# Beethoven Symphony No. 4 vs Sibelius Symphony No. 4



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Not one of either composer's more popular symphonies. Which do you prefer?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Beethoven's 4th is probably my least favorite among his symphonies. It's a fine symphony, to be sure - flawless, really - but I don''t feel that any great inner imperative drove its creation, and it lacks the visionary quality of the 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th and 9th. The Sibelius, though, I find simply astonishing: its vast spaces seem filled with pale, cold light, its language is cryptic, its message is ambivalent and finally elusive. Sibelius's last four symphonies are, for me, high peaks of the symphony as a genre.


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> Beethoven's 4th is probably my least favorite among his symphonies. It's a fine symphony, to be sure - flawless, really - but I don''t feel that any great inner imperative drove its creation, and it lacks the visionary quality of the 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th and 9th. The Sibelius, though, I find simply astonishing: its vast spaces seem filled with pale, cold light, its language is cryptic, its message is ambivalent and finally elusive. Sibelius's last four symphonies are, for me, high peaks of the symphony as a genre.


In the hypercritical heightened state of other discussions going on re famous conductors, the temptation to raise questions about some of your terminology is almost irresistible...

But I will resist and just say that whilst I might not explain myself in quite the same way, I am of the same opinion, more or less. I've been listening to the Beethoven for longer than the Sibelius, and yet I find it still completely unmemorable. The Sibelius I disliked at first, but it has grown on me over a relatively short period of time. I rarely listen to the first three symphonies, but the last four in rotation, with only the 6th a smidge ahead of the others.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> In the hypercritical heightened state of other discussions going on re famous conductors, the temptation to raise questions about some of your terminology is almost irresistible...


It isn't terminology. It's poetry.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

I enjoy Beethoven's 4th for its everlasting freshness and humor, more than the 6th and 7th (overfamiliarity really ruins it for me) now.

I love Sibelius's 4th too, but I always vote for the underdog.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

in 1908 Sibelius was diagnosed with a throat tumour and though the operation was a success he lived in fear of it's return. This might explain some of the melancholia of this symphony (composed 1910/11).


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Sorry but I just can’t see why we are comparing two such different works


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Sibelius, and it's not close. I'd take any Sibelius symphony over Beethoven 1-4 and 7-9.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

I sure prefer to discuss the merits of music itself to the merits of musicians and the merits of individual pieces to the merits of a composer. 

It is an interesting comparison, these two works. For Beethoven, it quite an overlooked work, between the popular 3rd and 5th. For Sibelius, the 4th to me is one of his signature pieces. A collection of moods, masterfully put together to form a surprisingly powerful piece. It helps to have travelled Finland though. 

It was my first ever visit to the Concertgebouw, still in my early teens, with my parents, when Colin Davis conducted Sibelius 4. I know, as the distant timpani rolls were quite prominent, as we were sitting behind the orchestra. By then, I found the music quite puzzling and vague, but it must have ignited my love for CM. And I can't remember what other music was played. 

There seems to be an advantage of discussing and comparing individual music pieces over complete oeuvres, composers or conductors .


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2020)

Anyone hear any resemblances between the Sibelius and Mahler's 3rd?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DavidA said:


> Sorry but I just can't see why we are comparing two such different works


So you're participating just to complain that you'd rather not participate?

There's an obvious solution.


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2020)

NLAdriaan said:


> It was my first ever visit to the Concertgebouw, still in my early teens, with my parents, when Colin Davis conducted Sibelius 4.


I've just listened to the third movement (Davis/LSO Live) and wondered if the Concertgebouw have recorded it. I can find others (2 and 5, Janssons or Szell) just not the 4th. Any suggestions?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I’m not giving a preference but just saying I have always loved Beethoven’s fourth after getting an old recording asa lad in a sale with Toscanini Conducting it. My dad explained to me the theory of the opening ‘in the beginning....let there be light’ and I was hooked on the work. And Toscanini.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Beethoven Symphony No. 4 hands down.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

I've always considered Beethoven's 4th one of his lesser symphonies (to the extent that this concept can be employed with regard to Beethoven) but still enjoy it, more so than the 1st, 2nd and 8th. The first movement alone is worth the price of admission and was clearly influential on later composers, an obvious example being the strong similarity between the opening of that movement and the opening of the first movement of Mahler's 1st symphony.

