# HBD, RVW - Greatest Symphonist of the 20th Century



## Abdel ove Allhan (Jun 19, 2014)

#'s 2,3,4,5,6 and 10(!) are masterpieces of the first order. 7, Symphonia Antartica has magnificent moments but lacks a continuous cohesiveness. 8 and 9 are masterpieces...of the second order. #10 (Job, a Masque for Dancing) I consider to be a free form symphony. I have never seen it staged yet I can visualize it perfectly while listening to it due, no doubt, to the evocative and archetypal paintings of William Blake. I don't include his 1st, A Sea Symphony as I am too easily prone to motion sickness, true story...naaaah.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Abdel ove Allhan said:


> #'s 2,3,4,5,6 and 10(!) are masterpieces of the first order. 7, Symphonia Antartica has magnificent moments but lacks a continuous cohesiveness. 8 and 9 are masterpieces...of the second order. #10 (Job, a Masque for Dancing) I consider to be a free form symphony. I have never seen it staged yet I can visualize it perfectly while listening to it due, no doubt, to the evocative and archetypal paintings of William Blake. I don't include his 1st, A Sea Symphony as I am too easily prone to motion sickness, true story...naaaah.


I think every composer has that, on the other hand it can depend on how one feels whilst listening..


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

RVW was a great composer, but as much as I enjoy the symphonies, they're not all masterpieces. None of them is standard repertoire and that has to count for something. And I really don't think he was the greatest 20th c symphonist by any standard. There were a lot of great symphonies written from 1900 to 2000. Shostakovich wrote better symphonies. i'd even argue that the two Elgar symphonies surpass RVW. Maybe even Franz Schmidt.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

I'm a big fan of RVW with a special fondness for at least 5 of his symphonies (which includes the 'Sea Symphony'). Even so, I too wouldn't say he was _the_ greatest of the 20thC. Speaking subjectively - as that's the only possible way to grade if one must - there is strong competition from the big 2 Russians and that's before considering the rest of the world.
Sticking with composers in my country and going on subjective quality more than quantity, Walton's 1st, Britten's Sinfonia da Requiem, Spring and Cello Symphonies and Tippett's 4 Symphonies also stand out as major masterpieces in British Music imo. There's more too, depending on your tastes of course. Malcom Arnold, John McCabe and David Matthews have a considerable output in symphonic form as does Robert Simpson to mention just a few. Of RVW's symphonies, I put no.5 at the top, then in no particular order of preference, nos.1,2,3,7,8. BTW, his 'Five Tudor Portraits' are symphonic in scope too.

So for me, RVW is a great symphonist, but the moniker of 'greatest' is obviously not one that can be definitively bestowed on any composer and is therefore somewhat moot.


----------



## Abdel ove Allhan (Jun 19, 2014)

Rogerx said:


> I think every composer has that, on the other hand it can depend on how one feels whilst listening..


And “that” is…what?


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Abdel ove Allhan said:


> And “that” is…what?


Other composer as stated, See the Mahler threads........


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I like RVW symphonies, but no — Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Miaskovsky, Schnittke, before we even get out of Russia.


----------



## Abdel ove Allhan (Jun 19, 2014)

mikeh375 said:


> nos.1,2,3,7,8. BTW, his 'Five Tudor Portraits' are symphonic in scope too.


No love for #4? One of the most muscular, sophisticated and contrapuntally complex compositions and a wild ride to boot. It is so different from almost anything he ever wrote (except for Job) but more interesting to me than anything his contemporaries in England or Russia produced. I realized I was poking the bee hive with this subject but felt compelled to counter the ubiquitous and head scratching love-fest for Shostakovich et al that permeates this forum.


----------



## Abdel ove Allhan (Jun 19, 2014)

Rogerx said:


> Other composer as stated, See the Mahler threads........


Hard pass.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I'd pick Shostakovich for the title. I find RVW's material stretched a bit over too long for its content.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Greatest symphonist of the 20th century?_

Shostakovich, *Sibelius *(first symphony 1899,all others 20th century), Vaughan Williams, Mahler, Elgar ... take your pick. All worthy choices.

