# Sibelius: a reward for being wrong



## arthro (Mar 12, 2013)

I think music must be one of the very few areas where admitting you've been wrong about somebody can result in satisfaction and reward.

I did have a fascination with Sibelius in my twenties (a while back) but it got replaced by anopinion that his music was a bit too facile, often a bit too easy, lush and romantic. Of course all these could be qualities for another person.

A bit older now I'm revisiting his symphonies in particular (of course). It happened when watching the latest star Wars. The orchestral accompaniment to the beginning, the battleship fight in space, there's a particular phrase that appears several times there, a brass fanfare, and I said immediately, that's Finlandia!

Of course, it isn't, it's John Williams, so we can say it is Sibelius influence. And why not?, Sibelius did the same thing ... borrowing from Bruckner, Tchaikovsky, to mention a few.

But anyhow, I took to listening to him again, and I actually thinkg now that the first symphony is pretty good, even spectacular, not immature as I thought before.

So that's it, I was wrong ... and I get rewarded for it by listening to his music with new ears!


----------



## juliante (Jun 7, 2013)

I have found this with many composers. Too steeped in classical period initially, I recall listening to Mahler 5 and 2 and concluding with resignation that this music would never click with me. Imagine! Similarly Bartok. Etc Etc! For me it takes a while to acclimatise with different composers' modes of expression - get 'new ears'. Generally I guess the more seemingly dissonant, the longer it takes. Not that Sibelius is dissonant to most of course, I would assume.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I enjoyed your Star Wars analogy. I have often thought that the opening of Finlandia, in particularly intense performances, sounds like the soundtrack to a '50s horror movie!


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

arthro said:


> I think music must be one of the very few areas where admitting you've been wrong about somebody can result in satisfaction and reward.
> 
> I did have a fascination with Sibelius in my twenties (a while back) but it got replaced by anopinion that his music was a bit too facile, often a bit too easy, lush and romantic. Of course all these could be qualities for another person.
> 
> ...


Welcome back!

..........


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Sibelius took time to grow on me, too. When I was younger, things like Finlandia and the 2nd symphony were so great, the 5th a bit less. The other symphonies - including No. 1 - just didn't make any impression or sense, especially the 4th. Most of his other symphonic poems were puzzling and dull and uninteresting. How wrong I was - in time I came to love the whole symphonic canon, most of the symphonic poems, the violin concerto and so much more. Now he's one of my favorite composers. The comment by Pierre Boulez that Sibelius was the world's worst composer was so off the mark. I collected a lot of Sibelius, but the BIS "complete" (it's not) Sibelius edition was the icing on the cake. Now I'm not going to pretend that everything is great - there's some dull, third-rate stuff there: Nightride and Sunrise, for example. But there's so much great music to hear from him. Too bad American audiences by and large don't care for it and so very little of it ever gets programmed.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

Another relatively late Sibelius convert here.
When I first tried his music 30 years ago it seemed uninspired, how wrong I was
I regular enjoy his works now and am greatly looking forward to a concert later in the year that is all Sibelius 
The Violin Concerto and Symphonies 6 and 7


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

I haven't been listening to classical long (just over a year) but I latched onto Sibelius almost immediately. I cannot imagine my life without the 4th in it (my favourite symphony by a country mile), it's a work of staggering emotion to me. The same is also true of Finlandia, Lemminkainen Suite, Tapiola (oh Tapiola, what a work). I really like Sibelius.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

classical yorkist said:


> I haven't been listening to classical long (just over a year) but I latched onto Sibelius almost immediately. I cannot imagine my life without the 4th in it (my favourite symphony by a country mile), it's a work of staggering emotion to me. The same is also true of Finlandia, Lemminkainen Suite, Tapiola (oh Tapiola, what a work). I really like Sibelius.


Great list--and I agree the 4th is staggering. Have you heard Sibelius conducting his own Andante Festivo?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I first heard Sibelius on an old London monaural LP back in the 1950s sometime. It had Anthony Collins conducting, and featured _En Saga_ on one side of the disk and _Tapiola_ on the other. I remember reading on the back of the album how it strangely thrilled people in 1895 (or whenever thereabouts) when _En Saga_ began to be heard in concert halls. I know it strangely thrilled me also, hinting at dark adventure and a curiously cold fire. Tapiola completed the capture, and I was hooked from then on.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Despite more recent candidates, I still think Anthony Collins 'got' Sibelius better than other conductors.

