# The First Symphony of Johannes Brahms



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

I've finally come around to listening to a Brahms symphony for the first time ever so I thought I might try the first symphony, played by the New York Philharmonic and conducted by Leonard Bernstein. 

And it is nothing short of extraordinary. 

The music sounds entirely unique, nothing like any other composer. It yells the name BRAHMS in my face. No other composer could have written anything that sounds like this! I can imagine the music as a hero just starting on a new adventure into the realms of symphony writing. This symphony to me sounds like an announcement of even greater symphonies to come. This symphony shouts "Brahms: the new symphonist! Prepare for some of the most profoundly significant symphonies ever composed!" This is a symphony that looks to the future of Brahms the Composer. The only other composer who I believe makes this statement is Mahler with his first (and also highly original) symphony. 

I wonder if anyone else here has had the same experience on first hearing this symphony. Share your stories here! Recommend some of your favourite recordings too!


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

I like the second and 4th the most. The first is nicely done, but seems to try very hard to impress at times and is more in the Beethoven mould.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

I used to have the Bernstein/Brahms Symphonies box:









This was back in the early 1990s and I could never really warm to it. It is too long ago, as I pawned it in about 1996, for me to say why I was not moved as I had expected to be. I think I had found Bernstein to be too flabby and I wanted a firmer wrist to my Brahms symphonies.

Just last week, I finally replaced that set with this one, used and not yet played... I really did trade in quite a pile ;-)









I hope it turns out to be the manlier interpretation of Brahms that I expect


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

starry said:


> I like the second and 4th the most. The first is nicely done, but seems to try very hard to impress at times and is more in the Beethoven mold.


Beethoven mould? Could you please explain? Looking at the score I cannot see anything at all particular to a Beethoven symphony other than the coda of the fourth movement. But with that, that coda doesn't really sound like Beethoven all that much. The concept is similar but not the content.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

Even though the theme of the fourth movement has been tied to the theme of the finale of Beethoven's ninth by many, to me the only movement in this symphony that really reminds me of Beethoven is the first.

When I think of Beethoven, I think "something out of nothing". He could take very simple ideas and themes and develop them into something truly astounding. The first movement of Brahms' first always seemed to me like an attempt to do the same. At any rate, the fascination of this movement is entirely in the development and not in the theme itself.

From the second movement on, however, Brahms seems to come into his own with more flowing, spontaneous sounding themes that seem to unwind naturally. And, he gives us the added plus of intriguing development on top of it.

For me, the 3rd and 4th symphonies are his very best, but we all differ in preference.

There are many great performances of this work, but for me it doesn't get any better than the live performance by Janowski and the Pittsburgh Symphony on Pentatone in SACD.


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

A great work but I'm (sadly) too old to remember hearing for the first time.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Interetsing how the topic of Beethoven came up...I didn't expect it actually. I didn't hear any Beethoven in the work or see much of it in the score the first time listening. I'll have to pay more attention to looking for the Beethoven in the music next time.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Hans von Bulow called it Beethoven's 10th. And then there's Brahms own "any *** can see that" quote when asked about the similarities between one of his themes and one from Beethoven's 9th.


----------



## Feathers (Feb 18, 2013)

I remember the first time I heard it, it captured me right from the beginning, and I could hear the heart thumping (in both me and the music). Sometimes it sounds like it's too big for its own size, but never to the point of sounding like an overreacting drama queen. Overall I really like it.


----------



## TrevBus (Jun 6, 2013)

Adore all of Brahms. His 4 symphions just makes me wonder what if. What if he started sooner? Would the world still have the quality? Did Brahms wait just the right amount of time? Did inspiration or even desire take that long to mature in him to start composing the symphony? Well no answers because for me doesn't matter. We the public have them now, no matter how long it took.

BTW, love the 1st just a little better than 2 and 3 but a little less than 4. I have a complete set w/Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra. My favorite Brahms conductor.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

The opening of the first movement is one of the most ominous I've ever heard. It sounds like how I would imagine a heart attack would feel. One can indeed hear a bit of Beethoven if you think of it as an updated homage to the great composer under whose shadow Brahms lived. It took him a long time to get around to writing it -- between 14 and 21 years depending on which story you believe.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

The first has taken a long time with me. I still only like the 1st and 4th mvmts the most, I found it hard to sit through one time I saw it in concert. I of course love the 4th mvmt. for its great flute solo, and the theme thereof which is developed.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

GreenMamba said:


> Hans von Bulow called it Beethoven's 10th. And then there's Brahms own "any *** can see that" quote when asked about the similarities between one of his themes and one from Beethoven's 9th.


