# What do you think of Hans Rott's Symphony?



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Initially I didn't understand what was so controversial about it that caused such a negative response from Brahms and other critics, and a positive one from Mahler and Bruckner. The themes and orchestration didn't seem that out of the ordinary to me, but when the 1st movement hid the middle point, some chromaticism began occurring and a really well built contrapuntal passage highlighted the themes I initially found ordinary. I think it's a fine work, but perhaps not quite as radical or striking as I'd hoped. Bruckner was already doing much wilder things.

Edit: I suppose I should save my commentary till I've heard the whole thing. That middle movement really has Mahler foreshadowing. I can see some of it now.

And updating you in real time, the scherzo 3rd movement...Mahler and his 1st were definitely inspired by it. Further in and it practically is Mahler.

And finally, my first complete listening impression is that it is a brilliant work. It may in fact be worthy of a strong rediscovery and revival effort. It's rare to come across a composer of such a brilliant work who left us so little else and died so young.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

One thing I'm noticing on a repeat listening is that he often treats his themes like a passacaglia or ground, making for some rich counterpoint. This technique is all over the place and is used in such a way to create some wrenching harmonies that really do resemble Mahler. I hope more of you give this a chance.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

My impression is that Brahms was right as usual.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

Has any major conductor ever performed or recorded this symphony?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

jdec said:


> Has any major conductor ever performed or recorded this symphony?


Several. Search CDs for "Rott" on Amazon and you'll find well-known names. Rott's symphony is hardly obscure and is discussed often, though rare I think in concert halls.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Several. Search CDs for "Rott" on Amazon and you'll find well-known names. Rott's symphony is hardly obscure and is discussed often, though rare I think in concert halls.


Sorry, I meant "great conductors". I have not seen any of the great Mahler conductors of the likes of for example Bernstein, Abbado, Tennstedt, Rattle, Barbirolli, Kubelik, etc. to have any association with this composer's symphony.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

It was only in the late 1980s that a performing edition of the symphony was prepared and first performed in 1989 so it is no wonder that Bernstein, Tennstedt, Barbirolli, Kubelik etc. never performed it.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I think we often think of the "great conductors" as the ones who sold lots of LPs in the 1950s through the 1970s, most when people were rebuilding their libraries with stereo LPs.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

jdec said:


> Has any major conductor ever performed or recorded this symphony?


Didn't Paavo Järvi recorded it?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Pugg said:


> Didn't Paavo Järvi recorded it?


Yes. Doesn't he look a bit like Putin?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

KenOC said:


> Yes. Doesn't he look a bit like Putin?


Seems much nicer.
I myself have a recording on CPO conducted by: Dennis Russell Davies


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

I like it and so did Bruckner and Mahler. That's more than good enough for me.


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

I own three different versions: with Jarvi, Weigle and Davies, each offering different bonus (Suite für Orchester B-Dur, Orchestra Prelude in E major + Prelude to "Julius Caesar", Pastorales Vorspiel respectively).
I believe this is a brilliant composition, nicknamed Triangle Symphony due to somewhat excessive use of that instrument. Scherzo being the most elaborate and effective movement, this is already an advanced Mahler! Rott finished this symphony at 22.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

I love this symphony but can't get on with Mahler's. Go figure.

I have a number of recordings of the piece and IMHO the Paavo Järvi one shown above is the best by some distance. It's quite a sprawling work, but for me Järvi keeps it moving forward better than anyone else without robbing it of its many incidental beauties.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I'm listening for the first time. The third movement is like listening to Mahler through a closed door. 

David Hurwitz is brutal about this piece: "Hans Rott’s single symphony enjoys what little attention it gets solely by virtue of the fact that it sounds like anyone but Hans Rott. There’s the Bruckner/Mahler scherzo, the Brahms First Symphony tune in the finale, the Wagnerian ending: whether or not Rott did some of these things first hardly matters because everyone else did them better. Perhaps his only original contribution to the proceedings other than the decision to mix this particular heterogeneous brew is an obbligato triangle part of positively stupefying persistence."


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

clavichorder said:


> Initially I didn't understand what was so controversial about it that caused such a negative response from Brahms and other critics, and a positive one from Mahler and Bruckner. The themes and orchestration didn't seem that out of the ordinary to me, but when the 1st movement hid the middle point, some chromaticism began occurring and a really well built contrapuntal passage highlighted the themes I initially found ordinary. I think it's a fine work, but perhaps not quite as radical or striking as I'd hoped. Bruckner was already doing much wilder things.
> 
> Edit: I suppose I should save my commentary till I've heard the whole thing. That middle movement really has Mahler foreshadowing. I can see some of it now.
> 
> ...


when I like it the first time something is wrong :lol:


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

OT: I like it. Jarvi's recording is excellent.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Manxfeeder said:


> I'm listening for the first time. The third movement is like listening to Mahler through a closed door.
> 
> David Hurwitz is brutal about this piece: "Hans Rott's single symphony enjoys what little attention it gets solely by virtue of the fact that it sounds like anyone but Hans Rott. There's the Bruckner/Mahler scherzo, the Brahms First Symphony tune in the finale, the Wagnerian ending: whether or not Rott did some of these things first hardly matters because everyone else did them better. Perhaps his only original contribution to the proceedings other than the decision to mix this particular heterogeneous brew is an obbligato triangle part of positively stupefying persistence."


