# Karajan Brahms symphonies - which cycle?



## Steve Wright (Mar 13, 2015)

Which HvK Brahms cycle is best, please? Sound quality is definitely a consideration...
Thanks!


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

Well, as with most symphonic cycles that Karajan recorded several times, sound quality is about the only criteria by which to tell them apart. I exaggerate, but not much. I have his 60s, 70s and 80s Brahms, and they're all splendid - if you like the Karajan style, that is. The 60s cycle is not easily available, I think, at least not as a set, but both the 70s and 80s are.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

I agree with Andreas, in pretty much everything he said.

If you're unavailable to get the 60s set, I'd recommend getting the separate recordings of symphonies 1 and 2-3 which can be had for pretty cheap used. I honestly can't wholly recommend his Brahms 4th, but that's just me. There are others that easily outclass it.


----------



## Steve Wright (Mar 13, 2015)

Andreas said:


> Well, as with most symphonic cycles that Karajan recorded several times, sound quality is about the only criteria by which to tell them apart. I exaggerate, but not much. I have his 60s, 70s and 80s Brahms, and they're all splendid - if you like the Karajan style, that is. The 60s cycle is not easily available, I think, at least not as a set, but both the 70s and 80s are.


Thanks, very informative. I thought I'd read somewhere that his 80s cycle was not the best (that's the one I have, I think, see pic. Correct?) so I was wondering if I should investigate the other two cycles. 







I was also wondering if the 70s cycle represented the best mix of recording quality and HvK at his peak. But from what you say, maybe I'm just fine. Certainly sounds good to my novice ears.
While we're here, I'd welcome any other recommendations for Brahms cycles/individual symphonies. I'd say beauty and lyricism are my thing, more than granite and drama, though I realise that I'm gonna get both across all 4 symphs! 
Thanks all,


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

Steve Wright said:


> Thanks, very informative. I thought I'd read somewhere that his 80s cycle was not the best (that's the one I have, I think, see pic. Correct?) so I was wondering if I should investigate the other two cycles.
> View attachment 67162
> 
> I was also wondering if the 70s cycle represented the best mix of recording quality and HvK at his peak. But from what you say, maybe I'm just fine. Certainly sounds good to my novice ears.
> ...


In that set, no. 4 is actually from the 70s, while the other three are from the late 80s. Odd thing, but it's true. Unless DG made a mistake on the back cover.
Critical opinion of Karajan's 80s recordings is sometimes not very good, with the exception of his late Bruckner. But then again, critical opinion of his entire recording legacy is often not very good.

As to other old-school conductor Brahms cycles, I'd recommend Karl Böhm's recordings with the Vienna Philarmonic. Among more recent recordings, I love Simone Young with the Hamburg Philharmonic. Some people really like Marin Alsop's cycle, I don't listen to it much, but why not check it out. A personal favourite of mine is Paavo Berglund's cycle with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

Karajan's overall interpretations didn't change much. A few things here and there, but overall his conception remained largely the same. As mentioned, it's not easy to get the 60's recordings outside of the Karajan 60's box set, but the 70's recordings are readily available. The biggest gripe with many of Karajan's 80's recordings was the sound. He like to mess around a bit in the studio and many people find them "artificial sounding".

As far as recommendations of other ways to experience more Brahms and less Karajan. I would get the James Levine/Chicago set which is very inexpensive at around $12 these days. Sound quality is excellent and you will not find much better performances. Highly lyrical and very passionate. 

If you don't mind a small amount of tape hiss, then Klemperer is the other end of the spectrum. Very traditional Germanic readings that aren't bogged down in sentimentality. They are highly recommendable! 

Claudio Abbado's Brahms cycle with the Berlin Philharmonic is also in modern sound and highly recommendable if you would like to hear the same orchestra that Karajan used but with clearer details and a little closer to what Brahms probably envisioned.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

None!

Buy the Charles Munch/Boston Symphony Brahms 1, 2 and 4.

