Johann Nepomuk David - a first volume from cpo / finally

[Gauk]

Obviously I did not mean that David is stylistically similar to Braunfels, Pfitzner and Hindemith, as those three are not similar themselves. But all four composers can be seen as working out the problems of late-romantic/post-romantic symphonism in a German way. I can understand it if someone finds David hard going; he is not one for big showy gestures, and I suspect when I was young I would not have warmed to him at all. But I completely reject the assertion that his music is anonymous; he has a very distinct individualism, which is one of the reasons I find his music interesting.

It has been suggested before that composers can be split along a Bach/Beethoven axis, where the Bach end stands for music that is reflective and contrapuntal, and the Beethoven end is demonstrative and dramatic. On this reading, David is definitely a Bachian. But his music is neither arid nor academic. There is passion there, but it is the passion of a Bach fugue, not a Beethoven sonata. His orchestration is solid, skillful, suited to the material, but not showy. So I stand by what I said. David is worth study and yields rewards to those prepared to engage with him.

But he is very different from someone like Hartmann.

[guest128]

Obviously I did not mean that David is stylistically similar to Braunfels, Pfitzner and Hindemith, as those three are not similar themselves. But all four composers can be seen as working out the problems of late-romantic/post-romantic symphonism in a German way. I can understand it if someone finds David hard going; he is not one for big showy gestures, and I suspect when I was young I would not have warmed to him at all. But I completely reject the assertion that his music is anonymous; he has a very distinct individualism, which is one of the reasons I find his music interesting.

It has been suggested before that composers can be split along a Bach/Beethoven axis, where the Bach end stands for music that is reflective and contrapuntal, and the Beethoven end is demonstrative and dramatic. On this reading, David is definitely a Bachian. But his music is neither arid nor academic. There is passion there, but it is the passion of a Bach fugue, not a Beethoven sonata. His orchestration is solid, skillful, suited to the material, but not showy. So I stand by what I said. David is worth study and yields rewards to those prepared to engage with him.

But he is very different from someone like Hartmann.

To me, your entire defense and advocacy of David's music reads like an academic one (valid as it might be in that regard).  It may indeed be rewarding to study for identifying David's methods of "working out the problems of late romantic/post romantic symphonism in a German way", - but for the musicologically unlearned (even if very refined) sensibility which can't immediately correlate what is being heard to the perhaps expert and "distinctly individual" technic that undergirds it, it is uninspiring and even rather dispiriting to listen to (Symphony No.2 excepted).

Let me put it this way.  Encompassing (or underlying) the expressive "problems" of "late romantic/post romantic symphonism" (or any other cultural "language" or manisfestation) was a very more perennially HUMAN problem (I'll leave it undefined for now) which the great creators of the time (certain composers in our case) were able to use their chosen means to imaginatively "make audible", - confront, struggle with, and seek to resolve in a particularly lucid, transparent, and compelling way for those open to the communication. 


Though David may have mastered the technical apparatus of his craft, and even hit on a discernibly individual response to the "problems" you refer to, I would suggest (based only on the quality of my listening and historical understanding, - which can be questioned) David lacked the vision, daimon, synthesizing power, - whatever, - to truly produce a body of work that can speak convincingly to a larger audience (even if still small) than just the specialist "nuts and bolts" tribe.  If Hindemith can be considered a close relation on the horizontal level, there is the difference.  He did and could.

[Gauk]

When I said "working out the problems of late romantic/post romantic symphonism in a German way", I was just trying to express, perhaps poorly, what I saw as a common theme between various non-serialist composers writing in Germany in the early to middle 20th C. I was not intending this to be a reason for advocacy of David's music, and I'm no academic. When I listen to something like the 4th symphony I am enjoying the music for what it is; and I find it expressive and communicative.

[Dundonnell]

Having received earlier today my copy of the new cd release of the David Symphonies Nos. 1 and 6 I wrote a lengthy review......only for the telephone to ring and my post to disappear whilst I was engaged in the telephone conversation ::)

I really cannot bring myself to rewrite everything I wrote in that lost post. I am obviously delighted to finally have the opportunity to hear in cd quality sound the music of a composer about whom I have been "harping on about" for so long ;D I have also enjoyed the music itself. Whether it will appeal to others is-of course-a matter of personal taste. It is clearly heavily influenced by J.S. Bach, less so by Bruckner. Some will, no doubt, characterise the composer as an exponent of a certain kind of somewhat dry, German academicism. I hold it in higher esteem than that. David is not a second Hindemith or Hartmann but he is an eminently worthy and enjoyable composer whose work, at the very least, deserves the exposure it will now at least receive in order that people can make up their own minds. At the end of the day all I ever ask of the sort of composers whose music appeals to me but which has had a lengthy period of neglect is the opportunity for others to decide for themselves whether the music has merit.

