Widor Organ Symphonies 3 & 4 from cpo

[Alan Howe]

Follow this link:
http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/Charles-Marie-Widor-1844-1937-Symphonie-Nr-3-op-69-f%FCr-Orgel-Orchester/hnum/4947239

[eschiss1]

Oh, -those- organ symphonies- the Op.69 and the Antique, not op.13 no.3 and the 4th solo symphony.
Still waiting for the F minor and A major symphonies, but then, the piano concertos only -just- got recorded (twice) for the first time... still, the op.69 has gotten a couple of outings (though it's not a staple)- as I think has also the Antique. Have heard the former, not sure about the latter. Anycase though, probably good news Thanks!

[albion]

I'm a bit confused here by the information given in the jpc link -

the Symphony No.3, Op.69 (1894) is for organ and orchestra, but Op.42 No.3 is Organ Symphony No.7 for solo organ (1887) ...



Widor's 'symphonies' catalogue is not, perhaps, a model of clarity -

Organ Symphony No.1, Op.13 No.1 (1872), for solo organ
Organ Symphony No.2, Op.13 No.2 (1872), for solo organ
Organ Symphony No.3, Op.13 No.3 (1872), for solo organ
Organ Symphony No.4, Op.13 No.4 (1872), for solo organ
Symphony No.1 in F, Op.16 (1873) for orchestra
Organ Symphony No.5, Op.42 No.1 (1879), for solo organ
Organ Symphony No.6, Op.42 No.2 (1879), for solo organ
Symphony [unnumbered], Op.42 (1882), for organ and orchestra [orchestration of movements from Organ Symphonies 2 and 6]
Symphony No.2 in A, Op.54 (1882) for orchestra
Organ Symphony No.7, Op.42 No.3 (1887), for solo organ
Organ Symphony No.8, Op.42 No.4 (1887), for solo organ
Symphony No.3, Op.69 (1894) for organ and orchestra
Symphonie gothique [Organ Symphony No.9], Op.70 (1895), for solo organ
Symphonie romane [Organ Symphony No.10], Op.73 (1900), for solo organ
Sinfonia sacra [Symphony No.4], Op.81 (1908) for organ and orchestra
Symphonie antique [Symphony No.5], Op.83 (1911) for organ, orchestra, vocal soloists and chorus

[Gareth Vaughan]

Th info. in the jpc link is certainly confusing. But the numbering of Widor's Organ Symphonies - admirably set out by Albion - is fairly logical: those for solo organ are all numbered separately 1-10; those for orchestra (with or without organ and/or chorus) are numbered separately (1-3, plus Sinfonia Sacra [4] and Symphonie Antique [5]). The confusion comes with the unnumbered symphony given the opus no. 42, being an arrangement of movts. from the solo organ symphonies 2 & 6 - this, I agree, was not very helpful of M. Widor, and does not get us much further in discovering what exactly cpo have regarded as "Symphony No. 4".
All of Widor's symphonies have been recorded before, of course.

[eschiss1]

Wait, what?
I didn't know there had been (commercial, presumably) recordings of the first 2 orchestral symphonies. I have somewhere a broadcast of the F minor symphony (misleadingly and incorrectly given as "in F" in your listing; in F major it is -not-) and I am guessing there's some recording of the A major symphony but don't know for sure and haven't heard it. (Both of the first two orchestral symphonies can also be skimmed in some form- full score for no.1, reduced for no.2, I think- at IMSLP.)

[albion]

I have somewhere a broadcast of the F minor symphony (misleadingly and incorrectly given as "in F" in your listing; in F major it is -not-)

The 1870s edition by Durand, Schoenewerk & Cie., Paris (plate number 1595) describes the work as 1ere symphonie en fa par Ch. M. Widor. Thus "Symphony in F".

Given that the bulk of the first movement is indeed in F minor, the conclusion of the first movement and the entire finale is in F major. Therefore, the description is neither misleading nor incorrect.

[JimL]

I think it would be "Fa" if it were in the major.  And besides, something in F minor is also in F.  Only the modality is different from F Major.

[albion]

something in F minor is also in F.  Only the modality is different from F Major.

Exactly so.

[eschiss1]

The description "in F" has led a number of people who haven't seen the score- or Pizzetti's symphonie "en la" or Wellesz's first symphony similarly etc. - to decide that since there's a (no longer honored) convention that works without minor mode specified are in fact in major, those works are in fact in major (that is, their first fast movement's first main section's first main theme is based around a minor tonality- give or take, more or less, etc.) In each of these works that's not true- but I apologize for a massive digression way too much into it (there has been that convention, and it actually hasn't been honored for ages, fwiw. By the way, Stravinsky's "symphony in C" isn't an example one way or the other- "in C" is part of the title, not a key designation, and can't be augmented by major - but that's also neither here, there or price of chewing gum in this topic.)

[JimL]

Stravinsky's Symphony in C is in fact in C Major.  A better example would be Korngold's Symphony in F-sharp, which has a highly ambiguous opening.  One would be hard-pressed to assign a modality to it.

[Gareth Vaughan]

The 2 purely orchestral symphonies were around for a while on LP in the late 1960s early '70s on an obscure French label (can't remember the name - sorry) which was not sold in the UK. A friend of mine - now, alas, departed - picked up a copy in France, but I've no idea what happened to it after his death. I remember finding them rather dull - but I was young and foolish then, and might change my mind if I heard them now.

[eschiss1]

I tend to agree with regard to the 1st but on both counts- I hope to be more impressed on finding the recording again and giving it another listen.
(That said, my next listening priority is a rather big piece downloaded last night, other things may have to wait a bit. )