Brahms' Third Symphony

[Drasko]

I like Abbado/Dresden...

Now that is something I'd love to hear.

Have you heard that?

No, just noticed that there was a CD release.

[jochanaan]

...So, has anyone came across any good recordings recently?...

Not "recently," but my perennial favorite Brahms set is by Wolfgang Sawallisch and the Vienna Symphony (not Philharmonic); very naturally flexible.  You don't realize just how free Sawallisch is with the tempo until you try to conduct along...

The Celi Brahms set is also good, and less "drawn-out" than you might expect, but for some reason the Third on that set is a little too flexible for me.  Just my taste.  I tend to like my Brahms not too slow and heavy and drawn-out.

[rappy]

I'm still looking for a recording of the third which is as con brio as Karajan but more passionate.
I listened to the recommended Sanderling/Dresden, but wtf, where is the con brio? Same with Bernstein and Celi (of course...)

[Tyson]

Dorati, Jochum, or Szell will give you what you want.

[mjwal]

I've just rushed through this thread after a long absence, so forgive me not mentioning any names:
I too like the Orfeo Mitropoulos (& the badly recorded NYPO performance), but it is not my favourite. My favourite is the (sometimes erratically played) version by Hermann Scherchen, where the "stuttering" and almost desperately tormented quality comes to the fore in the last movement; other conductors have all disappointed me here, just when I expect the symphony's true climax followed by that ineffably "all passion spent" coda. I get Walter out occasionally, ditto Mravinsky & Wand. I haven't explored any more recent recording than the latter; I just cannot believe that Chailly et al. are going to ring my bell. In fact I believe that the age of great conductors of classical music has passed: I have consistently got more thrills from concerts/recordings of modern music, from Xenakis to Lachenmann, than from more traditional fare in recent interpretations. I haven't liked anything by Gardiner so far, outside of Bach (hated that much touted Missa Solemnis!), so I am waiting rather tepidly for reports on his new 3rd.

[Renfield]

I haven't liked anything by Gardiner so far, outside of Bach (hated that much touted Missa Solemnis!), so I am waiting rather tepidly for reports on his new 3rd.

Occasionally affable steely blitzkrieg Brahms. But the choral works on the disc are well worth it!

[rubio]

My favourite is the (sometimes erratically played) version by Hermann Scherchen, where the "stuttering" and almost desperately tormented quality comes to the fore in the last movement; other conductors have all disappointed me here, just when I expect the symphony's true climax followed by that ineffably "all passion spent" coda.

Is this one from Lugano (on Tahra)?

[ccar]

 

I'm still looking for a recording of the third which is as con brio as Karajan but more passionate. I listened to the recommended Sanderling/Dresden, but wtf, where is the con brio? Same with Bernstein and Celi (of course...)

I can't comment on Karajan. But if you look for a con brio reading of the Brahms 3rd I would name Hermann Abendroth. There are at least 4 Abendroth recordings of the S3 (Leipzig 1949; Prague 1950; Czech 1951; Leipzig 1952; Berlin RSO 1956.) but for the sheer drive sensation I would go for the Berlin 1956 or the Leipzig 1952. (the 1952 Berlin Classics is probably more easy to find).

I too like the Orfeo Mitropoulos (& the badly recorded NYPO performance), but it is not my favourite. My favourite is the (sometimes erratically played) version by Hermann Scherchen, where the "stuttering" and almost desperately tormented quality comes to the fore in the last movement; other conductors have all disappointed me here, just when I expect the symphony's true climax followed by that ineffably "all passion spent" coda.

Scherchen is also a favorite of mine, as a conductor, a musician and a personality. And his wonderful Indian Summer at Lugano produced some of the most impressive musical experiences I may imagine. I already mentioned in another thread his Beethoven's symphonies and rehearsals which for me are even more special than his Brahms. But probably we do belong to same Scherchen (and Mitropoulos) fan club.  

Carlos        

[not edward]

Is this one from Lugano (on Tahra)?

This sounds like something for me to look out for. I don't always like what Scherchen does, but it's always interesting...and the description of this interpretation makes it sound unusually different from the norm.

[mjwal]

Yes, Carlos, the same club, indeed. I wasn't there in Lugano, but in a way I was - when German radio decades ago played a series of Beethoven symphonies with rehearsals. I don't know when I've ever been so off my head as with the rehearsal of the 7th, it was all there in the room, the demented cries of encouragement and the mediocre orchestra being pushed over the top - dionysian is the word. After that I managed to tape the actual performance - which wasn't quite so exciting, but still great.
To answer rubio's question, I've got the Brahms #3 on Aura + the Dvorak concerto w/Fournier, but it is from Lugano, I think. The only Scherchen I have on Tahra - whenever I look, they're either o.o.p or too expensive for me (I hardly ever spend more than 15 Euro per CD at most) - is the 1950 Mahler #3 with Rössl Majdan, which I love.

[Sergeant Rock]

I haven't liked anything by Gardiner...(hated that much touted Missa Solemnis!)

Amen, brother!

...so I am waiting rather tepidly for reports on his new 3rd.

The Hurwitzer says: "Gardiner's view of the Third Symphony is like a fan: it blows and sucks at the same time." 

Full review here: http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12498

Sarge

[Renfield]

The Hurwitzer says: "Gardiner's view of the Third Symphony is like a fan: it blows and sucks at the same time." 

Full review here: http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12498

Sarge

But he also says Toscanini and Furtwängler (!!!) "screwed up" the 3rd symphony too. I'm not crazy for Gardiner's, but I'd listen to it five times a day and ask for more, if the alternative were endorsing that statement.

