# Rank Sergei Prokofiev's Symphonies



## Aries

My ranking:

5th - violent, monumental symphony, especially the first movement
2nd - great dissonant symphony, the most dissonant symphony of Prokofiev's
1st - a modern Haydn symphony, only the 3rd movement of this neoclassical symphony is a bit weak
3rd - weaker than the 2nd, but a great racy finale belongs to this symphony
6th
4th
7th - boring and uninteresting

What is your ranking?


----------



## KenOC

6 - Easily his finest, though it broke his career
5 - Big beefy stuff, a great work
1 - Always fun -- ah, the joy of youth...
All the others...

Prokofiev wrote his 6th Symphony in 1947, only a few months before he was attacked under the second Zhdanov decree as an "anti-democratic formalist," effectively ending his public career. This symphony was the main cause. He said of it, "Now we are rejoicing in our great victory, but each of us has wounds that cannot be healed. One has lost those dear to him, another has lost his health. These must not be forgotten." World War II had cost the Soviet Union 24 million lives.


----------



## techniquest

5 - The most popular after the 1st and with good reason. This one has everything - a masterful work.
6 - But not far behind is this superb work, especially the 2nd movement.
2 - A symphony of 'iron and steel', massive sound and dissonance in the 1st movement and a fascinating set of variations in the 2nd.
3 - Using material from the opera 'The Fiery Angel', this one has a lot going for it nonetheless especially in the central movements.
1 - Frivolous but fun; Prokofiev for people who don't like Prokofiev, or Haydn for people who don't like Haydn!
7 - A study in lost 'mojo' perhaps, but it's almost like the classical symphony (1st) in a fuller symphonic form - maybe it should be dubbed the 'romantic' symphony.
4 - Using material from 'The Prodigal Son' this one really doesn't work either in it's original or re-written incarnation.


----------



## ptr

techniquest said:


> 5 - The most popular after the 1st and with good reason. This one has everything - a masterful work.
> 6 - But not far behind is this superb work, especially the 2nd movement.
> 2 - A symphony of 'iron and steel', massive sound and dissonance in the 1st movement and a fascinating set of variations in the 2nd.
> 3 - Using material from the opera 'The Fiery Angel', this one has a lot going for it nonetheless especially in the central movements.
> 1 - Frivolous but fun; Prokofiev for people who don't like Prokofiev, or Haydn for people who don't like Haydn!
> 7 - A study in lost 'mojo' perhaps, but it's almost like the classical symphony (1st) in a fuller symphonic form - maybe it should be dubbed the 'romantic' symphony.
> 4 - Using material from 'The Prodigal Son' this one really doesn't work either in it's original or re-written incarnation.


This pretty accurately reflects my views, thanks for summarising my thoughts! 

/ptr


----------



## violadude

Aw, I really like #7  Especially the "big theme" in there.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Techniquest pretty much nails it for me, too. 2, 5 and 6 are my definite faves of the cycle and have much more about them than the others, I think. The first is beautifully crafted and nicely proportioned but it seems to me like an academic exercise along the lines of 'Yep - that went well so I'll push the envelope with the next one a bit...'. I can't help thinking that the comparatively simple but enigmatic 7th was written with a view to keep himself out of further trouble, but without the level of hidden deception that Shostakovich employed in some of his works. Nos 3 and 4 are OK in their way but when I listen it's always at the back of my mind that they are re-hashed to a degree.


----------



## Ukko

I like 7 more than 3 (which I'd put next to last), and 6 more than 5, otherwise _Techniquest_'s ranking works for me.


----------



## OldListener

1 - Always a pleasure to hear.
7 - The first movement especially.

I have no affection for the others.


----------



## Cygnenoir

All the 7 symphonies has its very unique caracter. Always fun listening to, there's so much happening, like a fun ride in a carousel. I think the ranking changes with time, but here we go.

5 - Above the others, simply amazing! Especially the two mid-movements.
2 - Strikes as hard as a fist, cuts as deep as a knife!
7 - Really amusing and child-like (not so unlike the 1st). I love it even if it's "pretty" and without "mojo".
6 and 1 - Pretty good stuff as well.
3 and 4 - Ok, but with some great moments.


