Conductor/Composers

[giles.enders]

I have often been struck by the shear number of pre war heavyweight conductors, who were also prolific composers and whose compositions have largely remained in the shadows.  Felix Weingartner 1863-1942, Wilhelm Furtwangler 1886-1954, Otto Klemperer 1885-1973 Bruno Walter 1876-1942, Victor de Sabata 1892-1967,  George Szell 1897-1970.  I think it is easy to see why they turned to conducting

[Mark Thomas]

On the whole I agree, Giles. Certainly I have better things to do than revisit the symphonies of  Furtwangler and Walter any time soon. Weingartner I've blown hot and cold with. Some of his music is pretty well put together and has staying power. Other works (the later symphonies and  the Cello Concerto spring to mind) seem to take a long time to say not very much. I have a CD with Szell's Variations on an Original Theme but haven't listened to it for years and so wouldn't want to pass comment, but obviously it didn't make strong impression on me. I've never heard anything by Klemperer or de Sabata...

[Alan Howe]

I'd put Weingartner and Furtwängler in a different category to the others mentioned - both were true, if second-division composers. The former's first three symphonies are thoroughly revival-worthy and the latter's 2nd is certainly worth an occasional outing if it is given the sort of commitment that Barenboim manages to muster. Klemperer's stuff is not worth bothering about at all, and Walter's Symphony is Mahler without the genius.

De Sabata's Respighi-like tone poems are definitely worth a spin, though...
http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/Victor-de-Sabata-La-Notte-di-Platon/hnum/3658400

[eschiss1]

Quite a few composers had a second career as composers, or as instrumentalists and a third career as conductors (and Liszt juggled five or six, and is still sometimes thought of, I think- though not by me, as that pianist who composed...); in Szell's case if I recall he stopped composing early on...
Furtwangler 3 didn't quite catch me though I still liked it- might have liked it more with a better conductor than Alfred Walter; have to try one of the other recordings. The Barenboim recording of no. 2 (I know I've said this) I really have found myself playing. Weingartner's symphonies I still haven't heard except for a good radio tape of no. 6, but that seems very good if restrained (appropriate for an homage to Schubert, but then the violin sonata op. 42/2, the other work I know by him, is restrained too.) Haven't heard Klemperer's symphonies more than once or twice each but they seem fun- modern for this forum of course, but who cares? - and his rather drunk (in the Mahler-y sense, thinking of the drunken one in springtime...) "merry waltz", sometimes heard on the classical channel on TV, is a delight. All subjective, of course.
Eric

[jerfilm]

How about the recent recording of Weingartner's Violin Concerto?  I'm not much into 20th century music but this one strikes a chord with me......

[Amphissa]

 
I've talked to a dozen or so young conductors as well as some older ones with longer experience, and the issue of conductor as composer has come up quite often (since I often ask about it). Most of them consider this as an important, even necessary, tradition.

Why? I always ask, and the answer is always something like this:

A conductor is a musician who must necessarily look into the heart and mind of a composer through the score, find the heart of it and the details that give it expression, and with the orchestra as the musical instrument, bring it to life. The only way to really do this is to compose music myself, to become immersed in the creative process, and to develop completely my understanding of all instruments and sections within the orchestra more fully.

Is every conductor a good composer? Of course not. But I have heard conductors premier their own works in concert, knowing that the works would probably never be recording and might never be performed again. It was the process that was important, not necessarily the product.

Of course, what is different today is that conductors use composition as a means towards becoming a better conductor, whereas the older tradition was that the composer conducted as a means to pay the bills and hone his composing chops. What better way to continually grow and evolve as a composer than to get your head into the music of other composers constantly?

One of the greatest American unsungs was a fine composer/conductor/pedagog. Howard Hanson. His symphonies deserve much more visibility, and as a conductor, he was a moving force in the U.S.

These days, the tradition lives -- sort of. Boulez and Salonen come to mind. I don't care much for their music, but they compose as well as conduct.

[jerfilm]

So does Stanislaw Skrowaczewski if you can stand it......

[febnyc]

DeSabata's music is very good.  But I'd rank Weingartner at the top of the heap of conductors-who-also-compose.  I suppose we could count Leonard Bernstein in this category - but his "serious" music never really appealed to me at all. 

