Messages

I have also thought about the Fifth Symphony – some sources mention "five symphonies" but I have never came across anything concrete.

One possibility is actually that by mistake (more or less), Maliszewski's contribution to the 1928 Schubert symphony competition might have been counted as "Symphony No. 5". Indeed, he wrote two movements for this (well-known, of course) competition, a Scherzo partially based on Schubert's sketches and a finale, i.e. he was one the composers who really tried a (sort of) completion of the Unfinished. They were finally labeled 'Scherzo and Overture in Honour of Schubert' and they are also included in this disc set (in particular the finale is an oddity which I find mildly amusing). It does not sound completely unreasonable to me that this is the work which is meant when some sources mention a Fifth Symphony but of course this is just a guess.

As the label is the same as in case of the Lauber symphonies, I would expect the CD to be available via jpc sooner or later.

I also played the disc some days ago without being too excited. The date of composition of the symphony is given as 1899–1912, however it seems that 1899, rev. 1912 is more adequate, in any case it was Kalafati's graduation piece from conservatory in 1899 and 1912 is the year in which it was revised (or at least the revision was completed). Indeed, it does sound like a graduation piece in places, in particular the first movement. I was surprised that it actually does not even sound too Russian in parts, once again in particular the first movement. However, in the later movements there are some elements of national romanticism indeed which might recall Glazunov in a watered-down manner. The MusicWeb review also compares it to Kalinnikov and besides the fact that the two composers were of about the same age, that's something I do not really understand – all in all, I can hardly hear Kalinnikov's subtle lyricism, melodic gift and orchestral colourfulness in this work, it's much more straightforward and less inspired. One exception might be the slow movement indeed, which I also consider to be still the finest one. However, all in all I was not too impressed, and I would agree the symphony is too long. Anyway, I am glad the piece was recorded as I am always happy to add one more late-Romantic Russian symphony to my collection if only to round up the picture. However it's nothing essential in my view.

When I began playing the Legend I initially thought it might be more interesting, the years in between are audible as the harmonic language is more advanced, for instance, moreover there are some details of orchestration which are new (like a piano in the orchestra). However, my first impression later cooled down since the piece is much too long and meanders for ages indeed. I wouldn't give much on the fact that it was awarded second place in the Schubert competition, the first place was awarded to Mikhail Chernov who is completely unknown today and I don't know of any other Russian composer to have participated (for sure there were 42 participants from Russia but so far I have not heard about any well-known name who contributed).

The Polonaise is much smaller in scale, a typical official and occasional piece, it's a nice listen, maybe also because it does not promise more than it fulfills.

The Merlin overture is included here:
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/Karl-Goldmark-1830-1915-Symphonie-Nr-1-L%E4ndliche-Hochzeit-op-26/hnum/1149823
I don't have this disc, however.

Yes indeed, the titles of the first and third movements do not make sense. It seems reasonable that it should be "bewegt" instead of "bericht" (there is a "Bericht" in German but that's a noun and means "report"). To clarify the issue, I had a look at Tobias Bröker's catalogue of 20th century violin concertos, and indeed, this is true. In fact, here the titles are given as

I. Leicht bewegt
II. Sehr langsam
III. Rhythmisch bewegt.

In fact, this piece is also included in the third box of Melodiya's Svetlanov edition, focusing on vocal-symphonic music. However I have to admit I did not give it a listen so far even if I have the set.

Maybe they just included his photo because it was a series about the Russian Five and Cui was part of them. Anyway, we cannot know for sure of course.

You are certainly right, Eric, but I might add two points:

1) Often – and up to some degree also in the course of this debate – the question is raised why Cui, as a member of the Group of Five, whose explicit aim was to create a distinctively Russian sounding music, wrote music in which it is typically hard to find right these Russian colours. This seems paradoxic, but the quote I supplied explains things a little. At least I guess it is less surprising to find no Russian sound in his music if we know he did not aim at doing so...

