That other Tchaikovsky symphony ...

[Contratrombone64]

I attended a wonderful Sydney Symphony concert last Saturday evening. Two works: Schubert's youthful and delicious 3rd symphony AND Tchaikovsky's fantastic and seldom performed "Manfred Symphony". The program notes state that the Sydney Symphony' only played it three times in its life ... extraordinary. A work I know quite well, and one I also own a full score of. Anyone have any ideas why it's not listed as Number 7, or something?

 

[Fretless]

Good question. Tchaikovsky was one of my favorites as a kid--his 4th in particular. In my University studies Tchaikovsky was completely left out of our music history classes supposedly for the reason that his music did nothing to advance music historically, so I didn't get to study much of him.

My local symphony played the Manfred about 11 years ago, and I remember being surprised that I didn't know about it at all. It left nearly no impression on me, though, aside from some interesting rhythmic games that Tchaikovsky played on the audience. I recall it being a chore to play--but that is almost entirely the fault of the conductor we had, who really gave it no life.

 

[some guy]

It's not listed as number seven because it came between 4 and 5 (or 5 and 6). I suppose Tchaikovsky may have been ambivalent about its symphony-ness. Like Sibelius' Kullervo and other creatures like the Liszt symphonies and the long Richard Strauss things, it could be called a tone poem. A long tone poem to be sure.

Of course, it is every bit a symphony, my favorite Tchaikovsky symphony as a kid. That and the third. (Maybe the Manfred comes in between 3 and 4. Do I even HAVE Google??)

And there is a so-called number seven, too. It's mainly the third piano concerto, retro-arranged into a symphony, which is what it started out as. Or so a musicologist or two has claimed.

 

[Contratrombone64]

some guy - I've heard that "seventh" I wasn't a fan ...