George Antheil: Symphony No.5 (1947/1948)

George Antheil (1900-1959): Symphony No.5 "Joyous" (1947/1948).
I. Allegro
II. Adagio molto [07:44]
III. Finale. Allegretto [15:49]
Radio-Sinfonie-Orchester Frankfurt diretta da Hugh Wolff.
Cover image: painting by Carmen Herrera.
***
The music published in our channel is exclusively dedicated to divulgation purposes and not commercial. This within a program shared to study classic educational music of the 1900's (mostly Italian) which involves thousands of people around the world. If someone, for any reason, would deem that a video appearing in this channel violates the copyright, please inform us immediately before you submit a claim to KZbin, and it will be our care to remove immediately the video accordingly.

[@valerieheinderyckx4506]

Super excitant...❤ merci.

[@notaire2]

Wunderschöne und spannende Interpretation dieser neoklassischen und etwas parodischen Sinfonie mit farbenreichen und perfekt synchronisierten Tönen aller Instrumente. Der zweite Satz klingt besonders schön und auch lyrisch. Der geniale Maestro dirigiert das perfekt trainierte Orchester im gut phrasierten Tempo und mit perfekt kontrollierter Dynamik. Nicht so "erfreulich" wie der Titel, sondern etwas pessimistisch. Danke fürs wertvolle Hochladen mit möglichst hoher Tonqualität!

[@1lekhine]

Nice and dynamic. Good mood. Danke

[@ozgoodel.9645]

In his autobiography, Antheil wrote of this work, "In this...symphony, I have put, without shame, all of my tears, my anger. It is the best music of which I have been, so far, capable."

[@marta2004marta2004]

amazing piece.

[@ronaldbwoodall2628]

This is joyous music, yes, but also tender and touching in the 'adagio'. It's a delightful work, and with the contrasting Fourth, is Antheil's finest symphony. He was a copious borrower with varying success; here I believe he integrated his influences in his most effective manner. I hadn't heard this work since an early '50's LP with Herbert Haefner conducting a Vienna Orchestra that I borrowed from the library (SPA-16, now available in a 2-cd set with other Antheil works on another label). it was quite good for its day, but I'm glad to have this modern cd available in a great performance.

[@smijification]

The adagio is truly lovely.

[@jdoggtn7]

I always found the "Joyous" designation a little peculiar, as there is not a small amount of sinister vibes in the opening Allegro, which is not surprising given its descent from the "Transatlantic" overture. That opera was full of political corruption and shady dealings. But in the symphony movement there are a few moments of Western America grandeur to contrast with the rambunctiousness. Only the final movement is somewhat joyful, and even then, there is again a dark and mysterious undertone. I suspect that "Joyous" was primarily to contrast with his earlier Fifth, the "Tragic" which he completed but withdrew.

[@jdoggtn7]

It needs to be stated that Antheil is frequently charged with "borrowing" from Shostakovich or Prokofiev. His late music does indeed have something of a spiritual affinity for the sound of Soviet composers of that era. But the truth is, when the passages that are supposedly "borrowed" from Prokofiev or Shostakovich are analyzed by someone familiar with the body of Antheil's work, it becomes apparent that they were borrowed not from any other composer, but rather from Antheil's own earlier work, particularly the opera "Transatlantic" of 1930. The fact is, bits and pieces of that opera become motivic material in the Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Symphonies, as well as the two Serenades, and really just about every work from 1936 on. He also used materials from his film scores, the "Oh, my honey" motive that appears in every Antheil work from Ballet Mecanique on, and bits and pieces from the Sonata Sauvage (as in the opening of the Third Symphony) or the early violin sonatas ( as in the Violin Concerto). Despite a similarity of sound, most of the material that "resembles" Shostakovich or Prokofiev was in fact composed by Antheil BEFORE the works he is supposedly imitating! Similar charges have been unfairly leveled against Ives.

[@andrewpetersen5272]

John Shaw Wish I could give you two thumbs up.

