GMG Classical Music Forum

Ask and ye shall receive!   ;D  Appended below are a few posts from today's WAYLT thread, discussing Karajan's various Beethoven cycles (sorry if I missed anyone).  Let the bickering begin....   8)

Quote from: Renfield on March 24, 2009, 12:36:42 PM
Re Karajan,

To use a rather un-British exclamation: whoa! I step away from the computer for a few hours, and everything goes Karajan. :o

Two things:


1) Regarding Karajan's Beethoven cycles, I only counted (and count, in general, when asked questions like these) CD releases.

If I were to also count DVD releases, I am fairly certain that at least some of the Unitel performances (viz. at least the 5th and 9th) are live, and unique to their video version, as far as official release is concerned; ditto for one of the two 9ths on video from the 1980s.

All in all, there are four - three on DG, one on EMI - integral cycles of the Beethoven symphonies on CD by Karajan, to spell out my answer fully.


2) On Karajan's Beethoven (cf. "Beethoven cycles"), on the other hand, I didn't think the level of specificity required was that which you lot seemed to go into after I left the conversation! And I still don't think it's the right thread for it.

If someone (I could do it if you wanted) made "Karajan Beethoven" thread, I'd be delighted to offer more than a 'context-conditional' sketch of what I think about his cycles, like I did above; likewise for the others who have opinions on Karajan's Beethoven, so we can actually discuss them in a less fleeting and 'by the way' context than the Listening thread. If nothing else, this is a lot of versions we're comparing!

Quote from: jlaurson on March 24, 2009, 11:23:53 AM
I think I said the relevant bits here: http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=433 (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=433).

I don't have the complete 4th cycle--and the three discs of it that I do have (1/2, 5/6, 9)--didn't leave much of an impression beyond what I state in the above:

The Philharmonia cycle I've not heard. I'm not terribly keen on trying it out, I should admit, because often I don't find early recordings all that interesting... Then again: Maybe I should... after all Karajan/Philharmonia are responsible for THIS  (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2005/08/new-york-soundtrack.html)Till Eulenspiegel.

I was VERY happily surprised by the Third cycle, which I had never considered until it was sent to me. Since I consider the second cycle ('66) a "standard" (which means "very good" but it also means "replaceable" with another excellent set), but the third one of great character, I'd probably recommend the latter over the former to anyone who already has an acceptable first and/or second cycle.

I'd certainly not like to part with it... but if I were left with only three cycles, I'm not sure if it would be among them.  The only one that I'd surely keep is Barenboim... and once my Vanska cycle is complete (I'm still lacking the 9th), that'd be up there, too... though I await P.Jaervi and T.Dausgaard to see if they can improve, further. I guess my foil would be Gardiner, whose Eroica was my touchstone until P.Jaervi came along.

Quote from: jwinter on March 24, 2009, 10:50:19 AM
I think you may be right about the 5 cycles -- not sure about the DG DVD, I know the Sony DVD is the 80s DG CD set. 

But I have to say, owning all 4 cycles on CD, I think Karajan's approach to Beethoven was fairly consistent over the years, so I couldn't recommend getting all of them unless to a serious collector (which many of us are, I know -- I was for a long while, though not as much anymore).  Hindsight being 20/20, I'd have been much better served years ago by picking up other interpretations of Beethoven (or indeed of something else entirely) rather than all of that Karajan, and if somebody snuck into my house tonight and purloined 3 of my sets, leaving me with either the 60s or 70s one, I don't know that I'd bother to replace any of the others.  If I had to make a Karajan Beethoven recommendation today, I'd say get the SACD 60s set, with perhaps the remastered double of 5, 6 & 9 from the 70s set as a supplement (all three being improvements, particularly the 6th -- the Penguin Guide was right in pointing out that it was a shrewdly chosen 2-fer).

Quote from: premont on March 24, 2009, 10:22:06 AM
Ok, as I thought one must have all Karajan cycles. Am I wrong in thinking there are five?
1) EMI 1950es with Philharmonia
2) DG 1962 BPO
3) DG 1977 BPO
4) DG 1980es BPO
5) I have some idea of a DVD set, different from the CD sets.

PS: I never favored (American spelling, I know) the sound of the BPO, - it is in my opinion too string and especially too bass-heavy. Still I get some enjoyment from Cluytens Beethoven cycle from the late 1950es, before the orchestra became heavily Karajanized.

Argh! Just as I made this (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,11795.0.html) thread. ;D

Merge, or keep them both for the sake of seeing what comes of the poll? :) (Since the other thread isn't just for the Beethoven, but can accommodate all the "how's Karajan's Bruckner/Tchaikovsky/Webern/Franck?" questions too, and still more.)

Thanks, JWinter for starting this thread. I shall observe the events carefully. My actual point of view (first and foremost prompted by you and Jens) is to acquire the 1962 set and then - having listened to this - decide if I want to waste more of my savings on Karajan.

Thanks J, you saved me some typing, as I had stopped by this board to start this very thread.  :)

I just got the 1970s HvK set, so now I have even more motivation to get to listening it.  :) I also have the 1963 set, which I admire for it's rawness and ferocity.

Quote from: Renfield on March 24, 2009, 12:57:17 PM
Argh! Just as I made this (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,11795.0.html) thread. ;D

Merge, or keep them both for the sake of seeing what comes of the poll? :) (Since the other thread isn't just for the Beethoven, but can accommodate all the "how's Karajan's Bruckner/Tchaikovsky/Webern/Franck?" questions too, and still more.)

