# Tchaikovsky's 5th Symphony



## Aurelian (Sep 9, 2011)

This work is not one of my top 5-7 favorites, but I like it. Audiences seem to like it also.

Yet, at times I have seen comments that it is boring. Do you think so? Please explain if you do.

Nice performance:


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I like it a lot - not among the very best symphonies, but very high in the next level (5/6 on the Artrockometer).

Here are my impressions from a while ago, when I was listening to the whole set for my blog:

_The tragic first movement recalls the opening of Beethoven's fifth, not in themes or melodies, but in atmosphere. In true Tchaikovsky style though, there are great melodic parts, in particular near the subdued end. The Andante starts with a haunting horn melody, taken over by the orchestra. There is an almost Mahlerian sadness and frustration to this part, very unlike most of his slower movements - but very effective. The scherzo is a waltz, but suitably restrained and fitting in the overall scheme. The Finale has a noble feeling to it, with resignation slowly giving way to optimism. Re-listening to this symphony was a pleasant surprise. I found it much, much stronger than I remembered._


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

My favourite symphony. Tchaikovsky put up his best fight against Beethoven's shadow in this one.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

It was my favorite in my first year or so listening to classical as a teenager before I really discovered beethoven. A few years later I could not stand it anymore and this lasted for quite a while. Now again many years later it''s somewhere in between such extremes.


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

*Masterpiece! *I simply adore this symphony. The 2nd movement especially brings tears to my eyes.


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

One of the best final mvmts Tchaikovsky has ever written. Along with 6th this is my fav. Tchaikovsky symphony.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Note Tchaikovsky's unusual use of two clarinets on the opening solo of the first movement - something that orchestrators avoid because of the phasing effect (due to slight pitch differences) - but he used it for it's ghostly effect as I understand it.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

A more interesting question to me is what exactly makes the 6th superior in the minds of... "many amongst some"

Maybe someone erudite can chime in.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

My favourite Tchaikovsky symphony. My favourite recordings include Gergiev with the VPO and Celibidache with the Munich PO. Mravinsky's recordings are very good, too.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Fabulin said:


> A more interesting question to me is what exactly makes the 6th superior in the minds of... "many amongst some"


I'm one of them, so let me...



> Maybe someone erudite can chime in.


Oh. Never mind then.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

The slow movement is quite melancholic, I like to listen to it when I'm in the mood. I just appreciate stuff like Serenade for strings and the Romeo and juliet fantasy overture more, for their concision.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

For me "Not one of my top favourites, but I like it" applies to pretty much all Tchaikovsky's output. Where the symphonies are concerned, these days I find I get more enjoyment from the first two (perhaps partly because they're less familiar to me) than from the others.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

The 6th has that stroke of genius with the slow finale subverting expectations or common dramaturgy. Whereas the 5th uses the fate idea familiar from the 4th an beethoven 5th that was becoming a bit of cliché by then.


----------



## architecture (Dec 30, 2017)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

It was among my favorites for many years, especially the Stokowski-New Philharmonia -- where he rolls right through the famous pregnant timpani at the beginning of the final movement -- and later Mravinsky and Gergiev versions. I can't say I ever found it boring.

Like many romantic pieces i overdid it and saturated my interest. Now I rarely listen to it, don't have a copy at home, and have mostly memories of it.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

This was the first Tchaikovsky symphony I heard and loved it immediately - the old Ormandy recording. It has everything - passion, great tunes, brilliant orchestration...what more do you need? As time went by, I read a lot of criticism of the work, including some from the composer who thought it was empty of true feelings. And I became aware of the criticism that Tchaik "wore his heart on his sleeve". The finale is quite dramatic and maybe over the top. But that hasn't diminished it one bit for audiences, conductors or orchestra players - it's a real thrill to play, too. Ok, so the coda of the finale is a cheap, hollow victory. Who cares? It's also sad to see otherwise fine conductors treat the work so casually and alter it: Stokowski rescores it and makes cuts, Szell adds a cymbal crash, Rodzinski made a big cut in the finale. Why do they treat his music so carelessly?

