Nielsen 1

    So I think that Carl Nielsen might have the best symphonic batting average. Six symphonies, six winners (some might argue no. 6 isn't the best but I dig it). In some ways I consider him a culmination of the best features of both of the late Romantic schools of compositional thought. He has the accessibility of Brahms because of the clarity of ideas and formal aspects, but the adventurous nature of Bruckner in his orchestration. It is kind of like listening to Brahms if he learned how to take risks and what to do with the rest of the brass section beyond the horns. His harmonic ideas are also interesting as this G minor symphony starts off in C major as he writes pieces as a journey to the key rather than primarily in that key.

    Anyways, this is another situation where I'm gonna skip going over each movement because it would literally just be me gushing about every little aspect of the piece. He is easily in my top 5 symphonists, even though I didn't listen to his music until about a year and a half ago. In the future I'll plan this out more ahead of time and present some analysis (especially for the second, which is one of my favorites). In the mean time go listen to some Nielsen while I figure out what to listen to for post 50!

Hartmann 2

    Well this was a symphony that I initially started by thinking of it more favorably than his first, but I think in the end the first symphony might be stronger. While the orchestration and pacing is more polished in this symphony it feels like all the life was polished out of it at the same time. This piece is so subdued after the first movement that it just doesn't have the have the energy to carry itself to the finish line.

   Unlike the last symphony of his, where the last movement was strongest, the first here is probably the strongest, but that may only be by the virtue of the piece not having overstayed its welcome yet. The tempo was a bit rigid for my taste and the movement comes in at just under 15 minutes and it supports that, but only barely. I wrote in my notes that the movement seemed short "moments," and that problem carries through the symphony.

   The final 2 movements both have a pastorale quality to them, which is one of the interesting things about the work, since it replaces its scherzo with a pastorale movement. The finale in particular though starts off sounding like an extension of the third, and never really gives the sense of closure that is needed for a work of this scale.

Kayser 1

    I'd have to double check, but I think this might be the first one movement symphony I've done. Although I think that might be an artifact of the track listing because the piece separates itself in to 3 pretty convenient movements. So Leif Kayser seems like he might have an interesting backstory as apparently he gave up composing after having some early success to become a priest and later went back to composing.

    Looking back on my notes (the real problem with me letting these entries pile up), the only consistently positive thing I have listed in each section is the orchestration, which serves the ends of each section well, alternating between boisterous and adventurous to more pared down and austere. In particular on the latter point, the second movement is carefully crafted in its use of counterpoint between solo instruments. Other than that, I really liked the rhythmic language and dramatic structure of the piece. Melodically, not the strongest I've listened to though.

EDITS: Wow having to edit it this quickly to update my thoughts... I realized my notes weren't great and that I was a bit foggy on this so I relistened to some bits of it, and think I may have undersold it. My notes didn't remind me well enough just how interesting the orchestration is, and I think the recording I listened to initially may have not been the best because Aarhus Symphony Orchestra recording is pretty damn engaging. Also, it totally is in 3 movements and the first recording I had just lazily didn't put track breaks in. If I weren't already behind I just would've rewritten this all but oh well. I'll keep this here as a reminder of what a crappy notetaker I am.

Holmboe - Chamber Symphony No. 1

   This work is one of the finer examples of mid-20th century writing that I can think of. Often this era leaves me a little cold, but this piece has an energy and consistency of language that kept me engaged throughout.

    Apparently built on a system of motivic and thematic metamorphosis derived from Sibelius, the internal logic of the piece is airtight. I never felt lost while listening to the piece, instead I was carried away by the at times tense and other times nervous energy. I also liked that Vagn Holmboe didn't feel the need to use complex harmony all the time and allows the harmonic language to simplify when it serves the piece. The piece also comes to a satisfying conclusion in the finale, which feels like it wraps up the themes of the previous movements.

    Another winner!

Bendix No.2 "Sommerklange fra Sydrusland"

    Ok, I really need to keep myself to some sort of schedule, so I don't end up with this kind of backlog of entries to write. So todays entry, Victor Bendix No. 2 - "Summer Sounds from South Russia", deserves more written about it than I'm going to give it.

    The opening sets up high expectations for the piece. The melodic and harmonic language are consistently interesting and memorable. Bendix's scoring in particular is worth checking out. It is delicate and meticulous, and although the language is very chromatic late Romantic, he shows much more restraint than is generally associated with that. In fact, the subtlety of all the elements is wonderful. The sections of each movement blend in to each other masterfully. The rhythmic language is at times complex, but still natural sounding.

    This is a piece that I might try and find more information on, curious if it is based on specific folk songs (which I could see) or if it is just programmatic. In the mean time I'll just pull it out and listen to it when I want something that owns subtlety in the way that other composers of the era owned grandeur.

CEF Weyse 7

    Well Christoph Ernst Friedrich Weyse is one of the earliest Danish composers I found and this symphony was the first track on the album of his key masterpieces, so sure. Overall, I found the symphony to be a little too imitative of Mozart and Haydn, and not their best works either. The piece overall is mostly solid, although the second movement drags on too long for my taste. The finale is probably the most solid of the movements, as the main theme of the rondo is the strongest in the symphony.

     Wish I had more to say, but it is kind of exactly what you'd expect from a Classical symphony, and the themes generally aren't strong enough to carry it without something else adventurous. Another piece of fine background music I suppose.

JPE Hartmann 1

    Well I've decided on doing Danish composers this week, because why not. Themes help me pick out symphonies and I have a hankerin' to listen to some Nielsen later this week so let's go! We're gonna get started with a couple early figures in Danish music with this and the next entry. I think I'm going to listen Johann Peter Emilius Hartmann's second symphony later this week as well, because the first was written in 1836 and the second in 1880, so it'll be interesting to see how his music might evolve between the two. As it stands this symphony seems kind of reminiscent of Mendelssohn to me, but not to the point where it sounds like mere imitation.

    The themes throughout the symphony are clear and approachable and the main driver of the symphony and they also potentially have a light folk influence to them, especially in the last movement. The orchestration is very solid throughout, and I in particular like his willingness to really pare down the forces and allow solos to carry important parts. The first movement opens with a solo clarinet and uses it again to signal the ending. These little intimate moments break up what can sometimes feel a little longwinded in the outer movements. 

    I feel the inner movements are stronger here, although I do like the upbeat finale theme. I found it odd at first that the third movement was a Minuet instead of a Scherzo, but it fits the lighter tone of the symphony well. The second movement has some nice chordal progressions and has an interesting climax. I was really hoping for a clarinet solo in the last movement though because the first three all have important exposed clarinet parts, and wanted to make that connection, but no go.

   So overall I guess I'm lukewarm on this symphony? There were things I liked, but it just felt like it wasn't saying very much.

Brian 23

    Also quite brevis, only lasting around 14 minutes. I'll skip the Havergal Brian intro since it is in the previous entry. Both this and Brian 22 have a somewhat militaristic tone to them at times, especially at the beginning of the first movement of 23 with its use of brass and percussion. After the aggressive opening of the first movement it transforms in to a delicate section of woodwinds with absolutely fascinating orchestration. Around here I realized that I think I like Brian because I also have a short attention span when developing ideas. The melodies in this movement are not very strong but the development of motific ideas and use of harmonic complexity drive the arc of the piece.

    The second movement has a darkly triumphant feel at the opening. This movement feels like it is almost its own little microcosm of a symphony. It has a boisterous opening, followed by a simpler section, which leads in to a comic section, and ends big again. The end of the movement in particular has a lot going on and is very daunting sounding.

    Now to figure out the theme for this week, and actually get caught up.

Brian 22 - "Symphonia Brevis"

    Well clearly this whole writing an entry every day business has gone and failed hard. So in an effort to catch back up this entry and the next entry will be on a composer I find kind of interesting, Havergal Brian. He was a prolific symphony writer in the 20th century and most of his writing was done in his seventies to nineties. Also peculiar is that his first symphony, the Gothic, is a MASSIVE nearly two hour long work (which I will get to someday, but it is exhausting listening to it), but many of his later symphonies are very succinct.

    This is a very distilled symphony due to its brief two movement form. That doesn't prevent Brian from going through a large variety of ideas in each movement though, it just means that the results are turbulent and can shift to completely different affects on a whim. The counterpoint can be quite complex at times in both movements, and there is an uncomfortable energy permeating the first. There are periods of stillness and relative harmonic simplicity that are suddenly punctuated by grotesque dissonances, especially in the second movement, which is marked as a march. The end of the first movement ends suddenly, while the second ends in an almost comically obvious yet still unusual 5-6-7-8 in the melodic voice.

    Shorter Version: There is definitely enough of interest in here to spend the whole less than 10 minutes it takes to listen to it.

Cliffe 1

    Ok so here is another great symphony, that I can only assume isn't standard repertoire because the composer wasn't very prolific. Frederic Cliffe was an English composer who studied with Arthur Sullivan and only wrote a handful of orchestral pieces between 1889 and 1905. And I now need to find recordings of the rest of this cause this symphony was freakin great.

