# Which is your favourite set of Martinů symphonies?



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Although there does not seem to be too many sets around... Which is your favourite set of Martinů symphonies? 

Václav Neumann has always been the yardstick for me, but I also like the finesse of Jiří Bělohlávek, the muscle of Neeme Järvi, the zen of Vladimir Válek, the brilliance of Bryden Thomson, and the volatility of Cornelius Meister.

I would also appreciate any comment on the Arthur Fagen set. I haven’t heard this set yet, but the CDs are in the post... Is there any other set available?

Or would you prefer the individual recordings of Karel Ančerl, Jiří Kout, Charles Munch, Claus Peter Flor, Walter Weller, Klaus Tennstedt or others?


----------



## haydnguy (Oct 13, 2008)

Kiki said:


> Although there does not seem to be too many sets around... Which is your favourite set of Martinů symphonies?
> 
> Václav Neumann has always been the yardstick for me, but I also like the finesse of Jiří Bělohlávek, the muscle of Neeme Järvi, the zen of Vladimir Válek, the brilliance of Bryden Thomson, and the volatility of Cornelius Meister.
> 
> ...


Me too!:lol:-------------------------------------------------


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

The Fragen CDs arrived today. Just ripped them and had a quick sampling of a few movements. 

The syncopated rhythm in the No. 2 Scherzo sounds clean, humourous and at ease like Bělohlávek (BBCSO), but in my memory perhaps Bělohlávek sounds more crystalline.

The No. 4 Scherzo is interesting. The vivo scherzo section certainly sounds exciting, and the two consecutive thwacks at the climax sound prominent like Järvi's and Thomson's (everyone else's that I've heard sound soft in the background). On the other hand, the trio section is nice and gentle although I have to admit I have a soft spot for the pastoral magic of Bělohlávek (CzechPO/Chandos) instead.

The No. 5 Larghetto sounds closer to but not quite the fluffy lightness of Flor, rather than the sometimes pressing sometimes enchanting magic spells of Ančerl (Toranto). Still it is not bad.

So far I feel pretty positive about this set. I'm really looking forward to more attentive listening later on this week!


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

This thread gives me the opportunity to again draw attention to the magnificent 2nd Symphony, oddly enough the one from the cycle of 6 that can appear overlooked!

Jiri Belholavek, Neeme Jarvi and Bryden Thomson have all recorded impressive interpretations.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

This thread seems a bit hidden away, only just found it! Move it to the Orchestral section???

I have the Symphony sets you mention, and there are two cycles that for me are a bit indifferent. Fagen's and Válek's. Otherwise it's what grabs you. As a cycle the most consistent has to be Neumann's, but there's more than enough to enjoy in Jarvi, Thomson, Meister (a very worthy effort!), and of course all the Bělohlávek recordings and near-complete sets. I just don't get on with his Fifth, either of them, sorry!

Nobody beats Ancerl, though. A shame Karel Sejna only recorded No.3 ( awful recording quality!) of the Symphonies....


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Putting together a "best" cycle, I'd probably go for a modern cycle, and insist on an historic one on top. It'd go something like this:

No.1: Neumann, then Bělohlávek on Chandos
No.2: Thomson, then Flor
No.3: Jarvi, then Neumann
No.4: Bělohlávek on Chandos, then Thomson
No.5: Neumann, then Jarvi
No.6: Bělohlávek on Chandos, then Bělohlávek on Supraphon

Supplemented with the 1,3,5 on Multisonic by Karel Ancerl, No.4 by Kubelík and by Turnovský, Nos.5&6 Ancerl's later Supraphon recordings, and Munch in No.6!

There you go, limited myself to just six recordings. Impressive AND disciplined!:devil:


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

CnC Bartok said:


> Putting together a "best" cycle, I'd probably go for a modern cycle, and insist on an historic one on top. It'd go something like this:
> 
> No.1: Neumann, then Bělohlávek on Chandos
> No.2: Thomson, then Flor
> ...


you have reminded me about the incomplete Flor cycle-a shame he did not complete as the recordings he did make are impressive!


