# Sibelius Symphony no. 3



## Waehnen

Sibelius' Symphony no. 3 must be his most underrated symphony. With the 6th it is the least recorded and it is a well known fact it is the only symphony Karajan never recorded.

What can I say? I have always LOVED this Symphony. It is the first Sibelius wrote at his new home, Ainola, where he stayed for the rest of his life. Maybe that is the reason why this Symphony has always carried the word HOME in my mind and soul. C-major also resonates HOME.

It is also the most Finnish symphony ever, to me. It is strange how musicologists have never realized that the rhythm of the first theme is in the rhythm of a Finnish Folk Song, "Tukutuku lampaitani". Can you spot the rhythmic resemblance? What a PERFECT rhythmic motive for a symphony. Here's the link:






Being a "Home Symphony", the structure and scale are also kind of modest in the way that this is not a great German castle on a hill, but Ainola by the Tuusula lake. It is only 3 movements. I admit it takes a perfect performance to make the 3rd Symphony click and make sense for it is unforgiving. You have to believe in the music a bit more than, say, Maazel or Saraste did.

What are the best recordings of the 3rd Symphony you have heard? For me Berglund with Bournemouth is the best. Ashkenazy, Blomstedt, Elder and Davis/Boston take the 2nd place together.


----------



## Heck148

Yes, Sibelius #3 is under-rated, imo...
I love the 2nd mvt, with all of the varied bass lines, and underlying rhythm that he uses...

Bernstein/NYPO is my favorite, Maazel/VPO is quite good, so is Mravinsky/LenPO....


----------



## KevinJS

Not exactly a go to spin, is it? Just had a look and noticed that I have at least two copies on CD, Spinning one of them now.









It doesn't appear in the DG 100 Great Symphonies box set, although 2 & 5 do. 2 can also be found in the TimeLife 100 Greatest Recordings Of All Time set.


----------



## Waehnen

Bernstein, Saraste and Maazel are rushed and unemphatic, ”let’s get this over with” -kinda performances in my opinion. You will even get a wrong idea of the symphony.


----------



## Neo Romanza

Waehnen said:


> Sibelius' Symphony no. 3 must be his most underrated symphony. With the 6th it is the least recorded and it is a well known fact it is the only symphony Karajan never recorded.
> 
> What can I say? I have always LOVED this Symphony. It is the first Sibelius wrote at his new home, Ainola, where he stayed for the rest of his life. Maybe that is the reason why this Symphony has always carried the word HOME in my mind and soul. C-major also resonates HOME.
> 
> It is also the most Finnish symphony ever, to me. It is strange how musicologists have never realized that the rhythm of the first theme is in the rhythm of a Finnish Folk Song, "Tukutuku lampaitani". Can you spot the rhythmic resemblance? What a PERFECT rhythmic motive for a symphony. Here's the link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Being a "Home Symphony", the structure and scale are also kind of modest in the way that this is not a great German castle on a hill, but Ainola by the Tuusula lake. It is only 3 movements. I admit it takes a perfect performance to make the 3rd Symphony click and make sense for it is unforgiving. You have to believe in the music a bit more than, say, Maazel or Saraste did.
> 
> What are the best recordings of the 3rd Symphony you have heard? For me Berglund with Bournemouth is the best. Ashkenazy, Blomstedt, Elder and Davis/Boston take the 2nd place together.


I wouldn't say the 3rd is his _most_ underrated symphony, but it's certainly not popular. I always thought of his 6th as his most underrated. Both the 3rd and the 6th are almost Neoclassical in mood: light and airy compared to his other symphonies. The 3rd is really where Sibelius' mature style finally reared its head. He shook off the Tchaikovsky influence, which he was already doing in his 2nd, but with the 3rd he sounds like no one else. This is actually quite a remarkable feat, but from this point forward, the mature composer spread out his wings and blazed the trail behind him.


----------



## philoctetes

The OP states my view of the symphony very well. Ashkenazy, Saraste, Berglund, Kamu... Also I have found that couplings of the 3rd and 6th go very well together, including the 7th is even better...

PS... not only did Karajan avoid the 3rd, his recordings of #6 sound awful to me...


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Okko Kamu with the Helsinki Radio Symphony Orchestra and Kurt Sanderling and the Berlin Symphony Orchestra are my favorites


----------



## mbhaub

I've played this symphony. It's quite deceptive - very difficult to pull off. The last movement in particular is a minefield for lesser conductors; the tempo changes come at you one after the other. Accelerate, pull back, faster but not so much...it's very difficult. If you follow Sibelius' directions you'll see that Bernstein and Maazel really have the skill to make it all work. Is it too fast? Not if you trust the composer. I have way too much Sibelius on the shelf, but the 3rd that I really like is Maazel in Pittsburgh, a set that doesn't get enough credit - it's more relaxed and frankly better played than the VPO set. And the recording is heck of a lot better.


----------



## philoctetes

mbhaub said:


> the tempo changes come at you one after the other. Accelerate, pull back, faster but not so much...it's very difficult.


Yes, for example, Blomstedt seems to completely ignore the cross-rhythms that Ashkenazy brings out so well.. and I heard him live with the same disappointing results...

Maybe it's just me but the 3rd has always seemed like a compact, neo-classical anticipation of what Sibelius expanded upon in the 4th and especially the 5th. There is a theme in the first movement that I think I hear echoes of in the 4th.


----------



## philoctetes

barbirolli I also like, the low strings are deep and strong


----------



## Kreisler jr

The old Kamu was also on a cheap DG Resonance/Musikfest/whatever together with the 1st (and it was boxed together with HvK 4-7).
I think it is an interesting piece but I can understand its low popularity. It does have neither the accessible "heart on sleeve" romanticism of the first two (and the 5th in some way) nor the dark/mysterious/nordic/icy atmosphere of 4,6,7 + Tapiola. It's almost Sibelius version of (neo)classicism. (Just seeing that Philoktetes wrote a similar characterization already.)


----------



## Waehnen

Kreisler jr said:


> The old Kamu was also on a cheap DG Resonance/Musikfest/whatever together with the 1st (and it was boxed together with HvK 4-7).
> I think it is an interesting piece but I can understand its low popularity. It does have neither the accessible "heart on sleeve" romanticism of the first two (and the 5th in some way) nor the dark/mysterious/nordic/icy atmosphere of 4,6,7 + Tapiola. It's almost Sibelius version of (neo)classicism. (Just seeing that Philoktetes wrote a similar characterization already.)


Have you heard either Berglund or Ashkenazy versions? It is a totally different experience when the music isn't just rushed through (like Bernstein and Maazel) but eveything is made to work. Pure musical joy!


----------



## Kreisler jr

I have Ashkenazy/Decca and I don't remember the Kamu as "rushed" (and IIRC Maazel/Pittsburgh is only fast in the middle movement), these are the three 3s I have. I am not a huge fan of the composer in general...


----------



## Waehnen

Kreisler jr said:


> I have Ashkenazy/Decca and I don't remember the Kamu as "rushed" (and IIRC Maazel/Pittsburgh is only fast in the middle movement), these are the three 3s I have. I am not a huge fan of the composer in general...


If you have the Ashkenazy version I shall preach at you no more! Then you know this ain't your cup of tea.


----------



## Kreisler jr

I don't dislike the piece at all. I just don't like Sibelius in general all that much (neither do I strongly dislike his music), so I might proportionally like the 3rd more than some Sibelians who worship the other symphonies but don't care for #3


----------



## Neo Romanza

Kreisler jr said:


> I just don't like Sibelius in general all that much...


Okay, thanks for stopping by!


----------



## vincula

I have a soft spot for Watanabe/JPO ´62






Regards,

Vincula


----------



## Knorf

I adore Sibelius's Third Symphony. I've been obsessed with each of them in turn, and my fascination for No. 3 was one of the longest, and I've never gotten over it (as with Nos. 4 & 6, which I feel similarly intensely about.)

It's a pity Karajan never did it. His Fourth and Sixth are among "best ever" for me, especially the DG Fourth and EMI Berliner Sixth. The latter for me is one of the greatest Sibelius recordings of all time.

Kamu/Helsinki is a favorite for the Third for me. Close to it are Berglund, especially with the COE, and Järvi/Gothenburg on BIS. The newer Kamu/Lahti is also excellent, and frankly there are many others in contention.


----------



## Becca

My top 2 of those I am familiar with...

Gibson / Scottish Nat'l Orchestra
...followed closely by...
Barbirolli / Halle / 1969 Proms Live


----------



## Bruckner Anton

So pitty that Karajan did not record the third. It is a great piece.


----------



## Kiki

There are too many good ones: Saraste (x2), Mravinsky, Collins, Rozhdestvensky, Ashkenazy (the earlier one), followed by: Berglund (x3), Bernstein, Watanabe, Barborolli (the live one only) etc. - some fast, some slow, some driving hard, some others more reflective.

Kajanus is usually the yardstick, but unfortunately I think he didn't get it right in the slow movement. Never warm to C.Davis's Sibelius. I actively avoid Elder and Vänskä.

Need to get the Alexander Gibson... I've been saying that to myself for years.