    The biggest thing that this symphony did for me that I've been missing lately is that it has the gravitas to support itself. The dramatic arc of each movement is great, and has the big moments that justify a structure of this size. The piece isn't programmatic, but the music is very evocative. It would be easy to create a narrative for what is happening in the music. The orchestration, especially the doublings, are inventive but still solid. The brass writing is also spectacular. Switching the scherzo to movement two also works in the favor for the pacing of the work and keeps the two longest movements from being against each other. It is kind of a shame this piece isn't standard and that Cliffe didn't write more... and that more of it isn't recorded.

    The outer movements are some of the best examples of late symphonic writing in the Wagnerian camp that I've heard. I particularly like the composers attention to orchestrational detail and layers. Underneath the surface there are a lot of little things of note going on. The finale even has a bit of the appeal some of the best of Dvorak's symphonies.

    As mentioned the scherzo is the second movement in this symphony and is presented in a lilting three throughout with the feel of some kind of grand dance. The orchestration in the only slightly slower contrasting section imitates an organ at spots. I would actually really like to see the score for both of the middle movements because these have the most interesting orchestration and doublings to me. The third movement, which is marked as a Ballade, may have some of my favorite moments in it, which is good because I was prepared for the worst when I saw an almost 16 minute long late Romantic slow movement. Usually that means you're in for a somewhat bloated, dismal slow movement, but the pastoral quality and forward momentum really carry this.

   This is another one that you must check out.

Stanford 2 - "Elegiac"

    And now to get caught back up a couple of Romantic British Isles composers... damn, with some more forethought I could have made this British week or something at this rate. Anyways, the first one is Charles Villiers Stanford, another Irish composer. This second symphony makes me want to listen to more Stanford, but probably not this one again.

    This symphony is an example of one that has a lot of things I like about it, but it just doesn't work for me. The dramatic arc of the piece just doesn't feel right to me. Which is a kind of subjective an hard to pin down thing, but I'll point out some things I noticed in each movement.

    The orchestration is pretty solid, but nothing really grabbed me throughout the first movement. There was a climax before the recap of that was very striking with its use of dramatic pauses, but it felt somewhat out of place. Despite the second movement being pretty active and having a lot of qualities I like, it just leaves me cold. Maybe the melodies are not strong enough to keep me engaged.

    The third movement opens with what must be a nerve-wracking horn solo, but the real nice moment here is the very end which ends with a sudden shift to a brass chorale. Although I am biased towards scherzos, I would call this the strongest movement again. The final movement has the same issues as the first, the themes are kind of weak and the structure just doesn't have the memorable moments needed to carry a piece of this scope.

    But that's all fine because the next entry is on something great.

Clementi D major Op.18, No. 2

    This has similar problems to the Sammartini from a couple posts ago. This symphony by Muzio Clementi (of the first sonatinas I think every pianist learns fame) seems more concerned with craft than anything and seems to just follow the outline of the symphony slavishly. This is of course without doing an analysis of the piece, which I need to get around to sometime. So this will be another situation of talking over any interesting points from my notes and not looking too deeply like the Sullivan symphony.

    The slow opening of the first movement feels kind of clunky to me, in particular its transition to the allegro. Rather than building up and leading in to the allegro, the introduction resolves and then there is a short pause before picking up again. It is moments like this that make me feel like the the piece is a little uninspired sounding. The slow movement is probably my favorite although I do like the minor theme from the minuet. The final movement has some interesting use of pedal tones, but otherwise is a little dull as well.

    Be back later to keep catching up.

Sullivan - Symphony in E minor - "Irish"

    Yes, Arthur Sullivan of Gilbert and Sullivan. As far as I know, this is his only symphony and is title the "Irish", in the same way the Mendelssohn's 3rd is the Scottish. The ideas for the piece were generated while he was on vacation there. Overall, the vibe is early-mid Romantic, and kind of sounds like an amalgamation of Schubert, Schumann, and Mendelssohn with a couple exceptions that I'll talk about briefly. Mostly, though, the piece just sounds like an imitation of other symphonies at the time, without a lot of Sullivan's personal style in it.

    So the exceptions... the outer movements have a heavy reliance of dotted rhythms, and are probably the closest to demonstrating the style that Sullivan is known for. The second movement's main theme is curiously presented in octave horn and alto trombone (yes I read that somewhere... can't pick out an alto trombone out of a crowd). The third movement feels the most genuine, with an almost pastoral quality and an excellent use of oboe solo. Also odd is that I wouldn't have assumed this was a British symphony until the last two movements.

    Other than the third movement I would probably just suggest a Schubert or Mendelssohn symphony to someone. To be fair, probably Schubert, as I'm not the biggest Mendelssohn fan.

Sammartini 5 in Bb Major

   Ok this is going to be a really short entry, which is fitting as this symphony by Giovanni Sammartini is not particularly long. But also because I realize that maybe I don't have the knowledge baseline needed to make educated commentary on earlier symphonies. Like, the piece seems solidly constructed enough, but it vanishes from my mind seconds after hearing it. I love craft as much as the next guy, maybe more, but for anything other than background music I'm not sure I would really suggest this. I can't even comment on the orchestration, since it is just strings and harpsichord throughout. Though to be fair this is an early symphony of Sammartini so maybe I should try and listen to something later by him.

Goldmark 2

    Ok... way behind on my posts so here goes a big ol dump of 5 of them. First off is Karl Goldmark's second symphony. He was a late Romantic Hungarian composer and you can definitely hear the influences of the Wagnerian school of thought in his composition although apparently the two composers had issues with each other (go figure, Wagner having and issue with a composer named Goldmark).

    I would overall say that the symphony fits in the vein of the Wagnerian school, but perhaps a little less excessive than Bruckner or Wagner. It has the complex use of forms, emphasis on motives over themes (to a degree), highly contrapuntal development of ideas (although that is more generally Germanic), and extremely dramatic high and low points. The first movement is an exemplar of these traits and even has a bit of the Brucknerian tendency to pause briefly between dramatic shifts in the tone of the music. Of note to me were the fugal development (which seems a bit odd in the first movement of a symphony), and the climactic section about 8 minutes in to the movement.

    The slow movement is pretty standard fare for this era, but not nearly as long or excessive as many symphonies at the time, which I think works in its favor. I often find myself getting lost in the excessive slow movements of the late Romantic, and they also seem to be the most homogenous movements in terms of timbre which does them no favors.

    The scherzo movements on the other hand, tend to be more short lived than I like, although in the proportions of this symphony, it seems about right. I really enjoyed this movement. The opening movement is a delicate interplay of phrases between the woodwind and string choirs. This movement really struck me though with the contrasting theme which is chorale-like with a trumpet solo, which almost reminded me more of British music than German.

    The last movement opens with a slow section, but quickly works in to an Allegro Alla Breve that is a great display of technical prowess. In a good way... that isn't always the case. The brass sit a lot of this movement out or in the background, only coming to the foreground to signal the end. This movement has swirling chromatic gestures peppered throughout it as well.

    Overall, I think I'll keep this in the back of my mind for when I'm in the mood for something late Romantic, but don't have an hour to listen to one. It seems like a solid B+ kind of piece to me. I still prefer Bruckner, but this symphony also has it's place.

Smith - Symphony in A minor

Rec.:London Mozart Players

    This is a symphony I was thinking of doing for the week of symphonies by women composers, so I'm doing it now, because I clearly didn't get to it then. Alice Mary Smith was an English composer in the mid-1800's and wrote a couple symphonies, in addition to many other works. This work doesn't have the tonally ambiguous nature or overly dramatic tones of the Romantic, but it rather seems like an extension and refinement of Classical music.

    The clarity of the themes is one thing that strikes me as Classical in nature with this symphony. They are almost always the foreground and unobscured. In many hands this would get dull rather quickly, but her orchestration, while conventional, is very skillful and precise, which keeps the straightforward presentation of ideas from getting dull. That might actually be a good description of the work overall, mediocre ideas saved by excellent craftwork (not kraftwerk, though). And I do appreciate some good craft displayed in addition to artistry.

    This is another one of those symphonies that remind us not to draw stylistic lines in the sand with respect to date. I feel like we tell a narrative in the Romantic era about how complexity builds up until Brahms decided to look back to the simplicity of the Classical era to inform his music, but the more I listen to composers that are off the beaten path, it seems like that tradition never really died during the Romantic. We all just love Beethoven so much that we are more concerned with the development of music in his footsteps, but it seems like plenty of composers were happy to keep developing in a more conservative style during this era as well and that their music is equally interesting. Well maybe not to Beethoven's... that guys music is legit I hear, but certainly to some other Romantics. I'd rather listen to this again than Schubert 1 again.

Wanhal - Sinfonie in G minor

Rec.:Camerata Zürich

    Hmm... I'm gonna have to stretch to find something meaningful to say about this one. That is not an indication of quality, but that it fits the mold of a Classical symphony almost too well, and there aren't any rough edges or unusual features to really point out. Each movement is about what you'd expect out of a run of the mill Classical symphony. It is firmly what I'd consider background music, but I may want to check Johann Baptist Wanhal more because it seems like he was a pretty major figure at the time, and especially in Czech Classical music (really? I really need to stop gravitating to Czech composers so often).