Let's have a look at these melodies...

Form/Phrasing
Beethoven: AA'BA'BA' 
Brahms: AA'BC

Both melodies use 4 bar phrases, phrase B is most similar because of the rhythm and degrees of the scale used and the harmonies they both imply. Both melodies have different harmonic progressions and implied harmonies apart from the B phrase in which they're about 75% the same. Both have the same idea of a rhythmic motif as its basis although both rhythmic motifs are different apart from the B phrase where the rhythm is probably 50% the same. Beethoven's uses mainly smaller intervals for a longer time than Brahms's.

I would say that yes there are a few similarities but the melodies are at least 65% different.

The overall style of the symphony, at any rate, is very different from the style of Beethoven. It's very Brahmsy and Romantic. *I would never associate this work with the music of an earlier composer whose music is by and large very different and only few similarities can be found.* It's kinda like calling Beethoven's 3rd symphony very similar in style to Bach just because of the fugato sections and the way counterpoint has been used to develop some of the material.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

It yells Beethoven to me. That's why I like it though.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

TrevBus said:


> Adore all of Brahms. His 4 symphions just makes me wonder what if. What if he started sooner?


He did "start sooner!" Both Serenades, Serenade No. 1 in D major, Op. 11. (1857) and Serenade No. 2 in A major, Op. 16. (1859) are earlier attempts at writing a symphony, which Brahms felt, once embarked in the composing of each, that he was not quite ready, or confident enough, to call them "Symphony."

There is no telling if he had some self-awareness that he needed more time for his way, i.e. a seemingly innate inclination and preference for the larger structures (as in really large, architectural, etc.) and therefore turned these first two attempts into Serenades, or if he was merely intimidated by the presence of the Beethoven and Bruckner symphonies, and was in a dilemma as to the aesthetic choice of which way he wanted to go in the midst of the presence of those two symphonic giants.

He did get to one formalist symphonic piece prior the first symphony, the first piano concerto, completed the same year as the second serenade, though I imagine the "weight" of coming up with a work titled "symphony," and instead writing a concerto probably eased his self-doubt.

As to Brahms' self-doubt, there is little doubt 
http://www.music.pomona.edu/orchestra/bra_1.htm

The article mentions that in his time, the symphony, older format, was considered passé (there is nothing new under the sun, it seems) and that what Bruckner had done with the symphony was the newest and most current idea of 'what a symphony should be.' (Of course, Beethoven's symphonies were still then considered an apex and ideal.)

So we have a very retro-conservative composer (relative to his time) stewing over what to do. The article states (I did no know) that his first piano concerto is a reworking of a sonata for two pianos which he first tried to re-work as a symphony!

I'd say that he got around to a symphony at just the right moment, for the composer himself, and for the listener.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

I'm not saying he's copying Beethoven obviously, though the flowing triumphant finale theme and the opening monumentally tragic movement could point towards the 9th. What I mean is it has less of that autumnal Brahms which you could later see as representing his style. Movements like the first movement of the 2nd or the second or last movement of the 4th have a rhapsodic organic feel which relates to him as well. The 3rd I don't like as much as the 2nd or 4th partly because I think there are fewer convincing performances, so that might reflect on the music.


----------



## Eschbeg (Jul 25, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I would say that yes there are a few similarities but the melodies are at least 65% different.


What is the threshold of percentage at which we're allowed to take similarities seriously? What is the percentage of similarity between any Rameau piece and Debussy's _Hommage à Rameau_?

The similarities between Beethoven's and Brahms's respective melodies (whatever numerical value we want artificially want to calculate it at), coupled with the manner in which the two melodies are revealed--first iteration in the low strings, then each successive iteration gradually rising in range and growing in scoring--as well as the fact that both melodies are used to announce the shift from minor to parallel major, seem to make Brahms's famous comment to the dilettante who noted similarities between the two pieces pretty spot on. Obviously it would be silly to act as if the two symphonies were identical to each other, but it would be equally silly to act as if there were no tangible connections between the two. It's not like those are the only two options. Brahms didn't seem to think so, anyway.


----------



## LFTBR (Aug 2, 2013)

I am still amazed that, many years ago as a naive and dense music student, I found the Brahms symphonies appalling! I would never voluntarily listen to them, and finally when the college orchestra I played in was doing Brahms 1st I broke down and bought a score, several recordings, and set about analyzing the entire work over a long Christmas holiday. Well, I've never looked back!