And please don't ask me to rationalise that!


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

I am just exploring Sibelius. I've listened to 5 of his symphonies. His music is strange and difficult but has its charm. His symphonies seem to lack any unifying idea or structure. They are more like collections of motifs and the motifs seem to be changing and shifting all the time and require a lot of attention. All his symphonies are different from each other. Most composers symphonies are similar to each other, ie all Bruckner, Mozart or even Beethoven symphonies are alike, but not with Sibelius. I read that Sibelius had synaesthesia and translated what he saw into his music.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Jacck said:


> I am just exploring Sibelius. I've listened to 5 of his symphonies. His music is strange and difficult but has its charm. His symphonies seem to lack any unifying idea or structure. They are more like collections of motifs and the motifs seem to be changing and shifting all the time and require a lot of attention. All his symphonies are different from each other. Most composers symphonies are similar to each other, ie all Bruckner, Mozart or even Beethoven symphonies are alike, but not with Sibelius.* I read that Sibelius had synaesthesia and translated what he saw into his music.*.


Interesting post! It was news to me that Sibelius has synesthesia, so I looked it up on Wikipedia, and found his name among many others listed as an authentic synesthete. But imagine my surprise to find Scriabin--forever presented as the Number One example of synesthesia in a CM composer--listed as a pseudo synesthete; one who mimicked/utilized the outward trappings of the condition to "color" his music! Mind you, Wikipedia could be wrong--it's happened. Their listings seemed to be based upon either the direct testimony of the people themselves or of those who were close to the alleged synesthetes.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I think you get different things from the music of different eras. It is too easy to go from, say, Haydn to, say, Schumann and to fail to get Schumann because you are looking for classical virtues rather than romantic ones. To me this is why some people don't get contemporary music (as opposed to "modern romantic" music) because they go expecting to get the same enjoyment and nourishment that they get from the music of other eras. It works backwards the same way: for people who like contemporary music but find romantic (and even classical and baroque) music indulgent and unchallenging. You need to listen to music of an era that is new to you in the spirit of exploring what it does to you. The same is also the case but in a "smaller" way for individual composers. We can't listen to someone new knowing what we want it to be like.


----------



## Iaeda (Jan 16, 2018)

A composer whose work is steeped in a love for his native land. He masterly turns his inspiration from nature into a celebration of Finland's past and future. On top of that admirable feat the music is often glorious when taken by itself.


----------



## Neward Thelman (Apr 6, 2017)

>> Sibelius did the same thing ... borrowing from Bruckner, Tchaikovsky, to mention a few. <<

If there were ever two composers who were more different from each other - pretty much opposites - they'd be Bruckner and Sibelius. About the only stylistic and/or theoretical similarities between the two are that they were both classical composers who wrote a lot for orchestra.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Enthusiast, you are probably right. I came to classical via movie soundtracks. A lot of the soundtracks use modern 20th century orchestral music. I've been listening to Jerry Goldsmith's Planet of the Apes soundtrack and similar stuff




and that is why I have virtually no problem with for example Varese's Deserts or Arcana, because Goldsmith might have been inspired by it





I had the oposite problem from most classical listeners. I needed to "get into" romantic, classical and baroque. The romantic was easy. The hardest part was the classical. I honestly found Beethoven kind of bland at first listening. Although I learned to enjoy him more over time, as my brain got reprogrammed and used to the classical music.

And Sibelius is Sibelius, unique composer, genius. The music that he produces is unlike any other composer.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> Enthusiast, you are probably right. I came to classical via movie soundtracks. A lot of the soundtracks use modern 20th century orchestral music. I've been listening to Jerry Goldsmith's Planet of the Apes soundtrack and similar stuff
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I get it but am quite different! The first thing for me is what the music does over time. So the structure and discipline of a piece of music are very important to me. Not that I study it - I have no academic understanding of different classical forms, for example -
or listen out for them. It is just that for the music to deliver it needs to take me from one place to quite a different place and to be more than the thematic ideas. By the time I have been listening to a piece for a good 5 or 10 minutes it has either drawn me in or it has just been like looking out of the window of a train as it rushes through rural and occasional urban scenes. Beethoven is amazing in this respect - although he also gives us endless moments of incredible invention and power - and Mozart, too.

