I have just received an e-mail from Karlheinz Siessl who conducted the premiere of Rufinatscha's Symphony in C minor, now officially designated No.3, in Mals and then in Innsbruck last weekend. The work's non-string parts were reconstructed by composer Michael F. P. Huber, apparently to very authentic effect.
According to Mr Siessl, the finale sounded particularly sensational, being spirited and modern-sounding for its date (1846), and the whole piece took 53 minutes in performance - in other words, somewhere between Symphony No.4 (old No.5) and No.5 (old No.6).
Mr Siessl believes that this is Rufinatscha's most important work; if it is superior to his two later symphonies, then it sounds as though we could have a masterpiece of major proportions on our hands.
The CD is due out in autumn 2013.
Excellent news!
When you say "the CD", Alan, which recording company are you referring to? Chandos?
It's now two years since Vol.1 of the Chandos 'series' appeared. Back in April 2011,
you reported Ralph Couzens as saying that Vol.2 was due in 2012 and would include the Piano Concerto and Symphony 5. Do we know anything further? The 5th seems to be widely regarded as his 'masterpiece' and so this disc was the one I was ready to spend money on! ;D
If the Chandos plan was to work backwards through the symphonies (?), at the present rate we'd get the 3rd at the end of 2016 .... so let's hope this CD does appear in autumn 2013.
I confess that I know nothing of Rufinatscha, except that his music is well-regarded here at UC.
Symphony No.3 will be issued by the Tiroler Landesmuseen in Innsbruck. The performers will be the St Blasius Academy Orchestra under Karlheinz Siessl.
As for Chandos, all I know is that their Rufinatscha series is on hold.
Thanks for that clarification, Alan.
So, it's good news and bad news! Good that the 3rd is definitely being produced, and bad that Chandos have put their series on hold. :)
Good news about the Third, but Chandos' series "on hold"? That doesn't sound very promising. On hold for what reason, do you know, Alan?
I know nothing - unfortunately.
I have heard the performance of Rufinatscha's Symphony No. 3 on October 25.: It was an overwhelming experience! The development of the sonata form of the 1. movement is thrilling. The trio-part oft the 3. movement is a class of its own. The finale sounded particularly sensational, indeed: like a earworm. (It reminds me on the Scherzo of Schumann's Symphony D Minor, 1841) Only the 2. movement, maybe, is a little bit light with a too static metre and too trivial melody?
I do not agree with Mr Siessl, that this is Rufinatscha's most important work (I do believe his most important works are his Piano Lieder) – but I totally agree that this C Minor Symphony is his best Symphony! I believe it is also - and even more - due to Mr Michael F.P. Huber's mastership of orchestration, sense of tension and resolution in dynamics, and originality in varied form of flow in music. A masterpiece!
Yesterday in Austria there was a broadcasting with one hour or music by Rufinatscha (Lieder, Symphony No. 6 (under Seipenbusch) and chamber music). A concerto aria from the concerto last weak by the St Blasius Academy Orchestra under Karlheinz Siess for the very first time is included. There is a livestream to hear here one week long: http://oe1.orf.at/programm/321791 (http://oe1.orf.at/programm/321791)
(Some mistakes happened during the broadcasting and the information is confused and incomplete. >:( )
Thanks, a.b., for your report.
Perhaps you will let us know if there is a radio broadcast of the symphony at some point?
with pleasure! I hope the CD will come out earlier than autumn 2013! It is to be feared that there will be no radio broadcast before. :'(
I also hope, the Double-CD with (nearly) Complete Piano Lieder will be available before Christmas this year.
Pity the livestream broadcast is just snippets......
Jerry
The concerto aria "Der Schwur am Grabe der Mutter" (The oath at the grave of the mother[?]), sung by Andreas Mattersberger, Orchester der Akademie St. Blasius, Karlheinz Siessl, first performance in our time, is in full lenghts (07:02 min) :)
I take the opportunity to announce our future Rufinatscha recordings - with prospected dates of issue. All recordings will appear under the Label "musikmuseum" (the record label of the Tiroler Landesmuseen).
1) Rufinatscha Lieder - early February 2013.
2) Rufinatscha Symphony no. 3 & 3 concert arias - autumn 2013 or Jan 2014, depends on the financial resources. Money, money... donations welcome ;-)
My impression on the Symphony Nr 3, even more after listening to a preliminary version of the recording made on Nov 24/25, is largely the same as that of conductor Karlheinz Siessl: The c minor symphony is a capturing and very successful work with an almost Brucknerian final movement (reminding more of the later composer's Scherzi), and also the slow movement is well-balanced and melodious. Michael F. P. Huber has done an excellent job, the completion shows his typical handwriting, but it is very true to Rufinatscha's style. The first movement of no. 3 ist as monumental and full of grandeur as those of the later symphonies, but much more impressive and thrilling than the (sometimes dull, too long) 1st mov. of the 6th. I was worrying about some passages which seemed dull for me from the score in the 1st movement of no. 3, but the performance has brought them to life. The scherzo foreshadows that of the 6th, sometimes with direct borrowings.
I'm rubbing the hands in glee.
