The Greatest Symphony Ever ?

[Kuhlau]

For me Beethoven's 9th is the best.

I agree that it's an incredible symphony, and equally as groundbreaking as his 'Eroica' Symphony. But it's to the latter than I most often turn when I'm in the mood for a Beethoven symphony. My preference is for John Eliot Gardiner's recording on Archiv of the Third Symphony (although, the performance he conducted for the BBC Films docu-drama 'Eroica' is superior in my estimation).

FK

[Christianhowes]

That is really great, I really love that music. Is there any other albums of him which is really good.

Christian howes - Innovative music,Music producer, Music Composer

[Kuhlau]

That is really great, I really love that music. Is there any other albums of him which is really good.

Christian howes - Innovative music,Music producer, Music Composer

Well, if you've enjoyed Beethoven's Third Symphony and have already experienced his Ninth, may I suggest you try his Fifth and Sixth next?

FK

[zoned]

Hi Guys and Gals! Happy you all are enjoying this. I must say I am thrilled to hear some people rate Beethoven's 9th near the top,indeed. What shall I do for an encore? Keep tuning in,your thoughts are fascinating! Oh,Suk's Asrael Symphony(Angel of Death) is largely unheralded but brilliant. Keep your intelligent ears open! Take care, Zoned.

[Robert Newman]

The greatest symphony ? Well, by the 20th century there were many people who thought there was really nothing more to be done in that form. And except for the very remarkable careers of Shostakovitch, Sibelius, Prokofiev etc. (who wrote music that was often identified with their nations) there aren't really many choices from our time. Still, I would suggest a listen to extraordinary works such as -

Edmund Rubbra (1901-86)
Symphony No. 1 (1937), Op.44

Rubbra is not famous even today. He wrote 11 Symphonies. He was British and never really sought public exposure. But his work is really extraordinary and very convincing. My second choice (as best ever symphony) may be Shostakovitch's last (15th).

Conductor Sir Adrian Boult said of Rubbra -

'He has never made any effort to popularize anything he has done, but he goes on creating masterpieces'.

[some guy]

Mr. Newman,

Did you stroll ever so gently through this thread before you posted this: "there aren't really many choices from our time."

If not, please do so. And, if I can remember all the ones mentioned so far, I'll mention some others. (If I duplicate some, you may fire me, of course!)

Wellesz - nine
Reynolds - two (that I know of)
Glass - several (around eight last I noticed)
Ashley - one (yes, the Robert Ashley of Wolfman fame)
Copland - three
Stravinsky - three
Solbiata - two (that I know of)
Gerhard - four
Kodaly - one
Brian - thirty-two
Arnold - nine
Ives - four
Henze - ten

That's a short list off the top of my head, and only of ones that Art Rock and I have not yet mentioned (I think). If I were home, I could wander around my CD collection and list dozens more.

So while I would agree that the symphony was not the first choice for most of the important figures of the twentieth century, it did manage to stay pretty vigorous notwithstanding.

[Robert Newman]

Hi there Someguy,

Yes, for sure, many people have written symphonies in the 20th century. I meant (and you seem to agree) that by the 20th century it was widely believed nothing really new could be achieved in that form. Even the examples you've given (which you agree 'were not the first choice for most of the important figures of the 20th century') indicate the same.

But let me clarify my position. In literature the writer of a 'novel' should really produce a 'nouvelle' (a 'new' way of writing about things) though few books written and published today of that name are any such thing. In the same way the symphony arrived at the 20th century with general belief that not much new could actually be done in that form. The list you have given of 20th century symphony writers (Copland, Stravinsky, Kodaly, Ives etc) is a good one. But even these works have not led to a widespread interest amongst music lovers in new symphonies. In fact, the opposite seems to be true. These symphonies hardly contain any genuinely new approaches to symphony writing. And this is no doubt why many people believe the greatest achievements in that form are still those of Beethoven etc. in the early 19th century.

Anyway, I do believe there are a few great exceptional symphonies of the 20th century - works so special they deserve to be called 'great'. I nominate two (the 15th Symphony of Shostakovitch - whose final minutes are surely some of the most remarkable in all of symphonic literature) and, the very first symphony of the little known Edmund Rubbra (1937). In other words, great as Beethoven's symphonies are, in my view there are symphonic works written in the 20th century which are at least as musically great. Though only very few. Of which (in my view) these are two. I would be happy to say why if you like.

Regards

[some guy]

You are of course correct in everything you say. I was just pointing out that there is, despite everything, quite a lot to choose from symphonically in the twentieth century. I would certainly not want to get into a dispute as to whether Reynolds' Vortex is greater than Beethoven's 2nd or Dhomont's Frankenstein symphony greater than Schumann's 4th. But there are a lot of fine symphonies from the past century, more than two I'd say.

I'll give Rubbra a spin, again.

[Robert Newman]

Hi there Some Guy,

I also agree with you.

Best wishes

[Corno Dolce]

Aloha MIMF'ers,

Sometimes I wonder if the Greatest Symphony Ever has yet to be written...

There maybe someone out there who is learning the art and craft of composing a symphony or one who is not yet born - someone who'll appear when the rest of us are pushing up daisies.