Dark and forboding, but somehow still full of light and joy, I love the 1st symphony of Brahms. It, along with its 3 companions are regular staples in my listening list. The 4th was on repeat (with Kleiber) all day yesterday in my car!


----------



## Geo Dude (May 22, 2013)

Favorite recordings:

Mackerras and Gardiner. Celibidache is also excellent, though quite different from those two.


----------



## Cheyenne (Aug 6, 2012)

This is the only piece where I swear by one conductor, and that's Wilhelm Furtwängler. His 1945 finale only performance is unbelievable, and there are nice performances dating from 1951 and 1952 too: I prefer the latter, which may be helped by better orchestral playing. Avoid the 1950 RCO one and you'll be fine. I have tried many others, but the excitement he creates in that finale was eclipsed by no one.


----------



## JCarmel (Feb 3, 2013)

I've got that Bernstein Brahms No 1, somewhere....and I thought it was great at the time I bought it.. many decades/aeons ago.
In fact I bought a second LP copy to give as a gift to someone else, who knew no Brahms whatsoever. I thought the disc would be_ the _perfect introduction to the composer. Now, I enjoy Sir Adrian's recording...because its preceded by Dame Janet's 'Alto Rhapsody' on the same cd & without having to get up off my chair to change the disc, I get two very favourite pieces of Brahms.


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

It didn't have that effect on me. Simply because it was the last of his symphonies I got round to listening to. My favourite vacillates between the 2nd and 4th depending on mood.
I was disappointed in 1 for a long time and could never put my finger on why. Suffice to say it has grown on me a lot since those early days. 

Like all great composers, Brahms has a unique voice. Regardless whether you think of him as a conservative in his time. All we are left with is beautiful music. 

I sometimes think it would be nice to experience a composers works chronologically. Too late for most of them. 
Although I reckon I could do a job on Schumann. I only really know 3 of his works.


----------



## mtmailey (Oct 21, 2011)

The finale is my favorite part, this symphony is almost equal to BEETHOVEN works.


----------



## isridgewell (Jul 2, 2013)

I have always been fairly middle of the road about this symphony until I heard the Toscanini recording. You either love or hate Toscanini, but the way he whips up the closing pages is nothing short of breathtaking, even in mono sound.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

I LOVE the 1st symphony and love Karajan's recordings of it.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Itullian said:


> I LOVE the 1st symphony and love Karajan's recordings of it.


Karajan's analog is my favorite. But I've never heard one I didn't like!


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

I like Brahms 1st a lot. It is in my opinion the best 1st symphony, just ahead of Mahler's. Solti is my favorite performer, his whole cycle is quite good.


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I wonder if anyone else here has had the same experience on first hearing this symphony. Share your stories here! Recommend some of your favourite recordings too!


It's funny, we both made a statement on another post about having never heard a symphony by Brahms, lol. I thought to myself the day after that I must rectify that and here you are doing the same - I will be a sheep and follow you in this endeavour.

I'll listen to the First tonight and move on from there  then share of course.


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

starry said:


> I like the second and 4th the most. The first is nicely done, but seems to try very hard to impress at times and is more in the Beethoven mould.


I definitely get a Beethovenesque feel from the last movement of the First Symphony, but don't have the score to compare.


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

Well, I've just finished listening to Jansons and VPhil, quite something. For my first hearing of this symphony I rather quite like it. I agree with COAG that it has some fresh and new music in it. I'm going to let it sink in, have another listen tomorrow and go from there.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

science said:


> Karajan's analog is my favorite. But I've never heard one I didn't like!


Karajan did 2 analog recordings of it on DGG. A 60s and a 70s.
I think the 60 is the better of the 2. It's coupled with a Schumann symphony on an Originals issue.

I also enjoy his Digital cycle of the Brahms.


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

I'm amazed so many posters have only just got around to hearing something so fundamental as Brahms 1.
It's a bit like saying you've never eaten a banana!