Supplement it with James Levine/Chicago in Symphony No. 3


----------



## Steve Wright (Mar 13, 2015)

hpowders said:


> None!
> 
> Buy the Charles Munch/Boston Symphony Brahms 1, 2 and 4.
> 
> Supplement it with James Levine/Chicago in Symphony No. 3


Thanks everyone! All sound good. I also like everything I have read of Gunter Wand (for Brahms, and Beethoven). I have started with this cheap acquisition (well, cheap second-hand, anyway) - looks good...?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Four-Sympho...495270&sr=8-5&keywords=brahms+symphonies+wand
But the others tempt me, particularly Levine.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Get all of them.  He was a master for each version that he recorded here .


----------



## Steve Wright (Mar 13, 2015)

PS If anyone can advise me on choosing between the two Bruno Walter cycles - New York Philharmonic 1951-3 versus Columbia Symphony Orchestra 1959-60 - I'd be very grateful. Again, sound quality a consideration though not the only one!
Thanks,
Steve


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

If you want an extremely fine set of interpretations that contain both beauty and drama, I would recommend Istvan Kertesz with the Vienna Philharmonic on Decca Eloquence. His individually recorded live performance of the Brahms 2nd on BBC Legends cd (coupled wih Schumann's "Spring" Symphony) is outstanding, and superior to his Vienna 2nd.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

hpowders said:


> None!......
> Supplement it with James Levine/Chicago in Symphony No. 3


Agreed!!
Try Solti/CSO for #1, Wand/CSO is really excellent, also - 
Reiner for the rest - 
#2 - NYPO [you should have Monteux/LSO in there, too]
#3 Chicago
#4 Royal PO


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Steve Wright said:


> PS If anyone can advise me on choosing between the two Bruno Walter cycles - New York Philharmonic 1951-3 versus Columbia Symphony Orchestra 1959-60 - I'd be very grateful. Again, sound quality a consideration though not the only one!


The earlier NYPO set has faster tempi, and some great wind playing - but, the sound is congested at the climaxes, a drawback for me.....later ColSO set is more relaxed, lots of wind, brass detail - smaller string sections....neither is top choice for mew, tho I do enjoy Walter's recordings in general.


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

Both his late 70's and late 80's cycle on DG are excellent. 70s with better sound sonority and dynamic, but the recorded timbres of instruments are not quite genuine comparing with a real concert. 80s is less Hifi in sound but closer to the real effect. His interpretation did not change much, but the tempo tends to be more flexible in the latter version, and the voices are perfectly balanced.
Please note that none of the above CD pictures are for his entire 80s cycle. It was re-issued on the new DG DUO series (the CD cover is a painting of Brahms).


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Bruckner Anton said:


> Please note that none of the above CD pictures are for his entire 80s cycle. It was re-issued on the new DG DUO series (the CD cover is a painting of Brahms).


Yes, as far as I understand, the recording with Karajan at his window includes #4 from 1978 and #1-3 from the late 1980s cycle:









This is the version you mention, with all four symphonies recorded in the late 1980s thus representing Karajan's third full Brahms cycle:









I am unsure whether this is a full or partial 1980s cycle:


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

There was quite a bit of nonsense written about Karajan, especially in his later years, as if some people felt they had to balance the general adulation in which he was held in some parts. Whatever he was as a man, he generally turned out excellent performances of the Brahms Symphonies. I have the 1977 cycle which is as good as any. Of course you can get individual performances which may surpass Karajan’s but given his style, these are very good. Unfortunately the 80s performances were spoiled by his own or others tinkering with the balances but many were reissued remastered sounding very well on the Gold series.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

An important issue that went unmentioned in this discussion is one of mastering, and relates to Karajan's 1970s cycle.

There are several versions of the full 1970s cycle.

