The Snowshoed Sibelius

[Sergeant Rock]

The 19 cycles of Sibelius I own:
Inkinen/NZSO

I didn't realize Inkinen was complete now. I like his Seventh. I think I'll order the Fifth (can't have too many Fifths).

Sarge

[Brian]

I didn't realize Inkinen was complete now. I like his Seventh. I think I'll order the Fifth (can't have too many Fifths).

Sarge

His Seventh was the best part of his cycle, by a long shot. Here's my MW review of his Fifth:

"The Fifth, as I said, is awkward. It feels like a teenage boy who is a full head taller than his classmates and not yet sure how to use his bulk. What do I mean? The first movement moves strangely, clumsily, across its landscape; some moments are fast when they should be slow (2:38, 3:50), or slow when they should be fast (12:48-13:13); heroic when they should be cowed (7:30-8:05), or tender when they should be heroic (the chord at 4:51, the strings after 10:10). Where are the timpani and brass at the big transition point? Why is the coda so unexciting? Actually, I can answer that: timid horns at 13:12, lack of presence for the timpani, and the fact that the build-up beginning around 12:00 is unusually dull. The slow movement, at 9:39, feels almost like a nocturne, still and solemn: Inkinen is actually slower than Celibidache (9:21) here, let alone Davis/LSO (8:08) or Vänskä (8:47). The nocturnal feel really works, though it forces the oboist into a solo (after 8:00) that sounds forced.

"In the finale, something quite shocking happens: while delivering the glorious "swan hymn", the French horns sound ugly. I didn't think it possible! But they have a nasty bite, a muted harshness, which boggles the mind. Intonation is suspect and the phrasing, with certain notes "pointed" and the graceful flow of the notes made clunky and fitful, is grating to the ears. Then the trumpets cut in too quickly at 6:30 and the final orchestral build-up fails to bring euphoria or a sense of entry into the heavens. Add to this the ponderous first movement, the poorly-timed final chords (too, too fast!), and slightly charmless recorded sound."

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2011/Mar11/Sibelius_sy45_8572227.htm

[Karl Henning]

Oof. A bad horn section is one of the direst flaws an orchestra can suffer from.

(can't have too many Fifths).

Overheard a fellow in a liquor store once . . . .

[Mirror Image]

I didn't realize Inkinen was complete now. I like his Seventh. I think I'll order the Fifth (can't have too many Fifths).

Sarge

Yeah, it's been complete for quite some time now.

[Sergeant Rock]

His Seventh was the best part of his cycle, by a long shot. Here's my MW review of his Fifth:

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2011/Mar11/Sibelius_sy45_8572227.htm

The Hurwitzer thinks more highly of it (rated it 9). You say that "Pietari Inkinen conducts the Symphony No. 5 with [...]laid-back, clarity-first prettiness"--a negative assessment while Hurwitz, seeing the glass half full, says "Pietari Inkinen's emphasis on lucidity gives the music a contrapuntal interest you might not have suspected that it had, and that compensates for the lack of sheer power."

With the Fifth you and I usually think alike so it'll probably be a CD I love to hate 

Sarge

[Octave]

Thanks for the clarification, Jens; and for all this recent conversation about favorites etc, everybody.

I'm certain I will have gotten a few more Sibelius cycles before summer's end, absolutely no doubt.  I'd like to start exploring a lot of the non-symphonic music as well; for that, I've relied almost entirely upon the Bis ESSENTIAL box and extra material appended to the sets I've gotten (most generously the Berglund/Helsinki/Bournemouth EMI 8cd "blue box", about a disc of which ended up in that recent 4cd Bournemouth cycle reissue).

[TheGSMoeller]

Out of the sets I've been listening to via Spotify, the one that continues to stick in my mind is Segerstam/Helsinki on Ondine...





I love the way that Segerstam concludes many of these works, especially the handling of the 4th's final minutes. It becomes so desolate, so tragic, more so than any other recording I've heard (so far). With just over a minute left, starting with the question and answering between the flute and oboe, Segerstam builds patience, with stretched pauses, allowing these darker moments to sink in longer.
Plus, the balancing seems just right. The ending if the 7th is perfect example, the increasing wave of sound leading up to the final "amen" chords, the trombones followed by the lower strings has never sounded so pure.

