Skip to main content

Brahms: Symphony #3

The Third is the most overlooked of Brahms' symphonies. In fact, The Essential Canon of Classical Music (which has become a veritable bible to me as I write this blog) gives the work only three bare sentences, saying that the Third "is infused with a genial lyricism," a phrase I view to be more condescending than insightful.
**********************
Riccardo Muti and the Philadelphia Orchestra
Johannes Brahms (1833-1897)
Complete Symphonies
Philips, 1989
**********************
I consider this symphony simple and direct. It is a pearl. And it has one element that at the time was considered shocking in its originality: a quiet, peaceful ending during an era of loud and drawn-out symphonic climaxes. With the minor exception of an out of tune clarinetist (more on this below), this is an excellent recording.

Before we get to the listener notes, let's spend a brief moment on my favorite pet peeve: atrociously written liner notes. Here's a particularly inscrutable line from Bernard Jacobson, who wrote the text accompanying this CD:

"In the quest for organic unity the Third Symphony admittedly relies as pervasively as its companion works on intricate developments of motivic detail."

I suppose he could say that the themes are complex and detailed, but that just doesn't have quite the same pseudo-intellectual heft, does it?

Listener Notes for Brahms' Third Symphony:
1) This symphony starts out lightly, with none of the seriousness and gravitas of Brahms' First or Fourth Symphonies. Of course that means more emphasis on the woodwinds, which as we've seen before aren't exactly the forte of the Philadelphia Orchestra. And unfortunately it's the clarinet who's the worst offender in this recording. Listen to the clarinet at 0:59, 1:26-1:40 and 2:20 in the first movement and tell me you agree that this musician has a poor tone and is often out of tune.

2) In the beginning of the second movement, the clarinet soloist is again out of tune on many notes. I find it hard to believe the the Philly Orchestra has a clarinetist with such a tin ear. The first minute or so of this movement is painful--and I mean fingernails-on-a-chalkboard painful.

It's unfortunate, because when a clarinet is played really well, it sounds so mournful, so unutterably sad and beautiful, that there's just no instrument like it. But when played poorly or off-key, this unforgiving instrument can make even professionals sound like high school hacks. I'll attempt to stop complaining about this now.

3) Notice at 7:48 in the second movement, the trombones enter with a chord that is off key. I actually blame Brahms for errors like this--one of the liabilities of composing a symphony where you keep wind players sitting there not playing for periods of 10 minutes or more, is their instruments cool down. When the instrument cools down, the acoustics change, and this can especially be a problem with brass instruments, particularly long coiled brass instruments like the french horn and trombone. So let's give the trombones a bit of a break here and lay the blame on Brahms instead. Plus, it doesn't take the trombones long to get back in sync with each other. By the next entrance they make, at 8:20 and then again at 8:28, they nail their chords perfectly.

4) Despite the minor mistakes by our friends in the clarinet and trombone section, doesn't the second movement end beautifully?

5) The third movement is a perfect showcase for Philly's exceptionally expressive string section. When I listen to works like this heartrending third movement, it makes me feel like the luckiest man on the face of the earth, simply because I'm alive and able to experience music like this.

6) What's your take on how this symphony ends? I find myself struggling for a way to write about it. It's not really fair to say that it goes out with a whimper instead of a bang, nor is it fair to say it ends in an anti-climax. I guess it's just best to just listen it rather than to try to do it justice by describing it in words.



Comments

Chantal said…
How true #5 is, when you mention how lucky you are to experience music like that! There are times when I'm engrossed in a CD, or a concert particularly, where I close my eyes and think "Things can't get any better right now". I love that feeling!
Daniel said…
Thanks for your comment Chantal! It's a great feeling, isn't it?

DK

Popular posts from this blog

Does Bach Suck?

It's not often that you see a classical music-related comment that makes you spit out your coffee : "Bach sucks because he was not a true composer. A true composer hears the music before he writes it. Bach composed using a mathematical system of numbers which he tought[sic] his students. After his death one of his students published a book “How to write a menuet[sic] with little or no musical knowledge”. Frankly, the result of his work is not musical, the opening bars always sound musical because he copied someone else’s melody, broke it down into numbers and wrote counterpoint from it. Handel did not even like Bach, because Handel wrote music. Anyone who does like Bach does so because they are told to. For a comparison, listen to music by Frescobaldi, Rameau, or Couperin, then listen to Bach. The difference? Something that is musical throughout the entire piece, and something that is musical for 10 seconds and quickly loses interest." Once I'd finished mopping the co

Why Classical Music Writing is So Difficult to Read

Have you ever read the liner notes of a classical music CD and scratched your head wondering what the heck the writer was trying to say? Or attempted to read a classical music concert review in your newspaper and felt totally illiterate? One of the things that frustrates many people about classical music is its perceived elitism. It's unfortunate, but most of what gets written about classical music only worsens that perception. Most of the classical music writing I see out there--either in symphony concert program books, in concert reviews in major papers like the New York Times, or worst of all in the little essays in the booklets accompanying most classical music CDs--is quite simply terrible. Often, it is pretentiously written, it is full of industry jargon (yes, even the classical music industry has its own jargon), and it reads like an intellectually insecure liberal arts student's PhD thesis. There are a few reasons for this. First, there's the fundamental difficulty

How to Start Your Own Classical Music Collection

I'm often asked by people who are new to classical music for a list of CDs or key symphonies that I think are the best choices to start off a new classical music collection. What are ideal symphonies or works that can help you get started getting to know classical music? Today I'm going to attempt to answer this question, and I'll provide you with a brief list of works that can form the foundation of a great collection of important classical music. Keep in mind that whenever one reviews any type of list like this, invariably one can complain that a given work was left off the list ("where's Chopin? or Mahler?"), or even that some work was left on the list ("ugh, Beethoven's 5th again?"). This list is in no way meant to be exhaustive. It is merely a starting point for the novice listener. If you purchase recordings of these works and listen to each and every one of them, you'll have a great head start on your journey towards getting to know c