Towards the end of last year, having at last acquired a miniature facsimile copy of the original score from Musikproduktion Hoflich, I spent approximately 200 hours copying it out into Sibelius software. I now have a few CDs to give away to anyone who likes to send me the cost of postage and their terrestrial address. Alternatively, I shall endeavour to turn it into MP3 files which I could then attach to e-mails.
Bearing in mind that this is a purely synthetic performance, I think I can say that, on the whole, I'm a bit disappointed with this work compared to the 5th and 8th symphonies currently now available once more on Marco Polo CDs. I certainly don't agree with Robert Schumann's enthusiasm for it. In particular, I find the opening movement rather tame, its one redeeming feature being the little double fugue towards the end. However, the work seems to improve from movement to movement. I do like the rather spooky scherzo in B minor and the rollicking rondo/sonata finale brings the whole thing to a rather jolly end.
Well done on doing all that hard work, John. I know how much the composer means to you and I for one am extremely grateful to you for making me persevere with Lachner (and Spohr) - much to my joy and benefit.
I've already heard John's fine MIDIficiation of Franz Lachner's Sixth and can recommend it to anybody who is curious to hear the piece. FWIW my own view is that what we have is a pretty good 35 minute symphony smothered in the 50+ minute behemoth which Lachner makes of his material. It simply won't stretch that far and, as John says, the first movement in particular is a rambling affair, which has lots of good ideas spread rather thinly. The finale is the most successful movement and it's no surprise that it's also the shortest. In sum, not a bad work, but one that can't sustain it's "heavenly length". All that said, John's hard work gives us a chance to get to know the work and, if he is agreeable, I'll save him the trouble of mailing it out as I can easily make mp3s of it myself and provide a download link. Is that OK, John?
Will look forward to the download link. Thanks Mark and John.....
Jerry
Many thanks Mark. That's alright by me, but will you need me to send you the original wav files?
No, I have the CD and will use that, thanks.
Give me a few days before the downloads appear - I can't call this weekend my own, I'm afraid...
Thanks once again Mark. By the way, the finale is by far the longest movement on paper, running into 837 bars as opposed to the 458 0f the opening movement ! The relatively short playing time is no doubt due to (a) the faster tempo and (b) the lack of repeats.
Meter could also be a factor. I don't know that it is, I'm just saying. If you have a 4/4 first movement and a 3/8 or 2/4 finale it would have to make a difference.
Looking forward to hearing it, even with the caveats to ear.
Thanks, something to look forward to :)
Quite right Jim. The finale is in 3/4 time as opposed to the opening Allegro non troppo in common time. In this movement, by the way, we are spared a slow introduction.
John's MIDI realisation of the Symphony has now been uploaded to the German Music folder in the Downloads board.
I really think that this symphony is excellent. Thank you for synthesizing it; I wish that an orchestra would perform and record it. I think Schumann's enthusiasm for the piece may be that he wished that he had penned it as it sounds more like him than either the 5th or the 8th. I wonder if he borrowed any themes from it as I am convinced that he borrowed a theme from Hugo Staehle's only symphony in his Introduction and Allegro Appassionato for Piano and Orchestra, Op.92.
Knowing the Op. 92 Konzertstück by heart as I do, pray, which theme? :)
The very opening theme in the Schumann sounds a lot like the first subject in the second movement of Staehle's symphony. Also, I think Brahms borrowed a theme from Schumann's Introduction and Allegro for Piano and Orchestra, Op.134 for the finale of his Second Sympony.
You really have me with that one. I know the Concert Allegro and Brahms' S2 just as well, and I'm stumped. The 2nd subjects don't seem to have a lot in common, and that's the only place I can think of where there might be some commonality. Wait a sec...OK. I think I see where you're talking about. Enh, maybe that one phrase is identical, but not the rest.
It is only part of the subject. I would be floored if Brahms had taken an entire theme from a Schumann work and used note-for-note in its entirety without using the word Schumann in title. Certainly Brahms must have heard the piece before, and the theme stuck with him and inspired him while he was writing his second symphony.
It may be my iPod, but the middle movement mp3s sound like they're at mostly much too low a basic volume. And I think there's a couple of patches of questionable intonation (so to speak) in the first movement especially- I think. A certain passage sounds at one point quite dissonant - but maybe it should be. But I think the first movement is very strong in my honest opinion, some parts really stick with me anyway (yes, that 2nd group especially is what used to be called a happy inspiration!...); really though-- if it weren't for the ... quality of MIDI orchestral sounds, it sounds, taken in all, like a work I could and should present to other Schubert fans ( musiclovers, I mean, not just conductors of whom I know few. But if a conductor were interested in this and could be sent a copy of the parts and the MIDIs that could be a good thing too.)
Dear John , I read that you spent so much time creating a sibelius file of this work. Would you export this as a XML file and send it to me? (at least the 4th mov.)I can improve the Sound quality ... gerd.prengel @ gmail.com
Last weekend John has sent me his files from the 6th symphony. Having listened so far onlyto the midi rendition from YouTube I had only a rather low expectation of this symphony, but now I reworked on the Scherzo and Finale files from John with my NotePerformer tool and I can say that these movements are just fantastic and I can understand why Schumann loved this work!! Soon you will listen to them here .... :-)
Gerd
That's great. Thanks in anticipation...
So here is the Scherzo - for me one of the greatest Scherzos I know... doesn't the mysterious beginning soemhow foreshadows Brucker? And the beautiful Trio uses a phrase which Dvorak would pick up in the 2nd Trio of the scherzo of the 9th....
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-3.mp3
In this first version I left out the repeats and still the Scherzo lasts 8 minutes. I may add the repeat bars in the Trio.
I am not quite finished with the Finale ...
Thank you, John, for all your labour providing us with the notes of this work!!
