Raff symphonies from Chandos

[eschiss1]

And one doesn't need to bash Mendelssohn's abilities to write symphonically to promote Raff, either... anycase, I disagree with that statement for what I would say are good reasons.

[Alan Howe]

Quite so, Eric. Mendelssohn wrote at least two great symphonies (3 & 4) and three other utterly memorable ones (leaving aside the string symphonies). In Raff's symphonies, the composer slowly develops his own personal synthesis of the Mendelssohnian and Lisztian traditions. To anyone who has taken the trouble to familiarise him/herself with them, Raff could never be confused with the older master. 

[kolaboy]

If I threw eggs every time a bone-head of a reviewer irritated me my kitchen would be coloured an eternal yellow. At least we're well beyond the point of Raff being just one of a jumble names (along with Cornelius, Tausig, and Von Bulow) mentioned in the odd Liszt biography.

And, at the risk of deviating from the primary topic I would also have to say that Mendelssohn's Lobsegang is just as much a masterpiece as the much touted 3rd, and 4th.
Two cents 

[Alan Howe]

I would also have to say that Mendelssohn's Lobsegang is just as much a masterpiece as the much touted 3rd, and 4th.

You may well be right.

[Gareth Vaughan]

I have a soft spot for the Lobgesang too.  As to the reviews of the Chandos/Jarvi Raff disk, the Irish Times is so short it is scarcely worth bothering about - clearly written by a musical hack (probably doubles up on the sports and financial columns as well!).  I am pleased, however, that The Guardian recognized the worth of the Shakespeare preludes.

[petershott@btinternet.com]

You're absolutely right, Kolaboy. At long long last we can say that Raff has finally 'arrived' and is no longer one of those shadowy figures lurking in the footnotes of a Liszt biography. I should have remembered that and not have been tempted to malacious treatment of an egg!

[Alan Howe]

Raff has arrived on CD, but not in concert performances. I fear, Peter, that 'unsung' has to mean more than 'recording available', good start though this undoubtedly is. For example, how many treatments of Raff's music have been published in the modern era?

[petershott@btinternet.com]

I suppose you're actually right, Alan, I admit with some sadness.

Just one anecdote might illustrate the matter. I was talking with a member of a very well known String Quartet after a concert at Snape towards the end of the summer.

Question: Why don't you perform or record works outside the 'canon'?

Answer: Well, they're not 'central' or are 'less important'. If we routinely included such items within our repertory, then commentators [presumably lazy journalists] would start thinking we couldn't compete with the most renowned Quartets in performing Beethoven, Brahms, Schubert etc.

I guess much the same goes for orchestras and conductors.

Sad, isn't it?

[eschiss1]

A member of the Orlando Quartet was, I think, put a similar question (they do record and perform some less-known modern works but the question was about 19th-century undersung works, I think) in an interview in Fanfare, quite awhile back.  The response was a little different - they wouldn't know where to start- but still -

is begged the question the phrase I want?... - (obviously... if you wouldn't know where to start but really want to, there are solutions for that.  E.g.-- please, I just mean for example... - start with Cobbett's, take some notes, have an advisor whose expertise is in 19th-c music, go from there... )

[Gauk]

I have a feeling that part of the problem is that modern audiences have got into the habit of fearing that any unfamiliar name is going to turn out to be an astringent serialist, and they shy away from anything unfamiliar and therefore not "safe". It's a great shame.

[Gareth Vaughan]

I'm sure you are partly right. To counter this, whenever I arrange a concert, I always put the dates after the name of any composer with which I think the audience may be unfamiliar.  I don't know if this does any good, but it might help.

[eschiss1]

Ah well, I'd be much more worried that the composer was, like any number I've run into, absolutely talentless and a waste of my time; quite a few of the "astringent serialists"- but we've had this discussion and it goes nowhere.

[petershott@btinternet.com]

I think dates (and nationalities?) in the notice of a concert might well be useful in 'introducing' a potential audience to a composer, making them possibly a little less apprehensive about what they might hear following the purchase of a ticket.

And I don't want to be too insulting to those with innocent ears but how about a little thumbnail picture or sketch of the composer? After all, I think that very often there is a curious kind of congruence between a composer's image and the nature of his music. (Except - and to retrieve the thread - in the case of Raff. For I happen to think there is somehow a complete lack of 'fit' between what Raff looks like and what his marvellous music sounds like!)

Oooh, but what sort of utter rot is this! What kind of world are we living in where potential audiences have to be lulled into buying a ticket or persuaded by gimmickry into listening to the work of a composer? Is this the world of dumbed down culture? When I was at school and then later university we all knew there was a world out there way beyond our present experiences and even imaginings. And it was perfectly natural to want to find out more about it by reading books and attending to those wiser than ourselves. You very quickly cottoned on to the idea that within your grasp, and with a little bit of effort, there was great music to be heard and that listening to it provided not only endless pleasure but, despite the chores of having to conjugate Latin verbs or ponder over algebraic conundrums, a sense that there was after all some point to life. I was far from a swot but I didn't have to be lured into a concert by a composer's dates, images of him, or the promise of a bag of sweets. On the contrary, no-one could keep me out of concerts. Grrrr, why this dumbo world where people have to be told 1822-1882 to entice them into sampling the music of Raff? Humph, end of rant!

[Alan Howe]

Well I for one am much more likely to explore an unfamiliar composer whose dates are 1822-1882 than one whose dates are 1922-1982, so dates are important and helpful. However, given that Schmidt-Kowalski's were 1949-2013, I have to remind myself at least to check the latter's music out...

[eschiss1]

How about 1811-1886?