# Works notable for only 1 movement



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I find frustrating that many works have only one movement I like, almost always the first. The others seem to be purely excercises or run-throughs in the form of that particular era it was in. Lots of examples I have:

Mozart Symphonies 25, 29, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39
Mozart Piano Concertos 15, 20, 25

Schubert Symphones 5, 9 (2nd movement I like)
Brahms Symphonies 3 and 4
Mahler Symphony 6
Mendelssohn Symphonies 3 and 4
Tchaikovsky Symphony 6

I hate having to listen to the other movements for continuity, but feel they are there purely for structural reasons.

Curious to hear if others have a similar problem and what those examples are?


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

Beethoven symphony no. 5, first movement.
Sibelius symphony no. 2, last movement.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Funny, I was thinking about this the other day. The example that came to mind was Walton's 1st symphony. I've got nothing against the other movements, but the first just towers over them - such a storm that the prospect of more music is a little off-putting.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

What a fascinating thread; while I understand the listing of some of the works above, I fear that you guys are not listening to these works properly. The first movements of Tchaikovsky's 6th, Walton's 1st and Mahler's 6th are truly superb pieces in their own right, but the movements that follow shouldn't be simply regarded as run-throughs in order to meet a prescribed form. The last movements for example of all three of these symphonies is also a mammoth work, with the Walton last movement being particularly interesting in that he found it very difficult to write, and it - far more than the 1st movement - could easily be considered a single-movement work as it has a very different feel and sound to the preceding movements. Yet, if you listen to the symphony as a whole, it fits and works so well.
To me the only duff movement of Tchaikovsky's 6th is the 3rd; Tchaikovsky is the master of repeated phrases, but with this one if you took out the repeats, the movement would probably be no more than a couple of minutes long, so bereft is it of ideas.
But this is the joy of music - we all hear things and appreciate things in a different way


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

techniquest said:


> What a fascinating thread; while I understand the listing of some of the works above, I fear that you guys are not listening to these works properly.


Don't be afraid!

For me, and I suspect for the others who've posted, it's not about understanding the works, it's simply about what we personally get from them.
If we can allow for the fact that people can have widely different tastes in musical eras, composers, and works, what's so weird about having widely different tastes in individual movements?


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

Nerefield, you need to read the last line in my post


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Well, we _were_ talking about being interested only in the first movement... :lol:


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2018)

No I absolutely do not have a problem those examples you gave. Most of those examples are masterpieces from start to finish.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I cannot think of a single example fitting your description myself.

There are indeed works where one movement stands out, but in those cases I also listen with pleasure to the rest. An example is Mahler 5, where the Adagietto, overplayed as it is, gets to me every time.


----------



## Bill Cooke (May 20, 2017)

Prokofiev's Piano Concerto No. 2 - the first movement is brilliant; the ones that follow are nice but don't carry the same weight.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Jerome said:


> No I absolutely do not have a problem those examples you gave. Most of those examples are masterpieces from start to finish.


Yes they are but some parts of them are more masterpieces.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

DeepR said:


> Sibelius symphony no. 2, last movement.


I don´t think the last movement have the effect it have without the other movements.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I can't think of a single work where I find a particular movement fantastic and the remaining movements just okay.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Using the most obvious meaning of "notable," I'd nominate Litolff's Concerto Symphonique No. 4 in D minor, Op. 102. Only the familiar scherzo from this four-movement work is ever played. In fact, it's the _only _thing by Litolff ever played!


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Using the most obvious meaning of "notable," I'd nominate Litolff's Concerto Symphonique No. 4 in D minor, Op. 102. Only the familiar scherzo from this four-movement work is ever played. In fact, it's the _only _thing by Litolff ever played!


And yet another example of an unfairly forgotten and unappreciated composer of the 19th century. Listen to the wonderful Adagio of this same work at 19:54. It begins with an engaging melody introduced by the horns. The Largo of the Litolff Concerto Symphonique #5 is even more impressive but unfortunately is not available on YouTube.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Carl Orff - O Fortuna ~ Carmina Burana

If I got one Euro from everyone who has this in / on their shelf's and only play this part, I was a rich man.