----------



## Rogerx

Minnesota Orchestra, Osmo Vänskä/ Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra, Paavo Berglund- / Jukka-Pekka Saraste 

In no particular order.


----------



## Waehnen

Thank you for your tips!

I bought the Barbirolli/Halle. What a refreshingly slow and well articulated 1st Movement.

In my ears the 3rd Symphony is lateromantic music and should be played as such. This is in no way more ”classical” than Brahms. Great music often balances itself between classical form and romantic expression. Just like us humans. Pure form is boring and so is pure emotion without form.


----------



## Becca

Waehnen said:


> I bought the Barbirolli/Halle. What a refreshingly slow and well articulated 1st Movement.
> .


Which Barbirolli/Halle? The studio/Warner or the live Proms?


----------



## Waehnen

Becca said:


> Which Barbirolli/Halle? The studio/Warner or the live Proms?


Warner it is! Wonderful stuff.


----------



## HenryPenfold

I enjoy Sibelius 3 very much and of the 20 plus recordings I have, I prefer the *Anthony Collins, LSO on Decca/Eloquence* head and shoulders above them all.

Of the rest, I'd mention Ashkenazy, Philharmonia on, Decca and various Berglund, Maazel and Vanskas (I even like his often maligned Minnesota).

On the down side is the ruined (by the first movement) Barbirolli Halle on EMI (now Warner). The Barbirolli aficionados that I know say this is an appalling performance and possibly Glorious John's worse recording.

The best of them all ..................


----------



## Waehnen

HenryPenfold said:


> I enjoy Sibelius 3 very much and of the 20 plus recordings I have, I prefer the *Anthony Collins, LSO on Decca/Eloquence* head and shoulders above them all.
> 
> Of the rest, I'd mention Ashkenazy, Philharmonia on, Decca and various Berglund, Maazel and Vanskas (I even like his often maligned Minnesota).
> 
> On the down side is the ruined (by the first movement) Barbirolli Halle on EMI (now Warner). The Barbirolli aficionados that I know say this is an appalling performance and possibly Glorious John's worse recording.
> 
> The best of them all ..................


I beg to differ on the Barbirolli! Here is a true orginal a conductor. What a vision and courage!


----------



## HerbertNorman

Waehnen said:


> Sibelius' Symphony no. 3 must be his most underrated symphony. With the 6th it is the least recorded and it is a well known fact it is the only symphony Karajan never recorded.
> 
> What can I say? I have always LOVED this Symphony. It is the first Sibelius wrote at his new home, Ainola, where he stayed for the rest of his life. Maybe that is the reason why this Symphony has always carried the word HOME in my mind and soul. C-major also resonates HOME.
> 
> It is also the most Finnish symphony ever, to me. It is strange how musicologists have never realized that the rhythm of the first theme is in the rhythm of a Finnish Folk Song, "Tukutuku lampaitani". Can you spot the rhythmic resemblance? What a PERFECT rhythmic motive for a symphony. Here's the link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Being a "Home Symphony", the structure and scale are also kind of modest in the way that this is not a great German castle on a hill, but Ainola by the Tuusula lake. It is only 3 movements. I admit it takes a perfect performance to make the 3rd Symphony click and make sense for it is unforgiving. You have to believe in the music a bit more than, say, Maazel or Saraste did.
> 
> What are the best recordings of the 3rd Symphony you have heard? For me Berglund with Bournemouth is the best. Ashkenazy, Blomstedt, Elder and Davis/Boston take the 2nd place together.


I can agree , I like the work too... Ever tried the recording the Minnesota Orchestra and Osmo Vänskä did (as pointed out by @Rogerx)? I like that one a lot


----------



## CnC Bartok

It's a fantastic piece of music, and certainly it is under-rated. As to whether it is Sibelius' most under-rated, or if indeed it is not among his best works, are both debatable. I do not find it intrinsically in any way weaker than the other six instrumental symphonies at all.

I would probably say that No.6 is not only the most overlooked of the seven, but for me it is also the greatest of them, maybe a toss-up with No.7? That's Sibelius doing his "pure spring water" bit to perfection.

My favourite No.3 is Anthony Collins. Yes he's a bit fast, but it works for me, the incessant rhythms are just brilliantly conveyed by Collins. I don't know Kamu's old DGG recording, sorry, a big gap, I know. But his later BIS recording from a few years ago is very good....


----------



## jim prideaux

Apart from the 5th the 3rd is my my favourite symphony composed by Sibelius and as a result I do have numerous recordings. As I type I am listening for the first time to the Saraste Finnish RSO recording. I have read the contributions to this thread with interest and have noticed that Saraste takes the first movement with some pace. However that is not a criticism as I do believe it is often particularly interesting to hear different interpretations of favourite works.

I have found the Segerstam Helsinki recording ( Ondine, coupled with the 5th) to be consistently rewarding. He appears to ensure that the central slow movement is accorded the appropriate degree of prominence whereas some conductors can on occasion appear to underestimate just how wonderful the movement actually is. I also find the Gibson RSNO recording impressive.

I am enjoying the Saraste and will also return to other recordings over the next few days.....will see what the Barbirolli Halle is like, which will be interesting considering some of the posts above. One recording I will return to is the Oramo CBSO ( Erato) as it appears to receive less recognition than it perhaps deserves.

I am also reminded that I need to do something about a major gap in my listening....Collins!


----------



## Waehnen

One thing that people might not appreciate is the pure technical and compositional mastery of this symphony.

You know, with great effort, an amateur composer could technically put together some symphonies of not that great a technical level. Even I as a trained composer could write stuff that is technically on the same level as many symphonies of the common repertoire.

But there is no way I could ever surpass the virtuoso technical expertise of the 3rd Symphony. To be able to create so powerful and good sounding music with an original musical language and make use of the orchestra with very complicated textures to such an extent is just adorable. And the material is so strong! 1st class material, everywhere, and everything is in sight. Nothing is hidden, everything is there for you to see and hear.

Not many could achieve this. Beethoven and Brahms come to mind but not many others.


----------



## Beethoven123

Yay, I love Sibelius 3 (definitely his most under-rated, I don't go for the 4th particularly, despite that last chord (A minor, I believe) being perfection). The second movement, in particular, just stays with me. The rhythms are, on-the-surface, quite simple, but one can hear the detail put in, just like I find with Mahler. I'd always been told Sibelius 3 wasn't good, probably because it feels like an anti-climax to the second for some (I disagree). It's just so strong and powerful and, to my perception, maybe quite nationalistic. My favourite Sibelius symphony would have to be the seventh, followed by 2 and 3.


----------



## Beethoven123

I listened to the Barbirolli - Halle, and I've heard a bit of the Berglund interpretation as well - which sounds wonderful.


----------



## Waehnen

Beethoven123 said:


> I listened to the Barbirolli - Halle, and I've heard a bit of the Berglund interpretation as well - which sounds wonderful.


Berglund is overall more balanced, Barbirolli is artistic like anything.

The only thing I don't tolerate is not taking the music seriously and not playing to its strenghts and just rushing through it. I generally dislike fast tempos in Sibelius.


----------



## Mannheim Rocket

I do like this symphony quite a bit and feel it doesn't get the love it deserves, but I find the dismissal of quicker performances as having no feeling for the music or not taking it seriously to be misguided.


----------



## Kreisler jr

I have actually read urgent recommendations that especially commended Maazel/Pittsburgh for the quick tempo (mainly of the middle movement, a little above 8 min.)...


----------



## Knorf

Mannheim Rocket said:


> I do like this symphony quite a bit and feel it doesn't get the love it deserves, but I find the dismissal of quicker performances as having no feeling for the music or not taking it seriously to be misguided.


I totally agree. It's a significant mistake, I feel, to equate faster tempos with "rushing through it," and just as bad, if not worse, to equate slower tempos with more profound feelings or anything of the sort.

In the words of the greatest conductor I ever personally played for, "Slow is not expressive. Slow is not beautiful. Some music should be slow, some should not be slow. Slow is slow." (It helps if you imagine a charming Hungarian-accented tenor-range voice, "slow ees slow.")


----------



## joen_cph

Kreisler jr said:


> The old Kamu was also on a cheap DG Resonance/Musikfest/whatever together with the 1st (and it was boxed together with HvK 4-7).
> I think it is an interesting piece but I can understand its low popularity. It does have neither the accessible "heart on sleeve" romanticism of the first two (and the 5th in some way) nor the dark/mysterious/nordic/icy atmosphere of 4,6,7 + Tapiola. It's almost Sibelius version of (neo)classicism. (Just seeing that Philoktetes wrote a similar characterization already.)


Indeed, I find it more uniform and repetitive, than a lot of other Sibelius ... I like it though.


----------



## Waehnen

Knorf said:


> I totally agree. It's a significant mistake, I feel, to equate faster tempos with "rushing through it," and just as bad, if not worse, to equate slower tempos with more profound feelings or anything of the sort.
> 
> In the words of the greatest conductor I ever personally played for, "Slow is not expressive. Slow is not beautiful. Some music should be slow, some should not be slow. Slow is slow." (It helps if you imagine a charming Hungarian-accented tenor-range voice, "slow ees slow.")


It is also a mistake to suggest that I would think slow equals emotion.

