Living Symphonists

[Dundonnell]

Referring back to my original post which launched this thread I notice (with some surprise) that I omitted Philip Glass Glass is now 75 but, as the composer of nine symphonies, certainly qualifies as a 'symphonist'

There have been only a few passing comments on Glass throughout this thread and I get the impression that those who have mentioned him have little regard for Glass's music.

To be honest, I must confess the guilty secret that I rather like Glass Not to sit and study but as hypnotically restful music. I do think that there is a place for this kind of thing for at least some people and I also applaud the fact that Glass did revert to the use of traditional musical forms in middle-age. I have actually just finished listenening to his Tirol Concerto for piano and string orchestra and, although the finale is rather tediously and, obviously, repetitively jolly, the rest of the concerto is actually rather beautiful.

I wouldn't want to have to listen to a surfeit of Glass but just now and again it is actually rather pleasant

[Christo]

I must confess the guilty secret that I rather like Glass

I personally can't stand his 'symphonies', but do play his other music. As you say: for entertainment. 

[Jimfin]

I don't possess any Glass, though I have a regretted purchase of John Adams, but I have a friend who likes all that minimalist stuff and plays it at dinner parties, where I admit it makes quite reasonable background music, less grating that 'pop' and less demanding to be listened to than 'classical'. For myself, I usually play ballet music when I entertain. The latest Dutton Holbrooke, Aucassin and Nicolette is the latest, though sadly none of my guests have enquired about its composer.

[Dundonnell]

Rather Adams and Glass than Boulez, Stockhausen or Ligeti any day, say I

[shamokin88]

Little by little I have been taking in the substance of older comments, before I joined up. I notice that this discussion seemed to begin with Finns. And yet nowhere do I recall anyone commenting on Erik Fordell who, in my 1977 ASCAP catalogue, is credited with some 25 symphonies. I have have never heard a note of his music although I would very much like to.

But the question as to who is a "symphonist" seems a subjective one. Our Alan Hovhaness is not a "symphonist" with however many - 63? - in the same sense that my cousin, Roger Sessions, was with a mere 9. Something about the nature of one's response to the masterpieces of the past determines the
designation; the habit, I think, not the number of times that a composer has written "Symphony" on his manuscript.

Best to all.

[Leea25]

Like shamokin88, I too would like to hear some Fordell - don't ask my why, I just have a feeling i would like it.  Incidentally, there is one tiny piece of his currently available, a little string piece called I Folkton. It's on this CD:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sibelius-Rakastava-Fordell-Svendsen-Himmelens/dp/B0042NP4TS

Sorry - slightly OT.

Lee

[JollyRoger]

..........I guess I'm a foolish old romantic..

..... that's OK, as long as you aren't implying that the second two terms entail the first! 

No indeed.....at age 72 , I'm old, lean to late and modern romantic in musical tastes,perhaps foolish at times...and let me add somewhat cantankerous.

[JollyRoger]

I must confess the guilty secret that I rather like Glass

I personally can't stand his 'symphonies', but do play his other music. As you say: for entertainment. 

I hesitate to post as this is off-topic but will be breif. Glass has written some engaging music when he dosen't outdo his stay, listen to the fascinating Concerto for Saxophone Quartet here on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF8oaYY7S7Q&feature=plcp&context=C457a627VDvjVQa1PpcFPZ06_LvJY8kwnEOw1R7ZkGE0u9GqrrPYc%3D
But in his more grandiose efforts(symphonies), I just can't conjure up the imagery required to stay attentive to music that appears contrived (IMHO) rather than inspired..So back to the thread, Glass is indeed a symphonist..he has created enough to qualify as such...

[Amphissa]

I try with some of these modernists. Silvestrov, for example, has been described as post-Mahlerian, neo-classical, that sort of thing. His music is not as abrasive as some, qualifies as tonal I suppose. but it is far from lyrical.

That said, I have uploaded a Silvestrov piece that, if not exactly endearing, is at least atmospheric and worthy of a listen.

I do have some more Silvestrov works that I can upload, if there is interest, including a symphony or two. Personally, I find his music ... (oh, the worst of all pejoratives a composer can suffer) .... boring.

[Dundonnell]

I try with some of these modernists. Silvestrov, for example, has been described as post-Mahlerian, neo-classical, that sort of thing. His music is not as abrasive as some, qualifies as tonal I suppose. but it is far from lyrical.

That said, I have uploaded a Silvestrov piece that, if not exactly endearing, is at least atmospheric and worthy of a listen.

I do have some more Silvestrov works that I can upload, if there is interest, including a symphony or two. Personally, I find his music ... (oh, the worst of all pejoratives a composer can suffer) .... boring.

Silvestrov's relatively new Symphony No.8 (2007) is the only Silvestrov symphony I don't have a copy of.

[eschiss1]

Hrm. Even Dennis Busch (born 1947) only had 80 symphonies in storage with the American Music Center in New York City (as of 1994, but I don't think any later ones were stored*) (no.67 has been recorded.)

*they changed their policies at some point I gather. Whether his even larger number (ok, not several hundred- misremembered) of chamber serenades (mentioned in the NY Public Library catalog as also having been deposited there) had anything to do with that I couldn't rightly say but I feel like I'm gossiping in even so suggesting...) (Actually, it seems his 100 or so string trios take up the plurality of the 300-odd works there.)

[eschiss1]

Quite sure "modernist" is not the word for Silvestrov, objectively speaking- the term does have a fairly definite meaning and refers to a fairly definite period (and attitude) in the visual and musical (and other) arts. (It does not mean the same as modern or current, or even "progressive" or "avant-garde".) Based on what little I have seen in score and heard.

[JollyRoger]

I try with some of these modernists. Silvestrov, for example, has been described as post-Mahlerian, neo-classical, that sort of thing. His music is not as abrasive as some, qualifies as tonal I suppose. but it is far from lyrical.

That said, I have uploaded a Silvestrov piece that, if not exactly endearing, is at least atmospheric and worthy of a listen.

I do have some more Silvestrov works that I can upload, if there is interest, including a symphony or two. Personally, I find his music ... (oh, the worst of all pejoratives a composer can suffer) .... boring.

I first heard a Silvestrov on an Olympia CD I bought years ago and was sorry I bought it have since disposed of it.
..I still do not know what all the fuss is about..
Perhaps its was not his best.

[Amphissa]

Quite sure "modernist" is not the word for Silvestrov, objectively speaking- the term does have a fairly definite meaning and refers to a fairly definite period (and attitude) in the visual and musical (and other) arts. (It does not mean the same as modern or current, or even "progressive" or "avant-garde".) Based on what little I have seen in score and heard.

This is rather like saying that "classical" refers only to music written during the period defined as the "Classical" period and that "romantic" refers only to music written during the "Romantic" period. Silvestrov incorporates many of the same approaches to composition used by "Modernist" composers, including serial. So, to me he is a modernist, even if he was born later than the original "Modernists." I'm not sure why he is commonly referred to a Mahlerian, because I hear very little in his music that sounds anything like Mahler. He certainly lacks the lyricism of Mahler.

[Amphissa]

Rather Adams and Glass than Boulez, Stockhausen or Ligeti any day, say I

I agree with this completely, although I like Glass better than I do Adams. I tend to like Glass better as background music to video, dance, etc. Not so much just to sit and listen.