# Your favourite Vaughan Williams Symphony



## Habib

What is your favourite Vaughan Williams symphony and why?


----------



## Weston

I wanted to say No. 2, but Sinfonia Antartica won out. I just love the wordless soprano. I don't dare play it when it's 11 degress F. outside in Nashville though!

[Edit: And it IS spelled Antartica with a "c" missing. Does anyone know the etymology of that?]


----------



## Habib

I didn't vote myself. For me, its a close contest between Symphonies Nos. 4 & 8. The fourth is very menacing and I like how the movements are linked and continue on one from the other. I also like No. 2 and 7 but I think the orchestration of No. 8, particularly the percussion used in the final movement, is the best. I also think that the first movement 'variations without a theme' is also interesting and I like the slow movement with its pensive violin solo.


----------



## Kuhlau

The Fifth Symphony will always be very special for me, as I first head it a few months after my wonderful little daughter arrived in my life. 

FK


----------



## Elgarian

The fifth for me too. It was the first RVW symphony I encountered, recorded from a BBC 'Third Programme' concert on a poor reel-to-reel tape recorder probably in about 1966/7. I'd go walking among the Derbyshire hills (the nearest unspoilt wild countryside available to me) with the 5th (or sometimes the Tallis Fantasia) playing in my imagination. I met my wife-to-be around that time, and she borrowed my 5th symphony tape, so it was always playing in her flat.

But even without all these nostalgic associations, it would still be the outstanding RVW symphony for me - it's one of the very finest expressions of that mystical English pastoral character that I value so much.


----------



## ecg_fa

*Fave V. Williams symphony*

Hard to choose00 I also very much like his 5th & Symphonia Antarctica & others, but went for no. 2,'London' Symphony. The first I heard and I found exciting in its own distinctive
way-- opened a door to me for much English music .

Ed


----------



## Kuhlau

Elgarian said:


> The Fifth ... is one of the very finest expressions of that mystical English pastoral character that I value so much.


I couldn't agree more, sir. 

FK


----------



## Frasier

Weston said:


> [Edit: And it IS spelled Antartica with a "c" missing. Does anyone know the etymology of that?]


Vaughan Williams changed it to the Italian to go with Sinfonia, hence Sinfonia Antartica.


----------



## Lark Ascending

I voted for the Pastoral Symphony which I think is a beautiful work, especially the wordless vocals in the fourth movement.


----------



## Yagan Kiely

I've always found everything I've heard by him to be terribly boring and uninspiring.

That said, I have no argument backing my opinion, I just find it boring and unmemorable.


----------



## Kuhlau

Yagan, your response begs the question: What have you heard?

FK


----------



## Yagan Kiely

Sym 5 & 6
Flos Campi
Tuba Concerto
Thomas Tallis
Greensleeves
Lark
Dives & Lazarus

I believe some of these are the more 'popular' works of his, but I still find them uneventful and.... well... very dull lifeless and boring (much like Schumann). Anything you can suggest?**

**I've always find Chopin similar and though over the past 4 years I haven't really changed though I have found a few pieces I like now.

*Sam reasoning as in my first post, but that is OT.


----------



## Herzeleide

Yagan Kiely said:


> I've always found everything I've heard by him to be terribly boring and uninspiring.
> 
> That said, I have no argument backing my opinion, I just find it boring and unmemorable.


Fallacy fallacy objective fallacy _ad somethingorotherus_ fallacy objective opinion argument fallacy _ad wrongus_ fallacy subjective fallacy fallacy fallacy subjective incivil fallacy _ad stupidus_ subjective subjective fallacy fallacy fallacy fallacy fallacy _Ad nauseam_...


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> Fallacy fallacy objective fallacy _ad somethingorotherus_ fallacy objective opinion argument fallacy _ad wrongus_ fallacy subjective fallacy fallacy fallacy subjective incivil fallacy _ad stupidus_ subjective subjective fallacy fallacy fallacy fallacy fallacy _Ad nauseam_...


Getting irate much? Do you really hate it that much that I dare to have a different opinion that you have to follow me around attacking me? It's not my fault your arguments had so many fallacies in them. Why don't you try and contribute to this forum instead?


----------



## Kuhlau

Well, it seems, Yagan, that Vaughan Williams clearly isn't for you. 

