Messages

If I may ask given his dates, which parts of Langgaard's output are considered in the purview of this site?

A concert in Freiburg Germany on Sunday January 19 features orchestral works by Szymanowski and Zemlinsky respectively: the Sym Concertante with Piano (Sym 4) and the Sinfonietta. The concert also has the "Polish" Sym of Tchaikovsky.

https://bachtrack.com/concert-event/jonathan-nott-conducts-szymanowski-zemlinsky-and-tchaikovsky-swr-symphony-orchestra-konzerthaus-freiburg-19-january-2025/414593

I don't disagree that the proof is in the performance rather than the means of the historical French orchestra, but it is reasonable to conclude that here at least one produces the other. The differentiated sound of the French historical orchestra provides more clarity and bite without much effort to score it. The blended orchestra sound of modern times based on the Germanic tradition rather impedes athleticism and clear articulation than fosters it unless special care is taken (e.g. Mahler). Franck might well have orchestrated the symphony differently if the Germano Austro orchestra was his standard.

Yes eschiss I listened to the Gaubert already per your recommendation. The strings came through clearly enough but woodwinds were inaudible to me. The performance was interesting though. As for Mr Howe's post, yes the PCO in 1946 would at least have some flavor of the historical French orchestral sound from 1880 -1930 although I think it was already starting to fade post WW2. I was commenting on the Monteux and Munch Boston references.

I don't know how others feel but these French historical recordings of the d minor symphony seem much more exciting to me than the usual suspects of the stereo era.

Mr Howe,
 This goes to the question I asked hyperdanny of French performance style vs orchestral sound. Clearly these can go together but are also potentially separable. I don't doubt that at least into the 50s that some non French conductors might have continued a French performance style tradition in the performance of French orchestral music. I do doubt that non French orchestras (other than possibly some Russian (Soviet) orchestras) between 1900 and 1955 used actual French orchestral instruments of that era in any widespread fashion. The difference in sound between French and German orchestras of that era was not subtle. But I don't know what instruments your citations had in their orchestras, particularly in the 1910 - 1930 time period.

[French]

Thanks eschiss for the Gaubert reference. To be clearer the search was only for early (pre WW2) French orchestras for the Franck Sym. They are what Franck would have heard predominantly.I didn't reference any early non French orchestra because they did not have the French orchestral sound. AFAIK only the Russian orchestras sort of backhandedly did but I'm not sure when they crossed over to the polyglot German blended sound current today.

Performances

Manon, Werther, Manon, Werther, Manon, Werther, Manon, Werther ...

The increase in recordings is indisputable as the vast majority of his operas finally have decent to excellent recordings. For one of the very greatest opera composers this was overdue by decades. Performances, though not so much.

I don't love it deeply, so the authentic French way doen't work for me, I find it mawkish.

Are you referring to some perceived French performance style or the actual historical difference in the sonic characteristics of certain French instruments vs Germanic-Austro instruments? The former accentuated timbral differences while the latter favored blend. I have had trouble locating pre WW2 French orchestra performances of the Franck symphony. The earliest I found was Desormiere with the Paris Conservatoire in 1951. The French historical sound was fading quite a bit at this point although there was still a bit of difference that can be heard in the admittedly rough recording. Now of course the Germano Austro manner is widespread.

There might be some influence from the recording format but that wouldn't affect live performances. I think these broad tempo preferences are more socio-culturally influenced. Now, when there is effectively no limit to recording length, we see another speeding up of tempos, perhaps influenced by the now dominant HIP performances of Baroque music spilling over into Classical and early Romantic works. For myself, I think late Romantic music, because of its heavily chromatic progressions, benefits from slower tempos, the other styles are rather biased to more lively tempos. The amount of low bass also influences the relative speed of music.

[For the first time, they have been recorded here on CD, including the popular «Bacchanale» from Samson et Dalila,]

Swiss label Prospero have released a CD with symphonic poems by Saint-Saëns, played by the Sinfonieorchester Basel conducted by Ivor Bolton. The label website states that 'For the first time, they have been recorded here on CD, including the popular «Bacchanale» from Samson et Dalila, according to Hugh Macdonald's new critical edition published by Bärenreiter.'

Is this accurate? I see alternative CD recordings for all of the listed works on the linked CD. Or are they talking merely about some revised edition scores?? Also seems rather short measure at 50 minutes if the timings are accurate.

I understand that although there would be no need to be exhaustive for each composer's symphonic output. Generally a composer has one or maybe two styles to consider and compare with others. But we are really handicapped in assessing them (in this site's case) for degrees and kinds of Romanticism. Brun's output has made that clearer to me.

Thanks for your additional research eschiss. I guess we can say E major and not be called foolish.

As for the style that Brun uses, I think it is instructive to listen to the symphonies sequentially. For example in comparing the Sym 1 and Sym 2 it is clear that the Sym 1 has a direct ancestry from Beethoven to Schumann to Brahms of his Sym 1 and 2. The Brun Sym 1 Finale while fairly extrovert has typical Romantic urgency and drama. The way the brass are used is also typically Romantic. Even the soft low passage about 3 minutes in, there is nothing lax about it. There is still a noticeable tension to the passage before the main music resumes.

The Brun Sym 2 Finale has a similar extrovert quality but the material is more akin to dance and ballet. The brass are used only to accentuate the basic melodic and rhythm material rather than provide a typical Romantic climax. The material flows along much more lyrically and there is no overt urgency about it. I think this is where much of Brun's later symphonic progression stemmed from and why I have trouble viewing the later symphonies as standard Romanticism. At best we might trace a line from early Schubert to Mendelssohn to the Brahms of Sym 3. The 8 year younger Schoeck went along a somewhat similar path.

What we very much lack is a detailed academic study of the 20th C tonal symphony from 1915 - 1960. If it isn't neoclassical or obvious Romantic drama we are not quite sure what to call it.

Link to...

Screenshot from Amazon suggesting that someone thinks it's in E minor, anyway (including, btw, the program notes I downloaded when I bought the mp3s, iirc.)

I think we would need to see the score. Admittedly late Romanticism was rather lax about moving between major and minor parallel keys so this might prove to be an academic question; but  Amazon is the least trustworthy site for classical music. I wouldn't pay any attention to the info they put up.  They had Michael Jackson listed as the composer of Cosi fan tutte awhile back. This is from Musicweb

Fritz BRUN (1878-1959)
Symphony No. 4 in E major (1925) [57:01]
Rhapsody for Orchestra (1957) [10:08]
Moscow Symphony Orchestra/Adriano
rec. Moscow, 2008/13
Volume 6 - Brun Orchestral Series
GUILD GMCD7411 [67:09]

I think we are facing a near future where we are going to have to crowdsource such works as the Borowski PC on CD at least in part.

Symphony 4 is listed as E Major on the YT video of the Adriano set.

Yes there is something interesting about this music although I am not yet settled on its overall merit. On reflection it is apparent that composers after WW1 who did not want to go severe atonal/serial faced a difficult decision as to what musical method and rhetoric to employ. Basically composers born between 1860 and 1885 grew up in a late Romantic musical environment. Apart from Satie, they all started in that style and then reacted against it in various ways. But almost all of them returned to tonal Romanticism (or at least Romantic gestures), at times later in their career, seemingly unable to escape it unlike the later avant garde. But sticking to an unchanging Wagnerian or Brahmsian model essentially assured a composer's isolation after 1925. So the only 2 Brun symphonies I hear as unequivocally Romantic are the first 2 done by 1911. After that other elements become noticeable even though his music remained in tonal keys.