Stenhammar Gillet på Solhaug

Started by Alan Howe, Wednesday 15 June 2016, 22:43

Previous topic - Next topic

Alan Howe


M. Yaskovsky

What's it like? Wasn't Stenhammar called the Swedish Wagner?

Alan Howe

Yes, he was. Try following the above link which has audio excerpts.

kuula


Alan Howe

Mine's on order too. Couldn't resist the gorgeous-sounding audio excerpts any longer...

Paul Barasi

I've everything of Sten I could get my hands on (inc Tirfing, the Song, theatre music, above all the BiS box of symphonies & piano concertos). But  I wasn't sufficiently impressed with the excerpts to get this one, which sounds like Wagnerian pastiche of less than the usual standard. Doubtless others will get many hours of enjoyment from it.

Alan Howe


minacciosa

Gorgeous, and manifestly Swedish. It's not like his mature style, which I like even better. He turned his back on Wagnerian "excess". If you have not already, see his Serenade (a major work whose substance is belied by its title) and the Symphony No.2

Alan Howe


eschiss1

if you're unfamiliar with Stenhammar, I second those recommendations and add his last 4 string quartets. (Others would add his 2nd piano concerto but not yet me. It will grab me sometime, but not yet :( ). His 1907 choral rhapsody Midvinter (Op.24), too, with its hypnotic opening.
Some of my favorite music by Stenhammar is - like Gillet, I guess (haven't heard it, and not suggesting that Gillet is any better than the reception suggests, btw) - "derivative" too - but in the case of these other works, anyway (unlike Gillet, perhaps) the string quartets may be Beethovenian (and my own favorite, no.4, reminds me of the Grieg G minor quartet too), his only acknowledged symphony* may be Sibelian/Brucknerian at points, but the borrowings are made to serve the composer's vision. That the trio of the scherzo of no.4 sounds somewhat like that from Beethoven's Harp quartet (in general outline, form, etc.) is noticeable, similarly with the form of the 2nd part of the finale of his 3rd quartet and the first movement of Beethoven's Op.131 in some ways (even down to the theme of his finale, which is a bit like Beethoven's...) - but he does "Stenhammarish" things with them, has his own things in mind, in the important senses is not just being a student and a copy (and so it's fine by me that he realizes that originality is not an end in itself, either!)

Sorry about the only semi-informative rant.  I really do love what I know of his music (and thanks to a recent gift I have a new opportunity to hear more of it (and other things), which I intend to take full advantage of. I feel very lucky lately and happy. ... Anyway.)



*Op.34 in G minor, sometimes referred to against his wishes as his "2nd" symphony because he wrote an F major symphony beforehand which he tossed, though it's been resurrected and is enjoyable

Revilod

I'm a big fan of Stenhammar too and will be investigating this opera. For Stenhammar at his most Wagnerian, try the final pages of the F Major Symphony...a splendid piece which I'm sure Stenhammar rejected not at all because of the quality of its invention.

chill319

While we're praising Stenhammar, may I opine that performances led by Stig Westerberg are really worth seeking out? First and foremost Symphony 2 (Stockholm Philharmonic) and the Serenade (Swedish Radio Symphony Orchestra). One disc couples the latter with Piano Concerto 2, a work which can sound merely peculiar in some hands but which comes across powerfully and provocatively in the performance by Janos Solyom with the Munich Philharmonic under Westerberg.

The initial album release of Stenhammar's quartets several decades back convinced me at the time that his is a major cycle, and I have not changed my opinion since. What riches!

Alan Howe

The opera is pretty Wagnerian, but lighter, and equally obviously not by Wagner - if that makes sense. What it has is Stenhammar's typical generosity of spirit.