[Martin Lind]

I can't compete with the collections of many here. I think Karajan is good, Thomas Sanderling less so. But what I really love is an interpretation with Furtwängler ( I think 1952 ), life, not so bad sound. There is agogic, especially in the first set and I really got the impression to listen to this music completely afresh. I liked that alot.

Regards
Martin

[Sergeant Rock]

But he also says Toscanini and Furtwängler (!!!) "screwed up" the 3rd symphony too.

Yeah, the guy's completely mad    Seriously, I don't know what the hell he's talking about. Fürtwängler's Third (18.12.49 with the Berlin Phil) is my absolute favorite version of the symphony. Nonetheless, I think I'll trust him about Gardiner's.

Sarge

[Brian]

Nonetheless, I think I'll trust him about Gardiner's.

Indeed; I've found that in most instances, when Hurwitz awards less than 5 in the artistic category, he has very good reasons for doing so, and expresses them clearly, citing the original scores. I'm looking forward to seeing how he eviscerates reviews Simon Rattle's new Brahms cycle*.

*I haven't heard it, but I know what Hurwitz thinks of the Rattle/Berlin partnership from reviews like this one.

[Renfield]

Yeah, the guy's completely mad    Seriously, I don't know what the hell he's talking about. Fürtwängler's Third (18.12.49 with the Berlin Phil) is my absolute favorite version of the symphony. Nonetheless, I think I'll trust him about Gardiner's.

Sarge

Oh yeah, he's mostly right on Gardiner's 3rd. Rather, as if most often the case with his rubbish*, nothing he reports about the performance is an outright lie; but the end result is entirely in line with Gardiner's "previous efforts in the series".

It's just that the 3rd takes on a more disagreeable appearance when treated in the steely manner Gardiner reserves for Brahms' music, so as to 'properly de-romanticise it' - what he calls being faithful to Brahms' intentions, if I remember correctly an interview he gave for Gramophone around the time the first issue was released. It (the 3rd) becomes colourless, instead of 'edgy'.

Conversely, the choral works on the third volume are wonderful in my opinion (using Abbado's readings as a comparison, also very good, also in my opinion), and not at all bad just because the 3rd isn't excellent, so we thus we have to reject everything about the disc like a baby - how was it that M put it? - "shitting all over the place because that's the only way it can attract attention".




* Even though the last sentence, above, makes it obvious how vehemently I dislike Hurwitz's brand of 'reviewing', I'd like to make it plainer:

I have no problem with Hurwitz's skill with turns of phrase - though it impresses me little, both within the context of his profession and in general. Others are as eloquent, but not as inclined to show off. But his way of selectively, vehemently condemning particular recordings without a seeming afterthought for what people might find to like in them, always looking at what they should dislike, is wrong.

Not because, as a method, it's been outlawed. In fact, it's quite useful, this sort of viciousness in criticism (see: E. Hanslick). Yet like Hanslick, Hurwitz never makes it explicit that this is his manner of approach, while reviewing within the context of other people who do not subscribe to the cult of Authority of the Reviewer-God, like Jed Distler; Hurwitz is a century too late, and proud of it. He is inconsistent, much like M pretending to be a force of nature, all the while he's still a human, and IMO not one of the most musically knowledgeable critics, either.

Finally, and crucially, I do not enjoy anyone eviscerating (cf. Brian's post) anything, because to me, this betrays a total lack of respect for its source. Is Hurwitz smarter than Gardiner? Is Gardiner smarter than Hurwitz? Does it matter? In my world, criticism has absolutely no relation to comparing the size of one's di- knowledge with that of others', but is rather an act of intelligent assessment, on paper.

For example,

"The finale, taken at a ridiculous tempo given the range of feeling that the music wants to express".

What the f[ornicate] does that mean, apart from 'I did not like his speed in the finale'? I do not want to have to take for granted that 'Hurwitz knows', when he does not put down on paper anything other than the critics' equivalent of booing or cheering for a record. Hanslick, in direct comparsion, not only backed up, but based his viciousness on the grounds of a consistent theory of aesthetic excellence, that stands on its own philosophical merits enough to be studied still. Hurwitz is just a cheap imitation, destroying the value of his informed views with the inconsistency with which he applies them; he is M, only he gets paid for being a music critic, and so I much prefer M.

[Renfield]

On a separate and less extended note, Simon Rattle's reading of the 3rd was an interesting one to me, though not a top choice.

As usual, he brings out the structural undercurrents, and formal cogency of the piece, but it just feels like he should have given it a little more of an opportunity to breathe... On the other hand, it's very informative: much like Bernstein's!


(For comparison, I loved Rattle's 2nd, and the 1st past the opening movement, which also had the issue I report with the 3rd, above.)

[MishaK]

Indeed; I've found that in most instances, when Hurwitz awards less than 5 in the artistic category, he has very good reasons for doing so, and expresses them clearly, citing the original scores. I'm looking forward to seeing how he eviscerates reviews Simon Rattle's new Brahms cycle*.

*I haven't heard it, but I know what Hurwitz thinks of the Rattle/Berlin partnership from reviews like this one.

I reviewed Rattle's Brahms cycle (among other recent BPO recordings) at length HERE.

[Sorin Eushayson]

The Hurwitzer says

The Sorinater says: anything Hurwitz hates must be good! 

[cosmicj]

Surprised by the criticism of Gardiner here but I absolutely agree.  I have three of his recordings (Bach B-minor Mass, Schumann's Peri oratorio & the Carissimmi disc) and find all of them conducted unmusically.  Up until now, I've been surrounded by universal praise for Gardiner and absolutely perplexed by it.  Anyway, thanks for knowledgeable commentary about the beautiful Brahms 3rd.  Don't want to derail the thread.