But I wonder, Alan, if you'll permit me to be an utter pest. Do you know anything more about that sad decision by Chandos? (Or at least can venture an intelligent guess?)
Did the first Chandos release fall deadborn from the record press and achieve only minimal sales, and in view of that the company has decided to make no further investment? Have they decided there is a far greater market for Tchaikovsky? Is the scheduled series of Rufinatscha merely 'on hold', or plain cancelled? Is Gianandrea Noseda too busy with other things? Are there any contractual reasons preventing another company having a go at, say, the chamber music? What does your crystal ball tell you?
There - I said I'd be a pest! But I'm sure all members would be especially grateful for any news (and hopefully not bad news).
Thanks for the update, Dr Gratl. We can't wait to hear the 3rd Symphony!
As for the Chandos project, I have no further news at all. All I know is that the recording of vol.2 - due to take place in the early summer of 2012 - was supposed to be being put off until 2013.
The description of Symphony No.3 is certainly mouthwatering and I really look forward to hearing it and the concert arias. Whilst it's certainly long I must take mild issue with Dr Gratl's characterisation of the first movement of No.6 as "sometimes dull, too long". To me it has all the monumental inevitability of, say, Schubert's Ninth or, indeed, something from Bruckner's canon.
I agree with Mark: the first movement of No.6 (5) is glorious.
QuoteTo me it has all the monumental inevitability of, say, Schubert's Ninth or, indeed, something from Bruckner's canon.
I couldn't agree more, Mark. It is a major piece of symphonic writing in the mould of Schubert's 9th symphony and definitely suggestive in parts of Bruckner. Quite a revelation when I heard it first. For me, at least, it certainly does not outstay its welcome.
You see, Dr Gratl: Rufinatscha has already persuaded us of his greatness!
Just to keep everyone informed: Rufinatscha's 3rd Symphony will be out soon-ish, so watch this space and we'll let you know the moment we have more precise details...
Very good news, Alan. Thanks for the update.
It's still not out, but progress has been made, I understand...
I don't suppose we have any more news about this recording!
This question is I hope appropriate to this subforum- will the edition of the score and/or parts be made available (for an appropriate fee, considering the amount of editing work involved, but in more than archival, e.g. commercial quantities) as well?
Gareth: I believe the delay is to do with preparing the coupling for the Symphony (songs).
Eric: I'm sorry, I don't know.
Thanks, Alan.
The coupling is now confirmed as three concert arias.
The project is now back on course - funding was apparently the issue, but this problem has recently been resolved.
Excellent news. Hurrah!
I've been busy working on the translation of the liner notes. With one section left to do, it is hoped that the official release date will not be too far away.
Is one of those concert arias, perhaps, the one originally mistaken for the F Major symphony?
No idea, Jim. There's no hint in the liner notes - after all, it would be a trifle embarrassing...
Oh, yeah. That. Well, are any of the 3 in F?
I don't know. Why not PM MusFerd?
The CD should be out in a couple of weeks. It's being manufactured as I write this...
Sorry to ask a silly question, but this would be a Chandos release right?
No, it'll be available from the Tyrolean State Museum in Innsbruck. Apologies for the lack of clarity. Further details to follow, although I imagine it'll be listed at jpc.de or Amazon.de.
One more question - Are we to assume / conclude that the Chandos won't continue the series after Vol. 1 !?!
I'm afraid I have no news at all. Sorry. Why not try emailing Ralph Couzens at Chandos?>>>
enquiries@chandos.net
Dear JimL, the concert aria in F which was mistaken for a symphony will not be on the CD, since the scoring has two bassetthorns - quite unusual for the 1830s and too expensive for our performance in 2012.
Hi Herr Gratl,
Please do keep us informed about the release of the CD - including where potential purchasers might be able to buy it.
Thanks!
My dear Herr Gratl! Why is it so difficult to find 2 basset horns? I would imagine many clarinetists have one, as performances of the 2 Mendelssohn Konzertstüke for clarinet, basset horn and orchestra are to be found all over the place on YouTube.
My dear Jim: Herr Gratl said it would be too expensive, not too difficult!
Hmmmmm. Why would it cost any more to pay a clarinetist to play a basset horn? Do oboists get extra pay for playing Haydn's Philosopher Symphony?
I think we should simply take Herr Gratl at his word. If he says it was too expensive, it was too expensive. Now let's move on...
The CD has now been manufactured. I hope to be able to give details of availability as soon as I hear back from Dr Gratl.
Dear Rufinatscha fans, the CD with the 3rd Symphony (recon. Huber) and the 3 Concert arias is out now - it is available in the Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum; please contact my colleague Silvia Eller:
s.eller@tiroler-landesmuseen.at
Thank you for the information, Dr Gratl. We are certainly looking forward to hearing the CD!
I should add that the Tyrolean State Museum Shop website is currently under construction - hence the need in the first instance to contact Dr Gratl's colleague Silvia Eller by email if you are interested in purchasing the new CD.
