Wading through Spotify, I've come across the Svetlanov set of the complete Miaskovsky Symphonies from Warner. Here is a composer completely unfamiliar to me but one that I feel I ought to have some knowledge of. I gather that some symphonies are more highly regarded than others - please could someone give me a bit of guidance as to what might be the most worthwhile way into this large corpus of work?
???
I'm sure everyone familiar with at least some portion of Miaskovsky's enormous output will have their own opinions, so you may want to solicit a variety of perspectives and tastes. Most everyone seems to agree that #21 is his greatest symphony, but beyond that, thoughts vary.
Having said that, I'll list my personal favorites: #5, 6, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, and 27. In general, the earlier symphonies are more rhapsodic, chromatic and at times Scriabinesque. The late symphonies are more concise and clearly structured. This may influence where you want to begin, depending on your preference.
One caveat, however, and a major one at that, as well as quite personal: I hold Svetlanov's conducting and interpretations generally in very low esteem. Given the opportunity, I far prefer interpretations by Gauk, Kondrashin, and others, who provide much more deeply involved, heartfelt, and nuanced accounts of these works. I do like Svetlanov's account of #24 very much, but others such as #27 fall far short for me.
Quote from: Albion on Friday 12 August 2011, 17:55
Wading through Spotify, I've come across the Svetlanov set of the complete Miaskovsky Symphonies from Warner. Here is a composer completely unfamiliar to me but one that I feel I ought to have some knowledge of. I gather that some symphonies are more highly regarded than others - please could someone give me a bit of guidance as to what might be the most worthwhile way into this large corpus of work?
Having bought that set and played one after another, I'm afraid that they all tend to merge together, but try 2, 17, 21, and 27. None of the symphonies are unpleasant, but some lack greatness. They vary in length and structure. No. 21 is in a single movement, but it certainly works as a symphony, and is highly regarded.
By the way, he wrote other stuff besides symphonies. There are concertos for cello and violin, a whole bunch of rather good piano sonatas, and a couple of sinfoniettas.
http://www.myaskovsky.ru/?mode=works (http://www.myaskovsky.ru/?mode=works)
19 is for Wind Band. The last movement has a really great Big Tune.
I have a particular fondness for #5, which strikes me as rather Sibelian in spots, and has a really spooky, atmospheric slow movement. #6 is intensely chromatic and dissonant, but has a choral finale. I also like #15. A couple of his other symphonies warrant attention, #22, composed in memoriam of the Great War, (WWII) and the final symphony, #27.
P.S. Amphissa is our resident Miaskovsky man. I'm sure he'll jump on this thread in no time with a major essay and some links... ;D
If you want to just try it out, get #6 and see if you like it. Another favorite is #21, especially if you can find the Chicago SO recording with Morton Gould. The Svetlanov set is pretty basic: no notes at all. SOund is typical Melodiya of the era. I kept my Olympia/Alto set and am glad I did. They have notes, such as they are.
Yes, Gould's #21 is superb. If you don't mind dated sound, however, do try Ormandy's #21 (vintage c. 1948) -- the most eloquent of them all, IMHO.
The Svetlanov set is definitely worth having, but don't expect a large number of masterpieces. IMHO, the best place to start with Miaskovsky is the Violin Concerto (there's an excellent version on Naxos) and the Cello Concerto (Rostropovich - don't settle for anything less!!)
Many thanks for all these really helpful responses: I'll begin with 21 as that seems to have been cited by several members and then explore outward from that (6, 17 and 27 also appear in a number of the posts above).
As I will be listening to them streamed there are no background notes at all, so the link to the excellent Miaskovsky site provided by Hovite was very welcome!
;D
For myself I think you'll find some of the best Miaskovsky is in his string quartets, especially the "first" (not really) and last of them. Still available on the Northern Flowers label, I'm given to believe, in the same quite fine Taneyev Quartet recording I first heard them from on LPs back in college. The last quartet (no.13 in A minor) has received a couple of live and CD recordings more recently (e.g. the Kopelman Quartet), too.
I am also grateful for this thread as Miaskovsky is for me too one of the composers that I just "don't get". And like you I have always assumed that it was because I was listening to the wrong stuff, first, so I am also looking forward to getting hold of his Symphony 21.
