"Symphony-prog"

Kudos to Ivan and especially Trademark on this thread.  Very interesting stuff and something most of us can digest and learn from.

Check out: "Andrew Lloyd Webber - Variations"
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.asp?cd_id=10885

Next topic: the conceptualization of pop's inherent rhythms and their relation with late-classical piano-concerto cadencies, as seen by an outsider in the music of Papa roach and Limp Biskit.

To the Bat Library Robin, This may take some actual research.
    

Edited by Trademark - November 26 2006 at 22:44

Ivan:

Thanks for the clarifications, and please understand, I was not denying nor trying to downplay Mussorgsky's later influences on composers who came after him. Shostakovich was particularly enamored and even re-orchestrated Mussorgsky's opera Boris Gudunov, although ironically, Shostakovich was also unable to truly break free of the shadow of the classical forms until his 13th symphony.

The Mighty Handful resented only one 19th century European composer that I am aware of, and that was Wagner. They went so far as to attend his music dramas with the sole purposae of making loud catcalls from the balconies. They admired Lizst, Smetana, Dvorak and other nationalists who were struggling to create new music outside the Classical structures. The European composers they had more contempt for were the old school classicists like Haydn & Mozart, not the young "rule breakers" of their own gneration. They simply had no use for them because they (the Europeans) were not Russian.

I cannot be partially right. The analysis of Sheherezade won't support any claim that it is a symphony in the classical era definition. It simply is not. The symphonic structure used in Sheherezade is Sonata Allegro form. The only thing about it that compares it to a sympnony is the fact that an orchestra played it. It is symphonic, not a symphony, don't confuse the terms. It is a single, large scale movement in S-A form. That's all. Rimsky, of course, later recanted his ideas and rigorously taught the classical forms for the last 25-30 years of his life in the conservatory.

I've read the book you cite, it's here on my shelves with hundreds of others on this ands similar subjects. The quote is actually not from the text of the book, it is from the review and is the opinion of the reviewer, not exactly that of the author. Are you aware that you are quoting a book review and not the book? JSTOR is a storage facility for journal articles and book reviews, where I've whiled away more hours of my life than I care to admit to.

The book itself places Mussorgsky's influence in perspective with his compositional achievements (which are modest, pun intended), and looks more at the social structures in modern musicc that have given him such wide influence with a particular focus on Shostakovich.

The author never mentioned ELP though, which was how I found Mussorgsky about 30 years ago. Oh well.

"the Russian Nationalist Movement who IMHO were not Modern yet but neither shared the paramethers of the rest of Europe."

I think what you mean by this is that they did not share the parameters of Germany. France, and much of Eastern Europe were doing very similar things in terms of creating nationalist music and all took a dim view of the Teutonic traditions. The Russians might well have approved of some of their contemporaries in Europe had they given them any thought at all. The basic fact is that under the leadership of Balikirev, they just didn't give a crap what the rest of Europe were doing, they were focused on Russia alone. When the circle broke up around 1880 they all changed their styles to include more western influence. Mussorgsky escaped this fate by dying.

This is also inaccurate because symphonic suites, and tone poems were all the rage in Europe at that time. They (the Russian Five) used a modern (for the time) format to create nationalist music.

As for correcting the inaccuracies, that of course is up tyo you all. I just thought you might not be aware of them. I'd want to be factually correct, and then form my opinions based on correct information so I could support it if asked, but that's just me.



