Sibelius Symphony no.7 video finally included of the whole thing

Sibelius IS innovative!!! But I don't have the will-power to explain right now.

Hopefully someone else will.

Have you heard the 4th symphony? Is it "written in an unoriginal romantic tonal idiom"?

(Obviously you haven't or you wouldn't have posted such a mal-informed post. The answer: NO!)

Anyway... :whistling:

I'll have a try Dan :D

Sibelius was most certainly innovative, and this is one of his most innovative pieces (at least from what I've heard). For a start, the form is very different to the form of any symphony before it. It's all in one movement, but that movement is structured very very carefully to give the listener the same sort of experience as if they'd listened to a normal 4 movement symphony. There are a number of different sections, and three points of climax all of which employ the same theme in the trombones which I believe Michel posted earlier. Another innovative and interesting thing about this symphony is that almost all of it is developed from very little material - it is an extremely 'organic' work in that one can trace the melodic material in most of the different sections to one or several of the motifs/themes introduced in the first section (the section leading up to the first statement of the trombone theme). This creates a great sense of unity which holds the work together but the skill with which the material is manipulated and developed gives enough variety to keep the listener's interest.

It's true that this is much more rooted in tradiational harmony than a lot of other works that were being written at the same time - but is that a bad thing? There are some truley amazing and beautiful moments harmonically, and some points that sound decidedly not-common-practice, for example the work starts with an ascending A natural minor (A Aeolian) scale, which finishes on an Ab minor chord - a long way away from the home key in just the first few bars - it's not until quite a way in that we arrive in the home key of C major (sorry I can't give an exact bar reference, don't have a score :()

These are just my thoughts on it from having listened to it many times and tried to do a bit of analysis on the form myself - please do not take these as having any authority whatsoever - I could be talking complete scraggy :D

Anyway, I hope I've gone some way to explaining how innovative and original Sibelius's music was, and perhaps now you'll give it another listen with these things in mind and see if you can appreciate it a little more, gianluca :)

The people in this video bore me to death.

The people in this video bore me to death.

If you're bored by Leonard Bernstein, then I pity your life. I guess it would be better if they wore shakos or windmilled on guitars (no offense to my bizoy, Pete Townsend, he sure plays a mean pinball)

Also, to gianluca, I'm sure Sibelius will be much better remembered than you.

Also, to gianluca, I'm sure Sibelius will be much better remembered than you.

So, your point being what? Some genius composers may be (unjustly) forgotten, whereas some mediocre composers may be remembered. The fact that person X is better remembered than person Y doesn't necessarily mean that X's work was better or greater than Y's. I'm sure Britney Spears will be better remembered than most classical composers living today....

Now back to Sibelius, I stick to my belief that he is an uninteresting conventional composer of minor importance (and I'm pleased to have read an interview with Boulez in which he expressed the same view). And yes, Daniel, I did listen to his Fourth Symphony as well (I even studied the score), but for a work written in 1911, its musical language is still lightyears away from that of the more innovative pieces written around that time - e.g., Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire, Stravinsky's Petrushka and Rite of Spring, Debussy's Jeux, Scriabin's Prometheus, etc.

Furthermore, the one-movement form of Sibelius' Seventh isn't that innovative or unconventional. Something similar had already been done by Schoenberg in his first Chamber Symphony (written in 1906!), which also has several individual sections integrated into a single uninterrupted organic form, and which moreover has a greater structural complexity and a much more advanced harmonic language than Sibelius' 7th.

So, your point being what? Some genius composers may be (unjustly) forgotten, whereas some mediocre composers may be remembered.

ah, so... are you, um, immodestly comparing yourself to Sibelius?

and I'm pleased to have read an interview with Boulez in which he expressed the same view

HAHAHA

yes, quote Boulez... the man who said "before me, there was no music"

Furthermore, the one-movement form of Sibelius' Seventh isn't that innovative or unconventional. Something similar had already been done by Schoenberg in his first Chamber Symphony (written in 1906!), which also has several individual sections integrated into a single uninterrupted organic form, and which moreover has a greater structural complexity and a much more advanced harmonic language than Sibelius' 7th.

And simply because you fail to comprehend the complexity of Sibelius' music does not MAKE it in any way less complex. Your superficial assessment of Sibelius is simply more demonstration that your opinions have very little actual value.

But then, Gianluca, your credibility on this forum was shot months ago.

If you don't like tonal music, or neo-tonal music, just stay out of threads dealing with it. You just come acoss as another elitist donkey.

HAHAHA

yes, quote Boulez... the man who said "before me, there was no music"?

So where and when exactly did Boulez say that? I'd like a reference for that quote. Often, a quote by Boulez may sound rather bizarre when taken out-of-context. And if it was an isolated statement, it was probably only meant jokingly or ironically. Even so, that doesn't mean all his views are not to be taken seriously, for Boulez - whether you like it or not - remains one of the world's greatest musical minds and he sure has highly intelligent thoughts and views on music.

And simply because you fail to comprehend the complexity of Sibelius' music does not MAKE it in any way less complex. Your superficial assessment of Sibelius is simply more demonstration that your opinions have very little actual value.

But then, Gianluca, your credibility on this forum was shot months ago.

If you don't like tonal music, or neo-tonal music, just stay out of threads dealing with it. You just come acoss as another elitist donkey.

Yeah right, just because I criticize the composer you happen to love, my opinions have little value? And when did I say I didn't like tonal music? I love music from the baroque, classical and romantic periods - which is all tonal music. I only have problems with music that ignores the most important musical innovations of its own time.

Ok, so I have to stay out of threads on composers of which I am critical, eh? Come on, then I could as well say to you: if you are intolerant of other opinions, you'd better stay out of discussion boards altogether.

Finally, Qccowboy, you just come across as another incompetent debater who is intolerant of people disagreeing with him, which doesn't make your credibility any greater than mine. Any time you encounter an opinion you disagree with, you either pass it off as 'superficial' or 'balony' - without being open to further discussion - or you childishly revert to rude personal insults.

Finally, Qccowboy, you just come across as another incompetent debater who is intolerant of people disagreeing with him, which doesn't make your credibility any greater than mine. Any time you encounter an opinion you disagree with, you either pass it off as 'superficial' or 'balony' - without being open to further discussion - or you childishly revert to rude personal insults.

Actually, I'm not the one whose first post (or there abouts) was a condemnation of DelTredici, Corigliano, and company.

The only thing you've done since you've arrived on this forum is criticize and diminish the work of other composers.

Watch who you're accusing. That's an awfully wide paintbrush you're using. One day it's going to come back and slap you in the face.