# What's the best box set of Furtwangler Beethoven symphonies.



## Itullian

Which do you recommend?
Thanks :tiphat:


----------



## jim prideaux

Itullian said:


> Which do you recommend?
> Thanks :tiphat:


I would also rather like to know, and as a lot of members seem to have a better developed facility with 'images' could you please show the packaging rather than defining/describing the set you recommend.

Thanks in anticipation.

Jim


----------



## DarkAngel

Does price matter? There is a clear wartime BPO winner if price is no object........:devil:

Are you looking for BPO wartime radio Beethoven, or later VPO & BPO series from 1948->54.....


----------



## premont

DarkAngel said:


> Does price matter? There is a clear winner if price is no object............
> 
> Are you looking for BPO wartime radio Beethoven, or later VPO & BPO series from 1948-54.....


Depends upon the artistic quality, if you ask me.


----------



## DarkAngel

DarkAngel said:


> Does price matter? There is a clear *wartime BPO winner* if price is no object........:devil:
> 
> Are you looking for BPO wartime radio Beethoven, or later VPO & BPO series from 1948->54.....












New BP SACD boxset has best sound for BPO wartime Beethoven, remastered from actual original magnetic tapes of radio broadcasts, better than previous Music & Arts, Andromeda, Pristine XR......

Get much more than just Beethoven, Amazon USA Prime $211


----------



## Manxfeeder

I don't know about "the best," but to my ears, the Music & Arts set is pretty solid, though it only has Symphonies Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and the famous 9th from 1942.


----------



## Itullian

DarkAngel said:


> Does price matter? There is a clear wartime BPO winner if price is no object........:devil:
> 
> Are you looking for BPO wartime radio Beethoven, or later VPO & BPO series from 1948->54.....


Price IS an object 
How about a set of just the Beethoven?


----------



## wkasimer

Itullian said:


> Price IS an object
> How about a set of just the Beethoven?


I think that the only complete set is on EMI/Warner. It's cheap, but I don't think that it contains a lot of his best recordings. I also favor the incomplete M&A set that Manxfeeder recommended.


----------



## jegreenwood

Manxfeeder said:


> I don't know about "the best," but to my ears, the Music & Arts set is pretty solid, though it only has Symphonies Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, and the famous 9th from 1942.
> 
> View attachment 122051


I just picked that up based on what I've read on this forum. I've only listened to the Eroica so far, but I was impressed. Looking forward to the 9th..


----------



## jegreenwood

Manxfeeder said:


> I don't know about "the best," but to my ears, the Music & Arts set is pretty solid, though it only has Symphonies Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, and the famous 9th from 1942.
> 
> View attachment 122051


I just picked that up based on what I've read on this forum. Different cover art, though. I've only listened to the Eroica so far, but I was impressed. Looking forward to the 9th..


----------



## DarkAngel

Manxfeeder said:


> I don't know about "the best," but to my ears, the Music & Arts set is pretty solid, though it only has Symphonies Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, and the famous 9th from 1942.
> 
> View attachment 122051


*Wartime BPO Beethoven*
There is a newer version of that Maggi Payne M&A boxset that you can buy today on Amazon......



















*The cheap competitor is Andromeda, they are complete opposites in sound presentation*
---M&A is softer more opaque sound, obvious distortion under full orchestra
---Andromeda is very brightly lit, shrill and quickly fatiguing, obvious distortion under full orchestra

If I had to choose one of these -> M&A


----------



## rice

Speaking of Furtwangler, there will be a complete DG and Decca recordings box coming out in September.


----------



## Manxfeeder

DarkAngel said:


> *Wartime BPO Beethoven*
> There is a newer version of that Maggi Payne M&A boxset that you can buy today on Amazon......


Thanks for clearing that up. I was wondering if that was the same set, and I was also wondering about the Andromeda.


----------



## jegreenwood

Manxfeeder said:


> Thanks for clearing that up. I was wondering if that was the same set, and I was also wondering about the Andromeda.


I have the newer M&A.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

The best sounding are the Tahra transfers, if you can find them. After that, go with M&A.

His best postwar performances are both available right now in Tahra transfers on Amazon for relatively cheap. I would jump on both of these. They all have claim to being his best recordings of these works, and the sound is better than the wartime. The second CD set has excellent sound in fact.

5/25/47 5th and 6th. My favorite 5th, on fire from beginning to end. A great 6th as well.










2-CD set including 12/8/52 3rd and 5/23/54 5th and 6th. I flip back and forth between this Eroica and the wartime. This one is more expansive and weighty. Both are worth it. The 5th is his best recorded and overwhelming in the transition from the 3rd to the 4th movements. The Pastorale is my favorite of all.










I also consider his 1953 7th and 8th to be his best recordings of these works. Again, you can find them cheap on Amazon:










Although the wartime 9th is his greatest IMO, the 1954 Lucerne is also essential and his greatest in the opinion of many. It is certainly the best recorded. Best transfer is Audite:










The essential wartime recordings are the 3rd, 4th, 9th, and Coriolan Overture. All of these are musts, and the easiest way to collect them is the wartime M&A boxset. (Many also prefer the wartime 5th and 7th, though I think his postwar recordings surpass them) The Tahra transfers are still my favorite for these, but they are harder to find.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Additionally, the 1951 Bayreuth 9th is one of his three essential versions of the work. The Orfeo has the best transfer by far:










So to sum up, essential Furtwangler Beethoven includes:

Wartime 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, Coriolan overture on Tahra or Music & Arts

12/8/52 3rd on Tahra

5/25/47 5th and 6th on Tahra

5/23/54 5th and 6th on Tahra

1953 7th and 8th on DG

7/29/51 Bayreuth 9th on Orfeo

8/22/54 Lucerne 9th on Audite


----------



## wkasimer

Tahra issued a 1944 Eroica in SACD format - a terrific performance in amazingly good sound for the date:


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

wkasimer said:


> Tahra issued a 1944 Eroica in SACD format - a terrific performance in amazingly good sound for the date:
> 
> View attachment 122056


Yes, the best transfer but pretty expensive last I checked.

Also the Tahra transfer of the 1942 9th is the best. My most prized recording in my entire collection.


----------



## DarkAngel

DarkAngel said:


> *Wartime BPO Beethoven*
> There is a newer version of that Maggi Payne M&A boxset that you can buy today on Amazon......


The newer M&A wartime boxset has same 1999 Maggi Payne remasters of CD 1-3, but CD 4 is newer 2012 remaster of 9th, I still see the old boxset (bottom pix) for sale but new one is less expensive and more up to date (for 9th)


----------



## DarkAngel

*For your cheap set of 1947-54 live & studio Beethoven* there are two popular very cheap boxsets, 5CD Warner & 6CD Andromeda boxsets.......

But to complicate things further the performances are not the same, for instance 9th is 51 Bayreuth for Warner and 54 Lucerne for Andromeda, decisions decisions.......


----------



## Itullian

^^^^^^^
I picked up the Warner set and the new M&A set.
Thanks DA. :tiphat:


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Additionally, the 1951 Bayreuth 9th is one of his three essential versions of the work. The Orfeo has the best transfer by far:


So many people rave on about this performance of the ninth but I can never quite see why. I would say the one with the VPO is better though in worse sound. Furtwangler himself was not that happy with the Bayreuth performance and his mood was not helped by Walter Legge's barbed comment after: "A good performance, but not as good as it might have been."


----------



## DarkAngel

DavidA said:


> So many people rave on about this performance of the ninth but I can never quite see why. I would say the one with the VPO is better though in worse sound. Furtwangler himself was not that happy with the Bayreuth performance and his mood was not helped by Walter Legge's barbed comment after: "*A good performance, but not as good as it might have been*."


We should not overlook greatness before us in pursuit of perfection, think how many masterful performances occurred that opening season of new Bayeuth festival 1951, at the time they probably thought we could do better (Mr Legge) today we are spellbound by such high artistic standards......


