I have just noticed that in the schedules for tomorrow (Saturday the 24th of March) that CD Review is promising us a listen to a new recording of Schubert's Symphony no. 7, the Unfinished. Has this numbering now become current? I have not come across it before.
-
-
It is listed as "No 7" in the most recent edition of Deutsch Catalogue of Schubert's Compositions (from which we get the "D" numbers).
IIRC, Jeffrey Tate's recording of the "Great" C major Symphony on EMI from the late '80s referred to that work as "No 8" from the same source.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT] -
The Schubert symphonies nos.1-6 are numbered as such in English as well as German speaking countries (D.82, 125, 200, 417, 485 and 589).
The 1st edition of Deutsch catalogue mentions further symphonies D.615, 729, 759 and 944, and additionally 812 and 849. The 2nd edition adds 708a as well as 936a.
In the 1st edition D.615 was a collection of several fragments all related to a symphony in D major. Further research however showed that these fragments were meant for at least three symphonies in D, of which the youngest of these symphonies had to be dated in 1828. These newest fragments were consequently renumbered D.936a in the 2nd edition, and are the sketches/short scores for what now is called symphony no.10.
However, four other fragments turned out to belong together, these were renumbered D.708a.
This symphony to the present day is not numbered in the series of 1-10.
======
So what about the numbers 7, 8 and 9?
As D.615 was not recognised as a work which to some extant came near completion, and therefore was considered unfinished and unperformable, it didn't get a number of its own.
D.729 however was a clearly well sketched symphony in E, again unfinished and considered unperformable, wasn't given an own number either. This work was clearly dated 1821.
D.759 is the symphony in b-minor of which 2 mvts ARE complete and performable, and which we know now as the Unfinished Symphony. Composed 1822, this one was chronologically given the number 7.
[However, this work was discovered in 1865, and published AFTER the C-major symphony D.944. The latter being numbered 7 by its publisher, this b-minor symphony was numbered 8, the number it kept to the present day.],
Then it was known that Schubert composed a symphony in the summer of 1825, as he stayed in Gmuenden and in Gastein. This symphony was presumably lost. It was known that the work had been completed, and therefore the Deutsch catalogue attached a number to this elusive work, calling it symphony no.8 D.849 "Gastein symphony".
From his final year it was known that Schubert was working on a grand symphony again.
As in 1839 a full scale symphony in C major resurfaced (found by Schumann in the possession of Schubert's brother Ferdinand), this had got to be that symphony composed in Schubert's last months.
The Deutsch catalogue called this Symphony no.9 D.944 (Grosse C-dur/ Great C-major, calling the 6th symphony, also in C-major, the Kleine C-dur/little C-major).
[However, as this symphony was published in 1840, and it was immediately following the nos.1-6, it was numbered "Symphony no.7", the number it kept in the German speaking countries until very recently.]
So far so good, there were 9 symphonies, numbered 1-9.
=======
Then in turned out that the date on the manuscript of symphony 9 D.944 was not to be read as 1828, but as 1825. This meant that the symphony which was presumed lost, was identical with the grand symphony in C and this D.944 therefore was the “Gastein”. The symphony D.849 was definitely proven to be non-existant.
Before that however it was suggested (by Joseph Joachim e.g.) that this elusive Gastein symphony HAD survived, only not as an orchestral work, but as an work for piano: the sonata four piano 4 hands in C D.812. Joachim produced a very nice (but IMO rather un-schubertian) orchestration. This symphony is also known as “Gastein” symphony [and is a.o. recorded by Abbado as well as on a Naxos CD as such.]
This symphony hasn’t got a number within the 1-9 range either.
Then the symphony in E D.729 was completed and orchestrated by Weingaertner (in the 1920s). This work was published in London as Symphony no.7, as it was definitely composed before the “Unfinished” symphony no.8, and thereby the publisher was completely ignoring the fact that in the German speaking countries there already existed a symphony which had been numbered 7.
From then on two different numbers were concurrently used, and confusion reigned at both sides of the Channel.
============
With the publication of the 2nd edition of the Deutsch catalogue the state of the numbering is as follows:
Symphonic fragment D.2B
Symphonies
no.1 D D.82
no.2 B-flat D.125
no.3 D D.200
no.4 c-minor D.417 “Tragic”
no.5 B-flat D.485
no.6 C D.589 “Little C-major”
symphonic fragments in D D.615 (2 mvts)
Symphony in D D.708a (nearly complete continuity draft of 4 mvts, indications for orchestration)
No.7 in E D.729 (continuity draft of 4 mvts, 1 mvt fully orchestrated, 1 mvt partly so)
No.8 in b D.759 “Unfinished” (2 complete mvts, part of scherzo, no finale)
No.9 in C D.944 “grand C-major”
No.10 in D D.936a (3mvts in short score and continuity draft)
==============
But with recordings made in German speaking countries you have to be careful: D.944 sometimes is still numbered 7 (DGG states Symphonie nr.9 (7) C-dur e.g.), or even no.8 (Tudor)Comment
-
Thanks Roehre, all is now clear!Originally posted by Roehre View Post
I shall print off your full exegesis and file it with my Marriner complete(??) Schubert symphonies and Mackerras D615/ 708A/ 936A (Hyperion).
