# Favorite Dvorak Symphony (other than 9 of course)?



## Paul T McGraw

I seem to have an affinity with the music of Dvorak. I love his symphonies. Of course my favorite is the 9th, as it may be for most classical fans. But what about the other 8 symphonies? I seem to switch my loyaties every few days, but usually I seem to favor 6, 7, or 8. How about you? Do you have a favorite Dvorak symphony other than the 9th?

Paul McGraw


----------



## mbhaub

The 8th. Such a sunny, energetic, beautiful work...with some darker moments in the 2nd movement. I've loved this for so long - some 50 years by now. First recording was the Bruno Walter/Columbia Symphony recording which is still a top recommendation. I just had the extreme pleasure of conducting it a few months ago - so much fun I felt guilty (almost) about taking a pay check for doing it. An ingenious composition all based on a simple G major triad.

Dvorak's symphonies are by and large uncharted territory. Most orchestras only play 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9,.....they're missing out. Nos. 3 and 6 are real corkers, too.


----------



## Heck148

#6 - I'm glad to see it getting much more concert exposure....reminds me a bit of Brahms #2 - same key, etc...

love the "Furiant" in the scherzo mvt....


----------



## Paul T McGraw

mbhaub said:


> The 8th. Such a sunny, energetic, beautiful work...with some darker moments in the 2nd movement. I've loved this for so long - some 50 years by now. First recording was the Bruno Walter/Columbia Symphony recording which is still a top recommendation. I just had the extreme pleasure of conducting it a few months ago - so much fun I felt guilty (almost) about taking a pay check for doing it. An ingenious composition all based on a simple G major triad.
> 
> Dvorak's symphonies are by and large uncharted territory. Most orchestras only play 7, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9,.....they're missing out. Nos. 3 and 6 are real corkers, too.


The 8th is remarkably postive and as you say "sunny'. I do not turn to the 3rd very often, but I love the 6th. I have seen descriptions of the seventh as being Dvorak's most technically perfect symphony, which I do not really understand. I am a hobbyist composer and the 7th is awesome, but is it really technically superior?

By the way, what group do you conduct?


----------



## jim prideaux

Since joining TC a number of years ago I have frequently commented on certain symphonies written by Dvorak.

No.3 is marvellous, particularly the central of the three movements.
No.5 is as impressive to these ears as any of the subsequent works, the finale being a superb example of how a movement can unfold and progress towards a subtle feeling of resolution.


----------



## CnC Bartok

"Perceived Wisdom": Dvorak's last three Symphonies are the only ones worth listening to. It is indeed utter nonsense!

I will say, though, that 1 and 2 aren't that good. Do hear them, for completeness' sake, as weak works by Dvorak are still a hell of a lot better than big works by lesser composers. No.1 has some fine music, but both works are straggly and a bit over long.

3 is a hidden gem, and 4 is not as average as some make out. Both have a bit "too much Wagner" in them, but does that really matter?

And then we come on to the great Symphonies. Yes, No.5 is a masterpiece, a beautiful, sunny work, only bettered on that front by No.8. So is No.6, and it belongs with the last three, if you get my drift!

My favourite is No.8, same reasons as above. Ok, I have Schumann 2 and Sibelius 6 down as my respective favourites from those composers, but as far as I am concerned, it's perfect. Not No.9, and not just because of over-exposure. No.7 is also a masterpiece, but it suffers from being Brahms-influenced, and a lot darker and more serious than the others. Again, I'm happy to say "so what" to that criticism, some aren't. And listen to the final movement (this is most noticeable in Bělohlávek's final recording) to what's going on the orchestra. So many voices, such a virtuoso tour de force, did any composer ever know how to orchestrate better?


----------



## Merl

It changes all the time. A bit ago it was the 8th (and there are some stellar Dvorak 8ths out there Honeck, Szell, Neumann, Walter, etc) and then it was the 7th. Currently it's the 5th and playing Rowicki's incredible 5th this morning only reaffirms what a fantastic symphony it is when in the right hands. The 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th and 9th are some of my favourite symphonic works by any composer. The first two are meh, the 4th goes nowhere fast and the 6th is decent but not in the same league as the 5th, 7th, 8th and 9th for me (yeah i know some disagree).


