Brahms Symphony Cycles

[DavidRoss]

I just had my first listen to Haitink's Brahms 2 with the Conc'bouw, from the 70s cycle. A used LP that I paid all of $1 for.

Damn, this is good, in every way (playing, interpretation, sound). Is the rest of Haitink's cycle as excellent as this?

All of Haitink's old RCO recordings for Philips are about as good as pre-HIP big band orchestral music gets -- Beethoven, Mahler, Debussy, Brahms, you name it!  When I started buying classical LPs more than 40 years ago, once I discovered Haitink/RCO/Philips I pretty much stopped wasting my money on Karajan. 

[Mookalafalas]

This thread has been dead for a while.  Thought I'd revive it to ask about the Chailly (Nov. 2013) Brahms set that has come out.  I have several excellent cycles, but most are a bit long in the tooth. I'm wondering if this performance is as engaging as Chailly's Beethoven set.

[kishnevi]

This thread has been dead for a while.  Thought I'd revive it to ask about the Chailly (Nov. 2013) Brahms set that has come out.  I have several excellent cycles, but most are a bit long in the tooth. I'm wondering if this performance is as engaging as Chailly's Beethoven set.

I am, as I post, listening to the Fourth.  So far, the performances are very good, and the sonics excellent.  Beyond that (and the fact that CD 3 is filled up with some nice bonuses),  I have the feeling that as excellent as it is,  it's not quite so special as his Beethoven.  But this is only a first listen, so opinion is very much subject to revision.

[Mookalafalas]

I am, as I post, listening to the Fourth.  So far, the performances are very good, and the sonics excellent.  Beyond that (and the fact that CD 3 is filled up with some nice bonuses),  I have the feeling that as excellent as it is,  it's not quite so special as his Beethoven.  But this is only a first listen, so opinion is very much subject to revision.

  Thanks for the quick response, Jeffrey. I appreciate it. I will try to be patient and wait til I hear a bit more.

[Todd]

I'm wondering if this performance is as engaging as Chailly's Beethoven set.

After listening to the First and Second, I would have to say no.  Even if the Third and Fourth are the best ever, the set will certainly not display the consistency of Chailly's LvB.

[jochanaan]

Has anyone mentioned the Wolfgang Sawallisch/Vienna Symphony (not Philharmonic) set from, I believe, the 1960s or early '70s?  Lovely playing, perfectly judged tempos, and a flexible approach that never gets out of hand.  This set, and the Reiner recording of the Double Concerto (with Nathan Milstein and Gregor Piatigorsky), I consider ideal Brahms.

I seem to recall hearing one of the Mackerras recordings over the radio, and liking it very much.

So you can guess that I don't like my Brahms too heavy. I could barely tolerate the one Karajan recording I've heard.  On the other hand, I'm also fond of the Celibidache set; its more transparent sound makes it lovely.

"Do I contradict myself?  Very well, then I contradict myself.  I am large, I contain multitudes..." --Walt Whitman

[jochanaan]

BTW, one constant source of irritation is how many conductors take the Andante moderato from #4 as if it were "Adagio lamentoso"!

[jochanaan]

If you have not already done so, track down the John Gardiner or Andrew Manze recordings of the Brahms symphonies.  Judging by the comment above you would find them interesting.

I probably would.  Thanks, SA!

[TheGSMoeller]

Listened to Nos. 1 and 3 earlier today, and was extremely impressed with these performances. A nice blend of HIP practices and modern instruments. Chailly gives us Brahms with no congestion musically, both symphonies were very forward driven, right up to the final chords. This makes for an exciting, intense Brahms. The 3rd does a grand job of showcasing Brahms wonderful orchestrations, mainly in part to the Gewandausorchestrer. Not sure yet if I need to own this, still need to hear Nos. 2 and 4, but so far it has presented good performances that I really want to revisit.

[asin]B00E6G23TA[/asin]

[TheGSMoeller]

Listened to Nos. 1 and 3 earlier today, and was extremely impressed with these performances. A nice blend of HIP practices and modern instruments. Chailly gives us Brahms with no congestion musically, both symphonies were very forward driven, right up to the final chords. This makes for an exciting, intense Brahms. The 3rd does a grand job of showcasing Brahms wonderful orchestrations, mainly in part to the Gewandausorchestrer. Not sure yet if I need to own this, still need to hear Nos. 2 and 4, but so far it has presented good performances that I really want to revisit.

