# Your own personal Symphonic Cycle



## anon2k2

Just for fun, I've decided to listen to a symphonic cycle of my own creation. I haven't yet made up my own mind about what pieces to listen to, but I have set the rules for how I'm going to choose:

I'm going to choose 9 symphonies with a limit of one work per composer. Why 9? 9 seems to be a magic number for symphonic cycles (Beethoven, Schubert, Bruckner, etc)

So what I mean by this is that I'm going to choose Symphony no. 1 by a certain composer, then Symphony No. 2 by a different composer.

Just off the top of my head, a list could be like this:

Brahms #1
Sibelius #2
Beethoven #3
Mahler #4, etc.


Anyway, I'll let you know what I come up with, but I'd like suggestions what you'd choose for your cycle.


----------



## Edward Elgar

1 - Vaughan Williams' Sea Symphony
2 - Rachmaninov's 2nd
3 - Saint-Saen's 3rd
4 - Brahm's 4th
5 - Shostakovich's 5th
6 - Beethoven's 6th
7 - Vaughan Williams' Sinfonia Antartica
8 - Dvorak's 8th
9 - Dvorak's 9th

(Sorry Sibelius!)


----------



## BuddhaBandit

Shostakovich's 1st
Sibelius' 2nd
Vaughn Williams' 3rd
Brahms' 4th
Mendelssohn's 5th
Tchaikovsky's 6th
Beethoven's 7th
Mahler's 8th
Bruckner's 9th


----------



## ChamberNut

I've seen this on another site. It was fun to come up with a list, so I'll try it again.  

Brahms - Symphony No. 1
Schumann - Symphony No. 2
Beethoven - Symphony No. 3
Mendelssohn - Symphony No. 4
Bruckner - Symphony No. 5
Beethoven - Symphony No. 6
Beethoven - Symphony No. 7
Bruckner - Symphony No. 8
Schubert - Symphony No. 9


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

ChamberNut said:


> I've seen this on another site.


Me too... a couple of times. My favorite was the one where you were optionally allowed to use the sums-of-digits to fill in the categories, too: e.g.: Shostakovich 10 could subsitute for your (1), Mozart 40 could substitute for your (4), or (possibly) Haydn 104 could substitute for your (5), for instance.

Oh, and I also like the twist where you're allowed to include one "name/non-numbered" symphony.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

anon2k2 said:


> I'm going to choose 9 symphonies with a *limit of one work per composer.* (emphasis mine)


CQ to _Edoo_ & _CN_... I think part of the challenge is supposed to be avoiding multiple mentions of the same composer... I think the *Bandit* responded in the spirit of the Original Poster.

Interesting and tasteful lists, both... but- are you willing to try another with 9 different composers?! Oh, heck, I might as well practice what I preach, and have a go, in accordance with the parameters of the first post:
Prokofiev 1
Sibelius 2
Bruckner 3
Mendelssohn 4 
Mahler 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Beethoven 7
Schubert 8
Dvořák 9
I agonized over leaving off my cherished Borodin #2. I also wish I could have found room for Mahler's _Titan_- but I decided I'd prefer #5 for the Mahler entry.

There are other ways this list could be made more challenging. I'm working on one where no composers _and no nationalities_ are repeated.


----------



## SamGuss

I'm going to cheat, well because I am not as exposed as most here and only familiar with a few symphonies at this time, though I am getting wonderful ideas to go anc check out  Of the ones listed though, I do have and enjoy and did have a tough choice on #5 and #9 (Mahler and Beethoven respectively).

Brahms Symphony No. 1
Mahler Symphony No. 2
3... I honestly can't think of one. 
Tchaikovsky Symphony No. 4
Beethoven Symphony No. 5
Beethoven Symphony No. 6
Beethoven Symphony No. 7
Dvorak Symphony No. 8
Dvorak Symphony No. 9


----------



## BuddhaBandit

Chi_town/Philly said:


> [*]Prokofiev 1
> [*]Sibelius 2
> [*]Bruckner 3
> [*]Mendelssohn 4
> [*]Mahler 5
> [*]Tchaikovsky 6
> [*]Beethoven 7
> [*]Schubert 8
> [*]Dvořák 9


Interesting. This is practically a list of the "almost made it" for me- Mahler's 5th just lost out to Mendelssohn's, and I would've had Dvořák and Schubert as 8 and 9 (respectively, so Dvořák's 8th and Schubert's 9th) if I didn't love the Bruckner and Mahler so much. I also desperately wanted to include the Symphonie Fantastique, but I'm a purist when it comes to numbered/named symphonies .

Here's another twist: as the symphony really developed from the Classical period onward, make a cycle with nos. 1-3 from the Classical period, 4-6 from the Romantic, and 7-9 from the modern/20th Centry period.


----------



## World Violist

Oh, this is pretty cool! (I'll have to come back to this; my symphonic knowledge is quite limited... so I repeated a couple of composers...)

Brahms 1
Mahler 2
Beethoven 3
Schumann 4
Sibelius 5
Mahler 6
Sibelius 7
Mahler 8
Schubert 9


----------



## confuoco

anon2k2 said:


> 9 symphonies with a limit of one work per composer.


I think the most of you didn't mention this


----------



## confuoco

With this limit it is difficult

1. Prokofiev
2. Sibelius
3. Nielsen
4. Brahms
5. Beethoven
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Shostakovich
8. Schubert
9. Dvorak


----------



## Badinerie

My Symphonic Cycle would be...

*1st. Elgar.* _Just Sublime!_
*2nd. Honneger. *_Gets my Pulse going within the first few seconds, fantastic!_
*3rd. Saint Saens.* _Heavy Metal for an orchestra. Rick Wakeman eat your heart out!_
*4th. Bruckner.* _So Im an old romantic!_
*5th. Sibelius.* _The first Symphony that "got me"as a kid_
*6th. Haydn. *_A breath of fresh air from the "Symphony Daddy!"_
*7th. Vaughan Williams.* _A breathtaking emotional episode. beautiful eerie and sad._
*8th. Beethoven.* _Easily the best he wrote...Really, listen to it!_
*9th. Dvorak. *_Is this really over a hundred years old...way ahead of its time._


----------



## Rachovsky

#1 - Brahms
#2 - Mahler
#3 - Saint-Saens
#4 - Tchahikovsky
#5 - Shostakovich
#6 - Mahler
#7 - Beethoven 
#8 - Dvorak
#9 - Beethoven

This was harder than I expected. I love the 5th, 9th, 6th, and 7th of so many composers but I had to pick the ones I liked best.


----------



## mark4mich

1-Brahms
2-Rachmaninov
3-Saint-Saens
4-Brahms
5-Beethoven
6-Beethoven
7-Beethoven
8-Dvorak
9-Beethoven


----------



## Artemis

Several people have overlooked the restriction that each composer can only appear once.

Here's a list that meets the requirements:

Brahms	1
Sibelius	2
Schumann	3
Bruckner	4
Mendelssohn	5
Beethoven	6
Shostakovich	7
Schubert	8
Dvorak	9

This exercise doesn't permit any decent Haydn or Mozart symphonies unless the rules are bent by allowing the sum of the digits, eg Mozart 40 = 4+0 = 4; or Haydn 104 = 1+0+4=5. If this were allowed I would substitute Mozart 40 for Bruckner 4, and Mozart 41 for Mendelssohn 5. But what the heck can be done with Haydn 94 = 9+4 =13? Sorry but it's a daft exercise.


----------



## opus67

Artemis said:


> This exercise doesn't permit any decent Haydn or Mozart symphonies unless the rules are bent by allowing the sum of the digits, eg Mozart 40 = 4+0 = 4; or Haydn 104 = 1+0+4=5. If this were allowed I would substitute Mozart 40 for Bruckner 4, and Mozart 41 for Mendelssohn 5. But what the heck can be done with Haydn 94 = 9+4 =13? Sorry but it's a daft exercise.


Add them up till they reach a single digit.


----------



## cathcacr

*Starting lineup and backup list*

The starting lineup:

Barber 1
Sibelius 2
Vaughan Williams 3
Sibelius 4
Sibelius 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Sibelius 7
Bruckner 8
Dvorak 9

The second string:

Walton 1
Hanson 2
Nielsen 3
Nielsen 4
Vaughan Williams 5
Beethoven 6
Rautavaara 7
Dvorak 8
Beethoven 9

And, oh heck, why not, the third team:

Mahler 1
Hovhaness 2
Beethoven 3
Schmidt 4
Nielsen 5
Sibelius 6
Beethoven 7
Beethoven 8
Bruckner 9

While we're at it, a fourth team:

Brahms 1
Mahler 2
Saint-Saens 3
Mahler 4
Tchaikovsky 5
Vaughan Williams 6
Vaughan Williams 7
Schubert 8
Mahler 9

Well, that was kinda fun. Had to leave Shostakovich 5 off the fourth team! Which would make Beethoven 5 sixth-team.


----------



## cathcacr

*Starting to dig here . . .*

The fifth team:

Hanson 1
Nielsen 2
Mahler 3
Beethoven 4
Shostakovich 5 (along with Mahler 3, the standout of the cycle)
(can someone help me with a sixth here?)
Bruckner 7
(an eighth! I need an eighth!)
Schubert 9 (whew, was almost all out of 9's)


----------



## cathcacr

*A sixth team?*

Nielsen 1
Brahms 2
Brahms 3
Brahms 4
Beethoven 5
(I'm all tapped out after this)


----------



## cathcacr

Artemis said:


> Several people have overlooked the restriction that each composer can only appear once.


Oh dammit. Okay, here goes:

Barber 1
Sibelius 2
Vaughan Williams 3
Schmidt 4
Nielsen 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Rautavaara 7
Bruckner 8
Dvorak 9


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Edward Elgar said:


> ...
> 7 - Vaughan Williams' Sinfonia Antartica
> ...
> (Sorry Sibelius!)


Wow. I'm wondering... if you don't like Sibelius _In General_, I can understand your choice. However if you DO like Sibelius _In General_, do you _really_ like Vaughn-Williams' 7th more than Sibelius' 7th?



SamGuss said:


> 3... I honestly can't think of one.


Mahler 3? Beethoven 3?


----------



## World Violist

Okay, I'm really going to try here and not repeat any composers, because I'm apparently getting yelled at regardless of any disclaimer I may have tacked at the head of my list...

Brahms 1
Mahler 2
Beethoven 3
Schumann 4
Shostakovich 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Sibelius 7
Rautavaara 8
Schubert 9

Ach... I had to still cheat just a bit because I've not heard Shosty's 5th or Rautavaara's 8th completely... I'll come back yet again when I've actually heard even more symphonies. You've not heard the last of me!!!


----------



## Edward Elgar

Kurkikohtaus said:


> Wow. I'm wondering... if you don't like Sibelius _In General_, I can understand your choice. However if you DO like Sibelius _In General_, do you _really_ like Vaughn-Williams' 7th more than Sibelius' 7th?


Unfortunatly, I'm a sucker for the old film scores, so yes I'm afraid - although I consider Sibelius to be the stronger symphonist which is why I was sorry to omit him from my list.

Also I'd like to change Beethoven's 6th for Tchaikovsky's - A much sexier symphony!


----------



## SamGuss

Revision (still cheating a little though):

Brahms Symphony No. 1
Sibelius Symphony No. 2
Beethoven Symphony No. 3
Tchaikovsky Symphony No. 4
Mahler Symphony No. 5
Beethoven Symphony No. 6
Shostakovich Symphony No. 7
Mahler Symphony No. 8
Dvorak Symphony No. 9


----------



## mark4mich

OK, within the rules:
1 Brahms
2 Rachmaninov
3 Saint-Saens
4 Mendelssohn
5 Mahler
6 Tchaikovsky
7 Beethoven
8 Schubert
9 Dvorak


----------



## BuddhaBandit

SamGuss said:


> Revision (still cheating a little though):
> 
> Brahms Symphony No. 1
> Sibelius Symphony No. 2
> Beethoven Symphony No. 3
> Tchaikovsky Symphony No. 4
> Mahler Symphony No. 5
> Beethoven Symphony No. 6
> Shostakovich Symphony No. 7
> Mahler Symphony No. 8
> Dvorak Symphony No. 9


Trade the Beethoven 3rd for the Saint-Säens 3rd and you're set (trust me, the SS 3rd is a great one!)


----------



## confuoco

BuddhaBandit said:


> Trade the Beethoven 3rd for the Saint-Säens 3rd and you're set (trust me, the SS 3rd is a great one!)


I like SS 3rd too, altough critics accuse Saint-Saens of stolen tunes and ideas. But I think this symphony has perfect form and architecture...the first movement is going on and on, keeping my attention all the time. There isn't a lot of symphonic movements that can do this to me. And the last movement is triumphant.


----------



## World Violist

I still need to hear the SS Third... I forget whether or not I've heard Nielson's Second yet. But all the rest I've listened to!

1 Brahms
2 Nielson
3 Saint-Saens
4 Tchaikovsky
5 Beethoven
6 Mahler
7 Sibelius
8 Schubert
9 Dvorak


----------



## Moldyoldie

Brahms 1st
Mahler 2nd
Saint-Saëns 3rd
Bruckner 4th
Beethoven 5th
Sibelius 6th
Beethoven 7th 
Shostakovich 8th
Beethoven 9th

Boy, I know I'm going to be reconsidering this list in short order.


----------



## opus67

Moldyoldie said:


> Brahms 1st
> Mahler 2nd
> Saint-Saëns 3rd
> Bruckner 4th
> *Beethoven* 5th
> Sibelius 6th
> *Beethoven* 7th
> Shostakovich 8th
> *Beethoven* 9th
> 
> Boy, I know I'm going to be reconsidering this list in short order.


Yep.  10char


----------



## opus67

Oh, what the heck, I'll put (a partial) one down.

1 Schumann 
2 [_currently vacant_]
3 Saint-Saens
4 Brahms
5 Mendelssohn
6 Tchaikovsky
7 [_currently vacant_]
8 Schubert
9 Dvorak

I wouldn't mind a list with the last two composers interchanged, either.


----------



## SamGuss

Time for a reversion:

Brahms Symphony No. 1
Sibelius Symphony No. 2
Saint-Saens Symphony No. 3
Bruckner Symphony No. 4
Beethoven Symphony No. 5
.... currently empty
Shostakovich Symphony No. 7
Mahler Symphony No. 8
Dvorak Symphony No. 9


----------



## Rachovsky

opus67 said:


> Oh, what the heck, I'll put (a partial) one down.
> 
> 1 Schumann
> 2 [_currently vacant_]
> 3 Saint-Saens
> 4 Brahms
> 5 Mendelssohn
> 6 Tchaikovsky
> 7 [_currently vacant_]
> 8 Schubert
> 9 Dvorak
> 
> I wouldn't mind a list with the last two composers interchanged, either.


2 - _Mahler_
7 - _ Beethoven _

?


----------



## opus67

Rachovsky said:


> 2 - _Mahler_


Not familiar with any of his symphonies. Same with Bruckner, Sibelius, Shostakovich...



