The Radio 3 Boards Forum from myforum365.com
07:00:16, 02-12-2008 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Whilst we happily welcome all genuine applications to our forum, there may be times when we need to suspend registration temporarily, for example when suffering attacks of spam.
 If you want to join us but find that the temporary suspension has been activated, please try again later.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

The Radio 3 Boards > The Music Boards > Music Through The Ages > 20th Century > Robert Simpson
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
  Print  
Author Topic: Robert Simpson  (Read 531 times)
roslynmuse
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1615
« on: 00:26:14, 09-02-2007 »
I caught the end of Simpson 10 this afternoon - innocent ear and all that, I was racking my brains to place it. Interesting that both Britten and Shostakovich came to mind before the more obvious Nielsen, and that I realised who it was by its weakness rather than its strength. I was at the first performance in Liverpool and have the CD (in fact I have CDs of all the symphonies) and yet despite an admiration for his musical integrity, I just cannot warm to this music and it stays on the shelf, unlistened and unloved.

Anyone else had the same experience? Or want to give an alternative view?
Logged
barkofile
*
Posts: 20
« Reply #1 on: 02:29:37, 09-02-2007 »
I caught all of Simpson 10 this afternoon - knowing what it was, but never having heard it before.  I found it a more powerful experience than I expected (as with Simpson 9 yesterday), and was glad I'd listened.  But then again, Simpson seems to speak in a language that somehow falls between two stools (if a language is capable of such a feat) - a language that wants to shake off its romantic roots, but achieves less modernity (less bite, less impact, less individuality, whatever) than Ravel or Shosta or (of course) Strav.  I suppose I mean that he makes some good sounds and structures without really achieving a voice.  I must say that I detect no similarities to Britten whatever.  Britten was always edgier, sparer.

Simpson was CotW a few months back.  I found his music interesting put patchy (though not as patchy as John Adams currently!).  I promised myself I'd try to hear more of his work, but I failed until this week.  I've remade my promise, but I guess I'll fail again.  Simpson is a good listen if he's around, but he's not quite worth chasing.  OMG, I'm being patronising!  Sorry.
« Last Edit: 02:32:48, 09-02-2007 by barkofile » Logged
Gabrielle d’Estrées
Guest
« Reply #2 on: 17:46:48, 09-02-2007 »
I have 2,3,4,5 & 9 on CD. Haven't heard the others so will Listen Again this weekend & let you know. Whilst I enjoy and admire Simpson's music, which I find very engrossing and dramatic, there's norra lorra laffs; much dark, earthy, grinding music and a lot more shade than light. More contrast needed - perhaps it comes later.
Logged
UB
*
Posts: 12
« Reply #3 on: 13:37:53, 07-03-2007 »
I have been a Simpson fan for many years - ever since I picked up a used lp of his 3rd symphony.  My favorite symphonies are 3, 6, 7 and 9. If you find his symphonies too thick and dark - I can not imagine the 6th being found that way but everyone hears music differently - I suggest that you give his string quartets a try. They are more varied and the lighter sound world may open him up for you.

I would like to have another recorded set of his symphonies - but I am thankful for the one we do have.
Logged
Ron Dough
Admin/Moderator Group
*****
Posts: 5133



WWW
« Reply #4 on: 10:05:10, 08-03-2007 »
I'm a complete Simpson fan too; I love the way that the symphonies grab me and drag me through their architectural argument. It is something of a cold harsh world, and maybe they are too self-consciously clever to be universally loveable, but that sense of a dramatic, guided, emotional and intellectual journey seems to me to be much closer to want I want from a symphony than, say, those of the Bax cycle (on R3 next week afternoons, btw) which for all their colour and fantasy somehow seem to meander from minute with only a rare sense of planned direction; not so much symphonic as rhapsodic. 
Logged
offbeat
****
Posts: 270
« Reply #5 on: 23:12:51, 08-03-2007 »
Must admit find it hard to appreciate Simpson because each work seems more complicated or thickly scored than the last - maybe my attention span is fickle - as for Bax i agree he does tend to meander but how beautifully....maybe my fault but like music that is self indulgent as Bax most certainly is...for the same reason like Scriabin..although would agree Simpson is the better composer...
Logged
Andy D
*****
Posts: 3061
« Reply #6 on: 16:26:11, 14-03-2007 »
I've loved Robert Simpson's music ever since I first heard the 9th quartet about 12 years ago and have collected most of the Hyperion series of recordings. That quartet is still one of my favourites.

He has a very distinctive style throughout much of his output, so I wouldn't want to sit and listen to a whole concert of his music (but that applies to most composers I can think of). I'm fortunate that I've been able to programme a couple of his chamber works in the concert series that I'm involved in planning.  Cheesy
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
« previous next »
 
Jump to: