: J.Z. Herrenberg on November 08, 2021, 10:01:40 PM
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!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on November 08, 2021, 11:09:32 PM
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."
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 11, 2021, 12:02:56 AM
Informative review of new 9th Symphony recording:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2021/Nov/Arnold-sym9-TOCC0613.htm
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on November 11, 2021, 07:28:13 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 11, 2021, 12:02:56 AM
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 !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 13, 2021, 11:30:46 PM
Quote from: André on November 11, 2021, 07:28:13 AM
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/
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on November 14, 2021, 06:23:44 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 13, 2021, 11:30:46 PM
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
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on November 14, 2021, 10:36:06 AM
Quote from: relm1 on November 14, 2021, 06:23:44 AM
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....
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on November 14, 2021, 05:20:19 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on November 14, 2021, 10:36:06 AM
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. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on November 14, 2021, 11:11:02 PM
Quote from: relm1 on November 14, 2021, 05:20:19 PM
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.
Interesting point. Prokofiev's 7th Symphony (which I think highly of) is sometimes regarded in this way as well.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on November 15, 2021, 06:11:39 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 14, 2021, 11:11:02 PM
Interesting point. Prokofiev's 7th Symphony (which I think highly of) is sometimes regarded in this way as well.

Yes, definitely a good example.  Any composer who pushes their creative boundary will be perplexing when that cycle comes to an end because each work has a sort of "different approach".  I love Arnold's symphonies and find them all quite individual.  Just imagine if he had died at No. 7, which is probably his darkest, couldn't the same claim apply that he was in a declining mental place and lost his spirited youthfulness in that work.  The accusation is sort of challenge proof because any good composer develops themselves over time.  If they aren't, then they are repeating themself which is worse...that's as if they have nothing more to say but keep saying it.  Maybe that reviewer was up against a deadline and just had to run with their initial impressions.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on January 17, 2022, 12:52:55 PM
I have a very limited exposure to Malcolm Arnold's music. I plan to listen to more of it in 2022. I have already started with this CD [Arnold Overtures] conducted by the composer himself:


(https://img.discogs.com/vnGo6nuCcRm-YOqlvvpaeOOOWZ4=/fit-in/500x500/filters:strip_icc():format(webp):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-11249243-1512723393-5035.jpeg.jpg)


Sussex Overture: This is lively, upbeat and tuneful music that is well presented here. The music is well orchestrated with much orchestral colour on show. Arnold was making sure that his music was being portrayed to best advantage here. It is well played and recorded and he was in total control. Good for him.

Beckus The Dandipratt: I like the overall tone, atmosphere and musical language of this work. On the surface there is a quirky air of levity about it but its foundation is based on a slightly disconcerting and menacing tone.

The Smoke: This is another interesting and engaging Arnold work with regard to musical language, overall dynamics and the sense of atmosphere in the music. This is a very fine musical composition.

The Fair Field: This is definitely atmospheric and evocative music which will hopefully evoke good memories in some listeners' consciousness. It is a fine piece of writing and, once again, is well scored.

Commonwealth Christmas Overture: This work opens in quite a festive mood [including the relevant bells] which is, to be honest, quite twee but the music soon develops into something more meaningful. It is an interesting work, up to a point; at some points it is celebratory and at others it is quite contemplative [not that the two need be mutually exclusive] and one could look at it globally as a sort of a variation on an annual theme. The scoring in the central section certainly raised one of my eyebrows. As I progressed through the work my ultimate conclusion was that it was banal, urbane and unexciting overall.

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 17, 2022, 11:59:45 PM
Quote from: aligreto on January 17, 2022, 12:52:55 PM
I have a very limited exposure to Malcolm Arnold's music. I plan to listen to more of it in 2022. I have already started with this CD [Arnold Overtures] conducted by the composer himself:


(https://img.discogs.com/vnGo6nuCcRm-YOqlvvpaeOOOWZ4=/fit-in/500x500/filters:strip_icc():format(webp):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-11249243-1512723393-5035.jpeg.jpg)


Sussex Overture: This is lively, upbeat and tuneful music that is well presented here. The music is well orchestrated with much orchestral colour on show. Arnold was making sure that his music was being portrayed to best advantage here. It is well played and recorded and he was in total control. Good for him.

Beckus The Dandipratt: I like the overall tone, atmosphere and musical language of this work. On the surface there is a quirky air of levity about it but its foundation is based on a slightly disconcerting and menacing tone.

The Smoke: This is another interesting and engaging Arnold work with regard to musical language, overall dynamics and the sense of atmosphere in the music. This is a very fine musical composition.

The Fair Field: This is definitely atmospheric and evocative music which will hopefully evoke good memories in some listeners' consciousness. It is a fine piece of writing and, once again, is well scored.

Commonwealth Christmas Overture: This work opens in quite a festive mood [including the relevant bells] which is, to be honest, quite twee but the music soon develops into something more meaningful. It is an interesting work, up to a point; at some points it is celebratory and at others it is quite contemplative [not that the two need be mutually exclusive] and one could look at it globally as a sort of a variation on an annual theme. The scoring in the central section certainly raised one of my eyebrows. As I progressed through the work my ultimate conclusion was that it was banal, urbane and unexciting overall.
Interesting review - thanks Fergus.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on January 19, 2022, 02:00:53 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 17, 2022, 11:59:45 PM
Interesting review - thanks Fergus.

Cheers Jeffrey. I am looking forward to further exploration.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on January 19, 2022, 08:35:09 AM
Just curious - what does everyone consider to be the greatest recording of the masterful 5th Symphony? So far I've only heard Hickox/LSO on Chandos and been satisfied with it, but I'd like to hear other recordings as well.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on January 19, 2022, 12:01:50 PM
Quote from: kyjo on January 19, 2022, 08:35:09 AM
Just curious - what does everyone consider to be the greatest recording of the masterful 5th Symphony? So far I've only heard Hickox/LSO on Chandos and been satisfied with it, but I'd like to hear other recordings as well.

Penny/Ireland on Naxos is a good one.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on January 19, 2022, 01:57:50 PM
Quote from: vers la flamme on January 19, 2022, 12:01:50 PM
Penny/Ireland on Naxos is a good one.


Arnold's own interpretation on Lyrita is excellent, too.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 19, 2022, 10:46:41 PM
Quote from: J.Z. Herrenberg on January 19, 2022, 01:57:50 PM

Arnold's own interpretation on Lyrita is excellent, too.

Arnold's own recording was on EMI/Warner - he did No.4 on Lyrita.  The No.5 on EMI was my introduction to the work and so I'm not the most objective "witness" here but that performance remains my favourite

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/KuYAAOSwgEJfqzTK/s-l400.jpg)

I remember buying this LP so clearly with a Christmas gift voucher!  Of course in the UK the logo was Nipper not Angel......  Peterloo Overture and the 4 Cornish Dances were equally played to oblivion.  Still my go-to No.5 performance.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on January 19, 2022, 11:03:45 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on January 19, 2022, 10:46:41 PM
Arnold's own recording was on EMI/Warner - he did No.4 on Lyrita.  The No.5 on EMI was my introduction to the work and so I'm not the most objective "witness" here but that performance remains my favourite

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/KuYAAOSwgEJfqzTK/s-l400.jpg)

I remember buying this LP so clearly with a Christmas gift voucher!  Of course in the UK the logo was Nipper not Angel......  Peterloo Overture and the 4 Cornish Dances were equally played to oblivion.  Still my go-to No.5 performance.


Thanks for the correction! By the way, No. 4 on Lyrita is also terrific... !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on January 20, 2022, 02:54:22 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on January 19, 2022, 10:46:41 PM
Arnold's own recording was on EMI/Warner - he did No.4 on Lyrita.  The No.5 on EMI was my introduction to the work and so I'm not the most objective "witness" here but that performance remains my favourite

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/KuYAAOSwgEJfqzTK/s-l400.jpg)

I remember buying this LP so clearly with a Christmas gift voucher!  Of course in the UK the logo was Nipper not Angel......  Peterloo Overture and the 4 Cornish Dances were equally played to oblivion.  Still my go-to No.5 performance.

Did this ever make it to CD?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: springrite on January 20, 2022, 04:45:58 AM
It took me a couple of decades, but I have finally fallen in love with the Arnold 9th. It moves right into the second spot just behind the 6th, and I wouldn't be surprised if it overtakes it soon.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: springrite on January 20, 2022, 04:48:03 AM
...but my most-listened-to Arnold work over the past two months has been The Return of Odysseus!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 20, 2022, 08:09:57 AM
Quote from: vers la flamme on January 20, 2022, 02:54:22 AM
Did this ever make it to CD?

Yes absolutely here;

(https://img.discogs.com/kMX_uCxAwHtrQKmfFw24Fyn5LII=/fit-in/600x591/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-14544442-1576749952-1093.jpeg.jpg)

with the Cornish Dances here;

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/519TSTBX61L._AC_.jpg)

The Groves/Bournemouth SO Symphony No.2 on the first disc is very good as well - Groves was a great believer in and promoter of Arnold - he premiered the 2nd Symphony I seem to remember...?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on January 20, 2022, 08:14:14 AM
Quote from: springrite on January 20, 2022, 04:48:03 AM
...but my most-listened-to Arnold work over the past two months has been The Return of Odysseus!

Really? That's probably one of my least favorite works I've heard by Arnold! :laugh: Glad to hear you've fallen in love with Arnold's 9th, though. While I wouldn't rank it overall as highly as the 5th or 7th symphonies, it's an important, unique, and deeply-felt work.

P.S. Thanks to those who replied to my query regarding recordings of the 5th. I'll compare some of them and report back when I get a chance! I've noticed there's also some non-commercial performances available on YT.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: springrite on January 20, 2022, 08:58:01 AM
Quote from: kyjo on January 20, 2022, 08:14:14 AM
Really? That's probably one of my least favorite works I've heard by Arnold! :laugh: Glad to hear you've fallen in love with Arnold's 9th, though. While I wouldn't rank it overall as highly as the 5th or 7th symphonies, it's an important, unique, and deeply-felt work.

P.S. Thanks to those who replied to my query regarding recordings of the 5th. I'll compare some of them and report back when I get a chance! I've noticed there's also some non-commercial performances available on YT.
I taught The Odyssey for a couple of years. Maybe that has something to do with it...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 20, 2022, 11:36:30 AM
I like Arnold's own (EMI) recording of the 5th Symphony although the sound suddenly cuts back in the catchy third movement, which always distracts me. These are both good:
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on January 21, 2022, 04:34:51 AM
I have just completed listening to another set of Arnold Overtures, this time under the baton of Gamba:


(https://www.chandos.net/artwork/CH10293.jpg)


A Grand Festival Overture: This music is suitably celebratory and jocose and high spirited. It is well driven. I was very pleased with the fate of the mechanical wind instruments!

Peterloo: The whole scene is very well conceived and executed, particularly the military aspect of it. There is a great sense of drama, tension and of affray. The Lament section is a particularly fine piece of writing. The Finale section is a wonderful tribute to the dead and injured.

The Smoke: I like this short work. It is dynamic, exciting, atmospheric and very interestingly scored.

Tam O' Shanter: This is a wonderfully dramatic and exciting work. The orchestration is wonderfully adventurous and broad in scope. It is very well driven here. It could easily be described as a riotous cacophony but that would be unfair as it is electrifying in places and Gamba does a great job in portraying this atmosphere.

A Flourish For Orchestra: This is a short but wonderfully expressive assertively performed work.

The Fair Field: This is a wonderfully atmospheric and evocative work. It is well scored and it is well delivered here with both drama and excitement by Gamba.

A Sussex Overture: This is exciting and colourful music that is also filled with both atmosphere and drama. Gamba delivers a very fine, colourful and well driven account of this flurry of a work. 

Anniversary Overture: Short but not very engaging for me. There is plenty of orchestration but not very much interesting musical content here.

Robert Kett: This work apparently refers to an historical figure involved in a siege. Keeping in tone with the theme there are plenty of military overtones. The work is also filled with drama, tension and atmosphere.

Beckus The Dandipratt: This version has quite the swagger to it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 27, 2022, 02:37:08 AM
Just a little back up this thread I was extolling the virtues of this LP;

(https://www.picclickimg.com/d/l400/pict/154763244298_/EMI-LP-ASD-2878-TAS-LIST-Arnold-Symphony.jpg)

which made me realise that I'd never acquired the version of the 4 Cornish Dances on that LP in CD format (The Arnold conducts the LPO version on Lyrita had supplanted it).  So I managed to pick up this CD which appears to be the only CD version of this performance (which is every bit as good as I remember...)

(https://img.discogs.com/nHR4F0HHMyATKKri-YLgEGQZc4g=/fit-in/600x604/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-15927701-1600790036-5161.jpeg.jpg)

But what struck me was just how fine the 3 Sinfoniettas on this disc are.  Discussions of Arnold usually fall into 2 categories;  the "light" Dances/Overtures/Film Scores and the "serious" Symphonies.  As their title belies these Sinfoniettas fall between those 2 (simplistic) categories and I suspect get rather overlooked - not least by me.  But they contain so much vintage Arnold!  All are scored for small/classical-style orchestras. The first two are in 3 fast-slow-fast movements with much enjoyable material but its No.3 in 4 movements that is the stand-out piece.  A genuine mini symphony with a brooding slow movement and a riotous finale.  I have other versions but this performance from Ronald Thomas and the late-lamented Bournemouth Sinfonietta is a cracker.  The disc as a whole is very good although Groves' "English Dances" is the least impressive thing here - such wonderful pieces but lacking the last bit of brio and swagger and orchestral virtuosity here (back to Arnold and the LPO for these....)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on January 27, 2022, 04:08:13 AM
You have whetted my appetite! As a fledgling Arnoldian there is still a lot for me to discover!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 27, 2022, 04:28:45 AM
Quote from: J.Z. Herrenberg on January 27, 2022, 04:08:13 AM
You have whetted my appetite! As a fledgling Arnoldian there is still a lot for me to discover!

