Karajan ~ Beethoven The Symphonies 6 SACD's boxset

[Harry]

I have both sets, old style cd and sacd....and the stereo sound is barely noticeable 

Makes me wonder why I shelled out money for the sacd set 

Well maybe it really depends what sort of equipment you have my friend.
To my ears the sound is much better as the original remastering, whatever Hurwitz says, there is not little of everything more, but add at least 50% better definition, naturalness, dept, and good timbres.
I have both re-masterings, so could make a-b comparison.

[AnthonyAthletic]

Well maybe it really depends what sort of equipment you have my friend.
To my ears the sound is much better as the original remastering, whatever Hurwitz says, there is not little of everything more, but add at least 50% better definition, naturalness, dept, and good timbres.
I have both re-masterings, so could make a-b comparison.

Mornin' Harry, how's the weather over the sea?  Hot, slightly foggy and gloomy in the UK today.

To me, running either on my Sony or Pioneer unit there is not that much difference on two channel stereo.  Tried them in store and on my equipment, same goes for other associates.  This is in two channel stereo, in surround its a different matter, and definately not worth the extra shell out of money, when it can be spent on other goodies, and other competetive sets of the same variety 

[Harry]

Mornin' Harry, how's the weather over the sea?  Hot, slightly foggy and gloomy in the UK today.

To me, running either on my Sony or Pioneer unit there is not that much difference on two channel stereo.  Tried them in store and on my equipment, same goes for other associates.  This is in two channel stereo, in surround its a different matter, and definately not worth the extra shell out of money, when it can be spent on other goodies, and other competetive sets of the same variety 

Would you believe it 27 degrees! The hottest days in 300 years here, that is for a April month. so the same here yes.
I compared the stereo layers of both sets on my primary and secondary units with some of my friends, and compared the SACD layer on Marantz and Musical Fidelty machines, the last one a 16,000 pounds machine, and we all came to the conclusion that the difference was huge.
But hey, its not a big deal right. You are right and I am, its all subjective right.
Have a nice warm day my friend.

[AnthonyAthletic]

I can expect the difference to be huge on a 16,000 machine    That's where money is better spent elsewhere.  Imagine buying a machine for 16,000 Euro or 16,000 Euro's on music...not much of a choice is there? 

[Harry]

I can expect the difference to be huge on a 16,000 machine    That's where money is better spent elsewhere.  Imagine buying a machine for 16,000 Euro or 16,000 Euro's on music...not much of a choice is there? 

Well I did both, so no pain there as you know.

[Mark]

This thread has made interesting reading ... especially as I've just put down £10 on what I suspect is the very first release of the '63 cycle on CD:

[AnthonyAthletic]

This thread has made interesting reading ... especially as I've just put down £10 on what I suspect is the very first release of the '63 cycle on CD:

I gave this set away about 2 years ago, and I am almost certain it was first issue on cd at the time.

I now have the SACD set, which was my Free intro to the Britannia Music Club R.I.P

For a tenner, worth every penny.  No doubt somebody will come on and tell us about the cuts in the Pastoral spoiling the set 

[Great Gable]

This thread has made interesting reading ... especially as I've just put down £10 on what I suspect is the very first release of the '63 cycle on CD:

Mark - I just checked the Penguin guide of 1994 - there was already a version on CD around then (DG 429 036-2)

[Mark]

No doubt somebody will come on and tell us about the cuts in the Pastoral spoiling the set 

Cuts? What cuts?

Mark - I just checked the Penguin guide of 1994 - there was already a version on CD around then (DG 429 036-2)

Given that catalogue number, I think this is the first CD release.

[Lilas Pastia]

It's not a cut, but a standard repeat not taken. You can't miss it when it doesn' arrive  Quite jarring and hard to explain. Of the myriad Pastorales recorded, this must be th eonly one not to take that repeat!! I bought that set 12 years ago (at least) with the exact same cover. Can't tell about the catalogue number, though.