Gerd
Gerd, you really are doing great work - these Lachner realisations are quite revelatory. Thanks so much. This Scherzo in particular is a fine piece and, as you say, the Bruckner pre-echoes are quite tantalising.
Listening earlier to the midi rendition, even in that version this scherzo sounded captivating. Just fantastic. Lachner had a great sense of melody, and he could even write great music off them, often enough.
Thanks again for your hard work Gerd, and John!
Thank you! Here now also the Finale - and what firework this is!!
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-4.mp3
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-4.pdf
It's certainly a firecracker.
Can't wait to hear the whole symphony...
Me, too. These are terrific. Thanks, Gerd!
After 2 weeks of much labour - many errors especially in the horns in the original version had to be dealt with - I finally could create a new MP3 rendition of the first movement. And what a movement this - for me unexpected - this movement at least reaches the quality of the last movement and is one of the most fascinating symphony movements of classical music!
A most melodic main theme is the basis of manifold wonderful elaborations with much counterpoint, crowned at the end with the longest and most elaborated fugato of any symphony I know! Very beautiful is also the second theme - a pure melody of 50 seconds only performed by clarinetts, basson and pizzicato strings - very unusual - and only in the exposition which is also very unusual....
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-1.mp3
Thanks! BTW based on the material at IMSLP,
1) Allegro non troppo, quarter=144
2) Andante, eighth=92
3) Scherzo, Allegro assai (dotted minim=54)
4) Finale. Allegro con brio (dotted minim=76)
I am now also about to finish the Andante - a movement with an haunting beauty!! So in 1 or 2 days the whole symphony will be finished :-)
I am a bit concerned about John (being 88 years old). I wrote to him several times in the last 3 weeks without getting any answer... Does anyone of you know how he is doing? Without him this project would never have been possible ...
Gerd
There is also the Andante in D that seems to have been Lachner's first try at a slow movement for this symphony and which exists only in ms. at present.
No idea about Mr White, sorry!
So, finally it is done - the 6th symphony is finshed! The last movement was the Andante - a wonderful movement starting somewhat sparing with only strings and bassoon, but then it unfolds an haunting beauty as the other instruments join in ...
All movements together:
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-1.mp3 Allegro non troppo
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-2.mp3 Andante
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-3.mp3 Scherzo
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-4.mp3 Finale Allegro con brio
What a mighty symphony ! Thank you, forum, thank you John - without you I never would have got to know this treasure !!
I wish I could celebrate this with John, but I can't reach him ...
Gerd
..and at 42 minutes, not too long!
Dear Gerd, what magnificent work you have done in revealing what a truly grand symphony this is. Thank you very much for your commitment. I do hope the symphony gets played (and recorded) by a professional orchestra - it is certainly worth it.
Seconded, Gareth. Surely, someone will take up the baton...
Well, the first thing to do is to get a score out to some conductors and record companies, with a few soundbites. I would suggest CPO for a start. Any company is going to be much more interested if they know score and parts are readily available (especially in a good clean modern print-out).
By now I got the Information that a study score is available which I have ordered and received now :
https://www.bodensee-musikversand.de/Noten/Orchester/Lachner-Franz-1803-1890-Sinfonie-D-Dur-Nr6-op56-fuer-Orchester-Studienpartitur-453799.html
I which I had known this at the beginning of my work....!
I will create now the parts for the instruments and the whole score as PDF files...
Well done, Gerd. You are indefatigable.
And now - dare I ask? - did you ever finish Symphony No. 2?
Well, regarding the 2nd symphony I could ignite the enthusiasm of a friend for this work and he is now working on the Finale and should finish it in 2 weeks or so ...😊😊
Here's the preface to the MPH score:
Franz Lachner
(b. Rain am Lech, 2 April 1803 — d. Munich, 2 January 1890)
Symphony No. 6 in D major, op.56 (1837)
I Allegro non troppo – Fugue à 2 sujets - p. 1
II Andante - p. 61
III Scherzo – Trio. Allegro assai - p. 88
IV Finale. Allegro con brio - p. 131
Preface
The critical assessment of Franz Lachner as a composer has varied remarkably over the years down to the present day. Especially after 1868, the year in which he retired as general music director in Munich (his application had been submitted three years earlier after his rebuff by Wagner), and still more so today, the positive views have been eclipsed by derogatory opinions, culminating in the claim that he was "a talented but failed symphonist who sought salvation in the [...] suite, only to be harried there by the same things that thwarted him in the symphony. At least he [...] realized, to his great credit, that his talents lay elsewhere." (1) Given his decades-long success and his influential position as a virtually uncontested musical authority in mid-nineteenth-century Bavaria, judgments of this sort cannot account for the excitement that Lachner's symphonies once engendered, especially from 1834 to roughly 1855. On the other hand, the patent aesthetic and political motives behind the personal antagonism, deliberate disregard, and artistic disparagement that this traditionalist composer was made to suffer, especially from adherents of the New German School from the mid-nineteenth century on, and the change of taste that Lachner was unwilling to join, suggest that the reasons for his descent into oblivion are not to be found in his scores. Moreover, unless we are willing to deny wholesale the existence of a typically southern German musical tradition with its own aesthetic outlook and, especially, its points in common with the music of Schubert, a fresh historical assessment of its most successful and by no means only composer is not only necessary but unavoidable. Not only did this fail to happen in the scholarly congresses held in honor of his bicentennial, even contexts long obvious were ignored.
To understand the unfamiliar music of a forgotten composer, we would be well-advised not to take the most obvious step and play him off against such well-known luminaries as Beethoven and Schumann. Any such approach is doomed to failure, just as it is meaningless and unfruitful to grasp Bruckner's symphonies with the aid of Hanslick and Brahms. Like any musical culture, the music of the Biedermeier period – indeed the early and high romantic music in the entire region of southern Germany and Austria – must be viewed in its historical context. There we discover a more or less vague North-South rift, aggravated by increasing tensions within the German Federation, which, as we all know, culminated in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866. Many critics were at pains to turn this rift into a cliché and to propound an adherence to the Schubert style, and to naturalness in music, as being typically "southern German" qualities.