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Ančerl's No. 5 (Toronto) has long been a favourite. More magical than his 1955 Czech which is more expansive. Recently found his 1960s 1,3,5 at a price that does not cost an arm and a leg and it's in the post. Can't wait to hear that!

Munch's No. 6 (Boston) is pretty much in a class of its own. It's on fire and hotter than most other conductors'. His 1967 live Czech recording is good too but have to put up with his grunting taking centre stage.

Also think very highly of Flor's incomplete cycle. His No. 5 especially. What he showed us in this symphony cannot be more different from Ančerl, but I really enjoy it. My only complaint is the laid-back sound quality. Have to turn up the volume on a good set-up for it to come through properly.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

WOW, I am already proud to have one Martinu cycle in my collection, Bryden Thomson. No comparisons here. Am glad that it is recognized here as a good one. Thanks for highlighting them here, I absorb your views:tiphat:


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

I still have not gone through the entire Fagen set yet, but one pleasant surprise is how clearly the various instruments in the background can be heard. Kudos to Fagen, the orchestra and Naxos. So far I've only gone through 2, 4 and 5 and I'm mostly impressed by the mesmerising No. 4 slow movement, although my favourites for these remains Bělohlávek/BBC (No. 2), Järvi (No. 4), and Ančerl/Toronto (No. 5).


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

The entire Neeme Järvi cycle in Bamberg. Martinu and Bax were very difficult for me to digest, but he's one of the few who made it more enjoyable. I doubt I would listen to that composer's symphonies in the future.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

That's too mad. I see Martinů's symphonies from his US period being probably his easiest to digest. For me Bax requires more attentive listening otherwise I'll certrainly get lost. :lol:


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Kiki said:


> Václav Neumann has always been the yardstick for me, but I also like the finesse of Jiří Bělohlávek, the muscle of Neeme Järvi, the zen of Vladimir Válek, the brilliance of Bryden Thomson, and the volatility of Cornelius Meister.


I just ordered my third set which is the Bryden Thomson. I have Jarvi, and Belohlevek's live set on Onyx. I really love these symphonies. I am interested in more of Martinu's modern music like the Double Concerto. I'm not crazy about the neo baroque stuff.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

starthrower said:


> I just ordered my third set which is the Bryden Thomson. I have Jarvi, and Belohlevek's live set on Onyx. I really love these symphonies. I am interested in more of Martinu's modern music like the Double Concerto. I'm not crazy about the neo baroque stuff.


The Thomson set is really exciting. I hope you like it! It might not have the finesse of the Bělohlávek, but its muscle power is every bit as spectacular as the Järvi.

_The Double Concerto for Two String Orchestras, Piano and Timpani H271_ is a fantastic piece IMO, ahead of other pieces written in the late 1930s in terms of how it looks forward to the more concise, fantasy-like style of his later period. 

Among other "Martinu's modern music", his last three large orchestral works: _Les Frescoes du Piero della Francesca H352_, _Paraboly H367_ and _Estampes H369_ are fantastic, which I think are all unjustly neglected. 

There is also _Toccata e due canzoni H311_, written in around the same time as the symphonies. Don't let the title put you off, it does not cause headaches like some of his earlier neo-classical works (or "neo baroque" as you put it). In fact its sound world is closer to the Double Concerto but is a bit sunnier and more lyrical.


----------



## Monsalvat (11 mo ago)

I haven't (yet) heard his symphonies but I did enjoy some of his string quartets. I'll have to listen to the recommendations already posted in this thread.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Kiki, I just discovered those three late works last night. I really like them a lot. I plan on picking up the Supraphon CD that includes all three. I hope I like the Bryden Thomson set. I couldn't pass it up for 10 dollars. I also like Valek who has a softer or Zen like quality as you mentioned. And the recording has a warm sound which I prefer.


----------



## sasdwf (Feb 6, 2021)

Thanks for the thread, which has caused me to revisit these symphonies. I’ve long been a huge Ancerl fan and encourage folks to seek any of his recordings out if they are interested in this music and haven’t heard them.