However, in my opinion, Sibelius' 4th symphony is one of his greatest works with the first movement again standing out as highly innovative although perhaps not as influential on later composers as Beethoven's 4th. The 4th could be considered to be something of an idiosyncrasy in Sibelius' list of opuses but I personally never tire of listening to it.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

MacLeod said:


> I've just listened to the third movement (Davis/LSO Live) and wondered if the Concertgebouw have recorded it. I can find others (2 and 5, Janssons or Szell) just not the 4th. Any suggestions?


I just listened to Vanska/Lahti on the BIS label, which I can recommend. I also have Davis on LSO live and Karajan's EMI set from the 70-80's. Both are great recordings too and it is depending on the moment, which I would prefer. Currently, I prefer Vanska.

The Concertgebouw ddn't record a full Sibelius cycle, as far as I know. And I couldn't find a separate recording of the 4th either. Davis first full cycle in the seventies for Philips was with the Boston Symphony. By then, the RCO had an exclusive Philips contract. In the eighties, this changed. Ashkenazy could have been the one to record his Sibelius cycle with the RCO, as he did with Rachmaninov, but he did Sibelius with the Philharmonia it (great cycle too!). There are boxes of radio recordings of the RCO (anthology, released per decade), but also there no Sibelius 4. I do have a radio recording of Sibelius 5 with Kondrashin and the RCO, released as a separate CD with Brahms 2, but it isn't as memorable as you might think, nor are the Jansons recordings. Both Haitink and Chailly never were much of a Sibelius conductor, it was pretty much Davis' territory as a guest conductor.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Apparently the Sibelius symphony was know (in Scandinavia) as the Barkbröd (Bark bread) - a reference to 19th century austerity when some where forced to eat tree bark.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

MacLeod said:


> Anyone hear any resemblances between the Sibelius and Mahler's 3rd?


The scale and impact of Mahler 3 is quite overwhelming, compared to Sibelius. Also Mahler 3 is one of my desert island pieces, which makes it hors concours for me:angel:.

However, the second part of Mahler 3 however might perhaps be somewhat compared with Sibelius 3, as they both are somewhat earthly connected to the geography of origin? But who could compare Finland with Austria and who would compare one part of a symphony with a complete other? When I listen to both pieces after each other, I think they sound like coming from different planets. This is interesting as Sibelius 3 was composed a good 15 years after Mahler 3 and actually after Mahler's entire oeuvre. To me, however, Mahler's soundscape is bigger and more varied than Sibelius' more subtle one. Not surprisingly perhaps, when you do compare the Austrian countryside and the cosmopolitic Vienna with Finland's and Helsinki's atmosphere.

It might be interesting to discuss in general the influences of the surroundings on the work of composers.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

MacLeod said:


> Anyone hear any resemblances between the Sibelius and Mahler's 3rd?


I don't, no.

Anything in particular?


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2020)

At the risk of sounding poetic, both seem to have a meandering, reflective quality. Beethoven is almost always striding purposefully to get from A to B. Sibelius wallows in the scenery; Mahler wallows in introspection.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

MacLeod said:


> At the risk of sounding poetic, both seem to have a meandering, reflective quality. Beethoven is almost always striding purposefully to get from A to B. Sibelius wallows in the scenery; Mahler wallows in introspection.