When it comes to this symphony, a too fast tempo sounds like rushing to me. Of many fast interpretations I genuinely get the feeling that the conductor does not play to the strenghts of the music. When it comes to this music, I have all the right to think that Bernstein or Maazel did not really understand this enigmatic Symphony, but Berglund and Ashkenazy did.

Sibelius himself preferred the interpretations of Karajan whose tempi are slow. Listen to Andante Festivo conducted by Sibelius himself. The tempo is extremely slow, even. Listen to Kajanus recordings, which Sibelius himself endorced - the music is always made to sing and nothing is rushed, ever. Every note is taken seriously.

One of the reasons for this symphony being so unpopular are the too fast interpretations. That is what I indeed do believe.

In some other works, Bernstein and Maazel are my favourite conductors. In some works I enjoy fast tempi and feel it does justice to the music.

Yet I apologize the way I put my words might sometimes seem rather frank. When it comes to art, I need to stay true to myself and have courage to speak. That said, of course I realize my standards and preferences sure are not the only ones on the planet. There are even people who search for totally different things in music than I do.


----------



## Heck148

Neither Bernstein nor Maazel/VPO "rush" thru Sibelius Sym #3, and they most certainly don't miss the point, or fail to find the strength of the music...they are most convincing...and this symphony is well-served by tempi that
move along....
Sibelius was always quite complimentary towards conductors who presented his music...he was no fool...


----------



## Waehnen

Heck148 said:


> Neither Bernstein nor Maazel/VPO "rush" thru Sibelius Sym #3, and they most certainly don't miss the point, or fail to find the strength of the music...they are most convincing...and this symphony is well-served by tempi that
> move along....
> Sibelius was always quite complimentary towards conductors who presented his music...he was no fool...


Out of interest, I just did some reading what critics have said about Maazel in general. Here is one quote from New York times:

"He projected an image of an analytical intellectual - he had studied mathematics and philosophy in college, was fluent in six languages (French, German, Portuguese, Spanish and Italian, as well as English) and kept up with many subjects outside music - and his performances could seem coolly fastidious and emotionally distant."

The above happens with SOME Sibelius by Maazel, too. Just pointing out I am not the only one thinking the way I do.

I have even read anecdotes of Sibelius privately expressing dislike of some of the performances of his symphonies because of too fast tempi, but still thanking the conductor afterwards.

But who am I to say someone shouldn't think Maazel was the most fierce and expressive Sibelian to ever have walked this earth?


----------



## Waehnen

None of the above I wrote has been against some great conductors but on behalf of this symphonic masterpiece which I do believe has been misunderstood a lot.

I am happy to say that both Maazel and Bernstein are the kind of professionals to whom I can turn to as a kind of reference point when some stuff doesn’t make sense. ”OK, I don’t get this. What did Bernstein say about it?” They make music sound good and flow well and they have a level of quality, always.

Sometimes I am happy to pick up a Maazel version of some musical masterpiece when I don’t particularly want to dwell on emotions. There is value in strongly structured musical forms, too.

This is a thread concerning the 3rd Symhony by Sibelius. You just need to have emotion in the orchestral expression — otherwise the classicism of the material takes over. This is late romantic and early modernist stuff, not ”cold neoclassicism”. In this context I stand by what I have written.

This symphony is the most misunderstood symphony I know. It has given much trouble to many great conductors. All this is the subject of this thread.


----------



## Forster

I find the 3rd unremarkable. It's ok, better than the 1st and 2nd. I've heard Davis/LSO, Berglund/BSO, Segerstam/HPO, Sanderling/BSO and Gibson/RSNO

Could it be where Shore got the Fellowship theme from?


----------



## philoctetes

The Kamu I refer to is in this excellent box, with 3,6, and 7 on one disc... wasn't the DG with Berlin? This is much different


----------



## Kreisler jr

No, Kamu's DG 1+3 (and some tone poems) is with Helsinki from the early 1970s. 
#7 has a picture of the LP cover? 
The 2nd (I have not heard) is with the Berlin Philharmonic. IIRC Kamu had a grant to study with Karajan for some time in the late 1960s or so.


----------



## Heck148

Waehnen said:


> Out of interest, I just did some reading what critics have said about Maazel in general.


Maazel isn't one of my favorite conductors...but his Sibelius set with VPO is generally good - 3, 4, 7, Tapiola are all quite good...
He was wont to put kind of weird "eccentricities" into his readings - sometimes almost sounded "gimmicky", or for effect, and not really related to the music, just his personal stamp....more towards his earlier career, not so much later on.

He was also a jerk to his musicians, overall, a lot of stories about him - one thing he did that prompted contract changes in orchestral agreements - Maazel was known for arriving at a new posting - firing long-standing, popular musicians who were held in high regard, bringing his chosen people into fill the vacancy, then he'd leave after his first or second contract expired!! Comes in, trashes the place, and leaves....not saying that his replacements were poor musicians...it's just that this approach generates much apprehension on the part of the orchestra musicians.


----------



## Heck148

Waehnen said:


> None of the above I wrote has been against some great conductors but on behalf of this symphonic masterpiece which I do believe has been misunderstood a lot.
> 
> I am happy to say that both Maazel and Bernstein are the kind of professionals to whom I can turn to as a kind of reference point when some stuff doesn't make sense. "......
> This is a thread concerning the 3rd Symhony by Sibelius. You just need to have emotion in the orchestral expression - otherwise the classicism of the material takes over. This is late romantic and early modernist stuff, not "cold neoclassicism". In this context I stand by what I have written....


I was just listening to Bernstein/NYPO last night, and it still is a splendid performance of Sibelius #3, my overall favorite....it is not rushed, tho there are some places where it needs to move along - mvt I/ second theme [celli], and the final section on mvt III, the quasi-chorale that gradually builds to the final climax...this needs forward momentum for sure, and Bernstein gets it right...I love how Lenny highlights those cadential passing tones in the chorale, first in the celli, then finally in trombone II [a nice "Reiner-esque" touch]. He also gets that nice "swing" in mvt II, the fascinating 6/4 mvt...the NYPO plays with a most attractive lilt, a lift - it's not fast, it just "swings"...

I don't really favor some of the Finnish orchestras for this music....I know Sibelius is the great national musical figure, and the orchestras certainly play passionately and expressively, but I find the sound to be deficient - the strings are often thin and scrappy sounding, and the winds and brass sound anemic when compared to other better ensembles - NYPO, VPO, LondonSO, NBC, Philadelphia, etc...
I appreciate that listeners will be sympathetic to the "home team", which is totally fine.....but for me, the actual sound of the orchestra is of major importance.


----------



## Waehnen

Heck148 said:


> I was just listening to Bernstein/NYPO last night, and it still is a splendid performance of Sibelius #3, my overall favorite....it is not rushed, tho there are some places where it needs to move along - mvt I/ second theme [celli], and the final section on mvt III, the quasi-chorale that gradually builds to the final climax...this needs forward momentum for sure, and Bernstein gets it right...I love how Lenny highlights those cadential passing tones in the chorale, first in the celli, then finally in trombone II [a nice "Reiner-esque" touch]. He also gets that nice "swing" in mvt II, the fascinating 6/4 mvt...the NYPO plays with a most attractive lilt, a lift - it's not fast, it just "swings"...
> 
> I don't really favor some of the Finnish orchestras for this music....I know Sibelius is the great national musical figure, and the orchestras certainly play passionately and expressively, but I find the sound to be deficient - the strings are often thin and scrappy sounding, and the winds and brass sound anemic when compared to other better ensembles - NYPO, VPO, LondonSO, NBC, Philadelphia, etc...
> I appreciate that listeners will be sympathetic to the "home team", which is totally fine.....but for me, the actual sound of the orchestra is of major importance.


You have a solid point there. I also think Finnish string sections are often too thin. For me American brass playing sounds just so cool. German woodwinds are also gorgeous.


----------



## Waehnen

Heck148 said:


> I was just listening to Bernstein/NYPO last night, and it still is a splendid performance of Sibelius #3, my overall favorite....it is not rushed, tho there are some places where it needs to move along - mvt I/ second theme [celli], and the final section on mvt III, the quasi-chorale that gradually builds to the final climax...this needs forward momentum for sure, and Bernstein gets it right...I love how Lenny highlights those cadential passing tones in the chorale, first in the celli, then finally in trombone II [a nice "Reiner-esque" touch]. He also gets that nice "swing" in mvt II, the fascinating 6/4 mvt...the NYPO plays with a most attractive lilt, a lift - it's not fast, it just "swings"...
> 
> I don't really favor some of the Finnish orchestras for this music....I know Sibelius is the great national musical figure, and the orchestras certainly play passionately and expressively, but I find the sound to be deficient - the strings are often thin and scrappy sounding, and the winds and brass sound anemic when compared to other better ensembles - NYPO, VPO, LondonSO, NBC, Philadelphia, etc...
> I appreciate that listeners will be sympathetic to the "home team", which is totally fine.....but for me, the actual sound of the orchestra is of major importance.


I bought the Bernstein version and will listen to it again with open mind in the next a few days!


----------



## Heck148

Waehnen said:


> I bought the Bernstein version and will listen to it again with open mind in the next a few days!