My copy of the CD arrived today and I've been playing the Symphony all afternoon. It's a big piece (47+ mins.) and quite different in feel from the symphonies in B minor (4, previously 5) and D major (5, previously 6) which came after it. This may have something to do with the reconstruction work done by Michael Huber (which includes some very daring-sounding writing for brass), although it is clearly intended to be a more dramatic, even strident-sounding piece than its successors. So now we have a truly original trio of works: No.3 in C minor (could be titled 'Dramatic'), No.4 in B minor (could be titled 'Elegiac') and No.5 in D major (could be titled 'The Great D major').
I can't think of anything like these three great symphonies - each one so different from the other two - except to say that they breath the same (Austrian) air as Bruckner. As for No.3 in particular, it's an extraordinary work for 1846, i.e. considering Bruckner 1 was still twenty years in the future. If Bruckner was a one-off, so too was Rufinatscha in the generation before him. I await other opinions with keen interest...
From what this sounds like, I can hope that some other widely (relatively...)-distributed label (... cpo?) will eventually consider recording his surviving chamber and orchestral (and other) music (on separately-available CDs and/or downloads, if it please them :), for their advantage and that of prospective musiclovers and radio/TV/whatever outlets etc., libraries, whathave. (Our local library has some cpo discs in some of their rather good multiseries of unusual music, but rarely their entire 6-odd-CD sets, e.g.))
I can hardly wait for my copy to arrive. Rufinatscha has been such a revelation. A true Unsung great.
I should explain that the new recording is very much HIP-influenced, with a small-ish body of strings playing without a lot of vibrato. This, to my mind, increases the stridency of an already decidedly dramatic piece, especially in the first and last movements, and makes the third movement scherzo sound very rustic indeed. While appreciating greatly the (very real) achievement of the orchestra here, I'd now like to hear a full symphony orchestra take on the work...
The CD is now available online at half price (EUR 9 instead of EUR 18):
http://shop.tiroler-landesmuseen.at/cd-dvd/musikmuseum/musikmuseum21.html (http://shop.tiroler-landesmuseen.at/cd-dvd/musikmuseum/musikmuseum21.html)
Have just placed my order! Looking forward to receiving it as soon as possible. It would be nice to receive it before Christmas but if it doesn't arrive before Christmas it will be a lovely treat after the festivities!
Great. We'll look forward to your assessment, Dennis.
Have also just placed my order! One disappointment though having spent some time going through the Tiroler Landsmuseum site, is that the CD's of chamber music by Rufinatscha (as well as many other titles) that were listed on their old site, have now disappeared. Of particular note was the recording of the piano quartets, which I found to be most rewarding. Also, only one of the two Netzer symphonies volumes appears to be still available?
It's a shame, of course. However, we must remember that we're not dealing with a major recording label here, but what is essentially a cottage industry, albeit an important one, initiated by scholars at the Innsbruck museum. I assume that only small numbers of the CDs were manufactured in the first place.
The chamber music CDs, including the piano quartets, were still available in Innsbruck in July. I see that Records International still offers them for sale, also the two volumes of Netzer symphonies.
https://www.recordsinternational.com/cd.php?cd=06M046 (https://www.recordsinternational.com/cd.php?cd=06M046)
Records International offers things on an as-available basis, though- they're a distributor/whathave - listing there isn't guarantee of existence, unless I'm mistaken. Though things are worth a try, and placement of an order there would help both of them out (I admit I've only bought one or two items from RI myself so far, if memory serves- requested and received as gifts to be more specific...)
When I visited the museum shop in mid September, all the Klingende Kostbarkeiten and the other CDs were still in stock as far as I remember, so the ones that appear to be missing now may simply not have made it to the new website (yet, one hopes) for some reason. I too couldn't resist placing my order for the new Rufinatscha disc and have added the Symphonic Works by Tschiderer for good measure ( and for half price :D)
Dear Wheesht, you are right, my colleagues are working hard to update our webshop, which means that in the end all our CDs should be included. We are sorry - not only our shop, but the whole website is under construction at the moment.
Thanks, Dr Gratl. That's good to know.
As is so often the case, Alan has ably summarised the pros and cons of this important release, which I've now heard a few times. Like its two successors, Rufinatscha's Third Symphony serves to remind us what a significant voice this unknown Tyrolean could have become, had he been better known. It is a masterful, serious piece of composition, the outer movements (and particularly the splendid finale) being particularly impressive. Rufinatscha chooses his material with care and gives his structures plenty of time to develop, although they are never over-long or diffuse. The slow movement, which comes second, and the rather bucolic scherzo are perhaps not quite up to the standard of their counterparts in the Fourth or Fifth, but that's setting the bar rather high, and the symphony overall is a very fine piece of work. Although the scoring itself has many reminders of late Schubert, the bones of the work are much more forward-looking - there are clear harbingers of Bruckner in the sheer scale of Rufinatscha's conception for example. Dr Gratl's booklet notes, ably translated by Alan himself, quote at length from a fascinating contemporary review of the Third. The author clearly regarded Rufinatscha as a reformer and something of a conservative revolutionary. He mentions a Berliozian idée fixe, although I have yet to identify it. Michael Huber's modern realisation of the score (only the original string parts are extant) strikes me as completely idiomatic and convincing. He has clearly studied Rufinatscha's other orchestral works minutely.
