What is the most underestimated Symphony?.
You know, the one that should be famous and well known, but languishes in obscurity, and why?.
I have had a great tendency to concentrate on the core repertoire, so my discoveries of lesser known works aren't as great as they should be, so this question should create a nice shopping list of possible Symphonies to get into.
OK, so here's mine, Bax's Third!, not exactly obscure, and yet it's such an incredible work, there should be dozens of recordings of it, all the major Conductors should have seriously thought about recording it, and yet...
So what's yours?.
The 2 symphonies for organ and orchestra by Alexandre Guilmant are really excellent and should be better known.
Roberto Gerhard's Collages.
Not that nos. 1, 2, and 4 aren't also very nice. They are.
I guess the question is "by whom?"
By the general public: Beethoven's 5th since it exists in their mind as a simple motif.
By radio listeners: Shostakovich's 8th for being too dark and broody for background consumption.
By gmg: ah c'mon do you guys underestimate anything?
:D
Quote from: DavidW on May 07, 2010, 04:11:04 PM
I guess the question is "by whom?"
By the general public: Beethoven's 5th since it exists in their mind as a simple motif.
By radio listeners: Shostakovich's 8th for being too dark and broody for background consumption.
By gmg: ah c'mon do you guys underestimate anything?
:D
Not to the degree it deserves... :)
8)
----------------
Now playing:
Quatuor Terpsycordes - D 810 Quartet in d for Strings 2nd mvmt - Andante con moto
Speaking of which, this is some bitchin' Schubert, underestimated IMO... ;)
8)
I wouldn't call them obscure but three symphonies that are grossly overshadowed by other works are:
Dvorak's 5th
Beethoven's 4th
Schubert's 5th
One which has great credentials to be played more often than it currently is (which is basically not at all): Dopper's 7th.
It is constructed so successfully that if any of the four movements were part of another less-known symphony, they would be considered a highlight. Together they're great, and the work has everything - tight form, nice melodies, an atmospheric, folky scherzo, beautiful adagio with pseudo (early) Sibelian tones and a hilariously "I shall out-do all that has come before" finale which make the whole thing one of the biggest potential audience-pleasers. Bantock's Celtic and Hebridean symphonies have similar potential to really be enjoyed by people, but the works probably offer too many challenges for any concert breakthrough. The music itself is naive, but so is things like the Planets, and that is fine stuff too.
Tubin's 4th is "known", but really generally only as part of a recorded cycle with only niche interest. This symphony in particular though can stand alongside early Sibelius, RVW and so on, which get played so much more it is ridiculous. Brian's 7th. I am not joking :'( Enescu's symphonies occupy a strange zone in which the composer is somewhat known and respected, but the music is unknown. I agree with mention of Gerhard - my ears are inexperienced to this idiom, but his style reminded me somewhat of some Varèse, who has no problem in being a popular figure. Hornteacher is also right to point out that early Dvořák is morbidly underrated. Symphonies 2-5 (I think the 6th has "broken through" in the past few decades) are super.
It took some effort not to just list favourites that I know few others would like - often for good reason :P Composers like Atterberg and Holmboe in particular pose problems. They write music on a very high level of achivement, but no piece really stands out to say "pick me!" like Tubin manages to achieve in his 4th.
Well, I'd pick Atterberg's 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th, and 8th.
If I had to pick only one, I'd go with the one-and-only symphony by Jan Vorisek, which is better than most of Schubert's, and about as good as the first two Beethovens.
Oh, boy, where to begin? :o I collect symphony cycles and have been fortunate to "discover" some real winners off the beaten path.
One that immediately springs to mind is Pettersson's 7th, which, it's true, has its adherents among lovers of obscure 20th century orchestral works, but to the general classical music public is probably rarely heard (of). To me, this work is everything a contemporary symphony should be: grand in scale, serious in intent, emotionally gripping (some would say draining because of its intense gloom), challenging yet accessible, tuneful, and subtly constructed with great craftsmanship. Of the two widely available recordings, I prefer
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/410P69VA3EL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
Of others, I could easily see (hear?) Atterberg's 3, 4, or 6 entering the core repertoire and enjoying wide appeal on concert programs, thanks to their great tunefulness and carefully modulated drama. Plus they sound close to film music, which is the baseline for orchestral music for most folks these days.
Lots of great ones from the Classical and early Romantic era. Two worthy of mention are Vanhal g2, which can stand alongside the Sturm und Drang masterpieces of Haydn, and Kalliwoda's 5th, which is worthy of inclusion amongst the symphonies of LvB, Schubert, Schumann, and Mendelssohn.
I could go on... ;D
PS Back to the original post, I couldn't agree more about Bax--a great treasure of early 20th-century music, though admittedly not to everyone's taste.
It's a shame that so few conductors ever programs the Sibelius 3rd symphony at concerts. I've always been very fond of this work. It's probably the sunniest and most optimistic of the Sibelius symphonies , and is illustrative of the composer's description of his music as "pure fresh water" as constrasted with the "musical cocktails" his contemporaries were producing.
