Post by jandl100 on Oct 29, 2015 9:22:28 GMT
Bohuslav Martinu? - not exactly a household name, even among many classical music devotees.
A Czech composer 1890-1959. Quite heavily influenced by neo-classical Stravinsky, but he has a unique musical voice of his own.
Wiki article here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohuslav_Martin%C5%AF
If you want to expand your classical horizons from the traditional Bach / Vivaldi / Haydn / Mozart / Beethoven / Mahler / Shostakovich seam, Martinu is one good way to go about it.
Why bother? Well, the situation is quite well summarised by this review excerpt from Music web international ….
“The reason you should buy all the Martinů Symphonies is because they are each amongst the best symphonies written by anyone in the entire 20th century. They measure up to Stravinsky, Nielsen, Sibelius, Shostakovich and Prokofiev and are not found wanting in any respect. They are original and they span a wide range of structures and emotions. They have tunes, drama and coherence. In performance they are absolutely thrilling. None of the six is an early work because Martinů didn't write a symphony until he was over 50 so the listener does not have to tolerate early experiments. The reason they are not yet part of the regular repertoire is just happenstance. Fifty years ago Mahler was hardly ever played, Nielsen was just a name and Sibelius was mistrusted. So it goes.”
…. So there, that told you!
In some ways, the 1st symphony is my favourite; it has a very powerful opening, is typically and uniquely rhythmic in a Martinu-esque kind of way, and has a glorious slow movement.
But I'm going to point you in the direction of his 6th and last symphony to start with.
Martinu didn't even call it a symphony, but "Fantaisies symphoniques". As Wiki says … “The symphony is quite unlike the previous five symphonies. In Paris in the autumn of 1955, Martinů described it to Miloš Šafránek as a work "without form. And yet something holds it together, I don't know what, but it has a single line, and I have really expressed something in it".
Personally, the 6th reminds me in a number of ways of Sibelius final, 7th symphony. It similarly followed after a series of well structured and highly melodic predecessor symphonies, and is much more of a 'stream of consciousness' affair.
From Wiki again …
The Sixth Symphony is distinguished from its predecessors by a canzona-like structure, with an exceptionally high level of invention. Motivic development is carried out in series of extended sections each with a distinct texture, steadily increasing in speed through to the end of the second movement. The reversion in the finale to the lento tempo of the opening movement is accomplished more rapidly, with the correspondence becoming exact only close to the end.
The symphony opens with an hallucinatory, otherworldly texture that sounds like music only just in the process of being formed—music without rhythm, melody, or harmony. This is created using only nine instruments: three flutes, three trumpets, and three solo strings, in superimposed rhythmic layers that divide the slow beat into nine, ten, and twelve subdivisions simultaneously. The complexity produces what is in effect an aleatory texture, "a gateway into the imprecise realm of fantasy".
For me, it manages to encapsulate his symphonic cycle, while sounding distinct and different in itself. I think it is the sheer variety of Martinu characteristics that are presented in a way that just flow from one to another that appeals. It doesn't try to make a coherent whole, so some parts you may enjoy and others you may not. Anyway, I think it makes an interesting and varied listen.
The full Wiki article on the 6th is here - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._6_(Martin%C5%AF)
If you enjoy this, and the other symphonies you may be tempted to investigate, and want to delve further into Martinu's music – chamber music, concertos, sonatas - well, knock yourself out, fill yer boots – it's all good stuff!
... Paul (Slinger) – the 1st cello concerto is wonderful!
There are quite a few different recordings of the symphonies available, from the early stereo Supraphon recordings with Vaclav Neumann conducting the Czech Philharmonic – also handily available on LP for Julian! - through the rather excitable rendition by Neeme Jarvi recorded with great clarity by BIS, a fine cycle on Chandos conducted by Bryden Thomson, to the more recent full cycle by Jiri Belohlavek and the BBC SO. The full cycle on budget label Naxos under Fagen is also very good.
I'd recommend the Jarvi on BIS or Thomson on Chandos as good intros to the 6th symphony – excellent sound and exciting performances. Belohlavek, in particular, sounds a bit drab and bland in comparison.
Jarvi TIDAL link - listen.tidal.com/album/22486407
For Spotifyers this link should get you started
For Youtube, this is rather good -
Anyways …. Enjoy! - Martinu has a different sound world to most classical music and maybe it will appeal to you as much as it does to me.