I’ve listened most to the Jarvi set and have been pretty happy with it: great recording with consistently good playing and atmospheric interpretations. I’ve just done some spot comparisons on Apple Music of the Behlolavec, Neumann, and Meister sets. They all offered excellent accounts, but the Meister set surprisingly (to me) made the best first impression. I plan to listen to it in more depth.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Hard to say - 3 ,4 ,5 and 6 are all pretty strong....I might give the nod to #4 by a slight margin...
I have Neumann/CzPO for complete set -[c. '77]....and 3 and 6 from a separate release from '84.....the later ones are splendidly recorded, the CzechPO sounds superb, some wonderful solo work, trumpet and bassoon esp....


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

starthrower said:


> Kiki, I just discovered those three late works last night. I really like them a lot. I plan on picking up the Supraphon CD that includes all three. I hope I like the Bryden Thomson set. I couldn't pass it up for 10 dollars. I also like Valek who has a softer or Zen like quality as you mentioned. And the recording has a warm sound which I prefer.


This one from Tomáš Netopil? Very good performances. Great sound also.










IMO the Thomson set could not be more different from the Válek. It is great in a different way. 10 USD is definitely worth it.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Yes, that's the CD I was referring to.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Kiki said:


> This one from Tomáš Netopil? Very good performances. Great sound also.


Yes, that's the CD I was referring to.


----------



## jimsumner (Jul 7, 2013)

starthrower said:


> I just ordered my third set which is the Bryden Thomson. I have Jarvi, and Belohlevek's live set on Onyx. I really love these symphonies. I am interested in more of Martinu's modern music like the Double Concerto. I'm not crazy about the neo baroque stuff.


There aren't a lot of great viola concertos. But his Rhapsody Concerto for Viola and Orchestra is one of his best pieces, IMO. Give the Maxim Rysanov version a listen on one of the streaming services and see what you think.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

I'm going to try to keep my post short since Martinů is one of those composers who I could talk endlessly about. There are three symphony cycles that reign supreme (or at least reign supreme in my view): Bělohlávek (complete cycle on Onyx, but his partial cycles on Chandos and Supraphon are worth checking out, too), Thomson and Järvi. I also like Neumann, but he's slightly behind these aforementioned cycles. The Fagen, Meister and Válek cycles are comparatively weak all-around. They have orchestras that just aren't up to the task and sound rather underrehearsed, but, more importantly, the playing just isn't that exciting. I read a review that called Järvi's cycle "sloppy" and perhaps it is, but it's so much fun to listen to that it doesn't even matter. Martinů is a difficult composer to perform due to those tricky syncopations that occur in all six symphonies. One of the problems with these symphonies to a newcomer, and I've said this on another thread, is since these symphonies were written in such quick succession, there's a certain uniform quality to them, but a deeper dive into each of them will reveal their differences. As I also mentioned on another thread, Martinů churned out one work after another and never went back to give any more thought to a composition --- in other words, once a work is finished and he's moved on then that's it. Anyway, I find his symphonies incredibly rewarding and a joy to listen to, but I can only suggest listeners try his other orchestral works like the ballets, concerti, but also his choral, chamber, operatic and solo piano works. There's so much to digest in his oeuvre, but the only unfortunate thing is if you still buy CDs (like I do), then his music, especially those older Supraphon recordings are difficult to come by. I acquired almost all of my Martinů collection years ago, but occasionally I'll see a recording that I don't have and want, but, unfortunately, the price is the only thing that isn't attractive.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Neo Romanza said:


