Parry Symphony 4 - original version

[Mark Thomas]

Looking at the CD's timings, maybe the first movement was more than five minutes long and musically poorer quality than Proserpine, so they chose to include that instead as they couldn't have both. Not that I'm defending that decision, of course, if that's what happened..

[Mark Thomas]

The original version of the Fourth Symphony at first hearing is an impressive work. I'm ashamed to say that I'm not familiar enough with the final version to make comparisons but, judging this work on its own merits, this symphony is certainly a very welcome acquaintance. The first movement is rather austere and serious, but that severity is balanced by a restless energy. The Intermezzo second movement lasts less than two minutes and acts as a bridge to the fine introspective slow movement which the booklet notes describe accurately as "lyrical pathos". It's a lovely piece. Lightening the mood, the Scherzo (which Parry replaced entirely in the later version) has the character of a pair of dances, one sprightly and the other more leisurely. It's relaxing music, such as Brahms might have inserted as a middle movement. The Finale is another strong movement. Vigorously dramatic in places, it demonstrates how to be celebratory without being tediously repetitious, and closes the work with a grand, upbeat flourish. No wonder Hans Richter was impressed. I really must listen to the final version now.

[FBerwald]

I had an interesting conversation with someone from Chandos on Facebook the other day after I "liked" their new Parry Symphony 4 post and I mentioned to this person that many of us (unsung-crowd) were very disappointed to see the Raff Chandos cycle come to an abrupt close as we were very excited and is there any plans continue it He/she replied "There is no plan to at the moment but that doesn't mean it won't happen!".

So is this just polite conversation or is it a chance to start something great/wonderful again? If there's any chance of this being a green light to continue the series, I'm all for it.

[Mark Thomas]

As far as I know, the Chandos Raff series came to an abrupt halt because of contractual, problems following Järvi's equally abrupt departure from L'Orchestre de la Suisse Romande. New parts for Symphonies Nos.3 & 4 had been already been prepared. I don't believe that there's much chance of a resumption, more's the pity. Anyway, back to Parry's rather fine original Symphony No.4...

[FBerwald]

Dear Mark, I was thinking more along the lines of a different conductor/orchestra. Anyways like you said back to Parry 4.

[Dylan]

Haven't heard the new Chandos recording of the Parry yet, but I have to say I hope it's better than the performance broadcast this afternoon, which struck me as distinctly under-characterised and underpowered - by comparison Bamert's recording of the revised work has far more sweep imagination and energy; a shame, as I genuinely believe it is the first really major British symphony, and deserves better...

[Dylan]

PS; interesting to read back the thread and find myself agreeing with llja about the original version of Sibelius 5; I've never shared the universal enthusiasm for the "official" 5th, which always struck me as far too neat and rather pat...hearing the original was a revelation - a vastly more daring imaginative and disturbing work, a true successor to Sibelius 4th...I'm afraid by comparison the original of Parry's symphony offers no such revelations...

[Alan Howe]

I wasn't greatly impressed by the radio broadcast either, but I was in the car, so...

[Alan Howe]

...but evidently the grandeur found by Bamert in the revised score isn't in evidence here.

[Alan Howe]

...but the real problem, as I've established this morning having listened to the whole thing, is that I've been spoilt by the revised version all these years. The latter is so much grander - dare I say it, more Elgarian - that the first version rather pales by comparison. So, an important release musicologically speaking, but a greatly inferior work, I fear. Or perhaps I should say a very different work...

[Alan Howe]

Of course, there's another point of view - which is that this a much 'purer' work, with much less imported and therefore imposed Elgarian nobilmente. I'm listening again on that basis...

By the way, the BBC National Orchestra of Wales are a superb band.

[Mark Thomas]

I'll be very interested in your conclusion. Not really knowing the final version of the work and so coming to this original version untainted, as it were, by knowledge of the later revisions, I was very impressed by this symphony.

[Alan Howe]

I listened to it over headphones yesterday and was - oddly - much more impressed than I had been when listening to it over speakers. Maybe I was concentrating better. Anyway, I feel that the key is to try to forget the revised version (V2) which so bowled me over when I heard it a couple of years back.

The clear Elgarian additions of V2 are hard to put out of one's mind; it takes a few hearings of V1 to 'get it' without making comparisons all the time. I'm now in a much better position to appreciate V1 - and to hear the passages (and there are many) which are actually proleptic of Elgar.

[eschiss1]

are there recordings of the revision besides Bamert's on Chandos? I gather Naxos was thinking on a complete cycle but while they've (almost?) finished their cycle of Stanford symphonies, they've only released Parry's 2nd symphony  (22 years ago).

[Alan Howe]

No: Bamert's the only one.