Koechlin Symphony No.1/etc.

[Alan Howe]

Do tell us what you think. At least the performance and sound seem good...

[Tapiola]

I'm happy to disagree with everyone else about Koechlin's Symphony No. 1. A beautiful, pensive, eloquent, even thought-provoking (an epithet that often comes to mind whenever I hear something by this composer) piece. I don't mind if it doesn't follow a formal symphonic structure/development, that's his own taking on the form after all (in this case it's an orchestration, though). His ear for orchestration and ecstatic harmonic language is second to none. And truth be told, he's a much more interesting composer than many others who are mentioned on this forum (sorry, I couldn't help myself).

[Alan Howe]

Actually, I'm genuinely glad that someone values the Koechlin so highly. Although I don't share this opinion at present, maybe the penny will drop for me at some point in the future...

[Mark Thomas]

Absolutely, no apology needed, it's always good to be challenged by different opinions.

[Ilja]

Having taken my time to inhale Koechlin's symphony, I've reversed my earlier rather negative view on the work (which was based on an older recording, and also quite some time ago). As Alan indicated, this is music that is about the journey, not the destination. And if it's aimless, that is by intention. For that reason alone, the comparison with Franck seems a bit off to me; if there is any prevailing influence in Koechlin's very individual musical language it's probably Fauré. Of course, that also makes it difficult to find one's orientation, and penetrate the structure of the music – and I can see how that may turn some people off it. However, the rich textures and, following Tapiola, "ecstatic harmonies" make it a rich listening experience nonetheless even if it is one that I at least need to be in the right mood for. Don't take this on if you're in a hurry, it does need full attention to be rightly appreciated.

[Ebubu]

I hesitated before buying, and I should have known better.

Before you buy, you always have the option to know whether you'll listen to it a second time...
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_lv1WdJ1SsiEBVTuVhs7DxMaJ4Xrryazac

[Alan Howe]

It's not always that simple. Sometimes curiosity can be piqued on first listening, only for one to be disappointed on subsequent hearings having actually bought the recording. But I take your point.

[Mark Thomas]

I've just listened to Koechlin's Seven Stars Symphony in the hope of a Road to Damascus moment, but I'm afraid that my reaction is the same as I had to the Symphony No.1. To be fair it does have a little more life to it, but Koechlin's mixture of heavy chromaticism, generally slow tempi and extremely lush orchestration is just not to my taste. As my mother would say: "I'm sure it's very nice if you like that sort of thing", but I'm afraid it's just not my cup of tea. 

[Ilja]

The chromaticism is not as pronounced in his early pieces, such as the symphonic poem A Loin (1900) or the suite from Les heures Persanes (by far my favorite piece of his, mostly because it does break the mould somewhat), but the slow tempi are mostly consistent throughout his works. I mean, Koechlin's Allegro con fuoco (e.g., the scherzo of the 1st symphony) could be another composer's Allegretto (or even Andante). But I also think Koechlin's very individual language can work against him: it's very marmite and if it doesn't "click", there's little you can do. And to be honest, even I can't alway suffer it.

[John Boyer]

[...] Koechlin's mixture of heavy chromaticism, generally slow tempi and extremely lush orchestration is just not to my taste. As my mother would say: "I'm sure it's very nice if you like that sort of thing", but I'm afraid it's just not my cup of tea. 

To paraphrase Abe Lincoln, "For those people who like that sort of symphony, I suppose it was the sort of symphony that those people would like."

But do you know the chamber music? I have a number of his chamber pieces for wind and piano which I think are quite lovely and are an excellent introduction to Koechlin.  Give them a try.

[eschiss1]

I doubt the distinction is only chamber vs. orchestral Koechlin as  something else, of course (consider that his first and second symphonies are - in the latter case mostly - orchestrations, again.)

[John Boyer]

Good point, but I think Koechlin benefits from the greater clarity of a chamber piece. Think of the difference in the sound picture of the orchestral works of Debussy versus his chamber works. They're clearly the same composer, but the chamber works take on a different quality absent the lush orchestral sound.

[eschiss1]

As a general thing, yes (I can vouch for one claim made for orchestration, as I recall I paid much less attention to what is now one of my very favorite works until I heard it arranged (years ago now though), just once even, for full string orchestra rather than its original for string quartet. Anyhow, I apologize for digressing from Koechlin.)

[eschiss1]

The conductor's name is more familiar than I thought; besides recording Dohnanyi's Veil of Pierrette (and other Dohnanyi works for Capriccio around 2020), and some other works in recent recordings she made a (freely available online) recording of Mayer's F minor symphony for SWR2.