GMG Classical Music Forum

-

Herein, your are most cordially invited to discuss Beethoven symphony recordings, whether individual issues or integral cycles. All such recordings, bar none, are welcomed; to be compared, contrasted and debated to our hearts' content.


And if I might offer a more personal prompt, a solid representation of good (not boring, not plodding, not tired) non-HIP cycles would be a very good start, seeing as more historically-conscious performance styles have had a head-start. 8)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Courtesy of Que, below are previous threads specifically devoted to one of the Beethoven symphonies in particular:


Beethovens 1st Symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4043.msg96963.html#msg96963)

Beethoven 2nd (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,5995.msg142256.html#msg142256)

Beethoven's 3rd symphony recommendations (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,11339.msg280736.html#msg280736)

Beethoven's 4th Symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,3932.msg94845.html#msg94845)

Beethoven Symphony No.5 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4047.msg97088.html#msg97088)

Beethoven's 6th Symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4604.msg110506.html#msg110506)

Beethoven's 7th Symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,3764.msg91441.html#msg91441)

Your favorite recordings of Beethoven's 9th symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,2638.msg67628.html#msg67628)

Recordings that you enjoy: Beethoven Symphony #9 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,12281.msg302312.html#msg302312)

The Best and Cheapest Beethoven's Ninth (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,7278.msg173583.html#msg173583)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


To start the discussion off here, and for your general delectation, I thus offer Toscanini's Beethoven cycle with the NBC Symphony Orchestra, recorded over a series of live concerts in 1939. Historical sound or otherwise, interpretatively, this is a cycle that never fails to impress (me) with its directness, certainty of articulation, and thoroughly 'modern' aesthetic. In fact, I firmly believe that if this set had been afforded the sound of the 1952 studio set, choosing between them would be a non-issue.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41cm01pVf-L._SL500_AA240_.jpg)


Interestingly, of all the contemporary Beethoven cycles I have and have heard, it's Vänskä that I have felt most approaches Toscanini purely in terms of rhythmic articulation, even if the former opts for a more dynamically 'reserved' sound.

And indeed, even that to a lesser degree than one might expect, doing a side-by-side comparison.


Edit: However, common to a few other GMG members, I have not yet heard Järvi Jr.

A series of recordings that are excellent, spiritual successors to Toscanini but in stereo are done by Monteux.  Swift tempos, classicist eye to the structure, but always finds the emotional heart.  I don't know if you can find an easy to find cycle of his, but they are worth listening to. :)

Interesting. I realise I've never heard Monteux's Beethoven: a twofer is available on Decca (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-Symphonies-Vienna-Philharmonic-Orchestra/dp/B00000422R/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1265668740&sr=8-1), with Symphonies 1, 3, 6, 8.

Which is cool, sad though how so many of his other recordings just went oop.  Yeah that twofer is cool, worth hearing. :)

Quote from: Renfield on February 08, 2010, 01:39:54 PM
Interesting. I realise I've never heard Monteux's Beethoven: a twofer is available on Decca (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-Symphonies-Vienna-Philharmonic-Orchestra/dp/B00000422R/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1265668740&sr=8-1), with Symphonies 1, 3, 6, 8.

Worth hearing definitely, but the other twofer with 2, 4, 5, 7 is the better of the two. The 5th doesn't completely carry the momentum after incredible first movement but all three other symphonies are reference stuff, for me at least.

Oddly, the other twofer seems OOP. Decca logic.

Or is it Universal Music Group? I forget. ::)


On a related note, someone contemporary who, to my ears, tries very hard to hit the 'swift classicist' vein for Beethoven is Dausgaard. However, and though his cycle is very good, occasionally the effort seems to show a little.

It's like his Beethoven unfolds, in a very captivating fashion: but by comparison, his Schumann just happens.

(I recall someone enquiring about his Schumann lately. That's a must-get, IMO. Especially the 1st.)

Quote from: Drasko on February 08, 2010, 01:50:08 PM
Worth hearing definitely, but the other twofer with 2, 4, 5, 7 is the better of the two. The 5th doesn't completely carry the momentum after incredible first movement but all three other symphonies are reference stuff, for me at least.

I have both but there is no 9th. I agree that the works recorded with the LSO (2, 4, 5, 7) is better than the ones done with the VPO but they do combine to make a great cycle that is minus the 'Choral'.

There are many LvB sets out there both historic and modern with those recorded in between. No set I've heard has fully satisfied me. There has usually been a symphony or two in each set that has let the side down. In most cycles this has been the 7th and this is certainly been so in all of Toscanini's essays.

So I can't recommend a full set of the LvB symphonies. I've heard and bought many and this is what I've kept.

Toscanini NBCSO - RCA
Bruno Walter NYPO and Philadelphia (mono), Columbia SO (minus the 9th)
Andre Cluytens - BPO
Rene Leibowitz - RPO
Monteux (as mentioned minus the 9th)

Quote from: Renfield on February 08, 2010, 01:21:47 PM
To start the discussion off, and for your general delectation, I thus offer Toscanini's Beethoven cycle with the NBC Symphony Orchestra, recorded over a series of live concerts in 1939. Historical sound or otherwise, interpretatively, this is a cycle that never fails to impress (me) with its directness, certainty of articulation, and thoroughly 'modern' aesthetic. In fact, I firmly believe that if this set had been afforded the sound of the 1952 studio set, choosing between them would be a non-issue.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41cm01pVf-L._SL500_AA240_.jpg)

Hi Renfield!

Are these the same performances that were offered on Naxos as part of the Tocanini Concert Edition and/or on RCA Gold Seal as part of the Arturo Toscanini collection? If so, how do the transfers compare?

Can I also ask how these performances compare to his later ones on RCA?

I wanted to +1 the Walter (either one) and Cluytens mentioned in Holden's post, the second is zippy, the former is very (to piss off Jens) IMPACTFUL. 0:)

Quote from: Holden on February 08, 2010, 11:12:48 PM
I have both but there is no 9th. I agree that the works recorded with the LSO (2, 4, 5, 7) is better than the ones done with the VPO but they do combine to make a great cycle that is minus the 'Choral'.

There is a 9th (which I haven't heard), but it wasn't released for Decca but for Westminster and later on CD from DG in their Westminster series, out of print now.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HBNGAAPML.jpg)

I think there was a box of all nine from Japanese Decca/Universal at one point. Not completely sure though.

Quote from: Renfield on February 08, 2010, 01:21:47 PM
Herein, your are most cordially invited to discuss Beethoven symphony recordings, whether individual issues or integral cycles. All such recordings, bar none, are welcomed; to be compared, contrasted and debated to our hearts' content.

If I could suggest to Renfield to edit the title subject line of this forum thread Beethoven Symphonies on Record

It is confusing in that it sounds like you are asking for vinyl record versions of Beethoven Symphonies
(unless that is actually what you are seeking)

Quote from: Drasko on February 09, 2010, 04:10:24 AM
There is a 9th (which I haven't heard), but it wasn't released for Decca but for Westminster and later on CD from DG in their Westminster series, out of print now.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HBNGAAPML.jpg)

I think there was a box of all nine from Japanese Decca/Universal at one point. Not completely sure though.

Yes good idea, that is exactly how I made up my complete Monteux Beethoven set:

2CD Decca/WP 1,3,6,8
2CD Decca/LSO 2,4,5,7
1CD Westminster/LSO 9

Quote from: DarkAngel on February 09, 2010, 04:13:56 AM

If I could suggest to Renfield to edit the title subject line of this forum thread Beethoven Symphonies on Record

Though I see what you mean, I like the title. It has a 'classic' ring to it that appeals to me.

I am not thrilled by Toscanini's Beethoven.  :P

Quote from: Beethovenian on February 09, 2010, 05:09:39 AM
I am not thrilled by Toscanini's Beethoven.  :P

What are your favs? :)

Quote from: DavidW on February 09, 2010, 05:36:34 AM
What are your favs? :)

This music is done so well by so many. Ugh. Szell does a great job if we're talking one cycle. I mostly collect Nines and like Wand, Reiner and Furtwangler for that one.

Quote from: Beethovenian on February 09, 2010, 05:39:50 AM
This music is done so well by so many. Ugh. Szell does a great job if we're talking one cycle. I mostly collect Nines and like Wand, Reiner and Furtwangler for that one.

Me too, Dave. If you go shopping for more 9ths, and like that stylistic grouping, let me suggest 2 excellent additions to you: Kletzki/Czech PO and Jochum/Concertgebouw.  Both from <>1968. Of your 3 mentioned, I particularly like the Wand. :)

8)

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 09, 2010, 05:47:29 AM
Me too, Dave. If you go shopping for more 9ths, and like that stylistic grouping, let me suggest 2 excellent additions to you: Kletzki/Czech PO and Jochum/Concertgebouw.  Both from <>1968. Of your 3 mentioned, I particularly like the Wand. :)

8)

Yes, well, you have me to thank for that if I remember correctly.  0:)

Thanks for the recs, friend!

Quote from: Beethovenian on February 09, 2010, 05:49:38 AM
Yes, well, you have me to thank for that if I remember correctly.  0:)

Thanks for the recs, friend!

Yes, you and M, actually. What a pair! ;D

My pleasure. I want everyone to be able to enjoy the 9th as much as I do. :)

8)

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 09, 2010, 05:54:05 AM
Yes, you and M, actually. What a pair! ;D

My pleasure. I want everyone to be able to enjoy the 9th as much as I do. :)

8)

It's my favorite symphony, so no problems with that here.

Aside form the Karajan 1970s set and the Bernstein/Vienna - the ones I am currently enjoying are Jarvi and Dausgaard. 

For me, the older sets are dramatic in a serious manner, whereas Dausgaard and Parvi are dramatic in a surprise way - which I think is more appropriate to these works.  I have felt that Beethoven has suffered from to much gravitas imposed on the music, I am aware of this especially in the symphonies, so I am happy that the newer recordings are taking a lighter more spirited approach.

I plan completing the sets of Dausgaard and Parvi discs, since they exemplify this approach.

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 09, 2010, 05:47:29 AM
Me too, Dave. If you go shopping for more 9ths, and like that stylistic grouping, let me suggest 2 excellent additions to you: Kletzki/Czech PO and Jochum/Concertgebouw.  Both from <>1968. Of your 3 mentioned, I particularly like the Wand. :)

Wand's RCA set is my favorite.

I also like Szell's and Barenboim's. They complement each other well, with Wand occupying a space (interpretivey) somewhere in between.

I also love HvK's 1963 set on DG.

Quote from: Drasko on February 09, 2010, 04:10:24 AM
There is a 9th (which I haven't heard), but it wasn't released for Decca but for Westminster and later on CD from DG in their Westminster series, out of print now.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HBNGAAPML.jpg)

I think there was a box of all nine from Japanese Decca/Universal at one point. Not completely sure though.

I have the Monteux 9th on CD but also on original 2-LP vinyl. Got the set many years ago...but long after I'd becme a fan of the Monteux/LSO Beethovens (2, 4 & 7 in particular). As a result, I had VERY high hopes for the 9th, but was ultimately disappointed. It ain't Papa Monteux's best IMO. Interp aside, there's a kind of odd balance in the recording, and it was the gatefold album notes of the vinyl version that explained this to me. Apparently the recording set-up not only separated 1st and 2nd violins, but also seated the orchestra on a specially raked stage AND repositioned some of the instruments compared to a more "standard" orchestral layout. Don't recall how the singers/chorus were positioned. (Hey, I'm going by memory...ALWAYS an iffy thing. I can try digging my album off the shelves when I get home if anyone wants more specifics.)