> 7 - _ Beethoven _
> ?


If I had decided to include Beethoven, I wouldn't have a list in the first place.


----------



## David C Coleman

Brahms #1
Mahler #2
Beethoven #3
Nielsen #4
Shostakovitch #5
Dvorak #6
Sibelius #7
Bruckner #8
Schubert #9


----------



## Sam

Now this is hard!

1 Mahler
2 Rachmaninov
3 Saint-Saens
4 Shostakovich
5 Sibelius
6 Tchaikovsky
7 Beethoven
8 Bruckner
9 Dvorak

Really wanted Mahler 2...but with Rach, who can argue?


----------



## Elgarian

I hadn't realised, until trying to compile this list, that I don't feel very passionately about about _anyone's_ 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th symphonies, but by contrast there's far too much competition among the contenders for the first 5 spots. So there are some heart-wrenching compromises that have to be made. Here goes:

*1 - Elgar* 
No competition here - overwhelmingly my favourite symphony of all symphonies.
*2 - Parry *
Derivative, yes. But the third movement is one of the loveliest pieces of English music that I know, and listening to this symphony makes me feel as if I understand why Parry was such a well-liked man.
*3 - Sibelius*
Not my first choice among Sibelius symphonies, but still a favourite - and the only way I can get him into the list.
*4 - Brahms* 
Hard to choose, between this and Tchaikovsky's, and I still feel hesitant.
*5 - Vaughan Williams* 
An old, old favourite, and an automatic choice for my number 5 slot.
*6 - Tchaikovsky*
Just filling up the slot in a worthy fashion, really.
*7 - Beethoven*
And filling up another in the same way.
*8 - Boyce*
Always injects a touch of Rococo charm into any day and makes me feel better, though I don't think it really counts as a symphony in the same sense as all the others and I may be cheating.
*9 - Schubert*
Thinking about what to put in the ninth slot made me realise that I don't have enough Schubert in my CD collection. I propose to do something about that, pronto - and so making this list has served a useful purpose!


----------



## World Violist

Alright, I'll come back to this, even though my symphonic knowledge hasn't increased any...

1- Schumann (I don't know it very well, but it's a nice one and an unused composer!)
2- Rachmaninoff (I really don't know this, I should get it...)
3- Saint-Saens (Don't know this one... but it's been recommended several times, so...)
4- Brahms (That first movement is INTENSE! and so is the last)
5- Beethoven (I really do hate it, but I'm rather forced into liking it; it is Beethoven, after all)
6- Tchaikovsky (My favorite Tchaikovsky. Bar none)
7- Sibelius (My favorite Sibelius. Bar none)
8- Schubert (not the greatest 8th, but the only good one left)
9- Mahler (My favorite Mahler. Bar none)

I just had to redo this for the changes I had to make to put Mahler's Ninth in there.


----------



## Moldyoldie

opus67 said:


> Yep.  10char


D'OH! Okay, okay -- how about this?

Brahms 1st
Mahler 2nd
Saint-Saëns 3rd
Bruckner 4th
Vaughan Williams 5th
Sibelius 6th
Dvorák 7th 
Shostakovich 8th
Beethoven 9th


----------



## opus67

Moldyoldie said:


> D'OH! Okay, okay -- how about this?


Much better.


----------



## Lisztfreak

1st Walton
2nd Brahms 
3rd Nielsen
4th Tchaikovsky
5th Beethoven
6th Vaughan Williams
7th Sibelius
8th Shostakovich
9th Bruckner

It's a pity that the Bruckner's representative isn't finished actually... but Beethoven would be a too obvious choice, and Mahler... well, I don't like him so much.


----------



## Lance

Heres my cycle of symphonies:


Scriabin 
Rachmaninov 
Shostakovich
Tchaikovsky 
Sibelius
Beethoven
*Undecided*
Schubert
Beethoven


----------



## woodwind_fan

1st: Mahler
2nd: Rachmaninoff
3rd: <space currently available>
4th: Brahms
5th: Tchaikovsky
6th: <space currently available>
7th: Beethoven
8th: <space currently available>
9th: Dvorak
(10th: Shostakovich)

I actually have this as a playlist on my iPod! Any suggestions for the gaps would be most welcome!


----------



## World Violist

woodwind_fan said:


> 1st: Mahler
> 2nd: Rachmaninoff
> 3rd: <space currently available>
> 4th: Brahms
> 5th: Tchaikovsky
> 6th: <space currently available>
> 7th: Beethoven
> 8th: <space currently available>
> 9th: Dvorak
> (10th: Shostakovich)
> 
> I actually have this as a playlist on my iPod! Any suggestions for the gaps would be most welcome!


I don't know Saint-Saens' Third Symphony, but I've heard it's really spectacular. As for the eighth, Schubert's is always a warhorse, so you might want to try that if you haven't already.

Problem with the Sixths; all the good ones I know (Beethoven, Mahler, Tchaikovsky) you've already taken up... but oh well.


----------



## concertodave

*My personal symphonic cycle*

1.Schumann- real happy music
2.Brahms- Full of the summer we didn't get in the Uk  
3.Berwald -Some quirky rythms and a beautiful adagio his no 4 is even better
4.Glazunov - My all time favourite full of heart rending melody
5.Stanford - Glorius tunes germanic with a touch of english mixed in
6.Tchaikovsky - some pain and beauty in this one
7.Beethoven - Just gotta dance to this one  
8.Dvorak - My second favourite Dvorak symphony but still brilliant
9.Bruckner - There are some great 9s out there but I love the scherzo in this


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

woodwind_fan said:


> ...
> 3rd: <space currently available>...
> 6th: <space currently available>...
> 8th: <space currently available>...
> I actually have this as a playlist on my iPod! Any suggestions for the gaps would be most welcome!


A nice twist on the theme, *woodwind_fan*! 
I agree with *world*'s advocacy of Schubert 8. Although I don't want to speak out against Saint-Saëns Symphony 3 ("Organ"), I'll put in a word for Sibelius 3 or, possibly more to your taste (and a worthy applicant in its own right) Mendelssohn 3 ("Scottish"). I guess Schumann's "Rhenish" is worth contemplating, too.

Yeah... 6 is much the tougher nut. Bruckner 6 is amazingly underrated. Now that I think of it, though, with your mention of Shostakovich 10, maybe Prokofiev 6 rates a trial.


----------



## World Violist

Chi_town/Philly said:


> A nice twist on the theme, *woodwind_fan*!
> I agree with *world*'s advocacy of Schubert 8. Although I don't want to speak out against Saint-Saëns Symphony 3 ("Organ"), I'll put in a word for Sibelius 3 or, possibly more to your taste (and a worthy applicant in its own right) Mendelssohn 3 ("Scottish"). I guess Schumann's "Rhenish" is worth contemplating, too.
> 
> Yeah... 6 is much the tougher nut. Bruckner 6 is amazingly underrated. Now that I think of it, though, with your mention of Shostakovich 10, maybe Prokofiev 6 rates a trial.


Ah, why couldn't I think of Sibelius' third??? Darn. That's one of my favorites of Sibelius, too.

How is Rautavaara's Sixth as an option? I don't know much Rautavaara at all...


----------



## woodwind_fan

As it stands, I would probably have Copland 3 and Vaughan-Williams 6, but only as I don't really have any comparisons. I need to listen to more symphonies!


----------



## opus67

opus67 said:


> Oh, what the heck, I'll put (a partial) one down.
> 
> 1 Schumann
> 2 [_currently vacant_]
> 3 Saint-Saens
> 4 Brahms
> 5 Mendelssohn
> 6 Tchaikovsky
> 7 [_currently vacant_]
> 8 Schubert
> 9 Dvorak
> 
> I wouldn't mind a list with the last two composers interchanged, either.





Rachovsky said:


> 2 - _Mahler_
> ...
> 
> ?


Yes.

So, the updated list reads

1 Schumann 
2 Mahler
3 Saint-Saens
4 Brahms
5 Mendelssohn
6 Tchaikovsky
7 [_currently vacant_]
8 Schubert
9 Dvorak


----------



## Isola

Mahler 2
Mahler 5
Mahler 6
Beethoven 6
Beethoven 9
Prokofiev 1
Shostakovich 5
Dvorak 9
Tchaikovsky 6


----------



## Isola

Oops, carelessly overlooked the rule of numerical order. OK, here we go again:

Prokofiev 1
Mahler 2
Brahms 3
Sibelius 4
Mahler 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Shostakovich 7
Schubert 8
Beethoven 9


----------



## World Violist

1- Ugh, I'm not in the mood to think of first symphonies...
2- Brahms
3- Beethoven
4- Schumann
5- Shostakovitch
6- Tchaikovsky
7- Sibelius
8- Schubert
9- Mahler


----------



## Lang

Ok, as this thread seems set to continue, here is my list:-

1. Havergal Brian, 'Gothic'
2. Honegger 'Symphony for Strings'
3. Ives
4. Brahms
5. Nielsen
6. Tchaikowsky
7. Beethoven
8. Dvorak
9. Mahler


----------



## violin maniac

I think I'd have to urge you alll to consider a black horse entry into this competition.






Not famous, but after hearing it recently I feel it may deserve a spot in this Symphonic Cycle. A new spin on something in pop culture that brings us back and forward in time....

May not be a total classic, but absolutely beautiful.


----------



## Atabey

1-Brahms
2-Rachmaninov (Sorry Sibelius)
3-Mendelssohn
4-Bruckner 
5-Tchaikovsky
6-Mahler
7-Beethoven (To me heads and shoulders above the competition,yes even Mahler,DSCH and Bruckner)
8-Shostakovich
9-Schubert (now i am disgusted wtih myself.For once in my life i agree with Karajan and that is about this symphony not being a great piece of music)

If i had been not restricted to use a composer once
1-Brahms-Mahler tied
2-Brahms-Sibelius-Rachmaninov tied
3-Brahms (Mendelssohn,Beethoven,Mahler tied for the second)
4-Shostakovich (Tchaikovsky close second,then Mahler-Brahms-Bruckner tied)
5-Mahler (then Beethoven-Bruckner-Tchaikovsky tied)
6-Mahler (then Beethoven-Shostakovich tied)
7-Beethoven (then Shostakovich,then Mahler,then Bruckner)
8-Shostakovich (then Mahler,then Schubert,then Bruckner)
9-Beethoven-Mahler tied
(10-Shostakovich)


----------



## Zombo

An interesting exercise...albeit quite abstract.

1-Elgar
2-Sibelius
3-Beethoven also Lutoslawski
4-Brahms
5-Shostakovich, I want to put Prokofiev too...
6-Tchaikovsky
7-Penderecki, also Rautavaara
8-RVW
9-Dvorak

didn't make this list with much thought


----------



## Kuhlau

A list that will change from week to week, if not day to day:

First Symphony - Elgar (or Walton, or Sibelius)
Second Symphony - Sibelius
Third Symphony - Beethoven (or Saint-Saens)
Fourth Symphony - Nielsen
Fifth Symphony - Vaughan Williams
Sixth Symphony - Beethoven
Seventh Symphony - Sibelius (or Mahler, or Dvorak)
Eighth Symphony - Vaughan Williams
Ninth Symphony - Beethoven

FK


----------



## opus67

Ah, but you're not supposed to repeat composers as per the stipulation set by the OP.


----------



## Kuhlau

Okay. So I cheated. 

FK


----------



## islandersbob

Mahler 1st
Borodin 2nd
Copland 3rd
Mendelssohn 4th
Beethoven 5th
Tchaikovsky 6th
Haydn 7th
Dvořák 8th
Schubert 9th

no repeat composers is hard.....but I was able to make the necessary cuts / changes to get it done!

with repeats it's would be something like this
1. Mahler, Vierne, Haydn
2. Borodin
3. Mahler, Copland
4. Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky
5. Tchaikovsky, Mahler, Beethoven
6. Tchaikovsky, Beethoven
7. Haydn
8. Dvořák
9. Schubert; Dvořák


----------



## Rondo

Now that I have given this some serious thought...

1: Grechaninov
2: Mahler
3: Nielsen
4: Tchaikovsky
5: M. Arnold
6: Sibelius
7: Beethoven
8: Bruckner
9: Dvorak
(10: Shostakovich)


----------



## World Violist

1: Brahms
2: Rachmaninoff
3: Beethoven
4: Ives
5: Shostakovich
6: Tchaikovsky
7: Sibelius
8: Mahler
9: Dvorak


----------



## LindenLea

Without repeating a composer, I'd go with...

Elgar No.1
Mahler No.2
Vaughan Williams No.3
Tchaikovsky No.4
Sibelius No.5
Beethoven No.6
Dvorak No.7
Schubert No.8
Bruckner No.9

(unfortunately this system discounts Mozart,as the bulk of his most lovely late symphonies came between his 35th and 41st!)


----------



## World Violist

So now with another symphonist to slide into this, here I go again...

1- Brahms
2- Schumann
3- Beethoven
4- Tchaikovsky
5- Shostakovich
6- Mahler
7- Sibelius
8- Dvorak
9- Rubbra


----------



## tahnak

*Nine Symphonies' Cycle Selection*

Ninth has to be ' Choral ' by Ludwig Van Beethoven
Eighth has to be 'Symphony of a Thousand' by Gustav Mahler
Seventh has to be the Funereal Symphony in E Major by Anton Bruckner
Sixth has to be Tchaikovsky's Pathetique
Fifth has to be Dmitri Shostakovich 
Fourth has to be Jean Sibelius
Third has to be Saint Saens Organ Symphony
Second has to be Rachmaninov
First has to be Brahms


----------



## opus67

opus67 said:


> Yes.
> 
> So, the updated list reads
> 
> 1 Schumann
> 2 Mahler
> 3 Saint-Saens
> 4 Brahms
> 5 Mendelssohn
> 6 Tchaikovsky
> 7 [_currently vacant_]
> 8 Schubert
> 9 Dvorak


Finally, I now have a complete list, without the inclusion of a Beethoven symphony, of course.

1 Schumann 
2 Mahler
3 Saint-Saens
4 Brahms
5 Mendelssohn
6 Tchaikovsky
7 *Bruckner*
8 Schubert
9 Dvorak

Just for the inner movements Bruckner got in there, the adagio especially. There have been times that I considered including Mahler's 5th and Bruckner's 9th (which might make its way in sooner or later), but I could not find alternatives to the spot they would be vacating.


----------



## Habib

1- Mahler
2- Rachmaninov
3- Beethoven
4- Shostakovich
5- Prokofiev
6- Vaughan Williams
7- Sibelius
8- Schubert
9- Dvorak


----------



## World Violist

1- Brahms
2- Schumann
3- Beethoven
4- Tchaikovsky
5- Shostakovich
6- Rubbra
7- Sibelius
8- Mahler
9- Dvorak

I can't really see Beethoven as being anywhere as near as great a symphonist as some people see him as being. I think his Third is really the only one I see as "great" musically among the Beethoven symphonies. The Ninth is great historically. I never really got beyond that, though. Maybe I should try it again soon.


