# Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov - Op. 32 - Symphony No.3



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

How do you rate this piece? What are your favourite recordings?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Not a great symphony, but certainly better than anything I could write! His 2nd is better. My personal favorite recording is the Svetlanov with the USSR State Symphony Orchestra once on RCA. You'd think works like this would be good repertoire for small, community and amateur orchestras. But no. They want to embarrass themselves with Scheherazade and other virtuosic pieces.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

mbhaub said:


> You'd think works like this would be good repertoire for small, community and amateur orchestras.


Why? Is it so easy to play this symphony?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Yes, it is easier than Scheherazade. It's far less demanding for the principal winds. But there's this: I know that amateurs want to play the great masterpieces. I do, everyone does. But...when amateurs play things like Scheherazade, the great (and very difficult) symphonies of Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak and the like they are up against the local professional orchestra which plays that repertoire. Amateurs are better off not seeking comparisons by playing the repertoire the big boys don't. And guess what? Audiences love it! For unknown and incomprehensible reasons, professional orchestras have abandoned a lot of fine music and it's now in the domain of the amateurs: Kalinnikov symphonies, the Hanson 2nd, Tchaikovsky 1 & 2, all of Chadwick, Beach, Macdowell. You will never hear the Big 5 play the Rimsky-Korsakov symphonies - but they trot out Scheherazade frequently. And part of it is that some of this repertoire isn't an orchestral spectacular showpiece. Not every obscure R-K work is easy btw. I wanted to program Night on Mt. Triglav for a Halloween concert several years ago, but it's a beast of work to put on. The pan pipe parts make it very difficult for even professionals to mount.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I think R-K did better when writing programmatic and dramatic music—his abstract instrumental music doesn't do it for me. _Antar_ and _Scheherazade_ I enjoy much more. I find the 3rd dry and uninspiring.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Not so good and not so bad, as others saying he wrote better works, I try fit it in later.


----------



## RobertJTh (Sep 19, 2021)

It's a rather dry and faceless composition, a far cry from the inspired 2nd (though "Antar" benefited from several revisions, while R-K never bothered to revise his 3rd.)
I think even the 1st is better and certainly more original. But it's interesting to see how academic R-K could be when he composed in traditional forms. Just take a look at his numerous piano compositions. In that respect, he resembles Sibelius: without the added colors of the orchestra, his music sounds grey and dull. But the 3rd shows that not even all his orchestral works are equally valuable.

Here's my choice, a pretty spirited performance, Anichanov certainly tries to makes as much of the music as possible.
But the Sinfonietta is so much more fun! - and not only because it quotes the sweet Russian melody that Stravinsky used too in his Firebird.


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

A very good symphony, but not his best. Antar (Symphony No. 2) is more memorable. Of course his Scheherazade is absolutely superb.


----------

