# Supposition about Symphonies "No. 5"



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

This is a theory or observation that I have, and frankly, I'm not sure if I'm reading too much into this or if it is legit. My supposition is that, since the time of Beethoven, for symphonists that have written at least five symphonies, their fifth symphony, on the average, seems to be disproportionately better than one of their other numbered symphonies.

Prokofiev 5 is generally considered his best
Sibelius 5 is one of his best (the best IMO)
Tchaikovsky 5 is one of his best
Shostakovich 5 is considered one of his two best (the other being no. 10)
Mahler 5 is considered one of his best (with no. 2 and 9, arguably)
Bruckner 5 is considered one of his better symphonies
Arnold 5 is, IMO, his best

Mendelssohn, Martinu, Persichetti, Maslanka, Panufnik, Honegger, Henze, Dvorak, Hanson, Honegger, Nielsen all wrote 5 or more symphonies. I'm not versed enough to weigh in there.

But overall it seems that *NO.5 IS MORE LIKELY TO STAND OUT* than most of a composer's other symphonies. If this is true, I would suggest it is because of one of two reasons:

_1) The learning curve of writing symphonies yields a big payout by the 5th time. In other words, by the time you're writing you're fifth symphony you have worked out the pitfalls and problems of writing symphonies and you have matured as a composer to the point where you can really write a masterpiece. (yet you haven't gone so far over the hill as to have lost creative energy).

2) Composers put special attention on NO.5 in homage to Beethoven. _

Thoughts? Am I up in the night? is the COVID playing tricks on my brain? or is there a pattern?


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

Prokofiev, in particular, seemed to really pay attention to his No.5. It is, not accidentally, his Opus 100. I believe he aimed for a landmark work to be his opus 100 and I think that, in homage to the impact Beethoven 5 made, he brought out his "best ideas" for this symphony. At least from a critical and public reception, it was the high point of his career. He made the cover of Time magazine in the USA, the Soviet leaders loved the piece, and he was very celebrated.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

It is rather odd, isn't it. Schubert's 5th is his most played after 8 and 9. Raff's 5th is his most popular, too. But not being into numerology and without superstitious leanings, it's just a number. Recall that for decades Dvorak's New World was known as "no. 5". Then when they re-numbered, it became "no. 9". Of course, the manuscript score has a different take: "no. 8". 

Prokofiev's 5th may be better known and the most popular along with no. 1, but many musicians consider no. 6 to be the better symphony.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

From Tchaikovsky Research:

On 10/22 June, Tchaikovsky wrote to Nadezhda von Meck: "I must work harder in the future; I want so much to show not only to others, but to myself, that I still haven't expired... I don't know whether I wrote to you that I had decided to write a symphony. 

The most intensive work on the Fifth Symphony was carried out between 7/19 and 17/29 June, although Tchaikovsky continued to doubt his abilities: "I am working quite assiduously on a symphony, which, if I am not mistaken, will be no worse than its predecessors. But perhaps this is just my opinion now... I may later feel that I am written out, that my head is empty, that my time is past, etc."

//Later he would consider it insincere, because he felt too miserable to identify with its triumphant mood. Others around him meanwhile told him that it was his best work thus far.//


"Show not only to others, but to myself, that I still haven't expired"... = "Seize the fate by the throat" ?


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Mendelssohn's #5 is officially his Reformation symphony (check out Bruggen's interpretation!) but chronologically his Scottish symphony, one of his best.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Don't forget Vaughan Williams, Glazunov. Martinu and Nielsens 5th's were up there in their output. But considering what it takes to write a symphony at all, and great inspiration can't be turned on, I think it's just incredible dumb luck. No doubt experience does play a part over earlier symphonies though.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

And, of course, the numbers assigned are not always absolutely a reflection of the order. (It is possible that by the time you get to 5, that occasional anomaly tends to work itself out, so 5 would still be 5 even if 2 is really 1 or 4 is really 2.)