I'd take Sibelius from this group through little question to me Shostakovich wrote more symphonies of high quality and lasting value. But I find Sibelius at his best more enduring -- Nos. 4 and 7 mainly -- and far more compact and listenable.

Shostakovich and Mahler shared a trait: lots of overtstatement and restatement being the most notable.

RVW a little too up and down in quality to be considered best.

Elgar didn't write enough symphonies to compete with the others.

Until the idea of Mahler as a great symphonist was unveiled in the 1960s Sibelius was considered the greatest symphonies since Beethoven. I think he still is.


----------



## Abdel ove Allhan (Jun 19, 2014)

Phil loves classical said:


> I'd pick Shostakovich for the title. I find RVW's material stretched a bit over too long for its content.


To me Shostakovich is like Oakland, there’s no there, there. No, wait, as Shakespeare said, “…full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
Vaughan Williams counterpoint and harmonic sense are coupled with the 2 great French impressionists Debussy and Ravel (who he studied with) plus a rich blend of British folk and liturgical melody tempered with his enduring reverence for Bach and a formal acumen drilled into him by Sir Hubert Perry, Charles Stanford and in Berlin by Max Bruch. His vocabulary is like Sibelius, they both admired each other’s work, a modern romanticism. RVW has, I believe, a deeper, timeless appeal shaped by an ancient and primary,even mystical quality. If you have heard works like Flos Campi, Serenade to Music or his Mass in G you can hear this beauty of mode, melody and counterpoint that merge into a fabric, a tapestry of immutable radiance. He differed from the modernists like Stravinsky, Shostakovich, etc. in that he felt they were not serious about being serious about music. He referred to much of their compositions as “wrong note music”. Musically speaking it was a contentious time and the principles can be forgiven for mildly disrespectful attitudes. There is an hilarious anecdote when RVW was shown a piece by a student written in the 12 tone style he sincerely requested that “should you ever come across a tune, don’t hesitate to write it down,”
Here is an interesting article about RVW’s 150th birthday in the NYTimes. Beware, it has a pay wall unfortunately.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/12/arts/music/ralph-vaughan-williams-150th-anniversary.html


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

I disagree with the OP's declamations about Vaughan Williams being "the greatest 20th Century symphonist." His cycle is rather uneven. I don't have much time for the 7th or 9th symphonies. I also don't think too much of the 4th symphony. I mean are we to say his symphonies are "greater" than Mahler, Shostakovich, Sibelius, Nielsen, K. A. Hartmann, Honegger, Prokofiev, Myaskovsky, Ives et. al.? Not for me.

FYI, I love Vaughan Williams and think he's a fabulous composer, but he's not the only composer in the 20th Century to write symphonies worthy of people's attention.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Neo Romanza said:


> I disagree with the OP's declamations about Vaughan Williams being "the greatest 20th Century symphonist." His cycle is rather uneven. I don't have much time for the 7th or 9th symphonies. I also don't think too much of the 4th symphony. I mean are we to say his symphonies are "greater" than Mahler, Shostakovich, Sibelius, Nielsen, K. A. Hartmann, Honegger, Prokofiev, Myaskovsky, Ives et. al.? Not for me.
> 
> FYI, I love Vaughan Williams and think he's a fabulous composer, but he's not the only composer in the 20th Century to write symphonies worthy of people's attention.


Who said he's the only composer?


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

golfer72 said:


> Who said he's the only composer?


To me, the OP implied it by saying Vaughan Williams is the greatest symphonist of 20th Century. In other words, there are no others. Maybe I'm reading him wrongly?


----------



## Abdel ove Allhan (Jun 19, 2014)

Neo Romanza said:


> To me, the OP implied it by saying Vaughan Williams is the greatest symphonist of 20th Century. In other words, there are no others. Maybe I'm reading him wrongly?


