Thanks for posting. Enjoyed the conversation and the comments about late romantics transmogrifying into modernists. As an aside, I listened to Sibelius' and Walton's violin concertos together recently. It's well known that Sibelius was a strong influence on Walton, and it was lovely to hear the one composer coming through the other. Sibelius is probably my favourite symphonic composer, and I'm enjoying discovering Nielson. I love everything Walton ever did :)
I've felt for a long time that Nielsen, like Sibelius and Janacek, belongs to a transitional generation of composers who began as "romantic" composers but in mid-career somehow became modernists. (Full disclosure: I'm generally much more comfortable with "modern" or 20th-Century composers than with "romantic" composers.) For me, Nielsen's Fourth Symphony marks his entree into modernism. I also consider Nielsen one of the great symphonists: in the 20th-Century, in the same league as Sibelius, Vaughn Williams, maybe even Shostakovich. Nielsen's Sixth is my favorite of his, much as I love his Fourth and Fifth--because, whereas they are grandiose (nothing pejorative meant), the Sixth is somehow not only quirkier but more personal; it not only delights me but moves me deeply at moments.
interesting comment. I discovered (for me) his 6th when I returned from the Pacific islands in 1972 after a year away and starving for my own culture. I had only known his 4th and 1st and liked them a lot. I lived alone for a while and listened to no 6 daily until I couldn't live without it. It had turned up on the other side of a Vox label of Sibelius's 6 Humoresques which I was after. It became a favorite disc which I wore out beyond playability.
It is music to make one think; not "simply" sit back and enjoy. This is a very complex symphony loaded with questions about where we are and where we are going.That is for each one of us to answer. Bravo! Bravo Nielsen!!
Richard Yiengst Symphonies and most of classical music, other than several very obviously programmed pieces, honestly don't communicate the same thing to all of us. No questions here for me, just great music.
That sounds more like an excuse for a bad symphony. Compare this to Villa-Lobos' 7th bachiana brasileira and all the pomp and pretentiousness of this symphony will be teared down by the accessible tropical beauty of the later. That's how good works of art should be.
+Nois Eh Pica No, Villa-Lobos' 7th bachiana brasileira doesn't affect this at all. It's not a bleedin' competition. But thanks for parading your arrogant naive immaturity for all to appreciate.
@104968128922112379167 Wow, you suddenly got a little mad, didn't you? Let me see if I'm missing something: no arguments, only offenses. Is there anything I can say to actually defend myself in such circumstances? If somebody where to come across this discussion, they would readily notice your lack of interest for the topic at hand, which you seem to not understand; the contempt in your attitude; the latent inability to progress in any actual discussion regarding art criticism, barely hidden by your shameless insults. Well, let them be the judges; your actions are public. Is it mature what you're doing before this crowd, TintoBrassic? What were you thinking, did you just thought you could act any way you want simply because you're on the INTERNET? Then isn't this arrogance, to think you can do whatever you want regardless of social conventions or etiquette? How naive of you; all your insults fit you like a glove, and I don't think you realize it.
@Steven Moore The symphony is about mortality and even being able to grin at its face. Listen from 7:18 onward and the climax at 7:57 which the late Robert Simpson described as Nielsen portraying the oncoming and climax of a heart attack and then the extreme emotion of its aftermath 8:24. It is at once amazing to hear and oh so disturbing. The heart trouble would eventually claim his life at 66.
When a composer bares his soul in music which is superbly crafted, yet is also touched by humility and by an absence of self-glorification, there you have art of the highest order.
@Steven Moore Yes it is a shame as you say. I get very annoyed that Mahler gets played ad nauseam at the expense of so many great composers who get almost totally ignored. That's what I mean by over rated.
