# SS 21.11.20 - Glazunov #5



## cougarjuno (Jul 1, 2012)

A continuation of the Saturday Symphonies Tradition:

Welcome to another weekend of symphonic listening!

For your listening pleasure this weekend:

*Alexander Glazunov (1865 - 1936)*

Symphony #5 in B flat major, Op. 55

1. Moderato maestoso - Allegro
2. Scherzo
3. Andante
4. Allegro maestoso
---------------------

Post what recording you are going to listen to giving details of Orchestra / Conductor / Chorus / Soloists etc - Enjoy!


----------



## cougarjuno (Jul 1, 2012)

This week we'll go with Glazunov's Symphony #5. Written in 1895 and dedicated to Sergei Taneyev, some critics hail this as Glazunov's best symphony. Certainly the beautiful orchestration is evident from the lyrical first movement to the boisterous finale. There are echoes of Dvorak and Schubert in the first, of Mendelssohn in the Scherzo, of Tchaikovsky in the slow movement and of Rimsky-Korsakov in the finale and yet Glazunov pulls it all together in an extremely satisfying and unifying piece. A few recordings around, but I'll go with Yondani Butt and the Philharmonic on this ASV disc.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Great symphony - beautifully written and very exciting. By coincidence I was picking some cds for the car club road trip tomorrow and packed the Svetlanov set of Glazunov symphonies. I should get to #5 somewhere around Kirkland Junction. Happy Listening.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Glazunov: Symphonies Nos. 1 & 5

Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra, Neeme Järvi

I will go with this one.


----------



## Mika (Jul 24, 2009)

mbhaub said:


> Great symphony - beautifully written and very exciting. By coincidence I was picking some cds for the car club road trip tomorrow and packed the Svetlanov set of Glazunov symphonies. I should get to #5 somewhere around Kirkland Junction. Happy Listening.
> View attachment 146291


I will listen this one


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

I really like Glazunov and have this set in my collection, which I can recommend 
So easy choice for me


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

As I need little excuse to listen to Glazunov I am now listening to both the 4th and the 5th fROM the Olympia recording by Rozhdestvensky and the USSR Ministry of Culture S.O.

I am aware that I have mentioned this before but I find it interesting that Glazunov has not been performed at the Proms since 1919.......to me this is clear evidence that his music ( apparently regarded by many as conservative) has unfortunately been increasingly treated with little regard......( rant over!)


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Rogerx said:


> Glazunov: Symphonies Nos. 1 & 5
> 
> Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra, Neeme Järvi
> 
> I will go with this one.


I have a few Glazzy cycles but I'll go with Jarvi (like Roger) as it was first to hand. I can only echo what Jim P said...an excellent symphonist. His 5th is one of the best ones, for me.


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

I’ll start with Järvi and the Symphonieorchester des Bayerischen Rundfunks. If I like this work and have time (I’ve been terribly busy with work and family lately), I’ll explore some of the Russian orchestras’ offerings. I’m really only familiar with this composer’s Violin Concerto in A Minor, Op. 82, so I’m excited finally to listen seriously to one of his symphonies.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

Simplicissimus said:


> I'll start with Järvi and the Symphonieorchester des Bayerischen Rundfunks. If I like this work and have time (I've been terribly busy with work and family lately), I'll explore some of the Russian orchestras' offerings. I'm really only familiar with this composer's Violin Concerto in A Minor, Op. 82, so I'm excited finally to listen seriously to one of his symphonies.


Enjoy it....be interested to read what you make of it!


----------



## D Smith (Sep 13, 2014)

I'll listen to Jarvi here. Thanks for stepping in, cougarjuno.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

I'll reach for the Serebrier box and give that one a try.