I also think this opens up a whole new topic (maybe needs a new thread?!): who are people's "sung" composers who remain unsung on a personal level - or to put it another way, who are famous composers, appreciated around the world, that for some reason you just "don't get"? And what pieces do people recommend as a way in to their music? For me this would include: Mahler, Stravinsky, Glazunov (I just find him incredibly bland...) - yet they come from a period of music that I most love.
Do start a new thread, Christopher!
Quote from: TerraEpon on Friday 12 August 2011, 20:46
19 is for Wind Band. The last movement has a really great Big Tune.
That one is rather special.
I don't know much Miaskovsky ...only the 6th and 21st of the symphonies both of which are excellent, though very different, works.... but isn't the gorgeous 'Cello Concerto the best way in? It is so well written for the 'cello, its lyricism is so well sustained and its tunes will stay with you forever. Try the second theme of the finale!
I like the Cello Concerto. I absolutely adore the Violin Concerto. And, as I said, I highly recommend the 5th Symphony in D Major. It was the first symphony other than the 21st that I heard, and it was with the encouragement of Amphissa that I became an aficionado of Miaskovsky's music. Are you out there, Dave?
Christopher, for the most wonderful Glazunov, get your hands on Victor Tretyakov's passion reading of the Violin Concerto in a. My favorite violin concerto......
Jerry
....or Serebrier's recently-released set of Glazunov's concertos on Warner.
About Glazunov's concerto, no better than early Oistrakh IMO.
Glazunov Symphony #5 with Konstantin Ivanov! Available in the past in various LP incarnations, but I don't know if it's on CD.
Ivanov's recording of Miaskovsky's symphony 5 was very good, too. Better than Svetlanov's, iirc. (Come to think of it, if Downes' recording on Marco Polo of Syms. 5 and 9 is still available, that's good to get... oh wait, we've left that topic.)
Ah yes, Siegfreid, the old Miaskovsky mutating into Glazunov trick! That's the second most often used one in the book!
He used it often enough... :)
Starker! Zis is KAOS! Ve don't mutate composers here!
I know this started with the symphonies in mind, but I'd like to recommend the Sinfoniettas (Russian Disc, Svetlanov) which sit well alongside the magnificent 21st Sym.
Miaskovsky highlights:
Symphony No 16 (wonderful slow movement) commemorates an air disaster.
Symphony No 6 - a sprawling epic but with some wonderful moments (beautiful flute passage in trio of the scerzo - one of my favourite moments in all music - deeply moving + the choral finale - wonderful. I was so privileged to hear this live in London and even got to chat to the charming conductor (Jurowski) about it during the rehearsals.
No 3 (influence of Cesar Frank)
No 15 (look out for Kondrashin's fine recording) No 17 (in a Gauk box on Brilliant but the Svetlanov is good too)
No 21 (Ormandy/Gould/Measham)
No 24 and 25 (together on Naxos)
No 27 - deeply moving, the dying composer's response to those who had condemned his music in 1948 (Alto or Chandos - sadly the Gauk version did not appear in the Brilliant boxed set)
I can't believe more people don't plump for #5, a wonderfully haunting, albeit rather Sibelian work. As Amphissa has pointed out, the opening theme has a motive that brings to mind 'Lara's Theme' from Jarré's score to Dr. Zhivago.
Quote from: JimL on Thursday 25 August 2011, 06:37
I can't believe more people don't plump for #5, a wonderfully haunting, albeit rather Sibelian work. As Amphissa has pointed out, the opening theme has a motive that brings to mind 'Lara's Theme' from Jarré's score to Dr. Zhivago.
Must give it another listen - I have the old series Olympia CD.
JimL - yes, I too went and had another listen, and I agree that the 5th is a beauty. And, that theme Amphissa mentioned is so evocative of old Russia and its changing landscape, at least for an old romantic like me!
Have read poor reviews of Svetlanov's take on no.5 if I recall and have to agree. Too slow. Downes on Marco Polo is one of several good recordings though (and his recording premiered- I think; such claims should always be careful on principle :) - no.9 in E minor, another really lovely, passionate symphony.)
If you want to hear Myaskovsky's 2nd symphony, the Czech station Rozhlas D-Dur (Rozhlas (http://www.rozhlas.cz/d-dur)) will be broadcasting it tomorrow morning at 3:38 am and again at 7:38 pm Eastern standard time US 8/26 (more locally European time at 9:38 am 8/26 and again at 1:38 am on 8/27) in Gottfried Rabl's recording for the Orfeo label. Early (1911) work, long (45-ish minutes), but one of my favs (have heard that recording once or twice, know it mostly from other recordings). Enjoy if you catch it ! (They have a webstream - iTunes/mp3 - several streams, last I checked- or I wouldn't mention it, since it seems to me actually hearing one of his works you haven't heard yet, even an earlier one, well-played as I recall this one is here..., is the best advice of all, or at least- part of it.)