What I said above applies equally to Gustav Mahler who, like Nielsen, was 'broken on the wheel of Life' and yet saw fit to pour out sorrow and joy in abundance in his symphonies and orchestral songs. The flamboyance, bravura, extrovertism, is all part of Mahler and part of his idea of the symphony being a whole world and, just as importantly, being a musical mirror of the crazy world we all, as Human beings, inhabit. Yes, even those whose racial prejudices are, allegedly, showing through their professed dislike of Mahler! (Mahler was often on the receiving end of that kind of irrational opinion, too!)
Very, very fine performance of this strange and wonderful symphony. I continue to fail to understand those astute and surely appreciative (?) commentators who constantly complain about too-fast tempi. My friends, you must LISTEN, LISTEN, LISTEN, and appreciate the FLOW, FLOW, FLOW. Just sayin'.
I adore Nielsen's symphonies, in fact I think he is one of the finest composers of that idiom but I can't quite get into the 6th though it's growing on me as the best music usually does!
I would like to know what Nielsen's real intent was in writing this symphony. I get a different meaning each time I listen to this magnificent work. Today I listened to it, and I'm now convinced it's a modern sounding rendering of his earlier 2nd symphony "Four Temperaments". The movements of this and the 2nd follow the same order: an angry 1st mvt, a carefree, innocent 2nd, a 3rd mvt expressing deep melancholy, and a cheerful, triumphant finale. It's all there!
Cette symphonie est un chef d'oeuvre ! L'interprétation est remarquable et la battue de Paavo Jarvi est à la fois sobre et expressive ...Bravo et merci pour cette vidéo ...
Traindude Fine performance. I wish that Nielsen's music was performed more. What a glorious moment in the 1st movement when the horns play at 504. This piece is whimsical and profound. Genius!
I really love this symphony, Of course, it is not as "great" as the 4th or 5th, but what an imagination and originality for a symphony written by a 60 year old Nielsen! It is a real pleasure to listen to and admire his artistry. Great performance too!
Sinfonia Semplice... Certamente não é tão simples. Da hat Nielsen sicherlich was neues zur Musikwelt entstanden. Ganz interessantes und inspirierendes Werk!!
Any major symphony that ends with just the bassoons can't be all bad! I remember hearing this piece decades ago with the NY Phil and Bernstein. Liked it then, and I still like it. Certainly not music to relax to, and no tunes to remember, but very entertaining.
It may not be as "great" as the 4th or 5th, but I'd rather a composer speak for himself rather than for humanity. And the incredibly subjective, haunting and original 1st. mvt. degenerating into the sarcasm of the rest of it, render it one of the most unique symphonies ever written!
Somewhere I came across the (mis?)information that Nielsen was, in this symphony, poking fun at the "avant-garde" music of the time, and it sounds as if that were the case. But intentionally or not, he produced a masterpiece of stylistic and orchestral invention, elicting various but subdued emotions. And it's hilarious! It could be called his "Concerto for Orchestra", with its many instrumental highlights (part of the third movement heralds a similar passage in Bartok's famous one). The outbursts beginning at 28:30 remind me of Charles Ives; I wonder if Nielsen was familiar with his music. In any case, his 6th is always a delight to hear.
It's curious that, in certain moments, this work reminds 1st movement of Shostakovich 15th. And I think that Shostakovich didn't intend to refer to this work.
It's classical in form, but the unorthodox 2nd movement is very much in tune with our own time. Nielsen was willing to think "outside the box": he was the 20th century answer to Beethoven. Like Beethoven he adapted classical form to his own ideals. Nielsen was a rock star long before "rock and roll " became part of the lexicon.
Mir gefällt diese lebhafte und rhythmische Leistung dieses relativ unbekannten Meisterwerks fast ohne nordischen Geschmack. Alle Spieler sind wahre Virtuosen.
@@steveegallo3384 Thanks for your nice reply. While commenting on many uploads on TH-cam I really wish I could understand Spanish, in which quite a lot of comments are written.
How many realise that it was only after his death did Nielsen's 6th get published. It bewildered people of his time and even after being published continued to do so. Only gradually did this music emerge as a masterpiece, that some people do things that cannot be properly appreciated because they are visionaries and not slaves limited by their own time.
