Suffolkcoastal's Symphonic Journey

[Suffolkcoastal]

The latest from the journey through my symphonic collection:

1909
Bowen: Symphony No 2 in E minor
Casella: Symphony No 2 in C minor
Grechaninov: Symphony No 2 in A minor
Paderewski: Symphony in B minor 'Polonia'
Prokofiev: Sinfonietta in A major (revised 1929 version)
Steinberg: Symphony No 2 in B flat minor 'In Memoriam N. Rimsky-Korsakov'
Tournemire: Symphony No 2 in B flat major 'Ouessant'
Volbach: Symphony in B minor

I find York Bowen's 2nd Symphony marginally more interesting than his rather disappointing 1st symphony. The middle two movements come off best, the slow movement has moments of real poetry and the scherzo is wittily attractive. The 1st movement as in his 1st symphony, sounds rather Russian in feeling but lacks material of any real distinction,whilst the finale I find rather empty.
The Casella 2nd Symphony is rather interesting. The fairly adventurous and at times haunting 1st movement is clearly under Mahler's influence. The slow movement is however just a reorchestration of the 1st symphony's slow movement, which seems rather pointless and detracts from the rest of the symphony. The scherzo (2nd movt) and finale are not quite up to the 1st movement in quality, though the scherzo has a strange nagging quality. Certainly worth investigating, though a pity about the slow movement.
Grechaninov's 2nd Symphony is a pleasant and rather typical late romantic Russian symphony. It has some attractive moments enhanced by excellent orchestration. The influence of Tchaikovsky is plain to hear at times. If the musical ideas had more memorability and distinction this would be well worth seeking out.
Paderewski's B minor Symphony is fairly lengthy at around 75 minutes in duration. Its length is also its real drawback. Though there are some absolutely captivating moments, for me the symphony meanders far too much and also never really achieves any lasting forward momentum.
It would be interesting to hear Prokofiev's Sinfonietta in its original 1909 version. The work as revised twice and if the revision is limited then it is remarkable how early Prokofiev's distinctive voice and harmonic twists emerged. It is in 5 movements, around 25 mins in length. There is some enjoyable writing, though the slow 2nd movement is rather dry and of less distinction IMO.
Maximilian Steinberg's 2nd Symphony dedicated to the memory of his teacher and father-in-law Rimsky-Korsakov is a work of some distinction. The sombre elegiac and fairly powerful 1st movement is quite impressive and the symphony generally comes off as a whole and makes quite a strong impression and this is certainly worth seeking out. It seems on my research on the composer, as this is work is about as adventurous as he got, which is a pity.
Charles Tournemire's 2nd Symphony is rather uneven. Like the Paderewski it tends to meander far too much, though there are moments that temporarily hold one's attention better. After the interesting 1st Symphony I find this work somewhat disappointing.
Finally Fritz Volbach's B minor Symphony. Again at times this is quite interesting, stylistically a mix of R Strauss, Wagner and at times Bruckner (especially in the slow movement). The short Scherzo tries to be witty but doesn't convince. However in parts of this movement and the finale there seems almost to be an anticipation of the sound world of Strauss's Der Rosenkavalier.

[Suffolkcoastal]

Continuing the journey through my symphonic collection this evening and the last few nights:

1910
Alfano: Symphony No 1 in E major (rev 1953 version)
Atterburg: Symphony No 1 in B minor
L Glass: Symphony No 4 in C minor
Glazunov: Symphony No 9 (completed fragment)
Mahler: Symphony No 9 in D
Maliperio: Sinfonie del silenzio e della morte
Miaskovsky: Sinfonietta in A major
Peterson-Berger: Symphony No 2 in E flat 'Sunnanfard'
Rontgen: Symphony in C minor (No 3)
Scriabin: Prometheus, Poem of Fire (Symphony No 5)
Szymanowski: Symphony No 2 in B flat major
Vaughan Williams: A Sea Symphony

The Alfano was revised a number of times including deleting a whole movement. This is an enterprising and colourful work. at times it anticipates the mature Respighi in language and shows a composer worth investigating. Atterburg's 1st Symphony is also an interesting work. It already shows a certain individuality and the adagio and scherzo really stand out. Only the finale lets the work down somewhat as it struggles to maintain interest, but still well worth getting to know.
Louis Glass's 4th Symphony is in comparison with the above rather dull and mechanical. The ideas fairly uninteresting and the work really lacks and melodic distinction. The slow movement starts promisingly but soon gets lost in rather uninspired material.
Glazunov composed just a 9 minutes fragment of a 9th symphony. It is a great pity he never completed it as the fragment that survives is rather melancholic and resigned and it would have been interesting to see how the composer would have developed this.
The 9th is one of the two Mahler symphonies that I can appreciate and that I admire, especially the 3rd and 4th movements. It seems for me to almost sum up the weariness, resignation and pent-up tension of a world that was soon to be shattered by the outbreak of World War One.
The Maliperio isn't really a symphony as such and has been described as consisting of three tone poems, which is an apt description. Heavily programmatic, this is nevertheless a work of interest and of a composer trying to find a language with which he is confident.
Miaskovsky's early A major Sinfonietta is a delightful work. The 1st movement is clearly under Tchaikovsky's spell and the lovely slow movement very much under Rimsky-Korsakov's. The finale is a little more forward looking with hints of the more mature composer.
The Peterson-Berger is subtitled 'Journey on southerly winds' and is a highly programmatic work, typically late romantic in spirit and sound and a work I rather enjoyed. In fact there are some really beautiful and poetic moments as well as some occasionally rather rhetorical ones, but overall worth investigating.
The numbering of Julius Rontgen's Symphonies isn't always clear, but the C minor of 1910 seems to be the 3rd. It is actually quite a forthright and energetic work, at times rather Brahmsian, at others almost Mahler like. The overall impression is better than the ideas themselves which lack ream memorability.
Scriabin's Prometheus is sometimes referred to as his 5th Symphony so I included it in symphonic survey. This really is an extraordinary work, as daring in someways as the contemporary works of Stravinsky and Schoenberg. It is perhaps for me more a work to admire than really enjoy. Szymanowski's 2nd Symphony is strongly influenced by Scriabin, in three movements it a work worth investigating even if for me the fugal finale doesn't come off.
Finally Vaughan Williams and there can be few more arresting openings to a symphonic cycle than that of A Sea Symphony. By 1910 RVW had found his own individual soundworld and hearing in historic context is a real ear opener. I love this work as I do all of his symphonies. The finale is probably overlong and too episodic, however there are so many beautiful and moving moments it is easy to forgive and overlook this.

[Suffolkcoastal]

The latest in my symphonic journey:

1911
Brun: Symphony No 2 in B flat major
Elgar: Symphony No 2 in E flat major
Gliere: Symphony No 3 'Ilya Murometz'
H Hadley: Symphony No 4 in D minor
Huber: Symphony No 6 in A major
Langgaard: Symphony No 1 'Klippepastorale'
Mahler: Symphony No 10 in F sharp minor (D Cooke III)
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 2 in C sharp minor
Sibelius: Symphony No 4 in A minor
Stanford: Symphony No 7 in D minor

