Suffolkcoastal's Symphonic Journey

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.

1933
Brian: Symphony No 4 ‘Das Siegeslied’
Chavez: Symphony No 1 ‘Sinfonia da Antigona’
Copland: Short Symphony (Symphony No 2)
Elgar/Payne: Symphony No 3 in C minor (I’ve put this work under 1933 as this was the last year Elgar worked on it.)
Harris: Symphony No 1 ‘Symphony 1933’
Ivanovs: Symphony No 1 in B flat minor ‘Poema Sinfonia’
Kabalevsky: Symphony No 3 in B flat minor ‘Requiem in Memory of V I Lenin’
Koechlin: Seven Stars Symphony
G Lloyd: Symphony No 2
Malipiero: Symphony No 1 ‘In quattro tempi, come le quattro stagioni’
Meulemans: Symphony No 2
Meulemans: Symphony No 3
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 13 in B flat minor
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 14 in C major
Peterson-Berger: Symphony No 5 in B minor ‘Solitude’
Schmidt: Symphony No 4 in C major
Weill: Symphony No 2

Brian’s 4th Symphony is a much better work than its two predecessors. It is scored for a very large orchestra, chorus and solo soprano (in the central movement). It opens in almost pseudo-baroque mode, but this changes abruptly to a more typical Brian manner. The Choral writing is at times highly virtuosic and exuberant and almost borders on the neurotic. The music seems to have a fairly natural flow and Brian’s very individualistic harmonic approach is very much apparent. In the central movement this results in some almost unearthly moments of respose.
Carlos Chavez’s 1st Symphony was inspired by Greek legend and it is a highly compressed little work lasting barely over 10 minutes. Chavez creates an interesting harmonic pallete through his use of modes, which helps to create an almost ritualistic feeling.
Copland’s Short Symphony is amongst his finest works IMO. The three movements play without a break and the work is scored without heavy brass (trombones & tuba) and no percussion, though it does include a Piano and more unusually a Heckelphone. This results in a light textured work in Copland’s now recognisable style (though still with hints of Stravinsky) which flow naturally and with complete inevitability, though it rather surprisingly took Copland two years to compose. The works rhythmic complexities meant that it was, until recently, rarely performed. Copland also arranged the works as a Sextet for Clarinet, Piano & String Quartet.
I made the decision to play the Elgar/Payne Symphony under 1933 rather than 1997 when Payne finally finished his realisation, as this was the last year that Elgar worked on the sketches. How successful this project was is still open to debate. But it at least allowed us to hear some rather beautiful Elgar themes (the 2nd subject of the 1st movement and slow movement), in fact the slow movement really comes across best for me and is a highly moving ‘completion’ of the sketches. The ending of the work though is wrong IMO. Yes I believe it should end quietly but I firmly believe that the slow movement and finale where to daringly in the same way (there is in the sketches an idea which seems to able to link the finale and slow movement).
Roy Harris’s 1st numbered Symphony was the first American symphony to be commercially recorded but quite astonishingly has been recorded just once since. This is one of Harris’s best symphonies and in the slow movement, one of his most interesting and haunting movements . Harris’s highly individual and instantly recognisable style is immediately apparent and the first movement is tautly constructed. The finale is a successful reworking of the finale of his earlier unpublished Symphony – American Portrait of 1929 and makes a successful conclusion to this fine and very underrated symphony.
The first of the Latvian composer Janis Ivanov’s 21 symphonies is a short one movement work. As its subtitle hints, this is really more of a symphonic poem. There are plenty of still undigested influences from the Russian National School present, but still this is a pleasant but unimportant work.
Kabalevsky completed his 3rd Symphony a year before his 2nd. It is an two movements, the 1st of which acts like an orchestral introduction to the Choral setting of N Assayev which forms the 2nd movement. So in this respect it could almost be said to slightly mirror Shostakovich’s 2nd & 3rd Symphonies (though they are of course in one continuous movement). Kabalevsky’s writing is far less adventurous than Shostakovich’s and the choral section is much longer than in those works. In many ways this 20 minutes could almost be regarded stylistically as the blueprint for similar later occasional Soviet commemorative works.
Charles Koechlin’s Seven Stars Symphony is really more of a symphonic suite inspired by 7 stars of the silver screen. Koechlin was fascinated by film and wrote some pieces for imaginary films. The score is very atmospheric , nicely orchestrated with some quite adventurous harmonic touches. It played far less often these days which is a pity.
George Lloyd’s 2nd Symphony shows a greater emotional range than his first symphony of the previous year and this an impressive symphony for a 20 year old. The symphony has a strong profile and slightly let down IMO but its rather uninspired 3rd movement. This is at times quite a dark work, the slow 2nd movement is quite moving and the strange searching finale makes a satisfying conclusion.
Malipiero’s 1st numbered symphony get its subtitle from an original intention to set poems by the Venetian poet by Anton Lamberti and has nothing to do with four infamous concerti by Vivaldi, even though Malipiero was well known as an editor of Vivaldi’s works. This symphony like many of this composers works avoids sonata and variation form altogether and takes its inspiration from Italian models of the 17th century and earlier. The symphony is attractive and distinctive in its stylistic astringent archaism. Like many Italian works of the period it is colourfully orchestrated.
The 2nd & 3rd Symphonies of the Flemish composer Arthur Meulemans were both composed in 1933 and both fairly short. The 2nd is a concise score well integrated and orchestrated with an impressionistic slant. The 3rd has a loose programme based on his birthplace and its distinctly Ravelian in places.
Miaskovsky’s 13th and 14th Symphonies are strongly contrasted. The 13th is in one movement and work of his darkest and most impressive scores. Miaskovsky maintains the intensity throughout the 20 minute score and this is well worth hearing. The 14th Symphony is in 5 movements which a central scherzo. This is an optimistic and bright work with folk influences and shows Miaskovsky in acceptable Soviet Socialist Realism mode.
The 5th and final symphony of Peterson-Berger is a pleasant rather light work, even though it is entitled ‘Solitude’ and is nicely scored but rather inconsequential
Franz Schmidt’s 4th Symphony is for me his finest symphony and was dedicated to the memory of his daughter who died following child birth. This is an impressive work that begins and ends with a solo trumpet. The work has a superb sense of continuity helped by Schmidt considerable contrapuntal skills. The 2nd movement which features passages for solo cello (Schmidt’s own instrument) is very moving and inspired. There are hints of Strauss and occasionally Mahler but this is a very satisfying work and strongly recommendable.
Finally Kurt Weill’s 2nd Symphony is in three movements. The first two movement are convincing with a hint of anxiety and contemplation. For me though the finale is perhaps to easy a resolution of the tensions inherent in the first two movements. Nevertheless this is a work of interest.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.

1934
E Bacon: Symphony No 2
Badings: Symphony No 3
Bax: Symphony No 6
Harris: Symphony No 2
Hindemith: Symphony Mathis der Maler
Holst: Scherzo
Kabalevsky: Symphony No 2 in C minor
Knipper: Symphony No 4 in D major ‘Poem of the Komsomol Fighters’
Langgaard: Symphony No 8 ‘Memories of Amalienborg’
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 15 in D minor
Popov: Symphony No 1
Q Porter: Symphony No 1
Roussel: Symphony No 4 in A major
Roussel: Sinfonietta
Tubin: Symphony No 1 in C minor

Got through quite a lot of listening the last 3 days, as I had to spend Monday afternoon off work while the hot water boiler in my flat was being fixed.
The American composer Ernst Bacon was a contemporary of Harris. He is primarily known in the US as a composer of songs (he wrote over 200). His 2nd Symphony is pleasant light weight work with jazz and American folk idioms (and quotations) used throughout. It would be the kind of work that a Youth Orchestra would probably enjoy playing. In his use of folk idioms he slightly anticipates later works by Harris and Copland.
Henk Badings 3rd Symphony is an intense and compelling work. The work’s energy and drive and underlying tension seem typical of the mid 1930’s and seem to mirror the rise of Fascism. Occasionally one is reminded of Hindemith and in the slow movement there are some clear anticipations of the world of Shostakovich’s war time symphonies. This symphony is recommended to any adventurous listeners.
The 6th is IMO Bax’s symphonic masterpiece. A compelling and highly organised symphony, and one of the finest British symphonies of the period. A melancholy opening gives way to an aggressive and convincing allegro feroce. The slow movement is genuinely haunting. The finale is formally interesting, consisting of an Introduction, Scherzo & Trio and Epilogue. The transformation into the Epilogue is particularly ‘spine tingling’ and masterly.
Roy Harris wrote his 2nd Symphony quite quickly following the success of his 1st. However, it was only performed twice in the 1930’s the completely forgotten and not played again until the 21st century. The symphony has its problems; the first movement is rather disjointed, the 2nd movement, a study in canons (and the best movement) ends to abruptly, and the finale, while it maintains an impressive momentum, doesn’t quite convince. But for Harris fans likemyself, it is good to get to know what is a transitional work in his output.
Hindemith’s Symphony Mathis der Maler, which uses material from his, at that time, unfinished opera, is probably his best known work, and needs little comment from me. The work isn’t really a traditional symphony and is more, as Hindemith was going to call it, a symphonic suite. I enjoy the work and Hindemith scoring and textures, especially his brass scoring’ are well worth studying.
The Scherzo was the only movement that Holst managed to complete of his planned symphony before is very untimely death. Some fragments of the slow movement survive, but nowhere near enough to reconstruct. The scherzo gives as a glimpse of what I’m sure would have been an absorbing and fascinating symphony had he lived to complete it.
Kabalevsky’s 2nd Symphony was at one time better known than it is today. The central slow movement is by far the best movement of this piece. A powerful and moving movement full of typical Russian melancholy. The outer movements are much lighter but rather conventional.
Lev Knipper’s 4th Symphony is scored for chorus and orchestra and is blatantly cinematic. The 1st movement includes Knipper best known ‘tune’ known as ‘Meadowlands’ which became a popular Red Army marching song. There are some fine introspective moments, much of the score however blatantly trumpets ‘Social Realism’ in a manner that would have sent Stalin into a state of complete ecstasy. Knipper must be one of the few composers who was also a secret agent (NKVD).
Rued Langgaard continued on his eccentric way in his 8th Symphony. This is in 4 movements with a chorus in the 3rd and an occasionally pronounced role for the piano. Like the 7th Symphony, this work sounds like it belongs firmly in the mid 19th century with its romantic, slightly Grieg like folk idiom and is totally inconsequential.
Miaskovsky’s 15th Symphony is a straightforward and conventional Miaskovsky symphony. For me the 1st movement, which was originally intended as the finale of the 14th Symphony, comes off best as it maintains interest and momentum.
Gavril Popov’s 1st Symphony is IMO one of the most striking symphonies of the period. It is in three movements, the 1st is as long as the other two movements together. The symphony is often dissonant and the dramatic intensity is impressively maintained and rarely lets up even in the short and slightly sarcastic finale. The score is quite thick and heavy, which helps to accentuate the dramatic power of this work. Thoroughly recommendable.
The American composer Quincy Porter’s 1st Symphony is in three movements and is quite interesting. The symphony is nicely orchestrated and often French in feeling, especially in the first two movements, which have a somewhat archaic pastoral and melancholic character, rather untypical of many American works of the period. The bright, driving finale provides and effective contrast even if it does end rather too abruptly.
Albert Roussel’s 4th Symphony is another outstandingly fine score from this underrated composer. A slightly mysterious slow introduction gives way to a purposeful first movement proper. The slow 2nd movement is the highlight of the work, its searching intensity is very moving. The short scherzo makes an effective contrast and the highly attractive finale makes a perfect conclusion to this concise and classically balanced symphony.
Roussel composed his little 10 minute Sinfonietta earlier in the same year as the 4th Symphony. It is a charming and nicely balanced work, which would be ideal for a programme like ‘Breakfast’, if they could manage to play the work complete!
Finally Eduard Tubin’s 1st Symphony. This impressive symphonic debut occupied the composer for 3 years and is in three movements. Tubin’s highly individual soundworld is already clearly evident and doesn’t really remind you of any composer (except perhaps occasionally a sort of Nordic Bax). The soundscapes he creates are evocative and the symphony is maintained by a sure hand. The moderately slow finale makes a purposeful and fitting conclusion.

