Listening to Seconds

[Amphissa]

I didn't want to hijack Chill's thread, but it did raise some questions that got me thinking. Apologies if this seems too far off topic.

My questioning arose as I thought about the designation of Mahler's 2nd as the greatest ever. Now I don't want to get into some sort of heavily turgid discussion of what constitutes "best" or "greatest." We've all gone down that route on many occasions.

Rather, the questions that arose for me had to do with behavior vs abstract judgment. As a recovered Mahler fanboy, I own more than 50 recordings of the 2nd and have easily heard twice that many, as well as having heard it in concert several times. It is, in my opinion, a great symphony, and may be the greatest 2nd.

However, if someone were to tell me "pull out your favorite 2nd to listen to tonight," Mahler 2 would not be among my choices. And tomorrow night, that would not be among my choices, or the night after.

Is it simply familiarity? I am 100% certain it is not just familiarity. The 2nds that I would choose among are just as familiar to me, and to the extent they are available, I own many recordings of those.

So, what is it that differentiates listening behavior from objective judgment. Why is it that I can entertain the notion that Mahler 2 is "the best" and yet prefer to listen to several other 2nds instead - and probably prefer to listen to those others many times before listening to Mahler 2 again?

Based on my listening preferences -- the music I actually pull out and play -- I'd have to say these (in alphabetical order, not order of preference) would be at the top of my second symphony listening list:

Borodin
Brahms
Howard Hanson
Kalinnikov
Rachmaninoff
Rimsky-Korsakov
Sibelius
Vaughan Williams

And as I looked at my own list of 2nds, that caught me by surprise. There are not many unsungs in that mix.

Which got me thinking about 3rds. What 3rd symphony would be annointed as the "greatest 3rd"? Mahler? Beethoven? A list of 3rds that I actually listen to most often would contain more unsungs.

Berwald
Brahms
Gliere
Magnard
Saint-Saens
Vaughan Williams

And on down the list. The symphonies of any number that the experts (and even I) might say is the "greatest" or the "best" usually does not coincide with the symphonies I actually listen to most often. If I want to listen to a 5th symphony, it is more likely to be Myaskovsky than Beethoven.

So, I guess my question to you is, do your listening choices coincide with your judgment of the greatest symphonies? Which 2nd and 3rd symphonies do you actually listen to most often?

[Hovite]

So, I guess my question to you is, do your listening choices coincide with your judgment of the greatest symphonies? Which 2nd and 3rd symphonies do you actually listen to most often?

Third Symphony? No contest! Bruckner.

Second: probably Mahler.

[wunderkind]

"Seconds" would be Mahler, Sibelius, Balakirev, Kalinnikov, Rachmaninov

"Thirds":  Brahms, Beethoven, Ropartz, Mahler, Schmidt-Kowalski, Mendelssohn, Glazunov, Schumann, Saint-Saëns, Ryelandt

"Fourths": Braga Santos, Giannini, Mahler, Mendelssohn, Dvořák, Schubert, Parry

just a few - off the top of my head

[Peter1953]

An interesting thread, Amphissa.

For me there is indeed a difference between the Seconds and Thirds that I love most, and I listen to most. It's strange, but I rarely listen to my absolute favourites. These works are so "anchored" (is this English?) in my head. Although these masterpieces are so heavenly, they just don't give me as a listener any suprises anymore.
However, I have a few favourite Seconds, not at the same level as my first choice, to which I listen quite frequently (at least a few times a year, some even a few times a month).

My absolute favourite Seconds are:
Brahms, Mahler, Rachmaninov, Schumann

The Seconds I listen more frequently to are:
Bortkiewicz, Gernsheim, JPE Hartmann, Rubinstein, Rufinatscha.
A new find for me is Herzogenberg, and I'm going to add this marvellous work to the list.