Fritz Brun's 2nd Symphony is a pleasant late romantic work. The 1st movement is heavily under Brahms's influence, but the slow movement is genuinely satisfying and quite memorable, even if the rest of the work is rather anonymous.
Elgar's 2nd is among my very favourite symphonies. The 3rd movement in particular is an astonishing movement, surely the most original composed by a British composer up until that time. The ending of the work in which the horizon suddenly seems to spread out in front of you is beautifully judged and deeply satisfying.
Gliere's large scale 'Ilya Murometz' Symphony is one of the last of the Russian Nationalist symphonies. Highly programmatic it is a highly colourful and enjoyable score inspite of its considerable length which does lead to some long-windedness in places. Though is was available in a cut version, the uncut version is much to be preferred.
The American Henry Hadley's 4th Symphony is also rather attractive, no masterpiece but some of the ideas are quite memorable, and the scherzo in particular (representing the American South) really is delightful with its 'cakewalk' rhythms.
The 6th is by far the most pleasing of the Hans Huber symphonies to date. This is much lighter work than its predecessors and light attractive scoring also adds to the work. For once Huber isn't trying to be too dramatic or say to much and teh result is a work that is worth investigating. No masterpiece maybe but very pleasant all the same.
Rued Langgaard's 1st Symphony is a youthful work, over 50 minutes in length and in 5 movements. The subtitle roughly translates as 'Mountain Pastorals. The work is composed in the typical luxuriant late-romantic manner of the period. The inner movements come off best, the larger outer movements rather overstay their welcome and are in places rather overscored and the composer isn't as yet in command of his material.
I listened to Mahler's 10th in Deryck Cookes final (3rd) performing version. The 1st movement seems to evolve naturally from the last movement of the 9th and is a fascinating movement and was of course completed and completely scored by Mahler. The rest of the work doesn't for me live up to this movement. It may be worth listening to some other 'completions' to see if they come over as more satisfactory, though I personally doubt it.
Miaskovsky's 2nd Symphony is in three movements and is a dark agitated work. It is one of the works of the period in which you can almost sense the world moving towards the catastrophe of World War One and the tension and unpredictability of the Russia in which this work was composed. Though occasionally (especially in the slow movement) the work feels a little long for its material, this is still an absorbing work. The finale is rather interesting being a sort of scherzo and finale rolled into one and with a particularly nagging and brooding intensity, the work ends on a surprising dissonance.
Sibelius's 4th Symphony is a masterpiece IMO. The sparsity and originality of its writing is awe inspiring and its reaction against the opulent scores of many of its contemporaries equally striking.
Finally another work, that could also almost be considered a reaction, Stanford's compact final symphony, a work of classical proportions and scoring and in its way very satisfying. In three movements, the 2nd movement is a minuet and the finale a theme & variations in which the final variation is almost a complete movement in itself.

[Suffolkcoastal]

Another installment in the journey through my symphonic collection.

1912
Draeseke: Symphony No 4 in E minor 'Symphonia Comica'
Korngold: Sinfonietta in B major
Melartin: Symphony No 4 in E major 'Summer Symphony'
Nielsen: Symphony No 3 'Sinfionia Espansiva'
Parry: Symphony No 5 in B minor 'Symphonic Fantasia'
1913
Atterburg: Symphony No 2 in F major
Bantock: A Hebridean Symphony (Symphony No 1)
Buttner: Symphony No 3 in D flat major
Ives: A Symphony New England Holidays
Magnard: Symphony No 4 in C sharp minor
Respighi: Sinfonia Drammatica
Schmidt: Symphony No 2 in E flat
Tournemire: Symphony No 3 in D major 'Moscow'
Tournemire: Symphony No 4 'Pages-Symphoniques'
Vaughan Williams: A London Symphony (original version)

Draeseke's 4th and final symphony was composer 25 years after his 3rd. It is a short lightweight and highly entertaining score. The subtitle 'Symphonia Comica' is very apt and there is much humour is this well crafted score (even down to the E minor key. Draeke is certainly a composer who shouldn't be overlooked.
Korngold's Sinfonietta is a truly remarkable work for a boy in his mid-teens and shows what an outstanding talent he really was. It really is a full-blown symphony (around 40 minutes in length) and the skill and clarity of the scoring in particular is astonishing.
Melartin's 4th Symphony really should be in the standard repertoire. It is a highly inventive and haunting work showing a composer of real individuality. Its ideas are memorable and the music makes a totally satisfying whole. Like the exact contemporary 3rd of Nielsen, the slow movement uses solo wordless voices in the slow movement, in this case two sopranos and a mezzo and personally I find this movement even more evocative than the better known Nielsen. If you don't know this symphony please take the trouble to give it a try!
The Nielsen 3rd is a very fine work and totally individual, and is well enough known for me to add little here apart from to express my admiration for this score.
Parry's final symphony is structually inventive. Cast in one continuous movement subdivided into 4 sections. The restless passion in this work marks it out from his earlier symphonies, and at the same time it is marked by skillful craftmanship to make a highly satisfactory score.
Atterburg's 2nd Symphony follows on from his excellent 1st symphony in producing another well written work. Like the 1st it shows a certain individuality and some quite memorable writing. The slow movement is one again quite beautiful, and the pacing of the 1st movement is well handled. As in the 1st symphony however, the finale is somewhat unsatisfactory.
The Hebridean Symphony of Bantock is an intriguing and highly atmospheric score. I was shocked at the sheer quality of the writing when I first encountered this work about 15-20 years ago and Bantock is clearly a much better composer than I had imagined based on the comments I'd read. The scoring is excellent and very skillful and the harmonic language almost impressionistic at times (that final chord is gorgeous). This work deserves far more attention.
Buttner's 3rd Symphony is much better than his first two symphonic efforts. This work seems to be much better held together and has more inevitability about it, even if the ideas themselves are less than memorable. Bruckner and Strauss seem to be influences.
Ives's 'Holdays Symphony' which consists of Washington's Birthday, Decoration Day, Fourth of July & Thanksgiving Day (which can be and often are played separately) is certainly unlike anything else of its time. Largely composed over 9 years from 1904-13 it shows the experimental Ives in full maturity. Certainly Ives's aural imagination must have been stunning to have created such a unique soundworld. I think Washington's Birthday comes off best and Ives's humour can be easily grasped. The other movements are a little harder to take, though Thanksgiving Day is genuinely moving.
Magnard's 4th Symphony composed a number of years after his 3rd is a very fine work. Impeccable craftmanship and counterpoint skills are evident throughout and the work makes a very satisfactory whole. It was a such a tragedy than he was killed a year later defending his estate from advancing German troops. Magnard's symphonies deserve to be much better known.
Respighi's Sinfonia Drammatica is a large scale work in 3 movements. It certainly has some striking moments, particularly in the finale (the most dramatic movement). It is rather long for its material and the invention sometimes flags, but still worth a listen.
Franz Schmidt's 2nd Symphony is an excellent work, inventive at times quite memorable, showing fine craftmanship. The work is in 3 movements lasting in total around 50 minutes. Like his 1st the 2nd symphony has grown on me over the years and I would recommend it to those who don't know the work. Strauss is an obvious influence at times, but there is still plenty of originality.
Tournemire's 3rd and 4th symphonies are quite different. The 3rd is a colourful work, with, as its subtitle of 'Moscow' suggests, a strong Russian flavour. The ideas aren't of the highest quality but nevertheless this is an enjoyable work. The 4th is in one continuous movement and more austere but very satisfying and for me his finest symphony so far and a work to which I must return.
Finally Vaughan Williams's wonderful 'A London Symphony'. Now that the original version has been restored I find it more difficult to listen to his final version, even though the cuts RVW made generally make the work much tauter. The Original however has some incredibly haunting and moving passages and the scoring has a real virtuosity about it that marks it out from RVW's later works.

[Suffolkcoastal]

Another installment in my symphonic journey.

1914
Enescu: Symphony No 2 in A major
Garofalo: Romantic Symphony
Gram: Symphony No 1
Langgaard: Symphony No 2 'Awakening of Spring'
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 3 in A minor
Rangstrom: Symphony No 1 in C sharp minor 'August Strindberg in Memoriam'
Ropartz: Symphony No 4 in C major
Tournemire: Symphony No 5 in F minor
Vermeulen: Symphony No 1 'Symphonia Carminum'
1915
Gilse: Symphony No 4
Kajanus: Sinfonietta
Peterson-Berger: Symphony No 5 in F minor 'Lappland Symphony'
Sibelius: Symphony No 5 in E flat (Original Version)
Stenhammar: Symphony No 2 in G minor
R Strauss: Alpine Symphony