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> So many people rave on about this performance of the ninth but I can never quite see why. I would say the one with the VPO is better though in worse sound. Furtwangler himself was not that happy with the Bayreuth performance and his mood was not helped by Walter Legge's barbed comment after: "A good performance, but not as good as it might have been."


This was the recording that first turned me on to Furtwangler 23 years ago. People who don't understand the spiritual side of music won't appreciate it.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> This was the recording that first turned me on to Furtwangler 23 years ago. People who don't understand the spiritual side of music won't appreciate it.


Sorry mate, I do understand the 'spiritual side' of music - so did Legge btw - and I still don't think it's very good. That sort of argument is a non-starter as it is a non-argument! You can say that about anything to 'win' an argument! Only thing is it a statement that proves nothing :lol:


----------



## Manxfeeder

DavidA said:


> Sorry mate, I do understand the 'spiritual side' of music - so did Legge btw - and I still don't think it's very good. That sort of argument is a non-starter as it is a non-argument! You can say that about anything to 'win' an argument! Only thing is it a statement that proves nothing :lol:


I'm a big fan of the 9th and of spirituality in musical performances, but on this one, I have to agree with David - this one doesn't so much for me. I didn't think much of it when I first heard it ten years ago, and after digging it out today and hearing it again, I still don't. It's just a recording of a performance, as an old friend of mine once said.


----------



## chill782002

The Andromeda is not the best sounding but is perfectly listenable and an easy, relatively cheap way to collect all of the wartime recordings in one go. I very much lean towards his Beethoven recordings from this period as the performances are often electrifying. 

However, I agree with others that the Tahra transfers sound considerably better with a greater sense of space and less distortion. Some of the Melodiya releases that came out 10-15 years ago also sound very good and it's worth remembering that many of the wartime master tapes (particularly the 5th and 7th) were seized by the Russians at the end of the war and carted off to the Rodina (although it's still unclear whether this was as a result of official policy or spontaneous misappropriation by a visiting Soviet Furtwängler fan).

The new Furtwängler box looks great but it also looks rather expensive. In addition, some of the Beethoven recordings on there cannot have been sourced from the master tapes (again, particularly the 5th and 7th) as the tapes are most likely lost. That said, acquiring that would probably be cheaper than seeking out individual Tahra and Melodiya copies of the wartime performances.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Sorry mate, I do understand the 'spiritual side' of music - so did Legge btw - and I still don't think it's very good. That sort of argument is a non-starter as it is a non-argument! You can say that about anything to 'win' an argument! Only thing is it a statement that proves nothing :lol:


Technically speaking it's not his best, but it has a special quality similar to Knsppertsbusch's '51 Parsifal. Some of us hear it, and some don't. I enjoy it more than '54 Lucerne actually.

And mate, I could care less about "winning" an argument. I just make observations.


----------



## DarkAngel

chill782002 said:


> The new Furtwängler box looks great but it also looks rather expensive. In addition, *some of the Beethoven recordings on there cannot have been sourced from the master tapes (again, particularly the 5th and 7th) as the tapes are most likely lost*. That said, acquiring that would probably be cheaper than seeking out individual Tahra and Melodiya copies of the wartime performances.


There is great detail in book about what tapes were used and how they were acquired, most of the "stolen russian tapes" were returned to Germany in 1991, if they did not have the actual original broadcast tapes they used original tape copies made to be sent to other radio stations for later broadcast (these did not ever go to Russia)......

Also very important is to understand how to playback tapes from 1940 in best possible sound, the actual magnetic tape used and gear to play/record it is different than what we have today and requires special techniques for best sound......

Resistance is futile, only $200 measly dollars buy buy......


----------



## DarkAngel

next post please


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

chill782002 said:


> However, I agree with others that the Tahra transfers sound considerably better with a greater sense of space and less distortion.


I cannot emphasize enough what a steal this 2-CD Tahra set is right now for $12 on Amazon. The recordings of the BPO 3rd from 12/8/52 and BPO 5th and 6th from 5/23/54 are the best combination of sound and performance quality you can find for Furtwangler's Beethoven. These are the recordings that I would first recommend to a Furtwangler novice, NOT the Warner/EMI with the comparatively subdued VPO recordings.










Combine this set with the 1953 DG BPO 7th and 8th and the 1954 Lucerne 9th on Audite and you have an excellent launching point into Furtwangler's Beethoven, followed of course by the wartime M&A set (or Tahra if you can find them).


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Technically speaking it's not his best, but it has a special quality similar to Knsppertsbusch's '51 Parsifal. Some of us hear it, and some don't. I enjoy it more than '54 Lucerne actually.
> 
> And mate, I could care less about "winning" an argument. I just make observations.


Then please allow for the fact that other peoples observations can be different to yours without the implication that people who don't see things your way somehow don't understand the 'spiritual side' of the music. We do. We just observe things differently


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Then please allow for the fact that other peoples observations can be different to yours without the implication that people who don't see things your way somehow don't understand the 'spiritual side' of the music. We do. We just observe things differently


I wasn't directing the comment at you. I was speaking generally. I think many people miss the special qualities of the Bayreuth 9th for the same reason they miss them with Kna's '51 Parsifal. Sometimes things don't always seem to go as well, but there remains a spirit in the performance that is hard to describe.

This has remained one of the most acclaimed recordings of the 9th for over half a century. Gramophone Magazine named it one of the 100 greatest recordings of the century. You may think your opinion that it's "not good" is more valid, but it is still in the distinct minority. Again, I can attest that this was the recording that first turned me on to Furtwangler. I immediately recognized that it provided a deeper experience than all the Karajans, Soltis, and Toscaninis. And my opinion was obviously shared by others.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> *I wasn't directing the comment at you. I was speaking generally.* I think many people miss the special qualities of the Bayreuth 9th for the same reason they miss them with Kna's '51 Parsifal. Sometimes things don't always seem to go as well, but there remains a spirit in the performance that is hard to describe.
> 
> This has remained one of the most acclaimed recordings of the 9th for over half a century. Gramophone Magazine named it one of the 100 greatest recordings of the century. You may think your opinion that it's "not good" is more valid, but it is still in the distinct minority. Again, I can attest that this was the recording that first turned me on to Furtwangler. I immediately recognized that it provided a deeper experience than all the Karajans, Soltis, and Toscaninis. And my opinion was obviously shared by others.


Maybe it was the fact that you were answering my post gave me the impression that you were directing the comment at me. Quite a logical assumption you know! As I said, people race about it but I just don't see what they find in it. Nor of course do other people who reckon that Karajan's 77 performance or Toscanini's is greater. And I think actually if you go by sales of recordings you will find that I am in the majority! :lol:

But don't let that worry you! This is all a matter of personal taste. :tiphat:


----------



## Merl

I'm with Hurwitz on this. The first movement is a total grind and incredibly slow and the adagio is lethargic and sloppy. Compared to the Lucerne 9th (which I own) its a really poor performance and the sound doesn't help. The Musicweb review wasn't much better than the Classics today one, so maybe David A, myself and Manxfeeder aren't in the monority.

https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-14240/


----------



## DavidA

Merl said:


> I'm with Hurwitz on this. The first movement is a total grind and incredibly slow and the adagio is lethargic and sloppy. Compared to the Lucerne 9th (which I own) its a really poor performance and the sound doesn't help. The Musicweb review wasn't much better than the Classics today one, so maybe David A, myself and Manxfeeder aren't in the monority.
> 
> https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-14240/


Interesting that although this review calls Furtwangler's 'a slice of history' it goes on to say that Karajan's 'has great depth, power and sensitivity. From the exhilarating first movement to the exuberant fourth movement finale sung by four especially well-blended soloists (Anna Tomowa-Sintow, Agnes Baltsa, Peter Schreier and José van Dam), this is a recording of great stature and _is definitely the version to have.' 
_ So another 'minority' opinion?