If you want to sample Monteux's best in Beethoven, do go for the 2,4,5,7 set. And Drasko is absolutely right: it's the 2, 4 and 7 that are the top tier items here...the 4th and 7th being my own top choices among studio recordings of the stereo era. The LSO plays with real verve and the Decca recording engineers also did a splendid job. The recordings were originally done under contract for RCA and released in the US on the budget Victrola label LPs; honestly, if you can find r-e-a-l-l-y clean vinyl originals -- maroon label or even the later pink label from the "dynaflop" era -- those probably offer the best representation of the original analog sonics. Ownership later reverted to Decca, who released them on both London and Decca budget LPs and, during the past two decades or so, CDs. More recently, as in the last 10 years, high-ticket reissues on 180- or 200-gram vinyl have been available, with reproductions of the RCA Victrola original album covers; nice clean surfaces, but IMO not particularly preferable to originals for sonics. And most collectors will opt for the 2-CD pack anyway, I'm sure.

FWIW,

Dirk

Quote from: George on February 09, 2010, 06:10:59 AM
Wand's RCA set is my favorite.

Yep, mine as well I think. Beautifully recorded and played. Think I'll spin some of it when I get home later!

Quote from: DarkAngel on February 09, 2010, 04:13:56 AM

If I could suggest to Renfield to edit the title subject line of this forum thread Beethoven Symphonies on Record

It is confusing in that it sounds like you are asking for vinyl record versions of Beethoven Symphonies
(unless that is actually what you are seeking)

'On record' was intended to denote an open discussion of the recorded history of Beethoven's symphonies, vs. some sort of stylistic or historical/modern divide. LPs could even be brought up, within the context, as by dirkronk just now.

Making this, by design, more a discussion thread than a recommendation thread, though the concepts are intrinsically connected. :)

(In other words, it's perfectly fine to exchange recommendations - that's part of what we're all here for!

But I nonetheless wanted as broad a subject line as possible.)

Quote from: George on February 09, 2010, 03:35:07 AM
Hi Renfield!

Are these the same performances that were offered on Naxos as part of the Tocanini Concert Edition and/or on RCA Gold Seal as part of the Arturo Toscanini collection? If so, how do the transfers compare?

Can I also ask how these performances compare to his later ones on RCA?

Hi George.

Regarding the Naxos series, I believe they are. And though I've not heard the Naxos versions myself, I have gathered from hearsay that the Music & Arts release has the best remastering this cycle has been afforded so far.

I'm not sure if RCA has ever released these, but I'm pretty certain they released the 1952 cycle in four (?) volumes, as part of the Arturo Toscanini Collection. Which would lead me to expect they didn't also release the 1939 cycle in the same series.


Performance-wise, Toscanini's conducting is noticeably more confident here, than in 1952: it sounds less like being pushed to '11', and more like a skillful etching of the dynamics of the symphonies (especially the earlier ones) that involves impact, but does not obsessively revolve around it. Frankly, and even though I also love the 1952 cycle, I think Toscanini was starting to get a little old for what he was trying to achieve, by that point. But, I'll hasten to add, you can only tell by comparing him to himself! ;)

The 1939 Eroica, for instance, blows the 1952 out of the water. And even though both Pastorals are great, the earlier one feels a little more balanced, even if it's possibly a bit faster than the 1952 version. The 1939 9th is also much happier, '9thier' than in 1952.

Holden is right about the 7th, though: in neither cycle does it work as well as the rest; most especially when we have that staggering Toscanini concert with the NYPO on Naxos Historical that I've recommended in the past, to compare it with.

(For the record, I was happy to confirm my suspicion that Vänskä would come close to that one, stylistically. But not quite 'up there'.)



All this with the proviso of highly restricted sound, very good for 1939, but so very far away from 1952. :(

Quote from: Renfield on February 09, 2010, 07:28:48 AM
Hi George.

Regarding the Naxos series, I believe they are. And though I've not heard the Naxos versions myself, I have gathered from hearsay that the Music & Arts release has the best remastering this cycle has been afforded so far.

Given that Ward Marston mastered the 1939 performances for RCA, I would be very surprised if the Music and Arts masterings were better. Perhaps they found a better source?

QuoteI'm not sure if RCA has ever released these, but I'm pretty certain they released the 1952 cycle in four (?) volumes, as part of the Arturo Toscanini Collection. Which would lead me to expect they didn't also release the 1939 cycle in the same series.

I think they did. It was a multi volume set. My two Beethoven CDs from that set are numbered volume 25 and 26 or something like that.

QuotePerformance-wise, Toscanini's conducting is noticeably more confident here, tha an in 1952: it sounds less like being pushed to '11

Yes, I hear that as well and though I like the few 1939 performances I have heard from Toscanini, I still prefer Szell for this style of conducting

Quote from: George on February 09, 2010, 08:44:17 AM
Yes, I hear that as well and though I like the few 1939 performances I have heard from Toscanini, I still prefer Szell for this style of conducting

(http://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/ngmg/bUTTHEAD.gif)


Sarge

I don't see any mention of Vanska.  His SACD cycle is available for a very reasonable price, in excerpts it seems lively, but perhaps too light for my taste.  Any comments?

Quote from: Scarpia on February 10, 2010, 07:32:31 AM
I don't see any mention of Vanska.  His SACD cycle is available for a very reasonable price, in excerpts it seems lively, but perhaps too light for my taste.  Any comments?

I've heard the 9th, thought at the time that it was a little dry but well played.  But maybe I'm too picky.

Quote from: Scarpia on February 10, 2010, 07:32:31 AM
I don't see any mention of Vanska.  His SACD cycle is available for a very reasonable price, in excerpts it seems lively, but perhaps too light for my taste.  Any comments?

Quote from: Renfield on February 08, 2010, 01:21:47 PM
Interestingly, of all the contemporary Beethoven cycles I have and have heard, it's Vänskä that I have felt most approaches Toscanini purely in terms of rhythmic articulation, even if the former opts for a more dynamically 'reserved' sound.

And indeed, even that to a lesser degree than one might expect, doing a side-by-side comparison.

:'(

;)


Much like this post, Vänskä's Beethoven is of the 'less is more' school. But no one modern beats his ear for rhythm, IMO.

Edit: That I've heard. Maybe Järvi does, for all the excitement about him!

Quote from: Renfield on February 10, 2010, 08:43:08 AM
:'(

;)


Much like this post, Vänskä's Beethoven is of the 'less is more' school. But no one modern beats his ear for rhythm, IMO.

Edit: That I've heard. Maybe Järvi does, for all the excitement about him!

Sorry, when I search for Vanska it does not find Vänskä.

Quote from: Scarpia on February 10, 2010, 08:52:43 AM
Sorry, when I search for Vanska it does not find Vänskä.

It does on Google.  Try Osmo Vänskä; or Osmo Vanska.  They both show the same person.

Quote from: Scarpia on February 10, 2010, 08:52:43 AM
Sorry, when I search for Vanska it does not find Vänskä.

It's him you should apologise to, for looking him up under the wrong name. :P

Besides the joke, though, all forum search engines I've ever used have been a pain in the backside over things like that.

I must say, stuck at home in the Blizzard, I've had a bit of a revelation.  Last week I listened to Beethoven Symphony No. 3 By Immerseel and his HIP band.  Although I've enjoyed other selections form this set, I was bored by the Eroica.  Today, I put on Barenboim's recording with the Staatskapel Berlin.  What a difference!  Immerseel's funeral march clocks in at just over 13 minutes, it left me wondering when it would end.  Barenboim's is just over 18 minutes, and I was savoring every generously performed note of it.  The impression from the other three movements was similar.  Immerseel's band was straining just to play the notes, and imposing a strictly defined aesthetic on this music, while Barenboim and his superb ensemble were finding exquisite insights in every bar.  There were certainly liberties and indulgences taken, but I was, by and large, convinced.

I am a serious devotee of HIP, I think we need to know what composers expected to hear when they created their music.  But we can't be limited by that.   Full modern orchestra with a creative conductor can find things in the music that even the composer didn't imagine could be realized. 

And I will be looking for more recordings by Barenboim and the Staatskapelle Berlin.

Quote from: Holden on February 08, 2010, 11:12:48 PM

So I can't recommend a full set of the LvB symphonies. I've heard and bought many and this is what I've kept.

Andre Cluytens - BPO

Holden - there is only the Cluytens 6th around on Testament. Is it one of the greatest 6th around - besides B Walter and K Bohm?

Quote from: MichaelRabin on February 10, 2010, 01:35:11 PM
there is only the Cluytens 6th around on Testament. Is it one of the greatest 6th around - besides B Walter and K Bohm?

All the Cluytens Beethoven symphonies are available.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51QNOg7HZnL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)

They are very good.
http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-9-Symphonies-Box-Set/dp/B000FOTHC8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1265842170&sr=8-1

Quote from: MichaelRabin on February 10, 2010, 01:35:11 PM

This is a separate recording to the one from the complete set he recorded for EMI between 1958 and 1960. I've heard it and it is as good as the one he recorded for the complete cycle but is not necessarily superior or inferior in any way. It was played with the BPO  in 1957 and was probably what inspired them to ask him to record the complete set of 9. Cluytens was very consistent as a conductor and this performance doesn't vary much from the one recorded for EMI. Both can be considered to be among the 'great' LvB 6ths along with Bruno Walter's recordings.

Mackerras' most recent cycle remains my favorite.  Although, the DSD remastering of the Szell set with Cleveland has been a revelation.  In previous releases it sounded intense, but lacking in finesse and "feeling".  That is now rectified.  The new remastering reveals a greater dynamic range (ie, real pianissimo's), and a range of color and shading that were never even hinted at before.  If you liked Szell before, I bet you will love the latest iteration.

Quote from: Tyson on February 11, 2010, 12:04:01 PM
Mackerras' most recent cycle remains my favorite.  Although, the DSD remastering of the Szell set with Cleveland has been a revelation.  In previous releases it sounded intense, but lacking in finesse and "feeling".  That is now rectified.  The new remastering reveals a greater dynamic range (ie, real pianissimo's), and a range of color and shading that were never even hinted at before.  If you liked Szell before, I bet you will love the latest iteration.

Tyson I have the highest regard for MacKerras/SCO/Hyperion set............but I wish the 9th was also done with SCO, the switch to another orchestra leaves me wondering what if............

Quote from: Scarpia on February 10, 2010, 12:43:50 PM
I must say, stuck at home in the Blizzard, I've had a bit of a revelation.  Last week I listened to Beethoven Symphony No. 3 By Immerseel and his HIP band.  Although I've enjoyed other selections form this set, I was bored by the Eroica.  Today, I put on Barenboim's recording with the Staatskapel Berlin.  What a difference!  Immerseel's funeral march clocks in at just over 13 minutes, it left me wondering when it would end.  Barenboim's is just over 18 minutes, and I was savoring every generously performed note of it.  The impression from the other three movements was similar.  Immerseel's band was straining just to play the notes, and imposing a strictly defined aesthetic on this music, while Barenboim and his superb ensemble were finding exquisite insights in every bar.  There were certainly liberties and indulgences taken, but I was, by and large, convinced.

I am a serious devotee of HIP, I think we need to know what composers expected to hear when they created their music.  But we can't be limited by that.   Full modern orchestra with a creative conductor can find things in the music that even the composer didn't imagine could be realized. 

And I will be looking for more recordings by Barenboim and the Staatskapelle Berlin.

This is no surprise to me.  I have both cycles and the Immerseel never comes out of the box anymore.  It's just not that stimulating -- period instruments cannot make up for indifferent interpretation. 

Barenboim has become my favorite composer for live concerts.  He is never boring, and if critics carp about how loosely he is with the score, and whether his tempos are not sufficiently fleet, or his rubatos too extreme, or his dynamics to extreme, then I imagine they have spent their time reading notes rather than listening to music. 

Quote from: Bunny on February 11, 2010, 12:39:51 PM
This is no surprise to me.  I have both cycles and the Immerseel never comes out of the box anymore.  It's just not that stimulating -- period instruments cannot make up for indifferent interpretation. 

