# Haydn: Dorati or Fischer?



## The Third Ear

Hello,

After a long time I am back to Haydn. I own several recordings of his symphonies by Trevor Pinnock (Sturm und Drang Symphonies) and by Kuijken, both on period instruments. I am deeply in love with these recordings but I would also like to listen to the more conventional recordings and pick one of these 33 CDs complete Box Sets: Dorati (Decca) or Fischer (Brilliant Classics).

The Dorati is far more expensive than the Fischer's set (on Amazon.co.uk Dorati is sold GBP 180 and the Fischer GBP 63) but if the price is not an issue then what are the pros and cons of each set, in what do they differ?

Thank you very much


----------



## jhar26

The Dorati set is remarkable for being the first complete one, but although it probably was great for it's time, now it sounds a bit heavy handed to me. I haven't heard any of the Fischer recordings. Worth considering: Harnoncourt's magnificent set of the Paris symphonies.


----------



## Elgarian

I've been enjoying the Goodman (incomplete) series on Hyperion recently, though they too are period, and not what you're after. I can't get into the modern instrument versions. I have the Colin Davis London symphonies but (as Gaston finds the Dorati, which I haven't heard) they sound just too 'big' and weighty, and too smooth.

So my post is of no use to you at all, but perhaps you'll indulge me for the pleasure of joining in the chat.


----------



## Monte Verdi

Hello,

:tiphat:My vote is for Dorati after comparing a number of conductors and orchestras including the ones named above. I like the Dorati's because his pacing is solid, tight and consistent. I have collected the vinyl box set's so I cannot say how the transfers to CD sound but the vinyl is superb with full rich textures and a truly natural ambiance not found often enough in recordings of the Haydn symphony's, IMHO. Kuijken with the Age of Enlightenment orchestra are quite good as well as Bruno Weil on Sony Classics but when the votes are in, Dorati. BTW, I collect mostly original instrument recordings so a vote for modern instrument performance I do not take lightly.

Ramon


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

I'm looking into Minkowski's London Symphonies myself... already having two other recordings. I would suggest that you also look at the possibility of the Naxos set.


----------



## The Third Ear

jhar26 said:


> Worth considering: Harnoncourt's magnificent set of the Paris symphonies.


In 1988 I purchased my first set of period instruments' records : a 4LPs set of Bach's St. Matthew Passion by Harnoncourt and the Concentus Musicus Wien and since then I am a big amateur of period instruments recordings. Since I like to have different recordings of the same work this Harnoncourt's recording maybe a future purchase but I already have the Kuijken set of Paris symphonies and right now I would like a modern instruments recording.



Elgarian said:


> I can't get into the modern instrument versions


The Bach's St. Matthew Passion by Harnoncourt was a revelation for me and since then most of the recordings I buy are period instruments recordings. I love the intimacy that most of these recordings convey and I also find that most modern instruments versions of Renaissance, Baroque and Classic music sound _too 'big' and weighty_ for my taste. I also love this sense of intimacy in Romantic period music recordings; John Eliot Gardiner's recording of Brahms 'Ein Deutsches Requiem' replaced my Guilini's beloved recording (which I still love). But sometime in spite my bias toward period instruments recordings I also enjoy the smoothness of 'modern' recordings of pre-Romantic music when I find them not to much bombastic.


----------



## TxllxT

I've got the Brilliant Fischer Haydn Box and from Dorati I've got a selection. Definitely go for Fischer! Interpretation, recording, price, what you want more? I also have Pinnock in Sturm und Drang on period instruments. Fischer is not unaware of this.


----------



## Ralfy

I bought the Dorati because it was offered at around 40 pct off in HK almost a year ago, together with several Decca box sets.


----------



## Bill H.

I have the the complete 33 disk Dorati set when it came out a couple of years ago, and I have some of the Fischers on individual CDs.

I do enjoy the Dorati set very much, but overall, I believe the Fischer has some advantages in updated interpretation and performance. My biggest complaint about Dorati is that many of his minuet movements sound ponderous and dated because of the rather slow tempi. Worse, I get the feeling that the initial phrases of the minuets' first subject are sight-readings--they seem tentative and subdued, only to pick up some in volume and confidence on the repeat. There are others where Dorati misses the point entirely, such as the finale of the Surprise Symphony (the sudden ff drum roll near the end is completely missing-this is the feature that gives the work its alternate German name--Mit dem Paukenschlag). OTOH, there are any number of the Doratis that I couldn't do without, and so I'll keep the set with me always.