[@ProfessorPille]

Years ago I had a discussion about this exact idea with BSO pianist Gilbert Kalish while we walked the Tanglewood grounds and the student orchestra, in the distance, rehearsed the Ballet Mécanique. Without either of us having heard the opera or seen the score, we both suspected that Transatlantic was the missing link in understanding Antheil's career and his possible influence on other composers--but maybe also the piano music, which in the early 20s had some notoriety and may have ranged further than we know. However, I do think Antheil makes *conscious* nods to the Russians in the Fifth Symphony--certainly in the finale which borrows from the finale of the Prokofiev Fifth. Otherwise, in the many years I've been listening to Antheil *and* Shostakovitch I don't detect anything other than occasional and superficial similarities in their music. They occupy two very different musical worlds. This dismissal of Antheil's music as derivative has become a kind of lazy critic's received myth that needs to be kicked aside.

[@sergioazevedo7390]

I don't agree. Prokofiev's Fifht is clearly borrowed here, orchestration included! No problem for me, and I love Antheil symphonies, and all composers here and there got what they like from other composers, but in this case is so obvious that Prokofiev (the scherzo of the fifth) was the model that is impossible to desguise that... another detail: In 1930, Prokofiev had already writen 4 piano concertos, 4 symphonies, a violin concerto, 5 ballets and 5 piano sonatas... so, to pretend that Antheil was oblivious to all that is not serious. I know what survives of Transatlantic and its material as nothing to do with these late symphonies. It remembers much more the first Stravinsky and the italian futurists, Satie, the music of the 1923 or 1924, etc., in a time when even that futuristic style was no more in fashion... Antheil was a good orchestrator, but lacked original melodic ideas. But, nevertheless, I like these symphonies, they are fun to listen to, and play, and they are very well writen, even with all the stollen ideas.

[@jdoggtn7]

@@sergioazevedo7390 Actually listening to the recording of Transatlantic one can hear extensive passages from the opera that were orchestrated into both the Fourth and Fifth Symphonies, and there are motives and melodic material in the Sixth which also derives from Transatlantic. It is not easy to make the comparison because there is no commercial recording of Transatlantic, but I have two complete recordings of the opera (one in English and one in German) and there are long passages (more than 30 bars in one instance) from the opera that appear in the late symphonies. Likewise, the late and very romantic Violin Concerto of 1947 is largely built out of materials from the early violin sonatas, and even the Third Symphony opens with the opening of the early "Sonate Sauvage" for piano.

[@sergioazevedo7390]

@@jdoggtn7 That is not my point! In 1930, Antheil was no more an original, after Stravinsky and Prokofiev, even Shostakovich! In 1930 all these composers had composed their most important works, and Antheil borrows heavily from them. If the opera was the source for the late works of Antheil, that does not matter, it only means that the opera itself already borrowed heavily from these composers! Why do you think Antheil is negleted today? Mainly because he never developed his own musical idiom. I like is music, is fun and well writen, but I recognize that he is unable to write any tune of his own, and that the most interesting passages, mainly the "scherzi" of his symphonies, are ideas from someone else. More even Prokofiev than Shostakovich, but mainly these two.

[@stephengoldstone2022]

This work will be broadcast on Radio 3 on November 20th 2015. There is undoubtedly a strong hint of Prokofiev's fifth, to which someone has already alluded. Likeable music with originality.

[@dezama125]

In the first movment, while there is a Russian sound to the music at times, I think the "wrong notes" in the first tune are pure Antheil, unlike anyone else. The shift to triple time (4:51) in the development section, then back to duple time (6:19) is a nice subtle touch. I also especially like how the rhythmic motive that he introduces in the retransition (6:50) back to the brief recap (7:04) continues into the recap. The second movement is gorgeous (as is the slow movement of the Fourth), a little Brahms and a little Ives----definitely American but without being a Copland knockoff. A favorite moment for me in the last movement is when (21:01) he brings back the opening theme of the first movement, plus the fanfare from the beginning of the last movement, along with the dotted main theme (it's hard to hear in this performance). The coda seems a little stuck on, but it might work better if Antheil's tempo marking was followed: The score says "poco a poco accel[erando]" for the pounding D minor chords of the last 20 seconds. (I've yet to hear it in any performance; here, a faster tempo starts abruptly, then gets slightly faster toward the end.)