I have never understood why this is the least performed of his symphonies. Anyone who follows this composer must agree that this 6th symphony is a potpourri of the previous five. "Simple Symphony" it certainly isn't!!
The passage from 7:18 to 9:05 has been likening experiencing a heart attack and its aftermath by the late composer, musicologist Robert Simpson. Only Nielsen, who else?
Wer sich wirklich für klassische bzw. wahre ernste Musik interessiert, kennt natürlic auch Carl Nielsen. mit 12 Jahren lernte ich Arnold Schönberg kennen und schätzen, ja seine 12-Ton Musik faszinierte mich, die Rockmusik und Beatles waren mir immer zu primitiv, von Schlagermusik ganz zu schweigen! Oh was wurde ich damals in der Schule deswegen gemobbt und ausgegrenzt...
Erkennbar. Wie hatten damals ein Klassenheft wo die Dozenten die Aufgaben hineinschrieben. Das Buch war natürlich bunt bemalt mit Rolling Stones, Beatles und dergleichen. Bis der moment dass ich mit meinem Freund das Heft definitiv gross beschriftet haben mit Alban Berg , Hindemith , Wagner, R.Strauss. Das Gesicht des Lehrers als er das zum ersten Mal gesehen hat , , , fiel fast vom Stuhl
I love this symphony! The first movement is so sweet and melodious and the finale theme & variations is SUPERB, and ends triumphantly. Now of course the quirky Humoreske second movement is problematic. It's hard to resolve those repeated mocking trombone glissandos with the context of serious music.
The first movement is a little too fast for my tastes; I completely missed the beautiful F sharp major passage at 5:03 simply because the tempo was utterly through the roof. It seems like a parody at times; the tempo carries over to the Humoreske (which really just is a bit funny now, and not much more than that). On the other hand, I am pleased to finally be able to hear the quiet cymbals at 9:30, the Proposta Seria is exactly right, and the orchestra is swell.
Thpose of us, who have nothing better to do, might wonder why Nielsen didn't write/compose the full standard nine symphonies like say Beethoven did. Does anyone know why he left it at six symphonies? Thanx.
@@sawyerpoet Well he wrote his last/final symphoy in 1924-1925 and he didn't die until 1931 so he certainly had the remaining time in his life to compose a couple more, if not even a 9th symphony right?
He was ill at the time of composition and he deteriorated all the way until his death. I've searched the musical bibles and can't find justification for the idea that 9 is the standard. It's a canonical shamanism that a composer is less if she/ he hasn't attained that number. Sibelius managed 7or 8 if you include Kullervo or 9 if you include the 4 Legends which he suggested once. However, it doesn't matter a hill of beans if magic numbers aren't reached. Quality over quantity.
@@noriemeha Sibelius destroyed one symphony. I think the thing with the "9" is more like a boundary that for some strange reason no composer is able to conquer (or at least most of them, Shostakovich wrote more). It's not "you have to write 9 symphonies" but "You wrote 9 symphonies? You'll gonna die before you can finish the 10th."
This video is terrible. Why, when there is so much interesting going on in the orchestra, do we have to put up with views of the conductor? I agree with the other commenters here, the music is wonderful and the performance is good. But, oh, how bad is the video!
This must be one of the most contrived compositions I have ever heard. NIelsen was a Romantic in reaction against romanticism, which is evident in his first symphonies, especially 3-5. Finally, in 6 he breaks free. The result is this pathetic mish-mash. We would do him a great favour by destroying the score.
Nielsen had failing health throughout its composition which may have affected its 'state of mind'. But I think it would be wrong to take your advice. There was always a thread in his creative musicianship that was this music, I think he gave it a freer rein here. Composers of tonal music were being chastened by a post-war aggressive avant-garde which disdained their music and melody in general. Nielsen was a forward-looking composer, more so than say, Sibelius. I heard this music as a teenager and have liked it ever since over many decades.