They are quite different - absolute music (albeit with clearly defined "moods") but without the extra emotional weight that Arnold imbued his symphonies which I hear as more explicitly personal statements....
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on February 16, 2022, 06:36:50 AM
After the extremely positive experience of hearing Vernon Handley's recordings of the Robert Simpson symphonies, I've been listening today to his recordings of Malcolm Arnold in the Conifer box set. So far, I have heard symphonies 1 through 3, and am really impressed.

I sometimes forget just how very enjoyable Arnold's symphonies are.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on February 16, 2022, 02:21:18 PM
Quote from: foxandpeng on February 16, 2022, 06:36:50 AM
After the extremely positive experience of hearing Vernon Handley's recordings of the Robert Simpson symphonies, I've been listening today to his recordings of Malcolm Arnold in the Conifer box set. So far, I have heard symphonies 1 through 3, and am really impressed.

I sometimes forget just how very enjoyable Arnold's symphonies are.

His symphonies are consistently engaging with lots of striking ideas. Yesterday when I was listening to his 5th on the Chandos disc, once again I realized how brilliant and even profound at times he could be.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mapman on May 01, 2022, 08:35:45 AM
I listened again to the first movement of his 3rd last night. I really like his melodies. Unfortunately, I'm still unconvinced by the movement as a whole.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on May 01, 2022, 09:42:15 AM
Quote from: Mapman on May 01, 2022, 08:35:45 AM
I listened again to the first movement of his 3rd last night. I really like his melodies. Unfortunately, I'm still unconvinced by the movement as a whole.

I am a big fan of Arnold in general and his symphonies in particular.  But in fact No.3 is one of the one's I respond to least.  Not helped by the very "obvious" ending.  Also, whenever I hear it there is a passage which reminds me of a particularly bad British Game Show theme from the 1970's called "Sale of the Century".  The association is tenuous but it puts me off the symphony!!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: steve ridgway on May 01, 2022, 09:45:57 AM
I remember "Sale of the Century" - you could win stuff like Hoover vacuum cleaners. ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: DavidUK on May 01, 2022, 11:49:07 AM
1st, 7th, and 9th symphonies are the ones I am currently enjoying the most. Pretty good stuff.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on May 01, 2022, 12:44:40 PM
Quote from: DavidUK on May 01, 2022, 11:49:07 AM
1st, 7th, and 9th symphonies are the ones I am currently enjoying the most. Pretty good stuff.
I think that the odd numbered ones are best although I also think highly of No.6.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on May 12, 2022, 04:25:10 PM
Reposting comments I made in the WAYL2 thread:

Quote
Quote from: André on May 10, 2022, 05:30:27 PM
Malcolm Arnold, symphony no 7. BBC SO conducted by the composer.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TaAOT0RMmU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TaAOT0RMmU)

Arnold has conducted most of his symphonies on disc or in concert (1-7 AFAIK). This performance is the broadcast premiere of the work from a 1977 concert. It is the only time where I find that Arnold's unusually slow approach does not really work. His performances of the others are wonderful, the best of the competition IMO  for nos 3 and 4.

In the 7th his way with the work is very measured, crushing but highly charged. Ultimately the music founders under its own weight. Timings tell the story: Yates and Gamba take around 32 minutes, Penney and Handley 38 and Arnold a whopping 51 minutes. I haven't heard Groves and Downes yet (2 more YT videos), but both seem to clock in at 39 minutes.

The first movement alone takes 23 minutes against 12-13 for Y an G and 16 for P and H. Granted, it's a highly personal statement, but high drama is turned into unrelieved gloomy tragedy. My favourite version is Penney, with Handley running him close. I have a feeling Groves and Downes will be interesting to hear.

Quote
Quote from: André on May 12, 2022, 07:21:56 AM

Malcolm Arnold: symphony no 7.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXiyIIa3KHw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXiyIIa3KHw) Downes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrdtAGKGFTw  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrdtAGKGFTw) Groves

Arnold's most troubled, puzzling symphony. Each movement being a portrait of one of his children, it is understandable that the work does not seem structured conventionally. Also, in this instance Arnold seems to have laid bare some very personal, even raw sentiments. A troubling work, and possibly the composer's most intimate one. I think it has parallels with Mahler 7 and Vaughan Williams 6 in its refusal to have anything 'pleasoing' to share with the listeners.

Two youtube links, with Charles Groves and the BBC Symphony, then Edward Downes and the BBC Philharmonic. Concerts honouring the composer's 65th birthday (1986, Downes) and 70th birthday (1991, Groves). Both clock in around the same time (39 minutes) but there are big differences in conception. I came down in favour of Downes' urgent, incisive treatment vs Groves' moodier, slacker approach. Downes wins my vote and I think it's a top recommendation anlong with the recorded accounts of Penney and Handley.

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on June 06, 2022, 10:00:52 AM
Just ordered a copy of the new biography of Sir Malcom;

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41-UnftovPL._SX383_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

I suspect this will be an uneasy read.....  Apparently this focuses on Arnold's latter years when he relied on the care of others.  Clearly I am in no position to judge but there are two polar opposite views; that of Katherine Arnold - his daughter, and that of Anthony Day his long-time carer between whom there was literally no love lost.  This book seems to have been written from Katherine's standpoint.  As ever, I doubt things are quite as black and white as presented here so perhaps a more assiduous biographer would have taken a more objective stance.  One incontrovertible fact - Arnold wrote and dedicated his 9th Symphony - which I consider a masterpiece - to Anthony Day.  The 7th Symphony which is also a genuinely remarkable if bleak work is allegedly portraits of his children......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on June 06, 2022, 11:40:51 PM
The 7th is definitely the most defiantly grim and unrelentingly intense work in his oeuvre. The 9th is intense as well but in a different way.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on June 06, 2022, 11:44:57 PM
My favourites so far are the 4th and 5th, after listening to six of them lots of times. The final three are still ahead of me...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: André on June 07, 2022, 04:09:10 AM
Quote from: Maestro267 on June 06, 2022, 11:40:51 PM
The 7th is definitely the most defiantly grim and unrelentingly intense work in his oeuvre. The 9th is intense as well but in a different way.

Yes.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Mirror Image on June 07, 2022, 11:20:01 AM
Quote from: Maestro267 on June 06, 2022, 11:40:51 PM
The 7th is definitely the most defiantly grim and unrelentingly intense work in his oeuvre. The 9th is intense as well but in a different way.

Oh yes and I love both of these symphonies immensely along with the 8th. If I were to be honest about, I'd say each Arnold's symphonies have real merit and something unique about them. After Vaughan Williams, I'd certainly rank Arnold as one of the great English symphonists.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Figaro on August 20, 2022, 12:57:05 PM
Anyone with a view on Arnold's Concertos, either collectively or individually? This is a long old thread but has mainly focused on the symphonies, with very little attention on anything else.

Yet he wrote nearly twenty concertos, for a wide range of instruments (curiously no straight up piano or violin concertos, given they're the most common usually). Mark Morris is quite dismissive of them ("pleasant music making") but is very dismissive of Arnold generally - anyone with a dissenting view? The concertos are all quite short which makes me lean towards not expecting any great masterpieces among them, but does anyone have any favourites or recommendations among them?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 20, 2022, 02:22:55 PM
Quote from: Figaro on August 20, 2022, 12:57:05 PM
Anyone with a view on Arnold's Concertos, either collectively or individually? This is a long old thread but has mainly focused on the symphonies, with very little attention on anything else.

Yet he wrote nearly twenty concertos, for a wide range of instruments (curiously no straight up piano or violin concertos, given they're the most common usually). Mark Morris is quite dismissive of them ("pleasant music making") but is very dismissive of Arnold generally - anyone with a dissenting view? The concertos are all quite short which makes me lean towards not expecting any great masterpieces among them, but does anyone have any favourites or recommendations among them?
The Piano Concerto (for three hands) is my favourite.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 20, 2022, 11:14:20 PM
Quote from: Figaro on August 20, 2022, 12:57:05 PM
Anyone with a view on Arnold's Concertos, either collectively or individually? This is a long old thread but has mainly focused on the symphonies, with very little attention on anything else.

Yet he wrote nearly twenty concertos, for a wide range of instruments (curiously no straight up piano or violin concertos, given they're the most common usually). Mark Morris is quite dismissive of them ("pleasant music making") but is very dismissive of Arnold generally - anyone with a dissenting view? The concertos are all quite short which makes me lean towards not expecting any great masterpieces among them, but does anyone have any favourites or recommendations among them?

I think Arnold is a nailed-on genius even if a flawed one.  But I do not think his genius is best expressed via his concerti.  All his technical skill and understanding of instrumental technique is there but they do not have that extra layer of very personal emotion that imbues his finest work - which in essence are probably the 9 symphonies.  The concerti are his most absolute music and none the worse for that.  I like the idea that many of them are "gifts" for the players who inspired them but personally prefer /listen to more often just about anything else in his orchestral output.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on August 20, 2022, 11:29:28 PM
I find most of Arnold's concertos to be tuneful and glorious! Try this if you can find it:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Malcolm-Arnold-Concertos-Clarinet-Trumpet/dp/B07D1PPM5Y/ref=sr_1_8?crid=3NOHTK62QU343&keywords=%22malcolm+arnold%22+%22bournemouth%22&qid=1661066759&sprefix=malcolm+arnold+bournmouth%2Caps%2C635&sr=8-8
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vers la flamme on August 21, 2022, 04:31:24 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on June 06, 2022, 10:00:52 AM
Just ordered a copy of the new biography of Sir Malcom;

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41-UnftovPL._SX383_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

I suspect this will be an uneasy read.....  Apparently this focuses on Arnold's latter years when he relied on the care of others.  Clearly I am in no position to judge but there are two polar opposite views; that of Katherine Arnold - his daughter, and that of Anthony Day his long-time carer between whom there was literally no love lost.  This book seems to have been written from Katherine's standpoint.  As ever, I doubt things are quite as black and white as presented here so perhaps a more assiduous biographer would have taken a more objective stance.  One incontrovertible fact - Arnold wrote and dedicated his 9th Symphony - which I consider a masterpiece - to Anthony Day.  The 7th Symphony which is also a genuinely remarkable if bleak work is allegedly portraits of his children......

Any other thoughts on this bio? I'm very curious to read it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on August 21, 2022, 05:57:46 AM
My only disappointment is that he didn't write a full-scale concerto. They all seem to be either relative miniatures or for reduced forces, often both.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 21, 2022, 08:54:34 AM
Quote from: vers la flamme on August 21, 2022, 04:31:24 AM
Any other thoughts on this bio? I'm very curious to read it.

I have a copy but have not yet started it - Rob Barnett wrote a review on MusicWeb
http://www.musicweb-international.com/Classrev/2022/Aug/Arnold-inside-book.htm
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on August 24, 2022, 02:27:05 AM
For archive purposes: Symphonies 1 & 2 [Penny] Naxos:


(https://cdn.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/8.553406.jpg)



Symphony No. 1

On first listen I found this to be an interesting work. I like its tones, its moods, atmospheres and its musical language. The first movement was very engaging throughout and I particularly like the scoring for brass and the lower register instruments.
The slow movement opens very calmly and serenely. However, discordant elements from the first movement soon invade this peaceful space to create interesting contrasts and sensations. It makes for a very interesting, appealing and atmospheric work.
The opening of the final movement is fraught and filled with tension. These levels are augmented as the movement proceeds and the woodwinds make a very fine contribution. This is very fine, atmospheric and compelling music.
I particularly like the scoring throughout the work. I find it to be very appealing as it portrays wonderful sonorities.


Symphony No. 2:

I am tending to like Arnold's musical language in general. I find it to be both appealing and engaging.
The opening movement is very lyrical and light in tone. There is a sense of inventive orchestration here. There are interesting side bars attached to the main vista which, in itself, is broad and expansive.
The second movement is much more menacing in the atmosphere department. The orchestration, again, plays a big part in the creation of the relevant tone.
The tone of the opening of the slow movement is somewhat stark and bleak; even menacing, in a disconcerting way. There is a wonderful atmosphere prevailing here in this movement.
The final movement is a total and wonderful contrast to the preceding slow movement. It reverts to the  tone and atmosphere of the opening movement. It moves along with great forward momentum and it is well driven. It concludes with a satisfactory and definitive resolution.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on August 24, 2022, 03:25:06 AM
Symphonies 3 & 4 [Penny] Naxos:


(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiNzk1MjQ5Ny4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6OTAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE0NzExMjYzMjV9)



Symphony No. 3:

I find the music of the opening movement to be wonderfully inventive. The musical statement, in itself, is relatively straightforward but what makes things really interesting here is the scoring and the delivery of the music in terms of its orchestration. There is also great tension in this music. I find it all to be very engaging. It makes for very interesting and engaging listening. The slow movement is wonderfully atmospheric. The scoring, once again, plays a great part in this. It is the variety of tones and sonorities on display here that I find to be very appealing and interesting. The sum of the individual parts lends to a very engaging whole here. Drama and tension also lend wonderfully to the overall atmosphere in this movement. The final movement is a quirky contrast to the monumental slow movement. I find it to be filled with excitement and the music is wonderfully presented and driven here. The woodwinds are wonderfully playful and effective here in contributing to the overall atmosphere of the movement. The conclusion is particularly fine, emphatic and definitive.


