Skip to main content

Mendelssohn: Symphony #2

Today's post will cover Felix Mendelssohn's Second Symphony, from disc 2 of our 3-CD set of his five symphonies.

Admittedly, the Second is a bit of a marathon. It starts off innocently enough like any other symphony, with three instrumental movements. But instead of finishing things up with a predictable fourth movement, Mendelssohn takes us into a nine-movement choral work. Collectively, the entire work is as long as two "normal" Mendelssohn symphonies.

Mendelssohn dedicated his Second Symphony to the 400th anniversary of the invention of printing, which he believed to be one of the most important events in history.
**********************
Herbert Von Karajan and the Berliner Philharmoniker
Felix Mendelssohn (1809-1847)
Five Symphonies

Deutsche Grammophon, 1973
**********************
Listener Notes for Mendelssohn's Second Symphony:
1) I'll say this for Mendelssohn: in this symphony he finally puts the brass section to work.

2) I don't see what's so aesthetically disappointing to music critics about this symphony. It has a wonderful, simply stated 10 note introductory theme, a pleasant fast waltz second movement, and a very moving third movement. Granted, I may not be contemplating life's greatest questions or overcome by emotion as I listen to this work, but other than that, this is really quite a nice work of music.

3) The third movement, in fact, is as beautiful as any slow movement I've heard recently for this blog. Perhaps it doesn't quite measure up to the second movement of Liszt's Faust Symphony, but it certainly holds its own against any of Beethoven's early symphonies or any of the works by Haydn I've listened to lately.

4) Woodwind intonation alert: It's highly disappointing to hear quite a few off-key woodwind notes in the third movement. The clarinets are the primary guilty party here. Imagine if this third movement were played perfectly? The hair on the back of my neck would be standing up.

5) At the 6:25 mark in the third movement, hear the oboe (barely) pick off a really difficult high note in a solo. Then hear him hit it with a lot more confidence on the second try at 6:45.

6) Listen to these Germans sing! Feisty, aren't they?

7) Classical music newcomers will likely find the unintelligible German singing a bit disconcerting. My advice is don't worry so much about what they're saying; just let the music wash over you. In a nutshell, the singers are praising the lord, worrying if the night will pass, and once the night does pass, thanking God and praising him some more. If you don't understand the words, you aren't missing all that much.



Comments

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

Schubert: Symphony #3

I have a confession to make. Today's CD is not only further proof of my need to start this blog, but it is perhaps the most embarrassing example of how mindless and uncontemplative my life had become over the past several years. This CD sat on my shelf with more than a hundred other CDs for years, unlistened to, unnoticed, and collecting dust. It was just like all the rest of my CDs, except, uh, in one key respect: It was still in its cellophane wrapper. I had been so out of touch with myself that I bought CDs that I forgot I bought. I must have wanted to listen to this CD at some point, but apparently in the time between buying the CD and putting it on the shelf, I got distracted. For ten years. That is a prime, and admittedly foolish-sounding, example of why I'm taking a break from my career, and why I started this blog. I guess I didn't want to wake up in another ten years and hear myself making excuses for myself like "I work too hard and make too much money to