Sorry about that!  Yours must have come up as I was creating this one.  I'd say keep them both, as Karajan recorded everything under the sun.  This thread's pretty specific.  :)

Quote from: George on March 24, 2009, 02:04:04 PM
I also have the 1963 set, which I admire for it's rawness and ferocity.

Ferocity? How does it compare to Toscanini and Harnoncourt?

In the other thread:

Quote from: Herman on March 24, 2009, 01:31:21 PM
...Part of the Karajan fan psychosis is wanting to start your own daily Karajan threads, ideally about which one of his Beethoven iterations is best / the greatest / your favorite.

I agree that Karajan fandom can verge on the psychotic.  However, I see the point of this thread as running almost counter to that.  Surely no sane person needs all of Karajan's Beethoven recordings -- they are literally legion.  So, here we can apply a critical eye, and hopefully separate the wheat from the chaff in the area where his recordings are most duplicative, and thereby potentially most confusing for the newbie (or even not-so-newbie). 

Like him or loathe him, Karajan is widely acknowledged as a "Great Beethoven Conductor".  Is he?  Why or why not?  I'd love to get into that here.  I'd also love to see some discussion beyond my first, practical question:  if one is trying to put together a representative collection of Beethoven recordings, does Karajan need to be there?  And if so, which recordings?

Quote from: premont on March 24, 2009, 02:53:41 PM
Ferocity? How does it compare to Toscanini and Harnoncourt?

Haven't heard Harnoncourt, but HvK's LvB is different from the Toscanini for sure. Tempos are not as fast and when things heat up, the BPO sounds like they are at the brink of control (even boiling over a bit at times), with Toscanini the orchestra always sounds well in control when playing more intense passages. HvK's 63 cycle is less refined, more "rough around the edges" than Toscanini's. I usually like my Beethoven in this manner. Don't get me wrong, I also like Toscanini's cycle, but for very different reasons.

Quote from: jwinter on March 24, 2009, 03:02:14 PM
I'd also love to see some discussion beyond my first, practical question:  if one is trying to put together a representative collection of Beethoven recordings, does Karajan need to be there?  And if so, which recordings?

That is an interesting question! To begin with, for instance, I'm aware that Karajan did the whole 1963 cycle with Toscanini as reference, to the point of playing back the latter's last recording of the 9th in the control room as Karajan himself was recording it, to make sure he got it right.

This partly answers premont's question: The 1963 cycle was essentially Toscanini through the Karajan/Berliner prism. And that's where a very interesting distinction exists between that and his earlier and later efforts. The Pastoral would probably never misfire in Karajan's hands as it did in 1963, if he weren't so desperately trying to modernise it (through the Toscanini prism, to invert my metaphor above). :)

I like the 1970s cycle a lot. It has so much energy and power (typically HvK) but the expressive nuances are also in the right place, and the huge, rich sound of the BPO doesn't throw the music off its classical proportions (especially in the earlier works) either. HvK just has the knack for LvB's symphonies, he knows how they should sound.

Honest speaking, Karajan's Beethoven isn't my cup of tea. Willem Mengelberg & Felix Weingartner's No. 1-9, Bruno Walter's 1-8, Kabasta's Eroica are my favourite versions.

Quote from: jwinter on March 24, 2009, 03:02:14 PM
... if one is trying to put together a representative collection of Beethoven recordings, does Karajan need to be there?

Despite the tongue-in-cheek title, I really don't want this to be a "let's all worship Karajan" thread.  So I suppose I should offer my own answer to this question.  And for me, the answer is...

No.

He certainly can be there, but he's not indispensible.  No one is.  I think, if you really want to get a representative sampling of Beethoven symphony recordings, you need to spread the wealth.  You need recordings from several different categories -- whether we're talking individual CDs or whole sets depends on your budget and your taste for Beethoven.  But, IMO, you need to hear all of the following broad types at some point.

A few caveats.  These are very broad categories; they represent roughly how I might pigeon-hole a recording at first glance.  Many of them can overlap, and a conductor may fall into more than one category.  You could apply the same categories, in most respects, to Mozart, Haydn, Schubert etc,  My examples are meant to illustrate the category, not imply that these are the only or best way to go.

HIP, period instruments.  Like 'em or loathe 'em, they present Beethoven in a very different light, and ought to be at least explored.  I think Hogwood or Gardiner are good, safe choices, but there are many good options.

HIP-influenced, modern instruments.  Recent Abbado for example, or Zinman.  There has been a lot of interesting scholarship on Beethoven scores in the past few years, and it's always good to hear current thoughts, usually in SOTA sound to boot.

Old-school Germanic.  This is where Karajan fits, but there are many other options, too many to list.  I think everyone needs a set by one of the great German or Austrian orchestras -- Berlin, Vienna, or Dresden.  

A bit of flavor.  Try something from a distinctly non-Germanic source.  If you want something safe, perhaps a US or UK orchestra for something close to home.  Or branch out and hear how Beethoven sounds done in a Russian style, or Czech, or French.  You'll often need to find older recordings to really hear the authentic local styles -- like so much these days, many individual orchestral traditions seem to be dying out.

Historic.  Try something by Furtwangler or Toscanini to see what the shouting's about.  Weingartner, Scherchen, Bruno Walter, lots of possibilities.

So, for example, if someone had Hogwood, Abbado (I like the DVDs from Rome), Karajan 77, Kletzki / Czech PO, and Furtwangler, I'd say that they've got a very nice Beethoven collection, that covers lots of bases and will provide many years of enjoyment.  I'd say the same thing about someone who had Gardiner, Zinman, Bohm, Bernstein NYPO, and Toscanini.  Or individual CDs from Savall, Vanska, Kempe, Markevitch, and Mengelberg.  You get the idea.

