Sibelius 4

[aukhawk]

The phrase "I just happen to like X a lot, but YMMV" does not enter this frame of mind. Yes, I like some recordings better than others, too. Is this because I magically know how Sibelius wanted it? See auwhawk's remark upon the timing of the Fourth's largo. Some people are absolutely sure that less than nine minutes is too fast. Sibelius never even heard it slower.

Fair enough.  Our listening is greatly coloured by our preconceptions.  These will include: the reputation/nationality of the conductor/orchestra in this repertoire; the cover art; the approximate recording date and the label; opinions gleaned from reviewers and from this forum; track timings, if we choose to investigate them.  It's impossible to escape these influences, for good or ill.

My choice of a 9-minute threshold (actually 11 minutes) is simply a screening process in the face of more recordings of a work than I have time left in this world to listen to.  Yes maybe in the process I miss out on some insight that Ashkenazy or Maazel may bring - I accept that - but I know what I like, and that is (in most classical music) slower tempi - so I don't waste too much time on recordings that I can see at a glance are unlikely to appeal to me.

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

My first thoughts about Berglund's Bournemouth 4 is that it's authoritative, Jupiterian.

I never saw him. People used to say to me that the Bournemouth orchestra was made up of retired musical gentlefolk and that's what they sounded like! So I never bothered.  But listening to this now, it's not totally fair!

I find Berglund's Bournemouth Sibelius to be truly outstanding (sound a little strident). I didn't like his Helsinki cycle at all.

[Daverz]

Segerstam's Ondine recording with the Helsinki Philharmonic is Richard Kaplan's "Desert Island" choice in his Fanfare Sibeliusaurus.

[asin]B0007Y0DCO[/asin]

It's certainly a riveting performance.  If you have a Fanfare subscription, you can peruse the Sibeliusaurus here:

http://fanfarearchive.com/articles/atop/30_3/3030020.aa_SIBELIUSAURUS_Wherein_Well_Fanfare.html

[Mandryka]

I find Berglund's Bournemouth Sibelius to be truly outstanding (sound a little strident). I didn't like his Helsinki cycle at all.

Just thinking about 4 the Helsinki seems rather brash. I've started to listen to this one from the Finish RSO and I like the sound of the orchestra very much. And I like the way he lets the music respire, and the way creates a sense of mystery.



I think it's his first recording (1970), followed by Bournemouth six years later. The Helsinki may well have been his last studio recording.

[Herman]

Fair enough.  Our listening is greatly coloured by our preconceptions.  These will include: the reputation/nationality of the conductor/orchestra in this repertoire; the cover art; the approximate recording date and the label; opinions gleaned from reviewers and from this forum; track timings, if we choose to investigate them.  It's impossible to escape these influences, for good or ill.

Most important perhaps is the recording that made us love the particular piece of music. The imprint version.

[amw]

I think my imprint version for this piece was Simon Rattle & the CBSO, but I haven't listened to that recording in probably a decade at this point....

edit: revisiting now. The phrasing is disjunct and incoherent, at times to the point of atomisation. There are impressive moments (eg the very opening of the recording) and the second movement comes across well. I'm not sure this would be a favourite of mine at this point though. So much for imprinting I guess.

edit 2: listened to 2 more recordings to follow up: Pietari Inkinen/New Zealand Symphony Orchestra—better phrasing but I struggled to maintain interest in the slow movements—and the Berglund/Finnish Radio Symphony recording mentioned above which I liked the best of the three, although it's still not perfect (I'd like more incisive rhythms, I think).

[relm1]

Why do some conductors play the last movement with bells and others with glockenspiel?  I forgot who used bells but it was quite jarring. 

[amw]

I think the textual evidence for bells is stronger but no idea if the question has ever been resolved—Sibelius didn't specify anything more than "Glocken"

[amw]

In fact Paul Magi with the Uppsala Chamber Orchestra would be a fine recommendation in this music if he didn't rush the crucial 3rd movement - as it is though he is ruled out, for me, a shame because the orchestral sound is just right and the important woodwind soloists spot on.

Taking this anti-recommendation for my 4th listen of the night. I see what you mean about the more atomised woodwind solo phrases being somewhat rushed (or rather, elided together, ie it's the rests that are glossed over) but once it gets into the longer melodic lines this is certainly the best I've heard in terms of phrasing, and I also quite like the sound of the orchestra. This may at least become a preferred version for me personally.