    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

Edited by Trademark - November 26 2006 at 22:58

Trademark wrote: This as I understand it, is the question being asked. "The question is, has there ever been a true SYMPHONIC rock release, in the sense of "rock structured like a classical symphony"? There are a number of issues raised in the answers so far, and many create confusion rather than providing an answer to the question. First of all the "classical symphony" by definition is NOT a 19th century form and the structural forms mentioned in that context are not found in true classical era symphonies. It is an 18th century term and refers specifically to works conforming to the template set out and perfected by Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven. as aptly stated above, it consists of four discreet (separate) movements each with its own structural form. The opening movement is nearly always in Sonata Allegro form (you'll have to look it up, there isn't space here for the whole lesson). This is followed by either a slow movement in a binary or ternary song form and a Minuet, or Scherzo in a faster tempo. These inner movements can be in either order. The closing movment will be faster and will be a Rondo, Sonata Rondo or another Sonata Allegro. That, by definition in the Harvard Dictionary of Music is a classical symphony. Bringing things like Fand or Scheherezade into the picture is misleading. These are both tone poems as is Tarkus in technical terms. They are episodic in nature, and have cyclic (recurring themes) construction but are NOT symphonies. They are p[layed by "symphony orchestra" but that, also, does not make them symphonies, only symphonic. Classical symphonies rarely, if ever, (I cannot find an example) use recurring themes throughout the 4 differrent movements. This was common in renaissance (not the band) era masses, but not in classical symphonies. This change came about along with many other changes during the 19th century, when the previous generations "rules" began to be questioned by young composers such as Hector Berlioz and Franz Lizst Rimsky Korssakov's Sheherezade is also NOT a symphony, it, too is a tone poem and the Renaissance (the band) piece has no relationship to it other than that it uses the same "story line" which is hundreds of years old pre-dating either composition. R-K did not call it a symphony, he called it a tone poem. He was a classicist by nature and would have followed the form had that been his goal. He decided to writre something else; i.e. a tone poem. Yes' Close to the Edge is also NOT a symphony. It is set in a symphonic form (Sonata Allegro) so it could only be at most one movement of a symphony. Part of the problem here lies with the general lack of specific m,usical knowledge, which can be forgiven in those who truly want to learn. People tend to think of any music played by an orchestra as a symphony and this, in the classical era under discussion, was simply not the case. Composer's since the 1920's have applied the term to any piece of music they wanted to so the term symphony in the 20th & 21st century has little meaning apart from being something for a larger orchestra. But in the classical era this was not true. Progressive rock is based to some extent upon university/conservatory style musical training (to list the many early artists with music degrees is outside the scope of this post). However, the majority of that influence is NOT from the classical era. It is primarily (there are always exceptions, Gentle Giant's Renaissance leanings are one example) from the Romantic era which begins (more or less with Betthoven's death in 1827 and extends to about 1915 give or take a couple of years. The Post-Romantic era (and many musicologists and theorists disagree as to whether it even exists) covers the years from about 1890 - 1915.   This (the Romantic) era was one of innovation with respect to formal structures and was the "hey day" of the tone poem. Nearly all the prog epics we know and love fall under this heading. Anoher part of the problem may stem from the mis-information provided in PA's definition of Symphonic Prog. Most of it is pretty vague and harmless, but with respect to specific information regarding classical music there are factual errors. The following paragraph should be considered for revision: "As in any other genre, different Symphonic bands had different approaches to Classic Music, for example YES and GENESIS are mainly influenced by the Baroque and Classical periods, while EMERSON LAKE & PALMER has a predilection for post Romantic and modern authors like Mussorgsky, Rimsky Korsakov, Bartok or Ginastera, being that their sound is less melodic and more aggressive." Baroque music is based on the concept of counterpoint. Contrapuntal writing allows each individual voice within the texture to carry a distinct and separate melody which taken all together form a harmonic progression. Classical and Romantic era music simplified this complex texture and became much more homophonic (Chords accompanying a melody). Yes falls in some instances into the classical mold, more often into the romantic mold and nearly never into anything than can be called baroque (the into to Madrigal is a very brief example of an exception). Genesis are not baroque, and not classical at all in their influences. Their music is universally homophonic and the influence so clearly Romantic that the statement made me laugh out loud. The only influence Bach had on Genesis' music was the fact that he solidified the concept of chord progression by root movement, something that ALL composers since have to thank (or curse) him for. In that way Britney Spears and Nickleback are influenced by the Baroque as much as Genesis. Mussorgsky and Rimsky-Korsakov, while certainly having influeced ELP are not Post Romantic. Both fall squarely within the Romantic era, Rimsky's output having been composed almost entirely before 1890 and Mussorgsky having died in 1881. So, getting back to the original question, I would say that it is highly unlikely that the form of a truely defined classical symphony has ever been used in a piece of progressive rock. There are none I have encountered. There are thousands of examples where bits and pieces are borrowed, and re-ordered to make "classical sounding" music, just nothing Mozart would have recognized as a symphony.

This as I understand it, is the question being asked.

"The question is, has there ever been a true SYMPHONIC rock release, in the sense of "rock structured like a classical symphony"?

There are a number of issues raised in the answers so far, and many create confusion rather than providing an answer to the question.

First of all the "classical symphony" by definition is NOT a 19th century form and the structural forms mentioned in that context are not found in true classical era symphonies.

It is an 18th century term and refers specifically to works conforming to the template set out and perfected by Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven. as aptly stated above, it consists of four discreet (separate) movements each with its own structural form. The opening movement is nearly always in Sonata Allegro form (you'll have to look it up, there isn't space here for the whole lesson). This is followed by either a slow movement in a binary or ternary song form and a Minuet, or Scherzo in a faster tempo. These inner movements can be in either order. The closing movment will be faster and will be a Rondo, Sonata Rondo or another Sonata Allegro. That, by definition in the Harvard Dictionary of Music is a classical symphony.

Bringing things like Fand or Scheherezade into the picture is misleading. These are both tone poems as is Tarkus in technical terms. They are episodic in nature, and have cyclic (recurring themes) construction but are NOT symphonies. They are played by "symphony orchestra" but that, also, does not make them symphonies, only symphonic.

Classical symphonies rarely, if ever, (I cannot find an example) use recurring themes throughout the 4 differrent movements. This was common in renaissance (not the band) era masses, but not in classical symphonies. This change came about along with many other changes during the 19th century, when the previous generations "rules" began to be questioned by young composers such as Hector Berlioz and Franz Lizst

Rimsky Korssakov's Sheherezade is also NOT a symphony, it, too is a tone poem and the Renaissance (the band) piece has no relationship to it other than that it uses the same "story line" which is hundreds of years old pre-dating either composition. R-K did not call it a symphony, he called it a tone poem (or symphonic Suite and again, symphonic refers to the fact that it was played by an orchestra, it does not make it a "symphony" by strict classical era definition. The two things are very, very different). R-K was a classicist by nature, and would have followed the correct form had that been his goal. He decided to writre something else; i.e. a tone poem.