----------



## opus67

World Violist said:


> The Ninth is great historically.


Could you please explain a little on what you mean by "historically"?


----------



## World Violist

opus67 said:


> Could you please explain a little on what you mean by "historically"?


I think to say that Beethoven's Ninth is significant historically is quite self-explanatory. For anyone to have written such a massive work at all is one thing; to all but break the lines of symphonic thought that had ruled over both Haydn and Mozart as well as countless others all their lives is quite another, and Beethoven does both here to tremendous effect. It changed the face of music forever.

The reason I say it isn't the greatest thing since the B minor Mass musically is because it isn't as great as it could easily have been. If you look at his later piano sonatas and string quartets, they reach an entirely new height on the emotional level; this does also as far as symphonies go, but I feel that the Third is far more "human" and therefore greater in its ability to resonate within the audience. This is just my opinion of course.


----------



## opus67

Thanks, WV. I agree that it's quite obvious why the 9th is great and significant historically, but it was I who misunderstood your post. I thought you were making a distinction between the 3rd and 9th; the former being great musically, and the latter (only) historically.


----------



## mueske

World Violist said:


> I think to say that Beethoven's Ninth is significant historically is quite self-explanatory. For anyone to have written such a massive work at all is one thing; to all but break the lines of symphonic thought that had ruled over both Haydn and Mozart as well as countless others all their lives is quite another, and Beethoven does both here to tremendous effect. It changed the face of music forever.
> 
> The reason I say it isn't the greatest thing since the B minor Mass musically is because it isn't as great as it could easily have been. If you look at his later piano sonatas and string quartets, they reach an entirely new height on the emotional level; this does also as far as symphonies go, but I feel that the Third is far more "human" and therefore greater in its ability to resonate within the audience. This is just my opinion of course.


I see what you mean, but I disagree. The fact that it is more than "human" is what makes it great, beter than all of his other symphonies. It's an emotional work, but not on a personal level, like the late string quartets and piano sonatas, it embraces all of mankind, something never done before.

For me it's both great musically and historically.

And I might give this thing a try...

1. Brahms
2. Rachmaninoff
3. ???
4. Shostakovich
5. Tchaikovsky
6. ???
7. Sibelius
8. Beethoven (didn't know any other 8th I really like)
9. Dvorak


----------



## mueske

mueske said:


> I see what you mean, but I disagree. The fact that it is more than "human" is what makes it great, beter than all of his other symphonies. It's an emotional work, but not on a personal level, like the late string quartets and piano sonatas, it embraces all of mankind, something never done before.
> 
> For me it's both great musically and historically.
> 
> And I might give this thing a try...
> 
> 1. Brahms
> 2. Rachmaninoff
> 3. ???
> 4. Shostakovich
> 5. Tchaikovsky
> 6. ???
> 7. Sibelius
> 8. Beethoven (didn't know any other 8th I really like)
> 9. Dvorak


1. Brahms
2. Rachmaninoff
3. ???
4. Shostakovich
5. Tchaikovsky
6. Mahler
7. Sibelius
8. Beethoven
9. Dvorak

Still can't think of a good third, any sugestions?


----------



## mark4mich

mueske said:


> 1. Brahms
> 2. Rachmaninoff
> 3. ???
> 4. Shostakovich
> 5. Tchaikovsky
> 6. Mahler
> 7. Sibelius
> 8. Beethoven
> 9. Dvorak
> 
> Still can't think of a good third, any sugestions?


Saint-Saens or Vaughan-Williams


----------



## mueske

mark4mich said:


> Saint-Saens or Vaughan-Williams


I'll give Vaughan-Williams a try, never really listened to anything from him. I know, shame on me I guess. And he is a composer with whom I have something in common, we were born on the same day!


----------



## nickgray

1. Sibelius
2. Mahler? I haven't listened to a lot of 2nds (yet)
3. Saint-Saens
4. Schumann
5. Tchaikovsky
6. Mahler
7. no seventh as of yet
8. Beethoven
9. Dvorak


----------



## World Violist

1- Rautavaara
2- Brahms
3- Enescu
4- Bruckner
5- Shostakovich
6- Rubbra
7- Sibelius
8- Mahler
9- Aho

There, all symphonies that I've heard. Finally.


----------



## Lisztfreak

Lisztfreak said:


> It's a pity that the Bruckner's representative isn't finished actually... but Beethoven would be a too obvious choice, and Mahler... well, I don't like him so much.


Times change, people change...


----------



## emiellucifuge

Hi everyone,

1 - Prokofiev
2 - Rachmaninoff
3 - Gorecki
4 - Mendelssohn
5 - Shostakovich
6 - Beethoven
7 - Bruckner
8 - Mahler
9 - Dvorak

Thats what I truly think, now ill try and do one with composers that havent been mentioned much (I only looked through the first few pages)

1 - Liszt
2 - Suk
3 - Widor
4 - Scriabin
5 - Nielsen
6 - Miaskovsky
7 - (-)
8 - Glazunov
9 - (-)


----------



## Sorin Eushayson

This looks kind of fun. My list won't be very diverse, I'm afraid...

1. Mendelssohn.
2. Er... Mendelssohn.
3. Beethoven.
4. Yeah... Mendelssohn.
5. Beethoven again.
6. Beethoven...
7. Beethoven...
8. Mahler!!! 
9. ...And Beethoven. 

Well now I feel boring.  Of course, a favourites list would feature a lot of Mozart, some Haydn, Grieg, Brahms, Berwald, Paine, Boccherini...


----------



## bdelykleon

Hm, amusing:
1-João Domingos Bomtempo
2-Méhul
3-Beethoven
4-Brahms
5-Mendelssohn
6-Mahler
7-Sibelius
8-Dvorak
9-Schubert


----------



## Mirror Image

I'll just stick to symphony numbers 1-9. Here are mine:

1. Langgaard
2. Vaughan Williams
3. Mendelssohn
4. Nielsen
5. Mahler
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Shostakovich
8. Dvorak
9. Bruckner


----------



## andruini

Mine is pretty simple..

1. Prokofiev
2. Khachaturian
3. Brahms
4. Schumann
5. Shostakovich
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Beethoven
8. Schubert
9. Dvorak


----------



## wolf

Sorin Eushayson said:


> ...Of course, a favourites list would feature a lot of Mozart, some Haydn, Grieg, Brahms, Berwald, Paine, Boccherini...


Berwald is certainly worthy of more attention than he has got, singuliere is a masterpiece almost, but Boccherinis symphonies, do you honestly think these worthy of being on a list? I haven't listened to absolutely everyone, but I've got several and op 35 and 41 are soso but not impressive. And Griegs - only - symphony is so bleak that he himselt didn't want it played...If you do not mean his 2 'symphonic pieces', but they cannot either be mentioned on the same day as his greater works.

As Artemis pointed out this list is grossly unfair to Haydn and Mozart.


----------



## JAKE WYB

Brahms 1st 
mahler 2nd- greatest live experience ive had but not really symphonic 
BAX 3rd- most magical slow movement imaginable 
dvorak 4th- vastly underated -musically marvelluos
Vaughan williams 5th - perfect
tchaikovsky 6th
SIBELIUS 7th - the peak of all symphonic thought -cant be bettered
Schubert 8th
Bruckner 9th


----------



## Mirror Image

JAKE WYB said:


> Brahms 1st
> mahler 2nd- greatest live experience ive had but not really symphonic
> BAX 3rd- most magical slow movement imaginable
> dvorak 4th- vastly underated -musically marvelluos
> Vaughan williams 5th - perfect
> tchaikovsky 6th
> SIBELIUS 7th - the peak of all symphonic thought -cant be bettered
> Schubert 8th
> Bruckner 9th


My goodness we must have been separated at birth, JAKE WYB!

All of those symphonies are simply outstanding! You keep this up I'm going to have to check my birth certificate again! 

By the way, Vaughan Williams' 5th is his best symphony, imho. "A London Symphony" comes second.


----------



## Sorin Eushayson

wolf said:


> Berwald is certainly worthy of more attention than he has got, singuliere is a masterpiece almost, but Boccherinis symphonies, do you honestly think these worthy of being on a list? I haven't listened to absolutely everyone, but I've got several and op 35 and 41 are soso but not impressive. And Griegs - only - symphony is so bleak that he himselt didn't want it played...If you do not mean his 2 'symphonic pieces', but they cannot either be mentioned on the same day as his greater works.
> 
> As Artemis pointed out this list is grossly unfair to Haydn and Mozart.


Boccherini's D Minor Symphony "The Devil's House" is a personal favourite of mine and I have had very good experiences with his other symphonies. Grieg's C Minor symphony is certainly not "bleak" in my view, a work he probably banned because it did not sound Scandinavian enough when compared to those of his contemporaries; it certainly had a positive reception at any rate. In fact, Grieg's symphony is my favourite of his. Remember, I'm talking about _favourites,_ not necessarily works of legendary quality.


----------



## wolf

Sorin Eushayson said:


> Boccherini's D Minor Symphony "The Devil's House" is a personal favourite of mine and I have had very good experiences with his other symphonies. Grieg's C Minor symphony is certainly not "bleak" in my view, a work he probably banned because it did not sound Scandinavian enough when compared to those of his contemporaries; it certainly had a positive reception at any rate. In fact, Grieg's symphony is my favourite of his. Remember, I'm talking about _favourites,_ not necessarily works of legendary quality.


Yes of course you have the right to think whatever you want to! I just wondered if perhaps when mentioning Grieg you actually thought of not just the strict 'symphonic' output, but orchestral music of his as a whole. It's certainly seldom Grigs symphony is mentioned as a favorite. Personally I am not fond of it - compared to Holberg, Pianoconc etc it is lacking in elegance. But thats only my view, and Grieg is certainly not someone I shrug off, as so often is the case.

It IS a little unusual though, for someone not at all liking Tchaikovsky, to hail Grieg. I like them both though, although I can agree that Pjotr's 'neurasthenic subjectivity' can be a little too overwhelming sometimes...(Second mvt 5th symph at the end, the syrup is almost dripping at the floor...)


----------



## Mongoose

My choice would be,in no particular order.
Elgar 2nd (Barbirolli)
Dvorak 4th (Kertesz)
Beethoven 7th (Cantelli and Reiner)
Schubert 6th (Beecham,absolutely sublime)
George Lloyd 5th (Lloyd conducting,a neglected masterpiece)
Sibelius 1st (Sargent and Maazel)
Mozart 40th (Szell)
Haydn 'Clock' (Beecham
Bizet Symphony in 'C' (Fremaux and Beecham)

Any comments? Mongoose.


----------



## JAKE WYB

nice to see dvorak 4th - i find those early dvorak symphonies every bit as musically engaging as the famous last 3 or 4 but unjustly shadow the others - 

4 i find contains some of dvoraks most mature and subtle writing particularly radiant in the slow movement that seems to be lacking in the more confident but dryer 7th 8th and 9th


----------



## Mongoose

Jake. I could'nt agree more with your comments. The 3rd is also a marvellous work,but there are magical moments in all of Dvoraks works. He must have been a kindly guy.
Best wishes,Mongoose.


----------



## Aramis

How about this:

Schumann
Berlioz
Mendelssohn
Beethoven
Schubert
Tchaikovsky
Beethoven
Haydn
Dvorak


----------



## starry

No doubt I'll forget something, and I suppose I would need to rehear some lesser known things. So all these are quite famous.

1 Elgar
2 Borodin
3 Schumann
4 Brahms
5 Sibelius
6 Beethoven
7 Bruckner
8 Schubert
9 Dvorak


----------



## JAKE WYB

Mongoose said:


> Jake. I could'nt agree more with your comments. The 3rd is also a marvellous work,but there are magical moments in all of Dvoraks works. He must have been a kindly guy.
> Best wishes,Mongoose.


oh yes I always regarded Dvorak in his early symphonies as the nearest great composer to be a good close friend - every bar seems to glow with friendliness and down to earth innocence - in no other cylcle do i get such an honest and personable warmth - these works are always there with open arms when times are dark.


----------



## TresPicos

Sorry, wrong thread...

I'll try again with this one when I have resolved my Dvorak problem...


----------



## Dim7

No repeating composers? This is tough but I'll give it a try:

1. Langgaard
2. Penderecki
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Shostakovich
6. Mahler
7. Bruckner
8. Can't think of any
9. Schubert


----------



## JAKE WYB

Cmaj7 said:


> No repeating composers? This is tough but I'll give it a try:
> 
> 8. Can't think of any


why not dvorak or Vaughan williams?? better than nothing


----------



## Dim7

If I had heard those then perhaps.

Dvorak's one seems to be especially popular, didn't know that eight was popular along with ninth. If i recall correctly his ninth bored me.


----------



## JAKE WYB

9 bores me too - try 8th honest its much more colourful and lively


----------



## Jash

1. Beethoven 8th
2. Haydn 101
3. Sibelius 5
4. Mendelssohn 5
5. Mozart 41
6. Rachmaninoff 2
7. Shostakovich 5
8. Brahms 3
9. Saint-Saens 3


----------



## Andy Loochazee

Jash said:


> 1. Beethoven 8th
> 2. Haydn 101
> 3. Sibelius 5
> 4. Mendelssohn 5
> 5. Mozart 41
> 6. Rachmaninoff 2
> 7. Shostakovich 5
> 8. Brahms 3
> 9. Saint-Saens 3


I think you have lost the plot a bit. The idea is to come up with a list of symphonies (1 to 9) which correspond with the actual symphony numbers in the original works. For example, you might select Mahler's 4th as your No 4 choice, and Beethoven's 8th as your No 8 choice. All you have done is list what are presumably your favourite symphonies without any regard for this constraint. Go back to the OP where it's explained, and see subsequent examples.


----------



## Dim7

While Jash did misunderstand the intented idea of this topic, I must say that approach makes much more sense. The number of the symphony is musically rather irrelevant.


----------



## Andy Loochazee

Dim7 said:


> While Jash did misunderstand the intented idea of this topic, I must say that approach makes much more sense. The number of the symphony is musically rather irrelevant.


Following that approach it simply becomes a list of favourite symphonies, which exercise has been done many times over. The idea of this thread is to make the task more challenging by listing one's favourite symphonies subject to the constraint that the rank numbers align with the numbering of those symphonies. That's the raison d'etre of this thread.


----------



## Dim7

There's that restriction about not repeating composers too, so it doesn't make the thread pointless.


----------



## Andy Loochazee

Dim7 said:


> There's that restriction about not repeating composers too, so it doesn't make the thread pointless.


Yes, there's that restriction too. Obviously I didn't make up the rules. This was done over a year ago by someone who has long since disappeared.