Lenny's NYPO complete Sibelius symphony set is one of the few complete sets I recommend:

1, 3, 4, 5, 7 are outstanding; 2 is very good, tho not my top pick; #6 I just don't get at all....


----------



## Waehnen

Heck148 said:


> Lenny's NYPO complete Sibelius symphony set is one of the few complete sets I recommend:
> 
> 1, 3, 4, 5, 7 are outstanding; 2 is very good, tho not my top pick; #6 I just don't get at all....


Listened to it! It is GOOD in a general sense. But it is not authentic and perfect, like Berglund/Bournemouth (NOT HELSINKI!). This statement is from my point of view and it is not aimed negatively at Bernstein.


----------



## EdwardBast

I like the 4th and 7th better, but the 3rd is next in line for me.


----------



## Waehnen

EdwardBast said:


> I like the 4th and 7th better, but the 3rd is next in line for me.


Same here! 4th and 7th are on the first spot. 3rd is the second best.


----------



## joen_cph

Maybe 4 - 2 - Kullervo - 6 - 1 - 3 - 7 - 5 for me ...

but mood-wise and conceptually, and in the case of Kullervo also cast-wise, they're so different from each other, that the sequence tends to change all the time.

Regarding the 3rd, I have no favourite recording, but for the 5th, probably Celibidache's eccentric DG, partly an operatic performance due to his accompanying singing and shouting ... but the end there is magnificent.


----------



## bz3

I like 6 and 7 the best of the symphonies, after that I could go any which way. 4 took me the longest to warm up to.


----------



## Josquin13

The Sibelius 3rd is a symphony that a good number of conductors conduct well, but very few get right, IMO, even a number of conductors that I normally like in Sibelius--such as Saraste & Segerstam. The problem is that there's something almost Baroque-like, or as others have pointed out, "neo-classical" about the Sibelius 3. If a conductor doesn't get that, it doesn't matter how well they conduct the symphony, it's not going to work, in my view, because the performance won't be nearly detailed enough.

Integral to this idea of the Sibelius 3 being a more 'classically' orientated work is the size of the ensemble used. Like the Sibelius 4th, it's not a symphony written for a large orchestra. Therefore, getting the orchestral balances right is crucial. They can't be too thick or muddy or mushy. Every note must be heard. Which is why the harder, more detailed approach taken by certain Finnish conductors works more effectively in the 3rd than a less sharply focused, thicker, more homogenous sound: Which will inevitably, IMO, sound less idiomatic in this music.

That is one of the reasons why Paavo Berglund's more transparent approach to Sibelius works so well in the 3rd--i.e., the close attention that he pays towards getting the orchestral balances just right, along with his insistence on a reduced vibrato in the strings, and beautifully translucent horns. Berglund stated that it was vitally important that a conductor "conducts the whole score" in Sibelius, so that every note can be heard. Which is presumably what inspired him to so attentively shape every phrase & nuance within the context of the larger themes & thrust of the symphony. For this reason, no conductor builds the climaxes in Sibelius more powerfully than Berglund, IMO, because he allows the listener to hear the whole score with an unusual degree of clarity, which can be very exciting, & especially in the climaxes.

Sibelius himself said the details in his scores must "swim in the sauce". In other words, he wanted all those myriad details to be heard and not to become submerged or lost or drowned out or diminished by the larger themes. Rather, they need to be heard clearly within the mix, according to Sibelius. Which, to my mind, is especially true for the 3rd Symphony (& 4th), and explains why the Sibelius 3 has an almost Mozartian feel about it at times (though of course it can't be played like it's Mozart, because Sibelius's phrasing is very different from Mozart's).

Sibelius told his son-in-law, Jussi Jalas, "The III Symphony is well suited for a very small orchestra,"... "I performed it in Moscow with an orchestra that had 12 violas, etc., and the woodwinds were almost wiped out. When I had it published, I was going to add a note that the orchestra should not exceed 50 players."* (It's a pity that Sibelius didn't do so, because if he had, I think a lot of conductors would have understood the style of this symphony better.)

In other words, most conductors conduct & record the Sibelius 3rd with an oversized orchestra. Which prevents them from achieving the kind of transparency or translucency and attention to detail that the score requires in order to work most effectively.

Many years ago, I recall being excited & pleased to find out that Berglund had used a smaller sized ensemble in his recording of the 3rd with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe (on Finlandia). For this performance, Berglund added only a single cello to the chamber orchestra. In other words, it isn't the same full-sized orchestra that Berglund used in his other COE recordings of the 1st, 2nd, & 5th Symphonies.

With that in mind, here are the 10 best recordings that I've heard of the Sibelius 3rd (& I've listed them in the order in which they came into my mind),

1. Paavo Berglund, in his two recordings with the Bournemouth Orchestra & the Chamber Orchestra of Europe, but not so much with the Helsinki Philharmonic, which isn't comparable, in my view. Indeed Berglund later commented that the Bournemouth SO had previously played under Sibelius, and as a result had managed to maintain a tradition of playing his music. So they understood perfectly what he wanted from them, according to Berglund, and I believe that is reflected in the high quality of his Bournemouth cycle. While the Helsinki Philharmonic, on the other hand, was a young orchestra at the time and, according to Berglund, he had a more difficult time getting them to do what he wanted, as he had to teach them how to play Sibelius's music. With the result being that he felt there were some successes in the Helsinki cycle (notably, 2 & 5), but also some failures.**

(**Here are Berglund's actual recollections--as printed in an interview he gave to the Finnish Quarterly: "Sibelius himself conducted in Bournemouth, so the tradition was there. When I recorded the symphonies again in the 1980's with the Helsinki Philharmonic, the Sixth Symphony was pure gobbledygook to the orchestra and the work was hard. The orchestra was enthusiastic, nevertheless. The Second and Fifth Symphonies went well".)

--Berglund, Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra, EMI: 



--Berglund, Chamber Orchestra of Europe, Finlandia: 




2. Okko Kamu, his first DG recording with the Helsinki Radio Symphony Orchestra, along with his later BIS recording with the Lahti Symphony Orchestra. They are both excellent performances, & Kamu is every bit as good in the 4th. For me, the 3rd & 4th were the highlights of his Lahti cycle, and Kamu definitely has the measure of both symphonies, IMO (though I have preferred Berglund's live Barbican LPO performances of Symphonies 5, 6, & 7--which are remarkable--to Kamu's; indeed Berglund was often known to be at his best in Sibelius when performing live in concert).

--Kamu, Lahti Symphony Orchestra: 



--Kamu, Helsinki Radio Symphony Orchestra, DG: 




3. Sir Alexander Gibson, in his 1965 recording with the Scottish National Orchestra on the Saga label. Plus, there is another 1983 recording of the 3rd with the same orchestra on Chandos, which was part of Gibson's first Sibelius cycle (& probably one on his later Collins cycle, as well--with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, which isn't a favorite cycle of mine). The Chandos 3rd is a very good performance, too, but I don't like it quite as much the earlier Saga recording. Although I do think that had Gibson lived to record a Sibelius 3rd with the Uppsala Chamber Orchestra, as he did with the 1st & 2nd Symphonies towards the end of his life, his Uppsala 3rd would have been even better than the 1965 3rd: considering that his chamber performances of the 1st & 2nd in Uppsala have all the transparency and clarity of detail that the 3rd needs in order to work most effectively.

--Gibson, Scottish National Orchestra (1965, Saga): 



--Gibson, Scottish National Orchestra (1983, Chandos): 



--Gibson, Uppsala Chamber Orchestra, Symphonies 1 & 2--again, these are highly detailed, brilliant Sibelius performances!: 




4. Sir John Barbirolli, with the Hallé Orchestra: Not the studio recording for EMI, but rather the live performance from The Proms. Compared to the other recordings mentioned above, Barbirolli offers a strikingly different interpretation--right from the very start, where he's surprisingly slow, deliberate, & measured at the opening (albeit, with slightly too large an orchestra), and I find it a very interesting alternative view of the Sibelius 3: 



.

5. Vladimir Ashkenazy, Philharmonia Orchestra, on Decca. This is another performance of the 3rd that I find somewhat different, yet extremely engaging:














6. Sakari Oramo, City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, on Erato: this is another interesting, highly detailed, & at times very exciting performance of the 3rd, from one of the better young conductors today, IMO. While the performance is sort of in the Berglund vein, Oramo isn't copying Berglund, but rather has his own fascinating interpretation, which works quite well, in my view:














7. Owain Arwel Hughes, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra: Last, but definitely not least is this wonderful recent account of the 3rd by the Welsh conductor Owain Arwel Hughes, who some will know from his championing of the music of Danish composer, Vagn Holmboe on the BIS label (for which I am grateful!): Apparently, his lengthy cycle of Holmboe recordings proved to be so time consuming that it may have actually kept Hughes from becoming a better known & more celebrated conductor... But make no mistake, Hughes is a very fine conductor, & if his new Sibelius cycle continues on the same level that it has started out, with such excellent live performances of the Sibelius 1st & 3rd Symphonies, it's going to become one of the leading digital cycles in the catalogue for its combination of high quality performances with superb sound (& I'm assuming--I hope, correctly?--that Hughes is intending to record the whole cycle EDIT: in answer to my own question, yes, he is going to record all seven symphonies). In fact, this would be my #1 pick for the best Sibelius 3rd in the catalogue that offers both a high quality performance combined with 'state of the art' audiophile sound; as well as one of my top picks, overall:














https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09KPX7ZP7/ref=dm_rogue_digital

*The above quotes, along with some of the accompanying information in my post are taken from an article in the Finnish Music Quarterly that I've found particularly helpful--here's a link: https://fmq.fi/articles/sibelius-the-view-from-the-podium

P.S. The connection between "Tuku tuku lampaitani' and the 3rd is very interesting, thanks! I didn't know about this Finnish folk song. Did you know that one of the melodies in the 3rd was used or rather lifted for a recurring musical theme in the film score to the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Here it is, briefly heard twice in "The Return of the King" theme: 



.


