Conductor Golo Berg has kindly told us that cpo are shortly to release his recording of Julius Otto Grimm's Symphony in D minor, coupled with same composer's Suite in Kanonform.
To consult our previous thread on the Symphony, please follow this link:
https://www.unsungcomposers.com/forum/index.php/topic,8198.0.html
Following the release of the CD, the download of the radio broadcast will, of course, cease to be available from this website.
This will be a treat.
Indeed it will - and many thanks to Golo Berg for giving us notice of its forthcoming release.
As I recall that the consensus here seems to have been disappointment (perhaps caused by initially extremely high initial expectations, but then, perhaps not!), hopefully the cpo release will improve matters, ...
btw how close to the release of a disc does it usually appear on this page (https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/theme/-/tname/labelshop_cpo_komponistenverzeichnis) which seems to provide the earliest info on the site? :) I suppose one way to find out will be to check regularly for when "Grimm" appears among the composers...
one other question: Grimm wrote at least two suites in the form of a canon, perhaps 3 (no.1 in C for strings is op.10, no.2 in G for full orchestra is Op.16. There's a suite no.3 for strings, not sure at the moment if it's also "in Canonform", op.25) . Is it clear which was meant?
I guess we'll find out more when the CD is officially announced for release. We don't have a firm date - and the conductor may not actually have the exact details. His message to me reads 'soon'.
The radio broadcast previously posted at:
https://www.unsungcomposers.com/forum/index.php/topic,8729.msg90147.html#msg90147
Rather a 'grim' wait for the release of this important work. Wonder how long it'll be before it comes out?
Looking forward to it, anyhow, and hoping other conductors pick it up, too. Enjoyed listening to it.
Quote from: Alan Howe on Wednesday 26 March 2025, 11:41Rather a 'grim' wait for the release of this important work. Wonder how long it'll be before it comes out?
The delay is over. To be released on 24 April:
(https://d1iiivw74516uk.cloudfront.net/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwcmVzdG8tY292ZXItaW1hZ2VzIiwia2V5IjoiOTc2Nzk0My4xLmpwZyIsImVkaXRzIjp7InJlc2l6ZSI6eyJ3aWR0aCI6OTAwfSwid2VicCI6eyJxdWFsaXR5Ijo2NX0sInRvRm9ybWF0Ijoid2VicCJ9LCJ0aW1lc3RhbXAiOjE3NDI5OTc5MTN9)
https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/9767943--julius-otto-grimm-symphony-op-19-second-suite-in-canon-form-op-16
Wahay! Marvellous!!! Thanks for the notification!
You must have ESP, Alan.
Or cpo keeps a closer watch on us than we thought. Hmmm...
In which case, what other long lingering recordings can we persuade them to let loose from the basement?
Please see this new thread for possible unreleased cpo recordings:
https://www.unsungcomposers.com/forum/index.php/topic,9738.0.html
April 24th for the download. How long until the CD is released, I wonder.
It's usually within a couple of weeks (of the download). Worth keeping an eye on jpc.de...
Thanks, Alan. Long live the CD.
The coupling is the 34+ minute Second Suite in Canon Form in G Major, Op.16.
The CD will also be available from jpc on 24th of this month:
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/julius-otto-grimm-symphonien/hnum/11169417
Thankfully. I never understood why different formats should be released on different dates.
My copy's already been sent off - wonder how come?
Edit: The CD's available now! They must have changed the date:
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/julius-otto-grimm-symphonien/hnum/11169417
Clearly a certain number of cpo releases come out independently of the company's usual monthly quota.
Ah, that's me told.
Always keep an eye on jpc. The download date (at Presto) is still 24/4.
Until it suddenly isn't. The 4D chess games cpo is apparently playing with their release dates never cease to amaze me.
It's all very odd. We end up checking websites every day...
Mine, also, has been shipped, two days ago. I have to say the cost and shipping to the USA were quite reasonable.
Normally, I would have waited until it showed up on Amazon.com, but thought it better to get ahead of the tariff situation.
Quote from: raffite33 on Saturday 12 April 2025, 16:14the tariff situation.
I'm sure we all trust that there won't be a hugely negative effect on CD collecting on the other side of the Atlantic.
