8th symphonies

[Maestro267]

And there are also 13 symphonies for strings alone to contend with as far as Mendelssohn is concerned. Should we include those in the official canon to give him a final total of 18?

[LKB]

1) Mahler. Every conceivable orchestral and choral texture is present, multiple soloists, a titanic conclusion which boggles the senses...

2) Bruckner. Deeply felt, utterly committed, a final coda that banishes darkness with God's own thundering certainty.

3) Dvorak, which I've played. Particularly the smiling third movement, like the summer sun on a face which sorely needs it.

4) Shostakovich. While l get a little impatient with the first movement and sometimes find it hard to take the second seriously, l find the dogged, frantic third movement oddly hypnotic. As for the Passacaglia, l believe it to be one of his most effective symphonic efforts. Towards the end a wandering, seemingly aimless clarinet solo turns into a clock with no hands, alternating half-steps which disappear into the strings, and then emerges to join with another clarinet long enough to lead us from the long night of g-sharp minor into the C Major dawn of the final movement. Splendid composing.

5) Beethoven. An affectionate salute to his Classical origins, with a few innovations thrown in.

6) Schubert, which I've also played. The ruminating clarinet and oboe soloes in the second movement are more challenging than it may seem, and I was happy to achieve a positive result on the latter.

[Madiel]

It is interesting to me which composers' symphonies get renumbered and which don't. As recently as 1960ish, Dvorak's Symphony No. 8 was still called No. 4 and No. 9 occasionally known to many as No. 5. (Yesterday I listened to a Szell/Cleveland "No. 4" that was released in 1958.) That got fixed to the universal agreement of all the musical world. Meanwhile, we've known for years that Mendelssohn's symphonies are out of order, but we're not bothered enough to swap them around, even though all the out-of-order pieces have convenient nicknames.

Because out of order is less of a problem than having the wrong quantity entirely.

[foxandpeng]

Emil Tabakov
Vagn Holmboe
Robert Simpson
Allan Pettersson
Einojuhani Rautavaara
RVW
Eduard Tubin
Anton Bruckner
Alexander Glazunov
Per Nørgård

Attempted to keep 10 only. Arnold, Sallinen, DSCH,  Rosenberg, Pavlova, Rubbra, Brian all knocking at the door.

[vandermolen]

+1 for Pettersson (one of his best with 6 and 7 IMO) and Schnittke (thank you MI).

[Mirror Image]

+1 for Pettersson (one of his best with 6 and 7 IMO) and Schnittke (thank you MI).

No problem, Jeffrey. We're certainly on the same page in regards to Pettersson and Schnittke.

[Sergeant Rock]

The six Leaders of the Pack (vroom, vroom)

Havergal Brian
Vaughan Williams
Beethoven
Dvořák
Bruckner
Mahler

[Holden]

I agree on Schubert, but I disagree on which symphony it is. I'm a millennial so No. 8 is in C major and finished.  0:)

That was my assumption as well.

[Jo498]

The Schubert symphonies did get re-numbered but almost everyone above a certain age got to know them in a different numbering, so the old one will stick for some time. But it could be that in 30-50 years, referring to the b minor Unfinished as #8 would be as odd as referring to Dvorak's "New world" as #5.

The numbers of the (non-string) Mendelssohn symphonies reflect the order of eventual publication (with "4" (Italian)+ "5" (Reformation) only getting published posthumuously). I am against renumbering here because it would only produce confusion (there are good reasons to keep the string symphonies out of the numbering and also the #2 that would be removed and only classified as a cantata/choral piece)l. A good option would be not to use the numbers at all but only key, nickname (all but #1 have one) or opus number.

[vandermolen]

How could I forget HB? Possibly his greatest symphony.

[TheGSMoeller]

Oh shit! I forgot Schnittke!

That's what I'm here for, buddy!

[TheGSMoeller]

Allan Pettersson

Per Nørgård

These two are so good and I could easily add to my list. Thanks for the reminder!

[(poco) Sforzando]

It is interesting to me which composers' symphonies get renumbered and which don't. As recently as 1960ish, Dvorak's Symphony No. 8 was still called No. 4 and No. 9 occasionally known to many as No. 5. (Yesterday I listened to a Szell/Cleveland "No. 4" that was released in 1958.) That got fixed to the universal agreement of all the musical world. Meanwhile, we've known for years that Mendelssohn's symphonies are out of order, but we're not bothered enough to swap them around, even though all the out-of-order pieces have convenient nicknames.

The Beethoven piano concertos 1 and 2 are also out of order, being listed by publication date, and the tiny early op. 49 sonatas are stuck in between opp. 31 and 53. As for Dvorak, my old scores still have 4 and 5 on their covers rather than 8 and 9. The music is still the same, and I'm not going to buy new copies just for that.

[Mirror Image]

That's what I'm here for, buddy!