Enescu's 2nd Symphony is quite attractive with a variety of influences, it is a powerful if somewhat enigmatic work, which needs a number of listening to fully appreciate it.
Much is claimed for Carlo Garofalo's Romantic Symphony on the CD, but I'm afraid I find this work very dull, with little distinguished material. It lacks the personality of his countryman contemporaries such as Respighi, Casella & Maliperio and its idiom is more Germanic than these composers, perhaps one work best left in obscurity.
The Dane Peder Gram's 1st Symphony is an impressive work. Very forthright almost strident at times with real forward drive and integrity this work really is worth investigating. It has a certain Russian feel to it, especially in the 1st movement.
Rued Langgaard's 2nd Symphony is a two movement work, featuring a solo soprano in the 2nd movement. It is a more satisfying work than his 1st symphony and is better scored. The influence of Strauss is apparent at times and Langgaard still one feels, hasn't full control of his material though.
Miaskovsky's 3rd Symphony is a very sombre dark-hued work in 3 movements. It is an impressive if overtly pessimistic work. The main motif has a certain similarity to that in the Liszt Faust Symphony. One almost feels the impending tragedy that was to overtake his homeland in the next 3 years is foreshadowed in this symphony.
Rangstrom's 1st Symphony was described as 'pure kitsch' in an old Penguin Guide and sadly it is not a good work. the 1st movement is passable with occasionally interesting textures. The other 3 movements are totally devoid of interesting ideas, with empty rhetorical gesturing. A poor work.
Gut Ropartz's 4th Symphony I find rather appealing. It is a nicely balanced work, the slow movement is rather fine and the whole work has a welcome understatement about it which comes off.
Tournemire's 5th Symphony is also worthwhile. There is still some of the Russian feeling of his 3rd symphony in this work and it has a seriousness of purpose that is most satisfying. The finale is more overtly French and nods towards impressionism.
Vermeulen's 1st symphony is certainly worth investigating an intriguing work, with French overtones and at times a certain sparseness in the harmony that marks it out from contemporary works.
Gilse's 4th Symphony is perhaps less memorable than its predecessors. Still at times under Mahler's influence and also Strauss's it is still a well crafted work.
Kajanus's Sinfonietta is a pleasant if rather anonymous work, that nevertheless worth a listen. Peterson-Berger's 3rd Symphony is rather less interesting than its predecessor. Though nicely written, it is rather anonymous and lacks any really striking ideas.
The original version of Sibelius's 5th Symphony is an intriguing listen. Sibelius was surely correct to revise it as it does give the impression of a work in progress, at least to my ears, even though occasionally it is more harmonically challenging than the finale version.
Stenhammar's 2nd Symphony is a totally delightful work, with attractive and memorable ideas. The 1st movement is delightfully inventive and the finale is at times a real contrapuntal 'tour de force' if a little long. But still a work that deserves a place in the regular repertoire.
Finally Strauss's Alpine Symphony. Really a large scale symphonic poem. The masterful scoring helps this score and there is an inevitability about the work that is satisfying and enables one to listen to the work without the need to follow its detailed programme.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from my symphonic journey:

1916
Atterburg: Symphony No 3 'West Coast Pictures'
Ives: Symphony No 4
Langgaard: Symphony No 3 'La Melodia' (1933 vers)
Langgaard: Symphony No 4 'Fall of the Leaf' (1920 vers)
Madetoja: Symphony No 1 in F major
Melartin: Symphony No 5 'Sinfonia Brevis'
A Merikanto: Symphony No 1
Nielsen: Symphony No 4 'Inextinguishable'
Schreker: Chamber Symphony
Szymanowski: Symphony No 3 'Song of the Night'
Wetz: Symphony No 1 in C minor
1917
Dopper: Symphony No 7 'Zuiderzee'
Huber: Symphony No 7 in D minor 'Schweizerische'
Prokofiev: Symphony No 1 in D 'Classical'
Rosenberg: Symphony No 1 (rev version)

The 3 movements of Atterburg's picturesque 3rd Symphony were originally conceived as separate works. It is certainly a colourful work and the central storm movement is quite spectacular. Though no masterpiece the atmosphere and colour of the work make this a worthwhile work that we should perhaps hear more often.
Ives's 4th Symphony is a problem work for me. Utterly different from anything else of its time. Three of the four movements are effective and highly absorbing. The 2nd movement just goes over the top for me in its complexity and for all the calculations it comes over as a wash of jumbled fragments that overwhelming to the ear.
I'm completely baffled by Langgaard's 3rd Symphony. It is really a piano concerto in one continuous span, but for all the world it sounds like it belongs in the mid 19th century and is at times rather Schumannesque, but without any distinguished material. His 4th Symphony could almost be by a different composer, a far more absorbing and strange symphony with some haunting textures and worth repeated listening. Though the material isn't perhaps that memorable, the overall effect of the work stays with me for a while afterwards.
Madetoja's 3 movement 1st symphony is an attractive work, quite distinctive in style with an a French feeling in places. Only the finale fails to convince as it comes over as rather static and without forward drive.
The 5th Symphony of Melartin continues this composer's fine symphonic cycle. Though titled Sinfonia Brevis, it is still a little over 30 minutes in length and in absolutely no way negligeable. Melartin really does have a distinctive sound world and it's about time we heard more of his music in this country.
Aare Merikanto's 1st Symphony is a fairly conservative work, certainly less adventurous than his works of the next decade. The work is pleasant enough but comes over as rather dull.
No introduction needed for Nielsen's superb and highly individual 4th Symphony. A work I need to study more of as I have the score. Everytime I follow it I find more than I'd missed before. Is there any other composer for whom the grace note was such an integral part of his style?
Schreker's Chamber Symphony is also a fine work. Not as striking as Schoenberg's but still an absorbing and haunting work with a Mahlerian touch, especially in the last movement.
Szymanowski's 3rd Symphony is starting to be heard more often. An exotic work with solo singer and chorus setting a Persian text in translation. It is utterly individual and its exotic soundworld is maintained impressively without ever drifting into cliche.
Richard Wetz's 1st Symphony is a big hour long work in a typical late romantic German manner. Bruckner is the undoubted major influence and Wetz even occasionally seems to pick up some of Bruckner's mannerism. The symphony though lacks the conviction of Bruckner and the movements often seem overlong.
Cornelis Dopper's 7th Symphony is a pleasant rather lightweight work, with occasional folk influences, especially in the attractive 2nd movement, though apart from this it is rather unmemorable.
The same could be said of Hans Huber's 7th Symphony, again a rather lightweight work, with some rather Brahmsian textures as well as the occasional touch of Mahler, the material isn't particularly distinguished.
Prokofiev's delightfully witty and enchanting 1st Symphony needs no introduction. It still sounds fresh to me, but then I avoid listening to it to it too often. Sadly it is done to death at certain times of day on R3 these days.
Finally Hilding Rosenberg's impressive 1st Symphony. Though it underwent some revision later in Rosenberg's long life, it comes over as a strikingly individual work of no mean power and conviction and a work that deserves to be given more exposure.

[Suffolkcoastal]

The latest installment in the journey through my symphonic collection.

1918
Atterberg: Symphony No 4 in G minor 'Sinfonia Piccolo'
Kaski: Symphony in B minor
Madetoja: Symphony No 2
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 4 in E minor
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 5 in D major
Pejacevic: Symphony in F sharp minor
Saminsky: Symphony No 2

1919
Alfven: Symphony No 4 'From the outermost skerries'
Andreae: Symphony in C major
Buttner: Symphony No 4
Rangstom: Symphony No 2 in D minor 'My Country'
Sibelius: Symphony No 5 in E flat (revised version)
Wetz: Symphony No 2 in A major