My absolute favourite Thirds are:
Beethoven, Brahms, Mahler, Mendelssohn, Saint-Saëns, Schumann

The Thirds I listen quite often to are:
Berwald, Draeseke, Gernsheim, Raff, Rubinstein, Schmidt-Kowalski

____

Looking at my list I draw the conclusion that the unsungs give me more listening pleasure.

[TerraEpon]

Of course, by the definition in the othe rthread, Saint-Saens's third is actually his 5th.

But who's counting?

[chill319]

"Greatest" can become an easy solipsism, and I fall into it as readily as anyone. At the same time, while aesthetics is always slippery and sometimes daft, I'm drawn (like so many) to the notion that there must be *some* measurable metric that makes the neglect of certain composers and music unconscionable. So while this forum is, in a certain sense, recreational, I believe there's also cultural work going on in the sharing here. Important work. A sifting of passions and prejudices with the water clearer afterward. Three centuries ago Bach walked leagues to hear Buxtehude play. Today the complete works of Beethoven can be stored on the head of a pin and played (with an optional backbeat) in elevators around the world. In short, there's never been a greater need for cultural and historical sifting.

As an example of the useful sifting this forum provides, I would point to Amphissa's astute observation that the music we actually listen to on any given day may not be the music whose impact has made the greatest impression on us on some past day.

Like Amphissa, I listen to quite a few Symphony 2s more often than Mahler 2. Do any of the following reasons resonate? (a) "Variety is the spice of life" (b) I try to listen actively, not passively. Mahler sings big things, and today I may have nothing new to contribute to the conversation amidst my quotidian trivialities. (c) Would you only want *best* friends and no other friends?

[chill319]

Hovite, may I ask which Bruckner 3 is your favorite?

One of my "guilty pleasures" has long been the Bohm/Vienna recording of the 1891 version on Decca. (Background: I had a professor who decades ago helped establish a version between the one Wagner saw and the 1877 version.)

[oldman]

An intriguing thread Frankly I've been so busy that I hadent really thought about which second symphonies I liked best....  I've checked my collection and I find that there is a lot to consider

Bendix,Bischoff,Berwald,Borressen,Chadwick,D'Indy,Dopper,Gade,Gilse
Glazunouv,Gliere,Hamerik,Herzogenberg,Hol,Hartmann,Kalinnikov,Langaard,
Lilburn,Majetoda,Malipiero,Melartin,Parry,Petersen-Berger,Raff,Rangstrom,
Ries,Roussel,Rubenstein,Franz Schmidt,A.M. Smith,Spohr,Stenhammar
Svensen,Tubin,Wetz,Zemlinsky

... (Whew)

They are now on my ipod. Thanks for the new listening program!

[Ilja]

The Dopper 2nd is a great piece, for sure, as is Hamerik's (I can't find much evidence of its subtitle 'the Tragic', though).

For my nomination for 'best second' I'm wavering between Schumann's and Franz Schmidt's.

[sdtom]

I have always been quite taken with the Hanson #2. Sadly I've never heard a live performance.
Thomas

[John Hudock]

In addition most of those listed already I would add Hovhannes' 2nd, 'Mysterious Mountain' as one of those I re-listen to frequently, especially the Reiner recording.

For something more on the unsung side, the Raff 2nd has always been one of my favorites of his.

[mbhaub]

The 2nds I listen to the most: F Schmidt, Vaughan Williams, and Mahler. But way, way beyond all of them is the Elgar, which is one of my favorite works of all time. I have some 30 recordings -- and every week one of them is heard in this home. I never tire of it. I guess it's no accident that almost all of the recordings are with British orchestras and conductors.

The 3rds are the usual suspects: F Schmidt, Vaughan Williams, Mahler, but the Gliere, Sibelius, Raff, Arnell, and even the Elgar are tops.

[Tom Deneckere]

I'm new on the forum...
Does Bernstein's 2nd qualify as unsung and/or romantic? I like it a lot!

[Alan Howe]

No, Bernstein 2 is modern tonal.