I would welcome any comments from other MBs, if they know any of the works above or any other symphonies that I have been listening to on my symphonic journey. Also if it would be interesting if any MBs have tried any of these works and their impressions of them and any responses to Roehre’s fascinating commentaries.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.

1935
R Harris: Symphony for Voices
Holmboe: Symphony No 1
Khachaturian: Symphony No 1 in E minor
Khrennikov: Symphony No 1
Shebalin: Symphony No 3 in C major
Shostakovich: Symphony No 4 in C minor
Sinding: Symphony No 4 in A major ‘Winter to Spring’
Vaughan Williams: Symphony No 4 in F minor
Walton: Symphony No 1 in B flat minor
1936 (beginning)
Barber: Symphony No 1
Chavez: Symphony No 2 ‘Sinfonia India’
Eller: Symphony No 1
Grechaninov: Symphony No 5 in G minor
K A Hartmann: Symphony No 1 ‘versuch eines Requiem’ (1955 version)
Hovhaness: Symphony No 1 ‘Exile’ (1970 version)
Malipiero: Symphony No 2 ‘Elegia’
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 16 in F major ‘Aviation Symphony’
Piston: Symphony No 1

I noticed that under 1934 I forgot to add and comment on Britten’s Simple Symphony, mind you this entertaining little work doesn’t need any comment from me!

Roy Harris’s Symphony for Voices is scored for unaccompanied voices and is a real ‘tour de force’. It sets three Whitman texts. At times the texts are simply secondary to the textures Harris creates. The textures themselves are quite unconventional at times. The ideas of the fugal finale become a melodic and harmonic blueprint for many later works in Harris’s output.
Vagn Holmboe’s 1st Symphony is scored for chamber orchestra and is a delightful 15 minute long work with at times modal harmony and very attractive ideas. The trumpet theme in the 1st movement is a real ‘earworm’. This work would make an excellent introduction to this fine composer’s music.
Khachaturian’s 1st Symphony is a 40 minute long work in 3 movements. The distinctive slightly exotic colouring, typical of the composer adds to the immediate appeal of the work and at times it is quite a dynamic and exciting piece. However, the symphony is not particularly tautly constructed and the work suffers from Khachaturian’s tendency to overscore in places.
Tikhon Khrennikov, is more famous these days for his infamous controlling influence on Soviet composers. His early three movement 1st Symphony is not without some merit. The central movement, with its typical Russian melancholy has some depth and the outer movements occasionally betray the influence of Prokofiev, with a slightly humorous touch, though the quality of material isn’t strong.
Shebalin’s 3rd Symphony is a fine work. The music at times has an almost pastoral melancholy combined with an absorbing introspection. The ideas have merit and the symphony shows an expert hand at work. The slow movement is a Passacaglia and the finale employs fugal elements. This work is certainly worth seeking out .
Shostakovich’s 4th Symphony needs little introduction. For me, the work comes across as almost portraying some strange disturbing dream like state, often terrifying, grotesque and deeply disturbing. The sound world that Shostakovich conjours up, more than compensates for the slightly loose construction of this powerful work IMHO. The orchestration and texture owes much to Mahler and some ideas owe something to the Stravinsky of Petrushka. The work is a challenging but rewarding listen, are they any more nightmarish and numbing codas than that to this symphony?
The 4th was Sinding’s last symphony and is one of his final works. It is, as the composer admitted, more of a symphonic rhapsody. In this work Sinding clings stubbornly to the world of late Wagner and Strauss, though his ideas lack the distinction of these Masters.
Vaughan Williams 4th Symphony also needs little introduction. The harsh nature of the harmonic language partially deflects the listener from what is the most ‘classical’ in design of his symphonies. This really is a very fine symphony, written by a great symphonist. I love the way the motto devours the subjects of the finale in the electrifying fugal epilogue.
Walton’s 1st Symphony too needs no introduction. I’ve long been an admirer of this score. The finale bothers some commentators and did me for a while, however I’m now much more convinced by it. I always wish that Walton wrote more than two symphonies, for despite the debt owed to Sibelius, he shows himself to be a very fine symphonist.
Samuel Barber’s 1st Symphony is a very accomplished work. It is in one movement but clearly divided into four sections. The opening idea generates all subsequent material. Barber’s recognisable style is already fully displayed in this impressive and tautly constructed symphony.
Carlos Chavez’s 2nd Symphony is his best known work. It is like his 1st, quite short . It alludes to a sonata structure, but has three ideas. A prominent role is given to native Mexican percussion instruments. The work though no masterpiece, is most entertaining and thoroughly enjoyable.
Heino Eller was an Estonian composer and teacher, Tubin, Part and Sumera were amongst his pupils.
Eller was already approaching 50 when he composed this 45 minute long symphony. It is an absorbing and finely written work. There is an occasional modal touch to the harmony and a slightly impressionistic touch to the orchestration, which is atmospheric and just occasionally reminds me of Bax. The slow movement really is quite beautiful and this symphony is well worth exploring.
Grechaninov’s 5th and final symphony still clings defiantly to the late romantic Russian nationalism of his youth. It owes less to Tchaikovsky than its two predecessors and more perhaps to stylistically to Glazunov. Though this symphony is at times quite enjoyable to listen to , it seems completely out of place in the world of the mid 1930’s.
Karl Amadeus Hartmann’s 1st Symphony was not his original Symphony No 1. This was originally assigned to a work called Miserae of 1934. The present Symphony No 1 was originally entitled ‘Symphonic Fragment and assumed this position as the official 1st Symphony when Miserae was withdrawn in 1950. The symphony is scored for solo contralto and orchestra and sets Walt Whitman in translation. This is a dark protesting work that emerges from the world of late Mahler and Schoenberg and his school, although Hartmann’s language is more tonal than Schoenberg’s at that time. This work isn’t a symphony as such, but still makes a powerful statement in dark times.
The first of Hovhaness’s 67 numbered symphonies dates from a period that saw the composer destroy a considerable number of his works and is his only Symphonic survivor from the 1930’s. The symphony was revised in 1970 and a new central movement added to replace the original central movement. This movement is more in keeping with the Hovhaness of the early 1970’s than the 1930’s and 40’s. The composer’s recognisable style though is evident in the rest of this work, with its simple ritualistic symbolism incorporating canon, imitation and fugue.
Malipiero’s 2nd Symphony is a gentle and restrained work somewhat less astringent in its archaism that other of works of his at that time. It is clearly and atmospherically orchestrated and really rather appealing in its subdued lyricism.
Miaskovsky’s 16th Symphony has its original inspiration in the flight and accident of the huge aeroplane the ‘Maxim Gorky’. In its generally folksy optimism is one of the most positive works Miaskovsky produced in the 1930’s. The 2nd movement is not a scherzo, more an intermezzo in the Brahmsian mode and the slightly funereal 3rd movement does pay homage to those who lost their lives in the Gorky’s accident. The outer movements are typical of Miaskovsky’s take on socialist realism.
Finally Walter Piston’s 1st Symphony. This is a rather sombre three movement work. It is typical of the slightly austere introspective works Piston produced up until the mid 1930’s and can be said to some up his style at that point. The 1st movement has some quite dense textures and the central movement has some of the searching melancholy that was to inhabit many of Piston’s works of the 1940’s and early 1950’s. A thoughtful and interesting work.

Any comments on any of these works would be welcome.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.

1936 (conclusion)
Rachmaninov: Symphony No 3 in A minor
Rangstrom: Symphony No 4 ‘Invocatio’
Shebalin: Symphony No 4 in B flat major ‘Heroes of Perekop’
M Willson: Symphony No 1 ‘A Symphony of San Francisco’
1937
Boughton: Symphony No 3 in B minor
Dyson: Symphony in G
Hanson: Symphony No 3
Ivanovs: Symphony No 2 in D minor
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 17 in G sharp minor
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 18 in C major
Moeran: Symphony in G minor
Rubbra: Symphony No 1
Rubbra: Symphony No 2 in D
W Schuman: Symphony No 2
C Scott: Symphony No 3 ‘The Muses’
Shostakovich: Symphony No 5 in D minor
Tubin: Symphony No 2 ‘Legendary’

I admit to having a soft spot for Rachmaninov’s 3rd Symphony. Though this is no masterpiece, I find this a deeply personal work, full of wistful nostalgia. The orchestration is very skilful in this work and helps Rachmaninov’s individual style of late romanticism, avoid sounding stale and gives the work a slightly contemporary edge and therefore avoid the pitfalls of fellow Russian émigrés such as Grechaninov. As in the other two symphonies a little chant like idea forms the basic cell of the work.
Ture Rangstrom’s 4th Symphony is scored for organ and orchestra and is in 6 movements, 5 of which are quite short, whilst the 5th movement accounts for about half the length of the symphony and it is here that the organ is introduced. The symphony had its origin in a short work for organ. It occasionally reminds me of Respighi and there are some pleasant ideas, but also, as with his 3 earlier symphonies, plenty of rhetorical and slightly banal gestures and the work is not particularly symphonic.
Shebalin’s 4th Symphony is in two movements and in the light of Stalin’s purges, chooses a safe subject from recent Soviet history as its inspiration. Shebalin just about manages to avoid the cinematic rhetoric found in works by lesser composers. The opening with its searching chromaticism is quite promising and the tonality is at times quite free, creating some atmospheric moments. However the 2nd movement starts to fall in to the cinematic trap as it searches for a positive conclusion, with which, one suspects, the composer isn’t exactly sympathetic towards.
Written for the 30th Anniversary of the San Francisco earthquake, Meredith Willson’s 1st Symphony is a competent but rather dull piece. Willson was better known as a musical/film composer and orchestrated and famous for ‘The Music Man’. There are touches of jazz and romanticism in the work but the material is uninteresting and the symphony as a whole rather unmemorable, despite its noble intensions.
Rutland Boughton’s 3rd Symphony is a competent and solidly written work. Elgar’s influence is readily apparent, especially in the 1st two movements, which have a certain dignity. The 3rd movement is quite charming and makes an effective contrast, though for me the finale is less distinguished. Overall a work that should have the occasional hearing, but no more.
Dyson’s Symphony in G is quite an attractive well written symphony. The 2nd movement is for me the best movement, with is slightly wistful nostalgia that stays in the memory. The theme and variations 3rd movement is quite enterprising and contains some engaging and slightly unexpected touches. The finale for me has a slightly Russian feel to it and perhaps the movement isn’t as convincing as it should be as the material is less memorable and rather commonplace at times.
The 3rd is the longest on Howard Hanson’s seven symphonies. Hanson’s own vein of romanticism is now firmly established and this is the most Sibelian in feeling of his symphonies, especially in the woodwind scoring. Hanson’s control of the ebb and flow of a symphonic movement is better handled than in his first two symphonies, though still doesn’t quite avoid the tendency to reach rather empty climaxes at times. Still I’m quite fond of this rather engaging symphony.
The Latvian composer Janis Ivanov’s 2nd Symphony is a rather contemplative work, with a searching chromatic opening which is quite promising. Ultimately I feel that the opening promise isn’t really fulfilled in this symphony. Still the symphony has some merit and individuality, having shorn most of the Russian Nationalist elements of the 1st Symphony.
The 17th Symphony is among Miaskovsky’s finest scores of the period. The 1st movement contains plenty of the now recognisable brooding melancholy typical of this composer, successfully combined with a searching dramatic intensity. The slow 2nd movement is one of Miaskovsky’s finest and most beautiful movements, the main idea sounds as if it is going to quote a rather well known ‘tune’ from ALW’s Requiem (is this yet another example of ALW’s Magpie tendencies?). A welcome lighter Scherzo gives way to a powerful and purposeful finale, which satisfactorily concludes this fine symphony. Well worth investigating if you don’t already know it!
Miaskovsky’s three movement 18th Symphony is only about half the length of its predecessor and is an example of Miaskovsky’s lighter and more populist touch, especially in the folksy outer movements. The central slow movement is about the same length as the other two movements combined and has an attractive nocturnal lyricism.
Moeran’s G Minor Symphony, is another of my symphony for which I have a rather large soft spot. It is at time heavily indebted to Sibelius and also occasionally to Delius, but the sheer memorability of its ideas outweigh this debt. Thematically its roots are founded on a typically haunting and melancholic Norfolk folk song and the slow 2nd movement is a fine example of nature painting in music. The finale is somewhat unsatisfactory and disjointed. Nevertheless despite the weaknesses this a lovely work.
Rubbra’s 1st Symphony is a very impressive opening to a symphonic career. The 1st movement has a driving energy that never really lets up and the tension is impressively maintained. This movement might surprise those who think of Rubbra as primarily a mystic, meditative composer. The short 2nd movement based on a French dance starts off quite lightly but even here, eventually an underlying tension begins to emerge. The large finale, occupies over half the work’s length and is largely slow. Here Rubbra just about manages to remain in control and maintain interest to build up to an effective conclusion.
Rubbra’s 2nd Symphony followed closely on the heels of the 1st. This is a more contrapuntal work than its predecessor and the one symphony by Rubbra that shows the influence of Vaughan Williams (particularly in the finale). The first movement is rather sombre but impressive, this is followed without a break by the energetic and rather turbulent scherzo which inhabits the world of the 1st symphony. The slow 3rd movement has a certain tension that continues to underlie the more serene passages in this movement. The Rondo finale is for me a slightly less imposing movement than the other three, however it still makes a satisfactory conclusion.
William Schuman's 2nd Symphony was withdrawn by the composer along with his 1st and was performed after the end of the decade, however a couple of recordings and scores survive. The symphony is a tough 20 minute long work, a pedal C is present throughout and the high harsh wind scoring makes at times difficult listening. One earlier listener said the symphony made him lose faith in the power of asprin to cure a headache! Schuman style is already present as well as a strong influence of his teacher Harris. The symphony is imperfect but was an important stepping stone towards the breakthrough of his 3rd Symphony.
Cyril Scott’s 3rd Symphony is an interesting though slightly mixed symphony. The influence of Debussy and more especially in this work, Ravel, is quite strong. The last movement used a wordless chorus and for me is particularly Ravelian. The texture is very atmospheric and impressionistic and also occasionally reminds me of Bax and in the more complex harmonies Messiaen. With its impressionistic sound wash, the symphony certainly isn’t particularly English sounding. Perhaps ultimately there isn’t enough contrast in this symphony and the rather heady sound wash can be a bit wearing, but certainly worth investigating if you want to hear a very unBritish British symphony!
Shostakovich’s 5th Symphony is an international masterpiece that needs little comment from me. I’m fond of this symphony especially the highly moving slow 3rd movement. The finale is actually quite interesting in the way the momentum suddenly grinds to a halt and the lyrical 2nd subject is presented slower in a rather nostalgic fashion, and following this the movement never recovers the dashing momentum towards D major that it seemed to be doing. Rather it is deflected and when D major finally appears to be achieved in the now rather ponderous coda, the implication of pure D major is again avoided by leaving just a bare D.
Finally Tubin’s 2nd Symphony. Despite the subtitle ‘Legendary’ no specific programme is implied, rather the work creates a kind of legendary atmosphere, and quite absorbing it is too. Interestingly, Tubin uses the piano to lightly colour the texture like Shostakovich does in his 5th. The symphony is in three movements and Tubin’s own highly personal idiom is clearly evident throughout.