----------



## alan sheffield

6th - As usual, great melodies but with driving rhythms and pungent harmonies
3rd - Surprised that my ranking at number 2 is highest. For me, the big tune in 1st movement is one of his greatest. Heard it at the Proms under Abbado in 70s and can still remember the experience
5th - More great tunes but seems a little "lightweight" to my ears today
1st - Unrepeatable delight
2
7
4


----------



## Bone

5 - just a great piece with big, fun melodies
1 - classical for the hip young set
6 - good, but a notch below 1 and 5 for me
2 - if you've got to write a "primitivist" piece, you could do worse
3 - starting to get a little shoddy on construction
4 - meh
7 - I'm sure I've heard it, but not memorable at all

I have Jarvi and Ozawa sets plus numerous single recordings of 1 and 5 as well as Previn 6. Really like all the Jarvi, but Slatkin and St. Louis 5 is truly special to me.


----------



## Zingo

techniquest said:


> 5 - The most popular after the 1st and with good reason. This one has everything - a masterful work.
> 6 - But not far behind is this superb work, especially the 2nd movement.
> 2 - A symphony of 'iron and steel', massive sound and dissonance in the 1st movement and a fascinating set of variations in the 2nd.
> 3 - Using material from the opera 'The Fiery Angel', this one has a lot going for it nonetheless especially in the central movements.
> 1 - Frivolous but fun; Prokofiev for people who don't like Prokofiev, or Haydn for people who don't like Haydn!
> 7 - A study in lost 'mojo' perhaps, but it's almost like the classical symphony (1st) in a fuller symphonic form - maybe it should be dubbed the 'romantic' symphony.
> 4 - Using material from 'The Prodigal Son' this one really doesn't work either in it's original or re-written incarnation.


Well put. Exactly my order as well.


----------



## chalkpie

Hey does anybody have the skinny of the Gergiev (Decca) set of Prokofiev symphonies? It seems to be a love or hate affair at Clamazon. Somebody did mentiion some breathing "noise", which I am not a fan of. I ordered it anyway based on the fact that I read Proko is gergiev's favorite composer and Decca's sound is usually great.

What am I in for? Thanks.


----------



## Cosmos

5: the first one I listened to and fell in love with
3: "Fiery" yes, almost alien at times
1: Cheery and fun,
6: Very good, but not one of my favorites
7: It has its moments, its very sparse and kind of sad
4: Ok I guess
2: The hardest for me to listen to.


----------



## EdwardBast

Without commentary: 
5
6
3
7
2
1
4


----------



## TxllxT

My ranking & recommendations:








Charles Dutoit at his best and one of the best orchestral recordings ever made: you never heard basses going that deep into the subsonic. 








Mariss Jansons at his best and one of the best orchestras being recorded by Chandos








One of André Previn's first recordings after having arrived in the West. The 1st is bustling with youthful expectations, the 7th is a kind of nice bonus, not adding anything new.

For the 2nd, 3rd, 4th I listen to Gergiev's recording with LSO of all Prokofiev's symphonies, but either Gergiev or Prokofiev somehow fail to thrill me...


----------



## hpowders

From best to worst:

5 (YEA!!!)
7
3
1
4
2
6 (HISS!!!)


----------



## Vasks

Here's mine.....

*5
6
4
3
1
7
2*


----------



## Richannes Wrahms

Uncyclopedia said:


> Symphony No. 1 in Hadyn Major "Pastiche"
> Symphony No. 2 "The Symphony which can actually kill people"
> Symphony Nos. 3-6 in God Knows What Key "All pretty much the same"
> Symphony No. 7 "Symphony No. 1"


My ranking: 7, 2, 1, 3, 6, 5, 4.