I keep hitting the Escape key, but I'm still here!Comment
-
Roehre:
Your message #3 seems to cover a lot of information unknown to most us.
I do remeber, however that "The Great C major" used to be known as Nº 7 - even on some scores and parts.
Partly, I believe because it was assumed that Nº 8 (The Unfinished) was Schubert's last symphony, so nobody bothered to look for the real Number Seven.
A bit like Dvorak's symphonies, where Nº 4 in G suddenly became Nº 8 in G and the "New World" jumped from 5th to 9th .
(I have heard of, but never heard Dvorak's numbers 1 to 5. Are they ever performed?)
HS
Comment
-
In Germany the Unfinished and the Great C major are known as 7 & 8, but not over here.Comment
-
Originally posted by Eine Alpensinfonie View Post
Except when referring to CD releases originating from Germany, as outlined in the first paragraph of:
[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]Comment
-
re post #3.
As I mentioned on another thread,who needs music publications when you can get information like that on here.
Many thanks Roehre,this kind of stuff is invaluable to the musically uneducated like me.
Comment
-
So, in fact, we should be talking about 11 symphonies.Originally posted by Roehre View Post
What's the gen on D708a then, Roehre? This is a new one to me.
Finally, given last I looked, CD Review was still a British programme, the website has got it wrong again. It should, of course, say the 8th ("Unfinished") Symphony.Comment
-
Evening HS,Originally posted by Hornspieler View PostRoehre:
Your message #3 seems to cover a lot of information unknown to most us.
I do remeber, however that "The Great C major" used to be known as Nº 7 - even on some scores and parts.
Partly, I believe because it was assumed that Nº 8 (The Unfinished) was Schubert's last symphony, so nobody bothered to look for the real Number Seven.
A bit like Dvorak's symphonies, where Nº 4 in G suddenly became Nº 8 in G and the "New World" jumped from 5th to 9th .
(I have heard of, but never heard Dvorak's numbers 1 to 5. Are they ever performed?)
HS
For years the only the complete Dvorak set was from Iztvan Kertesz and the LSO on Decca. Very good it is too. Now you can get sets from Anguelov, Belohlávek, Neeme Järvi, Kubelik, Neumann, Pesek, Rowicki, Suitner to name a few. Mind you the prices vary from £16 basically to almost £60 and the quantity of fillers vary too. The early symphonies are pretty good though the last five are in a class of their own. I too remember the New World Symphony when it was No 5.
BWS
Chris.Comment
-
The Dvorak Symphonies were number reorganised in the early 60s - fine I've got used to it. Schubert symphonies - 8 for me will always be the Unfinished, and 9 the Great C Major - maybe there is a chronological case for renumbering, but surely that is outweighed by the confusion it creatyes no least because of the no of CDs in circulation with the hitherto accepted nomenclature.Comment
-
And here's the Dvorak-chronology
During his lifetime only 8 symphonies were published. The present #1 got lost and was only recovered in the 1930s, therefore it is the only symphony Dvorak most likely never heard and most definitely did not revise later, as happened to ALL other symphonies, some more, some less.
In the old numbering there were 5 symphonies numbered 1-5.
The present numbering is 1-9, as follows:
Nr.1 c-minor, "Bells of Zlonice" (sometimes opus 3), Burghauser 9.
Nr.2 B-flat major, opus 4, B.12
Nr.3 E-flat major, opus 10, B.34 (the only 3-movement work)
Nr.4 d-minor, opus 13, B.41
Nr.5 F-major opus 24 & 76, B.54 (one of Dvorak's works with 2 opus numbers, the quintet B.49 opus 18 & 77 being another one, due to Simrock publishing the works as a recent ones, though more than a decade old at that time)
Nr.6 D-major opus 60, B.112
Nr.7 d-minor opus 70, B.141
Nr.8 G-major opus 88, B.163
Nr.9 e-minor opus 95, B.178. "From the New World
The present numbers 5-9 were published with a number, present numbers 2-4 without any.
The symphonies were published in their order of opus number, therefore:
nr.6 opus 60 was numbered 1
nr.7 opus 70 became nr.2
nr.5 opus 24 became nr.3 opus 76
nr.8 opus 88 nr.4 and finally
nr.9 opus 95 nr.5.