[vandermolen]

I find Berglund's Bournemouth Sibelius to be truly outstanding (sound a little strident). I didn't like his Helsinki cycle at all.

Much as I like the Helsinki version of the Four Legends and Tapiola, this tends to be my view as well. I much prefer the Bournemouth SO Kullervo Symphony to the Helsinki version and tend to like every CD I have performed by them, including Shostakovich Symphony 11 ( live and studio version), Malcolm Arnold Symphony 1, VW Symphony 6 etc.
PS I just realised its the Segerstam version of the Legends and Tapiola that I like.

[aukhawk]

Taking this anti-recommendation for my 4th listen of the night. I see what you mean about the more atomised woodwind solo phrases being somewhat rushed (or rather, elided together, ie it's the rests that are glossed over) but once it gets into the longer melodic lines this is certainly the best I've heard in terms of phrasing, and I also quite like the sound of the orchestra. This may at least become a preferred version for me personally.

Glad you enjoyed it.  I see the same orchestra has recorded quite a lot of Sibelius with Alexander Gibson - that had escaped my notice until now.

[Sergeant Rock]

Why do some conductors play the last movement with bells and others with glockenspiel?  I forgot who used bells but it was quite jarring.

I haven't updated this for several years but here is a list of recordings showing who uses what.

Tubular Bells
Bernstein/NY Phil
Ormandy/Philadelphia
Blomstedt/San Francisco
Ansermet/Suisse Romande
Stokowski

Glockenspiel and Tubular Bells
Maazel/Pittsburgh
Davis/LSO (RCA)
Davis/Boston
Järvi/Gothenburg
Szell/Cleveland
Reiner/Chicago

Szell and Reiner begin with the glockenspiel, then add tubular bells, and end with just bells.
I think the combination of instruments is the most effective. Davis, for example, begins with glockenspiel, uses bells only in the central climax, and has both appear near the symphony's end, which make those bars sound even more chaotic and disturbing than usual.

Glockenspiel
Maazel/Vienna
Ashkenazy/Philharmonia
Berglund/COE
Berglund/Bournemouth
Berglund/Helsinki
Vänskä/Lahti SO
Karajan/Berlin Phil (DG)
Karajan/Berlin Phil (EMI)
Segerstam/Helsinki
Beecham/RPO
Barbirolli/Hallé
Sakari/Iceland
Kegel/Dresden
Rattle/CBSO
Rozhdestvensky/Moscow
Sanderling/Berlin SO
Saraste/Finnish RSO
Inkinen/New Zealand SO


Sarge

[André]

Sibelius 4 stampede today. I listened to the following versions:


That's the 1954 mono version originally issued on Columbia.









Very different responses from those eminent conductors. Much to my surprise the least interesting version was the Collins. My recollection of his set was very positive. Here the symphony almost founders into anonymity. There is little 'face' to the interpretation or execution. That's not what my memories were telling me. Oh, well...

Coincidentally, the most apocalyptic, apoplectic interpretation was recorded the same year (1954), with Ormandy and the Philadelphians. Conductor and orchestra have a knife in their teeth. The sound is extremely up front and immediate (page rustles and creaking chair noises easily heard), which gives a brightly lit, jumbo soundstage. Unnatural but thrilling. Easily the most virtuosic playing of the group. The glockenspiel in IV is not given any highlighting, it is actually quite discreet. There is a ferocity, a savagery that I find only equalled in Shostakovich's 8th. Every time I listen to this version I am pinned to my seat.

The Barbirolli and Ansermet versions are probably the 2 best "normal" versions, which is to say bleak, stern, tense and yearning, superbly played and engineered (Kingsway Hall, London 1963 and Victoria Hall, Geneva 1963 respectively). Both are absolutely superb and deserve a place on the podium. Ansermet uses tubular bells but they are silvery, not tubby - just perfect. His disc is completed by a very fine Isle of the Dead by Rachmaninoff, as good a coupling as can be imagined.

Karajan's 1976 Berlin performance has always been viewed as a controversial recording, both in terms of interpretation and sound. I find it awesome in a brucknerian way. It is terribly slow and ultra intense, drawing the listener in by its sheer magnetism. The sound is very much in line with what EMI did with Karajan's Verdi operas of the period (Trovatore and Don Carlos) and his 1974 Bruckner symphonies, with their gigantic dynamic range. I love this recording but will freely admit it is not for everyday listening. Neither is the work, for that matter.

