Symphonies in Disguise?

[eschiss1]

anasik - the legends op22 - I think more a suite or suchlike by Sibelius' standards- even from his first numbered symphony he showed he had some clear notions what he, personally, meant by the word, and I'm not positive the Legends qualify?

[JimL]

I've always thought of two John Adams works as symphonies in all but name: Harmonielehre and Naive and Sentimental Music.

Having just discovered Adams' fabulous Harmonielehre, I'm inclined to agree with you, Jim. What a piece!

Check out the other one.  If that isn't a symphony too, what is?

[Richard Moss]

Perhaps a bit late to comment, as this thread is not new, but in the opinion of forum members, what distinguishes (or even defines!) a symphony compared to a suite (other than the composer's own title)?

[eschiss1]

Goodness, so far as I'm concerned, Shostakovich's song cycle on Akhmatova lyrics (once on Decca CD coupled with a memorable account of his 14th symphony) is something of a brief vocal symphony in disguise, my point was that Sibelius had his standards , I believe, for what constituted a symphony and what didn't - just as Holmboe did too, just for example - and they weren't the same standards ... or my standards either - but they did lead to e.g. the latter composer's getting maybe pretty far toward a 9th symphony twice (one such work becoming, I believe, one of his Symphonic Metamorphoses) before his actual one.

[reineckeforever]

hi, what do you think about Tchaikovsky's Manfred?

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Interesting thread. As to Tapiola not being designated a symphony by Sibelius, I think he had two reasons - 1) the inspiration is clearly programmatic and 2) there is only a single, but very powerful mood.  Though Tapiola is just as stringent as Symphony No. 7, the latter work feels 'larger' and is more varied.

[Alan Howe]

hi, what do you think about Tchaikovsky's Manfred?

It's a looser, programmatic symphony - but a symphony all the same.

[eschiss1]

Manfred's also a declared symphony, not one in disguise

[Jimfin]

Which could lead to the question of unnumbered symphonies. Some people, like Britten, didn't number their symphonies (as they don't really form a cycle), but others wrote symphonies with numbers and others without, like Tchaikovsky's Manfred and Arnold's Toy, String and Brass symphonies. Obviously they felt them somewhat apart from the cycle, lighter or programmatic.

[Paul Barasi]

It makes me wonder how little I know. Such as:

Which composer was first to number his own symphonies?

If there are works which are not called symphonies yet actually are, then which works are named as symphonies but aren't?

How many symphonies have been written?

What does the chronological mapping of symphonic composition look like?

What proportion of total symphonic output has been recorded?

[kolaboy]

I'm sure some will not agree, but in my mind Tapiola is a symphony in all but name. And Kullervo, of course. Brings the old fellow to a nice symmetric "9", anyway.

The four Lemminkäinen Legends are clearly a symphony; that together with Kullervo gives us 9 Sibelius symphonies; and if you count Tapiola as well (which is a symphony, if the seventh is), that would give us no less than 10 of them. Picking up Sibelius' favourite 20th century composer, Béla Bartók's Music for string, percussion and celesta is yet another 'symphony in all but name'.

I love the op.22 Legends - but they (to me) come across more as a suite of related, but ultimately stand-alone pieces, much like Klami's op.23. As per Tapiola being falling short of the "symphonic mark" by virtue of it's programme, that's never personally been an issue for me, seeing as how I tend to ignore the programmatic aspect. Just as absolute music - without any mythological associations - the piece never fails to move me.
Perhaps there would have been greater contrasts of mood in the eighth... and I hope someday we will have the great privilege to find out