FK


----------



## Yagan Kiely

Oh well, I'll try listening again later on maybe something will rub off.


----------



## JTech82

Yagan Kiely said:


> Sym 5 & 6
> Flos Campi
> Tuba Concerto
> Thomas Tallis
> Greensleeves
> Lark
> Dives & Lazarus
> 
> I believe some of these are the more 'popular' works of his, but I still find them uneventful and.... well... very dull lifeless and boring (much like Schumann). Anything you can suggest?**
> 
> **I've always find Chopin similar and though over the past 4 years I haven't really changed though I have found a few pieces I like now.
> 
> *Sam reasoning as in my first post, but that is OT.


This is an interesting observation, because for one thing I don't think you're listening hard enough. His symphonies are wonderful as are his other orchestral works. The other being you haven't heard all of his symphonies, which are all very different from each other.

But it's like somebody has said already, Vaughan Williams is clearly not for you.

By the way your observation on Schumann is also off the mark. I couldn't DISAGREE with you more. Perhaps you haven't heard the right works by the right conductor played by the right orchestra.


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> By the way you're observation on Schumann is also off the mark. I couldn't DISAGREE with you more. Perhaps you haven't heard the right works by the right conductor played by the right orchestra.


As I said, I have no reason to dislike them. I just find him dull and un-melodic, but I have no objective reasoning for it. I have heard many of his 'popular' (many) and a few less by great performers, but I still haven't changed my view yet.



> I don't think you're listening hard enough.


I've definitely tried, and believe me, I always listen well to pieces. Even pieces that initially revolt me (not these).


----------



## JTech82

Yagan Kiely said:


> As I said, I have no reason to dislike them. I just find him dull and un-melodic, but I have no objective reasoning for it. I have heard many of his 'popular' (many) and a few less by great performers, but I still haven't changed my view yet.
> 
> I've definitely tried, and believe me, I always listen well to pieces. Even pieces that initially revolt me (not these).


I guess Vaughan Williams and Schumann aren't for you then huh? Well there are so many other composers to listen to. Nobody likes the same things. I actually like Vaughan Williams a lot. I didn't like him at first, because I felt he was just kind of "ho hum" for lack of a better phrase.

But as I was listening again to a Vaughan Williams piece (I forget which one now) with maybe less expectations, I finally understood the pieces better. At a passing listen, I can see why you would perceive him to be dull or boring, but now I can't see your viewpoint at all. All I can really tell you is keep trying and if you're not into him, then wait a couple of months before you come back.

I know it's not good to totally dismiss someone's music, but I always at least try and give things a try and I'm glad to see you're at least making an effort to want to like him.


----------



## Bach

Vaughan Williams is a fantastic melodist but actually has a rather clumsy and amateurish approach to composition (as he himself admitted). Nice composer though. Nothing more and nothing less than nice.


----------



## Elgarian

Bach said:


> Nothing more and nothing less than nice.


Nice? The stark, bleak tragedy of the 6th symphony (for instance) ... _nice_? I'm entirely baffled by such a use of the word! Can you explain that a bit more?


----------



## Bach

Well, I'm sure there are exceptions and I know that his music can be described as bleak in places (as I have done so myself) - but I feel that much of it is very warm. Very cosy and reassuring. England's still as beautiful as it always was. A nice feeling.


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> England's still as beautiful as it always was. A nice feeling.


I hate how nationalistic so many composer are. Why can't some talk about how there country wasn't actually 'perfect in every possible way for the entirety of history'.


----------



## Kuhlau

Know you of such a composer?

Take Shostakovich, for example. He was forced to kiss *** and portray his country as nothing but glorious.

FK


----------



## Yagan Kiely

Please don't bring that up again. While it is obvious that he indeed disliked Stalin (which in itself says nothing), there is little or no evidence to Shostakovich's life ever being in danger. The only 'evidence' comes from a completely unverified and _proven _scratchy (at best) account by Volkov, who rarely visited Dmitri. Even Volkov's account on Symphony 7 contradicts itself. Yes he was paid and glorified when he did 'kiss ***'. But there is no evidence to prove that he was forced to, other than they wouldn't pay for pieces that didn't.

Back to v-williams....