Lest they be forgotten, the three concert arias, which total just over half an hour, are no mere make-weights, and are almost as substantial and worthwhile discoveries as the Symphony.
Although they in no way devalue the importance of this CD, I do have some small misgivings about the recording itself. The combination of a restricted acoustic, and a smallish orchestra with strings playing with minimum vibrato, does indeed make the work sound thinner, and so more strident, than I suspect it should. If the Third could be treated to the sort of performance and recording that Chandos afforded the Fifth, then I am sure that many more beauties and dark corners hidden in this performance would be revealed. That's not to denigrate either producers or performers here, though, who hardly have the resources of a major label. I should also say that two of the concert arias feature a soprano with a very distinctive voice, which may not be to everyone's taste.
Overall though, we must be hugely grateful to the Tiroler Landesmuseen for seeing through this project to record all of Rufinatscha's symphonies. What talent the man had, and how shameful was the neglect of it by his contemporaries.
I am looking forward with anticipation for my copy to arrive! - and, am pleased that the Tiroler Landsmuseum's other CD's have not disappeared, as I am sure that there are still some titles missing in my collection!
Thank you, Mark, for your review. I concur with (almost) every word. My only quibble would with the notion that the two inner movements are less outstanding than those in Symphonies 4 or 5. I believe that a larger orchestra and a more generous acoustic would allow for more sheer beauty - as well as more light and shade - to come through.
Listening again, the slow movement of No.3 seems to me to alternate between sections of stunning lyrical beauty and others of immense, almost crushing power. Some sonorities hark back to Beethoven (9?), others look forward to Bruckner. This is astonishing music. The unbuttoned, rustic scherzo, by contrast, stands somewhere between Schubert (9) and Mahler. Extraordinary. Of course, I imagine neither Bruckner nor Mahler knew Rufinatscha, so there must just have been something in the (compositional) water.
By the way: this is often music of an identifiably outdoor Austrian stamp. Of Mendelssohn/Schumann there is not a trace. Still less does Rufinatscha point forward to Brahms.
Unless Julius Epstein knew his teacher's works (wholly possible?) and played some for -his- pupil Mahler (... could be. Don't know if any biography of Mahler has ever mentioned anything like this, though.)
I'll clearly have to listen again with greater attention to the middle movements, Alan, to see if I hear what you hear. Don't get me wrong, though, I wasn't saying that I thought them unremarkable, just that I didn't think them quite as remarkable as the outer movements, or their equivalents in his two final symphonies.
I can see why the first and fourth movements would grab the attention of anyone listening to this music. The middle movements are surely intended to offer a contrast to the titanic goings-on which open and and close the work.
I'm now fully in the grip of this magnificent music. Listening to it alongside other (sung) symphonies of the same period only enhances its stature, originality and grandeur.
I have listened several times to this symphony and earlier today listened to it again and jotted down my thoughts and feelings on each movement. Before passing on my comments, I would like to say the following. I already had three Rufi symphonies - symphonies 1 , 5 (now 4) and 6 (now 5) all purchased from Tiroler-Landesmuseen of course. I bought the CDs mainly because of the glowing praise these works received on UC! Upon receiving the earlier CDs, I listened to the music but have to confess that initially I didn't "get" the music. Indeed, it took me several listens before I became familiar with the music and then become far fonder of this composer! With symphony no 3 however, from the very first time I listened to it, I was completely and utterly taken with the music! The opening movement grabbed my attention immediately and was really thrilling! My attention and enjoyment never waned through movements 2, 3 and 4, with its triumphant and totally satisfying conclusion. It is almost self-evident that IMHO this symphony is, of the 4 Rufi symphonies I have, my favourite!(and perhaps I might go so far as to say Rufinatscha's best symphony - I may have to revise my opinion however when my CD of Symphony no 2 turns up!) As I listened to this symphony again, I wrote down my comments and here they are. Movement 1 : grand, big dramatic opening , air of expectancy, a lot of tension, strong sense of forward propulsion, big climaxes, leading to a contrasting quiet conclusion. This movement grabbed me from the very first note and kept me enthralled through the entire movement! Movement 2 : very strong and enjoyable contrast to previous movement, hesitant, questioning, beautifully and delicately scored, less dramatic than movt 1 but still with moments of drama, passages of limpid beauty, some gorgeous writing for the strings, with an impressive conclusion, combining feelings of both hesitancy and delicacy. Movement 3 : a joyous, dance-like movement, delightfully scored, firstly with slowing down of the music, then becoming more lyrical with almost a pastoral feel to the music, beautiful writing for the woodwinds (loved the flute trills!), then a more relaxed feel to the music before building up again and culminating with a very satisfying conclusion. Movement 4 : very dramatic opening, recalling the drama of the opening movement, draws the listener in immediately, the music then becomes calmer and more relaxed, although the drama is never far away, strongly insistent forward propulsion of the music takes over with a pronounced rhythmic drive combined with imaginative scoring, slowing down then followed by crescendos, with the music constantly developing and evolving all the while, moments of relaxation but always followed by high drama, leading to a triumphant conclusion! As is obvious by my comments, I am hugely impressed by this symphony. I can see why some members have stated that the opening and closing movements, both hugely dramatic, tend to bookend the 2 inner movements and for that reason tend to overshadow the 2 middle movements. This not my opinion however as I believe the 2 inner movements provide an effective, very satisfying foil to the opening and closing movements. As far as I am concerned, this is a marvellous, thrilling and hugely enjoyable symphony. If you don't already have it, buy it!!!!
