Franz Schmidt(1874-1939)

[Dundonnell]

Of course the Staatsoper was the Hofoper (Court Opera) back then! 

Can you clear up for me my confusion regarding the exact set-up in Vienna in Mahler and Schmidt's time?

My understanding was that the members of the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra are selected from the membership of the Vienna State Opera orchestra. This would suggest, logically, that the opera orchestra is larger than the VPO?

Mahler was the Director of the State(or, as you say, more correctly Court) Opera from 1897 until 1907 and doubled from 1898 until 1901 as Principal Conductor of the VPO.

Is that correct, as far as you know?

[M forever]

The Wiener Philarmoniker are a private organization founded in 1842 which is run and administrated by its members. You have to have a position in the Staatsoper orchestra for at least 3 years before you can apply for membership, although they do invite new members of the opera orchestra and outside players to help out in their concerts when needed. But you can't become a full member before you have a permanent position in the opera (the trial position in the opera is 2 years before you get a permanent contract) and another year of experience. Typically, applying for membership is just filling out a form as they obviously already know the players from everyday services at the opera, so almost all the opera orchestra players are also members of the WP. They play a limited series of subsciption concerts in Vienna every year, as well as additional subscription-free concerts and festival appearances, tours and recordings, so they are really busy, but he WP are not a full-time concert orchestra. They never had an artistic director or principal conductor, but until the 1930s, most or all of the WP subscription concerts were typically led by one conductor elected by the members every year. Often, that was the same conductor who was also principal conductor at the opera but since there is no direct technical connection between the two organizations, there is no rule which says that. Since the 1930s, they have usually invited a number of different conductors to lead the subscription series and other concerts.

[Dundonnell]

Thank you for that information! That is very helpful.

[M forever]

There is also a lot of information about this and the WP's specific instruments and playing style on their website (in English, too!).

[Moldyoldie]

(Pasted from "What Are You Listening To?" thread)

Schmidt: Symphony No. 2
Chicago Symphony Orchestra
Neeme Järvi, cond.
CHANDOS
I'm on a second go-round with this work, following close on the heels of a virgin voyage late last night.  Having become refamiliarized with early 20th century Austrian composer Franz Schmidt's symphonic masterpiece, the Symphony No. 4 (Mehta/WP recording), a sidle backwards seemed in order.  My word! If one likes to luxuriate non-stop in a certain manner of Late Romantic expression that flows from a seemingly limitless font of symphonic invention, this is for you!  I'm not sure what else I can add other than Järvi and the Chicagoans manage to hold it all together in a most satisfying manner.   I'd also guess, however, that this may be "too much" of a good thing for many listeners; it was somewhat the case for me last night.  Perhaps experienced Brucknerians might adjust to the length and architecture more readily, though this is very much of its own expressive style, dating from 1913.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

(Pasted from "What Are You Listening To?" thread)

Schmidt: Symphony No. 2
Chicago Symphony Orchestra
Neeme Järvi, cond.
CHANDOS
I'm on a second go-round with this work, following close on the heels of a virgin voyage late last night.  Having become refamiliarized with early 20th century Austrian composer Franz Schmidt's symphonic masterpiece, the Symphony No. 4 (Mehta/WP recording), a sidle backwards seemed in order.  My word! If one likes to luxuriate non-stop in a certain manner of Late Romantic expression that flows from a seemingly limitless font of symphonic invention, this is for you!  I'm not sure what else I can add other than Järvi and the Chicagoans manage to hold it all together in a most satisfying manner.   I'd also guess, however, that this may be "too much" of a good thing for many listeners; it was somewhat the case for me last night.  Perhaps experienced Brucknerians might adjust to the length and architecture more readily, though this is very much of its own expressive style, dating from 1913.

I am a Brucknerian, but even if I weren't, I would like this piece, I think. And as you say - Järvi and the Chicagoans are excellent.

[Dundonnell]

Three cheers for Neeme Jarvi

A number of members here don't rate him highly as a conductor but few of his fellows have such an extensive repertoire or have been prepared to commit so much to disc.

His work in the recording studio with the Royal Scottish National Orchestra was quite remarkable. His pioneering set of the Tubin symphonies for BIS put that composer on the musical map. I have a lot of admiration for Jarvi

[Keemun]

Three cheers for Neeme Jarvi

I have this set of Schmidt's symphonies conducted by Jarvi with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra and the Detroit Symphony Orchestra. 



Symphonies Nos. 1-3 are excellent.  Symphony No. 4 is good, but it doesn't compare to Mehta's excellent recording with the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra (graciously provided HERE by Jezetha). 

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Symphonies Nos. 1-3 are excellent.

May I conclude you finally have come to like No. 2?

[Keemun]

May I conclude you finally have come to like No. 2?

Well, yes, but my favorites are still 1 and 4.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Well, yes, but my favorites are still 1 and 4.

Admirable consistency! 

[Dundonnell]

I have this set of Schmidt's symphonies conducted by Jarvi with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra and the Detroit Symphony Orchestra. 



Symphonies Nos. 1-3 are excellent.  Symphony No. 4 is good, but it doesn't compare to Mehta's excellent recording with the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra (graciously provided HERE by Jezetha). 