----------



## Kuhlau

Forced not by direct authoritarian edicts, Yagan, but by the general pressure to conform to what was acceptable. I never suggested his life was in danger; I just said he wrote a lot of nationalistic music. And you've yet to show me a composer who didn't. 

FK


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> general pressure to conform to what was acceptable


Exactly the same as the US under McCarthyism. Same pressure in almost all countries, and given that, it isn't an issue because it is 'the norm'.
There is a 'general' pressure in Australian composer communities to write Atonl music aswell.



> And you've yet to show me a composer who didn't.


Why do I have to? I said I hate how composers do that. I never said that I '... hate v-williams because of A even though others don't A'.


----------



## Elgarian

Bach said:


> Well, I'm sure there are exceptions and I know that his music can be described as bleak in places (as I have done so myself) - but I feel that much of it is very warm. Very cosy and reassuring. England's still as beautiful as it always was. A nice feeling.


Well, of course you can cherry pick bits of RVW (eg _Lark Ascending_)and call them cosy and reassuring, but you could do that with most composers I think. Have you listened to the 4th or 6th symphonies, for example? They are far, _ far_ from cosy and reassuring; indeed I find some of RVW's work (such as the 6th symphony) to be too disturbing, too bleak - almost nihilistic in its outlook - to cope with, these days.


----------



## JTech82

I've been listening to this one:










Man, it's wonderful. All of the symphonies are beautiful, so I think it's stupid to pick just one. They all are unique and beautiful.


----------



## Bach

They're a bit overblown. Not very succinctly structured and lots of annoying 'big' tunes.


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> They're a bit overblown. Not very succinctly structured and lots of annoying 'big' tunes.


My, what a formidable, incisive critique! Such flawless logic is utterly irrebuttable. I bow down to such a penetrating mind.


----------



## Bach

Surely you must agree with me.

I can only wonder what Boulez thinks of Vaughan Williams - probably just laughs.


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> I can only wonder what Boulez thinks of Vaughan Williams - probably just laughs.


Probably, but then Boulez was/is unimpressed by Brahms, Tchaikovsky and Schoenberg's 'classical' serial works, not to mention almost all of Stravinsky, with the exception of the Rite.

Since when did I copy Boulez's opinions?


----------



## Bach

You might not, but I do and I would advise you to as well. Stravinsky's neoclassical period was shyte, Tchaikovsky is dull and 'tune based'. I think Boulez is the greatest living musician.


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> You might not, but I do.


Funny, you come across as the mindless type.

BTW It's just occurred to me that Boulez has indeed conducted some of his neoclassical works (e.g. Symphony of Pslams), presumably meaning that he thinks it's not that bad.


----------



## Bach

Wow, personal attacks, what can I say? (not what Oxford University said when they offered me a scholarship but that's for another conversation I feel) I think Boulez is a fairly good role-model. If he doesn't like something, you have to ask yourself why - and one often finds that it's for a very good reason.

The Symphony of Psalms is an exception to his otherwise uninspired period. I'd agree with Boulez that it's probably worth conducting.


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> Wow, personal attacks, what can I say? (not what Oxford University said when they offered me a scholarship but that's for another conversation I feel)












What credentials you have! Unfortunately the very fact that you felt the need to point out your scholarship leads one to believe of your paucity of rational argument.



Bach said:


> The Symphony of Psalms is an exception to his otherwise uninspired period. I'd agree with Boulez that it's probably worth conducting.


Of course you'd agree with Boulez, it's what some mindless follower would do. Ironically, Boulez himself is intensely critical about others' opinions on such matters. Never once have I read anything written by him where he has deferred his opinion to anyone else. So letting someone else, rather than your own ears and critical faculties, dictate to you what's good and bad, is a profoundly un-Boulezian thing to do.


----------



## Bach

Herzeleide said:


> What credentials you have! Unfortunately the very fact that you felt the need to point out your scholarship leads one to believe of your paucity of rational argument.


I don't really know enough details to formulate a rational argument on Vaughan Williams' symphonies - they sound clumsy to my ears. Besides, I'm only 18 - I'm proud of my irrational immaturity! (not forgetting that you have been rather sweeping and personal yourself)

I was told by Robert Saxton that while you're young you should imitate those who you admire most - for me that's Boulez. I doubt I'll think the same way in five or ten years time.