Barenboim has become my favorite composer for live concerts.  He is never boring, and if critics carp about how loosely he is with the score, and whether his tempos are not sufficiently fleet, or his rubatos too extreme, or his dynamics to extreme, then I imagine they have spent their time reading notes rather than listening to music.

I'm not as negative on Immerseel as you may have assumed from my previous post.  He does a superb job on 5, 7 and particularly 2.  3 is a misfire, 6 I don't really like much anyway.  But after listening to more and more of his cycle it strikes me that he has a very strict idea of proper performance practice for Beethoven (reinforced by his writings in the booklet, which is quite dogmatic about how Beethoven should be played).  He doesn't vary the approach in the different symphonies, which all have unique sound worlds.  I'm getting Immerseel fatigue.  He is not as versatile musician as Barenboim.

In any case, I listened to Barenboim's Beethoven 4 today.  I've never like the 4th but it has started to give me an appreciation of what this music is about.

Quote from: Renfield on February 08, 2010, 01:39:54 PM
Interesting. I realise I've never heard Monteux's Beethoven: a twofer is available on Decca (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-Symphonies-Vienna-Philharmonic-Orchestra/dp/B00000422R/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1265668740&sr=8-1), with Symphonies 1, 3, 6, 8.

Renfield! Your inbox is full. Please PM me when you empty it?  :)

Quote from: Scarpia on February 11, 2010, 02:48:06 PM
I'm not as negative on Immerseel as you may have assumed from my previous post.  He does a superb job on 5, 7 and particularly 2.  3 is a misfire, 6 I don't really like much anyway.  But after listening to more and more of his cycle it strikes me that he has a very strict idea of proper performance practice for Beethoven (reinforced by his writings in the booklet, which is quite dogmatic about how Beethoven should be played).  He doesn't vary the approach in the different symphonies, which all have unique sound worlds.  I'm getting Immerseel fatigue.  He is not as versatile musician as Barenboim.

In any case, I listened to Barenboim's Beethoven 4 today.  I've never like the 4th but it has started to give me an appreciation of what this music is about.

Note: "Hybrid" refers to modern instrument historically informed performance.  I didn't coin this but I also can't remember where I first saw it referred to that way.  First hybrid cycle I believe was Harnoncourt's.

I don't know if it's the dogmatic approach, his strict adherence to "rules" or some other factor, but the plain truth is that Immerseel's cycle is very disappointing and although he has the 2, 5, and 7 standing out from the rest,  the remainder sink into a pool of mediocrity.  The cycle as a whole is not in the top tier.  It's not completely awful but in such a crowded field it's a non-starter for me.  The period instrument cycle that I like best is (no surprise) the Hogwood cycle followed by Gardiner (actually sounds like a Hybrid cycle!!).  After that there are a few individual discs such as Savall's Eroica (which although far from perfect has amazing shock value), and Bruno Weil's 2 discs with Tafelmusik.  For the rest I prefer some of the "Hybrid Hip" cycles: Dausgaard, Harnoncourt, Vänskä; and the more traditional cycles by Barenboim, Szell, Wand, Leibowitz, Cluytens, Toscanini, and some more which I don't recall off the top of my head.

In such a crowded field, efforts such as those by Philippe Herreweghe (still trying to get the whole thing recorded) and Immerseel fall by the wayside.  I'm still waiting for a really fantastic period instrument Beethoven cycle.  Who knows, perhaps Harnoncourt will record it with the CMW. 

I have some interest in Hogwood, not much in Gardiner, but there is a Bruggen cycle which you will sometimes hear mention of which is unfortunately out of print and not easily found used (at least not for a reasonable price).

After hearing Jarvi and Dausgaard, Gardiner sounded bland.  As of today my favorites are Jarvi and Szell, but I have not heard most of the ones you guys are discussing.  Karajan 70s, Bernstein VPO, Blomstedt are my main sets, and they are all good - just not the ones that I enjoy the most.  I don't think I need another complete set beyond completing the Jarvi.

Quote from: Franco on February 12, 2010, 06:39:44 AM
After hearing Jarvi and Dausgaard, Gardiner sounded bland.  As of today my favorites are Jarvi and Szell, but I have not heard most of the ones you guys are discussing.  Karajan 70s, Bernstein VPO, Blomstedt are my main sets, and they are all good - just not the ones that I enjoy the most.  I don't think I need another complete set beyond completing the Jarvi.

I'm curious about Daussgaard after hearing some of his Schumann.

His traversal is interesting, I guess, in that he is recording all of the orchestral music and not just the symphonies.  So with any CD of a symphony it will be paired with some other orchestral work - and some of his programming is not what I might want.

His performances are very good though, not unlike Jarvi - just the kind of interpretations I like in Beethoven: quick, witty and transparent.

Quote from: Scarpia on February 12, 2010, 06:32:41 AM
I have some interest in Hogwood, not much in Gardiner, but there is a Bruggen cycle which you will sometimes hear mention of which is unfortunately out of print and not easily found used (at least not for a reasonable price).

I have the Brüggen cycle as well, but I also have some problems with it.  First the sound is from the earliest digital era so it's incredibly cold and bright which does no favor to violins played without vibrato.  I would not go out of my way to get it nowadays as it doesn't add much to the discussion.  I also forgot to mention the two Norrington cycles.  The LCP cycle has it's pros and cons, but imo is more of a historic document than a reference Beethoven cycle.  His later hybrid cycle is much better Beethoven. I wouldn't suggest that anyone should try to acquire the Brüggen cycle nowadays as it doesn't add more insight into the discussion and as you note the prices are way too high.  I'll have to get it out and review the performances because I don't remember much more than the awful way it sounded.

Bruggen/Phillips set is currently available at Archiv Music as a re-issue:

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=278720 (http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=278720)

Quote from: Franco on February 12, 2010, 06:39:44 AM
After hearing Jarvi and Dausgaard, Gardiner sounded bland.  As of today my favorites are Jarvi and Szell, but I have not heard most of the ones you guys are discussing.  Karajan 70s, Bernstein VPO, Blomstedt are my main sets, and they are all good - just not the ones that I enjoy the most. I don't think I need another complete set beyond completing the Jarvi.

ha ha............I said that about 10 sets ago  ;)

Quote from: DarkAngel on February 12, 2010, 06:59:45 AM
Bruggen/Phillips set is currently available at Archiv Music as a re-issue:

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=278720 (http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=278720)

By re-issue, I assume that you mean via CD-R copy?  :-\

Quote from: DarkAngel on February 12, 2010, 07:01:52 AM

ha ha............I said that about 10 sets ago  ;)

Yeh, I forgot I wishlisted the Norrington and Abbado/Berlin.

:)

Quote from: George on February 12, 2010, 07:02:20 AM
By re-issue, I assume that you mean via CD-R copy?  :-\ 

Yes...........but they are quite nicely done now by Archiv with complete artwork and booklets, CD even has label artwork, only when you look at the data side of the CD will you notice the color and see it is CDR

Quote from: George on February 12, 2010, 04:52:06 AM
Renfield! Your inbox is full. Please PM me when you empty it?  :)

Thanks. I knew I had forgotten to do something. There even appears to be a PM by someone that I've forgotten to respond to.

Fixed. :-[

Quote from: Bunny on February 12, 2010, 06:54:06 AM
I have the Brüggen cycle as well, but I also have some problems with it.  First the sound is from the earliest digital era so it's incredibly cold and bright which does no favor to violins played without vibrato. 

Yes, I can second that, about the overly-bright sound. However, Brüggen's cycle does have its rewards. It feels like 'workshop' Beethoven, discovering all sorts of nifty things and highlighting them left and right. Haydnised Beethoven, if you will.

I can't say I like it more than Norrington's, but it's a very idiomatic, playful cycle worth sampling at least to 'see what he does with them'. Even if, all in all, it's probably a bit more candy-coated than I prefer my Beethoven to be.

Quote from: Renfield on February 12, 2010, 07:20:05 AM
Thanks. I knew I had forgotten to do something. There even appears to be a PM by someone that I've forgotten to respond to.

Fixed. :-[


Yes, I can second that, about the overly-bright sound. However, Brüggen's cycle does have its rewards. It feels like 'workshop' Beethoven, discovering all sorts of nifty things and highlighting them left and right. Haydnised Beethoven, if you will.

I can't say I like it more than Norrington's, but it's a very idiomatic, playful cycle worth sampling at least to 'see what he does with them'. Even if, all in all, it's probably a bit more candy-coated than I prefer my Beethoven to be.

I don't think there is anything about it that is worth the $65.00 + that it goes for nowadays.  Perhaps if it's rereleased as a budget box I would recommend it.

Quote from: Franco on February 12, 2010, 07:04:16 AM
Yeh, I forgot I wishlisted the Norrington and Abbado/Berlin.

For Abbado/BPO did you decide to go with the 2000 teal boxset or the newer live maroon boxset?
(best to get live set which is also cheaper if you want my opinion)

Quote from: DarkAngel on February 12, 2010, 07:27:57 AM

For Abbado/BPO did you decide to go with the 2000 teal boxset or the newer live maroon boxset?
(best to get live set which is also cheaper if you want my opinion)

The newer maroon box.

Quote from: Bunny on February 12, 2010, 07:24:47 AM
I don't think there is anything about it that is worth the $65.00 + that it goes for nowadays.  Perhaps if it's rereleased as a budget box I would recommend it.

Yes, it's definitely not essential at that price. I got it for €15 new, on offer from JPC.

Quoting the now first post of this thread for everyone's convenience:

Quote from: Que on April 06, 2007, 04:02:16 AM
Beethovens 1st Symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4043.msg96963.html#msg96963)

Beethoven 2nd (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,5995.msg142256.html#msg142256)

Beethoven's 3rd symphony recommendations (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,11339.msg280736.html#msg280736)

Beethoven's 4th Symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,3932.msg94845.html#msg94845)

Beethoven Symphony No.5 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4047.msg97088.html#msg97088)

Beethoven's 6th Symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4604.msg110506.html#msg110506)

Beethoven's 7th Symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,3764.msg91441.html#msg91441)

Your favorite recordings of Beethoven's 9th symphony (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,2638.msg67628.html#msg67628)

Recordings that you enjoy: Beethoven Symphony #9 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,12281.msg302312.html#msg302312)

The Best and Cheapest Beethoven's Ninth (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,7278.msg173583.html#msg173583)

I guess you are not a thread merge kind of guy.

Quote from: Franco on February 18, 2010, 05:42:46 AM
I guess you are not a thread merge kind of guy.

He walks the path of the index. 8)

Quote from: Que on February 17, 2010, 11:55:30 PM
Quoting the now first post of this thread for everyone's convenience:

I just thought of something: would it be possible to append the index right after the first post, or even in it? It might be useful to keep the present thread's topic outline as the first thing anyone reads, before posting (assuming they consult the first page).

Edit: I made the proposed change myself. How does it look? :)

Erich Kleiber, Beethoven 9th. Because I'm listening to it right now.

We know that Beethoven was studying Bach, Handel and other Baroque composers at the time that he composed his ninth symphony. Does anyone else hear marked echoes of the Baroque music style in the first and second movements?

Quote from: DavidW on February 08, 2010, 01:28:33 PM
A series of recordings that are excellent, spiritual successors to Toscanini but in stereo are done by Monteux.  Swift tempos, classicist eye to the structure, but always finds the emotional heart.  I don't know if you can find an easy to find cycle of his, but they are worth listening to. :)

Very well said. Just listened to his recording with the San Fran of Beethoven's 2nd Symphony last night. Joie de vivre!

Question.
When some of you talk about period instruments in Beethoven's day are you referring to instruments that were constructed during his lifetime, instruments that were available during his lifetime, or a combination of both? Are there any documents extant at the time that tell us the name, manufacturer and date of construction of the various instruments that were being used by the musicans who made up the diverse chamber ensembles, pickup bands, local, provincial and capital city orchestras throughout Europe?