----------



## techniquest

> Hey does anybody have the skinny of the Gergiev (Decca) set of Prokofiev symphonies? It seems to be a love or hate affair at Clamazon. Somebody did mentiion some breathing "noise", which I am not a fan of. I ordered it anyway based on the fact that I read Proko is gergiev's favorite composer and Decca's sound is usually great.
> 
> What am I in for? Thanks.


This set has it's merits but not my favourite set; Kitajenko wins that particular crown. 
The LSO orchestral sound quality is very good, but there is some noise which is _really_ distracting, and at times Gergiev zips through movements as if in a desperate hurry to get it over and done with (time is money!!). If you can get the set for a reasonable price then definitely go with it. My recommendation for other options would be Kitajenko / Phoenix Edition (5 discs inc. both versions of No.4) or Weller / Brilliant Classics (4 discs). The latter is very cheap but still very good; you only get the revised version of No.4 but you do get Scythian Suite and Russian Overture as fillers.


----------



## chalkpie

techniquest said:


> This set has it's merits but not my favourite set; Kitajenko wins that particular crown.
> The LSO orchestral sound quality is very good, but there is some noise which is _really_ distracting, and at times Gergiev zips through movements as if in a desperate hurry to get it over and done with (time is money!!). If you can get the set for a reasonable price then definitely go with it. My recommendation for other options would be Kitajenko / Phoenix Edition (5 discs inc. both versions of No.4) or Weller / Brilliant Classics (4 discs). The latter is very cheap but still very good; you only get the revised version of No.4 but you do get Scythian Suite and Russian Overture as fillers.


Helpful - thanks man. I got it pretty cheap, so I'm going for it. I will check out your rec.


----------



## Skilmarilion

violadude said:


> Aw, I really like #7  Especially the "big theme" in there.


Me too. :tiphat:

I'm more or less indifferent re: the second movement, but the rest of the work is quite wonderful.


----------



## HIDEKI SUKENOBU

#5
#1
#7
the others aren't worth comments.


----------



## EdwardBast

Revised preferences:
5 or 6
2 or 3
7
1
4

I flip-flop on 5 and 6 and on 2 and 3.


----------



## 20centrfuge

The only one of Prokofiev's symphonies I am not fond of is No. 4. I love all the others. My ranking would usually go like this:

6 - Bitter, frustrated, hopeful, soulful -- the first symphony of Prokofiev's I came to love and still one of my all time favorites.
5 - Levine's interpretation brings it to life. Justifiably great.
3 - Check out Muti's rendition of this apocalyptic work that, to me, feels like movie music from Hollywood's Golden Age.
2 - An enigma, but one that I enjoy. 
1 - Light and delightful.
7 - Some great themes. I will admit that Prokofiev had lost some of his verve at this point, but still very enjoyable.
4 - I guess I could give it another listen.


----------



## MoonlightSonata

5
1
4
2

I have yet to listen to the others.


----------



## Fugue Meister

You's guys is all crazy it's....

(and with commentary)
No. 6 Just ever so slightly better than 3 its one of his crowning achievements and in sort of a rare key eb.. challenging but worth it.
No. 3 After many years going over the cycle its become one of my favorite all time symphonies and I mean all the movements.
No. 5 & No. 1 tied both are classics and rightfully so.
No. 2 sort of cool but... meh
No. 4 & 7 both sort of well will put it this way they never get repeat listens thats as harsh as I'll be (but they're sort of garbage)


----------



## realdealblues

Symphonies Nos. 1 & 5 get extensive listening from me, but the others I listen to far less.

My Favorite is probably #1, followed by #5...the rest all vary. 

I may have to go back this week and re-listen closely to the rest to see if I can put them in a kind of order. I just re-listened to #2 for the Saturday Symphony not long ago and found myself enjoying the 1st movement but feeling a little bored during the 2nd. I seem to remember enjoying #6 more than usual last time I heard it several months ago. I don't have very fond memories of either version of #4 though so that may well be my least favorite. Symphonies 3 & 7 I don't really recall at the moment which makes me feel like I may need to go back and re-evaluate them.