I couldn't ascribe 'meandering' to Sibelius or Beethoven.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Compilation of the TC Top Recommended Lists

*46. Sibelius - Symphony No. 4*
47. Nielsen - Symphony No. 4 "The Inextinguishable"
48. Dvořák - Symphony No. 7
49. Mozart - Symphony No. 25
50. Schubert - Symphony No. 5
51. Mahler - Symphony No. 8
52. Prokofiev - Symphony No. 1 "Classical"
53. Webern - Symphony
54. Schumann - Symphony No. 3 "Rhenish"
*55. Beethoven - Symphony No. 4*


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

I think this poll is similar to Sibelius No. 1 vs. Haydn No. 1 or Shostakovich No. 1 against Mozart No. 1. You're taking a composer's best symphony and comparing it to another composer's least favorite symphony ... or one of his least favorite.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Definitely rocking with the Beethoven. One of my favorites of his. I was surprised to see folks ranking it as least favorite.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

flamencosketches said:


> Definitely rocking with the Beethoven. One of my favorites of his. I was surprised to see folks ranking it as least favorite.


I agree with you flamenco.....the 4th is my personal favourite when it comes to Beethoven, a result of overfamiliarity with others.

However Sibelius remains my favourite composer.

Ultimately I enjoy Beethoven's 4th more than Sibelius 4th. Very simplistic I do realise.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

jim prideaux said:


> I agree with you flamenco.....the 4th is my personal favourite when it comes to Beethoven, a result of overfamiliarity with others.
> 
> However Sibelius remains my favourite composer.
> 
> Ultimately I enjoy Beethoven's 4th more than Sibelius 4th. Very simplistic I do realise.


I think that's what happened to me as well. Don't get me wrong, I love Beethoven's 5th, 7th, and his 9th as much as the next guy (after some initial resistance) but the 4th seems somehow resistant to overexposure.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Both are personal favorites of the two composers' less popular symphonies.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I've always liked Beethoven's 4th. It has a giddiness to it, and it sounds like he is in love or in one of his latest crushes.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Rather odd comparison....I like them both.
As a professional bassoonist, i find LvB #4 has a special place in my musical consciousness. ...challenging part to play.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Heck148 said:


> Rather odd comparison....I like them both.
> As a professional bassoonist, i find LvB #4 has a special place in my musical consciousness. ...challenging part to play.


I always worry about the bassonist in the solo in the last movement. How do you tongue all those notes? You can't double-tongue on a bassoon, can you?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Sibelius 4 for me. The ending is so gripping and haunting. Maazel, Berglund, Karajan, Blomstedt -- too many excellent recordings to mention. Someone I respect musically calls the 4th the perfect symphony for atheists.

YES - you can double tongue on the bassoon. Some people do it better than others, some pro players actually can't do it at all. It takes a lot of practice, a lot of time, a great reed. When I've played that nasty bassoon part in the finale I admit it: I cheated by using the usual slur-2 tongue-2 method. It depends on the tempo the conductor goes. I deeply admire (and envy) players who can tongue those rapid staccatos the way they're written.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> Anyone hear any resemblances between the Sibelius and Mahler's 3rd?


No. I find them radically different. Where do you hear a resemblance?

EDIT: I see you've already answered this question. I can only say that Sibelius NEVER meanders.


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> No. I find them radically different. Where do you hear a resemblance?
> 
> EDIT: I see you've already answered this question. I can only say that Sibelius NEVER meanders.


To my ears, he meanders in the third movement of the 4th. Though the strength of reaction against my use of the word suggests that it is being taken as a negative. Nothing wrong with meandering, and I stick to my opinion.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

mbhaub said:


> Sibelius 4 for me. The ending is so gripping and haunting. Maazel, Berglund, Karajan, Blomstedt -- too many excellent recordings to mention. Someone I respect musically calls the 4th the perfect symphony for atheists.


Huh... Is this person an atheist himself, or just another presumptuous religious fanatic who thinks he's been commissioned by God to make puerile judgments about people who don't share his beliefs?


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Manxfeeder said:


> I always worry about the bassonist in the solo in the last movement. How do you tongue all those notes? You can't double-tongue on a bassoon, can you?


Bassoonists can double tongue, and, depending on the tempo in Beethoven IV, mvt. 4, sometimes must.

