# Prokofiev's first symphony



## Gustav

Since someone has mentioned Bizet's first symphony, I will be glad to recommand to everyone in this forum the first symphony of Prokofiev, his "classical" symphony in D, this work is much more different than rest of his works, but I think this is perhaps his most well known and good sounding symphony.

P.S I don't usually like light symphonies, but Prokofiev's first is an exception, it has such rich symphonic quality that I can't even describe. Just listen to it!


----------



## Daniel

Hello,

I like this symphonie for its freshness and high level of originality. One can see examples like Haydn, but it is built up with this secure feeling for individuality and it is a musical smile, Prokofievs own hand-writing.

Daniel.


----------



## glezzery

I LOVE Prokofiev's 1st. It is fun and georgous! A truly fine piece of music. I know some think it is a joke, but i don't see it! It has too much respect and love and humor for it to be a joke! The fact it continues to be so popular so proof!


----------



## Mr Salek

This is so laid back for a symphony. It's a welcome break from a Romantic great.


----------



## linz

This work is one of several that established neo-classism before the bear-claws of Stravinsky. Perfectly balanced and formed, the first movement flows so well its pratically a sin. The finale makes you want to dance the gigue! Another fine light symphony is Mozart's 25th.


----------



## riverbank

i'm a big fan of the classical symphony, just a shame it's so short (must be the shortest symphony ever written).


----------



## Vesteralen

Resurrection time again! 

This is one good example in my experience of a first hearing being an indelible and irreplaceable one.

Ormandy/Philadelphia will always be the ultimate performers of the "Classical" symphony for me. I've heard others, but they never quite seem to measure up. Quicksilver.


----------



## Manxfeeder

Vesteralen said:


> Resurrection time again!
> 
> This is one good example in my experience of a first hearing being an indelible and irreplaceable one.


Yeah, that's one of those few pieces which creates an instant memory, especially the third movement; a nice classical melody with the wrong chords.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

There's great flute stuff in that symphony, it's actually one of the first ways I fell in love with Prokofiev some years ago, playing orchestral excerpts from there.


----------



## mmsbls

His classical symphony is certainly vastly different than later works, but I have always loved it.


----------



## samurai

I think a good part of its appeal lies in the fact that it is by turns both whimsical and yet "serious" at the same time.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant

Is it not the case that its style and brevity were partly determined by Prokofiev's intention to write a complete work without using a piano to compose at? 
Or did I dream that?


----------



## myaskovsky2002

I don't like it...I put "dislike" on every person saying that they love it...LOL (it is a joke, bien sûr!)


----------



## myaskovsky2002

Jeremy Marchant said:


> Is it not the case that its style and brevity were partly determined by Prokofiev's intention to write a complete work without using a piano to compose at?
> Or did I dream that?


I'm pretty sure you did...LOL

Martin


----------



## myaskovsky2002

For me his first doesn't sound as Prokofiev...

Martin


----------



## Jeremy Marchant

myaskovsky2002 said:


> I'm pretty sure you did...LOL


You inspired me to look it up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._1_(Prokofiev)


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

"Ormandy/Philadelphia will always be the ultimate performers of the "Classical" symphony for me. I've heard others, but they never quite seem to measure up." [/QUOTE] from Vesteralen

Agree with every word.


----------



## Pugg

So many good ones out there, almost impossible to choose.


----------



## techniquest

riverbank said:


> i'm a big fan of the classical symphony, just a shame it's so short (must be the shortest symphony ever written).


Not quite - Langgaards' 11th symphony is half the length of Prokofiev's 1st 
Some say that the 1st doesn't sound like Prokofiev, but in my ears it could be no one else; despite it's specific characteristics and instrumentation, it oozes Prokofiev at every turn.


----------



## TxllxT

Ormandy is rather fast in order to get the entrée light & spiritual.

Gergiev takes a much more relaxed tempo, which however keeps the light & spirit preserved as well as brings out the classical mood better...

