Search - S. Taneyev, Thomas Sanderling, Novosibirsk Academic Symphony Orchestra :: Taneyev: Symphonies Nos. 1 & 3

Easy to Admire But ...

J Scott Morrison | Middlebury VT, USA | 03/21/2008

(3 out of 5 stars)

"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"

A Russian Brahms?

Neil Ford | Sydney, Australia | 06/17/2008

(2 out of 5 stars)

"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."