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> I was told by Robert Saxton that while you're young you should imitate those who you admire most


In composition: yes. In opinions: obviously not.


----------



## Bach

I think your compositional output is defined by your ideal aesthetic. My ideal is similar to that of Boulez but I achieve it in a completely different way. (the string quartet that I posted on this site, for example, sounds nothing like Boulez)


----------



## Herzeleide

Bach said:


> I think your compositional output is defined by your ideal aesthetic. My ideal is similar to that of Boulez but I achieve it in a completely different way. (the string quartet that I posted on this site, for example, sounds nothing like Boulez)


There's a difference between someone sharing an aesthetic ideal and someone copying someone else's opinions.


----------



## Bach

Well, I prefer to think of myself as sharing his aesthetic.. as you said, he dislikes Brahms - I hold Brahms in high esteem.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

Bach said:


> Wow, personal attacks, what can I say?


Not much you can say- and not much _I_ can say. All that *needs* saying is stated in the Terms of Service agreement that all who post here _agreed to follow_ when signing on to this message board (and I quote):

*Be polite to your fellow members. If you disagree with them, please state your opinion in a >>civil<< and respectful manner.

Do not post comments about another member's person or >>posting style<< (unless said comments are unmistakably positive). Argue opinions all you like but do not get personal and never resort to >>ad homs<<.*

I've been posting here for a while- and it's my experience that the Site Owner and the Administration Team take willful disregard for the Terms of Service quite seriously.


----------



## Elgarian

I see (in fact, am quite alarmed by the observation) that this is my 500th post in this forum, and I'm dismayed to find that I'm using it to ask that this thread not be ruined for those of us who wish seriously to discuss the music of Vaughan Williams here.

I'm astonished at how often discussions in this forum deteriorate into displays of bad temper, intolerance, and the exchange of personal insults. Quite apart from the fact that such exchanges break the rules of the forum, it seems that there are some very important basic principles of civilised discussion that have not been grasped by those who indulge in these unpleasant exchanges:

1. It's perfectly possible (and indeed _necessary_ to civilised, intelligent discourse) to disagree with someone else's opinions while still respecting them or, at the very least, tolerating them. If you can't tolerate someone else's differing opinion, how can you expect anyone else to tolerate yours?

2. If someone has a different opinion from mine, this does not mean I may assume that he is wrong, or misguided, or stupid, and it certainly doesn't give me the right to talk to him as if he is.

3. This is _music_ we're talking about - _music_ - that wonderful, life-enhancing art form that has something to offer _everyone_. If we permit our discussions of it to be a source of unpleasant dissension and bad-tempered debate, and use our musical tastes as a basis for scoring points off someone else, then what on earth do we think we are demonstrating? If we can't master the most elementary basics of how to get along with each other while discussing this universal art form, then what a shallow, pointless activity our understanding of music is proving to be.


----------



## Yagan Kiely

Jeeze, both of you are acting like little children. H, you are not the bastion of logic (and often fail the basics), so don't pass yourself off as one.

B... well... ditto


----------



## Bach

At least I know I'm bad. 

Still, Vaughan-Williams' symphonies - bit messy.


----------



## alan sheffield

*Favourite VW Symphony*

No 6 just. It has everything a symphony should have packed into a short space of time. 
First Movement - A great transformation of harsh rhythmic music into a glorious VW sweeping tune
2nd movement - builds up tension into a simple but powerful climax
3rd movement - controlled chaos
4th movement - unrepeatable and unsurpassed quiet ending


----------



## JTech82

I think Symphony No. 2 "A London Symphony" is one of my favorites. Symphony No. 5 is also deeply rewarding.


----------



## Edward Elgar

Yagan Kiely said:


> I hate how nationalistic so many composers are. Why can't some talk about how there country wasn't actually 'perfect in every possible way for the entirety of history'.


I can't think of a national composer who did this! The fact that you think Vaughan-Williams was describing Britain as perfect in every way possible through his music suggests to me that you are saying Vaughan-Williams' music is perfect in every possible way!

So you don't like Schumann, you don't like nationalist composers, you don't like the 12 tone system and you don't like anything experimental. I suppose the question that would provide a shorter answer would be, "What do you like?"!