Quote from: RJR on January 28, 2011, 07:46:16 AM
Question.
When some of you talk about period instruments in Beethoven's day are you referring to instruments that were constructed during his lifetime, instruments that were available during his lifetime, or a combination of both? Are there any documents extant at the time that tell us the name, manufacturer and date of construction of the various instruments that were being used by the musicans who made up the diverse chamber ensembles, pickup bands, local, provincial and capital city orchestras throughout Europe?

When people speak of period instruments they mean instruments that are constructed the same way as the ones available and in common use at the given time the performers are seeking to replicate. In the case of string instruments that may include instruments actually built in Beethoven's time, but they would have to be restored to the original state. Even if you buy an authentic 17th/18th century Stradivari today, it does not look the way it looked when it left Stradivari's workshop. After Paganini, almost everyone angled violin necks down a bit and put in longer fingerboards and much higher bridges in order to accomodate greater string tension and accordingly a bigger, more brilliant tone. Same was done to violas and cellos. Later still, metal strings replaced gut. If you really want to be literal, you'd have to restore the neck and bridge at the very least to its pre-romantic state. In the case of brass instruments, you can't use originals from the composer's period because brass doesn't age well. It goes soft and brittle. Historic brass instruments are good only for museum display. Playing them would a) sound horrible and b) break them. You need to manufacture new instruments according to authentic period specifications, which generally means narrower bore, and in the case of trumpets and horns no valves or pistons. Whether all this hoopla is worth the effort in every case is sometimes questionable, as good conductors and performers are perfectly capable of adjusting their technique such as to produce a "period sound" on modern instruments (see e.g. Antonini's Beethoven), while likewise incompetent conductors and performers can make a mess of orchestral balances that they meant to clarify notwithstanding the use of period instruments (see e.g. Norrington's first Symphonie fantastique). Of course without someone restoring original instruments, even those seeking to replicate the sound on modern instruments wouldn't know what to do anyway, so there is no question that the HIP movement has brought a significant gain in our understanding of the development or orchestral sonorities.

Any thoughts on Leinsdorf?

[asin]B006ZJJ6XW[/asin]

The only Leinsdorf Beethoven I have heard is the 9th (not sure if the same performance is included in the box above) which is excellent, a very driving, energetic version, which is nicely complemented by the Schoenberg:

[asin]B00004TCPT[/asin]

schmidt-issertedt and weingartner put forth some fine lvb!

anyone like Salonen's Beethoven?
the eroica & fifth are among my favs...makes me wonder what boulez could do with these pieces

under 'audio'
http://www.celebratesalonen.com/#/media

Quote from: xochitl on July 14, 2012, 08:29:49 PM
the eroica & fifth are among my favs...makes me wonder what boulez could do with these pieces

There are recordings of Boulez conducting Eroica and the 5th, and studio recordings no less.

The fifth is with The New Philharmonia, released by Columbia on LP, never made it to CD. Haven't heard it myself.

Eroica is with Baden-Baden orchestra recorded in early 60s. Studio recording never officially released, but used to be available here and there from the collectors. Unfortunately rather bland performance, bit on the slow side. You'd never guess the conductor from the recording.

Quote from: Drasko on July 15, 2012, 02:07:19 AM
There are recordings of Boulez conducting Eroica and the 5th, and studio recordings no less.

The fifth is with The New Philharmonia, released by Columbia on LP, never made it to CD. Haven't heard it myself.

Eroica is with Baden-Baden orchestra recorded in early 60s. Studio recording never officially released, but used to be available here and there from the collectors. Unfortunately rather bland performance, bit on the slow side. You'd never guess the conductor from the recording.

That Baden-Baden Boulez Eroica is one of the most uninteresting I can think of. The Columbia 5th is also a dud, but whereas the Eroica is 'normal' (except that it's lifeless), the 5th is resolutely perverse. The 1st movement is the slowest I've ever heard. He makes Bernstein WP sound petulant by comparison. I just can't fathom what may have possessed him.

A full cycle is a good thing in theory, but in practice something inevitably falls by the wayside. Therefore those I deem the best are rather mainstream sounding in terms of tempi and balances, boast a good mix of heft and energy and are superbly played and very well recorded. My favourites are the Böhm WP, Schmidt-Isserstedt WP, and Cluytens BP.

Various other cycles by Jochum, Karajan, Szell also do well but are not on that level IMO. Karajan and Szell in partular tend to induce fatigue through excessive, unrelenting energy. With Jochum I find everything superbly shaped, but ultimately lacking in profile. Finding the right balance between muscle and repose, wit and Gemütlichkeit is very hard. In my experience the 3 cycles I mention score best in that regard. And the most recent is already 40 years old :o.

Other worthies: Ansermet SRO is very characterful, and it keeps a nice balance between beauty of sound and strongly profiled orchestral playing. Kempe Munich is very nice too, but the recording is a bit too distant, which robs the performances of some of their punch. Best 7th ever IMHO. Davis SD is marvelous in places (a glorious 3rd) and has great playing and sound, but he doesn't seem equally involved in all the symphonies.

Blomstedt SD and Zinman were once favourites but I got tired of them. Blomstedt is sometimes too ponderous, whereas Zinman seems to equate alacrity with speed. It's beautifully played and recorded though.

I have the reissued Leinsdorf set but haven't listened to it yet.

about full cycles, yeah

i havent yet found one that's perfect, but then, my views and demands on the individual symphonies tend to evolve [almostweekly] the more i hear them

Currently going through  the Cluytens cycle, which happens to be the one EMI chose to include in its 50-disc set (what's the occasion, though? It's not a sesquicentenary or a bicentenary year...unless you expect a special tribute on the 185th anniversary of the composer's death ???).

In any case, this box has been very rewarding so far. The Cluytens set, recorded 1958-1961 has been spottily available since it was issued. It was quickly relegated to the back benches when EMI started issuing Klemperer's recordings. I made its acquaintance in the early seventies whent it was already relegated to cheap reissue on the Seraphim label. Exit Cluytens, one of EMI's star conductors of the fifties and sixties ::). Since then only the Pastoral and the Ninth have been available here and there. Wise decision from EMI. They could chose between Karajan and the Philharmonia (uncompetitive to many since his landmark 1962 set with his orchestra), or the Klemperer renderings, which have never been absent from the catalogue and didn't hold much interest from german, french or american record collectors.

The whole cycle is beautifully and characterfully played (those winds!!), sturdily conducted with just the right mix of energy and heft that makes Beethoven's sound world 'complete', not wanting in any department. Particularly successful are symphonies 1, 3, 6, 7 and 9. They are so satisfying that I'm not tempted to engage in comparisons. At first  I though that this 7th would be a comfortable, unremarkable reading, but Cluytens develops nicely from a 'symphonic' approach to 1 to an intensely lyrical, exquisitely balanced slow movement, one of the most remarkable I've heard in that work. Good scherzo, excellent Finale.

For 2 and 5 I prefer a more dynamic approach - not necessarily faster, just more accented. # 4 is very good - nothing to carp at - but this has been especially successful on disc with brilliant versions by Böhm WP, Karajan BP (his most successful Beethoven interpretation IMO, whether from 1962 or 1977), Jochum BP and C. Kleiber. The only  disappointment is in # 8, where fine readings of 2-4 cannot compensate for a sluggish, lumpy first movement. The Eight is a difficult work to bring off. I still haven't heard an interpretation that truly satisfies me. The way I see it, this is a schizophrenic work, alternating  between hyperactive bustle,  zaniness, top-heavy orchestration on the one hand and good humour, cheerfulness and transparent textures on the other. IOW I want to like it but it unnerves me no end.

Quote from: jwinter on July 10, 2012, 05:15:02 AM
Any thoughts on Leinsdorf?

[asin]B006ZJJ6XW[/asin]

The only Leinsdorf Beethoven I have heard is the 9th (not sure if the same performance is included in the box above) which is excellent, a very driving, energetic version, which is nicely complemented by the Schoenberg:

[asin]B00004TCPT[/asin]

My favorite no.9, only one to ever bring me to the edge of my seat. And yes, a real great combo with the Schoenberg which is equally emotional.

Quote from: Annie on July 16, 2012, 02:16:52 PM
i'd recommend three different 8ths to you if you already haven't tried...most probably muti

(http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/6601/189506.jpg)
(http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/9425/3519i.jpg)
(http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/4435/594762.jpg)

Thanks' I'll try to locate the Muti outside of the complete set. I think I have downloaded the Walter. It's probably there in the ever growing queue... Harnoncourt? Hmmm... Not sure. I wish he would redo his Beethoven with the Concentus Musicus. He's now past 80, a time where most conductors take a bit more time to smell the flowers...

i found chailly's 8th pretty amazing

probably the best thing from his cycle imo

Quote from: André on July 16, 2012, 03:13:50 PM
Thanks' I'll try to locate the Muti outside of the complete set. I think I have downloaded the Walter. It's probably there in the ever growing queue... Harnoncourt? Hmmm... Not sure. I wish he would redo his Beethoven with the Concentus Musicus. He's now past 80, a time where most conductors take a bit more time to smell the flowers...

At this point, it may be easier and almost as cheap to get the full Muti.  To be honest, I don't remember anything standing out from that cycle.   And I was impressed by the non symphonic works in Harnoncourt's cycle more than the symphonies (especially the concertos with Aimard)--I have the full box with the Missa Solemnis, Creatures of Prometheus, etc.

I do think the Chailly cycle would be well worth getting--at least, it's my current favorite.

Re the Cluytens and the 50CD EMI box you mentioned earlier--what set is that?  I don't remember seeing any such thing (was it an EMIFrance release?).

I've seen and been intrigued by the Chailly set. Judging from the speed merchant-like timings, Chailly seems intent on breaking some world record.

Can't post a pic of the EMI set, as I write from my Ipad. It can probably be done, but I haven't learned how ;D

Just google "beethoven 50 cd" and go to the Amazon link it will suggest. It's right there. It even has a nice review from an Amazon user. I don't see any dud in the whole lot, everything is in good stereo and the price is right. I bought it for 50$.

Quote from: André on July 17, 2012, 03:29:09 PM
I've seen and been intrigued by the Chailly set. Judging from the speed merchant-like timings, Chailly seems intent on breaking some world record.

Can't post a pic of the EMI set, as I write from my Ipad. It can probably be done, but I haven't learned how ;D

Just google "beethoven 50 cd" and go to the Amazon link it will suggest. It's right there. It even has a nice review from an Amazon user. I don't see any dud in the whole lot, everything is in good stereo and the price is right. I bought it for 50$.

Voici!
[asin]B000J0ZPH4[/asin]
Although the price is apparently much higher now--$114 for a new copy and $58 plus s/h for a used copy.  And I don't like to buy used CDs unless I can examine them first.  I've bought some on Amazon MP without a problem, but I've also had a couple in which their definition of "good" or "like new" was apparently much more flexible than mine.   So I'll wishlist it and hunt for alternate sources.  Although you are right,  it looks like there are no duds in there.

ETA--it seems less on the European Amazons, but not enough of a difference that I'll jump on it.  My listening pile is already too high and does not need another 50 CD boxset unless it's too cheap not to buy  :(

As for Chailly--I like him because he seems to find emotional depths many conductors don't seem to bring out in the symphonies.  Jens used the term "darker" in talking about Chailly's cycle,  but I'd prefer an adjective on the order of "intense".

Could 'intense' and 'darker' apply to the orchestra's tonal characteristics? That's what I would expect from the Leipzig Gewandhaus. And that's why I'm interesed in it. If the conductor has the humility and intelligence to let the musicians play according to their particular culture and tonal world we have a winning combination. Something that, in my experience is not achieved all that often when it comes to Beethoven symphonies - the desire to make a 'statement', to leave an individual mark is just irresistible. After all, when is the next time you'll be in the studio to record the Nine again?