Must be one of the few good recordings Mehta has ever made then

[not edward]

Must be one of the few good recordings Mehta has ever made then

At that time, I think Mehta was making good recordings: for me the slightly earlier Bruckner 9th with the WP and Schoenberg Variations for Orchestra with the LAPO are quite possibly my favourite recordings of those pieces; his 1975 Mahler 2 with the WP I also find very fine.

I do wish he'd recorded more Schmidt: that recording of the 4th I find absolutely devastating.

[Dundonnell]

At that time, I think Mehta was making good recordings: for me the slightly earlier Bruckner 9th with the WP and Schoenberg Variations for Orchestra with the LAPO are quite possibly my favourite recordings of those pieces; his 1975 Mahler 2 with the WP I also find very fine.

I do wish he'd recorded more Schmidt: that recording of the 4th I find absolutely devastating.

I accept your assessment, of course.

What went wrong then?

[Keemun]

At that time, I think Mehta was making good recordings: for me the slightly earlier Bruckner 9th with the WP and Schoenberg Variations for Orchestra with the LAPO are quite possibly my favourite recordings of those pieces; his 1975 Mahler 2 with the WP I also find very fine.

I do wish he'd recorded more Schmidt: that recording of the 4th I find absolutely devastating.

I've not heard the others you mentioned, but his Mahler 2 is excellent.  It ranks near the top of my list. 

[Moldyoldie]

I have to concur with the praise conveyed here on Zubin Mehta's Vienna recording of Schmidt's Symphony No. 4.  Here's a brief review pasted from "What Are You Listening To?".  I'd be most interested in any brief comparisons you can make or experiences you've had with those of Welser-Möst, Järvi, or Luisi; whether musically or technically.


Schmidt: Symphony No. 4
Vienna Philharmonic
Schoenberg: Chamber Symphony No. 1
Members of the Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra
Zubin Mehta, cond.
DECCA
Franz Schmidt's Symphony No. 4 of 1933, written in the wake of the death of the composer's daughter, is undoubtedly his masterpiece -- an incredibly inspired extrapolation of this composer's symphonic style which I like to describe as being sort of ultra-legato Bruckner; i.e., many lines of melody and harmony undulating and intersecting unbroken in a most unique, constantly flowing Late Romantic expression. To appreciate this composer and the special beauties of this symphony in particular, the listener must allow its unbroken lines to wash over them and its ultimate logic to culminate in its own time -- patience is rewarded. I've yet to hear another recording of this work -- more recent ones I know of are from Franz Welser-Möst, Neeme Järvi, and Fabio Luisi -- but the presumptuous feeling here is it really isn't necessary as conductor Zubin Mehta and the Vienna Philharmonic seemingly convey the work's full measure and the warm, early '70s analog recording is exemplary.

On another musical plateau altogether is the appended Chamber Symphony No. 1 of Arnold Schoenberg, composed in 1906. It often hints of unabashed atonality, and at least to these ears, is not as immediately appealing. However, it can reward committed listening when heard in isolation and with an intellectual bent toward its purposely revolutionary means of musical expression. The players here are members of the Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra, again under Zubin Mehta, who make a dedicated and modestly convincing case for the work.

[Dundonnell]

The Zubin Mehta performance of Schmidt's 4th has been praised by a number of members here. I don't doubt for one second that it is an exceptionally fine account. I have a great deal of respect for the opinions of the members who have heard the Mehta. I suspect that it was one of Mehta's finest recordings. I have not heard it.

I do have the Welser-Most EMI recording and I-just as fervently-believe that this is one of the best interpretations of any piece that this conductor has committed to disc. Welser-Most had a torrid time as Principal Conductor of the London Philharmonic Orchestra-"Frankly Worse Than Most" he was nicknamed but he has survived and prospered. Though I don't often agree with Norman Lebrecht his article on Welser-Most is fair-

http://www.scena.org/columns/lebrecht/040212-NL-welsermost.html

Welser-Most will take over in 2010 as General Music Director of the Vienna State Opera.

The recording of Schmidt's 4th won the Gramophone Magazine Award for 1996 for Best Orchestral Conducting.

I cannot say that it is a superior reading to Mehta's; I don't know. It is however worth hearing!

[Moldyoldie]

Thank you, Dundonnell, for the response.  I've read about the early Welser-Möst saga in London -- brutal.  If there's credence to Lebrecht's article, it sounds as if it was a two-way street -- with both sides traveling the wrong way!

I've recently ordered W-M's recording of Bruckner's Fifth to which I'm greatly looking forward to hearing.  Perhaps I'll put his Schmidt No. 4 on the shopping list; comparing performances is often instructive to this listener.

[Dundonnell]

Thank you, Dundonnell, for the response.  I've read about the early Welser-Möst saga in London -- brutal.  If there's credence to Lebrecht's article, it sounds as if it was a two-way street -- with both sides traveling the wrong way!

I've recently ordered W-M's recording of Bruckner's Fifth to which I'm greatly looking forward to hearing.  Perhaps I'll put his Schmidt No. 4 on the shopping list; comparing performances is often instructive to this listener.

You can't say fairer than that

[Sergeant Rock]

I own the Mehta and W-M Fourths and ordered Luisi's a few days ago (I hope to have it in my hands early next week). I plan to compare the three recordings. I'll post my thoughts here.

Sarge