Atterberg's 4th Symphony is a highly attractive and relatively brief symphony of about 20 mins duration. It uses Swedish folk material effectively to create a light work of great charm and no great pretentions.
Heino Kaski's only symphony was written during the turbulent year of the Finnish Civil War. It isn't particularly Sibelian, perhaps slightly more influenced by his teacher Palmgren. Though for a relatively early work it is accomplished, for some reason it has never stayed in my memory.
Madetoja's 2nd Symphony is a different matter, the Finnish Civil War and World War 1 seem to cast their shadow over this highly impressive 40 minute long work.The 2nd movement makes a particularly strong impression, a landscape which for all its pastoral overtones is subdued with am impending darkness and uncertainty. This erupts in the aggressive 3rd movement, before the short resigned finale ends the work uncertainly. Madetoja isn't quite able to shake off Sibelius's influence in places, but this really is a rewarding work, well worth investigating.
Miaskovsky managed to composed two symphonies during the upheavals of 1918 in Russia. In the 4th we are on now familiar Miaskovsky territory, restless sombre but with a now increasing confidence of purpose. The 5th was Miaskovsky first popular success and his first major key symphony. It starts almost as if it could have been written by his younger colleague and friend Prokofiev and the 1st movement is generally relaxed in nature. The 2nd is a rather strange movement sparse at times. The symphony alludes to Russian folk elements and this is particularly well displayed in the scherzo and finale. The scherzo being attractive and more popular in tone.
Dora Pejacevic was the daughter of a Croatian Governor, her symphony is a fairly long work, written in a later romantic style and is worth an occasional revival as it is by no means insignificant.
Lev Saminsky's 2nd Symphony is an odd little work, which occasionally reminds me of earlier Scriabin and with the occasional French touch, but overall is difficult to really note any significant influences but at the same time it doesn't make a lasting impression.
Alfven's 4th Symphony, has a very loose programme attached to it and uses a solo soprano and tenor vocalise in the manner of Nielsen's 3rd. It is a highly descriptive and atmospheric work, which one feels becomes rather diffuse at times. For all the beauty of sound the symphony's continual ebb and flow becomes occasionally slightly monotonous and lacks focus. The tenor tessitura is also rather high at times and this takes away the romantic longing that Alfven was aiming for. Certainly not as appealing as his first 3 symphonies IMO.
The Swiss composer and conductor Volkmar Andreae's C major symphony is an interesting but variable work. The first movement is quite compact and comes off nicely, but the last two movements perhaps over-relax and lack focus, the slow movement though is quite startling, very sombre, often quite dissonant with a distinctly Mahlerian feel, the symphony is worth investigating for this movement alone.
Paul Buttner 4th Symphony is certainly his best. The late romantic German idiom is here confidently handled and there is more purpose, drive and consistancy, something absent from his earlier symphonies.
Ture Rangstrom's 2nd Symphony is a somewhat better achievement than his rather dire 1st symphony. The lighter more pastoral writing he employs in places is quite pleasant, however there is still a lot of the rather empty rhetorical gesturing which so seriously marred his first effort in the medium.
The revised 5th Symphony of Sibelius needs no introduction, now the earlier version has been recorded (which I commented on under 1915) we have a real idea of Sibelius's symphonic thought processes. I cannot help but admire the drive, clear purpose and inevitability of this symphony in its revised version, even if it isn't among my favourite Sibelius works.
Finally Richard Wetz's 2nd Symphony. As in 1st symphony he seems incapable of shaking off the spectre of Bruckner. In fact the very opening could almost be described as pastiche Bruckner. The 2nd and 3rd movements are marginally better but rather undistinguished even though the orchestral handling is secure enough.

[Suffolkcoastal]

The latest in the journey through my symphonic collection, and I’ve reached the 1920’s.
1920
L Glass: Symphony No 5 ‘ Sinfonia Svastica’
Langgaard: Symphony No 6 ‘The Heaven Storming’
Pingoud: Symphony No 1
Sinding: Symphony No 3 in F Major
Turina: Siinfonia Sevilliana
Vermeulen: Symphony No 2 ‘Prelude a la nouvelle journee’
1921
Bliss: A Colour Symphony
Enescu: Symphony No 3
Krenek: Symphony No 1
Pijper: Symphony No 2
Pingoud: Symphony No 2
Roussel: Symphony No 2 in B flat
Simonsen: Symphony No 1 in A minor ‘Hellas’
Vaughan Williams: A Pastoral Symphony
Vermeulen: Symphony No 2 ‘Threne et Pean’
Weill: Symphony No 1

Louis Glass ‘s 5th Symphony seems to be regarded as his masterpiece and much praise has been heaped upon it in some quarters. I would argue that it is by some margin his best symphony so far. The first movement has an occasional touch of Nielsen about it and the slow movement really is quite beautiful. The rest of the work doesn’t quite live up to these movements but the symphony is certainly worthwhile.
Langgaard’s 6th Symphony is certainly among his more original compositions. Though for me it is perhaps too episodic there is some strikingly powerful writing in time that occasionally verges on the visionary.
The Finn Pingoud’s 1st Symphony is a short two movement work that seems to usher in the 1920’s. The writing at times is quite astringent and there is absolutely no trace of any Sibelian influence. At times there is an almost slight anticipation of the world of Les Six.
Sinding’s 3rd Symphony is a relatively conservative work heavily under the influence of Wagner & Strauss. It is a much more weighty work than its two predecessors and lacks their appeal.
Turina’s Sinfonia Sevilliana is a pleasant three movement work dating from around the same time as his best known work Danzas Fantasticas. Very much in the Spanish Nationalist tradition of Falla’s well known ballets, combined with hints of Ravel, the work though slight is genuinely appealing.
Vermeulen’s 2nd Symphony comes as a genuine shock. A tough, at times atonal work, it sounds in places as if it could easily have been written 40 years later. The atonality seems to be arrived at through genuine independence of line and a strong contrapuntal element, that gives the music a drive and intensity that is striking.
I enjoy Bliss’s Colour Symphony and it is sad that he never composed another orchestral symphony. His individual language a mixture of Elgarian swagger with a Stravinskian bite is already apparent and perhaps this work should be heard more often as Bliss manages to sustain the interest of the listener.
Enescu’s 3rd Symphony is an impressive work, it seems in the finale to finally resolve the tensions of his 2nd Symphony and the earlier two movements of this work. The idiom is still a mixture of late romantic with a touch of French impressionism and the exoticism of Szymanowski. A very rewarding work.
Krenek’s 1st Symphony is a somewhat episodic work, but very much of its time, with often chamber like contrapuntal textures it shows a young composer searching for a distinctive voice.
Pijper’s 2nd Symphony is a short and relatively avant-garde score for the time. Again a strong contrapuntal element results in some atonality and the influence of Stravinsky is also noticeable in some places. It does seem slightly odd that two of the most forward looking symphonies of the period should come from the Netherlands.
Pingoud’s 2nd Symphony carries on in a similar manner to his 1st though in some places it is perhaps a little less ambitious and striking. Roussel’s 2nd Symphony is a transitional work in his output. It is I find a rather introspective work and in the outer movement rather dark hued in orchestral timbre, that gives the work an intensity that stays with the listener. The lighter central movement makes an effective enough contrast.
The Dane Simonsen’s 2nd Symphony is rather a slight work, the finale I find rather short and unsatisfactory, though the slow central movement does succeed in creating a pastoral atmosphere that is quite attractive.
I think that Vaughan Williams’ Pastoral Symphony is one of his masterpieces. A work, whose uneasy peace has haunted me since I first heard it. The inevitability and planning of the work is masterly, more so as it seems understated. The finale in which human emotion finally breaks through shows Vaughan Williams as a symphonist of the highest order.
Vermeulen’s 3rd Symphony is as striking as his 2nd. It is to my ears and even finer work still, teh concentration and inevitability are sustained and the tough musical language is effectively handled> I really am surprised that more attention is granted to Vermeulen as he is clearly a composer that rewards further investigation and will surprise new listeners.
Finally Kurt Weill’s youthful 1st Symphony. Much of the work’s material comes from incidental music to a play and the writing is effective and appealing. I particularly like the rather resigned and almost poignant last 5th of the symphony. The jazz influences aren’t as yet readily apparent but this work is enjoyable nevertheless.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from my symphonic journey:
1922
Atterberg: Symphony No 5 in D minor ‘Symphonia Funebre’
Bax: Symphony No 1 in E flat
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 7 in B minor
Nielsen: Symphony No 5
1923
Alnaes: Symphony No 2 in D major
Grechaninov: Symphony No 3 in E major
Hanson: Symphony No 1 in E minor ‘Nordic’
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 6 in E flat minor
Rathaus: Symphony No 2
Sibelius: Symphony No 6 in D minor
Zemlinsky: Lyric Symphony

