# Is the symphony a dead art form?



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

After searching for 21st century symphonies I've found the pickings rather slim. Wikipedia lists only 15, barely more than one per year, the majority by Phillip Glass. Also researching some of the works it appears the symphony has evolved very far from the classic period idea of symphonic form. Some are very short. Others have become more like program music suites.

So in the 21st century what makes a symphony a symphony as opposed to a tone poem or suite? Is the symphony (or the tone poem for that matter) now moribund? Are these not now just orchestral works of varying lengths? If so, I have no problem with that. It's a bit freeing actually.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Currently planned out all my symphonies up to no. 8. 
Looking forward to the next Glass symphony to come out.
I haven't yet heard Vine's symphon no. 7, should attain a copy soon methinks. Also, Ross Edwards has written some I haven't even heard yet. 
Is Nørgård stil around these days? If so I hope he continues to compose all his incredible symphonies. As with Rautavaara and Segerstam and Pärt. So many symphonies to listen to from the 21st century, so little time.....

I think that these days composers write symphonies according to their own definition of what a symphony exactly is. But it's certainly orchestral.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Whenever a person thinks a genre like symphonies, for example, has been exhausted, a composer comes out of the woodwork that makes us rethink everything that has come before. I think we're all still waiting on this composer to come.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I think classical music itself is pretty much moribund. Serious music has moved on to jazz, soundtracks and more adventurous rock.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Composer/conductor Leif Segerstam of Finland has written well over 200 symphonies so far , and he shows no signs of stopping ! Amazing guy . He has a huge repertoire which includes a lot of obscure but interesting rewpertoire by Scandinavian composers , yet manbages to be unbelievably prolific composer sof symphonies and other works . 
He nakes Haydn look lazy !


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

bigshot said:


> I think classical music itself is pretty much moribund. Serious music has moved on to jazz, soundtracks and more adventurous rock.


Yup, as well as some pretty ghastly "crossover" stuff. And presumably also some avant garde work, most of which no one will listen to twice, not even the avant garde enthusiasts.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

It does seem like the symphony is no longer regarded as quite the prestige form of composition it once was. Chamber works and other things were kind of filler for a composer while they worked on their serious job of their next symphony. Maybe it is due to economics, no one can afford the lavish banquet of a symphony unless it is from a big name like Glass. I'm going to assume Segerstam is some kind of malfunctioning symphony robot machine that simply can't be stopped. It's interesting if you look at Giya Kancheli's career for instance, he wrote a regular series of 7 symphonies, one every few years until the 80s, but then none since despite a whole load of orchestral works. Is it just his choice or does the symphony no longer fit modern classical.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

quack said:


> I'm going to assume Segerstam is some kind of malfunctioning symphony robot machine that simply can't be stopped.


Nuclear weapons were tried but proved ineffective...


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Some views on the subject were expressed here:
http://www.talkclassical.com/538-shostakovich-last-great-symphonist.html


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Weston said:


> After searching for 21st century symphonies I've found the pickings rather slim. Wikipedia lists only 15, ....


Classical music time line....
1000 - 1100
1100 - 1200
1300 - 1400
1400 - 1500
1500 - 1600
1700 - sinfornias
1750 - 1975 Symphonies.

So... a very brief and high-peak rather exhaustive run... 
I say it did rather well, and no grief if it is 'over.'


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Nuclear weapons were tried but proved ineffective...


Whereas a tiny little prescribed tablet daily may just have helped to moderate that disorder. Pity when people don't get and avail themselves of modern readily available help, ain't it?


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I don't think so. 
Do you know how many postmodernists have claimed we were in the end of: history, science, literature, art, mankind! , etc.?, and despite all these clever and well read gentlemen and their catastrophic predictions we are still here, still with our happy lives, and, not so happily, still with these postmodernist gentlemen too...


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

superhorn said:


> Composer/conductor Leif Segerstam of Finland has written well over 200 symphonies so far , and he shows no signs of stopping ! Amazing guy . He has a huge repertoire which includes a lot of obscure but interesting rewpertoire by Scandinavian composers , yet manbages to be unbelievably prolific composer sof symphonies and other works .
> He nakes Haydn look lazy !


More than Haydn and Hovhaness put together. Yikes! I wonder if any of them are any good, mind you...


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

brianvds said:


> More than Haydn and Hovhaness put together. Yikes! I wonder if any of them are any good, mind you...