----------



## jim prideaux

just noticed this thread and would just like to say that I personally think many of you have been very harsh about the 7th!
have recently grown to enjoy more and more of Prokofiev's music but first came across the 7th years ago and it is really rather good!


----------



## 20centrfuge

Fugue Meister said:


> You's guys is all crazy it's....
> 
> (and with commentary)
> No. 6 Just ever so slightly better than 3 its one of his crowning achievements and in sort of a rare key eb.. challenging but worth it.
> No. 3 After many years going over the cycle its become one of my favorite all time symphonies and I mean all the movements.
> No. 5 & No. 1 tied both are classics and rightfully so.
> No. 2 sort of cool but... meh
> No. 4 & 7 both sort of well will put it this way they never get repeat listens thats as harsh as I'll be (but they're sort of garbage)


Yours is very similar to mine.


----------



## dgee

3, 1, 5, 2, the others. 3 is just one of my favourite things and so is one. Never warmed to 4, 6 or 7 and remain bemused especially by 6 which has lovely moments along with lots of not much all just sort of splurged out haphazardly. I would think 4 would be on the bottom of most lists


----------



## Adam Weber

6, 2, 5, 7, 1, 3, and 4, from most to least favored.


----------



## manyene

The 6th, a 'war symphony' that has always struck me as more personal then DSCH's 8th (another great work). Followed by the 5th, 1st and 7th. I like the 3rd (helped by knowing the opera from which its themes have been drawn) and the 2nd, which I respect but do not understand; and the 4th that has not really registered with me despite several attempts.


----------



## CrunchyFr0g

Being new to the forum I just found this thread when I was thinking about starting one on the same subject.
I'm surprised to see so little love for #3. I think it's an amazing piece - the scherzo is electric (not literally obviously  )
So:
3
5
6
4 (orig)
2
7
4 (rev)
1 (I mean its great but it feels like it doesn't belong with the mature symphonies)


----------



## mbhaub

I'm always surprised and disappointed in that given the enormous number of recordings of the complete symphonies, that other than 1 & 5 they rarely - really rarely - ever show up on concert programs, at least in the US. After nearly 50 years of going to concerts all over, I've never run across 2 or 4. No.3 was a glorious performance with Muti & Philly. No. 7 with USSR State Symphony Orchestra with no less than Svetlanov. And I really like the 4th!


----------



## CnC Bartok

6
5
7
1
2
3
4

Never managed to warm to 3&4, and 2 is too vulgar in the first movement to inspire love.

His last three Symphonies are pretty awesome to be honest, even the much-maligned Seventh.


----------



## flamencosketches

mbhaub said:


> I'm always surprised and disappointed in that given the enormous number of recordings of the complete symphonies, that other than 1 & 5 they rarely - really rarely - ever show up on concert programs, at least in the US. After nearly 50 years of going to concerts all over, I've never run across 2 or 4. No.3 was a glorious performance with Muti & Philly. No. 7 with USSR State Symphony Orchestra with no less than Svetlanov. And I really like the 4th!


I saw Prokofiev's 4th in concert last month, in the United States, relatively major city. Only Prokofiev concert I've ever attended. It was a good performance. I can't say I'm familiar with much of his work, especially symphonies.

His 4th is pretty widely disliked, no? Why?


----------



## CrunchyFr0g

CnC Bartok said:


> 6
> 
> His last three Symphonies are pretty awesome to be honest, even the much-maligned Seventh.


The 7th can be great but it has to be the 'sad ending' version.


----------



## CnC Bartok

CrunchyFr0g said:


> The 7th can be great but it has to be the 'sad ending' version.


I'll back you up on that!:tiphat:


----------



## Strange Magic

Number 3 at the top: I find it an amazingly engaging work, endlessly rewarding.
Then 4 in the original version, then 5 and 7 in a tie, with 6 last. No, 2 is last. 

Number one is in a separate category and I've heard it too often over the decades to give it a proper place in the ranking.