Edit: And I see that ORigel has touched on this issue, with Mendelssohn as the example.


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

Haydn's 5th wasn't his best.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

Olias said:


> Haydn's 5th wasn't his best.


I know you're joking but I will take this opportunity to say that the OP clearly states _post-Beethoven_


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Alwyn's single movement no.5 is one of his best. Schnittke C.G. No.4/Symphony No.5


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Of course, where would Ferdinand Ries's Fifth Symphony be without Beethoven's Fifth? Or even without Beethoven! Of course, it might just be his Fourth Symphony. It seems to me the Ries Fifth resulted from a misnumbering of the true order of the symphonies. 
In any case, those few of you who haven't yet heard the Ries Fifth have a real treat in store when you encounter it for the first time. Remember, Ries was very close to Beethoven -- a friend, pupil and secretary to the master. And from hearing the Ries Fifth, one can postulate that he listened very carefully to the elder composer, too.


----------



## Joe B (Aug 10, 2017)

Since you mentioned Hanson:

As far as Howard Hanson goes, I don't think anyone who is into his music would rate "Symphony No. 5" above any of his first 3 symphonies. I know I don't.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

I think you're reading too much into things. I think some of your examples are legitmate but some seam to be circumspect. I don't think Mahler 5 is more highly regarded than Mahler 6 for example. And Tchaikovsky later symphonies (4-6) are just considered better than his earlier ones; nothing special about no. 5.

To try and put this to an 'objective' test I recalled that the BBC had polled conductors on what they thought were the 'greatest' symphonies. This creates a list that clearly can't be biased by your 'theory'. https://www.classical-music.com/features/works/20-greatest-symphonies-all-time/. There are two no. 5's (Beethoven and Shostakovich) but neither are in the top 10. There are 3 no. 6's and 3 no. 7's. 5 doesn't seem to be at all overrepresented.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

I see your point BachIsBest and you are probably right, but, on the other hand, any list of the top 20 symphonies without Sibelius 5 on it, is CRAP, C*R*A*P, doggy-doo-doo, excrement, poopy-poopy-poopy-pants. :lol:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Composers may or may not have felt some special incentive to produce a great #5, but I don't think I find anyone's #5 to be necessarily their best. Of symphonies by some of the composers you list, I'd cite as equal to their #5s the following:

Prokofiev 6 (though I'm fond of 5)
Sibelius 4 and 7
Tchaikovsky 4 and 6 
Mahler 2, 4 and 6
Bruckner 8 and 9 
Mendelssohn 3 and 4 
Dvorak, 7, 8 and 9
Nielsen 4


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

I agree that Prokofiev 6 is better music than 5, though 5 is WAYYYYYYY MORE POPULAR in terms of the amount of recordings and the number of times it is programmed.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

You are not the first to notice that Fifths tend to be pretty good -- but I'm not sure anything can be read into that.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

MarkW said:


> You are not the first to notice that Fifths tend to be pretty good -- but I'm not sure anything can be read into that.


Or perhaps that anything _should_ be read into that. (Reading various TC threads proves that people _can_ say almost anything.)


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Joe B said:


> Since you mentioned Hanson:
> As far as Howard Hanson goes, I don't think anyone who is into his music would rate "Symphony No. 5" above any of his first 3 symphonies. I know I don't.


Agreed....3 is the best, #1 is also very strong.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

I suspect that by the time a composer gets to the Fifth Symphony, he or she has acquired enough skill and practice to be at the height of powers. So the Fifth should be pretty good. I rank the Beethoven Fifth as a great favorite, and hold the Vaughan Williams, Prokofiev, Sibelius, Schubert, Shostakovich, Mahler, and Bruckner Fifths to high esteem among those composers' symphonies.

What I eagerly but hopelessly await is the Brahms Fifth, which, should it occur, may likely be my favorite of that composer's profound and marvelous symphonies. Alas ....