----------



## Bevo (Feb 22, 2015)

This used to how it was for me, especially when I was just stepping into the realm of Classical music. But the one thing that made the biggest difference was me starting to write music myself. The initial difference this made was making me realize how much true effort and devotion these composers put into composing. From then on, if I listen to a piece I feel I have a moral obligation to listen to every movement, simply due to how much hard work went into it. The other major difference it made was that it has now made me listen to certain pieces from a different per perspective. I used to not be a huge fan of slower movements, but when you try writing one you realize the amount of balance it takes to convey the mood/emotions you want it to. Pieces that used to bore me to tears now speak to me in a different way. I can recognize the beauty of these pieces now, unlike before. I can't promise that composing will have this effect on everyone, but it certainly did for me. When I listen to pieces, it's not just for entertainment, I analyze at the same time.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> I find frustrating that many works have only one movement I like, almost always the first. The others seem to be purely excercises or run-throughs in the form of that particular era it was in. Lots of examples I have:
> 
> Mozart Symphonies 25, 29, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39
> Mozart Piano Concertos 15, 20, 25
> ...


I respectfully disagree, especially on Mahler's 6th symphony. I think all the movements are powerful, and I have a special weakness for the slow movement, which always melts me, it's incredibly majestic. About the Tchaikovsky's 6th symphony I think there are at least 3 movements fitted to the mood of the work.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

Nereffid said:


> Funny, I was thinking about this the other day. The example that came to mind was Walton's 1st symphony. I've got nothing against the other movements, but the first just towers over them - such a storm that the prospect of more music is a little off-putting.


....thought it was only me! (Moeran's is the same)....


----------



## AfterHours (Mar 27, 2017)

No, none that I can think of offhand, especially not with works you're citing like Brahms 3rd and 4th (which are thoroughly staggering, prismatic masterpieces of cyclic form, theme and emotional expression), Schubert's 9th ... and so forth... I would suspect this is a result of listening only (or mostly) for form and not (or much less) for content. The purpose of music (all art) is to express emotion(s)/concept(s). To the degree one is not aligning his listening/assimilation of works to this (as in only paying attention to form/technical matters and not their purpose/elicitation), one is not really considering the work at hand, or much in the way of it's overall purpose and content. I don't claim to know for sure this is what you're running into, but based on this thread and a comment (or few) of yours that Ive happened across about your depreciating affinity for music, that's what I would initially suspect. If this is the case, you wouldnt be the first (by far), so I don't say this to single you out, but it is something that came to mind after reading your OP.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

One of the most infamous examples must be Barber's String Quartet, Op. 11. I'm almost certain that most people know the second movement Adagio, albeit in the form of the composer's arrangement for string orchestra, but the rest of the work remains fairly obscure. A pity!


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

AfterHours said:


> No, none that I can think of offhand, especially not with works you're citing like Brahms 3rd and 4th (which are thoroughly staggering, prismatic masterpieces of cyclic form, theme and emotional expression), Schubert's 9th ... and so forth... I would suspect this is a result of listening only (or mostly) for form and not (or much less) for content. The purpose of music (all art) is to express emotion(s)/concept(s). To the degree one is not aligning his listening/assimilation of works to this (as in only paying attention to form/technical matters and not their purpose/elicitation), one is not really considering the work at hand, or much in the way of it's overall purpose and content. I don't claim to know for sure this is what you're running into, but based on this thread and a comment (or few) of yours that Ive happened across about your depreciating affinity for music, that's what I would initially suspect. If this is the case, you wouldnt be the first (by far), so I don't say this to single you out, but it is something that came to mind after reading your OP.


I think it is more important to find what you like personally in music and delving into the music itself, rather than going by ratings, or consensus. Concepts are what makes me admire some music that is underappreciated by casual listeners more than others. Big emotions can be easily achieved. More objective discernment is only possible by analysis.


----------



## AfterHours (Mar 27, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> I think it is more important to find what you like personally in music and delving into the music itself, rather than going by ratings, or consensus. Concepts are what makes me admire some music that is underappreciated by casual listeners more than others. Big emotions can be easily achieved. More objective discernment is only possible by analysis.