Any comments on any of these symphonies from fellow MBs would be most welcome.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.

1938
Brian: Symphony No 5 ‘Wine of Summer’
J N David: Symphony No 2
R Harris: Symphony No 3
Van Hoof: Symphony No 1
Ivanovs: Symphony No 3 in F minor
Lajtha: Symphony No 2
Muradeli: Symphony No 1 ‘In Memoriam S M Kirov’
1939
Bantock: Symphony No 3 ‘Cyprian Goddess’
Bax: Symphony No 7
Bortkiewicz: Symphony No 1 in D major ‘From my homeland’
Cowell: Symphony No 2 ‘Anthropos’
Frommel: Symphony No 1 in E major
Holmboe: Symphony No 2
Von Klenau: Symphony No 5 ‘Triptikon’
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 19 in E flat major
Milhaud: Symphony No 1
Pfitzner: Kleine Symphonie
Rosenberg: Symphony No 3 (revised 1950 version)
Rubbra: Symphony No 3
Schoenberg: Chamber Symphony No 2
Shostakovich: Symphony No 6 in B minor
Tansman: Symphony No 4 in C sharp minor

Havergal Brian’s 5th Symphony is scored for baritone and orchestra and is a setting of Alfred Douglas. Not a true symphony but still a very effective almost at times ecstatic work setting that makes considerable demands on the baritone soloist if he is to be heard clearly over the substantial orchestra. The scoring though is less thick than in his previous works and the work at times has an almost impressionist feel to it.
The 2nd Symphony of the Austrian Johann Nepomuk David is of some interest. The harmonic language is fairly tonal, indeed occasionally modal. The 1st movement opens slowly with atmospheric harmonies scored for wind instruments alone. The main section of the movement has plenty of energy with an almost Hindemith like momentum in places. There is plenty of emotional depth in the slow movement. The 3rd movement though is quite bizarre almost sounding like Mahler through the ears of Ravel via Bolero and has a rather frantic near neurotic drive. The scoring of the finale in particular is a little thick, and the finale itself brings more than one reminder of Hindemith’s Mathis der Maler, but still it is fairly successful. Certainly worth a listen.
Roy Harris’s 3rd Symphony is of course amongst the best known of American symphonies. It is a very fine work, though not for me quite the equal of the 7th Symphony. It shows an original take on the one movement symphony, something Harris was to repeat in his other one movement symphonies. It may surprise some, that some of the material, especially earlier on, was taken from an unfinished concerto for Heifitz. The concerto itself exists in piano score but was never orchestrated.
The 1st Symphony of the Belgian Jef van Hoof is a fairly attractive and relatively easy going work. Stylistically it occasionally comes close to Roussel and also at times to Strauss. The work though is rather short on memorability.
Though no programme is given, the 3rd Symphony of Ivanovs is a colourful work that seems to be inhabiting the fairy tale world of Rimsky Korsakov (especially in the 3rd movement) and also the world of Stravinsky’s Firebird. The slow movement is also rather Borodin like at times, but this can be forgiven when the main theme is so beautiful. This work really belongs to the end of the 19th century and can in light of his 2nd symphony, be seen as regressive. But if we can ignore this it comes over as rather appealing.
The 2nd Symphony of the Hungarian Laszlo Lajtha is quite impressive. Like Bartok and Kodaly he was interested in his native folk music though unlike these composers his music is little known outside of Hungary. The 2nd Symphony looks back to Lajtha experience in World War I. The 1st movement has real energy and passion and a sound world that seems to combine both the Hungarian and the French, almost as if Bartok had taken a course with Roussel and Honegger. There is also at times a slight similarity to Martinu. Overall this is an angry and defiant symphony and really is worth seeking out.
Muradeli is most (in)famous these days for his opera ‘The Great Friendship’ which so angered Stalin and set off Zhandov’s purges. Like Stalin, Muradeli was a Georgian and this symphony was written in honour of Kirov the Lenningrad party boss, murdered on Stalin’s orders then given a state funeral by Stalin to cover his tracks. It is a rather typical Soviet work of the period. Like Khachaturian with his Armenian influences, Murdeli’s harmonic language is occasionally coloured by Georgian elements. The lyrical idea in the long 1st movement is quite attractive, but otherwise this symphony is pretty bland and unmemorable.
Granville Bantock’s 3rd Symphony is a very atmospheric score, it was unusually finished in Fiji of all places! Generally the symphony manages to maintain interest throughout its 25 minutes and the scoring is rich and colourful. With touches of archaic pastoralism.
The 7th was Arnold Bax’s last symphony and seems to be a very conscious summing up of his symphonic career by the composer. The material is somewhat planer than usual for Bax, for the 1st movement manages to maintain and impressive forward sweep. The central slow movement looks back to the early tone poems though the material here is less interesting than in those works. The finale is a theme and variations which just about comes off. The concluding Epilogue is amongst Bax’s simplest but most hauntingly beautiful, a real poignant and moving symphonic farewell.
Bortkiewicz was a Ukrainian born composer of Polish origin. Bortkiewicz’s harmonic language is frankly late romantic and at times distinctly Tchaikovskyian. One can perhaps admire the composer for stubbornly clinging to the sound world of his youth and some of the ideas, especially in the scherzo, have some appeal. But overall this isn’t really a work of any real memorability or interest.
Henry Cowell composed his 2nd Symphony during his period of incarceration on ‘Morals’ charges. During this period Cowell’s music changed from the experimental avant-garde of his earlier works to a more approachable and folksy idiom, Though his interest in Asian music still remained strong. This symphony sums up the changing Cowell perfectly. A fairly easy going 1st movement, a distinctively Asian 2nd movement, a more more austere almost atonal at times slow movement and a folksy finae with an Irish touch. Quite a mix!
The reputation of the German Gerhard Frommel has been rather tainted by his alleged pro-Nazi sympathies. How much his openly supported the regime though is open to question. The symphony is a fairly substantial 3 movement work and was premiered by Furtwangler. It is largely is the post late-romantic Austro-German tradition, though interestingly with an occasional Gallic touch. Ultimately though, the symphony is rather unmemorable.
Vagn Holmboe’s 2nd Symphony is a very impressive work. The dark 1st movement has real energy with an almost militaristic touch that only finally relents in the last few bars to make a disturbingly quiet conclusion. The central movement has a slightly sombre and melancholic property with slightly pastoral overtones, whilst the finale is powerfully defiant. Thoroughly recommendable.
The 5th Symphony of Paul von Klenau is a short work in three movement lasting less than 15 minutes. Despite its brevity, the work’s rather rhetorical late romantic idiom soon wears thin.
Miaskovsky’s 19th Symphony is scored for wind band. The inspiration came from a highly successful arrangement of his 18th Symphony for similar forces and was written for the 21st Annivesary of the Red Army. The work was written and scored in only a month and is quite lightweight with quite pleasing ideas. An idea in the 3rd movement reminds me slightly of ‘speed bonny boat’!
Milhaud was already 47 when he completed his 1st Symphony. The declaration of World War II and a commission from Chicago seem to have spurred Milhaud into finally composing a full scale symphony. The four movements contrast well with each other to make a satisfactory whole. The 1st movement is a gently pastoral, the 2nd has an almost bucolic energy. The 3rd movement is the finest and has real emotional depth with some Stravinsky like scoring. The finale is optimistic and lively, as if determined to ignore the international situation.
Pfitzner’s ‘Kleine Symphonie’ is written in a fairly easy going late romantic style typical of the composer. It has some attractive moments, especially the engaging finale.
Rosenberg’s 3rd Symphony is a fine symphony from this imposing Swedish symphonist. The 1st movement has plenty of tension and drama and Rosenberg handles his material impressively. The 2nd movement has a somewhat melancholic touch and this gives way to a driving and forceful 3rd movement which gives way to a finale that creates a sense of rather uneasy peace. Rosenberg’s style is quite distinctive and is well worth investigating.

As my post is a fraction too long it continues below......