@@noriemeha You make some good points, cogently expressed. I like Nielsen's first five symphonies very much. But I am convinced that he was a dyed-in-the-wool Romanic who wanted to rebel and be modern. His, modernity, though, is awkward and self-conscious, and sometime does not fit into the context of the work as a whole, for example the excessive side-drum part in Symphony 4. I regard Nielsen's mature works as flawed masterpieces. And, having listened carefully to the whole of Symphony 6, whether in sickness or in health, I am convinced that, having finally discarded the broad stream of Romanticism, Nielsen really had nothing to say.
@@phillipvietri8786 "I am convinced that, having finally discarded the broad stream of Romanticism, Nielsen really had nothing to say." The first thing to say is that this is nonsense, because Nielsen definitely still had plenty to say in the 1920s. It is also the complete opposite of the view of Nielsen in Robert Simpson's 1952 book, Carl Nielsen, Symphonist, which first introduced me to these symphonies back in the 1960s. Simpson, who was himself a composer, despised late Romanticism, and has some harsh words for Sibelius, Nielsen's exact Nordic contemporary, for persisting with various of its conventions. Ironically, though, Simpson struggled with No 6, greatly admiring the first movement but regarding the rest as a kind of appendix in which Nielsen descended from objectivity to subjectivity (clearly a major offence for Simpson). It was only many years later that I discovered that Simpson hadn't actually heard the sixth when he wrote the book, and had based that chapter on reading the score. Personally I've always been puzzled as to why people have so much difficulty with the sixth. To me it's just fantastically inventive music, albeit cast within a context of gallows humour which is new not only to Nielsen but to symphonic music in general. Simon Rattle pointed out that this symphony was unique in that respect until Shostakovich 15 appeared 50 years later. I don't know the source for this, but apparently someone once said that black comedy was the only art form appropriate to the 20th century. I think that's quite a useful way of thinking about this symphony, but my main advice is just to listen to it: it's definitely a masterpiece. s
Nielsen's 6th is a gorgeous banquet of orchestra delights and musical athletics. I love it!
Thanks for posting. Enjoyed the conversation and the comments about late romantics transmogrifying into modernists. As an aside, I listened to Sibelius' and Walton's violin concertos together recently. It's well known that Sibelius was a strong influence on Walton, and it was lovely to hear the one composer coming through the other. Sibelius is probably my favourite symphonic composer, and I'm enjoying discovering Nielson. I love everything Walton ever did :)
Love Paavo Jarvi! He looks like he was having so much fun conducting this! Who says there can't be humor in classical music?
I've felt for a long time that Nielsen, like Sibelius and Janacek, belongs to a transitional generation of composers who began as "romantic" composers but in mid-career somehow became modernists. (Full disclosure: I'm generally much more comfortable with "modern" or 20th-Century composers than with "romantic" composers.) For me, Nielsen's Fourth Symphony marks his entree into modernism. I also consider Nielsen one of the great symphonists: in the 20th-Century, in the same league as Sibelius, Vaughn Williams, maybe even Shostakovich. Nielsen's Sixth is my favorite of his, much as I love his Fourth and Fifth--because, whereas they are grandiose (nothing pejorative meant), the Sixth is somehow not only quirkier but more personal; it not only delights me but moves me deeply at moments.
interesting comment. I discovered (for me) his 6th when I returned from the Pacific islands in 1972 after a year away and starving for my own culture. I had only known his 4th and 1st and liked them a lot. I lived alone for a while and listened to no 6 daily until I couldn't live without it. It had turned up on the other side of a Vox label of Sibelius's 6 Humoresques which I was after. It became a favorite disc which I wore out beyond playability.
@Steven Moore Nielsen's contemporaries Strauss, Mahler and Sibelius were more "romantic" in their musical language than Nielsen.
@Steven Moore As I am.
Jim Samson"s book "Music in Transition" is very good on this!
