I'm British and I'm astounded that these days my compatriots only listen to 4 or 5 British composers. Likewise it seems that most Americans listen to American mainstream music only if it's by Gershwin, Ives or Copland. But this symphony by Harris is a truly great work. I must mention the visuals on this upload. Magnificent!
Robert - Couldn't agree more. There is more to American composers then Gershwin, Copland and Ives. I love these composers but I also a diehard listener of Harris, Rorem, Bernstein....Yes Bernstein his compositions are just simply not listened to today with the exception of course of West Side Story. Listen up on rorem's 3rd Symphony, trust me you won't be disappointed.
I’m American and I don’t like Gershwin, Copland or Ives. I like some of Barber, but that’s pretty much it. I don’t even like much American rock. I much prefer the Brits, especially the Beatles! I’m just now checking Harris out.
Yes, but it's gone. 'Twas on TH-cam. The description said it was by Bernstein, but nothing more that I remember. I liked it so much that I copied the link, which a month or two later went blank ("Sorry, that video has been removed..."). The timpani of the last couple minutes are truly profound, with a terrifying inevitability almost. They have a power that I've not found in any other recording, and I've listened to many. I have another of Bernstein's recordings at home, but it's not quite the same. This one here, under Alsop, is very good.
The earlier LB recording is back on YT in the Sony remastering, which gets rid of some of the "aircraft hangar" reverb which was on the 1962 LP. A few fluffed notes remain as LB and John McClure had an especial liking for the occasion of the recording with the NYPO on fire with love for this perfect symphony. Apparently it is very difficult to play and stretches all parts of the orchestra. Koussevitsky's BSO version comes close but the recording is limited and, for some reason, hard to find. RCA must have it in its vaults. Maybe Allsop will re-record it and do it properly. It is too late for Neeme Jarvi to undo his awful mess.
@@aintmisbehavin1743 The Bernstein recording on a old LP I have is just too rushed for me- just like his Shostakovich 5th! I grew up with the Harris' 3rd recording conducted by Hanson. Of course his orchestra couldn't touch the NY Phil., but I can hear and relish every note-- not so rushed that to me it sounds like the brass were trying to show how fast they could tongue, expressive phrasing be damned. This performance led by Alsop sounds nearly perfect to me!
I love everything about this piece - the beauty, the growth, the pacing, the overall sound; Except one thing - and I'd love for someone to expound if they wish: He almost always treats the sections as individual units. The strings, then the strings with woodwinds. The brass come in later - always section versus section. Almost no color of a woodwind mixing/blending with a string, or a brass and woodwind forming a new sound. Not to mention virtually no percussion, right? It gives the work a very unique sound, and I'm wondering if this is on purpose, or if he just doesn't use much "color" in general. (I'll dig deeper into his music). I'm a fan of beauty created by unique combinations of instruments, so that would be my only hesitation in calling this the "greatest" American symphony, such as others have.
Orchestration is difficult. For a contemporary American master of orchestration try most anything by Walter Piston. He literally wrote the book on orchestration.
Roy Harris took an approach to composition that he liked to call "autogenetic"--meaning, the melodies sort of self-actualized and developed themselves. It's different from something like Beethoven, where all the motives can be traced to one, and they're all unified. Instead Harris tends to meander, and that's just when he's composing his melodies. For all the other facets of composition, including orchestration as you bring up, he liked to imagine that he was an "intuitive" composer. He threw tons of shade towards the direction of people like Virgil Thompson and Aaron Copland. He even disrespected his composition teacher Nadia Boulanger. That is why, eventually, his popularity fell in the 40s and those whom he stepped on basically "paid him back" for his problematic personality. It's ironic because from the late 20s and especially up to 1939 he was VERY well respected and the most loved American composer. But now, not so much.
Harris' modal harmonies come out his admiration for Renaissance polyphony. That predisposes him to timbres that blend, as voices in a choir might. But saving something, anything, is a time honored strategy for reengaging the listener in a long form piece. Where other composers might do this my key modulation, Harris leans on orchestration, texture and rhythm.