Finished the Chailly set (minus the non-symphonies works) and my final thoughts after listening to 2 and 4 remain as they did during the first round of listening. However, I did just finish Thielemann/Dresden set (music only, not the included DVD) and I'm surprised to say that I prefer this one over the Chailly. Stylistically these are polar opposites, offering contrasting views on performance preferences. Where Chailly is lean and light but still with plenty of dramatics, Thielemann is more weighty and dark, even the recorded tone of the Dresden is heavier on the lower strings. In most cases the tempi of Thielemann are slower, although the 2nd's finale is like a rocket, but it is never lethargic and still full of energy.
I think what I really enjoy from the Thielemann/Dresden performances is how there is such a strong focus on the ebb and flow of Brahms brilliant writing, a more personal emphasis from Thielemann in this area really ushers out the lyrical aspect of these works. There are certainly more interpretive choices on display. I own Thielemann's first Brahms 1st disc with Munich and always loved his handling of the finale's famous string chorale, it's soft, delicate and airy, he again instills this in his Dresden performance. Another highlight is the 3rd Symphony, the entire piece, a beautifully crafted rendition.

[asin]B00M14IFRI[/asin]

[aligreto]

I have enjoyed reading this thread. The Brahms symphonies took me a long time to appreciate; I initially found them dull, boring and "heavy" in terms of orchestration/orchestral colour. I persisted with my listening for quite a while with no success. Then I discovered the Mackerras set...




....and that changed everything for me. It was as if the curtain in the dark room was opened and the light flooded in. Smaller orchestral forces brought greater transparency and with that, for me, came a greater appreciation for the music.


Another set that I now greatly value is the Harnoncourt...




....whose interpretations I think are wonderful.

[TheGSMoeller]

Two GREAT sets, aligreto. 
If you like that "smaller forces" tone, check out Manze and Gardiner's cycles. Both are very good.

[aligreto]

Two GREAT sets, aligreto. 
If you like that "smaller forces" tone, check out Manze and Gardiner's cycles. Both are very good.

Thank you for that; I have the excellent Gardiner cycle but not the Manze and I will certainly investigate that one.

[Leo K.]

Finished the Chailly set (minus the non-symphonies works) and my final thoughts after listening to 2 and 4 remain as they did during the first round of listening. However, I did just finish Thielemann/Dresden set (music only, not the included DVD) and I'm surprised to say that I prefer this one over the Chailly. Stylistically these are polar opposites, offering contrasting views on performance preferences. Where Chailly is lean and light but still with plenty of dramatics, Thielemann is more weighty and dark, even the recorded tone of the Dresden is heavier on the lower strings. In most cases the tempi of Thielemann are slower, although the 2nd's finale is like a rocket, but it is never lethargic and still full of energy.
I think what I really enjoy from the Thielemann/Dresden performances is how there is such a strong focus on the ebb and flow of Brahms brilliant writing, a more personal emphasis from Thielemann in this area really ushers out the lyrical aspect of these works. There are certainly more interpretive choices on display. I own Thielemann's first Brahms 1st disc with Munich and always loved his handling of the finale's famous string chorale, it's soft, delicate and airy, he again instills this in his Dresden performance. Another highlight is the 3rd Symphony, the entire piece, a beautifully crafted rendition.

[asin]B00M14IFRI[/asin]

Thanks for recommending the Thielemann! I've now heard the 1st and 2nd. The account of the 1st is among the most moving and powerful I've heard - listen to those wonderful dark & heavy strings! Your description of Thielemann's focus with the 'ebb and flow' of Brahms' writing is right on. The 2nd is played epic, a serious reading, deeply moving and it'll take a couple more listens to review it properly. Aces!

[San Antone]

However, I did just finish Thielemann/Dresden set (music only, not the included DVD) and I'm surprised to say that I prefer this one over the Chailly. Stylistically these are polar opposites, offering contrasting views on performance preferences. Where Chailly is lean and light but still with plenty of dramatics, Thielemann is more weighty and dark, even the recorded tone of the Dresden is heavier on the lower strings. In most cases the tempi of Thielemann are slower, although the 2nd's finale is like a rocket, but it is never lethargic and still full of energy.

I also like Thielemann's Brahms cycle.  I think it is one of the best set of recordings he's done.

[André]

My favourite cycle is still the Böhm Vienna DGG. Böhm secures powerful and sonorous yet lean and forward-moving performances from the WP.

Giulini WP, Walter Columbia Symph, Haitink Amsterdam, Kertesz WP, Karajan BP('64), Mackerras and Ansermet are also very good ones, securing different aspects of the wide brahmsian spectrum of emotions and musical syntax.

Not too enthusiastic about "favourite" oldies such as Boult, Barbirolli, Jochum BP or Klemperer. Tomy ears they have aged somewhat.

Podium:

1- Böhm and the BRSO (Orfeo) or BPO (DGG). Much loved also : Giulini and the LAPO, Munch BSO, Haitink Concertgebouw.
2 - Abbado and the BP (DGG 1969, one of his earliest recordings - NOT the more rigid 2000-something later recording), Giulini LAPO. This is a difficult symphony to get right.
3- Walter and the Columbia Symphony (CBS-Sony). By a long mile. Wand and the NDR (Hamburg).
4- Haitink Concertgebouw, Böhm WP, both from around 1971. Fischer-Dieskau and the Czech Philharmonic (Supraphon).