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection:

1940
Bainton: Symphony No 2 in B minor
Bantock: Celtic Symphony (Symphony No 4)
L Berkeley: Symphony No 1
Bortkiewicz: Symphony No 2 in E flat major
Britten: Sinfonia da Requiem
Casella: Symphony No 3
Creston: Symphony No 1
Eisler: Chamber Symphony
Hindemith: Symphony in E flat
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 20 in E major
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 21 in F sharp minor
Odak: Adriatic Symphony
Pfitzner: Symphony in C
Rosenberg: Symphony No 4 ‘The Revelation of St John’ (revised 1949 version)
Stravinsky: Symphony in C
V Thomson: Symphony No 2 in C major
Tubin: Sinfonietta on Estonian Motifs
M Willson: Symphony No 2 in E minor ‘The Missions of California’

Edgar Bainton’s 2nd Symphony is an atmospheric and at times picturesque score, a work that seems to turn its back on world events, in order to create an almost mythological world. No masterpiece, but a pleasant work which listeners might respond to and enjoy. There are occasional moments when the listener is reminded of Bax, but Bainton lacks that composer’s strong profile.
Bantock’s Celtic Symphony is scored for string orchestra and six harps. Like the Bainton it turns its back on world events and returns again to Bantock’s beloved Hebridean folksong as its inspiration. There are occasional hints of Vaughan Williams in this slight but gently relaxed work.
Lennox Berkeley’s partial Gallic ancestry and his Gallic training are much in evidence in his 1st Symphony. This is a thoughtful and quite classical score. The 1st movement is unsettled and almost pithy in its invention with a distinctive neo-classical bite, whilst the 2nd has a welcome transparent clarity. The 3rd movement is slow and more austere but quite impressive. Whilst the finale provides a light and almost witty conclusion to this approachable symphony.
As with his 1st Symphony, Bortkiewicz’s 2nd is firmly tied to the late romantic Russian tradition. Bortkiewicz seems incapable of exorcising the ghost of Tchaikovsky and the influence of Glazunov and Rachmaninov also occasionally surfaces. The best movement is the slow 3rd movement, which has a lovely main theme and really is quite beautiful. The finale though is purely imitation Tchaikovsky and rather uninteresting.
The Sinfonia da Requiem is among Britten’s most impressive scores of his earlier years and I’ve long been an admirer of this striking score. The power and anguish of the emotionally charged 1st movement really marks Britten’s coming of age. The nightmarish chase that is the 2nd movement clearly has hidden personal implications. The 3rd movement restores a sense of calm thought the continual undermining of the D major tonality creates a feeling of a rather unsettled, uneasy calm.
Casella’s 3rd Symphony was written over 30 years after its predecessor. This is a very different work from his earlier two symphonies. Casella’s earlier romanticism has seemingly been enriched by Hindemith, Honegger and Stravinsky, though his admiration for Mahler still shows its hand in this work. The slow movement is rather austere and the scherzo almost sardonic. Though the finale tries to lift the work to a more lofty conclusion, one feels that this triumph is somewhat hollow.
Paul Creston’s 1st Symphony is a genial unpretentious work in which, as usual with this composer, a choreographic feeling is never far away. There is plenty of lively rhythmic energy in the 1st movement and the 2nd movement is light and quite catchy with again plenty of rhythmic interplay. The slow 3rd movement has a slightly impressionistic feel with a touch of nostalgia about it. The scoring is light and transparent throughout.
Hans Eisler’s Chamber Symphony is founded on his score for a documentary film ‘White Flood’. It as a stark and rather gritty atonal score, but at the same time the sound world Eisler creates is quite absorbing and even haunting.
Hindemith’s E flat Symphony is performed or broadcast as much at should be. Hindemith’s rigorous command and adherence to a Baroque like counterpoint is evident is this work. There is plenty of contrast between tutti passages and simpler two or three part contrapuntal textures, although one feels that Hindemith occasionally over scores in tutti passages. The energy of the too short 1st movement is infectious, the 2nd movement contrasts with a rather dry and severe manner with Stravinsky like figurations in the woodwind. There is an element of slightly dark humour in what is otherwise a rather classical scherzo and trio. The finale seems a little more unsettled, but in the end concludes the symphony effectively.
Miaskovsky wrote two symphonies at the same time during the relatively quiet year of 1940 in the Soviet Union in the uneasy peace between the purges and the onset of the German invasion of 1941. The 20th Symphony is in three movements and is generally quite genial and relaxed with folk like elements. The slow central movement has an appealing main theme and the finale temporarily introduces a more unsettled atmosphere before a hymn like idea concludes this rather attractive symphony. The 21st Symphony was one of a number of works commissioned by the Chicago Symphony Orchestra and its Music Director Frederick Stock and is among Miaskovsky’s finest works. The work is in one movement and first called a Symphonic-Fantasy and last only around 15-16 minutes. It contrasts strongly with the general optimism of No 20. This taut work has an underlying melancholy and nervous tension that is successfully maintained throughout this impressive score.
The Croatian Krsto Odak’s Adriatic Symphony is almost cinematic in its picturesque intentions. A pleasant enough, but ultimately rather uninteresting score.
Pfitzner’s C major Symphony is only around 20 minutes in length and is written on Pfitzner’s Austro-German late romantic manner. Its brevity is a plus as this prevents Pfitzner’s romantic manner from rambling and this is also aided by a lighter touch to the scoring and an obvious delight in counterpoint.
Hilding Rosenberg’s 4th Symphony ‘The Revelation of St John’ combines texts from the Bible with Chorals setting the words of Hjalmar Gulberg. The work is scored for Baritone, Chorus & Orchestra, originally Rosenberg used a reciter and changed this to a baritone in its 1949 revision. The work is really more oratorio than symphony but it still a powerful and impressive score of around 80 minutes in length. Some of the writing is indeed striking and almost appropriately visionary. The Chorals are simpler and almost archaic. The work is slightly uneven, but at its best this is a genuinely impressive and powerful symphony that listeners should experience.
Stravinsky’s Symphony in C is reasonably familiar I would imagine to many MB’s. But doesn’t seemed to be performed or broadcast that much these days. I personally find it among the most ‘classical’ and balanced of Stravinsky’s scores. Classical in its proportions and structure. The scoring is quite transparent and creates the effect of the orchestra used being smaller than in fact it actually is. Part of the success of this symphony is its understatement, nothing is pretentious, and the work is most satisfying.
Virgil Thomson’s 2nd Symphony was originally composed in 1930, but completely reorchestrated in 1940. This symphony is a short work, in Thomson familiar naive manner. Simple ideas are offset by often slightly quirky harmony with a touch of humour. Though underneath this all, a slightly militaristic touch occasionally surfaces. The central slow movement has a degree of underlying sadness underlying the surface simplicity.
Tubin’s Sinfonietta on Estonian Motifs is a light attractive three movement work. Tubin’s distinctive style is present throughout, the ideas are most attractive and this is quite a charming work which should have wider appeal.
Finally Meredith Willson’s 2nd Symphony. This is a marginally more interesting work than his 1st Symphony, much of the work is cinematic/documentary like and rather anonymous, though the occasional Spanish touches help to spice up the slightly dull ideas. The slow 2nd movement does though have some lyrical and thematic merit.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection:

1941
Arnell: Sinfonia quasi variazioni
Bridge: Allegro Moderato (Symphony for Strings)
J A Carpenter: Symphony No 1
Diamond: Symphony No 1
Furtwangler: Symphony No 1 in B minor
B Herrmann: Symphony
Holmboe: Symphony No 3 ‘Sinfonia Rustica’
Holmboe: Symphony No 4 ‘Sinfonia Sacra’ (revised 1945 version)
Honegger: Symphony No 2
van Hoof: Symphony No 2 in A flat major
Ivanovs: Symphony No 4 ‘Atlantis’
von Klenau: Symphony No 7 ‘Sturm’
Kleztki: Symphony No 3 (1939/41)
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 22 in B minor
Moyzes: Symphony No 2 (revised version)
Piston: Sinfonietta
Rubbra: Symphony No 4
W Schuman: Symphony No 3
W Schuman: Symphony No 4
Shostakovich: Symphony No 7 in C major ‘Leningrad’
Sowerby: Symphony No 3
Vermeulen: Symphony No 4 ‘Symphonie les Victoires’
Willan: Symphony No 2

Arnell at one point thought of assigning his Sinfonia quasi Variazioni as his official Symphony No 1. Written in his mid 20’s it displays confidence and imagination and is in 5 sections. The style is somewhat anonymous but shows skill in orchestration.
The Allegro Moderato was the only almost completed movement of Frank Bridge’s intended Symphony for Strings, he was working on it until the day he died. It is a powerful and searching movement, less enterprising perhaps stylistically then his chamber works of the 1930’s, but there is a certain sense of regret in this movement. I’m quite sure that had he lived and completed it, this would have been a work of some significance.
John Alden Carpenter’s 1st Symphony was originally composed in 1916/7 and entitled ‘Sermon in Stones. The work was completely rewritten in 1940 to produce a relatively short one movement work. Carpenter’s music was quite popular in the US between c1910-30, but by 1940 he was somewhat neglected. The revised work is quite pleasant and generally relaxing but of no great distinction.
David Diamond’s 3 movement 1st Symphony marks a strong symphonic debut. Diamond’s personal style is already evident, with some nods to Roussel, Ravel, Stravinsky & Copland. The work shows considerable command of counterpoint and orchestration and is tautly constructed. The 1st movement is very swift moving, the central slow movement moving and elegiac in tone, whilst the finale, after a slow introduction brings the symphony to a confident conclusion.
Wilhelm Furtwanglers’ 1st Symphony is a large 75+ minute long work. It was composed during a lull in his conducting engagements, due to his less than enthusiastic support for the Nazi regime. The symphony is composed in the late romantic Austro-German tradition, with Bruckner’s influence readily apparent. The works origins go back to 1908 and essentially the work belongs stylistically to this period. The symphony though struggles to justify its length, with much rhetoric that occasionally borders on the banal.
Bernard Herrmann is of course best known for his film scores. His symphony is quite an engaging work, the language is somewhat Sibelian and occasionally even Waltonian. The ideas have some merit though they are not that memorable. But there is plenty of drama and just enough of interest to engage the listener.
Holmboe’s 3rd Symphony was the first of three works written during the German occupation of Denmark. In three movements it uses Danish folk ideas. The outer movements have an almost aggressive defiant optimism verging on the boisterous. The central slow movement accounts for over half the length of the work. It is rugged and serious with an underlying melancholy.
The 4th Symphony was revised in 1945 and dedicated to the memory of his brother who died in a German concentration camp. In six relatively short movements, it is scored for chorus and orchestra and uses Latin texts. There is a mixture of almost militaristic defiance and austere archaism in the work. The work is not among Holmboe’s strongest as its ideas don’t readily stay in the memory and the structure isn’t as coherent as his finest works, but still this work makes a fair impact.
Honegger’s 2nd Symphony is in three movements and scored for string orchestra with an optional (nearly always used) trumpet to double the 1st violins at the climax of the last movement. This is a highly impressive and tautly argued work and amongst the finest works of the decade IMO. The unsettled often anguished 1st movement is superbly written and argued. The dark and austerely beautiful and ingeniously combines passacaglia and sonata form. The optimistic finale attempts to banish the pessimism of the previous two movements. It maintains an unstoppable drive and momentum that peaks with the entry of the trumpet in a mood of exhilaration. This symphony appears so rarely in the concert halls in the UK and on radio these days, this work is a masterpiece and should deserves to be heard more often.
The 2nd Symphony of Jef van Hoof is in four movements and is basically romantic in style with a touch of impressionism. Stylistically though Strauss and Mahler seem to be strong influences. The slow 3rd movement is actually quite attractive and the finale uses folk like ideas, but overall the symphony is rather inconsequential.
Ivanovs 4th Symphony is a work rich in atmosphere and almost cinematic in its descriptiveness. The influences seem to rage from Puccini, Respighi to late Rimsky-Korsakov. Surprisingly at times the work almost reminds me of Bantock and the Bainton of the 2nd Symphony. A wordless female chorus is used in the highly evocative 2nd movement to create a feeling of mystery and other worldliness.
Von Klenau’s 7th Symphony attempts to a pictorial work in basically late romantic style with some slightly more spicy dissonance in places. However the work is rather tiresome, repeating similar rather clichéd phrases, especially in the quicker movements. The slow movement offers some respite but is thematically rather dull.
Paul Kletzki became best known as a conductor after World War II, when he stopped composing. The 3rd Symphony, among his last works, was a personal reaction to those who had perished at the hands of the Nazi regime. This is quite an impressive and angrily defiant score. The tonality is quite free with considerable angular and dissonant counterpoint and more reflective moments marking a memorial to those who had perished. It is a pity that Kletzki stopped composing in the 1940’s as I’m sure many other fine works could have come from his pen if this symphony is to go by.
Miaskovsky’s 22nd Symphony is the first of the Soviet War symphonies and is among Miaskovsky’s most impressive and moving scores. The opening is a near quotation from the opening of the Schubert ‘Unfinished’. The 1st movement combines a sense of foreboding with a beautiful lyrical 2nd subject with a real sense of poignant nostalgia. The 2nd movement is very sombre and brooding before a finale that attempts to convey a spirit of optimism and defiance in a manner that seems to have become a blueprint for later Soviet symphonic finales of the period.
Alexander Moyzes’s 2nd Symphony was originally composed in 1932 and then substantially revised in 1941. In two movements it is a score of variable quality. The 1st movement comes off best as its ideas have some distinction and the impressionistic touch to the orchestration enhances them. The 2nd movement though is very loose and the ideas far less interesting. One theme has a very strong resemblance to one in Prokofiev’s Romeo & Juliet. I am unable to ascertain if this theme was a result of the 1941 revision or not.
Walton Piston’s Sinfonietta is an engaging three movement score in the composer’s instantly recognisable neo-classical manner, with characteristic ideas and tautly constructed.
The 1st movement of Edmund Rubbra’s 4th Symphony is by far the longest part of this work. It is a beautifully restrained movement, very satisfying and a movement that seems to open up a vast and serene landscape. The remaining movements however are less appealing, the 2nd movement is like a Brahmsian intermezzo and is fairly pleasant, but the finale tries to make a more positive and affirmative conclusion, but lacks real conviction in its ideas.
The 3rd Symphony was the work with which William Schuman burst on to the American musical scene and is still his best known symphony. It is a work of tremendous impact, confidence and muscularity. Schuman’s individual and recognisable style is confidentally displayed, although one feels in places that the influence of his teacher Harris hasn’t been fully assimilated. The symphony is in two movements each in two parts, Passacaglia & Fugue, Chorale & Toccata and is tautly constructed. Schuman tends to play off the various instrumental families against each other in the orchestration and combines them to create passages of real excitement and power. How this work was omitted from the Proms in Schuman’s centennial in 2010 is utterly beyond me.
Schuman perhaps should have learnt from Harris that following up your success with one symphony by immediately composing another, is not necessarily to your advantage. The 4th is still a fine work, but lacks the raw power and impact of the 3rd, though the central slow movement is a successful example of the urban loneliness that American composers seem to be particularly adept at portraying.
Shostakovich’s 7th Symphony is of course well known to most MBs and needs little comment from me. It was the 1st Shostakovich symphony I heard complete and has the immediate impact it was designed to create. These days I find it a somewhat uneven work, especially the outer movements, the central movements are still the most moving parts of the work for me.