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

SONNET CLV said:


> I suspect that by the time a composer gets to the Fifth Symphony, he or she has acquired enough skill and practice to be at the height of powers. So the Fifth should be pretty good. I rank the Beethoven Fifth as a great favorite, and hold the Vaughan Williams, Prokofiev, Sibelius, Schubert, Shostakovich, Mahler, and Bruckner Fifths to high esteem among those composers' symphonies.
> 
> What I eagerly but hopelessly await is the Brahms Fifth, which, should it occur, may likely be my favorite of that composer's profound and marvelous symphonies. Alas ....


There's Schoenberg's orchestration of Brahms's G minor piano quartet. Doesn't sound much like a Brahms symphony, though.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

If a composer wrote 10 or fewer symphonies then No. 5 is likely a mature example of his or her style.

If a composer wrote more than 10 symphonies it probably is not representative of his or her style.

How about Mozart Sympjony No. 5?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I call Schoenberg's orchestration of Brahms's G minor piano quartet his "fifth symphony." :lol:


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

larold said:


> If a composer wrote 10 or fewer symphonies then No. 5 is likely a mature example of his or her style.
> 
> If a composer wrote more than 10 symphonies it probably is not representative of his or her style.
> 
> How about Mozart Sympjony No. 5?


Or take Martinu. His first five symphonies were written all within a short period. His symphonies do not span his career.

Meanwhile, I can't think of many 5s that enjoy the special place in their composers' works that Beethoven 5 does for Beethoven. Note that it is a matter of popularity rather than informed reputation or being a personal favourite for experienced listeners - I doubt many here would say Beethoven 5 is their favourite but most of us know that it is the one that people who don't listen to a lot of classical know and like the best - and, from that it seems that many of the examples given in the OP would not qualify as being their composers' Beethoven 5. I think it is true that Shostakovich 5 and Prokofiev 5 do qualify and Sibelius 5 might compete for that place with Sibelius 2. Nielsen 5, Mahler 5 and Tchaikovsky 5 do not qualify.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Shosty ( September 25, 1906 - August 9, 1975 )


----------



## Ekim the Insubordinate (May 24, 2015)

I've thought about this over and over since reading it, not wanting to simply be argumentative. But I just don't really agree with the basic premise. Even for Beethoven - sure, the 5th is a great hook that draws many in to classical music, but I wouldn't consider it his greatest. I certainly think it is among his greatest, but the 9th is a superior work. Beyond that, you also have the 3rd and 6th and 7th, which are up there with the 5th.

Tchaikovsky's 5th? What? Ahead of the 6th? Or the 4th?
I recognize that many love Mahler's 5th, but even look around here - his 2nd frequently is found at the top of any poll in which it is included.
Schubert - his 5th ahead of his 8th and 9th? 
Bruckner? 

No - I think a particular fondness for Beethoven's 5th drove someone to try and shape some thesis to fit that love, to make it into something quantifiable and more broadly applicable. But I don't think there is any particular specialness to a 5th symphony in the post Beethoven era. I just think that, in that era, with the much lower symphonic output, the likelihood of the 5th being a standout is much greater (one out of 9, or 11% chance of being the greatest, versus 1 out of 41 or 1 out of 104).


----------



## Prodromides (Mar 18, 2012)

20centrfuge said:


> My supposition is that, since the time of Beethoven, for symphonists that have written at least five symphonies, their fifth symphony, on the average, seems to be disproportionately better than one of their other numbered symphonies.
> 
> Arnold 5 is, IMO, his best
> 
> ...


Utter tosh ... er ... Ernst Toch, I mean ... as but only one example. 