    Anyways though, I'm gonna skip the movement by movement yet again, because the symphony just kind of vanished from my head when I was done. I mean, the themes were good, the scoring and orchestration were good, everything was good, but there was no real drama to the piece. It didn't seem to tell a story to me (no, I don't mean that in the programmatic sense), the movements just kind of start and then stop after fulfilling the requirements of that movement. But again, if you are looking for good study music, it might be ok? I find that the kind of middle of the road Classical music is best for that because you aren't constantly distracted by inspired moments in the piece.

Mozart - Cassation in G Major

Rec.:Toronto Chamber Orchestra

    And now for something that really catches the spirit of April Fool's Day. It is both fun and stupid. Wait you say that title isn't for a symphony. Well, this is more commonly known as the Toy Symphony by (maybe?) Leopold Mozart. This is definitely a piece to only listen to once in a long while. While the various bird calls and percussive effects are interesting to listen to because of how out of place they sound among the traditional Classical music, it wears thin pretty quick because they are used kind of blandly and repetitively. The percussion effects are particularly awkward.

    Other than that the symphony is a pretty standard 3 movement affair, although the drone in the last movement is an interesting musical idea, when present. But clearly, this piece wasn't composed to be the most stunning piece of serious music, and was probably meant to entertain children, so that does forgive some of the plain presentation.

    Anyways, it is a fun novelty to check out, but not much more beyond that.

Gossec - Symphonie à 17 parties en fa majeur

Rec.:Concerto Köln

     Checking the dates on Francois-Joseph Gossec I find it interesting that it was written in 1809 by a composer who did most of his symphonic writing in the 1760's and 1770's. This is because this sounds like a Baroque work in many ways that is just adopting the structure of a Classical work. What is even weirder are hearing little flashes of Romanticism in spots. Probably because this guy was born in 1734 and lived to be 95! Probably making him a unique example of a composer who wrote in three pretty distinct eras.

    That is also what I would say is the most compelling case for checking this symphony out. It is crazy to think that this was written AFTER Beethoven 1. I can't think of anything else I've heard like this and I actually quite enjoy it. It has the building intensity of Baroque sequencing practice, with the clarity of Classical melodies, and the orchestration sense and dramatic moments of an early Romantic work (minus the harpsichord, but again that is what makes this great).

    I'm going to skip the movement by movement break down here because the above describes each movement well. Each movement serves the purpose you expect out of a symphony at the time, although I find it odd that the minuet is the longest movement. Another one to definitely listen to. Oh, I also picked this because I like the idea of 17 parties, especially in F major.

Hailstork 3

Rec.:Grand Rapids Symphony

    This is one I listened to while on the bus yesterday. So I definitely need to relisten to the quietest sections, but I can give you my impressions. The piece is definitely American in quality. It has the use of brass and percussion, rhythmic intensity, and clarity that I generally associate with the American sound of the Copland tradition. In the faster spots of the first and third movement it also tends to relay on melodic and rhythmic cells overlapping with each other. Although he does keep the music more subtle in these faster sections, rarely letting the orchestra grow to climactic moments.

    The second and fourth movements also kind of pair up in my head even though the last movement isn't particularly slow, but they are both very meticulously paced and fairly subdued. In particular I was expecting a more grand finale from the last movement to match the frenetic energy of the first movement, but the last movement instead keeps its energy contained for the most part, just under the surface of the level of the piece. And even at that it takes a large chunk of the middle of the movement for an even more subdued section that doesn't have the melodic fragments (which ARE from the first movement at times) driving it forward. I feel like this finale is also the most complex movement musically.

    Anyways, just down to today to catch up, so I will do two tomorrow, and while I did listen to Hailstork #2 as well yesterday I'll do something else tomorrow. Twice tomorrow.

Dietrich Symphony in D minor

Rec.:Oldenberg State Orchestra

    So I'm a few days behind on my entries so let's make things brief while I catch up, eh? A couple days ago I listened to Albert Dietrich's Symphony in D. Dietrich was a friend and collaborator of Brahms, so it should come as no surprise this symphony is in a more conservative late Romantic style. The symphony is even dedicated to Brahms, although it does precede Brahms' symphonies.

    The symphony does kind of sound like a Brahms symphony too, although a little less subtle, a few more rough edges, everything is a little clearer. I like it. Don't love it, but that is fine. It feels odd that the movements are so even in duration, usually there is at least one movement that is significantly different in duration. Although I do like the extra time taken to develop the Scherzo, especially considering how much I enjoyed the second theme in that movement. I feel like the first three movements were pretty solid, but the fourth movement left me a little cold for some reason. I'll have to relisten to it sometime and see what I'm missing because I can't place what I dislike about it.

    Anyways, back later today with Adolphus Hailstork #3.

Kapralova - Military Sinfonietta

Rec.:Who Knows... on YouTube

    Damn, two pieces I love in a row, this is great! Well Vítĕzslava Kaprálová died at the age of 25, so I can kind of understand why her music isn't more well known, even if it was apparently very well received during her life and shortly after her death. She studied with some of the most important modernist composers, had performances in high profile venues and was poised to be an important composer, then you know, tuberculosis.

    I think I might also just have a thing for Czech composers too, cause they seem to be doing pretty well for me. This piece is a single movement symphony and is more optimistic sounding than I would've expected a symphony about the military written in the mid-30s. While the work isn't programmatic, as far as I know, it is very evocative. It seems to be depicting more a military life than a battle. The orchestration has elements you'd expect from a military themed work, a fair amount of snare drum and trumpet usage, but also has many heartfelt solo violin and woodwind lines. The end of the symphony sounds like it ends on a call to battle as the tone darkens and becomes more frantic and violent.

    Anyways, this is late again and there is a lot to absorb in this 15 minutes of music. So go take a listen! Not a bad way to end woman composers week here, although this doesn't mean I'm done with the music of women symphonists by a long shot.

Mayer 5

Rec.:Berlin Chamber Symphony Ensemble

    So as this post is a little late (good thing I've only got like one other reader for right now) I'm gonna keep it short and say that if you like Mid-Romantic music you MUST check this out. Emilie Mayer is now on my list of composers to check out more thoroughly. This 5th symphony is in F minor is a masterpiece. It is always so much harder to describe why something is great than to find the faults in it, but here it goes. The themes are all memorable and well developed, the contrapuntal writing is solid, the orchestration is great (soloists are used to great effect, there are little inspired moments where the orchestration isn't exactly what you'd expect, particularly like the use of the brass in the second movement), the forms lead the listener through the piece without effort, each movement and the piece as a whole have a good dramatic arc. Of course each of these descriptions don't really do the piece justice.

    The fact that this work isn't played more often is criminal and I will be checking more of Mayer's symphonies out in the near future (if I can find recordings, this was literally the only piece by hers on Spotify) to see if they all live up to the expectations set by this work. If so, I may have a new composer to add to my list of favorite symphonists.

    So seriously, go listen to this.

Larsen - Solo Symphony

Rec.:Colorado Symphony Orchestra

    First off I'd suggest reading the program notes for this one on Libby Larsen's website. Not because they are remotely needed to enjoy this pice, but because they are interesting. This is another unqualified success of a symphony as far as I'm concerned, which isn't too surprising to me as I've enjoyed Libby Larsen's work since I first heard it. She is my favorite type of modern composer, the kind who seems to look at all the tools available to composers over the years and pick which ones work for the situation without binding her compositional identity to it.

    I'm gonna forgo the play by play for this symphony and just talk briefly about each movement before you go out and listen to this... which you should. The first movement (Solo-Solos) takes the idea of solos and kind of rethinks it with the solo lines being spun in to the orchestra, the idea that the soloist needs the support of the orchestra in order to work. The second movement (One Dance, Many Dancers) is something I've actually wanted to do for a while, which is a stylistic theme and variations idea. In additions to varying the content of the melody the style of dance that is used for each variation changes.

    The third movement (Once Around) fits a more modern scherzo movement feel: aggressive, loud, and brief. The finale is a great musical representation of the title, which is The Cocktail Party Effect. It bustles with activity and ambiguity, with little snippets of melody floating around for the listener to try and pick out. The orchestration in all the movements is amazing, but I in particular like it in this finale.

   Sorry, I know it is brief on the details today, but what can I say, for something this good I'd rather you just go listen to it rather than read my dumb ass trying to explain it. So do yourself a favor and listen to more Libby Larsen, starting with this one.

Tomorrow: Emilie Mayer No. 5

Archer 2

Rec.: Southern IL University Edwardsville

    This piece is a perfect example of the problem I have with a lot of modern symphonies, especially ones for band. I absolutely love the music of each music independently, but I'm not sure it congeals as a full work. The most obvious examples of this to me are the Daugherty Metropolis symphony and the de Meij Symphony #1 - Lord of the Rings. These are pieces, like this one, where every movement stands on its own, making it sound like a series of pieces that may have a common external theme, rather than a single piece in multiple sections.

    But like said, each movement is great in its own way. The first movement, March, is a raucous circus march that reminds me of Ives. There are a lot of twists and turns and some irregular metric pulses, little humorous solos pepper the movement. The alto sax gets a fair amount of love in here as well. Given the material in the following movements though, this seems an odd way to start the symphony since it is considerably lighter in character and style than the other two. In a four movement symphony this would be a scherzo movement, but here it leads off.