Bravo Paavo. Carl Nielsen's 6th reminds of Charles Ives' symphonies: Simple only in their playful, catchy rhythms and after that, anything goes.
It is music to make one think; not "simply" sit back and enjoy. This is a very complex symphony loaded with questions about where we are and where we are going.That is for each one of us to answer. Bravo! Bravo Nielsen!!
Richard Yiengst Symphonies and most of classical music, other than several very obviously programmed pieces, honestly don't communicate the same thing to all of us. No questions here for me, just great music.
That sounds more like an excuse for a bad symphony. Compare this to Villa-Lobos' 7th bachiana brasileira and all the pomp and pretentiousness of this symphony will be teared down by the accessible tropical beauty of the later. That's how good works of art should be.
+Nois Eh Pica No, Villa-Lobos' 7th bachiana brasileira doesn't affect this at all. It's not a bleedin' competition. But thanks for parading your arrogant naive immaturity for all to appreciate.
@104968128922112379167 Wow, you suddenly got a little mad, didn't you? Let me see if I'm missing something: no arguments, only offenses. Is there anything I can say to actually defend myself in such circumstances?
If somebody where to come across this discussion, they would readily notice your lack of interest for the topic at hand, which you seem to not understand; the contempt in your attitude; the latent inability to progress in any actual discussion regarding art criticism, barely hidden by your shameless insults. Well, let them be the judges; your actions are public. Is it mature what you're doing before this crowd, TintoBrassic? What were you thinking, did you just thought you could act any way you want simply because you're on the INTERNET? Then isn't this arrogance, to think you can do whatever you want regardless of social conventions or etiquette? How naive of you; all your insults fit you like a glove, and I don't think you realize it.
@Steven Moore The symphony is about mortality and even being able to grin at its face. Listen from 7:18 onward and the climax at 7:57 which the late Robert Simpson described as Nielsen portraying the oncoming and climax of a heart attack and then the extreme emotion of its aftermath 8:24. It is at once amazing to hear and oh so disturbing. The heart trouble would eventually claim his life at 66.
Like his 4th and 5th symphonies, Nielsen's 6th is a virtuosic treat, a treasure among all 20th century works.
When a composer bares his soul in music which is superbly crafted, yet is also touched by humility and by an absence of self-glorification, there you have art of the highest order.
Well that certainly rules out Mahler, the most self indulgent and over rated composer if ever there was one!
@Steven Moore Yes it is a shame as you say. I get very annoyed that Mahler gets played ad nauseam at the expense of so many great composers who get almost totally ignored. That's what I mean by over rated.
@@TheVaughan5 I couldn't agree more.
What I said above applies equally to Gustav Mahler who, like Nielsen, was 'broken on the wheel of Life' and yet saw fit to pour out sorrow and joy in abundance in his symphonies and orchestral songs. The flamboyance, bravura, extrovertism, is all part of Mahler and part of his idea of the symphony being a whole world and, just as importantly, being a musical mirror of the crazy world we all, as Human beings, inhabit. Yes, even those whose racial prejudices are, allegedly, showing through their professed dislike of Mahler! (Mahler was often on the receiving end of that kind of irrational opinion, too!)
Very, very fine performance of this strange and wonderful symphony. I continue to fail to understand those astute and surely appreciative (?) commentators who constantly complain about too-fast tempi. My friends, you must LISTEN, LISTEN, LISTEN, and appreciate the FLOW, FLOW, FLOW. Just sayin'.
The end of Proposta seria (III)! The serene resignation ... Never thought Nielsen could bring a tear to my eye ... What an artist!
Here was Carl Nielsen, a hundred years ahead of his time, feeling regrets that his music didn't amount to much !
The strings in the third movement are so dark, mysterious, and hypnotizing.
I adore Nielsen's symphonies, in fact I think he is one of the finest composers of that idiom but I can't quite get into the 6th though it's growing on me as the best music usually does!
Marvelous performance of a truly great piece of comedic music.