It's a bright,fresh and invigorating symphony which deserves to be heard more often.
However,there a quite a few excellent recordings of it by such eminent Sibelians as
Paavo Berglund, Lorin Maazel, Simon Rattle, Vladimir Ashkenazy and others.
Kurt Weill's 2nd.
Franz Schmidt's symphonies, at least outside of Austria and Slovakia (his birthplace), go unheard. Anyone who likes Brahms, Dvorak, Bruckner, Schubert or Strauss should have no problem appreciating Schmidt. His First makes a glorious noise and I can not imagine an audience not enjoying themselves.
Sarge
Hugo Alfvén's Nos.2 and 4.
Bruckner's 5th. Entirely deserving of the same praise as the 7th, 8th, 9th and 4th.
OK, not the most underestimated symphony, but it came to mind.
I agree with the others who saying early Dvorak. Love his 4th symphony!
William Boyce, Symphony No. 1. Absolutely gorgeous.
Quote from: Grazioso on May 08, 2010, 04:38:28 AM
One that immediately springs to mind is Pettersson's 7th, which, it's true, has its adherents among lovers of obscure 20th century orchestral works, but to the general classical music public is probably rarely heard (of). To me, this work is everything a contemporary symphony should be: grand in scale, serious in intent, emotionally gripping (some would say draining because of its intense gloom), challenging yet accessible, tuneful, and subtly constructed with great craftsmanship. Of the two widely available recordings, I prefer
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/410P69VA3EL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
I love that symphony; Segerstam's is the one recording I
haven't heard. I prefer Dorati's to the CPO.
Quote from: Velimir on May 08, 2010, 12:34:34 AM
If I had to pick only one, I'd go with the one-and-only symphony by Jan Vorisek, which is better than most of Schubert's, and about as good as the first two Beethovens.
I thought of the same symphony when I saw the title of this thread. However, I'd say that the comparison with Beethoven's first two symphonies is difficult, because Vorísek's was composed twenty years later.
But it is undoubtedly one of the greatest symphonic creations of the 1820s. The Andante sounds to me as a peculiar mixture of Mozart and Dvorák, and the Scherzo has a vital and a bit perverse energy that is quite unique.
Ten beautiful, not widely known (perhaps even underestimated, who can tell?) symphonies that I happen to love - and you might not know yet ;) :
Matthijs Vermeulen - Symphony No. 2 `Prélude à la nouvelle journée' (1919)
Léon Orthel – Symphony No. 2 `Piccola Sinfonia' (1940)
Eugene Goossens – Symphony No. 1 (1940)
Ludvig Irgens Jensen – Sinfonia in Re (1943)
Cecil Armstrong Gibbs – Symphony No. 3 `Westmorland' *) (1944)
Kaljo Raid – Symphony No. 1 (1944)
Joly Braga Santos – Symphony No. 3 (1949)
Ulvi Cemâl Erkin – Symphony No. 2 (1951)
Lennox Berkeley – Symphony No. 2 (1958)
Arnold Cooke – Symphony No. 3 (1967)
*) BTW, the constituency voted 60 % Lib.Dem., last Thursday
If I had to choose one, it would have to be Dieter Schnebel's massive Sinfonie X.
Quote from: Brahmsian on May 08, 2010, 08:54:40 AM
Bruckner's 5th. Entirely deserving of the same praise as the 7th, 8th, 9th and 4th.
OK, not the most underestimated symphony, but it came to mind.
I agree with the others who saying early Dvorak. Love his 4th symphony!
Where Bruckner is concerned, it seems like the 6th--a glorious work--gets shorter shrift than the 5th :(
Quote from: Lethe on May 07, 2010, 04:51:50 PM... Dopper's 7th ... Bantock's Celtic and Hebridean symphonies ... Tubin's 4th ... Brian's 7th ... Enescu's symphonies ... Gerhard ... early Dvořák ... Atterberg and Holmboe ...
As so often, I'm in complete agreement! Yet I don't think Dopper's Seventh is in the same league as Tubin, Brian or Holmboe - three favourites. But great to read all those names and to know there are Highly Esteemed Listeners who care about them ... :)
Magnard 3
Vorisek
Braga Santos 4
Gade 1
Atterberg 3
Hans Huber's Sym. 1: excellent mix of powerful and heartfelt passages, great melodies and admirable cohesion.
Another wonderful but sadly neglected symphony is the single one by Paul Dukas.
There's more to this French composer than the Sorcerer's apprentice,but unfortunately not much,because he was so self-critical that he destroyed most of his music.
The symphony in C major is a three movement work, and filled with wonderful melodic ideas. When you hear it wou will wonder where it's been all your life.
The outer movements are highly energetic and optimistic,and the slow movement is filled with melancholy,but with a brighter middle section.
The symphony has been recorded a number of times, by such conductors as Jean Martinon on EMI ( a classic recording) Jean Fournet and Yan-Pascal Tortelier,among others. I got to know it in the 70s from a long out of print Decca recording with Walter Weller and the LPO which is long overdue for being reissued on CD.