So, if we narrow it down to just the Old-school Germanic category -- if you're looking for the best traditional readings from Berlin, Vienna, or Dresden, is Karajan your best choice?  I'll let y'all chew on that one for a while ...  8)

One of the reasons why these constantly reiterated Karajan LvB threads are  equally amusing and irritating is because they're basically about a no-brainer.

If you're into multiple LvB symphony sets the Karajan sixties set is one of the first ten you need.

Period. End of discussion.

Quote from: Herman on March 25, 2009, 06:13:53 AM
One of the reasons why these constantly reiterated Karajan LvB threads are  equally amusing and irritating is because they're basically about a no-brainer.

If you're into multiple LvB symphony sets the Karajan sixties set is one of the first ten you need.

Period. End of discussion.

Implication: The other three cycles are trivial.

Period? End of discussion?

;)

Quote from: Herman on March 25, 2009, 06:13:53 AM


If you're into multiple LvB symphony sets the Karajan sixties set is one of the first ten you need.

Period. End of discussion.

But why is Karajan that important? That I want to know.

Non period, evidently. Continued discussion.

Quote from: Herman on March 25, 2009, 06:13:53 AM
One of the reasons why these constantly reiterated Karajan LvB threads are  equally amusing and irritating is because they're basically about a no-brainer.

If you're into multiple LvB symphony sets the Karajan sixties set is one of the first ten you need.

Period. End of discussion.

True enough.  But the simple fact that they keep recurring with such frequency (which I'll grant, though I honestly don't remember the last thread devoted to Karajan's LvB recordings) is instructive.  I can tell you from personal experience that there's a substantial force -- a combination of record company PR, CD reviews, internet forums, et al -- that pushes a newbie Beethoven shopper towards that 60s Karajan set, and that the multiple iterations can lead to compulsive duplications.  I have FIVE different versions of Karajan conducting the 9th, and ya know what?  I'm not ever particularly fond of Karajan's take on the 9th.  After many years of listening, I wouldn't put ANY of them in my personal top ten.  WTF is up with that?  The only symphony where Karajan is my favorite is the 5th -- so why did I buy four complete sets?!?  Is it voodoo, or what?

Honestly, I'm not quite sure myself.  Some of it is mildly OCD collector-itis -- my first hobby from childhood was collecting comic books, which are of course numbered sequentially, so the instinct to fill in the gaps and build a complete set is deeply ingrained in me.  I see a lot of that in other folks' posts here as well -- I know I'm not alone in that boat.

So it looks like I had a couple of purposes in starting this thread.  First of all, to help folks navigate through the maze of HvK's Beethoven, and figure out what's really worth hearing.  I've heard them all, so I might as well try to put the experience to some good use.  A second purpose, I suppose, is to try to get a handle on the psychology behind the multiple-box-set-itis that plagues so many here, myself freely included, and of which Karajan's LvB is an obvious example.

Quote from: premont on March 25, 2009, 06:59:59 AM
But why is Karajan that important? That I want to know.

Non period, evidently. Continued discussion.

That's the question isn't it?  Is he really all that?  And if not, why do so many people think he is?  That's part of what I'd like to figure out.

A sane survey, JWinter. And of course all your categories are represented in my library.

The interesting point for me at the moment, is Karajans relative importance in your category Old School Germanic. You seem to think, that one do not need any of his sets, if one has got e.g. Wand, Jochum or/and Blomstedt already? Others seem to think that HvK is indispensible.

As to this and your other categories I would also like to put a broader questiony:

Which ones do you need to own (hear) because they are characteristic of the category in question, and which ones have that much individual to offer, that you must have (hear) them almost at any cost?

Quote from: premont on March 25, 2009, 07:14:55 AM
The interesting point for me at the moment, is Karajans relative importance in your category Old School Germanic. You seem to think, that one do not need any of his sets, if one has got e.g. Wand, Jochum or/and Blomstedt already? Others seem to think that HvK is indispensible.

I think it depends on the size and quality of the library you're trying to build.  If you are trying to keep it small and still cover all the essential bases, I think Bohm or Wand or Kempe would serve as well as Karajan as a single representative of the style.  If, on the other hand, you've been around the block, and have decided that a) you really like Beethoven, and want to explore him in depth, and b) old-school German Beethoven is the style you greatly prefer, and is where you want to focus your attention/purchases, then we get into the question of who do you need to hear to get a full representation of everything old-school German LvB has to offer?  At that point, I think you need some Karajan in the mix.  Even at that point, though, you don't need four sets.  Either the 60s or 70s set would serve the purpose.  My plan is to argue the merits of each.

If you reach the point that you do need 4 HvK sets, I think you're now collecting Karajan recordings, not Beethoven recordings; and what you're listening for is more instructive of the evolution and variation in Karajan's personal style, not necessarily of providing further insight into Beethoven's music.  There's nothing inherently wrong with that, and if you're somebody like M Forever who's deeply schooled in German orchestral performing traditions, that may be right up your alley.  But by that point you've entered a very narrow niche, and you don't need advice from knuckleheads like us. 

Unless you stumbled into that niche without really realizing what you were getting yourself into, like I did; in which case you can start a goofy thread like this.  It can still make for a rewarding, if confusing and in the end wastefully expensive experience.

Quote from: jwinter on March 25, 2009, 06:07:25 AM
Old-school Germanic.  This is where Karajan fits...

[/quote]

Does he? If Karajan was trying to emulate Toscanini (an Italian leading American orchestras), was he being old-school Germanic?