One of the best symphonic pieces that I've heard in my life! Simply fantastic! Superb!
I would like to know what Nielsen's real intent was in writing this symphony. I get a different meaning each time I listen to this magnificent work.
Today I listened to it, and I'm now convinced it's a modern sounding rendering of his earlier 2nd symphony "Four Temperaments". The movements of this and the 2nd follow the same order: an angry 1st mvt, a carefree, innocent 2nd, a 3rd mvt expressing deep melancholy, and a cheerful, triumphant finale. It's all there!
Cette symphonie est un chef d'oeuvre ! L'interprétation est remarquable et la battue de Paavo Jarvi est à la fois sobre et expressive ...Bravo et merci pour cette vidéo ...
I. Tempo giusto
13:11 II. Humoreske
17:35 III. Proposta seria
23:03 IV. Thema mit Variationen
^helpful comment.
Traindude Fine performance. I wish that Nielsen's music was performed more. What a glorious moment in the 1st movement when the horns play at 504. This piece is whimsical and profound. Genius!
This symphony beautifully contrasts against itself I love it!
Para mí Nielsen es, sin duda, el "músico del silencio". Y esta sinfonía me lo confirma. El silencio es una parte fundamental de la partitura.
Interesting and amazing symphony.
I really love this symphony, Of course, it is not as "great" as the 4th or 5th, but what an imagination and originality for a symphony written by a 60 year old Nielsen! It is a real pleasure to listen to and admire his artistry. Great performance too!
Sinfonia Semplice... Certamente não é tão simples.
Da hat Nielsen sicherlich was neues zur Musikwelt entstanden. Ganz interessantes und inspirierendes Werk!!
Beautiful rendition !
Thanks a lot
Any major symphony that ends with just the bassoons can't be all bad! I remember hearing this piece decades ago with the NY Phil and Bernstein. Liked it then, and I still like it. Certainly not music to relax to, and no tunes to remember, but very entertaining.
Plenty of tunes to remember for me :)
It may not be as "great" as the 4th or 5th, but I'd rather a composer speak for himself rather than for humanity. And the incredibly subjective, haunting and original 1st. mvt. degenerating into the sarcasm of the rest of it, render it one of the most unique symphonies ever written!
Somewhere I came across the (mis?)information that Nielsen was, in this symphony, poking fun at the "avant-garde" music of the time, and it sounds as if that were the case. But intentionally or not, he produced a masterpiece of stylistic and orchestral invention, elicting various but subdued emotions. And it's hilarious! It could be called his "Concerto for Orchestra", with its many instrumental highlights (part of the third movement heralds a similar passage in Bartok's famous one). The outbursts beginning at 28:30 remind me of Charles Ives; I wonder if Nielsen was familiar with his music. In any case, his 6th is always a delight to hear.
Yes, Nielsen was a century ahead of Charles Ives ! The two of them opened us up into a completely new world of music !
It's curious that, in certain moments, this work reminds 1st movement of Shostakovich 15th. And I think that Shostakovich didn't intend to refer to this work.
Good performance; he captures the tart neo-classicism of this brilliant piece well
It's classical in form, but the unorthodox 2nd movement is very much in tune with our own time. Nielsen was willing to think "outside the box": he was the 20th century answer to Beethoven. Like Beethoven he adapted classical form to his own ideals. Nielsen was a rock star long before "rock and roll " became part of the lexicon.
Mir gefällt diese lebhafte und rhythmische Leistung dieses relativ unbekannten Meisterwerks fast ohne nordischen Geschmack. Alle Spieler sind wahre Virtuosen.
notaire2 -- I see that you beat me here by 3 years....but I finally caught up to you!
@@steveegallo3384 Thanks for your nice reply. While commenting on many uploads on TH-cam I really wish I could understand Spanish, in which quite a lot of comments are written.
@@notaire2 -- You are most welcome! I am increasingly reliant upon Google Translate for foreign idioms....It's fun, too!
