According to the lengthy article on Parry in the June issue of Gramophone magazine, Chandos will be releasing a recording of the original 5-movement version of his 4th Symphony in October. The BBC National Orchestra of Wales is conducted by Rumon Gamba.
I'm sorry, I don't know how I missed this... Parry's 4th symphony was originally in 5 movements? and a new recording..... This is really exciting news
Yes: Parry originally included an Intermezzo between the first and second movements. He also completely recast the first movement and replaced the Scherzo. So, the 1910 revision is essentially a new work based on the material in the original.
Also, didn't they discover new manuscripts in 2015 in the family archives - was this from that lot?
How exciting! Thanks for reporting this, Alan. That'll be a 'must have' CD for many of us.
From a skimpy listing in the Naxos USA preorders section, it looks like the filler will be "Suite Moderne." Catalog number is CHAN 10994, so that's a regular CD, not a SACD.
This would appear to be the link:
http://naxosdirect.com/items/symphony-no.-4-suite-moderne-467053 (http://naxosdirect.com/items/symphony-no.-4-suite-moderne-467053)
Release date: 5th October.
And just announced on MDT today:
https://www.mdt.co.uk/parry-symphony-no4-bbc-orchestra-of-wales-gamba-chandos.html (https://www.mdt.co.uk/parry-symphony-no4-bbc-orchestra-of-wales-gamba-chandos.html)
I wonder what Parry would think about this.
The writer Gottfried Keller rewrote his novel "Der Grüne Heinrich" (which appeared when he was still quite young) later in life and strongly objected to comparing the versions or even still reading the old one. Maybe Parry wanted the first version forgotten?
Well, Brahms (for example) did a good job of destroying music he didn't want to be heard; evidently Parry didn't, so...
As for Keller, it's rather tricky to stop people reading the first version of a published novel! Keller may not have liked this, but it affords us a fascinating insight into his development as a writer and as a man. I suspect the same will be true of Parry's 4th which in places sounds very Elgarian - until one realises that it was revised in 1910, 21 years after its premiere!
I for one am drooling at the prospect of hearing Parry's first thoughts!
I shall be looking out for this one. I find that first versions are generally more interesting (not always objectively "better" maybe, but more interesting) than later ones. This is particularly clear in works like Sibelius Fifth, where the first iteration is incomparably more daring that the "final" product (still great, don't get me wrong).
But I do think this practice of endless tinkering with already-performed and sometimes already-published works has historically been one of the worst aspects of classical music.
I don't think this is a case of 'tinkering', though. Parry's 4th (Original Version) is a quite different work and it's from the composer's own hand...
Excerpts are now available here:
https://www.chandos.net/products/catalogue/CHAN%2010994 (https://www.chandos.net/products/catalogue/CHAN%2010994)
Pdf of the sleevenote here:
https://www.chandos.net/chanimages/Booklets/CH10994.pdf (https://www.chandos.net/chanimages/Booklets/CH10994.pdf)
Thanks, Alan.
I've been wondering why the Suite Moderne took so long to be recorded. Now I am slightly disappointed to find that they decided to omit the first movement. The booklet doesn't give a clue why this was done. Does any of our members know the reason?
I'm more than a little disappointed, given that the Suite was written almost as a 4 movement symphony, as I see the notes make clear. Why then omit the 1st movt? It doesn't make any sense. I would very much like to hear the rationale for what strokes me as a bizarre idea.
Looking at the CD's timings, maybe the first movement was more than five minutes long and musically poorer quality than Proserpine, so they chose to include that instead as they couldn't have both. Not that I'm defending that decision, of course, if that's what happened..