I'd argue that Beethoven _never_ intended all of those notes to be articulated. It's marked _dolce_, and you ain't playin' _dolce_ if you're tonguing it all. Also, performance practice of the day was definitely in general for wind players to add slurs as they saw fit. But conductors and current practice pressure bassoonists to tongue it all, especially in auditions. For it to be "dolce," judicious slurs are the answer. For the record, I think it's a stupid excerpt for an audition list, but that's another story. I also think it should be slurred. But I don't always get to decide, so I have to be able to tongue it all.

For me, I have a very fast single tongue. I can single tongue sixteenth notes comfortably at quarter (crotchet) = 140 and up. That's often fast enough for Beethoven 4. If it's not, I resort to varying degrees of double tonguing. Sometimes it works to throw in one or two here and there just to keep it all going fast enough; effectively it's like adding a slur in terms of single tongue comfort. With a single tongue, for me the issue is sustaining the speed; going fast enough in bursts is no problem.

What I dislike is machine-gun-like T-K-T-K-T-K-T-K-T-K through the whole passage; I think it sounds bad and isn't _dolce_.


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2020)

NLAdriaan said:


> I just listened to Vanska/Lahti on the BIS label, which I can recommend. I also have Davis on LSO live and Karajan's EMI set from the 70-80's. Both are great recordings too and it is depending on the moment, which I would prefer. Currently, I prefer Vanska.


Thanks. I've got 5 versions of the symphony already, so it was only the RCO I was looking for.



NLAdriaan said:


> The scale and impact of Mahler 3 is quite overwhelming, compared to Sibelius. Also Mahler 3 is one of my desert island pieces, which makes it hors concours for me:angel:.
> 
> However, the second part of Mahler 3 however might perhaps be somewhat compared with Sibelius 3, as they both are somewhat earthly connected to the geography of origin? But who could compare Finland with Austria and who would compare one part of a symphony with a complete other? When I listen to both pieces after each other, I think they sound like coming from different planets. This is interesting as Sibelius 3 was composed a good 15 years after Mahler 3 and actually after Mahler's entire oeuvre. To me, however, Mahler's soundscape is bigger and more varied than Sibelius' more subtle one. Not surprisingly perhaps, when you do compare the Austrian countryside and the cosmopolitic Vienna with Finland's and Helsinki's atmosphere.
> 
> It might be interesting to discuss in general the influences of the surroundings on the work of composers.


I'm certainly not suggesting that they are similar symphonies, merely that I was struck (and it seems no one else is) by a reflective quality in both.

Just an idle thought.


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> Huh... Is this person an atheist himself, or just another presumptuous religious fanatic who thinks he's been commissioned by God to make puerile judgments about people who don't share his beliefs?


I read this as a positive - not a negative, casting aspersions on atheists.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> I read this as a positive - not a negative, casting aspersions on atheists.


It doesn't matter whether it's positive or negative. If the commenter is himself an atheist, it may (or may not) be an interesting observation worth exploring. If he's religious, his perspective and/or motives are suspect.


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

I voted for Beethoven, because I haven't listened (yet) Sibelius 4th. I'm still ''practicing'' with his 1st... :lol: (I could had voted for Sibelius 1st, over Beethoven's 4th... But this isn't our subject here).


----------



## Guest (Jul 17, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> It doesn't matter whether it's positive or negative. If the commenter is himself an atheist, it may (or may not) be an interesting observation worth exploring. If he's religious, his perspective and/or motives are suspect.


I just mean that I didn't leap to suspect his motives!


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

_No one leaps to suspect the Spanish Inquisition!_

Sorry.

I'll come in again.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> To my ears, he meanders in the third movement of the 4th. Though the strength of reaction against my use of the word suggests that it is being taken as a negative. Nothing wrong with meandering, and I stick to my opinion.