That's a really helpful description, Dennis. Thanks so much for taking the time to write it all down and share it with us. I'm really glad too that you have been taken by the music to the same degree as me. I can't get it out of my head at all...
Yes, indeed, thank you, Dennis. You certainly have a refined ability to describe music.
Find postings very helpful. Thank you! What I miss, though, is some appreciation of Mr Huber´s reconstructive work.
Appraising the "flute trills in the scherzo" is actually complemeting Mr Huber´s creativity; same goes for those clarinette interjections and timpani accents.
Or take the last movement, where Michael FP Huber in the horn passage creates a link with the 1st movement, something Rufinatscha wouldn´t have done. So, maybe hats off to Mr Huber?
Best
UED
The answer is simple: of course, there's bound to be a large 'Huber element' in such a major reconstruction. However, I still find the overall effect to be essentially faithful to Rufinatscha when compared to his other symphonies. Beyond that, we need an expert to judge...
Don't be so sure Rufinatscha "wouldn't have done" anything. There are some indications of thematic/motivic linkages in both the 4th and 5th symphonies. The 5th, in particular has a "motto" theme cyclically running through it in 3 of the 4 movements. It first appears in the slow introduction of the first movement, becomes an integral part of the second subject in that movement, and reappears in both the slow movement and at the very end of the finale. In the 4th symphony there is definitely a linkage between the second subject of the slow movement and the second theme of the finale, IIRC.
I think the 'Huberisms' would mainly be to do with orchestral colour rather than themes or structure.
I was wondering whether anyone else has ordered the CD...? Any further opinions?
I have listened to this work five times now and am enormously impressed. It is a major composition by anyone's standards and places Rufinatscha IMHO firmly in the frontline of 19th century symphonists. The symphonic architecture is highly accomplished without in any way being "academic". More than ever it illustrates the line between Schubert and Bruckner. This is music of high seriousness with its roots firmly in Beethoven but blossoming into a distinctive individual voice.
Mr Huber's reconstruction strikes me as sensitive and, as far as one can be certain in such matters, probably pretty faithful to the composer's intentions. I now long to hear a performance by one of the big professional orchestras - not that the Akadamie St Blasius are less than professional or committed, but the music really demands a bigger, and dare I say "sleeker" sound. I have only one criticism of the playing and that is that, to my ears at least, the Trio of the 3rd movt lacks charm, especially since Mr Huber has produced some delicious passages for the woodwind.
The three arias are also very fine and a valuable addition to the catalogue of this composer's recorded work.
QuoteI have listened to this work five times now and am enormously impressed. It is a major composition by anyone's standards and places Rufinatscha IMHO firmly in the frontline of 19th century symphonists.
It's good to have another view - and such a positive one at that. Thanks, Gareth. Now to get the piece recorded by a bigger orchestra in a more flattering acoustic...
I ordered all the Rufinatscha discs from the museum shop last week and am eagerly awaiting the parcel!
And the parcel arrived yesterday - hope to listen to some of these possibly over the weekend! :)
I understand that Michael Huber had only heard symphonies 1, 2 and 4 (5) before completing his work on the 3rd. He was told that Symphony No.4 (5) would probably be the closest to No.3 in terms of style. Rufinatscha's orchestral style wasn't hard to grasp (he wasn't an innovator like Berlioz), so faithful orchestration wasn't too difficult to achieve. The only liberty he allowed himself was in the music given to the trumpets – which involves chromatic writing that Rufinatscha couldn't have envisaged. However, he did decide on a more brilliant sound overall – as well as composing extra counterpoint for the development sections of the outer movements and cross-references between movements.
The biggest problem he faced was the obvious one: how to fill in the places where the strings weren't playing. Apparently features such as the trills in the scherzo/trio were entirely his idea - as were the timpani strokes. In the second movement (from 1:35) the wind/brass parts had to be made up from scratch as the strings are silent there and are supposed to sound like Bruckner.
Apparently Herr Huber only recently realised that Rufinatscha used the same theme in the finale of both the 3rd and 4th symphonies!
Interesting...
Quite fascinating. He really has done a convincing job. It would be a very welcome development if he were to be commissioned to orchestrate the three orphaned movements of the unfinished symphony. Any chance of that?
We may hope...
Further thoughts on Rufinatscha:
1. He fills the gap between Schubert and Bruckner – perhaps between Mendelssohn/Schumann and Bruckner because his style reminds us more of Mendelssohn/Schumann than of Schubert. Comparisons could also be made with Robert Volkmann.