While the Ormandy/Sony recording was my entry to this work, it's Andre Previn with the Royal Philharmonic on Telarc that really nails it for more - the finale goes at a blistering pace that is heart-stoppingly exciting.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

It's chock full of good melodies which I never find boring. I usually listen to the Ormandy CD on Delos.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Kreisler jr said:


> The 6th has that stroke of genius with the slow finale subverting expectations or common dramaturgy. Whereas the 5th uses the fate idea familiar from the 4th an beethoven 5th that was becoming a bit of cliché by then.


But most works of art end on the deflating and dying out of drama, and this has been true for every age. Explosive finales are actually a rare exception.

Edit: Besides, there is no "fate motif" in Beethoven's 5th...


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

the four notes that begin Beethoven's Fifth symphony are called "fate knocking at the door."


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> Whereas the 5th uses the fate idea familiar from the 4th an beethoven 5th that was becoming *a bit of cliché* by then.


Yeah, even before Beethoven, Joseph Haydn sort of "did it to death".


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Russians believe(d) in fate in the 19th century, the reason it is so often seen in Tchaikovsky's music. We think of that as passe' in our time.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

larold said:


> the four notes that begin Beethoven's Fifth symphony are called "fate knocking at the door."


That's what I called out. The creation of Anton Schindler.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

I've never before encountered this work described as boring. I _have_ seen others refer to it as overly dramatic or excessively emotional. Personally, I've never felt it was _any_ of the above. The only piece by Tchaikovsky I enjoy more is the Serenade For Strings. My preferred recommendations for the Fifth are Szell/Cleveland Orchestra and Dorati/London Symphony.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> Yeah, even before Beethoven, Joseph Haydn sort of "did it to death".


Mozart


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Not a favorite of mine...and I freely admit that overexposure is the problem...if I never had to perform it, or hear it again, that would be fine...Tchaikovsky 5, and 4, are, for me, way overperformed, and with every orchestra I played in, every new conductor had to program these warhorses (along with the dreadful Rach #2!!) to try out their wings...
I know audiences love this work, but I find it long, repetitious and overblown. I much prefer the first three Tchaik symphonies to the better known, overplayed #s 4 and 5.


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

A masterpiece! One of my favorite symphonies.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> ...along with the dreadful Rach #2!!


Them's fightin' word!:devil:


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

I treasure the Tchaikovsky Fifth highly. If Hanson's "Romantic" Symphony (No.2) is my _favorite_ symphony (and it is!), the Tchaikovsky Fifth remains my second favorite.

This doesn't mean I listen to it endlessly. In fact, I haven't programmed it for a listening session for quite some while. (I suspect it is due a turn.) But I occasionally note in on radio broadcasts while I'm drivin' the ol' Jeep on the Turnpike, and it still never fails to charm and thrill me. I know the work so well that even the low-fi car radio can't damage these goods. For all the glories of the first three movements, and there are many, the Finale caps this masterpiece with a worthy ending, something perhaps not as common in "symphony" world as it should be.

A quick look at my Discogs database reveals I currently have some two dozen versions of the symphony in my collection, on both vinyl and CD. It seems, though, that the one I most often have turned to for the fullest level of beauty and drama that this symphony was designed to deliver comes from the baton of Russian maestro Evgeny Mravinsky. His documentation of the final three Tchaikovsky symphonies, though made in the Soviet Union in the mid 1960s ranks as superlative readings _and_ recordings of these works. I'm glad I got the opportunity to make the acquaintance of this conductor's Tchaikovsky, which I did decades ago on vinyl issues I still treasure. It is life altering, presenting a measure against which all recorded orchestral music can be considered.









Off hand, I recall being impressed as well by recordings of Markevitch and Monteux.















But, is there really a _poor_ recording of this work to be had? Maybe not, at least not until the likes of Maximianno Cobra gets hold of it. (And if someone reading this knows of a Cobra Tchaikovsky Fifth available on-line, please do not inform us of it. Ignorance is bliss, especially considering what I heard Cobra do to Beethoven's Fifth!)


----------



## Saxman (Jun 11, 2019)

Love this work!

