@@AndreyRubtsovRU Agree (or if the melody found its way into a concerto or some other form) although I find the following movements almost as alluring, particularly 2 and 3. Orchestral suites never seem to get the respect they deserve. :) Yes, that ending section (extended coda?) being the opening section transformed into the major mode by the central theme shows Glazunov's formal and narrative mastery using a simple modal device. The evocation of the sea, the castle, the lovers -- it's a wonderful piece.
The first movement is excellent. I find the rest rather uninteresting, too much like standard cinema music of 1930's Hollywood. But quite good first movement.
As Bartje says, the cinematic productions were imitation of works by Glazunov and similar composers. Often times Hollywood actually straight up used music from these and earlier composers.
Your assumption is that Hollywood cinematic music is of its time. On the contrary: it’s Lisztian and regressive. Glazunov is mostly regressive. The first movement here is attractive, in an imitative way, qua Wagner. The rest is better done by Liszt. And indeed, Korngold’s regressive cinematic music is better than Glazunov’s.
You are talking about music. Subjective matter. It is all in the ear of the beholder. It is all a matter of interpretation and perception which makes a comparison between composers, styles and historical time periods, ridiculous and pointless.. Each composer wrote, or tried to write, their own stories. Enjoy that for what it is worth. Be happy we had a Glazunov who was a formidable teacher and knew his orchestration techniques. The guy was a craftsman. Are you? Respect is sorely lacking nowadays.
Bartje Bartmans I’m sorry if I offended you. I’m not a big fan of Glazunov, though there are moments. You ask whether I’m a craftsman. It’s not for me to review the craftsmanship of my own compositions. That is the bailiwick of listeners and the subset of critics. I’ve been very fortunate in regard the critics, but as you say: that’s subjective. In regard my self proclaimed expertise on cinematic music, again, just my opinion. I have lectured on it in (but mostly in Asia,) and I did produce the world premiere performance and recording of a Korngold string quartet, and I do consider Korngold the nonpareil film composer; but this is all subjective, as you point out. My disesteem for much of Glazunov should be of no matter to you.
Wow, this is a "Silver Age" masterpiece! Beautiful and sad, the last sumptuous beauty before the destruction and harshness of WWI.
Alekszandr Glazunov:A középkorból-Zenekari szvit Op.79
1.Nyitány:Allegro 00:00
2.Scherzo:Allegro assa 09:24
4.Trubadúr szerenád:Andantino 13:03
4.Finálé:Allegro 16:43
Csajkovszkij Szimfonikus Zenekar
Vezényel:Vladimir Fedoszejev
Thank you
0:00 is a good place to start.
Ironically this time 4:20 is actually better one.
4:20 begins an extraordinarily beautiful tune.
indeed. would've been even more popular standalone. that 6/4 end is a bit not on the same plane...
@@AndreyRubtsovRU Agree (or if the melody found its way into a concerto or some other form) although I find the following movements almost as alluring, particularly 2 and 3. Orchestral suites never seem to get the respect they deserve. :) Yes, that ending section (extended coda?) being the opening section transformed into the major mode by the central theme shows Glazunov's formal and narrative mastery using a simple modal device. The evocation of the sea, the castle, the lovers -- it's a wonderful piece.
Fabulous find....Unknown t'me…..must re-hear right now! Thanks!
Other parts remind of Richard Strauss, I think. Wonder Who influenced Whom?
1902? In the Russian context, "from the middle ages" might as well be "from my grandparents' day"
Beautiful!!!
Thanks for the great upload. Have you rediscovered Glasunov recently? What do you think of him?
conan2717 Well, they won't hate him
The first movement is excellent. I find the rest rather uninteresting, too much like standard cinema music of 1930's Hollywood. But quite good first movement.
Look at the date 1902. Way before standard cinema music. You are turning things around. He was ahead of his time by decades.
As Bartje says, the cinematic productions were imitation of works by Glazunov and similar composers. Often times Hollywood actually straight up used music from these and earlier composers.
Your assumption is that Hollywood cinematic music is of its time. On the contrary: it’s Lisztian and regressive. Glazunov is mostly regressive. The first movement here is attractive, in an imitative way, qua Wagner. The rest is better done by Liszt. And indeed, Korngold’s regressive cinematic music is better than Glazunov’s.
You are talking about music. Subjective matter. It is all in the ear of the beholder. It is all a matter of interpretation and perception which makes a comparison between composers, styles and historical time periods, ridiculous and pointless.. Each composer wrote, or tried to write, their own stories. Enjoy that for what it is worth. Be happy we had a Glazunov who was a formidable teacher and knew his orchestration techniques. The guy was a craftsman. Are you? Respect is sorely lacking nowadays.
Bartje Bartmans I’m sorry if I offended you. I’m not a big fan of Glazunov, though there are moments. You ask whether I’m a craftsman. It’s not for me to review the craftsmanship of my own compositions. That is the bailiwick of listeners and the subset of critics. I’ve been very fortunate in regard the critics, but as you say: that’s subjective. In regard my self proclaimed expertise on cinematic music, again, just my opinion. I have lectured on it in (but mostly in Asia,) and I did produce the world premiere performance and recording of a Korngold string quartet, and I do consider Korngold the nonpareil film composer; but this is all subjective, as you point out. My disesteem for much of Glazunov should be of no matter to you.
The piano is really out of tune
Mikko Korhonen Yep. For years and years I believed that they had used an old-fashioned upright piano like my parents and grandparents had.