Revisiting Brahms and his symphonies

[mc ukrneal]

Today, I noticed that I have the Brahms symphony set conducted by Toscanini. I haven't listened to a Brahms symphony in ages, and I threw this on, despite my misgivings about the old sound many of these old performances have. Well, the sound was decent for its age. But what blew me away was how light and airy it was compared to the many slow tempo, plodding versions I have heard in recent years.

So my question is this: Is there a version out there that you thinks blows some fresh air into these warhorses?

For reference I have sets: Wand (#1 is definitely faster, and more to my liking, probably need to revisit these), Bohm and Karajan (going for slow and plodding in #1 - gosh, why did I ever get these?), and a mix of all sorts of others (Kleiber 4, Mravinsky 3, Steinberg 1 (slow, plodding), Bernstein 4, Karajan 2). If you think one of these fits the bill, let me know so I revisit it.

[Daverz]

Dausgaard in No. 1.  Chamber orchestra Brahms, but not HIP or underpowered.  The other releases in this cycle I've heard have been good, but it was No. 1 that blew me away.  Ant it's No. 1 that I usually have a "problem" with sometimes being too thick and portentous.



(For some reason Amazon has a silly price on this disc, so click on the pic to buy at Presto).

Before that, Levine/Chicago in No. 1, a very direct and involving performance.

[asin] B004H6P2LU[/asin]

(I have a Japanese issue and am assuming that Sony didn't muck up this box.)

[Marc]

Today, I noticed that I have the Brahms symphony set conducted by Toscanini. I haven't listened to a Brahms symphony in ages, and I threw this on, despite my misgivings about the old sound many of these old performances have. Well, the sound was decent for its age. But what blew me away was how light and airy it was compared to the many slow tempo, plodding versions I have heard in recent years.

So my question is this: Is there a version out there that you thinks blows some fresh air into these warhorses?

For reference I have sets: Wand (#1 is definitely faster, and more to my liking, probably need to revisit these), Bohm and Karajan (going for slow and plodding in #1 - gosh, why did I ever get these?), and a mix of all sorts of others (Kleiber 4, Mravinsky 3, Steinberg 1 (slow, plodding), Bernstein 4, Karajan 2). If you think one of these fits the bill, let me know so I revisit it.

Definitely not an 'expert', but you might try Van Beinum (Concertgebouw, partly mono), Mackerras (Scottish CO) and Chailly (his 2nd cycle, Gewandhaus Leipzig).
No doubt there are more alternatives, I for instance appreciate Haitink (Concertgebouw) much.

Most of these performances are, if I recall correctly, less 'plodding' than many others... just give it a try.

[amw]

Mackerras, Gardiner, or Norrington (with the London Classical Players on EMI) may be what you're looking for... at least as far as performances in the Toscanini mold. Beinum and Cantelli offer a more "classicistic" view, or for something more hard-driven but still fast, you may be interested in Walter (in New York, mono) or Doráti (in Minneapolis, stereo). Of the recordings you already have, and excluding the Toscanini set, I have the most time for Wand.

[Ken B]

Harnoncourt and Berglund might appeal. I like Abbado a lot too. Mackerras from the 90s is a must.

Cantelli , who was Toscanini's protege, has been mentioned. His stereo 3 is my favorite of that symphony.

[Mandryka]

Today, I noticed that I have the Brahms symphony set conducted by Toscanini. I haven't listened to a Brahms symphony in ages, and I threw this on, despite my misgivings about the old sound many of these old performances have. Well, the sound was decent for its age. But what blew me away was how light and airy it was compared to the many slow tempo, plodding versions I have heard in recent years.

So my question is this: Is there a version out there that you thinks blows some fresh air into these warhorses?

For reference I have sets: Wand (#1 is definitely faster, and more to my liking, probably need to revisit these), Bohm and Karajan (going for slow and plodding in #1 - gosh, why did I ever get these?), and a mix of all sorts of others (Kleiber 4, Mravinsky 3, Steinberg 1 (slow, plodding), Bernstein 4, Karajan 2). If you think one of these fits the bill, let me know so I revisit it.

When I was interested in this music I remember thinking that Kempe combined the energy and freshness of Toscanini with the feeling of Furtwangler.

Brahms 1 was my main interest at the time, and if you can find Scherchen and Stokowski / Hollywood Bowl playing it then it may be interesting for you.

I just haven't kept up with new recordings.  Anyone got a view on Dohnanyi/Cleveland? I may listen to Dausgaard later.

[Jo498]

I also found that the Wand studio set from the 1980s is surprisingly close to Toscanini in some respects. I have not heard any of the "HIP-influenced" sets (Norrington, Gardiner etc.). Of Harnoncourts I had 3 and 4 both of which are not driven at all, fairly transparent and "light" but also slow and lyrical (I didn't like them at all and I like Harnoncourt most of the time).

[André]

Dausgaard in No. 1.  Chamber orchestra Brahms, but not HIP or underpowered.  The other releases in this cycle I've heard have been good, but it was No. 1 that blew me away.  Ant it's No. 1 that I usually have a "problem" with sometimes being too thick and portentous.



(For some reason Amazon has a silly price on this disc, so click on the pic to buy at Presto).

Before that, Levine/Chicago in No. 1, a very direct and involving performance.

[asin] B004H6P2LU[/asin]

(I have a Japanese issue and am assuming that Sony didn't muck up this box.)

+1 on the Levine box. The Vienna remake is also excellent but not an improvement - just different, courtesy of different orchestral cultures. Wand in Cologne (1980s) gets another vote. Both sets get to the heart of the matter without dawdling.