[@JimboCKW]

15:57 shostakovich's fifth? is it just me?

[@jimwood8527]

No, there's a strong shos influence here.

[@harmonicparadox2055]

More than influence. I'm sure he's consciously quoting him.

[@ProfessorPille]

Consciously quoting Prokofiev's Fifth too. It's an end-of-the-war celebration symphony and Antheil's consciously making nods to compatriot composers. I've also heard the old line about Antheil sounding like Shostakovich. That doesn't hold. We forget that in the 1920s George Antheil was the much-heralded Bad Boy of Music while Shostakovich was still searching for his voice. It's more likely Antheil influenced Shostakovich, especially during the latter's more modernistic period. I've discussed this possibility with professional musicians and gotten favorable responses. Equally, Antheil's later "popular" style derives directly from his avant-garde years, especially in his kaleidoscopic (?) approach to his melodic material. When he turned to writing the later symphonies, he started studying (of all symphonists!) Anton Bruckner. I'm no professional musicologist, but I've spent about 50 years listening to George Antheil's underrated music. He's still one of my favorite composers. This is a wonderful symphony that would be a huge hit in a modern concert.

[@sergioazevedo7390]

Obviously :) the them of the 5th :)

[@moosatious]

Written (I am sure, at least begun) in an amazing place: Manhattan Beach California. Won't give exact address, but a virtual stone's throw from the intersection of Rosecrans and Highland, at one of the highest elevation points in the city. It's pretty congested up there now, leaving no view from his old house, but it must have been spectacular back then. And yes, I do hear hint's of another composer's 5th symphony here, a Russian's (not Shostakovitch!) written a few years earlier.This is better

[@joseflindholm4581]

Why has Antheil been neglected?

[@sansovino4124]

I couldn't hum a bar of Antheil despite having listened to several hours of his music. It's well crafted, but just not memorable. Crumbs from the masters.

[@GaryALucas]

Yes. I overlooked him myself. I certainly don't remember any mention or airplay, in the Chicago area, though that doesn't mean there wasn't. I don't recall the CSO playing any, again.... I would guess many did not take Antheil seriously because of his Hollywood soundtrack music. He's certainly a favorite now, right up there with Henry Cowell and Charles Ives in my book. Funny, he didn't really register with me until I read of his aid to Hedy Lamarr with her 'frequency hopping' device. On top of that he scored a couple of my favorite films, Nicholas Ray's 'In A Lonely Place' and 'Knock On Any Door'.

[@reidwhitton6248]

I can't hum a bar of Boulez or Stockhausen, but they are much better known.

[@andrewpetersen5272]

Reid Whitton Touche! Well played!

[@andrewpetersen5272]

Ian Jenkins Well crafted but not memorable. You're not describing Antheil, you"re describing Bruckner!

[@stueystuey1962]

This has America written all over it. Not nearly as macabre or pathos filled as Shostakovich. Lacks the cerebral genius of Prokofiev - which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Finally, the energy and the home grown idiom, I am reminded more of Nielsen than any other symphonist.

[@jslasher1]

Love this symphony, which is full of élan and vigour. So, what if it is heavily influenced by DSCH and Prokofiev?

[@andrewpetersen5272]

Perhaps we should just let Antheil be Antheil! Any problems with that?

[@joemahlerng]

It's Prokofiev, specifically the 5th, but not bad.

[@alejandrotuzio4206]

the first movement is Prokofiev 5th's outlet

[@ecdysview]

I guess people like motoric music; me not. Blah.

[@andrewpetersen5272]

You must have stopped after the first movement, or after Rachmaninoff.

[@piitii8141]

I would recommend a slower rendition in that case, 2017's recording with the BBC Philharmonic Orchestra & John Storgårds.