----------



## DarkAngel

Merl said:


> I'm with Hurwitz on this. The first movement is a total grind and incredibly slow and the adagio is lethargic and sloppy. Compared to the Lucerne 9th (which I own) its a really poor performance and the sound doesn't help. The Musicweb review wasn't much better than the Classics today one, so maybe David A, myself and Manxfeeder aren't in the monority.
> 
> https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-14240/


DH is a tough critic for certain artists, although he does admit the Furtwangler 54 Lucerne is a great 9th, the latest Pristine XR surpasses Tahra in sound for me......I think he is correct that most people would prefer sound on latest Warner issue 51 9th compared to Orfeo, just listened to both recently for this thread.....don't tell anyone but I usually skip the adagio of B9

His sound reservations about 42 9th are almost all corrected now in amazing new BP SACD boxset issue

Agree with David that 77 Karajan 9th is his best and ranks very high among any version available....


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Merl said:


> I'm with Hurwitz on this. The first movement is a total grind and incredibly slow and the adagio is lethargic and sloppy. Compared to the Lucerne 9th (which I own) its a really poor performance and the sound doesn't help. The Musicweb review wasn't much better than the Classics today one, so maybe David A, myself and Manxfeeder aren't in the monority.
> 
> https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-14240/


Oh God, please, Hurwitz??! He is the last reviewer I would ever expect to appreciate this 9th. He is a simple minded technician when it comes to how he listens. The man is soulless and boorish. He has no business reviewing interpretations that are far over his head. Read his review of Horenstein's Mahler 8th for confirmation of how dense this man is.

I am listening right now to the Bayreuth 9th and the main theme of the Adagio just started. It is just as beautiful as I remember it. There is a sense of palpable purpose permeating throughout this performance. That is what makes it so special and celebrated through the decades.

Different people hear music differently. Tell me, what is your explanation for this recording's fame and it's being named one of the 100 greatest recordings of all time by Grammophone Magazine? What are so many people hearing that you are not?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Just finished the Adagio. One of the greatest ever recorded without question. Again, Hurwitz has no business even commenting on this recording. However, if you want a simple-minded reviewer who tells you whether or not the ensemble plays together, then he is your man.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Oh God, please, Hurwitz??! He is the last reviewer I would ever expect to appreciate this 9th. He is a simple minded technician when it comes to how he listens. *The man is soulless and boorish. *He has no business reviewing interpretations that are far over his head. Read his review of Horenstein's Mahler 8th for confirmation of how dense this man is.
> 
> I am listening right now to the Bayreuth 9th and the main theme of the Adagio just started. It is just as beautiful as I remember it. There is a sense of palpable purpose permeating throughout this performance. That is what makes it so special and celebrated through the decades.
> 
> Different people hear music differently. Tell me, what is your explanation for this recording's fame and it's being named one of the 100 greatest recordings of all time by Grammophone Magazine? What are so many people hearing that you are not?


Why? Because he dares to disagree with you? Sorry mate, but name calling like this is not on.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Just finished the Adagio. *One of the greatest ever recorded without question. *Again, Hurwitz has no business even commenting on this recording. However, if you want a simple-minded reviewer who tells you whether or not the ensemble plays together, then he is your man.


Not without question at all. There are several people here who would question it. Furtwangler himself questioned it as he himself was reportedly disappointed with this performance. Your problem is that you are not the all knowing oracle on this! Other people have differing opinions


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Why? Because he dares to disagree with you? Sorry mate, but name calling like this is not on.


No, because his reviews reveal him to be simple-minded, soulless, and boorish.

Hurwitz is very blunt and arrogant when talking about artists he doesn't like, why can't I be the same way in discussing Hurwitz?

Like I said in the beginning, some people are attuned to spiritual qualities, some people are more into technicalities. Hurwitz is firmly in the second group. Read his review of Horenstein's Mahler 8th. His priorities are clearly on display in savagely disparaging one of the handful of greatest of Mahler recordings.


----------



## Merl

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Oh God, please, Hurwitz??! He is the last reviewer I would ever expect to appreciate this 9th. He is a simple minded technician when it comes to how he listens. The man is soulless and boorish..........
> 
> Different people hear music differently. Tell me, what is your explanation for this recording's fame and it's being named one of the 100 greatest recordings of all time by Grammophone Magazine? What are so many people hearing that you are not?


But it's not just Hurwitz. Clements of the Guardian gave it 3 out of 5 stars and Ralph Moore of Musicweb said, 
_"Ludwig Weber's somewhat wobbly but imposing bass is not ideal; he is in danger of falling off the melismata upon the word "Freude" on his entry. He also has trouble sustaining a clean legato but his top notes are secure. Ira Malaniuk is adequate but also wobbly in the ungrateful mezzo line. Wolfgang Windgassen's rather nasal tenor sounds distinctly ill at ease in his martial ditty, sliding up to all his higher notes and having trouble sustaining a pleasing tone in the high tessitura of his part. Gré Brouwenstijn's vibrant soprano is at times distorted by the recording into something of a shriek and in truth the quartet before the final apotheosis is ragged and ill-tuned; unfortunately, it is precisely at this point that the original tapes suffer most from flutter and "wibbling" which it would seem lay beyond the powers of the sound engineer to correct.

No; this is not the Choral by which we should remember Furtwängler. Go to the issues I cite above for a much more satisfactory listening experience which does him justice. 
_

I'm hearing what they're hearing. Awful sound, out of tune horns, poor singing, pedestrian pacing, slack ensemble, etc. Could it not be possible that the 3 people who have posted negative comments about this performance, here, just think this is vastly inferior to Lucerne and not a great 9th. I've got hundreds of 9ths, old and new, most are superior to this one. The Lucerne account is way better in every respect.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Not without question at all. There are several people here who would question it. Furtwangler himself questioned it as he himself was reportedly disappointed with this performance. Your problem is that you are not the all knowing oracle on this! Other people have differing opinions


In the Bernstein thread I stated something similar to your opinion on the Bayreuth 9th. I stated that I never saw his Rite of Spring as anything special. Another poster adamantly disagreed. I listened to the blasted thing four times this week and finally had the "Ah hah" moment where I understood what people see in it. Another poster congratulated me on not sticking to my guns, and I replied that I am not interested in winning debates. I would rather expand my understanding.

Could you see yourself ever changing your opinion on the Bayreuth 9th, or is your ego too invested in being "right?"


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Merl said:


> But it's not just Hurwitz. Clements of the Guardian gave it 3 out of 5 stars and Ralph Moore of Musicweb said,
> _"Ludwig Weber's somewhat wobbly but imposing bass is not ideal; he is in danger of falling off the melismata upon the word "Freude" on his entry. He also has trouble sustaining a clean legato but his top notes are secure. Ira Malaniuk is adequate but also wobbly in the ungrateful mezzo line. Wolfgang Windgassen's rather nasal tenor sounds distinctly ill at ease in his martial ditty, sliding up to all his higher notes and having trouble sustaining a pleasing tone in the high tessitura of his part. Gré Brouwenstijn's vibrant soprano is at times distorted by the recording into something of a shriek and in truth the quartet before the final apotheosis is ragged and ill-tuned; unfortunately, it is precisely at this point that the original tapes suffer most from flutter and "wibbling" which it would seem lay beyond the powers of the sound engineer to correct.
> 
> No; this is not the Choral by which we should remember Furtwängler. Go to the issues I cite above for a much more satisfactory listening experience which does him justice.
> _
> 
> I'm hearing what they're hearing. Awful sound, out of tune horns, poor singing, pedestrian pacing, slack ensemble, etc. Could it not be possible that the 3 people who have posted negative comments about this performance, here, just think this is vastly inferior to Lucerne and not a great 9th. I've got hundreds of 9ths, old and new, most are superior to this one. The Lucerne account is way better in every respect.


Funny you mention Ralph Moore. He is not as bad as Hurwitz, but he is another reviewer who gets stuck on technicalities and misses the big picture, as you can plainly see in the review you quoted. Ironically, Mr. Moore and I got into it recently on the Wagner thread when I took issue with his negative characterization of people who find the '51 Kna Parsifal a uniquely special recording with a sense of occasion. Again, Mr. Moore seems largely blind to this and disdains it. No surprise at all that he would have a similar opinion of the Bayreuth 9th.