Sarge

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on March 25, 2009, 07:46:36 AM
Does he? If Karajan was trying to emulate Toscanini (an Italian leading American orchestras), was he being old-school Germanic?

Sarge

I think so, although he's clearly not the most typical example -- I wouldn't call Herbie a kapellemeister by any stretch.  You're right that he was trying to move to a style closer to Toscanini (and away from Furtwangler), but I see that as being more of a movement within and reaction to the tradition than a clean break from it.  Plus I think his later cycles showed the Toscanini influence to a much lesser degree. 

Quote from: jwinter on March 25, 2009, 09:37:04 AM
Plus I think his later cycles showed the Toscanini influence to a much lesser degree. 

That. I would also consider Karajan part of that 'old school' (in fact, haven't I made a comment along these lines this week or the previous? I recall someone asking me why I would think that - oh yes, premont!), with the 1963 Beethoven and some of his contemporary BPO Brahms as exceptions/experiments, that he anyway veered away from in his subsequent re-recordings of the pieces.

If nothing else, Karajan considered himself a kappellmeister, as my 'fanboy' quote below (in my signature) testifies. He signed as such. :)


(Which is part of why I find collecting Karajan's recordings so exciting: tracing that sense of "evolution and variation in [his] personal style" that jwinter mentioned. And since he did a Beethoven cycle every decade from the 1950s onwards, these cycles are excellent reference points.)

Here is my list of favorites for each:

1st HvK/BPO '85 Gets a bad rap by many, but I think it is truly sparkling.

2nd Hogwood/AAM

3rd Gardiner/Orchestre Révolutionnaire on the dvd Eroica

4th Hogwood/AAM-by default

5th HvK/BPO '62* followed closely by Giulini/L.A.

6th Hogwood/AAM

7th Bernstein/BSO Not the best performance, but still my favorite recording considering the significance of the event. Ashkenazy/Philharmonia for the performance.

8th HvK/BPO '62*

9th Dohnányi/Cleveland by a nose. Furtwängler/BPO of 1942 is very, very close behind.

As you can see, the HvK '62 makes it twice on the all-time list.  However, I enjoy 3-8 from the set at a high level.  So, this set is of great listening value to me.

I found discussion here contructive and stimulating.

I have investigate the legacy of Karajan earlier, and found then amoung the `old school' style of playing, Karajan paid most attention to details.

I have compared six versions of Beethoven symphony no.3 `Eroica', despite the slightly fleet tempo, Karajan succeeded in creating a true climax in first movement, while the detail of each part are well presented.

In the second movement, Karajan dynamic control is second to none, while keeping the tempo, Berlin philharmonic played brilliantly under his baton.

Certainly you won't hear the transparency of Zinman, the inevitability of Furtwangler, the heaviness of Klemperer, but Karajan version should be among one of the greatest.

Some may complaint that Karajan lacking last ounce of passion, I found him excellent in presenting composer's will, and presented it brilliantly.

Quote from: jwinter on March 26, 2009, 06:56:59 AM
Fascinating list!  I have Stokowski and Weingartner, and one of the Mengelbergs I think.  I know I've heard the Stokowski (though it's been a long time), but I honestly don't recall listening to the others (I was acquiring quite a bit of Beethoven at one point, and I don't think my listening ever quite caught up to the pile).  I will definitely give them a spin some time soon!

I have seen many folks recommend the Fricasy, I may have to pick that up...

I think it's one of Holden's favorites.

I'd like to hear the Mengelberg, I wonder if the ones LL recommends are still in print, on CD?

Quote from: Bogey on March 25, 2009, 07:34:33 PM
2nd Hogwood/AAM

4th Hogwood/AAM-by default

The Hogwood Fourth has been my favorite since the first time I heard it. It really is one-of-a-kind. I actually listened to his Second yesterday for the first time, and it was a great one too.

Going to have to check out that Cleveland Ninth.

EDIT: I voted banana

Quote from: chankaiming on March 25, 2009, 08:47:54 PM
I found discussion here contructive and stimulating.

I have investigate the legacy of Karajan earlier, and found then amoung the `old school' style of playing, Karajan paid most attention to details.

I have compared six versions of Beethoven symphony no.3 `Eroica', despite the slightly fleet tempo, Karajan succeeded in creating a true climax in first movement, while the detail of each part are well presented.

In the second movement, Karajan dynamic control is second to none, while keeping the tempo, Berlin philharmonic played brilliantly under his baton.

Certainly you won't hear the transparency of Zinman, the inevitability of Furtwangler, the heaviness of Klemperer, but Karajan version should be among one of the greatest.

Some may complaint that Karajan lacking last ounce of passion, I found him excellent in presenting composer's will, and presented it brilliantly.

Stravinsky always complained about "interpretations" which thwarted the composer's will by ignoring markings in the score!

Chankaiming: is that baby in your picture a future musical prodigy?   0:)

Quote from: jwinter on March 25, 2009, 07:35:13 AM
I think it depends on the size and quality of the library you're trying to build.  If you are trying to keep it small and still cover all the essential bases, I think Bohm or Wand or Kempe would serve as well as Karajan as a single representative of the style.  If, on the other hand, you've been around the block, and have decided that a) you really like Beethoven, and want to explore him in depth, and b) old-school German Beethoven is the style you greatly prefer, and is where you want to focus your attention/purchases, then we get into the question of who do you need to hear to get a full representation of everything old-school German LvB has to offer?  At that point, I think you need some Karajan in the mix.  Even at that point, though, you don't need four sets.  Either the 60s or 70s set would serve the purpose.  My plan is to argue the merits of each.