Don't hesitate to look for a recording of this wonderful symphony, one of the finest by a French composer.
Now, writing about French composers, the four symphonies by Étienne-Nicolas Méhul spring to mind. Some of the finest of the Classical era and, unfortunately, seldom played or recorded.
On the basis of remarks here and then a listen on Youtube, I have ordered the Pettersson No 7, sounds remarkable, brooding and consolatory by turns.
Mike
Quote from: knight on May 09, 2010, 10:32:18 AM
On the basis of remarks here and then a listen on Youtube, I have ordered the Pettersson No 7, sounds remarkable, brooding and consolatory by turns.
Mike
It's an amazing piece, superior to anything else I've heard of Pettersson's work; although to be fair, I've only heard about six of the symphonies, and there may be some gems I've not heard yet.
Be warned it's a real downer; you'll be digging out your Mahler 9 for a bit of light relief afterwards.
Heck....well, I cannot say that I have not been warned. But, it did sound like my kind of piece.
Mike
Quote from: MDL on May 09, 2010, 11:28:29 AM
Be warned it's a real downer; you'll be digging out your Mahler 9 for a bit of light relief afterwards.
Pettersson makes Shostakovich sound like Mr. Rogers. The former's music isn't leavened (undermined?) by irony or black humor, but is deadly serious and intensely personal. It's not all darkest gloom, though: the 7th, for example, has its moments of great, luminous beauty and it ends, to my ears, more in philosophical resignation than in despair. Btw, Knight, if you like the 7th, try the 8th next, for something rather along the same lines. Of the two recordings I have, I prefer Segerstam on BIS over the CPO disc.
I'd say Moeran's (only) Symphony does not get nearly the love it deserves-- at least outside of GMG.
It's Funny, for Atterberg the 5th is still my fave-- there is something in the middle movement that that just knocks me over every time. 3, 6, 7 and 8 are all great.
Hanson's 4th is one that doesn't get the recognition it deserves, IMO.
Also second the recommendation for Pettersson's 8th-- I have grown to like that one most of his symphonies.
Also have to chime in on Braga Santos's 4th.
This is the problem I have with Atterberg. He's great, but people in this thread have so far suggested 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (is the 9th that bad ;D), which is damn near the entire cycle rather than a single "this screams to be chosen" work.
Quote from: Daverz on May 08, 2010, 09:12:11 PM
Magnard 3
Since Magnard's Third is his symphony that's most often cited as a favorite or best, I submit it should not be in this thread as "underestimated." Instead, I think his true underappreciated masterwork is the Fourth. (That it also happens to be my favorite of the four is neither here nor there...just a coincidence...really ;D )
Sarge
Quote from: jowcol on May 10, 2010, 04:37:09 AM
Also second the recommendation for Pettersson's 8th-- I have grown to like that one most of his symphonies.
Been there, done that. I started by being bowled over by the 7th (Dorati), then, when I had recovered, it was time for the 8th being the favorite (Commissiona). After recovering from that, I think the 6th became my favorite (Kamu/Sony as well as Trojahn/cpo). I'm currently feeling that maybe the 9th are the most compelling (but even more demanding listening than those cited). Every decade I seem to move on to another favorite, these works takes time to absorb.
But above all, we need all of those older recordings on CD!
Quote from: Lethe on May 10, 2010, 04:41:08 AM
This is the problem I have with Atterberg. He's great, but people in this thread have so far suggested 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (is the 9th that bad ;D), which is damn near the entire cycle rather than a single "this screams to be chosen" work.
As problems go, having too much good material to choose from is a great one to have, but I'd agree it doesn't fit this thread as well.
Quote from: Lethe on May 10, 2010, 04:41:08 AM
This is the problem I have with Atterberg. He's great, but people in this thread have so far suggested 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (is the 9th that bad ;D), which is damn near the entire cycle rather than a single "this screams to be chosen" work.
Fine, then...
I'll scream it.
2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!... and 3. ::)
...and...
Two of the finest, almost never programmed.
Wm.Schuman 3rd Symphony
Hindemith Symphony in E Flat
Can't understand the obscurity. ::)
If I'm remembering correctly, a performance of the SIBELIUS 4th Symphony a couple of years ago by either Toronto or Montreal S.O. was the first ever in Canada. Certainly held in high esteem by thread members, but elsewhere almost always eschewed. Even 3, 6 & 7 get more performances.
I am constantly tempted to throw the Korngold F minor into the fray!
Quote from: Lethe on May 10, 2010, 04:41:08 AM
This is the problem I have with Atterberg. He's great, but people in this thread have so far suggested 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (is the 9th that bad ;D), which is damn near the entire cycle rather than a single "this screams to be chosen" work.
I would venture to say that Atterberg is one of the most underestimated symphonists! (His non-symphonies haven't grabbed me as much, so far.) I haven't heard 2 in a couple years - sorry, Greg - but would definitely second the votes for 3 and especially 8.