Well I never said he was the only symphonist nor implied there are no others. I did say he has a deeper timeless appeal etc. and gave my reasons why I believe him to be the greatest. I also revere Sibelius and Neilsen. As far as the other symphonists you mentioned Ives and Prokofiev can hold my attention and at times can provoke sincere admiration.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

The problem is the use of the word 'greatest', an absolute term, and one that should really be avoided in any discussion of topics that involve such personal opinions as music and such.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Never been a huge fan of Vaughan Williams myself, his music seriously reminds me of a really long fart. I think if 'nothing's there' in Shostakovich's music, this must indicate there's nothing really _there_ in any of reality except for the patterns and information similar to ones we've encountered.


Abdel ove Allhan said:


> Well I never said he was the only symphonist nor implied there are no others. I did say he has a deeper timeless appeal etc. and gave my reasons why I believe him to be the greatest. I also revere Sibelius and Neilsen. As far as the other symphonists you mentioned Ives and Prokofiev can hold my attention and at times can provoke sincere admiration.


Of course I respect your perspective especially because it's one that's arrived at for many valid reasons. People like to over-objectify this sort of thing, but I promise even your most unique evaluations of Vaughan Williams are just as objective as anyone else who has spent time with CM. They just use different criteria and interpretations from any other random person, given they can only ever judge according to their hearing alone too. What may be helpful is that you listed Nielsen, Sibelius, Prokofiev etc. alongside RVW, since it helps us decipher the patterns in your own objective perspective. This won't ever lead us to some kind of agreed truth to unlocking the keys to RVW's mind, as people never can agree ultimately, but it can make us truly understand what you're actually thinking: People think if two minds happen together with similar separate impressions, they've witnessed some kind of verification for their idea, which is as meaningful as two Dallas Cowboys fans meeting, but next time I listen to his music I'll be cross-referencing it with Prokofiev's who is more relatable for me and who seems like he may hold some new keys, to this shared sport of choice of ours.



Abdel ove Allhan said:


> He differed from the modernists like Stravinsky, Shostakovich, etc. in that he felt they were not serious about being serious about music. He referred to much of their compositions as “wrong note music”.


I also never heard anything wrong with Stravinsky's choice of notes myself. They seem to work, despite his music being a bit too lackluster and forced for my tastes. That is to say, whatever's wrong with Stravinsky isn't his initial choice of notes, but something more foundational or interpretive.


----------



## Abdel ove Allhan (Jun 19, 2014)

Ethereality said:


> Never been a huge fan of Vaughan Williams myself, his music seriously reminds me of a really long fart.


Perhaps you're just hearing the noises in your own head.


----------



## Abdel ove Allhan (Jun 19, 2014)

Becca said:


> The problem is the use of the word 'greatest', an absolute term, and one that should really be avoided in any discussion of topics that involve such personal opinions as music and such.


We all arrive at judgements 'subjectively' through our individual life experience. If there is a symphonist from the 20th century with a comparable stable of works to rival RVW, they are unknown to me. If you are unwilling to make a personal evaluation and justify that conclusion, well, you should try it. There's nothing like a good debate to clarify ones world view.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Abdel ove Allhan said:


> Perhaps you're just hearing the noises in your own head.


No if what I heard of RVW was in my head, I would've died a long time ago. I can sometimes enjoy his symphonies for what they're worth, but his popular works like the Fantasias and Lark ascending are the worst works in CM.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Abdel ove Allhan said:


> We all arrive at judgements 'subjectively' through our individual life experience. If there is a symphonist from the 20th century with a comparable stable of works to rival RVW, they are unknown to me. If you are unwilling to make a personal evaluation and justify that conclusion, well, you should try it. There's nothing like a good debate to clarify ones world view.


Oook, if you say so ...


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

I love some of RVW's shorter orchestral works (Lark Ascending, Fantasia on Greensleeves, Fantasia on a Theme of Thomas Tallis, Oboe Concerto), but the symphonies have done very little for me and I generally either dislike them or am at best neutral towards them.

Now for the finest 20th century symphonist? The title would probably go to Sibelius as far as I am concerned, with Shostakovich and Nielsen as strong contenders.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

^ Agreed. I would add Prokofiev to Sibelius and Shostakovich and pause a little before including Nielsen in the same category. RVW's symphonies are not in the same tier.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

RVW symphony no.3




I remember some people praising the use of poly modality or something of the sort, in the slow movement.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> ^ Agreed. I would add Prokofiev to Sibelius and Shostakovich and pause a little before including Nielsen in the same category. RVW's symphonies are not in the same tier.