BTW, Musicweb sells the entire Fischer set as 8 MP3 disks, for 23GBP postpaid:

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2009/Mar09/Haydn_mp3_NI1722.htm

The sound should not suffer in this format (especially if at 320 kbps bitrates), and you can choose which ones to burn to CD-Rs if you want to play them in a conventional audio CD player, or put them all on your computer or portable player.


----------



## Delicious Manager

The main problem with the Fischer set is sound quality. Not only are they very uneven in recorded quality, some of them sound like they were recorded in a Turkish bath, so boomy and resonant are they. This is a great let-down (and a common Nimbus problem) and not helped by the fact that the recordings range over 14 years. 

I managed to get the complete Doráti Haydn set a few years ago on eBay. Here you have much better recording (vintage Decca analogue - the finest of its time). I don't find the minuets heavy - after all they ARE 'minuets' and not 'scherzos'. I think the Doráti set remains a remarkable musical document. Also, you get a lot of alternative versions (eg different versions of No 22, various alternative movements to some of the symphonies, etc).

The set conducted by Dennis Russel Davies and the Stuttgart Chamber Orchestra has to be ruled-out straightaway. He shows little respect for the music by having all the edge-of-the-seat, nail-bitingly exciting alto horn parts in C and B flat played at 'basso' register an octave down, thereby ruining Haydn's intended effect.


----------



## Vaneyes

Neither, IMHO, there hasn't been a full set of Haydn Syms. worth buying.


----------



## clavichorder

Dorati is good for the later symphonies but I'll wager he's mush for the earlier. I did not buy the Fischer set but copied it to my library from a friend. Sometimes I feel there is something wanting throughout, but there is no denying they are solid. I hope they do a HIP set.


----------



## Vesteralen

My vote is for Fischer. I had most of the Dorati's on LP and Fischer complete on CD when I moved. Because I was essentially halving my collection, I dumped the Doratis. I also objected to the elephantine tempi in some of the Dorati minuets. The sound on the Fischer discs are fine on the systems I listen with. I even think his London symphonies, older though they are, are excellent. If you have state-of-the-art equipment, or if you are a real stereophile, your results may vary.


----------



## itywltmt

Vaneyes said:


> Neither, IMHO, there hasn't been a full set of Haydn Syms. worth buying.


That's a tad harsh...

Haven't *Roy Goodman and the Hanover Band *done a "complete" Haydn cycle? I know they covered most of the symphonies for Hyperion, and I quite enjoy the few CDs of that collection I own. Goodman (like Fischer) is approaching the works from a period angle, quite appropriate for Haydn.

I match Dorati's output to that of *Herrmann Scherchen *in the 1950's (there again, a sound and approach consistent with the moods and approaches of the day). Again, on the Scherchen set, I know he did quite a few of the later Haydn symphonies (with the Vienna Symphony, I believe, re0issued as vintage recordings on DG), but am unsure if he did a complete set.


----------



## joen_cph

*Scherchen *did not make a complete set, a rough estimate would say almost 20 symphonies. Definitely one of the valuable additions to a Haydn collection.
The sound problems of *Fischer* are really not that bad IMO and mainly belong to some of the later symphonies, where one is likely to supplement with alternative versions as well.


----------



## Ukko

joen_cph said:


> *Scherchen *did not make a complete set, a rough estimate would say almost 20 symphonies. Definitely one of the valuable additions to a Haydn collection.
> The sound problems of *Fischer* are really not that bad IMO and mainly belong to some of the later symphonies, where one is likely to supplement with alternative versions as well.


Fischer recorded the later symphonies first. He didn't quite have his act together, and neither did Nimbus' engineers. He and they got better later.


----------



## weirving

Delicious Manager said:


> The main problem with the Fischer set is sound quality. Not only are they very uneven in recorded quality, some of them sound like they were recorded in a Turkish bath, so boomy and resonant are they. This is a great let-down (and a common Nimbus problem) and not helped by the fact that the recordings range over 14 years.


I disagree strongly. They sound like a good performance in a church, perhaps half-way back in the pews, in other words, a lot like one is likely to hear in a live venue. Most recordings sound too "front-row-center" for me, anyway. Many sound so detailed as to be "conductor's-ear-view"! Detailed, for sure, but unrealistic - not at all like one would hear in a live venue from the audience area. I love these Nimbus recordings, and I find many of them to sound especially FANTASTIC over high-end headphones! That said, if your sound systems listening area is live, with high ceilings and lots of hard surfaces - wood or tile floors, bare walls - I can see how these recordings, with one's listening room acoustics superimposed upon their recording venue's acoustics, can be a bit much, though.