First, let me counter by stating that the 7th Symphony by Malcolm Arnold is better, to me, than his 5th.
Secondly consider Mr. Toch and the other composers I list below (this data is culled from my personal music collection):

Aho, Kalevi
Alwyn, William
Bolcom, William
Brewaeys, Luc
Englund, Einar
Frankel, Benjamin
Hoddinott, Alun
Holmboe, Vagn
Ikebe, Shin-Ichiro
Lemeland, Aubert
Melartin, Erkki
Miaskovsky, Nikolai
Nordgren, Pehr Henrik
Sallinen, Aulis
Saygun, Ahmed Adnan
Searle, Humphrey
Segerstam, Leif
Sessions, Roger
Silvestrov, Valentin
Tal, Josef
Tansman, Alexandre
Toch, Ernst
Tournemire, Charles
Vaughan Williams, Ralph
Wellesz, Egon
Wiren, Dag
Wissmer, Pierre
Yun, Isang

I realize other TC members already mentioned Alwyn and Vaughan Williams, but most of these names above have not figured into this thread's conversation.
My favorite symphony by Roger Sessions is his 9th.
I think the 6th symphonies of both Vagn Holmboe and Nikolai Miaskovsky are their finest symphonic efforts (& both wrote a lot).
The ones who have the best 5th symphonies include Alexandre Tansman and Aulis Sallinen, but - while I love Searle's #5 - I consider Humphrey's 4th as his best.
A large number of Symphony No.3s reside within my favorites list but these were written by composers who did not issue any 5ths (they are not on my list above, but include Jolivet, Szymanowski, Blomdahl, Enescu, etc.)
Benjamin Frankel's - and Isang Yun's - Symphony No.2 is the most memorable & resonant work within each's symphonic cycle.

Lastly, I think Richard Rodney Bennett's 1st Symphony is his best (& the best symphony debut of any composer).

There are my thoughts. Yes, the OP is up all night with 5 card stud on the brain (COVID19 may or may not be playing tricks). There are definitely patterns (plus subsets of patterns) to be discerned regarding musical compositions throughout the centuries, but some of these (if not all) are coincidences and in all likelihood are not premeditated to be subsequent chain-links in the long lineage.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

^ I like Arnold's 7th better too, but Arnold himself felt 5th was his favourite.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

To elaborate more on the connection between Beethoven's 5th and Tchaikovsky's 5th:



> (...) it was Beethoven's symphonies in fact which kindled in the young Tchaikovsky the zeal to write music himself, rather than just escaping from everyday reality into the magical realm of Mozart's opera. Moreover, the feeling of "sadness" which overcame him whenever he heard Beethoven's music is one that would remain with him all his life, and, if around 1860 it was perhaps mainly due to his despair at the thought that he would never be able to write anything similar (...)


The full main melody of Tchaikovsky's fifth symphony as heard in the finale features a variation in C# minor on the first sentence, which has the right rhytmic contour, but cannot take off from its first tone. When it finally does, it goes an interval down, thus creating a motif similar to that of Beethoven's 5th, but with a smaller fall... _literally _"falling short" of Beethoven's theme. After that comes the descending "homecoming" figure. Tchaikovsky's call-backs and sorrows about not being able to match Beethoven symphonically are heard throughout not only this symphony, but also his other ones, especially the 6th. If the 5th is an expression of a bittersweet but overall more satisfied than not result of this valiant struggle, in the 6th it descends into a full depression by failure.

The lyrical finale of the 5th, just like in Mendelssohn's Scottish, is an example of an unwillingness to finish a symphony on a clear-cut choral melody after Beethoven has done so in his 9th, and of settling for an orchestral cantabile instead.

Moreover, of all Tchaikovsky's symphonies, the 5th has in my view the most muscular form, with every movement being a tour de force, which is also an echo of what the 5th is within Beethoven's ouvre.

In Tchaikovsky's lifetime people in his circle spoke about the 5th as his greatest work, and 130 years later it remains a fan favourite among his symphonies. When Beethoven was asked which one of his symphonies was his favourite, the expectation was that he would point to "The Great C minor", so in a way it was received, at least by some, in a similar way to how Tchaikovsky's 5th was in its own time.

The overall victorious mood of the two symphonies is comparable, although with much more self-doubt and bittersweetness in Tchaikovsky's case. No other symphony after Beethoven came so close to being a "classical" symphony about victory as Tchaikovsky's 5th was. Or at least no other did so with such skill and such effect.