----------



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

I'd say the neglect is surprising, given he drew from the same well as Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov, but then some might say they don't need Glazunov given we already have Tchaik/Rach. I say the more the merrier.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

jim prideaux said:


> As I need little excuse to listen to Glazunov I am now listening to both the 4th and the 5th fROM the Olympia recording by Rozhdestvensky and the USSR Ministry of Culture S.O.
> 
> I am aware that I have mentioned this before but I find it interesting that Glazunov has not been performed at the Proms since 1919.......to me this is clear evidence that his music ( apparently regarded by many as conservative) has unfortunately been increasingly treated with little regard......( rant over!)


Much as I enjoy Glazunov and agree his music seems largely overlooked, I am left with the feeling that his problem is being in the shadow of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov as already mentioned. Not original or different enough to make him standout perhaps
Enjoyable way to spend a Saturday morning for me though


----------



## Posauner (Nov 8, 2020)

This is a new work for me, I'll be starting with the Philharmonia Orchestra as well.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Since I have it and like the cover...


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

A first spin for this Symphony since listening to it when the Serbrier box first appeared, in fact I listened to it twice this morning.

The opening movement starts off a little lugubriously but after the first few minutes it gathers momentum and becomes more appealing. The Scherzo is at times playful and jaunty - a nice, albeit light, movement. The Andante for me is the movement I enjoyed least, I feel it is too balletic at times but that may just be my prejudices surfacing. The Symphony ends with a rousing Finale which is boisterous and forward moving - a fine concluding movement.

Overall this is a very decent Symphony and one that will encourage me to remember to open this box more frequently.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I’ve never spent much time with Glazunov and don’t remember listening to his 5th Symphony, so I spun up Serebrier’s version with the Royal Scottish National Orchestra. I'm very much in agreement with Malx on this one.

Mvmt 1: Very broad, brooding slow opening, bursting after a couple of minutes into an allegro, where the introduction theme is heard again in a much quicker form and developed extensively. Very fine orchestration and excellent use of the brass.

Mvmt 2: A light, scampering Mendelssonian scherzo. Lots of staccato winds and triangle punctuations. The trio is a bit slower and sounds a bit “Russian,” hardly surprising. All this is quite attractive music.

Mvmt 3: This andante is soothing and perhaps a little melancholy. It achieves a mini-climax with a bit of passion before subsiding. The themes, to me, are not sharply characterized, so it doesn’t stick in memory (on first hearing anyway).

Mvmt 4: Nice wham-bam opening. And the pace never lets up in this often-noisy movement. The composer cranks it up even further as the end approaches.

A very enjoyable symphony with plenty of good material for its modest running time and showing pretty obvious compositional and orchestration skills. Thanks to SS for this one!


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

jim prideaux said:


> As I need little excuse to listen to Glazunov I am now listening to both the 4th and the 5th fROM the Olympia recording by Rozhdestvensky and the USSR Ministry of Culture S.O.
> 
> I am aware that I have mentioned this before but I find it interesting that Glazunov has not been performed at the Proms since 1919.......to me this is clear evidence that his music ( apparently regarded by many as conservative) has unfortunately been increasingly treated with little regard......( rant over!)


Well, Vladimir Jurowski performed this work with the London Philharmonic at the BBC Proms in 2019.
It's pretty well done.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

Well, I stand corrected as I did check performances at the Proms but it was before 2019. Good to know that the 5th was in fact performed so thanks Orfeo.


----------



## kyjo (Jan 1, 2018)

I love this symphony! Glazunov may not achieve the emotional depth and melodic memorability of Tchaikovsky or Rachmaninoff, but he was a superb orchestrator and always develops his ideas with great skill. For me the highlight of the symphony is the rousing, syncopated finale - a thrilling movement!


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

jim prideaux said:


> Well, I stand corrected as I did check performances at the Proms but it was before 2019. Good to know that the 5th was in fact performed so thanks Orfeo.


You're welcome.
:tiphat:


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

I have several recordings, including the one shown by KenOC. It might not be the very pinnacle of music, but I don't know of any clunkers by Glazunov.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Haydn man said:


> Much as I enjoy Glazunov and agree his music seems largely overlooked, I am left with the feeling that his problem is being in the shadow of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov as already mentioned. Not original or different enough to make him standout perhaps
> Enjoyable way to spend a Saturday morning for me though





maestro267 said:


> I'd say the neglect is surprising, given he drew from the same well as Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov, but then some might say they don't need Glazunov given we already have Tchaik/Rach. I say the more the merrier.


