Messages

But I think we're getting close to submitting any printed notation to such software and having it produce a reliable, decent quality audio rendition without too much user input at all.

If you are saying generating reality-quality other than midi-quality performance, then there won't be miserable circumstances like Ulrich Leykam "conducting" literally his own "Bayreuth Digital Orchestra" to accompany Naxos-Marco Polo's S. Wagner Sonnenflammen production.

Ooff. I listened to some samples. It sounds like it would have been way more straightforward to hire an actual orchestra given the technical work involved. But I don't know what circumstances led to them performing the work in this arrangement.

It should be added that while orchestral music can be made to sound somewhat realistic via technology with some effort these days, not even AI can seem to fake good vocals, never mind operaic singing voices to any believable level yet.

There are various generative AI engines today that have no issue producing somewhat convincing vocals, or instrumental music for that matter. It's just that "classical" music has not been the focal point for the best efforts sofar; rather, those have been directed at other, more popular genres. As an example, I just asked for a "gothic song about bananas" on Suno and got this - frighteningly realistic. Also witnessing AI developments in my own field I am convinced that, with time (and money), this technology could make great strides very quickly.

As is the Violin Concerto/Symphonic Poem Le Ménétrier (The Minstrel) from 1911.

Most of it I find very attractive, but unfortunately d'Ollone's orchestral works are rather difficult to get performed because of his unfortunate choices (in hindsight) of genre. The Fantaisie is too short at 13 minutes (alas, don't get me started about the demise of the Konzertstück); the scènes lyriques, orchestral songs, cantatas and chorales are uncommon genres for a modern concert hall; at just under 20 minutes, the wonderful symphonic poem Les villes maudites is really too long for the overture slot but too short to be the major orchestral piece of the evening (not even counting the required choir). Le Ménétrier may the only work I know of his to have a realistic shot at revival in the concert halls. That's a pity, because a lot of his music is tuneful and driven, yet contemplative in a way somewhere between Pierné and Tournemire. Of course, there's also quite a lot of chamber music, which is all just wonderful.

I generally agree with what's being said here, but I do ask myself whether we - as a modern audience - are that well suited to judge this piece on its own merits. We simply lack experience with this subgenre of 19th-century theatrical music, which may sound very "trashy" to our ears. Hurwitz doesn't really help, because calling something "really a symphony" provokes comparison with what is a very different world of music; there was a very good reason why Suppé didn't want to do that and it goes well beyond the arguments mentioned by Hurwitz. Having said all that and liking Suppé's Fantasia more than (apparently) most of you do I still think it's hard to make the case that it's a major re-discovery. However, I do think it's an interesting piece.

His aesthetics is peculiar from time to time. He thought Pfitzner's PC, and by extension, all of his compositions are extremely boring.

Can't say I wholly disagree there, though.

Thanks, this sounds like a really interesting set; not least because they show a very clear musical evolution. However, that might even be more illustrated if everyone didn't keep forgetting about the other symphonies. After all, Enescu wrote nine of the things. 

Now, I sort of understand the reluctance about Bentoiu's completions of the E minor (1934) and D major (1941). But the neglect of the "Study symphonies" is more difficult to fathom. The fact that they were written when in he was his teens doesn't mean they've stopped being symphonies all of a sudden; the "study symphony" ephitet to justify ignoring them is even possibly even more moronic than talking about numbers "00" and "0" (Bruckner) or just assigning random symphony numbers to orchestral things even if they're not symphonies (Mendelssohn).

Allow me to revive this ancient thread. I have found another piece that employs the same five-note motif (CCCD#C) at the start, Hendrik Waelput's Pacification of Ghent cantata of 1876:

So now there are three pieces that contain this fragment, all from the French-Belgian tradition and written in 1876 (Waelput), 1884 (Jaëll) and 1891 (Hamerik). It's awfully close to the opening of Mozart's Requiem, but slightly different. I'd be grateful if anyone would be able determine where this comes from?