Quote from: eschiss1 on Thursday 25 August 2011, 22:36
Have read poor reviews of Svetlanov's take on no.5 if I recall and have to agree. Too slow. Downes on Marco Polo is one of several good recordings though (and his recording premiered- I think; such claims should always be careful on principle :) - no.9 in E minor, another really lovely, passionate symphony.)
I don't know about Downes premiering. I have a fine performance conducted by Konstantin Ivanov with the USSR Radio Symphony. Surely it must predate the Downes/BBC Philharmonic.
Really? I thought that (the Ivanov) was a recording of the 5th, not the 9th... and Downes' recording of the 5th, I think, wasn't even its 2nd recording, let alone its premiere, no. (Recording) Premiere of the 9th, though, I believe it was...
(Whether or not Ivanov recorded the 9th - he did record the 5th and 16th and quite well. And 21, but I haven't heard that recording of his, I think.)
Sorry. I was talking about the 5th. I didn't realize the premiere recording to which you were referring was the 9th.
Ah, but I was so clear, as always *removes the mud... clear mud of course!* wasn't I? *and more mud* Now where'd that all come from... :):):)
Relatively major un(commercially) recorded Myaskovsky (some of these have been recorded ... not commercially): at least the following-
*two cantatas? oratorios? (Kreml Nochu (The Kremlin at Night); and Kirov is With Us)
*one violin sonata (op.70, in F major. two movements; a sonata form, and a theme and variations-and-finale. The tape, and CD copy, I have of this is in --...erm... ... decrepit sound, in my honest opinion.)
I forgot to mention Cello Sonata No 2 as one of his finest works - a lovely work (there are several recordings). Worth looking out, especially if you don't know Miaskovsky's chamber music.
both cello sonatas. agreed!
some yeas ago. I downloaded a Piano Concerto in 2 movements (don't know if this is the complete concerto) by Miaskovsky. The player was Igor Zhukov. I am non sure that this piece is really written by Miaskovsky, but I'd like to know if someone does know it.
Bye, Andrea
There is the two movements Concert-Fantasia for Piano and Orchestra by P.I. Thcaicovskij in a recording by Igor Zhukov.
I know the concerto-fantasia, the style is quite different, more modern. SO it could be myaskovsky, but i never found notice about his piano concerto...
thx, Andrea
I'd heard from someone else at some point I think about a (possibly unfinished) piano concerto by Myaskovsky but I am dubious. (One arranged from a film score by Weinberg, yes, that does exist.)
The Tchaikovsky concert-fantasia? In quite a few recordings, and deservedly so (not to suggest that Myask. works that are wholly unrecorded except for broadcasts, like the violin sonata in F major op.70, are also deservedly so... ah, you know what I mean. I have heard the violin sonata- in a tape with more hiss crackle and pop than I would wish on a Madison Avenue hack - but near as I can tell , it's pretty good though not as good as the 2 cello sonatas- still, deserves better than no recordings... worthy contemporary (which it is; op70 to 69) of the very fine 25th symphony.
Well, when I'll come back home I'll listen it again, then, if it is possible, I'd like to post it here, so we can enlarge the discussion.
I don't know deeply the orchestral works of Myaskovsky, so it's difficult for me to catch stylistical similarity.
the violin sonata op.70 is difficult to find also in score, but now I am looking for it.
A bit too harsh with Tchaykovsky op. 56?Don't you like first movement cadenza...dialogue between piano and cello in the second...?
Bye, Andrea
... me? I do quite like the Tchaikovsky, wasn't implying otherwise???
sorry :-\, I understood that you meant that tchaykovsky op.56 has - deservedly - quite few recordings.
I said deservedly quite a few recordings. As in, not a few, by now, and a good thing, too. :) Sorry, English prides itself on being one confusing language, and I don't help much :(
So, this website has proved its worth to me (as if that were necessary!). Miaskovsky has long been a composer I just didn't understand, or "get". So, after going through this thread, I did an audit of how many times people recommended various of him symphonies, and the results were as follows:
21 - six recommendations
27 - four
6 - three
17 - three
15 - three
5 - two
9 - two
16 - two
19 - two
24 - two
2,3,22,23,25 - one each
So, I am now working my way down the list in that order and am becoming a major Miaskovsky fan. Thanks everyone for that!