I wouldn't want to spent the money on them to find out.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

The Wikipedia list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:21st-century_symphonies is not good, and for instance doesn´t mention

Sergei Slonimsky, currently 32; http://www.remusik.org/en/sergeislonimsky/)
Kalevi Aho. At least 15+3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Kalevi_Aho
Per Nørgård, currently 8: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_Nørgård
Alain Bancquart (at least 6 



 http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_Bancquart)
Ib Nørholm (currently 12, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ib_Nørholm)
Gloria Coates (at least 15 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Coates)
Valentin Silvestrov (at least 7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentyn_Sylvestrov)
Poul Ruders (currently 4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poul_Ruders)
Sven David Sandström (currently 3 http://www.svendavidsandstrom.com/workgenre.html)
Julian Anderson (currently 1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Anderson)
Victoria Borisova-Ollas (currently 1 http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Borisova-Ollas)
Jouni Kaipainen (currently 4, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jouni_Kaipainen)
Alla Pavlova (8; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alla_Pavlova)
Maxwell-Davies (9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Maxwell_Davies)

etc.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

quack said:


> It's interesting if you look at Giya Kancheli's career for instance, he wrote a regular series of 7 symphonies, one every few years until the 80s, but then none since despite a whole load of orchestral works. Is it just his choice or does the symphony no longer fit modern classical.


What? Kancheli's symphony count is at least up in the 20s...


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

violadude said:


> What? Kancheli's symphony count is at least up in the 20s...


No, Kancheli has only written seven symphonies to date.


----------



## CypressWillow (Apr 2, 2013)

aleazk said:


> I don't think so.
> Do you know how many postmodernists have claimed we were in the end of: history, science, literature, art, mankind! , etc.?, and despite all these clever and well read gentlemen and their catastrophic predictions we are still here, still with our happy lives, and, not so happily, still with these postmodernist gentlemen too...


And I seem to remember a famous prediction that we were soon to be at the end of something else:

"...that the public concert as we know it today would no longer exist" in a hundred years.

Some chap named Gould.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Neo Romanza said:


> No, Kancheli has only written seven symphonies to date.


Hmm I must have been thinking of someone else. My bad.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Well, I still have hope for the symphony, Aho has already written 15 of them.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

> Hmm I must have been thinking of someone else. My bad.


Maybe-maybe Alemda Karamanov (24): http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/Name/Alemdar-Karamanov/Composer/6147-1


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

The symphony has been moribund (at least) for 42 years. No, Glass hasn't helped.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

KenOC said:


> The symphony has been moribund (at least) for 42 years. No, Glass hasn't helped.


Could you give some examples among those you have heard from after 2000, and why they are moribund?


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

joen_cph said:


> The Wikipedia list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:21st-century_symphonies is not good, and for instance doesn´t mention
> 
> Sergei Slonimsky, currently 32; http://www.remusik.org/en/sergeislonimsky/)
> Kalevi Aho. At least 15+3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Kalevi_Aho
> ...





joen_cph said:


> Some views on the subject were expressed here:
> http://www.talkclassical.com/538-shostakovich-last-great-symphonist.html





PetrB said:


> Classical music time line....
> 1000 - 1100
> 1100 - 1200
> 1300 - 1400
> ...


I thought this thread was supposed to be about the 21st century not the 20th? I doubt there's much problem in the 20th. Whether in this century it has dwindled I don't really know, but lack of knowledge of something isn't evidence. Certainly Wikipedia isn't great evidence, there is probably less interest in recent classical music in general. It's possible some classical music is moving to different forms related to other experimental/jazz/minimalist forms which may contain fewer instruments.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

starry said:


> I thought this thread was supposed to be about the 21st century not the 20th? I doubt there's much problem in the 20th. Whether in this century it has dwindled I don't really know, but lack of knowledge of something isn't evidence. Certainly Wikipedia isn't great evidence, there is probably less interest in recent classical music in general. It's possible some classical music is moving to different forms related to other experimental/jazz/minimalist forms which may contain fewer instruments.


There is a reason I stopped at 1750 - 1975 symphonies, leaving the last quarter of the 20th century until the present blank.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

What is the reason?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Starry, you are right that the mentioned Shostakovich thread is more about that composer in particular than I remembered it to be (p.3-4 though). There is some other thread I forgot the title of.

