# Myaskovsky and his symphonies



## kanishknishar (Aug 10, 2015)

*In case you don't know who Myaskovsky is: *
_Myaskovsky is a Soviet Russian composer who is considered the "Father of Soviet Symphony" after his 27 symphonies. He wrote numerous other works included seven string quartets. He was the professor of composition at Moscow Conservatory from 1921 till he died in 1950. His students include Khatchaturian, Kabalevsky, Shebalian and B. Tchaikovsky among others._

After a long time of procastinating, I finally got around to starting the Svetlanov boxed set of Myaskovsky's orchestral works. I heard the 10th and 13th. I didn't realize that Myaskovsky was experimental. Neither works have left an imprint - possibly because they aren't the typical symphony with a big melody and boom-bum! finale.

Where should I start with Myaskovsky's symphonies? What are your view of his symphonies - of his works, in general? Have you even heard any of his works?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I have quite a few Myaskovsky symphonies and listen to them from time to time. I have the same problem with "getting into" them. Somehow they don't seem very compelling listening. But I'll keep trying!


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I´ve got his works except some string quartets and admire those I now better; it´s a major task to really get into all of them in detail ...

The Arte Nova budget CD with the 2 cello sonatas and the cello concerto played by Rudin would be my primary recommendation for an introduction to him. At least try hearing it, also before Tarasova.

There´s also McLachlan´s recording of the piano sonatas etc. (now a low-price release), and the Taneyevs of the quartets (13), plus a good deal of recordings of the violin concerto.

As regards the symphonies, there´s of course Svetlanov´s complete set, also containing other orchestral works, supplemented by various individual recordings such as those on Marco Polo/Naxos, some supplementary Russian recordings, Järvi´s DG 6th, etc.

The autumnal Symphonies 5+9 in the Downes recording on Marco Polo/Naxos is a good start as regards the symphonies, and more melodic than Svetlanov´s release I think.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

The 6th is my favourite, but make sure to get the version with the chorus.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

Submitted a post about his symphonies in the "Latest Purchases" Thread a few years ago: http://www.talkclassical.com/1006-latest-purchases-156.html?highlight=#post560925


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Have just listened to the *27th* with Svetlanov - quite glorious and definitely one of the more catchy and very "Russian" among his symphonies, with a grand and natural, recorded sound.






It´s a conservative work; in the 1st movement, one can come to think of a mix of the sweeping qualities of Glazunov´s 4th, 1st movement, and Scriabin´s symphonies; the slow 2nd movement opens with some nice, Wagnerian brass; then comes the strings, almost Peer Gynt-like, and vast landscapes evolve; the robustness of the finale luckily also has a healthy sense of moving forward and sufficiently varied episodes. Motifs seem to appear throughout several movements, in varied forms.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

the 27th would be a great place to start (ironically!)--a grandeur and lyricism and as the previous post has pointed out it most definitely belongs in the tradition of the late 19th/early 20th century Russian symphony-it is a work I listen to with regularity and while aware of the incredulity of some 'what! written in the early 50's! and all that it is a work that I find most decidely 'human' in its concerns........

Polyansky on Chandos is a great alternative to Svetlanov......I would also give a number of the latter symphonies a good listen (25th!),the slow movements in particular can be really rewarding!


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I have the 27th symphony (I think - I'm not near my catalog) coupled with a cello concerto. I can't recall anything about the music whatsoever other than liking it okay while wondering what his advocates were raving about. I think I may need to partially memorize the works to better appreciate them.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Herrenvolk: Myaskovsky isn't experimental in general. You just happened to pick his two strangest symphonies to start. The 10th is strange because it is based on Pushkin's wild hallucinatory poem The Bronze Horseman. The 13th is probably the most harmonically experimental of the 27, although it calms down in the last half.

I agree with joen_cph on recommending 5 & 9 as a good place to start. Both are traditional four movement works, the 9th among his very best. I also agree that the Downes, unfortunately, is better than the Svetlanov recordings.

8 and 17 are also pretty traditional four movement works. The latter's slow movement is among the best he wrote. 

The 21st is my favorite of the single movement symphonies. Wonderful and accessible.

The 24th is extroverted and dramatic with memorable tunes. The first movement's brass fanfares sound a lot like Debussy's Fetes, from the Three Nocturnes. The slow movement's theme must have been in Shostakovich's head when he wrote the opening movement of his 12th. 