Ah, I have overlooked this! :D
May I disturb your fine statistics? ;D
My vote will be No. 5, but if I had two votes I would add No. 27 as well! ;)
*goes in and adds a recommendation of no.20, not intentionally to complicate things, but because it deserves it - though if I had only one vote I probably used it already...*
Christopher - as a Myaskovsky fan myself, that's good to hear. ;)
Putting on my cynics hat ( ::) ::)) I wonder how many people making recommendations actually do so on the basis of beng familiar with all of them! You can't recommend what you don't know, and since the 21st and 27th are the most familiar to listeners, those will be the ones most often recommended. ;)
Then again recommendations might be very changeable - the other day I said I prefer the 21st and 5th, but the truth is probably "the last one I listened to" ;D ;D
I think there's a lot to be said for working through them chronologically, so you get a feel for his musical development. What do you think, vandermolen?
Eric, can you give a reason for your recommendation? No. 20 is perhaps the one I couldn't warm to. I thought it quite bland.
Or have I missed something?
Maybe it's Svetlanov? Or my low-quality BBC-Player recording? :-\
BTW, I know them all, too, though not all as well as I know 2, 3, 5, 6, 10, 11, 13, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 27 ;)
Quote from: semloh on Friday 28 October 2011, 22:57
Christopher - as a Myaskovsky fan myself, that's good to hear. ;)
Putting on my cynics hat ( ::) ::)) I wonder how many people making recommendations actually do so on the basis of beng familiar with all of them! You can't recommend what you don't know, and since the 21st and 27th are the most familiar to listeners, those will be the ones most often recommended. ;)
Then again recommendations might be very changeable - the other day I said I prefer the 21st and 5th, but the truth is probably "the last one I listened to" ;D ;D
I think there's a lot to be said for working through them chronologically, so you get a feel for his musical development. What do you think, vandermolen?
In some situations there's a case to be made for following the wisdom of crowds, and this is possiblyone of them. Unless you are an incorrigible curmudgeon, there is a good chance you will like what a lot of other (similar-minded) people have likes. I reject the chronological argument though. You wouldn't read a writer's earlier works before reading their masterpieces, in fact the earlier works might put you off altogether. Start with the best, and if they really really appeal, explore the other works. Same, for me, applies to music.
Anyway, I have been spending a most enjoyable evening watching the re-opening of the Bolshoi live on TV here in Moscow, and they have included in the programme one of my favourite unsing pieces (though by a VERY sung composer) - "Nature and Love" by Tchaikovsky. You might be able to watch it on http://www.youtube.com/bolshoi (http://www.youtube.com/bolshoi)....
In re 20: It could be any of those, but I did study part of the score myself after borrowing it from the library- familiarity might have something to do with it. (Though Taruskin praises 20 based I think just on Svetlanov's recording and for the same reasons I would- the strong effect made by the slow movement together with the apotheosis of its themes in the finale's coda, among the most - unfettered?..- music I know from the composer.)
Quote from: Christopher on Friday 28 October 2011, 23:12
I reject the chronological argument though. You wouldn't read a writer's earlier works before reading their masterpieces, in fact the earlier works might put you off altogether. Start with the best, and if they really really appeal, explore the other works. Same, for me, applies to music.
Sounds a reasonable argument, Christopher. :)
But I think it's still an instructive thing to do later down the track... I've certainly taken to doing it with more familiar 'sets' of music - e.g. the Haydn string quartets, the Mozart piano concertos, and the Beethoven piano sonatas, but I confess I've never done it with the Myaskovsky symphonies, although I keep meaning to! ;D
(I asked vandermolen, by the way, because he is an avowed Myaskovsky fan! My apologies if I appeared to exclude others :-[)
Quote from: semloh on Friday 28 October 2011, 22:57
Christopher - as a Myaskovsky fan myself, that's good to hear. ;)
Putting on my cynics hat ( ::) ::)) I wonder how many people making recommendations actually do so on the basis of beng familiar with all of them! You can't recommend what you don't know, and since the 21st and 27th are the most familiar to listeners, those will be the ones most often recommended. ;)
Then again recommendations might be very changeable - the other day I said I prefer the 21st and 5th, but the truth is probably "the last one I listened to" ;D ;D
I think there's a lot to be said for working through them chronologically, so you get a feel for his musical development. What do you think, vandermolen?