That's the numbering as used until the late 1960s.Comment
-
In the recent BBC Four programme Symphony: Beethoven and Beyond, Simon Russell Beale knowledgeably referred to D.944 as "Die Grosse Symphonie" and it was captioned as "Schubert - Great Symphony". Would any other music lover use such terms without qualification?Comment
-
If you think that's bad, take a look at the numbering of Mozart's symphonies.
No. 1 does seem to be the real thing, but 2 & 3 were not by Mozart, 4 - 36, are all by Mozart, in roughly chronological order.
37 is by Michael Haydn (apart from Mozart's introduction) and 38 - 41 are masterpieces.
42 to 52 are early works, from the time of numbers 7 -19, as is "55". However, 53-54 are again doubtful.Comment
-
A fascinating thread, in which Roehre's contributions are outstanding. There are a few points to mention, though.
Originally posted by Roehre View PostThe first Otto Deutsch catalogue dates from 1951, when numberings were already well established. They begin with Breitkopf und Härtel's Schuberts Gesamtausgabe from the 1890s, the origin of most performance material, even today. Its editor was Brahms, whose policy was to place incomplete works last in any list, no matter when they had been written. Consequently, the 'Great' C Major became No. 7, with the Unfinished (its senior by several years) becoming No. 8. This numbering was for years the standard numbering in central Europe, and may also have been influenced also by Ferdinand Schubert's practice from the 1830s of referring the 'Great' C Major as number 7, seemingly in ignorance of the Unfinished. But all this reckons without Sir George Grove.Originally posted by Hornspieler View Post
Grove brought back with him several scores from his famous visit to Ferdinand Schubert. One of them was the continuous orchestral sketch of a symphony in E major, dating from 1821. The score, together with that of Rosamunde, is now at the Royal College of Music. He argued that the canon of Schubert's symphonies should be revised to include the E major symphony sketch at 7, with the ‘Great’ C Major moving to 9. This is the thinking that usually prevails today (certainly in the English-speaking countries). Breitkopf made room for such a symphony in the 1920s by re-numbering the "Great" C major as 9.
Groves' thinking was deeply flawed, for if we include each sketch in the canon, then we could say that Schubert wrote at least fifteen symphonies. (And Beethoven and Mahler ten, Elgar three, etc.) But he didn't. Yet the sketches for the seventh have a sort of mythical status. Agreed it is in full score, but the sketch cannot be performed without a great deal of work being done to complete the many pages where Schubert has left nothing but a violin line. (Schubert was trying the experiment of composing directly to full score - there are no separate sketches - and he never tried it again.) Even where the scoring is fuller there is often little indication of harmony or counterpoint, so that any attempt at reconstruction becomes largely guesswork. This can be a rewarding exercise, of course, and there have been several attempts at reconstruction, Brian Newbould's being probably the most successful. But none of this can alter the fact that Schubert came nowhere near to completing the score, so that it remains truly puzzling why it is so often included in the numbered canon at all.
The first six symphonies are unaffected by this controversy and may be known by their numbers without fear of confusion (though we should recognise that Schubert gave none of his symphonies a number anyway; it was mainly Ferdinand’s doing). But there remains enough confusion over the later symphonies for me to suggest that they are best not numbered at all. The Unfinished and ‘Great’ C Major are easily recognisable and well known by these titles. To attempt to use the numbers 7 and 8 (undoubtedly correct though they would be*) might confuse the situation even more, for I suspect that 8 and 9 will still be seen most often, leaving a place for the phantom No. 7.
*(Baerenreiter actually brought out a revised score and performance materials of the Unfinished in the 1990s, numbered 7. Their 'Great' C major is number 8.)
Actually, only five were published in Dvořák's lifetime, and only one of those (3, now 5) was revised before publication. Two (the present numbers 3 and 4) were published in 1912, but not numbered. The present 1 and 2 were not published until the 1950s, as part of Supraphon's project. The old numbering is complicated because Simrock of Berlin published the earliest of the five third, so it carried the number 3, not 1, with the G major symphony (published by Novellos) joining as 4, and the New World as 5. The deception was completed by Simrock's giving number '3' a false opus number (76 instead of 24) to suggest it was composed much later than it was. Dvořák went along with this deception, though very much under protest - interestingly, he turned to another publisher for the next symphony, and only came back to Simrock with the New World, by which time he could dictate his own terms.Originally posted by Roehre View Post
The situation was rectified in the 1950s, when the four earlier works were added and all nine published in revised editions by Supraphon. Thus, the five previously known symphonies became numbers 5 (formerly 3), 6 (1), 7 (2), 8 (4) and 9 (5). Incidentally, Dvořák listed his symphonies on the score of the New World, leaving out one entirely (because it was lost) and not being entirely sure about some of the others. The dates of composition are wrong for the E-flat (should be 1873), F major (should be 1875) and G major (should be 1889):
https://
.
Last edited by Pabmusic; 24-03-12, 07:06.Comment
Comment