----------



## Waehnen

Josquin13 said:


> The Sibelius 3rd is a symphony that a good number of conductors conduct well, but very few get right, IMO, even a number of conductors that I normally like in Sibelius--such as Saraste & Segerstam. The problem is that there's something almost Baroque-like, or as others have pointed out, "neo-classical" about the Sibelius 3. If a conductor doesn't get that, it doesn't matter how well they conduct the symphony, it's not going to work, in my view, because the performance won't be nearly detailed enough.
> 
> Integral to this idea of the Sibelius 3 being a more 'classically' orientated work is the size of the ensemble used. Like the Sibelius 4th, it's not a symphony written for a large orchestra. Therefore, getting the orchestral balances right is crucial. They can't be too thick or muddy or mushy. Every note must be heard. Which is why the harder, more detailed approach taken by certain Finnish conductors works more effectively in the 3rd than a less sharply focused, thicker, more homogenous sound: Which will inevitably, IMO, sound less idiomatic in this music.
> 
> That is one of the reasons why Paavo Berglund's more transparent approach to Sibelius works so well in the 3rd--i.e., the close attention that he pays towards getting the orchestral balances just right, along with his insistence on a reduced vibrato in the strings, and beautifully translucent horns. Berglund stated that it was vitally important that a conductor "conducts the whole score" in Sibelius, so that every note can be heard. Which is presumably what inspired him to so attentively shape every phrase & nuance within the context of the larger themes & thrust of the symphony. For this reason, no conductor builds the climaxes in Sibelius more powerfully than Berglund, IMO, because he allows the listener to hear the whole score with an unusual degree of clarity, which can be very exciting, & especially in the climaxes.
> 
> Sibelius himself said the details in his scores must "swim in the sauce". In other words, he wanted all those myriad details to be heard and not to become submerged or lost or drowned out or diminished by the larger themes. Rather, they need to be heard clearly within the mix, according to Sibelius. Which, to my mind, is especially true for the 3rd Symphony (& 4th), and explains why the Sibelius 3 has an almost Mozartian feel about it at times (though of course it can't be played like it's Mozart, because Sibelius's phrasing is very different from Mozart's).
> 
> Sibelius told his son-in-law, Jussi Jalas, "The III Symphony is well suited for a very small orchestra,"... "I performed it in Moscow with an orchestra that had 12 violas, etc., and the woodwinds were almost wiped out. When I had it published, I was going to add a note that the orchestra should not exceed 50 players."* (It's a pity that Sibelius didn't do so, because if he had, I think a lot of conductors would have understood the style of this symphony better.)
> 
> In other words, most conductors conduct & record the Sibelius 3rd with an oversized orchestra. Which prevents them from achieving the kind of transparency or translucency and attention to detail that the score requires in order to work most effectively.
> 
> Many years ago, I recall being excited & pleased to find out that Berglund had used a smaller sized ensemble in his recording of the 3rd with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe (on Finlandia). For this performance, Berglund added only a single cello to the chamber orchestra. In other words, it isn't the same full-sized orchestra that Berglund used in his other COE recordings of the 1st, 2nd, & 5th Symphonies.
> 
> With that in mind, here are the 10 best recordings that I've heard of the Sibelius 3rd (& I've listed them in the order in which they came into my mind),
> 
> 1. Paavo Berglund, in his two recordings with the Bournemouth Orchestra & the Chamber Orchestra of Europe, but not so much with the Helsinki Philharmonic, which isn't comparable, in my view. Indeed Berglund later commented that the Bournemouth SO had previously played under Sibelius, and as a result had managed to maintain a tradition of playing his music. So they understood perfectly what he wanted from them, according to Berglund, and I believe that is reflected in the high quality of his Bournemouth cycle. While the Helsinki Philharmonic, on the other hand, was a young orchestra at the time and, according to Berglund, he had a more difficult time getting them to do what he wanted, as he had to teach them how to play Sibelius's music. With the result being that he felt there were some successes in the Helsinki cycle (notably, 2 & 5), but also some failures.**
> 
> (**Here are Berglund's actual recollections--as printed in an interview he gave to the Finnish Quarterly: "Sibelius himself conducted in Bournemouth, so the tradition was there. When I recorded the symphonies again in the 1980's with the Helsinki Philharmonic, the Sixth Symphony was pure gobbledygook to the orchestra and the work was hard. The orchestra was enthusiastic, nevertheless. The Second and Fifth Symphonies went well".)
> 
> --Berglund, Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra, EMI:
> 
> 
> 
> --Berglund, Chamber Orchestra of Europe, Finlandia:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Okko Kamu, his first DG recording with the Helsinki Radio Symphony Orchestra, along with his later BIS recording with the Lahti Symphony Orchestra. They are both excellent performances, & Kamu is every bit as good in the 4th. For me, the 3rd & 4th were the highlights of his Lahti cycle, and Kamu definitely has the measure of both symphonies, IMO (though I have preferred Berglund's live Barbican LPO performances of Symphonies 5, 6, & 7--which are remarkable--to Kamu's; indeed Berglund was often known to be at his best in Sibelius when performing live in concert).
> 
> --Kamu, Lahti Symphony Orchestra:
> 
> 
> 
> --Kamu, Helsinki Radio Symphony Orchestra, DG:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Sir Alexander Gibson, in his 1965 recording with the Scottish National Orchestra on the Saga label. Plus, there is another 1983 recording of the 3rd with the same orchestra on Chandos, which was part of Gibson's first Sibelius cycle (& probably one on his later Collins cycle, as well--with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, which isn't a favorite cycle of mine). The Chandos 3rd is a very good performance, too, but I don't like it quite as much the earlier Saga recording. Although I do think that had Gibson lived to record a Sibelius 3rd with the Uppsala Chamber Orchestra, as he did with the 1st & 2nd Symphonies towards the end of his life, his Uppsala 3rd would have been even better than the 1965 3rd: considering that his chamber performances of the 1st & 2nd in Uppsala have all the transparency and clarity of detail that the 3rd needs in order to work most effectively.
> 
> --Gibson, Scottish National Orchestra (1965, Saga):
> 
> 
> 
> --Gibson, Scottish National Orchestra (1983, Chandos):
> 
> 
> 
> --Gibson, Uppsala Chamber Orchestra, Symphonies 1 & 2--again, these are highly detailed, brilliant Sibelius performances!:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Sir John Barbirolli, with the Hallé Orchestra: Not the studio recording for EMI, but rather the live performance from The Proms. Compared to the other recordings mentioned above, Barbirolli offers a strikingly different interpretation--right from the very start, where he's surprisingly slow, deliberate, & measured at the opening (albeit, with slightly too large an orchestra), and I find it a very interesting alternative view of the Sibelius 3:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 5. Vladimir Ashkenazy, Philharmonia Orchestra, on Decca. This is another performance of the 3rd that I find somewhat different, yet extremely engaging:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. Sakari Oramo, City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, on Erato: this is another interesting, highly detailed, & at times very exciting performance of the 3rd, from one of the better young conductors today, IMO. While the performance is sort of in the Berglund vein, Oramo isn't copying Berglund, but rather has his own fascinating interpretation, which works quite well, in my view:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Owain Arwel Hughes, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra: Last, but definitely not least is this wonderful recent account of the 3rd by the Welsh conductor Owain Arwel Hughes, who some will know from his championing of the music of Danish composer, Vagn Holmboe on the BIS label (for which I am grateful!): Apparently, his lengthy cycle of Holmboe recordings proved to be so time consuming that it may have actually kept Hughes from becoming a better known & more celebrated conductor... But make no mistake, Hughes is a very fine conductor, & if his new Sibelius cycle continues on the same level that it has started out, with such excellent live performances of the Sibelius 1st & 3rd Symphonies, it's going to become one of the leading digital cycles in the catalogue for its combination of high quality performances with superb sound (& I'm assuming--I hope, correctly?--that Hughes is intending to record the whole cycle EDIT: in answer to my own question, yes, he is going to record all seven symphonies). In fact, this would be my #1 pick for the best Sibelius 3rd in the catalogue that offers both a high quality performance combined with 'state of the art' audiophile sound; as well as one of my top picks, overall:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09KPX7ZP7/ref=dm_rogue_digital
> 
> *The above quotes, along with some of the accompanying information in my post are taken from an article in the Finnish Music Quarterly that I've found particularly helpful--here's a link: https://fmq.fi/articles/sibelius-the-view-from-the-podium
> 
> P.S. The connection between "Tuku tuku lampaitani' and the 3rd is very interesting, thanks! I didn't know about this Finnish folk song. Did you know that one of the melodies in the 3rd was used or rather lifted for a recurring musical theme in the film score to the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Here it is, briefly heard twice in "The Return of the King" theme:
> 
> 
> 
> .