Quote from: raffite33 on Saturday 12 April 2025, 16:14...I have to say the cost and shipping to the USA were quite reasonable.
...thought it better to get ahead of the tariff situation.
JPC shipping to the US is quite inexpensive, even for large orders.
I don't think the tariffs apply to works in the keys of D minor, F sharp, or G, so you should be safe for now.
Well, maybe they'll slip through during one of the periods when he's declared a Pause.
(Just checked the other thing I was wondering about, and that guy hasn't too drastically revised the Kennedy Center program since personally taking over its management; the May 1 program with works by Schnittke and Shostakovich (the 4th symphony), which I was worried for- though I can't be in DC this year - is still there, for example.) Apologies; tangential, but, well, not used to this, is all the rest I will say at all...
As I suggested, Eric, we are all hoping that classical musical enthusiasts will be left well alone.
Well, unless they're gay. Or "different". Or Mexican. Or Chinese. Or European. Or once even thought something uncomplimentary about King Trump.
I'm sure Shostakovich, ironically, passes muster as Putin's chum Gergiev champions him and the White House cronies won't want to upset Vlad.
I'm really looking forward to receiving my delivery from jpc. This is an important release.
Never heard the Symphony? Try it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDHesxU6YmQ&t=2058s
And just to be clear: I was talking about the undesirability of tariffs upon imports of CDs into the US.
I'm surprised more people have not promoted his symphonic works in concerts, as he was a great friend of Brahms.
It is one thing to opine on the undesirability of an extra impost on CDs. None of us want that.
It is entirely another to inject politics into the thread. I, for one, regret the intrusion.
Quote from: terry martyn on Tuesday 15 April 2025, 11:41It is entirely another to inject politics into the thread. I, for one, regret the intrusion.
Me too. Hopefully, we've moved on...
Quote from: Alan Howe on Wednesday 02 April 2025, 21:53The coupling is the 34+ minute Second Suite in Canon Form in G Major, Op.16.
Is this a world premiere recording of the second suite? I am unable to find anything online. Also, don't forget to take down the link to the symphony that we have on the forum!
QuoteAlso, don't forget to take down the link to the symphony that we have on the forum!
Link removed, thanks for the reminder.
(https://media1.jpc.de/image/w2182/rear/0/0761203561223.jpg)
Quote from: Justin on Tuesday 15 April 2025, 14:06Is this a world premiere recording of the second suite?
I believe so, yes.
Ilya,
Having enjoyed a further listen to his symphony yesterday evening, I have just downloaded the 1st suite in C maj - many tks for the upload, which in its own way I hope will be as entertaining to listen to. I've just found that 'Repertoire Explorer' (https://repertoire-explorer.musikmph.de/en/product/grimm-julius-otto/) has a long description of the work.
Cheers
Richard
I didn't know that text, thank you for the link.
By the way, I'm not a hundred percent sure about the identity of the performers. There is a recording of the 3rd Suite (also in the downloads board) by the Collegium Instrumentale Köln, but that sounds nothing like this recording, which I have a suspicion could be older.
My copy of the CD arrived this morning from jpc - and, naturally, I couldn't resist listening to the Symphony, which sounds resplendent in this recording. What a stupendous work this is. How on earth it has remained buried and unknown for so long is hard to imagine. Gernsheim's memory of the work in his later years is now triumphantly vindicated.
Curious to hear your thoughts on the suite too, Alan.
The 2nd Suite is much harder work (for me, at any rate) - and it's somewhat odd to encounter baroque-style orchestral music in 19th-century guise. I can't think of anything like it, unless it's a Stokowski Bach arrangement! I must say, though, that it has a certain grandeur which regularly bursts through the busy counterpoint.