If you reach the point that you do need 4 HvK sets, I think you're now collecting Karajan recordings, not Beethoven recordings; and what you're listening for is more instructive of the evolution and variation in Karajan's personal style, not necessarily of providing further insight into Beethoven's music.  There's nothing inherently wrong with that, and if you're somebody like M Forever who's deeply schooled in German orchestral performing traditions, that may be right up your alley.  But by that point you've entered a very narrow niche, and you don't need advice from knuckleheads like us. 

I have got an innate tendency towards completism too, and I usually have to figth against it. In the actual sitiation I have made up my mind, and my relative completism is directed towards Beethoven and not Karajan. I am interested in only those Karajan recordings, which have got something important to say about Beethoven. If Karajans 1960es set was meant to be a copy of Toscanini, do I then need it, as I have got the Toscanini set. Would the 1970es set be more rewarding as to Beethoven? I hear already clearly, that nobody recommends the 1950es set nor the 1980es set.

Quote from: premont on March 26, 2009, 10:44:43 AM
I have got an innate tendency towards completism too, and I usually have to figth against it. In the actual sitiation I have made up my mind, and my relative completism is directed towards Beethoven and not Karajan. I am interested in only those Karajan recordings, which have got something important to say about Beethoven. If Karajans 1960es set was meant to be a copy of Toscanini, do I then need it, as I have got the Toscanini set. Would the 1970es set be more rewarding as to Beethoven? I hear already clearly, that nobody recommends the 1950es set nor the 1980es set.

If I was forced to pick one, and only one, set, I'd go with the 1970s one, as I wouldn't want to be without the 5th from that set, and the 6th & 9th are much improved (the 60's Pastorale is way over-Toscanini-ized, not good, and not even a real word for that matter).  The 70s is much more representative of Karajan's general style as evidenced in other recordings.  My actual rec, as I think I said at the beginning somewhere, would be to get the 60s set in SACD sound, and get the devious 2-fer of the 70s 5, 6 & 9 as a supplement.  The 2-fer has improved sound over the original big-box issue of the whole 70s set; haven't heard any of the subsequent reissues of the set to compare.  Or, if you have other desires Karajan-wise, you could look at the DG symphonies box for a bargain.

Very quickly, the 50s set has dim sound and little unique to justify putting up with it, IMO.  There are highlights to the 80s set, but it's generally not as strong as the other 2 DG sets.  The CD with the 8th and several overtures is quite enjoyable for one.

Quote from: premont on March 26, 2009, 10:44:43 AM
I hear already clearly, that nobody recommends the 1950es set nor the 1980es set.

There is a 'semantic tension'(!) to note, here, between "appreciate" and "recommend". In my personal opinion, the most musically consummate Beethoven cycle that Karajan has recorded is his last one, the 1980s cycle on DG.

However, the numerous infelicities in the recording (qua recording - the sound), and the less consistent orchestral playing for Karajan's standards (which could disappoint those expecting to hear the 'picture perfect' Karajan of the 1970s - though when the playing is at its best, it is comfortably better than in any other Beethoven cycle under Karajan, and most under anyone else) result in my not being as willing to recommend it.

In other words, as I don't recommend recordings based solely on what I have enjoyed and appreciate, I would recommend the 1970s cycle first, as a complete testament of (purely) Karajan's own style of Beethoven interpretation. The later cycle might be a greater musical achievement (see especially the 3rd, 5th and 3/4ths of the 9th), but it has caveats that the second DG cycle does not.

The first DG cycle is, as we have already discussed, an 'exceptional' affair reflecting a stylistic amalgam that, though successful, is not representative of 'Herbert von Karajan's own' conception of Beethoven, as evidenced from both his earlier and later recordings.

And the 1950s cycle has a number of objectively extraordinary performances, like the 5th, 6th and 9th, but is just recorded using a less overwhelmingly accomplished ensemble than the Berlin Philharmonic, and thus ends up being recommended last; musically, however, it's as close to Karajan's 'own' Beethoven as the 1970s cycle - minus the fact of the intervening 20 years. It's fresher, but less authoritative overall.


How's that for a less hastily typed response? :)

JWinter and Renfield, you both recommend the 1970es cycle, and for the same reason: That it is the most representative of Karajans style. So my revised conclusion must be to acquire this and no more.

In this way my next Beethoven Symphony acquisitions will be Barenboim, Karajan 1977 and part of Dausgaard. But there are others, who´s importance I want to know. But this maybe belongs another thread.

premont, you have 999 posts. Make the next one special.  :D

A related query -- which of Karajan's versions of the Missa Solemnis do you prefer?  After rummaging through my shelves, I'm actually pretty surprised to find that I don't have this work by Karajan -- I've got Bohm, Bernstein, Klemperer, Davis, Toscanini, Harnoncourt, and Gardiner, but no Herbie.

Quote from: jwinter on March 28, 2009, 05:19:10 PM
A related query -- which of Karajan's versions of the Missa Solemnis do you prefer?  After rummaging through my shelves, I'm actually pretty surprised to find that I don't have this work by Karajan -- I've got Bohm, Bernstein, Klemperer, Davis, Toscanini, Harnoncourt, and Gardiner, but no Herbie.

Unlike the Beethoven 9th, which I have close to 20 versions, Missa Solemnis is quite under-represented in my collection.  I think I have Karajan/BPO on an Angel LP-set and a version by Colin Davis on LP as well.  The only CD version I have is the version by Gardiner.