> I managed to get the complete Doráti Haydn set a few years ago on eBay. Here you have much better recording (vintage Decca analogue - the finest of its time). I don't find the minuets heavy - after all they ARE 'minuets' and not 'scherzos'. I think the Doráti set remains a remarkable musical document. Also, you get a lot of alternative versions (eg different versions of No 22, various alternative movements to some of the symphonies, etc).


I agree with critics who find some of it too heavy, distorted through the lens of mid-century middle-European sensibility. But as documents of a great conductor's point of view of a complete cycle of Haydn, these remain valuable. As for the sound, I love the vinyl, but I found the CD transfers to be disappointing.



> The set conducted by Dennis Russel Davies and the Stuttgart Chamber Orchestra has to be ruled-out straightaway. He shows little respect for the music by having all the edge-of-the-seat, nail-bitingly exciting alto horn parts in C and B flat played at 'basso' register an octave down, thereby ruining Haydn's intended effect.


I agree. That is an unforgivable sin. It effectively is altering the orchestration. Stokowski was famous - or infamous - for doing this. He altered the scoring of almost everything he ever recorded, thinking he knew better, I suppose. Sometimes, the changes he made were small, like changing a 4-note bassoon solo in the first movement of the *Beethoven 5th* to a horn solo. Sometimes it was wholesale and massive, like throwing out whole sections of Ravel's orchestration of *Pictures at an Exhibition* and re-scoring all the brass parts in *Tchaikovsky 5th*.

No less than Mahler once thought it his mission to re-orchestrate the "problematic" scoring of Robert Schumann's symphonies, too. The result ended up sounding more like textbook Austro/German Post-Romantic ideas "proper" scoring, but it surely didn't sound like Schumann any more!

My "fantasy" complete sets would be Roy Goodman/Hanover Band, George Szell/Cleveland Orchestra and Mogens Wöldike/Vienna State Opera Orchestra. I LOVE the Haydn I have heard from all these, but alas, Szell and Wöldike are deceased, therefore unlikely to ever complete their cycles, and Goodman, while still alive, appears to have lost interest in completing his cycle, so far split between Nimbus and Hyperion, and has moved on to other projects.


----------



## bigshot

It's far from complete, but I'm listening to Bernstein's Haydn symphonies right now and they're fantastic.


----------



## NightHawk

I have the Dorati and really like the set 'as a boxed set'. But, I would highly suggest forgetting about the box and getting every Haydn Symphony conducted by Frans Bruggen with the Orchestra of the 18th Century you can lay hands on. Really, really beautiful.


----------



## Ramako

I have the Adam Fischer box set. Occasionally I think about getting the Antal Dorati one as well, as I think I prefer his performances for some, and would certainly be interested for many... Adam Fischer's can be a bit too edgy at times, but actually might be the better set I don't know not having the other one. The Antal Dorati is only £40 from iTunes anyway.

Certainly I remain thoroughly unimpressed by some of the other options. I believe Roy Goodman did or tried to do them all but I would not get that box set that's for sure. However Trevor Pinnock has done a very good job for some of the earlier ones. I might get the whole of his _Sturm und Drang_ set at some point.


----------



## moody

WEIRVING.

You got at least two of your facts right Szell and Woldike are indeed deceased.
But your comment on Mussorgsky's "Pictures" is incorrect. Stokowski wrote his own symphonic transcription in 1939, he did drop two sections but it's all his work and it has been done by others.
As for the brass in Tchiakovsky's 5th I found these remarks by one critic: ' There are eccentric moments in the mannered brass adumbration at 9.45 in the finale and 12.40 where Stokowski adds a "yip" to the brass that I have never previously heard. In fact the presence and accentuation of the brass sometimes suggests an approach like a high cholestrol "Capriccio Italien' on steroids'.
Great, real Stokowski the way I saw him many,many times. The original recording was made by British Decca on their ultra hi-fi Phase 4 stereo label and is mind blowingly exciting.
Perhaps you would enlighten us with more evidence?


----------



## bigshot

Stokowski supposedly based his Mussorgsky on Mussorgsky's own arrangements. The intent was to peel away the layer of Rimsky. His Bach transcriptions were to emulate the sound of an organ. Stokowski may or may have not achieved what he was after, but his alterations of the score weren't always totally willful.