Abbado is just a bit too heavy on the entrée, but still very OK.

My votes go to Gergiev.


----------



## Ralphus

I also think it's a wonderful piece.



> Quicksilver


The perfect adjective for this piece.



> Some say that the 1st doesn't sound like Prokofiev, but in my ears it could be no one else; despite it's specific characteristics and instrumentation, it oozes Prokofiev at every turn.


Agreed!

The recording I keep returning to is that of the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra (DG). Of all the complete sets I own (Kitaenko, Weller, Kosler, Gergiev) or have known (Ozawa, Rostropovich) the 1st isn't satisfactory in any of them, in my opinion. Perhaps I aspire to a 'quicksilver' to high to attain.


----------



## Judith

Love the Classical Symphony!! Saw it performed live by RLPO conducted by Vasily Petrenko. Yes it is short compared to other symphonies but suits me if I want to listen to a symphony but short of time.


----------



## hpowders

Yes. Prokofiev's First is my favorite Prokofiev Symphony. Light and lilting.

My favorite performance of it happens to be with the Chicago Symphony directed by Sir Georg Solti.


----------



## Pugg

Judith said:


> Love the Classical Symphony!! Saw it performed live by RLPO conducted by Vasily Petrenko. Yes it is short compared to other symphonies but suits me if I want to listen to a symphony but short of time.


I am not jealous...but like to have seen that one also.


----------



## Roger Knox

I think it came from a composition assignment. He was using classical harmonic progressions strangely out of context, emptying them of conventional romantic expressive effect but still cleverly achieving order and coherence. For music theory knowers: in the Gavotte in D major, the second chord (C major) is a Neapolitan sixth(!) in B, followed by the V chord F#, which "resolves" to G major -- a deceptive cadence (!), but this chord now becomes IV moving back to the home chord D major -- a plagal cadence! Earlier these chords and cadences might have created surprise or colour or antique reference, but now they are sort of mechanical and create a toy-like effect, that has its own charm to be sure! Later Prokofiev used all kinds of chords, scales, and figures but he generally avoided atonality, and he certainly created great melodies!


----------



## SONNET CLV

Isn't the Prokofiev First almost everybody's favorite symphony? It certainly is delightful. And I've loved it for decades, since my first hearing of the work.

I used to be able to say I never heard a bad performance of the "Classical Symphony". And that was true till I listened to Rostropovich's interpretation from the ERATO box set of the complete symphonies.









I've always loved Rostropovich, one of the most talented musicians (a genius, certainly) of all time. He's done some great work with Russian music, especially of Shostakovich whom he knew personally. And he knew Prokofiev, too. But his slow, meandering way with the First Symphony is a absolute travesty. Sorry, Slava. One to avoid.


----------



## David Phillips

It's astonishing that Prokofiev wrote the piece in the hope that it would become a classic - and it has!


----------



## jim prideaux

reflective of the humour and grace intrinsic to this work was the grin with which the conductor Lars Vogt turned to the audience half way through the final movement when performing with the Royal Northern Sinfonia-a concert I was fortunate enough to attend earlier in the year.

(funnily enough my favourite recording of the work by the Orpheus Chamber Orch. is on a DG cd which also includes the Bizet Symphony-see opening of this thread)


----------



## T Son of Ander

SONNET CLV said:


> Isn't the Prokofiev First almost everybody's favorite symphony? It certainly is delightful. And I've loved it for decades, since my first hearing of the work.
> 
> I used to be able to say I never heard a bad performance of the "Classical Symphony". And that was true till I listened to Rostropovich's interpretation from the ERATO box set of the complete symphonies.
> 
> View attachment 96611
> 
> 
> I've always loved Rostropovich, one of the most talented musicians (a genius, certainly) of all time. He's done some great work with Russian music, especially of Shostakovich whom he knew personally. And he knew Prokofiev, too. But his slow, meandering way with the First Symphony is a absolute travesty. Sorry, Slava. One to avoid.


