# Composers and Directors



## csacks (Dec 5, 2013)

I have just read a post by Mahlerian about Stravinsky conducting one of his own pieces. I would like to ask your opinion about composers conducting their own compositions. Are they any better that other directors? Thanks in advance for your opinions


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Really depends on the composer --some were highly competent conductors and some were disasters. And some took yup conducting expressly so they could do their own music -- some under the misconception that theirs was the "only way" to do them. It's like poets reading their own poetry -- some are awful at it.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Some composers are great conductors: Mahler, Boulez, Bernstein, Berlioz.
Some composers are fine conductors, at least of their own work: Stravinsky, Adams.
Some composers are not especially skilled conductors, but may turn out a decent recording of some of their own pieces, like Copland.

And then there's Bruckner, who should never have conducted anything, and the many conductors who have composed some pieces on the side, such as Furtwangler, Walter, Markevitch, Salonen, Gielen, and so forth.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> Some composers are great conductors: Mahler, Boulez, Bernstein, Berlioz.
> Some composers are fine conductors, at least of their own work: Stravinsky, Adams.
> Some composers are not especially skilled conductors, but may turn out a decent recording of some of their own pieces, like Copland.
> 
> And then there's Bruckner, who should never have conducted anything, and the many conductors who have composed some pieces on the side, such as Furtwangler, Walter, Markevitch, Salonen, Gielen, and so forth.


Lutosławski was a good conductor too.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Mahlerian said:


> Some composers are great conductors: Mahler, Boulez, Bernstein, Berlioz.
> Some composers are fine conductors, at least of their own work: Stravinsky, Adams.
> Some composers are not especially skilled conductors, but may turn out a decent recording of some of their own pieces, like Copland.
> 
> And then there's Bruckner, who should never have conducted anything, and the many conductors who have composed some pieces on the side, such as Furtwangler, Walter, Markevitch, Salonen, Gielen, and so forth.


Actually Salonen was a composer before his conducting career, he said that the primary reason he took up conducting was to ensure that someone would conduct his own compositions.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Richard Strauss & Paul Hindemith also conducted, although from what I have seen and read, with somewhat indifferent results.


----------



## OldFashionedGirl (Jul 21, 2013)

Richard Strauss conducting looked like he didn't take his naps.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Mendelssohn and Wagner revolutionized conducting.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Itullian said:


> Mendelssohn and Wagner revolutionized conducting.


Yes, but Spohr was one of the first to use a small baton. Saved him from Lully's fate, no doubt.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

OldFashionedGirl said:


> Richard Strauss conducting looked like he didn't take his naps.


There is a story, perhaps apocryphal, that Strauss was conducting and he pulled out his pocket watch, noticed the time, and sped up the tempo so that he wouldn't be late for a card game!


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> Some composers are great conductors: Mahler, Boulez, Bernstein, Berlioz.
> Some composers are fine conductors, at least of their own work: Stravinsky, Adams.


Aside from being such a gifted composer and pianist, Rachmaninov was considered a very fine conductor of his own works if I'm not mistaken.

His recording of the 3rd symphony is very highly regarded.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

MarkW said:


> Really depends on the composer --some were highly competent conductors and some were disasters.


I'm very ignorant about orchestral direction, but I have difficulties understanding how the creator of his music, who knows better than anybody else how that music should sound could be a terrible director of his own work.
It's like as someone is saying to the composer that he doesn't know the speed or the dynamics of his creation. "No, you didn't really want to achieve that effect"... it sounds strange to me.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

norman bates said:


> I'm very ignorant about orchestral direction, but I have difficulties understanding how the creator of his music, who knows better than anybody else how that music should sound could be a terrible director of his own work.
> It's like as someone is saying to the composer that he doesn't know the speed or the dynamics of his creation. "No, you didn't really want to achieve that effect"... it sounds strange to me.


Conducting is all about communicating to the orchestra what you want to have happen. It could be that a composer is a poor conductor in a sense that they are a poor communicator and they didn't achieve the sounds from the orchestra that they intended.

I think your objection is only valid if the composer himself/herself stated that they think they're recording of the work is perfect.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

A layman´s point of view, but very often I prefer conductors to composer´s own recordings of their works.

This applies (in the main) to: 
Hindemith, Bartok, Stravinsky, Poulenc, Glazunov, Furtwängler 

but not to:
Britten, Boulez, Penderecki, Henze, Shostakovich, Prokofiev, 

Mixed opinions:
Elgar, Rachmaninov, Copland, Strauss, Lutoslawski, Walton, V-Lobos.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

joen_cph said:


> A layman´s point of view, but very often I prefer conductors to composer´s own recordings.
> 
> This applies (in the main) to:
> *Glazunov* ...


For what he did to Rachmaninov's 1st symphony premiere alone, we can chuck him to the 'lousy conductor' pile without hesitation. :tiphat:


----------



## Bevo (Feb 22, 2015)

I can't speak too much from experience because I just write music, I don't play, but I would think that if the composer had the same skill set as others he would be the best to conduct his own compositions. I say that because he understands his music on a different level that others, and knows what he's searching for. It might not be a personal favorite, in terms of interpretation, but it would be about how the music was intended to be performed, not necessarily what sounds best to the audience.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

csacks said:


> I have just read a post by Mahlerian about Stravinsky conducting one of his own pieces. I would like to ask your opinion about composers conducting their own compositions. Are they any better that other directors? Thanks in advance for your opinions


I am also curious about conductors who compose. I heard some Furtwangler composition last month and it was interesting.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

As far as Aaron Copland is concerned, he could not "out-conduct' Leonard Bernstein in his populist compositions.

Nobody bettered Leonard Bernstein's incomparable, heartfelt performance of the suite from Appalachian Spring with the NY Philharmonic, not Copland, not anybody!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

If a composer has the skills needed to be a fine conductor and can get what he wants from an orchestra, we should give his interpretations an appropriate respect as representing how he wants his music to sound. That doesn't mean, though, that other interpretations are not valid. I think very few composers either expect or want that their works should sound exactly the same in performance every time, everywhere and forever.


----------



## AdmiralSilver (Sep 28, 2013)

The same question applies to Piano composers & Pianist composers. in my view, a certain composition is meant to be interpreted and not just played, a composer writes an idea, a performer interpret it. I myself have composed a little piece, and when I play it I think I play it badly.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Becca said:


> Actually Salonen was a composer before his conducting career, he said that the primary reason he took up conducting was to ensure that someone would conduct his own compositions.


His own and his friends', I believe. He's claimed that he was more or less selected out of a group including Saariaho and Lindberg as the most promising of them to conduct the new era of Finnish music. Fwiw, I personally consider him more of a composer than a conductor, but (as I think was the case with Bernstein) I think that his work on the podium helps rather than hinders his output even though he (again like Bernstein) isn't very prolific.


----------