EDIT: Wrote symphonies instead of symphonists. Whoops
Any of the early Dvořák. Just need the right recording to make them shine:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61s53Fmx0DL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
Glad you like that set, Bill! ...did I recommend them to you? I forget. :-X I think I'll give Anguelov a spin tomorrow in the Second and Fourth. Dvorak's Second is the symphony where he truly found his mature "voice" - I especially love the scherzo, which is this marvelous concoction that sounds like the Beethoven of the 7th and 8th symphonies attempting to write some "Slavonic Dances." And the finale is irresistible...
Quote from: erato on May 10, 2010, 02:53:12 PM
I am constantly tempted to throw the Korngold F minor into the fray!
Agreed, a masterpiece that's at least well represented on disc, even if it doesn't seem to garner much discussion.
Quote from: Grazioso on May 12, 2010, 03:46:41 AM
Agreed, a masterpiece that's at least well represented on disc, even if it doesn't seem to garner much discussion.
...or performances, which is what tempted me to represent it as underestimated. At a time when almost everything is available on disc, performances are what matter.
Quote from: erato on May 12, 2010, 04:31:50 AM
...or performances, which is what tempted me to represent it as underestimated. At a time when almost everything is available on disc, performances are what matter.
It's maybe the hardest tonal symphony ever written, which is one reason why it garners so few performances.
Quote from: Christo on May 12, 2010, 04:44:20 AM
Errrr ... Chopin? Bach? :-\
I'm confused ... I was referring to things Atterberg wrote that were not symphonies?
Quote from: Guido on May 12, 2010, 07:08:36 AM
It's maybe the hardest tonal symphony ever written, which is one reason why it garners so few performances.
Hardest in what way? To play? To conduct? To listen to?
Quote from: MDL on May 09, 2010, 11:28:29 AM
It's an amazing piece, superior to anything else I've heard of Pettersson's work; although to be fair, I've only heard about six of the symphonies, and there may be some gems I've not heard yet.
Be warned it's a real downer; you'll be digging out your Mahler 9 for a bit of light relief afterwards.
I have been away on holiday and it was waiting for my return yestarday. I have listened through to it three times and I am very glad it has been brought to my attention. It certainly is bleak, but I did not find it depressing. I need to listen some more to get the hang of the one movement sweep.
Mike
All 2.5 of Borodin's symphonies (the 3rd being completed posthumously by Glazunov) are almost entirely ignored. They're not even played here in Russia.
A great pity as they're remarkable music, No 2 (B-minor) most especially so - "up there" with the Tchaikovsky symphonies, I would have said?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3e6CPLBZWI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3e6CPLBZWI)
Quote from: Grazioso on May 10, 2010, 04:14:00 AM
Pettersson makes Shostakovich sound like Mr. Rogers. The former's music isn't leavened (undermined?) by irony or black humor, but is deadly serious and intensely personal. It's not all darkest gloom, though: the 7th, for example, has its moments of great, luminous beauty and it ends, to my ears, more in philosophical resignation than in despair. Btw, Knight, if you like the 7th, try the 8th next, for something rather along the same lines. Of the two recordings I have, I prefer Segerstam on BIS over the CPO disc.
I just came from the Youtube Petterson 7th and my reaction is that I will begin looking for more of this music immediately. Incidentally, my first thought was "sounds a bit like Simpson". My next reaction was "How the hell did I avoid hearing
this for so long?".
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51AYG88Y0YL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
Parry's third symphony is my choice. I don't think it ever comes even close to being performed in the concert hall, which is an extraordinary piece of neglect. And it's not merely a fine thing in its own right; listening to it, one realises that Elgar didn't just appear like lightning from a clear sky. Parry's 3rd has all sorts of little Elgar-like touches that make me nod and smile when I hear them.
Quote from: False_Dmitry on May 21, 2010, 03:45:45 PM
All 2.5 of Borodin's symphonies (the 3rd being completed posthumously by Glazunov) are almost entirely ignored. They're not even played here in Russia.
A great pity as they're remarkable music, No 2 (B-minor) most especially so - "up there" with the Tchaikovsky symphonies, I would have said?
The Borodin 2nd Symphony used to be a fairly standard piece. Since about the 1970s, it seems to have fallen out of favor (even in Russia). This is a shame, since it's definitely my favorite 19th-century Russian symphony.
Quote from: Velimir on May 21, 2010, 11:50:10 PM
The Borodin 2nd Symphony used to be a fairly standard piece. Since about the 1970s, it seems to have fallen out of favor (even in Russia). This is a shame, since it's definitely my favorite 19th-century Russian symphony.
Similarly, I don't think that Rimsky Korsakov's Antar gets the respect it deserves. While it doesn't have the fireworks of Scheherazade, in a lot of ways I love it even more.
This thread--- it's not so easy to figure out about one symphony that is "underestimated".... :-\ It would be easier to talk about who is the most underestimated composer of symphonies. "Underestimated" isn't the same thing as "obscure" or "rare" or "unsuccesful"(in that case it would definately be the infamous Rachmaninoff 1st)- or whatever...! "Underestimated" means that the work is known to an extent in order to be estimated and undervalued, right?