----------



## hpowders

Vaneyes said:


> Neither, IMHO, there hasn't been a full set of Haydn Syms. worth buying.


How can anyone logically be satisfied with so many symphonies performed by one conductor? No conductor hits the mark every time, especially given so many Haydn symphonies.

You want a definitive collection of Haydn symphonies, one will have to collect individual performances by many conductors.

There is no single set of Haydn symphonies that can be considered definitive.

You want to be satisfied musically, you will have to spend the money. Nothing completely satisfying in cheap collections by one conductor of Haydn symphonies. Sorry.

If you primarily care about your finances and the music is secondary, then get Dorati or Fischer.
Don't blame me if you quickly get bored.


----------



## apricissimus

I'm often satisfied with performances or recordings that are less than perfect.

I don't get the desire for "definitive" recordings. I'm sure if you try hard enough you can find fault with nearly any recording. If I hold out for something perfect, I'm going to keep myself from enjoying what's actually out there.


----------



## Itullian

Dorati is still the Gold standard for me. The rustic sound is perfect for Haydn and the recorded sound is much more transparent then the muddy Fischer set which I donated to my library.


----------



## KenOC

hpowders said:


> There is no single set of Haydn symphonies that can be considered definitive.


There is no set of individually selected performances of the symphonies that will be considered definitive by more than one person.


----------



## hpowders

KenOC said:


> There is no set of individually selected performances of the symphonies that will be considered definitive by more than *one person.*


By the way, I am proud to say I was recently promoted up to "person". The reason why TC came to a halt last night, for the ceremony.


----------



## Haydn man

Itullian said:


> Dorati is still the Gold standard for me. The rustic sound is perfect for Haydn and the recorded sound is much more transparent then the muddy Fischer set which I donated to my library.


Dorati is the set for me as well


----------



## hpowders

There are many Dorati/Haydn performances that have been bettered by others including Bernstein and Szell in the Paris and London symphonies.

Dorati's band cannot compete with the NY Philharmonic and Cleveland Orchestra.


----------



## Cheyenne

Fischer's late ones are terrible, partly due to the sound; Dorati was great with them. The earlier ones Fischer handled perfectly well; and they gain more from the slightly more period approach. Minuets are invariably slow with modern instrument recordings (only Jochum and Harnoncourt being the exception), but it would be shame to overlook them. I greatly prefer Dorati, but if you have the money, it may be worth getting a better Paris and London set and then buying Fischer for the earlier symphonies.

Szell recorded most of the London symphonies and they are great; Scherchen did many of the London ones and a great deal of other popular ones too - they are both of inestimable value as Haydn conductors. Fricsay has an especially good 44, Furtwängler an intriguing 88, Schuricht a solid 86. Bernstein is great for the Paris symphonies, and his London set is wonderful too. They are what you'd expect of Bernstein, though not as indulgent as some of his later performances: it fits Haydn well. Harnoncourt rendition of the London ones with the Concertgebouw have great clarity; Davis' famous ones with the same orchestra are good but not particularly distinguished. Jochum and Beecham do their own thing, and do it well. I second Wierving in liking Wöldike too. Tate has a London set with a chamber-like clarity, but I am not fond of the phrasing. Walter was a great Haydn conductor who has a few noteworthy recordings, and if you enjoy Klemperer his traversal of a few of Haydn's symphonies is also worth a listen. Minkowski I haven't listened to enough; I am uncertain about them. Hogwood I would avoid.

For now, if you really want a complete traversal, I'd say get Fischer, particularly for the earlier symphonies, supplement with Pinnock's Sturm und Drang set, Scherchen's bunch, Bernstein and Kiujken's Paris sets, the ones Szell did, and Bernstein/Beecham/Jochum/Davis/Kiujken/Harnoncourt for the London symphonies.


----------



## hpowders

When you are talking about the great Haydn symphonies, the Paris set, 88, the London set; Dorati just won't do after a while.
One must seek out the truly great performances: Szell, Bernstein, Jochum and Davis on modern instruments and Kuijken with period instruments.


----------



## Alydon

Dorati's Haydn was at one time about the only one ever played and I grew up with him, later buying chunks of Fischer's set which to my ears never compared to the ever reliable Dorati. Of course, there were many more around including the clunky Beecham set and the lean and immaculate Jochum in the 'London' symphonies, which to me seem to have stood the test of time. But now I think it's a case of mix and match with ever increasing period instrument recording's - Harnoncourt, Minkowski and Fey amongst the most successful, but Dorati will always have good memories and a big thank you, introducing me on a life-time of Haydn.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Maybe I should check out Dorati's 45, 48 and 49 - although I already do own recordings of 45 and 49 .