Lachner was unquestionably the most prominent and successful representative of this "southern German style." His symphonies are characterized by compressed thematic-motivic workmanship combined with an increased emphasis on counterpoint. The cultivation of counterpoint to a degree "verging on an end in itself" (2) remained intact in Austrian art music throughout the whole of the nineteenth century. This "elegant type of counterpoint [was] rooted in sound" and frequently stood in "only seeming opposition" to the often deliberate simplicity of the chosen devices. In a certain sense it can be said that a synthesis of Baroque and Classical thought emerged on a new ground of Romantic lyricism. The frequently heard accusation of monotony in Lachner's thematic-motivic development is not to be found in a supposedly prima facie nonexistent opposition of musical themes so much as in the fact that his themes, though often enough motivically related, are presented as musical material of maximum contrast and combined and brought closer together with the aid of thematic-motivic variation, combination, and contrapuntal superposition, during which head motifs often assume a commanding position. A sense of monotony can soon arise, especially when this combinatorial game is maintained at great length, making it difficult or impossible to trace a line of evolution in the development. Yet it is precisely the abandonment of classical linear development in favor of a trend toward the "pendular prolongation of a single motif" (3) that leads to an "unbridled flow of thematic material" – an important element in the Schubert style that Lachner adopted for his own large-scale compositions. That said, the listener's interest in this reiteration and prolongation of motifs does not reside in a zealous search for their mere recurrence, but rather in retracing the manner in which they are manipulated, the way the components of the material are combined, in conjunction with the contrasting emotions conveyed by these devices. It was precisely here that a change of paradigms took place during the first half of the century, a change that led above all to the distinction between a "southern German style" that adhered to this taste, and a "northern German style" that added new impulses of its own. This fact is crucial for the study and assessment of Lachner's music.
This manner of dealing with musical material, a characteristic of the "southern German style" as a whole, accords essential importance to form. Not only are form and content – technique and expression – of equivalent importance, they are meant to unite in a Romantic afflatus. Lachner is frequently accused of having been so intent on satisfying the idealized, overblown aesthetic demands placed on the symphony from the late 1820s on that it kept him from surmounting and transcending his merely technical talent with the convincing creative urgency of true genius. Regarding this criticism there is, however, no overlooking the fact that it was precisely not his concern to unleash his creative genius to the extent that it ineluctably led him to burst the bounds of formal design. His rejection of musical subjectivity, rather than being grounded in a lack of talent, was deeply rooted in a Classical tradition of thought. Southern German composers were far less subjective than Beethoven; on the contrary, they remained beholden to an ideal of objectivity rooted in the Classical period and probed various strategies for its solution, up to and including Bruckner's symphonic mysticism.
To quote one reviewer: "The motifs from which [Lachner] created his symphony are original, characteristic, fresh, and noble. [...] True to his themes, he spurns any ingredient alien to them; nor does he need such ingredients. [...] And how manifold and rich, how unaffected and lucid are his contrapuntal combinations! How many gradations of passion and feeling he depicts with a single melody! How distinct and well-formed are his periods! And how elevated everything is by his splendid instrumentation! Only in this way is it possible for unity and clarity to reign supreme throughout an entire work, when the themes chosen for each individual piece are maintained and developed consistently and exhaustively, and when the same aesthetic idea informs every section of the tone-poem." (4) Remarkably, the focus of attention falls precisely on Lachner's insistent hold on his existing material, which is developed in changing affects and various combinations. Here clarity in the presentation of relationships is clearly preferred to an emphasis on complexity of devices. The listener takes delight in the variegated richness in his presentation of a fixed set of ideas, whose flexible manipulation is accorded greater value than their emotive content. Accordingly, in this view of music, the notion of formal unity is marked by extreme rigor.
Among the formative influences on Lachner – besides Schubert, with whom he formed a deep friendship – were Beethoven and Spohr. In contrast, traces of Mendelssohn or even Schumann can be dismissed, if only because Lachner came into contact with the Leipzig school too late for it to have a large impact on his musical thought. Asked whether he was a "Mendelssohnian" or a "Schumannian," he is said to have replied, with an amusing but untranslatable pun, "Let's just say I'm myself." (5)
Lachner was fond of stating a second theme in the winds for the sake of timbral contrast, and he does just this in the Sixth Symphony. Other formal features of his symphonic sonata-allegro movements are his frequently bold expansion of the exposition and recapitulation (which has repeatedly earned him the not entirely unjustified reproach that his movements are too long) and his fugal presentation of the themes in these sections. An especially striking example of this can be found in the opening movement of the present symphony, where the splendidly Handelian double-fugue of the two themes is specifically underscored in the recapitulation (pp. 42ff.). As in the Classical style, his development sections usually tend to be short. Particularly noticeable are the clear periodicity of his phrases and his flowing, logical escalations.
Lachner's most successful symphonies were his Fifth, Sixth, and Third, which he himself considered his best. (6) Even his final symphony, the Eighth, was greeted with great applause, especially in Vienna. The stunning success of its Vienna première in 1851 prompted an offer from the House of Habsburg to became court chapel-master in Vienna – an opening that Lachner turned down, however, when it was bettered by his promotion to general music director in Munich with a sizeable increase in salary.