Symphony No. 4:

The very opening bars of the first movement demonstrate the wonderful musical language and orchestrational ability of Arnold. This can be both a tempestuous and, alternatively, serene movement. Whichever mode the music is in Penny interprets it well. Penny brings a wonderful edge to the music. The music sounds expansive in spacious sound.
The music in the second music is beguiling and very engaging. I like the way that it flits about. It has a wonderful atmosphere and Penny treats it very well by letting it flow almost by itself. It has a wonderful, ever so slightly disconcerting tone to it. It moves along well.
The third movement opens in a pastoral vein with that slightly disconcerting cloud floating across the sky. This is an expansive reading. Once again, the orchestration is very attractive and engaging. It certainly helps in building a wonderful sense of atmosphere and the various sonorities are very appealing.
The pace and the tone in the final movement picks up considerably making for a welcome contrast. The music has wonderfully tumultuous passages and Penny drives them well again. The work/movement has a very fine conclusion.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on August 24, 2022, 04:54:26 AM
Symphony No. 4 [Arnold] Lyrita:


(https://i.scdn.co/image/ab67616d0000b2730b54cda9023d297460fc6778)


It is always interesting to listen to a composer conducting their own work. It is not always a successful enterprise. The sound is very good in the Lyrita recording. The significant difference between the two presentations is that the overall recording time is much more expansive under Arnold, 54 mins. approx vs. 38 mins. approx under Penny [my only other reference for this work].


Arnold's own interpretation of his opening movement here is quite expansive [18:46 mins. vs. 13:04 for Penny] but it never falters or feels ponderous. It is a very lyrical interpretation. Interestingly, I feel that Penny brings more bite to the music than does Arnold, not that Arnold is not menacing in his tone where appropriate.

Arnold' own presentation of the slow movement is a little more expansive [5:40 mins. vs. 5:05 with Penny]. There is, however, very little difference between this and the Penny version with regard to tone and overall atmosphere. The orchestra, if anything, sounds a bit more full here.

Arnold's own presentation of the third movement is very expansive [18:40 mins. vs. 11:38 mins under Penny]. The strings sound more lush here and the overall sound is more full. I personally feel that this movement does drag and could have done with some degree of editing [just my impression after hearing these two versions for the first time] as it begins to sound interminable after a time especially at 18:40 mins. 

The final movement under Arnold seems to be to be much more controlled [directorily] but he does, I must admit, give the music a very good run for its money. Arnold's own conclusion to the movement/work is excellent! The pace does not seem to be overly slow but Arnold's presentation is much longer than Penny's [11:02 mins vs. 7:58 mins. for Penny].

I readily admit that this is my first time hearing this work so I am not sure whether or not the variance in the length of recordings between the two conductors is a case of one observing repeats and the other not; I am not familiar enough with the work to pay much attention to that aspect in my comparison at this point.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 05, 2022, 07:43:43 AM
Symphonies 5 & 6 [Penny] Naxos


(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiNzk1NDE3NS4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6OTAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE0MDE5ODI1NTd9)



Symphony No. 5

I really like the opening section of the first movement. I find the orchestration to be wonderfully engaging and inventive. The tone and atmosphere are also very engaging; lyrical but disconcerting without being overly menacing. The music has an edge to it with plenty of drama and tension along the way and Penny presents it very well. It really is such a wonderful piece of music.
The slow movement is a rich and opulent piece of pastoral writing. I find it to be quite evocative. The orchestration and the musical language are both very engaging. Approximately half way through this movement we hit a very menacing passage and the scoring for the brass and woodwinds is particularly wonderful.
The third movement is an animated and inventive, scherzo-like movement that is full of energy and drive. There is also an element of quirky humour in this music alone with more tension and drama for added interest.
The final movement is also an animated affair which has a militaristic element with the presence of a fife led march and blazoning trumpets. It appears that we are being led into battle here. Penny is certainly up for the challenge here and delivers an almost rumbustious presentation of the music. The final section is a wonderful conclusion filled with both glory and serenity.


Symphony No. 6 

What a wonderful opening passage, and indeed movement, to a symphony! Discursive and menacing, it grabs one's attention. As ever with Arnold I am finding that I really like his musical language and orchestration. I find this first movement to be wonderfully taut, tense and exciting.
The slow movement is a contrast in tempo only, for me. There is that same element here, as in the opening movement, of an underlying disconcerting current that is wonderfully atmospheric. There is wonderful tension in this music also but it is not so tightly coiled, rather loosely sprung. This tension is prolonged and it is not released but rather augmented as the movement progresses. This makes for a wonderfully fraught and portentous atmosphere.
The tone and mood changes immediately with the trumpet fanfare in the opening of the final movement. The atmosphere reverts however, as the movement progresses but in a more upbeat tone on occasion. The tension, this time has an outlet when the work concludes with a satisfactory and definitive resolution.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on September 05, 2022, 09:08:41 AM
Thanks for the ongoing review. I have listened to the first five multiple times already and of them I like nos. 4 and 5 best. The final four are still ahead of me...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 05, 2022, 10:06:33 AM
Quote from: J.Z. Herrenberg on September 05, 2022, 09:08:41 AM
Thanks for the ongoing review. I have listened to the first five multiple times already and of them I like nos. 4 and 5 best. The final four are still ahead of me...

Thank you for taking the time to read the notes. However, as you have listened to those works much more than I have I have no doubt that you could write far better notes than I.

This is, in fact, my first time to listen to the symphonic cycle of Malcolm Arnold. I have come late to this composer. I regret that because I have found his music to be wonderful in every respect. His music has been a revelation for me.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on September 05, 2022, 11:46:33 AM
Quote from: aligreto on September 05, 2022, 10:06:33 AM
Thank you for taking the time to read the notes. However, as you have listened to those works much more than I have I have no doubt that you could write far better notes than I.


Too kind.

QuoteThis is, in fact, my first time to listen to the symphonic cycle of Malcolm Arnold. I have come late to this composer. I regret that because I have found his music to be wonderful in every respect. His music has been a revelation for me.


I have come just as late to him as you. Fortunately, the more musical experience you have, the easier it is to hear if a composer is any good. Malcolm Arnold certainly is. I still have a lot to explore.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 05, 2022, 12:46:36 PM
Quote from: J.Z. Herrenberg on September 05, 2022, 11:46:33 AM

I have come just as late to him as you. Fortunately, the more musical experience you have, the easier it is to hear if a composer is any good. Malcolm Arnold certainly is. I still have a lot to explore.

Yes, I too look forward to listening to more of his music.
Although I think that Penny is very good I also look forward to exploring other conductors' interpretations and presentations of Arnold's symphonies; just for an alternative interpretation.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: J.Z. Herrenberg on September 05, 2022, 12:52:59 PM
Quote from: aligreto on September 05, 2022, 12:46:36 PM
Yes, I too look forward to listening to more of his music.
Although I think that Penny is very good I also look forward to exploring other conductors' interpretations and presentations of Arnold's symphonies; just for an alternative interpretation.


I prefer Arnold in both the Fourth and the Fifth. The entry of the march in the final movement of the Fourth, for instance, has a biting satirical edge Penny cannot match. It is both hilarious and frightening.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 06, 2022, 01:35:44 AM
Quote from: J.Z. Herrenberg on September 05, 2022, 12:52:59 PM

I prefer Arnold in both the Fourth and the Fifth. The entry of the march in the final movement of the Fourth, for instance, has a biting satirical edge Penny cannot match. It is both hilarious and frightening.

Thank you for your comments. I will see if I can find Arnold in the Fifth for comparative purposes.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 06, 2022, 01:42:49 AM
Quote from: aligreto on August 24, 2022, 02:27:05 AM
For archive purposes: Symphonies 1 & 2 [Penny] Naxos:


(https://cdn.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/8.553406.jpg)



Symphony No. 1

On first listen I found this to be an interesting work. I like its tones, its moods, atmospheres and its musical language. The first movement was very engaging throughout and I particularly like the scoring for brass and the lower register instruments.
The slow movement opens very calmly and serenely. However, discordant elements from the first movement soon invade this peaceful space to create interesting contrasts and sensations. It makes for a very interesting, appealing and atmospheric work.
The opening of the final movement is fraught and filled with tension. These levels are augmented as the movement proceeds and the woodwinds make a very fine contribution. This is very fine, atmospheric and compelling music.
I particularly like the scoring throughout the work. I find it to be very appealing as it portrays wonderful sonorities.


Symphony No. 2:

I am tending to like Arnold's musical language in general. I find it to be both appealing and engaging.
The opening movement is very lyrical and light in tone. There is a sense of inventive orchestration here. There are interesting side bars attached to the main vista which, in itself, is broad and expansive.
The second movement is much more menacing in the atmosphere department. The orchestration, again, plays a big part in the creation of the relevant tone.
The tone of the opening of the slow movement is somewhat stark and bleak; even menacing, in a disconcerting way. There is a wonderful atmosphere prevailing here in this movement.
The final movement is a total and wonderful contrast to the preceding slow movement. It reverts to the  tone and atmosphere of the opening movement. It moves along with great forward momentum and it is well driven. It concludes with a satisfactory and definitive resolution.
Interesting review Fergus. If you don't already know it, you should hear Arnold's own recording of the 1st Symphony which is much slower than any other version I know and thereby invested with much more gravity - a terrific recording which is by far my favourite.
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 06, 2022, 01:47:49 AM
Quote from: aligreto on September 05, 2022, 07:43:43 AM
Symphonies 5 & 6 [Penny] Naxos


(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiNzk1NDE3NS4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6OTAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE0MDE5ODI1NTd9)



Symphony No. 5

I really like the opening section of the first movement. I find the orchestration to be wonderfully engaging and inventive. The tone and atmosphere are also very engaging; lyrical but disconcerting without being overly menacing. The music has an edge to it with plenty of drama and tension along the way and Penny presents it very well. It really is such a wonderful piece of music.
The slow movement is a rich and opulent piece of pastoral writing. I find it to be quite evocative. The orchestration and the musical language are both very engaging. Approximately half way through this movement we hit a very menacing passage and the scoring for the brass and woodwinds is particularly wonderful.
The third movement is an animated and inventive, scherzo-like movement that is full of energy and drive. There is also an element of quirky humour in this music alone with more tension and drama for added interest.
The final movement is also an animated affair which has a militaristic element with the presence of a fife led march and blazoning trumpets. It appears that we are being led into battle here. Penny is certainly up for the challenge here and delivers an almost rumbustious presentation of the music. The final section is a wonderful conclusion filled with both glory and serenity.


Symphony No. 6 

What a wonderful opening passage, and indeed movement, to a symphony! Discursive and menacing, it grabs one's attention. As ever with Arnold I am finding that I really like his musical language and orchestration. I find this first movement to be wonderfully taut, tense and exciting.
The slow movement is a contrast in tempo only, for me. There is that same element here, as in the opening movement, of an underlying disconcerting current that is wonderfully atmospheric. There is wonderful tension in this music also but it is not so tightly coiled, rather loosely sprung. This tension is prolonged and it is not released but rather augmented as the movement progresses. This makes for a wonderfully fraught and portentous atmosphere.
The tone and mood changes immediately with the trumpet fanfare in the opening of the final movement. The atmosphere reverts however, as the movement progresses but in a more upbeat tone on occasion. The tension, this time has an outlet when the work concludes with a satisfactory and definitive resolution.
The two greatest Arnold symphonies IMO.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 06, 2022, 02:08:45 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 06, 2022, 01:42:49 AM
Interesting review Fergus. If you don't already know it, you should hear Arnold's own recording of the 1st Symphony which is much slower than any other version I know and thereby invested with much more gravity - a terrific recording which is by far my favourite.

(https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=231.0;attach=90819;image)

Thank you very much for that Jeffrey. Much appreciated.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 18, 2022, 05:33:09 AM
Arnold: Symphonies Nos. 7 & 8 [Penny]


(https://www.boosey.com/imagesw/shop/product/$wm1_700x0_$_8552001_cov.jpg)



Symphony No. 7

I really like the opening of this symphony. I find the musical language to be captivating. I also like the tension in the opening movement. The movement is also filled with drama and a great atmosphere with some very enchanting passages therein. I have nothing to compare it with at the moment but it feels to me that Penny gets things just right here. Future comparisons will tell. Anyway, it is a movement of fine atmospheric and tonal contrasts. It has a slightly but wonderful menacing undercurrent to it. The conclusion of the movement is wonderfully charged.
The central, slow movement is a wonderful contrast to the opening movement in terms of tempo. However, the wonderful atmosphere of those more enchanting and bewitching passages in the opening movement is maintained and indeed further developed here. This is certainly a very interesting soundscape.
With the final movement the tension returns to the work which is delivered very well by all sections of the orchestra in turn. Once again, the range of sonorities to be heard in the scoring is quite engaging and appealing. We do get quite a definitive resolution to the work at the conclusion of the movement.


Symphony No. 8

I really liked this work from the opening bars of the first movement. It is exciting, atmospheric and compelling music. The work also has its fair share of both tension and drama. The main attractions for me in this work are both the musical language and the orchestration employed in order to deliver the musical language. It can be dissonant but that lends an edge to the music. The orchestration can also be lean and sparse but that, for me, lends to a sense of excitement, sonic contrast, intensity and drama.
The slow movement is a thing of particular beauty in its own way. The scoring is sparse but very interesting, atmospheric and engaging. Both the tone and atmosphere are quite restrained and underplayed in this movement and yet it makes for compelling listening. The intensity level of the music is augmented towards the conclusion of the movement which is an interesting spike.
The tone and atmosphere of the final movement is quite a contrast to what has preceded it. It is jaunty, animated, intense and intriguing. The orchestration, once again, is wonderfully engaging. The movement concludes with a flurry of excitement. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 22, 2022, 07:52:35 AM
Arnold: Symphony No. 9 [Penny]


(https://cdn.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/8.553540.jpg)


The music of the opening music is a wonderful mix of lyricism and atonality [not that both are mutually exclusive]. The tone is light and airy and it sounds a bit quirky and mischievous to me. It is graceful and nimble and this is, by and large, achieved by the relatively sparse scoring for different couplings of instruments. I find it to be very engaging. The intensity and dramatic levels rise as the movement progresses towards its conclusion and the movement finishes on a rather positive, even bold tone.