Actually, I don't think that I have responded with my list:

1. Schumann 1
2. Rach 2
3. Beethoven 3
4. Brahms 4
5. Sibelius 5
6. Tchaikovsky 6
7. Shostakovich 7
8. Schubert 8
9. Dvorak 9


----------



## Tapkaara

Andy Loochazee said:


> Yes, there's that restriction too. Obviously I didn't make up the rules. This was done over a year ago by someone who has long since disappeared.
> 
> Actually, I don't think that I have responded with my list:
> 
> 1. Schumann 1
> 2. Rach 2
> 3. Beethoven 3
> 4. Brahms 4
> 5. Sibelius 5
> 6. Tchaikovsky 6
> 7. Shostakovich 7
> 8. Schubert 8
> 9. Dvorak 9


Ah, Sibelius's 5th. Such a profound and mighty work.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Pretty much eliminates Mozart and Haydn, eh?

Brahms' 1st
Mahler's 2nd
Karol Szymanowski- 3rd (Song of the Night)
Mendelssohn- 4th (Italian)
Vaughan-William's 5th
Tchaikovsky's 6th
Bruckner's 7th
Schubert's 8th
Beethoven's 9th


----------



## TresPicos

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Pretty much eliminates Mozart and Haydn, eh?
> 
> Brahms' 1st
> Mahler's 2nd
> Karol Szymanowski- 3rd (Song of the Night)
> Mendelssohn- 4th (Italian)
> Vaughan-William's 5th
> Tchaikovsky's 6th
> Bruckner's 7th
> Schubert's 8th
> Beethoven's 9th


I heard Mozart's 1st symphony a while ago. A nice piece. Not bad for an 8-year-old!


----------



## Lisztfreak

TresPicos said:


> I heard Mozart's 1st symphony a while ago. A nice piece. Not bad for an 8-year-old!


If only it were really written by Wolfgang... It's almost sure now that it is old Leopold's music.


----------



## nuimos

hi.
Robert Simpson produced the greatest symphonic cycle of the late 20th century. Hyperion has brought out the ... Create your own Listmania! with this product ...
I am very happy to see this forum.
Keep posting to us daily.

Thank you .

nuimos.

[Link Removed]


----------



## Bobotox

Here is my list:

1. Knowles Paine
2. Mahler
3. Scriabin
4. Braga Santos
5. Raff
6. Rubinstein
7. Bax
8. Gade
9. Glazunov


----------



## World Violist

1- Tchaikovsky
2- Brahms
3- Szymanovski
4- Sibelius
5- RVW
6- Rubbra
7- Rautavaara
8- Mahler
9- Shostakovich


----------



## alan sheffield

*Personal Symphonic Cycle*

Walton - 1st Symphony ( Barber close second)
Tippett - 2nd Symphony (would have put Mahler 2 here except that had nothing left for 9)
Roussel - 3rd Symphony
Shostakovich - 4th Symphony
Nielsen - 5th Symphony
Vaughan Wiliams - 6th Symphony
Sibelius - 7th Symphony
Bruckner - 8th Symphony
Mahler - 9th Symphony


----------



## Lukecash12

Scriabin - 5th "Prometheus"
Roslavets - Symphony (the one and only)
Alkan - Symphony for solo Piano (it counts, doesn't it?)
Janáček - 'Sinfonietta'
Sibelius - 2nd Symphony
Mendolssohn - 4th Symphony
Dvorak - 9th Symphony
Adolf Van Henselt - 1st


----------



## emiellucifuge

Allow me to retry.

1.Rachmaninov
2.Brahms
3.Penderecki
4.Mendelssohn
5.Prokofiev
6.Myaskovsky
7.Dvorak
8.Mahler
9.Beethoven
10.Shostakovich


----------



## Conor71

Ill have another go too - slightly different list:

1. Brahms
2. Mahler
3. Beethoven
4. Nielsen
5. Shostakovich
6. Sibelius
7. Bruckner
8. Vaughan Williams
9. Dvorak


----------



## Dim7

I'll try again, though this will be probably more misleading because I try to have something for each number:

1.Langgaard
2.Sibelius
3.Scriabin
4.Brahms
5.Beethoven
6.Mahler
7.Shostakovich
8.Bruckner
9.Schubert

The fact that there's no Beethoven's third is probably the most ridiculous thing about this list. It's perhaps my favorite symphony. I also find Brahms' fourth a bit overrated and prefer his first. Bruckner's eight is hardly my favorite Bruckner symphony (I like 4th, 7th and 9th more), though the first movement is pretty awesome.


----------



## World Violist

I keep making more of these list revisions...

1- Rubbra (definitely not a first choice for me, but hey, it's a darn good 1st symphony)
2- Brahms (my favorite Brahms)
3- Sibelius (still one of my favorite Sibelius symphonies)
4- Nielsen (simply amazing)
5- RVW (gorgeous)
6- Tchaikovsky (one of the most moving first movements I've ever heard)
7- Shostakovich (most convincing 7th symphony I've ever heard... including, I'm afraid, Beethoven's)
8- Bruckner (see below)
9- Mahler (close to perfection; only thing I could never figure out was why on earth the second movement was so darn long, but still it's not as drawn out as some other symphonic movements I've heard)

This time I couldn't help putting Bruckner's 8th in. Definitely my favorite 8th symphony of the lot, probably one of my favorite symphonies period. Monumental first movement, spectacular second movement (without much of the dull repetition one may find in the same composer's fourth or seventh symphonies), one of the most sublime slow movements I've ever heard, and... a finale that I never really could get my head around, but I suspect that's a fault of mine, not the symphony's. I love it.


----------



## starry

TresPicos said:


> I heard Mozart's 1st symphony a while ago. A nice piece. Not bad for an 8-year-old!


I prefer his 8th.


----------



## audiophilia

1. Brahms
2. Brahms
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Sibelius
6. Mahler
7. Beethoven
8. Bruckner
9. Bruckner
10. Shostakovich

Lots of runners up!


----------



## MattTheTubaGuy

Here are my first choices, but they might change

1-Rimsky-Korsakov
2-Sibelius (played)
3-Saint-Saens
4-Brahms (played - trombone part though)
5-Mahler (seen played)
6-Tchaikovsky (played)
7-Vaughan Williams (heard live on radio)
8-Dvorák (played)
9-Shostakovich

now ones I have played:

1-Shostakovich(2009)
2-Sibelius(2008,2009) (going to play Tchaikovsky(2010))
3- (none yet)
4-Brahms(2007)
5-Tchaikovsky(2007)
6-Tchaikovsky(2008), Dvorák(2008)
7- (none yet)
8-Dvorák(2009)
9-Dvorák(2008)


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

Brahms 1
Brahms 2
Draeseke's 3rd
Bruckner 4th
Beethoven 5th
Dvorak 6th
Bruckner 7th
Dvorak 8th
Bruckner 9th


----------



## Danny

Brahms 1
Mahler 2
Saint Saens 3
Vaughan Williams 4 
Tchaikovsky 5
Beethoven 6
Bruckner 7
Dvorak 8

Im gonna have to cheat due to lack of listening experience with the 9th and let Beethoven and Dvorak share my crime..


----------



## tonphil1960

*I am going to*

I will cheat some too,,,,,,,,

Beethoven 7th
Shostacovich 5th
Brahms 3rd
Mahler 5th
Dvorak 9th
Prokiefiev 1st
Mozart 41
Schumann 4th
Beethoven 9th

I can't make a list without the 9th or the 7th, nice to start and end with Beethoven.


----------



## TWhite

Okay, here I go: 

Rachmaninoff's First 
Mahler's Second
Copland's Third
Brahms' Fourth 
Shostakovitch's Fifth
Dvorak's Sixth
and I'd have to cheat, because it would be Beethoven for #'s 7,8 and 9

Tom


----------



## tgtr0660

Brahms 1
Sibelius 2
Beethoven 3
Brahms 4
Shostakovitch 5
Mahler 6
Bruckner 7
Dvorak 8
Beethoven 9
Shostakovitch 10
Mozart 25
Mozart 41


----------



## Ilych

Tchaikovsky 1
Mahler 2
Mahler 3
Tchaikovsky 4
Mahler 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Bruckner 7/Beethoven 7 (tie)
Dvorak 8
Dvorak 9/Mahler 9 (tie)


----------



## muxamed

1. Alfven
2. Stenhammar
3. Nielsen
4. Sibelius
5. Shostakovich
6. Mahler
7. Bruckner
8. Schubert
9. Beethoven


----------



## muxamed

Or:

1. Sibelius (Barbirolli/HO/EMI)
2. Brahms (Harnoncourt/VPO/Teldec)
3. Mendelssohn (Abbado/LSO/DG)
4. Vaughan Williams (Bernstein/NYPO/Sony)
5. Prokofiev (Szell/Cleveland/Sony)
6. Martinu (Thomson/Scottish PO/Chandos)
7. Beethoven (Harnoncourt/COE/Teldec or Kleiber/VPO/DG)
8. Shostakovich (Previn/LSO/EMI)
9. Bruckner (Giulini/VPO/DG)


----------



## Orgelbear

Too much fun to pass up, but I'm going to number them chronologically (1 was written first, 2 second, and so on), otherwise a couple of my absolute favorites wouldn't be eligible

Mozart 41
Beethoven 5
Schubert 9
Brahms 4
Saint-Saëns 3
Dvorak 9
Ives 4
Vaughan Williams 3
Copland Organ Symphony

(I'm going to cheat and call Mahler 8 and RVW 1 cantatas and take them along, too.)

And if that whole idea is cheating, here's my secondary list.

Vaughan Williams 1
Hanson 2
Saint-Saens 3
Brahms 4
Stanford 5
Beethoven 6
Shostakovich 7
Mahler 8
Schubert 9


----------



## unpocoscherzando

1. Grieg
2. Bizet (Roma)
3. Borodin
4. Brahms
5. Honegger
6. Mozart
7. Sibelius
8. Mendelssohn (string sinfonia)
9. Beethoven


----------



## jalex

1) Webern?
2) Prokofiev
3) Mendelssohn
4) Vaughan Williams / Nielson
5) Shostakovich
6) Mahler
7) Sibelius
8) Dvorak (sorry Schubert)
9) Beethoven


----------



## chrislowski

Brahms 1
Honegger 2
Szymanowski 3
Shostakovich 4
Mahler 5
Miaskovsky 6
Rautavaara 7
Schnittke 8
Bruckner 9

There's so many more I want to add


----------



## Art Rock

1. Brahms
2. Bax
3. Mendelssohn
4. Mahler
5. Raff
6. Beethoven
7. Sibelius
8. Schubert
9. Bruckner
10. Shostakovich


----------



## Klavierspieler

1. Schumann
2. Schumann
3. Schumann
4. Schumann
5. Beethoven
6. Beethoven
7. Beethoven
8. Beethoven
9. Beethoven


----------



## myaskovsky2002

anon2k2 said:


> Just for fun, I've decided to listen to a symphonic cycle of my own creation. I haven't yet made up my own mind about what pieces to listen to, but I have set the rules for how I'm going to choose:
> 
> I'm going to choose 9 symphonies with a limit of one work per composer. Why 9? 9 seems to be a magic number for symphonic cycles (Beethoven, Schubert, Bruckner, etc)
> 
> So what I mean by this is that I'm going to choose Symphony no. 1 by a certain composer, then Symphony No. 2 by a different composer.
> 
> Just off the top of my head, a list could be like this:
> 
> Brahms #1
> Sibelius #2
> Beethoven #3
> Mahler #4, etc.
> 
> Anyway, I'll let you know what I come up with, but I'd like suggestions what you'd choose for your cycle.


Magic number?

I'M sorry I composed 27! And they're all great!

Nikolai Myaskovsky


----------



## myaskovsky2002

MattTheTubaGuy said:


> Here are my first choices, but they might change
> 
> 1-Rimsky-Korsakov
> 2-Sibelius (played)
> 3-Saint-Saens
> 4-Brahms (played - trombone part though)
> 5-Mahler (seen played)
> 6-Tchaikovsky (played)
> 7-Vaughan Williams (heard live on radio)
> 8-Dvorák (played)
> 9-Shostakovich
> 
> now ones I have played:
> 
> 1-Shostakovich(2009)
> 2-Sibelius(2008,2009) (going to play Tchaikovsky(2010))
> 3- (none yet)
> 4-Brahms(2007)
> 5-Tchaikovsky(2007)
> 6-Tchaikovsky(2008), Dvorák(2008)
> 7- (none yet)
> 8-Dvorák(2009)
> 9-Dvorák(2008)


Lucky you!

MARTIN


----------



## Vaneyes

1. Mahler
2. Mahler
3. Mahler
4. Bruckner
5. Mahler
6. Mahler
7. Mahler
8. Bruckner
9. Tie Mahler/Bruckner


----------



## jdavid

No. 1 - Beethoven 
No. 2 - Mahler
No. 3 - Beethoven
No. 4 - Schumann 
No. 5 - Beethoven
No. 6 - Beethoven
No. 7 - Beethoven
No. 8 - Bruckner
No. 9 - Beethoven


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

1st- Brahms
2nd- Mahler
3rd- Schumann
4th- Nielsen
5th- Vaughan-Williams
6th- Tchaikovsky
7th- Bruckner
8th- Schubert
9th- Beethoven
10th- Shostakovitch
41st- Mozart
104th- Haydn


----------



## jdavid

Your list is great - mine is so conservative with all the Beethoven entries, but I'm sorta that way. but I love the Schumann 3rd and the Neilsen 4th, and that you added the Mozart and Haydn *smile* 'wave'.



StlukesguildOhio said:


> 1st- Brahms
> 2nd- Mahler
> 3rd- Schumann
> 4th- Nielsen
> 5th- Vaughan-Williams
> 6th- Tchaikovsky
> 7th- Bruckner
> 8th- Schubert
> 9th- Beethoven
> 10th- Shostakovitch
> 41st- Mozart
> 104th- Haydn


----------



## altosax

I have a pretty conservative list.

1st - Brahms
2nd - Mahler
3rd - Nielsen
4th - Sallinen
5th - Sibelius
6th - Vaughan Williams
7th - Rautavaara
8th - Bruckner
9th - Beethoven
10th - Shostakovich

I added a 10th symphony so I could include Shostakovich. Some people included a second set (keeping with the idea that no composer is repeated in either set):

1st - Walton
2nd - Penderecki
3rd - Harris
4th - Hanson
5th - Tubin
6th - Prokofiev
7th - Rubbra
8th - Holmboe
9th - Dvorak


----------



## jalex

Update of my old one

1) Brahms
2) Prokofiev
3) Schumann
4) Vaughan Williams / Nielsen
5) Shostakovich
6) Mahler
7) Sibelius
8) Dvorak
9) Beethoven

Symphonie Fantastique as bonus disk


----------



## jalex

altosax said:


> 4th - Sallinen
> 
> I have a pretty conservative list.


Almost! [filler]


----------



## brianwalker

1. Brahms
2. Mahler
3. Brahms
4. Brahms
5. Mahler
6. Beethoven
7. Bruckner 
8. Schubert
9. Mahler
10. Mahler


----------



## altosax

jalex said:


> Almost! [filler]


Sallinen does write in a tonal style but perhaps he is not quite as conservative as my other choices. I so much wanted to include George Rochberg's first or second symphony, both of which I really love but there are such a number of really good first and second symphonies (especially second). Or is Rochberg now a conservative choice?