We all hear music differently (Hmmm...strange that I keep saying this and another poster claims I think mine is the only opinion).

Again, why did Grammophone Magazine name this celebrated recording one of the 100 greatest of the century? Was it a misprint?

The other Beethoven recordings they named were the following hardly controversial choices:

Symphony No 3 - Klemperer '55
Symphony No 5 - C. Kleiber
Symphony No 6 - Bohm
Symphony No 7 - Toscanini '36
Piano concertos - Kempff/Van Kempen
String quartets - Italiano
Piano sonatas - Schnabel
Fidelio - Klemperer

How did the Bayreuth 9th become included in such august company if it's a fraud?

I also must be a fool, because I just listened to the entire thing and enjoyed it immensely. A true sense of occasion, which is what the 9th is all about. The only 9th in existence that beats it is the wartime Furtwangler.


----------



## bigshot

Personally, I would listen to "bad Furtwangler" before I'd listen to "appropriate Beethoven". Furtwangler lived in an era where conductors could take chances. They were performing for the specific place and time, not for a recording. If something didn't work, they would just play it differently the next time. Every note produced under Furtwangler's baton wasn't golden... but every note was interesting and worth hearing. That's more than I can say for a lot of "safe" conductors.

And Hurwitz is a typical internet style critic... all technical rigidity and fixed ideas of what is "proper". I wouldn't expect him to understand Furtwangler.


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> No, because his reviews reveal him to be* simple-minded, soulless, and boorish.*
> 
> Hurwitz is very *blunt and arrogant when talking about artists he doesn't like*, why can't I be the same way in discussing Hurwitz?
> 
> Like I said in the beginning, some people are attuned to spiritual qualities, some people are more into technicalities. Hurwitz is firmly in the second group. Read his review of Horenstein's Mahler 8th. His priorities are clearly on display in savagely disparaging one of the handful of greatest of Mahler recordings.


Your reviews don't reveal the same qualities in you?

O wad some Power the giftie gie us 
To see oursels as ithers see us! 
(Burns)


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> In the Bernstein thread I stated something similar to your opinion on the Bayreuth 9th. I stated that I never saw his Rite of Spring as anything special. Another poster adamantly disagreed. I listened to the blasted thing four times this week and finally had the "Ah hah" moment where I understood what people see in it. Another poster congratulated me on not sticking to my guns, and I replied that I am not interested in winning debates. I would rather expand my understanding.
> 
> Could you see yourself ever changing your opinion on the Bayreuth 9th, or is *your ego too invested in being "right?"*


As you are the one leading the charge on self-justification, I assume it is your own ego that is invested somewhat in being right. Why on earth can't you just allow people to have a different opinion instead of coming in with a load of guff which is perfectly meaningless to anyone intelligent. What we are talking about here is opinion.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> As you are the one leading the charge on self-justification, I assume it is your own ego that is invested somewhat in being right. Why on earth can't you just allow people to have a different opinion instead of coming in with a load of guff which is perfectly meaningless to anyone intelligent. What we are talking about here is opinion.


What you are asking essentially is why can't I allow people to have a different opinion by not stating my own. Sir, my opinion is no less valid than yours. We are both allowed to share them. That is why I come to this site, and I just presented an example of where I changed mine. So your attack on me is incorrect and unwarranted. Have you ever had your mind changed by a fellow poster?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

bigshot said:


> And Hurwitz is a typical internet style critic... all technical rigidity and fixed ideas of what is "proper". I wouldn't expect him to understand Furtwangler.


Precisely.

I listen to a recording with an open mind, giving it a chance to impress me in one way or another. I don't sit with a checklist or litmus test. Sometimes a recording may impact me in a completely unexpected way and for reasons I never thought of before. There is no one single way to perform a work, which I why I often have dozens of recordings of the same work.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Penguin Guide description of the Bayreuth 9th:

“A reading without parallel. The spacious, lovingly molded account of the slow movement is among Furtwängler’s finest achievements on record”

Like myself, these authors were obviously deluded. What are we hearing? Maybe we belong to a cult. There must be some explanation other than the recording itself...


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> What you are asking essentially is why can't I allow people to have a different opinion by not stating my own. Sir, my opinion is no less valid than yours. We are both allowed to share them. That is why I come to this site, and I just presented an example of where I changed mine. So your attack on me is incorrect and unwarranted. Have you ever had your mind changed by a fellow poster?


When you are accusing me of an 'attack' may I remind you I wasn't the one who said the memorable phrase: 'People who don't understand the spiritual side of music won't appreciate it.' If that isn't an implied attack I don't know what is! :lol:


----------



## DavidA

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Penguin Guide description of the Bayreuth 9th:
> 
> "A reading without parallel. The spacious, lovingly molded account of the slow movement is among Furtwängler's finest achievements on record"
> 
> Like myself, these authors were obviously deluded. What are we hearing? Maybe we belong to a cult. There must be some explanation other than the recording itself...


In don';t know when you are going to get it into your head that I have already said that this recording has been praised by many people. The problem I have is that I cannot see why as when I have listen to it I have been underwhelmed.


----------



## wkasimer

Merl said:


> But it's not just Hurwitz. Clements of the Guardian gave it 3 out of 5 stars and Ralph Moore of Musicweb said,
> _"Ludwig Weber's somewhat wobbly but imposing bass is not ideal; he is in danger of falling off the melismata upon the word "Freude" on his entry. He also has trouble sustaining a clean legato but his top notes are secure. Ira Malaniuk is adequate but also wobbly in the ungrateful mezzo line. Wolfgang Windgassen's rather nasal tenor sounds distinctly ill at ease in his martial ditty, sliding up to all his higher notes and having trouble sustaining a pleasing tone in the high tessitura of his part. Gré Brouwenstijn's vibrant soprano is at times distorted by the recording into something of a shriek and in truth the quartet before the final apotheosis is ragged and ill-tuned; unfortunately, it is precisely at this point that the original tapes suffer most from flutter and "wibbling" which it would seem lay beyond the powers of the sound engineer to correct.
> 
> No; this is not the Choral by which we should remember Furtwängler. Go to the issues I cite above for a much more satisfactory listening experience which does him justice._


_

This obviously isn't a review of the Bayreuth 1951 performance._


----------



## bigshot

DavidA said:


> In don';t know when you are going to get it into your head that I have already said that this recording has been praised by many people. The problem I have is that I cannot see why as when I have listen to it I have been underwhelmed.


That can either be a fault of the performance, or it can be the fault of your perception of it. Either way, you should just move on and listen to something else. Maybe you'll feel differently in five or ten years.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

wkasimer said:


> This obviously isn't a review of the Bayreuth 1951 performance.


No wonder he didn't like it


----------



## DavidA

bigshot said:


> That can either be a fault of the performance, or it can be the fault of your perception of it. Either way, you should just move on and listen to something else. Maybe you'll feel differently in five or ten years.


Ot the fault of neither. Some performances just don't gell with the particular listener. A thing called personal preference.


----------



## DavidA

wkasimer said:


> This obviously isn't a review of the Bayreuth 1951 performance.


Clements review is of a later 1954 performance but he interestingly says of the Bayreuth performance: 'one of the most famous of all recordings of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony is that of the performance conducted by Wilhelm Furtwängler to mark the reopening of the Bayreuth Festspielhaus in 1951, though it's claimed that EMI's recording was made at the rehearsal rather than the concert itself.'


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Incidentally, this is my ranking of the Furtwangler 9ths, excluding the wartime Stockholm which I have not heard. The review above was the 8/8/54 Bayreuth recording, not the 7/29/51.