continued in the next posting below ......

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection:

1942

Antheil: Symphony No 1 ‘1942’
Atterberg: Symphony No 7 ‘Sinfonia Romantica’ (revised 1972 version)
Bernstein: Symphony No 1 ‘Jeremiah’
Carter: Symphony No 1
Diamond: Symphony No 2
Gould: Symphony No 1
Harris: Symphony No 4 ‘Folksong’ (revised 1942 version)
Harris: Symphony No 5
Khachaturian: Symphony No 2 in E minor ‘The Bell’
Knipper: Symphony No 8
Langgaard: Symphony No 9 ‘Fra Dronning Dagmars By’
McKay: Sinfonietta No 4
Martinu: Symphony No 1
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 23 in A minor
Moyzes: Symphony No 3 in B flat major ‘Mala Symphonie’
Sulek: Symphony No 1
Tansman: Symphony No 5 in D major
Tubin: Symphony No 3 in D minor
Vainberg/Weinberg: Symphony No 1 in G minor
Robert E Ward: Symphony No 1

Antheil’s 4th Symphony was composed during his period as a war correspondent. It mixes an Americana style with aspects of Shostakovich and Prokofiev to create a distinctly and probably appropriate (for his job) cinematic/documentary manner. It is effective enough in performance but lacks real cohesion and originality.

Atterberg’s 7th Symphony was composed over a decade after his 6th. The symphony is based on ideas from his opera ‘Fanal’. It was revised near the end of the composer’s life, when he tore up the finale and partially cut the 1st movement, suggesting a short orchestral work from the 1960s could be used as a finale if needed. As it stands the 3 movement symphony is rather lop sided, as the finale cum scherzo is fairly short and folk like and doesn’t balance the other 2 movements. The 1st movement is the effective and individual enough to have some merit, but this isn’t amongst Atterberg’s best works.

Bernstein 1st Symphony has been a favourite of mine for many years and is a fine work for a composer in his mid 20’s. It has real memorability and eclectic though it may be at times, Bernstein’s own distinctive style bursts confidentally through. It is a symphony that should be heard far more often than it is.

I was listening to Elliott Carter’s 1st Symphony (despite the use of No 1, Carter never wrote another actual work entitled symphony No 2), the day before the great composer died. This work is very accessible with few hints, except perhaps in the use of two simultaneous pulses in the 1st movement, of his mature style. The manner is rather Coplandesque, and the slow central movement is expressive and appealing. The finale is lighter and more folksy in manner.

Diamond’s 2nd Symphony is an impressive large scale 40 minute long work. I first heard this in a evening concert broadcast on R3 20 years ago, I doubt R3 would do the same these days. The 1st and 3rd movements are slow and the 2nd & 4th much shorter and swift moving. The elegiac almost funereal 1st movement has drama but it arguably too long. The 2nd movement is biting and energetic. The 3rd movement is also elegiac and rather wistful but very moving, the finale shows considerable contrapuntal dexterity and makes an effective conclusion. Diamond has the breadth of a true symphonist which he admirably shows here.

Morton Gould’s 1st Symphony is almost as long as the Diamond but is less distinctive. The 1st and 3rd movements have some depth and emotion, however the scherzo is light and sounds out of place and the finale often sounds like imitation Harris.

Roy Harris’s 4th Symphony was originally completed in 1940, but revised with the addition of two orchestral interludes and the reversal of the outer movements. It became popular during World War II as it was designed for amateur choruses to sing with their local orchestra. The choral parts are very straightforward though the orchestral writing is sometimes a bit more demanding. Harris’s setting of the American folk tunes is effective as is his use of them in the ‘interludes’. The most adventurous movement is the 6th ‘Negro Fantasy’ with its unusual orchestral textures.

The 5th Symphony got Harris in to a bit of trouble during the McCarthy era as it was dedicated to the armed forces of the Soviet Union (which of course were allies of the US in 1942). The 1st movement was tinkered with continually for many years, though the recent Naxos recording restores the original 1st movement. The short martial 1st movement is effective and the central choral movement is among Harris’s most effective and moving movements. The finale, a mix of fugue & variation is dominated by an idea with a strong contour and effectively concludes one of Harris’s strongest scores.

The 2nd Symphony of Khachaturian is a large scale 59 minute long work. Its subtitle comes from its use of the ‘Tocsin’ or alarm bell. The symphony is variable in quality. The 1st movement is at times quite dramatic and exciting but rambles somewhat. The slow central movement is the best and makes effective use of the Dies Irae. The finale is the weakest of the three and like the 1st movement is somewhat overscored in places.

The 8th Symphony of Lev Knipper is a typical rather cinematic Soviet symphony of the time. The 1st movement has some merit but the finale is very poor with a rather banal and weak idea being ‘worked to death’. The central slow movement though is lyrical and quite appealing.

The 9th Symphony is another tame and uninteresting offering from the eccentric Rued Langgaard. Stylistically the work could almost have been written in 1842 with a sound world reminiscent of Mendelssohn, Schumann & Gade!

The Sinfonietta by McKay (an American composer) is rather neo-classical and in three short movements and effective if rather inconsequential.
In his early 50’s and exiled from his homeland Martinu finally produced his 1st Symphony and what a fine and highly individual work it is. The anguish, passion and striking textures of the unsettled 1st movement are superbly handled. This is followed by an energetic scherzo with a wistfully nostalgic and very Czech trio. The slow 3rd movement is noble and deeply felt, before the optimistic and stubbornly defiant finale successfully concludes this impressive work of great individuality.

Miaskovsky composed his 23rd Symphony whilst evacuated to Georgia and it used some local folk ideas and shares one with one in Prokofiev’s 2nd String Quartet. The 1st movement is slightly uneven as I feel that the ideas don’t quite ‘gel’. The 2nd movement though is coherent and very moving and haunting. The finale is lighter and returns to some of the folk like manner of the 1st.

The 3rd ‘Mala (little) Symphony of Alexander Moyzes is a short 5 movement work, Turning its back on contemporary events, it is more in the manner of a divertissement and rather pleasant but slightly anonymous in style.

Stepjan Sulek’s 1st Symphony is a rather laborious work. The rather solemn 1st movement is passable, but the other movements I find to be totally devoid of any interesting ideas and the finale is very trite.

Alexander Tansman’s 4th Symphony is a fine work. At the time Tansman had fled to the US with both his homeland Poland and adoptive land France, under German occupation. The outer movements re distinctive and have a nervous searching quality and there is more than an occasional passing nod to the US composers Piston and Diamond, stylistically and in contrapuntal treatment. The central movements, an Intermezzo and a Scherzo are lighter, with the scherzo containing some delightful rhythmic interplay.

Eduard Tubin’s 3rd Symphony is another symphony form Estonia’s greatest composer. In three movements this symphony has a relentless determined forward tred that doggedly urges the symphony forward from a solemn opening movement to a finale of defiance. Tubin’s individual style is very distinctively displayed throughout.

The 1st Symphony of Vainberg or Weinberg (I actually prefer to use Vainberg) was written three years after he had fled his native Poland following the Nazi invasion, to the Soviet Union, where he was to remain. It is a promising work from a composer in his early 20’s. The influences (Shostakovich, Prokofiev & Mahler), haven’t as one would expect, been fully assimilated. The 1st movement contrasts a lyrical quicker idea with a more solemn slower one and the composer just about pulls it off. The scherzo is very Shostakovich like, but the slow movement shows the influence of Mahler and has some depth and promise.

Finally the 1st Symphony of the American , Robert E Ward, who is, at the time of writing November 2012, still living and now turned 95. It is a very short (less than 15 minutes) graduation piece, lyrical and undemanding and pleasant to listen to in a very approachable manner.
Comments on any of the above would be welcome.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection:

1943

Arnell: Symphony No 1
Blomdahl: Symphony No 1
Vladimir Bunin: Symphony No 1 in E minor
Finney: Symphony No 1 ‘Communique’
L Gruenberg: Symphony No 2
Hanson: Symphony No 4 ‘Requiem’
Koppel: Symphony No 2
Martinu: Symphony No 2
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 24 in F minor ‘In Memory of Vladimir Derzhanovsky’
Piston: Symphony No 2
Popov: Symphony No 2 ‘Motherland’
Rathaus: Symphony No 3
W Schuman: Symphony No 5 ‘Symphony for Strings’
Shostakovich: Symphony No 8 in C minor
Tubin: Symphony No 4 ‘Sinfonia Lyrica’ (revised 1978 version)
Vaughan Williams: Symphony No 5 in D

Arnell’s 1st Symphony is an assured and very classically proportioned work. The 1st movement has a certain poise and sophistication and the form is confidentally handled. The slow 2nd movement however is rather dry and the material is to be honest rather dull. The scherzo is quite entertaining but I feel is a little short. The finale is also quite bright and makes a satisfactory but conventional conclusion.

Blomdahl is a Swedish composer, and his 1st Symphony is an impressive score. Blomdahl was to become one of Sweden’s most adventurous composers, this Symphony though is still very recognisably Nordic in feeling. The 1st movement is dark and unsettling. The central movement continues with sombre tone though it makes a strong impact and the energetic finale makes for an effective conclusion.

Vladimir Bunin’s 1st Symphony is 1 three movement work of around 40 minutes duration. The first two movements are rather sombre and static and there’s not really enough effective contrast, though there is plenty of atmosphere. The finale is a rather typically cinematic Soviet movement.

Ross Lee Finney’s 1st Symphony is a curious short work, not symphonic, more like the background music to a newsreel or documentary of the period. Generally the music is recognisably American but curiously understated.

Louis Gruenberg’s 2nd Symphony is a rather typical American work of the period, but one that lacks any distinctive stylistic features or an language of any individuality, even though it is pleasant enough to listen to.

The 4th is one of Hanson’s best works, written in memory of his father. Each movement has a subtitle taken from the Requiem Mass. Hanson’s lyrical and often extremely beautiful musical language here reaches its apogee in a finely crafting and very moving symphony.