How many realise that it was only after his death did Nielsen's 6th get published. It bewildered people of his time and even after being published continued to do so. Only gradually did this music emerge as a masterpiece, that some people do things that cannot be properly appreciated because they are visionaries and not slaves limited by their own time.
The first violinist looks like Mahler
I have never understood why this is the least performed of his symphonies. Anyone who follows this composer must agree that this 6th symphony is a potpourri of the previous five.
"Simple Symphony" it certainly isn't!!
Who directed this telecast? Stop concentrating on the conductor, and let us see the musicians, from the front, when they have solos.
The passage from 7:18 to 9:05 has been likening experiencing a heart attack and its aftermath by the late composer, musicologist Robert Simpson. Only Nielsen, who else?
By then Nielsen knew all about heart attacks.
Wer sich wirklich für klassische bzw. wahre ernste Musik interessiert, kennt natürlic auch Carl Nielsen. mit 12 Jahren lernte ich Arnold Schönberg kennen und schätzen, ja seine 12-Ton Musik faszinierte mich, die Rockmusik und Beatles waren mir immer zu primitiv, von Schlagermusik ganz zu schweigen! Oh was wurde ich damals in der Schule deswegen gemobbt und ausgegrenzt...
Erkennbar. Wie hatten damals ein Klassenheft wo die Dozenten die Aufgaben hineinschrieben. Das Buch war natürlich bunt bemalt mit Rolling Stones, Beatles und dergleichen. Bis der moment dass ich mit meinem Freund das Heft definitiv gross beschriftet haben mit Alban Berg , Hindemith , Wagner, R.Strauss. Das Gesicht des Lehrers als er das zum ersten Mal gesehen hat , , , fiel fast vom Stuhl
Pieter Vel und Ralph Madach. Heutzutage kennt fast niemand diesen großen Namen wegen der Entartung des Bildungssystem, wenigstens in den USA.
Wonderful!
I love this symphony! The first movement is so sweet and melodious and the finale theme & variations is SUPERB, and ends triumphantly.
Now of course the quirky Humoreske second movement is problematic. It's hard to resolve those repeated mocking trombone glissandos with the context of serious music.
Is the Humoreske here the first ever instance of a symphonic movement only consisting of woodwinds and percussion?
It is, therefore, a very "human" symphony,
The first movement is a little too fast for my tastes; I completely missed the beautiful F sharp major passage at 5:03 simply because the tempo was utterly through the roof. It seems like a parody at times; the tempo carries over to the Humoreske (which really just is a bit funny now, and not much more than that). On the other hand, I am pleased to finally be able to hear the quiet cymbals at 9:30, the Proposta Seria is exactly right, and the orchestra is swell.
Thpose of us, who have nothing better to do, might wonder why Nielsen didn't write/compose the full standard nine symphonies like say Beethoven did. Does anyone know why he left it at six symphonies? Thanx.
Why? He died.
@@sawyerpoet Well he wrote his last/final symphoy in 1924-1925 and he didn't die until 1931 so he certainly had the remaining time in his life to compose a couple more, if not even a 9th symphony right?
He was ill at the time of composition and he deteriorated all the way until his death. I've searched the musical bibles and can't find justification for the idea that 9 is the standard. It's a canonical shamanism that a composer is less if she/ he hasn't attained that number. Sibelius managed 7or 8 if you include Kullervo or 9 if you include the 4 Legends which he suggested once. However, it doesn't matter a hill of beans if magic numbers aren't reached. Quality over quantity.
@@noriemeha Sibelius destroyed one symphony. I think the thing with the "9" is more like a boundary that for some strange reason no composer is able to conquer (or at least most of them, Shostakovich wrote more). It's not "you have to write 9 symphonies" but "You wrote 9 symphonies? You'll gonna die before you can finish the 10th."
Yes, he died.
very sweet
What was Carl Nielsen thinking?
i think the scherzo ought perhaps tp be played as the 3rd mvt
Thanks!