Here's an excerpt from the Preface to the work at Musikproduktion Höflich:
Following a highly successful first Suite in Canonform Op. 10, Grimm was evidently inspired to write this second piece using the same device, seven years later. This time, rather than limiting himself to the strings-only format of the first Suite, he chose to write for full orchestra. The new work was given its premiere under Grimm's baton in Münster in October 1869, and the following March he had the opportunity to perform it at the Leipzig Gewandhaus. On that occasion, it was listed in the programme as 'Symphonie in Kanonform' – perhaps due to Eduard Hanslick's comment that the First Suite also had strong symphonic characteristics. The Leipzig performance was warmly received, particularly for Grimm's creative employment of canon: "The composition is a musical masterwork. The work is, with all its artistry, so full of light, and so appealing in its complex refinement, that even the first hearing brings true pleasure... We listened to the four long movements of the Symphony with rapt attention, and overall we recognised the ingenious and sophisticated artist throughout – in spite of, we are tempted to say, a stubbornly one-dimensional form, he has managed to hold our interest from the first to the last bar; and within self-imposed limitations he unfolds astonishing variety: that is to say, this is no mean achievement, in our opinion. And only true art maintains the freshness of the spirit upon which it works; artifice always wearies and enervates. Grimm's Symphony is admittendly a clever piece of work, but it is also a work of art. And the auditorium, which paid tribute to every movement with its very warmest applause, also fully recognised this."
By the time Grimm published the Second Suite in 1871, he had evidently decided that 'suite' rather than 'symphony' was the most appropriate descriptor for the work. It appeared with a dedication to his old friend Johannes Brahms; and Grimm also provided a piano duet transcription, issued at the same time.
The opening Allegro con brio is particularly substantial, and for the most part Grimm keeps the orchestral texture relatively uncluttered in order for the two lines of the canon (at an octave, and doubled in strings and wind) to be clearly audible. He also succeeds in obtaining great variety in the character of his various canonic themes, which is no doubt what prompted such complimentary reviews. The second movement, a minuet, is cleverly written to vary canonic instrumental pairings – the orchestral colouring changes almost from phrase to phrase; and this is followed by a sombre Molto Adagio in a kind of Baroque pastiche. The finale marks a return to the transparent textures of the opening movement, although the canonic material (still at an octave) is sometimes hidden within the accompanimental texture, allowing Grimm greater freedom with his melodic writing. Bach is never far away – the first violin melody two bars before letter D bears a striking resemblance to the first movement of the Fifth Brandenburg Concerto BWV 1050. This Second Suite marks Grimm's last serious engagement with canonic writing. Although there is a Third Suite Op. 25, this only contains a single movement in canon form.
Katy Hamilton, 2015
https://repertoire-explorer.musikmph.de/wp-content/uploads/vorworte_prefaces/1704.html
I'll agree that the string version of Grieg's Holberg Suite is more in Baroque manner than using contrapuntal techniques; and I don't even know Henschel's string-orchestra Serenade in 4 movements in Canonform (pub.1874) for comparison (though MPH has republished it, too)...
I'd be surprised if Saint-Saëns hadn't had a go at it. His 1883 opera Henry VIII has a section that contains several Tudor Dances, I know... one of which is the theme "The Jolly Miller" I know from Brian's "Comedy Overture".
If I'm going to be honest, the 2nd Suite doesn't interest me. No doubt it's ingeniously constructed, but it doesn't interest me any more than baroque music as a whole. No, the Symphony's the thing here - and what a work it is. Take that, Herr Dahlhaus!
Quote from: Alan Howe on Wednesday 16 April 2025, 16:47The 2nd Suite is much harder work (for me, at any rate) - and it's somewhat odd to encounter baroque-style orchestral music in 19th-century guise. I can't think of anything like it, unless it's a Stokowski Bach arrangement!
Like the Holberg mentioned by Eric, there's also Raff's Suite, Op. 181. If we extend, for stylistic purposes, the 19th century to include the first decade of the 20th, there are also Reger's Suites, Op. 93 and 103, as well as the Concerto, Op. 123. Going back to Raff and considering chamber music, there the Quartets Op. 193/1 & 3. So, perhaps not so unusual after all?
The Grimm isn't just a suite, though. It's canonic throughout, giving it a distinctly contrapuntal, baroque flavour quite different from most 19th century compositions called 'suites'.
Closest thing I can think of is Toivo Kuula's Fugue from his Opus 10. But it sounds like Grimm's suite is slimmer than that.
Let's not forget Jadassohn's G major Serenade No. 1 in 4 canons of 1872 - written amidst the onslaught of Grimm's three suites, and sounding more attractive than either the latter's 1st or the 3rd.
Good spot. Thanks.