And that idiotic set of comments is one of the reasons why Hurwitz is very low on my list of critics worth reading. Sure it's not the most original of works but then again it was a student work begun when he was 20. Try comaring Rott's symphony to what Richard Strauss was doing at that age.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

Becca said:


> And that idiotic set of comments is one of the reasons why Hurwitz is very low on my list of critics worth reading. Sure it's not the most original of works but then again it was a student work begun when he was 20. Try comaring Rott's symphony to what Richard Strauss was doing at that age.


You mean mean the 1st symphony, that breathless Brahms imitation (that Brahms liked)? 

I actually like that piece... but yeah, it's not in the same league with Rott's symphony.

Hurwitz's comment is indeed very stupid. Of course Rott was learning from the masters. And his Brahms quote was imho very good, and bold...


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

Becca said:


> And that idiotic set of comments is one of the reasons why Hurwitz is very low on my list of critics worth reading. Sure it's not the most original of works but then again it was a student work begun when he was 20. Try comaring Rott's symphony to what Richard Strauss was doing at that age.


Well, Rott finished his symphony when he was 22. With not too much age difference (2 years only) R. Strauss at 24 composed his first symphonic poem masterpieces _Don Juan_ and _Death and Transfiguration _ which score quite higher in my book. Nonetheless Rott's symphony is pretty good and it's a shame he died at 25, it would have been really interesting to see his musical development had he lived longer.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Manxfeeder said:


> I'm listening for the first time. The third movement is like listening to Mahler through a closed door.
> 
> David Hurwitz is brutal about this piece: "Hans Rott's single symphony enjoys what little attention it gets solely by virtue of the fact that *it sounds like anyone but Hans Rott.* There's the *Bruckner/Mahler* scherzo, the *Brahms* First Symphony tune in the finale, the *Wagner*ian ending: *whether or not Rott did some of these things first hardly matters because everyone else did them better.* Perhaps his only original contribution to the proceedings other than the decision to mix this particular heterogeneous brew is an obbligato triangle part of positively stupefying persistence."


Is Hurwitz unaware that parts of Rott's work that sound strikingly like Mahler _preceded__ by years_ the works they sound like? Rott submitted the first movement of his symphony for judgment in 1978. Mahler didn't begin his first symphony until 1887. Hurwitz's statement that "whether or not Rott did some of these things first hardly matters because everyone else did them better" is feeble, and hardly a criticism at all considering that the standard of comparison is three of the greatest composers of the era. But essentially it fails to do justice to the freshness of the piece, which doesn't really sound like anyone but Rott, a fascinating young composer already reaching beyond his inevitable influences.


----------



## Guest (Aug 17, 2017)

The first time I heard Rott's symphony I thought, wow....this sounds like Mahler.

Of course I had to google it and see if anyone else thought so, only to find that Rott's symphony preceded anything Mahler wrote. I really like Rott's symphony. Keep in mind...I am a newbie.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

"...whether or not Rott did some of these things first hardly matters because everyone else did them better."

Well, maybe some of them did them better because he did them first! Hurwitz uses _Mahler_ against Rott when Mahler was a great supporter and obviously liked this symphony enough to be noticeably influenced by it.

As far as Brahms is concerned, he was hardly complementary about other composers. Just ask his friend Max Bruch about the tactless comments he made about his music. Probably the worst mistake Rott ever made was going to Brahms and seeking help or encouragement. And of course Brahms in his usual tactless way was hardly encouraging and Rott unfortunately took it to heart.

Then there was Bruckner, who hardly knew how to get his own music played, let alone anyone else's.

Looks like a big mess during a time when something was needed after Brahms and Wagner and the world of music was in a state of flux, and Rott had his own youthful ideas of what was needed.

His Symphony may be an early work, but I find a sense of expanded time and space in that Mahler picked up on and ran.

It's just a shame that Rott didn't receive more encouragement because of his psychologically fragile self. Mahler seemed to be one of the few who knew his worth. And lo and behold, Rott's symphony is being played today, and there's been considerable interest, despite Hurwitz's spiteful remarks. Such brutal criticism is one reason why I hold some critics in exceedingly low regard, and I believe his opinion has been proven wrong, or Rott wouldn't be getting a hearing today by a big-name conductor such as Jarvi.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Does anyone really enjoy listening to this attentively from start to finish? The dreadfully inept development and counterpoint makes it unbearable for me, but then I really don't like Bruckner or Mahler either.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Larkenfield said:


> It's just a shame that Rott didn't receive more encouragement.


To some extent I agree with this, but I think part of being a composer or artist is to just do what you do and believe in your work regardless of criticism - as long as you truly believe it is good anyone else's opinion should be taken with a grain of salt regardless of who they are. Not necessarily easy to do, but look at Mahler and Ravel and many others (even Brahms music was heavily attacked by some).