The third movement of the Sibelius 4th is very tightly constructed and purposeful, built on two themes which evolve slowly and separately in alternating sections (a structure that may show the influence of Bruckner). The first theme begins by echoing the shape of the first movement's opening motif, and has a hesitant, groping quality, with broken phrases over odd harmonic discontinuities. Sibelius repeatedly interrupts its gradual development with the second theme, a rising melody which undergoes a similar process of interrupted development but eventually provides a powerful, if brief, climax. Both themes acquire more and more emotional power as they evolve.

I can see why you'd use the word "meandering" to describe the movement, as it moves back and forth between its two slowly developing themes. I demur only because of the word's common connotation of aimlessness.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Excellent description, Woodduck!


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

The two symphonies are formally and not at least psychologically/mood-wise so different from each other, that preference rather becomes a portraiture of the respondent. 

Sibelius for me, but for a shot of less troubled optimism, Beethoven.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Woodduck said:


> Huh... Is this person an atheist himself, or just another presumptuous religious fanatic who thinks he's been commissioned by God to make puerile judgments about people who don't share his beliefs?


I am not an atheist, nor is the musician said that. It's that the ending is so stark, so empty - it's like looking into the abyss knowing there's nothing there, no meaning, no hope. It is a very unsettling ending.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Woodduck said:


> The third movement of the Sibelius 4th is very tightly constructed and purposeful, built on two themes which evolve slowly and separately in alternating sections (a structure that may show the influence of Bruckner). The first theme begins by echoing the shape of the first movement's opening motif, and has a hesitant, groping quality, with broken phrases over odd harmonic discontinuities. Sibelius repeatedly interrupts its gradual development with the second theme, a rising melody which undergoes a similar process of interrupted development but eventually provides a powerful, if brief, climax. Both themes acquire more and more emotional power as they evolve.
> 
> I can see why you'd use the word "meandering" to describe the movement, as it moves back and forth between its two slowly developing themes. I demur only because of the word's common connotation of aimlessness.


If I remember correctly - Sibelius establishes the tritone motif from the beginning of the first movement and it appears throughout the piece.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

I voted for Sibelius despite being a huge Beethoven fan. I feel Sibelius' 4th played a more significant role in his stylistic development than Beethoven's 4th in his. I went through a Sibelius phase quite in the beginning when I became seriously interested in classical music and, to be honest, I felt almost obliged to like his music. Despite that I recall struggling with the flowing and more thoughtful nature of the music and thus the more rhythmic quality of his early works was generally more appealing to me. Recently I've been rediscovering his symphonies and tone poems a bit and I think the late-Romantics have done their job - Sibelius seems much more approachable and more memorable than it initially did. Just another example of how musical taste develops.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Manxfeeder said:


> I always worry about the bassonist in the solo in the last movement. How do you tongue all those notes? You can't double-tongue on a bassoon, can you?


Yes, 2ble tonguing works on bassoon...it's a tricky lick...you have to jump right in...don't be late!!
The tempo is fast 160 pm for quarter note (tho many take it a bit slower). I once played it with a guy who wanted to go faster than 160!! That was memorable!! I did spit'em out in time, tho i can't say much for the "dolce espressivo" lol!!


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Luckily, most conductors never go anywhere near 160 in Beethoven 4. But...some do. We reserve special words for them.

My personal experience has ranged from 132 bpm to mid to high 150s. 140ish seems most common, which is great for me. Recordings are about the same, even period instruments.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Knorf said:


> Luckily, most conductors never go anywhere near 160 in Beethoven 4. But...some do. We reserve special words for them


Funny thing with the 160+ guy- i asked him before rehearsal what approx. tempo he was aiming for...he hummed it off, c 144 or so, which would have been fine....at rehearsal he started zipping along, then slowing it down....i had no idea where it would end up...at the concerts he went hyper-spazz, with the 160 + deal....thing was the strings couldn't keep it together at that speed, so it would slow down, only to accelerate back to warp 10 on the repeated half notes!! I just jumped in and went like hell!! Came out good, surprisingly..


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

larold said:


> I think this poll is similar to Sibelius No. 1 vs. Haydn No. 1 or Shostakovich No. 1 against Mozart No. 1. You're taking a composer's best symphony and comparing it to another composer's least favorite symphony ... or one of his least favorite.