This and the next sound identical to me, with a very 'flat' sound resulting from Karajan's famous lush strings that were unfortunately combined with very little bass prominence:









And:









The following version of his full 70s cycle, on the other hand, includes a more prominent bass response which is extremely welcomed, at least by this listener:









Unfortunately, the flatter, less bassy, version was used for the Karajan 70s boxset:









As for the OPs original question, I'd say it's a toss up between the 60s and 70s sets. Definitely the 60s if the 70s alternative must be one of the 'flat' versions.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Having listened to all 3 extensively, I think the 60s cycle possesses the best sound and the best interpretation (though admittedly, all are similar, with minor variations in tempo). This release is a modern 24-bit remaster, and is both airy and powerful. It can be found easily and inexpensively at:

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8364858--brahms-symphonies-nos-1-4

In three formats (MP3, CD-quality FLAC, Hi-Res FLAC).

70s is too boomy and crowded, making it hard to hear some instruments. It is the least of the three. 80s is slower, but has quite nice digital sound (at least in the OIBP remaster available in the 1980s box).


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

MatthewWeflen said:


> View attachment 147591
> 
> 
> Having listened to all 3 extensively, I think the 60s cycle possesses the best sound and the best interpretation (though admittedly, all are similar, with minor variations in tempo). It is a modern 24-bit remaster, and is both airy and powerful. It can be found easily and inexpensively at:
> ...


Is this set available on CD?


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Malx said:


> Is this set available on CD?


I don't think so, though I see a vinyl link on the bottom of this page.

The weird thing is that some passages (especially in the 2nd symphony) sound quite a bit better on this download than on the OIBP CDs from the 60s box set. As such, I recommend the download as the first choice.

If you have a PC with a CD burner, you could always purchase the CD-quality FLAC and then burn it to disc for playing. I have burned many albums for my Dad this way, and they are indistinguishable from factory pressed CDs in terms of quality.

https://superuser.com/questions/60107/burning-flac-files-directly-to-cd-audio


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

I feel Karajan's best Brahms set was the one he recorded in the 1970s. However, I prefer emphasizing favorite individual interpretations as follows:

Symphony 1...Van Beinum/Concertgebouw and Klemperer/Philharmonia 
Symphony 2...Monteux/London Symphony
Symphony 3...Kempe/Berlin Philharmonic 
Symphony 4...Walter/Columbia Symphony and Van Beinum/Concertgebouw


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Handelian said:


> There was quite a bit of nonsense written about Karajan, especially in his later years, as if some people felt they had to balance the general adulation in which he was held in some parts.


There is no work of art so wonderful, so universally admired, loved, or respected, that there won't be _someone_-certainly on the Internet but not just there-who tries to puff up themselves and their tastes by bashing it. Karajan was hugely successful over a very long career, so of course he has his detractors, and they're more prideful than average because of Karajan's prominence in the history of recorded music. Rather like people who bash _The Beatles_, for example. But I digress.

Karajan's Brahms is excellent. I'm not sure I can pick between the three DG cycles, not because there aren't important differences, but because each recording of each individual symphony are all very good to outstanding.

I wouldn't want to _only_ have Karajan for Brahms, but I wouldn't want to _not_ have Karajan for Brahms, either.

I'm hoping DG releases a Blu-ray remaster of at least one of Karajan's Brahms cycles, but that series hasn't made any new releases in months, sadly. It's a pity because all of these DG Blu-ray Disc remasters have been superb, typically the best those recordings have ever sounded relative to any previous format. Here's to hoping...

One last comment: don't neglect considering Karajan's Vienna Philharmonic Brahms on Decca, not a complete cycle but possibly my favorite for No. 1 and No. 3, among Karajan's Brahms recordings.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I like Karajan's 80s Brahms cycle a lot (I have them all). It's broader but some of the string playing and the general realisation are excellent. I may prefer others for Brahms symphonies but that's not to say that Karajan is not good. All of his sets are excellent in their own way.