The Sixth Symphony in D major, op. 56, was composed in 1837 and first performed, under Lachner's baton, in Vienna's Great Redouten Hall during a Concert Spirituel on 15 March 1838. A few weeks later it was published in full score by Tobias Haslinger in Vienna – a print that also served as the basis of our reproduction. At this time Lachner was at the zenith of his career as a composer. Even the usually critical Robert Schumann, who had ideas and ambitions of his own, found in this symphony "a masterly order and clarity, a lightness and euphony. In a word, it is so mature and well-wrought that we may safely accord the composer a place near his favorite model, Franz Schubert, compared to whom he falls short in variety of invention but at least equals in talent for instrumentation." (7)
Translation: Bradford Robinson
Notes
(1) Wolfram Steinbeck: "Franz Lachner und die Symphonie," Franz Lachner und seine Brüder: Hofkapellmeister zwischen Schubert und Wagner: Bericht über das musikwissenschaftliche Symposium anlässlich des 200. Geburtstages von Franz Lachner, veranstaltet von der Gesellschaft für Bayerische Musikgeschichte und dem Institut für Musikwissenschaft der Universität München, 24.-26. Oktober 2003, ed. Stephan Hörner and Hartmut Schick (Tutzing, 2006), p. 143. In this article, which almost consistently disparages Lachner as a composer, the author constructs his explanation of Lachner's change from the symphony to the suite from his alleged failure in the symphonic genre owing to lack of talent, but without elaborating any stylistic features of his music. He also ignores the general change in taste that took place around 1850, a change that the composer was unwilling to follow and which led him to proclaim that the symphony was dead.
(2) Theophil Antonicek: "Biedermeierzeit und Vormärz," Musikgeschichte Österreichs, ed. Rudolf Flotzinger and Gernot Gruber, vol. 2 (Vienna, 21995), p. 324.
(3) Ibid., p. 326.
(4) Allgemeiner Musikalischer Anzeiger 9 (Vienna, 1837), p. 4.
(5) "Lassens Ihnen sagen, ich bin selber aner." Quoted from Ludwig Karl Mayer: "Franz Lachner als Instrumentalkomponist" (Ph. diss., Munich University, 1922), p. 93.
(6) See Otto Kronseder: "Franz Lachner: Eine biographische Skizze zur Erinnerung an seinen 100sten Geburtstag," Altbayerische Monatsschrift 2- 3 (Munich, 1903), special issue, p. 28
(7) Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 11 (Leipzig, 1839), p. 18.
The present reproduction is based on a copy from the musical collection of the Austrian National Library (shelf mark: SA.83.D.15.. Mus 22), which has earned our warm gratitude by kindly placing the score at our disposal. For performance material, please ask Robert Lienau Musikverlag, Frankfurt am Main.
https://repertoire-explorer.musikmph.de/wp-content/uploads/vorworte_prefaces/1145.html (https://repertoire-explorer.musikmph.de/wp-content/uploads/vorworte_prefaces/1145.html)
Please note that performance materials are available here:
https://en.schott-music.com/shop/sinfonie-nr-6-no353556.html (https://en.schott-music.com/shop/sinfonie-nr-6-no353556.html)
Wow, Alan, this is really good news that the notes for the instrument parts are also available!! (The company Schott is 45 minutes away from my hometown Darmstadt :-)
It would have been a tremendous task to create all the files ...
So I will create only the score pdf file which we can present to conductors or CPC. If they are interested I get them the notes for a performance. Is this a reasonable procedure?
Sounds very reasonable, Gerd. Thanks for all you wonderful work.
Might I suggest that conductor Gernot Schmalfuss be contacted via the Evergreen Symphony Orchestra of which he is Music Director and Chief Conductor here?>>> eso@cyff.org.tw
Yes, do you want to contact him or should I do it?
I want to contact another German conductor who performed so well some Kalliwoda symphonies...
Would you mind taking on that responsibility, please? And do contact whomever you think is most appropriate.
So, here now also the score files (with many, many notes ...):
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-1.pdf
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-2.pdf
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-3.pdf
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-4.pdf
mp3:
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-1.mp3
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-2.mp3
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-3.mp3
www.gerdprengel.de/Lachner_6_symph-4.mp3
With these files any conductor should get a pretty good impression of the work...
Yes, indeed!
I note that Gerd's realization of Lachner's sixth is now up on facebook. I hope that was done with your knowledge and consent, Gerd.
Brian
where in facebook do you see that? I don't find it ...
Gerd
On the YouTube channel of Bom Cabedal:
https://youtu.be/_nCyU7mLpos
Brian
...who seems to have the same recordings as we have in our Downloads board. >:(
That's very naughty. That's theft, really, I think.
I had noticed that from time to time. ::) I generally accept this sort of thing, rightly or wrongly, as being part of the surprisingly anarchistic world of classical music sharing and it's general lack of acknowledgement and seeking of permission to share . But in this case I thought it was particularly egregious given the sheer effort that Gerd put into his realization, as the well as the fact that the posting on facebook must have followed immediately on the heels of Gerd having shared his work here.
Brian
No, this is alright! I had contacted him because of his former midi version at youtube of the symphony with the many errors. He asked whether he could use my mp3 files which was fine with me. So, everything is ok. He also gave credit to my name. I don't have any claims on my version, just want to spread it in any way :-)
But where do you find it at facebook?
Gerd
Ah, right. OK. That's all good then.
I stand corrected. Sorry Gerd!
Brian
I think where Brian says "Facebook", he means "Youtube", Gerd.
Oh, yeah, right. Youtube, not facebook. :-[
Brian
I dont get it - in November I contacted the orchestra in Taiwan that recorded a Lachner symphony without ever getting an answer... and now I got the Information by a German musicologist that this orchestra will record the 6th symphony this year.... !!??
But good news either way, yes?
It'll be great to have the recording, but Gerd got there first!
There are places where a "real" recording could conceivably improve on Gerd's balance-wise, but Gerd's rendition has in many places clarity and coherence (no small things, in fact very important) to recommend it at just the points where they're important imho (the 2nd theme of the first movement, as it continues with its dotted rhythms- as might not be as clear in those not-rare recorded performances with fallible ensemble :( - becomes just a bit ecstatic, if that's the word I want. One way or the other, it's a really terrific passage...)
