The Snowshoed Sibelius

[Moonfish]

Sibelius: Violin Concerto     Wicks/The SO of Radio Stockholm/Ehrling

I came across a reference to Camilla Wicks a few months ago, heard her Sibelius VC on YouTube and realized that I really wanted this recording. I find her Sibelius performance magnificent! Camilla Wicks plays like a goddess!  The first movement is truly magical! Hahn used to be my top choice here, but I am afraid that Wicks' passionate playing wins me over! I wish she recorded many more of the "famous" violin concertos...... 
I understand that Ehrling's recordings of the symphonies are well regarded but OOP.      Do you think they ever will be re-issued?

[asin] B007TB4766[/asin]

Camilla Wicks with Bruno Walter:


https://www.youtube.com/v/oEEStY8gBco

[Moonfish]

Sibelius: Symphonies Nos 1 and 4     WP/Maazel

Do you have a preference for Maazel's WP cycle over the one with the Pittsburgh SO?

from
[asin] B0000041Z3[/asin]

[Dancing Divertimentian]

https://www.youtube.com/v/oEEStY8gBco

That sounds very nice! It's a great concerto, for sure.

I'm fond of Ida Haendel's recording licensed from EMI in a superior transfer below.

Haendel literally gobbles the work whole:



[asin]B000058UTF[/asin]
In this transfer (as opposed to the EMI) you can really hear what the orchestra is up to, which is obviously a plus. And the sonics overall make a statement! Fine, fine recorded sound...from 1976! Here's the cover from the above Amazon link. Click to super-enlarge:






One thing I like about Haendel as opposed to Wicks is - from the sound of it - Wicks likes to slide into a note whereas Haendel hits it squarely. Both approaches have their merits, obviously.   

On this German Amazon page are samples from all three movements from Haendel's recording (from the EMI, alas, which doesn't do justice to the orchestra) but the track samples are mislabeled: the first three samples are all from the VC.

[Moonfish]

That sounds very nice! It's a great concerto, for sure.

I'm fond of Ida Haendel's recording licensed from EMI in a superior transfer below.

Haendel literally gobbles the work whole:


In this transfer (as opposed to the EMI) you can really hear what the orchestra is up to, which is obviously a plus. And the sonics overall make a statement! Fine, fine recorded sound...from 1976! Here's the cover from the above Amazon link. Click to super-enlarge:



One thing I like about Haendel as opposed to Wicks is - from the sound of it - Wicks likes to slide into a note whereas Haendel hits it squarely. Both approaches have their merits, obviously.   

On this German Amazon page are samples from all three movements from Haendel's recording (from the EMI, alas, which doesn't do justice to the orchestra) but the track samples are mislabeled: the first three samples are all from the VC.

Thanks DD! I haven't heard Haendel performing Sibelius although I was quite impressed the other week with her rendition of Elgar's VC. I understand your point about "sliding" versus "hitting" the notes. Perhaps I am a "slider" by nature?     I definitely need to listen to Haendel's Sibelius!!!

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Thanks DD! I haven't heard Haendel performing Sibelius although I was quite impressed the other week with her rendition of Elgar's VC. I understand your point about "sliding" versus "hitting" the notes. Perhaps I am a "slider" by nature?     I definitely need to listen to Haendel's Sibelius!!!

"Sliders" aren't looked on too kindly by us "Hitters". Be expecting a visit from my boys shortly.....

Actually I probably shouldn't make too much of the "sliding" thing. Wicks obviously is well equipped to take on this work.

[jfdrex]

Sibelius: Symphonies Nos 1 and 4     WP/Maazel

Do you have a preference for Maazel's WP cycle over the one with the Pittsburgh SO?

from
[asin] B0000041Z3[/asin]

On the whole, yes.

Whereas in Vienna Maazel takes a fresh, youthful, and impulsive approach, showing a tendency to attack and forge ahead, in Pittsburgh he gives us an older man's Sibelius (especially in the first two symphonies), with slower tempi and a pronounced tendency to micromanage and underline.  Barbirolli could pull that sort of approach off most of the time and sound natural doing it; but when Maazel attempts this sort of thing, it all too often sounds mannered and contrived.