There are ways in which this symphony is very different from Tchaikovsky's mature symphonies/symphonic poems and Rachmaninoff's symphonies, concertos, and sonatas. Most crucially, I think, it has little of the contrast and conflict of these works, especially in the opening movements. Every one of the works I mentioned by Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff sets up a dramatic opposition of themes in the first movement (or only movement in the case of symphonic poems), a choice between two irreconcilable alternatives, one dark and one light, one tense and stressful, the other idyllic or ideal. The conflict and contrast is steadily exacerbated throughout the first movement and usually taken up again in some form later in the work. Everything is on the line expressively and one feels this. It could end in peace and glory or in disaster. In the Glazunov Fifth there is nothing at stake. I suspect this difference in dramatic "content" (or structure) is enough to account for the greater and more lasting popularity of Tchaikovksy and Rachmaninoff. Well, that and the tunes.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Haydn man said:


> Much as I enjoy Glazunov and agree his music seems largely overlooked, I am left with the feeling that his problem is being in the shadow of Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov as already mentioned. Not original or different enough to make him standout perhaps
> Enjoyable way to spend a Saturday morning for me though


I think you have echoed my feelings as well. Glazunov is a very fine composer, and among his symphonies there are some very fine works. I don't think in all honesty that he delivered on the promise shown in his very First symphony, and I hold that one to be one of the best of the lot really. But these are genuinely good pieces.
I think he's a victim of the "unless you're a firebrand revolutionary in music, your music is worth sod all" mentality that didn't help during the first half of the 20th Century, and later in the USA. How Rachmaninov survived that is pretty miraculous....
Personally I think Glazunov sounds more like Borodin than Rachmaninov or Tchaikovsky, which is a very good reason for liking him. 
I listened to Fedoseyev from his cycle. Very enjoyable, but his Violin Concerto remains my favourite piece of Glazunov's oeuvre.....


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

CnC Bartok said:


> I think he's a victim of the "unless you're a firebrand revolutionary in music, your music is worth sod all" mentality that didn't help during the first half of the 20th Century, and later in the USA. How Rachmaninov survived that is pretty miraculous....


Didn't nearly every good, relatively conservative composer thrive in the early 20thc? As for Rachmaninoff, he was the Led Zeppelin of his day. He got his own kind of contract for appearances, a healthy percentage of the gate rather than a fixed fee, the kind of contract Peter Grant negotiated for Zeppelin.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

EdwardBast said:


> Didn't nearly every good, relatively conservative composer thrive in the early 20thc? As for Rachmaninoff, he was the Led Zeppelin of his day. He got his own kind of contract for appearances, a healthy percentage of the gate rather than a fixed fee, the kind of contract Peter Grant negotiated for Zeppelin.


True, but there was certainly a dismissive backlash against the vast majority of them later on....?


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

CnC Bartok said:


> True, but there was certainly a dismissive backlash against the vast majority of them later on....?


Well, I wouldn't say the majority. It's a bit of a myth or stereotype that the 20th century (even the mid or late 20th century) was all about writing highly dissonant, atonal, 12-tone, or avant-garde music. It really wasn't.

After Stravinsky abandoned Neoclassicism by the 50's and even took up serialism by the end of that decade, a lot of composers decided to follow suit, but not as many as has been exaggerated. In my country, Copland did of course. And it was therefore decided to teach serialism in college, especially at the graduate level, but it actually backfired and caused a conservative backlash against the approach. Stravinsky and Copland weren't considered as cutting edge or representative anymore by the younger generation. By the 1970's, conservative movements such as Minimalism and Neoromanticism (which never completely died out, but was reinvented) began to become popular among composers and audiences in response to atonality and serialism.