Lachner is one of my favourite composers. Unlike Schumann,I can readily see why he won that prize for his Fifth. I listen to it again and again. And his Eighth is up there in my favourite top 20 symphonies of all time. I am sure that Schubert would have approved of his light touch in the Finale. I do hope that cpo will issue a recording of the Sixth. That would be a treat!
Quote from: terry martyn on Friday 04 September 2020, 09:24
I do hope that cpo will issue a recording of the Sixth. That would be a treat!
I take it you've already heard Gerd's realization of the 6th...? I too can hardly stand still waiting for a recording of that symphony. As far as thinking about a possible recording the 7th goes, I'm honestly a little more convinced that the 7th suite is the better work between the two versions.
https://youtu.be/_nCyU7mLpos (https://youtu.be/_nCyU7mLpos)
I must thank you for the link to Gerd´s rendition. I had heard, and was dissatisfied with, the earlier MIDI one. But this is so much better and I am listening to it with pleasure as I type.
Dear Terry,
I am glad that this 6th symphony does speak to you. Rendering this has been one of the most satisfying things of my life :-) Please listen also to the 2nd symphony which is also awesome (for me much better than the more known 5th): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKTmLXPEG8Y
Gerd
I've listened to the realizations of the 2nd, 4th and 6th symphonies a few times by now . If I'm left with the wish that these works be taken on eventually by several really good "live" orchestras, that's -meant- as a compliment (to be sure, my first reaction is great enjoyment, and the other reaction is after reflection :) . ) The one moment/section out of all three works that I remember and love best just right now is the second subject/group of the 6th symphony (this part does come out better in the more recent realization), fwiw... maybe because that sort of clear, "martial" (dotted/double-dotted) counterpoint that knows exactly where it's going appeals greatly to me :D (and happens in the 1st movement 2nd subjects of the chamber music of a composer we're discussing in another thread here, e.g. in his cello sonata, clarinet sonata, A major quintet, and other works...)
Lachner n°6 available on cpo
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/franz-lachner-symphonie-nr-6/hnum/7971973
Well that's nice - but I'm more intrigued with the Bassoon Concerto. I didn't even know Lachner wrote one. Must buy.
Just noticed something odd: how can an item that has not yet been released have a sales rank of 2279?
Well, it can be ordered, so presumably the ranking is pre-release.
The Bassoon Concertino is a nice addition, but the Symphony's the thing here.
From the Lachner partial worklist @ "Die Componisten der neueren Zeit: Adam, Auber, Beethoven, Bellini...":
*Concertino für das Fagott mit Orchesterbegleitung (im Besitze des Herrn Hirth (dedicatee, I assume)). Diabelli, 1826.
also (next line) Rondo für das Fagott mit Orchesterbegleitung (für Hirth in Wien) 1825.
(this list, and another, are linked from the IMSLP category page. Kronseder's worklist- p.52 thereof- gives 1826 date for the rondo. Intriguingly, Kronseder mentions two harp concertos, I wonder if he's right. Anyway.)
anycase, in my opinion a commercial recording of symphony 6 is very good news. Thanks in advance, cpo.
Edit: why not record the Andante in D, though? (the first version of the slow movement.)
Like buses, two Lachner must-buys have arrived - for me - in tandem, one a recording issued many years ago and of which I was completely unaware until adriano brought our attention to it the other day(the harp concerto, awaited from DHL currently),and now, the prize of prizes, the Sixth!
If I had to choose my Desert Island Discs, I would include the old Marco Polo recordings of Lachner´s Fifth and his Eighth, with that sublime Schubertian finale. But the Sixth!! A hope realised, and I expect to hear a performance that justifies Schumann´s econiums. With the bonus of that bassoon concertino that adriano mentioned as well the other day.
Exactly - this really is the prize of prizes! Wonderful news, instant must-buy disc. Funny how the bassoon concertino just happens to appear here like clockwork too.
If, like me, you are greedy, I hope they get round to recording 2 and 4 as well.
I was just thinking the same. And it would not be before time,as I can´t think of any other symphonic composer of his stature so shamefully neglected.
I'd say Thieriot is even more scandalously neglected: there's not even a single recording of one of his symphonies - closely followed, say, by Abert, of whose symphonies only No.4 has ever appeared on CD.
As I've said before, although I eagerly snap up every new release of a Lachner symphony, I've never been blown away by any of them. To me his material too often can't bear the weight of the contrapuntal/developmental processes he puts it through. The result is frequently too repetitive and ultimately self-defeating - and just too long.
I'm now anxiously waiting to find out whether No.6 will finally 'do it' for me - as, for example, Rufinatscha's 1st (1834) always does:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95dE7Mu-KcE
Much more exciting - and original - than anything FL wrote - IMvHO, of course.
I respectfully disagree: the extensive development of seemingly mundane (but fun!) thematic material is the unique selling point of Lachner's symphonies. Sure, it's not as "serious" as other people's work, but it's always interesting.
QuoteI'd say Thieriot is even more scandalously neglected
I most heartily agree, Alan. I have liked everything I know by Thieriot. Lachner is interesting, yes - but he does go on a bit sometimes (especially in Symphony No. 5, which really is too long for its material - 6 is much better; 4 too, I would suggest).
Quotebut it's always interesting.
Really? Mundane material made interesting through clever developmental processes? I know this is a matter of opinion, but this sounds more like a recipe for boredom...
Anyway, I've ordered the new cpo release and look forward to being proved wrong.
If you are prepared to listen to the whole of the Fifth, and then play it again immediately after,you might find,as I have, that the work becomes mesmerizing. For me, it is not a moment too long, and I would have been willingly one of the Viennese jury to award it the prize over Nicolai´s engaging,spirited,work. As to the Ries effort, it does not move me in the way that Lachner succeeds in doing.