I'll start the voting off with a solid 4 out of 5 for being interestingly different.
A Czech composer 1890-1959. Quite heavily influenced by neo-classical Stravinsky, but he has a unique musical voice of his own.
Wiki article here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohuslav_Martin%C5%AF
If you want to expand your classical horizons from the traditional Bach / Vivaldi / Haydn / Mozart / Beethoven / Mahler / Shostakovich seam, Martinu is one good way to go about it.
Why bother? Well, the situation is quite well summarised by this review excerpt from Music web international ….
“The reason you should buy all the Martinů Symphonies is because they are each amongst the best symphonies written by anyone in the entire 20th century. They measure up to Stravinsky, Nielsen, Sibelius, Shostakovich and Prokofiev and are not found wanting in any respect. They are original and they span a wide range of structures and emotions. They have tunes, drama and coherence. In performance they are absolutely thrilling. None of the six is an early work because Martinů didn't write a symphony until he was over 50 so the listener does not have to tolerate early experiments. The reason they are not yet part of the regular repertoire is just happenstance. Fifty years ago Mahler was hardly ever played, Nielsen was just a name and Sibelius was mistrusted. So it goes.”
…. So there, that told you!
In some ways, the 1st symphony is my favourite; it has a very powerful opening, is typically and uniquely rhythmic in a Martinu-esque kind of way, and has a glorious slow movement.
But I'm going to point you in the direction of his 6th and last symphony to start with.
Martinu didn't even call it a symphony, but "Fantaisies symphoniques". As Wiki says … “The symphony is quite unlike the previous five symphonies. In Paris in the autumn of 1955, Martinů described it to Miloš Šafránek as a work "without form. And yet something holds it together, I don't know what, but it has a single line, and I have really expressed something in it".
Personally, the 6th reminds me in a number of ways of Sibelius final, 7th symphony. It similarly followed after a series of well structured and highly melodic predecessor symphonies, and is much more of a 'stream of consciousness' affair.
From Wiki again …
The Sixth Symphony is distinguished from its predecessors by a canzona-like structure, with an exceptionally high level of invention. Motivic development is carried out in series of extended sections each with a distinct texture, steadily increasing in speed through to the end of the second movement. The reversion in the finale to the lento tempo of the opening movement is accomplished more rapidly, with the correspondence becoming exact only close to the end.
The symphony opens with an hallucinatory, otherworldly texture that sounds like music only just in the process of being formed—music without rhythm, melody, or harmony. This is created using only nine instruments: three flutes, three trumpets, and three solo strings, in superimposed rhythmic layers that divide the slow beat into nine, ten, and twelve subdivisions simultaneously. The complexity produces what is in effect an aleatory texture, "a gateway into the imprecise realm of fantasy".
For me, it manages to encapsulate his symphonic cycle, while sounding distinct and different in itself. I think it is the sheer variety of Martinu characteristics that are presented in a way that just flow from one to another that appeals. It doesn't try to make a coherent whole, so some parts you may enjoy and others you may not. Anyway, I think it makes an interesting and varied listen.
The full Wiki article on the 6th is here - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._6_(Martin%C5%AF)
If you enjoy this, and the other symphonies you may be tempted to investigate, and want to delve further into Martinu's music – chamber music, concertos, sonatas - well, knock yourself out, fill yer boots – it's all good stuff!
... Paul (Slinger) – the 1st cello concerto is wonderful!
There are quite a few different recordings of the symphonies available, from the early stereo Supraphon recordings with Vaclav Neumann conducting the Czech Philharmonic – also handily available on LP for Julian! - through the rather excitable rendition by Neeme Jarvi recorded with great clarity by BIS, a fine cycle on Chandos conducted by Bryden Thomson, to the more recent full cycle by Jiri Belohlavek and the BBC SO. The full cycle on budget label Naxos under Fagen is also very good.
I'd recommend the Jarvi on BIS or Thomson on Chandos as good intros to the 6th symphony – excellent sound and exciting performances. Belohlavek, in particular, sounds a bit drab and bland in comparison.
Jarvi TIDAL link - listen.tidal.com/album/22486407
For Spotifyers this link should get you started
For Youtube, this is rather good -
Anyways …. Enjoy! - Martinu has a different sound world to most classical music and maybe it will appeal to you as much as it does to me.
I'll start the voting off with a solid 4 out of 5 for being interestingly different.