1. 3/22/42 (BPR, Tahra, Music & Arts, Pristine, Archipel, Andromeda) 
2. 7/29/1951 (Tahra, Orfeo, EMI) 
3. 8/22/54 (Audite, Tahra, Pristine, Music & Arts, Andromeda) 
4. 8/31/51 (Orfeo) 
5. 1952 (Tahra, Music & Arts) 
6. 1953 (DG, ICA) 
7. 1/7/51 (Orfeo) 
8. 8/8/54 (Music & Arts)
9. 1937 (EMI Great Conductors, Music & Arts, Archipel)
10. 4/19/42 (Archipel)


----------



## chill782002

DarkAngel said:


> There is great detail in book about what tapes were used and how they were acquired, most of the "stolen russian tapes" were returned to Germany in 1991, if they did not have the actual original broadcast tapes they used original tape copies made to be sent to other radio stations for later broadcast (these did not ever go to Russia)......
> 
> Also very important is to understand how to playback tapes from 1940 in best possible sound, the actual magnetic tape used and gear to play/record it is different than what we have today and requires special techniques for best sound......
> 
> Resistance is futile, only $200 measly dollars buy buy...…


The tapes returned to West Germany in the late 1980s of these recordings were not the masters but fairly heavily gen'd copies. To confirm this, one only has to listen to the first releases of these recordings made by DG shortly after the tapes' return. The sound is poor, far worse than the Melodiya issues I mentioned. However, the Melodiya releases do not claim to be the masters, these are most likely taken from lower generation tape copies or even the original Melodiya vinyl releases made in the 1960s (these as the most likely sources to have been made from the masters themselves). The 3rd, 4th, 6th and 9th are most likely from the masters (the 3rd is for certain) as these tapes were not captured by the Russians at the end of the war.

Nevertheless, I must admit that I have not heard the new Furtwängler box and it is amazing what can be achieved with current remastering techniques.


----------



## flamencosketches

I saw the Bayreuth Furtwängler 9th at a record store yesterday and passed it up, recalling this discussion. I don't want to have to pick a side in this contentious fight.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

flamencosketches said:


> I saw the Bayreuth Furtwängler 9th at a record store yesterday and passed it up, recalling this discussion. I don't want to have to pick a side in this contentious fight.


You just did :lol:


----------



## gardibolt

It should be pointed out that, if the Orfeo liner notes are to believed, their Bayreuth 9th is not the same as the others on the market. Their Orfeo is the actual performance at the Festival from Bavarian Radio tapes; the other issues are from the rehearsal the day before. So we're not all talking about the same performance (though they're obviously close together and I would be hard pressed to tell you differences).


----------



## bigshot

DavidA said:


> Ot the fault of neither. Some performances just don't gell with the particular listener. A thing called personal preference.


No problem. You don't have to be able to appreciate everything other people appreciate.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Merl said:


> I'm hearing what they're hearing. Awful sound, out of tune horns, poor singing, pedestrian pacing, slack ensemble, etc. Could it not be possible that the 3 people who have posted negative comments about this performance, here, just think this is vastly inferior to Lucerne and not a great 9th. I've got hundreds of 9ths, old and new, most are superior to this one. The Lucerne account is way better in every respect.


I would say that you are FOCUSING on what they are focusing on. Even people who love this recording like I do can grant that it is not the best sound quality or best ensemble. The question put to you which you avoided is why so many have revered the recording despite all the failings you choose to focus on. What are we hearing?

As a demonstration of how revered this recording is, the number of Amazon reviews it has is exceeded by only one recording, the 1963 Karajan. Makes total sense if you know anything about recordings and their reputations. Even though I don't esteem the Karajan as highly I understand why it has garnered the acclaim. So what is your explanation for this one? An accident of history?

I agree with the assessment of the Amazon reviewer Jeffrey Lipscomb. Even though I like the '42 recording better, I agree with his characterization of their pros and cons. I just like the greater intensity of the '42. Some people require better sound quality, and for them the '54 Lucerne is the best. I have compared the Lucerne and Bayrueth many times. They are both great. But I agree with Lipscomb that there is greater fire and energy in the '51 Bayreuth, a greater sense of occasion than in Lucerne. The greatness of Lucerne is in its heavenly meditative qualities.

Incidentally, the author who literally wrote the book on Furtwangler recordings, John Ardoin, also agrees with Lipscomb. At the end of the day, there is no debate at least as to what I stated at the beginning of the thread, these are the three essential Furtwangler 9ths, and their relative merits are up to individual taste. Anyone who says differently is just acting from bias.

Lipscomb's comparison:

1. This Furtwangler (1951) with the Bayreuth Festival Orchestra & Chorus (Schwarzkopf, Hongen, Hopf, & Edelmann). It is less extreme than the 1942 and has more energy and passion than the 1954. Schwarzkopf is superb, Edelmann is excellent. The other Furtwangler 9ths listed here are better played (no wavering horn player in the Adagio), but this one has a special sense of occasion that makes it unique. The CD transfer here is identical to the one in the complete Beethoven set on EMI. So if you already have that one, there is no need to buy this one.

2. Furtwangler/BPO 1942, Bruno Kittel Choir, with Tilla Briem, Elisabeth Hongen, Peter Anders, and Rudolph Watzke (Music & Arts CD 4049). This is the most impassioned and dramatic of ALL 9ths. The BPO plays as if possessed, and the singers (except for Briem's shaky high notes) are superb. This is a performance of huge extremes: I feel the 1951 Bayreuth is perhaps the better balance of mind and heart. Furtwangler only conducted the 9th on special occasions. Likewise, this intensely anguished reading should only be heard every once in a while.

3. Furtwangler/Philharmonia 1954, Lucerne Festival Chorus, with Schwarzkopf, Elsa Cavelti, Ernst Haefliger, and Edelmann (best transfer is on Tahra 1054/7). Just 3 months before his death, Furtwangler is slower and more meditative. Wonderfully weighty and profound, this 9th lacks some of the fire and energy of the 1951 Bayreuth. This was the conductor's own favorite of all his live 9ths - and there are times when I feel it is his greatest reading.


----------



## DavidA

flamencosketches said:


> I saw the Bayreuth Furtwängler 9th at a record store yesterday and passed it up, recalling this discussion. I don't want to have to pick a side in this contentious fight.


You can buy it for about a couple of quid second hand. See for yourself. Or try Spotify. There is no 'contentious fight'. Just a robust discussion.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-...9+furtwangler&qid=1565283722&s=gateway&sr=8-5


----------



## WildThing

This is the best set I've heard, in typically superior sound from Pristine Classical:










It includes his brutal wartime 9th from March 1942, an excellent performance of the violin concerto with concertmaster Erich Röhn from 1944, and a couple of overtures from studio recordings.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

WildThing said:


> This is the best set I've heard, in typically superior sound from Pristine Classical:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It includes his brutal wartime 9th from March 1942, an excellent performance of the violin concerto with concertmaster Erich Röhn from 1944, and a couple of overtures from studio recordings.


Don't know why I can't find that on their website. Obviously these aren't all wartime recordings to include all 9 symphonies. If it is a collection of their previously released singles, it should include the wartime symphonies 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, violin concerto and Coriolan overture (all excellent), the 1954 1st (don't remember it too well but always felt live 11/30/52 to be the best), 1948 2nd (the only one), 1952 EMI 6th (more "pastoral" than the wartime but not as dramatic as the live '47 or '54), and 1953 8th (excellent, his best).


----------



## WildThing

Brahmsianhorn said:


> If it is a collection of their previously released singles, it should include the wartime symphonies 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, violin concerto and Coriolan overture (all excellent), the 1954 1st (don't remember it too well but always felt live 11/30/52 to be the best), 1948 2nd (the only one), 1952 EMI 6th (more "pastoral" than the wartime but not as dramatic as the live '47 or '54), and 1953 8th (excellent, his best).


That's correct, that's exactly what it is!


FURTWÄNGLER Beethoven: The Complete Symphonies - PABX007


----------



## Itullian

OK, so I ordered these now. What else should I get? :tiphat:


----------



## DarkAngel

Itullian said:


> OK, so I ordered these now. What else should I get? :tiphat:


If you still have any money left how about newest 2014 Audite remaster of 54 Lucerne B9 (sounds great to me) and an amazing (and I do mean amazing) Emperor PC with Edwin Fischer......sound is very good!