When Artificial Intelligence gets around to music we will finally have a machine that evaluates symphonies and gives us a score we can accept as accurate. Until that time each of us has to assign a value to the music we hear. I give this a score of 86/100, but that's just my opinion for whatever it is worth.
If beauty is in the eye of the beholder than there is no discussion to be had. For me there is a difference between pretty and beautiful but the difference is hard to calculate or explain. Evaluating music is very much like evaluating faces. There is physical beauty that comes from the arrangement and proportion of facial elements along with skin color, tone, and texture. We might all agree that a particular girl is pretty but some of us would say "she is not my type." Each of us has some vague concept of the ideal buried deep within us. More important than the physical is the spirit than reaches out to us in a smile or glint of an eye. As a result of her appearance and behavior you can say with certainty that you like her. When it comes to "I love her" we are now in the realm of the unexplainable. So it is with music. My judgment of the Harris symphony is based on my 77 years of listening to great music filtered through my level of talent and training. Each piece of music tells us a sound story than can range from boring to brilliant. If a piece of music does not touch my heart or raise the hairs on the back of my neck it is not great. If the syntax of the story does not rise to the level of great oration (think Gettysburg Address) then it may be pleasant but not sublime.
I don't think there will ever be an Artificial Intelligence that can objectively judge a work, for the simple reason that it doesn't have some components that it needs to understand why a musician wrote those certain notes. Music is not judged, it is listened to. There is a reason why one music takes a direction rather than another. I believe that this is the case, it is my opinion.
What makes music so special is how personal it is. Each of us hears it in our own individual way relative to our prior musical experience and taste. So, my reference to AI was only hypothetical. Asking to rate a piece of music is like asking what any piece of art is worth.
@@stephenjablonsky1941 British comedian/actor/pianist once said "I'd much rather listen to a Beethoven string quartet than Bing Crosby singing 'White Christmas', but don't ask me why." I think that says it all. I love this symphony and I'm glad Marin Alsop includes all of the pastoral section that R.H. decided to cut ( Why?) But otherwise l find it to be a rather ordinary performance compared to say Bernstein or Toscanini.
Sorry, but this work hurts my brain, and I can appreciate (and enjoy) the works of Stravinsky. To me, this work feels random, aimless, plodding, simple, and lacking real dynamics. There's only one part that sounds novel and enjoyable to my ears, and I wish the whole work could be expanded around that theme. 10:37 to 11:06.
Yech! This song is terrible!.........................................Oops! This comment fits with the (disgusting) rap song I heard on TH-cam. Roy Harris is one of my favorite composers. #1 actually. Thanx 4 posting this Classic!
i) The music is OK but a bit bland. ii) I don't see the relationship of the photographs to the music (apart from a vague notion of "americanness"). iii) Walker Evans is an infinitely more original and greater artist than Roy Harris.
@@Shadowfax-1980 When one disparages a commentator, it is advisable to provide at least the semblance of an argument. I did not give much argument myself, but I was not talking to Roy Harris.
@@Shadowfax-1980 Let's face it, it's fine music, very well crafted, but I don't think either that it has a very strong personnality. It's somewhat academic. In french, I would say it's "impersonnel".
Splendide spectacle symphonique de toute beauté...Merci encore pour cette très belle version.
One of my all time favorites. It really is the greatest American symphony.
I'm British and I'm astounded that these days my compatriots only listen to 4 or 5 British composers. Likewise it seems that most Americans listen to American mainstream music only if it's by Gershwin, Ives or Copland. But this symphony by Harris is a truly great work.
I must mention the visuals on this upload. Magnificent!
I listen to and collect records by British Composers as well as american HOLST MALCOLM ARNOLD HAVERGAIL BRIAN...