Maazel/ Pittsburgh emphasizes lots of small details in the music that you don't notice in his Vienna interpretations, which adds to the interest; but often (to my ears) this is at the expense of the music itself.  In a way, the difference between the young Maazel and the older Maazel has some parallels with Bernstein's young and older selves:  Think of the contrast between Bernstein's aggressive, extroverted Beethoven or Mahler with the NYPO in the 1960s, and his later recordings of those same works for DG in the 1980s, where things are usually significantly slower and more emotionally overblown.  Or, indeed, Bernstein's energetic NYPO Sibelius from the 1960s vs. those recorded performances of symphonies 1, 2, 5, and 7 from Vienna some 20 or 25 years later.

The Pittsburgh set does benefit from richer recorded sound, with a wide dynamic range.  And the set has the advantage of an excellent performance of the violin concerto.

Bottom line:  Although I don't love everything in the Vienna set equally--Maazel seems to skim the surface in symphonies 5 & 6 there--I am happy to listen to most of those recordings again and again.  By contrast, there are things in the Pittsburgh set that are worth hearing once and that will make you sit up and take notice and say to yourself, Hmm, that's different; but, having heard them once, I'm not in a hurry to listen to them again.

[Moonfish]

Any thoughts on Goss' Sibelius biography? Has anybody here read it by any chance?

Found a mixed review in THE.

[asin] 022600547X[/asin]

[Moonfish]

On the whole, yes.

Whereas in Vienna Maazel takes a fresh, youthful, and impulsive approach, showing a tendency to attack and forge ahead, in Pittsburgh he gives us an older man's Sibelius (especially in the first two symphonies), with slower tempi and a pronounced tendency to micromanage and underline.  Barbirolli could pull that sort of approach off most of the time and sound natural doing it; but when Maazel attempts this sort of thing, it all too often sounds mannered and contrived.

Maazel/ Pittsburgh emphasizes lots of small details in the music that you don't notice in his Vienna interpretations, which adds to the interest; but often (to my ears) this is at the expense of the music itself.  In a way, the difference between the young Maazel and the older Maazel has some parallels with Bernstein's young and older selves:  Think of the contrast between Bernstein's aggressive, extroverted Beethoven or Mahler with the NYPO in the 1960s, and his later recordings of those same works for DG in the 1980s, where things are usually significantly slower and more emotionally overblown.  Or, indeed, Bernstein's energetic NYPO Sibelius from the 1960s vs. those recorded performances of symphonies 1, 2, 5, and 7 from Vienna some 20 or 25 years later.

The Pittsburgh set does benefit from richer recorded sound, with a wide dynamic range.  And the set has the advantage of an excellent performance of the violin concerto.

Bottom line:  Although I don't love everything in the Vienna set equally--Maazel seems to skim the surface in symphonies 5 & 6 there--I am happy to listen to most of those recordings again and again.  By contrast, there are things in the Pittsburgh set that are worth hearing once and that will make you sit up and take notice and say to yourself, Hmm, that's different; but, having heard them once, I'm not in a hurry to listen to them again.

Thanks Jdfrex! A very thoughtful and comprehensive comparison. I certainly have plenty of food for thought. Interesting aspects of the slower detailed Pittsburgh cycle. Perhaps these detailed interpretations (although not listened to very often) provides a new perspective as one listens to the faster more compressed performances. I will certainly pay more attention after reading your impressions.

[Moonfish]

Do you think that BIS's Sibelius edition will be issued as a larger complete set in the near future (2015-16)? I am considering jumping into some of these releases/volumes, but hesitate in the anticipation of a major set.

http://www.bis.se/bis_pages/bis_sibelius-edition.php

[North Star]

Do you think that BIS's Sibelius edition will be issued as a larger complete set in the near future (2015-16)? I am considering jumping into some of these releases/volumes, but hesitate in the anticipation of a major set.