Have been away so sorry not to have responded before. I don't have a strong view on how you discover Miaskovsky/or Myaskovsky - I prefer the former spelling. His music is so little known (even in Russia I think) that I regard it as great to discover it at all. I do know all the symphonies as I have the Warner box + the Olympia/Alto issues of the same recordings + various other single issues. I think that the chronological approach makes very good sense too and agree that we probably recommend what we are most familiar with and often the first recording we have heard, if more than one is available. Recently someone recommended Symphony No 26 to me, which is really good - I had largely ignored it before. A biography in English by Gregor Tassie should be published early next year - hopefully this will lead to more interest.
Of the (even) lesser known symphonies I'd recommend No 16 for its wonderful slow movement (inspired by an air disaster), No 8 also for it's slow movement, which I've seen described as the work of 'a Delius of the Steppes'! Also No 3 and 26. 15 is a great introduction to Miaskovsky too and don't forget the wonderfully eloquent Cello Sonata No 2, which I love.
At least his name though is not so little known in Russia- even not very classical-music-minded people I meet here who hail from there have heard of him more often, based on conversations, than people here have heard of comparable US composers, I would venture to say.
Quote from: eschiss1 on Sunday 30 October 2011, 12:23
At least his name though is not so little known in Russia- even not very classical-music-minded people I meet here who hail from there have heard of him more often, based on conversations, than people here have heard of comparable US composers, I would venture to say.
That's good news. On the two occasions I was there - once to the USSR and more recently I was surprised, especially on my earlier visit on the lack of recordings of his music. When I asked for any recordings in Melodiya the main record shop in Leningrad (as it was then called) I was regarded as if raving mad (this was in 1985 however). It's good to hear how things have changed.
actually, I'm not sure when my (few) encounters with people here were, and as they were quite possibly college students there was a bias statistically there. (Just as my surprise in learning - in a different brief conversation again- that someone I met knew of- and may have known, or known someone who knew, Evgeny K. Golubev, should have been mediated by the fact that the person I was talking to, while not a music professor at the college I was at- a community college where I was taking some very good computer courses - was a professor all-same, and one from the former USSR (this was in 1999 or 2000. I hope too that she wasn't confusing him with the once-politician - Moscow mayor I think?- Evgeny Golubev (yes, seriously...) - but I think she did know who I meant from my memory of the conversation :) )
(I love this area. anyway. but am on the flip side not that surprised that Myaskovsky's fortunes have taken a turn for the worse. His name I gather survives- maybe - and maybe only as a teacher. His music, I can believe, does not (there?) or didn't. Hopefully the situation has improved.
Taruskin wrote a brief article when Svetlanov's set first came out about what he thought about it. I tend to agree with the gist - including his praise, yes, for the 20th in particular (maybe biased by the fact that it had eluded even "tied-in" collectors with big collections of broadcast tapes for ages- symphonies 4, 14 and 20? nope- nothing here... are you sure we can't interest you in ( .... ) ? So for the longest time the most complete collections of recorded Myask. symphonies were 24 symphonies full (not counting the 3 sinfoniettas, different versions of the same symphony, etc.) 14 is only ok I guess (I think I will warm to it), 4 is impressive but I prefer 3 and 5 in their different ways, but 20 in its warm-hearted way has somehow captured mine... go figure... though my two favorite Myas. symphonies remain 2 and 3, still. Though that's not counting the wonderful quartets! ... (I've been a fan for awhile myself and apologize for the tone :( Never been to the USSR or anywhere that was part of it, though.)
If you (always speaking generally- none of this is directed solely to vandermolen of course, else it would be a P.M. ...! ) can catch symphony no.10 in London next year, I think it's a good idea. I rather doubt I can...
Interesting post - I must pay more attention to nos 2 and 20 which I'm less familiar with. I was very fortunate to hear nos 6 and 21 live in London in recent years and to get the chance to speak to Jurowski, the conductor of No 6, who was extremely pleasant to talk to.
I agree that the 21st is a near masterpiece, but I also think the 25th is just as great (it makes me think of Magnard's 4th, which is my favorite "Franckian" symphony along side d'Indy's 2nd).
Welcome, rbrianm.