I'm not quite sure what your reply refers to exactly, as it seems somewhat non-sequitur to what I said, but it's no matter and was more an educated guess based on a prior comment(s) and this OP. If your methods are infact working for you and I am mistaken, then no worries and wouldn't need discussion anyhow.


----------



## KJ von NNJ (Oct 13, 2017)

I would rather approach this by what becomes widely known to the public, as in Beethoven 5 1st movement. Of course to most of us, the whole thing is a keeper but many people identify the 1st movement as being the whole Beethoven 5th! 

Another that comes to mind is the 2nd movement of Mendelssohn's 3rd symphony (shaving commercials back in the day, Old Spice I think). Some people may not know the composer but everyone knows that bouncy, buoyant scherzo. The first movement of Mendelssohn's 4th symphony is another one. Remember that bicycling movie Breaking Away?
Mahler 5's adagietto has always been way more recognizable to the general public than the rest of the work. Wie Shade (what a shame).

I often listen to Schubert's 3rd symphony, 1st movement on it's own. It's like a great Beethoven or Mozart Overture. The rest of the work is fine, don't get me wrong.


----------



## Sol Invictus (Sep 17, 2016)

Sibelius' 7th...


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

A majority of symphonies. This is true of even the best symphonies, the 1st movement is where the idea is and the rest is just there to be there.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> A majority of symphonies. This is true of even the best symphonies, the 1st movement is where the idea is and the rest is just there to be there.


I could not disagree more. I can think of no more than a handful of symphonies where I would prefer the 1st movement over the others.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> A majority of symphonies. This is true of even the best symphonies, the 1st movement is where the idea is and the rest is just there to be there.


This is, of course, a provocative generalization. However, the _Prague_...


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> A majority of symphonies. This is true of even the best symphonies, the 1st movement is where the idea is and the rest is just there to be there.


My view is not qute as extreme, but I have a similar view of over 1/2 of symphonies out there. But this is from a perspective where we are just looking for something revolutionary and transcending, and not really into the period practice. Schubert was smart to leave his no, 8 unfinished, as he probably didn't want to spoil it like his others :lol:


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

Symphony Fantastique is a game changer from start to finish but I admit, like a lot of people, I've listened to the 4th and 5th movements WAY more than the others.

Sometimes also the Farewell Symphony by Haydn only gets attention for the 4th movement.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> A majority of symphonies. This is true of even the best symphonies, the 1st movement is where the idea is and the rest is just there to be there.


This isn't true of the majority of the Beethoven symphonies.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

DaveM said:


> This isn't true of the majority of the Beethoven symphonies.


It's not even remotely true of any of them.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

DeepR said:


> B*eethoven symphony no. 5, first movement*.
> Sibelius symphony no. 2, last movement.


The last movement is the best movement of that symphony, but the others are superb too. The slow movement is fantastic. Beethoven's 5th does not belong in this thread.

One which may belong here is Shostakovich's cello concerto no.1. The opening movement is energising, but that long second movement, despite its brilliant moments goes on way too long. Then the last is a pale version of the first.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

eugeneonagain said:


> The last movement is the best movement of that symphony, but the others are superb too. The slow movement is fantastic. Beethoven's 5th does not belong in this thread.
> 
> One which may belong here is Shostakovich's cello concerto no.1. The opening movement is energising, but that long second movement, despite its brilliant moments goes on way too long. Then the last is a pale version of the first.


I found Beethoven's 5th great for start to almost finish. The last movement seemed to ramble and repeat too much, and the ending sounded like a joke to me, like guessing when it will be that final note.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> I found Beethoven's 5th great for start to almost finish. The last movement seemed to ramble and repeat too much, and the ending sounded like a joke to me, like guessing when it will be that final note.


This post sounds like a joke to me.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Phil loves classical said:


> I found Beethoven's 5th great for start to almost finish. The last movement seemed to ramble and repeat too much, and the ending sounded like a joke to me, like guessing when it will be that final note.