Other composers I might have included that I guess are less conservative could be Frankel, Valen, Kancheli, Lees, Kazandjiev, or Norholm (all off the top of my head). But I think they too are somewhat conservative.


----------



## Art Rock

Art Rock said:


> 1. Brahms
> 2. Bax
> 3. Mendelssohn
> 4. Mahler
> 5. Raff
> 6. Beethoven
> 7. Sibelius
> 8. Schubert
> 9. Bruckner
> 10. Shostakovich


Ten more then, by ten other composers.

1. Moeran
2. Suk (Asrael)
3. Gorecki
4. Alfven
5. Vaughan Williams
6. Myaskovsky
7. Rautavaara
8. Aho
9. Dvorak
10. Rubbra


----------



## MrCello

Beethoven 1
Beethoven 2
Beethoven 3
Beethoven 4
Beethoven 5
Beethoven 6
Beethoven 7
Beethoven 8
Beethoven 9

Do I win now?


----------



## grocklin

No repeats-
1. Prokofiev 
2. Brahms
3. Mendelssohn
4. Tchaikovsky
5. Shostakovich
6. Sibelius
7. Dvorak
8. Schubert
9. Beethoven


----------



## EarthBoundRules

Here's mine without repeats:

1. Schumann
2. Mahler
3. Brahms
4. Nielsen
5. Shostakovich
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Beethoven
8. Bruckner
9. Schubert


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

1. Brian
2. Tchaikovsky
3. Carl Vine
4. Beethoven
5. ComposerOfAvantGarde 
6. Haydn
7. Mozart
8. Glass
9. Can't decide. Don't like any of them enough.


----------



## opus55

This is a fun thread. Nice to see many folks picking Brahms and Schumann for No.1 spot.



Klavierspieler said:


> 1. Schumann
> 2. Schumann
> 3. Schumann
> 4. Schumann
> 5. Beethoven
> 6. Beethoven
> 7. Beethoven
> 8. Beethoven
> 9. Beethoven


 :lol:


MrCello said:


> Beethoven 1
> Beethoven 2
> Beethoven 3
> Beethoven 4
> Beethoven 5
> Beethoven 6
> Beethoven 7
> Beethoven 8
> Beethoven 9
> 
> Do I win now?




My cycle at the moment (runner ups in parenthesis)
1. Brahms (Schumann, Mahler, Prokofiev, Beethoven)
2. Mahler
3. Sibelius (Beethoven)
4. Tchaikovsky (Brahms, Shostakovich)
5. Beethoven (Mahler)
6. Vaughan Williams (Mahler)
7. Dvorak
8. Schubert
9. Bruckner (Beethoven)


----------



## myaskovsky2002

if my memory still works: Haydn 101 (very similar), Shostakovich 15

Martin


----------



## Crudblud

1. Schnittke*
2. Sibelius
3. Mahler**
4. Tippett
5. Beethoven
6. Henze
7. Bruckner
8. Schubert
9. Dvorak

By no means definitive, but a good cycle nonetheless. Edit: Even better now that Tippett's 4th is in there.

* = Would've gone with Messiaen's Turangalila, but it seems wrong given that it is technically a first but at the same time it isn't numbered.
** = Second choice would be Tippett's 3rd.


----------



## tannhaeuser

1) Mahler 1st "Titan"
2) Mahler 2nd "Resurrection"
3) Beethoven 3rd "Eroica"
4) Tchaikovsky 4th
5) Mahler 5th
6) Tchaikovsky 6th "Pathétique"
7) Shostakovich 7th "Leningrad"
8) Bruckner 8th
9) Beethoven 9th "Choral"


----------



## Oskaar

Mahler no 1
Sibelius no 2
Beethoven no 3
shostakovich no 4
nielsen no 5
tchaikovsky no 6
Bruckner no 7
schubert no 8
dvorak no 9


----------



## An Die Freude

1. Brahms
2. Mahler
3. Saint Saens
4. Mendelssohn
5. Bruckner
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Sibelius
8. Schubert
9. Beethoven


----------



## Crudblud

Ver. 2.0

1. Messiaen
2. Sibelius
3. Mahler
4. Tippett
5. Beethoven
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Schnittke
8. Bruckner
9. Dvorak


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I change mine:

0 Bruckner
1 Webern (he didn't really write more than one did he?)
2 Tchaikovsky
3 Saint-Saens
4 Beethoven
4.2 Carl Vine
5 ComposerOfAvantGarde 
6 Haydn
7 Mozart
8 Glass
9 ... Still none good enough for me ...


----------



## Xaltotun

1. Brahms (Sibelius, Franck, Schumann, Rachmaninov)
2. Mahler (Bruckner)
3. Mahler (Beethoven, Saint-Saëns, Bruckner, Brahms)
4. Sibelius (Bruckner, Nielsen)
5. Bruckner (Sibelius, Mahler, Beethoven)
6. Bruckner (Mahler, Sibelius)
7. Mahler (Bruckner, Sibelius, Beethoven)
8. Schubert (Bruckner, Mahler)
9. Beethoven (Schubert, Bruckner)


----------



## Kalervonpoika

I guess I could have made a completely different list, but here it is:

1. Sibelius
2. Rachmaninov
3. Beethoven
4. Schumann
5. Nielsen
6. Mahler
7. Dvorak
8. Bruckner
9. Schubert


----------



## pierrot

1 - Sibelius
2 - Ives
3 - Mendelssohn
4 - Brahms
5 - Shostakovich
6 - Tchaikovsky
7 - Beethoven
8 - Bruckner
9 - Mahler


----------



## JustinR

A lot tougher than it sounded but good fun!

1 - Rachmaninov
2 - Bruckner
3 - Brahms
4 - Schumann
5 - Silvestrov
6 - Pettersson
7 - Sibelius
8 - Shostakovich
9 - Schubert


----------



## Prodromides

Yes, the selection process for this thread is time-consuming, so it's not easy.
Nonetheless, by starting with #9 and working backwards to #1, I made this process easier on myself.
There are far less composers in my collection who have written a Symphony No.9, so it's easier to pick a favorite.
Although the amount of Symphony No.1s are the most voluminous to choose from, the most difficult number (for me) was #3 because it just so happens that I consider many Symphony No.3s to be the some of the finest works by favorite composers (Gliere's "Ilya Muromets", Szymanowski's "Song Of The Night", "The Pastoral" by Vaughan Williams, Blomdahl's "Facetter", Gerhard's "Collages", etc.). I've found my focus to rest mainly on the post-WWII / most recent half of the 20th century, so here's my hypothetical program [from A (Arnold) to Y (Yun), so to speak]:

9. Roger Session's Symphony #9
8. Symphony #8 "Indian Sounds" by Gloria Coates
7. Malcolm Arnold's Symphony #7
6. Vagn Holmboe's Symphony #6
5. Humphrey Searle's Symphony #5
4. Symphony #4 "New York" by Roberto Gerhard
3. Andre Jolivet's Symphony #3
2. Isang Yun's Symphony #2
1. Richard Rodney Bennett's Symphony #1

There's quite a number of labels (BIS, Chandos, CPO, etc.) who've been just great in offering volumes of lesser-known symphonic cycles on discs to us customers. I wish to also acknowledge the symphonic output by composers who haven't made it onto my listing above, such as Zwilich, Wissmer, Wellesz, Villa-Lobos, Vaughan Williams, Valen, Tubin, Tippett, Tcherepnin, Tansman, Tal, Szymanowski, Segerstam, Saygun, Sallinen, Rautavaara, Panufnik, Nordgren, Miaskovsky, Martinu, Lutoslawski, Lemeland, Landowski, Kupferman, Honneger, Hoddinott, Harrison, Frankel, Englund, Enescu, Chavez, Brian, Blomdahl, Bazelon, Alwyn, Aho, etc.


----------



## violadude

Prodromides said:


> Yes, the selection process for this thread is time-consuming, so it's not easy.
> Nonetheless, by starting with #9 and working backwards to #1, I made this process easier on myself.
> There are far less composers in my collection who have written a Symphony No.9, so it's easier to pick a favorite.
> Although the amount of Symphony No.1s are the most voluminous to choose from, the most difficult number (for me) was #3 because it just so happens that I consider many Symphony No.3s to be the some of the finest works by favorite composers (Gliere's "Ilya Muromets", Szymanowski's "Song Of The Night", "The Pastoral" by Vaughan Williams, Blomdahl's "Facetter", Gerhard's "Collages", etc.). I've found my focus to rest mainly on the post-WWII / most recent half of the 20th century, so here's my hypothetical program [from A (Arnold) to Y (Yun), so to speak]:
> 
> 9. Roger Session's Symphony #9
> 8. Symphony #8 "Indian Sounds" by Gloria Coates
> 7. Malcolm Arnold's Symphony #7
> 6. Vagn Holmboe's Symphony #6
> 5. Humphrey Searle's Symphony #5
> 4. Symphony #4 "New York" by Roberto Gerhard
> 3. Andre Jolivet's Symphony #3
> 2. Isang Yun's Symphony #2
> 1. Richard Rodney Bennett's Symphony #1
> 
> There's quite a number of labels (BIS, Chandos, CPO, etc.) who've been just great in offering volumes of lesser-known symphonic cycles on discs to us customers. I wish to also acknowledge the symphonic output by composers who haven't made it onto my listing above, such as Zwilich, Wissmer, Wellesz, Villa-Lobos, Vaughan Williams, Valen, Tubin, Tippett, Tcherepnin, Tansman, Tal, Szymanowski, Segerstam, Saygun, Sallinen, Rautavaara, Panufnik, Nordgren, Miaskovsky, Martinu, Lutoslawski, Lemeland, Landowski, Kupferman, Honneger, Hoddinott, Harrison, Frankel, Englund, Enescu, Chavez, Brian, Blomdahl, Bazelon, Alwyn, Aho, etc.


Wow that is quite an unusual list! I like it  I have heard a few of those symphonies on the list, namely the Holmboe, Malcolm Arnold and Yun (I'm surprised someone else on here knows Isang Yun! I tried starting a thread about him in the composer guestbook section with not that much success).


----------



## Prodromides

violadude said:


> Wow that is quite an unusual list! I like it  I have heard a few of those symphonies on the list, namely the Holmboe, Malcolm Arnold and Yun (I'm surprised someone else on here knows Isang Yun! I tried starting a thread about him in the composer guestbook section with not that much success).


Thanks for the compliment, violadude.

However, are you implying that you've never heard 6 out of my list of 9? 
Guess that makes me a geek of the obscure...

Glad you are familiar, though, with CPO's cycle on Isang Yun (or perhaps for you the exposure to Yun was via the Camerata label?)


----------



## violadude

Prodromides said:


> Thanks for the compliment, violadude.
> 
> However, are you implying that you've never heard 6 out of my list of 9?
> Guess that makes me a geek of the obscure...
> 
> Glad you are familiar, though, with CPO's cycle on Isang Yun (or perhaps for you the exposure to Yun was via the Camerata label?)


Yup, I have the CPO recording of his symphonies, and from there I have listened to quite a few of his chamber pieces on youtube.


----------



## maestro267

Finally come up with a list:

Brahms 1st
Vaughan Williams 2nd (London)
Roussel 3rd
Bax 4th
Arnold 5th
Tchaikovsky 6th (Pathétique)
Beethoven 7th
Mahler 8th
Dvorák 9th


----------



## gabem

Okay, this is very difficult but here we go

1: Elgar
2: Sibelius
3: Mahler (probably my favorite of the group)
4: Bruckner
5: Beethoven
6: Mahler
7: Shostakovich
8: Mahler
9: Dvorak

Really Tough. Honorable mention: Saint-Saens "Organ" Symphony No. 3


----------



## tgtr0660

tgtr0660 said:


> Brahms 1
> Sibelius 2
> Beethoven 3
> Brahms 4
> Shostakovitch 5
> Mahler 6
> Bruckner 7
> Dvorak 8
> Beethoven 9
> Shostakovitch 10
> Mozart 25
> Mozart 41


I should propose an alternative:

1. Shostakovich
2. Beethoven
3. Bruckner
4. Schumann
5. Beethoven
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Beethoven
8. Bruckner
9. Bruckner
10. Mahler (kind of). 
25. Mozart
40. Mozart 
41. Mozart 
103. Haydn


----------



## tgtr0660

And a third alternative:

1. Mahler
2. Borodin
3. Saint-Saens
4. Bruckner
5. Mahler
6. Beethoven
7. Shostakovich
8. Shostakovich
9. Dvorak


----------



## jalex

Mahler
Mahler
Beethoven
Mahler
Mahler
Mahler
Beethoven
Mahler
Beethoven


----------



## gabem

For no. 3....Mahler! Saint-Saens! Brahms! take your pick!


----------



## Ramako

1 per number and 1 per composer is immensely difficult, and would probably look like this:

1. Mendelssohn
2. Schumann
3. Schubert
4. Mahler
5. Sibelius
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Haydn (yes, I am serious)
8. Dvorak
9. Beethoven


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Ramako said:


> 1 per number and 1 per composer is immensely difficult, and would probably look like this:
> 
> 1. Mendelssohn
> 2. Schumann
> 3. Schubert
> 4. Mahler
> 5. Sibelius
> 6. Tchaikovsky
> 7. Haydn (yes, I am serious)
> 8. Dvorak
> 9. Beethoven


I love Haydn's seventh!


----------



## Ondine

As the OP asked: Just one of each composer up to nine symphonies.

In this order:

Symphony in C major, Wq 174 - C.P.E. Bach

Op. 18 Nos. 4 & 6 - J.C. Bach

'La casa di diavolo' - Boccherini

'Prague' Symphony - Mozart

'The Bear' - Haydn

Symphony No. 2 - Beethoven

Symphonie 'Frantastique' - Hector Berlioz

'Titan' - Mahler

'New World' Symphony - Dvorak


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Well then!

Saint-Saëns 3
CPE Bach Hamburg (orchestral) symphony no. 1
Beethoven 4
Bruckner 4
Henze 7
Mahler 7
Webern Symphony
Schnittke 1
Shostakovich 7


----------



## Ondine

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well then!
> 
> Saint-Saëns 3
> CPE Bach Hamburg (orchestral) symphony no. 1
> Beethoven 4
> Bruckner 4
> Henze 7
> Mahler 7
> Webern Symphony
> Schnittke 1
> Shostakovich 7


Looks like a wonderful cycle to share with you, CoAG


----------



## jani

J. Sibelius symphonies 1-2
L.B Beethoven Eroica
J. Sibelius Symphonies 4-5
L.B Beethoven 6-7
J. Sibelius 7th Symphony 
L.B Beethoven 9th symphony


----------



## brianwalker

1. Brahms 
2. Brahms 
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms 
5. Mahler 
6. Mahler
7. Beethoven
8. Bruckner
9. Beethoven


----------



## MaestroViolinist

1. Schubert
2. Sibelius 
3. Beethoven 
4. Schubert
5. Mendelssohn
6. Tchaikovsky 
7. (no idea) 
8. Schubert 
9. Dvorak


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

MaestroViolinist said:


> 1. Schubert
> 2. Sibelius
> 3. Beethoven
> 4. Schubert
> 5. Mendelssohn
> 6. Tchaikovsky
> 7. (no idea)
> 8. Schubert
> 9. Dvorak


This is a fun seventh:


----------



## MaestroViolinist

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> This is a fun seventh:


Hm, maybe...