QuoteLet's not forget Jadassohn's G major Serenade No. 1 in 4 canons of 1872 - written amidst the onslaught of Grimm's three suites, and sounding more attractive than either the latter's 1st or the 3rd.
And I think the only recording of it to date is the one I instigated with Cameo Classics now available from Wyastone here: https://www.wyastone.co.uk/salomon-jadassohn-orchestral-works.html (https://www.wyastone.co.uk/salomon-jadassohn-orchestral-works.html)
Note too that Grimm originally called the 2nd suite a symphony. (No idea if the cpo notes mention this, but Ms Hamilton does.)
Quote from: eschiss1 on Thursday 17 April 2025, 00:31Grimm originally called the 2nd suite a symphony
The liner notes tell us that the programme acompanying the performance at the Leipzig Gewandhaus on 3rd March 1870 described the work as a 'symphony in canon form'.
Regarding the genesis of the composition of the Symphony, the booklet notes reiterate the view that the first three movements almost certainly date back to 1852, but that the finale is later - although the Grimm estate at the Münster City Archive 'has preserved an earlier handwritten version that differs significantly from the published final movement.' Various performances of the work took place in 1862, 1872 and 1873, all of which pre-date its publication by Rieter-Biedermann in 1874.
I wonder what Golo Berg knows? Intriguing...
The New York Philharmonic performed the Suite/Symphony in Canon Form on April 18, 1874, where it was billed "Suite #2, Op. 16".
No NYPO performances of the Symphony in D minor, alas, though the Boston Symphony did perform it on February 22, 1884.
No further performances for either, however.
Quote from: Alan Howe on Thursday 17 April 2025, 11:17although the Grimm estate at the Münster City Archive 'has preserved an earlier handwritten version that differs significantly from the published final movement.'
This was evidently something that Chris Fifield didn't know about when writing his book a decade ago; on p.269 he says that its 'whereabouts are unknown today'.
Oh, you meant of the finale of the symphony, not of the 2nd suite... (I see you've uploaded the manuscript.)
Quote from: eschiss1 on Saturday 19 April 2025, 16:48(I see you've uploaded the manuscript.)
Huh? ???
I was pointing out that there is clearly another (earlier) version of the Symphony's finale which is mentioned in cpo's booklet notes. It would be useful to know a bit more about it.
Cypressdome has uploaded/mirrored the earlier version of the symphony's finale (in manuscript full score, as digitized by Stadtarchiv Münster) to IMSLP, so in principle it should be possible for one to find out a lot about it.
See here, specifically (https://imslp.org/wiki/Symphony_in_D_minor%2C_Op.19_(Grimm%2C_Julius_Otto)#967481).
But I do see I was responding to the wrong person, sorry!
Thanks, Eric, for clearing that up - and for linking us to the manuscript of the alternative version of the finale.
I wonder whether Grimm had always had difficulties over the finale...
So: is Grimm's Symphony the final proof that the claim of a symphonic gap between Schumann 4 and Brahms 1 proposed by Carl Dahlhaus is false?
How much proof do we need? Grimm's symphony is just one of many. There is a performance gap to be sure, but no gap in terms of worthy material.
Up to now I'd thought Dietrich's Symphony was the best candidate to 'bridge the gap'; now I think Grimm's the man. So, evidently, did Chris Fifield.
And if among Brahms' by no means huge circle of composing friends (or even just in the place and time period...) we find a "gap symphony" :) no worse and new to us, all the better.
To be honest, we've given Dahlhaus way too much credit for much too long, simply because it was convenient to consider the gap in performance as representative of the lack of "worthy" contemporary musical material. Dahlhaus, while a distinguished scholar, was also known for what is now called "presentism", the narrow vision of (in this case the musical past) through the lens of present priorities. It is, to be sure, one of the most fatal flaws that can befall any historian, but one has to regard this in the light of the ideological belligerence displayed by the West Berlin serialist avant-garde (as insular as the city they worked in) of the time.
However, even back then there were people with enough repertoire knowledge to know that this "thesis" was utter gobbledegook, not in the least because they would have performed this music before the War. Few people realise how lethal the Nazi regime was for the richness of the concert repertory. Not only Jewish and Slavic composers were barred from the concert halls, but also a host of others deemed "unworthy" for whatever reason, or simply because they weren't "the best" according to some Nazi culture chief of the time (Hans Franke's chum Bruno Schestak played a role here, too). Most of these works never returned to the repertory after the war, and the whole thing worked to confirm Dahlhaus's idea.