Is there a poor recording? Yes. I'd say Furtwangler '52 and Anikhanov '93 are to be avoided. Besides Mravinsky (which simply must be heard), there are four others I'd reach for: Dmitriev, Edwards, Klemperer and Van Kempen. But there are a lot of other good ones (even if I prefer others).


----------



## progmatist (Apr 3, 2021)

I like it, but prefer his 2nd "Little Russian" Symphony.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

larold said:


> Russians believe(d) in fate in the 19th century


I'm reminded of How Don Giovanni was performed in Paris, in the 1830s


hammeredklavier said:


> This performance is described in detail in Katharine Ellis's 1994 article. The music was transposed to suit Adolphe Nourrit (the great tenor singer of the day) in the role of Don Giovanni, originally a baritone part. Mozart's two-act opera was divided into five, and the plot changed considerably: Anna commits suicide at the end and Don Juan has a nightmare foretelling his own death. The 'scena ultima' was cut and the opera ended, after Don Giovanni's destruction, with Anna's funeral, to the sound of 'O voto tremendo' from Idomeneo and the 'Dies irae' from the Requiem. A ballet (with excerpts of other works by Mozart) was inserted into the ball scene, in accordance with the tradition of French grand opera.


It also happens to be Tchaikovsky's favorite opera; I wonder if he also watched it in its "Romantically-twisted" versions, like Berlioz.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Fabulin said:


> A more interesting question to me is what exactly makes the 6th superior in the minds of... "many amongst some"
> 
> Maybe someone erudite can chime in.


I'd say the Fifth is majorly flawed structurally. The main problem is that the triumphant transformation of the symphony's "Fate" motto that opens the finale is an unmotivated non sequitur. In the slow movement it recurs as a terrifying, threatening interruption. The next time it sounds as a quiet but ominous reminder at the end of the third movement. Then, suddenly: Triumph! with nothing to explain how we got there from threat and destruction. It's like a novel with the crucial chapters missing. Dramatically, and thus structurally, incoherent. The 4th and 6th don't have these kinds of structural problems. I find both of these more satisfying for this and other reasons.

That said, I've always liked the 5th's great melodies and excellent orchestration - but perhaps I've heard it enough for one lifetime(?) I'm sure I would enjoy a good live performance if I happened to hear one, but I'm not motivated to seek it out anymore.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

progmatist said:


> I like it, but prefer his 2nd "Little Russian" Symphony.


Yes, Tchaik syms 1-3 are really quite delightful, and underperformed...


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

EdwardBast said:


> I'd say the Fifth is majorly flawed structurally. The main problem is that the triumphant transformation of the symphony's "Fate" motto that opens the finale is an unmotivated non sequitur. In the slow movement it recurs as a terrifying, threatening interruption. The next time it sounds as a quiet but ominous reminder at the end of the third movement. Then, suddenly: Triumph! with nothing to explain how we got there from threat and destruction. It's like a novel with the crucial chapters missing. Dramatically, and thus structurally, incoherent. The 4th and 6th don't have these kinds of structural problems. I find both of these more satisfying for this and other reasons.
> 
> That said, I've always liked the 5th's great melodies and excellent orchestration - but perhaps I've heard it enough for one lifetime(?) I'm sure I would enjoy a good live performance if I happened to hear one, but I'm not motivated to seek it out anymore.


Agreed about the fourth movement being a "non sequitur". It has never bothered me, but I can see why it might bother others. Thank you.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Fabulin said:


> Agreed about the fourth movement being a "non sequitur". It has never bothered me, but I can see why it might bother others. Thank you.


I didn't want to give the impression that what I said about the Fifth is a widely held opinion. Mostly an idiosyncrasy of mine to listen that way, I think, although the renowned British critic Donald Francis Tovey said something similar about the finale - something like (from memory) "It gives the Alice-and-Red-Queen sensation of running faster and faster without getting anywhere."


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

EdwardBast said:


> I didn't want to give the impression that what I said about the Fifth is a widely held opinion. Mostly an idiosyncrasy of mine to listen that way, I think, although the renowned British critic Donald Francis Tovey said something similar about the finale - something like (from memory) "It gives the Alice-and-Red-Queen sensation of running faster and faster without getting anywhere."


