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.
Sunday, April 12, 2015
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.
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.
Friday, April 10, 2015
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.
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.
Thursday, April 9, 2015
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.
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.
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.
Wednesday, April 8, 2015
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)