You've gotta listen in the right spirit. And then, when it's done, throw your hat in the air and cheer! I guarantee you'll feel better.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

“I hate having to listen to the other movements for continuity, but feel they are there purely for structural reasons.” 

I wouldn’t waste my time with these composers, because they obviously didn’t feel that way or they wouldn’t have written what they did. What composer would consider any of their music as filler for structural reasons?—and it’s hardly complementary to someone like Mozart or Mahler. That someone likes a bit here and a bit there doesn’t suggest that listener fully understands the composer or is interested in doing so. Some of these examples are like sex without foreplay—let’s just start in the middle without the warm-up.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> I found Beethoven's 5th great for start to almost finish. The last movement seemed to ramble and repeat too much, and the ending sounded like a joke to me, like guessing when it will be that final note.


I also think the ending of Beethoven's 5th is a joke, as you described. But I think it's a very funny joke and that's why I love it.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

eugeneonagain said:


> The last movement is the best movement of that symphony, but the others are superb too. The slow movement is fantastic. Beethoven's 5th does not belong in this thread.


After the superb, heroic ending of the first movement, those awful, banal themes and rhythms of the second movement are to me the biggest letdown in the symphonic repertoire. The 5th = the first movement, the rest is tacked on. The 3rd also has the greatest first movement, but fares much better afterwards. So yeah, opinions.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

DeepR said:


> After the superb, heroic ending of the first movement, those awful, banal themes and rhythms of the second movement are to me the biggest letdown in the symphonic repertoire. The 5th = the first movement, the rest is tacked on. The 3rd also has the greatest first movement, but fares much better afterwards. So yeah, opinions.


I suspect you've probably over-listened to it and have a deeply jaded opinion. To call the themes of the 2nd movement 'a let-down' seems to me beyond ridiculous, After a first movement of that sort the contrast is ideal and the opening theme is a classic typically heroic theme.


----------



## GAJ (Oct 15, 2016)

I started my 'listening career' with this 'problem'. For me I was devouring so many new pieces I only ever played single favourite movements on vinyl. As I wore out or scratched those favourite moments I eventually resorted to listening to other movements. By the time my collection was being replaced with CD's all the gaps in my musical listening were being filled in. Pointless me giving any examples of favourite single movements as I'm now a committed listener to complete movements. (Sibelius 7 ironically has remained top of my list since first hearing it nearly 50 years ago but do admit to experimenting with recording on tape the three trombone themes on their own!)


----------



## Jacob Brooks (Feb 21, 2017)

Schubert's last piano sonata! After the first two movements the other two make no sense! He didn't usually have this problem (EG the other two of the three last sonatas) it's a shame!


----------



## Guest (Jan 25, 2018)

Phil loves classical said:


> I find frustrating that many works have only one movement I like, almost always the first. The others seem to be purely excercises or run-throughs in the form of that particular era it was in. Lots of examples I have:
> 
> Mozart Symphonies 25, 29, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39
> Mozart Piano Concertos 15, 20, 25
> ...


I sometimes find that I like 2 out of 3, or 3 out of 4 movements. But of the examples you've given, I'd only contradict the Mahler 6 where it's the andante that is the standout, not the first. Of the others, it would be trolling to suggest that I'd not bother with any of them! :devil:


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> A majority of symphonies. This is true of even the best symphonies, the 1st movement is where the idea is and the rest is just there to be there.


The reason I can't agree with this is that the best symphonies have more than one idea, to say the least. Although sometimes the idea, for one movement anyway, is to take the simplest possible motive or theme and derive an astonishingly complex variety of material from it. You can see that, very famously, in the first movements of Mozart's no. 40 and Beethoven's no. 5. Really, nothing matches the Litolff Scherzo as a one-movement classical hit that I know of, except Pachelbel's Canon in D, usually performed without the accompanying Gigue.


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

Aaron Copland Billy the Kid Suite. I heard it tonight live in concert and didn't like it at all, or most of it, except one part. Don't know exactly which part that is but it's at about 14 minutes of a 20 minute rendition of the piece.


----------

