Amazon.co.uk allows you to pay for your items in your local currency. Restrictions apply. Learn More. |
Frequently Bought Together
Product details
|
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product)
|
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
Format:Audio CD
Tanayev has always been one of those composers who gets forgotten by comparison with his more illustrious forbears and contemporaries, unjustly so. This CD - and well done again to Naxos for issuing it - contains very good music that is well-played and recorded. Whilst it might lack the last ounce of refinement, it is well worth purchasing. Buy with confidence!
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com:
3 reviews
8 of 9 people found the following review helpful
A Russian Brahms?
17 Jun 2008
Format:Audio CD
As a result of my recent exploration of early Russian symphonists, I have come up with a rather subversive theory: at the end of the 19th Century, Europe's great symphonic tradition passed from Germany/Austria to Russia! Taneyev is a very interesting "serious" composer, a sort of Russian-flavoured Brahms. The first symphony, in particular, has a distinctive melodic and dramatic approach.
Unfortunately, these performances do not adequately communicate Taneyev's virtues. These works require more vigour, stronger expressive gestures, and much more attention to dynamic contrast (unless the music is actually _supposed_ to sound this flat - which I don't believe). I've yet to hear the Polyansky version of this program, but it's next on my list.
Unfortunately, these performances do not adequately communicate Taneyev's virtues. These works require more vigour, stronger expressive gestures, and much more attention to dynamic contrast (unless the music is actually _supposed_ to sound this flat - which I don't believe). I've yet to hear the Polyansky version of this program, but it's next on my list.
11 of 14 people found the following review helpful
Easy to Admire But ...
21 Mar 2008
Format:Audio CD
I must confess at the outset that most of my exposure to music by Sergey Taneyev (1856-1915) has led to admiration but not love. I really do like the chamber music I've heard but none of it rises to the highest level, in my opinion. And, sadly, I must say the same about these two symphonies. It is one of those so-common coincidences that these two symphonies, never recorded before, have now been recorded twice in the past year or so. The other CD, on Chandos, is with Polyansky and the Russian Philharmonic Taneyev: Symphonies Nos. 1 & 3. I have not heard that issue.
In fairness, Taneyev, always highly critical of his own work, never published either of these works. Indeed, his Fourth Symphony (in order of composition) was published as 'Symphony No. 1' and he never finished the Second Symphony. The present First Symphony was actually Taneyev's graduation piece from the conservatory, written when he was but seventeen. It is in the usual four movements and is skillfully constructed. The shadow of Tchaikovsky, his teacher, hangs over it and there is much to admire. But it does not comprise a coherent whole. The Scherzo is probably the best of the four movements.
The Third Symphony, written ten years later, actually sounds more 'academic' and this is probably because Taneyev's style became more and more complex, even dry, as he grew older. The fourth movement, in fact, is a congeries of contrapuntal devices that sounds frankly more like an exhibition of his skills than an organic whole. Still, there are some felicities along the way. The Scherzo has brio and rhythmic ingenuity. The first movement is quite attractive and my favorite of the four.
The performance of the Novosibirsk Academic Symphony Orchestra under Thomas Sanderling is a cut or two above serviceable but by no stretch of the imagination is this a major orchestra and there is occasinal dodgy ensemble and intonation. There is some boxiness to the recorded sound.
A mild recommendation, then, for those who are really curious about Taneyev as symphonist, but I'd suggest that consideration be given to the Chandos issue for those who are interested.
Scott Morrison
In fairness, Taneyev, always highly critical of his own work, never published either of these works. Indeed, his Fourth Symphony (in order of composition) was published as 'Symphony No. 1' and he never finished the Second Symphony. The present First Symphony was actually Taneyev's graduation piece from the conservatory, written when he was but seventeen. It is in the usual four movements and is skillfully constructed. The shadow of Tchaikovsky, his teacher, hangs over it and there is much to admire. But it does not comprise a coherent whole. The Scherzo is probably the best of the four movements.