> I'm going to try to keep my post short since Martinů is one of those composers who I could talk endlessly about. There are three symphony cycles that reign supreme (or at least reign supreme in my view): Bělohlávek (complete cycle on Onyx, but his partial cycles on Chandos and Supraphon are worth checking out, too), Thomson and Järvi. I also like Neumann, but he's slightly behind these aforementioned cycles. The Fagen, Meister and Válek cycles are comparatively weak all-around. They have orchestras that just aren't up to the task and sound rather underrehearsed, but, more importantly, the playing just isn't that exciting. I read a review that called Järvi's cycle "sloppy" and perhaps it is, but it's so much fun to listen to that it doesn't even matter. Martinů is a difficult composer to perform due to those tricky syncopations that occur in all six symphonies. One of the problems with these symphonies to a newcomer, and I've said this on another thread, is since these symphonies were written in such quick succession, there's a certain uniform quality to them, but a deeper dive into each of them will reveal their differences. As I also mentioned on another thread, Martinů churned out one work after another and never went back to give any more thought to a composition --- in other words, once a work is finished and he's moved on then that's it. Anyway, I find his symphonies incredibly rewarding and a joy to listen to, but I can only suggest listeners try his other orchestral works like the ballets, concerti, but also his choral, chamber, operatic and solo piano works. There's so much to digest in his oeuvre, but the only unfortunate thing is if you still buy CDs (like I do), then his music, especially those older Supraphon recordings are difficult to come by. I acquired almost all of my Martinů collection years ago, but occasionally I'll see a recording that I don't have and want, but, unfortunately, the price is the only thing that isn't attractive.


Thanks for your assessment! I agree with yours by and large. Bělohlávek, Thomson and Neeme Järvi are safe bets. I may be a bit more generous towards Válek and Fagen for their more reflected/articulated approach but I have to admit their selling point is definitely not excitement. As for Meister, he's not bad, just that he fails to shine next to the others. 

While these cycles are great, I think they ought to be supplemented by some amazing recordings of individual symphonies from the likes of Ančerl, Kubelik, Flor, Turnovský, Sawallisch, Šejna etc.

Being a collector can be challenging. Add a bit of OCD to it and it can be tormenting.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Kiki said:


> Being a collector can be challenging. Add a bit of OCD to it and it can be tormenting.


Is there such a thing as "a bit of OCD"?


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Becca said:


> Is there such a thing as "a bit of OCD"?


You're being rational, Becca.  On one hand, OCD must have been at play in my head on some occasions. On the other hand, I don't want to admit it, so no, I've never exhibited behaviour that resembled OCD. Therefore, the compromise is "a bit" - it works in a rhetorical way.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Kiki said:


> Thanks for your assessment! I agree with yours by and large. Bělohlávek, Thomson and Neeme Järvi are safe bets. I may be a bit more generous towards Válek and Fagen for their more reflected/articulated approach but I have to admit their selling point is definitely not excitement. As for Meister, he's not bad, just that he fails to shine next to the others.
> 
> While these cycles are great, I think they ought to be supplemented by some amazing recordings of individual symphonies from the likes of Ančerl, Kubelik, Flor, Turnovský, Sawallisch, Šejna etc.
> 
> Being a collector can be challenging. Add a bit of OCD to it and it can be tormenting.


My pleasure and you are correct there are many individual performances outside of these cycles that are incredibly fine like Ančerl and Turnovský. I would say that Turnovský's performance of the 4th is actually the greatest one I know. If he had recorded the entire cycle, then his set would be, without a doubt in my mind, the reference set.

There's just so much music out there and I'm rather lucky in the fact that the bulk of my CD collection happened within a 6-7 year period. I was buying CDs cheap and shipping wasn't quite what is nowadays. I would say the most frustrating thing about buying classical CDs is how fast they go out-of-print and if you don't buy within a month of its release, then there's a good chance that you won't be able to find it for that initial price. Thankfully, I'm pretty much winding down my CD buying and if I do buy a CD nowadays, it's usually some that is obscure and OOP.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Neo Romanza said:


> My pleasure and you are correct there are many individual performances outside of these cycles that are incredibly fine like Ančerl and Turnovský. I would say that Turnovský's performance of the 4th is actually the greatest one I know. If he had recorded the entire cycle, then his set would be, without a doubt in my mind, the reference set.
> 
> There's just so much music out there and I'm rather lucky in the fact that the bulk of my CD collection happened within a 6-7 year period. I was buying CDs cheap and shipping wasn't quite what is nowadays. I would say the most frustrating thing about buying classical CDs is how fast they go out-of-print and if you don't buy within a month of its release, then there's a good chance that you won't be able to find it for that initial price. Thankfully, I'm pretty much winding down my CD buying and if I do buy a CD nowadays, it's usually some that is obscure and OOP.