Robert - Couldn't agree more. There is more to American composers then Gershwin, Copland and Ives. I love these composers but I also a diehard listener of Harris, Rorem, Bernstein....Yes Bernstein his compositions are just simply not listened to today with the exception of course of West Side Story. Listen up on rorem's 3rd Symphony, trust me you won't be disappointed.
Yes, the Walker Evans photography is exceptional and adds much to the music!
I agree with the gist of your comment...but Charles Ives belonging to the mainstream of American music? I wish that were so!
I’m American and I don’t like Gershwin, Copland or Ives. I like some of Barber, but that’s pretty much it. I don’t even like much American rock. I much prefer the Brits, especially the Beatles! I’m just now checking Harris out.
One of the best American symphonic works of the 1930s, very popular in its day, but regularly overlooked today. This is an excellent performance.
A symphony that you love on the very first hearing.
With William Schuman, Harris is one of the greatest american symphonists of the XXs century. 😘
Love the sweetness of the music who start to 8 mns.
One of the great American symphonies. Required listening.
Do you have a favorite recording?
Yes, but it's gone. 'Twas on TH-cam. The description said it was by Bernstein, but nothing more that I remember. I liked it so much that I copied the link, which a month or two later went blank ("Sorry, that video has been removed..."). The timpani of the last couple minutes are truly profound, with a terrifying inevitability almost. They have a power that I've not found in any other recording, and I've listened to many. I have another of Bernstein's recordings at home, but it's not quite the same. This one here, under Alsop, is very good.
Sony Music can be overprotective of its copyrights from time to time. The delation of the Bernstein recording is a case in point.
The earlier LB recording is back on YT in the Sony remastering, which gets rid of some of the "aircraft hangar" reverb which was on the 1962 LP. A few fluffed notes remain as LB and John McClure had an especial liking for the occasion of the recording with the NYPO on fire with love for this perfect symphony. Apparently it is very difficult to play and stretches all parts of the orchestra.
Koussevitsky's BSO version comes close but the recording is limited and, for some reason, hard to find. RCA must have it in its vaults.
Maybe Allsop will re-record it and do it properly. It is too late for Neeme Jarvi to undo his awful mess.
@@aintmisbehavin1743 The Bernstein recording on a old LP I have is just too rushed for me- just like his Shostakovich 5th! I grew up with the Harris' 3rd recording conducted by Hanson. Of course his orchestra couldn't touch the NY Phil., but I can hear and relish every note-- not so rushed that to me it sounds like the brass were trying to show how fast they could tongue, expressive phrasing be damned. This performance led by Alsop sounds nearly perfect to me!
Outstanding work.
magnificent masterpiece
Always enjoy the "let's get serious now" bit at 14:40.
I love everything about this piece - the beauty, the growth, the pacing, the overall sound; Except one thing - and I'd love for someone to expound if they wish:
He almost always treats the sections as individual units. The strings, then the strings with woodwinds. The brass come in later - always section versus section. Almost no color of a woodwind mixing/blending with a string, or a brass and woodwind forming a new sound. Not to mention virtually no percussion, right?
It gives the work a very unique sound, and I'm wondering if this is on purpose, or if he just doesn't use much "color" in general. (I'll dig deeper into his music).
I'm a fan of beauty created by unique combinations of instruments, so that would be my only hesitation in calling this the "greatest" American symphony, such as others have.
"Voices"
Orchestration is difficult. For a contemporary American master of orchestration try most anything by Walter Piston. He literally wrote the book on orchestration.
Roy Harris took an approach to composition that he liked to call "autogenetic"--meaning, the melodies sort of self-actualized and developed themselves. It's different from something like Beethoven, where all the motives can be traced to one, and they're all unified. Instead Harris tends to meander, and that's just when he's composing his melodies. For all the other facets of composition, including orchestration as you bring up, he liked to imagine that he was an "intuitive" composer. He threw tons of shade towards the direction of people like Virgil Thompson and Aaron Copland. He even disrespected his composition teacher Nadia Boulanger. That is why, eventually, his popularity fell in the 40s and those whom he stepped on basically "paid him back" for his problematic personality. It's ironic because from the late 20s and especially up to 1939 he was VERY well respected and the most loved American composer. But now, not so much.
