Favourite symphonic cycles: symphonists whose symphonies you find all excellent

ChamberNut · March 13, 2025, 07:02:47 AM

Quote from: Florestan on March 13, 2025, 06:59:24 AMAnd I have a question: how does one symphony only qualify as a symphonic cycle?

Because you listen to it over and over again.

Florestan · March 13, 2025, 07:21:10 AM

Quote from: ChamberNut on March 13, 2025, 07:02:47 AMBecause you listen to it over and over again.

(poco) Sforzando · March 13, 2025, 07:37:59 AM

Quote from: ChamberNut on March 13, 2025, 07:02:47 AMBecause you listen to it over and over again.

If so, then surely Anton Webern qualifies, because you can listen to his over and over within the span of an hour.

Karl Henning · March 13, 2025, 07:43:27 AM

Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on March 13, 2025, 07:37:59 AMIf so, then surely Anton Webern qualifies, because you can listen to his over and over within the span of an hour.

You're a wildman!

vandermolen · March 13, 2025, 07:51:05 AM

Nice thread idea!

VW
Sibelius
Bruckner
Bantock
Bax
Walton (only two)
Elgar (including No.3)
Tubin
Gipps
Glazunov
Miaskovsky
Holmboe
Vasks
Shostakovich
Honegger
Rubbra
Alwyn (all good)
Copland
Rootham (only two)
Arnold
Gliere
Brahms

vandermolen · March 13, 2025, 08:00:43 AM

A clearer 'Roast Chicken' here

ChamberNut · March 13, 2025, 08:21:21 AM

Quote from: vandermolen on March 13, 2025, 08:00:43 AMA clearer 'Roast Chicken' here

Comes with vegetables, I see.

arpeggio · March 13, 2025, 09:20:41 AM

I do not know the answer to questions like this. Any answer I give would be totally subjective based on my personal tastes.

I do not know if there was a composer who composed nothing but great symphonies. If a composer wrote nine symphonies, one of them would be better than the other eight.

For example, one of my favorite symphonists is Nielson. I suspect that the vast majority of the members of this forum believe that he is one of the great symphonists. In spite of his stature, I can not connect with his Sixth Symphony. There are many who would probably think that it is his greatest. If a person really likes his Sixth, why would they be interested in my subjective opinion? In spite of my feelings, one should listen to the symphonies of Nielson and make up their own minds.

Karl Henning · March 13, 2025, 09:36:07 AM

Quote from: arpeggio on March 13, 2025, 09:20:41 AMI do not know the answer to questions like this. Any answer I give would be totally subjective based on my personal tastes.

I do not know if there was a composer who composed nothing but great symphonies. If a composer wrote nine symphonies, one of them would be better than the other eight.

For example, one of my favorite symphonists is Nielson. I suspect that the vast majority of the members of this forum believe that he is one of the great symphonists. In spite of his stature, I can not connect with his Sixth Symphony. There are many who would probably think that it is his greatest. If a person really likes his Sixth, why would they be interested in my subjective opinion?

I'm interested in any musical detail you might supply about your non-connection. For me, the interest in that conversation would be less "why doesn't he agree with me?" than, how does he read the piece? We compare subjective opinions all the time here.

AnotherSpin · March 13, 2025, 09:59:58 AM

Quote from: Karl Henning on March 13, 2025, 09:36:07 AMI'm interested in any musical detail you might supply about your non-connection. For me, the interest in that conversation would be less "why doesn't he agree with me?" than, how does he read the piece? We compare subjective opinions all the time here.

Yes, exactly. If someone else's opinion seems uninteresting, it only reinforces the stance we've already taken. But if it holds something unexpectedly striking, our certainty may waver, or even shift.

One way or another, we'll still decide that we're evolving and making our own choices.

Well, so be it.

DavidW · March 13, 2025, 10:48:33 AM

Quote from: arpeggio on March 13, 2025, 09:20:41 AMAny answer I give would be totally subjective based on my personal tastes.

Yes, that is the point of the thread. We are sharing our subjective impressions. Let us post our hot takes, not write a Wikipedia article!

arpeggio · March 13, 2025, 12:34:22 PM

OK. Based on my musical tastes, I can only think of two composers who have a symphony cycle that I like every symphony they composed: Tchaikovsky and Sibelius.

Jo498 · March 13, 2025, 02:28:06 PM

Brahms and Mahler are the only ones where I struggle to pick clear favorites or set others at least a bit behind. Maybe Sibelius as well.

This doesn't mean I think that e.g. Beethoven's, Schubert's or Bruckner's 1st symphonies are weak but they seem clearly behind some of their others, so I think it would be underestimating the excellence of Bruckner's 5th or 7th if I'd claim that the 1st or 2nd were very close in excellence.

Daverz · March 13, 2025, 03:21:44 PM

The lists already posted are very exhaustive, so I'll just mention Koppel, Andriessen and Saygun as symphonists who always leave me wanting more.

Symphonic Addict · March 26, 2025, 10:35:50 AM

I wouldn't call all of my mentions to be completely excellent in their entirety, but rather consistent:

Beethoven
Dvorak
Brahms
Nielsen
Vaughan Williams
Tubin
Casella
Rachmaninov
Martinu
Alwyn
Walton (despite he only wrote 2, they're tremendously great)
Honegger
Sibelius

André · March 28, 2025, 02:44:19 PM

Quote from: DavidW on March 13, 2025, 06:15:59 AMI don't think Mozart belongs on the list. When he was young, he wrote a multitude of mildly interesting symphonies, and then his mature output consists of a handful of absolute masterpieces. That is not terribly consistent.

You also mentioned Prokofiev, and while this forum demonstrates enthusiasm for his entire symphonic output, I personally think that the 1st, 5th, and 6th stand in a higher tier than the rest of his symphonies.

I definitely agree that Mozart's early symphonies are not very interesting. Charming and surprisingly accomplished for a teenager, but entirely forgettable. From 25 on it was hit and miss: 25, 29, 34 are great. 26, 28, 31 are good. 36-41 are masterpieces. You are right: not terribly consistent.

Madiel · April 01, 2025, 05:59:28 AM

Hmm. Off the top of my head, I think the ones I'd find most consistent thus far would include:

Beethoven
Brahms
Nielsen

These are the composers where I genuinely feel you could put any of their symphonies up and I'd be pretty enthusiastic about listening to it (I've just finished listening to all the Nielsen cycle, so that really reminded me how I think every one of them is engaging). For other composers I either feel I don't have quite enough of a handle on the cycle to be sure how I feel about it, or there's at least one work somewhere that doesn't entirely convince me.

EDIT: Haydn probably comes darn close to be honest.

relm1 · April 02, 2025, 06:03:47 AM

I have a confession to make. I've never heard Tchaikovsky's Symphonies No. 1-3 nor Dvorak's Symphonies 1-6.

ChamberNut · April 02, 2025, 06:23:00 AM

Quote from: relm1 on April 02, 2025, 06:03:47 AMI have a confession to make. I've never heard Tchaikovsky's Symphonies No. 1-3 nor Dvorak's Symphonies 1-6.

There is some really great music in there. Dvorak's 6th is a masterpiece.

Madiel · April 02, 2025, 07:05:53 AM

On the one hand, I really enjoy at least Dvorak's middle symphonies, and probably the earliest too though I'm arguably still getting to know them. And number 6 is undoubtedly a mature work.

On the other hand... I regard 7, 8 and 9 as among the great masterpieces of the symphonic literature and I find it hard to get past regarding them as just on another level. It's not that I consider the first 6 poor, it's that the last 3 blow my mind.