The opening of the second movement is wonderfully scored for wistful woodwinds. This atmosphere of wistful sentiment is carried through into the body of the movement and, once again, the quality of the scoring for various combinations of groups of instruments is of the highest order.

The third movement is a total contrast to what has gone before in terms of tone and atmosphere. It is an animated celebratory movement with great forward momentum and it is well driven by Penny. Appropriately, the clarion call is led, for the most part, by the brass section with wonderful support and comment from the woodwind section.

The final movement is a massive one and almost just as long as the three preceding ones added together. The opening tone is very dark, bleak and almost one of despair. It is filled with anguish and desolation but it is also hugely atmospheric. It is both haunting and intense but lyrical and the music also has a majestic quality to it. It is expansive and the orchestration is, once again, very effective and engaging and it never feels ponderous to me for such profound music. I also feel that it has a very calm profile. However, all of the darkness and despair is negated in the dying bars with one note that rings out hope and optimism for me despite Arnold asserting that the movement, even with the ending, was meant to be a complete surrender to despair.


This particular recording was made in the presence of the composer. There is also a rather insightful interview with Arnold [by Penny] at the conclusion of the CD with regard to Arnold's Symphony No. 9.


This symphonic cycle by Arnold has been a significant "find" for me.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 22, 2022, 08:05:21 AM
Just as an afterthought, I have posted the individual CDs in this series above but it should also be noted that Naxos have also gathered these together in a box set for those who may be interested.


(https://i.discogs.com/BcYr5o5aneJVJQULEaoOy3LEE_j0X3TxDkU5zkhU5Bc/rs:fit/g:sm/q:90/h:421/w:422/czM6Ly9kaXNjb2dz/LWRhdGFiYXNlLWlt/YWdlcy9SLTM2Mjg2/ODctMTM5NDQ3OTk5/NS03NzE4LnBuZw.jpeg)



There is also this centenary edition which also contains all of the Dances:


(https://www.naxos.com/ECard/2021/b2c/Arnold-Complete-Symphonies/images/8.506041.png)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on September 22, 2022, 09:29:06 AM
The Arnold 9th is one of the most powerful symphonic statements in the British repertoire. The composer indicated that were it not for that concluding chord, the surrender to despair would be total.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on September 23, 2022, 12:54:55 AM
Quote from: aligreto on September 22, 2022, 07:52:35 AM
Arnold: Symphony No. 9 [Penny]


(https://cdn.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/8.553540.jpg)


The music of the opening music is a wonderful mix of lyricism and atonality [not that both are mutually exclusive]. The tone is light and airy and it sounds a bit quirky and mischievous to me. It is graceful and nimble and this is, by and large, achieved by the relatively sparse scoring for different couplings of instruments. I find it to be very engaging. The intensity and dramatic levels rise as the movement progresses towards its conclusion and the movement finishes on a rather positive, even bold tone.

The opening of the second movement is wonderfully scored for wistful woodwinds. This atmosphere of wistful sentiment is carried through into the body of the movement and, once again, the quality of the scoring for various combinations of groups of instruments is of the highest order.

The third movement is a total contrast to what has gone before in terms of tone and atmosphere. It is an animated celebratory movement with great forward momentum and it is well driven by Penny. Appropriately, the clarion call is led, for the most part, by the brass section with wonderful support and comment from the woodwind section.

The final movement is a massive one and almost just as long as the three preceding ones added together. The opening tone is very dark, bleak and almost one of despair. It is filled with anguish and desolation but it is also hugely atmospheric. It is both haunting and intense but lyrical and the music also has a majestic quality to it. It is expansive and the orchestration is, once again, very effective and engaging and it never feels ponderous to me for such profound music. I also feel that it has a very calm profile. However, all of the darkness and despair is negated in the dying bars with one note that rings out hope and optimism for me despite Arnold asserting that the movement, even with the ending, was meant to be a complete surrender to despair.


This particular recording was made in the presence of the composer. There is also a rather insightful interview with Arnold [by Penny] at the conclusion of the CD with regard to Arnold's Symphony No. 9.


This symphonic cycle by Arnold has been a significant "find" for me.

Thanks, Fergus. I am not ready, I think, for the box set but like the sound of your description of the 9th.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 01:28:22 AM
Quote from: Irons on September 23, 2022, 12:54:55 AM
Thanks, Fergus. I am not ready, I think, for the box set but like the sound of your description of the 9th.

It is a wonderful work, Lol, in Arnold's mature voice. I hope that you do not find the last movement too desolate or depressing. There is nothing else quite like it in his other symphonies. In his own words he would have liked it to have been his last word on a difficult Life that he had lived.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on September 23, 2022, 02:06:24 AM
I think Arnold's 9th is one of his genuine masterpieces born out of unbelievably harrowing experiences for the composer.  It is NOT an easy listen and the last movement makes demands on players and audiences alike but such is the case with most great Art.  The fact that pieces such as this still languish in relative shadows and has never been performed at the Proms (given some of the music that has) tells you everything you need to know about the state of serious music in the UK.

Recently John Gibbons - who has conducted as much Arnold as any living conductor I guess - released a fairly controversial version of No.9 in which he takes the finale a lot quicker than any other commercial recording.  He knows his Arnold so you have to give consideration to his views and reasonings.  Personally I think he is wrong but it certainly makes for an interesting debate.

https://johngibbonsmusic.co.uk/blog/2022/05/talking-about-arnold-ninth-symphony/
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 23, 2022, 03:32:08 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on September 23, 2022, 02:06:24 AM
I think Arnold's 9th is one of his genuine masterpieces born out of unbelievably harrowing experiences for the composer.  It is NOT an easy listen and the last movement makes demands on players and audiences alike but such is the case with most great Art.  The fact that pieces such as this still languish in relative shadows and has never been performed at the Proms (given some of the music that has) tells you everything you need to know about the state of serious music in the UK.

Recently John Gibbons - who has conducted as much Arnold as any living conductor I guess - released a fairly controversial version of No.9 in which he takes the finale a lot quicker than any other commercial recording.  He knows his Arnold so you have to give consideration to his views and reasonings.  Personally I think he is wrong but it certainly makes for an interesting debate.

https://johngibbonsmusic.co.uk/blog/2022/05/talking-about-arnold-ninth-symphony/
Most interesting. I bought the Gibbons No.9 when it first came out but haven't got round to listening to it yet. That will be rectified very soon! I've always liked the 9th - the Penny version is my favourite.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 03:32:50 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on September 23, 2022, 02:06:24 AM
I think Arnold's 9th is one of his genuine masterpieces born out of unbelievably harrowing experiences for the composer.  It is NOT an easy listen and the last movement makes demands on players and audiences alike but such is the case with most great Art.  The fact that pieces such as this still languish in relative shadows and has never been performed at the Proms (given some of the music that has) tells you everything you need to know about the state of serious music in the UK.

Recently John Gibbons - who has conducted as much Arnold as any living conductor I guess - released a fairly controversial version of No.9 in which he takes the finale a lot quicker than any other commercial recording.  He knows his Arnold so you have to give consideration to his views and reasonings.  Personally I think he is wrong but it certainly makes for an interesting debate.

https://johngibbonsmusic.co.uk/blog/2022/05/talking-about-arnold-ninth-symphony/

That is something that I cannot envisage and, on the face of it, would also seem wrong to me but I have not heard it.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 03:33:39 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 23, 2022, 03:32:08 AM
Most interesting. I bought the Gibbons No.9 when it first came out but haven't got round to listening to it yet. That will be rectified very soon! I've always liked the 9th - the Penny version is my favourite.

Do please let us know your thoughts when you do listen to it, Jeffrey.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 23, 2022, 03:38:12 AM
Quote from: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 03:33:39 AM
Do please let us know your thoughts when you do listen to it, Jeffrey.
Will do Fergus.
Nice to hear the lovely theme tune from 'Whistle Down the Wind' played on BBC Radio 3 this morning, on my way to work.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 03:39:23 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 23, 2022, 03:38:12 AM
Will do Fergus.
Nice to hear the lovely theme tune from 'Whistle Down the Wind' played on BBC Radio 3 this morning, on my way to work.

Life can feel good sometimes  ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 23, 2022, 03:45:03 AM
Quote from: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 03:39:23 AM
Life can feel good sometimes  ;D
Yes, and such a contrast between Whistle Down the Wind and the 9th Symphony, both, in their way, entirely characteristic of Arnold and testament to his versatility and genius.

As a teacher in a Girls' school, I've always related to his 'Belles of St Trinians' theme music!  ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 03:54:00 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 23, 2022, 03:45:03 AM

As a teacher in a Girls' school, I've always related to his 'Belles of St Trinians' theme music!  ;D

Total, unadulterated bias on your part  ;)  ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on September 23, 2022, 06:37:19 AM
Re: Symphony No. 9, I really liked the world premiere.  Very well paced and probably the closest we have to Arnold's conducting approach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awIxuj_DCsw
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on September 23, 2022, 07:16:13 AM
Quote from: relm1 on September 23, 2022, 06:37:19 AM
Re: Symphony No. 9, I really liked the world premiere.  Very well paced and probably the closest we have to Arnold's conducting approach.

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

And remember Groves really had to push the BBC to perform the work after the score-reading panel took fright with its sparse scoring and basically assumed Arnold had lost it......  Groves was a great champion of many British composers and their works but possibly this was his finest hour.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 23, 2022, 01:27:23 PM
Quote from: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 03:54:00 AM
Total, unadulterated bias on your part  ;)  ;D
8)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 26, 2022, 01:14:26 AM
Quote from: aligreto on September 23, 2022, 03:33:39 AM
Do please let us know your thoughts when you do listen to it, Jeffrey.
I've been listening to it this morning Fergus (Symphony No.9). It had me gripped throughout. It's a while since I listened to any other recording (I have those be Penny, Handley and Gamba) but this one struck me as being as good as any (I rate the Penny version very highly and enjoy the interview at the end). Gibbons's recording didn't sound to me like he was rushing through the finale, which I found to be a convincing reading. The pared down instrumentation can be seen as evidence of diminishing powers due to mental collapse - however, I don't see it that way and regard this movement (and the work as a whole really) as a bleakly poetic traversal through a barren landscape, whether physical or metaphorical as Arnold moved towards the end of his life. The influence of Mahler's 9th Symphony (finale) seems quite clear in the last movement.
(//)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: foxandpeng on September 27, 2022, 06:38:50 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 26, 2022, 01:14:26 AM
The pared down instrumentation can be seen as evidence of diminishing powers due to mental collapse - however, I don't see it that way and regard this movement (and the work as a whole really) as a bleakly poetic traversal through a barren landscape, whether physical or metaphorical as Arnold moved towards the end of his life.


For what it is worth, I agree entirely! Debilitating mental health can be as great a catalyst to creativity as it can be erosive. I certainly think that #9 reflects Arnold's harrowing depths just as much as earlier works showcase his playful ingenuity and pleasure.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 27, 2022, 12:46:03 PM
Quote from: foxandpeng on September 27, 2022, 06:38:50 AM
For what it is worth, I agree entirely! Debilitating mental health can be as great a catalyst to creativity as it can be erosive. I certainly think that #9 reflects Arnold's harrowing depths just as much as earlier works showcase his playful ingenuity and pleasure.
An interesting point Danny, with which I agree.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on December 04, 2022, 11:40:21 PM
A new release of Malcolm Arnold music - some of the recordings are 2019 but I can't see that they have been released (at least on CD) before:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0BMM8XJ5S/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_3?smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&psc=1
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on December 04, 2022, 11:57:27 PM
Quote from: Carshot on December 04, 2022, 11:40:21 PMA new release of Malcolm Arnold music - some of the recordings are 2019 but I can't see that they have been released (at least on CD) before:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0BMM8XJ5S/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_3?smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&psc=1

No this is a wholly new release which compliments the disc of overtures by the same performers;

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/2LAAAOSwtnRjDd7s/s-l500.png)

None of the music is new to the catalogue but its a good few years since there have been new performances and quite a lot is only getting its 2nd studio recording
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Scion7 on December 05, 2022, 01:09:40 AM
Very good!   :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on December 05, 2022, 04:01:38 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on December 04, 2022, 11:57:27 PMNo this is a wholly new release which compliments the disc of overtures by the same performers;

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/2LAAAOSwtnRjDd7s/s-l500.png)

None of the music is new to the catalogue but its a good few years since there have been new performances and quite a lot is only getting its 2nd studio recording
I've seen it advertised as a new release recently.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on December 05, 2022, 04:56:57 AM
Quote from: Carshot on December 04, 2022, 11:40:21 PMA new release of Malcolm Arnold music - some of the recordings are 2019 but I can't see that they have been released (at least on CD) before:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0BMM8XJ5S/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_3?smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&psc=1

Thank you for the heads-up, @Carshot  I'll have to stream that one, given how much I love the first Gamba volume posted by @Roasted Swan . I remember liking the Padstow Lifeboat in the Conifer set already.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on December 05, 2022, 06:44:25 AM
Quote from: Papy Oli on December 05, 2022, 04:56:57 AMThank you for the heads-up, @Carshot  I'll have to stream that one, given how much I love the first Gamba volume posted by @Roasted Swan . I remember liking the Padstow Lifeboat in the Conifer set already.
The Padstow Lifeboat is good fun.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on December 05, 2022, 07:09:53 AM
Quote from: Papy Oli on December 05, 2022, 04:56:57 AMThank you for the heads-up, @Carshot  I'll have to stream that one, given how much I love the first Gamba volume posted by @Roasted Swan . I remember liking the Padstow Lifeboat in the Conifer set already.

