# Havergal Brian's Symphony No. 1 "The Gothic"



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

I'm just curious how many of you actually heard this gigantic work?

From what I gather, it's a colossal mess of a symphony. It is the largest symphony ever written from what I've read about it, but that doesn't constitute good music. The grand scale of something could very well mean lack of overall structure and a lack of motivic and thematic development.

Anyway, it hasn't been recorded very much. The Marco Polo label has recorded it as has the Naxos label, but the question remains who's listening?


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

JTech82 said:


> Anyway, it hasn't been recorded very much. The Marco Polo label has recorded it as has the Naxos label, but the question remains who's listening?


Actually I believe it has only been recorded once; the man who founded Marco Polo later founded Naxos and re-released the Gothic on that label.

Most planned performances don't even happen. That should say something about the giganticness...

I haven't heard it either, by the way. I intend to some day, whether or not other people like it. I tend to listen to the stuff people tell me not to anyway.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

World Violist said:


> Actually I believe it has only been recorded once; the man who founded Marco Polo later founded Naxos and re-released the Gothic on that label.
> 
> Most planned performances don't even happen. That should say something about the giganticness...
> 
> I haven't heard it either, by the way. I intend to some day, whether or not other people like it. I tend to listen to the stuff people tell me not to anyway.


Oh that's cool. Thanks for that information. I did not know any of that. 

I was just curious if people have heard this. I haven't, so I can't give any kind of critical assessment on it, but the piece is just...well....too big. The whole thing seems very daunting.

I would like to hear it, but I don't think I'm drunk enough yet.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

I have this recording. It was originally released on Marco Polo and now it's on Naxos.

It's not a bad symphony at all. Way overblown and too long, but Brian really creates a unique sound world full of interesting harmonies and textures, and the music is constantly taking unexpected turns, which keeps some measure interest for the listener.

But, I often enjoy brevity and directness in music, and Brian's monster meanders quite a bit. As a result, this is not a symphony that is easily digested, and thus I cannot listen to it with much consistancy as it requires so much attention.

Having said all that, Brian is a mad genius who had a very fertile musical mind. Very talented and probably under-rated, but long-winded in this work, which make it unaccessible for many.

Worth a listen, but listen when you have the time and energy!


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> Worth a listen, but listen when you have the time and energy!


Or when you're sober!


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

I heard from many people that he wasn't that great of a composer. I have also read many reviews of his works and they aren't very kind to him. Granted, I have not heard a note of his music nor do I own anything by him, but it's off-putting when you read reviews by others who call him a hack or a composer who lacks direction.

It will be interesting to see what happens with his music. I'll stick to my favorite English composers: Vaughan Williams, Bax, Delius, Bliss, and John Ireland.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

I will also add that I'm not sure if any of have seen the way he writes out his many of his symphonies. Here's an example of the way Symphony No. 1 "Gothic" is broken down:

1. Part 1: I. Allegro assai: section 1 00:01:02
2. Part 1: I. Allegro assai: section 2 00:04:27
3. Part 1: I. Allegro assai: section 3 00:03:33
4. Part 1: I. Allegro assai: section 4 00:04:44
5. Part 1: II. Lento espressivo e solenne: section 1 00:06:09
6. Part 1: II. Lento espressivo e solenne: section 2 00:02:53
7. Part 1: II. Lento espressivo e solenne: section 3 00:03:24
8. Part 1: III. Vivace: section 1 00:01:53
9. Part 1: III. Vivace: section 2 00:02:36
10. Part 1: III. Vivace: section 3 00:03:23
11. Part 1: III. Vivace: section 4 00:01:40
12. Part 1: III. Vivace: section 5 00:01:12
13. Part 1: III. Vivace: section 6 00:01:01
14. Part 1: III. Vivace: section 7 00:01:15
15. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 1 00:01:30
16. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 2 00:01:09
17. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 3 00:01:41
18. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 4 00:02:04
19. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 5 00:00:56
20. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 6 00:02:53
21. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 7 00:01:29
22. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 8 00:00:26
23. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 9 00:02:06
24. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 10 00:02:56
25. Part 2: IV. Te Deum Laudamus: Allegro moderato: section 11 00:02:49