Yes' Close to the Edge is also NOT a symphony. It is set in a symphonic form (Sonata Allegro) so it could only be at most one movement of a symphony.

Part of the problem here lies with the general lack of specific musical knowledge, which can be forgiven in those who truly want to learn. People tend to think of any music played by an orchestra as a symphony and this, in the classical era under discussion, was simply not the case. Composer's since the 1920's have applied the term to any piece of music they wanted to so the term symphony in the 20th & 21st century has little meaning apart from being something for a larger orchestra. But in the classical era this was not true and the classical era (death of bach to the death of Beethoven in rough terms) is what the poster was asking aabout quite specifically.

Progressive rock is based to some extent upon university/conservatory style musical training (to list the many early artists with music degrees is outside the scope of this post). However, the majority of that influence is NOT from the classical era. It is primarily (there are always exceptions, Gentle Giant's Renaissance leanings are one example) from the Romantic era which begins (more or less with Beethoven's death in 1827 and extends to about 1915 give or take a couple of years. The Post-Romantic era (and many musicologists and theorists disagree as to whether it even exists) covers the years from about 1890 - 1915.   This (the Romantic) era was one of innovation with respect to formal structures and was the "hey day" of the tone poem. Nearly all the prog epics we know and love fall under this heading.

Anoher part of the problem may stem from the mis-information provided in PA's definition of Symphonic Prog. Most of it is pretty vague and harmless, but with respect to specific information regarding classical music there are factual errors. The following paragraph should be considered for revision:

"As in any other genre, different Symphonic bands had different approaches to Classic Music, for example YES and GENESIS are mainly influenced by the Baroque and Classical periods, while EMERSON LAKE & PALMER has a predilection for post Romantic and modern authors like Mussorgsky, Rimsky Korsakov, Bartok or Ginastera, being that their sound is less melodic and more aggressive."

Baroque music is based on the concept of counterpoint. Contrapuntal writing allows each individual voice within the texture to carry a distinct and separate melody which taken all together form a harmonic progression. Classical and Romantic era music simplified this complex texture and became much more homophonic (Chords accompanying a melody). Where the Classical era composers stuck to strict forms and neat orderly 4 measure phrases, the Romantics expanded the vocabulary, they allowed more freedom of expression and less rigidity in the structure. This is one of the many parallels to prog.

Yes falls in some instances into the classical mold, more often into the romantic mold and nearly never into anything than can be called baroque (the into to Madrigal is a very brief example of an exception).

Genesis are not remotely baroque, and not remotley classical in their musical output. Their music is universally homophonic and the influence so clearly Romantic that the statement made me laugh out loud. The only influence Bach had on Genesis' music was the fact that he codified the concept of chord progression by root movement, something that ALL composers since have to thank (or curse) him for. In that way Britney Spears and Nickleback are influenced by the Baroque as much as Genesis.

Mussorgsky and Rimsky-Korsakov, while certainly having influeced ELP are NOT Post Romantic. Both fall squarely within the Romantic era, Rimsky's output having been composed almost entirely before 1890 He taught and revised his own music in the St. Petersburg conservatory until his death in 1908) and Mussorgsky having died in 1881.

So, getting back to the original question, I would say that it is highly unlikely that the form of a truely defined classical symphony has ever been used in a piece of progressive rock. There are none I have encountered. There are thousands of examples where bits and pieces are borrowed, and re-ordered to make "classical sounding" music, just nothing Mozart would have recognized as a symphony.
    
    
    
    
    

Edited by Trademark - November 26 2006 at 21:57

That's it, I'm interpreting Shostakovich's 'Leningrad' for a synthesizer and guitar based orchestra.

Just checked again and Song of Sheherezade by Renaissance is almost a Symphony by itself, all the elements are present.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 26 2006 at 13:50

Sorry to bring up something so familiar, but 'Close to the Edge' neatly fits the symphony pattern. I believe its structure was analysed in detail in a fascinating study of prog entitled ROCKING THE CLASSICS. Of course it's got vocals, but so do Beethoven's Ninth and Mahler's Eighth. I guess you could also detect a typical symphony pattern in 'Karn Evil 9'.

If all this still doesn't convince you, there's an excellent example of a single musician trying to sound like an entire late-romantic orchestra ON HIS OWN (and almost succeeding, albeit for only three or four minutes): Patrick Moraz, on the final track of his solo-album THE STORY OF I.

The Enid's Fand is definitely the only actual symphony-prog i've ever heard, though im not especially fond of this album (aerie faerie nonsense) by them, as it seems to be a bit too classical and not enough prog rock, but it is still a very good album nonetheless.