I think it is a big strength of Sibelius who was a very disciplined composer. Listen, if you can, to one of Vanska's recordings of earlier versions of some of his key works (the violin concerto, the 5th symphony). He edited out some wonderful ideas to make the pieces tighter and ultimately more powerful. You can contrast his music with that of Mahler, who famously compared his ambitions with those of Sibelius by saying that he wants to include everything in his symphonies. As a result, his symphonies can seem a bit of a mess or rather over-worked to me unless they are in the hands of a master.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

I was not that impressed by Sibelius 4th. I think the reason might be in the interpretation. I read somewhere on this site, that the absolute definitive recording of the fourh symphony is Karajan and every other interpretation is just subpar. So I listened to Karajan and did not enjoy it very much. Now I listened to Rozhdestvensky and it is much superior imho. One should not believe everything one reads 
Rozhdestvensky 




Karajan


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> It is just that for the music to deliver it needs to take me from one place to quite a different place and to be more than the thematic ideas.


I enjoy music differently. Music produces some feelings in me, evokes certain atmosphere, stimulates my brain. I do not need anything else from the music. I do not understand how people search for meaning behind music and try to interpret it what the conducter wanted to say or not. People analyze Mahler and analyze Schostakovich and project their ideas how Schostakovich fought against stalinism etc. If I want deep philosophy, I will read a book. Music is not intellectual, it is rather like poetry, evoking sounds, emotions, atmospheres.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> I was not that impressed by Sibelius 4th. I think the reason might be in the interpretation. I read somewhere on this site, that the absolute definitive recording of the fourh symphony is Karajan and every other interpretation is just subpar. So I listened to Karajan and did not enjoy it very much. Now I listened to Rozhdestvensky and it is much superior imho. One should not believe everything one reads
> Rozhdestvensky
> 
> 
> ...


I do like the Karajan but would never consider it the only Sibelius 4. I also like Rozhdestvensky in this symphony - and indeed in all the Sibelius symphonies - he is one of my favourites. I have always had a very strong liking for Maazel in the 4th - his first recording with the Vienna PO - and if I had to choose a favourite for the 4th it would be that one.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Jacck said:


> So I listened to Karajan and did not enjoy it very much. Now I listened to Rozhdestvensky and it is much superior imho. *One should not believe everything one reads *


...particularly when it refers to Karajan!


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

listening to Maazel on youtube and you are right, very good interpretation. It is curious how different the interpretations can sound from each other. This is completely different music from the Karajan.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Yes indeed. Karajan in the 4th is bleak. Maazel gives us lots of intensity.


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

The scherzo from the First Symphony and the Romance for String Orchestra are the only works by Sibelius that truly mind me of other composers (the scherzo from Dvorak's New World Symphony and the Tchaikovsky's Serenade for Strings respectively). Maybe a bit of Wagner or Bruckner in the Kullervo Symphony.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

arthro said:


> I think music must be one of the very few areas where admitting you've been wrong about somebody can result in satisfaction and reward.
> 
> I did have a fascination with Sibelius in my twenties (a while back) but it got replaced by anopinion that his music was a bit too facile, often a bit too easy, lush and romantic. Of course all these could be qualities for another person.
> 
> ...


The Tchaikovsky influence is well documented I believe - could you cite a specific example regarding the Bruckner please? 
Great thread by the way.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> Sibelius took time to grow on me, too. When I was younger, things like Finlandia and the 2nd symphony were so great, the 5th a bit less. The other symphonies - including No. 1 - just didn't make any impression or sense, especially the 4th. Most of his other symphonic poems were puzzling and dull and uninteresting. How wrong I was - in time I came to love the whole symphonic canon, most of the symphonic poems, the violin concerto and so much more. Now he's one of my favorite composers. The comment by Pierre Boulez that Sibelius was the world's worst composer was so off the mark. I collected a lot of Sibelius, but the BIS "complete" (it's not) Sibelius edition was the icing on the cake. Now I'm not going to pretend that everything is great - there's some dull, third-rate stuff there: Nightride and Sunrise, for example. But there's so much great music to hear from him. Too bad American audiences by and large don't care for it and so very little of it ever gets programmed.