1. Part 2: V. Judex: Adagio molto solenne e religioso: section 1 00:05:44
2. Part 2: V. Judex: Adagio molto solenne e religioso: section 2 00:01:04
3. Part 2: V. Judex: Adagio molto solenne e religioso: section 3 00:02:20
4. Part 2: V. Judex: Adagio molto solenne e religioso: section 4 00:01:56
5. Part 2: V. Judex: Adagio molto solenne e religioso: section 5 00:01:43
6. Part 2: V. Judex: Adagio molto solenne e religioso: section 6 00:02:57
7. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 1 00:05:50
8. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 2 00:01:29
9. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 3 00:03:28
10. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 4 00:02:54
11. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 5 00:01:15
12. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: sectioin 6 00:02:00
13. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 7 00:00:48
14. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 8 00:01:58
15. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 9 00:04:42
16. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 10 00:07:45
17. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 11 00:02:15
18. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 12 00:01:52
19. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 13 00:00:53
20. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 14 00:01:27
21. Part 2: VI. Te ergo quaesumus: Moderato e molto sostenuto: section 15 00:00:46

This has to be the most moronic way to write a symphony I've ever seen. I mean I'm sorry but it's really just ridiculous and you will notice that a lot of his symphonies are broken down by movement, but then by sections, which is probably the craziest things I've ever seen.

It seems like to me he felt he had to compose, but the problem that I've read with him is he lacked consistency and direction.

Ladies and gentlemen my rant is over with now. You can all return to your regularly scheduled Mahler.


----------



## Lisztfreak (Jan 4, 2007)

Here's the scoring.

2 piccolos, 6 flutes (1 doubling alto-flute), 6 oboes (1 doubling oboa d'amore and 1 bass-oboe), 2 English horns, 2 clarinets in Eb, 5 clarinets in Bb, 2 basset horns, 2 bass-clarinets (1 doubling contrabass-clarinet), 3 bassoons, 2 contrabassoons.
8 horns, 2 cornets in Eb, 8 trumpets (1 doubling bass-trumpet), 3 tenor-trombones (1 doubling bass-trombone), 2 contrabass-trombones, 2 euphoniums, 2 tubas.
2 timpani sets, 2 harps, organ, celesta.
Glockenspiel, xylophone, 2 concert drums, 6 pairs of large cymbals, tubular bells, rattle-machine, thunder machine.
Strings.
Soprano, alto, tenor, bass, 2 large mixed choirs, a boys' choir.

+ 4 brass bands each composed of 2 horns, 2 trumpets, 2 tenor-trombones, 2 tubas and a set of timpani.

My oh my, this is quite exaggerated.

I've read somewhere that Brian wrote more for himself than for the public. True. I would also add - more for the drawer than for the concert hall.


----------



## Lang (Sep 30, 2008)

I have the recording of the work, plus another recording on video tape that I haven't heard for many years. I also attended a public performance of the work at the Albert Hall, conducted by Ole Schmidt.

Being at the public performance was an overwhelmingly emotional experience. Brian knows exactly what he is doing. The wind-down at the end, the emotional outbursts, followed by the final, shimmering chord on the words 'in aeternum' leaves the listener in a kind of blissful limbo. 

I have never had problems with Brian's structures. Delius, to me, is a composer whose large-scale works don't really hold together, but I have never felt this with Brian. I did analyse the first movement of the Gothic when I ran a music appreciation class, and found that the structure was watertight. You have to listen to Brian, especially later Brian, with a flexibility of musical response, which some people find difficult.

An interesting sidelight on the 'Gothic' symphony is that while Brian was writing it, he was living as a music copyist, and spent all day working, and then wrote the Gothic at night. The lack of food and sleep he experienced at that time caused him to experience hallucinations. He reported that he might look up from his manuscript and see Bach sitting in the chair opposite, watching him. Being a hard-headed Northerner he says that he realised it was a hallucination, took no notice, and carried on with his work. 