I wouldn't pause at all to add Nielsen to that list and I actually think RVW's symphonies belong on the list, too. Disagree all you want, but many people, including myself, think highly of RVW as a symphonist. I can think of no other British composer that has had the kind of impact he as had with his symphonic works.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

Neo Romanza said:


> I wouldn't pause at all to add Nielsen to that list and I actually think RVW's symphonies belong on the list, too. Disagree all you want, but many people, including myself, think highly of RVW as a symphonist. I can think of no other British composer that has had the kind of impact he as had with his symphonic works.


Well, I persist in my disagreement that RVW is in the same tier of symphonist as Sibelius or Shostakovich and certainly is not the greatest symphonist of the 20th century, as the thread claims. I don't deny his influence as a British composer and if the thread had said RWV is the greatest British symphonist, I would have no problem with that statement.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> Well, I persist in my disagreement that RVW is in the same tier of symphonist as Sibelius or Shostakovich and certainly is not the greatest symphonist of the 20th century, as the thread claims. I don't deny his influence as a British composer and if the thread had said RWV is the greatest British symphonist, I would have no problem with that statement.


I certainly disagree with the premise of the OP's claim, but think RVW is _one_ of the great symphonists.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

I like RVW. I _love _Sibelius.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

*Greatest Symphonist of the 20th Century*



Becca said:


> The problem is the use of the word 'greatest', an absolute term, and one that should really be avoided in any discussion of topics that involve such personal opinions as music and such.


Agreed.

I have a soft spot for RVW's symphonies, in particular 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, however, ... well, what is meant by "greatest"?

If I had the choice to take the symphonies from RVW or Sibelius or Shostakovich or Prokofieff or Tubin or Holmboe or Sumera or Tüür or Norgard to the desert island, my pick would be Sibelius.

If I could take two boxes with me, Sibelius and Norgard. Followed by Shosty and Tubin.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Neo Romanza said:


> I disagree with the OP's declamations about Vaughan Williams being "the greatest 20th Century symphonist." His cycle is rather uneven. I don't have much time for the 7th or 9th symphonies. I also don't think too much of the 4th symphony. I mean are we to say his symphonies are "greater" than Mahler, Shostakovich, Sibelius, Nielsen, K. A. Hartmann, Honegger, Prokofiev, Myaskovsky, Ives et. al.? Not for me.
> 
> FYI, I love Vaughan Williams and think he's a fabulous composer, but he's not the only composer in the 20th Century to write symphonies worthy of people's attention.


Yes, and I would add Rachmaninov, Copland, Roussel, Messiaen, and Dutilleux, if not Stravinsky for his Symphony in C and Hindemith for his Symphonic Metamorphosis. I consider the latter two among the greatest works of the 20th century. But that's just me.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

fluteman said:


> Yes, and I would add Rachmaninov, Copland, Roussel, Messiaen, and Dutilleux, if not Stravinsky for his Symphony in C and Hindemith for his Symphonic Metamorphosis. I consider the latter two among the greatest works of the 20th century. But that's just me.


But since we're talking about symphonists, would the Hindemith _Symphonic Metamorphoses_ actually count as a "symphony"? I thought it was just a theme and variations work? Certainly his _Mathis der Maler Symphony_, _Pittsburgh Symphony_ or _Die Harmonie der Welt Symphony_ would qualify as a symphonies.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Neo Romanza said:


> But is the Hindemith _Symphonic Metamorphoses_ really a "symphony"? I thought it was just a theme and variations work?


There's a lot of 20th century music where one could debate that, if such debates are your thing.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

fluteman said:


> There's a lot of 20th century music where one could debate that, if such debates are your thing.


I'm not into debating, but I do think if Hindemith meant it to be a symphony, he would've titled it as such, especially considering the other works of his that _are_ called symphonies.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

On the another forum you would make friends quite quick, @Abdel ove Allhan . VW is the most popular composer there thank certain members.


----------