Koppel’s 2nd Symphony comes 13 years after its predecessor. As with the 1st Symphony Koppel was highly dissatisfied with the work and didn’t acknowledge it. It is however by no means negligible. About 30 minutes long and in 3 movements, it is the first of Koppel’s three war-time symphonies, written when Denmark had been under German occupation for 3 years. The 1st movement maintains an underlying tension, but is arguably too long for its material. The central slow movement is often dreamlike and nostalgic, and is the finest movement, whilst the finale has more militaristic episodes but doesn’t quite hold together.

Martinu’s 2nd Symphony is a much more relaxed work than his 1st. The slow movement though has a feeling of a wistful, dreamlike sadness and longing which his most appealing. The energetic scherzo has a somewhat strident edge to it and the finale is a rhythmically exhilarating movement, that brings this highly enjoyable work to a joyful conclusion. Martinu’s highly individual sound world is delightfully present through, with his distinctive use of the piano in the orchestral texture.

The 24th Symphony of Miaskovsky was composed in memory of his friend, the musicologist Vladimir Derzhanovsky. It is in 3 movements and is among Miaskovsky’s finest symphonies. The movement have a real symphonic sweep to them which is maintained and holds the listeners attention throughout. The slow central movement is among Miaskovsky’s most moving, with genuine sadness and nobility. The finale like the 1st movement has plenty of drama before is unexpectedly concludes quietly and serenely in F major. A symphony that commemorates both a friend and those killed in the war and well worth investigating.

Walter Piston’s 2nd Symphony is amongst the finest of the American war times symphonies, extremely satisfying and moving. The 1st movement contrasts a slightly melancholic idea with a brighter slightly jazzy one, a challenge that Piston confidentally solves, the movement ends in a haunting and elegiac coda. The slow central movement is exceptionally beautiful, elegiac in tone it contains one of Piston’s finest melodic inspirations. The finale is full of nervous energy that drive this excellent symphony to a defiant conclusion.

Gavril Popov’s 2nd Symphony has its origin in a film score that the composer completed prior to working on this score. The sombre and dark-hued 1st movement is very striking and scored for strings alone. The bright Petrushka like scherzo has an air of wistful nostalgia about it. The 3rd movement is dominated by the strings and is the longest movement, built in arch form. The finale is full of nervous energy which is only partly offset by the affirmative coda. Not the equal of the exceptionally striking 1st Symphony but still a work of interest.

The Polish born Karol Rathaus’s 3rd Symphony was written 20 years after its predecessor, after teh composer had fled to the US. The symphony lacks the striking individuality of its predecessor, but it is still a work of merit inspite of its relative conventionality. The 1st and 3rd movements make the most impact.

William Schuman’s 5th Symphony is scored for strings alone and is amongst its composer’s best works. The outer movements are full of energy and drive that are impressively maintained. The central slow movement is elegiac and has a coda of haunting beauty. Schuman’s individual style is instantly recognisable throughout.

Shostakovich’s 8th Symphony needs little comment from me, as it is I would imagine very familiar to most MBs. I’ve always found it among this composer’s most moving and haunting works. Striking in the impact of its message on the tragedy that is war. The finale is curious, lighter in texture and seems to be heading for an affirmative and uplifting conclusion, when its sidesteps this in a strangely slightly wistful and cool coda, as if one had woken from a dream on a grey still morning. A fascinating score.

Eduard Tubin’s 4th Symphony is among my favourite symphonies. Quite simply it is a gloriously lyrical and memorable symphony, highly approachable and distinctive with a sound world unlike any other composer. I first heard this on R3 one afternoon about 20 or so years ago and was completely spellbound by it (those were the days when one could just switch on R3 and hear a work like this for the 1st time). The 4 movements compliment each other and are distinctly orchestrated, the ideas stay with one long after listening. I cannot recommend this beautiful work highly enough.

Finally my favourite symphony and work of all, Vaughan Williams Symphony no 5. This has been my favourite work for 30 years since I was in my teens and my love for it is undiminished. It also a superbly written and original symphony. In the 4th tonality is continually undermined chromatically in the 5th it is more subtly undermined by modal means, before D major is finally established in the incredibly beautiful coda. Each movement is perfectly paced and not a note to long. For those who may be interested, it is well known that some ideas come from his then unfinished Pilgrims Progress, however a couple of others originate in a pageant from 1938 called ‘England’s Pleasant Land’. There is a recording of some extracts from this work (scored for wind band) and is fascinating to hear these ideas in embryonic form.

As usual any comments or discussion on any of these works will be most welcome.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection:

1944

Arnell: Symphony No 2 ‘Rufus’
Barber: Symphony No 2
Creston: Symphony No 2
Dohnanyi: Symphony No 2 in E major (revised 1957)
Freitas Branco: Symphony No 3
Goossens: Symphony No 2
M Gould: Symphony No 2 ‘Symphony on Marching Tunes’
Harris: Symphony No 6 ‘Gettysburg’
Holmboe: Symphony No 5
Khrennikov: Symphony No 2 (revised version)
Martinu: Symphony No 3
Mennin: Symphony No 2
Milhaud: Symphony No 2
Moeran: Sinfonietta
Prokofiev: Symphony No 5 in B flat
Rosenberg: Symphony No 5 ‘Hortulanus’
Sulek: Symphony No 2 in D ‘Eroica’
Tansman: Symphony No 6 ‘In Memoriam’
Tansman: Symphony No 7 ‘Lyrique’
Villa-Lobos: Symphony No 6 ‘On the Outline of the Mountains of Brazil’
Wordsworth: Symphony No 1

Arnell’s 2nd symphony was originally composed before his 1st Symphony but was heavily revised. ‘Rufus’ was a pseudonym used by Arnell when entering the work for a competition. Generally this is a better work than the 1st Symphony. The outer movements of this 3 movement work are confident and almost brash in their masculinity and make a strong impression. As with the 1st Symphony the slow movement is more problematical. It suffers from the same rather dull invention and less than inspired orchestration, though structurally it is more assured.

Samuel Barber famously withdrew his 2nd Symphony leaving only the central movement in the 1960’s. The score was reconstructed from orchestral parts in the 1980’s (I often why no one bothered to trace the scores that had been purchased in the 50’s, I know of two from that era). It is a powerful and dramatic score. Barber was serving in the USAF and the wartime experience of a pilot is embodied in this work. The 1st movement contains some of Barber’s most dissonant and exciting music. The central movement ‘night flight’ is among Barber’s most stunningly haunting and beautiful creations, capturing the loneliness of a night flyer guided only by a single radio beam (I simply adore this movement). The finale has much of the excitement and drama of the 1st but is less tautly constructed.

Paul Creston’s 2nd Symphony is in two movements consisting of an Introduction & Song followed by an Interlude & Dance. It is one of his most appealing scores. The 1st movement is lyrical, singing and refined, Creston’s brand of lyricism is always beautifully poised and never over the top. The 2nd movement is more energetic with plenty of rhythmic drive and driving pulse very typical of teh composer.

Dohnanyi’s 2nd Symphony comes 40 years after its predecessor. A large symphony of over 50 minutes duration, it is largely composed in a late-romantic idiom, often rather Straussian but with plenty of individuality. The 1st movement controls symphonic ebb and flow confidentally and has an engaging lyrical 2nd subject. The 2nd movement for me lacks distinctive ideas, but the concise and more contemporary scherzo has plenty of energy. The finale is more diffuse and struggles to hold one’s attention.

Luis de Freitas Branco was a Portugese composer. His 3rd Symphony isn’t a strong work. It starts for all the world like Bruckner before a slightly more contemporary idiom establishes itself. There is too strong a reliance on organum harmony and homophonic textures. This results in a rather stodgy texture, particularly in the rather turgid scherzo and the work lacks the forward sweep and planning of a true symphonist. There are some more attractive and picturesque moments, especially in the slow movement.

Goossens’ 2nd Symphony is a substantial 40 minute long work. His sound world is very eclectic, with hints of Bax, Walton, Britten, Prokofiev & Copland. It is very much a product of the war years in its strident determination and vigour and more reflective elegiac passages and it is effectively orchestrated. Real individuality though is lacking as is real distinction in the material.

Morton Gould’s 2nd Symphony (Symphony on Marching Tunes) was written for the Centenary of teh YMCA and makes references to a number of well known tunes. The 1st & 3rd movements are rather brash and the 1st is strongly influenced by Harris. The finale ‘In Memoriam’ is by far the best movement and is a moving and elegiac tribute to the fallen of the war.

Harris 6th (Gettysburg) Symphony is one of his more successful works. The 1st movement ‘awakening’ is for me his finest symphonic movement, perfectly illustrating his individual autogenic method of construction and concluding in a glorious singing cantilena. The graphic 2nd movement ‘conflict’ is cinematic battle music and very effective it is too, one is immediately reminded of The Red Badge of Courage in its detail. The 3rd ‘dedication’ is among Harris’s most moving and elegiac creations. The finale is slightly less successful, largely a reworking of the 2nd part of his 1940 American Creed, but it still rounds the symphony of in a highly effective manner.

Holmboe’s 5th Symphony is in 3 movements and is a strong score. The driving, nagging nervous energy of the 1st movement is impressively maintained and the movement shows elements of the ‘metamorphic’ technique Holmboe was to adapt in composing his later works. The funeral like solemnity of the slow movement is also well managed. The finale is slightly Stravinskyian and makes an effective contrast in its more upbeat mood and generally lighter texture.

The 2nd is the longest of Khrennikov’s 3 symphonies. It was initially composed in 1942 and then substantially revised. The symphony is very cinematic and the depth of many other Soviet war time symphonies. There are some lighter and more attractive moments and the 2nd movement has a greater depth than the others. The finale though is very banal and empty.

Martinu’s 3rd Symphony is the darkest of his 6 Symphonies, tautly and motivically argued it creates a powerful impression. The tension of the 1st movement is wound up to near breaking point as the music twists around trying to break free of the motivic 3rds. The central 3rd movement is Martinu at his most personal and individual the textures are quite unlike any other composer and handled with extreme confidence. The finale starts with the same nervous energy as the 1st movement but dissolves into a dream like section before a more optimistic and generally serene coda (though with bitonal piano chords) concludes the work in E major. A masterpiece!

Peter Mennin withdrew his 2nd Symphony as he was dissatisfied with it. It is in fact a very assured accomplishment for a 21 year old and already shows some aspects of his mature style and polyphonic mastery, though there are still hints of Piston, Harris & Schuman in this deeply serious and powerful work.

Continued in posting below ......

[Suffolkcoastal]

1944

continued from above posting ......

Darius Milhaud’s 2nd Symphony was commissioned by the Boston Symphony Orchestra in memory of Koussevitsky’s wife. This is a more relaxed and lighter work than its predecessor. The 5 movements are engaging and generally refined, with copious invention and transparency of scoring, with some very idiosyncratic touches in the 2nd movement especially.

Moeran’s Sinfonietta is a delightful relaxed and unpretentious piece with a slight neo-classical bent to it. The ideas are engaging and distinctive and here Moeran seems totally in command of his material.

Prokofiev’s 5th Symphony needs little introduction from me. For me it is the Symphony in which he finally masters symphonic form. The balanced and spacious 1st movement coalesces diverse ideas into a successfully and convincing whole. The 3rd movement again demonstrates the beadth and command that the composer achieves in this symphony, its wistful and nocturnal nostalgia is most haunting. I love too the gradual acceleration of energy on the finale which leads to that totally manic coda.

Rosenberg’s 5th Symphony has a subtitle which roughly translates as ‘The Garden Keeper’. Scored for solo contralto, chorus and orchestra is sets passages from the Bible. The work is generally restrained and peaceful, seeking refuge from the turmoil of world war. The writing is very spacious lyrical and often very beautiful with some occasional hints of Nielsen. This may be quite attractive to some MB’s so well worth investigating.

Stejpan Sulek’s 2nd Symphony subtitled ‘Eroica’ is I’m afraid no match for Beethoven’s masterpiece. In fact it is a pretty poor work, weak and inconsequential with rather trite ideas. The 3rd movement contains a near ‘rip off’ of the well known 1st movement of Shostakovich’s 7th and the finale is totally banal. A symphony to avoid for most I feel.