I'd guess there won't be a single release combining them all. Of course, this is the 150th anniversary year for Sibelius, but it doesn't seem like something BIS would do.

[Moonfish]

I'd guess there won't be a single release combining them all. Of course, this is the 150th anniversary year for Sibelius, but it doesn't seem like something BIS would do.

You have to excuse me. I am still drooling over the BIS Sibelius Edition...     

Nice write-up for volumes 1-5 at Musicweb!

[Moonfish]

Sibelius:
Spring Song Op 16
Lemminkäinen Suite Op 22
Romance Op 42
The Dryad Op 45.1
Dance Intermezzo Op 45.2
Pan and Echo Op 53a

Royal Liverpool PO/Groves

Ah, I had such a great morning with these tone poems. Grove's renditions surprised me with the mystery and warm sound (I expected worse). Interestingly, I was fascinated by Sibelius's early Spring Song which I never had heard before.
I am trying to revisit the symphonies at the same time as I wish to explore Sibelius's more unknown works. Not surprisingly I am quite interested in the BIS Sibelius Edition that I so far have avoided due to the relatively high cost (I guess it is not that bad per cd, but still).  What are some early works worth pondering/experiencing?

*I think I am coming down with a combined Elgar/Sibelius "bug" that will ultimately become chronic.....*

cd 1 from:
[asin] B0000CGP1U[/asin]

[Brian]

Moonfish,

1. I haven't heard Maazel in Vienna, but the Pittsburgh cycle is wonderful, for many reasons outlined above. I'd like to say that 3 and 6 are particular favorites, against all the stiff competition. There are some excellent fillers too, and the cycle is available for around $15. I'd say it is a "different" Sibelius vision from the mainstream, but in the opposite direction from Maazel/Vienna. Very interesting that one conductor can do such different things.

2. The BIS box sets are meant to form the complete set together! That's why when you collect them all, the spines form a new artwork.

[Karl Henning]

I pound the table for the Maazel/Pbgh set.

[jfdrex]

Maazel's Pittsburgh set certainly has more than its share of detractors.

For example... James Leonard is utterly scathing:  Whatever comprehension Maazel once had has turned to disdain: his conducting almost completely lacks any sense of forward momentum whatsoever and his performances are among the most torpid and turgid ever recorded. Whatever compassion Maazel once had has turned to dismissal: his capricious disregard of balances and tempos, his finicky fiddling with phasing and dynamics, his blithe indifference to the letter and the spirit of the scores bespeaks a conductor who thinks himself better than the music he conducts.

http://www.allmusic.com/album/sibelius-orchestral-works-limited-edition-box-set-mw0001385059

Not to be outdone in his scorn for this set, "The Man in the Hathaway Shirt" (on Amazon) opines:  Chronic and severe constipation. That's the only reason I can imagine that Maazel conducted Sibelius like this with the Pittsburgh Symphony...  The present issue has glorious sound--it may be the best *sounding* Sibelius cycle I've ever heard--but Maazel says nothing in this music, and he says it so slowly and de-lib-er-ate-ly...  At times it almost sounds like a rehearsal with Maazel having the orchestra play slowly to illustrate a point. I'm not unsympathetic to an "objective" or "bird's eye" view of the music--indeed, I feel this is how it works best... But objective doesn't have to mean devoid of personality--listen to Boulez at his best.  What I miss in the Maazel performances is any understanding of build, of structure. Phrases are unconnected. When a phrase or section returns later in the movement, it is played the same way as the first time; there is no metamorphosis--fatal in Sibelius. And the tempi are incredibly slow. Some white-hot sections of the 7th, some of the most intense music ever written, are played for the most part with underemphasized accents, moderate dynamics and a dragging, plodding feeling. There are a few great moments, but they're so far and in-between that you'll have to set your alarm to wake you just before they come. One can be "icy hot," one can even be "icy cold," but Maazel just sounds *bored,* despite having the wonderful Pittsburgh Symphony at his disposal...