It has taken cpo some time to get the first volume of the cycle on issue(this disc was recorded in 2011 but the first, so far unissued, recording was made in 2008). The reason given to me was that there was a delay caused by the need to receive appropriate cd booklet notes. I have to say that the booklet notes are both scholarly and extremely informative.

My grateful thanks therefore to that wonderfully enterprising company, CPO. I look forward to further issues of Johann Nepomuk David's music in the future.

[giwro]

Ah, I look forward to getting a copy of this first volume...

As an organist, I have some exposure to JND, some of his organ works are quite gorgeous - some of the harmonies very surprising.
The organ works have been largely neglected by most performers, but I have seen that tendency for many of the German composers who were alive and active during WWII.  There seems (at least in my circle) to have been an unspoken prejudice against the composers and music due to the associations people have with the Nazi regime.  This is especially true for any composer who continued to work and managed to somehow coexist with the politics of the day.  On the other hand, composers like Hugo Distler who stood against and actively opposed the Nazis have had a lot more exposure.

I'm not making a judgement call here, simply an observation - at any rate I'm glad to see some of those neglected folks finally getting some recognition.  I'd post some private recordings of the organ stuff, but it appears most folks here aren't interested in that too much.

BR,

- Jonathan

[Dundonnell]

Thanks, Jonathan, for your comments :)

As a matter of fact, although I would almost invariably characterise myself as primarily interested in orchestral and choral music, rather than chamber or instrumental(as must be pretty self-evident to others too ;D) the one instrument which does individually appeal to me is actually the organ. My grandfather was a church organist. I deeply admire Messiaen's organ music, for example.

Returning to David's music....I have just re-read the posts made earlier this year on this thread. I do find myself very much in agreement with Gauk's comments.
There are a lot of German and Austrian composers who I would rate both more highly or at least on a par with David.......but I am not sure that I am particularly interested in that sort of comparative exercise. Nor am I sure that I am terribly interested in dissecting and criticising the music which does not overly appeal to me. That is definitely not an attack on or even criticism of those whose do ;D Their comments are frequently both insightful and perfectly valid comment.

I happen to think that, at a time when we seem to be being "force-fed" Mahler, with new cd versions of his symphonies pouring forth every month, there is still room to explore the music of those Austrian and German composers who continued to work within the symphonic tradition throughout the 20th century. Some will be more interesting, or "better" than others. Some will appeal to a larger body of music listeners than others. That is the nature of taste. Of course there is every justification for musical criticism and analysis. Others are actually better placed than I to offer such comment.

I "enjoy" what I have heard of David. I make no huge or special claims for it. I do think that it deserves what will-in all reality-be limited exposure through the CPO recordings. And I am content to leave it at that :)

[Jolly Roger]

OK, - my apologies for violating the protocols, if that's what I (unintentionally) did, - (though I was being
serious and not humorous, Kyjo, - but in a playful and theatrical way; emoticons always seem kind of goofy to me when I use them).

It's only that the question arises in my mind from time to time (about myself as much as anyone) as to what lies behind the wish to accumulate and engage with thousands upon thousands of music recordings, - and can one avoid the eventual despair such unbridled aestheticism typically results in (or at least in my and some others' experience).

It seems a valid question, and one I've discussed with more than a few acquaintances away from the forum.

Colin's such a colorful and eloquent character here, and such a voracious and enthusiastic collector and commentator (Kyjo too), I thought I might engage them on a topic with quite alot of curious and interesting facets to it.  But apparently I only succeeded in provoking defensiveness and ill-will (again, unintentionally).  Sorry. 

Greg,
I hope humor does violate not the protocols,humor is the best healer but it may be skating on thin ice when discussing personalities. especially if is the "kidding kind". It was obvious that your comments were "tongue in cheek" and not malicious, perhaps the wording was too clever. Please don't be disuaded from making them it, it is breath of fresh air we all need.

[Jolly Roger]

Yes, may I just remind honourable members that making observations about other members' personal characteristics is not really the done thing on this forum. Anyway the current thread is all about David (whose music I regret to say I have not yet got to know). Which symphony is the most profound, complex and exciting?

Sydney, I hope that you have heard same of David's music by now...depending on what you hear first, you may find his music
quite angular, sometimes dense and a difficult nut to crack...but stay with it..I think it is ingenious and highly original music that merits repeated listening..
There are few things I know that are as gripping and powerful as the opening movement of the 4th symphony..that's what got me hooked.
I can't wait to hear CPO do this one with decent audio..and the second movement is a nightmarish dance with the ghost of Mahler (at least that's how I see it)..I think Mahler and Bach are present, but almost unrecognizable.
BTW: I wounder if someone could post the movement for the symphonies we have here at A&M, not sure if his 4th has 2 or 3.