As a matter of interest, I wonder when the last time Grimm's Symphony was performed prior to being taken up by Golo Berg in Münster...
Leipzig Gewandhausorchester performed the suite op.16 as early as 1867/11/14 and individual movements from it as late as 1893/1/26; the symphony at least once, on 1873/1/16, the composer conducting.
Thanks, Eric. Any performances in the 20th century?
The Deutsches Zeitungsportal (https://www.deutsche-digitale-bibliothek.de/search/newspaper?query=Grimm%2BCanonform&fromDay=4&fromMonth=4&fromYear=1900&toDay=18&toMonth=2&toYear=1943) gives mentions of some performances of the suites after 1900, but more of the first than the second, it seems.
I'll wager that the Symphony hadn't been performed since the late 19th century. I'd love to be proved wrong, though...
Apparently, the symphony was played in 1927 (https://www.deutsche-digitale-bibliothek.de/newspaper/item/Z5EZRN7YMYADW5XGMBFR5BENVL66JW6J?fromDay=4&toYear=1943&fromYear=1900&toDay=18&toMonth=2&fromMonth=4&query=%5C"Julius+Otto+Grimm%5C"+sinfonie&hit=&issuepage=2) during a festival to celebrate his 100th birthday, conducted by Rudolf Schulz-Dornburg (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Schulz-Dornburg). This was in Münster, which appears to have maintained fond memories of its most famous composer.
Good job I didn't put any money on my bet! Thanks, Ilja. Maybe no further performances since 1927, though?
I couldn't find any. A few for the suites, the last one (at least on the DZP) from 1934.
Hrm!
Schulz-Dornburg is a name that's been turning up lately a few times- interesting... Thanks.
(He seems to have been the dedicatee of Frommel's - remember?- first symphony (https://search.worldcat.org/title/896103397), for example - out of our current orbit, but we have discussed it before :) - and of one work which I noticed on IMSLP that isn't in our orbit (Vorfrühling, by Wellesz) but which explains why his name rang a bell... And he premiered Karl Weigl's 2nd symphony...)
The whole Symphony is now available on YouTube:
(i) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu3ca3G6Exk
(ii) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKWTmiJgo90
(iii) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFpRYxHcGr0
(iv) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FxypdBnR4A
Just wondering whether members have had time to absorb this fine Symphony? I can certainly hear why Chris Fifield thought it was a significant work...
I've only heard it once so far, unfortunately (the upload we had here, I forget if it's the same as the cpo recording - ah right, seems to be from the timings at Prestoclassical and as observed subdivisions on the mp3, almost the same that is) - I intend to return to it, anyway, soon. I'm convinced of its quality, if not necessarily of its prescience, so to speak, but I am convinceable!
I expected to have heard it,and commented by now, but I ordered it from Presto and they have just promised me that it will be ready to be sent by July 25th.
Oh, dear. I apologise - I ordered my copy from jpc in Germany. I didn't realise what the UK release date would be.
And that's what I would have done normally,so I am kicking myself for straying from the straight and narrow.
Ah, I forgot it's been available from jpc since April...
Mine is still in transit from JPC.
Y'all can still listen to it on Youtube, and the proceeds of that will flow to cpo as well, of course.
Anyhow, I must confess myself rather impressed by this work – yet another confirmation (as if we needed it) of the finalist ridiculousness of the "Dahlhaus Gap".* It is a weighty work in the good sense, with some real depth and an impressive diversity of moods, going from Brahmsian lyricism to a more stringent tone that is somewhat reminiscent of Bruch. That may be its greatest weakness where it comes to public perception, but it's hardly Grimm's fault: almost every passage reminded me of a different (usually later) work. It may have well worked against the symphony being appreciated on its own merits, however.
Still a hugely entertaining work, however. I thought that in practice it consists of three parts: a brooding, quite diverse first movement, a rather non-funereal Trauermarsch second movement, and a final section consisting of two almost continually forward-driving fast movements. I took my time listening to it yesterday evening and it didn't feel like an almost 45-minute symphony at all. If I were to voice a niggle, it might be that its emotional center is perhaps too much concentrated within that first half-hour (and particularly the first movement), making the rest feel not as substantial as it could have been.