The harp concerto arrived tonight, and ,as promised, I will give you my first impressions of that CD on a new thread...........
QuoteIf you are prepared to listen to the whole of the Fifth, and then play it again immediately after
Oh, I've done so, but there's only so much working-out of the workaday material one can take. I admire the ambition, but there's just no inspiration.
Guess who said this of Symphony No.3...?
<<Consider the scherzo (placed second). It's a witty essay in contrapuntal textures, ear-catching at first, but twelve minutes later, when it's still bustling away, you want to kill yourself.>>. (Strictly no googling!)
Sounds like Hurwitz.
Alan, I always assume your opinion is very Honest!
For whatever reason, I did take to symphony no.6 from the start (except for the possibly unintended harsh dissonances in the performance I was listening to , which I should try to check against the score- a work which reminds me at its best of the more joyous and better parts of Schubert 9 (not my favorite work by not my favorite composer, but it certainly -has- its points) has something going for it. The skipping/French-overture-ish rhythmic section with its very interesting harmonic shifts, maybe.
By the way, "working out" is not (just) a matter of "let's find interesting contrapuntal combinations". Otherwise there'd be no difference between the Baroque and Romantic eras. Our remit may claim that dissonance is something to be avoided if at all possible (!), but given that we're not just reviewing Czerny etudes, it's a matter of the how, not the whether, and the reharmonization and rerythmicis... not going to _try_ that - is part of its working out too- and leads to wonderful results, not boring reassembly. (Not that a good work based on contrapuntal technique is boring- if it is, it's not a _good_ work. But that's a separate issue...)
(And yes, while I have a higher opinion of some of Lachner's themes, putting that aside and using a well-known example of the other thing; I've been listening lately to not just Stradal's but a number of other arrangements of Liszt symphonic poems, because. Sometimes the piano, duet, organ or trio ensemble gives some added clarity to my listening. Some of Liszt's themes considered as they are on their first appearance would not necessarily take much repetition; lovely though the secondary theme of Die Ideale is, without the harmonic and other variation he subjects it to, there might be trouble. Some other themes don't -need- such assistance, but when in one of the poems he takes a lovely very brief detour into a foreign key (somehow slightly presaging the page into D-flat just before the coda of Bruckner 9/i?...) - who cares if he really needed it, what matters is the beauty of it. Etc.)
QuoteSounds like Hurwitz.
I only quote him when I agree with him!
Quoteand leads to wonderful results, not boring reassembly
Would that were the case with Lachner. Anyhow, I'm awaiting a sudden and glorious epiphany with the arrival of the cpo/L6 from jpc sometime next week...
Epiphany: candidate for Word of the Day?
It probably isn't; he's not Liszt. I honestly miss college, where I could actually make an analogy... it was the last time in my life where people seemed to understand these things have things in common and contrast was not the same as these things are identical :)
(https://media1.jpc.de/image/w300/front/0/0761203521029.jpg)
Quote from: Alan Howe on Saturday 22 May 2021, 10:17
QuoteSounds like Hurwitz.
I only quote him when I agree with him!
Although I confess to be rather smitten with Lachner's Third (while acknowledging its faults), I also don't think the Sixth will provoke quite the same urge to self-harm - judging by Gerd's realization it's a fair deal more compact, and better able to sustain tension. I found it lively enough in its synthetic form, and hope that Schmallfuss and the Evergreen SO will imbue it with more still in their performance.
By the way, I think that Robinson's version of the Fifth Symphony does it few favours - it's already a long work, and those languid tempos dont't help at all.
QuoteBy the way, I think that Robinson's version of the Fifth Symphony does it few favours - it's already a long work, and those languid tempos dont't help at all.
No doubt that's true.
QuoteBut what about the Berger 2nd?!
Although I'd be quite happy to go there, let's not. At least, not here.
Lachner is such a unique composer for me: while I am acutely aware of his shortcomings, so well described here, there's not a single piece of his that I don't like very much, even love.
Me too, I go through the looooong 5th with a sort of mesmerized pleasure,
I suggest though, and the Schmalfuss 3rd for me proves it, that many of the problems are the result of not-so-good orchestras or indifferent conducting, just think about the Suites on Marco Polo...
In short, I can't wait to have this new one, too.
You may well be right about the quality of recorded performances. I'd certainly say that the Schmalfuss/cpo version of No.3 was excellent - which bodes well for No.6.
Some attractive-sounding excerpts are now available:
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/franz-lachner-symphonie-nr-6/hnum/7971973
The CD's here....
First movement: over-reliance on bouncy theme? Sequences galore, but genuine dynamism. Reminder to self: Lachner isn't Schubert! Nevertheless, quite a head of steam is forged as the movement progresses. Some lovely lyrical moments. Oh, no - a fugue, which only serves to hold up the movement. Finally the tempo quickens again before the close.
Slow movement: Very lovely. Full of interest and variety.
Scherzo: one of the first examples in the literature of shadowy-ghostly goings-on? Beautiful, relaxed trio section. A very fine creation.
Finale: alternation of triumphal theme (dotted rhythm) and secondary calmer theme. Genuine excitement builds. Much the most original Lachner movement I have ever encountered. Gorgeous string-led section towards the close.
Schumann's positive assessment justified! Apart from that deadly fugue section!
Performance seems pretty-well ideal. Playing nicely 'finished'; recording clear, but with plenty of 'space' round aural image. TT: 44:14
hrm. moreso than some of Mendelssohn's somewhat earlier orchestral scherzos? Intriguing. (First appearance specifically in a symphony is an interesting distinction but composers weren't who weren't averse to arranging chamber music as a symphony or exchange music between different orchestral works and symphonies didn't hold the name symphony in such especial reverence - as late as Pfitzner or as early as Cherubini.)