0:33 "it's easy for even a great composer to get them wrong. here for example is the end of Tchaikovsky's piano trio in a minor you can hear that it sounds like we're approaching the end. You can hear the music's galloping ahead reaching a peak of intensity the music, seems to be arriving at home straight. But believe it or not we're still four minutes from the end at this point."


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

I love this symphony, it's one of my favorite works by Tchaikovsky. The gorgeous melodies and dazzling orchestration never fail to move me, and I have no problem with it's optimistic finale.



hammeredklavier said:


> 0:33 "it's easy for even a great composer to get them wrong. here for example is the end of Tchaikovsky's piano trio in a minor you can hear that it sounds like we're approaching the end. You can hear the music's galloping ahead reaching a peak of intensity the music, seems to be arriving at home straight. But believe it or not we're still four minutes from the end at this point."


So the coda of the last movement of Beethoven's Fifth "sucks"? Actually no, this dude is completely off the mark in what he is saying. If he wanted to make a fair point, he should have selected obscure, weak works. It's quite easy to criticize a masterpiece, much harder is to make one.

"Then his voice changed in tone as he told me that he wanted to give me some good advice. 'Never pay any attention to what critics say,' he proceeded, and expatiated on this theme. When I ventured to put in the remark that their articles might sometimes be of great importance, he cut me short. 'Remember,' he said, 'a statue has never been set up in honour of a critic!'" - Sibelius: A Close-Up.


----------



## progmatist (Apr 3, 2021)

EdwardBast said:


> I'd say the Fifth is majorly flawed structurally. The main problem is that the triumphant transformation of the symphony's "Fate" motto that opens the finale is an unmotivated non sequitur. In the slow movement it recurs as a terrifying, threatening interruption. The next time it sounds as a quiet but ominous reminder at the end of the third movement. Then, suddenly: Triumph! with nothing to explain how we got there from threat and destruction. It's like a novel with the crucial chapters missing. Dramatically, and thus structurally, incoherent. *The 4th and 6th don't have these kinds of structural problems.* I find both of these more satisfying for this and other reasons.
> 
> That said, I've always liked the 5th's great melodies and excellent orchestration - but perhaps I've heard it enough for one lifetime(?) I'm sure I would enjoy a good live performance if I happened to hear one, but I'm not motivated to seek it out anymore.


In the 6th, Tchaikovsky broke the rule that a symphony must end with a fast, cheerful movement. Many audiences have broken out in applause at the conclusion of the 3rd movement. The conductor would wait for the applause to die down, then proceed with the final movement. From that point forward, many composers have followed Tchaikovsky's lead, ending with a more somber movement.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Those philistines who dare to clap after the third movement! You ought to try to prevent it; it's almost impossible - but in places with more sophisticated audiences they don't clap. Lorin Maazel made a very funny movie called "A Week in the Life of a Conductor" with a nod towards this problem. I wish that movie was available; my old VHS copy is dead.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

progmatist said:


> In the 6th, *Tchaikovsky broke the rule that a symphony must end with a fast, cheerful movement.* Many audiences have broken out in applause at the conclusion of the 3rd movement. The conductor would wait for the applause to die down, then proceed with the final movement. From that point forward, many composers have followed Tchaikovsky's lead, ending with a more somber movement.


There was no rule. Just a practical convention - and certainly not a structural problem in the Sixth. The symphony was a big success from the start because it worked.


----------



## David Phillips (Jun 26, 2017)

It's a great work - Paul van Kempen gives a wonderful performance on Eloquence.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

*Tchaikovsky's 5th Symphony?*

The 5th is very entertaining but not great like the 4th and the 6th which are exemplar. The 1st and the 2nd are good; and the 3rd "Polish" is much better than it's reputation. The non-canonical "Manfred" has great moments but is rambling in some places.


----------



## Superflumina (Jun 19, 2020)

I'm not a fan, I prefer the 6th but then again I don't really like Tchaikovsky all that much.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

Aurelian said:


> This work is not one of my top 5-7 favorites, but I like it. Audiences seem to like it also.
> 
> Yet, at times I have seen comments that it is boring. Do you think so? Please explain if you do.