Harris' modal harmonies come out his admiration for Renaissance polyphony. That predisposes him to timbres that blend, as voices in a choir might. But saving something, anything, is a time honored strategy for reengaging the listener in a long form piece. Where other composers might do this my key modulation, Harris leans on orchestration, texture and rhythm.
The Harris Third just pips the Copland Third as the greatest American symphony.
Both are great. I also think Mennin's Seventh should be in the conversation.
It is the greatest American symphony
If you like No. 3 you'll like Harris's No. 7 too, though it gets far less attention.
When Artificial Intelligence gets around to music we will finally have a machine that evaluates symphonies and gives us a score we can accept as accurate. Until that time each of us has to assign a value to the music we hear. I give this a score of 86/100, but that's just my opinion for whatever it is worth.
Just out of curiosity, how did you arrive at that score?
If beauty is in the eye of the beholder than there is no discussion to be had. For me there is a difference between pretty and beautiful but the difference is hard to calculate or explain. Evaluating music is very much like evaluating faces. There is physical beauty that comes from the arrangement and proportion of facial elements along with skin color, tone, and texture. We might all agree that a particular girl is pretty but some of us would say "she is not my type." Each of us has some vague concept of the ideal buried deep within us. More important than the physical is the spirit than reaches out to us in a smile or glint of an eye. As a result of her appearance and behavior you can say with certainty that you like her. When it comes to "I love her" we are now in the realm of the unexplainable. So it is with music. My judgment of the Harris symphony is based on my 77 years of listening to great music filtered through my level of talent and training. Each piece of music tells us a sound story than can range from boring to brilliant. If a piece of music does not touch my heart or raise the hairs on the back of my neck it is not great. If the syntax of the story does not rise to the level of great oration (think Gettysburg Address) then it may be pleasant but not sublime.
I don't think there will ever be an Artificial Intelligence that can objectively judge a work, for the simple reason that it doesn't have some components that it needs to understand why a musician wrote those certain notes. Music is not judged, it is listened to. There is a reason why one music takes a direction rather than another. I believe that this is the case, it is my opinion.
What makes music so special is how personal it is. Each of us hears it in our own individual way relative to our prior musical experience and taste. So, my reference to AI was only hypothetical. Asking to rate a piece of music is like asking what any piece of art is worth.
@@stephenjablonsky1941 British comedian/actor/pianist once said "I'd much rather listen to a Beethoven string quartet than Bing Crosby singing 'White Christmas', but don't ask me why." I think that says it all.
I love this symphony and I'm glad Marin Alsop includes all of the pastoral section that R.H. decided to cut ( Why?) But otherwise l find it to be a rather ordinary performance compared to say Bernstein or Toscanini.
Sorry, but this work hurts my brain, and I can appreciate (and enjoy) the works of Stravinsky. To me, this work feels random, aimless, plodding, simple, and lacking real dynamics. There's only one part that sounds novel and enjoyable to my ears, and I wish the whole work could be expanded around that theme. 10:37 to 11:06.
Yech! This song is terrible!.........................................Oops! This comment fits with the (disgusting) rap song I heard on TH-cam. Roy Harris is one of my favorite composers. #1 actually. Thanx 4 posting this Classic!
i) The music is OK but a bit bland. ii) I don't see the relationship of the photographs to the music (apart from a vague notion of "americanness"). iii) Walker Evans is an infinitely more original and greater artist than Roy Harris.
Time to get your ears checked.
@@Shadowfax-1980 When one disparages a commentator, it is advisable to provide at least the semblance of an argument. I did not give much argument myself, but I was not talking to Roy Harris.
@@Shadowfax-1980 Let's face it, it's fine music, very well crafted, but I don't think either that it has a very strong personnality. It's somewhat academic. In french, I would say it's "impersonnel".