Böhm is slower but just as forceful as either. His Brahms is grim, determined, often stabbing. Not a first choice, but definitely worth consideration. That goes for individual issues of the 1st in Berlin and Munich (BRSO), too.

I have the Toscanini performances. Impressive but severely unemotional and shorn of any affection for the music.

[Cato]

One of the best performances of the Fourth Symphony in my experience is by Serge Koussevitzky and the Boston Symphony.

YouTube offers the First movement: apparently the entire work is available on iTunes.

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

And someone has digitally cleansed a performance from the 1940's of the Third Symphony

https://www.youtube.com/v/e6QIJ0PPRzs&t=55s

[Karl Henning]

Always worth revisiting, I think.

[mc ukrneal]

Always worth revisiting, I think.

I think so too. I just got the choral works set on Brilliant (as recommended by GMGers) and it's been dandy. I think a bit of a different take on the symphonies would help bring back some of the love. It's fun to explore an 'old love' again....

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

I think so too. I just got the choral works set on Brilliant (as recommended by GMGers) and it's been dandy. I think a bit of a different take on the symphonies would help bring back some of the love. It's fun to explore an 'old love' again....

My top recommendation for Brahms are Kertesz/WPO on Decca and Janowski/Pittsburgh on Pentatone. I also think Barbirolli/WPO and Ansermet/OSR are very interesting "alternate" readings.

I've been listening to Maazel/Cleveland and found a lot to enjoy.

If you don't want 'plodding' than Jochum/EMI would be an obvious thing to try.

I'm also intrigued by Daussgaard, but haven't heard it.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

If you don't want 'plodding' than Jochum/EMI would be an obvious thing to try.

Also Jochum/BPO on DG - mono sound but very good for its age.

[Mandryka]

For reference I have sets: Wand (#1 is definitely faster, and more to my liking, probably need to revisit these), Bohm and Karajan (going for slow and plodding in #1 - gosh, why did I ever get these?), and a mix of all sorts of others (Kleiber 4, Mravinsky 3, Steinberg 1 (slow, plodding), Bernstein 4, Karajan 2). If you think one of these fits the bill, let me know so I revisit it.

I'm going to now state the obvious. The BIG one you don't seem to know, the one by the man who probably had even more feeling for what Brahms's music was about than Toscanini, is FURTWANGLER. I'd say, more than anyone else I know, he "blows some fresh air into these warhorses"

[Jo498]

One should certainly hear Furtwängler, at least in 1 and 4 (as far as recall I was considerably less impressed by the other two). But he is really very different from what ukrneal seemed to be asking for. It is certainly not light at all and often rather slow (or maybe more precisely it has rollercoaster tempo changes with a usually slowish base tempo). So I think it is understandable that people didn't mention Furtwängler as an obvious suggestion.

I have never heard Weingartner's Brahms recordings who is historically probably the closest to Brahms time and environment. There is a great 2nd by Fritz Busch (who studied with Steinbach who was close to Brahms) in decent sound (it's on the Great conductors vol.). I think there is also a live 4th with Busch in bad sound somewhere (only encountered on the radio many years ago)

[Mandryka]

One should certainly hear Furtwängler, at least in 1 and 4 (as far as recall I was considerably less impressed by the other two). But he is really very different from what ukrneal seemed to be asking for. It is certainly not light at all and often rather slow (or maybe more precisely it has rollercoaster tempo changes with a usually slowish base tempo). So I think it is understandable that people didn't mention Furtwängler as an obvious suggestion.

I have never heard Weingartner's Brahms recordings who is historically probably the closest to Brahms time and environment. There is a great 2nd by Fritz Busch (who studied with Steinbach who was close to Brahms) in decent sound (it's on the Great conductors vol.). I think there is also a live 4th with Busch in bad sound somewhere (only encountered on the radio many years ago)

Furtwangler 2 -- or at least one of them -- is very intense neurotic. It's like, this symphony, allegedly pastoral, was never supposed to be like that. I never listen to 3.

The Furtwangler way clearly isn't light and airy, but it blows fresh air in there I think. Is that a contradiction? Oh fuck it . . .

[Jo498]

It depends on how one reads the metaphor. If one wants a different perspective from most of what ukrneal has, Furtwängler is a great suggestion. If one associates "fresh air" with a chamber music like or HIP approach it is rather far fetched.

[bluto32]

Definitely not an 'expert', but you might try Van Beinum (Concertgebouw, partly mono), Mackerras (Scottish CO) and Chailly (his 2nd cycle, Gewandhaus Leipzig).
No doubt there are more alternatives, I for instance appreciate Haitink (Concertgebouw) much.

Most of these performances are, if I recall correctly, less 'plodding' than many others... just give it a try.

I also have the Chailly/Leipzig cycle (Decca, 2013) and can confirm it goes at a brisker pace than Karajan (80s) and Abbado (90s) without sounding frenetic. Very good, detailed sound to my ears.

Bluto

[mc ukrneal]

Some very interesting recommendations - thanks to everyone! It looks like I have some listening ahead of me!! This may take longer than I anticipated, which could be great fun!

[Brahmsian]

My first exposure to Brahms' symphonies was Sawallisch/LPO.  Then Van Zweden with the Netherlands Philharmonic.

Most recently, I have also revisted Brahms' symphonies through Daniel Raiskin's reading and really enjoy these performances.

[asin]B005V8K6XC[/asin]