Best according to who? Neither 4 is amongst the composers' most popular.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> Funny thing with the 160+ guy- i asked him before rehearsal what approx. tempo he was aiming for...he hummed it off, c 144 or so, which would have been fine....at rehearsal he started zipping along, then slowing it down....i had no idea where it would end up...at the concerts he went hyper-spazz, with the 160 + deal....thing was the strings couldn't keep it together at that speed, so it would slow down, only to accelerate back to warp 10 on the repeated half notes!! I just jumped in and went like hell!! Came out good, surprisingly..


Tales from the trenches! One of the slowest performances I ever gave was a conductor the whole orchestra hated. He was convinced slowing down was the way to be expressive. He was unbelievably pendatic. Anyway, this the only time after Beethoven 4 that I didn't get a solo bow in my career, and I nailed every solo in every movement.


----------



## Guest (Jul 18, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> The third movement of the Sibelius 4th is very tightly constructed and purposeful, built on two themes which evolve slowly and separately in alternating sections (a structure that may show the influence of Bruckner). The first theme begins by echoing the shape of the first movement's opening motif, and has a *hesitant, groping quality, with broken phrases over odd harmonic discontinuities. *Sibelius repeatedly interrupts its gradual development with the second theme, a rising melody which undergoes a similar process of interrupted development but eventually provides a powerful, if brief, climax. Both themes acquire more and more emotional power as they evolve.


Yep, I get all that. That's why I compared it to the more purposeful progress made in Beethoven's symphonies



Woodduck said:


> I can see why you'd use the word "meandering" to describe the movement, as it moves back and forth between its two slowly developing themes. I demur only because of the word's common connotation of aimlessness.


Well, in some senses, aimlessness would be right. It's as if there is an arrival, but without any sense of determination, purpose, decisiveness, but a reluctance. There's nothing wrong with aimlessness, is there?


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Love Beethoven no 4. Pity it's underrated. Had Sibelius 4 as monthly focus and found it a difficult symphony to listen to


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> Well, in some senses, aimlessness would be right. It's as if there is an arrival, but without any sense of determination, purpose, decisiveness, but a reluctance. There's nothing wrong with aimlessness, is there?


I don't think we're talking about the same thing. You're talking about a quality of motion. I'm talking about compositional procedure. Compositionally, "meandering" is not an apt description for the movement. However, if I did want to describe the music's kinetic quality, I think I'd call it "searching" or "groping." "Meandering" is commonly applied to rivers or other things that just go aimlessly here and there without will or purpose, whereas this music has, for me, a strong sense of purpose, but one that's oddly frustrated and uncertain, full of quiet tension, mystery and suspense. Words have connotations, and "meander" has no suggestion of those expressive qualities that make this music compelling. It rather suggests the absence or irrelevance of such qualities.

I think that says all I want to say.


----------



## Guest (Jul 18, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> I don't think we're talking about the same thing. You're talking about a quality of motion. I'm talking about compositional procedure.


Well, quite. I was talking about my personal response to the music, not carrying out a musical analysis. I thought that was clear from my reference to poetry (aside from my jesting at your use of the word - in another thread, I think).


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Judith said:


> Love Beethoven no 4. Pity it's underrated. Had Sibelius 4 as monthly focus and found it a difficult symphony to listen to


I love it too. Such a terrific work


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

MacLeod said:


> Yep, I get all that. That's why I compared it to the more purposeful progress made in Beethoven's symphonies
> Well, in some senses, aimlessness would be right. It's as if there is an arrival, but without any sense of determination, purpose, decisiveness, but a reluctance. There's nothing wrong with aimlessness, is there?