Other recordings at my disposal are the Abravanel, Rozhdestvensky, Sanderling, Karajan DG, Levine, Oramo and Hannikainen. I'm not sure I'll go through the whole lot, but I am sorely tempted.

[Mirror Image]

Sibelius 4 stampede today. I listened to the following versions:


That's the 1954 mono version originally issued on Columbia.









Very different responses from those eminent conductors. Much to my surprise the least interesting version was the Collins. My recollection of his set was very positive. Here the symphony almost founders into anonymity. There is little 'face' to the interpretation or execution. That's not what my memories were telling me. Oh, well...

Coincidentally, the most apocalyptic, apoplectic interpretation was recorded the same year (1954), with Ormandy and the Philadelphians. Conductor and orchestra have a knife in their teeth. The sound is extremely up front and immediate (page rustles and creaking chair noises easily heard), which gives a brightly lit, jumbo soundstage. Unnatural but thrilling. Easily the most virtuosic playing of the group. The glockenspiel in IV is not given any highlighting, it is actually quite discreet. There is a ferocity, a savagery that I find only equalled in Shostakovich's 8th. Every time I listen to this version I am pinned to my seat.

The Barbirolli and Ansermet versions are probably the 2 best "normal" versions, which is to say bleak, stern, tense and yearning, superbly played and engineered (Kingsway Hall, London 1963 and Victoria Hall, Geneva 1963 respectively). Both are absolutely superb and deserve a place on the podium. Ansermet uses tubular bells but they are silvery, not tubby - just perfect. His disc is completed by a very fine Isle of the Dead by Rachmaninoff, as good a coupling as can be imagined.

Karajan's 1976 Berlin performance has always been viewed as a controversial recording, both in terms of interpretation and sound. I find it awesome in a brucknerian way. It is terribly slow and ultra intense, drawing the listener in by its sheer magnetism. The sound is very much in line with what EMI did with Karajan's Verdi operas of the period (Trovatore and Don Carlos) and his 1974 Bruckner symphonies, with their gigantic dynamic range. I love this recording but will freely admit it is not for everyday listening. Neither is the work, for that matter.

Other recordings at my disposal are the Abravanel, Rozhdestvensky, Sanderling, Karajan DG, Levine, Oramo and Hannikainen. I'm not sure I'll go through the whole lot, but I am sorely tempted.

No Berglund, Segerstam, or Vänskä in your collection?

[aukhawk]

Karajan's 1976 Berlin performance has always been viewed as a controversial recording, both in terms of interpretation and sound. I find it awesome in a brucknerian way. It is terribly slow and ultra intense, drawing the listener in by its sheer magnetism. The sound is very much in line with what EMI did with Karajan's Verdi operas of the period (Trovatore and Don Carlos) and his 1974 Bruckner symphonies, with their gigantic dynamic range. I love this recording but will freely admit it is not for everyday listening. Neither is the work, for that matter.

As I wrote on page 2 of this thread

I second this opinion.  Karajan/EMI (now Warner, remastered) is my preferred version out of 20 in my collection.

However as a result of this thread I have listened to a lot and I would now say that Vanska/Lahti out-Karajans Karajan, being over a minute slower in each of the 1st and 3rd movements - the 3rd being a compelling listen.  (Vanska/Minnesota is less extreme, though still slower than Karajan, and the lush recording doesn't really suit this music I feel.)

By the way, in my abortive blind listen, the only responder was mc ukrneal (thanks!) and of the 6 'blind' samples he listened to, the one he picked was ... Karajan/Warner

[André]

Vänskä should be coming up tonight  .

.................................................................................

Meanwhile, this morning I listened to the following versions:




Tauno Hannikäinen. A cd transcript of the vinyl. I don't think it's ever made it to silver disc.

Sakari Oramo and the Finnish Radio Symphony. A 2006 concert.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wtmSQckIPEw







I have always discounted Sanderling's Sibelius on account of its too polished orchestral image, esp the smooth, rounded brass. While this is indeed a fault from my point of view, it does not entirely robb the edge off his performances. The inner voices in the 4th have an unusual importance. Contrary to most of the other symphonies there is little thematic development in the 4th. Much depends on incidental details, whether rythmic, harmonic, or in the orchestral balances. In this respect Sanderling is a fascinating guide. His unsentimental, serious interpretation is valid if not ideal. Karajan's bold decision to impose a big, heavy mantle of string sound makes the textures decidedly brahmsian, but his refusal to gild the lily means the inherent gruffness remains, for example in the treatment of the enigmatic, inconclusive last chords. With Sanderling we do not get so much weight of string tone, but the beautifully rounded brass and legato phrasing make this Sibelius sound too healthy. Those last chords for instance are too gentle and consolatory. I miss the sense of pain, suffering, loneliness.

