# Dvořák - Op. 3 - Symphony No. 1 in C minor



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

The poll for my competition in the Movie Corner, the Talkclassical best film score award - 1993, will close on September 7, so it's your last chance to vote.


In this discussion we will speak about the first symphony of the Czech composer. How do you rate it? 

Conductor: István Kertész 
Orchestra: London Symphony Orchestra

You can suggest better recordings, if you want.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Dvorak's own assessment of this early work was pretty accurate: it's not very good. Way too long, lacking thematic interest, transitions are awkward, orchestration so-so. What we know as Symphony 2 he called Symphony 1, he didn't even want this first attempt counted. Some conductors included it in their recorded cycles under protest. But...I'd kill to be able to write something so "bad". This supposedly terrible symphony is still vastly superior to the scribbling of people like Rubinstein. The orchestration is vastly superior to Schumann. The Bells of Zlonice is no masterpiece, but it's not the total dog that people think.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Not my cup of tea. I marked "not so good and not so bad".


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I voted "good". Enjoyable but long-winded.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Bulldog said:


> I voted "good". Enjoyable but long-winded.


^ what he said. The first two aren't bad but they take a big upturn from the 3rd onwards


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

I like it....it does go on a bit, tho....


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

mbhaub said:


> Dvorak's own assessment of this early work was pretty accurate: it's not very good. Way too long, lacking thematic interest, transitions are awkward, orchestration so-so. What we know as Symphony 2 he called Symphony 1, he didn't even want this first attempt counted. Some conductors included it in their recorded cycles under protest. But...I'd kill to be able to write something so "bad". This supposedly terrible symphony is still vastly superior to the scribbling of people like Rubinstein. The orchestration is vastly superior to Schumann. The Bells of Zlonice is no masterpiece, but it's not the total dog that people think.


I personally agree with the results of the poll. Not horrible, not very good. The second movement is my favourite one, the fourth is quite good and the rest is not so exciting.


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

I voted very good. Enjoyable, but not up to the standard and level of his symphonies Nos. 3, 5, 6,7,8 & 9. It is a finer symphony however than Nos. 2 &4.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

haziz said:


> I voted very good. Enjoyable, but not up to the standard and level of his symphonies Nos. 3, 5, 6,7,8 & 9. It is a finer symphony however than Nos. 2 &4.


About right......


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

The only Dvorak symphonies I consider excellent are 7, 8 and 9. Everything else is either boring or mildly interesting in places.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

I am liking it, just not as good as the later ones.
I am a István Kertész addict so no complains any further .


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> The only Dvorak symphonies I consider excellent are 7, 8 and 9. Everything else is either boring or mildly interesting in places.


Can not really agree with this......5.6 and particularly 3?


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

jim prideaux said:


> Can not really agree with this......5.6 and particularly 3?



I totally agree. His Symphonies Nos. 3, 5 and 6 are absolute masterpieces.


----------



## dko22 (Jun 22, 2021)

I think the first symphony has a very powerful atmosphere and does not at all outstay its welcome when uncut and performed with conviction like Kertesz (but few others) manage. The slow movement is as beautiful as just about anything else in his canon. I voted "excellent" even though I know it has weaknesses. Taken as a whole, it's a better work than 2 or 4 certainly and as I'd put the composer after Bruckner as the greatest symphonist of the 19th century (at any rate post-classical), the symphony still measures up pretty well.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

While the Dvorak first symphony is not quite mature and has its faults of youth , I'm still very fond of it and I'm glad it was discovered by chance years after the composer had disowned it . 
The symphony is full of interesting and memorable themes and its lack of academically "correct" structure actually makes it quite appealing to me at least . Its full of quirky and surprising turns of phrase .


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

3, 5 and 6 are nowhere near as good as 7, 9 and 9. They have their mo


jim prideaux said:


> Can not really agree with this......5.6 and particularly 3?


So I gave the 3rd another try - and liked it! Still don't think it's a masterpiece but it's quite enjoyable. I hear some Wagnerian influences but with very clear and distinct Dvorak voice.


----------