And "Santa Fe Listener" is typically acerbic when he weighs in on Maazel's way with the Second Symphony in Pittsburgh:   Certainly this is a dispirited (and dispiriting) Sym. #2 -- loggy, lacking in rhythmic bite, and noncommittal where it needs to be epic and heroic. I wonder why Maazel bothers to conduct works in which he basically sits on the sidelines and watches the scenery go by? ... In all, this isn't a CD any lover of Sibelian should bohter with.

I suppose I tend toward the conventional view of this set--I find it intriguing and frustrating at the same time.  In symphonies 1 & 2, Maazel wanders into Celibidache Land, and you wonder if he'll ever find his way out.  (But is my reaction to Maazel's interpretations here colored by my previous exposure to more surging, high-powered performances?)  On the other hand, I do find this deliberate approach works much better in the later symphonies; there, for the most part, I can appreciate Maazel's detailed examinations of the scores even when this isn't my preferred way of hearing these works.

So...  Those of you who are more highly disposed to this set than I am:   What am I missing?  And how does one account for such scathing reactions as those cited above?

[Sergeant Rock]

So...  Those of you who are more highly disposed to this set than I am:   What am I missing?  And how does one account for such scathing reactions as those cited above?

Not everything is ultra slow (the Third is certainly swift and "high-powered")...but, in fact, it is the far-from-the-mainstream tempos that make this set appealing to me. I've never associated high speed with "forward momentum"...Maazel always makes it home and the view along the way utterly gorgeous. Works especially well, I think, in 4, 6 and 7.

Sarge

"Symphonies Nos. 4, 5, and 6, while still on the slow side at times, are generally excellent, and the Third may well be the finest version on disc, bar none." --Classics Today, the Hurwitzer

[Karl Henning]

And how does one account for such scathing reactions as those cited above?

Lack of sympathy for the performances under advisement, combined with an intemperate enthusiasm for giving free rein to scorn.

[jfdrex]

Lack of sympathy for the performances under advisement, combined with an intemperate enthusiasm for giving free rein to scorn.

Yes, the latter quality certainly seems to be a common denominator among these three reviewers. (Indeed, a spécialité de la maison for at least one of them. )

[jfdrex]

Not everything is ultra slow (the Third is certainly swift and "high-powered")...but, in fact, it is the far-from-the-mainstream tempos that make this set appealing to me. I've never associated high speed "forward momentum"...Maazel always makes it home  and the view along the way utterly gorgeous. Works especially well, I think, in 4, 6 and 7.

Sarge

"Symphonies Nos. 4, 5, and 6, while still on the slow side at times, are generally excellent, and the Third may well be the finest version on disc, bar none." --Classics Today, the Hurwitzer

Yes, you're certainly right about the Maazel/ Pittsburgh 3rd.  Maazel's briskness here almost comes as a shock after hearing some of his tempi in the 2nd.

Ah, the Hurwitzer...  As I recall, he was not this enthusiastic about Colin Davis's RCA set.    ("Lemminkäinen obviously needs a dose–hell, a whole bottle–of Viagra. The Swan of Tuonela, at nearly 11 minutes, does more than evoke the mythological dwelling place of the dead: it sounds as if both conductor and orchestra studied music there. And speaking of the dead, Lemminkäinen in Tuonela, at more than 18 minutes, seems to go on forever." --DH)  Ouch! Talk about giving free rein to scorn.

[Moonfish]

Sibelius: Symphony No 4          Pittsburgh SO/ Maazel

I am starting to understand the earlier posts about Maazel's Pittsburgh SO cycle. The 4th symphony moved in a pace I could barely have imagined. It almost seemed to be a joke.  The slug-like pace seemed to remove some of the darkness and mystery within the 4th  - it was just so slow (in my ears) that the wonder of the 4th quickly dissipated. Surely the purpose must have been to emphasize the wonder, but the glacial approach seems to have the opposite effect. I am not even sure if I can handle another exposure to this recording..... 

from
[asin] B004H6P2O2[/asin]