Of course, those Masters who have come before us and bequeathed our cultural patrimony with gifts from their musical pen...be they Mahler, Bruckner, Rachmaninoff, Tchaikovsky, Shostakovich, Beethoven, Mozart...in no particular order...have set the bar so very high indeed.

Cheerio,

CD

[Kuhlau]

In other words, great as Beethoven's symphonies are, in my view there are symphonic works written in the 20th century which are at least as musically great.

For me, Robert, this sentence of yours is disconcertingly vague and (IMO) threatens to undermine the points you made before it. How are you qualifying 'great' in this context? And how can we measure 'greatness'?

FK

[Robert Newman]

For me, Robert, this sentence of yours is disconcertingly vague and (IMO) threatens to undermine the points you made before it. How are you qualifying 'great' in this context? And how can we measure 'greatness'?

FK

Hi there Kuhlau,

Your points really apply to the entire thread, don't they ? How I define 'great' is as big an issue to you as it is to me or to anyone else deciding on the value of a musical piece. Don't you agree ? Perhaps we should in the first instance address that a question to the best possible person - the original poster ?

But let me try to deal with the problem you have with my own post. The 'disconcerting vagueness', I mean.

I mean (and have given two specific examples) that in my considered view there are at least two symphonies of the 20th century which deserve to be regarded as musically equal to, if not superior to, the symphonies of Beethoven which were written in the early 19th century - almost 200 years ago. These I have already named. Surely that's specific ? Perhaps you missed them and this is why you speak of 'vagueness'. ? Please also give me your own choices. The two symphonies which I dare to rate as highly as those of Beethoven are (since this thread is about sharing opinions) the 15th (last) Symphony of Shostakovitch (1961 ?) and the 1st Symphony of Edmund Rubbra (1937).

Let me at least make a start to answering your other point -

In reply to your questions -

a) How are you qualifying 'great' in this context?

b) And how can we measure 'greatness'?

I define a symphony as being 'great' which is highly consistent with itself and which successfully achieves the impacts and effects sought after by the composer. And you ?

We measure 'greatness' in symphonies by them succeeding in the above to an uncommon degree. And you ?

Thus, the 'greatness' of a symphony is not a highly subjective affair or anything to do with its popularity but one of objective reality. Measured by and appreciated by those who know their stuff.

I suggest that since the time of Beethoven there have been various symphonies which are musically equal to, if not even superior to his own ? Which, to me, is true.

I look forward to your own views in reply.


Regards

[Kuhlau]

Your points really apply to the entire thread, don't they?

Actually, yes, they do.

I mean (and have given two specific examples) that in my considered view there are at least two symphonies of the 20th century which deserve to be regarded as musically equal to, if not superior to, the symphonies of Beethoven which were written in the early 19th century - almost 200 years ago. These I have already named. Surely that's specific ? Perhaps you missed them and this is why you speak of 'vagueness'.?

My apologies, Robert. The vagueness remark referred to the idea of 'greatness' in general - it wasn't a suggestion that you hadn't been clear on which 20th century symphonies you regard as 'great'.

I define a symphony as being 'great' which is highly consistent with itself and which successfully achieves the impacts and effects sought after by the composer. And you?

We're back to vagueness here, I'm afraid. You'll need to demonstrate what you mean by 'highly consistent with itself'. You'll also need to explain how anyone other than the composer can ascertain what he or she 'sought after' - some documentary evidence/examples would be good, if you have any of these.

We measure 'greatness' in symphonies by them succeeding in the above to an uncommon degree. And you?

The notion of 'degree' suggests a calibrated scale of some kind. Do you have one that we can use in order to make our calculations and subsequent pronouncements of 'greatness'?

Thus, the 'greatness' of a symphony is not a highly subjective affair or anything to do with its popularity but one of objective reality. Measured by and appreciated by those who know their stuff.

I shall believe in this 'objectivity' once you've convinced me of its existence by providing information that addresses my preceding two points.

I suggest that since the time of Beethoven there have been various symphonies which are musically equal to, if not even superior to his own. Which, to me, is true.

And I agree. The difference is that I'm not attempting to postulate that 'greatness' can be measured quite as objectively as you seem to think is possible.

I look forward to your own views in reply.

And I to yours, sir.

FK

[Robert Newman]

Kuhlau,

Since this thread is on 'the greatest symphony ever' it's surely more appropriate if you would open a thread on 'musical greatness' where that subject can be discussed in detail. I've read the thread and various members have already pointed out that to say one symphony is the 'greatest' is itself filled with difficulties.

It seems the best that can be achieved here is for you to share with us your own choice as to the best symphonies. As I and others have already done.

Regards

[sunwaiter]

Duke Ellington said there were TWO kinds of music. i quite agree. then this thread, if it is really enjoyable because of all the things i can learn browsing through its four pages, is still a little absurd to me, because i don't believe in musical objectivity. yes, there is culture, and i do assume that someone who likes britney spears wouldn't get into such a discussion simply because that someone (in most cases) is not musically educated, so to say. but now, what is "greatness" in music? john lee hooker's music is not less great than ludwig von's ninth, according to me.

i repeat: it's not because i find it absurd to talk about it that i refuse to talk about how great some music is, but i can't be serious about it, because music is music, not science.