The Third Symphony, written ten years later, actually sounds more 'academic' and this is probably because Taneyev's style became more and more complex, even dry, as he grew older. The fourth movement, in fact, is a congeries of contrapuntal devices that sounds frankly more like an exhibition of his skills than an organic whole. Still, there are some felicities along the way. The Scherzo has brio and rhythmic ingenuity. The first movement is quite attractive and my favorite of the four.
The performance of the Novosibirsk Academic Symphony Orchestra under Thomas Sanderling is a cut or two above serviceable but by no stretch of the imagination is this a major orchestra and there is occasinal dodgy ensemble and intonation. There is some boxiness to the recorded sound.
A mild recommendation, then, for those who are really curious about Taneyev as symphonist, but I'd suggest that consideration be given to the Chandos issue for those who are interested.
Scott Morrison
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Not Just a Tchaikovsky Epigone
2 Nov 2010
Format:Audio CD
Taneyev's name rarely gets a mention without a reference to Tchaikovsky, as though he his existence is justified only in reference to the other, older, man. This is hardly fair to Taneyev, who had a symphonic voice which is entirely his own, and if it is to reckoned as a satellite of another sphere's influence, is more honestly compared with Brahms.
Of these two works, the first on the program, number 3 in d minor (although I understand there is some confusion in the numbering), is the stronger. The first movement, in fact, is quite strong, both in terms of highly memorable thematic material, and the working-out thereof. It is fair to compare Taneyev -- favorably, in some points -- with Dvorak here. Taneyev's contrapuntal and orchestral wherewithal is on full display, and the movement's interest never flags. The interior two movements are similarly strong (particularly the march-like scherzo). The fourth movement, although billed as the "crowning glory" of the work (on the CD's case) is actually where Taneyev seems to hit the bottom of his well. There are several long, and repetitive, sequences towards the movement's end which seem as though they were in need of some editing. At times, Taneyev seems to want to show off his harmonic and linear facility just for erudition's sake. It's hard to fault him for this urge, given what must have been the prevalent anti-academic climate of Russian musical culture (then under the dominance of "The Five").
Symphony "no. 1" -- the quotes are in recognition of the problems with -- is a slightly less "masculine" work, if that makes sense. Its virtues are less evident from a surface examination, but are present nonetheless.
Although some of the other reviewers have carped at the quality of the performances on this disc, I cannot find fault with them, really. Of course, this is said without having listened to the competing Chandos editions, which, given Chandos's usual standards, may indeed be stronger.
Of these two works, the first on the program, number 3 in d minor (although I understand there is some confusion in the numbering), is the stronger. The first movement, in fact, is quite strong, both in terms of highly memorable thematic material, and the working-out thereof. It is fair to compare Taneyev -- favorably, in some points -- with Dvorak here. Taneyev's contrapuntal and orchestral wherewithal is on full display, and the movement's interest never flags. The interior two movements are similarly strong (particularly the march-like scherzo). The fourth movement, although billed as the "crowning glory" of the work (on the CD's case) is actually where Taneyev seems to hit the bottom of his well. There are several long, and repetitive, sequences towards the movement's end which seem as though they were in need of some editing. At times, Taneyev seems to want to show off his harmonic and linear facility just for erudition's sake. It's hard to fault him for this urge, given what must have been the prevalent anti-academic climate of Russian musical culture (then under the dominance of "The Five").
Symphony "no. 1" -- the quotes are in recognition of the problems with -- is a slightly less "masculine" work, if that makes sense. Its virtues are less evident from a surface examination, but are present nonetheless.
Although some of the other reviewers have carped at the quality of the performances on this disc, I cannot find fault with them, really. Of course, this is said without having listened to the competing Chandos editions, which, given Chandos's usual standards, may indeed be stronger.
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Listmania!
![NAXOS/ string Quartets [2]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51sAycZ%2BncL._AA60_.jpg)
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