I don't think it is boring. It's maybe my favorite Tchaikovsky symphony, but not sure. No. 4, 5 and 6 are all on a very equal high level.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Aries said:


> I don't think it is boring. It's maybe my favorite Tchaikovsky symphony, but not sure. No. 4, 5 and 6 are all on a very equal high level.


I agree with this. I've never found any of those works boring. To my ears, everything about them is direct and to the point.


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

Coach G said:


> *Tchaikovsky's 5th Symphony?*
> 
> The 5th is very entertaining but not great like the 4th and the 6th which are exemplar. The 1st and the 2nd are good; and the 3rd "Polish" is much better than it's reputation. The non-canonical "Manfred" has great moments but is rambling in some places.


All of his numbered symphonies are great. I adore all of them including Nos. 1-3, and regard them as equally polished and beautiful as Nos. 4-6. Manfred, somehow, has never clicked for me. I feel a bit guilty for not liking it! Tchaikovsky, together with Beethoven, is my favorite composer.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Heck148 said:


> Not a favorite of mine...and I freely admit that overexposure is the problem...if I never had to perform it, or hear it again, that would be fine...Tchaikovsky 5, and 4, are, for me, way overperformed, and with every orchestra I played in, every new conductor had to program these warhorses (along with the dreadful Rach #2!!) to try out their wings...
> I know audiences love this work, but I find it long, repetitious and overblown. I much prefer the first three Tchaik symphonies to the better known, overplayed #s 4 and 5.


It is my favorite of Tchaikovsky's symphonies (other than Manfred), but I see where you're coming from. It is overplay and quite repetitive (but overblown and long, not so much for me). A close friend of mine prefers his Third to the others, which objectively, I can see why.


----------



## progmatist (Apr 3, 2021)

haziz said:


> All of his numbered symphonies are great. I adore all of them including Nos. 1-3, and regard them as equally polished and beautiful as Nos. 4-6. Manfred, somehow, has never clicked for me. I feel a bit guilty for not liking it! Tchaikovsky, together with Beethoven, is my favorite composer.


His "unofficial" Symphony No. 7 also has its charm.


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

progmatist said:


> His "unofficial" Symphony No. 7 also has its charm.


I do sometimes listen to the reconstructed 7th symphony, admittedly not anywhere as often as I listen to Nos. 1-6.


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

All Brahms' criticisms of Tchaikovsky are extant in the 5th; formless, showy, poorly-structured, vulgar, shallow. I can see where he's coming from. I was a bigger fan when I was younger. Have played it a few times - lots of fun, in an eye-rolling way. But it does have some great tunes - although as ever with Tchaik, they're often not suited to much development. And the opening of _IV_ of course: 'who's got the key to the shithouse?'
Heard a real hell-for-leather performance by Zdenek Macal about thirty years ago. That was good enough to remember it still!


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

I loved this piece when I just turned my attention to classical music. It is quite accessible and has a lot of great tunes. But when I kept listening to it repeatedly, I started to feel a bit bored. 
Unlike many German Composers (such as 3B), Tchaikovsky tends to put well developed music materials at the beginning of a work, which limits the possibility for further development on the materials (maybe he wants the audiance to focus mainly on the themes not on their development? I dont know). Just take a look at the first movement of the violin concertos by Tchaikovsky and by Brahms, and you get what I mean.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I understand the charge of showy, vulgar, shallow. But formless or poorly structured? Because of the recurring motive and the general tunefulness it seems pretty easy to grasp at least on the surface level of the not too sophisticated listener. It certainly was easier for me to grasp at 15-16 than the eroica or any brahms.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Bruckner Anton said:


> (maybe he wants the audiance to focus mainly on the themes not on their development? I dont know).


You say this as if it was not the default idea of most musical compositions, in most genres. It is "development" that one has to buy into, and there is a fair scholarly consensus that to Tchaikovsky it was a foreign idea to which he paid respects only insofar as it did not stand in his way.



GraemeG said:


> vulgar, shallow. I can see where he's coming from.


These adjectives would never come to my mind. Care to elaborate?