The composers on my list above all composed symphonies in the 21st century, which is the reason behind the choice. I have heard only a few of those recent works, one of the reasons being that recordings aren´t always easy to get, but there´s no doubt that for instance Nørgård´s are important and ground-breaking on any list of more modern symphonies. On the other hand, there does seem to be fewer very young composers focusing a lot on the symphonic form nowadays, but we don´t know that much yet.

Slonimsky´s caleidoscopic style, mixing both attractive, polystylistic and ambitious, serious elements, makes him a writer of diaries on his times, cf. a quote from the link:"_it seems to me that the essence of the symphony concludes in that it is a kind of diary of humanity without words about our time and about our very dreadful era. Such eras of the division of people into separate atoms when literally taken to the limit, are a struggle of everybody against the individual, the individual against everybody and everybody against everybody. If anything I am probably more of a romantic in music than a neoclassic. Regarding form, they can be really varied. They can be polyphonic, homophonic sonorous, melodic or monophonic .... Yes, It seems to me that listeners, conductors and performers, concerning this question, are simply a few generations ahead of the music critics, which are all the time making it difficult for us to work freely in the area of the symphony. From one side, some critics confirm that the symphony is an outdated form. Surely, they are looking at the symphony as necessarily a four-part sonata Allegro, andante, scherzo, and finale cycle. By no means is this the only type of symphony today. From a different side comes the opposite. Conservative and not very well educated critics, of the classical from, consider that the symphony must be composed of four movements and that in general it must by long and boring. This contradiction is met all the time in our press. For me, from one side, this bothers me because critics fall upon my symphonies from two sides from the other angle, it means that it is worth it to write .... Sergei Mikhailovich speaks regarding western music, about that he can't say that there exists only one school. He goes through examples of the different school like the sonorous with its paradoxical, philosophical core. He talks about his admiration for Cage in America and the Minimalists, which also study different African rhythms, the Gamalan and others. In line with this school, there are others like the Complex-City with Norman Hall, Bervist, and others. There is the post-serial school of Boulez who to this day lives and works. There is the work of Messiaen with his completely original modes, arithmetic language, original rhythms connected to the east and with Indian music. There are very many different schools and trends. Finally, there is a line, in the opinion of Slonimsky, of which little is known in our music. This is the line of Slavic folklore for example Martinu and Szymanowski_".


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Band Symphonies*

As one of the few band junkies here I know of the following off the top of my head:

James Barnes has composed seven symphonies for band, three since 2000. He was born on September 9, 1949. He is still actively composing.

John Corigliano compose his _Third Symphony for Band_ in 2004.

David Maslanka so far has completed six symphonies for band and two for orchestra, three since 2000.

Thomas Sleeper has complete two symphonies for orchestra and one for band since 2000.

Jack Stamp completed his _First Symphony for Band_ in 2006.

Frank Ticheli has completed two symphonies, one for band and the other for orchestra, since 2000.

The above composers are well known to band junkies. I have recordings of most of these works. :trp:


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

KenOC said:


> The symphony has been moribund (at least) for 42 years. No, Glass hasn't helped.


What are you talking about? Of course Glass is helping... helping... helping... helping....


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

joen_cph said:


> I have heard only a few of those recent works, one of the reasons being that recordings aren´t always easy to get,


This could well be a factor as well as our lack of knowledge. Classical recordings are still trying to catch up on music that was ignored in previous centuries rather than focussing on the present century. But as someone said the symphony also has to evolve and having expectations through some older perspectives probably isn't helpful. We don't have much perspective on music of the past decade yet.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

I propose the ludwig as the unit of a composer's output of symphonies. One ludwig = 9 symphonies. Thus Brahms composed 0.44 ludwigs of symphonies, Haydn composed 11.55 ludwigs, Hovhaness composed 7.44 ludwigs, etc. 

In this way we can put comparative symphonology on a more rigourously quantitive and scientific basis. 

Ever since Beethoven, all the major composers seem to have stuck to no more than one and a half to two or so ludwigs, and often much less. Of those who composed much more, most of those symphonies are not particularly great (I'm not sure even half a ludwig of Hovhaness' symphonies, for example, will end up in the permanent repertoire.) 

Thus the symphony remains a weighty kind of thing, we should perhaps rather have a small number of good ones than a plethora of bad ones? (Incidentally, the plethora is the unit of Baroque concertos, with one plethora equaling Vivaldi's output.)