Ravel received harsh treatment by critics early in his career, they changed their tune in time and he was quoted on the subject:

"Didn't I represent to the critics for a long time the most perfect example of insensitivity and lack of emotion?...and the successes they have given me in the last few years are just as unimportant." - Ravel

"Inspiration may be a form of super-consciousness, or perhaps of subconsciousness-I wouldn't know. But I am sure it is the antithesis of self-consciousness." - Aaron Copland

As far as Rott's symphony I've listened to it once ages ago when it was enshrined in the Classical Music Project. I thought it was pretty good, but I haven't felt compelled to listen to it again since.


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

In fact I consider myself extremely lucky because I first encountered Rott's Symphony in E Major in live concert performance. A friend of mine knew and shared my interest in Bruckner and Mahler so he had let me know I would not want to miss the event.
Then of course I had to order all the recordings available at that moment. I was spellbound.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

tdc said:


> I thought it was pretty good, but I haven't felt compelled to listen to it again since.


Could there be a reason for the latter, perhaps? I for one think there is.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Improbus said:


> Does anyone really enjoy listening to this attentively from start to finish? The dreadfully inept development and counterpoint makes it unbearable for me, but then I really don't like Bruckner or Mahler either.


I did, recently. I don't think it's so inept, but it does have a youthful way about it that can seem naive.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

clavichorder said:


> I did, recently. I don't think it's so inept, but it does have a youthful way about it that can seem naive.


I don't mean to offend the people who like it, I just don't see why they do, but then my taste in music is very narrow.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Think of it this way: it's better than Wagner's Symphony in C.


----------



## T Son of Ander (Aug 25, 2015)

clavichorder said:


> Think of it this way: it's better than Wagner's Symphony in C.


That's not saying much. :lol: I'm glad Wagner stuck to opera.

I heard the Rott symphony the other day for the first time. It left a good impression, and I definitely will give it more listening time.


----------



## T Son of Ander (Aug 25, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Yes. Doesn't he look a bit like Putin?


:lol: Every time I see Paavo I do a double take! He does look like Vladi, but yes, as Pugg said, much nicer.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

clavichorder said:


> Think of it this way: it's better than Wagner's Symphony in C.


I'm not so sure about that; either way it's still not better than this:


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

I respectfully but strongly disagree, and I'm as dyed-in-the-wool a Mozart nut as anyone you'll find on here.


----------



## Alfacharger (Dec 6, 2013)

carol235 said:


> The first time I heard Rott's symphony I thought, wow....this sounds like Mahler.
> 
> Of course I had to google it and see if anyone else thought so, only to find that Rott's symphony preceded anything Mahler wrote. I really like Rott's symphony. Keep in mind...I am a newbie.


Mahler was all ready Mahler when Rott composed the symphony.






Is it just me but does the opening theme of Rott's symphony, first movement sound similar to the opening theme to Raff's Seventh.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

I don't think it's just you. IMO there's a definite resemblance there. Good spot.


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

Alfacharger said:


> Mahler was all ready Mahler when Rott composed the symphony.


Rott's Symphony in E Major 1878-80
Mahler's First Symphony 1884-88

Pure facts.
I am aware Mahler composed Das klagende Lied at about the same time (1878-80), but really, many moments in Rott's symphony pre-date many similar moments in Mahler's later works. We can only speculate what Rott's next symphony would sound like.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Azol said:


> Rott's Symphony in E Major 1878-80
> Mahler's First Symphony 1884-88
> 
> Pure facts.
> I am aware Mahler composed Das klagende Lied at about the same time (1878-80), but really, many moments in Rott's symphony pre-date many similar moments in Mahler's later works. We can only speculate what Rott's next symphony would sound like.


There are some sketches of a 2nd symphony


----------



## Alfacharger (Dec 6, 2013)

Azol said:


> Rott's Symphony in E Major 1878-80
> Mahler's First Symphony 1884-88
> 
> Pure facts.
> I am aware Mahler composed Das klagende Lied at about the same time (1878-80), but really, many moments in Rott's symphony pre-date many similar moments in Mahler's later works. We can only speculate what Rott's next symphony would sound like.


It would speculate that it would have sounded like a composition by Rott, not Mahler


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Whatever you think of his music we may agree that he didn't quite _look_ like a genius:









:tiphat:


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Would you care to enlighten us as to what a genius does look like?


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Becca said:


> Would you care to enlighten us as to what a genius does look like?


The greatest of great examples:


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

There are four or five recordings of it; I've owned most of them. The score was interesting when I discovered it but it does not stand up well over time. It does not reward repeat listening as do some of the Mahler and Bruckner or even Shostakovich symphonies. I like the original Cincinnati-Samuel recording better than others that have followed, some of which have been bland.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Becca said:


> Would you care to enlighten us as to what a genius does look like?


If a genius can look like Handel or like Einstein, we can at least expect a wide range of hairstyles. Are there any geniuses with buzz cuts?


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Woodduck said:


> If a genius can look like Handel or like Einstein, we can at least expect a wide range of hairstyles. Are there any geniuses with buzz cuts?


Handel, actually; or at the very least he was close:


----------