25 and 27 have been recommended above for good reason.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

^^^
I agree with all of the above-mentioned recommendations. Let me add Symphonies nos. XV, XVI, & XX (as far as the 15th is concerned, Kondrashin with the USSR Radio & TV Large SO is strongly recommended).


----------



## kanishknishar (Aug 10, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> Herrenvolk: Myaskovsky isn't experimental in general. You just happened to pick his two strangest symphonies to start. The 10th is strange because it is based on Pushkin's wild hallucinatory poem The Bronze Horseman. The 13th is probably the most harmonically experimental of the 27, although it calms down in the last half.
> 
> I agree with joen_cph on recommending 5 & 9 as a good place to start. Both are traditional four movement works, the 9th among his very best. I also agree that the Downes, unfortunately, is better than the Svetlanov recordings.
> 
> ...


Thank you, Mr. Blast!



KenOC said:


> I have quite a few Myaskovsky symphonies and listen to them from time to time. I have the same problem with "getting into" them. Somehow they don't seem very compelling listening. But I'll keep trying!


In my case, I was pointing out a deficiency of my own, Mr. Ken. The need for having a traditional - or any! - structure. of needing some sort of melody to keep my attention or even brash finales. 'tis music, one needs have no needs.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Myaskovsky's output is more diffuse, as would tend to happen with one who wrote that many symphonies, but he has a satisfying style with a satisfying variety of manifestations of that. Treat exploration of his output like you might of Haydn's, and you'll have a lot of fun. I'm glad that a composer like him exists. The one I first heard and still enjoy the most, is symphony number 15, which shows more of a Glazunovian or Tchaikovskian influence:


----------



## kanishknishar (Aug 10, 2015)

clavichorder said:


> Myaskovsky's output is more diffuse, as would tend to happen with one who wrote that many symphonies, but he has a satisfying style with a satisfying variety of manifestations of that. Treat exploration of his output like you might of Haydn's, and you'll have a lot of fun. I'm glad that a composer like him exists. The one I first heard and still enjoy the most, is symphony number 15, which shows more of a Glazunovian or Tchaikovskian influence:


But aside from being fun, would you call him on the greatest masterpieces composers/genius of the 20th Century?

_______________________________

So I've heard his SQ #12 and 13. This is very typical Romantic. A drastic change from S #10 and #13. So maybe I picked the most radical work for my venture into Myaskovsky's oeuvre. 
They seem pleasant works. Enjoyable to listen to. They don't seem like trifle works. Easier than perhaps Beethoven's dense later SQs - but they were never for the beginner like I am.
Since I have no experience with SQs and no knowledge of music theory, how do Myaskovsky's rank up musically? Are they "masterworks"? (quotes utilized because the assessment remains entirely subjective.)


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Have you heard the 4 symphonies of Alexander Tcherepnin? 1 is fresh and quirky. 3 is unusual, maybe contains some Janacek like repetition and uses more 'oriental' scales. 4 takes a similar direction to Prokofiev with his 7th, a simpler musical language that ends up sounding like a leaner reincarnation of Russian romanticism. 2 never left as big an impression.


----------



## kanishknishar (Aug 10, 2015)

clavichorder said:


> Have you heard the 4 symphonies of Alexander Tcherepnin? 1 is fresh and quirky. 3 is unusual, maybe contains some Janacek like repetition and uses more 'oriental' scales. 4 takes a similar direction to Prokofiev with his 7th, a simpler musical language that ends up sounding like a leaner reincarnation of Russian romanticism. 2 never left as big an impression.


Odd that you'd mention him outta the blue. I downloaded a disc of his but it seems to have vanished. So, which symphony should I start with?


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Herrenvolk said:


> Odd that you'd mention him outta the blue. I downloaded a disc of his but it seems to have vanished. So, which symphony should I start with?


Save #4(my favorite) for a second or later listening. Start with 1 or 3.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

^^^
The BIS series (with the piano concerti) is excellent.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I have CDs of several of his symphonies, including the 6th , which is probably the best known of the 27 , and would like to hear all of them . I also have the classic Rostropovich recording of the cello concerto on EMI and the much more recent one on DG with Misha Maisky and Pletnev conducting .
Myaskovsky's music is an acquired taste, but one worth acquiring . It's brooding and elusive and doesn't reveal its secrets on first hearing .
I particularly like the 8th symphony . The slow movement is absolutely haunting and unearthly , featuring a melancholy Tatar folk melody played by the English horn . It sounds curiously reminiscent of American Indian music .


----------

