# Charles Villiers Stanford



## ojoncas (Jan 3, 2019)

I’ve been introduced to his Piano Concertos recently, I’m liking it much!

I’ve noticed he composed symphonies, does anyone even know about them?
I can’t find much about which one (out of 7) I should start with, basically, which one/ones is/are good? Are they even worth the time?

I’m quite doubtful they are commonly listened to.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Check this thread:

SS 27.10.18 - Stanford #4


----------



## BenG (Aug 28, 2018)

I agree with you about his piano concerto. For me the symphonies are not worth listening to, I find them extremely boring. However I strongly recommend his choral works, especially 'For Lo, I raise up', for its feiry nature. His magnificat and nunc dimittis in A is also very good.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Chandos recorded lots of his works, including all symphonies. Good melodic stuff in the romantic style.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

BenG said:


> ...For me the symphonies are not worth listening to, I find them extremely boring...


They're worth a listen for a good reason: it gives you a perspective as to what was considered "good" in Victorian England, why some people considered England "The Land without Music" and Elgar's rise to prominence. By comparing the lesser composers (Stanford and Parry) you realize just how much greater the later composers were. I don't find the Stanford symphonies boring, but they are uninspiring. They're extremely well-made, the craftmanship is undeniable. They never take off and excite the listener. He did write a series of Irish Rhapsodies that I enjoy much more, and some of the chamber music is quite good.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

My personal favorites of the symphonies are numbers III & V. The Third remains as Stanford's most popular symphony and was the most famous of British symphonies before Elgar's First entered the scene in 1908. I would try these two first.

As mentioned already, his Irish Rhapsodies are well worth knowing and I would try his chamber works (piano trios, piano quartets, Clarinet Sonata are all wonderful). His choral works may be what Stanford is best known for, and without hesitation, I would grab The Revenge: A Ballad of the Fleet, Songs of the Sea, and Songs of the Fleet.

In other words, this album:










Enjoy.
:tiphat:


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

Yes, I agree about the greatness of the piano concertos and the symphonies. To my ears the latter ones don't sound dull.

The _Concert Variations upon an English Theme_, for piano and orchestra is another highly appealing work. Recommended for those that don't know it.

I remember liking the String Quintet in F major, too. He was quite prolific. All his works may not be that great, but there are some gems for sure.


----------



## rwm (Dec 24, 2015)

My favorite piece by Stanford.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I've got his *Requiem* on the Naxos label. Although long it is less dark compared to other requiems of the period (eg. Verdi, Berlioz). You've got a combination of the English choral tradition with influences of Mendelssohn and Verdi. The two disc set includes highlights from an opera on an oriental theme (mainly orchestral). Okay as a filler but nowhere near to being the finest pieces of orientalism (but we've got Scheherazade for that).

I've also got his *Clarinet Concerto*, and one way of looking at it is the concerto which Brahms never wrote. The jig in the final movement will get your toes a tapping. It caused mild controversy at the time of its premiere, but this was the time when some people admonished Brahms for bringing those vulgar gypsy tunes into the concert hall. The disc I have is by Thea King, who also plays the very different concerto by Finzi.


----------