The original version of the Fourth Symphony at first hearing is an impressive work. I'm ashamed to say that I'm not familiar enough with the final version to make comparisons but, judging this work on its own merits, this symphony is certainly a very welcome acquaintance. The first movement is rather austere and serious, but that severity is balanced by a restless energy. The Intermezzo second movement lasts less than two minutes and acts as a bridge to the fine introspective slow movement which the booklet notes describe accurately as "lyrical pathos". It's a lovely piece. Lightening the mood, the Scherzo (which Parry replaced entirely in the later version) has the character of a pair of dances, one sprightly and the other more leisurely. It's relaxing music, such as Brahms might have inserted as a middle movement. The Finale is another strong movement. Vigorously dramatic in places, it demonstrates how to be celebratory without being tediously repetitious, and closes the work with a grand, upbeat flourish. No wonder Hans Richter was impressed. I really must listen to the final version now.
I had an interesting conversation with someone from Chandos on Facebook the other day after I "liked" their new Parry Symphony 4 post and I mentioned to this person that many of us (unsung-crowd) were very disappointed to see the Raff Chandos cycle come to an abrupt close as we were very excited and is there any plans continue it He/she replied "There is no plan to at the moment but that doesn't mean it won't happen!".
So is this just polite conversation or is it a chance to start something great/wonderful again? If there's any chance of this being a green light to continue the series, I'm all for it.
As far as I know, the Chandos Raff series came to an abrupt halt because of contractual, problems following Järvi's equally abrupt departure from L'Orchestre de la Suisse Romande. New parts for Symphonies Nos.3 & 4 had been already been prepared. I don't believe that there's much chance of a resumption, more's the pity. Anyway, back to Parry's rather fine original Symphony No.4...
Dear Mark, I was thinking more along the lines of a different conductor/orchestra. Anyways like you said back to Parry 4.
Haven't heard the new Chandos recording of the Parry yet, but I have to say I hope it's better than the performance broadcast this afternoon, which struck me as distinctly under-characterised and underpowered - by comparison Bamert's recording of the revised work has far more sweep imagination and energy; a shame, as I genuinely believe it is the first really major British symphony, and deserves better...
PS; interesting to read back the thread and find myself agreeing with llja about the original version of Sibelius 5; I've never shared the universal enthusiasm for the "official" 5th, which always struck me as far too neat and rather pat...hearing the original was a revelation - a vastly more daring imaginative and disturbing work, a true successor to Sibelius 4th...I'm afraid by comparison the original of Parry's symphony offers no such revelations...
I wasn't greatly impressed by the radio broadcast either, but I was in the car, so...
...but evidently the grandeur found by Bamert in the revised score isn't in evidence here.
...but the real problem, as I've established this morning having listened to the whole thing, is that I've been spoilt by the revised version all these years. The latter is so much grander - dare I say it, more Elgarian - that the first version rather pales by comparison. So, an important release musicologically speaking, but a greatly inferior work, I fear. Or perhaps I should say a very different work...
Of course, there's another point of view - which is that this a much 'purer' work, with much less imported and therefore imposed Elgarian nobilmente. I'm listening again on that basis...
By the way, the BBC National Orchestra of Wales are a superb band.
I'll be very interested in your conclusion. Not really knowing the final version of the work and so coming to this original version untainted, as it were, by knowledge of the later revisions, I was very impressed by this symphony.
I listened to it over headphones yesterday and was - oddly - much more impressed than I had been when listening to it over speakers. Maybe I was concentrating better. Anyway, I feel that the key is to try to forget the revised version (V2) which so bowled me over when I heard it a couple of years back.
The clear Elgarian additions of V2 are hard to put out of one's mind; it takes a few hearings of V1 to 'get it' without making comparisons all the time. I'm now in a much better position to appreciate V1 - and to hear the passages (and there are many) which are actually proleptic of Elgar.
are there recordings of the revision besides Bamert's on Chandos? I gather Naxos was thinking on a complete cycle but while they've (almost?) finished their cycle of Stanford symphonies, they've only released Parry's 2nd symphony (22 years ago).
No: Bamert's the only one.
I still haven't reacquainted myself with the final version of No.4, but it's a relief that my positive impression of the original work wasn't so out of line with your assessment, Alan.
It was my memory of V2 that spoilt my initial assessment of V1. Rather a faux pas on my part.