# Lost symphony by Etienne Mehul found



## Fsharpmajor (Dec 14, 2008)

According to this article, it pre-dates Berlioz by twenty years in terms of cyclic form:

*http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...e-Mehul-symphony-set-for-London-premiere.html*


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

wow amazing


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

Well, that's hilarious... considering we just studied Berlioz in my college Music History class. So it looks like Berlioz didn't invent the use of the _idee fixe?_ I'll be sure to let the professor know about this.


----------



## Falstaft (Mar 27, 2010)

Thanks a lot for this F#! May even write something up based on this!


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

So is the official story now that Mehul invented the cyclic form, but nobody knew about it, and Berlioz still came up with the idea on his own?


----------



## Fsharpmajor (Dec 14, 2008)

That seems to be what the article is saying:

*"Ironically, although later composers used the cyclic form they would not have heard Mehul's 4th symphony as it was never published"*


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

This thread's title is entirely incorrect (perhaps the original poster did not read carefully the article). The article itself is cheap journalism.

Mehul's symphony #4 was discovered by Professor Charlton in 1979, as stated in the article. Although it may well be the first London performance today, symphony #4 has already been recorded and released on CD. *The Gulbenkian Orchestra directed by Michel Swierczewski (Nimbus label, 1992)* has recorded all four symphonies, therefore certainly not the first premiere in modern times of Mehul's symphony (unless there is sometime particularly special about a French Romantic piece being performed in London in the year 2010).


----------



## Fsharpmajor (Dec 14, 2008)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> This thread's title is entirely incorrect...Although it may well be the first London performance today, symphony #4 has already been recorded and released on CD.


You're right--I was misled by the ambivalent wording of this sentence:

*A symphony lost for 200 years that "changed the couse of musical history" when it was finally rediscovered will be played for the first time in London this week.*

Sorry about that.


----------



## Falstaft (Mar 27, 2010)

Well, I couldn't resist using such an interesting article as a spring board for a blog post. Check out my take on the 4th (the verdict: cyclical processes are there, but a little overrated and certainly not the raison d'etre for the entire work)

The "Lost" Romantic: Méhul's Fourth

http://unsungsymphonies.blogspot.com/2010/11/lost-romantic-mehuls-fourth.html

Thanks again F#, would not have known about this "premier" without your post.


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

How funny! I only just realised that Unsung Symphonies is your blog


----------



## Fsharpmajor (Dec 14, 2008)

Falstaft said:


> Thanks again F#, would not have known about this "premier" without your post.


I'll see if I can make some other useful mistakes. 

Here's a mostly forgotten symphony by Alfredo Casella that you might be interested in:

*http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12314*


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

There are very few recordings of Mehul's symphonies available. Do they really deserve such neglect on disc compared to those of, say, von Weber?


----------

