Havergal Brian Gothic Symphony from Hyperion

[hattoff]

I'm now listening to The Gothic for the third time in two days (phew!), and this is my first encounter with this massive work. I have to say that the recording is impressing. I can only imagine the challenges involved in recording this symphony in a live performance.


Morten

There's no rush, it took twenty years for me to understand the whole thing. I know you'll be quicker than that but take it easy.

I still hear wonderful new things forty years later. It's the greatest music for those who are patient.

[M. Henriksen]

I don't know if I'll be any quicker in the understanding of the music challenging as it is, but I find the recording impressive. We'll see in twenty years or so!


Morten

[TerraEpon]

It's ironic really. If the symphony had been just 'part I' it'd probably linger in obscurity and probably have never been recorded...

But honestly, I *really* love the first three movements and would honestly be quite satisfied with work were it that. Part II, despite the reason for the pieces infamy, etc....I actually am not quite as taken by outside of a few highly enjoyable spots.

[vandermolen]

It's ironic really. If the symphony had been just 'part I' it'd probably linger in obscurity and probably have never been recorded...

But honestly, I *really* love the first three movements and would honestly be quite satisfied with work were it that. Part II, despite the reason for the pieces infamy, etc....I actually am not quite as taken by outside of a few highly enjoyable spots.

I tend to agree with you, but I have to say that being fortunate enough to be at the Proms performance this year (the second time I have heard it live) I did appreciate Part II much more than before.

[Dundonnell]

I have said it before, Jeffrey, as you know , but the minute or two from the point of that glorious C major, F sharp, D minor cadence at the end of the third movement-which alone never fails to have me tingling with excitement-to the massed choirs rising bathed in golden light..............

I don't think that I have ever actually GASPED aloud at a concert before

[Christo]

Says the Bruckner fan. 

[Dundonnell]

Quote from the new issue of that wonderful(not) magazine "The Gramophone":

"I'm glad I had an opportunity to experience this leviathan live but I'll remember it with mixed feelings. Certainly it gives one a greater appreciation of Mahler's Eighth-a minnow by comparison but indubitably the work of the greater genius. And it means, now that my generation has had 'our' Gothic at the Albert Hall....that it now doesn't need to be resuscitated for another 30 years or so. In fact, I can honestly say that I've never enjoyed a second-rate piece of music so much"

How can people write such rubbish And how dare the writer(a Sub-Editor of the magazine) suggest that that should be that for another 30 years thereby denying so many others the opportunity to experience a live performance of the work

[Latvian]

How can people write such rubbish   And how dare the write(a Sub-Editor of the magazine) suggest that that should be that for another 30 years thereby denying so many others to experience a live performance of the work

Agreed! This is a ridiculous proposition! Should we also wait another 80 years for another performance of Foulds' "World Requiem"? Both of these works are of a scale that we shouldn't expect annual performances, but several decades' wait seems rather extreme when they were met with such interest and excitement! And while they have their flaws, they are most emphatically NOT second-rate curiosities! Personally, I listen to Brian's "Gothic" far more often than Mahler's 8th, whatever I may think of their relative merits...

[Dundonnell]

Given also that the Proms performance sold out within 12 hours of the opening of booking, how many others would have wished to have been present but were denied the opportunity either because they couldn't get a ticket or were unable to travel to London(or indeed to Brisbane a year ago).

The comment is so typically and offensively "London-centric"

[BFerrell]

Who wrote that stuff? A regular contributor?

[Dundonnell]

Who wrote that stuff? A regular contributor?

The sub-editor.

[Mark Thomas]

That little piece tells you all you need to know about the modern Gramophone, its shallowness and bias. Although I do have Gramophone on subscription, it's as much out of habit as anything else. If you want to return to the good old days of Gramophone, buy the International Record Review. Serious reviews from open-minded, knowledgeable reviewers who you can respect.

[petershott@btinternet.com]

Quite so, Mark. And I consider your restraint admirable.

I don't have an objection to "shallowness" as such - although it is terribly sad that the magazine's readership want dumbed down editiorial content.

But I do hugely object to blinkered, prejudiced, smug.....yes, sheer offensive rubbish.

Like you I have the wretched thing on subscription simply because it is a source of information that I might otherwise miss (though having said that I can't recall any occasion in the last couple of years when I've read something in Gramophone and exclaimed 'Hey, I didn't know that'....which suggests that Gramophone is actually redundant to my needs).

I've sent them an e-mail explaining why I'm so dismayed to read drivel of this kind. Might be useful if others also did so. But I doubt if they'll take note.

Peter

[Jimfin]

Sadly, all that seems to make its way onto the shelves here is Gramophone and the BBC Music magazine, the latter even shallower. They recently described Stanford's cello concerto as "sturdy and Brahmsian", neither of which I think are accurate. But people persist with the old myths they have read elsewhere: the Stanford is 'Brahms and Water' and Brian was a naive megalomaniac. One would hope that music critics would actually listen to the music: if not, perhaps they are in the wrong job.

[Dundonnell]

It seems that a number of us continue to buy the magazine purely on a subscription basis-that goes for me too

It just simply is habit. I started buying it back in 1964 and, apart from a short break in the mid 1980's, have every issue stacked in boxes on top of my library shelves.

IRR is so, so much better but, presumably, 'Gramophone' continues to sell and the sad fact is that we are amongst those who continue to buy it. Breaking the habit of decades is not easy