I'll probably plunge for a cheapo just-issued-reissue of the Philharmonia versions, going for 25$ at Archambault (coincidentally, approx 10 pounds  )

[AnthonyAthletic]

It's not a cut, but a standard repeat not taken.

Repeat not taken (scherzo) = omission = why did he do this? 

But as you say, its not much to write home about and I for one find it barely missable

[George]

Repeat not taken (scherzo) = omission = why did he do this? 

Given the brisk tempos, perhaps he was rushing across the pastoral greens, in an effort to get to the 7th symphony. 

[Renfield]

This thread reminds me about two things:

1) That I had underestimated this remastering, for the SACD edition, which is indeed rather superb. (I had some grudges with the 9th, until I realised it was simply recorded that way.)

2) That I definitely need to remember to find some time one afternoon and do that Karajan 9th cross-comparison. It's very telling, for the "spirit" of the rest of each of his four sets, the 9th.


(Incidentally, I hope I don't need to add that I agree with this first Karajan DG Beethoven cycle being great. Though I find the differences in quality smaller than others seem to, between it and both of his later cycles; perhaps even his earlier one, too...)

[Lilas Pastia]

The BPO in the first cycle is still recognizably the same orchestra one can hear in contemporaneous recordings by other conductors: Böhm, Jochum, Keilberth, Kubelik...

In the 1977 cycle it is substantially different. Sectional personality has given way to the orchestra sounding like one giant instrument capable of a multitude of colours. Each one has its adherents, and there are successes in both cycles.

[George]

The BPO in the first cycle is still recognizably the same orchestra one can hear in contemporaneous recordings by other conductors: Böhm, Jochum, Keilberth, Kubelik...

In the 1977 cycle it is substantially different. Sectional personality has given way to the orchestra sounding like one giant instrument capable of a multitude of colours. Each one has its adherents, and there are successes in both cycles.

I believe Val also likes the 1977 cycle. If the rest is as good as the 9th (the only one from that cycle that I own), then I am sure it's excellent. I know that both 9ths have their strengths and I am glad to have them.

[Lilas Pastia]

Interestingly, the Pastorale in the 1977 cycle sounds very good (repeat taken in III) even though it's actually faster than the brusque 1963 version.

[M forever]

I heard all the Beethoven symphonies live with Karajan in the 80s when they recorded them again for CD - the cycle which originally had the horrible "sun god" covers - and he didn't take the repeats in the live performances either. Something I could never agree with. I want all the repeats. I also think that the scherzo should be repeated in the 5th symphony, as research has shown that may have been an option that Beethoven wanted, and it makes sense.
Interestingly, Brahms apparently didn't mind when the repeats were not taken in his symphonies. His opinion was that if a piece is already well known, the exposition repeat is not necessary as the listeners will know the material and be able to follow what is going on in the development. Still, many pieces, including Brahms' and Beethoven's symphonies, have such nice transitions which get lost when the exposition goes directly into the development.

[Lilas Pastia]

Fascinating! I certainly couldn't agree more with Brahms , but it's true that, when well done, transitions do include interesting material (modulations). One of the most elaborate 'bridges' is in Mendelssohn 4:I. OTOH, one of the most abrupt ones in in Beehtoven 5:IV. One really wonders if Beethoven did want the material to be repeated. Under certain conductors it works, under others (typically those who take the opening of the movement by the throat), it doesn't.

[M forever]

One of the most elaborate 'bridges' is in Mendelssohn 4:I. OTOH, one of the most abrupt ones in in Beehtoven 5:IV. One really wonders if Beethoven did want the material to be repeated. Under certain conductors it works, under others (typically those who take the opening of the movement by the throat), it doesn't.

But that's not Beethoven's fault. I think that particular repeat is very important. Again, having known the symphonies at first from Karajan's recordings and live concerts, I didn't know the repeat "acoustically" although I had seen it in the score, and I well remember when I first heard the repeat taken (which was either in Bernstein's or Kleiber's WP recording), I almost fell off the chair or whatever I was sitting or lying on when I listened to that.

[Lilas Pastia]

Just reissued: the 1977 set at budget price.