----------



## bigshot

All of the above.

Haydn is one of the most important composers, and one where the conductor is given considerable freedom. I love all three of the complete sets, and I have many sub collections too. I really see more reason to have a lot of versions of Haydn symphonies than I do Beethoven.


----------



## John Fowler

The Dorati Haydn box has one advantage over the Fischer box - it includes an appendix with two versions of Symphonies 22 and 63, four finales to 53, and two finales to 103 - unavailable elsewhere.
You have to buy the whole box to get the appendix CD. Boo.

My favorite complete Haydn set would have been the Goberman/Mackerras set that Columbia records (USA) announced back in the late '60s.
Max Goberman recorded 45 Symphonies with the Vienna State Opera Orchestra between 1960 and 1962, when he died of a heart attack.
Columbia acquired the rights and started a reissue program on the budget label Odyssey.
Their plan was to fill in the missing 61 Symphonies with new recordings by Charles Mackerras and the London Symphony.
8 LPs covering Symphonies 1-22 were issued (the Mackerras Symphony 18 was on Volume 7) before the plan foundered.
Oh, well.

Sony just issued the 45 Haydn Symphonies (mostly early) that Goberman recorded in a nice budget box.
Listed on Amazon UK, but not yet on American Amazon.

Look up "Goberman Haydn" on the Amazon UK search bar.


----------



## John Fowler

One question - Does the Fischer recording of Haydn Symphony 48 use trumpets?

Haydn scored it for two oboes, bassoon, two horns (first, third and last movement in C-alto), and strings.
No trumpets.
Live performances of Symphony 48 sometimes substitute trumpets for high horns in C.
This takes away a lot of the danger (no clams), but also much of the excitement - high horns have a uniquely thrilling sound (they whoop).
That's a big problem with the Dennis Russell Davies set, which was recorded live in concert.

I listened to the Fischer on you-tube, but I didn't hear the characteristic whooping sound of high horns.
Did I miss something?

Dorati and Goberman whoop quite nicely, thank you.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Does Brüggen whoop as well?  That's the version I own. To my ears, it does.


----------



## hpowders

OP: Neither. Focus on Bernstein and C. Davis.


----------



## Haydn man

Whenever I return to the Dorati set, I always enjoy the performance and agree with others that the recordings are remarkably consistent.
The Davis set of London Symphonies has always struck me as well played and recorded whenever I have heard any of them
Until a few months ago I would not have considered listening to many other versions, but have recently had the pleasure of HIP introduced to me.
The Minkowski London Symphonies are first class and I would also recommend the Bruggen set also.
You just can't have too much Haydn, and subscribing to Spotify helps


----------



## Albert7

Why not both. Dorati is very cool still.

Davis is fabulous to me.

But no matter, I love any Haydn recording. It's Haydn so it's going to be awesome to my precious ears LOL .


----------



## Itullian

Dorati by a mile.
The recordings are just much more transparent than Nimbus' muddy sound.
Donated my Fischer to the library.


----------



## Haydn man

Itullian said:


> Dorati by a mile.
> The recordings are just much more transparent than Nimbus' muddy sound.
> Donated my Fischer to the library.


I agree the consistency of the Dorati set is remarkable, I have not heard one I don't like.


----------



## geralmar

Strange that there has been no mention of Ernst Marzendorfer, whose recording of a complete symphony set (107 symphonies, 49 LPs) with the Vienna Chamber Orchestra actually preceded Dorati's.


----------



## bigshot

The Fischer set is better on the earlier numbers.


----------



## Albert7

bigshot said:


> The Fischer set is better on the earlier numbers.


In what way(s)?


----------



## Mal

Just bought Fischer's complete Brilliant set new for less than £30 at Amazon UK marketplace! And that's the 33CD set, not the 8 disk MP3 set.

Anyone compared Dorati and Fischer symphony by symphony? 

According to Gramophone, Fischer got much better as he went on, starting about even with Dorati, ending up better. Do you agree? How does his best (21 to 39) compare with Dorati? 

Fischer 1 to 20 were recorded early, so don't expect a great start, though it should then get better until the London symphonies (recorded first...)