2. He couldn't quite free himself from the influence of Beethoven - which we can hear in the first movement of the 3rd Symphony. He's at his best when he remembers his Tyrolean roots and doesn't try to compose under the spell of Beethoven – e.g. the Scherzo of Symphony No.3. The slow movement unfortunately lacks the development technique of Beethoven or Bruckner. The finale is interesting because rhythm is made the determining feature of the music.
3. What his symphonies lack is the sense of resolution of a Beethoven finale – not one finale resolves into the major, so the listener is left feeling unsatisfied because the music feels somewhat oppressive. In this respect he could have learned something from Mendelssohn 3 or Schumann 4.
4. As for his stature – point 3 may be negative, but he is an extremely interesting symphonist: conservative, but very forward-looking in his best moments, e.g. the Scherzo of Symphony No.4 (5) is very close to Bruckner. The slow movements of Nos. 2, 4 (5) and 5 (6) have something of Bruckner's solemnity. He also lacks the ability to develop melody convincingly – much sounds 'academic'. Perhaps he should have been more daring.
5. Rufinatscha is more progressive in his piano sonatas and songs. Perhaps his piano sonatas, if orchestrated, would give us a taste of the Rufinatscha we would really like to hear!
What do forum members think?
"not one finale resolves into the major"-
speaking subjectively this would fail to bother me at all, done right. (Several other B minor symphonies come to mind as having memorable, even stunning, endings in the minor- Tchaikovski 6, Herrmann 2, perhaps Gliere 3, others certainly...) Must listen to all of symphony 4/5/B minor (I've, well, erm, cheated and listened to some of it as uploaded/posted on YouTube. Indeed sounds wonderful and remarkable, what I've heard. If/when I have the funds, etc., etc. etc., I hope to purchase some of those recordings...)
This doesn't bother me either, Eric. Indeed, it seems to me to be one of the most distinctive and novel-sounding features of Rufinatscha's symphonies.
Eric: I think the following points (submitted to me) might be relevant in response:
1. A great symphony must exhibit proper dramatic development overall – which Rufinatscha's symphonies do not.
2. There is no valid comparison with Tchaikovsky 6 or Glière 3. The former, for example, embodies a developing drama throughout whereas, for example Rufinatscha's 4th (B minor) does not. The Glière is a programme symphony – quite a different animal.
3. It may be that Rufinatscha was too introverted or modest a character to be able to give his emotions free rein in music – especially in comparison to, say, Berlioz or Schumann who packed everything into their music.
4. Significantly, Rufinatcha's last surviving composition – the Andante in A major – shows no sign of the poverty, bitterness or illness of his final years. It's calm and magical: no sign of bitterness or struggle at all.
The most interesting point is this question of a perceived lack of development in Rufinatscha's symphonies. The impression, I suppose, is of a mood which doesn't really change over the course of an entire work.
For me, though, this is part of the fascination: there is a dogged solemnity which (especially in Symphonies 3, 4 and 5) characterises these works throughout as no other. There may not be the sense of 'release' typical of other symphonists, but there is, by way of compensation, the feeling that struggles aren't necessarily so easily overcome...
Maybe Robert Hermann's 2nd might be the closest point of contact, given those descriptions (relatively, relatively) and given that I really, really like that B minor symphony too (and find it sufficiently, minatorily powerful that I can't listen to it more than once-a-while, I think - thanks, inter alia, to Mr. Fifield, for directing such a fine and striking performance thereof...) - my interest is piqued.
I do wish more of his public-domain (which would be most of his 1st edition) scores survived that could be perused and perhaps digitized for consideration, and perhaps wider distribution of e.g. his chamber works, etc. ... - well, I should say that they do, to my knowledge, but Swiss libraries hold on to them closer-to-the-vest than some other places do...)
I had been wondering why the recording of Symphony No.3 turned out to be some six minutes shorter than the first performance, the length of which was reported by the conductor, Karlheinz Siessl, as 53 minutes. Apparently the first movement exposition repeat plus a few transitional bars have been left out of the recording.
Another reason for a second recording...?
Some further points have been made to me about Rufinatscha:
1. Style: not yet Brucknerian or Wagnerian, but going in that direction. Also some influences from Mendelssohn and Schumann. As a symphonist, the starting-point is Beethoven, with a Schubertian sense of scale, Schumannesque expressivity and some Brucknerian features. His mastery of orchestral colour is in advance of Schumann, although Schumann is more original.
2. Character: little is known about the composer himself, but it seems he must have been very ambitious, otherwise he wouldn't have found his way to the sophistication of Vienna from provincial Innsbruck. He certainly made a name for himself around the time the 3rd Symphony was written and performed (1846). He would seem to have been a stubborn individual because he remained true to his predominantly conservative style throughout his life. Later he probably felt embittered at being left behind by musical fashion.
3. Comparisons are unavoidable. Rufinatscha may not be genius of the stature of his famous contemporaries, but his rediscovery is thoroughly justified.
