10 ESSENTIAL 19TH-CENTURY SYMPHONY CYCLES for BEGINNERS

10 Essential 19th-Century Symphony Cycles for Beginners
Ludwig van Beethoven: 9 Symphonies
Johannes Brahms: 4 Symphonies
Anton Bruckner: 11 Symphonies, more or less
Franz Schubert: 8 Symphonies, more or less
Robert Schumann: 4 Symphonies
Franz Berwald: 4 Symphonies
Felix Mendelssohn: 18 Symphonies
Camille Saint-Saëns: 5 Symphonies
Antonin Dvořák: 9 Symphonies
Piotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky: 7 Symphonies

[@craigkowald3055]

Seattle Symphony performed Dvořák 5 a few years ago. What a rare treat. The first movement has one of his greatest tunes.

[@markfinnerty66]

I think the Beethoven symphony cycle is unmatched in the history of classical music. My favourites are the sixth and seventh but really any of them are required for anyone wanting to introduce themselves to this type of music

[@barrymoore4470]

I agree, Beethoven is the ultimate titan among symphonists. All subsequent nineteenth-century composers of the form, at least in the German-speaking lands, wrote in Beethoven's shadow and were keenly aware of it. On the other hand, I had a friend who argued that the cycle is uneven in quality, opining that the second, fourth, and eighth symphonies are inferior to the other six, and contrasted this with Mahler, who he asserted created a masterpiece in each one of his nine numbered and completed symphonies.

[@markfinnerty66]

⁠​⁠@@barrymoore4470I wouldn’t particularly disagree with your friend about the second, fourth and eighth in terms of are they as good. But I’d argue the standard of them is still a cut above

[@antiksur8883]

​​@@markfinnerty66I mean, I don't know. I find it hard to believe that the second is supposed to be inferior to the first, or the fourth is inferior to the Eroica.

[@jgesselberty]

Have all of these, except for Berwald. Must get out wallet and buy. Love that you included the Mendelssohn String Symphonies. What delights they are. I have all 11 Bruckner Symphonies. Well, I have one, but I just use a Post-It Note to change the number when I want to listen to a different one. (Just kidding)

[@cedmcclish9008]

I didn’t care much about Mendelssohn’s music until I heard the 10th String Symphony. It changed everything.

[@carlconnor5173]

I’m one of those who came to love Bruckner eventually. For years all I knew of was the 4th. Then I heard his other symphonies on the radio. I have to admit it was the amazing climaxes that soared to the heavens that got me interested. The more I heard each new (to me) symphony the more I got into them. And, yes, those Adagios sealed the deal. I highly recommend giving Bruckner a chance.

[@barrymoore4470]

It has been said that Bruckner's symphonies require the right conductors to bring out their qualities to best effect. Of course, this can be said of any performance of an orchestral work, but Bruckner seems especially vulnerable to uneven or uncommitted interpretations.

[@ammcello]

Thanks for including Berwald. The 3rd is the gift that keeps on giving.

[@marktanney3347]

I listened to Berwald 3d.Fantastic work. Yet I had never heard of him. I always find that amazing

[@DavesClassicalGuide]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@leestamm3187]

Great list, as ever. Nice to see Berwald, one of the more obscure greats.

[@stevekole9796]

A great aspect of music is its subjection to interpretation. Conductors have a great responsibility in shaping a piece. Of course, this involves tempi, dynamics, instrumental emphasis, rubato, etc. In other words, the care executed in phrasing! This is why I have many different performances of a work for comparison. I recommend that people consider having alternative performances of various works to experience the differences which can arise via interpretation!

[@MegaVicar]

Its good to see Berwald and Saint-Saëns on the list.

[@petterw5318]

Great series! I hope you continue it with other "clumps" like piano concertos or string quartets.

[@DavesClassicalGuide]

Coming soon.

[@barrymoore4470]

String quartets would be particularly apposite, as this form is often contrasted with the symphony in terms of address, the symphony being seen as a composer's public utterance, with the string quartet illuminating the composer's more interior, private moods.

[@rosstwele8966]

You mentioned Saint-Saëns and Berlioz as the two great French orchestral composers of their century. I’ve often wondered about Charles Gounod. Would you consider a Repertoire list of essential Gounod works, if there are any?

