Malipiero and Braga Santos

[Jolly Roger]

In a discussion of Malipeiro, it was noted that his music made a change from a lyrical melodious style to a bitter acidic neo-classical style.
Contrast Sinfonia 1 and 2 with 9 and 10 for example.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=malipiero+sinfonia

Joly Braga Santos made a similar change in style which was quite marked between his 4th and 5th symphonies of 6.
In both cases it was said that the composers felt that there was no longer a demand for tonal, melodic music and their music was out of style.
In Santos case, this was a real tragedy because his lyrical works are quite moving.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLf0kKUKLf9vi79lMLbTiL6EX7PRHNTvA_

Did other composers composers of note go thru a similar extreme devolution?

[relm1]

Hopefully this will be relevant - my list of symphonic composers who shifted from tonal to atonal (or otherwise). Not all could be painted with the same brush.

composer (years composing tonal symphonies vs. atonal/nontonal symphonies)

Absil 1 tonal vs. 4 nontonal
Atterberg 1911-1944 vs. 1953-1956
Branco 1924 vs 1926-1952
Casella 1905-1909 vs. 1940
Eshpai 2 tonal vs 7 atonal
Flem 1908 vs. 1958-1974
Flury 1923-1946 vs. 1946-1951
Holler 1946 vs 1973
Johann Nepomuk David 1937 vs 1938-1965
Kabelac 1942-1960 vs. 1962-1970
Kallstenius 4 tonal vs. 1 12-tone
Klenau 1908-1913 vs. 1935-1946
Langgaard 1911 vs 1914-1951
Lloyd 1932-1948 vs 1956-1989
Melartin 1902-1915 vs. 1924
Merikanto 1916-1918 vs 1952
Meulemans 1931-1933 vs. 1933-1960
Moyzes 1929-1951 vs. 1955-1983
Nowowiejski 1904 vs. 1907-1941
Peiko 1946-1985 vs 1990-1993
Rakov 1940-1962 vs 1973
Revol Bunin 1943 vs 1945-1975
Ridky 1924-1931 vs 1938-1956
Rivier 1932-1961 vs 1978
Schreker 1899 vs. 1916
Scott 1899-1903 vs. 1939-1952
Scriabin 1900-1904 vs. 1908-1910
Simonsen 1920-1921 vs 1923-1925
Skulte 1954-1965 vs 1974-1987
Szymanowski 1907-1910 vs. 1916-1932
Tubin 1934-1946 vs 1954-1982
Wellesz 1945-1948 vs. 1951-1971
Wordsworth 1944-1960 vs 1977-1986
Yamada 1912 vs. 1916-1934
Zolotarev 1902-1942 vs. 1944-1962

Hmm,  how exactly are you defining tonal versus atonal because your list above seems questionable in some cases and not exactly following the definition but maybe more personal style shifts in some cases.  
Tonal means there is a tonal or harmonic center (or tonic) and atonal would mean it is without a tonal center.  I doubt Wordsworth, atterberg, tubin and some others technically qualify from your list.  I don't think Lloyd qualifies as ever having been atonal let alone for the last three decades of his output.

[Dundonnell]

Hmmm....... ???

Much as I dislike in any way disagreeing with a fellow cataloguer ;D I do agree that the list requires considerable scrutiny and modification. There are undoubtedly composers on the list whose musical style changed considerably (or even very considerably) and who did make a significant shift from "tonal" to "atonal" music. However, in many cases, this shift is not dramatic but an evolution. Nor, necessarily, is it clear-cut. British composers like Benjamin Frankel or Humphrey Searle used serial methods but their symphonies equally use tonal centres.

And...if we are talking about an evolution of style which remains within the tonal tradition then it could be argued that most composers do exhibit some development and that it would be possible to divide their output, even if only chronologically. But how helpful is it to include them with others whose development is more stark ???

Early Bruckner develops into later Bruckner. Mahler's later symphonies are significantly more "developed" than the First.

On the other hand:  Is later Atterberg significantly "different" from early Atterberg ??? Can one really argue the same point about the music of George Lloyd ???

[Gauk]

The fact that a work is listed without a key is not really a reliable guide. I'm sure there are many examples of quite conventional works that don't have a key signature in the title.

An example of a symphonist who went tonal-atonal-tonal would be Rautavaara.

[Dundonnell]

There are a number of composers-actually...quite a large number ;D-who reverted to tonality or at least to what is sometimes called "neo-romanticism" in later life.
One example in Britain might be Iain Hamilton, who did so in an attempt to make his music more accessible.