One factor I'm high on with the Berglund/Bournemouth set is the power it conveys. Perhaps it's the way it's recorded, but at times it sounds like a much larger orchestra, I've never thought of Sibelius as a very muscular composer, but these performances attempt to alter that view.

[Sadko]

Out of the sets I've been listening to via Spotify, the one that continues to stick in my mind is Segerstam/Helsinki on Ondine...

If I could have only one I think I'd also choose this one.

[mahler10th]

Out of the sets I've been listening to via Spotify, the one that continues to stick in my mind is Segerstam/Helsinki on Ondine...



I've never thought of Sibelius as a very muscular composer, but these performances attempt to alter that view.

This is surprising!  Not very muscular?  I have an idea of what you mean, but no idea whatever made you think such a thing     I've always thought of Sibelius as 'robust' and 'muscular' in his compositions.  We are at opposite ends of the scale.  Maybe there is some middle ground, or perhaps your new listening will indeed alter you into hearing  the Sibelius 'muscular' side. Interesting...

[Mirror Image]

It really doesn't matter whether Sibelius' music is muscular or not, this doesn't alter or hinder my enjoyment of his music. His music is what it is and doesn't need to be anything else, but I don't think Monkey Greg meant his comment in a derogatory way.

If you want some Sibelian muscle, just listen to the last movement of Symphony No. 2 or listen to Tapiola or Kullervo.

[TheGSMoeller]

This is surprising!  Not very muscular?  I have an idea of what you mean, but no idea whatever made you think such a thing     I've always thought of Sibelius as 'robust' and 'muscular' in his compositions.  We are at opposite ends of the scale.  Maybe there is some middle ground, or perhaps your new listening will indeed alter you into hearing  the Sibelius 'muscular' side. Interesting...

Hi, Scots John,

I'll agree that his compositional writing is very robust, very full-bodied.

And John (M.I.) is right, me not seeing Sibelius as "muscular" was in no way derogatory, and it also doesn't mean that his fortissimos are any less fortissimo than other composers. Perhaps it's because the lighter and softer moments from Sibelius' symphonies have affected me more, like the second movement of his 3rd, or the ending of the 4th and 6th.

And that's what I am crediting Berglund/Bourenmouth with, for opening my ears to this brawniness, not just within his writing, but with its projections.

[mahler10th]

Hi, Scots John,

I'll agree that his compositional writing is very robust, very full-bodied.

And John (M.I.) is right, me not seeing Sibelius as "muscular" was in no way derogatory, and it also doesn't mean that his fortissimos are any less fortissimo than other composers. Perhaps it's because the lighter and softer moments from Sibelius' symphonies have affected me more, like the second movement of his 3rd, or the ending of the 4th and 6th.

And that's what I am crediting Berglund/Bourenmouth with, for opening my ears to this brawniness, not just within his writing, but with its projections.

***Flexes muscles***

I sure hope I didn't sound pushy or offensive in my last post.     I'm just surprised that such a view exists!  It is wonderful to hear things like this, it completely challenges me to reassess what I hear.  Great stuff.

[Parsifal]

And that's what I am crediting Berglund/Bourenmouth with, for opening my ears to this brawniness, not just within his writing, but with its projections.

Oddly, Berlund/Bournmouth struck me for its transparency of texture and clarity in elucidating form, which I suppose would be the opposite of "brawniness", to the extent to which I know what you mean by "brawniness."  The only two symphonies of Sibelius that I might be tempted to characterize as "brawny" would be the Tchaikovskyesq first and second, and I found Berglund's performances of those unsatisfactory, for lack of a sufficiently hefty orchestral sound.  Interesting that the same recordings could create such different impressions in different listeners.

[TheGSMoeller]

***Flexes muscles***

I sure hope I didn't sound pushy or offensive in my last post.     I'm just surprised that such a view exists!  It is wonderful to hear things like this, it completely challenges me to reassess what I hear.  Great stuff.

