 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: stevensfo
Date: 2007-08-29 09:25
Apologies - not really about clarinets.
I just received an email from eclassical.com advertising some new recordings.
Among the descriptions I noticed:
-- "Symphony No. 3 (Sinfonia concertante) for Violin and Orchestra. Aho started writing a violin concerto, but the work took him in a slightly different direction. " --
Can some kind soul explain what the difference is between a 'Violin Concerto' and 'Symphony for Violin and Orchestra'?
Is it that the concerto must be in Sonata form and the symphony can be more flexible, or some more obscure reason?
Steve
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2007-08-29 10:18
Possibly rooted in the fact that a Concerto is originally designed to pit the orchestra's large forces against the soloist's small force, a constant juxtaposition.
A Sinfonia might be thought to be more accompanimental or complimentary (not meaning to mitigate or diminute the orchestra's role).
Just a guess! I'm looking forward to hearing the answer!
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: skygardener
Date: 2007-08-29 10:19
On the same subject I have seen the title 'Tone Poem for Violin and Orchestra'.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bahamutofskycon
Date: 2007-08-29 14:44
Tobin's reply is great in my opinion.
I might also add that traditionally a concerto is often of a "show-off" piece for a virtuoso. Concertos aren't always full of musical integrity - oftentimes they can degenerate into virtuosic showy passages. (There are of course many wonderful concertos and composers who refute and transcend this - this is by no means a blanket statement).
A "Symphony for Violin and Orchestra" would leave me to believe that it is a symphony with a very prominent solo violin part. I would expect the violin soloist and the orchestra to be of equal and complimentary importance.
This sounds like Berlioz' second symphony; "Harold in Italy" is a "Symphony with Viola obbligato" and is almost a viola concerto. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_In_Italy
Steve Ballas
Post Edited (2007-08-29 14:49)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Firebird
Date: 2007-08-30 00:00
I would like to think that a Concerto is something to prominently feature a soloist like say Sibelius Violin Concerto or Rachmaninov Piano Concertos.
On the other hand, a Symphony will give the soloist less prominence and more equal footing with the orchestra, like say Lalo Symphonie Espagnole or like as mentioned earlier, Berlioz's Harold in Italy.
Perhaps we should let a real expert elaborate on this.
Chan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: elmo lewis
Date: 2007-08-30 23:23
In addition to the above comments, most concertos have 3 movements, the symphony probably has 4.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2007-08-31 00:30
Coming back around to this one...
Sinfonia: is a term that has multiple definitions based on the contextual period of time. I don't know Aho's music enough to say with any confidence that he is hearkening back to any of the baroque or classical definitions.
This term generically is used to mean an overture to a larger work. When you add the term "concertante" you can presume that there is no larger work to follow organically. A Concert Overture for Violin and orchestra.
So I'm going to guess that this is a one movement work less than twenty minutes in length?
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2007-08-31 00:34
After googling my guess is completely wrong!
Four movements (good job Elmo!) and around forty minutes.
I was right (damn wikipedia) in the fact the modern Sinfonia Concertante is more of a symphonic work featuring a single instrument(s). But this also supports the idea that it contrasts against a concerto which is more concerned with opposition of forces.
James
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
