Spohr, complete Symphonies (Griffiths)

[adriano]

I had this newly released cpo set in my hands this morning in a shop, but hesitated buying it... Perhaps because I consider Spohr's music too often a bit boring, or perhaps because of Griffiths? Try to convice me, fellow members!
Though, I like his Clarinet concertos and some of his operas, particularly "Faust"

[Alan Howe]

It's probably the best set of Spohr's symphonies made so far: Griffiths is really fine in this repertoire and, most importantly, he has a very good, full-sounding orchestra. I'd say: buy it!

[adriano]

Aye aye Sir :-)

[Alan Howe]

The set's worth getting for symphonies 3,4 and 5 alone. Everything else is a bonus...

[Alan Howe]

Excerpts here, of course:
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/louis-spohr-symphonien-nr-1-10/hnum/3872154

[adriano]

 

[eschiss1]

Some of his music I find very memorable indeed (it took me less than a minute to recognize the finale of the Op.33/1 string quintet when it was being played over the speakers at Port Authority NYC this afternoon) but not positive the symphonies are up there with the best of the concertos, chamber works etc. ...

[Double-A]

There is a passage in Spohr's autobiography which to me seems to show his attitude towards his composing.  I recount it here from memory--I am too lazy to try and find it in the book.

At some point in the book he relates this experience:  After finishing compositions he always liked them very well.  But if he encountered one of them some two years later he often found them lacking. 

Yet he continued to publish right after completion.

This seems to explain his productivity.  He was 1. a famous violin virtuoso, 2. a famous conductor, 3. an impresario, 4. a chamber musician etc.; he was far from a full time composer, yet he has 150 some opus numbers (quite a few of which are monumental works like operas) plus a serious number of WoOs.  It explains also the unreliable quality of his output.  I'd be hesitant to buy a complete set of anything by Spohr (I remember a reading of one of his string quintets.  I wasn't playing and it didn't help that the first violin was not up to the virtuoso passages.  Even so one could get an impression of the work and it was concentrated boredom).  I used to own a recording of one of his symphonies long ago (don't remember which symphony or who conducted, except that it was combined with the overtures to Jessonda and Faust).  But I hardly ever listened to it.  It didn't interest me.

I don't want to be down on Spohr.  I like him and much of his music is very impressive.  But there is the rest of it.  One might speculate that he might have avoided becoming unsung if he had published only the top 25% of his work.

A completely unrelated question:  How can a composer with three symphonies inspired by extramusical stimuli be regarded without question mark the prototype of "classicism"?

[FBerwald]

How does the CPO set compare with the Hyperion versions with Shelley?

[Alan Howe]

They're both excellent. My preference for Griffiths relates to his choice of orchestra which sounds fuller than Shelley's and gives Spohr's music more romantic power.

[adriano]

In 1-2 hourst I will hold this cpo set in my hands :-) Will let you know my impressions and will chose the non-bonus Symphonies first to listen!

[eschiss1]

Double-A: the program symphony began with the Romantic era, but it was preceded by the Characteristic Symphony, of which many examples were produced during the Classical era.  Things are not simple (and yes, I know Spohr's titled symphonies were produced in the 19th century. A better answer is really "Spohr is more accurately regarded maybe as an example of early Romanticism"- someone whose enjoyment of Beethoven's quartets, to choose a well-known fact(oiid?) e.g., stopped around the latter's quartet no.9 or so... (but who did proselytize Beethoven's early quartets when he could, iirc- though he despaired even of that, sometimes, not because of the music but because of the tastes of the musicians, qv story of Beethoven and Rode performances by an ensemble early in his career...)

[adriano]

Interesting discussion, compliments!
Just heard the 4th Symphony - and was absolutely thrilled. We are not far away from Raff :-)
Griffiths' interpretation and his orchestra are great. I am looking forward to explore these Symphonies and will certainly revise some of my prejudices about this composer.

[Alan Howe]

I'm relieved that my recommendation wasn't without merit. I think Griffiths is at his best in the late classical/early romantic repertoire and I'm pleased that he chose to record Spohr with a full symphony orchestra rather than a pumped-up chamber orchestra. Not that his interpretations are heavy - they aren't; but he manages to give full value to Spohr's burgeoning romanticism while retaining a keen sense of scale and the requisite athleticism. It's an excellent set.

Just one word of warning, though: not everything is as fine as symphonies 3, 4 and 5. Nos 6 and 7 in particular seem to me to be 'misses'.

I am intrigued by Adriano's comparison of Spohr's 4th with Raff. I think that's spot-on: I think I can hear clear pre-echoes of Im Walde in the first movement. Incidentally Griffiths' performance of No.4 is absolutely superb - by far the best I've ever heard. He seems to understand the wide-ranging idiom perfectly.

[Gareth Vaughan]

Mr Vaughan (aside): He seems to understand Holbrooke very well too.