In this day and age it's hard not to view a new symphony cycle without a suspicion that something is uselessly underlined (as if we're too uncouth to get the point without that 'help') -  or simply not ready to be committed to posterity's judgment. Let's call that the Cycle Curse. And of course it applies to Bruckner, Mahler, Mozart etc. From what I've read Chailly might have committed a 'real' cycle.

I've been working my way through Chailly's set over the past couple of weeks.  Not quite finished yet, but so far I have to say that I'm quite impressed.  I would agree that it is both "intense" and "dark": it's beautifully recorded, and he gets great clarity of texture from the orchestra, yet while everything is audible, he still manages to give the music the weight and power that it needs, despite the very swift tempo.  The speeds are fast but on the whole the performances seem very natural rather than forced; he's particularly good in those symphonies that require a flowing sense of rhythm.  I listened to his 7 & 8 just this morning; the 7 is excellent (though I wish he'd slow down and smell the roses just a bit in the opening of the first movement), and I'll agree with xochtl that the 8 is one of the best I've ever heard. 

Chailly's is the first set I've heard that consistently takes what we've learned through period performance, revised scores, original metronome markings & the like, and applies it convincingly and with deep emotion, with a modern orchestra.  It's all a matter of personal taste, and again I'm still not quite finished with my 1st listen.  That said, I think I can already say that among recent (last 15-20 years) cycles on modern instruments, the only set I own that I would rank alongside Chailly is Barenboim's with the Staatskapple Berlin (although that is very different in character; I haven't heard his new one). 

To provide some context, to my ears I greatly prefer Chailly to Zinman (whose Beethoven I've always disliked, although the piano concertos aren't as bad as the symphonies, and I quite like his Schumann for some reason).  If I wanted a modern set I would give Chailly a clear edge over Abbado (at least the 1st two sets; the DVDs from Rome I thoroughly enjoyed, though some of that is surely the visual element), Haitink's London set (good, but not at this level), Vanska (who leaves me cool, though I can't quite say why), Rattle (terrible, one of the very few I've sold), or Harnoncourt (fascinating but a little too mercurial for my every day use).  I would even give it a small edge over Wand's, although I tend to think of Wand more as of the previous generation.  There are lots of recent Beethoven sets that I haven't heard of course; I'd like to try Mackerras, and am morbidly curious to hear Pletnev and Thielemann.

At any rate, I'm still absorbing the Chailly, but I would say that it's definitely worth exploring.  It will probably end up somewhere in my top 10 cycles overall.  (Not that I sit around ranking Beethoven cycles all day, but heck, it beats workin'  ;D )

I've seem the Chailly issued as single discs. I hope there will be a space-saving box set.

Quote from: André on July 19, 2012, 03:11:02 PM
I've seem the Chailly issued as single discs. I hope there will be a space-saving box set.

It was originally released as a box set. I know a single disc of the 9th followed.

[asin]B005CYLSW8[/asin]

jwinter - I agree with you about Vanska; I think something about the rigid, unfeeling perfection of it all makes it sound like it was performed and conducted by automatons rather than people. My 21st century favorites are Abbado/Rome (mostly identical to the red Abbado box, by the way), Barenboim/Berlin, and (Nos 1-3 and 7 only) Dausgaard. P. Jarvi has the most persuasive "HIP-informed" Pastorale that I've heard so far and excellent readings of 2, 3, 7, and 8 as well. The Scottish Mackerras is really good but maybe not essential; I was able to score a new copy for $20, but even at a higher price it's worth it for his accounts. The only real disappointments I had were with the 4th's slow movement and the somewhat less crisp acoustic for the 9th. I am still waiting to purchase Chailly, Thielemann, and P. Jarvi's 9th.

Oh, thanks. Never saw it as a box set. The store I go to is strong on boxes usually, but I seem to have missed it. Definitely one to look for.

vanska's set left me cold as well, except for the 3rd, 7th and 6th [which is probably my favorite of all recordings of the piece ive heard]

it's really good to go back to it and sort of listen to the symphonies 'cleaned up' of unnecessary stuff and think 'well, yup, that's the score all right' and it is athletic and incredibly well executed...but i dont sense the spirit

My favorites are Bohm/VPO and Kletzki/CzechPO

Bohm for the elegant Vienese charm and Kletzki for the wonderful phrasing and spirited sound of the Czechs.

Quote from: bigshot on July 19, 2012, 11:29:41 PM
My favorites are Bohm/VPO and Kletzki/CzechPO

Bohm for the elegant Vienese charm and Kletzki for the wonderful phrasing and spirited sound of the Czechs.

Kletzki is sooo good! :o :) (introduced at GMG by Dancing Divertimentian)

My other "traditional" favourite is Jochum's cycle with the Koninklijk Concertgebouworkest aka RCO:

[asin]B000JU7N88[/asin]

On the HIPpies the jury is still out - Brüggen's cycle has a lot going for it, so has Immerseel's...

Q

i just sampled some kletzki on spotify [the whole cycle is up]

WOW

where has this been all my life?


btw i also just heard the eroica 1st movement with skrowaczewski and im hooked  ;D

 Quote from: xochitl on Today at 01:18:20 AM (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=15789.msg645201#msg645201)

vanska's set left me cold as well, except for the 3rd, 7th and 6th [which is probably my favorite of all recordings of the piece ive heard]....

   
Wow, that's strong praise for Vanska's Pastorale.  I'll have to pull that out and relisten to it...

I was listening to Chailly's Pastorale last night.  Overall very nice, surprisingly effective for being so fast (I tend to like a more relaxed approach here).  Not an absolute top choice, but the thunderstorm was really stunning, quite brutal at points...

Quote from: jwinter on July 20, 2012, 05:52:39 AM
I was listening to Chailly's Pastorale last night.  Overall very nice, surprisingly effective for being so fast (I tend to like a more relaxed approach here).

Yeah, my favorite Pastorale is Barenboim's so that is where my sympathies lie! I do agree with him that the 6th is maybe the highlight of the Vanska cycle.

Quote from: jwinter on July 19, 2012, 11:47:34 AM
I've been working my way through Chailly's set over the past couple of weeks.  Not quite finished yet, but so far I have to say that I'm quite impressed.  I would agree that it is both "intense" and "dark": it's beautifully recorded, and he gets great clarity of texture from the orchestra, yet while everything is audible, he still manages to give the music the weight and power that it needs, despite the very swift tempo.  The speeds are fast but on the whole the performances seem very natural rather than forced; he's particularly good in those symphonies that require a flowing sense of rhythm.  I listened to his 7 & 8 just this morning; the 7 is excellent (though I wish he'd slow down and smell the roses just a bit in the opening of the first movement), and I'll agree with xochtl that the 8 is one of the best I've ever heard. 

Chailly's is the first set I've heard that consistently takes what we've learned through period performance, revised scores, original metronome markings & the like, and applies it convincingly and with deep emotion, with a modern orchestra.  It's all a matter of personal taste, and again I'm still not quite finished with my 1st listen.  That said, I think I can already say that among recent (last 15-20 years) cycles on modern instruments, the only set I own that I would rank alongside Chailly is Barenboim's with the Staatskapple Berlin (although that is very different in character; I haven't heard his new one).

After some of the comments the thought occurred to get this set (I tend to be a multiple-version owner, but not so much for Beethoven symphonies).  But after listening to the samples on Amazon, the words "swift," "fast" don't come to mind.  If you added some analog artifacts to the sound, you probably could convince me I was listening to Toscaninni or Karajan '63.  It would be foolish of me to make any substantial comment based on short excerpts, but the tempos strike me as quite typical of the Toscanini school of Beethoven (as opposed to the Furtwangler).

Quote from: Annie on July 20, 2012, 01:28:55 PM
that's because toscanini followed beethoven's metronome markings as close as possible, so did chailly. chailly says his aim was observing beethoven's markings but then admits slow movement of 9th is slower than beethoven's...

And that was just the point I was trying to make.  Observing Beethoven's metronome marks is nothing new, and was not an innovate introduced by HIP performers.

Quote...the only set I own that I would rank alongside Chailly is Barenboim's with the Staatskapple Berlin (although that is very different in character;

I read somewhere that Barenboim used Furtwangler as his model so I suppose that you couldn't get two sets more diametrically opposed.

The cycle with the East/West Divan Orchestra is available on Spotify. His Staatskapelle Dresden can be heard on NML

Quote from: xochitl on July 20, 2012, 01:10:28 AM
i just sampled some kletzki on spotify [the whole cycle is up]

WOW

where has this been all my life?


btw i also just heard the eroica 1st movement with skrowaczewski and im hooked  ;D

Definitely one of the best cycles. Mid sixties IIRC, very popular in France and in various retail distribution chains. Back then it was low-end, unglamorous, entry-level Beethoven ::). Since then it's been recognized as one of the mor e serious contenders - if only clean copies could be obtained. Symphonies 1,2,4-6 and 8 could hardly be bettered.  The Czech Phil's tonal qualities are abundantly on evidence despite the slightly fuzzy sound.

BTW Kletzki was a polish Jew, not a Czech, and a not inconsiderable composer.

Quote from: xochitl on July 20, 2012, 01:10:28 AM
btw i also just heard the eroica 1st movement with skrowaczewski and im hooked  ;D

Skrowaczewski's First is one of my all-time favorites - so energetic! - but I listened to his Seventh today and was seriously disappointed. Ensemble playing wasn't as sharp and the finale had a serious lack of French horns.

Quote from: Que on July 19, 2012, 11:43:36 PM
Kletzki is sooo good! :o :) (introduced at GMG by Dancing Divertimentian)

And quickly seconded by Que. :)

Quote from: André on July 20, 2012, 05:35:33 PM
Definitely one of the best cycles. Mid sixties IIRC, very popular in France and in various retail distribution chains. Back then it was low-end, unglamorous, entry-level Beethoven ::). Since then it's been recognized as one of the mor e serious contenders - if only clean copies could be obtained. Symphonies 1,2,4-6 and 8 could hardly be bettered.  The Czech Phil's tonal qualities are abundantly on evidence despite the slightly fuzzy sound.

BTW Kletzki was a polish Jew, not a Czech, and a not inconsiderable composer.

You did'n shortlist the 9th, while I think this is one of the rare cycles with a superb 9th as a jewel in the crown. :)

The Kletzki cycle has been reissued by Supraphon twice in the past few years, first as three double discs and lately as a complete set:

[asin]B004NWHVSA[/asin]

Q

Quote from: Annie on July 21, 2012, 05:48:30 AM
is this a remastered set? i have the recording somewhere. could you compare the quality between the two if i upload a movement of the 9th somewhere for you ?

I have the three doubles - those were remastered in 2000. I highly doubt that Supraphon remastered these recordings all over again for the complete set.

Q

Quote from: jwinter on July 19, 2012, 11:47:34 AM

At any rate, I'm still absorbing the Chailly, but I would say that it's definitely worth exploring.  It will probably end up somewhere in my top 10 cycles overall.  (Not that I sit around ranking Beethoven cycles all day, but heck, it beats workin'  ;D )

i listened to your suggestion and acquired the chailly. i've finished it and wanted to thank to you. i wouldn't even have guessed...

Quote from: Que on July 21, 2012, 06:29:32 AM
I have the three doubles - those were remastered in 2000. I highly doubt that Supraphon remastered these recordings all over again for the complete set.

I have the box and there's nothing fuzzy about the sound. It sounds fantastic. Haven't heard the earlier version.

The Kletzki Beethoven were some of my first classical purchases around 40 years ago; not because I knew something about their quality, bot because Supraphon discs were cheap; and I was a student. I still have these LP discs around.

Quote from: bigshot on July 21, 2012, 02:04:43 PM
I have the box and there's nothing fuzzy about the sound. It sounds fantastic. Haven't heard the earlier version.

That's why remastering exists. I'll put it on the wish list.

Tossing in yet another vote of confidence in the Kletzki. Fantastic cycle all around, and an amazing Ninth as someone mentioned.

