Shostakovitch Symphony No?

As I mentioned in my first post in this thread, if you really wish to comprehend, so that you may be able to appreciate and, possibly even to like the complex Symphonic and Chamber work of Shostakovich, you have to go in chronological order and study why and how he composed each one of them.

Of course, if you have limited knowledge of his work and you jump to the 14th, you will never get it. The same applies to the 7th or the 13th String Quartet, for that matter. Imagine a novice to try to get into Wagner's Music by having as a first listening experience the first scene of Siegfried?! He might even hate Wagner for the rest of his life. Or, contemplate for a while a case of another "virgin" listener who wants to dig in Bach's music, starting with the unfinished Fugue from the Art of Fugue.

The 14th Symphony is a masterpiece of a very personal nature. You have to reach -to attain- it, not simply to jump in. It's not a cycle of Songs, but a Symphony with integrated voices. The magic of this Symphony is the innovative orchestration, which influenced later on Schrhedrin to compose his "Carmen" Ballet (on the homonym Opera by Bizet), using an almost identical orchestration.

Finally, like any other trully Great composer, even the less "important", significant, brilliant works (actually even its trash works) are good music to listen to, to explore and to learn more about him and music in general. For example, in Bach's case, there is nothing to discard. Every work counts. Mozart's output likewise. Beethoven's as well. And the list may go on...

Therefore, it's not what to avoid, but rather to what extent and how much I am able to get into the music of Shostakovich. I can assure you the journey is exciting and the final destination is absolutely worthwhile.

Parla

I really hate to come back on the same matters, but, after eyeresist's post, I find myself obliged to respond, since Shostakovich is one of my soft spots.

To start with Symphonies 13 and 14. They are not Song Cycles, as at face value they may seem. It is too superficial. Shostakovich himself called the 14th a Symphony to emphasise the unity of the work musically and philosophically, since most of the poems deal with the subject of death and mortality. Not all movements are linked; there are some breaks that effectively divide the work into a "conventional" four-movement structure. It's important to note that this Symphony is almost completely atonal! It was dedicated to Britten, by the way.

13th is a sort of Choral Symphony. The music provides a solid symphonic framework for the work : a strongly dramatic opening movement, a scherzo, two slow movements and a finale; in other words, a fully justified form of Symphony.

12th is not a failure. Not at all. It's not his strong one, but it's a truly program music, above all. It's an extremely traditional Symphony with no experimental endeavours. It has been called a "folk heroic epic", while the 11th was called a "folk music drama". 11th is a masterwork of an immediacy and simplicity, unusual even for Shostakovich. The work lends itself to a strong emphasis on tonality and a generally accessible musical idiom. The musical effect is breathtaking in the hands of a great conductor (regardless of the program it represents, if it is sometimes considered as "film music", it should be a Master one and it works perfectly fine even without any program. I have experienced an unforgettably magnificent and fully memorable live performance in US with the late Kreizberg).

7th and 8th are inaccessible masterpieces that require preparation, study and comprehension of their purpose and structure of composition. It's slippery ground for the innocent, indifferent, casual or average listener. However, for the well prepared, they constitute a very rewarding listening experience. They work normally in live performances rather than in recordings.

The 4th is also a great work of an ambiguous character, but great musical interest in a radical orchestration, development, structure and resolution. I have seen a live performance of it in Berlin with Gergiev and it was stunning and truly memorable.

So, to sum up: the Shostakovich's Symphonies are not incosistent but rather uneven. They all have something to offer, particularly if one has the time, courage and genuine interest to indulge in them from the First to the last.

As for the performances, due to their complex, thick and dense orchestration, I prefer the state of the art, demonstration quality recording of Kitayenko on Capriccio, in excellent SACD format. It's expensive, but absolutely worthwhile. There are some very good recordings, in SACD, on Pentatone, with different conductors and obviously various results (the 5th with Kreizberg and the 15th with Pletnev are strong contenders). Caetani on Arts is fine, but not even close to Kitayenko. Otherwise, you may chose whatever suits your hi-fi system (be careful, Shostakovich orchestration can easily blow your speakers away; at low listening levels, the effect is minimal. For me, his Symphonies work always better in live performances).

Parla

I, for one, think his 11th symphonies is amongst my favourite of his. I was surprised to find in this thread that it gets such a mixed response, I would've thought that it was universally praised. It's just that it had a big effect on me. And one can always look up the program online to get a better idea of what's going on, but it's not like the music doesn't hold it's own or anything like that. One musn't be discouraged by it having a program.

Atonal, I hope will try it out for yourself, especially if you're in the neighbourhood, listening to the 10th, heh. Shostakovich is one of my favourite composers and I hope you find a lot to like in his music.

Also, would like to second the Petrenko/Liverpool proposal. I think that cycle is worth keeping an eye on, it's great. I enjoyed all the releases so far. If only we could get a new one every couple of months.

Magnus, your language is anti-music and, therefore, not prone to any reply, on the substance at least.

However, the verdict for 11th, even in this tiny thread, is against you. As for the 12th, time will tell, even in these forums. Just for your information, 12th is played (and even recorded) more often than other more "trusted" works of Shostakovich or other composers of 20th century. It's not a work for everyone or for your everyday concerns and needs, but when it's the right time and the right place (live performances are much more preferable), it works and it's pure Shostakovich.

Parla

I'm interested to read everyone's opinions on this subject, no matter how controversial - as long as we don't descend to personal attack. Let's please continue to play the ball, not the man.

I would start with 5 and 10,  the best in terms of symphonic form.  I would leave 4 and the engimatic 15 until much later.  I would avoid 3 and 12.