How dare you push me!     

A great aspect of music is being able to hear different things, reading through this Sibelius thread has given me more appreciation to his music. I've had the Blomstedt set for many years now, still pleased with it, but Berglund, Segerstam, Ashkenazy and Bernstein all offer a unique insight that I may have been unaware of.

I did some across a Sibelius site that I think I saw you on. Some pretty good info to be found there also.

[Mirror Image]

Oddly, Berlund/Bournmouth struck me for its transparency of texture and clarity in elucidating form, which I suppose would be the opposite of "brawniness", to the extent to which I know what you mean by "brawniness."  The only two symphonies of Sibelius that I might be tempted to characterize as "brawny" would be the Tchaikovskyesq first and second, and I found Berglund's performances of those unsatisfactory, for lack of a sufficiently hefty orchestral sound.  Interesting that the same recordings could create such different impressions in different listeners.

I wasn't too impressed with Berglund's Bournemouth cycle. His Helsinki is still my favorite among those two cycles. Haven't heard his Chamber Orchestra of Europe cycle, but given I like a large orchestra for Sibelius, I doubt I would be thrilled with those performances.

[TheGSMoeller]

Oddly, Berlund/Bournmouth struck me for its transparency of texture and clarity in elucidating form, which I suppose would be the opposite of "brawniness", to the extent to which I know what you mean by "brawniness."  The only two symphonies of Sibelius that I might be tempted to characterize as "brawny" would be the Tchaikovskyesq first and second, and I found Berglund's performances of those unsatisfactory, for lack of a sufficiently hefty orchestral sound.  Interesting that the same recordings could create such different impressions in different listeners.

And as I mentioned before, it (Berglund) may be the way it was recorded, but the way it came through on my headphones was heftier than others I was listening to.

My new found interest in Sibelius' symphonies is definitely giving me new perspective, and perhaps the more I discover, the more I'll see Berglund the way you do, Parsifal. Thanks for the post. 

[Parsifal]

And as I mentioned before, it (Berglund) may be the way it was recorded, but the way it came through on my headphones was heftier than others I was listening to.

My new found interest in Sibelius' symphonies is definitely giving me new perspective, and perhaps the more I discover, the more I'll see Berglund the way you do, Parsifal. Thanks for the post. 

Well, there are some things in a musical performance or composition that can be objectively defined, and others that are quite subjective, and we've wandered into the latter area.   I'm quite anxious to listen to Berlund's last Sibelius cycle, with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe.  His middle cycle, with Helsinki for EMI, did little for me, though the consensus seems to be that it is one of the more worthwhile cycles available.

[Brian]

It's funny that Segerstam gets singled out here for the excellence of his endings when - although I love the cycle very much and his First and Seventh are my all-time #1 choices (his Third is co-#1) - the thing I think about most with Segerstam is, why did he ruin the ending of the Fifth?!?!?! If it weren't for his needless rush through the last 60 seconds of #5, I'd be very very happy with Segerstam as my "desert island" cycle. As is, I can't choose him.

[Mirror Image]

Good call, Brian. I don't recall liking Segerstam's 5th too much nor do I care much for his 6th. My favorite 5th is a toss-up between Vanska/Lahti and Bernstein/NY Phil. My favorite 6th is Vanska/Lahti. Since the 5th is so popular and seems to be ingrained into so many classical listeners' minds, this symphony is quite possibly the most critiqued of the seven. I need to spend more time with the 5th myself. I always seem to flock to the 4th, 6th, and 7th.

[TheGSMoeller]

It's funny that Segerstam gets singled out here for the excellence of his endings when - although I love the cycle very much and his First and Seventh are my all-time #1 choices (his Third is co-#1) - the thing I think about most with Segerstam is, why did he ruin the ending of the Fifth?!?!?! If it weren't for his needless rush through the last 60 seconds of #5, I'd be very very happy with Segerstam as my "desert island" cycle. As is, I can't choose him.

I've heard the ending of the 5th taken in different tempos. The brief final build up leading to the separated 'button' chords is marked un pochettino stretto in the score.