----------



## gvn (Dec 14, 2019)

Great thread. Really good question--surely many people setting out to build a collection of standard symphonic repertoire must ask themselves "Which Karajan Brahms would be preferable?" And really good, intelligent answers from a diversity of well informed folks.

I hesitate to risk spoiling the thread with my 2 cents' worth, but some things that have been said express my own feelings exactly.



MatthewWeflen said:


> Having listened to all 3 extensively, I think the 60s cycle possesses the best sound and the best interpretation (though admittedly, all are similar, with minor variations in tempo).


That's also how I hear things. As regards interpretation, I find very very little difference, but I hear a slight extra lightness of touch in K's early Brahms, which I particularly like. His later Brahms tended to put on weight very slightly.

As regards sound quality, more surprisingly I again find myself in agreement. Not a matter of better equipment, but of better microphone placement: the orchestra is captured more naturally, and with better focus. (I should specify that, for the 1970s recordings, I have the bassier set preferred above.)



Knorf said:


> I wouldn't want to _only_ have Karajan for Brahms, but I wouldn't want to _not_ have Karajan for Brahms, either.


Strong agreement. I'm by no means an uncritical admirer of Karajan, but I do admire his Brahms recordings very much. All of them. What other composer did he conduct so well so consistently? (Schoenberg, maybe? But of course he didn't perform Schoenberg anything like as often as Brahms!) And if I had to choose only half a dozen Brahms cycles, even if I could choose them from the whole range of recorded history without regard to sound quality, one of Karajan's would still be among them.



Knorf said:


> One last comment: don't neglect considering Karajan's Vienna Philharmonic Brahms on Decca, not a complete cycle but possibly my favorite for No. 1 and No. 3, among Karajan's Brahms recordings.


I'd draw special attention to this, too. Especially in No. 3 (which has long been reputed the most difficult of the Brahms symphonies to get right). I suspect, if you polled solely the folks who have listened seriously to ALL Karajan's Brahms recordings, you'd find a scatter of votes for different recordings of the other symphonies, but in No. 3 you'd get a clear majority voting for his 1960s Decca recording.


----------



## gvn (Dec 14, 2019)

Steve Wright said:


> PS If anyone can advise me on choosing between the two Bruno Walter cycles - New York Philharmonic 1951-3 versus Columbia Symphony Orchestra 1959-60 - I'd be very grateful. Again, sound quality a consideration though not the only one!
> Thanks,
> Steve


If sound quality is a factor, it would have to be the later cycle, because the earlier set has significant amounts of congestion (as noted above).

But the two sets are interpretatively very different indeed. The earlier set is fast, a little insecure, high-strung, high pressure, high tension, distinctly influenced by Toscanini. The later set is thoroughly assured, relaxed, laid back, at ease, but not at all sentimental or perfumed--not a bit. I almost think of them as by two different conductors who just happened both to be named Bruno Walter. They're both very good indeed. Much depends on whether one wants to listen for tension or for relaxation.

If I were to pick half a dozen Brahms symphony sets from the past 100 years of recording, regardless of sound quality, I'm not sure that _both_ conductors named Bruno Walter wouldn't feature in the final half dozen. (Alongside whom? Toscanini/Philharmonia [not very good sound quality], Furtwängler mixed & matched [ditto], Karajan DG/Decca 1960s... and who else? Maybe Böhm [he learnt the symphonies from Brahms's circle, and I think it shows]. Or maybe even Stokowski [emphatically not the early Philadelphias, but the final glowing studio recordings strewn across 4 different labels].)


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

1 - 60s
2 - 80s
3 - Decca VPO
4 - 70s


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> 1 - 60s
> 2 - 80s
> 3 - Decca VPO
> 4 - 70s


The ultimate Frankenkarajan set...


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

Knorf said:


> The ultimate Frankenkarajan set...


A set that is easier on the ears than on the wallet...