Brian can be a difficult composer, but he is also a rewarding one. His music is worth listening to, even if you don't 'get it' straight away.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Lang said:


> I have never had problems with Brian's structures. Delius, to me, is a composer whose large-scale works don't really hold together, but I have never felt this with Brian. I did analyse the first movement of the Gothic when I did a music appreciation class, and found that the structure was watertight. You have to listen to Brian, especially later Brian, with a flexibility of musical response, which some people find difficult.


Delius is not known for his large-scale works and I never have associated him with those works. Delius, like Grieg, is more pleasing in smaller works.


----------



## Lang (Sep 30, 2008)

JTech82 said:


> Oh that's cool. Thanks for that information. I did not know any of that.
> 
> I was just curious if people have heard this. I haven't, so I can't give any kind of critical assessment on it, but the piece is just...well....too big. The whole thing seems very daunting.
> 
> I would like to hear it, but I don't think I'm drunk enough yet.


Didn't you say in another thread that you had heard it twice, and thought it was rubbish? Sorry if I misunderstood, but I am not sure what you mean here.


----------



## nickgray (Sep 28, 2008)

I heard it, only once. It was good, but... rather long, the whole grand scale of it is just too tiring and requires lots of time and dedication to listen and understand it. I do like large works, but this one's just too large in its own way.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

I don't recall me ever saying that I had heard it. I think I would remember hearing the longest symphony ever written. 

Having said that, all I wanted to know is if people have heard it or not and this is kind of my haven for opinions about him.

Bear in mind I haven't heard a note of Brian yet, but I can assure you from what I've read there's a reason I haven't.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

nickgray said:


> I heard it, only once. It was good, but... rather long, the whole grand scale of it is just too tiring and requires lots of time and dedication to listen and understand it. I do like large works, but this one's just too large in its own way.


Yeah, I think that's one reason I haven't listened to it yet. It's just way overblown. Give me Mahler and Bruckner. They were masters of writing for large orchestras.


----------



## Lang (Sep 30, 2008)

JTech82 said:


> I don't recall me ever saying that I had heard it. I think I would remember hearing the longest symphony ever written.
> 
> Having said that, all I wanted to know is if people have heard it or not and this is kind of my haven for opinions about him.
> 
> Bear in mind I haven't heard a note of Brian yet, but I can assure you from what I've read there's a reason I haven't.


Next quote from 'Under Rated English Composers'



JTech82 said:


> Not to be argumentative, but I disagree with you about Brian. I listened to his symphony "Gothic" twice and each time reveals another mess after another. His work really lacked the cohesive structure the piece really needed. This piece is so massive it's almost just too much. I'll leave the big symphonies to the big boys Mahler and Bruckner.


----------



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

I also own this double CD set and have the work on my i Pod. It is too long but decently written. I would not put Mr Brian in the category of the greats but he was good. I admire his violin concerto and symphony #3.

Jim


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Maybe I have heard it I just don't remember it, I'm having a lapse of memory sorry Lang. I've heard so much stuff between January up until now it's hard to remember anything.

Maybe that's why I started this thread? I'm confused now.


----------



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

JTech82;45676 I'm confused now.[/QUOTE said:


> Pleasure to meet you confused. I'm Jim
> 
> Jim


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

handlebar said:


> Pleasure to meet you confused. I'm Jim
> 
> Jim


 Yeah, I really forget a lot, but I'm able to retain information that I read pretty good, but I seem to can't remember what I've heard and when I've heard it.


----------



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

I'm sorry, what did you say???

Jim


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Jtech, I say check thids symphony out. Brian was a very good composer, I'd go as far to say a genius. I'm not surprised to hear he had hallucinations. This music is very much like a hallucination.

But the man understood harmony and structure and allowed his bizarre imagination to run wild. I think, at least, if you end up not liking it, you will think that the experience was worth-while.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

handlebar said:


> I'm sorry, what did you say???


My memory is so bad that I can't remember what I did just a couple of minutes ago.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

handlebar said:


> I'm sorry, what did you say???


My memory is so bad that I can't remember what I did just a couple of minutes ago.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

handlebar said:


> I'm sorry, what did you say???
> 
> Jim


 Yeah, it's gotten so bad that sometimes when I take a shower I wash my hair twice, because I couldn't remember if I washed it the first time!