Thank you for your tremendous contribution. I like how you define what you mean by the terms you use: neoclassicism refers here to a smaller and more transparent orchestra size, for this symphony is more chamberlike than the others. Yet it is still late romanticism and early modernism and NOT neoclassicism in the sense of Stravinsky, Hindemith and the like. Yet, in comparison to other Sibelius symphonies, it indeed is "classical" in it's methods.


----------



## HenryPenfold

Josquin13 said:


> The Sibelius 3rd is a symphony that a good number of conductors conduct well, but very few get right, IMO, even a number of conductors that I normally like in Sibelius--such as Saraste & Segerstam. The problem is that there's something almost Baroque-like, or as others have pointed out, "neo-classical" about the Sibelius 3. If a conductor doesn't get that, it doesn't matter how well they conduct the symphony, it's not going to work, in my view, because the performance won't be nearly detailed enough.
> 
> Integral to this idea of the Sibelius 3 being a more 'classically' orientated work is the size of the ensemble used. Like the Sibelius 4th, it's not a symphony written for a large orchestra. Therefore, getting the orchestral balances right is crucial. They can't be too thick or muddy or mushy. Every note must be heard. Which is why the harder, more detailed approach taken by certain Finnish conductors works more effectively in the 3rd than a less sharply focused, thicker, more homogenous sound: Which will inevitably, IMO, sound less idiomatic in this music.
> 
> That is one of the reasons why Paavo Berglund's more transparent approach to Sibelius works so well in the 3rd--i.e., the close attention that he pays towards getting the orchestral balances just right, along with his insistence on a reduced vibrato in the strings, and beautifully translucent horns. Berglund stated that it was vitally important that a conductor "conducts the whole score" in Sibelius, so that every note can be heard. Which is presumably what inspired him to so attentively shape every phrase & nuance within the context of the larger themes & thrust of the symphony. For this reason, no conductor builds the climaxes in Sibelius more powerfully than Berglund, IMO, because he allows the listener to hear the whole score with an unusual degree of clarity, which can be very exciting, & especially in the climaxes.
> 
> Sibelius himself said the details in his scores must "swim in the sauce". In other words, he wanted all those myriad details to be heard and not to become submerged or lost or drowned out or diminished by the larger themes. Rather, they need to be heard clearly within the mix, according to Sibelius. Which, to my mind, is especially true for the 3rd Symphony (& 4th), and explains why the Sibelius 3 has an almost Mozartian feel about it at times (though of course it can't be played like it's Mozart, because Sibelius's phrasing is very different from Mozart's).
> 
> Sibelius told his son-in-law, Jussi Jalas, "The III Symphony is well suited for a very small orchestra,"... "I performed it in Moscow with an orchestra that had 12 violas, etc., and the woodwinds were almost wiped out. When I had it published, I was going to add a note that the orchestra should not exceed 50 players."* (It's a pity that Sibelius didn't do so, because if he had, I think a lot of conductors would have understood the style of this symphony better.)
> 
> In other words, most conductors conduct & record the Sibelius 3rd with an oversized orchestra. Which prevents them from achieving the kind of transparency or translucency and attention to detail that the score requires in order to work most effectively.
> 
> Many years ago, I recall being excited & pleased to find out that Berglund had used a smaller sized ensemble in his recording of the 3rd with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe (on Finlandia). For this performance, Berglund added only a single cello to the chamber orchestra. In other words, it isn't the same full-sized orchestra that Berglund used in his other COE recordings of the 1st, 2nd, & 5th Symphonies.
> 
> With that in mind, here are the 10 best recordings that I've heard of the Sibelius 3rd (& I've listed them in the order in which they came into my mind),
> 
> 1. Paavo Berglund, in his two recordings with the Bournemouth Orchestra & the Chamber Orchestra of Europe, but not so much with the Helsinki Philharmonic, which isn't comparable, in my view. Indeed Berglund later commented that the Bournemouth SO had previously played under Sibelius, and as a result had managed to maintain a tradition of playing his music. So they understood perfectly what he wanted from them, according to Berglund, and I believe that is reflected in the high quality of his Bournemouth cycle. While the Helsinki Philharmonic, on the other hand, was a young orchestra at the time and, according to Berglund, he had a more difficult time getting them to do what he wanted, as he had to teach them how to play Sibelius's music. With the result being that he felt there were some successes in the Helsinki cycle (notably, 2 & 5), but also some failures.**
> 
> (**Here are Berglund's actual recollections--as printed in an interview he gave to the Finnish Quarterly: "Sibelius himself conducted in Bournemouth, so the tradition was there. When I recorded the symphonies again in the 1980's with the Helsinki Philharmonic, the Sixth Symphony was pure gobbledygook to the orchestra and the work was hard. The orchestra was enthusiastic, nevertheless. The Second and Fifth Symphonies went well".)
> 
> --Berglund, Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra, EMI:
> 
> 
> 
> --Berglund, Chamber Orchestra of Europe, Finlandia:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Okko Kamu, his first DG recording with the Helsinki Radio Symphony Orchestra, along with his later BIS recording with the Lahti Symphony Orchestra. They are both excellent performances, & Kamu is every bit as good in the 4th. For me, the 3rd & 4th were the highlights of his Lahti cycle, and Kamu definitely has the measure of both symphonies, IMO (though I have preferred Berglund's live Barbican LPO performances of Symphonies 5, 6, & 7--which are remarkable--to Kamu's; indeed Berglund was often known to be at his best in Sibelius when performing live in concert).
> 
> --Kamu, Lahti Symphony Orchestra:
> 
> 
> 
> --Kamu, Helsinki Radio Symphony Orchestra, DG:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Sir Alexander Gibson, in his 1965 recording with the Scottish National Orchestra on the Saga label. Plus, there is another 1983 recording of the 3rd with the same orchestra on Chandos, which was part of Gibson's first Sibelius cycle (& probably one on his later Collins cycle, as well--with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, which isn't a favorite cycle of mine). The Chandos 3rd is a very good performance, too, but I don't like it quite as much the earlier Saga recording. Although I do think that had Gibson lived to record a Sibelius 3rd with the Uppsala Chamber Orchestra, as he did with the 1st & 2nd Symphonies towards the end of his life, his Uppsala 3rd would have been even better than the 1965 3rd: considering that his chamber performances of the 1st & 2nd in Uppsala have all the transparency and clarity of detail that the 3rd needs in order to work most effectively.
> 
> --Gibson, Scottish National Orchestra (1965, Saga):
> 
> 
> 
> --Gibson, Scottish National Orchestra (1983, Chandos):
> 
> 
> 
> --Gibson, Uppsala Chamber Orchestra, Symphonies 1 & 2--again, these are highly detailed, brilliant Sibelius performances!:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Sir John Barbirolli, with the Hallé Orchestra: Not the studio recording for EMI, but rather the live performance from The Proms. Compared to the other recordings mentioned above, Barbirolli offers a strikingly different interpretation--right from the very start, where he's surprisingly slow, deliberate, & measured at the opening (albeit, with slightly too large an orchestra), and I find it a very interesting alternative view of the Sibelius 3:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 5. Vladimir Ashkenazy, Philharmonia Orchestra, on Decca. This is another performance of the 3rd that I find somewhat different, yet extremely engaging:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. Sakari Oramo, City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, on Erato: this is another interesting, highly detailed, & at times very exciting performance of the 3rd, from one of the better young conductors today, IMO. While the performance is sort of in the Berglund vein, Oramo isn't copying Berglund, but rather has his own fascinating interpretation, which works quite well, in my view:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Owain Arwel Hughes, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra: Last, but definitely not least is this wonderful recent account of the 3rd by the Welsh conductor Owain Arwel Hughes, who some will know from his championing of the music of Danish composer, Vagn Holmboe on the BIS label (for which I am grateful!): Apparently, his lengthy cycle of Holmboe recordings proved to be so time consuming that it may have actually kept Hughes from becoming a better known & more celebrated conductor... But make no mistake, Hughes is a very fine conductor, & if his new Sibelius cycle continues on the same level that it has started out, with such excellent live performances of the Sibelius 1st & 3rd Symphonies, it's going to become one of the leading digital cycles in the catalogue for its combination of high quality performances with superb sound (& I'm assuming--I hope, correctly?--that Hughes is intending to record the whole cycle EDIT: in answer to my own question, yes, he is going to record all seven symphonies). In fact, this would be my #1 pick for the best Sibelius 3rd in the catalogue that offers both a high quality performance combined with 'state of the art' audiophile sound; as well as one of my top picks, overall:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09KPX7ZP7/ref=dm_rogue_digital
> 
> *The above quotes, along with some of the accompanying information in my post are taken from an article in the Finnish Music Quarterly that I've found particularly helpful--here's a link: https://fmq.fi/articles/sibelius-the-view-from-the-podium
> 
> P.S. The connection between "Tuku tuku lampaitani' and the 3rd is very interesting, thanks! I didn't know about this Finnish folk song. Did you know that one of the melodies in the 3rd was used or rather lifted for a recurring musical theme in the film score to the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Here it is, briefly heard twice in "The Return of the King" theme:
> 
> 
> 
> .