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

I have not listened to all of Karajan's sets, so I can't be of much help there. I definitely have the 1970s set, and I believe have a couple of duplicates of it. Probably have the others, but I am currently too lazy to go hunting through my collection. I do find that Karajan and the BPO provide great interpretations of the Brahms symphonies. Do not let the naysayers and Karajan haters deter you. He does provide great performances in this, and most 19th century repertoire.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Brahmsian Colors said:


> Symphony 2...Monteux/London Symphony


Monteux/LSO is a great Brahms 2nd.....just excellent all the way...


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

I'm afraid the current place in Matthew's Karajan thread has got me all loved up on all things 80s digital with Karajan so my list is

80s 
70s
60s


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

HenryPenfold said:


> I'm afraid the current place in Matthew's Karajan thread has got me all loved up on all things 80s digital with Karajan so my list is


Quite honestly the 80ies cycle of most Karajan recordings are geat. More and more people appreciate it more.
Just two days ago I had a discussion with a relative of mine, who said he doesn't care what others say he likes Karajan 80ies recording more than the 60ies on Beethoven. I say the same about other recordings too. It has substantially a lot to do with the improved DG recording technology in 80ies when they moved their studios to Berlin. I say they were on paar with Decca as far as sound quality is concerned in the 80ies, on top of BPO and Karajan's sheer performance of course.

Thanks to Mathew's thread, we are starting to appreciate the 80ies cycle.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

Axter said:


> Quite honestly the 80ies cycle of most Karajan recordings are geat. More and more people appreciate it more.
> Just two days ago I had a discussion with a relative of mine, who said he doesn't care what others say he likes Karajan 80ies recording more than the 60ies on Beethoven. I say the same about other recordings too. It has substantially a lot to do with the improved DG recording technology in 80ies when they moved their studios to Berlin. I say they were on paar with Decca as far as sound quality is concerned in the 80ies, on top of BPO and Karajan's sheer performance of course.
> 
> Thanks to Mathew's thread, we are starting to appreciate the 80ies cycle.


Egg wetter gree!

I developed my appreciation of classical music and built my music collection up during an era when it was the default position to disparage Karajan. He was accused of ruining the music, not understanding much of it, and being driven by power and his ego. He was labelled a megalomaniac. This certainly affected my view of his art.

It's a strange experience to be now enjoying almost everything I hear him conduct. And what's more, enjoying the 1980s stuff the most, be it Tchaikovsky, Strauss, Brahms, Bruckner and even Haydn.

Following Matthew's thread, disc by disc, has been an incredible eye (ear?) opener. I'm rewriting my Karajan history!


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

HenryPenfold said:


> Egg wetter gree!
> 
> I developed my appreciation of classical music and built my music collection up during an era when it was the default position to disparage Karajan. He was accused of ruining the music, not understanding much of it, and being driven by power and his ego. He was labelled a megalomaniac. This certainly affected my view of his art.
> 
> ...


Absolutely egg wetter gree!

Those who disparaged Karajan with those sort of comments had either gray chooma or were just jealous. And that comes from a Sir Georg Solti fan as I am.
Similarly, I hate the same thing when people talk nonsense about Sir Georg being too loud, high voltage, Decca made him etc... 
This is regrettable, because soon people will appreciate them once again and regret not having done so earlier.

Lesson is to ignore what other "_experts_" say when they don't talk technical substance but rather make bold conclusions based on their own taste whatever it is.

As shakespeare says:
_A poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon stage and then is heard no more. Its a tale, told by an *idiot*, full sound and fury, *signifying nothing!*_

_PS: replace "player" with "critiques"_


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

The 80s Brahms is good and some of the digitally captured sound is incredible (especially the brass climaxes). I just think the swifter tempii in the 60s are preferable, and the sound is nearly as good, especially in the Hi-Res remaster.

I may reevaluate when I get there in a few discs. My new Sony Z1R headphones have those 80s digital recordings sounding like absolute dynamite. I just re-listened to the Alpensinfonie and it is astonishing.


----------