A few years ago I went through various recordings on the Naxos music library trying to decide which performances to buy and jotted down Fischer's 13,17 and the whole 21-39 box as must buys... when the price came down... though the now amazingly low price of the full box set made me jump for that instead!

The main problem with Dorati, during my streaming test, was the measured, very slow, rustic tempos of the minuets. That's what convinced me to go with Fischer as the main listening standard - but this is streaming remember, maybe the rich Decca sound will be better from CD, and one might get used to those minuets...


----------



## Larkenfield

All the Dorati Haydns can be heard online as well as many of the Fischer performances for comparisons. I find more warmth, lushness and personality in the Doratis. The Fischers are a little dryer in sound and slightly less closely miked. But both are fine sets.


----------



## larold

I continue to enjoy the Dorati set more as I age, especially in comparison to later period performances that often make Haydn sound like Beethoven. I find him and his band brilliant in many of the lesser-known masterpieces such as Nos. 13, 41, 53, 70, 72 and 90.

I think the second-best performer of Haydn's symphonies was Dennis Blum who recorded 9 of them before most people were recording any of them. He only recorded Nos. 39, 52, 59, 60, 70, 73, 81, 90 and 91 but all by a wonderful group of musicians with a clarity and balance that were not typical of the time.

Of the more modern sets I would prefer Fischer whose work was featured on the documentary about Haydn that aired way back when on A&E. The BBC 5-part documentary used period bands that sounded sour to me.


----------



## KenOC

I have all three complete sets but still prefer Dorati. But I'll often turn to Kuijken for the later symphonies.

Thomas Fey recorded a fair portion of his planned complete cycle, which might well have displaced Dorati had he completed it. Tragically, he suffered a disabling injury in a home accident and has shown no sign of returning to the podium.

BTW, to mention again: If you're an Amazon Prime member, the entire Dorati cycle is available for free streaming. You just add it to your Amazon library in the cloud and you can play it from any device you use.


----------



## Haydn man

I would not want to be without Dorati, it is still my go to set 
Warm performances with great feeling for the music.
I do love HIP as well and the Pinnock with the Sturm und Drang Symphonies shines a different light compared to Dorati 
Not as keen on the Fey but have only heard a few of those
Minkowski doing the London Symphonies has the theatrics in the Surprise Symphony which I feel gets a bit tiresome after a few listens. The rest of the set is good but not great


----------



## Pugg

For me Dorati all the way, endless hours listening pleasures.


----------



## Enthusiast

I'm with most, I think: Fischer's set is a bargain and is mostly a joy. The Dorati is a little heavy for modern ears. Either way, you will need an extra set of London symphonies but you are really spoiled for choice there: Jochum (wonderful), Davis (excellent), Bernstein (also excellent), Harnoncourt, Minkowski (a great HIP set). 

Whatever you choose, though, the Pinnock Sturm und Drang set is an essential one.


----------



## Triplets

Mal said:


> Just bought Fischer's complete Brilliant set new for less than £30 at Amazon UK marketplace! And that's the 33CD set, not the 8 disk MP3 set.
> 
> Anyone compared Dorati and Fischer symphony by symphony?
> 
> According to Gramophone, Fischer got much better as he went on, starting about even with Dorati, ending up better. Do you agree? How does his best (21 to 39) compare with Dorati?
> 
> Fischer 1 to 20 were recorded early, so don't expect a great start, though it should then get better until the London symphonies (recorded first...)
> 
> A few years ago I went through various recordings on the Naxos music library trying to decide which performances to buy and jotted down Fischer's 13,17 and the whole 21-39 box as must buys... when the price came down... though the now amazingly low price of the full box set made me jump for that instead!
> 
> The main problem with Dorati, during my streaming test, was the measured, very slow, rustic tempos of the minuets. That's what convinced me to go with Fischer as the main listening standard - but this is streaming remember, maybe the rich Decca sound will be better from CD, and one might get used to those minuets...


I've got the Fisher set and no haven't compared it to Dorati, which I did listen to back in the days when it was the only complete game in town. If you want a a second cycle I suggest a HIPP set for contrast and would by the Decca set split between Hogwood, Bruggen, and Dattone.
Fisher has a lot of quality recordings mixed with a fair number of stinkers. I was particularly disappointed by the perfunctory 'London' #104. Can't beat the price, though...


----------



## Mal

I disagree about Pinnock's Sturm and Drang set. For me, the forces are too modest, the sound is dry and close, minuets and fast movements rushed, and it lacks charm. It has some panache certainly, but not enough to outweigh the negatives, for me. I sold my set.