----------



## JTech82

Edward Elgar said:


> I can't think of a national composer who did this! The fact that you think Vaughan-Williams was describing Britain as perfect in every way possible through his music suggests to me that you are saying Vaughan-Williams' music is perfect in every possible way!
> 
> So you don't like Schumann, you don't like nationalist composers, you don't like the 12 tone system and you don't like anything experimental. I suppose the question that would provide a shorter answer would be, "What do you like?"!


You oppose a very good question. I've never heard Yagan say he liked anything.


----------



## JTech82

Yagan Kiely said:


> I hate how nationalistic so many composer are. Why can't some talk about how there country wasn't actually 'perfect in every possible way for the entirety of history'.


I agree with what Edward Elgar said, RVW in no way projected that England was the Holy Grail. If you actually would listen, instead of complain, which you do more of then listening, then you would soon realize that RVW has done some pretty disturbing work. He did do some pieces that are "English," but so what? This doesn't take away from the enjoyment of the music does it?

I find this statement of Yagan's to be exactly what is wrong with his listening habits. All he does is complain, which in turn, takes away any kind of enjoyment he can get from music. It's a wonder why he's even on this forum to begin with.


----------



## JTech82

I'm starting to grow quite fond of RVW's Symphony No. 2 "London Symphony." I just heard Richard Hickox's interpretation of it on Chandos and it comes highly recommended to everyone.

I still have a soft spot for Boult's interpretation though. Some things will never change.


----------



## Elgarian

This word 'nationalistic' is probably causing problems because it means different things to different people. It's best avoided in this context, I think.

The crucial thing to recognise about RVW is that he has a profound understanding of his roots, and he expresses that understanding (wonderfully well) in his music. There's nothing wrong with understanding where one comes from, and feeling deep satisfaction in that sense of belonging, either on the part of a composer or his listeners. I enjoy the Englishness of English music in a particularly heightened way because I happen to be English; but I also rejoice in the Frenchness of Massenet, the Germanicness of Wagner, and the Finnishness of Sibelius. We are who we are, and these composers owe much of their inspiration to their roots - the culture, the society, the land - in which they were formed. It's part of being human.

*Important footnote:*

Could I please make a *general* plea for some self-restraint in this thread and elsewhere? There has been so much hostility and personal abuse generally in recent weeks, that this forum is becoming quite an unpleasant place to visit. This is a thread for the discussion of RVW's music, not for pointing out the limitations, real or imagined, of other posters. The best, most effective kind of moderation is self-moderation. Please - if you find yourself about to make negative comments about a fellow poster: think again; and don't do it. It doesn't matter if we disagree about the music; but it matters very much if we stop being civil to each other.


----------



## jhar26

Elgarian said:


> *Important footnote:*
> 
> Could I please make a *general* plea for some self-restraint in this thread and elsewhere? There has been so much hostility and personal abuse generally in recent weeks, that this forum is becoming quite an unpleasant place to visit. This is a thread for the discussion of RVW's music, not for pointing out the limitations, real or imagined, of other posters. The best, most effective kind of moderation is self-moderation. Please - if you find yourself about to make negative comments about a fellow poster: think again; and don't do it. It doesn't matter if we disagree about the music; but it matters very much if we stop being civil to each other.


I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Edward Elgar

Elgarian said:


> Could I please make a *general* plea for some self-restraint in this thread and elsewhere? There has been so much hostility and personal abuse generally in recent weeks, that this forum is becoming quite an unpleasant place to visit. This is a thread for the discussion of RVW's music, not for pointing out the limitations, real or imagined, of other posters. The best, most effective kind of moderation is self-moderation. Please - if you find yourself about to make negative comments about a fellow poster: think again; and don't do it. It doesn't matter if we disagree about the music; but it matters very much if we stop being civil to each other.


I just feel it insulting to the composer's memory that someone would imply that he was naive enough to see his country as an ideal place to be. Britain at the time of Elgar and RVW was not plesant. The cities were (and still are) full of crowded slums and infectious diseases. The countryside was possibly the most hostile enviroment in the civilized world. When I hear nationalistic music that counjours up images of rolling hills and picturesque moors, I feel this is the composer trying to describe how Britain _should_ be. From this perspective, their music can be quite heart-breaking.