In a general sense, this thread strikes home for me professionally as well. I was trained as a historian in the early nineties. At that time, sources were a rare thing, something to treasure. Many historians, myself included, developed what might be called a "hamster mentality", just collecting everything you could because you didn't know whether you'd ever get the chance again – basically turning us into professional hoarders. 
Since then, a paradigmatic shift has come about because of the digital revolution. Instead of collectors we've become curators, selecting what we need from a vast forest of possibilities. Ironically, that comes with the same fear of overlooking that crucial bit of information that you really need. As a music collector, it still pains me to throw things away as much as it does as a historian.

Perhaps it's somewhat of an over-compensation of the "great slowing down" of the twentieth century. Still, although I like a first recording of a piece to keep within conventional limits I have no problems with subsequent ones being more experimental.

I like those too, but I'm glad there are others, which seemingly show a somewhat different approach.

The thing with Mahler is that no (or hardly any)one else conducted his symphonies for a fairly long time. He was no fringe figure as a conductor, but certainly not (yet) particularly broadly known as a composer outside of a few musical centres where people were able to see his performances for themselves. The three composers that you mention all existed in the direct personal orbit of Gustav Mahler himself, and as important as that circle and Vienna as a musical capital were, it wasn't the entire musical world. Mahler's present eminence in the concert hall has exaggerated his contemporary significance.

To be honest, I'm not pessimistic about symphonies at all. About he concert hall repertory perhaps, yes, but the issue isn't so much the audiences as the moving parts necessary to get music performed. From arrogant impresarios, via soloists unwilling or unable to study new music, to marketing people that remain desperately afraid to lose their dwindling subscription audiences - but refusing to engage with a new, more opportunistically concert-going public. I've met them all and have been part of one of these groups. It is the gigantic infrastructure of classical music that is threatening to bring it all down.

Both of Franck's recorded symphones are hugely enjoyable works; what they also share is a certain, almost muscular, confidence. 

Chronologically, the A major and Bb major symphonies are Franck's Symphonies No. 4 and 5. There seem to be various dates floating around, from the late 1850s (IMSLP) to 1882/1883 (German Wikipedia), and it is not entirely clear which one was written first. For me, the A major feels the more "senior" of the two, but of course that doesn't mean much. 

There are three earlier symphonies in A minor, G minor and B major written in the 1840s and 1850s but they are listed as "verschollen" (lost). Does anyone know more about them and how "lost" they are exactly? 

Amazon.de/.nl/.fr/.es however, are not. Personally, I'd wait until JPC gets it.

Oops! I see that Amazon.de does list the CD.

It should be added that Glazunov's status in Russian concert halls is much more solid, but those performances aren't listed on Bachtrack for ... obvious reasons. I'd say his best-known works west of Kaliningrad are probably the ballet Raymonda (which has seen a surprising number of performances of late) and the Alto Saxophone Concerto (also because of the scarcity of concert repertoire for that instrument).

Years ago, I was fortunate enough to witness an absolutely scorching performance of the Glaz 5 by the Netherlands Radio SO under Alexander Lazarev, and the audience's reaction was as euphoric as the one mentioned by Martin. That experience renewed my faith in people's ability to listen past the iron repertory, and it also showed that these are not risky pieces to program.

FWIW I think there's only so much further you can take the Berlioz-Liszt-Mahler conception of the symphony. There's probably a lot more life left in something rather more modest, but just as effective. I know which I favour...

That is why I think the efforts of composers such as Woyrsch, Larsson, Gram and others to get out of the corner Mahler c.s. painted themselves into by moving to smaller forms are so fascinating. The post-Mahlerian popularity of forms like the Sinfonia Brevis and Kammersinfonie might express the same desire.

All good points. I was mostly considering Mahler's influence on his direct contemporaries, to be honest; a few decades later it was obviously greater. 

Not sure about Sibelius, either. His introduction into the Germanic performance canon is a fairly recent one, if memory serves – his music was certainly more popular in the UK for a long time.