Or maybe this, even though it isn't a seventh symphony.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

MaestroViolinist said:


> Hm, maybe...
> 
> Or maybe this, even though it isn't a seventh symphony.


Well I like Salieri........


----------



## MaestroViolinist

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well I like Salieri........


His music is the best isn't it? I just love it. It's so... Perfect.

:lol::lol:


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

MaestroViolinist said:


> His music is the best isn't it? I just love it. It's so... Perfect.
> 
> :lol::lol:


Really? Well I think there could be some improvements here and there. Same goes for Mozart's 7th. They aren't _very_ good, but they're alright and both are enjoyable.


----------



## MaestroViolinist

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Really? Well I think there could be some improvements here and there. Same goes for Mozart's 7th. They aren't _very_ good, but they're alright and both are enjoyable.


(I was joking by the way)

I was just thinking, maybe Mozart's A Musical Joke was actually taking off his own earlier works? Because listening to his 7th reminded me of A Musical Joke. Well, the beginning anyway.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

MaestroViolinist said:


> (I was joking by the way)
> 
> I was just thinking, maybe Mozart's A Musical Joke was actually taking off his own earlier works? Because listening to his 7th reminded me of A Musical Joke. Well, the beginning anyway.


Maybe I dunno. I don't like A Musical Joke anyway. I don't like most of his Divertimenti.


----------



## MaestroViolinist

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Maybe I dunno. I don't like A Musical Joke anyway. I don't like most of his Divertimenti.


How could you not like A Musical Joke? It's the funniest piece of music I've heard! (Literally)


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

MaestroViolinist said:


> How could you not like A Musical Joke? It's the funniest piece of music I've heard! (Literally)


Well I've heard funnier music.


----------



## MaestroViolinist

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well I've heard funnier music.


Really? Show me.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

MaestroViolinist said:


> Really? Show me.


I can't right now. I haven't uploaded it to SoundCloud yet.


----------



## ahammel

01. Prokofiev
02. Mendelssohn
03. Vaughan Williams
04. Brahms
05. Schubert
06. Bruckner
07. Sibelius
08. Beethoven
09. Dvořák
10. Shostakovich
11. Haydn
12. Mozart

5 and 9 can be swapped if I'm allowed to use the old Dvořák numbering system where _From the New World_ is no. 5.


----------



## Celloissimo

This is an arduous task, but:

1. Sibelius
2. Mahler
3. Saint-Saens
4. Bruckner
5. Shostakovich
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Dvorak
8. Mahler (I had to cheat, there was no choice)
9. Beethoven


----------



## julianoq

OK, here we go. This is a reflection of the present moment, tomorrow the list can be totally different.

1. Sibelius
2. Sibelius
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Shostakovich
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Beethoven
8. Dvorak
9. Schubert


----------



## JCarmel

I'm going with MaestroViolinist's 7th option!


----------



## CyrilWashbrook

Had difficulties getting #6 right. I got to this point:

1. Rott
2. Sibelius
3. Mahler
4. Brahms
5. Tchaikovsky
6. -------------
7. Beethoven
8. Bruckner
9. Dvorak

Filling 6th spot required some rearrangement into this:

1. Rott
2. Sibelius
3. Tyberg
4. Brahms
5. Bruckner
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Beethoven
8. Dvorak
9. Mahler

All of them, though, would be very much open to change and reordering. The Rott is possibly the most secure, if only because I'm not particularly attached to any alternative first symphonies.


----------



## Mahlerian

1. Brahms
2. Schumann
3. Mendelssohn
4. Sibelius
5. Bruckner
6. Mahler
7. Dvorak
8. Shostakovich
9. Beethoven

Not necessarily my favorite by each composer in each instance...


----------



## unpocoscherzando

1 Borodin
2 Schumann
3 Honegger
4 Brahms
5 Sibelius
6 Tchaikovsky
7 Beethoven
8 Mendelssohn (string symphony)
9 Mozart


----------



## AClockworkOrange

Under the rules, my present cycle would be:
1. Brahms
2. Mahler
3. Furtwangler (specifically the three movement version as conducted by Wolfgang Sawallisch with the Bayerisches Orch)
4. Mendelssohn 
5. Beethoven
6. Tchaikovsky 
7. Sibelius 
8. Bruckner
9. Schubert

The biggest surprise is Schubert's 9th being chosen over Beethovens. The rules in this thread are challenging indeed. Mahlerian's closing statement applies for me too


----------



## Ukko

1. Berlioz
2. Sibelius
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Nielsen
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Prokofieff
8. Bruckner
9. Dvorak

Those *@$!! rules do cause incongruities.


----------



## Feathers

This was much more difficult than I thought. After shuffling these composers around and around to avoid repeated numbers, I think this is my cycle at the moment:

1: Scriabin
2: Mahler
3: Beethoven
4: Brahms
5: Mendelssohn
6: Tchaikovsky
7: Bruckner
8: Shostakovich
9: Dvorak

If we go up to some of the higher numbers, Mozart and Haydn would pretty much take over.


----------



## MagneticGhost

1. Elgar (would have gone VW but then Elgar wouldn't have got a look in)
2. Mahler
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Shostakovich
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Vaughan Williams
8. Bruckner
9. Dvorak


----------



## guitarnote

My first post. I love games like this. Here's my offering. Very tough call without repeating. I don't think I would have added Sibelius or Dvorak if I could have doubled up. And, Shostakovich's 10th would certainly have made this list if we went higher, causing a shift for 5. 

1. Brahms
2. Sibelius
3. Rachmaninov
4. Schumann
5. Shostakovich
6. Mahler
7. Beethoven
8. Bruckner
9. Dvorak


----------



## GraemeG

A fun game. My list is close to a couple of others.
1 Brahms
2 Mahler
3 Schumann*
4 Nielsen
5 Beethoven*
6 Dvorak
7 Sibelius
8 Bruckner
9 Schubert

*An alternative was to have Beethoven at 3, and Shostakovich at 5. This would work OK for me too.
And I'd take Sibelius 6 over Dvorak in a heartbeat in real life, but if i did it in this list then the whole edifice would start to fall apart. With a bit more familiarity, the 6 spot might go to Vaughan Williams at the expense of Dvorak from the list entirely. Time will tell.
The Shostakovich I really want in the list is 11, but I'm unaware of a decent 10th to bridge the gap!
cheers,
GG


----------



## AClockworkOrange

AClockworkOrange said:


> Under the rules, my present cycle would be:
> 1. Brahms
> 2. Mahler
> 3. Furtwangler (specifically the three movement version as conducted by Wolfgang Sawallisch with the Bayerisches Orch)
> 4. Mendelssohn
> 5. Beethoven
> 6. Tchaikovsky
> 7. Sibelius
> 8. Bruckner
> 9. Schubert
> 
> The biggest surprise is Schubert's 9th being chosen over Beethovens. The rules in this thread are challenging indeed. Mahlerian's closing statement applies for me too


Although I want to stick with rules I am going to have add a tenth symphony - namely Shostakovich's tenth symphony.

I'm still listening to Prokofiev, Niesen, Suk, Martinu, Vaughan Williams and Bernstein so no doubt my cycle will change again. I keep getting sidetracked by Lieder and Opera at present (plus Mahler and Shostakovich). So much I want to listen to and so little time :lol:


----------



## TresPicos

It's almost four years since I first tried to put together my list, but one position is still eluding me. I already have Beethoven at #6 and Schubert at #9, and Dvorak can only fill one of the positions in between. So, I need a good enough #7 or #8. Sigh...


----------



## TrevBus

Not saying that these are the best just the ones I listen to a great deal. Picking the top 9 of 30 or so symphonies I enjoy the most was a rough ride but here goes:

#1 William Walton
#2 Sibelius
#3 Richard Arnell
#4 George Antheil
#5 Beethoven
#6 Nielsen
#7 Cornelis Dopper
#8 R V Williams
#9 Dvorak


----------



## TrevBus

Ah!!! The sublime #4 of Braga Santos. Good see another enjoying this composer, esp. #4.


----------



## anasazi

Difficult choices, but in the end, I will go with these:

1. Walton #1
2. Rachmaninov #2
3. Bax #3
4. Nielsen #4
5. Shostakovich #5
6. Prokofiev #6
7. Beethoven #7
8. Vaughan Williams #8
9. Bruckner #9

And since that leaves out most of Haydn and Mozart symphonies, I add one 10+ opus:

Mozart Symphony #39 in E flat.

I love Mozart's substitution of two clarinets for two oboes. It gives this work
a real Autumnal glow.

Also, I am adding one single non-numbered symphony (for those composers who only
composed a single symphony): Moeran - Symphony in g minor.

Plus, one concerto, partly because I couldn't fit any of his symphonies in my list,
but mostly because I just love it so much: Sibelius - Violin Concerto. 

Almost forgot two other items. First the extended song-cycle. For that I choose
"Youth's Magic Horn" by Mahler, partly since this piece also includes the song that
would later show up in Mahler's Symphony #2. I suppose that is cheating a little.

And finally, the extended tone-poem that is sort of like a symphony:

"A Hero's Life" by Strauss.

That's all.


----------



## Ondine

All Haydn's

All Mozart's

J.C. Bach's

C.P.E. Bach's

Those of Beck, Dussek, Stamitz, Benda, Kraus, Gossec & Mehul.

Beethoven's #2, 1, 6, 7, 8 & 5.

All Dvorak's

Nielsen's

Sibelius'

Gorecky's

Schnittke's

Volan's 'Daar Kom die Alibama'


----------



## Cosmos

1 Shostakovich
2 Rachmaninov
3 Brahms
4 Mendelssohn
5 Mahler
6 Beethoven
7 Prokofiev
8 Schubert
9 Bruckner

This was tricky, and it was hard to pick and choose from my favorites (I mean, only ONE Mahler, Bruckner, or Beethoven symphony?! You're killing me) but this is the best I can do.


----------



## senza sordino

Tough, but here goes
1 Berlioz
2 Sibelius
3 Saint Saens
4 Brahms
5 Mahler
6 Tchaikovsky 
7 Beethoven
8 Schubert
9 Dvorak
10 Shostakovich


----------



## DaDirkNL

1. Beethoven
2. Mahler
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Schubert
6. Beethoven
7. Beethoven
8. Schubert
9. Schubert


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Not so tough
1. Varese
2. Varese
3. Varese
4. Varese
5. Varese
6. Varese
7. Varese
8. Varese
9. ......... now starting to run out


----------



## AClockworkOrange

AClockworkOrange said:


> Under the rules, my present cycle would be:
> 1. Brahms
> 2. Mahler
> 3. Furtwangler (specifically the three movement version as conducted by Wolfgang Sawallisch with the Bayerisches Orch)
> 4. Mendelssohn
> 5. Beethoven
> 6. Tchaikovsky
> 7. Sibelius
> 8. Bruckner
> 9. Schubert
> 
> The biggest surprise is Schubert's 9th being chosen over Beethovens. The rules in this thread are challenging indeed. Mahlerian's closing statement applies for me too


An updated list, still as difficult as ever:
1. Berlioz (Symphonie Fantastique)
2. Mahler
3. Vaughan Williams
4. Brahms
5. Tchaikovsky
6. Bax
7. Bruckner
8. Schubert
9. Beethoven


----------



## hillisg

Barber 1
Hovhaness 2
Brahms 3
Mahler 4
Beethoven 5
Sibelius 6
Shostakovich 7
Schubert 8
Dvorak 9


----------



## LancsMan

Brahms 1
Elgar 2 
Vaughan Williams 3 
Sibelius 4
Nielsen 5
Mahler 6
Bruckner 7
Schubert 8
Beethoven 9


----------



## musicrom

Prokofiev 1
Sibelius 2
Saint-Saens 3
Tchaikovsky 4
Shostakovich 5
Czerny 6 (this is a kind of ugly pick, but I'm low on good 6ths)
Beethoven 7
Haydn 8
Dvorak 9

Thankfully I only had to pick 9. If it was 10, my entire list would have been different (I would've had to take Shostakovich at 10, then Beethoven at 5, then I have no idea at 7... Maybe Mahler at 5, I don't know...).


----------



## Guest

Mahler 1
Mahler 2
Beethoven 3
Bruckner 4
Beethoven 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Beethoven 7
Schubert 8
Dvorak 9

There are some faults to this - Mozart and Haydn are among my favorite composers of symphonies, but cutting things off at 9 eliminates my favorites of their works. So I am really limited to late classical through late romantic. Not that there aren't some fine choices there, but it isn't truly representative of my broader love of symphonies.


----------



## Vesteralen

Can't believe I never played this game before (I must have..but I can't locate it)

Anyway, here's a new list:

1 Barber
2 Schumann
3 Brahms
4 Mahler
5 Nielsen
6 Schubert
7 Vaughan Williams
8 Dvorak
9 Bruckner

and, since there were so many close ones, a second list:

1 Shostakovich
2 Vaughan Williams
3 Mendelssohn
4 Brahms
5 Schubert
6 Vaughan Williams
7 Mahler
8 Bruckner
9 Beethoven


----------



## Bulldog

1. Prokofiev
2. Schumann
3. Mahler
4. Mahler
5. Beethoven
6. Mahler
7. Shostakovich
8. Bruckner
9. Beethoven
10. Shostakovich


----------



## Haydn man

1 Elgar
2 Rachmaninov
3 Vaughan Williams
4 Brahms
5 Mahler 
6 Tchaikovsky
7 Beethoven
8 Schubert
9 Dvorak


----------



## nightscape

As with all of my lists, one per customer.

Enescu 1
Mahler 2
Mendelssohn 3
Brahms 4
Raff 5
Bruckner 6
Sibelius 7
Dvorak 8
Beethoven 9


----------



## EdwardBast

All Russian, no repeats:

1. Rachmaninoff
2. Rimsky-Korsakoff, Antar
3. Stravinsky Symphony in C
4. Glazunov
5. Prokofiev
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Schnittke
8. Shostakovich
9. Miaskovsky


----------



## Avey

musicrom said:


> Prokofiev 1
> Sibelius 2
> Saint-Saens 3
> Tchaikovsky 4
> Shostakovich 5
> Czerny 6 (this is a kind of ugly pick, but I'm low on good 6ths)
> Beethoven 7
> Haydn 8
> Dvorak 9


I so desperately wanted to like this post.

But there is the _Pastorale_. Thus, I am quite disturbed by your comment.