Quote from: jwinter on March 28, 2009, 05:19:10 PM
A related query -- which of Karajan's versions of the Missa Solemnis do you prefer?  After rummaging through my shelves, I'm actually pretty surprised to find that I don't have this work by Karajan -- I've got Bohm, Bernstein, Klemperer, Davis, Toscanini, Harnoncourt, and Gardiner, but no Herbie.

I find Herbie's 1958 Philharmonia recording (a Legge-produced EMI, recorded in Vienna w/ Schwarzkopf, Ludwig, et al.) to be the only one of his I need. It is lovely in so many ways, far preferable (IMO, of course, but perhaps not in yours) to his two later ones with Berlin, which I've heard but do not own. Keep in mind that I am anything but a Karajan fan, though my preferences come after many, many years of hearing him in a vast repertoire of recordings...never in person. Still, while I have comparatively few Karajan recordings in my collection, this is one that I never plan to get rid of.

FWIW,

Dirk

This thread has a brilliant title!


and: 20 versions of the ninth?!

Quote from: Guido on March 29, 2009, 02:50:16 AM
and: 20 versions of the ninth?!

I plead guilty to having more than 30; and over 50 5ths. It's not healthy, I know. :o


Re the Missa Solemnis, I only have the EMI, and haven't even listened to it (yet - it's in the big choral box, and the bulk of my EMI Karajan listening comes from the numerous, and mostly orchestral, EMI discs of his I had prior to buying the box set).

But I greatly appreciated a live one on DVD from (IIRC) the Salzburg Easter Festival.

Quote from: Guido on March 29, 2009, 02:50:16 AM



and: 20 versions of the ninth?!

Nothing wrong with that, seeing as the 9th is one of the greatest achievements of the entire western civilization.

Wait just a minute................

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51DYp0zh2ML._SL500_AA240_.jpg)

EMI has remastered and re-packaged the 1952-55 Karajan set, selling for $18 new at Amazon sellers (Caiman etc)
The newest 2009 Penguin Guide has given it a rosette and moved it to top position of complete sets for
both performance and historical significance. They especially say the sound is very good now..........

I have placed an order

Quote from: DarkAngel on March 29, 2009, 05:29:15 PM
Wait just a minute................

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51DYp0zh2ML._SL500_AA240_.jpg)

EMI has remastered and re-packaged the 1952-55 Karajan set, selling for $18 new at Amazon sellers (Caiman etc)
The newest 2009 Penguin Guide has given it a rosette and moved it to top position of complete sets for
both performance and historical significance. They especially say the sound is very good now..........

I have placed an order

Oh, [apologies to the moderators] for f***'s sake!

Why did they not include the remastered versions in their big 'Orchestral' box, then!?

Even I am irked when I have to buy the same Beethoven cycle a third time, Karajan or otherwise. >:(


(That having been said, my above comments on the Philharmonia cycle still stand:

It's a wonderful, fresh cycle, eminently representative of Karajan's style as it would develop and inform his later Beethoven, particularly from the 70s onward. But the Philharmonia is no Berliner Philharmoniker, nor is the younger Karajan his older version; and in both cases, it shows.

If they've made miracles with the sound, it would be third on my list, still. :) )

Quote from: Renfield on March 29, 2009, 05:39:53 PM
Oh, [apologies to the moderators] for f***'s sake!

Why did they not include the remastered versions in their big 'Orchestral' box, then!?

Even I am irked when I have to buy the same Beethoven cycle a third time, Karajan or otherwise. >:(

Renfield
Looking at back of package on Amazon artwork it has been given the ART remaster treatment......just like all the GROTC series
Usually these are very good, I remember long ago comparing the Klemperer Mahler 2nd original CD to the ART remastered Great Recording of the Century version and it was very noticeable improvement......this might cost you some more money  :D

Quote from: DarkAngel on March 29, 2009, 05:52:31 PM
Renfield
Looking at back of package on Amazon artwork it has been given the ART remaster treatment......just like all the GROTC series
Usually these are very good, I remember long ago comparing the Klemperer Mahler 2nd original CD to the ART remastered Great Recording of the Century version and it was very noticeable improvement......this might cost you some more money  :D

Not much. MDT has it for US $20.

Quote from: DarkAngel on March 29, 2009, 05:29:15 PM
Wait just a minute................

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51DYp0zh2ML._SL500_AA240_.jpg)

EMI has remastered and re-packaged the 1952-55 Karajan set, selling for $18 new at Amazon sellers (Caiman etc)
The newest 2009 Penguin Guide has given it a rosette and moved it to top position of complete sets for
both performance and historical significance. They especially say the sound is very good now..........

I have placed an order

I bought this set last year ...

Quote from: DarkAngel on March 29, 2009, 05:52:31 PM
this might cost you some more money  :D

Oh, even were the remastering bad, it would have. I'm hopeless with respect to the Karajan discography. ;D

(Many thanks for the tip-off, though. I seriously did not think EMI would have the sheer audacity to- [mutters].)

Quote from: Guido on March 29, 2009, 02:50:16 AM
This thread has a brilliant title!


and: 20 versions of the ninth?!

This is about right IMO.  I have no intention to have versions performed by the likes of Estonian National Orchestra or the Beijing Philharmonic in my collection.  Bottomline, I just want to have the generally acknowledged top 10-15 orchestras represented in my collection with some orchestras like the BPO, VPO or the RCO performed under different conductors or in different decade with the same conductor.

Quote from: Coopmv on March 29, 2009, 06:52:10 PM
This is about right IMO.  I have no intention to have versions performed by the likes of Estonian National Orchestra or the Beijing Philharmonic in my collection.  Bottomline, I just want to have the generally acknowledged top 10-15 orchestras represented in my collection with some orchestras like the BPO, VPO or the RCO performed under different conductors or in different decade with the same conductor.