For those who haven't heard the music yet, try these audio samples (Symphony No.3 = tracks 1 to 4):
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/johann-rufinatscha-symphonie-nr-3-c-moll/hnum/6808869 (https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/johann-rufinatscha-symphonie-nr-3-c-moll/hnum/6808869)
Down to earth with an almighty bump...
http://musicweb-international.com/classrev/2016/Jul/Rufinatscha_sy3_CD13020.htm (http://musicweb-international.com/classrev/2016/Jul/Rufinatscha_sy3_CD13020.htm)
>:(
All that verbiage on the reviewer's part for "context" and no mention of Rufinatscha's own pupils, but maybe he's never heard of Brüll. Well, side issue.
I enjoy reading a negative review when I am in the mood and I clicked on the link hoping to get a nice assortment of well crafted sarcasms and incisively worded put downs.
No such luck. This writing is as dull as its writer suggests Rufinatscha's music is. The composer is bad, the orchestra is bad, the conductor is bad, the recording is bad, the sound is bad, the instrumentation* is terrible. (The reviewer admits as discreetly as he can manage that the singers are ok).
I have no familiarity with Rufinatscha's music and maybe it is dull (come to think of it: The soundbites don't suggest it is, but it is hard to extrapolate from 30 seconds to a 15 minute movement). The probability is rather low that a CD from a source with a good reputation would be this bad.
It seems like a good idea to introduce a little known composer in a review of this kind, but the "biography" supplied here is excessively long. It also suffers from the sneer that the reviewer sees fit to display throughout his work (as monotonously as he says the music is). It seems that Rufinatscha couldn't even manage his own finances and was generally a looser. (Mozart messed up his private life at least as bad BTW). And somehow a connection is suggested to his alleged lack of success as a composer. If the music were bad and Rufinatscha had been highly successful making money would that surprise the reviewer?
Not knowing the recording I still think that string parts are simply not enough to "reconstruct" a symphony (unless the composer is as bad as the reviewer here suggests and does instrumentation by having everybody playing at all times--something easily disproved by the soundbites). The work should almost be called "composed by Mr. Huber based on the string parts by Rufinatscha". The case is quite different from reconstructing a symphony from a piano reduction: Every leading voice will be represented in the reduction (in some cases even with hints at the instrumentation) while wind or brass solos are missing completely from the string parts and need to be composed fresh to fit the harmonic and rhythmic frame provided by the source. I'd think it would be wiser to record a piece with more complete material.
*The reviewer knows that the instrumentation is largely not by Rufinatscha. Yet he manages to criticize Rufinatscha for it and at the same time to say that Huber managed to reproduce Rufinatscha's (bad) style of instrumentation. Even though he admits early in the review that he had heard Rufinatscha once before in his life and didn't pay attention because he was bored. Remarkable.
Seems to be a review by a person who came in prepared to hate the music but with the hypocritical self-assurance that "he could evaluate any obscure composer on first hearing with sympathetic ears". His constant warnings regarding the dreariness of the music is just dreary in itself. He claims the booklet was written by a Rufinatscha enthusiast - Well the review, in my opinion, was by a definite Rufinatscha Non-enthusiast.
These kind of unwarranted negative reviews are the things that prevent unsung music from getting a wider hearing. May be someone from this forum should write a counter review. Musicweb-International does publish 2 or more reviews of many releases.
I just find it incomprehensible that a critic would hate this wonderful music.
There are a lot of close-minded people out there. Dear Alan, why don't you write the counter review?
This review strikes me as typical of a young man very pleased with himself and determined to make his mark as a reviewer. It has all the brash discourtesy and sneering arrogance of youth. A very poor imitation of Bernard Shaw at his most trenchant - but Shaw, of course, was an accomplished musical reviewer and writer and managed to be amusing as well, something which Mr Stevenson (Bob) assuredly is not. This review is as worthless and empty as its writer (absurdly) declares Rufinatscha's music to be. I note that contributors to this forum have already shown how easy it is to highlight the many flaws in this complacent trash.
I haven't heard the reconstruction of the 3rd symphony yet and won't say one thing or another. I'll note that another reviewer with a similar reaction to the release who'd heard more of his music, and who knew that this is the (probably) last entry in the label's complete cycle, would more likely have written a more compact review that, even if about the same in content, would have noted that this disc might be more for the completist- that someone wanting to hear this composer closer to his best should hear symphony in D (#6 it says, actually 5) on Chandos, or the symphony in B minor on the Tyrol museum label...
I post to the MW message board way too often, but maybe someone else wants to say -something- polite...
Reminds me of an old friend of mine who never could wait to hear what was going to come out of his own mouth next......
Quotewhy don't you write the counter review?
I'm too close to the project to be suitably objective, I'm afraid.
Personally, I really like this recording! Must give it another spin.
I've had this recording sitting on the back burner for a long time and having read the MWI review, it was time to put it on. Well...it is no masterpiece regardless of the booklet writer's opinion. Just what it is I don't know - there is no way that this reconstructed work is "close" to the original. There's a lot of odd sounding wind writing that seems really out of place. Trombones in the 3rd movement. The trumpet blasts away in the first movement with no sense of blend. It's hard to accept that with only the five string parts extant, that a reasonable construction of the whole by adding at least 16 other wind and timpani parts can be authentic. I may be wrong. What really would have helped is to trim the length of the whole thing - the outer movements are way too long for their meagre material.
