The Worst First!

[Luke]

Before I edited it just now that contained a typo which could be a good neologism too. Symphobic: one scared by symphonies

[Wanderer]

Before I edited it just now that contained a typo which could be a good neologism too. Symphobic: one scared by symphonies

"Symphobic" («συμφοβικός») would be someone afraid of plus signs. One afraid of symphonies would be a "symphoniophobic" («συμφωνιοφοβικός»). 

[Luke]

"Symphobic" («συμφοβικός») would be someone afraid of plus signs. One afraid of symphonies would be a "symphoniophobic" («συμφωνιοφοβικός»).

Even better!

[Karl Henning]

I think I know some who are afraid of plus signs!

[NumberSix]

"Symphobic" («συμφοβικός») would be someone afraid of plus signs. One afraid of symphonies would be a "symphoniophobic" («συμφωνιοφοβικός»).

Nerd.

And I like it. 

[Karl Henning]

I don't say the Loyal Opposition are at all unfair (they're not) just that I think I've identified my Least Favorite Post Ever 😉

[JBS]

I think this thread has argued itself into some very odd positions over the years!

Elgar's First, Brahms's First - these are phenomenal symphonies by composers whose entire symphonic output (granted that's only one other symphony in the case of EE) are of the highest quality. And of course Brahms's 4 have to be seen as one of the finest of all cycles, and IMO unrivalled in the 19tb century - I can't possibly see how it could be otherwise.

I suppose one could sideline Beethoven on the technicality that since the First Symphony was premiered in 1800, his cycle of symphonies was not completely in the 19th century--but the 19th century did include Schubert, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, and Bruckner.

[Cato]

"Symphobic" («συμφοβικός») would be someone afraid of plus signs. One afraid of symphonies would be a "symphoniophobic" («συμφωνιοφοβικός»).

Excellent!

Looking back through the pages, besides the immense debates about Elgar's First Symphony, other candidates included Beethoven, Gounod, Saint-Saens, Roy Harris, and Elliott Carter.

I have not heard the Symphony #1 of the young Saint-Saens, but I suspect it might be a good one!

[JBS]

Excellent!

Looking back through the pages, besides the immense debates about Elgar's First Symphony, other candidates included Beethoven, Gounod, Saint-Saens, Roy Harris, and Elliott Carter.

I have not heard the Symphony #1 of the young Saint-Saens, but I suspect it might be a good one!

It's not bad--but I think, as with Bruckner, the two symphonies without official numbering (Symphony in A and Urbs Roma) are actually better.

[Karl Henning]

It's not bad--but I think, as with Bruckner, the two symphonies without official numbering (Symphony in A and Urbs Roma) are actually better.

I need to revisit these. I recall nothing at all of them.

[Karl Henning]

Separately, now playing on my rideshare's radio: Danse macabre.

[Luke]

I suppose one could sideline Beethoven on the technicality that since the First Symphony was premiered in 1800, his cycle of symphonies was not completely in the 19th century--but the 19th century did include Schubert, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, and Bruckner.

Re Beethoven, yes, that was my thinking. Re the others, all fabulous, but IMO Brahms is most consistently high quality from first to last.

[JBS]

Re Beethoven, yes, that was my thinking. Re the others, all fabulous, but IMO Brahms is most consistently high quality from first to last.

I hereby invoke the rule of chaconne a son goût.

[Karl Henning]

In my efforts to preserve space for the contrarian POV, I  seem to have destroyed all my Brahms cred. Ah, well!

[Luke]

I hereby invoke the rule of chaconne a son goût.

Love it! 

[NumberSix]

I hereby invoke the rule of chaconne a son goût.

Hey now, personne ne parle espagnol ici!

 

[NumberSix]

In my efforts to preserve space for the contrarian POV, I  seem to have destroyed all my Brahms cred. Ah, well!

Our good opinion once lost is lost forever. -- Darcy Us

[Cato]

Excellent!

Looking back through the pages, besides the immense debates about Elgar's First Symphony, other candidates included Beethoven, Gounod, Saint-Saens, Roy Harris, and Elliott Carter.

I have not heard the Symphony #1 of the young Saint-Saens, but I suspect it might be a good one!

I found the Elliott Carter Symphony #1: I hope to hear it tomorrow.

And...

...and...

...and...

I do not believe anybody has mentioned...

[Spotted Horses]

What we have here is the worst thread.

The question was never well defined. Is it a symphony which is bad in an absolute sense? Then the worst first is undoubtedly pathetic hash by a composer whose subsequent symphonies are similarly pathetic hashes that have all fallen into obscurity. Is it a symphony whose quality is most clearly below the composer's subsequent efforts. In the former case no one has any idea what the worst first is. In the latter case being a "worst first" would be no dishonor.

The thread seems to have defaulted to a game of triggering fellow posters by making disparaging remarks about brilliant works.

[Karl Henning]

Well, the thread is 17 years old, and has seen varied use through its career.