Quote from: Que on July 21, 2012, 01:12:32 AM
You did'n shortlist the 9th, while I think this is one of the rare cycles with a superb 9th as a jewel in the crown. :)

+1

 Quote from: Annie on July 21, 2012, 04:22:19 PM (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=15789.msg645582#msg645582)

i listened to your suggestion and acquired the chailly. i've finished it and wanted to thank to you. i wouldn't even have guessed...

 
You're very welcome!  Glad you're enjoying it too.  It's definitely one of my best purchases in a while.  I've pretty much stopped buying Beethoven cycles -- I've got more than 50 of them at this point, and while the music still engages, I have reached a point where there has to be a really compelling reason for me to find the shelf space for yet another set.  But I think Chailly's is really something special -- for me, it's extremely satisfying.

Quote from: jwinter on July 23, 2012, 11:09:22 AM
...  It's definitely one of my best purchases in a while.  I've pretty much stopped buying Beethoven cycles -- I've got more than 50 of them at this point, and while the music still engages, I have reached a point where there has to be a really compelling reason for me to find the shelf space for yet another set.  But I think Chailly's is really something special -- for me, it's extremely satisfying.

Thanks for your reviews of Chailly´s cycle above and here. Even if I own 44 cycles I still acquire a new one now and then (some way left to the 50  :)), and recently I got Leinsdorf´s and Wyn Morris´cycles. Chailly´s is now on my wishlist and will become purchased with my next JPC order.

 Quote from: (: premont :) on Today at 03:47:25 PM (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=15789.msg646110#msg646110)

Thanks for your reviews of Chailly´s cycle above and here. Even if I own 44 cycles I still acquire a new one now and then (some way left to the 50  :) ), and recently I got Leinsdorf´s and Wyn Morris´cycles. Chailly´s is now on my wishlist and will become purchased with my next JPC order.

 
Hope you like it!  Dude, I should be getting a percentage...  ;D 

Let us know how you like the Leinsdorf.  I've always enjoyed his 9, which is the only thing I've heard from it -- if the rest of it is as good as that, I may have to grab the set.

Cluytens is now on Naxos Music Library.

Quote from: Brian on July 23, 2012, 12:59:12 PM
Cluytens is now on Naxos Music Library.

It is also available in the ultra cheap 50 disc EMI set that also contains Cluytens' Overtures and violin concerto (with Oistrakh, which is playing as I write :D), string quartets by the Hungarian Quartet,  sonatas by Eric Heidsieck, the Missae by Giulini, Fidelio under Karajan, violin sonatas with Ferras and cello sonatas by Tortelier. The piano concertos are split between Gilels and Gelber.  Considering all the extra material in legendary performances it's worth the extra outlay.

just heard mengelberg's 5th and 7th with the concertgebouw live.

the 5th absolutely blew my mind, especially the transition from scherzo to finale [i gasped audibly] never been so engaged with the last movement...and it didnt sound cheap!  i couldnt believe my ears

the 7th i felt was a bit more disfigured, even if 80% of it was extremely compelling.  i just felt like it was being twisted and molded waay too much

but that 5th!  ay!  my new favorite possibly displacing leibowitz, bruggen, wand, and dorati

cant wait to hear the rest of the cycle

The Mengelberg is amazing, xochitl, but try the De Sabata, which is my overall preferred version of the work.

Listening closely to Chailly's cycle, I love almost everything about it, but it really does bother me that he had the new 'Urtext' critical edition available and chose not to use it. (Currently playing the 'Eroica'; that half-chopped-off trumpet solo in the first movement's coda is so delightfully quirky that it's a little disappointing when the missing bars get filled in.)

does anyone know the menuhin/sinfonia varsovia cycle? i've always loved their renditions of the mozart symphonies but didnt know they'd also done beethoven

i was listening to the eroica and it was rather impressive: insightful, balanced, with absolutely gorgeous and incisive strings, and more heart than ive heard in most places outside bernstein.

gonna check out the rest for sure

Quote from: xochitl on November 18, 2013, 12:02:28 AM
does anyone know the menuhin/sinfonia varsovia cycle? i've always loved their renditions of the mozart symphonies but didnt know they'd also done beethoven

i was listening to the eroica and it was rather impressive: insightful, balanced, with absolutely gorgeous and incisive strings, and more heart than ive heard in most places outside bernstein.

Once upon a time there was a poster here, who was a fanatic fan of it, but I have parted with my set long time ago, finding the interpretations nice but unmemorable. Since then, I have become more of a completist, so your words make me consider a repurchase.

Quote from: (: premont :) on November 18, 2013, 02:10:02 AM
Once upon a time there was a poster here, who was a fanatic fan of it, but I have parted with my set long time ago, finding the interpretations nice but unmemorable. Since then, I have become more of a completist, so your words make me consider a repurchase.

Welcome back. :)

Q

From the New York Times....

The Ultimate Beethoven Symphony Collection https://nyti.ms/2WLvlvg (https://nyti.ms/2WLvlvg)

Quote from: j winter on March 28, 2020, 05:26:54 PM
From the New York Times....

The Ultimate Beethoven Symphony Collection https://nyti.ms/2WLvlvg (https://nyti.ms/2WLvlvg)

Tomassini has not mentioned any of my favourites. OK he's a music critic but has he really listened to as many of the recordings as he can? Take the Eroica. Why would you choose the Bernstein over acknowledged great performances by Toscanini, Monteux (Concertegebouw), Leibowitz, Furtwangler.....

Quote from: Holden on March 28, 2020, 05:50:04 PM
Tomassini has not mentioned any of my favourites. OK he's a music critic but has he really listened to as many of the recordings as he can? Take the Eroica. Why would you choose the Bernstein over acknowledged great performances by Toscanini, Monteux (Concertegebouw), Leibowitz, Furtwangler.....

The Bernstein is one of my favorites.  Why should he slavishly choose an "acknowledged great performance" over his own favorite?

Quote from: Daverz on March 28, 2020, 05:53:40 PM
The Bernstein is one of my favorites.  Why should he slavishly choose an "acknowledged great performance" over his own favorite?

Good point. I've heard the Bernstein and it didn't really grab me.

Another vote for Bernstein/NYPO (Bernstein/VPO is a turkey), my second favourite after Erich Kleiber and the VPO. As far as these other 'great' performances are concerned, who is doing the acknowledging? I have Monteux and Leibowitz and both are fine performances but they wouldn't  have immediately sprung to mind as 'acknowledged greats'.

Quote from: Que on November 18, 2013, 09:54:14 AM
Welcome back. :)

Q

November 2013... thanks to jwinter, who kicked this thread, I'm very curious now: has Premont bought the Menuhin set again... and changed his mind about it? ;)

(Apologies for interfering in the Lenny debate.)

Quote from: Marc on March 29, 2020, 05:52:24 AM
November 2013... thanks to jwinter, who kicked this thread, I'm very curious now: has Premont bought the Menuhin set again... and changed his mind about it? ;)

I wrote that I would consider a purchase. Maybe I didn't find a set at a decent price, maybe my motivation wasn't that great after all, and I probably thought that Beethoven's symphonies were all too well represented on my shelfs (50+). What happened was that I forgot about it, my musical radar turning in other directions.

Quote from: Holden on March 28, 2020, 05:50:04 PM
Tomassini has not mentioned any of my favourites. OK he's a music critic but has he really listened to as many of the recordings as he can? Take the Eroica. Why would you choose the Bernstein over acknowledged great performances by Toscanini, Monteux (Concertegebouw), Leibowitz, Furtwangler.....

He didn't, CORINNA da FONSECA-WOLLHEIM chose Bernstein's for the third.  Most of the symphonies have a different person choosing, Tommasini chose for #1 and #9.

8)

Quote from: (: premont :) on March 29, 2020, 07:57:35 AM
I wrote that I would consider a purchase. Maybe I didn't find a set at a decent price, maybe my motivation wasn't that great after all, and I probably thought that Beethoven's symphonies were all too well represented on my shelfs (50+). What happened was that I forgot about it, my musical radar turning in other directions.

Except for the 50+, that's quite... recognizable. ;)

Can someone post the NYT list? It's not free to look at, apparently.

Quote from: Jo498 on March 29, 2020, 09:18:51 AM
Can someone post the NYT list? It's not free to look at, apparently.

Here's the list with the author who selected each

1: Klemperer/Philharmonia '57 (Anthony Tommasini)
2: Norrington/London Classical Players (Joshua Barone)
3: Bernstein/New York (Corinna da Fonseca-Wollheim)
4: Haitink/London (Zachary Woolfe)
5: Boulez/Philharmonia (Seth Colter Walls)
6: C. Kleiber/Bavarian State Orch live 1983 (David Allen)
7: Honeck/Pittsburgh (David Allen)
8: Gardiner/ORR (Joshua Barone)
9: Furtwangler/Bayreuth '51 (Anthony Tommasini)

It's certainly an eclectic list.

I have not heard all of them but the Bernstein Eroica might be the least controversial choice ;)

Boulez in the 5th is an outlier choice from the (far) left field. I find it infuriating to listen to. What a waste!

I could not make such a list... but for most of Beethoven's symphonies, I prefer a period instruments sound. Which means I like the recordings of Brüggen (twice), Hogwood and Van Immerseel, just to mention a few.

Of the 'modern' instruments recordings that I know, I do recall great performances of Nos. 1 & 6 by Sawallisch/Concertgebouw Orkest, No. 5 by C. Kleiber/Wiener Phil, No. 8 by Morris/London SO, and No. 9 by Haitink/Concertgebouw, the latter with an impressive vocal quartet (Popp, Watkinson, Schreier, Holl).
But my knowledge of these works is a bit limited. I don't have a huge load of discs and boxsets, compared to many other Beethoven fans.
If I would have to choose one set of 'modern' instruments recordings, it would probably be a tie between Leibowitz/Royal Phil and Haitink/Concertgebouw. Well, no, not a tie really. In the end, I'd pick Leibowitz, for its overall freshness.

Quote from: Marc on March 29, 2020, 09:16:58 PM
I could not make such a list... but for most of Beethoven's symphonies, I prefer a period instruments sound. Which means I like the recordings of Brüggen (twice), Hogwood and Van Immerseel, just to mention a few.

Of the 'modern' instruments recordings that I know, I do recall great performances of Nos. 1 & 6 by Sawallisch/Concertgebouw Orkest, No. 5 by C. Kleiber/Wiener Phil, No. 8 by Morris/London SO, and No. 9 by Haitink/Concertgebouw, the latter with an impressive vocal quartet (Popp, Watkinson, Schreier, Holl).
But my knowledge of these works is a bit limited. I don't have a huge load of discs and boxsets, compared to many other Beethoven fans.
If I would have to choose one set of 'modern' instruments recordings, it would probably be a tie between Leibowitz/Royal Phil and Haitink/Concertgebouw. Well, no, not a tie really. In the end, I'd pick Leibowitz, for its overall freshness.

I knew I forgot something, so... in the 'end', from the cycles that I have, I would pick these:

HIP and period instruments: Van Immerseel/Anima Eterna
'Old skool' (yet very modern): Leibowitz/Royal Phil
HIP on 'modern' instruments: De Vriend/Netherlands SO (forgot this one, it's a great set - performances with lots of energy and passion, with great sound quality, too)

+ 1 for the De Vriend set!

Quote from: André on March 30, 2020, 07:14:39 AM
+ 1 for the De Vriend set!

Yes, I am also a friend of that set.

+1 for Leibowitz - especially his Eroica

Quote from: jwinter on July 19, 2012, 11:47:34 AM
I've been working my way through Chailly's set over the past couple of weeks.  Not quite finished yet, but so far I have to say that I'm quite impressed.  I would agree that it is both "intense" and "dark": it's beautifully recorded, and he gets great clarity of texture from the orchestra, yet while everything is audible, he still manages to give the music the weight and power that it needs, despite the very swift tempo.  The speeds are fast but on the whole the performances seem very natural rather than forced; he's particularly good in those symphonies that require a flowing sense of rhythm.  I listened to his 7 & 8 just this morning; the 7 is excellent (though I wish he'd slow down and smell the roses just a bit in the opening of the first movement), and I'll agree with xochtl that the 8 is one of the best I've ever heard. 