You can buy these SACD hybrid new for $14 each....

















Next step is Furtwangler Brahms if you are ready.......
(You have Wagner and Fidelio covered)


----------



## DarkAngel

WildThing said:


> This is the best set I've heard, in typically superior sound from Pristine Classical:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It includes his brutal wartime 9th from March 1942, an excellent performance of the violin concerto with concertmaster Erich Röhn from 1944, and a couple of overtures from studio recordings.


Rose also has a few other Furtwangler Beethoven works not included in this set, his 54 Lucerne B9 is the very best I have heard but the 42 wartime B9 from the set is not a clear winner for me, I finally gave in and recently subscribed to Pristine Streaming.......


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Itullian said:


> OK, so I ordered these now. What else should I get? :tiphat:


Great choices.

The only thing you are missing now is his greatest 5th and arguably greatest 6th, from the 5/25/47 concert that marked his return to conducting in Germany after the war.

Search Amazon for "Beethoven Furtwangler Tahra" and look for either this cover:










Or this one:










You should be able to find a copy for under $20.


----------



## WildThing

DarkAngel said:


> Rose also has a few other Furtwangler Beethoven works not included in this set, his 54 Lucerne B9 is the very best I have heard


Yup, I have this one as well. Another one of the great 9ths in great remastered sound. I almost always go for Pristine remasterings of historical recordings over the competition...when my wallet can afford it! The improvement is often staggering. For example I have Music & Arts's Furtwängler Bruckner set of the symphonies 4-9, and it's an excellent bargain. But I was listening to the samples of Pristine's individual releases of these symphonies the other day and damned if I wasn't tempted to pull the trigger on them, despite the heftier price tag! The sound was just that much more noticeably clear and vivid.


----------



## bigshot

If you have a good AVR, you can turn on one of the light hall ambiences and get similar sound quality. Sound processing does a lot for old recordings. I have the RCA Toscanini box and some of it is unlistenable in mono. But if you put a DSP on it, it sounds a million times better.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Wilhelm Furtwangler - The Great EMI Recordings 21-disk set *is on sale now at Presto Classical for $19.99*. Includes all nine Beethoven symphonies (three different orchestras though), Brahm's four symphonies, Tristan und Isolde, and many other works all listed in the linked page.


----------



## DarkAngel

^^^^
Not the best sound available, but that is a frickin great price for 21 CD set, normal price is $74!


----------



## DarkAngel

The mega 34 disc DG boxset is coming soon Sept 27, should go for about $80 Amazon sellers......


----------



## jegreenwood

Fritz Kobus said:


> Wilhelm Furtwangler - The Great EMI Recordings 21-disk set *is on sale now at Presto Classical for $19.99*. Includes all nine Beethoven symphonies (three different orchestras though), Brahm's four symphonies, Tristan und Isolde, and many other works all listed in the linked page.


Mine arrived yesterday.


----------



## flamencosketches

jegreenwood said:


> Mine arrived yesterday.


Mine too  Well, two days ago actually, but I just started listening yesterday. The sound (on disc one, anyway) is quite excellent. Doesn't leave too much to be desired, as far as mono sound goes.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

That DG boxset looks fantastic. Lots of great performances from throughout his career. A gold mine, really.


----------



## DarkAngel

DarkAngel said:


> The mega 34 disc DG boxset is coming soon Sept 27, should go for about $80 Amazon sellers......


*ALERT Ping......*.

Presto UK has this listed now for $73, release date Sept 27 website has track listings

Many early recordings included from 1929-36, but they do not include alternate performances of same work so you get only one Beethoven 9th for instance (this is a big mistake!)

https://www.prestomusic.com/classic...helm-furtwangler-complete-dg-decca-recordings


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DarkAngel said:


> *ALERT Ping......*.
> 
> Presto UK has this listed now for $73, release date Sept 27 website has track listings
> 
> Many early recordings included from 1929-36, but they do not include alternate performances of same work so you get only one Beethoven 9th for instance (this is a big mistake!)
> 
> https://www.prestomusic.com/classic...helm-furtwangler-complete-dg-decca-recordings


Noticed some misprints. The 1942 Bruckner should be the 5th, not the 4th. And the wartime Beethoven 4th, 5th, and Coriolan are from 1943, not 1942.

As I said, this is a gold mine for Furt fans, far superior to the EMI offering in terms of performance quality.

Where do you see a Beethoven 9th? The one disappointment for me was that they omitted the 1953 VPO 9th which was issued previously by DG as a single in their "Wiener Philharmoniker" series.


----------



## Gondowe

In the Dg mega set. Do you know or think if the sound will be better than the 80s and 90s editions that are what I have in many cases?
Greetings
My god, I have just revised the Dg official site and is true. The 9th with WPO is omitted. So there is not a complete DG and Decca recordings. What other recordings will be ommited? Why to lie.


----------



## DarkAngel

Gondowe said:


> In the Dg mega set. Do you know or think if the sound will be better than the 80s and 90s editions that are what I have in many cases?
> Greetings
> *My god, I have just revised the Dg official site and is true. The 9th with WPO is omitted*. So there is not a complete DG and Decca recordings. What other recordings will be ommited? Why to lie.





> *Where do you see a Beethoven 9th?* The one disappointment for me was that they omitted the 1953 VPO 9th which was issued previously by DG as a single in their "Wiener Philharmoniker" series.


BH is right much worse than I thought.....
Not only no alternates of best works but the true shocker NO B9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Here's the missing recording:


----------



## gardibolt

That's exceedingly weird. Two Schubert 9th recordings, a Bruckner 9th, but no Beethoven 9th?


----------



## Gondowe

Can anybody tell me if the sound of the Pristine editions of, say, Beethoven 5th 1943 or Bruckner 8th 1944, is better than the pseudo-stereo made in japan and can be finded in youtube?
Thanks and greetings


----------



## DarkAngel

Gondowe said:


> Can anybody tell me if the sound of the Pristine editions of, say, Beethoven 5th 1943 or Bruckner 8th 1944, is better than the pseudo-stereo made in japan and can be finded in youtube?
> Thanks and greetings


I have new Japan Tahra (King Records releases) and subscribe to Pristine XR streaming, I think the best sound for most wartime Furtwangler is the new BP SACD Boxset......don't expect any miracles but slight edge in better sound


----------



## Gondowe

I have discovered. (Late I know) another page, furtwanglersound, with transfers by Eduardo Chibas that claims to have the best sound, better even than Pristine. Ihave listened some parts with the demos of both transfers and have no ears to note difference. (Suppose my problem)
Anybody could compare it?
Greetings


----------



## DarkAngel

Gondowe said:


> I have discovered. (Late I know) another page, furtwanglersound, with* transfers by Eduardo Chibas* that claims to have the best sound, better even than Pristine. Ihave listened some parts with the demos of both transfers and have no ears to note difference. (Suppose my problem)
> Anybody could compare it? Greetings


That Chibas website very nice I listened a few samples very good work, compared to Pristine XR more "presence" which can sometimes sound clearer, Pristine has more depth and deeper more detailed lower mids & bass......which gets him in more trouble in the forte full orchestra sections (42 beethoven 9th) where both heavily distort

You can only download Chibas work in FLAC format, but it is almost half the price of Pristine XR so a real price savings!

http://furtwanglersound.com/

Some info on remaster goals Chibas used (EAR mastering) for these.....

http://furtwanglersound.com/ourphilosophyofsou/

Henry Fogel (fanfare) gives his takes on various remasters of Furtwangler performances

http://furtwanglersound.com/reviews/wilhelmfurtwnglert/



> When he told me that he was making his own transfers of Furtwängler material, I was extremely skeptical, and told him so. I was so pleased with Pristine's work, as well as Obert-Thorn's on Naxos, that I did not see the need, nor did I feel that even a very gifted amateur, with no formal engineering or musical training, could equal those earlier results. I was wrong.


----------



## Gondowe

Thank you. I downloaded Bruckner 8th 1944 as first train. Good covers burning CD. When have time I will listen it.