----------



## Daniel

*IMPORTANT:*

Enough ad hominems.
ANY, and I emphasize ANY new reply with ad hominem - content, posted by any member who was involved in these previous discussions, will mean: Ban of the member. It is a last official warning.

The moderation


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> I agree with what Edward Elgar said, RVW in no way projected that England was the Holy Grail. If you actually would listen, instead of complain, which you do more of then listening, then you would soon realize that RVW has done some pretty disturbing work.


How on earth do you know what I do more of? I study and listen to hours of music a day, it's pretty much all I do. When I'm at uni, a large % of class time is listening to music. Please, you have no reason to even believe that, so why bring it up as an argument (of all things)? Listen _instead_ of complain? What would be the point of just saying 'I like this' on a forum? There is nothing wrong with doing both, you do both.



> He did do some pieces that are "English," but so what? This doesn't take away from the enjoyment of the music does it?


Well, I don't 'get' his music, I don't find it melodic enough, but I have no reason for it as I have already said. I said I dislike the amount of nationalist composers, I dislike it from a political point of view not musical.



> I find this statement of Yagan's to be exactly what is wrong with his listening habits. All he does is complain, which in turn, takes away any kind of enjoyment he can get from music. It's a wonder why he's even on this forum to begin with.


1)What do you actualy mean by 'all he does is complain'?
2)I get lots of enjoyment from music of all genres accroess hundreds of years I've done a composition course because of my love of the music, I only love the music because of how much enjoyment I get out of ALL asepcts, how do you factor that in?
3)Debating aspects you like and dislike in music is enjoyable. I only do that BECAUSE I love and enjoy music, otherwise there would be no point in debating at all.
4)I'm here because I love music and wish to defend the views I have formulated though years of thinking reading and listening.

If you actually noticed or read in this thread, I have pointed out the pieces I have listend to, and asked if there are suggestions for listening to works of his that would allow me to enjoy the music. How is this complaining? I'm trying to enjoy a composer that I currently don't. The facts of this thread a contrary to your personal attack against me.


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> Could I please make a *general* plea for some self-restraint in this thread and elsewhere? There has been so much hostility and personal abuse generally in recent weeks, that this forum is becoming quite an unpleasant place to visit. This is a thread for the discussion of RVW's music, not for pointing out the limitations, real or imagined, of other posters. The best, most effective kind of moderation is self-moderation. Please - if you find yourself about to make negative comments about a fellow poster: think again; and don't do it. It doesn't matter if we disagree about the music; but it matters very much if we stop being civil to each other.


Agreed also...


----------



## Elgarian

Edward Elgar said:


> When I hear nationalistic music that counjours up images of rolling hills and picturesque moors, I feel this is the composer trying to describe how Britain _should_ be. From this perspective, their music can be quite heart-breaking.


Yes indeed. The 'English pastoral' music of Elgar and RVW is the expression of a _vision_, and is part of a long tradition of such, closely parallelling (in the visual arts) the Virgil woodcuts of Blake, the mystical landscape paintings of Samuel Palmer, and the early etchings of Graham Sutherland. I think you're right to point to the heart-breakingness of it, which is also implicit. There's an awful lot of heartbreak in RVW, and there is in Elgar too.


----------



## KScott

Wow! I never dreamed that the music of RVW would bring out the most hostile of some folks.

For me, the music of Vaughan Williams is more than pastoral pleasantries, but the insight of a marvelous composer who, in my opinion, was England's finest symphonist. Yes, there are many, many other symphonists who came after RVW - Alwyn, Bax, Brian, Rawsthorne, Tippett, Lloyd, Simpson, Frankel, to name a few - and though I admire all of these men, for some reason I always come back to the mysticism and plainspoken simplicity of Vaughan Williams.

Plainspoken because he didn't mince notes nor words with his music. He told it like it was, from the first symphony through the ninth.

I have no one favorite, but I can say my least favorite is the last. It's not an easy work to listen, much less conduct. It's certainly the most austere work in his canon, and also the most unique in terms of orchestration, aside from the eighth.

To both Bach and Yagan, I offer this advice:

Perhaps you should both revisit the Tallis Fantasia, for starters, and work from there. Bach, you say you are young at 18, and believe me when I tell you that when I was your age, I adored Vaughan Williams, but could not stand Elgar. It took me several years to get into Elgar, and when I did get into him, it was not through the _Enigma Variations_, the cello concerto. the two massive symphonies or the violin concerto, but his monumental oratorio _The Dream of Gerontius_, which I consider his masterpiece. That led me back to his other work, and I have had no regret about it since.