So this is very hard indeed! :D
But i'll give it another try. At first, Schumann maybe comes to my mind. He's little underestimated as a symphonist. I think his second symphony is very grand 8) And the first movement of the third is just exhilarating and ingenious- Brahms must have loved that one!
Beethoven, Bruckner, Brahms, Mahler- those are most valued i think, at least nowadays.
Maybe Mendelssohn is also little underestimated? At least the Italian is just gorgeous...!
Then there are those "pop" symphonies, like Tchaikovsky 4th 5th 6th, i'm sure there are tons of people who just love them. Maybe those are also little underestimated- maybe for certain people there exists still a certain "superiority" of the German music (i'm sure of it, unfortunately)? Maybe we should talk about which is the most underestimated country producing symphonies (of course "a country" doesn't produce symphonies...or does it?). Maybe Sweden then? Coz I'd never heard- perhaps I should be ashamed to admit that :o ???- of Atterberg or Petterson before entering GMG.
I'll try little listing (there maybe missing one- or two :P) ;
Italy-don't know any Italian symphonists
Poland- Paderewski (in b-minor-now really, who has heard that one?), Szymanowski, not his best works i guess- a little "uneven" set. Lutoslawski definately
Hungary- Liszt, did Leo Weiner wrote any symphonies??
Germany, Austria- Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Brahms, Bruckner, Bruch (maybe those?), Schönberg (the chamber symphonies, do they count?), Webern, Karl Amadeus Hartmann (eight symphonies)
France- Berlioz, Saint- Saens (maybe those are underestimated?), Franck, Dukas, Magnard
Russia- Tchaikovsky, Balakirev (his symphonies are little underestimated i guess- usually he's regarded as a composer of solo piano works), Borodin, Glazunov, Skrjabin, Rachmaninoff, Kallinikov, Maiskovsky, Prokofiev, Shostakovich (hey, they are very productive :) :o )
Then Grieg from Norway but i guess- though I love it- he himself was underestimating himself ;)
Danmark- Johan Peter Emilius Hartmann, Niels Gade, Nielsen
Finland- Mielck ( pupil- allegedly a favorite one- of Max Bruch who composed the first professional Finnish symphony- he died at 22), Sibelius (not underestimated here in Finland but maybe in Central Europe?), Melartin, Madetoja, Furuhjelm, Kaski, Ikonen, Ernest Pingoud (born in Russia) Väinö Raitio, Aarre Merikanto, Klami, Marttinen,Englund, Rautavaara, Heininen, Meriläinen, Kohlenberg (born in Germany), Kaipainen- of these Furuhjelm, Pingoud, Ikonen, Väinö Raitio (who produced only one)and Kohlenberg are never heard, even here in Finland.
And now I realise that my knowlidge of certain cultures and their music is on its end :D
From Great Britain I know only Elgar and Vaughan-Williams :-[
So a neat answer is the GRIEG SYMPHONY IN C-MINOR- it was underestimated even by it's composer (you can't beat that :P ) :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
But seriously, should we have an "Eurivision contest of symphonies" ???
Quote from: abidoful on May 22, 2010, 03:28:54 AM
Italy-don't know any Italian symphonists
There have been a few: Boccherini, Clementi, Martucci, Respighi (1)
Quote from: Grazioso on May 22, 2010, 06:07:16 AM
There have been a few: Boccherini, Clementi, Martucci, Respighi (1)
Malipiero! He seems to stand out as one of the only post-classical period Italians who made a real stab at a sizable "cycle".
Quote from: Velimir on May 12, 2010, 09:49:22 PM
Hardest in what way? To play? To conduct? To listen to?
To play. As with almost all of Korngold's mature orchestral works, the writing is incredibly taxing and fitting the whole thing together is very hard. Die Todte Stadt is one of the hardest operas to sing and play through, but Heliane is perhaps the most complicated and difficult of all operatic scores for the orchestra. The Symphony is of a similar level of hardness, and even the Symphonic Serenade for Strings is very taxing.
Vanhal: Symphony in D minor (Bryan d1)
Lalo: Symphony in G minor
And I think that Franck's Symphony in D minor deserves more attention.
If pushed, I'd probably nominate Schmidt's Fourth, even if emotionally speaking it makes Pettersson seem like a stroll in the park.
A couple of other Fouths that seem to get less attention than they might: Roussel's and Beethoven's; Mahler's Seventh also seems consistently undervalued to me.
I love Kalinnikov's first symphony. This work is so expressive.
Quote from: Ric on May 25, 2010, 08:55:45 AM
I love Kalinnikov's first symphony. This work is so expressive.
Ditto that. One of the great symphonic slow movements.
Quote from: edward on May 25, 2010, 07:59:04 AM
If pushed, I'd probably nominate Schmidt's Fourth, even if emotionally speaking it makes Pettersson seem like a stroll in the park.
Well, that got me curious. Found this interview on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TekW2gaUPn4
The Dallas Sym director talks about this symphony, and he's actually really interesting to listen to.