[@fredcasden]

What I'd like to see you do is an exploration of 19th century composers who were considered important in their time but have been lost to posterity. In other words, they didn't quite make the cut. There's probably some interesting stuff: maybe one symphony by this one or one concerto by that one that are worth our attention. Who else is going to tackle that if not you?

[@bigg2988]

Heartily support that idea. The 19th century especially is littered with bits and pieces of exquisite talent, if not genius, from composers who worked, as pertinently said, in the shadow of the giants, trying to make own mark in the idiom of those idols. At that time there was just so far a composer could go in the direction of originality without being written off (literally!) by the critics and hissed by the audiences. Consider that Berlioz and Wagner, before they got their breakthrough, were considered pretentious at best, ugly at worst. What we ought to be getting at, is that while not many had enough character (or funds!) to stand against popular trends, in that mainstream there are gems to be found of exceptional filigree and no mean inspiration - now brushed under the rug only because they are not greater than the works by historically important masters... and life is short. So yes, please, we would like to hear an extended talk of these "diamonds in the dust" (and comment on it!). :))

[@Vandalarius]

Thanks for doing this! Love the recommendations.

[@brucemiller5356]

one of your best talks. terrific

[@timyork6150]

I always feel keen anticipation for the "discoveries" that many of your talks bring. But could that be possible with 19th century symphonists? Yes, it was! Berwald. Thanks, Dave.

[@iagoapcen]

Thank you. I actually started feeling bad for you when you got to Bruckner :-) having watched so many of your other videos.

[@heatherharrison264]

I have all of these, and they are all good choices. I'm glad to see Berwald here. His music deserves to be better known. The 19th century was a good time for cycles of large scale works. Collectors of clumps will find additional symphonies beyond these, and there are some nice large clumps of string quartets, piano sonatas, and other forms too. Naturally, Schubert is a mess in these too. It's hard enough to figure out the symphonies with all of the unfinished fragments floating around. The piano sonatas and chamber music include a lot of unfinished stuff too. I'm sure many musicologists have built entire careers trying to sort all of this out.

[@barrymoore4470]

For sure, on Schubert. A scholar could devote his life to Schubert's legacy.

[@howardgilman5698]

I so hope that one day the Krommer symphony cycle could be recorded. The 2 I've heard were impressive in a late Haydn manner.

[@DavesClassicalGuide]

It has been recorded.

[@fortunatomartino8549]

Invaluable service Could you make the unsung masterpieces of the 19th century too Or any century

[@barrymoore4470]

I'm a lover of lists, so I would definitely welcome such efforts from our host, but he's been championing unsung masterpieces throughout the history of his channel, including this upload.

[@MikeRusso2000]

Hello Dave - Thanks for including Berwald, a key figure in the spread of symphonic thought after Beethoven. Recognizing that you want to stick to a concise clump of ten, I’m curious to know where Neils Gade’s eight symphonies stack up. Did he just miss the cut, or are you not a fan?

[@brianthomas2434]

​@@MikeRusso2000not to be a dick, but I think it's GADE. You might want to edit.

[@MikeRusso2000]

@@brianthomas2434Thank you for the heads up! We can thank autocorrect for this mishap. Will correct when I get home to my laptop.

[@brianthomas2434]

How about the best symphonies by composers who only attempted one? Don't know what your vote would be, but I'm sure Grieg wouldn't make the cut.

[@DavesClassicalGuide]

I think I did that one.

[@hillcresthiker]

You might enjoy Hans Rotts first and only.

[@ThreadBomb]

If they could re-number Dvorak, why couldn't they re-number Mendelssohn? This always bugs me when I think of it.

[@Xanthe_Cat]

If you’re not bothered by referring to the mature symphonies using their name, then you can drop their numbers, and you have: * Symphonies Nos. 1 -- 12 for strings (and Symphony No. 8 for orchestra, in its full orchestra arrangement) * Symphonic movement for strings in C minor * Symphony No. 13 in C minor, op. 11 (Mendelssohn’s autograph literally titled this work Sinfonia XIII, continuing the numeric series, so this isn’t a huge stretch) * Lobgesang, Scottish, Italian, Reformation (note the numbers 2 to 5 for these symphonies are hardly the order they were composed, which is more like: 5, then 4, then 2, then 3. Number them however you like.)