Have you heard Ozawa? The first movement is so slow, it's unlistenable. Martinon is the other extreme, IMO too fast. I think Levine got it just right with the CSO. The only problem with that recording is that the winds don't come through enough. The balance is off, and it sounds muddy at times. But it is my favorite.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Any good time loving for Walter Weller and the LSO from 1974? It was my introduction to this work. I haven't heard but a few others and think I will stick with Weller.


----------



## hpowders

Gustav said:


> Since someone has mentioned Bizet's first symphony, I will be glad to recommand to everyone in this forum the first symphony of Prokofiev, his "classical" symphony in D, this work is much more different than rest of his works, but I think this is perhaps his most well known and good sounding symphony.
> 
> P.S I don't usually like light symphonies, but Prokofiev's first is an exception, it has such rich symphonic quality that I can't even describe. Just listen to it!


Yes, Gustav from 2005, the Prokofiev Symphony 1 is a delightful little gem, but it is one of the most difficult orchestral works for a conductor to bring off convincingly. Solti/Chicago has never been bettered, IMO.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I like Prokofiev's first symphony and it's without doubt an accomplished work but I can't help thinking that more individuality went into his first violin and piano concertos.


----------



## BiscuityBoyle

elgars ghost said:


> but I can't help thinking that more individuality went into his first violin and piano concertos.


That was the whole idea of the work - to write a symphony à la Haydn.


----------



## Mal

It's actually the famous "undiscovered" symphony by Haydn, which scholars have been trying to track down for a long time. Prokofiev found it in a shed in Murmansk. Stalin insisted that he keep quiet about the discovery and pretend that it was his own symphony. The great leader then claimed it as another example of the creative grandeur inspired by communism.


----------



## Guest

Abbado and Chamber Orchestra of Europe was my introduction. Sounded pretty good to me. I've heard Jarvi and Scottish National and Sondergard with Danish Radio






...difficult to separate I think.


----------



## EdwardBast

To sort out some of the background on the "Classical" Symphony that was confused earlier in the thread:

Jeremy Marchant had it exactly right back in 2011: The impetus for the symphony was tied up with Prokofiev's desire to compose away from the piano. Why did he want to do this? As he explained it, he usually composed at the piano but had noticed that "thematic material composed without the piano was often better in quality." He also believed, and the symphony seems to bear this out, that "a composition written this way would probably have more transparent orchestral colors."

Why the style of Haydn? Prokofiev wrote: "Haydn's technique had become clear to me after working with [Nikolai] Tcherepnin and it seemed it would be easier to dive into the deep waters of writing without the piano if I worked in a familiar setting." It was Tcherepnin, Prokofiev's favorite teacher at the St. Petersburg Conservatory, who had instilled in him an appreciation for Haydn and Mozart.

The symphony was composed over close to two years, the Gavotta first in 1915, the first and second movements in 1916, and the finale in June and July of 1917 while "walking through the fields" in a small town outside of Petrograd. Harlow Robinson writes that "Prokofiev devised a game for himself while finishing the last movement: eliminating all minor chords."

IMO, the Classical is in a different category than the other symphonies, a special case for obvious reasons. There isn't much point in comparing it to its more serious and ambitious successors.


----------



## Josquin13

Lately, I've been enjoying the 'new kid on the block' (more than Gergiev & Jarvi). In fact, I'd put him in the same league with the legendary Prokofiev conductor Nicolai Malko in the 1st & 7th, which is really saying something:


















https://www.amazon.com/Prokofiev-Sy...2599905&sr=1-17&keywords=prokofiev+symphony+7


----------



## Triplets

hpowders said:


> Yes, Gustav from 2005, the Prokofiev Symphony 1 is a delightful little gem, but it is one of the most difficult orchestral works for a conductor to bring off convincingly. Solti/Chicago has never been bettered, IMO.


Haven't heard the Solti/CSO, but Levine with the same Orchestra is my favorite


----------