----------



## Heck148

CrunchyFr0g said:


> Being new to the forum I just found this thread when I was thinking about starting one on the same subject.
> I'm surprised to see so little love for #3. I think it's an amazing piece - the scherzo is electric (not literally obviously  )
> So:
> 3
> 5
> 6
> 4 (orig)
> 2
> 7
> 4 (rev)
> 1 (I mean its great but it feels like it doesn't belong with the mature symphonies)


Good list!! I'd switch the two #4s, revised is better, imo...#3 is great, I don't know if I'd put it ahead of 5 and 6, but it's right up there with them....
agree about #1 - good piece, composed when he was student.....but not up with the mature symphonies...


----------



## Vasks

No. 5 is his symphonic masterpiece. And I have yet to hear #2. So....

5
6
4
3
7
1
2


----------



## Littlephrase

Have yet to hear the 4th, but my ranking of the rest is: 

5 
6
2
3
7 
1


----------



## tdc

Prokofiev symphonies:

2
6
5
3
4
7
1


----------



## paulbest

Aries said:


> My ranking:
> 
> 5th - violent, monumental symphony, especially the first movement
> 2nd - great dissonant symphony, the most dissonant symphony of Prokofiev's
> 1st - a modern Haydn symphony, only the 3rd movement of this neoclassical symphony is a bit weak
> 3rd - weaker than the 2nd, but a great racy finale belongs to this symphony
> 6th
> 4th
> 7th - boring and uninteresting
> 
> What is your ranking?


great to see everyone has the 4th,,at the very borrom of the list,,,below the pitifully 4th, belongs that neo classical thing called the 1st sym. I note everyone has the 1st at the bottom, or 2nd place from bottom,,so my taste is spot on with everyone else.

,,,see since you and I have same taste, you really should give Henze a shot,,,,,
The 7th is OK, has its moments .

I love the 2nd's opening quite a lot. 
The 3rd's opening is fantastic as well. 
The 4th, both versions are duds.


----------



## mbhaub

paulbest said:


> below the pitifully 4th, belongs that neo classical thing called the 1st sym. I note everyone has the 1st at the bottom, or 2nd place from bottom.


What posts are you reading? If you look back from the beginning, the 1st is rated highly...only later do people seem to shun it. Whatever one thinks of it, it's a first-rate bit of writing. Study it: the creative juices were flowing, the technical aspects amazing. The modulations are brilliant. The finale he tried to write without ever using a minor chord. The only complaint against it, by players anyway, is that it's technically extremely difficult to play. Violinists always complain about it - so many difficult position and string changes. The wind parts are very demanding. And it all sounds so easy. Haydn this is not. Audiences certainly love it. And is was not a student work. The first piano concerto was.


----------



## CrunchyFr0g

mbhaub said:


> What posts are you reading? If you look back from the beginning, the 1st is rated highly...only later do people seem to shun it. Whatever one thinks of it, it's a first-rate bit of writing. Study it: the creative juices were flowing, the technical aspects amazing. The modulations are brilliant. The finale he tried to write without ever using a minor chord. The only complaint against it, by players anyway, is that it's technically extremely difficult to play. Violinists always complain about it - so many difficult position and string changes. The wind parts are very demanding. And it all sounds so easy. Haydn this is not. Audiences certainly love it. And is was not a student work. The first piano concerto was.


I just want to say that although I was one who voted it 7th, I agree with this completely. I put it there because it seems to inhabit a different world from the other symphonies. 
On its own terms it is everything mbhaub says. 
And I'll confess that I've stolen the idea to end a musical phrase with a cadence from another key.


----------



## tdc

mbhaub said:


> What posts are you reading? If you look back from the beginning, the 1st is rated highly...only later do people seem to shun it. Whatever one thinks of it, it's a first-rate bit of writing. Study it: the creative juices were flowing, the technical aspects amazing. The modulations are brilliant. The finale he tried to write without ever using a minor chord. The only complaint against it, by players anyway, is that it's technically extremely difficult to play. Violinists always complain about it - so many difficult position and string changes. The wind parts are very demanding. And it all sounds so easy. Haydn this is not. Audiences certainly love it. And is was not a student work. The first piano concerto was.