Chailly's is the first set I've heard that consistently takes what we've learned through period performance, revised scores, original metronome markings & the like, and applies it convincingly and with deep emotion, with a modern orchestra.  It's all a matter of personal taste, and again I'm still not quite finished with my 1st listen.  That said, I think I can already say that among recent (last 15-20 years) cycles on modern instruments, the only set I own that I would rank alongside Chailly is Barenboim's with the Staatskapple Berlin (although that is very different in character; I haven't heard his new one). 

To provide some context, to my ears I greatly prefer Chailly to Zinman (whose Beethoven I've always disliked, although the piano concertos aren't as bad as the symphonies, and I quite like his Schumann for some reason).  If I wanted a modern set I would give Chailly a clear edge over Abbado (at least the 1st two sets; the DVDs from Rome I thoroughly enjoyed, though some of that is surely the visual element), Haitink's London set (good, but not at this level), Vanska (who leaves me cool, though I can't quite say why), Rattle (terrible, one of the very few I've sold), or Harnoncourt (fascinating but a little too mercurial for my every day use).  I would even give it a small edge over Wand's, although I tend to think of Wand more as of the previous generation.  There are lots of recent Beethoven sets that I haven't heard of course; I'd like to try Mackerras, and am morbidly curious to hear Pletnev and Thielemann.

At any rate, I'm still absorbing the Chailly, but I would say that it's definitely worth exploring.  It will probably end up somewhere in my top 10 cycles overall.  (Not that I sit around ranking Beethoven cycles all day, but heck, it beats workin'  ;D )

I have the Chailly and am always disappointed when I hear it. Playing and recording brilliant but the tempi are simply too fast thanks to the over-slavish regard for Beethoven's metronome markings. As Jan Swafford has pointed out LvB was deaf by the time he put them in so made no allowance for the difference in what he could hear in his head and what is actually practical. The orchestras in Beethoven's day could not possibly have played it at the speeds indicated so they are an indication of his intention but there to be modified in practice. Chailly constantly sounds rushed imo.

Quote from: Handelian on November 04, 2020, 12:43:00 PM
I have the Chailly and am always disappointed when I hear it. Playing and recording brilliant but the tempi are simply too fast thanks to the over-slavish regard for Beethoven's metronome markings. As Jan Swafford has pointed out LvB was deaf by the time he put them in so made no allowance for the difference in what he could hear in his head and what is actually practical. The orchestras in Beethoven's day could not possibly have played it at the speeds indicated so they are an indication of his intention but there to be modified in practice. Chailly constantly sounds rushed imo.

It is a subject with many aspects. The fast metronome markings also apply to some relatively early Beethoven works, e.g. op.18 quartets (1801, one year before the Heiligenstadt document), though they were added later, and Beethoven liked extremes in tempi
https://www.cbc.ca/music/read/this-is-what-happens-when-you-actually-follow-beethoven-s-metronome-marks-1.5014521
https://thebeethovenproject.com/how-fast-shall-we-play/

Many orchestras with HIP ambitions tend to play the symphonies at extreme speed too, often to the fast side.

Quote from: MusicTurner on November 04, 2020, 01:41:38 PM
It is a subject with many aspects. The fast metronome markings also apply to some relatively early Beethoven works, e.g. op.18 quartets (1801, one year before the Heiligenstadt document), though they were added later, and Beethoven liked extremes in tempi
https://www.cbc.ca/music/read/this-is-what-happens-when-you-actually-follow-beethoven-s-metronome-marks-1.5014521
https://thebeethovenproject.com/how-fast-shall-we-play/

Many orchestras with HIP ambitions tend to play the symphonies at extreme speed too, often to the fast side.

It's important to realise that although Beethoven was perhaps the first notable composer to indicate specific metronome markings in his music, this was not done in 1817, when his hearing loss was by then quite considerable. Hence he was recalling the tempi from memory. Swafford says that as a composer himself he has often put metronome marks on his own pieces and he invariably has to scale them down a couple of notches when he actually hears the piece played. I think the quote, "A metronome marking gives us a basic indication of the composer's intention regarding the speed and to a certain extent character of a piece. But within the piece there are of course innumerable deviations from that speed, which is not to be seen as a straight-jacket." That is right. It is the speed that is natural. Certainly we know that Beethoven's musicians simply couldn't manage the speeds indicated in many his markings. Was he so impractical? It is the speed that makes the music tell that is important.

One of the aspects is that even though a user might be totally deaf, the metronome is visually/physically indicating speed as well, as further indication. As an early propagator for some HIP ideas regarding the symphonies, Scherchen for example succeeded in playing the indicated metronome markings back in the 60s - 50s, including with the rather provincial orchestras such as the Svizzera Italiana. Today's it's more common and perfected say with Gardiner & his specialized HIP orchestra.

Some have suggested that maybe Beethoven's own metronome had a fault, but it sounds unlikely to me - and also generally, why wouldn't someone have objected then, which to my knowledge doesn't seem to have been the case?

Quote from: MusicTurner on November 05, 2020, 03:36:13 AM
One of the aspects is that even though a user might be totally deaf, the metronome is visually/physically indicating speed as well, as further indication. As an early propagator for some HIP ideas regarding the symphonies, Scherchen for example succeeded in playing the indicated metronome markings back in the 60s - 50s, including with the rather provincial orchestras such as the Svizzera Italiana. Today's it's more common and perfected say with Gardiner & his specialized HIP orchestra.

Some have suggested that maybe Beethoven's own metronome had a fault, but it sounds unlikely to me - and also generally, why wouldn't someone have objected then, which to my knowledge doesn't seem to have been the case?

The fact is that historically nobody seems to have played them at those speeds. No one played the hammerklavier Sonata at the speed specified. It is practically unobtainable.

Quote from: Handelian on November 05, 2020, 05:24:56 AM
The fact is that historically nobody seems to have played them at those speeds. No one played the hammerklavier Sonata at the speed specified. It is practically unobtainable.

Researching in the British Library I came across the notes of a conductor, Sir George Smart, who premiered several Beethoven symphonies in London, who traveled to Vienna to consult with Beethoven. He didn't notate his tempos specifically, but he did obsessively save every concert program and write down the time each piece took in the margins. I don't know if he consulted a watch while conducting or what, but it was clearly important to him.

Here was a post I wrote about it at the time here on GMG:

Quote from: Brian on April 07, 2011, 03:55:00 AM
I've recently unearthed, at the British Library, a trove of concert programs kept by the English conductor Sir George Smart, active in the 1810s-30s, who was a major Beethoven advocate, leading the English premiere of Beethoven's Ninth and at one point traveling to Vienna to ask the composer about the proper tempos for all the symphonies. Beethoven composed a short unpublished canon in his presence (16th September 1825). For concerts he conducted, Smart not only kept the programs, but made little notations of some of the timings of the works which most interested him, as well as how long the interval was and when everybody got to go home.

These two struck me as interesting:

5th of May, 1823. Sinfonia Pastorale – Beethoven. [Handwritten note:] "32 M. No repeats."
March 23, 1829: Sinfonia Pastorale – Beethoven. [Handwritten note:] "All through but no repeats 32 ½ minutes."

Karajan '62 (no repeats) is 36 minutes. Norrington LCP (w/ repeats) is 40, Bruggen (also with repeats) 42, and the ultimate romantic, Barenboim, takes 45.

On March 1, 1830, the Sinfonia in C minor was 26 minutes, though in 1827 it had been 31 (no mention of repeats). In March 1833, "Sinfonia No. VII." was "40 m." including "Slow movement Enc'd:" and a marginal note informs us that the encore was partly because the symphony was to be followed by an aria from Cosi, but the soprano arrived very late indeed, "just after we began the Encore of the...Beethoven" . Apparently the reason for her delay was that she was also performing in another concert at another theatre that night!

It's very interesting seeing how programs were constructed. One night in 1825 began with Beethoven's 4th ("in Bb 31 minutes"), which was immediately followed by "La ci darem"! And here's the second half of the March 7, 1825 Philharmonic Society concert:

Sinfonia in C minor - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Beethoven
Aria, "Il mio tesoro," (Il Don Giovanni) - - - - - - - Mozart
Introduction and variations, Corno obligato - - - Schuncke
Scena, "Softly sighs" (Der Freischutz*) - - - - - - Weber
Overture, Preciosa - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Weber
[*sung in English. All German arias were translated; there are numerous arias sung from a Mozart work called "Il Flauto Magico" ;D , and also see below]

Another concert begins with "Eroica" and continues with Cherubini's Ave Maria and a "Fantasia Harp"!

Oddly, the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography says "Smart conducted the first English performance of Beethoven's ninth symphony at the Philharmonic Society in 1826," an error, as it was actually in March 21, 1825. Smart's handwritten note says, "New Grand Characteristic Sinfonia (M.S.) with Vocal Finale - Beethoven. Composed expressly for this Society _ (Italian Words [!]) Formed 2d Act of the Concert." The performance "Began 22m past 10" and the concert "over 26m past 11" - Smart's note says "1 H 04 M."

Quite obviously, those timings would be unusually fast even today in every case but the Ninth, which now usually lasts 64ish in HIP readings. Perhaps this helps explain why orchestras back then were so notoriously scruffy!

I personally am grateful nobody in the recording era has attempted a 32-minute Pastoral...only Scherchen has ever come close with his 34-minute version (to my knowledge). If he'd quickened up the slow movement, the villagers' dance, and given just a tiny bit more flow to the finale, he probably could have made it! If your goal is to match Sir George Smart's speeds, Scherchen's first movement is truly ideal.

Quote from: Handelian on November 05, 2020, 05:24:56 AM
The fact is that historically nobody seems to have played them at those speeds. No one played the hammerklavier Sonata at the speed specified. It is practically unobtainable.

https://simpk.de/en/_5_Autograph_Tempo_in_Beethoven's%20%E2%80%9CHammerklavier_Sonata%E2%80%9D_1321.html

"... we see that very few pianists come close to Beethoven's half note = 138: Artur Schnabel (1935) and at best Michael Korstick (2003) and Walter Gieseking (1949) (...) The majority of pianists remain in the range suggested by performance editions and other work commentary, from those of Ignaz Moscheles (1841) to William S. Newman (1971) (...) Only Carl Czerny, who studied the sonata repeatedly with Beethoven and who premiered the piece, was apparently of the opinion that the tempo half note = 138 was possible and also made sense aesthetically. He writes (...):

The principle difficulty comes from the tremendously fast and fiery tempo given by the author himself, and then in the performance of the melodic but polyphonic passages to be performed strictly Legato, in the clean performance of the passages, tensions and leaps and finally in the endurance that all of this requires. All of the individual difficulties require attentive practice, and the conception of the grand, whole first movement, kept more in the symphony style develops after repeated performance then after it has been learned, accorded the proper amount of time (...)

we find a gradual change of attitude since 1970 (...) There are an increasing number of voices calling for the feasibility of the tempo, or at least suggesting that one could come close, and who also point out that the work develops a very different and much more appropriate character at the quicker tempo. "

Quote from: MusicTurner on November 05, 2020, 05:56:49 AM
https://simpk.de/en/_5_Autograph_Tempo_in_Beethoven's%20%E2%80%9CHammerklavier_Sonata%E2%80%9D_1321.html

"... we see that very few pianists come close to Beethoven's half note = 138: Artur Schnabel (1935) and at best Michael Korstick (2003) and Walter Gieseking (1949) (...) The majority of pianists remain in the range suggested by performance editions and other work commentary, from those of Ignaz Moscheles (1841) to William S. Newman (1971) (...) Only Carl Czerny, who studied the sonata repeatedly with Beethoven and who premiered the piece, was apparently of the opinion that the tempo half note = 138 was possible and also made sense aesthetically. He writes (...):

The principle difficulty comes from the tremendously fast and fiery tempo given by the author himself, and then in the performance of the melodic but polyphonic passages to be performed strictly Legato, in the clean performance of the passages, tensions and leaps and finally in the endurance that all of this requires. All of the individual difficulties require attentive practice, and the conception of the grand, whole first movement, kept more in the symphony style develops after repeated performance then after it has been learned, accorded the proper amount of time (...)

we find a gradual change of attitude since 1970 (...) There are an increasing number of voices calling for the feasibility of the tempo, or at least suggesting that one could come close, and who also point out that the work develops a very different and much more appropriate character at the quicker tempo. "

Confirms what I said. Schnabel tried it too fast and made a complete mess of it. It should be a lesson that two pianist with transcendental techniques - Solomon and Pollini - both came in at 102. Beethoven's markings are often all over the place - like his rehearsals were! That doesn't mean we ignore them but it means we don't slavishly adopt them. Even Brautigam on a fortepiano is the same. Stravinsky once told Colin Davis that he thought his tempo for a certain movement of his was too fast. When Davis replied that is what Stravinsky had marked the composer said, "That is just the beginning!"