William Steig of symphonists
Does music ever actually go anywhere.
Not for you I guess.
Fantastik - Carl når han er bedst
Allegretto: 13:12
they invited Mahler to play with them! 17:56
13:10 woodwinds
2:30 9:42
0:29 - There's my Paavo! (nice smile)
(Y)
This video is terrible. Why, when there is so much interesting going on in the orchestra, do we have to put up with views of the conductor?
I agree with the other commenters here, the music is wonderful and the performance is good. But, oh, how bad is the video!
+Jane Sullivan they do that a lot in videos--more focus on players
The Jarvi dynasty like it like that.
an embarrassing piece to conduct
how so? i'm sorry if that's a stupid question, i'm fairly new to classical music.
i must have just thought the conductor looked....silly: so nothing to learn from me there...sorry.
big yawn, i was going to go to a concert friday to hear this, but after listening first time on here,, no thanks
Must be over your head.
Hmmm . . in one hearing, a 'final' judgement of a late work of someone who has been composing for some 40-50 years.
@Steven Moore You have mistaken his emotion; it is closer to despair than boredom.
Great choice! Just wait his other symphonies to premiere.
This must be one of the most contrived compositions I have ever heard. NIelsen was a Romantic in reaction against romanticism, which is evident in his first symphonies, especially 3-5. Finally, in 6 he breaks free. The result is this pathetic mish-mash. We would do him a great favour by destroying the score.
Nielsen had failing health throughout its composition which may have affected its 'state of mind'. But I think it would be wrong to take your advice. There was always a thread in his creative musicianship that was this music, I think he gave it a freer rein here. Composers of tonal music were being chastened by a post-war aggressive avant-garde which disdained their music and melody in general. Nielsen was a forward-looking composer, more so than say, Sibelius. I heard this music as a teenager and have liked it ever since over many decades.
@@noriemeha You make some good points, cogently expressed. I like Nielsen's first five symphonies very much. But I am convinced that he was a dyed-in-the-wool Romanic who wanted to rebel and be modern. His, modernity, though, is awkward and self-conscious, and sometime does not fit into the context of the work as a whole, for example the excessive side-drum part in Symphony 4. I regard Nielsen's mature works as flawed masterpieces. And, having listened carefully to the whole of Symphony 6, whether in sickness or in health, I am convinced that, having finally discarded the broad stream of Romanticism, Nielsen really had nothing to say.
@@phillipvietri8786 "I am convinced that, having finally discarded the broad stream of Romanticism, Nielsen really had nothing to say." The first thing to say is that this is nonsense, because Nielsen definitely still had plenty to say in the 1920s. It is also the complete opposite of the view of Nielsen in Robert Simpson's 1952 book, Carl Nielsen, Symphonist, which first introduced me to these symphonies back in the 1960s.
Simpson, who was himself a composer, despised late Romanticism, and has some harsh words for Sibelius, Nielsen's exact Nordic contemporary, for persisting with various of its conventions. Ironically, though, Simpson struggled with No 6, greatly admiring the first movement but regarding the rest as a kind of appendix in which Nielsen descended from objectivity to subjectivity (clearly a major offence for Simpson). It was only many years later that I discovered that Simpson hadn't actually heard the sixth when he wrote the book, and had based that chapter on reading the score.
Personally I've always been puzzled as to why people have so much difficulty with the sixth. To me it's just fantastically inventive music, albeit cast within a context of gallows humour which is new not only to Nielsen but to symphonic music in general. Simon Rattle pointed out that this symphony was unique in that respect until Shostakovich 15 appeared 50 years later. I don't know the source for this, but apparently someone once said that black comedy was the only art form appropriate to the 20th century. I think that's quite a useful way of thinking about this symphony, but my main advice is just to listen to it: it's definitely a masterpiece.
s
Great performance! Too bad this piece plainly and simply sucks!
"Too bad this piece plainly and simply sucks!" No, it doesn't.
Just a reflection of the shape of your hearing.