----------



## musicrom

Avey said:


> I so desperately wanted to like this post.
> 
> But there is the _Pastorale_. Thus, I am quite disturbed by your comment.


Yes, I definitely need to take a listen to Beethoven's 6th (I assume this is the Pastorale that you're referring to) - there are quite a few major pieces I still haven't really discovered yet, since I only really got into classical music pretty recently - but anyways, I already have Beethoven in my list, so I can't take him again. There's also Tchaikovsky's 6th, but for some reason I haven't gotten into it as much as many seemed to have (plus I have Tchaikovsky at 4).


----------



## Op.123

Brahms 1
Brahms 2
Brahms 3
Brahms 4
Beethoven 5
Beethoven 6
Dvorak 7
Dvorak 8
Beethoven 9


----------



## musicrom

Burroughs said:


> Brahms 1
> Brahms 2
> Brahms 3
> Brahms 4
> Beethoven 5
> Beethoven 6
> Dvorak 7
> Dvorak 8
> Beethoven 9


The point of this thread is to use all different composers. Looks like that might make it a bit harder for you.


----------



## AClockworkOrange

AClockworkOrange said:


> An updated list, still as difficult as ever:
> 1. Berlioz (Symphonie Fantastique)
> 2. Mahler
> 3. Vaughan Williams
> 4. Brahms
> 5. Tchaikovsky
> 6. Bax
> 7. Bruckner
> 8. Schubert
> 9. Beethoven


Another update, the rules are still no easier:
1. Bernstein
2. Mahler
3. Saint-Saens
4. Beethoven
5. Tchaikovsky
6. Bax
7. Sibelius
8. Schubert
9. Bruckner
14. Shostakovich
38. Mozart
[Un-numbered] Korngold
[Un-numbered] Berlioz (Symphonie Fantastique)


----------



## billeames

Brahms 1
Beethoven 5
Shostakovich 10
Messiaen Turangalila
Mahler 5
Prokofiev 5
Dvorak 9
Bruckner 8
Tchaikovsky 5

Thanks. Bill


----------



## Winterreisender

Brahms 1
Mahler 2
Gorecki 3
Mendelssohn 4
Sibelius 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Shostakovitch 7
Schubert 8 (Unfinished)
Beethoven 9

Bonus: Berlioz Fantastique


----------



## TurnaboutVox

I only know 9 symphonic cycles tolerably well, so this was a case of rearranging the 9 until this emerged. I have stuck to only numbered works and resisted the temptation of Brucknerian '0's and '00's. I really must get out more.

Vaughan-Williams 1st
Schumann 2nd
Sibelius 3rd
Nielsen 4th
Bruckner 5th
Beethoven 6th
Shostakovich 7th
Schubert 8th
Mahler 9th

The usual caveat applies - these aren't necessarily my favourite symphonies from each of these composers.


----------



## Chronochromie

Brahms 1st
Rachmaninov 2nd
Sibelius 3rd
Schumann 4th
Mahler 5th
Tchaikovsky 6th
Schubert 7th Unfinished (Maybe cheating a bit here but some call it No. 7)
Bruckner 8th
Dvorak 9th
This list is bound to change in the near future.


----------



## Orfeo

I. Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, or Atterberg
II. Glazunov, Schumann, Tubin, Sibelius, or Atterberg
III. Alfven, Bax, or Tchaikovsky
IV. Mahler, Tubin, Melartin, or Schmidt
V. Bruckner, Myaskovsky, Vaughan Williams, or Tchaikovsky
VI. Glazunov, Tchaikovksky, or Myaskovsky
VII. Bruckner, Dvorak, Bax, or Glazunov
VIII. Mahler, Bruckner, Schubert, Dvorak, or Glazunov
IX. Bruckner, Mahler, Atterberg, Beethoven or Schubert


----------



## TurnaboutVox

dholling said:


> I. Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, or Atterberg
> II. Glazunov, Schumann, Tubin, Sibelius, or Atterberg
> III. Alfven, Bax, or Tchaikovsky
> IV. Mahler, Tubin, Melartin, or Schmidt
> V. Bruckner, Myaskovsky, Vaughan Williams, or Tchaikovsky
> VI. Glazunov, Tchaikovksky, or Myaskovsky
> VII. Bruckner, Dvorak, Bax, or Glazunov
> VIII. Mahler, Bruckner, Schubert, Dvorak, or Glazunov
> IX. Bruckner, Mahler, Atterberg, Beethoven or Schubert


Maybe sitting on the fence, just a little?


----------



## Kilgore Trout

1. Gavriil Popov
2. Alfred Schnittke
3. Karol Szymanowski
4. Charles Ives
5. Peter Maxwell Davies
6. Karl Amadeus Hartmann
7. Hans Werner Henze
8. Dmitri Shostakovich
9. William Schuman


----------



## Guest

Starting Line-Up:

Walton 1
Mahler 2
Saint-Saens 3
Brahms 4
Nielsen 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Beethoven 7
Schubert 8
Dvorak 9

2nd String: 

Brahms 1
Sibelius 2
Schumann 3
Mendelssohn 4
Shostakovich 5
Mahler 6
Vaughan Williams 7
Dvorak 8
Beethoven 9


----------



## hpowders

Yeah, no composer may repeat, otherwise my list would be all Haydn.


----------



## Guest

TurnaboutVox said:


> Maybe sitting on the fence, just a little?


A friendly reminder that this is talkclassical - where any "top 5" variety of thread will garner standard responses like "I like my 700 favorite composers equally, so this thread is absurd" and "you forgot to use 'favorite' instead of 'best', and there is no best; you are therefore an idiot".


----------



## omega

1 - Brahms
2 - Mahler (_Auferstehung_)
3 - Szymanowski (_The Song of the Night_)
4 - Nielsen (_The Inextinguishable_)
5 - Chostakovitch
6 - Tchaïkovski
7 - Sibelius
8 - Bruckner
9 - Beethoven


----------



## realdealblues

Without repeating a composer...

1 - Bernstein
2 - Sibelius
3 - Brahms
4 - Tchaikovsky
5 - Beethoven
6 - Mahler
7 - Bruckner
8 - Schubert
9 - Dvorak


----------



## Itullian

I'll give it a go.

Brahms 1
Schumann Rhenish
Mendelssohn Scottish
Mozart Linz
Schubert Great
Bruckner 8
Mahler 1
Beethoven 6
Sibelius 2
Nielsen 4


----------



## SONNET CLV

Brahms Symphony No. 1
Sibelius Symphony No. 2
Mahler Symphony No. 3
Ralph Vaughn Williams Symphony No 4
Shostakovich Symphony No. 5
Tchaikowsky Symphony No. 6 “Pathetique”
Bruckner Symphony No. 7	
Schubert Symphony No. 8 “Unfinished”
Dvorak Ninth Symphony “From the New World”


----------



## Skilmarilion

1 Sibelius
2 Rachmaninov
3 Mendelssohn
4 Brahms
5 Shostakovitch
6 Tchaikovsky
7 Beethoven
8 Bruckner 
9 Mahler


----------



## hpowders

^^^I agree!!!


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Mahler 1 "Titan"
Brahms 2
Beethoven 3 "Eroica"
Brahms 4
Beethoven 5
Mahler 6 "Tragic"
Beethoven 7
Schubert 8 "Finished"
Beethoven 9 "Choral"


----------



## sjorstakovitsj

Schnittke 1
Mahler 2
Tischenko 3
Lutoslawski 4
Ustvolskaya 5
Martinu 6
Coates 7
Bruckner 8
Mahler 9

Couldn't help but including Mahler twice


----------



## hpowders

Mahler 8
Mahler 6
Haydn 102
Beethoven 6
Brahms 4
Sibelius 7
Ives 3
Schuman 6


----------



## SixFootScowl

Beethoven 3
Beethoven 5
Beethoven 6
Beethoven 9
Mendelssohn 1
Mendelssohn 4
Mendelssohn 5

not necessarily in that order


----------



## MoonlightSonata

Beethoven 5
Beethoven 7
Beethoven 9
Mozart 40
Vaughan Williams 1
Haydn 45
Haydn 99
Shostakovich 7
Shostakovich 15

I know, it's a sin not to have Mahler, but I've never heard a full Mahler symphony, in concert or recorded, so I can't comment. I do rather like Mahler 1 though, or what I've heard of it.


----------



## clavichorder

This is a cool thread, I don't know why it has one star. I should do an updated list.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

clavichorder said:


> I should do an updated list.


Good idea, here's my new one. Only two have changed since the last one.

1. Mahler I "Titan"
2. Mahler II "Resurrection"
3. Beethoven III "Eroica"
4. Mahler IV (or Brahms IV, I CANNOT choose between them. I won't do it! )
5. Beethoven
6. Mahler VI "Tragic"
7. Beethoven
8. Schubert VIII "Unfinished"
9. Beethoven VIIII "Choral"

Yup, for symphonies, I'm an old-school type of person. My apologies to Bruckner, he barely missed making the list a couple of times.


----------



## hpowders

*The OP stated one symphony per composer:*

Ives No. 3
Schuman No. 6
Mennin No. 7
Pohjola No. 1
Copland No. 3
Schmidt No. 4
Mahler No. 8
Bruckner No. 7
Schumann No. 2
Haydn No. 94


----------



## hpowders

anon2k2 said:


> Just for fun, I've decided to listen to a symphonic cycle of my own creation. I haven't yet made up my own mind about what pieces to listen to, but I have set the rules for how I'm going to choose:
> 
> *I'm going to choose 9 symphonies with a limit of one work per composer. * Why 9? 9 seems to be a magic number for symphonic cycles (Beethoven, Schubert, Bruckner, etc)
> 
> So what I mean by this is that I'm going to choose Symphony no. 1 by a certain composer, then Symphony No. 2 by a different composer.
> 
> Just off the top of my head, a list could be like this:
> 
> Brahms #1
> Sibelius #2
> Beethoven #3
> Mahler #4, etc.
> 
> Anyway, I'll let you know what I come up with, but I'd like suggestions what you'd choose for your cycle.


A fine idea!!!


----------



## Skilmarilion

hpowders said:


> Haydn No. 94


That's odd, I thought Segerstam's 94th would be the clear choice there.


----------



## Markbridge

Brahms #1
Vaughan-Williams #2
Nielsen #3
Bruckner #4
Tchaikovsky #5
Mahler #6
Dvorak #7
Mahler #8
Beethoven #9

That's today. I could easily come up with another list tomorrow.


----------



## Itullian

The Schumann symphs followed by the Brahms symphs followed by Schubert's Great.


----------



## Rhombic

Balakirev 1
Glière 2 (sorry, Borodin, I really appreciate yours...)
Lyatoshynsky 3
Glazunov 4
Prokofiev 5
Myaskovsky 6
Henry Cowell 7
Shostakovich 8
Beethoven 9


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Without repeating a composer....
Honegger 1
Shostakovich 2
Farrenc 3
Beethoven 4
Mendelssohn 5
Sibelius 6
Mahler 7
Schubert 8
Bruckner 9

With repetitions...
Honegger 1
Shostakovich 2
Farrenc 3
Beethoven 4
Sibelius 5
Sibelius 6
Mahler 7
Schubert 8
Bruckner 9

Alternate list....
Carl Vine 1
Beethoven 2
Glass 3
Mahler 4
Dvorak 5
Nielsen 6
Sibelius 7
Bruckner 8
Shostakovich 9


----------



## licorice stick

A lot of trade-offs here in composers' oeuvres, but a fun question nonetheless.

Mahler 1
Elgar 2
Brahms 3
Tchaikovsky 4
Prokofiev 5
Bruckner 6
Beethoven 7
Schubert 8
Dvorak 9


----------



## scratchgolf

1. Brahms 1
2. Mahler 2
3. Schumann 3
4. Mendelssohn 4
5. Shostakovich 5
6. Beethoven 6
7. Glazunov 7
8. Dvorak 8
9. Schubert 9


----------



## ArgumentativeOldGit

1 - Elgar
2 - Brahms
3 - Beethoven
4 - Sibelius
5 - Nielsen
6 - Tchaikovsky
7 - Dvorak
8 - Schubert 
9 - Mahler


----------



## 20centrfuge

Brahms 1
Sibelius 2
Beethoven 3
Nielsen 4
Mahler 5
Prokofiev 6
Shostakovich 7
Schubert 8
Dvorak 9


----------



## afterpostjack

Rachmaninov 1
Mahler 2
Mendelssohn 3
Schumann 4
Sibelius 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Beethoven 7
Bruckner 8
Schubert 9

Some care was taken in order to avoid repeats.


----------



## phlrdfd

Sibelius 1
Brahms 2
Beethoven 3
Shostakovich 4
Mahler 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Dvorak 7
Bruckner 8
Schubert 9


----------



## MoonlightSonata

It's interesting to see how much variety there is. So far on this page all the first symphonies, for example, have been different.


----------



## ahammel

MoonlightSonata said:


> It's interesting to see how much variety there is. So far on this page all the first symphonies, for example, have been different.


Well, here's another:

1. Webern
2. Mendelssohn
3. Vaughan Williams
4. Brahms
5. Schubert
6. Beethoven
7. Sibelius
8. Bruckner
9. Mahler

Edit: 2-5 are the same as my first effort, although I have to say I'm not terribly pleased with 2 and 3. Felix will probably move into the 4 spot if I ever hear a second symphony that I really love. Beethoven jumps around the list, and could conceivably end up in the 3 spot at some point.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

New list!

Matsumura 1
Shostakovich 2
Farrenc 3
Beethoven 4
Sibelius 5
Nielsen 6
Mahler 7
Schubert 8
Bruckner 9


----------



## hpowders

Sibelius 7
Mahler 8
Mahler 6
Bruckner 7
Ives 3
Prokofiev 1
Shostakovich 5
Shostakovich 15


----------



## donnie a

Fun question—but a tough one!

0. Bruckner 
1. Ives (Yep)
2. Brahms
3. Schumann
4. Tchaikovsky
5. Shostakovich
6. Sibelius
7. Dvorak
8. Beethoven
9. Mahler

Notes:

0. I figure I can cheat here since zero isn't technically a number (Is it??). I wanted to save Bruckner for 7, but I love number 0, and how many other zeroes are there to choose from?

1. I love this work—never have understood why it's mostly dismissed as a substandard "student work".

4. Wanted to include Mahler and Ives in a three-way tie.

Also, I have a strange urge to insert Das Lied von der Erde between 8 and 9, since it's a symphony, too. But I already cheated once.


----------



## ahammel

donnie a said:


> 0. I figure I can cheat here since zero isn't technically a number (Is it??).


It is.



donnie a said:


> I wanted to save Bruckner for 7, but I love number 0, and how many other zeroes are there to choose from?


Schnitke, Sorabji, and Bruckner 00.


----------



## donnie a

ahammel said:


> It is.


Am I going to be punished?


----------



## ahammel

donnie a said:


> Am I going to be punished?


I'll allow it.

............


----------



## donnie a

ahammel said:


> I'll allow it.
> 
> ............