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Elgarian said:


> My memory is so bad that I can't remember what I did just a couple of minutes ago.


 Yeah, Elgarian I know exactly what you mean.


----------



## Lisztfreak (Jan 4, 2007)

Oh dear, here are the first reported cases of dementia caused by overdosing with classical music... The poppers and heavy-metallers are going to feel triumphant.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Lisztfreak said:


> Oh dear, here are the first reported cases of dementia caused by overdosing with classical music... The poppers and heavy-metallers are going to feel triumphant.


I feel so bad sometimes, because I've heard so much I have to be reminded that I heard something.


----------



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

They say that the mind is the first thing to go and the second I cannot remember.

Jim


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

JTech82 said:


> I will also add that I'm not sure if any of have seen the way he writes out his many of his symphonies. Here's an example of the way Symphony No. 1 "Gothic" is broken down:
> 
> 1. Part 1: I. Allegro assai: section 1 00:01:02
> 2. Part 1: I. Allegro assai: section 2 00:04:27
> ...


That's not the way the symphony itself is broken down, it's just the way it's presented on the CD (track listing). There are many examples of this in Mahler as well.


----------



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

I agree. The M2 and M3 as well as M8 all break down into micro parts.

Jim


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

handlebar said:


> They say that the mind is the first thing to go and the second I cannot remember.


What was it you said was the first thing to go, Jim?


----------



## handlebar (Mar 19, 2009)

Hey now: I have a photographic memory! Too bad I'm always out of film.

Jim


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

handlebar said:


> I agree. The M2 and M3 as well as M8 all break down into micro parts.
> 
> Jim


Well he's definitely no Mahler.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

JTech82 said:


> Well he's definitely no Mahler.


Well how about this? Sibelius' 7th is sometimes split into four parts (which I hate, mind you), and almost every opera ever written is done the same way as well.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

World Violist said:


> Well how about this? Sibelius' 7th is sometimes split into four parts (which I hate, mind you), and almost every opera ever written is done the same way as well.


Let's not get into a whole argument about this it's not worth it. I don't listen to opera, so it wouldn't matter to me if it's divided into 20 sections!

Brian just seems like he got way in over his head with this symphony to me. That's all I'm saying. Leave the mammoth epics to Bruckner and Mahler.


----------



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

I love this piece. I'm a big fan of epic 'bombastic' music, so this is right up my street.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

I have the recording, tis good but not worth the hype..

Dont think he wrote all his symphonies like that, I have the 4th and 7th as well and they are structured like ordinary romantic symphonies.


----------



## Jennamaree (Dec 20, 2010)

I am in the Children's Choir for the Brisbane performance on the 22nd of December. As the Children's choir is used sparingly I have only heard the 4th, 5th and 6th movements but will be able to give a full report after the performance. To me the work sounds amazing and I really get the feel of gothic art and architecture that the piece drew its inspiration from. It can be overwhelming at times but Havergal really seems to know what he's doing and the polyphony is simply divine to listen to. Also, given the enormity of the work hearing a recording is no substitute for hearing it in person.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

I assume you are performing this specific piece then?

That must be quite an awesome experience. How is it rehearsing? Do you still retain a feel for the pieces overall structure or does the sheer length cause forgetfulness?
Im interested...


----------



## Jennamaree (Dec 20, 2010)

Yes I am performing this piece. At first my rehearsal was just learning my part along with the rest of the Children's Chorus so I couldn't really focus on the work in its entirety however as the performance is tomorrow we are now well and truly into full rehearsals.  (Although, again, I have not heard part 1, yet.) The music itself seems to be constantly growing outwards in all directions when listened to and it takes a different kind of listening to fully appreciate it. Instead of a story it creates rather a feel overall of grandness and immensity with much direction. Hah, it is almost too difficult to describe. 

Its complexity can largely be explained by Havergal's lack of formal training as he stopped at a very young age, (something close to sixteen maybe, don't quote me on it). The are many phrases where he seems determined to change the time signature every bar! And I personally could not count how many modulations of key signature there are. However, much like learning any new piece, the difficulty is in getting a feel for the music, the actual music is not extremely difficult. It is putting everything together that is hard.