Josquin13

Thank you for such an illuminating and interesting commentary on this wonderful symphony.

Much appreciated.

Henry


----------



## jim prideaux

Can I echo Henry P's response to your post Josquin......as it is a 'wonderful symphony' and worthy of real discussion your contribution will prove invaluable as a reference point for further listening.

On a perhaps more personal note I have been clattering on about Oramo's CBSO cycle for ages and it is really gratifying to read your positive comments.


----------



## Malx

jim prideaux said:


> Can I echo Henry P's response to your post Josquin......as it is a 'wonderful symphony' and worthy of real discussion your contribution will prove invaluable as a reference point for further listening.
> 
> On a perhaps more personal note I have been clattering on about Oramo's CBSO cycle for ages and it is really gratifying to read your positive comments.


You are not a lone voice regarding Oramo's CBSO cycle Jim, it is a consistently high quality set - for the purposes of this thread it contains a very fine recording of the 3rd.

I will also add my respect, as I have often done in the past, to the praise for Josquin's remarkable posts. Josquin should consider collecting them together for a blog.


----------



## jim prideaux

At work doing some preparation so on YT....

Now listening to a 2006 performance of the 3rd by Oramo and the Finnish RSO.

This should 'work'!


----------



## jim prideaux

jim prideaux said:


> At work doing some preparation so on YT....
> 
> Now listening to a 2006 performance of the 3rd by Oramo and the Finnish RSO.
> 
> This should 'work'!


And it did!....very impressive, pace 'bang on' throughout and there is a certain clarity/transparency that is admirable.


----------



## Merl

I totally agree with Jos (and others here) who rate the Oramo 3rd highly. Its a quality account. Otherwise Jos' recommendations for Berglund / Bournemouth and (surprisingly) Ashkenazy / Philharmonia are excellent ones.

I have been dismissive of quite a few Ashkenazy recordings in the past but I really like his Sibelius cycle.. Great, big brass sound.


----------



## golfer72

The 3rd may be my favorite of all the Sibelius Symphonies. I have the Jarvi cycle on BIS. Great sound


----------



## Knorf

golfer72 said:


> I have the Jarvi cycle on BIS. Great sound


A really underrated Sibelius cycle, in my opinion.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Yup, the 3rd was always my favourite Sibelius symphony by a good margin. I only have and heard the Davis /BSO recording. I have to revisit some of the others again (not the 2nd, that I've heard enough of).


----------



## Waehnen

Herbert Blomstedt with San Francisco hasn’t gotten many mentions. I wonder why?

The execution is very classical and crystal clear. The playing sounds beautiful. Everything is balanced.

There is not as much emotion as in Berglund/Bournemouth or Ashkenazy/Philharmonia or Barbirolli/Halle, but if I had to choose a strict version with pure musical forms and pure musical joy without dwelling in emotions, this would be very high on the list.

BTW, I cannot find Okko Kamu or Sakari Oramo versions as a digital purchase. (I have so many classical CD’s that I just cannot but a CD for everything!)


----------



## jim prideaux

Listening again to Berglund and the COE ( Finlandia)....the whole performance seems to be just 'right'.


----------



## vincula

jim prideaux said:


> Listening again to Berglund and the COE ( Finlandia)....the whole performance seems to be just 'right'.


Very good indeed. I'm very fond of the entire Berglund/COE cycle. The quality of the recording itself does help too.

Regards,

Vincula


----------



## Waehnen

jim prideaux said:


> Listening again to Berglund and the COE ( Finlandia)....the whole performance seems to be just 'right'.


Indeed! Listening to it right now after a long time. It is a chamber like approach which works in favour of this symphony in particular. Much more intimate than the Blomstedt of this morning.


----------



## Knorf

I think Berglund's CoE Sibelius cycle was reflexively panned by some for much the same reason Karajan's last Beethoven cycle was: at least two previous cycles were already made, and were widely praised and sought by collectors. So another cycle seemed superfluous, as if the conductor were trying too hard and running out of steam, interest, and relevance.

And of course there were some who at the outset disliked the smaller orchestra Berglund employed—ignoring that with extra players for some of them, Berglund was actually right at the string numbers many, many orchestras used for classic Sibelius recordings, or at least not far off.

But just as it is a mistake in my opinion to simply reject the Karajan digital Beethoven out of hand (and this was a mistake I regrettably made myself, for decades), it's an even greater mistake to dismiss Berglund's last Sibelius cycle, becuase he rethought many of his interpretive choices for these symphonies beyond even what Karajan did for Beethoven. 

I return to Berglund's CoE Sibelius often, as great as the Bournemouth and Helsinki cycles undeniably are, especially for No. 3 as we've been discussing, but also for No. 4. Berglund's CoE Fourth for me is also one of the great ones, up there with Karajan in my estimation. 

As always, YMMV

ETA: to be fair, the CoE Berglund Sibelius cycle was in fact praised by many at release, but you could say the response was mixed.


----------



## jim prideaux

Currently rectifying a 'gap' in my listening with the Collins/LSO performance of the 3rd. Beginning to realise why so many positive reviews.......will have to listen to the entire cycle!


----------



## joen_cph

I heard Alexander Gibson's Chandos recording the other day & liked it - fast, but with a good sense of the music's structures and architecture, yet still pointing to the work's inherent variety. Some slight coordination problems in the Finale, but not important.


----------



## Malx

joen_cph said:


> I heard Alexander Gibson's Chandos recording the other day & liked it - fast, but with a good sense of the music's structures and architecture, yet still pointing to the work's inherent variety. Some slight coordination problems in the Finale, but not important.


Not suprised by the slight issues - Scottish Orchestra, final movement, bar will open shortly........

Only joking of course and only a Scot can make that comment  Seriously, I am very fond of Gibson's Sibelius recordings and not just from a parochial point of view.


----------



## joen_cph

Malx said:


> Not suprised by the slight issues - Scottish Orchestra, final movement, bar will open shortly........
> 
> Only joking of course and only a Scot can make that comment  Seriously, I am very fond of Gibson's Sibelius recordings and not just from a parochial point of view.


Agree about the qualities found in Gibson's set; for example, I decided to keep Gibson, when compared to Sanderling (I also have some further sets).


----------



## Heck148

Malx said:


> ...I am very fond of Gibson's Sibelius recordings and not just from a parochial point of view.


Gibson has some fine Sibelius recordings....his #5 with LSO from early 60s is indeed very fine, the only one, imo, that gives Bernstein/NYPO a challenge....LSO was a great orchestra at that time, and Gibson does a fine job...slight edge to Bernstein, but Gibson is very convincing.
I have his Karelia Overture [SNO] which is very good also...far and away better than the wimpy, flaccid Vanska/Lahti version...


----------



## Tero

Due to the space on CDs you often get 3, 6 and 7 lumped together on one disc. I like them all, the 6th slightly more than the 3rd.

I believe the 3rd might be slightly influenced by popular music, so it comes off as entertaining.


----------



## Waehnen

Here is a magnificent live performance by Esa-Pekka Salonen and the Swedish Radio Symphony Orchestra






Both momentum and clarity in the 1st Movement are on an excellent level. It is obvious that Esa-Pekka and the orchestra are enjoying it! The second movement is both delicate and dance-like. Yet not "rushed" at all. The Finale is so exciting!

For some reason watching and listening to this symphony live works wonders, to the advantage of the work. Like someone commented on Youtube, in this performance the rhythm is just right, and without a perfect handling of the rhythm on every theme, this symphony just will not work.

It is obvious that every main theme on this symphony is derived from a motive where there is the interval 3rd and a repetition on one of the three notes of the motive. And on these motific principles a constant and almost an endless flow of variations. Maestros Sibelius and Salonen!

No complaints!


----------



## Waehnen

After all the Mahler, I listened again to the 3rd by Barbirolli. Musically, in my ears this is the best Sibelius 3rd ever. I am almost in tears after the finale. Every movement is perfectly done. Well done, Glorious John, extremely well done!


----------



## jim prideaux

Waehnen said:


> After all the Mahler, I listened again to the 3rd by Barbirolli. Musically, in my ears this is the best Sibelius 3rd ever. I am almost in tears after the finale. Every movement is perfectly done. Well done, Glorious John, extremely well done!


is this the recording from the Halle complete cycle? ( or is there one I am missing?)


----------



## Waehnen

jim prideaux said:


> is this the recording from the Halle complete cycle? ( or is there one I am missing?)


I have been able to find just one Barbirolli Sibelius 3rd, with Halle, label is Warner, together with the 6th Symphony.

I am aware that some people do not like this record, or it is even concencus that the record is somehow bad. In my ears it is perfect when it comes to interpretation and handling the orchestral textures.

The sound quality is not as good as in some other records but the pure energy and insight of the conductor more than make up for it.