[mbhaub]

Sometime ago this was a long discussion, and we had quite a list of composer/conductors. There are some nice works by famous conductors, but the masterpieces are far and few between.

As of late, one composer I have been quite impressed with is Jose Serebrier. I really enjoyed the earlier Naxos disk with his symphonies, and I have the highest hopes for the new one of the first. Then there's Lorin Maazel. His symphony, which he had the Vienna Philharmonic play, was like a lump of clay. It does nothing. But his recent opera "1984" I have watched many times in the last year and I find it utterly fascinating. Not at all what I would have expected: very modern, harsh, nasty at times, but then beguiling at others.

As to Howard Hanson. Recently, BBC Music made nasty swipe at him. I didn't like the comment, and thought it was rude. But in truth, it was fairly accurate. Hansons music is pleasant, but that's about it for me. I do think the 2nd symphony is a special work, and maybe the Great American Symphony. And the opera Merry Mount is pretty good too. But the rest of his output is just uninspired, however well constructed.

[JimL]

As to Howard Hanson. Recently, BBC Music made nasty swipe at him. I didn't like the comment, and thought it was rude. But in truth, it was fairly accurate. Hansons music is pleasant, but that's about it for me. I do think the 2nd symphony is a special work, and maybe the Great American Symphony. And the opera Merry Mount is pretty good too. But the rest of his output is just uninspired, however well constructed.

I've always had a soft spot for his 1st Symphony, the "Nordic".  It's been a while since I've heard it, though.

[eschiss1]

re Hanson, maybe I heard the 2nd symphony's "main theme" too  often when I worked for a summer at Interlochen, but I think the 3rd-5th symphonies are superior- more interesting, inventive, harmonically more searching.  I used to have a recording of the 3rd but right now only have one of the 6th (not Schwarz's - the Vox, coupled with Hanson's piano concerto and Schuman's 7th- Landau/Music for Westchester SO; Eugene List/MIT SO/David Epstein; Utah SO/Abravanel. Pretty good, enjoyable disc, variety of styles.)
Eric

[Delicious Manager]

I too have listened with interest to the new Naxos CD which includes Serebrier's First Symphony - an early work from his late teens. The shadow of Shostakovich looms large over many of the proceedings, but it's worth a listen. He strikes me as a conservative but skilled composer who is unlikely to break-in to the mainstream (not 'original' enough, perhaps?). I enjoy Hanson's music and have quite a lot of it on CD. It's very post-Sibelius and doesn't break any new ground, but is definitely worth the occasional outing.

A conductor whose music has struck me as very strong indeed would almost definitely fall outside the purpose of this particular forum, but anyone with a daring ear could do a lot worse than explore the colourful and skillful music of Hungarian conductor Peter Eötvös. Esa-Pekka Salonen is also a composer of some note although, again, most likely outside the scope of this forum.

[edurban]

I love the vivid Symphonic Waltz, Op.8 of Frederick Stock (1872-1942).  It was written in 1907 for Stock's Chicago Symphony and recorded by him (and them) in 1930.  At 8 1/2 minutes long it won't try anyone's patience, and the wonderful orchestration and warm-hearted joi-de-vive (more R. Strauss than J. Strauss) make it well worth a listen.  Biddulph re-issued it as part of a 2 disc Stock set in the mid-1990s.

And there's plenty more Stock, though I haven't heard it.  2 symphonies, concerti for violin (1915 premiere: Zimbalist/Stock, also perf. by Elman/Stokowski) and cello (1929, Wallenstein premiere.)  Symphonic Variations on an Original Theme, A Psalmodic Rhapsody (solo voice, chorus & orchestra) and chamber music...

Here's some biographical info from the Chicago Symphony website:
http://cso.org/uploadedFiles/8_about/History_-_Rosenthal_archives/Frederick_Stock.pdf

David

[TerraEpon]

Klemperer was mentioned in the thread, and I disagree that he had "nothing worth bothering" -- there's a piece he wrote called "Merry Waltz" (I believe it's from an opera) that's a wonderful little piece. I can't say anything else about his music though.

[Alan Howe]

I really meant Klemperer's truly awful symphonies.