And not just in America. Even Europe, with its progressive reputation, never left conservatism completely. Take the important composer Hans Werner Henze, who was quite conservative throughout his very long and successful career. Penderecki too, whose dissonant output really didn't last that long when compared to the remainder of it. Starting in the late 60's, conservatism began creeping into his music and it became more and more conservative. You could even say it became extreme. Lutoslawski is another European who remained quite conservative throughout his long and successful career. Even the more "avant-garde" aleatoric devices used in some later pieces when heard today are not jarring at all and the conservative nature of the pieces remain intact.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

CnC Bartok said:


> True, but there was certainly a dismissive backlash against the vast majority of them later on....?


For sure. Standard music history texts in the mid to late-20thc dismissed nearly all of the important Russian and Soviet composers, for example, with a few scant pages.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

EdwardBast said:


> For sure. Standard music history texts in the mid to late-20thc dismissed nearly all of the important Russian and Soviet composers, for example, with a few scant pages.


Yes, politics always seems to get in the way. That's why I studied analysis and believe what my ears and eyes (the musical score) tell me rather than biased descriptions of summaries ...


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

EdwardBast said:


> There are ways in which this symphony is very different from Tchaikovsky's mature symphonies/symphonic poems and Rachmaninoff's symphonies, concertos, and sonatas. Most crucially, I think, it has little of the contrast and conflict of these works, especially in the opening movements. *Every one of the works I mentioned by Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff sets up a dramatic opposition of themes in the first movement (or only movement in the case of symphonic poems), a choice between two irreconcilable alternatives, one dark and one light, one tense and stressful, the other idyllic or ideal. *The conflict and contrast is steadily exacerbated throughout the first movement and usually taken up again in some form later in the work. Everything is on the line expressively and one feels this. It could end in peace and glory or in disaster. In the Glazunov Fifth there is nothing at stake. I suspect this difference in dramatic "content" (or structure) is enough to account for the greater and more lasting popularity of Tchaikovksy and Rachmaninoff. Well, that and the tunes.


That's quite true, although the andante stands out in that regard. Overall I do like this symphony a great deal, even though I have a warmer spot for Glazunov's Second, Sixth, and Eighth Symphonies, which do stand out as having those qualities highlighted above even more. Plus the fact that there's an abundance of very fine, even compelling ideas, very well structured, and with the orchestration that is generally brilliant. But other than that, yes, his symphonies like the Fifth are essentially urbane, engaging, and quite consistent, the latter attribute that's apparent in the symphonies of Bruckner, Sibelius, Bax, or Martinu.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

CnC Bartok said:


> I think you have echoed my feelings as well. Glazunov is a very fine composer, and among his symphonies there are some very fine works. *I don't think in all honesty that he delivered on the promise shown in his very First symphony*, and I hold that one to be one of the best of the lot really. But these are genuinely good pieces.
> I think he's a victim of the "unless you're a firebrand revolutionary in music, your music is worth sod all" mentality that didn't help during the first half of the 20th Century, and later in the USA. How Rachmaninov survived that is pretty miraculous....
> Personally I think Glazunov sounds more like Borodin than Rachmaninov or Tchaikovsky, which is a very good reason for liking him.
> I listened to Fedoseyev from his cycle. Very enjoyable, but his Violin Concerto remains my favourite piece of Glazunov's oeuvre.....


I will have to respectfully disagree with you here. The works he had written by the close of the Nineteenth Century and by the turn of the next century represent the pinnacle of his musical art, namely his Sixth Symphony, Raymonda, The Seasons, the First Piano Sonata, the Violin Concerto.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I just listened to the Seventh and what impressed me was just how consistently the students of Taneyev, including Glazunov, mastered the art of counterpoint. Every line knows exactly where it's going and each maintains its integrity. No dangling threads. But I'm getting the impression Glazunov's uncomfortable with silences and long, exposed solos? I'll be listening to the rest of his symphonies in the next few days to see whether this generalization holds up.


----------