    The second movement, by the composers own admission, is patterned after the music of Philip Glass. The orchestration in this movement is probably the most subtly interesting of the symphony. It is also nice to have some more minimalist music in the vein of Glass for wind ensemble. Once again though, I'd rather hear an extended work in this style, rather than the imitation of another composer stuck in the middle of a symphony.

    The final movement is a theme and variation and strikes me as the closest to something that feels of the scope of a symphony. The theme is developed well and the orchestration is solid and interesting. It has a satisfying conclusion.  Oddly though, if there were another movement of this scope in the symphony I think this would have actually made a really solid opening to a symphony.

    Again, I feel like I've been kind of negative this week, but I must again stress that I love music here, just not the labelling. Maybe over the course of this year I'll be able to more clearly define and articulate what makes something symphonic to me.

Tomorrow: Libby Larsen Solo Symphony

Price - Symphony No. 1 in E minor

Rec.:New Black Music Repertory Ensemble

    So this symphony by Florence Price is an interesting one historically, as it was the first symphony performed in the U.S. by an African-American woman. The music is definitely imbued with the sounds of her southern roots, but isn't merely settings folk songs. It is a full symphonic treatment in the spirit of Dvorak. Overall, I dug it quite a bit, although did find it a tad uneven.

    Although part of me hates comparing composers to more well known composers, it can help as a point of reference, and the first movement of the symphony does sound like it is a lost Dvorak movement in some ways. The use of folk music in a way that makes them sound natural as symphonic themes is present, and some of the orchestration reminded me of him as well. The form is easy to hear, and the themes are strong enough to notice it. I really like the orchestration in the first two movements especially.

    The second movement has a much more obviously American sound to it. There is a sense of hymn tunes and has little twinges of gospel music in it.

    The last two movements are a little underwhelming to me. They are more straightforward Americana settings, and are 4 and 5 minutes long, as compared to the 16 and 13 of the first two movements. One short movement sounds ok to break up a symphony, but having the length ratios off that much kind of just throws me off. The orchestration and thematic elements continue to impress, but seem to lack the depth of the first two movements. The piece is completely worth checking out though.

Tomorrow:Kimberly K. Archer No. 2

Andrée 2

Rec.:Stockholm Symphony Orchestra

    This is gonna be a short (and late!) entry cause I gotta get ready for an interview this afternoon. I want to check out more from Elfrida Andrée after listening to this symphony. In particular, she wrote a couple organ symphonies which sound like they might be interesting. Andrée was a Swedish composer, organist, and activist. Part of the reason why I want to check out the organ symphonies is apparently she was Scandinavia's first officially appointed female organist.

    Anyways, the symphony itself... I liked it. Didn't love it, but I might relisten to it when I have a chance to focus on it more. What is interesting about it to me is that it sounds early Romantic even though I can assume it was written around 1870 or later based on the other dates of her compositions I have available. Which serves as a good reminder that when we look back at music throughout history, we can sometimes think that there is a constant evolution of style and complexity going on, but looking at the music of lesser known composers it becomes more clear that the "top tier" composers were often on the cutting edge and there was music i more established styles still being written.

    This work though, the themes are solid, the orchestration interesting, the forms clear. Solid work, but nothing really grabbed me and forced me to stop what I was doing while listening (cooking dinner), which most of my favorite symphonies have. Anyways, may revisit this one later.

Later today: Florence Price Symphony in E minor.

Michelle Ende' The Symphony No. 4 'Pastoral'

Rec.: The Bay Area Philharmonic

    So stumbled across this when looking for other pastoral symphonies on Spotify and decided that I should correct my lack of knowledge of symphonic music by women composers... so in other words it inadvertently made me kick off a week of symphonies by women composers. Too bad this symphony totally doesn't do a thing for me and researching it may have driven me slightly mad.

    So before I get in to the symphony itself I'll get in to the madness. While listening to this I was trying to find ANY info I could on this composer, the conductor, and the orchestra and came up with like next to nothing. From what I can glean from the program notes on cdbaby The Bay Are Philharmonic is a volunteer orchestra based in Tampa Bay and was formed by Michelle Ende' and Simon Parsons and from what I can tell it exists to promote new music, exclusively by Ende'. I say this because there are like 10+ recordings of her music from the group, but composer, the conductor, and the orchestra all have ZERO web presence. Not a homepage or social media page to be found on any of them. I'm pretty sure I'm listening to something that doesn't exist written and performed by people who don't exist. How do you end up with 10 released cd's and no trail of anything to find online...

    Anyways, to the music. Erm... I don't think this symphony is particularly good. A lot of it reminds of the score to one of the worst movies ever made, After Last Season, a bad movie notable for having an equally bad soundtrack. There are lots of timid gestures that seem to enter in at irregular times and I'm not sure if they are using a synthesizer to reinforce or replace parts or if it is in the score or what, but there is this synthetic sound going on somewhere that was making my orchestrator sense tingle the whole symphony. The melodies are mostly long, aimless tunes, although the very opening is interesting in that it kind of sounds like the deconstruction of a Copland piece. The movement also kind of just ends, not like it dies off, or builds to an abrupt ending, but just seems to end mid-thought.

   And the complaints above? They pretty much apply to every other movement in the symphony. Which is kind of a parallel to the Vaughan Williams 3rd symphony I listened to yesterday. They both have very similar affects across all movements and similar tempos throughout, but while the Vaughan Williams managed to pull this off though changing use of colors in the orchestration, this symphony just kind of flatly repeats the few orchestral ideas it seems to have and lacks the passionate volatility of the RVW symphony. My notes for the work starting around the second movement are just mad scrawling trying to figure out what is going on with the orchestration and what I'm supposed to be getting out of this either emotionally or intellectually. There are pseudo minimalist ideas going on here, but lacks the establishing of harmonic language that makes that music work. The piccolo in the 3rd movement was driving me nuts, cause it sounds completely unnatural.

    The final movement is basically the same thing but with a faster underlying part supporting the long and aimless melodies. There is an interesting idea right before the end with an abrupt timpani solo, but it is over before you can even begin to enjoy it and then the music just stumbles to the end quickly afterwards.

    I don't know, maybe this is kind of like the Ades (I swear that I like contemporary music) and would reward knowledge of the score or study to the listener. But I'm of the opinion that a good symphony, like any good piece of art, should have a satisfying surface level that draws a person to want to examine it more. Or be SO out there that it is obviously breaking the mold (looking at you copy of Finnegan's Wake that I've got through the first 2 chapters like 5 times of). And this symphony just doesn't dissociate me enough from my expectations in it's own language to be satisfying. Maybe this was just an off work for her though, I'll have to check out some of her other symphonies. Anyways, hopefully tomorrow will be better!

Tomorrow: Elfrida Andree No. 2

Vaughan Williams 3 - Pastoral Symphony

Rec.:Cond. Sir Mark Elder

    Well I guess at least one decent thing came out of WWI and that would be this symphony. The inspiration for this symphony came to Ralph Vaughan Williams while he was serving in France during the war. Which I would imagine contributes to the overall somber tone of this pastoral symphony.

    My first though while listening to the first movement is that nobody writes in this mysterious, lush style better than Vaughan Williams (RVW from here on out). There is just a certain magical quality to the music that is distinctly his. Although this can have the side effect of making much of his music indistinguishable from others in his works. A lot of his slow, rich, harmonically rich pieces are kind of interchangeable in my head. On the other hand, what lacks in memorable moments in the first movement is made up for how enjoyable the experience is while you are in it. It is the kind of music that you can just let wash over you.

    If the first movement is forests and fields then the second movement sounds marshy and foggy. The noteworthy aspect of this movement is the trumpet solo, which the player is instructed to play as a bugle (all on one fingering), and has the player go to out of tune partials. This was apparently inspired by a bugler he heard during the war who failed to play his octaves correctly. So you heard it here folks, keep playing your music loud and wrong in case you inspire a nearby better musician! The trumpet solo leads up to a brief explosion of light in the otherwise dark movement, which then settles back in to a distant horn solo.

    The third movement has the only extended aggressive music and the only real fast music in the symphony as well. Even at that the aggression and energy dwindles back down by the end of the movement. This movement is full of folk gestures and pentatonic scales (although they were present in the earlier movements, they were really obvious here). I also found it interesting that once the tone of the movement started to wind down around the halfway point that there were no more large climactic spots like I would have expected.

   Hark! A voice! The defining feature of the final movement is a wordless vocal soloist. Still in the pentatonic language, the themes of this movement are presented more clearly and often more simply than in the other movements. The voice for instance, is accompanied by strings on a unison note. While there is an optimistic climax, the music once again settles in to its somber tone, with the voice carrying the piece to the end.

W.A. Mozart 20

Rec.:Northern Chamber Orchestra

    And for the 20th blog entry I thought I'd do a 20th symphony, because it won't be that long before I can't celebrate numbers that way here. Apparently written when Mozart (Wolfgang, we'll hit some Leopold Mozart I'm sure) was 16, because Mozart was a jerk and was trying to make the rest of history feel bad. This was interesting for me as well because generally I don't listen to too much of the middle area of Mozart symphonies.