----------



## Paul T McGraw

CnC Bartok said:


> "Perceived Wisdom": Dvorak's last three Symphonies are the only ones worth listening to. It is indeed utter nonsense!
> 
> I will say, though, that 1 and 2 aren't that good. Do hear them, for completeness' sake, as weak works by Dvorak are still a hell of a lot better than big works by lesser composers. No.1 has some fine music, but both works are straggly and a bit over long.
> 
> 3 is a hidden gem, and 4 is not as average as some make out. Both have a bit "too much Wagner" in them, but does that really matter?
> 
> And then we come on to the great Symphonies. Yes, No.5 is a masterpiece, a beautiful, sunny work, only bettered on that front by No.8. So is No.6, and it belongs with the last three, if you get my drift!
> 
> My favourite is No.8, same reasons as above. Ok, I have Schumann 2 and Sibelius 6 down as my respective favourites from those composers, but as far as I am concerned, it's perfect. Not No.9, and not just because of over-exposure. No.7 is also a masterpiece, but it suffers from being Brahms-influenced, and a lot darker and more serious than the others. Again, I'm happy to say "so what" to that criticism, some aren't. And listen to the final movement (this is most noticeable in Bělohlávek's final recording) to what's going on the orchestra. So many voices, such a virtuoso tour de force, did any composer ever know how to orchestrate better?


No one could orchestrate better than Dvorak using the standard orchestral instrumentation. Throw in harp, celeste, piano, 2 or more percussion players with all of their toys and more impressive results are possible, but no one was any better with the standard orchestra. I do not think Dvorak gets enough appreciation in general, and certainly not enough respect for his orchestration skills.


----------



## Paul T McGraw

Gee, I need to listen to the 3rd again. It is getting more love than I expected, ditto the 5th.


----------



## Merl

Paul T McGraw said:


> Gee, I need to listen to the 3rd again. It is getting more love than I expected, ditto the 5th.


Try Rowicki, Jansons or Pesek for the 5th. Cracking accounts by both. Jarvi and Neumann are similarly impressive in the 3rd.


----------



## Art Rock

I'll use my standard division in tiers to reflect my taste:

Hors concours: 9
Tier 1 ("essential"): 7,8
Tier 2 ("important"): 3,5,6
Tier 3 ("good to have"): 2,4
Tier 4 ("for completion"): 1


----------



## Roger Knox

CnC Bartok said:


> No.7 is also a masterpiece, but it suffers from being Brahms-influenced, and a lot darker and more serious than the others. Again, I'm happy to say "so what" to that criticism, some aren't. And listen to the final movement (this is most noticeable in Bělohlávek's final recording) to what's going on the orchestra. So many voices, such a virtuoso tour de force, did any composer ever know how to orchestrate better?


Startling, that the very qualities I like about No. 7 are point of criticism for others. I must check out Bělohlávek's recording.


----------



## CrunchyFr0g

Another vote for #8


----------



## Paul T McGraw

Art Rock said:


> I'll use my standard division in tiers to reflect my taste:
> 
> Hors concours: 9
> Tier 1 ("essential"): 7,8
> Tier 2 ("important"): 3,5,6
> Tier 3 ("good to have"): 2,4
> Tier 4 ("for completion"): 1


Based on what I have read, your tiers are very close to the "accepted wisdom" with possible disagreement from some regarding 3 and 4. That is some would flip the positions of 3 and 4.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Roger Knox said:


> Startling, that the very qualities I like about No. 7 are point of criticism for others. I must check out Bělohlávek's recording.


Roger, I should reiterate that this is not a criticism I myself voice or feel. But I have read comments that make the connection between the Brahmsian overtones and the status of the work. "It's like Brahms, so must be his best work" suggests Dvořák is an inferior composer, a very very debatable valuation, while the opposite suggests the normally sunny, happy Czech composer was out of his comfort zone being deep and dark and serious. Neither argument holds much weight, but I think they are sentiments that do still persist?