Thank you! I promise to be good. :devil:


----------



## martrepuS

1. Mahler
2. Mahler
3. Mahler
4. Brahms
5. Beethoven
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Shostakovich
8. Schubert
9. Dvorak
10-41. Mozart
42-104. Haydn


----------



## haydnfan

1. Mahler
2. Rachmaninov
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Nielsen
6. Mahler
7. Bruckner
8. Bruckner
9. Mahler
10. Shostakovich


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

1. Brahms
2. Rachmaninov
3. Beethoven
4. Glazunov
5. Sibelius
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Vaughan Williams
8. Schubert
9. Dvořák
10. Shostakovich


----------



## Becca

1. Vaughan Williams
2. Vaughan Williams (1913 version)
3. Mendelssohn
4. Tubin
5.1 Sibelius
5.2 Nielsen
5.3 Rubbra
5.4 Mahler
5.5 Vaughan Williams
6. Sibelius
7. Bruckner
8. Mahler
9. Shostakovich

In reality there are also many possible choices for 1,2 & 3 ... or just about any of them!


----------



## T Son of Ander

1 Mahler
2 Borodin
3 Tchaikovsky
4 Tubin
5 Beethoven
6 Sibelius
7 Rautavaara
8 Beethoven
9 Dvorak

I could come up with many lists. It's tough to choose!


----------



## Avey

Rather than contribute, I want to complain:

Does anyone read the initial post in a thread? Or do people just follow their predecessor? 

You know, rules and purposes and such.


----------



## haydnfan

Avey said:


> Rather than contribute, I want to complain:
> 
> Does anyone read the initial post in a thread? Or do people just follow their predecessor?
> 
> You know, rules and purposes and such.


That post is seven years old. It doesn't matter what was said, what matters is what we're talking about now.


----------



## Selby

How fun.

Without repeats:

1. Ives
2. Mahler
3. Nørgård
4. Gerhard
5. Sibelius
6. Bax
7. Vaughan Williams
8. Rautavaara
9. Beethoven
10. Shostakovich
11. Hovhaness
12. Milhaud
13. Holmboe

Hmmm... that's as far as I can get without taking liberties.

cheers.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Flutey's Russian edition

1. Kalinnikov
2. Rachmaninoff
3. Gliere
4. Glazunov
5. Prokofiev
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Prokofiev
8. Glazunov
9. Shostakovich
10. Shostakovich

Honorable mention: 21. Myaskovsky (for all his symphonies he wrote some really great ones that go way past 10)


----------



## Bulldog

Avey said:


> Rather than contribute, I want to complain:
> 
> Does anyone read the initial post in a thread? Or do people just follow their predecessor?
> 
> You know, rules and purposes and such.


I never pay attention to the "one work per composer" rule unless it follows my preferences. When I was in the workforce, I had to go along with a host of silly and arbitrary mandates. I didn't retire to keep doing that.:tiphat:


----------



## Becca

Bulldog said:


> I never pay attention to the "one work per composer" rule unless it follows my preferences. When I was in the workforce, I had to go along with a host of silly and arbitrary mandates. I didn't retire to keep doing that.:tiphat:


The advantage to having been the boss is that we had no silly and arbitrary mandates .... unless, of course, you talked to the employees :angel: :devil:


----------



## Gustav Ilych Shostakovich

With the composer/symphony restriction.

1. Beethoven 7.
2. Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique.
3. Bruckner's Romantic.
4. Prokofiev 5.
5. Schubert's Great.
6. Scriabin's Le Divin Poème.
7. Shostakovich 10.
8. Mahler's Resurrection.
9. Tchaikovsky's Pathétique.

The free choice: 
1. Tchaikovsky 1.
2. Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique.
3. Tchaikovsky 4.
4. Bruckner 4.
5. Shostakovich 8.
6. Tchaikovsky's Manfred.
7. Shostakovich 10.
8. Mahler's Resurrection.
9. Tchaikovsky's Pathétique.


----------



## VishnuB

1- Brian
2- Mahler
3 - Beethoven
4 - Brahms
5 - Shostakovich
6 - Tchaikovsky
7 - Sibelius
8 - Bruckner
9 - Schubert


----------



## Classical Music Fan

This is a pretty hard list for me to come up with. 
1. Brahms
2. Mahler
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Tchaikovsky
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Beethoven
8. Dvorak
9. Beethoven


----------



## Fat Bob

1. Elgar
2. Mahler
3. Rachmaninov
4. Brahms
5. Vaughan Williams
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Sibelius
8. Bruckner
9. Beethoven


----------



## szabomd

1. Brahms 
2. Sibelius
3. Saint-Saens
4. Bruckner
5. Mahler
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Shostakovich
8. Dvorák
9. Beethoven


----------



## Philidor

Schumann Symphony No. 1
Brahms Symphony No. 2
Beethoven Symphony No. 3
Mendelssohn Bartholdy Symphony No. 4
Sibelius Symphony No. 5
Tchaikovsky Symphony No. 6
Dvorak Symphony No. 7
Bruckner Symphony No. 8
Mahler Symphony No. 9


----------



## Becca

1 - Lilburn
2 - Chavez
3 - Martinu
4 - Tubin
5 - Rubbra
6 - Nielsen
7 - Bax
8 - Lloyd
9 - D. Matthews


----------



## Xisten267

Let me try (I decided to go with ten symphonies instead of nine):

*By known number, free choice of composers:*

1. Brahms
2. Mendelssohn
3. Beethoven
4. Brahms
5. Beethoven
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Bruckner
8. Bruckner
9. Beethoven
10. Shostakovich

*By known number, with the composer/symphony restriction:*

1. Mahler
2. Mendelssohn
3. Brahms
4. Sibelius
5. Prokofiev
6. Tchaikovsky
7. Bruckner
8. Schubert ("Unfinished")
9. Beethoven
10. Shostakovich

*By order of composition*, only complete works, free choice of composers:*

1st. Brahms - Symphony no. 1
2nd. Mahler - Symphony no. 2 "Resurrection"
3rd. Beethoven - Symphony no. 3 "Eroica"
4th. Brahms - Symphony no. 4
5th. Beethoven - Symphony no. 5
6th. Beethoven - Symphony no. 6 "Pastoral"
7th. Tchaikovsky - Symphony no. 6 "Pathétique"
8th. Prokofiev - Symphony-Concerto
9th. Beethoven - Symphony no. 9 "Choral"
10th. Bruckner - Symphony no. 8 "Apocalyptic"

*By order of composition*, only complete works, with the composer/symphony restriction:*

1st. Berlioz - Symphonie Fantastique
2nd. Sibelius - Symphony no. 2
3rd. Brahms - Symphony no. 3
4th. Mendelssohn - Symphony no. 2 "Lobgesang"
5th. Prokofiev - Symphony no. 5
6th. Mahler - Symphony no. 6
7th. Tchaikovsky - Symphony no. 6 "Pathétique"
8th. Bruckner - Symphony no. 6
9th. Beethoven - Symphony no. 9 "Choral"
10th. Shostakovich - Symphony no. 10

*Considering when the said symphonies were finished.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

1) Schumann
2) Rachmaninoff
3) Brahms
4) Mendelssohn
5) Schubert
6) Sibelius
7) Bruckner
8) Dvorak
9) Beethoven


----------



## Livly_Station

Kinda unfair because some numbers have a lot of tough competition in my preferences, others not so much...

Also, I might be forgetting some symphonies...

1 - Scriabin
2 - ???
3 - Brahms
4 - Langgaard
5 - Mahler
6 - Beethoven
7 - Rautavaara
8 - Schubert
9 - Beethoven
10 - Mahler


----------



## PathfinderCS

1 - Havergal Brian
2 - Guimant (w. organ)
3 - Saint-Saens
4 - Widor (Symphonie Antique)
5 - Gade
6 - Shostakovich
7 - Vaughn Williams
8 - Mahler
9 - Beethoven


----------



## jim prideaux

1.Walton/Mahler
2.Martinu/Beethoven
3.Nielsen/Brahms
4.Schubert/Mahler
5.Dvorak/Sibelius
6.Sibelius
7.Beethoven/Dvorak
8.
9
27. Myaskovsky

Gave up (as you can see!) but thought I would leave my work in progress up here!


already realised I missed Schumann's 2nd!

....and Beethoven's 4th.

Too difficult!


----------



## Roger Knox

1 Kalinnikov
2 Tyberg
3 Magnard
4 Taneyev
5 Ropartz
6 Tournemire
7 Raff
8 Glazunov
9 Roentgen
10 Miaskaovsky


----------



## tbazar

Brahms 1
Schumann 2
Saint-Saens 3
Sibelius 4
Nielsen 5
Tchaikovsky 6
Bruckner 7
Schubert 8
Beethoven 9
Shostakovich 10


----------



## Prodromides

Roger Knox said:


> 1 Kalinnikov
> 2 Tyberg
> 3 Magnard
> 4 Taneyev
> 5 Ropartz
> 6 Tournemire
> 7 Raff
> 8 Glazunov
> 9 Roentgen
> 10 Miaskaovsky


None of these names begin with the letter "B". Refreshing.
Instead we get the 3 "T"s and the 3 "R"s.


----------



## jim prideaux

Knew I had missed something form my initial attempt....Kalinnikov 1st


----------



## Roger Knox

Prodromides said:


> None of these names begin with the letter "B". Refreshing.
> Instead we get the 3 "T"s and the 3 "R"s.


I never noticed that. But there is _something_ over-familiar about "B," now that you mention it.


----------



## Roger Knox

jim prideaux said:


> Knew I had missed something form my initial attempt....Kalinnikov 1st


I have a certain familiarity with the letter K.


----------



## dko22

hmm -- not so easy...

*Rachmaninov 1* Tchaikovsky was earliest favourite and the several times mentioned Kalinnikov I also like.
*Suk "Asrael"* which is his 2nd.
*Nielsen 3*
*Alexander Brincken 4 *No.4 has produced several wonderfully radiantly happy works like Tubin or Martinu but the slow movement of this is even better
*Arnold 5* Bruckner's is probably the best 5th but he's excluded as is Nielsen. Silvestrov a strong candidate.
*Bruckner 6*. For some reason no.6 has produced the most enigmatically individual symphonies from so many composers. Beethoven, Nielsen, Sibelius, Tchaikovsky, Martinu, Pettersson, Mahler, Vaughan Williams, Prokofiev just for starters as well as the winner!
*Sibelius 7*
*Weinberg 8* very hard - most composers who got this far are not at their best here. As Weinberg's greatest symphonies are later, I decided he must go in here as this is a very fine work in its own right
*Schubert 9* the rules (which have been widely ignored, unfortunately) are only one work for a composer which is really infuriating as Bruckner 9 would otherwise be the clear winner here. As it is, it's a toss up between Schubert, Mahler, Dvorak and perhaps even Simpson and Arnold.

No. 10 is not included but here Mahler would definitely win.


----------



## ORigel

Mine is not creative:
1 Brahms
2 Mahler
3 Mahler
4 Nielsen
5 Beethoven
6 Tchaikovsky
7 Bruckner
8 Bruckner
9 Beethoven


----------



## RobertJTh

Two-by-two coupling because why not.

1 and 2: Elgar
3 and 4: Nielsen or Sibelius, can't decide
5 and 6: Bruckner
7 and 8: Beethoven
9 and 10: Mahler


----------



## haziz

1. Kalinnikov, Tchaikovsky, Sibelius
2. Tchaikovsky, Borodin, Sibelius, Rimsky-Korsakov, Kalinnikov
3. Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, Mendelssohn
4. Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Glazunov
5. Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, Sibelius, Glazunov, Shostakovich
6. Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, Beethoven
7. Beethoven, Dvorak, Shostakovich
8. Dvorak, Beethoven, Schubert
9. Beethoven, Dvorak, Shostakovich
10. Shostakovich



Because I can't live with only one each for each numeral.


----------



## Rieslingfan

New to this discussion, and fascinated by all the lists from over the years. My trouble is that three of my favorite symphonies are by Mozart (25 & 39) and Haydn (92).


----------



## PeterKC

1. WALTON
2. RACHMANINOFF
3. ANTHEIL
4. IVES
5. ATTERBERG 
6. NIELSEN
7. LLOYD
8. MAHLER
9. SCHUBERT
BRITTEN - SIMPLE
BLISS - COLOR
COPLAND - SHORT


----------



## SearsPoncho

With one limit per composer (some are cheating - naughty, naughty), and Haydn and Mozart just attempting their 1st efforts, here's the best I can do off the top of my head:

1) Brahms
2) Sibelius
3) Stravinsky - Symphony of Psalms (It was his 3rd composed symphony after the early 1st and the Symphony for Wind instruments)
4) Mahler
5) Shostakovich
6) Tchaikovsky
7) Bruckner
8) Schubert
9) *BEETHOVEN*


----------



## leonsm

Two per composer

Walton/Bax - 1
Mahler/Khachaturian - 2
Saint-Säens/Beethoven - 3
Nielsen/Szymanowski - 4
Shostakovich/Yoshimatshu - 5
Atterberg/Penderecki - 6
Pettersson/Sallinen - 7
Bruckner/Schubert - 8
Dvorak/Beethoven - 9
Villa-Lobos - 10


----------



## Art Rock

SearsPoncho said:


> It was his 3rd composed symphony after the early 1st and the Symphony for Wind instruments


One of my pet peeves: the title of the composition is "Symphonies of Wind Instrument " and it is not a symphony. From Edward Cone's book on Stravinsky: "In the title of this piece, Stravinsky used the word "symphonies" (note the plural form) not to label the work as an essay in the symphonic form, but rather in the word's older, broader connotation, from the Greek, of "sounding together. "


----------



## Becca

Rieslingfan said:


> New to this discussion, and fascinated by all the lists from over the years. My trouble is that three of my favorite symphonies are by Mozart (25 & 39) and Haydn (92).


Use the modulo function (remainder when divided by 9) +1 😁

P.S. Rheingau or Mosel?


----------



## Rieslingfan

Becca said:


> Use the modulo function (remainder when divided by 9) +1 😁
> 
> P.S. Rheingau or Mosel?


Mosel and Nahe primarily, but plenty of Rheingau as well.


----------



## SearsPoncho

SearsPoncho said:


> With one limit per composer (some are cheating - naughty, naughty), and Haydn and Mozart just attempting their 1st efforts, here's the best I can do off the top of my head:
> 
> 1) Brahms
> 2) Sibelius
> 3) Stravinsky - Symphony of Psalms (It was his 3rd composed symphony after the early 1st and the Symphony for Wind instruments)
> 4) Mahler
> 5) Shostakovich
> 6) Tchaikovsky
> 7) Bruckner
> 8) Schubert
> 9) *BEETHOVEN*


I'll substitute my #3 for Martinu. I'm genuinely sorry for acting like a jerk or offending anyone here. I hate the pettiness of the internet, and when I became the exact person I hate, it offended me more than those I responded to. Hope all of you can forgive me...and let's move on!


----------