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Recently listened to Thielemann's Brahms 2, I think I will have to get used to it more as there is definitely something in here I want to get to know better. It is one of the best recordings Thielemann has made in my opinion.

I have been listening to a lot of Brahms 2s recently, Thielemann was the latest one. I jotted down a few thoughts on each one I listened to for comparison.



As Christian Thielemann once said, 'democracy has no role in the context of orchestral music,' so it is useful to keep this dictatorial style of music making in mind when understanding his interpretative style; Thielemann is the boss and his word is final. With a reputation of fiercely conservative politics and poor diplomatic skills throughout his career as a conductor, he had found his dream job as artistic authoritarian over Staatskapelle Dresden in the more politically conservative state of Saxony in 2012. So, a conservative man conducting some fittingly conservative repertoire, the second symphony of Johannes Brahms, should have some anachronistic flair so as to sound at least delightfully quaint. Considering my adoration of Furtwängler's performances of Brahms 2, particularly his 1952 concert with the Berliners in Munich amongst many others by him and other conductors of that era, I know how thrilling these old hat interpretations of the Austro-German warhorses can be.

And Thielemann certainly brings big sweeping old hat orchestral rubato to the music, appropriately slowing down in the right places and jerking the music back up to tempo where he deems the time is right. This approach to tempo is somewhat predictable even as a throwback to the great conductors of the past, yet its musical justification is not apparent. There is a disconnect between rubato and dynamics, a disconnect between the final tempo of a ritardando and the tempo of the following phrase and sometimes understated articulation particularly in the first and third movements that leaves this Brahms 2 undercooked and served cold. A limited dynamic range in general gives little variety to how each phrase is shaped and as a result the music has a tendency to feel restraint or constricted.

Thielemann certainly has an artistic vision for the piece, one which despite these unfortunate losses certainly brings out a different aspect: one of consistency and regularity. Instead of bringing out the pronounced articulations, dynamic and expression markings expressed in the score , Thielemann opts for an overall abstract austerity that only hints at the possible evocations mood possible in the piece without actually arriving there. The syncopations present in the development section of the opening movement plod along with a stubborn regularity and squareness, successfully shifting our perception of a metric centre but only to bring out yet another tepid squareness instead of vitality and rhythmic tension in need of musical resolution. In the exposition and recapitulation, Thielemann goes so far as to hush down the ben marcato dissonant syncopations against an espressivo counterpoint between low strings, bassoons and violins. He emphasises a certain regularity and squareness in the music once again, rather than the rhythmic vitality that can make this music really come alive.

The orchestra certainly sounds great; every musician follows him obediently and submits to his authority with diligence as he diligently directs them. The orchestral tuttis are a great mass of sound and very effective for Brahms.

Thielemann takes the exposition repeat in the first movement.

[TheGSMoeller]

This is fantastic!
Smaller ensemble, small bore trombones, 19th century horns, little to no vibrato...perhaps not everyone's cup of Brahms, but these performances are thrilling, never dull, and brilliant in their clarity and execution of these gorgeous scores. Sweepingly romantic it is, but not in the broad manner of Bernstein or Thielemann. It's more in the family of Gardiner's HIP cycle with ORR, which I believe will be replaced with SCO/Ticciati as my new top choice for 'smaller-sized' Brahms cycle. 
I'm very interested in reading some of your thoughts, and I'll add more of my own later...I'm using my phone and it's taking me forever just to type this post   

[asin]B079JGMVZH[/asin]

[San Antone]

This is fantastic!
Smaller ensemble, small bore trombones, 19th century horns, little to no vibrato...perhaps not everyone's cup of Brahms, but these performances are thrilling, never dull, and brilliant in their clarity and execution of these gorgeous scores. Sweepingly romantic it is, but not in the broad manner of Bernstein or Thielemann. It's more in the family of Gardiner's HIP cycle with ORR, which I believe will be replaced with SCO/Ticciati as my new top choice for 'smaller-sized' Brahms cycle. 
I'm very interested in reading some of your thoughts, and I'll add more of my own later...I'm using my phone and it's taking me forever just to type this post   

[asin]B079JGMVZH[/asin]

Thanks for alerting us to this new recording of the Brahms symphonies.  I sampled some of it and enjoyed the performances very much. 

[Daverz]

Haven't heard Ticciati yet, but I was very taken with the Dausgaard Symphony No. 1 with the Swedish Chamber Orchestra. 



I haven't heard his No. 2 yet, which has gotten mixed reviews (well, some didn't like this No. 1, either).