Potter Symphonies vol.2 (cpo)

[Alan Howe]

...featuring the Symphonies in C minor (1826/1847) and B flat (1821), together with his Concertante for Piano, Violin, Cello, Double Bass and Orchestra and his Overture 'The Tempest':
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/cpo/detail/-/art/cipriani-potter-symphonien-c-moll/hnum/11171777

Thank you, Howard Griffiths!

[terry martyn]

Have any of these works been recorded before?

[eschiss1]

He apparently has a symphony (no.3/6) in C minor (1826) and a symphony (unnumbered by the composer, sometimes given "no.8") in C minor (1834). I'm not sure what the (1847) refers to again? (His symphony in E-flat was revised in 1846, though. The no.2 in B-flat (1821, revised 1839) seems to be the other... the opening pages of the holograph of its 1839 version are available at Archive.org and mirrored at IMSLP.)

I see commercial recordings of
*symphony no.1 in G minor, (1819/1824-26/1833)
*"Symphony no.8 in E-flat and Symphony no.10 in G minor" (now called no.5- called no.8 by the composer- (1828/46) and symphony no.6 (composer called both no.2 and no.10 (1832))
*Symphony "no.7" (now no.4) in F (1826) (recorded with Bennett's Op.43) ; there's probably other commercial recordings. The B-flat may have been recorded non-commercially. I don't know what the C minor symphony is supposed to be, again.

[eschiss1]

The "Concertante for violin, cello, double bass, piano and orchestra on Les folies d'Espagne" in D minor was recently published (possibly a first non-ms edition?) by Ries & Erler (Hagels edition "Based on the autograph score (shelfmark: Add MS 31782) preserved in the British Library, London"), I see no sign at least of an earlier commercial recording.

[terry martyn]

Thanks,Eric!   It seems that these are premiere recordings.

[Alan Howe]

Howard Griffiths' vol.2 (cpo) contains Symphony No.3 in C minor (Potter's No.6), i.e. the earlier of the two in that key, and Symphony No.2 in B flat (unnumbered by Potter).

Howard Griffiths' vol.1 (cpo) contains No.1 in G minor (also Potter's No.1)

Hilary Davan Wetton (on Unicorn Kanchana) has recorded No.5 in E flat (Potter's No. 8 ) and No.6 in G minor (Potter's No.10).
Douglas Bostock (on Classico) has recorded No.4 in F (Potter's No.7).

So, by my calculation, we now have commercial recordings of six of Potter's Symphonies. We should also remember that Howard Griffiths is recording them all for cpo. It looks as though cpo will be following Potter's numbering/non-numbering rather than the modern (chronological) system adopted by Wikipedia - see below:

Symphony [No. 1] in G minor (1819, revised 1824–26 & 1833) [styled No. 1 by the composer]
Symphony [No. 2] in B♭ major (1821, revised 1839) [unnumbered by the composer]
Symphony [No. 3] in C minor (1826, revised 1847) [styled No. 6 by the composer]
Symphony [No. 4] in F major (1826) [styled No. 7 by the composer]
Symphony [No. 5] in E♭ major (1828, revised 1846 with replacement slow movement) [styled No. 8 by the composer]
Symphony [No. 6] in G minor (1832) [styled both No. 10 and No. 2 in G minor by the composer]
Symphony [No. 7] in D major (1833) [styled No. 2 in D major by the composer]
Symphony [No. 8] in C minor (1834) [unnumbered by the composer]
Symphony [No. 9] in D major (1834) [styled No. 4 in D major by the composer]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cipriani_Potter

N.B. Nos. 3 and 9 (misnumbered as 7), as per the Wikipedia numbering, can be found on YouTube.

[terry martyn]

Alan,I am intrigued by the reference to Potter originally styling one of his symphonies "No 10".  But you mention nine.  Is there another one out there somewhere (or,even more than one?)?

[Alan Howe]

I don't know myself, but the Wikipedia article says this:

<<Although there are nine extant symphonies, the composer's numbering shows that he wrote ten.>>

So, it seems that Potter may have written ten, but only nine have survived. Perhaps someone else can shed more light on this...

[jdperdrix]

Potter's symphonies numbering is a nightmare!
He wrote two symphonies in C minor.
From Griffiths's vol. 2 booklet:
First one in 1826 revised in 1847, which is his third symphony (also known as number 6)
Second one in 1834, his eighth (available on youtube)
The second volume of Griffiths's contains the first one.

Moderator's note: please see the above post which explains about the numbering problem.

[Alan Howe]

I suggest we stick to the modern, chronological numbering (1 - 9) system here - it's the least confusing way of referring to his Symphonies, especially as Potter himself didn't give them all numbers!

[jdperdrix]

Howard Griffiths' vol.2 (cpo) contains Symphony No.8 in C minor (unnumbered by Potter), i.e. the later of the two in that key, and Symphony No.2 in B flat (also unnumbered by Potter).
Note: original post now corrected.

I just wanted to emphasize that the C minor symphony in this recording is the one from 1826, his No. 3 and not No. 8 from 1834 (according to the booklet).

[Alan Howe]

Duly noted - thanks. Corrections duly made. It doesn't help that the C minor Symphony involved is described as from '1847' on the website and from '1826/1847' on the back of the CD.

[Alan Howe]

My copy has now arrived and it really is a model of how to present these symphonies. The string section uses the minimum of vibrato, but the orchestra (the BBCNOW) is of sufficient size never to underplay the latent power of the writing. If only the cpo had used a comparable band in their recording of Van Bree recently...

Incidentally, I hadn't realised that Symphony No.2 in B flat is in three movements, i.e. without a scherzo - the only one of Potter's symphonies to follow this pattern.

[Alan Howe]

...and the Symphony in B flat is an absolute riot of invention and must be an absolute pig to play for the violins, although they do have some occasional respite. Do I sense some influence from Rossini here? Perhaps...

What a pity Potter didn't continue to compose symphonies along the lines of his very fine, serious overture 'The Tempest', completed in early December 1837. We are almost in Weber/Mendelssohn territory here...

[terry martyn]

I was rather underwhelmed by the C minor symphony,Alan.  Not the performance,I should add, but the music itself. I would have pre-dated it somewhat,as the B flat symphony sounds to me more advanced. And more up to the standard and individuality of symphonic composition that I have now come to expect of Potter.

I would love to know your considered thoughts on the C minor symphony,Alan,and the curiosity of the concertante work that I was expecting to sound like Spohr - but it certainly didn't.