(The scherzo of Beethoven 5, however much I feel like I've heard it too often, is certainly a contender.)
Only 44 minutes! Robbed! And I was hoping to quote Geoffrey Dunn "Ït lasts two hours and more,Not counting the encore"!!
44 minutes are quite sufficient. The first movement's already irritating me with its multiple repetitions of the 'bouncy' theme. And, oh that wretched fugue. The remainder of the work is a great improvement, though.
Then Offenbach´s Eurydice would have been in harmony with you,Alan! (Offenbach was, of course, satirising contemporary offerings of heavenly length, amongst his many other Second Empire Aunt Sallies)
Very likely. Actually I have no problem with heavenly length, provided the length is indeed heavenly! But when Lachner slams on the brakes towards the end of the first movement in order to introduce a fugue which throws a spanner into the progress of the music, I throw up my hands in despair! Especially as the remainder of the symphony is really rather fine. Talk about a blot on the landscape...
I am persuaded that this is Lachner's finest symphony - by some distance. It's not over-long and contains some really memorable and individual music. I might even be reconciled to that fugue - one day!
Then I really look forward to hearing the CD even more, then. (I think I'll wait a few months and make a point of making that one of my gift-card things - last year's worked out very well.)
Thank you for all your comments on this symphony, Alan. Obviously, the CD now has to go on my wants list. ;)
I have now played through the Symphony twice. Much as I want to admire that fugue, I think it is out of place, portentious,and affects the balance of this otherwise pleasing symphony.
For those that haven't yet bitten this particular bullet: the symphony and concerto are now on Spotify.
Amazon Music also now - looking forward to hearing the symphony in a professional recording and the bassoon work at all.
Interestingly, the tempi are quite different compared to Gerd Prengel's version. Movements 1 and 3 are much (> 2 minutes) slower, 2 and 4 much (> 1 minute) quicker. Because I listed to Gerd's version quite a few times, it makes the finale sound rather rushed. I'm all in favor of keeping up the pace with Lachner (especially with Lachner), but this seems to go a bit too far.
Strange: I didn't notice any problem with the tempi. Perhaps I was too bothered by that wretched fugue...
Did you account for Gerd omitting repeats in the 1st & 3rd movements unlike Schmalfuss who includes them? I didn't notice any too crucial tempi differences either. Schmalfuss feels only just slightly snappier overall to me.
Agreed.
That's a good point. But in the latter part of the finale, and particularly throughout the Andante, I do find the difference noticeable. It could've been allowed to "breathe" a bit more, in my view.
The opposite point of view is that Lachner is best done swiftly - or not at all ;).
A nice quip, Alan, but I can't see anything to recommend it. To all music its tempo giusto (or range thereof!), surely.
QuoteTo all music its tempo giusto (or range thereof!), surely.
I'd say that Lachner 6/Schmalfuss is done within 'the range thereof'. Lachner's symphonies can easily sag under their own weight if they're not done swiftly. But that's just my view...
(and since you mention Lachner just generally, I hope the accelerating pace of recordings of his music continues, as there are still not just a few unrecorded symphonies to go but a number of other works too. I will agree they should preferably be played well or not at all ;) )
By now I also got me the CD and I am glad that it finally has been recorded :-) I am very happy regarding the Scherzo and the Finale, but absolutely frustrated about the way too slow Fugue at the end of the 1st movement. The fugue in my recording always has been a highlight for me (not only of this work) - how can they present this sooo tiring and boring? If I remember well, it is 2 minutes longer than in my version! This almost makes me angry ... :-(
On the other hand the wonderful middle part of the Andante is rushed through soo fast that all its melancholic beauty got lost ... But in the end I am reconciled with the joyful and splendid Finale!
Gerd
It's not the tempo of the fugue that bothers me - it's its mere existence! A tempo change isn't going to make any difference.
sorry, Alan, I certainly do not agree with you here. I adore the symphony's fugue of the Noteperformer recording ... !
I'm guessing Alan means it's the fact that it -is- a fugato*, which similarly puts sections of Liszt's B minor sonata and many, many other works into boredom for him- I conjecture!
*Fugato: a substantial fugal section inside another, eg sonata-form, rondo or variations, movement. (Maybe not variations unless it's part of the coda. The connotation is that it's not a separate piece but transitions into the remainder of the work fairly seamlessly.)
Fair enough. I find it academic and unnecessary in the extreme. In fact it simply holds up the symphonic argument.
I know what you mean about the fugue, Alan. While, however, I don't find it as otiose as you obviously do, I DO nevertheless think it would benefit, as Gerd says, from a brisker pace (but then, as we know, many pieces of music benefit from a being given a more animated tempo).
Thanks for being more specific!
It's a major talking point with regard to this symphony which I think is Lachner's best. At all events, I think the cpo recording is splendid and I'm glad to have it.
QuoteAt all events, I think the cpo recording is splendid and I'm glad to have it.
Agreed!
Here's MusicWeb's review:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2021/Sep/Lachner-sy6-5552102.htm
The reviewer greets this important work with modified rapture. Those few of us (maybe only myself!) that rank Lachner alongside Raff as two great composers, worthy of places alongside Brahms,Schumann,and Mendelssohn will be disappointed, but not surprised. Welcome as this recording of the Sixth is , repeated hearing leaves me a little flat. I am going to go out on a limb that I expect Alan in particular will want to cut off (and ,yes, I do agree with him about the fugue), when I say I think the conductor makes the music a bit rushed at times. I wouldn´t add this recording to my list of Desert Island Discs must-haves, unlike the Marco Polo recordings of the ethereal Eighth and the Fifth. Yes,I did say the Fifth, which I love and find the polar opposite of boring.
I wouldn't put Lachner in the same category as Raff at all. I don't think his music quite stacks up - and his influence was zero, unlike Raff. But that's just my opinion. Each to his own!