The recorded sound is no help - it's a very raw, edgy sound. The orchestra string section is small, which always results in that thin, wiry sound. No Vienna Philharmonic here. The playing wasn't terrible at all. The winds are in tune, and so are the few strings. But the conducting just seems so heavy handed at times.
Nonetheless, I'm glad to have it and that I've heard it. Great, undiscovered masterpiece? Not a chance, but worth a listen, even if it is echt-Rufinatscha.
The woodwind and brass section definitely sound at odds with the strings. Add to this the whole mood of the piece is very sombre - one has to prepare before listening to this offspring of Rufinatscha. Most of us are enthralled by the sound-world of his Symphony No. 5 in D that this switch to a brooding C minor No. 3 is sort of like a sudden jump from a preppy Mozart Concerto to Rachmaninoff's Isle of the dead [apologies for this sort of layman's example]. The reviewer's total dismissal of this piece and tone is what has upset so many of us :D.
I added reverberation to the recording via Audacity and found the sound greatly improved!!
Don't know about Audacity, but I did run it thru the Surround Sound system with an setting to simulate different concert halls, and the added space and reverb really did make it sound better.
A friend was over today and we gave the symphony a listen and he had a nice idea. Take some other obscure symphony for which we have all the parts and give the arranger for the Rufinatscha only the 5 string parts and ask him to complete the symphony. Then compare it to the original and then we'll know if it's really possible to render an accurate, or close, version with only 33% of the score.
Perhaps not a positive review, but neither is it a very well-written one. If I had two thousand words to spend (which on the internet one really should do sparingly) more of it might concern the performance and sonics. I have great sympathy for MusicWeb (and even published on the site), but it is fairly clear that they are in need of a clearer editorial line (and, honestly, a new web site). Despite never having been a particular fan of Rufinatscha's music, I'd hate the Tyrolean Museum to be influenced by this.
Oh, I'm sure that our Innsbruck friends won't be deflected from their promotion of Rufinatscha's music. They believe in him! As do I...
MusicWeb makes amends:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2016/Aug/Rufinatscha_sy3_CD13020.htm (http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2016/Aug/Rufinatscha_sy3_CD13020.htm)
Many thanks to the perceptive reviewer!
That's more like it. A very even-handed review.
Agreed. Someone who is listening properly!
And it is good to see someone I can agree with regarding the respective merits of the two recordings of the Sixth/Fifth.
I can't help but comment on Ilja's well-chosen footnote:
- By comparing and scaling these great musicians you are diminishing art itself. Every artist has its own mind, sensibility and technique which gives us varieties and choices. Please do not make art into a competition: it is insulting to wonderful composers and artists - Anonymous YT commenter
The ABC classical music station has held competitions for every type of composition, and even now is running one for 'best classical music for Rio Olympics'! Crikey! [thanks - winge over]
Love Rufinatscha, and insufficiently discriminating to mind which recording!
Hear hear!
And yet, life's too short to listen closely to _all_ the art music that's been recorded. For help selecting I particularly look for advocates, those who have found a personal connection to particular works and composers. Time and again this forum has proven a valuable resource. Thanks to all.
Well, mes amis, I have finally heard all of the extant Rufinatscha symphonies, and I must say that after my initial impressions, he has been knocked down a peg in my estimation (although I still consider him an estimable composer). I know that it was standard in earlier periods of music (particularly the Baroque) to recycle material, but the symphonies after No. 3 seem to be chock full of ideas that Rufinatscha came up with in his 2nd and 3rd. Cases in point: the motive from which the principal theme of the first movement of the 2nd Symphony is derived is reused in the finale of the 4th (formerly 5th) Symphony, and the quotation of the aforementioned material in the cadence of the 2nd theme group is virtually identical in both symphonies. The 2nd subject in the opening movements of both the C minor and B minor symphonies is virtually identical, and same can be said of the 2nd subjects in the finales of both works. Also, it appears that some of the material from the trio of the scherzo in the C minor symphony was recycled in the same section of the 5th (formerly 6th). It's almost like Rufinatscha was either dissatisfied with his treatment of the material in one work, so he subsequently recycled it in another, or that he ran out of fresh ideas, and had to self-plagiarize.
doesn't bother me when other composers (Ropartz (especially), Medtner, Mahler, etc.) do things arguably rather much like this, but I'll have to hear it in context. (Of course it helps a lot in the latter cases that the material being repeated - in Ropartz' last 3 quartets and 5th symphony, e.g. - is _worth_ hearing again in the same or altered guises.)
Admittedly, the most extreme case of this is Alfredo Casella's first 2 symphonies, where he lifted the slow movement from the 1st, and just stuck it into the 2nd wholesale. Didn't even rescore or transpose it.
Well, no, that's not the most extreme case I can think of. But, well,...
I was going to say I haven't a chance of hearing Rufinatscha 3 but I think I can listen to the reconstruction over NML, so I will do so.
It's on YouTube.
...which, of course, is grand larceny.