Nice thread. Agree with Christo and Jowcol's choices (Moeran, Braga Santos, Armstrong Gibbs etc). Also,
Lilburn Symphony No 1 (on Naxos)
Hanson Symphony 6
Popov Symphony 1 and 2
Arnold Symphony 6
Bax no 3 yes,yes,yes
Rubbra 4 and 5 and 7
Hurum Symphony/ Kleiberg'Bell Reef Symphony' (thank you Greg :D)
Bantock Celtic Symphony
Brian No 8
Kinsella No 3
Tubin No 2 and 4
Rootham Symphony
Alwyn No 2
Truscott Symphony
Miaskovsky symphonies 3,6, 16,17,27
Quote from: Christo on May 08, 2010, 11:33:08 AM
Ten beautiful, not widely known (perhaps even underestimated, who can tell?) symphonies that I happen to love - and you might not know yet ;) :
Matthijs Vermeulen - Symphony No. 2 `Prélude à la nouvelle journée' (1919)
Léon Orthel – Symphony No. 2 `Piccola Sinfonia' (1940)
Eugene Goossens – Symphony No. 1 (1940)
Ludvig Irgens Jensen – Sinfonia in Re (1943)
Cecil Armstrong Gibbs – Symphony No. 3 `Westmorland' *) (1944)
Kaljo Raid – Symphony No. 1 (1944)
Joly Braga Santos – Symphony No. 3 (1949)
Ulvi Cemâl Erkin – Symphony No. 2 (1951)
Lennox Berkeley – Symphony No. 2 (1958)
Arnold Cooke – Symphony No. 3 (1967)
*) BTW, the constituency voted 60 % Lib.Dem., last Thursday
Interesting quoted works. I am familiar with a few of the listings; however, what are the following like in terms of style, color, classification? Any reviews or composer similarities? Romantic? Impressionist? Expressionist? Neoclassical? Avant-garde? My preferences tend toward the impressionist persuasion. Not limited to it, of course.I like Gibbs and even have a piano score by him. Also like Goosens and Jensen. Don't care for Cooke. Don't know the others. Good listing.
Well, Magnard's #4 has been taken (good choice, Sarge), so I'll take Maxwell Davies #6 (could choose 2 or 5, as well).
Humphry Searle's #2 is underestimated, too, a major post WW2 work.
And what about Schoenberg's Kammersinfonie #1, a major 20th C work that shows the way to the future, a yearning piece of music which transcends its own origin in a certain fin-de-siècle Jugendstil ambiance to urgently delineate the urban feeling of the future, vacillating between hectic Engagement and leisurely flanerie.
P.S. I can't compete with Luke's brilliant analysis of this work on the Mendelssohn vs Schoenberg thread next door - he certainly doesn't underestimate it!
Bainton's 2nd and Mennin's 3rd are also candidates, in my book.
Quote from: jowcol on July 06, 2010, 03:37:03 AM
Bainton's 2nd and Mennin's 3rd are also candidates, in my book.
Agree with these + Bainton Symphony No 3, Arnell symphonies 3-5, Ruth Gipps Symphony No 4, Klaus Egge Symphony No 1.
If I had to pick just one symphony that is underrated it that is totally off the top of my head it would Roussel's "Symphony No. 1." People talk a lot about his later symphonies with their Neo-Classicism and tight construction, but this is the most rewarding work I've heard from Roussel. It's impressionistic and totally owes much to Debussy and Ravel, but Roussel developed a unique synthesis of his own for this particular symphony. A beautiful work that doesn't get the kind of recognition it deserves.
Of particular note, I want to also mention my love for Miaskovsky's "Symphony No. 24," which I also feel is so underrated. Actually, his Symphonies Nos. 20-27 all deserve a solid place in the concert repertoire.
For your consideration:
(http://www.vladimir-fedoseyev.com/media/files/guilmant.jpg)
And another under-appreciated work by a great composer:
(http://www.louisvierne.org/images/m_orchestre.jpg)
Quote from: Mirror Image on July 07, 2010, 08:04:39 AM
If I had to pick just one symphony that is underrated it that is totally off the top of my head it would Roussel's "Symphony No. 1." People talk a lot about his later symphonies with their Neo-Classicism and tight construction, but this is the most rewarding work I've heard from Roussel. It's impressionistic and totally owes much to Debussy and Ravel, but Roussel developed a unique synthesis of his own for this particular symphony. A beautiful work that doesn't get the kind of recognition it deserves.
Of particular note, I want to also mention my love for Miaskovsky's "Symphony No. 24," which I also feel is so underrated. Actually, his Symphonies Nos. 20-27 all deserve a solid place in the concert repertoire.
Strongly agree on both 24 Miaskovsky (the middle movement sold me on him) and yes, I need to get the 1st Rousell-- I responded to it much more than his later symphonies. A great work.
I've been listening frequently to Finn Mortensen's op 5 symphony (on Aurora) recently, and this is a VERY strong work, strongly contrapuntal with a beatiful slow movement. Elements of Hindemith as well as Bruckner here. And the disc is coupled with his very fine Wind Quintet, anybody in love with Nielsens similar quintet really ought to hear this.
Allow me to recommend 4 underestimated symphonies:
Those of the mysterious Norwegian composer Fartein Valen.