Note, I'm not totally against period performances per.se., I think Kuijken and the Orchestra Of The Age Of Enlightenment do a great job on the Paris symphonies, as does Brüggen with the Orchestra Of The Age Of Enlightenment on Nos. 43, 50, 58 & 59.

Haydn: The Symphonies Decca 2016 does look interesting. It contains much OAE, so it might be a better bet for me on period instruments. But are they up to the standard of their Paris set with Kuijken?

https://www.deccaclassics.com/gb/cat/4789604


----------



## Mal

Triplets said:


> Fisher has a lot of quality recordings mixed with a fair number of stinkers. I was particularly disappointed by the perfunctory 'London' #104. Can't beat the price, though...


Those Austro-Hungarians, they have never forgiven Haydn for deserting the palace to chase the British pound  Davis has a good version...


----------



## Mal

Haydn man said:


> Not as keen on the Fey...


I like what I've heard of Fey, I preferred his performance of 49 to Fischer, in my streaming test, a few years ago. In fact I bought his 49, 52, 58 disk immediately after hearing his 49. Exciting!


----------



## Mal

Here's Fischer criticising Fischer, introduced by Stephen Moss:

"Adam Fischer ... tells me ... that while occasional movements can be routine, every symphony has some spark of genius. But he warns me not to set too much store by his recordings of the later (and best known) symphonies, which he recorded first and feels are the weakest of the set. "By the time I got halfway through I wanted to start again.""

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2009/jan/01/classicalmusicandopera


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

Hasn't HIP performances become conventional these days? My last symphonic love was Ottavio Dantone and Accademia Bizantina. Mark my words: SYMPHONIC LOVE


----------



## Mal

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> Hasn't HIP performances become conventional these days? My last symphonic love was Ottavio Dantone and Accademia Bizantina. Mark my words: SYMPHONIC LOVE


"What I like" is my convention, and I like some non-HIP, and some HIP. Thanks for the recommendation of Ottavio Dantone and Accademia Bizantina, I see they have attempted 78-81. "Third ear" says many of these transitional symphonies are "not memorable" and don't recommend any! Penguin recommend Naxos. I generally like Naxos in Haydn, they play modern instruments heavily influenced by HIP, best of both worlds.


----------



## Mal

As I continue going through my Fischer box set I'm more and more loving... Dorati. In performances by Fischer I don't like every time, so far, I go on utube and listen to Dorati I like it! This happened with Fischer 3, 9, and 17. But there are several other Fischer I don't like, and I suspect Dorati will do better. He just sounds so much more warmer and beautiful in the slow movements, exciting and involved in the fast. It really is the difference between light and dark, Dorati making these minor Haydn symphonies sound wonderful, first rate, and unmissable; Fischer makes them sound like nothing. I can see why Fischer is on record saying he wishes he could re-record half this box!

I'm not finding Fischer a total loss, about half the performances up to 18 are wonderful, but the other half are dogs. A real roller coaster. Not a good starter set; good thing I already like Haydn, and some Fischer, already, and know there is a lot better to come.

P.S. I'm not joining Amazon Prime as I don't want to make that tax dodger Bezos any richer.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

I hear Dorati bringing more substance and brio to his performances---much more enjoyable for me.


----------



## Mal

But is Dorati better than Fischer in *every* symphony? I haven't compared Dorati directly with Fischer performances I have liked, so I can't comment. 

I'd find it remarkable for a conductor not to put a foot wrong in the first 18 Haydn symphonies. Does anyone think Dorati dropped the ball in any of these early symphonies?

News flash: An antipodean critic on Amazon suggests Dorati is leaden in the first movement of 39, and Fischer puts in a sterling effort. And indeed it is so. Might have to buy both box sets folks


----------



## hpowders

Don’t forget Harnoncourt’s wonderfully alive complete Haydn Paris Symphonies!


----------



## Pugg

Haydn67 said:


> I hear Dorati bringing more substance and brio to his performances---much more enjoyable for me.


I agree, simply a must have for all Haydn fans this Dorati complete set.


----------



## Mal

hpowders said:


> Don't forget Harnoncourt's wonderfully alive complete Haydn Paris Symphonies!