It's the Seventh in this set I was referring to, btw. Never heard so much going on in the Finale....!


----------



## Art Rock

Paul T McGraw said:


> Based on what I have read, your tiers are very close to the "accepted wisdom" with possible disagreement from some regarding 3 and 4. That is some would flip the positions of 3 and 4.


Well, there should be one composer where my taste is reasonably in line with the majority - usually it is not.


----------



## Paul T McGraw

Roger Knox said:


> Startling, that the very qualities I like about No. 7 are point of criticism for others. I must check out Bělohlávek's recording.


Are you a particular fan of Brahms? I have mixed feelings about Brahms. I am 66, and all of my life I have accepted the conventional wisdom that Brahms was a member in the very small fraternity of the greatest of the great. But lately, I have begun to entertain doubts. To me, the Dvorak 7th is a superior version of Brahms. It is as if Dvorak was saying, I can do Brahms, but with better melodies. I am somewhat kidding, but not entirely. I started having doubts when I realized it had been many years since I listened to a Brahms symphony. Usually I pick Dvorak or Tchaikovsky, or Bruckner or Mahller.


----------



## Roger Knox

CnC Bartok said:


> Roger, I should reiterate that this is not a criticism I myself voice or feel. But I have read comments that make the connection between the Brahmsian overtones and the status of the work. "It's like Brahms, so must be his best work" suggests Dvořák is an interior composer, a very very debatable valuation, while the opposite suggests the normally sunny, happy Czech composer was out of his comfort zone being deep and dark and serious. Neither argument holds much weight, but I think they are sentiments that do still persist?


No, I don't think you agree with those criticisms of No. 7. If the sentiments you've mentioned do persist I oppose them. Partly because such shallow valuations, when applied to composers of surpassing greatness such as Brahms and Dvorak, miss the mark with me.

I think it's a matter of a taste, of what belongs in a symphony, in this symphony by this composer -- and No. 7 I like and respect in equal measure. No. 8 is excellent too, but a little less to my taste, and in time I will listen to the earlier symphonies based on the recommendations in this thread.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

mbhaub said:


> The 8th. Such a sunny, energetic, beautiful work...with some darker moments in the 2nd movement. I've loved this for so long - some 50 years by now. First recording was the Bruno Walter/Columbia Symphony recording which is still a top recommendation. I just had the extreme pleasure of conducting it a few months ago - so much fun I felt guilty (almost) about taking a pay check for doing it. An ingenious composition all based on a simple G major triad


I agree entirely with your choice of the Eighth, which I have loved for over 50 years as well. Kertesz/London Symphony, Kubelik/Berlin Philharmonic and Dorti/London Symphony have long been my favorite interpretations of this glorious work.


----------



## Roger Knox

Paul T McGraw said:


> Are you a particular fan of Brahms? I have mixed feelings about Brahms. I am 66, and all of my life I have accepted the conventional wisdom that Brahms was a member in the very small fraternity of the greatest of the great. But lately, I have begun to entertain doubts. To me, the Dvorak 7th is a superior version of Brahms. It is as if Dvorak was saying, I can do Brahms, but with better melodies. I am somewhat kidding, but not entirely. I started having doubts when I realized it had been many years since I listened to a Brahms symphony. Usually I pick Dvorak or Tchaikovsky, or Bruckner or Mahller.


Yes I'm a particular fan of Brahms, ever since my mother sang the Lullaby to me in the crib and played the Ab Major Waltz on the piano! I became a pianist too. Brahms was a great melodist (e.g. songs, piano pieces), but his symphonies with their short motifs are less likely to present complete melodies. I think that today it's okay to look for alternatives to the conventional wisdom, and Dvorak is deserving of re-evaluation. For me Dvorak's still his own man in the Brahms-influenced No. 7, and incidentally a list of significant composers influenced by Brahms would be very long indeed ...


----------



## Judith

Quite fond of the 7th. Easy to listen to with beautiful melodies


----------



## jim prideaux

5th-Jansons and the Oslo P.O.