Quote from: jowcol on July 06, 2010, 03:37:03 AM
Bainton's 2nd and Mennin's 3rd are also candidates, in my book.
Mennin's 6th could be added; or, perhaps the quite different Finnish composer Madatoja's 2nd..
Quote from: Mirror Image on July 07, 2010, 08:04:39 AM
If I had to pick just one symphony that is underrated it that is totally off the top of my head it would Roussel's "Symphony No. 1." People talk a lot about his later symphonies with their Neo-Classicism and tight construction, but this is the most rewarding work I've heard from Roussel. It's impressionistic and totally owes much to Debussy and Ravel, but Roussel developed a unique synthesis of his own for this particular symphony. A beautiful work that doesn't get the kind of recognition it deserves.
Of particular note, I want to also mention my love for Miaskovsky's "Symphony No. 24," which I also feel is so underrated. Actually, his Symphonies Nos. 20-27 all deserve a solid place in the concert repertoire.
Very much agree with you about Roussel - I'd never bothered to listen to Symphony No 1 as the focus is usually on 3 and 4 but the impressionistic No 1 was a revelation, which led me on to the chamber music. Miaskovsky's Symphony No 24 is one of his best and a very fine work (It's on Naxos).
Quote from: vandermolen on July 14, 2010, 05:46:13 AM
Very much agree with you about Roussel - I'd never bothered to listen to Symphony No 1 as the focus is usually on 3 and 4 but the impressionistic No 1 was a revelation, which led me on to the chamber music. Miaskovsky's Symphony No 24 is one of his best and a very fine work (It's on Naxos).
We do have similar tastes. :D This is scary.
Anyway, Roussel's
Symphony No. 1 is just so beautiful and unlike any other orchestral work he composed. It's very uncharacteristic of his mature style.
I only own the Svetlanov Miaskovsky box set, which has proven to be very special to me. I need to seek out alternatives though just so I can do some comparisons.
Quote from: Mirror Image on July 14, 2010, 09:40:54 AM
We do have similar tastes. :D This is scary.
Anyway, Roussel's Symphony No. 1 is just so beautiful and unlike any other orchestral work he composed. It's very uncharacteristic of his mature style.
I only own the Svetlanov Miaskovsky box set, which has proven to be very special to me. I need to seek out alternatives though just so I can do some comparisons.
There are 7 recordings of Miaskovsky's 6th Symphony (Kondrashin x2, Stankovsky, Liss, Jarvi,Dudarova, Svetlanov.) If you only have the Svetlanov you need to hear one with the chorus at the end. There is symphony 24/25 on Naxos and a fine version of No 17 with Alexander Gauk + the older Olympias have alternatives of symphonies 5, 11, and 27 + a few Marco Polo releases (ie Symphony 8). You probably know all this already!
Quote from: vandermolen on July 07, 2010, 05:14:07 AM
Agree with these + Bainton Symphony No 3, Arnell symphonies 3-5, Ruth Gipps Symphony No 4, Klaus Egge Symphony No 1.
The Egge Symphony. Great. very few seem to know this one. Also love his piano concerto.
Quote from: vandermolen on July 15, 2010, 03:45:33 AM
There are 7 recordings of Miaskovsky's 6th Symphony (Kondrashin x2, Stankovsky, Liss, Jarvi,Dudarova, Svetlanov.) If you only have the Svetlanov you need to hear one with the chorus at the end. There is symphony 24/25 on Naxos and a fine version of No 17 with Alexander Gauk + the older Olympias have alternatives of symphonies 5, 11, and 27 + a few Marco Polo releases (ie Symphony 8) . You probably know all this already!
I wasn't aware that there that many recordings of the 6th available. Thanks for that information. I'm still making my way through the Svetlanov set, but I have to say I'm most impressive with
Symphonies Nos. 20-27. This seems to be a turning point, if you will, in his orchestral output. The music became much more personal with a strong Romantic lyricism, which, of course, I enjoy.
From a "famous" composer I'd say Schubert's Fourth. Really an amazing work that gets overshadowed by Unfinished, Great, and even 3, 5, and 6 thanks to the Beecham recordings.
I also have taken a liking to Kabalevsky symphonies lately, especially the fourth, and I feel like it could certainly use some more attention.
And as a side note, I always like these sorts of threads. Going through them always opens up more than a few new and exciting pieces for me.
D'Indy's Symphony No. 2
Sounds like Mahler, but with a French flair, making it lush.
Scriabin 3rd Symphony (Divine Poem)
The sort of music i adore -despite being repetitive - i find the lush orchestration compelling - like being immersed in a warm bath.....
What about Max Bruch's symphonies? I've never heard them, but some say that they are great!
Quote from: karl bohm on July 20, 2010, 11:00:34 PM
What about Max Bruch's symphonies? I've never heard them, but some say that they are great!
No they are definitely not. No 3 is relatively OK, the other two are mediocre at best.
Damn, this is an old thread. Resurrection time:
Braga Santos 4. For reasons stated innumerable times elsewhere.