Many of the works here are less strikingly avant-garde than the symphonies of Pingoud, Pijper and Vermeulen I commented on under 1920/1. But this is already showing the huge variety of styles and symphonic structures that were to develop as the 20th century progressed.
Atterberg wrote his 5th Symphony during a period of personal difficulty, it is a far more unsettling work that its predecessors with an impressive forward energy and tonal ambiguity, the last movement climaxes in a rather macabre waltz somewhat in the manner of Ravel’s La Valse.
The outer movements of Bax’s 1st Symphony started life as a Piano Sonata which Bax, upon taking advice, decided was too symphonic and was turned into a symphony with a new central movement. This is a rather dark brooding work. The ebb and flow of the 1st movement is perhaps too episodic and lacks the control Bax would ultimately bring to his symphonic writing. The orchestra required is very large but the orchestration is superb with some impressive original touches. The dark central movement is the finest of the three IMO.
Miaskovsky wrote his 7th Symphony at the same time as the 6th and was finished before that work. It is almost the opposite of that work, being in two movements and shows for the first time a more compact symphonic handling, something that was to become briefly more prevalent in Miaskovsky’s writing. Harmonically it is somewhat tougher than his earlier symphonies and inspite of its relative brevity shows a wide emotional range.
Little introduction is needed for Nielsen’s masterly 5th Symphony, one of the finest of all 20th Symphony. It is one of those works that each time you follow the score, you discover something new and become more impressed by the sheer quality and originality of this masterpiece.
Alnaes 2nd Symphony, could have been written 25 years earlier. It is a pleasant , relatively light work, very romantic in spirit, The influence of Grieg can be felt in places and there is genuine Scandinavian charm , but ultimately the work is rather unmemorable.
Grechaninov’s 3rd Symphony was among the last works he composed before emigrating from the new Soviet Union. The symphony inhabits a post Tchaikovskyian late romantic world and like teh Alnaes could easily have been written in the 1890’s. The 1st movement is actually quite charming and nicely scored, the rest of the symphony isn’t quite on the same level, but still pleasant enough.
Howard Hanson’s 1st Symphony already shows Hanson’s mature style in full evidence. Though Hanson’s style is basically late-romantic with a Nordic touch, it is still recognisably his own and one feels that it could only have been composed in the 20th century. Structually a little loose at times , I still find plenty to enjoy in this work.
Miaskovsky’s 6th Symphony is a large hour long work and very impressive it is too. As with the 7th Symphony, Miaskovsky seems to have found a wider emotional range and the impetus of the 1st movement in particular is very impressive. The remaining movements maintain a convincing balance. The finale originally has a choral part, though the composer also wrote the movement without chorus. The use of the chorus actually works well, this was my first time listening to the symphony with its choral ending, (my Svetlanov recording omits the chorus).
The 2nd Symphony of Karol Rathaus is an interesting work. Rather sombre and at times quite powerful, it makes a strong impression. The harmonic writing is quite striking, and at times , especially in the last movement almost anticipates Messiaen. This is well worth seeking out.
I’m especially fond of Sibelius’s 6th Symphony, I find it beautifully satisfying and a source of endless fascination, it is along with the 3rd, my favourite Sibelius symphony.
Finally Zemlinsky’s Lyric Symphony. This is probably his best known work. More of an extended song cycle for soprano, baritone and orchestra than a symphony, the model seems to be Mahler’s Das Lied von der Erde. The work is extremely beautiful, inhabiting a post-Wagnerian sound world with Mahlerian and Straussian touches. If you’ve never heard this work before I wholeheartedly recommend it to you.

[Suffolkcoastal]

The latest listening from my symphonic journey:
1924
Antheil: Symphony for Five Instruments
Copand: Symphony for Organ & Orchestra
L Glass: Symphony No 6 ‘Birth of Scyldings’
Holst: A Choral Symphony
Prokofiev: Symphony No 2 in D minor
Sibelius: Symphony No 7 in C
Tansman: Sinfonietta No 1
Tournemire: Symphony No 8 ‘Le Triumph de la Mort’
1925
Antheil: A Jazz Symphony
Gram: Symphony No 2
Melartin: Symphony No 6
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 8 in A major
Nielsen: Symphony No 6 ‘Sinfonia Semplice’
Shebalin: Symphony No 1 in F minor
Shostakovich: Symphony No 1 in F minor

Antheil little Symphony for Five Instruments is rather typical Antheil of the period mixing the influence of Stravinsky with hints of American popular music of the period in an entertaining manner.
Copland’s Symphony for Organ & Orchestra is an impressive work from a young composer, though an early work there are plenty of anticipations of the mature composer, particularly rhymically. Stylistically there is a strong French influence and the three movement work is interesting in that the weight of the work is in the finale with a relatively brief and subdued first movement.
Louis Glass’s 6th Symphony though better than most of his early symphonies is rather a disappointment after the rather appealing 5th Symphony and rather unmemorable.
Holst’s Choral Symphony is an interesting but slightly uneven work. I’m a huge Holst fan and for me the first three movements work well and set Keats well, especially the gem of the symphony and one of Holst finest creations, the 2nd movement ‘Ode on a Grecian Urn’. The main problem is the finale, which seems awkward structurally and in its setting of Keats. Still Holst was always somewhat unconventional and one wouldn’t want him to have been anything else.
The 2nd Symphony is one of Prokofiev’s hardest nuts to crack. In two movements and structurally inspired by Beethoven’s final Piano Sonata as the composer admitted. The sheer density of the contrapuntal lines, dissonance and thick orchestration makes the 1st movement difficult to listen to and appreciate fully. The 2nd movement at over twice the length of the 1st is an theme and variations and is much better and more typical of the composer. Though the overall effect is of a composer still ill at ease symphonically.
Sibelius’s 7th Symphony needs little comment from me, I think it is one of the masterpieces of symphonic writing, impressive in its compression and structural logic and inevitability. My only slight reservation is that i always feel it ends slightly too abruptly as if there should be another dozen bars or so.
Alexander Tansman is a composer that is rather overlooked. His early Sinfonietta No 1, shows the influence of both Stravinsky and Les Six, but is still a nicely crafted work and by no means insignificant.
Charles Tournemire’s 8th Symphony shows the composer had travelled a fair distance from his romantic 1st Symphony. A rather strange and almost muted work at times, it is far more subdued than you would expect from its subtitle and there is a transparency to the orchestration which enhances the work. Worth seeking out I feel.
Antheil’s Jazz Symphony is very entertaining as with the Symphony for Five instruments there is a mix of Stravinsky and American popular music in this lightweight work.
The Dane Peder Gram’s 2nd Symphony is like his 1st, a strong work , hovering on the borders of late romanticism there is also an awareness of contemporary musical developments and his music certainly has individuality and is worth seeking out.
Melartin’s 6th and final symphony, I find slightly more uneven than its predecessors though it is still an interesting work from this fine and absurdly neglected Finnish master. The 1st movement is the most impressive, hovering on the borders of antonality at times it is uncompromising stuff. The shorter central movements though making a strong contrast seem to avoid the questions the 1st movement asks and the finale doesn’t really ultimately satisfy, at least for me. Still Melartin is really worth trying as the 4th and 5th Symphonies at least should IMO be in the international repertoire.
Miaskovsky’s 8th Synphony is also slightly disappointing after the its two predecessors. This symphony has a programmatic content based on the popular Stenka Razin. The work appropriates folk material at times and also at times harks back to the Russian Nationalism of the later 19th century. The work is enjoyable enough though the slow 3rd movement is far too long for its material and far too static.
Nielsen’s 6th Symphony is one of the most fascinating and cryptic of all symphonies. It took me some time to come to terms with it, but I now find it a daring and original masterpiece and perhaps in its tractured style amongst the most forward looking symphonies of the period.
Finally two graduation symphonies, both in the same key, from young Russian composers. The emergence of the 23 year old Vessarion Shebalin in his 1st Symphony became totally overshadowed by that of Shostakovich. Yet this substantial 45 minute symphony is a most impressive work from a young composer. The three movement work is more conventional than the Shostakovich but the writing is assured and Shebalin shows a greater contrapuntal skill than Shostakovich does. If you don’t know this work, it is worth while trying.
Shostakovich’s 1st Symphony still strikes as a remarkable work from a 19 year old. Though there have been some arguments in another post about how much Steinberg had a hand in this work, there are just too many obvious anticipations of the mature composer and the style is already recognisably Shostakovich, that this can only have been very superficial help from Steinberg. An awareness of teh Stravinsky of Petrushka is apparent as is Prokofiev. The other striking aspect is the often very sparse orchestration , that was to become typical of the mature composer’s style.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.
1926
Bax: Symphony No 2 in E minor & C
Borresen: Symphony No 3 in C major
Janacek: Sinfonietta
Madetoja: Symphony No 3 in A major
Pijper: Symphony No 3
Popov: Chamber Symphony for Seven Instruments
Reznicek: Symphony No 5 ‘Dance Symphony’
Shcherbachov: Symphony No 2 ‘Blokovskaya’
Tansman: Symphony No 2
1927 (beginning)
Boughton: Symphony No 2 ‘Deidre – A Celtic Symphony’
Brian: Symphony No 1 ‘Gothic’
Grechaninov: Symphony No 4 in C major
E Halffter: Sinfonietta in D (revised version)
Edward Burlingame Hill: Symphony No 1
Marek: Sinfonia
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 9 in E minor