----------



## bigshot

In remastering, everything depends on the quality of the source you're starting with. The best source isn't necessarily in the hands of the record labels. It can turn up anywhere. I got an extremely rare set of 78s in a St Vincent DePaul thrift store. It was in perfect condition and trumps any CD release of that particular set. It's all fate. And an amateur might have more time to devote to a restoration than a professional who is on a schedule.


----------



## DarkAngel

DarkAngel said:


> That Chibas website very nice I listened a few samples very good work, compared to Pristine XR more "presence" which can sometimes sound clearer, Pristine has more depth and deeper more detailed lower mids & bass......which gets him in more trouble in the forte full orchestra sections (42 beethoven 9th) where both heavily distort
> 
> You can only download Chibas work in FLAC format, but it is almost half the price of Pristine XR so a real price savings!
> 
> http://furtwanglersound.com/
> 
> Some info on remaster goals Chibas used (EAR mastering) for these.....
> 
> http://furtwanglersound.com/ourphilosophyofsou/
> 
> Henry Fogel (fanfare) gives his takes on various remasters of Furtwangler performances
> 
> http://furtwanglersound.com/reviews/wilhelmfurtwnglert/


*BH what say ye*........these are pretty impressive, unknown to me previously


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DarkAngel said:


> *BH what say ye*........these are pretty impressive, unknown to me previously


It's interesting that Fogel recommends that one starts with the wartime Beethoven 9th, because that was the first one from the samples that jumped out to me as an improvement over previous attempts. I'll look at downloading it in the near future.


----------



## Gondowe

Hello. Is there any chance of getting the following recordings (or some charitable soul that provides them to me)? Beethoven Symphony 5 of 1939. Simphony 7 of 1942. Ravel Daphnis and Chloe Suite 1 (incomplete).
I mean, without buying the complete packs. I don´t care about perfect sound.
Thanks and greetings.


----------



## Gondowe

DarkAngel said:


> I have new Japan Tahra (King Records releases) and subscribe to Pristine XR streaming, I think the best sound for most wartime Furtwangler is the new BP SACD Boxset......don't expect any miracles but slight edge in better sound


The above written is due to: I have an old Philips dvd player and a Samsung bluray player, and I think the BPO edition, being in SACD hybrid, can be reproduced only in a cd or sacd player. Can anybody tell me if I'm wrong?
Greetings


----------



## bigshot

Hybrid SACDs can be played in any disc player... blu-ray, DVD, or CD. But it has to be an SACD player to access the SACD layer. Otherwise it will just play as a CD.


----------



## Gondowe

Thank you. Uffff, in another forum they assure me that I could not reproduce them. I would need a CD player or a Sony device. 
Now thinking about it, I don't know if the sound improvement would be enough to invest € 240 of the pack without having the complete security of going to be able to listen to them and then having to invest another 150, for example, in a new device.
I found the old Tahra recording of the 5th of 1939 at a good price, and only for pure and hard collecting would I miss the Daphnis and Chloe suite No. 1 and the "incomplete" Schubert of the 44, "complete", as I think ( from what I have investigated) that the 7th of 42 is the same as that of 43 of doubtful dating. And hope that these works will come out in the future in other labels or that this pack will be published in another format and cheaper.
What do you think about?
Anyway I'll wait for sound reviews of the "complete" DG pack and it will be a possible objective. And only in terms of sound, select the "must have" from pristine and chibas.
Thanks and greetings


----------



## jegreenwood

With all due respect, Uffff does not know what they are talking about. Bigshot is correct. I'm not sure what you mean by, "I would need a CD player or a Sony device." These are "hybrid" discs - meaning they have a CD layer as well as an SACD layer. . The Berlin Philharmonic website states, "[f]or the first time, the Berliner Philharmoniker are releasing a complete edition of these recordings on 22 CD/SACD." Your Blu-Ray and DVD players should be able to play these. Have you ever played a CD through them?

As for "Sony device," I'm not sure what that means (although I suspect it might relate to ripping SACDs - an unrelated topic).

To be honest, I have not bought the set even though I have an SACD player - too expensive for me, especially with the newly announced DG set.


----------



## Gondowe

jegreenwood said:


> With all due respect, Uffff does not know what they are talking about. Bigshot is correct. I'm not sure what you mean by, "I would need a CD player or a Sony device." These are "hybrid" discs - meaning they have a CD layer as well as an SACD layer. . The Berlin Philharmonic website states, "[f]or the first time, the Berliner Philharmoniker are releasing a complete edition of these recordings on 22 CD/SACD." Your Blu-Ray and DVD players should be able to play these. Have you ever played a CD through them?
> 
> As for "Sony device," I'm not sure what that means (although I suspect it might relate to ripping SACDs - an unrelated topic).
> 
> To be honest, I have not bought the set even though I have an SACD player - too expensive for me, especially with the newly announced DG set.


For "Sony device" I mean a player (cd, bluray,...) of Sony label. I would have to buy a new one.

But, as I said above, I came to the same conclusion as you, too expensive. With the added fact that I could not take full advantage of the sound without buying a sacd player, which, some decent costs much more than the box. In recordings that, for the most part, can be obtained more easily cheaper, except the two indicated. And, also, expecting the Dg set.
Greetings


----------



## bigshot

Hybrid SACDs play on any CD player, just like regular CDs. They play on blu-ray players and DVD players fine too. You don't need to buy a new player.


----------



## chill782002

OK, my copy of the new BP Furtwangler box has arrived. Haven't had time to listen to that much of it yet, but, in terms of sound quality and on the basis of my first listening choice (1943 Brahms 4th and Haydn Variations, a favourite of mine) it seems to have a slight edge over the Pristine remaster (the best version I'd previously found of that recording). The sound is more natural and a little more detailed (particularly in the low end) but it is also a lot quieter, have had to turn it up quite a bit more than was the case with the Pristine version. However this is probably just a sign that it hasn't had a volume boost, which the Pristine version presumably has. Pleased overall but I'm not sure the improvement justifies the price tag. Will check out the 1943 (although, interestingly, this box claims it was recorded in 1942) Beethoven 7th and the 1944 Bruckner 9th later.


----------



## DarkAngel

chill782002 said:


> OK, my copy of the new BP Furtwangler box has arrived. Haven't had time to listen to that much of it yet, but, in terms of sound quality and on the basis of my first listening choice (1943 Brahms 4th and Haydn Variations, a favourite of mine)* it seems to have a slight edge over the Pristine remaster (the best version I'd previously found of that recording)*. The sound is more natural and a little more detailed (particularly in the low end) but it is also a lot quieter, have had to turn it up quite a bit more than was the case with the Pristine version. However this is probably just a sign that it hasn't had a volume boost, which the Pristine version presumably has. Pleased overall but I'm not sure the improvement justifies the price tag. Will check out the 1943 (although, interestingly, this box claims it was recorded in 1942) Beethoven 7th and the 1944 Bruckner 9th later.


Not a big improvement but despite the high price new BP set also has best sound for me......



> I have new Japan Tahra (King Records releases) and subscribe to Pristine XR streaming, I think the best sound for most wartime Furtwangler is the new BP SACD Boxset......don't expect any miracles but slight edge in better sound


----------



## DarkAngel

DarkAngel said:


> I have new Japan Tahra (King Records releases) and subscribe to Pristine XR streaming, I think the best sound for most *wartime Furtwangler is the new BP SACD Boxset*......don't expect any miracles but slight edge in better sound


Great news, the Furtwangler wartime BPO boxset is now on Tidal streaming (CD quality), usually these special limited production boxsets don't make it to Tidal ........


----------



## jegreenwood

It looks to me as though Tidal is offering just the a Beethoven cycle from the full box set. Better - much better - than nothing, but to be noted. Of course with Tidal's search engine, the rest may be available under Wilhelm.

Also has anyone heard the big new DG box? Presto shows it out of stock, but at least parts of it are available for download. FLAC versions of the wartime and postwar recordings - a total of 26 hours of music - are available for a total of $26. No digital booklet available. Maybe something on the DG website?