P.S. Yes, I did it! I limited myself to just one! ;D
Weill's two symphonies are very interesting, eclectic works. They move from mocking humor to determined seriousness within the blink of an eye!
Klaus Egge: Symphony No 1
See above for my list of 10,000 more 8)
Quote from: vandermolen on October 25, 2013, 02:41:04 AM
Klaus Egge: Symphony No 1
See above for my list of 10,000 more 8)
We love you,
Jeffrey :)
Quote from: sanantonio on October 25, 2013, 04:20:46 AM
I think Haydn's symphonies are the most under rated
Truth!
Haydn? Underrated? Are you f****** kidding me? You people baffle me to no end!
You're underrating him now.
Quote from: karlhenning on October 25, 2013, 05:21:47 AM
You're underrating him now.
I like Haydn's music quite a bit,
Karl. But I just don't see how the hell he is underrated? I'd like some reasoning on your part, if you wouldn't mind.
Quote from: sanantonio on October 25, 2013, 05:34:10 AM
That's because you apparently do not know much about Haydn other than you've heard of him.
Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions......
Just because I love a particular composer's music doesn't automatically mean I think they're underrated. For example, I dearly love Mahler's music, though he's hardly underrated!
I fully recognize that Haydn was a masterful and historically important composer and I never said that he wasn't!
Quote from: sanantonio on October 25, 2013, 05:47:23 AM
And my love for Haydn's music has nothing to do with why I suggested that his symphonies, in particular, have been underestimated. Among the Classical era composers, his symphonies have been considered "third" after Beethoven and Mozart, whereas, I really think that his invention surpassed both those composers at times.
I agree with you that Haydn gets less exposure than M&B in the concert hall.
Quote from: kyjo on October 25, 2013, 07:28:42 AM
I agree with you that Haydn gets less exposure than M&B in the concert hall.
. . .
because . . . .
(Feeling a bit like Sir Bedivere.)
I stand with you.
And probably Gurn's chihuahua.
I agree with Kyjo. Haydn's symphonies are not underrepresented in either recordings or the concert hall. There are multiple complete sets, and nearly complete sets (which itself is a tremendous accomplishment because it takes many years of effort on part of the musicians). The Londons and Paris are very popular. And he gets programmed alot. I've even heard the first symphony in concert!
Saying that Haydn is underperformed compared to Mozart or Beethoven isn't saying much. Those two composers dominate concerts at the expense of everyone else.
I wish Gunther Kochan's 5th symphony was better known. I find it contemporary, well crafted, and engaging.
Here are some links to his symphonic music. Hope some enjoy it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aFeHTQRqxo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jhrX6WbkUw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jhrX6WbkUw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JwxJyUfPw4
one of the things I liked so much about his music was it had a fresh sound (always held me attentive and engaged) while also felt somewhat traditional (in a good way). I like it when composers don't abandon tradition but personalize it.
I once underestimated the length of Mahler's 3rd symphony.
Quote from: TheGSMoeller on October 26, 2013, 06:21:59 AM
I once underestimated the length of Mahler's 3rd symphony.
Bet
you were sorry! 0:)
Quote from: karlhenning on October 26, 2013, 01:25:26 PM
Bet you were sorry! 0:)
Why past tense? He's still listening! ;)
Quote from: sanantonio on October 25, 2013, 07:57:02 AM
Not to flog the horse over Haydn, but I think there might be a subconscious assumption that any composer who wrote 104 symphonies, well, there must be a lot of chaff. But that assumption is proven false by an investigation into the amazing variety and creative invention that abounds in the works themselves. It is frankly an achievement that is quite astounding -- and one which, I think, is easy to underestimate since aside from, oh, maybe 20-25 works, the rest of the symphonies are hardly performed at all.
Also, the whole idea of what is a symphony changed not too long after Haydn's career was over. Especially after Beethoven's Third, Haydn's symphonies might seem slight in comparison.
So, I stand by my nomination of Haydn is one of the most underestimated of symphonists.
It used to be that lots of folks thought that Haydn was, well, less
great with less heart or whatever makes a great composer than Mozart or Beethoven. But in recent years such voices have become muted in the face of increasing acquaintance with more than just a few of the 104 and other works. Papa Haydn once said that, due to his relative isolation at a minor nobleman's court, he
had to become original. :)
I tend to think that the Franck symphony is underestimated. It was very familiar at one point, but may be less so today; yet it's a beautifully constructed, masterfully crafted, powerful piece. But I've heard a number of recordings that somehow fail to get at the essence of the symphony; either they're over-romanticized, or too fast or too slow or too metronomic or something. I myself tend to think of Franck as the Belgian Bruckner; he has something of the same spiritual emphasis.
As for composers, I've heard lots of people dissing Dittersdorf, but from the one recording I heard over the radio, I wonder if that's a serious "misunderestimation." (To paraphrase a Bush. :) )
Quote from: DavidW on October 26, 2013, 03:41:16 PM
Why past tense? He's still listening! ;)
As much as I love the work, my favorite Mahler symphony, that last movement can seem interminable.