I agree that many people rate it highly, I just don't understand why (although you have given some insight here). Regardless of how technically clever it is put together it still sounds like music written in the 18th century, it doesn't sound modern and it doesn't sound like Prokofiev. How difficult a work is to perform is neither here nor there. I'm not saying it is garbage, I just don't rate it as highly as the other symphonies.

The first Piano Concerto on the other hand displays brilliant use of harmony and sounds distinctly like the Prokofiev I know and love.


----------



## Enthusiast

5, 6, 2, 7, 1, 3, 4.


----------



## CrunchyFr0g

tdc said:


> it doesn't sound like Prokofiev.


Oh I think it sounds exactly like Prokofiev. The 'false' cadences in the first movement couldn't be anyone else, and the Gavotte, with its wide melodic leaps is also very typical.


----------



## tdc

CrunchyFr0g said:


> Oh I think it sounds exactly like Prokofiev. The 'false' cadences in the first movement couldn't be anyone else, and the Gavotte, with its wide melodic leaps is also very typical.


Can you give an example of another Prokofiev work in the same style as the first symphony?


----------



## EdwardBast

tdc said:


> I agree that many people rate it highly, I just don't understand why (although you have given some insight here). Regardless of how technically clever it is put together *it still sounds like music written in the 18th century*, it doesn't sound modern and it doesn't sound like Prokofiev. How difficult a work is to perform is neither here nor there. I'm not saying it is garbage, I just don't rate it as highly as the other symphonies.
> 
> The first Piano Concerto on the other hand displays brilliant use of harmony and sounds distinctly like the Prokofiev I know and love.


I'd say it sounds like someone in the 20thc writing a classical style symphony with 19thc orchestration. Like Tchaikovsky when he was sounding most like Mozart maybe? Rating it lower than the others sounds reasonable to me, given that it is kind of a style exercise. On the other hand, it's brilliant.


----------



## CrunchyFr0g

tdc said:


> Can you give an example of another Prokofiev work in the same style as the first symphony?


Maybe the Suite from Lt Kije. 'Kije's Wedding' features those harmonic slips into a different key to set up cadences. The Polonaise from the music to Boris Godunov.

Much of the children's music is in the same vein. The Summer Day Suite for example.

For the wide melodic leaps one example would be Juliet's Theme at the start of Romeo & Juliet. Or the waltz 'At The Palace' from Cinderella.


----------



## superhorn

Chalkpie, the Gergiev set was originally on Philips but has been reissued on Decca after the unfortunate demise of Philips several years ago . It was recorded in the LSO's home the Barbican, which is said not to have very good acoustics , so the sound could be better but is still perfectly OK . 
But the performances are all terrific . 
No wonder the LSO's current chief Simon Rattle is desperate for a new , world class hall there with (one opes) first rate acoustics .


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

5th
7th
1st
4th
Don't care for 2,3,6


----------



## chalkpie

superhorn said:


> Chalkpie, the Gergiev set was originally on Philips but has been reissued on Decca after the unfortunate demise of Philips several years ago . It was recorded in the LSO's home the Barbican, which is said not to have very good acoustics , so the sound could be better but is still perfectly OK .
> But the performances are all terrific .
> No wonder the LSO's current chief Simon Rattle is desperate for a new , world class hall there with (one opes) first rate acoustics .


Thanks Superhorn. I've had the set for years now and di enjoy it! Although I spin Shostakovich Wayne more often


----------



## RobertJTh

One critic (forgot who) once said that the 2nd was the greatest of all. And guess what, I agree.
Prokofiev planned to revise it since he was never satisfied with it, but then again, he revised the 4th too, and there was nothing wrong with that one either. Somehow he must have felt an urge to bring his early works up to the new soviet standards, and seen in that light the ultra-modernist 2nd stood out like a sore thumb in his oeuvre.

Anyway, in order of preference:

2
7 (original ending)
5
7 (revised ending)
4 (original version)
3
6
4 (revised version)
1

Note that I still like the 1st, it's just overplayed and overrated, and I wish that Prokofiev had called it a sinfonietta or something, since it feels out of place in the series of "mature" symphonies.