----------



## SuperTonic (Jun 3, 2010)

For anyone who is interested and has some time to kill, this symphony has been posted on YouTube in its entirety, split into 10 parts.

Brian - Symphony 1 "Gothic", part 1

The link to the next part will always be in the comments.


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

JTech82 said:


> I will also add that I'm not sure if any of have seen the way he writes out his many of his symphonies. Here's an example of the way Symphony No. 1 "Gothic" is broken down:
> 
> 1. Part 1: I. Allegro assai: section 1 00:01:02
> 2. Part 1: I. Allegro assai: section 2 00:04:27
> ...


I think you mistake Brian's compositional technique with the indexing of a CD done in the interests of convenience and providing reference points. BIZARRE!


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

Brian's true structure is:

I Allegro assai - attacca:
II Lento espressivo e solenne - attacca:
III Vivace - attacca:
IV Te Deum laudamus. Allegro moderato
V Judex crederis esse venturus. Adagio solenne e religioso
VI Te ergo quaesumus. Moderato e molto sostenuto


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

Jennamaree said:


> Yes I am performing this piece. ...
> Its complexity can largely be explained by Havergal's lack of formal training as he stopped at a very young age, (something close to sixteen maybe, don't quote me on it). The are many phrases where he seems determined to change the time signature every bar! And I personally could not count how many modulations of key signature there are. However, much like learning any new piece, the difficulty is in getting a feel for the music, the actual music is not extremely difficult. It is putting everything together that is hard.


Great that you're performing the Gothic! Good luck for tomorrow. 
I have been closely involved with the preparation of the vocal score and liasing generally with the people putting on the show in Brisbane.

I think you're a little off beam in saying that the complexity is down to a lack of formal training. He had all the training he needed, and the Gothic is preceded by a whole range of orchestral works which are far more conventional and approachable. Brian was, after all, 44 when he started writing the work - he knew what he was doing. If it is complex, that is because he wanted to write a complex piece of music. I have to say, however, it is gratuitously unhelpful in very many places - what Brian really needed was a good editor.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

emiellucifuge said:


> Brian's true structure is:
> 
> I Allegro assai - attacca:
> II Lento espressivo e solenne - attacca:
> ...


In fact, the structure is even simpler.

The Gothic is in two parts, the first part (made up of the first three movements) for an orchestra of Straussian proportions, the second for a truly massive orchestra (some 180), two large double choruses, children's choir, four soloists and four offstage brass and timpani bands. Part II sets the Te Deum.

It therefore traces its lineage via Mahler 8 to Beethoven 9, via works like the Berlioz Te Deum.


----------



## Rangstrom (Sep 24, 2010)

MusicWeb is reporting a rumor of a concert performance of the Gothic in July led by Brabbins. A recording on Chandos or Hyperion would be great news, especially if some of the yet unrecorded syms get a shot.


----------



## stephenphillips (Dec 29, 2010)

I too was involved in the recent Brisbane performance of Brian's Gothic Symphony, a project that has taken 28 years of determined effort by Gary Thorpe of 4MBS Classic FM radio and the assistance, ultimately, of hundreds of talented people. As a member of the Queensland Symphony Orchestra, I joined rehearsals late on account of clashes with the QLD Ballet's season of "The Nutcracker", for which we supplied the orchestral music. Fortunately the first sessions for me were tutorials, during which I was able to get a little 'time alone' with the First Violin part and see something of what we were up against. While nothing in the symphony is outrageously unplayable, it does require genuine study, with many pages of extreme high writing (often in massed divisi with the 2nds) and intervalic leaps that are by no means intuitive.

As orchestral and full tutti rehearsals progressed the outlines of the work were gradually filled in with greater resolution and depth, forming a gigantic tapestry which I can best describe as a sonic and emotional wonderland. With so great resources, Brian fashions some truly intimidating climaxes, while at other times developing (in my experience) totally novel concoctions of a delicacy others have aptly styled "wraith-like". His use of the orchestra, far from amateurish, is highly calculated and deft.