    Probably the most interesting elements to me in the firs movement are some orchestration things and a pretty huge formal thing. Orchestrationally, the trumpets and horns are pretty foreground and have a decent amount of featured content, which isn't super rare or anything, but still noteworthy. The other thing is that this orchestra was using harpsichord to bolster the forte sections of the work, which I was surprised to hear basso continuo in a symphony this late number wise, but I suppose he was still pretty early in his career. It also isn't noted in the score that I looked at though, so maybe it was a historical choice on the part of the ensemble. The big interesting thing in here though is the form. The is virtually no introduction to the sonata-allegro form, which, again, I don't know enough about middle area Mozart symphonies to know if that is uncommon or not. The interesting thing to me though is that on the recapitulation of the form he swaps the order of the themes and presents the second one first. That would make this piece an ideal one to show experimentations on forms, because the change is easy to recognize and it still clearly follows the rules of the form.

    The middle movements are about what you'd expect, a slow binary movement and a minuet and trio. The noteworthy element in the second movement is the prominent featuring of the flute on the melody through most of it, typically in octaves with the violins. In the third movement, the thing that struck me the most is the use of sustained notes obscuring the usual clear cut dance feel of the movement. In particular, the trio has some interesting suspensions upon first listening.

    Another sonata form, this time in very toe-tapping 12/8. The harpsichord is back from the first movement on the loud sections. Otherwise, I'd note the use of old school sonata form, where the development and recapitulation are repeated as well. Overall, the symphony has some interesting elements here and there, but I can see why it isn't one of the top 40 hits of Mozart.

Thomas Ades - Chamber Symphony, Op. 2

Rec.:London Philharmonic Orchestra

    So I was curious as to the context of this piece so I looked up the program notes. Oh by the way, was still in a chamber symphony mood, and wanted to do something more contemporary, so this is it. So anyways, as I was reading this description while listening to the symphony I started frantically searching to see if he had done another Chamber Symphony because the notes didn't seem to match up to what I was listening to at all except for one super important thing: Basset Horn and Bass Clarinet featured prominently. Which is a pretty big coincidence. Anyways, what I'm trying to say is I think I might be an idiot after reading the program notes, because I didn't hear nearly any of what he said was in there.

    Some for instances, where as I am hearing a primarily timbral exploration throughout this four movement, but continuous symphony, he describes the first movement as having an introduction followed by a sonata form with two clear theme groups in the matter of Schubert. What I hear is the kind of dark timbral pseudo jazz, full of little half formed gestures that one might expect in something like a Lynch film. I mean, with the hi-hat, harmon muted brass, and lines that sound like they could be from an Eric Dolphy solo, the inspiration seems pretty clear. Also there is apparently an obvious and strict tango rhythm in the first two movements that I can kind of hear if I strain for it. I think these gestures that are described as obvious in the notes may only seem that way if one is already been introduced to their use prior to listening.

    The final three movements are described as a queasy, but steady development of the tango ideas, a movement that builds momentum and collects flotsam(really...?) from the first movement, and then an overview of the music that ties up loose ends. Aside from the somewhat pretentious description, I just can't hear a lot of the formal elements. The themes are just not clearly defined enough for me, and while timbrally amazing, I'm not sure I want to take the time it would take to uncover the obfuscating layers to hear the formal elements. I mean I'm kind of cool with themeless music (although I am a sucker for a good tune), but that isn't what this is supposed to be. So I guess overall, I would give it a listen once for the orchestrational merits(which again are great), but personally, I just couldn't really get in to it.

Tomorrow:Something contemporary that I like so I don't seem against modern music

Milhaud - Chamber Symphony No.1, Op.43 "Le printemps"

Rec.:Orchestra of Radio Luxembourg

    Well a couple of quick thoughts while I listen to this. One, this might be the longest post title I've had yet and it is for what may be the shortest symphony I'll ever do. Two, I feel like these Milhaud chamber symphonies are a bit of a copout, but they are fascinating in the "what makes something a symphony" kind of way. Third, chamber symphonies are fair game for this blog because I've become a massive fan of the genre over the last couple years.

    This chamber symphony has many of the elements that you would expect out of a larger symphonic work, especially an impressionistic one, just distilled and stripped the their bare Formal minimum. You can even hear the separation of movements in this three and a half minute work. There is the swirling opening movement, the more lush song-like strains in a middle movement, and the nervous activity of the final movement. The stripped down orchestration really lets him experiment with interesting color combinations as well. The harp writing is something to behold in this symphony as well, as they are more integral than you often hear.

    Some final thoughts. I've listened to this piece a few times over the last few years and every time it feels like it lasts longer than it does but I'm still engrossed the entire time. It is like a blipvert from Max Headroom, it somehow is fed to you in a condensed form and then expands in your head until it fills the space of a full symphony. Unlike blipverts though, I don't think it will occasionally make your head explode.

Harty - An Irish Symphony

Rec.:Irish RTC national symphony orchestra

    So for St. Patrick's Day I thought I would do a symphony from an Irish composer and in searching I found this one by Hamilton Harty which was plainly called "An Irish Symphony" and it seemed appropriate enough.

    The first movement - On the Shores of Lough Neagh - sets a solid foundation for how the folk elements are going to be used. This definitely isn't a straight forward setting of folk melodies, which is honestly what I was kind of worried about after the number of straightforward Irish music settings I've heard over the years, but rather a full symphonic development of folk themes. If you were to drop a needle in to the middle of this movement, the folk elements may not even be present, as much of the development in between thematic sections sounds more traditionally symphonic. Formally, nothing is super clear, it is almost like a free fantasy on the theme or stylistic variations. The movement is very fluid feeling throughout.


    The Fair-Day - an energetic reel (I think) that says what it needs to and gets out of the way. It comes in at under 3 minutes, but a lot happens in that time, a lot of orchestration shifts through the movements and a very interesting folk gesture in the strings at the opening that signals the form really effectively. The use of xylophone in this movement is nice as well, especially the fun little duet with the piccolo towards the end.

    The third movement - In the Antrim Hills - The opening of this actually reminds me more of Scheherazade than anything. The rest of the movement though is an odd mix of folk ballad and melodramatic Romantic slow movement. Nice use of harp in this movement as well, which I suppose was kind of expected for the slow movement of An Irish Symphony. This movement is kind of an excellent blend of cliches from Folk and Romantic musics that don't sound cliche when combined. The simplicity of the themes are saved by the orchestration and harmonic language.

    The last movement is called The Twelfth Night. This movement almost feels like a reworking of the other movements in to a free form finale. I'd have to go back and check to see if the themes were the one presented in the earlier movements, but all the stylistic ideas presented in the previous movements are reused here. Which for the most part works, but it feels a little less focused that the other movements because of it.

    If your in the mood for something Irish to listen to and still want to feel like a fancy pants, this will do the trick nicely.

Tomorrow: Something Short... got a lot to do.

W.F. Bach - Sinfonia in D Major, FK64

Rec.: Akademie fur Alte Musik Berlin

    So felt like doing something a bit shorter today and haven't really done too much early Classical, so W.F. Bach it is. So maybe the theme will be symphonies in D this week? neh... no theme this week it is.

    One thing that struck me is how active and prominent the horn parts were. That just seems like an oddly forward thinking orchestration for something that is still using harpsichord. The other orchestration thing to note is the excellent writing for two featured flutes in the second movement.

    One compelling case I could make for listening to this symphony is that you can really hear the transition from Baroque to Classical in it. I'd be curious to take the time to work out the forms and see what they are. The development of ideas definitely seems more Baroque than classical, but the structure feels more Classical. It is interesting enough, if not terribly memorable or striking.

Tomorrow: The return of planning tomorrow's symphony.

Danzi D minor, Op. 19

Rec.:Orchestra della Svizzera Italiana

    Lately, a lot of the composers I've been checking out are composers who are Beethoven contemporaries. I think I realized that I didn't know much of the music in the transitionary period between the Classical and Romantic eras other than his. So now Franz Danzi lands on here, in addition to Kalivoda and Mehul. This time we have the son of an Italian cellist who was raised in Germany.

    So I'm writing these impressions as the finale is finishing up, and gonna be brief. I think Wikipedia may have nailed it when it labelled him "not a composer of the first rank." This is by no means a BAD symphony, just lacks a certain spark that many composers bring. The construction is fine, the orchestration functional, the themes are pleasant but not particularly memorable, but there that is kind of the problem. Everything is so by the book here that there is no real drama in the music. It is the musical equivalent of a photo taken to sell something on Craigslist. Functional, but not really inspired. Each of the movements is exactly what you'd expect out of a Classical work, and while there might be a hint of Romanticism in there, it is barely noticeable. Also, for a minor symphony it doesn't seem to spend much time in minor key areas.

     Maybe some of his other symphonies are more interesting? Anyways, I don't have a theme yet for this week so there will either be one tomorrow that I can retrofit Danzi in to or no theme this week. So you know... Tomorrow there'll be something.

Schulhoff 2

Rec.: Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra

    I was introduced to this composer earlier this week by my friend Jacqui. After listening to a woodwind trio by Schulhoff I wanted to check some more stuff out by him. Erwin Schulhoff's music has the kind of excited energy that I find very appealing in early-mid 20th centruy music so I was hooked. So I just found the first symphony I could on Spotify of his and went with it. I was also intrigued by the scherzo alla jazz and what that would entail.