Two further and noteworthy examples would obviously be Penderecki in Poland and George Rochberg in the USA. Both incurred and still incur the ire of certain music critics for changing their idiom. The anger of these critics seem to result from their perception that the composers in question were somehow "betraying" the cause of modern music.
Penderecki is a big enough name to have not only survived the criticism but to have had virtually all the music he has composed since the mid-1970s recorded. Each new recording has been greeted however with scorn by at least one distinguished British writer. Rochberg had to try to defend or at least explain his stylistic evolution.

[relm1]

One could argue John Adams had a style evolution.  He used to be straight up minimalist but now is more neo-romantic.  Basically it's probably easier to find a list of composers who have NOT evolved their style because as Shostakovitch put it, "A creative artist works on his next composition because he was not satisfied with his previous one." which in itself implies an evolution otherwise you are repeating what you said musically. 

[Christo]

There are a number of composers-actually...quite a large number ;D-who reverted to tonality or at least to what is sometimes called "neo-romanticism" in later life.
One example in Britain might be Iain Hamilton, who did so in an attempt to make his music more accessible.

Two further and noteworthy examples would obviously be Penderecki in Poland and George Rochberg in the USA. Both incurred and still incur the ire of certain music critics for changing their idiom. The anger of these critics seem to result from their perception that the composers in question were somehow "betraying" the cause of modern music.
Penderecki is a big enough name to have not only survived the criticism but to have had virtually all the music he has composed since the mid-1970s recorded. Each new recording has been greeted however with scorn by at least one distinguished British writer. Rochberg had to try to defend or at least explain his stylistic evolution.

In recent decades, the main shift has been one from atonal to tonal, one might say. Other examples are John Kinsella (atonal till 1980 but producing a series of ten tonal symphonies from 1984 on), Alvaro Cassuto (also well-known as the conductor that brought us Braga Santos, who basically went from tonal to atonal and back again to tonal at hist early demise in 1988), perhaps Hendrik Andriessen (but his 'atonality' was always a moderate one), certainly Arvo Pärt and perhaps even Alfred Schnittke.

[Gauk]

Two further and noteworthy examples would obviously be Penderecki in Poland ...

I have never heard any pre-atonal Penderecki, in contrast to Lutoslawski.

[Jolly Roger]

Hopefully this will be relevant - my list of symphonic composers who shifted from tonal to atonal (or otherwise). Not all could be painted with the same brush.

composer (years composing tonal symphonies vs. atonal/nontonal symphonies)

Absil 1 tonal vs. 4 nontonal
Atterberg 1911-1944 vs. 1953-1956
Branco 1924 vs 1926-1952
Casella 1905-1909 vs. 1940
Eshpai 2 tonal vs 7 atonal
Flem 1908 vs. 1958-1974
Flury 1923-1946 vs. 1946-1951
Holler 1946 vs 1973
Johann Nepomuk David 1937 vs 1938-1965
Kabelac 1942-1960 vs. 1962-1970
Kallstenius 4 tonal vs. 1 12-tone
Klenau 1908-1913 vs. 1935-1946
Langgaard 1911 vs 1914-1951
Lloyd 1932-1948 vs 1956-1989
Melartin 1902-1915 vs. 1924
Merikanto 1916-1918 vs 1952
Meulemans 1931-1933 vs. 1933-1960
Moyzes 1929-1951 vs. 1955-1983
Nowowiejski 1904 vs. 1907-1941
Peiko 1946-1985 vs 1990-1993
Rakov 1940-1962 vs 1973
Revol Bunin 1943 vs 1945-1975
Ridky 1924-1931 vs 1938-1956
Rivier 1932-1961 vs 1978
Schreker 1899 vs. 1916
Scott 1899-1903 vs. 1939-1952
Scriabin 1900-1904 vs. 1908-1910
Simonsen 1920-1921 vs 1923-1925
Skulte 1954-1965 vs 1974-1987
Szymanowski 1907-1910 vs. 1916-1932
Tubin 1934-1946 vs 1954-1982
Wellesz 1945-1948 vs. 1951-1971
Wordsworth 1944-1960 vs 1977-1986
Yamada 1912 vs. 1916-1934
Zolotarev 1902-1942 vs. 1944-1962

Hmm,  how exactly are you defining tonal versus atonal because your list above seems questionable in some cases and not exactly following the definition but maybe more personal style shifts in some cases.  
Tonal means there is a tonal or harmonic center (or tonic) and atonal would mean it is without a tonal center.  I doubt Wordsworth, atterberg, tubin and some others technically qualify from your list.  I don't think Lloyd qualifies as ever having been atonal let alone for the last three decades of his output.