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Orfeo said:


> It is my favorite of Tchaikovsky's symphonies (other than Manfred), but I see where you're coming from. It is overplay and quite repetitive (but overblown and long, not so much for me). A close friend of mine prefers his Third to the others, which objectively, I can see why.


I can't TBH (it's neck and neck with the "Manfred" at the bottom of my list) but I'm willing to be persuaded. Which recording(s) would he or you recommend?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

The charge of vulgarity is one that has been levelled at a number of great composers - including Mahler and Dvorak - and often represents for me a sort of Austro-Hungarian snobbism that has surely had its day?


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Kreisler jr said:


> I understand the charge of showy, vulgar, shallow. *But formless or poorly structured?* Because of the recurring motive and the general tunefulness it seems pretty easy to grasp at least on the surface level of the not too sophisticated listener. It certainly was easier for me to grasp at 15-16 than the eroica or any brahms.


The only structural problems I find are in the way the recurring themes are treated from one movement to another. On the level of individual movements it sounds tightly organized and well planned to me. The first movement is perhaps a bit too rote - unlike the opening movements of the 4th and 6th, it falls neatly into textbook sonata form.

I don't get the showy and vulgar critique.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

Showy and vulgar is the same as flashy and brilliant; if one doesn't like it... there is a famous unfair polemic by Adorno who thinks the slow movement is kitsch and makes up a Hollywood scene to fit the music... I think you nailed the dramatic problem above that the E major transformation of the fate motive at the beginning of the finale seems to come from nowhere. And the wild hunt of the finale Tovey compared with Alice and the red queen is also mysterious. If the triumph was there in the finale-intro why all the pseudo dramatic fuss?


----------



## mparta (Sep 29, 2020)

GraemeG said:


> All Brahms' criticisms of Tchaikovsky are extant in the 5th; formless, showy, poorly-structured, vulgar, shallow. I can see where he's coming from. I was a bigger fan when I was younger. Have played it a few times - lots of fun, in an eye-rolling way. But it does have some great tunes - although as ever with Tchaik, they're often not suited to much development. And the opening of _IV_ of course: 'who's got the key to the shithouse?'
> Heard a real hell-for-leather performance by Zdenek Macal about thirty years ago. That was good enough to remember it still!


Really? I heard Macal play it in Dallas '76 or '77 and have never forgotten it, he poured the gas, threw in the match and danced in the middle of it. Just a blazing performance. Kind of fun to hear that someone else had the same experience.

I have a prejudice in which I sense emotional sloppiness in the 5th, but I also used to think that about the 4th and have recently recanted, much enamored of the Gergiev with the Mariinsky, which also comes with 5 (and I haven't listened to that)

I've heard the 6th twice, both in Chicago, wonderful performances by Solti and Muti. The last movement is special but there are phrases and colors in the first movement, beyond the big tune, that I think are remarkable.
Recently came back to the early symphonies and am so enchanted by the 1st that I'm stuck on it. HvK/BPO. Love it.

There's an obscene little text for the slow movement of the 5th that every music school student probably knows. I think that does some damage, actually, and is puerile in a -- well-- puerile way. But i learned it from John Browning of all people. Time goes by, there are the occasional oddities


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

Kreisler jr said:


> I think you nailed the dramatic problem above that the E major transformation of the fate motive at the beginning of the finale seems to come from nowhere. And the wild hunt of the finale Tovey compared with Alice and the red queen is also mysterious. If the triumph was there in the finale-intro why all the pseudo dramatic fuss?


If you fulfill the requirements for victory you still have to play it out. And that is really satisfying. The movement is so brilliant, I never had the idea that something is wrong with it.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

The last segment of the finale sounds like "a journey home" end credits after a drama. Can you see the credits rolling?
*9:52*













And the brief scherzo part at the very end always makes me think of Tchaikovsky making a wink to the audience, like a personal signature based on his being known mostly for his ballets. Of course this is a modern projection.

