Scriabin: the symphonies.

[minacciosa]

I'm not fond of Scriabin's first two symphonies at all; I consider them second or third rate works of unfocused Wagnerian tendencies. However, the 3rd is terrific.

[adriano]

That's a very hard judgement, mincacciosa: I am shocked :-)
What exactly do you mean with "unfocused Wagnerian tendencies"?
In my (personal) opinion, the First, for example, is an excellent (ane very beautiful) work. Wagnerian tendencies or not, much of the music of that time was influenced by Wagner: but this cannot be an argument of making Scriabin's music third rate; his use of Wagner is not ofembarrasing kind.

[chill319]

Regarding Symphony 1, I've never quite understood how movement 2 and movement 4 relate to each other and to the whole, but the first movement has my vote for the most beautiful use of the circle of fifths ever, and the last movement really takes that baton and crosses the finish line with it. Overall, an amazing first symphony.

[minacciosa]

Hadrianus, I apologize for the passion of my judgements; I realize everyone may not agree. I see and hear a tremendous growth between the first two symphonies and the third, which also has much more memorable material and more competent motivic development. I've actually performed No.2 as a section violinist. I remember rehearsing it, and at that time already knowing the third, the second appeared rather weak to me by comparison.

[adriano]

@chill319
I think there is no need of a correlation between these two (2nd and 4th) momevents. The 4th is just a kind of scherzo-intermezzo (mazurka-like?). The Sonata principle used in the 2nd movement is interrupted for a while and will be taken up again only in the 5th movement. The 3rd mvement too appears to me like a slow-movement-like (ABA) interlude.
In other words:
1) Lento - a short prelude (similar to his earlier orchestral work "Reverie"
2) Allegro drammatico - sonata form with a sort of "secondary section"
3) Lento - an ABA interlude
4) Scherzo-Intermezzo - (with a quite different orchestration than the rest)
5) Allegro (Sonata form taken up again - and, at the same time conceived as the Symphonie's Finale)
6) Andante (a postlude-like addition, an extra piece with voices)
At the (rather unsuccessful) premiere, the last movement was omitted - and only played in a performance some months later.
In my (totally unprofessional) opinion, this work is a combination between a suite and a symphony - or a suite with symphonic elements. Scriabin was still searching and experimenting.
Hope that some members in here will not having heart attacks reading this, it just came out spontaeously, with not enough time to consult my score :-)

[sdtom]

We all have our opinions. I like the 3rd very much.
Tom

[sdtom]

I don't know why it didn't register with me before but his single movement 4th symphony could easily have been a part of The Planets.

[Christopher]

There's a 4th symphony? Is it recorded?

[eschiss1]

Poème de l'extase, Op.54, and quite a few times, yes.

[sdtom]

Just got a new recording of it with the LSO and I really enjoy it.
Tom

[eschiss1]

If I may,

A performance by the Frankfurt Radio Symphony of the Poème de l'extase (on their own YouTube channel; not a rip by someone else, not a sample. Whole thing. Conducted by Markus Stenz. Really good YouTube channel, by the way, though not everything they play on it was composed strictly between 1825 and 1920, so for those who insist on that, duly warned. ;^) )

[sdtom]

Is their a recording of the first that people are fond of?

[adriano]

I think the version by Golovanov and all three versions by Svetlanov (1963-68s, 1990-92s and 1996) are excellent and intensive. I also like the ones by Kitaienko (available since a couple of month as a complete bargain set), Muti and Segerstam :-)

(one hour later)
Just re-listened (after many years) to the Riccardo Muti version (Philadelphia Orchestra, 1985).
A real discovery, and how lyrical and tense at the same moment! And very exctatic when it should be - already preparing the spirit of Scriabin's following Symphonies.
In the second movement I discover an extra 3 bars of timpani, which were never in the scores - maybe added by Muti - but which are more than plausible... Now I must find out who else did the same thing. In any case, not even in the new critical edition they are to be found.
Muti makes a splendid interpretation of the 3rd movement, perhaps the best?
The (Glazunovian) fourth movement is really pianissmo-piano as I never heard before; very eerie-like and mysterious.
The last movement with soloists and choir is excellent and very mystical. This may become very easily cheap, depending on the interpreation.
In all movements, Muti delivers splendidly organic rubati and intersting tempi changes.

[sdtom]

I like your enthusiasm about the Muti recording and will hunt it down. Currently I have the Pletnev recording with the Russian National Orchestra. It is coupled with The Poem of Ecstasy which I can say that I prefer the trumpet work on this recording over my new LSO recording which I quite enjoy the 3rd on.

[Alan Howe]

Pletnev is as good as Muti in No.1 - and is better recorded. Muti has been the standard recommendation for all the symphonies for many years now.