Alexander Tansman composed two symphonies in 1944. The 6th ‘In Memoriam’ is a compelling and moving work. The 1st movement scored for wind instruments alone is rather Stravinskyian, especially in its scoring, and is restrained and austere. The swift moving 2nd movement is scored for strings alone with a nagging insistent bite to it. The full orchestra is used in the 3rd movement whilst the finale brings in the choir singing a text in French by the composer in memory of those who had fallen for France (his adoptive home) in the war. The gravity and relative simplicity of the writing here is very moving and creates a real sense of loss and memory.
The 7th Symphony was dedicated to Igor and Vera Stravinsky (close friends of Tansman). Here Bartok emerges as an influence alongside Stravinsky particularly in the slow-fast-slow 1st movement. The slow 2nd movement one wishes was long, as its searing intensity has real impact. There is genuine wit in the Stravinskian 3rd movement as well as the Gallic wit of Milhaud and Poulenc in the bitonal colouring. The finale is also engaging with an almost Gershwin like touch in places as the music has a jazzy frenetic energy, before this gives way to wistful nocturnal coda of quiet repose.

The subtitle of Villa-Lobos’s 6th Symphony comes from the technique he used to create the thematic substance of the work. Namely creating determining the notes and duration of the themes by plotting them on transparent graph paper, and laying this over a picture of the Orgaos Mountain in Brazil, using their outline to create the themes. What results is a surprisingly engaging symphony in which the angular thematic ideas are blunted by the rich and individual harmony and orchestration. The music is often very picturesque and atmospheric, and though not a masterpiece, it is far from insignificant.

Finally William Wordsworth’s 1st Symphony. This a rather severe score that is fairly heavy going. There is plenty of power in the austerity of the work and more than a passing resemblance to Rubbra in places. A lack of real individuality and ideas of distinction let down what is otherwise an interesting score.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection:

1945

Arnell: Symphony No 3
Atterberg: Symphony No 8
Diamond: Symphony No 3
Diamond: Symphony No 4
Effinger: Little Symphony No 1
Guridi: Pyrennean Symphony
Ivanovs: Symphony No 5 in C
Jacob: Symphony No 2 in C
D Jones: Symphony No 1
Klami: Symphony No 2
Koppel: Symphony No 3
Langgaard: Symphony No 10 ‘Hin Torden-bolig’
Langgaard: Symphony No 11 ‘Ixion’
Malipiero: Symphony No 3 ‘delle campane’
Martinu: Symphony No 4
D Moore: Symphony No 2 in A major
Muradeli: Symphony No 2
Ropartz: Symphony No 5 in A major
Sauguet: Symphony No 1 ‘Expiatoire’
Shostakovich: Symphony No 9 in E flat major
B Stevens: Symphony No 1 ‘A Symphony of Liberation’
H Stevens: Symphony No 1
Stravinsky: Symphony in Three Movements
Tippett: Symphony No 1
Vermeulen: Symphony No 5 ‘Les lendemains chantans’
Villa Lobos: Symphony No 7

Arnell’s 3rd Symphony is a large hour long work in 6 movements, though the 5th is really only a short introduction to the large scale finale. This work shows plenty of the masculinity and power manifest in Arnell’s first two symphonies. The slow 3rd movement is for me a vast improvement on the slow movements of its predecessors with real depth and tragedy present. The finale has a distinctive American feel to it, though it is rather diffuse and far too long.

Atterberg’s 8th Symphony is a charming and relaxed work using Swedish folk ideas and employs only a small brass section in the orchestration. There is a distinctly Sibelian feel to the sound world in the slow 2nd movement, and the scherzo is rather ‘catchy’ and enjoyable. The finale is less successful and borders on the banal at times and detracts from what is an enjoyable work.

The 3rd is my favourite Diamond symphony. Here he reverses the process of his 2nd Symphony with the 4 movements being fast-slow-fast-slow. The 1st movement shows off Diamond’s considerable contrapuntal skills, ideas are tossed about but control and pacing are handled in expert fashion. The two slow movements are real gems [naturally!! they're Diamond's!! Ed. ] and exceptionally beautiful and refined, though one could are argue that they are not contrasted enough. The poignant elegiac finale always brings tears to my eyes.

Diamond 4th Symphony followed on swiftly from its predecessor and is his best known symphony. A compact 3 movement work lasting a little over 15 minutes. The outer movements are swift and again show considerable command of counterpoint. The central slow movement is moving and contrasts well .

Cecil Effinger was an American composer. His Little Symphony is indeed ‘little’ lasting less than 15 minutes. It is pleasant but heavily influenced by Roy Harris and at times could easily be mistaken for him.

Guridi is a native of Spain’s Basque country. His 45 minute long Pyrennean Symphony is in three movements. It is rather diffuse, but the orchestration and some ofthe ideas are actually quite appealing. Overall, a surprisingly engaging and picturesque work.

Janis Ivanovs’ 5th Symphony is a serious and fairly powerful work. Though it lacks real memorability this still comes over as a work of some nobility and stature and avoids falling into the rhetorical cinematic trap that many Soviet symphonies of the time fall in to.

Gordon Jacob’s 2nd Symphony is an interesting work. An imposing slow introduction gives way to a sonata form 1st movement proper, though the main idea is perhaps slightly disappointing after the anticipation of the introduction. The 2nd movement is in turns bleak & austere and elegiac & consoling. The scherzo is much lighter but well orchestrated. The finale consists of a Ground and 27 variations and shows impressive structural pacing but is perhaps less memorable than it should be.

Daniel Jones 1st Symphony is a big 50 minute long work, powerful and forthright in manner, the work of a composer determined to make his mark in his 1st Symphony. The ideas though aren’t that memorable and the orchestration less than inspired. The scherzo, full of a Beethoven like energy comes off best.

Klami’s 2nd Symphony I find slightly uneven. The first movement has a distinct Sibelian feeling to it, whilst the 3rd and 4th movements have more of a Gallic touch to them. The bustling energetic finale reminds me of Roussel and the orchestration is excellent throughout. There is enough of interest here though to warrant investigation for those who don’t know the work.

The 3rd is Koppel’s finest symphony so far. In one movement though clearly in three sections. The rather plaintive opening with its viola ostinato is clearly influenced by Nielsen, but the Koppel shows more individuality as the symphony progresses. The central section in particular has energy and power with dark undertones. There are moments of bleak despair that are quite striking, portraying the agony of Denmark’s occupation (Koppel fled to Sweden in 1943). The sympho y ends quietly in a numbing chill atmosphere.

Rued Langgaard’s 10th Symphony is vast improvement on its three tame predecessors. The language is still routed in a kind of Straussian late romanticism but more contemporary elements creep in and the breadth of the work is fairly well handled, though one still feels that the work is slightly diffuse. There is plenty of drama and some interesting textures too.

The 11th Symphony, which featured in this years Proms in tiny, a mere 6 minutes in length. Even in such a short work, more of a symphonic prelude than a symphony, Langgaard is problematical. The work is heavily scored and soon becomes tiresome in its reliance on the same phrase and harmonic progression.

Malipiero’s 3rd Symphony is an engaging and rather appealing work. Its inspiration is drawn from the recent German occupation of Venice. Malipiero’s symphonic manner is unusual being based on motivic combinations that contrast rather than develop in the normal symphonic manner. The composer here though succeeds in creating a moving an interesting work that is skilfully orchestrated. One perhaps is reminded of composers such as Respighi & Pizzetti in its Italian impressionist manner. The finale is very moving and usually presents again part of the 1st movement slightly differently scored.

Continued in the posting below.....

[Suffolkcoastal]

1945

continued from the above posting .....

The 4th continues Martinu’s impressive symphonic cycle. Here Martinu returns to the 4 movement form of his 1st Symphony. The 1st movement is relatively short combining Czech elements with Martinu’s very personal dream like atmosphere. The scherzo is Martinu’s most Beethovenian with its capricious bluff manner and driving forward momentum which contrasts with a wistful pastoral Trio. The slow 3rd movement displays intense emotional feelings in a poignant movement of sad beauty. The finale steadily builds confidence before a buoyant optimistic coda concludes.

The US composer Douglas Moore is better known for his opera The Ballad of Baby Doe. His 2nd Symphony is a fairly attractive lightweight work of around 20 minutes duration. It is nicely balanced and refined but lacks the personality of many other American works of the period.

The 2nd Symphony of Muradeli is large 50 minute long work. Murdali’s Georgian background accounts for the works exotic colouring, somewhat similar to Khachaturian’s, especially in the scherzo, but is lacks the distinctive personality of that composer. The slow movement has a typical Soviet pastoral element whilst the finale falls in to the cinematic and rhetorical trap of many Soviet symphonies.

Ropartz was in his early 80’s when he composed his 5th Symphony and it comes some 30 years after its predecessor. It is a work that seems to give a sense of relief and joy at the end of World War II. It is a pleasantly attractive symphony, quite light and generally easing going and lyrical.

Sauguet’s 1st Symphony is an imposing 50 minute long work of some interest. It is a dark work reflecting the suffering of the War. The first movement is dominated by a nagging 5 in a bar rhythm and is menacing and unsettling. The 2nd movement is more gentle even pastoral, but with a sense loss permeating just under the surface. It at times comes close to being a Gallic Vaughan Williams. The scherzo combines 3 march like ideas, but despite considerable contrapuntal skills, is rather heavy going. The finale seems to some up a sense of shock at man’s inhumanity. There is a sense of resigned despair which is only briefly lifted.

Shostakovich’s 9th Symphony is well known of course, so little comment needed. There are plenty of theories why Shostakovich resorted to generally such a light work (although the shadow of the 8th Symphony still haunts the slow 2nd movement), when a work glorifying the victory over Nazi Germany was so widely expected. One feels that Shostakovich sheer distaste for war possibly precluded him from composing a large scale triumphant work.

Bernard Stevens 1st Symphony ‘A Symphony of Liberation’ is about 20 minutes in length and in 3 movements. It is a noble but rather conventional work and somewhat anonymous.
Halsey Stevens 1st Symphony is a compact little 15 minute long work dominated in its outer sections by nagging dance like rhythms of a slightly jazzy style. There is also a Stravinskyian touch in some of the writing.

Stravinsky’s Symphony in Three Movements also needs little comment from me. I’ve always been fond of this score, loving the often exciting rhythmic drive of the outer movements and the cool sophistication of the central movement.

Michael Tippett’s 1st Symphony is rather underestimated as I found it a generally impressive work of great individuality, in fact there isn’t a symphony quite like it from that time. The sprung dancing madrigalian rhythms dominate the 1st and 3rd movements in particular and the bar lines could almost be done away with. The intensity of the slow movement is unlike anything else. The finale impressively coalesces into a very confident whole, and the quiet understated ending is effective. I personally detect something of the influence of Rubbra in places and perhaps the scoring is a touch heavy at times. But isn’t it time this work was heard more often?

Vermeulen’s 5th Symphony is a work of astonishing energy. All of his symphonies to date seem to been composed ahead of their time. This is a tough uncompromising 45 minute long work that makes considerable demands on the listener. Vermeulen often spins a dense polyphonic web which can be a tough nut to crack, at least initially. The fury of the 1st movement is quite striking as is the desolation and subdued anger that seem to haunt the central movement. Vermeulen is well worth investigating for those who want a challenge, and the challenge I hope will be as rewarding as I’ve found with this considerably underestimated composer.