Turnovský's 1965 #4 is great. I also like that fact that he restored those 3 bars of fantastic piano solo that Martinů removed in the 1950 published score. Many other later recordings did not until this century. (Kubelik's 1948 #4 also played those 3 bars, but strictly speaking he recorded it before Martinů removed them.)


----------



## dko22 (Jun 22, 2021)

Tunovsky's 4th is what introduced me to Martinů and it's still remarkable. I find Neumann the most idiomatic interpreter overall. Bělohlávek is not as bad in this composer as in many others but I still don't really rate him.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

dko22 said:


> Tunovsky's 4th is what introduced me to Martinů and it's still remarkable. I find Neumann the most idiomatic interpreter overall. Bělohlávek is not as bad in this composer as in many others but I still don't really rate him.


In a way I agree with you about Bělohlávek. I first learnt about his work through his BBC CDs, didn't like them and he quickly became a conductor I proactively avoid. I listened to him only because he made many Martinů recordings, and honestly he did have a good sense for Martinů's music which I've found appealing, although I am still not a fan of his "signature" out-of-focus and murmuring bass line.

For me, Neumann is still my yardstick in Martinů's symphonies, so I totally agree with you on him. Unfortunately he did not record much of Martinů apart from the symphonies. That's a pity.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Kiki said:


> In a way I agree with you about Bělohlávek. I first learnt about his work through his BBC CDs, didn't like them and he quickly became a conductor I proactively avoid. I listened to him only because he made many Martinů recordings, and honestly he did have a good sense for Martinů's music which I've found appealing, although I am still not a fan of his "signature" out-of-focus and murmuring bass line.
> 
> For me, Neumann is still my yardstick in Martinů's symphonies, so I totally agree with you on him. Unfortunately he did not record much of Martinů apart from the symphonies. That's a pity.


There's not as much Martinu from Neumann as there is from Bělohlávek, but there is quite a bit beyond the six symphonies - a couple of operas, and a healthy sprinkling of the concertos.....

Bělohlávek is excellent in Martinu, although admittedly in some works there is precious little to compare on CD. I confess to not quite understanding your comments on his bassline. Not how I hear things...! He was a fine conductor in so many composers though, his late Dvořák cycle is excellent, as is his Suk, quite a lot of his Janáček, and his Brahms symphony cycle is among my favourites, partially because he takes the screechy edge off, something I don't always get on with in Brahms to be honest.

That CD from Tomáš Netopil memtioned above is getting a good few spins here in recent weeks, the best Fresques since Ančerl, and great to have some of his later masterpieces all in excellent sound and very fine performances.

I do want to hear more Martinu from Jakub Hrůša........


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

CnC Bartok said:


> There's not as much Martinu from Neumann as there is from Bělohlávek, but there is quite a bit beyond the six symphonies - a couple of operas, and a healthy sprinkling of the concertos.....
> 
> Bělohlávek is excellent in Martinu, although admittedly in some works there is precious little to compare on CD. I confess to not quite understanding your comments on his bassline. Not how I hear things...! He was a fine conductor in so many composers though, his late Dvořák cycle is excellent, as is his Suk, quite a lot of his Janáček, and his Brahms symphony cycle is among my favourites, partially because he takes the screechy edge off, something I don't always get on with in Brahms to be honest.
> 
> ...


Bělohlávek is good in Martinů. No doubt about that. I did pick him as my favourite in the #4 survey and a close second in the #2 survey. However, to explain my criticism - the low frequencies produced by his orchestras often sound fuzzy and the percussion often soft. I never like that. Despite that, he did so many good things in Martinů that outweigh what I don't like. That's why he is one of my favourite Martinů conductors.

As for other repertoire, I'll leave that to his advocates.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

CnC Bartok said:


> I do want to hear more Martinu from Jakub Hrůša........


Apart from Hrůša , there's another young conductor whom I like to hear more Martinů from - Andrés Orozco-Estrada. He did some nice Martinů during his time with the hr-Sinfonieorchester, including a very good Double Concerto on their official youtube channel.


----------