Edit: to clarify, the descending figure appears to have (at least initially) likely reflected Tchaikovsky's persistent feelings of getting old and losing skill, but in the finale this feeling has been overcome, as can be read in his private correspondence.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

I remember touching this very subject five years ago (around this time). I said at the time that "There is no doubt that the Fifth Symphony holds a very special place in Classical Music (as does the Eighth in my humble opinion): from Beethoven to Schubert to Mendelssohn, from Tchaikovsky to Glazunov to Myaskovsky to Shostakovich, from Bruckner to Mahler to Wellesz, from Parry to Stanford to Vaughan Williams to Bax to Lloyd, from Gade to Nielsen to Sibelius, and so forth. In short, there are many great Fifths out there." 
Source: Picking Your Favorite Fifth Symphony(ies)

That said, I agree with Ekim the Insubordinate, Phil loves classical and Woodduck in that although in a number of instances, the Fifth Symphony ranks up there, if not better, than the ones before or after in the composer's oeuvre, that is not always the case (it depends on the composer, how his/her works are evaluated, and so forth). For instance, is Beethoven's Fifth better than, say, his Third? I would argue no; the Third, which broke new grounds at the time of its conception and premiere, points to the Beethoven as a more mature, daring artist. The Fifth simply confirms that. Glazunov's Fifth is his most popular symphony, but in my estimation, he rather outdid himself in numbers Six and Eight. Shostakovich's own Fifth Symphony is likewise his most popular symphony, at least arguably, but would I rank it higher than, say, his Fourth, Eighth, Tenth, Thirteenth? Nah.

But it is an interesting topic. I love many Fifth Symphonies (esp. of Stanford that I happened to listen to this morning). But I equally or more greatly adore many of the other numbered (and un-numbered) symphonies we're lucky to have at our disposal. Vaughan-Williams' Sea Symphony, which I also listened to this morning, continues to be a wonderful treat.


----------



## paul k (Aug 14, 2020)

I enjoy listening to both the Scottish & the Reformation symphonies.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Interesting, isn't it? Maybe it would be fairer to say that a case can often be made that 5th is 'best', though as in the case of Sibelius, Arnold, Shostakovich, RVW, a case could equally made for other symphonies (e.g. 7th, 7th, 10th, 9th respectively).


----------



## OperasAndPassions (Aug 14, 2020)

Olias said:


> Haydn's 5th wasn't his best.


neither Mozart's:lol:

A similar thing could be said about the 9th's ones. Beethoven's, Schubert's and Dvorak's are their most acclaimed ones in general. Mozart's and Haydn's 9th not so much though....joking again :lol:


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Bruckner's first symphony is his No.0, WAB 100 in D minor, that makes his 4th symphony his actual 5th.
Mendelssohn wrote a set of string symphonies prior to writing his "regular" symphonies.


----------



## Sequentia (Nov 23, 2011)

hammeredklavier said:


> Bruckner's first symphony is his No.0, WAB 100 in D minor, that makes his 4th symphony his actual 5th.


Not to forget Bruckner's Symphony No. 00. As Schnittke has been mentioned earlier, one may point out that he also wrote a "zeroth" symphony. Then there is Sorabji, whose Piano Symphony No. 5 (_Symphonia brevis_) is outstanding, but is unnumbered in the manuscript.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

hammeredklavier said:


> Bruckner's first symphony is his No.0, WAB 100 in D minor


Just correcting a common error: Bruckner composed the symphony that is now known as '0' *after* the one that is now known as his first.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

larold said:


> How about Mozart Sympjony No. 5?


there is a bit of a "Baroque feel" to it, @3:23


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

The working title of Brahms’ D major serenade was in fact “Symphony-Serenade”, thus in a way his fourth symphony is actually his fifth. Brahms’ fourth symphony is also a tragic symphony, which Beethoven’s fifth was originally supposed to be.


----------