----------



## Guest (Jul 3, 2013)

As others have suggested, I think wikipedia cannot be relied upon on this particular issue.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

In terms of anticipating any new symphonic works, Gorecki's 4th is due to have its world premiere in April 2014. Of course sadly, it is his last.

http://shop.lpo.org.uk/performances/detail.asp?9286,63,0,0,0


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

Regarding Segerstam:




Wikipedia said:


> As a composer, he is known especially for his numerous symphonies (261 as of 2012[1]). Of these, over a hundred have been performed.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leif_Segerstam

I understand that the muse cannot be denied, etc., but I kinda wonder how he can stay motivated to continue to crank these symphonies out when many of these (hundreds!) may never be performed, or hardly ever anyway.


----------



## Ravndal (Jun 8, 2012)

Skilmarilion said:


> In terms of anticipating any new symphonic works, Gorecki's 4th is due to have its world premiere in April 2014. Of course sadly, it is his last.
> 
> http://shop.lpo.org.uk/performances/detail.asp?9286,63,0,0,0


Finally! I have waited for this


----------



## nightscape (Jun 22, 2013)

Rautavaara has written 8 symphonies, his 7th is the most popular and quite beautiful. The problem isn't so much the output, its the popularity of current classical or orchestral music. I have this sneaky feeling that a lot of people associate modern classical with minimalism, which is unfortunate.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

bigshot said:


> I think classical music itself is pretty much moribund. Serious music has moved on to jazz, soundtracks and more adventurous rock.


Jazz isn't jazz anymore.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Jazz isn't jazz anymore.


This is unfortunately what I'm finding out. I'm a huge fan of the late 40s, 50s, and early 60s bebop movement and thought what happened after this period was degrading to what has come before. Where's the swing? Fusion really put the final nail in jazz's coffin IMHO.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Neo Romanza said:


> This is unfortunately what I'm finding out. I'm a huge fan of the late 40s, 50s, and early 60s bebop movement and thought what happened after this period was degrading to what has come before. Where's the swing? Fusion really put the final nail in jazz's coffin IMHO.


That rhythmic involuntary response of the voluntary nervous system lingered for awhile, with guys like Oscar; often muted, but there. "Pure cerebral" music is the thing now. There is no _effective_ difference between new jazz and new classical.


----------



## Jobis (Jun 13, 2013)

bigshot said:


> I think classical music itself is pretty much moribund. Serious music has moved on to jazz, soundtracks and more adventurous rock.


-soundtracks
-rock
-serious

pick one.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Hilltroll72 said:


> That rhythmic involuntary response of the voluntary nervous system lingered for awhile, with guys like Oscar; often muted, but there. "Pure cerebral" music is the thing now. There is no _effective_ difference between new jazz and new classical.


There was a small jazz renaissance in the 80s with guys like Wynton Marsalis, but even he couldn't save the genre as talented as a musician as he may be. It became nothing but a rehash of bebop with nothing new added to the mix.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I have a BIS recording of one of the earlier Segerstam symphonies conducted by the composer, and while it's hardly easy listening and does not have any recognizable themes as such, it's not at all uninteresting .
It's subtitled "Thoughts at the border ". The composer's liner notes explaining the title are extremely abstruse .
It's in one long movement of about 40 minutes .


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

Hilltroll72 said:


> That rhythmic involuntary response of the voluntary nervous system lingered for awhile, with guys like Oscar; often muted, but there. "Pure cerebral" music is the thing now. There is no _effective_ difference between new jazz and new classical.


Improvisation as an essential part of a performance is one huge difference.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

Neo Romanza said:


> There was a small jazz renaissance in the 80s with guys like Wynton Marsalis, but even he couldn't save the genre as talented as a musician as he may be. It became nothing but a rehash of bebop with nothing new added to the mix.


Marsalis ultimately didn't have much new to say. There's a lot of really great, creative music being made today that often goes under the heading of "Jazz", though maybe that term is antiquated now. It's at least a part of the Jazz tradition though.

Bemoaning the death of jazz strikes me as similar to being a fan of the Romantic era in classical music and not liking the direction(s) classical music took in the 20th century.


----------



## Guest (Jul 3, 2013)

apricissimus said:


> Bemoaning the death of jazz strikes me as similar to being a fan of the Romantic era in classical music and not liking the direction(s) classical music took in the 20th century.


