Vaughan Williams: The symphonies

[EdgeleyRob]

I don't have multiple versions of complete symphonic cycles as a rule,but I seem to have made an exception in the case of Vaughan Williams,although I don't have the complete Andrew Davis cycle.
The Boult 50's set is my favourite,it has a historic classic recording feel about it,but I wouldn't be without Handley,Haitink and Previn.
I also have Slatkin and Bryden Thomson which Ilisten to a lot,not sure why the Slatkin gets such a bad press ?

The box highlighted by Petrushka is also on my shelves and is an incredible bargain http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vaughan-Will...6780183&sr=1-1

What's wrong with the Sea Symphony ?

[BBMmk2]

ER, that link didnt work for me?

[cloughie]

You missed it! (#8, beginning of last "paragraph")


- the Ninth, recorded at around the same time (the composer, who supervised the recording sessions of the other Symphonies, died on the day the sessions for the Ninth started) was recorded for EVEREST and is available with the DECCA cycle in some re-issues.


Mine would be similar: 5 3 6 4 7 9 (Job) 2 8

- still waiting for the performance/recording of No1 that takes the scales from my ears! Maybe the Thomson, whose cycle I've never heard

If you are throwing the wonderful Job into the list the 5 3 Job 2 6 4 7 8 9 1

[Parry1912]

I've got the Boult (EMI), Handley, Haitink, Previn and Slatkin cycles (although I've not yet listened to the latter). I've also got Davis in 6, Berglund in 4 & 6, Daniel in 1, Norrington in 2, Thompson in 6 & 9, Gibson in 5 Hickox in 2, 3, 6 and 8 and Barbirolli in 2 & 5.

I'm surprised at how few forumites seem to have multiple cycles given how ridiculously cheap some of them are or have been!

My favourites:

1. Haitink or Handley
2. Hickox
3. Previn (maybe?)
4. Berglund (or Haitink)
5. Handley or Previn
6. Davis (or Handley)
7. Haitink
8. Haitink
9. Haitink

but I would be loathe to dispense with any of the alternatives that I have. Such wonderful music! And as for the Sea Symphony - what is there to not love!

[PJPJ]

ER, that link didnt work for me?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vaughan-Williams-Symphonies-British-Composers/dp/B005DZIM0M/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1356780183&sr=1-1

[You need to copy the original link to get the full string]

[cloughie]

The other comment I would make on cycles is that I find the Andrew Davis set the most disappointing - lacks life somehow!

[EdgeleyRob]

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vaughan-Will...6780183&sr=1-1

[You need to copy the original link to get the full string]

sorry

This is very good too



I'm not familiar with the rest of the Naxos set though

[Suffolkcoastal]

I have the Handley, the Boult 2nd set on LP and the some of the Hickox that he recorded on CD and a couple of other symphonies in different versions. The Handley does perfectly for me. I have heard all of the Previn which are ok, but the 3rd and 4th are below par and I've also heard most of the A Davis. The Davis performances are weak (the 6th is awful), though his 9th from the 2008 Proms is very good. What I've heard of the Slatkin performances are passable. I still love the Boult set as well as the Handley.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I have heard all of the Previn which are ok, but the 3rd and 4th are below par

I cannot disagree more forcefully, suffy; Previn's 3rd is one of the very best things he (and the LSO) has ever recorded. The depth of feeling they bring out in the last movement I find breath-taking - the sheer sense of loss that avoids any trace of sentimentality - it really is something very special.

[Petrushka]

I cannot disagree more forcefully, suffy; Previn's 3rd is one of the very best things he (and the LSO) has ever recorded. The depth of feeling they bring out in the last movement I find breath-taking - the sheer sense of loss that avoids any trace of sentimentality - it really is something very special.

[Suffolkcoastal]

Sorry that is a typo, mind thinking one thing, fingers doing the other, it should have read 2nd and 4th. SC

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Sorry that is a typo, mind thinking one thing, fingers doing the other, it should have read 2nd and 4th. SC

Phew!

[LeMartinPecheur]

Sorry that is a typo, mind thinking one thing, fingers doing the other, it should have read 2nd and 4th. SC

Grrr, I do not think that the 2nd is below par. Suffie, now you are ducking and diving twixt frying pan and fire!

Are you sure you didn't mean 4th and 6th? - you would be with the critical concensus there tho' I don't personally know either recording.

[Pabmusic]

I have most sets and many individual performances. Here's a list I'd call 'essential' (silly word) and which gives some important historical performances, along with suggestions for modern recordings:

A Sea Symphony:

Boult 1953; Haitink, Handley or Bakels

A London Symphony:

(1914 version) Hickox

(1920 version) Dan Godfrey/LSO (acoustic, 1926) or Goossens/Cincinnati SO (1941).

These are the only recordings of the 1920 version, which some felt the best of all (one outspoken conductor on this matter was Bernard Herrman). Goossens omits the scherzo repeat, while Godfrey cuts 23 bars from the epilogue – the same 23 bars that RVW later cut for the 1936 version.

(1936 version) Henry Wood; Barbirolli 1956; Boult 1971 (a BAL choice once, I recall); Previn/LSO; Haitink

A Pastoral Symphony

Boult 1952; Previn/LSO; Bakels

Symphony in F (No. 4)

RVW (1936); Stokowski/NBC SO (1943); Berglund; Hickox

The RVW contains passages that were subsequently altered. The most notable is the end of the slow movement, where the flute plays an F, not an E as is in the revised score.

Symphony in D (No. 5)

RVW 1952; Barbirolli 1944; Boult 1953; Boult 1969; Previn/LSO; Handley; Menuhin/RPO

The RVW is a live recording with the LPO from 1952. The Barbirolli was the first recording, made about nine months after the premiere (which had been given by RVW).

Symphony in E minor (No. 6)

Boult/BBC SO; Handley; Hickox; Davis

The 1946 Boult recording was made nine months after the first performance by the same forces. RVW subsequently (1950) made changes to the scherzo, and Boult re-recorded that movement. Both versions are on most CD issues.

Sinfonia Antarctica

Barbirrolli/Halle/Margaret Ritchie; Boult/LPO/Margaret Ritchie; Haitink; Handley; Slatkin

The 1953 Barbirolli recording was some five months after the premiere given by the same forces; I think Boult does better, but they are both fine performances.

Symphony No. 8:

Barbirolli/Halle; Handley; Slatkin; Bakels

The Barbirolli was recorded by the same forces that gave the premiere.

Symphony No. 9:

Boult/LPO (1958); Boult (1969); Haitink; Slatkin

The Boult (Everest, but now on Decca) was recorded just hours after RVW’s death was announced. Boult gives a short speech aimed at American audiences.

This blog has a recording of the first performance, by Malcolm Sargent. Anyone who has read Roy Douglas’s book Working With Vaughan Williams will know just how much he hated this performance. He did not even call it the ‘first performance’, just the ‘first hearing’ and added that he couldn’t wait for the first performance (ie: the second) to be given by Boult:

http://themusicparlour.blogspot.com/2010/07/malcolm-sargent-rpo-vaughan-williams.html

[You should ignore the petty squabbling apparent on the blog site. ]

[Op. XXXIX]

I seem to be in the minority here, but if you asked me to choose between A Sea Symphony and Eine Alpensinfonie to take to my desert island, I would choose the former.

The only option more scary to me would be choosing between the Fantasia on the Old 104th Psalm Tune and Symphonia Domestica.