Living Symphonists

[eschiss1]

... oh-kay, I can get that serialism and minimalism have a whole lot to do with each other, sort of like violins and serpents (both instruments, though one of those no longer exists)... and in each case one has made more inroads into popular culture than the other (minimalist music - a broad category, like serial music - sometimes uses popular rhythms and techniques - and has, I suspect some fans who are not otherwise into "classical music", and in fact is sometimes considered "crossover"; minimalist music is more likely to be heard in a film score than serial-technique music (can think of several examples of the former and fewer-- Frankel's Curse of the Werewolf, not many others- of the latter.)

More briefly, no, I'm pretty sure Carter knows what serial and minimalist music are more or less and the difference between them, and when he says one he means one, not both of them, m'kay? No calling on "authorities" for things they haven't even said.

[JollyRoger]

Yes, preserve us from academics who use serial techniques, like Dmitri Shostakovich and others.

I have a notion what you're trying to say as opposed to what you actually are saying, though I still disagree with all but the obvious part of it, quite possibly...

I have spent countless hours trying to enjoy Carter, Searle and Sessions and it has not borne fruit for me. This has no doubt given rise to my negativity regarding serialism. I wish I were perceptive and intellectual enough to "get it".
DSCH has always been a favorite of mine..but till now I was unaware of his affinity for serialism. And if the 4th symphony is an example, I am all for it.
But what is most likely that I don't even know what serialism is..and I'm beginning to care less..

[eschiss1]

I was responding to the use awhile back of "academics" as some sort of insult (this always has my head spinning when I can be bothered to care at all - which is a more impersonal subject for another thread, since I at that point immediately cease to care about the attitude of the person expressing the sentiment, for what little that is worth) - but in regards Shostakovich am thinking more of - for example- works like his 12th quartet, actually. (Or sections perhaps of his - remarkable to my ears and also quite good to my ears - 14th symphony...?) (With Weinberg, even more thoroughgoingly and obviously, his 12th quartet, but if I recall, the example there is not good, since Weinberg, unlike Shostakovich, was neither professor nor held official positions.)

But you hit on something when you mention the 4th symphony, since serial techniques refer to one thing, and atonality (or non-tonality) another- quite a few times in the same work, but quite a few times not.

Still haven't listened to the Jeffrey Jacob 3rd of 2009, as to Living Symphonists, but meaning to soon.

[semloh]

.......
More briefly, no, I'm pretty sure Carter knows what serial and minimalist music are more or less and the difference between them, and when he says one he means one, not both of them, m'kay? No calling on "authorities" for things they haven't even said.

Apologies, Eric! You are quite right. 

I was (mis)using the term 'serialism' to refer to the kind of repetitive compositions I associate with Philip Glass, whereas Carter uses the correct term, i.e. "minimalism". In any case it doesn;t alter the point of my quotation - i.e. Carter loathes repetitive compositions, and that I agree entirely with his views.

I really don't see a problem with serialism (correctly defined!) 

[eschiss1]

Got it
(I don't have a problem with all the minimalists myself- certainly not with Reich. That said, I can't continue responding to this specific thread, as I have no way to respond to its opening post as worded, now that I reread it, and hence no way to avoid drifting therefrom... )

[ttle]

Personal tastes apart, those who are interested in fairly traditional or tonal symphonies can still find some new ones coming up. For instance, from Slovenia, in the last twenty years: Alojz Ajdič's No. 3, Darijan Božič's No. 2, Maksimiljan Feguš's No. 1, Igor Krivokapič's No. 1 (I have not heard No. 2 yet), the late Dane Škerl's Nos. 7 and 8, Črt Sojar Voglar's No. 2 (not yet heard Nos. 1 & 3). From Latvia, in addition to Vasks's Nos. 2 and 3, Romualds Kalsons has turned to a kind of neo-tonal writing. From neighbouring Lithuania, Osvaldas Balakauskas and Onutė Narbutaitė are active major symphonists whose recent music is more challenging, but still very approachable. Serbia's Jugoslav Bošnjak has also composed a successful, immediately appealing Symphony-Passacaglia. And this is only from a few countries.

I would also recommend Thierry Pécou's "Symphonie du Jaguar".

[Paul May]

Been following Paul Wilkinson on twitter too. His updates are saying he has nearly finished it.  I can play some of his preludes for piano they are really good. Think there is some on YouTube.

[Christo]

Personal tastes apart, those who are interested in fairly traditional or tonal symphonies can still find some new ones coming up. For instance, from Slovenia, in the last twenty years: Alojz Ajdič's No. 3, Darijan Božič's No. 2, Maksimiljan Feguš's No. 1, Igor Krivokapič's No. 1 (I have not heard No. 2 yet), the late Dane Škerl's Nos. 7 and 8, Črt Sojar Voglar's No. 2 (not yet heard Nos. 1 & 3). From Latvia, in addition to Vasks's Nos. 2 and 3, Romualds Kalsons has turned to a kind of neo-tonal writing. From neighbouring Lithuania, Osvaldas Balakauskas and Onutė Narbutaitė are active major symphonists whose recent music is more challenging, but still very approachable. Serbia's Jugoslav Bošnjak has also composed a successful, immediately appealing Symphony-Passacaglia. And this is only from a few countries.

I would also recommend Thierry Pécou's "Symphonie du Jaguar".

Great post. I know Vasks, Kalsons, Balakauskas and Narbutaitė, but all the other names are new to me. So much to learn! 

[eschiss1]

Hrm. I've heard of but not heard Skerl...

[Christo]

Another new - for me - name on the symphonic front comes from New Zealand: Ross Harris. Naxos is going to release his recent (2006/2008) second and third symphonies. I don't think the symphony is dead in places like Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, New Zealand. 

[nigelkeay]

I don't think the symphony is dead in places like Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, New Zealand. 

I think I can throw a little light on why NZ happens to be mentioned here. During the 1980s the Auckland Philharmonia Orchestra (essentially a regional orchestra operating on a significantly smaller budget than the national orchestra the NZSO) was able to implement some progressive policies thanks to the General Manager of those years, Christopher Blake, being himself a composer. The orchestra systematically recorded onto CD works by local composers that had been performed in its Main Series concerts. Reading workshops took place where perhaps two days were devoted to reading through new works.
In 1990 a Composer-in-Residence scheme started up (12 month residency), the major work produced being presented in the Main Series Concert of the following year. It seems that so many works were being produced that the CD production couldn't keep up, although everything will certainly exist in the radio archives etc.

[Christo]

Great to learn, many thanks! I'll order for the Ross Harris disc with this great story in mind. 

[nigelkeay]

I just tracked down this page (it had moved on the Radio NZ Concert site); recordings in the Radio New Zealand archive recently brought to light in a program called "Resound". Symphonic and chamber music all mixed in here: http://www.radionz.co.nz/concert/audiofeatures/resound

[JollyRoger]

If you will listen to Lowell Leiberman's Symphony No. 2, you will see that the traditional symphony is far from dead.
At least this marvelous symphony makes me feel that way..
There is such an abundance of "music" today, things of real value get lost in all the noise..

[karelm]

If you will listen to Lowell Leiberman's Symphony No. 2, you will see that the traditional symphony is far from dead.
At least this marvelous symphony makes me feel that way..
There is such an abundance of "music" today, things of real value get lost in all the noise..

Interesting how perspectives differ.  I consider Leiberman's Symphony No. 2 a perfect example of the poor state of modern symphonies.  Though it is extremely tonal, this is absolutely 3rd rate composing with nothing original nor distinctive to say.  What do you think makes this worth hearing?  It reminds me of bad film music.