I assure you, there are many more than 20 9ths that are not performed by B-grade orchestras recording on Naxos. ;)

(No particular offense meant to Naxos, though I am still at a personal loss to justify their re-recording of the core repertory using third-rate ensembles.)

Quote from: Renfield on March 29, 2009, 06:56:02 PM
I assure you, there are many more than 20 9ths that are not performed by B-grade orchestras recording on Naxos. ;)

(No particular offense meant to Naxos, though I am still at a personal loss to justify their re-recording of the core repertory using third-rate ensembles.)

Come to think of it, I actually do not have any Beethoven symphonies on Naxos at all.  I tend to buy Naxos only for some of the more rarely performed works.  I do have this historical Beethoven 9th recording by HvK with the Vienna Symphony.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51w%2B5aBYUFL._SS500_.jpg)

Quote from: Coopmv on March 29, 2009, 07:03:28 PM
Come to think of it, I actually do not have any Beethoven symphonies on Naxos at all.  I tend to buy Naxos only for some of the more rarely performed works.  I do have this historical Beethoven 9th recording by HvK with the Vienna Symphony.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51w%2B5aBYUFL._SS500_.jpg)

Now that is an (apparently) controversial 9th. I've read reviews that completely dismissed it, and also glowing praise.

What did you think of it? Myself, I'd far from consider it the best available live Karajan 9th (commercially or otherwise), mostly on account of the 'creaky-sounding' VSO, but I'd say it's a solid enough account: there's nothing particularly bad about it! :)

Quote from: Renfield on March 29, 2009, 06:56:02 PM
I assure you, there are many more than 20 9ths that are not performed by B-grade orchestras recording on Naxos. ;)

(No particular offense meant to Naxos, though I am still at a personal loss to justify their re-recording of the core repertory using third-rate ensembles.)

In the early 1990s, they did so to make money because they were a super-budget label and could make money on that model.

Artistically, Naxos has had some considerable successes in the core repertoire. Here's my handy list based solely on my personal experience. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,6764.msg158441.html#msg158441) There are other great examples in that thread, the Mendelssohn Octet chief among them. And for what it's worth, I love Stephen Gunzenhauser's Slovakian take on the Beethoven overtures.

The Naxos LvB 9, with the Nicolaus Esterhazy Sinfonia, features maybe my favorite tenor-solo performance - Manfred Fink's take is so, well, joyful; you can hear him smiling! - but otherwise is not noteworthy.

Quote from: imperfection on March 29, 2009, 02:16:28 PM
Nothing wrong with that, seeing as the 9th is one of the greatest achievements of the entire western civilization.

No it is not. It is not even one of Beethoven's most succesful symphonies, artistically.

Quote from: DarkAngel on March 29, 2009, 05:52:31 PM
Renfield
Looking at back of package on Amazon artwork it has been given the ART remaster treatment......just like all the GROTC series
Usually these are very good, I remember long ago comparing the Klemperer Mahler 2nd original CD to the ART remastered Great Recording of the Century version and it was very noticeable improvement......this might cost you some more money  :D

Well I got the newly released 1950s EMI Beethoven 5CD set, booklet says remastered 2008 by EMI (Walter Legge production).......I would be surprised if big Karajan EMI box is not also remastered but don't own it so can't verify, perhaps Renfield can check his set and see if remaster date is given

The sound on this remastered set is very good, never owned old set so can't compare, this is about as good as mono can sound.
And the performances are great also, comparing the 1950 vs 1960 vs 1970 sets the fastest timings remain with 1970s set, the 1950s set is actually slightly slower than 1960s set but sounds a bit more dramatic overall.

If I could keep only one set it would be an easy decision for me...........1970s set (includes one of the greatest 9ths ever)

What is "banana"? Did the Velvet Underground have a version?

Quote from: nicht schleppend on April 05, 2009, 12:17:06 PM
What is "banana"? Did the Velvet Underground have a version?

Old forum joke.  If you think it's a stupid poll, vote banana.  If you look at polls over at the old forum, you'll see it all over the place.  :)

Quote from: jwinter on April 06, 2009, 04:28:35 AM
Old forum joke.  If you think it's a stupid poll, vote banana.  If you look at polls over at the old forum, you'll see it all over the place.  :)

Ah. Thanks for the tip.

Happy New Year!

This thread seems the ideal place to ask for advice on Karajan Beethoven symphony cycles.

I was about to plump for the 77 cycle based on what I have read here (and in other threads) so far:

* EMI 50s in mono, but I would prefer stereo
* DG 63 very highly regarded but
   (i) sound a bit mediocre on standard release
   (ii) SACD set is better although very expensive and I don't have an SACD player...
   (iii) apparently there are some "train wreck" incidents in I and II of the 9th where the orchestra isn't keeping in time very well
   (iv) No. 6 supposedly poor
* DG 77 also very highly regarded with perhaps a better 6th. Better sound than standard 63 release
* DG 80s - not much info on this other than the sound is reportedly very poor despite being DDD.

However... There is a massive 13 CD set released in 2011 which is just called "Karajan Beethoven", featuring all the 80s symphonies along with the piano concertos (Weissenberg) and other stuff. The extras aren't terribly important to me, however - it's the symphones I'm most interested in as I have the concertos already by other artists. This set is relatively cheap (about the same price as the 77 cycle) and one reviewer on Amazon said that the 80s symphonies were the "Gold remastering" edition which sound fantastic - better than the 77.

[asin]B005IML464[/asin]

Anyone here care to comment? Is the sound quality very good, and how do the interpretations differ from the 77? Also, what's the singing like in No. 9?