----------



## dko22

Frankly, there are two groups:

6 -- the most deeply felt and disturbing probably
2 -- stylistically the most adventurous and some of the invention is absolutely of the highest order
5 -- along with 6, the most popular choice among the critics as the greatest.
7 -- deceptive. There is a deep melancholy there which in a sympathetic performance is really moving

the four above are well ahead of the rest and in certain moods, any of them could be the favourite

3 -- has its moments but very uneven
1 -- simply too lightweight though brilliantly written
4 -- I don't find either version convincing -- clearly the weakest.


----------



## jim prideaux

dko22 said:


> Frankly, there are two groups:
> 
> 6 -- the most deeply felt and disturbing probably
> 2 -- stylistically the most adventurous and some of the invention is absolutely of the highest order
> 5 -- along with 6, the most popular choice among the critics as the greatest.
> 7 -- deceptive. There is a deep melancholy there which in a sympathetic performance is really moving
> 
> the four above are well ahead of the rest and in certain moods, any of them could be the favourite
> 
> 3 -- has its moments but very uneven
> 1 -- simply too lightweight though brilliantly written
> 4 -- I don't find either version convincing -- clearly the weakest.


Agree entirely regarding your description of the 7th.......


----------



## Kiki

dko22 said:


> Frankly, there are two groups:
> 
> 6 -- the most deeply felt and disturbing probably
> 2 -- stylistically the most adventurous and some of the invention is absolutely of the highest order
> 5 -- along with 6, the most popular choice among the critics as the greatest.
> 7 -- deceptive. There is a deep melancholy there which in a sympathetic performance is really moving
> 
> the four above are well ahead of the rest and in certain moods, any of them could be the favourite
> 
> 3 -- has its moments but very uneven
> 1 -- simply too lightweight though brilliantly written
> 4 -- I don't find either version convincing -- clearly the weakest.


Well-said about No. 7! It is also very efficient in its gestures.

I would also add that No. 5 is romantic and conservative in character, while No. 6 is more fantasy-like and nerve-wracking.


----------



## Forster

1 - small but perfectly formed
5 - inner movements the best
6 - sustains interest throughout
2 - love the dissonance
7 - some kind of memorable theme...that I can't remember. I've not listened to it for ages.
4 - revised. Original is clunky
3 - has made very little impression - just trying it again now


----------



## maestro267

5, 4, 2, 1, 6, 3, 7


----------



## dko22

Kiki said:


> Well-said about No. 7! It is also very efficient in its gestures.
> 
> I would also add that No. 5 is romantic and conservative in character, while No. 6 is more fantasy-like and nerve-wracking.


Agree entirely on 5 v 6 comment


----------



## jim prideaux

Nice to see that the 7th is slowly gaining some acknowledgement....as to the 'theme'.....can recall it quite vividly as I do believe there is such a sense of melancholy (reminds me of Brahms in it's essential 'feel')


----------



## Kiki

jim prideaux said:


> Nice to see that the 7th is slowly gaining some acknowledgement....as to the 'theme'.....can recall it quite vividly as I do believe there is such a sense of melancholy (reminds me of Brahms in it's essential 'feel')


I remember reading many years ago some professional critic saying Prokofiev retreated to simplicity (or something along that line) in his 7th. He probably did not like Prokofiev much... I think simplicity is probably an illusion of Prokofiev's very refined and efficient way of expressing the range of emotions in this symphony, and that includes the obvious melancholy as well as a strong sense of content. Just my two cents.


----------



## jim prideaux

Kiki said:


> I remember reading many years ago some professional critic saying Prokofiev retreated to simplicity (or something along that line) in his 7th. He probably did not like Prokofiev much... I think simplicity is probably an illusion of Prokofiev's very refined and efficient way of expressing the range of emotions in this symphony, and that includes the obvious melancholy as well as a strong sense of content. Just my two cents.


Exactly......my two cents!


----------