Hannikäinen was a renowned sibelian. His interpretations have been labeled 'thunderous'. He conducted the music at the composer's funeral. I don't hear thunder in this performance so much as bleakness and desolation. There are no exaggerated dynamics, no defiant outbursts, no sound and fury. This interpretation brought strong hints of angst (Verklärte Nacht) and decadence, even nihilism. A very somber view. The recording is from 1954 and sounds coarse and unfocused. I would love to hear it in a good remastering.

I have read good reviews of Oramo's CBSO disc of symphonies 2 and 4 on Erato. I haven't heard that disc. Reviews for the rest of the cycle were much less positive. This concert performance is excellent, swift, volatile and very well played. Everything sounds natural and unexaggerated, with drama and feeling in perfect balance. Excellent account of the last chords. Some conductors make them sound like the work is dying away. I much prefer the blunt, inconclusive way Oramo, Karajan and a couple others treat it. I am tempted to try the Erato disc.

Abravanel and the Utah Symphony formed a symbiotic relationship, always reliable on all counts with the exception of weight of sound. The Utah band was never on the level of the big american orchestras in terms of numbers, but they made up for it in refinement and musicality. This counts for much in the Sibelius 4th, where a lot depends on atmosphere and attention to detail. This chamber music approach is all to the benefit of the score. Abravanel conducts with passion and flair. In the scherzo I would have preferred a more flowing tempo. Here it sounds more like a swift Valse triste than usual. The sound is airy, transparent.

Levine has recorded the above disc of 4 and 5 as well as no 2 with the BP on DGG. I am not aware of any other Sibelius performances from him. He certainly takes full advantage of the sheer might of sound at the BP's disposal - they still sounded very powerful in 1994. I would not be surprised to learn that the string section is by a good margin the biggest of all the orchestras involved. Furthermore this was recorded not in the Philharmonie, but in the friendly acoustics of the Jesus-Christus-Kirche. What we hear is an attentive, unabashedly dramatic performance, the only one to rival Ormandy's Philadelphians in the big climaxes of I and III. It is also a rather ruminative performance, the second slowest of the group (that honor belongs to HvK). The 5th symphony is in the same mould, an authentic Thor performance.

[aukhawk]

Hang on to that Levine in case we ever get a Sibelius 5 thread - it would be right up there IMHO.

Oramo/CBSO was the BBC's Building a Library choice - but it seems unremarkable to me.  I'm a big fan of Sanderling generally but have been unable to engage with his Sibelius, try as I might.  That Hannikainen looks a terrific find.  I love the English 'Made in the U.S.S.R.' on the label!

I listened to Ormandy yesterday (from the RCA/Sony box, not the earlier recording you list above, which looks interesting), and thought that had a lot of merit, as an 'alternative' view of Sibelius - much more attack than I am used to hearing.

[vandermolen]

This is one of the great ones I think:

[André]

2 versions on the fringes and 2 central recommendations.

Rozhdestvensky's 4th is a wonder to behold if you respond to the elemental aspects of Sibelius' music: the terrifying  forces of wind, darkness, overcast skies, barren landscapes, impenetrable forests, etc. The whole production is geared to intensify that feeling: big, big soundscape, raw power from the brass and timpani, super intense strings and conducting to match. Along with the 1954 Ormandy this is the version that takes the music in a direction only hinted at in other recordings. As such it cannot be recommended as an only version, but I find it essential listening. On this disc the coupling is the 5th symphony in what is easily the most violent performance on record. Listening to the two works in succession is both exhilarating and exhausting.

Karajan and his Berliners in 1965 are different animals compared to their later incarnation on EMI. Much has to do with subtle changes across the board: slightly faster tempi, slightly less sonorous (noisy?) sound from the orchestra, better balanced recording, etc. IMO this is one of the unalloyed triumphs of their collaboration in terms of refinement of sound, purity of execution and perfect balance of the orchestral sections. During the mid sixties the same ingredients produced varying results, depending on the conductor's mood of the moment, ranging from  'chocolate Beethoven' symphonies to aggressive Schubert 9, to his buttery first Sacre. But then sometimes everything gelled and conspired to produce quite extraordinary results, as in this Sibelius 4th. Although some 55 years have passed since this was made I still rate the recorded sound here as the most beautiful and faithful of all the versions I've heard.