I believe that RVW's music will catch up with you in time. What we don't like, or like on the surface, comes back to you in maturity with a vengeance.

Yagan - it's understandable that you don't appreciate his music, nor serial or post-serial music. I myself am not fond of minimalism, though I do recognize some masterpieces in that genre from the likes of John Adams and Philip Glass. But one cannot dismiss the music without giving probable cause. Perhaps this is the legal side talking. (I used to be a paralegal.) Yet while you give some reasons as to why, you have to find the reason that this music does not really communicate with your soul. Give it time and revisit it down the line.

The great RVW interpreters? Boult is chief among them, though I do prefer the old Decca set to the stereo EMI remakes - much tauter, leaner sound and certainly a real sense of raw power from his baton. Andrew Davis, of what little I heard of his cycle, is impressive, as are those of Bryden Thompson, Bernard Haitink and Andre Previn. But the cycle that is worth hearing is that of Vernon Handley, one of England's finest conductors and who is sadly with us no more. My regret is that he never came over to America to conduct (to my knowledge). His RVW cycle holds second to Boult's.

American orchestras should do RVW more!


----------



## handlebar

The 3rd evokes the UK to me. I listened to it while on a bus trip from London to Wales and it always reminds me of that. Those beautiful rolling hills.

Jim


----------



## Elgarian

handlebar said:


> The 3rd evokes the UK to me. I listened to it while on a bus trip from London to Wales and it always reminds me of that. Those beautiful rolling hills.


Yes, it certainly does that. But don't forget the war; the sense of loss; the sound of the bugle; the wordless, aching singing. That English pastoral mysticism is very beautifully there, but so is grief.


----------



## handlebar

Elgarian said:


> Yes, it certainly does that. But don't forget the war; the sense of loss; the sound of the bugle; the wordless, aching singing. That English pastoral mysticism is very beautifully there, but so is grief.


Yes, i agree. One hears so much in his symphonies.

Jim


----------



## Elgarian

handlebar said:


> Yes, i agree. One hears so much in his symphonies.


This is what rescues his music from the sentimentalism that some people accuse him of, don't you think? He doesn't shy away from things like grief, loss, death; they are included in the package, as it were. This England that he paints - these fields and hills - is a place people live in, and die in, and suffer in, and indeed die and suffer _for_ (in the war); and yet despite all that, there is still this beauty, this mystery, of which they're a part. There's no evasion in RVW's symphonies - even the most attractive of them


----------



## handlebar

Now see I feel the same way in parts about Mahler's music. The humanity involved as well as the glorious beauty that he paints life's colours. One needs minor keys for negativity and positives behaving in major keys. 
I have always considered Scriabin's patterns of colour and how they intertwine with key structure.

VW was before his time as were Mahler and Scriabin.

Jim


----------



## Conor71

I found this a difficult question to answer as I really like most of RVW's symphonies especially the 3,5 & 7th - ended up chosing the 5th though mostly for that awesome Adagio .


----------



## audiophilia

5, 6 and 7 are pretty incredible pieces.


----------



## Fsharpmajor

My favourite's the Antarctic one. It's, well, cool.

Least favourite's the Sea one, which I think is horrible, but that's because I hate the text, i.e. Walt Whitman's poetry.


----------



## Sid James

Compared to other composers of the time, like Janacek, Debussy or Busoni, RVW seems to "straight-laced" and "safe." Even when he does let his hair down to experiment a bit (eg. Sym. 6, 8, 9) or is more dark (Sym. 4, 7), he simply seems to be going through the motions a bit, copying other modern composers.

I also like the _Sinfonia Antartica_, it paints the atmosphere quite well, pity there is little thematic development. Someone I know says this simply reflects the oppressiveness of the environment and the ill-fated expedition in the movie, but I just think it's not as good as it can be. Sorry to be blunt, but this is my opinion.

One thing that I do acknowledge RVW doing, together with Holst, is resurrecting an interest in English Renaissance and folk music. This had not been done by the previous generation of UK composers. But even when he is doing something new, the results can be engaging and interesting (_Tallis Fantasia_) or rather lifeless and repetitive (_Dives & Lazarus_)...