Anyway, Tchaikovsky, with his experience in ballets, operas, and operatic symphonies, and the ability to write very fast would be one hell of a film composer.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

IT does remind me of a Wild west movie, eg from ca. 4:40 in the linked performance


----------



## progmatist (Apr 3, 2021)

GraemeG said:


> All Brahms' criticisms of Tchaikovsky are extant in the 5th; formless, showy, poorly-structured, vulgar, shallow. I can see where he's coming from. I was a bigger fan when I was younger. Have played it a few times - lots of fun, in an eye-rolling way. But it does have some great tunes - although as ever with Tchaik, they're often not suited to much development. And the opening of _IV_ of course: 'who's got the key to the shithouse?'
> Heard a real hell-for-leather performance by Zdenek Macal about thirty years ago. That was good enough to remember it still!


Brahms' criticism should be taken with a grain of salt. He was highly critical of the entire romantic movement, and all those involved in it. Despite the fact his own style was quite romantic.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

From Slonimsky's Lexicon of Musical Invective: early reviews.

"The Tchaikovsky Fifth Symphony was in part a disappointment. One vainly sought for coherency and homogenousness...The second movement showed the eccentric Russian at his best, but the Valse was a farce, a piece of musical padding, commonplace to a degree, while in the last movement, the composer's Calmuck blood got the better of him, and slaughter, dire and bloody, swept across the storm-driven score."

"In the Finale we have all the untamed fury of the Cossack, whetting itself for deeds of atrocity, against all the sterility of the Russian steppes. The furious peroration sounds like nothing so much as a horde of demons struggling in a torrent of brandy, the music growing drunker and drunker. Pandemonium, delirium tremens, raving, and above all, noise worse confounded!"

"The Finale is rioutous beyond endurance."


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Animal the Drummer said:


> I can't TBH (it's neck and neck with the "Manfred" at the bottom of my list) but I'm willing to be persuaded. Which recording(s) would he or you recommend?



Bernstein and the NYPO (either Sony or DG): persuasively done.
Svetlanov and the Russian Federation Symphony (Canyon/Warner)
Rostropovich and the London Philharmonic (EMI/Warner)
Rozhdestvensky and the USSR Radio and TV Large Symphony (Melodiya)
Jansons and the Oslo Philharmonic (Chandos)


----------



## mparta (Sep 29, 2020)

Orfeo said:


> Bernstein and the NYPO (either Sony or DG): persuasively done.
> Svetlanov and the Russian Federation Symphony (Canyon/Warner)
> Rostropovich and the London Philharmonic (EMI/Warner)
> Rozhdestvensky and the USSR Radio and TV Large Symphony (Melodiya)
> Jansons and the Oslo Philharmonic (Chandos)


Koussevitzky, BSO, back in an era when the BSO (I think ) didn't record much, no major label contract, but this will make you tear up with what we missed. White hot.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

It's funny that when it comes to a composing giant such as Tchaikovsky (or Beethoven or Mozart or Mahler or whoever), that we've conditioned ourselves that when they have Symphonies that are simply stunning, we tend to place their "non-stunning" Symphonies into the bin of also-rans, when, in fact, they stand up quite nicely in spite of not have obvious "hooks" and other lures of the GREAT Symphonies.

A Symphony such as Tchaikovsky's 5th is a VERY GOOD Symphony.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

pianozach said:


> It's funny that when it comes to a composing giant such as Tchaikovsky (or Beethoven or Mozart or Mahler or whoever), that we've conditioned ourselves that when they have Symphonies that are simply stunning, we tend to place their "non-stunning" Symphonies into the bin of also-rans, when, in fact, they stand up quite nicely in spite of not have obvious "hooks" and other lures of the GREAT Symphonies.
> 
> A Symphony such as Tchaikovsky's 5th is a VERY GOOD Symphony.


So you are saying that the 5th symphony is non-stunning and not great?


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Aries said:


> So you are saying that the 5th symphony is non-stunning and not great?


Some Symphonies simply stand head and shoulders above the rest. One could also say that ALL of Tchaikovsky's Symphonies are "Great", but his 6th Symphony is in the "Stunningly Great" category.

If I had to pick his Top Three, I suppose I'd go with 6, 2, & 5.