30+ years on for me, and I can't imagine anyone not liking Brahms 1, at least after a few listenings.
Every teenager ought to fall in love with that pounding introduction to start with.
It's a great piece to play too; and violins 1 & 2 should be split left and right on the stage to hear the antiphonal effects.
You look through the score, and it's remarkable how often Brahms avoids the first beat of the bar with his themes. Like a sleight-of-hand trick.
The greatest 1st symphony, too; only Mahler runs it close.
cheers,
Graeme


----------



## Bradius (Dec 11, 2012)

I love Brahms 1st. Though I find it a difficult work to understand. I listen to it quite often. I have the von Karajan performace. Very nice. Though I like the JEG one too. I think it will take many more listenings before I 'get' the 2-3rd movements.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

That 1st mvt. is truly incredible. I get it stuck in my head.


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

And I seem to have 5 CDs of it, too; included with full cycles by Furtwangler, Celibidache, Boult: stand-alone recordings by Klemperer and Giulini. Nothing recorded by youngsters!
GG


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

GraemeG said:


> I'm amazed so many posters have only just got around to hearing something so fundamental as Brahms 1.
> It's a bit like saying you've never eaten a banana!


I have never eaten a banana, are you amazed?


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

Bix said:


> I have never eaten a banana, are you amazed?


I have really I just stated it as a 'so what' to the generalising statement about the 'fundamentality' of Brahms 1.


----------



## TudorMihai (Feb 20, 2013)

I've never been a fan of Brahms but, after reading this thread, I decided to give the symphony a try. I can't believe what I've been missing. It's one of the most beautiful symphonies I've ever heard (and that's saying a lot since I'm a great listener of symphonies). I liked it so much that I decided to listen to all of his four symphonies. Truly masterful works (wish he had written more). Thanks to these symphonies, I am now willing to listen to more of his works. Thank you, TC!


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

GraemeG said:


> I'm amazed so many posters have only just got around to hearing something so fundamental as Brahms 1.
> It's a bit like saying you've never eaten a banana!
> 
> 30+ years on for me, and I can't imagine anyone not liking Brahms 1, at least after a few listenings.
> Every teenager ought to fall in love with that pounding introduction to start with.


Well, I was 19 when I heard my very first symphony - Brahms 3 with Giulini conducting.
The next symphony I listened to was Brahms 1.....I was still a "teenager", if just barely.

So I guess I just got in under the wire in 1972.


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

I'm onto Brahms' Symphony 2 now - Jansons and the VPhil again.

Well the first movement is a variation on the theme of his wiegenlied, it's addictive to listen to, the symphony seamlessly progresses from one movement to the other. So far, again, I like.


----------



## FLighT (Mar 7, 2013)

brotagonist said:


> I used to have the Bernstein/Brahms Symphonies box:
> 
> View attachment 22633
> 
> ...


My first hearing of Brahms 1 is the 57' Klemperer/Philharmonia/EMI. It's still my favorite version, and that complete set is uniformly good.


----------



## Over the Rainbow (Oct 12, 2018)

Simply for Brahms first symphony. I invite you to listen to this, I think you will be surprised in a good way.


----------



## Hermastersvoice (Oct 15, 2018)

The amazing thing about the Klemperer recording, though taken a bit slower than the competition, is the effect of the music being propelled forward in an unflinching, unforgiving way. The opening statement is not to be argued against. On repeated listening the sensation may develop that Klemperer breathes with the planet. It’s that strong.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

When I first came to TC Brahms was one of my least favourite symphonists (but I did like the 3rd a lot and bits of the 4th). However, I did a lot of listening and since then I've collected multiple Brahms cycles. I'll be honest, the 1st is my least favourite Brahms symphony but it's still very good (even if it is Beethoven 10, IMHO). Of all the recordings I have Wand and Levine (CSO) knock it out of the ballpark.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

The 3rd and 4th are for me the works where Brahms truly found his own voice.

Furtwangler is for me the master in Brahms, though this underrated set in much better sound is also very good:


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

from a Michael Steinberg program note:

"Joachim, writing to him [Brahms] in March 1877 from Cambridge, England, where he had just introduced the First Symphony, refers to it as a piece that 'really gets to people.' That has not changed."


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

I have long felt Klemperer's big boned interpretation with the Philharmonia Orhestra (EMI) to be an ideal fit for the First's sense of commanding presence. Some listeners however have referred to Klemperer's approach as "elephantine" or "stodgy". That being the case, I would recommend Van Beinum's contemporaneous conception with the Amsterdam (or Royal) Concertgebouw Orchestra. Minus what some might consider Klemperer's plodding quality, Van Beinum retains a good deal of the former's grandeur but directs his own reading with a sense of graceful beauty. Another fine rendition is given by Jochum with the London Philharmonic (EMI), who tends to clear some of the "cobwebs".