Thanks for the tip, I like Harnoncourt's in 45, 59, and 60. In my ongoing traversal, I just listened to Fischer's first go at a named symphony, "Philosopher" no.22, and wasn't impressed: leaden in the slow movements, neurotic in the fast. Listened to Dorati in the first movement and also found him rather leaden, with winds "blary" and indistinct, recording sound inferior. I like Marriner/ASMF and no-one/Orpheus in this symphony. Here's Marriner from his (mostly) wonderful box set of named symphonies:




Dorati:


----------



## poconoron

hpowders said:


> Don't forget Harnoncourt's wonderfully alive complete Haydn Paris Symphonies!


Agreed............they are magnificent, and make me believe that Haydn was actually a greater composer of symphonies than Beethoven, or anyone. He certainly laid the groundwork, as did Bach in other genres.


----------



## hpowders

poconoron said:


> Agreed............they are magnificent, and make me believe that Haydn was actually a greater composer of symphonies than Beethoven, or anyone. He certainly laid the groundwork, as did Bach in other genres.


I love the "drunken" syncopated ending he uses for the ending of "The Bear". Nobody else does that-like a real clumsy dancing bear!!


----------



## hpowders

poconoron said:


> Agreed............they are magnificent, and make me believe that Haydn was actually a greater composer of symphonies than Beethoven, or anyone. He certainly laid the groundwork, as did Bach in other genres.


For me Haydn was the greatest composer of symphonies-many are perfect models of what sonata form is all about.

The Paris (82-87), 88, and London (93-104) symphonies have given me endless hours of pleasure; greater than Beethoven's, no doubt in my mind!

I have so many sets of the Paris and London Symphonies. Love comparative listening!


----------



## Pugg

Haydn67 said:


> I hear Dorati bringing more substance and brio to his performances---much more enjoyable for me.


Irony wants it that OP is never been seen again.


----------



## jdec

hpowders said:


> For me Haydn was the greatest composer of symphonies-many are perfect models of what sonata form is all about.
> 
> The Paris (82-87), 88, and London (93-104) symphonies have given me endless hours of pleasure; greater than Beethoven's, no doubt in my mind!
> 
> *I have so many sets of the Paris and London Symphonies. Love comparative listening!*


Which ones are your favorite so far?

Edit: Never mind, I just saw your favorite sets on post #31. I'll check some of them!


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Haydn67 said:


> I hear Dorati bringing more substance and brio to his performances---much more enjoyable for me.


I still like the Dorati among complete sets, but for my money, it's hard to beat Szell and Scherchen for their individual performances. Davis/Amsterdam are also very fine in their renditions of some of the "London" Symphonies.


----------



## Granate

I've just bought the complete set of Fischer new for 15€, the Brilliant Box. I'm not going to listen until August but reading this thread I'm now regretting the purchase. Should I cancel it? Which is the best guide to swim into these 33 cds anew?


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Fischer by a mile for me. I find Dorati to be monochrome, lead-footed and with not so great sound. Fischer sounds more “Haydnesque”


----------



## Manxfeeder

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Fischer by a mile for me. I find Dorati to be monochrome, lead-footed and with not so great sound. Fischer sounds more "Haydnesque"


I don't want to sway Granate, because I respect his discernment. But personally, I also like Fischer. I don't know why, but Dorati hasn't clicked with me. I guess I just have different ears. But I agree that with Fischer, the late symphonies are done better by others. I've supplemented them with Jochum, Bernstein, Beecham, and Szell. They're all fun to hear in their own way.

For those HIP enthusiasts, Fischer recorded these in the hall that Haydn used. I guess that makes them partially HIP.


----------



## Granate

Thank you Manxfeeder. But I'm clueless at Haydn so far. I just listened to Karajan's 80s recordings more than four years ago and nothing since then.

I thought I couldn't let a 15€ offer pass this way.


----------



## larold

They're both good but I have leaned toward Dorati as time has gone on. I think his orchestra sounds fruitier and he exhibits a broader range of emotional direction than Fischer. Not by a lot but by enough.

I think Dorati one of the most underappreciated -- undervalued if you will -- conductors in history. He is one of a small handful of conductors that created 2 two million selling recordings: the Haydn symphonies for London and his famous 1812 Overture recording on the Mercury label.


----------



## Granate

Very much agree about Dorati. Excellent conductor. I am still waiting for his LSO Dvorak recordings to be reissued. His Beethoven too.


----------



## Enthusiast

For me it is definitely Fischer. As a teenager I had one of the Dorati sets when they were being issued. I quite liked it but felt that Haydn before the Paris symphonies was not that interesting. How wrong I was. The Fischer set is a little uneven and generally the Fischer London symphonies are said to be poor - a judgment I agree with.


----------