You remind me of René Leibowitz's writings:

" The music lover or musician educated in France does not know very much about Sibelius. Even the frequenting of certain foreign musical centers (Germany, Austria, Belgium, Holland, Italy) will not shed significant light on this musician. Perhaps one knows his name, that he is Finnish and even that he is author of the "Valse triste," and he may thus be understood as an inoffensive composer of salon music. But if one looks upon the musical scenes in England or America, one realizes that the name of Sibelius, rarely spoken in our country, appears in those countries scarcely less often than the famous brands of cars, cigarettes, or toothpaste. The critics praise him in dithyrambs. Toscanini claims that he is "the greatest symphonist after Beethoven" and there is even a "Sibelius Society" which has adopted the goal of recording and promoting his works.
Astonishment and curiosity seize you, and one must ask if this is, passing by unnoticed, one of the most central events of the music of our time. To consult a score, I chose for myself the most important works of Sibelius (for example the Fifth Symphony). The astonishment grew, the curiosity shrank: the score offers a portrait that grew into poverty and misery beyond belief. But the admirers of Sibelius reassure us: "Listen, and you will see…" Alas, hearing does not deny what sight had perceived.
What is presented is as follows: some vague sonic shapes without consistency, banalities and vulgarities assuming the role of "themes." Their appeal is awkward and ill-formed, their harmonies incorrect, poor and schematic. Suddenly the flow is interrupted, without the author giving thought to the various consequences of it-still-[they are capable[?]]. Then the themes reappear, without rhyme or reason, without connection to what precedes and what follows; ground down to bits, twisted apart, even clumsier and more painful than they had been on first appearance.
The rhythmic monotony, the absence of any real counterpoint, the uniformity of tempo, in short the ennui which arises from all this quickly makes you sleepy when, rudely, you are awakened because the piece is finished-without our being able to say, however, how or why anything in it has happened. This description was only of the first movement, but the others are such that the reader need only read the above to have an idea of them.

It is then that the anxiety grabs you and one expresses his doubts over the "admirers." Naturally, it is you who does not understand. The harmony which you feel is wrong…but that is exactly the thing which makes Sibelius so original! The absence of development…but that is precisely his power, this is what places him "above schools"! The rhythmic and melodic laziness…but these are the qualities of Sibelius who, like Beethoven, managed to make the most of the most simple elements, etc….
All of this, however, does not seem to be playing fair. It is difficult to believe in the symphonic work of those who appear incapable of creating a [style/era/sphere of influence]; we are not very convinced by the "hovering" above the schools, when someone at the school had to be a dunce, and one suspects this is the case due to the originality of the ignorance, incompetence, and impotence.
But then, why such tremendous success?
Perhaps Sibelius himself is most surprised. It is always possible that one might explain it with the conservatism of the musical public, who see in Sibelius the possibility of making new music in old styles. What solace, what restoration of a peaceful conscience if one could prove the validity of such a venture. "You see, I told you so, all those dissonances…One may still make good music without them."
But the sole merit of Sibelius is that we can clear him of all these [nuances?] with regard to such a philosophy, because he showed us in such a magisterial way that the old styles, once so authentic, have now become false.
And he also showed us that, by using the old styles, there is nothing easier than to become the worst composer in the world."


----------



## Guest (Jul 18, 2020)

hammeredklavier said:


> You remind me of René Leibowitz's writings:


Why? I love Sibelius! He's one of my favourite composers and thus far, the only one whose house I made the pilgrimage to visit.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

MacLeod said:


> Why? I love Sibelius! He's one of my favourite composers and thus far, the only one whose house I made the pilgrimage to visit.


That's something I would love to do. Ainola named after his wife, of course.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> You remind me of René Leibowitz's writings:
> _
> "The music lover or musician educated in France does not know very much about Sibelius..._
> 
> ...


One of the most stupendous wastes of words in the whole history of music and criticism.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Mendelssohn's 4th (A minor)


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Great to see Beethoven catching up. His 4th is severely underrated.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Woodduck said:


> One of the most stupendous wastes of words in the whole history of music and criticism.


Leibowitz' remarks (1955) have been shown to go back to Adorno's views and a reverence for the Neue Wiener Schule 
(https://relatedrocks.com/2007/10/01/the-sibelius-problem/).