There's a lot of that going around, isn't there?

One thing about whinging, however. It's ineffectual.

It doesn't change anything in the world, and it doesn't even make the whinger feel better.

It is obsessive. The whinger whinges, changes nothing, feels the same, whinges some more. Doesn't sound quite the thing to me.

In the meantime, composers continue to compose, performers continue to perform, squabblers continue to squabble, world without end, amen.

The symphony is a dead art form in the same way that the concerto grosso is a dead art form. People in general just stopped doing each of those things after awhile. Particular individuals kept doing each of them, of course. And, in the case of the latter, certain individuals resuscitated the form after it had laid quietly lifeless for many years. It happens.

In any event, you have some options. You can ceasely bemoan the dearth of contemporary symphonies, which accomplishes exactly naught. You can learn to enjoy what is happening, which makes you and everyone around you happier and better looking. Or you could write yourself a nice little symphony, which could have all sorts of consequences.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KenOC said:


> *The symphony has been moribund (at least) for 42 years.*


*The above statement, or near identical, has been moribund (at least) for 113 years.*

Where did you first hear this, sitting on your Grandpa's/Grandma's knee?


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Didn't people say the symphony was dead after Beethoven died, that nothing more could be done there. People say things like this every so often.

And even if it is relatively lifeless now the main thing is that classical music continues in some form just like it did when other genres within it fell out of fashion. Other forms have become less used in the past compared to their previous popularity like the trio-sonata, the cantata and the oratorio, but that must happen for music to change with the times.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

apricissimus said:


> Marsalis ultimately didn't have much new to say. There's a lot of really great, creative music being made today that often goes under the heading of "Jazz", though maybe that term is antiquated now. It's at least a part of the Jazz tradition though.
> 
> Bemoaning the death of jazz strikes me as similar to being a fan of the Romantic era in classical music and not liking the direction(s) classical music took in the 20th century.


You and I obviously share very different opinions about jazz and that's perfectly fine. Jazz, for me, is a dead art form. Jazz is much more than improvisation, though it does play a vital role in the music. For me, 'if it ain't got that swing, it don't mean a thing.'


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

I think that "dead" is a very strong word. In fact compose a symphony is not a lucrative business these days as compose video-game music, and the general interest seems to be lower, but I think (and hope) that it can be changed.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

A relevant article from NPR, focused on the United States: "We're not out to crown the best American symphony, to decide whether Aaron Copland's Symphony No. 3 is more important than John Corigliano's Symphony No. 1. Instead we're wondering: Is the music still viable? Who writes symphonies in America these days? And who hears them? What relevance do they have in the American artistic landscape?"

http://www.npr.org/blogs/deceptivec...0007/IN-SEARCH-OF-THE-GREAT-AMERICAN-SYMPHONY


----------



## isridgewell (Jul 2, 2013)

Hugh Wood's Symphony is a great reply to this post.

Sadly it is funding that is killing the symphony. A friend of mine is a composer and he said that if your face fits you will get 10 mins at the start of a concert.

New symphonies do not get "bums on seats" and that is what is killing off probably the oldest and most established of forms.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

isridgewell said:


> Sadly it is funding that is killing the symphony.


Sounds to me like another word for "demand." If nobody cares about new symphonies, should they be "funded"?


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

isridgewell said:


> Hugh Wood's Symphony is a great reply to this post.
> 
> Sadly it is funding that is killing the symphony. A friend of mine is a composer and he said that if your face fits you will get 10 mins at the start of a concert.
> 
> New symphonies do not get "bums on seats" and that is what is killing off probably the oldest and most established of forms.


Has he done a new symphony? I know he did one in the early 80s but that was years ago.


----------



## korenbloem (Nov 5, 2012)

I don't think its dead! it is just modern composers are not very popular overall. So the modern repoirtraire wont be preformed as much, as it should be.

over 10 a 20 years: the symphonistics of the 70,s and 80s will dominated the concert halls. over 60 years or contempories will dominate the concerthalls. (I hope!!!)


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

isridgewell said:


> A friend of mine is a composer and he said that if your face fits you will get 10 mins at the start of a concert.


Perhaps I need coffee this morning, but what does this mean - if your face fits? If it looks good in the program book? (It's a sincere question, not a rhetorical challenge.)


----------