Thanks for this list, It really made me think..I'll avoid the debilitating  effect of nit-picking wordsmithing which stifle a simple discussion
and throw everone off track..
Each of these composers requires a seperate discussion. For example, I was surprised to see Atterberg on the list,but now remember his 9th(last) symphony was not melodious as the previous ones were.
It was interesting to see Melartin on the list, I have yet to hear anything not melodic from him..

[Jolly Roger]

Perhaps the discussion would make more sense if we focused on the mood (Uplifting and opposed to dour) of the music rather than the mechanics(tonal or atonal) , which can lead us into whirlpools of semantics.

[Balapoel]

I'm glad you appreciated my list. I was hoping it would provoke discussion and more listening.

Perhaps the discussion would make more sense if we focused on the mood (Uplifting and opposed to dour) of the music rather than the mechanics(tonal or atonal) , which can lead us into whirlpools of semantics.

I'm listening to Merikanto's 3rd now - tuneful, but certainly not late-romantic like his first 2, particularly his first written 36 years earlier. I would consider it on the more harmonically conservative side of symphonies written at that time; however, it suffers from some of the neo-classicism of the time - overuse of ostinato, quick and unstable harmonic changes, episodic rather than progressive, etc. But others are free to disagree -but for my mind, the 1st and 3rd of Merikanto operate in different sound worlds.

[Vandermolen]

In a discussion of Malipeiro, it was noted that his music made a change from a lyrical melodious style to a bitter acidic neo-classical style.
Contrast Sinfonia 1 and 2 with 9 and 10 for example.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=malipiero+sinfonia

Joly Braga Santos made a similar change in style which was quite marked between his 4th and 5th symphonies of 6.
In both cases it was said that the composers felt that there was no longer a demand for tonal, melodic music and their music was out of style.
In Santos case, this was a real tragedy because his lyrical works are quite moving.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLf0kKUKLf9vi79lMLbTiL6EX7PRHNTvA_

Did other composers composers of note go thru a similar extreme devolution?

Yes, I agree with you about Braga Santos. I rarely play nos.5 and 6.

[chill319]

It was interesting to see Melartin on the list, I have yet to hear anything not melodic from him.

Melartin sensibly addressed his more astringent scores to solo and chamber performers. Try the wonderful string Trio, op. 133, or the Piano Sonata, op. 111. These are by no means rigorously atonal works, but they come closer to atonality than, say, The Rite of Spring or Prokofiev's Symphony 2, movement 1. Not to mention Sibelius's contemporaneous Symphony 7.

[Jolly Roger]

It was interesting to see Melartin on the list, I have yet to hear anything not melodic from him.

Melartin sensibly addressed his more astringent scores to solo and chamber performers. Try the wonderful string Trio, op. 133, or the Piano Sonata, op. 111. These are by no means rigorously atonal works, but they come closer to atonality than, say, The Rite of Spring or Prokofiev's Symphony 2, movement 1. Not to mention Sibelius's contemporaneous Symphony 7.

I do not hear much astringency with his symphonies, with which I am very familar and fond of. I think the Ondine cycle is screaming for a complete redo with better audio. Unless someone has already done that..

[chill319]

the Ondine cycle is screaming for a complete redo with better audio

We are of like minds. A couple of years back I suggested the cycle to Chandos. Forgetting particular labels, and assuming state of the art engineering, who would you like to lead it? My own first choice would be Segerstam; I think he's good at finding an effective and affecting balance between the narrative (Mahlerian, if you will) and the structural aspects of scores where most conductors tend to favour the one or the other. (Were Stig Westerberg available he would become my first choice.)

That said, perhaps the time for a total Melartin redo is not quite here. The restored score for Melartin's Symphony 3 is so much richer than the truncated version led by Grim that I have little confidence in the cycle's other musical choices. Only Symphony 6 was published. If scholars drawing on materials in the Sibelius Library can do for the other unpublished symphonies what has been done for the third, it will be worth releasing Melartin symphonies singly, as definitive scores come out. That, in my estimation, could include the sizable chunk of symphony 7 that exists -- 150 bars or so, far more than Stenhammar's symphony 3 sketches, which Rozhdestvensky recorded.