Bax’s 2nd Symphony is among my favourite Bax works. It seems to naturally continue on from his 1st Symphony and yet again the imaginative and individual orchestration is striking. It holds together much better than the 1st Symphony and in the 2nd subject of the 1st movement contains one of Bax’s finest melodic inspirations.
Borresen’s 3rd Symphony is a fresh sounding and fairly attractive work, mixing occasional Danish folk ideas (most notably in the finale) with a post Tchaikovskyian harmonic and melodic colour, which results in the work seeming a little old-fashioned for the 1920’s.
Janacek’s Sinfonietta is of course familiar to most MB’s, so real need of comments. I have to admit that I didn’t take to it when I first heard the work, however I recognise and enjoy it as a work of utter stylistic originality and quite unlike anything else.
Compared to the dark hued 2nd Symphony, Madetoja’s 3rd is a relatively compact pastoral work of great charm and freshness. Though for me it doesn’t have the impact of the 2nd, the 3rd is really delightful and a work that audiences would certainly respond to if it was performed in concert.
Pijper’s 3rd Symphony is short 15 minute work with jazz and Stravinskyian influences and one which I find highly enjoyable.
Gavril Popov’s Chamber Symphony is an early and highly imaginative work from this composer. He uses his 7 instruments very effectively to create interesting textures and ideas and stylistically this work certainly presents a composer of individuality, in that he creates a contemporary sound world without being over-reliant on the influences of his contemporaries.
Reznicek’s 5th Symphony started off as Symphonic Dances and that is basically what the work remains. The score is very attractive and shows an awareness of contemporary music and impressionism to create some evocative textures and ideas.
Shcherbachov 2nd Symphony is a large scale hour long work for soloists, chorus and orchestra.
Setting poems by Alexander Blok, this is quite a striking powerful work, rather sombre at times. One can hear the influence of Mahler in places and the scale is certainly Mahlerian. Certainly worth investigation especially for those who like large scale monumental symphonies.
Tansman’s 2nd Symphony is a nicely crafted work, Stravinskyian in places it still shows a composer of some individuality and imagination.
Rutland Boughton’s 2nd Symphony is an interesting almost impressionistic late romantic work, no masterpiece but still a work that has some character and it certainly isn’t negligible. I think this work would come off quite effectively in a concert performance.
Havergal Brian’s mighty and monumental Gothic Symphony has of course been commented upon many times on these boards. Brian’s style really is quite unlike any other composer and the sometimes almost quirky orchestration enhances this individuality. Some textures and ideas are quite daring but Brian somehow manages to pull these off. Despite an almost two hour duration this symphony really does have a certain inevitability that keeps the listener focused. For me this work really is an individual statement that borders on being a masterpiece.
Grechaninov’s 4th Symphony is a fairly attractive work in a Tchaikovskyian style, in fact at times it sounds like pastiche Tchaikovsky, but in the world of the 1920’s the work comes over as dreadfully old-fashioned.
Ernesto Halffter’s Sinfonietta in D, is a very interesting work. Roehre description of it above, is very accurate. Stravinsky’s Pulcinella is a key influence on the work, but it also anticipates works as yet unwritten as Roehre says, and for me in particular it seems also to anticipate the neo-classical works of Martinu in its Sinfonia Concertante manner.
The 1st Symphony of the American Edward Burlingame Hill, is a very compact work lasting under 20 minutes. It has a slightly late-romantic feel to it but also incorporates almost impressionistic ideas at times. Famous as a teacher he counted Elliot Carter, Walter Piston & Roger Sessions amongst his students.
Marek’s Sinfonia is a strong 30 minute long work in one movement. Very much of its time its impressionistic writing is quite convincing and the work has a strong profile and inevitability. It is a pity in a way that Marek almost ceased to compose after the 1940’s.
Finally Miaskovsky’s 9th Symphony. This work hovers between the dark hued textures of his early symphonies and the slightly more optimistic and folk-like textures of the 8th Symphony. The scherzo is the most attractive movement.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.
1927 (concluded)
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 10 in F minor
Pingoud: Symphony No 3
Sessions: Symphony No 1
Shostakovich: Symphony No 2 ‘October’
A Tcherepnin: Symphony No 1
1928
Atterberg: Symphony No 6 in C major
Bantock: Pagan Symphony (Symphony No 2)
Butting: Symphony No 3
Copland: Symphony No 1
Dupre: Symphony in G minor for Organ & Orchestra
Ives: Universe Symphony (realised Stern)
Prokofiev: Symphony No 3 in C minor
F Schmidt: Symphony No 3 in A major
Sowerby: Symphony No 2
V Thomson: Symphony on a Hymn Tune
Webern: Symphony

Miaskovsky’s 10th Symphony was composed at the same time as his 9th. The 10th is a compact work, one of Miaskovsky’s shortest symphonies, at a little over 15 minutes in length. It takes for its inspiration Pushkin’s ‘The Bronze Horseman’. It is a strongly dramatic work, powerfully scored at times and also among Miaskovsky’s toughest works harmonically.
The 3rd is the most immediately appealing of Pingoud’s 3 symphonies. Its four compact movements seem to balance and compliment each other even if the ideas themselves aren’t readily memorable.
The 1st Symphony of Roger Sessions is an early work and thoroughly Stravinskyian in feeling and largely unlike the tough uncompromising atonal style he gradually evolved in his later works. The three movement work is very attractive especially the rather lovely and memorable slow movement.
Shostakovich’s 2nd Symphony is one of a number of rather unconventional works he composed at the end of the 1920’s. I followed this with the score to see how he creates the web of sound that characterises the first part of the work. It struck me how something slightly similar but more tonal is used to create a feeling of mass unrest in the much later 11th Symphony. The 2nd half of the work including the choral section is more conventional and straightforward but effective.
Alexander Tcherepnin’s 1st Symphony is a very interesting work. It caused another of those Parisian scandals when first performed. The first movement is vigorous and almost Hindemith like, the 2nd movement which caused the scandal, is scored for unturned percussion alone is a rhythmic development of the main ideas of the 1st movement. The slow movement has a slightly melancholic touch and the finale returns to the mood of the first movement.
Atterberg’s 6th Symphony, is sometimes referred to as the ‘Dollar Symphony’ as it received 1st prize in a competition celebrating the centenary of Schubert’s death. The first two movements are very attractive and freshly scored with melodic appeal, however the finale is rather to rhetorical and even slightly bombastic in places and rather spoils the work.
Bantock’s Pagan Symphony, is nominally in one movement with clearly defined sections. It is a pleasant rather pastoral work, fitting the underlying Greek mythological ideas behind the work. However I find it a far less interesting work than the excellent earlier Hebridean Symphony, though it is nicely scored.
Max Butting’s 3rd Symphony is a work of interest and I found it a convincing work. The composers contrapuntal skill is evident, stylistically derived from Reger, but there are also some Neo-Classical tendency. It would be interesting to have all 10 of his symphonies recorded commercially.
Copland’s 1st Symphony is a version of his Symphony for Organ & Orchestra, commented on earlier under 1924, without organ. The organ part is dispersed throughout the orchestra with extra brass for climatic purposes. Personally I find the version with Organ more effective.
Marcel Dupre’s Symphony for Organ & Orchestra is an effective work, and the balance of organ and orchestra is well handled. The first two movement I do find rather bland, the 3rd movement is rather appealing as is the finale with its fussy, typically French, energy.
With incomplete works realised or completed later, I have largely kept to the year in which the composer last did major work on the piece in question. Ives worked off and one on his Universe Symphony for many years, but the last major work on it seems to have been around 1928. It has been realised by several other composers/scholars. Personally I don’t like the piece at all the long percussion only first section is rather static and the rest of the work as it stands for me lacks any real conviction, inspite of its highly avant-garde language, it seems to me that Ives didn’t finish the work as he simply couldn’t find the musical language he needed to fulfil his ambitious project.
The 3rd symphony, along with the 4th, are two symphonies in which Prokofiev drew on other recently completed works for material. The 3rd uses material from his supernatural opera ‘The Fiery Angel’ which I rather like. The material itself is quite striking and in places nearly as uncompromising as that of 2nd Symphony. Whether Prokofiev succeeds in creating a strongly symphonic work from this material is open to question, however the ideas and the occasionally ‘fantastical’ orchestration, still make this work entertaining listening.
The 3rd Symphony of Franz Schmidt came 2nd to the Atterberg 6th in the above mentioned Schubert competition. I’ve always rather liked this work, especially the transparency of the counterpoint and of the scoring of the work, which is an advance on his previous two symphonies. The language is still basically that of the late Austro-German romantic tradition with a Straussian touch, though harmonically it is more fluid than in his earlier works. The slow movement really is rather lovely and the scherzo has one of those ideas that becomes an ‘earworm’ and I still can’t get it out of my head. The finale balances the work nicely.
The American composer Leo Sowerby’s 2nd Symphony is also rather an attractive piece. The first two of the three movement have an ‘open air’ feeling to them, which in the 2nd movement is tinged with a touch of melancholy that slightly anticipates the soundworld that Copland and Harris were to cultivate during the next decade.
Virgil Thomson, is one of those composers that divides opinion, his often simplistic and naive style can repel as many as it attracts. The Symphony on a Hymn Tune, in which the hymn tune normally sung in the US to ‘How Firm a Foundation’ forms the basis of much of the material (along with Yes, Jesus loves me), is quite fun to listen to, with its sometimes quirky chamber like orchestration and ‘tongue in cheek’ bitonality and sudden juxtapositions. This is a marmite like work, you either love it or hate it, I hate marmite, but love this work!
Finally Webern’s little 10 minute Symphony. I personally find Webern far more fascinating and absorbing than either Schoenberg or Berg. The highly individual soundworld that Webern creates here is compelling in its eerie haunting beauty.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.
1929
Bax: Symphony No 3
J Becker: Symphony No 3 ‘Symphonia Brevis’
Copland: Dance Symphony
Foerster: Symphony No 5
Jacob: Symphony No 1
Miaskovsky: Sinfonietta in B minor for String Orchestra
Peterson-Berger: Symphony No 4 in A major ‘Stockholm’
Rangstrom: Symphony No 3 in D flat major ‘Song under the Stars’
Shebalin: Symphony No 2 in C sharp minor
Shostakovich: Symphony No 3 ‘First of May’
R Thompson: Symphony No 1