Quote from: Handelian on November 05, 2020, 08:14:27 AM
Confirms what I said. Schnabel tried it too fast and made a complete mess of it. It should be a lesson that two pianist with transcendental techniques - Solomon and Pollini - both came in at 102. Beethoven's markings are often all over the place - like his rehearsals were! That doesn't mean we ignore them but it means we don't slavishly adopt them. Even Brautigam on a fortepiano is the same. Stravinsky once told Colin Davis that he thought his tempo for a certain movement of his was too fast. When Davis replied that is what Stravinsky had marked the composer said, "That is just the beginning!"

The link I gave does only list some of the Hammerklavier recordings, giving some background info about the work's reception since Czerny and later on. Schnabel often tends to be rather sketchy in his performances, Solomon and Pollini tend to avoid extreme tempi in general.
Beveridge Webster for example seems faster than Schnabel (8 mins 44 versus 8:52), and it works better technically for him
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFzP0h3p1-I

Stewart Goodyear, also fast, is 9:16 though.

I think the main problem is that nobody plays always 20% (or some other set percentage) more slowly than the Beethoven MM marks. E.g. almost everybody plays the scherzo movements of the symphonies as indicated or actually faster. (Test: Would you know without looking it up which scherzo has the fastest indication in the Beethoven symphonies? and by a some margin 132 for the bar instead of typically 108-116 and which is the slowest (discounting the menuetto of the 8th) This is even mostly consistent in the italian markings with the slowest being merely "allegro" and the fastest "presto" and allegro molto/vivace etc. in between)
There are also a few fast movements "traditionally" played often faster than indicated (finale of the 7th is often closer to 80-82 for the half note than 72). OTOH one has the extremely fast marks like in op.106,i and most people seem to find the markings for most slow movements very fast. (And these slow movements are usually playable at the faster speeds, they just don't always conform to our notion of adagio.

So the puzzle is why would Beethoven notate unproblematic tempi for the scherzi and some other movements and extremely fast ones for some others? Sure, there may be a few real mistakes with the tempo markings (there almost certainly are in the 9th symphony) but generally they are quite consistent.

I think the conclusion we come to is the same as John Swafford in his Beethoven biography that the metronome markings are frankly sometimes all over the place and they are not to be taken too slavishly. The main point is to get the spirit of what Beethoven meant rather than a letter of trying to get a rushed tempo. There is one tempo in the Turkish section of the ninth which is too slow as marked. We would imagine if Beethoven actually heard it he would've changed it. We live in an age where it seems that authenticates want to allow everything to rule apart from musical sense. The great composers were not like that and would adjust the music to suit the halls they played in, the instruments they had available and their singers. They were pragmatists. I think it's about time we started being pragmatic while appreciating what the hip movement has brought in terms of understanding. There is no such thing as authenticity in music - the spirit is more important than the letter.

Beethoven's metronome marks are accurate as an indicator of his intentions. For example when he marked the first movement of Op. 106 at half note = 138 he meant that the movement should be played at a fast tempo, which in turn gives it a dramatic, impassioned and wild character due to the speed with which the shifts in harmony and dynamics must be executed. Beethoven was clear that a metronome mark should only apply to the opening bars of a work and "one cannot put a number on sentiment", that the tempo of any piece should change a dozen times over the course of the piece to reflect the sentiment of the music but these changes should be carried out in a manner "only as to be detected by the most sensitive ear". The tempo of half note = 138 in this case is perfectly playable with a bit of practice, and certainly appropriate for the first thirty seconds or so until the first ritardando. Among pianists who take Beethoven's instructions in context of his own self declared performance practice, Peter Serkin stands out as someone who uses 138 as a default tempo but slows down for more expressive passages and speeds up for more brilliant ones.

The flaw of the article linked above is that it attempts to measure "average tempo" over the entire course of the movement when in fact the idea of a metronomic tempo maintained throughout a movement (as in eg Mikhail Rudy's recording, where the entire movement is taken at a strict tempo of half note = 123-124) was not something Beethoven ever would have endorsed.

As such, Scherchen's Westminster recordings of the Beethoven symphonies are probably the most "HIP" as they take his metronome markings as given for the opening of each movement but subsequently treat the tempo with a great deal of flexibility. The flaw of Chailly (who I still quite like) is his metronomic tempi, not his fast speeds; like most modern performers, he plays Beethoven as though he were Stravinsky.

AFAIK there is also some evidence that "espressivo" or similar meant slowing down for (late) Beethoven, because in one of the late sonatas he somewhere wrote "a tempo" or "tempo primo" although there was no explicitly ritenuto or rallentando before, only "espressivo".

Quote from: Jo498 on November 05, 2020, 09:15:20 AM
(Test: Would you know without looking it up which scherzo has the fastest indication in the Beethoven symphonies? and by a some margin 132 for the bar instead of typically 108-116 and which is the slowest

This question fascinated me and this morning lying awake in bed I mentally played bits of all eight scherzos and tapped my finger; I'd start a mental snippet of one, get tapping, and switch to another scherzo to see how the tempos lined up in my head. The result of course is not knowably the composer's intention - the result was an expression of how I personally feel each scherzo should go.

Anyway, in my head, #5 is the slowest, then #4 and #9 roughly together, then #6 only slightly faster, and then 1-3 and 7 were all kind of grouped together in a big faster bunch, where if I tapped a consistent tempo and played through all four with the tapping dictating the music, none of them sounded wrong to me. If I had to guess, I would guess that #1 is meant to be the fastest, just because of the details in 3 and 7 which get blurred at the speed which feels proper to me in 1.

Quote from: Jo498 on November 06, 2020, 04:16:38 AM
AFAIK there is also some evidence that "espressivo" or similar meant slowing down for (late) Beethoven, because in one of the late sonatas he somewhere wrote "a tempo" or "tempo primo" although there was no explicitly ritenuto or rallentando before, only "espressivo".

Historical evidence suggests that Beethoven was pretty flexible in tempi when he was conducting himself

Quote from: Brian on November 06, 2020, 05:22:00 AM
This question fascinated me and this morning lying awake in bed I mentally played bits of all eight scherzos and tapped my finger; I'd start a mental snippet of one, get tapping, and switch to another scherzo to see how the tempos lined up in my head. The result of course is not knowably the composer's intention - the result was an expression of how I personally feel each scherzo should go.

Anyway, in my head, #5 is the slowest, then #4 and #9 roughly together, then #6 only slightly faster, and then 1-3 and 7 were all kind of grouped together in a big faster bunch, where if I tapped a consistent tempo and played through all four with the tapping dictating the music, none of them sounded wrong to me. If I had to guess, I would guess that #1 is meant to be the fastest, just because of the details in 3 and 7 which get blurred at the speed which feels proper to me in 1.

Yes, the 5th "Allegro" is the slowest at 96 (and it is rather different in mood than all the others). The 7th has the "Presto" with 132 bars/minute.

The others are mostly so close together, that it is to be expected that conductors would not always do the differences

100: 2 and 4 "Allegro"
108: 1 and 6 "Allegro" - Beethoven wrote "allegro molto e vivace" in the 1st probably because the movement was still called "menuetto" and the "speedy" indication is to show that it really isn't one (although many Haydn minuettos were in whole bars but usually more like a fast waltz, say 60-70 bars/minute, not 100)
116: 3 and 9, "Allegro vivace" and "Molto vivace"

Quote from: Jo498 on November 06, 2020, 04:16:38 AM
AFAIK there is also some evidence that "espressivo" or similar meant slowing down for (late) Beethoven, because in one of the late sonatas he somewhere wrote "a tempo" or "tempo primo" although there was no explicitly ritenuto or rallentando before, only "espressivo".

Yes, that's in op. 109.

Has anyone heard the Symphonies set conducted by Joe Hisaishi with the Nagano Chamber Orchestra?  Apparently very HIP influenced.  It got a very positive review in Fanfare. 

Cross-posted from the WAYL2 thread:

Quote
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71Ss%2BSgp1zL._AC_SL400_.jpg)

Symphonies 1 and 3. Live performances by a youth orchestra under its then 31 year old conductor. Not surprisingly, these are fresh, vital, urgent performances. Textures are lean and transparent, with 36 strings deployed with an ear toward a good bass end (9-10-6-6-5). Violins are placed antiphonally, vibrato varied according to the affect sought by the conductor. The clarity achieved is impressive, allowing for minute articulation details to register. I immediately repeated the Eroica's Marcia funebre. Analekta has secured very good sound for these 2009 performances. The audience is very quiet. The conductor moans and groans a little but it's noticeable only with earphones. Frankly surprising.

Listening  to these performances from the grass roots led me to realize that Beethoven has become lingua franca to young musicians the world over.

This Beethoven Birthday I've been reacquainting myself with a cycle I haven't heard in a while, Paavo Jarvi's. (Don't own #9.) So far I've listened to 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6.

Notes:

- #5 the strings probably could have used a tiny pinch of vibrato in the Fate motif, as fast as it is. I like the ample space he gives to the oboist for their cadenza. The real noteworthy feature is the finale, though: the most prominently recorded contrabassoon ever? You can't always hear it playing musical notes, since it doubles the basses, but you almost always here its funky mechanical rattle. It's audible throughout almost the entire movement. Good piccolo playing. In the first movement especially, however, you really miss the force and weight of a full-sized symphony orchestra with more string players.

- #6: Like the oboe in 5, Jarvi gives a lot of space to the woodwind players in their bird calls at the end of the second movement. The tempo drops and there's a big pause before the flute enters. There's a similar moment of total calm just after the thunderstorm and before the finale. The light, nonchalant playing of the violins in the first movement give an outdoor sweetness to the music without being too rich.

Overall, they've all been quite nice so far, although No. 5 is not likely to be a favorite (maybe because I listened to Carlos Kleiber's a few days before and remembered just how ruthless and exciting he is, even with a far bigger band). One consistent bonus point has been really good French horns in the orchestra.

Quote from: Daverz on November 10, 2020, 11:44:50 AMHas anyone heard the Symphonies set conducted by Joe Hisaishi with the Nagano Chamber Orchestra?  Apparently very HIP influenced.  It got a very positive review in Fanfare. 

Listened to several symphonies from the Hisaishi cycle. I liked what I heard.

Hisaishi, eh? I'm a big fan of his scores to the Ghibli films, but didn't realize he recorded a Beethoven cycle. Sounds interesting.

Does the Chailly set follow the original tempo markings?

I remember it being fairly fast but i'm not sure if it was strictly following what Beethoven wrote. Didn't sound that bad to me at that speed.