Too lengthy, but irresistible

[Alan Howe]

OK, I admit it: I just can't help myself. I find some unsung pieces of music irresistible, even though I know they're too long. An example? Rheinberger's 53-minute long Florentiner Sinfonie (that's longer than any of Brahms' symphonies). Its first movement features a rising figure that is repeated again and again in different guises, but oh the flood of melody and the gorgeous orchestration - heaving cello lines, solemn brass. I'm in seventh heaven. Too long? Of course. But what scenery...
Then, as it if that weren't enough, there's a gloriously lyrical slow movement to lose yourself in, followed by the dreamiest of menuettos suggesting, according to the composer's wife, a slow carriage journey out of the city of Florence to a high-lying church from where the city could be viewed beneath them. Then there's a jolly, boisterous finale which just sweeps you along - again too long, but I can forgive the composer anything because there's always some lovely tune to carry you along or some marvellous passage of orchestral writing to entertain you. Too lengthy? Sure, but I can't help myself...

Has anyone a candidate in this category (one or two per person, please, preferably with reasons)?

[JimL]

Urspruch Symphony.  A little more sung: Dvorak 2.

[mbhaub]

The much loved Gliere 3rd. Let's be honest, there are large swaths in the symphony, esp that long last movement, that should have been cut. Second movement the same. It would have been fine at 60 min. What I hate though is that in trimming it as many conductors do, they always cut that wonderful contrabassoon solo in the second movement. But I still listen to the whole shebang frequently.

Then there's the Tchaikovsky Manfred which also could have been sheared - but by the composer, not conductors! Actually, I think the first three movements are just fine as he wrote them, but that last movement needed some trimming. Like Toscanini did. I love that symphony, but maybe if Tchaik had cut out that unnecessary fugue in the last movement, and some padding along the way, it would be played more often. But the ingeniousness and skill of the writing make it worthwhile.

Lastly, virtually all of The Ring. I love the cycle. I've sat through several productions, plan on more. I have several recordings. I love it. All of it. Yet there are times (usually in Twilight) that wouldn't it have been nice if each opera had been written to match the length say of La Boheme?

[Mark Thomas]

As Jim has suggested, my vote would go for Dvorak's Second because of the endless supply of melody coupled with constant rhythmic interest which he shoehorns into the sheer youthful energy of the work. It's one of my stock choices when I need to cheer myself up and start whistling. A wonderful feel-good piece.

[minacciosa]

Can't agree about cuts in Ilya Morumetz. Safer to say that it's a piece some embrace completely and others do not. I think its breadth is absolutely suited to the material and fully realized.

[X. Trapnel]

Don't touch a note of Ilya Murametz! There's not a dull moment; the lengthiness is repetition/elaboration of good material, not uninspired note spinning.

[kyjo]

I just have to nominate Marx's Herbstsymphonie. I wallow in every minute of it! I wouldn't care if it went on for hours, even though it is really too long! There's no end to the gorgeous orchestration and sumptuously rich textures. The Gliere Ilya Murametz, however, is not too long at all; Gliere knows how to fill a large time span with exciting, memorable music a little better than Marx, but I enjoy the two symphonies equally!
P.S.- Sorry if this doesn't make any sense!

[Amphissa]

I also prefer the uncut Gliere 3, especially Farberman's recording.

My addition to this topic of overly long but (to me) irresistible works has to be Taneyev's "Oresteia". The most one normally encounters from this opera is the Overture, which was not a part of the opera, but a separate symphonic poem based on music from the opera, and one bit of music from Act 3. 

At 2 1/2 hours, the complete opera is not something you would normally want to listen to in one sitting, although I have listened to the complete work in one night (with intermissions between the acts) on multiple occasions. Taneyev actually called it a trilogy. The complete work is in 3 acts, but each act is basically a separate opera.

Despite its length, I find the music and orchestration compelling. And this from someone who really doesn't much like opera.

I wish someone would film a performance of the trilogy for DVD.

[eschiss1]

I'm having much too much trouble answering this one myself- some (many?...) of the pieces that first come to mind seem on reflection to be - not too lengthy but... very, very lengthy and just right, though not for everyday use. But that's -- other threadage.

[minacciosa]

In the case of Wagner, every opera he ever wrote except Rheingold qualifies.

[JimL]

My addition to this topic of overly long but (to me) irresistible works has to be Taneyev's "Oresteia". The most one normally encounters from this opera is the Overture, which was not a part of the opera, but a separate symphonic poem based on music from the opera, and one bit of music from Act 3. 

At 2 1/2 hours, the complete opera is not something you would normally want to listen to in one sitting, although I have listened to the complete work in one night (with intermissions between the acts) on multiple occasions. Taneyev actually called it a trilogy. The complete work is in 3 acts, but each act is basically a separate opera.

Isn't Meyerbeer's Huguenots like, 5 hours long, uncut?  Or do I have it confused with Wagner's Rienzi?  Or is there no confusion because they're both that long?

[Alan Howe]

No, the Meyerbeer's definitely long - 4 CDs in Bonynge's performance - but definitely not 5 hours. Who wants to do the math (for US members)/maths (for UK members)...?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Les-Huguenots/dp/B00000E4N9/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1344884844&sr=1-1

[Gareth Vaughan]

I really cannot agree about "The Ring" - there is not a note out of place. It is an extraordinary masterwork. The carefully controlled and brilliantly woven tapestry of leitmotifs clothes an architectural structure of colossal intellect - a truly grand design. I would not say the same of every opera he wrote, but one must recognize genius when one encounters it.  That said, I fully realize that Wagner divides opinion massively - he did in his lifetime and he does now. If you don't respond to his music, fair enough - you're in respectable company (Rossini!) - but I'm afraid I do, very profoundly.  Mind you, I also adore Rossini - and I'm sure I'd rather have spent an afternoon in his company than in Wagner's.

[Alan Howe]

I agree 100% with Gareth. For Wagnerites such as myself, there's not a note too many in the Ring. In fact, I'm contemplating purchasing the forthcoming version on Blu-ray recorded at the Met with, among others Bryn Terfel. Oh dear, I'm obviously hooked...

[pcc]

I wish there was more space for anti-Wagnerites to-day, like myself.  I always feel like an atheist in church concerning Wagner.  We _will_ see the Met's PARSIFAL next season, although I'm giving my 15-year old daughter (an avid opera fan) the option of us leaving if it gets to be too, too much - it's her first Wagner, and I think it our duty to go, but as for me there are plenty of extra notes in it I can miss.  (For years it was performed annually at Indiana University, where I went, on a Sunday early afternoon and evening with a longish dinner break.  Very Midwestern, but lots of people didn't come back after dinner...)