----------



## Subutai (Feb 28, 2021)

mbhaub said:


> Ok, so the coda of the finale is a cheap, hollow victory.


That is exactly the reason the 5th is my favourite Tchaik symphony. The blistering finale has always been the one let down for ''musicians' in an otherwise perfect symphony. I wouldn't know a sonata from a sultana but that there is one of the finest finales to any piece of music. It makes me jump up for joy as if I've just beaten the oppositions defenders and scored the winning goal in a football match! Tchaikovsky knew the depths of despair as well as the heights of ecstacy. That's what makes him a complex and tragic figure.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

pianozach said:


> Some Symphonies simply stand head and shoulders above the rest. One could also say that ALL of Tchaikovsky's Symphonies are "Great", but his 6th Symphony is in the "Stunningly Great" category.
> 
> If I had to pick his Top Three, I suppose I'd go with 6, 2, & 5.


I would go with 4, 5 and 6.

2 is nice, but doesn't has the greatness of his later symphonies imo.

Comparing the last 3 is difficult. I think I heard the 5th the most by far, because at some point I listened to it over and over again. And the last time I heard it I thought I should do it again.

Comparing the 4 movements all one by one, I think these are my evaluations:

1st movement: 4=5=6
2nd movement: 4=5 > 6
3rd movement: 6 > 5 > 4
4th movement: 5 > 4=6

I think the finale of the 6th is beautiful, but I think it doesn't fits as well as a finale as the finales of the 5th and 4th. The symphony seems a bit unfinished like Schuberts 8th. Mahler in his 9th did it better, because the Finale is very long, not just a short tragic collapse.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Aries said:


> I think the finale of the 6th is beautiful, but I think it doesn't fits as well as a finale as the finales of the 5th and 4th. The symphony seems a bit unfinished like Schuberts 8th. Mahler in his 9th did it better, because the Finale is very long, not just a short tragic collapse.


The finale of the 6th is perfect - and it absolutely fits in the scheme of things, into the original program the composer wrote. What an astonishing and brave move he made, to end a grand symphony on a note of desolation without hope. Mahler studied it and there's no question he took the lessons to heart in his own 6th.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

At the end of the day, it's just more optimal to end a work on a bang.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Fabulin said:


> At the end of the day, it's just more optimal to end a work on a bang.


Here's something far more optimal:


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

mbhaub said:


> The finale of the 6th is perfect - and it absolutely fits in the scheme of things, into the original program the composer wrote. What an astonishing and brave move he made, to end a grand symphony on a note of desolation without hope. Mahler studied it and there's no question he took the lessons to heart in his own 6th.


The 9th is even closer with one dance and one fast movement in the middle. One could argue that after 50 years of tone poems it was not such a step for PIT to present a slow finale. But it is not so easy to do it convincingly. I agree with those who think that the Pathetique succeeds here and that this is one point that lifts it above PITs other symphonies. I also think that the first movement is at least as good as any other of his first movements and the two middle movements can hold their own against any of his other dance/scherzo/march movements. The 5/4 allegretto is not that different in mood etc. from the valse in the 5th but the 5/4 gives it that special touch.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

I greatly prefer the finales to Syms 2, 3, and 1 over those of 4 and 5....more effective, better tunes, really rousing when done right. Finale of 6 is a special case...it's effective, but I don't often listen to it....I and III are my favorite mvts of Sym #6.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

better tunes???


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Fabulin said:


> better tunes???


yes definitely - #2 and 3 have wonderful themes in the finale - principal and secondary, same with#1...
finales to 4 and 5?? pretty blah....


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Heck148 said:


> finales to 4 and 5?? pretty blah....


Yes, they're pretty (profoundly beautiful) .
Blah?


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

pianozach said:


> One could also say that ALL of Tchaikovsky's Symphonies are "Great", but his 6th Symphony is in the "Stunningly Great" category.


Tchaikovsky's 6th = "Pathetic" 
Schubert's 9th = "Great"
That's just how we call them.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

hammeredklavier said:


> Yes, they're pretty (profoundly beautiful) .
> Blah?


Finales to 4 and 5?? Not in my book...2 and 3 have wonderful final movements...same with 1.


----------