Thanks,
Bluto

They were called gold on first release, I believe. I doubt remastering would fix those. The problem was the miking and mixing.

I'd say the 1960s because it's the one I have.   :P

Seriously,  I don't have a problem recommending it, although I've not heard anything from the other sets
1) the sound strikes me as being par for the course for that era.  May not be great, but it's not bad.
2) I don't remember anything wrong in the 9th, although it's been a while since I've listened to that one.
3) Nor did the 6th sound sub-par to me--but that's the least favorite symphony for me out of the whole cycle, because I played the heck out of it early on in my listening career and now suffer a sort of burn out in that one.

  As a Karajan's admirer, I don't recommend the 1980s and 1950s cycle. The 1950s cycle is brilliance, energetic but streamline and faceless, just like performances by other young conductors (at that time) such as Bernstein on Sony, Cantelli and Fricsay. The 1980s cycle is at very good sound (in the Gold Edition) but too polished, lacks bite and inevitable feelings in 1960s and 1970s cycle.

While not a complete set, I picked up this single about 2 years ago.  This is on the Melodiya label ...

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51ukcFgVN8L._SL500_AA300_.jpg)

I have the 62 set and also own the Choral from 77 (fantastic) and the Eroica from the 80s set. I also owned the 77 set on vinyl years ago when it first came out. Honestly it really is a matter of roundabouts and swings. On the whole the 62 set is the most highly regarded but the 77 choral is probably the best of Karajan's performances and possibly the finest on disc. Obviously no one conductor is going to reign supreme in every work and even in individual movements there are variables. Fior example, the funeral march in the 80s Eroica is superb - possibly the best HvK did. If you own the 62 set the first movement of no 6 is a bit airless but apart from that you can't go far wrong with Karajan, whatever sniffy remarks are made by certain critics.

Quote from: DavidA on January 05, 2013, 10:51:15 AM
I have the 62 set and also own the Choral from 77 (fantastic) and the Eroica from the 80s set. I also owned the 77 set on vinyl years ago when it first came out. Honestly it really is a matter of roundabouts and swings. On the whole the 62 set is the most highly regarded but the 77 choral is probably the best of Karajan's performances and possibly the finest on disc. Obviously no one conductor is going to reign supreme in every work and even in individual movements there are variables. Fior example, the funeral march in the 80s Eroica is superb - possibly the best HvK did. If you own the 62 set the first movement of no 6 is a bit airless but apart from that you can't go far wrong with Karajan, whatever sniffy remarks are made by certain critics.

I have every Beethoven cycle (I believe) Karajan had ever recorded, including the version he recorded with the Philharmonia Orchestra on EMI. 

I thought recently the 1977 pastoral symphony as a supplement To my 1962 Beethoven set. It's basically the same interpretation but they're just a little more relaxed I think. I got it the next to nothing from Amazon website and just had to pay the postage.

Quote from: DavidA on January 11, 2013, 10:13:36 AM
I thought recently the 1977 pastoral symphony as a supplement To my 1962 Beethoven set. It's basically the same interpretation but they're just a little more relaxed I think. I got it the next to nothing from Amazon website and just had to pay the postage.

The 1977 Beethoven cycle was included in this box set I bought from Amazon UK a few years ago ...

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/511p-cufYSL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)

I actually have the LP set in my record collection as well.  That was a very nicely done LP set with many excellent photos ...

I owned the old LP set. Beautiful production with lovely photographs. Alas they do not make them like that any more!

I know this excellently-titled thread has long been unused, but since I had time recently to go over the audio-only blu-ray Beethoven symphony cycles by Karajan in the last few months, I thought would throw out my two cents. As far as I know, there are no blu-ray sets of the early Philharmonia set from the 50's nor the Karajan Gold set from the 80's, but those were never in contention for me as a preferred Karajan cycle, despite their qualities.

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81GqTp5MkbL._SL1400_.jpg)
The 60's set has long been treasured for its drive and intensity; some discussion was had about its homage to Toscanini already. It's sound was never as good as the 70's, but the blu-ray audio goes a long way.

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/814-MvendfL._SL1500_.jpg)
I always thought the 70's set interpretations were similar to the 60's, perhaps with a little more relaxation. But Karajan could never be called sluggish nor meek, still preferring swift tempos and rigorous attacks.

The big difference for me comes in the sound of the Berlin Philharmonic, which in the 70's had become a machine. In this vein, the 60's set, for me, has a more realistic orchestral balance, but the power of the 70's Berlin 'wall of sound' always impressed me - of course, this can be far from listener's tastes. The 70's set has a beefy, cinematic bass line, and while the recording is sometimes lamented for its over-engineering, it has never bothered me so much.

This is more bandying about over Karajan and audio, more than it is Beethoven, but I think my allegiances still lean more towards the 70's. Most certainly on CD this is the case, but the blu-ray makes a solid case for the 60's to my ears.

1960s DG for me, though his icy cold Pastoral needs to be replaced by Walter's or Boehm's

This thread made me realize that I have digital downloads of the recent-ish remastering of the 60s set and I forgot!  Maybe I should listen to that today.

I am not even sure, I think I might have the 70s in the amazon cloud but I have only the 60s as physical discs and know only them and never bothered to seek out the others. Besides 5 and 9 which are among my favorites, the latter partly for the singers, I don't think they are that good, usually pretty good, except the un-rustic pastoral but overall too "slick" to be my favorites.

HvKs LvB is middle of the road for me with one exception, the 5th. This is especially so in his 50's PO recording and in the 60's, his first with the BPO.