I believe it was René Leibowitz rather than his pupil Boulez.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> Sibelius took time to grow on me, too. When I was younger, things like Finlandia and the 2nd symphony were so great, the 5th a bit less. The other symphonies - including No. 1 - just didn't make any impression or sense, especially the 4th. Most of his other symphonic poems were puzzling and dull and uninteresting. How wrong I was - in time I came to love the whole symphonic canon, most of the symphonic poems, the violin concerto and so much more. Now he's one of my favorite composers. The comment by Pierre Boulez that Sibelius was the world's worst composer was so off the mark. I collected a lot of Sibelius, but the BIS "complete" (it's not) Sibelius edition was the icing on the cake. Now I'm not going to pretend that everything is great - there's some dull, third-rate stuff there: Nightride and Sunrise, for example. But there's so much great music to hear from him. Too bad American audiences by and large don't care for it and so very little of it ever gets programmed.


I can only assume that's a really bad performance of Night Ride! I think it's a terrific piece, but the conductor/orchestra have be willing to let the stark darkness come across in the early passages, then layer brass over brass to bring up the sun. And then the little woodwind twiddles as the birds wake up... maybe it's just me, but I rate it along with Pohjola's Daughter and Luonnotar as the best of Sibelius' tone poems.


----------



## Biffo (Mar 7, 2016)

One of the first Sibelius LPs I bought was an album of tone poems from Antal Dorati and the LSO; it contained Nightride and Sunrise and it has been a favourite ever since. The BIS disc I have it on is from Osmo Vanska and the Lahti Symphony Orchestra, presumably the performance in the Complete Edition. Vanska is a bit slower than Dorati, especially in the Sunrise but it is still a fine performance with beautiful playing from the Lahti SO.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> Sibelius took time to grow on me, too. When I was younger, things like Finlandia and the 2nd symphony were so great, the 5th a bit less. The other symphonies - including No. 1 - just didn't make any impression or sense, especially the 4th. Most of his other symphonic poems were puzzling and dull and uninteresting. How wrong I was - in time I came to love the whole symphonic canon, most of the symphonic poems, the violin concerto and so much more. Now he's one of my favorite composers. The comment by Pierre Boulez that Sibelius was the world's worst composer was so off the mark. I collected a lot of Sibelius, but the BIS "complete" (it's not) Sibelius edition was the icing on the cake. Now I'm not going to pretend that everything is great - there's some dull, third-rate stuff there: Nightride and Sunrise, for example. But there's so much great music to hear from him. Too bad American audiences by and large don't care for it and so very little of it ever gets programmed.


I had the opportunity to hear the Sibelius violin concerto in concert, paired with Brahms Symphony #2. It was very vibrant and intense, and I really benefited from hearing it live.


----------



## arthro (Mar 12, 2013)

Neward Thelman said:


> >> Sibelius did the same thing ... borrowing from Bruckner, Tchaikovsky, to mention a few. <<
> 
> If there were ever two composers who were more different from each other - pretty much opposites - they'd be Bruckner and Sibelius. About the only stylistic and/or theoretical similarities between the two are that they were both classical composers who wrote a lot for orchestra.


Oh well OK, I'm not a Bruckner fan, so probably that was an unqualified comparison. However, in my defense (if you'll allow) I was thinking brass fanfares. But you're right, if I don't know Bruckner, or even like him, I shoud have left old Anton out.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Sibelius also wrote beautiful songs:

Flickan kom ifrån sin älsklings möte.

Svarta rosor.

Var det en dröm.


----------



## diegorvila (Dec 27, 2016)

I do like Nightride and Sunrise a lot!! 
I haven't heard it in a long time, though. Maybe if I listen to it now I'll find it less enrapturing.


----------