2) The other question raised in this context was why Cui was omitted from Svetlanov's recordings of music by the Russian Five. To this end, it is certainly a valid point to know that Cui is commonly not regarded as a great composer and I think it is very likely that Svetlanov agreed with this, too (knowing that he did record tons of other Russian music, including a good deal of stuff nobody else recorded – the Melodiya anthology which came out two or three years ago contains a total of 120 CDs).

Of course, you and others might enjoy his music nevertheless. In this sense, I certainly agree with Mark's statement.

I think we simply have to accept that Cui was not a particularly gifted composer, and I do not see much of a point in exploring his output on a systematical basis. My guess is that Svetlanov most probably have thought similarly, which is why he omitted Cui's music from his otherwise extensive recording activities. Cui's best works are said to be found in his art songs (at least is that what most sources claim – I don't know them and I am not even particularly interested in songs). As for the lack of Russian sound in his music, however, the following quote certainly explains a lot. It is taken from a letter to Felipe Pedrell written in French:

"Un sujet russe d'opéra m'irait pas du tout. Bien que russe, je suis d'origine mi-française, mi-lithuanienne et je n'ai pas le sens de la musique russe dans mes veines. ... C'est pourquoi à l'exception de mon premier opéra Le prisonnier du Caucase, tous les sujets de mes opéras sont et seront étrangers."

In other words, Cui did not even have the ambition to compose in a Russian sounding manner.

Your guess is perfectly right, Richard. The mp3 is simply mislabeled.

Eric, I am not sure where you got your information about Kelley's First from. To my best knowledge, his First is his Op. 15, subtitled "Gulliver: His Voyage to Lilliput", a work from 1900 whose key is sometimes given as F Major.

Just one correction: the conductor's name is certainly not Józefa Elsnera. This is actually the name of the Philharmonia – could be translated as Józef Elsner Philharmonia Opole, where Józef Elsner or also Joseph Elsner (1769–1854) was a composer of the pre-Chopin generation. As this link demonstrates:
http://cojestgrane24.wyborcza.pl/cjg24/Opole/1,30,102964,Uroczysty-koncert-z-okazji-Narodowego-Swieta-Niepo.html
the conductor's name is actually Przemysław Neumann.

For the moment, I would guess that it will reappear later this month. In the past months, jpc / CPO typically have been rather late with announcing their new releases. So I was surprised to see that they already announced their June (actually, late May) novelties (to which the Reinecke disc should belong – it is clearly not part of the May / late April batch) so early. Maybe it was an error or so. Anyway, as Alan got the CD, it must exist, and I tend to believe it will reappear once the next batch of new releases can be found on their website.

It should be noted that Sicmu now also uploaded the 'real' Munih recording, so that we have every reason to assume that the first recording he uploaded was conducted by Anton Nanut as initially stated.

Somebody must have an error at some point in case of this symphony, but I am sure that this one must be No. 17 indeed. Here are the arguments:

1) the announcement I cited,
2) the key: the MGG (German music encyclopedia) gives F Sharp Major as the key of the Seventh and G Major as the key of No. 17, and this one definitely ends in G Major,
3) the title: the symphony undoubtedly refers to 18th century music, and No. 17 is called "In preclassical forms", which fits perfectly,
4) the style: the other Cuclin works from around 1950 (No. 7 is from 1948) are more romantic in tone.

As for the work itself, I am afraid I agree with Alan. Cuclin is a kind of an oddity anyway in my view, and while I do collect his stuff it's more about curiosity than about the prospect of really discovering something substantial. However, his late works like Symphonies Nos. 17&20 are really a tough listen, and that's not because they would be complicated in any way...

In fact, this is a misattribution. The symphony from these YouTube videos is not Cuclin's Symphony No. 7, but his Symphony No. 17 "In preclassical forms" from 1965. I once got a broadcast recording of this symphony (again, just three movements, by the way) plus announcement which definitely clarified things. The title partly explains the neoclassical formulas Cuclin uses in this work (which, to be honest, I am not too fond of).