Bax’s 3rd Symphony is one of my favourite symphonies and is probably his best known symphony. Structually it follows the now standard Bax form of three movements + epilogue. The symphony finally relaxes the tensions that inhabit his first two symphonies. The ebb and flow between fast and slow music in the outer movements (typical of Bax) is well handled and yet again one is astonished by Bax’s orchestral ear. Many of his works were published before they were performed so sure was Bax of his orchestration. The symphony concludes with the lovely and haunting epilogue, among Bax’s finest inspirations IMO
The American John Becker is one of the group of composers such as Cowell & Riegger who tried to create a genuine modern American sound in the 1920’s and 30’s but has fallen into total obscurity. This is the only work I have by him. It is in two movements, a short scherzo (in the spirit of mockery) followed by a longer 2nd movement. The music has a lot of nervous energy is often quite dissonant, and seems to stylistically anticipate the style of his compatriot Wallingford Riegger ‘s works of the 1930’s and 40’s. He apparently composed 7 symphonies and I would love to hear some of the others so as to really evaluate this composer.
Copland’s Dance Symphony was hastily assembled by the composer from his earlier ballet Grohg in order to enter a work in the RCA Victor competition in 1929. The ballet itself is well worth hearing, Stravinsky’s influence is apparent but Copland’s own rhythmic vitality is also very much evident. The Dance Symphony itself comes over as an entertaining work, though given its origin, not particularly symphonic.
Josef Foerster’s 5th and final symphony was written in memory of his son. It is a moving work in four movements, the 2nd and 4th being slow. The 1st movement has plenty of ebb and flow which is convincingly handled and the 3rd movement starts off almost as a lighter contrast but becomes more anxious and despairing. Both slow movements are elegiac and moving, the finale being much the longer. Having two slow elegiac movements is quite risky but there is just enough contrast between them and IMO Foerster manages to pull it off.
Gordon Jacob’s 1st Symphony was written in memory of his brother who was killed at the battle of the Somme. It is a work of interest and reminds me slightly of Bliss. The influences are Russian and French with some Elgar and the symphony is unusually in five movements, with two contrasting slow movements surrounding a central scherzo. The first of the slow movements seems, as the CD notes also comment, to show a slight similarity in places to Holst’s Saturn. This is certainly worth hearing.
Miaskovsky’s Sinfonietta in B minor, is quite a substantial 27 minute long score for string orchestra and is very effective. The work was one of a handful of his works that became fairly well known in the west during the 1930’s.
Peterson-Berger’s relatively brief 4th Symphony is among his strongest works. It is subtitled ‘Holmia’ (Stockholm) and is meant to portray the feelings of a visitor from north Sweden to the capital. It is a lightweight work, not without some charm, but ultimately rather unmemorable.
Ture Rangstrom’s 3rd Symphony is in one movement lasting around 20 minutes. It is a considerable improvement on his first two symphonies and the orchestration too has greater clarity in places. He does occasionally fall into the trap of still writing rather empty rhetorical gestures in places, but overall there is another poetic writing to make this symphony pleasant.
Shebalin’s 2nd Symphony is also a rather short 20 minute work, this time in two movements. The two movements are of almost equal length and balance well. The opening is very haunting and Russian and almost anticipates the opening of Shostakovich’s 11th Symphony. Harmonically the writing is quite free and while not quite as experimental as Shostakovich’s of the period, is far less conservative than it was to become and reflects the general stylistic freedom that was still evident in the Soviet Union at that time, before Stalin’s iron grip was fully established.
Shostakovich’s 3rd Symphony is not for me among his most successful works. Roughly following the pattern of his 2nd Symphony, being in one movement with a choral finale, the symphony is much longer than its predecessor with a long orchestral section followed by a short choral finale. The orchestral writing and ideas do occasionally anticipate the world of the masterful 4th Symphony in places, but overall the work doesn’t really convince. The choral writing is fairly straightforward.
Finally the American Randall Thompson’s 1st Symphony. This is an ok work, which shows stylistically some occasional anticipations of his better known 2nd Symphony, but overall this three movement is rather unmemorable.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection.

1930
Hanson: Symphony No 2 ‘Romantic’
Honegger: Symphony No 1
Isasi: Symphony No 2 in G minor
Klami: Sinfonie Enfantine
Koppel: Symphony No 1
Prokofiev: Symphony No 4 (original version)
Rontgen: Symphony (No 8) in C Sharp minor
Rontgen: Symphony (No 10) in D major ‘Waltz Symphony’
Roussel: Symphony No 3 in G minor
W G Still: Symphony No 1 ‘Afro-American’
Stravinsky: Symphony of Psalms
1931 (beginning)
Bax: Symphony No 4
Brian: Symphony No 2 in E minor
Ibert: Symphonie Marine
Langgaard: Symphony No 5 ‘Steppenatur’ (1931 version)
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 11 in B flat minor
Rontgen: Symphony (No 18) in A major