Precisely what to make of the work as a whole? I am still involved in that process, now something of a convert and, after the opportunity of listening to recordings of other Brian compositions and reading treatments of his work, convinced that his is a voice worthy of close inspection (and, for that matter, of revival). The more that is known of his mind and world (including significant musical friendships) the more this and other pieces can be appreciated.

I feel enormously privileged. "I played The Gothic!" Special thanks also to John Curro, maestro, and Alison Rogers, Chorusmaster, for their Herculean efforts and so many others who made this fantastic experience possible.

Cheers,

Stephen.

P.S. attached PDF file is an image of the final dress rehearsal, taken from edge of stage at the Brisbane Concert Hall, QPAC.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

Thanks a lot for that, very interesting


----------



## Rangstrom (Sep 24, 2010)

I didn't notice the posts about the Queensland performance when I pulled this thread up. Two performances of the Gothic in one 12 month period. Unbelievable. So how was the performance? Any reviews?


----------



## Sarabande (Nov 26, 2010)

I like this symphony its worth checking out if you dont mind long works. I've only heard it once I'll have to listen to it again it was worth it the first time should be again.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

I can't help but think the reason this symphony is the most famous of his is because of its length and the number of players needed. He did plenty of other pieces, I remember liking one a reasonable amount, I think it might have been his 8th.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

starry said:


> I can't help but think the reason this symphony is the most famous of his is because of its length and the number of players needed. He did plenty of other pieces, I remember liking one a reasonable amount, I think it might have been his 8th.


Although I am sure there is a sense in which people want to perform _The Gothic_ - bizarrely it is one his most performed symphonies - precisely because of its size, it is also true that its scale and resources are deployed by Brian to produce a work of an unparalleled magnificence which simply couldn't be achieved with less.

People curious to hear other works by Brian should try and track down the 2 CD set EMI released of *symphonies 7, 8 and 9* - these are excellent performances and recordings. No need to apologise for anything here - 7 is a twentieth century symphony to stand with the best, and the shorter 8 and 9 are entertaining and impressive works. The finale of 9 is overwhelmingly massive.

There is a Lyrita CD of *symphonies 6 and 16* which is also well worth acquiring. 6 is perhaps the simplest Brian symphony (it was originally the overture to an unfinished opera). Again both symphonies receive high quality performances and recordings.

The Hyperion recording of *symphony 3 *is self recommending. Lasting nearly an hour, the symphony has concertante parts for two pianos.

The Naxos recordings, although one is immensely grateful for them (and I understand that further releases are possible), are somewhat patchy, being in the old Naxos spirit of eastern European orchestras unfamiliar with the music recording with minimal rehearsal and, often, less than high quality parts. Nevertheless *symphony 4* rewards attention. It's the only choral symphony other than _The Gothic_ that Brian wrote. At half the length, and needing only half the choral forces of _The Gothic_, it is nevertheless a powerful and impressive work, composed in the run up to the second world war and full of foreboding.

The good news is that at least three CDs of Brian's symphonies and other orchestral music are in the can and awaiting release.

I must commend the Havergal Brian Society's *website *(www.havergalbrian.org). Running to over 500 pages, it has detailed information about everything Brian wrote, and very many articles about his music. There are also many article _*by*_ Brian, for he was an eminent journalist and his writings on music are unfailingly interesting and informed. (And blow the myth that he was in any sense a recluse. He wasn't.)


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

Rangstrom said:


> I didn't notice the posts about the Queensland performance when I pulled this thread up. Two performances of the Gothic in one 12 month period. Unbelievable. So how was the performance? Any reviews?


Not a huge number I can find, given the way the concert was brilliantly promoted (it sold out weeks beforehand, so they sold tickets to the final rehearsal, and that all but sold out, too).

http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/review-havergal-brians-symphony-no1/story-fn6ck8la-1225976720044

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...concerted-effort/story-e6frg8n6-1225976789146


----------



## mahlernerd (Jan 19, 2020)

I came across this thread while researching this massive work. I really hope that sometime in the next few decades some group can organize a performance of this work, and you can GUARANTEE that I would 100% be going to that.


----------