----------



## DarkAngel

jegreenwood said:


> It looks to me as though Tidal is offering just the a Beethoven cycle from the full box set. Better - much better - than nothing, but to be noted. Of course with Tidal's search engine, the rest may be available under Wilhelm.


OMG......you are right just a "partial" boxset, seemed too good to be true (and was!)


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

The Beethoven wartime boxset is also streaming thru Apple Music. The tracks are arranged as corresponding to 4 full CDs. Does this mean it is available as a 4-CD set somewhere?


----------



## wkasimer

jegreenwood said:


> It looks to me as though Tidal is offering just the a Beethoven cycle from the full box set. Better - much better - than nothing, but to be noted.


Ditto for Spotify.



> Also has anyone heard the big new DG box? Presto shows it out of stock, but at least parts of it are available for download. FLAC versions of the wartime and postwar recordings - a total of 26 hours of music - are available for a total of $26. No digital booklet available. Maybe something on the DG website?


Also on Spotify.


----------



## Otological Epicurean

Who'd ever play a CD or SACD on a BD or DVD player as the latter types are for BD and DVD/DVD-A. That'd be like playing a stereo disc thru' an av amp ie. only a good idea if you can't afford an av system in one room for av and a separate dedicated audio only system for audio in another separate room. If this were not the case there'd be no need or demand for CD players and stereo amps AND one could advocate using a cheap BD player thru' a cheap av amp and get as good a sound from one's CDs as if playing them thru' a decent cd drive and equally decent pre and power amp combo. GIGO


----------



## jegreenwood

Otological Epicurean said:


> Who'd ever play a CD or SACD on a BD or DVD player as the latter types are for BD and DVD/DVD-A. That'd be like playing a stereo disc thru' an av amp ie. only a good idea if you can't afford an av system in one room for av and a separate dedicated audio only system for audio in another separate room. If this were not the case there'd be no need or demand for CD players and stereo amps AND one could advocate using a cheap BD player thru' a cheap av amp and get as good a sound from one's CDs as if playing them thru' a decent cd drive and equally decent pre and power amp combo. GIGO


Where's Bigshot when you need him? :devil:


----------



## Adamus

jegreenwood said:


> Where's Bigshot when you need him? :devil:


he has his own website. Contact him that way? http://the-audio-expert.freeforums.net/
Username: admin Last Online: 17hours ago.


----------



## hoodjem

Manxfeeder said:


> I don't know about "the best," but to my ears, the Music & Arts set is pretty solid, though it only has Symphonies Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and the famous 9th from 1942.
> 
> View attachment 122051


I am wondering if anyone has an opinion as to which Furtwangler conducted performance is best for each movement of Beethoven's 9th.

I vote for the 1954 Philharmonia-Lucerne Festival third movement.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

hoodjem said:


> I am wondering if anyone has an opinion as to which Furtwangler conducted performance is best for each movement of Beethoven's 9th.
> 
> I vote for the 1954 Philharmonia-Lucerne Festival third movement.


Oh, the first movement of 1942. Arguably the greatest single symphony movement on record.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Oh, the first movement of 1942. Arguably the greatest single symphony movement on record.


That one is the type of performance that I just can't listen to that frequently because it terrifies me so much. The intensity is off the wall - even if you didn't know the circumstances you'd know that something unprecedented was going on. The Bayreuth 9th was the performance that introduced me to the miracle of Furtwangler. I had never cared for the symphony all that much, but by the time it was over I was flat-out crying. Definitely a fond moment in my music-listening voyage. I then excitedly turned to the 1942 version and was bowled over by just how different the same work could sound under the same baton within a span of a decade. I still prefer the '52 but recognize the incredible significance of the '42. I need to listen to that Lucerne one sometime.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Allegro Con Brio said:


> That one is the type of performance that I just can't listen to that frequently because it terrifies me so much. The intensity is off the wall - even if you didn't know the circumstances you'd know that something unprecedented was going on. The Bayreuth 9th was the performance that introduced me to the miracle of Furtwangler. I had never cared for the symphony all that much, but by the time it was over I was flat-out crying. Definitely a fond moment in my music-listening voyage. I then excitedly turned to the 1942 version and was bowled over by just how different the same work could sound under the same baton within a span of a decade. I still prefer the '52 but recognize the incredible significance of the '42. I need to listen to that Lucerne one sometime.


The first movement is certainly terrifying, but the adagio is sublime, almost elegiac. The Lucerne Adagio is maybe his best rendition, but he was a master at this movement any time he conducted it.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Brahmsianhorn said:


> The first movement is certainly terrifying, but the adagio is sublime, almost elegiac. The Lucerne Adagio is maybe his best rendition, but he was a master at this movement any time he conducted it.


Yes indeed. Some people say he conducted it too slow, but for me every phrase is played with such gripping beauty and conviction that my attention never wanders. Such a shame that such immortal conducting is nowadays considered "out of fashion" in favor of faceless "objectivity." Not to generalize, of course, but if anyone tried to conduct Beethoven like Furtwangler in these times they would be laughed at. Then again, maybe no one could conduct like him even if they tried.


----------



## Sondersdorf

I did not want to start a new thread and it seems like many people that know Furtwangler's Beethoven Symphony recordings have visited this thread somewhere along the line.

I have some Furtwangler mp3s that were poorly tagged and after reading some of this thread and a few others I have bought some more Furtwangler Beethoven. Now I want to compare them to the recordings I already owned and get everything properly tagged.

So, can someone tell me when this B3 was recorded? https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8055812--beethoven-by-furtwangler

That's the one I have based on the track times of the movements. The album art does not really match the album name. Shockingly, absolutely shockingly, MusicBrainz and Discogs have not been able to help me out. I even did a Google search using track times and came up with nothing but the Presto Music offering. The world is dissolving into utter chaos.

For anyone not ready to look at the link, here at the track times for the four movements:

B3, I 16:47
B3, II 19:13
B3, III 6:38
B3, IV 12:55

Bonus points: please help identify the performance dates of the other three symphonies on this release.


----------



## Sondersdorf

I figured out the dates on my, as it comes out, Tahra three-CD album of live recordings of Furtwangler. It has the wrong album name on both Amazon and Presto Music. It should be "Live Recordings 1947 -1953". And, if you find the album at https://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Sy...e+1947&qid=1605540216&sr=8-10#customerReviews you can zoom in on the back cover of the album and find:

B3, Recorded 8 December, 1952.
B5 and B6, Recorded 25/5/1947.
B7 and B8 Recorded 14/4/1953.

State of the art music tagging in 2020 for Tahra FURT 2002-2004.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

That’s a fantastic issue. My favorite 5th, 7th & 8th, and very close to my favorite 3rd and 6th. I only like the 1944 VPO 3rd and 1954 BPO 6th slightly better.


----------



## Granate

I found a very cheap new copy of the 1952 Vienna Choral in the Tahra Edition. Is it worth buying versus the Archipel available on Streaming?

The Audite Lucerne Choral is on its way, and maybe I should order the 1953 to complete the poker.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Granate said:


> I found a very cheap new copy of the 1952 Vienna Choral in the Tahra Edition. Is it worth buying versus the Archipel available on Streaming?
> 
> The Audite Lucerne Choral is on its way, and maybe I should order the 1953 to complete the poker.


I have it and it's excellent. Sure to be a vast improvement on the Archipel.


----------



## Granate

*Tahra excerpts on PrestoMusic*

I streamed the whole Archipel edition on Spotify and it sounded great, less boring than I recalled. The Tahra excerpts sound more balanced, probably richer in detail, although Archipel is bolder and sharper on the strings, even if that means the picture is "noisier".

I started playing the Pristine Stereo mix of the 1942 Choral and the Sound Quality was so different to 1952 that I'm now playing my Fricsay CD instead of that one.

And I purchased the Vienna 1952 Tahra CD plus the Archipel for Vienna 1953.


----------