* I'm feeling a bit bad for poor Carl if this what he'll be remembered by, because even he doesn't seem to have been entirely convinced by his own thesis.
Quote from: Ilja on Saturday 17 May 2025, 10:11poor Carl
He's been comprehensively overtaken by events, i.e. the rediscovery of a number of fine symphonies written post-Schumann 4 and, most importantly, Chris Fifield's landmark book. Musicology marches ever onward!
Glad that it does, even if the direction (e.g., extreme HIPness) sometimes seems self-defeating.
Agreed, although I was really meaning the discovery, established in recent decades, that Dahlhaus' gap wasn't as barren as he had claimed.
Quote from: Ilja on Saturday 17 May 2025, 10:11in practice it consists of three parts: a brooding, quite diverse first movement, a rather non-funereal Trauermarsch second movement, and a final section consisting of two almost continually forward-driving fast movements.
Ilja makes a good point. In this performance (the only one we have, after all) Golo Berg starts off the 4th movement at virtually the same breakneck pace as the third finishes so, despite the few seconds break between them, the ear almost carries over from one to the other seamlessly and one does have the impression of a balanced three movement work: 16:29, 11:09 and 14:33, enhanced by the Finale returning to the Scherzo's pace at the close. Maybe this was Grimm's intention, whilst still keeping within the four movement tradition. It really doesn't matter, it's a powerful and satisfying listen all the same, but I wonder whether a longer break between the final pair of movements, such as one might easily get in the concert hall, would destroy the impression and expose the imbalance of the four movements?
Luckily it arrived in the post this morning. On a single hearing the symphony strikes me as a competent, somewhat forward looking work for its period, graced by effective inner movements but let down by a finale that doesn't stand up to the material that preceded it. In short, it's not bad, but it's nothing that I would recommend.
The Suite in Canon Form made a more favorable impression, having a great deal of period (albeit pastiche) charm.
The finale has really grown on me over the past few weeks of repeated listening. In any case, many fine symphonies in the 19thC are constructed in similar fashion, e.g. Bruckner 7, Brahms 2, etc.
It's not just a matter of length, though, but also of two movements that share a similar tempo and a (almost) consistent forward drive. Brahms' 2nd has a much more pastoral scherzo which is very different from the finale; same for Bruckner 7, where the variation within the movements is greater too (and which is altogether a very different beast).
Agreed. It took a moment for me to realize the finale had even begun. It's as if it were the second half of one long movement, separated only by a double bar.
My reaction was quite different: there's a very obvious minor key ending to the Scherzo which forms a clear contrast with the bright major key start to the finale. I had also been familiar with Reverie's computer realisation, so there was no surprise when I first heard the new recording.
I mentioned Bruckner 7 and Brahms 2 because they are front-loaded as far as their first two movements are concerned, as is Grimm's Symphony. I've never confused the last two movements of the latter.
FWIW I had been interested in Grimm's Symphony for years (I have a copy of the score). While Chris Fifield was researching symphonies for his book, I supplied him with copies of recordings and we discussed at some length the candidates for the period post Schumann 4, including the Grimm whose background was (and still remains) something of a mystery, with its origins apparently in the early 1850s, the later addition of a finale (replacing the alternative version now known to be in the archive at Münster) and the story of the elderly Gernsheim remembering the first movement motto/rhythm many years later.
Another thing which struck me quite forcibly is how similar Grimm's orchestral palette is to Hiller's - more so than to Schumann's. In a way I guess that shouldn't be surprising as Hiller was regarded as a very prominent and influential composer in the 1850s when Grimm started work on the Symphony and, of course, it doesn't detract from his achievement.
Two aspects of the Symphony stand out for me: first, the sheer memorability of the themes in all four movements and second, the motto/rhythm which permeates the whole of the opening movement. I wonder whether Bruckner could possibly have encountered it?
The performance from one of Germany's many medium-sized regional orchestras is pretty good too. It sounds to me that conductor Golo Berg believes in every bar of the work. Now we need one or two more recordings to see what other conductors and orchestras make of it.