Havergal Brian-Symphony 1-The Gothic

Hi All. I was wondering anyone has heard this symphony live or otherwise and if so, what they thought of it. I've only read about it and apparently it is the largest symphony ever written. I don't know how people can get away with such superfluous pieces but at the same time it fascinates me. Does anyone know a decent recording of this piece?

There's the orchestration

Woodwind=32

2 Piccolos

6 Flutes (1 doubling Alto Flute)

6 Oboes (1 doubling Oboe d'amore 1 doubling Bass Oboe)

2 English Horn

Clarinet in E-flat

5 Clarinets in B-flat (1 doubling 2nd E-flat clarinet)

2 Basset Horns

2 Bass Clarinets in B-flat

Contrabass Clarinet in B-flat

3 Bassoons

2 Contrabassoons

Orchestral brass=26

8 Horns in F

8 Trumpets (2 doubling Cornets in E-flat)

Bass Trumpet

3 Tenor Trombones

Bass Trombone (doubling 2nd Contrabass Trombone)

Contrabass Trombone

2 Euphoniums

2 Tubas

Percussion=26

2 sets of Timpani

2 Bass Drums

2 (preferably 3) Snare Drums

Indian long drum

2 Tambourines

2 Triangles

6 pairs of large Cymbals

Gong

Bird Scare

Thunder Machine

Small chains

Xylophone

Glockenspiel

Tubular Bells

Chimes in E-flat

Keyboards=2

Celesta

Organ

Voices

Solo quartet (Soprano, Alto, Tenor, and Bass)

4 Mixed Choirs

Children's Choir

Four offstage Brass Bands

(used only in the fifth and sixth movements and each comprising of)

2 Horns

2 Trumpets

2 Tenor Trombones

2 Tubas

1 set of Timpani

Strings

2 Harps (preferably more ad lib.)

20 First Violins

20 Second Violins

16 Violas

14 Cellos

12 Double Basses.

I've heard of it but never heard it. I think huge orchestral works are in short supply. We need more Mahlers and Brians in this world.

I've heard of it but never heard it. I think huge orchestral works are in short supply. We need more Mahlers and Brians in this world.

Good luck getting it played. Orchestras are useless.

I don't know how people can get away with such superfluous pieces but at the same time it fascinates me.

I'm wondering what, to you, makes this piece "superfluous"?

Do you rather mean "extravagant"?

As far as I'm concerned, if someone commissioned him to write this large a piece, it must have been for a reason. And it probably got performed.

Funny thing, you'd think wiht a name like that, he was a Nordic composer...

His real name was William Brian. He was a Brit.

And yeah, his symphonies, including this one, are recorded on Naxos label.

This work touches me deeply and is one of my very favorites - I have two recordings of it plus the full score but it really needs a new recording that has better sonics (I'm not a fan of the digital reverb and alterations made to the Naxos/Marco Polo recording however it is the best one we currently have available to us).

I don't find this work superfluous at all any more than the pyramids, Sistine Chapel, the Acropolis, or Notredame Cathedral are superfluous with their excessive impracticalities - they are still monumental and some of the greatest man made creations in history made with sincere and lofty goals.

If you've not heard it, it is a bit difficult to describe - sort of a combination of Mahler's 8th Symphony, Shostakovich's Symphony No. 4, Schoenberg's Gurrelieder, William Walton's Belshazzar's Feast and some of the stranger pieces of Bernard Herrmann. It certainly is not perfect, but it is very sincere and aims extremely high and still manages to move me in ways nothing else really does. I also believe this will appeal more to those who enjoy the cumulative effect of a musical piece rather than what every note in each measure is doing.

i said the piece was superfluous because of the size of its orchestration. I consider pieces of such a scale superfluous. I will admit that my first symphony is also superfluous, but not to the same scale as Brian. It might match up to Berlioz's Requiem. I'm not sure.

I've been told it's a hard piece to put ones finger upon. I personally relish the idea of listening to it. Thanks much.

ok, it's just a strange choice of words... it has a very heavily dismissive connotation. superfluous - unnecessary - we can live without it.

it's as though you're dismissing Brian's piece as unnecessary.

unnecessarily extravagant, sure.

unnecessarily extravagant, sure.

Exactly. Some of the music isn't bad, in fact I like some bits of it quite a lot, but the fact is that it will most likely never be performed to a professional standard as it is close to impossible to get that many good musicians together. The recording I own (Naxos recording - I forget the conductor) isn't exactly great quality... I'm all for writing large scale orchestral works but this just pushes it too far.

It's a balancing test of the composer's intentions versus the practicality of peformance. Brian used as large an orchestra as he could imagine. Does that make it wrong? Not necessarily. I think a lot of his music was written for the sake of being music, not to be performed right away, a goal which all of us nieve young composers so strive for.

Brian is a rare case where he practically died in obscurity hardly recieveing any recognition durring his lifetime for his compositions. But he wrote huge amounts! 32 Symphonies in all. Just to think writing this massive work and not getting it played. The first ever professional premiere wasn't until Brian was 90 years old in 1966. A true master of continuing to write in the face of tremedous adversity.