The Confier/Padstow Lifeboat is the original Brass Band version and is - as you say - great fun.  Gavin Sutherland recorded the orchestral arrangement by Phillip Lane on the ASV/British Light Music Classics series Vol.4

(http://www.classical.net/music/recs/images/a/asv02131.jpg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59gdlfJ4nLs
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on December 05, 2022, 07:21:40 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on December 05, 2022, 07:09:53 AMThe Confier/Padstow Lifeboat is the original Brass Band version and is - as you say - great fun.  Gavin Sutherland recorded the orchestral arrangement by Phillip Lane on the ASV/British Light Music Classics series Vol.4

(http://www.classical.net/music/recs/images/a/asv02131.jpg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59gdlfJ4nLs


Thank you RS, I'll check that version.  :)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on December 05, 2022, 07:37:54 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on December 05, 2022, 07:09:53 AMGavin Sutherland recorded the orchestral arrangement by Phillip Lane on the ASV/British Light Music Classics series Vol.4

(http://www.classical.net/music/recs/images/a/asv02131.jpg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59gdlfJ4nLs


What's not to love, Malcolm at his bonkers-est! You can't tell me that's not fun for an orchestra to play this, that would almost make Rick Stein less grumpy !!

I might have just decided chosen my final music to be played at my funeral , carried out by wobbly pallbearers...  ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on December 05, 2022, 12:42:43 PM
Quote from: Papy Oli on December 05, 2022, 07:37:54 AMWhat's not to love, Malcolm at his bonkers-est! You can't tell me that's not fun for an orchestra to play this, that would almost make Rick Stein less grumpy !!

I might have just decided chosen my final music to be played at my funeral , carried out by wobbly pallbearers...  ;D

If they drop you is that "man overboard...."
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on December 05, 2022, 12:49:30 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on December 05, 2022, 12:42:43 PMIf they drop you is that "man overboard...."

Oh buoy...

It's a classical work that can allow some loud coffin, I guess...;D  >:(
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on January 12, 2023, 05:47:32 AM
I very much enjoyed this new release from Chandos.  Great sound and performances plus I think some rarities such as Arnold's earliest symphonic poem, The Larch Trees, op. 3.  Philharmonic Concerto, Op.120, is exciting and dramatic work, a concerto for orchestra.

(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiOTQxMTg5My4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6OTAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE2NzA0MzA1MzB9)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 12, 2023, 06:34:49 AM
Quote from: relm1 on January 12, 2023, 05:47:32 AMI very much enjoyed this new release from Chandos.  Great sound and performances plus I think some rarities such as Arnold's earliest symphonic poem, The Larch Trees, op. 3.  Philharmonic Concerto, Op.120, is exciting and dramatic work, a concerto for orchestra.

(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiOTQxMTg5My4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6OTAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE2NzA0MzA1MzB9)

Rumon Gamba has generally proved to be an excellent Arnold conductor, especially in the overtures and ballets for Chandos, so it's great to see him doing more. His 2001 broadcasts of the first six symphonies are great, but he was less convincing in the commercial recordings of 7-9: the 7th in particular is just frantically fast to the point where the first movement has no coherence. It's such a pity that Richard Hickox gave up after the 6th, as I suspect that he could have really got into the 7th, but he apparently had no empathy for the later scores...

 ::)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 12, 2023, 06:43:58 AM
I'm currently enjoying this excellent CD (recently reissued on Alto)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 12, 2023, 08:41:02 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 12, 2023, 06:43:58 AMI'm currently enjoying this excellent CD (recently reissued on Alto)


Douglas Bostock is SERIOUSLY underrated. The repertoire he recorded for ClassicO has now vanished into the mist. He gave a fabulous performance of Bantock's "Pagan Symphony" (search Youtube) and now seems to have aligned himself with CPO to very good effect. As with Howard Griffiths, Bostock gets zero respect and recognition in the UK because his career is abroad...

 ::)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 12, 2023, 10:13:14 AM
Quote from: Albion on January 12, 2023, 08:41:02 AMDouglas Bostock is SERIOUSLY underrated. The repertoire he recorded for ClassicO has now vanished into the mist. He gave a fabulous performance of Bantock's "Pagan Symphony" (search Youtube) and now seems to have aligned himself with CPO to very good effect. As with Howard Griffiths, Bostock gets zero respect and recognition in the UK because his career is abroad...

 ::)

We'll have to agree to disagree about Bostock!  Clearly a passionate and dedicated musician who cares deeply about the music he performs but I cannot think of a single example (I don't know his Pagan Symphony) where his versions are not trumped by other performances.  The new Arnold Divertimento is a case in point - his Classico version is perfectly good - perhaps even very good.  But then you hear the new Gamba and bluntly put that is better.  Bostock is a perfect example of the great being the enemy of the good.  His Novak disc is lovely.... but I've never heard a different version.........

Not strictly true about his British music ClassicO discs - 10 are included in the Membran set still available......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 12, 2023, 01:18:43 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on January 12, 2023, 10:13:14 AMWe'll have to agree to disagree about Bostock!  Clearly a passionate and dedicated musician who cares deeply about the music he performs but I cannot think of a single example (I don't know his Pagan Symphony) where his versions are not trumped by other performances.  The new Arnold Divertimento is a case in point - his Classico version is perfectly good - perhaps even very good.  But then you hear the new Gamba and bluntly put that is better.  Bostock is a perfect example of the great being the enemy of the good.  His Novak disc is lovely.... but I've never heard a different version.........

Not strictly true about his British music ClassicO discs - 10 are included in the Membran set still available......

Membran dropped several key recordings including the Potter/ Bennett, Bowen and the choral disc which included Dyson, Brian and Bridge. Plus it was a bargain-bin issue with not a booklet note in sight. Bloody shoddy! Here is Bostock's "Pagan Symphony"...

https://www.mediafire.com/file/mguxupua9u7uxe2/Bantock_-_Pagan_Symphony_%25281923-28%2529_-_Bostock.mp3/file

 :)

His new (so far three volume) string orchestra discs for CPO are glorious, especially in Bantock's "In the Far West" and "Scenes from the Scottish Highlands".
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 12, 2023, 01:53:30 PM
Quote from: Albion on January 12, 2023, 01:18:43 PMMembran dropped several key recordings including the Potter/ Bennett, Bowen and the choral disc which included Dyson, Brian and Bridge. Plus it was a bargain-bin issue with not a booklet note in sight. Bloody shoddy! Here is Bostock's "Pagan Symphony"...

https://www.mediafire.com/file/mguxupua9u7uxe2/Bantock_-_Pagan_Symphony_%25281923-28%2529_-_Bostock.mp3/file

 :)

His new (so far three volume) string orchestra discs for CPO are glorious, especially in Bantock's "In the Far West" and "Scenes from the Scottish Highlands".

I enjoyed Vol.1 of the CPO series - well played by the small (14 strong) orchestra but I thought the transcription of the Elgar Organ Sonata pretty much a failure in every respect musically.  Well played but a pointless transcription that added nothing to our knowledge or appreciation of the work (no fault of Bostock or his band mind).  I haven't heard the Bantock disc.  Vol.3 interests me more although Ethel Smyth does little for me and the COnstance Warren is charming but minor.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 12, 2023, 03:36:26 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on January 12, 2023, 01:53:30 PMI enjoyed Vol.1 of the CPO series - well played by the small (14 strong) orchestra but I thought the transcription of the Elgar Organ Sonata pretty much a failure in every respect musically.  Well played but a pointless transcription that added nothing to our knowledge or appreciation of the work (no fault of Bostock or his band mind).  I haven't heard the Bantock disc.  Vol.3 interests me more although Ethel Smyth does little for me and the COnstance Warren is charming but minor.

Neither the Mass nor "The Wreckers"?

https://www.mediafire.com/file/bh7iq7bj2jdsppd/Smyth_-_Mass_in_D_%25281891%2529_-_Oramo_2022.mp3/file

https://www.mediafire.com/file/tcs77jckj6jrs0e/Smyth_-_The_Wreckers_%25281906%2529_-_Botstein_2015.mp3/file
???

Yes, Gordon Jacob's wonderful orchestration of the Elgar Organ Sonata was and remains more than sufficient...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 12, 2023, 11:10:59 PM
Quote from: Albion on January 12, 2023, 03:36:26 PMNeither the Mass nor "The Wreckers"?

https://www.mediafire.com/file/bh7iq7bj2jdsppd/Smyth_-_Mass_in_D_%25281891%2529_-_Oramo_2022.mp3/file

https://www.mediafire.com/file/tcs77jckj6jrs0e/Smyth_-_The_Wreckers_%25281906%2529_-_Botstein_2015.mp3/file
???

Yes, Gordon Jacob's wonderful orchestration of the Elgar Organ Sonata was and remains more than sufficient...

By no means do I think either work is "bad" and neither do I think it a pre-requisite that musicmust be original/mould-breaking.  BUT I find Ethel Smyth to be a musical conservative who - at the time of any given composition - is distinctly 2nd tier.  There is something I find intriguing in someone who in so much of their life tested boundaries and challenged convention but in the thing they cared about most - music - they were essentially conservative.  Now there are a lot of very fine second tier composers so no issue with that, but just to take the two famous British composers born either side of Smyth - Elgar in 1857 and Delius in 1862; I would take a bar of hard-won genius in early Elgar over the solid Leipzig-certainties of the Mass or the flawed magic of A Village Romeo and Juliet over the earth-bound Wreckers.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on January 13, 2023, 12:48:25 AM
Quote from: Albion on January 12, 2023, 08:41:02 AMDouglas Bostock is SERIOUSLY underrated. The repertoire he recorded for ClassicO has now vanished into the mist. He gave a fabulous performance of Bantock's "Pagan Symphony" (search Youtube) and now seems to have aligned himself with CPO to very good effect. As with Howard Griffiths, Bostock gets zero respect and recognition in the UK because his career is abroad...

 ::)

Have you listened to this Bostock issue? I'm tempted.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 13, 2023, 01:58:04 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 13, 2023, 12:48:25 AMHave you listened to this Bostock issue? I'm tempted.

It's a very good alternative to the Chandos recording of Gipps' symphony No.2 and anything by Arthur Butterworth is always a bonus. This was one of the discs that made it into the Membran reissue, but if you can get the original release you get booklet notes!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 13, 2023, 02:18:02 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on January 12, 2023, 11:10:59 PMBy no means do I think either work is "bad" and neither do I think it a pre-requisite that musicmust be original/mould-breaking.  BUT I find Ethel Smyth to be a musical conservative who - at the time of any given composition - is distinctly 2nd tier.  There is something I find intriguing in someone who in so much of their life tested boundaries and challenged convention but in the thing they cared about most - music - they were essentially conservative.  Now there are a lot of very fine second tier composers so no issue with that, but just to take the two famous British composers born either side of Smyth - Elgar in 1857 and Delius in 1862; I would take a bar of hard-won genius in early Elgar over the solid Leipzig-certainties of the Mass or the flawed magic of A Village Romeo and Juliet over the earth-bound Wreckers.

Fair points. When it comes to late 19th and early 20th century British music there was such a wealth and variety on offer: Sullivan, Mackenzie, Parry, Goring Thomas, Cowen, Stanford, Elgar, Smyth, Delius, German, Bantock, Vaughan Williams, Holst, Coleridge-Taylor, Hurlstone, Boughton, Holbrooke, Scott, Foulds, Berners, Bax, etc. Smyth was essentially conservative and remained so, as in her late Double Concerto and The Prison, but I find her music always interesting, melodic and beautifully scored. Although she was not the "big player" that some have claimed she was certainly not insignificant: anybody who could whip the parts from the orchestra's music stands after The Wreckers had been savagely cut in Leipzig and simply clear off with them, terrify Thomas Beecham and sing her Mass to Queen Victoria at the piano deserves some kudos...

 ;)
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 13, 2023, 02:51:02 AM
Quote from: Albion on January 13, 2023, 02:18:02 AMFair points. When it comes to late 19th and early 20th century British music there was such a wealth and variety on offer: Sullivan, Mackenzie, Parry, Goring Thomas, Cowen, Stanford, Elgar, Smyth, Delius, German, Bantock, Vaughan Williams, Holst, Coleridge-Taylor, Hurlstone, Boughton, Holbrooke, Scott, Foulds, Berners, Bax, etc. Smyth was essentially conservative and remained so, as in her late Double Concerto and The Prison, but I find her music always interesting, melodic and beautifully scored. Although she was not the "big player" that some have claimed she was certainly not insignificant: anybody who could whip the parts from the orchestra's music stands after The Wreckers had been savagely cut in Leipzig and simply clear off with them, terrify Thomas Beecham and sing her Mass to Queen Victoria at the piano deserves some kudos...

 ;)

To the bold text - exactly so and well put!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 13, 2023, 12:10:18 PM
Quote from: Irons on January 13, 2023, 12:48:25 AMHave you listened to this Bostock issue? I'm tempted.
Yes, it's a fine disc.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on January 13, 2023, 12:20:55 PM
I have it as part of the 10-disc British Symphonic Collection (which includes a disc of Arnold, to keep it on topic for the thread) and the Bostock is my definitive Butterworth 1.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 13, 2023, 12:23:08 PM
Quote from: Maestro267 on January 13, 2023, 12:20:55 PMI have it as part of the 10-disc British Symphonic Collection (which includes a disc of Arnold, to keep it on topic for the thread) and the Bostock is my definitive Butterworth 1.
The Arnold disc (recently reissued on Alto) is a very fine one.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on January 14, 2023, 12:39:13 AM
Quote from: Albion on January 13, 2023, 01:58:04 AMIt's a very good alternative to the Chandos recording of Gipps' symphony No.2 and anything by Arthur Butterworth is always a bonus. This was one of the discs that made it into the Membran reissue, but if you can get the original release you get booklet notes!

Quote from: vandermolen on January 13, 2023, 12:10:18 PMYes, it's a fine disc.

Quote from: Maestro267 on January 13, 2023, 12:20:55 PMI have it as part of the 10-disc British Symphonic Collection (which includes a disc of Arnold, to keep it on topic for the thread) and the Bostock is my definitive Butterworth 1.