3rd-Jarvi and the SNO (As Merl has already mentioned)


----------



## MarkW

I've always thought that if you match levels and orchestras, you could splice together phrases from the finales of Dvorak's Sixth and Brahms' Second in any number of places and get a wonderful pastiche.


----------



## Enthusiast

I think 8 is the "second best" (after the extraordinary New World) but 3 through to 7 are all fine and distinctive symphonies in their different ways and I am not sure how to choose between them. Rowicki and Neumann are generally very good and Kertesz (not a lot of mention of him in this thread whereas he used to be the acknowledged "best") is often excellent. Suitner's set is also pretty good. From 6 onwards we have the must have option of Ancerl and quite a large variety of other very good accounts, including some great historical recordings. I would need to listen afresh to them all to work out who I might prefer in each work but I know that I find Kubelik hard to beat in 8.


----------



## Heck148

Enthusiast said:


> ..... Kertesz (not a lot of mention of him in this thread whereas he used to be the acknowledged "best") is often excellent.


Kertesz is great with Dvorak, his LSO/Decca complete set is really great...all of them are excellent, with #6, #8, #4 being top-notch....superbly recorded, #6 and 8 are esp outstanding.

my faves, of later symphonies:

#6 - Kertesz/LSO
#7 - Monteux/LSO
#8 - Kertesz/LSO
#9 - Toscanini/NBC, Reiner/CSO


----------



## Olias

The 8th. I never get bored with it. One of my favorite parts is in the third movement trio section where it sounds like two different meters going on at the same time.

This is probably the best live recording of the 8th and 9th. I absolutely love it.

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=118764


----------



## Merl

Olias said:


> The 8th. I never get bored with it. One of my favorite parts is in the third movement trio section where it sounds like two different meters going on at the same time.
> 
> This is probably the best live recording of the 8th and 9th. I absolutely love it.
> 
> http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=118764


Did Mackerras ever conduct any less than excellent Dvorak? I have the Prague 8&9 and these two beauties and all are superb. Mackerras had a great feel for Dvorak.


----------



## Heck148

Olias said:


> The 8th. I never get bored with it. One of my favorite parts is in the third movement trio section where it sounds like two different meters going on at the same time.


That is an accurate assessment...Dvorak has the melody [violins, then oboe/bassoon] in 6/8, [time signature is 3/8] while the accompanying rhythmic figure fits nicely into 3/4 - pattern repeats each 2 bars...

Dvorak does a similar thing in the scherzo [III] mvt of #7 - melody is in 6/4 - rhythm fits into 3/2 - you can easily feel the compound time [melody] - ooo ooo/ o ; or the simple time - oo oo oo/ o...

Sibelius loved 6/4 time - he made some great use of it in his symphonies - 1, 3, 5 also, IIRC...in any case, it's playing the compound against the duple...


----------



## Merl

I never get bored of hearing Dvorak symphonies. Even the New World gets a regular outing and ive heard that a million times. I just wished he'd lived long enough to knock out at least another 9.


----------



## Olias

Merl said:


> I never get bored of hearing Dvorak symphonies. Even the New World gets a regular outing and ive heard that a million times. I just wished he'd lived long enough to knock out at least another 9.


He actually lived almost another decade after writing the NWS. He was recorded as saying he had "done all he could with the genre" and so he started writing tone poems and several operas. Personally, I think he still had some great symphonies left in him.


----------



## snowyflow

Without any hesitation, the 7th! I like it even more than the popular 9th. The 8th is sweet, but to me that's also the problem, easily get tired after listening to it few times...too sweet.


----------



## gellio

CnC Bartok said:


> Roger, I should reiterate that this is not a criticism I myself voice or feel. But I have read comments that make the connection between the Brahmsian overtones and the status of the work. "It's like Brahms, so must be his best work" suggests Dvořák is an inferior composer, a very very debatable valuation, while the opposite suggests the normally sunny, happy Czech composer was out of his comfort zone being deep and dark and serious. Neither argument holds much weight, but I think they are sentiments that do still persist?
> 
> It's the Seventh in this set I was referring to, btw. Never heard so much going on in the Finale....!
> 
> View attachment 121170


The set vaulted the 7th above all others, including the 9th, for me.


----------

