Thread: Symphony 5=Quality Asssurance

Unlike the classical period, Beethoven and later composers limited themselves to a 'few' symphonies due to various reasons, so it is possible the some of them wrote good ones in the middle. Some might even argue the same for some other number.

I have no problem whatsoever with you including Bruckner's 5th among those great masterpieces.

It is in it's rightful place there, as are virtually all the Bruckner symphonies.

Some people acuse him of being repetitive. For the sake of not starting a veritable argument about who I think is repetitive, I'll just leave it at that.

Originally Posted by Frasier

Sibelius - 4 or 6. His 5th is a joyous pop chord thing but not his best, surely. One fatigues easily to it.

Dude...

... well, you're entitled to your opinion, I guess.

Chi_Town, nice idea here, something that has also occured to me. From your list, I would question only the inclusion of Schubert and Bruckner, for these reasons:

1. Is the work know as his 5th really his 5th? There is much confusion with the numbering of his later symphonies, I don't know how accurate the numbering of his earlier ones are. Any scholars care to comment?
2. I believe the piece we know as the 5th is hugely overshadowed by the Unfinished and the Great C Major, at least in terms of popularity.
3. Lastly, Bruckner's 5th is certainly a great piece, but again, overshadowed in popularity by number 4 for Newbies, number 7 for Initiates, and number 8 for Fanatics. Said differently, is anyones favourite Bruckner Symphony Number 5?

_______________________________________
EDIT
_______________________________________

Re-reading your first post, I realize that you are not saying that the 5th is each composer's best, but simply that they are quality works. So over all, I agree with your list in its entirety. Ignore my **** rebuttal if you wish.

Originally Posted by Kurkikohtaus

[*]Lastly, Bruckner's 5th is certainly a great piece, but again, overshadowed in popularity by number 4 for Newbies, number 7 for Initiates, and number 8 for Fanatics. Said differently, is anyones favourite Bruckner Symphony Number 5?[/LIST]

What is the difference between newbies and initiates?

Originally Posted by opus67

What is the difference between newbies and initiates?

To clarify my nomenclature, a Newbie would be someone who is totally new to Bruckner, while an Initiate is someone who has been "initiated" into the Bruckner world and has heard a few of the symphonies several times.

I know, shaky ground.

Hello and sorry, Chi_town/Philly,

actually I haven't seen this question until now.

Well, I haven't heard of any plan to a 5th symphony by Brahms in particulary, but that he might have done some sketches, is indeed possible. It is somehow very demanding to get closer information on fragments or little ideas or sketch-books Brahms did during his whole life, because they have often been destroyed, and we own just a rare field of authentic sources. That is caused by Brahms' "preventing" methods and a high self-critic.
Brahms composed the 4th symphony in 1884/1885. If he had done some works for a 5th, he might have worked on them maybe earlier (very hypothetic) or later... Since we can notice a presentiment of the end of this his life in the early 90s, and since Brahms began to put his works into a final order, and to separate works, which he wanted to be published and which not. He set up a testament. And in the action of this long time of organising, there was enough time to destroy so many sketches and "unpublishable" works again. So it is a hard job for any musicologist to get a clear view of Brahms' plans in his last years. But we should realise: If Brahms knew this his own end coming, he might not have started such a huge work like a symphony in this his very last days. And I have no information, if he might have used some sketches for other well-known works, because we don't have many sketches at all.

But in thinking how I am acting as a composer, how many ideas, motifs and sketches are done inside, on papers and books, I think there is a high possibility, that Brahms worked out plans for a symphonic work, even if he wasn't sure himself, for what specific work they could be worth. 12 years are a long period. But let us imagine, that the formal and harmonical way and solution of a new symphony would have been another challenging duty for Brahms, who walked a very difficult and dangerous line in his very last works (choral works, or even piano works: What is that? Is that a "new" way? Leading to where? A limited way? After Liszt, Wagner, to Mahler, to the French?).

But, maybe once we will know more. Sorry for being unable to access any further information concerning this matter right now.

Greetings,
Daniel

So here's my vote for Bruckner's fifth. It is my favorite. It and the ninth are very close in my book, and so tomorrow I might vote for the ninth. But the fifth is the one I listen to most frequently. It's just a lovely, lovely piece--the loveliest in an oeuvre that's pretty consistently lovely.

Of course, Bruckner's fifth is actually his seventh symphony. (Making my least favorite third his real fifth. I take that back. His first, the f minor study symphony is my least favorite. The 00, as it were. You see how bewildering this whole "fifth" thing is?)

Originally Posted by opus67

Unlike the classical period, Beethoven and later composers limited themselves to a 'few' symphonies due to various reasons, so it is possible the some of them wrote good ones in the middle. Some might even argue the same for some other number.

I wonder what Haydn could have produce if he had lived during Beethoven's era: 104 symphonies to 10, 15?