    I'll save the biography, as it is a sad one, and get right in to the music. These are impressions being written while listening as I've done before, so this is a little more free form. So far in the first movement I'm loving the clarity and drive of the neo-classical (I think I would classify it as that) style. It is thematically strong and the themes are well developed. In some ways it feels like a more approachable Hindemith to me (although he is another guy I have unreserved love for the music of). The double reed writing of Schulhoff in the first movement is particularly good.

    Slow movements seem to me to have suffered the roughest treatment during this time period. A lot of the times they seem to be striving to avoid their identity as the slow, serious movement. Or sometimes they make them overserious. This movement avoids a little bit of that, but I feel like it never quite settled on what it wanted to be. Which I understand is an incredibly vague assessment, but that is the initial impression I have. Maybe it will make more sense on repeat listenings.

    The opening of the third movement lured me in to thinking that this was a REALLY loose definition of jazz. In otherwords I thought the only thing he was gonna do is use the muted trumpet. Sure enough though, there is a saxophone duet with the trumpet all accompanied by what sounds like banjo. So now I can say I've heard a symphony with sax and banjo in it. As far as content goes, I like it in the way I usually like these European adaptations of the jazz idiom (one of my favorite pieces is Milhaud's La Creation du Monde after all). Also interesting is how succinct and unrelated the movements feel compared to more integrated symphonies that seemed popular at that time.

    The longest movement is the last, which still comes in at under 7 minutes. I think there might be late Romantic movements that last longer than this symphony. But I think this works in the pieces favor. The music is all very efficiently presented and developed in a way that it would feel weird if there was extra fluff and fat hanging on it. The final movement is driving and has a clarity to the thematic presentation and the form. This movement sounds like a modern reinterpretation of a Classical era final movement. It hits a lot of the same beats that you would expect out of one, but with a more modern sense of harmony and orchestration.

    Well it is official, I need to stop finding composers who I really enjoy or I'm never going to finish listening to all the music I want to listen to. Schulhoff is definitely on my list of composers I need to check out more extensively now, and while this symphony was not as impressive as the trio I listened to of his, I still found it enjoyable.  

I'll figure out next week's theme tomorrow

Martinu 2

Recording:Czech Philharmonic Orchestra

     I think I liked this, but I feel like I need to listen to it again. There seems like there is a kind of hazy sheen over much of the symphony. The foreground is often pointed and clear with a background that just kind of smudges the clear lines the melody produces.

     And now for some quick thoughts on each movement. The first movement feels like being carried on the wind for much of it. The timbres used are adventurous, the movement is flowing and nebulous. There is a sense of emotional volatility present here. The second movement has may of the same features but is more impressionistic in nature. With the exception of an odd little fast action towards the end of the movement, it has the same clear folk-like melodies of the first movement obscured by the backgrounds.

    The last two movements are more forward moving and neo-classical in style. The third movement, with its complex themes, harmonies, and rhythms, keeps a clarity to it that seems very characteristic of the style tome. The final movement keeps the momentum, but with much of the first movements shimmer returned. The melodies in this movement feel kind of outdoorsy to me. In the last movement I particularly liked the use of dissonant background lines in the last movement.

Tomorrow: Erwin Schulhoff Symphony No. 2

Kalivoda 6

Recording: Pilsen Radio Symphony Orchestra

    Writing this a bit late tonight cause I went to a JavaScript meetup so this one is gonna be extra short: You gotta listen to this symphony. The only reason I can think of why this symphony isn't in the standard repertoire is that it isn't more well know. The orchestration is great, the themes are memorable and developed well, the contrapuntal writing is fantastic, and so forth. If I had listened to this many, many years ago before I had listened to all the Beethoven symphonies you probably could have fooled me in to thinking it was one of his. Which is probably the oddest thing about it to me is that sounds more Germanic than the other works I've listened to this week. Potentially with the exception of the Vranicky. Amazing all around. Might try and get a score to this and revisit it sometime.

Tomorrow: Martinu No. Something

Dvorak 3

Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra - cond. Jose Serebrier

    Figured I couldn't let Czech week go by without doing some Dvorak, and figured I'd save the later symphonies for some other time. I ended up picking this one because I was curious about the 3 movement structure of the symphony. While I don't think this gels as well as a cohesive whole as his other symphonies there a lot of great little moments in this symphony that makes it worth listening to.

    I'm gonna skip the first movement except to say that is reminds me a bit of one of his folk dance settings, with a little more formal ambiguity to it. Otherwise, there wasn't a lot of remarkable thing in the movement. The second movement is kind of peculiar to me, though. This is the longest slow movement he ever wrote, and it is variations on a slow march. I feel like the theme is not Dvorak's strongest, but it works as a vehicle to do a lot of interesting orchestrational variations. In particular, the harp writing in this movement is quite nice and it is all scored in a transparent enough way that it is clear to the listener. Some nice harmonic touches here and there throughout this movement as well. I was wondering if the march element was a justification for the lack of a scherzo, since, while slow, it isn't especially somber or anything.

    The final movement is a Rondo, and my favorite movement. There are many elements in here that almost sound like a opera overture, but thematically, this seems the most like Dvorak to me. The variety is pretty exciting and there a bits of 3 against 2 metric feels that are interesting as well. The scoring, especially towards the end skews pretty high, and becomes a bit shrill at spots. But everyone in the orchestra gets little spots to shine in here, and overall it is quite a bit of fun. If you're running low on time, this seems like would be fun to listen to as a stand alone movement.

Tomorrow: Jan Vaclav Kalivoda No. 6

Ancerl 2

Recording: Czech Philharmonic Orchestra

    If I had to characterize this symphony in C#(gross) by Karel Ancerl succinctly, I would say it is aggressive and comedic. With the exception of the third movement all the movements have some comedic or satirical sounding elements, and even the third movement has an oddly aggressive opening. It travels through parts that sound mechanical, mocking , and celebratory at times, but everything has an underlying levity to it, to my ears at least. The movements tend to end optimistically, reinforcing this.

    The third movement even sounds dance-like in spots. There is also a chorale section in this movement with interruptions from the high winds and strings, which reminded a bit of one of my favorite composers, Maslanka (yes I realize that Ancerl came first, just making the comparison). I think I even heard the same suspension at the end of this movement as the end of Maslanka 4.

    Keeping it brief today, this one may not be a must-listen, but there are some interesting things happening in here to be sure. Especially if you want to listen to some interesting orchestration ideas, especially in regard to the extensive use of trumpets in the symphony.

Tomorrow: I suppose I should do some Dvorak?

Foerster 4 - "Easter Eve"

Recording: Prague Symphony Orchestra

    So this is something I should have done in about a month if I had an ounce of forethought in me, but I picked it now, so let's get talking. Josef Foerster is one of the many composers that straddled the period between the late Romantic and early to mid-20th century that seems to have been largely forgotten (One of my favorites being Paul Juon, who I will be stoked if I can actually find a place to buy the recording of his Symphony in A). That time in particular seems to unkind many great composers who didn't adapt to a more modern style, and Foerster seems to have been caught in that.


    But on to the symphony itself. It strikes me by the opening and closing movements that Easter must be a much more solemn event in other parts of the world. The music is somber and ceremonial for much of the first movement. I particularly like the writing for the low brass in the opening movement, as it has some nice background melodies on display. There is also a charming, light-hearted woodwind section towards the end of the movement. The build to the end made me realize this recording kind of muffles on the louder dynamics and as later movements would confirm I should've found a better recording. Even my headphones didn't save it.

    The second movement made me wonder about the programmatic element of the piece; whether it was a depiction of the events of Easter, or a depiction of the celebration of those events. This thought occurred to me while listening to this movement because many of this light-hearted scherzo's themes sound like folk melodies, although Wikipedia says that Foerster was not a setter of folk melodies. Maybe he just has a knack for melody in that vein. I'd be curious to see the score as well, since I think I may have heard a Euphonium solo sneak in somewhere! Also, some interesting low oboe and horn doublings toward the end of the movement, which has a very sly ending.

    This movement strikes me as the most big "R" Romantic. Whereas the first movement was more ritualistic and the chromatic lines were tucked away, this movement is more emotional and the chromaticism is front and center. I can even hear twinges of Bruckner in spots (which realistically means I hear Wagner I suppose). I really enjoyed the orchestration here with a little bass clarinet solo(!) and some gorgeous low brass choir sections at the end. This may be one of my new favorite slow movements, which may owe somewhat to the fact that, unusual for a Romantic, the slow movement is the shortest. The movement doesn't overstay its welcome, as many slow movements in the late Romantic tend to do for me.

    The final movement starts with a Lento Lugubre marking, and has a surprising amount of forward momentum for that tempo. I found myself checking the pulse to make sure it was actually that slow at times. The opening is quite heartfelt, before suddenly transitioning to the allegro, which is more in line with the serious tone of the first movement. In this movement it struck me that this is the kind of piece that will certainly reward repeat listenings, as there are a lot of subtle things going on. And some unsubtle things... like a freaking organ?! Seriously, I kind of didn't want to say anything (is there such a thing as spoiler warning for a 110 year old symphony?) because it took me by complete surprise. Like, was it in the background the whole time and I just somehow missed it, or did it patiently just wait to blind side the listener in the finale. Now this piece is in my list of pieces I'd like to see live, because recordings just don't capture the grandeur of organ.

