Top 5 Symphony Cycles--Minus the Obvious

[karlhenning]

Posts: 6666

Cool post count, Sara! : )

[Lethevich]

I considered leaving it at that but I have spamming to do. Also, this thread is bringing me yet closer to buying Rangström's cycle - it's one of my major blind-spots. I can ill afford it, bleh.

[Sergeant Rock]

Elgar, Schmidt, Langgaard, Ives, Magnard


Edit: I just noticed Prokofiev on the list. Odd choice to include him but not RVW. I would have voted for Brian obviously. All his symphonies have been recorded and are readily available to anyone who belongs to the forum.


Sarge

[Cato]

Cato's here, Grazioso!   

  "Get off the bar and get on the wall!"   

The      Music      Police want to have a word with you!

The word is: Hartmann!!!

Apparently by drinking breakfast again, you have made a terrible mistake!   0:)

50 hours of community service: breaking Grofe' CD's on the rockpile!   0:)

[DavidW]

I voted for Bax, Lutoslawski, Arnold, Simpson and Penderecki.

Even though I love Stravinsky and Berlioz I don't really think of either one as having symphony cycles.

[karlhenning]

The      Music      Police want to have a word with you!

The word is: Hartmann!!!

Right on, Cato! : )

Hartmann!

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Bax, Elgar, Enescu, Langgaard, Magnard.




(and HAVERGAL BRIAN, of course)

[karlhenning]

Bax, Elgar, Enescu, Langgaard, Magnard.

This reminds me of another (theoretical, don't let's re-tool the poll over this) question:

Elgar, now. Can two (completed) symphonies be a "cycle"? Is a pair of songs a "song cycle"?

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

This reminds me of another (theoretical, don't let's re-tool the poll over this) question:

Elgar, now. Can two (completed) symphonies be a "cycle"? Is a pair of songs a "song cycle"?

Ok - bicycle, then.

[karlhenning]

: )

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

[Grazioso]

This reminds me of another (theoretical, don't let's re-tool the poll over this) question:

Elgar, now. Can two (completed) symphonies be a "cycle"? Is a pair of songs a "song cycle"?

Only by stretching things. Ditto the inclusion of Hindemith and Stravinsky. But, I would have been equally remiss not to include them. As I believe you noted earlier, it was no coincidence that Hindemith didn't number and name his symphonies conventionally according to time-honored Germanic tradition. But, man, those are some good symphonies!

Actually, I think "cycle" is rarely well applied to the symphony genre. Now, were you to find a composer who consciously planned them all out and related them in some way, or at least published groups of them at the same time (cf. some Classical-era symphonies, sets of six string quartets, etc.), then it might be more apropos.

When in doubt, banana.

[karlhenning]

Actually, I think "cycle" is rarely well applied to the symphony genre. Now, were you to find a composer who consciously planned them all out and related them in some way, or at least published groups of them at the same time (cf. some Classical-era symphonies, sets of six string quartets, etc.), then it might be more apropos.

Well, then you get into questions (significant in music, particularly, I think) of the nature and import of planning.  In the case of symphonies and string quartets, when a genre spans a composer's career, so that the cycle develops, takes narrative turns, in ways which parallel the composer's life-cycle, then I have no problem with the fact that there was no Start-Up Plan.

Again, though:  In this sense I think Tchaikovsky composed a cycle of symphonies.  Brahms, not so much; not sure I'd do so far as to 'deny' Brahms's four the label of cycle, but I think you twig my point.

[Scarpia]

Why isn't Schubert on the list, are his symphonies "obvious?"  I don't think so, two good ones, one not finished, the rest utterly forgettable.  I wouldn't even consider voting for him if here were on the list.   

[Scarpia]

Well, then you get into questions (significant in music, particularly, I think) of the nature and import of planning.  In the case of symphonies and string quartets, when a genre spans a composer's career, so that the cycle develops, takes narrative turns, in ways which parallel the composer's life-cycle, then I have no problem with the fact that there was no Start-Up Plan.

Again, though:  In this sense I think Tchaikovsky composed a cycle of symphonies.  Brahms, not so much; not sure I'd do so far as to 'deny' Brahms's four the label of cycle, but I think you twig my point.

What could you possibly be talking about?  Brahms symphonies aren't a cycle?  They span the second half of his composing career, more or less.

[karlhenning]

What could you possibly be talking about?  Brahms symphonies aren't a cycle?  They span the second half of his composing career, more or less.

Not that they are not a cycle, but less so than other composers who have written (not necessarily a great many) more symphonies.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Why isn't Schubert on the list, are his symphonies "obvious?"  I don't think so, two good ones, one not finished, the rest utterly forgettable.  I wouldn't even consider voting for him if here were on the list.   

I agree with this negative assessment of Schubert's symphonies. If they'd been written by Franz Schmo, most of them would hardly ever get played or recorded. (Though they might get discussed at "Gurn's Classical Corner.")

[DavidW]

The 8th and the 9th are immensely popular, the 8th has even been used in movies.  Hard to imagine those symphonies became so popular just by Schubert's name.

[Scarpia]

The 8th and the 9th are immensely popular, the 8th has even been used in movies.  Hard to imagine those symphonies became so popular just by Schubert's name.

I agree that 8 and 9 are first rate.  1-6 are utterly unremarkable, in my opinion, and I find it odd that they get recorded so often, mainly to fill out symphony cycles.

[(poco) Sforzando]

But if in fact 3 are the minimum requirement for a cycle as for a quorum, then I will take MGLSN.

Three is a tricycle, two a bicycle, one a unicycle; what you do with 104 is up to you. But it's at least a bicycle built for two.