Franz Lachner (1803-90): Symphony Nº3 in D minor, Op.41(1833/34).

Franz Paul Lachner (Rain am Lech 1803-Munich 1890): Symphony Nº3 in D minor, Op.41(1833-34)
I.Allegro : 00:00
II.Scherzo.Allegro assai: 13:38
III.Andante con moto quasi allegretto: 25:46
IV.Finale.Allegro : 37:44
Evergreen Symphony Orchestra
Gernot Schmalfuss
More information : www.historiadelasinfonia.es/na...
Picture: Carl Gustav Carus (1789-1869) : Die Rudelsburg (1825)

[@herminioteixeira5921]

Hoje estou ouvindo Laschner, outro autor magnífico, sem transito nas principais salas de concertos do mundo. Felizmente, algumas grandes orquestras e canais como JIH lhes dão vitrine! Certamente, muitos agradecemos por isso.

[@rogernortman9219]

This is the greatest previously unrecorded symphony to come along in over 20 years!

[@hyseo1121]

A reviewer from classicstoday said this symphony is too long. He even said listning to scherzo is terrible experience though it is ear catching at first. I want to know how he can listen to Bruckner symphony. It is full of repetitions. Anyway i do not agree on his opinion on this symphony. All the movements are full of interesting ideas and melodies. Very skillfully orchestrated. In some parts it is somewhat academic. But overall it is very good work.

[@bomcabedal]

It's a common complaint about Lachner, and sometimes it's true. The only recording of the 5th is arguably too long because it's played so &&&& slowly. But this work is beautifully proportioned and well played.

[@pietrolandri6081]

My modest opinion is based upon bit of context. This symphony was written in the same year when Brahms was born, when Bruckner was 11 years old and only few years after death of Schubert and Beethoven. I'm a simple music lover, not an expert at all, have no ability to carry out sophisticated analysis, etc.
Just naively let me agree with you that is somewhat bizarre to blame a romantic symphony to be excessively long only because it's a few minutes exceeding half an hour. Guess it's not that longer than the shortest symphonies of Bruckner or Mahler, as long as any symphony of Brahms or last (complete) symphony of Schubert. By memory I'm not sure any Raff symphony is also shorter.
Regardless, length of a piece of music tells you nothing as of whether it's a good or a bad one. Good pieces are just as long as they should be to be good. Longer or shorter they may turn to be less good.
Another point is whether the conductor plays them too fast or too slow or just at a proper speed. As Bom Cabedal correctly pointed out #5 may have been played damn slower in the sole available interpretation but it remains to my amateur ears one of the most beautiful romantic symphonies ever written. This one is very good too, perhaps less fascinating and more introspective, certainly worth to be listened more in repertoires of main conductor and not criminally ignored.
Back to my opening, guys, it's a 1833 symphony but its language is, again to my amateur ears, anticipating orchestral pieces of second half of that century, thus posing serious questions as of why on the earth Lachner is ignored. Because my modest opinion is that Brahms and Bruckner owe little more than something to their older colleague

[@paulusaurelius6563]

This 'reviewer' should try to compose a better Symphony than Lachner's instead of complaining.

[@pierrebonnechere7032]

1833: Beethoven was dead for 6 years, Brahms is a baby, Medelssohn writes his 3rd symphony... This symphony is rather fresh and full of nice passages, lots of ideas and melodies, and very well weaved! For those who like more heavy work, listen to his 8th symphony, a masterpiece by all standards.

[@pierrebonnechere7032]

@@bomcabedal many people confuse Franz Lachner with his brother Ignaz, whose talent is far less original.

[@philhomes233]

A lot of Lachner can be a little turgid, (but always interesting and hugely melodic). This symphony isn't turgid at all.

[@arturdankovsky8293]

I must say that I used to hold quite a negative opinion about the Romantics (although I always loved Schubert), but Lachnner belongs to one of them, who has changed my mind.

[@kjmolinar]

You might like Brahms too

[@markmccarty9910]

Based on this recording, Schmalfuss and his wonderful Evergreen Symphony Orchestra (Taiwanese!) should give us a lot more Lachner.

[@bomcabedal]

Not sure how likely that is when it is pirated to TH-cam with a month.

[@ptan54]

@@bomcabedal youtube actually introduced me to a lot of obscure composers...if i like the work I buy the recording off itunes. I discovered Paul Buttner on a certain youtube channel :)

[@bomcabedal]

@@ptan54 Sure, but you won't find that music for sale though. If it is, I pull it from my channel. The "I only buy it because I listened to it on TH-cam" argument is rather too glib for my liking, the more so because there is no way to check its veracity. I will believe your good intentions, but to rip it immediately deprives the producer of even their marginal chance of making a few sales. A lot of collectors don't care about format and are quite willing to save a buck by ripping it off TH-cam.

[@ptan54]

@@bomcabedal I don't know about other folks; I bought the Atterberg and Erkki Melartin symphonies off iTunes after hearing those on TH-cam. Without a sampling of these composers' music I wouldn't have splashed out the money. Hyperion, CPO, Sterling and others are commendable companies for recording obscure works, and their prices are reasonable so I like to support them.

[@bomcabedal]

@@ptan54 the question here is: for that, do you require the _entire_ work to be on TH-cam, and do you think it's reasonable to have someone illegally upload it mere months after its commercial release. I think that is ethically questionable to say the least. A minefield I know, but this crosses one line too many for me. I hear too many people claiming they buy the recording after hearing it on TH-cam to take EVERYONE at their word.

[@ernshaw78]

I'd take this over Bruckner. Late 19th century music is overly pedestrian.

[@bomcabedal]

That's a very broad categorization. Rather too broad, I think, the more so since there is no single late 19th-century style.

[@user-pg4cu4et4x]

Well, stick to your Ludwig van, man!