Many thanks for feedback, appreciated. I have ordered the Classico CD.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 14, 2023, 01:25:43 AM
Quote from: Irons on January 14, 2023, 12:39:13 AMMany thanks for feedback, appreciated. I have ordered the Classico CD.

It'll be worth it! I collected the discs originally and it was a great series as Bostock covered such diverse repertoire as Cipriani Potter and Frederic Cowen. If you can find it, try to get volume 12 "Elgar and the English Choral Tradition" recorded in Liverpool which includes the orchestral version of Dyson's The Blacksmiths, Brian's Psalm 23 and Bridge's A Prayer.

Quote from: vandermolen on January 13, 2023, 12:23:08 PMThe Arnold disc (recently reissued on Alto) is a very fine one.

A valiant effort to keep the thread on track...

;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 14, 2023, 03:02:18 AM
QuoteIt'll be worth it! I collected the discs originally and it was a great series as Bostock covered such diverse repertoire as Cipriani Potter and Frederic Cowen. If you can find it, try to get volume 12 "Elgar and the English Choral Tradition" recorded in Liverpool which includes the orchestral version of Dyson's The Blacksmiths, Brian's Psalm 23 and Bridge's A Prayer.

A valiant effort to keep the thread on track...

;D

Oh no off topic AGAIN!!!  To the highlighted text - I do like that disc a lot but it contains one of the most curious recording errors I know!  The first solo soprano entry in the very beautiful Howells Sine Nomine is actually sung on the wrong notes - a straight comparison with the only other recording of the work on Naxos reveals the mistake.  Quite how that got past singer, conductor and producer I do not know.....
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 14, 2023, 06:36:20 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on January 14, 2023, 03:02:18 AMOh no off topic AGAIN!!!  To the highlighted text - I do like that disc a lot but it contains one of the most curious recording errors I know!  The first solo soprano entry in the very beautiful Howells Sine Nomine is actually sung on the wrong notes - a straight comparison with the only other recording of the work on Naxos reveals the mistake.  Quite how that got past singer, conductor and producer I do not know.....

Not as great as Dorati's "acclaimed" Concertgebouw "Sleeping Beauty" where in the Act 1 March the cellos misread the tenor clef for the bass clef. Perhaps Dorati had nipped out to the loo. Sample 2:30 in wonderment...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNQWet5Ai64&list=PLClKtfs9ReDfdmonz_V8XglzlQK1F3VST&index=2

... it didn't happen in Minneapolis (perhaps Dorati had a commode)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0apAHC3NROg&list=OLAK5uy_lyLsZrY3_cAC5HOMrewh2pO-fG_FDcg2M&index=2

 ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 14, 2023, 08:07:44 AM
Quote from: Albion on January 14, 2023, 06:36:20 AMNot as great as Dorati's "acclaimed" Concertgebouw "Sleeping Beauty" where in the Act 1 March the cellos misread the tenor clef for the bass clef. Perhaps Dorati had nipped out to the loo. Sample 2:30 in wonderment...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNQWet5Ai64&list=PLClKtfs9ReDfdmonz_V8XglzlQK1F3VST&index=2

... it didn't happen in Minneapolis (perhaps Dorati had a commode)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0apAHC3NROg&list=OLAK5uy_lyLsZrY3_cAC5HOMrewh2pO-fG_FDcg2M&index=2

 ;D

I did know about that one - but it still comes up as a shock!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on January 15, 2023, 10:25:24 AM
Quote from: relm1 on January 12, 2023, 05:47:32 AMI very much enjoyed this new release from Chandos.  Great sound and performances plus I think some rarities such as Arnold's earliest symphonic poem, The Larch Trees, op. 3.  Philharmonic Concerto, Op.120, is exciting and dramatic work, a concerto for orchestra.

(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiOTQxMTg5My4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6OTAwfSwianBlZyI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0IjoianBlZyJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE2NzA0MzA1MzB9)

I, too, really enjoy this new release. I bought the CD but on uploading it to my laptop then iPhone the alphabet characters all look Chinese! Mervyn Cooke's excellent booklet notes mention that the "wrong" recurring note (my phrase) during the "The Padstow Lifeboat" represents the sound of the foghorn at the nearby Trevose Head lighthouse. I had not known this and it adds to my enjoyment.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 16, 2023, 01:26:05 AM
Quote from: Carshot on January 15, 2023, 10:25:24 AMI, too, really enjoy this new release. I bought the CD but on uploading it to my laptop then iPhone the alphabet characters all look Chinese! Mervyn Cooke's excellent booklet notes mention that the "wrong" recurring note (my phrase) during the "The Padstow Lifeboat" represents the sound of the foghorn at the nearby Trevose Head lighthouse. I had not known this and it adds to my enjoyment.
I like that foghorn moment - great fun!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on January 16, 2023, 05:46:54 AM
Quote from: Figaro on August 20, 2022, 12:57:05 PMAnyone with a view on Arnold's Concertos, either collectively or individually? This is a long old thread but has mainly focused on the symphonies, with very little attention on anything else.

Yet he wrote nearly twenty concertos, for a wide range of instruments (curiously no straight up piano or violin concertos, given they're the most common usually). Mark Morris is quite dismissive of them ("pleasant music making") but is very dismissive of Arnold generally - anyone with a dissenting view? The concertos are all quite short which makes me lean towards not expecting any great masterpieces among them, but does anyone have any favourites or recommendations among them?

Bit of a belated response here! I would say that overall, his concerti are a bit of a mixed bag, but the best ones definitely deserve to be heard. The Guitar Concerto is my favorite, with its glorious tune in the first movement and mysterious second movement. Following closely behind is the Concerto for 2 Pianos 3-Hands, which is tremendous fun all-around. Not technically a concerto, but the Fantasy on a Theme of John Field for piano and orchestra is a substantial, tremendously exciting, and phantasmagorical work with passages resembling some of the more nightmarish sections of his symphonies. His Viola Concerto and Clarinet Concerto no. 2 (with its jazzy finale) are also particular favorites. I find the rest of his woodwind concerti (the ones for flute and horn) to be less interesting.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on January 16, 2023, 06:36:54 AM
QuoteBit of a belated response here! I would say that overall, his concerti are a bit of a mixed bag, but the best ones definitely deserve to be heard. The Guitar Concerto is my favorite, with its glorious tune in the first movement and mysterious second movement. Following closely behind is the Concerto for 2 Pianos 3-Hands, which is tremendous fun all-around. Not technically a concerto, but the Fantasy on a Theme of John Field for piano and orchestra is a substantial, tremendously exciting, and phantasmagorical work with passages resembling some of the more nightmarish sections of his symphonies. His Viola Concerto and Clarinet Concerto no. 2 (with its jazzy finale) are also particular favorites. I find the rest of his woodwind concerti (the ones for flute and horn) to be less interesting.



I agree with what you say.  But I would add the Clarinet Concerto No.1 on this new disc which I think is the best of Arnold's more serious/non-crowd-pleasing concertos.... the performance here is absolutely top notch
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on January 16, 2023, 06:48:59 AM
I like the PC (for three hands) and the Guitar Concerto in particular.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on January 22, 2023, 05:43:26 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on January 16, 2023, 06:36:54 AMI agree with what you say.  But I would add the Clarinet Concerto No.1 on this new disc which I think is the best of Arnold's more serious/non-crowd-pleasing concertos.... the performance here is absolutely top notch

I'll definitely give that new recording a spin! I recall it being a very serious and rather acerbic work (compared to most of his other concerti).
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Albion on January 23, 2023, 06:15:05 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 16, 2023, 06:48:59 AMI like the PC (for three hands) and the Guitar Concerto in particular.

Bang on! Add the Concerto for Piano Duet, the Philharmonic Concerto and the Double Violin Concerto and you're in business...

 ;D
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on February 05, 2023, 11:47:14 PM
I picked up recently quite cheap this disc;

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41z-YipTp6L._AC_.jpg)(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51sTjKnG4AL._AC_.jpg)

Which - as can be seen from the back cover image includes all of Arnold's music for flute.  This actually makes for a very entertaining and diverse programme.  Helped by the fact that Galway is backed by some pretty stellar fellow players.  The Three Shanties are very well known (I bet just about every player of any standard who has been in a woodwind quintet will have tried them they are such fun).  But coming back to the 2 Concerti they are rather good too.  In fact the whole programme is a winner.

I know in the flute community Galway can be a bit of a marmite thing (love it or hate it) I guess mainly because when at a certain point in his career he was promoted as "the world's best flautist" there were other players his equal (probably!)  The truth is he DOES has a quite unique sound -"pipey" with that fast vibrato.  I don't know enough about the flute to express an opinion either way but I enjoyed this disc a lot.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on June 03, 2023, 12:13:43 PM
my favourite concerto is the viola, despite it's somewhat throwaway finale. Indeed it's one of my favourite Arnold works full stop. Amazingly, I saw it done live -- of course by an amateur orchestra as professionals still won't play him for some reason (unless making a recording). I saw the complete symphonic cycle one year at the Arnold Festival. All amateur (or at best semi-pro) orchestras but somehow Arnold can still work that way.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on June 03, 2023, 12:33:46 PM
Just to put my cards on the table-- Arnold is my favourite English composer by a country mile. The symphonies are nearly all wonderful and at least half of the concertos are also very fine. Not to mention songs and chamber music. What I don't really respond to it what mainly gets performed -- the Dances and the like. It's not surprising that he still doesn't really get his due.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on June 04, 2023, 06:42:04 AM
Quote from: lunar22 on June 03, 2023, 12:13:43 PMmy favourite concerto is the viola, despite it's somewhat throwaway finale. Indeed it's one of my favourite Arnold works full stop. Amazingly, I saw it done live -- of course by an amateur orchestra as professionals still won't play him for some reason (unless making a recording). I saw the complete symphonic cycle one year at the Arnold Festival. All amateur (or at best semi-pro) orchestras but somehow Arnold can still work that way.

Indeed, it's a fine work. But yeah, Arnold did have a rather annoying habit of writing somewhat "throwaway" finales in his concerti, often after extended, probing slow movements - as in the Viola Concerto. My absolute favorite concerto by him is the one for guitar (that glorious tune in the first movement!), followed by the unabashedly populist Concerto for 2 Pianos 3-Hands, the phantasmagoric Fantasy on a Theme of John Field for piano and orchestra, the Clarinet Concerto no. 2 (with its jazzy finale), and the Viola Concerto.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on June 04, 2023, 06:46:27 AM
Quote from: lunar22 on June 03, 2023, 12:33:46 PMJust to put my cards on the table-- Arnold is my favourite English composer by a country mile. The symphonies are nearly all wonderful and at least half of the concertos are also very fine. Not to mention songs and chamber music. What I don't really respond to it what mainly gets performed -- the Dances and the like. It's not surprising that he still doesn't really get his due.

He's certainly one of my favorite English composers! He was equally at home in writing both "serious" and "light" music, but much like the equally underrated Kabalevsky from the Soviet Union, he's often dismissed as a composer of exclusively light music (not that there should be anything wrong with that, of course!) whilst in reality there are numerous works of great depth and substance in his output. What I wouldn't give to see a live performance of the 5th Symphony at some point in my life, but I'm not holding my breath...
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on June 04, 2023, 09:10:17 AM
Quote from: kyjo on June 04, 2023, 06:42:04 AMIndeed, it's a fine work. But yeah, Arnold did have a rather annoying habit of writing somewhat "throwaway" finales in his concerti, often after extended, probing slow movements - as in the Viola Concerto. My absolute favorite concerto by him is the one for guitar (that glorious tune in the first movement!), followed by the unabashedly populist Concerto for 2 Pianos 3-Hands, the phantasmagoric Fantasy on a Theme of John Field for piano and orchestra, the Clarinet Concerto no. 2 (with its jazzy finale), and the Viola Concerto.

exactly -- the slow movement of the viola concerto is absolutely vintage Arnold but he can occasionally spoil things by being seemingly frightened to remain in a serious mood. On the other hand, the unpredictability is also arguably one of the most compelling things about him -- a conundrum to the last. I'm possibly slightly less convinced than you with the clarinet concerto but agree entirely with the other choices. I'd never expected a guitar concerto to be so interesting. By the way, although I slightly turn my nose up at the Dances, there is some hilarious lighter Arnold such as the Carnival of the Animals or the Grand Grand Overture with the vacuum cleaners carefully selected to be at the right pitch.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on June 05, 2023, 08:31:59 PM
Quote from: kyjo on June 04, 2023, 06:46:27 AMWhat I wouldn't give to see a live performance of the 5th Symphony at some point in my life, but I'm not holding my breath...

I had the immense pleasure to hear this magnificent symphony live just before the pandemic, and I don't think that a concert like that will take place soon.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 05, 2023, 11:52:30 PM
Quote from: kyjo on June 04, 2023, 06:46:27 AMHe's certainly one of my favorite English composers! He was equally at home in writing both "serious" and "light" music, but much like the equally underrated Kabalevsky from the Soviet Union, he's often dismissed as a composer of exclusively light music (not that there should be anything wrong with that, of course!) whilst in reality there are numerous works of great depth and substance in his output. What I wouldn't give to see a live performance of the 5th Symphony at some point in my life, but I'm not holding my breath...
The 5th is the only one that I have seen live. At the Barbican in London. It was an Arnold birthday concert (80th?) Arnold was there and I got his autograph on the programme - a memorable evening!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on June 06, 2023, 05:47:30 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on June 05, 2023, 11:52:30 PMThe 5th is the only one that I have seen live. At the Barbican in London. It was an Arnold birthday concert (80th?) Arnold was there and I got his autograph on the programme - a memorable evening!