Short version: a must listen to.

Tomorrow: Karel Ancerl Symphony No.2 in C#

Vranicky Op.11 No 1

<h1><strong>Recording: Dvorak Chamber Orchestra</strong></h1>
<br>
<p>Gonna keep it short today. Pavel Vranicky is a Czech (Moravian) composer who lived in Vienna and was a contemporary of Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven. And from what little I've listened to him, he seems like a composer that might be considered among there ranks in some alternate universe. He was well respected at the time, especially as a conductor, with Beethoven and Haydn seeking him out to perform their works (again, my sources are wikipedia, the only thing I let myself read before writing these). He seems to skew more on the Classical side (from what I've heard of him), and is no lesser of a tune-writer or orchestrator than Mozart or Haydn to my ears.</p>
<br>
<p>This symphony in C minor is in many ways an ideal Classical symphony. Not one of the exceptional ones that get played mostly today, but certainly solid. The orchestration is excellent, the melodies are all memorable, there aren't any awkward moments to be found. There are some dramatic moments, some light ones, some playful ones, some stately. If, like myself, you are just as impressed by the craftsmanship of composers (especially from the Classical and Baroque eras) as the artistry of them, then you should definitely check this one out.</p>
<br>
<p>What the hell... let's do Czech Composers this week
<h1><strong>Tomorrow: Josef Foerster Symphony #4 - 'Easter Eve'

Ticheli 1

Recording: University of Miami Symphony Orchestra

    Just gotta get through this today... got a splitting headache. So this might seem an odd choice to end first symphony week, but Frank Ticheli may have been one of the more influential composers to me and a number of other people who are around my age who grew up playing in wind ensembles in the 90s and 00s. I was actually curious to check out the first symphony cause I hadn't seen a recording of it until now, as a lot of wind ensemble composer's orchestral music doesn't get recorded. Also I don't think I've found a recording of Maslanka 1, which would've been my other choice.

    Anyways, The first movement, Of Youth, has extensive use of bell-like open harmonies. The winds are the dominant texture for much of the movement, and the strings are almost used like a single instrument to respond to the winds. The middle of the movement has a wistful, nostalgic feel to it. Appropriately, the movement feels drifting and aimless for much of it, which in many situations would be a criticism, but it works to paint a picture of youth in this movement. The end of the movement is a little fanfare-y though, which seems off a bit to me.

    The second movement exemplifies my favorite part about Ticheli's writing, his ability to write almost perfectly constructed slow movements from a tension standpoint. Rest is probably the best example of this, but this movement, Of Wisdom, also has a very carefully constructed build in tension throughout the movement. Just when the building tension becomes almost unbearable, it breaks in to the climax, and then it steadily calms itself down to the end of the movement, equally as controlled as the build was.

    This movement might be some of my favorite fast Ticheli writing. This movement, Profanation, sounds like a less refined version of his normal style of faster writing with just a few rough edges that makes it more exciting to me. Sometimes his faster writing can come across as a little sterile to me nowadays, but I don't feel that here. Some interesting orchestrational things, to me at least, are the use of the piano doublings for texture, and the use of the horn section towards the end, the latter of which reminds me of Peter and the Wolf's horn section for some reason. I don't feel like looking more in to that right now, cause I just want to get this done.

    This movement, Prayer, strikes me as a Copland-esque. It trades off between string solos over the winds and a male vocal soloist. I may need to revisit this movement cause my headache was not doing me any favors here, as even on my best days I have a hard time understanding lyrics. Overall this movement struck me as a heroic version of the second movement with a vocalist. Which I kind of wanted more out of it than that, but I'm fully willing to admit that it may be more due to my condition than the work itself, I'll have to give it another shot.

    No Wrap up and no preview, I'll be back tomorrow though.

Méhul 1

Recording: Rhenish Philharmonic Orchestra

    And now for the symphony of a man who I misspelled both the first and last name of yesterday. It is fixed now. So I ran in to this chap when I was looking up contemporaries of Beethoven, realizing I knew very little of the symphonic music that was happening at the same time as his. And listening to his symphonies made me kind of go on a quest for other lesser known composers since I found each of his symphonies extremely solid. Maybe not the equivalent of the greatest works of the pantheon of master composers, but certainly the equal to some of their lesser works that still receive a ton of performances.

    In many ways the opening movement sounds like it could almost be a sequel to Mozart 40. A very anxious and driving minor movement. This makes sense from what I read about Étienne Méhul. Namely that he felt that he had to accustom his audience to the fact that a Frenchman could follow in the footsteps of Mozart and Haydn. This was written the same year as Beethoven 5, and while it doesn't have that tumultuous of a sound, there is still some edges here and there that mark it as solidly Romantic. Which is appropriate because according to the only research I do for this blog (what wikipedia says), he was the first composer to ever be labelled as a Romantic.

    The inner movements are very classical in spirit, with what sounds like a theme and variation and a menuetto. There are interesting orchestrational things going on here with a low bassoon and horn interjection towards the end of the movement that struck me as an interesting color choice. The third movement opens with an extended pizicatto section, that is later mimicked by staccato winds. In between these sections the meneut feels like it never quite settles in to the full melody.

    The last movement is restless throughout, and again reminiscent of some more anxious Mozart music, to my ears at least. This has the kind of embellishments all over the place driving things forward that would give me nightmares if they were in the back of my Arban's book, but I feel like they might be in there somewhere. If I have any problem with the finale it is that the consistency of motion almost obscures the ending which comes as a bit of a surprise, since it just drives straight to the end.

    I know this is a little short, but there is not a ton to say except that it is a solid piece of work. You should check it out. Like the next time you're thinking about listening to Beethoven 2 or 4 again, put this on instead.

To wrap up first symphony week: Frank Ticheli Symphony #1

Rautavaara 1

Recording: Belgium National Orchestra

    Einojuhani Rautavaara (which I can almost guarantee you will be spelled wrong somewhere in this post) is a composer I've been meaning to listen to more of since playing Cantus Arcticus. I really loved the harmonic language of the piece and the thick layers of sound that he used. So I figure his symphonies might be a good place to start.

    Immediately I'm struck by how unmistakable his sound is. I haven't listened to much but his sound is distinctive, kind of like Arvo Part's music and it makes me wonder if he has a structured approach to his harmony like Part does (forgive me not looking up the umlaut). So I'm listening to the 2003 version and from what little I could find I should listen to the earlier versions which are radically different. It makes me wonder if the piece sounds less mature in the first version.

    Much of the first movement seems built around three broad ideas: a planing chordal section, a section that alternates between two chords, and a dotted rhythmic section. As the first movement, which is longer than the other two movements combined, progresses, these three ideas combine with each other, especially the chordal planing and the dotted patterns. The planing dominates the first part of the movement, with breaks between planing styles serving to create contrasts. The tonal language seems to stretch and split at spots, creating a bitonal sounding tension between sections of the orchestra. The first alternating chord section features a violin solo which gives a sense of being lost, as opposed to the sound of seeking that the opening planing section caused.

    After the violin solo ends, the dotted pattern enters in to the picture. From here on out, much of the movement is a build in complexity of texture and harmony until the coda. After the melody of the third section is established, the harmonic texture of the first is slowly added on to the dotted theme, creating a planed harmony on top of the melody. It is briefly broke up by a return of the opening, but this time there are violent interjections by the brass and timpani, which culminates in a glorious climax fully combining all the elements with the exception of the alternating chords, which form the coda. This time the alternating chords sound more peaceful than disorienting, although there is a dark undertone to it, reinforced by the ending of the movement.

    The beginning of the second movement features some stunning solo work, and the movement features some very sensitive horn writing. This movement features much of the planing present in the first movement but with a more ephemeral feel throughout the movement. I am surprised at how forward moving all this planing sounds, because I would think that style of harmonic movement would drag down after a while, but somehow it continues to lead the listener forward in Rautavaara's hands. There are some curious combinations of wind colors towards the end of this movement.

    So wow, I was totally not expecting the third movement. After two movements of this lush, tense writing, I was greeted with an at times playful, at times grotesque, scherzo. It sounds like a parody of folk music or circus music at times. It is also times like this that I wish I would take more time for research so I don't sound completely ignorant if it IS based on folk melodies. At times there are these violent developments of the theme that remind a bit of Ives, but the end reminds me of Rite of Spring, but with the richer harmonies of Rautavaara. The ending of the symphony also comes abruptly, as it ended with ten seconds left to go on the track and I just stared at it waiting for a stinger.

    Short summary since this already went long: Lush harmonies, masterful orchestrating, and just bizarre finale movement in the context of the rest of the work. I'd recommend it for sure!

Tomorrow: Etienne Mehul Symphony #1

Haydn 1

Recording: Camerata Academica Salzburg - Hans Reinartz

    Well going to do this kind of different today as I have a lot to do (I have a meet and greet with a bunch of potential employers tonight). So instead of writing my thoughts down then writing the blog you'll be getting just whatever pops in to my head while listening to it live in the blog. I was originally gonna do a quick analysis to go along with this one (score is only like 12 pages) as analyzing classical era music is kind of relaxing, but the print quality was so poor on the imslp score that it would have taken me more time to figure out the notes than analyze them.