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^^ Klemperer does sound at home in the 1st and I certainly wouldn't call his approach stodgy. But his "cragginess" - the same quality that made his Beethoven so iconic - is perhaps a less obvious fit for Brahms. I loved his Brahms symphonies as a young man but came to want more warmth and tenderness than he was willing to allow. So, for me, Walter, Sanderling and then Abbado (along with a great many others, of course!) came to represent more of what I felt Brahms to be about. But, yes, Klemperer's 1st is the one that works best and is, I think, a great performance.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> ...for me, Walter, Sanderling and then Abbado (along with a great many others, of course!) came to represent more of what I felt Brahms to be about.


I fully agree with your choice of Walter. While his Columbia Symphony account is excellent, I think his earlier, mono N.Y. Philharmonic presentation is outstanding.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

I love bananas. I eat one almost every day.
Guess I'll give this symphony another shot then.


----------



## Hermastersvoice (Oct 15, 2018)

Why Klemperer? It’s the inevitability of the interpretation which makes such an impression. Stodginess, plodding, slow? Perhaps, but such assertions are totally beyond the point. Its deeply rooted rhythm becomes ingrained in your soul, it’s inescapable.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I have the Bernstein DG set, and the Sawallisch cycle. Got it as part of a Brahms 5 disc set on Decca for 8 dollars. I also like Abbado's early 70s DG version, and Solti/Chicago. The Solti is a good cycle. He seems to have not been flying on steroids for those sessions.


----------



## geralmar (Feb 15, 2013)

My first exposure to the first symphony was in junior high school when our orchestra played the fourth movement with several other student orchestras at an all-city concert. During the rehearsal the conductor flew into a rage when the saxophones pealed in during the "big tune". At the concert I noticed the saxophones remained glumly silent during the entire movement.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Hermastersvoice said:


> The amazing thing about the Klemperer recording, though taken a bit slower than the competition, is the effect of the music being propelled forward in an unflinching, unforgiving way. The opening statement is not to be argued against. On repeated listening the sensation may develop that Klemperer breathes with the planet. It's that strong.


I too love the craggy, inexorable Klemperer recording. It was my favorite until I heard Furtwangler's, which is simply revelatory. Klemperer conveys power, but Furtwangler penetrates occult secrets, in Brahms as much as in Bruckner and Wagner. He takes us to the very edge, his brinksmanship revealed in the daringly long timpani roll in the andante, in the unbelievable intensity of the finale, and in the sense of organismic life and purpose that takes nothing for granted along the way.


----------



## trbl0001 (Sep 13, 2020)

Love Brahms 1, one of the first symphonies that I really listened to when I started listening to classical music. I still think it's one of the greats, especially the fourth movement, obviously. Third and fourth I feel mixed about, sometimes enjoy, sometimes not, depending on the performance I think. 

I sometimes wonder if Brahms 1 gets under-rated because it's not really very innovative - I would think quite backward-looking for its time. Not sure why that would affect your enjoyment of it today, though.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I've finally come around to listening to a Brahms symphony for the first time ever so I thought I might try the first symphony, played by the New York Philharmonic and conducted by Leonard Bernstein.
> 
> And it is nothing short of extraordinary.
> 
> ...


I love this post, totally agreed.

Edit: Klemperer to me, though Alsop/LSO has grown on me. Furtwängler/NDR SO is the first recording by that conductor that I ever enjoyed, and the first recording of this symphony I've ever enjoyed, so it deserves a special place in my heart.


----------



## Iota (Jun 20, 2018)

flamencosketches said:


> I love this post ..!


That makes two of us!

I remember when I first heard the opening bars of the symphony in my teens on a Bruno Walter LP, I had the very vivid sensation of giant gates opening onto a place of immense importance and vast dimensions, and was awestruck. And what followed felt like the moving around and collisions of musical tectonic plates to me, I'd never heard anything like it!

A little later Brahms 1st piano concerto also struck me with something approaching tornado force, reaching an apex of intensity when I heard it live at the RFH in London in the 1980's played by Krystian Zimerman, shortly after he'd won the Chopin Competition. The power and drama that poured out of the piece in that performance left a huge and indelible impression on me.


----------



## SearsPoncho (Sep 23, 2020)

Walter and Abbado are my go to recordings for Brahms' 1st. I like the cycles both made, although I consider the 4ths of both conductors to be the weak links, relatively speaking, of their Brahms recordings.


----------