Wow!  Have you somewhere listed all the famous composers/musicians you've met during your life? 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on June 06, 2023, 06:01:26 AM
Quote from: relm1 on June 06, 2023, 05:47:30 AMWow!  Have you somewhere listed all the famous composers/musicians you've met during your life? 
The only one that I had a proper conversation with was Vladimir Jurowski, who was absolutely charming. I managed to get the autograph of Malcolm Arnold (who seemed a bit spaced-out) and Lennox Berkeley who asked if I was a musician (sadly not). I have, however, had some very nice correspondence with a few composers including John Kinsella, Stale Kleiberg, George Lloyd, William Alwyn, David Diamond, Vagn Holmboe and the poet Ursula Vaughan Williams.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Irons on June 06, 2023, 06:46:09 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on June 06, 2023, 06:01:26 AMThe only one that I had a proper conversation with was Vladimir Jurowski, who was absolutely charming. I managed to get the autograph of Malcolm Arnold (who seemed a bit spaced-out) and Lennox Berkeley who asked if I was a musician (sadly not). I have, however, had some very nice correspondence with a few composers including John Kinsella, Stale Kleiberg, George Lloyd, William Alwyn, David Diamond, Vagn Holmboe and the poet Ursula Vaughan Williams.

Your correspondence may turn up in a publication of a composer's letters, Jeffrey. That would be something!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on July 05, 2023, 07:05:48 AM
Hidden away on an unpromisingly titled "Best of the BBC Proms" cover disc of the July BBC Music Magazine is Sakari Oramo's excellent performance of Arnold Symphony No.5 from the 2021 Proms;

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/Z8IAAOSwHMJknV9U/s-l500.jpg)

Still in newsagents for a few more days I think.  Other works are Foulds' Le Cabaret Overture from the same 2021 Prom, RVW's "Toward the Unknown Region" from 2018 and some de Falla and a short piece by Laura Mvula
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on July 05, 2023, 07:12:50 AM
Thanks for the tip - found it on eBay!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on July 05, 2023, 02:37:06 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on July 05, 2023, 07:05:48 AMHidden away on an unpromisingly titled "Best of the BBC Proms" cover disc of the July BBC Music Magazine is Sakari Oramo's excellent performance of Arnold Symphony No.5 from the 2021 Proms;

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/Z8IAAOSwHMJknV9U/s-l500.jpg)

Still in newsagents for a few more days I think.  Other works are Foulds' Le Cabaret Overture from the same 2021 Prom, RVW's "Toward the Unknown Region" from 2018 and some de Falla and a short piece by Laura Mvula
Excellent news! Thanks. Will try to get a copy tomorrow.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on July 06, 2023, 09:06:30 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on July 05, 2023, 07:05:48 AMHidden away on an unpromisingly titled "Best of the BBC Proms" cover disc of the July BBC Music Magazine is Sakari Oramo's excellent performance of Arnold Symphony No.5 from the 2021 Proms;

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/Z8IAAOSwHMJknV9U/s-l500.jpg)

Still in newsagents for a few more days I think.  Other works are Foulds' Le Cabaret Overture from the same 2021 Prom, RVW's "Toward the Unknown Region" from 2018 and some de Falla and a short piece by Laura Mvula
Am listening to it now - a fine performance.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on July 06, 2023, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on July 06, 2023, 09:06:30 AMAm listening to it now - a fine performance.


TBH - I haven't listened to the disc yet but my memory of the live concert was a powerful performance but "different" at certain poiints from what I am used to.  Is that a fair assessment?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on July 07, 2023, 12:11:27 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on July 06, 2023, 09:59:07 AMTBH - I haven't listened to the disc yet but my memory of the live concert was a powerful performance but "different" at certain poiints from what I am used to.  Is that a fair assessment?
Yes, absolutely right IMO. Some sections made me sit up but overall a very fine performance which the audience clearly enjoyed.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on July 11, 2023, 11:25:29 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on July 07, 2023, 12:11:27 AMYes, absolutely right IMO. Some sections made me sit up but overall a very fine performance which the audience clearly enjoyed.

I have listened to this newly released recording several times now and what strikes me is that in places counter rhythms usually treated as supporting subservient strands are given equal prominence here, and to very good effect. Whether this is a decision of the conductor or recording engineers I don't know but suspect the former. Very happy to have this new recording to add to my library.
 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on July 11, 2023, 12:19:37 PM
Quote from: Carshot on July 11, 2023, 11:25:29 AMI have listened to this newly released recording several times now and what strikes me is that in places counter rhythms usually treated as supporting subservient strands are given equal prominence here, and to very good effect. Whether this is a decision of the conductor or recording engineers I don't know but suspect the former. Very happy to have this new recording to add to my library.
 
A very good point! You explain the appeal of this new recording much better than I could.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Carshot on August 15, 2023, 09:49:56 AM
The "official" Malcolm Arnold site is down, reporting that "The MalcolmArnold.co.uk website is currently on hold under the management of SWW Trust Corporation. " Can anyone throw light on what has happened please?

http://malcolmarnold.co.uk/recordings/recordings.html
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 15, 2023, 10:33:25 AM
Quote from: Carshot on August 15, 2023, 09:49:56 AMThe "official" Malcolm Arnold site is down, reporting that "The MalcolmArnold.co.uk website is currently on hold under the management of SWW Trust Corporation. " Can anyone throw light on what has happened please?

http://malcolmarnold.co.uk/recordings/recordings.html

"SWW Trust Corporation
Legal Services
The SWW Trust Corporation offer Estate Administration, Specialist Legal Drafting & Professional Attorneyship services.
Follow
 
View all 6 employees

About us
SWW Trust Corporation provides friendly, efficient and professional executorship, trustee and attorney services, with competitive, transparent pricing
We pride ourselves on delivering a quality service, tailoring it perfectly to meet your needs, whether that is through providing advice or dealing with the complete administration of an estate."

So perhaps the Malcolm Arnold Estate is still being haggled over......?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 22, 2023, 01:54:48 AM
Last night I finished reading (wading!) through this recent biography;

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71fzDdYiAgL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg)

I bought the book as soon as it was published quite a few months ago but simply could not face reading it until now.  In many ways it is revelatory and extremely detailed.  But the story it tells in painful detail is a dark and tragic one.  Arnold's struggles with his mental health later in life were known of but I did not know/realise that he was bi-polar all of his adult life.  Even in his early 20's when working as the principal trumpet in the LPO he had to have an extended leave of absence due to the first of many serious breakdowns.  He was in and out of mental institutions for his entire life.  Heartbreaking details such as he wrote his sunny/life-affirming set of English Dances straight after release from one such incarceration when he was given experimental (now rejected) insulin therapy.

Profound mental health issues compounded by alcolholism meant that his personal life was a disaster for both him and those closest to him.  But the bulk - and I do mean the bulk of this 500+ page book is spent dissecting the years he was looked after by Anthony Day.  Author Meredith lays out the painful detail and this is written almost like a case for the prosecution against Day, his treatment of Arnold and his manipulation of the (valuable) Arnold estate.  It is damming in the extreme.  This is not the place to go into all the arguments and counter arguments - which do exist.  Meredith suggests quite strongly that Day "made" Arnold compose some of his later works even when it was clear that his bi-polar issues as well as the on-set of dementia meant that these works were a shadow of his former glories.  Also, according to Meredith all of Arnold's later recordings (from the late 70's on) were made with Arnold under the direct influence of powerful medication and as such the slow speeds - often discussed here and elsewhere- are not as such a genuine "musical" choice but the product of a drugged mind.  Many of the later works were edited/completed/revised by others who Day then sought to marginalise so as to give the impression that this was a "late flowering" by Arnold himself.

The book continues its narrative after Arnold's death detailing - again painfully - the legal battle between Day and the Arnold children to regain control of his estate - there is some discussion that Day got Arnold to write a new will making him main inheritor.  The sad sad truth is that no-one including Day in this story ultimately "gained" from this.  Arnold's family were estranged and experienced damaging family crises in his earlier life, Arnold himself was clearly a genius but one who was very ill for nearly his entire life.  Even Day, whatever his motivations and personality did devote over twenty years to the daily personal care of a very ill man at considerable personal cost died relatively soon after without any real sense of happiness or fulfilment.

Clearly the music and the man are intertwined but for me this book makes no attempt to really discuss the music - in the closing pages there is not a single comment on Arnold's musical legacy.  There is some discussion about the "worth" of the 9th Symphony.  Personally I do still think that is an extraordinary achievement precisely because of how Arnold was able to produce the work - which is "less" than earlier works - when caught in the vice of his illnesses.  Interestingly there is no mention of other hands doing anything to this work - its the Michaela Petri pieces, the Welsh Dances, The Manx Suite, the 2nd Brass Quintet and the infamous Cello Concerto amongst others that are mentioned as being the pieces that should have been left unwritten....

This book does make me want to listen again to much of Arnold's work although I'm not sure I'll ever be able to hear any of his music again as completely free of shadows.  Which of course is the main irony given that the enduring public persona of Arnold is this rotund, jolly man dancing on the podium in Hoffnung Festival mode.  You do learn a lot about Arnold reading this book but sadness is the enduring emotion.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on August 22, 2023, 03:50:38 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 22, 2023, 01:54:48 AMLast night I finished reading (wading!) through this recent biography;

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71fzDdYiAgL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg)

I bought the book as soon as it was published quite a few months ago but simply could not face reading it until now.  In many ways it is revelatory and extremely detailed.  But the story it tells in painful detail is a dark and tragic one.  Arnold's struggles with his mental health later in life were known of but I did not know/realise that he was bi-polar all of his adult life.  Even in his early 20's when working as the principal trumpet in the LPO he had to have an extended leave of absence due to the first of many serious breakdowns.  He was in and out of mental institutions for his entire life.  Heartbreaking details such as he wrote his sunny/life-affirming set of English Dances straight after release from one such incarceration when he was given experimental (now rejected) insulin therapy.

Profound mental health issues compounded by alcolholism meant that his personal life was a disaster for both him and those closest to him.  But the bulk - and I do mean the bulk of this 500+ page book is spent dissecting the years he was looked after by Anthony Day.  Author Meredith lays out the painful detail and this is written almost like a case for the prosecution against Day, his treatment of Arnold and his manipulation of the (valuable) Arnold estate.  It is damming in the extreme.  This is not the place to go into all the arguments and counter arguments - which do exist.  Meredith suggests quite strongly that Day "made" Arnold compose some of his later works even when it was clear that his bi-polar issues as well as the on-set of dementia meant that these works were a shadow of his former glories.  Also, according to Meredith all of Arnold's later recordings (from the late 70's on) were made with Arnold under the direct influence of powerful medication and as such the slow speeds - often discussed here and elsewhere- are not as such a genuine "musical" choice but the product of a drugged mind.  Many of the later works were edited/completed/revised by others who Day then sought to marginalise so as to give the impression that this was a "late flowering" by Arnold himself.

The book continues its narrative after Arnold's death detailing - again painfully - the legal battle between Day and the Arnold children to regain control of his estate - there is some discussion that Day got Arnold to write a new will making him main inheritor.  The sad sad truth is that no-one including Day in this story ultimately "gained" from this.  Arnold's family were estranged and experienced damaging family crises in his earlier life, Arnold himself was clearly a genius but one who was very ill for nearly his entire life.  Even Day, whatever his motivations and personality did devote over twenty years to the daily personal care of a very ill man at considerable personal cost died relatively soon after without any real sense of happiness or fulfilment.

Clearly the music and the man are intertwined but for me this book makes no attempt to really discuss the music - in the closing pages there is not a single comment on Arnold's musical legacy.  There is some discussion about the "worth" of the 9th Symphony.  Personally I do still think that is an extraordinary achievement precisely because of how Arnold was able to produce the work - which is "less" than earlier works - when caught in the vice of his illnesses.  Interestingly there is no mention of other hands doing anything to this work - its the Michaela Petri pieces, the Welsh Dances, The Manx Suite, the 2nd Brass Quintet and the infamous Cello Concerto amongst others that are mentioned as being the pieces that should have been left unwritten....

This book does make me want to listen again to much of Arnold's work although I'm not sure I'll ever be able to hear any of his music again as completely free of shadows.  Which of course is the main irony given that the enduring public persona of Arnold is this rotund, jolly man dancing on the podium in Hoffnung Festival mode.  You do learn a lot about Arnold reading this book but sadness is the enduring emotion.
Interesting review - thanks
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on August 22, 2023, 04:14:37 AM
this book seems to have had mixed reviews -- among the complaints are the biased treatment of Day and the dismissal of all his late works, both of which you highlight. I think for true Arnold fans, the 9th symphony is a critical work -- it may be relatively basic on a technical level but nevertheless speaks directly to the heart. And leaves us with the message that inspiration and depth of feeling are ultimately far more important than technical facility, although of course in his prime, Arnold had both. Perhaps I'll get it when it comes out in paperback.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Papy Oli on August 22, 2023, 04:21:49 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 22, 2023, 01:54:48 AMLast night I finished reading (wading!) through this recent biography;

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71fzDdYiAgL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg)


Quote from: vandermolen on August 22, 2023, 03:50:38 AMInteresting review - thanks

indeed, thanks @Roasted Swan !
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 22, 2023, 04:32:38 AM
Quote from: lunar22 on August 22, 2023, 04:14:37 AMthis book seems to have had mixed reviews -- among the complaints are the biased treatment of Day and the dismissal of all his late works, both of which you highlight. I think for true Arnold fans, the 9th symphony is a critical work -- it may be relatively basic on a technical level but nevertheless speaks directly to the heart. And leaves us with the message that inspiration and depth of feeling are ultimately far more important than technical facility, although of course in his prime, Arnold had both. Perhaps I'll get it when it comes out in paperback.

to the bolded text - exactly so and very well put......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: atardecer on August 24, 2023, 08:22:28 PM
This forum reminded me of this composer, and I'm starting to get into his music I think. I had listened to the guitar concerto ages ago and thought it was good. I recently re-listened to the guitar concerto and then tried the 5th symphony and thought both were excellent. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on August 25, 2023, 06:07:29 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on August 22, 2023, 01:54:48 AMLast night I finished reading (wading!) through this recent biography;

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71fzDdYiAgL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg)


Fascinating.  It reminds me of Sir Peter Maxwell Davies whose team was robbing him.  But way worse since Arnold had mental issues and was heavily drugged during this time.  Really awful.  Where do things stand now?  Is Day still alive?  Did Arnold's kids get any of Arnold's estate?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Maestro267 on August 25, 2023, 07:22:47 AM
I was going to say why did they put a picture of someone else on the cover of that biography before realizing that I've never ever seen a picture of a young Malcolm Arnold before. All the photos I've seen are of him in older age.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on August 25, 2023, 07:42:59 AM
Quote from: relm1 on August 25, 2023, 06:07:29 AMFascinating.  It reminds me of Sir Peter Maxwell Davies whose team was robbing him.  But way worse since Arnold had mental issues and was heavily drugged during this time.  Really awful.  Where do things stand now?  Is Day still alive?  Did Arnold's kids get any of Arnold's estate?