    And.... here we go! Not a bad opening actually. Kicks right in to the main theme without an introduction. Sonata form as to be expected. While primarily violin dominated it does sound like there are some good inner string and wind counterlines going on. Very effective use of sudden dynamic contrasts, even some nice building crescendos in spots. Which sounds like a dumb thing to compliment, but not something I always see in early classical music, which I'm gonna go ahead and ignorantly classify this as since it is a 3 movement symphony. I also dig the use of pedal points throughout the first movement.

    Double checked the score cause I was kind of interested in the meter, and it is a slow 2/4, also appears to be a binary form. No winds in this movement at all. I like the extensive use of 16th note triplet pick ups in this movement and the little and the contrasting dotted rhythms in the B section. Sounds like the violas might be getting a little love in the B section as well. Nope, just the second violins, that is what I get for trying to listen to something with laundry being about six feet away. A poor decision on my part

    And now for the finale... Dancy 3 feel. Haydn really had a knack for melodies, even this early in his symphonies. Speaking of which I realize there might be two before this, symphony A and B, but I had a hard enough time finding this symphony on Spotify. Oh wait... it's over already? Oh, it is only like 2:15. Well, it was a good two minutes (Insert your own joke here).

    Sorry for the odd format but this may happen again on days where I have limited time. Overall, nothing groundbreaking, which I wouldn't expect, but a perfectly cromulent early classical symphony.

Tomorrow: Einojuhani Rautavaara Symphony #1

Creston 1

Recording: Ukraine National Symphony Orchestra

    This is the first piece I've listened to previously for the blog. I've never really payed close attention to it however, having listened to it for the first time on the bus a month or two ago. I'm huge fan of Paul Creston and I'm sure I'll get to all five of his symphonies eventually. For those of you not familiar with his work, Creston is a self-taught American composer who eventually taught at Central Washington University (which I bring up as a WA resident). His work is generally very tricky rhythmically, but very approachable for listeners on a harmonic and timbral level.

    His Symphony #1 is no exception. I'm not sure when this was written in his composing career, but it doesn't have the rough edges of the previous two symphonies I listened to that I assumed were due to inexperience. The first movement, "With Majesty," confirmed this for me as it contrasts complex rhythmic driving sections with long soaring melodies. The way he orchestrates in this movement reminds of a more tonally approachable version of Vincent Persichetti's music at times. A characteristic that will be present in most of the movements is his use of nimble woodwind solo lines.

    Movement II - "With Humor" - is surprising to me in that I was expecting something more akin to the fourth movement here. It is a very restrained Scherzo movement, with a tempo slower than I was expecting. The humor instead derives from quick timbral shifts and more awkward metric shifts. There is a lush string section in the middle that forms a nice contrast in the movement.

    I think it is the third movement, "With Serenity," is where I realized just how good Creston is at planing sonorities. It is also where I realized that the thing I admire the most about his metric language is that metric changes always seem in service of his melodies and not just there for the sake of complexity (a trait I try and use in my own music). The orchestration is excellent in this movement too, I especially liked his use of soft trombones as a base for the woodwinds towards the beginning of the movement.

    The fourth movement - "With Gaiety" - is easily my favorite movement, but again, I'm a sucker for lively, witty music. This movement comes out of the gate swinging with some really tricky oboe and clarinet solos. There are more soaring melodies over rhythmic backgrounds reminiscent of the first movement and the angular string parts in the background sound like they are pretty crazy for the players. There is a wonderful bassoon solo about 2:30 in. I was thinking to myself during this movement that I can see why Creston may have picked up more traction with his wind ensemble pieces as this kind of rhythmic interplay and tight focused writing is more characteristic in that medium.

    Overall, I would completely suggest this symphony, but I have only run in to one Creston piece I haven't been in to in the past, so that is hardly surprising to me. Also a spoiler alert: His symphonies get better from here!

Tomorrow: Let's kick it old school: Haydn 1

Schubert 1

Recording: WDR symphony Cologne - Gunter Wand Conducting

    Well this wasn't as pleasantly surprising as yesterday. It was by no means unpleasant, but was just kind of dull I guess. I ended up checking the years on them cause I was curious as to the what it came out around and was shocked to see that Beethoven 7 and 8 were premiered the year before this. Although to be fair Schubert was only 16 at the time and the classical style of early Beethoven would be easier to imitate. On the other hand, his first mass was the next year and sounds much more solid to me. Hmm... The symphony was written the same year as Wellington's Victory, so maybe it was just a bad year in general for music.

    The thing that sticks out about the first movement are the kind of awful trumpet parts. They are pitched so high at spots that they ruin the texture, especially given the light Classical era style that pervades the piece. Either that or they are out of tune on this recording something fierce. Other than that, the opening struck me as kind of boilerplate stately classical music but the construction of the piece was really solid, even if the transition back to the recapitulation was really jarring (in a non-intentional kind of way). All of the movements are very string dominant with winds for emphasis

    The middle two movements almost sound like contractual obligations. Like they were constructed to take the shape of a slow movement and a minuet and trio so they could be checked off and the piece could be called a symphony. I don't think the recording was doing the second movement any justice though, as the dynamics sound so flat and it starts so loud that I actually looked up the score to see if the slow movement was that clumsily edited. At least the version I looked at was supposed to start at a piano and I certainly didn't catch any of that kind of delicacy here. Again they aren't BAD, they just sound like themes were filled in to a symphonic movement generator and then placed in.

    The finale has a bit more life to it, but I also found myself getting kind of distracted by other things by this point in the symphony due to the middle movements. Trumpets are back in full force, although not quite as rough sounding as the first movement. Not sure there is more here than the other movements or if I'm just more tolerant of lively by the numbers music.

    I suppose they can't all be zingers!

Tomorrow: Paul Creston Symphony #1

Shostakovich 1 and a new blog.

About the blog

    I'm a huge fan of symphonic music, and as a composer and music theorist who is making a career shift in to web development, this blog will hopefully be a good way to keep me honest about listening to new pieces regularly.

    Specifically my goal is to try and listen to 366 symphonies over the course of the next year and write short impressions, and, when I have time, try and present some analysis. I may get around to doing some research on the piece or maybe I won't, depends on how busy I am that day! Most of the recordings should be available on Spotify and if not I'll let you know.

This Week

    Well my original thought was to start with Schubert #8 since it was the first symphony I ever performed in and it would get rid of a symphony that would be an easy out if I decide to quit. But instead I have decided that the first week should be full of first symphonies!

Shostakovich Symphony No. 1 in F min

Recording: American Symphony Orchestra - Leon Botstein Conducting

    I considered that perhaps I should start with something I was familiar with first, but decided that I should save those for another time when I have my analyses of them on hand and can say something intellectual about them. So instead let's be completely unintellectual and start with something that is in the big list of "stuff I've been meaning to listen to" that I know virtually nothing about!
Well after listening to it and taking a quick glance at what wikipedia has to say about it I can see why they mention his time as a cinema pianist. This entire symphony has a very film score feel to it. The first movement strikes me almost as music to accompany a cartoon in many spots. It is very soloistic and passes the themes around to the soloists with very light accompaniment for much of it. The second theme is initialized in the flute and is dance-like. Very nice solos for most of the woodwinds and the trumpet in the movement. The end is interesting in that it kind of just dies away, with a couple false endings.

    Clarinetist better be on their game, the opening solo of the second movement sounds crazy. Very rambunctious opening and an interesting contrast section that utilizes a petal point to create some interesting tension. End of this movement is one of the most cinematic parts of the piece until the finale. Has a very chase scene feel until a false ending in the piano, which once again introduces a subdued ending.

    Probably the least sold on the third movement... Timbrally, it seems a bit duller than the previous movements, although there are some nice oboe and violin solos in the movement. The whole movement just feels kind of, I'm not sure this is the right way to describe it, predictable to me. As if everything is in the right spot, but the charm of the other movements are their rough edges and quick transitions.

    First half bounces back between the serious cinematic sentimentality of the third movement and the boisterousness of the second. Some serious melodrama going on in the violin solo in the first half. Then with like a bit over 4 minutes left the proceedings are disrupted by a timpani solo, which really brings things to a halt. When the motion starts back up again it sounds like the last few minutes of a 50s sci-fi film where the main actor gives a ham-fisted speech about the power of human nature or something and then the credits swell and a short orchestral version of the main fight music plays to close out the credits. That may be a unique interpretation to my interests, or may be because a lot of those composers were influenced by Shostakovich.

    Overall I can't say I regretted listening to it. In my head I kind of split Shostakovich in to two people: The guy who wrote pieces like Festive Overture and Symphony number 9, and the guy who wrote Symphony number 5 and the string quartets. This piece was kind of interesting to listen to for me because it had a little bit of both of those Shostakovich's blended together in such an early piece. It seems a bit inconsistent in quality at times, but he was also only 19 when he wrote it and that is certainly better than anything I wrote at that age (most of which has hopefully been safely incinerated by now).

Tomorrow I'll be back with Schubert 1.