Finally the 7th Symphony of Villa-Lobos. About 40 minutes long, this work has plenty of atmosphere. The short 1st movement has plenty of energy whilst the slow movement spins an intoxicating landscape that is very enticing. The scherzo maintains a good forward flow whilst the finale is a contrapuntal tour de force, which though impressive is less immediately appealing than the other movements.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection:

1946

H Andriessen: Symphony No 3
Blitzstein: Airborne Symphony
Copland: Symphony No 3
Cowell: Symphony No 4 ‘Short’
Englund: Symphony No 1 ‘War’
K A Hartmann: Symphony No 2 ‘Adagio for Large Orchestra’ (revised 1950 vers)
Hindemith: Sinfonia Serena
Honegger: Symphony No 3 ‘Liturgique’
Honegger: Symphony No 4 ‘Delicae Basiliensis’
Koppel: Symphony No 4
Langgaard: Symphony No 12 ‘Helsingeborg’
G Lloyd: Symphony No 4 in B Major
Malipiero: Symphony No 4 ‘In Memoriam’
Martinu: Symphony No 5
Mennin: Symphony No 3
Miaskovsky: Sinfonietta in A minor
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 25 in D flat major (revised 1949 vers)
Milhaud: Symphony No 3 ‘Te Deum’
Persichetti: Symphony No 3
Popov: Symphony No 3 ‘Heroic’ or ‘Spanish’
Riegger: Symphony No 3
Sessions: Symphony No 2
Tubin: Symphony No 5 in B minor
Vainberg/Weinberg: Symphony No 2
Wellesz: Symphony No 1

With 4 movements entitled Ouverture, Sonata, Saraband and Fuga, Andriessen’s 3rd Symphony has Baroque formal models for his 3rd Symphony. This is a very approachable work, the 1st movement has a noble simplicity and the Saraband has a stately gravity and the Fuga is Hindemith like in its fussy counterpoint.

Marc Blitzstein is better known for his contributions to American musical theatre. The Airborne Symphony is scored for narrator, tenor & baritone soloists, chorus and orchestra. It isn’t in any way a true symphony more perhaps a mix of a theatre work and cantata. The influence of Copland is readily apparent as are the nods to musical theatre. Some of the text is rather dated, but the work has some merit and one or two ideas stay in the memory.

Copland’s 3rd Symphony is his largest orchestral score and among his most impressive achievements, as well as being amongst my favourite symphonies. The 1st movement is prelude like and presents material that will occur later in the symphony, the quiet elegiac simplicity of the conclusion of this movement seems to be a memorial to America’s dead in the recent war. The lively scherzo and the charming trio follow. The slow movements outer sections are typical of the more austere Copland this frames a lively central section. The finale introduces the familiar Fanfare for the Common Man before embarking on a joyous sonata movement with ideas that seem to be related to the fanfare, before a dissonant crunch begins a coda that begins with the most delicate polyphonic lines and finally concludes in a grand optimistic manner.

Henry Cowell’s 4th Symphony is probably the best known of his symphonies. A short work, it is quite simple and folksy, and even has a very Irish-American jig for a scherzo. The finale is a fuguing tune, the Hymn and Fuging Tune was favoured by the early American composer William Billings and Cowell composed many works of this type.

The Finnish composer Einar Englund’s 1st Symphony reflects his war time experiences. It is somewhat uneven and one feels that Englund is yet to find a distinctive voice. The march like 1st movement makes a passing nod to Nielsen, and the slightly sarcastic scherzo and poignantly reflective slow movement show some promise. The finale though is rather rhetorical and doesn’t convince.

The 2nd Symphony of Karl Amadeus Hartmann is a 15 minute long ‘Adagio for Large Orchestra’ which is probably culled from an earlier withdrawn orchestral work. As it stands it makes quite a powerful statement, creating a dark landscape with sudden energetic outbursts. Ultimately though one feels there isn’t enough here to stand on its own as a full blown symphony.

Hindemith’s Sinfonia Serena is a generally genial work in four movements. The 1st movement is relaxed and quite expansive, the 2nd is a very witty ‘Paraphrase on a Beethoven March’ and is scored for wind instruments. The 3rd movement is scored for strings alone, and is unusual in featuring two solo violins and violas, one of each being backstage and the strings being divided into two groups, one playing slow material, the other more lively. Hindemith eventually combines these two in clever counterpoint. The finale is divertissement like and is enjoyable. This work make come as a surprise to those who regard Hindemith as a rather austere and humourless composer.

Honegger’s 3rd Symphony a reaction to World war II and man’s inhumanity, is one of the great 20th century symphonies IMO. The 1st movement conjures up a whirlwind of dark emotions. The 2nd movement which is in turns, consoling, elegiac, anguished and despairing offers uneasy calm, but a calm still haunted by tragedy. The finale begins with a slow menacing march gradually builds in intensity until it collapses in a series of grinding discords into a coda of calm slightly uneasy peace. The haunting piccolo solo sounding a note of haunting regret and the C sharp major conclusion apparently serene but because of its sharpness, not so.

Honegger completed two symphonies in 1946, the 4th is a relaxed and enjoyable work written for Paul Sacher and his Basle orchestra. The 1st movement begins somewhat mysteriously but resolves into a generally relaxed and pastoral movement. The 2nd movement is a passacaglia on a Basle folk song. The finale is generally genial and appealing. The whole work is superbly crafted and makes a strong contrast to its predecessor.

With his 4th Symphony Koppel seems to have now firmly hit his symphonic stride. Koppel’s 4th Symphony is an impressive dark and sombre 3 movement work. Two ideas dominate the 1st movement, a dark menacing march like idea and a more pastoral one, the latter though is slightly undermined by bitonal touches. The Intermezzo, is hardly the more relaxed movement that Intermezzi normally are, here we have a kind of bitter humour and the darkness of the 1st movement remains. The finale offers little relief from the underlying darkness and tension. Koppel seems now to have found a very personal language in this dark symphony.

Langgaard’s 12th Symphony is a great deal longer than its tiny predecessor, being in one movement of about 8 minutes duration. The language is still rooted in late-romanticism and feels more like a short tone poem.

George Lloyd composed his 4th Symphony is Switzerland whilst recuperating from his traumatic experiences in the Arctic convoys during the war. It is a big work lasting over an hour, but is far too long for its material. The 1st movement is somewhat lighter than one would have expected, but lacks real memorability. The slow movement begins atmospherically, a portrait of the long Arctic nights, but fails to live up to this and ends up as repetitive note-spinning, that occasionally borders on the sentimental. The slightly mischievous scherzo comes off best. The finale though is poor, it attempts to gradually work towards a triumphant conclusion, but the material is weak and the movement is far too long, the coda in particular never seems to want to end as it flounders in empty rather banal gestures.

Malipiero’s 4th Symphony is a work of some interest. It begins with a motif on trombones which reoccurs throughout the work. The mood of the 1st movement swings between lighter and more austere passages and doesn’t quite come off IMO. The slow 2nd movement though is very fine, a searching funereal movement of real emotionally depth. The scherzo is energetic and quite aggressive. The finale is a set of variations on a theme from earlier in Malipeiro’s career, it is generally rather restrained but is curiously rather memorable.

The 5th is the toughest of Martinu’s symphonies to crack to date. The 1st movement uses two tempi, the 1st is slow uncertain, hesitant and rather mysterious the other quicker but seems to twist around tritons in rather anguished manner. Martinu skilfully pulls the movement off to create a piece that is very unnerving in its tension and uncertainty. The 2nd movement is a Larghetto that mechanically propels itself along, with a determination not to dither or divert from its intended path. The finale begins slowly with a motivic imitational idea, the Allegro contains one of Martinu’s most memorable and optimistic themes. This needs two attempts though to establish itself as the slow opening interposes, which then almost requires the allegro to begin again to finally establish the triumphant optimistic mood. Martinu was hopeful of returning to his Czech homeland, sadly he was never to do so, the Communist take over was to put pay to that.

Peter Mennin’s 3rd Symphony was written for his doctoral thesis. Although still only 23 he has already found a distinctive style. The outer movements are dominated by swift polyphonic textures, austere, compromising and energetic. The dark locrian mode, a favourite of the composer generates many of the ideas. The central slow movement spins a elegiac and nostalgic web of counterpoint that comes off very well.

Miaskovsky’s A minor Sinfonietta is a generally relaxed and conservative work scored for string orchestra. The middle movements are arrangements of two early piano pieces by the composer. Overall this is a fairly enjoyable and light work.

Miaskovsky’s 25th Symphony is about 35 minutes long and in 3 movements. It opens with a long slow movement which is basically a set of variations. The movement is often extremely beautiful, haunting and very Russian in its wistful nostalgia and the symphony is worth getting to know for this movement alone. The short central movement is less memorable. The finale gradually increases in intensity and strength to build a sense of optimism and hope.

Continued in the posting below .....

[Suffolkcoastal]

1946

continued from the above posting .....

Milhaud’s 3rd Symphony came out of a commission to compose a Te Deum and his return to France. The 1st movement for orchestra alone is optimistic with slightly angular fanfare like ideas. The slow movement uses a wordless chorus to create some interesting effects, although they wear thin after a time. The short lyrical pastoral 3rd movement for orchestra, prepares for the finale which is a forthright setting of the Te Deum for chorus and orchestra.

Like his compatriots William Schuman and Peter Mennin, Vincent Persichetti withdrew his first two symphonies. Persichetti’s 3rd Symphony is a typical American work of the period. The 1st and 3rd movements are slow, the 1st is actually marked ‘somber’. The 2nd movement is a light scherzo and the finale a contrapuntal ‘tour de force’. The influence of Harris and Schuman one feels is yet to be fully assimilated and the composer yet to find a distinctive language of his own.

Gavril Popov’s 3rd Symphony is a large 50+ minute long work for string orchestra. The ideas are derived from an earlier score Popov wrote for a documentary on the Spanish civil war. This used some old Spanish dances and some of these are woven in to the fabric of the score. The 4th movement is an impressive 20 minute long elegy of real intensity. The string writing throughout is quite taxing and this is a score of some distinction.

Wallingford Riegger was a composer of some interest. His early music was romantic, but his later scores are tough and highly individual as Riegger adapted serialism in his own unique way. He also composed some light, tonal and enjoyable dance scores. The 3rd Symphony really is a work of complete individuality. The writing is dominated by nagging and quirky textures, that have a nervous energy that is quite unlike any other composer of the time. The writing is often sparse and jagged and here and there an element of humour creeps in. Riegger manages to create a work of some conviction from all of this. A work worth seeking out for the more adventurous.

The 2nd Symphony was a key work in Roger Sessions’ output marking the transition to the tough uncompromising works that were dominate the remaining years of his life. Like the Riegger, this is a work of real individuality and unlike anything else of the period. The 1st movement seems to be seeking a resolution it never quite finds. The tiny 2nd movements is full of capricious humour. The slow 3rd movement is the most impressive of all, written in memory of President F D Roosevelt, this is an eloquent and moving memorial to the late President. The finale swings between jocularity and acidity with abrupt suddenness to create a sense of incomplete finality. This is a very fine symphony and it is shocking that it has only been recorded once, over 50 years ago.

Tubin’s 5th Symphony is another fine work from Estonia’s greatest composer. The 5th is the composer’s reaction to the loss of Estonia’s freedom and was composed in exile in Sweden, where Tubin was to remain for the rest of his life. The 1st movement is dominated by a nagging punchy rhythmic idea and there is a sense of anger and defiance in this movement. The slow movement is sad and rather despairing, a sense of loneliness and isolation dominate this very absorbing movement. The finale return to the defiance and anger of the 1st movement, this is broken off in a coda that seems for a moment to create a world of calm acceptance, but Tubin has none of this and the music finally swells in defiance and hope. Tubin’s highly individual style and impeccable craftsmanship are displayed throughout.

Vainberg or Weinberg’s 2nd Symphony is scored for string orchestra and is about 30 minutes in length. This is a substantial and quite impressive score. The 1st movement is rather dark and sombre and at times sounds like a rather limpid waltz that tries to get going but is always weighed down. The rather sombre feel continues in to the slow 2nd movement, the textures here are rather sparse, creating a sense of unease. The finale has some swifter music which the work needs, but the symphony ends on a rather wistful and slightly Shostakovich like coda.

Finally Egon Wellesz’s 1st Symphony. There can’t have been many composers that have commenced their symphonic cycle at the age of 60! This three movement symphony is a homage to the late romantic Austro-German tradition, but with some more contemporary elements thrown in. The work begins with a slow limping introduction before a sonata form movement proper gets going. The development is a forthright almost Reger like fugato. The 2nd movement is a rather animated scherzo with an odd halting trio with strange juxtaposed triads. The finale is a slow movement and very Mahlerian and often comes rather too close to imitation Mahler, but it is still very beautiful.