I like Leibowitz as a conductor, but a CD I owned of his chamber music compositions was culled; the music seemed very dull and un-ambitious.

However, the dismissive view of Sibelius say in the French avant-garde of the 1950s was replaced with positiveness and looking at him for inspiration in the 1970s, as demonstrated by Julian Anderson:

"_France in the 1970s: the influence of Sibelius on contemporary music is now so substantial and lasting that one can speak of him as a key figure in the shaping of current musical thought. Yet, given the disdain with which his music was treated by members of the European avant-garde following the Second World War, the growing interest in Sibelius's work amongst a younger generation of composers has been one of the least expected developments in music during the past thirty years. The presence in France of musicologists Marc Vignal, Patrick Szerznowizc and Harry Halbreich is significant here. Initially a composition student of Messiaen at the Paris Conservatoire between 1955 and 1958, Halbreich abandoned composition to become one of the most unusual and influential impresarios of the 1970s and 1980s, (...) he provided the crucial link for a whole generation of avant-garde composers to Sibelius, considerably altering their musical style in the process. The main French composers involved directly or indirectly include Hugues Dufourt, Tristan Murail, Pascal Dusapin, Alain Banquart and, to a lesser extent, Gérard Grisey._"

(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291078300_Sibelius_and_contemporary_music)

The site also says:"_Some examples of the literature that discusses the more progressive features of Sibelius's music include: Hepokoski (1993), Howell (1989), Jackson and Murtomâki (2001), and Murtomâki (1993). For discussion about Sibelius's influence upon contemporary composers see Anderson (2004) and Szendy (1993,11-12) (...) _

Sibelius has later been considered a innovator for example also among later northern composers, where he's been a major influence, some of them very experimental. He's been a continuing inspiration for Nørgård, both in the earlier works and later. Nørgård says that the individuality of each Sibelius symphony is remarkable, and that this has been forming his own approach to composing works; others have noted the simplistic energy of Sibelius 1st Symphony, probably not always realized by us today, as stunning and brutalist for its day; and others again have remarked on the organic transformations as inspirational.

_ "'It is scarcely surprising (though profoundly depressing) that such a radical yet organic transformation of the traditional sonata design should have passed uncomprehended.' (...) The last three symphonies, on the contrary, 'stem from the determination to pursue the implications of the masterly Fourth'_, says Arnold Whittall in 'Music since the First World War,' 1977).

The organic changes also inspired Holmboe's metamorphosis-principle, for example.

_"Out of contemporary British composers Peter Maxwell Davies, George Benjamin, Oliver Knussen and Julian Anderson are devoted Sibelius enthusiasts. For Davies and Benjamin, the tempo transformation in the first movement of Sibelius's Fifth Symphony has been a model for a continuously unfolding structure, Knussen has mentioned Sibelius's textures and his powerful bass writing as major sources of interest, and the opening of Anderson's Symphony (2003) has been described in a review as 'Sibelius re-imagined by Ligeti'.

In recent American music, Sibelian undertones can be heard in pieces as different as Feldman's Coptic Light (1985) and Stucky's Second Concerto for Orchestra (2003)."_

Cf. https://relatedrocks.com/2007/10/01/the-sibelius-problem/


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

For me Beethoven's 4th wins by just a bit, though Sibelius' 4th is probably the composer's finest symphony in terms of pure craftsmanship. The Sibelius 4th is tight, efficient, and mysterious; not a note is wasted, everything is packed in tight like a neutron star. The Beethoven is not the finest of the composer's nine, but it is gem, like the 6th or the 8th, one of Beethoven's more relaxed sojourns.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Coach G said:


> The Sibelius 4th is tight, efficient, and mysterious; not a note is wasted, everything is packed in tight like a neutron star.


I love the imagery; precise and cosmic. :tiphat:


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Neutron star is way too dense for my taste, Sibelius is anything but dense.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> Neutron star is way too dense for my taste, Sibelius is anything but dense.


Well, there's denseness, and then there's density...


----------