No, Anthony Day died in February 2019.  I doubt this book could/would have been written if he was still alive to contest it.  The terms of Arnold's last will left Day the house where they had lived in full (in fact Day as business manager had had the deeds transferred to him some years before) as well as 50% of the royalties.  After Arnold's death there was extended legal wrangles about ownership of his manuscripts which Day claimed to all be his but ultimately many were retained by the Arnold family and now are deposited at Eton college library.  On Day's death he in turn left his share of the royalty income in full and without any conditions to Bunwell Primary School (a small school near where Day and Arnold lived in Norfolk in the East of England) - which I assume benefits from this substantial gift to this day. 

The genuine tragedy of this story is how no-one benefitted and everyone's life - including Day's - was blighted.  My guess is that he genuinely thought he was "helping" Arnold but along the way reckoned he should receive his "fair share" of the financial pie that keeping Arnold alive generated.  But the book tells stories of broken relationships and perceived sleights throughout Day's life including his closest family - he had power of attroney over his mother's estate and took £50k from it without her consent or the consent of his siblings.  This book should be read by the curious but ultimately it tells the reader little about Arnold the artist/composer and perhaps too much about him as a very sick and rather tragic figure.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on August 25, 2023, 07:44:15 AM
Quote from: relm1 on August 25, 2023, 06:07:29 AMWhere do things stand now?  Is Day still alive?  Did Arnold's kids get any of Arnold's estate?
Day died in 2019. The kids certainly got something but Day got the greater part. What exactly happened to the estate after Day's death, perhaps someone else knows but it seems there are still arguments going on over the archives.

PS I see that Roasted Swan answered simultaneously with more info. It's a pretty strange irony to me that much of his archives are now in that pillar of the Establishment, Eton College. Surely Arnold would have turned in his grave -- or perhaps he would have seen the funny side
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Luke on August 26, 2023, 02:06:30 PM
Quote from: relm1 on August 25, 2023, 06:07:29 AMFascinating.  It reminds me of Sir Peter Maxwell Davies whose team was robbing him.  But way worse since...

Just FWIW I heard some of the unreported domestic events surrounding the defrauding of PMD from friends and witnesses when I visited Sanday earlier this year, and the whole situation was shocking, extending way beyond theft into much scarier places.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on September 04, 2023, 07:14:12 AM
A masterpiece of Arnold's oeuvre that still receives far too little attention (even from fans of the composer) is the Fantasy on a Theme of John Field for piano and orchestra:

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51sACmTA73L._SY300_SX300_QL70_FMwebp_.jpg)

https://youtu.be/QZGKpVUf0fs?si=BZpvDQy2HRsnc-wM

A substantial piece at 22 minutes in length, it dates from the 1970s and contains echoes of the contemporaneous 7th Symphony in its more nightmarish moments, particularly the opening few minutes. The juxtapositions between the beguiling sweetness of the John Field nocturne that forms the basis of the work and the phantasmagorical, often disturbed passages that frequently disrupt it make for an absolutely thrilling rollercoaster ride of a listen. The work strikes me as very much a late-20th century counterpart to the Dohnanyi Variations on a Nursery Tune, though of course the Arnold is overall much darker in mood. It's given an absolutely scintillating performance on the above disc by Peter Donohoe and the RSNO under Martin Yates. Anyone else familiar with this rather extraordinary work?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: DavidW on September 04, 2023, 08:26:53 AM
Kyjo,

Arnold's 7th is my second favorite Arnold symphony (with the 9th being my favorite).  What I like about Arnold is that even when he is dark, he is still rhythmic and melodic.  When I want something dark but I don't want to indulge in Pettersson, Mahler etc. that take it to 11, the 7th or the 9th is where I usually turn to.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Symphonic Addict on September 04, 2023, 12:15:21 PM
Quote from: kyjo on September 04, 2023, 07:14:12 AMA masterpiece of Arnold's oeuvre that still receives far too little attention (even from fans of the composer) is the Fantasy on a Theme of John Field for piano and orchestra:

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51sACmTA73L._SY300_SX300_QL70_FMwebp_.jpg)

https://youtu.be/QZGKpVUf0fs?si=BZpvDQy2HRsnc-wM

A substantial piece at 22 minutes in length, it dates from the 1970s and contains echoes of the contemporaneous 7th Symphony in its more nightmarish moments, particularly the opening few minutes. The juxtapositions between the beguiling sweetness of the John Field nocturne that forms the basis of the work and the phantasmagorical, often disturbed passages that frequently disrupt it make for an absolutely thrilling rollercoaster ride of a listen. The work strikes me as very much a late-20th century counterpart to the Dohnanyi Variations on a Nursery Tune, though of course the Arnold is overall much darker in mood. It's given an absolutely scintillating performance on the above disc by Peter Donohoe and the RSNO under Martin Yates. Anyone else familiar with this rather extraordinary work?

Agreed, all what one wants to hear from Arnold's characteristic style is there.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: vandermolen on September 04, 2023, 12:47:40 PM
Quote from: lunar22 on August 25, 2023, 07:44:15 AMDay died in 2019. The kids certainly got something but Day got the greater part. What exactly happened to the estate after Day's death, perhaps someone else knows but it seems there are still arguments going on over the archives.

PS I see that Roasted Swan answered simultaneously with more info. It's a pretty strange irony to me that much of his archives are now in that pillar of the Establishment, Eton College. Surely Arnold would have turned in his grave -- or perhaps he would have seen the funny side
After all, he did write the St Trinian's school song!
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on September 04, 2023, 11:08:14 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on September 04, 2023, 12:47:40 PMAfter all, he did write the St Trinian's school song!

There is that -- and it's one of his more memorable lighter works.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on September 05, 2023, 05:12:03 AM
Quote from: kyjo on September 04, 2023, 07:14:12 AMA masterpiece of Arnold's oeuvre that still receives far too little attention (even from fans of the composer) is the Fantasy on a Theme of John Field for piano and orchestra:

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51sACmTA73L._SY300_SX300_QL70_FMwebp_.jpg)

https://youtu.be/QZGKpVUf0fs?si=BZpvDQy2HRsnc-wM

A substantial piece at 22 minutes in length, it dates from the 1970s and contains echoes of the contemporaneous 7th Symphony in its more nightmarish moments, particularly the opening few minutes. The juxtapositions between the beguiling sweetness of the John Field nocturne that forms the basis of the work and the phantasmagorical, often disturbed passages that frequently disrupt it make for an absolutely thrilling rollercoaster ride of a listen. The work strikes me as very much a late-20th century counterpart to the Dohnanyi Variations on a Nursery Tune, though of course the Arnold is overall much darker in mood. It's given an absolutely scintillating performance on the above disc by Peter Donohoe and the RSNO under Martin Yates. Anyone else familiar with this rather extraordinary work?

Interestingly, in the book I mention above Meredith singles out the Field Fantasy as a key Arnold work - its one of the few in this book that he discusses in much detail.  A lot has to do with Arnold increasingly fractured mental health at the time but he sees it as one where Arnold's compositional skill has not yet been seriously impaired by his health.  Key to its success he feels is a performance which fully embraces the harsh juxtapositions of styles and content.  In this regard I think Donohoe/Yates are the most successful by some distance of the 3 commercial recordings good though Lill/Handley & Dyson/Heikkila are.  This same Dutton disc contains the best version (for me) of Symphony 7 too.  Another potentially disturbing/perplexing work but one performed by Yates/RSNO with blazing conviction.  The first performance where the work "made sense" for me.  Overall an excellent Arnold disc and one that makes me sorry Yates has not recorded more......
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: kyjo on September 07, 2023, 04:27:18 PM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on September 05, 2023, 05:12:03 AMInterestingly, in the book I mention above Meredith singles out the Field Fantasy as a key Arnold work - its one of the few in this book that he discusses in much detail.  A lot has to do with Arnold increasingly fractured mental health at the time but he sees it as one where Arnold's compositional skill has not yet been seriously impaired by his health.  Key to its success he feels is a performance which fully embraces the harsh juxtapositions of styles and content.  In this regard I think Donohoe/Yates are the most successful by some distance of the 3 commercial recordings good though Lill/Handley & Dyson/Heikkila are.  This same Dutton disc contains the best version (for me) of Symphony 7 too.  Another potentially disturbing/perplexing work but one performed by Yates/RSNO with blazing conviction.  The first performance where the work "made sense" for me.  Overall an excellent Arnold disc and one that makes me sorry Yates has not recorded more......

Indeed, the Field Fantasy is one of the works which best encapsulates the multifaceted nature of Arnold's compositional personality (dark/nightmarish, fun/humorous, lyrical/Romantic) and the Dutton recording does it full justice. In fact, it's one of the best discs devoted to Arnold's music known to me - the 7th Symphony and Philharmonic Concerto are also fabulous.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: atardecer on September 10, 2023, 11:41:05 PM
Malcolm Arnold - Fantasy for guitar op. 107
Shani Inbar guitar

Another piece by Arnold I'm impressed with, this is a very imaginative composition. I'm not sure I've come across another guitar work where the two low strings are combined to create the percussive effect as is done here. Another thing is often I find tremolo parts on classical guitar don't sound that great to me, yet I find the tremolo sections here quite unique (again with this I think he is more percussive in his approach) and tastefully written.

Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on September 12, 2023, 02:41:46 AM
Courtesy of the recent biography - here's a quiz question for those interested......

Which "standard" orchestral instrument (present in many 19th century scores) did Arnold NEVER use because he disliked its sound? [NB: it does appear in one of the later scores edited/arranged by another hand but never by Arnold himself]
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on September 12, 2023, 04:51:25 AM
although on a website which lists his orchestral music with orchestration, there is a symbol for cor anglais, I can't so far find any works which contain it and there are a few composers who dislike it (I love it and use it all the time...). I also can't think offhand of any prominent solo for that instrument. So that for a wild guess?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on September 12, 2023, 06:00:55 AM
Quote from: lunar22 on September 12, 2023, 04:51:25 AMalthough on a website which lists his orchestral music with orchestration, there is a symbol for cor anglais, I can't so far find any works which contain it and there are a few composers who dislike it (I love it and use it all the time...). I also can't think offhand of any prominent solo for that instrument. So that for a wild guess?

Well done - got it in one!  I must admit I love the Cor Anglais - no explanation is given as to why Arnold did not.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on September 12, 2023, 06:09:03 AM
Quote from: Roasted Swan on September 12, 2023, 02:41:46 AMCourtesy of the recent biography - here's a quiz question for those interested......

Which "standard" orchestral instrument (present in many 19th century scores) did Arnold NEVER use because he disliked its sound? [NB: it does appear in one of the later scores edited/arranged by another hand but never by Arnold himself]

I was thinking of tuba, but no, that was Sibelius who didn't use Tuba after his Symphony No. 2.  Maybe harp?
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on September 12, 2023, 06:17:39 AM
Quote from: kyjo on September 07, 2023, 04:27:18 PMIndeed, the Field Fantasy is one of the works which best encapsulates the multifaceted nature of Arnold's compositional personality (dark/nightmarish, fun/humorous, lyrical/Romantic) 

it's no surprise the Field Fantasy comes at a similar period to the 7th symphony. Both are among his darkest and most troubled works as well as being among the finest.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: relm1 on December 01, 2023, 05:40:39 AM
Quote from: lunar22 on September 12, 2023, 06:17:39 AMit's no surprise the Field Fantasy comes at a similar period to the 7th symphony. Both are among his darkest and most troubled works as well as being among the finest.

I also like the Philharmonic Concerto which I think is from the same period and feels like a symphony, perhaps a concerto for orchestra given its title. 
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: lunar22 on December 01, 2023, 06:30:21 AM
indeed -- I sometimes think of the Field Fantasy and Philharmonic Concerto almost in the same breath despite the obvious differences.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Alex Bozman on December 06, 2023, 02:40:45 PM
Quote from: relm1 on December 01, 2023, 05:40:39 AMI also like the Philharmonic Concerto which I think is from the same period and feels like a symphony, perhaps a concerto for orchestra given its title. 
Agree about the Philharmonic Concerto. It's quite a gritty piece and packs a lot into a fairly short time span.
Title: Re: sir Malcolm Arnold
Post by: Roasted Swan on December 06, 2023, 11:04:16 PM
Quote from: Alex Bozman on December 06, 2023, 02:40:45 PMAgree about the Philharmonic Concerto. It's quite a gritty piece and packs a lot into a fairly short time span.

I like the Philharmonic Concerto  but critically it has dividied opinion.  The nay-sayers find it too bombastic and full of empty noisy gestures.  The most recent biographer seems to fall into the camp of it being a work that in some way Arnold wrote against his will nd that it reflects his mental decline.