I've uploaded a Dorico/Noteperformer video of the 6th Symphony's original Andante movement on youtube.
It's impossible to say for certain why Lachner decided to revise and discard this Andante in favor of a new one in the course of the symphony's composition. Regardless, I thought having an opportunity to hear this original movement would not be entirely wasteful. Hope you enjoy it for what it is (keeping in mind obvious shortcomings due to the audio format etc!)
There were several penciled "vi-de" instructions added on top or bottom of the score, but I decided not to follow them so that the score could be heard in full. Played with no cuts and base tempo of the movement (q=72) throughout, performance time is just under 15 minutes. My highlights for the movement are the two poignantly scored, lugubrious passages starting from rehearsal letters B & G.
Youtube link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdfnj66T_zc)
Thank you Tuomas, how interesting.
I have now come to the conclusion that the finale of No.6 is worthy to stand alongside Schubert 9. Apologies for not 'getting' Lachner before...
I noticed, Alan, that you have been steeping yourself recently in Lachner's musical background and his symphonies, and I wondered about the road to Damascus!!
The Secretary to the Community where I live in Spain is a German-speaking Italian from the South Tyrol, with an aristocratic background. Some years ago, I mentioned that I was awaiting the arrival of this symphony on CD.
"Ach,Lachner!!", she said, and her eyes lit up in pleasure.
Here's an enthusiastic review:
Meeting Franz Lachner: the Sixth Symphony on cpo
Colin Clarke
The repertoire might be off the beaten track, but what delights await. A masterly order and clarity reigns in this symphony, a lightness and euphony, in a word, it is so mature and well-formed that we an readily award the composer a spot in the near vicinity of his preferred model, Franz Schubert.
So wrote one Robert Schumann of Franz Lachner's Sixth Symphony. Born on April 2, 1803, both of Lachner's parents were organists (although his father was a clock-maker by trade). He arrived in Vienna via Munich (he was appointed Kapellmeister there in 1836(, and it was in the Austrian capital he became part of the circle around Schubert himself.
The Sixth Symphony was completed in February 1837 (and premiered in Munich in April of that year, under the composer's baton). The first movement opens gently, easing itself in. Certainly it does so in this most affectionate performance:
Schubert's influence is immediately evident in the harmonies. Even the climaxes sound Schubertian. The real characteristic though is an easy and logical flow throughout. The Evergreen Symphony Orchestra (from Taiwan) under Gernot Schmalfuss give everything. High violins are tested in Lachner's score and come out on top; balance is superb throughout, as is the recording (made in the Keelung City Cultural Centre in Taiwan). So is linear clarity (there's a fair amount of counterpoint here). When the music demands rigour (as it does from time to time: a contrapuntal passage in the first movement that strides off determinedly: it turns out to be a good olf Handelian double fugue!) the Evergreens are right there, and there is an infectious enthusiasm that suffuses the performance.
Some critics have been disparaging of the slow movement, an Andante, but not me. It is a dream, static at heart and blissfully so. Texturally, Lachner's string writing is blissfully slight and transparent, his woodwind writing beautifully expressive (especially notable in this radiant performance):
The Scherzo is fascinating. It has something of the mechanistic about it (perhaps his father's clocks had a subliminal say in it!). The Taiwanese players dig in nicely; at other times they dance in an almost but not quite Mendelssohnian way. It is a fabulous movement:
The finale has moments of woodwind pastoral joy, a sort of Mendelssohn-Schumann cross-breed in feel; and yet at one point near the end it threatens to whirl off into a Brahms Hungarian Dance. It is all wonderful fun, and a stirling introduction to a composer we should all know more about (he also wrote an oratorio on Moses: that I should like to hear!)
A truly lovely disc. The repertoire might be off the beaten track, but what delights await!
https://www.classicalexplorer.com/estonian-premieres-on-alpha/ (edited)
Quote from: terry martyn on Friday 14 March 2025, 14:20I noticed, Alan, that you have been steeping yourself recently in Lachner's musical background and his symphonies, and I wondered about the road to Damascus!!
The key has been 'steeping myself' in the three cpo releases of the symphonies, i.e. Nos.3, 4 and 6. This has meant listening over and over again to 'get' the idiom which, I am now convinced, is masterly. Lachner isn't really like his contemporaries: there's something almost baroque/classical/objective about his musical processes - quite different from, say, Mendelssohn and Schumann, and looking ahead to other composers 'from the south', such as Netzer and (more distantly) Rufinatscha and Bruckner.
PS. Still don't much care for the fugue section at the end of 6/1.
Full agree on the baroque/classical elements in Lacher. I've always regarded his symphonies as a sort of example of how Weber's might have sounded had he lived longer; they exude a similar energy and use of rather short melodic arcs. Meanwhile, Mozart and Gluck still audibly lurk somewhere in the background. But that does not mean that they're conservative for their time.
That said, I remain of the opinion that Lachner had real issues with pacing and timing; the symphonies often feel more like elaborate improvisations than that are consciously built up according to some underlying concept. Perhaps, this structural nonchalance is due to Lachner's focus on melodic development, which was arguably his greatest gift.
Alan- well, yeah- I -believe- you won't find much disagreement that successfully incorporating a fugue into other forms (especially "sonata-allegro") is/was not a skill available to many... (Mozart and Beethoven got it really right famously several times, and a few others less famously. One author suggested, iirc, that the best- almost the only- places to try it were the development and the beginning of the coda, and with a few exceptions may have been right- which Lachner did, but lack of proper pacing in music will sink, well, anything.)
Edit: there are undeniably exceptions with effective fugues in the recap. Two of the best I know are out of our discussion range- the finale of Edmund Rubbra's first symphony (if it even is a sonata form) and the first movement of Roger Sessions' 4th (more a mini-fughetta early in the recap, but a good one.)