----------



## Romantic Geek

While I'm a huge fan of Ralph Vaughan Williams, it seems that I've totally glossed over his symphonies. I haven't even listened to one.

Someone tell me where to start and where to end...and then I would love to vote in this little fantastic poll.


----------



## tenor02

symphony. no 3....LOVE IT!!!!!


----------



## TresPicos

Romantic Geek said:


> While I'm a huge fan of Ralph Vaughan Williams, it seems that I've totally glossed over his symphonies. I haven't even listened to one.
> 
> Someone tell me where to start and where to end...and then I would love to vote in this little fantastic poll.


You could start at the beginning _and _end of his suite of symphonies and go towards the middle from both directions: 9, 1, 8, 2, 7, 3, 6, 4, 5.


----------



## Romantic Geek

Well I just listened to the 9th and I have to say I'm not terribly impressed. Hopefully they get better.


----------



## Conor71

Romantic Geek said:


> Well I just listened to the 9th and I have to say I'm not terribly impressed. Hopefully they get better.


The 4th, 6th and 9th are a bit more tempestuous than the others - try out the 2nd, 3rd and 5th if you are able .


----------



## LatinClassics

Romantic Geek said:


> Well I just listened to the 9th and I have to say I'm not terribly impressed. Hopefully they get better.


I would definitely try his 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th symphonies. "Symphony No. 5" in particular has one of most moving moments in English classical music ---- the third movement (Romanza). You must hear this.

In terms of the more modern symphonies, I enjoy the 4th and 6th a lot, though the 7th and 8th have some very fine moments as well.


----------



## Romantic Geek

Lol, it was so waywardly. I really couldn't even process it (despite being a theory major). I couldn't appreciate the beauty of the piece. I'm certain that I'll find one of these that I love as I love the majority of Vaughan Williams works that I have actually heard (the little vocal set, Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis, English Folk Song Suite, etc.)


----------



## LatinClassics

Romantic Geek said:


> Lol, it was so waywardly. I really couldn't even process it (despite being a theory major). I couldn't appreciate the beauty of the piece. I'm certain that I'll find one of these that I love as I love the majority of Vaughan Williams works that I have actually heard (the little vocal set, Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis, English Folk Song Suite, etc.)


I think it's important to realize that Vaughan Williams' symphonies are not like his other orchestral works. They are cut from a completely different cloth. In time, you will come to enjoy them I believe.


----------



## Romantic Geek

Maybe if I had a score to follow. 

IMSLP only has the first 3 symphonies.


----------



## alfine

Tough choice but No6 - both 5 and 6 are magic but for rhythm and power No6 wins - RVW was very good at opening symphonic statements (Sea Symphony etc) and No6 is his most striking. And although he pooh-poohed it, it may well be a chilling image of nuclear war and its aftermath - probably the first of its kind from a bastion of English pastoral - who would have thought that?


----------



## MattTheTubaGuy

I'm not sure which is my favourite.

I love the Sinfonia Antartica, but I also like the 6th and 9th. the first is also good.
I first heard the 6th when I got out a cd with the Tuba Concerto on it, and I thought 'what is this strange music'.
a couple of years later, I listened to it again, and I thought it was absolutely amazing.
Then I got a different recording out that actually sounded quite different, with the woodwind a lot more prominent. (the first recording I heard was very brassy, particularly the climax of the 2nd movement.)
the 9th is also good. I love the Tuba solo in the 3rd movement,
it just makes me feel (impossible to describe). and then the triplet build up near the end then the harp gliss.
I kind of like saxophones actually, I don't know why they're not used more often.

I will have to say no. 7, Sinfonia Antartica actually, which I first heard played by the NZSO on the radio at their Antarctica concert special, I think possibly commemorating Sir Ed actually.


----------



## Danny

I always liked what I considered to be the anger and rashness of the opening of the fourth but I feel the rest is always something of a comedown. Im going with the 2nd which since the Hickox and Chandos version now just seems to glow..


----------



## snailmailtrail

LONDON!!!!
Followed by 6th. I love the last movement. In fact, I was playing harp in this, and the reviewer wrote "the harp, a ghostly angel surveying the desolation...."


----------