----------



## Becca

There is a live Barbirolli/Halle 3rd from the 1969 Proms which I much prefer to the studio recording. I believe that it is available on BBC Legends but can also be found on YouTube...


----------



## HenryPenfold

Waehnen said:


> I have been able to find just one Barbirolli Sibelius 3rd, with Halle, label is Warner, together with the 6th Symphony.
> 
> I am aware that some people do not like this record, or it is even concencus that the record is somehow bad. In my ears it is perfect when it comes to interpretation and handling the orchestral textures.
> 
> The sound quality is not as good as in some other records but the pure energy and insight of the conductor more than make up for it.


If the opening of the first movement of the third was meant to take that long Sibelius would have written more notes .......


----------



## Waehnen

HenryPenfold said:


> If the opening of the first movement of the third was meant to take that long Sibelius would have written more notes .......


Luckily there is enough space in the world for many opinions on the matter.  There are MANY MANY MANY notes in the 1st Movement.


----------



## Becca

HenryPenfold said:


> If the opening of the first movement of the third was meant to take that long Sibelius* would have written more note*s .......


I refer the honourable gentleman to the last few bars of the 5th symphony ... Sibelius never wrote more notes than he felt to be necessary.


----------



## HenryPenfold

Becca said:


> I refer the honourable gentleman to the last few bars of the 5th symphony ... Sibelius never wrote more notes than he felt to be necessary.


Then the problem must lay with Rubberbrolly


----------



## Becca

How droll


----------



## Waehnen

Last night I got me some Sibelius Symphony Scores! I explored the 3rd Symphony before going to sleep. What struck me while reading the score: This is Glorious C Major, shining bright! Hence all the chorales in all the movements, peaking in the Finale. It is hard to express but the C Major just shines through from the score like the sun, pushing aside the chromatic shadows.

It is this play of light and shadow that the conductor just needs to get right in addition to the strong rhythmic expression. Barbirolli comes close! Berglund is there!


----------



## Triplets

KevinJS said:


> Not exactly a go to spin, is it? Just had a look and noticed that I have at least two copies on CD, Spinning one of them now.
> 
> View attachment 161494
> 
> 
> It doesn't appear in the DG 100 Great Symphonies box set, although 2 & 5 do. 2 can also be found in the TimeLife 100 Greatest Recordings Of All Time set.


I played that Saraste recording a lot. I love Sibelius 3.


----------



## Waehnen

Just letting you guys know that there is one recording of this symphony that just seems perfect in EVERY way.

*Sibelius: 3rd Symphony
Neeme Järvi/Gothenburg
Deutsche Grammophon*

Every other version have at least a few aspects or details which do not totally convince me.

But I cannot really think of a better version than this. Perfect tempos, perfect balance, perfect sense of drama, perfect phrasing, great sound, profound understanding of Sibelian musical gestures.


----------



## Malx

Taking a lead from Josquins post a couple of pages back, I have invested in the RPO recording conducted by Owain Arwel Hughes and can only agree that here is an extremely fine recording both in terms of interpretation and sound quality.
Well worth a listen - not everything that is good must be old.


----------



## Waehnen

I am rather obsessed with Barbirolli/Halle version of the 3rd. Another excellent one is surprisingly the Berliner’s first ever take on the symphony with Rattle although the interpretations are total opposites.

This symphony just clicks with me like no other. The rhythmic genius of it, oh my.


----------



## neoshredder

It’s a masterpiece. Just like his 2nd Symphony. For those looking to get into Classical Music, I suggest those 2 Symphonies.


----------



## Waehnen

neoshredder said:


> It’s a masterpiece. Just like his 2nd Symphony. For those looking to get into Classical Music, I suggest those 2 Symphonies.


Excellent suggestions indeed! Those two along with the 7th and some Beethoven really got me into symphonic music back in 1996.


----------



## golfer72

Waehnen said:


> Just letting you guys know that there is one recording of this symphony that just seems perfect in EVERY way.
> 
> *Sibelius: 3rd Symphony
> Neeme Järvi/Gothenburg
> Deutsche Grammophon*
> 
> Every other version have at least a few aspects or details which do not totally convince me.
> 
> But I cannot really think of a better version than this. Perfect tempos, perfect balance, perfect sense of drama, perfect phrasing, great sound, profound understanding of Sibelian musical gestures.


I have the Jarvi with the same orchestra on BIS. I have the entire cycle. The 3rd is probably my favorite. BIS has great sound quality. Havent heard the DG. Early DG CD's had a kind of "clinical" sound. Have you heard the BIS cycle?


----------



## Waehnen

golfer72 said:


> I have the Jarvi with the same orchestra on BIS. I have the entire cycle. The 3rd is probably my favorite. BIS has great sound quality. Havent heard the DG. Early DG CD's had a kind of "clinical" sound. Have you heard the BIS cycle?


I heard that set around 20 years ago, I remember borrowing the CD´s from a public library. Cannot remember much from it because at the time I preferred my Vänskä/Lahti set, which I bought on CD. I actually also listened the whole symphony cycle by Vänskä/Lahti live at a cathedral in Helsinki. That was quite something.

The Vänskä set was my 2nd Sibelius cycle. Whereas I have had some other great Sibelius CD´s by Järvi/Gothenburg on DG. For example The Oceanides/Aallottaret by Järvi/Gothenburg/DG is still the best I have ever heard. It has influenced my own orchestral writing a lot -- that kind of orchestral writing, balance and sound I like the best. And I bought that CD in the 90´s!


----------



## Joachim Raff

Lots of good ones, but what makes a really great one? You need a conductor to keep things moving as it can have dead spots. Also you need contrast, balance and texture. A great soundstage in the recording is needed to hear all the orchestral detail. I have listen to many over the years including the new one from Rouvali. I always come back to Kamu(DG) who just about hits all the spots.


----------



## Waehnen

Joachim Raff said:


> Lots of good ones, but what makes a really great one? You need a conductor to keep things moving as it can have dead spots. Only also need contrast, balance and texture. A great soundstage in the recording is needed to hear all the orchestral detail. I have listen to many over the years including the new one from Rouvali. I always come back to Kamu(DG) who just about hits all the spots.
> View attachment 180027


I have not been able to find the Kamu version from iTunes! I will have to search again.

Edit: Now I found it! I have heard so much praise for the version I had to get it. Thanks!


----------



## Waehnen

Joachim Raff said:


> Lots of good ones, but what makes a really great one? You need a conductor to keep things moving as it can have dead spots. Also you need contrast, balance and texture. A great soundstage in the recording is needed to hear all the orchestral detail. I have listen to many over the years including the new one from Rouvali. I always come back to Kamu(DG) who just about hits all the spots.
> View attachment 180027


You and many others have been right — what a glorious version this is! This is the opposite of Barbirolli in all the classicism but this interpretation works just as well.

In every movement there were new aspects for me even though I have been listening to this symphony for 26 years. The unique articulation of the finale’s grand theme is one such high point! I have never thought of the rhythm that way — and neither has any other conductor I have heard. Wonderful!

A great symphony can be interpreted in many ways, and still it works.


----------



## RobertJTh

Kamu/DG was the recording that introduced me to the symphony - and I immediately loved it. More than the 1st it was coupled with.
Later I learned that his bright-eyed, crystal-clear "neo-baroque" approach was on one side of the interpretation spectrum, while a version I came to appreciate later (Sanderling/BerlinSO) was on the other end. Kamu revels in the brighter colors, Sanderling emphasizes the dark undercurrent. And it works, both ways. A miraculously multi-interpretable piece it is, indeed.


----------



## Neo Romanza

Of all of the Sibelius symphonies, the 3rd is my least favorite. I think one of the reasons is I feel it doesn't quite have enough meat on the bones for me. There are some fine moments and if I were to pick out a favorite performance it would probably be Segerstam/Helsinki PO on Ondine, which is played just about right or "right" to my ears anyway. Of course, the 3rd foreshadows the turbulent and brooding 4th, but it is the 4th where the mature symphonic Sibelius finally his symphonic head.

Some members mentioned Barbirolli's 3rd and it's actually quite good, but sounds even better with the recent remastering from Warner:










I would say Barbirolli is one of my favorite Sibelius symphony cycles. What he lacks a truly fantastic orchestra with The Hallé, he makes up for in a passionate interpretation of the composer that is right up there with Bernstein's cycle with the New York Philharmonic (another favorite cycle of mine).


----------



## Becca

It is often true that if you can find a live Barbirolli performance, the gain over a studio recording generally outweighs the slight loss in sound quality...


----------



## Kreisler jr

Kamu is also interesting historically, IIRC he was a bit of a Karajan protegé and had won a competition in Germany, so he got to complete the first ever DG Sibelius cycle (4-7 of course with Karajan) while in his early/mid 20s, although the Berlin Phil was only used for the 2nd symphony. 
I am no Sibelius expert but the best of these DG recordings might be the somewhat hard to find tone poems (En Saga and Lemminkainen, they are among others on a cheap french twofer of "Nordic music" with Tapiola and some Grieg cond. by Karajan.)
(FWIW, very few conductors had a student/menté-like relation with Karajan, besides Kamu maybe Ozawa and the very young Thielemann (in the 1980s), his best known protegé was of course, AS Mutter.)


----------