The Hanson, Honegger, Prokofiev, Roussel & Stravinsky were all commissioned by Koussevitsky and the Boston Symphony Orchestra on its 50 Anniversary. Among other works were Burlingame Hill Symphony No 2 (which I don’t have), Copland: Symphonic Ode, Hindemith: Concert Music for Strings & Brass, Respighi: Metamorphoseon, so quite a collection of interesting and varied works.
Hanson’s 2nd Symphony is his best known work, made famous from its inspired use in the film ‘The Alien’. A cyclic three movement work, it is highly attractive and really memorable and seems to have served as the stylistic blueprint for many Hollywood composers (especially that notorious magpie John Williams). The only drawback with Hanson is his tendency to build climaxes without sometimes fulfilling the expectation. Still I’m really fond of the work.
Honegger’s 1st Symphony is an impressive symphonic debut, a strongly argued and concise score. The strongly propulsive first movement briefly reminds me of Prokofiev, the processional like central movement is impressive and the lighter finale makes a strong contrast with its surprising slow and quiet end as the movement gently unwinds on the two main ideas. I greatly admire Honegger and can’t understand why his music is heard so little these days.
The Spanish composer Andre Isasi’s 2nd Symphony is a 40 minute long work in a thoroughly late-romantic quasi Straussian idiom. I don’t find it a very strong work, though the finale with a touch of Spanish feeling is the most enjoyable movement of a rather uninteresting work.
Klami’s little 3 movement Symphonie Enfantine is a pleasant work that is distinctly Gallic in feeling.
Herman Koppel’s 1st Symphony is an early work and is heavily under the influence of his compatriot Carl Nielsen, this could be hard to come to terms with for some, but despite this it is still a well crafted work, though the symphony’s poor reception meant that he didn’t turn again to the genre for over 10 years.
Prokofiev’s 4th Symphony is based on actual and projected music for his ballet The Prodigal Son. The music isn’t particularly well integrated into symphonic form and needs more development, something that the revised version of 1947 (which I’ll comment on under that year) does somewhat better. Still the slow movement contains that gorgeous tune of forgiveness from the ballet and the ballet is among my favourite Prokofiev scores.
The two Rontgen symphonies aren’t strong works. The C sharp minor is late romantic in idiom with a Nordic touch and is fairly atmospheric, the D major is only 10 minutes long and rather inconsequential.
Roussel’s 3rd Symphony is among his best works. The neoclassical work is very well written with interesting ideas. The propulsive 1st movement gives way to a more refined central movement with a fugal central section. The scherzo is absolutely delightful and memorable and the finale makes a thoroughly satisfying conclusion. Thoroughly recommendable if you don’t already know it.
William Grant Still’s Afro-American Symphony was at one time quite popular in the US. The bluesy first two movements are perhaps not contrasted enough, but the witty 3rd movement ‘humour’ is great fun. The finale tries to create an uplifting conclusion, but I feel this is only partially successful.
Stravinsky masterly Symphony of Psalms is too well known to need any comments from me. Personally I regard it as a masterpiece.
Bax’s 4th Symphony is not his strongest symphony. However it is among his brightest and most optimistic works and enjoyable even if the material lacks the distinction of its two predecessors.
I find Brian’s 2nd Symphony rather disappointing. Lasting about 50 minutes and scored for large orchestra, I find that there is not enough contrast in the first two movements and the scoring is less than ideal. The 3rd movement is a little more interesting and the finale benefits from less cluttered scoring and more characteristic ideas.
Ibert’s Symphonie Marine was put together from music from a film (Ibert was among the first composer to write for films). It is a short work, pleasant enough but clearly betrays its non-symphonic origin.
Langaard’s 5th Symphony is in one movement but comes across as more like a symphonic poem. I personally don’t find the work particularly compelling but others may enjoy Langaard’s rather quirky romantic writing.
Miaskovsky’s 3 movement 11th Symphony is quite a strong work. It is a typically slightly sombre symphony from this composer, the central slow movement is fine and comes across best.
Finally Rontgen’s A major Symphony. This is pleasant enough, but rather like the other two symphonies of his commented on above, rather uninteresting.

[Suffolkcoastal]

More from the journey through my symphonic collection and 1000th post!

1931 (conclusion)
Tansman: Symphony No 3 ‘Sinfonia Concertante’
R Thompson: Symphony No 2
1932
Alfano: Symphony No 2 in C major
Badings: Symphony No 1
Badings: Symphony No 2
Bax: Sinfonietta
Bax: Symphony No 5
Brian: Symphony No 3 in C sharp minor
Britten: Sinfonietta
W L Dawson: Negro Folk Symphony
Eisler: Kleine Symphonie
Kabalevsky: Symphony No 1 in C sharp minor
Langgaard: Symphony No 7 ‘By Tordenskjold in Holmen’s Church’ (1932 version)
G Lloyd: Symphony No 1
Miaskovsky: Symphony No 12 in G minor
Rootham: Symphony No 1 in C minor
Szymanowski: Symphony No 4 ‘Sinfonia Concertante’

Tansman’s 3rd Symphony is scored for the unusual combination of Piano Quartet and Orchestra and an engaging work it is too. The combination brings to mind the contemporary works of Martinu and the combination is effectively handled. The 2nd movement is a homage to Gershwin and it’s catchy and fun. No masterpiece this but an effective and enjoyable piece of neo-classicism.
Randall Thompson’s 2nd Symphony was once quite popular in the US but in recent years has all but disappeared from the repertoire. Though no masterpiece, it is an engaging and tuneful symphony, a work that would probably go down well at the proms. It was a favourite of Bernstein’s (he was a pupil of Thompson) in his earlier years, he described the popular style theme of the slow movement as sounding ‘like something Perry Como’ might sing!
Alfano’s 2nd Symphony is a colourful and atmospheric score, the orchestration reminds one of Respighi at times and the influence of Ravel is also apparent. Its main drawback is that one wishes that the material was more memorable, but still a symphony worth trying.
The Dutch composer Henk Badings established himself as a distinctive voice in this decade. His 1st Symphony is scored for chamber orchestra and is an interesting work. It shows a flair for counterpoint as well as some atonality. His 2nd Symphony, this time for full orchestra, is quite impressive, the outer movements have a strong masculinity with some martial overtones, a young composer flexing his muscles and the central movement makes an effective contrast.
Arnold Bax’s Sinfonietta started life as a Symphonic Phantasy and was not performed in the composer’s lifetime. The work is typical of the composer in three connected section, the finale is more exuberant and optimistic.
Bax’s 5th Symphony has grown on me and having the score to follow helps. On the surface this may seem a rather rhapsodic work, but it is actually a very tightly and impressively thematically organised work. The finale contains some of Bax’s most sustained symphonic writing in a fast tempo and the epilogue which starts like it is going to wind the symphony down quietly actually generates a powerful and affirmative close.
Havergal Brian’s 3rd Symphony is IMO a marginally more successful work than his 2nd Symphony. The first movement’s slow relentless tread is well managed, though as in the 2nd symphony the 2nd movement doesn’t really offer enough contrast and the 3rd movement almost feels out of place. The scoring though is better in this work though still cluttered at times.
Britten’s Sinfonietta is a very assured piece of writing as one would expect from such a gifted and confident young composer. The Schoenberg Chamber symphony is the model but there are times, especially in the slow movement when Britten indulges in his own personal slightly melancholic pastoralism, something that was to occur throughout his composing career.
William Levi Dawson’s Negro Folk Symphony (I have two conflicting dates of 1932 and 1934 for this work) was a favourite of Stokowski’s. It is a pleasant enough work that marries black folk influences to a basically late romantic idiom.
Eisler’s Kleine Symphonie is absolutely characteristic of the later Weimar years. An engaging little work, that marries atonality with German popular music of the times most successfully.
Kabalevsky’s 1st Symphony is in two movements and the material started off as part of a projected Lenin Cantata for the 15th Anniversary of the October Revolution. The influence of late Russian Nationalism and his teacher Miaskovsky are apparent and not as yet fully digested.
Rued Langgaard’s 7th Symphony is another example of this composer’s eccentricity. It sounds for all the world like it should have been composed in the mid 19th century and is almost Schumannesque in places and I’m afraid totally uninteresting.
George Lloyd’s 1st Symphony is a very impressive symphonic debut from a 19 year old. Very confident in style with a brassy emphasis at times and shows a solid command of counterpoint and is scored effectively if a little brash in places.
Miaskovsky’s 12th Symphony is also known as the ‘Collective Farm Symphony’ and is not among his best works. It’s rather unfortunate inspiration (the farm owning Kulags were brutally treated by Stalin) has also led to its neglect. Miaskovsky was not aware of this at the time however. The typical brooding 1st movement is fine, but the central movement and finale are week and uninspired.
Cyril Rootham was 57 by the time he completed his 1st Symphony. It is a rather masculine work, confidentally and effectively scored. The first two movements seem to be the most successful, especially the slow 2nd movement, but the 3rd and 4th movements perhaps offer to straightforward a resolution.
Finally to end as I started, with a Symphony/Sinfonia Concertante. Szymanowski’s work is scored for piano and orchestra and was among his last works before ill-health blighted his final years. I’m very fond of this work. The piano writing ranges from the concertante to being part of the orchestral texture. The work is engaging, memorable and highly individual and should certainly be heard more often than it is.