The Vänskä interpretation is sometimes spot on, sometimes curiously unbalanced. Tempo relationships are rather extreme, with very fast and very slow inner movements. This results in making the work sound slightly episodic. When tempi are more 'central' the kinship with the multi section/one movement 7th becomes quite clear. When they are very contrasted as here the modernity of the work is less apparent, the 4 movements have a character of their own that detracts from the unity of the whole. That being said, the performance is beautifully shaped according to the conductor's vision and splendidly executed and recorded.

Ormandy II is another very central recommendation in the best sense: terrific intensity of playing, a very strong personality on the podium, perfectly proportioned and shaped performance. The sound is excellent but not as luminous and refined as on Karajan's DGG or Vänskä's BIS. Compared to their earlier self this version is more settled, less destructive - the 1954 was simply pulverizing in its intensity, an effect compounded by the coarsely up front recorded sound. I would not hesitate to put this RCA version among the top recommendations.

I haven't heard the Maazel in decades (had it on lp) but if memory serves I think it is one of the very best. Haven't heard Ashkenazy, Bernstein, Blomstedt, any of the Davises etc (check Sarge's list above). The Berglund Helsinki and Segerstam Danish Radio are on their way. If anyone has one of the Beechams I'd like to read comments.

[vandermolen]

2 versions on the fringes and 2 central recommendations.

Rozhdestvensky's 4th is a wonder to behold if you respond to the elemental aspects of Sibelius' music: the terrifying  forces of wind, darkness, overcast skies, barren landscapes, impenetrable forests, etc. The whole production is geared to intensify that feeling: big, big soundscape, raw power from the brass and timpani, super intense strings and conducting to match. Along with the 1954 Ormandy this is the version that takes the music in a direction only hinted at in other recordings. As such it cannot be recommended as an only version, but I find it essential listening. On this disc the coupling is the 5th symphony in what is easily the most violent performance on record. Listening to the two works in succession is both exhilarating and exhausting.

Karajan and his Berliners in 1965 are different animals compared to their later incarnation on EMI. Much has to do with subtle changes across the board: slightly faster tempi, slightly less sonorous (noisy?) sound from the orchestra, better balanced recording, etc. IMO this is one of the unalloyed triumphs of their collaboration in terms of refinement of sound, purity of execution and perfect balance of the orchestral sections. During the mid sixties the same ingredients produced varying results, depending on the conductor's mood of the moment, ranging from  'chocolate Beethoven' symphonies to aggressive Schubert 9, to his buttery first Sacre. But then sometimes everything gelled and conspired to produce quite extraordinary results, as in this Sibelius 4th. Although some 55 years have passed since this was made I still rate the recorded sound here as the most beautiful and faithful of all the versions I've heard.

The Vänskä interpretation is sometimes spot on, sometimes curiously unbalanced. Tempo relationships are rather extreme, with very fast and very slow inner movements. This results in making the work sound slightly episodic. When tempi are more 'central' the kinship with the multi section/one movement 7th becomes quite clear. When they are very contrasted as here the modernity of the work is less apparent, the 4 movements have a character of their own that detracts from the unity of the whole. That being said, the performance is beautifully shaped according to the conductor's vision and splendidly executed and recorded.

Ormandy II is another very central recommendation in the best sense: terrific intensity of playing, a very strong personality on the podium, perfectly proportioned and shaped performance. The sound is excellent but not as luminous and refined as on Karajan's DGG or Vänskä's BIS. Compared to their earlier self this version is more settled, less destructive - the 1954 was simply pulverizing in its intensity, an effect compounded by the coarsely up front recorded sound. I would not hesitate to put this RCA version among the top recommendations.

I haven't heard the Maazel in decades (had it on lp) but if memory serves I think it is one of the very best. Haven't heard Ashkenazy, Bernstein, Blomstedt, any of the Davises etc (check Sarge's list above). The Berglund Helsinki and Segerstam Danish Radio are on their way. If anyone has one of the Beechams I'd like to read comments.

Excellent review Andre. Thank you. I shall be putting on the Rozhdestvensky later. Yes, Maazel's is a great performance, as is his Tapiola.